TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2026                                                                       10:58 A.M.



                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE HOUSE WILL

                    COME TO ORDER.

                                 GOOD MORNING, COLLEAGUES.

                                 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 MEMBERS IN THE PLEDGE OF

                    ALLEGIANCE.

                                 (WHEREUPON, ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER LED VISITORS AND

                    MEMBERS IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.)

                                 A QUORUM BEING PRESENT, THE CLERK WILL READ THE

                    JOURNAL OF MONDAY, APRIL 27TH.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                          1



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. FALL:  MADAM SPEAKER, I MOVE TO DISPENSE

                    WITH THE FURTHER READING OF THE JOURNAL OF MONDAY, APRIL 27TH AND THAT

                    THE SAME STAND APPROVED.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WITHOUT OBJECTION,

                    SO ORDERED.

                                 MR. FALL:  TODAY WE HAVE A QUOTE BY BENJAMIN

                    FRANKLIN, AND THE QUOTE SAYS, "AN INVESTMENT IN KNOWLEDGE PAYS THE

                    BEST INTEREST."  AND THESE WORDS ARE BY BENJAMIN FRANKLIN.

                                 MADAM SPEAKER, MEMBERS HAVE ON THEIR DESK A MAIN

                    CALENDAR AND A DEBATE LIST.  BEFORE ANY HOUSEKEEPING AND/OR

                    INTRODUCTIONS WE WILL BE CALLING FOR THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEES TO MEET

                    OFF THE FLOOR TODAY:  WAYS AND MEANS, ENERGY, HEALTH, JUDICIARY,

                    LABOR, MENTAL HEALTH, SOCIAL SERVICES, TRANSPORTATION, VETERANS'

                    AFFAIRS AND CODES.  WE WILL BEGIN OUR FLOOR WORK BY TAKING UP

                    CALENDAR RESOLUTIONS ON PAGE 3.  WE WILL THEN CONTINUE TO CONSENT

                    WHERE WE LEFT OFF YESTERDAY WITH CALENDAR NO. 371 ON PAGE 39.  AFTER

                    THAT, WE WILL TAKE UP THE FOLLOWING BILLS ON DEBATE:  CALENDAR NO. 318

                    BY MS. GLICK, RULES REPORT NO. 98 BY MR. DINOWITZ, AND RULES REPORT

                    NO. 99 BY MS. ROSENTHAL.  I WILL ANNOUNCE ANY FURTHER FLOOR ACTIVITY AS

                    WE PROCEED.  MAJORITY MEMBERS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT THERE WILL BE A

                    NEED FOR A CONFERENCE ONCE WE CONCLUDE OUR WORK ON THE FLOOR.  AS

                    ALWAYS, I WILL CONSULT WITH THE -- WITH THE MINORITY ON THEIR

                    CONFERENCE NEEDS.

                                 SO WITH THAT AS A GENERAL OUTLINE, MS. SPEAKER, LET'S

                    BEGIN BY CALLING FOR THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE TO MEET IN THE

                                          2



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    FALL.

                                 WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE MEMBERS, PLEASE MAKE

                    YOUR WAY TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.  WAYS AND MEANS

                    COMMITTEE MEMBERS, SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.  WE HAVE NO

                    HOUSEKEEPING THIS MORNING -- EXCUSE ME -- WE HAVE SEVERAL

                    INTRODUCTIONS.  SO LET US START WITH MS. WALSH FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN

                    INTRODUCTION.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM

                    SPEAKER, AND GOOD MORNING, COLLEAGUES.  I'M SO EXCITED THAT A GROUP IS

                    HERE TODAY FROM THE TOWN OF GALWAY IN THE 112TH ASSEMBLY DISTRICT

                    THAT I'M HONORED TO INTRODUCE.  THE GALWAY SENIORS, WHO YOU'LL SEE UP

                    ABOVE HERE, ARE AN INCREDIBLY VIBRANT AND BUSY, BUSY GROUP OF SENIORS.

                    THEY'VE COME TO THE CAPITOL TODAY FOR A CAPITOL TOUR, GUIDED BY THEIR

                    FEARLESS LEADER LIZZY FEULNER, WHO'S HERE AND -- AND MANY OF MY

                    FRIENDS.  THESE SENIORS TRAVEL, THEY DO A LOT OF TRIPS DURING THE YEAR.

                    I'M SO GLAD THAT THEY ADDED ALBANY AND A TRIP TO THE CAPITOL TO THEIR

                    BUSY AGENDA.

                                 AND, MADAM SPEAKER, IF YOU COULD PLEASE WELCOME

                    THE GALWAY SENIORS TO THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE AND AFFORD TO THEM ALL THE

                    CORDIALITIES OF THE HOUSE.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  YES, OF COURSE.

                                 ON BEHALF OF MS. WALSH, THE SPEAKER AND ALL

                    MEMBERS, I CAN'T SEE YOU BEHIND ME UP THERE, BUT WE WELCOME YOU TO

                                          3



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    THE ASSEMBLY CHAMBER AND EXTEND TO YOU THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR.

                    PLEASED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE YOU IN OUR MIDST TODAY AND PUTTING YOU ON

                    THE TOUR ROTATION.  SO THANK YOU, GALWAY SENIORS, FOR BEING HERE TODAY.

                    ENJOY OUR PROCEEDINGS.  THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TODAY.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 MR. BURDICK FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

                                 MR. BURDICK:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  IT IS

                    MY HONOR TO INTRODUCE KOJI SATO, A DISTINGUISHED RESIDENT OF MY

                    DISTRICT.  HE'S BEEN A RESIDENT FOR OVER 35 YEARS OF CHAPPAQUA, AND

                    SERVES AS PRESIDENT OF THE JAPANESE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NEW

                    YORK, WHICH HAS A 119-YEAR HISTORY IN THE STATE.  HE IS HERE TODAY WITH

                    COLLEAGUES TO ADVOCATE FOR THE FRED KOREMATSU DAVIS CIVIL LIBERTIES

                    AND THE CONSTITUTION IN COMMEMORATION OF THE JAPANESE AMERICAN

                    CITIZEN FRED KOREMATSU WHO DURING WORLD WAR II REFUSED PLACEMENT

                    IN A JAPANESE INTERNMENT CAMP.

                                 MADAM SPEAKER, KINDLY WELCOME MR. SATO AND

                    EXTEND TO HIM THE PRIVILEGES AND CORDIALITIES OF THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON BEHALF OF MR.

                    BURDICK, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, WELCOME, MR. SATO, TO THE

                    ASSEMBLY CHAMBER, OUR PEOPLE'S HOUSE, EXTENDING TO YOU, SIR, THE

                    PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR.  WE HOPE YOU ENJOY OUR PROCEEDINGS TODAY.

                    THANK YOU FOR DOING ALL OF THE IMPORTANT WORK THAT YOU ARE DOING WITH

                    THE JAPANESE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK.  THANK YOU FOR

                    JOINING US TODAY.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                          4



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MS. LEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

                                 MS. LEE:  GOOD MORNING, MADAM SPEAKER.  IT IS MY

                    HONOR TO INTRODUCE SAKI MORI, DIRECTOR OF THE JAPANESE AMERICAN

                    CITIZENS LEAGUE.  SAKI HAS SERVED AS THE DIRECTOR OF THE JAPANESE

                    AMERICAN CITIZENS LEAGUE SINCE SEPTEMBER OF 2025, OVERSEEING A

                    NATIONAL ORGANIZATION WITH OVER 100 CHAPTERS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES.

                                 JAPANESE AMERICAN CITIZEN [SIC] LEAGUE, OR JACL, IS

                    THE OLDEST AND LARGEST ASIAN AMERICAN CIVIL RIGHTS ORGANIZATION IN THE

                    COUNTRY.  FOUNDED IN 1929, THE ORGANIZATION HAS ADVOCATED FOR THE

                    CIVIL RIGHTS OF JAPANESE AMERICANS, ASIAN AMERICANS AND ALL

                    AMERICANS FOR NEARLY 100 YEARS.  JACL PROMOTES EDUCATION OF BOTH

                    CIVIL RIGHTS AND JAPANESE AMERICAN HISTORY, INCLUDING THE HISTORY OF

                    JAPANESE INTERNMENT AND FRED KOREMATSU'S FIGHT AGAINST INJUSTICE.

                                 I'M VERY GRATEFUL TO HAVE SAKI MORI AND THE JAPANESE

                    AMERICAN CITIZENS LEAGUE JOINING US HERE TODAY.  MADAM SPEAKER,

                    PLEASE WELCOME SAKI MORI AND EXTEND TO HER THE PRIVILEGES OF THE

                    FLOOR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON BEHALF OF MS.

                    LEE, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, WELCOME, MS. MORI, TO THE

                    ASSEMBLY CHAMBER, EXTENDING TO YOU THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR.

                    HOPING YOU ENJOY OUR PROCEEDINGS TODAY.  AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR ALL OF

                    THE IMPORTANT WORK THAT YOU ARE DOING WITH THE JAPANESE AMERICAN

                    CITIZENS LEAGUE.  VERY IMPORTANT AND WONDERFUL TO SEE YOU HERE

                    TODAY.  THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                          5



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. GIBBS FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

                                 MR. GIBBS:  GOOD MORNING, MADAM SPEAKER.  IT'S

                    AN HONOR AND A PRIVILEGE TO STAND BEFORE YOU THIS MORNING.  I'M ALSO

                    EXCITED TO RECOGNIZE MRS. AUBRY, THE LOVELY WIFE OF OUR MEMBER

                    JEFFREY [SIC] AUBRY, THIS MORNING.

                                 ON BEHALF OF ASSEMBLYMEMBER BRIAN CUNNINGHAM

                    AND ASSEMBLYMEMBER JORDAN WRIGHT, I AM PLEASED TO INTRODUCE

                    SOYINI CHUN-SHUE -- EXCUSE ME, SOYINI CHAN-SHUE.  SOYINI IS THE

                    FOUNDER AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF CITY SAFE PARTNERS, A HARLEM-

                    BASED MINORITY- WOMEN-OWNED SECURITY FIRM DEDICATED TO ADVANCING

                    SAFETY AND STABILITY IN COMMUNITIES.  THE COMPANY SPECIALIZES IN

                    COMPREHENSIVE RISK MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES, OPERATING

                    ACROSS NEW YORK, NEW JERSEY, TEXAS AND GEORGIA.

                                 CITY SAFE PARTNERS PROVIDES HIGHLY-TRAINED PERSONNEL

                    INCLUDING ACTIVE AND RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT AND MILITARY

                    PROFESSIONALS, AND EMPLOYS FORWARD-THINKING, TECHNOLOGY-DRIVEN

                    STRATEGIES TO SAFEGUARD COMMUNITIES, BUSINESSES AND PUBLIC SPACES.

                                 A FORMER NYPD OFFICER, SUNINI [SIC] BRINGS 22 YEARS

                    OF EXPERIENCE IN THE ORGANIZED CRIME CONTROL BUREAU, RETIRING WITH

                    THE RANK OF SERGEANT SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT.  SHE HOLDS A MASTER'S

                    DEGREE IN NON-PROFIT, PUBLIC AND ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT FROM

                    MARIST COLLEGE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT, AND A BACHELOR'S OF SCIENCE IN

                    SOCIOLOGY FROM THE COLLEGE OF NEW ROCHELLE.  HER LEADERSHIP AND

                    VISION HAS EARNED NATIONAL RECOGNITION, INCLUDING HONORS FROM THE

                    WOMEN'S PRESIDENT [SIC] ORGANIZATION AND JP MORGAN CHASE, WHICH

                                          6



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    HAVE RECOGNIZED CITY SAFE PARTNERS AS ONE OF THE FASTEST-GROWING

                    WOMEN-OWNED AND WOMEN-LED COMPANIES IN THE COUNTRY.  UNDER HER

                    DIRECTION, CITY SAFE PARTNERS HAS BECOME A TRUSTED PROVIDER OF SECURITY

                    SERVICES ACROSS THE RESIDENTIAL, RETAIL, CONSTRUCTION, AND GOVERNMENT

                    SECTORS.

                                 MADAM SPEAKER, I ASK THAT YOU EXTEND SUNINI [SIC]

                    CHAN-SHUE THE CORDIALITIES OF THE FLOOR AS WELL AS WELCOMING MRS.

                    AUBRY BACK TO THE CHAMBERS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 ON BEHALF OF MR. GIBBS, MR. WRIGHT, MR.

                    CUNNINGHAM, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, WELCOME, SOYINI, TO OUR

                    ASSEMBLY CHAMBER, AND CONGRATULATIONS, MA'AM ON ALL OF THE

                    WONDERFUL ACCOMPLISHED WORK THAT YOU HAVE DONE WITH CITY SAFE

                    PARTNERS.  WE DEFINITELY EXTEND TO YOU THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR AND

                    HOPE YOU ENJOY OUR PROCEEDINGS TODAY.  CONTINUED BEST WISHES TO YOU

                    AS YOU BUILD UPON YOUR PREVIOUS SUCCESSES.

                                 AND I JUST -- A MOMENT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE TO SAY

                    HELLO AND WELCOME TO MRS. AUBRY.  IT'S WONDERFUL, WONDERFUL TO SEE

                    YOU HERE TODAY, EXTENDING TO YOU THE CORDIALITIES OF THE HOUSE, OF

                    COURSE, AND PLEASE TELL YOUR HUBBY I SAID HELLO.  THANK YOU SO VERY

                    MUCH, BOTH OF YOU, FOR JOINING US TODAY.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 RESOLUTIONS, PAGE 3, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 1214, MS.

                    KAY.

                                          7



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM APRIL 9, 2026, AS YELLOW RIBBON DAY IN THE

                    STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MS. KAY ON THE

                    RESOLUTION.

                                 MS. KAY:  GOOD MORNING, MADAM SPEAKER.  I RISE

                    TODAY TO PAY TRIBUTE TO THE MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES ARMED

                    FORCES, AND PARTICULARLY TO THOSE FORMER PRISONERS OF WAR WHOSE

                    SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY WILL NEVER BE FORGOTTEN.

                                 ARMY STAFF SERGEANT MATT MAUPIN WAS THE FIRST POW

                    OF THE IRAQ WAR.  HE WAS CAPTURED APRIL 9, 2004, AND REMAINS THE

                    INSPIRATION FOR THIS SPECIAL, YET SOMBER DAY WHICH SERVES AS A REMINDER

                    OF ALL THOSE WHO SERVE OUR COUNTRY AND DESERVE RECOGNITION THROUGHOUT

                    OUR STATE AND OUR NATION.

                                 IN 2006, THE NEW YORK STATE LEGISLATURE BEGAN TO

                    COMMEMORATE YELLOW RIBBON DAY ON APRIL 9TH OF EACH YEAR

                    FOLLOWING THE ADVOCACY OF HALFMOON RESIDENT CAROL HOTALING, ALSO

                    KNOWN AS "THE YELLOW RIBBON LADY."  EVERY YEAR COUNTLESS PEOPLE

                    DEVOTE THEIR TIME TO DISTRIBUTE YELLOW RIBBONS THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF

                    NEW YORK TO HEIGHTEN AWARENESS AND SHOW SUPPORT FOR OUR

                    SERVICEMEN AND WOMEN WHO ARE SERVING OUR COUNTRY, AND TO PROMOTE

                    UNITY AND RESPECT FOR THOSE BRAVE INDIVIDUALS AND -- AND THOSE WHO

                    PROTECT OUR FREEDOM EVERY DAY.  BUT WE NEED TO ALSO HONOR OUR ACTIVE

                    DUTY SERVICEMEN AND WOMEN AND THEIR FAMILIES EVERY DAY.  YELLOW

                    RIBBON DAY SERVES AS A REMINDER OF THAT GOAL.

                                          8



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 I WANT TO ALSO THANK AND HONOR THE FAMILIES OF THE

                    ACTIVE DUTY SERVICE MEMBERS WHO, ALTHOUGH NOT ALWAYS RECOGNIZED,

                    SACRIFICE JUST AS MUCH FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR COUNTRY.  THANK YOU TO

                    MY COLLEAGUES WHO HAVE SIGNED ON TO THIS RESOLUTION.  THANK YOU TO ALL

                    OF THE ACTIVE DUTY MEN AND WOMEN SERVICE MEMBERS, INCLUDING A

                    MEMBER OF THIS BODY WHO SACRIFICED SO MUCH EVERY DAY TO KEEP US

                    SAFE.

                                 PLEASE JOIN ME IN REQUESTING KATHY HOCHUL PROCLAIM

                    APRIL 9, 2026 AS YELLOW RIBBON DAY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING

                    AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 1215, MS.

                    BICHOTTE HERMELYN.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM APRIL 28, 2026, AS W -- MWBE ADVOCACY

                    DAY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE RESOLUTION,

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

                    ADOPTED


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 1216, MS.

                    MCMAHON.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM APRIL 2026, AS ESOPHAGEAL CANCER

                    AWARENESS MONTH IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                          9



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE RESOLUTION,

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

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 1217, MR.

                    TANNOUSIS.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM APRIL 2026, AS PARKINSON'S DISEASE

                    AWARENESS MONTH IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MR. TANNOUSIS ON

                    THE RESOLUTION.

                                 MR. TANNOUSIS:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                    PARKINSON'S DISEASE IS A DISORDER THAT AFFECTS APPROXIMATELY 1.2

                    MILLION AMERICANS AND ABOUT 13 MILLION PEOPLE WORLDWIDE.  THERE IS

                    NO KNOWN CURE.  MY UNCLE GEORGE PASSED AWAY, WAS -- WAS DEALING

                    WITH PARKINSON'S DISEASE FOR YEARS, PASSED AWAY IN NOVEMBER OF 2020.

                    AND I BRING THIS RESOLUTION FORTH TODAY TO BRING AWARENESS TO THIS

                    DISEASE AND TO BRING SUPPORT TO THOSE THAT SUFFER FROM THIS.

                                 I AM PRIVILEGED TO HAVE THE AMERICAN PARKINSON'S

                    DISEASE ASSOCIATION, THE HEADQUARTERS, IN MY DISTRICT, WHICH IS AN

                    ORGANIZATION THAT SUPPORTS PEOPLE WITH PARKINSON'S DISEASE TO HELP

                    THEM ENSURE THAT THEY HAVE A LONG-LASTING AND NORMAL LIFE AS BEST AS

                    POSSIBLE.

                                 SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO

                    RECOGNIZE THIS DISEASE AND MAKE A BIG PUSH TO HOPEFULLY ONE DAY FIND A

                    CURE.  THANK YOU SO MUCH.

                                         10



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING

                    AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 1218, MS.

                    BUTTENSCHON.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM MAY 3-9, 2026, AS SMALL BUSINESS WEEK IN

                    THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MS. BUTTENSCHON ON

                    THE RESOLUTION.

                                 MS. BUTTENSCHON:  TODAY I RISE AS WE

                    ACKNOWLEDGE THIS RESOLUTION OF THE VITAL IMPORTANCE OF SMALL BUSINESS

                    IN NEW YORK STATE, EMPLOYING OVER THREE-AND-A-HALF MILLION

                    HARDWORKING NEW YORKERS, CLOSE TO 45 PERCENT OF OUR WORKFORCE.  OUR

                    STATE'S OVER 400,000 SMALL BUSINESSES REPRESENT 98 PERCENT OF THE

                    BUSINESS IN NEW YORK STATE AND GENERATES $1 TRILLION IN SALES,

                    SHIPMENT AND REVENUES ANNUALLY.

                                 THESE BUSINESSES ARE BUILT OVER GENERATIONS BY MANY

                    FAMILY-OWNED, FOUNDED BY INDIVIDUALS, VETERANS, WOMEN, MINORITIES

                    AND NEW RESIDENTS OF OUR GREAT STATE.  THEY ALL HAVE TAKEN ON THE

                    AMERICAN DREAM AND ARE SUCCESSFUL.  THE NUMBER IS A TELLING STORY, AS

                    IT'S VERY, VERY POWERFUL.  IN THE DISTRICT I REPRESENT, JUST A FEW:  UTICA

                    COFFEE, MOUNTAIN ICE.  CLEARLY, FRIENDS BAKERY, TWIN PONDS AND SO

                    MANY MORE THAT I COULD TALK ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF WHAT THEY'VE

                    PROVIDED IN THE ECONOMY OF THE MOHAWK VALLEY.

                                         11



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 SO AS WE PROCLAIM SMALL BUSINESS WEEK IN NEW

                    YORK STATE, I CHALLENGE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU TO VISIT AT LEAST FIVE

                    SMALL BUSINESSES DURING THAT WEEK, AND BE SURE TO REMIND OURSELVES OF

                    THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE HARDWORKING AND THE FOUNDATION OF OUR ECONOMY.

                    THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING

                    AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 1219, MS.

                    RAJKUMAR.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM MAY 26, 2026, AS GUYANESE INDEPENDENCE

                    DAY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE RESOLUTION,

                    ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE --

                                 MEMBERS:  AYE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: -- THANK YOU.

                    OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 1220, MS.

                    LUNSFORD.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM OCTOBER 4-10, 2026, AS BANNED BOOKS

                    WEEK IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE RESOLUTION,

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

                                         12



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 1221, MR.

                    LAVINE.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM OCTOBER 2026, AS PRO BONO AND ACCESS TO

                    JUSTICE MONTH IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK, AND RECOGNIZING THE STATE'S

                    PIONEERING ROLE IN EXPANDING ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE RESOLUTION,

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

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 1222, MR.

                    TAGUE.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM FEBRUARY 2026, AS CAREER AND TECHNICAL

                    EDUCATION MONTH IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MR. TAGUE ON THE

                    RESOLUTION.

                                 MR. TAGUE:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  I RISE

                    TODAY AS A FORMER BOCES STUDENT AND SOMEONE WHO HAS ALWAYS

                    APPRECIATED A HANDS-ON APPROACH TO LEARNING.  IT IS MY HONOR TO JOIN

                    YOU ALL IN DECLARING THIS AS CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION MONTH

                    HERE IN NEW YORK STATE.

                                 VOCATIONAL LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES PRESENT A WHOLE

                    NEW WORLD TO COUNTLESS STUDENTS IN OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM, WITH MANY

                    OF THEM FINDING A PASSION FOR LEARNING OUTSIDE OF THE TRADITIONAL

                                         13



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    CLASSROOM SETTING AND STRUGGLING TO SUCCEED IN A TRADITIONALLY ACADEMIC

                    SENSE.  PERHAPS MOST IMPORTANTLY, CAREER AND TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATION

                    PROVIDES YOUNG PEOPLE WITH A DIRECT ON-RAMP TO LUCRATIVE PROFESSIONS

                    DIRECTLY OUT OF HIGH SCHOOL, WHILE ALSO GIVING THEM A JUMP START ON

                    DEGREES AND CERTIFICATIONS SHOULD THEY PURSUE FURTHER EDUCATION OR

                    TRAINING.  IT MUST BE SAID AS WELL THAT VOCATIONAL TRAINING HAS COME TO

                    REPRESENT NOT JUST TRADITIONAL TRADES, BUT THE INDUSTRIES OF THE FUTURE AS

                    WELL.  THROUGH PROGRAMS SUCH AS OUR BOCES, YOUNG PEOPLE NOW HAVE

                    THE CHANCE TO LEARN ABOUT CODING, ROBOTICS, NETWORKING AND OTHER

                    CUTTING-EDGE FIELDS BY WORKING HANDS-ON TO LEARN ABOUT THE TOOLS AND

                    TECHNIQUES THAT THESE JOBS REQUIRE.

                                 CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION IS THE FUTURE, AND THE

                    VOCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES WE ARE ABLE TO OFFER TO STUDENTS MUST BE

                    SUSTAINED AND EXPANDED IF WE HOPE TO EQUIP OUR YOUNG PEOPLE WITH THE

                    MARKETABLE SKILLS THAT THEY NEED TO COMPETE IN TOMORROW'S ECONOMY.

                                 I HOPE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU WILL JOIN ME THIS

                    YEAR AND IN THE YEARS TO COME IN WORKING TO PROVIDE AS MANY HANDS-ON

                    LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES AS POSSIBLE TO NEW YORKERS FROM ALL WALKS OF

                    LIFE SO THAT OUR CHILDREN HAVE THE GREATEST OPPORTUNITY WE CAN GIVE

                    THEM TO FIND THEIR CALLING AND DEVELOP A LOVE FOR LEARNING, WHETHER IN

                    OR OUT OF THE CLASSROOM.

                                 THANK YOU ALL, AND PLEASE JOIN ME IN SUPPORTING THIS

                    GREAT RESOLUTION.  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING

                                         14



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 1223, MR.

                    DESTEFANO.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM OCTOBER 14, 2026, AS EMERGENCY NURSES

                    DAY, AND OCTOBER 11-17, 2026 AS EMERGENCY NURSES WEEK IN THE

                    STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MR. DESTEFANO ON

                    THE RESOLUTION.

                                 MR. DESTEFANO:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, FOR

                    THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THIS RESOLUTION.

                                 EMERGENCY NURSES DAY WILL BE OBSERVED OCTOBER

                    14TH OF THIS YEAR.  IT'S A TIME TO RECOGNIZE THE EXTRAORDINARY DEDICATION,

                    SKILL AND COMPASSION OF EMERGENCY NURSES.  THEY'RE HEALTHCARE

                    PROFESSIONALS WHO SERVE ON THE FRONT LINES OF MEDICINE, PROVIDING

                    LIFESAVING CARE IN SOME OF THE MOST CRITICAL AND STRESSFUL SITUATIONS.

                    WHETHER THEY'RE TREATING ACCIDENT VICTIMS, RESPONDING TO HEART ATTACKS

                    OR COMFORTING FRIGHTENED FAMILIES, EMERGENCY NURSES ARE OFTEN THE FIRST

                    TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE WHEN EVERY SECOND COUNTS.  EMERGENCY NURSES

                    WORK LONG HOURS IN FAST-PACED ENVIRONMENTS WITH QUICK THINKING AND

                    CALM DECISION-MAKING ARE ESSENTIAL.  THEY MUST BALANCE MEDICAL

                    EXPERTISE WITH EMPATHY, OFFERING REASSURANCE TO PATIENTS WITH -- DURING

                    THE MOST DIFFICULT TIMES OF THEIR LIVES.  THEIR ABILITY TO REMAIN STRONG

                    UNDER PRESSURE IS TRULY REMARKABLE.

                                 ON THIS DAY WE HONOR EMERGENCY NURSES FOR THEIR

                                         15



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    TIRELESS COMMITMENT TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY.  THEIR SERVICE SAVES

                    COUNTLESS LIVES AND STRENGTHENS OUR COMMUNITIES EACH AND EVERY DAY.

                    WE OWE THEM OUR GRATITUDE, RESPECT AND APPRECIATION NOT ONLY ON

                    EMERGENCY NURSES DAY, BUT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE YEAR.

                                 THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING

                    AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  MS. SPEAKER, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL ON THE

                    ENERGY COMMITTEE TO MEET IN THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ENERGY COMMITTEE

                    MEMBERS, PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY QUIETLY TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE

                    ROOM.  ENERGY COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE

                    ROOM.

                                 MS. SHRESTHA FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

                                 MS. SHRESTHA:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                    TODAY I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE AN AMAZING GROUP OF YOUNG PEOPLE

                    FROM THE LEGISLATIVE GAZETTE, WHICH IS SUNY NEW PALTZ'S PUBLIC

                    AFFAIRS REPORTING INTERNSHIP, FOCUSING ON THE STATE HOUSE.

                                 SO WE ARE JOINED BY DARREN JOHNSON, PATRICK KELLY,

                    NANCY MAC INNES, KYRA HIGBIE, ZANDER DORING, MARIETOU SACKO,

                    MAWAZI MATENDE, ZAMIA OKPARA, EMILY SALAZAR.  THEY ARE THE STUDENT

                    EDITORS, REPORTERS, MULTIMEDIA SPECIALISTS AND THEIR ADVISOR, WHO HELP

                    KEEP THIS NONPARTISAN NEWS ORGANIZATION RUNNING IN ITS 48TH YEAR.

                                         16



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    MULTIPLE GAZETTE REPORTERS HAVE GONE ON TO WIN PULITZER PRIZES, AND I

                    LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING WHAT CRITICAL STORIES THESE JOURNALISTS UNCOVER.

                                 I ASK YOU TO EXTEND THEM THE PRIVILEGE -- PRIVILEGES

                    AND CORDIALITIES OF THE FLOOR, AND WELCOME THEM TO THE NEW YORK STATE

                    CAPITOL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON BEHALF OF MS.

                    SHRESTHA, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, WELCOME, OUR YOUNG LEADERS,

                    TO OUR ASSEMBLY CHAMBER, EXTENDING TO YOU THE PRIVILEGES OF THE

                    FLOOR.  THANK YOU FOR THE IMPORTANT WORK THAT YOU DO EVERY SINGLE DAY,

                    DOING THE THOROUGH INVESTIGATION, TIMELY INFORMATION FOR OUR

                    COMMUNITY.  MAKE SURE YOU KEEP THAT IN MIND AS YOU MOVE FORWARD.

                    OBVIOUSLY WE ALWAYS WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR JOURNALISM IS FREE,

                    INDEPENDENT.  AND SO THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR THE HARD WORK THAT

                    YOU'RE DOING NOW AND IN THE FUTURE, AND FOR JOINING US TODAY.  THANK

                    YOU VERY MUCH.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 MS. SOLAGES FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

                                 MS. SOLAGES:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                    TODAY I RISE TO INTRODUCE THE MEMBERS OF THE LINKS, INCORPORATED.

                    ESTABLISHED IN 1946, THE LINKS, INCORPORATED IS ONE OF THE NATION'S

                    OLDEST AND LARGEST VOLUNTEER SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS.  COMPRISED OF MORE

                    THAN 17,000 PROFESSIONAL WOMEN IN 300 CHAPTERS GLOBALLY, THE LINKS

                    ARE COMMITTED TO ENSURING THAT THE CULTURAL AND ECONOMIC SURVIVAL OF

                    AFRICAN AMERICANS AND PEOPLE OF AFRICAN ANCESTRY.  IN NEW YORK

                    STATE, THEY HAVE 15 CHAPTERS SERVING THE GREATER NEW YORK METRO AREA

                                         17



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    AND UPSTATE REGION INCLUDING THE WONDERFUL PLACE OF LONG ISLAND.

                                 I WANT TO THANK THEM FOR REALLY ADVOCATING ON VOTER

                    EDUCATION, HEALTH EQUITY, BLACK MATERNAL HEALTH, ECONOMIC

                    EMPOWERMENT.  THE LIST GOES ON.  AND A FUN TIP:  ASSEMBLYMEMBER

                    DAIS' MOTHER IS A MEMBER OF THIS PRESTIGIOUS ORGANIZATION.

                                 SO, MADAM SPEAKER, IF YOU WILL, EXTEND THEM A

                    PRODUCTIVE DAY ON THE CAPITOL AND AS WELL EXTEND THEM THE CORDIALITIES

                    OF THE HOUSE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON BEHALF OF MS.

                    SOLAGES, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, WE WELCOME THE MEMBERS OF

                    LINKS, INCORPORATED TO OUR ASSEMBLY CHAMBER, THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE,

                    EXTENDING TO YOU THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR.  HOPING YOU ENJOY OUR

                    PROCEEDINGS TODAY.  THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR THE OUTSTANDING

                    VOLUNTEER SERVICE WORK THAT YOU DO IN OUR COMMUNITIES EVERY SINGLE

                    DAY.  THE FAR RANGE OF ISSUES THAT YOU PUT FORWARD REALLY SPEAKS TO THE

                    KNOWLEDGE AND COMMITMENT YOU HAVE TO OUR COMMUNITIES, VERY

                    LONGSTANDING COMMITMENT TO OUR COMMUNITIES.  SO WE THANK YOU VERY

                    MUCH FOR THAT, AND THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US TODAY.

                    ENJOY YOUR DAY HERE IN ALBANY.  THANK YOU.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 ON CONSENT, PAGE 39, CALENDAR NO. 371, THE CLERK

                    WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A09355-A, CALENDAR

                    NO. 371, PAULIN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW, IN RELATION

                    TO MANDATING THAT HOSPITALS REPORT CASES OF POISONINGS TO POISON

                                         18



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    CONTROL CENTERS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THIS BILL IS LAID

                    ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A09404-A, CALENDAR

                    NO. 372, SANTABARBARA, ROSENTHAL, WEPRIN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE

                    BANKING LAW, IN RELATION TO THE PROHIBITION OF LENDING INSTITUTIONS

                    ISSUING UNSOLICITED MAIL-LOAN CHECKS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 180TH

                    DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (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. A09588-B, CALENDAR

                    NO. 373, TORRES, LEVENBERG, HEVESI, HYNDMAN, TAPIA.  AN ACT TO

                    AMEND THE BANKING LAW, IN RELATION TO PROHIBITING CERTAIN FINANCIAL

                    INSTITUTIONS FROM CHARGING FEES BASED ON THE FREQUENCY OF MORTGAGE

                    PAYMENTS OR CHANGING SUCH PAYMENT SCHEDULE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THIS BILL IS LAID

                    ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10032, CALENDAR NO.

                                         19



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    374, EACHUS.  AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 283 OF THE LAWS OF 2023,

                    AMENDING THE TAX LAW RELATING TO AUTHORIZING THE TOWN OF CORNWALL

                    TO IMPOSE A HOTEL AND MOTEL TAX, IN RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS

                    THEREOF.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  HOME RULE

                    MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (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. A10163, CALENDAR NO.

                    375, LAVINE, KASSAY, SANTABARBARA, MCDONALD, CONRAD, GALLAHAN,

                    DINOWITZ, WEPRIN, SIMON, SLATER, K. BROWN, ZACCARO, HYNDMAN,

                    SCHIAVONI, LEMONDES, CHANG, COLTON.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE VETERANS'

                    SERVICES LAW, IN RELATION TO PRE-RELEASE BRIEFINGS FOR INCARCERATED

                    VETERANS REGARDING AVAILABLE FEDERAL AND STATE BENEFITS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 60TH

                    DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE CLERK WILL

                                         20



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MR. LAVINE TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                 CAN WE HAVE QUIET IN THE CHAMBER?

                                 THANK YOU.

                                 MR. LAVINE:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  I AM A

                    BIG FAN AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN OF ONE OF AMERICA'S GREATEST PRESIDENTS,

                    IF NOT OUR GREATEST PRESIDENT, ABRAHAM LINCOLN.  AND THIS BILL IS WRITTEN

                    WITH LINCOLN'S PHILOSOPHY IN MIND.  WE KNOW NEW YORK STATE HAS ONE

                    OF THE LARGEST VETERAN POPULATIONS OF ANY OF THE STATES IN THE NATION, AND

                    LINCOLN BELIEVED THAT IT IS, AS AMERICANS, OUR SOLEMN OBLIGATION TO

                    CARE FOR OUR VETERANS.  THIS BILL ACCOMPLISHES PRECISELY THAT -- THAT

                    PURPOSE BY GUARANTEEING, TO THE EXTENT WE CAN GUARANTEE, THAT VETERANS

                    WHO ARE ABOUT TO BE RELEASED WHO HAVE BEEN INCARCERATED WILL BE ABLE

                    TO RECEIVE THE BENEFITS THAT THEY NOT ONLY DESERVE, BUT THE BENEFITS TO

                    WHICH WE WANT THEM TO BE ENTITLED.

                                 SO I THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK ON THIS PARTICULAR

                    PIECE OF LEGISLATION, AND I, OF COURSE, AM VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MR. LAVINE IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10207, CALENDAR NO.

                    376, KAY, MCDONALD.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW, IN

                                         21



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    RELATION TO REQUIRING A COLLECTING OFFICER OF TAXES TO ACCEPT PAYMENTS OF

                    TAX, INCLUDING ANY INTEREST DUE THEREON, ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST FIVE

                    CENT DENOMINATION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MS. KAY TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 MS. KAY:  SORRY, I HAD TO DO THIS.  YESTERDAY I FELT

                    THAT I WAS A LITTLE SHORT-CHANGED WHEN MY COLLEAGUE TOOK ALL THE PENNY

                    JOKES, BUT THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MS. KAY IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10243, CALENDAR NO.

                    377, PAULIN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE SOCIAL SERVICES LAW, IN RELATION TO

                    ADULT CARE FACILITY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE CLERK WILL

                                         22



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (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. A10279-A, CALENDAR

                    NO. 378, WEPRIN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE INSURANCE LAW, RELATING TO

                    PROHIBITING INSURANCE DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF AN INSURED'S

                    MARITAL STATUS FOLLOWING THE DEATH OF THE INSURED'S SPOUSE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT JANUARY 1ST.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MR. WEPRIN TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                 MR. WEPRIN:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THIS

                    LEGISLATION WOULD PREVENT AN INSURER FROM REFUSING TO INSURE, CANCEL A

                    POLICY OR DECLINING TO RENEW A POLICY, LIMITING COVERAGE AVAILABLE,

                    INCREASING A POLICYHOLDER'S PREMIUM RATE OR IMPOSING LESS FAVORABLE

                    TERMS OR CONDITIONS UPON RENEWAL SOLELY BECAUSE THE POLICYHOLDER HAS

                    LOST A SPOUSE AND THEIR MARITAL STATUS HAS CHANGED.  THIS LEGISLATION

                    ENSURES THE SURVIVING SPOUSE HAVE EQUITABLE ACCESS TO INSURANCE

                    COVERAGE, HEREBY PROTECTING VULNERABLE HOUSEHOLDS FROM FINANCIAL

                    HARDSHIP AND PROMOTING FAIRNESS IN THE INSURANCE MARKET.

                                         23



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MR. WEPRIN IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10307, CALENDAR NO.

                    379, PAULIN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE EXECUTIVE LAW, IN RELATION TO

                    NOTIFICATION TO LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OF FIREARM DENIALS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THIS BILL IS LAID

                    ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10312-A, CALENDAR

                    NO. 380, PAULIN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW, IN RELATION

                    TO INFORMATION THAT RESIDENTIAL HEALTH CARE FACILITIES ARE REQUIRED TO

                    PROVIDE TO RESIDENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THIS BILL IS LAID

                    ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10352, CALENDAR NO.

                    381, GLICK, ROSENTHAL.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL

                    CONSERVATION LAW AND THE AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS LAW, IN RELATION TO

                    ENACTING THE "LEAD-FREE GAME DONATION ACT."

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THIS BILL IS LAID

                    ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10419, CALENDAR NO.

                    382, SOLAGES.  AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 581 OF THE LAWS OF 2005,

                                         24



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    AMENDING THE LOCAL FINANCE LAW RELATING TO STATUTORY INSTALLMENT

                    BONDS, IN RELATION TO EXTENDING THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  MS. SPEAKER, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE

                    HEALTH COMMITTEE TO MEET IN THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  HEALTH COMMITTEE

                    MEMBERS TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.  HEALTH COMMITTEE

                    MEMBERS, PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 ON CONSENT, PAGE 41, CALENDAR NO. 383, THE CLERK

                    WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10633, CALENDAR NO.

                    383, HUNTER, CASHMAN, WILLIAMS, LEVENBERG, MCMAHON, LEMONDES,

                    SAYEGH, KELLES, BURDICK, COLTON.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL

                    CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO DEER MANAGEMENT PERMITS; AND TO

                    REPEAL CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF SUCH LAW RELATING THERETO.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  READ THE LAST

                                         25



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MR. SIMPSON TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                 MR. SIMPSON:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  I

                    HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THIS BILL.  I -- I LIKE -- I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE INTENT

                    OF THE BILL, BUT I HAVE HEARD FROM MANY ORGANIZATIONS MADE UP OF

                    SPORTSMEN WITHIN MY DISTRICT THAT THERE'S BEEN NO COMMUNICATION

                    BETWEEN THE SPORTSMEN AND DEC ON THIS ISSUE.  I THINK IT'S REALLY

                    IMPORTANT TO KEEP THE PEOPLE THAT ARE AFFECTED BY A POLICY LIKE THIS

                    ENGAGED, INFORMED AND SUPPORT -- AND ULTIMATELY, THEIR SUPPORT BEHIND

                    SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

                                 THIS HAS BEEN DONE IN THE PAST.  THERE'S BEEN SOME

                    BAD EXPERIENCES.  AND THERE HASN'T BEEN ENOUGH SCIENTIFIC DATA TO -- AT

                    THIS POINT FOR ME TO SUPPORT THIS.  SO I WILL BE VOTING NO.  THANK YOU,

                    MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. SIMPSON IN THE NEGATIVE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER P. CARROLL:  ARE THERE ANY

                    OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10653, CALENDAR NO.

                                         26



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    384, PAULIN, ROMERO, MCDONALD.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE ARTS AND

                    CULTURAL AFFAIRS LAW, IN RELATION TO RENAMING AGENCY BUILDING 1,

                    AGENCY BUILDING 2, AGENCY BUILDING 3, AND AGENCY BUILDING 4,

                    LOCATED AT THE EMPIRE STATE PLAZA.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER P. CARROLL:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 100TH

                    DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER P. CARROLL:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (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. A10692, CALENDAR NO.

                    385, SCHIAVONI, REYES, BURDICK, LEMONDES.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE

                    ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO ESTABLISHING THE

                    AUTHORITY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION TO

                    MANAGE ATLANTIC BONITO AND FALSE ALBACORE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER P. CARROLL:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER P. CARROLL:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                         27



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MR. FALL FOR AN ANNOUNCEMENT.

                                 MR. FALL:  MR. SPEAKER, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE

                    JUDICIARY COMMITTEE TO MEET IN THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER P. CARROLL:  JUDICIARY

                    COMMITTEE TO THE CONFERENCE ROOM.  JUDICIARY COMMITTEE TO THE

                    SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  ON CONSENT, PAGE

                    42, CALENDAR NO. 386, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10851, CALENDAR NO.

