At a glance
The Common Council held its regular monthly meeting on April 28, 2026. The Council paid its bills and passed a long slate of routine resolutions, but the evening was dominated by two neighborhood fights: residents near the redeveloped Pocketbook Factory pressed the Council over constant noise from the building's rooftop machinery, and a series of speakers urged the Council to adopt a long-debated code clarification limiting industrial activity on the Hudson waterfront. Three local laws — on short-term rentals, video conferencing, and the waterfront code — were formally distributed for a vote next month. The Council also weighed a Minneapolis affordable-housing idea and an early, contested move toward charter revision.
010:00
Opening & Roll Call
The Council opened its regular April meeting, took roll, and placed the month's minutes, committee reports, and communications on file.
Key points
- Roll was called and the meeting opened; minutes from the March 24 regular meeting, committee reports, and communications were accepted and placed on file.
- Two of the communications concerned the Pocketbook Factory — a resident petition and a written response from the building's operator — setting up the meeting's first major discussion.
A note on the transcript
This page is built from YouTube's automatic captions of the meeting. That transcript has no speaker labels and garbles many names, so this summary describes who spoke by role rather than by name. Check anything important against the city's official minutes.
021:56
Pocketbook Factory: neighbors' noise and parking complaints
Residents living near the redeveloped Pocketbook Factory pressed the Council over constant noise from the building's rooftop machinery and over parking pressure in the surrounding streets.
Key points
- A resident who organized a neighborhood petition said the building's rooftop mechanical units — HVAC and restaurant exhaust — produce near-constant noise that he has documented with a decibel meter, and that readings sometimes exceed the city's nighttime limit, especially for homes in the corridor between Prospect and Washington Streets.
- A representative of the Pocketbook Factory said the project is in full compliance with city code, was fully permitted, and was overseen by city code enforcement, the State Historic Preservation Office, and the National Park Service. He said the operator wants to be a good neighbor and is negotiating a long-term lease of a nearby parking lot.
- Residents also called for residential parking permits, arguing homeowners who pay high taxes should be able to park near their homes.
- The Council President said noise and parking are not matters the Council can act on directly, and referred the petition to the Council's Safety committee — urging residents, code enforcement, police, and the mayor's office to verify that what was built matches what the Planning Board approved.
What's next
The petition goes to the Council's Safety committee. The Council President asked that residents, code enforcement, the police, and the mayor's office work together to check the building against its Planning Board approval.
0328:11
Bills and a slate of resolutions
The Council paid its monthly bills and passed a long list of resolutions by roll-call vote. One resolution — an honorary street naming — was tabled.
Key points
- The monthly bills were approved.
- Resolutions passed included: appointing commissioners of deeds; a Climate Smart Community task force appointment; accepting senior center donations; the 2025 firefighter service-award program; license agreements (including one with the Hudson River Historic Boat Restoration & Sailing Society); DPW fund transfers for street lighting; training for Planning Board members; EV-charging-station contracts; the 2026 events awards; authorizing a public hearing on a federal Community Development Block Grant project; and a transfer to a capital fund for parking-kiosk installation.
- An honorary street-naming designation was tabled: city code requires a unanimous Council vote to name a street after a living person, and two members were absent. It returns next month.
A note on the transcript
Resolution titles here are drawn from a rough automatic transcript; check the city's official agenda for exact wording.
0438:57
Three local laws head toward a vote
The Council formally distributed three local laws for a vote next month, after discovering it had never adopted a protocol for sending legislation to members electronically.
Key points
- The Council President explained that laws had been shared electronically, but the Council had never formally adopted electronic transmission as its official method — so printed copies were physically placed on members' desks to satisfy the legal notice requirement.
- The three laws: a short-term-rental (STR) local law; a cleanup of the city's video-conferencing rules; and a clarification of the waterfront zoning code (Chapter 325).
- The waterfront code clarification is not ready for a vote. The Council President said it needs more research into litigation risk and an updated preamble before it can be sent to the county and the local planning board for the required review.
What's next
The short-term-rental and video-conferencing laws are expected to be voted on at next month's regular meeting. The waterfront code clarification needs more work before it can advance.
0545:20
Public comment: residents push to limit industry on the waterfront
A series of speakers urged the Council to adopt the waterfront code clarification, framing it as protecting limits on industrial activity that Hudson set in 2010.
Key points
- A resident urged adoption, citing guidance from the New York State attorney who helped Hudson develop its Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP). She argued that a dock permit without clear caps on intensity of use is more valuable to an owner — and that the city should not be deterred by threats of litigation.
- A local business owner recounted Hudson's 2010 defeat of a multinational company's proposed industrial expansion on the waterfront, after which the city updated its zoning to cap industrial operations. He described the proposed law as a clarification that reaffirms those existing 2010 limits, not a new restriction.
- Residents living near the waterfront described a sharp increase in gravel-truck traffic, safety concerns crossing the railroad tracks, and dust and air-quality concerns from uncovered trucks.
Connections
This thread connects to Hudson's Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP), the 2010 zoning changes that followed a contested industrial proposal, and a 2020 truck study. A fully built Hudson AI would follow the waterfront across every meeting and board where it surfaces.
0658:56
New business: an affordable-housing idea, and a debate over charter revision
Council members raised a Minneapolis affordable-housing program and the early steps toward a Hudson charter revision — the latter drawing pushback that it is moving too fast.
Key points
- A council member described Minneapolis's "4d" program, which gives small landlords a tax incentive to keep units affordable, with limits on rent increases. The city attorney cautioned that New York municipalities can only do what state law specifically authorizes, so a local tax incentive would face legal hurdles. The Council agreed to obtain and review the program details.
- A council member said they are assembling a committee and collecting letters of interest from residents, connected to a possible charter revision.
- In public comment, a resident argued the charter-revision invitations are premature — the Council should first study the options for forming a charter revision commission under state municipal home rule law, ideally with a presentation from counsel. Another speaker warned, from experience with New York City charter change, that the process can cause unintended harm and should be approached carefully.
- Hudson's last major charter revision was in 1973; speakers urged a slow, transparent process with strong public participation.
