WEDNESDAY, MAY 5, 2021                                           10:44 A.M.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE HOUSE WILL COME

                    TO ORDER.

                                 THE REVEREND ELIA WILL OFFER A PRAYER.

                                 REVEREND DONNA ELIA:  LET US PRAY.  GOOD AND

                    GRACIOUS GOD, YOUR LOVING KINDNESS IS POURED OUT UPON THIS

                    ASSEMBLY.  THANK YOU FOR THIS MOMENT AND FOR THE PRIVILEGE OF PUBLIC

                    SERVICE.  GIVE THE BODY THE STRENGTH AND WISDOM IT NEEDS TO DO THE

                    DAILY TASKS WHICH COLLECTIVELY CONTRIBUTE TO THE COMMON GOOD.  THANK

                    YOU FOR THIS DAY AND FOR THE VERY BREATH THAT ENLIVENS US.  TENDERLY

                    BLESS THIS ASSEMBLY, EACH LEGISLATOR AND STAFF PERSON, EACH FAMILY

                    MEMBER, EVERY CONSTITUENT AND COMMUNITY.  BLESS OUR STATE, NATION,

                    AND THE WORLD.

                                 AS BUSINESS COMES BEFORE THE BODY, HELP THEM WITH

                                          1



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    ALL DELIBERATION TO GIVE THE BEST OF THEMSELVES, THEIR INTELLECT AND

                    REASON, THEIR HEART AND CONVICTION, AND WHEN NEEDED, PROBLEM-SOLVING

                    SKILLS.  LET THERE BE ROOM FOR THOSE WHO HESITATE TO SPEAK.  STRENGTHEN

                    THE WEARY AND GIVE GOOD HEALTH TO ANY WHO FEEL UNWELL, AND GIVE

                    COURAGE TO ALL.  AS WE CONTINUE TO EMERGE FROM THIS PANDEMIC, WE ARE

                    MINDFUL OF THE SUFFERING OF SO MANY.  GIVE HEALING TO ALL.  HELP US

                    WORK TOGETHER.  BRING AN END TO VIOLENCE AND EMPOWER ALL PEOPLE TO

                    SPEAK UP IN THE FACE OF INJUSTICE.  YOU WHO MAKE PEACE IN HIGH PLACES,

                    BRING PEACE WITH JUSTICE IN OUR TIME.  IN YOUR HOLY NAME, WE PRAY.

                    AMEN.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  AMEN.

                                 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.)

                                 AND MAY WE WISH THE REVEREND A HAPPY BIRTHDAY,

                    WHICH SHE HAD IN THE PAST MONDAY.  HAPPY BIRTHDAY, REVEREND ELIA.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 A QUORUM BEING PRESENT, THE CLERK WILL READ THE

                    JOURNAL OF TUESDAY, MAY 4TH.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

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

                    THAT WE DISPENSE WITH THE FURTHER READING OF THE JOURNAL OF TUESDAY,

                    MAY THE 4TH AND ASK THAT THE SAME STAND APPROVED.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO

                                          2



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    ORDERED.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  I'D LIKE TO BEGIN OUR PROCEEDINGS WITH -- WITH A QUOTE.  THIS

                    ONE THIS MORNING IS COMING FROM HERMANN KARL HESSE.  HE IS A

                    GERMAN-BORN SWISS POET, NOVELIST, AND PAINTER.  HIS WORDS FOR US THIS

                    MORNING, MR. SPEAKER, IF YOU HATE A PERSON, YOU HATE SOMETHING IN

                    HIM THAT IS A PART OF YOURSELF.  WHAT ISN'T A PART OF OURSELVES DOES NOT

                    DISTURB US.  AGAIN, MR. KARL HESSE, HE'S A GERMAN-BORN POET AND

                    NOVELIST.

                                 MEMBERS ARE -- DO HAVE ON THEIR DESK A MAIN

                    CALENDAR.  I JUST WANT TO REMIND FOLKS THOUGH THAT TODAY IS THE THIRD

                    SESSION DAY OF THE 18TH WEEK OF THE 244TH LEGISLATION -- LEGISLATIVE

                    SESSION.  AND BY THE WAY, THIS IS THE LAST SESSION DAY OF THE WEEK OF

                    THE 244TH LEGISLATIVE SESSION.  SO COLLEAGUES YOU DO HAVE ON YOUR DESK

                    A MAIN CALENDAR AND AFTER THERE ARE ANY INTRODUCTIONS BY THE SPEAKER

                    AND/OR HOUSEKEEPING, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE UP RESOLUTIONS ON PAGE 3;

                    HOWEVER, OUR PRINCIPAL WORK FOR THE DAY, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE

                    CONSENT -- CONSENTING FROM THE MAIN CALENDAR.  WE'RE GOING TO START

                    WITH CALENDAR NO. 241 BY MS. BUTTENSCHON AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO GO

                    TO CALENDAR NO. 258 AND GO STRAIGHT THROUGH, MR. SPEAKER, TO CALENDAR

                    NO. 279.  WE ALSO ARE GOING TO TAKE UP SOME BILLS ON DEBATE TODAY.

                    WE'RE GOING TO START THAT PROCESS WITH CALENDAR NO. 35 BY MR.

                    GOTTFRIED, FOLLOWED BY CALENDAR NO. 221 BY MS. CRUZ, AND CALENDAR

                    NO. 206 AND 207 BY MS. BICHOTTE HERMELYN.  THAT IS THE ORDER THAT WE

                    WILL PROCEED IN FOR THE TIME BEING, MR. SPEAKER.  SHOULD THERE BE THE

                                          3



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    NEED TO ANNOUNCE ANYTHING IN THE FUTURE, WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU.

                    IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THIS SESSION THOUGH, HOWEVER, THERE IS GOING TO

                    BE A NEED FOR A MAJORITY CONFERENCE.  AND SO AS ALWAYS, THOSE OF US

                    WHO ARE ON REMOTELY AND THOSE OF US WHO ARE IN THE CHAMBERS NEED TO

                    WITH SPEEDILY GET ON REMOTELY SO THAT WE CAN BEGIN THAT MAJORITY

                    CONFERENCE.  AND, AS ALWAYS, MR. SPEAKER, WE WILL CONSULT WITH OUR

                    COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE TO DETERMINE WHAT THEIR NEEDS MAY BE.

                                 THAT'S THE GENERAL OUTLINE OF -- IF YOU DO HAVE

                    INTRODUCTIONS OR HOUSEKEEPING, NOW WOULD BE A GREAT TIME.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  WE HAVE NEITHER.

                                 WE WILL GO DIRECTLY TO RESOLUTIONS, PAGE 3, THE CLERK

                    WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 244, MS.

                    SOLAGES.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO PROCLAIM MAY 1-8, 2021, AS MATERNAL HEALTH

                    AWARENESS WEEK IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 245, MS.

                    BYRNES.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO PROCLAIM MAY 2-8, 2021, AS PROFESSIONAL

                    MUNICIPAL CLERKS WEEK IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                          4



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 246, MRS.

                    BARRETT.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO PROCLAIM MAY 7, 2021, AS MILITARY SPOUSE

                    APPRECIATION DAY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MRS. BARRETT ON THE

                    RESOLUTION -- NO, I'M SORRY.

                                 ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING

                    AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 247, MS.

                    SIMON.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO PROCLAIM MAY 6, 2021, AS DYSLEXIA AWARENESS

                    DAY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 248, MR.

                    MCDONALD.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO PROCLAIM MAY 2021, AS HUNTINGTON'S DISEASE

                    AWARENESS MONTH IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                          5



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 249, MRS.

                    GUNTHER.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR M.

                    CUOMO TO PROCLAIM MAY 6-12, 2021, AS NURSES WEEK IN THE STATE OF

                    NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 250, MS.

                    SOLAGES.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO PROCLAIM MAY 5, 2021, AS MOTHER'S EQUAL PAY

                    DAY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.

                                 PAGE 20, CALENDAR NO. 241, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A01177, CALENDAR NO.

                    241, BUTTENSCHON, LUNSFORD, GRIFFIN, LUPARDO.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE

                    NEW YORK SATE URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ACT, IN RELATION TO

                    MARKETING AND EXPANDING EXPORT TRADE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                          6



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL RECORD

                    THE VOTE ON ASSEMBLY PRINT 1177.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES 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.)

                                 MS. BUTTENSCHON TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 MS. BUTTENSCHON:  ON THE BILL.  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  SMALL BUSINESSES MAKE UP 98 PERCENT OF NEW YORK STATE

                    BUSINESSES.  THEY EMPLOY MORE THAN HALF OF NEW YORK'S PRIVATE SECTOR

                    AND ARE THE BACKBONE OF OUR COUNTRY.  IN MY TENURE AS CHAIR OF THE

                    SUBCOMMITTEE ON EXPORT, I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HOST ROUNDTABLES

                    THROUGHOUT THE STATE AND HAVE UNFORTUNATELY LEARNED THAT SMALL

                    BUSINESSES ARE OFTEN OVERLOOKED AS POTENTIAL EXPORTERS OF THE GREAT

                    NEW YORK STATE GOODS AND SERVICES AND, THUS, INFORMATION TO BEGIN

                    AND MAINTAIN AN EXPORT PROGRAM DOES NOT INCLUDE THEM.  BUSINESSES

                    NEED TO SUPPORT -- BE SUPPORTED IN THE FORM OF UPDATED INFORMATION,

                    TECHNICAL EXPERTISE, AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF WORKING ALLIANCES TO

                    POSITION THEMSELVES FOR MAXIMUM TRADE POTENTIALS WITHIN OTHER

                    COUNTRIES, STATES AND REGIONS WITHIN NEW YORK STATE.

                                 DUE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC, IT IS MORE IMPORTANT

                    THAN EVER TO ENSURE THE COMPETITIVENESS ON A DOMESTIC AND GLOBAL

                    MEANS.  WE HAVE THE BEST PRODUCTS AND SERVICES IN THE WORLD AND THEY

                    DESERVE TO BE SHOWCASED.  THIS LEGISLATION WILL WORK TO DO A BETTER JOB

                    AT SPREADING INFORMATION AND WORKING WITH BUSINESSES TO MAKE THEM

                                          7



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    AWARE OF ALL THE POSSIBILITIES AND RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THEM.  THE

                    STATE NEEDS THIS AND IT WILL HELP THESE BUSINESSES GROW.  WE MUST

                    DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY TO ENCOURAGE AND ASSIST ALL

                    BUSINESSES TO REALIZE THE PROMISE OF EXPANDED INTERNATIONAL, INTERSTATE

                    AND INTRASTATE TRADE.  THIS IS COMMON SENSE MEASURE THAT SUPPORTS OUR

                    LOCAL BUSINESSES, OUR FARMERS, AND HELPS BRING NEW MARKETS AND

                    INTRODUCES MORE CONSUMERS TO ALL NEW YORK HAS TO OFFER.

                                 IN ADDITION, I MET JOHN DYSON, THE FOUNDER OF OUR

                    HISTORIC I LOVE NEW YORK MOTTO IN UTICA AS WE OPENED AN INNOVATIVE

                    ENERGY MUSEUM LAST MONTH THAT WAS IN HIS HONOR.  THIS LEGISLATION WILL

                    EXPAND TO I LOVE NEW YORK PRODUCTS AND SERVICES.  WE HAVE THE BEST

                    OF THE BEST IN THIS STATE AND WE NEED TO SHARE OUR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES

                    WITH THE WORLD.  I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS LEGISLATION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. BUTTENSCHON IN

                    THE AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 FIRST VOTE OF THE DAY, MEMBERS.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 PAGE 22, CALENDAR NO. 258, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A05668, CALENDAR NO.

                    258, GUNTHER, WOERNER, SANTABARBARA, TAYLOR, L. ROSENTHAL, ABINANTI,

                    NIOU, BRABENEC, STECK, BARRON, HEVESI, BRAUNSTEIN, GOTTFRIED.  AN ACT

                    TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW, IN RELATION TO THE EMPLOYMENT OF

                    PERSONS TO FUNCTION AS INFECTION PREVENTIONISTS IN CERTAIN GENERAL

                                          8



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    HOSPITALS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A05678, CALENDAR NO.

                    259, JOYNER, OTIS.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE LABOR LAW, IN RELATION TO

                    BENEFITS OF SHARED WORK PROGRAMS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MS.

                    JOYNER, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE.  THE SENATE BILL IS

                    ADVANCED.  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A05795, CALENDAR NO.

                    260, BURDICK.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO AUTHORIZING

                    THE CITY OF WHITE PLAINS TO IMPOSE AN OCCUPANCY TAX.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  HOME RULE MESSAGE

                    IS AT THE DESK.  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL RECORD

                    THE VOTE.  THIS IS ON A-5795.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER WHO

                    WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

                    MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MR. GOODELL TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, SIR.  I WILL BE

                    SUPPORTING THIS LEGISLATION THAT EXTENDS THE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY

                    OF WHITE PLAINS TO IMPOSE AN OCCUPANCY TAX OR A HOTEL TAX UP TO 3

                    PERCENT ON HOTELS THAT ARE WITHIN CITY.  ALTHOUGH I KNOW THAT SEVERAL OF

                    MY COLLEAGUES ARE CONCERNED ABOUT LOCAL GOVERNMENT, PARTICULARLY

                                          9



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    CITIES IMPOSING OCCUPANCY TAXES OR THEIR OWN SALES TAXES, THIS WILL BE

                    AT LEAST THE THIRD OR FOURTH TIME WE'VE EXTENDED IT FOR THE CITY OF

                    YONKERS [SIC] SO IT IS NOT A NEW TAX.  AND FOR THAT REASON, I'LL BE

                    SUPPORTING IT.  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. GOODELL IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, SIR.  PLEASE RECORD THE

                    FOLLOWING COLLEAGUES IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS:  MR. DESTEFANO, MR.

                    DURSO, MR. GANDOLFO, MS. GIGLIO, MR. LALOR, MR. LAWLER, MR.

                    MONTESANO, MR. SCHMITT, AND MR. TANNOUSIS.  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    GOODELL, SO NOTED.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  ALSO -- I APOLOGIZE, ALSO MR.

                    SMITH.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU.  SO

                    NOTED.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, IF YOU

                    COULD PLEASE RECORD OUR COLLEAGUES MR. STIRPE, MR. BARNWELL, MR.

                    BURKE, MS. MCMAHON, MR. SANTABARBARA, AND MR. RAMOS IN THE

                    NEGATIVE ON THIS ONE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ARE THERE ANY OTHER

                    VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                         10



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MR. BURDICK, CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR FIRST BILL.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 I WON'T TELL YOU THAT THIS IS THE BEST YOU'LL EVER DO IN

                    THE ASSEMBLY, BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE'RE ALL SO GLAD THAT YOU ACTUALLY

                    PASSED IT IN THE MORNING.

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 SO CONGRATULATIONS.  KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.

                                 NO. 261, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A05838, CALENDAR NO.

                    261, CRUZ, GALEF.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC SERVICE LAW, IN RELATION

                    TO REQUIRING AT LEAST ONE COMMISSIONER OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE

                    COMMISSION TO HAVE EXPERIENCE IN UTILITY CONSUMER ADVOCACY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MS.

                    CRUZ, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE.  THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.

