WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 2023 1:39 P.M.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The House will come

to order.

In the absence of clergy, let us pause for a moment of

silence.

(Whereupon, a moment of silence was observed.)

Visitors are invited to join the members in the Pledge

of Allegiance.

(Whereupon, Acting Speaker Aubry led visitors and

members in the Pledge of Allegiance.)

A quorum being present, the Clerk will read the

Journal of Tuesday, March 14th.

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Mr. Speaker, I move to

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

dispense with the further reading of the Journal of Tuesday, March the

14th and ask that the same stand approved.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Without objection, so

ordered.

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank you, sir.

Colleagues and guests that are in the Chambers, we are still in

Womens' History Month so we're going to start with a quote today

from Olive Dennis, who was born in 1885. Olive was the first female

engineer whose design innovations changed the very nature of the way

people traveled on railways. She went to Goucher College in 1908.

She went to Columbia and received her master's degree and she went

to Cornell University in 1920 and got her degree in civil engineering.

And it was around that time that she said these words, Mr. Speaker.

There is no reason that a woman can't be an engineer simply because

no other woman has ever been one. Well, Alice [sic] Dennis was an

engineer. She served well, she lived a good life and since her life very

many women are also engineering in this country and we hope that

will be more to come.

With that Mr. Speaker, members have on their desks

a main Calendar. After any introductions and/or housekeeping we

will be calling for a Rules Committee in the Speaker's Conference

Room. That Committee will produce an A-Calendar containing our

Sunshine Package which we will take up today while the sun is

shining. Mr. Speaker, we will begin our work on the floor by taking

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

up resolutions on page 3. I believe one of our colleagues may have

some comments on that resolution. After that we will take up Rules

Report No. 100, which is on page 4 by Mr. Zaccaro and it is on

debate. As we proceed there may be a need to announce any further

legislative floor activity. If so, we will be pleased to let you all know

that. However, Mr. Speaker, that's the general outline of where we're

going today. If you have introductions and/or housekeeping, now

would be a great time, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: No introductions or

housekeeping, Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Then, Mr. Speaker,

would you please call for the Rules Committee to meet in the

Speaker's Conference Room?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Certainly. Rules

Committee, Speaker's Conference Room immediately.

On page 3 --

(Pause)

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: Resolutions, page

3, the Clerk will read.

THE CLERK: Assembly Resolution No. 185, Reyes.

Assembly [sic] Resolution memorializing Governor

Kathy Hochul to declare March 11, 2023 to April 12, 2023 as

Garifuna-American Heritage Month in the State of New York.

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: On the resolution,

all those in favor signify by saying aye; opposed, no. All those in

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

favor?

MEMBERS: Aye.

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: All those opposed?

The resolution is approved.

THE CLERK: Assembly [sic] No. 186, Ms. Jackson.

Legislative Resolution memorializing Governor

Kathy Hochul to proclaim March 12, 2023 as Working Moms Day in

the State of New York.

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: On the resolution,

all those in favor signify by saying aye; all those opposed. The

resolution is adopted.

THE CLERK: Assembly [sic] No. 187, Mr. Lavine.

Legislative Resolution memorializing Governor

Kathy Hochul to proclaim March 13-19, 2023 as Neurodiversity

Celebration Week in the State of New York.

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: On the resolution,

all those in favor signify by saying aye; opposed. The resolution is

approved.

THE CLERK: Assembly [sic] No. 188, Ms. Solages.

Legislative Resolution memorializing Governor

Kathy Hochul to proclaim March 22-28, 2023 as Doula Week in the

State of New York, in conjunction with the observance of World

Doula Week.

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: On the resolution,

all those in favor signify by saying aye; opposed. The resolution is

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

adopted.

THE CLERK: Assembly [sic] No. 189, Ms. Lupardo.

Legislative Resolution memorializing Governor

Kathy Hochul to proclaim March 2023 as American Red Cross Month

in the State of New York.

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: On the resolution,

all those in favor signify by saying aye; opposed. The resolution is

adopted.

Page 4, Rules Report No. 100, the Clerk will read.

THE CLERK: Senate No. S00832, Rules Report No.

100, Senator Brisport (A04014, Zaccaro). An act to amend the Public

Health Law, in relation to excluding certain runaway youths from

being able to consent to certain medical, dental, health and hospital

services.

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: An explanation

has been requested, Mr. Zarro [sic].

Mr. Zaccaro.

MR. ZACCARO: Thank you, Mr. [sic] Speaker.

This bill amends Chapter 780 of 2022 to make clarifying amendments

by removing the term "runaway youth" from those able to consent to

certain medical and health and dental, hospital services. This bill here

was actually passed by Member Gottfried -- this chapter was passed

last Session sponsored by Member Gottfried, and what this does is

today clarifies that homeless youth and individuals who have received

services at an approved runaway or homeless youth crisis service

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

program or transitional independent living support program may

consent for these health services.

The health of vulnerable populations including

runaway and homeless youth is imperative to their future and I urge

my colleagues today in voting for this important bill. Thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: Ms. Walsh.

MS. WALSH: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will the

sponsor yield?

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: Will the sponsor

yield?

MR. ZACCARO: Of course.

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: Proceed.

MS. WALSH: Thank you so much. So,

understanding that this is a chapter amendment and that you were not

here actually when this was passed in the -- the wee hours of the very

end of Session, as I recall, around two in the morning on our last day

of Session. So, this chapter amendment, as you said, make changes in

that it addresses one of the concerns that was raised on debate

regarding runaway youth, and yet the -- the bill-in-chief still, and the

-- and the chapter doesn't change the fact that homeless youth will be

able to consent to a whole range of health care services; is that

correct?

MR. ZACCARO: Yes, that's correct.

MS. WALSH: Okay. So a couple of things that I'd

like to kind of bring out in our discussion. As far as the nature of the

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

health services that can be received, there are no limits as far as it

could be something as minor as a cavity being filled, to a hospital stay,

to any level of medical or health service that's -- that's desired; is that

correct?

MR. ZACCARO: Yes, it -- it does. And medical

care will have to obviously decide necessity of these -- in special

circumstances.

MS. WALSH: But there's nothing in this bill-in-chief

or in the chapter that addresses, for example, the cost of those

services. It could be something -- $20 or it could be something that's

many, many thousands of dollars; correct?

MR. ZACCARO: That's correct.

MS. WALSH: Okay. Now, as far as the definition of

homeless, would a homeless youth include an individual, for example,

that was undocumented, coming into New York, staying -- being

housed temporarily in hotel, housing or something of that nature in

New York City or elsewhere in New York State?

MR. ZACCARO: Yes. So, homeless youth is

someone under the age of 18 who is in need of services and is without

a place of shelter where supervision and care are available. And this

determination usually requires a finding by the State that there's no

safe home for the child to return to or an overt statement by a parent

that the minor is not welcome home.

MS. WALSH: Okay. So -- so my question had to do

with does this include both documented and undocumented

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

individuals that are in New York State without home? Without regard

to them in the definition of homelessness.

MR. ZACCARO: Yes.

MS. WALSH: Okay. Thank you. And what about

homeless youth who are homeless with their parents? Does that --

does that come under the definition of homeless youth?

MR. ZACCARO: Right. Particularly for this bill and

the purpose of this bill, that would be separate.

MS. WALSH: Oh. And how so?

MR. ZACCARO: Well, in this -- in this instance the

bill clarifies that a homeless youth or individual that's receiving

services at an approved runaway and homeless youth crisis service

center or program or a transitional independent living support program

may give consent for medical, dental, health and hospital services for

themselves. And they -- and in these cases they would have to be

away from the family.

MS. WALSH: Okay. So this -- so this could

encompass a runaway youth that is homeless or a homeless youth that

is just without any parental support, then. Is that the -- I just want to

understand that that's what you said.

MR. ZACCARO: Yes.

MS. WALSH: Okay. Very, very good. All right. I

think you have covered the questions that I had, and I'd like to at this

time go on the bill.

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: On the bill.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

MS. WALSH: Thank you so much. So as I said, this

bill -- the bill-in-chief was passed at around two in the morning. It's

kind of funny that we're taking this up in the same day as sunshine --

Sunshine Week, the bill package that we're going to be facing next.

Some of you may remember the debate on this bill. I think one of the

things I'd like to say first off is that very often the -- the members on

my side of the aisle are sometimes perceived as not perhaps having the

effectiveness of members in the Majority, and I would like to say that

as a direct result, I believe, of the debate that we had on this bill, this

chapter amendment came forward to really address the major concern

that was raised about the bill which had to do with runaway youth.

Because the bill itself didn't define how long the individual -- the --

the minor had to be -- have run away for and so on. I won't repeat that

debate. But anyway, it was very heartening for me to see a chapter

amendment that actually tracked our debate and tried to correct what

we thought was a pretty big problem with the bill-in-chief. So I'd like

to say that right off. I think that that is a -- a positive thing. So I have

fewer issues with the bill in this chapter than I did with the

bill-in-chief that we took up last Session. But I do think that there are

a couple of issues that really need to be considered. One is just that

this is a completely wide-open proposition in terms of the kinds of

medical services that will be -- that a -- that a child, a -- a youth could

consent to. It could be -- it could be really anything. There are no

guardrails at all in terms of cost of the proceeding -- the procedure,

what the procedure is. It could -- it could go to everything from a

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

hospital stay to a routine dental appointment. So it's pretty wide open,

and I think that that's something that this Body should consider.

I think also, I appreciate the clarification from the

sponsor as far as the homeless youth that are homeless with their

parents. That was a concern that I had because it would have been an

interesting question to see if the will or the -- the consent of a -- of a

homeless youth could consent to a procedure that a parent that they're

with would -- would not -- would not consent to and if that consent

could override the parental objection. So it seems as though that's

been addressed in the way that this chapter amendment has been -- has

been framed.

I think that the -- the other -- just the question, I

guess, is -- and it really is beyond, I think, the chapter -- but the larger

question that really gets called up is who pays for this? I think we

know who pays for this. I personally, and I think most of us, would

not have any objection to a homeless youth getting routine care that is

either an emergency or is something that if it's taken care of quickly

and effectively it won't -- it will -- will prevent a bigger problem from

taking place, and the example of a cavity is something that I use. If

we fill a cavity for a view bucks, now that prevents maybe a root canal

later, for just some -- some kind of an analogy. But this -- the way

that this chapter is worded it does -- it's very expansive in terms of the

-- there are no limits on the kind of medical, dental, hospital or health

care that would be provided to -- to the homeless youth.

And so for that reason I -- I remain concerned about

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

the bill, but I do think that the chapter is an improvement over the --

the bill that we debated last June. So thank you very much, Madam

Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: Mr. Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you. Would the sponsor

yield?

ACTING SPEAKER SHIMSKY: Will you yield?

MR. ZACCARO: Yes.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you. I just had a couple of

very short follow-up questions from my colleague's questions, and

again, thank you for -- for helping us understand this better. As I

understand it, this would enable someone under the age of 18 to

consent to any medical procedure if they were homeless, and you

mentioned that well, one of the criteria is they're receiving services.

But I'm looking at the statutory language and it seems to say that you

would be a homeless youth as defined in Section 535 -- or 32(a) of the

Executive Law or you're receiving homeless services. So am I correct,

then, that a homeless youth as defined in Second 532(a) of the

Executive Law would be eligible under this provision to consent for

any medical services even if they're not receiving services?

MR. ZACCARO: So it says here in the bill a person

under the age of 18 who is need of services and is without a place of

shelter or supervision and care are available. So in this case care must

be available.

MR. GOODELL: I -- I apologize, but I -- I'm looking

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

at the bill language itself, on line 9, 8 and 9 where it says homeless

youth as defined in Section 532(a) of the Executive Law or those

receiving services. So am I correct, then, that if you met the definition

under 532(a) you do not need to be receiving homeless services,

correct?

MR. ZACCARO: Yes. However, it -- it still does

say in the law a place of shelter where supervision and care are

available.

MR. GOODELL: Okay. My colleague asked the

question, who is paying for this and your answer is?

MR. ZACCARO: Well, in this case in relation to

who's paying for it in this case the -- just give me one second here. It's

a -- it's a fiscally-neutral bill; however, if -- if they were off of their

parents' insurance they would qualify for Child Health Plus in this

case and that's who the medical provider would be paying for the

insurance.

MR. GOODELL: So you're saying that a -- a youth

under the age of 18 could consent to expensive medical procedures

and the parents who did not consent would be stuck with the co-pay,

deductible and insurance coverage?

MR. ZACCARO: Yes. So in this case the parents

would have to pay for the services. And as I mentioned before, if they

are without insurance the State would have to pay under Child Care

[sic] Plus.

MR. GOODELL: And of course the Child Care [sic]

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

Plus under this situation would be -- could be 100 percent State

depending on whether the individual is here documented or

undocumented, correct?

MR. ZACCARO: Yes.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you for those clarifications.

MR. ZACCARO: Of course.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Novakhov.

MR. NOVAKHOV: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Would the sponsor yield?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Zaccaro, will

you yield?

MR. ZACCARO: Yes, I will.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The sponsor yields,

sir.

MR. NOVAKHOV: Thank you very much. So,

maybe I'm missing something, but I'm curious how the medical

facility or the doctor will identify if the person is homeless or not.

MR. ZACCARO: Yeah, so in -- in this case with the

facilities it would be defined by the State and OCF [sic] for -- for

those who qualify for services.

MR. NOVAKHOV: And what was the procedure?

MR. ZACCARO: Right. So when a homeless youth

or individual comes in -- into these programs it would be determined

by the State and the program if this particular individual qualifies or is

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

deemed homeless and qualifies for services.

MR. NOVAKHOV: So he cannot go directly to the

doctor or the medical office, he has to come to --

MR. ZACCARO: I'm sorry, could you repeat

yourself?

MR. NOVAKHOV: He can't go -- so he can't go

directly to the medical office or to a doctor stating that he's homeless

and he needs the services?

MR. ZACCARO: Right. This bill -- this bill speaks

to the fact that they must be receiving services at an approved

runaway and homeless youth crisis service program or a transitional

independent living support program.

MR. NOVAKHOV: All right. Thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Read the last section.

THE CLERK: This act shall take effect in 90 days.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: A Party vote has

been requested.

Mr. Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, sir. The Republican

Conference I believe will be generally opposed, but certainly anyone

can vote as they wish here on the floor of the Assembly.

Thank you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you.

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank you, Mr.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

Speaker. The Majority Conference is generally going to be in favor of

supporting young people needing access to health services whether or

not they live with their parents. So we're going be voting in the

affirmative on this one, and obviously if people want to vote negative

they certainly can.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you.

The Clerk will record the vote.

(The Clerk recorded the vote.)

Mr. Goodell to explain his vote.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think

all of us here on the floor are aware that if an individual shows up at

an emergency room and needs emergency health care, they receive it.

The emergency room doesn't say, Who's your insurance agent and

we're not going to let you in until you tell us. They don't hold up care.

Emergency care, by law, must be provided to anyone who presents

themselves at an emergency room in an emergency situation,

regardless of anything else. And I appreciate the sponsor's desire to

provide unlimited health care, if you will, to those who are under 18

that present themselves and claim that they're homeless. And as my

colleague pointed out, there's no mechanism in this bill to actually

identify whether the individual is homeless. And so if you're a parent

and your child wants some expensive medical procedure and you don't

want to pay the co-pay or deductible, send them to the emergency

room and tell them to say that they're homeless, because under this bill

apparently the State picks up the cost. This bill is not limited to life-

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

threatening, serious or emergency situations. It covers everything,

including elective surgery. A lot of parents want to know what's going

on with their kids under age 18, especially as it relates to elective

surgery. So I'm very concerned that while this bill makes a substantial

improvement over the original chapter, it still leaves parents out of the

loop. It ignores their important role. It doesn't require any effort to

contact the parent. It applies even, by the way, ironically, if the

parents are homeless with the youth it would still apply. Look, we

know that we need an obligation to provide health care in those

important situations, but a wide open blank check is not the right

approach. And so I would hope that we continue this process of

chapter amendments till we narrow this bill down to ensure that we

meet the legitimate health care needs of all of our residents without

opening the door to fraud and abuse.

