THURSDAY, MAY 28, 2020 1:17 P.M.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE HOUSE WILL COME

TO ORDER.

IN THE ABSENCE OF CLERGY, LET US PAUSE FOR A MOMENT OF

SILENCE.

(WHEREUPON, A MOMENT OF SILENCE WAS OBSERVED.)

VISITORS ARE INVITED TO JOIN THE MEMBERS IN THE PLEDGE

OF ALLEGIANCE.

(WHEREUPON, ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY LED VISITORS AND

MEMBERS IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.)

A QUORUM BEING PRESENT, THE CLERK WILL READ THE

JOURNAL OF WEDNESDAY, MAY 27TH.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, I MOVE TO

DISPENSE WITH THE FURTHER READING OF THE JOURNAL OF WEDNESDAY, MAY

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THE 27TH AND ASK THAT THE SAME STAND APPROVED.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO

ORDERED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER. I WANT TO TAKE A QUICK MOMENT TO SHARE A QUOTE. THIS ONE

TODAY IS ABOUT COURAGE. ONE ISN'T NECESSARILY BORN WITH COURAGE, BUT

ONE IS BORN WITH THE POTENTIAL. WITHOUT COURAGE, WE CANNOT PRACTICE

ANY OTHER VIRTUE WITH CONSISTENCY. WITHOUT COURAGE, WE CAN'T BE KIND,

TRUE, MERCIFUL, GENEROUS OR HONEST. MR. SPEAKER, THAT QUOTE IS FROM

NONE OTHER THAN MAYA ANGELOU, AND I'M PLEASED TO DELIVER IT TODAY.

AND I CERTAINLY WELCOME OUR COLLEAGUES TO THE CHAMBERS, EVEN THOSE

WHO ARE REMOTE. AND CERTAINLY ANY STAFF THAT'S IN THE CHAMBERS, I WANT

TO WELCOME YOU ALL AS WELL. I WANT TO BEGIN MR. SPEAKER, BY JUST

THANKING YOU FOR THE AWESOME WORK THAT WAS DONE ON YESTERDAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR GUIDANCE AND DIRECTION TOWARDS GETTING

THAT DONE. IT WAS A SUCCESSFUL SESSION, AND I CERTAINLY WANT TO THANK

THE MEMBERS WHO PARTICIPATED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE FOR THE

COLLEGIAL MANNER IN WHICH WE WERE ABLE TO GET THROUGH SOME THINGS,

EVEN THOUGH SOME -- SOME THINGS TOOK A LITTLE LONGER. BUT I THINK WE

HAD VERY SUCCESSFUL FIRST SESSION, AND I'M HONORED TO BE A PART OF THIS

HONORABLE BODY.

I WANT TO REMIND MEMBERS THAT WE WILL BE OPERATING

UNDER THE SAME RULES AS WE DID ON YESTERDAY. THE SAME PROCEDURES.

EVERYTHING -- IT'S PRETTY MUCH THE SAME EXCEPT THE BILLS THAT WE'LL BE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

VOTE -- VOTING ON AND THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'LL BE HAVING. THESE ARE

EXTRAORDINARY TIMES. EXTRAORDINARY. NO ONE EVER THOUGHT WE WOULD

BE LIVING IN A DAY LIKE THIS, BUT WE ARE. SO ONCE AGAIN, I WANT TO ASK

FOR YOUR APPRECIATION, FOR YOUR COOPERATION, AND I WANT TO THANK YOU IN

ADVANCE FOR YOUR PATIENCE AS WE DEAL IN THIS NEW NORMAL, AS WE DEAL

WITH THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS IN THESE CHAMBERS.

TODAY WE WILL CONTINUE TO TAKE UP A SERIES OF BILLS

DESIGNED TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF NEW YORKERS DURING OUR ONGOING

STRUGGLE AGAINST COVID-19 AND ITS IMPACT ON OUR STATE AND OUR

CITIZENS. TO THAT END, MEMBERS HAVE ON THEIR DESKS A MAIN CALENDAR

WHICH CONSISTS OF BILLS THAT REMAIN FROM YESTERDAY'S A-CALENDAR.

RULES REPORT NO. 29 THROUGH 57. WE WILL BE WORKING ON A PORTION OF

THAT MAIN CALENDAR TODAY. IN ADDITION, MEMBERS ALSO HAVE AN

A-CALENDAR WHICH WE WILL ALSO TAKE UP TODAY.

AT THIS TIME, MR. SPEAKER, I MOVE THAT WE ADVANCE

THE A-CALENDAR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES' MOTION, THE A-CALENDAR IS ADVANCED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER. I WILL ANNOUNCE THAT IF THERE IS A FURTHER NEED FOR ANY

COMMITTEES A LITTLE LATER, MR. SPEAKER, I --I DO SUSPECT THAT THERE MAY

BE. AT THE CONCLUSION OF OUR WORK TODAY WE WILL TAKE UP TWO

PRIVILEGED RESOLUTIONS, THE ONE WE DID NOT GET TO ON YESTERDAY NIGHT.

ONE IS BY MR. OTIS HONORING FIRST RESPONDERS, AND THE OTHER ONE IS BY

MR. MCDONALD MEMORIALIZING THOSE THOUSANDS OF LIVES THAT WE'VE LOST

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

IN THIS PANDEMIC.

WITH THAT, MR. SPEAKER, I BELIEVE WE'RE READY TO BEGIN

OUR PROCEEDINGS AND CONSIDER THE IMPORTANT BUSINESS BEFORE US.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU SO VERY

MUCH, MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: SO, IF WE COULD START ON

PAGE 4 WITH RULES REPORT NO. 35.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A10348-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 35, L. ROSENTHAL, STIRPE, ABINANTI, GOTTFRIED, BARRON,

CARROLL, GLICK, SIMON, SEAWRIGHT, MOSLEY, D'URSO, DENDEKKER, PERRY,

RAMOS, LIFTON, OTIS, BICHOTTE, ORTIZ, COLTON, BLAKE, REYES, RODRIGUEZ,

EPSTEIN, WRIGHT, SIMOTAS. AN ACT TO AMEND THE LABOR LAW, IN RELATION

TO SUSPENDING THE FORFEITURE OF UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS DURING THE

COVID-19 STATE OF EMERGENCY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: AN EXPLANATION HAS

BEEN REQUESTED, MS. ROSENTHAL.

ONE MINUTE, MS. ROSENTHAL.

LET'S MOVE THE SENATE BILL.

ON A MOTION BY MS. ROSENTHAL, THE SENATE BILL IS

BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.

MS. ROSENTHAL, AN EXPLANATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. ROSENTHAL: OKAY. OVER TWO MILLION PEOPLE

ACROSS NEW YORK HAVE APPLIED FOR UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE SINCE THE

COVID-19 PANDEMIC BEGAN IMPACTING BUSINESSES IN EARLY MARCH. A

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

KEY WAY IN WHICH THE STATE CAN CONTINUE TO HELP PEOPLE WHO HAVE LOST

THEIR JOBS OR EXPERIENCED REDUCED WORK HOURS IS BY MAKING

UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS MORE ACCESSIBLE TO THOSE IN NEED. ON MAY 14,

2020, THE GOVERNOR SUSPENDED THE FORFEITURE OF BENEFIT DAYS BY

EXECUTIVE ORDER TO PROVIDE CLAIMANTS WITH TEMPORARY RELIEF FROM

SERVING FORFEIT-DAY PENALTIES THROUGH JUNE 13, 2020. SO THIS BILL

CODIFIES THE SUSPENSION OF THE APPLICABILITY OF FORFEIT-DAY PENALTIES

THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND STATE DISASTER

EMERGENCY DECLARED BY EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 202. THIS WILL ALLOW

CLAIMANTS WHO HAVE HAD SUCH PENALTIES ASSESSED AGAINST THEM DUE TO

PAST CLAIMS, BE ABLE TO COLLECT UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS DURING THIS

UNPRECEDENTED TIME.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. MONTESANO.

MR. MONTESANO: YES, MR. SPEAKER.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. MONTESANO: THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, IN THE

PAST DAY OR TWO AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN DOING A LOT OF WORK TO TRY

AND MAKE LIFE A LITTLE BIT EASIER FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING THROUGH

THIS PANDEMIC AND HAVE FINANCIAL ISSUES AND PROBLEMS, LOSS OF

EMPLOYMENT. AND, YOU KNOW, THE ONE THING I DON'T UNDERSTAND -- FIRST

OF ALL, THE GOVERNOR TOOK THIS ACTION, FIRST OF ALL, TO FORGIVE FORFEITURE

DAYS FOR PEOPLE WHO MADE A WILLFUL STATEMENT ON THEIR APPLICATION FOR

UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. NOW, HE TOOK THIS UPON HIMSELF, WHICH I

BELIEVE -- QUITE FRANKLY, THROUGHOUT THIS PANDEMIC I BELIEVE HE'S REALLY

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PUSHED THE ENVELOPE ON HOW MANY EXECUTIVE ORDERS HE'S ISSUED AND

HOW MANY ACTS HE'S TAKEN UPON HIMSELF WITHOUT EVER CONSULTING THE

LEGISLATURE. BUT HERE, WE'RE CONDONING AND WE'RE FORGIVING A WILLFUL

MISCONDUCT TO GET BENEFITS FROM THE STATE UNEMPLOYMENT SYSTEM THAT A

CLAIMANT MAY NOT OTHERWISE BE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE AT ALL OR ON A

REDUCED AMOUNT OF MONEY. SO WHILE THE GOVERNOR TOOK IT UPON

HIMSELF TO ISSUE THAT EXECUTIVE ORDER AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO EXPIRE ON

JUNE THE 13TH OF THE -- OF THIS YEAR, I BELIEVE HE SHOULD LIVE WITH THAT

DECISION THAT HE MADE RATHER THAN US CODIFYING WHAT I BELIEVE IS

EXCESSIVE USE OF EXECUTIVE POWERS. WHY SHOULD WE -- NOW, WE'RE NOT

TALKING ABOUT A PERSON MAKES AN HONEST MISTAKE ON THEIR APPLICATION

AND THEIR CLAIM FOR UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. THE STATUTE SPECIFICALLY

SAYS "WILLFUL." SO, YOU HAVE TO INTENTIONALLY KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING

AND -- FOR THIS WILLFUL ACT. NOW, WHY SHOULD WE CONDONE IT? WHY

SHOULD WE REWARD IT WITH TAXPAYERS' MONEY AND GIVE THESE PEOPLE A

BENEFIT THEY'RE NOT OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO?

SO FOR THESE REASONS, I'LL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE AND

I WOULD ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME. THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. GARBARINO.

MR. GARBARINO: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. ROSENTHAL, WILL

YOU YIELD?

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MS. ROSENTHAL: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. ROSENTHAL YIELDS.

MR. GARBARINO: THANK YOU, LINDA. JUST -- CAN

YOU GO OVER HOW SOMEONE EARNS A FORFEITURE DATE PENALTY, HOW THAT'S

DETERMINED?

MS. ROSENTHAL: SURE. SO I'LL EXPLAIN WHAT A --

WHAT A FORFEIT-DAY PENALTY IS. A FORFEIT DAY IS A DAY IN THE FUTURE FOR

WHICH A CLAIMANT CANNOT RECEIVE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS.

SO UNDER THE NEW YORK STATE LABOR LAW, A FORFEIT-DAY PENALTY IS

ASSESSED AGAINST A CLAIMANT WHEN HE OR SHE HAS WILLFULLY MADE A FALSE

STATEMENT OR REPRESENTATION IN ORDER TO GET BENEFITS TO WHICH THEY WERE

NOT ENTITLED. SO, FOR EVERY FORFEIT DAY THAT IS ASSESSED, A CLAIMANT LOSES

25 PERCENT OF HIS OR HER BENEFITS FOR THE WEEK. THERE'S A MAXIMUM OF

FOUR EFFECTIVE DAYS OF BENEFITS A WEEK, SO SOMEONE COULD OSTENSIBLY

GET NOTHING FOR THAT WEEK.

MR. GARBARINO: IS THERE -- DOES THIS HAPPEN

OFTEN? ARE THERE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT GET -- THAT HAVE FORFEITURE DAYS

APPLIED? DO YOU HAVE THOSE NUMBERS? HOW MANY --

MS. ROSENTHAL: I -- I DON'T HAVE THOSE NUMBERS,

BUT I'VE HEARD FROM PLENTY OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE PAID BACK THE MONEY

THAT THEY -- THEY -- TO WHICH THEY WERE NOT ENTITLED, AND THIS IS LIKE A

FURTHER -- IT'S A PUNISHMENT BASED ON THEIR ORIGINAL ACTION. THE REASON

FOR THIS BILL IS BECAUSE PEOPLE WHO ARE UNEMPLOYED AT THIS TIME OFTEN

CAN'T GET FOOD, CAN'T PAY THEIR RENT, CAN'T GET MEDICATION. SO IN A

COMPASSIONATE MOVE AND IN AN UNDERSTANDING OF PEOPLE'S UNIQUE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

CIRCUMSTANCES THESE DAYS, THIS BILL GIVES THEM THEIR UNEMPLOYMENT

BENEFITS.

MR. GARBARINO: WELL, MY QUESTION IS -- SO IN THE

PAST THEY'VE ALREADY DEFRAUDED THE GOVERNMENT BY WILLFULLY -- AND THIS

IS NOT AN ACCIDENT. IT -- IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS IN THE LEGISLATION THIS IS --

THIS IS NOT FOR SOMEONE WHO MAKES AN ACCIDENT, THIS IS FOR SOMEONE

WHO WILLFULLY MAKES A FALSE STATEMENT TO GET UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS.

SO MY -- MY QUESTION IS IF THEY'VE ALREADY DONE THIS IN THE PAST AND

DEFRAUDED AND -- AND THEY'VE BEEN CAUGHT, HOW DO WE -- BY SUSPENDING

THIS, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE NOT DEFRAUDING THE SYSTEM RIGHT

NOW?

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE

BETTER QUESTION IS HOW WILL THESE PEOPLE EAT.

MR. GARBARINO: NO, I THINK THE BETTER QUESTION

IS HOW ARE THEY -- HOW ARE THEY NOT DEFRAUDING THE GOVERNMENT NOW

WAS MY QUESTION.

MS. ROSENTHAL: THEY'RE NOT DEFRAUDING THE

GOVERNMENT NOW.

MR. GARBARINO: HOW DO WE KNOW?

MS. ROSENTHAL: EXCUSE ME?

MR. GARBARINO: THEY ALREADY HAVE FORFEITURE

DAYS THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE PAYING BACK FROM PREVIOUS -- PREVIOUS

WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS THAT THEY'VE MADE AND WERE CAUGHT. SO MY

QUESTION IS, IF WE'RE SUSPENDING THIS, THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE ALREADY

PREVIOUSLY DEFRAUDED NEW YORK STATE AND NOW WE'RE SAYING, YOU

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

KNOW WHAT? RIGHT NOW WE'RE NOT GOING -- WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY

ATTENTION TO YOUR PAST FALSE STATEMENTS. WE'RE GOING TO LET YOU GET

WHAT YOU CAN GET NOW. YOU KNOW, DO -- DOES IT -- THOSE FORFEITURES

STAY?

MS. ROSENTHAL: OKAY. I HAVE NUMEROUS

ANSWERS FOR YOU.

MR. GARBARINO: SURE.

MS. ROSENTHAL: ONE -- ONE TIME OF DOING

SOMETHING DOESN'T MEAN YOU'RE GOING TO DO THE SAME THING IN THE

FUTURE. SECONDLY, CLAIMANTS FORFEIT DAYS OF BENEFITS, BUT THEY ALSO PAY

BACK THE OWED MONEY AND THERE MIGHT BE AN ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY

PUT ON THEM IN ADDITION TO THAT.

MR. GARBARINO: OKAY. BUT WE'RE NOT -- WE'RE

NOT MAKING THEM PAY BACK THEIR PREVIOUS PENALTIES RIGHT NOW. THAT'S

WHAT THIS BILL DOES, RIGHT?

MS. ROSENTHAL: NO. THEY HAVE TO PAY BACK THE

OWED MONEY.

MR. GARBARINO: SO THEY -- IF -- IF -- IF THEY'VE --

IF THEY'VE PREVIOUSLY HAD FORFEITURE DAYS, THEY NEED TO PAY BACK THAT

MONEY NOW IF THEY APPLY FOR UNEMPLOYMENT, BEFORE THEY GET

UNEMPLOYMENT OR DOES THIS BILL SUSPENDS THAT, I THINK.

MS. ROSENTHAL: THAT'S -- NO. WELL, WHAT

HAPPENED WAS WHATEVER HAPPENED IN THE PAST, AND THEN NOW THEY'RE

UNEMPLOYED AGAIN. ALL -- ALL WE'RE WAIVING IS FORFEIT DAYS. WE'RE NOT

WAIVING PAYING BACK OR AN ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY THAT MIGHT BE LEVIED

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AGAINST THEM.

MR. GARBARINO: SO -- BUT THEY CAN'T COLLECT THAT

MONEY NOW. WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR THEM TO -- TO PAY IT BACK AT A FUTURE

DATE. SO THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE -- THEY'RE GOING TO EARN BENEFITS

NOW, EVEN THOUGH THEY -- THEY DEFRAUDED THE GOVERNMENT PREVIOUSLY,

AND HOPE -- AND WE'RE GOING TO HOPE TO COLLECT THAT MONEY LATER ON?

MS. ROSENTHAL: THEY WILL HAVE TO PAY IT BACK

LATER. AND AT THIS MOMENT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO COLLECT UNEMPLOYMENT

SINCE THEY NEED THAT MONEY TO EAT AND PAY THEIR RENT.

MR. GARBARINO: IF SOMEONE -- IF IT'S FOUND OUT

THAT SOMEONE LIED ON THEIR BENEFITS NOW, DURING THIS PANDEMIC OR -- OR

WILLFULLY MADE A FALSE STATEMENT, CAN THEY EARN ADDITIONAL FORFEITURE

DAYS NOW OR ARE WE SUSPENDING THAT AS WELL?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I DONT' BELIEVE WE'RE SUSPENDING

FUTURE FORFEIT DAYS. NEXT TIME, IF THEY'RE UNEMPLOYED AND THEY APPLY,

THEY WILL HAVE TO PAY THOSE FORFEIT-DAY PENALTIES.

MR. GARBARINO: SO IF -- IF THE PEOPLE THAT WERE

-- THE PEOPLE THAT CURRENTLY HAVE FORFEITURE DAYS DUE TO PREVIOUS, YOU

KNOW, WILLFUL STATEMENTS, WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS WHO'VE EARNED THOSE

FORFEITURE DAYS, WE'RE NOW SUSPENDING THE RECAPTURE OF THAT FOR NOW. IF

THEY AGAIN DEFRAUD THE GOVERNMENT WITH -- WITH CURRENT WILLFUL FALSE

STATEMENTS, THEY CAN -- AND THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR FINDS OUT, THEY

CAN EARN FORFEITURE DAYS FOR -- FOR DEFRAUDING THE GOVERNMENT AGAIN?

WE'RE NOT GETTING RID OF THAT.

MS. ROSENTHAL: NO, IN THE FUTURE. IF THEY'RE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

UNEMPLOYED AGAIN THEY WILL HAVE TO PAY FORFEIT DAYS.

MR. GARBARINO: WHEN THEY -- WHEN THEY FILE FOR

UNEMPLOYMENT AGAIN IN THE FUTURE.

MS. ROSENTHAL: YES.

MR. GARBARINO: OKAY.

ON THE BILL, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, MR.

GARBARINO.

MR. GARBARINO: I HAVE HELPED THOUSANDS OF

PEOPLE GET UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS DURING THIS TIME THROUGH MY OFFICE.

PEOPLE THAT DESERVE IT, PEOPLE THAT NEED IT. I'M SURE ALL OF MY

COLLEAGUES HAVE. IT'S PROBABLY BEEN THE -- THE THING THAT WE'VE BEEN

CALLED UPON THE MOST DURING THIS PANDEMIC. AND WE'VE PAID OUT, AS

THE SPONSOR SAID, THERE'S ABOUT TWO MILLION PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY FILED

AND WE'VE PAID OUT PROBABLY BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN UNEMPLOYMENT

BENEFITS. I THINK -- AND THOSE ARE FOR PEOPLE THAT REALLY NEED IT. I DON'T

UNDERSTAND - AND I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE WHO SPOKE BEFORE - I DON'T

UNDERSTAND WHY THIS WAS DONE IN AN EXECUTIVE ORDER. I DON'T

UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE CODIFYING IT. THIS BILL IS ALLOWING PEOPLE WHO

ALREADY DEFRAUDED THE GOVERNMENT PREVIOUSLY MAKE WILLFUL FALSE

STATEMENTS. IT'S ALLOWING -- IT'S GIVING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO -- TO DO

IT AGAIN AND NOT HAVE TO PAY BACK THOSE -- THOSE PREVIOUS FORFEIT DAYS,

THE PREVIOUS MONEY THAT THEY EARNED THAT THEY WEREN'T ENTITLED TO. I

THINK EVERY -- YOU KNOW, MOST OF THE CASES THAT I'VE HANDLED IN MY

OFFICE, PROBABLY EVERY CASE, THESE PEOPLE -- I SPOKE TO THEM ON THE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PHONE, THEY NEEDED THE MONEY, THEY DESERVED IT. THEY NEEDED IT TO

FEED THEIR FAMILIES. THIS IS -- THIS BILL ALLOWS SOMEONE WHO PREVIOUSLY

DEFRAUDED THE GOVERNMENT TO GO BACK AND DO IT AGAIN AND NOT HAVE TO

PAY -- PAY THE PENALTY.

I -- I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. I CAN'T SUPPORT IT. AND I

ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO -- TO VOTE NO AGAINST THIS BILL. THANK YOU,

MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

ON RULES REPORT NO. 35, THIS IS A PARTY VOTE. ANY

VOTE -- ANY MEMBER WISHING TO BE RECORDED AS AN EXCEPTION TO THEIR

CONFERENCE POSITION IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY

LEADER AT THE NUMBER PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. AS YOU

MENTIONED, THIS IS A PARTY VOTE. THE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE IS

GENERALLY VOTING NO ON EXTENDING UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS TO THOSE WHO

PREVIOUSLY INTENTIONALLY DEFRAUDED THE SYSTEM. IF THERE ARE ANY

REPUBLICAN MEMBERS WHO WANT TO PROVIDE THOSE BENEFITS, THEY ARE

URGED TO PROMPTLY CALL THE MINORITY LEADER'S OFFICE AND LET THEM KNOW

THAT THEIR OPINION IS DIFFERENT.

THANK YOU, SIR.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, THIS IS A

PARTY VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. FOLKS WHO UNDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE DO

SOMETIMES DO THINGS THAT THEY SHOULDN'T DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY SHOULD

BE PUNISHED FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFE. IF YOU HAVE BEEN WORKING AND

EXPERIENCED LOSING YOUR JOB AS A RESULT OF COVID, YOU STILL NEED TO

PAY YOUR RENT, LIGHTS, UTILITIES, ET CETERA, JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER AMERICAN

AND EVERY OTHER NEW YORKER. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE A PARTY VOTE IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE, AND ASK THAT MEMBERS WHO WOULD CHOOSE TO VOTE NO TO

PLEASE GIVE US A CALL AND/OR COME INTO THE CHAMBERS AND CAST YOUR

VOTE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU BOTH.

(THE CLERK RECORDED VOTE.)

MS. WALSH TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I THOUGHT IT

MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO MY COLLEAGUES TO HEAR FROM THE NEW YORK STATE

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND SOME EXAMPLES OF UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

BENEFITS FRAUD, WHAT THAT INCLUDES. PROVIDING FALSE INFORMATION OR

FAILING TO DISCLOSE INFORMATION ON YOUR APPLICATION FOR BENEFITS

INCLUDING LYING ABOUT HOW YOU LOST YOUR JOB. WORKING WHILE

COLLECTING UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS AND INACCURATELY REPORTING YOUR

DAYS AND EARNINGS. WORKING ANY AMOUNT OF TIME IN A WEEK WHILE

COLLECTING BENEFITS AND TELLING US YOU DID NOT WORK. WORKING OFF THE

BOOKS WHILE COLLECTING BENEFITS. USING ANOTHER PERSON'S IDENTITY - FOR

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

EXAMPLE, NAME, SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER - TO FILE FRAUDULENT CLAIMS.

HELPING ANOTHER PERSON TO FILE AN UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE CLAIM.

COLLABORATING WITH AN EMPLOYER TO ILLEGALLY CLAIM UNEMPLOYMENT

INSURANCE BENEFITS.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE -- WE'VE HEARD, AND THE

GOVERNOR HAS TALKED ABOUT THIS, THE -- THE RECORD NUMBER, REALLY

HISTORICALLY UNPRECEDENTED NUMBER OF PEOPLE APPLYING FOR

UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS, I'VE GOT TO THINK THAT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO, IN

LIGHT OF ALL THOSE APPLICANTS, TO BE ABLE TO DETECT FRAUD. BUT MY

POSITION IS THAT ONCE THAT IS DETECTED, I -- I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD

BE REWARDING PEOPLE WHO HAVE MADE WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS.

SO I'LL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WALSH IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. ROSENTHAL TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. ROSENTHAL: OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,

MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. ONE BAD MOVE IN ONE'S LIFE SHOULD

NOT SENTENCE ONE TO PURGATORY AND STARVATION. DURING THIS PANDEMIC

WHEN WE HAVE LOST MORE THAN 20,000 NEW YORKERS AND OVER 100,000

PEOPLE ACROSS THE UNITED STATES, NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO SAY, YOU WILL BE

PUNISHED BECAUSE YOU HAD SOME EXTRA UNEMPLOYMENT TO WHICH YOU

WERE NOT ENTITLED. PEOPLE WHO -- WHO GOT UNEMPLOYMENT UNDER FALSE

PRETENSES, WHATEVER, HAVE TO PAY BACK THE MONEY. AND THEY WILL PAY

BACK THE MONEY, AND SOME OF THEM HAVE ALREADY PAID BACK THE MONEY.

EVERYONE IS SUFFERING AS IT IS. TO SAY THAT FORFEIT DAYS, WHICH ARE BEING

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WAIVED ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL FOR THE FEDERAL INSURANCE FOR GIG WORKERS

AND OTHERS, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS WAIVING THEM. NEW YORK STATE

CAN DO THE SAME, SHOULD DO THE SAME AND WILL DO THE SAME. THERE'S

TIME FOR COMPASSION AND THERE'S TIME TO BE ANGRY AND HOSTILE. NOW IS

THE TIME FOR COMPASSION.

I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. ROSENTHAL IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. AS ONE

OF MY COLLEAGUES MENTIONED, ALL OF OUR OFFICES HAVE BEEN JUST

OVERWHELMED WITH PHONE CALLS WITH PEOPLE SEEKING UNEMPLOYMENT

BENEFITS. MOST OF WHOM HAVE NEVER, EVER SOUGHT UNEMPLOYMENT

BENEFITS IN THEIR ENTIRE LIFE. AND I'M SURE YOUR OFFICES ARE

OVERWHELMED JUST LIKE MINE WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE CRYING ON THE PHONE,

ADULTS CRYING ON THE PHONE BECAUSE THEY CANNOT GET THROUGH TO THE

UNEMPLOYMENT SYSTEM. WE'VE HAD PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN SEEKING

UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS FOR WEEKS WHO ARE FACING HORRIFIC FINANCIAL

CHALLENGES. AND EVERY DAY MY STAFF IS ON THE PHONE TRYING TO DO

EVERYTHING WE CAN TO HELP THEM. AND SO WHEN WE HAVE A SYSTEM THAT

IS COMPLETELY OVERWHELMED BY HONEST, HARD-WORKING PEOPLE WHO ARE

SEEKING BENEFITS FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THEIR LIFE, NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO

ADD MORE PEOPLE TO THIS OVERWHELMED SYSTEM BY ADDING MORE PEOPLE

WHO DEFRAUDED INTENTIONALLY, KNOWINGLY AND DELIBERATELY THE SYSTEM IN

THE PAST. LET'S FOCUS ON HELPING THE HARD-WORKING, HONEST PEOPLE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THROUGH THIS CRISIS FIRST, AND NOT ADD MORE PEOPLE TO THE SYSTEM THAT WE

KNOW FORFEITED THEIR BENEFITS FOR INTENTIONAL FRAUD.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. SIMON.

MS. SIMON: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN

MY VOTE. I WANT TO SAY THAT, FIRST OF ALL, I WILL BE VOTING IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE FOR THIS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY FOR SOME OF MY

COLLEAGUES THAT THE STANDARD THAT IS USED IN UNEMPLOYMENT WHEN IT

COMES TO WHETHER SOMETHING IS A WILLFUL ACT IS THAT SOMEONE ACTUALLY

ANSWERED THAT QUESTION, WHETHER THEY UNDERSTOOD IT OR NOT. AND WE

HAVE ALL LEARNED FROM TALKING TO THE CONSTITUENTS THAT HAVE BEEN

FLOODING OUR OFFICES HOW CONFUSING THE PROCESS OF APPLYING FOR

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE IS. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO MAKE ERRORS

BECAUSE THEY MISUNDERSTOOD OR THEY BELIEVED THEMSELVES TO BE

ELIGIBLE. AND UNDER THE UNEMPLOYMENT LAW THAT, IN FACT, IS -- IS

INTERPRETED IN THE SAY WAY AS SOMEONE WHO WILLFULLY DEFRAUDED

BECAUSE THEY WERE, IN FACT, LET'S SAY, INTENDING TO ACT IN A WAY THAT WAS

ILLEGAL AND -- AND DELIBERATELY DEFRAUD. AND THEY'RE ALL LUMPED IN THE

SAME CATEGORY. SO THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE FORCED TO PAY BACK

BENEFITS THAT THEY WERE NOT ENTITLED TO, BUT THE REALITY IS THEY DIDN'T

APPLY FOR THEM SEEKING TO DEFRAUD THE GOVERNMENT. AND RIGHT NOW

THOSE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE UNEMPLOYED AGAIN. IT'S A NEW TYPE -- A NEW

UNEMPLOYMENT CIRCUMSTANCE, AND THEY NEED TO EAT AND THEY NEED TO

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PAY THEIR RENT AND WE NEED TO BE THERE TO PROTECT THOSE WORKERS.

AND SO I AM VERY HONORED TO -- TO VOTE FOR THIS BILL IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE, AND I THANK THE SPONSOR FOR BRINGING THIS TO THE FLOOR.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. SIMON IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. WOERNER.

MS. WOERNER: I, TOO, HAVE -- I HAVE -- - I, TOO,

HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT PEOPLE WHO WOULD INTENTIONALLY DEFRAUD THE

SYSTEM, PARTICULARLY IN A MOMENT WHEN WE ARE SO -- THE SYSTEM IS SO

OVERWHELMED. BUT HAVING HELPED A NUMBER OF THE -- OF CONSTITUENTS

WHO FOUND THEMSELVES IN THIS POSITION WHERE THEY WERE -- THEY WERE

CHARGED WITH FORFEITURE DAYS AND THAT LIMITED THEIR BENEFITS, WHAT I

CAME TO LEARN WAS THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR HAD NOT STOOD UP THEIR

APPEALS PROCESS DURING THIS TIME. SO THEY HAD NO MECHANISM FOR DUE

PROCESS TO APPEAL THE DETERMINATION THAT THEY HAD -- THEY HAD -- THEY

OWED MONEY BACK, THEY HAD FORFEITURE DAYS. AND IN -- IN LIGHT OF THE

FACT THAT THERE IS NOT, OR WAS NOT AT THE TIME, DUE PROCESS AVAILABLE TO

THEM, I HAVE TO SUPPORT THE SUSPENSION OF THE FORFEITURE DAYS AS A

PENALTY. THEY'RE STILL OBLIGATED TO PAY THE MONEY BACK. THEY'RE STILL

OBLIGATED TO PAY THE ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY. BUT IT DOESN'T IMPACT THEIR

ABILITY TO SEEK UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS DURING THIS TIME WHEN THEY

HAVE NOW LOST THEIR JOB THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN.

SO WITH THAT I'LL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK

YOU.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WOERNER IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. BARRON.

MR. BARRON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER.

I DO WANT TO SAY THAT IT IS INTERESTING HOW THE SCRUTINY, THE MORALITY, THE

PRINCIPLES, ALL OF THIS COMES WHEN WE TALKING ABOUT POOR PEOPLE. AND

AS THE -- SIMON SAID, THAT MAYBE ALL OF THEM WERE NOT INTENTIONALLY

BEING FRAUDULENT. BUT YET IN THE FIRST ROUND OF MONEY GIVEN OUT FROM

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE $2 TRILLION, $500 BILLION WENT TO WALL

STREET WHERE THEY HAD TOXIC DERIVATIVES, WHERE THEY HAD INSIDER

TRADING. WHERE MANY OF THEM ON THESE COMPANIES WENT TO JAIL FOR LONG

LENGTHS OF TIME. WHERE THEY RIPPED OFF PEOPLE FOR BILLIONS OF DOLLARS,

BUT YET THE SAME SCRUTINY DOESN'T HAPPEN FOR WALL STREET. THEY CAN GET

$500 BILLION OF OUR TAXPAYING DOLLARS. NOBODY SAYS ANYTHING. ALL THE

MORALITY GOES OUT THE WINDOW. WE HEAR NOT A PEEP FROM THOSE FOLK.

AND YES, IT'S ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL. BUT EVEN IN WALL STREET IN NEW

YORK CITY, A LOT OF THESE FIRMS GOT THAT MONEY EVEN THOUGH THEIR FIRMS

WERE INVOLVED. AND SOME OF THEM, THEIR FIRMS WERE INVOLVED IN

SLAVERY AND THEY STILL GOT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS. BUT NOW WHEN IT COMES TO

POOR PEOPLE, NOW WHEN IT COMES TO PEOPLE THAT ARE JUST TRYING TO PAY

RENT, TRYING TO BUY SOME FOOD, TRYING TO PUT SOME CLOTHING ON THEIR

BACK - AND WE DON'T KNOW THE REAL NUMBERS OF WHO WAS REALLY

FRAUDULENT OR WHO JUST REALLY MADE SOME MISTAKES. I BET THE NUMBERS

ARE VERY, VERY SMALL. AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE'RE TALKING

ABOUT IS PEANUTS COMPARED TO WALL STREET.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SO TO MY COLLEAGUES THAT ARE VERY STRICT AND VERY

MORAL ON THIS, WHEN IT COMES TO POOR PEOPLE I WANT TO SEE YOU DO THE

SAME THING FOR THOSE RICH FAT CATS ON WALL STREET WHO ARE RIPPING OFF

THE ECONOMY AND ALMOST CAUSED THE ECONOMY TO CRASH. I VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. BARRON IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. GLICK TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. GLICK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN MY

VOTE. LIKE MY COLLEAGUES, I BELIEVE THAT MANY OF THE INDIVIDUALS

WHO'VE BEEN CAUGHT UP IN FOR FORFEITURE DAYS ARE INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE

NOT INTENTIONALLY DEFRAUDING THE PUBLIC AND THE GOVERNMENT. I ALSO,

LIKE MY COLLEAGUES, AM REMINDED OF FOLKS LIKE COUNTRYWIDE DURING THE

MORTGAGE CRISIS. THAT BUBBLE THAT BURST, THE PEOPLE WHO HAD DEFRAUDED

PEOPLE, TAKEN THEIR HOMES, TAKEN THE HOMES OF VETERANS ILLEGALLY. AND

WHEN THEY WERE CAUGHT THEY DIDN'T GO TO JAIL. THEY WERE ALLOWED TO

KEEP MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND THEY WERE JUST TOLD TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS.

THESE INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY HAVE MADE A -- A MINOR MISTAKE, AN

UNINTENTIONAL MISTAKE, SHOULD NOT BE HELD TO A STRICTER STANDARD THAN WE

HAVE HELD MANY, MANY VENDORS WHO SUBMIT FRAUDULENT BILLS TO THE

GOVERNMENT. THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GETS TONS OF THOSE. BUT THEY

CONTINUE TO BE VENDORS MAKING A GOOD PROFIT OFF OF THE TAXPAYER. SO

THE LITTLE GUY GETS HELD TO ACCOUNT WHILE CORPORATIONS WALK AWAY.

SO I'M -- I'M HAPPY TO -- TO VOTE FOR THIS TODAY, AND I

VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. GLICK IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. BURKE.

(PAUSE)

MR. BURKE TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

(PAUSE)

WE'LL MOVE ON. WE'LL GO TO MR. COLTON TO EXPLAIN HIS

VOTE.

MR. COLTON: YES, THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I HAVE DEALT WITH HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF

UNEMPLOYMENT CASES WHERE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WAITING A LONG TIME

BECAUSE THEY LOST THEIR JOB THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN, THEY DIDN'T

HAVE MONEY TO SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES. AND THIS PARTICULAR LAW WHICH

ALLOWS THE FORFEITURE TO BE OVERLOOKED DURING THE PERIOD OF TIME OF AN

EMERGENCY, I HAVE NO PROBLEM SUPPORTING THAT. BECAUSE MANY OF THE

PEOPLE WHO WERE SUBJECTED TO THIS DID NOT INTENTIONALLY KNOW WHAT

THEY WERE DOING. I KNOW THE STATUTE SAYS "WILLINGLY." BUT THERE'S WAYS

OF INTERPRETING THAT. I KNOW OF ONE CONSTITUENT WHO WAS UNEMPLOYED,

HER MOTHER WAS VERY, VERY SICK. AND SHE PARTICIPATED IN A PROGRAM

WHERE SHE COULD TAKE CARE OF THE MOTHER AND BE PAID MONEY FOR DOING

THAT. THAT SAVED THE STATE MONEY BECAUSE THE MOTHER DIDN'T HAVE TO GO

TO A NURSING HOME AND COULD BE CARED FOR AT HOME BY SOMEBODY WHO

WAS A FAMILY MEMBER. SHE DIDN'T CONSIDER THAT TO BE PAID INCOME.

SHE THOUGHT IT WAS A STIPEND FOR EXPENSES, AND SHE PUT DOWN THE WRONG

ANSWER. SHE WAS WRONG. SHE MADE A MISTAKE. BUT NOW HER CHILDREN

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

-- SHE'S UNEMPLOYED AGAIN YEARS LATER. HER CHILDREN HAVE NO FOOD.

THEY HAVE NO MONEY COMING IN TO SUPPORT THE FAMILY, AND THEY ARE

SUFFERING. SO IT IS IN THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC AND IN THE INTEREST OF THE

STATE THAT WE NOT SUBJECT HER FAMILY AND HER CHILDREN TO PUNISHMENT FOR

A MISTAKE THAT SHE MADE AT ONE TIME. AS PEOPLE HAVE POINTED OUT,

CORPORATIONS, SOMETIMES WILLINGLY -- AGAIN, THE QUESTION IS WHAT DOES

"WILLINGLY" MEAN -- HAVE DONE THINGS THAT HAVE HURT THE PUBLIC. HAVE

HURT PEOPLE. HAVE GOTTEN MANY MILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF

ABATEMENTS AND TAX SUBSIDIES, AND IT TURNS OUT THAT THEY DIDN'T FULFILL

WHAT THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE. YET NOW WE WANT TO PENALIZE SOMEBODY

IN A TIME OF AN EMERGENCY, AND NOT ONLY PENALIZE HER BUT HER CHILDREN.

SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM SUPPORTING THIS PARTICULAR LAW.

SHE STILL HAS TO PAY THE MONEY BACK, SHE'S STILL GOING TO BE SUBJECTED --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SIR, HOW DO YOU

VOTE?

MR. COLTON: I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: IT'S AN AFFIRMATIVE

VOTE.

MR. CRESPO.

MR. CRESPO: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN

MY VOTE. I -- I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL AND ALL OF MY

COLLEAGUES FOR SUPPORTING IT. LET'S BE VERY CLEAR, AND IT'S BEEN SAID.

BUT ALL OF US HAVE SEEN FIRSTHAND THE IMPACT OF THE ECONOMY IN OUR

COMMUNITIES, HOW MANY FAMILIES HAVE STRUGGLED WITH UNEMPLOYMENT

INSURANCE. AND EVEN THOSE WELL-INTENTIONED, AS HAS BEEN SAID, IT CAN

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

BE A DAUNTING TASK. EVEN WITH THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SYSTEM THAT THE

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR HAS MADE, IT HAS PROVEN TO BE A DAUNTING TASK FOR

MANY JUST TO GO THROUGH THE PROMPTS AND REPLY TO EVERYTHING.

MISTAKES ARE EASILY MADE. BUT LET'S BE CLEAR. INDIVIDUALS WHO COMMIT

ANY SORT OF WILLFUL FRAUD ARE STILL PAYING BACK ANY BENEFITS THEY'VE

RECEIVED. THEY'RE PAYING ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES ON TOP OF THAT.

THAT'S NOT GOING AWAY. THE FORFEITURE -- FORFEITURE DAYS ARE JUST AN

ADDED PENALTY BEYOND THAT TO PUNISH THOSE INDIVIDUALS. BUT YOU'RE NOT

JUST PUNISHING THAT INDIVIDUAL, YOU'RE PUNISHING THOSE CHILDREN, THEIR

FAMILIES. THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO TAKE THAT EXTRA STEP. I THINK THIS IS A

COMMONSENSE PIECE OF LEGISLATION. IT'S ABOUT HELPING FAMILIES FIRST AND

DEALING WITH THEIR NEEDS AND THE IMMEDIACY. AND AS SO MANY HAVE

POINTED OUT, WE KEEP LOOKING THE OTHER WAY WHEN MAJOR FRAUD IS

COMMITTED BY CORPORATIONS, BUT WE SOMEHOW WANT TO CONTINUE TO JUST

HIT PEOPLE OVER THE HEAD WITH A HAMMER WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR NEEDS

AND FAMILIES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.

THIS IS A COMMONSENSE BILL. I THANK THE SPONSOR AND

I'M REALLY PROUD TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. AS THE LABOR CHAIR, THIS IS

COMMONSENSE LEGISLATION.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. CRESPO IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. GARBARINO.

MR. GARBARINO: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. A COUPLE OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SAID, YOU KNOW,

PEOPLE HAVE FORFEITURE DAYS, YOU KNOW, THEY DID THIS WILLFULLY. THEY

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

DIDN'T KNOW AND IT WASN'T INTENTIONAL. YOU KNOW, ONE EVEN SAID WHAT

DOES "WILLFUL" ACTUALLY MEAN? WELL, GOOD NEWS. I HAVE AN ANSWER.

ON THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR'S OWN WEBSITE IT SAYS, SECTION 594 OF THE

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE LAW PROVIDES THAT A CLAIMANT WHO HAS

WILLFULLY MADE A FALSE STATEMENT OR REPRESENTATION TO OBTAIN ANY

BENEFIT. THEN IT SAYS UNDER THEIR STANDARDS, NOT EVERY FALSE STATEMENT

SUBJECTS A CLAIMANT TO THE PENALTIES PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION. WILLFUL

MEANS THAT -- MEANS KNOWINGLY, INTENTIONALLY OR DELIBERATING MAKING A

FALSE STATEMENT. I DON'T KNOW -- I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU UNINTENTIONALLY

INTENTIONALLY DO SOMETHING. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING HERE IS THIS IS NOT FOR

PEOPLE THAT MAKE AN HONEST MISTAKE. THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR'S OWN

STANDARDS SAY PEOPLE DON'T GET FORFEITURE DAYS UNLESS THEY KNOWINGLY,

INTENTIONALLY OR DELIBERATELY MADE A FALSE STATEMENT. THESE ARE FOR THE

PEOPLE THAT DID THIS KNOWINGLY, AND NOW WE'RE HELPING THEM OUT. WE

SHOULD -- WE SHOULD BE HELPING THE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY NEED

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE. ADDING THESE PEOPLE TO THE SYSTEM ALLOWS

-- MAKES IT HARDER FOR PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY DESERVE UNEMPLOYMENT TO --

TO GET IT RIGHT NOW.

AND AGAIN, I -- I VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GARBARINO IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. WALCZYK.

MR. WALCZYK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. THIS BILL WOULD ALLOW PEOPLE WHO HAVE, ON PURPOSE,

LIED. AND I HEAR "THE GOVERNMENT" GET TOSSED AROUND. THEY LIED TO ALL

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

OF US. THEY'VE LIED TO THEIR FELLOW CITIZENS WHEN THEY'VE APPLIED FOR

UNEMPLOYMENT. THEY'VE LIED TO THE GOVERNMENT. THEY'VE DONE IT ON

PURPOSE TO BUMP THEMSELVES UP, TO GET THEMSELVES IN THE FRONT OF THE

LINE BEFORE -- THERE'S A VERY LONG LINE, AND MY OFFICE IS INUNDATED WITH

PHONE CALLS RIGHT NOW FROM HONEST NEW YORK CITIZENS THAT NEED OUR

HELP, AND THIS BILL IS ABSOLUTELY OFFENSIVE TO EVERYONE WHO NEEDS HELP

RIGHT NOW, WHO IS DOING SO HONESTLY AND WHO NEEDS OUR ASSISTANCE.

SO NEEDLESS TO SAY, MR. SPEAKER, I'LL BE VOTING NO.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. WALCZYK IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. OTIS.

(PAUSE)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, CALL BACK

ON MR. BURKE. DID HE GET BACK IN OR NO?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WE HAVE NOT HEARD

FROM MR. BURKE. WE'RE WAITING FOR MR. OTIS.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: OKAY.

(PAUSE)

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. OTIS, ONCE AGAIN,

TO EXPLAIN YOUR VOTE?

(PAUSE)

MR. REILLY TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. REILLY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. DURING -- I

KNOW THAT WE'VE ALL BEEN HELPING OUR CONSTITUENTS, AS MANY OF YOU

HAVE SAID, WITH THE -- RECEIVING UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. I SPECIFICALLY

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

BROUGHT THIS UP, THE PENALTY DAYS, WITH THE GOVERNOR'S LIAISONS IN OUR

BROOKLYN AND STATEN ISLAND CALLS. AND AS A MATTER OF FACT IT WAS APRIL

28TH THAT I E-MAILED THEM ABOUT THIS. AND THEIR RESPONSE WAS THEY

WERE WAITING ON COUNSEL TO DECIDE A PLAN THAT WOULD NOT SIGNIFICANTLY

IMPACT BUDGET -- BUDGETARY DECISIONS. SO IT WOULDN'T HAVE BUDGET

IMPLICATIONS. WELL, THEY WOUND UP PUTTING OUT GUIDANCE AND

APPROVING UNEMPLOYMENT RECIPIENTS WITH THOSE DELAYS OF THE FORFEITURE

DAYS. THEY'RE NOW ALLOWED TO RECEIVE -- SO THE -- THE EXECUTIVE ORDER

ALREADY COVERED THIS. AND I THINK WE SHOULD LEAVE IT UP TO THE

EXECUTIVE TO RESCIND THIS. WE GAVE HIM THE POWER, AND LET HIM TAKE IT

AWAY. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE LOOKING TO IMPLICATE THE BUDGET MORE

THAN IT ALREADY HAS BEEN.

AND FOR THAT REASON I AM GOING TO BE VOTING IN THE

NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. REILLY IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: YES, MR. SPEAKER. I

ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN BORN AND RAISED IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK. I

ACTUALLY HAVE APPLIED FOR UNEMPLOYMENT BEFORE. AND IT IS AN ARDUOUS

PROCESS. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT. SO I CAN ONLY IMAGINE THAT IN A PANDEMIC

WHEN LITERALLY MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ARE APPLYING AT THE SAME TIME THAT IT'S

-- IT'S EVEN WORSE THAN IT WAS BACK THEN. THE SECOND TIME THAT I NEEDED

TO APPLY, I DIDN'T EVEN APPLY BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE SYSTEM WAS WAY TOO

BUREAUCRATIC. BUT THERE ARE SOME TIMES PEOPLE ARE IN A POSITION WHERE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THEY DON'T HAVE A CHOICE TO APPLY. THEY HAVE TO APPLY. AND SO WE

EITHER ARE GOING TO DECIDE THAT WE ARE GOING TO GIVE PEOPLE WHO EITHER

MADE AN ERROR OR INTENTIONALLY DID SOMETHING WRONG THAT THEY HAVE

PAID FOR, THEY HAVE PAID BACK, WE ARE EITHER GOING TO ALLOW THEM THE

OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE UNEMPLOYMENT OR WE'RE GOING TO PAY FOR A

HOMELESS SHELTER FOR THEM. WE'RE GOING TO PICK EITHER ONE OR THE OTHER.

AND SO I THINK IT MAKES SENSE THAT PEOPLE HAVE RESOURCES THAT THEY

NEED TO PAY THEIR INCOME, BUY THEIR CHILDREN'S FOOD AND STAY IN THE

HOUSE WHERE THEY ARE AS OPPOSED TO BECOMING HOMELESS.

I WANTED TO JUST SAY THAT BECAUSE I'M DEFINITELY VOTING

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE FOR THIS BILL. BUT WE DO HAVE SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES

THAT WOULD LIKE TO VOTE NO, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT SO DULY-NOTED:

MR. SANTABARBARA, MR. CUSICK, MR. ZEBROWSKI, MS. PHEFFER AMATO AND

MR. BARNWELL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

MR. DIPIETRO.

MR. DIPIETRO: TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: YES, SIR. PROCEED.

MR. DIPIETRO: OKAY. NUMBER ONE, I DON'T THINK

THIS IS REALLY A MATTER OF WHETHER OR NOT PEOPLE WANT TO GET BENEFITS OR

NEED BENEFITS OR -- OR I THINK IT'S MORE -- AND NOT EVEN ENTITLED. BUT I

DO THINK THERE'S SOME BAD ACTORS OUT THERE WHO WILL FRAUD THE SYSTEM

WHENEVER THEY CAN. SO I UNDERSTAND IF SOMEONE WANTS TO VOTE AGAINST

THIS. I AM. I THINK IT COULD HAVE BEEN A LOT BETTER BILL, BUT THAT'S --

THAT'S USUALLY WHAT I'M UP AGAINST FOR EIGHT YEARS IS -- IS USUALLY A LOT OF

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THESE BILLS COULD BE A LOT BETTER AND THEY WOULD GAIN BIPARTISAN SUPPORT.

BUT THAT -- THAT'S ANOTHER ARGUMENT.

WHAT REALLY BOTHERS ME, ALSO, IS THE FACT THAT WE'RE --

AND I'M THE ONE THAT BROKE THAT STORY ABOUT THE GOVERNOR SHIPPING OUT

OVER 2,000 JOBS TO SOUTH CAROLINA AND PAYING $9 AN HOUR TO HELP WITH

OUR UNEMPLOYMENT INSTEAD OF HIRING NEW YORK STATE WORKERS. I THINK

WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE FOCUSED ON THAT. ALSO, IN GETTING THESE

PEOPLE BACK INTO THE WORKFORCE.

BUT THE LAST POINT I WANT TO MAKE WAS I -- I WAS JUST

LISTENING IN MY KITCHEN AND I SAW THE SPONSOR MADE A COMMENT WHICH

REALLY UPSET ME WHEN SHE SAID THAT ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH THIS BILL

IS ANGRY AND HOSTILE. THOSE WERE THE TWO WORDS SHE USED. I'M NOT

ANGRY AND I'M NOT HOSTILE. AND I REALLY RESENT THAT. SO I RESENT BEING

LABELED AS ANGRY AND HOSTILE IF I DON'T GO ALONG WITH THIS BILL. BUT I

THINK IT -- AGAIN, THE BILL I HAVE TO SEPARATE NEW YORK CITY, I THINK THAT

IS WHAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED GOING FORWARD HERE BECAUSE WE

DEFINITELY SEE -- BECAUSE THAT COMMENT IS DEFINITELY INDICATIVE OF WHAT

THE ATTITUDE IS, AND I'M SORRY TO HEAR THAT.

SO, I'M GOING TO BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE. AND I'M

NOT ANGRY AND HOSTILE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DIPIETRO IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. OTIS ONE MORE TIME. GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE.

(PAUSE)

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, COULD WE

NOW GO TO RULES REPORT NO. 47 - WE'RE STILL ON DEBATE - BY MS. PAULIN.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: SENATE NO. S08182-A, RULES REPORT

NO. 47, SENATOR HOYLMAN (A10508-A, COMMITTEE ON RULES - PAULIN,

DINOWITZ, L. ROSENTHAL, ORTIZ, DENDEKKER, BUTTENSCHON, SEAWRIGHT,

LUPARDO, BLAKE, PERRY, JACOBSON, SIMON). AN ACT TO AMEND THE

EDUCATION LAW, IN RELATION TO AUTHORIZING LICENSED PHARMACISTS TO

ADMINISTER AN APPROVED VACCINE FOR COVID-19; AND PROVIDING FOR THE

REPEAL OF SUCH PROVISIONS UPON EXPIRATION THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: AN EXPLANATION IS

REQUESTED, MS. PAULIN.

MS. PAULIN: YES. THE -- WHAT THE BILL DOES IS IT

AUTHORIZES LICENSED PHARMACISTS TO ADMINISTER THE COVID-19 VACCINE

WHEN IT'S DEVELOPED.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. MONTESANO.

MR. MONTESANO: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A FEW QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. PAULIN, WILL YOU

YIELD?

MS. PAULIN: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. PAULIN YIELDS.

MS. PAULIN: I CAN'T SEE YOU. WAIT. HOLD ON, I

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WANT TO SEE YOU.

MR. MONTESANO: HERE I AM. I'M RIGHT ABOVE

YOU.

MS. PAULIN: THERE WE GO. OKAY, I SEE YOU.

MR. MONTESANO: MS. PAULIN, LET ME ASK YOU -- I

MEAN, WE -- AS WE SIT HERE TODAY AND DEBATE THIS BILL, THERE ACTUALLY IS

NO VACCINE THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE FDA OR FULLY DEVELOPED,

CORRECT?

MS. PAULIN: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. MONTESANO: ALL RIGHT. AND -- AND WHEN

THIS VACCINE COMES OUT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO KNOW REALLY WHAT THE SIDE

EFFECTS ARE GOING TO BE AND WHAT TYPES OF PATIENTS CAN TAKE THIS

VACCINE, IF THERE'S GOING TO BE ANY KIND OF PREEXISTING MEDICAL

CONDITIONS THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THEM FROM HAVING THIS VACCINE. WE

DON'T KNOW ANY OF THAT YET, CORRECT?

MS. PAULIN: WE DON'T KNOW ANY OF THAT YET.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. SO RIGHT NOW I KNOW

PHARMACISTS ARE ALREADY AUTHORIZED BECAUSE OF THEIR LEVEL OF EDUCATION

TO ADMINISTER, YOU KNOW, THE FLU VACCINE, TETANUS, DIPTHERIA, AMONG

SOME OF THE DIFFERENT VACCINATIONS THAT THEY COULD GIVE. BUT THOSE

HAVE BEEN TESTED VACCINES, AND THE DOCTORS THAT ARE REFERRING THE

PATIENTS FOR THOSE VACCINATIONS OR THE PHARMACISTS THEMSELVES HAVING

THE ABILITY TO QUERY THE PATIENT TO FIND OUT IF THIS VACCINE IS GOOD FOR

THEM. HOWEVER, MY CONCERN IS WHAT DO WE DO NOW THAT THIS VACCINE

HASN'T BEEN FULLY DEVELOPED YET, IT HASN'T BEEN FULLY TESTED, TO ALLOW

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PHARMACISTS WHO ARE NOT MEDICAL DOCTORS -- YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE A

DOCTORATE IN -- IN -- IN THEIR PHARMACY STUDIES, BUT THEY'RE NOT MEDICAL

DOCTORS -- TO DETERMINE IF A PERSON REALLY IS ELIGIBLE TO GET THIS

VACCINATION. DO YOU SHARE THAT TYPE OF CONCERN?

MS. PAULIN: SO, THAT'S WHY IF YOU LOOK AT THE WAY

WE ENACTED SOME OF THE OTHER VACCINES SUCH AS FLU OR SHINGLES, WE

ALLOWED THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT SOLELY TO DEVELOP RULES AND

REGS. WE GAVE THEM 90 DAYS TO DO SO. FOR THIS PARTICULAR BILL WE DID IT

A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY, IN THAT WE'RE DOING -- WE DID THE -- IN ADDITION TO

GIVING TIME, 90 DAYS, TO DO RULES AND REGS, WE ALSO SAY THAT THE STATE

EDUCATION DEPARTMENT AND THE COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH HAVE TO

COLLABORATE TO DETERMINE AND TO CERTIFY BEFORE -- BEFORE AND HOW THEY

GO FORWARD. SO WE DIDN'T SOLELY LEAVE IT WITH THE EDUCATION

DEPARTMENT. WE'VE ENGAGED THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, WHICH IS A

DIFFERENT WAY THAN WE'VE DONE IT BEFORE, AND WE REQUIRE THEM TO

CERTIFY. NOW, WE DON'T SAY HOW BECAUSE WE'RE NOT MEDICAL EXPERTS.

BUT WE APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT WE DON'T KNOW SEVERAL THINGS. WE

DON'T KNOW ALL OF THE THINGS THAT YOU MENTIONED, WHICH IS THE EFFECTS

ON DIFFERENT KINDS OF POPULATIONS. WE ALSO DON'T KNOW WHETHER THIS IS

GOING TO BE A SERIES OF VACCINES, ONE SHOT. ALL OF THE OTHER TYPES OF

VACCINES ARE -- ARE JUST ONE. THIS MIGHT BE TWO. DO WE WANT -- DO WE

NEED OR REQUIRE ADDITIONAL RECORDKEEPING ON THE PART OF THE

PHARMACIST? YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT WHEN THERE

IS A VACCINE WE WANT IT TO BE DISTRIBUTED AS WIDELY AS POSSIBLE. WE

ALSO KNOW THAT IF YOU INCLUDE PHYSICIANS AND NURSE PRACTITIONERS AND

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ALL OF THOSE MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS THAT DON'T NEED LEGISLATION IN ORDER TO

ADMINISTER A VACCINE, THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LESS THAN 1,000 IN THE

ENTIRE STATE OF NEW YORK. PROBABLY MORE LIKE 500 I HEARD THE

GOVERNOR SAY IN ONE OF HIS PRESS CONFERENCES. SO BY ADDING

PHARMACISTS - WHICH THERE ARE PROBABLY 5,000 LICENSED PHARMACISTS

ACROSS THE STATE - WE ALLOW THE VACCINE TO BE WIDELY DISTRIBUTED,

PARTICULARLY IN AREAS AND -- AND FOR PEOPLE WHO MIGHT NOT HAVE A

PRIMARY CARE PROVIDER AND MIGHT BE MORE VULNERABLE. WE GIVE

ENORMOUS ACCESS TO SO MANY MORE PEOPLE. WE BELIEVE THAT WE ARE

DOING IT WITH SAFEGUARDS MUCH GREATER THAN OTHER VACCINES THAN -- THAT

WE'VE ALSO ALLOWED, BUT -- BUT WE HAVE TO BALANCE THE TWO SO THAT WE

CAN HAVE ACCESS AND WE KEEP THEM SAFE. AND WE BELIEVE WE'VE DONE

THAT IN THIS BILL.

MR. MONTESANO: NOW, CURRENTLY THE GOVERNOR

ALREADY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DESIGNATE PHARMACISTS AS IMMUNIZERS, AS

HE ORIGINALLY DID WITH THE H1N1 PANDEMIC. SO WHY CAN'T THIS -- IN THE

BEGINNING AT LEAST, UNTIL A -- A VACCINE IS OUT, WE KNOW ABOUT DOSAGES

AND SO ON AND SO FORTH AND ABOUT PEOPLE'S MEDICAL HISTORIES THAT MAY

PREVENT THEM FROM HAVING IT, WHY CAN'T WE LEAVE THIS TO THE GOVERNOR

TO USE HIS AUTHORITY TO DESIGNATE THE PHARMACISTS LATER ON WHEN

EVERYTHING HAS SETTLED ON THIS PARTICULAR VACCINE? WHY THE LEGISLATION

UP-FRONT NOW?