Read the full transcript
0:03Are we on? >> Yeah, I am. >> Okay. Okay. So, this is the regular meeting for April 28th, 2026. Now, in session, uh please rise for the details of America for one nation. President Lawrence >> here. >> Council member Had >> here. >> Hagen >> here. >> Boston >> here. >> Roberts >> here. Beltona >> here. President here. Maranti >> here. >> Warren present. >> Uh, can I have a motion to dispense with
1:07the reading of the minutes of the March 24th regular meeting and place them on fire? Motion from Clare. Second from Henry. All in favor? >> I opposed. Uh committee department reports have been received and uh placed on file. They are composed from the website. Uh may I have a motion and second to place the committee reports on file. Motion by Dr. Don. Second by clair. All in favor? >> I uh communications have been posted in the city website. Uh may have motion and second to receive the communications and place them on file. Motion one second Henry. All in favor I >> opposed. Um so one of the communications that we received two actually relates to the pocketbook factory and so uh I think at this juncture we also have you know some old business relating to um
2:11clarification of the code but at this juncture if anyone wants to discuss the any council members have any comments on the communications regarding the pock factory. We received both a petition that I circulated last week and we received yesterday a response from book. >> Any discussion? Uh does anyone know what the code enforcement's input on this? >> I have not gotten any input from code enforcement by this. the only uh uh short-term solutions we discussed at the safety committee meeting which we passed along to DPW through um HPD were to uh implement the signs and painting on those streets and now that today I think it's the first day that they started doing that. So let's, you know, try to see what changes happen in the short term. Uh maybe some of the problems are mitigated just by some corrective parking on at least for the short-term safety issues. So
3:13>> in addition, um at the end of last year, there was a process in place to have a an agreement for the parkable factory to lease a substantial portion of the parking spaces behind the firehouse. uh there were issues with that in that DPW had not been brought into the discussion and there were some problems with how that was done in terms of the procedure and so that did not go through in December. Um we then had the snow situation that that we all remember in February March. So they now have a site plan and that contract isn't is going through the the appropriate channels and should be before the council. Um I hope by next month that they will formally be leasing and then they will be paving that uh portion of that parking lot which is behind the bar house as also I think will contribute. >> Any other council member comments? Dominic >> just got a question. So if I remember from the planning board one of the uh plans were to have permittance for the
4:19municipal parking lot. We know if the pop factory have any permits to utilize >> I know that the purchase support. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Municipal. Okay. Yes. Thanks. >> Yes, we do. >> Y >> any other comments? >> Are they here today to speak? >> I am about to ask the public if they have anything. Do you have any comments? >> No. >> Uh anyone from the public who would like to speak on this? just if you could you don't have to state your name but if you could indicate uh whether you're a Hudson resident or you're resident board for Carl Satada >> there was something I read recently and I think it was in the position to regarding this was questioning what was proposed versus what was actually there regarding the noise the equipment things like that so that It seemed to be lowhanging fruit to find out if what was proposed that the planning
5:23board agreed to versus what's actually on the top which would also um speak to people's concerns about so is something are there actions to coincide with that statement and to find out. So I I don't know if you've had an opportunity to see the response from the bar factory. We posted no we we got it last night and we posted this today. Uh so in response to the mechanical noise issue in petition um the statement is we are in full compliance uh of Hudson city code 2106 [clears throat] and they the rooftop units our full project was approved by the city of Hudson planning board and the construction was overseen by and approved by the city of Hudson code enforcement. Uh we have permanent certificate of occupancy on par. Um we we also it's a a reg registered building. So the design is also overseen
6:25and approved by New York State's Historic Preservation and National Park. So this is posted on the website bullet by bullet responses. Um I think you know I I haven't seen this icon that was approved by the planning board but the misconnect may be that things that may have been discussed uh were not part of the final approved uh site plan >> right >> and so that ideally would be a discussion between the uh residents and the book and probably the mayor's office uh to try to see if this is something that could be uh agreed to. So, but >> right >> something I I am going to refer this petition to uh Henry's uh committee which is safety that's very uh the police department reports. So, that's where we refer the um the issue is to uh noise or parking etc. those really are
7:29not things that we as a council can take action on. Right? So that's why I really like to see engagement with code enforcement, mayor's office, police department, and the community members on the top trying to figure out how do we work through this together. >> Awesome. >> Because we don't we can't there's not much we can do. >> Clear. I would also like to consider like to it be considered there's an old saying called trust but verify. >> Yes. So the Pockwood factory, thank you Pacwood Factory for everything it's providing in many ways, but they're saying that referenced against what the planning board said. Like if the planning board's documentation is a match for what the pocketbook said, then great. The next step is a safety meeting, seeing how people can work together. But I would just >> Oh, no. I have to ask you that. >> Yes. >> I'm seeing a disconnect between what the community members are saying and what I have heard from the park.
8:33>> Okay. Then I misunderstood because you >> I misunderstood reading this saying. Okay. So that everybody >> good. >> No, I just read it because I wanted to give you their response. >> Great. Thank you. >> Do you know the sound? Is it is it more at night that you hear it? >> I don't hear it at all. I'm on North Fifth and and Prospect. I live in the fourth floor, but I do think that um >> the sound is constant. Um >> I'm sorry. Can you for the record, can you identify >> and you are Hudson res? >> Hudson res. I live four doors down from the >> um I was the one that sort of pulled the neighborhood together to um put together this petition. Um, my major concern personally is the noise and the the people that sort of live on the it's essentially a handful of homes that sort of are the corridor that the noise goes towards. Um, and I've
