WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11, 2025 11:30 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 TUESDAY, JUNE 10TH.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, I MOVE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

TO DISPENSE WITH THE FURTHER READING OF THE JOURNAL OF TUESDAY, JUNE

THE 10TH AND THAT THE SAME STAND APPROVED.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WITHOUT OBJECTION,

SO ORDERED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU. GOOD

MORNING TO COLLEAGUES THAT ARE IN THE CHAMBERS AS WELL GUESTS THAT ARE

HERE WITH US TODAY.

I'D LIKE A SHARE QUOTE WITH YOU. THIS MORNING, THIS

ONE COMES FROM BARBARA JORDAN. SHE WAS AN -- WAS AN AMERICAN

LAWYER, AN EDUCATOR AND A POLITICIAN. SHE WAS THE FIRST AFRICAN-

AMERICAN ELECTED TO THE TEXAS SENATE. AND HER WORDS FOR US TODAY:

CHANGE IS NEVER EASY, BUT IT'S [SIC] ALWAYS POSSIBLE. AGAIN, THESE

WORDS FROM FORMER SENATE -- TEXAS SENATE REPRESENTATIVE BARBARA

JORDAN.

MADAM SPEAKER, MEMBERS HAVE ON THEIR DESK A MAIN

CALENDAR AS WELL AS A DEBATE LIST. BEFORE ANY HOUSEKEEPING OR

INTRODUCTIONS, WE'RE GONNA BE CALLING FOR THE RULES COMMITTEE. THAT

COMMITTEE IS GONNA PRODUCE AN A-CALENDAR, WHICH WE WILL DEFINITELY

TAKE UP TODAY. WE WILL ALSO BE CALLING FOR A WAYS AND MEANS

COMMITTEE TO MEET. WE'RE GONNA, HOWEVER, BEGIN OUR WORK TODAY BY

THE FOLLOWING BILLS ON CONSENT: RULES REPORT NO. 228 BY MR. ACARI,

RULES REPORT NO. 545 BY MS. CRUZ, AND CALENDAR NO. 95 BY

MR. WEPRIN. AND THEN WE'RE GONNA TAKE UP THE FOLLOWING BILLS ON --

ON DEBATE: RULES REPORT NO. 494 BY MS. ROZIC, RULES REPORT NO. 504

BY MS. WOERNER, AND CALENDAR NO. 149 BY MR. FALL. THERE COULD

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

POSSIBLY BE A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL ANNOUNCEMENTS ON FLOOR ACTIVITY,

MADAM SPEAKER. SHOULD THAT BE NECESSARY I WILL ADVISE.

HOWEVER, THAT IS A GENERAL OUTLINE OF WHERE WE'RE

GOING TODAY. IF YOU COULD PLEASE CALL MEMBERS TO THE SPEAKER'S

CONFERENCE ROOM. AND IF I COULD ENCOURAGE MEMBERS TO -- IF YOU

DIDN'T HEAR WHAT OUR PLAN IS FOR THE DAY, COME AND ASK SO THAT WE CAN

MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALWAYS READY TO GO TO THOSE COMMITTEE MEETINGS

AND WE CAN MOVE EXPEDIENTLY AT THEM.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

RULES COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO THE SPEAKER'S

CONFERENCE ROOM. RULES COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO THE SPEAKER'S

CONFERENCE ROOM.

WE HAVE NO HOUSEKEEPING THIS MORNING; SEVERAL

INTRODUCTIONS. WE WILL START WITH MR. COLTON FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN

INTRODUCTION.

MR. COLTON: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

I HAVE GUESTS WITH ME TODAY FROM BROOKLYN. THE --

ONE IS THE -- A SMALL BUSINESS, THE OWNER OF BOBBY'S AUTO, MUHAMMAD

SAJID AND AMIR IKBAL, TOGETHER WITH THE GUEST THAT THEY HAVE VISITING

THEM, HASSAN ISHAD. THESE PEOPLE AND THE SMALL BUSINESSES KNOWN FOR

ITS GENEROSITY AND HELPING COMMUNITY MEMBERS, PEOPLE WHO HAVE

PROBLEMS. EVERY MONTH OF RAMADAN THEY ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THE LOCAL

MOSQUE BY PROVIDING FREE IFTAR MEALS AND OTHER FOOD ITEMS TO THOSE IN

NEED, AND THEY ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

COMMUNITY AND THEY WANTED TO VISIT US HERE IN ALBANY TO SEE THE STATE

CAPITOL AND THE SEED OF GOVERNMENT.

SO I WOULD ASK THAT THEY BE RECOGNIZED AND SHOWN THE

CORDIALITIES OF THE HOUSE AND THE PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE, AND THAT WE

WELCOME THESE HONORED BUSINESSPERSONS TO THE ASSEMBLY CHAMBERS

[SIC].

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

ON BEHALF OG MR. COLTON, THE SPEAKER AND ALL

MEMBERS, WE WELCOME YOU, DISTINGUISHED GUESTS, TO OUR ASSEMBLY

CHAMBER AND EXTEND THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR TO YOU. SMALL BUSINESS

OWNERSHIP IS DEFINITELY THE BACKBONE OF COMMERCE, SO WE THANK YOU

FOR YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE COMMUNITY. WE HOPE YOU ENJOY OUR

PROCEEDINGS TODAY. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US.

(APPLAUSE)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, WHILE

WE PREPARE FOR SOME ADDITIONAL GUESTS, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE YOUNG

LADY WHO SITS IN FRONT OF ME, AMELIA MENDEZ, STAND. SHE IS HERE IN OUR

CAPITOL TODAY WITH SIX OTHER STUDENTS WHO HAVE BEEN INVITED BY THE

WOMEN'S CAUCUS TO SHADOW SOME OF THE MEMBERS HERE. SHE IS FROM

THE BRONX, AND SHE'S A SENIOR IN HIGH SCHOOL, LOOKING FORWARD TO GOING

TO COLLEGE.

SO IF YOU COULD WELCOME ALL SIX OF THEM -- THERE'S

ANOTHER ONE OVER HERE, MILLIE, THAT'S WITH OUR COLLEAGUE ON THAT SIDE,

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AND THE REST ARE SOMEWHERE IN THE CAPITOL. THEY'LL BE AROUND, SO WE

WANT TO PUT ON OUR BEST BEHAVIOR FOR THEM.

PLEASE WELCOME THEM TO OUR CHAMBERS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: YES. ON BEHALF OF

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES, THE WOMEN'S CAUCUS, SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS,

WE WELCOME OUR YOUNG PEOPLE TO THE ASSEMBLY CHAMBER AND EXTEND

THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR. PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU MAKE THE MOST OF

YOUR OPPORTUNITY TODAY. ASK LOTS OF QUESTIONS, INTRODUCE YOURSELF

AROUND. IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT INTERESTS YOU, YOU, TOO, MAY ONE DAY

BE IN THIS CHAMBER OR ANY CHAMBER ACROSS THE STATE AND IN THE COUNTRY.

SO THANK YOU. YOU COULD HAVE CHOSE [SIC] TO DO ANYTHING ELSE TODAY,

BUT YOU CHOSE TO COME HERE. WE APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU SO VERY

MUCH FOR JOINING US TODAY.

(APPLAUSE)

MR. RAMOS FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

MR. RAMOS: MADAM SPEAKER, I RISE FOR THE

PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION. TODAY I'M VERY PROUD TO HAVE A GROUP

WHO IS JOINING US TODAY, A GROUP OF LEADERS, PERUVIAN LEADERS, FROM THE

COMMUNITIES OF NEW YORK, MOSTLY FROM LONG ISLAND, WHO ARE VISITING

TODAY TO WITNESS THE PASSAGE OF A RESOLUTION THAT WE WILL BE TAKING UP

LATER. THE RESOLUTION WILL PROCLAIM AUGUST 23-24, 2025 PERUVIAN

GASTRONOMY WEEKEND IN NEW YORK STATE. FOR 50 YEARS, SUMAQ, THE

PERUVIAN -- THE PERUVIAN FOOD FESTIVAL, UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF VICKY

AND WILLIAM DIAZ, HAS BECOME ONE OF THE MOST ANTICIPATED EVENTS ON

LONG ISLAND. THE EVENT STRIVES TO DIFFUSE PERUVIAN CUISINE AND CULTURE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

IN NEW YORK STATE AND SHOWCASE THE DIVERSITY OF PERUVIAN

GASTRONOMY, AS WELL AS HIGHLIGHT THE TALENTED CHEFS WHO ARE INNOVATING

AND TAKING ANCIENT FLAVORS TO A NEW LEVEL. IN NEW YORK WE PAY TRIBUTE

TO THE EVENTS SUCH AS THESE WHICH FOSTER THE ETHNIC PRIDE AND ENHANCE

THE PROFILE OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY WHICH STRENGTHENS THE COMMUNITIES OF

OUR STATE.

WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE THE DISTINGUISHED

GUESTS TODAY: OSWALDO DEL AGUILA, GENERAL CONSUL OF PERU; JORGE

IGAR -- IZAGUIRRE, VICE CONSUL GENERAL OF PERU; VICKY AND WILLIAM

DIAZ, FOUNDERS OF SUMAQ FOOD FESTIVAL AND NOTICIA NEWSPAPER;

DANIELLA DIAZ FROM SUMAQ; KARINA SAENZ TREASURER, PERUVIAN

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; JOHAN CUADROS, CHIEF [SIC] OF SUMAQ

PERUVIAN FOOD FESTIVAL; BIANCA HERNANDEZ-OSCAR (PHONETIC), ASSISTANT

CHEFS; MANUEL AVENDAÑO, A REPORTER FOR NUESTRA GENTE TV; ALEJANDRO

ROMAN, REPORTER FOR METRO LATINO NEWS; VILMA GIA (PHONETIC), LOS

ANDES RESTAURANT IN NEW YORK. AND I ALSO WANT TO MENTION

SOMEBODY WHO'S NOT HERE BUT HAS CONTRIBUTED TO THIS FESTIVAL; KEVIN

SAGUDA (PHONETIC) FROM THE STATE FARM AND CENTRAL ISLIP, FOR THE

SUMAQ 2025 AMBASSADOR, BOTH -- THAT UNFORTUNATELY COULD NOT BE

HERE.

MADAM SPEAKER, I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE GIVE THEM A

WARM WELCOME AND PLEASE EXTEND THEM ALL THE COURTESIES OF THE

HOUSE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON BEHALF OF MR.

RAMOS, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, WE WELCOME THE GENERAL

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

CONSUL, VICE CONSUL GENERAL OF PERU HERE TO OUR ASSEMBLY CHAMBERS

TODAY AND ADDITIONAL DISTINGUISHED GUESTS TO CELEBRATE PERUVIAN

GASTRONOMY. I'M SURE IT'S GOING TO BE DELICIOUS FOOD THAT YOU'LL BE

PREPARING LATER. WE WELCOME YOU TO OUR ASSEMBLY CHAMBER AND

EXTEND THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR TO YOU. WE DO HOPE YOU ENJOY OUR

PROCEEDINGS TODAY. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US.

(APPLAUSE)

MR. SANTABARBARA FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

MR. SANTABARBARA: THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER. I RISE TODAY TO WELCOME A TRULY REMARKABLE GUEST IN THE

PEOPLE'S HOUSE, ELIZABETH BONKER, A NATIONAL LEADER IN THE DISABILITY

RIGHTS MOVEMENT AND A POWERFUL VOICE FOR INCLUSION.

ELIZABETH IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF

COMMUNICATION 4 ALL, A NOT-FOR-PROFIT THAT ASSURES NON-SPEAKING

INDIVIDUALS WITH AUTISM HAVE -- HAVE THE ACCESS TO THE TOOLS AND THE

EDUCATION THEY NEED TO BE HEARD. THOUGH NON-SPEAKING HERSELF, SHE

HAS INSPIRED MILLIONS AROUND THE WORLD. HER VALEDICTORIAN

COMMENCEMENT SPEECH AT ROLLINS COLLEGE IN 2022 VENT VIRAL WITH OVER

FOUR BILLION IMPRESSIONS, DELIVERING A MESSAGE OF DIGNITY, EQUALITY AND

HOPE. SHE'S ALSO AN ACCOMPLISHED AUTHOR, RECORDING ARTIST. A KEYNOTE

SPEAKER, FEATURED IN DOCUMENTARY -- THE DOCUMENTARIES SPELLERS

AND UNDERSTANDING AUTISM, AND SERVES ON THE AUTISM SOCIETY COUNCIL

OF ADVISOR [SIC].

SHE JOINS US WITH A NUMBER OF ADVOCATES TODAY HERE

FOR AN ADVOCACY DAY FOR A COMMUNICATION BILL OF RIGHTS MEASURE THAT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AFFIRMS EVERY PERSON HAS A RIGHT TO COMMUNICATE, REGARDLESS OF ABILITY.

JOINING HER IS VIRGINIA BREEN, EVELYN YANG, JONATHAN POLANCO,

CHRISTINE POLANCO, GALILEE DAMIAO; JOHN GILMORE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

OF AUTISM ACTION NETWORK; TYLER MASON, STACY MASON, TREVOR

MASON, THOMAS TOLNAY, ABBY NEWBOLD, AND ANDREA POLYERNO

(PHONETIC).

MADAM SPEAKER, IF YOU WOULD WELCOME THESE SPECIAL

GUESTS TO THE CHAMBER AND EXTEND TO THEM ALL THE CORDIALITIES OF THE

HOUSE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON BEHALF OF MR.

SANTABARBARA, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, WELCOME, ELIZABETH AND

SPECIAL GUESTS HERE TODAY TO OUR ASSEMBLY CHAMBER. THANK YOU FOR

ALL OF THE IMPORTANT ADVOCACY WORK THAT YOU DO FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

WE EXTEND TO YOU THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR. WE DO HOPE YOU ENJOY

YOUR TIME HERE TODAY. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US.

(APPLAUSE)

MR. EACHUS FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

MR. EACHUS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, FOR

ALLOWING ME TO MAKE THIS INTRODUCTION. THERE ARE VERY -- TWO VERY

IMPORTANT WOMEN IN MY LIFE WHICH ARE JOINING US TODAY. THE FIRST IS

MY WIFE, KIMBERLY SANDERS-EACHUS, WHO I HAVE BEEN NEXT TO FOR 33

YEARS AND PLAN FOR ANOTHER 33 YEARS. SHE IS MY STRENGTH, AND ACTUALLY

ALLOWS ME TO COME HERE EVERY DAY AND DO THE WORK OF THE PEOPLE.

JOINING HER IS A VERY GOOD FRIEND, WHO I SOMETIMES

CALL "MOM" BECAUSE SHE'S BEEN WITH ME FOR SO LONG. HER NAME IS JEAN

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ANTONELLI. JEAN ANTONELLI IS A 50-YEAR ACTIVE VOLUNTEER OF THE NEW

WINDSOR AMBULANCE CORPS. FIFTY YEARS SHE'S BEEN PARTICIPATING.

(APPLAUSE)

SHE IS AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE NEW WINDSOR

DEMOCRATIC PARTY ALSO, AND SHE IS A FORMER MEMBER OF THE TOWN OF

NEW WINDSOR PLANNING BOARD. ALSO THIS YEAR, 2025, SHE WAS

PRESENTED WITH THE NEW WINDSOR NICHOLAS BROOKS AWARD, WHICH IS

THE HIGHEST MUNICIPAL AWARD THAT NEW WINDSOR GIVES, AND WE'RE VERY

PROUD OF HER FOR RECEIVING THAT AND FOR ALL OF THE SERVICE THAT SHE HAS

PERFORMED.

WILL YOU PLEASE GIVE THEM THE CORDIALITIES OF THE

FLOOR? THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON BEHALF OF MR.

EACHUS, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, WE WELCOME OUR SPECIAL GUESTS

TO THE ASSEMBLY CHAMBER TODAY. MS. ANTONELLI, THANK YOU SO VERY

MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY, AND CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR

CONTRIBUTIONS AND SIGNIFICANT AWARD. THAT'S AN ASTOUNDING

ACCOMPLISHMENT, AND THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT.

AND WE ALWAYS LIKE TO WELCOME OUR SPOUSES AND

SIGNIFICANT OTHERS TO THE ASSEMBLY CHAMBER. YOU ALLOW THEM TO GIVE

YOUR SPOUSE LOTS OF TIME AWAY FROM HOME, AND WE APPRECIATE THAT

VERY, VERY MUCH.

SO WE EXTEND THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR TO BOTH OF

YOU TODAY AND HOPE YOU ENJOY OUR PROCEEDINGS. THANK YOU FOR

VISITING US AND JOINING TODAY. THANK YOU.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

(APPLAUSE)

MR. SMULLEN FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

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

TODAY TO INTRODUCE A FIERCE ADVOCATE, A GREAT FRIEND OF MINE, THE

FOUNDER OF FENTANYLFATHERS.ORG, GREG SWAN. HE CAME TO THE CAPITOL

TODAY FROM DETROIT TO HELP INTRODUCE THE FENTANYL FATHERS AND MOTHERS

ACT, WHICH IS A DEMAND REDUCTION LAW THAT WILL HELP OUR -- HELP SAVE

OUR YOUTH FROM ACCIDENTALLY INGESTING A POISON, FENTANYL, THAT CAN KILL

THEM. HE'S ALSO JOINED TODAY BY SHARON RICHMOND, A BEREAVED

MOTHER, AND WHOM I BELIEVE ASSEMBLYMEMBER BROWN WILL ALSO

INTRODUCE. BUT THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT I URGE EVERYONE TO

TAKE CAREFUL CONSIDERATION AND -- AND GET BEHIND TO HELP SAVE OUR YOUTH

FROM THE SCOURGE OF FENTANYL POISONING.