MS. PAULIN: WELL, I THINK THAT WE JUST WANT TO BE

PREPARED. WE'VE SAID -- YOU KNOW, I'VE HEARD MANY PEOPLE IN YOUR

CONFERENCE, FOR EXAMPLE, SAY IT'S NOT GOOD TO HAVE SO MUCH EXECUTIVE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

POWER. YOU KNOW -- YOU KNOW, WE'RE -- WE'RE TRYING TO BE IN FRONT OF

THE VIRUS AND TO DO WHAT WE BELIEVE IS ULTIMATELY THE RIGHT CHOICE.

PHARMACISTS ARE, AS YOU POINTED OUT, INCREDIBLY EDUCATED. THEY KNOW

WHAT TO WATCH FOR. WE THINK BY GIVING 90 DAYS BETWEEN THE TIME OF

THE CDC AND FDA RECOMMENDED -- THE -- THE -- YOU KNOW, AFTER THE

TIME THEY SAY IT'S OKAY TO DO THIS, YOU KNOW, WE BELIEVE THERE WILL BE A

LOT OF PRACTITIONERS ALREADY ADMINISTERING IT. THERE WILL -- DOCTORS AND

NURSE PRACTITIONERS AND SO FORTH WILL BE ABLE TO, SO WE WILL SEE -- WE

WILL SEE THOSE IMPACTS IN THOSE 90 DAYS. WE WILL HAVE TIME IN 90 DAYS.

AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO WANT IT SOONER

THAN 90 DAYS. AND I CAN ALMOST SEE THAT THE GOVERNOR MIGHT EXERCISE

HIS EXECUTIVE POWER TO EXPEDITE RATHER THAN DELAY. BUT HE COULD

PROBABLY DO BOTH WITH THE POWERS THAT WE'VE GRANTED HIM IF, GOD

WILLING, THERE'S A VACCINE AND WE CAN ALL BE DONE WITH THIS PANDEMIC.

MR. MONTESANO: THANK YOU, MS. PAULIN.

ON THE BILL, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, MR.

MONTESANO.

MR. MONTESANO: THANK YOU. WELL, I'M VERY

APPRECIATIVE FOR THE -- THE SPONSOR'S WORK ON THIS BILL AND I UNDERSTAND

THE NEED FOR IT WHEN WE GO FORWARD. MY BIG CONCERNS ARE THAT

EVERYTHING IS IN AN EXPERIMENTAL STAGE. AS A MATTER OF FACT THERE'S A

STORY IN THE PAPER LAST NIGHT INTO TODAY OF A GENTLEMAN WHO TOOK PART IN

THE TESTING PROCESS FOR THE VACCINE FOR A PARTICULAR COMPANY, AND HE

GOT DREADFULLY SICK FROM IT (UNINTELLIGIBLE) PERIOD OF TIME. AND THEY'RE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, WAS IT AN UNDERLYING CONDITION THAT HE

HAD, WAS IT JUST AN OUTRIGHT REACTION TO THE VACCINE. FROM WHAT I'M

READING IS I THINK THIS VACCINE WILL COME IN MULTIPLE DOSES, AND I'M JUST

CONCERNED THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT HAVE

UNDERLYING MEDICAL ISSUES THAT MAKE IT -- THAT WOULD NOT MAKE IT

CONDUCIVE TO THEM RECEIVING THIS PARTICULAR VACCINE. AND THEN THEY

WALK INTO A DRUGSTORE, THEY ASK FOR IT, AND ARE THE PHARMACISTS GOING TO

HAVE THE ABILITY AND THE TIME TO TAKE THE EXTENSIVE PATIENT HISTORY THAT'S

NECESSARY TO DETERMINE SHOULD THEY HAVE THIS VACCINE? SHOULD THERE

BE BLOODWORK BEFORE THEY GET THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF VACCINE? THIS IS

NEW TO ALL OF US. THE ILLNESS IS NEW, THE VIRUS, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE STILL

TRYING TO FIGURE OUT ITS COMPOSITION AND ITS FUTURE IMPACT ON PEOPLE

THAT HAVE GOTTEN IT ALREADY. AND -- AND WHILE I CAN APPRECIATE THE FACT

THAT WE WANT TO BE OUT IN FRONT OF THIS, WE ALREADY HAVE A MECHANISM

IN PLACE TO ALLOW THE PHARMACIST TO DO THIS IF -- IF NEED BE, AND THE

GOVERNOR COULD DO THAT WITH A STROKE OF A PEN. AND, YES, I DON'T AGREE

WITH ALL OF THE EXECUTIVE POWERS HE'S BEEN USING RECENTLY, BUT HE'S

ALWAYS HAD THIS OTHER POWER TO DO THAT. SO I -- I JUST HAVE A CONCERN

THAT WE'RE EVEN PUTTING THE PHARMACISTS IN AN AWKWARD POSITION WHEN

THIS FIRST COMES OUT BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME UP TO SPEED

ON THIS PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, VACCINE. AND THIS IS NOT AS SIMPLE AS A

FLU VACCINE OR A SHINGLES VACCINE. I THINK THIS VACCINE IS GOING TO BE

SOMEWHAT COMPLEX, AND I THINK BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE VIRUS IT'S

SUPPOSED TO TREAT OR HELP PREVENT, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, A

COMPLICATED TYPE OF VACCINE WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR PROBLEMS.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SO WHILE I APPLAUD THE SPONSOR FOR THIS BILL AND I

UNDERSTAND IT'S A NECESSITY, UNTIL I SEE THIS VACCINE COME OUT AND WHAT

IT'S CAPABLE OF AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT I'VE MENTIONED, I'M GOING TO

BE VOTING NO ON THIS PARTICULAR BILL AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MR.

MONTESANO.

MS. GLICK.

MS. GLICK: AS MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES KNOW, THE

HIGHER ED COMMITTEE IS VERY CAUTIOUS IN THE WAY IN WHICH WE MOVE

FORWARD ON THESE TYPES OF AUTHORIZATIONS. NOT ALL PHARMACISTS CHOOSE

TO BE CERTIFIED TO PROVIDE IMMUNIZATIONS. THAT'S NUMBER ONE. THERE --

THEY DO HAVE TO HAVE THE CERTIFICATION FOR IT. NEW PHARMACISTS COME

OUT OF SCHOOL HAVING HAD MORE TRAINING IN THAT ARENA. THE BILL ACTUALLY

SAYS NO SOONER THAN 90 DAYS. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT -- THAT THERE MAY BE

(UNINTELLIGIBLE) FOR IT TO BE -- FOR IT TO BE A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME IF BOTH

THE COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND THE COMMISSIONER

OF EDUCATION FEEL THAT EARLY REPORTS ARE MORE CONCERNING. SO IT'S NO

SOONER THAN 90 DAYS, AND IT IS WITH A CERTIFICATION BY BOTH DEPARTMENTS

THAT IT IS IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH INTEREST FOR PHARMACISTS TO BE ABLE TO DO

THIS IMMUNIZATION. AND YOU'RE QUITE RIGHT, MR. MONTESANO. WE'RE NOT

SURE OF EVEN WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION MIGHT BE. EVERYBODY IS THINKING,

WELL, YOU KNOW, YOU GO IN FOR A SHOT. WE HAVE NO IDEA IF THAT'S

ACTUALLY GOING TO BE THE MEANS FOR ADMINISTERING THIS VACCINE. SO

THERE ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS. THERE IS A TREMENDOUS PRESSURE FROM

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SOME QUARTERS TO RUSH THIS THROUGH BECAUSE WE'RE ALL CONCERNED. BUT I

BELIEVE THAT AT LEAST NEW YORK STATE, WHICH HAS BEEN VERY CAREFUL AND

DELIBERATIVE IN THESE AREAS, WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO. AND THAT THE

COMMISSIONERS WILL NOT CERTIFY SOMETHING THAT HAS NOT BEEN FULLY

VETTED AND IS APPROPRIATE. IF THEY DON'T THINK THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE, THAT

MORE MONITORING NEEDS TO BE DONE, IF THERE'S A SERIES OF

ADMINISTRATIONS, THAT THEY'RE NOT CONFIDENT THAT PEOPLE WILL GO TO THE

SAME PHARMACIST OR THEY DO NOT -- THEY MAY NOT CERTIFY IT. SO THERE ARE

SAFEGUARDS. SO I JUST WANT TO ASSURE YOU THAT WE DID NOT RUN DOWN THIS

ROAD AND PUT IT OUT OF THE COMMITTEE WITHOUT HAVING THOUGHT THROUGH

AND WORKED WITH. AND I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR FOR ACCEPTING THE

CONCERNS THAT WE HAD AND AMENDING THE BILL. WE THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE,

AND WE THINK THAT IF A VACCINE IS SAFE AND EFFECTIVE AND IS AVAILABLE, AT

SOME POINT AFTER 90 DAYS IT IS IN OUR INTEREST TO HAVE AS MANY PEOPLE AS

POSSIBLE HAVE ACCESS TO WHAT COULD BE TOTALLY LIFESAVING FOR AN -- AN

INNUMERABLE NUMBER OF NEW YORKERS.

SO, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN, BUT I WANT TO ASSURE

YOU THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL SAFEGUARDS ALONG THE WAY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. BENEDETTO.

MR. BENEDETTO: YES, EVERYBODY, I'M GOING TO BE

VOTING NO ON THIS PARTICULAR BILL. I'M GOING TO BE VOTING NO BECAUSE I'M

VERY UNEASY WITH THIS PARTICULAR BILL. WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A VACCINE.

WE DON'T KNOW THE DIMENSIONS OF A -- A VACCINE. WHY ARE WE

AUTHORIZING SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE A YEAR AWAY FROM -- FROM BEING

ACTUALLY ABLE TO BE USED? I WOULD -- I HAVE ABSOLUTE CONFIDENCE IN THE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

COMMITTEES IN VETTING BILLS AND LOOKING AT THEM VERY CAREFULLY. I KNOW

THAT HAPPENS. BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE ACTING ON. WE DON'T

KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IN PRODUCTION AND GIVING THE

AUTHORIZATION FOR PHARMACISTS TO USE. I WOULD FEEL A LOT MORE

COMFORTABLE IF I KNEW WHAT WE WERE DOING AND THEN WE WERE LOOKING

AT THE VARIOUS PHARMACISTS TO DO THIS. WE WILL HAVE TIME TO DO IT IN THE

FUTURE. OR WE WILL HAVE -- THE GOVERNOR COULD POSSIBLY DO IT IF WE'RE

NOT IN SESSION AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME. UNTIL THEN, UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT

WE'RE DEALING WITH, I WILL BE VERY UNEASY WITH PASSING A BILL

AUTHORIZING SOMEBODY TO GIVE AN INJECTION WHERE WE REALLY DON'T KNOW

EVERYTHING ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON.

I WILL BE VOTING NO. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. MCDONALD.

MR. MCDONALD: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. AND

TO THE SPONSOR AND TO THE CHAIR, THANK YOU FOR NOT ONLY THE SPONSORSHIP

BUT THE LEADERSHIP ON THIS BILL. I WOULD LIKE TO JUST CLEAR UP A LITTLE BIT

OF MIS -- MISINFORMATION OR MAYBE SOME CONFUSION. FIRST OF ALL, IN

RECORDKEEPING, I DARE SAY PHARMACIES AND PHARMACISTS ARE PROBABLY AS

GOOD AS, IF NOT BETTER, TODAY IN REGARDS TO RECORDKEEPING - PARTICULARLY

IN REGARDS TO VACCINES - THAN MANY OF THE OTHER HEALTH CARE

PRACTITIONERS THAT ARE OUT THERE. I KNOW THAT FOR A FACT BECAUSE MANY

TIMES THE PHYSICIANS ARE CALLING US TO HELP GIVE THEM THE RECORDS OF

THEIR PATIENT'S VACCINE HISTORY. IN REGARDS TO -- AND -- AND WHEN I FIRST

HEARD ABOUT THE 90-DAY MINIMUM, I THOUGHT ABOUT IT FOR A SECOND AND I

SAID, YOU KNOW, THAT MAKES SENSE. LET'S SEE WHAT THIS ENTAILS. IS IT

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MULTIPLE INJECTIONS, WHICH A PHARMACIST WILL HAVE NO PROBLEM BEING

ABLE TO KEEP TRACK OF. ANYBODY WHO HAS EVER GOTTEN A REFILL ON A

PRESCRIPTION AND GOTTEN A TEXT THAT THE PRESCRIPTION'S READY, KNOWS

EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. THE VACCINE PROBABLY WILL BE SIMILAR

IN ADMINISTRATION TO WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY DEALING WITH WITH FLU. MORE

THAN LIKELY AN IM INJECTION. IF IT NEEDS MORE, THEN THAT'S WHY THE CHAIR

AND THE COMMITTEE WISELY CHOSE TO MAKE SURE DOH AND SED

CONVERSE AND PROVIDE THE PROPER TRAINING OR GUIDANCE IF IT'S NECESSARY.

YOU KNOW, THE -- THE INTERESTING CONVERSATION ABOUT THE EXECUTIVE

ORDERS IS ALSO INTERESTING TO ME. IF WE CAN'T DO IT, WE -- IF THE

GOVERNOR'S DOING IT, WE'RE COMPLAINING ABOUT IT, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND

WHEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY PUT OUR OWN IMPRINT ON THIS, WE'RE

COMPLAINING ABOUT IT. WE'VE GOT TO KIND OF FIGURE THIS OUT, FOLKS. YOU

KNOW, I'LL BE VERY HONEST WITH YOU. AND THE CHAIR KNOWS THIS. WE'VE

HAD SOME VERY GOOD DIALOGUE OVER THE YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE. THE

LEGISLATURE AT TIMES, I THINK, AND IT MAY BE BECAUSE OF THE DICHOTOMY

BETWEEN THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT AND THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,

WHATEVER IT IS -- IF WE -- WE LOVE PHARMACISTS. I HEAR THAT ALL THE TIME.

WE TRY TO SUPPORT THE PHARMACY COMMUNITY. BUT THEY ARE, AS MEMBER

PAULIN HAD MENTIONED, A VERY HIGHLY-TRAINED PROFESSION. THEY'RE

PHARMDS, AS THE CHAIR POINTED OUT. THEY'RE DOCTORATES OF PHARMACY.

SIX YEARS OF EDUCATION. THEY'RE SMART FOLKS, TOO. AND QUITE HONESTLY, I

CAN TELL YOU AS ONE WHO STILL PRACTICES PHARMACY ALMOST DAILY- EXCEPT

FOR THIS AFTERNOON - PRACTITIONERS REACH OUT TO US QUITE OFTEN ABOUT THE

MEDICATION, THE ADMINISTRATION, THE SIDE EFFECTS. WE NEED TO STOP

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

LOOKING AT THE PROFESSION AS BEING A COMMODITY-DRIVEN PROFESSION AND

LOOK AT THEM AS HEALTHCARE PRACTITIONERS. AS A PERSON WHO REPRESENTS A

VERY POOR ASSEMBLY DISTRICT IN UPSTATE NEW YORK, I'VE SEEN MANY

PROVIDERS, PHYSICIANS, NURSE PRACTITIONERS, PAS LEAVE OUR URBAN AREAS

WHERE WE HAVE UNACCEPTABLY HIGH POVERTY. WHAT'S LEFT BEHIND USUALLY

IS A PHARMACY AND A PHARMACIST. AND QUITE HONESTLY, THAT'S WHAT IS LEFT

IN MANY CIRCUMSTANCES BECAUSE OF THE REIMBURSEMENT METHODOLOGY,

WHICH I WILL NOT GET INTO. CASE IN POINT, THE GOVERNOR WISELY CHOSE TO

ISSUE AN EXECUTIVE ORDER TO ALLOW PHARMACISTS TO DO POINT-OF-CARE

TESTING WHEN IT COMES TO THE DIAGNOSTIC TEST FOR -- FOR COVID-19.

PHARMACIES -- PROBABLY 48 OUT OF 50 STATES ACROSS THIS COUNTRY HAVE

BEEN ALLOWING PHARMACISTS TO DO THAT FOR SEVERAL YEARS. ONE COULD

WONDER - IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO MONDAY MORNING QUARTERBACK - IF

PHARMACISTS HAD THAT ABILITY, COULD WE HAVE BEEN DOING MORE TESTING

EARLY ON, AND WHAT THE IMPACT COULD BE? THAT'S NOT TO LAMENT. IT'S JUST

A POINT OF A MORE RECENT EXAMPLE WHERE I THINK YOU HAVE A HEALTHCARE

PROFESSION THAT NEEDS TO BE MORE RELEVANT, NEEDS TO BE VERY MINDFUL OF

ITS CURRENT WORK FLOW ISSUES, WHICH THE CHAIR HAS POINTED OUT AND I

RESPECT THOSE COMMENTS. BUT I THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE AHEAD

OF THE CURVE ON SOMETHING.

AND MY FINAL POINT IS, AND I UNDERSTAND MY

COLLEAGUES' CONCERN ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THE VACCINE. AT THE END OF THE

DAY, EVERY MEDICATION, EVERY VACCINE, IS VETTED AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE

THROUGH THE FDA. WE, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER PRACTITIONER, GIVE ALL THE SIDE

EFFECTS, THE POTENTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, THE GUIDANCE TO TAKE CARE OF THE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PATIENT. MY POINT IS IS THAT WHETHER IT'S A PHARMACIST, WHETHER IT'S A

NURSE, WHETHER IT'S A DOCTOR OR A PA, WE WILL ALL BE DEALING WITH A NEW

VACCINE. WE ARE ALL GOING TO BE WORKING THROUGH THIS PROCESS. LET'S

HOPE THAT THE FDA APPROPRIATELY TAKES THE TIME TO DO THE REVIEW THAT

NEEDS TO BE DONE TO BRING THE APPROPRIATE PRODUCT TO MARKET.

MY FINAL COMMENT IS THIS: IN 2009, H1N1 CAME OUT

OF NOWHERE. THE STATE OF NEW YORK CALLED ON PHARMACIES TO STEP UP

THE GAME, ISSUED AN EXECUTIVE ORDER. AND GUESS WHAT? PHARMACY

WAS THERE, AND I KNOW PERSONALLY, ADMINISTERED TENS, IF NOT HUNDREDS

OF THOUSANDS OF VACCINES. THE PROFESSION IS READY NOW. THIS BILL IS A

VERY POSITIVE STEP IN THAT DIRECTION.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. GOTTFRIED.

MR. GOTTFRIED: YES, MR. SPEAKER. I THINK THIS IS

A -- A VERY VALUABLE AND VERY INTELLIGENT BILL. IF AND WHEN A VACCINE IS

DEVELOPED, WE'RE GOING TO WANT IT TO GET OUT TO 20 MILLION NEW

YORKERS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. AND THAT MEANS HAVING A LOT OF PEOPLE

ON THE STREET LEVEL WHO ARE READY TO ADMINISTER THAT VACCINATION

QUICKLY TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE. FRANKLY, DEPENDING ON WHAT

THE VACCINE INDICATORS LOOK LIKE, WE MAY WELL WANT TO AUTHORIZE

PHARMACISTS TO BE DOING THIS VACCINATION EVEN EARLIER THAN 90 DAYS.

BUT EVEN WITH -- YOU MIGHT ARGUE FOR THAT CHANGE IN THE BILL. IT'S A VERY

IMPORTANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION. PHARMACISTS IN NEW YORK ARE

WELL-EXPERIENCED WITH VACCINATIONS. PHARMACISTS KNOW MORE ABOUT

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PHARMACEUTICALS AND VACCINATIONS THAN PROBABLY AN AWFUL LOT OF

PHYSICIANS. YOU KNOW, WE SEEM TO ASSUME THAT IF YOU GRADUATED FROM

MEDICAL SCHOOL NO MATTER HOW LONG AGO, YOU MUST KNOW EVERYTHING

FROM HEAD TO TOE. IT WOULD BE GREAT IF THAT WAS TRUE, BUT OF COURSE IT

ISN'T. BRAIN SURGEONS, YOU KNOW, DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT WHAT

PODIATRISTS KNOW ABOUT, AND VICE VERSA. AND SO THIS BILL PUTS ON THE

JOB A VERY IMPORTANT JOB THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED A LOT OF HANDS ON. IT

PUTS ON THE JOB PEOPLE WHO ARE REALLY TOP-NOTCH ON THIS TOPIC IN

PARTICULAR.

I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT STEP AHEAD. I -- I CERTAINLY

PLAN TO VOTE FOR IT.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON RULES REPORT [SIC] NO. A10508A. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.

ANY MEMBER WISHING TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO

CONTACT THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBER PREVIOUSLY

PROVIDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. ABINANTI TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. ABINANTI: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. SCIENCE

IS MORE IMPORTANT NOW THAN EVER. WE NEED TO FOLLOW THE SCIENCE. WE

HOPE THAT SCIENCE WILL FIND THE KEY THAT WILL OPEN THE DOOR TO FREE US

FROM OUR SELF-IMPOSED HOME DETENTION WITH TREATMENTS AND VACCINES.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

HOWEVER, FOR SCIENCE TO WORK FOR EVERYONE, THE FRUITS OF SCIENTIFIC

WORK MUST BE AVAILABLE WIDELY TO ALL. THIS LEGISLATION IS CAREFULLY

FASHIONED TO ALLOW THOSE PHARMACISTS WHO ARE APPROPRIATELY TRAINED

AND CERTIFIED TO ADMINISTER VACCINES FOR COVID-19. WHILE WE DO NOT

YET HAVE SUCH VACCINES, IT IS REALLY BETTER THAT WE SET UP A MECHANISM

AND TALK ABOUT THAT MECHANISM IN ADVANCE OF REALLY NEEDING IT AFTER

SOME THOUGHTFUL DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THAT MECHANISM SHOULD BE

FASHIONED. THIS LEGISLATION AUTHORIZES PHARMACISTS TO ADMINISTER

COVID-19 VACCINES, BUT ONLY AFTER BOTH THE COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH

AND THE COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION JOINTLY CERTIFY THAT THE VACCINE IS

READY TO BE DISTRIBUTED BY PHARMACISTS. THIS IS PUTTING IN THE HANDS OF

THE PEOPLE WHO SHOULD MAKE THESE DECISIONS, DECISIONS ABOUT

VACCINES.

I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. ABINANTI IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

(PAUSE)

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: MR. DIPIETRO TO

EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MAYBE NOT.

(PAUSE)

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE

FOLLOWING REPUBLICANS WILL BE VOTING NO ON THIS PARTICULAR LEGISLATION:

MR. DIPIETRO, MR. FRIEND, MR. MANKTELOW, MR. MIKULIN, MR.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MONTESANO AND MR. BLANKENBUSH.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: THANK YOU, MR.

GOODELL.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER. WE HAVE THREE MEMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO BE INCLUDED AS A

NO. IT SOUNDS LIKE A FIRM: BENEDETTO, BARRON AND BARRETT.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: THANK YOU, MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, WE'RE

GOING TO CONTINUE OUR DEBATE WITH RULES REPORT NO. 49. IT'S SPONSORED

BY MS. SIMOTAS.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A10516-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 49, COMMITTEE ON RULES (SIMOTAS, OTIS, BICHOTTE, ORTIZ,

JACOBSON, BLAKE, LUPARDO, SEAWRIGHT, SIMON, STIRPE, GRIFFIN, NOLAN,

WEINSTEIN). AN ACT TO AMEND THE ELECTION LAW, IN RELATION TO ABSENTEE

VOTING; AND PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF SUCH PROVISIONS UPON THE

EXPIRATION THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: ON A MOTION BY THE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SENATE -- BY MS. SIMOTAS, THE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL

IS ADVANCED. MR. GOODELL IS CALLING FOR AN EXPLANATION.

MS. SIMOTAS.

MS. SIMOTAS: YES, OF COURSE. THIS BILL AMENDS

VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ELECTION LAW TO DO SEVERAL THINGS. FIRST, IT

ELIMINATES THE SIGNATURE REQUIREMENT TO REQUEST ABSENTEE BALLOTS.

SECOND, IT ALLOWS VOTERS TO REQUEST ABSENTEE BALLOTS BY E-MAIL,

ELECTRONIC TRANSMITTAL SYSTEM, OR A WEB PORTAL ESTABLISHED BY THE STATE,

CITY OR COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS. THIRD, IT PERMITS A VOTER TO

DISPATCH AN ABSENTEE BALLOT IN THE MAIL UP TO THE DATE OF THE ELECTION

AND, FORTH, IT MAKES CONFORMING CHANGES OF OTHER AREAS OF THE LAW

RELATING TO DEADLINES FOR RECEIPT OF ABSENTEE BALLOTS, INCLUDING FEDERAL

WRITE-IN ABSENTEE BALLOTS, SPECIAL PRESIDENTIAL BALLOTS AND SPECIAL

FEDERAL BALLOTS. AND THOSE CHANGES WOULD BE WITH RESPECT TO THE

SIGNATURE REQUIREMENT TO REQUEST AN ABSENTEE BALLOT, AND THE DATE THAT

YOU'RE ABLE TO DISPATCH IT. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: MR. NORRIS.

MR. NORRIS: THANK YOU. WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD

FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

MS. SIMOTAS: OF COURSE I YIELD.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: MS. SIMOTAS YIELDS.

MR. NORRIS: THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, ASSEMBLYWOMAN SIMOTAS, IT'S GREAT TO SEE

YOU AGAIN.

MS. SIMOTAS: IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. NORRIS: AS WELL AS EVERYONE ELSE, AND I WOULD

JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT I THANK THE SPEAKER, THE MAJORITY LEADER AND THE

MINORITY LEADER AND EVERYONE FOR THEIR COOPERATION DURING THIS. IT'S

WORKED OUT VERY WELL, AND A SHOUT-OUT TO THE STAFF WHO PUT ALL THIS

TOGETHER, AS WELL.

NOW, MOVING TO THE QUESTIONS. IS THERE GOING TO BE A

REQUIREMENT THAT THE VOTER ACTUALLY STILL SIGNS THEIR ABSENTEE BALLOT

APPLICATION?

MS. SIMOTAS: THE APPLICATION? NO, THAT WAS --

MR. NORRIS: YES.

MS. SIMOTAS: NO. THERE'S NO LONGER A

REQUIREMENT. THE GOVERNOR, BY EXECUTIVE ORDER, HAD ELIMINATED THAT

REQUIREMENT FOR THE PRIMARY ELECTION COMING UP ON JUNE 23RD IN NEW

YORK STATE, AND THIS BILL WOULD ELIMINATE IT FOR THE UPCOMING ELECTION

IN NOVEMBER.

MR. NORRIS: OKAY. SO WHY ARE WE REMOVING THAT

CHECK? JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW THAT THAT VOTER IS THE VOTER

WHO WANTS THAT APPLICATION -- OR THAT ABSENTEE?

MS. SIMOTAS: BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE ALLOWING IS FOR

ELECTRONIC REQUESTS. IN THE NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF ELECTIONS, I CAN

TELL YOU HAS CREATED AN ELECTRONIC PORTAL THAT YOU CAN GO ONLINE AND

REQUEST AN ABSENTEE BALLOT, AND THE REQUEST GOES TO THEM DIRECTLY. AS

YOU CAN IMAGINE, WITH MAIL-IN BALLOTS, IT'S QUITE DIFFICULT RIGHT NOW

WITH THE COVID CRISIS THAT WE'RE ALL FACING. PLENTY OF PEOPLE DON'T

HAVE STAMPS, THEY CAN'T IMAGINE GOING TO THE POST OFFICE, THEY WANT TO

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

STAY IN THEIR HOMES, IN THE SAFETY OF THEIR OWN HOMES. SO, WHAT WE'RE

-- WE'RE ALLOWING IS FOR ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS TO REQUEST THE

ABSENTEE BALLOTS.

MR. NORRIS: NOW, ISN'T IT TRUE, THOUGH, RIGHT NOW

UNDER THE GOVERNOR'S ORDER THAT WHEN THEY MAILED OUT THESE

APPLICATIONS TO EVERYONE, THAT IT WAS A POSTAGE PAID BY THE LOCAL

GOVERNMENT TO RETURN THE APPLICATION FORM BACK TO THE BOARD OF

ELECTIONS?

MS. SIMOTAS: YES.

MR. NORRIS: WHY COULDN'T THAT BE DONE AGAIN FOR

THE NOVEMBER ELECTION?

MS. SIMOTAS: I'M SURE IT WILL BE, BUT SOMETIMES

PEOPLE DON'T RECEIVE THOSE REQUESTS FOR ABSENTEE BALLOTS. I CAN TELL YOU

THAT I KNOW PLENTY OF CONSTITUENTS IN MY DISTRICT WHO DID NOT RECEIVE IT,

EITHER THEIR CHILDREN THREW IT AWAY OR IT WAS MISPLACED, OR THE POST

OFFICE DIDN'T DELIVER IT. ALL WE'RE DOING IS MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE

PROVIDING ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR VOTERS -- FOR QUALIFIED VOTERS TO

REQUEST AN ABSENTEE BALLOT; NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS.

MR. NORRIS: OKAY. AND I -- I THINK THAT'S A VERY

GOOD IDEA, THAT WE ACTUALLY ALLOW PEOPLE TO REQUEST AN ABSENTEE BALLOT

BY THE WRITING -- I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE -- I THINK THAT WE SHOULD

HAVE A CHECK, AND THE REASON WHY I -- I BELIEVE THAT IS BECAUSE -- I'M

NOT SURE WHEN YOU REGISTERED TO VOTE, I REGISTERED WHEN I WAS 18 YEARS

OLD; MANY PEOPLE DO THE SAME THING. AND WE SIGNED THAT FORM BACK

THEN, AND AS DECADES GO ON, YOUR SIGNATURE CHANGES AND MANY PEOPLE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

DON'T UPDATE THEIR SIGNATURE WITH THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS. SO, WHEN

THAT ABSENTEE APPLICATION GOES BACK, THEY WILL GET THE SIGNATURE. AND

THEN WHEN THEY GET THE BALLOT BACK, THEY CAN HAVE A COMPARISON OF THE

SIGNATURES, A VERIFICATION. SO, THAT'S MY POINT AND MY CONCERN ABOUT

WHY WE'RE REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE CHECK FOR THE VERIFICATION

OF THAT APPLICATION, VERSUS THE ABSENTEE BALLOT ENVELOPE WHEN IT COMES

BACK.

MS. SIMOTAS: WELL, THERE IS NOTHING THAT PREVENTS

THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS FROM CHECKING A VOTER'S SIGNATURE AGAINST THEIR

BUFF CARD WHEN THEY REGISTERED TO VOTE WHEN THEY RECEIVE THE ABSENTEE

-- WHEN THEY RECEIVE THE ABSENTEE BALLOT BACK. I KNOW THAT IN NEW

YORK CITY, ACTUALLY IN EVERY BOARD, WHAT THE REQUIREMENT IS IS THAT THE

VOTER, BEFORE THE ENVELOPE IS EVEN OPENED, THAT THEY SIGN AND DATE THE

BALLOT. AND, AGAIN, THAT SIGNATURE CAN BE COMPARED WITH THE ONE THAT

YOU USED TO REGISTER -- WHEN YOU -- WHEN YOU REGISTERED TO VOTE AND, OF

COURSE, I'M SURE THAT MANY PEOPLE -- MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES AND MANY

OF US CAN BE VERY SENSITIVE THAT SIGNATURES CHANGE AND PEOPLE PROBABLY

DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THEIR SIGNATURE LOOKED LIKE WHEN THEY WERE 18; I

THINK I'M PROBABLY THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS THE SAME SIGNATURE, BUT,

NONETHELESS, I THINK THAT THERE IS PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITIES IN PLACE FOR

THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS TO MAKE THAT CHECK. I'VE CONFIRMED AT LEAST

WITH THE NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF ELECTIONS THAT IF THERE'S ANYTHING UN

-- ANYTHING THAT LOOKS UNCONFORMING WITH RESPECT TO THE SIGNATURE ON

THE ENVELOPE, THEY'RE JUST NOT GOING TO COUNT THOSE BALLOTS.

MR. NORRIS: OKAY. I'D LIKE TO MOVE MY QUESTIONS

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

TO A -- A DIFFERENT ANGLE ON THIS. IN TERMS OF THE ABILITY FOR SOMEONE TO

REQUEST AN ABSENTEE BALLOT, THEY CURRENTLY STILL NEED A REASON. NOW, I

WILL TELL YOU, THE LAST TIME THAT THIS CAME UP FOR A VOTE IN THIS CHAMBER,

I VOTED FOR NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOT, BUT, AT THIS POINT, WE'RE STILL NOT

THERE YET, IT HASN'T PASSED THE SECOND LEGISLATURE, IT HAS NOT GONE TO THE

VOTERS FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL APPROVAL. SO, WE'RE UNDER THE CURRENT

SITUATION WHICH REQUIRES THAT AN INDIVIDUAL HAS TO HAVE AN ILLNESS IN

ORDER TO OBTAIN AN ABSENTEE BALLOT. NOW, MY QUESTION TO YOU IS: IS

THERE ANYTHING IN THIS LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR TEMPORARY

ILLNESS, BY STATUTE, TO BE ALLOWED FOR THE CORONAVIRUS SITUATION

OCCURRING RIGHT NOW?

MS. SIMOTAS: THIS -- NOTHING IN THIS LAW CHANGES

THE DEFINITION. THIS BILL MERELY COMPLIMENTS THE MULTIPLE EXECUTIVE

ORDERS THAT WERE ISSUED THAT RESULTED IN ALL REGISTERED VOTERS BEING ABLE

TO REQUEST ABSENTEE BALLOTS VIA ELECTRONIC MEANS, BUT THIS BILL DOES NOT

CODIFY ANYTHING INTO LAW.

MR. NORRIS: OKAY. NOW, THAT'S A CONCERN OF MINE,

TOO, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE DONE A LOT OF THINGS, SOME I'VE AGREED

WITH, SOME I HAVEN'T AGREED WITH OVER THE LAST 20 TO 25 BILLS THAT WE'VE

PASSED, BUT WE'VE DONE THINGS, YOU KNOW, WITH MORTGAGES AND RENTS,

EXTENDING THE CHILDS [SIC] VICTIMS ACT. I AM CONCERNED THAT THIS IS NOT

BEING PLACED IN THE STATUTE GOING FORWARD BECAUSE OF THE CORONAVIRUS,

AND I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT TO YOU THAT THERE'S A RECENT COURT CASE - THIS

IS RIGHT OUT OF TEXAS FROM YESTERDAY - THAT SAID BECAUSE OF THE

LEGISLATURE NOT MAKING IT IN THE STATUTE, THEY WERE NOT GOING TO PROVIDE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

FOR IT BECAUSE OF THAT. SO, THAT'S A BIG CONCERN OF MINE. I HOPE THAT YOU

WILL TAKE THAT UNDER CONSIDERATION, AND YOUR COLLEAGUES, TO CODIFY THIS,

BECAUSE I WOULD SUPPORT THAT, IN STATUTE BECAUSE IF IT'S NOT THERE IN

STATUTE, THAT COULD BE A PROBLEM WHEN OUR COURTS EXAMINE THIS IN THE

PRIMARY OR IN THE GENERAL ELECTION GOING FORWARD.

NOW, ONE MORE QUESTION -- A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS.

IN TERMS OF THE AFFIRMATION, HOW ARE THESE VOTERS GOING TO AFFIRM THAT

THEY ARE ACTUALLY REQUESTING AN ABSENTEE BALLOT APPLICATION FOR A

PARTICULAR REASON, SUCH AS THE TEMPORARY ILLNESS. HOW ARE THEY GOING

TO MAKE THAT AFFIRMATION TO MAKE -- ACTUALLY REQUEST ONE?

MS. SIMOTAS: WELL, JUST TO CLARIFY WITH RESPECT TO

THE DEFINITION, YES, IT IS -- YOU'RE REQUESTING UNDER TEMPORARY

ILLNESS/THE COVID-19 CRISIS AND THAT YOU ARE -- YOU HAVE CONCERNS THAT

YOU DON'T WANT TO CONTRACT THE VIRUS AND THAT'S WHY YOU'RE REQUESTING

ELECTRONICALLY THIS ABSENTEE BALLOT. WITH RESPECT TO HOW DO YOU AFFIRM

IT'S THE PERSON, THE VOTER THEMSELVES WHO IS MAKING THE REQUEST, WELL, IF

YOU'RE REQUESTING IT ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THIS ELECTRONIC PORTAL, FOR

EXAMPLE, YOU ARE AFFIRMING WHEN YOU CLICK ON "SEND" THAT YOU ARE THE

PERSON, THE VOTER WHO IS REQUESTING THE BALLOT. AND, AGAIN, YOU DO SO

UNDER PERJURY OF LAW -- OF THE LAW. I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT PEOPLE ARE

GOING TO BE COMMITTING FRAUD, BUT, NONETHELESS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T SEE

EVIDENCE OF THAT TYPE OF VOTER FRAUD -- FRAUD. WHAT I KNOW IS THAT

THERE'S A LOT OF EVIDENCE OF VOTER SUPPRESSION. AND, AGAIN, I KNOW MY

-- MY LEARNED COLLEAGUES, THAT YOU AND I AGREE THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE

SURE THAT AS MANY PEOPLE POSSIBLE HAVE ACCESS TO THE POLLS, AND THIS IS

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AN OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE OUR ENTIRE STATE, OUR VOTERS, THE OPPORTUNITY TO

DO SO UNDER THESE EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES.

MR. NORRIS: OKAY. NOW, IN TERMS OF THE -- THE

PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATURE PRIOR TO NOW WANTING THE BALLOT TO BE

POSTMARKED BEFORE THE ELECTION, I THINK IT HAS A LOT TO DO WITH THE

POSTMARK AND MAKING SURE INDIVIDUALS WON'T BE ABLE TO VOTE, YOU

KNOW, AFTER THE POLLS CLOSE AT 9:00 O'CLOCK. SO, WHY IS THIS CHANGE

TAKING PLACE RIGHT NOW?

MS. SIMOTAS: I -- AGAIN, THIS IS A CLEANUP FROM

SOME OF THE EXECUTIVE LANGUAGE THAT WENT OUT AND, AGAIN, I THINK THAT

IF YOU'RE VOTING BY ABSENTEE, IT MAKES SENSE THAT IF YOU CAN POSTMARK,

IF YOU CAN CANCEL YOUR BALLOT ON THE DAY OF ELECTION, THAT THAT BALLOT

SHOULD BE COUNTED AND IT SHOULD COUNT TOWARDS THE VOTE, IT SHOULD

COUNT TOWARDS THAT ELECTION.

MR. NORRIS: NOW, ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY POST

OFFICES IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ARE OPEN PAST 9:00 P.M. ON ELECTION

DAY?

MS. SIMOTAS: I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY POST OFFICE

THAT'S -- WELL, USUAL -- NO, THAT'S NOT TRUE. I AM FAMILIAR WITH ONE

24-HOUR POST OFFICE IN NEW YORK CITY, IN MANHATTAN, BUT FOR THE MOST

PART, A POST OFFICE, I BELIEVE, CLOSE AT 5:00.

MR. NORRIS: THAT CAN BE A BUSY POST OFFICE ON

ELECTION DAY AFTER 9:00 O'CLOCK. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO ASK ONE MORE

PARTICULAR QUESTION, AND -- AND THAT IS GOING JUST GOING BACK TO THE -- TO

THE AFFIRMATION. WHAT TYPE OF AFFIRMATION APPEARS IN THAT WEB PORTOCAL

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

[SIC] TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE ACTUALLY ATTESTING TO SAY, I AM THE

PERSON WHO WANTS THAT BALLOT?

MS. SIMOTAS: WHEN THEY -- WHEN THEY CLICK ON

SEND/ACCEPT, THERE IS A DISCLAIMER.

MR. NORRIS: OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER VERIFICATION

LIKE FOUR -- LAST FOUR DIGITS OF A SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER, OR A DRIVER'S

LICENSE TO VERIFY, IN FACT, THAT YOU ARE THE PERSON REQUESTING THAT

ABSENTEE BALLOT APPLICATION?

MS. SIMOTAS: NO, BUT IF -- I WOULD ASSUME THAT IF

A VOTER RECEIVES AN ABSENTEE BALLOT AND THEY DID NOT REQUEST IT THAT,

FIRST, THEY WOULD PROBABLY COMPLAIN ABOUT IT TO THEIR BOARD OF

ELECTIONS, AND PERHAPS LAW ENFORCEMENT IF THEY THINK THAT THEIR

IDENTITIES WERE STOLEN AND THAT SOMEBODY WAS MAKING THE REQUEST AND

IT WASN'T THEM. AND, TWO, AGAIN, WHEN THEY SEND THE BALLOT BACK, THERE

IS A PROCESS THAT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS HAS TO FOLLOW, THAT THEY HAVE TO

CHECK THE SIGNATURES AGAINST THE BUFF CARD WHEN YOU REGISTERED TO VOTE

TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY MATCH. AND THOSE THAT DON'T MATCH CAN BE

THROWN OUT.

MR. NORRIS: OKAY.

ON THE BILL, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: ON THE BILL.

MR. NORRIS: THANK YOU, MS. SIMOTAS, FOR YOUR

ANSWERS, I APPRECIATE THEM. YOU KNOW, I JUST HAVE GRAVE CONCERNS

ABOUT THIS LEGISLATION, IN TERMS OF ENSURING THAT THE ACTUAL VOTER IS, IN

FACT, THE ONE WHO IS REQUESTING THE ABSENTEE BALLOT APPLICATION. AND

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WHEN THAT VOTER FILLS OUT THE ABSENTEE APPLICATION, THEY ARE AFFIRMING

UNDER THOSE PENALTIES THAT, IN FACT, NUMBER ONE, THEY NEED THE ABSENTEE

BALLOT APPLICATION, WHERE THE BALLOTS ARE BEING SENT AND, THIRDLY, THEY

WILL SIGN THAT APPLICATION WITH THE MOST CURRENT SIGNATURE THAT THEY USE.

THIS IS A MATTER OF FAIRNESS FOR EVERYBODY. YOU

KNOW, WHEN I GO INTO THE VOTING BOOTH AND I GO TO VOTE, I'M DOING IT

KNOWING THAT MY BALLOT IS SACRED, THAT IT IS -- IT IS -- -- IT IS FREE FROM

FRAUD, AND WE KNOW THAT IT IS MYSELF WHO IS GOING INTO THAT VOTING

BOOTH, AND I -- OR IF I APPLY BY ABSENTEE BALLOT PROPERLY IN DOING THAT.

AND I THINK IT'S A MATTER OF FAIRNESS FOR EVERYONE, AS A FAIR PLAYING

FIELD, THAT ALL VOTERS DO THAT IN GOOD FAITH, BUT, UNFORTUNATELY, AS WE

KNOW, THERE ARE SOMETIMES BAD ACTORS OUT THERE, AND THAT'S WHY I HAVE

CONCERNS THAT REMOVING THE SIGNATURE REQUIREMENT, IN PARTICULAR, TAKES

OUT THE VERIFICATION AS A STEP TO VERIFY, TO ENSURE THAT THAT VOTER IS

ACTUALLY THAT PERSON WHO IS SENDING IT BACK. AND I ALSO JUST WANT TO

MENTION, TOO, THAT THE CANCELLATION OF THE POSTMARK IS ALSO A CONCERN,

KNOWING THAT THERE MAY BE A POST OFFICE OUT THERE THAT ARE OPEN PAST

9:00 P.M. ON ELECTION DAY. THE LEGISLATURE BEFORE US CLEARLY STATED BY

STATUTE THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, AND THAT'S WHY THAT

PROVISION WAS PUT IN PLACE IN KNOWING THAT THERE ARE POST OFFICES THAT

ARE OPEN AFTER 9:00 O'CLOCK IS ALSO A CONCERN OF MINE.

SO, WITH -- WITH THAT, I THINK I WILL BE OPPOSED TO THIS

LEGISLATION. I ALSO WANT TO REQUEST THAT THIS BODY, A COEQUAL BRANCH OF

GOVERNMENT, DOES EXAMINE THE ISSUE OF DEFINING "TEMPORARY ILLNESS" TO

INCLUDE COVID AND CORONAVIRUS, BECAUSE I THINK WE SHOULD CODIFY

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THAT IN STATUTE AND NOT LEAVE THAT UP TO A QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE

GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER WILL STAND UP TO SCRUTINY BY THE COURT OF

APPEALS OR OTHER COURTS ALONG THE WAY. SO, WE SHOULD, JUST LIKE RENT

AND MORTGAGE AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS WE'VE TAKEN UP, THE EXTENSION

OF THE CHILD VICTIMS ACT, WE SHOULD, THIS COEQUAL BRANCH OF

GOVERNMENT, CODIFY THAT. I WOULD SUPPORT THAT, TO BE A VALID REASON TO

GET AN APPLICATION -- OR TO GET AN ABSENTEE BALLOT IN THIS UPCOMING

ELECTION.

SO, AGAIN, THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS. MR. SPEAKER, THANK

YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY, AND I APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUE ANSWERING MY

-- MY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: THANK YOU, MR.

NORRIS.

MR. RA.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD FOR A FEW QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MS. SIMOTAS: OF COURSE.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. RA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD TO SEE YOU.

SO, I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, AND -- AND MR. NORRIS BEING OUR

EXPERT AS OUR RANKER AND -- WITH HIS BACKGROUND, KNOWS THIS AREA OF

LAW WELL, SO HE WENT THROUGH A LOT OF WHAT I -- I WAS INTERESTED IN

DISCUSSING. BUT I -- I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, JUST IN TERMS OF

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THE FACT THAT YOU MENTIONED THE NEW YORK CITY PORTAL, AND WE ALL

KNOW, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THAT IS A LARGE BOARD OF ELECTIONS. WE

HAVE, YOU KNOW, VARYING SIZES OF BOARDS OF ELECTIONS THROUGHOUT NEW

YORK STATE, AND SO, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT PROCESS, BUT CURRENTLY IF

SOMEBODY WANTED TO DO THAT TYPE OF APPLICATION ELECTRONICALLY, ARE

THEY SENT, THEN, BOTH AN APPLICATION AND A BALLOT? SOMEBODY -- I'M NOT

CLEAR ON THAT. SOMEBODY HAD DESCRIBED TO ME A PROCESS WHERE

DEPENDING ON THE PROXIMITY TO ELECTION DAY, A VOTER MIGHT BE SENT

SIMULTANEOUSLY BOTH A BALLOT AS WELL AS AN APPLICATION AND THEN NEED TO

RETURN BOTH IN ORDER FOR THE BALLOT TO BE CONSIDERED VALID.

MS. SIMOTAS: COULD YOU CLARIFY YOUR QUESTION

WITH RESPECT TO A BALLOT AND AN APPLICATION SENT AT THE SAME TIME? I'M

NOT UNDERSTANDING.

MR. RA: SO, SAY SOMEBODY ASKS FOR A [SIC] ABSENTEE

BALLOT, BUT IT'S GETTING CLOSE TO ELECTION DAY AND NOW YOU HAVE TO DEAL

WITH THE MAIL, YOU KNOW, AND -- BECAUSE THEY CAN'T DO IT ELECTRONICALLY,

THEY HAVE TO GET THE BALLOT MAILED TO THEM, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FILL

IT OUT, MAIL IT BACK, THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS IS GOING TO HAVE TO GET IT

AND THEN MAIL THEM OUT A BALLOT AND, OBVIOUSLY, THIS ALL HAS TO HAPPEN

BEFORE, YOU KNOW, THE DAY BEFORE ELECTION DAY SO THEY CAN GET THAT

BALLOT IN THE MAIL. SO, WHAT IS THE CURRENT PROCESS IF SOMEBODY DOES

THAT ELECTRONIC REQUEST THROUGH -- THROUGH NEW YORK CITY?

MS. SIMOTAS: WITH RESPECT TO NEW YORK CITY, THE

CUT OFF FOR REQUESTING ABSENTEE BALLOTS I BELIEVE IS JUNE 16TH.

MR. RA: FOR THE PRIMARY?

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MS. SIMOTAS: FOR THE PRIMARY. FOR THE PRIMARY.

MR. RA: SO IT WOULD BE A WEEK BEFORE --

MS. SIMOTAS: IT WOULD BE A WEEK. AND THE BOARD

OF ELECTIONS IS CHECKING TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE

SENDING MORE THAN ONE ABSENTEE BALLOT TO EACH VOTER AT A TIME. SO, IF

THEY -- IF THEY GET THE APPLICATION IN THE MAIL, FILL IT OUT AND -- BUT THEY

HAD ALSO -- THEY HAD ALSO REGISTERED ELECTRONICALLY, THEIR UNIQUE VOTER

IDENTIFICATION NUMBER IS GOING TO TELL THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, DON'T

SEND THIS ONE PERSON TWO BALLOTS, THEY GET ONE BALLOT. THEY HAVE ONE

UNIQUE VOTER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER. SO, I DON'T THINK THAT THERE WOULD

BE ANY ISSUES.

MR. RA: OKAY. AND UNDER THIS, IS -- IS AN INDIVIDUAL

ABLE, THEN, TO REQUEST THE BALLOT ELECTRONICALLY FOR ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL,

SAY, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU HAVE A -- A PARENT WHO IS, YOU KNOW,

ELDERLY WHO LIVES IN SOME TYPE OF, YOU KNOW, ASSISTED LIVING OR NURSING

HOME FACILITY AND YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO REQUEST THEM A BALLOT. CAN

YOU REQUEST FOR SOMEBODY ELSE?

MS. SIMOTAS: NOT ELECTRONICALLY, NOT

ELECTRONICALLY. YOU ARE SWEARING AND AFFIRMING WHEN YOU CLICK THAT

BUTTON THAT YOU ARE THE PERSON WHO IS MAKING THE REQUEST. SO, I WOULD

ASSUME THAT ALL OR MOST OF OUR NEIGHBORS ARE HONEST INDIVIDUALS AND

NOT COMMITTING FRAUD. IF THEY DID, THEY'D BE COMMITTING FRAUD.

MR. RA: AND IS THERE -- I KNOW UNDER, YOU KNOW,

THE NORMAL APPLICATION, YOU CAN BASICALLY SAY, MAIL ME THE BALLOT.

PEOPLE OBVIOUSLY THAT COME AND HAND IN A BALLOT, ABSENTEE BALLOT

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

APPLICATION IN PERSON CAN -- CAN ASK FOR IT TO BE GIVEN TO THEM THERE,

AND THEN THEY ALSO ARE ABLE TO DESIGNATE AN INDIVIDUAL TO RECEIVE THE

BALLOT FOR THEM AND DELIVER IT TO THEM. WOULD THAT BE ALLOWED UNDER

THE ELECTRONIC REQUEST?

MS. SIMOTAS: I DON'T IMAGINE. WE HAVEN'T

CHANGED ANYTHING WITH RESPECT TO THE FORMS AND, AGAIN, WITH RESPECT TO

THE LEGAL REQUIREMENT THAT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS MAKE SURE THAT THEY

DISPATCH ONE ABSENTEE BALLOT TO EACH VOTER. LIKE, PEOPLE DON'T GET, YOU

KNOW, TO DO IT TWICE, THEY GET -- THEY GET ONE BALLOT, AND --

MR. RA: THAT -- THAT'S NOT -- THAT'S NOT WHAT -- WHAT

I'M ASKING IS CAN YOU -- THE PHYSICAL FORM THAT PEOPLE FILL OUT, SAYS,

YOU KNOW, I DESIGNATE JOE SMITH TO RECEIVE MY BALLOT, AND THEY CAN

DELIVER IT TO ME, I CAN FILL IT OUT AND THEY MAY HAND-DELIVER IT BACK TO

THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS FOR ME. WOULD THAT BE PERMISSIBLE?

MS. SIMOTAS: WHAT THE ELECTRONIC PORTAL FROM THE

BOARD OF ELECTIONS ALLOWS YOU TO DO, IT ALLOWS YOU TO SAY WHERE YOU

WANT THE BALLOT SENT.

MR. RA: OKAY.

MS. SIMOTAS: IT DOESN'T SAY -- IT DOESN'T REQUEST --

I DON'T BELIEVE IT REQUESTS FOR A DESIGNEE OR SOMEBODY TO BE GIVING --

HANDING IT TO THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS FOR YOU.

MR. RA: OKAY. AND THEN LASTLY, REALLY, WHAT TYPE OF

RECORDKEEPING IS REQUIRED UNDER THE STATUTE IN TERMS OF REQUESTS THAT

COME IN? DOES IT REQUIRE THE BOARDS OF ELECTIONS TO KEEP SOME TYPE OF

LOG, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF THEY WERE TO HAVE THE WRITTEN APPLICATION,

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THEY HAVE THAT ON FILE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS MOST OF THEM SCAN A LOT OF

THESE DOCUMENTS SO THEY HAVE IT AND THERE'S A -- THERE'S A PAPER TRAIL

THERE. IS THERE SOME TYPE OF LOG OF REQUESTS THAT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS

WILL BE REQUIRED TO KEEP SO THEY KNOW, YOU KNOW, ABOUT WHAT'S

REQUESTED ELECTRONICALLY ON SUCH AND SUCH DATE FOR THIS VOTER?

MS. SIMOTAS: I BELIEVE THAT THE STATE BOARD OF

ELECTIONS IS CREATING GUIDELINES AND IN TOUCH WITH THE LOCAL BOARD OF

ELECTIONS TO -- TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE HAVE -- THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO

KEEP THESE RECORDS AND DO THIS -- THIS WHOLE PROCESS PROPERLY. WITH

RESPECT TO THE CITY BOARD OF ELECTIONS, WHICH WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AND

WHICH I HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH, I KNOW THAT THEY ARE IN -- THAT THEIR

PARTICULAR PORTAL, ONLINE PORTAL IS UNIQUE. THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT IN

THIS BILL THAT REQUIRES A COUNTY OR LOCAL BOARD OF ELECTIONS TO DO THE

SAME THING. YOU MAY, IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE IT. AND,

AGAIN, THE STATE BOARD OF ELECTION IS CREATING THIS GUIDELINE AND IN

CONTACT REGULARLY WITH -- WITH LOCAL BOARD OF ELECTIONS.

MR. RA: OKAY. AND THEN, I APOLOGIZE; I SAID THAT

WAS THE LAST ONE, BUT -- BUT LASTLY, JUST ALONG THOSE SAME LINES, I KNOW

THE GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER WITH REGARD TO THE PRIMARY MADE

REFERENCE TO, YOU KNOW, A BALLOT BEING VALID REGARDLESS OF WHETHER

THERE IS, YOU KNOW, A [SIC] APPLICATION ON FILE OR ANYTHING OF THAT

NATURE. IS SIMILAR LANGUAGE IN THIS BILL?

MS. SIMOTAS: NO, THERE IS NO SIMILAR LANGUAGE IN

THIS BILL. LIKE I SAID, WHAT THIS BILL DOES, IT'S FOUR THINGS: IT REMOVES

THE SIGNATURE REQUIREMENT; IT ALLOWS VOTERS TO DISPATCH THEIR ABSENTEE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

APPLICATION, BALLOT APPLICATION UP TO THE -- I'M SORRY, THEIR ABSENTEE

BALLOT UP TO THE DATE OF THE ELECTION; IT -- IT MAKES CONFORMING CHANGES

FOR FEDERAL -- FOR THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMING UP IN NOVEMBER AND IT

JUST ALLOWS VOTERS TO REQUEST BALLOTS BY ELECTRONIC MEANS.

MR. RA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MS. SIMOTAS: THANK YOU.

MR. RA: MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. RA: I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR FOR ANSWERING

MY -- MY QUESTIONS, AND FOR ENDEAVORING TO LEGISLATE IN -- IN THIS AREA,

BECAUSE WE KNOW THIS IS GOING TO BE A VERY DIFFICULT ADMINISTRATIVE

SITUATION FOR THE BOARDS OF ELECTIONS, IN PARTICULAR WITH THE UPCOMING

JUNE PRIMARY, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO KEEP ALL

THE VOTERS SAFE, BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ISSUES WITH TRYING TO

PROPERLY STAFF THE POLLING PLACES. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE

THAT ARE IN GROUPS THAT MIGHT BE MORE SUSCEPTIBLE TO -- TO GETTING SICK

WHO ORDINARILY WORK THE POLLS, SO -- SO THAT IS, NO DOUBT, GOING TO BE AN

ISSUE. AND CUTTING DOWN ON -- ON THE PEOPLE THAT WOULD GO VOTE IN

PERSON, YOU KNOW, CAN BE A POSITIVE THING IN -- IN ALLEVIATING SOME OF

THAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE AWARE THAT THE GOVERNOR PUT

FORTH THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT'S GOING TO APPLY TO THE JUNE PRIMARY. I

THINK, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO BE KIND OF DOING THIS, YOU KNOW, FOR

THE FIRST TIME, IN TERMS OF HAVING ALL THESE ABSENTEE BALLOTS OUT THERE

WHERE PEOPLE ARE AUTOMATICALLY GETTING -- PEOPLE ARE AUTOMATICALLY

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

GETTING THE APPLICATIONS, AND I THINK WE NEED TO SEE HOW IT WORKS.

THERE DEFINITELY IS A LOT THAT OUR BOARDS OF ELECTIONS HAVE HAD TO DEAL

WITH OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST YEAR. AS EVERYBODY KNOWS, YOU KNOW,

THERE WAS A [SIC] HISTORIC PACE OF LEGISLATION IN -- IN THE AREA OF

ELECTION LAW LAST YEAR, AND OUR BOARDS OF ELECTIONS WERE DEALING WITH

FIGURING OUT HOW TO DO EARLY VOTING FOR THE FIRST TIME. AND THERE WAS A

LOT OF COSTS THAT WENT WITH THAT, BOTH IN TERMS OF STAFFING THOSE -- THOSE

SITES, BUT ALSO NEW TECHNOLOGY. THEY HAD TO GET, YOU KNOW, ELECTRONIC

POLL BOOKS, THEY HAD TO GET BALLOT PRINTERS, BALLOT SCANNERS, ALL THAT TYPE

OF STUFF.

NOW, AGAIN, WE'RE HEARING WITH THIS, THEY'RE GOING TO

NEED SCANNERS THAT CAN SCAN THESE ABSENTEE BALLOTS, BECAUSE THEY'RE

GOING TO HAVE A MUCH BIGGER QUANTITY OF THEM COMING IN. AND -- AND

WE'RE OBVIOUSLY ALL GOING TO WANT TO SEE THE RESULTS OF ELECTIONS

TABULATED AND REPORTED IN A TIMELY MANNER.

THE GOOD THING IS THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME, YOU

KNOW, FUNDING THROUGH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT IS, I BELIEVE,

AVAILABLE FOR -- FOR SOME OF THAT, FOR -- FOR THINGS LIKE THE SCANNERS, BUT

I THINK THE -- THE STATE HAS TO REMEMBER AS WE PUT SOME OF THESE NEW

MANDATES OUT LAST YEAR AND WE DID PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF FUNDING FOR

THOSE NEW MANDATES, WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO -- TO LOOK AT THAT ISSUE. I

KNOW THE STATE IS NOT IN A -- IN GREAT SHAPE FINANCIALLY RIGHT NOW AS A

RESULT OF EVERYTHING GOING ON, BUT NEITHER ARE OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

AND WE NEED TO FIND WAYS TO NOT PUT NEW COSTS ON OUR LOCAL

GOVERNMENTS DURING THIS TIME. THEY'RE EXPERIENCING THE SAME THINGS

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THE STATE IS, CASH FLOW ISSUES, LOSS OF -- LOSS OF TAX REVENUES,

PARTICULARLY OUR LOCAL SALES TAX WITH -- WITH SO MANY BUSINESSES SHUT

DOWN AND -- AND THANKFULLY ON LONG ISLAND WE'RE -- WE'RE STARTING

PHASE 1 AND -- AND HOPEFULLY OUR -- OUR COLLEAGUES IN THE CITY ARE ABLE

TO BEGIN THAT PROCESS IN THE NEAR FUTURE, AS WELL.

