DeFusco voted "No" on ordinance to protect HISTORIC buildings in R-1 districts

Click HERE to read full article

To be fair ,the proposed demolition ordinance was voted on twice- and Councilman DeFusco voted "NO" twice.

But on the second vote, DeFusco was joined by Councilpersons Russo, Ramos and Giattino.

According to the meeting minutes, the (second) "reconsideration" vote was requested by Mike Russo.

October 19, 2016 Meeting Minutes for the Hoboken City Council 

I actually recall watching this vote (and re-vote) in real time, live-streaming the October 19, 2016 meeting.

I recall being confused why DeFusco would oppose this ordinance which, as Jim Doyle said, would protect Historic Structures from being demolished in the interim, before the historic district was expanded (because who knows when that might happen).

But Councilman  DeFusco gave a reason: something about needing to expand the historic district first; he said something like approving the ordinance would be like building the second floor before the 1st, or something along those lines.

That is what I remember.

I only bring this up, because of the Councilman's resolution, statements and campaign video announcing his 'year-long' quest for the historic preservation of  901 Bloomfield, which is in the R-1 District, a district that was protected under the proposed demolition ordinance (which he voted against).

Personally, GA doesn't see a good reason for voting against Ordinance Z-438. Too much of historic Hoboken is disappearing too fast.

But, Councilpersons DeFusco, Russo, Ramos and Giattino did.

And only one of them is running for mayor.  And the one running for mayor appears to be campaigning on saving a historic structure in an R-1 residential district.  He will have a chance to explain his vote, and he's welcome to come here to do so.

This is the ordinance which passed 5-4:

ORDINANCE A-438



Comments

  1. Damn your no good, good for nothing FACTS, GA!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. And there it is. This is how MDF rallies to protect historic buildings in Hoboken.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With that logic, Giattino is against historic preservation too. Not sure this line of thinking works.

      Delete
    2. Giattino isn't making videos about how she is leading the charge on Hoboken's historic preservation. She also voted NO on Mike's phony resolution. Giattino doesn't talk out of both sides of her mouth.And she's not running for mayor

      Delete
    3. Giattino is a realtor who makes videos to SELL the buildings. You all argue from both sides of your mouth. Good luck in this echo chamber

      Delete
    4. Trolls are trying to change the subject from the wanna-be mayor DeFusco's flip flopping on historic preservation. Flip flop! Flip flop! He was against it before he was for it!

      Delete
    5. There's never anything good on tv on Wednesday. What time does Giattino's video to sell historic buildings come on? Is there a lot of buildings for sale? Can I call in and buy one during the show?

      Delete
    6. 328, demonizing realtors? Have you discussed that with the other members of Mike For Mayor?

      Delete
    7. One realtor based on his post on this site, I think of could qualify as a more than a little demonic.

      Delete
  3. And the mayor we do have killed historic districts with an extreme base flood elevation...thanks dawn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FEMA is the regulatory agency that raised BFE, not the mayor. Hoboken's historic districts are not dead yet- no thanks to DeFusco. He voted NO on the ordinance that protects historic buildings from demolition in historic districts!

      Delete
    2. NYC preservationists contested FEMA and won. Zimmer, always pointing fungers!

      Delete
    3. Zimmer's Fungers!March 8, 2017 at 3:31 PM

      Please take your meds.

      Delete
  4. Zimmer's Fungers!March 8, 2017 at 3:39 PM

    I'm pointing my fungers at DeFusco's FLIP FLOP.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mike, Mike, Mike. Spend a few bucks - get better trolls.

    Whether you like it or not, whether it's fair or not, every single one of these posts reads as follows.

    I'm Mike Defusco an I personally approve this lame attempt to undermine public discourse in Hoboken through a combination of personal insults, obfuscations, misdirection, rewriting history and outright spam because I Mike Defusco firmly believe the damage is worth the reward and I Mike Defusco do not believe that I can win a principled argument on the facts and am thus forced to resort to these gutter tactics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “I will vote no on resolution tonight because it actually is a political stunt,” said Bhalla. “I was for it conceptually, but what’s being hid from the public is, the developer has no interest from an economic standpoint in what is on the table. ”



      Delete
  6. Council President Jen Giattino said, “What bothers me most about this is giving false hope to something so many residents are passionate about. My heart wants to vote yes but my brain votes no.”



    Read more: Hudson Reporter - My heart votes yes but my brain votes no 127 year old church may become condos after resolution fails

    ReplyDelete
  7. Councilwoman Tiffanie Fisher said she would love to see all churches preserved but “at least we get the part everyone sees everyday.”


    Read more: Hudson Reporter - My heart votes yes but my brain votes no 127 year old church may become condos after resolution fails

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Read more: Hudson Reporter - My heart votes yes but my brain votes no 127 year old church may become condos after resolution fails"

    If this quote is meant in some way to disparage Jen G, then it does the exact opposite. She used her head, which any representative of the public should use when making such decisions. I applaud her. Loudly.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well well well, all of this certainly blew the hell up this week, wow! First week of March and the HudCo political hacks can't wait to sink their hooks into Hoboken. It appears DeFusco took the bait. Reminds me of Doctor Faustus.

    Caveat emptor.

    ReplyDelete
  10. My two cents. Russo and the Old Guard politicos needed a candidate try to split the reform vote for Romano to even have a chance to win or even get one at-large seat on the City Council and they set up DeFusco to do that.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment