Tuesday, August 18, 2026
Patricia (Patty) Morrison’s Letter
AS READ & DELIVERED to CITY COUNCIL

August 18, 2026

Hon. John Safford, Mayor
Members of the City Council
City Hall
474 Broadway
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866

RE: Proposed Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Amendments

Dear Mayor Safford and Members of the City Council:

As Frances Perkins said, the people are what matter to government, and a government should aim to give all the people under its jurisdiction the best possible life.

I resent this entire "property rights" positioning. You cannot credibly take that position while simultaneously stripping meaningful demolition protections from hundreds of property owners in one fell swoop. You are proposing to remove those protections from approximately 250 buildings in the Architectural District listed in the National Register of Historic Places.

That is not just disingenuous; it is deeply troubling.

At a minimum, this argument deserves a careful examination of the consequences of what is being proposed. The two positions do not reconcile. You cannot claim to be protecting property rights while simultaneously removing protections that affect hundreds of property owners. That fundamental contradiction deserves serious consideration before you cast your votes.

Before you take final action on the proposed UDO, the City must complete the applicable New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) review, including the Part 2 environmental assessment as required.

The response options for each environmental question evaluate potential impact magnitude as either "No, or small impact may occur" or "Moderate to large impact may occur."

Given the proposed elimination of meaningful demolition protections within the Architectural District, there are clearly questions about whether some of these changes could result in moderate to large impacts. The proposed amendments could create significant changes to the City's historic and architectural character and may warrant further analysis under SEQRA.

You will be conducting this review in public. All eyes will be watching. The environmental and historic preservation consequences of these amendments deserve an honest and thorough assessment—not a predetermined outcome.

I would also remind you of the Saratoga Springs Hospital case, Matter of Evans v. City of Saratoga Springs. Neighbors challenged the City's SEQRA review of a zoning change involving Saratoga Hospital, arguing that the City had failed to adequately consider the potential impacts of the hospital's foreseeable development. The Appellate Division agreed, finding that the City Council had not taken the required "hard look" at the relevant environmental concerns and annulling its SEQRA determination as to the hospital parcel. The matter was remitted to the City Council for a full environmental review.

The case is an important reminder that SEQRA is not a box-checking exercise. The environmental consequences of a proposed action must actually be considered based on the information reasonably available to the decision-makers.

Each of you was individually elected to represent all of the people of Saratoga Springs. Not the Mayor. You are not sitting at that table to represent the Mayor's wishes. You are there to represent the residents who have been voicing concerns for more than three months and asking you to reconsider these proposed changes and listen to the four independent subject matter experts who have reviewed them.

In my professional career, I relied on subject matter experts when making important decisions. I would never have executed a significant customer outcome without consulting engineering, finance, legal, or other appropriate experts. To do so would have been irresponsible and a dereliction of my responsibility.

The same principle should apply here.

Four independent organizations with expertise in historic preservation and planning have reviewed these proposed amendments and raised significant concerns. Their recommendations should not be dismissed or treated as obstacles to getting this vote completed. They should be an essential part of your decision.

And while there may be political pressure to support the Mayor's proposal, this is not about the Mayor.

Your responsibility is to the residents of Saratoga Springs and to the long-term interests of this city.

The vote you cast will have consequences far beyond this Council term. Once meaningful demolition protections are removed, historic buildings can be lost permanently. The character of the Architectural District can be changed permanently. That cannot be undone by a future Council.

If, after fully considering the environmental impacts, the concerns raised by the preservation professionals who reviewed these amendments, and the voices of the residents you were elected to represent, you conclude that these changes should not move forward, then the responsible course is to vote NO on the proposed UDO amendments.

Please vote responsibly.

Please listen to the experts. Please listen to your constituents. And please vote NO on these UDO changes.

Thank you.
Patricia (Patty) Morrison