BUT WE HAVE A REALLY LONG ROAD AHEAD OF US FOR

RECOVERY, AND I WOULD RATHER SEE US WAIT AND SEE, WE'RE A MONTH AWAY

FROM THAT JUNE PRIMARY, AND SEE HOW THIS ALL WORKS OUT SO THAT WE CAN

TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AND -- AND GIVE OURSELVES THE BEST CHANCE OF --

OF RUNNING A SUCCESSFUL AND FAIR ELECTION IN NOVEMBER. SO, FOR THOSE

REASONS, I'M NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL AT THIS TIME. THANK

YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. TAGUE.

MR. TAGUE: WELL, THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. FIRST

OF ALL, I JUST -- ON THE BILL, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL.

MR. TAGUE: FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE A

SHOUT-OUT TO MS. WEINSTEIN, MR. BARRON, MS. SEAWRIGHT AND MY GOOD

FRIEND, MR. MILLER, ALL SURVIVORS OF THE COVID-19. AND IF I MISSED

ANYBODY, I -- I APOLOGIZE, BUT I JUST WANTED THOSE FOLKS TO KNOW THAT

THEY WERE ALL IN MY THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS, AS I'M SURE THEY WERE

EVERYBODY ELSE'S, AND I'M SO GLAD TO SEE THEM IN TODAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

ON THIS BILL, MR. SPEAKER, I FIND IT IRONIC THAT AFTER

COMPLAINING FOR YEARS ABOUT OUR ELECTIONS BEING INSECURE AND

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

TAMPERED WITH, THAT MY FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES ON THE -- THE OTHER SIDE

OF THE AISLE ARE NOW CASTING ASIDE (UNINTELLIGIBLE) THAT SO OBVIOUSLY

INVITES ELECTORAL FRAUD. THIS BILL BRAZENLY DISMANTLES THE MOST BASIC

SAFEGUARDS WITHIN OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM, AND GENERALIZES PEOPLE'S LEVEL

OF TRUST IN OUR DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. YOU KNOW, LAST NIGHT WE HEARD

THESE WORDS BILL AFTER BILL AFTER BILL THAT SOME VOTED YES, THEY HAD

RESERVATIONS, THE BILL WASN'T ADEQUATE, FLAWED, CONCERNED, DOESN'T

ADDRESS EVERYTHING, WE STILL HAVE LOTS OF WORK TO DO.

YOU KNOW, I KNOW THESE ARE NOT NORMAL TIMES, AND I

UNDERSTAND THIS PANDEMIC PRESENTS UNIQUE CHALLENGES REGARDING OUR

ELECTIONS, BUT, THESE INCONVENIENCES SHOULD NOT COME AT THE COST OF OUR

ELECTORAL SYSTEM. WE ALREADY HAVE MEASURES IN PLACE TO ALLOW PEOPLE

TO VOTE ABSENTEE AND BY BETTER EDUCATING PEOPLE AS TO HOW THEY GET

THEIR ABSENTEE BALLOTS UNDER THE CURRENT PROCESS. WE CAN BOTH ASSURE

THAT PEOPLE VOTE AND THAT THE ELECTIONS THEY VOTE IN ARE FAIR. AND WORSE

YET, WHILE THIS BILL SEEKS TO SIMPLIFY ABSENTEE BALLOT VOTING, IT MAKES IT

A NIGHTMARE FOR OUR LOCAL BOARDS OF ELECTIONS. THIS WILL LIKELY

INCREASE THE COST TO LOCALITIES THAT HAVE TO COUNT THESE BALLOTS, WHILE

ALSO CREATING MORE ROOM FOR ERROR, AND MAKING IT HARDER TO INTERCEPT

FRAUDULENT BALLOTS.

THIS JUST -- THIS IS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF REACHING

THOUGHTLESSLY INTO THE POCKETS OF OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, AND IT

MANAGED TO MAKE -- AND IT ALREADY MANAGES TO MAKE THIS BILL EVEN

WORSE THAN WHAT IT ALREADY IS. THE SIMPLE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT WE

HAVE NO IDEA OF KNOWING IF THE PEOPLE WHO REQUEST THESE BALLOTS ARE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THE PEOPLE WHO WILL BE SENDING THEM BACK. IT'S COMMON SENSE. IT

DOESN'T TAKE A LAWYER OR (UNINTELLIGIBLE). THIS BILL IS DANGEROUS,

UNNECESSARY AND, TO ME, IT MAKES A MOCKERY OF OUR ELECTIONS. DURING

THIS CRISIS, PEOPLE NEED LEADERSHIP THEY CAN COUNT ON, AND THAT MEANS

CONDUCTING ELECTIONS THEY CAN TRUST.

I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS BILL. I FEEL IT'S A DESTRUCTION OF

OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM AND ITS MOST BASIC CHECKS AND BALANCES. I ALSO

FEEL THAT IT'S A DESTRUCTION OF OUR CONSTITUTIONS. AND FOR THOSE REASONS,

MR. SPEAKER, I WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE AND I URGE ALL MY

COLLEAGUES - REPUBLICAN, DEMOCRAT, INDEPENDENT - TO STAND UP FOR THE

PEOPLE AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS STATE AND THE UNITED STATES OF

AMERICA AND VOTE NO. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MR.

TAGUE. WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU BACK, GLAD YOU HAVE SOME ENERGY.

MR. BURKE.

MR. BURKE: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. IS THIS -- IS

THIS WORKING?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ABSOLUTELY.

MR. BURKE: ALL RIGHT, FINALLY.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. BURKE: I'D LIKE TO COMMEND AND THANK THE

SPONSOR FOR THIS BILL. AND, YOU KNOW, REALLY, IT'S -- IT'S KIND OF

MIND-BOGGLING TO ME. THERE HAS BEEN THIS NARRATIVE CREATED IN THIS

COUNTRY THAT WE'VE HAD THIS -- THIS TERRIBLE PROBLEM WITH VOTER FRAUD,

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

BUT WE ALL KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT TRUE. THE REALITY, AND THE REAL DANGER TO

OUR DEMOCRACY IS THE LONG, LONG, LONG, LONG HISTORY OF VOTER

SUPPRESSION. WE KNOW IT, EVERYBODY KNOWS IT, BUT THERE IS A

CONSIDERED EFFORT RIGHT NOW IN THIS COUNTRY TO USE SCARE TACTICS TO BLOCK

PEOPLE FROM GETTING TO THE POLLS. I'M SICK OF HEARING ABOUT IT. I'M SICK

OF IT.

YOU KNOW, I READ -- I READ A GOOD ARTICLE THE OTHER DAY

AND I THINK IT WAS REVEREND BARBER WHO SAID, YOU KNOW, JIM CROWE

DIDN'T GO AWAY, HE WENT AND GOT A LAW DEGREE AND NOW HE'S JAMES

CROWE, ESQ. I'M SICK OF THIS FLAWED NOTION THAT IT IS VOTER FRAUD, WITH

NO EVIDENCE OF IT, BUT IF YOU KEEP, YOU KNOW, PERPETUATING THE LIE LONG

ENOUGH, PEOPLE BEGIN TO BELIEVE IT. THIS VOTER SUPPRESSION IS THE REAL

VOTER FRAUD.

SO, THANK YOU, I'LL BE -- I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL, AND

THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANKS A LOT.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON RULES REPORT [SIC] NO. A10516-A. THIS IS A PARTY VOTE.

ANY MEMBER WISHING TO BE RECORDED AS AN EXCEPTION TO THE PARTY

POSITION IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE

NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR. THE REPUBLICAN

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

CAUCUS WILL BE VOTING NO ON THIS. IF THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE

REPUBLICAN CAUCUS THAT WOULD VOTE YES, PLEASE CONTACT THE MINORITY

LEADER'S OFFICE IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, THIS WILL BE

A PARTY VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. COLLEAGUES WHO WOULD DESIRE TO VOTE

NO SHOULD CALL MY OFFICE OR COME DOWN TO THE CHAMBERS AND CAST THEIR

VOTE. THIS WILL BE A PARTY VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, VERY QUICKLY

TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION STATES IN ARTICLE

II, SECTION 7 THAT THE LEGISLATURE SHALL PROVIDE FOR IDENTIFICATION OF

VOTERS THROUGH THEIR SIGNATURES, AND IN ALL CASES WHERE PERSONAL

REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED. THE SIGNATURE HAS SUCH SIGNIFICANCE AND I -- I

AGREE WITH MUCH OF WHAT MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SAID ABOUT THE NEED FOR

THAT DOUBLE CHECK BY HAVING AN ACTUAL SIGNATURE ON THE APPLICATION FOR

THE ABSENTEE BALLOT, AS WELL AS ON THE BALLOT ITSELF. THE BUFF CARD IS NOT

SUFFICIENT BECAUSE, IN MANY CASES, AS HAS BEEN BROUGHT OUT, THE BUFF

CARD SIGNATURE COULD BE VERY, VERY OLD, AND A COMPARISON WOULD BE

BETTER BETWEEN THE APPLICATION AND THE BALLOT ITSELF.

THE -- THE RATIONALE THAT WAS GIVEN THAT PEOPLE DON'T

HAVE STAMPS, PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO LEAVE THEIR HOMES, I DON'T BUY ANY

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

OF THAT. I THINK THAT THAT MAY BE TRUE, BUT LET'S FACE IT, VOTING IS ONE OF

OUR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES AS A CITIZEN, AND I THINK THE

BAR IS SET PRETTY LOW IF WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO IS REQUEST THE ABSENTEE

BALLOT, SIGN IT, PUT A STAMP ON IT AND MAIL IT BACK. YOU'RE GOING TO NEED

A STAMP TO MAIL IT BACK ANYWAY, I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU CAN'T JUST FIND A

STAMP TO PUT IN THE REQUEST TO GET THE ABSENTEE BALLOT ITSELF.

AND JUST VERY QUICKLY, IN TERMS OF THE FRAUD. SO, I

HAPPEN TO BE MARRIED TO AN ELECTION ATTORNEY. HE'S NOT AN ELECTION

ATTORNEY NOW, HE'S A JUDGE. WHEN HE WAS AN ELECTION ATTORNEY, HE

HANDLED A CASE -- WELL, I'LL JUST TELL YOU ABOUT ONE. DOWN IN ANOTHER

COUNTY, I WON'T MENTION IT, A LOVELY OLD LADY WENT AROUND A NURSING

HOME AND GOT ABSENTEE BALLOTS FOR OVER 200 PEOPLE AND SAID, HONEY,

JUST SIGN ON THE LINE AND I'LL VOTE IT THE WAY YOU'D WANT ME TO, AND

VOTED 200 TIMES, THIS ONE LADY. AND THAT WAS JUST ONE CASE THAT HE HAD.

VOTING FRAUD EXISTS. IT IS ACTUAL, IT'S REAL, AND IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY, I

BELIEVE, AS THE LEGISLATURE TO PUT AND KEEP RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE IN

PLACE, NOT TO SUPPRESS THE VOTE, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO

ARE SUPPOSED TO VOTE ARE THE ONES WHO ARE VOTING. SO, I WILL BE IN THE

NEGATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WALSH IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. SIMOTAS TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. SIMOTAS: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. IN THESE

CHALLENGING TIMES, WE CANNOT -- WE CANNOT ALLOW THE COVID CRISIS TO

UNDERMINE THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO VOTE IN NEW YORK. WE NEED TO

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MAKE ABSENTEE BALLOTS AS ACCESSIBLE AS POSSIBLE SO EVERYONE CAN SAFELY

VOTE FROM HOME IN NOVEMBER. THIS MEASURE WILL HELP PREVENT A

DEPRESSED TURNOUT IN THE FALL BY ALLOWING FOR ELECTRONIC APPLICATIONS,

WAIVING SIGNATURE REQUIREMENTS AND EXTENDING RETURN DEADLINES. THESE

CHANGES WILL PROVIDE MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR VOTERS TO CAST THEIR BALLOTS

WHILE NAVIGATING SOCIAL DISTANCING IN HEALTH EMERGENCIES. AS WE

RESPOND TO THIS ONGOING PANDEMIC, IT IS CRITICAL THAT WE PUT SUPPORTS IN

PLACE TO ENABLE NEW YORKERS TO CONTINUE SOCIAL DISTANCING AND TAKE

NECESSARY SAFETY PRECAUTIONS. MAKING ABSENTEE BALLOTS EASILY

ACCESSIBLE REALLY JUST STRENGTHENS OUR DEMOCRACY. IT DOES NOTHING TO

DO ANYTHING EXCEPT MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO VOTE.

AND I WANT TO ALSO SHARE A STORY THAT I'VE HEARD OF A

HUSBAND AND WIFE WHO HAD SIGNED EACH OTHER'S ABSENTEE BALLOTS,

BECAUSE AGAIN, WE ARE NOT ELIMINATING THE REQUIREMENT THAT YOU SIGN

YOUR BALLOTS, AND THAT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS CAN CHECK YOUR SIGNATURE.

BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, THE HUSBAND AND WIFE SIGNED EACH

OTHER'S BALLOTS AND BOTH OF THOSE BALLOTS WERE TOSSED OUT, AND THEY WERE

VOTING FOR THEIR SON.

SO, AGAIN, THERE ARE PLENTY OF MEASURES IN PLACE -- IN

PLACE TO MAKE SURE THAT FRAUD DOES NOT OCCUR. AND, AGAIN, IF YOU ARE

COMMITTING FRAUD, THEN I'M SORRY, YOU'RE BREAKING THE LAW AND YOU'LL BE

PROSECUTED. BUT, NONETHELESS, I BELIEVE THAT IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE

MAKE SURE THAT AS MANY NEW YORKERS AS POSSIBLE CAN VOTE, AND IN THIS

CRISIS AND THESE UNPRECEDENTED TIMES, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT

PEOPLE CAN GET THEIR BALLOTS MORE ACCESSIBLY. THANK YOU.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. SIMOTAS IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. FITZPATRICK TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. FITZPATRICK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I'LL

BE VOTING NO ON THIS BILL BECAUSE REMOVING THOSE -- REMOVING THOSE

KEY GUARDIANS OF INTEGRITY IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO

SAY TO MY GOOD FRIEND FROM BUFFALO, JUST -- JUST GOOGLE "VOTER FRAUD."

IT DOES EXIST, IT IS OUT THERE. I MIGHT RECOMMEND REACHING OUT TO

CONGRESSMAN JERRY NADLER WHO, BACK IN 1994, RAISED REAL CONCERNS

ABOUT VOTER FRAUD IN NEW YORK CITY AND HOW RAMPANT IT WAS. IT'S REAL,

IT'S THERE.

AND THIS YEAR IN THIS HYPER-PARTISAN ENVIRONMENT THAT

WE ARE IN GOING INTO 2020, ESPECIALLY WITH THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION,

THERE IS CERTAINLY A MOTIVE FOR THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO CHEAT TO CHEAT.

AND I'M AFRAID THAT THE CHANGES WE ARE MAKING TODAY WILL MAKE IT THAT

MUCH EASIER FOR THOSE WHO HAVE A MOTIVE TO CHEAT TO CHEAT IN THIS

YEAR'S ELECTION.

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE SPONSOR, I KNOW SHE MEANS

WELL, BUT I THINK THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS STEP WE'RE TAKING. I VOTE NO.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. FITZPATRICK IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. BICHOTTE.

MS. BICHOTTE: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR

ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I WANT TO CERTAINLY THANK THE SPONSOR

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

FOR INTRODUCING THIS BILL, WHICH PROMOTES ELECTRONIC APPLICATION FOR

ABSENTEE BALLOTS, AND IT REMOVES THE REQUIREMENT THAT SUCH APPLICANT --

APPLICATION BE SIGNED BY THE VOTER.

TODAY, WE FACE ANOTHER UNPRECEDENTED ATTACK ON OUR

CITY AND NATION, THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC. AS WE MOVE AHEAD WITH

ELECTIONS, WE HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATION TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERY

VOTER HAS AN ALTERNATIVE WAY -- ALTERNATIVE WAYS TO EXERCISING THEIR

RIGHT TO VOTE. THIS IS NOT A -- THIS, IN FACT, IS NOT A FORM OF VOTER

SUPPRESSION; IN FACT, IT DOES THE OPPOSITE.

AS THE LEADER OF THE MAJORITY PARTY IN BROOKLYN WITH

THE LARGEST VOTER POPULATION COUNTY-WIDE, A CITY THAT WAS HIT THE

HARDEST IN NEW YORK CITY, OF WHICH A MAJORITY OF THE COMMUNITY IS A

BLACK AND BROWN COMMUNITY, THIS BILL WILL HELP THE COMMUNITIES THAT

HAVE BEEN AFFECTED, ON AVERAGE, AND HAVE BEEN MARGINALIZED, ON

AVERAGE, BY VOTER SUPPRESSION ARE THE SAME COMMUNITIES THAT NEED A

WAY TO VOICE -- TO VOICE THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. ACROSS THE

COUNTRY, ONE-IN-13 BLACK AMERICANS CANNOT VOTE DUE TO

DISENFRANCHISEMENT (UNINTELLIGIBLE). WHEN VOTERS OF ALL BACKGROUNDS

HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO VOTE, PEOPLE REGAIN THEIR

FAITH IN THE SYSTEM AND IN OUR DEMOCRACY. THIS BILL WILL RECOGNIZE

REQUESTS MADE VIA ELECTRONIC MEANS, AND EXTEND THE DATE BY WHICH A

BALLOT MUST BE POST -- POSTMARKED.

EVERY CITIZEN SHOULD BE ABLE TO EXERCISE THEIR

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. THREE BOARD OF ELECTION WORKERS IN THE CITY

HAVE DIED AS A RESULT OF COVID-19, AND WE MUST FIND NEW WAYS TO

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MAKE SURE PEOPLE HAVE ACCESS TO THESE POLLS WITHOUT JEOPARDIZING THEIR

HEALTH. NEW YORKERS NEED US TO BE ENCOURAGED, RATHER THAN

SUPPRESSING -- SUPPRESSING THEIR RIGHTS TO VOTE. I WANT TO THANK THE

NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF ELECTION FOR THEIR HARD WORK AND FINDING

DIFFERENT WAYS IN MAKING SURE THAT AMERICANS, OUR VOTERS, HAVE A WAY

TO VOTE IN NOVEMBER. SO, THANK YOU, AGAIN, MR. SPEAKER, FOR ALLOWING

ME TO SPEAK, AND I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR. I WILL BE VOTING IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. BICHOTTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. LAVINE.

MR. LAVINE: THANK YOU. I WANT TO -- I WANT TO

THANK THE SPONSOR FOR HER HARD AND ADMIRABLE AND HONORABLE WORK IN

PREPARING THIS BILL, AND ARGUING IT.

A REFERENCE HAS BEEN MADE TO A STATEMENT MADE BY A

CONGRESSMAN NEARLY 30 YEARS AGO ABOUT VOTER FRAUD IN NEW YORK CITY.

NOW, THE WORLD 30 YEARS AGO WAS VERY DIFFERENT FROM TODAY'S WORLD.

OUR ABILITY TO MONITOR THE VOTING PROCESS 30 YEARS AGO DOES NOT

COMPARE IN ANY WAY TO OUR ABILITY TO DO THAT TODAY. IT IS A COMPARISON

THAT IS UTTERLY AND UTTERLY FALSE. LET US REMEMBER, THE RIGHT TO VOTE IS A

RIGHT, IT'S NOT A PRIVILEGE.

AND I'LL SHARE THIS WITH YOU: A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AS

CHAIR OF THE ELECTIONS LAW COMMITTEE, I ATTENDED A NATIONAL

CONFERENCE OF STATE LEGISLATURES MEETING IN INDIANAPOLIS, WITH A LOT OF

MY COLLEAGUES FROM THE MIDWEST, FROM STATES THAT ARE CONTROLLED BY A

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PARTY IN WHICH I AM NOT A MEMBER. THEY PRIDED THEMSELVES ON

PURGING ELIGIBLE VOTERS FROM THE VOTER ROLLS. THOUSANDS, HUNDREDS OF

THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE DENIED THE RIGHT TO VOTE FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER.

ANYTHING WE CAN DO TODAY IN THE MIDST OF A PANDEMIC AND THE MIDST OF

A PLAGUE TO BE ABLE TO ASSIST OUR CITIZENS TO VOTE IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT

DIRECTION.

AGAIN, THANK YOU TO THE SPONSOR. I AM VERY PLEASED TO

VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE ON THIS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. LAVINE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. WALLACE.

MS. WALLACE: THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR GIVING

ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE, AND I WANT TO THANK THE

SPONSOR FOR HER HARD WORK ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT BILL.

I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I SHARE SOME OF THE COMMENTS

RAISED EARLIER THAT THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD CODIFY, THAT THE PANDEMIC

SATISFIES THE ILLNESS JUSTIFICATION FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT UNDER THE NEW

YORK STATE CONSTITUTION. I DO THINK THERE'S PRECEDENT FOR DOING THAT.

FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE CLARIFIED THAT ILLNESS IS NOT ONLY THE ILLNESS OF THE

VOTER, BUT ALSO INCLUDES THE ILLNESS OF -- OF SOMEONE TAKING CARE OF AN

INDIVIDUAL WHO IS ILL OR PHYSICALLY DISABLED. BUT, I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS

INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT LEGISLATION TO ENSURE THAT EVERYONE CAN EXERCISE

THEIR SACRED AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO VOTE IN A SAFE MANNER.

THIS LEGISLATION IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT

WE PROTECT BOTH THE HEALTH OF OUR CITIZENS AND THEIR RIGHT OF SUFFRAGE.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THIS LEGISLATION SIMPLY MAKES ABSENTEE BALLOT MORE ACCESSIBLE. AS HAS

BEEN REPEATEDLY SAID, YOU STILL MUST SIGN THE BALLOT ITSELF, JUST LIKE YOU

WOULD SIGN THE POLL BOOK IF YOU VOTED IN PURPOSE -- I'M SORRY, IN

PERSON. AND AS THE SPONSOR SAID, YOU WILL STILL BE SUBJECT TO

PROSECUTION IF YOU COMMIT MAIL -- VOTER FRAUD, AND I ALSO THINK YOU

PROBABLY WOULD LIKELY BE GUILTY OF MAIL FRAUD.

SO, I THINK THERE'S ADEQUATE DETERRENTS AGAINST FRAUD,

AND I DO THINK THERE'S ADEQUATE PROTECTIONS, AND I WANT TO THANK THE

SPONSOR FOR THIS BILL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND I WILL BE VOTING IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WALLACE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, IF WE CAN

GO TO THE CALENDAR THAT WE JUST ADDED ON AND TAKE UP RULES REPORT NO.

58, THAT ONE'S BY MR. CYMBROWITZ, IT'S CALENDAR A -- 32-A.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO --

(PAUSE)

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. 10522, RULES REPORT

NO. 58, COMMITTEE ON RULES (CYMBROWITZ, FAHY, WEPRIN, ORTIZ,

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MOSLEY, LENTOL, BICHOTTE, FALL, BRONSON, NOLAN, RODRIGUEZ, JACOBSON).

AN ACT IN RELATION TO ENACTING THE "EMERGENCY RENT RELIEF ACT OF

2020" TO ESTABLISH AN INTERIM RESIDENTIAL RENT RELIEF PROGRAM; AND TO

PROVIDE FOR THE REPEAL OF SUCH PROVISIONS UPON EXPIRATION THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THERE IS A [SIC]

AMENDMENT AT THE DESK BY MR. FITZPATRICK TO BRIEFLY EXPLAIN THE

AMENDMENT WHILE THE CHAIR EXAMINES IT. GO AHEAD, MR. FITZPATRICK.

MR. FITZPATRICK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I

OFFER THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT, WAIVE ITS READING, MOVE FOR ITS

IMMEDIATE ADOPTION AND ASK FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN IT.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: PLEASE PROCEED WITH

YOUR EXPLANATION.

MR. FITZPATRICK: THANK YOU, SIR. THE BILL ADDS

PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 10396 TO SECTION 210-B

AND 606 OF THE TAX LAW, AUTHORIZE AN OWNER OF RENTAL REAL ESTATE,

RESIDENTIAL OR -- AND/OR SMALL BUSINESS, TO RECEIVE A TAX CREDIT FOR THE

2020 TAXABLE YEAR IN AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE LOSS OF RENTAL INCOME

RELATED TO THE INABILITY OF RESIDENTIAL TENANTS AND SMALL BUSINESS

COMMERCIAL TENANTS TO PAY RENT AS A RESULT OF THE GOVERNMENT-ORDERED

RESTRICTIONS IN RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC. THE CREDIT WOULD

BE AUTHORIZED FOR THOSE TAXPAYERS WHO FILE EITHER A CORPORATE FRANCHISE

TAX OR A PERSONAL INCOME TAX.

THE AMENDMENT FURTHER AUTHORIZES THE COMMISSIONER

OF TAXATION AND FINANCE TO ESTABLISH AN APPLICATION FOR THE CREDIT,

WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE PROVISION OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ESTABLISHING THE LOSS OF THE RENTAL INCOME, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE

LEASE AGREEMENT.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. FITZPATRICK, THE

CHAIR HAS EXAMINED YOUR AMENDMENT AND FOUND IT NOT GERMANE TO THE

BILL BEFORE THE HOUSE. YOU MAY APPEAL THE RULING OF THE CHAIR --

MR. FITZPATRICK: YES, I WOULD LIKE TO, MR.

SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: -- AND SPEAK TO THE

ISSUE OF GERMANENESS.

MR. FITZPATRICK: WELL, THE -- THE BILL-IN-CHIEF

PROVIDES THAT UP TO $100 MILLION OF MONEY THAT HAS BEEN ALLOCATED TO

THE STATE OF NEW YORK BY THE FEDERAL CORONAVIRUS RELIEF AND

ECONOMIC SECURITY ACT OF 2020, KNOWN AS CARES, FOR RENT RELIEF.

WHILE THE BILL-IN-CHIEF PROVIDES LANGUAGE IN UNCONSOLIDATED LAW, THE

INTENT OF THE BILL IS CLEARLY TO PROVIDE RENT RELIEF BY UTILIZATION OF THE

CARES ACT MONEY. THUS, THE AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE

INTENT OF THE BILL-IN-CHIEF, AND AMENDS THE TAX LAW TO PROVIDE RENT

RELIEF THROUGH THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A RENTAL REAL ESTATE INCOME RELIEF

TAX CREDIT. BOTH THE BILL-IN-CHIEF AND THE AMENDMENT PROVIDE RENTAL

RELIEF TO NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYERS AND, THEREFORE, THE AMENDMENT, I

BELIEVE, IS GERMANE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. FITZPATRICK

APPEALS THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR. THE QUESTION BEFORE THE HOUSE IS

SHALL THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR STAND AS THE JUDGMENT OF THE HOUSE?

THOSE VOTING YES VOTE TO SUSTAIN THE RULING OF THE CHAIR; THOSE VOTING

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

NO VOTE TO OVERRIDE THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR.

THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WITH ALL

DUE RESPECT, THE REPUBLICAN CAUCUS THINKS THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR

MAY BE MISTAKEN IN THIS SITUATION AND WE'RE VOTING NO TO OVERRULE YOUR

DECISION. THAT IS, WE ARE VOTING NO IN ORDER TO OVERRULE YOUR DECISION.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: YOU'RE WELCOME, SIR.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: ON THE CONTRARY, MR.

SPEAKER, WE CERTAINLY DO AGREE WITH YOUR DECISION THAT THIS IS NOT

GERMANE, AND BEING NOT GERMANE, WE SUPPORT YOUR DECISION AND WE

WILL BE VOTING YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

ANY EXCEPTIONS WILL BE REPORTED TO MINORITY AND

MAJORITY LEADERS AND WILL BE THEREFORE ANNOUNCED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: I APOLOGIZE, MR.

SPEAKER, BUT IF THERE IS SOMEONE WHO WOULD NOT LIKE TO VOTE IN

AGREEMENT WITH YOUR DECISION, THEY CAN CONTACT MY OFFICE AND LET US

KNOW.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ANNOUNCE THE

RESULTS.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE RULING OF THE CHAIR IS SUSTAINED.

THE CLERK WILL READ.

ON A MOTION BY THE -- MR. CYMBROWITZ, THE SENATE

BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.

MR. JOHNS.

MR. JOHNS: YEAH, THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I JUST

WANTED TO SPEAK ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. JOHNS: I SUPPORT AND I'M GOING TO BE VOTING

FOR THIS BILL. I THINK IT'S MUCH BETTER THAN THE BILL THAT WE PASSED

YESTERDAY, TRYING TO DO THE SAME BASIC IDEA. YOU KNOW, OUR GOAL IS TO

MAKE SURE THAT WE HELP THE WORKING POOR AND THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE LOST

THEIR JOBS TO THIS COVID PANDEMIC, AND I BELIEVE THAT THIS BILL IS A

WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN SITUATION. SO, IF I COULD JUST EXPLAIN THAT, IT'S A WIN

BECAUSE THE TENANTS ARE GOING TO HAVE A DIRECT VOUCHER THAT GOES TO THE

LANDLORD PAYING THEIR RENT; TENANTS WILL BE HAPPY. THE LANDLORDS ARE

GOING TO GET A DIRECT VOUCHER PAYING THE RENT; THE LANDLORDS ARE GOING

TO BE HAPPY. THE BANKS, BECAUSE THE LANDLORDS HAVE MONEY, ARE GOING

TO WIND UP HAVING THEIR MORTGAGE BE PAID, SO THE BANKERS ARE GOING TO

BE HAPPY. AND, ULTIMATELY, OUR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, THE

SCHOOL BOARDS, THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS, TOWNS, CITIES, COUNTIES, THEY'RE

GOING TO GET THEIR TAXES PAID BECAUSE THE LANDLORDS HAVE THE MONEY TO

PAY THE MORTGAGE AND ALSO PAY THE PROPERTY TAXES.

SO, IF THERE WAS ANY IDEA THAT THERE MAY BE FRAUD OR

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ABUSE, THERE WOULDN'T BE WITH THIS, BECAUSE THE MONEY THAT'S ALLOCATED

IS GOING TO GO IN A VOUCHER CHECK DIRECTLY TO THE LANDLORD, DIRECTLY TO

THE -- THE OWNER OF THE APARTMENT BUILDING, AND THAT WAY THEY'LL BE ABLE

TO USE THE MONEY TO PAY ALL THE BILLS THEY NEED TO PAY, AND IT'S ALSO

GOING TO HELP THE TENANTS BECAUSE THEY'LL HAVE A PLACE TO STAY. SO, I AM

IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL, MR. SPEAKER. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MR.

JOHNS.

MR. BARRON.

MR. BARRON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER.

THIS IS A SAD DAY. THIS IS A SAD DAY FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS HERE IN

THE STATE ASSEMBLY, AND IT'S A SAD DAY FOR TENANTS. IT IS FALSE TO BELIEVE

THAT THIS BILL IS GOOD FOR TENANTS, AND I'LL GET TO THAT IN A SECOND, BUT IT'S

A SAD DAY IN THIS ASSEMBLY WHEN THE SPEAKER SEES THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE

TO VOTES IN THE COMMITTEE, THE HOUSING COMMITTEE, THIS BILL WOULD

HAVE FALLEN, BEEN VOTED AGAINST IN THE HOUSING COMMITTEE.

SO, WHAT DID THE SPEAKER DO? HE CANCELLED THE

HOUSING MEETING, TOOK THE BILL OUT OF THE HOUSING MEETING AND THEN

TODAY PUT IT INTO WAYS AND MEANS, A COMMITTEE THAT HE HAS MORE

CONTROL OVER. THAT IS A SLAP IN THE FACE TO DEMOCRACY, AND SOME OF THE

EXCUSES AND REASONS FOR IT HAS GOT TO BE A JOKE. I WON'T EVEN REPEAT

SOME OF THE REASONS I HEARD WHY IT WAS CANCELLED. THAT'S THE FIRST ONE.

THE SECOND THING, AND I'M GOING TO BE HONEST AND

BLUNTLY HONEST TODAY, I'M SICK AND TIRED OF THE GOVERNOR HAVING CONTROL

OVER THE SPEAKER AND THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM MAJORITY LEADER OF THE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SENATE, AND THE GOVERNOR GETS HIS WAY DURING BUDGET TIME, AND NOW HE

GETS HIS WAY WITH THIS BILL. THIS BILL, GETTING TO THE BILL, NUMBER ONE,

THE GOVERNOR HAD $5 BILLION, FEDERAL STIMULATION MONEY TO DEAL WITH

COVID, $5 BILLION. THE SENATE ORIGINALLY WANTED TO DO $1 BILLION FOR

THIS BILL. THEY SAY THE ASSEMBLY ONLY WANTED $500 MILLION, SO THEY

BOTH CAME TO AGREEMENT ON $500 MILLION FOR THE BILL. THE $500

MILLION I THOUGHT WAS LOW, BUT SO BE IT. AT LEAST IT WAS $500 MILLION.

HOW DO YOU GET DOWN TO NOW $100 MILLION? YOU KNOW WHY?

BECAUSE THE GOVERNOR ORIGINALLY, EMBARRASSINGLY, INSULTINGLY TALKED

ABOUT $39 BILLION -- MILLION, $39 MILLION FOR THIS BILL OUT OF THE $5

BILLION. AND NOW, WE HAVE $100 MILLION.

LET ME TELL YOU WHY IT'S BAD FOR TENANTS. NUMBER ONE,

MANY OF THE TENANTS WERE PAYING 30 PERCENT, 40 PERCENT, 50 PERCENT OF

THEIR SALARY TOWARD RENT. WE WANTED A BILL THAT WOULD KEEP EVERYBODY

AT 30 PERCENT AND LET IT BE $500 MILLION, EVERYBODY AT 30 PERCENT AND

THEN LET THE VOUCHER GO TO THE LANDLORD TO DEAL WITH THE PLUS 30

PERCENT. NO, IT GOES BACK TO PRE-COVID TIME AND NOW THE TENANTS

HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE PRE-COVID, NOT THE 30 PERCENT, BUT ANYTHING

OVER 30 PERCENT. SO, WHEN A TENANT WHO HAS LOST THEIR JOB, A TENANT

WHOSE SALARY MIGHT BE LOWER BECAUSE OF THIS CRISES, IS NOW AT THE END

OF THIS FOUR-MONTH PERIOD, THIS TENANT IS GOING TO OWE BACK RENT, IS

GOING TO OWE BACK RENT. THE LANDLORD WILL BE FINE, THAT'S WHY PEOPLE

LIKE IT. THE LANDLORD WILL BE FINE, HE'LL GET HIS OR HERS, BUT THE TENANT IS

GOING TO OWE BACK RENT. AND GUESS WHAT? AFTER THE FOUR-MONTH

PERIOD, THERE'S NO PROTECTION OF THIS LANDLORD EVICTING THIS TENANT,

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

BECAUSE THERE'S NO GOOD CAUSE -- EVICTION CLAUSE IN THERE. SO, THE

TENANT CAN ACTUALLY BE EVICTED AFTER FOUR MONTHS, ESPECIALLY IF HE CAN'T

PAY THE BACK RENT THAT HE MIGHT -- OR SHE MIGHT OWE.

ALSO, THE LANDLORD COULD RAISE RENT, BECAUSE WE HAVE

NO CLAUSE IN THERE TO SAY YOU CAN'T RAISE THE RENT, YOU CAN'T EVICT THE

TENANT; NONE OF THAT IS IN THIS BILL. IT'S ALL TAKEN OUT BECAUSE THE

GOVERNOR DIDN'T WANT IT, SO HE GOT HIS TWO PARTNERS, THE HEAD OF THE

ASSEMBLY AND THE HEAD OF THE SENATE TO AGREE WITH HIM ON THIS, SO

THAT'S NOT EVEN THERE TO PROTECT THE TENANTS. THEN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

THIS IS FOR THOSE MAKING 80 PERCENT OF THE AMI AND BELOW. SO, YOU'LL

SAY, YEAH, BUT IT COULD BE BELOW, TOO. I'VE BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS FOR 17

YEARS AND I'VE BEEN CLOSELY ON AMI. THEY NEVER DO ANYTHING BELOW

THE TOP STATED AMI. THEY'RE NOT GOING BELOW. THE AMI OF NEW YORK

CITY IS $95,000. SO, THE -- 80 PERCENT OF THAT IS ABOUT $70-PLUS

THOUSAND, MAYBE $75,000. THE AMI OF MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS $36,000;

OF OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS, $42-, $38-. THE BLACK AND BROWN

COMMUNITIES, HARLEM, BED-STUY, BROWNSVILLE, WE DON'T HAVE AN AMI

OF $75,000. THIS BILL IS GOING TO GO NOT TO US, NOT TO THE MOST NEEDED;

IT'S GOING TO GO TO THOSE WHO HAVE A $75,000, AND EVEN FOR THEM IT'S NOT

GOING TO BE GOOD.

EVEN IF WE WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE BILLION DOLLARS FOR

THIS BILL, WITHOUT THE GOOD CAUSE EVICTION, WITHOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO

RAISE THE RENT, WITHOUT THE AMI LOWERED TO 40 TO 60 PERCENT IN OUR

RANGE FROM $35,000, $45,000, $55,000, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A BILL I

COULD LIVE WITH. SO, WHEN WE TOLD THE SPEAKER THAT WE'RE NOT VOTING

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

FOR THIS BILL, AND EIGHT TO TEN OF US SAID NO IN THE HOUSING COMMITTEE,

THE SPEAKER TOOK IT OUT. YOU LOOK, IF HE DOES IT TO THIS -- US IN THE

MORNING, HE'S GOING TO DO IT TO YOU IN THE AFTERNOON. SO, YOU GO AHEAD

AND VOTE FOR THIS, THIS FLAWED PROCESS. YOU GO AHEAD AND VOTE FOR THIS

FAKE BILL THAT DOESN'T REALLY PROTECT TENANTS, IT BENEFITS LANDLORDS. YOU

GO AHEAD AND DO THAT, BUT THIS IS A SAD DAY IN THE SO-CALLED "PEOPLE'S

HOUSE" THAT THE SPEAKER COULD USE THAT KIND OF AUTHORITY.

I CALLED UP AND TRIED TO SEE IF I COULD GET THIS BILL LAID

ASIDE. THEY SAID I COULDN'T DO IT. I THOUGHT WE WERE ABLE TO LAY BILLS

ASIDE. MR. SPEAKER, COULD I LAY THIS BILL ASIDE?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: NO, SIR. WE ARE ON

DEBATE, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE DOING NOW.

MR. BARRON: NOW. SO, THIS BILL I HOPE YOU COULD

CHANGE YOUR MIND AND VOTE AGAINST THIS BILL, BECAUSE IT'S A SLAP IN THE

FACE FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS IN THE HOUSE, AND IT CAN HAPPEN TO

ANYONE OF Y'ALL, WHEN THE SPEAKER DOESN'T LIKE THE WAY THE VOTE GOES

DOWN IN YOUR COMMITTEE, HE COULD -- HE COULD CANCEL THE VOTE AND PUT

IT IN A COMMITTEE THAT HE COULD HAVE INFLUENCE OVER, RULES OR WAYS

AND MEANS. VOTE NO. VOTE NO BECAUSE THIS IS BAD FOR DEMOCRACY,

VOTE NO BECAUSE THIS IS NOT GOOD FOR THE TENANTS. LET'S MAKE THEM DO A

BILL THAT WE CAN AGE IN THREE DAYS AND COME BACK AND VOTE ON A BILL

THAT WILL PROTECT TENANTS FROM BEING EVICTED AFTER FOUR MONTHS. LET'S

VOTE ON A BILL THAT WON'T ALLOW THE LANDLORDS TO RAISE THE RENT. LET'S

VOTE ON A BILL THAT WILL BE IN THE AMI OF THOSE WHO ARE MOST NEEDED,

40 TO 60 PERCENT OF THE AMI, AND THOSE WHO ARE AT 80 PERCENT, WE CAN

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

LEAVE 10 TO 20 PERCENT OF THE BILL FOR THAT.

THIS IS NOT A TENANT BILL, WHICH IS WHY YOU'LL HEAR

SOME OF YOUR COLLEAGUES VOTING FOR IT, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO PROTECT AND

BENEFIT LANDLORDS. I AM SO DISAPPOINTED. I DON'T MIND NOT WINNING A

BILL, I DON'T MIND NOT HAVING ALL THE VOTES ALL THE TIME, BUT TO DO IT LIKE

THIS? AND I'M SICK AND TIRED OF US GETTING TO BUDGET TIME AND PASSING

BUDGETS, AND THE SPEAKER COMES BACK AND TELLS US, WELL, THAT'S ALL WE

CAN GET. IF WE DON'T PASS IT, THEY'RE GOING TO SHUT DOWN THE

GOVERNMENT. IF WE DON'T PASS IT, ALL OF THESE HORRIBLE THINGS, THE FEAR

TACTICS, AND WE WIND UP VOTING FOR A BUDGET THAT CUTS MEDICAID BY $2.5

BILLION, VOTING FOR A BUDGET THAT CUTS $300-, $400 MILLION FROM THE

HOSPITALS DURING A PANDEMIC. THIS OH HYPOCRITICAL GOVERNOR WITH HIS

TWO PARTNERS, THE HEAD OF THE ASSEMBLY AND THE HEAD OF THE SENATE,

IT'S HYPOCRISY FOR THEM TO HAVE A BUDGET LIKE THAT THEN COME BACK TO

YOU AND CONVINCE YOU THAT THIS IS THE BEST YOU CAN GET.

THEY HAVE A LINE, IT AIN'T PERFECT - YOU SHOULDN'T EVEN

MENTION PERFECT IN THE SAME BREATH AS SOME OF THESE BILLS IN BUDGET -

AND THEN ALL YOU CAN GET IS, A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. THIS BILL IS A

STEP BACKWARDS, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO IMPROVE UPON IT. THEY

SAID WE'RE GETTING THE FEDERAL MONEY, AND, OH, WE'LL TAKE CARE OF IT

WHEN THE FEDERAL MONEY COMES IN. YOU CAN TAKE CARE OF THE TENANTS

RIGHT NOW UNTIL IT COMES IN, IF IT COMES IN.

SO, I AM LIVID TODAY, NOT BECAUSE THIS BILL IS GOING TO

PASS AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE GOOD FOR TENANTS; THE PROCESS. HOW DARE

YOU, SPEAKER! HOW DARE YOU DENY US OUR VOICE IN THE COMMITTEE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MEETING BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T CONVINCE PEOPLE TO VOTE THE WAY YOU

WANTED US TO VOTE. WE'RE GROWN MEN AND WOMEN. WE DON'T REPRESENT

YOU, WE REPRESENT OUR PEOPLE. WE REPRESENT OUR PEOPLE.

SO, YOU GO AHEAD AND PASS THIS BILL WITH THE WAY THIS

PROCESS WENT DOWN. YOU WILL BE NEXT. IT'S OUR DAY NOW, WE'RE HAVING

OUR TIME NOW, YOU WILL BE NEXT IF YOU ALLOW THIS TO GO DOWN. AND

DON'T LET THEM TELL YOU ANY NONSENSICAL FOOLISH REASON WHY THIS

HAPPENED. IF YOU BELIEVED THAT, SINCE I LIVE IN BROOKLYN, I'M GOING TO

SELL YOU THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE, BECAUSE YOU'D BE FOOLISH ENOUGH TO BUY

THAT FROM ME IF YOU BELIEVE WHAT'S GOING TO BE JUSTIFIED FOR DOING WHAT

THEY DID.

OF COURSE I'M VOTING NO. I WANT TO ENCOURAGE ALL MY

COLLEAGUES IN THE NAME OF DEMOCRACY AND THE NAME FOR OUR TENANTS TO

VOTE NO ON THIS. READ THE BILL YOURSELF. READ THE BILL YOURSELF AND SEE

IF WE DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROTECT TENANTS FOUR WAYS: ONE, IT

SHOULD BE $500 MILLION TO $1 BILLION; TWO, NO EVICTION CLAUSE; THREE,

DON'T RAISE THE RENT; FOUR, LET THEM ONLY PAY 30 PERCENT OF THEIR SALARY,

NOT 40, 50, THEY COULD GO UP TO THAT WHATEVER IT WAS PRIOR TO THE

CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC, AND THEN LET THE AMI COME DOWN. LET'S DO THAT

FOR OUR PEOPLE. AND THEN WHATEVER COMES IN FROM THE FEDS, WE ADD ON

THAT AND DO BETTER.

THIS IS A DISGRACE TO DEMOCRACY. OUR TWO LEADERS IN

THESE HOUSES, SHAME ON YOU. YOU NEED TO STAND UP TO THIS GOVERNOR

AND STOP KOWTOWING HIM AND USING ALL OF YOUR INFLUENCE ON US TO GET

US TO DO - OR GET Y'ALL TO DO, BECAUSE I'M NOT DOING IT - GET Y'ALL TO DO

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WHAT THE GOVERNOR ORIGINALLY WANTED TO DO, $39 MILLION OUT OF $5

BILLION, AND THEN YOU COMPROMISE WITH $100 MILLION. THIS IS A SHAME,

A DISGRACE. I VOTE NO.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. --

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU

SO MUCH. AND I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE PASSION OF MY COLLEAGUES. I

UNDERSTAND THEIR DISAPPOINTMENT AND NOT SEEING THE LEGISLATION THAT HE

WOULD LIKE TO SEE OR THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE, BUT I'M JUST GOING TO

ASK IF WE COULD MAINTAIN OUR CONVERSATION -- OUR CONVERSATION ON THE

BILLS SPECIFICALLY AS OPPOSED TO ONE PERSON OR SOMETHING OUTSIDE OF THE

BILL. IF WE CAN KEEP IT GERMANE TO THE BILL. WE JUST HAD A HUGE VOTE ON

SOME ISSUES THAT WERE NOT GERMANE, SO WE CAN'T IN OUR COMMENTS THEN

START BRINGING UP THINGS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY APPLY TO THE CONTENT OF

THE LEGISLATION.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES.

MR. EPSTEIN.

MR. EPSTEIN: WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. CYMBROWITZ,

WILL YOU YIELD?

MR. CYMBROWITZ: YES. YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. EPSTEIN: I APPRECIATE THAT. MR. CYMBROWITZ,

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

COULD YOU JUST LAY OUT TO ME, A FAMILY MAKING $50,000 A YEAR, RENT

$1,500, WHAT THE BENEFIT COULD BE TO THEM GOING FORWARD ASSUMING

THEIR INCOME'S CUT BY 30 PERCENT?

MR. CYMBROWITZ: IT DEPENDS HOW MUCH THEY

WERE MAKE -- HOW MUCH THEY WERE PAYING TOWARDS THEIR RENT, WHAT

PERCENTAGE. IF THEY WERE PAYING OVER 30 PERCENT OF THEIR RENT, THIS BILL

WOULD HELP BRING -- BRING THEM BACK DOWN TO THAT PERCENT --

PERCENTAGE. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY WERE BEING -- IF THEY WERE PAYING 35

PERCENT AND AFTER THEY LOST THEIR INCOME THEY WERE NOW GOING TO BE

PAYING, FOR ARGUMENT'S SAKE, SAY, 45 PERCENT OF THEIR INCOME, THIS --

THIS BILL WOULD HELP THEM AND BRING THEM BACK DOWN TO APPROXIMATELY

THE 35 PERCENT.

MR. EPSTEIN: SO A FAMILY MAKING $50,000 AND

$1,500 A MONTH RENT IS BASICALLY PAYING 35 PERCENT OF THEIR INCOME.

THEY LOSE A THIRD OF THAT SO THEY'RE ONLY MAKING $30,000 GOING

FORWARD. WHAT'S THE -- SO YOU'RE SAYING THE BENEFIT TO THEM WILL JUST BE

$500 A MONTH FOR THREE MONTHS?

MR. CYMBROWITZ: WELL, THAT TIME PERIOD IT

BRINGS THEM BACK DOWN TO THE POINT WHERE THEY WERE PAYING 35

PERCENT OF THEIR INCOME.

MR. EPSTEIN: RIGHT. SO ASSUMING AT $1,500 RENT AT

$50,000, IF THEY WERE TO GET REDUCED BY -- YOU KNOW, TO $35,000

BECAUSE THEY LOST WAGES, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT IS BASICALLY THAT

AMOUNT ALLOWS THEM TO GET, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY, CLOSE TO ABOUT $500 A

MONTH. THAT'S WHAT WOULD -- THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL OFFERS TO THEM?

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. CYMBROWITZ: FOR THE FOUR -- FOR THE FOUR

MONTHS THAT THIS BILL IS BEING USED. IT WOULD BE FROM APRIL THROUGH THE

END OF JULY TO HELP THEM PAY THE RENT.

MR. EPSTEIN: RIGHT. SO THAT'S BASICALLY $500 A

MONTH. AND FOR THE FAMILY THAT IS, LET'S SAY THEY'RE PAYING -- THEY'RE

LUCKY AND THEY'RE NOT PAYING LESS THAN 30 PERCENT OF THEIR INCOME

TOWARDS THEIR RENT, THEY'RE PAYING 29 PERCENT. SO A FAMILY MAKING

$40,000 A YEAR AND RENT'S, YOU KNOW, $1,000, IF THEY ARE FURTHER RENT

BURDENED THEY -- THEY ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THIS?

MR. CYMBROWITZ: IF THEY WERE PAYING -- IF -- IF

THEY WERE PAYING LESS THAN 30 PERCENT OF THEIR -- OF THEIR INCOME, THIS

DOES NOT HELP THEM.

MR. EPSTEIN: EVEN THOUGH RIGHT NOW THEY'RE REALLY

RENT BURDENED, THEY COULD HAVE ZERO INCOME NOW. WE'RE STILL NOT

PROVIDING ANY SUPPORT FOR THEM?

MR. CYMBROWITZ: WE WOULD PROVIDE SUPPORT TO

BRING THEM BACK DOWN TOWARDS THE 29 PERCENT (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

MR. EPSTEIN: SO SOMEONE AT 29 PERCENT COULD BE

ELIGIBLE?

MR. CYMBROWITZ: IF THEY ARE NOW PAYING 40

PERCENT OF THEIR INCOME BECAUSE OF LOSS OF WAGES, THEY WOULD BE

BROUGHT DOWN. THEY WOULD BE -- THEY WOULD BE CALCULATED BACK TO THE

-- WELL, THE FACT THAT THEY'RE NOW MAKING -- THAT THEY'RE NOW MAKING

LESS THAN 29 PERCENT IS WHAT YOUR EXAMPLE IS. THEY WOULD HAVE TO --

THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE SPENDING MORE THAN 30 PERCENT BEFORE AND AFTER.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. EPSTEIN: SO FOR THOSE FAMILIES --

MR. CYMBROWITZ: THEY WOULD NOT BE ELIGIBLE.

MR. EPSTEIN: RIGHT. SO THEY WOULD NOT BE

ELIGIBLE. SO A FAMILY WHO HAD AN INCOME, THEY LOST THEIR ENTIRE

INCOME, THEY'RE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ASSISTANCE AND THEY ARE NOW EXTREMELY

RENT BURDENED, THIS -- THEY WOULD NOT BE COVERED BY THIS.

MR. CYMBROWITZ: IF THEY WERE PAYING LESS THAN

-- LESS THAN THE 30 PERCENT OF THEIR INCOME BEFORE, THEY WOULD NOT BE

ELIGIBLE.

MR. EPSTEIN: AND SO IF A LANDLORD REFUSED TO TAKE

THIS REVENUE, IS THERE ANYTHING IN THIS LEGISLATION THAT WOULD REQUIRE

THEM TO TAKE THIS MONEY?

MR. CYMBROWITZ: THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD

FORCE THEM TO TAKE IT, NO.

MR. EPSTEIN: THANK YOU. AND IS THERE ANYTHING IN

THIS LEGISLATION THAT WOULD PROHIBIT A LANDLORD FROM TAKING THIS MONEY

AND THEN BRINGING A HOLDOVER PROCEEDING OR AN EVICTION PROCEEDING

RIGHT AFTER RECEIVING THIS MONEY?

MR. CYMBROWITZ: THIS IS THE PARTIAL PAYMENT

MADE ON BEHALF OF THE TENANT TO THE LANDLORD. IT DOESN'T GUARANTEE

PAYMENT OF ALL THE RENT TO THE LANDLORD, OR IS IT A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT

WHERE ALL THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED TO CERTAIN CONCESSIONS. BUT, NO,

THERE IS NOTHING IN THE BILL THAT WOULD STOP THAT.

MR. EPSTEIN: THANK YOU.

ON THE BILL, MR. SPEAKER.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. EPSTEIN: THANK YOU. SO, I -- I UNDERSTAND THE

INTENT OF THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL AND I APPRECIATE TRYING TO DO

SOMETHING. BUT AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE $100 MILLION SPREAD ACROSS THIS

STATE, WE COULD DO SO MUCH MORE FOR THE TENANTS OF NEW YORK. WE

COULD DO SO MUCH MORE. THINKING ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE

RENT-BURDENED. I'M NOT SURE IT MATTERS IF THEY WERE RENT-BURDENED

BEFORE THE CRISIS. THE QUESTION IS TODAY ARE THEY RENT-BURDENED? THE

QUESTION IS HOW ARE WE ASSISTING THE MOST VULNERABLE PEOPLE WHO HAVE

LOST ALL INCOME? THERE ARE MANY NEW YORKERS WHO HAVE NO ACCESS TO

UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS. MANY NEW YORKERS

WHO HAVE LOST SO MUCH INCOME. MANY NEW YORKERS WHO ARE

STRUGGLING EVERY SINGLE DAY WHO ARE RENT-BURDENED, WHO ARE STRUGGLING.

AND WE'RE TELLING THEM IF THEY WEREN'T RENT-BURDENED BEFORE, WE'RE NOT

GOING TO ASSIST THEM. OR WE'RE TELLING THEM, EVEN IF YOU WERE

RENT-BURDENED BEFORE, WE'RE ONLY GOING TO HELP YOU TO REMAIN

RENT-BURDENED. SO YOU'RE PAYING 80 PERCENT OF YOUR INCOME TOWARDS

RENT AND JUST STRUGGLING. OR WE'RE GOING TO SAY TO YOU, WELL, NOW IF

YOU'RE PAYING 90 PERCENT WE'RE GOING TO HELP YOU WITH THE 10, INSTEAD

OF SAYING, WE WILL HELP YOU GET OUT OF THIS CRISIS WE ARE IN. THERE'S NO

RIGHT TO STAY FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE UNREGULATED. THOSE TENANTS WHO ARE

STRUGGLING IN UNREGULATED UNITS, WHICH ARE MILLIONS ACROSS OUR STATE.

WE ARE NOT SAYING, HEY, LANDLORD, TAKE THIS MONEY BUT PROTECT THOSE

TENANTS. KEEP THEM IN THEIR HOME FOR SIX MONTHS OR A YEAR. WE WANT

TO STABILIZE PEOPLE. THIS IS A CRISIS. COVID-19'S A CRISIS, AND THAT'S --

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WE -- WE DID AN EVICTION MORATORIUM. THAT'S WHY THE GOVERNOR

EXTENDED IT TO AUGUST. BUT NOW WE'RE SAYING, WELL, IF YOU TAKE THE

MONEY, YOU CAN NOW GO AHEAD AND EVICT THOSE FAMILIES AND THEN PUT

THEM ON THE STREET AND PUT THEM AT GREATER RISK. WHY NOT DO MORE?

WHY NOT HELP THESE FAMILIES? WHY NOT LOOK AT DEEPER AFFORDABILITY, AS

WE JUST HEARD FROM ASSEMBLYMEMBER BARRON? THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO

HAD 40 PERCENT OF AMI, 60 PERCENT OF AMI. AND 80 PERCENT. WE

DON'T WANT -- WE WANT THIS TO GO TO ALL NEW YORKERS. ALL NEW YORKERS

WHO ARE STRUGGLING. THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO DO MORE. THERE'S

AN OPPORTUNITY TO HELP PEOPLE MORE. THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A

DIFFERENCE IN NEW YORK STATE. I DON'T BELIEVE THIS BILL DOES THAT. I JUST

DON'T BELIEVE THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY.

AND I ALSO WANT TO JUST FOLLOW UP ON THE ISSUE OF THE

HOUSING COMMITTEE. I APPRECIATE THAT WHEN WE HAVE A PROCESS IN

PLACE UNDER THE RULES. BUT WE HAD A STRUCTURE THAT WE PUT INTO PLACE

AND IT INCLUDED A COMMITTEE. NOW I UNDERSTAND THE RULES THAT ALLOWED

TO CIRCUMVENT THE HOUSING COMMITTEE AND GO STRAIGHT TO WAYS AND

MEANS. BUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE PRECEDENT. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT

WHAT THAT MEANS FOR OUR CHAMBER. I'M CONCERNED WHAT IT MEANS FOR

THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE TO NOT OPENLY HAVE A CONVERSATION FOR PEOPLE WHO

ARE COMMITTED TO HOUSING IN A COMMITTEE TO DISCUSS THESE ISSUES.

THIS IS A BILL THAT CAN HAVE IMPACT FOR SO MANY

PEOPLE. IF THIS BILL WAS STRUCTURED DIFFERENTLY, COULD WE SAY TO PEOPLE,

YOU KNOW WHAT? WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A DEAL. WE'RE GOING TO CANCEL

SOME OF THE RENT AND DO WHAT'S CALLED, YOU KNOW -- YOU KNOW, YOU

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WERE ALLOWED TO CANCEL RENT, AS LONG AS WE ENSURE THAT WE SUPPLEMENT

THAT SOMEHOW. SO WE COULD CANCEL THE RENT AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT?

25 PERCENT OF THIS RESPONSIBILITY IS TO THE LANDLORD, 25 OF THE

RESPONSIBILITY IS TO THE TENANT, AND REST THE GOVERNMENT WILL COVER.

THAT'S CALLED JUST COMPENSATION. THAT'S WHAT CANCELED RENT DOES. WE

COULD TAKE THIS $100 MILLION AND HELP TENANTS ALL OVER OUR CITY AND

STATE WHO ARE AT RISK OF EVICTION. I HOPE WE CONSIDER NOT DOING THIS

BILL. I HOPE THOSE -- THAT BEFORE VOTING ON THIS PEOPLE VOTE -- OPPOSE --

OPPOSE THIS BILL. AND I HOPE WE CONSIDER A PLAN THAT WILL HELP THE TENS

OF THOUSANDS OF NEW YORKERS, THE TWO MILLION WHO ARE UNEMPLOYED

WHO ARE STRUGGLING EVERY DAY. THE FOOD INSECURITY I SEE IN MY DISTRICT.

GIVING OUT PEOPLE PPE AND FOOD. PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING. THEY NEED

MORE HELP, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THIS BILL DOES IT.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. NIOU.

AGAIN, MEMBERS, PLEASE STAY ON THE SUBJECT MATTER OF

THE BILL. THANK YOU.

MS. NIOU: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. IT IS ON THE

SUBJECT OF THE BILL THAT WE DID CIRCUMVENT A PROCESS FOR THE BILL, AND

THEREFORE, DID NOT ACTUALLY EXERCISE DEMOCRACY IN MY OPINION. BUT

SOMEHOW, YOU KNOW, THIS BILL IS NOW ON THE FLOOR AND SO WE ARE

TALKING ABOUT VOTING FOR A BILL THAT IS NOT PROPERLY VETTED BY THE

HOUSING COMMITTEE ITSELF. AND I THINK THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT

REALLY DOES SHOW IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE PASS -- WE'RE LOOKING AT A

BILL RIGHT NOW THAT IS GOING TO BE MAINTAINING THE RENT BURDEN ON FOLKS

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AND ALSO WILL ARBITRARILY EXCLUDE PEOPLE. AND I THINK THAT IT'S REALLY

IMPORTANT THAT WE TALK ABOUT IT, RIGHT? BECAUSE THE RELIEF THAT THIS BILL

IS GOING TO PROVIDE IS GOING TO BE TOO LITTLE. AND WE KNOW THAT THERE IS

A -- THERE IS AN AMOUNT THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT WILL HELP PEOPLE ALL

ACROSS NEW YORK STATE. AND OF COURSE WE KNOW THE NEED IS GIGANTIC.