9:39religiously documented the noise level um since the thing's been uh installed. Uh, and it's it's it's constant. They're correct that it complies with Hudson's noise ordinance um on average. Uh but there are times when I do go out there and from different parts in that area between Prospect and Washington Street um that the noise is in exits. I have photographic decimeter proof of that. Um is that validated? Probably not. Um I don't personally know what more I can do. um to address this issue. I've had conversations directly with the owners about it. They acknowledged it, but then sort of dismissed it and told them that there was still more work to do uh and to contact them once um they were complete. Uh, as far as I know, they're pretty darn near complete with what they're doing in regarding landscaping and stuff, but the mechanical units that are on the roof, whether it be the HVAC uh,
10:41or um, the exhaust from the restaurant, um, does impose like a noise level that is is encroaching on the what's allowable per the cook, which I believe is it can exceed 55 after uh, a certain time of I think it's uh 10 p.m. Um I went out there at um 12:30 uh the night of the the gala uh this past weekend. Uh obviously there was no like music heavy bass uh event going on. Um but it was 12:30 at night. I think the gala was over because I saw people walking past my house. Um and it was registered at like 52 to 57. Um there's different parts along Prospect which are closer to the units that are on the ground adjacent to their event space. I think their their club that even when the club is not running um are in excess of that. Um so that's
11:45why I sort of canvas the neighborhood of both Washington Street and Prospect as well as uh North 6 um to ask people what their their thoughts were. uh the majority of the people um did not have much complaint about the noise. Uh the people that did were the people that simply had the arch that are sort of in that core the the construction of the building which is you know I I commend the pocketbook factory for the like what they did to the exterior in keeping with the overall look of the building. Uh, but it serves as just like a giant amphitheater and the noise that's coming off of the mechanical units as well as uh the the restaurant exhaust just gets channeled right down that cavity all the way to I forget what cross street that is there um between cross it's it's happening between fifth and sixth but I can't remember the name of the street but like every house that essentially has a backyard that faces that facade of the building and those units that are
12:48facing down into it are experiencing the snow and it consistently with everyone I talked to there when in their backyard had the same thing. Everyone that were on the opposing sides sort of had more concerns regarding the parking which culminated in the in the proposal that I or the petition that I had put together. Sounds like it's a catch base. >> It's definitely a catch base. And as long as you're in the sight angle of the noise, you you hear them. And it's like I said, 24 hours a day. Everyone here is welcome to come to my house and hang in my backyard. See if they hear. >> Now, you're not talking about music. We're all talking about some panels. To be quite honest with you, from my house, which is on Washington Street in my backyard, uh the mechanical units during music events, whether a door opens or not, are louder than the subwoofers that are in their event space. When I talk to people that are along Prospect Street, they sort of say, "We really don't hear the noise too much, but when the doors open, it's really loud." Or even when the doors aren't open, it's loud. Uh
13:50when I talked to some of the people associated with the hot food factory, they said that after you know pretty much when they first had an event, they started trying to implement some devices inside to do that. And I commend them on doing that effort. But like I said, the issue I personally have is the mechanical units on the roof and that noise. It's 24 hours a day and it's louder when the restaurant's running because it's a combination of the HVAC and the exhaust. >> [clears throat] >> Do we have any other com any raised hands online? >> Which one clarity? You said the car. So I kind of where exactly is that? So on Washington Street and Prospect Street, the houses that are on the let's just call it the south side of Washington Street or the odd side and the even side of Prospect Street to and again I live there but I don't know what that cross street is. It may even be called cross street for all I know. Dodge.
14:53>> No, it's not. >> Dodge state. >> It's it's >> I mean I can look at it, but essentially >> Franklin >> 14 15 20 houses that are there between Prospect and Washington Street there isn't an alley. It's like the only two streets that don't have an alley between them. And essentially the houses create sort of the the opposing [clears throat] sort of thing. So if you walk along Franklin Street, you don't hear the noise because the houses that are on there or the vegetation that are on there is blocking the noise. But if you go into any one of those people's backyards, you immediately hear the noise. It's the minute you have a side angle of those mechanical units, you hear the noise. And then like you said, as you walk out Prospect Street, whether you're on the odd or even side, the the unit that is uh on the the west end of their um sort of event space, which is
15:58on the ground, makes noise. And that just recently was kind of fired up in the last couple months, I think. >> Oh, yeah. >> Um and and you also have air hoods and the mechanical units on the roof. Um there's a there's a house that was my friend's house who just recently just got sold as well as a house that was demolished if you go in between those which is essentially being inside the pocketbook facto's courtyard or exterior space like the noise is pretty significant in that space as well. Um on one evening back I don't know few months ago there was no party going on or or or dance party or whatever going on. I went to the backyard of my friend Steer and I I had readings on my decorator that were like around the 70s. So I I think that this is not obviously um we've gotten emails, we've gotten your petition. I've had conversations some of the residents.
17:01I've also met with pocketbook uh before the petition came through. This is clearly not something that we can resolve here. Right. So what I would like to propose as I said I think having Henry's committee which has the police department reporting to it uh take a look at this and then try to um organize I mean Dominic and Claire are your representatives on the on the council um >> on one side >> excuse me >> on one side of the street. on one side of the street. Okay. Okay, >> if those of us who represent the folks who are impacted, can you coordinate with the mayor's office to meet with with code with police department and with uh the Facebook and try to, you know, as as uh our first community members indicated, look at, you know, verifying that what is there really is in compliance with what was approved by the planning board. um and then move on from there. Is that does that Neil does
18:06that uh address your next steps for you? >> Yeah, I mean I'm I'm individually like taking on some of this stuff myself just >> but from the point of view of >> invite you to have the help of the council members as well to sort of tackle some of these things that would would be very much appreciated. Um uh we have Yeah, go ahead. >> Hi Sean Roland from Taco. Um yeah, I just wanted to make sure that the council received my communication. >> Yes, we post. >> Okay, great. Um so I think you know each of the points in in the petition I addressed to you know our understanding of city code um and you know address specific points and continuing to work with the city have negotiation with the city to finalize the lease over a long-term hurricane lot. >> I mentioned that before you came.
