Opposition to the Plan for 11 Warren Street

This morning, Linda Mussmann, county supervisor representing the Fourth Ward, posted on Facebook this statement about the County's purchase of 11 Warren Street and its plan to use it as office space:

11 Warren Street is not destined to be a Columbia County building. This is a decision that can be reversed--please speak out on this issue if you are concerned about the misguided use of Hudson's main street. The Columbia County Board of Supervisors forgot to include Hudson in this discussion.

I for one am opposed to using our main street for offices for the County--we need residential and retail space not county office space at this site. This building (11 Warren Street) is a building that has long been discussed as a key to linking our main street to the waterfront. Hudson is an economic driver and a cash generator for not only Hudson but for the entire county. The days of dismissing Hudson should be over. We citizens of Hudson should have had a say in this discussion--no Hudson supervisors were involved with this potential sale except Rick Scalera. The rest of us were left out and the kids who were using the space for a "clubhouse" were kicked out. The clubhouse kids could have stayed in the building but were pushed out before they had a permanent place to go.

Hello residents of Hudson--speak out and stand up for our city--we already host a lot of county buildings in Hudson and a lot of parking lots for Columbia County cars--write the Board of Supervisors and state your concerns.

The two members of the Hudson Common Council who represent the First Ward, where 11 Warren Street is located, have expressed their opposition to the plan in letters to the Board of Supervisors. The following is the text of a letter from Gary Purnhagen:

I urge you to reconsider the current plans for 11 Warren Street. While I understand the County's decision to acquire the property for office space and storage, I have several issues would like to address.

Revenue

a. 11 Warren Street, developed as a mix-use commercial/residential complex, would significantly contribute to the County's tax rolls.

b. At this time, the County could sell the building for a significant profit is it chooses to.

Feasibility of 11 Warren Street for the current County plans

a. The purchase and renovation resulted in a cost of $444/sq. ft. This is for office space and storage.

b. While your relocation plan includes expansion needs for each department, once the departments use up that space, we'll be looking for other locations.

"Downtown Hudson" is a County resource. Columbia residents enjoy the riverfront park and Promenade Hill as much as anybody, including visitors. Private development and State funds are going into the area, allowing for proper redevelopment of 11 Warren Street would significantly contribute to the economic uplift that part of the County is experiencing.

In conclusion, please reconsider the current plans for 11 Warren Street and explore other options that will benefit the County in the long run. . . .

The following is quoted from a letter submitted to the Board of Supervisors by Councilmember Margaret Morris. References to "the presentation" and "the meeting" are to the presentation made by county engineer Ray Jurkowski at the special public input meeting that took place on January 24.

I am opposed to the use of this location for County offices. I understand the pressing need for additional space for the Columbia County Board of Elections (BOE) for staff offices, early voting, and storage of election machines. The current space does not serve the needs of the County or its residents. That said, I think that the purchase and refurbishing of the building at 11 Warren Street is not a sound fiscal solution.

Cost to the County:

The total cost is in excess of 8 million dollars--I do not have the presentation, so I do not have the exact dollar amount. The square footage is over 18,000 square feet. Again, I do not have access to the exact square footage. Using these two figures, that comes to $444 per square foot. While it is necessary for the BOE to remain within the City limits, I am sure that less expensive solutions could be found. The presentation did not provide any information on alternate locations that had been considered and why this location was deemed to be the most suitable. The John L. Edwards school would have provided sufficient space to consolidate all County offices. I think that $444 per square foot is not a fiscally responsible solution. The location chosen is a prime real estate location on lower Warren that would be better suited to mixed use commercial and residential development.

Missed Opportunity for County Tax Revenue:

Moving County offices to this location is not consistent with the City's Downtown Revitalization Initiative. Utilization of this space for mixed use development would help in revitalizing lower Warren Street. This would result in increased tax revenue (property and sale) for the County as a whole, not just at this location but on lower Warren Street. By moving County offices to this location, rather than allowing revenue-generating development, both the County and the City are foregoing tax revenue. The City of Hudson's financial success is also the County's financial success.

I believe that the County should consider either re-selling the property or entering into an agreement with a developer to make more appropriate use of a prime real estate location. . . .

I am asking you to reconsider the use of this location for County offices from a financial perspective. I do not believe that it serves the best interest of Columbia County or its residents. . . .

Another Initiative for Change

Hudson often suffers from county government's bad ideas, the latest being the acquisition of 11 Warren Street for use as county offices. Is it possible that having the county governed by a full-time leader, elected by the voters in the county, could benefit Hudson? The case for replacing Matt Murrell, the current chair of the Columbia County Board of Supervisors, with a full-time county executive is made in this press release from the Columbia County Democratic Committee.

Columbia County Deserves a Full-Time, Elected Leader

Columbia County is governed solely by the Board of Supervisors (BOS), a part-time legislative body comprised of Town Supervisors. Supervisors typically split their time between day jobs, managing their towns, and serving on the BOS.

Only four counties out of 62 in New York State are still governed by a BOS, with Columbia County being the largest of the four. Every other county in NYS has either a full-time, elected County Executive or a County Manager/Administrator, putting us at a distinct disadvantage.

Our county has a budget of nearly $200 million, supervised part-time by Stockport's Town Supervisor, Chairman Matt Murrell. The Chairman's role is "part-time," meaning no individual works full-time to manage or oversee county governance. The Chairman was not selected by voters; rather, he was installed by politicians, bypassing direct public accountability. Mr. Murrell received less than 500 votes in his last election. There are over 61,570 residents in our county. Why should he get to make decisions for 99.2% of residents who never voted for him? Part-time leadership means we're getting part-time results.