IT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO BE AROUND THE $10 BILLION MARK, RIGHT, TO REALLY BE

ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ACTUALLY HELPING EVERYONE. BUT THIS IS

NOT EVEN, LIKE, 1 PERCENT. THIS IS 1 PERCENT OF THAT $10 MILLION MARK.

AND -- AND EVEN WITH THE INITIAL FUNDING I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE AT

LEAST DOING $500 MILLION MINIMUM IN THE INITIAL FUNDING BECAUSE OF

HOW LARGE THE NEED IS. AND I WILL SAY THIS: I -- I -- I THINK THAT ONE OF

THE THINGS ABOUT THIS BILL THAT IS VERY CONCERNING TO ME IS THE FACT THAT,

YOU KNOW, THIS -- WE'VE SEEN THROUGHOUT OUR PROCESS AND WE'VE SEEN

THROUGHOUT OUR SYSTEMS FOR PPPS, FOR OTHER DIFFERENT ALLOCATIONS OF

MONIES THAT -- YOU KNOW, BIG CORPORATIONS, THE BIG LANDLORDS AND BIG

COMPANIES ARE -- ARE SUCKING UP A LOT OF THE FUNDS WITHOUT ACTUALLY

HAVING THE NEED. AND WHEREAS OUR SMALL LANDLORDS, OUR SMALL, YOU

KNOW, HOMEOWNERS ARE ACTUALLY THE ONES WHO ARE SUFFERING THE MOST

AND YET THEY'RE GOING TO BE THE ONES WHO ARE NOT GOING TO BE GIVEN

THESE FUNDS, AND I THINK THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A HARDER TIME

ACCESSING IT. AND I THINK THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I'M REALLY

CONCERNED ABOUT, ESPECIALLY SINCE MY DISTRICT DOES REPRESENT LOWER

MANHATTAN WHERE 85 PERCENT OF MY CONSTITUENTS ARE RENTERS AND THE --

THE -- THE TENEMENTS ARE THERE, THE ORIGINAL TENEMENTS, AND A LOT OF THE

HOUSING THERE IS OWNED BY SMALL LANDLORDS. AND THEN THERE'S, LIKE,

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THESE GIANT COMPLEXES OWNED BY THE SAME LANDLORDS THAT I THINK ARE

ALSO CAUSING A LOT OF THE ABUSES OF CERTAIN PROGRAMS. RIGHT NOW I THINK

THAT, YOU KNOW, THE STATE IS REALLY MAKING CERTAIN DECISIONS THAT ARE

GOING TO BE HARMFUL TO FOLKS, BECAUSE THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS WE

SHOULD BE RAISING REVENUE IN ORDER TO COVER A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT WE

ARE NEEDING RIGHT NOW.

I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A CRUEL BILL BECAUSE IT REQUIRES THE

PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY RENT-BURDENED AND HAVE LOST INCOME TO

CONTINUE THEIR HIGH RENT BURDENS IN ORDER TO ACCESS THIS PROGRAM. AND

IT'S NOT -- I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S -- IT'S FAIR. AND I BELIEVE THAT IT'S POORLY

DESIGNED BECAUSE I THINK THAT IF WE'RE WAITING FOR THE FEDERAL --

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO COME BACK AND FUND THIS PROGRAM, WE HAVE

MADE AN EVEN LARGER MISTAKE. I THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO FUNNEL MONEY

DIRECTLY INTO THE REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY WITH VERY LITTLE PROTECTIONS AND --

AND STRINGS ATTACHED TO MAKE SURE THAT TENANTS ARE PROTECTED. IT

CONDONES AND ENCOURAGES CERTAIN KINDS OF BEHAVIOR BY LANDLORDS, AND

ALSO, IT MAKES IT SO THAT THE FOLKS WHO NEED IT THE MOST, OUR SMALLER

LANDLORDS, OUR FAMILY-OWNED HOUSING, IS NOT GOING TO GET THE THINGS

THAT THEY NEED. WE NEED A PROGRAM THAT IS TRULY UNIVERSAL FOR RENTERS,

AND I THINK THAT THE MEANS TESTING IS -- AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF OF, LIKE,

THE -- THE -- OF THEIR INCOME, ET CETERA, IS ALL ON THE RENTERS. AND -- AND

-- AND AS OTHER SPEAKERS HAVE SAID, THE -- THE WORLD HAS COMPLETELY

CHANGED, HAS BEEN TURNED ON ITS HEAD. EVERYTHING IS DIFFERENT NOW.

AND FOLKS WHO COULD'VE PAID RENT YESTERDAY COULD NOT PAY RENT TODAY.

AND IT IS, YOU KNOW, APPARENT WITH THE 2 MILLION NEW PEOPLE WHO HAVE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

JUST FILED FOR UNEMPLOYMENT. AND SO WE KNOW THAT WE NEED TO MAKE A

CHANGE, AND WE NEED TO LOOK AT INFRASTRUCTURE, AND WE NEED TO INVEST IN

US, AS PEOPLE. WE NEED TO INVEST IN OUR PEOPLE IN NEW YORK AND WE

NEED TO INVEST IN OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. AND OUR HOUSING -- OUR HOUSING

PROBLEM IS -- IS SO LARGE AND SO HUGE IN NEW YORK THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE

BEFORE COVID, AND NOW COVID HAS JUST SHINED A LIGHT ON ALL OF THE

THINGS THAT ARE WRONG WITH WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING, AND WE'RE JUST

CONTINUING TO DO IT WITH THIS BILL. WE ARE LITERALLY MAKING IT WORSE FOR

OUR TENANTS, AND WE ARE NOT DOING THINGS THAT ARE PROTECTING THE FOLKS

WHO NEED IT THE MOST. THIS BILL DOES NOTHING FOR OUR HOMELESS

POPULATION, OUR FRIENDS WHO ARE LIVING ON THE STREETS RIGHT NOW, AND --

AND FOLKS WHO DESPERATELY NEED ACCESS TO PERMANENT HOUSING. THIS

DOES NOTHING TO MAKE SURE THAT -- THAT -- THAT THE BURDEN IS NOT ENTIRELY

ON TENANTS TO PAY THE FULL AMOUNT, AND IT DOES NOTHING TO HELP TO

ALLEVIATE THE RENT BURDEN LATER WHEN THINGS MIGHT NOT HAVE CHANGED

MUCH FOR OTHER FOLKS. AND I THINK THAT -- YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IT'S

REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ALL OF THESE

THINGS. AND ALSO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE --

WE REALLY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE VETTING A LOT

OF THESE ISSUES WITHIN OUR COMMITTEE. AND SO I HOPE THAT WE CAN TAKE

IT BACK A NOTCH AND BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A BILL THAT WORKS

FOR EVERYONE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON RULES REPORT NO. 58. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WISHING TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBER PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. CYMBROWITZ TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. CYMBROWITZ: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF OUR WORK TO SUPPORT NEW YORK'S TENANTS AND

LANDLORDS IN RESPONSE TO THE DEVASTATING EFFECTS OF THE COVID-19

PANDEMIC. THERE'S STILL MUCH MORE THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, AND A

CONTINUING NEED FOR LEADERSHIP AND ASSISTANCE FROM OUR COUNTERPARTS IN

WASHINGTON IS ESSENTIAL. WE CAN ONLY WORK WITH WHAT WE'RE GIVEN,

BUT WE WILL FIGHT FOR MORE. THIS LEGISLATION WILL START THE FLOW OF THE --

OF THE LIMITED RESOURCES ALREADY AVAILABLE TO THE STATE UNTIL WE CAN

SECURE THE FUNDING NECESSARY FOR A TRULY COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM. ONE

THAT ENSURES THAT LANDLORDS GET PAID AND TENANTS CAN STAY IN THEIR

HOMES. I WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH MY COLLEAGUES TO ESTABLISH THE

CORONAVIRUS EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, WHAT WE CALL

CERAP, TO ESTABLISH A PROGRAM THAT CAN MEET THAT CHALLENGE.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR YOUR PERSISTENCE AND

LEADERSHIP IN PROVIDING IMMEDIATE RELIEF TO NEW YORK STATE'S RENTERS.

I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. CYMBROWITZ IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. ROSENTHAL.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MS. ROSENTHAL: HI. TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. IN

ADDITION TO BEING A PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY OF UNPRECEDENTED

PROPORTIONS, COVID-19 HAS ALSO BEEN FINANCIALLY DEVASTATING TO SO

MANY FAMILIES. MILLIONS HAVE LOST THEIR JOBS AND MANY ARE STILL WAITING

TO RECEIVE UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. EVERY SINGLE DAY I HEAR FROM

CONSTITUENTS WHO ARE TERRIFIED ABOUT THEIR FUTURE AND HOW THEY'RE GOING

TO PAY RENT. TODAY I GOT AN E-MAIL FROM A PERSON WHO LIVES IN AN

APARTMENT WITH RODENTS AND NO HOT WATER. HE LOST HIS JOB AND HE WILL

PROBABLY NOT BE ABLE TO GAIN THAT POSITION BACK. HE APPLIED FOR

UNEMPLOYMENT BUT STILL HASN'T RECEIVED IT. HE CAN'T AFFORD THE -- HIS

RENT. HE ASKED THE LANDLORD COULD HE BREAK HIS LEASE. THE LANDLORD

REFUSED UNLESS HE COULD FIND A NEW TENANT, SO HE WILL PROBABLY BE

HOMELESS. THIS BILL WOULD NOT HELP HIM. THIS BILL BAILS OUT LANDLORDS

AND DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT THEY CANNOT EVICT THEIR TENANTS. THE CITY

HAS SOMETHING CALLED A "ONE-SHOT DEAL" WHERE IF A TENANT FALLS BEHIND

AND IS GOING TO BE EVICTED, THE CITY WILL PAY THE RENT ONLY IF THE TENANT

DEMONSTRATES THEY CAN PAY IT IN THE FUTURE. THIS DOESN'T HAVE ANY

PROTECTIONS, AND THE CITY DOESN'T THROW GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD IF THE

TENANT WILL STILL BE EVICTED. I UNDERSTAND WE WANT TO HELP TENANTS, AND I

HOPE WE WILL IN THE FUTURE WITH MORE MONEY. BUT THIS BILL ONLY HELPS

LANDLORDS, AND DOES NOT GUARANTEE TENANTS ANY RIGHT TO STAY. IT'S ALSO

WAY TOO HIGH AMI. HOUSING IS A RIGHT; BEING A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER IS

NOT. AND I CAN'T VOTE FOR A BILL THAT BAILS OUT LANDLORDS WITHOUT, AT THE

VERY LEAST, A GUARANTEE THAT TENANTS CANNOT BE EVICTED.

SO I VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE. THANK YOU.

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. ROSENTHAL IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. GLICK.

MS. GLICK: MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I

HAVE SEEN MANY RENT SUBSIDY PROPOSALS OVER THE YEARS. I CHAIRED

SOCIAL SERVICES AT ONE TIME. NONE OF THEM, NONE OF THEM, HAVE BEEN

IDEAL, AND ALL OF THEM HAVE BEEN ABOUT BALANCING THE DESIRE TO PROVIDE

A RENT SUBSIDY WHICH, BY ITS NATURE AND DEFINITION, GOES TO THE LANDLORD.

WE HAVE ALL SEEN LARGE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE COMING TO US, WORRIED ABOUT

GETTING THEIR UNEMPLOYMENT AND WORRYING ABOUT PAYING RENT. AND THIS

IS FAR FROM IDEAL. AMIS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN TOO HIGH, PARTICULARLY IN

NEW YORK CITY. IT NEEDS TO BE MORE SPECIFIED FOR INDIVIDUAL AREAS,

AND NOT ROPE IN LOWER-INCOME AREAS WITH HIGHER-INCOME AREAS. BUT

WITH ALL OF THAT BEING SAID, THIS IS ABOUT TRYING TO CONTINUE TO STABILIZE

SOME CIRCUMSTANCES FOR SOME PEOPLE. A RENT SUBSIDY IS NOT MONEY TO

THE TENANT. NEVER HAS BEEN. IT IS ALWAYS MONEY THAT GOES TO THE

LANDLORD. BUT WE ALSO NEED PROPERTY TAXES PAID, WATER AND SEWER TAXES

PAID. SO THIS ISN'T GREAT, BUT I'M GOING TO SUPPORT A BILL THAT PROVIDES A

RENT SUBSIDY, HOWEVER FLAWED IT MAY BE. YEAH, I'D LIKE IT TO INCLUDE,

YOU BETTER GIVE THE MONEY BACK IF YOU EVICT SOMEBODY. THAT WOULD BE

BETTER. BUT I DON'T KNOW ANY RENT SUBSIDY PROGRAM THAT HAS INCLUDED

THAT.

SO WITH THOSE CONCERNS EXISTING, I STILL WILL VOTE IN

FAVOR OF THE BILL. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. GLICK IN THE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. MOSLEY.

MR. MOSLEY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. YOU

KNOW, I WAS LOOKING AT THE CALENDAR, AND TODAY -- THIS WEEK WOULD

HAVE BEEN THE NEXT-TO-LAST WEEK WE WOULD BE HERE IN ALBANY. BUT I

WOULD BE REMISS NOT TO SAY THAT GIVEN THE STATE OF EMERGENCY THAT WE'RE

IN, THAT WE'LL PROBABLY BE HERE INTERMITTENTLY THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE

CALENDAR YEAR. NOW, I WAS TALKING TO ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES THIS

MORNING, AND THERE'S A DISTURBING PATTERN THAT WE'RE SEEING HERE. A

DISTURBING PATTERN WHERE MANY OF US WHO ARE ADVOCATES FOR ONE ISSUE

AND FERVENT ABOUT IT ARE NOT AS FERVENT WHEN IT COMES TO OTHER ISSUES

THAT IMPACT THOSE SAME INDIVIDUALS. SO WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

CAMPAIGN FOR FISCAL EQUITY AND BEING -- AND MAKING GOOD ON THAT, OR

TALKING ABOUT STANDING UP TO THE SPECIAL INTERESTS WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT

ROLLING BACK ON BAIL REFORM. AND LIKEWISE, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

HERE WITH REGARDS TO HOUSING AND HOUSING JUSTICE AND BRINGING TENANTS

BACK IN THE FOLD. CLEARLY, I HAVE MY RESERVATIONS ABOUT THE PROCESS.

THIS, I -- I THOUGHT IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN HEARD IN THE HOUSING

COMMITTEE. BUT AT THE SAME TIME I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS BILL IS BETTER

THAN NO BILL, AND THAT THE BIGGER AND LARGER SCOPE OF ALL OF THIS IS THAT

WE ARE GOING TO BE COMING BACK. WE KNOW WE HAVE TO COME BACK IN

LIEU OF WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE HEROES ACT. WE KNOW WE HAVE TO

COME BACK IN LIEU OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING IN ADDITION TO THIS

PARTICULAR BILL. SO I HAVE MY RESERVATIONS ABOUT THE PROCESS. ALMOST

LIKE WATCHING HOW SAUSAGES ARE MADE. IT WAS UGLY. BUT I KNOW THAT IN

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THE END, WE'LL HAVE TO DO BETTER WITH A FAR BETTER PACKAGE TO PROTECT

TENANTS, STABILIZE TENANTS, REDUCE THEIR ANXIETY IN AN EFFORT FOR THEM AND

THEIR FAMILIES TO MOVE FORWARD.

SO I RELUCTANTLY VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, UNDERSTANDING

THAT GOING FORWARD WE HAVE TO DO BETTER BY OUR TENANTS, WITHOUT

QUESTION. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. MOSLEY IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU, SIR.

MS. SIMOTAS.

MS. SIMOTAS: RENT IS DUE AGAIN. THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER, FOR ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. RENT IS DUE AGAIN IN

FOUR DAYS, AND COUNTLESS NEW YORKERS ARE STILL WAITING FOR RELIEF. I

CANNOT VOTE FOR THIS BILL BECAUSE IT WILL LEAVE TOO MANY PEOPLE BEHIND.

ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS FOR A MEANS-TESTED VOUCHER SYSTEM IS NOT

NEARLY ENOUGH TO HELP ALL THE RENTERS WHO ARE SUFFERING IN THIS CRISIS.

EVERY DAY I HAVE CONSTITUENTS WHO ARE CALLING MY OFFICE WHO ARE

TELLING ME THAT THEY ARE OUT OF WORK AND THEY'RE WAITING FOR

UNEMPLOYMENT. SOME OF THEM HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR MONTHS. OTHER

WORKERS ARE INELIGIBLE FOR UNEMPLOYMENT BECAUSE THEY WORK FOR THE

INFORMAL ECONOMY. HOW CAN WE EXPECT THEM TO PAY MONTHS OF BACK

RENT, RENT THEY'LL OWE WHEN THE EVICTION MORATORIUM ENDS? YOU KNOW,

WHEN MY FAMILY IMMIGRATED TO NEW YORK, MY PARENTS WERE FORTUNATE

TO FIND A RENT-STABILIZED APARTMENT WHERE THEY COULD RAISE ME AND MY

BROTHER. IT WAS THE ONLY REASON THEY WERE ABLE TO ACHIEVE UPWARD

MOBILITY, AND I KNOW ALL TOO WELL THE STORY WOULD HAVE BEEN VASTLY

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

DIFFERENT TODAY. THANKS TO SKYROCKETING RENT IN THE COMMUNITY, MANY

FAMILIES WERE ALREADY STRUGGLING TO GET BY BEFORE THIS PANDEMIC. NOW,

WITH THE UNPRECEDENTED ECONOMIC DISRUPTION WE'RE EXPERIENCING, MANY

ARE AT SERIOUS RISK OF LOSING THEIR HOMES IF WE DON'T PROVIDE MEANINGFUL

RELIEF. THEY NEED TO BE OUR FIRST PRIORITY, AND WE SHOULD BE PROTECTING

VULNERABLE TENANTS BEFORE BAILING OUT LANDLORDS. IF WE DON'T TAKE ACTION

NOW, WE'LL HAVE AN EVEN GREATER HOMELESSNESS CRISIS WHEN THIS STATE OF

EMERGENCY ENDS.

I VOTE NO, AND I ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO -- TO DO

THE SAME AND TO CONTINUE WORKING UNTIL WE ACTUALLY ARE ABLE TO PROVIDE

MEANINGFUL RELIEF FOR TENANTS. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. SIMOTAS IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. PERRY.

(PAUSE)

MR. KIM.

MR. KIM: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR ALLOWING ME

TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. DURING COVID-19 AND POST-COVID, WE ARE AS

STRONG AS THE MOST VULNERABLE. NO MATTER HOW YOU SLICE IT, THIS $100

MILLION IS A GIFT FOR THE LANDLORDS. WHAT'S EVEN WORSE IS THAT IT'S

DISGUISED AS A RENT SUPPORT PROGRAM. HOW CAN WE POSSIBLY THINK IT'S

OKAY TO BAIL OUT LANDLORDS AND NEGLECT THE TENANTS, THE POOR, THE

IMMIGRANTS. YOU KNOW, I WAS JUST OUT IN FLUSHING THIS WEEK AT A PPE

GIVEAWAY THING. AND EVEN THOUGH I HAD A MASK, I HAD -- I HAD MY

JACKET ON WITH MY ASSEMBLY LOGO AND NAME. AND WITHIN 30 MINUTES

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THERE WAS A LINE OF PEOPLE JUST BEGGING TO TALK TO ME. AND -- AND

THEY'RE UNEMPLOYED, JUST LOOKING FOR ANY KIND OF SUPPORT. AND THE

NUMBER ONE ISSUE WE CONTINUE TO GET IS, WHAT THE HELL AM I GOING TO DO

ABOUT MY RENT? IT WAS -- I JUST GOT A TEXT FROM A FRIEND. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, COLLEAGUE, FOR INTERRUPTING MY SPEECH WITH THAT TEXT.

AGAIN, WE ARE AS STRONG AS THE MOST VULNERABLE DURING THIS TIME. AND

WE KNOW INVESTING MONEY INTO OUR PEOPLE IS THE MORAL THING TO DO. IT'S

ALSO THE ECONOMIC THING TO DO. IF WE THINK THAT BY INJECTING $100

MILLION TO LANDLORDS THAT'S GOING TO SPUR THE ECONOMY, THAT'S THE BEST

RETURN ON THAT MONEY, IT'S NOT. GIVING THE $100 MILLION DIRECTLY TO OUR

PEOPLE IS HOW YOU SPUR THE ECONOMY, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THAT

MONEY WILL BE SPENT LOCALLY. THAT MONEY WILL BE FLOWING LOCALLY. IT'S

GOING TO RECIRCULATE LOCALLY. AND THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T

WRAP OUR HEAD AROUND WHY, IT'S STILL -- IT'S NOT JUST THE MORAL THING TO

DO, IT'S THE ECONOMIC THING TO DO, IS VERY TROUBLING.

AND LASTLY, THIS IS A SUBSIDY PROGRAM WITH NO

ACCOUNTABILITY AND ANY KIND OF CLAWBACKS. SO AGAIN, IT'S NOT A -- A

SUBSIDY. THIS IS A GIFT FOR THE LANDLORDS. SO WITH THAT, I CAN'T IN GOOD

CONSCIOUSNESS SUPPORT THIS BILL. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. KIM IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. NIOU.

MS. NIOU: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR ALLOWING

ME TO SPEAK SHORTLY AGAIN. I JUST WANTED TO SAY, AGAIN, THAT THIS IS --

THIS IS A -- THIS IS A PACKAGE THAT -- THAT WASN'T REALLY DELIBERATED. AND I

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

DO THINK THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO

HELP AS MANY PEOPLE AS WE CAN. AND SO AS OTHER SPEAKERS HAVE SAID

ALREADY, WE REALLY NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE HELPING THE RENTERS.

AND I KNOW THAT -- I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A DOMINO EFFECT. I

UNDERSTAND THAT LANDLORDS ALSO NEED HELP. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU

KNOW, WE'RE SEEING THIS -- THIS TRICKLE -- TRICKLE EFFECT OF, LIKE, ALL OF

THESE DIFFERENT THINGS FALLING TO PIECES RIGHT NOW IN THIS COVID WORLD.

AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY NEEDS HELP, AND I

THINK THAT THIS BILL IS NOT THE BILL THAT ACTUALLY PROVIDES THAT.

SO, THANK YOU SO MUCH AND I AM VOTING IN THE

NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. NIOU IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. SIMON.

MS. SIMON: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN

MY VOTE. I WANT TO SAY THAT I AGREE WITH MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES ABOUT

THE SHORTCOMINGS OF THIS BILL. IT, INDEED, DOES NOT PROVIDE THE RELIEF

THAT SO MANY PEOPLE NEED, AND SO MANY MORE PEOPLE NOW NEED RELIEF

THAN EVER BEFORE. BUT IT IS SOME RELIEF TO THOSE PEOPLE FOR WHOM IT CAN

HELP. AND FOR THE PEOPLE IT CAN HELP, IT WILL MAKE A MEANINGFUL

DIFFERENCE IN THEIR LIVES. A LITTLE BIT OF RENT HELP CAN GO A LONG WAY TO

SOMEBODY WHO DESPERATELY NEEDS THAT HELP. IT'S NOT -- IT'S A STOP GAP.

WE WILL BE BACK, AND WE WILL BE BACK AND ABLE TO DO MORE TO PROTECT

MORE PEOPLE. IN THE MEANTIME, THIS IS SOMETHING WE CAN DO NOW. IT

WILL BE AN IMMEDIATE BENEFIT FOR A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO DESPERATELY

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

NEED IT, AND I WANT TO BE THERE TO SAY YES. I WANT TO HELP THE PEOPLE I

CAN HELP WHEN I CAN HELP THEM, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO WORK VERY HARD

WITH ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO HELP PEOPLE IN A

BETTER, MORE PRODUCTIVE, MORE COMPREHENSIVE WAY ONCE WE HAVE THE

FUNDING AND THE MECHANISMS THAT WE CAN CREATE TO DO THAT.

SO I WILL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, BUT I DO WANT TO

-- TO -- TO SPEAK IN SOLIDARITY WITH SO MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES. THIS IS

NOT ANYBODY'S DREAM BILL, BUT IT IS A BILL THAT WILL REALLY MAKE A

DIFFERENCE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. SIMON IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. CARROLL.

MR. CARROLL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I RISE TO

SPEAK TODAY BECAUSE THIS BILL, THOUGH FAR FROM PERFECT, WILL BRING SOME

RELIEF TO TENANTS AROUND NEW YORK STATE. BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID, THIS

LEGISLATURE AND GOVERNOR NEED AND CAN DO SO MUCH MORE. AND

THOUGH I KNOW WE'RE WAITING FROM MANNA FROM HEAVEN, FROM

WASHINGTON, D.C., AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT MANNA IS GOING TO COME

ANY TIME SOON. THIS WILL PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF RELIEF FOR THE FEW

TENANTS THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS PROGRAM, OR

LANDLORDS OF THOSE TENANTS WILL BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS

PROGRAM, AND I WILL VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THAT BEING SAID, WE NEED

TO COME BACK SOON TO MAKE SURE THAT WE MAKE OUR WHOLE NEW YORK

FAMILY WHOLE. AND THAT'S GOT TO INCLUDE OUR TENANTS, OUR HOMEOWNERS,

OUR SMALL BUSINESSES. BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH MORE TO DO. AND WE

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

CAN'T JUST KEEP WAITING FOR THE PRESIDENT AND THE SENATE -- THE U.S.

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER TO DO THE RIGHT THING, BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T

DONE THE RIGHT THING IN FOUR YEARS AND I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO

START DOING THE RIGHT THING. AND NEW YORK NEEDS TO HELP ITSELF. AND

THIS LEGISLATURE AND THIS GOVERNOR, WE CAN DO THAT. THESE LAST TWO

DAYS WE'VE DONE A LITTLE BIT OF HELP, BUT WE CAN DO SO, SO MUCH MORE.

AND SO I'LL VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE TODAY BECAUSE I

DON'T WANT -- I WANT TO STOP THE HURT FOR THE FEW THAT THIS WILL HELP. BUT

WE NEED AND WE MUST COME BACK, BECAUSE I WILL NOT CONTINUE TO JUST

DO PARTIAL HELP ANY LONGER. SO I WILL VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, AND I HOPE

MY OTHER COLLEAGUES DO THE SAME AND I HOPE WE'RE BACK HERE VERY, VERY

SOON TO DO MUCH, MUCH MORE. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. CARROLL IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER, FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. WE HAVE SAID THIS ON

MORE THAN ONE OCCASION SINCE WE'VE BEEN BACK OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF

DAYS, THAT WE ARE IN EXTRAORDINARILY TRYING TIMES AND THERE ARE SO MANY

PEOPLE WHO NEED SO MUCH. AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE COULD GET TO

EVERYBODY WHAT THEY NEED BY THE END OF THE YEAR. I THINK IT'S GOING TO

TAKE SOME TIME FOR US TO GET EVERYTHING DONE THAT WE NEED TO DO.

NOW, I WILL JUST BE HONEST. I THINK THAT THIS BILL ACTUALLY WILL HELP A LOT

OF PEOPLE WITH THEIR RENT. NOW, IT MAY NOT HELP THE EXACT SAME PEOPLE

THAT SOME OF THE -- MY COLLEAGUES ARE TALKING ABOUT, BUT THERE ARE OTHER

100

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

NEW YORKERS IN THE STATE WHO NEED HELP AND NEED SUPPORT. I THINK

THEY WILL GET IT. I BELIEVE THEY WILL GET IT. I KNOW THAT IT WILL MAKE A

DIFFERENCE TO -- JUST LIKE NEW YORK IS HURTING, SO ARE LOCAL

GOVERNMENTS. NOT JUST COUNTY GOVERNMENTS, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS,

VILLAGE GOVERNMENTS, TOWN GOVERNMENTS. THIS IS THE WAY THEY COLLECT

RESOURCES, JUST LIKE THE WAY WE COLLECT RESOURCES, THROUGH TAXES. AND

WHEN TENANTS CAN PAY RENT, LANDLORDS CAN PAY PROPERTY TAX. SO THERE IS

A CYCLE THAT GOES ON HERE THAT'S, IF YOU WILL, A CYCLE OF LIFE THAT THIS

BELONGS TO EVERY NEW YORKER. SO I -- I EMPATHIZE. IN FACT, MY HEART IS

BREAKING FOR -- BECAUSE I HEAR THE PAIN IN PEOPLE'S VOICES WHEN THEY'RE

TALKING ABOUT THIS NOT BEING ENOUGH, BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S NOT ENOUGH.

IT'S -- IT'S NOT ENOUGH. BUT IT IS WHAT WE HAVE TODAY, AND I BELIEVE WITH

ALL OF MY HEART THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET THE REST DONE THAT WE NEED TO DO.

NOW, I KEEP HEARING THIS -- THIS THOUGHT ABOUT WAITING

ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. FIVE HUNDRED BILLION IS A LOT OF MONEY

THAT'S SPENT THAT WE ALREADY GOT FOR COVID ISSUES. THAT'S A LOT OF

MONEY. BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN WITH THOSE

DOLLARS AS WELL. THAT'S NOT TO TAKE ANYTHING AWAY FROM A TENANT WHO

NEEDS TO PAY RENT, OR ANYTHING AWAY FROM ANYONE ELSE. BUT THAT IS TO

SAY THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE A LOT OF NEEDS, AND I TRUST AND

BELIEVE THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET THEM DONE.

SO, MR. SPEAKER, I'M GOING TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS

BILL. AND I'M JUST GOING TO ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO DO ONE THING AS THEY

EXPLAIN THEIR VOTE AND AS THEY TAKE THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE NO IF THEY CHOOSE

TO: SPEAK TO THE BILL, NOT THE PROCESS. BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE DON'T

101

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

LIKE THE PROCESS, BUT THAT DOESN'T -- WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE AND

APPROVING HERE IS A BILL, NOT THE PROCESS. THE PROCESS IS NOT GOING TO

CHANGE. THERE'S STILL GOING TO BE A SPEAKER. THERE'S STILL GOING TO BE

THOSE COMMITTEES.

SO, MR. SPEAKER, I'M GOING TO BE VOTING IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE AND I'M GOING TO ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO DO LIKEWISE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. GRIFFIN.

MS. GRIFFIN: OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR

PERMITTING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I COMMEND THE SPONSOR OF THE -- OF

THIS BILL BECAUSE IT IS A GREAT START AT ADDRESSING THE RENT BURDEN BY

PROVIDING A LEVEL OF RELIEF TO SOME NEW YORK STATE TENANTS. THIS BILL

MAKES THE TENANTS AND LANDLORDS WHO QUALIFY WHOLE, WHICH WILL HAVE A

POSITIVE IMPACT ON MUNICIPALITIES. WE HAVE A FUNDING SOURCE FROM THE

FEDERAL CARES ACT, SO THERE IS NO BURDEN TO THE NEW YORK STATE

TAXPAYER.

IN THE FUTURE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US EXPAND THIS

PROGRAM TO HELP MORE PEOPLE IN FISCAL DISTRESS, BUT FOR NOW IT'S A GREAT

START AND I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. GRIFFIN IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. BICHOTTE.

MS. BICHOTTE: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR

ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. THIS BILL WILL PROVIDE VOUCHERS TO

102

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

LANDLORDS ON BEHALF OF TENANTS WHO LOST INCOME AS A RESULT OF THE

PANDEMIC. IT IS -- TO QUALIFY, TENANTS MUST EARN BELOW 80 PERCENT OF

THE AMI, WHILE PAYING MORE THAN 30 PERCENT OF THAT INCOME IN RENT

PRIOR TO MARCH 7TH. THE BILL WOULD PROVIDE ASSISTANCE BETWEEN APRIL 1

THROUGH JULY 31ST, AND WOULD BE FUNDED BY $100 MILLION ALLOCATED TO

THE STATE FROM THE FEDERAL CARES ACT.

NOW, MR. SPEAKER, MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES BELIEVE

THIS LEGISLATION DOES NOT GO FAR, AND I AGREE. THE NUMBER OF NEW

YORKERS WHO CAN'T PAY RENT IS GOING UP AND IT WILL ONLY CONTINUE TO

RISE. HOWEVER, MR. SPEAKER, MORE THAN ONE IN FIVE NEW YORKERS WILL

LOSE -- WILL LOSE THEIR JOBS BY THE END OF JUNE. NEARLY 40 PERCENT OF

NEW YORKERS HAVE SAID THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO MAKE RENT NEXT MONTH.

AND MORE THAN A QUARTER OF THEM DID NOT PAY RENT LAST MONTH. THIS BILL

DOES NOT PROVIDE ENOUGH MONEY. WE ALL KNOW THAT. AND IT DOESN'T

COVER ENOUGH PEOPLE. WE ALL KNOW THAT, TOO. BUT IT IS A STEP TOWARDS

PROVIDING RELIEF TO SOME PEOPLE IN THE IMMEDIATE TERM. AND WHEN WE

THINK ABOUT THIS, WE CAN EITHER DO NOTHING OR DO SOMETHING. WE HAVE

DEBATED OVER A NUMBER OF RELIEF BILLS. MORTGAGE FORBEARANCE. PEOPLE

HAD ISSUES WITH THAT. EVICTION MORATORIUM. PEOPLE HAD ISSUE WITH

THAT. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE ISSUE WITH EVERYTHING. AT THE END OF

THE DAY WE ALL NEED HELP.

AND LASTLY, I WANT TO SAY THE SPONSOR OF BILL IN THE

ASSEMBLY AND THE SENATE ARE TENANT ADVOCATE MEMBERS. THEY WOULD

NOT HAVE SPONSORED A BILL THAT WOULD BE SOLELY BAILING OUT LANDLORDS

AND NOT HELPING TENANTS. WE ALL NEED HELP. THIS IS -- THIS MONEY IS NOT

103

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

A LOAN. THIS -- THE TENANT WILL NOT HAVE TO PAY BACK. AND YOU COULD

THINK OF IT AS LIKE SECTION 8, KIND OF. WE NEED TO HELP EVERYONE. AND

I AGREE, WE NEED TO GO FURTHER.

SO AT THIS POINT I WILL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE,

HOPING THAT WE WILL HAVE OTHER BILLS TO GO FURTHER TO HELP MORE NEW

YORKERS. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU. MS.

BICHOTTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. DE LA ROSA.

MS. DE LA ROSA: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR THE

OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. THE (UNINTELLIGIBLE) DISPLACEMENT HAS

BEEN REAL IN MANY OF OUR COMMUNITIES BEFORE THE PANDEMIC HIT. BUT

NOW THAT THE PANDEMIC IS HERE, THAT (UNINTELLIGIBLE) DISPLACEMENT

MEANS THAT AN EVICTION BECOMES -- HOMELESSNESS BECOMES DEATH

BECAUSE OF COVID-19. WHILE THIS BILL ATTEMPTS TO BRING SOME RELIEF, I

BELIEVE THAT IT'S INADEQUATE. I BELIEVE THAT $100 MILLION SPLIT IN THE

WAY THAT THIS BILL DOES LEAVES OUT UNDOCUMENTED AND OTHER

NONTRADITIONAL EMPLOYEES LIKE GIG WORKERS WHO DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY

TO ACCESS ANY OTHER TYPES OF FINANCIAL RELIEF. THIS BILL ONLY PUTS A

BANDAGE ON THE RENT BURDEN PROBLEM. WHEN WE SAY THAT THIS BILL

MAINTAINS THE RENT BURDEN, A BURDEN MEANS THAT SOMETHING IS HEAVY

AND IT WEIGHS DOWN OUR PEOPLE. AND SO BECAUSE IT IS A BURDEN ON

THEM, WE MUST DO MORE IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO

SURVIVE AND THRIVE IN THIS TIME OF CRISIS.

I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE ISSUES THAT HAVE EXISTED AROUND

104

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AMI ARE NOT APPROPRIATELY ADDRESSED IN THIS BILL. AND WHILE I LOOK

FORWARD TO COMING BACK INTO SESSION TO ADDRESS A BILL THAT WILL TAKE

INTO CONSIDERATION THE PLIGHT OF THOSE WHO ARE HOMELESS ON OUR STREETS

RIGHT NOW AND THOSE WHO WILL BECOME HOMELESS, I ALSO KNOW THAT WE

MUST CONTINUE TO PUSH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. BUT WE HAVE THE

AUTHORITY AND THE RESPONSIBILITY TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE CONSTITUENTS

WHO HAVE SENT US TO ALBANY. I ALSO LOOK FORWARD TO PUTTING FORWARD A

PACKAGE THAT ALSO TAKES ACCOUNT COMMERCIAL RENTS FOR SMALL BUSINESSES,

AND WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT MORE MUST BE DONE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS

EQUITY IN THE WAY THAT THESE FORMULAS ARE CALCULATED, THE WAY THAT THE

LEGISLATION HAS BEEN DRAFTED, AND THE WAY THAT THE RELIEF WILL CONTINUE

TO COME INTO OUR COMMUNITIES.

I VOTE NO ON THIS BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. DE LA ROSA IN

THE NEGATIVE.

MS. RICHARDSON.

MS. RICHARDSON: MR. SPEAKER, I THANK YOU FOR

ACKNOWLEDGING ME. I COME TO YOU LIVE FROM THE 43RD ASSEMBLY

DISTRICT, GROUND ZERO FOR COVID-19 RIGHT NOW, WHEREAS TWO OF THE

TOP TEN ZIP CODES DIRECTLY IMPACT THE CONSTITUENCY THAT I REPRESENT AND

LIVE AMONGST. AND AS WE ARE NOW HERE TALKING ABOUT THIS HOUSING BILL,

MR. SPEAKER, I HAVE BEEN IN TURMOIL FOR THE LAST FEW WEEKS AS WE HAVE

GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO NEGOTIATE THE DIFFERENT POINTS OF

THIS BILL. NOW, I'VE HEARD MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES SPEAK TODAY, AND I

WANT TO PUT IT ON THE RECORD TO ALL MY COLLEAGUES WHO KNOW ME AND THE

105

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WHO KNOW ME, WHOM MY REPUTATION SPEAKS

LOUDER THAN MY VOICE THAT I'VE ALWAYS BEEN TO THE FOREFRONT OF THE

TENANT MOVEMENT. EVERYONE KNOWS THE WORK THAT WE PUT IN LAST YEAR

AND IN '15 BEFORE SOME PEOPLE EVEN SPOKE TODAY WAS ELECTED. AND,

MR. SPEAKER, I HAVE TO STAND FIRMLY FOR THIS BILL TODAY. BECAUSE IN THE

MIDDLE OF A PANDEMIC WHILE WE ARE -- WHILE EVERYBODY HAS BEEN

ROCKED, YOU CAN'T TELL ME THAT AID TO SOME BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GET TO ALL

IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. MR. SPEAKER, I WANT TO SAY ON THE RECORD THAT THIS

BILL IS JUST A FIRST STEP IN SEVERAL STEPS THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE, BECAUSE

THERE'S DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATIONS OF RENTERS. THERE'S DIFFERENT

CLASSIFICATIONS OF WHAT HOMEOWNERSHIP LOOKS LIKE, WHETHER YOU'RE A

RENTER, WHETHER YOU'RE A HOMEOWNER OR EVEN A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER.

BECAUSE AS THE MAJORITY LEADER SAID IT TODAY, THIS IS A DOMINO EFFECT.

AND SO I HAVE COMMUNICATED TO THE TENANTS' MOVEMENT, AND I HOPE

THAT THEY'RE LISTENING HERE LOUD AND CLEAR. CANCEL RENT WITH A FAILING

CAMPAIGN. YOU CAN'T JUST SAY THAT WHEN RENT IS A DOMINO EFFECT OF SO

MANY THINGS, SO MANY OTHER THINGS.

AND SO I'LL BE VERY FAST, MR. SPEAKER, BECAUSE I HEARD

THE BUZZER GOING. WHILE MILLIONS NOT -- MAY NOT BE ASSISTED,

THOUSANDS WILL. AND I'M COMMITTED TO COMING BACK, WHETHER IT IS IN

30 DAYS, 60 DAYS, 90 DAYS OR 180 DAYS. WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET IT

DONE. WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN COMMITTED AS THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE, AND I

KNOW WE REMAIN THERE. I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. I'M DONE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MS.

RICHARDSON. WE APPRECIATE IT.

106

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. TAYLOR.

MR. TAYLOR: MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU. GOOD

AFTERNOON, COLLEAGUES. THANK YOU. A LOT HAS BEEN SAID, EXCEPT FOR I

HAVEN'T SAID IT. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS THE LEGISLATION THAT -- THIS BILL

THAT -- IT HAS EVERYTHING THAT I WANT. IT'S NOT THE PERFECT. SO WHILE IT'S

NOT, I WANT -- LET ME -- FOR THE RECORD, I WILL BE VOTING IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE FOR THIS BILL, BUT I THINK THERE'S MORE THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE

AND I THINK EVERYBODY ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE KNOW THAT WE NEED TO

HAVE RELIEF ACROSS THE BOARD. I GOT HDFCS, I'VE GOT MITCHELL-LAMA.

THERE ARE A LOT OF FOLKS -- I JUST WANT TO ECHO SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES.

WE NEED TO DO THIS. IT'S NOT EVERYTHING, BUT IT'S A START. AND I TRUST THAT

WE WILL COMPLETE WHAT WE STARTED BY MAKING SURE THAT WE MEET THE

NEEDS OF EVERYONE, AND THIS IS JUST THE START.

SO, THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR ALLOWING ME TO

SPEAK.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MS. REYES.

MS. REYES: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I BRIEFLY

WANT TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. AND I THINK I WANT TO ALSO ECHO THE

SENTIMENTS OF MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES. I -- I -- AS A MEMBER OF THE

HOUSING COMMITTEE, I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED IN THE PROCESS TODAY. AND

I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS SO MUCH MORE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE. I

REPRESENT PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT JUST RENT-BURDENED, BUT WHO ARE

MORTGAGE-BURDENED AND WHO ARE MAINTENANCE-BURDENED. AND NOT

EVERYBODY WHO HOLDS A MORTGAGE IS A LANDLORD. AND UNFORTUNATELY,

107

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

HUGE SWAPS OF OUR COMMUNITY WILL NOT BE AFFECTED OR BENEFIT FROM THIS

-- FROM THIS BILL. AND, YES, WE SHOULD BE DOING ALL WE CAN. BUT I

BELIEVE THAT WE COULD BE DOING MORE, AND UNFORTUNATELY, THIS BILL IS NOT

IT.

SO I WILL HAVE TO BE VOTING -- VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. REYES IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. DAVILA.

MS. DAVILA: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR

ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. FIRSTLY, I AGREE WITH ALL OF MY

COLLEAGUES. I DO BELIEVE THAT $100 MILLION IS NOT ENOUGH. I DON'T THINK

THERE'S AN AMOUNT OF MONEY ENOUGH AT THIS POINT TO DEAL WITH THIS

PANDEMIC, BUT NEVERTHELESS, WE ARE. THIS $100 MILLION MAY NOT BE

ENOUGH, BUT AT LEAST IT'S SOMETHING. AND LET ME REMIND PEOPLE ABOUT

SOMETHING. IN 1977 IN MY DISTRICT WHEN THE LANDLORDS GOT DESPERATE

BECAUSE THERE WAS A BLACKOUT, WE LOST OVER 600 BUILDINGS, 600

BUILDINGS DUE TO FIRES. NOW, YOU KNOW THAT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN A

MISTAKE. WHY? BECAUSE LANDLORDS WERE NOT GETTING THEIR RENT. NO, WE

ARE NOT DOING ENOUGH. WE'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. AND WE -- AND I AM

HOPING AND LOOKING FORWARD TO COMING BACK, WORKING WITH MY

COLLEAGUES TO BE ABLE TO DO MORE THAN WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW.

AND BELIEVE ME, I'M NOT HAPPY WITH WHAT IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW. BUT

IT'S -- IT'S THE ONLY THING WE HAVE AT THE MOMENT. AND AS LEGISLATORS, WE

MUST INSIST AND COME BACK AND FIGHT THE REAL FIGHT. THIS $100 MILLION

108

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

IS TEMPORARY, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT. WE HAVE TO

STICK TOGETHER, AND WE HAVE TO FIGHT FOR MORE MONEY AND MORE RELIEF

FOR -- FOR ALL THOSE TENANTS. BUT I WOULD BE REMISS IF I WOULDN'T

MENTION ALL OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE NOT-FOR-PROFITS THAT DO RUN

AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF UNITS. THOSE PEOPLE

ALSO HAVE LOST THEIR JOBS. THOSE PEOPLE ARE ALSO SUFFERING. THIS WHOLE

CITY IS SUFFERING, AND THIS IS WHY I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: MS. DAVILA IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. ORTIZ.

(PAUSE)

MR. ORTIZ?

MR. ORTIZ: CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: YES, WE CAN.

MR. ORTIZ: CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: YES.

MR. ORTIZ: MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING

ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. WE DIDN'T ASK -- WE DIDN'T ASK-- WE DIDN'T ASK

FOR THE PANDEMIC, THE PANDEMIC CAME TO US. THIS IS A DIFFERENT TIME.

THIS IS VERY -- A LOT OF UNCERTAINTIES HAPPENING. BUT WE MUST CONTINUE

TO PUT PRESSURE TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WILL BE

ABLE TO GET THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES THAT WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO HAVE OUR

STATE MOVING FORWARD. WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE TODAY IS TO ENSURE THAT

WE WILL BE ABLE TO -- TO PROTECT SOME OF THE TENANTS, SOME OF THE

TENANTS THAT NEED THE -- THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES IN ORDER FOR THEM TO

109

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD.

MR. SPEAKER, I LEAVE YOU WITH THIS, AND I QUOTE:

"DON'T LET THE PERFECT BE THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD." AND I CLOSE QUOTE

AND I'M VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: MR. ORTIZ IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. COLTON TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. COLTON: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR GIVING

ME THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I WANT TO SAY FIRST OF ALL THAT,

CLEARLY, THIS BILL DOES NOT SOLVE THE CRISIS WHICH EXISTS BOTH FOR TENANTS

AND SMALL HOMEOWNERS. THE REAL SOLUTION TO THAT CRITICAL CRISIS WHICH

MAY RESULT IN NUMEROUS EVICTIONS AND HOMELESSNESS AS WELL AS LOSS OF

-- FORECLOSURES WHICH WILL BECOME A RESULT OF THE LACK OF THE ABILITY TO

PAY MORTGAGES AND TAXES, THAT REAL SOLUTION HAS TO BE FOUND. AND IN

ORDER TO DO THAT, WE HAVE TO TAKE A FIRST STEP. THIS FIRST STEP IS FAR SHORT

OF SOLVING THE PROBLEM, BUT IT IS A FIRST STEP, AND THEREFORE, I WILL VOTE

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE FOR THIS BILL BECAUSE IT IS A FIRST STEP. BUT WE MUST

COME BACK. WE MUST FIND A SOLUTION THAT WILL SOLVE THE NEEDS OF OUR

TENANTS, OUR SMALL HOMEOWNERS AND SO MANY PEOPLE WHO ARE AFFECTED

BY THIS PANDEMIC. AND WE MUST DO THAT, AND WE MUST FIND ONE THAT

BASICALLY HELPS PEOPLE TO SURVIVE IN A VERY SERIOUS SITUATION.

SO, MR. SPEAKER, I DO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE ON THIS

BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: MR. COLTON IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

110

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. EPSTEIN TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. EPSTEIN: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I RISE TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. THE CONSTITUTION SAYS YOU CAN'T DO A TAKING WITHOUT

JUST COMPENSATION. JUST COMPENSATION DOESN'T MEAN FULL

COMPENSATION, IT MEANS JUST COMPENSATION. SO THE QUESTION WE HAVE

HERE DURING THIS GLOBAL PANDEMIC IS WE'RE TELLING PEOPLE THEY NEED TO

TIGHTEN THEIR BELT. EVERYONE NEEDS TO TIGHTEN THEIR BELT. THIS BILL

DOESN'T TIGHTEN THE LANDLORDS' BELT AT ALL. ALL WE'RE SAYING TO THE TENANTS

IS, WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU ASSISTANCE AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY

A SHARE, THE GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO PAY A SHARE, LANDLORDS ARE GOING

TO BE KEPT WHOLE. I THINK THERE'S A BETTER WAY. I KNOW THERE'S A BETTER

WAY. I KNOW WE CAN DO MORE FOR OUR TENANTS, OUR SMALL BUSINESSES AND

OUR COMMUNITY. I DON'T THINK THIS BILL DOES IT.

I'M VOTING -- I'M GOING TO BE OPPOSED TO THIS BILL, AND

I ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE AGAINST IT AS WELL. THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. EPSTEIN IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. PERRY.

MR. PERRY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR THE

OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. MR. SPEAKER, THIS PROBLEM IS A HUGE

FIRE. IT'S BURNING DOWN THE HOUSE AND THREATENING TO DESTROY THE WHOLE

BLOCK. WE CAN EITHER LET IT BURN -- DO WE LET IT BURN OR TRY AND CONTAIN

IT? THIS BILL POURS WATER ON THE FIRE, BUT NOT ENOUGH TO EXTINGUISH IT.

THIS BILL PROVIDES SOME HELP, EVEN THOUGH IT'S INADEQUATE. IT THROWS

111

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SOME WATER ON THE FIRE TO SAVE US FOR ANOTHER DAY. THAT'S WHY I'M

VOTING YES, BECAUSE IT'S BETTER TO CONTAIN THE FIRE AND GIVE US TIME TO

COME UP WITH OUR OWN REMEDY. I PROPOSE WE VISIT THAT $16 BILLION BAG

OF UNCLAIMED FUNDS THAT SIT IN SOME PLACE IN ALBANY. THAT MONEY WE

COULD USE TO FASHION OUR OWN RESPONSE AS NEW YORKERS. AND EVEN

PROVIDE SOME -- SOME HELP FOR SMALL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE WE

ADDRESS THE BIG PROBLEM OF OUR TENANTS.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I WITHDRAW MY REQUEST AND I VOTE YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. PERRY IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. BARRON.

MR. BARRON: TO MY COLLEAGUES, THOSE OF YOU WHO

SAID, "AT LEAST THIS IS SOMETHING," THOSE OF YOU WHO LIVE IN BLACK AND

BROWN NEIGHBORHOODS WITH AN INCOME LOWER THAN 80 PERCENT, LOWER

THAN -- YOU'RE NOT GETTING ANYTHING. YOU'RE PUTTING OUR PEOPLE IN

DANGER. AT THE END OF THE FOUR MONTHS, YOU MUST UNDERSTAND THEY CAN

EVICT THESE TENANTS. NOBODY WHO'S BROKE IS GOING TO TAKE MOST OF THEIR

SALARY TO PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE OF THE RENT. THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN DEBT TO

THE LANDLORD AFTER FOUR MONTHS, AND THE LANDLORD CAN EVICT THEM

BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING IN THIS BILL TO STOP THAT. THE LANDLORD COULD

EVEN RAISE THEIR BILL. THIS IS NOT A FIRST STEP. IT'S A STEP BACKWARD. IT'S

NOT POURING WATER ON THE FIRE. YOU'RE POURING GASOLINE ON THE FIRE.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN WORSE SHAPE AFTERWARDS BECAUSE THEY CAN RAISE

THE RENT, THEY CAN EVICT THEM. THE AMI IS TOO HIGH. AND IF THE

112

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

GOVERNOR HAD $5 BILLION -- LISTEN, Y'ALL, HE HAD $5 BILLION AND HE

OFFERED YOU $39 MILLION. WHAT DO YOU THINK HE'S GOING TO DO IF THEY

GET $10 BILLION IN THE END OF JUNE FROM THE FEDS? HE OFFERED YOU $39

MILLION OUT OF $5 BILLION, AND ONLY GIVING YOU $100 MILLION FOR THIS.

THIS PROGRAM IS IT. WE ALWAYS SAY WE CAN DO BETTER. THIS IS IT. WE

SHOULD HAVE DONE IT NOW, AND COULD HAVE. YOUR TENANTS ARE GOING TO

BE HURT. YOU'LL SEE. AND, YOU KNOW, I -- I NEVER WANTED TO BE MORE

WRONG ON AN ISSUE THAN THIS. BUT THEY'RE GOING TO BE HURT. YOU'RE

KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. THEY'RE GOING TO BE HURT DOWN THE

ROAD, EVEN IF IT SEEMS TO BE SOME IMMEDIATE RELIEF. STOP SAYING IT'S ALL

WE CAN GET, BUT IT'S A LITTLE SOMETHING. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A LITTLE

SOMETHING HAD WE DONE $500 MILLION AND PROTECT THEM FROM BEING

EVICTED, SAY DON'T RAISE THE RENT AND BROUGHT THE AMI DOWN. THAT

WOULD HAVE BEEN A LITTLE SOMETHING, AND THAT --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: HOW DO YOU VOTE,

MR. BARRON?

MR. BARRON: IN THE NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. BARRON IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. WRIGHT.

MS. WRIGHT: THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. THIS -- AND I ALSO WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO MY

COLLEAGUE FOR REMINDING US WHAT HAPPENS IN COMMUNITIES WHEN THERE

IS DIVESTMENT FROM THE MAINTENANCE AND CARE OF THE BUILDINGS. THIS IS

JUST A START. IT'S ONE WAY THAT WE'RE PROVIDING RELIEF TO TENANTS

113

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THROUGHOUT THE STATE. IT'S NOT PERFECT. IT WILL ASSIST A NUMBER OF

TENANTS. MANY OF THEM ARE WORKING-CLASS TENANTS. IT WILL HOLD SOME

PEOPLE OVER UNTIL WE GET ADDITIONAL REVENUE. IT WILL MEET THE NEEDS OF

SOME. IT WILL SUPPORT -- SO THEREFORE, I WILL SUPPORT THIS AND OTHER

INITIATIVES THAT HELP US TO STABILIZE OUR COMMUNITIES. IT PROVIDES SOME

RENT RELIEF. IT PROVIDES A LITTLE BIT OF MORTGAGE RELIEF. AND IT PROVIDES A

LITTLE BIT OF TAX, SEWER AND UTILITY RELIEF, BECAUSE WE KNOW A LOT OF

HOMES WILL BE LOST DUE TO THOSE COSTS. I ACKNOWLEDGE, AND THIS -- THIS

BILL ACKNOWLEDGES THAT WE ALL NEED HELP. THIS IS A FIRST STEP. AND

WHILE MORE REMAINS TO BE DONE, I KNOW THAT I MUST AMPLIFY THE VOICE

OF MY COLLEAGUES. WE WILL PROVIDE THE HELP TO SOME WHILE WE REMAIN

COMMITTED TO FINDING RELIEF FOR ALL.

I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WRIGHT IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. FALL.

MR. FALL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR YOUR

LEADERSHIP. AND THANK YOU TO THE SPONSOR FOR CARRYING THIS VERY

IMPORTANT BILL. ONE OF THE E-MAILS I RECEIVE EVERY SINGLE DAY FROM

CONSTITUENTS IS THOSE THAT ARE HURTING BECAUSE THEY LOST THEIR JOBS AS A

RESULT OF COVID-19. AND WHAT WE'RE DOING WHAT THIS BILL IS WE'RE

HELPING THOSE VERY PEOPLE OUT. YOU KNOW, WHILE THIS IS NOT THE CR�ME

DE LA CR�ME OF -- OF RENT PACKAGES, BUT THIS IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT

DIRECTION AND I'M VERY OPTIMISTIC THAT WE WILL COME BACK AND WE WILL

DO MORE FOR THOSE THAT ARE STILL IN NEED.

114

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

I WITHDRAW MY REQUEST AND VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. FALL IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. BLAKE.

MR. BLAKE: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER AND

COLLEAGUES. FIRST AND FOREMOST, I -- I HOPE THAT EVERYONE IS DOING AS

WELL AS YOU CAN. IF YOU ARE LIKE ME AND YOU'RE A BLACK MAN IN THE

COUNTRY RIGHT NOW, YOU ARE NOT DOING WELL. AND SO MY PRAYERS ARE

WITH EACH OF YOU. YOU KNOW, MR. SPEAKER, I -- I REPRESENT THE

SECOND-POOREST DISTRICT IN NEW YORK STATE ACCORDING TO MEDIAN

INCOME. A DISTRICT WHERE WE'VE SEEN SO MUCH PAIN AND CHALLENGE.

WHERE MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS ARE LOOKING FOR US TO PROVIDE POLICY

SOLUTIONS. AND WE -- WE'VE BEEN WAITING ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

TO PROVIDE MORE HELP, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO HOUSING. ESPECIALLY

WHEN IT COMES TO RESOURCES FOR OUR SMALL BUSINESSES AND OTHERS, AND

SCHOOLS. AND WHILE THIS IS NOT THE PERFECT SOLUTION, THE LEVEL OF PAIN I

HAVE SEEN IN MY COMMUNITY IS SOMETHING I'VE NEVER SEEN BEFORE. THE

AMOUNT OF TEARS BY PEOPLE THAT JUST WANT SOME KIND OF HELP WHEN IT

COMES TO RENT RELIEF HAS BEEN DEVASTATING, AND -- AND WE NEED TO GO

FURTHER. WE HAVE TO GO DEEPER. THIS CANNOT BE OUR ONLY BILL. BUT I

CAN'T LET (UNINTELLIGIBLE) IN THIS MOMENT, AND WHEN I'M WATCHING -- YOU

ALL KNOW I'VE BEEN ABLE TO TAKE COURAGEOUS, DIFFICULT STANDS BEFORE.

BUT OUR PEOPLE ARE WAITING FOR SOMETHING. AND I -- AND I DON'T THINK IN

THIS MOMENT WHEN HOUSING IS THE MOST CRITICAL CONCERN FOR SO MANY OF

OUR COMMUNITIES WHO ARE STRUGGLING, HAVING NO IDEA HOW THEY'RE GOING

115

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

TO MAKE IT DAY TO DAY, WE NEED TO DO THE WORK HERE IN THE ASSEMBLY.

SO, I WILL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE ON THIS BILL,

RECOGNIZING THAT THERE ARE MORE CHANGES I WANT TO SEE HAPPEN HERE.

THIS IS A MOMENT FOR US TO DO MORE. AND IF MAYBE WE COULD GIVE

PEOPLE SOME PEACE IN THE MIDST OF ABSOLUTE CHAOS THAT IS HAPPENING IN

THE STREETS, IF WE CAN HELP YOU AT LEAST HAVE SOME PEACE WITH YOUR

HOME, MAYBE WE SHOULD GIVE THEM THAT FOR NOW. I WILL BE VOTING IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. BLAKE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, IN ADDITION

TO OUR COLLEAGUES WHO ARE ALREADY ON THE BOARD AS A NO, WE WOULD LIKE

TO ADD MR. RODRIGUEZ AS WELL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. IN ADDITION

TO THE INDIVIDUALS ON THE BOARD RIGHT NOW WE HAVE MR. DIPIETRO AND

MR. ASHBY WHO WISH TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU BOTH.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, WE'RE

116

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

GOING TO GO, CONTINUE WITH OUR DEBATE LIST AND WE'RE GOING TO GO TO

RULES REPORT NO. 29 BY MR. STERN, FOLLOWED BY RULES REPORT NO. 45

BY MR. LENTOL, AND THEN ONTO PAGE 5, MR. SPEAKER, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE

UP RULES REPORT NO. 50 BY MR. AUBRY, AND RULES REPORT NO. 54 BY

MR. MOSLEY. IN THAT ORDER, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: PAGE 5 [SIC], RULES

REPORT NO. 29, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A10252-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 29, STERN, BICHOTTE, DENDEKKER, BLAKE, COLTON, LUPARDO,

ZEBROWSKI, MALLIOTAKIS, SEAWRIGHT, EPSTEIN, GRIFFIN, ORTIZ. AN ACT TO

AMEND THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO SPECIAL DEFERMENTS

AND INSTALLMENT PAYMENTS DURING THE COVID-19 STATE OF EMERGENCY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: AN EXPLANATION IS

REQUESTED. OH, I'M SORRY THERE IS A SUB. ON A MOTION BY MR. STERN, THE

SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.

MR. GOODELL.

AN EXPLANATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED, MR. STERN.