19:08>> Yeah. So that's moving along well. I don't expect any issues. They they are referring us to have to go through, you know, proper planning. So, it's going to take time. But in the meantime, we continue to um communicate to all of our staff as well as uh any hotel guests they need to use the lot at 604 Washington Street. even though um and you know our doors are always open and is public and whenever there is an issue with anyone you know that a local resident sees some someone who's parking even though it is a public street can't control where people park. We certainly message all of our guests that they should be using our lot. Um and we are certainly sympathetic to neighborhood concerns around parking on the street. Um and yeah, I mean we want to the sentiment of of my response was that we want to be good neighbors. We are all in community together. We went through, you know, multi-year planning process with the city of Hudson. Cody
20:12enforcement oversaw the entire project. New York State Historic Preservation Office oversaw the project. National Park Service oversaw the process. So I can appreciate that. you know, you want to do due diligence and welcome the council members to do the same, but we follow letter of the law. We did everything by the books through all of those processes. So, I, you know, just want to make sure that everyone understands we we really follow the rules with everything. I understand it's a big project. It's a change in the neighborhood. It's a big impact. Um, and that's that's real and I I empathize, but it's also, you know, it brings a lot of positive exciting things to this to the neighborhood and the city, particularly [clears throat] in the form of revenue to the city, which is certainly important. We all know the physical state of things. And you know, we're really we're doing our best to be um a space that is open and welcoming both to local
21:17residents and to visitors. And that comes with the pros and cons, but I just wanted to really share that it's not on yours. Um but it is, you know, we that building is a commercial site and it was there long before any of the houses were there in the neighborhood [snorts] damage. who I get people who come in every day say, "I remember when, you know, my grandparents worked here and every day at 5:00 there would be a line of cars around the block and everyone would stream out and the neighborhood would be flooded with people. So like it's part of living in an urban environment that you have sites that are of different scales and serve different uses. So I think that's also important just a way um you know in line with the other concerns. Thank you. >> So, we're going to Oh, sorry. Go ahead. >> Hi. Oh, my name is Vor and I live on Hen Street. And I wasn't here when you were talking about the parking,
22:20but I think it's another example of these traffic studies that are kind of bogus and that it's time for us to have residential parking in place. Um, you know, we pay very large taxes as homeowners and we could be like many other places across the country where we have a sticker on our car that says we live here and we get to park here and if you don't have a sticker, you can't park there. It's pretty straightforward on residential streets. >> I'm I'm sorry. I I just don't want anyone to make the correlation between the pocketbook factory and a residential parking issue because the parking requirements were changed at the planning board level in the city. So that project could be >> done. So it's not >> Oh yeah. So look at this situation for residents at Lithia that more and more I'm all for the I totally support it 100%. This is a direct hypocrisy. It's
23:26directed at the situation in this city for residents especially nobody who visit me and and parking and it's real and I would hope to the common council we start to look at it. >> Any other comments? Yes. This the last time. >> Is it possible for me to ask a question directed towards the representative? >> I'm sorry. Excuse me. Is it possible for me to ask a question to the representative then? >> No. No. >> Comments have to be directed to us. you can make a comment >> and I'll just make a general comment and >> you can make comment and then if wants to respond to the counc um but I'm curious to know if um you know I know there was parking studies done and some others probably studies done um as the book factory went through the process of getting their permits received and doing what they did um I'm just curious if a study in terms of like the noise impacts relable to the
24:32the the mechanical units were was ever done by an acoustic engineer or uh the mechanical engineers with when I approached um uh the prior um uh building code. Uh he told me quote unquote that the units that they engineered and put on their roof were silent units. uh and um you know were would be code compliant. Um and my question is is a study done in terms of like the amount of noise that you give off um of it being an acceptable solution to the project. >> So that would certainly not have been done at the council level. that would have been at the planning board >> and that's >> and I don't know if yeah I don't know if that's where I would address that question too because I don't >> to the planning board very early in in the process and I've received no um communication back from them. >> Okay. So like I guess I'm just looking for whatever avenues I can to you know sort
25:35of state my concerns and and get the answers that I'm looking >> well there's new members of the planning board. I don't know how much they would know of this because it's a while back. So it's probably, you know, somewhere in the code documentation that was submitted and some kind of paperwork that was submitted prior to the member based on researching >> based on my research and it's very limited and it's not my area of expertise but there is I believe it's SQ violation which if that study wasn't done uh would um >> the only thing I can say on this is that you should take it to the planning board. >> Okay. >> And the planning board is independent of the council. >> Okay. >> Um we don't appoint them. >> And that to me is the probably the best forum to take that question to. >> What do they mean? >> Any other public comments? >> Okay.
26:37>> Sorry. Can we address officer is really who oversees the what has been done. So If it's been through the planning board process and they have produced their findings and their determinations on the matter, um then it's really in the hand of code enforcement. Code enforcement is one who's going to compare the documents and the approvals to what is going on on the ground. So that I would I think it should actually need to start with the code enforcement officer because once the planning board has issued its approval for something it's pretty it's done unless it needs to be sent back to them for some reason. But >> well I'm understanding this question to be in part what exactly did the planning board approve and also did they follow the >> that's now at the hands of the code. >> Right. Right. >> So right the the issue here is that you know, we can try to navigate and uh work with residents and work with the police department and the code enforcement
27:41office, which is essentially under the mayor's office. We can help with that, but we don't have authority over any of it. So, [snorts] I I want you to know like we do hear your concerns. Um, but I think you have to go through the appropriate channels. I did actually invite code enforcement to be here this evening, but they were unable to make it. Uh any other public comments? Okay. Um thank you very much. Uh we're going to move on. Uh bills. You have the list of bills on your desks. Uh may I have a motion uh and a second to pay the bills? Motion from Henry, second from Jason. Um, anybody got any questions, comments? No. Okay. So, do roll. >> President Lawrence.
28:43>> Yes. >> Council member Had. >> Hi. >> Fernhagen. Ronnie. >> Hi. >> Sar. >> Hi. >> Roberts. >> Hi. Belton VA. >> Hi, >> Cousin. >> Hi, >> Mari. >> Hi, >> Car. >> Uh, now we're moving on to resolutions. Uh, we have a resolution appointing commissioner of deeds, commissioners. Uh, may I have a motion and second Jason and Dan? Uh, roll call vote. >> President Lawrence. >> Yes. >> Council member. >> Hi. Bernhagen Roning. >> Hi, >> Sar. >> Yes, >> Roberts. >> Hi. >> Bel. >> President. >> Hi. >> Morant. >> Hi. >> Okay. Uh, next is a resolution um with a recommendation uh to this climate smart
29:48community task force of uh Alexandra Sanjenko. Uh may I have a motion? Claire and second is uh is uh Rich Roll. >> President Morris. >> Uh yes. >> Council member Hadad. >> Hi Ronnie. >> Hi >> Zar. Hi >> Foster. >> Hi >> Roberts. >> Hi >> Belton. >> Hi >> Cousin. >> Hi >> Mari. >> Hi >> Carrie. Okay. Uh next is an issue we discussed about the informal leading uh honorary street naming designation from L for way. Um in the code with the language relating to um a point uh naming a street after a living person requires a unanimous vote of the council and as we have two council members who are not present tonight. uh both side majority whether that's a simple
30:51majority or super majority and so forth they're all based upon the full council and absence and recusal or abstension they count as neither yes nor so since we do not have a uh full council here to vote on this we will be uh pausing it for now and if people have any questions whatever from last week they can follow up but we are tableling this for now I do want to know if there's anyone one online or in the room who has any comment on this? Are you seeing anything open? >> No, the answer's raised. >> Okay. Anybody in the room have any comments on this? >> Okay. So, we'll just hold this for uh next month. >> Okay. Uh next is a resolution uh accepting senior center donations. May I have a motion? One and clear. >> Yes. >> Council member Hadad. >> Hi.