                    386, STIRPE.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LAW, IN

                    RELATION TO EXTENDING THE REPORTING DEADLINE OF THE ADVISORY PANEL ON

                    EMPLOYEE-OWNED ENTERPRISES; AND TO AMEND CHAPTER 435 OF THE LAWS

                    OF 2017 AMENDING THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LAW RELATING TO

                    ESTABLISHING AN ADVISORY PANEL ON EMPLOYEE-OWNED ENTERPRISES

                    WITHIN THE DIVISION OF SMALL BUSINESS SERVICES, IN RELATION TO THE

                    EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                         28



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MR. GANDOLFO FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

                                 MR. GANDOLFO:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  ON

                    BEHALF OF MINORITY LEADER ED RA AND THE ENTIRE REPUBLICAN

                    CONFERENCE HERE, IT IS MY HONOR TO WELCOME SOME MEMBERS OF THE

                    NEW HAMPSHIRE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO OUR CHAMBER TODAY.

                    JOINING US WE HAVE DEPUTY MAJORITY LEADER AND HOUSE FINANCE

                    COMMITTEE MEMBER JOE SWEENEY; ASSISTANT MAJORITY LEADER AND

                    SMALL BUSINESS COALITION CHAIR BRIAN LABRIE; AND WITH THEM SOME

                    HOUSE REPUBLICAN STAFF FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE, CHRIS MAIDMENT, CALEB

                    KRUGER, SEAN CONNOR AND CHUCK MCGEE.

                                 THE NEW HAMPSHIRE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    CONSISTS OF 400 MEMBERS REPRESENTING 203 LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS ACROSS

                    THE STATE.  THEY ARE CREATED FROM DIVISIONS OF THE STATE'S COUNTIES, AND

                    ON AVERAGE EACH LEGISLATOR REPRESENTS ABOUT 3,300 RESIDENTS, THE

                    SMALLEST STATE LEGISLATIVE POPULATION-TO-REPRESENTATIVE RATIO IN THE

                    COUNTRY.

                                 NEW HAMPSHIRE HAS BY FAR THE LARGEST LOWER HOUSE OF

                    ANY AMERICAN STATE; THE SECOND-LARGEST BEING THE PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE

                    OF REPRESENTATIVES WITH 203 MEMBERS.

                                 MR. SPEAKER, WOULD YOU PLEASE EXTEND ALL THE

                    CORDIALITIES OF THE HOUSE TO THESE ELECTED OFFICIALS FROM NEW

                    HAMPSHIRE, OUR GUESTS HERE TODAY, AND OFFER THEM ALL OF THE PRIVILEGES

                                         29



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    OF THE FLOOR?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    GANDOLFO.

                                 ON BEHALF OF MR. GANDOLFO, THE MINORITY CONFERENCE,

                    THE SPEAKER AND ALL THE MEMBERS, WE WELCOME YOU TO THE CHAMBER,

                    EXTEND THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR, AND HOPE YOU ENJOY THE PROCEEDINGS.

                    THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 ON CONSENT, PAGE 42, CALENDAR 387, THE CLERK WILL

                    READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10936, CALENDAR NO.

                    387, GLICK, LEVENBERG, ROSENTHAL, BURDICK, SCHIAVONI.  AN ACT TO

                    AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO THE

                    DEFINITION OF TIDAL WETLANDS

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  THE BILL IS LAID

                    ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A10995, CALENDAR NO.

                    388, DE LOS SANTOS.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL

                    LAW, IN RELATION TO MAKING THE PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE VARIOUS

                    ON-PREMISES LIQUOR LICENSES CONSISTENT WITH RESPECT TO PUBLIC INTEREST

                    FACTORS THAT MAY BE CONSIDERED BY THE STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY WHEN

                    EVALUATING THE MERITS OF A LICENSE APPLICATION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  THIS BILL IS LAID

                    ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A11008, CALENDAR NO.

                                         30



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    389, HUNTER.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE COUNTY LAW, IN RELATION TO THE

                    EFFECTIVENESS OF CERTAIN COUNTY-TRIBAL DETENTION AGREEMENTS; AND TO

                    AMEND CHAPTER 213 OF THE LAWS OF 2024 AMENDING THE CORRECTION

                    LAW RELATING TO THE USE OF CERTAIN COUNTY JAILS, IN RELATION TO THE

                    EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 PAGE 35, CALENDAR NO. 318, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A05850, CALENDAR NO.

                    318, GLICK, BORES, SIMONE, LEE, COLTON, BURDICK, ROSENTHAL,

                    GONZ LEZ-ROJAS, DINOWITZ, SIMON, STECK, DAVILA, SHIMSKY,

                    MCDONOUGH, PAULIN, KAY, ROMERO, LASHER, LEVENBERG, KELLES, OTIS,

                    STIRPE, HEVESI, LUNSFORD, CRUZ, SEAWRIGHT, REYES, KASSAY, MITAYNES,

                    LUPARDO, STERN, MORENO, DILAN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL

                    CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO PROHIBITING THE PARTICIPATION OF

                    CERTAIN ANIMALS IN TRAVELING ANIMAL ACTS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                         31



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT DECEMBER

                    31, 2026.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  A PARTY VOTE HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MR. GANDOLFO.

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

                    REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL GENERALLY BE OPPOSED TO THIS BILL;

                    HOWEVER, ANY MEMBER WHO WISHES TO VOTE DIFFERENTLY MAY DO SO AT

                    THEIR DESK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  THE MAJORITY

                    CONFERENCE WILL SUPPORT THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.  FOR THOSE THAT WOULD

                    LIKE TO VOTE IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION THEY COULD DO SO AT THEIR DESK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MS. GLICK TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 MS. GLICK:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  BRIEFLY, I

                    WANT TO JUST CLARIFY THAT THIS IS LIMITED TO TRAVELING ACTS WITH -- THE

                    ANIMALS THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITED ARE LARGE CATS, BEARS, NON-HUMAN

                    PRIMATES, KANGAROOS AND WALLABIES.  THIS IN NO WAY LIMITS THE ABILITY

                    OF DOMESTICATED FARM ANIMALS TO BE BROUGHT TO COUNTY FAIRS OR TO OTHER

                    EVENTS.  THIS IS SIMPLY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC.  THERE HAVE BEEN TERRIBLE

                    INCIDENTS IN VARIOUS PLACES, INCLUDING IN NEW YORK STATE, WHERE SOME

                    OF THE ANIMALS HAVE GOTTEN OUT AND HAVE INJURED PEOPLE IN THE

                                         32



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    COMMUNITY.  SO THIS IS VERY MUCH A VERY LIMITED, TARGETED MESSAGE.

                                 4-H IS IMPORTANT, AND TAKING ANIMALS TO COUNTY FAIRS IS

                    A GREAT DEAL OF FUN, ENJOYMENT AND EDUCATION FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE, AND A

                    LOT OF PEOPLE SHOULD BE EXPOSED TO ANIMALS THAT ARE SAFE TO BE SHOWN

                    AND DISPLAYED PROPERLY.

                                 SO I WITHDRAW MY REQUEST AND VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  MS. GLICK IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MR. FALL FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN ANNOUNCEMENT.

                                 MR. FALL:  MR. SPEAKER, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE

                    LABOR COMMITTEE TO MEET IN THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  LABOR COMMITTEE TO

                    THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.  LABOR COMMITTEE TO THE SPEAKER'S

                    CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 MR. GANDOLFO FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

                                 MR. GANDOLFO:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  ON

                    BEHALF OF OUR COLLEAGUE MS. GIGLIO, PLEASE WELCOME ONE OF OUR

                    HONORED GUESTS IN THE CHAMBER HERE TODAY, SHARON SAVOCA MAHIN,

                    FOUNDER AND CEO OF SAVOCA ENTERPRISES, INC.

                                 SAVOCA ENTERPRISES IS A CERTIFIED MWBE SINCE 2002.

                    SHARON IS THE VP OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF WOMEN CONSTRUCTION

                    OWNERS AND EXECUTIVES.  SHE'S A BOARD MEMBER OF THE -- FOR THE

                                         33



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    NATIONAL WOMEN'S BUSINESS ENTERPRISE COUNCIL, AND SHE'S THE CHAIR OF

                    THE STEERING COMMITTEE FOR THE WOMEN'S BUSINESS COUNCIL.

                                 MR. SPEAKER, WOULD YOU PLEASE WELCOME OUR HONORED

                    GUEST HERE TODAY AND OFFER HER ALL THE CORDIALITIES OF THE FLOOR?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  THANK YOU.

                                 ON BEHALF OF MR. GANDOLFO, MS. GIGLIO, THE SPEAKER

                    AND ALL THE MEMBERS, WE WELCOME YOU TO THE CHAMBER AND EXTEND THE

                    PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR AND HOPE YOU ENJOY THE PROCEEDINGS.  THANK

                    YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 MR. FALL FOR THE PURPOSES OF AN INTRODUCTION.

                                 MR. FALL:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  ON BEHALF OF

                    MEMBER BARRETT, WE HAVE A SPECIAL GUEST FROM HER DISTRICT WHO IS

                    ACTUALLY STANDING RIGHT NEXT TO HER, AND THE SPECIAL GUEST IS COLUMBIA

                    COUNTY SHERIFF JACKIE SALVATORE.

                                 SHERIFF SALVATORE IS A PROUD GRADUATE OF HUDSON HIGH

                    SCHOOL.  SHE WENT ON TO ATTEND COLUMBIA AND [SIC] GREENE COMMUNITY

                    COLLEGE AND EARNED AN ASSOCIATE'S DEGREE IN BIBLICAL STUDIES FROM

                    VISION CHRISTIAN BIBLE COLLEGE AND SEMINARY.  SHE WAS ELECTED

                    COLUMBIA COUNTY SHERIFF LAST FALL, AND HAS BEEN LEADING THE SHERIFF'S

                    OFFICE AND THE DEPARTMENT WITH A COMMITMENT TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND

                    JUSTICE.

                                 MR. SPEAKER, CAN YOU KINDLY WELCOME OUR WONDERFUL

                    SHERIFF TO THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  ABSOLUTELY.  THANK

                                         34



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    YOU.

                                 ON BEHALF OF MR. FALL, MS. BARRETT, THE SPEAKER AND

                    ALL THE MEMBERS, WE WELCOME YOU, SHERIFF, TO THE CHAMBER, EXTEND THE

                    PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR AND HOPE YOU ENJOY THE PROCEEDINGS TODAY.

                    THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 ON DEBATE, PAGE 5, RULES REPORT NO. 98, THE CLERK

                    WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A03254-A, CALENDAR --

                    RULES REPORT NO. 98, DINOWITZ.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH

                    LAW, IN RELATION TO REQUIRING CHILDREN ENROLLED IN AN OVERNIGHT CAMP,

                    SUMMER DAY CAMP OR TRAVELING SUMMER DAY CAMP TO BE VACCINATED.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  AN EXPLANATION HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  THIS BILL PROTECTING CHILDREN

                    WOULD REQUIRE THOSE CHILDREN WHO GO TO A -- A REGULATED SUMMER CAMP

                    TO BE VACCINATED, POTENTIALLY SAVING LIVES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  MR. JENSEN.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  WOULD THE

                    SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I WILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER WRIGHT:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                         35



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. JENSEN:  THANK YOU TO MY -- MY FRIEND FROM

                    THE BRONX.  WOULD THIS -- IN YOUR EXPLANATION YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS

                    IS EXCLUSIVE TO REGULATED SUMMER CAMPS.  WOULD IT ONLY APPLY TO

                    SUMMER CAMPS OR WOULD IT APPLY TO ANY CAMPS THAT ARE OFFERED BY A

                    REGULATED ENTITY LIKE CAMPS DURING SCHOOL BREAK PERIODS?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  IT -- IT TAKES IN OVERNIGHT, DAY OR

                    TRAVELING CAMPS.  I BELIEVE THE TIME OF THE YEAR IS INDICATED HERE.

                    CAMPS THAT OPERATE BETWEEN JUNE 1ST AND JUNE 15TH IN THE CASE OF

                    TRAVELING -- IN -- IN THE CASE OF REGULAR CAMPS.  AND THEN TRAVELING

                    SUMMER CAMPS ARE BETWEEN MAY 15TH AND SEPTEMBER 15TH.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.  SO BETWEEN THOSE TIME PERIODS

                    IS WHEN THIS LEGISLATION WOULD BE MANDATED FOR?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YES.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.  WOULD IT APPLY TO -- OBVIOUSLY

                    YOU SAID ALL REGULATED CAMPS.  WOULD IT APPLY TO BOTH PUBLIC AND

                    PRIVATE ENTITIES?  I'LL USE EXAMPLES.  IF A MUNICIPALITY OFFERS A SUMMER

                    CAMP PERIOD, WOULD THEY BE MANDATED TO REQUIRE THESE VACCINATIONS AS

                    WELL?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  IT APPLIES TO ALL REGULATED CAMPS.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.  NO -- ARE THERE ANY EXCEPTIONS

                    IN THE LEGISLATION NOT FOR WHO WOULD BE EXEMPTED FROM RECEIVING THE

                    VACCINES OR HAVING TO HAVE THE VACCINES, BUT ARE ANY CAMPS ABLE TO

                    HAVE AN EXEMPTION OR AN OPT-OUT MECHANISM?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  THE CAMPS WON'T.  THERE ARE

                    CERTAIN CASES WHERE THE CHILD COULD BE EXEMPT IF THEY HAVE A LEGITIMATE

                                         36



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    MEDICAL EXEMPTION.  BUT IN TERMS OF THE CAMPS, IT -- IT'S NOT A FACTOR AS

                    TO WHETHER THEY'RE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  IS THE MEDICAL EXEMPTION THAT YOU

                    JUST RAISED, IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE MEDICAL EXEMPTION THAT IS APPLIED

                    FOR THE VACCINE REQUIREMENTS FOR SCHOOL ADMISSION?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YES.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.  HAVE THERE -- HAS THERE BEEN

                    ANY COMMENT OR FEEDBACK FROM THE ENTITIES, WHETHER PUBLIC OR PRIVATE,

                    WHO OPERATE THESE CAMPS?  I'LL USE FOR AN EXAMPLE, I KNOW THERE'S A

                    VERY PROMINENT CAMP ORGANIZATION ON LONG ISLAND, TLC FAMILY OF

                    CAMPS OR THE TIMBER LAKE CAMP, WHICH I KNOW HAS A VERY INFLUENTIAL

                    OWNER AND OPERATOR.  HAS THERE HAVE BEEN ANY FEEDBACK FROM THEM ON

                    THIS MANDATE THAT COULD POTENTIALLY LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF CAMPERS THEY

                    HAVE?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I'VE NOT RECEIVED FEEDBACK.  I'M --

                    I'M FAMILIAR WITH SOME OF THOSE CAMPS, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE.  AND IN

                    TERMS OF LIMITING THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THEY COULD HAVE, I DON'T KNOW

                    THAT THERE WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT -- THE VACCINATION RATES FOR YOUNG

                    CHILDREN ARE -- LIKE THE MMR, ARE PROBABLY 95 PERCENT OR MORE.  SO THE

                    POTENTIAL LIMITATIONS WOULD BE VERY LIMITED.  BUT REGARDLESS OF THAT, I

                    KNOW IF ONE OF MY GRANDCHILDREN WAS ATTENDING A SUMMER CAMP, I

                    WOULD NOT WANT KIDS WHO ARE UNVACCINATED AND WHO COULD BE

                    VACCINATED TO -- TO BE THERE.  THEY SHOULD GET VACCINATED.  NOW, OF

                    COURSE SOME CHILDREN FOR ONE MEDICAL REASON OR ANOTHER CAN'T BE, AND

                    THAT'S WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT TO HAVE A HIGH VACCINATION RATE SO WE DO

                                         37



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    HAVE HERD IMMUNITY PROTECTING ALL THE KIDS.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  YEAH.  SO IN THE -- IN THE SCHOOL

                    EXAMPLE, IF -- IF A FAMILY CHOOSES NOT TO VACCINATE THEIR CHILD THEY CAN'T

                    ACCESS PUBLIC, PRIVATE, PAROCHIAL, RELIGIOUS EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES, BUT

                    THEY STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO RECEIVE AN EDUCATION THROUGH HOME

                    SCHOOLING MECHANISMS.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  RIGHT.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO THERE IS STILL AN OPTION FOR THEM TO

                    GET THAT REQUIRED EDUCATION.  IS THERE A CONCERN THAT BY BARRING CHILDREN

                    WHOSE FAMILIES CHOOSE NOT TO VACCINATE THEIR CHILDREN FROM ACCESS TO

                    ANY SUMMER CAMP WITHOUT AN ALTERNATIVE OPTION?  THERE IS A CONCERN

                    THAT YOU COULD EFFECTIVELY PUNISH FAMILIES FOR EXERCISING THEIR MEDICAL

                    RIGHT ON THE CARE OF THEIR CHILD?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, WHAT I REALLY WOULD HATE TO

                    DO IS PUNISH THE CHILD WHO, FOR MEDICAL REASONS, CAN'T BE VACCINATED,

                    THEREBY POTENTIALLY JEOPARDIZING THEIR HEALTH OR SAFETY.  NOW, IF YOU'VE

                    BEEN READING THE PAPERS, AND I'M SURE -- I'M SURE YOU HAVE, IN THE PAST

                    YEAR YOU'VE NOTICED THAT THE MEASLES, WHICH IS THE MOST COMMUNICABLE

                    DISEASE ON THE PLANET WHICH WAS DECLARED EXTINCT, BASICALLY, I DON'T

                    KNOW, 25 YEARS AGO, HAS MADE A COMEBACK.  AND NOT SURPRISINGLY, THE

                    LOCATIONS WHERE IT'S MADE A COMEBACK ARE THE PLACES WHERE THE

                    VACCINATION RATES ARE LOWER, SUCH AS THOSE COMMUNITIES IN TEXAS OR

                    OKLAHOMA OR NEW MEXICO OR SOUTH CAROLINA -- I'M NOT GONNA TALK

                    ABOUT THEIR POLITICS; NOT REALLY RELEVANT, ALTHOUGH ACTUALLY IT IS.  BUT THE

                    FACT IS THAT IN PLACES LIKE NEW YORK, IN PART THANKS TO THE BILL THAT I

                                         38



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    PASSED, THAT WE ALL PASSED -- WELL, MANY OF US PASSED -- IN 2019, OUR

                    VACCINATION RATES ARE HIGHER, PROVIDING SAFETY TO KIDS.  BUT IF A CHILD --

                    IF A PARENT DOESN'T WANNA VACCINATE THEIR CHILD, AND NO ONE CAN FORCE

                    THEM TO, THEY DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO HOME SCHOOL THEM.  BUT IN TERMS OF

                    A CAMP, WE STILL DON'T WANT ANY OTHER KID JEOPARDIZED BECAUSE THAT

                    PARENT DECIDES THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO VACCINATE THEIR CHILD WHO HAS NO

                    SAY IN WHETHER TO GET VACCINATED.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO YOU JUST LISTED A WHOLE BUNCH OF

                    STATES WHERE THERE HAS BEEN HIGHER CASES OF THESE SORT OF

                    COMMUNICABLE ILLNESSES.  YOU DIDN'T MENTION NEW YORK STATE AS ONE

                    OF THEM, AND -- BECAUSE YOU SAID THE REASON -- BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY

                    DONE LEGISLATION FOR THIS.  SO WHEN THERE HAS BEEN MEASLES OUTBREAKS IN

                    NEW YORK STATE, HOW MANY OF THEM ARE HAPPENING -- HAPPENING AT

                    SUMMER CAMPS?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I DON'T HAVE DATA ON THAT TO GIVE

                    YOU.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO IF WE DON'T HAVE THE DATA TO SAY

                    THAT THIS LAW IS NECESSARY TO PRESENT -- TO PREVENT THE SPREAD OF ILLNESS

                    IN SUMMER CAMPS BECAUSE IN YOUR OPINION WE HAVE A STRONG ENOUGH

                    PIECE OF LEGISLATION ALREADY ON THE BOOKS THROUGH LAW FOR SCHOOLS, AND

                    WE DON'T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE OR DATA TO SAY THAT WE'RE SEEING THESE

                    ILLNESSES SPREAD IN SUMMER CAMPS, WHY ARE WE ENACTING POTENTIALLY A

                    LAW TO SOLVE A PROBLEM THAT DOESN'T EXIST IN NEW YORK STATE?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, I DIDN'T SAY IT DOESN'T EXIST.

                    WHAT I SAID IS I DON'T HAVE ANY DATA ON IT.  BUT THE FACT IS, THE MORE

                                         39



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    CHILDREN THAT ARE VACCINATED, NOT ONLY DOES THAT PROVIDE A HIGH DEGREE

                    OF SAFETY FOR THEM, BUT ALSO FOR OTHER CHILDREN, PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO

                    ARE -- ARE VULNERABLE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT CAPABLE OF BEING VACCINATED.

                    PERHAPS THEY'RE CANCER PATIENTS, OR FOR WHATEVER REASON.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO COULDN'T A IMMUNOCOMPROMISED

                    CAMPER SPREAD AN ILLNESS TO ANOTHER IMMUNO -- IMMUNOCOMPROMISED

                    CAMPER?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  IT -- IT'S CERTAINLY POSSIBLE, BUT --

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO WHY AREN'T WE BANNING THEM FROM

                    CAMPS?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  BUT THE HIGHER THE VACCINATION

                    RATE, THE LESS LIKELY IT IS.  IF THE VACCINATION RATE IS 95 PERCENT -- AND

                    THIS IS ACCORDING TO SCIENTISTS, NOT SOME WACKO ON THE INTERNET, THIS IS

                    ACCORDING TO SCIENTISTS -- IF THE VACCINATION RATES ARE 95 PERCENT OR

                    GREATER, IT'S EXTREMELY UNLIKELY THAT THE MEASLES OR SOME OF THESE OTHER

                    DISEASES WOULD SPREAD, EVEN IF SOMEBODY DID HAVE IT.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  AND I UNDERSTAND SCIENCE AND I

                    BELIEVE IN SCIENCE.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  EXCELLENT.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  BUT WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT

                    UNLIKE IN AN EDUCATION SETTING WHERE THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE OPTION,

                    THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE OPTION FOR CAMPERS WHO MAKE THE CHOICE TO GET

                    COMPROMISED OTHER THAN, IN YOUR OPINION, JUST DON'T GO TO CAMP.  AM I

                    CORRECT IN THAT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YOU ARE ACTUALLY INCORRECT.

                                         40



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.  WOULDN'T BE THE FIRST TIME.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  THIS BILL VERY CLEARLY TALKS ABOUT

                    REGULATED CAMPS.  THERE ARE SOME CAMPS THAT ARE NOT REGULATED, AND IF

                    -- IF THE PARENT OR PARENTS WANT TO SEND THEIR CHILD TO SUCH A CAMP, AN

                    UNREGULATED CAMP, THEY COULD DO THAT IF THEY WANT TO EXERCISE THAT

                    OPTION.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  DO -- DO YOU -- AND I'M NOT FAMILIAR

                    WITH THE -- THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN -- I'M FAMILIAR WITH REGULATED

                    CAMPS.  DO YOU HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF AN UNREGULATED CAMP THAT MAY BE

                    IN THE COMMUNITY, WHETHER IN -- IN UPSTATE, ON LONG ISLAND, IN NEW

                    YORK CITY?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, THE -- THE BILL HERE COVERS

                    DAY CAMPS, OVERNIGHT -- YOU KNOW, SLEEP-AWAY CAMPS AND TRAVELING

                    CAMPS.  THERE MIGHT BE OTHER POTENTIAL TYPES OF CAMPS.  I DOUBT THAT I

                    WOULD WANT TO SEE ANYBODY RELATED TO ME GO TO AN UNREGULATED CAMP

                    BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE IN A PLACE WHERE THEY'RE SAFE.  BUT

                    -- BUT -- IF -- IF THE PARENTS THINK IT'S SAFE FOR THE CHILD NOT TO BE

                    VACCINATED, I'M PRETTY SURE THE PARENT IS GONNA BE OKAY WITH THIS

                    UNREGULATED CAMP.  JUST BECAUSE IT'S NOT REGULATED DOESN'T MEAN IT'S

                    UNSAFE, NECESSARILY.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO -- SO REGULATED CAMPS HAVE A

                    HIGHER MANDATED BURDEN OF SAFETY PRECAUTIONS EVEN TAKING THIS BILL OUT

                    OF THE -- PART OF THE CONVERSATION.  SO YOU'RE OKAY WITH -- IF A CHILD ISN'T

                    VACCINATED, YOU'RE OKAY WITH A CHILD GOING TO A POTENTIALLY UNSAFER

                    CAMP IF IT'S UNREGULATED JUST BECAUSE THEY -- THE FAMILY CHOSE NOT TO

                                         41



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    VACCINATE THEIR CHILD, FOR WHATEVER REASON THEY CHOOSE, JUST BECAUSE OF

                    THAT CHOICE?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  IF THE PARENT WANTS TO MAKE THE

                    CHOICE TO SEND THEIR CHILD TO AN UNREGULATED CAMP -- AND -- AND AGAIN,

                    I'M NOT SAYING THEY'RE UNSAFE.  BUT IF THE PARENT WANTS TO MAKE THAT

                    CHOICE -- BECAUSE I KNOW SOME PEOPLE ARE ALL FOR CHOICE IN -- IN THIS

                    REGARD -- THEY COULD DO THAT.  BUT TO ME THE OVERRIDING CONCERN IS

                    MAKING SURE THAT THE CHILDREN AS A WHOLE ARE SAFE.  AND THAT MEANS NOT

                    SPREADING ANY DISEASE THAT -- THAT DOESN'T HAVE -- THAT SHOULDN'T BE

                    SPREAD.  IT'S -- IT'S REALLY VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  DO YOU HAVE -- AND I KNOW YOU

                    MENTIONED YOU DON'T HAVE ANY DATA ON HOW MANY OF THE VACCINATED

                    ILLNESSES ARE CURRENTLY BEING SPREAD IN SUMMER CAMPS.  DO WE HAVE

                    ANY DATA ON THE AMOUNT OF CAMPERS IN NEW YORK AT REGULATED CAMPS

                    WHO ARE CURRENTLY UNVACCINATED?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I DO NOT.  MANY CAMPS WOULD

                    REQUIRE THE CHILD TO BE VACCINATED ANYWAY --

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  -- REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE PASS

                    THIS LEGISLATION.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE THAT IN

                    STATUTE THAT CAMPS CAN ALWAYS PUT IN PLACE A HIGHER BURDEN AND

                    MANDATE THAT ALL CAMPERS HAVE TO BE VACCINATED, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM

                    WITH ALLOWING THESE CAMPS TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION ON THEIR OWN,

                    AND ALLOWING THE PARENTS WHO CHOOSE TO SEND THEIR CHILD TO A CAMP TO

                                         42



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    BE AWARE OF WHAT THE CAMP PROCEDURES ARE, AND IF THEY HAVE AN

                    IMMUNOCOMPROMISED CHILD OR THEY JUST DON'T WANT THEIR CHILD TO BE IN

                    A CAMP WITH SOMEBODY WHO IS UNVACCINATED, TO ALLOW THAT PERSONAL

                    CHOICE TO SAY, WELL, I DON'T WANT TO SEND MY CHILD TO THIS CAMP.  I'LL

                    SEND THEM TO THIS OTHER CAMP.  WHY -- WE WANT -- WE WANT TO RESPECT

                    CHOICE IN ONE RESPECT, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO ALLOW CHOICE ON THE OTHER

                    SIDE.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, FIRST, THE FACT THAT PROBABLY

                    MOST REGULATED CAMPS DO REQUIRE VACCINATIONS, THAT'S GOOD BUT IT'S NOT

                    -- IT'S NOT A LEGAL REQUIREMENT.  SOME OF THEM MAY NOT DO THAT.  AND IN

                    TERMS OF CHOICE, I BELIEVE PEOPLE SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE CHOICES.  BUT

                    WHEN THEIR CHOICES IMPACT OTHER PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY LITTLE KIDS, THAT'S

                    WHERE WE HAVE TO TAKE A STAND ON PREVENTING THEM FROM DOING

                    SOMETHING THAT COULD BE BAD FOR OTHER CHILDREN.  IF A PARENT DOESN'T

                    WANNA VACCINATE THEIR KID, THAT'S -- THAT IS THEIR BUSINESS.  THEY CAN

                    DECIDE THAT.  BUT THEN THEY CAN'T DECIDE TO JEOPARDIZE SOMEBODY ELSE'S

                    KID.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO BECAUSE A CHILD -- A PARENT

                    CHOOSES NOT TO VACCINATE THEIR CHILD THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE FULL ACCESS TO

                    SOCIETY IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, YOU'RE PUTTING WORDS IN MY

                    MOUTH.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  A LITTLE BIT.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I AM SAYING THAT IF THE PARENT

                    CHOOSE -- OKAY.  I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF -- IT WASN'T TOO LONG AGO

                                         43



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    THAT SOMEBODY ON THE STREET SAW ME -- AND IT'S VERY UNUSUAL FOR THIS TO

                    HAPPEN IN MY DISTRICT BECAUSE MOST OF THE PEOPLE LIKE THAT AREN'T IN MY

                    DISTRICT.  BUT A PERSON ACCUSED ME OF THROWING HER KID OUT OF SCHOOL.

                    AND I SAID TO HER, I DIDN'T THROW YOUR KID OUT OF SCHOOL, YOU CHOSE TO

                    TAKE YOUR KID OUT OF SCHOOL.  YOU KNOW, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.  IF A

                    PARENT MAKES A CHOICE BECAUSE OF THEIR OWN POLITICAL BELIEFS, WHICH IS

                    WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO IN CHOOSING NOT TO VACCINATE, YOU KNOW, FINE.

                    BE MY GUEST.  JUST DON'T LET IT IMPACT OTHER CHILDREN.  DON'T LET IT -- THE

                    POTENTIAL EXISTS FOR CERTAIN -- FIRST OF ALL, THE VACCINE ISN'T 100

                    FOOLPROOF.  BUT IT'S A VERY HIGH PERCENTAGE, 97, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS,

                    IT'S NOT PERFECT.  AND -- AND THEN OF COURSE THERE ARE THE

                    IMMUNOCOMPROMISED KIDS.  THEY COULD CHOOSE -- A PARENT CAN CHOOSE

                    TO NOT VACCINATE THEIR CHILD, BUT I DON'T WANT THEM, AND I DON'T THINK

                    MOST OF US WANT THEM DOING SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO NEGATIVELY

                    IMPACT SOMEBODY ELSE'S CHILD BECAUSE THEY HAVE RIGHTS ALSO.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.  SO YOU MENTIONED THAT THE

                    CHOICE TO -- TO NOT VACCINATE IS A POLITICAL CHOICE.  BUT I AM AWARE OF

                    ALSO A LOT OF FOLKS ACROSS THE STATE OF VARYING FAITH BELIEFS THAT CHOOSE

                    NOT TO VACCINATE ON RELIGIOUS GROUNDS.  AND IF A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION,

                    NO MATTER THAT FAITH, OPERATES A REGULATED SUMMER CAMP BUT MEMBERS

                    OF THAT FAITH CHOOSE NOT TO VACCINATE FOR A CERTAIN PURPOSE, WOULD THE

                    STATE BE MANDATING THAT RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS FORCE ADHERENCE TO THEIR

                    FAITH TO VACCINATE TO HAVE ACCESS TO A CAMP THAT'S IN THE PERSON'S FAITH

                    GROUP?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I'M CERTAINLY NOT

                                         44



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    A RELIGIOUS SCHOLAR.  BUT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THERE ARE VIRTUALLY NO

                    RELIGIONS THAT SAY DON'T VACCINATE.  THAT'S JUST NOT --

                                 MR. JENSEN:  I'M NOT SAYING THE RELIGIONS ARE SAYING

                    --

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  THAT'S JUST NOT A THING.  AND IN

                    TERMS OF WHETHER IT'S AGAINST SOMEBODY'S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, WE DEBATED

                    THAT ALREADY.  WE RESOLVED IT ON THIS FLOOR.  WE PASSED A LAW.  THERE IS

                    NO NON-MEDICAL EXEMPTIONS TO VACCINE REQUIREMENTS FOR SCHOOLS IN

                    NEW YORK STATE.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  I -- I WASN'T A MEMBER OF THE -- THE

                    ASSEMBLY WHEN THAT BILL CAME UP, SO --

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  THAT MAY BE TRUE BUT NONETHELESS

                    IT'S THE LAW.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  I'M JUST SAYING I WASN'T ABLE TO DEBATE

                    THAT BILL OR TO -- TO BE A PART OF THAT DEBATE.  SO THIS IS -- THIS IS THE FIRST

                    TIME I'M DEBATING THIS LEGISLATION OR ANY TYPE OF LEGISLATION TO DO WITH

                    THIS, BUT I'M JUST CONCERNED.

                                 THANK YOU, MR. DINOWITZ, FOR ANSWERING MY

                    QUESTIONS.

                                 MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  I

                    CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND SCIENCE.  I BELIEVE IN SCIENCE.  I VACCINATE MYSELF,

                    MY CHILDREN, AND -- AND I CHOOSE TO DO THAT, MY WIFE AND I.  HOWEVER,

                    WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ACCESS TO SUMMER CAMPS, WHAT THIS LEGISLATION IS

                                         45



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    DOING IS TAKING OUT ALL AVAILABLE CHOICE AND CREATING NO OPPORTUNITIES

                    FOR FAMILIES WHO, FOR WHATEVER REASON, WHETHER IT'S RELIGIOUS, WHETHER

                    IT'S MEDICAL, WHETHER IT'S POLITICAL, WHATEVER THE REASON IS TO NOT HAVE

                    ACCESS TO A PART OF OUR SOCIETY THAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE ACCESS TO NOW.

                                 THE SPONSOR BRINGS UP THE VACCINE MANDATE THAT'S IN

                    SCHOOLS, BUT THERE IS ALREADY AN OPTION THAT IS ACCREDITED, THAT IS

                    REGULATED THROUGH A HOME SCHOOL CURRICULUM IF PARENTS CHOOSE TO

                    PURSUE THAT.  SIMPLY SAYING THAT WELL, IF THEY DON'T WANT TO GET A

                    VACCINE AND THEY CAN GO TO AN UNREGULATED CAMP WHERE THERE MAY BE

                    LOWER STANDARDS OF SAFETY FOR WELL-BEING AND SAFETY OF ALL CAMPERS, I

                    BELIEVE, TO A DEGREE, IS A RED HERRING.

                                 WE DON'T HAVE ANY DATA ON HOW MANY INCIDENTS OF

                    SPREAD OF VACCINATED ILLNESSES ARE HAPPENING AT SUMMER CAMPS.  WE

                    HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE ENTITIES THAT OPERATE CAMPS LIKE TLC FAMILY OF

                    CAMPS, THE YMCA, TOWNS, VILLAGES, COUNTIES, CITIES THAT OPERATE

                    CAMPS FOR THEIR -- THEIR CONSTITUENTS AND OUR MUTUAL CONSTITUENTS.  AND

                    WE'RE CREATING A TWO-TIER SYSTEM WHEN WE ALREADY HAVE A SYSTEM IN

                    PLACE THAT IS PROTECTING CHILDREN, THAT IS ALLOWING CAMPS TO HAVE A

                    HIGHER BURDEN OF ENTRANCE AND MAY MANDATE THAT ALL CAMPERS HAVE

                    VACCINES, AND ALLOWING PARENTS TO MAKE AN EDUCATED CHOICE ON

                    WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO THESE CAMPS

                    KNOWING THAT THERE MAY BE OTHER CHILDREN -- WHETHER

                    IMMUNOCOMPROMISED OR ACTIVELY CHOOSING NOT TO VACCINATE -- IN CLOSE

                    PROXIMITY TO THEM.  CERTAINLY UNDERSTANDING ONE OF THE REASONS WHY

                    WE PASSED -- AND EVEN THOUGH I WASN'T A MEMBER OF THIS CHAMBER FOR

                                         46



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    THIS DEBATE -- THE SCHOOL VACCINE REQUIREMENT IS BECAUSE SCHOOL

                    HAPPENS INDOORS, AND ALL ILLNESSES ARE MORE TRANSFERRABLE IN A CONFINED

                    SPACE.  WHEN YOU HAVE A DAY CAMP OR A SUMMER CAMP THAT'S

                    PREDOMINANTLY TAKING PLACE OUTSIDE, YOU DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN OR

                    ANYBODY ELSE IN THAT SAME SITUATION WHERE ILLNESS CAN SPREAD AS EASILY.

                                 SO CERTAINLY I BELIEVE IN KEEPING KIDS SAFE.  I BELIEVE

                    IN SCIENCE.  I BELIEVE IN VACCINES.  HOWEVER, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS

                    LEGISLATION, WITHOUT STAKEHOLDER BUY-IN, WITHOUT STAKEHOLDER

                    INVOLVEMENT OR ANY CLEAR DATA TO KNOW IF WE'RE ACTUALLY SOLVING A

                    PROBLEM THAT IS HAPPENING IN THIS STATE, I BELIEVE IT IS A STEP TOO FAR.

                                 THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. ARI BROWN.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  WILL

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YES, I WILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  THANK YOU, MR. SPONSOR.  JUST ONE

                    REAL QUESTION.  I DO APPRECIATE THE SENTIMENT WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO

                    BRING FORWARD.  FATHER OF SEVEN, GRANDFATHER TO SIX, WE CERTAINLY AS

                    GRANDFATHERS LOOK TO PROTECT OUR KIDS.  JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION.

                    YOU MENTIONED A PARENT -- OR A CHILD SHOULDN'T BE SENT TO A SCHOOL OR A

                    CAMP OR WHATEVER IT IS, THEY CAN MAKE THEIR OWN DETERMINATION BUT IT

                                         47



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    SHOULDN'T IMPACT OTHER CHILDREN.  A DECISION OF THE PARENT SHOULDN'T

                    IMPOSE THEIR WILL ON OTHER KIDS WHO MAY OR MAY NOT BE VACCINATED, BUT

                    THEY CAN BE INDEPENDENT.  DID I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I SAID PARENTS CAN DECIDE WHETHER

                    TO HAVE THEIR CHILDREN VACCINATED, AND THAT'S THEIR CHOICE.  BUT WHEN

                    THEY EXPOSE AN UNVACCINATED CHILD TO ANOTHER CHILD WHO MAYBE IS

                    VACCINATED, MAYBE IS NOT, MAYBE IS IMMUNOCOMPROMISED, THEN THEY'RE

                    TAKING AWAY THE CHOICE FROM OTHER PARENTS AND CHILDREN.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  THAT -- THAT WAS EXACTLY MY POINT,

                    MR. SPONSOR.  I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID.  IT'S -- IT'S THAT CHOICE,

                    TAKING AWAY THE ABILITY FOR THAT PARENT TO SAY, HEY, I DON'T WANT THEM

                    NEAR THIS PARTICULAR KID.  WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ABOUT A 200-POUND

                    MALE THAT IDENTIFIES AS A WOMAN PLAYING IN GIRL'S SPORTS?  WHAT'S -- YOU

                    KNOW, THE PARENTS DON'T --

                                 (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSSTALK)

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  MY OPINION IS THAT THE CHAIR IS

                    UNDOUBTEDLY --

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  LET ME --

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  -- GONNA RULE THAT'S NOT GERMANE TO

                    THIS DISCUSSION.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  LET ME FINISH.  LET ME FINISH.  AS I

                    WAS SAYING --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WE'RE GONNA WAIT

                    AND ASK AND ANSWER QUESTIONS.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  CORRECT.  I WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF

                                         48



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    SPEAKING, MADAM SPEAKER.  MY POINT WAS, AS GRANDPARENTS WE'RE

                    LOOKING OUT FOR OUR KIDS, AS YOU HAD SAID.  WE WANT A PARENT -- HEY, IF

                    THAT OTHER KID DOESN'T WANT TO BE VACCINATED, WHY IMPOSING THEIR WILL?

                    WHY IS IT ANY DIFFERENT WHEN A PERSON WHO IS MUCH STRONGER THAN A GIRL

                    -- A BOY WHO IS MUCH STRONGER THAN A -- THAN A YOUNG GIRL, TO BE

                    ALLOWED TO PLAY IN A SPORT PUTTING THOSE KIDS IN DANGER?  IS ONE GROUP

                    OF CHILDREN MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANOTHER?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  MY OPINION, RE -- REGARDLESS OF

                    WHAT I THINK OF THAT, IS THAT A -- AN -- A CHILD WHO IS 200 POUNDS BEING

                    NEAR A CHILD WHO IS LESS THAN 200 POUNDS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH

                    WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO SPREAD A DISEASE.  THERE MAY BE OTHER ISSUES

                    WHICH YOU FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT, BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SPREADING

                    A DISEASE, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL ABOUT AND THAT'S WHAT THIS DISCUSSION

                    IS ABOUT.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  THANK YOU, MR. SPONSOR.  SO

                    YOU'RE SAYING WE ARE ONLY GONNA PROTECT CHILDREN UNDER CERTAIN

                    CIRCUMSTANCES IN NEW YORK, BUT NOT LOOK AFTER CHILDREN IN ALL

                    CIRCUMSTANCES?  IS -- IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  DID YOU HEAR ME SAY THAT?