For that reason I won't support this change. Thank

you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Goodell in the

negative.

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes to explain her vote.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, for the opportunity to explain my vote. I do want to point

out that what -- what a better place we would be in as Americans if we

didn't have to worry about people having access to health care because

we had universal healthcare. We don't have universal healthcare. We

have all sorts of system that unfortunately, unless you go to the

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

emergency room you -- they're going to ask for an insurance card.

They're going to ask for somebody to pay for it. And I, quite honestly,

want to really appreciate the sponsor for standing up on this one

because very often when young people leave home, when they

become runaways, they didn't do that because everything was perfect

at home. Some things were not -- not so right. Sometimes parents,

even unbeknownst to them, will abuse their children or allow other

people in their lives to abuse them. And they will run. And when

they do run, if they need help, if they need health care, if they need

counseling, then we as citizens ought to be here for them.

And so I -- I really do commend the gentleman for

introducing this legislation and I will be grateful for the day when we

are a country that allows people to get health care when they need it as

opposed to needing to be on their parents' or needing to be on

Medicaid or needing to be on Child Health Plus or needing to be on

the Affordable Healthcare Act. Again, Mr. Speaker, this is a good

piece of legislation, and we're not at the place in our society where we

can exclude people from health care simply because for whatever

reason they decided or are homeless. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mrs. Peoples-Stokes

in the affirmative.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

(The Clerk announced the results.)

The bill is passed.

Congratulations, Mr. Zaccaro, your first bill.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

(Applause)

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Mr. Speaker, we now

have an A-Calendar on our desks. Would you please move to advance

this A-Calendar?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: On Mrs. Peoples-

Stokes' motion, the A-Calendar is advanced.

Page 3, Rules Report No. 106, the Clerk will read.

THE CLERK: Assembly No. A01628, Rules Report

No. 106, McDonald, Stirpe, Fahy, Steck, Simon, Colton, Morinello,

Lupardo, Otis, DeStefano, Jacobson. An act to amend the Public

Buildings Law, in relation to the authority of the Commissioner of

General Services to lease public buildings.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: An explanation is

requested, Mr. McDonald.

One minute, Mr. McDonald. I think -- shh, shh.

Gentlemen -- gentlemen, please. The bill is being explained at the

request.

Proceed, sir.

MR. MCDONALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The

purpose of this bill is to require the disclosure of the names and

residential addresses of the natural persons who are the members, the

managers or otherwise authorized persons of an LLC, limited liability

company, when such LLC executes a lease agreement with the State

of New York as its tenant. As we all know, the State of New York

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

does lease a significant amount of private property throughout the

State of New York. LLCs tend to be a very common, if not the most

popular entity to lease those spaces and, therefore, because public

funds are involved in the course of that lease, we should make sure

that we have an idea who is leasing those properties.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would

the sponsor yield?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. McDonald, will

you yield?

MR. MCDONALD: It would be an honor to yield.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The sponsor yields.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Mr. McDonald. First

question I have is, would this apply where the State of New York is a

subtenant? In other words, the owner leases the building and the State

of New York is a tenant of the tenant?

MR. MCDONALD: So I guess the question -- or the

response, not the question, I think I -- I think I understand your

question, but the response is would the State of New York be

executing a lease in this situation?

MR. GOODELL: Yes. And they'd be leasing it from

-- from the tenant.

MR. MCDONALD: Who -- who would -- can you

give me an example who the tenant would be?

MR. GOODELL: Well, sure. A lot of times, as an

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

example, you might have a mall that is owned by one company. They

have a leasing agent that's a separate company completely, and the

leases are executed not with the owner, but with the sub -- the tenant

who's leased the entire place and the State of New York is subleasing

an office or space within the mall or within the commercial building

or something of that nature. So would it be, then, the tenant that's

leasing to the State and the sublease would be the one that would be

obligated to disclose their names and residential addresses?

MR. MCDONALD: Based on what you described I

would say yes.

MR. GOODELL: Am I correct that there's no

obligation to disclose names or -- or your residential address if the

State leases property from an individual? Sole proprietor.

MR. MCDONALD: Sole proprietor?

MR. GOODELL: Yes.

MR. MCDONALD: This bill does not address sole

proprietors.

MR. GOODELL: And likewise, if they lease from a

partnership, there's no obligation to disclose the names or residential

addresses of the partners; is that correct?

MR. MCDONALD: This bill only speaks to the

LLCs.

MR. GOODELL: And that would apply as well for a

lease, say, with a limited partnership, a real estate trust, a real estate

investment trust, maybe an inter vivos trust or even a testamentary

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

trust or even corporations or a PLLC or PC or any other legal entity; is

that correct?

MR. MCDONALD: This legislation only speaks to

LLCs.

MR. GOODELL: And so the answer is no, it doesn't

apply to anyone else, correct?

MR. MCDONALD: That would be correct.

MR. GOODELL: Okay. Now, this provides that if

the LLC is owned by any one of those other entities that I mentioned

-- and I only listed a half-dozen because we have limited debate. If

any of those other entities are a member of the LLC then that member

would have to disclose all of their shareholders and residential

addresses, for example; is that correct?

MR. MCDONALD: That's correct.

MR. GOODELL: So if a corporation leases a

building to the State, the corporation does not have to lease -- disclose

any of its shareholders or any of their addresses. But if the

corporation is a fractional owner of an LLC then their entire

shareholder list has to be disclosed?

MR. MCDONALD: That's the way this bill is stated.

MR. GOODELL: I see. Does this bill provide an

exception for those who might, for legitimate reasons, want to keep

their residential address confidential? So, for example, a victim of

domestic abuse. Does this allow them to get a waiver or an exception

from listing their home address?

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

MR. MCDONALD: So, we've had -- we've had this

discussion before. As a matter of fact this is our seventh trip around

the moon on this bill, believe it or not.

MR. GOODELL: I keep hoping this law will change.

MR. MCDONALD: No, but --

(Laughter)

I just keep hoping that it gets passed in the Senate.

MR. GOODELL: Hope burns eternal, I understand.

But -- but there's no exception in the statutory language, right, for

someone who is a victim of domestic abuse from having to disclose a

residential address?

MR. MCDONALD: Well, as you know, individuals

who are -- are domestic violence victims can register in a program that

the State has to make sure that their privacy is protected. I think you

might be aware of that. I think the other good news for everybody to

know is that the Federal government is actually taking a much more --

a closer look at LLCs in regards to providing more transparency.

Because the intent of this goal is not sinister, the intent of this goal is

very simple. The LLCs are the most popular vehicle we have for

renting out properties. Individuals sometimes try to be influential and

we'd like to know who's doing business with the State of New York.

MR. GOODELL: And I appreciate --

MR. MCDONALD: And I think I've mentioned in

the past as a --

MR. GOODELL: Well, I appreciate that, and -- and

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

as you correctly note, we have passed specific legislation to allow

victims of domestic abuse to keep their residential address

confidential, but those were in specific contexts, right? Each statute

that did that had a specific contextual basis, but this law itself is silent,

correct?

MR. MCDONALD: Yeah, our belief is that the

Address Confidentiality -- Confidentiality Program would take

precedence in this situation and, therefore, would address the concern

that you -- you appropriately raised.

MR. GOODELL: Now, of course not all victims of

domestic abuse have an Order of Protection outstanding. In fact, they

may just be the victim of stalking or threats, and that would not put

them into the domestic violence category but they are very, very

sensitive to their residential address. This doesn't have any exceptions

for them, does it?

MR. MCDONALD: No, but I'm advised that they

would fall underneath the Address Confidentiality Program. I'm

happy to stand corrected, but my understanding is that this would

cover them.

MR. GOODELL: I see. And last, what is the

sanction if the reporting entity doesn't have the information you're

requesting? As an example, let's say one of the LLC partners is a

large corporation. Large corporations are not required and normally

do not maintain shareholder lists with residential addresses. They use

the address that was given to them by their shareholder, and I will

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

assure you that none of my stockholdings use my home address. What

happens in that context? What's the sanction for the corporation?

MR. MCDONALD: So, you know, first of all, you

know, this legislation does give OGS the ability to develop regulations

in the process. However, this goes back to a comment I've shared

before. If you're going to engage in a business relationship with the

State of New York, the rules will be very clearly identified what is

best. And if you can't comply, you might want to not consider

applying to be a landlord in that situation.

MR. GOODELL: Ah, so your recommended solution

is that the State be unable to rent --

MR. MCDONALD: No --

MR. GOODELL: -- the property they want because

they lease -- or the landlord is not willing to give that information.

MR. MCDONALD: No, my recommendation -- and

I'm not a lawyer, I don't play one on TV. I'm a pharmacist and I play a

pharmacist on TV. But, you know, just like with law partnerships it's

always about having the right partnership and the right team to have a

successful outcome.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you very much. I

appreciate your comments. And maybe if it comes back on year eight

we can look at some amendments.

MR. MCDONALD: You know, I've heard that nine

times is a charm, so we'll see what happens.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Mr. McDonald.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

Mr. Speaker, on the bill.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: On the bill, Mr.

Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: So the obvious question to all of us

is, why are we looking at legislation that deals with just one legal

entity and requires that legal entity to report home addresses. Not just

all their members, but their home address. Not their business address,

not the address they might use for every other purpose, but their home

address. Why do it? And we don't require it for corporations or

individuals or sole proprietorships or partnerships or limited

partnerships or real estate trusts or inter vivos trusts or testamentary

trusts. We don't require it for PLLCs or PCs or any other business

entity in the world. But we want to know where the home address is if

the State rents land from an LLC.

Now, if the State rents from a corporation we don't

ask under this bill for the list of shareholders and their home address

unless the corporation is a fractional owner of an LLC that rents to the

State. And then they are obligated to provide us with a complete

shareholders list with a home address if they have it? Now, as my

colleague correctly pointed out, the solution is if you're a landlord and

you're an LLC you don't rent to the State if you don't want to make

this disclosure. Why would we say to the taxpayers that the State of

New York can't rent the best property at the best price in the best

location because the landlord won't rent to us because we have

unreasonable requirements on the landlord? What is the public policy

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

that's promoted by this bill? Now, if I have your curiosity I'll answer

your question in my opinion. Pure speculation. But in my opinion

this legislation dates back when LLCs formerly could contribute

150,000 to a political campaign, and a lot of the real estate LLCs in

New York City were contributing to Republican campaigns. And so

all of a sudden this is a crisis, we need to know who these people are

because they're backing Republicans. Now it's not an issue, it was

never an issue for corporations because corporations were limited to

5,000 a year. Okay, that was the case seven years ago when this bill

was introduced as an effort to extract retribution and illuminate those

LLCs that had the audacity to support Republicans. That was seven

years ago. Since then we have brought the contribution limits for

LLCs back to 5,000. They now have the same disclosure

requirements, or a cap, on financial contributions as anyone else. And

in addition, we require that if they make a financial contribution they

must list their members, right? So we've already solved the political

problem, and all this bill does is create practical problems with serious

unintended consequences of forcing the disclosure of personal

residences. And there is no statutory exception contained in this

legislation for those who are the victims of domestic abuse, who have

an outstanding Order of Protection, who just got divorced and don't

want their ex to know where they live, or the victims of threats or

stalking or domestic violence or anything else. And what is the public

policy of requiring they disclose their personal residence for the

privilege of renting to the State of New York who has gone through its

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

own process to ensure that this is the best location for the best price

for the taxpayers?

So this is a bill that creates problems in search of a

solution to a problem that was already solved several years ago and,

therefore, I won't support it and I don't recommend it to my

colleagues. Thank you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Read the last section.

THE CLERK: This act shall take effect on the 60th

day.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: A Party vote has

been requested.

Mr. Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, sir. The Republicans

will generally be in the negative on this bill, although obviously with

almost all my members here on the floor, anyone who can and wants

to can certainly vote in favor of it should they desire.

Thank you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. The Majority Conference is generally going to be in favor of

this piece of legislation. However, there may be a few who would

choose to be an exception. They can feel free to push their button.

Thank you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The Clerk will record

the vote.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

(The Clerk recorded the vote.)

Mr. McDonald to explain his vote.

MR. MCDONALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just a

clarification. I mean, this is our seventh time debating the bill. I -- I

have to be honest with you, I have never heard this conversation about

Republicans and LLCs. I just -- I have to be honest with you. I've

never heard that. So call me blind on that one. This issue came to me

from a local news station in the Capital Region. We have a lot of

public -- a lot of public leases, and it was a question about

accountability. That's what it's all about at the end of the day, and I

still stand behind that principle. As a person who has -- in my former

life as a business owner I engaged in a lot of relationships with the

State in regards to doing business. I knew going into this that I had to

have full disclosure. And it also should be noted that leases with the

State government are very desirable. And therefore, going back to my

earlier comment, I -- know who you're working with. Know who your

partners are going to be. Know what these minimum standards are

going to be to make sure that we have full accountability of public

funds being addressed. My colleague mentions concerns about those

individuals of stalking, domestic violence. We're all very sympathetic

to that. We feel very comfortable those issues appropriately

mentioned are not an issue when it comes to this and, therefore, I

encourage my colleagues to give strong consideration to this

legislation.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. McDonald in the

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

affirmative.

Ms. Walsh to explain her vote.

MS. WALSH: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, to

explain my vote. So, this is the first bill that we're taking up in what

the Majority Leader described as the Sunshine Package. And we take

up a Sunshine Package every year, we have four bills that we're

considering for our Sunshine Package. Four bills, and this is the first

one. I -- I won't be supporting this particular bill for the reasons that

my colleague, you know, elicited on debate. But -- but can't we do

better than that? Can't we do better than four bills to spread some

sunshine? And I would say respectfully to my colleagues that we

could start with the way that our own House operates. And I -- I look

forward to the package that we're going to be putting forward in the

Republican Rules reforms shortly, hopefully within the next couple of

weeks, about the way that we run our own House. And I think that

there's a lot that we can do, right within the way that we work here

that would spread a little sunshine on this process.

So I'll be voting no on this bill. Thank you very

much, Mr. Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Walsh in the

negative.

Mr. Lavine.

MR. LAVINE: I -- I've listened to both sides of this

argument -- you'll have to excuse me because I think I pressed my

speak -- speaker button by mistake. But I will say this --

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

(Laughter)

That I had -- I had some grave reservations about this

bill, but having listened to both the argument in favor and the

argument against, I think this is a much better bill than I thought

initially and I am voting for it.

Thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Lavine in the

affirmative. And Mr. Lavine, in legislative terms you could just say

never mind.

(Laughter)

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, for the opportunity to explain my vote. I have never heard

the whole political conversation around this legislation either. I have

listened to this debate for the last seven years. I think it's really

interesting, though, because I can tell you that Mrs. Adams, who gave

me $50 the last time I ran, I had to put her address down on the

campaign form. That's without a doubt. Everybody who contributes,

we have to know where -- where you live at. And I also know people

who have LLCs, and some of them set them up because they don't

want people to know their business and they don't want the people to

know who's in their business. And so it -- it can't be both ways. And

the society where everybody wants transparency, well, let's have it.

This bill allows us to get that opportunity, so I'm pleased to vote in

favor of it.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mrs. Peoples-Stokes

in the affirmative.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

(The Clerk announced the results.)

The bill is passed.

THE CLERK: Assembly No. A02873-A, Rules

Report No. 107, Kelles, Simon. An act to amend the Public Officers

Law, in relation to reporting of cryptocurrency holdings on the annual

Statement of Financial Disclosure.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: An explanation is

requested, Ms. Kelles.

MS. KELLES: Absolutely. So, this bill is very

simple. All it is is to add cryptocurrencies as a form of disclosure for

all government employees and officials. So it's very straightforward.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would

the sponsor yield?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Kelles, will you

yield?

MS. KELLES: Sure.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The sponsor yields.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Ms. Kelles. As you

mentioned, this only applies to cryptocurrency, correct?