Matt Murrell

On March 1, a petition to establish a full-time, elected County Executive began circulating. In just over two weeks, hundreds of voters across the political spectrum have already signed because Columbia County deserves better. Organizers for this effort intend to gather 5,000 signatures to place the referendum on the ballot. Following the submission of signatures, there will be town halls and information sessions before a vote on the referendum this November.

"This effort is borne out of hundreds of residents throughout our county who are frustrated with our current ineffective model of government. Matt Murrell is lashing out at Democrats and bragging about raising our taxes and fees when he should be laser-focused on keeping costs down and making sure government works for everyone," said Sam Hodge.

Our current form of government lacks vision and a comprehensive plan for the future. Sales tax revenues are declining, yet no strategy has been proposed to address the shortfall. Taxes continue to rise amid an affordability crisis gripping the county, with no solution being offered.

Our population is shrinking, but there's no initiative to attract new residents. Schools face declining enrollment as families are priced out of the area, yet no action is being taken. Our community college is laying off workers, and our hospital is struggling--cutting services and staff--while leadership offers no plan to turn things around.

"We need a full-time advocate to work with our Federal and State partners. A full-time, elected leader will be accountable for getting Columbia's fair share in State and Federal funding to improve our programs and infrastructure. There's money out there that we could be applying for but aren't," said Mike Dvorchak, Hillsdale Town Supervisor. "With the possibility of Medicaid cuts and a recession around the corner, now more than ever, it's important to have someone full-time, accountable to voters at the helm."

Fifty-eight out of 62 counties have adopted a different form of government due to the shortcomings and inefficiencies of the Board of Supervisors model. Given the chaos in Washington, D.C., we need a full-time professional, not a part-time amateur. It's time to move Columbia County forward. We deserve better.

The Board of Supervisors (BOS) will continue to serve as the county's legislative body and partner to the County Executive in governing Columbia County. Its responsibilities include, in part, approving the proposed budget, enacting local laws, and confirming nominees for county positions. If the County Executive vetoes an action by the BOS, it can be overridden by a two-thirds vote of the BOS. This is typical for all other upstate counties in NYS.

To learn more about the initiative, to sign the petition, or to volunteer to help in the effort, send an email to columbiacountyforward@gmail.com or visit columbiacountyforward.com.

On the Proposed New Congressional Districts

On Monday, the map showing the proposed new congressional districts was released, which showed a significantly reconfigured 19th Congressional District. Columbia County is still part of it, but now the district sprawls far to the west and includes much of the Southern Tier. The first image shows the 19th District as it is now. The second image shows the proposed redistricting.  

Today, the Columbia County Democratic Committee released the following statement, protesting the proposed redistricting. 

On Monday, May 16, Special Master Jonathan Cervas released his proposed congressional map. Cervas, an out-of-stater, with little to no connection to New York State, proposed a congressional map that would have disastrous consequences for Columbia County. If allowed to stand, Columbia County would be separated from both the Capital District and the Mid-Hudson Valley regions, as well as its county neighbors to the north and south. The proposed map groups Columbia County with Southern Tier and Finger Lakes counties, with which it has no commonality or relationship, in the newly constituted CD19. This is unprecedented and would result in a poor outcome for Columbia County when it comes to identity, representation, and allocation of resources.

“The redistricting process is taking place behind closed doors by a Republican judge and someone with little connection to our state,” said Sam Hodge, Chair of the Columbia County Democratic Committee (CCDC). “It’s an unconstitutional sham that will have long lasting consequences for our county and state. New Yorkers did not vote for an unelected guy from Pennsylvania to dictate our future. Columbia County appears to be an afterthought that was tacked on to a district that needed a few more people. We deserve better.”

Columbia County is located along the Hudson River in the Mid-Hudson Valley, and the Department of Economic Development has placed Columbia County in the Capital District. Under the proposed map, Columbia County would be isolated from both regions and be the only county in CD19 on the east side of the Hudson River. Columbia County should be part of a contiguous district of adjoining Mid-Hudson Valley counties. Based on current 2020 Census data, the combined populations of Columbia, Dutchess, Rensselaer, Ulster, and Greene Counties would be 748,393 people, which is within the range of +/-10 percent of the average congressional district.

To make matters worse, Columbia County has been excised from its peers and placed in the congressional district that shares little in common administratively. Our judicial, assembly, and senate districts have little, if any, overlap with other counties included in the proposed CD19. Effective government requires coordination and collaboration. The proposed map diminishes Columbia County's political power.

Columbia, Dutchess, Rensselaer, Ulster, and Greene Counties have a common history, developing major agricultural and industrial centers because of their proximity to the Hudson River. There is no such common history with counties located in the middle and western portions of New York State.

The five County Seat Cities of Hudson, Poughkeepsie, Troy, Kingston, and Catskill had a similar rise as major industrial cities that suffered steep economic declines in the first half of the 20th century but are now experiencing a great resurgence. These small to medium sized cities have diverse racial, ethnic, religious, cultural, socio-economic, and gender/sexual orientation populations. These cities have higher poverty levels than the surrounding countryside and have similar challenges to meet the need for infrastructure, broadband, workforce housing, and healthcare throughout the counties. Columbia County should be in a congressional district with its neighbors who face the same challenges and concerns.

Columbia County's proximity to New York City has created a rich, year-round arts community, with many artists, painters, dancers, musicians, actors, galleries, and antique stores that all create a destination for tourism. There is a significant and growing population of New York City dual homeowners. Newer residents are starting local small businesses, adding to the economic diversity in Columbia County. Columbia County is also home to many exurban communities of Albany, not Ithaca or Binghamton. Columbia County is tethered economically, culturally, and socially to its neighbors to the north and south. The proposed map ignores these connections, and in doing so, denies Columbia County of effective representation.  