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  ACTUALLY, I DID.  BECAUSE YOU --

                    MR. SPONSOR, YOU HAD SAID --

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YOU DID?  WHAT'S THE -- WHAT'S THE

                    SOUND EQUIVALENT OF AN OPTICAL ILLUSION?  I'M NOT SURE, BUT THAT'S NOT

                    WHAT I SAID.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  VERY SIMPLE.  YOU HAD SAID THAT

                                         49



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    WE SHOULD -- IT'S NOT FAIR THAT ONE CHILD SHOULD NOT BE PROTECTED BASED

                    ON ANOTHER CHILD OR PARENT'S DECISION.  I -- I DON'T HAVE TO EXTRAPOLATE

                    OUT THAT FAR TO AGREE WITH YOU AND SAY WHY DON'T WE PROTECT ALL

                    CHILDREN, MR. SPONSOR.  WHY IS THAT SO DIFFERENT IN ANY WAY?  WE'RE

                    LOOKING TO PROTECT CHILDREN.  I MEAN, THERE ARE SO MANY VACCINATIONS

                    AND SO MANY DISEASES AND SO MANY CHILDREN OF DIFFERENT MAKE-UP.

                    WHY IS THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN NOT IMPORTANT TO YOU, MR. SPONSOR,

                    IN THAT REGARD?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  SO WHAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY SAYING,

                    SINCE I'M GONNA EXTRAPOLATE FROM WHAT YOU SAID, IS THAT YOU'RE EQUATING

                    A CHILD WHO'S UNVACCINATED AND POTENTIALLY IS CARRYING A DISEASE WITH A

                    TRANS CHILD.  THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT YOU SAID AND, FRANKLY, IT'S

                    OFFENSIVE.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  TO -- TO DEFEND CHILDREN IN ANY

                    REGARD NO MATTER WHAT WALK OF LIFE I DON'T THINK SHOULD BE OFFENSIVE,

                    MR. SPONSOR.  I -- I JUST WANT TO REMIND YOU, YOU HAD SAID IT'S NOT FAIR

                    THAT ONE PARENT OF A CHILD SHOULD MAKE A DECISION THAT WILL AFFECT

                    OTHERS.

                                 THANK YOU, MR. SPONSOR.  THANK YOU, MADAM

                    SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  READ THE LAST

                    SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT OCTOBER 1ST.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  A PARTY VOTE HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                         50



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MS. WALSH.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                    MINORITY CONFERENCE WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS PIECE OF

                    LEGISLATION.  BUT IF THERE ARE YES VOTES, THEY MAY BE CAST NOW AT THE

                    MEMBERS' SEATS.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                    MAJORITY CONFERENCE WILL SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION.  FOR THOSE THAT

                    WOULD LIKE TO VOTE IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, THEY COULD DO SO AT THEIR

                    DESK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  MADAM SPEAKER, CAN YOU CALL ON THE

                    MENTAL HEALTH COMMITTEE TO MEET IN THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MENTAL HEALTH

                    COMMITTEE, PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

                    MENTAL HEALTH COMMITTEE MEMBERS, MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE SPEAKER'S

                    CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 PAGE 5, RULES REPORT NO. 99, THE CLERK WILL READ.

                                         51



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A09140, RULES REPORT

                    NO. 99, ROSENTHAL, SHIMSKY.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW,

                    IN RELATION TO LIABILITY PROTECTIONS FOR PERSONS ADMINISTERING

                    VACCINATIONS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  AN EXPLANATION HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  THIS BILL WOULD EXTEND EXISTING

                    LIABILITY PROTECTION FOR HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS WHO ISSUE VACCINES IN

                    ACCORDANCE WITH STATE OR LOCAL GUIDELINES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MR. JENSEN.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  WILL

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  I THANK OUR COLLEAGUE FROM

                    MANHATTAN FOR YIELDING FOR SOME QUESTIONS.

                                 YOU MENTIONED THIS WOULD EXTEND EXISTING

                    PROTECTIONS.  WHAT ARE THE CURRENT LEGAL PROTECTIONS PROVIDERS HAVE IN

                    TERMS OF ADMINISTERING IMMUNIZATIONS OR VACCINES?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  WELL, AS LONG AS VACCINES ARE

                    ADMINISTERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON

                    IMMUNIZATION PRACTICES, VACCINE PROVIDERS ARE FULLY PROTECTED FROM

                                         52



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    LIABILITY.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  AND HOW WOULD THIS LEG -- WOULD THIS

                    LEGISLATION CHANGE ANY OF THE PROTECTIONS?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  NO, NO.  NO.  THEY WOULD BE THE

                    SAME.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO IF -- PROVIDERS ALREADY HAVE THE

                    PROTECTION IN STATE STATUTE?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  WELL, IF THEY ADHERE TO FEDERAL

                    RECOMMENDATIONS.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  IN EXISTING STATUTE, IS IT FEDERAL, STATE

                    AND LOCAL OR IS IT FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  RIGHT NOW WE ADHERE TO FEDERAL

                    STANDARDS.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO THERE'S NO LANGUAGE IN THE EXISTING

                    STATUTE ABOUT STATE OR LOCAL LAW -- OR STATE OR LOCAL STANDARDS?

                                 (CONFERENCING)

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  OKAY.  SO WHAT WE HAVE REFLECTS

                    THE FEDERAL STANDARDS.  HOWEVER, IN THE EVENT THAT THE FEDERAL

                    STANDARDS CHANGE, THE STATE COULD ESTABLISH ITS OWN.  SO THIS WOULD

                    CONFER LIABILITY IF THE PROVIDER ADHERES TO STATE STANDARDS.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO IN THE SITUATION RIGHT NOW, OR THAT

                    WE'RE -- WE'RE SEEKING TO FIX, IF A NEW YORK-BASED PROVIDER

                    ADMINISTERS A VACCINATION, THEY HAVE TO -- THEY ARE GOVERNED BY

                    FEDERAL REGULATIONS IN TERMS OF LIABILITY UPON ANY INCIDENT OF VACCINE

                    INJURY, CORRECT?

                                         53



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  CORRECT.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO IF THERE -- A PATIENT WANTED TO HAVE

                    A RIGHT OF ACTION AGAINST THAT PROVIDER, WOULD THEY HAVE THE ACTION IN

                    FEDERAL COURT OR IN STATE COURT?

                                 (CONFERENCING)

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  SO -- SO RIGHT NOW THAT WOULD GO

                    TO FEDERAL COURT OF CLAIMS.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  I WOULD EXPECT IF THEY'RE

                    ADHERING TO STATE, IT WOULD GO TO A STATE COURT.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO IF THIS -- THIS LEGISLATION WERE TO BE

                    ENACTED INTO LAW --

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YES.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  -- AND WE ALLOW -- WE -- WE -- WE

                    CREATE A STATE OR A LOCAL STANDARD FOR LIABILITY --

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  WELL, STATE.  THIS ONLY CONCERNS

                    --

                                 MR. JENSEN:  NO, THE LEGISLATION SAYS LOCAL, ALSO.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  OKAY.  WELL, I GUESS BECAUSE

                    WE'RE STATE I'M TALKING ABOUT STATE.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  YEAH.  SO -- BUT THE LEGISLATION SAYS

                    THE STATE OR LOCAL STANDARD.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YES, YES.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  IT WOULDN'T REMOVE THE EXISTENCE OF A

                    FEDERAL STANDARD.  SO WOULDN'T A NEW YORKER STILL BE ABLE TO BRING A

                                         54



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    RIGHT OF ACTION FOR A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE A

                    STATE STANDARD?  BECAUSE DOESN'T FEDERAL LAW HAVE PREEMINENCE OVER

                    STATE LAW?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YES.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.  SO WOULDN'T -- IT WOULD ALL BE

                    ABOUT THE JURISDICTION THAT THE INJURED INDIVIDUAL BRINGS THE RIGHT --

                    RIGHT OF ACTION AGAINST.  SO EVEN THOUGH WE'RE SAYING THAT WE'RE

                    GRANTING THEM STATE PROTECTION OR EXCLUSION FROM LIABILITY, SOMEBODY

                    CAN STILL MAKE THE CLAIM IN FEDERAL COURT.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  IT DEPENDS IF -- IF THESE ARE

                    RECOMMENDATIONS THAT, LET'S SAY, THE STATE STILL ADHERES TO.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  YES.  BUT IF FEDERAL LAW STILL PROVIDES

                    A CERTAIN GUIDANCE NATIONWIDE BECAUSE -- AND I'M NOT A LAWYER, BUT MY

                    UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW IS THAT THE STATES MAY ENACT A HIGHER BURDEN

                    OF LAW, BUT THAT THE FEDERAL LAW STILL EXISTS.  SO IF THE FEDERAL GUIDANCE

                    IS STILL IN PLACE --

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YES.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  -- EVEN THOUGH NEW YORK STATE

                    CHOOSES TO NOT ABIDE BY IT, IT DOESN'T ERASE THE FACT THAT THE FEDERAL LAW

                    STILL EXISTS.  AND IT WOULD ALL BE ABOUT -- IT WOULD ALL BE ABOUT WHERE

                    THE INJURED -- THE PERSON CLAIMING AN INJURY WOULD FILE A CLAIM, NOT

                    NECESSARILY WHERE THE PROVIDER CHOOSES TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AGAINST A

                    CLAIM.  AM I CORRECT IN MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW?

                                 (CONFERENCING)

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  THIS -- THIS IS NOT CHANGING,

                                         55



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    OBVIOUSLY, THE FEDERAL LAW OR WHERE ONE CAN SUE.  THIS IS ABOUT

                    ESTABLISHING STATE STANDARDS.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.  OKAY.  THANK YOU TO THE

                    SPONSOR FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  FROM MANHATTAN.  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO, HEARING FROM FORMER MEMBERS OF

                    THE -- OF THE BENCH AND THE BAR THAT THE STATE CAN HAVE A HIGHER

                    STANDARD, BUT YET THE FEDERAL GUIDELINES ARE STILL IN EXISTENCE, MY BELIEF

                    IS THIS IS A SIMPLY -- THIS LEGISLATION MAY NOT HAVE THE INTENDED RESULT

                    BECAUSE IT'S NOT THE PROVIDER WHO WOULD CHOOSE WHERE THE CLAIM OF

                    INJURY HAPPENS, IT WOULD IT -- IT WOULD BE TAKING PLACE WHERE THE

                    PERSON FILES A CLAIM.  AND THE INJURED INDIVIDUAL WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO

                    FILE A FEDERAL LAWSUIT ALLEGING MALPRACTICE OR WHATEVER THE

                    TERMINOLOGY IN VACCINE INJURY WOULD BE, ALREADY EXISTING THAT WE

                    ALREADY HAVE MEDICAL MALPRACTICE STANDARDS.  AND AS WE'VE HEARD TIME

                    AND TIME AGAIN THAT THE ADMINISTERING OF IMMUNIZATIONS OR VACCINES IS

                    A MEDICAL PROCEDURE, WHICH IT IS, WOULDN'T THESE PROVIDERS STILL BE

                    UNDER PROTECTION OF THEIR MEDICAL MALPRACTICE COVERAGE?

                                 SO CERTAINLY, I THINK THIS IS A REACTION TO A MOVEMENT

                    THAT HAPPENED FOUR TO FIVE YEARS AGO AND IS UNNECESSARY TO PROTECT

                    PROVIDERS IN THIS STATE.  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. ARI BROWN.

                                         56



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  WILL

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  THANK YOU SO MUCH.  I TRY TO BREAK

                    IT DOWN INTO DIFFERENT SECTIONS.  I'M CERTAINLY NOT AN ATTORNEY, SO JUST

                    FOR MY OWN EDIFICATION.  THE FIRST SECTION I CALL "EQUAL PROTECTION."  SO

                    UNDER THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND THE

                    PARALLEL GUARANTEES IN THE NEW YORK CONSTITUTION, WHY IS IT LAWFUL TO

                    CARVE OUT A SPECIAL LIABILITY SHIELD FOR THIS CLASS OF DEFENDANTS WHILE

                    LEAVING SIMILARLY-SITUATED DEFENDANTS SUBJECT TO ORDINARY NEGLIGENT

                    RULES?  LIKE IN MY INDUSTRY WE HAVE THAT SCAFFOLD LAW.  IT'S LIKE THE

                    REVERSE UNIVERSE OF THIS BILL.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  PHYSICIANS HAVE LIABILITY

                    PROTECTIONS THROUGHOUT ALL SECTIONS OF LAW.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  I -- I APOLOGIZE.  I COULDN'T HEAR --

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  I SAID PHYSICIANS HAVE LIABILITY

                    PROTECTIONS UNDER ALL DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF LAW.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  I -- I COULDN'T HEAR.  SO WHAT

                    YOU'RE SAYING IS ONE CLASS OF WORKER OR EMPLOYEE HAS CERTAIN

                    PROTECTIONS AND PRECLUDES THEM FROM LIABILITIES OVER OTHERS?  IS THAT

                    WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  WE'RE -- WE'RE TALKING ABOUT --

                                         57



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  I COULDN'T HEAR.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HEALTHCARE

                    PROVIDERS WHO ADMINISTER VACCINES IN THIS CASE.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  OKAY.  THANK YOU.

                                 SO, THE NEXT SECTION I'LL CALL "DUE PROCESS."  UNDER THE

                    NEW YORK CONSTITUTION AND ALSO THE 14TH AMENDMENT UNDER THE

                    UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, WHICH BY THE WAY, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH

                    THE 14TH AMENDMENT OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, SPECIFICALLY THE DUE

                    PROCESS SECTION?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  ARE YOU?

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  ACTUALLY, I AM.  SO THE -- THE STATES

                    CANNOT DEPRIVE ANY PERSON OF LIFE, LIBERTY, PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE

                    PROCESS.  AND THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO GET TO WITH -- WITH THIS PARTICULAR

                    SITUATION.  SO WHAT'S THE LEGAL BASIS FOR THIS IMMUNITY -- I APOLOGIZE, I

                    DON'T HAVE A BETTER WORD -- SCHEME IF IT DEPRIVES INJURED NEW YORKERS

                    OF MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY TO PURSUE CLAIMS THAT WOULD OTHERWISE EXIST

                    UNDER NORMAL ORDINARY TORT LAW?

                                 (CONFERENCING)

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YES, SO -- SO PERHAPS YOU DON'T

                    KNOW THAT UNDER THIS BILL AND UNDER FEDERAL GUIDELINES, SOMEONE WHO

                    CLAIMS THEY ARE HARMED THROUGH A VACCINE CAN STILL GO FOR GROSS

                    NEGLIGENCE AND WILLFUL MISCONDUCT.  SO, THE AVENUE TO SUE IS NOT CLOSED

                    OFF.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  THANK YOU.

                                 THE NEXT SECTION -- AGAIN, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT JUST

                                         58



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    FROM WHAT I READ FROM THE BILL -- WE'LL CALL THIS SECTION "ACCESS TO

                    COURTS."  SO, UNDER THE NEW YORK CONSTITUTION AND THE FEDERAL

                    CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK PROTECTS -- PROTECTING ACCESS TO JUDICIAL

                    REDRESS, WHICH LIKE YOU SAID, THERE'S CERTAIN SECTIONS THAT THEY CAN GO,

                    BUT NOT IN EVERY ASPECT OF THIS PARTICULAR LAW.  HOW DOES THIS BILL AVOID

                    THE ARGUMENT THAT IT PLACES AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL BARRIER BETWEEN INJURED

                    PEOPLE AND THE COURTS?  IN OTHER WORDS, DO YOU THINK IT'S LEGAL AND

                    CORRECT TO TAKE AWAY THE PRACTICAL RIGHTS TO GO TO COURT, EFFECTIVELY

                    BRINGING -- YOU KNOW, BARRING INJURED NEW YORKERS FROM GETTING THEIR

                    DAY IN COURT, WHICH SOME ASPECTS OF THIS BILL SEEMS TO DO?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  WELL, AS I SAID IN THE PREVIOUS

                    QUESTION, IT DOESN'T BAR A PATH TO COURT IF THE PERSON IS SUING ON THE

                    BASIS OF WILLFUL MISCONDUCT OR GROSS NEGLIGENCE, WHICH IS THE STANDARD

                    CURRENTLY UNDER FEDERAL LAW.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  OKAY.  THANK YOU, MADAM

                    SPONSOR.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YOU'RE WELCOME.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MR. A. BROWN:  ON THE BILL.  THIS BILL, ASSEMBLY

                    BILL 9140, IT SEEMS TO EXPAND THE LIABILITY PROTECTIONS IN WAYS THAT

                    RAISES SERIOUS CONSTITUTIONAL CONCERNS UNDER THE NEW YORK

                    CONSTITUTION AND THE 14TH AMENDMENT.  IT APPEARS TO FAVOR ONE CLASS

                    OF ACTORS AND RESTRICT A MEANINGFUL LEGAL RECOURSE FOR INJURED NEW

                    YORKERS, AND INVITE CHALLENGES BASED ON DUE PROCESS, EQUAL PROTECTION,

                                         59



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    ACCESS TO COURTS, RETROACTIVITY AND SEPARATION OF POWERS.  THE

                    LEGISLATION -- LEGISLATURE SHOULD NOT BE CREATING BROAD IMMUNITY

                    WITHOUT CLEAR CONSTITUTIONAL FOOTING AND COMPELLING PUBLIC

                    JUSTIFICATION.

                                 LOOK, I LOOK AT THIS (INDISCERNIBLE) BECAUSE IN MY

                    INDUSTRY WE HAVE THAT BLANKET RESPONSIBILITY FOR ONE AND TOTAL

                    EXONERATION FOR THE OTHER UNDER THE SCAFFOLD LAW.  I DON'T KNOW,

                    MAYBE BECAUSE ONE GUY SWINGS A HAMMER AND ANOTHER GUY'S A DOCTOR

                    WE THINK WE CAN DO IT.

                                 BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON -- AND FOR THAT REASON I'LL BE

                    VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE.  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  A PARTY VOTE HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MS. WALSH.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                    REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS PIECE OF

                    LEGISLATION, BUT IF THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS THEY MAY BE CAST NOW AT THEIR

                    SEATS.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                    MAJORITY CONFERENCE WILL BE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE ON THIS PIECE OF

                                         60



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    LEGISLATION.  FOR THOSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO VOTE DIFFERENTLY, THEY CAN DO

                    SO AT THEIR DESK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  MADAM SPEAKER, CAN YOU CALL THE

                    COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL SERVICES TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 SOCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MEMBERS, PLEASE MAKE

                    YOUR WAY TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.  SOCIAL SERVICES

                    COMMITTEE MEMBERS, PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE SPEAKER'S

                    CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  MADAM SPEAKER, CAN WE NOW TAKE UP

                    THE FOLLOWING BILLS:  CALENDAR NO. 2 ON PAGE 6 BY MR. HEVESI,

                    CALENDAR NO. 30 ON PAGE 9 BY MS. PAULIN, CALENDAR NO. 53 ON PAGE 10

                    BY MS. CRUZ, AND CALENDAR NO. 54 ON PAGE 11 BY MR. DINOWITZ.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  MADAM SPEAKER, CAN YOU CALL ON THE

                    TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE TO MEET IN THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE

                    ROOM?

                                         61



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  TRANSPORTATION

                    COMMITTEE MEMBERS, PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE SPEAKER'S

                    CONFERENCE ROOM.  TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS, MAKE YOUR

                    WAY TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 PAGE 6, CALENDAR NO. 2, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A00065-B, CALENDAR

                    NO. 2, HEVESI, LAVINE, DINOWITZ, SEAWRIGHT, PIROZZOLO, PEOPLES-

                    STOKES, OTIS, SIMON, SAYEGH, SHRESTHA, KAY, ROMERO, KASSAY,

                    MCMAHON, CRUZ, SHIMSKY, BURDICK, ROSENTHAL, GALLAGHER.  AN ACT TO

                    AMEND THE SOCIAL SERVICES LAW, IN RELATION TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A

                    STATEWIDE SUPERVISED VISITATION INITIATIVE TO SUPPORT SAFE AND STRUCTURED

                    PARENTING TIME.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  AN EXPLANATION HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MR. HEVESI.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  GOOD

                    AFTERNOON, COLLEAGUES.

                                 THIS BILL WILL ESTABLISH A STATEWIDE SUPERVISED

                    VISITATION INITIATIVE TO SUPPORT SAFE AND STRUCTURED PARENTING TIME IN

                    NEW YORK STATE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MS. WALSH.

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

                    SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                         62



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. HEVESI:  BE MY PLEASURE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH.  SO, WE

                    DEBATED THIS BILL LAST YEAR, BUT THEN IT DIDN'T GET OVER THE FINISH LINE IN

                    THE SENATE.  SO HERE WE ARE AGAIN.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  YES.

                                 MS. WALSH:  FIRST OF ALL, HAS THE BILL CHANGED AT ALL

                    FROM LAST YEAR?

                                 MR. HEVESI:  SUBSTANTIVELY, THE BILL HAS NOT

                    CHANGED, BUT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY IT'S GONNA REQUIRE IS GONNA INCREASE

                    BECAUSE WE ARE NOW -- LAST WE SPOKE I BELIEVE WE WERE AT 28 COUNTIES

                    THAT DIDN'T HAVE SUPERVISED VISITATION, WE'RE NOW UP TO 32.

                                 MS. WALSH:  SO WHAT IS THE -- WHAT IS THE PRICE TAG

                    ESTIMATED FOR THE --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  OCA HAS IT AT 25 MILLION.

                                 MS. WALSH:  SO YOU SAID 25 MILLION LAST YEAR,

                    THOUGH.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  I THOUGHT IT WAS -- I -- I APOLOGIZE.  I

                    -- THERE MAY BE A DISCREPANCY.  WE'LL CHECK, BUT... DID I SAY 25 MILLION

                    LAST YEAR?

                                 MS. WALSH:  YOU DID.  YOU SAID 25 MILLION LAST

                    YEAR AND I SAID THAT WON'T BE ENOUGH.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  I'M GONNA STICK WITH THE OCA

                    ESTIMATE AT 25- WITH ROOM FOR GROWTH BECAUSE OF THE EXTRA COUNTIES

                    NOW.

                                         63



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MS. WALSH:  CERTAINLY, WITH ROOM FOR GROWTH.  YES.

                                 SO, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I REMEMBER TALKING ABOUT

                    WITH YOU LAST YEAR WAS THE IDEA THAT THE GOAL WOULD BE TO GET SOME

                    MONEY PLACED IN THE BUDGET -- IT WOULD NEED TO BE PLACED IN THE BUDGET

                    TO SUPPORT OFFICE OF VICTIM SERVICES THAT'S GOING TO BE TASKED WITH

                    DEVELOPING THIS PROGRAM AND, YOU KNOW, FUNDING THIS PROGRAM AT THE

                    STATE LEVEL.  WHAT PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE IN TERMS OF GETTING THIS AS A

                    BUDGET LINE?  WAS IT IN THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET OR WAS IT IN

                    EITHER OF THE ONE-HOUSE BUDGETS?

                                 MR. HEVESI:  IT WAS IN THE ASSEMBLY ONE-HOUSE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  BUT I DON'T BELIEVE WE'RE GONNA

                    ACHIEVE SUCCESS IN THIS BUDGET.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  AND WHY IS THAT?

                                 MR. HEVESI:  WELL, FIRST, WE HAVEN'T STARTED THE

                    NUMBERS GAME, BUT CONSIDERING THE NUMBER OF PRIORITIES THAT WE HAVE

                    AS A HOUSE THAT ARE IN FRONT OF THIS ONE, I DON'T BELIEVE THIS IS GONNA

                    MAKE THE CUT WHEN WE START CRUNCHING NUMBERS.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  WELL, THAT'S -- THAT'S

                    REFRESHINGLY TRANSPARENT AND HONEST, AND I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  I'M SORRY IF I THREW YOU OFF.  BUT OKAY,

                    YOU'RE WELCOME.

                                 MS. WALSH:  NO, NO, NO.  IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, A LOT

                    OF TIMES ON OUR SIDE OF THE AISLE WE -- WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHAT

                    NUMBERS ARE BEING CONSIDERED OR ANYTHING UNTIL WE GET HANDED A

                                         64



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    MEMO THAT'S WARM AND WE HAVE TO GET BRIEFED AND IMMEDIATELY VOTE

                    ON IT.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  ME, TOO.  ME, TOO.

                                 MS. WALSH:  BUT YOU HAVE INTEL ON THIS ONE, SO --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  THAT'S TRUE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- I'M APPRECIATIVE FOR THAT.  THAT'S

                    GREAT.

                                 SO MY QUESTION, THEN, IS LET'S SAY THAT THIS BILL IS

                    PASSED FROM HERE AND IT -- ACCORDING TO THE LEGISLATION IT STATES THAT THIS

                    ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 180TH DAY AFTER IT SHALL HAVE BECOME LAW.

                    SO WHAT HAPPENS IF IT GETS PASSED AND THERE IS NO FUNDING IN THIS YEAR'S

                    BUDGET?

                                 MR. HEVESI:  SO I -- I WOULD BE SURPRISED IF IT

                    PASSED WITHOUT FUNDING.  SO IF THE GOVERNOR'S GONNA SIGN THIS INTO LAW,

                    IT WOULD HAVE TO BE WITH FUNDING, OTHERWISE YOU'RE CREATING A STRUCTURE

                    WITHOUT ANY REAL -- REAL TEETH TO IT.  SO I'D BE STUNNED IF THE GOVERNOR

                    DIDN'T PUT MONEY IN IT IF SHE WAS GONNA SIGN IT, OR SAY, NO, COME BACK

                    NEXT YEAR IN THE BUDGET.

                                 MS. WALSH:  WELL, WHEN THE -- SO -- AND I

                    APOLOGIZE BECAUSE I GUESS I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS PART.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  OKAY.

                                 MS. WALSH:  LET'S SAY THAT WE EVENTUALLY, SOME DAY

                    SOON, PASS THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, RIGHT, AND IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY PROVISION IN

                    IT BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT'S LIKELY THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  RIGHT.

                                         65



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- BE IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET.  WE PASS

                    THIS BILL THIS YEAR, THOUGH, AND IN THIS -- IN THIS LEGISLATION IT HAS AN

                    EFFECTIVE DATE OF SIX MONTHS.  YOU'RE SAYING THAT IF THE GOVERNOR SIGNS

                    IT, SHE WOULD BE FUNDING IT.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  OTHERWISE --

                                 MR. WALSH:  IN WHAT MECHANISM?  HOW'S SHE

                    GONNA FUND IT IF THE BUDGET'S ALREADY BEEN PASSED FOR THIS YEAR?

                                 MR. HEVESI:  OH, NO -- I'VE -- WE'VE BEEN AROUND A

                    LONG TIME.  WE'VE SEEN THE WAY GOVERNORS ARE ABLE TO PUT IN MONEY

                    POST-BUDGET IF THEY HAVE THE WHEREWITHAL TO DO IT.  I'M ASSUMING THAT

                    THIS WILL BE THE SAME CASE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  SO -- I MEAN, I -- I DIDN'T KNOW THAT.

                    SO --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  OH.

                                 MS. WALSH:  NO.  WHERE WOULD SHE GO FIND THAT

                    MONEY AFTER THE FACT?

                                 MR. HEVESI:  SO THE -- THE -- POTENTIALLY HOPEFULLY

                    WITH THE OFFICE OF VICTIM SERVICES OR IN THE OCFS BUDGET FOR NOW,

                    AND THEN SHE'LL COME BACK MORE FOR NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET TO MAKE IT

                    WHOLE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE.  IN OTHER

                    WORDS, JUST TAKE THE -- TAKE THE MONEY OUT AND EARMARK IT FROM THE

                    EXISTING BUDGET LINE, AND THEN NEXT YEAR --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  YEAH.

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- PUT MORE MONEY IN TO COVER WHAT

                                         66



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    SHE ALREADY TOOK.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  YEAH.  AND THAT'S ONE REASONABLE WAY

                    TO DO IT.  IT'S JUST -- IF -- IF THE GOVERNOR IS SO INCLINED TO GET THIS UP AND

                    RUNNING, THERE'S WAYS TO DO IT.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  OKAY.  AND HAVE THERE BEEN

                    ANY CONVERSATIONS THAT YOU'VE HAD WHICH YOU COULD SHARE THAT THAT

                    COULD BE A LIKELY SCENARIO?

                                 MR. HEVESI:  I'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE EXECUTIVE,

                    THEIR INTERGOVERNMENTAL STAFF.  LIKE ALL OF OUR STAFF HERE, THEY ARE

                    TRAINED NEVER TO PROMISE ANYTHING, SO I GIVE THEM -- GIVE THEM CREDIT.

                    BUT MY SENSE IS CONSIDERING WE HAVE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION

                    SUPPORT, YOU AND I BOTH UNDERSTAND THE -- THE NEED FOR FAMILIES AND

                    KIDS AND HOW THIS IS CREATING A BACKLOG IN THE COURT SYSTEM.  I'M PRETTY

                    SURE THAT THIS WILL BE LOOKED ON FAVORABLY AT SOME POINT.  I'M FRUSTRATED

                    THAT IT WASN'T IN THIS BUDGET, BUT WE'LL -- YOU KNOW, WE'RE RELENTLESS.

                    WE'LL KEEP COMING BACK.

                                 MS. WALSH:  NO, I DO ADMIRE THE PERSISTENCE.  AND

                    I DO COMPLETELY ACKNOWLEDGE AND WILL SAY -- SAY NOW AND SAY LATER

                    THAT I THINK THAT THERE DEFINITELY IS A NEED TO PROVIDE SUPERVISED

                    VISITATION.  HAVING WORKED IN FAMILY COURT FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, I

                    RECOGNIZE THE NEED.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  THANK YOU.

                                 MS. WALSH:  IT'S REALLY -- IT'S THAT KIND OF MAYBE

                    CHICKEN-AND-EGG KIND OF SITUATION WHERE YOU WANT TO GET IT DONE BUT

                    YOU'VE GOT TO SOMEHOW LINE THE PROGRAM UP WITH AN ACCURATE ESTIMATE.

                                         67



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    I THINK PART OF THE -- THE FEAR THAT I HAVE, WHICH I'D LIKE TO JUST MAKE AS

                    PART OF THE LEGISLATIVE RECORD, IS THAT IN NO EVENT DO I WANT THESE COSTS

                    TO BE SHIFTED UPON LOCALITIES --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  ME, TOO.

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- FOR DEVELOPING THE PROGRAM.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  ME, TOO.  AND -- AND JUST TO GIVE YOU

                    SOME COMFORT ON THAT, LOOK, I'VE BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME NOW.  I'M

                    NOT OF THE GOVERNOR CUOMO WING OF THE PARTY WHERE WE'RE STICKING IT

                    TO COUNTIES EVERY CHANCE WE GOT.  I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT.  I HATED WHEN

                    HE DID IT.  IT WAS STUPID.  THE STATE CAN GENERATE THE MONEY FOR THIS,

                    AND THEY SHOULD.

                                 MS. WALSH:  BECAUSE -- BECAUSE IN THE BILL ITSELF,

                    THE BILL LANGUAGE, IT STATES THAT -- IT STATES THAT IT IS THE INTENT OF THIS

                    SECTION TO PROVIDE STATE SUPPORT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AT LEAST ONE

                    PROGRAM IN EACH COUNTY, ET CETERA.  BUT PROVIDING SUPPORT AND PICKING

                    UP THE COMPLETE TAB FOR THE WHOLE PROGRAM, IT DOESN'T SAY THAT IN THE

                    LEGISLATION.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  IT DOESN'T.  BUT I WILL GO ON THE RECORD

                    AND TELL YOU MY INTENT IS TO HAVE THIS COMPLETELY STATE-FUNDED WITHOUT

                    A MATCH OR ANYTHING FROM THE COUNTIES.  THE COUNTIES DON'T HAVE

                    ENOUGH MONEY TO COVER THIS.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.

                                 NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS I DID NOTICE IS THAT IT LISTED IN

                    THE BILL LANGUAGE ITSELF THE KIND OF CASES THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR A

                    DETERMINATION IN THE COURT'S DISCRETION TO ALLOW VISITATION, SUPERVISED

                                         68



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    VISITATION.  ONE OF THE THINGS IT MENTIONED WAS CHILD PROTECTIVE

                    PROCEEDINGS, AND THAT WAS INTERESTING TO ME BECAUSE THOSE WOULD BE

                    ARTICLE 10 CASES.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  MM-HMM.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THOSE ARTICLE 10 CASES RIGHT NOW, AT

                    LEAST UPSTATE IN THE AREA THAT I PRACTICE, MAYBE IT'S DIFFERENT IN THE CITY,

                    I DON'T KNOW.  BUT WHERE I PRACTICE, SUPERVISED VISITATION IN AN ARTICLE

                    10 CASE WOULD BE PROVIDED CURRENTLY THROUGH THE CASEWORKERS THAT

                    WORK FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  WELL, THAT'S INTERESTING.

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- WHICH WOULD BE COUNTY MONEY.  SO

                    ARE -- IT WOULD BE COUNTY -- THE COUNTY IS SUPPORTING THAT.  SO IN A WAY,

                    BY CREATING THIS PROGRAM WOULD WE BE TAKING SOMETHING OFF THE PLATE

                    AND OFF THE FINANCIAL PLATE OF THE COUNTY?

                                 MR. HEVESI:  THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.  SO THE

                    ANSWER IS SINCE IT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE HEARD OF IT, I DON'T KNOW.  BUT IT

                    SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT THING.  WE'RE PUTTING IN STATE MONIES THAT TAKES

                    SOME OF THE BURDEN OFF THE COUNTIES, THAT'D BE TERRIFIC.

                                 MS. WALSH:  IT WOULD TAKE -- IF THIS IS -- IF THIS IS

                    THE CASE, IT WOULD TAKE MONEY -- OR RESPONSIBILITY, TOO, OFF THE COUNTY

                    BECAUSE THOSE CASEWORKERS, IN ADDITION TO INVESTIGATING HOTLINES OF

                    ABUSE OR NEGLECT, EDUCATIONAL NEGLECT, ET CETERA, THEY ALSO --

                    ADDITIONALLY, THE CASEWORKERS HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO ACT AS

                    SUPERVISORS, AND THAT WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT TIME COMMITMENT THAT

                    THEY HAVE EACH WEEK THAT THEY WOULD NOT -- NO LONGER HAVE TO DO.

                                         69



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    THEY COULD DIVERT THEIR ATTENTION TO OTHER TASKS --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  WHICH WOULD BE A GOOD THING.

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- THAT THEY HAVE WITHIN THE OFFICE,

                    WHICH WOULD BE A POSITIVE.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  YEAH.  SO, LOOK.  THE -- THE -- I THINK

                    WHAT YOU'RE INDICATING IS THE LACK OF SUPERVISED VISITATION HAS CAUSED

                    YOUR CASEWORKERS TO ADJUST.  AND TO WASTE -- IT'S NOT A WASTE OF THEIR

                    TIME, BUT TO SPEND THEIR TIME SUPERVISING VISITATION WHEN THEY COULD BE

                    DOING ALL (INDISCERNIBLE) THINGS TO HELP THESE KIDS AND FAMILIES.  SO I

                    AGREE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  ALL RIGHT.  THAT'S WONDERFUL.

                    SO LET'S SEE.  LET ME GET BACK TO MY NOTES HERE.

                                 SO, TALKING ABOUT -- ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT THE BILL

                    THAT -- I WILL BE VERY HONEST, I -- I DON'T PARTICULARLY CARE FOR ABOUT THE

                    BILL --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  SURE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- IS THAT IT ESSENTIALLY TASKS THE OFFICE

                    OF VICTIM SERVICES, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE OFFICE FOR THE PREVENTION

                    OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, TO ESTABLISH THIS STATEWIDE SUPERVISED VISITATION

                    INITIATIVE, BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY PUT ANY MEAT ON THE BONES ABOUT WHAT

                    THAT -- WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE.  I KNOW THAT YOU MENTIONED AT THE

                    BEGINNING THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF COUNTIES THAT NO LONGER HAVE

                    SUPERVISED VISITATION PROGRAMS AVAILABLE FOR NON-ARTICLE 10 CASES --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  MM-HMM.

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- AND SO -- BUT IT DOESN'T -- IT DOESN'T

                                         70



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    REALLY GOING INTO MUCH DETAIL ABOUT, LIKE, WHO'S -- WHO'S GOING TO GET IT.

                    I KNOW IT'S IN THE DISCRETION OF THE COURT, BUT WHETHER PARENTS ARE GOING

                    TO GET IT WHO HAVE THE MEANS, WHETHER IT'S GOING TO BE AVAILABLE ON A

                    SLIDING SCALE.  WHAT -- YOU KNOW, IF YOU -- FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU QUALIFY

                    FOR A PUBLIC DEFENDER, WILL THAT BE SUFFICIENT TO BE RECEIVING FREE

                    SUPERVISED VISITATION?  YOU KNOW, THAT KIND OF THING.  SO IT JUST SEEMS

                    LACKING IN THAT WAY.  ARE WE JUST GIVING THEM THE TASK AND THEN WE'RE

                    JUST -- WE'RE JUST SAYING, GO FOR IT.  GO DEVELOP THIS PROGRAM.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  YES AND NO.  SO THE YES IS WE PICKED

                    THE OFFICE OF VICTIM SERVICES -- AND WE COVERED THIS LAST TIME --

                    BECAUSE THE VAST MAJORITY, UNFORTUNATELY, OF THESE CASES ARE DOMESTIC

                    VIOLENCE CASES.  SO WE THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE AGENCY.

                    WITH REGARD TO -- YOU KNOW WHAT?  ASK ME THAT AGAIN.  I WENT IN

                    ANOTHER DIRECTION.  I APOLOGIZE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  NO, NO.  THAT'S FINE.  I WAS JUST TALKING

                    ABOUT THE -- THE LACK OF SPECIFICITY.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  OH, OF COURSE.  I'M SO SORRY.

                                 MS. WALSH:  NO, NO.  THAT'S FINE.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  THE LACK OF SPECIFICITY.  SO THE

                    GUIDELINES THAT WE USED TO PUT THIS TOGETHER CAME FROM THE OFFICE OF

                    VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND THEY HAVE

                    A NUMBER OF PARAMETERS THAT EACH OF THE LOCALITIES WILL HAVE TO

                    SUBSCRIBE TO:  SECURITY PROTOCOLS, MANDATORY REPORTS, THAT KIND OF

                    THING.  BUT WE ARE LEAVING THE BONES TO BE PUT ON BY OBS AND THE

                    COUNTIES.  THE COUNTIES ARE GONNA COME BACK AND PROVIDE A COUPLE OF

                                         71



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    PIECES OF INFORMATION -- I THINK IT'S ABOUT FIVE OR SIX -- AND ONCE WE GET

                    A SENSE OF WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR, THEN I'M COMFORTABLE THAT OUR STATE

                    DEPARTMENT WILL BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH THAT.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  WHAT ABOUT IN TERMS OF

                    PAYMENT?  IS THERE -- IS THERE A DESIRE TO DO THIS ON A SLIDING SCALE?

                    BECAUSE -- AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE SAYING -- AND I DO THINK THAT IN

                    CASES INVOLVING ALLEGATIONS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE THAT THAT WOULD BE A

                    VERY APPROPRIATE SITUATION TO HAVE SUPERVISED VISITATION.  BUT THERE ARE

                    ALSO AN AWFUL LOT OF JUST REGULAR FAMILY COURT CASES WITH PARENTS THAT

                    ARE NOT GETTING ALONG THAT WILL WANT SUPERVISED VISITS.  AND IF THE COURT

                    ORDERS THEM, THEY'RE -- THEY'RE GONNA TO BE OUT THERE, TOO.  ARE WE

                    GOING TO LOOK TO SEE -- LIKE, WHO IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET IT OTHER THAN

                    WHOEVER THE COURT ORDERS?  BUT IN TERMS OF THEIR FINANCIAL CAPABILITY TO

                    PAY, WILL IT BE ON A SLIDING SCALE?

                                 MR. HEVESI:  YEAH, WE HOPE SO.  SO -- SO HERE'S

                    WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO.  THE -- THE PROGRAM'S -- THERE'S A COUPLE OF

                    THINGS THEY WE BUILT INTO THE LEGISLATION, STARTING WITH THE PROGRAMS

                    MUST COMPLY WITH THE COURT ORDERS.  AND THEN FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES

                    WE'RE GONNA OFFER FEE WAIVERS.  NOW, WE HAVEN'T OUTLINED THE SLIDING

                    SCALE YET.

                                 MS. WALSH:  RIGHT.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  WE'RE LEAVING THAT TO OBS.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  SO WE'RE GONNA KEEP AN EYE ON WHAT

                    REGULATIONS THEY PUT INTO PLACE.  IF WE THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE, GREAT.  IF

                                         72



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    NOT, WE CAN ADJUST.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  ALL RIGHT.

                                 NOW, ALSO, THERAPEUTIC VISITATION IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT

                    ANIMAL, AND A LOT OF TIMES THAT'S NECESSARY IF YOU HAVE PARENTS WHO

                    HAVE -- PARTICULARLY HAVE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES OR ADDICTION ISSUES OR IN

                    -- IN ANY WAY WOULD BE LESS LIKELY TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A -- A GOOD VISIT

                    WITH THEIR CHILD WITHOUT THE HELP OF A QUALIFIED THERAPIST --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  YES.

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- OF SOME KIND.  SO THAT ALSO IS MORE

                    EXPENSIVE.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  RIGHT.

                                 MS. WALSH:  AND THAT'S -- AND AS WE'VE TALKED

                    ABOUT SO MANY TIMES IN THIS CHAMBER, THERE IS A DEARTH OF MENTAL

                    HEALTH PROFESSIONALS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO EVEN PROVIDE THIS SERVICE.

                    AND SO HOW DO WE -- YOU KNOW, THE BILL REALLY IS KIND OF SILENT ABOUT

                    THAT AS WELL.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  YEAH, WE -- WE DON'T SET THE SCALE.  SO

                    -- SO JUST FOR GENERAL SUPERVISED VISITATION, WHAT WE FOUND IS FOR AN

                    HOUR VISITATION ONE TIME A WEEK, THE -- THE NUMBERS RANGE FROM $50 TO

                    -- WE'VE GOTTEN UP TO $300, WHICH IS A LITTLE CRAZY.  FOR A THERAPEUTIC,

                    WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE COST WILL BE EVEN MORE BECAUSE

                    YOU HAVE A PROFESSIONAL.  BUT WE DIDN'T WANT TO PUT IN, YOU KNOW, A

                    NUMBER THAT WOULD EITHER BE TOO HIGH OR TOO LOW FOR -- FOR GETTING THAT

                    PROFESSIONAL IN THERE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.