                    LAY THE BILL ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06229, CALENDAR NO.

                    262, THIELE, OTIS.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE TOWN LAW, IN RELATION TO

                    REQUIRING AN ELECTRONIC VERSION OF A TOWN CLERK'S SIGN-BOARD ON A TOWN

                    WEBSITE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MR.

                    THIELE, 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

                                         11



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    THE VOTE ON SENATE PRINT 3984.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES 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. GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, SIR.  I WILL BE

                    SUPPORTING THIS BILL, ALTHOUGH THERE ARE CONCERNS BY SOME OF MY

                    COLLEAGUES THAT WE ARE IMPOSING ANOTHER MANDATE ON LOCAL

                    GOVERNMENTS.  BY WAY OF BACKGROUND, FOR MANY TYPES OF ACTIONS YOU

                    HAVE TO POST PUBLIC NOTICE, FOR EXAMPLE, ON A MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE;

                    YOU HAVE TO POST PUBLIC NOTICE IN ADDITION TO ADVERTISING.  AND THAT

                    PUBLIC NOTICE IN UPSTATE NEW YORK HAS BEEN DONE ON A BULLETIN BOARD,

                    A PHYSICAL BULLETIN BOARD MAINTAINED BY THE TOWN CLERK WHICH, OTHER

                    THAN THE TOWN OFFICIALS THAT MIGHT WALK IN FROM TIME TO TIME, NOBODY

                    ACTUALLY SEES.

                                 THIS BILL WOULD SAY THAT IF THE TOWN HAS A WEBSITE

                    THAT'S REGULARLY MAINTAINED, AND THEY CAN DO SO WITHOUT ANY SIGNIFICANT

                    EXPENSE, THEY SHOULD ALLOW YOU TO POST THOSE LEGAL NOTICES ON THEIR

                    ELECTRONIC BULLETIN BOARD AND MEET THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT FOR

                    POSTING.  IT REALLY KIND OF BRINGS OUR PROCEDURE UP FROM THE 1900S INTO

                    THE -- INTO THE 21ST CENTURY, AND IT'S THE RIGHT MOVE AND I APPRECIATE THE

                    FACT THAT MY COLLEAGUE WHO DRAFTED THIS BILL ENSURED THAT IT WAS CLEAR,

                    THAT IT WAS ONLY IF THERE WAS NOT A SIGNIFICANT EXPENSE TO THE

                    MUNICIPALITY AND THEY ALREADY HAVE A WEB PAGE AND THEY CAN DO IT

                    WITHOUT A -- A CONSIDERABLE BURDEN ON THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT.  AND

                                         12



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    BECAUSE OF THOSE PROTECTIONS, I WILL BE SUPPORTING IT, EVEN THOUGH IT IS

                    AN ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT ON THOSE GOVERNMENTS.  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. GOODELL IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, SIR.  PLEASE RECORD THE

                    FOLLOWING COLLEAGUES IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS LEGISLATION:  MR. FRIEND

                    AND MR. WALCZYK.  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    GOODELL.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06305, CALENDAR NO.

                    263, WOERNER.  AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 55 OF THE LAWS OF 2011

                    AMENDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW RELATING TO

                    AUTHORIZING ANGLING BY A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL WITH UP TO THREE LINES IN

                    FRESHWATER, IN RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MS.

                    WOERNER, 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 SENATE PRINT 2044.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

                                         13



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06389, CALENDAR NO.

                    264, FAHY.  AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 141 OF THE LAWS OF 2014

                    AMENDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW RELATING TO

                    AUTHORIZING THE HUNTING OF BIG GAME IN THE COUNTY OF ALBANY WITH

                    RIFLES, IN RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

                                 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 ASSEMBLY PRINT 6389.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

                    MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MS. GLICK TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 MS. GLICK TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 OKAY.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, IF YOU

                    WOULD PLEASE RECORD OUR COLLEAGUES MR. BARRON, MS. WEINSTEIN, AND

                    MS. GLICK IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS ONE.

                                         14



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 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:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06436, CALENDAR NO.

                    265, PAULIN, GALEF, OTIS.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC SERVICE LAW, IN

                    RELATION TO DIRECTING THE COMMISSION TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS AND

                    SAFEGUARDS FOR CERTAIN RADIO AND PHONE PROVIDERS TO MEET ELIGIBILITY TO

                    PROVIDE LIFELINE SERVICES.

                                 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 ASSEMBLY PRINT 6436.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

                    MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06503, CALENDAR NO.

                    266, STIRPE, OTIS.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

                    ACT AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LAW, IN RELATION TO REQUIRING THE

                    DIVISION FOR SMALL-BUSINESS TO PUBLISH A SMALL BUSINESS COMPLETE

                    GUIDE.

                                         15



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 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 ASSEMBLY PRINT 6503.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

                    MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MR. GOODELL TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, SIR.  I WILL BE

                    SUPPORTING THIS LEGISLATION.  I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA THAT THE DEPARTMENT

                    OF -- DIVISION OF SMALL BUSINESS, WHICH IS A SECTION IN THE ECONOMIC

                    DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION, PUBLISH A -- A SMALL BUSINESS

                    COMPLIANCE GUIDE.  THIS LEGISLATION PROVIDES THAT THE GUIDE WILL

                    INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO CHANGES REGARDING PERMITS, LICENSES,

                    TAXES, INSURANCE, WORKPLACE SAFETY, COMPENSATION, WAGES, HOURS AND

                    BENEFITS.  MY ONLY COMMENT IS IT'S REALLY UNFORTUNATE WE HAVE TO HAVE

                    A PUBLICATION THAT GOES OUT ANNUALLY THAT COVERS SO MANY SUBJECTS IN

                    THE STATE OF NEW YORK, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE TIME WHEN WE CAN

                    PUBLISH A GUIDELINE THAT IDENTIFIES ALL THE REGULATIONS THAT WE ARE

                    STREAMLINING OR REDUCING.  BUT IN THE MEANTIME, LETTING OUR SMALL

                    BUSINESSES HAVE A SMALL BOOK EVERY YEAR ON ALL THE NEW REGULATIONS WE

                    PASS WILL PROBABLY IMPROVE OUR COMPLIANCE.  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. LAWLER TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                 MR. LAWLER:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  I'LL BE

                                         16



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    VERY BRIEF.  I SUPPORT THE -- THE BILL BECAUSE I DO THINK OUR SMALL

                    BUSINESSES STRUGGLE EVERY YEAR TO -- TO FIGURE OUT WHAT REGULATIONS THEY

                    NEED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE AS A BODY TEND TO

                    PASS MANY REGULATIONS AND NEW LAWS AND NEW BILLS TO -- TO TAKE EFFECT.

                                 SEVERAL YEARS AGO, NEW YORK STATE SENATE DID A STUDY

                    ON REGULATIONS IN NEW YORK STATE AND THEY FOUND THAT THERE WERE OVER

                    750,000 BUSINESS REGULATIONS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.  SO JUST THINK

                    ABOUT THAT AND HOW HARD IT IS TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REGULATIONS.

                    THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD MAKE THIS BILL BETTER IS IF WE COULD FIND A

                    WAY TO REDUCE REGULATIONS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK AND MAKE IT EASIER

                    TO DO BUSINESS.  SO MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN WORK ON AS WE

                    MOVE FORWARD.  WITH THAT, I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. LAWLER IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06871, CALENDAR NO.

                    267, CAHILL.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC SERVICE LAW, IN RELATION TO

                    UTILITY MEMBERSHIP DUES USED FOR LOBBYING ACTIVITIES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.

                                 ON MR. CAHILL'S MOTION, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE

                    HOUSE.  THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06877, CALENDAR NO.

                    268, ZEBROWSKI.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE INSURANCE LAW, IN RELATION TO

                                         17



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    ALLOWING INSURERS TO DISPENSE WITH OR DEFER INSPECTIONS OF PRIVATE

                    PASSENGER AUTOMOBILES PRIOR TO THE PROVISION OF COVERAGE FOR PHYSICAL

                    DAMAGE THERETO.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06888, CALENDAR NO.

                    269, BARRETT, LUPARDO, STIRPE, OTIS.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE AGRICULTURE

                    AND MARKETS LAW, IN RELATION TO A PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGN

                    REGARDING LYME DISEASE AND OTHER TICK-BORNE DISEASE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MRS.

                    BARRETT, 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 SENATE PRINT 4089.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

                    MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06910, CALENDAR NO.

                    270, CUSICK, FALL, COLTON, DURSO, GRIFFIN, REILLY.  AN ACT TO AMEND

                    CHAPTER 395 OF THE LAWS OF 1978, RELATING TO MORATORIUMS ON THE

                    ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY FOR THE SITING OF

                    FACILITIES AND CERTIFICATION OF ROUTES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF LIQUEFIED

                                         18



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    NATURAL OR PETROLEUM GAS, IN RELATION TO EXTENDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF

                    THE PROVISIONS OF SUCH CHAPTER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06970, CALENDAR NO.

                    271, WALKER, JACOBSON, OTIS.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE ELECTION LAW, IN

                    RELATION TO ESTABLISHING AN ELECTRONIC ABSENTEE BALLOT APPLICATION

                    TRANSMITTAL SYSTEM.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06971, CALENDAR NO.

                    272, PAULIN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION LAW, IN

                    RELATION TO LEASING OF CEMETERY LANDS.

                                 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 ASSEMBLY PRINT 6971.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

                    MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07018, CALENDAR NO.

                    273, HEVESI, BARRON.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW, IN

                    RELATION TO REQUIRING RESIDENTIAL HEALTH CARE FACILITIES TO DOCUMENT THE

                    REASON FOR AN INDIVIDUAL REQUESTING A VOLUNTARY TRANSFER OR DISCHARGE;

                                         19



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    AND TO AMEND A CHAPTER OF THE LAWS OF 2021 RELATING TO ESTABLISHING

                    REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TRANSFER, DISCHARGE AND VOLUNTARY DISCHARGE FROM

                    RESIDENTIAL HEALTH CARE FACILITIES, IN RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS

                    THEREOF.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MR.

                    HEVESI, 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 SENATE PRINT 6204.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

                    MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07019, CALENDAR NO.

                    274, SEAWRIGHT.  AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 223 OF THE LAWS OF 1996,

                    AMENDING THE BANKING LAW RELATING TO PERMISSIBLE FEES IN CONNECTION

                    WITH OPEN END LOANS, IN RELATION TO EXTENDING THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

                                 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 ASSEMBLY PRINT 7019.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

                                         20



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADERS AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07022, CALENDAR NO.

                    275, WALLACE, BARRON.  AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 462 OF THE LAWS OF

                    2015, AMENDING THE ELDER LAW RELATING TO LONG TERM CARE OMBUDSMAN

                    ACCESS TO ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES, IN RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF

                    CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF SUCH CHAPTER.

                                 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 ASSEMBLY PRINT 7022.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

                    MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07024, CALENDAR NO.

                    276, WOERNER, PRETLOW.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE RACING, PARI-MUTUEL

                    WAGERING AND BREEDING LAW, IN RELATION TO COUPLED ENTRIES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                         21



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL RECORD

                    THE VOTE ON ASSEMBLY PRINT 7024.  THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

                    MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07093, CALENDAR NO.

                    277, CLARK, GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS, LUNSFORD, PAULIN, GOTTFRIED, SIMON,

                    MEEKS, LAVINE, BRONSON.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE SOCIAL SERVICES LAW, IN

                    RELATION TO ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE RECEIPT OF CHILD CARE

                    ASSISTANCE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07120-A, CALENDAR

                    NO. 279 WAS PREVIOUSLY AMENDED ON THIRD READING AND IS HIGH FOR

                    FRIDAY.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

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

                    HAVE MEMBERS TURN THEIR ATTENTION TO CALENDAR NO. 35 BY MR. GOTTFRIED

                    ON DEBATE; MR. GOTTFRIED IS PREPARED.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  CALENDAR NO. 35,

                    PAGE 6.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  AND, MR. SPEAKER,

                    IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT COULD WE GO RIGHT TO CALENDAR NO. 221 BY MS.

                                         22



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    CRUZ, FOLLOWED BY CALENDAR NO. 206 AND 207 BY MS. BICHOTTE

                    HERMELYN.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, MRS.

                    PEOPLES-STOKES.  THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A00459, CALENDAR NO.

                    35, GOTTFRIED, PAULIN, NIOU, FAHY, HEVESI, SAYEGH, L. ROSENTHAL, KIM,

                    QUART, EPSTEIN, AUBRY, WALKER, CRUZ, STECK, PERRY, DICKENS, HUNTER,

                    REYES, COOK, SIMON, DARLING, WALCZYK, J. RIVERA, SEAWRIGHT,

                    FERNANDEZ, GLICK, O'DONNELL, CARROLL, TAYLOR, BRONSON, OTIS,

                    GALLAGHER, WEPRIN, VANEL, FORREST, JACKSON, GALEF, MEEKS, RAJKUMAR,

                    ANDERSON, LUNSFORD, CLARK, GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS, BURDICK, BARRON, BURGOS,

                    DINOWITZ, ZINERMAN, MAMDANI, LUPARDO.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE

                    CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW, IN RELATION TO VACATING CONVICTIONS FOR

                    OFFENSES RESULTING FROM SEX TRAFFICKING, LABOR TRAFFICKING AND

                    COMPELLING PROSTITUTION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  AN EXPLANATION IS

                    REQUESTED, MR. GOTTFRIED.

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  THIS

                    BILL EXPANDS A LAW THAT WE ENACTED A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO WHICH WAS,

                    FOR THE COUNTRY, A PRETTY LANDMARK LAW AT THE TIME THAT PROVIDES PEOPLE

                    WHO ARE THE VICTIMS OF SEX TRAFFICKING AND -- AND -- AND OTHER FORMS OF

                    TRAFFICKING, IT ENABLES THEM -- AND IF AS A RESULT OF THAT TRAFFICKING THEY

                    WERE COERCED INTO PERFORMING VARIOUS CRIMINAL ACTS, SPECIFICALLY --

                    SPECIFICALLY PROSTITUTION-RELATED OFFENSES, THEN THEY COULD GET THOSE

                    PROSTITUTION-RELATED CONVICTIONS EXPUNGED ON GROUNDS THAT THEY ONLY

                                         23



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    DID THOSE THINGS AS A RESULT OF BEING COERCED THROUGH TRAFFICKING.

                                 SEVERAL OTHER STATES -- QUITE A FEW OTHER STATES HAVE

                    NOT ONLY ENACTED A LAW MODELED ON WHAT WE DID ABOUT -- I GUESS ABOUT

                    TEN YEARS AGO, BUT QUITE A FEW STATES HAVE GONE BEYOND THAT AND HAVE

                    SAID THAT IF -- THAT WHATEVER CRIME YOU WERE COERCED INTO DOING THROUGH

                    BEING A TRAFFICKING VICTIM, YOU COULD APPLY TO A COURT -- TO THE COURT

                    THAT SENTENCED YOU TO HAVE THAT -- THAT CONVICTION VACATED.  AND THAT IS

                    WHAT THIS BILL WOULD DO.  IT WOULD BROADEN THE SCOPE OF THE LAW TO

                    ELIMINATE THE VERY NARROW LIST OF PREDICATE OFFENSES AND PROVIDE THIS

                    RELIEF TO SOMEONE WHO IS A SEX TRAFFICKING, LABOR TRAFFICKING, ET CETERA,

                    VICTIM TO GET A CRIMINAL CONVICTION THAT WAS THE RESULT OF ESSENTIALLY

                    BEING FORCED INTO IT BY BEING TRAFFICKED, TO GET THE CONVICTION EXPUNGED

                    OR VACATED.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. GOODELL.