SO, MADAM SPEAKER, IF YOU COULD KINDLY INTRODUCE

AND WELCOME GREG AND SHARON TO OUR CHAMBER, IT WOULD BE GREATLY

APPRECIATED.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON BEHALF OF MR.

SMULLEN, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, GREG AND KAREN [SIC], WE

WELCOME YOU TO OUR ASSEMBLY CHAMBER. THANK YOU FOR YOUR

CONTRIBUTIONS, ADVOCATING, EDUCATING RELATIVE TO FENTANYL. IT IS

RAVAGING OUR COMMUNITIES, AND YOUR HELP IS GREATLY NEEDED AND WE

APPRECIATE THE ASSISTANCE.

WE EXTEND THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR TO YOU. DO HOPE

YOU ENJOY OUR PROCEEDINGS TODAY. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR JOINING

US TODAY.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

(APPLAUSE)

PAGE 6, RULES REPORT NO. 228, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A07033-C, RULES

REPORT NO. 228, ZACCARO, REYES. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ARTS AND

CULTURAL AFFAIRS LAW, IN RELATION TO AUTHORIZING THE COUNCIL ON THE

ARTS TO DESIGNATE LITTLE YEMEN AS A CULTURAL DISTRICT.

(PAUSE)

PAGE 6, RULES REPORT NO. 228, CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A07033-C, RULES

REPORT NO. 228, ZACCARO, REYES. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ARTS AND

CULTURAL AFFAIRS LAW, IN RELATION TO AUTHORIZING THE COUNCIL ON THE

ARTS TO DESIGNATE LITTLE YEMEN AS A CULTURAL DISTRICT.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS BILL [SIC] 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: MADAM SPEAKER, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE

WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM?

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WAYS AND MEANS TO

THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM. WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE

MEMBERS TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

PAGE 16, RULES REPORT NO. 545, THE CLERK READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00203-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 545, CRUZ, DINOWITZ, SEAWRIGHT, HEVESI, KASSAY, KELLES,

COLTON, EPSTEIN, DAVILA, SANTABARBARA, HAWLEY, MEEKS, ZACCARO,

RAGA, SHIMSKY, PAULIN, KAY, HOOKS, CLARK, VALDEZ, JACOBSON,

JACKSON, DE LOS SANTOS, LEVENBERG, LASHER, TORRES, BRAUNSTEIN,

SIMON. AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW, IN RELATION TO

REQUIRING HOSPITALS TO DEVELOP A VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAM.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 280TH

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 25, CALENDAR NO. 95, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A06652-B, CALENDAR

NO. 95, WEPRIN, DILAN, CRUZ, BLANKENBUSH, BERGER, SANTABARBARA,

HAWLEY. AN ACT TO AMEND THE INSURANCE LAW, IN RELATION TO PERMITTING

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

LICENSED INSURANCE AGENTS, BROKERS, ADJUSTERS, CONSULTANTS, AND

INTERMEDIARIES TO CARRYOVER UP TO FIVE HOURS OF CONTINUING EDUCATION

CREDIT PER BIENNIAL LICENSING PERIOD.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS BILL [SIC] 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.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING ON DEBATE.

PAGE -- PAGE 15, RULES REPORT NO. 494, THE CLERK

READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY -- SENATE NO. S03486,

RULES REPORT NO. 494, SENATOR HINCHEY (A03862, ROZIC, REYES,

STIRPE, R. CARROLL, SIMON, GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS, HEVESI, DINOWITZ,

SEAWRIGHT, JACOBSON, KELLES, STECK, GLICK, ROSENTHAL, BARRETT, OTIS,

LEE, DAVILA, TAPIA, BURDICK, LEVENBERG, HUNTER, SIMONE, SOLAGES,

GALLAGHER, RAGA, EPSTEIN, LAVINE, CUNNINGHAM, BORES, SHIMSKY,

WOERNER, SANTABARBARA, LASHER, BURROUGHS, ZACCARO). AN ACT TO

AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW AND THE INSURANCE LAW, IN RELATION TO

PROVIDING INFORMATION TO PATIENTS AND THE PUBLIC ON HOSPITAL RULE-BASED

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

EXCLUSIONS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: AN EXPLANATION AS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. ROZIC.

MS. ROZIC: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS LEGISLATION IS TO ENSURE THAT

INDIVIDUAL -- INDIVIDUAL CONSUMERS HAVE ACCESS TO INFORMATION ABOUT

WHETHER A HOSPITAL OR GENERAL HOSPITAL IN THEIR AREA PROVIDES THE CARE

THEY SEEK PRIOR TO ADMISSION, AND TO IDENTIFY HEALTHCARE DESERTS IN

REGIONS OF THE STATE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. JENSEN.

MR. JENSEN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

MY FRIEND FROM QUEENS YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MS. ROZIC: ABSOLUTELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. JENSEN: THANK YOU, MS. ROZIC. AND I DO JUST

HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. LET ME JUST GET MY SCROLL OUT.

IN RESPONSE TO THIS LEGISLATION, WHAT IS THE -- THE

GENESIS OF THE NEED FOR THIS BILL? WHY -- WHY DO WE NEED IT?

MS. ROZIC: WHY DO WE NEED THIS BILL? IS THAT YOUR

QUESTION?

MR. JENSEN: YES.

MS. ROZIC: OKAY. SO, WE'VE HEARD FROM CONSUMERS

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ALL ACROSS THE STATE THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SITUATIONS IN WHICH THEY COME

TO A HOSPITAL AND IT TURNS OUT THE HEALTHCARE SERVICE THAT THEY ARE

SEEKING OR WANT IS ACTUALLY NOT TREATMENT THAT THEY -- OR A SERVICE THAT

THEY ARE GOING TO GET AT THAT HOSPITAL. SO, THIS JUST CREATES TRANSPARENCY

AROUND THAT. AND IF A SPECIFIC HOSPITAL HAS A HOSPITAL-BASED EXCLUSION

IT WOULD BE READILY AVAILABLE TO ANY CONSUMER, PUBLICLY AVAILABLE SO

THEY COULD MAKE THAT INFORMED DECISION BEFORE ENTERING OR GETTING

ADMITTED TO THE HOSPITAL.

MR. JENSEN: SO, IS -- IS THE -- WOULD THE

REQUIREMENTS APPLY TO HOSPITALS THAT THEY MAY HAVE POLICIES FOR THE

ENTIRE HOSPITAL ITSELF OR EVERY DOCTOR WHO PRACTICES WITHIN THE HOSPITAL,

OR IS IT FOR INDIVIDUAL PROVIDERS?

MS. ROZIC: SO THIS APPLIES TO ALL GENERAL HOSPITALS

ACROSS NEW YORK STATE -- I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT --

REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY ARE A RELIGIOUS HOSPITAL OR A SECULAR

HOSPITAL. THIS ALSO REQUIRES FACILITY-LEVEL DECISION-MAKING, NOT

PROVIDER-LEVEL DECISION-MAKING. AND ALTHOUGH SOME HOSPITALS MAY

HAVE MORE HOSPITAL RULE EXCLUSIONS THAN OTHERS, WHETHER OR NOT A

HOSPITAL HAS AN EXCLUSION DOES NOT DEPEND ON THEIR RELIGION OR THEIR

DOCTOR -- THEIR DOCTOR'S PERSONAL BELIEFS.

MR. JENSEN: SO -- SO IF A HOSPITAL WOULD PROVIDE A

MEDICAL SERVICE BUT THEY MAY HAVE ONE DOCTOR WITHIN THE FACILITY THAT

WILL NOT, FOR WHATEVER REASON. SO IT'S NOT A HOSPITAL-BASED EXCLUSION,

BUT IT'S PROVIDER EXCLUSION. WOULD THE HOSPITAL REQUIRED -- BE REQUIRED

TO SUBMIT THAT AS A HOSPITAL-BASED EXCLUSION BECAUSE THERE COULD BE A

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE SOMEBODY COMING IN TO AN EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT

MAY BE TREATED BY THIS PROVIDER WHO DOESN'T PROVIDE A SERVICE THAT THEY

MAY NEED, A MEDICAL TREATMENT THAT THEY MAY NEED?

MS. ROZIC: YEAH. I THINK THAT A FACILITY, A HOSPITAL,

COULD CHOOSE TO LIST THAT ON THEIR WEBSITE AS ONE OF THEIR EXCLUSIONS IF

THEY CHOOSE TO. AGAIN, WE'RE TARGETING MOSTLY THE FACILITY-WIDE POLICY

-- THE HOSPITAL RULE-BASED EXCLUSIONS. I THINK THAT THERE'S ALSO A SECTION

OF THE BILL THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO CREATE REGS

AND RULES, AND IF THOSE SITUATIONS WERE HAPPENING MORE THAN EXPECTED,

WE WOULD ASK THAT THE COMMISSIONER OR THE DEPARTMENT ITSELF COME UP

WITH MORE SPECIFIC REGS OR RULES TO DEFINE THAT.

MR. JENSEN: SO JUST DIGGING DEEPER INTO THAT

QUESTION, SO IF ANYWHERE A MEMORIAL HOSPITAL HAS A DOCTOR, DR. JOHN

DOE, WHO DOESN'T PROVIDE A SERVICE. WOULD THEY -- THEY WOULD HAVE TO

SUBMIT THAT TO DOH AS A POLICY-BASED EXCLUSION. WOULD THE DOCTOR'S

NAME BE PUBLICLY LISTED EITHER ON THE HOSPITAL'S WEBSITE OR THE DOH

WEBSITE?

MS. ROZIC: THE BILL DOES NOT SPEAK TO THAT AT ALL.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY.

DOES THIS BILL JUST SPEAK TO POLICY-BASED EXCLUSIONS

THAT ARE TREATMENT-BASED?

MS. ROZIC: YES. THESE ARE BASED ON HOSPITAL-WIDE

HEALTH SERVICES. THERE -- THERE'S ACTUALLY AN EXEMPTION FOR -- LET ME

JUST READ IT SO THAT I DON'T -- IT SHALL NOT INCLUDE RESTRICTIONS BASED ON

LACK OF EQUIPMENT, AVAILABLE BED SPACE IN THE FACILITY, OR INSURANCE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

DENIAL.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY. SO IF A HOSPITAL, YOU KNOW,

POTENTIALLY A SMALL HOSPITAL ANYPLACE IN THE STATE, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY

TREATMENT-BASED EXCLUSIONS, BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON THEY MAY NOT

OFFER EITHER -- THEY DO NOT OFFER TO PATIENTS KOSHER OR HALAL FOOD.

WOULD THAT HAVE TO BE LISTED AS A EXCLUSION? BECAUSE, I MEAN, PROPER

NUTRITION IS A FORM OF TREATMENT, ESPECIALLY IF, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY,

YOU KNOW, A NO SALT OR LOW SALT, LOW SODIUM DIET WOULD BE IMPORTANT

FOR SOMEBODY WITH A HEART CONDITION.

MS. ROZIC: SO, WE --

MR. JENSEN: WOULD --

MS. ROZIC: GO AHEAD.

MR. JENSEN: WOULD NOT OFFERING CERTAIN DIETARY --

NOT HAVING CERTAIN DIETARY RESTRICTIONS BE COVERED AS A HOSPITAL

POLICY-BASED EXCLUSION?

MS. ROZIC: MEALS ARE NOT GENERALLY CONSIDERED A

TYPE OF HEALTHCARE. SO IN MOST, IF NOT ALL CIRCUMSTANCES, THAT WOULD

FALL OUTSIDE OF THE HOSPITAL RULE-BASED EXCLUSION.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY.

GOING BACK TO THE INDIVIDUAL DOCTOR PROVISION. I

KNOW OUR FORMER COLLEAGUE FROM CHAUTAUQUA COUNTY, WHEN HE

DEBATED THIS BILL LAST YEAR HE RAISED A CIRCUMSTANCE THAT WAS RAISED BY A

MEMBER OF HIS OWN COMMUNITY FROM THE ORTHODOX JEWISH COMMUNITY,

ABOUT HOW SOME JEWISH PROVIDERS MAY NOT PRACTICE -- MAY NOT PROVIDE

NON-LIFESAVING TREATMENT ON THE SABBATH. IF SOMEBODY IS MAKING A

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

DECISION MAYBE TO NOT PRACTICE ON THE SPECIFIC DAY, WOULD THAT FOLLOW

-- WOULD THAT QUALIFY FOR MEDICAL -- OR A HOSPITAL-BASED EXCLUSION?

YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S NOT TREATING ON THE SABBATH, WHETHER IT'S FOR

RELIGIOUS REGIONS -- REASONS, NOT -- IVF OR OTHER REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH

CHOICES BE INCLUDED?

MS. ROZIC: WELL, I'LL SAY ONE OF TWO THINGS: FIRST

IS, TO MY KNOWLEDGE I DON'T BELIEVE THERE ARE HOSPITALS THAT DON'T

PROVIDE NON-EMERGENCY CARE ON THE SABBATH. SO --

MR. JENSEN: IT WOULDN'T BE THE HOSPITAL ITSELF, IT

WOULD BE AN INDIVIDUAL PROVIDER.

MS. ROZIC: AGAIN, IF THE HOSPITAL HAD A POLICY, THEY

WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO DISCLOSE IT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. BUT IT

DOESN'T GO DOWN TO THE PROVIDER LEVEL, THIS IS A FACILITY-BASED QUESTION

AND LIST.

MR. JENSEN: SO --

MS. ROZIC: SO THAT --

MR. JENSEN: SORRY.

MS. ROZIC: SO THAT'S ONE THING I'LL SAY. THE SECOND

THING -- GO AHEAD. I LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT.

MR. JENSEN: NO, SO IT'S -- AND I APOLOGIZE. I

PROBABLY -- I WAS INTERRUPTING YOU AND I CAUSED THAT, SO I APOLOGIZE.

SO IF IT IS JUST A PROVIDER-BASED EXCLUSION, NOT A

HOSPITAL- OR CENTER-BASED EXCLUSION IT WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE SUBMITTED?

INDIVIDUAL PROVIDER DECISION-MAKING WOULD NOT BE A -- A -- NECESSARY

TO REPORT TO DOH.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. ROZIC: CORRECT. AND I WOULD -- I WOULD SAY

THAT A HOSPITAL HAS TO MAKE THAT DECISION AS AN ADMINISTRATOR -- AS AN

ADMINISTRATION. THEY WOULD HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT THEY WANT TO PUT ON

THE LIST OR NOT.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY.

IN THE CONTEXT OF A HOSPITAL, WOULD IT BE WITHIN THE

GENERAL HOSPITAL ITSELF OR IF A MEDICAL CENTER -- SO I'LL USE THE UNIVERSITY

OF ROCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER AS AN EXAMPLE. THEY OPERATE THREE

HOSPITALS WITHIN MONROE COUNTY, BUT IT'S ALL UNDER THE SAME URMC

UMBRELLA. WOULD EACH OF THOSE THREE FACILITIES BE TASKED WITH

REPORTING THEIR OWN POLICY-BASED EXCLUSIONS, IF THEY HAD ANY, OR WOULD

IT BE -- WOULD EACH FACILITY ITSELF -- OR COULD THEY DO IT UNDER THE LARGER

ORGANIZATIONAL UMBRELLA?

MS. ROZIC: I BELIEVE IT'S EVERY GENERAL HOSPITAL.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY. WOULD -- SO WE'VE SEEN A LOT

OF HEALTH SYSTEMS START TO ACQUIRE AND BRING INTO THEIR FOLD

NON-HOSPITAL-BASED SERVICES; URGENT CARES, GENERAL PRACTITIONERS,

PEDIATRICIANS. WOULD THEY BE COVERED UNDER SERVICES THAT ARE NOT

PROVIDED WITHIN A HOSPITAL SETTING BUT UNDER THE LICENSING OF THE

ORGANIZATIONAL ENTITY?

MS. ROZIC: NO. THIS ONLY APPLIES TO GENERAL

HOSPITALS. AND I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT IT IS BECAUSE OF THESE

SPECIFIC MERGERS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAP OUT THE HEALTH SERVICES ACROSS

REGIONS IN THE STATE. I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE HAVE

PASSED THIS BILL PREVIOUSLY. AND ONE OF THE REASONS -- APART FROM

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

RUNNING OUT OF TIME -- THAT THE GOVERNOR ISSUED HER VETO MESSAGE WAS

THAT THERE WAS AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT OF COST TO IT. BUT SHE WAS GOING

BASED OFF THE FACT THAT -- THE SUGGESTION THAT THERE ARE 600 HOSPITALS

ACROSS THE STATE WHEN, IN FACT, THE NUMBER IS A LOT SMALLER. AND NOT --

THIS BILL DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR PUBLIC HEALTH FACILITIES, RESIDENTIAL HEALTH

FACILITIES, NURSING HOMES, DIAGNOSTIC TREATMENT CENTERS, DENTAL CLINICS

AND DISPENSARIES, REHAB CENTERS, MIDWIFERY, BIRTH CENTERS. AND THEN

ANY NUMBER OF OTHER FACILITIES. SO IT ONLY APPLIES TO GENERAL HOSPITALS,

OF WHICH THERE ARE AROUND 200 ACROSS THE STATE.

MR. JENSEN: WHAT -- WHAT IF SOME OF THOSE

ANCILLARY SERVICES ARE LOCATED WITHIN A HOSPITAL, BUT LICENSED

DIFFERENTLY? THEY'RE -- THEY'RE USING -- MAYBE LEASING SPACE FROM THE

HOSPITAL, BUT THEY'RE NOT UNDER THE HOSPITAL'S LICENSE. WOULD THAT

APPLY?