Columbia County shares similar agricultural, historic, artistic, and economic challenges and opportunities with Dutchess, Ulster, Rensselaer, and Greene Counties as part of the Mid-Hudson Valley region. Dividing Columbia County, or separating it from the Mid-Hudson Valley region, would seriously impact the residents who want to build for the future and be fairly represented in Congress. 

“It would be a gross miscarriage of justice that will have long-term adverse consequences for our residents and our region if these district lines are allowed to stand,” said Hodge. “The new map is a disaster for our county and must be changed.”

News from the County Board of Supervisors

We all recall last summer's suppressed initiative to get the issue of having a county executive on the ballot.

Photo: Columbia County Forward

Yesterday, Matt Murell, chair of the Columbia County Board of Supervisors, who connived successfully to keep the question off the ballot, announced in a press release that a committee has been formed to explore the notion of having a county manager/administrator. The press release follows.

Columbia County Board of Supervisors Chairman Matt Murell today announced the members of the County Manager/Administrator Committee, to be tasked with getting answers to the question of the advisability of establishing a county administrator position in the county's governing structure.

"The last time this idea was looked at was back in 2011 by a county committee," said Chairman Murell in December, when announcing the planned committee formation. "It seems there's no better time than the present to re-visit this subject. Fifteen years later, I for one am keenly interested in seeing how such a position could work for us now."

Named committee members are as follows:

James Guzzi, Deputy Chairman and Livingston Town Supervisor; Robert Lagonia, Deputy Chairman and Austerlitz Town Supervisor; Craig Simmons, Ghent Town Supervisor; Tistrya Houghtling, Minority Leader and New Lebanon Town Supervisor; Brenda Adams, Canaan Town Supervisor; and Richard Wolf, Copake Town Supervisor.

Also, Art Bassin, private citizen, former Ancram Town Supervisor and member of the 2011 County Manager Initiative Subcommittee; Susan Sharpe, CPA, private citizen, former CFO Greater NY Insurance Companies and former CFO of the NYS Insurance Fund; Rick Cummings, private citizen, is currently vice president of Mulhern Gas Co., Inc., a position he has held since 1990--he is fourth generation of the 100-year-old family business based in Hudson, and prior to that, Cummings was a financial consultant with Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., for four years; and Robert Fitzsimmons, County Attorney and former member of the 2011 County Manager Initiative Subcommittee. 

Serving on the committee's Panel of Experts will be Chairman Murell, who also serves as Stockport Town Supervisor; County Treasurer P. J. Keeler; County Controller James Breig; County Human Resources Director Michaele Williams-Riordan; and representatives from the Columbia County Economic Development Corporation and the Columbia County Chamber of Commerce.

In a nutshell, a County Administrator differs greatly from a County Executive, in that a County Administrator would serve as the Chief Operating Officer, with the key distinction that the position would report to, and work under the direction of, the Board of Supervisors;

A County Executive, on the other hand, places political power and day-to-day county operations in the hands of a single elected official, rather than the current system of 23 elected town and city supervisors working together as a governing unit. A County Executive effectively strips the County Board of Supervisors of its authority.

A date has yet to be set for the committee's first meeting.

About 11 Warren Street

The parking lot at 11 Warren Street is currently fenced off, with signs indicating access is restricted to construction vehicles only.  

Last week, Matt Murell, chair of the Columbia County Board of Supervisors, issued this update:

"We're making very good progress--I'm very pleased with the renovations and construction work that's been going on," reports Ron Knott, Stuyvesant town supervisor and chairman of the Columbia County Board of Supervisors Department of Public Works committee, on the steps being taken to turn 11 Warren Street into a building housing county offices.

Shortly, 11 Warren Street will become the new home of the Board of Elections, the Probation Department, the Public Defender's Office, and the Conflict Defender's Office.

The Board of Elections will be moving from 401 State Street to 11 Warren, while the others move from 610 State Street. The latter building has [been] deemed surplus by the Board of Supervisors and will be up for sale in the near future. . . .

The plan is to hold off on relocating the Board of Elections until after the primary on June 23, which also includes early voting from June 13-21. . . .

Following the primary, the "equipment that's out for it will be moved to 11 Warren, so we don't have to move it twice. The staff will move down probably that last week of June or the first week of July," [said Ray Jurkowski, Public Works Commissioner]. . . .

Looking ahead, Commissioner Jurkowski pointed out, "there's also a second portion to 11 Warren, which is the exterior. That's been on a parallel path to the construction phase. A couple months back the county entered into contract with LaBella Associates, and we've started programming the vision for the building's exterior."

Plans are to have the architects prepare three separate concepts, followed by meetings at which the public will be invited to critique those concepts. "We're trying to figure out what the public is looking for," said Commissioner Jurkowski. "By creating these charrettes, we feel we'll be able to get the input we've been looking for."

"This is a great project for the county," said Austerlitz Town Supervisor and Count Deputy Chairman [Robert Lagonia]. "For one, the Board of Education [sic] will finally have a great working space. I'm very excited to see it's all coming to fruition."

There is no indication if the plans for the exterior renovation will go before the Historic Preservation Commission for a certificate of appropriateness, which they should since the building is in a locally designated historic district. If the project does not go before the HPC, it will be just another example of the disdain county government has for the City of Hudson, its laws, and its concerns.