MS. KELLES: Correct.

MR. GOODELL: Is there a reason why we don't

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

include other currencies?

MS. KELLES: So, all cryptocurrencies are included

in this. This is not a discussion of proof of work or proof of stake or

proof of authority or proof of time. It's all cryptocurrencies. If you

are referring to other technologies that use blockchain, which is the

technology that all of them are based on, many of those are not

currencies. For example, it's used to help people register to vote, it's

used to transfer medical data. It's used for any number of things, and

those are clearly not currencies. But this does cover over 6,000

cryptocurrencies that exist, and this is just adding it to our existing

disclosures that are already quite comprehensive.

MR. GOODELL: I see. Is there a reason why we

currently do not have any obligation to report, for example, cash or

U.S. currency or foreign currency?

MS. KELLES: We do disclose our U.S. currency and

foreign currencies. I mean, I -- I know I do when we get forms. I

don't know exactly what you're referring to. Can you --

MR. GOODELL: Well, there's no obligation under

the current form to report cash, foreign currency, gold, silver, precious

metals.

MS. KELLES: True. I mean, if you have cash on

hand I understand.

MR. GOODELL: Right.

MS. KELLES: That is not -- I mean, I -- if there's

someone who has $500,000 sitting in cash in their house I think there

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

are other things we should be discussing. But this is really intended to

be for in addition to our existing reporting.

MR. GOODELL: So if --

MS. KELLES: If we want to do the -- the other types

I'm happy to discuss that with you, but this is specific to

cryptocurrencies.

MR. GOODELL: So I understand why we report

stocks, bonds and notes and mortgages because all of those impact

corporations and business entities that we might be voting on here on

the floor that could impact on their value. Am I correct, though, that

there's nothing that we can do here on the floor of the New York State

Assembly that would impact the value of -- certainly nothing we

would do that would impact the value of cash, foreign currencies or

even cryptocurrencies; is that correct?

MS. KELLES: I would not put cryptocurrencies in

that same category at all. Cryptocurrencies are obviously, as you

know, a new technology. They are sold on digital exchanges. They

are used for wealth. There are companies that are cryptocurrency

companies. There are companies that are cryptocurrency mining

companies that invest heavily in specific cryptocurrencies and have

certainly a policy and political agenda with respect to how we should

deal with currencies, specifically cryptocurrency. So I would never

put them in the same category as cash in your pillow under your bed.

MR. GOODELL: I see. Thank you for your

comments. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Read the last section.

THE CLERK: This act shall take effect January 1st.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The Clerk will record

the vote.

(The Clerk recorded the vote.)

Ms. Kelles to explain her vote.

MS. KELLES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, to explain

my vote. I just wanted to acknowledge why this is important. We

have a lot of un -- uncertainty around cryptocurrencies, and there's

still discussion, for example, at the Federal level; is it a commodity, is

it a security. You know, where does it fall on the spectrum of wealth.

But we do all recognize that it does fall on that spectrum, and we do

also recognize that there are, as I said, cryptocurrency mining

companies, there are platforms that have agendas. We have seen

tremendous amounts of influence of cryptocurrency on political

debate and discussion, and for that reason it seems prudent to make

sure that we are all clear when we are engaging in those discussions

about future regulation of cryptocurrency that we are all being

straightforward and transparent about our associations with the

companies that will clearly have a very robust perspective on -- on the

issue. So I think that this will -- as -- as is clear that it's in this

package, it is a good-government bill. The reason that we had it, the

language that we did, it very closely models the language already

existing in State law for the securities, but we did not add it to the

security section because there is still the discussion of which

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

cryptocurrencies are securities, is it -- are they commodities, so we

created a separate section. I wanted to make that very clear so that

everybody understood.

So thank you so much, Speaker, and I stand

obviously in the affirmative.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Kelles in the

affirmative.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

(The Clerk announced the results.)

The bill is passed.

THE CLERK: Assembly No. A04453, Rules Report

No. 108, Raga. An act to amend the Public Officers Law, in relation

to the ability of government agencies in New York to claim copyright

protection.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: An explanation is

requested, Mr. Raga.

MR. RAGA: Thank you. This bill would clarify that

State agencies can only claim copyright protection under certain

circumstances. In essence, this bill reinforces the principle that

business and government is a public business and, therefore, the

public should have access to records of our government without any

unnecessary barriers. The Federal Copyright Act states that copyright

protection is not available for any work of -- of the United States

government. However, they admitted state and local governments.

It's important that the same apply here in New York State. Currently,

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

the State and all the local governments and agencies can seek

duty of government.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Ra.

MR. RA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor

yield?

MR. RAGA: Yes, I yield.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The sponsor yields.

MR. RA: Thank you. I'm looking forward to

discussing this with you as I had the opportunity to for many years

with Mrs. Galef. So, welcome -- welcome to the copyright FOIL

debate.

(Laughter)

So this bill, you know -- and it's been around a

number of years, like I said, and I don't know if you're familiar with

the matter that I think talked a lot about this years ago which was a --

a case between Suffolk County on Long Island and First American

Real Estate. And at the time they had produced tax maps in Suffolk

County and an entity reproduced those maps without the consent of

Suffolk County and they claimed that FOIL was in direct conflict,

basically, with the Copyright Act. And the case made its way through

the courts and the courts concluded that that wasn't the case, that --

that they were able to meet -- their accounting was able to meet the

purpose of FOIL which was -- is disclosure without having to give up,

you know, copyright claims. So is that the type of situation, though,

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

that -- like, is the intent of this to basically change the law to -- to do

the opposite of what that decision did?

MR. RAGA: Thank you. This bill does not change

the process of -- does not change the process. In fact, it will --

instances like that will be up to a case-by-case basis, it could be taken

up by the courts.

MR. RA: Okay. If -- so -- but what this requires,

right, is the copyright would have to be waived, anything produced by

the State and local governments as well, correct?

MR. RAGA: Yes, so it would be waived by a State

agency.

MR. RA: And what about local governments?

Would they be required to waive copyright as well?

MR. RAGA: No, they will not.

MR. RA: Okay. Then they have been one of the

changes that's been made over the years with regard to this bill. So

my question, though, is copyright, you know, by its nature is -- is

designed to -- to protect a -- a work. And, you know, if the agency

were to produce something that they have copyrighted, it can be

FOILed, they could disclose it, but really what the copyright would

allow is say some business takes that government record now and is

trying to sell it. If you have a copyright you can say, Hey, you -- you

have to license this information from us or this -- this work. You can't

just sell it for your -- for your gain. If this were to become law there

would be no such ability to control the use of that work. So are you

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

concerned that if the agency is going to waive the copyright, if some

entity -- I think we all agree that the taxpayers paid for the work, right,

so it should be able to be disclosed, they should have access to it. But

if some entity now FOILs it and says, Hey, I'm going to sell it, what

recourse would the State have if this bill becomes law?

MR. RAGA: Sure. I think if a profit -- if a private

company took this information like you're saying and turned it around

to be used for profit, that would of course be unfortunate. I'm not

aware that that's a common occurrence. I think what's more important

is that us members of the Legislature are often in the position of

requiring an agency to do something, to produce something. And the

primary intent of this bill, and I think what's -- what's at focus is that if

a non-profit may be -- would be able to use information produced in a

manner that the State record in whatever way may be useful to them

and to -- to add value to the public they serve.

MR. RA: Yeah, and -- and again, I think the

disclosure part of it is fine, but -- but where I've always had a

difference of opinion regarding this bill is the fact that once you waive

the copyright you have no way of having any control over the use of

that information. So, I mean, you literally can have something that the

public has paid to be produced and some business can now start

selling it to that taxpayer who already paid to have it be produced in

the first place. And that was the issue in this -- in this case I'm talking

about. These tax maps were being sold. I'll give you another

example, and it came up in one of the memos that we've received in

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

opposition. We -- I'm sure you're familiar with when we go on the --

you know, when we go on our computers here we have LRS. It, you

know, tracks legislation and you can set alerts and all that type of

stuff. We're able to license that to people, you know, outside of these

walls who have an interest in what's -- what's going on. If we couldn't,

some lobbying firm could take all the data and technology, basically,

that the State has invested in and sell it to their clients, and the State

has no recourse because we can't -- we don't have any copyright.

MR. RAGA: Thank you. I think what's our focus

here also is that the scope of -- of its application, it's not like we could

take trade secrets and -- and that's part of this. It only applies to

documents that are already disclosed by the FOIL request and there's

already exemptions at hand.

MR. RA: Okay. Can you just -- I guess last question.

Can you give me any kind of example as to what you would see as

being something that would meet the exception here?

MR. RAGA: For sure. If an agency produces a

generic type of record a potential copyright could be waived. Under

this bill, for example, the -- the Department of Transportation should

not be able to copyright their own road networks. If an agency

produces something that includes artistic work, that would be an

exception. Where maybe it could still be subject to copyright, but that

particular agency, in its own discretion, can elect to waive the

their official materials. If they know those materials are intended to

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

be shared with the public and that was the primary reason for their

preparation, that would be included.

MR. RA: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, on the bill.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: On the bill, Mr. Ra.

MR. RA: So -- so just to, you know, make -- make

this point again, I think what we want here is the disclosure of the

information. That's fine. I think this can be done without waiving the

can't deny a FOIL request because the information's copyrighted

without them waiving it. Because my concern, again, is with no

any which way they want including for commercial purposes. And I

think the last thing we should want to see is information that the

taxpayers paid for now being sold to them by some entity. The other

thing is, copyright at its very core is -- is designed to really incentivize

work. People, you know -- you know, if I was going to write a -- a

book, but if you wanted to you could just take the book and sell it

yourself, I wouldn't have a lot of incentive to write a book. And that's

the purpose, is incentivizing work. So some of the things that I

mentioned, LRS or -- or -- or that type of database or some other

work that comes from -- from a State agency that they can, you know,

license out for whatever reason, it helps cover the cost, A, but that --

that is the incentive to -- to doing that.

So I -- I think we can have a bill that makes sure

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

anything that we want to get out in public, you know, FOIL a

particular report from an agency or whatever it is, that we can get it

out to the public without the State having to actually waive any rights

to that work. So because of that I'm going to be voting in the

negative. Thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Read the last section.

THE CLERK: This act shall take effect on the 60th

day.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: A Party vote has

been requested.

Mr. Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, sir. The Republican

Conference is generally opposed to this, but certainly the Republican

members are free to vote in favor of it here on the floor of the

Assembly.

Thank you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you.

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. The Majority Conference is generally going to be in favor of

this piece of legislation. However, there may be some who will desire

to be an exception. They should feel free to do so.

Thank you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you.

The Clerk will record the vote.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

(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. A04591-A, Rules

Report No. 109, McDonald. An act to amend the New York State

Printing and Public Documents Law, in relation to requiring State

agencies to make available all public documents in a digital format on

their website.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Read the last section.

THE CLERK: This act shall take effect on the 90th

day.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The Clerk will record

the vote.

(The Clerk recorded the vote.)

Mr. McDonald to explain his vote.

MR. MCDONALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And

it's great that we're in unison to round out our Sunshine Package

today. And just on this bill, this is a bill that former member Sandy

Galef had carried for years, and it required State agencies to make

public documents available on their respective websites. And as you

know, this Body, the legislative Body, does pass a lot of bills requiring

task force studies, reports, to be made available, but what we noticed

at times is it's not always publicly available. So this bill will clarify

that process that they're in a digital format. That way you can print it,

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

you can share it, you can store it, you can do whatever you want with

it but, more importantly, hopefully become better informed about the

proceedings and operations of the State of New York.

Thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. McDonald in the

affirmative.

Ms. Walsh.

MS. WALSH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, to explain

my vote. And -- and I certainly don't mean to rain on -- on my

colleague's parade here a little bit. I will be supporting this bill, but I

would like to point out that this legislation only says that annual

reports and public documents have to be posted on line. Its definition

of State agency includes any State office, department, division, board,

bureau, commission or corporation, which is great. But it does not

include the New York State Legislature or any of its standing special

select and joint committees, subcommittees and legislative

commissions, and I would just respectfully say to -- to everybody, why

not? I mean, why not? I think that if we really want to spread some

sunshine that would be a good next bill.

So thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I'm in favor.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Walsh in the

affirmative.

Ms. Giglio to explain her vote.

MS. GIGLIO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, to explain

my vote. And while we're speaking of sunshine, it would be great if

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

third-party contractors that do business with the State or that are hired

by State agencies, if they also made their forms readily available

either on the State website or on their own website. And that -- that

comes with people with developmental disabilities and forms such as

the CAS assessments and then also any appeals processes that any

candidate may be eligible for.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

(The Clerk announced the results.)

The bill is passed.

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Mr. Speaker and

colleagues, if we could now turn our attention to Rules Report No.

101 by Ms. Paulin - this is a chapter amendment - as well as Rules

Report No. 79. That one is by Ms. Fahy. In that order, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you.

That's on the main Calendar, page 5, Rules Report

101, the Clerk will read.

THE CLERK: Senate No. S00837, Rules Report No.

101, Senator Rivera (A04132, Paulin). An act to amend the Public

Health Law, in relation to protecting the confidentiality of vaccine

information; and to repeal provisions of the Public Health Law

relating thereto.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: An explanation is

requested, Ms. Paulin.

MS. PAULIN: Yes, of course. The bill is a chapter

amendment and changes when the Commissioner of Health may share

identifiable information to the CDC without written commitments

from Federal health officials and when they will not share that

information.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, sir. Would the sponsor

yield?

MS. PAULIN: I would be happy to.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The sponsor yields,

sir.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Ms. Paulin. I note that

the original legislation passed this Legislature unanimously and had

multiple cosponsors, including several Republicans. And the original

legislation had that unanimous support in large part because it was

very clear that the original legislation prohibited the disclosure of

personal identifying information in immunization records beyond

what was necessary by the person that was administering it, correct?

MS. PAULIN: Mm-hmm. Yes, of course.

MR. GOODELL: And this chapter amendment

eliminates or dilutes many of those protections, correct?

MS. PAULIN: I would say that one of the chapter --

one -- there are two parts of this and the, you know, one of them is a

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

result of another law that we passed allow -- and so what this would

do to compliment that provision is to allow this information to be

shared with law enforcement in case fraud was taking place.

MR. GOODELL: But it also --

MS. PAULIN: (Inaudible). I'm sorry.

MR. GOODELL: So the original said, as an

example, identifiable registrant information is not subject to

discovery, subpoena, warrant or other means of legal representation

with very few exceptions. That was completely deleted in this chapter

amendment and replaced with language that says a person to whom

this information is provided to shall not disclose the identity of such

person except as necessary for the best interests of the person or other

persons.

MS. PAULIN: So that was -- that's -- that's referring

to a slightly different section, and that has to do with the fact that

there's been public health outbreaks. So, you know, we had measles,

and polio and other things that, you know, have come back,

unfortunately, and so the Health Department believed that the burden

of requiring a signoff, actually to sign off on -- on the disclosure was

just too burdensome, so there was a concern that we would need the

information sooner. So there's two parts to this: One, that we would

no longer require the signoff. It could -- it's optional; and two, that the

information could be disclosed to law enforcement if fraud is

involved.

MR. GOODELL: Regarding the language I just

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

quoted on page 2, who makes the decision that it's in the best interest

of a person to disclose their personal identifiable information? I

mean, most assuredly any individual can sign a consent, but this is not

in a situation where a person signs a consent. They would be

involuntary. So who makes the determination that disclosing their

personal information is in their own best interest even though they

don't give a waiver?

MS. PAULIN: So, this really has to do much more

so with the Health Department being able to get that identifying

information, again, dealing with public health emergencies.

MR. GOODELL: I see. And likewise, then, it would

be the Health Department that would decide whether or not personal

identifiable information is to be disclosed in the best interest of

third-parties, correct?

MS. PAULIN: For the most part, yes.

MR. GOODELL: Now, the original bill required

covered entities to delete personal identifying information except to

the extent necessary to maintain records. That has been largely

deleted in this chapter amendment, correct?