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

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. GOTTFRIED, WILL

                    YOU YIELD?

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  CERTAINLY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. GOTTFRIED YIELDS,

                    SIR.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, MR. GOTTFRIED.  AND I

                    APPRECIATE YOUR EXPLANATION.  SO UNDER CURRENT LAW, IF AN INDIVIDUAL IS

                    A VICTIM, ESTABLISHES THAT THEY'RE A VICTIM OF SEX TRAFFICKING OR LOITERING

                    FOR PROSTITUTION OR ENGAGING IN PROSTITUTION OR PROMOTING PROSTITUTION,

                                         24



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    THEN -- THEN THAT'S A DEFENSE, IF YOU WILL, FOR ANY PROSTITUTION OR SEX

                    TRAFFICKING RELATED CHARGES; THAT'S THE CURRENT LAW, CORRECT?

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  WELL, IF -- IF THEY WERE

                    TRAFFICKED, WHETHER IT WAS SEX TRAFFICKING -- WELL, IF THEY WERE A VICTIM

                    OF TRAFFICKING, THEY CAN GET AN EXPUNGEMENT OR A VACATING OF THE

                    CONVICTION, BUT ONLY FOR DIRECT PROSTITUTION OFFENSES.  BEING A

                    PROSTITUTE THEMSELVES, SOLICITING IN A SCHOOLYARD, AND -- AND I THINK

                    THERE IS ONE OTHER, I CAN FIND IT FOR YOU.  BUT ESSENTIALLY, IT IS NARROWLY

                    LIMITED TO VACATING CONVICTIONS FOR PROSTITUTION OFFENSES.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AND THEN THIS BILL WOULD EXTEND IT

                    TO ANY CRIME WITHOUT LIMITATION, CORRECT?

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  CORRECT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SO AS LONG AS YOU ARE ARRESTED, FOR

                    EXAMPLE, AS A -- AS A PROSTITUTE AND AS A DEFENSE TO THAT PROSECUTION

                    DEFENSE YOU ASSERTED THAT YOU WERE ACTUALLY A VICTIM, THEN YOU COULD

                    MAKE A MOTION AND AVOID ANY CRIMINAL LIABILITY AT ALL, OR THERE WOULD

                    BE A PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE EVEN IF IT -- THE OTHER CHARGE WAS LIKE A

                    FELONY DWI, OR VEHICULAR MANSLAUGHTER, OR SEXUAL ASSAULT OF A THIRD

                    PARTY, OR BRIBERY, OR EMBEZZLEMENT, OR A VIOLENT CRIME LIKE ASSAULT, OR

                    ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF A WEAPON, RIGHT?  IT WOULDN'T MATTER WHAT THE

                    SUBSEQUENT CRIME WAS.

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  WELL, JUST TO -- TO MODIFY YOUR

                    PROCEDURAL PROPOSITION, THE MOTION IS A MOTION TO VACATE A JUDGMENT.

                    SO IT HAPPENS AFTER YOU'VE BEEN CONVICTED.  I MEAN, I SUPPOSE YOU

                    COULD -- YOU COULD RAISE THAT AS A DEFENSE AT YOUR ORIGINAL TRIAL, BUT --

                                         25



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    BECAUSE THERE'S NO LAW AGAINST IT, BUT IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE ANYONE DOING

                    THAT BECAUSE AT THE TIME YOU'RE UNDER ARREST FOR PROSTITUTION, YOU ARE,

                    YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY IN FEAR FOR YOUR LIFE BECAUSE OF THE -- BECAUSE OF

                    THE TRAFFICKING.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  CAN WE --

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  AND SO YOU -- YOU COME BACK

                    AFTER THE CONVICTION AND PRESUMABLY AFTER YOU HAVE BEEN FREED FROM

                    YOUR TRAFFICKING STATUS AND ARE THEN FREE TO GO BACK TO COURT AND SAY,

                    PLEASE, JUDGE, I WAS COERCED INTO THIS BY BEING A TRAFFICKING VICTIM.

                    AND IT WOULD THEN BE IN THE DISCRETION OF THE JUDGE WHETHER TO GRANT

                    THAT MOTION.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  BUT THIS BILL SAYS THAT -- A COUPLE OF

                    THINGS.  FIRST ON A PROCEDURAL LEVEL, THAT-- THAT MOTION DOESN'T HAVE TO

                    BE MADE WITH DUE DILIGENCE UNDER THIS REVISED LAW.  THE CURRENT LAW

                    REQUIRES SUCH A MOTION BE MADE WITH DUE DILIGENCE, THIS ONE

                    ELIMINATES THE REQUIREMENT THAT THAT MOTION TO VACATE BE MADE WITH

                    DUE DILIGENCE, CORRECT?

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  YEAH, I -- I THINK OUR LAW HAS

                    RECOGNIZED THAT VICTIMS OF TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCES LIKE THIS CAN'T REALLY

                    EXPECTED -- CAN'T REALLY BE EXPECTED TO, YOU KNOW, COME RUNNING TO

                    COURT FOR RELIEF WITH "DUE DILIGENCE."  THEY --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  IS THERE ANY -- IS THERE ANY TIME

                    LIMIT AT ALL ON THIS?  I MEAN, COULD IT BE YEARS LATER?

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  I SUPPOSE IT COULD.  AGAIN, IT

                    WOULD BE UP TO A JUDGE, AND THE LONGER YOU WAIT THE HARDER IT WILL BE TO

                                         26



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    PROVE YOUR CASE TO A JUDGE.  UM --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AND THAT -- I'M SORRY.  IF YOU MAKE

                    THIS ASSERTION, LET'S SAY YOU MAKE A MOTION A FEW YEARS LATER, AM I

                    CORRECT THAT YOUR MOTION STARTS WITH A PRESUMPTION THAT YOUR

                    PARTICIPATION IN THE VIOLENT OFFENSE OR WHATEVER THE OFFENSE MIGHT BE

                    WAS BECAUSE YOU ARE A VICTIM OF SEX TRAFFICKING?

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  AH, I DON'T SEE WHERE THERE IS

                    PRESUMPTION LANGUAGE HERE --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 2, LINE 20 AND

                    21.

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  PAGE 2, LINE 21, UM... WELL, IF

                    THERE WERE -- IF THERE IS A DOCUMENTATION, YEAH, THAT AT THE TIME YOU

                    WERE A VICTIM OF -- OF TRAFFICKING, YEAH, THAT WOULD CREATE A

                    PRESUMPTION.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  NOW, I NOTE THAT THIS GOES ON TO SAY

                    THAT A MOTION --

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  BECAUSE OTHERWISE -- OTHERWISE

                    IT -- I MEAN, IT'S KIND OF IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE OTHER THAN BY SAYING, I WAS

                    BEING KEPT IN SLAVERY AND I DID WHAT MY MASTER TOLD ME TO DO.  YOU

                    KNOW, TO PROVE THAT THE REASON I DID WHAT MY MASTER TOLD TO ME TO DO

                    IS BECAUSE I WAS IN SLAVERY, IS KIND OF HARD, AND THAT'S CURRENT LAW.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SO ONE OTHER THING, I SEE THIS ADDS

                    LANGUAGE --

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  I DON'T WHAT YOU COULD --

                                 MR. GOODELL: -- THAT --

                                         27



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  BY THE WAY, I -- IF YOU'RE ASKING

                    ME --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  OH, I APOLOGIZE, MR. GOTTFRIED.

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  IF I COULD COMPLETE MY ANSWER,

                    SINCE YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT THAT PART OF CURRENT LAW, IT -- IT MIGHT --

                    SOMEONE MIGHT SUGGEST THAT YOU HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE TO -- YOU KNOW, TO

                    PROPOSE, BUT IN THE COUPLE OF TIMES WE'VE PASSED THIS BILL BEFORE, I

                    DON'T THINK ANYONE'S OFFERED SUCH A SUGGESTION.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  I'D BE GLAD TO -- TO FORWARD

                    SUGGESTIONS FOLLOWING OUR DEBATE.

                                 LOOKING A LITTLE BIT FURTHER IN THIS, IT SAYS THAT A

                    MOTION TO VACATE A CONVICTION SHALL BE CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY NOT BE

                    MADE AVAILABLE TO ANY PERSON OR PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ENTITY UNLESS

                    SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE COURT.  SO THAT MEANS THAT THE VICTIM, FOR

                    EXAMPLE, OF A VIOLENT ASSAULT THAT MAY HAVE OCCURRED, OR THE -- THE

                    VICTIMS OF VEHICULAR MANSLAUGHTER, THE FAMILY, FOR EXAMPLE, OF

                    SOMEONE WHO WAS RUN OVER WHILE THE DEFENDANT WAS DRUNK, THEY

                    WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW THAT THE PERSON WHO KILLED

                    THEIR LOVED ONE IS MAKING A MOTION TO HAVE THE -- THE CONVICTION

                    VACATED, IS THAT CORRECT?

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  NO.  FIRST OF ALL, EVEN IF THAT

                    LANGUAGE WERE NOT IN THERE, UNLESS THE VICTIM OR THE VICTIM'S FAMILY HAS

                    THE RATHER ODD HABIT OF SCRUTINIZING ON A DAILY BASIS ALL THE COURT FILINGS

                    IN THE STATE, THEY'RE NOT LIKELY TO HAVE STUMBLED ACROSS THIS FACT

                    ANYWAY.  BUT THE -- THE COURT CAN ALWAYS SAY THAT IT WANTS TO NOTIFY THE

                                         28



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    VICTIM OR THE VICTIM'S FAMILY.  THE COURT WOULD BE FREE --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  OF COURSE --

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  -- TO DO THAT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AS YOU KNOW --

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  WHETHER THAT WOULD HAVE ANY

                    BEARING ON -- ON THE MERITS OF WHETHER THE PERSON DID WHAT THEY DID

                    BECAUSE THEY WERE FORCED BY THEIR SLAVERY INTO DOING IT, YOU KNOW, IT

                    WOULD BE AN INTERESTING QUESTION, BUT THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE JUDGE.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  OF COURSE, AS YOU KNOW, MANY

                    VICTIMS OF VIOLENT CRIMES, PARTICULARLY LOVED ONES OF THOSE WHO'VE BEEN

                    KILLED VIA AN ASSAULT OR GUN VIOLENCE OR VEHICULAR MANSLAUGHTER, THEY

                    OFTEN WATCH VERY CAREFULLY TO SEE IF AND WHEN THEY -- THE DEFENDANT IS

                    AVAILABLE FOR PAROLE AND THEY'RE AUTHORIZED TO SPEAK IN CONNECTION WITH

                    A PAROLE HEARING.  AND OF COURSE, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO SPEAK AT

                    SENTENCING, RIGHT?

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  RIGHT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AND SO WHY IS IT THAT WE WOULD NOT

                    WANT TO EXTEND THAT RIGHT TO THEM IF A DEFENDANT WHO CLAIMS THAT THEY

                    KILLED THEIR LOVED ONES IN A DRUNKEN ACCIDENT OR SHOT 'EM DEAD SHOULD

                    BE EXONERATED COMPLETELY BECAUSE THEY WERE -- A PROSTITUTION -- A

                    PROSTITUTE.  I MEAN, SHOULDN'T WE AFFIRMATIVELY PROVIDE THE VICTIM'S

                    FAMILY WITH THAT NOTICE AS WE DO IN PAROLE HEARINGS AND AS WE DO IN

                    SENTENCING?

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  I DON'T THINK SO.  FIRST OF ALL, THE

                    WHOLE THEORY OF THIS LEGISLATION IS THAT SOMEONE DID SOMETHING, AND IT

                                         29



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    MAY HAVE BEEN A VERY BAD THING, BUT SOMEONE DID SOMETHING BECAUSE

                    THEY WERE COERCED INTO IT BECAUSE OF BEING SEX TRAFFICKED OR -- OR LABOR

                    TRAFFICKED.  AND I THINK THOSE VICTIMS ARE GOING TO BE A LOT MORE

                    WILLING TO COME FORWARD AND GET THEIR RECORD CLEANED SO THEY CAN GO --

                    SO THEY CAN BECOME PRODUCTIVE MEMBERS OF SOCIETY AND START THEIR LIFE

                    AGAIN.  I THINK THEY'RE A LOT MORE LIKELY TO DO THAT IF THEY DON'T HAVE TO

                    FEAR THAT THEIR LIFE STORY IS GOING TO BE SPREAD ALL OVER THE PAPERS, OR ALL

                    OVER TOWN.  AND AGAIN, THE -- WHETHER -- THE FAMILY PROBABLY HAS NO

                    KNOWLEDGE OF WHETHER TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROCEEDING AS TO WHETHER

                    THE DEFENDANT WAS A TRAFFICKING VICTIM.  THEY'RE NOT LIKELY TO KNOW

                    ANYTHING ABOUT THAT, AND THAT'S THE ISSUE IN THE CASE.  THE ISSUE IN THE

                    CASE IS WAS THE -- WAS THE PERSON COERCED AND VICTIMIZED INTO DOING

                    WHAT THEY DID.  AND AGAIN --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SO -- OH, I'M SORRY.

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  -- REMEMBER, IT'S ALL WITHIN THE

                    DISCRETION OF THE JUDGE, INCLUDING IF THE JUDGE WANTS TO INVITE THE

                    FAMILY IN, THE JUDGE CAN DO THAT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU.  AM I CORRECT THAT IF

                    THIS BILL PASSES, JUST TO USE IT AS AN EXAMPLE, MS. MAXWELL, WHO IS

                    CURRENTLY IN PRISON AWAITING TRIAL ON CHARGES THAT SHE HELPED JEFF

                    EPSTEIN RECRUIT DOZENS OF YOUNG WOMEN COULD, AS A DEFENSE, CLAIM THAT

                    SHE WAS A VICTIM HERSELF?  AND IF SHE --

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  FROM WHAT I --

                                 MR. GOODELL: -- ESTABLISHED THAT SHE IS A VICTIM,

                    THEN SHE WOULD BE EXONERATED FROM ALL RELATED CHARGES, AT LEAST IN --

                                         30



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    UNDER STATE LAW?

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  I WOULD SAY THAT FROM WHAT YOU

                    AND I AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC KNOW ABOUT THIS CASE, SHE IS PROBABLY

                    MORE OF A TRAFFICKER THAN A PERSON WHO WAS TRAFFICKED.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  ALTHOUGH, AS WE BOTH ACKNOWLEDGE

                    --

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  WELL, IF THE TIME WAS --

                                 MR. GOODELL: -- THE CURRENT LAW -- THE CURRENT LAW

                    EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGE --

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  IT -- IT --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE, MR. --

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  IT WOULD BE EASIER IF I COULD

                    ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.  IF A -- A PERSON BEING A TRAFFICKER DOES NOT GET

                    THEM ANYTHING UNDER THIS STATUTE --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  ALTHOUGH WE EXPRESSLY, UNDER THIS

                    LAW, PROVIDE THAT IT IS A DEFENSE TO A TRAFFICKER THAT THE TRAFFICKER

                    THEMSELVES, OR HERSELF, OR HIMSELF WAS A VICTIM, CORRECT?  I MEAN, THAT'S

                    EXPRESSLY INCLUDED IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE CURRENT LAW, RIGHT?