On another 11 Warren Street-related topic, at the Common Council Legal Committee meeting last Thursday, an "Intermunicipal Agreement" between the City of Hudson and Columbia County was introduced for on-street parking for county employees at 11 Warren Street. There are 27 parking spaces in the parking lot in front of the building, which readers will recall was originally designed to be a strip mall, but the County is seeking 18 more parking spots for the exclusive use of county employees from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Of those 18 spaces, 14 would be on Warren Street and 4 on South First Street, adjacent to the building. Not only would the spaces be dedicated to county employees, but those employees would not be expected to pay parking fee. For this, the County would pay the City $18,006.30 in the first year. The agreement is for five years. Here is how the amount was calculated. (The following is quoted from the proposed agreement.)

• The annual parking fee paid to the City by the County shall be 90% of the current standard rate ($0.50) per hour x the number of annual County Working days: $0.50 per hour x 90% x 9 hours x (52 weeks x 5 days per week - 13 annual County holidays) = $1,000.35 per parking pass = $18,006.30 Total for the first year.
• In the event the City parking hourly rate changes, the County rate shall be 90% of any new rate applied to metered parking in the City.

Council president Margaret Morris, who chairs the Legal Committee, defended the proposed agreement, arguing that if county employees had to pay for parking on Warren Street they would seek parking in adjacent neighborhoods, on Union Street and Columbia Street, which would impact residents of those streets. She also said the County would allow neighborhood residents to use the off-street parking spaces in front of the building overnight and on weekends, when the offices in the building were closed. This is not mentioned in the proposed agreement. Morris cited Helsinki Hudson, back when it existed before the pandemic, using the county parking lot at Columbia and North Fourth, and maintained it was county policy to allow their parking lots to be used by the public during off-hours. It was pointed out (by Gossips) that Helsinki had an agreement with the County for the use of the lot, which was worked out during its Planning Board review, and not all county parking lots are open to the public during off-hours. For example, this sign appears in the lot at Sixth and Columbia.

Councilmember Claire Cousin (Fifth Ward) expressed concern about parking for Shiloh Baptist Church when there was an event or a funeral on a weekday. Councilmember Jennifer Belton (Fourth Ward) brought up the solution she had proposed, which was to have the county finance the creation of a parking lot on Water Street, on the other side of the Ferry Street Bridge, across from Hudson Power Boat Association, more than four blocks from 11 Warren Street. Councilmember Jason Foster (Third Ward) questioned the plan, which is part of the agreement, to relocate the designated handicapped parking space now on Warren Street into the parking lot in front of 11 Warren Street.

One little consolation: The County has agreed to allow the City to review the design for the signage to be installed to identify the designated on-street parking. Exactly who, representing "the City," will be reviewing and approving that signage is not known.

The proposed agreement, which can be found here, will be introduced to the full Council at its informal meeting on Monday, May 18.

COPYRIGHT 2026 CAROLE OSTERINK

Not Good News

For everyone who hoped that the plan to demolish the ill-fated "shopping center" in the first block of Warren Street and replace it with a market rate apartment building, as proposed by Benchmark Development in February 2021, would eventually happen, this is not good news. 

Today, Matt Murell, chair of the Columbia County Board of Supervisors, announced that the county intends to buy the property from Galvan for $3.35 million "to solve [the county's] infrastructure concerns that have arisen in recent years." Galvan bought the building from COARC in August 2014 for $1.575 million. What follows is the press release issued by Murell today:

The Columbia County Board of Supervisors at its Wednesday, August 9, monthly meeting voted to purchase the building located at 11 Warren Street, Hudson, in a move that is expected to solve infrastructure concerns that have arisen in recent years.

The property at 11 Warren Street sits on a .94 of one acre and is zoned Central Commercial, for professional, governmental, or business use. It offers 18,622-square-feet, all on one level, with 30 onsite parking spots. The building was erected in 1985. [Gossips correction: The building was built it 1975.]

With a purchase price of $3,350,000 and anticipated renovations and contingencies, the overall projected project cost of 11 Warren Street is $8,715,500.

“This is a positive step for Columbia County and I’m excited about this opportunity,” said Board of Supervisors Chairman Matt Murell, who noted that with the high cost of commercial construction, the sum required to put up a structure that would solve the needs under consideration makes that option virtually prohibitive.

“11 Warren Street solves a multitude of issues,” he said.

Among those issues, outlined Department of Public Works Commissioner Ray Jurkowski, are space and storage concerns with the Board of Elections at 401 State Street, an aging county building at 610 State Street, as well as other space questions. “11 Warren Street is a unique opportunity, with a number of features that make it attractive to the county,” he said.

Commissioner Jurkowski explained that “610 State Street, a building that dates to 1886, has been identified as an issue in the county infrastructure. The purchase of 11 Warren Street means the county will not have to make a significant investment in upgrades and renovations to that building.”

At this time, 610 State Street is home to the Probation Department, the Public Defender’s Office, and the 911 backup call center. The latter will be decommissioned when the new 911 center at Commerce Park is complete, at which time the 911 center in use at this time in the county public safety building becomes the backup call center.

A long-term third-party building condition estimate to maintain 610 State Street, conducted in 2019 and adjusted for inflation, stands at $5,090,400.

The county Board of Elections is currently housed in the county building located at 401 State Street, where its new voting machines are stored in the basement. That’s a situation Commissioner Jurkowski described as “not the best. The machines are a big investment and there are concerns with storing them in that environment.”

Further, a county Board of Elections is required by state law to maintain its offices within the limits of the county seat. A ballot initiative would be needed to move it out of the county seat.

“I stand strongly behind the purchase of 11 Warren Street–it’s a no-brainer,” said Austerlitz Town Supervisor and county Deputy Chairman Rob Lagonia. “It’s a huge game-changer for the county. I’m very excited about it.”