MS. PAULIN: Again, two purposes are public health

and for law enforcement.

MR. GOODELL: I see. Thank you very much, Ms.

Paulin.

On the bill, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: On the bill, Mr.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Last year we, as the Legislature,

unanimously passed a comprehensive privacy protection bill that dealt

with personal identifying information relating to immunizations. And

we passed that because we wanted to assure people who are getting

vaccines that their personal information could not be widely shared.

This chapter amendment eliminates many of those protections. The

chapter amendment, in fact, provides that the Health Department can

disclose personal identifying information when the Health Department

determines it's in your best interest without contacting you or seeking

a waiver or consent from you or any of your neighbors. So we now

authorize the Health Department, a huge bureaucracy, to basically

waive all the personal protections without the consent of individuals.

And it goes on to say we delegate now to the Health Department the

authority to make the determination that waiving all the personal

privacy protections that we gave last year can be done if they think it's

in the best interest of other unidentified individuals.

I was a cosponsor on the original legislation because I

recognized the need to have strong and effective privacy protections,

and I joined with my colleagues last year in supporting the original

legislation. Sadly, this chapter amendment eliminates or dilutes the

very privacy protections that we, as the Legislature, passed

unanimously last year, and for that reason I cannot support it. Thank

you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you, sir.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

Read the last section.

THE CLERK: This act shall take effect immediately.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: A Party vote has

been requested.

Mr. Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, sir. The Republican

Conference is generally opposed to trusting the State Health

Department with all of our personal data, and assuming that they will

act responsibly after we just got a Federal -- or a State court decision

throwing out their quarantine rules that would allow them to

quarantine someone with absolutely no due process without even a

finding that they were ill. But, those Republicans who support the

losses of these privacy protections can certainly vote in favor of this

legislation here on the floor.

Thank you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you.

Mr. Benedetto.

MR. BENEDETTO: Mr. Speaker, without giving

any speeches in favor of the bill, the Majority Conference will

generally be in support of this legislation, and those who might have

objections are certainly more than free to vote negative.

Thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you, Mr.

Benedetto.

The Clerk will record the vote.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

(The Clerk recorded the vote.)

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

(The Clerk announced the results.)

The bill is passed.

Page 4, Rules Report No. 79 the Clerk will read.

THE CLERK: Senate No. S02222, Rules Report No.

79, Senator Harckham (A00606, Fahy, Levenberg, Kelles). An act to

amend the Environmental Conservation Law, in relation to the public

awareness and involvement in the 30x30 Conservation Plan.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: An explanation is

requested, Ms. Fahy.

MS. FAHY: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This bill is a -- a chapter amendment which follows up on the

legislation from last year, and that is -- the intent here is to bolster the

resilience to climate change by establishing a goal of preserving 30

percent of our lands and water by 2030. Again, it's a chapter

amendment and this technically removes the requirement that we had

in last year's bill that would require DEC to provide a written plan and

notes that they would still hold one hearing, but post on their website

the strategies, methodologies and include the -- this information

annually or -- and update that website annually.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Smullen.

MR. SMULLEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would

the sponsor yield for a few questions on this amendment?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy, will you

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

yield?

MS. FAHY: Sure.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The sponsor yields.

MR. SMULLEN: Thank you, Ms. Fahy. Just a -- I

know we spoke about this in Committee and we also spoke about it on

the floor last year when this bill passed. I still have some reservations

and I just want to be made clear in public about what the

responsibilities of the State in implementing this goal and/or plan

because I have some concerns about the actual goals themselves.

Thirty by 30 it seems to be is open ended. First question just to make

sure what is your appreciation right now from DEC or from whomever

about the percentage of land that New York State has under that

would qualify for this that's currently under conservation?

MS. FAHY: In rough numbers - and that's part of

why we're seeking this legislation - but in rough numbers we've seen

anywhere from 17 to 19 percent lower estimates at the federal level

and again that's part of why we are looking for this goal. We've been

very open to how it is defined. We recognize that that would be done

via -- via the regulatory process through DEC because -- because we

know we have work to do, but if those estimates are truly that low but

because we don't have a good gauge of that it is part of the impetus for

this legislation.

MR. SMULLEN: Well, I think it's just the opposite.

I think we ought to have good transparency up front. Who signed

Executive Order 14008?

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

MS. FAHY: It would have been the Governor. Oh,

do you mean --

MR. SMULLEN: You mentioned the Federal

government. What is their role in this process?

MS. FAHY: Oh, you mean President Biden. The

Biden Administration did issue an Executive Order again with the

similar intent that was after we had introduced this bill a few years

ago but yes. This comes out of a -- a report from the UN so this is a

national effort as well as a global effort to protect the planet because

we know we are having weather-related disasters, we know we are

having serious problems with weather -- weather-related disasters as

well as climate change throughout the -- throughout the world. So this

was tied or the impetus again for this came out of a UN report.

President Biden, it was one of the first things he did in 2021 was to

issue an Executive Order.

MR. SMULLEN: So, we're following -- we're

following the goals of the UN and then we're taking that at the federal

level and putting it on the United States. Thirty by 30 is that the goal

for the United States?

MS. FAHY: It was issued again by the President as

an Executive Order as a goal. This bill was introduced before then but

happy to give the President kudos for doing it as well and again the

report was by the UN because of the alarming rate that we are losing

properties and -- and water.

MR. SMULLEN: But no enabling federal legislation

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

which would authorize or help the State buy land for either the

Federal government or the State to conserve?

MS. FAHY: This is only about New York State, this

is only about a goal here in the State. The fact that it has gotten

recognition beyond that is I think just fueling the need and recognizing

the need to -- to reach these types of goals as a part of climate action.

MR. SMULLEN: So if we pass this amendment and

we're essentially going to pass this to our environmental regulation

organization the DEC --

FAHY: Yes.

MR. SMULLEN: -- to be able to do it. But does this

legislative Body have any further action in the outcome or the results

of the planning the DEC is doing? Would we have to approve

anything?

MS. FAHY: Would what?

MR. SMULLEN: Would we have to approve

anything further?

MS. FAHY: No. Although again it does ask that the

website be updated annually. And but again, it's not -- it's not a

mandate, there's no funding attached to this, but we will certainly be

following those annual reports and what is issued. Again, there will

be a hearing held on this. We think it's very important and, once

again, I hope New York will help lead these efforts as we have led on

so many climate action.

MR. SMULLEN: So, we'll have a public hearing on

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

this. We, the Legislature, or the -- the -- the Executive branch have

some sort of public hearing.

MS. FAHY: The legislation requires that DEC, the

Executive branch hold the hearing. But certainly as you know we've

held many hearings. We have a new Chair, I'm sure she will have

many related hearings but this legislation only calls for the Executive

to hold that hearing.

MR. SMULLEN: So there is no Legislative public

hearing as a result of this.

MS. FAHY: No, no.

MR. SMULLEN: And this also requires -- obviates

any need for a formal plan for DEC to actually come to the public

with a formal plan as to how we're going to implement these goals?

MS. FAHY: Exactly. There's nothing formal, there

will not be a formal written plan. They will however be required to

explain the strategies as well as the methodologies on -- as part of this

hearing process as well as document all of this in a website and again

do that annually. So it doesn't negate that there's serious interest in

doing this given the serious erosion of lands and waters. And again,

really hope that we can lead the country in this type of effort.

MR. SMULLEN: And does this forthcoming budget

that we're about to pass or are supposed to pass by April 1st of this

year, does it have any funding for DEC to implement this initiative?

MS. FAHY: There's a lot of funding for DEC

including some increases that we have proposed --

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

MR. SMULLEN: For this -- for this initiative.

MS. FAHY: Not -- not on this. And this bill again

does not require any type of incentives or fundings so no.

MR. SMULLEN: It seems to me that this is a big job

and it would be millions of dollars worth of work. It would seem to

me to be sensible that we have a line item in this budget. If we're

going to pass a law telling DEC to do work that we as a Body ought to

give them the resources to do so. It ought to be quite specific if this is

such an important issue, let's do it.

MS. FAHY: I -- I think that DEC has supported this

and has shared the importance of this. But we also would separately

in the budget, as you know the Governor and we have supported

increases in their staffing, but there's no -- this is -- this is something

we recognize there is a need to do regardless so there was no specific

request for funding. And I -- I'm happy -- I appreciate your interest in

a line item, quite frankly, but at this time nothing was requested and

we think that this is something that really should be available. We

should have a good sense of what -- what is available and what we

have. I know many of us have passed bills regarding land property --

property easements to -- to help incentivize especially farmers without

any particular heirs to give some relief on property taxes and to

incentivize appropriate conservation easements. But aside from that

this is -- this is something that we hope there's an interest in

regardless.

MR. SMULLEN: Thank you. One last technical

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

question about the percentage of land does the current open space plan

which is referenced in the Governor's memo. How much of that is

farmland and how much of that is lands of the State of New York that

are under water?

MS. FAHY: Yeah, it's not -- it's not delineated at this

point again to us that -- that points to the need to have a better grasp of

this. Many cases at least Upstate we mostly hear about these types of

issues with regard to the Adirondacks. I think we need this for the

whole State, we need to have a better sense of what is farmland, what

are -- what -- where are our water conservation efforts, where are

regular land. So it is not delineated now but that's again part of the

reason why we think this is important and that's why also that this goal

is important.

MR. SMULLEN: Right. Thank you very much.

Mr. Speaker, on the bill.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: On the bill, sir.

MR. SMULLEN: As we've brought out last year in

the bill, the underlying bill-in-chief and this amendment, in my mind

this is far too open-ended without clear delineated guardrails as to

what this actually means for the people of the State of New York. It's

quite easy for legislators in the dense urban areas or the great suburbs

around the dense urban areas to say yeah, 30 percent sounds really

good. But if you're from the Mohawk Valley and the Adirondacks, a

park that has six million acres of public and private land which is way

over 30 percent at this point. In my region, in my district, we're --

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

we're way over 30 percent. What it's essentially doing is taking a

good idea and a goal which we've seen in the climate leadership in the

Community Protection Act which has been passed, you take a goal-

oriented bill and then a climate action counsel led by DEC changes

the rules in the middle. You go from playing football to now you're

playing basketball and the rules change in the middle of the game.

And that's why I was against this before and I would remain so

because this will primarily affect the people in districts like mine

where there is no 87 square miles of New York City. If you were

forced to go to conserve 30 percent of your land, what would that do

to New York City? If you were in the suburbs of Long Island or

Westchester County or the City of Buffalo or Syracuse, you certainly

had to do 30 percent of your land to be conserved this would be a

great -- a great change in your districts. And what I don't want it to be

done is just simply on the backs of rural Upstate districts that don't

have the votes to stop something like this or the votes to create a fair

and transparent process in getting to that number. Because I think the

number's way over 19 percent. I think that the lands under the State

bodies of water, I think lands that are farmland that are -- that are right

now being used to produce crops for the benefit of the people of New

York State are conserved in a good way. And I think they should be

conserved and I think all of the change that's going on with solar,

acreage going in -- and the various schemes to change how we use

land in New York State ought to be considered before we vote on it.

This is in my mind is putting the cart before the horse and no one is a

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

better or more ardent conservationist than I being from the great area

of the Adirondacks. But we want it to be on openly and transparency

-- and transparently so we can't change the game again in the future

with a simple vote of this legislature. And I understand the merits of

conservation but I don't see where it fits in in a federal plan just yet

where the lands of the west that are owned by the federal government

that are under the Bureau of Land Management. How many are they

and how many are already under conservation? Do those count? Are

the lands of Wyoming, does that count to offset land in Upstate New

York? I don't know. I can't tell from this plan. So therefore, I urge

caution and I urge reservation in going forward with a well-meaning

gesture that's open-ended and goal-oriented. I urge all of my

colleagues to consider it very carefully before voting. I will be voting

in the negative as I did on the bill-in-chief. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you.

Mr. Manktelow.

MR. MANKTELOW: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Would the sponsor yield?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy, will you

yield?

MS. FAHY: Sure.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy yields, sir.

MR. MANKTELOW: Thank you, Ms. Fahy. Back

in the 17 and 19 percent that you spoke of earlier, and I believe that

was the same number that we -- we heard last year, I believe when we

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

had this bill in front of us. Where are we -- where are we coming up

-- how are you or whoever coming up with the 17 and 19 percent?

MS. FAHY: Again, we're going off estimates that

have been recorded. As best we know they're -- they're rough

estimates. We've seen estimates as low as 13 percent of the national

level for national numbers. That's part of the impetus for this

legislation is one, we need a better sense of this. I actually think we --

we share the same goals as the -- the previous speaker. We know we

need to be protective of our farms. We've -- we've spent -- we have a

-- a lot of provisions in the one-House budget to help grow our farms

and particularly protect the federal farms. So this is -- this is about

getting a grasp of what we have and making sure that we are

strategically promoting smart development and smart land protections

where appropriate.

MR. MANKTELOW: So is it safe to say that the 17

to 19 percent is based off of the Federal government or based off of

New York State?

MS. FAHY: It's -- it's an estimate that we receive

from DEC and again told that it is a -- a rough estimate and that's why

we've decided to reintroduce the legislation to more formalize this

process and get a serious accounting as well as get an annual update

on where we are given the extraordinary erosion of what we are

seeing. There's an estimated -- I think it's one million in the US, again

because we don't have good breakouts on this, but in the US an

estimated one million acres are lost annualty -- annually to

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

development. And we know from the extreme weather patterns that

we are having, as well as a host of related climate change issues, we

know we're going in the wrong direction so that is part of why the UN

has recommended this across the world to begin to quantify, measure

and -- and try to preserve 30 percent of our land and water.

MR. MANKTELOW: So -- so let me ask the next

question. In the -- in the Governor's budget if she continues to

propose, you know, new housing across New York State and in our

rural communities that are very small, the new housing's going to have

to go some place. So we're going to want new housing, we're going to

want solar power and now we're talking about conserving 30 percent

of our land. So if you go outside of a small rural town or village,

where are we going to go?

MS. FAHY: I -- I think there's -- I live here in

Albany and there's plenty of places. But this bill is about a goal of 30

percent, this is not about the Governor's proposal on the Housing

Compact or other related proposals. But this is also tied to what is

often referred to as smart growth. When we see developments that

have a 12-acre development when the bulk of the actual building is on

one acre and we reserve some -- some space, there's a way to do the

development to -- to make sure that some of it is condensed as well as

leaving some open space on any large development. So it's part of a

smart design, smart growth and there's many ways to achieve this.

Again, this is about trying to get a sense of what we do have and

making sure that we are encouraging smart development as well as

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

being very again strategic about our farms, our land protection, our

forests, our rivers and -- and water bodies, bodies of water.

MR. MANKTELOW: I -- I agree with much of what

you said but I -- the one thing I disagree with is part of the Governor's

budget with the new housing. That actually does play into this

because we in our small communities where we don't have an

over-abundancy of extra land that's not being used, that -- that plays

into everything that we do here on this floor. And the people that we

represent back in these communities, they do have grave concern over

what the Governor's pushing with housing, why we're pushing the

solar projects and now 30 by 30. So another question that my

colleague had asked about the water. We are very fortunate to have

Lake Ontario, we are very fortunate to have part of Lake Erie, the

Finger Lakes, the Erie Canal, our Montezuma Wetlands. Again, I

want to ask the question. How much of that property, how much of

those water areas are in this 17 to 19 percent?

MS. FAHY: That is again one of the reasons why we

are adopting this -- this bill and this measure is to get a better

accounting because by their own admission we do not have a good

accounting. And again, while this is not about the Governor's

proposed housing development, I will add that the Governor has also

talked about trying to encourage development around the TOAs, the

transportation opportunity areas, to make sure that it is tied to more

condensed environmentally-friendly type developments. So where --

where this may help with guiding some of that, that would be

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

wonderful if -- if the two -- if one helps to guide the other. But again,

this all preceded the Governor's first proposal. But back to my

12-acre example. If -- if some of those 12 acres have a wetland on

them, it just means you have more condensed housing being built on

one of those 12 acres while reserving that, the use of that for the

residents. There's -- there's many ways to do it. I represent -- one of

the towns I represent is Guilderland and they have been years ahead of

folks with trying to do smart planning, smart growth. We've just last

year or two years ago just passed a conservation easement for them to

again to be able to work with their farmers or large land owners to

make sure they are -- it's a highly attractive area and to make sure that

they are making appropriate plans and yet keeping that quality of life

that the town residents want and that is having -- having lots of open

space that makes their -- makes the entire community desirable.