MS. ROZIC: I GUESS IN THAT VERY NUANCED PARTICULAR

SITUATION, I WOULD EXPECT THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WOULD COME

UP WITH AN ADDITIONAL REG OR RULE IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE. IF A HOSPITAL

OR AN ADMINISTRATION FEELS LIKE THERE IS THAT GRAY AREA AND THEY NEED

CLARIFICATION, THAT'S WHEN THE -- THE RULES AND REQUIREMENTS WOULD KICK

IN.

MR. JENSEN: WHAT IS -- IS THERE A DEADLINE -- WHAT'S

THE DEADLINE FOR A HOSPITAL HAVING TO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION TO THE

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH? IS IT JANUARY 1ST OF EVERY YEAR?

MS. ROZIC: IT'S ANNUALLY.

MR. JENSEN: ANNUALLY. SO --

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. ROZIC: AND THAT DOESN'T PRECLUDE SOMEONE

FROM DOING IT MORE THAN ANN -- OR SOONER THAN ANNUALLY. BUT AT

MINIMUM, WE EXPECT THE HOSPITAL TO BE REPORTING ON AN ANNUAL BASIS SO

THAT, AGAIN, CONSUMERS HAVE FULL TRANSPARENCY OF WHAT SERVICES ARE

WHERE.

MR. JENSEN: SO IF DOH SETS THE REGULATION THAT THE

REPORTING DATE IS MAY 1ST, AND SO EVERY HOSPITAL, IF THEY DO HAVE ONE OF

THESE POLICY-BASED EXCLUSIONS, WOULD HAVE TO REPORT BY MAY 1ST. BUT

ON AUGUST 13TH, ANYWHERE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL NOW CHANGES THEIR

POLICY OR ADDS AN EXCLUSION. WOULD THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT MIDCYCLE OR

COULD THEY WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT REPORTING DEADLINE TO SUPPLY THAT

INFORMATION?

MS. ROZIC: AGAIN, AT MINIMUM THEY WOULD HAVE TO

DO IT ANNUALLY, BUT THEY COULD CHOOSE TO DO IT SOONER THAN THAT. AND

THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH COULD COME AND ASK THEM TO DO IT SOONER IF

THAT'S THE CASE, IF THAT IS WHAT THE DEPARTMENT CHOOSES IN THEIR REGS.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY. CERTAINLY -- AND THIS IS -- I -- I

DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS, AND -- AND YOU MAY NOT, EITHER. BUT

WHEN DOH IS GRANTING -- APPROVING A CERTIFICATE OF NEED FOR A

HOSPITAL TO OPERATE, IS THERE A DISCUSSION WITH THE OPERATOR OF THE

FACILITY ABOUT ANY TYPE OF POLICY-BASED EXCLUSIONS THEY ARE -- THEY ARE

-- THEY ALREADY MAY HAVE UPON THE LICENSING OF THE FACILITY?

MS. ROZIC: I'VE NEVER OPENED A HOSPITAL OR STARTED A

HOSPITAL, SO I DON'T KNOW. BUT I'M HAPPY TO INQUIRE AND FIND OUT THE

ANSWER TO THAT.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. JENSEN: AND -- AND NOR HAVE I. ALTHOUGH IN

MY DEBATE WITH OUR FRIEND FROM BROOKLYN LAST NIGHT, I HAVE TALKED

ABOUT JENSEN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AS A -- AN EXAMPLE, AND WE DIDN'T -- I

DIDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS FOR THAT FICTIONAL HOSPITAL, EITHER.

SO, GETTING OFF THE -- THE SPECIFICS OF THE BILL AND HOW

IT WOULD ACTUALLY FUNCTION, DON'T MOST NEW YORKERS, IF THEY'RE NOT

GOING TO A HOSPITAL FOR AN EMERGENCY PURPOSE, BUT THEY MAY BE GOING

FOR A PRESCHEDULED PROCEDURE OR THEIR DOCTOR IS PRACTICING OUT OF THAT

HOSPITAL, WOULDN'T THEY ALREADY HAVE A PREEXISTING RELATIONSHIP WITH

THAT HOSPITAL AND THE PROVIDERS AND THE POLICIES THAT THAT INSTITUTION

HAS?

MS. ROZIC: IN SOME CASES, YES, AND IN OTHERS, NO.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY. OKAY. I THANK MY COLLEAGUE

FOR HER ANSWERS.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. JENSEN: CERTAINLY, I UNDERSTAND AND -- AND CAN

APPRECIATE THE NEED TO HAVE BETTER INFORMATION ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF

-- OF HEALTHCARE ACCESS IN THE STATE. ALTHOUGH, I DO -- I DO BELIEVE, AS I

NOTED TOWARDS THE END, THAT I THINK THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF NEW

YORKERS, WHEN THEY ARE GOING TO A HOSPITAL, THEY ALREADY KNOW WHAT

TYPE OF FACILITY IT IS; WHETHER IT'S A RELIGIOUS-BASED HEALTHCARE FACILITY,

WHETHER THERE ARE SPECIFIC EXCLUSIONS THAT MAY ALREADY BE ON THE

BOOKS. AND THEY'RE AWARE OF THAT EITHER WHEN THEY ARE DETERMINING

WHICH PROVIDER THEY WANT TO BE TREATED BY OR WHICH HOSPITAL THEY

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

WOULD WANT TO BE TREATED BY.

SO I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR INFORMATION, ALTHOUGH I

DO SHARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE ONEROUS NATURE THAT THIS

WOULD PLACE ON THE FACILITIES THEMSELVES, AS WELL AS THE DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH IN HAVING TO MAINTAIN THIS SORT OF DATABASE WHEN WE HAVE

ALREADY SEEN THAT THE DOH HAS QUITE A BIT OF THINGS ON THEIR PLATE.

ADDITIONALLY, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT -- EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT THE INTENT OF

THE LEGISLATION, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT CERTAIN

PROVIDERS COULD BE TARGETED BASED ON WHAT SERVICES THEY DO AND DO NOT

PROVIDE. AND CERTAINLY, THAT -- I WOULD HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THAT IF

DOH INTERPRETS THE TEXT OF THIS LEGISLATION DIFFERENTLY THAN THE

SPONSOR'S INTENT.

SO WHILE I UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR AND

THE REASONING FOR THIS, UNFORTUNATELY THIS WILL BE SOMETHING THAT I THINK

IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I'D BE ABLE TO SUPPORT.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 540TH

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

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

LEGISLATION. IF THERE ARE ANY AFFIRMATIVE VOTES, NOW WOULD BE THE TIME

TO CAST THEM AT YOUR SEATS.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER. THE MAJORITY CONFERENCE IS GONNA BE IN FAVOR OF THIS PIECE

OF LEGISLATION.

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 15, RULES REPORT NO. 504, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A06055-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 504, WOERNER, YEGER, BUTTENSCHON, ZINERMAN, MCDONALD,

HAWLEY, DESTEFANO, GIGLIO, SHIMSKY, GRIFFIN. AN ACT TO AMEND THE

EXECUTIVE LAW, IN RELATION TO PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN VICTIM STATEMENTS

TO BE TAKEN AT THEIR WORKPLACE INSTEAD OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MS.

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

ADVANCED.

AN EXPLANATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. WOERNER.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. WOERNER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, AND

MY COLLEAGUES.

LAW ENFORCEMENT IS TOO OFTEN CALLED TO HEALTHCARE

SETTINGS TO RESPOND TO AN ASSAULT ON ONE OF OUR HEALTHCARE WORKERS.

VERY FREQUENTLY, THE VICTIM OF THE ASSAULT IS INSTRUCTED THAT IF THEY WANT

TO MAKE A REPORT OF THE ASSAULT, THAT THEY NEED TO COME TO THE POLICE

STATION AND MAKE THAT REPORT. AT THE POLICE STATION, THEY CAN WAIT

SEVERAL HOURS WHILE THE RESPONDING OFFICER -- UNTIL THE RESPONDING

OFFICER IS AVAILABLE TO THEM. AND THEY REPORT THAT THEY FEEL VICTIMIZED

A SECOND TIME BY HAVING TO SPEND THAT TIME SITTING IN THE WAITING ROOM

OF A -- A POLICE STATION. AND THE NUMBERS ARE ACTUALLY PRETTY

FRIGHTENING. THE NEW YORK TIMES RECENTLY REPORTED THAT 55 PERCENT OF

ER PHYSICIANS AND 70 PERCENT OF ER NURSES HAVE BEEN PHYSICALLY

ASSAULTED IN THE WORKPLACE, MOST OFTEN BY PATIENTS, AND THAT -- AND THAT

MORE THAN A THIRD OF THOSE RESULTED IN PHYSICAL INJURY.

SO THIS BILL WOULD ALLOW THE VICTIM OF SECOND DEGREE

ASSAULT TO BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHOOSE TO HAVE THAT REPORT TAKEN

WHILE THEY ARE IN THEIR WORKPLACE, RATHER THAN GO TO THE POLICE STATION,

AND TO REPORT THE CRIME AGAINST THEM IN A -- IN A MORE COMFORTABLE

SETTING. WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? BECAUSE BEING ABLE -- BEING ABLE TO

REPORT TO HAVE A RECORD OF THE -- OF THE ACCOUNT IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF

BUILDING -- CERTAINLY BUILDING A CASE, BUT ALSO BUILDING A -- A PATTERN OF

BEHAVIOR IF THIS HAPPENS MORE THAN ONCE. AND WE DON'T WANT TO

DISCOURAGE THE VICTIMS FROM TAKING THE STEP TO REPORT THE CRIME. SO

THIS BILL IS MEANT TO -- TO ADDRESS THE -- THE SHORTCOMINGS IN THE CURRENT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

POLICY AND PROCEDURES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. ANGELINO.

MR. ANGELINO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WILL THE SPONSOR OF THE 113TH DISTRICT PLEASE YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MS. WOERNER: I WOULD BE DELIGHTED TO YIELD.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. ANGELINO: GOOD MORNING.

MS. WOERNER: GOOD MORNING.

MR. ANGELINO: I -- I'VE READ THROUGH ALL OF THIS,

AND I'VE ALSO READ THROUGH THE EXECUTIVE LAW SECTION THAT'S -- THAT'S

GOING TO BE AMENDED. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHO -- WHO IS THIS DIRECTED AT?

IS IT AT THE HOSPITAL AS AN EMPLOYER, OR THE POLICE OFFICERS WHO RESPOND?

MS. WOERNER: SO I WOULD SAY BOTH. I WOULD

CERTAINLY HOPE THAT THE EMPLOYER WOULD INFORM THEIR EMPLOYEES THAT

THEY HAVE THE RIGHT, SHOULD THIS HAPPEN TO THEM. AND AS I SAID, THE

NUMBERS ARE PRETTY SIGNIFICANT. IF YOU WORK IN A HOSPITAL, THIS IS LIKELY

TO HAPPEN TO YOU. THAT THEY, THE HOSPITAL THEMSELVES, WOULD INFORM

THEIR EMPLOYEES OF WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE. BUT I WOULD ALSO HOPE THAT

THE RESPONDING OFFICER WOULD ALSO INFORM THE -- THE VICTIM THAT THEY

HAVE THE OPTION AND TO -- TO ASK THEM WHAT -- WHAT THEIR PREFERENCE

WOULD BE; TO GIVE THE -- TO IMMEDIATELY GIVE THE REPORT OR TO

SUBSEQUENTLY GO TO THE STATION AND -- AND OFFER THE REPORT.

MR. ANGELINO: I WASN'T SURE IF IT WAS DIRECTED

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AT -- BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING HAPPENED SOMEWHERE, AND

EITHER THE HOSPITAL AS AN EMPLOYER DIDN'T WANT THAT HAPPENING IN THE

ER OR IN THEIR WORKPLACE, OR IF IT WAS DIRECTED AT OFFICERS.

MS. WOERNER: YOU KNOW, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR ALL

HOSPITALS OR FOR ALL OCCASIONS. WHAT I CAN SAY IS THAT THE GENESIS OF THIS

BILL CAME FROM CONVERSATIONS WITH EMERGENCY ROOM NURSES AT ONE OF

MY LOCAL HOSPITALS. AND IT WAS DEFINITELY A CASE THAT IT WAS THE -- THE

OFFICER WHO WAS SUGGESTING TO THEM THAT IF THEY WANTED TO MAKE A

REPORT THEY WOULD NEED TO COME TO THE POLICE STATION. I'VE

SUBSEQUENTLY SPOKEN TO EXECUTIVES FROM MANY OF THE UPSTATE

HOSPITALS, AND WHEN I RELAY THIS QUESTION TO THEM AND -- AND ASK THEM

IF THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE EXPERIENCING, THEY'RE ALL NODDING THEIR HEADS

(DEMONSTRATING).

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. I READ THE SECTION OF THE

EXECUTIVE LAW THAT'S CALLED THE FAIR VICTIM WITNESS, YOU KNOW,

SECTION OF THE EXECUTIVE LAW, AND IT'S PRETTY BROAD AND IT CONCERNS ALL

DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND POLICE, VICTIMS. BUT THIS -- THIS AMENDMENT

SEEMS ODDLY SPECIFIC WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH THE BIG BROAD. SO WHO

ARE THE VICTIMS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT HERE? BECAUSE IT JUST SAYS

"VICTIMS."

MS. WOERNER: RIGHT. SO IT'S -- IT'S HEALTHCARE

WORKERS.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY.

MS. WOERNER: SO IT IS THE EMERGENCY ROOM

NURSES, THE EMERGENCY ROOM DOCTORS, THE AIDES. THE VOLUNTEERS,

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

PERHAPS, BUT MOSTLY IT IS THE -- IT IS THE HEALTHCARE WORKER -- WORKERS

THEMSELVES.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. SO X-RAY TECHNICIANS?

MS. WOERNER: ABSOLUTELY. RESPIRATORY

THERAPISTS.

MR. ANGELINO: PHLEBOTOMISTS, WHATEVER.

MS. WOERNER: YES.

MR. ANGELINO: AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, MY WIFE

WAS -- WAS AN RN FOR 30-PLUS YEARS, AND SHE WAS ASSAULTED IN HER

OFFICE WHEN SHE WAS A NURSE PRACTITIONER. A DRUG-SEEKING PERSON

WANTED PAINKILLERS AND SHE SAID TYLENOL WILL DO, AND THAT SET THE

PERSON OFF. SO --

MS. WOERNER: I'M SORRY. THAT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN

TO ANY -- ANYONE, AND IT CERTAINLY SHOULDN'T HAPPEN TO OUR HEALTHCARE

WORKERS.

MR. ANGELINO: SO IN THE -- IN THIS, ANOTHER THING

THAT STANDS OUT THAT'S ODDLY SPECIFIC IS ASSAULT SECOND, WHICH IS A D

FELONY. BUT 642 MENTIONS A WHOLE LIST OF VIOLENT CRIMES. WHY IS IT

ONLY ASSAULT? WHY NOT ROBBERY? WHY NOT GRAND LARCENY?

MS. WOERNER: WELL, BECAUSE WE'RE -- WHAT WE'RE

DEALING WITH HERE ARE THE EXPERIENCES THAT OUR HEALTHCARE WORKERS ARE

HAVING IN THEIR WORKPLACE. AND SO THE ASSAULT 2 CATEGORY INCLUDES,

YOU KNOW, INTENT TO COMMIT PHYSICAL INJURY, CAUSE A SERIOUS PHYSICAL

INJURY. IT IS ACTUALLY IN THE -- IN THE -- IN THE PENAL LAW IT'S ACTUALLY A

PRETTY STRONG CATCHALL DEALING WITH THE KINDS OF PHYSICAL VIOLENCE THAT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

HEALTHCARE WORKERS OFTEN FACE.

MR. ANGELINO: AND MY CURIOSITY FOR ONLY ASSAULT

IS BECAUSE IN THE INSTANCE OF MY WIFE, SHE WAS PUSHED AGAINST THE WALL

AND HELD THERE, AND THE DRUG SEEKER, I -- I'M PRETTY SURE, GRABBED HER

PRESCRIPTION PAD, AND -- WHICH IS A ROBBERY.

MS. WOERNER: TRUE.

MR. ANGELINO: BUT THAT WOULDN'T BE COVERED

UNDER THIS.

MS. WOERNER: NO, BUT PERHAPS THAT'S ANOTHER BILL

WE COULD DO TOGETHER NEXT YEAR.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. THE -- AND I DID NOT LOOK

UP WHAT THE -- THE LAW WAS ON THE DEFINITION OF A HEALTHCARE FACILITY.

SO DOES THIS COVER A DOCTOR'S OFFICE, AN URGENT CARE CLINIC?

MS. WOERNER: IT IS -- THE -- THE -- AN ENUMERATED

FACILITY. SO IT WOULD BE AN ARTICLE 28 FACILITY, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE A

-- CLINICS, DOCTORS' OFFICES -- NO, NOT -- EXCUSE ME, NOT DOCTORS' OFFICES

-- HOSPITALS, NURSING HOMES. AND THEN I ALSO BELIEVE IT DOES INCLUDE

PHYSICIANS' OFFICES, DIAGNOSTIC AND TREATMENT CENTERS.

MR. ANGELINO: AND I'M NOT WELL-VERSED IN

WHATEVER THAT SECTION OF DEFINITIONS OF HEALTHCARE FACILITIES. BUT IS THAT

LIKE A -- I -- I SAW A NURSING HOME IS SPECIFIC IN THERE. HOW ABOUT A

REHAB FACILITY?

MS. WOERNER: A REHAB -- A REHAB FACILITY IS A

NURSING HOME.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. WOERNER: YES.

MR. ANGELINO: THANK YOU. WE HAVE EVERYTHING.

AND I KNOW A LOT OF DEMENTIA PATIENTS BECOME ASSAULTED. THEY NEVER

GET ARRESTED BECAUSE THEY'RE MENTALLY INCOMPETENT --

MS. WOERNER: RIGHT.

