Sullivan County Legislature rejects June public hearing on proposed HHAP site, citing walkability and infrastructure concerns

Sullivan County legislators voted on May 15 against setting a June 19 public hearing for a proposed long-term lease of county-owned land tied to a Homeless Housing and Assistance Program (HHAP) grant, after extended debate about the location’s suitability and the timing of public engagement.

The measure to set the hearing on the county-owned parcel listed in the meeting packet failed on a roll call vote (Yes: 1; No: 8). Legislator Catherine “Cat” Scott was recorded as the lone yes vote; Nadia Reich, Joe Perillo, Matt McPhillips, Brian McPhillips, Nick Salmony, Louie Alvarez, Amanda Ward and Terry Blosser Bernardo were recorded as voting no. A separate procedural motion earlier in the meeting invoked the legislature’s Rule 40 to require an immediate roll-call vote on the challenge to the hearing (the invocation was approved by the legislature during the meeting).

The debate centered on whether the parcel listed in the packet (referred to in the meeting as the county parcel on Petaluga Road) should be the subject of a public hearing. Legislator Terry Blosser Bernardo urged postponement of the hearing, arguing the scheduled hearing would effectively lock the county into that specific site before the public could weigh alternatives. “This is not just a public hearing on a lease. This is a binding location decision,” Bernardo said during public comment.

Supporters of setting the hearing said the county needs to move quickly to secure competitive state funding. “This money’s gonna go to somebody else,” said Legislator Amanda Ward, who stressed the county risks losing roughly $8,000,000 in state HHAP funding if it delays applying. Ward said site control is a stated grant requirement and argued the county has spent more than a year pursuing the proposal.

County staff and other legislators described ongoing site vetting. A county staff member who answered questions during the meeting said the HHAP program can fund “acquisition, construction, rehabilitation, and expansion,” and noted several alternative parcels have been discussed with county staff and the county attorney. County staff also told legislators that if a hearing is set on one parcel and votes later fall short, the county could still consider alternatives but that failing to apply could forfeit the grant opportunity.

Opponents focused on the listed parcel’s distance from transit, sidewalks, supermarkets, pharmacies and other services they said are important for “gateway housing” that aims to help people regain independence. Multiple speakers cited the success of an existing facility in Middletown that benefits from being located near community services and a performing arts center. Concerns also included potential water and sewer costs and whether the county could responsibly commit to a long-term (reportedly 25-year) lease without clearer infrastructure plans.

Legislators discussed options for keeping the grant opportunity alive while addressing concerns: holding a special meeting and public hearing on July 3, further vetting alternative sites in committee or executive session, and ensuring any new local law or public-hearing notice reflects the final site choice. County counsel confirmed that a new or amended local law would be required if the public hearing is set on a different site than the one previously filed.

The meeting record shows the legislature later approved moving items 7 through 22 in a block; the public-hearing resolution for the Petaluga parcel failed. Several legislators said they support “gateway housing” in principle but not on the packet-listed parcel as currently described. The meeting concluded with a commitment from members to continue site discussions and to consider a July public hearing date if a viable site can be agreed upon.

Why it matters: The HHAP program is a state competitive grant that requires site control and an application timetable. Failure to apply or to demonstrate a viable, accessible site could mean Sullivan County loses a one-time state funding opportunity for a housing project intended to serve individuals and families displaced from their homes. The debate reflects longer-running tensions among legislators over site selection, transparency and balancing timeliness with community input.