MR. MANKTELOW: Sure. And I -- I remember

you talking about that before and they -- they are much further ahead

than other areas. Back home as I talked about the water. It's 30 by 30

land and water. Is it going to be 50 percent land, 50 percent water?

Can it be 90 percent water, ten percent land? Can it be any mix of

that?

MS. FAHY: Again, I answered that earlier. At this

point we are not delineating what percent we are -- and we are leaving

that up to the DEC to report back. They may come back and say they

would like to add in more lands or more types of lands, how much

they count farms, wetlands, water bodies. Again, that is -- that is

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

something that we are going to leave to them and that's part of why we

have such rough estimates that we have not been as specific nationally

or here in the State.

MR. MANKTELOW: So if DEC does come back

and say we need this much more land, where does it come from?

MS. FAHY: Again, it's a goal. There's no funds

attached to this. If they come back and say through their assessment

over the next year we're only at 27 percent, it will give us a goal and --

and -- and know that we either need to discuss additional conservation

easements to encourage or incentivize more or we may come back at

35 percent and recognize we're doing something right in a whole host

of communities and that may be a model then to replicate in other

counties where there are highly-dense neighborhoods or where --

where we may want to modify other plans. So we don't have a good

sense. I think New York, especially when you think of so much of

Upstate and Downstate suburban, quite frankly when we first

introduced this I was surprised to hear the estimates were only 19

percent.

MR. MANKTELOW: Okay. So when DEC does

their public hearing they're going to do a public hearing, correct?

MS. FAHY: Mm-hmm, yes.

MR. MANKTELOW: At that public hearing, will

they tell us what percentage we're at and what percentage is water and

what percentage is land?

MS. FAHY: What we've required in the bill at this

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

point is what they're -- what -- that they be explicit about what the

strategies are and what the methodologies are. So they may say these

are the types of bodies of water they are going to count, they may say

a farm, county preserves, local municipal parks. That is something for

again, for them to delineate as a part of the strategies and

methodologies on their website and as well as the hearing. Whether

they would do that before the hearing or after the hearing we are not --

we are not mandating that. The entire piece of this is -- is that this is a

goal. We are leaving the flexibility just as -- by the way this was

similarly done by the President in the Executive Order. There's a lot

of open language as we try to get our arms around this. And again,

that -- that's part of the impetus for doing this because we don't have a

good number on it here in the State, nationally or around the world.

MR. MANKTELOW: Okay. So DEC comes out

with their recommendation, this is what they say we want to do. What

recourse at that time does this legislative Body have? If we don't

agree with it, what recourse do we have then?

MS. FAHY: We have plenty of recourse. We're a

legislative Body. We can deliberate again, we can propose if we're

well under a goal of 30 percent, we can start to look at additional

incentives, if we're well over we may want to revisit the goal itself.

So at this point again nothing is mandated here. We are trying to get

just as we've done with a whole host of studies or reports that we

require, we are trying to get our arms around this knowing that at least

nationally we're losing a million acres a year. That's a pretty

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

significant number nationally. We know -- we know our

weather-related disasters and climate change is getting worse, not

better at this time, so this is part of that multiprong effort to -- to look

at a whole host of areas that may help us address our goals. And if

preserving -- we know that preserving land and water and smart

growth -- we just passed a Bond Act a year ago or last fall I should say

that is putting billions of dollars into resiliency efforts to help us -- to

help protect us from water-related disasters.

MR. MANKTELOW: So -- yeah, I understand the

land. I understand, you know, you talk about losing a million acres.

We've lost a huge amount of acres to solar and wind projects Upstate

and across New York State. My last question to you is, we talk about

New York City and we talk about how big it is. What are they going

to do to contribute to the 30 percent?

MS. FAHY: As I just mentioned earlier, part of this I

would hope includes - but it's not for me to decide - but I would hope

includes municipal parks, includes the State parks and -- and more.

The rivers that abut so much of -- of New York. So again, I -- I think

there's a part of this for all and I would hope at the appropriate time

we will see a breakout of what regions have already achieved 30

percent and what regions need work. So that may help direct some of

our future efforts with incentives. But again, until we -- until we get a

good sense of the measurements here or a good sense of where we are

as a part of this, it's hard to develop any strategic plans without having

a good sense of exactly --

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

MR. MANKTELOW: Sure.

MS. FAHY: -- where we are that -- that is -- when we

first saw this, when the UN first began talking about this knowing how

tied this is to climate change, that's why it made so much sense that

we need to have a better accounting. Hard to know what to spend if

you don't know what's in your budget. It's the same --

MR. MANKTELOW: I don't mean to cut you off.

MS. FAHY: Sure.

MR. MANKTELOW: I've only got a minute left. I

agree with you. I just wish attached to this bill was where we are right

now, what's going to be used for this -- for the land, what's going to be

used for the water. And I was glad to hear you talk about New York

City. So I'm hoping that Central Park, the Hudson River and other

areas of New York City will be part of the whole solution, because I

know, as you said earlier, some of the things that -- that we have to

look at Upstate, I think the whole State needs to be a player in this,

they need to have some skin in the game and we can't constantly look

to the North to the West, Upstate New York where we're taking up all

of our properties, because we are losing them as I said to solar

projects, wind projects, the high water from Plan 2014, how much

property that took from our lakeshores. And now we're looking at

again the possibility of losing property to -- to make this 30 by 30

happen. I -- I want to see the goals. I want to see -- I know what the

goal is. I want to see the -- the parameters around that and where we

are today. So thank you for your time.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

MS. FAHY: Yes. That last thing. Again, I've been

proud to sponsor two bills for two of the towns that I represent for

conservation easements especially targeted at family farms to make

sure that they don't feel those development pressures and that we do

encourage smarter growth in those regions. So I -- you know,

protecting, helping to grow our family farms, helping to make sure

that we are doing this in a smart way throughout the State is part of

this goal.

MR. MANKTELOW: So really quick, what

percentage of those communities are considered in this?

MS. FAHY: In my region -- in my district, I don't

know. There is no -- we don't have -- again, we don't have a

percentage of -- I'm part of Albany County and don't have a number.

MR. MANKTELOW: Thank you, Madam Sponsor

for that and thank you for the information. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: Thank you.

Mr. Lemondes.

MR. LEMONDES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will

the sponsor yield?

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: Will the

sponsor yield?

MS. FAHY: Certainly.

MR. LEMONDES: Thank you. Two quick

questions. One I wanted to go back to the same question I asked in

committee. If lands currently encumber and/or those becoming

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

encumbered with solar projects will count towards the 30 percent or

not?

MS. FAHY: I think that's an excellent question.

Again, we've left this -- this is a -- a rather short chapter amendment

as well as the -- the legislation. We have really put this in the hands

of DEC. If for some reason they come back with an answer that we

think needs refinement, we will go back at this. But at this point we

have not made a requirement one way or the other as to whether solar

farms count towards this 30 percent. And I can see arguments on both

sides of that.

MR. LEMONDES: Thank you for that answer. And

secondly, due to the large acreage footprints around airfields, airports

and airstrips, will that land be considered conserved as well for

purposes of this?

MS. FAHY: I think that's another excellent question.

We've heard a number of examples of this. Again, I see where you

could argue this both ways. Those are open spaces but certainly with

very protected air rights and access rights, but that is by definition an

open space. So we have not delineated how this would be defined,

but that is something we will look to DEC to do. And certainly we

can revisit it if the -- what they come back with, if there's a debate to

be had. We want to encourage more, we want to encourage proper

use and -- you know, this is a goal toward climate change and smarter

growth. So all of this can be revisited but at this point we are not

being specific.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

MR. LEMONDES: Thank you. I raise that issue

because much of the land in many places in that category is ranched,

grazed, farmed, etc. It does -- it does serve multi-purpose uses. And I

would think that if it's good enough to be either open space or dual use

agriculture, etc. that that would count towards that goal, therefore

reduce pressure of which various types of my colleagues have -- have

raised.

MS. FAHY: Personally, I think it makes a lot of

sense but it's not for me to decide on that but yes, I agree. I mean I

think open space is open space even if -- like for instance an air -- an

airport it has limited access and limited air rights but it still is on open

space. So I think there's a definite argument to be made there but we

are leaving that to first be visited by DEC and we can certainly come

back.

MR. LEMONDES: Thank you. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: Mr. Tague.

MR. TAGUE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On the bill, please.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: On the bill.

MR. TAGUE: Unfortunately this bill, the

bill-in-chief, originally I was supportive of and I voted yes, but today

unfortunately I'm going to have to vote no. This bill takes

transparency away, takes away the involvement of local governments

and residents. We did the same thing in the budget three years ago

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

under a former Governor. We gave all the power to NYSERDA, we

took away home rule and now we have a problem with solar farms all

across productive farmland in rural Upstate New York. So without

the transparency in this and government again telling people what's

what and people not having the opportunity to sit in a hearing and ask

questions, I'm going to have to vote no on this bill and I would

encourage each and every one of my colleagues to do the same. I

don't understand why the original bill wasn't signed into law. I -- I

just don't get it. Instead we want to take more transparency out of the

procedure and give local governments less to say than the residents.

So for those reasons unfortunately a bill that I was supportive of now I

have to vote no. And if any of you folks care about agriculture or

eating or productive farmland in rural Upstate New York, I would

encourage you to vote no on this bill. Thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: Mr.

Palmesano.

MR. PALMESANO: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Will the

sponsor yield for some questions?

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: Will the

sponsor yield?

MS. FAHY: Certainly.

MR. PALMESANO: Thank you, Ms. Fahy.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: The sponsor

yields.

MR. PALMESANO: Just a couple quick questions.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

I'd like to hit on some of the points my colleagues may have

mentioned but with this plan for 30 by 30 conservation, these lands

that are put in this -- this range, would that basically prohibit the

industrial operations from being built with construction on these -- on

these properties?

MS. FAHY: Construction on -- on what properties?

MR. PALMESANO: On -- on -- on the lands. Like

if you have -- you have open -- open land area, you know, that you're

looking for conservation that's 30 by 30 whether it's farmland, whether

it's a field, whether it's a forest, will that -- will this -- if this were put

in place as these lands go into that -- to meet that 30, does that

prohibit any industrial commercialization or construction on those

properties?

MS. FAHY: No. This bill has no funds in it to take

lands, no takings authority and, you know, again, it is a goal which

requires it be published each year via its website and the DEC do this

accounting and tell us what their strategies and methodologies are,

seek that input via a public hearing so I think there's plenty of

transparency here. But certainly there's no takings authorized and no

prohibitions on the lands that -- that there are now. There's certainly

other processes for that if -- if there's a development for a -- an

existing open space that's, you know, as there is with the Adirondacks

again. There's plenty of processes in place for those to be reviewed.

This legislation would not impact that at all.

MR. PALMESANO: So these open space areas, this

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

land, they -- there could be developments on this land, you could

basically put a solar farm on this land, you could put a wind farm on

this land?

MS. FAHY: This -- again, there's other processes for

that. This is silent on that. It's a goal trying to get an accounting of

what is out there, but it is silent on, you know, on impacting whether a

current farm becomes a solar farm. Again, we have many other ways

to -- to address that than with a whole host of other layers to go

through in order to establish a -- a commercial -- commercial

construction or a solar farm.

MR. PALMESANO: I think also on open land we're

talking about it could be -- if it's not wind or solar it could be a

manufacturing plant could be placed on these lands that you're saying

as well? I mean are you saying it just doesn't speak to that?

MS. FAHY: It does not speak to that. You know,

we've talked about more about it than the length of the bill at this

point. The bill is really open-ended. It is trying to get an accounting

and assessment of what we do have. It does not give any explicit

authority for additional construction on open space nor does it give

any funding for any type of taking or set-aside for -- of additional

lands.

MR. PALMESANO: A lot -- a lot during this debate

you said well that's going to be up to the DEC to decide.

MS. FAHY: Yes.

MR. PALMESANO: So will the DEC make the

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

decision on these lands if they can put a solar farm or a wind farm on

these properties whether it's a open space land or a forest land?

MS. FAHY: Not through this bill. No. There is no

authority on that is granted through this bill. There are other ways for

that to be examined and deliberated on but not through this bill. This

bill is really about trying to get an assessment of what we have now

which, quite frankly, I think is long overdue. The fact that we only

have the roughest of estimates here in New York as well as nationally

and the fact that we don't have a good sense of what exactly New

York City has versus what Upstate has tells me there is an overdue

need for this.

MR. PALMESANO: And basically we're putting all

of the authority with the DEC to determine which one of these lands --

these lands as they make this assessment how much land is open

space, declared open space to meet this conservation plan by 2030?

MS. FAHY: Yes. I had a similar plan about three or

four years ago for parks to establish and lay out a trails plan for -- for

multi-module hiking, biking, walking, it's very similar. This is -- this

is a plan without establishing -- without requiring a written plan, but it

is really to give us a sense of what is out there and then happy to

continue those conversations but no additional authority is embedded

in this legislation.

MR. PALMESANO: Certainly. I think you can

appreciate the conversations coming from someone on our side who

have great concerns about seeing which we've already seen in Upstate

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

New York tremendous amount of agricultural land needs to be taking

-- not being taken, being used for solar and wind farms. And I mean,

quite frankly, you can't blame the farmers. They're getting -- they're

getting killed by everything else and policies are being implemented

by this Governor and this House. So you can't blame them for

wanting to take some funding to help get somebody coming to the

bank, but you can certainly understand the concerns many of us have

about prime agricultural land being taken off the book or forest land

being taken off the book for these commercialized wind and solar

farms, right?

MS. FAHY: Yes. I'm -- I am the daughter of two

farmers. I more than value our farms, particularly our family farms.

So I would hope this type of legislation will help to give us a better

accounting and where we need additional incentives to encourage that

all the better.

MR. PALMESANO: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Fahy.

Mr. Speaker, on the bill.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: On the bill.