MR. ANGELINO: -- FOR THAT. BUT THAT IS A FREQUENT

THING THAT WE DO.

MS. WOERNER: AND I THINK THIS IS ABOUT

RESPECTING THE VICTIM AND -- AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY HAVE AN

OPPORTUNITY TO TELL THEIR STORY TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AND HAVE A RECORD

BUILT OF IT SO THAT IF IT IS -- IF IT IS A REPEAT OFFENSE, THAT IT RISES IN THE --

IN THE LEVEL OF SEVERITY.

MR. ANGELINO: THE -- THIS -- AGAIN, IT DOESN'T SAY

WHO. IT DOESN'T SAY DOCTOR, NURSE, X-RAY TECH. IT JUST SAYS "VICTIM."

BUT WHAT ABOUT WITNESSES IN THE ER? A LOT OF TIMES THERE IS ANOTHER

COWORKER, WITNESSES, ALSO WE'D LIKE TO GET STATEMENTS FROM.

MS. WOERNER: AND -- AND WE WOULD HOPE THAT THE

LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WOULD TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY WITH ALL OF THE --

THE WITNESSES AVAILABLE TO THEM IN THE FACILITY TO -- TO DO THOSE

INTERVIEWS. BUT THE CONCERN THAT WE'RE -- THAT WE'RE FOCUSED ON IS

MAKING SURE THAT THE VICTIM WHO HAS BEEN ASSAULTED IN THE WORKPLACE

DOESN'T FEEL ASSAULTED A SECOND TIME OR VICTIMIZED A SECOND TIME BY

HAVING TO GO AND SPEND HOURS SITTING IN THE WAITING ROOM OF A POLICE

STATION.

MR. ANGELINO: IN THE EXECUTIVE LAW SECTION THAT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

YOU'RE AMENDING, 642, SECTION 4, I HAVE IT RIGHT HERE, BUT THAT REQUIRES

POLICE AND DAS TO EXPLAIN TO EMPLOYERS AND VICTIMS AND WITNESSES

HOW IMPORTANT IT IS. DOESN'T -- DOESN'T THAT SUFFICE IN THE PROSECUTION

PORTION THAT THAT'S ALREADY IN THERE? THAT'S WHY I SAID THIS IS ODDLY

SPECIFIC TO ONE -- ONE CRIME AND ONE PERSON AND ONE WORKPLACE, WHEN

THIS IS ENCOMPASSING ALL. WHY DO WE NEED TO SINGLE THIS ONE

WORKPLACE OUT?

MS. WOERNER: BECAUSE 70 PERCENT OF ER NURSES

AND 55 PERCENT OF ER PHYSICIANS ACROSS THE STATE ARE EXPERIENCING THIS

KIND OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE. SO I WOULD SAY THAT WHEN THE FREQUENCY

OF THIS KIND OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE RISES TO THAT LEVEL, IT'S WORTHY OF

SPECIAL CONSIDERATION.

MR. ANGELINO: I -- I KNOW LIQUOR STORES ARE IN THE

SAME BOAT WHEN PEOPLE COME IN, NEED THEIR ALCOHOL AND DON'T HAVE

THEIR ID OR FOR WHATEVER REASON. BUT THERE -- THERE'S ANOTHER WORKPLACE

THAT EXPERIENCES HIGH ASSAULT AND CONFRONTATION.

MS. WOERNER: AND -- AND AGAIN, A GREAT IDEA. I'M

HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU ON A BILL LIKE THAT NEXT YEAR.

MR. ANGELINO: NO, BAD IDEA. WE DON'T NEED TO

KEEP SINGLING OUT INDIVIDUAL SPECIAL INTERESTS. THE --

MS. WOERNER: I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I DON'T THINK

HEALTHCARE WORKERS ARE A SPECIAL INTEREST.

MR. ANGELINO: THE -- SO HOSPITALS ARE A STATIC

LOCATION. THEY DON'T MOVE. SAME WITH DOCTORS' OFFICES, ALL THESE.

THEY'RE A BUILDING SOMEPLACE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. WOERNER: YES.

MR. ANGELINO: AND THEY'RE DEFINITELY WITHIN

SOMEBODY'S JURISDICTION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.

MS. WOERNER: YES.

MR. ANGELINO: HAVE YOU TALKED TO ANY LAW

ENFORCEMENT OR DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ABOUT THIS?

MS. WOERNER: I HAVE NOT.

MR. ANGELINO: BECAUSE THIS SEEMS BETTER SUITED

THAT A STATIC HOSPITAL IN THE CITY OF NORWICH IS POLICED BY THE CITY OF

NORWICH POLICE DEPARTMENT WHERE AN ER DIRECTOR, OR ED THEY CALL

THEM NOW, EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR, OR EVEN THE HOSPITAL

PRESIDENT COULD REACH OUT TO A LAW ENFORCEMENT EXECUTIVE AND SAY, WE

NEED TO DO THIS. DO WE NEED TO CREATE A LAW STATEWIDE FOR EVERY

HOSPITAL AND EVERY POLICE AGENCY?

MS. WOERNER: I WOULD SAY THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF

THINGS THAT FROM A COMMONSENSE PERSPECTIVE COULD BE HANDLED WITHOUT

A LAW, BUT YET, THEY DON'T GET HANDLED WITHOUT A LAW. AND SO JUST LIKE

ALL THE OTHER ONES THAT WE DO, THIS IS A WAY TO SAY, HERE'S HOW IT SHOULD

WORK, AND HERE'S HOW WE WANT IT TO WORK. AND SO THIS IS THE WAY

YOU'RE GONNA DO IT.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. SO WE HAVE TO CREATE A LAW

FOR THIS.

MS. WOERNER: I WOULD -- I WOULD PREFER THAT WE

DIDN'T HAVE TO, BUT I THINK IT'S -- GIVEN THE FACT THAT THIS IS HAPPENING SO

FREQUENTLY AND FROM THE CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD WITH HEALTHCARE FACILITY

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

EXECUTIVES, IT'S HAPPENING -- THE -- THE ISSUE OF THE VICTIMS HAVING TO GO

TO LAW ENFORCEMENT TO MAKE THE REPORT IS HAPPENING FREQUENTLY ENOUGH

THAT WE -- WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ESTABLISH THE RULES.

MR. ANGELINO: AND THAT'S WHY YOU SHOULD HAVE

CONTACTED NEW YORK STATE ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE. MR.

PHELAN, I'M SURE, WOULD SEND OUT AN E-BLAST TO EVERYBODY SAYING, LOOK

IT, IF WE DON'T START DOING THIS THEY'RE GONNA CREATE A LAW. JUST, YOU

KNOW, BE USER-FRIENDLY. AND WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD NETWORK OF -- OF

COMMUNICATING AMONGST AGENCIES. BUT YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T CONTACT

ANYBODY, JUST -- JUST THE NURSES?

MS. WOERNER: JUST THE HOSPITALS.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. WELL, IT TAKES TWO, AND WE

COULD HAVE MAYBE AVOIDED ALL OF THIS.

WHAT IF -- AND I SEE IT SAYS "MAY" FOR VICTIMS AND IT

SAYS "SHALL" FOR POLICE. SO IT'S UP TO THE VICTIM. BECAUSE SOME OF

THESE VICTIMS WANT TO GO ON OVERTIME AND SAY, AT THE END OF MY SHIFT I

WILL GO IN AND DO THE STATEMENT.

MS. WOERNER: AND PERHAPS THEY DO. THE -- THE

REQUIREMENT IS THAT THE POLICE OFFICERS SAY, YOU HAVE THE OPTION.

WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO TAKE YOUR STATEMENT HERE OR WOULD YOU RATHER DO

IT AT THE END OF YOUR SHIFT, OR WHENEVER, AT THE POLICE STATION. THAT IS

THE -- THAT IS THE COMPLETE REQUIREMENT THAT WE'RE ASKING LAW

ENFORCEMENT TO DO; SIMPLY SAY, YOU HAVE THE OPTION. YOU'RE THE

VICTIM. YOU HAVE THE OPTION. WHICH WOULD YOU PREFER TO DO? IT SEEMS

LIKE A PRETTY SMALL ASK IF YOU --

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. ANGELINO: OH, THERE'S -- THERE'S PLENTY OF

THOSE IN THE EXECUTIVE LAW THAT REQUIRE POLICE TO ADVISE AND THERE'S A

LONG LIST OF THOSE. AND THIS IS JUST ONE MORE THAT WILL ADD TO IT. BUT IT'S

SITUATIONAL AND THEY ADAPT AND THEY KNOW, OKAY, I'M GOING INTO A

HOSPITAL, I HAVE TO DO THIS NOW. BUT IT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. YOU

KNOW, IT SOUNDS LIKE ONE COP AND ONE NURSE SOMEPLACE GOT INTO A SPAT.

MS. WOERNER: I -- I'M SORRY YOU CHARACTERIZE IT

THAT WAY. I CAN ASSURE YOU IT WAS NOT A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL WHO HAD THIS

PROBLEM.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY.

AND VICTIM IS NOT DEFINED. SO IT COULD BE ANYBODY.

MS. WOERNER: YES. A VICTIM COULD BE ANYBODY,

BUT IT IS DIRECTED AT HEALTHCARE WORKERS.

(CONFERENCING)

MR. ANGELINO: AND DO YOU WANT TO FOLLOW UP?

MS. WOERNER: IT IS VERY SPECIFIC IN HERE AS TO WHO

THE VICTIM IS. IT IS A -- IT IS AT THEIR WORKPLACE, PROVIDED THE WORKPLACE

IS THE SCENE OF THE ASSAULT, AND IS A HOSPITAL, EMERGENCY FACILITY,

NURSING HOME OR RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY AS DEFINED IN THIS SECTION IS A

-- OR A FACILITY OR HOSPITAL DEFINED IN MENTAL HYGIENE LAW. SO THEY

HAVE TO BE WORKING --

MR. ANGELINO: RIGHT.

MS. WOERNER: -- IN ONE OF THOSE FACILITIES.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. SO WHAT ABOUT THE TWO

MAINTENANCE GUYS AT A NURSING HOME WHO GET INTO A FIGHT OVER WHO'S

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

USING WHOSE DEWALT BATTERY AND IT COMES TO BLOWS? THEY'RE VICTIMS,

THEY'RE IN THAT WORKPLACE, AND HE WAS ASSAULTED AND IT'S SECOND

DEGREE. SO IT COVERS THESE PEOPLE, TOO, CORRECT?

MS. WOERNER: YES. IT WOULD COVER THOSE PEOPLE,

TOO.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY.

MS. WOERNER: AGAIN, I GO BACK TO 70 PERCENT OF

THE ER NURSES AND 55 PERCENT OF ER DOCTORS ARE BEING ASSAULTED IN

THEIR WORKPLACE. DON'T YOU THINK THAT THAT IS AN IMPORTANT ENOUGH

PROBLEM THAT WE SHOULD PUT SOME FOCUS ON IT?

MR. ANGELINO: I THINK IF IT WAS THAT IMPORTANT WE

WOULD HAVE CONTACTED LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES TO EXPLAIN THIS AND

SHOW THEM THE STATISTICS. AND YOU PROBABLY WOULD HAVE GOT WILLFUL

COMPLIANCE INSTEAD OF THIS. BUT I DO KNOW 100 PERCENT OF LAW

ENFORCEMENT CALLS ARE ALWAYS DIFFERENT. AND WHEN YOU START GETTING

SPECIFICITY IN HERE, IT -- IT DOESN'T FIT. AND THAT'S WHY I GAVE THE

EXAMPLE OF THE TWO MAINTENANCE WORKERS IN A NURSING HOME, BECAUSE

I'M SURE THAT'S HAPPENED SOMEPLACE AND COULD BE HAPPENING NOW.

ASSAULT, SECOND. D FELONY. PRETTY SERIOUS. I DON'T

KNOW WHAT THE SENTENCING IS ON THAT, BUT IT'S A FELONY AND IT'S NOT THE

LOWEST, CLASS E. SO IT'S A D FELONY. AND ALL OF THE EVIDENCE WILL BE

SCRUTINIZED IN THAT. SO WHAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE IS A HANDWRITTEN

STATEMENT TAKEN IN AN ER IN PLACE OF A TYPEWRITTEN STATEMENT, YOU

KNOW, USING A PRINTER IN A POLICE STATION. WHICH DO YOU THINK IS GONNA

GET PICKED APART THE MOST IF THIS COMES TO TRIAL?

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. WOERNER: WELL, I'M OLD ENOUGH TO HAVE

PREDATED COMPUTERS. AND I'M GONNA SAY THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT DID A

GOOD JOB BEFORE COMPUTERS, AND I WOULD FEEL LIKE IT'S PROBABLY PRETTY

TRUE THEY'LL DO A GOOD JOB WHETHER IT'S HANDWRITTEN NOTES OR WHETHER IT'S

TYPEWRITTEN NOTES.

MR. ANGELINO: I -- I, TOO, STARTED WITH PEN AND

PENCIL AND WROTE TICKETS AND STATEMENTS.

I WAS -- LIKE I SAID, I WAS JUST A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT

VICTIM WASN'T DEFINED. WE KNOW BECAUSE WE'RE STANDING HERE TALKING

ABOUT IT. IT'S NURSES, HEALTHCARE WORKERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT IT

JUST SAYS "VICTIM" AND THAT'S BIG AND BROAD AND I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT

THAT.

BUT I THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND I KNOW ALL OF THE

NURSES AND HEALTHCARE WORKERS REALLY APPRECIATE THIS. IT'S AN OPTION FOR

THEM, AND -- YES. YES, I DID THAT. THANK YOU. BUT I -- I APPRECIATE

THIS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MS. WOERNER: THANK YOU.

MR. ANGELINO: MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. ANGELINO: SO IF PEOPLE ARE LISTENING, I -- I

TRIED TO SPEAK SLOWLY TODAY BECAUSE I'M A LITTLE TIRED. PROBABLY THE

ONLY ONE WHO NOTICED WAS OUR STENOGRAPHER AND I KNOW THEY

APPRECIATE IT.

BUT THIS IS A CASE THAT WOULD PROBABLY HAVE BEEN

BETTER SUITED TO BE HANDLED LOCALLY, CASE-BY-CASE. AS I SAID AND AS THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SPONSOR TOLD ME, NO LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY WAS CONTACTED ABOUT THE

STAGGERING NUMBERS OF ASSAULTS. I KNOW IT. EVERY POLICE DEPARTMENT

WITH A HOSPITAL IN THEIR JURISDICTION, I GUARANTEE YOU, HAS A WORKING

RELATIONSHIP ESPECIALLY WITH THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THERE'S

USUALLY A POLICE CAR THERE EITHER WORKING OR THEY'RE SPENDING TIME THERE

BECAUSE THEY KNOW THERE'S FREE COFFEE THERE. THERE'S ALREADY A WORKING

RELATIONSHIP THAT COULD HAVE BEEN JUST ASKED. AND THE ASSOCIATION OF

POLICE CHIEFS [SIC] OR DCJS THROUGH THE ACCREDITATION PROCESS COULD

HAVE DICTATED THIS IN THE ACCREDITATION PORTION. WE DON'T NEED TO CREATE

A LAW THAT SAYS "SHALL" WHEN IT'S DIRECTING POLICE OFFICERS TO DO

SOMETHING, EVEN THOUGH IT'S COMMONSENSE. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS ASK.

YOU KNOW, I -- I FEAR THAT NOW OTHER SPECIAL INTEREST

GROUPS AND OTHER EMPLOYEE GROUPS OR UNIONS WILL START SAYING, WHAT

ABOUT LIQUOR STORES? WHAT ABOUT RETAIL? WHAT ABOUT WALMART AND ALL

OF THESE PEOPLE? I GUARANTEE YOU, OFFICERS ARE TRYING TO BE AS EFFICIENT

AS POSSIBLE. SOME AGENCIES ARE VERY BUSY. THEY WILL GO THERE, MAKE

SURE EVERY -- THERE'S -- WHATEVER THE THREAT IS HAS STOPPED. BUT A CLASS

D FELONY DESERVES THE ATTENTION THAT A CLASS D FELONY SENTENCE WILL

PROVIDE. AND A TYPEWRITTEN STATEMENT WITH DETAIL AT A POLICE STATION

WITH PHOTOGRAPH EQUIPMENT AND OTHER FORENSIC EVIDENCE GATHERING IS

MUCH BETTER THAN TRYING TO DO IT IN A BUSY EMERGENCY ROOM, EVEN IF IT'S

OFF -- AND I'VE DONE IT BEFORE. YOU GO TO THE MED ROOM WHERE IT'S QUIET

AND YOU CAN CLOSE THE DOOR AND TAKE A HANDWRITTEN STATEMENT. WE'VE

DONE IT. WE'LL DO WHICHEVER IS BEST. AND THE VICTIM ALWAYS DICTATES

WHAT IS BEST. WE DON'T DEMAND ANYTHING. THERE ARE BUSY AGENCIES

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THAT SAY, I HAVE TO GO TO THE NEXT CALL. CAN YOU COME TO THE STATION

WHEN WE'RE DONE? AND GENERALLY, AN ER NURSE OR DOCTOR UNDERSTANDS

THAT. THE -- AND IN EXECUTIVE LAW SECTION 642, SUB 4, IT ALREADY

DISTRICTS POLICE OFFICERS AND DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND EMPLOYERS TO WORK

FOR THE BEST INTEREST OF VICTIMS AND WITNESSES. SO THIS JUST ADDS A -- A

VERY SPECIFIC PORTION OF SECTION 642 OF THIS LAW.