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  IF A PERSON WAS -- WAS CONVICTED

                    OF -- OF -- OF TRAFFICKING AND WAS ALSO A VICTIM OF TRAFFICKING, THEN THE

                    FACT THAT THEY WERE A VICTIM OF TRAFFICKING WOULD BE GROUNDS FOR

                    MOVING TO VACATE A CONVICTION FOR TRAFFICKING.  THE -- THE EXAMPLE

                    YOU'RE CITING IS VERY INFLAMMATORY AND INTENTIONALLY SO, I ASSUME, BUT

                    HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS BILL.  BECAUSE THERE IS -- THERE IS -- THERE IS

                    NO -- THERE IS NO SUGGESTION THAT I'VE SEEN THAT THE PEOPLE YOU'RE TALKING

                                         31



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    ABOUT WERE TRAFFICKING VICTIMS, THEY WERE TRAFFICKING PERPETRATORS.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  WELL, OF COURSE WE HAVEN'T HEARD

                    HER DEFENSE YET, AND WE'RE WORKING HARD TO INCREASE ALL THOSE DEFENSE

                    OPTIONS FOR HER.  THANK YOU, MR. GOTTFRIED.

                                 ON THE BILL, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE BILL, MR.

                    GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SO THIS IS A BILL THAT SHOULD

                    PROBABLY BE NAMED THE SEX VICTIM GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD.  AND

                    THIS IS JUST LIKE MONOPOLY, EXCEPT THERE'S REAL VICTIMS INVOLVED.  UNDER

                    THIS BILL, IF YOU ARE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO ESTABLISH YOURSELF, AND I USE

                    THAT WORD FORTUNATE IN SOMEWHAT OF AN IRONIC WAY, IF YOU ARE FORTUNATE

                    ENOUGH TO BE CLASSIFIED AS A VICTIM OF SEX TRAFFICKING, YOU CAN USE THAT

                    AS A PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE FOR ANY CRIME WHATSOEVER.  THAT'S WHAT

                    THIS BILL SAYS.  YOU CAN USE IT AS A DEFENSE TO A DWI, A FELONY DWI.

                    YOU CAN USE IT AS A DEFENSE FOR VEHICULAR MANSLAUGHTER.  YOU'RE

                    DRUNKER THAN A SKUNK, YOU RAN OVER -- YOU KILLED INNOCENT VICTIMS, YOU

                    CAN SAY, BUT I WAS A VICTIM OF SEX TRAFFICKING, AND YOU HAVE A

                    PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE.  YOU CAN USE IT AS A DEFENSE WHERE YOU

                    SHOOT AND KILL OTHER PEOPLE.  NO EXCEPTIONS, NONE.

                                 NOW I UNDERSTAND THAT IF YOU'RE A VICTIM OF SEX

                    TRAFFICKING YOU MAY BE UNDER INTENSE INFLUENCE, AND WE HAVE ALWAYS

                    RECOGNIZED IN NEW YORK STATE, ALWAYS, THE DEFENSE OF DURESS.  BUT THE

                    DEFENSE OF DURESS ESTABLISH -- REQUIRES YOU TO ESTABLISH THAT THERE IS SO

                    MUCH DURESS YOU COULDN'T CONTROL YOUR OWN ACTIONS AND THIS TAKES IT A

                                         32



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    STEP FARTHER BY ELIMINATING THAT AND REPLACING IT WITH A PRESUMPTION ON

                    EVERY CRIME AND, THEREFORE, I CANNOT SUPPORT IT.  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. REILLY.

                                 MR. REILLY:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE BILL, MR.

                    REILLY.

                                 MR. REILLY:  SO I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT OF THIS

                    LEGISLATION.  I -- I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE TRYING TO HELP THOSE THAT ARE THE

                    VICTIMS OF SEX TRAFFICKING AND THOSE THAT LIVES ARE IN DANGER FROM IT.

                    BUT I THINK THERE'S NO GUARDRAILS TO REALLY HOLD THOSE ACCOUNTABLE THAT

                    COMMIT SERIOUS CRIMES WHILE IN THE PERFORMANCE OF PROSTITUTION.  YOU

                    KNOW, DURING MY CAREER -- I SPOKE MANY TIMES HERE ABOUT MY CAREER IN

                    THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, TALKING ABOUT THE WORK THAT I DID IN MIDTOWN

                    MANHATTAN.  AND ONE OF THE CASES THAT I COULDN'T HELP BUT REFLECT ON

                    DURING THIS DEBATE IS A CASE THAT HAPPENED ON WEST 50TH STREET AND 8TH

                    AVENUE, WHERE A PROSTITUTE HAD A JOHN IN HIS CAR AND THEY HAD A FIGHT

                    OVER PAYMENT.  THE PROSTITUTE PULLED OUT A KNIFE, HELD IT TO HIS THROAT,

                    MADE HIM GET OUT OF THE CAR AND CARJACKED HIM.  UNDER THIS LEGISLATION,

                    IF PASSED, YOU CAN VACATE THAT WITH JUST SIMPLY CONVINCING SOMEONE

                    THAT SHE WAS A VICTIM OF SEXUAL TRAFFICKING.

                                 I THINK THERE HAS TO BE SOME GUARDRAILS WHERE THE

                    THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED DURING THIS DEBATE, THE MORE SERIOUS CRIMES,

                    YOU DON'T JUST GET A GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD FOR THOSE EVENTS.  MANY OF

                    THE PROSTITUTES THAT I ARRESTED DURING THAT -- DURING MY CAREER WERE ALSO

                                         33



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    REPEAT OFFENDERS FOR PICKPOCKETING, GRAND LARCENY, STEALING CREDIT CARDS

                    FROM THEIR VICTIMS, OR CUSTOMERS, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO PRESENT THEM

                    AS, AND THAT WAS THEIR OWN VOLITION.  THEY WERE MAKING EXTRA MONEY

                    BY DO -- BY COMMITTING THOSE CRIMES.

                                 SO I THINK WHEN WE LOOK TO HELP THOSE THAT ARE THE

                    VICTIMS OF SEX TRAFFICKING, IT'S A NOBLE CONCEPT AND A NOBLE IDEA, BUT I

                    THINK WHEN WE EXPAND IT TO THIS EXTENT, WE ARE ACTUALLY PROTECTING

                    THOSE WHO WILL USE THIS AS COVER TO CONTINUE THEIR CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE.

                    SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION.  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    REILLY.

                                 MS. CRUZ.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE BILL, MS.

                    CRUZ.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO I'VE TALKED ON THE FLOOR BEFORE ABOUT

                    THE PRIOR WORK THAT I USED TO DO INVESTIGATING LABOR AND SEX TRAFFICKING.

                    UNLIKE MOST OF THE FOLKS IN THIS ROOM AND WHO ARE WATCHING US, I

                    ACTUALLY SAT ACROSS VICTIMS -- VICTIMS OF LABOR AND SEX TRAFFICKING AND I

                    HAD TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION OF WHETHER THEY WERE ACTUALLY VICTIMS.

                    SO YOU GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ASKING THEM DEEP QUESTIONS ABOUT

                    THE FACTS, ABOUT TIMELINES, ABOUT WHO THEY ARE, ABOUT WHO THESE ALLEGED

                    TRAFFICKERS ARE.  AND I HAVE TO BE HONEST, I'VE YET TO MEET THE FIRST

                                         34



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    SURVIVOR OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING THAT SITS THERE AND SAYS, YOU KNOW WHAT?

                    I'M GOING TO USE THIS TO CONTINUE MY QUOTE/UNQUOTE "CRIMINAL

                    ENTERPRISE."  MOST OF THE TIME, IF NOT 100 PERCENT OF THE TIME WHEN

                    THESE SURVIVORS COME TO US, THEY COME IN SEARCH OF HELP, IN SEARCH -- IN

                    SEARCH OF SURVIVAL, IN SEARCH OF SOME SORT OF PUBLIC BENEFIT, OF

                    IMMIGRATION HELP, OF LABOR HELP, OF ACTUALLY ESCAPING.  THERE WERE

                    TIMES WHEN I ENTERED A -- A FEW FARMS AND A FEW BROTHELS, I DON'T KNOW

                    EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY CALL THEM NOW, IN -- IN DENSE LOCATIONS WITH THE

                    POLICE.  AND WE HAD TO ASK THE QUESTIONS.  AND AGAIN, I HAVE YET TO

                    MEET A SINGLE ONE OF THEM WHO ACTUALLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY WERE

                    BEING TRAFFICKED.  AND I THINK THAT'S THE PART THAT WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING

                    HERE.  OFTEN THESE CRIMES OCCURRED TO THEM AND THEY DON'T EVEN

                    UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING TO THEM.

                                 AND SO WHEN WE'RE FIGHTING AGAINST THIS BILL, AND

                    WHERE WE'RE HAVING THE ARGUMENT THAT THIS IS A GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD,

                    WE'RE SKIPPING A WHOLE LOT OF STEPS.  WE'RE SKIPPING THE STEP WHERE

                    SOMEONE, USUALLY AN ATTORNEY, AN ADA, A POLICE OFFICER, AN

                    INVESTIGATOR COMES INTO CONTACT WITH THIS PERSON TO MAKE THE

                    DETERMINATION THAT THEY'RE POSSIBLY A TRAFFICKING VICTIM.  IF THEY'RE

                    LUCKY ENOUGH, THAT CASE WILL BE PROSECUTED.  IF THEY'RE NOT LUCKY,

                    GENERALLY THEY COME INTO THE SYSTEM BECAUSE THEY WERE, THEMSELVES,

                    WERE ARRESTED.  SOMETIMES IT'S FOR ENGAGING IN SEX WORK, AND LET'S KEEP

                    IN MIND THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SOMEONE WHO CHOOSES TO ENGAGE

                    IN SEX WORK AND SOMEONE WHO IS A TRAFFICKING VICTIM, BECAUSE THEY'RE

                    DOING AGAINST THEIR WILL.  AND THAT'S KEY HERE.

                                         35



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 SO LET'S SAY THEY GOT ARRESTED.  LET'S SAY THEY GOT TRIED,

                    AND THEN LET'S SAY THAT THEY FINALLY FACED WHAT WAS HAPPENING TO THEM

                    AND THAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR LIFE, AND

                    SOMETIMES THAT ARREST IS FOR SEX WORK, SOMETIMES THAT ARREST IS FOR A LOT

                    OF OTHER THINGS.  WHY CAN'T WE GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO START THEIR

                    LIFE AGAIN?  BECAUSE IF THAT NON-SEX WORK-RELATED ARREST HAD TO DO WITH

                    WHAT THE TRAFFICKER DID TO THEM, WAS FORCING THEM TO DO -- I MEAN, LET'S

                    THINK OF SOMETIMES WE HAVE FARM WORKERS THAT ARE TRAFFICKED.  WHAT IF

                    THEY GOT ARRESTED FOR, I DON'T KNOW, FALSIFYING INFORMATION AND -- AND

                    THEY WERE BEING FORCED BY THEIR TRAFFICKER, BY THE PERSON WHO BROUGHT

                    THEM TO THE FARM, THOSE INSTANCES ACTUALLY OCCUR.  AND TO THEN SIT HERE

                    AND SAY THAT THIS IS SOME SORT OF PRIVILEGE, THAT THEY WERE -- THAT THEY

                    WERE -- THAT WE'RE GIVING THEM SOME SORT OF PRIVILEGE WHERE, ACTUALLY,

                    WE OWE THIS TO THEM.  WE AS GOVERNMENT OWE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO

                    RESTART THEIR LIFE.

                                 SO I'M GOING TO URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO REALLY USE

                    COMMON SENSE, TO REALLY UNDERSTAND HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS AND TO NOT

                    MAKE ARGUMENTS THAT SOMEHOW THESE FOLKS, THESE SURVIVORS ARE OUT

                    THERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GAME THE SYSTEM.  BY THE TIME THEY

                    GET TO A LAWYER THAT ACTUALLY LOOKS AT HOW THEY CAN VACATE THIS

                    CONVICTION, THEY'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE SYSTEM, THE RINGER, THEY'RE

                    PROBABLY ON MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AND ALL THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS ERASE

                    A -- A CRIME THAT WAS COMMITTED BECAUSE SOMEONE WAS FORCING THEM TO

                    DO SOMETHING AGAINST THEIR WILL AND NOW THEY CAN'T GET A JOB, THEY CAN'T

                    GET A PLACE TO LIVE, THEY CAN'T MOVE ON WITH THEIR LIFE.  AND SO HOW CAN

                                         36



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    WE SAY WE REALLY CARE ABOUT VICTIMS, JUST NOT THOSE VICTIMS.  THAT

                    MAKES NO SENSE.

                                 AND SO I THANK THE SPONSOR OF THE BILL.  I THANK THE

                    COMMUNITY WHO HAS BEEN STANDING BEHIND SUPPORTING THIS BILL FOR SO

                    LONG, AND I HOPE THAT THIS IS THE ABSOLUTE LAST TIME THAT WE HAVE TO

                    MAKE THIS ARGUMENT SO THAT WE CAN TRULY GIVE VICTIMS THEIR JUSTICE.

                    THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 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 ASSEMBLY PRINT FIVE -- 459.  THIS IS A PARTY VOTE.  ANY

                    MEMBER WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED AS AN EXCEPTION TO THE CONFERENCE

                    POSITION IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE

                    NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, SIR.  THE REPUBLICAN

                    CONFERENCE WILL BE GENERALLY OPPOSED TO CALENDAR NO. 35, WHICH IS

                    ASSEMBLY BILL NO. A00459 THAT ALLOWS FOR THE VACATING OF CONVICTIONS

                    FOR ANY OFFENSE FROM ANYBODY WHO IS A SEX TRAFFICKER, AND IT RELATES TO

                    THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF ALL THOSE RECORDS.  THANK YOU, SIR.  IF THERE'S THOSE

                    WHO SUPPORT THIS, THEY SHOULD CERTAINLY CONTACT THE MINORITY LEADER'S

                    OFFICE SO WE CAN PROPERLY RECORD THEIR VOTE.  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  THE MAJORITY COLLEAGUES WILL GENERALLY BE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE

                                         37



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    ON THIS ONE -- BILL THAT WOULD ATTEMPT TO PROTECT PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING,

                    ON A REGULAR BASIS, HUMAN TRAFFICKED IN OUR COUNTRY.  THOSE WHO DESIRE

                    TO BE AN EXCEPTION SHOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE IN CONTACTING THE MAJORITY

                    LEADER'S OFFICE AND WE WILL PROPERLY RECORD YOUR VOTE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  SO NOTED.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MS. WALLACE TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 MS. WALLACE:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR

                    GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE.  YOU KNOW, I WAS

                    SITTING HERE READING -- I HAD TO PULL UP THE LANGUAGE AS I WAS LISTENING

                    TO DEBATE, AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THIS SECTION ONLY APPLIES IF THE

                    JUDGMENT IS THE RESULT OF THE DEFENDANT'S PARTICIPATION IN THE OFFENSE --

                    I'M SORRY, IF THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION IS A RESULT OF THE DEFENDANT'S

                    PARTICIPATION IN SEX TRAFFICKING.  SO IN OTHER WORDS, THE DEFENDANT MUST

                    HAVE COMMITTED THE OFFENSE BECAUSE OF SEX TRAFFICKING.  AND, YOU

                    KNOW, I SUBMIT THAT THAT IS THE GUARDRAIL THAT APPLIES, THAT THE JUDGE

                    MAKES A DECISION THAT THE DEFENDANT WAS FORCED INTO SEX TRAFFICKING

                    AND THAT'S WHAT CAUSED HER PARTICIPATION, OR HIS PARTICIPATION IN THIS

                    OFFENSE.