31:52>> Hagen. Ronnie. >> Hi. >> Smart. >> Hi. >> Foster. >> Hi. >> Roberts. >> Hi. >> Felo. >> Hi. >> Cousin. >> Hi. >> Moranti. >> Hi. >> Okay. Uh, next is the firefighter service award program 2025. Uh, motion. and second to vote. Do you want clear rolls? >> Yes. >> Hiagen. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> Foster. >> Hi. >> Roberts. Hi. Belton. Hi. >> Cousin. >> Hi Moranti. I >> hear >> uh next is a uh resolution uh approving the mayor to execute a license agreement with Hudson Fabulous. How can we have a motion and a second? Jason, there's a
32:56motion Henry second. Uh roll call. President Mark, >> hi >> Ron. >> Hi. >> Sara. >> Hi. >> Foster. >> Hi. >> Roberts. >> Hi. >> Belton. >> Volo. >> Hi. >> Cousin. >> Hi. >> Moranti. >> Hi. >> Har. >> Okay. Uh, next is authorizing a license agreement with the Hudson River uh, Historic Boat Restoration Sailing Society. May I have a motion and second? Jason and Henry roll. >> President Morris. >> Yes. >> Council member Hadad. >> Hi. >> Hagen. Ronnie. >> Hi. >> Sar. >> Hi. >> Foster. >> Hi. >> Roberts. >> Volo. Hi. >> Cousin. Hi. Moranti. Hi. Harry. Hey. Our
34:04next is authorizing DPW transfers for street lighting and filling uh motion uh from uh Jason and Henry. Uh any questions on this? I think we discussed it bank last week. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. Roll call. >> President Morris. >> Yes. >> Hi. >> Hagen. Hi >> Foster. >> Hi Robert. >> Hi Ba. >> Hi >> Cousin or Moranti. >> Hi. >> Okay. Uh next uh authorizing training for planning board members. May I have a compare motion vote and a second? Chair motion and uh second roll. >> President Warren. Yes. >> Council member Hadab. >> Hi. Hagen >> Ro.
35:05>> Hi >> Sar. >> Hi >> Foster. >> Hi >> Roberts. >> Hi >> Bella. >> Hi >> Mari. >> Hi. >> Uh next is selecting uh PO vendor for additional EV charging stations. I have a motion and second. Motion from uh Rich second from Henry. Um, may we have a roll call vote? >> President Morris. >> Yes. >> Council member. >> Hi. >> Hagen. Ronnie. >> Hi. >> S. >> Hi. >> Foster. >> Hi. >> Robert. >> Hi. >> Below. >> Hi. >> Cousing. >> Hi. >> Morance. >> Hi. Jared. >> Uh, next is authorizing the renewal of the charge point contract. Uh, may I have a motion and second? Motion from Rich, second from Dan. Roll call vote.
36:13>> President Morris. >> Uh, yes. >> House member. >> Hi. >> Hagen. Brown. >> Hi. >> S. >> Hi. >> Foster. >> Hi. Roberts. >> Hi Delta. >> Volo. >> Hi >> Cousin. >> Hi Mari. >> Hi >> Barry. >> Okay. Next is the uh 2026 events awards. Uh we did we had just distributed this last week. Uh do I have a motion and second vote bridge second? Roll call. President Morris. >> Yes. >> Council member. >> Hi. >> Bernhagen. >> Brownie. >> Hi. >> S. >> Hi. >> Foster. >> Hi. >> Roberts. >> Hi. >> Alison. >> Hi. >> Cousin. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> Har. >> Uh, next is authorizing the mayor to hold a public hearing regarding a CDBG
37:17project. May I have a motion and second? Go on. and second Jason. Um, roll. >> President Morris. >> Yes. >> Council member. >> Hi. >> Hagen. Ron. >> Hi. >> Sarah. >> Hi. >> Officer. >> Hi. >> Roberts. >> Hi. >> Bela. >> Hi. >> Present. >> Hi. >> Morance. >> Hi. >> Hi. Next, we have a resolution authorizing the mayor to enter into collection service agreement with T2. Uh, may I have a motion to second? We have a second from Jason and roll. >> Yes. >> Member. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> Sra. >> Hi. >> Foster. >> Hi. >> Robert. >> Hi. >> Belton. are
38:18>> present. >> Hi, >> Maranti. >> Hi, >> Carrie. >> Okay. Uh, next is authorizing funds transfer uh to capital fund for parking kiosks implementation. May I have a motion to vote and a second? Henry Dwan. >> President Wars. >> Yes. Council >> member. Hi. >> Bernhagen. Hi. Hi >> Foster. >> Hi >> Roberts. >> Hi >> Bella. >> Hi >> Cousin. >> Hi >> Marcy. >> Hi >> Carrie. >> So now we're going into local laws and uh while you have received all of these electronically and everything has been posted and you have had them for well more than the required time to be able to vote on them. Um what Lur and I have discovered is that we did not officially adopt um a protocol that allows for
39:25electronic transmission as laying on the desk. And so we have to physically lay these on your desk, which is why L has printed off copies of these laws and put them out for you so that we will just they're not urgent. We will vote on them next month. The first one is the one we've talked about with the STRs and uh this Yes. So the second is um just cleaning up our video conference and we're leaving voter law and change to a resolution so that we can be more um uh you know nimble in making change law changes. So that those are now laid on. The first one is the um local operates SDR that is now laid on your desk. And the second is the local law repealing uh current um the current the law that was put in place and then uh a local law clarifying um that section of the the culture. Okay. Um [clears throat]
40:29>> I'm sorry. >> No, I didn't print the public hearing on that one. >> I'm sorry. Which one are we on? >> This one. I didn't print it because we already held the public hearing and everything. I only printed this one because we weren't addressing this one. >> Okay. Well, I think that we probably I thought you printed this one as well. >> Um I think we I think we need to print that out and physically give it to >> We have plenty of time. >> Yes. >> Is it be a good time to then are we handling the clarifying law differently than the others? The others you you said are fairly straightforward. We just didn't put them on the desk. We're going to vote on the next. >> Well, no, we're not handling them differently. What we discovered when we were getting ready to vote on these was when we went into, you know, in the past the process has been the president has a physical copy of the law and there just a statement on your desks. um but they weren't physically given to the council members and without formally adopting a
41:32process to say we are going to transmit things electronically and there are rules under municipal law around that that says you can send it by email that's fine but you have to officially adopt that as your transmission everybody has to agree to be so I'd like to put that in place these are not urgent so we will get you a physical copy of uh the short-term rental piece and what we currently have are the physical copies and relative copy relating to uh video conferencing. >> Okay. Right. >> But it's not so we're not doing anything different. We're just trying to clean things up. >> I know. I I felt like I heard you say that they're not urgent. They're simple. We'll vote on them next month. But I feel like the the one law >> take the the clarifying. >> This one is about the dock. It's an old law. This one from Donna. >> Oh, I'm sorry. It's from down. >> Yeah, I'm sorry. I will go back to that in a second. I'm sorry. I I got turned >> in that same section. Yeah. No, like
42:34we're in a different place. >> So, right now the ones that we're not doing anything with right now that we will vote on next month for short-term rental and uh the video conference. >> Thank you. and we need to give you a physical copy of the to-term method between now and our next meeting so that we can proceed. Uh with regard to clarifying code section 325 of the Hudson code um at this point we did we had that uh last week we we looked at it. Um at this point I think we need to do some additional research um into uh you know potential uh outcomes into litigation in other municipalities. Uh and I don't think that we are at a point personally where we can uh make take any action or vote on this. Um I would like us to do some more work on um you know what the what the possible ramifications are and outcomes. Also the version that we looked at last that we currently have
43:39is the version submitted to us and the preamble to that law um not not the body itself from the 2010 later but the preamble is is something that I would want to update. There were pieces in the version from last year that I thought were worth putting in. So, we don't have a final copy that we could then send to the county and the local planning uh board. Um, so we can't vote on until we do that and they have a month to respond, but I don't think we're at a point where we have a final document that we can agree on and say we want to send this to the county. Uh, so that's where that's Yeah, thank you for catching me on that. Uh so any uh comment from the council >> Margaret? So does the clock start now? It's late on our desk. >> But the clock doesn't stop start because we haven't sent we're not sending it to the country. We're not ready. We don't have a final version that we are ready to send it to the country. >> No, I'm talking about these >> the video conference. >> There's not far.