YOU KNOW, IN MY EXPERIENCE, AND I'VE HAD A LOT IN

THIS SITUATION, PEOPLE AT A CRIME SCENE ARE USUALLY EXCITED, HYPED UP,

AND WANT EVERYTHING DONE TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW. AND WE'LL

GO THROUGH ALL OF THAT WORK AND WE'LL -- WE'LL TAKE THE STATEMENT AND

WE'LL GATHER THE EVIDENCE. BUT THEN AT THE END OF THE WORKDAY THEY

I WAS TALKING ABOUT IT AND I REALLY DON'T WANT TO DO THIS NOW, AND CAN

WE JUST DROP IT? SO SOMETIMES THAT TIME LAG IS HELPFUL FOR PEOPLE TO

CLEAR THEIR MINDS. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STATISTICS ARE ON THAT, BUT

IT HAPPENS OFTEN ENOUGH THAT I REMEMBER IT.

SO I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO REALIZE THAT THIS IS -- THIS IS

WELL-INTENDED, BUT IT'S FORCING SOMETHING TO HAPPEN THAT DOESN'T REALLY

NEED TO HAVE A LAW CREATED.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. REILLY.

MR. REILLY: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

YIELD?

MS. WOERNER: CERTAINLY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. REILLY: THANK YOU, MS. WOERNER. SO WHEN

READING THE BILL IT'S SAYING ASSAULT. WAS THERE A SPECIFIC INCIDENT THAT

THE ACTUAL ASSAULT WAS COMMITTED AND THE REPORT WASN'T TAKEN?

MS. WOERNER: SO AS I SAID, THE GENESIS OF THIS

WAS A SERIES OF CONVERSATIONS WITH EMERGENCY ROOM NURSES AT A LOCAL

HOSPITAL. BIG ROUNDTABLE CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE

WORKPLACE. THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT MANY STORIES OF ASSAULT; ASSAULT BY

PATIENTS, ASSAULTS BY FAMILY MEMBERS WHO ARE FRUSTRATED. A LOT OF

DIFFERENT SCENARIOS OF WHAT GAVE RISE TO THE ASSAULT. BUT THE -- ONE OF

THE THEMES THAT CAME OUT OF THAT CONVERSATION WAS THAT THEY FELT AS

VICTIMS THAT THE REQUIREMENT THEY WERE -- THAT THEY WERE HEARING FROM

LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT THEY COME TO THE STATION TO GIVE THEIR REPORT, THAT

THEY HAVE TO WAIT IN THE STATION UNTIL THE RESPONDING OFFICER IS FREE --

BECAUSE THEY CAN'T JUST GIVE IT TO ANYBODY, IT HAS TO BE THE RESPONDING

OFFICER -- THAT THAT RE-VICTIMIZED THEM. SO IT WASN'T A SINGLE

EXPERIENCE, IT WAS REPEATED MANY TIMES ACROSS THIS ROOM. I

SUBSEQUENTLY SPOKE TO A GROUP OF HOSPITAL CEOS, RELATED THAT

CONVERSATION. AND AROUND THE TABLE THEY ALL ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THAT'S

WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THEIR HOSPITALS AS WELL.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. SO IN THE -- IN THE LANGUAGE OF

THE BILL IT SAYS -- OF COURSE, REITERATING WHAT WAS ON THE PRIOR DEBATE --

IT SAYS LAW ENFORCEMENT "SHALL", RIGHT? SO IT MEANS THEY HAVE TO TELL

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THEM. IS THERE A PENALTY FOR NOT DISCLOSING THAT?

MS. WOERNER: NO. THERE'S NO PENALTY.

MR. REILLY: ALL RIGHT. WHO'S GONNA MONITOR THAT?

MS. WOERNER: WELL, I WOULD -- I WOULD -- I WOULD

HOPE IN THE LEADERSHIP IN THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY AND THE

LEADERSHIP IN THE HOSPITAL WOULD BOTH BE AWARE OF THAT OBLIGATION, AND

IF IT -- IF IT FAILS TO BE -- THE OFFICER FAILS TO PROVIDE THAT ADVICE THAT

SOMEBODY WILL CALL THEM ON IT.

MR. REILLY: WITHOUT HIGHLIGHTING ONE SPECIFIC

AGENCY OR -- OR HOSPITAL, IN -- IN YOUR OPINION, WITH THE -- WITH YOUR

DISCUSSION WITH THE ROUNDTABLES, WITH THE CEOS AND THE -- THE HOSPITAL

WORKERS, DO YOU THINK THERE'S, LIKE, ONE SPECIFIC AGENCY THAT THIS WAS

AN ISSUE WITH?

MS. WOERNER: NO.

MR. REILLY: THERE WAS MULTIPLE JURIS -- MULTIPLE

JURISDICTIONS?

MS. WOERNER: YES.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. SO WHEN THEY DEFINE -- SO THE

REASON WHY I LED WITH THE WAS IT A CONFIRMED ASSAULT, RIGHT, IS

OFTENTIMES THERE'S AN INCIDENT WHERE SOMEONE, THE LAYPERSON SAYS, I

WAS ASSAULTED, RIGHT? BUT UNDER THE DEFINITION OF ASSAULT, THERE HAS TO

BE PHYSICAL INJURY OR PAIN. AND IF THEY DON'T HAVE THAT PHYSICAL INJURY,

IT WOULD BE HARASSMENT. AND UNDER THE LAW -- UNDER PENAL LAW, POLICE

OFFICERS HAVE TO WITNESS HARASSMENT TO EFFECT A SUMMARY ARREST OR ISSUE

A TICKET, A VIOLATION, RIGHT? A CRIMINAL COURT SUMMONS. SO IF THAT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

DIDN'T -- IF IT DIDN'T HAPPEN IN THE PRESENCE OF THE POLICE OFFICER AND

WHAT THEY'RE BEING DESCRIBED AS AN ASSAULT, TRULY IS DEFINED AS

HARASSMENT, WOULD THIS BE COVERED UNDER THIS LEGISLATION?

MS. WOERNER: IT IS THE -- IT'S WHEN THE OFFICERS

HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE VICTIM WAS ASSAULTED. AND I WOULD ALSO

SAY THAT THE ASSAULT 2 STATUTE INCLUDES INTENT TO CAUSE PHYSICAL HARM.

MR. REILLY: SO THEY WOULD TAKE AN ATTEMPTED --

ATTEMPTED ASSAULT REPORT.

MS. WOERNER: ASSAULT 2 FOR -- FOR HEALTHCARE

WORKERS INCLUDES INTENT.

MR. REILLY: NO, NO, I -- I -- I UNDERSTAND WHAT --

WHAT IT IS. BUT YOU WOULD WANT THEM TO TAKE -- SO IF THEY DON'T HAVE

PHYSICAL INJURY THEY WOULD TAKE A REPORT FOR ATTEMPTED ASSAULT?

MS. WOERNER: I GUESS SO, YEAH.

MR. REILLY: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

MS. WOERNER: THANK YOU.

MR. REILLY: ON THE BILL, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. REILLY: SO THE REASON WHY I RAISED THAT ISSUE

-- AND MY COLLEAGUE WHO WAS DEBATING EARLIER MENTIONED SOMETHING

ABOUT HAVING THIS PERTAIN TO THE ENTIRE STATE. WHEN WE LOOK AT POLICE

DEPARTMENTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE, HE WAS CORRECT IN SAYING THAT SOME

ARE A LOT BUSIER THAN OTHERS. SO I WANT TO JUST GIVE YOU A BRIEF SCENARIO

THAT CAN HAPPEN. BELLEVUE HOSPITAL IN MANHATTAN. TREMENDOUSLY

BUSY. 13TH PRECINCT COVERS IT. RADIO RUNS ALL DAY LONG. NOT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

NECESSARILY ALL SERIOUS CRIMES, BUT THEY STILL HAVE TO RESPOND TO THEM.

AUDIBLE ALARMS, CALLS OF ASSAULTS. POSSIBLE FAKE CALLS OF SHOTS FIRED.

POSSIBLE REAL CALLS OF SHOTS FIRED. THEY RESPOND TO THE CALL OF AN ASSAULT

AT BELLEVUE HOSPITAL. THE NURSE SAYS SHE WAS ASSAULTED. THEY START

TALKING TO THE NURSE AND THEY DETERMINE THAT -- SO (INDISCERNIBLE) ADAM

FROM THE 13TH PRECINCT RESPONDS. THEY'RE HOLDING 25 JOBS ON THE

QUEUE. THERE'S FIVE SECTORS IN THE 13TH PRECINCT. THEY'RE ALL HANDLING

FIVE JOBS AT A TIME. SO NOW THEY GO THERE, THEY INTERVIEW THE NURSE.

TURNS OUT SHE WAS SLAPPED IN THE FACE. THERE'S NO PHYSICAL INJURY.

TECHNICALLY, UNDER THE PENAL LAW, IT'S AN ASSAULT -- I MEAN, IT'S A

HARASSMENT, NOT AN ASSAULT. SHE'S SAYING THAT SHE WAS ASSAULTED.

NORMAL EVERYDAY PEOPLE CHARACTERIZE THAT AS AN ASSAULT. BUT IT'S NOT

TRULY AN ASSAULT UNDER THE LAW. POLICE OFFICERS KNOWING THAT THEY ARE

BACKLOGGED, HOLDING JOBS, WILL OFTEN SAY, ALL RIGHT, LISTEN. I DIDN'T SEE

IT. THERE CAN'T BE AN ARREST ON IT. PLEASE GO TO THE PRECINCT, FILE THE

REPORT. WE HAVE TO GO. WE'RE HOLDING JOBS. THAT'S THE REALITY THAT

HAPPENS EVERY SINGLE DAY. I LIVED IT. I KNOW IT. COULD IT POSSIBLY BE

LIKE, HEY, LET ME SCRATCH OUT THIS REPORT. I'LL DO THE HARASSMENT REPORT.

I'LL HAND IT IN AT THE END OF THE TOUR. THAT'S WHAT WE USED TO DO. TWO

MINUTES IT TAKES TO SCRATCH OUT THE REPORT. EVERYBODY'S HAPPY, THAT'S IT.

IF IT'S TRULY AN ASSAULT, THE REPORT WOULD BE TAKEN THERE.

I THINK THAT THE REASON WHY THE SPONSOR FEELS THAT THE

NEED FOR THIS LEGISLATION IS THERE IS FOR A REASON THAT'S SPECIFIC TO ONE

INCIDENT INVOLVING DEPARTMENTS IN THE AREA. YES, THAT COMMUNICATION

TO THOSE DEPARTMENTS TO CLARIFY THAT WE COULD FIX THIS WITHOUT THIS IS

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

POSSIBLE. BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THAT PIECE

ABOUT "SHALL", IF WE TELL THE VICTIMS THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE THE REPORT HERE

IF IT'S A REAL ASSAULT AND SAY IT'S -- THEY NEED THEM TO COME BACK TO THE

PRECINCT. THE QUESTION I HAVE IS IF THE FURTHER INVESTIGATION REQUIRES

THAT, IF THE VICTIM SAYS NO BECAUSE THEY KNOW ABOUT THIS LAW, WE'RE

NOW GOING TO COMMIT -- WE'RE GONNA NOW CREATE MORE FRICTION BETWEEN

THE POLICE OFFICERS THAT ARE RESPONDING AND TRYING TO CONDUCT THAT

INVESTIGATION AND THE VICTIM. AND POSSIBLY THE ADMINISTRATORS FOR THE

HOSPITAL. SO THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN GET TO A POINT WHERE THIS SHOULD

BE COMMON SENSE. AND I'M HOPING THAT SOME OF THOSE LAW

ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES MAY ACTUALLY HEAR OUR DEBATE HERE AND REALIZE,

OH, WE SHOULD HAVE FIXED THIS. WE CAN CORRECT THIS. BUT, I JUST WANTED

TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE TAKE ON HOW THINGS HAPPEN ON THE STREET, HOW THE

LAW, HOW COMMON FOLK, INDIVIDUALS IN THE PUBLIC, DEFINE ASSAULT. BUT

POLICE OFFICERS KNOW THAT AN ASSAULT HAS TO HAVE A CERTAIN CRITERIA;

OTHERWISE, IT'S JUST HARASSMENT. SO, MADAM SPEAKER, THANK YOU FOR

GIVING ME THE TIME.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 120TH

DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: A PARTY VOTE HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL GENERALLY BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS PIECE

OF LEGISLATION, BUT IF THERE ARE MEMBERS THAT WISH TO VOTE YES, THEY MAY

DO SO NOW AT THEIR SEATS. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER. THE MAJORITY CONFERENCE IS GOING TO BE IN FAVOR OF THIS PIECE

OF LEGISLATION. THERE MAY BE A FEW THAT WOULD DESIRE TO BE AN

EXCEPTION, THEY SHOULD FEEL FREE TO DO SO AT THE THEIR SEAT.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. MEEKS TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. MEEKS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER FOR AN

OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I WANT TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR ON

THIS LEGISLATION. I HEARD ONE OF OUR COLLEAGUES EXPRESS THAT SOME

WOULD BE EXTREMELY BUSY AS IT RELATES TO LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUT I JUST

THINK BACK SOME YEARS AGO WHEN WE WERE FACED WITH A PANDEMIC IN

THIS NATION AND THE STATE OF NEW YORK. WHILE A NUMBER OF US WERE

ABLE TO BE CONFINED TO OUR HOUSEHOLDS, IT WAS THESE NURSES, THESE

DOCTORS, THOSE IN THE EMERGENCY ROOMS, THOSE IN A NURSING FACILITIES

ACROSS THE STATE THAT WERE ON THE FRONT LINE AND PUT IN HARM'S WAY AND

DAY TO DAY THEY'RE OFTEN PUT IN HARM'S WAY. AND I THINK IT'S OUR

RESPONSIBILITY AS LEGISLATORS TO DO WHAT'S IN THE BEST -- BEST INTEREST AND

PROTECT THESE MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY. SO, AGAIN, I WANT TO

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

COMMEND THE SPONSOR AND I WILL BE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. MEEKS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. WALSH TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. SO,

WITH THIS BILL, I -- YOU KNOW, I HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF RESPECT FOR NURSES. I

HAVE A FAMILY MEMBER, MY SISTER'S A NURSE AND HAS WORKED FOR A

NUMBER OF YEARS IN THAT FIELD. I JUST -- I JUST FEEL LIKE THIS BILL, KIND OF

GOING ALONG WITH THE DEBATE THAT WE HAD ON THE BILL, I THINK THAT IT'S --

IT'S A LITTLE TOO MANDATORY FOR MY TASTE. I THINK THAT PROBABLY A LOT OF

POLICE DEPARTMENTS ARE ALREADY WORKING WITH NURSES AND OTHER

PROFESSIONALS LIKE THAT TO TAKE THEIR STATEMENTS. I THINK THAT -- I THINK

THAT THE WAY THAT THE LAW IS RIGHT NOW IS SUFFICIENT AND I DON'T THINK THAT

THERE'S THE REAL NEED TO CHANGE IT, BUT I SAY THAT WITH GREAT RESPECT FOR

THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE. THERE ARE LOTS OF PEOPLE THAT NEED TO FILE

POLICE REPORTS WHO ARE BUSY, WHO ARE ESSENTIAL AND I JUST THINK THAT IF

WE START KIND OF ALONG THIS PATH, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IT -- I THINK IT'S

KIND OF A LITTLE BIT OF A SLIPPERY SLOPE. SO, I'M GONNA VOTE IN THE

NEGATIVE -- I'M GONNA VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. WALSH IN THE

NEGATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

PAGE 28, CALENDAR NO. 149, THE CLERK READ.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A02093-C, RULES

REPORT -- CALENDAR NO. 149, FALL, CUNNINGHAM, BORES, SANTABARBARA,

ALVAREZ. AN ACT TO AMEND THE GENERAL BUSINESS LAW, IN RELATION TO

ENACTING THE "CONSUMER PROTECTION AND AUTOMOTIVE TRANSPARENCY

ACT."

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: AN EXPLANATION'S

BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. FALL.

MR. FALL: THIS LEGISLATION AIMS TO MANDATE

TRANSPARENCY IN AUTOMOTIVE LABELING, SPECIFICALLY FOCUSING ON THE

ACCURATE DISCLOSURE OF MATERIALS USED IN THE INTERIORS OF AUTOMOBILES.

THIS BILL SEEKS TO PREVENT DECEPTIVE MARKETING PRACTICES THAT MISLEAD

CONSUMERS ABOUT THE COMPOSITION OF SEATING SURFACES, STEERING WHEELS

AND GEARS, SHIFTERS IN THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY. IT'S ALL ABOUT PROTECTING

AND INFORMING CONSUMERS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. GANDOLFO.

MR. GANDOLFO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR PLEASE YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. FALL: I YIELD.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. GANDOLFO: THANK YOU. SO, FIRST, WHEN WE

SAY LABELING, DOES THAT INVOLVE A PHYSICAL LABEL INSIDE THE VEHICLE?

MR. FALL: NO.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY.

MR. FALL: IT WOULD JUST ONLY BE ON THE MARKETING

MATERIAL, INCLUDING THE MANUAL OF THE VEHICLE.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. SO, MARKING MATERIALS.

WOULD THAT BE ON -- IF YOU GO TO THE MANUFACTURER'S WEBSITE, GO TO THE

PARTICULAR MODEL AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR INTERIOR OPTIONS, THIS IS

WHERE THAT WOULD APPLY?

MR. FALL: THAT IS CORRECT.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. WHAT ABOUT ON FLYERS,

BROCHURES, SAME THING?

MR. FALL: CORRECT.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. WHAT ABOUT ON THE DEALER

SIDE? IF A DEALERSHIP HAS ANY FLYERS THAT GO ABOUT MAYBE A PROMOTION

THEY'RE RUNNING WITH CERTAIN PACKAGES. WOULD THEY HAVE TO ALSO FOLLOW

-- IF THEY WOULDN'T NORMALLY DISCLOSE THE MATERIALS OF THE MODEL THEY'RE

OFFERING, WOULD THEY NOW HAVE TO FIT THAT ON THERE?