“It’s a home run for the county,” added Livingston Town Supervisor and county Deputy Chairman and Finance Chairman James Guzzi, who pointed to 11 Warren Street’s open floor plan, with no interior load bearing walls, as a “good fit in terms of its simplicity. It allows us to move office space around in different ways. 11 Warren Street is in good shape and it fills a void for the county in a good way.”

In addition, when the move out of 610 State Street is complete, it can be placed on the market and ultimately restored to the tax rolls.

It will be interesting to see how the five Hudson supervisors voted on this issue, but the minutes of this meeting have not yet been made available.  

COPYRIGHT 2023 CAROLE OSTERINK

Opposition to Another Bad Idea

The upcoming meeting on Wednesday of the Columbia County Board of Supervisors Space Utilization Committee, the committee that allegedly made the decision to acquire 11 Warren Street and use the failed shopping mall building for county offices, is drawing attention back to that bad idea. 

On Thursday, the 11 Warren Street Action Group (11WSAG) released a report titled "Columbia County Properties in the City of Hudson and Alternatives to 11 Warren Street." The report offers "a first ever comprehensive inventory and assessment, documenting the entire footprint of County-owned properties in Hudson, including surface parking in the Central Commercial district that would be better suited to commercial and residential development." The report can be found here. 

The cover of the report features these two photographs, juxtaposing the buildings that stood there in the 19th century, up until Urban Renewal in the 1970s, with what is there today. 

 

The press release announcing the report provides this information:

11 Warren Street Action Group (11WSAG) was formed in response to Columbia County's acquisition of 11 Warren Street in Hudson. Purchased from Galvan for $3.4 million, the current single-story 1980s structure is located in the historic district on Hudson's main commercial street. The County has announced its intention to use the location for storage and offices, and plans to spend approximately $5.5 million in further upgrades. The report was researched and written by 11WSAG member Clark Wieman, who brings an extensive background in urban planning and real estate management. 11WSAG chair Donna Streitz contributed additional research and editing.

This report will enable Columbia County tax-paying constituents, stakeholders, and representatives to consider innovative "upcycling" ideas for judicious and economically productive use of currently underutilized County-owned properties, bringing them to their full potential. The aim is to open a dialog that will take advantage of information now available in this report to benefit both the City of Hudson and the County at large, and serve as a model for other municipalities.

The Hudson Business Coalition has weighed in on the subject, releasing this letter to the editor on Thursday. The first sentence of the letter says it all, but the entire text of the letter follows:

The current plans proposed by the Columbia County Board of Supervisors for the property at 11 Warren St. are misguided and backward looking, and should they be allowed to proceed, will adversely affect the residents of Hudson, Columbia County, and our local economy for decades to come. The Board reached its decision without any prior public input sessions or consideration of Hudson’s business community, and failed to consider Hudson’s vibrant and ever-evolving downtown district or its waterfront redevelopment plans. 

Last year, the Board of Supervisors entered into a contract to buy the property at 11 Warren St. from its then-owner, the Galvan Foundation, for over $3.3 million. Since then, the County’s elected leaders have indicated their plans to move several offices and departments—including the Board of Elections, Public Defender, Probation Department, and District Attorney—from their current locations in Hudson to the building at 11 Warren when the property is renovated. Those renovations will cost an additional $5.5 million. 

These departments provide vital services to the residents of Hudson and Columbia County, and both the public and employees of each of those offices deserve a place that is safe, modern, and suited to each one’s particular functions. 

But moving these offices to 11 Warren St. will result in a cost that will be borne by all of Columbia County’s residents for years to come. 

The property at 11 Warren is an unfortunate relic of Hudson’s urban renewal period. Where once stood an entire block of handsome 19th-century buildings, home to residents and businesses, there is now little more than a blighted and ill-fated single-story remnant of a failed attempt to compete with the strip malls of Fairview Avenue during the 1970s. Since its construction nearly a half-century ago, the benefits of the building at 11 Warren St. have never been fully realized, because no one has ever developed the property to its full potential. 

The lot where 11 Warren St. is situated is among the most desirable properties in Hudson. It is steps from the newly-rehabbed Promenade Hill Park, which overlooks the Hudson river and provides stunning views of the Catskill mountains. It’s the first block of Warren St. experienced by thousands of yearly visitors to Hudson via AMTRAK. The County’s plans, as currently proposed, would continue to leave this entire block of Warren St. essentially dark outside the hours of 9am-5pm from Monday through Friday, and totally desolate on weekends and holidays. If they proceed, the County will likely occupy the property with these offices for decades, tying up any other potential uses for it. This would also mean keeping it off the tax rolls, leaving residents having to bear that additional tax burden. 

Instead, the property at 11 Warren St. should be fully utilized for commercial and residential purposes. There is potential to turn it into something much better than what’s now being proposed. Just three years ago, when it still owned the property, the Galvan Foundation released its own plans to redevelop it for mixed-use. Its plans at the time included the construction of over 60 apartment units, three retail units, and a restaurant—providing much needed housing for those living or wishing to move here, as well as furthering the economic resurgence of Hudson. Those plans were ultimately scuttled, but a return to that kind of planning and development is exactly what is now needed. 

Most recently, the 11 Warren St. building was home to the Hudson Youth Clubhouse, an afterschool program for our City’s young people. Due to the sale of the property, that program is now displaced. Better planning and development within Hudson would generate sales tax and property tax revenues that will help ensure funding for organizations exactly like this one—so that they could have a permanent home within Hudson and provide desirable programs for our youth. 