                                 SO I FULLY SUPPORT THIS BILL.  I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT THING.

                    AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I DON'T THINK ANY VICTIM OF -- OF SEXUAL

                    ASSAULT THINKS -- OR SEX TRAFFICKING CONSIDERS HIMSELF FORTUNATE TO HAVE

                    BEEN A VICTIM.  SO I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND I ENCOURAGE MY

                    COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. WALLACE IN THE

                                         38



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  YOU

                    KNOW, THE BILL DOESN'T SAY THAT YOU JUST WALK INTO COURT AND DEMAND

                    THAT THE -- YOUR JUDGMENT BE ERASED.  YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE GOVERNMENT

                    DOCUMENTATION OF YOUR STATUS AS A VICTIM OF TRAFFICKING.  EVEN IF YOU

                    PROVIDE THAT GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTATION, SHOWING THAT, IT IS STILL UP TO

                    THE DISCRETION OF THE JUDGE.  AND THIS BILL IS MODELED ON THE LAW IN

                    STATES ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND IT HAS PREVIOUSLY PASSED THE ASSEMBLY

                    FOUR TIMES, EACH WITH MORE THAN 100 VOTES.  AND I HOPE WE WILL DO THAT

                    AGAIN TODAY.  AND I WILL VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. GOTTFRIED IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER, FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE.  THIS PAST SATURDAY I

                    ATTENDED AN EVENT IN FRONT OF CITY HALL IN THE GREAT CITY OF BUFFALO

                    WHERE SOME YOUNG LADIES ARE ACTUALLY TAKING A RIDE DOWN TO VIRGINIA,

                    AND THEY'RE LITERALLY GOING TO WALK, TAKING TURNS, FROM VIRGINIA TO

                    BUFFALO.  AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS CALLED A FREETHEM WALK.  THIS

                    COUNTRY RIGHT NOW HAS SO MANY YOUNG PEOPLE, AND EVEN OLDER MEN AND

                    WOMEN, THAT ARE BEING ABDUCTED SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEX

                    TRAFFICKING.  AND SOMETIMES THE ONLY WAY YOU GET TO GET OUT IS BY

                    DEFENDING YOURSELF OR DOING SOMETHING THAT YOU DEFINITELY DID NOT WANT

                    TO DO.  THIS IS A REAL PROBLEM.  IT'S A NEW LEVEL OF SLAVERY.

                                         39



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 AND SO THESE YOUNG LADIES LED BY KELLY GALLOWAY ARE

                    GOING TO WALK HUNDREDS OF MILES IN AN EFFORT TO TRY TO FREE PEOPLE FROM

                    BEING ABDUCTED.  THERE ARE SOME YOUNG PEOPLE IN THE CITY OF BUFFALO

                    RIGHT NOW THAT WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE THEY ARE, THEY'VE BEEN

                    ABDUCTED.  WE REALLY DO HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH SHUTTING DOWN

                    OPPORTUNITIES FOR MEN AND WOMEN TO ABUSE OTHER HUMANS FOR THEIR

                    PURPOSES.  AND IF THAT HAPPENS AND THAT HUMAN HAS TO PROTECT

                    THEMSELVES AND THEIR LIFE, I THINK SOCIETY OWES THEM AN OPPORTUNITY.

                    NO ONE'S GOING TO GET THROUGH THIS PROCESS WITHOUT GOING THROUGH OUR

                    STATE COURT SYSTEMS, AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A FAIR PROCESS.  AND I

                    WANT TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION BECAUSE SOMETIMES

                    IT'S JUST RIGHT TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT.  SO THANK YOU, MR. GOTTFRIED, I LOOK

                    FORWARD TO VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE ON THIS ONE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES

                    IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 MR. LAVINE TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

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

                    PERHAPS IT WAS ALL THE YEARS I SPENT IN FEDERAL COURT THAT GAVE ME THIS

                    COMPUNCTION TO WANT TO TRY TO CORRECT THE RECORD.  A FEW OBSERVATIONS.

                    THIS HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CASE AGAINST GHISLAINE

                    MAXWELL, WHO IS BEING PROSECUTED IN THE FEDERAL COURT.  NOTHING.  YOU

                    MAY AS WELL BE COMPARING A NUCLEAR SUBMARINE TO AN ORANGE.

                    SECONDLY, WITH RESPECT TO CONFIDENTIALITY, THE LAW PROPOSED HERE

                    EXPRESSLY PROVIDES THAT A JUDGE HAS THE ABILITY TO SHARE THE FACT THAT THE

                    MOTION IS BEING MADE WITH THE SO-CALLED VICTIMS OF WHATEVER CRIMINAL

                                         40



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    ACTIVITY WOULD HAVE OCCURRED.  THIRDLY, FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF

                    PROSECUTORS, AND I REPRESENTED MANY HIGH LEVEL COOPERATORS IN FEDERAL

                    AND STATE COURT, THIS IS A VALUABLE TOOL BECAUSE IF WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO

                    ATTRACT SEX WORKERS TO BE ABLE TO COOPERATE IN PROSECUTIONS OF

                    HIGHER-UPS AND THOSE -- THE HIGHER-UPS OF THOSE HIGHER-UPS, WE NEED TO

                    DO SOMETHING TO TRY TO PROTECT THEM, AND PROTECTING THEIR RECORD IS OF

                    EXTREME IMPORTANCE.

                                 THIS PROVIDES A RAY OF HOPE TO THOSE WHO,

                    UNFORTUNATELY, AND MANY OF THEM AS LITTLE CHILDREN, LITTLE TINY CHILDREN

                    ARE VICTIMIZED, TO BE ABLE TO RETURN TO SOCIETY AND TO BE ABLE TO BECOME

                    A PRODUCTIVE PART OF -- OF OUR SOCIETY.  I THINK THIS IS A GREAT BILL, I'M

                    HAPPY TO VOTE FOR IT.  AND WHAT'S IN THE BACK OF MY MIND NOW IS IN -- IN

                    CONCLUSION, ANATOLE FRANCE'S FAMOUS STATEMENT THAT, THE LAW, IN ITS

                    AWFUL MAJESTY, PROHIBITS BOTH RICH AND POOR FROM STEALING BREAD AND

                    FROM SLEEPING UNDER BRIDGES.  LET'S DO WHAT WE CAN TO PROTECT

                    EVERYONE IN OUR SOCIETY.  I'M PLEASED TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. LAVINE IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 MR. MORINELLO.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  I'M TRYING TO UNMUTE.  I DID

                    UNMUTE.

                                 IN THE PAST, I'VE HAD DIFFERENT FEELINGS ON THIS

                    PARTICULAR BILL.  BUT I -- I'M DRAWING UPON MY EXPERIENCE WHEN I WAS

                    ON THE BENCH.  I DID NUMEROUS TRAININGS ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ON

                    VIOLENCE, AND WE HAD TRAININGS ON TRAFFICKING.  ONE OF THE MOST

                                         41



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    STARTLING THINGS IS IN MEXICO, A SMALL CITY IN MEXICO, THERE ARE TWO

                    SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT ON TRAFFICKING.  THERE'S ONE -- ONE SCHOOL OF THOUGHT

                    IS WHERE THEY TEACH THE TRAFFICKERS HOW TO ABUSE AND INTIMIDATE; THE

                    OTHER TEACHES THEM HOW TO CAJOLE AND HOW TO BE NICE AND BRING THEM

                    IN.  AND THEN THEY GO OUT INTO THE VILLAGES OF THE -- THE POOR VILLAGES,

                    AND THEY USE THESE TACTICS AND BRING THESE WOMEN, THESE YOUNG GIRLS

                    INTO THE STATES, THEY SMUGGLE THEM IN.  AND WHAT WAS EVEN MORE

                    SHOCKING IS ONE OF THE LARGEST GROUP HOMES FOR HUMAN TRAFFICKING WAS

                    IN MARYLAND RIGHT OUTSIDE OF WASHINGTON, D.C.

                                 WITH SOME DEEP, DEEP STUDIES, YOU CAN FIND THAT THIS

                    IS PREVALENT AROUND THIS COUNTRY AND THAT WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE IT.  I

                    ALSO FEEL THAT THE JUDGE HAS ENOUGH DISCRETION, AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A

                    WHOLESALE PASSING ON THIS.  I DO SUPPORT THIS BILL, I HAVE CHANGED MY

                    POSITION FROM THE PAST, AND I'VE DONE SOME ADDITIONAL RESEARCH ON IT.  I

                    VOTE YES AND I THANK THE SPONSOR.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. MORINELLO IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 MR. GOODELL TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, SIR.  AND I AGREE WITH

                    ALL MY COLLEAGUES WHO HAVE EXPRESSED THEIR DEEP HORROR AND

                    OPPOSITION TO SEX TRAFFICKING.  IT IS FUNDAMENTALLY INAPPROPRIATE,

                    INHUMANE, AND SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE FOCUS ON REDUCING AND

                    ELIMINATING WHENEVER POSSIBLE.  AND SO NORMALLY WHEN WE WANT TO

                    ELIMINATE OR REDUCE AN ACTIVITY THAT WE FIND ABHORRENT, WE MAKE IT

                    ILLEGAL.  AND THEN IF THE PERSON IS ARRESTED, WE LOOK AT WAYS TO GET THEM

                                         42



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    OUT OF THE SYSTEM.  SO, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN WE LOOK AT DIVERSION COURTS

                    FOR DRUG TREATMENT, WE LOOK AT DIVERSION COURTS FOR THOSE WITH MENTAL

                    HEALTH, AND WE SHOULD LOOK AT IMPLEMENTING A SIMILAR PROCESS TO HELP

                    PEOPLE GET OUT OF SEX TRAFFICKING.

                                 AND ALTHOUGH WE HAD THOSE TRIED AND PROVEN

                    APPROACHES IN HELPING OTHERS IN OTHER SITUATIONS, THIS LEGISLATURE HAS

                    TAKEN THE OPPOSITE APPROACH.  SO INSTEAD OF ARRESTING THOSE WHO SOLICIT

                    PROSTITUTION, INCLUDING THE PEOPLE WHO ARRANGE FOR THE PROSTITUTES, THE

                    PIMPS, EARLIER WE SAID THAT IT'S NO LONGER ILLEGAL TO SOLICIT FOR

                    PROSTITUTION.  SO INSTEAD OF INTERCEPTING THEM AND BRINGING THEM INTO

                    THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND TRYING TO HELP THEM AND HELP THEM GET OUT OF IT,

                    WE'VE NOW ELIMINATED THAT AS EVEN A CRIME.  AND THIS GOES ONE STEP

                    FURTHER.  IT SAYS IF YOU'RE FACING YEARS IN PRISON, IT'S A GOOD TIME FOR YOU

                    TO CLAIM THAT YOU'RE A SEX VICTIM AND THAT WHILE YOU'RE SORRY, YOU MAY

                    HAVE KILLED, HURT, MAIMED, SHOT, ASSAULTED OR OTHERWISE DONE HORRIFIC

                    CRIMES, YOU SHOULD GET OUT OF JAIL FREE.  AND I CANNOT SUPPORT THAT

                    CONCEPT.  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. GOODELL IN THE

                    NEGATIVE.

                                 MR. COLTON TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                 MR. COLTON:  I RISE TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE.  I AM VERY

                    CONFLICTED BY THIS LEGISLATION.  I ABSOLUTELY BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD NOT

                    VICTIMIZE SOMEBODY WHO WAS FORCED INTO TRAFFICKING, NO MATTER WHAT

                    KIND IT IS, BUT I AM ALSO VERY DISTURBED BY THE FACT THAT UNDER

                    CONFIDENTIALITY, VICTIMS WILL NOT HAVE A CHANCE TO BE AWARE OF THIS.  I

                                         43



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO REFINE THIS BILL A LITTLE BIT MORE SO

                    THAT WE DO RECOGNIZE THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE WHO MAY HAVE BEEN

                    VICTIMIZED WHO CAN THEN PRESENT WHATEVER EVIDENCE THEY HAVE OF WHAT

                    HAPPENED HERE AND -- WHILE STILL PROTECTING THE RIGHTS OF THOSE WHO MAY

                    HAVE BEEN IN SEX TRAFFICKING BY FORCE, BY -- NOT BY CHOICE.  I THINK THE

                    EXISTING LAW DOES PERMIT SUCH A DEFENSE TO BE RAISED.  I WOULD LIKE TO

                    EXPAND IT, BUT I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF VICTIMS NOT

                    BEING, YOU KNOW, BEING MADE AWARE OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE THEIR

                    INFORMATION TO THE COURT AND, THEREFORE, RELUCTANTLY I MUST VOTE IN THE

                    NEGATIVE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. COLTON IN THE

                    NEGATIVE.

                                 MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, SIR.  PLEASE RECORD THE

                    FOLLOWING COLLEAGUES IN THE AFFIRMATIVE:  MR. BYRNE, MR. DURSO, MS.

                    GIGLIO, MR. LAWLER, MR. MORINELLO, MR. SCHMITT, MR. SMITH, AND MR.

                    WALCZYK.  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  SO NOTED.

                                 MS. HYNDMAN.

                                 MS. HYNDMAN:  PLEASE RECORD OUR COLLEAGUES IN

                    THE NEGATIVE:  MR. COLTON, MR. SANTABARBARA, AND MR. EICHENSTEIN.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  SO NOTED.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                         44



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 CALENDAR NO. 221, PAGE 19, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A02199, CALENDAR NO.