MR. FALL: UNDER THIS LEGISLATION, THEY WOULD HAVE

TO MOVING FORWARD.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. NOW, IN TERMS OF

PREVENTING, I GUESS, MISLEADING, AS WE'RE SAYING, MATERIALS, ADVERTISING

OF THOSE MATERIALS. SO, IF A MANUFACTURER OFFERS A PACKAGE AND SAYS,

THIS IS A LEATHER INTERIOR, THAT HAS TO BE, I GUESS REAL, AUTHENTIC LEATHER;

IT CAN'T BE A VINYL PDC KIND OF MATERIAL?

MR. FALL: CORRECT. THAT HAS TO BE VERY CLEAR. SO,

FOR INSTANCE, IF THEY ARE SAYING THAT THERE'S LEATHER IN THE VEHICLE, THERE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

HAS TO BE LEATHER WHEN IT RELATES TO THE STEERING WHEELS, THE SEATS, OR

ANY INTERACTIVE SURFACES.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. AND WOULD -- WOULD THAT

APPLY TO -- BECAUSE THERE'S CERTAIN LEATHER PRODUCTS, LIKE BONDED

LEATHER, MANY PEOPLE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY CONSIDER THAT LEATHER

LEATHER, IT'S KIND OF PRESSED TOGETHER. WOULD THAT FALL UNDER THE --

WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO ADVERTISE THAT AS A LEATHER INTERIOR?

MR. FALL: THEY WOULD HAVE TO DISCLOSE --

MR. GANDOLFO: THEY WOULD HAVE TO SAY BONDED

LEATHER?

MR. FALL: YES.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. AND NOW VEGAN LEATHER,

WHICH TO ME IS A MISLEADING TERM IN ITSELF - I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE WHAT

IT'S ACTUALLY MADE OUT OF, SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO SPECIFICALLY SAY THIS IS

VEGAN LEATHER?

MR. FALL: CORRECT.

MR. GANDOLFO: DO THEY HAVE TO GO FURTHER AND

SAY WHAT THE COMPOSITION OF THAT PARTICULAR MATERIAL IS?

MR. FALL: I BELIEVE THAT IS SPELLED OUT, BUT THEY

WOULD HAVE TO LIST OUT THE PERCENTAGE AS THEY'RE MARKETING IT.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. SO, THERE'S NO LABELING

THAT GOES -- YOU MIGHT HAVE ANSWERED THIS, I THINK YOU DID, BUT I JUST

WANT TO CLARIFY FOR MYSELF, THERE'S NO PHYSICAL LABEL THAT WOULD GO ON

ANY SURFACE OF THE VEHICLE ITSELF, LIKE YOU'D FIND IN YOUR SHIRT OR IN -- IN

A PAIR OF PANTS WHERE IT SAYS, YOU KNOW, 58 PERCENT COTTON. THIS IS

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

STRICTLY ON THE WEBSITE AND THE MARKETING MATERIALS?

MR. FALL: THAT IS CORRECT, YES.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. OKAY, YOU ANSWERED ALL

OF MY QUESTIONS. I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. PALMESANO.

MR. PALMESANO: YES, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. FALL: I YIELD.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. PALMESANO: THANK YOU, MR. FALL. WHERE

DID -- I'M JUST CURIOUS, WHERE DID THIS LEGISLATION COME FROM? WHAT'S

THE GENESIS BEHIND IT?

MR. FALL: YEAH. SO THERE HAS BEEN ISSUES IN THE

PAST, AND THERE ARE TWO EXAMPLES I CAN CITE, WHERE YOU HAD A SITUATION

WHERE A MERCEDES-BENZ WAS ADVERTISING THAT THEY HAD ARTICLE LEATHER

IN THEIR VEHICLES, BUT IT WAS, IN FACT, GENUINE LEATHER. WE ALL KNOW

ARTICLE LEATHER IS MANMADE - IT'S ARTIFICAL, IT'S NOT REAL LEATHER. OKAY.

HOWEVER, THEY HAD REAL LEATHER ON THE SEATING MATERIAL, BUT NOT ON THE

INTERACTIVE SURFACES. ALL RIGHT, SO THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE. AND THEN

YOU HAD ANOTHER SITUATION WHERE A TOYOTA, YOU KNOW, SAID THAT THEY

WERE USING GENUINE LEATHER, BUT, IN FACT, IT WAS EITHER PARTIAL OR FAUX

LEATHER. SO THIS BILL WOULD CLARIFY THAT SO CONSUMERS AREN'T MISLED.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. PALMESANO: SO HAVE THERE BEEN ANY

COMPLAINTS FILED WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL UNDER THE GENERAL

BUSINESS LAW 350 FOR FALSE ADVERTISING? I KNOW THAT'S IN STATUTE.

HAVE -- HAVE THERE BEEN ANY COMPLAINTS FILED UNDER THAT LAW IN REGARDS

TO THIS THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF?

MR. FALL: NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.

MR. PALMESANO: OKAY. CAN YOU CITE ANY DATA OR

DOCUMENTED CASES WHERE CONSUMERS MAY HAVE SUFFERED ACTUAL

FINANCIAL HARM OR -- AS A RESULT OF POSSIBLE MISLABELED AUTOMOTIVE

MATERIALS?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. FALL: YEAH, SO, NO DATA AVAILABLE.

MR. PALMESANO: OKAY. SO I KNOW THE

MANUFACTURERS, THEY ALREADY DISCLOSE MUCH OF THIS INFORMATION IN THEIR

MANUALS AND WEBSITES. SO THAT'S ENOUGH TO ADDRESS THIS? I MEAN, ARE

YOU SAYING THEY DON'T PUT IT -- THIS INFORMATION IN THEIR DATA ON

WEBSITES?

MR. FALL: NO, IT'S -- THIS JUST MAKES IT VERY CLEAR ON

THE TYPE OF MATERIALS THAT THE MANUFACTURERS USE WHEN IT COMES TO

INTERACTIVE SURFACES WITHIN THE VEHICLE. THAT'S ALL IT IS. JUST MAKING IT

VERY TRANSPARENT.

MR. PALMESANO: OKAY. HAVE YOU HAD AN

ESTIMATED COST TO AUTO MANUFACTURERS THAT MAY BE COMPLYING WITH THIS

-- THIS LABELING AND MARKETING MATERIALS WHERE THESE -- WHAT THE COST

WOULD BE AND WHEN THAT OUGHT TO BE PASSED ONTO THE CONSUMER WITH

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE HIGHER VEHICLE PURCHASE?

MR. FALL: YEAH. SO WHEN THIS BILL WILL GO INTO

EFFECT, I BELIEVE A YEAR AFTER IT'S PASSED AND SO, IT WILL GIVE THE

MANUFACTURERS ENOUGH TIME TO UPDATE WHATEVER MARKETING MATERIAL

THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO UPDATE. ORIGINALLY, THE BILL WAS TO TAKE EFFECT

IMMEDIATELY. BUT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE TOOK INTO ACCOUNT

WHEN WE MADE THE CHANGE.

MR. PALMESANO: ALL RIGHT. IS THIS ALLEGED

MARKETING -- MISLEADING MARKETING, IS IT OCCURRING AT THE MANUFACTURER

LEVEL, AND/OR THE DEALER LEVEL, OR BOTH?

MR. FALL: BOTH.

MR. PALMESANO: ALL RIGHT. SO IT APPLIES TO BOTH

BUT THE PENALTIES ONLY APPLY TO THE MANUFACTURERS, CORRECT? BUT NOT THE

DEALER?

MR. FALL: THAT -- THAT IS CORRECT. IT'S ON A

MANUFACTURER LEVEL.

MR. PALMESANO: ALL RIGHT. SO IF THE

MANUFACTURER IS COMPLYING AND MAYBE THE DEALER PUT SOMETHING OUT, IF

THEY VIOLATED WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO HERE, THEY WOULD NOT BE LIABLE

FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. FALL: LIABILITY WOULD BE ON THE MANUFACTURER.

MR. PALMESANO: SO EVEN IF THE MANUFACTURER IS

MOVING ALONG -- SAY -- SAY THE MANUFACTURERS PUTS IT IN THE MATERIAL

AND SAY THE DEALER MIGHT -- THEY MIGHT SAY, WE HAVE THE SALE ON THIS

VEHICLE, IT'S ALL -- IT'S LEATHER, THIS, THAT, NOW THEY WOULDN'T -- THAT --

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THERE WOULDN'T BE NO RESPONSIBILITY ON THE DEALER; IT WOULD JUST BE ON

THE MANUFACTURER, EVEN IF THE DEALER IS PUTTING OUT MATERIAL? HOW

WOULD THAT WORK?

MR. FALL: I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TO LOOK

AT, FOR SURE.

MR. PALMESANO: WHAT'S THAT?

MR. FALL: WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT PIECE.

MR. PALMESANO: OKAY. ALSO, OBVIOUSLY AUTO

SALES, THEY HAPPEN NATIONWIDE. SO THIS IS ONLY GONNA AFFECT NEW YORK.

HOW WOULD THIS STATE LEVEL REGULATION INTERACT WITH EXISTING FEDERAL

CONSUMER PROTECTIONS AND LABEL LAWS UNDER THE FTC, FEDERAL TRADE

COMMISSION? ISN'T THAT KIND OF CONTRADICTORY AS FAR AS WHAT WE HAVE

AS A FEDERAL LAW AND FEDERAL CONSUMER LAWS WITH THIS BILL? WOULDN'T

THAT BE A KINDA CONTRADICTION AND IF IT'S JUST FOR NEW YORK, ISN'T THAT

GOING TO ADD A COST, OR I MEAN, BECAUSE THEY JUST HAVE TO DO IT FOR NEW

YORK; THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO CHANGE THEIR MANUALS FOR NEW YORK. IF

THEY DON'T WANT TO CHANGE IT FOR ALL THE 49 OTHER STATES, HOW WOULD THAT

WORK?

MR. FALL: SO, AGAIN, I MENTIONED THIS BILL WILL TAKE

ONE YEAR INTO EFFECT -- FOR IT TO BE INTO EFFECT, SO THEY WILL HAVE TIME TO

COMPLY WITH THE LAW. IT'S NOT GOING INTO EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

MR. PALMESANO: ALL RIGHT. AND I -- I SEE WHEN I

WAS READING, THAT YOU CAN'T USE TERMS LIKE LEATHER, BUT YOU'D HAVE TO

USE FAUX LEATHER AND VEGAN LEATHER; IS THAT RIGHT?

MR. FALL: THAT'S CORRECT.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. PALMESANO: AND -- AND I APOLOGIZE, I

SHOULD KNOW THIS. I'VE HEARD OF VEGAN DIETS, BUT WHAT IS -- WHAT

EXACTLY IS VEGAN LEATHER? JUST -- I'M -- JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY.

(CONFERENCING)

MR. FALL: YEAH. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE BILL, I THINK

ON PAGE --

MR. PALMESANO: PAGE 2?

MR. FALL: PAGE 2 --

MR. PALMESANO: YEP. AT THE BOTTOM.

MR. FALL: LINES 30 -- WHAT WAS IT? LINES 17-26, I

WOULD SAY. YOU KNOW, IT'S VERY CLEAR WHAT THE DEFINITION OF LEATHER IS,

PLASTIC, AND -- OR FABRIC, RIGHT? AND SO PRETTY MUCH IF A MANUFACTURER

IS GONNA USE THOSE TERMS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO PUT THAT IN THEIR MANUAL

OR ANY MARKETING MATERIAL.

MR. PALMESANO: ALL RIGHT. SO, AGAIN, JUST TO

CONFIRM THOUGH, 49 OTHER STATES, THEY DON'T HAVE THIS. SO, THEY -- THEY

HAVE THEIR MANUALS AND THEY (INDISCERNIBLE) FOR THEIR VEHICLES, NOW

THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO CHANGE ALL THEIR MANUALS FOR THE ENTIRE COUNTRY?

OR ARE THEY JUST GONNA HAVE TO CHANGE THE MANUALS FOR NEW YORK?

MR. FALL: WELL, YOU KNOW, NEW YORK'S THE

GREATEST STATE, SO, YOU KNOW, I GUESS THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FOLLOW

SUIT ONCE WE DO THIS.

MR. PALMESANO: I APPRECIATE YOUR ENTHUSIASM

FOR NEW YORK. I WISH OUR BUSINESSES AND PEOPLE LEAVING HAD THE SAME

ENTHUSIASM.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

YOU KNOW, I GUESS MY QUESTION TOO, I MEAN, WE'RE

FACING AN AFFORDABILITY CRISIS IN THIS STATE. IS IT REALLY WHAT THE STATE

LEGISLATURE -- THIS -- THE FOCUS ON THIS KIND OF TAKING AWAY FROM THE

AFFORDABILITY CRISIS? I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE PUSH FOR EVS AND THINGS

LIKE THAT ARE -- ISN'T THAT KIND OF A DISTRACTION FROM THIS?

MR. FALL: NO, I DON'T THINK IT IS. I THINK THIS IS

ABOUT JUST PROTECTING AND INFORMING CONSUMERS SO WHEN A CONSUMER IS

GOING TO PURCHASE THE VEHICLE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE WELL AWARE OF WHAT

THEY'RE GETTING READY TO PURCHASE, RIGHT? VERY SIMILAR TO YOU'RE GOING

TO BUY A DRESS SHIRT AND YOU'RE LOOKING FOR 100 PERCENT COTTON DRESS

SHIRT, YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT DRESS SHIRT IS 100 PERCENT COTTON,

RIGHT? SO VERY SIMILAR IN TERMS OF BUYING A VEHICLE WITH THE

APPROPRIATE MATERIALS THAT YOU'RE -- YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.

MR. PALMESANO: SURE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU,

MR. FALL, FOR YOUR TIME. I APPRECIATE IT.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. PALMESANO: YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE, YOU

KNOW, ON THE SURFACE, THIS BILL MAY SOUND HARMLESS, MAY ACTUALLY EVEN

SEEM HELPFUL, BUT I THINK WHEN YOU DIG A LITTLE DEEPER, IT JUST ADDS

UNNECESSARY BUREAUCRACY, BURDENSOME REGULATIONS AND COSTS, THEY WILL

ALL BE PASSED ON TO CONSUMERS WITH HIGHER PRICES AT A TIME WHEN WE

ALREADY HAVE AN AFFORDABILITY CRISIS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK. I THINK

THIS LEGISLATION IS REALLY AN ATTEMPT TO MICROMANAGE OUR AUTO --

AUTOMAKERS ON LABELING AND USING TERMS LIKE VEGAN LEATHER, OR FAUX

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

LEATHER. AND OUR MANUFACTURERS, LET'S BE CLEAR, OUR MANUFACTURERS IN

THE STATE OF NEW YORK ALREADY ARE ON A ROBUST FEDERAL CONSUMER

PROTECTION LAWS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS IS NECESSARY, BECAUSE,

YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THEY SELL AUTO -- AUTOS ACROSS THE COUNTRY. SO YOU

HAVE THAT CONFLICTING WITH THE FEDERAL PROTECTION LAWS, I THINK THE

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS CLEAR ENOUGH. I JUST THINK THIS IS REALLY JUST

GOING TO, YOU KNOW, INCREASE COMPLIANCE COSTS THAT FALL ON THE

CONSUMER. SO JUST TO KIND OF SUM UP, YOU KNOW, THOSE POINTS, I

BELIEVE THIS IS REALLY JUST A GOVERN -- GOVERNMENT OVERREACH INTO THE

PRIVATE SECTOR. IT WILL INCREASE COSTS AND THAT WILL BE PASSED ON TO OUR

CONSUMERS. IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS REALLY A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A

PROBLEM. I THINK IT ALSO - AND WE CAN GET INTO THOSE TERMS LIKE VEGAN

LEATHER OR FAUX LEATHER - IT CAN CREATE SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR FRIVOLOUS

LAW -- LAWSUITS. I THINK IT ALSO DISTRACTS FROM THE REAL SAFETY AND

CONCERNS MOST NEW YORK CONSUMERS ARE FACING. INSTEAD OF FOCUSING

ON AUTO SAFETY, AUTO AFFORDABILITY, INSURANCE REFORM, THIS BILL IS

PRIORITIZING VEGAN LEATHER OR FAUX LEATHER. I THINK WE CAN GO ON AND ON

ABOUT THIS, WHERE THE PROBLEMS ARE WE TALKED ABOUT. I JUST THINK THIS IS

JUST GOING TO BE ANOTHER BURDEN ON OUR MANUFACTURERS. IT'S NOT

NECESSARY BECAUSE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ALREADY HAS STRONG

CONSUMER PROTECTION LAWS AND I JUST THINK, FOR A HOST OF OTHER REASONS,

ALTHOUGH I DO APPRECIATE MY FRIEND'S SUPPORT FOR THE BILL AND HIS

ENTHUSIASM, I THINK HIS INTENTIONS ARE IN THE RIGHT PLACE. I JUST THINK

ULTIMATELY THIS BILL WILL CREATE MORE PROBLEMS, MORE CONFUSION AND

MORE COST FOR THE CONSUMERS AT A TIME THAT THEY DON'T NEED HIGHER COSTS

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

GIVEN THE STATE IS IN AN AFFORDABILITY CRISIS RIGHT NOW. SO, I THANK THE

SPONSOR FOR HIS TIME AND HIS PASSION FOR THE BILL, BUT, MADAM SPEAKER,

ON THIS BILL, I WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS BILL 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.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER,

COLLEAGUES HAVE ON THEIR DESKS AN A-CALENDAR. I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO

ADVANCE THAT CALENDAR.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON MRS.

