At a glance
The Common Council met Monday night and voted on a series of routine resolutions: bills, committee reports, budget transfers, and grant applications. The Council voted to apply for a state climate grant for Public Square sidewalk improvements (up to $160,000 with a $32,000 match) and a separate environmental grant to revise the city's Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, last updated in 2011. Katherine Kanaga of Friends of the Public Square gave an update on the park renovation: phase one bids are due August 11, work could begin this fall, and the park will be fenced during construction. The Council spent most of the evening discussing fee schedules (youth programs, parking violations, code enforcement) and a draft local law to establish a charter revision commission, no votes were taken on either.
Roll Call and Preliminary Motions
President Morris opened the meeting at 7 PM, took roll call (all 11 members present), and the Council dispensed with reading the agenda and placed committee reports on file.
Key points
- All 11 council members present
- Committee reports placed on file without reading
Public Square Renovation Update
Katherine Kanaga, co-chair of Friends of the Public Square, gave an update on the park renovation project, which has been in the works for five years. Phase one is going out to bid.
Key points
- Bids for phase one due August 11, with a contractor meeting held in the park today
- Phase one includes new pathways, repositioning the veterans memorial to Warren Street for better visibility, additional lighting funded by Michelle Henchie, replacing trees, and new benches similar to those at Promenade Hill
- Work will begin in fall or winter, the entire park will be fenced during construction
- The fountain phase is planned for later: a consolidated funding application for $675,000 from State Parks is due this Friday, Riley money ($250,000) and additional Henchie funds ($125,000 for block stone seating) will support that phase
- All grants are reimbursable, so the city must spend first and then get reimbursed, funds are earmarked for specific design elements and cannot be redeployed
- Sidewalk expansion around the park (phase three) is the subject of a separate grant application by the mayor, will be coordinated with Friends of the Public Square
- Bids due August 11
- Contractor selection follows
- Work begins fall or winter, park will be fenced
- Consolidated funding application for fountain phase due this Friday
The mayor is applying this round of CFA for sidewalk expansion around the park, which would align with Friends of the Public Square's phase three plans.
Bills, Appointments, and Resolutions
The Council voted on a series of routine items: paying bills, appointing the Register Star as the official newspaper, authorizing DPW transfers within the water system, accepting donations to the senior center and youth department, and scheduling the police department's National Night Out event for August 4.
Key points
- Council voted to pay bills that came in after last week's meeting, due before the next meeting
- Register Star reappointed as official newspaper
- DPW water system budget transfers authorized
- Senior center and youth department donations accepted
- National Night Out event set for August 4
Grant Applications
The Council voted on three grant applications: a state climate smart communities grant for Public Square sidewalk improvements, an environmental grant to revise the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, and a mitigation collection grant for a sewer project.
Key points
- Climate smart communities grant: up to $160,000 with a $32,000 city match, for streetscape improvements around the Public Square, intended to align the sidewalks (currently misaligned on the Warren Street side)
- LWRP revision grant: the city's last LWRP was done in 2011, never completed to the point of state approval, this grant will fund a new or revised plan so the city can register it with the state and become eligible for related funding
- Mitigation collection system project grant authorized (no details provided in discussion)
The grant application will fund work to realign the sidewalks on the Warren Street side of the park, which were moved inward at some point in the past. This is separate from but coordinated with Friends of the Public Square's phase three plans.
Hudson's Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, last updated in 2011, was never completed to the point of state approval. Once a revised plan is registered with the state, the city becomes eligible for related grant funding.
Interfund Loan for Sewer Debt Payment
Treasurer Heather Campbell explained that the sewer fund does not have enough cash on hand to cover a $167,000 debt service payment due August 1. The Council voted to authorize a temporary interfund loan from the general fund to the sewer fund, to be repaid when sewer revenues come in.
Key points
- The sewer fund has $177,000 in the bank, not enough to cover the debt payment and other expenses like payroll
- This is an annual wastewater treatment plant debt payment
- The loan will be repaid when the sewer fund generates revenue, this happens regularly with the water fund but is less common for the sewer fund
- The treasurer is working with DPW to identify any outstanding sewer revenues that should be collected
This is a temporary cash flow issue. The sewer fund will repay the general fund once revenues come in.
Fee Schedules: Youth Department, Clerk's Office, Code Enforcement, Parking
The Council voted to adopt a revised fee schedule for the youth department (open gym, swim lessons, basketball, soccer). President Morris then walked through proposed updates to fee schedules for the clerk's office, code enforcement, and parking violations. No votes were taken on these; the Council will submit comments and the schedules will return next month.
Key points
- Youth department fees approved: open gym is per day, swim lessons per two-week session, basketball and soccer per season
- Clerk's office updates: mass gathering permit stays at $200 (not a change), fireworks permit will be removed (the process involves a $500 donation to the fire department, not a city permit), auction fees simplified to a flat per-auction amount, paper catalog requirement will be eliminated (auction houses archive everything online)
- Code enforcement updates: finance worked with Craig (former code officer) and Nick (current officer) to simplify fixture fees, reduce the non-resident plumber application fee from $300 to $150, eliminate plumbing exam and renewal fees (the board of plumbers does not function), the $300 fee will now apply to any company outside Columbia County (not just Hudson)
- Parking violation updates: fines were last updated in 2020, many had no incentive to pay after 30 days, new structure doubles the fine after 30 days, triples after 60 days, quadruples after 90 days, then goes to collections after 120 days, the city is contracting with a collections agency
- Safety violations prioritized: fire zone increased from $50 to $100 (Dominic Merante suggested $125), crosswalk increased to $35, no parking zone to $35, alley parking from $20 to $50 (a significant safety issue for emergency vehicles), bus stop from $10 to $25
- The police department reviewed and approved the parking fine structure, the city compared its fines to other municipalities to avoid being an outlier
Council members should submit comments on the fee schedules within a week. The code enforcement schedule will go to the Legal Committee meeting Monday at 5:30 PM. Revised schedules will return next month for a vote, with local law updates as needed.