The businesses of Hudson—our myriad retailers, restaurants, performing arts venues, and lodging providers—generate considerable sales tax that’s distributed to all municipalities in Columbia County. A study presented recently from the New York State Tourism Industry Association makes clear that visitors to Columbia County spent over $230 million at restaurants, retailers, lodging businesses, arts and cultural venues, and those offering outdoor recreation. These revenues help offset potential property tax increases for our residents, and fund vital local programs and initiatives, like the aforementioned afterschool program.

Abandoning its current plans for this property, the Board of Supervisors could instead return us to sound economic development, civic pride, and positive long-term planning for our City and County. The “11 Warren St. Action Group”—a small cadre of concerned Hudson residents working to present better alternatives—just published a report that inventories over a dozen other properties within Hudson that are already owned by the County. In addition, the report identifies and analyzes four scenarios for properties in Hudson, as well as in Greenport’s commercial districts, that would be far better suited to the County’s purpose. The combined properties already in the County’s holdings include over 250,000 square feet of building space and provide a total of 200,000 square feet of parking, equating to about 450 parking spaces. These scenarios would result in a savings of up to $4.9 million—more than half of the proposed $8.9 million total cost for 11 Warren St. The County should give serious consideration to one or more of these alternatives. 

The Supervisors still have the opportunity to do the right thing for the citizens of Hudson and Columbia County if they quickly change course. Working in partnership with local government, civic organizations, private development partners and economic development agencies, we can all work to chart a brighter future for 11 Warren St., and our community as a whole. 

The 11 Warren St. Action Group has drafted and circulated a petition on behalf of our County’s residents that’s already garnered over 700 signatures from individuals expressing their opposition to what is being proposed by the Board of Supervisors. Their well-documented report inventories all of the County-owned property in Hudson and offers clear and actionable alternatives to the Board of Supervisors—we encourage everyone concerned about this issue to read it, and to make their thoughts known at the next Board of Supervisors Space Utilization Committee Meeting on May 22. 

To learn more, read the Action Group findings, and to sign that citizen petition, we urge everyone to visit hudsonbusiness.org/11warren.

The Board of Supervisors Space Utilization Committee meets on Wednesday, May 22, at 3:30 p.m. in the Committee Room at 401 State Street. The petition opposing this plan, which currently has 763 signatures, can be found here.

COPYRIGHT 2024 CAROLE OSTERINK

Considering the Consequences

On Thursday, the Register-Star published an article about the previous day's meeting of the Columbia County Board of Supervisors Space Utilization Committee: "Columbia County shows interest in acquiring Edwards school." What is being discussed and rather energetically promoted by a few Hudson elected officials is the acquisition of the John L. Edwards school building and the relocation of various city and county offices and departments to the former school building. 

At its August meeting, the Common Council passed a resolution requesting that Columbia County do a feasibility study on converting the building to the proposed new uses. The article reports that, when asked if the Common Council "would support the city paying for a third of the cost of the school," Mayor Rick Rector and Council president Tom DePietro said it would, which seems a little unfair since, based on the information provided in the article, the City wants to occupy only about a sixth of the building--15,000 of the 89,500 square feet.

Columbia County has a history of taking over old school buildings when the school district no longer has use for them. Two of the buildings the county is now looking to abandon--401 State Street and 610 State Street--were former school buildings. The county also once owned the Charles Williams School on North Third Street but swapped it for city-owned land on Columbia Street needed to construct the county office building at 325 Columbia Street. In 2010, after owning the building and letting it stand empty for five years or more, the City of Hudson sold it to the not-for-profit Second Ward Foundation.

If the current plan to acquire John L. Edwards were to be carried out, it would leave a number of buildings available for sale or reuse. It's important to consider what buildings they are and what impact new uses could have. It needs to be acknowledged, though, that everything that's been mentioned as possibly moving to JLE may not fit into the building. JLE is 89,500 square feet; the square footage of the buildings the county is looking to vacate totals 88,131 square feet; the City of Hudson wants 15,000 square feet for its offices and departments.

401 State Street

Photo: Historic Hudson

This building was constructed in 1915 and dedicated as Hudson High School at the beginning of 1916. It ceased being used as the high school in 1937, when the building that is now Montgomery C. Smith Elementary School was completed. It was used as the junior high school until the current high school building was completed in 1971, and the junior high was moved to Montgomery C. Smith. Not long after that, 401 State Street was acquired by the county. It now houses the Board of Supervisors chamber and committee room, the Board of Elections, the Civil Service Department, the offices of the county attorney and comptroller, and the departments of human resources, planning, and tourism.

610 State Street

This building, designed by Hudson architect Michael O'Connor and built in 1887, was actually the first Hudson High School. When students moved to the new high school building at 401 State Street in 1916, this building became an elementary school, and it probably continued to be used as an elementary school until John L. Edwards was built in 1964. The building now houses the Probation Department and the offices of the public defender and the county historian. Back in 2010, it was rumored the county was considering adapting the building to be a homeless shelter/transitional housing facility for women and children, to be run by Catholic Charities.

560 Warren Street

This building, designed by Warren & Wetmore, the architects responsible for the Columbia County Courthouse and involved in the design of Grand Central Station, was constructed as the home of the Hudson City Savings Institution. After two years of construction, the building opened in 1910. The county bought the building in 1998, when the Hudson City Savings Institution moved to its new building at 1 City Centre and morphed into Hudson River Bank & Trust, to be purchased a few years later by First Niagara Financial Group. The building now houses the Department of Motor Vehicles and the county clerk's office.

15 North Sixth Street

This building, located behind 560 Warren Street and connected to it by a skywalk over Prison Alley, was designed by local architect Lew Kremer and constructed soon after the county acquired the Warren & Wetmore bank building in 1998. This building houses the county treasurer's office and the Real Property Department.