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

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: IF WE COULD BEGIN BY

TAKING IT UP IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU, MA'AM.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON CONSENT, PAGE 3,

RULES REPORT NO. 596, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00422, RULES REPORT

NO. 596, TAGUE. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

OCCUPANCY TAX IN THE VILLAGE OF CATSKILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. HOME RULE MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS BILL [SIC] 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. A00423, RULES REPORT

NO. 597, TAGUE. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO THE

OCCUPANCY TAX IN THE VILLAGE OF COXSACKIE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU SO MUCH,

MADAM SPEAKER, FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO INTERRUPT OUR PROCEEDINGS VERY

BRIEFLY TO INTRODUCE A GOOD FRIEND OF ERIE COUNTY. AND SO, ON BEHALF

OF MS. MCMAHON, MYSELF AND ALL MEMBERS OF ERIE COUNTY, I WOULD

LIKE TO OFFER THE CORDIALITIES OF THE FLOOR AND WELCOME TO OUR

CHAMBERS, ANGELA MARINUCCI. SHE IS THE CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER OF

THE BUFFALO AND ERIE COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SHE'S ALSO A MEMBER

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

OF THE TOWN OF AMHERST BOARD. CLEARLY, SHE'S A PUBLIC SERVANT. SHE

WORKS REALLY HARD FOR US AND I'M HAPPY THAT SHE'S HERE. I HOPE YOU WILL

GIVE HER ALL THE CORDIALITIES OF THE FLOOR. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON BEHALF OF MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES, MS. MCMAHON, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, WE

WELCOME YOU TO THE CHAMBER AND EXTEND THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR TO

YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE TO YOUR COMMUNITY. WE HOPE

YOU ENJOY THE PROCEEDINGS TODAY. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR JOINING

US.

(APPLAUSE)

THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00423, RULES REPORT

NO. 597, TAGUE. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO THE

OCCUPANCY TAX IN THE VILLAGE OF COXSACKIE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. 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.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00673-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 598, CRUZ, BORES, ROSENTHAL, KELLES, JACKSON. AN ACT TO

AMEND THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW, IN RELATION TO FACILITATING

APPELLATE REVIEW OF RULINGS THAT IMPLICATE ISSUES OF PUBLIC CONCERN.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MS.

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

THIS BILL IS LAID ASIDE.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00761-C, RULES

REPORT NO. 599, R. CARROLL, JONES. AN ACT TO AMEND THE EDUCATION

LAW, IN RELATION TO REDUCING TUITION RATES FOR CERTAIN OLYMPIC ATHLETES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

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

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. A00785-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 600, SOLAGES, SAYEGH, DAVILA, PALMESANO, ZACCARO, CRUZ,

TAYLOR, O'PHARROW, CUNNINGHAM, BUTTENSCHON, KELLES, GIGLIO, MAHER,

MCMAHON, ANDERSON, KASSAY, TORRES, DAIS, BORES, SHIMSKY, RA,

SLATER, GANDOLFO, MCDONOUGH, DURSO, K. BROWN, LUNSFORD,

ROSENTHAL, DESTEFANO, REYES, LEVENBERG, MIKULIN, OTIS,

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS. AN ACT TO AMEND THE EDUCATION LAW, IN RELATION TO

REQUIRING SCHOOLS SAFETY PLANS TO INCLUDE A CARDIAC EMERGENCY RESPONSE

PLAN.

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. A00789, RULES REPORT

NO. 601, BENDETT. AN ACT IN RELATION TO AUTHORIZING JUSTIN FINKLE TO

TAKE THE COMPETITIVE CIVIL SERVICE EXAMINATION FOR THE POSITION OF

POLICE OFFICER AND BE PLACED ON THE ELIGIBLE LIST FOR EMPLOYMENT AS A

FULL-TIME POLICE OFFICER FOR THE ALBANY COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. 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.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

(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. A00953-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 602 WAS PREVIOUSLY AMENDED AND IS HIGH.

ASSEMBLY NO. A01464-A, RULES REPORT NO. 603,

PAULIN, SEAWRIGHT, LUPARDO. AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW

AND THE INSURANCE LAW, IN RELATION TO PROMOTING EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE

OVERSIGHT OF CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES; AND TO REPEAL

CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF SUCH LAW RELATING THERETO.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MS.

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

ADVANCED.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER 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. A01886, RULES REPORT

NO. 604, ROSENTHAL, RAGA, TAYLOR, BURDICK. AN ACT TO AMEND THE

ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE EMERGENCY TENANT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

PROTECTION ACT OF NINETEEN SEVENTY-FOUR AND THE EMERGENCY HOUSING

RENT CONTROL LAW, IN RELATION TO INSPECTION OF MAJOR CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENTS FOR WHICH RENT INCREASES ARE REQUESTED AND IN RELATION TO

EXTENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE RENT STABILIZATION LAW.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THIS BILL IS LAID

ASIDE.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A02643-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 605, SOLAGES, KAY. AN ACT TO AMEND THE EDUCATION LAW,

IN RELATION TO PERMITTING CERTAIN LICENSED ATHLETIC TRAINERS TO PRACTICE IN

NEW YORK STATE OF THEY ARE LICENSED TO PRACTICE IN ANOTHER STATE,

TERRITORY OR COUNTRY.

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.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A02747-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 606 WAS PREVIOUSLY AMENDED AND IS HIGH.

ASSEMBLY NO. A03307-A, RULES REPORT NO. 607,

BORES, BICHOTTE HERMELYN, SAYEGH. AN ACT TO AMEND THE UNIFORM

COMMERCIAL CODE, IN RELATION TO ADDRESSING EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

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.)

MR. BORES TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BORES: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

THE UCC HELPS TO SET UNIVERSAL LAWS THAT MAKE

COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS EASIER, BUT IT HAS TO BE PASSED STATE-BY-STATE.

NEW YORK LAST UPDATED THE MODEL BILL FROM UCC IN 2014 AND THERE

HAVE BEEN A LOT OF ADVANCES IN DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY, DIGITAL CURRENCY AND

THIS BILL BRINGS US UP-TO-DATE WITH WHERE THE REST OF THE STATES ARE, TO

CONTINUE TO MAKE NEW YORK A BETTER STATE FOR DOING BUSINESS. IT'S ALSO

BECAUSE IT'S CHANGING A LOT OF BACKGROUND LAW, BY FAR THE LONGEST BILL

I'VE EVER PASSED AND THE LONGEST ONE I WILL EVER PASS AND SO, I WANT TO

GIVE A SPECIFIC THANK YOU TO OUR STAFF WHO HAVE BEEN WONDERFUL IN

VETTING EVERY PIECE OF THIS. BUT, IT IS A SIMPLE BILL VETTED BY NATIONAL

GROUPS THAT HELP TO MAKE NEW YORK A MORE BUSINESS-FRIENDLY STATE

AND I PROUDLY VOTE YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. BORES IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A03411-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 608 WAS PREVIOUSLY AMENDED AND IS HIGH.

ASSEMBLY NO. A03938-B, RULES REPORT NO. 609,

SMULLEN, BEEPHAN, MIKULIN, PALMESANO, DESTEFANO, BLUMENCRANZ,

TAGUE, DURSO, BLANKENBUSH, SEMPOLINSKI, HAWLEY, BRABENEC,

MORINELLO, MCDONALD, MANKTELOW, JENSEN, DIPIETRO, WALSH, E.

BROWN, ANGELINO, GRAY, NOVAKHOV, MOLITOR, BUTTENSCHON, BARCLAY,

BOLOGNA, SLATER, WILLIAMS, CRUZ, BAILEY, CHLUDZINSKI, K. BROWN,

ZACCARO, GRIFFIN, SIMPSON, WOERNER, RAMOS, MCDONOUGH,

CUNNINGHAM, SEAWRIGHT, KASSAY, DAVILA, JONES, SMITH, MILLER,

LUPARDO, KAY, PAULIN, BERGER, ROMERO, RA, MAHER, CHANG, GANDOLFO,

GIGLIO, LEVENBERG, BENDETT, BROOK-KRASNY, GALLAHAN, PIROZZOLO,

FRIEND, LEMONDES, YEGER, NORBER, HEVESI, OTIS, FITZPATRICK, P.

CARROLL, COOK, HOOKS, FORREST, SIMONE, HYNDMAN, KELLES, BRONSON,

COLTON. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TRANSPORTATION LAW, IN RELATION TO

ENACTING THE "ALEXANDER JOHN SMULLEN TRAFFIC SAFETY MEMORIAL LAW".

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THIS BILL IS LAID

ASIDE.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A03980, RULES REPORT

NO. 610, SIMPSON. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO

EXPENDITURES FOR WARREN COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGES; AND TO AMEND

CHAPTER 368 OF THE LAWS OF 2008, AMENDING THE TAX LAW RELATING TO

AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY OF WARREN TO IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL MORTGAGE

RECORDING TAX, IN RELATION TO EXTENDING THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. 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. A04006-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 611, GANDOLFO. AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 45 OF THE LAWS

OF 1963 RELATING TO INCORPORATING THE BOHEMIA VOLUNTEER FIREMEN'S

BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, AND PROVIDING FOR ITS POWERS AND DUTIES, IN

RELATION TO THE USE OF CERTAIN MONEYS RECEIVED BY SUCH BENEVOLENT

ASSOCIATION AND MODERNIZATION OF CERTAIN LANGUAGE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE CLERK WILL

RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED. 224

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A04127-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 612, STIRPE. AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE AND DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT

OF PUBLIC SERVICE TO CONDUCT A STUDY ON THE DEPLOYMENT OF ENERGY

INTERCONNECTION PROCESSES INTO THE ELECTRICAL GRID.

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.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A04716-C, THE BILL WAS

PREVIOUSLY AMENDED AND IS HIGH.

ASSEMBLY NO. A05477-B, RULES REPORT NO. 614,

DESTEFANO. AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN TO ALIENATE

CERTAIN PARKLANDS FOR USE AS A RECHARGE BASIN AND TO DEDICATE OTHER

LANDS AS REPLACEMENT PARKLANDS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. HOME RULE MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

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. A05493-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 615, DURSO, MCDONOUGH, DESTEFANO, K. BROWN. AN ACT TO

AMEND THE HIGHWAY LAW, IN RELATION TO DEDICATING A PORTION OF THE

STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM TO CHARLIE BUNGER SR.

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.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A05619-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 616, STERN, LEVENBERG, KAY, BUTTENSCHON, BRABENEC,

SMULLEN, GRIFFIN, O'PHARROW, BEEPHAN. AN ACT TO AMEND THE REAL

PROPERTY TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO A REAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SURVIVING SPOUSES OF VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS OR VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE

WORKERS KILLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER 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. A06314-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 617, WIEDER, WOERNER, PAULIN, MAGNARELLI, EICHENSTEIN,

TAYLOR, TORRES, KAY, WEPRIN, WRIGHT, BENEDETTO, RAJKUMAR, LAVINE,

HEVESI, WILLIAMS, ROZIC, BURDICK, R. CARROLL, SAYEGH, COLTON,

ZACCARO, YEGER, BORES, LEVENBERG, KASSAY, LUNSFORD, P. CARROLL,

EACHUS, E. BROWN. AN ACT TO AMEND THE INSURANCE LAW, IN RELATION TO

ENSURING CONTINUED ACCESS TO BACKDROP DEVICES FOR PATIENTS WITH

COCHLEAR IMPLANTS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THIS BILL IS LAID

ASIDE.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A06468, RULES REPORT

NO. 618, TANNOUSIS. AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 759 OF THE LAWS OF

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

1973 RELATING TO THE TRANSFER OF LANDS TO THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GATEWAY NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, IN RELATION TO

THE TIME PERIOD IN WHICH LANDS MAY BE CONVEYED.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER 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. A06480-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 619 WAS PREVIOUSLY AMENDED AND IS HIGH.

ASSEMBLY NO. A06584-B, RULES REPORT NO. 620,

GALLAHAN. AN ACT TO AMEND THE HIGHWAY LAW, IN RELATION TO

DEDICATING A PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM TO TSGT KORY WADE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE CLERK WILL

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

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. A06612, RULES REPORT

NO. 621, BRONSON, GRIFFIN, SHIMSKY, COLTON, SANTABARBARA. AN ACT TO

AMEND THE LABOR LAW, IN RELATION TO PROTECTING CERTAIN EMPLOYEES

FROM A REDUCTION OF WAGES DUE TO THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN THE

INVESTIGATION OF A VIOLATION OF A WORKPLACE VIOLENCE PROTECTION

PROGRAM.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER 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. A06660, RULES REPORT

NO. 622, PALMESANO, BAILEY, SEMPOLINSKI. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX

LAW, IN RELATION TO EXTENDING THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE COUNTY OF

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

STEUBEN TO IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL ONE PERCENT OF SALES AND

COMPENSATING USE TAXES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. 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. A06756, RULES REPORT

NO. 623, KAY, ROZIC. AN ACT TO AMEND THE RETIREMENT AND SOCIAL

SECURITY LAW, IN RELATION TO PROVIDING CERTAIN DEATH BENEFITS TO

CORRECTION OFFICERS, CORRECTION OFFICER-SERGEANTS, CORRECTION

OFFICER-CAPTAINS, ASSISTANT WARDENS, ASSOCIATE WARDENS OR WARDENS

EMPLOYED BY ORANGE COUNTY.

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.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MS. KAY TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. KAY: GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.

AS IT STANDS, OUR RETIREMENT AND SOCIAL SECURITY LAWS

ARE DESIGNED SO THAT IT IS OFTEN MORE PRUDENT FOR CORRECTIONS OFFICERS IN

ORANGE COUNTY TO RETIRE AS SOON AS THEY CAN. THIS IS BECAUSE, IF THEY

DIE BEFORE THEY RETIRE, THEIR FAMILIES DO NOT RECEIVE THEIR FULL DEATH

BENEFITS. I HAVE SPONSORED THIS BILL BECAUSE I DO NOT WANT CORRECTIONS

OFFICERS TO HAVE TO DECIDE BETWEEN DOING THE SMART THING FOR THEIR

FAMILIES AND CONTINUING TO DO IMPORTANT WORK, ESPECIALLY NOW WHEN

WE ARE FACING SHORTAGE OF -- OF CORRECTIONS OFFICERS AND PARTICULARLY

WITH THOSE WITH EXPERIENCE AND INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE. WE NEED TO

PROVIDE ALL THE INCENTIVES WE CAN FOR THESE PROFESSIONALS IN ORANGE

COUNTY TO STAY ON THE JOB. PLEASE JOIN ME IN PASSING THIS BILL FOR THE

BENEFIT OF ORANGE COUNTY AND OUR CORRECTION PROFESSIONALS. 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. A06784, RULES REPORT

NO. 624, PHEFFER AMATO, GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS, ROZIC. AN ACT TO AMEND THE

RETIREMENT AND SOCIAL SECURITY LAW, IN RELATION TO DEATH BENEFITS FOR

ACTIVE NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY MEMBERS.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MS.

PHEFFER AMATO, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

ADVANCED. 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. A06842, RULES REPORT

NO. 625, HAWLEY. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO

EXTENDING THE EXPIRATION OF THE AUTHORIZATION TO THE COUNTY OF GENESEE

TO IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL ONE PERCENT SALES AND COMPENSATING USE TAX.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. 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.)

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A07030, RULES REPORT

NO. 626, MILLER. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO

EXTENDING THE AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF MADISON TO IMPOSE AN

ADDITIONAL RATE OF SALES AND COMPENSATING USE TAXES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. 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. A07251, RULES REPORT

NO. 627, MOLITOR. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO

EXTENDING THE AUTHORIZATION FOR CHAUTAUQUA COUNTY TO IMPOSE AN

ADDITIONAL ONE PERCENT RATE OF SALES AND COMPENSATING USE TAXES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. HOME RULE MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

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.

CONGRATULATIONS, MR. MOLITOR, ON YOUR FIRST BILL.

(APPLAUSE)

THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A07264, RULES REPORT

NO. 628, SEMPOLINSKI. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO

EXTENDING THE EXPIRATION OF THE PROVISIONS AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY OF

ALLEGANY TO IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL ONE AND ONE-HALF PERCENT SALES AND

COMPENSATING USE TAXES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. 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.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A07446, RULES REPORT

NO. 629, BRABENEC. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO

AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY OF ROCKLAND TO IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL RATE OF

SALES AND COMPENSATING USE TAXES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. 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. A07512, RULES REPORT

NO. 630, JONES, CLARK, SCHIAVONI. AN ACT TO AMEND THE VEHICLE AND

TRAFFIC LAW AND THE REAL PROPERTY LAW, IN RELATION TO MANUFACTURED

HOME CERTIFICATES OF TITLE, AND THE CONVEYANCE AND ENCUMBRANCE OF

MANUFACTURED HOMES AS REAL PROPERTY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON -- EFFECT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

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.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A07740, RULES REPORT

NO. 631, LEMONDES. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO

EXTENDING THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE COUNTY OF CAYUGA TO IMPOSE AN

ADDITIONAL ONE PERCENT OF SALES AND COMPENSATING USE TAXES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED. 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. A07770, RULES REPORT

NO. 632, TORRES. AN ACT TO AMEND THE LABOR LAW, IN RELATION TO

REQUIRING THE COMMISSIONER OF LABOR TO PREPARE AN ANNUAL REPORT ON

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE COST OF LIVING, POVERTY RATES AND ADEQUACY OF THE CURRENT MINIMUM

WAGE IN THE STATE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THIS BILL IS LAID

ASIDE.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A07843-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 633, SLATER, MORINELLO, SMULLEN, MCDONOUGH. AN ACT TO

AMEND THE HIGHWAY LAW, IN RELATION TO DEDICATING A PORTION OF THE

STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM TO JAKE ARCARA.