MR. STERN: YES, MR. SPEAKER. THIS AMENDS

ARTICLE 19-A OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW, CREATING A NEW SECTION

1910, COVID-19 STATE OF EMERGENCY INITIATIVE THAT WOULD PROVIDE

MUCH NEEDED RELIEF FOR HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS DURING THIS

VERY CHALLENGING TIME. IT WOULD ALLOW LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THE OPTION OF

DEFERRING THE DUE DATE FOR PROPERTY TAXES. AND THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO

DO IT IN ONE OF TWO WAYS: THEY CAN PUSHBACK THE DATE, THE DATE OF

THEIR CHOOSING, WITHIN AN ALLOWABLE TIME PERIOD. THEY CAN ALSO CREATE

117

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AN INSTALLMENT PLAN, ALSO WITHIN AN ALLOWABLE TIME PERIOD. THAT WOULD

BE AT THE OPTION OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. AND IMPORTANT TO NOTE, MR.

SPEAKER, THAT THIS WOULD BE AN AUTHORITY GRANTED TO THE LOCAL

MUNICIPALITY TO OPT IN WITHIN THEIR OWN DISCRETION BASED ON THE FACTS

AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS THEY ARE DEALING WITH ON THEIR OWN, IN THEIR OWN

LOCALITY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. RA.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SIR, WILL YOU YIELD?

MR. STERN: I DO.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MR. STERN. GOOD TO SEE YOU.

MR. STERN: YOU TOO.

MR. RA: HOPE YOU AND YOUR WHOLE FAMILY ARE

HEALTHY AND WELL. I JUST HAD A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, AND I'M SURE

YOU'RE WELL AWARE, YOU KNOW, BEING IN -- IN NEIGHBORING COUNTIES, THIS

HAS BEEN AN ISSUE THAT I KNOW HAD STARTED GETTING TALKED ABOUT ON -- ON

LONG ISLAND IN MARCH, AND I -- AND I ACTUALLY LEARNED A LOT ABOUT SOME

OF THE PROCEDURES IN SUFFOLK, SPEAKING TO SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES,

BECAUSE WE WERE COMING UP ON OUR DEADLINE SOONER FOR -- FOR A TAX

PAYMENT, AND THEN I STARTED TO LEARN ABOUT HOW, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT

COUNTIES HAVE TAX ACTS AND ALL THAT OTHER STUFF. SO -- SO, I HAVE NO

DOUBT THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF EFFORT REQUIRED TO TRY TO COME UP WITH

SOMETHING HERE THAT WOULD WORK, YOU KNOW, ACROSS THE BOARD IN NEW

YORK STATE.

118

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

BUT I DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS, JUST IN TERMS OF -- OF

HOW THIS WILL WORK. AS YOU'RE AWARE, YOU KNOW, THERE WILL BE A

MUNICIPALITY THAT IS RECEIVING TAXES AND THEN THEY DISPERSE THE TAX

PAYMENTS TO THE -- THE OTHER ENTITIES, YOU KNOW, AND EVERYTHING FROM

THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS, TO TOWNS, VILLAGES, FIRE DISTRICTS, YOU NAME IT. SO,

IF, YOU KNOW, ONE COMPONENT MUNICIPALITY WERE TO OPT IN TO THIS, I

MEAN, I GUESS STARTING FROM THE HIGHER LEVEL TO THE LOWER LEVEL, HOW

WOULD THAT WORK IF THERE WERE OTHER, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE TAKING IN A TAX

PAYMENT, SAY, THAT INCLUDES A NUMBER OF THOSE DIFFERENT SMALLER

MUNICIPALITIES, AND MAYBE ONE OR TWO HAVE OPTED IN AND OTHERS

HAVEN'T; HOW WOULD THAT WORK AND HOW DO WE DEAL WITH MAKING SURE

THE TAXPAYER UNDERSTANDS HOW THAT WORKS?

MR. STERN: WELL, I THINK YOU MAKE THE IMPORTANT

POINT AT THE BEGINNING OF YOUR REMARKS THAT THERE -- THERE CAN'T BE A

ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL HERE. THERE MIGHT BE, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS LEVELS OF

TAXING DISTRICTS IN ONE AREA THAT CHOOSES TO OPT IN, WHILE THERE ONLY

MIGHT BE A FEW IN ANOTHER PART OF THE STATE. SO, THERE WILL BE, IN

CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, AN AWFUL LOT OF COORDINATION BETWEEN THE

VARIOUS LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT.

LOOK, IF A LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT, A LOCAL MUNICIPALITY

CHOOSES TO OPT IN, THEN THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE THAT ONGOING

COMMUNICATION WITH TAX RECEIVERS AT THE TOWN LEVEL, OTHER TAXING

JURISDICTIONS MAYBE AT A HIGHER LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT, OR A LOWER LEVEL

OF GOVERNMENT, AN AWFUL LOT OF COORDINATION AND DISCUSSION. AND I

THINK IT'S ALSO GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT WHERE, BECAUSE THERE NEEDS

119

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

TO BE THAT COORDINATION BETWEEN THE VARIOUS LEVELS THAT, SURE, ONGOING

COMMUNICATION WITH PROPERTY TAXPAYERS IS GOING TO BE CRITICAL.

SO, IF THERE ARE LEVELS THAT OPT IN, BUT OTHERS DON'T,

THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE DISCUSSED AND THEN COMMUNICATED TO -- TO

TAXPAYERS, WHETHER THEY BE HOMEOWNERS OR PROPERTY OWNERS WHERE

BUSINESSES ARE BEING CARRIED ON. BUT, IT WOULD REALLY DEPEND ON THE

FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PARTICULAR LOCALITY.

MR. RA: OKAY, BUT -- SO THERE COULD BE, SAY, YOU

KNOW, A -- A TAX PAYMENT DUE BY -- BY AN INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYER, YOU

KNOW, AND IF THEY'RE GOING TO PAY THEIR TOWN RECEIVER OF TAXES AND, YOU

KNOW, MAYBE PART OF THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU GET YOUR TAX BILL AND

YOU HAVE THAT BREAKDOWN THAT SHOWS WHERE THE DIFFERENT AMOUNTS ARE

GOING. SO, THERE COULD BE ON THAT SAME TAX BILL, THOUGH, SOME ENTITIES

THAT HAVE -- HAVE OPTED IN TO THIS AND OTHERS THAT HAVE NOT, CORRECT?

MR. STERN: THAT'S RIGHT.

MR. RA: OKAY. AND ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT I KNOW

HAS COME UP, THEN, IS HOW THAT WORKS KIND OF IN THE HIERARCHY OF -- OF

PAYING. SO, SUPPOSE, YOU KNOW, A COUNTY, YOU KNOW, TAKES IN THEIR

MONEY OR WHOEVER, OR A TOWN, AND THEY HAVE TO PAY THESE OTHER

GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, IS IT, I MEAN, ARE THEY ABLE TO BREAK IT OUT IN THAT

WAY, JUST SAY, OKAY, THE FIRE DISTRICT OPTED IN SO WE JUST DON'T PAY THEM,

BUT THEY PAID US THE REST SO WE'RE GOING -- WE'RE GOING TO PAY OUT TO THE

SCHOOL DISTRICT, WE'RE GOING TO PAY OUT TO THE COUNTY, WE'RE GOING TO PAY

OUT TO THE VILLAGE.

MR. STERN: THAT IS POSSIBLE TO DO. AND SO, AGAIN,

120

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

IT'S THE VARIOUS TAXING DISTRICTS NEED TO COME TOGETHER TO -- TO WORK OUT

WHAT PROCEDURE IS GOING TO WORK BEST FOR THEM, BUT THAT COULD CERTAINLY

BE DONE.

MR. RA: OKAY. AND ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT I KNOW

CAME UP EARLY ON WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING WITH, YOU KNOW, LOCAL

GOVERNMENT ENTITIES AND REALLY WAS -- SPURRED THE NEED FOR STATE ACTION.

I KNOW SOME WAS DONE BY EXECUTIVE ORDER; FOR INSTANCE, THE -- THERE

WAS AN EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT ALLOWED OUR COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO EXTEND A

DATE. AND -- AND ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP INITIALLY WAS THAT

THERE WAS, PERHAPS, AN ABILITY TO EXTEND THE DATE, BUT NOT TO WAIVE

PENALTIES. SO, DOES THIS ADDRESS THAT AND ALLOW PENALTIES, AND, YOU

KNOW, ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE TO ALSO BE WAIVED IN ADDITION TO FORGOING

OR DELAYING REPAYMENT?

MR. STERN: IF A LOCALITY CHOOSES TO OPT IN AND THEY

PUSH THE DATE OUT, THEN IT PUSHES THE DATE OUT. AND SO, COME THE DUE

DATE, THE DUE DATE IS ULTIMATELY THE DUE DATE. AND SO, THEREAFTER,

PENALTIES AND INTEREST WOULD CERTAINLY STILL RUN, BUT UP UNTIL THAT TIME

DURING THIS PERIOD WHERE WE ARE RELIEVING SOME OF THE PRESSURE ON OUR

PROPERTY TAX TAXPAYERS, THERE WOULD BE NO PENALTIES, NO INTEREST

ACCRUING, AND THAT'S THE KEY HERE. AND, AS YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, IN OUR

AREA NOT ONLY IS THE TAX BILL SIGNIFICANT, BUT THE PENALTIES AND INTEREST

ARE QUITE SUBSTANTIAL, AS WELL. AND, AGAIN, THAT'S THE -- THE IMPORTANT

KEY HERE.

MR. RA: OKAY. AND THEN JUST IN TERMS OF -- NOW I

JUST WANT TO MOVE ON TO, YOU KNOW, SO THE ENTITY DECIDES, WHATEVER TAX

121

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ENTITY DECIDES TO OPT -- OPT IN TO THIS. NOW, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY

CAN DO -- IT CAN BE UP TO 120 DAYS. IS THERE -- I MEAN, IS THERE ANY

MINIMUM TIMEFRAME OR IS IT -- CAN THEY DO ANYTHING WITHIN THAT RANGE?

MR. STERN: THERE IS NO MINIMUM. THE MAXIMUM

IS OUT TO 120 DAYS AND, AGAIN, THAT CAN BE JUST PUSHED OUT TO A

MAXIMUM OF 120 DAYS, OR, OR A LOCALITY CAN COME UP WITH AN

INSTALLMENT PLAN DURING THAT TIME PERIOD THAT MIGHT WORK FOR THEM.

MAYBE IT WORKS FOR THEM, MAYBE IT DOESN'T WORK FOR OTHERS. BUT THAT IS

A MAXIMUM, NOT A MINIMUM. SO, A -- A LOCALITY MIGHT THINK THAT 45

DAYS IS MOST APPROPRIATE. ANOTHER MIGHT TAKE IT OUT TO 100 DAYS.

SOME MIGHT USE THE MAXIMUM OF 120. AGAIN, THE PURPOSE HERE WASN'T

JUST TO OFFER THE OPTION, BUT TO ALSO MAKE SURE THAT THAT

DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY IS IN THE HANDS OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SO

THAT THEY CAN BASE THEIR DECISION ON WHAT'S BEST FOR THEM.

MR. RA: YEAH, AND I -- I CERTAINLY CAN IMAGINE

GIVEN THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ALREADY KNOW WE HAVE DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE

STATE THAT ARE ON A DIFFERENT SCHEDULE WITH THE REOPENING PHASES AND ALL

OF THAT, SO -- SO PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, SOME AREA THAT'S CLOSER TO BEING

TRULY OPEN FOR BUSINESS, YOU KNOW, MIGHT WANT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A

SHORTER TIMEFRAME WHEREAS, YOU KNOW, DOWNSTATE, YOU KNOW, WHERE

WE'RE -- WHERE WE'RE A FEW WEEKS BEHIND, YOU KNOW, THE TIME PERIOD

MIGHT BE A LITTLE LONGER.

YOU MENTIONED THE INSTALLMENT PIECE OF THIS. SO, I --

THE -- THE CONCERN THAT, YOU KNOW, I HAVE HEARD WITH REGARD TO THAT, IN

PARTICULAR, SO WE -- WE TALKED A FEW MINUTES AGO ABOUT, YOU KNOW,

122

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WHAT HAPPENS IF A CERTAIN ENTITY WITHIN THAT TAX BILL SAYS THEY WANT TO

DEFER, AND THEN IT'S KIND OF OBVIOUS, OKAY, THEY'RE GOING TO -- THEY'RE

GOING TO WAIT TO GET THEIR MONEY. IF THEY DO A, YOU KNOW, DEFER ALL

THAT, OR INSTALLMENT AT -- AT, YOU KNOW, AT THE HIGHER LEVEL, IS THERE ANY

OBLIGATIONS THAT ARE TRIGGERED IN TERMS OF PAYING OUT TO THE LOWER

MUNICIPALITIES?

MR. STERN: I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A -- AN

OBLIGATION TO THEN PAY OUT IMMEDIATELY, BUT, AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE

SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE WORKED AMONG ALL OF THE VARIOUS LEVELS,

WHICH LEVEL IS TAKING IT IN AND WHAT KIND OF PROCESS THEY ARE GOING TO

BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH THEN TO GET IT BACK OUT. AND, OBVIOUSLY, THE

GOAL HERE IS TO TAKE IT IN AS QUICKLY AS THEY CAN IF THEY CHOOSE TO OPT IN,

AND TO GET IT OUT TO THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT AS QUICKLY AS

THEY CAN. AND I'M SURE THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE AN IMPORTANT POINT OF

CONVERSATION TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER PLAN THEY COME UP WITH THAT

IS APPROPRIATE FOR THAT PARTICULAR LOCALITY IS GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT

THERE'S A PLAN TO TAKE IT IN AND A PLAN TO GET IT OUT WHERE IT NEEDS TO GO.

MR. RA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. STERN.

MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. RA, ON THE BILL.

MR. RA: THANK YOU. THANK YOU, AGAIN, TO MY -- MY

COLLEAGUE, AND BEST TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY FOR CONTINUED GOOD HEALTH

AND SAFETY. THIS REALLY IS A VERY TRICKY ISSUE. YOU KNOW, FIRST AND

FOREMOST, ONE OF THE THEMES WE'VE HAD HERE THE LAST TWO DAYS IS -- IS

HOW DO WE PROVIDE RELIEF TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS STATE, AND WE'VE TRIED TO

123

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ENDEAVOR TO DO THAT IN MANY DIFFERENT WAYS, AND WE -- WE ALL KNOW

THAT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT WAS THE PREVIOUS BILL TO TRY TO HELP PEOPLE

WITH RENT PAYMENTS, WE DID ONE YESTERDAY REGARDING MORTGAGE, YOU

KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO FIND WAYS TO ASSIST THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE DURING

A VERY DIFFICULT AND TRYING TIME, AND AT A TIME WHEN A LOT OF PEOPLE

HAVE -- HAVE SUFFERED SEVERE ECONOMIC LOSS AS A RESULT OF ALL THIS, IN

ADDITION TO THE ABSOLUTELY DEVASTATING LOSS OF LIFE THAT WE'VE SEEN IN

THIS STATE. AND, YOU KNOW, IT -- IT'S HARD TO EVEN PUT INTO WORDS WHAT IT

MEANS TO A FAMILY WHEN THEY COMPOUND ONE OF THOSE WITH THE OTHER,

YOU KNOW, HAVE A -- HAVE A LOVED ONE - OR, IN MANY CASES, MULTIPLE

LOVED ONES WHO THEY'VE LOST AND ON TOP OF THAT, THEY'RE -- THEY'RE OUT OF

WORK, THEY'RE HAVING TROUBLE PAYING THEIR BILLS.

SO, I -- I THINK THAT TRYING TO FIND WAYS TO HELP IS AN

IMPORTANT THING. BUT, WE ALSO HAVE TO BE AWARE WITH REGARD TO OUR

LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, THEY ARE HAVING THE SAME TROUBLES THAT WE ARE AT

THE STATE LEVEL, AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS IN ONE OF THE EARLIER BILLS, WITH

THE BUSINESSES CLOSED, THEY'RE LOSING SALES TAX REVENUE, WHICH IS ONE OF

THE OTHER, YOU KNOW, MAJOR AREAS THEY GET INCOME IN. THEY'RE DEALING

WITH THOSE SAME CASH FLOW ISSUES THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH AT THE STATE

LEVEL. AND I KNOW ONE OF THE TOPICS OF DISCUSSION HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW,

SOME BONDING AUTHORITY FROM NEW YORK CITY THAT MAY OR MAY NOT

COME TOGETHER, AND WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW WE CAN

PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY, NOT JUST IN THIS WAY, BUT IN OTHER WAYS FOR OUR LOCAL

GOVERNMENTS, BECAUSE THAT IS GOING TO BE A REAL CHALLENGE FOR THEM IS --

IS THAT TAX FLOW ISSUE. WE ARE -- WE'RE EXPERIENCING IT AS A STATE, WE --

124

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WE, LIKE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, PUT OFF OUR INCOME TAX, PERSONAL

INCOME TAX FILING DEADLINE, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN IN APRIL, AND WE

PUT IT OFF INTO JULY. NOW, THAT WAS THE -- THE RIGHT THING TO DO, TO -- TO

GIVE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, SOME FLEXIBILITY SO THAT THEY CAN, IF -- IF THEY

WERE SUFFERING AN ECONOMIC HARDSHIP THEY COULD -- THEY COULD PUT OFF

PAYING THOSE TAXES AND THEY COULD -- THEY COULD, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVE

PENALTIES FOR COMING IN LATE AND ALL OF THAT.

BUT THE RESULT IS THE STATE HAS TO DEAL WITH SHORT-TERM

CASH FLOW ISSUES. AND IN THE STATE BUDGET WE AUTHORIZED THE DIVISION

OF BUDGET TO TAKE CARE OF THAT BY GOING OUT WITH SOME -- WITH SOME

SHORT-TERM BONDING. AND I THINK PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO

CONTINUE OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ON HOW WE CAN

BEST HELP THEM, WHETHER WHAT THE IMPACTS ARE GOING TO BE OF THIS

PANDEMIC IN -- IN GENERAL. YOU KNOW, IT BECOMES KIND OF A MULTI-FRONT

ISSUE FROM THEM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE DEALING WITH THE DECLINING REVENUE

THAT COMES WITH THIS. MANY ARE DEALING WITH, OBVIOUSLY, THE HIGHER

COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH RESPONDING TO THIS, YOU KNOW, IN THEIR

COMMUNITIES, DOING EVERYTHING THAT IT TAKES TO KEEP THE SERVICES THAT

WE ALL COUNT ON IN OUR COMMUNITIES GOING, WHILE TRYING TO KEEP THOSE

WORKERS SAFE.

AND -- AND ON TOP OF IT, THEY'RE WORRIED RIGHT NOW

ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO BE NEXT. THERE'S -- THERE'S TALK DEPENDING ON

WHAT COMES FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF -- OF MAJOR CUTS TO -- TO

REVENUE BY -- OF OUR MUNICIPALITIES, THAT STATE AID THAT THEY'VE COUNTED

ON FOR YEARS, AND WE'VE, UNFORTUNATELY, IN THE PAST TWO YEARS,

125

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PARTICULARLY IN THE STATE BUDGET, PASSED ON COSTS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY

BORNE TO THE STATE TO OUR COUNTIES. THERE WERE THE AIM PAYMENTS FOR

OUR TOWNS AND VILLAGES THAT GOT PASSED ALONG TO -- TO MANY OF OUR

COUNTIES LAST YEAR. THERE'S THE NEW HOSPITAL ASSESSMENT THAT IS GOING TO

BE PASSED ON TO -- TO THOSE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, $50 MILLION THAT'S GOING

TO BE APPORTIONED AROUND -- AROUND THE STATE. YOU KNOW, YOU

COMPOUND THAT WITH -- WITH EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S GOING ON IN OUR

COMMUNITIES, IT REALLY MAKES IT TOUGH FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

SO, I HOPE THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK WITH OUR --

OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO FIND SOLUTIONS, CERTAINLY GIVE THEM THE TOOLS

THAT THEY NEED. I THINK THAT'S ONE THING THAT I HOPE WE'VE ALL LEARNED

THROUGH ALL OF THIS IS THAT WE CAN DO A LOT OF GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE WE

REPRESENT WHEN WE WORK TOGETHER. YOU KNOW, I'VE -- WHETHER IT'S --

WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE PHONE CALLS AND COMMUNICATIONS KNOWING

THAT WE'RE -- WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER, WE'RE DEALING WITH THE SAME

THINGS. YOU KNOW, I'VE HAD INSTANCES WHERE SOMEBODY RAISES AN ISSUE

WHERE THEY SEE YOU SAID SOMETHING IN YOUR LOCAL PRESS AND A COLLEAGUE

CALLS YOU UP AND SAYS, HEY, WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS, HERE'S WHAT'S

GOING ON, AND -- AND IT'S INCREDIBLY HELPFUL.

BUT -- BUT I WANT TO, AGAIN, THANK THE SPONSOR. I KNOW

THIS IS A COMPLEX ISSUE TO TRY TO DEAL WITH IN A -- IN A STATE LIKE NEW

YORK STATE, BUT I ALSO DO SHARE MANY OF THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN

RAISED BY SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS REPRESENTING OUR -- OUR LOCAL

GOVERNMENTS. AND I THINK GOING FORWARD, IT'S THAT PARTNERSHIP THAT'LL --

THAT'LL HELP US NOT JUST HAVE OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PULL THROUGH THIS

126

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AND BE ABLE TO PROVIDE FOR THEIR RESIDENTS, BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, ONE DAY

IN HOPEFULLY THE NEAR FUTURE BE ABLE TO -- TO THRIVE AGAIN WITH OUR -- OUR

FAMILIES, OUR -- OUR COMMUNITIES, OUR -- OUR SMALL BUSINESSES. SO, I -- I

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WOULD

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SIR, WILL YOU YIELD?

MR. STERN: SURE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. STERN. FIRST AND

FOREMOST, I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU WERE VERY CLEAR THAT THIS IS A

LOCAL OPTION, THAT IT IS AN OPTION BY EACH INDIVIDUAL TAXING JURISDICTION

AND THAT DECISION BY ONE TAXING JURISDICTION DOES NOT BIND ANY OTHER

TAXING JURISDICTIONS. AND AS A FAN OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, I APPRECIATE

THAT APPROACH. AND SO, THANK YOU FOR THAT.

I HAD A COUPLE OF SPECIFIC SITUATIONS WHERE I WAS

HOPING YOU COULD GIVE ME SOME GUIDANCE ON HOW THIS WOULD WORK IN

PRACTICE. FOR EXAMPLE, NORMALLY WE GET OUR SCHOOL TAX BILL IN

SEPTEMBER. WE PAY IT WITHOUT PENALTY THROUGH THE END OF SEPTEMBER.

LET'S SAY THE SCHOOL TAX -- OR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DECIDES TO GIVE YOU UP

TO 120 DAYS. THAT WOULD MEAN THAT IT WOULDN'T BE DUE UNTIL THE END OF

DECEMBER, RIGHT? YOU GET ALL OF OCTOBER, ALL OF NOVEMBER. NOW,

NORMALLY IF YOU DON'T PAY YOUR SCHOOL TAX ON TIME, THE COUNTY WILL

RELEVY IT, IT'LL INCLUDE IT IN ITS TAX BILL. OF COURSE, THE COUNTY NEEDS

127

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ADVANCE TIME IN ORDER TO RELEVY, AND TYPICALLY THEY TAKE, AS I

UNDERSTAND, FOUR TO SIX WEEKS TO PREPARE THEIR TAX BILL.

SO, IF THE SCHOOL OPTED IN TO THIS, WOULD YOU ENVISION

THEN THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE COUNTY RELEVY BECAUSE

THERE WOULDN'T BE TIME FOR THE COUNTY TO PUT IT ON THE COUNTY BILL?

AND, IF SO, WHAT HAPPENS?

MR. STERN: FIRST OF ALL, IN THE EXAMPLE, WITH --

WITH A DUE DATE ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR THE FALL, THE HOPE THEN IS THAT

WITH PASSAGE OF THIS BILL, THAT WILL BEGIN THE CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE

LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT, YOU KNOW, TO BE ABLE TO PRINT UP TAX BILLS AND GET

THEM OUT APPROPRIATELY. I THINK IMPORTANT HERE BECAUSE YOU BRING UP

THE -- THE EXAMPLE OF A COUNTY BEING INVOLVED, THERE IS SPECIFIC

LANGUAGE THAT WOULD HOLD COUNTIES HARMLESS. SO I KNOW IN MY AREA

THAT IS A BIG ISSUE, THAT THE COUNTY MAKES ALL THE OTHER MUNICIPALITIES

WHOLE AND THEN THEY DEAL WITH IT GOING FORWARD. HERE, PARTICULARLY FOR

THOSE JURISDICTIONS WHERE THERE AREN'T DUE DATES UNTIL BACK TO SCHOOL

TIME AND IN THE FALL, CERTAINLY THERE SHOULD BE TIME TO BE ABLE TO DO THE

PAPERWORK NECESSARY TO COORDINATE BETWEEN VARIOUS LEVELS OF

GOVERNMENT AND MAKE SURE THAT THE -- THE LEVIES ARE REFLECTED

ACCURATELY.

MR. GOODELL: AND I DID SEE THE LANGUAGE THAT

SPECIFICALLY EXEMPTED THE COUNTIES FROM ANY OBLIGATION TO COVER

UNPAID MUNICIPAL BILLS. YOU REFERENCED 936, 976 AND 1330 OF THE REAL

PROPERTY LAW AS IT RELATED TO THOSE ACCRUALS. BUT -- SO, YOU KNOW, I'M

ANTICIPATING THE CALL FROM MY REAL PROPERTY TAX DIRECTOR. WHAT HAPPENS

128

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

IF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT GIVES 120 DAYS, WHICH MEANS THAT THE BILL, SCHOOL

DISTRICT BILL WOULDN'T BE DUE UNTIL DECEMBER 28TH OR THEREABOUTS, DOES

THAT MEAN THE COUNTY HAS NO OBLIGATION TO RELEVY? IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S

A -- JUST A VERY SIMPLE QUESTION: IF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT GRANTS 120 DAY

EXTENSION, DOES THAT THEN RELIEVE THE COUNTY OF ANY DUTY TO RELEVY ANY

UNPAID SCHOOL TAXES?

MR. STERN: THE -- THE -- THE PURPOSE OF THE

LANGUAGE HERE IS TO RELIEVE THE COUNTY OF THAT OBLIGATION. THAT BEING

THE CASE, COUNTIES CAN CERTAINLY OPT IN AT THEIR OPTION. MAY -- MAYBE

BASED ON THEIR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THEY CHOOSE NOT TO, BUT THE

SPECIFIC LANGUAGE HERE IS INTENDED TO RELIEVE THE COUNTIES OF THAT

OBLIGATION OF MAKING THE OTHER LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT WHOLE.

MR. GOODELL: SO THEN PRESUMABLY THE COUNTY

WOULD DO -- I HAVE TWO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS ON THAT. PRESUMABLY A

COUNTY COULD SAY TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS, IF YOU WANT TO GIVE AN EXTENSION,

WE CERTAINLY RESPECT YOUR AUTHORITY AS A SCHOOL BOARD, THAT'S WHY YOU

WERE ELECTED; HOWEVER, IF YOU GIVE AN EXTENSION BEYOND, YOU KNOW,

WHENEVER, NOVEMBER 15TH, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RELEVY. SO,

PRESUMABLY THERE COULD BE THAT DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE

SCHOOL DISTRICT, CORRECT? SO THEN THE FOLLOW-UP QUESTION IS, LET'S SAY THE

COUNTY SAYS, IF YOU DON'T GET IT TO US BY A CERTAIN DATE, WE SIMPLY ARE

PHYSICALLY UNABLE TO EVEN RELEVY, WHAT HAPPENS THEN? DOES THE SCHOOL

DISTRICT SEND OUT A FOLLOW-UP BILL?

MR. STERN: I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IF YOU'RE ASKING

THAT QUESTION, THEN THAT SAME EXACT QUESTION IS GOING TO BE ASKED

129

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

DURING THIS CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.

THEY'RE GOING SHARE THOSE SAME CONCERNS, IS THERE GOING TO BE ADEQUATE

TIME TO BE ABLE TO PRINT UP TAX BILLS APPROPRIATELY AND -- AND REFLECT THAT

ON THE ASSESSMENT ROLLS, OR NOT? YEAH, THE -- THE ANSWER TO THAT

QUESTION COULD BE VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE SAME EXACT CONVERSATION

GOING ON WITH OTHER LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT IN ANOTHER PART OF THE STATE.

SO, MY ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS I THINK IT REALLY DEPENDS, IT'S GOING

TO DEPEND ON THE CONVERSATION THAT TAKES PLACE FOR THOSE LEADERS IN

THOSE VARIOUS LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT TO BE ABLE TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT

ON HOW THAT PROCESS IS -- IS GOING TO WORK. AND THAT'S WHAT THIS IS

REALLY MEANT TO DO, IS TO BRING THOSE LEVELS TOGETHER TO HAVE THAT

CONVERSATION AND KNOW HOW THAT'S GOING TO GO.

MR. GOODELL: AND IF FOR SOME REASON THEY DON'T

COME TO AGREEMENT AND THIS BILL IS ENACTED, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE SCHOOL

TAX BILL THAT'S NOT DUE UNTIL LATE DECEMBER? DOES THIS BILL AUTHORIZE THE

SCHOOL TAX -- THE SCHOOL BOARD TO ISSUE A NEW TAX BILL, OR DOES IT JUST

ROLL OVER INTO THE NEXT SCHOOL FISCAL YEAR?

MR. STERN: IF I UNDERSTOOD THE QUESTION, THE -- THE

DUE DATE THAT IS SELECTED BY RESOLUTION, SAY, OF THE SCHOOL BOARD IF WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT THE SCHOOL, THE SCHOOL BOARD IS GOING TO ENACT A

RESOLUTION THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A DUE DATE, AND THAT DUE DATE IS THEN

GOING TO BE THE DUE DATE. THE TAXES NEED TO BE PAID BY THAT DATE AND, IF

NOT, THEN GOING FORWARD IT IS AS IF THE RESOLUTION WAS NOT ENACTED AND

THEN TAXES ARE GOING TO BE DUE AND THEY WOULD BE THEN OVERDUE WITH

PENALTIES AND INTEREST THEREAFTER. SO, THAT'S ULTIMATELY HOW IT IS

130

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

INTENDED TO WORK AT THE END OF DAY.

MR. GOODELL: AND IF WE'RE LACKING STATUTORY

AUTHORITY FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO ISSUE A NEW BILL OR SOMETHING, THEN

WE'D PRESUMABLY COME BACK AND ADDRESS THAT IN THE FUTURE, I PRESUME?

MR. STERN: I DIDN'T -- I DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE

QUESTION.

MR. GOODELL: WELL, I MEAN RIGHT NOW, NORMALLY,

YOU KNOW, IT'S RELEVIED IN JANUARY, UNPAID SCHOOL TAXES, AND THEN IT

FALLS UNDER THE COUNTY'S FORECLOSURE PROCESS, RIGHT, AUTOMATICALLY, BUT

THIS WOULD ONLY -- THIS WOULD DIVORCE IT FROM THE COUNTY FORECLOSURE

PROCESS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A STATUTORY PROCESS FOR SCHOOL TAXES. I

MEAN, THE PROCESS ONLY ENVISIONS THE COUNTY FORECLOSURE.

MR. STERN: RIGHT.

MR. GOODELL: SO, WHAT I ASSUME THAT ABSENT

FURTHER LEGISLATION, THAT UNPAID SCHOOL TAX BILL WOULD THEN ROLL OVER INTO

THE SUBSEQUENT SCHOOL TAX BUDGET YEAR AND WOULDN'T BE RELEVIED UNTIL

TWO YEARS DOWN THE ROAD.

MR. STERN: IT WOULD REMIND DUE IN

(UNINTELLIGIBLE), SURE.

MR. GOODELL: ONE OTHER QUESTION - AND I

APPRECIATE THESE ARE PRACTICAL CHALLENGES IN A COMPLEX AREA - WHEN THE

COUNTY TAX BILL COMES OUT, TYPICALLY THE TOWNS ARE INCLUDED, SOMETIMES

THE CITY, AS WELL. OFTENTIMES, A LOCAL TAX COLLECTOR COLLECTS THE COUNTY

AND THE COUNTY BILL AT THE SAME TIME.

MR. STERN: YEAH.

131

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. GOODELL: IF A TOWN SAYS YOU CAN MAKE

INSTALLMENT PAYMENTS AND THE COUNTY DOES NOT, WHEN A PARTIAL PAYMENT

COMES IN, DOES IT GO 100 PERCENT FIRST TO THE COUNTY AND THEN TO THE

TOWN, OR HOW WOULD THAT BE ADDRESSED? IN OTHER WORDS, WOULD THE

TAXPAYER BE NOTIFIED THAT YOUR FIRST PAYMENT MUST BE 100 PERCENT OF THE

COUNTY AND 20 PERCENT OF THE TOWN, AND THEN 20 PERCENT, YOU KNOW,

WHATEVER, OR I GUESS IT WOULD BE 33 PERCENT IF IT'S THREE MONTHS.

MR. STERN: YEAH, YEAH.

MR. GOODELL: SO -- AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS? SO,

IF SOMEONE SENDS IN AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE ONE-THIRD TOWN

BILL, DOES THAT MEAN THE TOWN SUMMIT PAYMENTS IN FULL AND THE COUNTY

IS IN ARREARS? CAN YOU GIVE ME SOME GUIDANCE ON THAT?

MR. STERN: THE VISION HERE IS THAT IT WOULD FULL

PRO RATA. SO, IF I AM GOING TO MAKE AN -- IF I RECEIVE MY TAX BILL FROM

THE TOWN RECEIVER OF TAXES, THEN I'M GOING TO -- THERE'S GOING TO BE -- IF

THEY CHOOSE TO DO INSTALLMENT, THEN THERE'S GOING TO BE A SET DOLLAR

AMOUNT AND THEN THE -- DEPENDING ON HOW MANY LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT

NEED TO BE -- DEPENDING ON HOW MANY LEVELS THEN RECEIVE THEIR

PAYMENT FROM THE -- FROM THE RECEIVER OF TAXES, THEY WOULD THEN

RECEIVE THAT PAYMENT PRO RATA DURING THE COURSE OF THESE, SAY, 120

DAYS; LET'S SAY THEY CHOOSE TO DO THE MAXIMUM. IF THEY CHOOSE TO DO

THE MAXIMUM, THEN THEY DO IT INSTALLMENTS AND THEN THERE IS GOING TO

BE ONE PAYMENT TO THE RECEIVER OF THE TAXES, AND THEN THE RECEIVER OF

TAXES, IN TURN, THEN, TO THE OTHER LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT THAT USUALLY THEN

RECEIVE PAYMENT, WILL RECEIVE PAYMENT PRO RATA.

132

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. STERN.

I APPRECIATE IT, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR COURTESY EVEN AS I'M SEEKING

COUNSEL FROM OTHERS, AS WELL. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR RESPONSES.

IT'S A VERY INTERESTING SITUATION WHEN YOU HAVE MULTIPLE TAX BILLS ON ONE

BILLING, WHERE SOME OF THEM MIGHT BE PAYABLE IN INSTALLMENTS, SOME OF

THEM MIGHT BE DUE WITHIN 30 DAYS, OR BEFORE INTEREST KICKS IN. SOME

MIGHT BE DUE IN 120 DAYS BEFORE THEY KICK IN AND WE HAVE RELEVY

PROVISIONS, IT CAN GET PRETTY INTERESTING PRETTY QUICKLY. THANK YOU SO

MUCH FOR YOUR EFFORTS IN THIS AREA. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MR.

GOODELL.

(PAUSE)

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON RULES REPORT NO. 29. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WISHING TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBER PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. STERN TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. STERN: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. FIRST BEFORE

I EXPLAIN MY VOTE, LET ME SAY THANK YOU TO MY FRIEND MR. RA FOR -- FOR

HIS KIND WISHES AND, OF COURSE, TO -- TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY, AND TO ALL

OF YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES, VERY BEST WISHES FOR GOOD HEALTH, IT'S GOOD TO

SEE EVERYONE.

133

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

YESTERDAY AND -- AND TODAY, MR. SPEAKER, WE HAD

PRODUCTIVE DAYS, PRODUCTIVE DAYS IN TRYING TO BE OF ASSISTANCE TO THOSE

THAT WE HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF REPRESENTING DURING THIS VERY CHALLENGING

TIME. WE HAD AN AGENDA OF COVID-19 INITIATIVES ALL TARGETED ACROSS A

VERY BROAD SPECTRUM OF ATTEMPTING TO THOSE IN NEED. AND THERE WAS

DISCUSSION THROUGHOUT MUCH OF THE DAY ABOUT SPECIFIC INITIATIVES THAT

ONLY WENT TO SPECIFIC CONCERNS, AND WE HEARD OVER AND OVER AGAIN,

WE'LL WE HAVE TO COME BACK AND WE HAVE TO CONSIDER OTHER INITIATIVES

BECAUSE WHAT ABOUT THIS, AND WHAT ABOUT THAT, AND WE NEED TO DO MORE

HERE.

THIS INITIATIVE TODAY THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING IS ONE OF

THOSE OTHER BILLS THAT WE WERE LOOKING FORWARD TO DISCUSSING THAT

FOCUSES ON SOME OF THOSE ISSUES THAT WERE NOT YET COVERED DURING THE

AGENDA YESTERDAY. THIS IS AN INITIATIVE THAT APPLIES TO ALL PROPERTY

OWNERS ACROSS NEW YORK STATE. AND ACROSS NEW YORK STATE, WE ALL

KNOW WHAT THOSE CONVERSATIONS LOOK LIKE. AT THE KITCHEN TABLE, THERE

IS A VERY WORRIED FAMILY DISCUSSING WHAT THEIR PRIORITIES ARE AND WHAT

CHECKS NEED TO BE WRITTEN AND WHICH ONES THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT

OFF. THAT CONVERSATION IS GOING ON WITH EVERY SMALL BUSINESS ALL ACROSS

NEW YORK STATE, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE BIG EXPENSES THAT WE'RE GOING TO

BE ABLE TO MEET NOW, AND WHAT ARE SOME OF THOSE THAT WE ARE JUST

GOING TO HAVE TO PUSH OFF IF WE HAVE ANY CHANCE OF MAKING IT.

AND SO, WITH ALL OF THESE CONVERSATIONS GOING ON ALL

ACROSS THE STATE, THIS BECOMES A VERY CRITICAL ISSUE AND INITIATIVE. IT

ALLOWS LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES AT THEIR OPTION TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT

134

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

TO OPT IN AND, IF SO, WHAT PLAN IS GOING TO BE MOST APPROPRIATE FOR THEM.

SO, MR. SPEAKER, WITH TWO MILLION-PLUS OF OUR NEW

YORK NEIGHBORS OUT OF WORK AND FEARFUL FOR THE FUTURE, I'M ASKING OF ALL

MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT THIS INITIATIVE TODAY BECAUSE IT WILL PROVIDE

MUCH NEEDED ASSISTANCE TO OUR NEIGHBORS DURING THIS VERY CHALLENGING

TIME. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. STERN IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. MALLIOTAKIS TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. MALLIOTAKIS: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I

WANT TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR AND SAY THAT I'M VERY PROUD TO

COSPONSOR THIS BILL. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE REGIONS THROUGHOUT THE

STATE THAT ARE AFFECTED BY THIS AND, AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, IT'S NOT

JUST THE RENTERS THAT ARE AFFECTED, IT'S THE HOMEOWNERS THAT ARE ALSO

AFFECTED. PROPERTY OWNERS ARE ALSO STRUGGLING TO PAY THEIR MORTGAGE, TO

PAY THEIR WATER BILLS, TO PAY THEIR PROPERTY TAXES.

A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, I WROTE, ALONGSIDE MY LOCAL

CITY COUNCILMAN, STEVE MATTEO, TO THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK

ASKING FOR HIM TO POSTPONE COLLECTION OF PROPERTY TAXES AND WATER BILLS

UNTIL PEOPLE CAN GET THINGS TOGETHER. AND, CERTAINLY, THAT TIME IS STILL

WHERE WE NEED RELIEF. AND THE RESPONSE I RECEIVED FROM THE

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE WAS THAT IT WAS UP TO THE STATE TO ALLOW US TO DO

SO. AND NOW THERE IS NO EXCUSES, WE'VE PASSED THIS LEGISLATION,

HOPEFULLY THE GOVERNOR WILL SWIFTLY SIGN IT, AND WE EXPECT MAYOR DE

BLASIO TO PROVIDE SOME FORM OF RELIEF BY FREEZING COLLECTION OF

135

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PROPERTY TAXES. BUT, ALSO, WE NEED TO REASSESS THESE PROPERTIES,

BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE VALUES ARE WHAT THEY ARE,

PARTICULARLY AFTER THIS CRISIS. WITH THAT SAID, I HOPE THE MAYOR WILL LOOK

AT FREEZING THE PROPERTY TAX LEVY, AS EVERY OTHER MUNICIPALITY IN THE

STATE DOES. THAT IS WITHIN HIS JURISDICTION AND HIS JURISDICTION ONLY

WITH THE NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL.

SO, WE NEED A COMBINATION OF BOTH THINGS. LET'S

FREEZE COLLECTION, LET'S FREEZE THE LEVY AND LET'S ALSO REASSESS THE VALUES,

AND THAT WILL BRING SOME SERIOUS RELIEF TO THE PROPERTY TAXPAYERS THAT I

REPRESENT, AND ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY OF NEW YORK.

THANK YOU. I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. MALLIOTAKIS IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. WALSH TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. SO, ON THE

FACE OF IT, I THOUGHT I KNEW WHAT I WANTED TO DO WITH THIS BILL. YOU

KNOW, AS WE DUG INTO IT A LITTLE BIT, I THINK THE DEBATE WAS VERY HELPFUL.

I THINK THAT IF THERE'S ONE THING WE'VE LEARNED THROUGH THE LAST FEW

MONTHS IS HOW INTERTWINED THINGS ARE, YOU KNOW, HOW ONE THING

AFFECTS ANOTHER THING. AND WHEN THE GOVERNOR SHUT DOWN OUR STATE

ECONOMY, WE ALL KNEW THAT OUR REVENUES WOULD BE INTERRUPTED, THEY'D

BE REDUCED, IT'D BE TENUOUS.

AND WHILE I APPRECIATE IN THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT

IT IS OPTIONAL, AND I THINK THAT THAT WAS LEADING ME TOWARDS A YES VOTE, I

DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT COUNTY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ARE UNDER SUCH

136

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

EXTREME STRESS RIGHT NOW. THE -- THE 2020-2021 BUDGET PASSED WAS

ALREADY AUSTERE, AND NOW WITH SALES TAX REVENUES VERY LOW, WE THINK

MAYBE INTO THE 3RD QUARTER OR BEYOND, AND CASH FLOW BEING AN ISSUE,

REVENUE PROJECTIONS, WE'RE WAITING TO SEE WHAT FURTHER CUTS THE

GOVERNOR WILL DO. THERE -- ONE TIME, HE HAD MADE A SUGGESTION THAT

HE WAS GOING TO DO A 20 PERCENT ACROSS THE BOARD CUT TO SCHOOLS,

COUNTIES, TOWNS, ET CETERA, WHICH IS BREATHTAKING AND DEVASTATING TO

THESE LOCAL BUDGETS. WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO AIM FUNDING, WHAT'S

GOING TO HAPPEN TO CHIPS FUNDING? COMPLICATING THIS IS THE FACT THAT

THERE ARE SOME ESSENTIAL SERVICES THAT COUNTY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

MUST PROVIDE, THEY'RE MANDATED TO PROVIDE IT.

SO, THE NEW YORK STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES

OPPOSES THIS BILL AND THEY SAY THAT, "IN THE FACE OF REVENUE LOSSES, WE

ARE REQUIRED UNDER STATE LAW TO FULLY FUND AND ADMINISTER ALL STATE AND

FEDERAL PROGRAMS, WHICH COMPRISE THE BULK OF OUR BUDGETS. OUR

CASELOADS ARE INCREASING AS IF THERE HAD BEEN NO CHANGE IN OUR REVENUE

FORECAST. ANY FURTHER CUTS OR DEFERRALS DIRECT OR INDIRECT TO COUNTY

REVENUES AT THIS TIME WILL PUT COUNTY FINANCES AT SEVERE RISK AND

POTENTIALLY DERAIL US FROM OUR MISSION OF PROVIDING ESSENTIAL SERVICES

IN THIS TIME OF CRISIS."

SO, RESPECTING WHAT NYSAC HAS TO SAY, I'M GOING TO

BE NEGATIVE ON THIS BILL, EVEN THOUGH IT'S OPTIONAL, I DO APPRECIATE WHAT

THE SPONSOR HAS TRIED TO PUT FORWARD.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WALSH IN THE

NEGATIVE.

137

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MS. GRIFFIN.

MS. GRIFFIN: HI. HAPPY TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE, MR. SPEAKER. I WANTED TO SAY I COMMEND THE

SPONSOR, ASSEMBLYMEMBER STERN OF INTRODUCING THIS BILL, AND I'M

PROUD TO BE A COSPONSOR.

THERE ARE SO MANY FAMILIES STRUGGLING ACROSS NEW

YORK STATE, AND MAY -- AS IS MANY HOMEOWNERS, IN ADDITION TO MANY

RENTERS, ALL DIFFERENT FAMILIES, ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF STRUGGLES, BUT WE ALL

HAVE THAT IN COMMON. AND THIS A WONDERFUL WAY THAT IF A MUNICIPALITY

DECIDES, THEY HAVE THE OPTION IF THEY CAN FORMULATE A PLAN TO HELP

RELIEVE THE HOMEOWNER OF THEIR PROPERTY TAXES TO MAKE IT INTO

INSTALLMENTS, OR PUSH BACK A DATE. THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO DO THAT AND

I THINK IT'S A -- IT'S A WONDERFUL OPTION THAT OUR MUNICIPALITIES CAN HAVE.

AND IF THEY CHOOSE TO -- TO MAKE -- TO MAKE A CHANGE, THEY NOW HAVE

THE OPTION TO DO IT. AND NOR ARE THEY OBLIGATED, BECAUSE WE REALIZE

THAT COUNTIES ARE UNDER PRESSURE, VILLAGES ARE UNDER PRESSURE, ALL OF OUR

LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES ARE UNDER PRESSURE, BUT IF THEY CAN FORMULATE IT IN

A WAY TO MAKE A CHANGE, THEY DO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HELP AND

PROVIDE RELIEF TO OUR HOMEOWNERS. SO, IN -- FOR THAT, I VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. SALKA.

MR. SALKA: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR THE

OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A POSITION ON MY VOTE, AND I WANT TO COMMEND

THE SPONSOR. YOUR INTENTIONS ARE -- ARE ADMIRABLE, BUT I'M GOING TO TALK

FROM A LITTLE PERSPECTIVE OF HAVING BEEN A TOWN AND COUNTY

138

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SUPERVISOR IN MADISON COUNTY AND THE TOWN OF BROOKFIELD, WHICH

WAS ABOUT A POPULATION OF 2,400.

MY CONCERNS REGARDING THIS IS, NUMBER ONE, THAT LOCAL

MUNICIPALITIES MIGHT FEEL UNDULY PRESSURED BY THE PEOPLE IN THEIR

COMMUNITIES TO GO AHEAD AND PASS THIS WITHOUT REALLY REALIZING WHAT

THE LONG-TERM CONSEQUENCES ARE GOING TO BE. I AM CONCERNED SERVICES

ARE GOING TO BE CUT. I KNOW IN MY TOWN OF BROOKFIELD, WE HAD MORE

ROADS THAN ANY TOWN IN MADISON COUNTY AND, YET, WE WERE THE POOREST

AND LOWEST TAX BASE, AND WE WERE ALWAYS STRUGGLING TO TRY TO MAINTAIN

EVEN THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF SERVICES.

ALSO, I HAVE THE EXPERIENCE OF TRYING TO WRITE A BUDGET

AND TRYING TO BALANCE OUR -- OUR BUDGET ON A TOWN LEVEL, AND IT WAS

VERY, VERY DIFFICULT, EVEN WITH A STEADY STREAM OF MONEY COMING IN.

AND NOW WITH THE THREAT OF HAVING LOWER THAN EVER SALES TAX REVENUE,

WITH OUR AIM PAYMENT BEING THREATENED, I'M AFRAID THAT THERE'S GOING

TO HAVE TO BE DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE KIND OF SHOOTING FROM THE HIP IN

RESPECT TO WHAT THESE TOWNS ARE GOING TO FEEL THE PRESSURE TO DO, AND

WE'RE -- YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO RUN INTO REAL PROBLEMS WITH THAT.

AND NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT THE COUNTIES ARE COMMITTED TO MAKING

THE SCHOOLS AND THE TOWNS WHOLE, AND SO IT'S UP TO THE COUNTIES TO BE

ABLE TO MAKE UP FOR THE REVENUE THAT WAS NOT BROUGHT IN ON TAXES THAT

WERE PAID IN TIME -- ON TIME. SO, I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THAT

WILL DO TO COUNTY BUDGETS AND, AGAIN, AND THE SERVICES THAT THEY HAVE TO

DELIVER.

SO, I'LL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS. I THINK THE

139

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

INTENT OF THE BILL IS WONDERFUL. NO ONE WANTS TO SEE MORE PROPERTIES ON

THE AUCTION BLOCK, THAT'S JUST NOT GOOD FOR ANY MUNICIPALITY, ANY

COUNTY, OR ANY QUALITY OF LIFE. BUT, WE ALSO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT

WE'RE PRUDENT AND MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, MONEY STREAMS ARE

COMING IN SO THAT THESE TOWNS CAN SURVIVE AND THESE TOWNS CAN PROVIDE

THOSE -- THOSE VALUABLE SERVICES. BUT, AGAIN, I WANT TO COMMEND THE

SPONSOR ON THIS AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. SALKA IN THE

NEGATIVE, I BELIEVE.

MR. MANKTELOW.

MR. MANKTELOW: CAN YOU HEAR ME ALL RIGHT, MR.

SPEAKER?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: YES, SIR. PLEASE, GO

RIGHT AHEAD.

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU. I WANT TO, AGAIN,

ALSO COMMEND THE SPONSOR FOR HIS WORK ON THIS AND THE THOUGHTFULNESS

OF THE BILL AND WHAT IT COULD DO, BUT AS A FORMER TOWN SUPERVISOR,

COUNTY LEGISLATOR, AND ALSO HAVING -- HAD A VILLAGE DISSOLVED IN MY

COMMUNITY, DOING THIS AND KNOWING WHAT THE COUNTY IS UP AGAINST AS

FAR AS MAKING PAYMENTS BACK TO -- BACK TO NEW YORK STATE EVERY --

EVERY FEW WEEKS BEGINNING IN JANUARY, I JUST FEEL THAT WE'RE GOING TO

KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD RIGHT NOW. IT MAY HELP FOR A SHORT TIME,

BUT THIS IS GOING TO SNOWBALL, BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY YOUR

TAXES FOR, YOU KNOW, UP TO THREE, FOUR MONTHS, YOU'VE GOT TO START

SAVING FOR THE NEXT YEAR. AND I KNOW WITH THE ESCROW ACCOUNTS THAT

140

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ARE INVOLVED WITH THE BANKS AND MORTGAGES, I JUST THINK IT'S GOING TO BE

A LOT FOR OUR LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES TO HANDLE, WHETHER YOU'RE AT THE

COUNTY, TOWN OR VILLAGE LEVEL, ALONG WITH YOUR FIRE DISTRICTS AND

LIGHTING DISTRICTS AND ALL OF THE OTHER DISTRICTS THAT FALL IN PLACE.

I THINK IT'S A -- A GREAT CHANCE TO DO SOMETHING, BUT

UNLESS THE STATE'S GOING TO DO THE SAME THING BY CUTTING BACK THE

MEDICAID PAYMENTS THAT ARE OBLIGATED FROM THE COUNTIES TO THE STATE,

WE'RE JUST KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. AND I WANT TO SUPPORT THIS,

BUT RIGHT NOW I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS BILL, JUST BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOING

TO HURT OUR LOCAL COMMUNITIES LONG-TERM, AND JUST WORKING TOGETHER

AND TRYING TO -- TO BRING THIS ALTOGETHER, ALONG WITH THE COVID ISSUES

THAT WE HAVE BACK HOME AND HOW MUCH MONEY IS GOING TO BE TAKEN

AND THE SALES TAX REVENUE, I JUST THINK IT'S GOING TO BE TOO MUCH FOR OUR

LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO -- TO HANDLE RIGHT NOW. SO, I'M GOING TO VOTE

NEGATIVE ON THIS AND ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. MANKTELOW IN

THE NEGATIVE.

MR. ABINANTI.

MR. ABINANTI: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. EACH

COUNTY HAS A DIFFERENT STRUCTURE, DIFFERENT NEEDS, DIFFERENT RESOURCES.

FOR EXAMPLE, WESTCHESTER COUNTY DOES NOT COLLECT THE TAXES, OUR

MUNICIPALITIES COLLECT THE TAXES. AND IN THESE TRYING TIMES, WE ARE

TRYING IN THE STATE TO MANEUVER THROUGH ALL OF THE CHALLENGES. WE

SHOULD GIVE OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THE SAME SUPPORT AND OPTIONS TO

MANEUVER THROUGH THE CHALLENGES AS THEY SEE THEM. I'M IN FAVOR OF

141

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

GIVING THEM MORE OPTIONS, MORE FLEXIBILITY. I'M IN FAVOR OF AS MUCH

HOME RULE AS POSSIBLE IN THIS ENVIRONMENT. I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. ABINANTI IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE

FOLLOWING REPUBLICANS MEMBERS WILL BE VOTING NO ON THIS BILL: MS.

BYRNES, MR. SALKA, MR. TAGUE, MR. KOLB, MR. MILLER, MR.

MCDONOUGH, MR. FRIEND, MR. ASHBY, MR. DIPIETRO, MS. MILLER AND

MR. LAWRENCE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

RULES REPORT NO. 45, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: SENATE NO. S08414, RULES REPORT NO.

45, SENATOR BAILEY (COMMITTEE ON RULES--LENTOL, OTIS, BICHOTTE,

ORTIZ, PERRY, BLAKE, MOSLEY, SEAWRIGHT, GRIFFIN--A10493). AN ACT TO

AMEND THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW, IN RELATION TO CONDUCTING HEARINGS

ON A FELONY COMPLAINT DURING A STATE DISASTER EMERGENCY; AND

PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF SUCH PROVISIONS UPON EXPIRATION THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: A [SIC] EXPLANATION IS

REQUESTED, MR. LENTOL.

142

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. LENTOL: YES, THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THIS IS

A BILL ABOUT AUDIO/VISUAL PRELIMINARY HEARING, A PRELIMINARY HEARING

THAT IS AUTHORIZED BY THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW IN EVERY FELONY CASE

UNLESS AND UNTIL A GRAND JURY -- WELL, I SHOULD SAY THIS, JUST TO GIVE YOU

A LITTLE BACKGROUND AS TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. IF SOMEONE IS

ARRESTED ON A FELONY COMPLAINT, THAT PERSON IS ENTITLED TO HAVE A GRAND

JURY EITHER INDICT OR NOT INDICT IN SIX DAYS, OR HAVE A PRELIMINARY

HEARING WITHIN SIX DAYS. AND RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE NEITHER BECAUSE OF

THE COVID-19 VIRUS, BECAUSE THERE ARE NO GRAND JURIES AND THERE ARE

NO PRELIMINARY HEARINGS BECAUSE THE COURTHOUSES REMAINED NOT LOCKED

DOWN, BUT THEY'RE NOT CONDUCTING MANY OF THESE HEARINGS.

SO, THIS WOULD REQUIRE IN A CASE INVOLVING A FELONY

COMPLAINT FOR AN AUDIO/VISUAL HEARING, AND A VIDEO APPEARANCE WOULD

BE AUTHORIZED WHERE THE COURT FINDS THAT DUE TO THE DISASTER AND

EMERGENCY, IT WOULD BE AN UNREASONABLE HARDSHIP FOR PERSONS TO

PERSONALLY APPEAR. AND THAT THE JUDGE MUST BE ABLE TO SEE AND HEAR

ANY TESTIFYING WITNESS, AND THAT DOCUMENTS NEEDED FOR THE HEARING MAY

BE EXCHANGED IN ADVANCE OF THE HEARING BY ELECTRONIC MEANS. AND THE

STENOGRAPHIC RECORD OR APPROPRIATE AUDIO RECORDING OF THE HEARING

WOULD BE MAINTAINED, AND THAT LIVE TESTIMONY RECEIVED BY ELECTRONIC

APPEARANCE WOULD BE DONE. THOUGH THIS DOES NOT MEAN A NEW HEARING

PROCESS, THIS IS THE SAME HEARING PROCESS THAT WE HAVE THAT WE WANT TO

DO UNDER THE DISASTER EMERGENCY. AND THEY HAVE LONG BEEN IN THE LAW,

AS I SUGGESTED. AND THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT THE BILL DOES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. PALUMBO.

143

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. PALUMBO: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD FOR A FEW QUESTIONS, PLEASE?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. LENTOL, WILL YOU

YIELD, SIR?

MR. LENTOL: I WILL, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. LENTOL YIELDS.

MR. PALUMBO: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. AND WE'VE

DISCUSSED THIS, OF COURSE, WE HAD SOME DISCUSSION YESTERDAY IN THE --

OR THE OTHER DAY IN THE CODES COMMITTEE, AND I THINK WE'RE IN

AGREEMENT ON A LOT OF -- ON A LOT OF THIS, AND I JUST HAD ONE CONCERN,

BECAUSE CLEARLY THE IDEA IS, AS YOU SAID, WE CAN -- THAT THERE IS NO DAY

IN COURT, SO TO SPEAK, FOR SOMEONE IN CUSTODY.

MR. LENTOL: CORRECT.

MR. PALUMBO: CORRECT? AND JUST TO CLARIFY FOR

OUR COLLEAGUES, UNDER THAT SECTION FOR ACTION ON ANY FELONY COMPLAINT,

YOU HAVE SIX DAYS TO INDICT SOMEONE OR THEY MUST BE RELEASED, CORRECT?

MR. LENTOL: THAT'S RIGHT.

MR. PALUMBO: RIGHT, AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO

OBVIOUSLY, JUST TO GIVE THEM THE LANDSCAPE, I'M SURE YOU -- YOU KNOW

ALL OF THIS QUITE WELL, SO IT'S GOING TO BE PROBABLY, IF YOU WOULD JUST

INDULGE ME WITH A FEW OF THESE YES QUESTIONS, BUT REALLY, THE OPTIONS

ARE YOU EITHER HAVE THIS PRELIMINARY HEARING, YOU INDICT THEM OR THE

ONLY OTHER CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE YOU CAN GO BEYOND THAT SIX-DAY

WINDOW IS IF THE PROSECUTOR SHOWS GOOD CAUSE; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. LENTOL: THAT'S RIGHT.

144

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. PALUMBO: SO, IN LIGHT OF THE PANDEMIC NOW,

OF COURSE, THERE ARE NO GRAND JURIES BECAUSE OF SOCIAL DISTANCING, WHICH

IS A 23 PER -- 23 PEOPLE IN A ROOM, PLUS A WITNESS, A PROSECUTOR AND A

COURT REPORTER, AND THE COURTS WERE CLOSED. AND UNDER OUR LAW, THIS IS

NECESSARY BECAUSE IT'S -- THERE IS NO AUTHORIZATION TO CONDUCT A HEARING

OR TRIAL BY ELECTRONIC MEANS; IS THAT ACCURATE, RIGHT? THAT WAS THE

REASON FOR THIS?

MR. LENTOL: WELL, THAT'S CORRECT, BUT THERE IS AN

EXECUTIVE ORDER BY THE GOVERNOR THAT WOULD -- BUT THE GROUND RULES

ARE SET FORTH IN THIS BILL.