                                         73



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 NOW, I NOTICED THAT SOME OF THE PLACES THAT CURRENTLY

                    DO HAVE A SUPERVISED VISITATION PROGRAM VERY OFTEN HAVE LONG WAIT

                    LISTS.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  YES.

                                 MS. WALSH:  SO HOW -- HOW DOES THIS LEGISLATION

                    ENVISION THAT THAT WILL BE HANDLED?  FOR EXAMPLE, YOU MENTIONED AS A

                    -- AS A GENERAL STANDARD THE IDEA THAT IT WOULD BE ONE VISIT PER WEEK.

                    BUT IF YOU'VE GOT A LONG LIST OF PEOPLE WAITING TO SEE THEIR CHILD EVEN

                    ONCE A WEEK, WOULD THE IDEA BE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE A FAMILY BE ABLE

                    TO FULLY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF -- OF THAT ONCE A WEEK VISIT OR THAT IT --

                    YOU'RE GONNA PARCEL IT OUT SO THAT MAYBE A FAMILY MIGHT ONLY BE ABLE TO

                    SEE THEIR CHILD ONCE A MONTH, BUT MORE FAMILIES COULD BE -- TAKE

                    ADVANTAGE OF A VISIT.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  SO MY INSTINCT IS THAT IT'S JUDICIAL

                    DISCRETION.  SO WHATEVER THE JUDGE THINKS IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE FAMILY.

                    SO -- SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT THE NON-CUSTODIAL

                    PARENT STILL HAS AN ACTIVE PART OF THE CHILD'S LIFE, AND WE'RE REALLY TRYING

                    TO AVOID CHILDHOOD TRAUMA, FAMILY SEPARATION, RIGHT?  BUT I WOULD

                    LEAVE IT UP TO THE -- TO THE JUDGE'S DISCRETION FOR HOW MUCH THEY WANT.

                                 I DO -- I DO WANT TO TOUCH ON THE POINT THAT YOU RAISED.

                    YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.  SO I HAVE A LIST HERE OF MOST COUNTIES AND

                    WHAT THEY HAVE.  AND WHAT WE'RE FINDING IS THAT THERE ARE 21

                    SUPERVISED VISITATION SITES THROUGHOUT THE STATE THAT RECENTLY CLOSED,

                    AND THEY NEED $200,000 TO DO THEIR START-UP AND GET BACK UP AND

                    RUNNING.  THEN WE HAVE 23 THAT, AS YOU MENTIONED, ARE ON THE SIX-

                                         74



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    MONTH TO ONE-YEAR WAIT LIST.  AND THEY WILL LEAVE LESS MONEY, BUT THEY

                    WILL LEAVE MONEY TO START PROVIDING AND, YOU KNOW, THAT SUPERVISED

                    VISITATION SO WE CAN GET RID OF THOSE WAIT LISTS.  BUT -- AND THERE'S ONE

                    OTHER GROUP WHICH IS BRAND-NEW START-UPS.  WE'RE LOOKING FOR BRAND-

                    NEW START-UPS.  AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT ONE OTHER THING I FOUND

                    INTERESTING, I LEARNED TODAY...

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  IF YOU COULD JUST

                    GIVE ME ONE MOMENT, PLEASE --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  SURE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  -- BEFORE MS. WALSH

                    DOES HER SECOND.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  MADAM SPEAKER, CAN YOU CALL ON THE

                    VETERANS' AFFAIRS COMMITTEE TO MEET IN THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE

                    ROOM?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  VETERAN [SIC]

                    AFFAIRS COMMITTEE MEMBERS, PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE SPEAKER'S

                    CONFERENCE ROOM.  VETERAN [SIC] AFFAIRS COMMITTEE MEMBERS,

                    SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 MS. WALSH.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  IF -- IF I COULD JUST CONTINUE.  YEAH.

                    SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IN NASSAU, SUFFOLK, JEFFERSON AND ORANGE

                    COUNTIES THERE ARE COMMUNITY DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTERS WHICH MAY

                    HAVE THE SPACE TO ACCOMMODATE AND EXPANDED GROWTH INTO SUPERVISED

                    VISITATION.

                                         75



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                                 (PAUSE/CONFERENCING)

                                 THANK YOU.  MY COUNSEL NEEDED --

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 MS. WALSH:  I WANTED TO GIVE YOU A MOMENT TO --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  I DO APPRECIATE IT.  THANK YOU.

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  BY THE WAY, IF YOU GET A JUDGE TO

                    COUNSEL YOU CAN'T INTERRUPT.

                                 MS. WALSH:  ALL RIGHT.

                                 THE BILL APPEARS TO BE SILENT, SO I WANTED TO ASK YOU

                    ABOUT WHETHER IT'S ENVISIONED THAT THESE VISITS WILL ALL TAKE PLACE IN A

                    BUILDING VERSUS -- I KNOW THAT SOMETIMES WHEN THERE ARE VISITS THAT ARE

                    BEING DONE IN ARTICLE 10 SITUATIONS, CASEWORKERS MIGHT OVER TIME THE

                    GOAL BEING TO HAVE THEM IN AS NATURAL A SETTING AS IS SAFE.  THEY COULD

                    BE HELD OUT IN A PARK, OR THEY COULD BE HELD IN -- IN A VARIETY OF PLACES,

                    NOT A BRICK-AND-MORTAR LOCATION.  BUT IS THAT -- IS THE BRICK-AND-MORTAR

                    LOCATION KIND OF WHAT'S BEING ENVISIONED HERE?

                                 MR. HEVESI:  IT IS.  AND I THINK THE BRICK-AND-

                    MORTAR IS REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE THERE ARE SECURITY PROTOCOLS THAT WE

                    NEED IN PARTICULAR.  SO PART OF WHAT I HOPE THE REGULATIONS BECOME WILL

                    BE STAGGERING OF VISITS SO CERTAIN PEOPLE DON'T COME AT THE SAME TIMES

                    AND DON'T SEE EACH OTHER.  THERE ARE ALSO DIFFERENT ENTRANCES THAT ARE

                    REQUIRED ACCORDING TO THE OBW REGULATIONS TO -- TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU

                    CAN GET OUT WITHOUT SEEING AN ABUSER, THAT KIND OF THING.  SO I WOULD

                    ARGUE THAT THE BRICK-AND-MORTAR IS THE CORE OF THIS.  THE OTHER

                                         76



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    SUPERVISED VISITATION WHILE -- THAT YOU MENTIONED, WHILE NECESSARY, IS

                    NOT WHAT YOU WANT.  IT'S THE EQUIVALENT OF HAVING SOMEBODY WATCH A

                    KID AND HOPE IT WORKS OUT WELL WITHOUT TRAINING, WITHOUT -- SOMETIMES

                    THEY HAVE THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS THEY'RE IN A FIGHT WITH.  IT'S REALLY NOT

                    THE BEST CIRCUMSTANCES.  SO SHORT ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS YES, WE

                    WANT THE BRICK-AND-MORTAR.

                                 MS. WALSH:  WELL, I THINK THERE'S A REAL -- IT -- IT'S A

                    BALANCING ACT, REALLY.  I MEAN, THERE ARE SOME CASES -- LIKE I WOULD

                    ARGUE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES WHERE SECURITY WOULD BE AT A PREMIUM.

                    THAT'S A PRIMARY CONSIDERATION.  IN OTHERS WHERE THE PARENTS ARE --

                    APPEAR TO BE FAIRLY COMPETENT PARENTS, THEY DON'T -- THEY DON'T APPEAR TO

                    HAVE MENTAL HEALTH OR ADDICTION PROBLEMS THAT ARE DOCUMENTED.  THEY

                    JUST DON'T GET ALONG.  BUT EACH PARENT COULD DO A VISIT SAFELY ON THEIR

                    OWN, BUT THEY'RE GONNA GO IN AND ASK THE JUDGE ANYWAY TO GET

                    SUPERVISED VISITS BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE THAT PERSON.  THEY DO NOT LIKE

                    THEM AND THEY WANT TO HAVE IT SUPERVISED EITHER BECAUSE THEY WANNA

                    THROW A WRENCH INTO -- INTO THE OTHER PERSON'S LIFE OR WHATEVER.  AND IF

                    A JUDGE BUYS IT AND -- AND ORDERS IT AND SAYS OKAY, I THINK THAT THE --

                    WHEN I -- WHEN I SERVED AS AN ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, I MEAN, MY GOAL

                    WAS ALWAYS TO TRY TO HAVE THE MOST NATURAL, NORMAL KIND OF VISIT THAT

                    YOU COULD POSSIBLY HAVE WITH A PARENT.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  THAT MAKES SENSE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  SO -- BUT I CAN APPRECIATE THAT IF THIS IS

                    -- AND IT SOUNDS TO ME FROM YOUR ANSWERS THAT THE -- THE NEEDS OF

                    FAMILIES WITH -- WHO HAVE HAD ALLEGATIONS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND

                                         77



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    THEIR SAFETY AND SECURITY IS PRIMARY, AND I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU THAT IN

                    THOSE CASES YOU WOULD WANT IT TO HAVE -- BE HAPPENING IN A PLACE

                    WHERE YOU COULD PROVIDE FOR THE SAFETY OF EVERYBODY INVOLVED.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  EXACTLY.

                                 MS. WALSH:  INCLUDING THE --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  UNFORTUNATELY -- YEAH, I AGREE.  AND

                    UNFORTUNATELY, THOSE ARE THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE CASES.  AND

                    SINCE WE ARE ESSENTIALLY BUILDING UP A STRUCTURE FROM -- YOU KNOW, WITH

                    BARE BONES FROM BEFORE THAT WASN'T REALLY WORKING -- SINCE WE'RE

                    BUILDING IT UP WE'RE GONNA FOCUS ON MAKING SURE IT'S AS SAFE AS

                    POSSIBLE.  AND THEN IF THE JUDGE, BY THE WAY, AFTER A CERTAIN PERIOD OF

                    TIME GETS THE REPORT BACK FROM THE PERSON DELIVERING THE SUPERVISED

                    VISITATION THAT, HEY, THEY JUST DON'T LIKE EACH OTHER.  THERE'S NO SAFETY

                    ISSUE, I'M SURE THE JUDGE COULD AMEND HIS ORDER.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  BUT IT -- IT DOESN'T SAY IN THE

                    BILL -- I MEAN, IT -- IT STATES AS A GOAL THAT WE WANT SAFE VISITATION, BUT

                    IT'S NOT IN ANY WAY LIMITING SUPERVISED VISITATION TO CASES INVOLVING

                    DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  NO.

                                 MS. WALSH:  IT'S REALLY ANYBODY THAT'S COMING IN IN

                    SUPREME COURT OR IN FAMILY COURT WITH A MATRIMONIAL OR FAMILY COURT

                    ISSUE.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  YEAH, OR AN ABUSE CASE OR A DIVORCE

                    CASE.  BUT YES.

                                 MS. WALSH:  YEAH.  YEAH.  IN ANY OF THOSE CASES.

                                         78



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    OKAY.

                                 AND WILL THERE BE ANY -- WILL THERE BE GUIDANCE GIVEN

                    TO THE JUDGES AS TO WHAT -- HOW THEY'RE -- WHAT THEY'RE TO CONSIDER WHEN

                    FIGURING OUT OR EXERCISING THEIR DISCRETION OR ARE WE JUST GONNA LEAVE IT

                    TO THEM?

                                 MR. HEVESI:  NO.  NO.  I THINK THE JUDGES HAVE BEEN

                    DOING IT FOR YEARS.  THEY --

                                 MS. WALSH:  YES, THEY HAVE.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  -- JUST ARE NOW TRYING TO DO IT IN A

                    SYSTEM THAT DOESN'T EXIST.  SO IT'S HARD TO DO.  BUT ONCE WE GET THIS UP

                    AND RUNNING, I'M SURE THE JUDGES WILL BE READY TO GET BACK INTO THE

                    GAME AND START ISSUING ORDERS FOR SUPERVISED VISITATION.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  I THINK THAT YOU HAVE VERY

                    COMPLETELY ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS THAT I'VE GOT.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  GOOD.

                                 MS. WALSH:  I THANK YOU --

                                 MR. HEVESI:  THANK YOU.

                                 MS. WALSH:  -- AND MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MS. WALSH:  SO I REALLY WANNA SAY UPFRONT AGAIN

                    THAT THERE ARE DEFINITELY -- THERE IS DEFINITELY A NEED ALL AROUND THE STATE

                    TO BE ABLE TO HAVE MORE AND BETTER SUPERVISED VISITATION.  BACK IN THE

                    OLD DAYS, BACK WHEN I STARTED TO PRACTICE IN THIS AREA, THERE WERE STILL --

                    IN THE COUNTIES THAT I SERVED, THERE WERE VOLUNTEER ORGANIZATIONS EITHER

                    THROUGH CHURCHES OR JUST THAT -- THAT POPPED UP THAT HAD A PRETTY LOW

                                         79



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    PRICE POINT PER VISIT THAT WERE OUT THERE AS A BUSINESS MODEL.  SO -- AND

                    SOME WERE STAFFED BY VOLUNTEERS, SOME WERE PAID INDIVIDUALS.  AND IN

                    THE AREA THAT I REPRESENT THEY HAVE ALL FOLDED.  THEY ARE DONE.  IT IS NOT

                    A BUSINESS MODEL THAT HAS WORKED.  AND JUST AS WE HAVE SEEN JUST

                    GENERALLY IN OUR WORLD RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A LOT OF ANIMOSITY OUT THERE.

                    AND THERE ARE PEOPLE -- IF YOU'RE IN FAMILY COURT AND YOU'RE FIGHTING

                    WITH YOUR EX OR YOUR -- YOUR SOON-TO-BE-EX, YOU'RE NOT A HAPPY PERSON.

                    AND YOU ARE VERY OFTEN WANTING SUPERVISED VISITS, EVEN THOUGH YOU --

                    YOU MIGHT HAVE FAMILY MEMBERS OR FRIENDS OR NEIGHBORS, OR YOU MIGHT

                    BE ABLE TO PAY FOR SUPERVISED VISITATION ON YOUR OWN.  BUT IF IT'S GONNA

                    BE PROVIDED FREE BY THE STATE, YOU COULD BE DARN SURE THAT EVERYONE'S

                    GONNA BE ASKING FOR IT.  SO I FIND THE PRICE TAG I THINK IS A HUGE

                    QUESTION MARK TO ME.  WE'VE ALL SEEN WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH CHILD CARE

                    SLOTS, RIGHT?  WE'VE SEEN COUNTIES THAT WHEN THEY RUN OUT OF MONEY

                    THEY HAVE TO CLOSE IT UP AND THEY HAVE TO SAY, I'M SORRY, WE CAN'T -- WE

                    CAN'T SERVICE ANY MORE CHILDREN IN THE COUNTY WITH CHILD CARE SLOTS.  I

                    CAN SEE THE SAME THING HAPPENING HERE IF THEY GROSSLY UNDERESTIMATE

                    HOW MUCH THIS IS GONNA COST.  I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, SOME COUNTIES

                    THAT ARE SMALL, THAT DON'T HAVE A BIG POPULATION, MAYBE IT WON'T COST

                    THAT MUCH.  BUT IT -- JUST IMAGINE YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY STARTING A BUSINESS

                    COUNTY BY COUNTY, AND THAT BUSINESS IS GOING TO NEED TO BE STAFFED;

                    STAFFED NOT ONLY BY PEOPLE MAYBE GETTING MINIMUM WAGE, BUT PEOPLE

                    THAT ARE GONNA HAVE TO BE TRAINED TO DO THIS, TO -- TO PROVIDE

                    SUPERVISION.  AND THEN YOU'RE ALSO GONNA NEED TO HAVE TRAINED

                    THERAPISTS TO BE ABLE TO DO THERAPEUTIC VISITATION, WHETHER THAT WOULD

                                         80



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                      APRIL 28, 2026

                    BE A -- A MASTER'S IN SOCIAL WORK, WHETHER THAT'S GOING TO BE A

                    PSYCHOLOGIST.  YOU'RE GONNA NEED SOMEBODY THERE.  AND THEY'RE

                    SOMETIMES -- THEY WERE SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAD -- THAT HAD STARTED

                    THEIR OWN BUSINESSES, AND THOSE BUSINESSES HAVE FOLDED.  SO WHETHER

                    THEY REALLY WOULD CONTRACT NOW WITH THE STATE AND START THEIR OWN IS --

                    IS QUESTIONABLE.

                                 WHILE I DON'T DISPUTE THE NEED TO HAVE SUPERVISED

                    VISITATION, MORE OF IT IN OUR STATE TO ALLOW KIDS TO BE ABLE TO SEE THEIR

                    PARENTS AS THEY TRY TO GET THROUGH THEIR MATRIMONIAL MATTER OR THEIR

                    FAMILY COURT MATTER, I REALLY THINK THAT THIS IS AN EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE

                    PROPOSITION.  AND FOR ME PERSONALLY, I THINK THAT THIS BILL JUST HAS A LOT

                    OF HOLES IN IT.  I THINK THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE WHERE WE ARE INDICATING

                    OUR DESIRE AND INTENT AS THE LEGISLATURE, BUT THEN WE ARE COMPLETELY, I

                    THINK, ABDICATING ANY ROLE AND WE'RE JUST PUTTING IT ALL ON THE OFFICE OF

                    VICTIM SERVICES TO DEVELOP THIS PROGRAM.  IT'S GOING TO BE A BIG

                    PROGRAM THAT WILL HAVE A BIG IMPACT ON THE STATE, ON OUR STATE, ON OUR

                    LITIGANTS, ON OUR KIDS.  AND I JUST THINK THAT WHEN THE PRICE TAG IS VERY

                    QUESTIONABLE, WHEN THE NEED IS GREAT, AND WHEN WE JUST DON'T HAVE A

                    LOT OF DETAILS IN THE PROGRAM ITSELF THE WAY IT'S LAID OUT RIGHT NOW.

                                 I THINK THAT THE SPONSOR AND THE PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT

                    THIS BILL HAVE EVERY GOOD INTENTION AND I APPLAUD IT.  I JUST THINK THAT

                    THIS BILL NEEDS WORK.  I THINK THAT WE NEED -- AND -- AND NOT FOR NOTHING,

                    BUT THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT WE'VE TAKEN UP THIS BILL, AND WE

                    CONTINUE TO NOT HAVE SUPPORT FROM THE SECOND FLOOR FOR THIS BILL.  WE

                    DON'T HAVE MONEY IN THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW FOR THIS INITIATIVE.  AND IT'S --

                                         81



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    IT'S -- I THINK IT'S GONNA BE A LOT MORE MONEY THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY

                    BEING BUDGETED.  LAST YEAR THE SPONSOR INDICATED 25 MILLION.  THIS YEAR

                    HE INDICATED 25 MILLION, BUT HE ALSO SAID THAT THERE ARE MORE COUNTIES

                    WHO HAVE HAD THEIR PROGRAMS FOLD AND WILL NEED THEM.

                                 SO I JUST THINK UNTIL WE HAVE MORE DETAIL, I'M GOING TO

                    CONTINUE TO VOTE NO ON THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.  I WOULD ENCOURAGE MY

                    COLLEAGUES TO THINK HARD ABOUT IT AND -- AND PERHAPS JOIN ME IN VOTING

                    NO.  NOT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS A NEED FOR THIS SERVICE, BUT

                    JUST BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE BILL IS NOT READY AND THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT

                    IS NOT THERE.

                                 SO, MADAM SPEAKER, THAT'S IT.  I'M GONNA BE NO ON

                    THIS, BUT I DO APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR'S PERSISTENCE.  AND I DO HOPE THAT

                    SOMEDAY A PROGRAM LIKE THIS GETS OVER THE FINISH LINE, BUT I JUST THINK

                    THAT THE BILL NEEDS MORE WORK.

                                 THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 180TH

                    DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MS. PAULIN TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  THANK YOU, MR. -- THANK YOU, MS.

                    SPEAKER.  MY BEGINNINGS IN ADVOCACY LIFE WERE WAY BEFORE I GOT THIS

                                         82



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    JOB AND -- AND WAY BEFORE I WAS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF AN AGENCY

                    THAT SERVERS BATTERED WOMEN.  IT WAS -- IT WAS TO ADVOCATE FOR A

                    SUPERVISED VISITATION PROGRAM IN WESTCHESTER COUNTY.  AND THAT NEED

                    CAME FROM NOT ONLY THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COMMUNITY, BUT FROM THE

                    JUDGES WHO DIDN'T HAVE A PLACE TO PUT CASES WHERE THEY REALLY NEEDED

                    TO SEPARATE THE PARENTS BECAUSE OF THE DANGER TO ONE OF THE PARENTS.  SO

                    THIS PROGRAM WILL BENEFIT THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE THEY'RE REALLY

                    HARDCORE.  WHERE YOU NEED TWO ENTRANCES IN ORDER TO HAVE THE -- THE

                    PARENT WHO'S BEING VICTIMIZED SEPARATED FROM THE PARENT WHO'S DOING

                    THE VICTIMIZATION.

                                 SO I APPLAUD THE SPONSOR FOR PUTTING FORWARD A BILL

                    THAT WILL BEGIN TO ADDRESS THIS STATEWIDE.  WE'RE VERY FORTUNATE IN

                    WESTCHESTER THAT THE COUNTY HAS PICKED UP THAT BURDEN OF COST AND THAT

                    THEY CONTINUE TO -- TO FUND THOSE TWO PLACES THAT WE PUT IN PLACE SO

                    MANY, MANY YEARS AGO, BUT THE REST OF THE STATE IS NOT AS FORTUNATE.  SO

                    I -- I UNDERSTAND THE, YOU KNOW, THE -- THE NEED TO BALANCE COST WITH

                    THE -- THE PROGRAM.  I JUST BELIEVE THAT THIS COULD HELP A LOT OF FAMILIES

                    MAINTAIN THOSE RELATIONSHIPS WITH THOSE CHILDREN.

                                 THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MS. PAULIN IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 MS. WALSH TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  YEAH, JUST VERY BRIEFLY.  AND I WANNA

                    -- I WANNA THANK THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER.  I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT VERY

                    CLEAR THAT WHEN THERE ARE SUPERVISED VISITS INVOLVING -- IN A DOMESTIC

                                         83



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    VIOLENCE CASE OR A CASE INVOLVING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, YOU ARE NOT GOING

                    TO HAVE THE MOTHER AND THE FATHER HAVING A VISIT AT THE SAME TIME OR IN

                    THE SAME BUILDING OR ANYWHERE NEAR AT THE SAME TIME WITH THAT CHILD.

                    THERE -- THERE IS GOING TO BE SEPARATION ANYWAY SO THE IDEA OF THEM

                    CROSSING IN THE HALLWAY OR SOMETHING IS JUST NOT A THING.  IT'S NOT --

                    THAT'S NOT -- THAT'S NOT WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.

                                 I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S REALLY ABSENT FROM THE,

                    BILL, THOUGH AND I'D MIGHT BE MORE SUPPORTIVE OF THE BILL IF IT WAS

                    SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED ONLY FOR THOSE TYPES OF CASES.  THAT WOULD BE A

                    MUCH LOWER PRICE TAG.  THEY ARE THE MOST NEEDY CASES AND I ABSOLUTELY

                    AGREE WITH THAT.  THIS -- THIS BILL, THOUGH, DOESN'T SAY THAT.  THIS BILL

                    SAYS THAT ANYBODY IN A FAMILY COURT OR MATRIMONIAL CASE IN STATE

                    SUPREME OR IN FAMILY COURT CAN ASK AND BE GRANTED SUPERVISED

                    VISITATION.  THAT'S A -- THAT'S A MUCH BIGGER UNIVERSE THAT WE'RE TALKING

                    ABOUT HERE.  THAT'S, ERGO, THE BIGGER PRICE TAG.

                                 SO THAT -- I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.  I THINK -- I

                    COMPLETELY AGREE THAT THOSE DV CASES ARE SOME OF THE VERY TOUGHEST

                    WITH THOSE, AND -- AND JUST PARENTS THAT HAVE BIG ADDICTION OR MENTAL

                    HEALTH ISSUES, THOSE ARE THE -- THOSE ARE THE HARDEST ONES.  BUT THEY'RE

                    ALSO THE MOST EXPENSIVE ONES TO PROPERLY STAFF AND -- AND HAVE THE

                    VISITS, BUT I WOULD RATHER PUT THE EGGS IN THAT BASKET AND DO PILOT

                    PROGRAMS AROUND THE STATE TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE BEFORE WE TAKE ON

                    SOMETHING AS BIG AS THIS BILL.

                                 SO, THANK YOU.  I'LL CONTINUE TO BE IN THE NEGATIVE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                         84



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MS. WALSH TO THE NEGATIVE.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 PAGE 9, CALENDAR NO. 30, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A00755-B, CALENDAR

                    NO. 30, PAULIN, SAYEGH, ROSENTHAL, SIMONE, OTIS, SANTABARBARA, REYES.

                    AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW, IN RELATION TO REQUIRING THE

                    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH EXAMINE HEAT VULNERABILITY AND HEAT-RELATED

                    DEATHS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  AN EXPLANATION HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MS. PAULIN.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  YES.  THE BILL WOULD REQUIRE THE

                    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO EXAMINE HEAT-RELATED DEATHS IN THE STATE AND

                    PUBLISH AN ANNUAL REPORT OF HEAT VULNERABILITY AND HEAT-RELATED DEATHS

                    IN THE STATE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MR. JENSEN.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  WOULD

                    THE CHAIR FROM WESTCHESTER COUNTY YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  I WILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.

                                         85



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    IN THE TERMS OF THIS LEGISLATION, WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR GETTING

                    THE INFORMATION ON THESE DEATHS TO THE STATE DOH?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  WELL, IN THE CASE OF THE CITY THAT

                    ALREADY DOES THIS WORK, THE CITY WOULD FORWARD THE INFORMATION THAT

                    THEY'VE GATHERED, WE'VE MODELED THE BILL EXACTLY LIKE THE CITY SO THERE

                    SHOULDN'T BE ANY INCONSISTENCY.  IN THE CASE OF THE OTHER COUNTIES

                    BECAUSE THEY HAVE THAT DATA, YOU KNOW, THROUGH -- BECAUSE WHERE

                    DEATHS ARE USUALLY REPORTED, THEY WOULD BE FORWARDING THE INFORMATION

                    TO THE STATE.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO IN -- IN MY UNDERSTANDING, THE

                    EXISTING NEW YORK CITY CODE HAS IT THAT HOSPITALS MUST BE THE ONES TO

                    CONVEY THE INFORMATION ON DEATHS TO THE CITY, IS THAT CORRECT?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  I -- I DON'T KNOW HOW THE CITY COLLECTS

                    IT --

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  -- WE JUST MAKE THE OBLIGATION ON THE

                    CITY AND HONESTLY HOW THE COUNTIES COLLECT IT WAS LESS RELEVANT, ALSO.  IF

                    -- YOU KNOW, IF THE COUNTIES GET THE INFORMATION FROM THE HOSPITALS,

                    THAT'S GREAT, YOU KNOW, BUT WHATEVER SYSTEM IS BEING USED CURRENTLY TO

                    GET THAT INFORMATION WOULD BE THE SAME.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO FOR BEING ABLE TO CLASSIFY

                    SOMETHING AS A HEAT-RELATED DEATH, WOULD THE COUNTIES AND THE CITY OF

                    NEW YORK, WOULD THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE ALL DEATHS WITHIN THAT

                    JURISDICTION OVER A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME AND ALL THE OTHER UNDERLYING

                    ISSUES THAT ARE HAPPENING AT THAT TIME SO THAT DOH COULD MAKE THE

                                         86



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    DETERMINATION WHETHER OR NOT IT IS A DEATH THAT WAS EXACERBATED BY

                    HEAT?  OR WOULD THE COUNTIES AND THE CITY HAVE TO MAKE A

                    DETERMINATION THAT A CERTAIN DEATH MAY HAVE BEEN A HEAT-RELATED DEATH

                    AND ONLY FORWARD CERTAIN INCIDENCES TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  I THINK IT'S THE LATTER BECAUSE I'M NOT

                    SURE THAT THE COUNTY WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION LIKE THAT

                    BUT --

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO IT WOULD --

                                 MS. PAULIN:  -- BUT IT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  THANK YOU.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  THE THING IS, THE CITY ALREADY DOES

                    SOMETHING SO I WOULD SAY WE NEED TO FIND OUT EXACTLY HOW THEY DO THIS

                    AND PROBABLY JUST ADVISE COUNTIES THAT THEY SHOULD DO IT SIMILARLY

                    BECAUSE THEY DON'T SEEM TO HAVE ANY PROBLEMS.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO IF IT IS THE LATTER OF THE EX -- OF THE

                    QUESTION I ASKED IT WOULD BE THAT ONLY A CERTAIN SUBSET OF DEATHS WITHIN

                    THAT CERTAIN PRIOR TIME PERIOD WOULD BE PASSED ALONG.  BUT CERTAINLY --

                    AND I GUESS I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MECHANISM IS NOW, BUT MY

                    UNDERSTANDING IS THAT NOT EVERY DEATH IS REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY

                    MEDICAL -- OR THE COUNTY MEDICAL EXAMINER TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF

                    DEATH IF SOMEBODY MAY DIE AT HOME, SOMEBODY MAY DIE IN A -- IN A

                    HOSPITAL SETTING OR A HEALTHCARE SETTING, SOMEBODY MAY DIE IN

                    SOMEPLACE ELSE.  AND SO THERE MAY NOT BE ALWAYS A CLEAR DETERMINATION

                    OF DEATH.  AND SO IF SOMEBODY DIES AND THEY DON'T HAVE AN AUTOPSY,

                    WHAT WOULD BE THE MECHANISM FOR A COUNTY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR

                                         87



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    NOT THAT INCIDENT OF DEATH WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE

                    REPORTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  I WOULD JUST SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THE

                    CITY'S VERY LARGE.  I DON'T THINK EVERYONE -- THERE'S NO AUTOPSY

                    REQUIREMENT FOR THOSE DEATHS AS WELL.  SO THE -- THEY HAVE FOUND THIS

                    SYSTEM THAT WORKS FOR THEM.  THEY'VE BEEN DOING THESE REPORTS AND IT'S

                    SHOWING, YOU KNOW, VULNERABILITIES AROUND THE CITY ITSELF AND, YOU

                    KNOW, AND POPULATIONS THAT ARE VULNERABLE.  SO IT MAY NOT BE PERFECT,

                    BUT IT'S BETTER THAN HAVING NO DATA AND SO IF WE CAN COPY WHAT THE CITY'S

                    DOING AND MAKE THAT STATEWIDE, WE WOULD HAVE A CUMULATIVE AMOUNT

                    OF DATA REALLY TO -- TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THIS IS MORE PROBLEMATIC.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO WITH THE CURRENT -- AND NEITHER OF

                    US REPRESENTING THE CITY OF NEW YORK IN OUR CONSTITUENCIES, SINCE

                    2020, WHEN THE CITY CODE BEGAN REQUIRING HOSPITALS SUBMIT THIS DATA,

                    HAS THE NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL OR THE CITY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,

                    HAVE THEY DONE ANYTHING, WHETHER REGULATIONS OR STATUTE, TO RESPOND TO

                    THE DATA THAT THEY WERE GIVEN?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  I DON'T KNOW, BUT I HAVE A REPORT.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  NO -- NO PROPS, MA'AM.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  NO PROPS.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  NO PROPS.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  SORRY, SORRY.  I HAVE A REPORT THAT I CAN

                    SHARE WHERE THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO -- TO GIVE THAT INFORMATION MAYBE

                    BACK TO THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT FOR THEM TO TAKE AN ADMINISTRATION

                    ACTION THAT MIGHT HELP ADDRESS IT BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW, BUT I HAVE THE --

                                         88



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    THEIR 2025 HEALTH DATA REPORT WHICH DOES INDICATE CERTAIN AREAS AND

                    CERTAIN POPULATIONS THAT ARE MORE SUSCEPTIBLE TO THIS ISSUE.  SO, YOU

                    KNOW, SO I DO THINK THAT IT'S USEFUL FOR THE DEPARTMENT AT LEAST IN THE

                    CITY, IT HAS THAT INFORMATION.  BUT STATEWIDE WE COULD HAVE IT AND IT

                    WOULD LEND ITSELF TO PERHAPS CERTAIN AREAS NEED SUPPORT OR AIR

                    CONDITIONING IN -- IN -- IN CERTAIN PLACES, YOU KNOW, LIKE LIBRARIES OR

                    SOMETHING.  YOU KNOW, SO IT'S -- I THINK IT'S -- IT'S VERY IMPORTANT

                    ALWAYS TO COLLECT DATA BECAUSE THEN PROGRAMS THAT YOU SET UP ARE MORE

                    USEFUL, YOU KNOW.  OTHERWISE WE'RE JUST SETTING UP A BUNCH OF

                    PROGRAMS WITHOUT ANY INFORMATION AND I -- I THINK THAT CAN BE

                    PROBLEMATIC.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  I MEAN I -- I FEEL LIKE WE DO THAT A LOT

                    IN THIS STATE, SET UP A PROGRAM FOR --

                                 (CROSSTALK)

                                 MS. PAULIN:  WELL, HERE'S -- HERE'S A WAY FOR US NOT

                    TO DO THAT AT THIS --

                                 MR. JENSEN:  THAT WAS -- SO YOU USED THE EXAMPLE

                    OF, YOU KNOW, LIBRARIES HAVING AIR CONDITIONING, BUT DO WE REALLY NEED

                    TO HAVE REPORTS AND ALL THIS DATA GIVEN TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FOR

                    INFORMATION, YOU KNOW, LIKE, HEY, THE SUMMERS ARE WARMER.  THIS IS A

                    BUILDING THAT'S BEEN UNRENOVATED SINCE 1963 AND THE -- THE

                    TEMPERATURE IS IN THE 90'S, MAYBE WE SHOULD PUT FANS OR AIR

                    CONDITIONING IN IT.  DO WE REALLY NEED DATA COLLECTION AND RAISING

                    ADMINISTRATIVE BURDENS ON COUNTIES AND THE CITY AND DOH TO MAKE A

                    RECOMMENDATION THAT I WOULD SAY IS SOMEWHAT COMMON SENSE,

                                         89



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    ESPECIALLY WHEN IT MAY ONLY BE AN ADVISORY OPINION FROM DOH TO THE

                    GOVERNOR AND THE LEGISLATURE SAYING, HEY, TAKE THESE ISSUES SERIOUSLY?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  SO I'LL JUST POINT OUT TO THE LAST DEBATE

                    THAT WE JUST HAD WITH -- ON SUPERVISED VISITATION AND THAT, YOU KNOW,

                    MY HONORED COLLEAGUE WAS TALKING ABOUT PUTTING IN TOO MUCH MONEY

                    FOR A PROGRAM THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE NEEDED TO BE NARROWER.  HERE

                    WE'RE IDENTIFYING THE NARROW -- NARROWER EXAMPLES TO KNOW MAYBE IT'S

                    IN THREE LIBRARIES, MAYBE THERE ARE POCKETS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT DON'T

                    HAVE ACCESS TO A -- A PUBLIC FACILITY.  YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE'RE TALKING

                    ABOUT IN THE CITY, I'M MAKING THIS UP BUT, YOU KNOW, JUST THE BRONX,

                    YOU KNOW, WHERE WE NEED TO PUT RESOURCES.  SO IT'LL -- IT'LL ENABLE US TO

                    PUT RESOURCES AND TAILOR THOSE RESOURCES TO VERY SPECIFIC AREAS SO IT'LL BE

                    LESS COSTLY TO HAVE A BIGGER IMPACT.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  IS THERE AN APPROPRIATION ATTACHED TO

                    THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  NOT -- UNTIL WE COLLECT THE DATA, YOU

                    KNOW, WHICH IS EASY BECAUSE IT'S JUST A BUNCH OF NUMBERS, YOU KNOW,

                    THAT ARE GONNA GET FED TO THE COUNTY -- FROM THE COUNTY TO THE STATE.

                    WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE NEED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES YET BECAUSE WE

                    DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A PATTERN TO -- TO TALK ABOUT.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO I KNOW IN -- I'VE SEEN PRESS REPORTS

                    OF -- IN NEW YORK CITY AND I KNOW IN MONROE COUNTY AND I'M SURE IN

                    WESTCHESTER COUNTY AS WELL THAT WHEN THE TEMPERATURE DOES RISE, LOCAL

                    GOVERNMENT OR THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT IS SAYING, HEY, YOU KNOW,

                    TEMPERATURES ARE GONNA BE DANGEROUSLY HIGH.  WE'RE SETTING UP

                                         90



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    COOLING CENTERS.  THEY'RE DOING THAT ALREADY WITHOUT HAVING THIS DATA.

                    SO WHY WOULD WE NEED TO SUBMIT ALL THE DATA TO DOH WHEN COUNTIES

                    MAY ALREADY BE TAKING STEPS ON THEIR OWN TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE

                    CONCERNS?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  WELL, I WOULD ARGUE THAT NOT ALL

                    COUNTIES ARE DOING THAT AND MAYBE WE'D FIND THE HEAT-RELATED DEATHS IN

                    THE COUNTIES THAT AREN'T.  YOU KNOW, SO -- SO IT -- IT JUST GIVE US MORE

                    INFORMATION TO ABLE TO HELP MORE PEOPLE.  YOU KNOW, OLDER PEOPLE ARE

                    PARTICULARLY SUSCEPTIBLE.  YOU KNOW, THEY'RE -- THEY'RE FINDING, YOU

                    KNOW, POOR PEOPLE OBVIOUSLY, MINORITIES ARE OBVIOUSLY MORE IMPACTED

                    BECAUSE THEY MAY NOT HAVE -- BUT -- BUT TO KNOW WHERE AND TO KNOW

                    EXACTLY WHAT THOSE POPULATIONS ARE IN THOSE SPECIFIC COUNTIES COULD

                    JUST BE HELPFUL.  JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST EYE OPENING SOMETIMES TO

                    HAVE THE INFORMATION.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  DO WE KNOW WHAT -- OR DO WE KNOW

                    WHETHER OR NOT THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH HAS THE STAFF AVAILABLE

                    OR AN OFFICE THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO EFFECTIVELY PROCESS THIS DATA, HAVE

                    THE DEVELOPMENT OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO SEND BACK FROM THE

                    LEGISLATURE AND WORK WITH THE GOVERNOR OR THE LEGISLATURE TO

                    DETERMINE POTENTIAL LEGISLATION?  SO WE -- DOES DOH HAVE THE ABILITY

                    TO ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING WITH THIS DATA?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  I THINK THAT DOH IS VERY CREATIVE AND

                    COULD EASILY, YOU KNOW, UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF OUR GREAT

                    COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH FIGURE IT OUT IF THEY HAD THE INFORMATION.

                                 MR. JENSEN:  WOULD -- WOULD ENTITIES THAT MAY BE

                                         91



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    IN NEED OF CAPITAL INVESTMENT LIKE COLLEGES WHERE HEAT MAY BE HOTTER

                    THAN IT IS IN OTHER PLACES BE PART OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR --

                                 MS. PAULIN:  IT'S HARD -- YOU KNOW, IT'S HARD TO

                    KNOW UNTIL WE START COLLECTING THE DATA OF -- OF HEAT DEATHS CAUSED BY

                    SPECIFICALLY HEAT.  WE -- WE --

                                 MR. JENSEN:  SO IS IT EXCLUSIVELY DEATHS?  BECAUSE

                    ISN'T THERE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THIS IS FOCUSED SOLELY ON HEAT-RELATED

                    DEATHS, BUT DOESN'T OTHER HEAT-RELATED INCIDENTS, DEHYDRATION, HEAT

                    STROKE, SUNBURN, DON'T THOSE HEAT-RELATED AFFLICTIONS OR SOLAR-RELATED

                    AFFLICTIONS ALSO HAVE AN IMPACT ON OVERALL PUBLIC HEALTH?  SO WHY ARE

                    WE EXCLUSIVELY LIMITING THE DATA TO JUST HEAT-RELATED DEATHS WHEN WE

                    KNOW THAT IT IS -- COULD BE ENHANCING COMORBIDITIES THAT LEAD TO --

                                 MS. PAULIN:  IT -- YOU HAVE TO START SOMEWHERE.

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 MR. JENSEN:  OKAY.  FAIR ENOUGH.  MY COLLEAGUE

                    WAS ADVOCATING AGAINST THE BILL AND I WAS LIKE, LET'S MAKE IT BIGGER.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  IN THAT WAY.

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 MR. JENSEN:  JUST TRYING TO THROW A CURVE BALL IN

                    THERE, MADAM CHAIR.

                                 THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO THE -- THE HEALTH

                    CHAIRWOMAN FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS.

                                 THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                         92



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. FALL:  MADAM -- MADAM SPEAKER, CAN YOU CALL

                    ON THE CODES COMMITTEE TO MEET IN THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  CODES COMMITTEE

                    MEMBERS PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

                    CODES COMMITTEE TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  A PARTY VOTE HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MS. WALSH.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                    REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS PIECE OF

                    LEGISLATION, BUT IF THERE ARE AFFIRMATIVE VOTES, THEY MAY BE CAST NOW AT

                    MEMBERS' SEATS.