MR. PALMESANO: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate

the sponsor's answers to our questions and trying to clarify some of

this issue. I really think this issue kind of boils down to some

concerns many of us on our side of the aisle have, certainly for myself

when I say it's in the DEC's hands, I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling in

my stomach when I hear the DEC is going to make the decision. I like

Commissioner Seggos. I don't like some of the decisions I've seen

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

them make time and time again. One such decision is where they

basically continue to deny air permits for construction of natural gas

power plants or for renewals. I mean things like that to ensure the

reliability -- the great -- but I think in this issue I think a lot of my

colleagues you saw the questions directed to the sponsor is about open

space and land because we have very strong concerns about prime

agricultural land being taken off the -- taken -- taken off the -- off the

-- off from agricultural to put solar farms and wind farms. And quite

frankly, when it comes to our farmers, who could blame them for

wanting to advantage of leases where they could pay thousands of

dollars to get some money in their pocket because unfortunately the

policies in this House, time and time again all you have to do is go to

the Farm Labor Act which is going to be devastating to our family

farms. And I remind my colleagues, 98 percent of the farms in New

York State are family-owned farms so the family farms. And then

also with our -- our forests. You know, we're very concerned about

clear-cutting of our forests. I remember a former colleague in a

hearing said I don't think -- see the need to clear-cut trees and forests

to put up solar farms and wind farms but that's kind of -- kind of --

counterintuitive to what we learned in elementary school where trees

absorb carbon dioxide through the process of photosynthesis. I think

my concern is putting it in the DEC's hands and what's going to

happen if we have this open space, these lands that are in these

conservation plans and then are they just going to put up more solar

farms and more wind farms across Upstate because we have to meet

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

our clean energy goals. And quite frankly, you know, I will remind

my colleagues, right now in all -- in all this land is being taken from

Upstate New York, not from New York City. It's coming off Upstate

New York. And I will remind my colleagues, 90 percent of the energy

generation in Upstate New York is energy -- is emission free, 90

percent with our wind, our hydro and our solar. Eighty-seven percent

of the generation in New York City is fossil fuel, it was like 75

percent before you guys decided to close down Indian Point which

provided 25 percent of the power to New York City with clean

energy. So I think what I'm concerned about is also this land

acquisition that's going to be required and a lot of my colleagues don't

realize. Just to -- just to put up -- it takes eight acres of land for one

megawatt of energy generation. Think about that for solar, eight acres

of land for one megawatt of solar. The climate action council plan

calls for 60 gigawatts of new solar, 60 gigawatts. One megawatt --

1,000 megawatts equals one gigawatt. We're talking about 480,000

acres of solar farms that need to be added to Upstate New York

because you can't put them in New York City unless you start doing

some rooftop solar. I think there's a great deal of concern from us on

our side of the aisle and from I think residents across Upstate New

York. And if you talk to local town boards, very concerned. You

took away all home rule now allowing local governments and the

municipalities and the people decide yes, we want a wind farm in our

community. We think we can benefit from it. Or yes, we want a solar

farm in our community. We think we can benefit from it. No. You

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

took away that control just like -- you think New York State knows

best just like you're trying to do with the housing plan -- the

Governor's trying to do with the housing plan to overrule local control,

local input and local authority. And that's the type of policies we

continue to see come out of this House and especially with the -- with

the so-called green agenda that you're advocating which is, quite

frankly, going to bankrupt families, farmers and manufacturers and

you're going to continue to see an exodus of more and more New

Yorkers and businesses leaving the State. We've already seen 500,000

New Yorkers leave the State in the past two years. You're going to

continue that exodus when you're putting plant, place and energy

policy, which this is a part of obviously, that requires that type of

generation. I mean when you talk about by 2030 anyone who has a

gas boiler or furnace, if that gas boiler and furnace goes, you can't

replace it with a gas boiler or a furnace. At that point in time you

have fully electrify your home and go out and get a geothermal heat

pump and the cost associated with that -- it will cost an average

homeowner more than $35,000. The public doesn't understand that.

The public doesn't know about it. Are you telling your people in your

districts that it's going to cost them $35,000 to convert their homes

over to fully electric? You should be because that's what's happening

and it's a runaway freight train. This is all part of an energy policy

that basically is going to jeopardize the reliability of the grid and the

affordability of our people of the State. And when you talk to

businesses and families when you talk about energy policy, the two

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

things they care about is affordability and reliability. If our businesses

can't get affordable and reliability in New York State, you better

believe they're going to go some place else where they can do it. So I

think this is part of an overall plan. I think the concept of it makes

sense but there's too much uncertainty at least for me. I think too

much uncertainty for a number of people on our side of the aisle.

There needs to be some -- some more guidelines to make sure we can

preserve our agricultural land, to make sure we can preserve our forest

land, make sure that they're not just clear-cut and putting up solar

farms across Upstate New York so we can meet these so-called green

energy goals. And it's not green energy goals. Don't believe it. I'm

not going to get into that debate about the Congo here -- I'm just

saying that's for another time but -- but -- but there's a time and place

for that. I'm not going to do it here, but it is part of my concerns with

this overall energy plan which this is a part of. And so I just say

public awareness is good but public awareness is also good to help

educate our constituents about the CLCPA how much it's going to cost

them, how it's going to jeopardize reliability of the grid, those things

you need to talk about because you're not. Alls you're talking about is

green and so-called clean energy. And it's not green and clean and it's

not -- certainly not reliable and it's certainly not affordable. So for

those reasons, Mr. Speaker, because there's too much uncertainty in

this to say that we're going to leave it up to the DEC, again I like

Commissioner Seggos as person. I don't have tremendous confidence

in the Department of Environmental Conservation on some of the

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

policies I've seen come out of them and certainly what they've done as

far as the CLCPA. There's too much at stake here for our families, our

farmers, our manufactures, our small businesses across the State and

for that reason I'm going to be voting no on this bill at this particular

time. Thank you.

(Applause)

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: Read the last

section.

THE CLERK: This act shall take effect immediately.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: Party vote

has been requested.

Mr. Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The

Republican Conference is generally opposed for the reasons

mentioned by my colleagues. Certainly those who support this

legislation can vote in favor of it here on the floor of the Assembly.

Thank you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: Thank you.

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. The Majority Conference is generally going to be in favor of

this piece of legislation. However, there may be a few that would

desire to be an exception. They should feel free to do so. Thank you,

sir.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: The Clerk

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

will record the vote.

(The Clerk recorded the vote.)

Mr. Lemondes to explain his vote.

MR. LEMONDES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like

to explain my vote. And one of -- one of the things that I can't support

this for is there are significant land masses that have not been taken

into account which again would reduce pressure on prime farmland.

One of them is simply Fort Drum, 107,000 acres; United States

Military Academy, 16,000 acres; Fort Hamilton, 120 acres. Two

installations right here in the Capital area NSA Saratoga Springs and

Watervliet Arsenal just down the street. I think for those installations

that have been -- that are -- that are federally-managed are oftentimes

the best conserved land that we have and are highly-managed by

federal conservation officers and programs, etc. That has not been

taken into account from what I can tell in this bill and should be.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: Are there any

other votes? Announce the results.

(The Clerk announced the results.)

The bill is passed.

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Mr. Speaker and

colleagues, if we could now turn our attention to Rules Report No. 92

by Ms. Fahy, as well as Rules Report No. 93 by Ms. Fahy.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: Page 4, Rules

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

Report No. 92, the Clerk will read.

THE CLERK: Senate S01346, Rules Report No. 92,

Senator Parker, (Fahy, Kelles, Steck -- A00993). An act to amend the

State Finance Law, in relation to decarbonization plans for

state-owned fleet vehicles; and to repeal certain provisions of the

Executive Law relating thereto.

ACTING SPEAKER MAGNARELLI: An

explanation has been requested, Ms. Fahy.

MS. FAHY: Sure. Mr. Speaker, this again is a

chapter amendment to the bill passed last year that requires -- it's

related to the State's implementation of its fleet decarbonization plan.

The chapter amendment would eliminate requirements for the Public

Authorities to prepare implementation decarbonization plan and just

focus on the State agencies themselves. It also requires some interim

targets but does not require -- does not establish a statutory concrete

timeline for the zero emission fleet conversion and it shifts the

planning requirement from Executive Law to State Finance Law. So

again, rather technical amendments directing OGS, DEC and

NYSERDA to prepare a State fleet procurement plan with the goal, I

should add, of -- of having zero emission vehicles by 2035, all new

emission vehicles by 2035 and larger vehicles by 2040.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Palmesano.

MR. PALMESANO: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Would the

sponsor yield for some questions?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy, will you

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

yield?

MS. FAHY: Yes.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The sponsor yields.

MR. PALMESANO: Thank you, thank you, Ms.

Fahy. I know you this said this is a chapter amendment, but the bill

we passed last year, if I'm not mistaken, said that the State of New

York would by 2025 ensure that 25 percent of their vehicles State fleet

would be electric vehicles; by 2030 50 percent of the State fleet would

be electric vehicles and by 2035 the entire fleet would be electric

vehicles or light-duty, correct?

MS. FAHY: Yes, that was last year's plan.

MR. PALMESANO: Right. And this one basically

removes the benchmark of having 50 percent by 2025 --

MS. FAHY: Yes.

MR. PALMESANO: -- and 50 percent by 2030. So

what was the reason for changing any of those benchmarks of 2025

and 2030?

MS. FAHY: It's flexibility. It's flexibility for the

Executive.

MR. PALMESANO: Right. So basically they have

more planning to make sure things can go -- get along -- go along

right that pathway so they can plan it out rather than say okay, I have

to have all these done by 2025 and this percentage by 2050. But also

-- so just to provide that flexibility in understanding the fact that

things could change and you want to have that flexibility and things

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

can -- you know, the grid might not be ready for it, there may be costs

associated with it so it just provides you're saying flexibility for them

and to take those benchmarks away, right?

MS. FAHY: Yes.

MR. PALMESANO: Okay. And for heavy-duty it's

2040, correct?

MS. FAHY: 2040, yes.

MR. PALMESANO: Okay. So for everyone else,

public, beginning in 2030, that's all new vehicles would have to be

electric purchased, correct?

MS. FAHY: You're asking for everyone, not the

State fleet now?

MR. PALMESANO: I think -- I think the way I

understand just so I get a better idea of this. I mean the reason I'm

asking these questions I often hear how the State's going to lead, the

State's going to lead. So, and it's really, quite frankly, the State should

lead with, you know, decarbonizing, (inaudible) our fleet before we

ask anyone else to do so. Wouldn't you agree with that?

MS. FAHY: Yes, but again this bill is only focused

on the State fleet.

MR. PALMESANO: Yes, yes. But I'm just trying to

understand so -- so heavy-duty is 2040 and it says unless it's not

feasible for a particular application. So that means that that would

provide flexibility to the State by saying okay, we can't have our

heavy-duty fleets be electric for these because of one, maybe there's

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

cost, maybe the reliability, the range issues, the infrastructure issues

because we know we need a tremendous amount of infrastructure both

(inaudible) installation and also to the grid, correct, so we can provide

some flexibility with that.

MS. FAHY: Again, there's flexibility but keep in

mind we've had a lot of chats over the years about electric vehicles

and the most recent reports show that electric vehicles now are a

comparable price to a traditional vehicle. And I think it was just today

I read that GM is planning to within one year has gone up more than

tenfold in terms of the electric vehicles they are producing. So

actually these goals may be more than achievable now given the

extraordinary rapid rate of change and with the prices lowering on

traditional or everyday electric vehicles as well as the way we are

seeing Detroit just pivot overnight to electric vehicles.

MR. PALMESANO: Right, right. I mean so I mean

the marketplace directive certainly would be the best place -- I think

the marketplace might be heading in that direction on its own but

we're mandating it here in the State of New York.

MS. FAHY: We are mandating it for electric

vehicles again because, once again, we are, you know, while we have

ambitious goals, we recognize we have to put our -- the incentives and

our own use of our own State dollars to make -- to help demonstrate

these goals are achievable.

MR. PALMESANO: Right. So, so just to go to the

heavy-duty. Heavy-duty for the State is 2040. Heavy-duty for the rest

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

of the State or heavy-duty for the State fleet is 2040, heavy-duty for

the rest of the public beginning after 2040 that's when their new

purchases have to be electric for heavy-duty based on the law, correct?

MS. FAHY: 2040, yes.

MR. PALMESANO: Okay. Now, school buses, and

I know this is about the State fleet but I think this brings up an

important example. If any of you have been taking to your school

districts lately, they're in a panic because the budget that was passed

last year by your side of the aisle with this issue, now every new

school bus beginning in 2027 has to be an electric vehicle school bus

purchase, correct?

MS. FAHY: The school buses are not addressed

here.

MR. PALMESANO: I understand that. I understand

that.

MS. FAHY: And yes, we have heard from some of

the school districts on that. But just as we've seen here locally with

the CDTA we know the prices of electric buses are coming down --

MR. PALMESANO: No, they're not.

MS. FAHY: -- and we will access. I mean --

MR. PALMESANO: They're not.

MS. FAHY: -- we've given flexibility just as we're

modifying this to get more flexibility. We'll get the flexibility I'm sure

with the school buses if it's not achievable but we said two years ago

we didn't think passenger vehicles would be affordable and now

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

they're saying they're quite comparable to the -- the passenger vehicles

are comparable to a traditional.

MR. PALMESANO: Let me ask you this question:

Would you define a school bus as a light duty vehicle or would that be

more classified as a heavy-duty vehicle?

MS. FAHY: It has its own classification. I think --

MR. PALMESANO: But if you had to put it in a

category, I know it has its own -- (inaudible) --when you -- (inaudible)

heavy-duty given the amount of batteries and weight of it, wouldn't

you say it's more heavy-duty?

MS. FAHY: Again, I -- they -- they do have

categories for those and I don't have it in front of me.

MR. PALMESANO: Of course.

MS. FAHY: Certainly it's not -- it's not a passenger

vehicle if that's what you're getting at. It's not -- it's certainly not a

traditional sedan so it is definitely much heavier than a passenger

vehicle.

MR. PALMESANO: Right. And I think my concern

is I mean here we are in this bill because you wanted flexibility, the

Governor wanted flexibility, she signed it with that caveat, so now

there's no benchmarks that you have to have your fleet 25 percent --

50 percent -- 25 percent of your fleet by 2025, 50 percent of your fleet

by 2030. They just have to have -- the State just has to have their

entire fleet converted by 2035, but yet for our school districts a

tremendous talk about the electrification unfunded mandate of all

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

mandates, that's what we're placing on our school districts. I know

this doesn't deal with school districts -- school buses, but it's

completely relevant and germane to the discussion because when we

talk about this issue over and over again, the State talks about how

we're going to lead. But yet we're taking our benchmarks out and

saying we're only going to need it by 2035 but every school district

now, every new bus we have to purchase has to be electric and they're

not coming down with all due respect. Last year they were around

$300-350,000. Now they're over $400-450,000 and becoming more.

And there's more to it than just cost, too. There's the reliability of

these vehicles as far as where they can go and travel to, you know, as

far as territory as well; wouldn't you agree?

MS. FAHY: We have absolutely have work to do but

we are over all across the board seeing the cost come down. And

remember, we have to take the --

MR. PALMESANO: That is just not true.

MS. FAHY: -- lifecycle here because the operating

costs are also lower and we've seen just locally here our CDTA, our

transit authority, the buses they have bought, if anything there's a

demand for more now just as we're seeing downstate a demand for

more because they're quieter, they're cleaner and in our -- in many of

the neighborhoods they are -- there's a welcome for that because of the

-- of the high rates of childhood asthma. So we've actually seen transit

buses become more in demand and more popular. Again, while the

cost is still higher absolutely, given what -- how quickly the

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

conversation has changed on passenger vehicles, our hope is, you

know, as we approach these deadlines, we'll see that conversation

changing with -- with costs and accessibility on -- on larger vehicles.

MR. PALMESANO: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Fahy.

MS. FAHY: Thank you.

MR. PALMESANO: Mr. Speaker, on the bill.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: On the bill, sir.

MR. PALMESANO: I know this bill and I know my

colleagues said well, this just a chapter amendment, why are we

debating it? In my opinion this is not just a chapter amendment. This

really substantially changes the bill because we totally removed the

targets saying by 2025, 50 percent of the electric vehicle fleet for the

State for light-duty had to be electric, 50 percent by 2030 had to be

electric and by 2035 the entire fleet, light-duty fleet had to be electric,

in 2040 the heavy-duty fleet has to be electric. You're totally

removing the benchmarks at 2025 and 2030 and for that actually I

commend the sponsor. That's what we should be doing. We should

be removing these mandates and these benchmarks and if they're goals

let's work towards it. Let's see how the market develops, let's make

sure the infrastructure develops. But what we're not doing and when

we -- when I hear -- we talk about the CLCPA and the clean energy

and the green energy, climate change, we always talk about how the

State is going to lead. I hear that come over and over from your guys

side of the aisle. The State's going to lead, we're going to lead. But

yet here we are leaving our school districts out on a limb. If you've

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

been talking to them they're scared to death about this electric vehicle

school bus mandate. The costs are exorbitant. It's going to increase

school budgets by -- transportation budgets by over $2.5 billion a year

according to the associations. The -- the -- the electric vehicle

infrastructure that needs to be in place is significant. We have one

school district in our region in the Horseheads School District, it was

said it was going to cost them $10 million just to bring the power in

from the grid into the school. Who's going to pay for that? Is that

going to get spread out all over the State like all these other policies

that are being implemented as far as like the Quebec line that comes

from Quebec, that's going to go from Quebec to New York City that's

already going to be increasing our electricity bills by ten percent on

the rates. So that's -- we're doing a disservice to our school districts.