MR. PALUMBO: GOT IT. AND THAT EXECUTIVE ORDER,

I GUESS THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT PEOPLE WERE BEING HELD INDEFINITELY IN --

IN CUSTODY WITHOUT HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EITHER REQUIRING THE

PEOPLE TO INDICT, OR EVEN TO HAVE THEIR HEARING AND GET THEIR DAY IN

COURT. SO, THIS WAS CERTAINLY NECESSARY, AND I THINK WE'D ALL AGREE

INSTEAD OF JUST HOLDING PEOPLE IN -- IN CUSTODY INDEFINITELY WITHOUT

HAVING DUE PROCESS, RIGHT, THERE'S NO OBJECTION TO THAT.

OKAY, SO MY QUESTION IS -- I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION

THEN I'M GOING TO GO ON THE BILL, REALLY, BUT IN THIS SECOND -- SECTION 2,

THE JUDGE HAS TO SEE THE WITNESS AND THERE WILL BE A RECORDED HEARING OR

VIDEO -- VIDEOGRAPHED, TAPED PROCEEDING. UNDER THE GOVERNOR'S

EXECUTIVE ORDER AND UNDER OUR -- OUR CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW, UNDER

SECTION 245.70, YOU CAN SEEK A PROTECTIVE ORDER, AND THE GOVERNOR

RECOGNIZES IN EXECUTIVE ORDER, AND THERE'S NO SUCH LANGUAGE IN THIS

BILL. IS THIS INTENDED AT ALL TO SUPERCEDE THE ABILITY FOR THE PROSECUTION

145

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

TO SEEK A PROTECTIVE ORDER IF MAYBE IT'S, SAY, A CHILD WITNESS, LIKE IF IT'S

-- IF IT'S AN 8-YEAR-OLD OR SOMEONE WHO THE IDENTITY THEY DON'T WANT TO

REVEAL, WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO SEEK THOSE PROTECTIONS?

MR. LENTOL: YES, THEY WOULD.

MR. PALUMBO: OKAY, GREAT. AND THAT WAS REALLY

ONE MAJOR CONCERN, BECAUSE THE EXECUTIVE ORDER EXPIRES JUNE 6TH, AND

I KNOW THAT ONCE THAT EXPIRES, THIS LAW WILL TAKE EFFECT AND WILL BE IN

EFFECT UNTIL APRIL 30TH, FOR ABOUT A YEAR, AND THEN IT WILL SUNSET,

CORRECT?

MR. LENTOL: YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. PALUMBO: OKAY. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.

ON THE BILL, PLEASE, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. PALUMBO: WELL, THANK YOU, AND I APPRECIATE

THAT. AND -- AND THE REASON WHY I THINK THIS LITTLE BIT OF A LESSON IS

NECESSARY IS BECAUSE THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE VERY, VERY DIFFERENT, STRICTLY

UNDER THESE TIMES, BUT THE TWO OPTIONS THAT A PROSECUTOR HAS ARE VERY,

VERY DIFFERENT. AND ALTHOUGH THIS IS CLEARLY AN IDEA THAT NEEDS TO BE

ADDRESSED STATUTORILY THAT DURING THE PANDEMIC WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY

TO CERTAINLY HAVE PEOPLE SEE -- GET THEIR DAY IN COURT, AND IT'S A VERY

SIMPLE ADJUSTMENT THAT WE CAN JUST ALLOW THESE HEARINGS TO BE DONE BY

VIDEO, BECAUSE IT WAS PREVIOUSLY PROHIBITED. AND YOU COULD DO

ARRAIGNMENTS AND OTHER JUST GENERAL CONFERENCES AND WAIVING THE

DEFENDANT'S APPEARANCE, BUT IN LIGHT OF THE DEFENDANT'S ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO

BE IN COURT, WE COULDN'T DO SO FOR AN ACTUAL HEARING.

146

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

NOW, HERE'S THE RUB, AND THIS IS MY CONCERN WITH THIS,

AND I KNOW THERE WAS A MODERATE CHAPTER AMENDMENT THAT WE JUST

RECEIVED A LITTLE WHILE AGO, BUT THIS IS DANGEROUS TO VICTIMS, AND LET ME

TELL YOU WHY. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT BALANCE THE WAY IT

TIPPED -- OUR -- OUR PREVIOUS LAW DOES, BECAUSE THE OPTION TO PROCEED

WITH EITHER A GRAND JURY OR AN INDICTMENT HAS BEEN AT THE PROSECUTOR'S

DISCRETION. AND, AS THOSE OF YOU KNOW, WELL PRETTY MUCH, AND I'LL

REITERATE IT, OF COURSE, THAT AN INDICTMENT IS DONE -- A GRAND JURY IS DONE

BY 23 INDIVIDUALS, CITIZENS FROM THE COMMUNITY, IN A ROOM WITH A

STENOGRAPHER, THE PROSECUTOR AND A WITNESS; THERE IS NO

CROSS-EXAMINATION. AND I KNOW A LOT OF OUR COLLEAGUES CERTAINLY

WOULD OBJECT TO THAT, BECAUSE THEY FEEL THAT THIS IS, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN

INDICT A HAM SANDWICH, AND WE'VE HEARD THAT MANY TIMES IN THIS

CHAMBER, THAT PEOPLE WERE VERY UPSET WITH THAT PROCESS. BUT IT IS WHAT

IT IS AND THAT'S HOW WE DO IT, AND THAT'S OUR SYSTEM OF JURISPRUDENCE

CURRENTLY.

THE PROBLEM IS, AND I HAD THESE QUESTIONS AND

CONCERNS IN THE CODES MEETING, AND I'VE BEEN SINCE CONTACTED BY SOME

VERY SENIOR PROSECUTORS WHO HAVE THE SAME CONCERN WHERE THEY DO NOT

HAVE THAT OPTION WHEN WE DON'T HAVE GRAND JURIES EMPANELED, LIKE WE

DO AS WE SIT HERE TODAY. SO, NOW EVERY SINGLE CASE THAT IS 144 HOURS

OLD OR LESS -- OR, AS YOU GET TO THAT POINT, YOU MUST HAVE A PRELIMINARY

HEARING.

NOW, A PRELIMINARY HEARING IS REALLY LIKE A MINI-TRIAL,

AND I'LL READ YOU THE CONTROLLING STATUTE, IT'S CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW,

147

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SECTION 180.60, WHERE, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY MUST CONDUCT IT, EACH

WITNESS MUST BE -- MUST BE UNDER OATH, THE PEOPLE MUST, NOT MAY, MUST

CALL AND EXAMINE WITNESSES AND OFFER EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE

CHARGE. NOW, THAT MEANS NON-HEARSAY EVIDENCE, SO YOU NEED A LIVE

WITNESS. SO, IF WE HAVE A CHILD SEX ABUSE VICTIM THAT WOULD OTHERWISE

BE BROUGHT INTO A GRAND JURY, WHICH IS A SECRET PROCEEDING, THEY ARE

NOW SUBJECT WITHIN SIX DAYS OF, SAY, A RAPE TO SIT IN THE SAME ROOM AS

THE DEFENDANT AND BE CROSS-EXAMINED BY HIS LAWYER. THIS IS A VERY

SIGNIFICANT DISADVANTAGE THAT YOU ARE NOW GIVING THE ABILITY TO

PROSECUTE VICTIM-SENSITIVE CASES, OR EVEN AN UNDERCOVER POLICE OFFICER,

FOR EXAMPLE, IN A DRUG CASE. THEY MUST BE PRODUCED NOW UNDER THIS

LEGISLATION.

AND LET ME GO TO PAGE 2 --

MR. LENTOL: WELL, LET ME CORRECT YOU.

MR. PALUMBO: I'M SORRY -- CERTAINLY, CERTAINLY.

MR. LENTOL: AS WE DISCUSSED YESTERDAY, THIS IS ALL

SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDERS. AND EVEN THOUGH YOU'VE CALLED IT A

MINI-TRIAL, A HEARING IS FAR LESS THAN A MINI-TRIAL. THERE'S NO JURY.

THERE ARE VERY FEW WITNESSES THAT ARE USUALLY CALLED BECAUSE OF WHAT

YOU SUGGESTED, AS WELL AS NOT WANTING TO GIVE UP ALL THE WITNESSES AT

ONE TIME AT A PRELIMINARY HEARING. SO, FOLKS WHO COME TO TESTIFY, THE

JUDGE CAN ORDER THAT THEIR VOICES BE GARBLED, THAT THEIR APPEARANCE BE

CHANGED BY VIRTUE OF THE PROTECTIVE ORDER THAT'S NOT ONLY GOING TO BE

AUTHORIZED IN STATUTE WHEN WE GET THE CHAPTER AMENDMENT -- EXCUSE

ME, THE CHAPTER AMENDMENT WILL AUTHORIZE THAT. BUT IT SEEMS TO ME

148

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THAT IT'S ALREADY AUTHORIZED BY THE EXECUTIVE ORDER IN ORDER TO PROTECT

WITNESSES. AND FURTHERMORE, THERE ALWAYS ISN'T A NECESSITY TO BRING THE

MAIN WITNESSES FORWARD IN ORDER TO GET AN INDICTMENT IN A GRAND JURY

CASE, AS THERE IS NOT A NECESSITY AT A PRELIMINARY HEARING TO GET A

PROBABLE CAUSE DETERMINED BY A JUDGE. BECAUSE ALL YOU MAY NEED IS A

POLICE OFFICER TO TESTIFY OR A TECHNICIAN OR SOMEBODY FROM THE

GOVERNMENT TO ESTABLISH THAT THERE'S A REASONABLE CAUSE THAT THIS PERSON

COMMITTED THE CRIME, AND THAT A CRIME WAS COMMITTED, WHICH IS REALLY

THE STANDARD. IT'S NOT GUILT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT LIKE IN A TRIAL.

IT'S JUST REASONABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT A CRIME WAS COMMITTED, AND

THIS DEFENDANT COMMITTED IT.

MR. PALUMBO: CERTAINLY. AND I WOULD -- I WOULD

AGREE TO DISAGREE WITH YOU IN SOME RESPECTS, CHAIRMAN, JUST BECAUSE IN

THAT EXAMPLE OF, SAY, A RAPE. YOU CAN'T PROVE LACK OF CONSENT WITHOUT

A LIVE WITNESS. SO THE RAPE VICTIM MUST BE PRODUCED AT A PRELIMINARY

HEARING AND THE GRAND JURY, BUT THEY'RE NOT SUBJECT TO

CROSS-EXAMINATION. AND THIS IS MY ONLY WRINKLE. AND OF COURSE THIS IS

-- THIS IS NOT INTENDED, AND I -- I JUST DON'T THINK --

MR. LENTOL: THAT WITNESS CAN BE DISGUISED. IT'S

NOT THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE THAT WITNESS IN -- IN THE

PRELIMINARY HEARING BECAUSE -- AND THAT WILL BE PART OF THE CHAPTER

AMENDMENT. OR IF HE TESTIFIES AND HIS FACE IS NOT SHOWN AND JUST HIS

VOICE IS EXPRESSED, THAT VOICE CAN BE GARBLED.

MR. PALUMBO: SURE. AND I -- I THINK THAT AND --

AND I COUPLE THAT WITH THE SECTION 3 OF THE BILL THAT SAYS, IF I CAN, ON

149

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PAGE 2, LINE 1, THE AUTHORITY FOR AN ELECTRONIC APPEARANCE PURSUANT TO

THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSIDERED SUFFICIENT MEANS TO ENABLE THE COURT TO

CONDUCT A HEARING ON A FELONY COMPLAINT WITHIN THE MEANING OF

SECTION 180.80 OF THIS ARTICLE, WHICH IS WHAT I READ BEFORE. NOW THAT --

I HAVE THE GOVERNOR'S ORDER HERE. THIS IS EXECUTIVE ORDER 202.28,

SIGNED MAY 7TH. THAT HE ACTUALLY ADDRESSES THAT IN THE OPPOSITE

DIRECTION WHERE THE GOVERNOR SAID -- AND THE GOVERNOR, OF COURSE,

BEING A SMART LAWYER, FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL, SAYS THAT, UNDER

SECTION 180.80 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW TO THE EXTENT THE COURT

MUST SATISFY ITSELF THAT GOOD CAUSE HAS BEEN SHOWN WITHIN 144 HOURS

FROM THE DATE -- FROM THE DATE RIGHT AFTER THIS ORDER. THAT A DEFENDANT

SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE HELD ON A FELONY COMPLAINT DUE TO INABILITY TO

IMPANEL A GRAND JURY DUE TO COVID-19, WHICH MAY CONSTITUTE GOOD

CAUSE PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION 3 OF SUCH SECTION. SO THIS ACTUALLY GOES

OVER THAT AND SAYS THAT IT'S NOT GOOD CAUSE TO NOT HAVE A GRAND JURY, AND

CONTRARY TO WHAT THE EXECUTIVE ORDER SAYS. AND SO THAT -- THAT REALLY IS

MY BIGGEST CONCERN, BECAUSE THE GOOD CAUSE IS A DISCRETIONARY CALL BY

THE JUDGE. THE JUDGE GETS TO HEAR BOTH SIDES AND CAN SAY, YOU KNOW

WHAT? I DON'T AGREE WITH YOU, AND ROR AND CUT THE DEFENDANT LOOSE.

BUT NOT IN THIS CURRENT BILL. WHEN THIS TAKES EFFECT -- AND THIS IS WHAT I

REALLY HOPE THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER AND DISCUSSING POSSIBLY A CHAPTER

-- ANOTHER CHAPTER AMENDMENT WITH THE GOVERNOR -- THAT IT WOULD BE

CONSISTENT WITH HIS EXECUTIVE ORDER BECAUSE IN THOSE VERY RARE

CIRCUMSTANCES THERE WOULD BE A COMPELLING REASON AND GOOD CAUSE,

BECAUSE YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO SUBJECT, FOR EXAMPLE, A CHILD SEX ABUSE

150

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

VICTIM, TO CROSS-EXAMINATION THAT WE WOULD NEED TO HOLD A DEFENDANT

IN THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE. OR OTHERWISE, PURSUANT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER,

THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT AND THAT

THEY COULD GARBLE THEM OR HIDE THEM. BUT TO THAT EXTENT, THEY WOULD

STILL NEED TO HAVE SOME FURTHER PROTECTIONS FROM BEING REQUIRED TO BE

CONFRONTED BY THE DEFENSE -- DEFENSE COUNSEL, AND FOR THAT MATTER,

KNOWING THE DEFENDANT IS IN THE COURTROOM, I WOULD SAY THE DEFENDANT.

AND THAT'S -- IT'S REALLY NUANCING, IT WAS CLEARLY UNINTENDED, OBVIOUSLY.

I DON'T -- AND -- AND YOU MAY NOT READ IT THAT WAY, BUT I DO. AND I

WOULD SUGGEST -- AND THE PERSON -- AND THESE PROSECUTORS WILL REMAIN

UNNAMED, BUT THEY'RE VERY EXPERIENCED AND THEY HAD THE SAME

CONCERNS THAT THE SHIELDING ABILITY IN THE EARLY STAGES OF A

VICTIM-SENSITIVE CASE ARE NOT AVAILABLE BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T JUST

OTHERWISE HOLD -- BECAUSE EVEN AFTER THAT HEARING -- THIS IS THE WRINKLE,

CHAIRMAN -- THAT -- OR MR. SPEAKER, THAT THESE PROCEEDINGS, THE

PRELIMINARY HEARING JUST ALLOWS YOU -- TO --

(LAUGHTER)

YEAH, I GAVE YOU A RAISE. BUT THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE

ONLY IF -- IF YOU PROVIDE PROBABLE CAUSE AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING,

THEN YOU'RE ONLY HOLDING FOR UP TO 45 DAYS FOR THE ACTION OF THE GRAND

JURY. YOU STILL HAVE TO INDICT. SO THAT VICTIM GETS TO TESTIFY AT THE

PRELIMINARY HEARING, A GRAND JURY EVENTUALLY, AND I DON'T BELIEVE WE'VE

EVEN ADDRESSED THE 45-DAY ISSUE THAT IF WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE NOW

THE DEFENDANT'S STILL IN CUSTODY AND WE STILL HAVEN'T OPENED UP GRAND

JURIES OR COURTHOUSES, WE MAY RUN UP AGAINST ANOTHER WALL THAT WOULD

151

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

CREATE ANOTHER PROBLEM.

MR. LENTOL: REMEMBER --

MR. PALUMBO: IT'S A REALLY NUANCED THING. I'M

SORRY? PLEASE -- YES, I'LL YIELD.

MR. LENTOL: YOU CAN'T HOLD SOMEONE FOREVER

WITHOUT SOME LIMITED REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE. AND THAT'S ALL WE'RE

DOING HERE BECAUSE THE LAW REQUIRES IT. DUE PROCESS REQUIRES IT. IF A

REASONABLE CAUSE IS SHOWN, THEN THE DEFENDANT WILL EITHER BE RELEASED

OR HE'LL BE HELD IN CUSTODY AFTER YOU'VE HAD YOUR PRELIMINARY HEARING.

AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE EITHER A PRELIMINARY HEARING BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT

THE LAW SAYS YOU HAVE TO DO. AND WE'RE TRYING TO FIND A MEANS OF

GETTING IT DONE SO AS NOT TO INTERRUPT PEOPLE'S LIVES, SO THAT THEY CATCH

THE VIRUS. AND WE'RE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT CATCHING THE VIRUS. WE DON'T

WANT TO HAVE PEOPLE COMING INTO GRAND JURIES AND DOING THIS. AND WE

HAVE TO FIND A REMEDY, A SHORT-TERM REMEDY, AND THAT'S WHY THIS BILL

EXPIRES WITHIN THE PERIOD OF THE -- WHEN THE -- WHEN THE PERIOD OF

EMERGENCY IS OVER. AND -- BUT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING BECAUSE

PEOPLE CAN'T BE HELD FOREVER. THAT WOULD BE UNREASONABLE. WE JUST

PASSED BAIL REFORM LAST YEAR. THERE IS NO BAIL REFORM IF PEOPLE ARE HELD

FOREVER BECAUSE THEY DON'T GET A HEARING OR A GRAND JURY PROCEEDING.

MR. PALUMBO: I CERTAINLY -- I DON'T DISAGREE WITH

THAT. I -- I -- I DO DISAGREE, OF COURSE, WITH THE BAIL REFORM, AS I HAVE

FOR QUITE SOME TIME. BUT I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THE FACT THAT PEOPLE

DESERVE THEIR DAY IN COURT, AND I THINK THAT THAT COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED

BY BEING CLEAR, WHICH I THINK YOU NOW HAVE BEEN, FOR -- FOR THE

152

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

LEGISLATIVE INTENT REGARDING THE FACT THE PROTECTIVE ORDERS ARE STILL

AVAILABLE. BUT I REALLY WOULD LIKE US TO SEE US STRIKE SECTION 3 BECAUSE

THE FACT THAT -- THE FACT THAT THE COURT CAN CONDUCT THESE ELECTRONIC

APPEARANCES AND HEARINGS IS NOT GOOD CAUSE. AND THAT IS -- IT

ELIMINATES GOOD CAUSE IN THOSE SITUATIONS. SO THAT'S REALLY MY CONCERN.

THE FIRST PART COMPLETELY MAKES SENSE, AND I THINK THAT'S JUST IN THE

INTEREST OF FAIRNESS. WE NEED TO CERTAINLY HAVE AN AVAILABLE MEANS FOR

THESE PEOPLE TO GET THEIR DAY IN COURT, 100 PERCENT. I DON'T THINK

ANYONE DISAGREES WITH THAT. I JUST FEEL THAT THIS DOES EXPOSE THE

VICTIMS TO SOME REALLY DIFFICULT SITUATIONS. SO THERE'S ALWAYS THAT

BALANCE BETWEEN VICTIM'S RIGHTS AND DEFENDANT'S RIGHTS. I THINK THIS JUST

GOES A LITTLE BIT TOO FAR, AND WE NEED TO KEEP THOSE --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SIR, YOUR TIME HAS

PASSED.

MR. PALUMBO: -- VICTIMS' RIGHTS ALWAYS AT THE

FOREFRONT.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THANK YOU, JOE.

MR. LENTOL: THANK YOU, MR. PALUMBO.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WOULD

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

MR. LENTOL: YES, I WILL, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. LENTOL YIELDS.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. LENTOL. I WAS

HOPING YOU COULD CLARIFY A COMMENT THAT WAS MADE EARLIER. IN LOOKING

153

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AT THE LANGUAGE OF THIS BILL, IT SEEMS TO ME ON LINES 17 THROUGH 19 IT

SAYS, THE JUDGE MUST BE ABLE TO HEAR AND SEE THE IMAGE OF EACH

WITNESS CLEARLY THROUGH THE INDEPENDENT AUDIO-VISUAL SYSTEM, AND SUCH

THE SOUND AND VISUAL IMAGE SHALL BE SIMILAR TO THE SOUND AND IMAGE

THE JUDGE WOULD HEAR AND SEE IF HE WERE HEARING THE TESTIMONY LIVE.

DOESN'T THAT LANGUAGE PRECLUDE ANYTHING THAT WOULD --

(DOG BARKING)

MR. LENTOL: MY DOG SAYS NO.

(LAUGHTER)

MR. GOODELL: THANK GOD YOUR -- YOUR DOG WENT

TO A HIGH-QUALITY LAW SCHOOL, RIGHT?

(LAUGHTER)

BUT THAT DOESN'T PRECLUDE HIDING THE IMAGE OF THE

VICTIM OR DISGUISING THEIR VOICE? IT SEEMS THAT LANGUAGE IS PRETTY CLEAR

THAT THE VOICE AND THE APPEARANCE HAD TO BE NOT DISGUISED, IF YOU WILL,

BUT VERY CLEAR AS IT WAS.

MR. LENTOL: I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, AND I

THINK THAT YOU SHOULD RECOGNIZE THAT A PROTECTIVE ORDER CAN TRUMP THAT

-- THAT STATUTORY LANGUAGE IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE WITNESS.

MR. GOODELL: AND CAN YOU POINT OUT TO ME

WHERE THAT PROTECTIVE ORDER LANGUAGE IS? IT'S CERTAINLY NOT IN THIS BILL

TEXT ITSELF, CORRECT?

MR. LENTOL: NO, IT'S NOT. IT'S JUST THE POWER OF THE

JUDICIARY TO ISSUE PROTECTIVE ORDERS IN ORDER TO PROTECT WITNESSES.

MR. GOODELL: WOULDN'T IT MAKE SENSE, THEN, TO

154

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

HAVE THAT REFERENCE IN THIS LANGUAGE, SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE ORDER?

BECAUSE NORMALLY -- THE NORMAL (UNINTELLIGIBLE) THAT A SPECIFIC

PROVISION OF THE STATUTE, THOUGH ABSENT SOMETHING ELSE, OVERRIDES

GENERAL RULES. I MEAN, IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC PROVISION THAT SAYS YOU

MUST PROVIDE THE IMAGE AND THE SOUND, THAT NORMALLY OVERRULES ANY

OTHER GENERAL RULE. SO SHOULDN'T WE AT LEAST HAVE A CROSS-REFERENCE?

MR. LENTOL: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) THE DISCRETION -- AND

THE EXECUTIVE ORDER COVERS THAT SITUATION THAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED, IF YOU

LOOK AT THE EXECUTIVE ORDER. I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME. 245.70.

MR. GOODELL: I -- I APOLOGIZE. THAT WAS 245 --

MR. LENTOL: .70.

MR. GOODELL: .70. THANK YOU, MR. LENTOL. I

APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.

MR. LENTOL: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON RULES REPORT NO. 45. THIS IS A PARTY VOTE. ANY MEMBER

WISHING TO BE RECORDED AS AN EXCEPTION TO THEIR CONFERENCE POSITION IS

REMINDED TO CONTACT THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBER

PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE

REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL BE VOTING NO. IF ANY MEMBER WOULD

PREFER TO VOTE YES, PLEASE CONTACT THE MINORITY LEADER'S OFFICE

155

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

FORTHWITH.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) VOTING

IN FAVOR. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) AND WE WOULD HOPE THAT OUR COLLEAGUES, IF

THEY WOULD LIKE TO VOTE NO, THAT THEY WOULD CONTACT THE RESPECTIVE

OFFICE AND WE WILL SO DULY NOTE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. GOODELL TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.

SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I APPRECIATE THE -- THE SPONSOR'S DESIRE TO

PROVIDE AN ELECTRONIC MEANS TO PROCEED WITH PRELIMINARY HEARINGS, AND

IF THE PROTECTIONS TO THE WITNESS IN PARTICULARLY SERIOUS CASES THAT MIGHT

DIRECTLY IMPACT THE WITNESS' IDENTITY OR SAFETY -- A CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

VICTIM, FOR EXAMPLE, OR A RAPE VICTIM OR IN A MOB SITUATION WHERE THE

WITNESS' IDENTITY IS EXTRAORDINARILY SENSITIVE -- IF THOSE PROTECTIONS WERE

IN PLACE IN THIS BILL, THEN I THINK IT WOULD BE A VERY DIFFERENT BILL. I

APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR'S REFERENCE TO SECTION 245.70 OF THE CRIMINAL

PROCEDURE LAW, BUT I -- I BELIEVE THAT SECTION 275.70 OF THE CRIMINAL

PROCEDURE LAW RELATES TO PROTECTIVE ORDERS IN THE CONTEXT OF DISCOVERY

RATHER THAN IN THE CONTEXT OF A PRELIMINARY HEARING. BECAUSE OF THE

VERY SERIOUS POTENTIAL UNINTENDED RAMIFICATIONS ON THE IDENTITY OF

WITNESSES AT THE EARLY PROCEEDINGS WHERE THE WITNESS WOULD OTHERWISE

156

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

BE PROTECTED IN A SECRET GRAND JURY PROCEEDING, I THINK IT'S

INAPPROPRIATE FOR US TO PROCEED AT THIS TIME UNTIL THAT ISSUE HAS BEEN

ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED.

FOR THAT REASON, I'LL BE VOTING NO AND I ENCOURAGE MY

COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. AND AGAIN,

THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR THEIR THOUGHTFUL DISCUSSION.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, WE DO

ACTUALLY HAVE ONE OF OUR COLLEAGUES THAT HAS CALLED IN TO REQUEST A NO

VOTE, MR. BARNWELL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR. THE FOLLOWING

REPUBLICANS WOULD LIKE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS LEGISLATION: MR. REILLY,

MR. MORINELLO, MR. MONTESANO, MS. MALLIOTAKIS, MR. MANKTELOW AND

MR. WALCZYK.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED, SIR. THANK

YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, I HAVE ONE

ADDITIONAL COLLEAGUE THAT WOULD LIKE TO VOTE NO ON THIS BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: CERTAINLY.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SANTABARBARA.

157

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?

MR. GOODELL: SIR, THERE ARE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THERE ARE?

MR. GOODELL: YES. MR. BYRNES [SIC] AND MR.

NORRIS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ARE VOTING FOR THE

BILL?

MR. GOODELL: THAT IS CORRECT, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ALL RIGHT.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: LET ME TRY THAT AGAIN.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

RULES REPORT NO. 50, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A10517, RULES REPORT

NO. 50, COMMITTEE ON RULES (AUBRY, OTIS, BICHOTTE, L. ROSENTHAL,

GLICK, DINOWITZ, DENDEKKER). AN ACT TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH TO CONDUCT A STUDY ON THE HEALTH IMPACTS OF COVID-19 ON

MINORITIES IN NEW YORK STATE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THERE IS AN

AMENDMENT AT THE DESK. MS. -- MR. BYRNE TO BRIEFLY EXPLAIN THE

AMENDMENT WHILE THE CHAIR EXAMINES IT.

MR. BYRNE: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I OFFER THE

158

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

FOLLOWING AMENDMENT, WAIVE ITS READING, MOVE FOR ITS IMMEDIATE

ADOPTION AND ASK FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN IT, AS YOU JUST SO

ELOQUENTLY OFFERED. FIRST, MR. SPEAKER, LET ME COMMEND THE SPONSOR

OF THE BILL-IN-CHIEF AND EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR THE LEGISLATION, WHICH

REQUIRES THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO CONDUCT A STUDY ON THE HEALTH

IMPACTS OF COVID-19 ON MINORITY COMMUNITIES IN NEW YORK STATE.

WHILE THIS IS A VERY LAUDABLE AND IMPORTANT PROPOSAL, ONE WHICH I

BELIEVE MAY HAVE BEEN A PRODUCT FROM LEGISLATIVE HEARINGS THAT WERE

DISCUSSED IN DEBATE YESTERDAY AND HELD EARLIER THIS MONTH, IT IS MY

POSITION AND THE POSITION OF MANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES THAT WE CAN STILL

IMPROVE UPON IT. THIS AMENDMENT DOES NOT DIMINISH THE BILL-IN-CHIEF

IN ANY WAY. RATHER, IT ADDS TO THE BILL-IN-CHIEF A REQUIREMENT THAT THE

STUDY ALSO LOOK INTO THE DIFFERENTIAL HEALTH IMPACTS OF COVID-19 ON A

RESIDENTIAL HEALTHCARE FACILITY'S STAFF AND RESIDENTS OF WHICH ALSO

INCLUDES MANY MEMBERS OF OUR MINORITY COMMUNITIES.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WE HAVE EXAMINED

THE AMENDMENT, MR. BYRNE, AND FOUND IT GERMANE TO THE BILL BEFORE THE

HOUSE.

ON THE AMENDMENT.

MR. BYRNE: THANK -- THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

THROUGH EXECUTIVE ORDERS, DIRECTIVES AND OTHER MANDATED POLICIES, THE

GOVERNOR AND STATE AGENCIES SUCH AS THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, AMONG

OTHER THINGS, HAVE REQUIRED HOSPITALS TO INCREASE THEIR CAPACITIES AND

DIRECTED NURSING HOMES TO TAKE BACK PATIENTS POSITIVE WITH COVID-19

159

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WHO HAD INITIALLY BEEN PREVIOUSLY HOSPITALIZED WHEN IT WAS DETERMINED

THEY NO LONGER NEEDED SUCH EXTENSIVE CARE. IN PART, DUE TO THESE

POLICIES, COVID-19 HAS SADLY GONE THROUGH SOME NURSING HOMES LIKE

WILDFIRE. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD HELP US TO DISCOVER IF THE MOST

VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES WERE EFFICIENTLY PROTECTED FROM THIS TRAGIC

PANDEMIC. SINCE WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN UNIMAGINABLE NUMBERS OF

DEATH IN RESIDENTIAL HEALTHCARE FACILITIES, LOOKING INTO DISPARITIES AND

NOT INCLUDING STAFF AND RESIDENTS IN SUCH NURSING FACILITIES SEEMS LIKE A

MISSED OPPORTUNITY. FURTHERMORE, SINCE THERE IS CONSIDERABLE OVERLAP

BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL HEALTHCARE FACILITY STAFF AND RACIAL AND ETHIC --

ETHNIC MINORITIES, IT WOULD SEEM AS THOUGH THIS SUBSECTION OF THE

POPULATION SHOULD ALSO BE TAKEN INTO SERIOUS CONSIDERATION. THIS

AMENDMENT DOES NOT REPLACE THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARINGS OR

AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION OF THE STATE'S HANDLING OF OUR NURSING FACILITIES

DURING THE PANDEMIC. IT IS WORTH NOTING THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS ALREADY

ANNOUNCED THAT BOTH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THE DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH ARE INVESTIGATING OUR NURSING HOMES. BUT THIS AMENDMENT

WOULD ENSURE THAT DOH IS REQUIRED BY LAW, BY THIS BODY, TO CONDUCT A

STUDY THAT REVIEWS BOTH THE DIFFERENTIAL HEALTH IMPACTS OF COVID-19

ON MINORITY COMMUNITIES AS WELL AS RESIDENTS AND STAFF AT NURSING

FACILITIES, AND THEN SHARE ITS FINDINGS WITH ALL OF OUR LEGISLATIVE LEADERS.

FROM THERE, WE, AS A COEQUAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT, CAN CONSIDER ALL

OF THE FACTS, FURTHER EVALUATE THE MERITS FOR CALLS FOR ADDITIONAL OUTSIDE

INVESTIGATIONS, AND INTRODUCE POLICIES THAT BETTER PROTECT OUR

COMMUNITIES -- OUR MINORITY COMMUNITIES AS WELL AS RESIDENTS AND

160

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

STAFF AT NURSING FACILITIES.

I THANK YOU FOR YOUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION OF THIS

AMENDMENT, AND IN THE INTEREST OF OPENNESS AND TRANSPARENCY, I URGE

ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT. THANK YOU,

MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

THE CLERK -- MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES. EXCUSE ME.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER. I AM GOING TO BE URGING A PARTY VOTE ON -- ON THIS ITEM. I DO

WANT TO APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUE. FIRST, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR

SPONSORING THE LEGISLATION. I THINK IT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT. AND I

APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE FOR WANTING TO

ADD AN AMENDMENT, BUT QUITE HONESTLY, A COUPLE THINGS: ONE, I DON'T

THINK THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH IS EXPANSIVE ENOUGH TO DO A

MULTI-TIERED STUDY, AND I DO THINK THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME SPECIFIC

FOCUS ON THE MINORITY COMMUNITY. IF YOU LOOK ACROSS THE

DEMOGRAPHICS OF WHO HAS DIED THE MOST, WHO HAS CONTACTED THE

DISEASE THE MOST IT, I THINK IT WARRANTS THAT. NOW, THAT DOESN'T MEAN

THAT NONE OF THOSE COMMUNITIES DON'T NEED TO HAVE SOME LOOK AT THOSE

AS WELL OR ANY KIND OF HEALTH FACILITY OR THE RURAL COMMUNITY OR THE

SUBURBAN COMMUNITY. OR QUITE HONESTLY, THE K-12 COMMUNITY.

EVERYBODY'S COMMUNITY DESERVES A LOOK. BUT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR

AND WHAT I WOULD ASK MEMBERS TO CONCUR WITH, IS THAT THIS IS A SPECIAL

LOOK THAT JUST LOOKS AT THE MINORITY COMMUNITY. AND LET'S FIGURE OUT

HOW DO WE ADD EVERYBODY ELSE IN AT SOME OTHER POINT.

161

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SO WITH THAT, I'M ENCOURAGING A PARTY VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.

SPEAKER. ALTHOUGH WE CERTAINLY DISAGREE WITH THE HEALTH

DEPARTMENT'S INITIAL EVALUATION TO SEND COVID-ACTIVE PATIENTS BACK

INTO THE NURSING HOMES, RESULTING IN THOUSANDS OF DEATHS, WE DO WANT

TO, AS A COURTESY, GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THAT DECISION ON

THEIR OWN AS PART OF A BROADER REVIEW. AND WE'RE PARTICULARLY

CONCERNED OVER THE HUNDREDS, IF NOT THOUSANDS, OF MINORITY MEMBERS

THAT WERE KILLED IN THE NURSING HOMES AS A RESULT OF THAT DECISION. AND,

THEREFORE, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE REVIEW THAT'S BEING CONDUCTED

BY THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT BE THOROUGH AND CAPABLE AND

COMPREHENSIVE. AND, THEREFORE, THE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL BE

SUPPORTING THIS EFFORT FOR A BROADER REVIEW. THERE WILL BE A PARTY LINE

VOTE BY THE REPUBLICANS IN FAVOR, UNLESS ONE OF OUR COLLEAGUES FEELS

DIFFERENTLY, IN WHICH CASE THEY SHOULD CERTAINLY CONTACT THE MINORITY

OFFICE IMMEDIATELY.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE. THIS IS A PARTY VOTE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, WE'RE

CALLING FOR A PARTY VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS AMENDMENT.

162

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

OF COURSE, OUR COLLEAGUES WHO WISH TO VOTE WITH THE

MINORITY THEY COULD ALWAYS DO SO. THAT -- YOU CAN CALL MY OFFICE. WE

HAVE A COUPLE NAMES ALREADY, BUT WE'LL HOLD OFF UNTIL THERE'S MORE,

SHOULD THERE BE MORE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, WE DO

HAVE ONE. MR. PHIL STECK WILL BE A YES VOTE ON THIS ONE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE AMENDMENT IS DEFEATED.

ON THE BILL -- ON A MOTION BY MR. AUBRY, THE SENATE

BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON RULES REPORT NO. 50. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WISHING TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBER PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MR. AUBRY TO

EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. AUBRY: CERTAINLY. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER,

FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN THE VOTE. THIS BILL WHICH WILL REQUIRE

163

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO CONDUCT A STUDY ON THE RACIAL AND ETHNIC

DISPARITIES IN RELATION TO THE IMPACT OF COVID-19. MANY OF YOU KNOW

THAT I COME FROM A COMMUNITY CALLED CORONA-EAST ELMHURST. AND

WHEN THE PANDEMIC STARTED IN THE LATE WINTER, I WAS AT A HOSPITAL,

ELMHURST HOSPITAL, WHICH MANY OF YOU MAY HAVE KNOWN WAS THE

CENTER OF THE OVERCROWDING OF THE COVID PATIENTS IN THE BOROUGH OF

QUEENS. I REMARKED TO THE COMMUNITY COUNCIL HOW I WAS UPSET THAT

SOMEBODY HAD STOLEN MY COMMUNITY'S NAME AND THREW IT INTO THE

MIDDLE OF A PANDEMIC, AND WE ALL LAUGHED. BUT WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT

WAS TO FOLLOW. THOSE DOCTORS, THOSE NURSES, THOSE COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS

THAT WERE IN THAT ROOM ALL DID UNDERSTAND, HOWEVER, THAT THE WORLD HAD

BECOME SO MUCH SMALLER AND THAT WE COULDN'T BUILD WALLS AND -- AND

HOLD THINGS OUT THAT ARE INTERNATIONALLY-BORNE. THAT COMMUNITY HAS

BEEN DEVASTATED BY THE VIRUS. MY PERSONAL FRIENDS NOW COUNT

SOMEWHERE UP TO 20 WHO HAVE FALLEN VICTIM TO THIS DISEASE. IT HAS

BEEN VERY DIFFICULT. WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO SAY GOODBYE. WE HAVEN'T

BEEN ABLE TO MOURN. MY COMMUNITY IN MANY WAYS IS IN SHOCK. AND

SO, WHEN A PART OF THIS PROCESS, ALL OF A SUDDEN IT WAS ANNOUNCED BY

THE LEADERS - BOTH THE GOVERNOR, THE MAYOR, AND ULTIMATELY THE

GENTLEMAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE - THAT REMARK, OH MY GOODNESS. HOW

COME IT HIT THESE MINORITY COMMUNITIES, BLACK AND BROWN, SO HARD? I,

IN ONE WAY, WAS RECOILED, BECAUSE I KNOW IN THIS BODY AND AROUND THE

COUNTRY WE HAVE OFTEN TALKED ABOUT WHAT IT IS TO BE IN MINORITY AND

POOR COMMUNITIES AND THE LACK OF SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED THERE.

AND IT'S A BEEN A BATTLE THAT WE HAVE FOUGHT FOR YEARS, THAT GOES BACK

164

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

UNDOUBTEDLY TO SLAVERY WHEN THE DISPARITY TREATMENT OF WHO YOU WERE

AS AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN AND THEN ULTIMATELY OTHER MINORITIES WAS

BORN. SO HERE'S A TIME -- THIS IS WHAT WE CALL THE "OPPORTUNITY OF

CRISIS" -- TO BRING TO BEAR THE FORCES OF THIS STATE, THE HEALTH FORCES OF

THIS STATE, TO LOOK AT WHY THESE COMMUNITIES ARE SO AND WERE SO

IMPACTED, ARE CONTINUING TO BE SO IMPACTED. AND WE JUST LOOK AT THE

HEALTH ASPECTS, BUT THOSE HEALTH ASPECTS WILL BE DETERMINED BY SOCIO --

OTHER SOCIOECONOMICS THAT WE HAVE OFTEN IN THIS COUNTRY STRUGGLED

WITH. HOW DO WE SOLVE THE PROBLEM? HOW DO WE GET RID OF THE

ORIGINAL SIN. AND MANY PEOPLE HAVE CAUSED (UNINTELLIGIBLE) SLAVERY TO

BE THE ORIGINAL SIN. AND THAT IT STRINGS OUT OVER TIME AND CHANGES AND

MORES. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN HERE WE HAVE A GERM FROM SOME

OTHER PART OF THE WORLD WHO DESCENDS ON US AND EXPOSES IT FOR ITS

REALITY.

YOU KNOW, IN AMERICA WE KIND OF -- WE HAVE A SHORT

MEMORY. WE DO. WE LIKE -- THEY SAY WE HAVE ABOUT SIX WEEKS AND WE

FORGET EVERYTHING. AND SO OFTENTIMES WE HAVE FORGOTTEN THE STRUGGLES

OF THE PAST. OFTENTIMES IN OUR BUSY LIVES ACROSS THIS STATE, DIFFERENT

HUMAN BEINGS, WE GET CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT IS OUR LOCAL ISSUE, AND

FORGET ABOUT LARGER ISSUES. SO I BRING YOU THIS STUDY IN HOPES THAT IT

WILL BRING US TO A PLACE WHERE WE WILL RECOGNIZE THAT HUMAN BEINGS ARE

ALL SUBJECT TO THE SAME THINGS. WAR OF THE WORLDS. REMEMBER? WAR

OF THE WORLDS. IT WAS THE LITTLEST OF GERMS THAT DEFEATED THE INVADERS

FROM MARS. THE LITTLEST OF GERMS BROUGHT DOWN THE ENEMIES THAT WERE

IN FRONT OF US. WE SAY WE'RE IN A WAR. I BELIEVE THAT'S TRUE. IN MY

165

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

COMMUNITY, WHICH HAS SUFFERED SO GREATLY, AS MANY OF OTHERS, HAVE

BEEN THE HEART OF THE WAR ZONE. THAT'S WHERE WE FOUGHT IT. NOW, I DO

KNOW THAT OTHER PLACES HAVE NOT SUFFERED AS WE HAVE. BUT WE ARE YOUR

BROTHERS. WE ARE THE MEMBERS OF THIS STATE. WE ARE CITIZENS. WE ARE

HUMAN BEINGS. WHETHER WE ARE FROM FAR OR NEAR, THAT'S WHO WE ARE.

AND WHAT HAPPENS TO US WILL HAPPEN TO YOU. AND WE SEE THAT

HAPPENING IN THE COUNTRY, WHERE OTHER PLACES WEREN'T AFFECTED. AND

NOW THOSE DEATH RATES ARE GOING UP. DO WE NOT UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE

UNABLE TO BE SEPARATED? WE CANNOT BE SEPARATED. WE ARE BONDED

TOGETHER BY THIS MORTAL COURT.

SO I ASK YOU TO SUPPORT THIS. I ASK US TO STAY VIGILANT

ON THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, ON THE GOVERNOR, ON THE RESOURCES OF THIS

STATE. I HOPE THAT WE WILL ACCEPT THE FACT THAT OUR HUMANITY CANNOT BE

SEPARATED BY RACE OR ECONOMICS OR COLOR OR LANGUAGE OR ANY OF THOSE

DISTINGUISHING FACTORS. BECAUSE WHEN YOU WALK BY ME AND YOU SIT BY

ME AND YOU TALK TO ME, WHEN WE MOVE IN THE WORLD TOGETHER WE ARE

SUBJECT TO THE SAME FRAILTIES.

I WITHDRAW MY REQUEST AND I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

(APPLAUSE)

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MR. AUBRY IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. BYRNE TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BYRNE: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I JUST WANT

TO -- TO REITERATE MY SUPPORT FOR THIS LEGISLATION. WHILE I REGRET THAT THE

AMENDMENT DID NOT PASS, I STILL WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL. I KNOW THE

166

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SPONSOR PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO IT. A LOT OF OUR COLLEAGUES ON BOTH SIDES

OF THE AISLE PARTICIPATED IN A PUBLIC HEARING. UNFORTUNATELY, I COULD NOT

PARTICIPATE BECAUSE I WAS IN A -- IN A HOSPITAL FOR THE BIRTH OF MY -- MY

CHILD. BUT I SPOKE WITH COLLEAGUES FROM BOTH CONFERENCES, AND I GOT

TO TELL YOU THAT THIS ISSUE HAS TOUCHED A LOT OF US, REGARDLESS OF PARTY.

WE HEAR THE GOVERNOR SPEAK IN HIS DAILY PRESS BRIEFINGS, AND HE TALKS

ABOUT "NEW YORK TOUGH" AND HE TALKS ABOUT HOW WE HAVE TO BE SMART

AND WE HAVE TO BE ALL THESE GREAT THINGS AND HOW WE HAVE TO BE LOVING.

AND I THINK THAT'S -- THAT'S THE TRUTH. NEW YORKERS DO HAVE TO BE

LOVING, AND WE HAVE TO BE CARING FOR ALL NEW YORKERS, AND CERTAINLY

THAT APPLIES WITH -- WITH THIS BILL, AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE

LOOK AFTER EVERYBODY. I -- YOU KNOW, I -- I REPRESENT A MORE SUBURBAN

AREA NORTH OF NEW YORK CITY, JUST ABOUT AN HOUR NORTH. A LITTLE BIT LESS

THAN AN HOUR NORTH OF THE BRONX. SO IT'S NO SURPRISE THAT A LOT OF MY

CONSTITUENTS ACTUALLY WORK IN THE BRONX. I HAVE FAMILY AND FRIENDS THAT

WORK DOWN THERE, AND I GOT A LOT OF STORIES THAT CAME BACK TO ME ABOUT

THE HOSPITALS DOWN THERE, HOW THEY WERE OVERWHELMED, AND THIS ---

THIS -- THE PAIN AND THE FEAR AND THE SADNESS THAT PEOPLE WERE LIVING.

SO THIS IS CERTAINLY A -- A -- A GREAT BILL AND I WILL BE

VOTING IN FAVOR OF IT. AND THE SPONSOR, I -- I FULLY EXPECT THAT YOU'RE

GOING TO HAVE BROAD BIPARTISAN SUPPORT WHEN THIS BILL PASSES TODAY.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MR. BYRNE IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. BARRON TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

167

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. BARRON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AT THE VERY

BEGINNING OF THIS CRISES, THE MAYOR CAME OUT WITH STATISTICS THAT SAID

34 PERCENT OF THE DEATHS IN NEW YORK CITY WERE IN THE LATINO-LATINA

COMMUNITY, AND THEY WERE 26 PERCENT OF THE POPULATION. TWENTY-EIGHT

PERCENT OF THE DEATHS WERE IN THE BLACK COMMUNITY, AND WE WERE 22

PERCENT OF THE POPULATION. AFTER GETTING THOSE STATISTICS, YOU WOULD

HAVE THOUGHT THAT ALL OF THE RESOURCES WOULD COME TO THOSE AREAS,

INCLUDING OUR NURSING HOMES AND OTHER PLACES. BUT THOSE AREAS THAT

WERE HARDEST HIT. BUT NO. A SHIP CAME TO THE WHITE COMMUNITY AND

HAD 1,000 BEDS ON IT. THEY ONLY USED 200 AND SENT THE SHIP AWAY WITH

800 BEDS UNUSED. THEY SET UP A HOSPITAL IN THE JAVITZ CENTER,

UNDERUTILIZED IN THE WHITE COMMUNITY. THEY ALSO SET UP CENTRAL PARK

IN THE WHITE COMMUNITY AS A MEDICAL FACILITY, AND ROOSEVELT ISLAND IN

THE WHITE COMMUNITY. THEY PRIORITIZED ALL OF THAT EVEN THOUGH IT WAS

SAID THAT OVER 62 PERCENT OF THE DEATHS - AND WE THOUGHT THAT WAS AN

UNDERCOUNT - WAS IN THE BLACK AND BROWN COMMUNITIES.

SO I SUPPORT THIS BILL 1,000 PERCENT. AND AFTER THE

STUDY, WHICH WILL SHOW CLEARLY THAT THERE'S PREEXISTING CONDITIONS,

POLITICAL, ECONOMIC CONDITIONS IN OUR COMMUNITY CALLED POVERTY,

UNEMPLOYMENT, HOMELESSNESS, THAT LEADS TO THE PREEXISTING HEALTH

CONDITIONS FROM STRESS OF HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE, HYPERTENSION, ASTHMA,

DIABETES, HEART DISEASE. THE PREEXISTING CONDITION OF POVERTY IS

CREATED BY A RACIST, PARASITIC, CAPITALIST SYSTEM.

I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE FOR THIS BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MR. BARRON IN

168

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. ORTIZ TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. ORTIZ: THANK YOU -- THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER,

FOR ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. LIKE THE PRIOR SPEAKER, YOU

KNOW, THAT WE -- WE -- YOU KNOW, WE SUFFERING THE MOST UNDER THIS

PANDEMIC EPIDEMIC AS A HISPANIC AFRICAN-AMERICAN IN THE CITY OF

NEW YORK BEING IF YOU COMBINED THE NUMBERS TOGETHER WILL BE THE

MAJORITY. ONE OTHER THING THAT HAPPENED WAS THE INEQUALITY AND THE

RACIAL DISPARITY CONTINUED TO BE SEEN. WHEN MY GRANDDAUGHTER, WHO IS

FIVE YEARS OLD, PENELOPE, SAID TO ME, PAPA, WHY -- WHY THE HISPANIC

COMMUNITY IS DYING SO QUICK? WHY DO THIS HAPPEN? AND I HAVE TO

EXPLAIN TO HER ABOUT WHAT'S REALLY IS HAPPENING AND WHAT IS REALLY --

REALLY -- WHY THIS IS REALLY HAPPENING IN OUR CITY WHO IS -- WHO -- WHO

-- WE HAVE THE (UNINTELLIGIBLE). WE HAVE SO MUCH MONEY IN THIS STATE,

IN THIS CITY, AND OUR PEOPLE CONTINUE TO BE THE ECONOMIC INEQUALITY

AND DISADVANTAGED.

SO, MR. SPEAKER, I REALLY THANK YOU SO MUCH, BECAUSE

WE HAVE 232 PEOPLE WHO HAS DIE IN THE SUNSET PARK-RED HOOK AREA IN

MY DISTRICT. AND WE HAPPENED TO BE THE LAST IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS

FIGHTING TOO HARD TO GET TESTING SITES IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND I APPLAUD

YOU FOR MAKING THIS BILL TO BECOME TO BE A REALITY. HOPEFULLY THIS

ADMINISTRATION WILL TAKE THIS -- THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION

SERIOUSLY, NOT ONLY TO COME OUT WITH THE STUDY, BUT TO COME OUT WITH

THE FINANCIAL ECONOMIC STRENGTH. THE FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC STRENGTH

TO HELP OUR COMMUNITY AND TO LIFT OUR COMMUNITY THAT HAS BEEN

169

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

IMPACTED THE MOST. AND WE TALKING ABOUT ECONOMIC SECURITY, FINANCIAL

SECURITY AND RESOURCES THAT OUR COMMUNITY WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE TO

MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE THE HEALTH COVERAGE THAT THEY NEED. THAT IS

THE REASON WHY I DO BELIEVE WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE

EVERYBODY COVERED, AND WE START IN THE EARLIER STAGE OF OUR CHILDREN'S

LIFE BY TACKLING HEALTHCARE, MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES IN OUR SCHOOL SYSTEM.

WE NEED TO START FROM THE BOTTOM UP, RATHER THAN THINK FROM THE TOP TO

THE BOTTOM.

SO, MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BRINGING

THIS BILL TO THE FOREFRONT. THANK YOU FOR GIVING IT TO US, AND I WILL BE

VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. GOD BLESS.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MR. ORTIZ IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. KIM TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. KIM: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR ALLOWING ME

TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I WANT TO FIRST AND FOREMOST THANK THE SPONSOR FOR

SPONSORING AND PUSHING THIS BILL FORWARD. I WANT TO ALSO THANK THE

SPEAKER AND THE STAFF FOR PUTTING TOGETHER THE -- ONE OF THE FIRST

STATEWIDE COVID-RELATED OVERSIGHT HEARINGS ON THE IMPACT OF

COVID-19 IN MINORITY COMMUNITIES. IT WAS A LONG HEARING, AND I

WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR PARTICIPATING. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) ONE OF THE

ISSUES I DO WANT TO RAISE IS THE IMPORTANCE OF ALSO INCLUDING THE IMPACT

OF COVID-19 ON ASIAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITIES. THERE'S A CATEGORY IN

THE CITY OF NEW YORK, AND WHEN YOU -- WHEN -- WHEN THEY COUNT THE

RACES OF "OTHER," AND MANY OF OUR ASIAN-AMERICAN BROTHERS AND SISTERS

170

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

FELL INTO THAT CATEGORY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT PROPERLY COUNTED WHEN THEY'RE

COUNTING THE -- THE FATALITIES. SO WE SHOULD DEFINITELY LOOK INTO

MAKING SURE THAT WE COUNT PROPERLY, THAT THE DATA IS KEPT PROPERLY, AND

-- AND EVERY ASIAN-AMERICAN WHO PASSED AWAY FROM COVID IS

INCLUDED IN THE FINAL COUNT. AND ALSO, THE IMPACT THAT IT HAD ON US -- OF

ASIAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITIES BEING SCAPEGOATED THROUGHOUT THIS

PROCESS. AND WE'VE SEEN IT ON SOCIAL MEDIA OVER AND OVER, US -- YOU

KNOW, AN OLDER ASIAN-AMERICAN WOMAN BEING KICKED IN THE FACE AND

BEING TOLD TO GO BACK TO THEIR COUNTRY AND WHY ARE YOU SPREADING THIS

ILLNESS IN THIS COUNTRY. AND ALL THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THIS STUDY

AND -- AND MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T PIT COMMUNITIES AGAINST

EACH OTHER. YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN HOSTING WEEKLY MEETINGS TO BUILD

SOLIDARITY WITH THE BLACK AND HISPANIC COMMUNITY TO -- TO PUSH BACK

AND MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN COME OUT STRONGER TO FIGHT COVID-19.

AND AGAIN, I LOOK FORWARD TO -- TO LEARNING MORE ABOUT HOW THIS

COMMISSION OR HOW THIS STUDY -- STUDY MOVES FORWARD.

AND I -- AGAIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH TO THE SPEAKER AND

THE SPONSOR FOR PUTTING THIS BILL FORWARD. AND I'M IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MR. KIM IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. FERNANDEZ TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. FERNANDEZ: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR

ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I, TOO, WANT TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR

FOR THIS VERY IMPORTANT, VERY NEEDED PIECE OF LEGISLATION. LIKE MANY OF

MY COLLEAGUES, I'VE SEEN MY COMMUNITY SUFFER. I HAVE THE ZIP CODE OF

171

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THE HIGHEST DEATH RATES IN THE BRONX RIGHT NOW, AND WE ARE SCARED. WE

WANT TO KNOW ANSWERS. AND THIS BILL WILL PROVIDE GUIDANCE, WILL

PROVIDE FACTS, AND HOPEFULLY SOLUTIONS TO FINDING OUT WHY OUR

COMMUNITIES ARE HURTING. AS MUCH AS WE KNOW WHY, WE NEED BETTER

DETAILS AND I REALLY HOPE THIS BILL DOES THAT.

AND AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR AND I VOTE IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MS. FERNANDEZ

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. RODRIGUEZ TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: I WANT TO THANK THE -- THE

SPEAKER AND THE SPONSOR FOR MOVING AHEAD WITH THIS VERY IMPORTANT

PIECE OF LEGISLATION. EAST HARLEM WAS ONE OF THOSE COMMUNITIES THAT

WERE SEVERELY IMPACTED AND HAD THE MOST CASES IN -- ON THE ISLAND OF

MANHATTAN. AND IT'S NO MISTAKE THAT AS THE PANDEMIC HAS UNFOLDED,

YOU KNOW, WE SAW A -- A REAL CORRELATION BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, POVERTY,

SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND THE LINK TO MINORITY COMMUNITIES. YOU

KNOW, I HAVE THE -- THE -- THE OTHER CHARACTERISTIC OF HAVING THE MOST

PUBLIC HOUSING IN ANY ASSEMBLY DISTRICT, AND AGAIN, THAT IS AN

IMPORTANT CORRELATION THAT HAS TO BE RECOGNIZED AS PART OF THIS STUDY.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE POVERTY, WE HAVE CLOSE CONDITIONS, WE HAVE

INADEQUATE HOUSING CONDITIONS. CHALLENGES WITH ACCESS TO HOUSING.

ALL OF THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE FOUGHT, YOU KNOW, TO CHAMPION AND --

AND IMPROVE UPON. BUT IT COMES TO -- TO LITTLE REGARD WHEN -- WHEN

THERE IS A PANDEMIC.

172

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SO, HOW DO WE DEAL WITH THIS IN THE FUTURE IS GOING TO

BE CRITICAL OF THIS STUDY, AND AS A RESULT I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND

ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MR. RODRIGUEZ

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. OTIS TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. OTIS: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE -- THE

IMPORTANT POINT OF THIS BILL - AND THIS IS AN IMPORTANT BILL - IS THAT WE

ARE GOING TO BE FACING OTHER HEALTH CHALLENGES IN THE FUTURE, AND SO IT'S

NOT JUST TO OBTAIN STATISTICS. IT'S TO GIVE US A ROADMAP SO THAT WE CAN

PROVIDE THE SUPPORT SYSTEMS TO MAKE THIS A HEALTHIER STATE FOR

EVERYBODY IN THIS STATE. WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO. THIS IS A

CHALLENGING TIME. AND THE GOAL HERE (UNINTELLIGIBLE) IS WHAT ARE WE

GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOMETHING IN ALL OF OUR COMMUNITIES GOING

FORWARD.

I VOTE AYE.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MR. ORTIZ --

MR. OTIS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. I'M SORRY.

MR. LAVINE TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. LAVINE: THANK YOU. I LIVE IN THE CITY OF GLEN

COVE, AND AS OF THIS MORNING WE HAD 858 CASES OF COVID-19

INFECTIONS, THAT IN A CITY OF APPROXIMATELY 27,000 PEOPLE. THIS STUDY

WILL HELP US TO UNDERSTAND THE DYNAMIC AND THE DEMOGRAPHIC THAT IS SO

ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THIS PANDEMIC. SECONDLY, I WANT TO SAY THAT OVER

THE YEARS I'VE HEARD A LOT OF EXTRAORDINARY SPEECHES ON THE FLOOR OF THE

173

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

STATE ASSEMBLY. I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR. HIS REMARKS WERE

PROFOUNDLY MOVING.

I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MR. LAVINE IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. HYNDMAN TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. HYNDMAN: THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE, MR. SPEAKER. AND I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR OF THE

BILL, MY COLLEAGUE, FOR BEING SO STEADFAST IN MAKING SURE THAT THIS BILL

HAS COME TO THE FLOOR AND THAT TODAY WE'RE VOTING ON IT. AS WE KNOW,

QUEENS WAS HIT PARTICULARLY HARD. ALL COMMUNITIES IN QUEENS, IN

PARTICULAR, ELMHURST AND ALSO SOUTHEAST QUEENS. AND I WANT TO THANK

MY COLLEAGUE FOR MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE -- THE REPRESENTATION IS HEARD

TODAY. ALTHOUGH THIS BILL DOESN'T HAVE THE FISCAL IMPLICATIONS OF "TO BE

DETERMINED," I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT TO COLLEAGUES THAT WE

HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FUNDING IS THERE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH TO DO THE NECESSARY WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS DOES NOT FALL BY

THE WAYSIDE AS WE COME BACK FROM THIS PANDEMIC. TO MAKE SURE THAT

WE ARE STEADFAST IN MAKING SURE THE FUNDS ARE THERE TO MAKE SURE

COMMUNITIES OF COLOR DO NOT GO THROUGH THIS AGAIN. THAT THE

DISPARITIES THAT WERE RECOGNIZED, WE WILL ACT UPON IT AND MOVE

FORWARD.

SO, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE,

AND I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MS. HYNDMAN

174

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. SAYEGH.