                                 THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                    MAJORITY CONFERENCE WILL SUPPORT THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.  FOR THOSE

                    THAT WOULD LIKE TO VOTE DIFFERENTLY, THEY CAN DO SO AT THEIR DESK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MR. DIPIETRO TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                 MR. DIPIETRO:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  I

                                         93



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    THINK, JUST MY OPINION, BUT I'M -- I HOPE I'M WRONG, BUT I THINK THERE'S

                    GONNA BE A -- AN INCREASE IN FATALITIES FROM HEAT THIS SUMMER IF IT'S --

                    A, IF THE CLIMATE -- IF THE HEAT THAT THEY'RE PREDICTING THIS SUMMER

                    STANDS TRUE, BUT ALSO BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE, IT'S HAPPENING AROUND THE

                    STATE, THEY CAN'T AFFORD THEIR ELECTRIC BILLS WHICH MEANS THERE'S GONNA

                    BE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT AREN'T GONNA PUT ON THEIR AIR CONDITIONERS

                    BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD THEIR ELECTRIC BILLS FROM WHAT HAS HAPPENED

                    WITH THE CLIMATE ACT.

                                 SO I'LL BE VOTING NO AND I'LL BE -- HOPE I'M WRONG ON

                    MY PREDICTION AND WE'LL FIND OUT IN THE FALL.

                                 THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. DIPIETRO IN THE NEGATIVE.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MR. FALL FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

                                 MR. FALL:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  ON -- ON

                    BEHALF OF MEMBER MCMAHON, AS PART OF THE NEW YORK STATE COALITION

                    AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, WE ARE JOINED TODAY BY STUDENTS FROM THE

                    SUNY BUFFALO SCHOOL OF LAW, FAMILY VIOLENCE AND WOMEN'S RIGHTS

                    CLINIC AND THEIR PROFESSORS, KELLEY OMEL AND JUDITH OLIN.  THE

                    STUDENTS ARE SANDY SPARKS, ALYSYN COLANGELO, LENNON GRECO, GABBY

                    CYWINSKI, LILY LEFFLER, KAILYN LANE, SKYLER REHBEIN, GABY BAKER AND

                    SARA TRIFVOVIC.  THESE STUDENTS PROVIDE FREE LEGAL REPRESENTATION TO

                                         94



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    SURVIVORS OF FAMILY VIOLENCE AND DIVORCE AND CHILD SUPPORT

                    PROCEEDINGS AS PART OF THEIR LEGAL EDUCATION.

                                 ON BEHALF OF MEMBER MCMAHON, I'D LIKE TO THANK

                    THEM FOR THE IMPORTANT WORK THAT THEY DO AND IF YOU COULD BE SO KIND

                    TO WELCOME THEM TO THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON BEHALF OF MS.

                    MCMAHON, MR. FALL, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, WE WELCOME THE

                    STUDENTS FROM THE UB FAMILY VIOLENCE AND WOMEN -- WOMEN'S RIGHTS

                    CLINIC.  WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE TODAY, EXTENDING TO YOU THE

                    PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR, HOPING YOU ENJOY OUR PROCEEDINGS TODAY.  WE

                    THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE WORK, THE COMMITTED WORK THAT YOU ARE DOING.

                    YOU COULD HAVE CHOSE ANY PROFESSION AND ANY AREA IN LAW AND YOU

                    CHOSE SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT AND MUCH NEEDED.  SO WE APPRECIATE

                    THAT VERY MUCH.  THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US TODAY.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 PAGE 10, CALENDAR NO. 53, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A01422, CALENDAR NO.

                    53, CRUZ, DE LOS SANTOS, SIMONE, KELLES, SIMON, RAGA, TAYLOR,

                    SEAWRIGHT, LEVENBERG, OTIS, WALKER, DAVILA, GLICK, ZACCARO,

                    ZINERMAN, ROSENTHAL, K. BROWN, GONZ LEZ-ROJAS, TAPIA, GALLAGHER.

                    AN ACT TO AMEND THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW, IN RELATION TO REQUIRING

                    ACCURATE INTERPRETATION OF STATEMENTS MADE BY DEPONENTS WITH LIMITED

                    ENGLISH PROFICIENCY IN ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENTS AND SUPPORTING

                    DEPOSITIONS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  AN EXPLANATION HAS

                                         95



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MS. CRUZ.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  NEW YORK

                    IS A LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STATE AND SOME NEW YORKERS ARE NOT FULLY

                    PROFICIENT IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.  IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE CONTEXT, THIS

                    BECOMES AN ISSUE WHEN A NEW YORKER WHO IS NOT FULLY PROFICIENT IN

                    ENGLISH SEEKS TO REPORT A CRIME.  HOW CAN A PERSON WHO IS NOT

                    SUFFICIENT IN -- PROFICIENT IN ENGLISH RELAY FACTS OF AN INVENT -- OF

                    INCENDIARY CHARACTER TO LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS IF HE, SHE OR THEY

                    CANNOT SPEAK OR WRITE ENGLISH?

                                 THE SOLUTION IS RATHER SIMPLE; REQUIRE THAT LAW

                    ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS USE QUALIFIED TRANSLATORS WHO CAN TRANSLATE THE

                    DEPONENT'S ACCUSATIONS INTO ENGLISH AND THEN REQUIRE THAT THESE

                    INDIVIDUALS SUBMIT AFFIDAVITS AFFIRMING WHAT THEY DID AS WELL AS THEIR

                    QUALIFICATIONS.  THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION WOULD ENSURE THE DEPONENT

                    HAVE THEIR ALLEGATIONS ACCURATELY TRANSLATED BY SOMEONE WHO IS

                    QUALIFIED TO TRANSLATE -- TO TRANSLATE THEM WHILE ALSO PUTTING DEFENDANT

                    ON SUFFICIENT NOTICE OF THE FACTS GIVEN -- GIVING RIGHTS TO FACTUAL

                    ALLEGATIONS LEVIED AGAINST THEM.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MR. MORINELLO.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A FEW

                    QUESTIONS?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  I WILL.

                                         96



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  I -- I REVIEWED THE TRANSCRIPT OF

                    LAST YEAR'S DEBATE AND I'M NOT EMBARRASSED TO ADMIT THAT WE MISSED THE

                    POINT, OKAY, ON OUR SIDE.  AT LEAST I DID.  SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS STATE

                    THAT AS A RETIRED JUDGE, I TRULY UNDERSTAND THE INTENTION AND THE NEED FOR

                    THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION.  MY QUESTIONING WILL FOCUS MORE ON

                    THE IMPLEMENTATION AND THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS, OKAY?  AND AS TO THE

                    DEGREE THAT WE CAN GO FORWARD.

                                 WOULD IT BE A FAIR STATEMENT TO SAY THE BILL SEEMS TO

                    ADDRESS PRIOR TO ENGAGING THE COURT SYSTEM, BUT ULTIMATELY THOSE

                    DOCUMENTS WILL FORM THE BASIS OF WHAT THE COURT AND THE JUDGES HAVE TO

                    LOOK AT WHEN THEY GO FORWARD?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THAT'S CORRECT.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  OKAY.  DO YOU ENVISION THE

                    OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION BEING INVOLVED ON IMPLEMENTATION?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  NO.  THE TIME WHEN THE COURT

                    ADMINISTRATION IS INVOLVED IS AT THE TIME WHEN THE CASE WOULD ACTUALLY

                    GO TO COURT AND THERE IS ALREADY A PROCESS FOR ALL OF THAT TO HAPPEN.

                    THIS IS PRIOR TO.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  OKAY.  HAVE THEY BEEN

                    CONSULTED ON THIS, THOUGH?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  NO.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  NO.  DO YOU ENVISION ANY

                    ABILITY FOR THEM OR NEED FOR THEM TO BE INVOLVED ONLY BECAUSE THERE IS

                    A PROCESS NOW WERE THERE ARE CENTRALIZED INTERPRETERS THAT THE COURTS

                                         97



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    CAN UTILIZE TELEPHONICALLY.  AND THIS WOULD SEEM TO BE SOMETHING THAT

                    COULD BE DOVETAILED INTO AND RESOLVE THE ISSUE FOR THE -- THOSE THAT HAVE

                    -- NOT PROFICIENT IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  WELL, I MEAN, THERE -- SO A COUPLE OF

                    THINGS.  THERE'S ALREADY A SYSTEM JUST WITH THE COURTS BUT WITH OTHER

                    AGENCIES AND EVEN LOCALITIES TO USE A CENTRALIZED INTERPRETING SYSTEM.

                    BUT JUDGING FROM PAST TIMES THAT WE'VE DEBATED THIS BILL, THERE ARE

                    COUNTIES WHERE THOSE TWO MAY BE ONE IN THE SAME.  SO THERE MIGHT BE

                    A NEED TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS, BUT GENERALLY, THERE'S ALREADY A

                    SYSTEM IN PLACE IN BOTH THE COURT SYSTEM AS WELL AS OUTSIDE OF IT.  THE

                    DIFFERENCE IS THAT IN THE COURT SYSTEM, YOU ARE ALREADY WHETHER IT'S IN

                    FRONT OF A JUDGE OR SIGNING YOU'RE CERTIFYING THAT YOU ARE AN INTERPRETER

                    QUALIFIED TO INTERPRET WHATEVER CONVERSATION IS HAPPENING.  OUTSIDE OF

                    IT, IT'S JUST PROVIDING THE INTERPRETATION BUT THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT

                    YOU AS AN INTERPRETER CERTIFY THAT YOUR INTERPRETING IS ACCURATE OR THAT

                    YOU'RE QUALIFIED TO DO SO.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  ARE YOU SAYING THAT THERE'S NO

                    RULE OR THAT THESE INTERPRETERS WOULD HAVE TO BE CERTIFIED?  I'M -- I'M

                    TRYING TO WHICH DEGREE AND AT WHAT POINT.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THAT'S CORRECT.  SO RIGHT NOW, A STATE

                    AGENCY -- THERE IS UNDER THE LAW AND BEFORE THAT IT USED TO BE AN

                    EXECUTIVE ORDER, STATE AGENCIES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE INTERPRETATION

                    UP TO, I BELIEVE IT'S 12 LANGUAGES AND AN ADDITIONAL FOUR IF THEY SO

                    CHOSE DEPENDING ON THE LANGUAGE NEED OF THEIR AREA.  AND SO FOR

                    EXAMPLE, IN ITHACA -- FOR THE ITHACA POLICE DEPARTMENT AND IN TOMS --

                                         98



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    TOMPKINS COUNTY GOVERNMENT, THERE'S ALREADY POLICIES IN PLACE

                    SAYING, WE'RE GOING TO CONTRACT WITH THESE TWO PARTICULAR ENTITIES TO

                    PROVIDE TRANSLATION WHEN SOMEONE COMES IN AND NEEDS IT.  THE

                    DIFFERENCE IS THAT IN THOSE INSTANCES THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT THOSE

                    INTERPRETERS SIGN OR ATTEST IN ANY WAY THAT THEY'RE A, QUALIFIED, OR -- AND

                    -- AND B, THAT WHAT THEY'RE INTERPRETING IS EXACTLY WHAT WAS RELAYED TO

                    THEM.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  SO IF THERE'S NO NEED OR RULE OR

                    LEGISLATION IN PLACE, THEN YOU CAN ALMOST HAVE ANYBODY DO THIS

                    INTERPRETATION.  WHAT -- SO MY QUESTION WOULD BE, WOULD IT NOT BE MORE

                    PRUDENT, BECAUSE ONE OF THE ISSUES WE ALWAYS HAVE IS WHERE IS THE

                    MONEY GONNA COME FROM?  AND THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES WHY WE'RE STILL

                    HERE WITHOUT A BUDGET.  WHERE IS THE MONEY GONNA COME FROM?  SO MY

                    FOCUS IS MORE, WOULD THERE BE ANY MERIT IN AT LEAST LOOKING TO MERIT --

                    MERIT THE TWO DIFFERENT SYSTEMS SO THAT WE HAVE A UNIFORM

                    INTERPRETATION SYSTEM SO THAT THIS WOULD BE UTILIZED AND THE -- WITH THE

                    ACCURACY SO THAT WE DO NOT HAVE MISINTERPRETATION AT THE INITIAL STAGES

                    OF INVOLVEMENT OF THE POLICE AND THEREFORE THE COURTS?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO THERE IS -- LET ME EX -- THE BEST WAY I

                    CAN EXPLAIN IT IS THERE IS A CENTRALIZED REQUIREMENT.  IT COMES VIA THE

                    LANGUAGE ACCESS PLAN THAT THE STATE HAS.  BUT THERE IS NOT NECESSARILY

                    A CENTRALIZED SYSTEM BECAUSE ONE IS USED BY THE COURTS, THEY MIGHT USE

                    THE SAME INTERPRETATION COMPANY THAT IS USED BY LOCAL COUNTY

                    GOVERNMENT OR STATE AGENCIES.  I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.  THIS

                    BILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT, SO I'M GOING TO LEAVE THAT PERHAPS FOR A

                                         99



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    SIDE CONVERSATION THAT YOU AND I CAN HAVE ABOUT EFFICIENCY.  I'LL LEAVE IT

                    AT THAT.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  IT WOULD JUST SEEM THAT MOVING

                    IN THIS DIRECTION, IF WE'RE GOING TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF BOTH VICTIMS AND

                    DEFENDANTS OR THE ACCUSED DEALING WITH THOSE THAT ARE NOT PROFICIENT,

                    THAT MAYBE THE DISCUSSION COULD LEAD TO THAT.  FOR EXAMPLE, A

                    CENTRALIZED INTERPRETATION CENTER THAT CAN BE UTILIZED BOTH RURAL AND

                    COURTS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS THAT THEY CAN GO -- THEY CAN CALL UP ON OR

                    DO IT VISUAL SO THAT THERE'S UNIFORMITY IN THE INTERPRETATIONS, BECAUSE

                    ISN'T IT MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS WHOLE PURPOSE IS TO ADMINISTER

                    JUSTICE IN A FAIR MANNER TO ALL PARTIES DOING IT IN THE MOST EFFICIENT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO YOU ARE CORRECT THAT THIS IS ABOUT

                    ENSURING JUSTICE AND ENSURING THAT WHATEVER THE DEPONENT IS SAYING TO

                    THE POLICE OFFICER OR WHERE THEY'RE MAKING THE COMPLAINT THAT IT IS

                    TRANSLATED SO THAT THEY CAN AT THE END OF THIS GET JUSTICE.  THE

                    CONVERSATION ABOUT EFFICIENCY, IT'S NOT CONTEMPLATED BY THIS BILL.  I

                    UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT WHAT THIS BILL CONTEMPLATES IS THE

                    LEGAL REQUIREMENTS SO THAT WHATEVER IS BEING INTERPRETED CAN THEN LATER

                    BE USED IN COURT.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  SO LET -- LET ME ASK YOU THIS AS A

                    HYPOTHETICAL.  YOU HAVE A NON-CERTIFIED INTERPRETER DO -- WHAT -- AT THE

                    INITIAL STAGES OF AN INFORMATION WHICH THEN MOVES TO AN ACCUSATION OR

                    DEP --

                                 (CONFERENCING)

                                 -- DEPOSITION, OKAY?  AND AT THE COURT -- AT THE -- ONCE

                                         100



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    THE COURT BECOMES INVOLVED, WHAT IF THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE

                    INTERPRETATION OF THE COURT INTERPRETER AND THE PERT -- THE -- THE INITIAL

                    INFORMATION WHICH LED TO THE ALLEGATION?  HOW DOES THAT GET RESOLVED?

                    NOW YOU'VE GOT -- YOU'RE -- YOU'RE NOT SERVING JUSTICE IT WOULD SEEM.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IN YOUR EXAMPLE, WOULD IT BE BEFORE THIS

                    BILL PASSES OR AFTER THE BILL PASSES?

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  PARDON?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IN -- IN YOUR EXAMPLE, ARE YOU

                    CONTEMPLATING --

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  AFTER -- AFTER THE BILL PASSES.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO IN AN INSTANCE LIKE THAT, AN

                    INDIVIDUAL, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS A FRIEND OR THE SISTER OR BROTHER OF THE

                    DEPONENT WHO CAME WITH THEM WOULD BE ALLOWED TO SERVE AS AN

                    INTERPRETER IF IT'S AN OBSCURE LANGUAGE.  FOR EXAMPLE, IN MANY UPSTATE

                    COUNTIES YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE ACCESS TO AN INTERPRETATION SYSTEM RIGHT

                    AWAY, THERE MAY BE AN ISSUE GETTING ACCESS TO SOMEONE.  THAT PERSON

                    WHO'S MAKING THE INTERPRETATION WOULD STILL HAVE TO SIGN AN AFFIDAVIT

                    SAYING THAT WHAT THEY'RE INTERPRETING IS ACCURATE AND THAT THEY HAVE

                    KNOWLEDGE OF THAT PARTICULAR LANGUAGE.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  DOES YOUR BILL TAKE INTO

                    CONSIDERATION DIALECT DIFFERENCES FROM DIFFERENT AREAS OF A PARTICULAR

                    COUNTRY OR A REGION?  BECAUSE DIALECT DIFFERENCES CAN HAVE DIFFERENT

                    MEANINGS SO THAT -- THAT IS WHERE A CENTRALIZED -- WOULD POSSIBLY AVOID

                    THAT.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO THE BILL TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE

                                         101



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    QUALIFICATIONS AND CERTIFYING -- OR SELF-CERTIFICATION BY THE INTERPRETER

                    THAT THEY ARE QUALIFIED TO INTERPRET THAT PARTICULAR LANGUAGE.  I WOULD

                    ASSUME THAT THEY'RE -- IF THEY'RE GOING TO SIGN AN AFFIDAVIT THAT SAYS THAT

                    THEY ARE KNOWLEDGEABLE AND THEY'RE DOING SO ACCURATELY IT WOULD TAKE

                    THAT INTO ACCOUNT.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  OKAY.  BUT I DON'T THINK THAT

                    ADDRESSED THE ISSUE OF DIALECT DIFFERENCES WITHIN THE SAME LANGUAGE.

                    SO THE PERSON WHO IS INTERPRETING IT AT THE INITIAL STAGES CERTIFIES THAT

                    YES, THEY ARE DOING IT ACCURATELY.  BUT THEY ALSO ARE NOT VERSED IN ALL

                    DIALECTS.  THE -- THE -- SO THERE'S -- THERE -- THERE COULD BE --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  WELL, I THINK THAT'S WHY THE BILL PREFERS

                    THAT IT BE CERTIFIED INTERPRETERS BECAUSE GENERALLY THOSE -- THOSE TYPE OF

                    INDIVIDUALS ARE TRAINED ON THE DIALECT AND THE DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS

                    OF A PARTICULAR WORD.  THE ONLY WAY YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO USE A FAMILY

                    MEMBER IS IF IT'S AN OBSCURE LANGUAGE THAT THERE'S NO ACCESS TO FOR AN

                    INTERPRETER, BUT GENERALLY THAT'S WHY THE BILL OPTS TO USE A CERTIFIED

                    INTERPRETER.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  OKAY.  AND I APOLOGIZE, I DID

                    ASK THIS AND YOU MAY HAVE ANSWERED.  HAS -- HAS THERE BEEN ANY

                    CONSIDERATION OF A CENTRALIZED INTERPRETATION CENTER THAT CAN BE

                    ACCESSED 24 HOURS A DAY?  STATE RURAL COUNTIES, I HAVE A VERY RURAL

                    COUNTY AND I HAVE A NUMBER OF H-2A WORKERS IN THE SUMMER, OKAY.

                    AND IF -- SHOULD THEY HAVE A PROBLEM EITHER AS A COMPLAINANT OR AS AN

                    ACCUSED, THEY -- THEY'RE BROUGHT TO A LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT.  SOMETIMES

                    TO THE JUDGE'S HOUSE BECAUSE THE DISTANCE FROM THE COURTHOUSE.  SO TO

                                         102



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    FACILITATE THAT, THERE'S NO WAY THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE AN INTERPRETER AT

                    THAT POINT.  THAT'S WHY I ASKED, WAS THERE EVER ANY CONSIDERATION?  IT'S

                    NOT A TRICK QUESTION, IT'S LIKE TO HAVE A CENTRALIZED 24-HOUR ACCESSIBLE

                    SO THAT ALL OF THESE RURAL COURTS CAN DISPENSE JUSTICE FOR THOSE THAT AREN'T

                    PROFICIENT IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THE STATE LANGUAGE ACCESS PLAN ALREADY

                    CONTEMPLATES THAT AND CREATES A -- A HOTLINE OR A -- A -- A SORT OF

                    CENTRALIZED SYSTEM --

                                 (CROSSTALK)

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  THERE WOULD BE A PERFECT WAY

                    OF ASSESSING IT, A HOTLINE.  IT -- IT -- IT --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IT ALREADY EXISTS.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  PARDON?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IT ALREADY EXISTS.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  YES.  HAS THERE BEEN ANY -- JUST

                    DISCUSSION WHEN THE BILL WAS COMING TOGETHER?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THERE WAS NO NEED TO DO THAT BECAUSE IT

                    ALREADY EXISTS.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  WELL, WHERE DOES IT EXIST?  YOU

                    SAID THE COURT SYSTEM IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU'RE DOING HERE.  IT EXISTS

                    IN THE COURT SYSTEM --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  -- BUT THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN THAT.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THIS -- THIS HAS -- SO THIS HAS NOTHING TO

                    DO WITH THE ACTUAL SYSTEM TO ACCESS THE INTERPRETERS BECAUSE THE NEW

                                         103



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    YORK STATE LANGUAGE ACCESS PLAN ALREADY TAKES CARE OF THAT.  SO THERE

                    IS A PLAN THAT'S BEEN -- THAT BEGAN AS AN EXECUTIVE ORDER AND IT'S NOW

                    LAW AND ALREADY ENSURES THAT AGENCIES HAVE ACCESS TO AN INTERPRETATION

                    SYSTEM.  GENERALLY, IT'S TWO TO THREE VENDORS PER AGENCY THAT THEY'RE

                    GIVEN AND THEY -- AND WHETHER IT'S THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE

                    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, THEY CAN CALL THOSE HOTLINES AND ARE ABLE TO

                    ACCESS THOSE INTERPRETERS.  IN THIS BILL, THE ONLY THING THIS BILL DOES, IT

                    CONTEMPLATES THE QUALIFICATIONS THAT AN INTERPRETER'S PUTTING FORTH IN AN

                    AFFIDAVIT SO THAT THAT AFFIDAVIT CAN THEN BE USED AS PART OF A --

                    ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  THANK YOU.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  OH, YES.  AND REQUIRING EACH LAW

                    ENFORCEMENT AGENCY TO DO IT BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, IT'S A "MAY" SITUATION.

                    WE WANT TO SAY "WILL" OR "SHALL."

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  THANK YOU.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MR. MORINELLO:  AS I STATED INITIALLY, INITIALLY I

                    THINK THE DEBATE PRIOR FOCUSED ON A NEED, WHICH I THINK WAS MISGUIDED

                    AND WE MISSED SOME OF THE POINTS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN ACCOMPLISHED

                    OVER THE LAST YEAR.  IT'S NOT THE NEED OR THE CONCEPT.  WHAT IT IS IS THE

                    IMPLEMENTATION, AND I STILL FEAR THAT BECAUSE OF DIALECT DIFFERENCES,

                    TIMING, JUSTICE COURTS IN RURAL AREAS, THAT IT SHOULD BE FOCUSED MORE ON

                    ADAPTING OR -- OR OPTING INTO THE STATE SYSTEM AND PUT TOGETHER A SYSTEM

                                         104



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    THAT HAS CENTRALIZED ACCESS TO IT, BECAUSE THE OTHER SIDE IS GONNA BE THE

                    ECONOMICS TO THIS AND AS WE STATED, NEW YORK STATE RIGHT NOW IS

                    STRUGGLING TO FIND WAYS TO FUND THEIR BUDGET.  AND THIS HAS BEEN ONE OF

                    THE REASONS WHY THERE'S NO BUDGET AT THIS TIME.

                                 SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YES, WE NEED THIS.  YES, IT'S

                    GOOD.  YES, IT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE COURT SYSTEM.  BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO

                    START WORRYING MORE ABOUT THOSE THAT DO NOT HAVE PROFICIENCY IN THE

                    ENGLISH LANGUAGE, THAT MAYBE WE START LOOKING TO, HOW DO WE

                    ACCOMPLISH IT STATEWIDE WITH ONLY ONE SYSTEM THAT ACCOMPLISHES ALL

                    THE NEEDS.

                                 THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. ANGELINO.

                                 MR. ANGELINO:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                    WOULD THE SPONSOR PLEASE YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. ANGELINO:  GOOD AFTERNOON.  LUCKILY, I -- WE

                    DID THIS SAME DEBATE LAST YEAR, SAME PEOPLE AND I READ THROUGH THAT.

                    BUT I -- I WAS ONLY GOING TO SPEAK ON THE BILL UNTIL YOU SAID SOMETHING

                    THAT WAS A LITTLE DIFFERENT, BECAUSE WHILE MY COLLEAGUE FROM NIAGARA

                    FALLS MENTIONED MOSTLY COURT PROCEEDINGS AND IN COURT, I THINK LAST

                    YEAR YOU AND I TALKED MOSTLY ABOUT LAW ENFORCEMENT OUT ON THE -- IN

                                         105



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    THE FIELD.  AND YOU SAID -- I -- I REMEMBER LAST YEAR I SAID, CAN'T A

                    TRUSTED FAMILY MEMBER BE THE INTERPRETER OR TRANSLATOR?  AND LAST YEAR

                    I DON'T THINK YOU SAID THEY COULD.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  I DON'T REMEMBER, IT'S LAST YEAR.

                                 MR. ANGELINO:  OKAY.  SO THAT WAS A CONCERN AND

                    THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I'M ASKING QUESTIONS NOW IS BECAUSE YOU SAID

                    THAT A -- WHEN I ASKED, YOU KNOW, IN A RURAL AREA IT'S HARD TO FIND

                    SOMEBODY, GENERALLY A POLICE OFFICER'S TALKING TO A VICTIM AND THERE'S

                    USUALLY FAMILY MEMBERS THERE.  WOULD ONE OF THOSE FAMILY MEMBERS

                    SUFFICE?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO WHAT THE BILL INTENDS TO DO IS THAT IN

                    AN INSTANCE LIKE THAT, THE ONLY TIME AN OFFICER SHOULD BE USING A FAMILY

                    MEMBER IS IF THE LANGUAGE -- IF -- IF THEY ATTEMPTED TO ACCESS

                    INTERPRETATION, THEY COULDN'T BECAUSE OF A NUMBER OF REASONS; LANGUAGE

                    IS NOT AVAILABLE, IT'S OBSCURE, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, THEN THEY SHOULD BE

                    ABLE TO USE A FAMILY MEMBER THAT'S THERE WHO WILL STILL HAVE TO GO

                    THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ATTESTING TO THE INTERPRETATION ACCURACY AND TO

                    THEIR SKILL LEVEL IN THE LANGUAGE.

                                 MR. ANGELINO:  OKAY.  AND WAS THERE A -- AN

                    INCIDENT OR A -- OR SEVERAL OR JUST ONE, SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED WHERE

                    TRANSLATION WAS LOST AND SOMETHING BAD HAPPENED TO SOMEBODY?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  I MEAN IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.  I DON'T

                    HAVE ONE SPECIFIC, BUT I COULD TELL YOU IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.

                                 MR. ANGELINO:  OKAY.  THANK YOU.

                                 MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

                                         106



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MR. ANGELINO:  SO LAST YEAR I THINK -- WE DON'T

                    NEED TO REHASH EVERYTHING BUT WITHOUT GETTING IN TOO DETAIL BECAUSE IT

                    WILL DOCK SOMEBODY BUT THIS SITUATION HAPPENS TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

                    THE -- I HAVE A BIG RURAL DISTRICT.  ENGLISH IS 99.9% OF THE PEOPLE.

                    WHEN WE DO ENCOUNTER SOMEBODY THAT DOES NOT SPEAK ENGLISH, IT'S

                    MOSTLY SPANISH AND WE GET THROUGH THAT PRETTY WELL FROM SPANISH

                    SPEAKERS, BUT IT'S NOT EXACT.  I MEAN, MY HIGH SCHOOL SPANISH IS

                    TERRIBLE.  SO WE USUALLY RELY UPON A FAMILY MEMBER AND WE'RE TALKING

                    SUPPORTING DEPOSITIONS HERE.

                                 AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, AT 2 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING

                    WHEN TWO COPS ARE AT A BAR FIGHT, ONE IS TRYING TO TALK TO THE VICTIM,

                    THEY DON'T SPEAK ENGLISH, USUALLY IT'S GONNA BE SPANISH, A FAMILY

                    MEMBER STANDS THERE.  THESE SUPPORTING DEPOSITIONS ARE TAKEN ON A

                    COP'S LAP ON A PIECE OF PAPER USING A PEN.  WE'RE TRYING TO GET THAT

                    SUPPORTING DEPOSITION DONE QUICKLY BECAUSE NO -- NO VICTIM INCIDENT IS

                    EVER THE SAME.  OUR -- WE'RE TRYING TO APPREHEND SOMEBODY, WE'RE

                    TRYING TO PREVENT FURTHER DAMAGE FROM HAPPENING, WE'RE TRYING TO GET A

                    SUPPORTING DEPOSITION AS A BASIS FOR PROBABLE CAUSE TO MAKE AN ARREST.

                    AND IF YOU WAITED TEN MINUTES, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY NOW IS 15 MILES

                    AWAY.  IT JUST MAKES OUR JOB MORE DIFFICULT.  I DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD

                    REALLY HAPPEN IF WE HAD TO RELY UPON THAT SUPPORTING DEPOSITION TO GO

                    THROUGH COURT, AND IF THAT WEREN'T PRIMA FACIE ENOUGH FOR THE COURT AS IT

                    IS NOW, A LOT OF THESE CASES WOULD GET THROWN OUT BASICALLY ON A

                    TECHNICALITY THAT IT WASN'T A CERTIFIED TRANSLATOR.

                                         107



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 SO I WAS HAPPY TO HEAR THAT IN AN URGENT SITUATION A

                    FAMILY MEMBER COULD DO THAT BECAUSE WE -- WE'RE ALL TRYING TO GET

                    JUSTICE HERE.  AND IT'S NOT VERY OFTEN THAT THE ACTOR OF A CRIME THAT

                    CAUSED DAMAGE, STOLE SOMETHING, COMES TO US FIRST AND WANTS TO

                    CONFESS.  WE HAVE TO RELY UPON VICTIMS OF THESE.

                                 I'LL BE -- I'LL BE VOTING NO JUST FOR THE CUMBERSOMENESS

                    OF THIS AND HOW IT'S GONNA IMPACT RURAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AND

                    METROPOLITAN LAW ENFORCEMENT.

                                 THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. MOLITOR.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  WILL

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  THANK YOU.  JUST A FEW QUESTIONS

                    ABOUT -- OR SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PARTICULAR

                    LAW.  WHAT TYPES OF ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENTS WILL THIS LAW APPLY TO?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  I'M SORRY, CAN YOU SAY THAT A LITTLE BIT

                    LOUDER?

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  YEAH.  WHAT TYPES OF ACCUSATORY

                    INSTRUMENTS WILL THIS LAW APPLY TO?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  ANY THAT WOULD BE USED TO ENSURE -- GIVE

                                         108



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    ME ONE SECOND.

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 I CAN READ ALL OF THEM, ALL RIGHT.  AN INFORMATION, A

                    SIMPLIFIED INFORMATION.  I AM -- JUST -- MY READING.

                                 (CONFERENCING)

                                 SO IT WOULD APPLY TO AN INDICTMENT, AN INDICTMENT

                    ORDER TO REDUCE PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION 1 OF SECTION 210.20.  A

                    SIMPLIFIED INFORMATION, A PROSECUTOR'S INFORMATION, A SUPERIOR COURT

                    INFORMATION, A MISDEMEANOR COMPLAINT OR A FELONY COMPLAINT.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  WHY WOULD IT -- WHY WOULD IT

                    APPLY TO AN INDICTMENT?

                                 (CONFERENCING)

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IF THERE WAS A DEPOSITION THAT OCCURRED

                    PRIOR TO GETTING TO COURT AND THEY ARE -- AND THERE WAS NO CERTIFIED

                    TRANSLATION PROVIDED AS IT WOULD IN THE COURT, THEN IT WOULD APPLY.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  BUT IN AN INDICTMENT THERE'S A GRAND

                    JURY PROCEEDING, AND IN THAT GRAND JURY PROCEEDING IF SOMEONE SPOKE

                    ANOTHER LANGUAGE BESIDES ENGLISH, THERE WOULD BE AN INTERPRETER AND

                    THAT INTERPRETER WOULD HAVE TO BE SWORN.  SO --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THAT'S CORRECT, YES.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  -- SO WHY WOULD THIS APPLY TO AN

                    INDICTMENT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IT WOULD BE FOR ANYTHING THAT WAS

                    COMMUNICATED PRIOR TO STEPPING INTO COURT.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO THIS LAW WOULD REQUIRE -- SO LET'S

                                         109



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    SAY, LET'S SAY A MISDEMEANOR INFORMATION WAS FILED IN LOCAL COURT, THIS

                    -- AND THE FACTS THAT ARE RELEVANT TO THIS PARTICULAR SCENARIO ARE -- OCCUR,

                    YOU'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS WHOLE PROCESS IN ORDER TO HAVE A

                    SUFFICIENT MISDEMEANOR INFORMATION, RIGHT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YEAH.  YEAH.  YEAH.  YEAH, CORRECT.

                    YEAH.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  RIGHT?  AND THEN YOU PROVIDE

                    NOTICE THE DEFENDANT THAT THE CASE IS GONNA GO TO GRAND JURY, AND ONCE

                    THERE'S AN INDICTMENT, YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AGAIN

                    IN COUNTY COURT OR SUPREME COURT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YOU'D ALSO HAVE TO ENSURE THAT THE

                    INDICTMENT IS TRANSLATED TO THE PERSON'S LANGUAGE.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  TO THE DEFENDANT/S LANGUAGE?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  TO THE -- BOTH.  YEAH, BOTH.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  WHERE -- WHERE IN THE LANGUAGE OF

                    THIS BILL, MAYBE I MISSED IT, BUT WHERE IN THE LANGUAGE OF THIS BILL DOES

                    IT REQUIRE OR DOES IT SAY THAT THE INDICTMENT NEEDS TO BE CONVERTED TO

                    THE DEFENDANT'S PRIMARY LANGUAGE?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  DO YOU HAVE IT IN FRONT OF YOU?  'CAUSE I

                    CAN POINT IT.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  I DO.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO IT WOULD BE WHERE IT SAYS, NOT

                    WITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION OF THE LAW TO -- TO THE CONTRARY WHERE THE

                    FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS OF THE ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT AND/OR ANY

                    SUPPORTING DEPOSITION FILED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS CONSIST

                                         110



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    OF STATEMENTS MADE BY THE DEPONENT TO A PUBLIC SERVANT.  SO THAT

                    SECTION RIGHT THE THERE.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  THAT SAYS DEPONENT THOUGH, NOT THE

                    DEFENDANT.  YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT -- THIS -- THIS BILL IS ABOUT A WITNESS

                    WHO MAYBE SPEAKS A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  -- IT'S NOT ABOUT A DEFENDANT WHO

                    SPEAKS A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SORRY, I -- MAYBE I MISHEARD YOU AND

                    I'M GONNA ASK THAT EITHER YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT LOUDER OR GET CLOSER

                    BECAUSE THERE'S LIKE NOISE AROUND US.  SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M

                    HEARING YOU AS BEST POSSIBLE.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  OKAY.  SO JUST TO BE CLEAR -- IS THAT

                    BETTER?

                                 MS.  CRUZ:  YES.  MUCH BETTER.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS LAW, THIS

                    PROPOSED LAW, DOES NOT APPLY TO AN INDICTMENT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YEAH, IT DOES.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  WELL, YOUR -- YOUR -- YOUR BILL IS

                    AMENDING SECTION 100.40.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  WELL -- NO, NO, NO.  IT -- IT A -- IT A -- IT

                    APPLIES TO MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE INTERPRETING THAT INFORMATION AND THAT

                    INDICTMENT FOR THE DEFENDANT.  I'M SORRY, NOT FOR THE DEFENDANT, FOR THE

                    DEPONENT.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  RIGHT, BUT YOU'RE AMENDING SECTION

                                         111



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    100.40 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW WHICH DOESN'T APPLY TO

                    INDICTMENTS.  IT APPLIES TO LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENTS.

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 AN INDICTMENT IS NOT A LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT ACCUSATORY

                    INSTRUMENT --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  HOLD YOUR THOUGHT FOR ONE SECOND.  HOLD

                    THAT THOUGHT.

                                 (CONFERENCING)

                                 WE DON'T READ IT -- I HAVE TO CONSULT WITH COUNSEL.  WE

                    DON'T READ IT TO NOT INCLUDE AN INDICTMENT, WE READ IT TO ACTUALLY

                    INCLUDE IT AS IT IS ALSO AN ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION 100.40

                    OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW IT'S TITLED LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT AND

                    YOUTH PART OF THE SUPERIOR COURT ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENTS; SUFFICIENCY

                    ON FACE.  AND IT LISTS THE INSTRUMENTS AND INFORMATION, A SIMPLIFIED

                    INFORMATION, A PROSECUTOR'S INFORMATION, A MISDEMEANOR COMPLAINT OR A

                    FELONY COMPLAINT.  THOSE ARE THE FIRST FOUR SECTIONS OF THAT LAW.  YOU'RE

                    SEEKING TO ADD A FIFTH SECTION, WHICH -- AND WE'LL GET TO HOW THAT

                    APPLIES TO THE OTHER FOUR SECTIONS HERE IN A MINUTE.  BUT YOU'RE SEEKING

                    TO ADD A FIFTH SECTION THAT DOES NOT SEEK TO CHANGE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR

                    AN INDICTMENT BECAUSE THAT'S UNDER A SEPARATE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW

                    SECTION.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  WHAT I'M LOOKING AT --  I'M -- WE'RE

                    GONNA HAVE TO I GUESS AGREE TO DISAGREE ON THAT.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  OKAY.  ALL RIGHT.  SO LOOKING BACK

                                         112



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    AT THE LANGUAGE OF THE BILL, THIS BILL WOULD REQUIRE BASICALLY SOME EXTRA

                    STEPS FOR THE FILING OF THE ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENTS THAT ARE LISTED IN THAT

                    SECTION.  WHEN -- WHEN WILL THIS ACTUALLY BE REQUIRED?  WHEN WILL THIS

                    HAPPEN LET'S SAY?  WELL, LET'S TAKE AN EXAMPLE, IT'LL BE A LOT EASIER.  THE

                    POLICE FILE A -- A MISDEMEANOR ALLEGING AN A -- AN ASSAULT -- A

                    MISDEMEANOR ASSAULT.  WHAT ARE THE FACTS OR CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ARE

                    REQUIRED UNDER THIS BILL FOR IT TO BE SUFFICIENT ON ITS FACE?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THE DEPONENT WHO WOULD BE SOMEONE

                    WHOSE PRIMARY LANGUAGE IS NOT ENGLISH, REQUIRES AN INTERPRETER, AN

                    INTERPRETER IS PROVIDED AND THE INFORMATION THAT COMES OUT -- AND WHEN

                    I MEAN INFORMATION I DON'T MEAN THE DOCUMENT, THE FACTS THAT COME OUT

                    LEAD THE POLICE TO THINK THAT A CRIME HAS OCCURRED AND TO THEN TAKE THE

                    NEXT STEPS.  IF THAT'S PART OF -- OF THE EXAMPLE THAT YOU ARE PUTTING

                    FORWARD, THEN IN AN INSTANCE LIKE THAT, YOU WOULD NEED THE DEPONENT'S

                    STATEMENT TO BE ACCOMPANIED BY A CERTIFICATION FROM THE INTERPRETER

                    AND THERE'S TWO WAYS THAT IT CAN BE DONE.  IT'S EITHER A STATEMENT

                    PROVIDED IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE DEPONENT, ALONG WITH A TRANSLATION THAT

                    -- AND A STATEMENT THAT SAYS IT'S ACCURATELY TRANSLATED, OR THE STATEMENT

                    COMPLETELY IN ENGLISH WITH A CERTIFICATION THAT SAYS, THIS HAS BEEN

                    TRANSLATED FROM THE DEPONENT'S ORIGINAL LANGUAGE AND I AM A CERTIFIED

                    INTERPRETER TO DO SO.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO TO USE MY COLLEAGUE'S EXAMPLE

                    JUST FOR -- TO MAKE THIS EASY; YOU HAVE A BAR FIGHT, LET'S SAY BETWEEN

                    JOHN AND PAUL.  AND THE POLICE SHOW UP, THEY TAKE A DEPOSITION FROM

                    PAUL WHO'S LET'S SAY THE VICTIM IN THIS PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCE AND THEY

                                         113



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    FILE AN ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT CHARGING JOHN WITH ASSAULT.  AT WHAT

                    POINT DOES THAT ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT GET CHALLENGED TO -- IF LET'S SAY

                    PAUL'S PRIMARY LANGUAGE WAS NOT ENGLISH?  AT WHAT POINT DOES THAT --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO LET'S WALK THE EXAMPLE BACK.  WHEN

                    THE POLICE SHOW UP, THEY DETERMINE THAT JOHN OR PAUL DO NOT SPEAK

                    ENGLISH OR WELL ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH THEM.  THE

                    MAJORITY OF POLICE DEPARTMENTS HAVE AN I SPEAK CARD AND THE MAJORITY

                    OF POLICE DEPARTMENTS ALREADY HAVE A SYSTEM IN PLACE TO BE ABLE OR

                    SOME ARE -- OR AN INTERPRETATION SYSTEM CONTRACTED TO BE ABLE TO CALL.

                    THEY CALL, SOMEONE PICKS UP AND THEN THEY'RE ABLE TO RELAY THE FACTS

                    AND THAT FACTUAL INFORMATION IS THEN USED BY THE POLICE TO FILE CHARGES

                    OR -- I'M NOT -- I'M -- NOT TO FILE CHARGES, I'M SORRY, TO THEN ARREST

                    SOMEONE AND THAT COULD RESULT IN A MISDEMEANOR, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.

