tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post5410065093646151576..comments2024-03-28T17:55:31.180-04:00Comments on The Gossips of Rivertown: A Garden in WinterCarole Osterinkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16010623982526286408noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-77000396946343597352013-12-05T10:39:12.812-05:002013-12-05T10:39:12.812-05:00You were correct, Peter:
As a Municipal Urban Ren...You were correct, Peter:<br /><br />As a Municipal Urban Renewal Agency, the HCDPA is a "corporate governmental agency, constituting a public benefit corporation" (General Municipal Law §553).<br /><br />It's the Hudson Development Corporation (HDC) that's the non-profit. <br /><br />Many pardons.unheimlichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00204285837938988668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-53603070532281690142013-12-03T16:02:31.786-05:002013-12-03T16:02:31.786-05:00I agree totally with Mr. De PietroI agree totally with Mr. De PietroPrison Alleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10059050028975347899noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-86301198365178818662013-12-03T15:03:21.161-05:002013-12-03T15:03:21.161-05:00By "our" garden, I meant a generally val...By "our" garden, I meant a generally valued community institution. I'm not personally involved with the garden, and what follows is entirely deduced from external observation. However, it's also arrived at by some familiarity with other practices of the HCDPA.<br /><br />By their own admission, the directors of the community garden have settled on a course which accords with their sense of honor. They don't wish to be perceived as criticizing Habitat for Humanity.<br /><br />But looking from the outside, the terms of engagement were to some degree engineered by parties who doubtless regret the garden's presence in the first place. Even before the garden group was notified of any threat, the situation recommended any number of public relations ploys for those doing the notifying. <br /><br />Subsequently, the moment the HCDPA framed the outcome as being entirely a decision for Habitat for Humanity to make - the HCDPA thereby appearing to relinquish its authority - Habitat tacitly agreed to a duplicitous strategy.<br /><br />First, the HCDPA self-consciously adopted the mantle of a neutral mediator. This "mediator" feigned to honor the garden directors with a "negotiating position," but in actuality the garden was being positioned. <br /><br />To be seen as honoring the garden was paramount, because the proffered "negotiating position" concealed a design to funnel the gardeners towards a single "compromise," to use the HCDPA's term. <br /><br />In the so-called compromise, the gardeners who'd already signaled they had no stomach to criticize Habitat would simply and obediently acquiesce, thus making way for the inevitable and famously beneficent housing group. The idea was to manipulate the vacancy of the lots with impunity, the wager being that the kinds of people who support community gardens are generally loathe to criticize organizations such as Habitat for Humanity.<br /><br />Even now, as long as Habitat for Humanity is tasked with deciding the fate of the lots, the same prefabricated "compromise" is on the table: the garden directors must agree to voluntarily relocate, period.<br /><br />This being Hudson, it's easy to suspect a conspiracy between the HCDPA and Habitat, wherein some such strategy was decided beforehand in anticipation of a mutual public relations headache. <br /><br />But in all sobriety, is there any other way to interpret the situation? How in the world did Habitat for Humanity agree to take responsibility - and to be SEEN as accepting the responsibility - for a decision that's entirely the HCDPA's to make?<br /><br />Strip away the fuzzy sentiment and it's plain to see that Habitat continues to pursue its advantage in accord within the original, passive-aggressive tactic, whoever thought of it first. If the situation was otherwise, Habitat would have relented by now.unheimlichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00204285837938988668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-74739282791774116782013-12-03T11:52:52.092-05:002013-12-03T11:52:52.092-05:00Unheimlich is correct--we can count on HCDPA to do...Unheimlich is correct--we can count on HCDPA to do the wrong thing. I suggest that those who have contributed to Habitat in the past put pressure on their board members and director, and threaten to withhold future contributions until they withdraw their application. Tom DePietrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13483039347127481113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-68897816252928810432013-12-03T07:53:21.384-05:002013-12-03T07:53:21.384-05:00...where is the outrage over the mayor's plan ......where is the outrage over the mayor's plan to turn over North Bay lands to the "conservancy"?...this is a huge chunk of city property, more than one hundred community gardens, and while the noise is all about the police station and garden, the big deal is going down without fanfare...michael lesawyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13283350595244628737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-44100185424495279982013-12-02T23:06:23.632-05:002013-12-02T23:06:23.632-05:00There's so much manipulation going on it would...There's so much manipulation going on it would be unbelievable except that this is Hudson.