Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homeless Shelter 26 Oakley topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council authorizes counteroffer, clears way for nonbinding letter of intent with county on shelter at 26 Oakley Street
Summary
The Poughkeepsie Common Council voted unanimously Feb. 18 to approve a counteroffer and authorize the mayor to sign a nonbinding letter of intent with Dutchess County over use of 26 Oakley Street as a homeless shelter, stipulating the facility be for families and single women and setting a 40-year term if accepted by the county
The Poughkeepsie Common Council voted unanimously Feb. 18 to authorize a counteroffer and, if accepted by Dutchess County, allow the mayor to sign a nonbinding letter of intent to establish a shelter at 26 Oakley Street.
Vice Chair Maya Shook, presenting a draft resolution (R25-25), said the counteroffer — described in the meeting as a modified letter of intent annexed as Exhibit A — would be transmitted as a county counterproposal and, if accepted, would let the mayor sign a nonbinding agreement that preserves negotiations for a formal settlement. “Should the county accept the common council's counteroffer, only then does the common council authorize the mayor to sign the letter of intent,” read the resolution text as presented on the floor.
Why it matters: The council and residents described a long negotiation over the county’s earlier proposals and said the current compromise reduces the scale and changes the target population from a larger individual shelter to a facility focused on families and single women. Council members and the mayor emphasized the change represents months of stakeholder meetings and community advocacy.
Council debate and public context: Council members who sponsored the measure included Council Member Brown, Council Member Grant and Council Member Henry. Multiple council members thanked negotiating team members and community stakeholders for lengthy talks; Council Member Menace highlighted that county proposals had earlier contemplated a much larger 200-bed facility and said the current draft represents a “dramatic” downsizing from earlier plans.
Mayor Yvonne Flowers and other council members said the county’s award of grant funding created a timeline that made rapid action necessary and that recent county engagement allowed a compromise with the county executive’s office. The mayor and several council members repeatedly said the proposed shelter would focus on families and single women and would limit single adult placements (the county’s earlier concept had been larger and more focused on single adults).
The resolution as presented included these basic terms in the transcript: the city would enter a nonbinding letter of intent with the county with edits incorporated by city counsel; the term referenced in council remarks was 40 years; and the letter would set general understandings while requiring further negotiation of a final settlement agreement.
Vote and outcome: The roll-call vote recorded every council member present voting “aye.” The clerk’s roll call sequence in the transcript recorded: Council Member Henry — yes; Council Member Menace — aye; Council Member Brown — aye; Council Member James — aye; Council Member Grant — aye; Council Member McClinton — aye; Majority Leader Patterson Thompson — aye; Vice Chair Maya Shook — aye; Chairman Wilson — aye. The chair declared, “Resolution passes.”
What remains: Council members and the mayor said additional negotiations on contract language and public engagement would follow, and the resolution authorizes the mayor to sign the letter of intent only if the county accepts the council’s counteroffer. Several speakers stressed that if the county accepts, a formal negotiated settlement agreement would still be required and the council would continue to seek community input.