A resident reported a plumber thought they had to pay $300 to hook up a dishwasher. That job does not require a permit. The $300 fee applies only to jobs that require actual plumbing permits (e.g., installing a new bathtub or reconfiguring plumbing).
Local Laws: Budget Transfers and Procurement Thresholds
The Council voted on two local laws, both updating outdated financial thresholds. One raises the dollar limit for department budget transfers without council approval, the other ties the city's procurement rules to current state law instead of a fixed dollar amount.
Key points
- Budget transfer threshold increased to $2,000 for departments, $5,000 for two DPW members, after that it comes to the Council (not updated in years)
- Procurement thresholds now reference state law: instead of hardcoding a fixed dollar amount in the charter and code, the city will follow whatever New York State requires for bids and quotes, this way the city does not have to update the charter every time the state changes its thresholds
Charter Revision Commission (Discussion, No Vote)
President Morris introduced a draft local law to establish a charter revision commission. The Council spent 30 minutes discussing the structure, membership, and public process. No vote was taken; Morris will revise the draft based on feedback and return next month.
Key points
- Morris proposed a seven-member commission: five community members who volunteered, the council president as ex officio, and the majority leader as ex officio (all with voting rights)
- The charter has not been comprehensively updated in years and is inconsistent: some things belong in the code, not the charter, language is outdated (e.g., still references proportional voting, which no longer exists), Morris's top priority is fixing the broken budget and BBA process
- Council members raised concerns about the process: who are the five volunteers, do they represent the community's demographics, should each ward have a representative, should the commission be larger and more inclusive
- Jennifer Belton and Lola Roberts suggested each ward appoint one member to ensure geographic and demographic diversity
- Jason Foster noted the version of the waterfront dock law sent to the planning boards in May was significantly different from the version submitted by a resident, with extensive changes made by the Council without public discussion
- Public comment: Ron Kisch noted a third method exists under state law (the Council can act directly as a charter commission, though this is rarely used), asked how many people responded to the call for volunteers (five), asked if Morris reached out to people who were suggested but did not volunteer (Morris declined to answer)
- Public comment: Matt McGee said this is important enough to require a public hearing, vetting of commission members should be public, a quorum of four (out of seven) is too low, some meeting rules in the draft are problematic
- Public comment: a resident said the previous charter commission (referenced but not named) had an agenda, the people who worked on it were not acting for the general good, they tried to cut the mayor's authority and install a city administrator, the five volunteers should be identified publicly
- Morris said she will take comments from the Council within a week, revise the draft, and return next month with a new version, a local law establishing a commission would require a public hearing
Council members should submit comments on the charter commission draft within a week. Morris will revise and return with a new draft next month. A local law would require a public hearing.
New York State allows three ways to revise a city charter: the mayor can appoint a commission, the council can appoint a commission, or a citizen group can form a commission through petition. All changes go to referendum. A fourth, rarely used method allows the council to act directly as a charter commission.
The number of members, how they are chosen, and whether each ward should have a representative are all still open questions. This draft is the starting point, not the final form.
Waterfront Dock Law: Public Hearing and Special Meeting Scheduled
President Morris announced plans to schedule a public hearing on the proposed waterfront dock law clarification, possibly within two weeks. She also proposed a special meeting immediately before the public hearing to give Colarusso an opportunity to present their response.
Key points
- The Council submitted the dock law clarification to the county and local planning boards in May, the county planning board disapproved it in a June 16 letter, disapproval means the Council would need seven votes (instead of six) to pass the law
- The local planning board has not yet responded, Morris is giving them more time
- Morris wants to hold a public hearing so residents can comment directly
- Jason Foster noted the version sent to the planning boards in May was extensively revised from the version a resident (Hudson Waterfront Park) originally submitted, those changes were made without public discussion
- Morris proposed a special meeting immediately before the public hearing for Colarusso's attorney or representatives to present their response to the proposed law
- Council members should send availability for a public hearing and special meeting within the next two weeks
- Public hearing on the dock law clarification, possibly within two weeks
- Special meeting immediately before the public hearing for Colarusso to present their response
- Council members should send availability
The county planning board disapproved the proposed law in June. Under state law, that means the Council would need seven votes (a super-majority) to pass it, instead of the usual six.
The version of the dock law sent to the planning boards in May was significantly different from the version originally submitted by a resident. Those changes were made by the Council, reportedly based on updated data, but were not publicly discussed at the time.
Adjournment and Executive Session
The Council adjourned the regular meeting and went into executive session for attorney-client discussion.
Key points
- Motion to adjourn passed
- Executive session scheduled immediately after adjournment
About this page
FUTURE HUDSON is an experiment in civic engagement: every public meeting of the City of Hudson since January 2026, transcribed and made readable, 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 automated 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.