Apparently, Margaret Morris Is "Really Happy" With Her New 20-Foot Concrete Driveway! She Even "Came Up With A Number" To Pay For It Herself! And The Moon Is Made Of Cheese!

Here is the timeline -- at least as far as I am aware of -- in regard to the recent driveway issue on the west side of South 5th Street south of Cherry Alley that readers are likely aware of by now.

The Public Works Board met on September 27th without discussing any issues or anomalies related to the sidewalk on South 5th Street between Warren and Union that was scheduled to be replaced the following month by the contractor Vosburgh & Sons.  The upcoming work was announced, and that was about it for the brief meeting. 

Approximately 6 days later, the Vosburgh spray-painted white lines and arrows on the sidewalk and in the street to delineate their planned sidealk work from Cherry Alley to Union Street.  The markings showed that nothing beyond the west edge (the property side) of the sidewalk was to be removed.  "We are to stick to the sidewalk" was the message/reminder, if you will.

Approximately 5 days later, on October 8th, and as planned, about 120 linear feet of sidewalk on South 5th alongside the property at 458 Union was replaced by Vosburgh.  However, in addition to the removal and replacement of the sidewalk, asphalt on private property outside the parameters of the planned sidewalk replacement -- and certainly outside the scope of the PWB's mission to replace the city's pedestrian-unfriendly sidewalks -- was removed and replaced with concrete.  Approximately 130 square feet of concrete was poured on private property, something that was never discussed at any public PWB meetings in general terms or specifically about 458 Union's sidewalk on South 5th.  A new 20-foot-long concrete driveway was created for the property owner that, as had always been the case, consisted of public right-of-way (sidewalk) and private property (between the garage and the nearest edge of the sidewalk) in nearly equal lengths and widths.  

12 days later, on October 20th, this blog published a piece questioning why the PWB's sidewalk contractor deviated from its own parameters and poured a substantial amount of concrete adjacent to a sidewalk on private property owned by the "president" of the Hudson Common Council, Margaret Morris.

What's not to be "happy" about?

6 days later, this past Monday at the October meeting of the Public Works Board, chairman Gary Purnhagen asked DPW Commissioner Tyler Kritzman to explain the issue of the driveway at 458 Union.  Talk about awkward.  Margaret Morris' name was not mentioned (nor was she in attendance), but everyone in the room and online knew who "the homeowner" in question was.  Gary asked, "Tyler, would you just broadly summarize how we were able to work with the homeowner on 5th & Union to address their driveway that was in the middle of the sidewalk work?  Because I think that sort of flexibility is noteworthy and could help others as well."

First of all, since Gary said, "we were able to work with the homeowner..." isn't he including himself, the chairman of the PWB???  Was he part of his "we"?  Why did he hand the explanation off to someone else?

"Flexibility," you say?  The contractor went outside their own pavement marking parameters (lines and arrows) onto private property!  How is that flexible and how is that part of your mission?

Also, nothing could be further from the truth that Margaret Morris' driveway was "in the middle of the sidewalk work."  This is the talk of someone who is lying, blind, or clueless.  Or all three!  News to Gary: the portion of Margaret's driveway on her private property was ADJACENT to the planned and marked "sidewalk work," not "in the middle" of it.  Only half of the driveway was "in the middle of the sidewalk work," and that was going to be replaced anyway since it was the actual sidewalk!  And the sidewalk always was, still is, and always will be next to the private property portion of the driveway to and from the one-car garage at 458 Union.  Gary makes it sound like Margaret's driveway was in the way of Vosburgh and the PWB's sidewalk work and it needed to be taken care of to allow the project to continue as planned.  This is pure nonsense spin hogwash.

Tyler did his best to explain the driveway situation, a revelation that most certainly would not have been part of the meeting if not for this blog.  "We allowed the homeowner to contact with our contractor and draw up a proposal if they wanted to continue after our sidewalk ended to finish to their driveway.  With that said, they were able to contact with Vosburgh and came up with a number between themselves and they got the work done."

When exactly did the "contact" and "proposal" between Margaret Morris and Vosburgh happen?  Who initiated things?  Was it soon after the September meeting but well before Vosburgh began ripping out Margaret's sidewalk and driveway 12 days later?  Why was none of this mentioned at the September meeting?  Because no one saw a "proposal" and "contact" between a property owner and Vosburgh over a driveway adjacent to a sidewalk coming in less than two weeks?  No, of course not!  It was all a big surprise, perhaps even to Margaret Morris.

Gary ended the driveway discussion by saying, "The homeowner is really happy."  (He actually said this.)

How much did Margaret Morris pay for the private portion of her driveway as part of her driveway "proposal" with Vosburgh, and did she pay Vosburgh or the Public Works Board for that extra work that did not involve a sidewalk and most certainly was not a part of Vosburgh's original bid for the project?  Did our Common Council prez pay for the work with cash, check, or money order?  Is there a public record of Margaret's payment and her "driveway proposal" with Vosburgh, assuming it was written on a piece of paper?  Or, like Margaret Morris' little parking lot crash last winter, is this a "private matter" of hers that is no one else's business?  Why do so many questions pop up around Margaret Morris, most or all of them left unanswered?   

This issue isn't so much about 130 square feet of suspicious concrete as it is about how this whole thing was handled so poorly and how the PWB was forced to explain all of it (or make up a story) after the fact.  All of it raises questions about where else the PWB is handling things so poorly and, of course, why Margaret Morris continues to behave like a tone deaf, entitled autocrat.

I've been told that Margaret has chosen not to utilize the Common Council President's office on the second floor of City Hall.  Is it because of all those damn stairs and having to endure the presence and chatter of the mayor and his aide next door?  I don't think it's even possible to leave a voicemail message for her at City Hall.  And why would she want to hear from any residents with their problems and concerns and suggestions?!  Hell, she's as happy as a pig in mud!  No need to spoil the fun; these are the good times!