                    AT THE POINT WHERE THEY DECIDE THAT THERE'S FACTUAL INFORMATION AND THAT

                    COULD LEAD THEM TO THINK THAT A CRIME HAS OCCURRED, THAT INTERPRETER -- I

                    WOULD GUESS THAT WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN IS THAT INTERPRETER IS THEN

                    INFORMED THAT THEY NEED TO SUBMIT A DOCUMENT SHOWING THEIR

                    QUALIFICATIONS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, OR THE TWO EXAM -- THE TWO

                    STATEMENTS THAT I GAVE YOU, A TRANSLATED STATEMENT OR A STATEMENT IN

                    ENGLISH AND CERTIFICATION OF THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE INTERPRETER.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO IF THE POLICE SHOW UP IN THIS

                    SCENARIO AND PAUL SAYS TO THEM, THAT GUY PUNCHED ME IN THE FACE AND

                    THEY TAKE THAT DOWN, THEY WRITE IT DOWN ON A SUPPORTING DEPOSITION,

                    PAUL SIGNS IT AND THEY FILE -- THE POLICE FILE AN ASSAULT THIRD IN THE

                    LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT.  THEN JOHN'S ATTORNEY AND JOHN FINDS OUT -- JOHN'S

                                         114



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    ATTORNEY FINDS OUT THAT PAUL'S PRIMARY LANGUAGE IS NOT ENGLISH, JOHN'S

                    ATTORNEY CAN MOVE TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT FOR INSUFFICIENCY?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW A LOT OF TIMES.

                    THERE'S -- IT'S ACTUALLY ONE OF THE BASIS -- INACCURATE INTERPRETATION IS

                    ACTUALLY OFTEN THE BASIS FOR APPEAL.  WHETHER THE APPEAL SUCCEEDS OR

                    NOT IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT CONVERSATION, BUT IT'S OFTEN NOW AND WHAT WE'RE

                    TRYING TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE AVOIDING THAT BASIS FOR APPEAL BY

                    CREATING A SYSTEM WHERE IT HAPPENS BASICALLY AUTOMATICALLY.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO WHAT IF -- WHAT IF THAT -- THAT

                    EXACT SAME SCENARIO OCCURS BUT THE POLICE ALSO GET A WITNESS FROM

                    SOMEBODY ELSE WHOSE PRIMARY LANGUAGE IS ENGLISH AND THEY HAVE IT ON

                    THE BAR CAMERA THAT JOHN PUNCHED PAUL.  CAN THEY STILL -- CAN THE

                    DEFENSE ATTORNEY STILL MOVE TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUFFICIENCY?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  IF -- IF THE POLICE FAILED -- IF -- IF THE

                    POLICE ARE USING THIS ADDITIONAL WITNESS'S STATEMENT AS PART OF THE ACC --

                    OF THE FACTS FOR THE ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT AND THEY FAILED TO GET A

                    CERTIFICATION OR AN INTERPRETER, THEN YES.  THE ANSWER IS YES.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  OKAY.  AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, IN THE

                    LANGUAGE OF THIS BILL THERE IS NO DEFINITION OF INTERPRETER; IS THAT

                    CORRECT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THAT'S CORRECT.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO ANYONE WHO'S [SIC] SUFFICIENTLY

                    SPEAKS THAT LANGUAGE COULD BE USED AS AN INTERPRETER UNDER THE

                    LANGUAGE OF THIS BILL?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THAT IS CONTEMPLATED BY THE LANGUAGE

                                         115



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    ACCESS LAW AND PLANS OF THE STATE, THAT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT

                    SECTION, WHERE WHO IS A CERTIFIED AND NOT A CERTIFICATED INTERPRETER AND

                    IS USED FOR THE PURPOSES OF MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATE AGENCIES

                    AND CITY AGENCIES.  THAT'S A SEPARATE SECTION.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  BUT -- BUT THIS DOESN'T REFERENCE

                    THOSE LAWS, RIGHT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THIS REFERENCES SOMEONE BEING ABLE TO

                    CERTIFY THAT THEY'RE AN INTERPRETER.  I THINK THE PART THAT IS OFTEN MISSED

                    IS THAT A LOT OF THIS IS ALREADY HAPPENING.  THE ONLY PIECE THAT'S MISSING

                    IS THAT CERTIFICATION BECAUSE A LOT OF AGENCIES, A LOT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

                    AGENCIES ARE ALREADY USING MANY OF THE PHONE LINE SYSTEMS TO CALL AN

                    INTERPRETER WHEN NEEDED.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  THANK YOU.

                                 ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO I -- I DON'T NECESSARILY DISAGREE

                    WITH THE PREMISE OF THIS BILL.  I THINK THAT IF YOU ARE -- IF THE POLICE ARE

                    GOING TO FILE CHARGES, YOU KNOW, THEY SHOULD BE ACCURATE IN -- IN THE

                    ALLEGATIONS.  AND I, YOU KNOW, WHEN I SPEAK TO THE POLICE OR WHEN I

                    DID SPEAK TO THE POLICE IN MY FORMER CAREER, I KNOW THAT MANY OF THEM,

                    IF NOT ALL OF THEM, WANTED TO DO THAT.

                                 I THINK THAT THIS BILL LACKS SOME DEFINITIONS THAT WOULD

                    MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT CLEARER AND EASIER TO IMPLEMENT, AND I THINK ONE OF

                    THE MAJOR PROBLEMS WE HAVE IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM RIGHT NOW

                    IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK IS A LOT OF CONFUSING LAWS THAT DON'T ACTUALLY

                                         116



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    WORK AND THIS IS -- I THINK WILL BE ANOTHER ONE OF THEM.

                                 I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED THAT THE SPONSOR'S

                    INTERPRETATION OF THIS BILL INCLUDES INDICTMENTS WHEN THE LANGUAGE OF

                    THIS BILL DOES NOT INCLUDE INDICTMENTS AND THE SECTION THAT'S REFERENCED

                    ALSO DOES NOT INCLUDE INDICTMENTS.  AN INDICTMENT IS A COMPLETELY

                    SEPARATE PROCEEDING THAT HAS ITS OWN SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE AND IF IT'S PART

                    OF THIS LEGISLATIVE RECORD THAT INDICTMENTS ARE INCLUDED, IT'S GONNA

                    CREATE A LOT OF CONFUSION ACROSS THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 SO FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I WOULD ASK ALL OF MY

                    COLLEAGUES TO PLEASE VOTE NO ON THIS BILL AND I WILL BE VOTING NO AS

                    WELL.

                                 THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  MR. REILLY.

                                 MR. REILLY:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  WILL

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A COUPLE QUESTIONS?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  OF COURSE, MR. REILLY.

                                 MR. REILLY:  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  THE

                    SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. REILLY:  THANK YOU SO MUCH.  SO THE QUESTION

                    I HAVE IS LET'S PUT THIS INTO A -- A REAL WORLD CONTEXT BEFORE IT REACHES

                    THE COURTS.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  YES.

                                 MR. REILLY:  SAY A POLICE OFFICER OR ANOTHER LAW

                    ENFORCEMENT OFFICER RESPOND TO A SCENE AND THEY'RE INTERVIEWING

                                         117



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    SOMEONE AND THIS OFFICER SPEAKS SPANISH BUT ENGLISH IS HIS PRIMARY.

                    AND THERE'S A SPONTANEOUS UTTERANCE BY ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS AND THE

                    INDIVIDUAL, HIS PRIMARY LANGUAGE IS SPANISH.  HE CREATE -- CREATES A

                    SPONTANEOUS UTTERANCE ADMITTING TO A CRIME IN SPANISH.  THE OFFICER

                    NOW PLACES THAT INDIVIDUAL UNDER ARREST.  WHEN THE ACCUSATORY

                    INSTRUMENT IS DRAWN UP BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, WILL THAT

                    OFFICER HAVE TO BE A QUALIFIED INTERPRETER UNDER THIS BILL?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO IN YOUR EXAMPLE, MR. REILLY, WOULD

                    THE EXCITED UTTERANCE BE USED AS THE BASIS TO ARREST THE INDIVIDUAL?

                                 MR. REILLY:  IT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE ACCUSATORY

                    INSTRUMENT.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO IN THAT INSTANCE AND I'M GONNA USE

                    ACTUALLY A -- A STATEMENT BY ONE OF YOUR COLLEAGUES, I THINK IT WOULD BE

                    IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND THIS BILL WOULD WANT IT TO BE AN

                    INDEPENDENT INTERPRETER THAT THEN IS ABLE TO CERTIFY THAT STATEMENT.  THE

                    REASON WHY, ESPECIALLY IN SPANISH, HE MIGHT UNDERSTAND IT, BUT AS WE

                    HEARD ONE OF YOUR COLLEAGUES EARLIER, THERE'S DIFFERENT DIALECTS.  THERE'S

                    -- IN SPANISH ONE WORD CAN MEAN FIVE DIFFERENT THINGS DEPENDING ON

                    THE COUNTRY AND SO WE WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE IN THE INTEREST OF

                    JUSTICE THAT THE PERSON HAS THEIR STATEMENT INTERPRETED BY SOMEONE WHO

                    IS CERTIFIED SO THAT, YOU KNOW, SIX MONTHS LATER THE CASE ISN'T THROWN

                    OUT.

                                 MR. REILLY:  SO IF THERE'S A SHOOTING AND THE POLICE

                    ARE INVOLVED IN THE SHOOTING AND NOW THEY STEP IN, NOBODY'S HIT AND

                    THEY STEP IN AND IT'S THE PERSON THAT WAS SHOOTING AT THEM AND THEY

                                         118



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    WERE SHOOTING AT -- AT EACH OTHER AND THE POLICE MOVE IN, NOBODY GOT

                    HIT AND THEY MOVE IN, THEY APPREHEND THE SUSPECT, THEY PLACE HIM IN

                    HANDCUFFS AND HE SAYS, I WAS LOOKING TO KILL YOU AND HE SAYS IT IN

                    SPANISH AND THERE'S A SPANISH SPEAKING OFFICER THAT'S THERE.  CAN THAT

                    BE USED IN THE ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  WELL, MR. REILLY, IF I ALSO REMEMBER

                    CORRECTLY, IN AN INSTANCE LIKE THAT THE ARREST IS ALSO OCCURRING BECAUSE

                    THE OFFICERS THEMSELVES VIEWED THE CRIME IN PROGRESS, CORRECT?

                                 MR. REILLY:  YES, BUT I'M GONNA -- BUT THEY -- THEY

                    ARE GOING TO USE A SPONTANEOUS UTTERANCE THAT -- THAT INDIVIDUAL

                    IMPLICATED THEMSELVES.  ACCORDING TO THIS LEGISLATION, IF THIS IS PASSED

                    AND SIGNED INTO LAW, THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS WOULD BE ABLE TO THROW THAT

                    OUT IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE OF THIS.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THE --

                                 MR. REILLY:  IS THAT CORRECT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SORRY, SOMEONE'S PHONE WENT OFF.

                                 MR. REILLY:  THAT'S OKAY.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THIS BILL WOULD -- DOESN'T CONTEMPLATE

                    ALLOWING THAT CASE TO BE THROWN OUT.  I -- I SUSPECT THAT THERE ARE GOING

                    TO BE TIMES WHEN SOMETHING LIKE THAT -- IF -- IF I MAY --

                                 MR. REILLY:  GO AHEAD, FINISH --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  -- WHERE SOMETHING LIKE THAT COULD

                    HAPPEN AND THERE'S OTHER PROTECTIONS IN THE LAW TO ENSURE THAT THAT IS

                    NOT -- THAT THAT CASE IS NOT THROWN OUT.

                                 NOW, I ALSO SUSPECT THAT AFTER THE PERSON SAYS THAT,

                                         119



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    YOU'RE GOING TO PROCEED TO ARREST THEM, YOU'RE GOING TO PROCEED TO

                    QUESTION THEM, THE EXCITED UTTER -- UTTERANCE PIECE ASIDE, ANYTHING THAT

                    THEY SAY TO YOU AFTER SHOULD BE THROUGH AN INTERPRETER THAT THEN GETS

                    CERTIFIED, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.  SO WE'RE NOT CONTEMPLATING HERE

                    ALLOWING THAT EXCITED UTTER -- UTTERANCE NOT TO BE USED IN COURT.

                                 MR. REILLY:  BUT IF IT'S BY -- IF IT'S INTERPRETED BY

                    THE POLICE OFFICER WHO SPEAKS SPANISH AND ENGLISH BUT THEY'RE NOT A

                    CERTIFIED INTERPRETER, IT AUTOMATICALLY WILL BE THROWN OUT ACCORDING TO

                    THIS LEGISLATION, CORRECT?  THIS SPONTANEOUS UTTERANCE BY ITSELF.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  WE'RE NOT CHANGING THAT PROCESS.

                                 MR. REILLY:  YOU -- BUT YOU ARE IF YOU'RE ASKING FOR

                    THE -- THE INITIAL, RIGHT, COMPLAINT TO BE FILED, RIGHT, THE ACCUSATORY

                    INSTRUMENT.  SPONTANEOUS UTTERANCES ARE OFTEN USED IN THE INITIAL

                    COMPLAINT WHERE IT RISES TO PROBABLE CAUSE.  SO I WANT -- IF THAT'S THE

                    CASE, THIS LEGISLATION WOULD SAY THAT -- IT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO SAY THAT

                    THE POLICE OFFICER IS NOT A CERTIFIED INTERPRETER AND THEREFORE IT WOULD

                    JEOPARDIZE THAT, CORRECT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO NO -- NO, NOT CORRECT.  THERE'S TWO

                    WAYS TO LOOK AT THIS.  THE FIRST ONE AGAIN, I WOULD -- WILL REPEAT, WE ARE

                    NOT CONTEMPLATING CHANGING THE INSTANCES WHERE A POLICE OFFICER WOULD

                    BE ABLE TO USE AN EXCITED UTTERANCE, TRANSLATED OR NOT, TO BEGIN THAT

                    PROCESS OF QUESTIONING, ARRESTING, ET CETERA.  I SUSPECT THAT AT SOME

                    POINT IN THAT INTERACTION WITH THE SUSPECT, THE OFFICER WOULD CONTINUE TO

                    QUESTION THEM ABOUT EVERYTHING ELSE THAT HAPPENED.  THAT CONTINUE TO

                    QUESTION AND PROCESS WOULD THEN HAVE TO BE TRANSLATED THROUGH AN

                                         120



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    INTERPRETER CERTIFIED, ET CETERA.

                                 I'M GOING TO CHECK WITH COUNSEL FOR ONE SECOND.

                                 MR. REILLY:  OKAY.

                                 (CONFERENCING)

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO IT -- IT ALSO OCCURS TO ME THAT IN THE

                    SAME WAY THAT A FAMILY MEMBER WITH AN OBSCURE LANGUAGE IN A SMALL

                    TOWN IN UPSTATE NEW YORK WOULD BE ABLE TO CERTIFY, I UNDERSTAND THE

                    LANGUAGE AND I ACTUALLY CAN INTERPRET THEM, THERE'S GOING TO BE AN

                    OPPORTUNITY FOR THE OFFICER TO BE ABLE TO DO THE SAME THING.

                                 MR. REILLY:  BUT IF THEY'RE NOT CERTIFIED --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO --

                                 MR. REILLY:  WOULD THAT -- WOULD THAT BE AN ISSUE?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I EXPLAINED

                    EARLIER TO YOUR COLLEAGUE IS THAT THE BILL CONTEMPLATES AND PREFERS THAT IT

                    BE SOMEONE WHO IS CERTIFIED AND CAN ATTEST TO THEIR ABILITY TO INTERPRET.

                    BUT WE ALSO KNOW THAT THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF LANGUAGES SPOKEN IN OUR

                    COUNTRY AND IF IT'S AN OBSCURE LANGUAGE AND THERE'S NO ACCESS TO

                    INTERPRETATION OTHER THAN THE COUSIN, FOR EXAMPLE, THEN THAT COUSIN

                    WOULD HAVE TO SAY, I AM CAPE -- I -- I'M TRANSLATING THIS TO THE BEST OF

                    MY ABILITY, I'M CAPABLE OF TRANSLATING IT, I UNDERSTAND THE LANGUAGE

                    AND HERE'S WHAT IT WOULD SAY.  SO I WOULD ARGUE THAT IN AN INSTANCE LIKE

                    THAT, AN OFFICER COULD -- COULD CONCEIVABLY SAY, I'M NOT CERTIFIED, BUT I

                    AM CAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING IT AND BE ABLE TO SIGN OFF ON THAT AS WELL.

                                 MR. REILLY:  SO TO -- SO TO PRESERVE THE LEGISLATIVE

                    RECORD HERE, SO IF AN OFFICER WHO SPEAKS THAT LANGUAGE SAYS THAT THEY

                                         121



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    HEARD THE SPONTANEOUS UTTERANCE IN THAT PERSON'S PRIMARY LANGUAGE AND

                    THEY'RE ABLE TO INTERPRET IT AND IT -- IT SHOULD BE -- IT SHOULD BE ABSTAIN --

                    IT -- IT SHOULD SURVIVE ANY CHALLENGE IN COURT?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THIS BILL IS NOT CHANGING THAT PROCESS.

                                 MR. REILLY:  SO IT WOULD -- THE -- THE CLEAR ANSWER

                    I'M ASKING FOR IS, WOULD THIS --

                                 MS. CRUZ:  I -- I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ME TO DO

                    AND MY ANSWER IS THIS BILL IS NOT CHANGING THAT PROCESS.

                                 MR. REILLY:  OKAY.  SO LET'S SHIFT GEARS A LITTLE BIT.

                    WHAT IF THERE'S A DYING DECLARATION?  POLICE OFFICER SHOWS UP ON THE

                    SCENE, SOMEONE GOT SHOT, THEY SPEAK SPANISH, THIS OFFICER SPEAKS

                    ENGLISH AND SPANISH AND THE PERSON DYING SAYS, SO AND SO SHOT ME AND

                    KILLED ME, THEY SAID IT IN SPANISH, WOULD -- NOW YOU CAN'T -- YOU CAN'T

                    GET THAT INTERPRETED BECAUSE AT THAT TIME MAYBE HE SUCCUMBS TO HIS

                    INJURIES AND DIES.  WHAT -- SAME SCENARIO, GOES TO COURT, THEY USE THAT,

                    THEY MAKE AN ARREST, SOMEONE'S CHARGED WITH THE MURDER.  WHAT WOULD

                    HAPPEN?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THIS BILL'S NOT CHANGING THAT PROCESS.

                                 MR. REILLY:  SO THE OFFICERS -- THE OFFICER TAKING IN

                    THAT INFORMATION IT WOULD BE FINE?  AND IT WOULD BE AN ACCUSATORY

                    INSTRUMENT AND SURVIVE?

                                 MS. CRUZ:  AGAIN, MR. REILLY, I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE

                    ASKING ME AND I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GET OUT OF ME AND I AM

                    TELLING YOU THIS BILL'S NOT CHANGING THAT PROCESS.

                                 MR. REILLY:  I'M GONNA BE HONEST WITH YOU, THE

                                         122



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    ONLY THING I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN

                    ON PAPER TRANSLATE TO THE STREET THE WAY IT SHOULD BE.

                                 THANK YOU.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. REILLY:  MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MR. REILLY:  SO AS YOU CAN TELL, THERE'S -- THERE'S A

                    LOT OF AMBIGUITY HERE AND JUST THE SHEER FACT THAT THERE'S A POSSIBILITY

                    THAT THE OUTCOME OF EVERYONE RECEIVING FAIR JUSTICE.  I'VE JUST EXPLAINED

                    HOW THIS BILL CAN INTERFERE WITH FROM THE INCEPTION OF FILING AN

                    ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT.  SO ON ITS FACE, PROSECUTORS MAY NOT BE ABLE TO

                    FILE THAT ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT BECAUSE THAT POLICE OFFICER OR LAW

                    ENFORCEMENT OFFICER THAT RESPONDED AND SPEAKS THAT LANGUAGE AS WELL

                    BUT IS NOT A CERTIFIED INTERPRETER, IT WOULD BE THROWN OUT.  IT WOULDN'T

                    EVEN REACH THE COURTROOM.  THAT'S THE CONCERN THAT I'M TRYING TO RAISE.

                    AND THOSE SITUATIONS, THE DYING DECLARATION, THE SPONTANEOUS UTTERANCE,

                    THOSE ARE REAL -- REAL LIFE CASES.  AND I SAY IT ALL THE TIME WHEN WE'RE

                    DISCUSSING THESE BILLS.  THE THINGS THAT ARE ON PAPER DO NOT TRANS --

                    TRANSITION TO THE STREETS OR TO THE COURTROOM THE WAY YOU THINK THEY

                    WILL.

                                 IT'S TIME TO SLOW DOWN AND ACTUALLY MAKE SURE THAT

                    WHAT WE WANT TO ACHIEVE IN THIS BODY LANDS THE WAY IT'S SUPPOSED TO.

                                 THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  MS. CRUZ.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                         123



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  SO A LOT HAS BEEN SAID ON THIS FLOOR TODAY

                    AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT FOLKS UNDERSTAND THE ONLY FILL -- THING THAT

                    THIS BILL IS DOING IS ADDING A CERTIFICATION FOR A PROCESS THAT ALREADY

                    EXISTS.  THERE'S MANY STATE AGENCIES, LOCALITIES, INCLUDING AS I

                    MENTIONED BEFORE THE ITHACA POLICE DEPARTMENT AND TOMPKINS COUNTY

                    GOVERNMENT, ALSO NEW YORK CITY AND MANY OTHER POLICE DEPARTMENTS,

                    STATE AGENCIES, CITY AGENCIES, HAVE AN INTERPRETATION SYSTEM.  THEY

                    HAVE IT BECAUSE IT'S THE LAW.  THE LAW SAYS YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE

                    INTERPRETATION IN THE TOP 12 LANGUAGES OF YOUR LOCALITY.  YOU CAN

                    CHOOSE UP TO FOUR MORE.  THERE'S ALREADY MONEY ALLOCATED TO IT, THERE'S

                    ALREADY CONTRACTS ENTERED INTO.  AND SO ALL OF -- THE -- THIS BILL DOES IS

                    SAY IF YOU ARE GOING TO USE THE FACTUAL INFORMATION YOU RECEIVED FROM A

                    DEPONENT, WHETHER IT'S IN A BAR FIGHT, WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE THEY CAME

                    INTO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR YOU CALL THEM TO YOUR HOME, IF WHATEVER

                    INFORMATION THAT PERSON IS GIVING YOU IS GOING TO RESULT IN A ACCUSATORY

                    INSTRUMENT THAT COULD THEN LEAD LATER TO AN INDICTMENT BECAUSE

                    INFORMATION IS TAKEN FROM THE INDIVIDUAL, THEN THAT INFORMATION HAS TO

                    BE NOT ONLY TRANSLATED BY A -- BUT ACCOMPANIED WITH A DOCUMENT THAT

                    SAYS THAT THE PERSON WHO MADE THE TRANSLATION/INTERPRETATION NOT ONLY

                    IS CAPABLE OF DOING THEM, THAT SOMETIMES CAN MEAN THAT IS SOMEONE

                    WHO IS CERTIFIED AND THAT SOMETIMES CAN MEAN THAT IT'S SOMEONE IN AN

                    -- IN A SMALL COUNTY WHERE THEY DIDN'T UNFORTUNATELY HAVE ACCESS TO AN

                    INTERPRETER IN THAT PARTICULAR LANGUAGE THAT HAS THE KNOWLEDGE OF IT.

                                         124



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 IT WOULD -- IT'S LUDICROUS TO ARGUE IN A STATE LIKE OURS

                    THAT SPANISH WOULD BE ONE OF THOSE LANGUAGES, BECAUSE I AM TELLING

                    YOU IF YOU CALL A HOTLINE THAT IS THE TOP LANGUAGE THAT IS AVAILABLE.  SO

                    THERE SHOULD NEVER BE AN INSTANCE WHERE THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE

                    LANGUAGE IS SPANISH.  IF YOU HAVE A LANGUAGE THAT UNFORTUNATELY

                    SOMETIMES IT TAKES A WEEK TO GET ACCESS TO AN INTERPRETER, YOU OF

                    COURSE DON'T WANT TO WAIT.  WE DON'T WANT LAW ENFORCEMENT TO WAIT.

                    AND SO TO STAND HERE AND HEAR ARGUMENTS THAT THE REASON WE MAY NOT

                    WANT THIS BILL IS BECAUSE IT COULD LEAD TO INJUSTICE, WHAT GREATER

                    INJUSTICE THAN SOMEONE GOING TO THE POLICE, MAKING AN ACCUSATION AND

                    OFTEN IT TAKES VICTIMS A LONG TIME TO COME FORWARD TO GO AND ACTUALLY

                    SPEAK TO LAW ENFORCEMENT, ESPECIALLY NOW WHEN THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE

                    WHO ARE SCARED OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND THAT BECAUSE WE FAILED TO GET A

                    SMALL PIECE OF PAPER, A CERTIFICATION, AGAIN THROUGH A SYSTEM THAT IS

                    ALREADY IN PLACE AND BEING PAID FOR, THE CASE GETS THROWN OUT.  WHAT

                    KIND OF JUSTICE IS THAT?  WE DON'T WANT THAT TO BE THE JUSTICE THAT NEW

                    YORKERS SEE BECAUSE LIKE IT OR NOT, WHETHER THEY SPEAK THE LANGUAGE OR

                    NOT, THESE ARE NEW YORKERS.  THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN OUR

                    COMMUNITY, THAT ARE PAYING TAXES, THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING AND THAT IF THEY

                    ARE VICTIMS OF A CRIME SPEAKING A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE SHOULD NOT BE THE

                    REASON WHY THEY DON'T SEE JUSTICE.

                                 AND I WOULD ARGUE FOR MY COLLEAGUES IN LAW

                    ENFORCEMENT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE, WHETHER THEY WERE FORMER

                    PROSECUTORS OR FORMER POLICE OFFICERS, OR OUR JUDGES, THAT THEY SHOULD

                    AGREE.  WE SHOULD WANT WHATEVER DOCUMENT LEADS TO AN INDICTMENT,

                                         125



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    WHATEVER DOCUMENT LEADS TO SOMEBODY BEING CHARGED, WHATEVER

                    DOCUMENT LEADS TO JUSTICE, SHOULD BE AS ACCURATE AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE

                    THE LAST THING ANY OF US SHOULD WANT IS SOMEONE WHO COMMITTED A

                    CRIME GOING FREE.  THE LAST THING ANY OF US SHOULD WANT IS SOMEONE

                    WHO IS A VICTIM NOT GETTING JUSTICE SIMPLY BECAUSE THEIR LANGUAGE WAS

                    INCONVENIENT TO GET IN A HOTLINE.  A HOTLINE THAT AGAIN I WILL REPEAT, IT IS

                    ALREADY IN PLACE, IT IS ALREADY BEING PAID FOR AND IT IS ALREADY

                    FUNCTIONING AND BEING USED BY MANY OF YOUR COUNTIES.  THERE'S NO

                    REASON WHY WE SHOULD BE AFRAID TO SIMPLY GET A LITTLE PIECE OF

                    DOCUMENT THAT LEADS TO ENSURING THAT THAT PERSON WHO COMMITTED A

                    CRIME IF THEY DID IN FACT COMMIT THE CRIME SEES THE INSIDE OF A

                    COURTROOM AND GETS THE JUSTICE FOR THE VICTIM THAT THEY DESERVE.

                                 AND SO ALL I'M ASKING IS FOR US TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF A

                    LAW THAT SIMPLY SAYS, IF SOMEONE DOESN'T SPEAK THE LANGUAGE, THEY

                    SHOULD GET THE SAME OPPORTUNITY AS THE REST OF US WHEN THEY COME

                    FORWARD TO SEEK JUSTICE.

                                 THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  READ THE

                    LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 90TH

                    DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  A PARTY

                    VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MS. WALSH.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                                         126



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS BILL.  IF THERE ARE

                    YES VOTES, PLEASE CAST THEM NOW AT YOUR SEATS, MEMBERS.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                    MAJORITY CONFERENCE WILL SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION.  FOR THOSE THAT

                    WOULD LIKE TO VOTE DIFFERENTLY, THEY CAN DO SO AT THEIR DESK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  THE CLERK

                    WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MR. REILLY TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                 MR. REILLY:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, TO

                    EXPLAIN MY VOTE.  SO THE INTENT I UNDERSTAND.  IT'S A NOBLE INTENT.  THE

                    PROBLEM IS THE PRACTICALITY.  NOW, WHAT WAS JUST MENTIONED ABOUT

                    BEING ABLE TO CALL UP AND GET AN INTERPRETATION AND, YES, SPANISH IS ONE

                    OF THOSE LANGUAGES THAT THERE'S ALWAYS AN INTERPRETER ON THE PHONE, BUT

                    THE IDEA THAT A SPONTANEOUS UTTERANCE TO A POLICE OFFICER COULD POSSIBLY

                    NOT BE INCLUDED IN A DOCUMENT THAT STARTS THE CASE OFF BY AN ACCUSATORY

                    INSTRUMENT, JUST THE EXPLANATION WAS EXPRESSED THAT, WELL, THEY COULD

                    CALL UP AND GET IT INTERPRETED.  THAT'S THE PROBLEM.  REALITY AND WHAT

                    WE HAVE ON THIS PAPER.

                                 WE CAN FIX IT.  YOU COULD PUT A LINE IN THERE THAT

                    EXCLUDES THAT.  HOPEFULLY THE GOVERNOR'S LISTENING, AND IF IT COMES

                    BEFORE HER DESK AND SHE SIGNS IT, WE WILL DO A CHAPTER AMENDMENT.

                    OTHERWISE, IT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE.

                                 I WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE.

                                         127



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  MR. REILLY

                    IN THE NEGATIVE.

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  ARE THERE

                    ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 PAGE 11, CALENDAR NO. 54, THE CLERK WILL READ


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A01441-A, CALENDAR

                    NO. 54, DINOWITZ, SEAWRIGHT, OTIS, JACOBSON, WEPRIN, ALVAREZ, KAY,

                    SANTABARBARA, COLTON, KASSAY.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC SERVICE

                    LAW, IN RELATION TO COMPLAINT HANDLING PROCEDURES BY THE PUBLIC

                    SERVICE COMMISSION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  AN

                    EXPLANATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  THE BILL ESTABLISHES RESPONSE

                    REQUIREMENTS TO BUILDING COMPLAINTS MADE BY CONSUMERS, AND EXPANDS

                    COMPLAINT HANDLING PROCEDURE REQUIREMENTS TO COMMERCIAL ENTITIES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  MR.

                    PALMESANO.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  YES, THANK YOU, MADAM

                    SPEAKER.  WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  WILL THE

                                         128



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YES, OF COURSE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BUTTENSCHON:  THE

                    SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  THANK YOU, MR. DINOWITZ.

                    SURPRISED TO SEE ME?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YEAH, ACTUALLY.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU.

                                 QUICK -- A FEW QUESTIONS.  THE GOVERNOR VETOED THIS

                    BILL A COUPLE YEARS AGO.  SHE CITED A FEW DIFFERENT THINGS; ONE, THAT IT

                    WOULD CREATE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASED WORKLOAD FOR THE COMMISSION

                    STAFF AND RESULT IN INCREASED EXPENSES TO THE STATE.  SHE TALKED ABOUT

                    TAKING AWAY THE DISCRETION FROM THE PSC.  DID YOUR BILL DO ANYTHING TO

                    ADDRESS THE VETOES THAT THE GOVERNOR MADE?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, FIRST, SHE'S -- THE -- THE VETO

                    MESSAGE WAS INCORRECT IN THEIR ASSERTIONS THAT IT WOULD INCREASE

                    EXPENSES.  IT WAS JUST PLAIN WRONG.  BUT ONE THING WE DID DO IS WE DID

                    MAKE SOME AMENDMENTS TO THE BILL SINCE -- SINCE THE VETO.  IT NOW

                    ALLOWS THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION DISCRETION, DISCRETION IN

                    DETERMINING APPEALS THAT WILL BE TAKEN UP BY THE COMMISSION.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.  IF THE PSC WANTED TO

                    IMPLEMENT THE CHANGES YOU HAVE IN THIS BILL IF THEY BELIEVED IT WAS

                    NECESSARY, DEEMED NECESSARY, THEY CAN GO THROUGH A PROCEEDING AND

                    IMPLEMENT THAT, CORRECT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  SAY IT AGAIN.

                                         129



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  YES, SURE.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YOU'RE KIND OF MUMBLING.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  IF THE PSC, WHO HAS THE -- YOU

                    KNOW, THE AUTHORITY HANDLING COMPLAINT MATTERS AND THINGS OF THAT

                    NATURE, IF THEY WANTED TO TAKE UP THE LANGUAGE IN THIS BILL AND

                    IMPLEMENT IT ON THEIR OWN BECAUSE THEY BELIEVED IT WAS NECESSARY TO

                    ADDRESS A PROBLEM, THEY COULD DO THAT NOW, CORRECT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I WOULD THINK SO, BUT I -- I HAVEN'T

                    -- I DON'T THINK THE PSC IS KNOWN FOR DOING THINGS THAT THEY SHOULD DO,

                    BUT DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO DO.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.

                                 WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE -- THE OTHER AREA I WANTED

                    TO TALK ABOUT, THE OLD BILL, IF I CORRECTLY -- HAD A 90-DAY, LIKE A -- COME

                    TO A DECISION WITHIN 90 DAYS, BUT THAT WAS REMOVED FROM THIS

                    LEGISLATION; IS THAT CORRECT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I'D HAVE TO CHECK.  I THINK THAT --

                                 (CONFERENCING)

                                 YEAH, THAT -- THAT'S CORRECT.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  HOW COME WE REMOVED THAT

                    90-DAY PERIOD OF TIME TO LOOK -- GIVE THEM THAT TIME TO DO THE

                    INVESTIGATION AND COME UP WITH A DECISION, IF THAT WAS WHAT THE PSC

                    USED NOW?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, WE -- WE'VE -- WE'VE TRIED TO

                    BRING EVERYBODY TOGETHER HERE, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT EVERYBODY HERE

                    WANTS TO DO THINGS THAT HELP THEIR OWN CONSTITUENTS WITH REGARD TO THE

                                         130



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    RATE, THE BILLS THEY PAY.  THEY'RE -- WHICHEVER SIDE OF THE AISLE YOU'RE

                    ON, I THINK WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE ON THIS, I HOPE.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  SURE WE ARE.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  AND WE ALSO WANTED TO ADDRESS

                    ISSUES THAT THE GOVERNOR RAISED.  SO I THINK THAT WE'VE SUCCESSFULLY

                    DONE ALL OF THAT.  AND THIS BILL, I THINK, WILL BE GOOD FOR ALL OF OUR

                    CONSTITUENTS, ALL OF THE CONSUMERS, AND YET IT SHOULD NOT RESULT IN A

                    VETO, ASSUMING IT PASSES BOTH HOUSES.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.  AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS

                    BILL WOULD INCLUDE ALL UTILITIES; GAS, STEAM, ELECTRIC, CORRECT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YES.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.  AND IT'S MY

                    UNDERSTANDING EVEN THOUGH THIS BILL FOCUSES ON BILLING COMPLAINTS, IT

                    WOULD ALSO COVER ANY OTHER COMPLAINTS, EVEN NON-BILLING ISSUES; IS THAT

                    CORRECT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  IT COULD.  BUT, I MEAN, VIRTUALLY

                    EVERY COMPLAINT IS A BILLING COMPLAINT.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  I HEAR YOU.  I MEAN, THAT'S -- THE

                    PEOPLE WE REPRESENT ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT THEIR BILLS, NO QUESTION

                    ABOUT IT.

                                 THIS LEGISLATION WOULD ALSO BROADEN THE SCOPE TO

                    INCLUDE NOT JUST RESIDENTIAL, BUT COMMERCIAL AS WELL; IS THAT CORRECT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YES.  BECAUSE WE WANT TO HELP OUR

                    SMALL BUSINESSES.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  I UNDERSTAND.  AND FROM YOUR

                                         131



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    PERSPECTIVE, THIS BILL IS NECESSARY BECAUSE THE PSC HAS FAILED TO -- TO

                    ENFORCE EXISTING COMPLAINT PROCEDURES, STATUTE AND PROCESS THEY HAVE

                    IN PLACE NOW?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, I DON'T LIKE TO USE WORDS LIKE

                    "FAILED," BUT I WOULD SAY THAT I DON'T BELIEVE THEY'RE DOING EVERYTHING

                    THEY COULD DO TO HELP DO THE RIGHT THING AND HELP OUR CONSUMERS AND

                    CONSTITUENTS AT THE SAME TIME.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  SO THERE'S A TIMEFRAME OF 15

                    DAYS, SO WALK ME THROUGH.  WHAT WOULD BE THE PROCESS?  IS -- IS THIS

                    KIND OF ACCURATE:  AN INDIVIDUAL WOULD FILE A COMPLAINT WITH THE PSC.

                    THE PSC TAKES IT, THEY SEND IT TO THE UTILITY.  THE UTILITY WOULD RESPOND

                    TO IT AND THEN THE UTILITY WOULD DO AN INTERNAL INVESTIGATION, OR THE PSC

                    DOES THE INTERNAL INVESTIGATION AND THEN SENDS IT BACK TO THE PSC.

                    HOW WOULD THAT WORK?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  IT WOULD WORK AS FOLLOWS:  I'M JUST

                    LOOKING AT THE BILL --

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  TAKE YOUR TIME.  PLENTY OF

                    TIME.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  -- TO MAKE SURE I HAVE THE

                    INFORMATION CORRECTLY.

                                 WELL, ULTIMATELY I GUESS THE UTILITY WOULD HAVE TO

                    ADDRESS THE ISSUES RAISED BECAUSE IT SAYS HERE THE PROCEEDINGS -- THE

                    BURDEN OF PROOF SHALL BE ON THE UTILITY CORPORATION OR MUNICIPALITY.

                                 (PAUSE/READING)

                                 YEAH, PROVISIONS FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND FORMAL

                                         132



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    REVIEW AND TO THE APPEAL TO THE COMMISSION IN ITS DISCRETION.  YEAH.  I

                    MEAN, THEY BOTH HAVE A -- A ROLE IN DOING THAT.  BUT THE POINT IS WE

                    HAVE 15 DAYS -- IT'S 15 BUSINESS DAYS, BY THE WAY, WHICH IS LONGER THAN

                    15 DAYS.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  SURE.  I AGREE.  SO EVEN IN THAT

                    CONTEXT THEY WOULD HAVE 15 DAYS -- THE UTILITY WOULD HAVE 15 DAYS TO

                    COMPLETE THEIR INTERNAL INVESTIGATION OR THEY WOULD -- IT WOULD BE 15

                    DAYS FROM THE TIME THE UTILITY PUTS IT BACK TO THE PSC FOR THE PSC TO

                    RESPOND TO THAT INVESTIGATION?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  LET ME CHECK.  I BELIEVE THAT THAT

                    WOULD BE -- THE PSC WOULD HAVE 15 DAYS.  IT'S 15 DAYS FROM -- IT'S 15

                    DAYS FROM THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION, THEY WOULD HAVE TO

                    INFORM THE COMPLAINANT, THE CONSUMER.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  AND THE -- THE UTILITY WOULD BE

                    REQUIRED TO PROVIDE -- WHAT WOULD THE UTILITY -- I GUESS FROM READING IT,

                    THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION AND A WRITTEN INTERPRETATION OF

                    WHAT THE INVESTIGATION IS --

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, THEY WOULD CERTAINLY HAVE TO

                    PROVIDE SOME DOCUMENTATION OR EVIDENCE, YEAH.  IT'S VERY EASY FOR

                    THEM.  ALL THEY GOT TO DO IS PUNCH A BUTTON OR TWO ON THE COMPUTER.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.  IF YOU SAY SO.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I DO.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  I -- I -- I KNOW YOU DO.  IF -- THE

                    QUESTION IS, WHEN AN INVESTIGATION TAKES PLACE, IS IT 15 DAYS FROM THE

                    TIME IT WAS FILED OR WHEN THE INVESTIGATION IS COMPLETE?

                                         133



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WHEN THE INVESTIGATION IS

                    FINISHED.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.  NOW, DOES THAT INCLUDE

                    THE APPEAL PROCESS, ALSO?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  THE WHAT PROCESS?

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  THE APPEAL PROCESS.  SO IF THEY

                    HAVE -- THE UTILITY -- I REMEMBER YOU SAID THAT THE PSC HAS DISCRETION

                    TO DEAL WITH APPEALS.  I KNOW IN THE PAST WHEN WE HAD THIS

                    CONVERSATION YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT THE APPEAL -- THEY WOULD STILL

                    HAVE TO PROVIDE THE WRITTEN REPORT EVEN THOUGH IT WOULD STILL BE GOING

                    THROUGH THE LEGAL PROCESS OF AN APPEAL PROCESS.  DOES THIS MEAN NOW

                    THE APPEAL PROCESS WOULD HAVE TO BE PART OF THAT COMPLETION, OR DOES

                    THAT REPORT HAVE TO BE FILED BEFORE THE APPEAL PROCESS FINISHES?

                    BECAUSE IT'S NOT ULTIMATELY FINISHED UNTIL THE APPEAL PROCESS HAS

                    WORKED ITS WAY THROUGH, CORRECT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, THERE WON'T BE AN APPEAL

                    UNTIL THERE'S A REPORT.  WHAT'S THERE TO APPEAL FROM?