44:40>> What do you mean? >> I thought I thought you said delay at our desk for a local. >> Oh yeah, the other items on our desk. Oh, not >> that is that's right. Yeah, we're you you have to do it eight days before you take action. >> Okay. >> And so all we're doing is we physically gave you a copy of it. >> Gotcha. >> You will have had it for eight days. The next >> we have had >> for six months. >> I know. >> Okay. Um so any comments from the council on uh clarifying the code? >> You we're all in agreement that we need to do some more work here. Okay. Any public not? >> Yes. >> Is it okay to speak? >> Yes. >> Hello everyone. Again, my name is Donna Stites. I'm a resident in first board and I'd like to make a few comments on the local law clarification 325171D1. Um, as the county council considers this proposal, highly recommend that council
45:43members listen to 15 minutes of William Sharp's comments from the September 26, 2011 council meeting where the WRP was adopted starts about the 57 minute mark on the audio file that's included in your meeting materials. I'd like to read a brief excerpt from that. A lot of the requirements which are in the conditional use permit actually mirror other sections of the city's laws and ordinances. They may not have been brought to bear before, but now they are actually in a specific conditions to ensure that the use is a good neighbor. There's a recognition that if it if there's going to be a continued dock operation down there that it try to coexist and exist well with other kinds of uses that are happening in the city of Hudson. the reintroduction of people to its waterfront, the revitalization of housing stock, the kinds of new vitality that public and private investment has brought to Hudson. And so this zoning attempts to create that kind of balance. The hard reality now and the reason for
46:48the proposed code clarification is that the fundamental balance that attorney sharp outlined when discussing the LWRP intent is being challenged by the current dock owner. For years, they've told the planning board they have no plans to increase activity at the dock. Yet, the 2020 truck study reveals otherwise. And whenever limits are discussed, their response is legal threats. You all should ask yourself why is that? The reason seems clear. A permit without limits is far more valuable for business and for resale than one with limits. And that's actually why clear caps on the intensity of use are essential and why this code clarification matters. A waterfront is a shared asset. It's our crown jewel. They can support a mix of uses, including industry, but only if reasonable limits are in place to ensure those uses remain good neighbors as intended by the LWRP. You have the authority and I believe the
47:52responsibility to clarify the code to help make sure that intent is followed to protect our waterfront and our city for that matter. I urge the council not to be influenced by the threat of litigation and do not focus on who owns the dock today. The vote applies to the document, whatever that may be. Ownership can change, but the consequences of your decision may last for decades. Thanks for your consideration and sincerely appreciate your support of this proposal. >> Questions? Um I've I've listened for that second. Um please can you fill me in more about who attorney Sharp is and who you represent? >> Oh yes. Um so uh William Sharp was the attorney for the New York State Department of State who um provided guidance to the city of Hudson in the development of LWRP and interpreted the LRP. >> Thank you. And then later on in his comments, he made an analogy about a
48:57horse farm and um that there were 10 horses in a field and then it became 20 horses. It was so I think it was a little confusing. It was colloquial but it was also an interesting way to think about um how much growth is too much growth and and it was in his own words. >> It's in that. Yeah. Any other subject comment? Um, uh, this I'm owner of Kitties and Green Wines and the Kaboot and the W Hotel and our new CAS development which I'm very excited about. We're uh submitting drawings very soon. See you'll be in front of you soon. Um, I'm here to urge you to bring this local law forward and for a vote and adopt it. So, you all know
50:01this story probably better than I do. I've been here for eight years, but it's an old story. So, in 2010, Hudson faced a defining moment. A Swiss multinational manufacturing company, Pulsome, proposed a massive industrial expansion on our waterfront. The community responded. Thousands of signatures, extensive public comment, grassroots effort. It was defeated. The city then updated its zoning code to ensure that no future owner could expand industrial operations beyond what existed at that time. Uh that was a clear intentional decision. piece of settlements on scale to reflect Hudson's vision for the waterfront. The balance vision they wanted industry to coexist with recreational use of the park at the docks residential development and a broader economic opportunity. That was their vision. The recent decisions have opened
51:04the door not just to increased truck volume, yes, but to the removal of any meaningful cap like how large operations a dock can grow. So without clear enforcable limits, that growth is effectively unlimited. This doesn't affect one just one operator. It applies to any future owner of the dock. So this law, it's a clarification. It's not a change in direction. It's a clarification of what was already adopted as the zoning code. It ensures the limits the city established in 2010. Uh and it ensures that it's enforceable. So this law clarifies what Hudson already decided that there there are enforcable limits to industrial activity on the waterfront. So I think the law in front view is straightforward and what it does
52:09is it reaffirms that expansion beyond those levels from 2010 or 2010 um was never permitted and it ensures that those limits cannot be reinterpreted or worked around. Um I understand there's serious concern about legal risk. Um, I want to address that just head on. Um, you know, the idea of adopting a clarification like this that exposes the city to massive financial liability, it's just not how the law works. So, what would happen if you adopted it? There's a signal that there would be an article 78. That happens. That that's not uncommon. the city has a mechanism to to deal with an article 78 in an afordable way. Um and so [clears throat] that what that's likely what would happen. Um frankly in my opinion um you know to keep the waterfront balanced we
53:14can't afford not to not to engage it. So, I encourage you to adopt the law, look at it, adopt it, and go forward and try and look for a balanced law. That's that's my my hope that I think that's what Hudson's vision was in 2010. Um, so it's not from just what's happening now, but it's what could happen next. Okay? >> So, because once these limits are gone, they're gone. They're gone. and the next owner may not share Hudson's vision. So, this is your moment to hold the line and Drew in 2010 and let it not be erased. >> I I appreciate your time. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Yes. >> Hi, I'm still Nicole. Um uh I I live on Allen Street and I look directly down and I go to the river many times during the week. And I think maybe you know the river from Hudson has always been sort of a