                    221, CRUZ, O'DONNELL, DE LA ROSA, SEAWRIGHT, LAVINE.  AN ACT TO

                    AMEND THE CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND RULES, IN RELATION TO INTEREST UPON

                    JUDGMENT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  AN EXPLANATION IS

                    REQUESTED, MS. CRUZ.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  A2199 SEEKS

                    TO AMEND CPLR 5003 TO ALLOW FOR THE CALCULATION OF INTEREST FROM THE

                    ORIGINAL DATE OF ENTRY OF DENIAL OF A SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN CASES WHERE

                    SUCH DENIAL IS REVERSED OR APPEAL.  THIS CHANGE WOULD APPLY IN CASES

                    WHERE SUMMARY JUDGMENT WAS FIRST DENIED THEN GRANTED AN APPEAL

                    FROM THE DATE OF ENTRY OF THE ORDER ORIGINALLY DENYING SUMMARY

                    JUDGMENT.  IT WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE INTEREST ON JUDGMENTS TO BE

                    MEASURED FROM THE DATE OF THE ENTRY OF THE ORDER ORIGINALLY DENYING

                    SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN CASES WHERE SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED AN

                    APPEAL AFTER BEING DENIED.  CALCULATING THAT INTEREST FROM SUCH A DATE

                    WILL RESULT IN A MORE EQUITABLE OUTCOME FOR THOSE WHO BRING AN ACTION

                    THAT IS ULTIMATELY DECIDED IN THEIR FAVOR, OFTEN AFTER WAITING YEARS FOR A

                    RESOLUTION OF THAT MATTER.  IF A PLAINTIFF IS GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT

                    ON APPEAL, IT IS A MATTER OF FAIRNESS TO ALLOW SUCH PLAINTIFFS TO RECEIVE

                    INTEREST ON A JUDGMENT FROM THE DATE OF THE ORIGINAL DENIAL OF SUMMARY

                    JUDGMENT BECAUSE THE PLAINTIFF SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED SUMMARY

                    JUDGMENT FROM SUCH A DATE TO BEGIN WITH.

                                 FURTHERMORE, THIS PROPOSAL WOULD ALLOW TO -- FOR THE

                                         45



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    INCREASE IN EFFICIENCY IN THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND FOSTER A SOLUTION OF

                    CASES PENDING APPEAL WHERE ONE SIDE ANTICIPATES THE REALISTIC OUTCOME

                    OF THE CASE AND APPEALS TO EXTEND THE LITIGATION AND DELAY PAYMENT OF

                    THE JUDGMENT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. WALSH.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  WILL THE

                    SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. CRUZ, WILL YOU

                    YIELD?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU.  SO JUST A COUPLE OF

                    QUESTIONS FOR YOU.  WHAT IS THE CURRENT RATE OF INTEREST THAT WOULD BE

                    PAID TO PLAINTIFF WHO PREVAILS ON APPEAL ON ONE OF THESE MOTIONS?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IT'S 9 PERCENT AS SET FORTH IN CPLR 5004.

                                 MS. WALSH:  AND DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW WHAT THE

                    AVERAGE RATE OF RETURN IS ON A, LIKE A SAVINGS ACCOUNT RIGHT NOW?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  I CAN SPEAK ON A PERSONAL NOTE, IT'S LIKE

                    SOMETHING LIKE 1 PERCENT, IT'S NOT A LOT.

                                 MS. WALSH:  IT'S UNDER 1 PERCENT.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YEAH.

                                 MS. WALSH:  RIGHT, OKAY.  SO YOU KIND OF STATED IN

                    YOUR EXPLANATION OF THE BILL WHAT THE PURPOSE WAS FOR THE BILL, BUT

                    WOULD YOU MIND JUST STATING AGAIN WHAT THE PURPOSE IS FOR ENACTING

                    THIS?

                                         46



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YEAH, IT'S FAIRNESS.  SO IF -- IF SOMEONE

                    ULTIMATELY PREVAILS ON -- ON THIS APPEAL, THE INTEREST WOULD START

                    ACCRUING FROM THE DATE WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE WON IN THE FIRST PLACE.

                    SO IT'S JUST TO MAKE THINGS FAIR BECAUSE DURING THAT MEANTIME, OFTEN UP

                    TO TWO YEARS IN SOME OF OUR -- IN SOME OF OUR DEPARTMENTS, THE PERSON

                    HAS TO NOT ONLY PAY FOR -- FOR LEGAL FEES, THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR MEDICAL

                    FEES, IT'S TO MAKE THEM WHOLE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  SO BECAUSE -- THANK YOU.  BECAUSE,

                    YOU KNOW, AND I ARE ATTORNEYS, BUT...

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THAT'S THE RUMOR.

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 MS. WALSH:  YEAH.  BUT MANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES

                    AREN'T, I THOUGHT WE COULD MAYBE JUST TALK ABOUT A COUPLE OF

                    HYPOTHETICAL SITUATIONS THAT MIGHT JUST KIND OF MAKE THIS A LITTLE BIT

                    MORE REAL FOR PEOPLE AS THEY'RE KIND OF DECIDING WHAT TO DO WITH THIS

                    BILL.  SO FOR EXAMPLE, PLAINTIFF, WHICH A PLAINTIFF IS THE INJURED PARTY --

                    ALLEGEDLY INJURED PARTY, WALKS INTO A RESTAURANT, OKAY, AND IS -- WALKS

                    INTO THE RESTAURANT AND IS HIT BY A SIGN THAT FALLS DOWN -- FALLS DOWN ON

                    HIS HEAD.  OKAY.  SO WE DO DEPOSITIONS, THERE'S QUESTIONING, THE OWNER

                    OF THE RESTAURANT ADMITS DURING HIS DEPOSITION, HEY, I HUNG THAT SIGN

                    AND I THOUGHT I HUNG IT WELL, BUT I GUESS I MUST HAVE MISSED A BOLT OR

                    SO, YOU KNOW, AND AT THAT POINT, THE INJURED PARTY, THE PLAINTIFF, FILES A

                    MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT.  SO IT'S REALLY, IN MY EXPERIENCE, THESE

                    TYPES OF MOTIONS FILED BY PLAINTIFF, THE INJURED PARTY, ARE PRETTY RARE.

                    USUALLY MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ARE FILED BY THE DEFENDANTS

                                         47



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    SAYING THAT THERE -- THERE AREN'T ANY ISSUES OF FACTS, BUT HERE THE

                    PLAINTIFF IS FILING IT.  SO PLAINTIFF FILES IT, IT GOES TO THE TRIAL JUDGE.  THE

                    TRIAL JUDGE TAKES A LOOK AT THE FACTS AND SAYS, VIEWING THIS IN THE LIGHT

                    MOST FAVORABLE TO THE DEFENDANT, I'M GOING TO DENY THE MOTION FOR

                    SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND THEN THE PLAINTIFF APPEALS AND GOES UP TO THE

                    APPELLATE DIVISION; HAVE I GOT THAT RIGHT SO FAR, THAT'S -- THAT'S -- THAT'S

                    PROCEDURALLY HOW THINGS GO, RIGHT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IT COULD IN SOME INSTANCES, YES.

                                 MS. WALSH:  WELL, WHEN IT'S DENIED, IF THE PLAINTIFF

                    WISHES TO APPEAL.  THEY COULD JUST GO HOME BUT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY

                    APPEAL, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO GO UP TO THE APPELLATE DIVISION, THEY

                    HAVE TO FILE THEIR NOTICE OF APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS, BUT THEN THEY HAVE

                    UP TO NINE MONTHS TO PERFECT THE APPEAL AND WE KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW,

                    AROUND THE STATE - WELL, JUST TAKE COVID OUT OF IT FOR A MINUTE - JUST IN

                    THE REGULAR COURSE OF BUSINESS IT'S NOT UNUSUAL FOR AN APPEAL TO WAIT

                    UNTIL SOME MONTHS HAVE PASSED BEFORE THE APPEAL IS PERFECTED, AND

                    SOMETIMES YOU CAN EVEN GET THAT EXTENDED EVEN MORE.  THEN IT'S GOING

                    TO GO ON TO AN APPEALS CALENDAR, MIGHT GET ARGUED IN PERSON, DEFINITELY,

                    YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE FULLY BRIEFED AND THEN YOU HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE

                    APPELLATE DIVISION TO MAKE A DECISION.  BUT AFTER ALL THAT TIME GOES BY,

                    LET'S SAY THE APPELLATE DIVISION SAYS, YOU KNOW WHAT, TRIAL JUDGE?  I

                    THINK YOU GOT IT WRONG.  WE'RE GOING TO GRANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT, BUT

                    THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY DETERMINATION OF DAMAGES AT THAT POINT SO THEY'RE

                    GOING TO REMAND IT BACK TO THE TRIAL COURT.  THE TRIAL COURT THEN IS GOING

                    TO MAKE A DETERMINATION OF WHAT THE DAMAGES ARE GOING TO BE.

                                         48



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 SO THIS BILL, I BELIEVE, IS GOING TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO

                    ASSIGN 9 PERCENT INTEREST, SO OVER NINE TIMES WHAT, YOU KNOW, YOU

                    WOULD GET OUT OF A SAVINGS ACCOUNT, NINE TIMES INTEREST FROM THE -- ALL

                    THE WAY BACK TO WHEN THE PLAINTIFF ORIGINALLY FILED THE MOTION FOR

                    SUMMARY JUDGMENT, CORRECT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  NO.

                                 MS. WALSH:  NO, OKAY.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THIS BILL -- THE 9 PERCENT IS ALREADY SET

                    BY LAW.  THIS IS SOMETHING THAT LET'S SAY --

                                 MS. WALSH:  YES, RIGHT.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  -- IT GETS DECIDED WAY UP, AND I'M GOING

                    TO SPEAK IN NON-LAWYER TERMS, AT THE BEGINNING -- AT THE BEGINNING

                    STAGE IN THE COURT PROCESS IT GETS DECIDED THEN AND THERE'S SOME DELAY

                    OF PAYMENT OR THERE'S AN APPEAL, THAT -- THAT 9 PERCENT INTEREST IS

                    ALREADY BUILT IN.  IT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SECTION OF THE LAW.  WE'RE

                    NOT SAYING THAT.  WHAT THIS CHANGE DOES IS THAT IF YOU COULD HAVE

                    ACTUALLY SUCCEEDED BEFORE YOU TOOK IT ALL THE WAY TO APPEALS, BEFORE

                    THE COURT ORIGINALLY DENIED IT, THEN YOU ATTACH AN ALREADY EXISTING

                    MANDATED 9 PERCENT.

                                 MS. WALSH:  I -- I THINK WE'RE SAYING THE SAME

                    THING, YOU'RE JUST MAKING THE POINT THAT THE 9 PERCENT IS SET IN STATUTE.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES.

                                 MS. WALSH:  IT'S NOT LIKE -- THE JUDGE DOESN'T SAY --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  I'M DOING IT FOR CLARIFICATION.

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- I'M GOING TO PICK A PERCENTAGE AND

                                         49



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    I PICK 9 PERCENT.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YEAH, NO.  I'M DOING IT FOR CLARIFICATION

                    BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO CONFUSION THAT MY LAW

                    DOESN'T -- MY PROPOSAL OF THE LAW DOESN'T SAY 9 PER -- DOESN'T TOUCH THE

                    9 PERCENT.  IT ONLY TOUCHES WHEN IT ATTACHES.

                                 MS. WALSH:  EXACTLY --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES.

                                 MS. WALSH:  I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE

                    SAYING, YEP.  BUT I'M ALSO RIGHT, AREN'T I, THAT THE TIME PERIOD WHERE IT

                    DOES ATTACH, THAT STATUTORY PERCENTAGE OF 9 PERCENT, THAT ATTACHES ALL THE

                    WAY BACK TO WHEN PLAINTIFF FIRST MADE THAT MOTION FOR SUMMARY

                    JUDGMENT, WHICH COULD BEEN SOME TIME AGO, CORRECT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  NOT WHEN HE MAKES THE MOTION, WHEN

                    HE'S -- WHEN THE MOTION IS DECIDED.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OH, WHEN IT'S DENIED BY THE TRIAL

                    JUDGE.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES, MM-HMM.  CORRECT.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY, GOTCHA.  THANK YOU FOR THAT

                    CLARIFICATION.  ALL RIGHT.  NOW, SO WHAT ABOUT A SITUATION WHERE A

                    PLAINTIFF SUES A DEFENDANT, THE DEFENDANT THEN BRINGS A COUNTERCLAIM

                    AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF.  DOES THAT -- DOES THAT DEFENDANT WHO MAKES A

                    COUNTERCLAIM GET THE BENEFIT OF WHAT YOUR BILL SAYS?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IN THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,

                    THERE ISN'T A COUNTERCLAIM.  THAT WOULD BE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT

                    PROCEDURE.  SO I'M NOT -- IF HE WERE TO THEN FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THAT,

                                         50



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    YES, BUT WE'RE NOT -- WE CAN'T CONFLATE THE TWO NECESSARILY HERE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  WELL, I'M ASKING BECAUSE BY

                    MAKING THAT COUNTERCLAIM, IT'S -- IT'S AS IF THE DEFENDANT IS STEPPING INTO

                    THE SHOES OF THE COMPLAINING PARTY OR THE PLAINTIFF BY BRINGING A

                    COUNTERCLAIM.  SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF THEY GET THE BENEFIT, IF THEY GET

                    TURNED DOWN TO BE ABLE TO GET THAT.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  WELL, GIVE ME ONE SECOND.

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 YEAH, THIS JUST APPLIES TO THE PLAINTIFF IN THE SUMMARY

                    JUDGMENT, NOT TO THE COUNTERCLAIM.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  VERY GOOD.  THANK YOU SO

                    MUCH.

                                 MR. SPEAKER, MAY I PLEASE GO ON THE BILL?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU.  SO I THINK THAT PROUDLY,

                    AND AS MANY OF MY LAWYER COLLEAGUES CAN RELATE TO, I REALLY CAN SEE

                    BOTH SIDES OF THIS ONE.  YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT ON THE PRO-SIDE FOR THE

                    BILL, YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE A REALLY LONG TIME BEFORE WE GET A DOLLAR

                    AMOUNT ASSESSED ON THE VALUE OF DAMAGES.  HOLD ON A SECOND.  I GOT

                    MY PAPERS NOT IN FRONT OF ME.  OKAY.  I THINK THAT THIS -- THIS BILL WILL

                    REALLY ONLY APPLY TO A VERY RELATIVELY SMALL NUMBER OF CLAIMS BROUGHT

                    EACH YEAR BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, ONE PERSON DESCRIBED IT TO ME ALMOST AS

                    LIKE THE UNICORN CASE, RIGHT, BECAUSE MOST OF THE TIME IT'S THE

                    DEFENDANTS WHO ARE BRINGING SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS INSTEAD OF

                    THE PLAINTIFFS.  IT WOULD BE A CASE WHERE MAYBE IT WOULD BE A FALL UNDER

                                         51



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    THE LABOR LAW OR SOMETHING THAT APPROACHES SOMETHING LIKE STRICT

                    LIABILITY BEFORE THE PLAINTIFF IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE THE ONE BRINGING

                    THIS SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION.

                                 SO I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO REALLY IMPACT A WHOLE

                    BUNCH OF CASES, BUT I ALSO THINK THAT -- AND I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE

                    SPONSOR IS NOT SETTING A 9 PERCENT STATUTORY INTEREST.  THAT'S ALREADY IN

                    THE LAW.  HOWEVER, WE'VE GOT TO CONSIDER THE FACT, YOU KNOW, IN -- IN

                    ORDER TO BE FAIR TO THE PLAINTIFF, WHICH IS, I THINK, WHAT THE SPONSOR IS

                    INTENDING BY HAVING THIS BILL, WE WANT TO ALSO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOT

                    REALLY A PENALTY TO THE DEFENDANT BECAUSE INTEREST IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE

                    A PENALTY.  WE'VE GOT A COURT OF APPEALS CASE WHICH IS I THINK THE

                    LOVE CASE, IRONICALLY, LOVE V. STATE THAT SAYS THAT INTEREST IS NOT

                    SUPPOSED TO BE A PENALTY, BUT IT REALLY DOES APPROACH A WINDFALL FOR THE

                    PLAINTIFF IF THEY'RE ABLE TO GET THIS 9 PERCENT INTEREST RELATING ALL THE WAY

                    BACK TO WHEN THE TRIAL JUDGE DENIED INITIALLY THE -- THE SUMMARY

                    JUDGMENT MOTION.  SO IT REALLY COULD ADD UP CONSIDERABLY.  IT COULD

                    POTENTIALLY SKYROCKET AND BECOME HIGHER THAN THE VALUE OF THE

                    JUDGMENT ITSELF.