520 Warren Street

The construction of this building was completed in 1907 for the National Hudson River Bank. It became Hudson City Hall in 1962, when city offices were moved from 327 Warren Street, Hudson's original city hall. The building houses the Common Council chamber, the offices of the mayor, Council president, city clerk, treasurer, and assessor, and the Department of Public Works.

18 South Third Street

This building started its life in 1853 as the Methodist Episcopal Church. It became the Hudson Boys Club in the 1930s, and is now the Hudson Youth Center. The offices of the Youth Department and recreational facilities, most notably a basketball court, are located in the building.

The purpose of this inventory of buildings is simply to make the point that the plan to fill the former John L. Edwards school with municipal offices is going to leave quite a few monumental and historically important buildings, two of them very visible on the city's main street, in need of new owners and new purposes. What those new purposes are is going to have an impact, by no means insignificant, on the city.
COPYRIGHT 2018 CAROLE OSTERINK

Dear Commissioner Flood

On Saturday, the Register-Star reported that the Columbia Economic Development Corporation (CEDC) is selling 33 acres of land on Route 66 to Ginberg's Foods for one dollar. This morning, Ken Flood, Columbia County's commissioner for planning and economic development, sent out CEDC's e-newsletter, which made no mention of the sale. Hudson alderman John Friedman (Third Ward) responded with this letter to Flood, which he copied to several Hudson elected officials and gave Gossips permission to publish.

Dear Commissioner Flood:

Thank you for sending me the CEDC e-newsletter this morning. I was very interested to learn that you have nothing to say about the give away of 33 acres of County-controlled land to perhaps the wealthiest private business in the county for the grand total of one American dollar. Rather than discuss the rationale behind this breathtaking decision, you remain silent. Did the Register-Star report the wrong valuation, perhaps? As I recall the report was the land was worth in excess of $300k. Well, perhaps your silence is eloquent.

I note in the past year the County petitioned the City of Hudson to waive a $35k building permit fee for the reconstruction of the County courthouse. At the time, the County pled poverty. Almost immediately after the Hudson City Council acquiesced to the County’s petition (against my vote, by the way), the County then entered into a lease with the Hudson City School District to rent the vacant Claverack School for $100k per year plus the cost to the County of upgrades to the School—when the asking price to purchase the entire property was only in the $300k range. I’ve never— in over 30 years in business and 20 years as a practicing attorney—heard of anyone paying 1/3 of the purchase price to rent a run-down property. Never.  

And, now, we learn of this fabulous gift of property deeded to the CEDC to benefit the County being given to a company that doesn’t need the gift. Ginsburg’s, we’re told, was going to leave the county if they didn’t get the gift; and in return they will create a total of 50 new jobs. At the same time, up and down Warren Street in the City of Hudson, hard-working entrepreneurs carve out their economic fate despite our County government (certainly not with the aid of it). Well in excess of 80 small, independent businesses call Hudson home, and they employ 100s. Can the CEDC provide some free rent money to these entrepreneurs—or do they have to threaten to move to Greene or Dutchess counties to get the CEDC’s attention? And the City of Hudson—the only meaningfully dense and urban area in the county and the County seat—gets beggared by the very County government that we pay taxes to (and that, in return, pays no property taxes to the City for all the land the County occupies within the city).

So, again Commissioner Flood, thank you for sending me this morning’s CEDC e-newsletter. It underscores what a wonderful relationship the citizens of Hudson have with their County government.

Last Night at 401 State Street

The Columbia County Board of Supervisors held its monthly meeting last night. The previous day, six members of the Board of Supervisors issued an open letter calling for the resignation of Matt Murell, chairman of the board, alleging that he "engaged in unethical and potentially unlawful conduct" to block the petition for a referendum on establishing an elected county executive. A press release from the Columbia County Democratic Committee, published below, describes what happened at the meeting last night.

Photo: Columbia County Democratic Committee

Columbia County Supervisors Chair Stifles Discussion of County Executive Plan

The chair of the Columbia County Board of Supervisors cut off discussion of a plan to create a county executive at a packed Wednesday night board meeting, shutting down a move by some Democratic members to censure him over his drive to deny voters a more modern and efficient form of county government.

The action by Chair Matt Murell, a Republican, came as about 100 voters in the chamber called for him to step down from his post, a proposal backed by the Columbia County Democratic Committee.

Murell repeatedly interrupted Democratic board member Tistrya Houghtling, the board's minority leader, as she attempted to describe why Murell should be censured for his actions in throwing out a petition to establish an elected county executive. Several Republican supervisors joined their Democratic colleagues on a procedural vote to consider the censure resolution, though it failed.

Murell said that any discussion about the censure should take place in executive session, prompting the board to require the public to clear the room. 

Houghtling, speaking after the meeting, said the censure discussion "should not have occurred behind closed doors. Our constituents and the public are our bosses, and they should be able to be part of a conversation that involves behavior that we believe is improper." What transpired in the executive session wasn't disclosed.

The petition was signed by nearly 4,000 Columbia County voters. Murell and the Republican-appointed board clerk denied the petition in July, using specious claims to reject about 1,500 of the signatures.

The Columbia County Democratic Committee filed a lawsuit challenging the signature counting. Murell then used taxpayer funds to hire a Republican-aligned special counsel to void the petition without gaining the Board of Supervisors' approval--a move that raises ethical and possibly legal questions.

Even more troubling, court testimony in the case showed that the taxpayer-funded special counsel prepared objections to the petition, a move that he and the clerk of the board later affirmed. A county resident who challenged the petition process on behalf of Murell was given the objections--pre-written--while in Murell's government office, another move that raises serious ethical and legal concerns.

Murell's actions on Wednesday once again show why the Columbia County Democrats believe he is unfit to chair the board.