54:19flight and you know it's changing rapidly but it still has an old sort of people have old feelings about it and I would I would suggest that the council actually go down there and try to go from what would be the what is the train station and let's say you got off the train you wanted to go get a coffee so you went across cross the street and then you looked down the street and you heard about the warehouse and you wanted to go there, would you be taking your life in your hands if you did it? Number one. Number two, if you're on the side of the tracks you're trying to cross to go to the river just now with the the increased traffic, I watch it. There are trucks now like going back and forth all the time. So there is no sort of space there for people to exist with those trucks and and I think as has been said if if this law is not adopted then moving forward that could increase
55:23infinitely not only for the safety of people and the enjoyment of the riverfront but also just for the air quality alone right I I guess you all know the plans for down there and it's going to be transformed into something it already is, but something really wonderful and I think it does the city owes it to itself and not to the gravel company to really consider the city and the people that live here and I do hope that you all really consider it because it's really important for all of us. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, >> I just want to second what Nicole just said. I happened to be bringing a friend from Bard who is suddenly interested in Hudson because of the the building exchange and we stood in front. We went to Basilica Antique Warehouse Kitty. I'm a resident here for eight years. I
56:31was stunned by the increase already of trucks. It was constant. The sound was so loud that my friend and I had a move at one point. We were on the other side of the road. There was constant travel of buses [snorts] of of trucks. And what stunned me mostly from my understanding, I was at the uh the the meetings here that happened a few months ago. These trucks were uncovered. I'm not a scientist, but I saw gravel. I saw dust being picked up. And as Nicole mentioned, go down there and spend some time there and see this for sound, for dust. the danger. I actually witnessed an Amtrak train guy running out stopping a train with his hands for a bus for let's keep calling them
57:33buses for a truck to pass first. I mean to me this is you know the heart and soul of Hudson is the Basilica is the Hudson part is Kitties that it be marred by this excess and again as Nicole of and Don was saying the idea of restriction Ben is so necessary. This is all too tight and too interwoven for this to be unrestricted industry build up on our Hudson waterfront. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other public comments? >> Okay. Anything online? >> No answer. >> Okay. Um so I don't think I have anything under old business. Um I have it up there. The uh communication from the mayor was filed under
58:36communications from climate smart. >> Okay. Communication. We did get communication from the mayor uh regarding climate smart community which you shall see. Um okay. Uh then moving on to new business. Uh, do we have any new business that we wish to bring up? >> I do just a brief brief thing on housing if that's excuse me brief thing on housing if that's okay. Yeah, sure. Sure. You want to up please let me know when it's so there's this program that Minneapolis has um uh I don't know if it something we can do but I would like to see if it's possible. what's called the 4D program. And basically, it's it's an incentive for um basically mom and pops with properties and and uh uh small landlords to make their property and rentals affordable by giving them kind
59:40of a little uh tax incentive. Uh so there there's a formula in in uh involved and there's some there's a 10-year program. So basically it allows people to and there's restriction on how much rent can be increased and uh there's also what's a good thing is that if this gets enacted and somebody applies and there's already a tenant in there um they're um their from my understanding their their wage their salary isn't based on the affordability that if someone was new coming into the program. So that allows people to uh not struggle, you know, staying in place um with restricted income um where the second the second now if you move into the property and you're in the low income classification once you're in I believe a year
1:00:42the classification then goes away but you're allowed to stay there even if you make get a raise or whatever. So, there's some cool things about this program. I don't I don't know how it can be enacted, but it also can incentivize some of the short-term rentals maybe to use uh some of their property um for this. Uh and uh mom and pops, you know, uh someone with multi-units uh a two family unit, one unit can be used. It's only the unit that is given affordability but it also gives that incentive for low incomes but also moderate income but also a small landlord where it's not giving like the big pilot um and an incentivized to keep it affordable. Uh so I mean I don't know if you can have you know there's this you know brief summary I can send everyone this >> yeah I think you can share this with there's a lot of moving pieces to it. a lot of things. There's a lot of things
1:01:44that we have, but I just want to see if that's something. >> Is this something that you think housing trust fund should uh look at and discuss >> and do some research on? >> Um, possibly. It it depends on um what it entails. If it entails um or is it something that you want the legal committee to look at? >> I think the legal because because it might have something, you know, because we're changing the competition plan is is knocking on our door and things like that, right? So, uh it might be some changes there. Uh Ken, I think I can send it to you. Uh you know, just to see how this can be util if it can be utilized. >> Yeah, that that's going to be a good question just um because that general principle in New York law that often people tend to not pay much attention to but um municipalities in New York are quite con can be very constrained in what they can and can't do. the principle that through the courts and the constitution and such in New York that basically municipalities are created by the legislature and so
1:02:50they only have powers that the legislature has given they don't have any inherent powers and so there are lots of things that they may want to do but there actually has to be an identifiable statutory grant to do that particular thing. Um, so sometimes things you see things done in different states may be a great idea, but there has to be some statutory grant to the municipality to do that kind of thing, which there may be. I'm not I don't know if this is doesn't require anything special or not, but um but you just have you're not just unrestrained free agents to do whatever legislating they want. it has to be grounded in a grant from the state legislature. So, um it did kind of make my ear per when you're talking about tax adjustments based on some kind of performance or or or some conditions. Um because generally speaking, there's not a lot of flexibility for
1:03:54municipalities taxes or tax adjustments. There are lots of them that have been granted by the state legislature where there are special tax adjustments um for veterans or for disabled persons or other things that are that originate for New York state legislative acts that are that are in state statute that municipalities can adopt. So something like this we would have to I mean there may be a basis for it but it sounds like it's going to have a lot of legal issues um that we'll >> well we did something like this I think I think it's going to be how the spark of Hudson did something under real property or something that I thought >> yeah there are a lot of special cases out there but we'll have to find out what >> authorities do someone still has to pay the taxes but You give someone an incentive like Sparks or whoever. Okay, great. Then they get they get a tax break, but the taxes are still there, but everyone else just still has to pay them. So even though you might give tax