MR. SAYEGH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE

OPPORTUNITY. THIS -- THIS BILL IS CRUCIAL BECAUSE ALTHOUGH WE'RE MET

WITH SO MANY UNCERTAINTIES WITH THIS PANDEMIC, ONE THING WE KNOW FOR

SURE IS THAT WITH ALL THE POLICIES WITH DISTANCING, IT BECAME EXTREMELY

DIFFICULT IN MANY COMMUNITIES IN URBAN SETTINGS THAT IMPACTED PEOPLE

OF COLOR, TO REALIZE THAT IN THOSE COMMUNITIES THERE WAS A LACK OF

TESTING. TODAY WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING MANY OTHER VARIOUS TESTING AND

FOLLOW-UP, AND WE'RE LOOKING TO EXPECT POTENTIALLY AN UP -- AN

UPGROWTH IN POTENTIAL INFECTIONS AS WE MOVE ON. SO I HOPE WITH ALL

THE UNCERTAINTY THAT WE ARE LEARNING HOW TO DEAL WITH PANDEMICS AND

TO LEARN THE REALITY OF THE IMPACT THESE TYPE OF PANDEMICS HAVE ON

NEIGHBORHOODS AND COMMUNITIES.

SO I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, AND I BELIEVE THAT -- THAT

IT IS CRUCIAL FOR GOVERNMENT TO UNDERSTAND AND LEARN FROM THIS

EXPERIENCE, AND DEAL WITH ISSUES - HOPEFULLY WE DON'T HAVE TO - BUT IF

WE HAVE TO, TO POTENTIALLY BE MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE AND UNDERSTAND

WHERE THE FUNDING AND THE SERVICES AND THE TESTING NEED TO BE

IMPLEMENTED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND I THEREFORE VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MR. SAYEGH IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

175

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SPEAKER. I DID WANT TO RISE AGAIN JUST TO REALLY RE-THANK THE SPONSOR OF

THIS LEGISLATION, AND ALSO REALLY RE-THANK MR. BYRNES [SIC] FOR HIS REALLY

KIND REMARKS, AND -- AND TO CONGRATULATE HIM ON THE NEW LIFE IN HIS

FAMILY. I DO ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT THE HEARING THAT THE SPEAKER AND HIS

STAFF PUT TOGETHER ON THIS TOPIC WAS REALLY KIND OF EYE-OPENING FOR A LOT

OF PEOPLE. BECAUSE PEOPLE OFTEN THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMEHOW,

INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR ENDS UP BEING THE REASON WHY THESE THINGS TEND TO

IMPACT PEOPLE OF COLOR MORE THAN OTHERS. BUT, IN FACT, THAT'S NOT REALLY

THE TRUTH. IT'S MOSTLY ECONOMICS. IT'S THE LARGEST SOCIAL DETERMINATE OF

WHAT HAPPENS TO PEOPLE AS IT RELATES TO THEIR HEALTH. INDIVIDUAL

BEHAVIOR IS WAY ON THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST. ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE IS WAY

UP THERE, AS IS THE ENVIRONMENTS THAT WE LIVE IN. A HUGE IMPACT ON --

ON OUR HEALTH. AND SO I THINK THAT THE -- THE SPONSOR HAS THE

WHEREWITHAL TO SEND THIS TO THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND ASK THEM TO

LOOK AT ALL THESE SPECIFIC SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH AND FIGURE OUT

HOW TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW IT CAN BE BETTER. I THINK OUR

CONVERSATIONS IN THESE CHAMBERS WILL BE BETTER ONCE WE UNDERSTAND

THE CONNECTEDNESS BETWEEN MANY OF THE ISSUES THAT WE DISCUSS AND

DEBATE ON A REGULAR BASIS, AND HOW THAT NOT ONLY JUST IMPROVED THE

LIVES OF PEOPLE OF COLOR. BUT WHEN THAT HAPPENS, EVERYBODY'S LIFE IS

IMPROVED. SOCIETY IS IMPROVED. OUR ECONOMY IS BETTER. AND SO I'M

EXCITED ABOUT THIS LEGISLATION BECAUSE I KNOW WHERE IT CAN GO. AND I

JUST WANT PUT ON THE TABLE THE RACIAL EQUITY ROUNDTABLE WHICH IS

OPERATED BY THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF BUFFALO AND FUNDED BY THE

KELLOGG FOUNDATION OF AMERICA THAT IS REALLY LOOKING DEEP DIVES INTO

176

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THIS KIND OF RESEARCH. AND I HOPE THAT THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT WILL

REACH OUT TO THEM WHEN THEY BEGIN TO DO THEIR WORK. AND I HOPE THAT

THIS TIME FRAME IS KIND OF IMMEDIATE. WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TIME TO

WAIT ON LOOKING AT THIS. I THINK WE HAVE TO BEGIN THIS SORT OF STUDY

RIGHT NOW.

SO AGAIN, CONGRATULATIONS AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH,

MR. SPONSOR. I WILL VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. WRIGHT TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. WRIGHT: GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU FOR THIS

OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I AM EXTREMELY HAPPY THAT WE HAVE

PASSED THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION TODAY. AFTER SITTING THROUGH

APPROXIMATELY 12 HOURS OF TESTIMONY WHERE WE HEARD ABOUT THE

VARIOUS IMPACTS THAT WERE DEMONSTRATED AND ILLUSTRATED, I SHOULD SAY,

THROUGHOUT COMMUNITIES OF COLOR IN OUR STATE OF -- OF OVER A WEEK AGO

DURING OUR HEARING. THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO MOVE UPON THOSE

TESTIMONIES AND -- THAT WE HEARD. THIS IS A FIRST STEP. IT HELPS US TO

IDENTIFY SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEEDED TO DO, AND THIS WAS ONE OF

THEM. SO I'M VERY HAPPY THAT WE'RE GOING TO EMPOWER THE DEPARTMENT

OF HEALTH TO LOOK FORWARD -- TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS TO DO THE WORK

THAT'S NECESSARY. THIS COVID VIRUS, THIS PANDEMIC, HAS EXPOSED ALL OF

THE SHORTCOMINGS, ALL OF THE DISPARITIES, ALL OF THE INEQUITIES THAT EXIST

WITHIN OUR SYSTEM. THIS EXPOSED US, AND THEN IT EXACERBATED ALL OF

THOSE WEAKNESSES.

177

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SO I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION SO

THAT WE CAN IDENTIFY, BEGIN TO ADDRESS, AND HOPEFULLY MAKE WHOLE

COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE UNFORTUNATELY BEEN LEFT WITH LESS THAN WHAT THEY

NEEDED TO SURVIVE, LESS THAN WHAT THEY NEEDED TO LIVE FULL, HEALTHY

LIVES, AND THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A FULL PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAM THAT

INVESTS IN THE WELLNESS OF ALL OF THE PEOPLE OF NEW YORK STATE.

I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MS. WRIGHT IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. CRESPO TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. CRESPO: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN

MY VOTE. I -- I, TOO, LIKE TREMAINE WAS PROUD TO TAKE PART IN THE

HEARINGS WITH -- ALONGSIDE SO MANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES TO DISCUSS THESE

ISSUES. BUT I MENTIONED SOMETHING THAT I WANT TO SHARE NOW. THAT FOR

US -- FOR MANY OF US, THIS PANDEMIC HAS EXPOSED IN WHAT I BELIEVE THIS

STUDY AND -- AND THE WORK THAT WILL BE DONE WILL -- WILL COME BACK WITH

IS A BIG "I TOLD YOU SO" FOR MANY OF US. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE BEEN

FIGHTING FOR SO MANY YEARS IN COMMUNITIES LIKE MINE IN THE BRONX AND

THE SOUTH BRONX FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE, FOR HEALTH JUSTICE. WE'VE

BEEN TALKING ABOUT DISPARITIES. THAT'S THE REASON WHY THE PUERTO RICAN

AND HISPANIC TASK FORCE MEMBERS IN THE 90'S PUSHED FOR THE CREATION

OF THE OFFICE OF MINORITY HEALTH WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.

WHAT -- YOU KNOW, MANY OF US HAVE THE SEEN THAT THIS COULD BE A

REALITY FOR US, AND UNFORTUNATELY IT TOOK THIS PANDEMIC AND THE LIVES

LOST AND THE IMPACT TO OUR COMMUNITIES FOR MANY OTHERS TO NOW REALIZE

178

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THAT WE WEREN'T JUST -- THESE WEREN'T JUST NARRATIVES. THIS WAS THE REAL

-- THE REALITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE SUSCEPTIBILITY THAT MANY OF

OUR COMMUNITIES HAVE HAD TO LIVE WITH FOR TOO LONG. AND SO I THINK

THAT THIS IS AN INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT BILL IN THE PACKAGE OF EVERYTHING

WE HAVE DONE THIS WEEK, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE WORK THAT LIES AHEAD

TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PRIORITIZE THE MANY WAYS IN WHICH THE

INFRASTRUCTURE IN OUR COMMUNITIES, THE ACTIVITIES, ALL THE THINGS THAT

MAKE US WHOLE AS -- AS -- AS PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. FROM OUR

HOMES TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS TO OUR -- THE PROGRAMS THAT ARE AVAILABLE

TO US, TO THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM THAT'S AVAILABLE TO US. THERE -- THERE HAS

TO BE IMPROVEMENTS AND THERE HAVE TO BE REAL INVESTMENTS TO BRING US

UP TO PAR TO WHAT SHOULD HAVE ALWAYS BEEN THE STANDARD, AND I BELIEVE

THIS BILL IS A -- IS THE FIRST STEP IN GETTING US THERE.

SO I'LL BE PROUD TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MR. CRESPO IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. SIMON TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. SIMON: YES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I ALSO WANT

TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR FOR THIS VERY IMPORTANT LEGISLATION. I ALSO

ATTENDED AND PARTICIPATED IN THAT HEARING FOR 12 HOURS, AND WE'RE JUST

BEGINNING TO SCRATCH THE SURFACE OF THE INEQUITIES THAT MANY OF US KNOW

HAVE BEEN FACED AND THAT WE KNOW WE NEED TO PLUMB THE DEPTHS OF TO

MAKE OUR SOCIETY MORE EQUITABLE. AND WE CAN START HERE WITH THIS

VERY, VERY IMPORTANT STUDY, AND I'M JUST VERY -- FEEL VERY PRIVILEGED TO

BE ABLE TO VOTE FOR THIS LEGISLATION.

179

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: MS. SIMON IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

CONGRATULATIONS, MR. AUBRY.

THE CLERK WILL READ. RULES REPORT NO. 54.

THE CLERK: SENATE NO. S08113-A, RULES REPORT

NO. 54, SENATOR PARKER (A10521, COMMITTEE ON RULES - MOSLEY,

GLICK, OTIS, BICHOTTE, L. ROSENTHAL, DENDEKKER, SIMON, BLAKE, ORTIZ,

STERN, LUPARDO, BARRON, ZEBROWSKI, PERRY, GRIFFIN, LENTOL, SEAWRIGHT,

REYES, COLTON, FRONTUS, SIMOTAS, WEINSTEIN.) AN ACT TO AMEND THE

PUBLIC SERVICE LAW, IN RELATION TO ISSUING A MORATORIUM ON UTILITY

TERMINATION OF SERVICES DURING PERIODS OF PANDEMICS AND/OR STATE OF

EMERGENCIES.

ACTING SPEAKER DENDEKKER: AN

EXPLANATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. MOSLEY, AN EXPLANATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. MOSLEY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THIS ACT

WOULD PRESCRIBE UTILITIES, WATER WORK CORPORATIONS AND MUNICIPALITIES

AND TELEPHONE CORPORATIONS FROM DISCONNECTING OR TERMINATING SERVICES

TO RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS DURING AND FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THE

COVID STATE OF EMERGENCY, AND TO ALLOW CUSTOMERS WHOSE FINANCIAL

CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE STATE OF EMERGENCY TO ENTER

180

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

INTO OR RE -- RESTRUCTURE A DEFERRED PAYMENT AGREEMENT ON SAID SERVICES.

DUE TO THE ONGOING COVID PANDEMIC AND RESULTING STATE OF

EMERGENCY, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF NEW YORKERS WHO ARE EITHER UNABLE

TO WORK OR NOT EARNING A SUFFICIENT WAGE AS A RESULT, OR ARE FACING HARD

DECISIONS ON WHICH BILLS THEY ARE ABLE TO PAY IN A GIVEN MONTH. DURING

THIS TIME WHEN HEALTH AND SAFETY -- SAFETY ARE OF THE UTMOST CONCERN,

MAINTAINING THE BARE NECESSITIES OF WATER, PHONE SERVICES, GAS AND

ELECTRICITY ARE OF PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE TO ENSURE THAT THE CONTINUED

HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE OF THIS STATE. THIS BILL WOULD GIVE VITAL

RELIEF TO THE PEOPLE MOST NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY THE ECONOMIC

RAMIFICATIONS OF THIS STATE OF EMERGENCY AND FURTHER OUR STATE POLICY OF

PRIORITIZING THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PEOPLE OF OUR GREAT

STATE.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: THANK YOU, MR.

MOSLEY.

MR. MONTESANO.

NO. NO, SORRY. SORRY. WE'RE GOING TO ZOOM FIRST.

MR. MONTESANO: I DIDN'T REQUEST TO SPEAK. I'M

GOOD.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: MR. PALMESANO.

MR. PALMESANO: YES. WILL MR. MOSLEY YIELD FOR

A FEW QUESTIONS?

MR. MOSLEY: YES.

MR. PALMESANO: THANK YOU, MR. MOSLEY.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

181

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. PALMESANO: THANK YOU. AND I CERTAINLY

APPRECIATE THE INTENT BEHIND THIS LEGISLATION. I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS

THAT CAME UP AS WE HAD -- WENT THROUGH COMMITTEE, SOME CONCERNS

MAYBE SOME POSSIBLE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. BUT I THINK WE ALL

AGREE WE WANT TO PROVIDE RELIEF. REAL RELIEF TO PEOPLE WHO NEED IT. SO

I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP HERE, AND THE FIRST COUPLE

OF ONES ARE MORE TECHNICAL IN NATURE. IF I COULD FIRST -- AND I KNOW IN

THE -- THE BILL WE HAVE BEFORE US THAT THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS, THAT

THERE WAS SOME LANGUAGE -- LIKE, THE 180-DAY LANGUAGE WAS LEFT OUT IN

ONE SECTION. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT'S BEING CHANGED?

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT. IT HAS BEEN CHANGED TO

MARCH 31ST AS THE HARD DEADLINE OF NEXT YEAR. AND IF WE NEED TO

CONTINUE THIS WE'LL REVISIT IT NEXT YEAR WHEN WE'RE IN SESSION.

MR. PALMESANO: SO IT'S NOT 180 DAYS?

MR. MOSLEY: NO, THAT'S BEEN REMOVED.

MR. PALMESANO: IT'S JUST -- OKAY. SO IT COULD BE

UP TO WHENEVER THE EMERGENCY ENDS VERSUS THAT PERIOD OF TIME. OKAY.

RELATIVE TO DETERMINING THE FINANCIAL NEED, WHO -- HOW IS THAT

DETERMINED? IS THAT DETERMINED BY THE UTILITY, IS THAT DETERMINED BY

THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION? BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING IN THE BILL

THAT KIND OF -- HIGHLIGHTING OTHER (UNINTELLIGIBLE) FINANCIAL CONDITIONS.

HOW'S THAT GOING TO WORK?

MR. MOSLEY: YEAH. THOSE RATES ARE DETERMINED

BY THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION. THEY ARE THE ONES WHO'LL

DETERMINE THE RATES. OBVIOUSLY, IT'S AN ARDUOUS TASK. IT'S A -- IT'S A

182

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PRETTY LONG, YOU KNOW, DETERMINATION OVER -- OVER SEVERAL WEEKS. SO

WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT IN OVERLAPPING THIS PROVISION IT WILL INTERFERE WITH

THEIR ABILITY TO MAKE THESE RULES -- THESE CHANGES OR DETERMINATIONS.

BUT GIVEN THE FACT THAT IT TAKES USUALLY SEVERAL MONTHS, WE DON'T

BELIEVE THAT IT'LL INTERFERE WITH THEIR ABILITY TO DO THEIR JOB.

MR. PALMESANO: OKAY. AND REGARDING MOVING

THE DATE TO MARCH 31ST, SO THAT'S A FIXED DATE. THAT'S -- IT ENDS AT THAT

POINT -- POINT IN TIME? THE PROGRAM WOULD END UNLESS YOU HAVE TO

REVISIT IT, CORRECT?

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. PALMESANO: OKAY. I THINK ANOTHER CONCERN

AND QUESTION THAT CAME UP REGARDING THIS ISSUE IS THE POSSIBLE IMPACT

THIS COULD HAVE TO RATEPAYERS AS FAR AS THE -- THE PROCESS, BECAUSE --

AND THIS CAME UP AND I THINK IT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT, YOU KNOW, IF

INDIVIDUALS FOR WHATEVER REASON AREN'T ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, PAY THEIR BILL

AND THEY'RE GETTING A SERVICE, THEIR BILL'S GOING TO INCREASE, THE AMOUNT

THEY OWE IS GOING TO INCREASE. THEIR ARREARS ARE GOING TO INCREASE. BUT

ALSO IF THEY'RE GETTING A SERVICE THAT THEY'RE NOT PAYING FOR, THAT COST

WILL INCREASE ALONG WITH THAT. AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, IF A UTILITY IS NOT

GETTING -- IF THEY'RE HAVING COST INCREASES, THEIR -- BECAUSE THEIR PROFIT IS

NOT MONITORED AND REGULATED BY THE PSC, CORRECT?

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. PALMESANO: SO IF -- IF A UTILITY IS OBVIOUSLY

NOT MAKING A PROFIT, IF THEY'RE LOSING A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF DOLLARS

BECAUSE IF FOR WHATEVER REASON PEOPLE AREN'T ABLE TO PAY THEIR BILL, SO

183

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE -- THE ONLY OPPORTUNITY THEY WOULD REALLY HAVE

TO RECOUP LOSSES - WHICH COULD BE MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS OF DOLLARS,

GIVEN WHAT WE'RE FACING AND HOW THIS HAS IMPACTED - THE ONLY

OPPORTUNITY THEY WOULD HAVE AT THAT POINT IN TIME WOULD BE REALLY TO

GO TO THE PSC AND TRY GET A RATE INCREASE, WHICH AT THAT POINT IN TIME,

THAT WOULD IMPACT ALL RATEPAYERS, CORRECT?

MR. MOSLEY: WELL, THEY COULD -- SO LONG AS -- YOU

KNOW, THE DETERMINATION OF THE PSC WOULD BE BASED UPON REASONABLE

PROVISIONS OR REASONABLE STANDARDS. SO THERE WON'T BE ANY JUSTIFIABLE

RATE INCREASE SO LONG AS -- BECAUSE THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT LOSS. IT'LL STILL

BE THE PSC STANDARDS THAT THERE'LL BE APPLIED. THOSE WILL NOT BE

INTERFERED BY THIS PIECE OF PUBLIC POLICY. CLEARLY, WE WANT TO MAKE

SURE THAT THE SERVICE PROVIDERS ARE -- ARE GIVEN THE SAME STANDARDS, THE

SAME PROVISIONS IN AN EFFORT TO COLLECT BILLS THAT ARE OUTSTANDING. BUT

WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS WILL HAVE ANY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT GIVEN THE

FACT THAT WE HAVE CAPPED OFF THE PROGRAM FOR MARCH 31ST OF NEXT YEAR.

THEY STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO COLLECT AS THEY WOULD DO IN THE NORMAL

COURSE OF BUSINESS. SO WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT JUST A FEW MONTHS.

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A COUPLE YEARS. BUT I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT.

MR. PALMESANO: AND I THINK WHEN -- WITH THAT

ISSUE BECAUSE IF, AGAIN, IF -- IF SOMEONE'S FACING A LOSS OF REVENUE AND

THEY HAVE LOSSES AND THEN THAT'S THEIR ONLY ALTERNATIVE IS TO GO TO

PETITION. AND THEN IF -- IF THEY DO GET APPROVAL BECAUSE OF THOSE LOSSES

AND THEY'RE SIGNIFICANT -- THOSE LOSSES ARE SIGNIFICANT AND A -- A RATE

INCREASE IS GRANTED THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE BORNE

184

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

-- IF IT WERE APPROVED, BE BORNE BY ALL THE RATEPAYERS, CORRECT, THOUGH?

I KNOW YOU'RE THINKING IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT IT WOULD BE BORNE

BY THE RATEPAYER, CORRECT?

MR. MOSLEY: YEAH, EVENTUALLY. BUT I THINK

WORST-CASE SCENARIO, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T WANT TO THINK

WORST-CASE SCENARIO. I THINK THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE PASSING A NUMBER OF

THESE BILLS TO MAKE PEOPLE AS WHOLE AS POSSIBLE, IN AN EFFORT TO ENSURE

THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO PROVIDE SERVICES ARE PAID FOR THOSE

SERVICES, WHETHER THEY BE SERVICE PROVIDERS LIKE ELECTRIC, GAS, WATER OR

TELEPHONE.

MR. PALMESANO: ONE OTHER POINT I WANTED TO

BRING UP AN ISSUE TO. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. IF WE HAD THE WAY

RIGHT NOW THAT COULD PROVIDE DIRECT IMMEDIATE RELIEF TO THE RATEPAYER,

AND -- WOULD YOU THINK GETTING DIRECT IMMEDIATE RELIEF TO THE RATEPAYER

WOULD BE MORE OF A PRIORITY THAN WHETHER IT MAY BE PUTTING UP A FEW

SOLAR PANEL -- SOLAR FARMS OR WIND FARMS? IF WE COULD PROVIDE DIRECT

IMMEDIATE MEANINGFUL RELIEF NOW, WOULD THAT BE MORE OF A PRIORITY

THAN MAYBE -- AND MAYBE DELAY DEVELOPING SOME WIND FARMS OR SOLAR

PANELS THAT WE COULD PROVIDE THAT RIGHT NOW TO OUR RATEPAYERS?

MR. MOSLEY: WELL, RIGHT NOW I THINK WE ARE IN THE

MIDST OF A PANDEMIC AND WE'RE IN THE MIDST OF A STATE OF EMERGENCY.

SO RIGHT NOW I REALLY CAN'T -- I DON'T THINK WE -- WE'RE AFFORDED THE --

THE LUXURY OF DEALING WITH WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE THE CASE. WHAT IS

HAPPENING NOW IN YOUR DISTRICT AND MY DISTRICT AND IN SO MANY OF OUR

DISTRICTS IS THAT WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO NEED IMMEDIATE RELIEF. THEY NEED

185

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

A LESSENING OF THEIR ANXIETY THAT'S BUILDING UP EACH AND EVERY DAY AS

BILLS START TO PILE UP FROM -- FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE FROM ALL WALKS OF LIFE.

SO I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT. WE DO NEED TO SWITCH TO ALTERNATIVE WAYS

OF PROVIDING CLEAN ENERGY SO THAT WE CAN REDUCE OUR CARBON FOOTPRINT,

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH A PRESSING SITUATION THAT'S

GOING ON IN REAL TIME RIGHT NOW AS PEOPLE WATCH AND AS PEOPLE, YOU

KNOW, SIT AT THEIR KITCHEN TABLES TRYING TO BALANCE THEIR BUDGETS BASED

UPON INCOME THAT WAS -- THAT -- THAT'S NO LONGER THERE THAT WAS THERE

JUST A FEW DAYS AGO.

MR. PALMESANO: AND -- AND I AGREE WITH YOU.

AND THANK YOU, MR. MOSLEY.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: ON THE BILL.

MR. PALMESANO: I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE

INTENTION BEHIND THIS LEGISLATION AND I APPLAUD THE SPONSOR'S EFFORT FOR

WANTING TO HELP THOSE IN NEED AND IMPACTED BY COVID AND THE

HARDSHIPS IT'S CREATED. BUT THE QUESTION I ASKED ABOUT WANTING TO

PROVIDE REAL RELIEF, AND I THINK YOU WOULD AGREE THAT WE WANT -- LIKE

YOU MENTIONED, YOU WOULD WANT TO PROVIDE REAL RELIEF BUT DIDN'T THINK

WE COULD DO THAT IN THE -- IN THE SITUATION WE WERE IN. I THINK WE HAVE

A WAY WE CAN DO IT NOW, AND I'LL SHARE THAT WITH YOU A LITTLE LATER. I DO

WANT TO PROVIDE REAL RELIEF AND NOT JUST AVERT MONEY THAT'S OWED, WHICH

I THINK IS CONCERNING -- WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT AND SOME OTHERS ARE

CONCERNED ABOUT THIS IS JUST GOING TO KIND OF CONTINUE A PROCESS AND A

PROBLEM THAT COULD BE HARDER TO OUTCOME. I THINK IT'S ALMOST -- IN SOME

186

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WAYS WILL HELP SET UP A FAILURE FOR THOSE WE'RE TRYING TO HELP BECAUSE

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A BIGGER HOLE. IF THEY'RE MORE IN ARREARS,

SOMETIMES IT'S GOING TO TAKE LONGER FOR THEM TO PAY BACK. AND THIS IS A

COST THAT -- IF THERE'S LOSSES, THESE ARE COSTS THAT HAVE TO BE MADE UP,

AND AS A RESULT OF IT THEY COULD END UP IN HIGHER UTILITY RATES FOR ALL OF

OUR RATEPAYERS AND OUR CUSTOMERS, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, THE PSC DOES

REGULATE. AND IF -- IF -- IF THERE ARE LOSSES, PROVEN LOSSES AND WE KNOW

THE FINANCIAL IMPACT THIS IS HAVING, IF INDIVIDUALS AREN'T PAYING THEIR

BILLS BECAUSE OF WHATEVER REASON. I UNDERSTAND THAT. THERE IS A

SIGNIFICANT LOSS. WE'VE SEEN ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND WE'RE SEEING IT

IN OUR BUSINESS COMMUNITY. THOSE COSTS WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED,

AND WHAT HAPPEN IS, AND I THINK THE CONCERN WE'RE HAVING IS WHEN

THOSE -- THOSE INCREASES HAPPEN, IT'S GOING TO BE BORNE ON ALL THE

RATEPAYERS. IT'S GOING TO BE BORNE ON OUR ESSENTIAL WORKERS. IT'S GOING

TO BE BORNE ON OUR SENIOR CITIZENS WHO MIGHT NOT BE QUALIFIED FOR A

HARDSHIP BECAUSE THEY'RE WORKING AND HAVE AN INCOME COMING IN AT A

TIME WHEN IT MIGHT NOT BE NECESSARY AND HELPFUL. AND I THINK ALSO ON

-- ON TOP OF THAT IS THAT IT WILL ALSO CREATE A HARDSHIP FOR INDIVIDUALS

WHO WE'RE TRYING TO HELP. BECAUSE AS THOSE BILLS COMPOUND AND AFTER

THE RATES INCREASE, NOW THEIR -- THEIR RATES ARE GOING TO INCREASE OVERALL

ON TOP OF THE ARREARS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE FORCED TO MAKE UP. I

THINK WE REALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS AND MONITOR THIS CLOSELY AND THE

IMPACT. AND I KNOW A LOT OF TIMES WHEN YOU HEAR -- EVERYONE HEARS

THE WORD "UTILITY," THEY THINK OF A BIG CORPORATION. BUT I -- I WANT TO

TELL YOU, WHEN YOU HEAR THE WORD "UTILITY," YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE

187

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

RATEPAYER, TOO. BECAUSE WHEN THE COSTS FOR A UTILITY GO UP, HENCE, THE

COST FOR THE RATEPAYER IS GOING TO GO UP AS WELL. WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK

TO PROVIDE REAL RELIEF TO REDUCE THE BURDEN THAT'S PLACED ON OUR

RATEPAYERS AND ON INDIVIDUALS. NOT INCREASE THE BURDEN. AND I THINK

WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS THIS COULD LEAD TO INCREASED COSTS, HIGHER BILLS,

MORE MONEY OWED FOR ALL. AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT PROGRAMS

THAT CAN WORK AND REDUCE IT, AND NOT JUST DEFER IT. AND I KNOW WHEN I

BROUGHT UP AN IDEA THAT COULD WORK AND I -- YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT

THE CLEAN ENERGY. DO WE -- MR. SPEAKER AND MY COLLEAGUES, DO WE

REALIZE RIGHT NOW WE COLLECT PROBABLY OVER $2 BILLION A YEAR IN TAXES,

FEES AND ASSESSMENTS THAT ARE PLACED ON OUR RATEPAYER'S UTILITY BILLS?

RIGHT NOW, SITTING IN A -- WITH OUR UTILITIES IS ABOUT $1.1 BILLION IN

MONEY, OFF THE BOOKS, THAT THEY'RE WAITING TO TRANSFER TO NYSERDA TO

PAY FOR RENEWABLE AND CLEAN ENERGY PROJECTS. NOW, RENEWABLE ENERGY

IS A WORTHWHILE GOAL. BUT AS THE SPONSOR INDICATED TODAY, WE'RE IN A

PANDEMIC. PEOPLE NEED RELIEF. WOULDN'T THAT MONEY BE BETTER UTILIZED

TO PROVIDE RELIEF TO OUR PEOPLE WHO ARE SUFFERING RIGHT NOW? WE'RE

COLLECTING ABOUT -- IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THROUGH THESE TAXES AND

FEES THAT ARE FOR CLEAN ENERGY, THE SPC, RPS, THE EPS FUNDS, $40

MILLION A MONTH. I -- I CONTEND THAT MONEY WOULD BE BETTER SERVED TO

PROVIDE RELIEF TO OUR RATEPAYERS NOW AND PROVIDE THEM THE HELP THEY

NEED. THAT'S WHAT NEW YORKERS NEED. THIS WILL HELP AND PROVIDE

THEM THE -- THE ASSISTANCE THEY NEED. I THINK WE HAVE TO LOOK TO

CONTINUE TO PROVIDE HELP AND RELIEF AND SEE WHERE IT'S MOST IMPACTFUL.

SO LET'S -- I URGE MY COLLEAGUES, WE COULD DO THIS RIGHT

188

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

NOW. WE COULD GET THE GOVERNOR TO PASS ONE OF HIS EXECUTIVE ORDERS

AGAIN. BUT WHAT THIS BODY CAN DO IS SAY, HEY, LET'S USE THESE FUNDS.

WE CAN DELAY THE CLEAN ENERGY PROJECTS. LET'S GET THIS FUNDING RELIEF

BACK TO -- TO THE RATEPAYER AND PROVIDE THEM THE RELIEF THEY NEED.

BECAUSE I THINK THE MORE WE DELAY AND DEFER, IT'S GOING TO BECOME

MORE PROBLEMATIC AND -- AND NOT HELP THE PEOPLE WE'RE TRYING TO HELP

AND I THINK IT'S JUST GOING TO COST MORE AND MORE CHALLENGE AND

HARDSHIP FOR THE INDIVIDUALS OUT THERE THAT ARE SUFFERING. AND AGAIN,

THESE CLEAN ENERGY PROJECTS, THE NYSERDA, THE C -- CLCPA WE

PASSED LAST YEAR. THESE ARE ALL THINGS -- THE SO-CALLED GREEN -- GREEN

NEW DEAL ARE ALL THINGS THAT INPUT MORE COSTS AND FEES AND -- AND TAXES

ON OUR UTILITY BILLS FOR OUR RATEPAYERS. SO ALL THESE THINGS ADD MORE TO

THE UTILITY. WE CAN PROVIDE THEM WITH SOME REAL RELIEF RIGHT NOW

INSTEAD OF JUST PUSHING OFF THE COST LATER DOWN THE ROAD. AND I THINK

THAT'S THE CONCERN I HAVE, MR. SPEAKER.

I KNOW -- AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR'S INTENT. I --

I APPLAUD HIM FOR THAT. AND I THINK THERE WILL BE SOME NO VOTES ON

THIS, AND LET ME JUST BE VERY CLEAR: THE NO VOTES AREN'T AN INDICATION OF

NOT WANTING TO HELP PROVIDE ASSISTANCE AT ALL. I THINK IT'S JUST TRYING TO

HIGHLIGHT THE CONCERNS AND POTENTIAL THAT ARE OUT THERE. YOU KNOW,

RELATIVE TO COSTS -- HIGHER RATE INCREASES FOR ALL OF OUR CITIZENS WITH

HIGHER COSTS, HIGHER RATES, HIGHER UTILITY BILLS. AND WE NEED TO DO

EFFORTS AND TAKE EFFORTS THAT'S GOING TO HELP REDUCE THAT BURDEN. SO --

AND I'M -- AND I'M REALLY HOPEFUL THAT THIS LEGISLATION WILL NOT PUSH THAT

BURDEN MORE AND MORE ON THOSE WE'RE TRYING TO HELP. BUT I'M KIND OF

189

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AFRAID THAT THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE END RUN. BUT AGAIN, I

APPLAUD THE SPONSOR FOR HIS INTENTION. I UNDERSTAND WHERE HE'S COMING

FROM. I JUST THINK THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE UNINTENDED

CONSEQUENCES OF THIS THAT CAN ACTUALLY LEAD TO INCREASED RATES FOR ALL OF

OUR RESIDENTS, ALL OF OUR -- OUR CUSTOMERS, ALL OF OUR RATEPAYERS AROUND

THE STATE, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE NEED RIGHT NOW. SO LET'S -- LET'S TRY TO

WORK TOGETHER AND MAKE SOME DIFFERENCES THAT CAN PROVIDE IMMEDIATE

RELIEF. WE HAVE THE ABILITY RIGHT NOW. AGAIN, $1.1 BILLION IS SITTING IN

-- IN OUR ACCOUNTS WITH OUR UTILITIES. JUST SITTING THERE. THAT COULD BE

PUT -- PUT OUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE IMMEDIATE RELIEF RIGHT NOW,

INSTEAD OF TRANSFERRING THAT MONEY TO NYSERDA FOR GREEN ENERGY AND

-- AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PRODUCTS. I'M NOT SAYING THOSE AREN'T

VALUABLE, BUT THAT'S NOT THE PRIORITY RIGHT NOW. THE PRIORITY SHOULD BE

OUR RATEPAYERS AND OUR -- OUR RESIDENTS AT HOME. THEY NEED THAT

ASSISTANCE RIGHT NOW, MORE THAN PUTTING UP A SOLAR FARM OR A WIND

FARM. I THINK IF WE COULD THAT -- I KNOW THE SPONSOR SAID HE WOULD LIKE

TO DO THAT. LET'S DO THAT RIGHT NOW. WE COULD PROVIDE IMMEDIATE

DIRECT RELIEF TO OUR PEOPLE BACK AT HOME WHO NEED THAT TYPE OF

ASSISTANCE BECAUSE I THINK WHERE WE'RE HEADED WITH THIS IS DOWN A ROAD

THAT I THINK IS JUST GOING TO CAUSE MORE AND MORE CHALLENGE. AND THAT'S

WHY I'M NOT -- I DON'T WANT TO SEE HAPPEN. I'M HOPEFUL THAT DOESN'T

HAPPEN WITH THIS LEGISLATION.

BUT, AGAIN, I WANT TO APPLAUD THE SPONSOR FOR HIS

INTENTION. I KNOW HOW HARD HE'S WORKING FOR THAT. WE NEED TO HELP

THE PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT ARE HURTING, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO

190

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

HERE. SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS AND

CAUTIONS AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, AND I HOPE WE CAN MONITOR THIS

CLOSELY AS WE GO FORWARD.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, I APPRECIATE IT.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: MR. MOSLEY, WHY DO

YOU RISE?

MR. MOSLEY: (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. BEFORE

MR. MOSLEY EXPLAINS HIS VOTE, WOULD HE YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: MR. MOSLEY?

MR. MOSLEY: YES, I YIELD.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.

MOSLEY. RIGHT NOW, AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A NUMBER OF PROGRAMS IN

STATE GOVERNMENT THAT WE FUNDED THROUGH THE BUDGET TO ASSIST PEOPLE

WITH UTILITY CHARGES. CERTAINLY IN THE WINTER WE HAVE A GREAT PROGRAM,

THE HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. WE ALSO HAVE A LOT OF

PROGRAMS THAT WE FUND THROUGH OUR DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES TO

HELP THOSE WHO ARE IN POVERTY PAY UTILITY BILLS. WHY -- WHY SHOULDN'T

WE TAKE MONEY FROM THE CARES ACT OR FROM THE FUNDING SOURCES THAT

WERE IDENTIFIED BY MR. PALMESANO AND EXPAND THOSE PROGRAMS TO

PROVIDE DIRECT RELIEF TO TENANTS AND LANDLORDS AND PEOPLE WHO OWN

THEIR OWN HOUSE, BUT EVERYBODY, IN TERMS OF HELPING THEIR UTILITY BILLS?

WHY DON'T WE EXPAND THOSE EXISTING PROGRAMS TO HELP THOSE WHO ARE IN

191

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

FINANCIAL DISTRESS PAY FOR THEIR UTILITY BILLS?

MR. MOSLEY: WELL, I -- I -- I APPLAUD THE SPIRIT OF

THE QUESTION. I THINK REPURPOSING ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY FROM ONE

AGENCY TO ANOTHER, WE KNOW HOW LONG THAT WOULD TAKE. BUT I BELIEVE

THAT THIS BILL IS A COST-NEUTRAL BILL IN THE SENSE THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS

IT'S DELAYING PAYMENTS. WE'RE NOT ABSOLVING PEOPLE FROM THEIR

PAYMENTS, WE'RE NOT TELLING PEOPLE THAT -- THAT, WHATEVER YOU OWED

BEFORE, WHAT -- WHATEVER YOU'RE GOING TO ACCRUE IS GOING TO BE ZEROED

OUT. THIS IS JUST DELAYING THAT PROCESS. THE SERVICE UTILITY COMPANIES

WILL GET THIS -- THEIR PAYMENTS. I APPLAUD EVERYTHING THAT MY COLLEAGUE

SAID BEFORE YOU. BUT AGAIN, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE -- AND I DON'T

WANT TO OBJECTIFY THEM TOO MUCH THROUGH THE DEBATE OF THIS LEGISLATION

BECAUSE THESE ARE HUMAN BEINGS. THESE ARE FAMILIES, THESE ARE

CHILDREN, THESE ARE ELDERLY PEOPLE WHO NEED THESE CRITICAL SERVICES THAT

SOMETIMES WE JUST OFTEN TAKE FOR GRANTED. BUT THIS IS JUST A

COST-NEUTRAL PROVISION. IT HAS NO NECESSARILY NEGATIVE FISCAL IMPACT ON

THE SERVICE PROVIDERS BECAUSE THEY WILL ULTIMATELY GET PAID ONE WAY OR

THE OTHER.

MR. GOODELL: IN TERMS OF TALKING ABOUT THE LENGTH

OF THIS DELAY, THIS BILL SPECIFICALLY MENTIONS 180 DAYS AFTER THE END OF

ALL THE EXECUTIVE ORDERS. IS THAT THE MEASURED PERIOD?

MR. MOSLEY: YES.

MR. GOODELL: AND SO IF ANY PORTION OF ANY

EXECUTIVE ORDER IS STILL APPLICABLE, THEN THAT 180 DAYS HASN'T STARTED TO

RUN. IS THAT CORRECT?

192

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. GOODELL: AND SO WE MADE ALL OF THE

RESTRICTIONS STATEWIDE AND STILL HAVE A RESTRICTION IN ONE AREA, PERHAPS A

RESTRICTION IN MASS GATHERINGS IN NEW YORK CITY, AND THOSE ON THE

OTHER END OF THE STATE WOULD STILL BE EXEMPT FROM ANY TERMINATION OF

SERVICE. WOULD THAT BE CORRECT?

MR. MOSLEY: SEE -- SO IT'S -- IT'S RELATED TO THE

STATE DISASTER DECLARATION THAT'S UNDER THE EXECUTIVE ORDER. SO, AS -- AS

WE MOVE FROM ONE REGION TO THE NEXT, IT WILL BE APPLICABLE FROM ONE

REGION TO THE NEXT.

MR. GOODELL: I KNOW THAT SOME OF THE OTHER

LEGISLATION WE DISCUSSED SPECIFICALLY MADE REFERENCE TO SPECIFIC

COUNTIES AS IT RELATED TO THE PERIOD. THAT LANGUAGE IS NOT INCLUDED IN

THIS BILL, THOUGH, IS IT?

MR. MOSLEY: AS LONG AS THE EMERGENCY IS IN PLACE

THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

MR. GOODELL: I SEE. SO WE COULD BE TALKING --

WELL, ALREADY IT'S BEEN, WHAT, THREE MONTHS ROUGHLY.

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. GOODELL: SO WE COULD BE TALKING A YEAR, A

YEAR-AND-A-HALF, DEPENDING ON WHEN THE LAST ORDER IS LIFTED, AND

DEPENDING, PRESUMABLY, ON WHETHER THERE'S A SECOND WAVE OR SOME

OTHER MANIFESTATION, RIGHT?

MR. MOSLEY: WELL, WE CAN'T PRESUME THAT BECAUSE

WE DO HAVE THAT HARD CAP, THE SUNSET CAP --

193

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. GOODELL: BUT WE -- WE CAN'T KNOW --

MR. MOSLEY: -- OF (UNINTELLIGIBLE) 31ST.

MR. GOODELL: BUT WE KNOW FOR SURE IT'S AT LEAST

180 PLUS THE THREE MONTHS WE'VE ALREADY HAD, RIGHT?

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. GOODELL: AND THE REASON THE UTILITY

COMPANIES TERMINATE SERVICE WHEN SOMEBODY DOESN'T PAY IS THEY DON'T

GIVE UP THEIR CHARGE FOR THE PAST DUE, RIGHT?

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. GOODELL: SO UNDER THE CURRENT SYSTEM THEY

TERMINATE THE SERVICE BECAUSE THEY OPERATE FROM THE ASSUMPTION THAT IF

YOU AREN'T PAYING IT NOW, YOU PROBABLY WON'T PAY IT IN THE FUTURE. AND

EVEN IF THEY GET A JUDGMENT FOR WHAT'S PAST DUE, IF YOU'RE NOT PAYING

YOUR UTILITY BILL NOW, YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO PAY THAT PAST DUE

JUDGMENT EITHER, RIGHT? I ASSUME THAT'S THE RATIONALE FOR THIS

TERMINATION OF SERVICE.

MR. MOSLEY: NOT UNTIL THE END OF THE CRISIS. BUT I

-- I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

MR. GOODELL: SO, IF SOMEBODY GOES FOR A YEAR,

YEAR-AND-A-HALF WITHOUT PAYING THEIR UTILITY BILL, THAT COULD BE QUITE A

SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT DUE TO THE UTILITY COMPANY, CORRECT?

MR. MOSLEY: IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE -- THE BILL IS,

AND DEPENDING ON HOW -- HOW THE RATE APPLIES TO A MONTH-TO-MONTH

BASIS. SO IT COULD BE -- IT CAN FLUCTUATE.

MR. GOODELL: NOW THIS BILL SAYS THAT YOU'RE

194

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

IMMUNE FROM ANY TERMINATION OF SERVICE EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT PAYING FOR

ANY OF THE SERVICE YOU'RE GETTING IF THERE WAS A CHANGE IN FINANCIAL

CIRCUMSTANCES. THAT'S THE TRIGGERING CRITERIA, RIGHT?

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. GOODELL: DOES THIS BILL REQUIRE THAT THAT

CHANGE PUTS YOU BELOW POVERTY OR WITHIN 200 PERCENT OF POVERTY, OR

JUST SIMPLY A CHANGE?

MR. MOSLEY: I -- I THINK IT'S UP TO THE PUBLIC

SERVICE COMMISSION TO DETERMINE THAT. IT'S -- IT'S --

MR. GOODELL: BUT IT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THIS BILL.

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. GOODELL: SO YOU COULD CHANGE -- I MEAN,

YOUR INCOME COULD DROP BY A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT BY MY TERMS. I MEAN,

A $10- OR $20,000 DROP WOULD BE PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL FOR ME, AND YOU

COULD STILL BE EARNING $100,000, RIGHT?

MR. MOSLEY: GIVEN YOUR EXAMPLE, YES.

MR. GOODELL: WOULD THAT -- IN THIS -- BUT THIS BILL

DOESN'T TALK ABOUT INCOME THRESHOLDS OR -- OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. JUST A

CHANGE IN FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

MR. MOSLEY: IT WOULD -- IT WOULD BE UP TO THE

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, CORRECT.

MR. GOODELL: ARE THERE OTHER SITUATIONS WHERE

WE EXPECT A PRIVATE CORPORATION TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE A PRODUCT TO

CUSTOMERS THAT WON'T PAY FOR IT?

MR. MOSLEY: WELL, THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A

195

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

UTILITY THAT WE ALL RELY UPON AND DEPEND UPON, AND ANY OTHER PRIVATE

COMPANY THAT'S OUT THERE PROVIDING ANOTHER SERVICE. THIS IS A SERVICE

THAT IS -- IS UNIFORM. IT'S STATEWIDE. IT IS SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE

DEPENDS UPON TO HAVE JUST TO SURVIVE AND JUST TO OPERATE, WHETHER

YOU'RE A PRIVATE RESIDENT OR A -- OR A COMPANY.

MR. GOODELL: BUT I MEAN, CERTAINLY, WE ALL AGREE

FOOD IS ESSENTIAL. WE ARE NOT CONSIDERING, I HOPE, LEGISLATION THAT

WOULD SAY IF YOU'RE A GROCERY STORE YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE FREE FOOD TO

SOMEBODY IF THEY'RE FACING A CHANGE IN FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES BASED

ON AN IOU? IN 18 MONTHS OR 12 MONTHS THEY'LL PAY YOU BACK?

MR. MOSLEY: WE ALSO DON'T GIVE GROCERY STORES A

MONOPOLY TO DETERMINE WHO EATS AND WHO DOESN'T EAT. YEAH, WE

PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO BE IN

THOSE PREDICAMENTS WHERE THEY'RE AT THE BECK AND CALL OF ONE PARTICULAR

GROCERY PROVIDER. SO, I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, BUT I

THINK IT'S JUST APPLES AND ORANGES IN TERMS OF COMPARING GROCERY STORES

TO UTILITY -- UTILITY SERVICES.

MR. GOODELL: AND THIS ALSO APPLIES TO NON-UTILITY

SERVICES, DOESN'T IT? DOES IT APPLY TO CELL PHONE COMPANIES, FOR

EXAMPLE?

MR. MOSLEY: NO, IT DOES NOT.

MR. GOODELL: ONLY HARD LINES.

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. GOODELL: OF COURSE YOU ONLY GET THE BENEFIT

OF THIS NON-FORECLOSURE, IF YOU WILL, OR THAT CONTINUED SERVICE, RIGHT?

196

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

NON-DISCONNECT IF YOU HAVE A CHANGE IN FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCE. IS

THERE ANY REQUIREMENT THAT THE CHANGE IN FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCE BE

RELATED TO COVID? IN OTHER WORDS, WOULD YOU BE ELIGIBLE FOR A

CONTINUED PROVISION OF UTILITY SERVICE IF YOU LOST YOUR JOB BECAUSE YOU

WERE FIRED FOR NOT SHOWING UP AND YOU WERE AN ESSENTIAL WORKER OR

YOU'RE -- OR YOU LOST YOUR JOB BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU WERE

EMBEZZLING AND YOUR EMPLOYER FROWNED ON THAT ACTIVITY? OR PERHAPS,

YOU KNOW, ANY OTHER UNRELATED -- IT'S JUST A CHANGE IN FINANCIAL

CIRCUMSTANCES. THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT THAT IT BE ACTUALLY CONNECTED TO

COVID?

MR. MOSLEY: IT HAS TO BE CONNECTED TO COVID.

MR. GOODELL: AND WHERE IS THAT CONNECTION IN

THIS -- THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE?

MR. MOSLEY: IT SHOULD BE ON PAGE 1, LINE 17.

MR. GOODELL: OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S VERY

HELPFUL. WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED COST OF THIS PROGRAM IN TERMS OF THE

AMOUNT OF UTILITY SERVICE WE ANTICIPATE THESE COMPANIES WILL PROVIDE

DURING THAT TIME PERIOD WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE TERMINATED

SERVICE UNTIL THE CUSTOMERS ARE EXPECTED TO BEGIN PAYING? DO WE HAVE

AN IDEA WHAT THE MAGNITUDE IS OF THE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE, IF YOU WILL,

OF THESE UTILITY COMPANIES, THE AMOUNT OF UNPAID BILLS?

MR. MOSLEY: THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD

HAVE TO DETERMINE, BUT WE CAN GET YOU THAT NUMBER.

MR. GOODELL: BUT WE DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT.

MR. MOSLEY: NO, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD

197

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

HAVE TO TABULATE.

MR. GOODELL: OKAY. AND I'M CORRECT, AM I NOT,

THAT IF THERE WAS NO CHANGE IN YOUR FINANCIAL CONDITION YOU WOULDN'T BE

ELIGIBLE, RIGHT?

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. GOODELL: WHICH MEANS THAT SENIOR CITIZENS

WHO ARE ON A FIXED INCOME, THEY WOULDN'T BE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS

NON-TERMINATION FOR NONPAYMENT, RIGHT?

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. GOODELL: AND ALL OF OUR FRONTLINE WORKERS,

THE POLICE, FIRE, HEALTHCARE WORKERS, THEY WOULDN'T BE ELIGIBLE IN ANY

WAY FOR THIS PROGRAM, CORRECT?

MR. MOSLEY: SO LONG AS THEY'RE STILL WORKING.

MR. GOODELL: AS LONG AS THEY'RE NOT FIRED OR LOSE

THEIR JOB.

MR. MOSLEY: CORRECT.

MR. GOODELL: SO THE ONLY ONES THAT WOULD BE

ELIGIBLE FOR THIS WOULD BE THOSE WHO ARE PRESUMABLY LAID OFF,

COLLECTING STATE AND FEDERAL UNEMPLOYMENT, OR NOT, AS THE CASE MAY

BE, RIGHT?

MR. MOSLEY: WE WOULDN'T KNOW THAT. SO LONG AS

THEY CAN PROVE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN FISCAL -- YOU KNOW, SUFFERED SOME

IMPACT FINANCIALLY BASED UPON THIS STATE OF EMERGENCY AND THE

PANDEMIC.

MR. GOODELL: AND -- AND I APPRECIATE THE FACT

198

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT EXPANDING OTHER EXISTING STATE PROGRAMS

AND THE TIMING. BUT JUST EARLIER TODAY WE PASSED A BILL ALLOCATING $100

MILLION, RIGHT, TO HELP TENANTS AND LANDLORDS, AND THAT BILL WENT THROUGH

FAIRLY QUICKLY. COULDN'T WE DO THE SAME THING FOR WHATEVER THE

ESTIMATED COST MIGHT BE TO COVER THIS AND USE THE SAME FUNDING, THE

CARES ACT FUNDING FOR THAT?

MR. MOSLEY: WELL, I DON'T KNOW HOW -- THAT --

THAT MONEY THAT COMES FROM THE CARES ACT OBVIOUSLY WAS EARMARKED

DIRECTLY FOR PARTICULAR PROGRAMS OF THIS NATURE THAT WE DEBATED EARLIER

AND PASSED OUT OF THIS HOUSE. I WOULD HAVE TO SAY THAT GIVEN THE

IMMEDIACY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT PEOPLE ARE FACING NOW,

IMMEDIATE RELIEF AND TIMING IS OF THE UTMOST IMPORTANCE. I HAVE NO

PROBLEM LOOKING AT OTHER ALTERNATIVE WAYS IN WHICH TO SUPPLEMENT AND

TO -- AND TO -- AND TO GIVE MORE RELIEF TO PEOPLE. BUT AT THE SAME TIME,

WE BELIEVE THAT THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST EFFICIENT AND MORE

SUSTAINABLE WAY OF DOING IT GOING FORWARD.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.

MOSLEY.

MR. MOSLEY: YOU'RE WELCOME.

MR. GOODELL: I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AND

YOUR THOUGHTFULNESS ON THIS BILL.

MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: ON THE BILL, MR.

GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: YOU KNOW, I WOULD BE REMISS IF I

199

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

DIDN'T REMIND OUR COLLEAGUES THAT THERE ARE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

THAT PRECLUDE THE STATE LEGISLATURE FROM SIMPLY ORDERING A PRIVATE

COMPANY TO PROVIDE A SERVICE TO CUSTOMERS WHO AREN'T PAYING. EVEN IF

THE CUSTOMER HAS PROMISED TO PAY IN 120 DAYS OR --OR A YEAR. WE DON'T

HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY, IN MY OPINION, FOR A PRIVATE COMPANY TO

EXTEND A LINE OF CREDIT TO SOMEONE AND SIMPLY SAY, YOU CAN KEEP USING

ALL THE SERVICE AND PRODUCT YOU WANT, AND BY ORDER OF THE STATE

LEGISLATURE WE MUST GIVE YOU AN UNLIMITED UNSECURED LINE OF CREDIT.

IT'S BEYOND OUR AUTHORITY. IT'S BEYOND OUR AUTHORITY BECAUSE WHEN YOU

REQUIRE A PRIVATE OR PUBLIC COMPANY OR ANOTHER MUNICIPAL ENTITY TO

GIVE AN UNSECURED LINE OF CREDIT, KNOWING THAT IT WON'T ALWAYS BE PAID

BACK, YOU VIOLATE THE FIFTH AMENDMENT TAKING CLAUSE. BECAUSE WE'D

JUST BE TAKING THEIR PRODUCT, KNOWING THAT SOME OF THAT PRODUCT WILL

NEVER BE PAID FOR. AND IT VIOLATES THE CONTRACT CLAUSE, WHICH IF YOU

CHECK SUPREME COURT RULINGS REALIZE APPLIES TO PRIVATE CONTRACTS

BETWEEN PRIVATE COMPANIES AND PRIVATE UTILITY CUSTOMERS. MY GREATEST

CONCERN, THOUGH, IS THE UNANTICIPATED CONSEQUENCE. WE KNOW THAT THE

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION CAREFULLY REGULATES ALL UTILITY RATES, AND

THEY DO THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT UTILITIES AREN'T EARNING TOO MUCH PROFIT,

THAT THE RATES ARE NOT TOO HIGH. SO WE KNOW BECAUSE THE PUBLIC SERVICE

COMMISSION IS CLOSELY REGULATING THESE UTILITY COMPANIES THAT DO NOT

HAVE EXCESSIVE PROFIT. SO WHAT'S THIS MEAN? IT MEANS IF WE ORDER

THESE UTILITY COMPANIES TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE UTILITIES TO PEOPLE WHO

AREN'T PAYING FOR THEM, AND WE KNOW BY DEFINITION THE PEOPLE WHO ARE

TAKING ALL THESE PRODUCTS ARE FACING A FINANCIAL CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCE,

200

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WE KNOW THAT, WE KNOW AT THE END OF THE DAY THOSE COMPANIES ARE

GOING TO HAVE HIGHER ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE. THEY'RE GOING TO BE HAVING

A MUCH HIGHER AMOUNT OF UNPAID BILLS AND THEY'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO

THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND SAY, WE MUST RAISE OUR RATES.

AND WHO'S GOING TO PAY THE HIGHER RATES? THE SENIOR CITIZENS ON FIXED

INCOME, OUR FRONTLINE HEALTHCARE WORKERS, OUR POLICE AND FIRE, AND

EVERYONE ELSE WHO'S PAYING BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ELIGIBLE. AND THAT

WOULD BE A VERY UNFORTUNATE SITUATION TO FORCE A HIGHER RATE INCREASE ON

THOSE INDIVIDUALS RATHER THAN ALLOW THE SYSTEM TO WORK OR EXPAND OUR

OWN DIRECT SUPPORT.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. AND AGAIN, THANK YOU TO MY

COLLEAGUE.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: THANK YOU, MR.

GOODELL.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON RULES REPORT NO. 54. THIS IS A PARTY VOTE. ANY MEMBER

WISHING TO BE RECORDED AS AN EXCEPTION TO THE CONFERENCE POSITION IS

REMINDED TO CONTACT THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBER

PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE

REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL BE NEGATIVE ON THIS. IF THERE ARE MEMBERS

OF THE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE THAT WANT TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS

201

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

LEGISLATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE MINORITY LEADER'S OFFICE AS QUICKLY AS

POSSIBLE.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: DULY NOTED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER. THE -- THIS WILL BE A PARTY VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

COLLEAGUES WHO WOULD LIKE TO VOTE NO SHOULD FEEL FREE TO CONTACT THE

RESPECTIVE OFFICES AND GIVE US A CALL. WE'LL SO DULY NOTE. PARTY VOTE IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

ACTING SPEAKER JONES: THANK YOU.

MR. MOSLEY TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. MOSLEY: I'D LIKE TO THANK MY COLLEAGUE,

SENATOR PARKER, FOR BEING THE PRIME SPONSOR IN THE UPPER HOUSE. I

UNDERSTAND MY COLLEAGUES' RESERVATIONS ABOUT PUTTING SERVICE PROVIDERS

AND UTILITY COMPANIES IN THE POSITION THAT THEY'RE BEING PUT IN. BUT I

WOULD HATE TO SEE THE ALTERNATIVE IF WE DID NOT PASS THIS BILL. THE

ALTERNATIVE OF PEOPLE NOT BEING ABLE TO KEEP THEIR LIGHTS ON. NOT

HAVING WARM, HOT WATER, WHICH IS IMPERATIVE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

MAKING SURE WE WASH OUR HANDS AND BEING AS CLEAN AS POSSIBLE. I

CANNOT IMAGINE IF WE DID NOT HAVE ELECTRICITY TO HAVE LIGHTS ON. I COULD

NOT IMAGINE NOT HAVING LANDLINES FOR PEOPLE WHO NOW -- WHO USE THE --

WHO ARE ACCUSTOMED TO HAVING CELL PHONES AS THEIR PRIMARY LINE.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE SEEING MORE PEOPLE REVERTING BACK TO LANDLINES

202

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AND REDUCING THE COST OF CELL PHONES JUST TO BRING DOWN THE COST OF

THEIR BOTTOM LINE IN THEIR OWN FAMILY. SO, WE ARE LIVING IN SOME VERY

PECULIAR TIMES. THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME PECULIAR MEASURES THAT

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE. BUT THEY'RE ALL AT THE BEHEST OF WHAT IS

BEST FOR NEW YORKERS. WHAT IS BEST FOR FAMILIES. WHAT IS BEST FOR

SENIORS. WHAT'S BEST FOR OUR CHILDREN. CHILDREN, SENIORS, FAMILIES THAT

NEED THESE AMENITIES JUST TO STAY ABOVE FLOAT. JUST TO KEEP THEMSELVES

FROM SINKING BELOW WATER. BECAUSE ONCE YOU START SINKING, IT'S HARD TO

GET BACK TO THE SURFACE. IT'S HARD TO GET BACK TO WHAT IS, QUOTE,

UNQUOTE, "NORMAL." IT IS HARD TO BE A PART OF SOCIETY.

SO, I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE'RE DOING SOME THINGS THAT

WE ARE UNACCUSTOMED TO DOING FROM A FUNDAMENTALLY CONSTITUTIONAL

PERSPECTIVE. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, JUST GIVING JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE

REPRIEVE AS IT RELATES TO PUBLIC UTILITIES AND JUST OFFSETTING THEIR COSTS.

NOT ABSOLVING PEOPLE. NOT ZEROING OUT. BUT JUST PUSHING THEM BACK

JUST A FEW MONTHS LATE WILL HOPEFULLY LEAD TO A LEVEL OF -- OF RELIEF FOR

FAMILIES THROUGHOUT OUR STATE. I CAN RECALL A WOMAN WHO CAME UP TO

ME JUST THIS PAST WEEKEND, MISS JEFFERSON, WHO LIVES IN MY MOTHER'S

BUILDING AND HAD LOST HER JOB, LOST HER HUSBAND A YEAR AGO, AND SAID,

WALTER, I -- BILLS ARE JUST PILING UP LEFT AND RIGHT AND I HAVE TO

MAINTAIN MY MAINTENANCE. WHAT DO I DO? I'M THANKFUL THAT WE HAVE

THE FORESIGHT AND I'M THANKFUL FOR THE SPEAKER HAVING THE FORESIGHT FOR

ALLOWING US TO PUSH THIS BILL THROUGH. AND THE MAJORITY LEADER.