                                 ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THINGS, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT

                    ALTHOUGH THE, SAY INSURANCE COMPANY REPRESENTING THE DEFENDANT,

                    ALTHOUGH THEY CAN'T CONTROL THE SPEED AT WHICH THE COURT SYSTEM

                    PROCEEDS ON AN APPEAL, THEY ALWAYS HAVE THE ABILITY TO STEP IN AND TRY

                    TO SETTLE OR RESOLVE A CASE DURING THE PENDENCY OF THAT APPEAL OR EVEN

                    AFTERWARDS IF IT GETS REMANDED FOR A TRIAL ON DAMAGES.  SO I DO THINK

                    THAT PROBABLY HAVING THIS BECOME LAW WOULD ENCOURAGE SETTLEMENTS IN

                                         52



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    THESE TYPES OF CASES, SO I DO SEE THAT SIDE OF THINGS, AS WELL.

                                 I THINK THAT THAT'S PRETTY MUCH ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT

                    THAT.  I PROBABLY WILL END UP SUPPORTING THIS BILL, HONESTLY, BECAUSE I

                    THINK THAT -- I THINK THAT IT REALLY IS NOT GOING TO IMPACT THAT MANY CASES

                    AND I DO THINK THAT INSURANCE COMPANIES DO ALWAYS HAVE THE ABILITY TO

                    -- TO SETTLE CASES AND RESOLVE THEM AS -- AS WE GO FORWARD.  SO THANK

                    YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, MS.

                    WALSH.

                                 MR. GOODELL.

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

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. CRUZ, WILL YOU

                    YIELD?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  I THOUGHT YOU WOULDN'T ASK.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, MS. CRUZ.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. CRUZ YIELDS.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, MS. CRUZ.  I JUST

                    WANTED TO FLESH OUT A LITTLE BIT HOW THIS MIGHT WORK.  LET'S SAY A

                    PLAINTIFF MAKES A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND WINS.  OF COURSE,

                    THE SUMMARY JUDGMENT ONLY DEALS WITH LIABILITY, IT DOESN'T DEAL WITH

                    DAMAGES, RIGHT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  CAN YOU REPEAT THAT LAST -- LIABILITY

                    DOESN'T DEAL WITH WHAT?  I DIDN'T HEAR YOU, I'M SORRY.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

                                         53



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    BY THE PLAINTIFF ONLY DEALS WITH LIABILITY, NOT WITH THE AMOUNT OF

                    DAMAGES, CORRECT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THAT'S CORRECT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MANY OF US NON-LAWYERS - WELL, I'M

                    A LAWYER - BUT MANY NON-LAWYERS MAY NOT REALIZE THAT EVEN IF YOU WIN

                    A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THERE MAY BE EXTENSIVE DISCOVERY AND

                    MAYBE EVEN A JURY TRIAL OVER THE AMOUNT OF THE DAMAGES, CORRECT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THAT'S CORRECT, YES.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SO LET'S FOLLOW A SCENARIO WHERE

                    THE PLAINTIFF MAKES A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND WINS, AND TWO

                    YEARS LATER YOU HAVE A TRIAL AND THEY ESTABLISH THE AMOUNT OF THE

                    JUDGMENT, HOTLY CONTESTED, THEY ESTABLISH THE AMOUNT OF THE JUDGMENT.

                    UNDER CURRENT LAW, INTEREST STARTS ONCE THE JUDGMENT IS RENDERED,

                    CORRECT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THAT'S CORRECT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SO UNDER CURRENT LAW, EVEN IF THE

                    PLAINTIFF WINS THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, UNDER CURRENT LAW

                    INTEREST ONLY STARTS ONCE THE LIABILITY HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED, CORRECT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  CORRECT, YES.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  BUT UNDER THIS BILL, IF THE PLAINTIFF'S

                    MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS INITIALLY TURNED DOWN AND THEN

                    REVERSED, THE JUDGMENT INTEREST RUNS NOT FROM THE DATE OF THE JUDGMENT

                    BUT ALL THE WAY BACK TO WHEN THE MOTION WAS TURNED DOWN EVEN THOUGH

                    THEY WOULD HAVE NEVER GOTTEN INTEREST IF THEIR MOTION HAD BEEN GRANTED

                    IN THE FIRST PLACE, RIGHT?

                                         54



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES, BUT YOU'RE -- CAN --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SO MY QUESTION IS --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  -- CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT YOUR

                    SCENARIO?  IN YOUR SCENARIO, AT WHAT POINT IS THE SUMMARY JUDGMENT

                    BEING MADE?

                                 MR. GOODELL:  WELL, LET'S SAY IT'S --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  BECAUSE I THINK BY THE USE OF YOUR

                    LANGUAGE, YOU'RE TRYING TO IMPLY THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ALL THE WAY AT

                    THE BEGINNING OF THE TRIAL, AND IT'S UNFAIR --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  NO, NO, NO, AFTER THE DATE OF

                    SUMMARY JUDGMENT, RIGHT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  -- SO I WANT TO -- UH HUH.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SO WHY IS IT FAIR, UNDER THIS BILL,

                    THAT WE AWARD INTEREST ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE DATE THE MOTION FOR

                    SUMMARY JUDGMENT WAS DENIED WHEN WE WOULDN'T GIVE INTEREST EVEN IF

                    IT HAD BEEN GRANTED?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  WELL, IT'S FAIR BECAUSE IN A SUMMARY

                    JUDGMENT PROCEDURE EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT DETERMINING THE AMOUNT, YOU

                    ARE DETERMINING THAT THE FACTS POINT TO A CLEAR DECISION OF WHO'S

                    WINNING BASICALLY.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  OH, SURE, BUT I MEAN --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  AND ALL YOU HAVE TO THEN DETERMINE -- IF

                    YOU ALLOW ME TO FINISH MY SENTENCE, ALL YOU HAVE TO NOW THEN

                    DETERMINE IS WHAT THE AMOUNT IS.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  WELL, HAVING BEEN A PRACTICING

                                         55



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    ATTORNEY FOR 40 YEARS, I'VE REPRESENTED PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS AND

                    OFTEN THE REAL ISSUE IN THE CASE IS NOT LIABILITY, IT'S THE AMOUNT OF

                    DAMAGES.  SO WHY DO WE GIVE A SPECIAL RETROACTIVE 9 PERCENT INTEREST

                    FOR THOSE PLAINTIFFS WHOSE INITIAL MOTION ON LIABILITY WAS DENIED WHEN

                    WE WOULDN'T DO IT EVEN IF IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED?  I MEAN, THAT'S

                    FUNDAMENTALLY UNFAIR.  WHY DO WE TREAT SOME PEOPLE WITH RETROACTIVE

                    9 PERCENT INTEREST WHICH, BY THE WAY, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT SAVINGS

                    ACCOUNT, IT'S PROBABLY 20 TO 30 TIMES MORE THAN YOU CAN GET IN A

                    SAVINGS ACCOUNT; WHY DO WE DO THAT?  WHY SHOULD WE DO THAT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  WE DO IT BECAUSE THE OTHER SIDE IS

                    FORCING THE PLAINTIFF TO GO THROUGH A PROTECTED APPEAL PROCESS THAT

                    SOMETIMES, DEPENDING ON WHICH JURISDICTION YOU'RE DOING, IT CAN TAKE

                    UP TO TWO YEARS TO EVEN GET INTO A COURTROOM, LET'S NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT

                    HOW LONG THE ACTUAL COURT DATE AND HEARING, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, COULD

                    TAKE PLACE.  SO IF YOU'RE FORCING SOMEONE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THAT AND

                    SPEND THE MONEY TO GET THEIR OWN MEDICAL CARE, PERHAPS, PAY FOR THE

                    LAWYERS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, AT A TIME THAT HAD WE MADE THAT DECISION

                    BACK THEN, HAD IT BEEN ON THEIR SIDE, YOU WOULD'VE SPENT A LOT LESS TIME

                    MAKING SURE -- MAKING -- FIGURING OUT WHAT THE AMOUNT WAS AND WHO

                    WAS WINNING.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS, THEN --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IT'S ABOUT FAIRNESS.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  -- IS TO PUNISH DEFENDANTS FOR

                    DEFENDING THEMSELVES ON LIABILITY.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  WELL, YOU CALL IT PUNISHMENT, I CALL IT

                                         56



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    ENCOURAGING SETTLEMENT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  WELL, IT'S GREAT IF YOU'RE THE

                    PLAINTIFF TO ENCOURAGE SETTLEMENTS, AND IT'S HORRIFIC IF YOU'RE A

                    DEFENDANT WHO'S CONTESTING LIABILITY, RIGHT?  I MEAN, THAT'S WHY WE

                    HAVE TWO SIDES AND LAWYERS REPRESENTING BOTH SIDES SO --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  I WOULD DISAGREE BECAUSE GENERALLY YOU

                    HAVE DEFENDANTS --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  -- SO YOU'RE SAYING THE PURPOSE OF

                    THIS -- LET ME JUST, IF I MAY, FINISH MY QUESTION.  SO YOU'RE TELLING ME

                    THAT THE REASON WE WANT TO DO THIS IS BECAUSE WE WANT TO PUNISH PEOPLE

                    FOR EXERCISING THEIR RIGHT UNDER OUR CONSTITUTION TO CHALLENGE LIABILITY.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  NO, I AM ABSOLUTELY NOT SAYING THAT.  I

                    AM SAYING THAT WHEN THESE APPEAL PROCESSES HAPPEN, IT'S GENERALLY THE

                    SIDE WITH THE MOST MONEY WHO CAN AFFORD TO DRAG THIS OUT -- IT'S A GAME

                    OF WHO'S GOING TO GIVE UP FIRST --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  OH, SO YOUR --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  I LET YOU FINISH, SO NOW YOU GOT TO LET ME

                    FINISH, RIGHT?  SO IT IS A GAME OF WHO IS GOING TO GIVE UP FIRST, WHO HAS

                    MORE MONEY FOR LAWYERS, WHO HAS MORE MONEY TO DRAG THIS OUT AS LONG

                    AS POSSIBLE.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SO HAVENING PRACTICED FOR YEARS, I

                    CAN ASSURE YOU, NOT ALL DEFENDANTS ARE RICH AND NOT ALL PLAINTIFFS ARE

                    POOR, RIGHT?  YOU CAN HAVE A RICH PLAINTIFF AND A POOR DEFENDANT, RIGHT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  I APPRECIATE YOU REMINDING ME, ANOTHER

                    LAWYER, THAT YOU'VE ALSO PRACTICED FOR YEARS, BUT YES, I COULD SEE WHAT

                                         57



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    YOUR ARGUMENT IS BUT, AGAIN, THIS IS ABOUT FAIRNESS.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  WELL, I WOULD AGREE.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  OH, GOOD, NOW WE'RE AGREEING ON

                    SOMETHING.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  YES, AND AM I CORRECT, THOUGH, THAT

                    UNTIL THERE'S A JUDGMENT RENDERED, A DEFENDANT DOES NOT OWE THE

                    PLAINTIFF THAT MONEY, CORRECT, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS PROCESS.  THAT'S

                    WHY WE HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A CIVIL TRIAL, RIGHT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES, AND HAD THE DECISION BEEN MADE AT

                    THE POINT THAT WE ARE TRIGGERING HERE, THEN THE MONEY WOULD BE OWED

                    FROM THAT POINT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU.  I APPRECIATE YOUR

                    COMMENTS, MS. CRUZ.

                                 ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE BILL, MR.

                    GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  WE HAVE TWO PROBLEMS THAT ARE

                    OBVIOUS ON THIS BILL.  THE FIRST ONE IS NOT ADDRESSED AT ALL BY THE BILL

                    AND IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T RELATE IN ANY WAY TO THE SPONSOR'S DESIRE AND

                    THAT IS THE FACT THAT CURRENTLY IN NEW YORK STATE OUR INTEREST RATE IS SET

                    BY STATUTE.  IT DOESN'T VARY BASED ON INFLATION OR AVERAGE INTEREST RATES.

                    AND SO AS A RESULT, AS MY COLLEAGUES HAVE NOTED, THE INTEREST RATE IS 9

                    PERCENT, WHICH IS HIGHER THAN ANYTHING ELSE YOU CAN GET EXCEPT FOR

                    HIGHLY, HIGHLY SPECULATIVE JUNK BONDS.  SO IT CREATES THIS PROBLEM

                    WHERE IF YOU LOSE A CASE AND LIABILITY IS ESTABLISHED, THERE'S A

                                         58



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    TREMENDOUS INCENTIVE TO PAY RIGHT AWAY BECAUSE YOU LOSE MONEY FOR

                    EVERY DAY YOU DON'T PAY BECAUSE THE INTEREST RATE IS SO MUCH OUT OF

                    WHACK WITH WHAT YOU CAN RECEIVE ANYWHERE ELSE.  BUT THAT'S JUST AN

                    OVERRIDING ISSUE ON THIS BILL AND NOT ADDRESSED BY THIS BILL.

                                 SO EVERYONE SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT IN A TRIAL, THERE'S

                    TWO ASPECTS TO EVERY TRIAL.  THE FIRST ASPECT IS ESTABLISHING WHO IS AT

                    FAULT.  AND AS MY COLLEAGUE NOTED, THAT'S NOT A BLACK AND WHITE ISSUE,

                    NOR IS IT ALL OR NOTHING.  OFTENTIMES YOU'LL HAVE A CASE WHERE THE

                    PLAINTIFF MIGHT BE PARTIALLY AT FAULT.  YOU MIGHT HAVE A CAR ACCIDENT

                    WHERE BOTH DRIVERS WERE NOT DRIVING PROPERLY, IN WHICH CASE THE COURT

                    HAS TO ALLOCATE LIABILITY AND SOMETIMES THAT'S COMPLEX.  YOU CAN HAVE

                    CASES WHERE THE LIABILITY IS CLEAR, OR FAIRLY CLEAR, AND NOT FACTUALLY

                    DEPENDENT.

                                 SO IT'S A TWO-STEP PROCESS.  THE FIRST PROCESS IS TO

                    ESTABLISH WHO'S AT FAULT AND HOW MUCH OF THE LIABILITY THEY BEAR, WHAT

                    PERCENT, SINCE IT MAY BE ALLOCATED AMONGST MANY PEOPLE, AND THE

                    SECOND IS TO ESTABLISH DAMAGES.  AND WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH A

                    PERSONAL INJURY CASE, YOU DON'T LOOK UP IN A LITTLE BLUE BOOK LIKE YOU DO

                    FOR YOUR CAR VALUE AND SAY, OH, BY THE WAY, A BROKEN ARM IS WORTH

                    X-DOLLARS AND PAIN AND SUFFERING IS WORTH Y-DOLLARS AND LET'S ADD IT UP.