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  RIGHT.  I UNDERSTAND THAT.  BUT

                    I'M JUST SAYING, THERE'LL -- THERE'LL BE A REPORT AND THEN THERE COULD BE AN

                    APPEAL OF THAT REPORT.  SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT REPORT BEFORE THE

                    APPEAL TAKES PLACE.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, YEAH.  I MEAN, 15 -- 15 DAYS

                    -- THEY HAVE 15 DAYS FROM THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  AND -- AND THE INVEST -- SO IF

                    SOMEONE WANTS TO -- SAY THE UTILITY, FOR WHATEVER REASON BECAUSE OF

                                         134



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    THINGS OUTSIDE THEIR CONTROL, HAD TO -- WANTED TO APPEAL THAT DECISION,

                    WHATEVER THAT CAME UP WITH.  THAT REPORT WOULD HAVE TO BE FILED EVEN

                    THOUGH THE APPEAL PROCESS HASN'T WORKED ITS WAY THROUGH; IS THAT

                    ACCURATE?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  AND KEEP IN MIND, BY THE WAY,

                    THAT EITHER SIDE COULD ALWAYS, IF THEY WANTED TO, I SUPPOSE, GO TO COURT

                    OVER THESE ISSUES.  BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE IN THE

                    BILL.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  SO ULTIMATELY, ANY COMPLAINT

                    WOULD LEAD TO AN INVESTIGATION; IS THAT CORRECT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  A CONSUMER COMPLAINT COULD LEAD

                    TO AN INVESTIGATION.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  LIKE, SOMETIMES RIGHT NOW, A

                    LOT OF TIMES THE PSC, IF A -- IF A -- IF A COMPLAINT COMES IN, THE UTILITY

                    WOULD CALL AND COMMUNICATE WITH THAT CONSTITUENT OR THAT PERSON VIA

                    PHONE CALL AND DO THAT.  THAT -- THAT'S NOT ALLOWED ANYMORE UNDER THIS

                    CASE?  IF THEY WERE ABLE TO SOLVE IT WITH A PHONE CALL BY SAYING, HEY,

                    MISS WALSH, HERE'S YOUR PROBLEM.  HERE'S OUR RESPONSE BACK.  NOW

                    THEY WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN COMMUNICATION TO WHOEVER THAT

                    PERSON IS; IS THAT CORRECT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, YES.  I DON'T KNOW ABOUT

                    YOU, BUT IF I WAS COMPLAINING AND FILING A COMPLAINT, I WOULD WANT A

                    WRITTEN RESPONSE.  I WOULD WANT EVIDENCE, BASICALLY.  I WANT TO SEE IT

                                         135



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    FOR MYSELF.  I DON'T JUST WANT A PHONE CALL FROM SOME NAMELESS PERSON

                    WHO WE MAY NOT EVEN BE ABLE TO TRACK DOWN.  SO A WRITTEN RESPONSE I

                    THINK IS VERY -- SOMETHING WHICH I THINK ALL OF OUR CONSTITUENTS WOULD

                    WANT.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  I -- I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT

                    POSITION.  BUT I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THE CONSTITUENT WANTS

                    A RESOLUTION.  AND IF THEY -- IF THAT CAN BE EXPLAINED TO THEM IN A PHONE

                    CALL, IF THEY'RE SATISFIED WITH THEM, IF THAT WOULD SATISFY IT, WOULDN'T THAT

                    BE ENOUGH?  BUT THEN -- IF THEN THEY'RE NOT HAPPY WITH THAT RESPONSE

                    THEN THERE COULD BE THE APPEAL FROM THE APPEAL, RIGHT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YOU COULD KIND OF BLOW OFF

                    SOMEBODY MORE EASILY ON THE PHONE, WHEREAS IF YOU HAVE A WRITTEN

                    EXPLANATION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER THEN YOU HAVE IT.  THERE'S NO DENYING

                    IT, THERE'S NO -- NO GOING BACK OR ANYTHING.  I -- I REALLY DON'T THINK IT'S

                    ASKING TOO MUCH FOR A CONSUMER WHO'S QUESTIONING A BILL TO GET A

                    WRITTEN RESPONSE.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WHAT'S SO HARD?

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  NO, I'M JUST -- JUST ASKING SOME

                    QUESTIONS, MR. DINOWITZ.  I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  AND I'M SURE YOU AGREE WITH ME.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  SOME THINGS, MR. DINOWITZ, NOT

                    ALL OF THEM.

                                 SO FROM READING THE BILL, IT DOES SEEM A BIT VAGUE ON

                    WHEN THE INVESTIGATION THAT TRIGGERS THE REPORT TO THE CUSTOMER OCCURS.

                                         136



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    FOR EXAMPLE, LET'S SAY IF A UTILITY IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE MATERIALS OR

                    DOCUMENTATION, IS THAT CONSIDERED AN INVESTIGATION?  JUST FROM ME --

                    MY PERSPECTIVE IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S SOME AMBI -- AMBIGUITY BETWEEN

                    THE INVESTIGATION AND DOCUMENTATION.  DO YOU NOT AGREE OR NO?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, WHAT -- WHAT LINE ARE YOU

                    LOOKING AT SPECIFICALLY?  BECAUSE I HAVE THE BILL RIGHT HERE.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  YUP.

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 IT WOULD BE -- IT SHALL BE IN WRITING AND PROVIDE ALL

                    SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION.  SO IS THE DOCUMENTATION, THE WRITTEN --

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSSTALK).  WHERE

                    ARE YOU LOOKING?

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  I'M SORRY, I'M LOOKING AT LINE

                    16, SECTION 43.  LINE 16 WHERE IT ASKS DO YOU --

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  OH, I SEE.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  AND THEN IT SAYS"...SHALL BE IN

                    WRITING AND PROVIDE ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION."  SO --

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  THAT'S NOT VAGUE.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  WELL, I'M JUST SAYING.  IS THE

                    INVESTIGATION A DOCUMENTATION OR IS IT BOTH?  DO YOU HAVE TO APPLY THE

                    INVESTIGATION WITH THE DOCUMENTATION?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  IT SAYS"... SHALL BE IN WRITING AND

                    PROVIDE ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS."  I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO

                    SAY THAT EXCEPT WHAT IT SAYS.  IT SHALL BE IN WRITING, PROVIDE ALL

                    SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION.

                                         137



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.  DOES THE BILL IN HERE

                    CLEARLY OUTLINE WHEN THE INVEST -- WHAT THE INVESTIGATION CONSISTS OF

                    AND WHEN IT SHALL BE CONSIDERED OVER?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  THE INVESTIGATION --

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  DOCUMENTATION IN 15 DAYS.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  IF -- IF THE CONSUMER IS

                    COMPLAINING ABOUT A BILL, THEN I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS LEGISLATION HAS TO

                    SPECIFICALLY SAY WHAT HAS TO BE IN THE INVESTIGATION.  IT'S PRETTY CLEAR TO

                    ANY REASONABLE PERSON THAT THE INVESTIGATION WOULD PERTAIN TO THE BILL.

                    SO WHATEVER DOCUMENTATION THE UTILITY MIGHT HAVE, THEY MAY SAY,

                    OKAY, YOU USED X-NUMBER OF HOURS AT WHATEVER THE COST WAS, AND YOU

                    MULTIPLE IT AND YOU GET A NUMBER.  NOW, IF THE CONSUMER IS SAYING, NO,

                    I WASN'T HOME FOR -- FOR A MONTH, AND THE ONLY ELECTRICITY GOING OUT OF

                    MY HOUSE WAS MY FRIDGE.  SO, I MEAN, THERE ARE -- THERE ARE MANY

                    DIFFERENT SCENARIOS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.  BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS, THE

                    UTILITY COMPANY CAN PRODUCE DOCUMENTATION WHICH WOULD CLEAR UP

                    WHETHER OR NOT -- WHETHER THE BILL WAS CORRECT OR NOT.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  SURE.

                                 SO YOU DON'T -- IS IT YOUR POSITION THAT THIS BILL DOESN'T

                    DUPLICATE SOME OF THE PROCESS WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE, RIGHT?

                    BECAUSE YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY DOING THIS BILL BECAUSE YOU THINK THERE NEEDS

                    TO BE CHANGES.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I THINK THIS BILL SIGNIFICANTLY

                    IMPROVES THE PROCESS THAT'S IN PLACE, AND I ALSO THINK THAT -- FIRST OF ALL,

                    I THINK PEOPLE ARE ENTITLED, AS I SAID, TO HAVE -- HAVE SOMETHING IN

                                         138



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    WRITING.  I THINK THAT WOULD TEND TO INCREASE THE RESPONSIVENESS TO

                    COMPLAINTS, ABOUT, YOU KNOW, RATES, ABOUT BILLS.  ABOUT RATE INCREASES,

                    FOR THAT MATTER.  AND I -- I THINK BY MANDATING THAT THEY DO THINGS IN A

                    CERTAIN WAY, ULTIMATELY I THINK IT'S GOING TO SAVE PEOPLE MONEY.  AND I

                    DON'T THINK THE COST OF, AS I SAID, PUNCHING THAT BUTTON AND GETTING A

                    WRITTEN RESPONSE IS SO EXCESSIVE.  IN ANY OTHER KIND OF BUSINESS, PEOPLE

                    -- YOU KNOW, PEOPLE GET WRITTEN RESPONSES.  WHY SHOULD IT BE ANY

                    DIFFERENT HERE?

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  ALL RIGHT.  SINCE OBVIOUSLY THIS

                    INVOLVES THE PSC, HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONSULTATION WITH THE PSC TO

                    DISCUSS THIS TO SEE IF IT'S NECESSARY OR BENEFICIAL TO THE PROCESS?  HAVE

                    THEY BEEN ABLE TO COMMUNICATE ON THAT WITH YOU?  HAVE YOU HAD ANY

                    COMMUNICATION WITH THEM OR JUST -- JUST DOING THE BILL?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  NO, I HAVE NOT BEEN IN

                    COMMUNICATION WITH THEM.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  RELATING TO THE PENALTY

                    STRUCTURE, RIGHT NOW THE PSC ALREADY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO LEVY PENALTIES

                    AGAINST UTILITIES IF THEY DON'T FILE -- FILE IN A TIMELY RESPONSE, CORRECT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, WE HAVE A SPECIFIC PENALTY

                    STRUCTURE HERE.  TOWARDS THE BOTTOM OF THE BILL IT SAYS, FAILURE BY THE

                    UTILITY OR IN ITS POWER TO PROVIDE A RESPONSE AS CALLED FOR HERE, THE

                    PENALTY IS $100 PER BUSINESS DAY FOR EACH BUSINESS DAY THAT EXCEEDS

                    THE INITIAL 15 BUSINESS-DAY PERIOD FOR UTILITY CORPORATIONS, OR $25 PER

                    BUSINESS DAY FOR EACH BUSINESS THAT EXCEEDS THE INITIAL 30-DAY BUSINESS

                    DAY PERIOD FOR MUNICIPALITIES.  SO IT'S SPELLED OUT VERY CLEARLY HERE.

                                         139



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.  SO IN THAT NOTE -- I

                    MEAN, AND WE TALKED ABOUT HOW THE PSC -- YOU SAID THE PSC HAS

                    DISCRETION NOW TO DEAL WITH APPEALS.  DO THEY HAVE -- DOES -- WILL THE

                    PSC HAVE DISCRETION IN THE APPLICATION OF A PENALTY TO ACCOUNT FOR IF

                    THERE ARE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THE UTILITY MIGHT HAVE IN NOT

                    ANSWERING IN A TIMELY BASIS?  WILL THE PSC HAVE DISCRETION IN DEALING

                    WITH THAT PENALTY OR IS IT BASICALLY BY THE BOOK WHAT IT SAYS?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I -- I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THIS BILL

                    THAT SAYS THAT.  BUT YOU KNOW WHAT?  WE -- THERE ARE DEADLINES.  WE ALL

                    HAVE TO COMPLY WITH DEADLINES.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  NOT IN THIS HOUSE, OBVIOUSLY,

                    WITH THE BUDGET BEING LATE.  BUT THAT'S OKAY.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, MAYBE NOT.  BUT WE, AS

                    INDIVIDUALS, HAVE TO COMPLY WITH DEADLINES.  IF YOU GET A PARKING TICKET

                    YOU GET 30 DAYS, FOR EXAMPLE, TO PAY IT OR TO -- TO CONTEST IT.  AND IF

                    YOU IGNORE IT AFTER 30 DAYS, THEN PENALTIES ARE TACKED ON.  AND THERE

                    ARE SO MANY DIFFERENT EXAMPLES OF -- OF THINGS LIKE THAT.  YOU HAVE TO

                    DEAL WITH DEADLINES.  I BELIEVE THAT.  AS INDIVIDUALS THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE

                    TO DO.  I WISH COLLECTIVELY WE'D BE ABLE TO DO THAT A LITTLE BETTER.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  I UNDERSTAND THAT.  DEADLINES

                    ARE GOOD FOR SOME PEOPLE, BUT NOT GOOD FOR OTHERS.

                                 MY QUESTION, DOES THIS ALSO APPLIES [SIC] -- THIS CAN

                    ALSO APPLY TO MUNICIPALITIES; IS THAT CORRECT?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YES.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.  AND IS THERE ANY

                                         140



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    CONCERN FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE THAT THIS REALLY -- YOU KNOW, WITH

                    HAVING TO RESPOND SO QUICKLY THAT THEY'RE GONNA PRIORITIZE SPEED OVER

                    THE LEGIT -- LEGITIMACY OF THE COMPLAINTS AND KEEPING THEM

                    (INDISCERNIBLE) AGAIN BECAUSE THIS AFFECTS OUR MUNICIPALITIES?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  I -- I DON'T HAVE THOSE CONCERNS.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.  DO YOU THINK THAT -- AND

                    I KNOW YOUR -- YOU -- YOUR PERSPECTIVE IS IT'S NOT GONNA COST -- PROPOSE

                    MORE OF A BURDEN ON UTILITIES OR ON THE PSC?  BUT, YOU KNOW,

                    OBVIOUSLY THERE'S GONNA BE SOMETHING INVOLVED IN THIS.  ARE YOU

                    CONCERNED THAT REQUIRING MORE WRITTEN NOTIFICATION ON EVERY SINGLE

                    COMPLAINT FOR A BILLING ISSUE OR A NON-BILLING ISSUE -- BECAUSE AS YOU

                    SAID, IT COULD BE FOR NON-BILLING ISSUES BUT YOU DIDN'T THINK IT WOULD

                    HAPPEN FOR THAT.  BUT ANY COMPLAINT COULD HAPPEN.  SO THESE ARE COSTS

                    THAT ARE -- THE UTILITIES ARE GONNA INCUR.  THEN THAT'S -- THOSE ARE COSTS

                    THEY'RE GONNA TRY TO RE -- RECOUP.  SO ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THIS COULD

                    OBVIOUSLY BE PUT BACK ON THE RATEPAYER TO PAY ADDITIONAL UTILITY COSTS

                    ON TOP OF IT TO PAY FOR THIS ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS EVEN THE GOVERNOR

                    SAID IS NOT NECESSARY?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  WELL, I -- I DON'T PITY THE UTILITY

                    COMPANIES, AND I DON'T THINK MOST OF OUR CONSTITUENTS DO, EITHER.  AND

                    TO WHATEVER EXTENT THE UTILITY COMPANY HAS TO DO ANYTHING, IT'LL -- IT'LL

                    BE A BENEFIT TO THE CONSUMER IF IT MEANS THEIR BILL GETS ADJUSTED IN THEIR

                    FAVOR.  SO I WOULD THINK THAT THIS WHOLE THING WILL BE A SAVINGS TO

                    CONSUMERS.  I HOPE, I HOPE THAT -- I KNOW ON A LOT OF BILLS THERE'S A

                    PARTY VOTE AND EVERYTHING.  BUT I WOULD HOPE ON SOMETHING -- WHEN IT

                                         141



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    COMES TO UTILITY RATES AND -- AND UTILITY BILLS THAT WE WOULD ALL BE

                    TOGETHER ON THIS, AND I -- AND I WOULD HOPE THE GOVERNOR WOULD AS

                    WELL.  WE'RE TRYING TO FIGHT FOR CONSUMERS HERE, FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS.

                    AND THE UTILITY, YEAH, I SUPPOSE UTILITY COMPANIES ARE SOMEBODY'S

                    CONSTITUENT, BUT THEY'RE NOT MY PRIMARY CONCERN.  NOT AGAINST THEM,

                    THEY'RE JUST NOT MY PRIMARY CONCERN.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  NO, I -- I UNDERSTAND THAT.  AND

                    I -- I WOULD, I GUESS, ON THAT POINT THE MORE MANDATES THAT WE PUT ON

                    THE UTILITY COMPANY, THE MORE REQUIREMENTS WE PUT ON THE UTILITY

                    COMPANY, THE MORE WE REQUIRE THEM TO BUY GREEN ENERGY, WELL, THAT'S

                    MANDATES THAT WE'RE PUTTING ON THE UTILITY COMPANY.  BUT OFTEN THAT'S

                    GONNA BE BORNE BY --

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  ARE YOU DIVERTING FROM THIS BILL

                    RIGHT NOW?

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  I DON'T THINK -- PEOPLE ARE

                    COMPLAINING -- WE'RE ABOUT BILLING COMPLAINTS.  PEOPLE ARE

                    COMPLAINING ABOUT THEIR UTILITY BILL, SO IT'S ALL RELEVANT AND GERMANE, I

                    WOULD THINK, FOR THIS CONVERSATION.  I'M NOT DIVERTING AT ALL, I DON'T

                    BELIEVE, BUT (INDISCERNIBLE) --

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  IT SOUNDS LIKE A DIVERSION TO ME.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  NOT A DIVERSION AT ALL, MR.

                    DINOWITZ.  IT JUST SOUNDS LIKE AN ISSUE YOU REALLY DON'T WANT TO DISCUSS.

                    THAT'S OKAY.

                                 RELATIVE TO THESE INCREASED RESPONSIBILITIES, LIABILITIES,

                    THE DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS, CAN YOU REALLY EXPLAIN HOW THIS BILL

                                         142



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    WILL ACTUALLY LEAD TO ENERGY AFFORDABILITY AND RELIABILITY GOALS?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  REPEAT THE LAST PART AGAIN?

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  SURE.  GIVEN THE FACT THAT

                    THERE'S GONNA BE INCREASED RESPONSIBILITIES, DOCUMENTATION

                    REQUIREMENTS, CAN YOU SAY HOW THIS BILL IS ACTUALLY GONNA HELP LEAD TO A

                    BROADER ENERGY AFFORDABILITY AND RELIABILITY GOALS THAT ARE -- ARE

                    REQUIRED TO BE MET?

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  YES.  I -- I THOUGHT I KIND OF WENT

                    INTO THAT ALREADY.  IF THE UTILITY COMPANY HAS TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION

                    AS TO HOW THEY CAME UP WITH A BILL, IN SOME CASES THE DOCUMENTATION IS

                    GOING TO SHOW THAT THE BILL IS TOO HIGH AND, THEREFORE, THAT PARTICULAR

                    UTILITY CONSUMER WILL SAVE MONEY.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  OKAY.

                                 MR. DINOWITZ:  LOWER COSTS.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  ALL RIGHT, MR. DINOWITZ.  I DO

                    APPRECIATE YOUR TIME, AS ALWAYS.

                                 MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MR. PALMESANO:  YES, MADAM SPEAKER AND MY

                    COLLEAGUES.  THIS LEGISLATION I THINK IS NOT NECESSARY; ONE, TOO, WE

                    KNOW THAT THE GOVERNOR VETOED THIS BILL, SAYING -- BRINGING OUT

                    CONCERNS ABOUT COST REQUIREMENTS TO THE PSC.  NOT, YOU KNOW,

                    DISCRETIONARY REQUIREMENTS.  NO CHANGES, AS THE SPONSOR SAID, TO

                    ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF THE GOVERNOR.  IT SEEMS TO IMPOSE NEW RIGID

                    REQUIREMENTS ON UTILITIES RESPONDING TO CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS.  THE

                                         143



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    EXISTING PSC PROCESS REALLY ALREADY PROVIDES A STRUCTURED AVENUE FOR

                    COMPLAINT RESOLUTION INCLUDING ESCALATION, DOCUMENTATION AND

                    REGULATORY OVERSIGHT, AS WELL AS MECHANISMS FOR CUSTOMERS TO ACCESS

                    COMPLAINT FILES AND SEEK FURTHER REVIEW.

                                 WE TALKED ABOUT THE HEARING PROCESS.  IT SAYS THERE'S

                    DISCRETION OVER THE PSC, BUT IT -- THE HEARING PROCESS DOESN'T -- THE

                    PROCESS ISN'T OVER UNTIL THE HEARING PROCESS, THE APPEAL PROCESS

                    FINISHES.  SO NOW THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO REPORT -- THERE'S GONNA BE

                    REPORT -- DOCUMENTATION MADE BEFORE THAT PROCESS TAKES PLACE.  I THINK

                    WE'RE ADDING ADDITIONAL INFLEXIBLE REQUIREMENTS WHICH COULD CREATE

                    SOME CONFUSION DUE TO AMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE, WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT,

                    ABOUT WHEN THE INVESTIGATION BEGINS AND ENDS.  WE COULD POSSIBLY

                    OVERWHELM EVEN CUSTOMERS WITH UNNECESSARY DOCUMENTATION WHEN

                    THEY'RE JUST TRYING TO GET A -- A SIMPLE ANSWER.

                                 IMPOSING ADDITIONAL BURDENS ON THE UTILITIES CERTAINLY

                    WILL AND CAN -- CAN AND WILL BE PASSED ON TO THE RATEPAYER BECAUSE THE

                    MORE WE BURDEN OUR BUSINESSES WITH REGULATIONS, WHETHER IT'S UTILITIES,

                    THAT'S GONNA GET PASSED ON.  AND IT SEEMS LIKE ALSO IF WE'RE PENALIZING

                    UTILITIES -- AND I KNOW WE ALWAYS SAY WE'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE

                    UTILITIES -- BUT SOME OF THESE SITUATIONS ARE OUTSIDE THEIR CROLL -- CONTROL.

                    AND IT SEEMS THAT WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT REMOVING THE DISCRETION FROM

                    THE PSC ON EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH I BROUGHT UP.

                                 I'M JUST CONCERNED THIS WILL LEAD TO HIGHER COSTS TO OUR

                    UTILITIES, WHICH WILL BE PASSED ON TO THE RATEPAYERS WHO ARE ALREADY

                    OVERBURDENED WITH SOME OF THE HIGHEST UTILITY RATES IN THE COUNTRY.

                                         144



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, THE GREEN MANDATES OF -- THIS HOUSE HAS PASSED

                    ON THEM AS COSTS.  AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT COSTS, THE COMPLAINTS THAT

                    WE'RE HEARING FROM OUR -- OUR PEOPLE BACK AT HOME -- I KNOW THIS IS

                    ABOUT A COMPLAINT BILL -- IS THE COST OF THEIR UTILITY BILL, AND THE COSTS

                    ARE SUBSTANTIAL.  I MEAN, FROM THE GREEN MANDATE THAT WE PUT IN THERE

                    WE'RE LOOKING AT OVER -- NEARLY HALF-A-TRILLION DOLLARS, MORE THAN A

                    QUARTER-OF-A-TRILLION DOLLARS.

                                 WE LOOK AT THE -- WHAT THE RESIDENTIAL ELECTRICITY RATE

                    WAS YEARS AGO, IT'S NOW 50 PERCENT HIGHER THAN IT IS [SIC] THEN BECAUSE

                    OF POLICIES.  A MEMO FROM THE OWN ADMINISTRATION CAME OUT SEVERAL

                    WEEKS AGO SAYING IF WE DON'T MAKE CHANGES -- I KNOW WE WANT TO HAVE

                    A COMPLAINT PROCESS -- BUT IF WE DON'T MAKE CHANGES, THOSE COMPLAINTS

                    ARE GONNA CONTINUE TO RISE SUBSTANTIALLY IF WE DON'T MAKE ANY DELAYS OR

                    CHANGES TO THE CLIMATE PLAN BECAUSE IT WILL INCREASE COSTS FOR HOME

                    HEATING BY MORE THAN $4,000 ANNUALLY.  IT WILL INCREASE COSTS FOR A

                    GALLON OF GAS BY MORE THAN $2.23 A GALLON ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IT IS

                    RIGHT NOW.  IT WILL INCREASE THE PRICE OF DIESEL BY MORE THAN $2.41 A

                    GALLON ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IT IS RIGHT NOW.  IT WILL INCREASE UTILITY

                    COSTS FOR OUR COMMER -- SMALL- AND MEDIUM-SIZED COMMERCIAL

                    BUSINESSES.  NOW, BUSINESSES ARE A PART OF THIS SO THEY'RE GONNA WANNA

                    BE COMPLAINING ABOUT THAT.  WE'RE ALREADY HEARING IT.  IT WILL INCREASE

                    THOSE COSTS, UTILITY COSTS FOR THOSE SMALL- AND MEDIUM-COMMERCIAL-

                    SIZED BUSINESSES BY UP TO 46 PERCENT, DEPENDING ON THE UTILITY AND SIZE

                    OF THE FACILITY.  IT WILL ALSO INCREASE DELIVERY TRUCK OPERATIONS BY MORE

                    THAN 60 PERCENT.  SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?  HIGHER FOOD COSTS, HIGHER

                                         145



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    HOUSING COSTS BECAUSE YOU HAVE LUMBER THAT'S BEING SHIPPED.  AND

                    REMEMBER, 96 PERCENT OF OUR GOODS ARE SHIPPED BY TRUCK.

                                 WHEN WE TALK ABOUT COMPLAINTS, OUR UTILITY BILLS, THE

                    ASSESSMENTS, THE TAXES, FEES AND ASSESSMENTS ARE NYSERDA, WHO PUT

                    OUT THAT MEMO, IS SITTING ON OVER $2.4 BILLION IN RATEPAYERS FUNDS RIGHT

                    NOW THAT THEY'VE COLLECTED FROM OUR RATEPAYERS TO PAY FOR THESE GREEN

                    ENERGY MANDATES.  WHY AREN'T WE PROVIDING DIRECT RATEPAYER RELIEF

                    RIGHT NOW?  JUST A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO WE PASSED A BILL FROM MY

                    COLLEAGUE THAT WOULD ALLOW NYSERDA TO -- TO REBATE BACK TO PEOPLE

                    IF THEY BUY AN ELECTRIC -- OR BUSINESSES IF THEY BUY AN ELECTRIC LAWN

                    MOWER AND ELECTRIC WEEK WHACKER, SUBSIDIZED BY THE RATEPAYER.  IF YOU

                    TALK TO YOUR RATEPAYERS AND YOU ASK THEM, DO YOU WANT YOUR UTILITY BILL

                    TO GO UP MORE TO PAY FOR SOMEONE'S ELECTRIC LAWN MOWER OR ELECTRIC

                    WEED WHACKER, THEY'RE GONNA TO SAY, NO.  I WANT DIRECT RATEPAYER RELIEF

                    RIGHT NOW.

                                 THAT $2.4 BILLION HAS BEEN SITTING THERE IN THEIR

                    COFFERS.  THEY CAN RELIEVE AND PROVIDE THAT RELIEF RIGHT NOW.  OUR TAXES,

                    FEES, ASSESSMENTS AND SURCHARGES, WHICH MAKE -- CAN MAKE UP IN SOME

                    CASES MORE THAN 20 PERCENT OF OUR UTILITY BILL, TO PAY FOR GREEN

                    PROGRAMS, WE SHOULD BE SUSPENDING THAT.  YOU KNOW, WITH THIS BUDGET

                    DEBATE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, I KNOW THE CLIMATE ACTIONS ARE BEING

                    TALKED ABOUT.  THESE ARE THINGS WE CAN DO AS PART OF THIS BUDGET TO

                    PROVIDE DIRECT RATEPAYER RELIEF RIGHT NOW.  AGAIN, THOSE TAXES, FEES AND

                    ASSESSMENTS ADD UP TO MORE THAN -- UP TO 20 PERCENT OF THE BILL

                    SOMETIMES.  LET'S SUSPEND THAT FOR A WHILE.  WE DON'T NEED MORE TAXES,

                                         146



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    FEES AND ASSESSMENT.  LET'S GET THAT DIRECT RATEPAYER RELIEF RIGHT NOW.

                                 IT JUST SEEMS ONE THING AFTER ANOTHER.  AND IN JUST --

                    IT'S ALL PART OF MISPLACED PRIORITIES.  I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE SPONSOR'S

                    TRYING TO DO.  I'M DELVING.  AND TALKING ABOUT COMPLAINTS ABOUT BILLING.

                    AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE LEGISLATION ALSO THAT WAS INTRODUCED

                    RECENTLY THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO AREN'T GETTING PAID

                    BECAUSE OF THE STATE BUDGET TO GET A -- NOT HAVE TO PAY THEIR UTILITY BILL

                    AND NOT HAVE TO PAY FEES.  AND THE ONLY ONES WHO ARE NOT GETTING PAID

                    IS THE LEGISLATURE.  SO THAT JUST SEEMS KIND OF OUT OF TOUCH WITH WHAT'S

                    GOING ON OUR CONSTITUENTS ARE FACING BACK AT HOME BY HOW A PIECE OF

                    LEGISLATION LIKE THAT GETS INTRODUCED TO HELP US OUT WHEN THE PEOPLE

                    WE'RE SERVING BACK AT HOME ARE TO THE BRINK WITH THESE RISING UTILITY

                    COSTS THAT ARE HURTING THEM EACH AND EVERY DAY BECAUSE OF THE POLICIES

                    THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN THIS HOUSE.  THE GOVERNOR AND OTHERS

                    MAY SAY WE'RE -- ALL-OF-THE-ABOVE APPROACH OR AFFORDABLE ENERGY, BUT

                    THE POLICIES DON'T MATCH THE WORDS.  ALLS YOU HAVE TO DO IS LOOK AT THE

                    LIST OF POLICIES THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED SINCE THE CLCPA.

                    ALL-ELECTRIC BUILDINGS.  ALL-ELECTRIC SCHOOL BUSES.  CAP-AND-INVEST.

                    ACT REGULATION.  ADVANCED CLEAN CAR [SIC] RESO -- REGULATIONS.  ONE

                    THING AFTER ANOTHER.  THIS IS CAUSING A BIG PROBLEM FOR OUR FAMILIES, OUR

                    SENIORS, OUR VETERANS.  INDIVIDUALS ON FIXED INCOMES AND OUR BUSINESS

                    COMMUNITY.  AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT OUR BUSINESS COMMUNITY, I

                    KNOW BUSINESSES ARE NOW PART OF THIS COMPLAINT PROCESS, WHEN YOU

                    TALK TO THEM ABOUT ENERGY COSTS, THEY CARE ABOUT TWO THINGS:

                    AFFORDABLE AND RELIABLE.  AND IF THEY CAN'T GET AFFORDABLE AND RELIABLE

                                         147



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    ENERGY HERE IN NEW YORK STATE, THEY ARE GONNA ELSEWHERE AS THEY ARE

                    ALREADY DOING.

                                 SO BASED ON, YOU KNOW, THE POINTS THAT I'VE RAISED AND

                    OTHER ISSUES I WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS BILL AND I URGE

                    SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES TO JOIN ME IN THAT VOTE.  THANK YOU VERY MUCH,

                    MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON 90TH DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  A PARTY VOTE HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MS. WALSH.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                    REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS PIECE OF

                    LEGISLATION.  BUT IF THERE ARE YES VOTES TO BE CAST, YOU MAY DO SO NOW AT

                    YOUR SEATS.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                    MAJORITY CONFERENCE WILL SUPPORT THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.  FOR THOSE

                    THAT WOULD LIKE TO VOTE DIFFERENTLY, THEY CAN DO SO HERE IN THE

                    CHAMBER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                         148



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  MADAM SPEAKER, CAN WE NOW TAKE ON --

                    OR TAKE UP CALENDAR NO. 67 ON PAGE 12 BY MS. ROSENTHAL, AND

                    CALENDAR NO. 77 ON PAGE 14 BY MR. COLTON?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 PAGE 12, CALENDAR NO. 67, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A01740-A, CALENDAR

                    NO. 67, ROSENTHAL, SIMON, GALLAGHER, GLICK, SHIMSKY, REYES, CRUZ,

                    LEVENBERG, WALKER, TAYLOR, RAGA, DE LOS SANTOS, WEPRIN, LAVINE,

                    OTIS.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC BUILDINGS LAW, IN RELATION TO

                    PROVIDING ACCESS TO MENSTRUAL PRODUCTS IN TOILET FACILITIES IN CERTAIN

                    PUBLIC BUILDINGS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  AN EXPLANATION HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  THE BILL REQUIRES THAT FREE

                    MENSTRUAL PRODUCTS BE AVAILABLE IN ALL FEMALE-DESIGNATED AND GENDER-

                    NEUTRAL RESTROOMS IN STATE-OWNED OR LEASED PUBLIC BUILDINGS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MS. WALSH.

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

                    SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                                         149



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    YIELD?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YUP.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH.  SO JUST A FEW

                    QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE.  AS ALWAYS, I'M DELIGHTED TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT

                    MENSTRUAL PRODUCTS ON THE FLOOR OF THE ASSEMBLY.  I GUESS --

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  SO AM I.

                                 MS. WALSH:  YOU ARE, TOO.  THAT'S AWESOME.  OKAY.

                                 SO, ONE OF MY QUESTIONS HAS TO DO -- I SAW THAT WE

                    WERE IN AN A-PRINT, AND IT LOOKED AS THOUGH THE DEFINITION OF A COVERED

                    PUBLIC BUILDING WAS AMENDED.  COULD YOU JUST RUN THROUGH WHAT THE

                    NEW DEFINITION IS FOR COVERED PUBLIC BUILDING?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  SURE.  ONE SECOND.

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 OKAY.  YEAH, WE DIDN'T CHANGE THE DEFINITION.  WE

                    CHANGED THE EFFECTIVE DATE.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OH, JUST THE EFFECTIVE DATE WAS

                    CHANGED.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YEAH.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OH, OKAY.  OKAY.  WELL, LET'S TAKE A

                    LOOK AT WHAT COVERED PUBLIC BUILDING IS TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE THAT'S

                    REALLY WHERE MY QUESTION IS.  SO PAGE 1, LINE 19 OF THE BILL, IT SAYS THAT

                    COVERED PUBLIC BUILDINGS SHALL MEAN A PUBLIC BUILDING OWNED OR LEASED

                    BY THE STATE OF NEW YORK UNDER THE SUPERVISION AND CONTROL OF THE

                    COMMISSIONER OF GENERAL SERVICES THAT IS DETERMINED BY SUCH

                                         150



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    COMMISSIONER TO BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.  SO, DO WE HAVE A LIST YET OF

                    WHAT -- HOW MANY BUILDINGS THERE ARE AND WHAT THOSE BUILDING ARE,

                    HOW MANY?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YES.  THERE ARE 22 FACILITIES.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THERE ARE 22.  SO THAT'S ALREADY BEEN

                    DETERMINED, WHICH IS FANTASTIC, BY --

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YES.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  OKAY.  NOW, DOES THAT LIST OF

                    22 -- BECAUSE MY QUESTION REALLY HAD TO DO WITH LET'S SAY A BUILDING IS

                    AN OFFICE BUILDING, BUT IT'S TECHNICALLY OPEN SO THAT THE PUBLIC CAN COME

                    IN BUT THAT THE -- WOULD YOU STILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THIS PROVISION

                    EVEN IF NO PUBLIC-FACING TASKS OR INTERACTIONS ARE MEANT TO TAKE PLACE

                    IN THE BUILDING?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  IT IS -- IT IS NOT MEANT FOR

                    BUILDINGS THAT ARE CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC.  SO IT'S JUST LIMITED TO THESE 22.

                                 MS. WALSH:  JUST THE 22.  OKAY.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  YES.

                                 MS. WALSH:  OKAY.  AND HOW MUCH DO WE THINK

                    THAT THIS MIGHT COST?

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  I DON'T KNOW, BUT WE DON'T ASK

                    HOW MUCH TOILET PAPER COSTS.  WE DON'T ASK HOW MUCH SOAP COSTS.  WE

                    DON'T ASK HOW MUCH TOWELS COST.  AND, YOU KNOW, WOMEN WHO HAVE

                    THEIR MONTHLY BLEED NEED PADS AND TAMPONS AND LINERS AND WHATEVER IT

                    IS THAT THEY NEED TO COPE WITH A BIOLOGICAL NEED.

                                 MS. WALSH:  SO, IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE BASICALLY

                                         151



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    SAYING IT DOESN'T -- IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MUCH IT COST.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  NO, I'M NOT SAYING THAT, BUT I'M

                    ALSO SAYING THAT WE VOTED SOME YEARS AGO TO PROVIDE FREE MENSTRUAL

                    PRODUCTS IN SHELTERS, CORRECTIONAL SETTINGS, AND IN SCHOOLS GRADE 6

                    THROUGH 12 THROUGHOUT THE STATE.  SO THIS IS JUST CONFORMING THE 22

                    PUBLIC BUILDINGS MANAGED BY OGS TO THE REST OF THE LAW CONCERNING

                    MENSTRUAL PRODUCTS.

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

                    MUCH.

                                 MS. ROSENTHAL:  THANK YOU.

                                 MS. WALSH:  APPRECIATE IT.  THANK YOU, MADAM

                    SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 365TH

                    DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 PAGE 14, CALENDAR NO. 77, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY -- ASSEMBLY NO. A01994,

                    CALENDAR NO. 77, COLTON, RIVERA, CRUZ, DESTEFANO, HYNDMAN,

                                         152



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    WILLIAMS, TAYLOR, JACOBSON, SEAWRIGHT, BENDETT.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE

                    VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW, IN RELATION TO PARKING INFRACTIONS.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  AN EXPLANATION HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MR. COLTON.

                                 MR. COLTON:  YES, OF COURSE, MADAM SPEAKER.

                    THIS BILL AMENDS THE VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW TO ALLOW CERTAIN

                    DEFENSES IN PARKING TICKETS DESPITE THE ENTRY OF A DEFAULT JUDGMENT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MR. MOLITOR.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  WILL

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 MR. COLTON:  YES, OF COURSE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  THANK YOU.  WHY IS THIS BILL

                    NECESSARY?

                                 MR. COLTON:  I THINK IT'S NECESSARY FOR A COUPLE OF

                    REASONS:  ONE IS A DUE PROCESS.  WHENEVER A STATE AGENCY OR SOMEONE

                    IMPOSES A FINE OR A PENALTY, THE PERSON WHO IS BEING SUBJECTED TO THAT

                    NEEDS TO KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE DUE PROCESS, THAT THE -- THE

                    COMPLAINT -- THE SUMMONS HAS BEEN PREPARED CAREFULLY, AND THAT THEY

                    HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION SO THEY COULD ADEQUATELY DEFEND IT.  THERE'S

                    ALSO A MATTER THAT WHEN PEOPLE, PARTICULARLY OUR CONSTITUENTS, ARE GIVEN

                    A NOTICE, THEY SOMETIMES WILL RECEIVE A NOTICE IN THE MAIL AND THEY

                                         153



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    DIDN'T FIND ANYTHING ON THEIR CAR.  BUT THEY GET A NOTICE IN THE MAIL

                    SAYING THAT THEY ARE BEING FINED $35, $100, THERE'S VARIOUS LEVEL OF

                    FINES, BECAUSE THEY PARKED SOMEWHERE THEY SHOULDN'T AND THEY DON'T

                    REMEMBER PARKING THERE.  THEY DIDN'T FIND ANY NOTICE ON THEIR CAR.

                    AND IF THE NOTICE THAT THEY GET HAS INCORRECT INFORMATION ON IT -- LIKE AS

                    TO THE DATE OR LIKE AS TO WHAT CAR IT WAS THAT WAS SUPPOSEDLY TICKETED

                    BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T FIND THE TICKET, OR THE ADDRESS, THE LOCATION WHERE

                    THE TICKET WAS APPARENTLY ISSUED -- THEN IT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR

                    THEM TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AGAINST THAT PARTICULAR TICKET WHICH WAS

                    INCORRECTLY -- INCORRECTLY WRITTEN.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO I JUST WANT TO UNPACK SOME OF

                    THAT.  SO THIS BILL WOULD ALLOW JUDGES TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION BY

                    THEMSELVES AS TO WHETHER A TICKET WAS ILLEGIBLE OR NOT?

                                 MR. COLTON:  IT -- IT WOULD BE A DECISION THAT

                    WOULD BE MADE WHEN THEY SAW CERTAIN INFORMATION WAS NOT THERE OR

                    NOT CORRECT.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  AND THEY COULD MAKE THAT RIGHT AT

                    THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE CASE WHEN THE CHARGE IS FILED?

                                 MR. COLTON:  IT COULD EVEN BE MADE BEFORE A CASE

                    IS BROUGHT.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  OKAY.  AREN'T YOU A LITTLE BIT

                    CONCERNED, MAYBE IN THE SLIGHTEST, THAT WE'RE GIVING JUDGES TOO MUCH

                    POWER TO DO WHAT THEY THAT WANT WITHOUT REALLY ANY -- YOU USED THE

                    WORDS "DUE PROCESS".  BUT DON'T YOU THINK IT'S BETTER THE WAY IT IS RIGHT

                    NOW WHERE A DEFENDANT BRINGS THE DEFENSE AND THEN THE OTHER SIDE GETS

                                         154



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    TO MAYBE BRING AN OPPOSING ARGUMENT AND THEN THE JUDGE GETS TO MAKE

                    THE DECISION THAT WITH ALL THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE, THE JUDGES CAN

                    MAKE A BETTER DECISION?  AND AT THE SAME TIME WE CAN ENSURE THAT

                    THOSE TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS THAT ARE GOOD ARE GOING FORWARD AND THOSE THAT

                    AREN'T ARE JUST GETTING DISMISSED.

