Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Tiny Homes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ulster County adopts policy to evaluate tiny-home developments on surplus property
Summary
The Legislature adopted Resolution No. 452, establishing a policy to evaluate surplus or idle county-owned land for tiny-home developments to support unhoused residents. The measure passed on the consent calendar by a 20–0 vote (three members absent).
The Ulster County Legislature voted unanimously on Nov. 18 to establish a county policy that requires evaluation of surplus or idle county-owned property for potential tiny-home developments intended to support people experiencing homelessness.
Resolution No. 452—"Establishing a Policy Requiring Evaluation Of Surplus Or Idle County-Owned Real Property For Inclusion Of Tiny Home Developments To Support Unhoused Persons"—was adopted on the consent calendar with a recorded vote of AYES 20, NOES 0 (Absent: Legislators Kitchen, Maloney and Uchitelle). The item was listed under the consent agenda and carried without separate floor debate, per the meeting record.
Several members of the public who signed up for public comment had listed support for tiny-home approaches: Tom Denton (New Paltz) and Michael Berg registered in favor of Resolution No. 452, and Craig Kelly and Betsy Blair also listed support during the public comment period. The clerk’s list shows public comment on the topic but the official minutes do not include full transcripts of those remarks.
The resolution directs county decision-makers to consider tiny-home developments as part of evaluation of surplus properties; the meeting record indicates the item was adopted as policy guidance and does not itself allocate capital funding or specify particular parcels. Implementation tasks, funding and timelines were not detailed in the minutes for Nov. 18 and will require follow-up by the appropriate county departments if proposals proceed.
The Legislature’s next steps on housing and property disposition will be determined in committee work and future agenda items; the Nov. 18 record places the policy in the county’s official guidance but does not commit funds or site-specific approvals.