                    IT'S OFTEN VERY COMPLICATED BECAUSE OFTEN, THE PLAINTIFF MAY HAVE

                    PRE-EXISTING INJURIES, OR THEY MAY HAVE RECOVERED FASTER THAN THEY

                    CLAIMED.  THEY MIGHT HAVE EVEN CLAIMED THAT THEY'RE STILL DISABLED, YET

                    THE DEFENSE HAS PICTURES OF THEM DOING CONSTRUCTION WORK WITH NO

                    SIGNS OF ILLNESS OR INJURY.  SO THOSE CAN BE VERY COMPLICATED.

                                         59



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 NOW UNDER THE CURRENT LAW IF THE PLAINTIFF MAKES A

                    MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON JUST THE LIABILITY AND WINS, THEY DON'T

                    GET A JUDGMENT, IT GOES TO THE NEXT STEP OF CALCULATING WHAT DAMAGES, IF

                    ANY.  AND I HAVE HAD CASES, AS MANY OF US HAVE, WHERE YOU MAY HAVE

                    LIABILITY AND VERY LOW JUDGMENT OR NOT -- OR A MIX JUDGMENT, SO THERE --

                    THE LIABILITIES CANCEL OUT EACH OTHER.  BUT UNDER CURRENT LAW IF YOU WIN

                    THAT MOTION, YOU DON'T GET INTEREST UNTIL THE LIABILITY HAS BEEN

                    ESTABLISHED, UNTIL THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED, AND THAT COULD BE

                    YEARS LATER.  UNDER THIS BILL, YOU'D GET RETROACTIVE INTEREST NOT TO THE

                    DATE THAT YOUR LIABILITY WAS FIRST ESTABLISHED, BUT TO THE DATE THE MOTION

                    WAS DENIED.  SO PLAN A, THE MOTION IS GRANTED, NO INTEREST RUNS UNTIL

                    THE JUDGMENT.  THIS BILL PRESENTS PLAN B, YOUR MOTION IS DENIED AND

                    YOU GET RETROACTIVE INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT.

                                 SO WHAT HAPPENS?  WHAT IS THE PERVERSE INCENTIVE THAT

                    OCCURS?  WELL, HERE'S THE PERVERSE INCENTIVE THAT THIS BILL CREATES.  IF

                    YOU'RE A PLAINTIFF AND YOUR LIABILITY IS GREAT YOU CAN DO A LITTLE HAPPY

                    DANCE IF THEY DENY YOUR MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BECAUSE YOU'LL

                    BE ABLE TO DENY -- DELAY THE CASE AT LEAST TEN MONTHS JUST BEFORE YOU

                    FILE YOUR BRIEF, AND MOST LIKELY OVER A YEAR JUST TO GET IT REVERSED.  AND

                    THEN WHAT DO YOU DO AS A PLAINTIFF?  YOU'VE GOT THE LIABILITY

                    ESTABLISHED, RIGHT?  THE INTEREST RUNS UNTIL THE DATE, UNDER THIS BILL, THAT

                    THE MOTION WAS DENIED AND SO NOW YOU DON'T EVEN NEED TO FIGHT THE

                    MOTION VERY MUCH.  AND THEN YOU DRAG OUT THE LIABILITY SIDE, THE

                    JUDGMENT SIDE, WHY?  BECAUSE YOU'RE GETTING A CLIENT 20, 30, 40 TIMES

                    MORE THAN THEY CAN GET ANYWHERE ELSE.  AND SO THIS GIVES AN INCENTIVE

                                         60



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    TO A PLAINTIFF TO DRAG OUT THE CASE AS LONG AS THEY POSSIBLY CAN BECAUSE

                    THEY ALREADY KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO GET MONEY AND THEY ALREADY KNOW

                    THEY'RE GOING TO GET RETROACTIVE INTEREST AT A RATE THAT'S FAR IN EXCESS OF

                    ANYTHING THEY COULD GET ANYWHERE ELSE FOR THEIR CLIENT.

                                 NOW WHEN WE START TELLING PEOPLE THAT THEY CAN GET

                    INTEREST AGAINST A DEFENDANT EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NO JUDGMENT

                    WHATSOEVER AGAINST THE DEFENDANT, THERE'S NOTHING THE DEFENDANT CAN DO

                    TO PROTECT THEMSELVES IS THERE, EXCEPT TO WAIVE THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL

                    RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS.  THINK ABOUT THAT.  WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE

                    SHOULD ADOPT THIS SO THAT WE PUT PRESSURE ON DEFENDANTS TO WAIVE THEIR

                    CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS, THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HAVE A

                    JURY LISTEN TO THE CASE BECAUSE IF THEY EXERCISE THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL

                    RIGHT AND THEY ASK A JURY OF THEIR PEERS TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH THEY

                    OWE, WE WILL PENALIZE THEM WITH 9 PERCENT RETROACTIVE INTEREST.

                                 THE SYSTEM REFLECTS A BALANCE.  THE SYSTEM THAT WE

                    CURRENTLY HAS SAYS TO THE DEFENDANT ONCE A JURY OR A JUDGE HAS

                    ESTABLISHED THAT YOU OWE MONEY, YOU SHOULD PAY IT RIGHT AWAY.  BUT

                    THE CURRENT SYSTEM ALSO SAYS UNTIL A JURY OR A JUDGE HAS SAID HOW MUCH

                    YOU OWE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY.  AND THIS BILL SAYS UNLESS YOU WAIVE

                    YOUR RIGHT TO A TRIAL AND SETTLE, IF YOU TRY TO DEFEND YOURSELF ON THE FIRST

                    MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, WE'RE GOING TO PENALIZE YOU BY FORCING

                    YOU TO PAY 9 PERCENT INTEREST RETROACTIVELY EVEN THOUGH YOU COULD NOW

                    HAVE EVEN PAID THEM OFF RETROACTIVELY BECAUSE THERE WAS NO

                    ESTABLISHMENT OF LIABILITY.  IT VIOLATES FUNDAMENTAL DUE PROCESS,

                    FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS OF FAIRNESS AND FOR THOSE REASONS, I WON'T BE ABLE

                                         61



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    TO SUPPORT IT.  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH.  WILL THE

                    SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. CRUZ, WILL YOU

                    YIELD?  MS. CRUZ YIELDS.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION

                    BECAUSE I ACTUALLY WAS A PLAINTIFF'S LAWYER FOR TEN YEARS, AND IN THOSE

                    TEN YEARS I THINK I FILED THE SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION TWICE.  THIS IS A

                    VERY RARE OCCURRENCE.  IN THE EVENT -- UNDER OUR CURRENT CPLR IF I WERE

                    TO WIN AS THE PLAINTIFF, THE SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION ON THE FIRST TRY,

                    WHEN WOULD THE 9 PERCENT ATTACH?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  AT THE TIME WHEN THE DECISION WOULD

                    HAVE -- COULD HAVE BEEN MADE.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  OKAY, SO RIGHT THEN.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  SO IF I WERE TO LOSE AND IT'S

                    APPEALED, UNDER CURRENT LAW IF I WERE TO WIN ON APPEAL, WHEN DOES THAT

                    9 PERCENT ATTACH?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IF YOU WERE TO WIN APPEAL, IT'S AT THE

                    SAME TIME.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  AT THE SAME TIME AS THE APPEAL.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES.

                                         62



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  SO THAT THEN CREATES A DIFFERENCE.

                    IF I HAD WON THE FIRST TIME, THE 9 PERCENT ATTACHES AT THE TIME I WON AT

                    THE SUPREME COURT LEVEL.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THAT IS CORRECT.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  SO THERE'S A GAP.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  OF A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY FOR MANY

                    PEOPLE.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  SO WHAT YOUR LAW IS -- WHAT YOUR

                    PROPOSAL IS DOING IS JUST ALIGNING THE DECISION.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  ARGUABLY YES, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU THINK

                    ABOUT THE FACT -- I THINK YOU MENTIONED IT IN SAYING THAT YOU'VE ONLY

                    FILED TWO OF THESE --

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  YES.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  -- AND THIS IS A RARE OCCASION, BUT IN

                    THOSE RARE OCCASIONS THAT IT DOES HAPPEN, IT PUTS THE PERSON ON THE

                    LOSING END IN A HOLE -- IN A FINANCIAL HOLE THAT WE ARE TRYING TO -- TO

                    MAKE RIGHT.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  AND -- AND DO YOU HAPPEN TO

                    KNOW HOW MUCH IT COSTS TO FILE ONE OF THESE APPEALS IN NEW YORK?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  A LOT OF MONEY.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  I'LL SAY ON AVERAGE JUST THE

                    PRINTING COSTS WOULD ROUTINELY RUN ME ABOUT $2,000.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  AND THAT DEPENDS ALSO ON THE HOURLY RATE

                    OF WHATEVER LAWYER YOU HIRE.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  THAT'S CORRECT.  I MEAN, THAT'S TRULY

                                         63



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    JUST PRINTING THE MATERIAL TO SEND TO THE COURT.  SO IT'S AN ONEROUS AND

                    COSTLY DECISION FOR A PLAINTIFF TO DECIDE TO APPEAL ONE OF THESE

                    DECISIONS, CORRECT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES, AND ARGUABLY THE FINANCIAL

                    INCENTIVE FOR THE OTHER SIDE TO DRAG IT OUT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

                                 MS. LUNSFORD:  ALL RIGHT.  THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

                    THAT'S ALL.

                                 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 ASSEMBLY PRINT 2199.  THIS IS A PARTY VOTE.  ANY MEMBER

                    WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED AS AN EXCEPTION TO THE CONFERENCE POSITION

                    IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS

                    PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

                                 MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, SIR.  I'M SO BLESSED TO

                    HAVE GREAT COLLEAGUES IN THE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE THAT SPEAK

                    ELOQUENTLY ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS BILL, BUT THE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE

                    WILL BE GENERALLY IN THE NEGATIVE.  THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO VOTE IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE SHOULD CONTACT THE MINORITY LEADER'S OFFICE.

                                 THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  THE MAJORITY COLLEAGUES WILL GENERALLY BE VOTING IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE ON THIS ONE.  THERE MAY BE MEMBERS WHO WOULD DESIRE TO

                                         64



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    BE AN EXCEPTION.  IF SO, THEY SHOULD FEEL FREE TO CONTACT THE MAJORITY

                    LEADER'S OFFICE, WE'LL BE PLEASED TO RECORD THEIR VOTE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, MRS.

                    PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MS. CRUZ TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  GENERALLY, AS

                    MY COLLEAGUE ON THE OTHER SIDE MENTIONED, THESE ARE UNIFORM CASES.

                    YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS OF PRESENTING

                    ENOUGH EVIDENCE FOR YOUR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION TO BE GRANTED.

                    SO WHEN -- WHEN WE'RE SAYING THAT ON APPEAL YOU SHOULD GET THE

                    MONEY BACK TO THE DATE OF WHEN THE DECISION WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE,

                    IT'S BECAUSE THIS MONEY WOULD HAVE BELONGED TO THE PLAINTIFF IN THE FIRST

                    PLACE.  THE PLAINTIFF NOW HAS TO BE OUT MONEY FOR MEDICAL COSTS, FOR

                    LAWYERS AND FOR GOD KNOWS WHAT ELSE DEPENDING ON THE PARTICULAR

                    CASE.  AND ALL WE'RE SAYING IS IF -- RIGHT NOW UNDER THE LAW THERE'S AN

                    INCENTIVE TO DRAG OUT THE CASE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE IN SOME

                    JURISDICTIONS WE'RE SEEING OUTWARDS OF 18 MONTHS AND NOW WITH

                    COVID WE'RE GOING TO SEE AN EVEN LONGER TIME, ALL WE'RE SAYING IS IN

                    THESE FEW INSTANCES WHERE IT HAPPENS, WE SHOULD BE PROTECTING NEW

                    YORKERS ENOUGH TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MAKING THEM WHOLE.  AND I

                    WILL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. CRUZ IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 MR. GOODELL.

                                         65



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, SIR.  I HAVE THE

                    FOLLOWING COLLEAGUES THAT WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION:  MR.

                    BROWN, MS. GIGLIO, MR. GIGLIO, MR. LEMONDES, MR. MONTESANO, MR.

                    MORINELLO, MR. NORRIS, MR. RA, MR. REILLY, MR. TANNOUSIS, AND MS.

                    WALSH.  ALSO MS. MILLER.  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  SO NOTED, THANK YOU.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  IF YOU COULD RECORD OUR COLLEAGUES MS. WALLACE AND MS.

                    WOERNER IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS ONE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  SO NOTED.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 CALENDAR NO. 206, PAGE 18, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A06046, CALENDAR NO.

                    206 --

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER -- MR.

                    SPEAKER, IF WE COULD JUST RESERVE HANGING ON THAT ONE RIGHT NOW --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES,

                    I'M SORRY.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  -- AND I ACTUALLY LIKE TO

                    ASK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, IF YOU HAVE ANY HOUSEKEEPING OR RESOLUTIONS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  WE HAVE A NUMBER OF

                    FINE RESOLUTIONS WHICH WE WILL TAKE UP WITH ONE VOTE, MRS.

                                         66



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    PEOPLES-STOKES.  ON THE RESOLUTIONS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY

                    SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTIONS ARE ADOPTED.

                                 (WHEREUPON, ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NOS. 251-255

                    WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.)

                                 NO OTHER HOUSEKEEPING, MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  THANK YOU VERY MUCH.  IF YOU COULD NOW CALL ON COLLEAGUE

                    JAIME WILLIAMS FOR AN ANNOUNCEMENT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. WILLIAMS FOR AN

                    ANNOUNCEMENT.

                                 MS. WILLIAMS:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  AT THE

                    CALL OF THE SPEAKER, CONFERENCE WILL FOLLOW IMMEDIATELY.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MAJORITY CONFERENCE

                    IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING SESSION.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  THANK YOU.  MAJORITY

                    COLLEAGUES, IF YOU CAN MAINTAIN YOUR POSITION IN THE ZOOM AS WE

                    SPEAK, WE'LL BE GOING RIGHT INTO A CONFERENCE WITH THE SPEAKER.

                                 I NOW MOVE THAT THE ASSEMBLY STAND ADJOURNED UNTIL

                    THURSDAY, MAY THE 6TH, TOMORROW BEING A LEGISLATIVE DAY, AND THAT WE

                    RECONVENE AT 2:00 P.M. ON MONDAY, MAY THE 10TH, MONDAY BEING A

                    SESSION DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE ASSEMBLY STANDS

                    ADJOURNED.

                                 (WHEREUPON, AT 12:55 P.M., THE ASSEMBLY STOOD

                                         67



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                          MAY 5, 2021

                    ADJOURNED UNTIL THURSDAY, MAY 6TH, THURSDAY BEING A LEGISLATIVE DAY,

                    AND TO RECONVENE ON MONDAY, MAY 10TH AT 2:00 P.M., MONDAY BEING A

                    SESSION DAY.)













































                                         68