"Last night was a stark reminder of why our county government is broken," said Sam Hodge, Columbia County Democratic Chair. "What Murell did was wrong--and he knows it--which is why he silenced his own colleague rather than allow a real debate. It's outrageous."

"Once again, the public was shut out with no opportunity to speak. This is not democracy, and it's exactly why we must change this system," Hodge added.

The Plan to Put County Offices in a Big Box

At the beginning of Wednesday's meeting about the proposal to acquire the vacant Walmart store on Fairview Avenue and turn it into an "efficient operation center for county government," a list was distributed of the departments that would leave the county seat if the plan were to be implemented. They are as follows:

From 325 Columbia Street:

• Environmental Health/Health Department
• Mental Health
• Health Care Consortium
• Office for the Aging

From 401 State Street:

• Planning/Tourism
• Youth Bureau, including STOP-DWI
• Central Services with storage facilities
• DPW/Facilities

From 601 State Street:

• Probation Department
• Public Defender
• County Historian
• Backup 911 Center

Also:

• Social Services--from 25 Railroad Avenue
• Columbia Economic Development Corp.--from 4303 Route 9 (the Holcim building)

Only the county offices required by law to be situated in the county seat would remain in Hudson, and those would all be relocated to 325 Columbia Street. They include the Board of Supervisors' offices and boardroom; Human Resources, including Civil Service; Accounts Payable; Payroll Department; County Attorney's Office; Budget Officer; Board of Elections; District Attorney's office, which has already moved to 325 Columbia Street. The Department of Motor Vehicles and the County Clerk's office would remain at 560 Warren Street.

Ken Flood, in his capacity as the Chief Operating Officer of the Columbia County Capital Resource Corporation (one of Flood's several titles and roles), stated at the outset of the meeting that its purpose was to "listen to the public provide an opinion on this option," but, even though this time it was the CRC who was listening and not the Board of Supervisors, many at the meeting felt it was July 2008 and the "public hearing" on Ockawamick all over again. At that meeting, hundreds of people filled the auditorium at Montgomery C. Smith--then the middle school, now the intermediate school--to express the opinion that buying an abandoned school building in the "geographic center of the county" to create a county "campus" somewhere other than the county seat was a singularly bad idea. But in spite of overwhelming opposition to Ockawamick, the Board of Supervisors went ahead and spent $1.5 million to purchase the building, which remains unused. On Wednesday, Second Ward Supervisor Ed Cross expressed the feelings of many when he told Flood, "It seems like we already bought it [the old Walmart building], and now you're selling it to us."

It seemed few at the meeting liked the idea of spending "something less than $2.7 million" to buy an abandoned big box and another $14 million to refit it as an office building--the few being Ken Flood and the members of the CRC board who were present: Bruce Bohnsack, Sid Richter, Ted Guterman, Jim Mackerer, and possibly others not noticed by Gossips. In the many questions and comments voiced during the hour-and-a-half-long meeting, there were some recurrent themes.

• The proposal, which involves 125,000 square feet of building and 14.5 acres of land, doesn't include a plan for sheltering the homeless. Since county's current practice of housing the homeless in motels costs an inordinate amount of money and so far the implementation of the recommended "congregate housing" model doesn't promise to be much better in terms of expense to taxpayers, it seems essential that any proposal that purports, among other things, to save taxpayer money should address the homeless housing problem. 
• Moving 300 county employees, who buy lunch and shop in Hudson, out of the city will have a negative impact on Hudson businesses.  Mayor Richard Scalera demanded to know during meeting, "Whose interest is it to move 300 county employees out of the City of Hudson?" No answer was forthcoming.
• The proposal creates access problems for a substantial number of people who require services. Michael Cole, director of the Mental Health Department, reported that 20 to 30 percent of his department's clients walk to the clinic. Mayor's aide Carmine Pierro said that 46 percent of clients of the Health Department and 55 percent of the clients of the Department of Social Services live in Hudson.   
• Moving government offices out of the city into a box store situated among box stores is detrimental to the community at large. Matthew Frederick, an architect and urban designer who recently moved to Hudson, warned that "the location of county buildings in sprawl becomes an endorsement of sprawl."
• The removal of county offices from Hudson constitutes the systematic dismantling of the county seat. 
• By emphasizing efficiency and cost reduction, the proposal is apathetic toward the consumers of the services and strips them of their dignity.

Toward the end of the meeting, Scalera expressed his frustration with a process that has gone on for more than two years. He reminded Flood that the Board of Supervisors had created an ad hoc subcommittee--the Space Utilization Subcommittee, chaired by Fifth Ward Supervisor Bart Delaney--and had tasked that group with finding the best place for the Department of Social Services. After study and consideration, that subcommittee made the decision to keep DSS in Hudson and narrowed the sites for a new DSS building down to two: the southwest corner of Fourth and State streets (a vacant lot owned by the City of Hudson) and the northwest corner of Fourth and Columbia streets (a vacant lot owned by Eric Galloway). Scalera wanted to know why, when the decision of the Space Utilization Subcommittee was supposed to be binding, the CRC was now proposing another "option."

Ted Guterman, attorney for the CRC and the IDA, expressed his opinion that the acquisition of the old Walmart building "could possibly be a golden opportunity for the county--to get it out of the 19th century and into the 21st century."

A special meeting of the CRC, at which they may make the first (nonbinding) decision of a series of decisions about this acquisition, has been scheduled for Friday, December 17, at 8 a.m., at the Columbia Economic Development Corporation office, 4303 Route 9 (the Holcim building).      

Francesa Olsen's coverage of the meeting appears in today's Register-Star: "Walmart proposal gets a chilly response."