<br /><br />Last month Pierro stated that the lots were slated for housing as "a stipulation," i.e. a condition. Since then nobody can point out where any stipulation was ever established.<br /><br />The head of the HCDPA has expressed her wish that the lots be used for housing, but probably to avoid criticism the HCDPA has deferred its authority to Habitat's decision.<br /><br />The Habitat board, for its part, must have collaborated on this ploy last summer. It was surely decided beforehand that Habitat's chances were better if public opinion had to choose between the two non-profits, rather than the garden and the HCDPA (another non-profit!).<br /><br />It was a cynical miscalculation. Consider the possibility that an outlet like FOXnews gets wind of the face-off, or Drudgereport.com (30 million viewers daily!) which ran a similar story from Florida three weeks ago.<br /><br />Because the Right-leaning media like nothing better than exposing the Left as a loose aggregation of special interest groups (well?), the spectacle of two such groups opposing one another is grist for that mill. <br /><br />On the other hand, the Right-leaning media strongly favor community gardens. That Florida story above had readers siding with the gardeners, and not the municipality that was eradicating them. This is something FOXnews has in common with an organization like the National Audubon Society. <br /><br />So in a well-publicized face-off with Habitat for Humanity, our garden would be the winners. And that's something that can and should be brought to the attention of the national Habitat organization as soon as possible. <br /><br />Surely the national organization has the brains to spot its county chapter's miscalculation, and word would quietly descend from on high to back off. unheimlichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00204285837938988668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-58787727159002817252013-12-02T22:04:56.118-05:002013-12-02T22:04:56.118-05:00But there seems to be droit du seignor here, regar...But there seems to be droit du seignor here, regardless of which City agency is involved. Isn't Habitat claiming the propoerty based on a promise made by Mayor Scalera? Isn't that the premise? Why else is HCDPA considering it? Why else is the question so limited: Habit or Community Garden? If we were truly trying to decide what to do with public property -- is HCDPA a public entity? -- wouldn't there be a series of public meetings? No, no, whether City Council or HCDPA, we are being offered a Hobbesian Choice. WE -- the public -- deserve better. Peter Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12627451247693034161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-5313845933648191222013-12-02T21:44:46.051-05:002013-12-02T21:44:46.051-05:00I don't think that it's the Common Council...I don't think that it's the Common Council that will decide. The lots are owned by HCDPA, so it is the board of HCDPA that will make the decision. That board is made up of the mayor, Cappy Pierro (Common Council majority leader), Ohrine Stewart (Common Council minority leader), and Don Tillson (chair of the Planning Commission). Lyle Shook, who used to be on the HCDPA board, resigned a month or so ago, and I don't who has replaced him on the board, if he has been replaced, or the process by which the one board member who is not an elected official or political appointee is chosen. Carole Osterinkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16010623982526286408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-47458132869858892882013-12-02T21:13:05.922-05:002013-12-02T21:13:05.922-05:00So, the deal that was done in secret -- Mayor Scal...So, the deal that was done in secret -- Mayor Scalera's "promise" to Habitat -- will stand as status quo while the status quo -- the Community Garden -- must now justify its existence? This is insane. Has anyone looked at the Scalera promise to Habitat? Was it legal? Was it public? Did the Common Council approve? For this Council to recognize some secret pact today does not make that pact right -- it only makes this Council a co-spirator! Peter Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12627451247693034161noreply@blogger.com