                                 MR. COLTON:  WELL, I THINK THE LAW IS VERY CLEAR

                    THAT IF THE TICKET CONTAINS CENTRAL WRONG INFORMATION, IF THE INFORMATION

                    IS OMITTED OR IF IT'S WRONG, THEN THE TICKET SHOULD BE DISMISSED.  AND,

                    YOU KNOW, WHY ARE WE FORCING SOMEONE TO GO THROUGH THE ANXIETY --

                    AND IT MIGHT BE A SENIOR CITIZEN, YOU KNOW, WHO GETS THIS TICKET -- AND

                    -- AND HAS TO COME TO MY OFFICE, WHICH HAS HAPPENED MANY TIMES.  SO

                    NOW WE'VE GOT TO GO AND PUT IN AN ANSWER TO THE TICKET AND WE DON'T

                    EVEN KNOW FOR SURE IF THE DATA'S MISSING WHEN IT HAPPENED.  SO HOW DO

                    YOU DEFEND A TICKET WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHEN SUPPOSEDLY YOU'RE

                    ACCUSED OF -- OF DOING THIS?

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  WELL, THAT IS --

                                 MR. COLTON:  SO I -- I THINK WHEN THE LAW IS CLEAR

                    ON THE POINT THEN WE'RE NOT ASKING THE JUDGE TO MAKE A DECISION IN

                    TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, IS SOMEBODY TELLING THE TRUTH OR NOT TELLING THE

                    TRUTH.  WE'RE ASKING A DECISION TO BE MADE WHEN THE INFORMATION THAT IS

                    REQUIRED TO BE ON THAT TICKET IS MISSING OR ILLEGIBLE OR IT IS WRONG.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  BUT AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, THAT

                    DEFENSE HAS TO BE BROUGHT BY THE DEFENDANT, THE ONE CHARGED WITH THE

                    TRAFFIC VIOLATION.

                                 MR. COLTON:  THAT'S CORRECT.

                                         155



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  AND BY CHANGING THE LAW AND

                    PUTTING IT IN THE HANDS OF A JUDGE TO DO WITH WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO,

                    YOU COULD HAVE ONE PART OF YOUR DISTRICT -- FOR EXAMPLE, YOU COULD

                    HAVE ONE JUDGE WHO THROWS OUT ALL TICKETS THAT APPEAR TO THAT JUDGE TO

                    BE ILLEGIBLE, AND ANOTHER JUDGE WHO DOESN'T THROW OUT ANY OF THEM.

                    AND SO YOU'RE CREATING -- YOU'LL BE CREATING DIFFERENT STANDARDS WITHIN

                    YOUR OWN DISTRICT BASED UPON THE JUDGE INSTEAD OF BASED UPON THE BODY

                    OF LAW THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS ACROSS ALL OF NEW YORK STATE.

                                 MR. COLTON:  WELL, I WILL TELL YOU THAT IT IS NOT

                    NECESSARY EVEN FOR A JUDGE TO MAKE THIS DECISION IF, IN FACT, THE

                    INFORMATION IS MISSING.  WHEN -- WHEN THE AGENCY LOOKS AT THE TICKET

                    AND THEY GET READY TO SEND OUT THE NOTICES, IF THERE'S NO ADDRESS OR

                    LOCATION OF WHERE THE TICKET WAS ISSUED, IF THERE IS NO DESCRIPTION OF THE

                    CAR OR IF THERE IS -- IF THERE IS NO DATE ON IT, OR IF THE DATE -- AND -- AND

                    THIS HAS BEEN SHOWN TRUE WITH MANY, MANY TICKETS ISSUED IN NEW YORK

                    CITY IN PREVIOUS YEARS -- THE DATE WAS -- HAD THE WRONG YEAR.  SO YOU'LL

                    HAVE A TICKET ISSUED IN THE FUTURE.  OBVIOUSLY, THAT CANNOT GO FORWARD.

                    AND -- AND YOU'RE SAVING THE -- THE CONSUMER, THE CONSTITUENT, THE

                    PERSON TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE NEED OF ANSWERING THAT TICKET WHEN

                    IT'S OBVIOUS YOU DON'T HAVE -- IT'LL ACTUALLY SAVE A LOT OF TIME FOR THE

                    COURT.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  WELL, IF IT'S NOT THE COURT THAT'S

                    MAKING THE DECISION, WHAT AGENCY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT WOULD MAKE

                    THAT DECISION?

                                 MR. COLTON:  IT WOULD BE PROB -- IT WOULD BE

                                         156



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    WHOEVER MAKES THE DECISIONS NOW.  IT WOULD PROBABLY BE EITHER OATH

                    OR IT WOULD BE THE DEPARTMENT -- THE PROSECUTING AGENCY; MOTOR

                    VEHICLES, PARKING VIOLATIONS.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  BUT THE WAY -- THE WAY IT WORKS

                    RIGHT NOW, AN OFFICER WHO -- WHO FILES A TRAFFIC VIOLATION WOULD FILE THAT

                    WITH THE COURT, AND THAT'S THE BEGINNING OF A -- OF A PROCEEDING.  IT

                    WOULDN'T GET TO A PROSECUTING AGENCY OR TO ANYBODY ELSE UNTIL IT GOES TO

                    THE COURT FIRST.  SO THE WAY IT WOULD WORK -- THE WAY YOUR LAW WOULD

                    APPLY IS IT WOULD GO TO THE COURTS AND IT WOULD BE ON THE COURTS TO

                    DISMISS THESE CHARGES.  IN FACT, I EVEN THINK IN YOUR BILL MEMO YOU

                    MENTIONED GIVING THE JUDGES DISCRETION TO DISMISS THESE TICKETS, YOU

                    USED THE WORDS SUA SPONTE, WHICH MEANS ALONE, WITHOUT ANY SORT OF

                    PROCESS AT ALL.  SO THAT'S, I GUESS, WHERE I'M CONFUSED.  IF IT'S NOT THE

                    COURTS, WHO IS IT?

                                 MR. COLTON:  WHEN A TICKET IS WRITTEN OUT BY A

                    TRAFFIC OFFICER, THE TICKET IS THEN -- THE TICKET IS THEN SUBMITTED TO THE

                    AGENCY THEY REPRESENT, AND -- WHICH WOULD BE PROBABLY IN NEW YORK

                    CITY THE PARKING VIOLATIONS BUREAU.  AND THEN IF THEY SEE -- AND THEN

                    THEY WOULD THEN SUBMIT THE TICKET TO THE -- THE COURT, WHICH WOULD BE

                    VERY OFTEN ADMINISTRATIVE ARBITRATOR OR A JUDGE.  IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY

                    BE A CIVIL COURT JUDGE.  THEY WOULD SUBMIT IT TO WHOEVER DEALS WITH --

                    WHO ADJUDICATES THOSE TICKETS.  AND IF THEY SEE THAT THE TICKET IS

                    MISSING INFORMATION AND THAT IT CAN'T POSSIBLY GO FORWARD, THEN THEY

                    WOULD SAVE A LOT OF TIME AND MONEY BY SIMPLY DISMISSING IT AT THAT

                    POINT.

                                         157



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO THE PARKING VIOLATIONS BUREAU

                    WOULD HAVE THIS POWER TO SUA SPONTE GET RID OF TICKETS?

                                 MR. COLTON:  IF WOULD BE -- IF THERE'S A CENTRAL

                    PIECE OF INFORMATION MISSING, YES.  THEY KNOW THEY CAN'T GO FORWARD.

                    THE LAW SAYS IF IT'S MISSING THESE PIECES OF INFORMATION, IT MUST BE

                    DISMISSED.  SO ALL YOU'RE DOING IS YOU'RE CUTTING OUT THE NEED TO SEND

                    NOTICES TO THE PERSON THAT YOU HAVE A COURT DATE OR THEY HAVE A CERTAIN

                    PERIOD OF TIME WHEN THEY HAVE TO ANSWER THIS TICKET, AND YOU WOULD

                    SAVE THAT ADMINISTRATIVE WORK.  SO IT ACTUALLY WOULD BE CUTTING DOWN

                    ON THE NUMBER OF CASES IN MANY INSTANCES.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO -- AND I AGREE WITH YOU, CUTTING

                    DOWN THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT ARE DEFICIENT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA.

                    AND THIS SEEMS TO BE -- YOU MENTIONED SOME CONSTITUENTS IN YOUR

                    DISTRICT.  THIS SEEMS TO MAYBE BE A LOCAL ISSUE.  DO YOU THINK THIS --

                    ARE -- ARE YOU AWARE OF THIS HAPPENING IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS ACROSS THE

                    STATE?

                                 MR. COLTON:  I THINK THAT IT CERTAINLY HAPPENS WITH

                    CONSTITUENTS -- IF IT HAPPENS IN MY DISTRICT IT'S PROBABLY GONNA HAPPEN

                    IN OTHERS.  NOW, IN SOME JURISDICTIONS IT MAY HAPPEN MORE THAN IN

                    OTHER JURISDICTIONS.  IN A CONGESTED AREA WHERE THERE'S A LOT OF PARKING

                    PROBLEMS, WHERE THERE'S A LOT OF PARKING REGULATIONS, IT'LL PROBABLY

                    HAPPEN IN THOSE AREAS MORE THAN IN OTHER AREAS.  BUT IT REALLY DOESN'T

                    PREJUDICE ANYONE WITH THIS KIND OF A LAW, BECAUSE WHAT IT DOES IS IT

                    PREVENTS UNNECESSARY LITIGATION GOING INTO WHOEVER'S GONNA HAVE TO

                    MAKE THE DECISION.  AND IT'S OBVIOUS ON THE FACE OF IT.  IF IT'S MISSING A

                                         158



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    TYPE OF CARD, IF IT'S MISSING A DATE THAT IT WAS ISSUED, IF THE DATE ISSUED

                    IS IN THE FUTURE, IT'S OBVIOUS YOU CAN'T GO AHEAD WITH THAT.  IT'S GONNA

                    GET DISMISSED.  SO WHY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE -- THE ADMINISTRATIVE

                    BURDEN OF HAVING SOMEBODY PUT IN AN ANSWER OR GO TO COURT AND GET

                    AGGRAVATED AND FRUSTRATED?  WHY NOT NIP IT RIGHT IN THE BUD AND SAY,

                    THIS TICKET, ON ITS FACE, IS DEFECTIVE ACCORDING TO THE LAW?

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  AND YOU WOULD AGREE -- I'M

                    ASSUMING YOU WOULD AGREE THAT THE -- THE PARKING LAWS, THE VEHICLE

                    AND TRAFFIC LAWS SHOULD BE ENFORCED AS LONG AS THE TICKET IS ELIGIBLE --

                    OR LEGIBLE, RIGHT?

                                 MR. COLTON:  YES, ABSOLUTELY I WOULD AGREE THAT,

                    YOU KNOW, PARKING LAWS, ALL LAWS SHOULD BE ENFORCED.  BUT IF IT'S ON ITS

                    FACE DEFECTIVE, THEN I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD PUT THE CONSTITUENT THROUGH

                    THE -- THE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN AND THE TIME AND THE ANXIETY OF HAVING

                    TO GO THROUGH A PROCEEDING WHEN IT'S NOT NECESSARY.  IT HAS TO BE

                    DISMISSED.  AND I THINK IT'S UNFAIR.  IT'S A VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS IF YOU

                    HAVE, SAY, A SENIOR CITIZEN WHO DOESN'T HAVE THE TIME OR THE ABILITY TO

                    ANSWER IT TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH FURTHER STRESS AND JUST PAYS THE TICKET,

                    EVEN THOUGH ON ITS FACE IT WAS DEFECTIVE.  I DON'T THINK THAT'S DUE

                    PROCESS.  I THINK WE SHOULD TREAT EVERYONE EQUALLY, NO MATTER WHAT

                    DISABILITIES OR DISADVANTAGES THAT THEY MAY HAVE IN SIMPLY NOT WANTING

                    TO GO THROUGH THE -- THE PROCESS OF HAVING TO USE A COMPUTER TO ANSWER

                    IT, IF -- IF THE LOCALITY PERMITS THAT, OR HAVING TO GO DOWN TO A PARKING

                    VIOLATIONS BUREAU OR DMV SITE IF THE LOCALITY PERMITS THAT AND HAVE TO

                    ANSWER IT IF IT ON ITS FACE IT'S DEFECTIVE

                                         159



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO IN -- IN MY -- IN MY COUNTY, ALL

                    OF THE TRAFFIC TICKETS ARE DONE BY AN ELECTRONIC TICKET PRINTER.  AND FROM

                    WHAT I UNDERSTAND NOW, MOST POLICE AGENCIES ARE USING THOSE, PARKING

                    VIOLATION AGENCIES ARE USING THOSE.  I DON'T LIVE IN THE CITY, BUT FROM

                    WHAT I UNDERSTAND THAT MAYBE IS STARTING TO HAPPEN NOW.  THERE'S MORE

                    OF THESE ELECTRONIC TICKETS.  IF EVERYONE JUST SWITCHES TO AN ELECTRONIC

                    TICKET MACHINE, THEN THIS LAW WOULD BE UNNECESSARY, WOULDN'T YOU

                    AGREE?

                                 MR. COLTON:  WHAT I HAVE FOUND WITH COMPUTERS

                    AND ELECTRONIC MACHINES, THEY'RE NOT TOTALLY ACCURATE.  THINGS HAPPEN.

                    THEY MALFUNCTION.  AND OUR CONSTITUENTS SHOULD NOT, YOU KNOW, BE THE

                    VICTIM OF SOMETHING THAT IS MALFUNCTIONING AND THAT THEY DIDN'T DO AND,

                    YOU KNOW, BE MADE TO ANSWER IT.  SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, THE PAPER

                    GETS TORN, IT DOESN'T COME OUT RIGHT.  THE INFORMATION IS NOT THERE.  AND

                    IT -- AND -- AND PARTICULARLY, IN THIS PARTICULAR KIND OF SITUATION, BECAUSE

                    VERY OFTEN WHEN THE TICKET IS NOT ACCURATELY PRINTED OUT, IT DOESN'T END

                    UP ON THE CAR.  I FIND A LARGE NUMBER OF CONSTITUENTS COMING TO ME --

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  HOW DO YOU PROVE THAT?

                                 MR. OTIS:  -- WITH THIS PROBLEM.  THE TICKET WAS

                    NEVER ON THEIR CAR.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  WELL, THAT -- WOULDN'T ANYBODY SAY

                    THAT THAT WANTED TO GET OUT OF A TRAFFIC TICKET?  I NEVER GOT IT.  THAT'S THE

                    BEST DEFENSE, ISN'T IT?

                                 MR. COLTON:  THAT'S NOT THE DEFENSE.  THE DEFENSE

                    IS IT WASN'T PROPERLY FILLED OUT AND THAT MAY BE THE REASON WHY THEY

                                         160



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    NEVER GOT IT.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  WELL, HOW DO YOU KNOW IT'S NOT

                    PROPERLY FILLED OUT IF YOU NEVER GOT IT?

                                 MR. COLTON:  THAT THE'S POINT, YOU CAN'T.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  OKAY.

                                 MR. COLTON:  THAT'S WHY IF IT'S NOT PROPERLY FILLED

                    OUT, IF IT'S MISSING A DATE OR A TYPE OF CAR OR AN ADDRESS WHERE IT

                    HAPPENED, THAT TICKET HAS TO BE DISMISSED.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO YOU'RE -- SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT

                    PEOPLE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO RESPOND WHEN THEY GET TICKETS IF IT'S POSSIBLE

                    THAT THE TICKET IS DEFICIENT IN SOME WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, MAYBE EVEN

                    BEYOND THE INTENT OF THIS LEGISLATION?

                                 MR. COLTON:  NO.  I'M SAYING THAT IF THE TICKET ON

                    ITS FACE IS DEFECTIVE, THEN THE PERSON -- IT SHOULD BE DISMISSED WITHOUT

                    HAVING THE PERSON TO RAISE THAT DEFENSE AND GO TO THE COURT AND GO TO

                    WHATEVER INCONVENIENCE IT MAY BE TO RAISE SUCH A DEFENSE.  WE'RE

                    DEALING SOMETIMES WITH SENIOR CITIZENS.  WE'RE DEALING SOMETIMES WITH

                    PEOPLE WHO DON'T READ THE SAME LANGUAGE.  THEY MAY HAVE A DIFFICULTY.

                    THERE MAY BE AN OBSTACLE IN THEM PUTTING IN A DEFENSE.  SO WHAT I'M

                    SAYING IS, IF THE TICKET LACKS CERTAIN REQUIRED INFORMATION, AND THAT

                    INFORMATION IS STATED BY THE LAW, THIS IS NOT ARBITRARY.  IT SAYS -- THE LAW

                    SAYS RIGHT NOW -- THE CURRENT LAW SAYS, IF CERTAIN INFORMATION IS MISSING

                    LIKE THE DATE THAT THE INCIDENT OCCURRED OR LIKE THE TYPE OF CAR OR -- OR

                    LIKE THE LOCATION WHERE THE TICKET -- THESE ARE ESSENTIAL THINGS IN ORDER

                    TO BE ABLE TO DEFEND AGAINST SUCH A CHARGE.  IF THAT INFORMATION IS NOT

                                         161



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    ON THERE, THE CONSTITUENT SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH THE

                    TROUBLE OF PUTTING IN A DEFENSE.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  OKAY.  SO LET ME ASK YOU --

                                 MR. COLTON:  (INDISCERNIBLE).  THE INFORMATION IS

                    MISSING, AND IT'S VERY SIMPLE:  SIMPLY DISMISS THE TICKET SUA SPONTE.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO LET ME ASK YOU THIS QUESTION:

                    LET'S SAY THE DEFICIENT INFORMATION WAS THE TYPE OF CAR.  LET'S SAY THE

                    OFFICER FAILED TO PUT IN THE TYPE OF CAR ON THE TICKET, AND THEN THEY

                    SUBMITTED THE TICKET TO -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU CALLED IT, THE PARKING

                    VIOLATIONS BUREAU.  WHEN THE PARKING VIO -- WHEN THE PARK, LET'S SAY

                    -- AH, THIS IS A BAD EXAMPLE.  LET ME USE A DIFFERENT EXAMPLE.  LET'S SAY

                    THAT THE OFFICER PUT A -- THE MAKE AND MODEL OF SOME -- OF -- OF

                    WHATEVER CAR THEY THOUGHT WAS -- THAT VIOLATED THE PARKING LAWS, RIGHT,

                    AND THAT'S DEFICIENT BECAUSE THEY PUT THE WRONG ONE.  AND THEN THAT

                    TICKET GOES TO THE PARKING VIOLATIONS BUREAU.  HOW'S THE PARKING

                    VIOLATIONS BUREAU --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WERE YOU TAKING

                    YOUR SECOND 15?

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  I WILL, YES.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  OKAY.  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  HOW WILL THE PARKING VIOLATIONS

                    BUREAU KNOW THAT THAT INFORMATION IS DEFICIENT?

                                 MR. COLTON:  IF THE INFORMATION IS ON THE TICKET,

                    THAT TICKET IS NOT GOING TO BE DISMISSED.  THAT WOULD END UP GETTING

                    DISMISSED IF THE PERSON HAD TO PUT IN A DEFENSE AND SAY, THAT'S NOT MY

                                         162



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    CAR.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  BUT ISN'T THAT -- BUT WHAT IF THEY'RE A

                    SENIOR CITIZEN AND THEY CAN'T GET THERE TO PUT IN A DEFENSE?

                                 MR. COLTON:  WE'RE TRYING TO IMPROVE THE LAW AS

                    BEST WE CAN.  WE SHOULD NOT UNNECESSARILY BURDEN CONSTITUENTS IF WE

                    CAN AVOID DOING THAT.  AND IF THE INFORMATION REQUIRED TO BE ON THERE IS

                    WRONG, THEN IT MAY HAVE TO TAKE A COURT APPEARANCE OR AN APPEARANCE

                    BEFORE A -- AN ARBITRATOR TO PROVE IT'S WRONG.  YOU MAY HAVE TO SUBMIT

                    YOUR REGISTRATION OF YOUR CAR.  BUT EVEN THAT ISN'T PROOF THAT IT'S WRONG

                    BECAUSE YOU MIGHT HAVE BEEN DRIVING SOMEBODY ELSE'S CAR.  THIS LAW

                    DOESN'T SAY -- THIS LAW SAYS TICKETS MUST BE DISMISSED WHEN THE

                    INFORMATION IS MISSING OR MISDESCRIBED [SIC].  AND IF IT HAS NO DATE, IT

                    HAS TO BE DISMISSED.  IF IT HAS A FUTURE DATE; THE TICKET WAS ISSUED IN '26

                    AND THEY PUT DOWN '29.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  RIGHT.

                                 MR. COLTON:  CAN'T PREDICT A VIOLATION IN THE

                    FUTURE.  OBVIOUSLY IT HAS TO BE DISMISSED.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  WOULDN'T THE BEST WAY TO AVOID THE

                    INCONVENIENCE OF GETTING THE -- A PARKING VIOLATION IS TO JUST AVOID

                    BREAKING THE VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW?

                                 MR. COLTON:  THEY MAY -- THEY MAY HAVE NOT

                    VIOLATED THE LAW BECAUSE THE DATE IS WRONG, WHEN -- WHEN ONE THING IS

                    WRONG.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  WAIT A SECOND, WAIT A SECOND.  IF

                    I'M -- IF I'M PARKED ILLEGALLY AND THE OFFICER WRITES DOWN THE WRONG

                                         163



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    INFORMATION, IT'S NOT THAT I DIDN'T COMMIT AN OFFENSE.  IT'S JUST THAT THE

                    OFFICER SCREWED UP ON THE TICKET.  I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE, IT'S NOT LIKE, YOU

                    KNOW, THE OFFICER TRANSPOSES ONE NUMBER AND ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S

                    SOMEBODY ELSE THAT COMMITTED THE PARKING VIOLATION.  IT'S STILL ME.

                                 MR. COLTON:  THE FAILURE TO PUT THE CORRECT

                    INFORMATION USUALLY IS AN INDICATOR THAT THE TICKET WAS NOT PROPERLY

                    MADE OUT AND THAT THERE'S A STRONG POSSIBILITY THAT THAT PERSON IS NOT THE

                    ONE THAT THE TICKET SHOULD HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO.  AND -- AND THAT'S ALL

                    WE'RE SAYING.  IT'S NOT -- YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, SUDDENLY YOU GET A

                    TICKET.  ON AUGUST 28TH YOU GET A NOTICE.  NO TICKET WAS EVER FOUND ON

                    YOUR CAR.  AND IT SAYS THAT YOU PARKED AT A CERTAIN LOCATION, AND THAT

                    LOCATION IS NOWHERE NEAR WHERE YOU'VE EVER BEEN.  THAT TICKET, YOU

                    KNOW, BASICALLY IF IT'S IN ANOTHER --

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  THEN I WOULD HAVE A GREAT DEFENSE.

                                 MR. COLTON:  -- THEN YOU MIGHT HAVE TO ANSWER

                    THAT.  BUT IF THE INFORMATION IS MISSING, IT DOESN'T HAVE THE LOCATION,

                    YOU CAN'T ANSWER IT.  HOW CAN YOU DEFEND THAT?  IF THE DATE IS MISSING.

                    WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT QUESTIONS OF WHERE SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW, IS

                    TRYING TO GETTING AWAY BECAUSE CERTAIN INFORMATION IS -- IS -- THEY TRY TO

                    DISPUTE IT.  THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT UP.  NO.  HERE IS A MISSING DATE.

                    NO DATE.  YOU CAN'T DEFEND THAT.  HOW DO YOU DEFEND IT?  YOU DON'T

                    KNOW WHAT DATE YOU WERE ACCUSED OF PARKING THERE.  THE LOCATION IS

                    MISSING.  YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT -- WHAT PLACE YOU'RE ALLEGED -- YOU'RE

                    BEING ACCUSED OF PARKING.  YOU CAN'T DEFEND THAT KIND OF TICKET.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  AND YET -- WELL --

                                         164



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. COLTON:  AND, THEREFORE JUSTICE, DUE PROCESS

                    REQUIRES THAT IF THE REQUIRED INFORMATION IS NOT THERE, THEN THAT TICKET

                    SHOULD BE DISMISSED AND YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROBLEM

                    AND THE BURDEN OF GOING TO A HEARING.  OR EVEN IF IT'S ON THE COMPUTER,

                    MANY SENIORS CAN'T USE THE COMPUTERS VERY EFFECTIVELY.  SO THEY WOULD

                    MORE BE INCLINED TO SAY, I'M JUST GONNA PAY THAT TICKET BECAUSE I DON'T

                    KNOW HOW TO DEFEND IT.  AND -- AND THAT IS WRONG.  AND -- AND AS THE

                    PEOPLE'S HOUSE HERE, WE WANT TO AVOID PEOPLE SUFFERING THAT KIND OF AN

                    INJUSTICE.  IT MIGHT BE A SMALL INJUSTICE, BUT SMALL INJUSTICES IS [SIC]

                    WHAT MAKES PEOPLE FEEL THAT GOVERNMENT DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THEM, AND

                    WE WANT TO SHOW THAT WE DO CARE ABOUT THEM.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  THANK YOU, MR. COLTON.

                                 ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MR. MOLITOR:  SO I -- I THINK THIS IS MAYBE A -- A

                    HYPER-LOCAL ISSUE THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING HERE FOR SOME OF THE SPONSOR'S

                    CONSTITUENTS WHO MAYBE DON'T WANT TO ABIDE BY THE VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC

                    LAW.  AND I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO CHANGE THE ENTIRE BODY OF STATE LAW

                    IN ORDER TO -- IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS SITUATION BETTER FOR THE SPONSOR'S

                    DISTRICT OR THE PEOPLE IN THE SPONSOR'S DISTRICT.

                                 FIRST OF ALL, I THINK IT'S A NON-ISSUE.  MOST PLACES, IF

                    THEY'RE NOT ALREADY USING THEM, ARE GOING TO BE USING THEM; ELECTRONIC

                    TICKETS SO WE WON'T HAVE ILLEGIBLE TICKETS ANYMORE.  AND SO TECHNOLOGY

                    IS CATCHING UP.  AND SECOND OF ALL, I THINK PUTTING THIS AMOUNT OF

                    POWER IN THE HANDS OF A -- OF A REGULATORY AGENCY OR JUDGES WHO, YOU

                                         165



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    KNOW, SIT ON THE BENCH FOR LONG TERMS OR FOR LIFE IS GONNA CREATE A HUGE

                    PROBLEM.  YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TICKETS DISMISSED PRETTY MUCH FOR NO

                    REASON WHATSOEVER.  YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO CHALLENGE THEM AT ALL.  AND

                    THAT'S NOT THE WAY OUR SOCIETY WORKS.  WE'RE A SOCIETY OF LAWS.  AND

                    MAYBE YOU THINK IT'S REALLY NOT THAT BIG OF A DEAL EXCEPT WHEN YOU'RE IN

                    THE CITY AND YOU'RE DOUBLE-PARK -- SOMEONE'S DOUBLE-PARKED YOU,

                    YOU'RE REALLY GONNA WISH THAT THE -- THE VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW WAS

                    ENFORCED.  BUT, YOU KNOW, IF THE TICKET BLEW AWAY, I GUESS IT WON'T BE.

                                 SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW.  I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT

                    TO MAKE OF THIS -- THIS BILL.  BUT FOR ALL THOSE REASONS I WOULD ENCOURAGE

                    MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE NO ON THIS BILL AND I'LL BE VOTING NO AS WELL.

                                 THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. DURSO.

                                 MR. DURSO:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  WOULD

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR TWO OR THREE QUICK QUESTIONS?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 MR. COLTON:  YES, ABSOLUTELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. DURSO:  SO, MR. COLTON, JUST WHEN YOU WERE --

                    DISCUSSING THIS BILL WITH MY COLLEAGUE, YOU SAID IF SOMEONE RECEIVED

                    THE TICKET BUT THEY DON'T HAVE IT ON THEIR CAR, RIGHT?  WOULD THAT BE

                    GROUNDS FOR A DISMISSAL OF THE TICKET?

                                 MR. COLTON:  NO.  THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE OF FACT.

                                         166



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    IF, IN FACT, THE -- THE PERSON WHO GOT THE TICKET, YOU KNOW, WAS ABLE TO

                    SOMEHOW FIND A -- A WITNESS WHO -- IN ANOTHER BLOCK IN ANOTHER

                    NEIGHBORHOOD -- WHO SAW THE AGENT PUTTING A TICKET ON A DIFFERENT CAR,

                    BUT HOW DO YOU PROVE THAT?  THAT'S VERY UNLIKELY.

                                 MR. DURSO:  I'M JUST ASKING IF --

                                 MR. COLTON:  IF THE TICKET IS NOT ON THE CAR, WHAT

                    HAPPENS IS YOU'LL GET A NOTICE FROM THE PARKING VIOLATIONS THAT A TICKET

                    HAS BEEN ISSUED TO YOU ON THIS -- AND IT HAS THE COPY OF THE TICKET,

                    WHICH IS THE DATE, THE LOCATION OF WHERE THE TICKET WAS ISSUED, THE KIND

                    OF -- THE CAR -- THE MAKE AND MODEL OF THE CAR THAT THE TICKET WAS

                    PLACED ON, AND YOU'LL HAVE THAT NOW IN YOUR HAND.  OR IT'LL HAVE A TICKET

                    WHICH HAS THE INFORMATION MISSING.  IF THE INFORMATION IS MISSING, IT

                    SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN SENT OUT TO YOU TO DEFEND --

                                 MR. DURSO:  OKAY.

                                 MR. COLTON:  -- BECAUSE IT'S -- IT'S MISSING.

                                 MR. DURSO:  BUT -- WELL, YOU JUST MENTIONED IF THEY

                    PUT THE TICKET ON ANOTHER CAR.  IT'S PROBABLY NOT MY TICKET.

                                 MR. COLTON:  THAT'S CORRECT.

                                 MR. DURSO:  SO WHY WOULD I DEFEND A TICKET THAT'S

                    NOT MINE?

                                 MR. COLTON:  HUMAN BEINGS MAKE MISTAKES.

                    COMPUTERS MAKE MISTAKES.

                                 MR. DURSO:  SO YOU'RE SAYING FOR THE PERSON THAT

                    RECEIVED THE TICKET ON THEIR CAR THAT MAY HAVE BEEN MINE, THEY

                    SHOULDN'T GET THAT TICKET?  I AGREE.

                                         167



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. COLTON:  THE PERSON WHO WAS ILLEGALLY PARKED

                    SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE TICKET.

                                 MR. DURSO:  OKAY.

                                 MR. COLTON:  BUT THERE'S -- IF THERE'S NO

                    INFORMATION ON IT, IF THE DATE IS MISSING, IF THE LOCATION THE TICKET WAS

                    ISSUED IS MISSING, IF THE MAKE AND MODEL OF THE CAR IS MISSING, THEN

                    THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE, THERE'S A VERY STRONG CHANCE THAT IT MIGHT NOT

                    HAVE BEEN YOUR CAR THAT THE TICKET WAS PUT ON.  AND SOMEHOW YOUR CAR

                    --

                                 MR. DURSO:  BUT IF IT WASN'T PUT ON YOUR CAR --

                                 MR. COLTON:  SOMEHOW WHEN THE AGENT WAS

                    WALKING BY YOUR CAR HE HAD HIS -- HIS GIZMO OUT AND MAYBE IT

                    REGISTERED ON YOUR CAR INSTEAD OF THE CAR THAT IT WAS ISSUED.

                                 MR. DURSO:  IT SHOULDN'T BE DOING THAT.

                                 MR. COLTON:  I DON'T KNOW WHY.  IT CAN BECOME

                    SILLY.  BUT THE POINT IS, CONSTITUENTS SHOULD NOT SUFFER THE BURDEN OF

                    HAVING TO ANSWER SOMETHING WHERE IT IS NO INDICATION OF -- OF THE

                    INFORMATION THAT WAS ON THERE.  IT WASN'T ON THERE.  IT'S NOT A QUESTION

                    OF, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT IT ONE WAY OR THE ANOTHER.  YOU -- YOU -- THE

                    -- THE TRAFFIC AGENT SHOULD NOT HAVE PROCESSED THE TICKET THAT WAS

                    MISSING A DATE OR MISSING THE LOCATION OR MISSING THE TYPE OF CAR.

                                 MR. DURSO:  MR. COLTON, I JUST ASKED ARE YOU GONNA

                    GET THE TICKET IF IT'S NOT ON YOUR CAR.  I UNDERSTAND ALL THE OTHER STUFF.  IF

                    IT'S MISSING INFORMATION, IF IT'S ON SOMEONE ELSE'S CAR, IF THERE'S BEDBUGS

                    ON THE TRAIN, I GET ALL THAT.  THAT IS -- WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF THE TICKET IS

                                         168



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    NOT ON YOUR CAR AND IT GOES ON THE WRONG CAR, THE PERSON THAT GOT THAT

                    TICKET OBVIOUSLY IS NOT GONNA PAY THE TICKET.  IT'S NOT ON THEIR CAR.

                                 MR. COLTON:  THEY MIGHT HAVE TO GO TO COURT TO

                    ANSWER IT.

                                 MR. DURSO:  UNDERSTOOD.

                                 MR. COLTON:  THEY MIGHT HAVE TO PUT IN AN

                    ANSWER.  THAT'S NOT RIGHT.  THAT'S NOT DUE PROCESS.

                                 MR. DURSO:  I AGREE.  NO ONE SHOULD PAY A TICKET

                    THAT'S NOT THEIRS.  BUT NOW PART OF THIS, IT SAYS ILLEGIBLE.  SO IT SAYS AN

                    ILLEGIBLE TICKET.  IS IT ILLEGIBLE ON ALL ACCOUNTS?  SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF

                    THAT TICKET'S LEFT ON MY CAR AND IT RAINS AND I -- IT'S NOW ILLEGIBLE.  CAN I

                    NOW SAY, THIS ISN'T FOR ME.  I CAN'T READ IT?

                                 MR. COLTON:  THE ILLEGIBLE REFERS TO THE TICKET THAT

                    IS BEING FILED WITH PARKING VIOLATIONS OR WHATEVER IS THE AGENCY.

                                 MR. DURSO:  NOT THE PERSON?

                                 MR. COLTON:  YOU CAN'T, FOR EXAMPLE, TAKE A TICKET

                    THAT YOU GOT ON YOUR CAR AND -- AND SMEAR IT OFF.

                                 MR. DURSO:  NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT.

                                 MR. COLTON:  THE AGENCY'S NOT GONNA DISMISS THAT

                    TICKET.

                                 MR. DURSO:  SO IF THE TICKET ON YOUR CAR IS ILLEGIBLE

                    BECAUSE OF RAIN, WIND, LIGHTING STRIKES THE CAR, IT STILL COUNTS, CORRECT?

                                 MR. COLTON:  IT'S NOT THE TICKET ON YOUR CAR THAT

                    THEY GO BY.

                                 MR. DURSO:  RIGHT.

                                         169



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 MR. COLTON:  IT'S THE TICKET THAT IS PROCESSED BY THE

                    --

                                 MR. DURSO:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. COLTON:  -- PARKING VIOLATION AGENT.

                                 MR. DURSO:  OKAY.  SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF THERE'S A

                    TRIPLICATE, IF IT'S -- IF IT'S SENT IN TO THE PARKING VIOLATION, THAT'S WHAT

                    COUNTS, CORRECT?

                                 MR. COLTON:  YES.

                                 MR. DURSO:  BECAUSE YOU DID SAY BEFORE, IF IT

                    BLOWS AWAY, HOW IS THERE PROOF THAT YOU EVER GOT IT.  BUT NOW YOU'RE

                    SAYING IF IT'S SENT IN AND IT'S AT THE TRAFFIC VIOLATION, IT DOES COUNT,

                    CORRECT?

                                 MR. COLTON:  YES.  AND IT ALSO COUNTS --

                                 MR. DURSO:  SO -- AS LONG AS IT'S WRITTEN OUT

                    CORRECTLY.

                                 MR. COLTON:  IF YOU DIDN'T GET THE TICKET ON YOUR

                    CAR BUT THE TICKET WAS PROPERLY FILLED OUT AND PROCESSED BY THE AGENT,

                    THIS BILL DOESN'T HELP YOU.

                                 MR. DURSO:  OKAY.

                                 MR. COLTON:  AS LONG AS IT HAS THE CORRECT

                    INFORMATION.

                                 MR. DURSO:  GOT IT.  SO -- AND -- AND I JUST WANTED

                    THAT ON THE LEGISLATIVE RECORD, BECAUSE YOU SAID BEFORE IF YOU DON'T

                    RECEIVE THE TICKET, RIGHT, YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY IT.  IF IT'S NOT YOUR

                    CAR -- SO IN OTHER WORDS, MR. COLTON, IF YOU WERE PARKED IN A

                                         170



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    HANDICAPPED SPOT AND YOU DIDN'T HAVE A HANDICAPPED STICKER, RIGHT, AND

                    I'M THE TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT AGENT.  I WROTE OUT THE TICKET FOR YOUR CAR

                    BUT I PUT IT ON MY COLLEAGUE'S CAR.  SHOULD YOU STILL PAY THAT TICKET?

                                 MR. COLTON:  IF IT -- IF, IN FACT, YOU WERE THE ONE

                    THAT THE TICKET DESCRIBES ACCURATELY.  THE TICKET HAS TO HAVE CERTAIN

                    BASIC INFORMATION.

                                 MR. DURSO:  IF ALL THE BASIC INFORMATION IS FILLED IN

                    --

                                 MR. COLTON:  THEN YOU WOULD BE GUILTY.

                                 MR. DURSO:  BUT -- OKAY.  SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE

                    THAT CLEAR.  REGARDLESS IF YOU ACTUALLY RECEIVED THE TICKET OR NOT, YOU'RE

                    STILL GUILTY OF THAT VIOLATION AS LONG AS THE TRAFFIC BUREAU RECEIVES IT?

                                 MR. COLTON:  THIS BILL DOES NOT DEAL WITH WHETHER

                    YOU RECEIVED THE TICKET OR NOT.  THIS BILL SIMPLY DEALS WITH WHETHER THE

                    CORRECT INFORMATION HAS BEEN FILLED IN, THE REQUIRED INFORMATION HAS

                    BEEN FILLED IN ON THE TICKET.  IT DOES NOT DEAL WITH WHETHER OR NOT YOU

                    RECEIVED IT.

                                 MR. DURSO:  SO IT HAS TO BE LEGIBLE TO THE TRAFFIC

                    ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, AND IF YOU WERE TO GO TO COURT TO DEFEND IT YOU

                    HAVE TO ABLE TO READ IT THERE?  IT'S NOT ABOUT WHAT'S ON YOUR CAR OR ON

                    MY COLLEAGUE'S CAR OR SOMEONE ELSE'S CAR --

                                 MR. COLTON:  THAT'S CORRECT.  IT'S -- IT'S WHAT ON THE

                    TICKET.

                                 MR. DURSO:  OKAY.  ENOUGH SAID.

                                 MR. COLTON:  AND THAT'S WHAT THE LAW REQUIRES,

                                         171



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    AND -- AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BASICALLY MODIFIES.

                                 MR. DURSO:  I JUST WANTED TO CLEAR THAT UP.  THANK

                    YOU, SIR.  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 90TH

                    DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  A PARTY VOTE HAS

                    BEEN REQUESTED.

                                 MS. WALSH.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                    REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL GENERALLY BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS PIECE

                    OF LEGISLATION.  BUT IF ANYONE WISHES TO SUPPORT IT, YOU MAY DO SO NOW,

                    CERTAINLY, AT YOUR SEATS.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  THE

                    MAJORITY CONFERENCE WILL SUPPORT THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.  FOR THOSE

                    THAT WOULD LIKE TO VOTE IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, THEY COULD DO SO HERE IN

                    THE CHAMBER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  THANK YOU.

                                 THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                         172



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  MADAM SPEAKER, DO WE HAVE FURTHER

                    HOUSEKEEPING OR RESOLUTIONS?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  WE DO HAVE A PIECE

                    OF HOUSEKEEPING.

                                 ON A MOTION BY MS. KELLES, PAGE 29, CALENDAR NO.

                    224, BILL NO. A09047-A, THE AMENDMENTS ARE RECEIVED AND ADOPTED.

                                 WE HAVE A NUMBER OF RESOLUTIONS BEFORE THE HOUSE.

                    WITHOUT OBJECTION, THESE RESOLUTIONS WILL BE TAKEN UP TOGETHER.

                                 ON THE RESOLUTIONS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING

                    AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTIONS ARE ADOPTED.

                                 (WHEREUPON, ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NOS. 1224-1230

                    WERE UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED.)

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  MADAM SPEAKER, CAN YOU CALL ON MS.

                    CLARK FOR THE PURPOSES OF AN ANNOUNCEMENT?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MS. CLARK FOR THE

                    PURPOSE OF AN ANNOUNCEMENT.

                                 MS. CLARK:  THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.  I AM

                    ANNOUNCING MAJORITY CONFERENCE IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING SESSION IN

                    THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.  MAJORITY CONFERENCE IMMEDIATELY

                    FOLLOWING SESSION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  MAJORITY

                    CONFERENCE IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING SESSION IN THE SPEAKER'S

                                         173



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                       APRIL 28, 2026

                    CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 MR. FALL.

                                 MR. FALL:  I NOW MOVE THAT THE ASSEMBLY STAND

                    ADJOURNED, AND THAT WE WILL RECONVENE AT 10:30 A.M., WEDNESDAY,

                    APRIL 29TH, TOMORROW BEING A SESSION DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER:  10:30 TOMORROW.

                    THANK YOU.

                                 ON MR. FALL'S MOTION, THE HOUSE STANDS ADJOURNED.

                                 (WHEREUPON, AT 4:55 P.M., THE HOUSE STOOD ADJOURNED

                    UNTIL WEDNESDAY, APRIL 29TH AT 10:30 A.M., THAT BEING A SESSION DAY.)































                                         174