1:04:56break to some, that means that the everyone else just has to pay more, right? >> So you know, if you want to really give everyone a tax break, you have to lower you have to lower the budget. No, I hear I feel like why don't we why don't we get a copy of the document because we haven't read it, look at it and think about it and then talk about it. >> But we need to read it first. >> Yeah. >> Um I have one other thing. Any other new business from any council members? >> Okay. So I just wanted to reiterate my uh statement last week. Um, I am in the process of putting together a service committee. I've had some uh uh interest expressed from members of the public. I'm continuing to collect um uh information uh uh requests for, you know, letters of interest from individuals in the community. Um again, putting it out there. Um, if you anyone
1:06:01in the community is interested, please send me a letter via email or whatever way you like, uh, explaining your interest, your background, what you bring to the table, and, uh, I'm hoping to get this up and running within the next month. So, um, okay, we have a comment online. >> Yeah, Ronald, >> sorry. >> Hello. Uh my comment is in relation to the just made remarks about the charter revision commission. Uh before any process of charter revision gets underway and certainly before expressions of interest are solicited for service on any charter vision commission. The council should become familiar with the options for setting up such a commission. the options for the commission's procedures and the commission's possible goals. In other words, I think these invitations are premature. Those options and possib No, I'm not. If
1:07:04I may go on. >> Oh, sorry. I thought you were friending >> a little bit longer. No, these options and possibilities are set forth uh in the municipal home rule law under the consolidated laws of New York State. Uh section chapter 36A, section 4, powers of counties and cities to adopt charters, part two, city charter revisions. I think the council should be familiar with those sections of the law. There's also a very useful publication by the state revising city charters in New York State. Uh it's part of the James A. [ __ ] local government technical series. Originally published in 1998, reprinted in 2015. I think it would be useful if council either Mr. Dao the council to the council or Mr. Howard the city general council made a presentation to the to the council about the state of
1:08:07these laws and the various possibilities and provisions which are available to you. I really I think that before the council uh has considered these various options there there are at least three different options for constituting a charter revision commission. There's an option in which the council does it. There's an option in which the mayor does it. We're somewhat acquainted with the petition option which the citizens for charter change brought forth last year. I think these things should all be considered before anybody is invited to serve on a commission whose whose manner of whose constitution has not yet been determined. This is a very, you know, complicated process with many possibilities that need to be considered in advance. I'll just finish by saying that the last ch extensive charter revision took place in 1973. I believe it revised a charter from the
1:09:0920s. Before we set up a charter that might be governing Hudson for the next 50 years, we need to take our time and do this slowly, carefully, and and not rush through it. And I think that at every stage of the process, there should be maximum transparency and maximum public participation. Thank you. >> Thank you. And I'm >> sorry, just moment. Sorry, Logan. >> You have another hand up. >> We have another hand up. >> Okay. I would like to speak after that then. >> Oh, sorry. Is this Matt? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. Sorry. Go ahead, Matt. >> Uh, yes. Uh I I've experienced uh Sydney charter change in in New York City and it it opens a lot of doors and they might be the wrong ones. You have to really think about this and and be clear because it's it's a process that can
1:10:15bring good but it also can even unintentionally cause harm and and I think we need to be cautious and and we did have to work against this what happened in the city because part of the intention was to eliminate some laws of the city which many people thought were good. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Then you have B. >> Can you hear me? >> Can you hear me? >> Yes. Go ahead. >> You can hear me? Yes. >> Okay. Hey, before I ask the question, I'd like to ask, can somebody tell me how the council uh determines where council members live to ensure that they're not living
1:11:19somewhere else than they are claiming? Has the council ever dealt with this? And is there is there like an official means of ensuring the council members live where they're saying they are? Okay. So, you can make one comment per topic. Uh we have already discussed this in a previous meeting. Uh the rules for running for office on the council are uh laid out by the Columbia County Board of Elections. Uh Columbia County Board of Elections is responsible for the accuracy of the voter roles and registration and that's where it resides. And I am not going to discuss this further. But what if somebody moves after they've been after they've been collected? >> Okay. Can you mute, please? So, Bill, if you have a different question or comment, that's fine. But I we're not going to engage in this conversation. I've answered your question. That's how it's done. That's where the responsibility resides. If you have another comment, that's fine. On a different topic, go ahead.
1:12:22>> You can unmute. >> You can unmute. >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm wondering if I could maybe u by a show of hands um of the council members uh who believes that Dwan Sarowir doesn't live >> can you mute please Glo okay are there any other hands raised >> okay uh so that's it for the oh >> is it Kevin Bean was here initially he talked >> earlier there was a citizen that business owner was talked to me earlier the day was coming to Yeah. >> And something may have come up for him. I was just going to briefly >> uh touch on the topic that he >> Sure. Yes. Go ahead. >> Um so, uh >> this is a new business item. >> New business. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So, uh it's not completely under our perview, but um it did come up a little bit. Uh Johnson Mile was denied its permit um due to some complaints of some Warren Street businesses. He is owns a Warren Street business uh neighbor
1:13:25running and uh he is in support of the event and I won't go into too much more detail so I don't put too many words in his mouth but in case just something came up with that he had to leave wanted to put it out there that a positive event and u favor >> okay thank you anything else may I have a motion to adjurnn All in favor? >> Thank you.
About this page
Hudson AI transcribes, summarizes, and connects the public meetings of the City of Hudson so any resident can follow what the city is deciding without attending every meeting. This page covers one meeting; see the full archive.
How it was made
The meeting video was transcribed automatically; the transcript was then organized into sections and summarized. The raw transcript is above — every claim can be checked against it.
What to be skeptical of
The transcript is an automated transcript and contains speech-recognition errors; names and numbers may be wrong. This page has not been reviewed by a human. Nothing here is an official record — the city's official minutes are authoritative.