We really need to put the brakes on the electric school bus. I hope

your side of the aisle looks at that issue, too, because they're -- they're

scared to death. Come 2027 every new school bus has to be electric.

They might get a two-year delay but that's not enough time. They

need time to implement this. The infrastructure's not in place. The

electric infrastructure's not in place because we got to triple our

energy grid, our generating capacity to meet this demand. And so I

would hope your side of the aisle would work with us and let's delay

this on our school buses and, quite frankly, at a minimum their whole

fleet shouldn't be -- the State of New York -- the school buses and

school districts shouldn't be ahead of the State of New York in

implementing their fleet. The -- the heavy-duty fleet for the State is

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

2040 but yet every school district has to have their whole fleet

converted by 2035? And I would imagine most of you say if you're

comparing a school bus fleet, it's more of a heavy-duty given the

batteries and the weight and everything else. So we shouldn't be

asking our school districts to do it before the State of New York can

do it and show they can do it successfully and responsibly. And the

State of New York has an out in this language because if not feasible.

Well, we should do it for our school districts as well. The

Commissioner of Education during the budget hearing raised the

alarm about this. She didn't want to come out and say no, that we

shouldn't be doing it, but it's on their radar screen and they're

concerned about it. I would urge your side of the aisle, please pump

the brakes on this mandate on our school districts. If you're talking to

your school districts and you're hearing them, they are scared to death

of this. There's not enough money to pay for it. I don't care how

much money you put into it. There's not enough money to pay for it.

It's -- it's a substantial cost. And it's not just the cost remember. It's

the range issue of the electric vehicles. Yes, maybe the technology is

getting better. Let's let the technology get better first before we put

this mandate on them.

You know, in rural areas like my - Steuben County is

1,400 square miles. What are you going to do to these schools now

that they're going to need more electric school buses to travel to these

rural areas. What about when there's transportation from, you know,

during a -- you might not think about this because a lot of times I

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

would say your side of the aisle doesn't think about the long-term

implications to some of this stuff. I mean what about sports? When

our sectional teams like they have to travel from Jamestown to

Syracuse. How many buses are they going to need to bring along the

way? How many issues from that perspective? So it's cost issues,

there's affordability issues, there's range issues and there's certainly

safety issues because we -- you've seen the fires that have been

happening with the lithium-ion batteries with -- down in New York

City. I know one of my colleagues have put in a bill, we've put in bills

on that. This is a big issue with our school buses. What if one of

those things catches on fire with our kids on it. I mean there's some

safety concerns. We need to make sure we're making -- mapping that

all first to make sure we're not going to have this type of risk to our

kids. I mean how are you all going to feel the first time there's a

school bus -- electric school bus fire and children die on it. Then what

are you going to do? Well, we should have thought about that before.

We can't be a reactant. We need to be proactive. Our children are our

most valuable people, we need to make sure we're protective of them.

And I will say, you know, from a -- from an ironic perspective, how

ironic is it that our kids are going to be riding on school buses with

batteries, batteries that produce -- are made from cobalt lithium and

we know that 70 percent of the cobalt is extracted in the Democratic

Republic of Congo using child labor -- using child labor -- they use

child labor --

(Applause)

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Gentlemen,

gentlemen.

MR. PALMESANO: And so they use child labor so

that visual kids from the Congo making these batteries that our -- our

kids here are riding on the school bus from a safety perspective. I

wish my colleagues -- and when I bring up the Congo, when I bring up

the child labor issue, I never hear your side of the aisle talk about

we're going to lead on that. Commissioner Seggos during testimony

says we're not going to lead on that, that's up to the Federal

government to do it. But when I talk about New York State being just

0.4 percent of the total global emissions, 0.4 and China being 29

percent of the global emissions, it has 1,000 coal plants and building

more. Two weeks ago they announced they're going to expand their

coal capacity by 70 gigawatts. How smart is this to go down this

pathway just to balance climate change on the backs of New Yorkers,

families, farmers, seniors, manufactures and small businesses and not

take into consideration the affordability, reliability energy grid and

just only talk about clean and green, which it's not clean and green

because these materials that also -- I talked about Congo producing it,

extracting it, but these elements that produce these batteries live in the

cobalt, they're produced from China. They control 87 percent of that

market just like they control 87 percent of the solar market. Those --

those elements, the materials are produced in China. How do they

produce them? Using coal energy. So it's almost like the end justifies

the means to all of you. It's like you don't care what the implications

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

are. You don't care that there's kids dying, being maimed in the

Congo as long as it's not happening in New York or the U.S. --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mrs. Peoples-Stokes,

why do you rise?

MR. PALMESANO: You don't care.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: I'm not going to have

this gentleman telling me what I don't care about. He can voice his

opinion on the bill, don't tell me how I feel.

MR. PALMESANO: Okay, all right. Fair enough.

I'll just leave it at that.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: I think that would be

MR. PALMESANO: I'm going to be voting no

because there's a lot of problems that need to be addressed. Thank

you.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Certainly.

Mr. Smullen.

MR. SMULLEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would

the sponsor yield for a few questions?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy, will you

yield?

MS. FAHY: Yes, certainly.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy yields.

MR. SMULLEN: Thank you, Ms. Fahy. I had a

couple technical questions that will lead to some responses, I believe.

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

In the summary of provisions it says this chapter amendment would

narrow the scope of the original legislation to exclude public

authorities. Could you explain that, please?

MS. FAHY: The last year's version included public

authorities in addition to State agencies and this would take up a

public authorities and keep the focus on directing the State agencies

just because we have so many public authorities it was a little more

(inaudible) and the focus is about directing OGS, DEC and

NYSERDA to prepare this State flee procurement.

MR. SMULLEN: So this is going to limit this bill to

simply those State agencies that New York State in front of their

name?

MS. FAHY: Essentially, yes.

MR. SMULLEN: Okay. So how many public

authorities are there in New York State? Not a trick question.

MS. FAHY: Yeah. There's a lot -- there's a lot. I

think it's in the --

MR. SMULLEN: And would you say that those

public authorities at which there are hundreds that are listed on the

public authority's control board website, do they have more vehicles

or less vehicles than the State of New York proper has?

MS. FAHY: I don't know.

MR. SMULLEN: The answer is they have a lot

more.

MS. FAHY: Okay. Combined, yes, combined --

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

MR. SMULLEN: They have a lot more. Would that

include the Metropolitan Transportation Authority will now no longer

have to decarbonize its fleet?

MS. FAHY: They're already -- yeah. They're already

tied to other provisions.

MR. SMULLEN: I'm just saying they're no longer

bound by -- we're passing a chapter amendment on a law from last

year that says New York shall decarbonize its public dollar funded

transportation assets. And now we're saying public authorities don't

have to be included.

MS. FAHY: Last year was focused on the State fleet,

this year is also focused on the State fleet as well and more -- and

again focused on the State agencies.

MR. SMULLEN: So if you're -- if you're in the

Metropolitan Transportation Authority that runs buses all over New

York City, do you now no longer have to comply with the elements of

the law that we passed last year?

MS. FAHY: They are aggressively moving towards

electric --

MR. SMULLEN: But they don't have to --

MS. FAHY: Let me finish -- let me finish. That's

under a different plan and under a different proposal. This is focused

on the State agencies.

MR. SMULLEN: So they're being let out the

decarbonization --

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

MS. FAHY: They are moving quite rapidly to

electrification. If anything the buses they're approved quite popular --

electric buses.

MR. SMULLEN: And I -- and I fully agree. They

ought to be moving first and they ought to be moving fastest and they

ought to be doing the most to decarbonize in the dense urban areas,

that's a good thing.

MS. FAHY: Thus far they are.

MR. SMULLEN: But what my colleague pointed out

and which I just like to emphasize is, we're saying as a Body that this

fleet of vehicles in the dense urban area that moves millions of people

everyday, if it's not good for them they don't have to do it but they can

do it on their timeline. But we're saying to the vast majority of public

school districts in Upstate New York, you will decarbonize by 2027

because you're going to now be forced to buy electric school buses.

MS. FAHY: First of all, this is not about school

buses. This is about the State fleet. Second of all, the MTA is on its

own timeline which as I understand is a more aggressive timeline

which they've been rapidly moving ahead on and moving -- they're

moving faster and further than we are at this point. This is to the State

fleet under State agencies. As far as I'm concerned we should all be

moving, but the school buses that was addressed last year. There's

also a waiver process embedded in that legislation so where a waiver

is needed per the comments from the previous speaker, that can be

addressed as well where, you know, in -- in certain areas where it

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

becomes a --a feasibility issue. There is a waiver process. It's the

same as we -- it's similar to what we came back at here as to try to

provide some flexibility and to better focus to this legislation but that

doesn't mean that the MTA or others or school buses aren't also

moving toward electric vehicles --

MR. SMULLEN: And who pays for that? And

here's the question and this is (inaudible). And this is why this issue is

-- is so regionally-based is who is paying for the MTA's transition to

electric buses? And they're asking the State to bear that cost. And I

understand why, but it's really hard to see --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: So, hold it. One

minute, one minute. You asked the question and then you answered

your own question. So she can sit down if you want to go on the bill.

MR. SMULLEN: Mr. Speaker, on the bill.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Go on the bill. I

think that's -- thank you, sir.

MR. SMULLEN: My -- my -- my point is here and --

and this is -- is no discredit to the S=sponsor or to the idea of

decarbonization, but it's a fundamental fairness issue of having to do

with regions of New York State. They have different levels of

technology and different timelines to do this actual transition. And

this is what's been so irritating about the climate leadership in the

Community Protection Act and the subsequent actions of the Climate

Action Council and now what the legislature is forcing some areas of

the State to do prematurely before the technology is ready. And it's

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

fundamentally unfair that organizations like the New York Power

Authority, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and all of the

State-funded entities that run transportation fleets, whether they're

light-duty, whether they're medium-duty or whether they're

heavy-duty are now required to do this at the same speed and rapidity

in which publicly-funded school districts are required to do so under

New York State law as of today. So what we should be doing is

repealing the requirement that all electric school buses be done at the

same time, and then we can talk about fairness and we can talk about

equity for rural communities. So yes, Mr. Speaker. This is a big issue

and it was brought on us this afternoon with very little preparation for

debate. And if you wonder why there is suddenly such resistance to

these ideas and this hypocrisy, now you know why. Because you're

asking my school districts to pay and you're letting the people in the

dense urban areas --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Smullen, we can

hear you. You don't need to scream.

MR. SMULLEN: I really appreciate that, Mr.

Speaker, because apparently we're not being heard and now you are. I

am voting against this bill. It's preposterous, hypocritical and

completely, completely preposterous. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you, sir.

Mr. Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would

the sponsor yield?

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy, will you

yield?

MS. FAHY: Yes, thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy in all

graciousness yields.

(Laughter)

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Ms. Fahy.

MS. FAHY: You're welcome.

MR. GOODELL: This chapter amendment requires

these plans to be prepared by every State agency in the next eight or

nine months by the end of this year, correct?

MS. FAHY: Yes. Yes. The date is still -- yes, but

again this bill has been in the works for I think three years. It's been

on our bill list for the last month so with regard to the last comment

this bill has been on Third Reading for -- for at least a month but yes,

yes.

MR. GOODELL: And this bill now requires that in

less than nine months each State agency have a plan on how to

convert all of their vehicles to all electric within 12 years, correct?

MS. FAHY: Yes, 20 -- yes, and more for heavier

duty vehicles. And let me -- if I may, let me just -- I eluded to this

earlier on how plans are so rapidly changing. There's been so much

criticism of GM and Detroit over the last few years about moving very

slowly on electric vehicles. As we all know they are ramping up

dramatically. And it was coincidental because with regard to today's

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

debate but just today I read that Ford plans to have its factories on

pace to crank out 600,000 electric vehicles by the end of this year --

this calendar year which is a sixfold, sixfold increase from what they

had in 2022. And they plan to be on pace for two million vehicles by

2026. So, you know, when we first debated this bill over a year ago

there was quite a price difference on electric vehicle -- passenger

vehicles. Now we are seeing the reports that they are comparable

costs. We are moving there. There is a -- there's a waiver process on

school buses. We have shown flexibility, we are trying to put in the

incentives. We received a lot of money under the Inflation Reduction

Act in terms of a domestic made batteries. And in fact we've been

awarded some of those right here in Rochester. We are growing jobs

in this State as a result of these initiatives and these investments.

Thank you.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you. Now a few weeks ago

we passed a bill requiring that as part of this transition that New York

State only buy American-made electric vehicles primarily composed

of American-made components. And a few weeks ago you

acknowledged that there are currently no vehicles that meet that

criteria. So my question then is how do we expect the agencies to

develop plans to comply with our prior legislation when there are no

vehicles that meet that criteria?

MS. FAHY: This bill has been in play for about two

to three years. Again, given the extraordinary pivoting of Detroit and

others, and the fact that they are ramping up so quickly, faster than --

100

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

than anticipated, the agencies are telling us they can meet this. That is

part of why we modified some of this. But as you yourself just noted

we've got a minimum of 12 years here. Within just a few years of

these debates of having some of this legislation, we're now seeing

passenger vehicles comparably priced to traditional vehicles. So I

tend to be an optimist.

MR. GOODELL: Yes, and I appreciate the points

you've been making up. Now the original law that we passed required

OGS to do this implementation. And this chapter amendment takes it

away from OGS and has every agency developing a plan. But don't all

State agencies rely on OGS or State offices and State buildings?

MS. FAHY: It is the three -- it is the three in

conjunction that are doing it. Yeah. The agencies requested this type

of flexibility because of their own fleets but it's still being led,

essentially being led by --

MR. GOODELL: But all the buildings are still under

the jurisdiction of OGS, right?

MS. FAHY: Yes.

MR. GOODELL: And in order to implement this

plan, all those buildings and the related parking has to be converted to

electric charging stations, correct?

MS. FAHY: Yes. Many of them already --

MR. GOODELL: So how is it that the individual

agencies can come up with a thoughtful plan on how to make a

conversion when the conversion relies on a separate agency OGS that

101

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

has to make the infrastructure changes? Shouldn't the planning

remain with OGS so that the implementation of the infrastructure

corresponds to the conversion of the vehicles? Why are we separating

it into two agencies rather than keeping it in one agency?

MS. FAHY: Again, the infrastructure -- every

agency is working on this now and as you know we've received

billions, there's been billions allocated for this infrastructure just last

fall as a part of the Inflation Reduction Act so we're also receiving

billions federally to help with this infrastructure, but the agencies

themselves have requested this type of flexibility. I would assume the

entire plan is still being primarily led by OGS since they are -- they

have the bulk of the -- the State fleet as well as in consult with DEC

and NYSERDA.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Ms. Fahy. I appreciate

your comment.

MS. FAHY: I should add and NYPA who is also

working on the infrastructure.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Ms. Fahy.

On the bill.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: On the bill, Mr.

Goodell.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, sir. So this bill

actually makes a couple of chapter amendments to the original bill.

The first chapter amendment is it eliminates the required phase-in of

electric vehicles until 2035 for light vehicles, in 2040 for heavy-duty.