BECAUSE, ULTIMATELY, IT WILL GIVE PEOPLE LIKE MISS JEFFERSON A RELIEF THAT

IS OVER -- IS WELL OVERDUE.

203

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SO I PROUDLY SUPPORT MY COLLEAGUES AND THANKING

THEM FOR BEING SUPPORTIVE OF THIS LEGISLATION, AND I PROUDLY VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. MOSLEY IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. EPSTEIN TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. EPSTEIN: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I RISE TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I JUST WANT TO APPLAUD THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL AND OUR

LEADERSHIP FOR PUSHING THIS THING FORWARD. I WAS TALKING TO A

CONSTITUENT EARLIER TODAY, AND HER FEAR ABOUT HER GETTING UTILITIES SHUT

OFF WERE SEVERE. WHAT WAS HER SON GOING TO DO ABOUT SCHOOL? WHAT

WERE THEY GOING TO DO ABOUT CHARGING THEIR PHONE? SHE'S OUT OF WORK.

SHE'S UNEMPLOYED, TRYING TO GET UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. HOW ARE

THEY GOING TO HEAR FROM THE UNEMPLOYMENT AGENCY? ISSUE AFTER ISSUE

AFTER ISSUE, THEY ARE CONNECTED TO UTILITIES. TALK WITH FAMILIES WHO ARE

GETTING EDUCATIONAL NEGLECT CASES BECAUSE CHILDREN ARE NOT LOGGING ON

TO SCHOOL. PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING, AND UTILITIES ARE IMPORTANT. WHEN WE

TALK ABOUT EVERYONE TIGHTENING THEIR BELTS A LITTLE, WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS

WE'RE TIGHTENING BELTS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE THE HAVE-NOTS. THIS ALLOWS

SOME BALANCE TO ENSURE THAT LARGE CORPORATIONS HAVE TO TIGHTEN THEIR

BELTS A LITTLE, AND THAT MEANS ALLOWING PEOPLE TO HAVE THEIR UTILITIES ON

DURING THIS PANDEMIC.

I APPLAUD THE SPONSOR, I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND I

ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME.

THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR LEADERSHIP, MR. SPEAKER.

204

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. EPSTEIN IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. GOODELL TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR. I -- I APPRECIATE

THE DESIRE EVERY ONE OF US HAS TO HELP THOSE WHO ARE STRUGGLING DURING

THIS DIFFICULT TIME. BUT I THINK THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO HELP THOSE WHO

ARE STRUGGLING IN THIS DIFFICULT TIME IS FOR US TO HELP THEM DIRECTLY.

THOSE WHO HAVE SPECIAL FINANCIAL NEEDS, WE SHOULD BE THERE, AS THE

STATE LEGISLATURE, TO SUPPORT THEM WITH OUR RESOURCES. NOT ORDERING

OTHER COMPANIES OR OTHER PEOPLE TO PAY OTHER'S BILLS. IF -- AND I BELIEVE

WE DO. IF WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION, AS WE DO, TO HELP PEOPLE WITH

UTILITIES, WE SHOULD EXPAND OUR PROGRAMS THAT PROVIDE FINANCIAL

ASSISTANCE. NOT EVERY UTILITY COMPANY IN NEW YORK STATE IS A CON

EDISON. I HAVE SEVERAL VERY SMALL UTILITIES SERVING MY DISTRICT; STEUBEN

ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE. I HAVE WESTFIELD VILLAGE ELECTRIC SYSTEM. THE

VILLAGE OF WESTFIELD IS VERY SMALL. AND BROCTON AND MAYVILLE. I HAVE

JAMESTOWN. THEY ALL HAVE THEIR OWN UTILITY SYSTEMS. THEY ONLY HAVE

A FEW THOUSAND CUSTOMERS. THEY DON'T HAVE HUGE CORPORATE DEEP

POCKETS. THIS WILL DIRECTLY IMPACT THEIR CUSTOMERS. AND WE SHOULD BE

AWARE THAT SOME UTILITY COMPANIES, MUNICIPAL UTILITY COMPANIES, THE

UNPAID UTILITY BILL IS A TAX LIEN. SO IF YOU'RE IN THE CITY OF JAMESTOWN

AND YOU DON'T PAY YOUR WATER OR YOUR ELECTRIC, IT'S A LIEN ON YOUR

PROPERTY AND THEY CAN FORECLOSE ON YOUR HOUSE. OR IF YOU'RE A LANDLORD

THEY CAN FORECLOSE ON THE BUILDING. AND WHEN WE SAY WE'RE HELPING

PEOPLE BY ALLOWING THEM TO ACCRUE A YEAR'S WORTH OF ELECTRIC CHARGES OR

205

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WATER CHARGES OR UTILITY CHARGES, THEY MAY NEVER BE ABLE TO PAY THAT

OFF. AND SO LET'S STAND UP TO THE PLATE OURSELVES AND PUT OUR MONEY

WHERE OUR MOUTH IS AND HELP OUR RESIDENTS USING THE FEDERAL CARES

[SIC] FUNDS, USING THE MONEY WE'VE SET ASIDE FOR OTHER LOWER PRIORITIES,

AND LET'S STEP UP TO THE PLATE OURSELVES RATHER THAN CREATING FINANCIAL

ISSUES ALL ACROSS THE STATE FOR THESE SMALL UTILITIES.

THANK YOU, SIR.

(PAUSE)

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE

REPUBLICAN MEMBERS THAT ARE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS LEGISLATION INCLUDE

MR. REILLY, MS. MALLIOTAKIS, MR. SCHMITT, MR. SALKA, MS. MILLER, MR.

PALUMBO, MR. SMITH AND MR. RA. ALSO, MR. GARBARINO.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: YOU'RE WELCOME.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER. WE ARE JUST GOING TO CHANGE GEARS A LITTLE BIT. SO I WANT TO

GIVE YOU THE SCHEDULE FOR THE REST OF THE NIGHT. I HOPE MEMBERS WILL

PAY -- PAY VERY CLOSE ATTENTION. WE HAVE FOUR BILLS REMAINING TO

CONSIDER THIS EVENING, SO WE WILL NOW NEED TO STAND AT EASE WHILE THE

206

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

FINAL BILL IS BEING PRINTED. THE MINORITY NEEDS TO TAKE A SHORT BRIEFING,

AND THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED BY A WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE MEETING,

AS WELL AS A RULES COMMITTEE MEETING. AND THEN WE WILL RETURN TO

SESSION TO TAKE UP THOSE BILLS. SO I AM ASKING MEMBERS WHO ARE NOT

ON WAYS AND MEANS OR RULES TO PLEASE STAY OR REMAIN IN YOUR ZOOM

SESSIONS. WAYS AND MEANS AND RULES WILL RECEIVE NEW ZOOM

INVITATIONS. SO IF YOU'RE ON WAYS AND MEANS OR RULES YOU WILL RECEIVE

A BRAND-NEW ZOOM INVITATION FOR THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS THAT WE

ANTICIPATED YOU TO PARTICIPATE IN. AND THEN WE WILL REENTER SESSION ON

ZOOM AFTERWARDS.

LET ME REPEAT, ALL MEMBERS SHOULD KEEP YOUR ZOOM

SESSIONS OPEN. AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO COMMUNICATE WITH MEMBERS

AS COMMITTEES MEET AND WHEN WE RETURN TO SESSION.

MR. SPEAKER, IF YOU COULD HAVE US STAND AT EASE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE HOUSE WILL STAND

AT EASE.

MR. GOODELL. I'M SORRY.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR. AS MENTIONED BY

THE MAJORITY LEADER, THE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL BE BRIEFED. IT

MAY BE IN WRITING OR IT MAY BE BY ZOOM. BUT I WOULD URGE ALL MY

COLLEAGUES IN THE MINORITY CONFERENCE TO, NUMBER ONE, STAY ON ZOOM

CALL, THE CONFERENCE CALL THAT WE'RE ON RIGHT NOW. AND NUMBER TWO,

PLEASE WATCH CAREFULLY YOUR E-MAIL FOR EXCITING UPDATES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE HOUSE WILL STAND

AT EASE.

207

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

(WHEREUPON, THE HOUSE STOOD AT EASE.)

* * * * *

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE HOUSE WILL COME

TO ORDER.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, WE WILL

NEED TO ADVANCE THE B-CALENDAR, PLEASE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES' MOTION -- ON MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES' MOTION, THE

B-CALENDAR IS ADVANCED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER. WE'LL TAKE UP RULES REPORT NO. 59 FROM MEMBER ABBATE;

FOLLOWING THAT, WE'LL DO RULES REPORT NO. 60 FROM MEMBER MOSLEY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A10528, RULES REPORT

NO. 59, ABBATE, HEASTIE, PEOPLES-STOKES, WEINSTEIN, ABINANTI,

ARROYO, AUBRY, BARNWELL, BARRETT, BARRON, BENEDETTO, BICHOTTE, BLAKE,

BRAUNSTEIN, BRONSON, BUCHWALD, BURKE, BUTTENSCHON, CAHILL, CARROLL,

COLTON, COOK, CRESPO, CRUZ, CUSICK, CYMBROWITZ, DARLING, DAVILA, DE

LA ROSA, DENDEKKER, DICKENS, DILAN, DINOWITZ, D'URSO, EICHENSTEIN,

ENGLEBRIGHT, EPSTEIN, FAHY, FALL, FERNANDEZ, FRONTUS, GALEF, GANTT,

GLICK, GOTTFRIED, GRIFFIN, GUNTHER, HEVESI, HUNTER, HYNDMAN,

JACOBSON, JAFFEE, JEAN-PIERRE, JONES, JOYNER, KIM, LAVINE, LENTOL,

LIFTON, LUPARDO, MAGNARELLI, MCDONALD, MCMAHON, M. G. MILLER,

MOSLEY, NIOU, NOLAN, O'DONNELL, ORTIZ, OTIS, PAULIN, PERRY, PHEFFER

208

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AMATO, PICHARDO, PRETLOW, QUART, RAMOS, REYES, RICHARDSON, RIVERA,

RODRIGUEZ, D. ROSENTHAL, L. ROSENTHAL, ROZIC, RYAN, SANTABARBARA,

SAYEGH, SCHIMMINGER, SEAWRIGHT, SIMON, SIMOTAS, SOLAGES, STECK,

STERN, STIRPE, TAYLOR, THIELE, VANEL, WALKER, WALLACE, WEPRIN,

WILLIAMS, WOERNER, WRIGHT, ZEBROWSKI. AN ACT TO AMEND THE

RETIREMENT AND SOCIAL SECURITY LAW, THE EDUCATION LAW, THE PUBLIC

AUTHORITIES LAW AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW

YORK, IN RELATION TO ESTABLISHING A CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019

(COVID-19) BENEFIT FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYEE DEATH BENEFITS; AND

PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF SUCH PROVISIONS UP ON THE EXPIRATION

THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MR.

ABBATE, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

ADVANCED. GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK. THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: I HEREBY CERTIFY TO AN IMMEDIATE VOTE,

ANDREW M. CUOMO, GOVERNOR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: AN EXPLANATION IS

REQUESTED, MR. ABBATE.

(PAUSE)

MR. ABBATE: I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN HEAR ME.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WE CAN HEAR YOU,

MR. ABBATE.

MR. ABBATE: DID YOU HEAR THE EXPLANATION?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: YES, WE CAN.

MR. ABBATE: OKAY, YOU DID. YOU HEARD IT

209

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ALREADY? OR SHOULD I DO IT AGAIN?

OKAY, I'LL DO IT AGAIN.

AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR STAYING UP AT THIS

LATE HOUR. THIS BILL WOULD ESTABLISH AN ACCIDENTAL DEATH BENEFIT FOR

MEMBERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE/NEW YORK CITY PUBLIC RETIREMENT

SYSTEMS OR PENSION SYSTEMS WHO DIED OF COVID-19 BETWEEN MARCH

1ST OF 2020 AND DECEMBER 31ST OF 2020.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD FOR JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, PLEASE?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WILL YOU YIELD, MR.

ABBATE?

MR. ABBATE: YES, I WILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THERE WE GO.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO, THANK YOU

FOR YOUR EXPLANATION ABOUT THE BILL, AND IT IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

THE QUESTION I HAD IS IN OTHER SECTIONS OF THE LAW, OF THE RETIREMENT

AND SOCIAL SECURITY LAW, THE -- THERE IS A PRESUMPTION OF ELIGIBILITY --

A LINE OF DUTY PRESUMPTION. FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE IN THE HEART BILLS THAT WE

HAVE THAT CAN BE REBUTTED BY THE EMPLOYER. IS THAT THE CASE WITH THIS

PARTICULAR BILL OR NOT? IS THERE A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION OR NOT?

MR. ABBATE: WELL, OUR ORIGINAL BILL HAD A

PRESUMPTION IN IT. THE SECOND FLOOR DECIDED TO CALL IT A "SPECIAL

ACCIDENTAL DEATH BENEFIT." THEY'RE CONTENDING THAT THAT'S BETTER THAN A

PRESUMPTION; I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THAT, BUT THIS IS THE BILL WE

210

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

HAVE BEFORE US.

MS. WALSH: OKAY, SO THE -- OKAY. BECAUSE I WAS

LOOKING THROUGH THIS VERSION OF THE BILL AND I DIDN'T SEE IT, SO THAT'S WHY

I WANTED TO ASK YOU ABOUT THAT. SO, THERE IS NO REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION

SO AS LONG AS THE -- IT CAN BE MADE OUT THAT THE INDIVIDUAL, THE

EMPLOYEE REPORTED TO WORK DURING THE RELEVANT TIME PERIOD, TESTED

POSITIVE FOR COVID AND PASSED AWAY DURING -- BY A CERTAIN TIME, THAT

INDIVIDUAL'S FAMILY WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS BENEFIT THEN; IS THAT -- IS

THAT CORRECT, MR. ABBATE?

MR. ABBATE: YOU'RE CORRECT. IT'S A COVID OR

COVID-RELATED DEATH.

MS. WALSH: OKAY --

MR. ABBATE: YOU KNOW, WE WANTED TO --

MS. WALSH: OKAY. SO, NOW YOU'RE MAKING ME

THINK ABOUT WHAT A COVID-RELATED DEATH WOULD BE. SO, IT WOULD HAVE

TO BE A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR IN THE INDIVIDUAL'S DEATH, IS THAT -- WOULD

THAT BE CORRECT?

MR. ABBATE: WHAT'S HAPPENED -- WHAT'S HAPPENED

IN NEW YORK CITY IN THE VERY BEGINNING, AND WE'RE TRYING TO WORK THAT

OUT, IS THAT SOME DEATH CERTIFICATES, THE DOCTORS PUT HEART FAILURE OR

PNEUMONIA. SO, NOW WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WAS

COVID, BUT AT THAT TIME, THEY WERE JUST PUTTING THAT ON THERE. SO,

WE'VE ASKED SOME OF THE PARTICIPATING REPRESENTATIVES OF THE FAMILIES TO

MAKE SURE THAT THOSE DEATH CERTIFICATES HAVE THAT, AND IF YOU LOOK IN THE

BILL, IT DOES SAY IT CAN BE CERTIFIED BY A PHYSICIAN, NURSE PRACTITIONER, A

211

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WERE CALLED IN. SO, THAT'S WHY THAT'S IN THERE.

MS. WALSH: VERY GOOD. YES, I DID SEE THAT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

MR. ABBATE: MY PLEASURE, THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON RULES REPORT NO. 59. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WISHING TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBER PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. RA TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I WANT TO THANK

THE SPONSOR FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND -- AND CONTINUING, YOU KNOW,

TO PUSH TO -- TO HELP PROTECT THE FAMILIES OF -- OF SO MANY WHO HAVE

ALREADY LOST THEIR LIVES AND MAY IN THE FUTURE AS A RESULT OF THIS -- OF

THIS VIRUS WHO ARE OUT SERVING OUR COMMUNITIES EACH AND EVERY DAY. I

KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF IDEAS OUT THERE TO HELP COMPENSATE THOSE WHO

HAVE BEEN ON THE FRONT LINES OF THIS PANDEMIC, WHETHER IT'S NATIONALLY

OR AT THE STATE LEVEL. YOU KNOW, IDEAS LIKE DIFFERENT TYPES OF HAZARD

PAY AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, BUT -- BUT CERTAINLY, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT

THAT WE -- WE RECOGNIZE THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE LOST TO THIS WHO ARE

IN PUBLIC SERVICE BY -- BY ENSURING THAT THEIR FAMILIES HAVE THE BENEFITS

THEY ARE GOING TO NEED.

IT'S NO, YOU KNOW, SECRET TO ANYBODY HERE THAT WHEN

212

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WE'VE HAD ISSUES IN THE PAST LIKE 9/11 IN NEW YORK STATE, THE FIGHT THAT

TOOK PLACE AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL TO MAKE SURE THOSE WHO GOT SICK YEARS

AND YEARS LATER, AND THEIR FAMILIES, WERE TAKEN CARE OF WAS SOMETHING

THAT BASICALLY CONTINUED UNTIL JUST RECENTLY TO MAKE THOSE BENEFITS

ESSENTIALLY PERMANENT FOR PEOPLE. SO, IT'S -- IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE --

WE TAKE ACTION NOW TO PROTECT THESE FAMILIES. OUR HEARTS CERTAINLY GO

OUT TO THEM AND WE THANK EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THOSE FRONTLINE

WORKERS WHO HAS [SIC] BEEN OUT THERE IN OUR COMMUNITIES AT THEIR OWN

RISK TO TRY TO KEEP US SAFE DURING THIS TIME.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I CAST MY VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. RA IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER ABINANTI: MR. AUBRY TO

EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. AUBRY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR ALLOWING

ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I COULD NOT PASS THE

OPPORTUNITY TO TELL YOU THAT THIS VOTE FOR ME IS FOR MS. PRISCILLA

CARROW. MS. PRISCILLA CARROW I MET WHEN SHE WAS A 16-YEAR-OLD. SHE

WORKED FOR ME IN SUMMER YOUTH EMPLOYMENT. SHE DIED THE DAY WE

CAME BACK UP HERE TO PASS THE BILL. SHE WORKED AT ELMHURST HOSPITAL,

THE HOSPITAL THAT IS IN MY DISTRICT THAT WAS SO EGREGIOUSLY AFFECTED. SHE

WAS A SUPERSTAR IN OUR COMMUNITY. SHE SERVED EVERYONE. SHE WAS --

NO GOOD DEED WOULD EVER GO UNDONE AS LONG AS SHE WAS AROUND. AND

SO, I JUST WANTED TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SAY THAT AND TO DEDICATE

213

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THIS -- MY VOTE ON THIS BILL TO HER AND HER FAMILY. THANK YOU SO VERY

MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER ABINANTI: MR. AUBRY IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR. ON THIS PARTICULAR

BILL, ASSEMBLYMEMBER MR. DIPIETRO WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE. THANK

YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED. THANK

YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A10530, RULES REPORT

NO. 60, COMMITTEE ON RULES (MOSLEY, LENTOL, THIELE, ROZIC). AN ACT

TO AMEND A CHAPTER OF THE LAWS OF 2020 AMENDING THE LOCAL FINANCE

LAW RELATING TO BOND ANTICIPATION NOTES ISSUED IN CALENDAR YEARS 2015

THROUGH 2021, AS PROPOSED IN LEGISLATIVE BILLS NUMBERS S. 8417 AND A.

10492, IN RELATION TO EXPENDITURES AND TEMPORARY TRANSFER OF RESERVE

FUNDS FOR EXPENSES RELATED TO STATE DISASTER EMERGENCY DECLARED

PURSUANT TO EXECUTIVE ORDER 202 OF 2020 AND AUTHORIZING THE

EXTENSION OF REPAYMENT OF INTER-FUND ADVANCES MADE FOR EXPENSES

RELATED TO STATE DISASTER EMERGENCY DECLARED PURSUANT TO EXECUTIVE

ORDER 202 OF 2020 (PART A); TO AMEND THE PUBLIC SERVICE LAW, IN

214

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

RELATION TO ISSUING A MORATORIUM ON UTILITY TERMINATION OF SERVICES

DURING PERIODS OF PANDEMICS AND/OR STATE OF EMERGENCIES; AND TO

AMEND A CHAPTER OF THE LAWS OF 2020 AMENDING THE PUBLIC SERVICE

LAW, RELATING TO ISSUING A MORATORIUM ON UTILITY TERMINATION OF

SERVICES DURING PERIODS OF PANDEMICS AND/OR STATE OF EMERGENCIES, AS

PROPOSED IN LEGISLATIVE BILLS NUMBERS S.8113-A AND A.10521, IN

RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF (PART B); TO AMEND THE BANKING

LAW, IN RELATION TO THE FORBEARANCE OF RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE PAYMENTS

(PART C); AND TO AMEND THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW, IN RELATION TO

HEARINGS CONDUCTED ON A FELONY COMPLAINT DURING A STATE DISASTER

EMERGENCY (PART D).

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MR.

MOSLEY, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

ADVANCED. GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK. THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: I HEREBY CERTIFY TO AN IMMEDIATE VOTE,

ANDREW M. CUOMO, GOVERNOR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THERE IS A -- AN

AMENDMENT AT THE DESK BY MR. GOODELL, WHO WILL BRIEFLY EXPLAIN THE

AMENDMENT WHILE THE CHAIR EXAMINES IT.

PLEASE PROCEED, MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR.

SPEAKER, I OFFER THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT, WAIVE ITS READING, MOVE FOR

ITS IMMEDIATE ADOPTION AND ASK FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN IT.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: PLEASE PROCEED.

MR. GOODELL: THE AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE

215

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

PROPOSING WOULD APPLY TO THE BILL-IN-CHIEF. THE BILL-IN-CHIEF STATES IN

SECTION 1 THAT, QUOTE, "THIS ENACTS INTO LAW LEGISLATION PROVIDING FOR

IMPORTANT PROVISIONS RELATING TO A STATE DISASTER EMERGENCY." AND THE

PROPOSED AMENDMENT FOCUSES EXACTLY ON THE SAME ISSUE ON WHAT IS A

STATE DISASTER EMERGENCY, HOW IT SHOULD BE DETERMINED AND HOW LONG

IT SHOULD LAST AND, IN PARTICULAR, IT EMPHASIZES THE LEGITIMATE ROLE OF THE

STATE LEGISLATURE IN EXERCISING ITS LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION AS PART OF A

CHECKS AND BALANCES. IT RECOGNIZES AND ACKNOWLEDGES THE INCREDIBLY

IMPORTANT ROLE PLAYED BY OUR LOCAL OFFICIALS, AND IT ENSURES DUE PROCESS

PROTECTIONS ON FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS.

IN PARTICULAR, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE

THAT A DECLARATION OF A STATE OF EMERGENCY BE DONE ON A

COUNTY-BY-COUNTY BASIS, WITH SPECIFIC REASONS WHY EACH COUNTY IS

INCLUDED IN THAT STATE OF EMERGENCY. THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE AS WE

HAVE SEEN, SOMETIMES THERE'S A STATE OF EMERGENCY THAT APPLIES

STATEWIDE WITHOUT RECOGNIZING THE TREMENDOUS DIFFERENCES THAT APPLY

IN A STATE OF OUR SIZE. SO, IN MY COUNTY, AS AN EXAMPLE, OUR COUNTY

WAS SHUT DOWN BEFORE WE HAD A SINGLE CONFIRMED CASE. AND WHEN

THEY SHUT DOWN MY COUNTY, THEY CLOSED SUNY FREDONIA AND SENT ALL

THE CHILDREN, ALL THE STUDENTS FROM SUNY FREDONIA IN A COUNTY WITH NO

CONFIRMED CASES BACK HOME. MANY OF THEM, THEN, RETURNING TO NEW

YORK CITY, LONG ISLAND AND OTHER COUNTIES WHERE THE INFECTION WAS

RAMPANT.

SO, THIS WOULD REQUIRE THAT INSTEAD OF ONE BROAD

SWEEP ALL ACROSS NEW YORK STATE REGARDLESS OF THE LEVEL OF DANGER OR

216

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THE IMMINENT DANGER, IT WOULD REQUIRE A MORE THOUGHTFUL, CAREFUL,

BALANCED NUANCE APPROACH THAT LOOKS AT THE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF

THE COUNTIES THAT ARE BEING AFFECTED, PARTICULARLY ON A DISASTER

EMERGENCY THAT HAS SUCH HORRIFIC IMPLICATIONS TO EACH COUNTY'S HEALTH

CARE SYSTEM AND BUDGET.

THE SECOND PART ENSURES THAT WE MAINTAIN CHECKS AND

BALANCES AND THE PROPER ROLE FOR THE STATE LEGISLATURE, AND IT DOES THIS

BY SAYING THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS THE AUTHORITY ON HIS OWN TO ISSUE A

STATE OF EMERGENCY FOR 30 DAYS. AT THE END OF THAT 30 DAYS, HE HAS THE

AUTHORITY TO RENEW THE EMERGENCY DECLARATION FOR 15 DAYS, BUT THAT'S ALL

HE HAS WITHOUT FURTHER LEGISLATIVE AUTHORIZATION. AND THE CONCEPT IS

QUITE STRAIGHTFORWARD, AFTER THE FIRST 30 DAYS IF THE GOVERNOR NEEDS

MORE TIME, HE CAN RENEW IT FOR 15 DAYS, AND THAT GIVES US 15 DAYS FOR

US, AS A LEGISLATURE, TO MEET AND DECIDE WHETHER IT SHOULD BE RENEWED

AND, IF SO, AT WHAT LEVEL AND WITH WHICH COUNTIES. AND HAVING

DEMONSTRATED OVER THE LAST TWO DAYS THAT WE CAN MEET IN A REMOTE

MANNER, THAT GIVES US TWO WEEKS TO SET UP A REMOTE MEETING IF THAT

WOULD BE NECESSARY.

THE THIRD PART OF THIS PROPOSAL RECOGNIZES THAT NO ONE

KNOWS A LOCAL COMMUNITY BETTER THAN THE LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS.

THEY'RE NOT MAKING WIDE-RANGING HUGE DECISIONS ON JURISDICTIONS THAT

MIGHT BE HUNDREDS OF MILES AWAY; THEY ARE THERE ON THE GROUND. AND

SO, THE THIRD PORTION OF THIS PROVIDES THAT LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS, THE

CHIEF ELECTED OFFICIALS, THAT'D BE YOUR COUNTY EXECUTIVE, OR THE MAYOR

OF NEW YORK CITY, OR YOUR CHAIRMAN OF THE LEGISLATURE, AS THE CASE

217

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MAY BE AS DEFINED IN THE EXECUTIVE LAW ALREADY, COULD REQUEST THE

GOVERNOR TO TERMINATE OR MODIFY AN EMERGENCY DECLARATION AS IT

RELATES TO THEIR COUNTY OR CITY.

AMAZINGLY, I'VE JUST MENTIONED THE LAST ONE, SINCE I

AM CURRENTLY OUT OF TIME. THE LAST ONE REINSTATES DUE PROCESS

PROTECTIONS FOR EVERYONE.

SO, THAT'S A BRIEF SUMMARY, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR

ANALYSIS, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: CERTAINLY. MR.

GOODELL, WE HAVE EXAMINED YOUR AMENDMENT AND FOUND IT NOT

GERMANE TO THE BILL BEFORE THE HOUSE. YOU MAY APPEAL THE RULING OF

THE CHAIR AND SPEAK TO THE ISSUE OF GERMANENESS.

MR. GOODELL: WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, MR. SPEAKER,

I WOULD LIKE TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR AND HAVE AN

OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN WHY I BELIEVE THIS IS GERMANE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: AS IS YOUR RIGHT, SIR.

MR. GOODELL: WELL, THANK YOU, SIR. AND THE

BILL-IN-CHIEF STARTS OUT IN SECTION 1 AND SAYS, QUOTE, "THIS ACT ENACTS

INTO LEGISLATION" A LAW -- "LEGISLATION PROVIDING FOR IMPORTANT

PROVISIONS RELATING TO A STATE DISASTER EMERGENCY." THE PROPOSED

AMENDMENT DOES EXACTLY THE SAME THING. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT

WOULD ENACT INTO LAW LEGISLATION PROVIDING FOR IMPORTANT PROVISIONS

RELATING TO A STATE DISASTER EMERGENCY.

SO, THE VERY PURPOSE OF THIS LAW AS SET FORTH IN SECTION

1 IS EXACTLY THE SAME PURPOSE AS THE AMENDMENT, BUT I WOULD POINT OUT

218

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

THAT ON PART B, WHICH IS ON PAGE 3, LINES 28 THROUGH 29, PART B APPLIES,

QUOTE, "FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS AFTER THE COVID-19 STATE OF

EMERGENCY IS LIFTED OR EXPIRES." AND THE AMENDMENT PROVIDES THE VERY

PROCESS FOR LEGISLATIVE CHECKS AND BALANCES, AND FOR LOCAL INVOLVEMENT

IN DETERMINING WHETHER IT SHOULD BE LIFTED OR EXPIRES. IT DIRECTLY

RELATES TO PART B. IT ALSO RELATES TO PART C. PART C REFERS TO A COVERED

PERIOD WHICH IS DEFINED AS, "FURTHER EXTENDED BY ANY FUTURE EXECUTIVE

ORDERS AND CONTINUED TO APPLY IN THE COUNTY OF A QUALIFIED MORTGAGOR'S

RESIDENCE." WELL, THE IRONY IS UNDER CURRENT EXECUTIVE LAW, IT'S NO

REQUIREMENT THAT THE ORDER BE ON A COUNTY-BY-COUNTY BASIS AND,

INDEED, THE GOVERNOR HAS MADE IT CLEAR IN THE CURRENT PANDEMIC THAT HE

WILL NOT ISSUE EXECUTIVE ORDERS BASED ON A COUNTY-BY-COUNTY ANALYSIS.

SO, THE ONLY WAY THAT PART C IN THE BILL-IN-CHIEF MAKES SENSE, WHEN IT

REFERS TO HOW IT APPLIES IN A COUNTY, IS IF THAT DECLARATION ACTUALLY IS BY

A COUNTY-BY-COUNTY BASIS, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE PROPOSED

AMENDMENT DOES.

AND I WOULD POINT OUT IN PART D, PART D ONLY APPLIES

DURING THE PERIOD OF A COVID STATE DISASTER EMERGENCY AND THE

EXTENSIONS THEREOF, AND THE AMENDMENT TALKS PRECISELY OVER WHAT

AMENDMENTS CAN BE DONE AND HOW THEY ARE TO BE ACCOMPLISHED.

AND SO, WHETHER WE'RE LOOKING AT SECTION 1, SECTION

B, SECTION C -- OR PART B, PART C, PART D, EVERY PART OF THE BILL-IN-CHIEF

IS AFFECTED AND DEFINED AND MODIFIED AND CLARIFIED BY THE PROPOSED

AMENDMENT. SO, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS INTRICATELY RELATED AND,

THEREFORE, IS GERMANE TO THE BILL-IN-CHIEF. AND WITH THAT, I WOULD URGE

219

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MY COLLEAGUES, WITH GREAT RESPECT TO THE SPEAKER, TO SUGGEST THAT

PERHAPS HIS DECISION MIGHT HAVE BEEN MISTAKEN IN THIS PARTICULAR

SITUATION. THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU. MR.

GOODELL APPEALS THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR. THE QUESTION BEFORE THE

HOUSE IS SHALL THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR STAND AS THE JUDGMENT OF THE

HOUSE. THOSE VOTING YES VOTE TO SUSTAIN THE RULING OF THE CHAIR; THOSE

VOTING NO VOTE TO OVERRIDE THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR.

THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE

REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL VOTE AS A PARTY TO OVERRIDE THE DECISION OF

THE CHAIR AND, THEREFORE, WE WILL BE VOTING NO. IF THERE'S ANY MEMBER

WHO DISAGREES WITH THAT, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THEM TO PROMPTLY CALL THE

MINORITY LEADER'S OFFICE. THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO MY COLLEAGUE WHO I THINK ELOQUENTLY

LAID OUT HIS ARGUMENT FOR WHY HIS AMENDMENT SHOULD BE GERMANE, THE

MAJORITY WILL RESPECTFULLY HONOR YOUR DECISION THAT IT IS NOT GERMANE

AND WE WILL BE TAKING A PARTY VOTE. THOSE WHO WISH TO VOTE DIFFERENT

FROM THAT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTACT ME AND I WILL MAKE SURE THEY

ARE RECORDED APPROPRIATELY.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO REMIND US ALL THAT WHEN WE

220

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

ORIGINALLY PASSED THE LEGISLATION UNDER THE HEAT OF A PANDEMIC, WHICH

HAD MANY OF US NERVOUS AND SCARED, AND I THINK MANY OF US STILL ARE;

WE'VE LOST SO MUCH. WE'VE LOST SO MANY PEOPLE, PEOPLE WHO WERE

HERE LAST WEEK ARE NOT. BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS IS WE ALREADY HAVE

A SUNSET ON THIS. THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE OVER, THIS IS EXECUTIVE ORDER,

BY THE -- APRIL, I WANT TO SAY THE 21ST, OR UNLESS THE PANDEMIC ENDS

BEFORE THEN. BUT IF YOU LISTEN TO MOST OF THE RENOWNED SCIENTISTS, NOT

JUST IN AMERICA, BUT IN THE WORLD, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE OVER BY THEN.

AND SO, IT IS GOING TO TAKE TIME FOR US TO WORK THROUGH THIS.

WHILE WE'RE DOING THAT, THOUGH, HERE'S ONE THING THAT I

KNOW THAT'S A FACT, EVERY DAY AT 3:30 THE REASON THAT I LIVE IN IS ON A

PHONE CALL WITH THE EXECUTIVE GOING THROUGH AND SUGGESTING CHANGES

THAT HE SHOULD MAKE AS IT RELATES TO THE REGION THAT WE LIVE IN. I WOULD

HOPE THAT MR. GOODELL AND EVERY OTHER PERSON HAS THAT SAME

OPPORTUNITY. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IF THEY DON'T HAVE THAT, I WOULD BE

ONE OF THE FIRST PEOPLE WHO WOULD WANT TO HELP THEM GET ACCESS TO IT,

BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT A REGIONAL APPROACH MAKES SENSE; HOWEVER, I

WILL SAY, AGAIN, AND I WILL REPEAT THIS, I BELIEVE THAT THE EXECUTIVE

ORDER HAS -- ALLOWS FOR A DAILY BRIEFING FOR PEOPLE IN REGIONS ABOUT

WHATEVER EXECUTIVE ORDERS ARE COMING OUT, AND BASED ON THAT, SOME

THINGS HAVE CHANGED AND I THINK THAT WE CAN USE THAT SAME PROCESS

WELL INTO THE FUTURE. SO, AGAIN, THIS IS A PARTY VOTE WITH THE SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES.

THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

221

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, I DO HAVE A

COUPLE OF EXCEPTIONS. WOULD YOU PLEASE NOTE MEMBER BUTTENSCHON,

MEMBER JONES AND MEMBER SANTABARBARA.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.)

THE RULING OF THE CHAIR IS SUSTAINED.

ON THE BILL.

(PAUSE)

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. GOODELL: THE BILL-IN-CHIEF COLLECTS A NUMBER

OF CHAPTER AMENDMENTS TO LEGISLATION THAT WE'VE BEEN CONSIDERING OVER

THE LAST TWO-AND-A-HALF DAYS. I SAY TWO-AND-A-HALF BECAUSE AS IS TYPICAL

OF THIS LEGISLATURE, IT SEEMS WE DO SOME OF OUR HEAVIEST LIFTING AFTER

MIDNIGHT, AND IT'S ABOUT TWO IN THE MORNING. AND SO, OVER THE LAST TWO

DAYS, DESPITE NOT HAVING BEEN IN SESSION FOR SEVERAL WEEKS, WE HAVE

REVIEWED MULTIPLE BILLS, AND MANY OF THEM HAVE PASSED WITH VERY

STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, AND SOME HAD CONSIDERABLE OPPOSITION. AND

SO, IT'S SOMEWHAT IRONIC THAT AT TWO IN THE MORNING WE ARE NOW DOING A

CLEANUP BILL ON THE LEGISLATION THAT WE'VE PASSED WITHIN THE LAST 48

HOURS, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS DOES.

222

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MOST OF THE LEGISLATION IN THE CLEANUP IS RELATIVELY

MODEST. PART A DEALS WITH THE FLEXIBILITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO

UTILIZE CAPITAL RESERVE FUNDS FOR OTHER DESIGNATED PURPOSES, INCLUDING

OPERATING EXPENSES, WITH CERTAIN LIMITATIONS IN RESPONSE TO THE

COVID-19 PANDEMIC. THAT BILL PASSED UNANIMOUSLY EARLIER IN ITS

ORIGINAL FORM. THE AMENDMENTS ARE VERY MODEST.

THE SECOND PART, PART B, EXPANDS THE MORATORIUM ON

UTILITY TERMINATION TO THOSE WHO ARE CLAIMING TO HAVE A CHANGE IN THEIR

FINANCIAL CONDITION. THIS PROVISION HAD SUBSTANTIAL OPPOSITION ON

MULTIPLE GROUNDS, INCLUDING THE FACT THAT WE ARE FORCING PRIVATE

COMPANIES, AS WELL AS PUBLIC UTILITIES, PUBLIC ENTITIES, TO CONTINUE TO

PROVIDE SERVICE AND PRODUCTS LIKE WATER OR OTHER PRODUCTS, TO PEOPLE

WHO ARE NOT PAYING FOR THEM. AND TO SIMPLY SAY TO THE OTHER PEOPLE,

YOU HAVE AN UNLIMITED LINE OF CREDIT AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE ANY

PAYMENTS, BUT YOU ARE ENTITLED TO CONTINUE TO RECEIVE SERVICE, AND THE

PROBLEM WITH THAT IS IT'S A VIOLATION OF THE CONTRACT CLAUSE OF THE U.S.

CONSTITUTION, WHICH PROHIBITS STATE LEGISLATURES FROM IMPAIRING THE

VALIDITY OF A CONTRACT. IT CONSTITUTES A VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH

AMENDMENT WHICH PROHIBITS GOVERNMENT FROM TAKING PRODUCT OR

ANYTHING OF PROPERTY WITHOUT COMPENSATION, AND HERE WE'RE FORCING BY

GOVERNMENT EDICT THAT COMPANIES GIVE A PRODUCT TO PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT

PAYING FOR IT AND WE'RE FORCING THE COMPANIES TO EXTEND A LINE OF CREDIT

TO THE VERY PEOPLE WHO HAVE PROBABLY THE LOWEST CREDIT WITH THAT

COMPANY BECAUSE THEY AREN'T EVEN PAYING THEIR CURRENT BILLS WITH THAT

COMPANY. AND IT'S COMPLETE FRAUD FOR US TO SUGGEST THAT THE PEOPLE

223

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WHO AREN'T PAYING NOW, BECAUSE THEY HAVE FINANCIAL PROBLEMS, WILL AT

SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE BE ABLE TO PAY UP ALL THE ARREARS. THAT KIND OF

DEFIES EXPERIENCE OVER DECADES AND DECADES.

SO, THERE WAS CONSIDERABLE OPPOSITION BOTH ON THE

CONCEPT AND -- AND, BY THE WAY, THERE IS GREAT SUPPORT TO THE CONCEPT OF

HELPING PEOPLE PAY UTILITIES THROUGH GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS THAT WE

FUND, THAT THE STATE FUNDS, GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS SUCH AS HEAP OR

OTHER UTILITY ASSISTANCE THAT ARE PROVIDED. WE SUPPORT THAT, BUT JUST

ORDERING A PRIVATE COMPANY TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE SERVICES OR GOODS

OR PRODUCTS TO CUSTOMERS WHO AREN'T PAYING AND WILL NOT LIKELY EVER

PAY IS INAPPROPRIATE AND UNFAIR. AND FOR A LOT OF THE SMALLER

COMPANIES, IT MAY ACTUALLY RESULT IN THEIR FISCAL INSOLVENCY.

THE THIRD SECTION, PART C, DEALT IN THE SAME MANNER

WITH THE FORBEARANCE OF RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGES, AND WHAT IT BASICALLY

SAID IS IF YOU HAVE SOMEONE THAT DOESN'T WANT TO PAY THEIR MORTGAGE

AND THEY'RE SUFFERING A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE A RIGHT

TO TAKE UP TO A YEAR OF THEIR MORTGAGE AND PUT IT AT THE VERY END,

INTEREST FREE. THINK ABOUT THAT. YOU'RE ASKING BANKS TO MAKE A 20, 25,

30 YEAR INTEREST FREE LOAN. AND, ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE TAKING MONEY FROM

A PRIVATE COMPANY AND WE'RE APPROPRIATING IT WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT.

AND AS WE NOTED, THERE WERE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES, THERE IS SEPARATION

OF POWERS ISSUES, BECAUSE THIS BILL ELIMINATED THE AUTHORITY OF THE

JUDICIARY TO EVEN ENFORCE CONTRACTS. IT ONLY APPLIED TO STATE-CHARTERED

BANKS, WHICH WAS A REAL PROBLEM BECAUSE THESE ARE THE SMALLER BANKS,

THEY'RE OUR COMMUNITY BANKS; THEY'RE NOT THE BANK OF AMERICAS OR THE

224

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

WELLS FARGO'S OR THE HUGE, MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATIONS. THESE WERE

THE SMALL COMMUNITY BANKS THAT ARE CHARTERED JUST IN NEW YORK STATE

AND WE ARE TARGETING THEM AND PUTTING THEM AT A SEVERE FINANCIAL RISK.

SO, THE AMENDMENT IS SLIGHTLY BETTER, BECAUSE THE

AMENDMENT SAYS IF OUR LEGISLATION ACTUALLY WOULD PUT THE BANK OUT OF

BUSINESS, IF IT WOULD CAUSE THE BANK TO GO INTO BANKRUPTCY, WHY THEN

THEY CAN GET A BREAK. I THINK THAT'S AN APPROPRIATE INITIAL RESPONSE, BUT

I THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE ON ALL THE CONSTITUTIONAL LEVELS, ON THE BREACH

OF CONTRACTS, ON THE JUDICIARY BEING EXCLUDED. AND, IRONICALLY, THERE

WAS A U.S. SUPREME COURT CASE ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THIS BACK IN THE

1930'S AT THE HEIGHT OF THE GREAT DEPRESSION, AND THAT SUPREME COURT

DECISION TALKED VERY CLEARLY ABOUT WHAT MIGHT BE ALLOWED AND WHAT

MIGHT NOT BE ALLOWED IN TERMS OF MORTGAGE FORBEARANCE AND IT -- AND IT

MENTIONED -- IN THAT CASE, IT UPHELD THE MORTGAGE FORBEARANCE BECAUSE

IT WAS FOR A SHORT TIME PERIOD. THE MORTGAGOR, THAT WOULD BE THE

BORROWER, WAS REQUIRED TO PAY ALL THE INCOME TO THE PROPERTY TO THE

BANK DURING DEPENDENCY. THERE WAS NO WAIVER OF INTEREST OR PENALTIES

- I'M SURE WE WAIVED ALL THE INTEREST AND PENALTIES - AND IT WAS SUCH AN

EXTRAORDINARY TIME THAT THERE WEREN'T ANY BANKS OPEN. YOU COULDN'T

REFINANCE, YOU COULDN'T EVEN PURCHASE -- A THIRD-PARTY COULDN'T EVEN

PURCHASE IT BECAUSE THERE WERE NO BANKS OPEN. THAT'S NOT OUR CASE

TODAY. WHILE OUR CASE MAY BE SERIOUS, IT CERTAINLY PALES TO BOTH THE

SITUATION THAT OCCURRED IN THAT CASE AND THE REMEDY THAT WAS ALLOWED IN

THAT CASE.

THE LAST PART DEALS WITH THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW,

225

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

AND IT WAS APTLY EXPLAINED BY MY COLLEAGUE, MR. PALUMBO. THIS

CHANGE WOULD NOT ONLY ALLOW, BUT WOULD PROBABLY REQUIRE THAT

PRELIMINARY HEARINGS BE CONDUCTED WITH ELECTRONIC MEDIUM, LIKE ZOOM

OR SIMILAR PROGRAMS, AND THE STATUTORY LANGUAGE ITSELF, AS WE POINTED

OUT EARLIER, REQUIRES THAT THE PICTURE AND THE SOUND OF THE WITNESS BE AT

THE SAME QUALITY AS IF THEY WERE IN FRONT OF THE COURT. AND THAT'S A

SPECIAL PROBLEM BECAUSE UNDER THE CURRENT SITUATION -- CURRENT LAW, WE

KNOW THAT SOMETIMES WITNESSES ARE UNDER INCREDIBLE DANGER IF THEIR

IDENTITY IS DISCLOSED TOO SOON, WHICH IS WHY WE HAVE GRAND JURY

PROCEEDINGS THAT ARE SECRET.

AND SO, IF YOU WERE A WITNESS TO A MOB HIT, OR A BRUTAL

GANG MURDER, OR A DRUG TRANSACTION, OR IF YOU WERE THE VICTIM OF A CHILD

ABUSE CASE, OR YOU ARE A RAPE VICTIM, THERE ARE MANY SITUATIONS WHERE

WE WANT TO PROTECT THE IDENTITY OF THE WITNESS AS LONG AS POSSIBLE,

BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT THAT WITNESS TO DISAPPEAR PERMANENTLY OR SHOW

UP DEAD, OR GO THROUGH HORRIFIC ADDITIONAL TRAUMA, WHICH IS EXACTLY

WHY WE HAVE A GRAND JURY PROCEEDING.

ALTHOUGH THAT CONCERN WAS CAREFULLY ARTICULATED BY

ASSEMBLYMEMBER PALUMBO, UNFORTUNATELY THIS AMENDMENT DOES NOT

ADDRESS IT AT ALL. AND WHAT WE WERE TOLD THAT IN THEORY, THERE COULD BE

A PROTECTIVE ORDER, THE STATUTORY REFERENCE THAT WE WERE GIVEN ONLY

TALKS ABOUT PROTECTIVE ORDERS IN DISCOVERY CASES AND, BY ITS TERMS,

WOULD NOT APPLY IN A PRELIMINARY HEARING.

SO, WHILE WE RECOGNIZE THE NEED TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S

A TIMELY PRELIMINARY HEARING, OR A SECRET GRAND JURY, OR SOME OTHER

226

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

COMPELLING PURPOSE, WE ALSO RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING IT

CLEAR THAT A PROTECTIVE ORDER CAN COVER THE WITNESS' IDENTITY IN THESE

UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. THE FOURTH COMPONENT HAD EXTENSIVE

OPPOSITION, AND NONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT LED TO THAT OPPOSITION WERE

ADDRESSED.

SO, FOR MY COLLEAGUES WHO UNANIMOUSLY VOTED FOR

WHAT WAS IN PART A AND IS CONTINUED IN PART A, THEY CAN REST ASSURED

THAT THEIR AFFIRMATIVE VOTE GAVE ALL THE AUTHORITY THAT WAS NEEDED AND

THAT THE AMENDMENTS TO PART A ARE INSIGNIFICANT. AND FOR THOSE WHO

VOTED AGAINST PART B WHICH WAS THE UTILITY REQUIREMENT THAT UTILITY

COMPANIES PROVIDE FREE SERVICE FOR THOSE WHO DIDN'T PAY, OR PART C THAT

DEALT WITH MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE FORBEARANCE IN VIOLATION OF THE

CONSTITUTION, OR AGAINST PART D, WHICH REQUIRED WITNESS IDENTITY TO BE

DISCLOSED, FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO VOTED AGAINST THOSE, THEY PROBABLY

WILL CONTINUE TO OPPOSE THESE MODEST AMENDMENTS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR, AND I APPRECIATE THE

OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THIS BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON RULES REPORT NO. 60. THIS IS A PARTY VOTE. ANY MEMBER

WISHING TO BE RECORDED AS AN EXCEPTION TO THE CONFERENCE POSITION IS

REMINDED TO CONTACT THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS

PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

227

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE

REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THESE AMENDMENTS.

IF ANY MEMBER OF THE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WOULD PREFER TO VOTE IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE, PLEASE CONTACT THE MINORITY LEADER OFFICE FORTHWITH.

THANK YOU, SIR.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, THERE ARE

FOLKS ALL OVER THE STATE OF NEW YORK. THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT STILL

WATCHING US, BUT THEY ARE ANTICIPATING OUR WORK. IT'S TO GIVE THEM

SOME SEMBLANCE THAT THEY CAN MAKE IT THROUGH THE NEXT FEW WEEKS

WHILE WE EXPERIENCE THIS PANDEMIC. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY PLEASING TO

EVERYBODY'S EARS TO HEAR THAT WE'RE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO PUT IN IN ORDER

FOR ALL OF US TO GET THROUGH THIS IN ANY KIND OF WHOLE WAY, BUT, IT MAY

FEEL LIKE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE GREATEST THING, BUT I REALLY DO BELIEVE

WHEN WE ALL ARE CONTRIBUTING TO HELP EACH OTHER, WE WILL ALL END UP

BEING BETTER OFF.

AND SO, I AM, YOU KNOW, VERY PLEASED TO ASK THIS

MAJORITY TO TAKE A PARTY VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS LEGISLATION SO THAT WE

MIGHT MOVE FORWARD. THERE ARE PEOPLE DEPENDING ON US. AND SO, I

THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THIS FINAL STEP AND GO HOME AND SHARE WITH THEM

WHAT WE'VE DONE TO TRY TO HELP MOVE THEIR LIVES FORWARD. THIS IS NOT

GOING TO BE THE LAST THING WE HAVE TO DO, MIND YOU. THERE'S GOING TO

BE MORE. WE HAVE NO IDEA YET HOW MUCH MORE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO

OFFER FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS STATE, BUT I THINK WE'VE GOT A GOOD START ON

IT.

228

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SO, PARTY VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, MR. SPEAKER.

OBVIOUSLY, I WILL -- I'M HAPPY TO TAKE COLLEAGUES WHO WOULD NOT LIKE

TO VOTE FOR THIS, AND WE'LL BE HAPPY TO PUT THEIR NAMES ON THE RECORD AS

SUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. ABINANTI TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. ABINANTI: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I'D LIKE

TO ADDRESS MY COMMENTS TO SECTION C, WHICH AMENDS A BILL THAT WE

DEALT WITH THE OTHER DAY DEALING WITH FORBEARANCE OF MORTGAGE

OBLIGATIONS FOR ONE TO FOUR FAMILY-OWNED AND OCCUPIED RESIDENTIAL

PROPERTIES. IN A TIME OF CRISIS, IT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT ROLE OF THE

LEGISLATURE TO PROTECT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. AND THAT IS WHAT WE'VE

TRIED TO DO OVER THE LAST 48 HOURS. THIS PARTICULAR SECTION IS AN ATTEMPT

TO HELP THOSE HOMEOWNERS WHO COULD LOSE THEIR HOMES BECAUSE OF A

LOSS OF INCOME DURING THIS COVID PANDEMIC THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR

OWN. IT'S A SHORT-TERM SOLUTION. IT ENCOURAGES NEW YORK STATE

REGULATED LENDING INSTITUTIONS TO BE REASONABLE, TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE

BORROWERS, AND IT PUTS A LITTLE PUSH IN THERE THAT IF THEY CAN'T REACH THEIR

OWN AGREEMENT, IF THEY -- IF THIS IS NOT A REASONABLE ENOUGH

INDUCEMENT, THEN THE BORROWER CAN FALL BACK TO A REMEDY SET FORTH IN

THE STATUTE OF BEING ABLE TO PAY BACK THE MISSED PAYMENTS OVER A

PERIOD OF TIME, OR TO PAY THEM AS A BALLOON PAYMENT AT THE END OF THE

MORTGAGE PERIOD.

229

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

NOW, SOME QUESTION HAS BEEN RAISED ABOUT THE

VALIDITY OF THIS, THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THIS. LET ME NOTE THAT THIS

AMENDMENT CHANGES SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT FROM THE BILL THAT WE

PASSED THE OTHER DAY. THIS CONTINUES THE OBLIGATION OF THE BORROWER TO

PAY INTEREST. SECONDLY, IT DEFERS OBLIGATIONS; IT DOESN'T IMPAIR

OBLIGATIONS. AND, LASTLY, THE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM HERE IS

SOMETHING THAT IS TOTALLY WITHIN THE CONTROL OF THIS STATE LEGISLATURE,

THE FORECLOSURE PROCESS.

THIS IS A VERY REASONABLE BILL. IT IS NECESSARY TO HELP

OUR HOMEOWNERS AND I URGE ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. ABINANTI IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR. THE FOLLOWING

REPUBLICAN MEMBERS WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THESE AMENDMENTS:

MR. NORRIS, MR. MORINELLO, MR. SCHMITT, MR. FITZPATRICK AND MS.

MILLER. THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

MR. LENTOL TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. LENTOL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I JUST

WANTED TO CLEAR UP THE RECORD, BECAUSE MR. GOODELL CITED SOMETHING

THAT I THINK WAS MY FAULT, BECAUSE IN OUR DISCUSSION OF THE PRELIMINARY

HEARING BILL EARLIER TODAY, I HAD CITED THE WRONG SECTION TO HIM, AND I'D

LIKE TO NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT THE -- IT WASN'T THE SECTION THAT I GAVE --

230

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

I GAVE HIM THE WRONG SECTION. IT WAS EXECUTIVE ORDER 202.28 THAT

SUPPLIES THE MEANS FOR A COURT, WHEN NECESSARY, TO SHIELD THE IMAGE OF

A WITNESS, OR TO GARBLE THE WITNESS' VOICE. IT WASN'T THE SECTION THAT I

GAVE HIM. SO, BE SURE THAT IN THAT PRELIMINARY HEARING, THE VIRTUAL

PRELIMINARY HEARING THAT WE WANT TO SET UP, ALL WITNESSES WILL BE

PROTECTED BY VIRTUE OF THAT EXECUTIVE ORDER. AND IF THAT EXECUTIVE

ORDER IS NOT ENOUGH, JUDGES HAVE THE AUTHORITY, BY THEIR OWN POWER, TO

DO WHATEVER IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE WITNESS. I VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. LENTOL IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION, AND WE ARE REMINDED NOT

TO USE MEMBERS' NAMES IN EXPLAINING OUR VOTES. THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, AS WE

CONCLUDE TODAY'S -- THIS MORNING'S SESSION, WE WILL TAKE UP TWO

PRIVILEGED RESOLUTIONS THAT WE DISCUSSED ON YESTERDAY, ACTUALLY, ONE BY

MR. OTIS HONORING FIRST RESPONDERS, AND THE OTHER BY MR. MCDONALD,

MEMORIALIZING THE MANY LIVES THAT HAVE PERISHED AS A RESULT OF THIS

PANDEMIC. SO, MR. SPEAKER, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE TAKE UP THESE

RESOLUTIONS, BUT BEFORE YOU TAKE UP THESE RESOLUTIONS, I WOULD NOTE THAT

WHEN WE ADJOURN, WE WILL ADJOURN UNTIL FRIDAY, MAY THE 29TH,

TOMORROW BEING A LEGISLATIVE DAY, AND THAT WE WILL RECONVENE AT THE

231

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

CALL OF THE SPEAKER. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES.

THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 856, MR.

OTIS.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION HONORING THE FIRST RESPONDERS

FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK WHO HAVE BATTLED ON THE FRONT LINES, FOR

THEIR HEROISM DURING THE UNPRECEDENTED TIME OF CRISIS CREATED BY THE

COVID [SIC] VIRUS DISEASE 2019.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. OTIS ON THE

RESOLUTION.

MR. OTIS: ON BEHALF OF ALL OF OUR COLLEAGUES HERE IN

THE STATE ASSEMBLY, EVEN AT THIS LATE HOUR, WE MAKE SPECIAL NOTE OF --

OF THE FIRST RESPONDERS AND FRONTLINE WORKERS WHO HAVE SO SACRIFICED.

YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW THAT THE DEADLY VIRUS COULD BE ANYWHERE, AND

WE HAVE AN ABILITY TO AVOID EXPOSURE TO IT AND BE CAREFUL. BUT THE FIRST

RESPONDERS AND THE FRONTLINE WORKERS FACE A DIFFERENT CHALLENGE. WHILE

THE VIRUS COULD BE ANYWHERE, FIRST RESPONDERS KNOW WHEN THEY REPORT

TO WORK THEY WILL ENCOUNTER THE VIRUS. THEY ALL HAVE MADE A DECISION

THAT THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES TO ALL OF US, THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES TO CARE FOR

THE ILL, RESPOND TO EMERGENCY, TO KEEP THE FABRIC OF OUR SOCIETY

TOGETHER, IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANY GUARANTEE OF PERSONAL SAFETY.

ORDINARY ACTS BECOME EXTRAORDINARY HEROISM.

SO TODAY WE HONOR THEIR SERVICE. WE HONOR THEIR

232

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

SACRIFICE. WE HONOR THOSE WHO HAVE BECOME ILL. THOSE WHO CONTINUE

TO PUT THEIR LIVES AT RISK, AND THE MANY OF THOSE WHO ARE LOST TO US

TODAY. WE HONOR THE FIRST RESPONDERS FOR THEIR COMMITMENT TO

HUMANITY.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE RESOLUTION -

AGAIN, FOR THE FIRST TIME I BELIEVE SINCE WE'VE GONE THIS WAY - ALL THOSE

IN FAVOR FROM ALL OVER THE STATE, WHEREVER YOU MAY BE, IN YOUR HOMES

OR OTHERWISE, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 855, MR.

MCDONALD.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION EXPRESSING SINCERE HEARTFELT

CONDOLENCES TO THOSE NEW YORKERS AND THOSE AROUND THE UNITED STATES

AND THE WORLD WHO HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES TO COVID-19.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. MCDONALD ON

THE RESOLUTION.

MR. MCDONALD: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR THE

OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO OFFER OUR HEARTFELT CONDOLENCES OF THIS BODY TO

THOSE NEW YORKERS, TO THOSE AROUND THE UNITED STATES AND THE WORLD

WHO HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES TO COVID-19. THIS GLOBAL PANDEMIC HAS

CREATED AN UNPRECEDENTED HEALTH CRISIS THAT HAS CAUSED SIGNIFICANT

ECONOMIC RISK AND HARM TO THE WELL-BEING OF THE BUSINESSES,

ORGANIZATIONS, COMMUNITIES AND CITIZENS THROUGHOUT OUR GREAT STATE OF

NEW YORK. MORE THAN 5.3 MILLION CASES OF COVID-19 HAVE BEEN

233

NYS ASSEMBLY MAY 28, 2020

REPORTED WORLDWIDE, WITH AT LEAST 342,000 DEATHS. ALMOST -- OVER

100,000 DEATHS THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES. AND TODAY HERE IN NEW

YORK STATE, 23,722 INDIVIDUALS HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES.

EACH AND EVERY NEW YORKER THROUGHOUT THIS STATE HAS

BEEN AFFECTED IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER BY KNOWING SOMEBODY WHO HAS

SUFFERED UNDER THE GUISE OF THIS HORRIFIC PANDEMIC. THE NEW YORK

STATE ASSEMBLY RECOGNIZES THE DEVASTATING LOSS OF LIFE FROM THIS

LIFE-THREATENING VIRUS, AND SHARES THE GRIEF AND HEARTACHE WITH THE

FAMILY MEMBERS AND LOVED ONES OF THOSE WHO HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES.

MR. SPEAKER, THE MEMORY OF THOSE WHO HAVE DIED WILL

BE FOREVER IMPRINTED IN THE HEARTS OF ALL THE CITIZENS OF THE GREAT

EMPIRE STATE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED.

LET US ALL RISE IN THE MEMORY OF THE ONES LOST TO THIS

DISEASE.

(WHEREUPON, A MOMENT OF SILENCE WAS HELD.)

THE ASSEMBLY STANDS ADJOURNED.

(WHEREUPON, AT 2:29 A.M., THE HOUSE STOOD ADJOURNED

UNTIL FRIDAY, MAY 29TH, THAT BEING A LEGISLATIVE DAY, AND TO RECONVENE

AT THE CALL OF THE SPEAKER.)

234