102

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

So it eliminates the required phase-in. And it instead replaces that

phase-in with a requirement that within nine months all the State

agencies develop a plan that doesn't need to be implemented in full for

12 to 17 years. And based on legislation we passed a few weeks ago

that plan has to show how they're going to convert to American-made

electric vehicles with American-made components even though we

acknowledge that no such vehicles are commercially manufactured in

the United States today. And they're supposed to come up with a plan

in nine months on how they're going to make this conversion when

each agency relies on an entirely separate State agency OGS to make

all the infrastructure changes necessary to provide the charging. And

this chapter amendment takes that whole process away from OGS and

gives it to State agencies who have no control over OGS even though

OGS is the one that has to make the infrastructure changes. Now

we're told that the industry is changing dramatically, that prices are

going up by the way for school buses, they went up about six percent

on a State bid, that just came out a few months ago, but we're told

they're going down on light-duty and that the changes are massive. So

why are we coming up with a plan in such a changing environment

when we know that the plan won't be worth the paper it's written on

within a few months after it's written. Instead of making plans that go

out 12 years on a changing landscape, set goalposts, set requirements,

make more sense. So we're in a situation where this bill fractures the

process, takes responsibility away from OGS for the implementation

of the conversion, but leaves the actual infrastructure to OGS, fails to

103

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

acknowledge that the components necessary for this transition like

transformers, which I'm told now have a two-year lead time

completely ignores that. It eliminates all the benchmarks that we had

in the original bill, requires agencies to come up with a plan on how

they're going to convert when they don't have the electric

infrastructure and we prohibit them by law from buying any vehicles

that are currently commercially available. And then at the same

token, as my colleagues mentioned, we set a hard deadline for all the

electric school buses. And in my district, most of my district in the

Southern tier, we're powered by coal out of Pennsylvania. So we raise

the price of school buses from 120,000 to 400,000 so they can run on

coal and send billions of dollars to China to finance their huge coal

construction. And we import a massive amount of product from the

worst polluter in the world so we can run our school buses on coal on

a timeline that's completely indefensible. And while we're patting

ourselves on the back we excuse ourselves from having to actually

make any changes for at least 12 years and instead of having

guidelines that are enforceable against ourself, we replace it with a

planning obligation by each agency to come up with a realistic plan on

how they're going to act over the next dozen years within guidelines

that we know are impossible currently to meet. Other than that I think

it's a good idea. I should say somewhat facetiously. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, and again, I do appreciate my colleague's comments and I

recognize that these chapter amendments were not initiated by my

colleague, but she gets the great opportunity to try to defend them here

104

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

on the floor when -- when I suspect some of the changes were kind of

forced by the Second Floor Governor's Office. So thank you to my

colleague, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you.

Ms. Byrnes.

MS. BYRNES: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Would the sponsor yield just for a couple questions?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy?

MS. FAHY: Certainly.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy yields, Ms.

Byrnes.

MS. BYRNES: My question is obviously we're

talking about decarbonization by moving to electric. Would -- in your

opinion, does hydrogen constitute electric? Hydrogen buses, other

vehicles run by hydrogen, do they constitute electric?

MS. FAHY: Yes.

MS. BYRNES: So if there are, for example, city

buses that run via hydrogen, they would meet whatever requirements

might be necessary in the future.

MS. FAHY: Yes.

MS. BYRNES: For school buses.

MS. FAHY: Oh, are we talking -- oh, sorry. You're

talking about the school --

MS. BYRNES: Well, no. I mean, let's just talk about

the city buses.

105

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

MS. FAHY: Sorry, I thought you were talking about

the fleet, but either way the hydrogen --

MS. BYRNES: Well, either way, there are also

vehicles, there's a number of vehicles that are also out there that run

on hydrogen. I mean, does hydrogen under the law constitute

electric?

MS. FAHY: Yes. We have a new, brand-new plant

just a few miles from here that's about on track with already hundreds

of employees on track to create 1,200 jobs in the next year all because

of our investments in the green hydrogen, so yes.

MS. BYRNES: So what will the State be doing then

in order to try not to just effectuate the use and purchase of plug-in

batteries, but also the use, potential use of hydrogen-powered

batteries? Because obviously the infrastructure necessary is going to

be 100 percent different, my understanding is, from just being plugged

in to this huge infrastructure grid that we don't have, hydrogen

requires a different process and they can even do it mobiley. So what

would the State being doing to effectuate all options?

MS. FAHY: That's, again, part of a planning process

and that flexibility at this point is something we want to see. Plug

Power just opened a new plant, again, right on the edge of my district,

my former district, and are moving toward from zero to 1,200 jobs

practically I think within a year. So yes, there's huge potential for that

and -- and there's flexibility. Again, that's part of this planning

process. That's why this industry, as I keep saying, this industry is

106

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

changing so extraordinarily rapidly, and we are seeing billions in

investment to -- to get to achieve these goals.

MS. BYRNES: And the last question I'll have and

then we'll move on, is that if things are changing so fast, but also, our

-- our schools, our municipalities, the fleet that you want to convert,

these decisions, and everything is going to have to be done so quickly,

how in the world when things -- when the deadlines are so short and

so mandatory at this point and so quick, is there even an opportunity

to look out there and make educated decisions financially on the best

ways to proceed?

MS. FAHY: Again, this is about the State fleet. The

goals are 2035, 2040. So 12 years, 17 years.

MS. BYRNES: Well, maybe --

MS. FAHY: That's -- the planning is this year, but

that doesn't mean it's a -- the plan is in blood, it's, you know, certainly

it will be adjusted as, you know, as the environment changes or as the,

you know, as State fleets are retired and new ones are -- are brought

on. But I, you know, and sorry, I was reflecting on in just 2019, we

adopted the CLCPA goals --

MS. BYRNES: Right.

MS. FAHY: -- and at that time those were

considered quite, quite ambitious. We are moving very rapidly toward

those goals. I see this very similarly.

MS. BYRNES: And for the State fleet, you're talking

about this timeline, but in other aspects that are being jammed, people

107

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

believe, jammed down their throats, you have much shorter times

where they have to make major decisions of 450,000 vehicles, you

know, with no infrastructure, with no idea what's going on. Does that

seem very fair to them?

MS. FAHY: Again, this is about the State fleet, but if

you are referring to school buses again, not part of this bill --

MS. BYRNES: Right.

MS. FAHY: -- But if you are referring to that, keep

in mind a waiver process was embedded in that and there is new

funding being freed up on that, so I'm -- I'm working with my school

districts as well, and where we need to give flexibility, we will do that,

they have time to do that. It's -- they're not trying to make those

purchases --

MS. BYRNES: But isn't the waiver only like for one,

maybe two years and only a one-time deal? And then after that you're

S-O-L and you have no other opportunities for waivers.

MS. FAHY: That's, again, not this bill so I forget the

specifics of it but --

MS. BYRNES: But you can understand our

frustration.

MS. FAHY: I represent -- I represent multiple school

districts, I have an urban, rural, suburban school district. Where we

need flexibility, I will be working with them. In the meantime,

though, we want to move forward. We have found with the Transit

Authority, transit buses have proved immensely popular, especially

108

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

given our asthma rates, especially given quiet zones, so they have so

far proved immensely popular. I'm hoping we'll see the same with the

State fleet and again with other legislation this -- the school buses.

MS. BYRNES: Thank you for your courtesies.

MS. FAHY: Thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Woerner.

MS. WOERNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the

sponsor yield for one question?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy, will you

yield for one question, Ms. Woerner?

MS. WOERNER: Yes, thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Okay. I'll hold you

to that.

MS. FAHY: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I

will yield.

MS. WOERNER: I think there may be some

confusion on the floor, I just want to clarify. This bill has nothing to

do with electric school buses; is that correct?

MS. FAHY: That is quite correct.

MS. WOERNER: Thank you very much.

MS. FAHY: Thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: You're a woman of

your word, Ms. Woerner.

Mr. Pirozzolo.

MR. PIROZZOLO: Mr. Speaker, if I may, on the

109

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

bill.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: On the bill, sir.

MR. PIROZZOLO: So, I would like to call this bill

out for what it is. It's just bad. Now I'm not calling it bad because of

the green energy initiatives, which you could consider admirable, I'm

calling it bad because it's an attack once again on the private sector.

This bill is going to negatively affect small business and independent

business while we, as the government Body, look down upon the

small people and say you must do this, but we are not going to do this

for ourselves. And we know what's going to happen in 12 years or 17

years, we're just going to vote to extend and push the can down the

road, just like we have with class-size bills, okay? I don't know how

many times it's probably happened in this Chamber. But I think that

anyone who votes in favor of this amendment that lets the government

off the hook on -- we should be taking the lead and we should be

showing the private sector this is how you do it. We should be

holding ourselves to the same standards that we impose upon

everybody else. And until the day that happens, anybody who votes

for this should be ashamed of themselves for what they are doing to

their district. I will be voting no.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Eachus.

MR. EACHUS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the

sponsor yield?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy, will you

yield?

110

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

MS. FAHY: Certainly.

MR. EACHUS: Thank you. First of all, I'd like to

thank my colleague, Ms. Byrnes, for bringing up the fact that I believe

this bill, am I correct, says zero emission vehicles.

MS. FAHY: Yes, you're correct.

MR. EACHUS: Okay, so I don't know why so many

people are so up about electric vehicles. There are other zero

emission vehicles being made right now. I believe you made

reference to, perhaps a hydrogen plant that's producing hydrogen

engines, which by the way, do produce electricity. They do not need

batteries, they produce electricity themselves as long as they're

supplied with hydrogen. We have such things as biodiesel, and those

are out there. And if I'm correct, all you're asking is for these agencies

to come up with a plan in nine months, or a little bit less, on how

they're going to change, not necessarily to electric, but I'm sure there

will be electric involved, but to zero emission vehicles.

MS. FAHY: That is correct, and I will just add this

bill has been in play for a few years. The original bill was passed last

year, so they have had, in terms of notice on this, for over a year now.

But yes, that is correct, the plan itself would be due at the end of this

year.

MR. EACHUS: I thank you very much.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Eachus, thank

you, sir.

MS. FAHY: Thank you.

111

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Read the last section.

THE CLERK: This act shall take effect immediately.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: A Party vote has

been requested.

Mr. Goodell, just in time.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, sir. It's always good to

be on time. The Republican Conference will be generally opposed,

but those who support this are certainly encouraged to vote in favor on

the floor. Thank you.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you, sir.

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. The Majority Conference is going be in favor of this piece

of legislation. There could be a few who want to be an exception,

they certainly have the opportunity to vote at their preference. Thank

you, sir.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Thank you.

The Clerk will record the vote.

(The Clerk recorded the vote.)

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes to explain her vote.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, for the opportunity to explain my vote. I just have to remind

myself that I'm so grateful that none of us were in the room back in

1941 when a similar conversation was going on about lead paint,

whether lead should be in paint. Here we are in 2023 and we're still

112

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

paying for that decision that protected business and gave public away.

We're still spending money on education, we're still spending money

on health care. We're still spending money on trying to rehab and get

paint out of communities. We're still seeing children suffer from lead

poisoning so at some point, the responsibile people in the room have

to make some decisions as to what we're using right now in our

everyday lives and how it impacts our health status, and how it

impacts our environment. So I'm grateful to be here in 2023 and

having the opportunity to support this piece of legislation by my

colleague Fahy. Zero emissions, there's nothing wrong with wanting

to accomplish that goal. It's a great goal, let's go for it and

congratulations to the young lady who sponsored the legislation.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mrs. Peoples-Stokes

in the affirmative.

Mr. Goodell to explain his vote.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, sir. This is somewhat

of an interesting bill because what it actually does is eliminate all the

hard phase-in deadlines that were contained in the original. So those

who are environmentalists might be quite upset that instead of making

a commitment to have 25 percent of our vehicles zero emission by

2025, we've eliminated that. And we've eliminated the requirement

that we'd be 50 percent at 2030. And we've eliminated any

requirement at all for heavy-duty vehicles until 2040. So rather than

forge ahead with leadership in meeting our own objectives, this bill

does the opposite. And so I support the environment and I think we

113

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

need to lead by example. And why many of my Republican

colleagues are opposed to this is not because this bill is taking the

lead, it's gone backwards. And they're upset not only is it going

backwards, but we're imposing different standards on everyone else.

So the public authorities have been eliminated from this requirement

to go green, they've all been eliminated. The original statute required

them to meet those deadlines, this eliminates that. Yet, when it comes

to rural school districts, those buses that went from 120,000 to

$400,000 a piece, that standard stays in place. Let's lead by example,

let's treat everyone fairly and equitably, let's do it in a rationale basis,

and let's pretend -- stop pretending that we're leading by example

when we pass a bill that eliminates all the requirements that were

contained in the original bill and put them all off for 12 to 17 years.

Thank you, sir.

(Applause)

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Walker to

explain her vote.

MS. WALKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I grew up

in Brownsville, Brooklyn, as most people know, and in Brownsville

we have a rate of asthma, even for adults, at 14 out of every 100

people suffer from asthma. And as a child, I was one of those

individuals. There are roads that go through our community such as

Linden Boulevard which, you know, lots of trucks, some of them

State-owned, some not, are emitting dirty air into the atmosphere.

And particulate matter, once it's emitted into the atmosphere, once it's

114

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

breathed in, it affects your lungs, you start seeing symptoms such as

runny noses and a lot of things that might resemble to you to be

something like the common cold, but not realizing that it is your

environment that's making you feel this way. And so from an

environmental justice perspective, since we know that there are a lot

of roadways that are going through many communities that are Black

and Brown within the State of New York. I want to commend the

sponsor on her forward thinking because, quite frankly, we do look

forward to a time when all states, all vehicles, are no longer emitting

dirty atmos -- dirty air into the atmosphere. But I think we, as a State,

have an opportunity to lead the way and be the example that we are

seeking for everyone to be and become, and so it comes a time when

we need to walk the talk. And so congratulations and I look forward

to its passage. I vote in the affirmative.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Walker in the

affirmative.

Ms. Fahy to explain her vote and close.

MS. FAHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I rise

in support of this bill and quite pleased and proud of it. And let me

just use a line that we used last year in talking about this. The

transportation sector accounts for approximately 36 percent of New

York's total annual greenhouse gas emissions, 36 percent. So this

commitment, this type of plan is long overdue. I'm a little surprised to

hear that something we're rolling back so excessively to make this not

as effective. This again, applies to all State agencies. Yes, we are

115

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

trying to get flexibility just as we've given some flexibility on school

buses with waiver authority, and we're giving incentives all along the

way, including additional incentives on batteries as the -- as the

battery development -- as the Feds have just done.

So this is, again, is long in the works. Just as we've

adopted ambitious CLCPA goals in 2019, we are on target to meet

those. Do we have a lot of work to do? Absolutely we have a lot of

work to do. Will we all be healthier? As my colleague just pointed

out as a result, yes, or we wouldn't be making this multibillions of

dollars in investments if it wasn't to make ourselves healthier and if it

wasn't to prevent additional weather-related environmental disasters

that are costing this State and costing this country billions upon

billions. I think our previous Governor said in his first ten years in

office, 50 billion of State dollars were spent on weather-related

disasters. We're either going to address climate change one way and

make our residents healthier or address it another.

Again, this is New York leading, this is leading with

a plan to get us there starting with our State agencies and having goals

that we are already seeing, Detroit is meeting in a -- in a rather rapid

way. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And with that I again vote in the

affirmative.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Ms. Fahy in the

affirmative.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

(The Clerk announced the results.)

116

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

The bill is passed.

Mr. Goodell for an announcement.

MR. GOODELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would

you recognize Mr. Norris for an important reminder?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mr. Norris for an

important reminder.

MR. NORRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Republican

Conference will meet at 5:30 sharp, and that is on time at 5:30.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Republican

Conference at 5:30 sharp in the parlor.

MR. NORRIS: No, via Zoom, via Zoom.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Via Zoom.

MR. NORRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: Mr. Speaker, do you

have any resolutions or further housekeeping?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: Housekeeping, first I

believe of this year.

On a motion by Mr. Dinowitz, page 7, Calendar No.

11, Bill No. 1880, the amendments are received and adopted.

Numerous fine resolutions, we will take them up with

one vote.

On the resolutions, all those in favor signify by saying

aye; opposed, no. The resolutions are adopted.

(Whereupon, Assembly Resolution Nos. 191-193

117

NYS ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 2023

were unanimously adopted.)

Mrs. Peoples-Stokes.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: I now move that the

Assembly stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m., Thursday, March the 16th,

tomorrow being a Session day.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: The Assembly stands

adjourned.

(Whereupon, at 5:16 p.m., the Assembly stood

adjourned until Thursday, March 16th at 10:00 a.m., Thursday being a

Session day.)

118