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.)

MR. RA TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

JUST QUICKLY, ON BEHALF OF OUR -- OUR COLLEAGUE, MR.

SLATER, WHO WE -- WE ARE THINKING ABOUT AND GLAD TO SEE HIM ON THE

ZOOM AND ON THE MEND.

(APPLAUSE)

BUT -- BUT, GIVEN -- GIVEN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS BILL,

I DID WANT TO MENTION ON HIS BEHALF THE -- THE PERSON WHO THIS HIGHWAY

WOULD BE DEDICATED TO, NAMED JAKE ARCARA, WAS A HIGHWAY

MAINTENANCE WORKER WHO WAS TRAGICALLY KILLED ON THE JOB BY A MOTORIST

WHO SPREAD -- WHO SPEED THROUGH A CONSTRUCTION ZONE. SO, THIS IS

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

REMEMBERING HIM AND SHOULD BE A REMINDER ABOUT THE DANGERS THAT SO

MANY OF OUR HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE WORKERS FACE WHEN THEY'RE ON

CONSTRUCTION JOBS AND A REMINDER TO ALL OF US TO -- TO SLOW DOWN, PULL

OVER, TO MAKE IT SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE MORE WORKERS THAT ARE INJURED OR

-- OR TRAGICALLY KILLED LIKE THIS INDIVIDUAL WAS. HAPPY TO CAST MY VOTE

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND SENDING MY BEST TO MY FRIEND MR. SLATER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. RA IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08029-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 634, SHIMSKY. AN ACT TO AMEND THE VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC

LAW, IN RELATION TO THE OPERATION OF TRAFFIC-CONTROL SIGNAL PHOTO

VIOLATION-MONITORING DEVICES IN CERTAIN INTERSECTIONS IN THE COUNTY OF

WESTCHESTER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MS.

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

ADVANCED. 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.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08142-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 635, BURDICK. AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 405 OF THE LAWS

OF 2011, RELATING TO AUTHORIZING THE LEASE OF LANDS LOCATED AT THE STATE

UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT PURCHASE, IN RELATION TO THE PERMITTED USE

OF PROCEEDS FROM THE LEASE OF SUCH LANDS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER 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. A08237-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 636, SLATER. AN ACT TO AMEND THE HIGHWAY LAW, IN

RELATION TO DEDICATING A PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM TO

WESTCHESTER PURPLE HEART RECIPIENTS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

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. A08305, RULES REPORT

NO. 637, BERGER, HEVESI. AN ACT TO AMEND THE CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND

RULES, IN RELATION TO EXPENSES IN MATRIMONIAL ACTIONS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

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

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. A08594, RULES REPORT

NO. 638, P. CARROLL. AN ACT TO AMEND THE GENERAL BUSINESS LAW, IN

RELATION TO USED MOTOR VEHICLES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THIS BILL IS LAID

ASIDE.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08702, RULES REPORT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

NO. 639, ROSENTHAL. AN ACT TO AMEND SUBPART A OF PART BB OF CHAPTER

56 OF THE LAWS OF 2021 RELATING TO ESTABLISHING A COVID-19

EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND AMENDING THE STATE

FINANCE LAW RELATING TO ESTABLISHING A COVID-19 EMERGENCY RENTAL

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ALLOCATION FUND, IN RELATION TO EXTENDING THE

EFFECTIVENESS OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THIS BILL IS LAID

ASIDE.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08784, RULES REPORT

NO. 640, BARRETT. AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 465 OF THE LAWS OF 2016,

AMENDING THE TAX LAW RELATING TO AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF HUDSON TO

IMPOSE HOTEL AND MOTEL TAXES, IN RELATION TO EXTENDING 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. A08801, RULES REPORT

NO. 641, PHEFFER AMATO. AN ACT TO AMEND THE RETIREMENT AND SOCIAL

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SECURITY LAW, IN RELATION TO ELIGIBILITY FOR RETIREMENT BENEFITS FOR

CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MS.

PHEFFER AMATO, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

ADVANCED.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER 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.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, IF WE

COULD PLEASE GO BACKWARDS AND TAKE UP RULES REPORT NO. 609 BY MR.

SMULLEN.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: PAGE 5, RULES

REPORT NO. 609, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A03938-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 609, SMULLEN, BEEPHAN, MIKULIN, PALMESANO, DESTEFANO,

BLUMENCRANZ, TAGUE, DURSO, BLANKENBUSH, SEMPOLINSKI, HAWLEY,

BRABENEC, MORINELLO, MCDONALD, MANKTELOW, JENSEN, DIPIETRO,

WALSH, E. BROWN, ANGELINO, GRAY, NOVAKHOV, MOLITOR, BUTTENSCHON,

BARCLAY, BOLOGNA, SLATER, WILLIAMS, CRUZ, BAILEY, CHLUDZINSKI, K.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BROWN, ZACCARO, GRIFFIN, SIMPSON, WOERNER, RAMOS, MCDONOUGH,

CUNNINGHAM, SEAWRIGHT, KASSAY, DAVILA, JONES, SMITH, MILLER,

LUPARDO, KAY, PAULIN, BERGER, ROMERO, RA, MAHER, CHANG, GANDOLFO,

GIGLIO, LEVENBERG, BENDETT, BROOK-KRASNY, GALLAHAN, PIROZZOLO,

FRIEND, LEMONDES, YEGER, NORBER, HEVESI, OTIS, FITZPATRICK, P.

CARROLL, COOK, HOOKS, FORREST, SIMONE, HYNDMAN, KELLES, BRONSON,

COLTON. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TRANSPORTATION LAW, IN RELATION TO

ENACTING THE "ALEXANDER JOHN SMULLEN TRAFFIC SAFETY MEMORIAL LAW".

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: 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.)

MR. SMULLEN TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. SMULLEN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE.

THE "ALEXANDER JOHN SMULLEN TRAFFIC SAFETY

MEMORIAL LAW" IS DONE WITH GRATITUDE. FIRST, TO THE PEOPLE OF THE

STATE OF NEW YORK ASSEMBLED HERE FOR PASSING THIS LEGISLATION

UNANIMOUSLY. AND I SAY THANK YOU TO SPEAKER HEASTIE FOR BRINGING

THIS TO THE FLOOR IN MY NAME AND MY SON'S NAME. I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK

MINORITY LEADER WILL BARCLAY AND CHIEF-OF-STAFF LAUREN O'HARE FOR

MAKING THIS IS A PRIORITY. AND MAJORITY LEADER CRYSTAL PEOPLES-STOKES

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AND THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE DONATE LIFE FAMILY HERE IN THE

ASSEMBLY: PHIL PALMESANO, YUDELKA TAPIA AND OTHERS FOR THEIR

SUPPORT AMONGST THE 77 COSPONSORS, LIKE MY FRIEND CATALINA CRUZ AND

BRIAN MANKTELOW. THIS IS A GOOD BILL, LIKE MY SON WAS. IT'S DONE IN

MEMORY OF ALL OF THOSE WHO'VE BEEN LOST ON OUR HIGHWAYS. I HOPE TO

HELP FAMILIES REMEMBER THEIR LOVED ONES, AS I LOVED MY SON. I THANK

MY COLLEAGUES IN THIS BODY AND MY SENATE COLLEAGUE, PAT FAHY, FOR

PASSING THIS IMPORTANT LEGISLATION IN THE SENATE, HOPEFULLY LATER TODAY.

AND I ASK THE GOVERNOR TO PLEASE SIGN THIS LEGISLATION IN THE

EVERLASTING MEMORY OF ALEXANDER JOHN SMULLEN. MAY GOD BLESS AJ.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

(APPLAUSE)

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. SMULLEN IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

(APPLAUSE)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, I WANT

TO HONOR MY COLLEAGUES. WE'VE ACTUALLY GOTTEN THROUGH QUITE A BIT OF

FLOOR WORK HERE TODAY, BUT WE HAVE A LOT MORE TO GO. AND SO, I'M

GOING TO ASK FOR FOLKS' PATIENCE AND TO STAY AROUND SO WE CAN GET

THROUGH THIS QUICKLY. AND WE'RE GOING TO GO TO OUR DEBATE CALENDAR

AND TAKE UP RULES REPORT NO. 194 BY MR. CARROLL -- R. CARROLL, RULES

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

REPORT NO. 206 BY MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS, RULES REPORT NO. 305 BY MS.

ROSENTHAL, RULES REPORT NO. 315 BY MR. JACOBSON, RULES REPORT NO.

411 BY MR. STECK, FOLLOWED BY RULES REPORT NO. 439 BY MS. TAPIA. IN

THAT ORDER, MADAM SPEAKER. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU. PAGE 6,

RULES REPORT NO. 194, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00174, RULES REPORT

NO. 194, R. CARROLL, ANDERSON, JACKSON, MITAYNES, EPSTEIN, LUNSFORD,

LASHER. AN ACT TO AMEND THE REAL PROPERTY LAW, IN RELATION TO

PROHIBITING RENT MINIMUMS IN MORTGAGES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: AN EXPLANATION HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. CARROLL.

MR. R. CARROLL: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

THIS BILL WOULD PROVIDE AND PROHIBIT -- PROHIBIT ANY

PROVISION IN A MORTGAGE THAT WOULD ESTABLISH A RENT MINIMUM.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. WALSH.

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

SPONSOR YIELD?

MR. R. CARROLL: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD? THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SO THIS BILL IS REALLY KIND OF SHORT. THERE'RE JUST A FEW

LINES TO IT. SEEMS VERY SIMPLE, BUT IT WOULD HAVE A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

IMPACT. CAN YOU EXPLAIN FOR US FIRST KIND OF WHERE THE GENESIS OF THIS

BILL CAME FROM? WHY YOU BELIEVE THAT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT BILL FOR US

TO PASS.

MR. R. CARROLL: WELL, SO, ASSEMBLYMEMBER

WALSH, I WAS READING THE NEW YORK TIMES, WHERE ALL GOOD IDEAS COME

FROM, AND THERE HAS BEEN -- ESPECIALLY IN COMMERCIAL MORTGAGES, THIS

WOULD BE FOR ALL MORTGAGES FOR REAL PROPERTY, BUT WHERE THIS TAKES HOLD

IS REALLY IN COMMERCIAL MORTGAGES. AND OFTENTIMES, THE MORTGAGEE

REQUIRES THAT THERE BE A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF RENT THAT IS TAKEN, OR THERE

IS A PENALTY, OR ACTUALLY, DEFAULT OF THAT MORTGAGE. AND SO, IN LARGE

COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IN MIDTOWN MANHATTAN, TO SMALLER COMMERCIAL

BUILDINGS ON MAIN STREETS OFTENTIMES THE MORTGAGOR HAS A RENT

MINIMUM AND HE OR SHE IS THEN REQUIRED TO RENT THEIR SPACE AT X

AMOUNT PER SQUARE FOOT AND THIS DOES NOT ALLOW INDIVIDUAL BUSINESSES

TO MAKE DECISIONS IN REALTIME, IN WAYS TO GET NEW TENANTS AND TO BE

DYNAMIC. AND SO THIS IS A PRO-SMALL BUSINESS, PRO-BUSINESS BILL AND IT

WOULD MAKE SURE THAT RENT MINIMUMS ARE NO LONGER ALLOWED IN

MORTGAGE CONTRACTS IN NEW YORK STATE.

MS. WALSH: WELL, WHY ARE RENT MINIMUMS PUT IN

THERE TO BEGIN WITH?

MR. R. CARROLL: I -- I THINK THAT OFTENTIMES I

THINK MORTGAGEES ARE LOOKING TO BE VERY CONSERVATIVE IN THE WAY THEY

DECIDE TO LEND MONEY. THAT BEING SAID, THEY HAVE MANY TOOLS AT THEIR

DISPOSAL TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MORTGAGES THAT THEY WRITE ARE PROTECTED.

AND SO, THAT -- YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THIS IS AN UNNECESSARY BARRIER

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THAT STOPS SMALL BUSINESSES AND LARGE BUSINESSES FROM MAKING DYNAMIC

CHANGES. THIS BECAME READILY APPARENT DURING THE COVID-19

PANDEMIC WHEN THERE WERE LOTS AND LOTS OF VACANCIES THROUGHOUT OUR

STATE IN BUSINESS DISTRICTS IN CITIES, BOTH BIG AND SMALL, WHERE IF THESE

RENT MINIMUM PROVISIONS WERE NOT IN THE CONTRACTS, INDIVIDUAL OWNERS

OF COMMERCIAL SPACE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO RENT OUT PROPERTY THAT

THEY HAD -- THAT THEY HAD TENANTS WHO WANTED TO -- TO LEND TO.

MS. WALSH: AND I NOTICED IN THE JUSTIFICATION

PORTION OF THE MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT, YOU DO TALK ABOUT THE

COVID-19 PANDEMIC, BUT HERE WE ARE IN 2025, YEARS AFTER THE

PANDEMIC, AND YET YOU STILL BELIEVE THAT A BILL THAT WOULD MAKE

CHANGES LIKE THIS IS STILL WARRANTED AND NECESSARY?

MR. R. CARROLL: RENT MINIMUMS STOP AND PUNISH

SMALL BUSINESSES FROM BEING ABLE TO GO OUT INTO THE MARKET AND

ACTUALLY GET TENANTS TO RENT SPACE. THIS DOES NOT ALLOW A TENANT OR -- OR

A MORTGAGOR SUDDENLY TO NOT PAY THEIR MORTGAGE. IT DOESN'T ALLOW THEM

TO BREAK THE TERMS OF THEIR MORTGAGE. WHAT IT DOES IS ALLOWS THEM TO

GO OUT TO THE OPEN MARKET AND MAKE A BUSINESS DECISION THAT THEY ARE

CLOSE TO. AND SO, I THINK IT WAS -- IT WAS SHOWN TO BE AN ISSUE DURING

COVID-19, BUT IT IS STILL AN ISSUE TODAY AND THAT IS WHY I'VE INTRODUCED

THE BILL AND WHY I HOPE WE PASS IT HERE TODAY.

MS. WALSH: WHAT THE BILL DOES DO, THOUGH, IS THAT

STATEWIDE -- NOT JUST IN NEW YORK CITY, BUT STATEWIDE, WHAT IT DOES IS

IT LOOKS AT EVERY SINGLE CONTRACT AND MORTGAGE ALREADY EXECUTED,

RECORDED AND IN EFFECT, THAT CONTAINS A PROVISION, LIKE THE ONE THAT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, WOULD BE VOID AND UNENFORCEABLE AS AGAINST

PUBLIC POLICY. SO, JUST A FEW LINES IN A BILL, BUT IT -- IT WOULD HAVE BOTH

A RETROACTIVE AND A PROSPECTIVE EFFECT, CORRECT?

MR. R. CARROLL: LOOK, THAT IS CORRECT, BECAUSE

EVEN THOUGH IT DOES NOT EXPLICITLY SAY THAT IT WILL RETROACTIVELY EFFECT

MORTGAGES, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT IF WE ARE STRIKING THIS

PROVISION AS AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY, THAT WOULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF THAT.

LET ME JUST MAKE THIS VERY CLEAR. THESE ARE ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY IN

COMMERCIAL MORTGAGES AND IT DOES NOT STOP. YOU KNOW, IT -- IT DOES

NOT ALLOW THE BORROWER TO SUDDENLY NOT PAY THEIR MONTHLY MORTGAGE.

WHAT IT DOES IS GIVE THE MORTGAGOR THE ABILITY TO FIGURE OUT HOW BEST TO

USE HIS OR HER SPACE AND HOW BEST TO COLLECT RENT, AND THAT SEEMS LIKE

THE BETTER WAY, THE PERSON WHO IS CLOSER TO IT, THAN HAVING A BANK

DECIDE TO PUT IN A -- A CLAUSE THAT, YOU KNOW, WAS BOILERPLATE THAT THEY

PUT IN EVERY SINGLE COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE AND PUT A NUMBER TO IT AND

THEN THE ACTUAL PERSON WHO'S TRYING TO RENT THE SPACE IS ENCUMBERED

AND CAN'T BECAUSE THEY WILL EITHER AUTOMATICALLY DEFAULT, OR THEY WILL

GET A HIGH PENALTY THAT WOULD END UP CAUSING THEM PROBABLY TO DEFAULT.

MS. WALSH: COULDN'T THEY JUST GO BACK TO THE BANK

AND RENEGOTIATE THAT TERM?

MR. R. CARROLL: YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT MAYBE IF

YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, A LARGE FINANCIAL INSTITUTION OR A LAW FIRM IN

MIDTOWN MANHATTAN, YOU MIGHT HAVE THE SOPHISTICATION AND THE ABILITY

TO DO THAT. BUT, IF YOU'RE A SMALL STRIP MALL, YOU KNOW, ON WOLF ROAD,

OR YOU HAVE A SMALL COMMERCIAL BUILDING IN ALBANY, I DON'T THINK

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE POWER OR THE ABILITY TO DO THAT AND THAT'S WHY

WE SHOULD STEP IN AND MAKE SURE THAT STOPS. SO THAT INDIVIDUAL

BUSINESSPEOPLE CAN GO OUT AND MAKE THESE DECISIONS AND I THINK THERE

WILL BE ZERO, YOU KNOW, ADDED LIABILITY TO THE -- TO THE MORTGAGEES, TO

THE BANKS THAT HAVE WRITTEN THESE LOANS BECAUSE, OF COURSE, YOU STILL

OWN -- YOU STILL OWE ALL OF THAT MONEY ON YOUR MORTGAGE ONCE WE PASS

THIS.

MS. WALSH: I UNDERSTAND. THE UNITED STATES

CONSTITUTION HAS A CONTRACTS CLAUSE IN ARTICLE 1, SECTION 10 AND THAT

CLAUSE SAYS THAT IT PROHIBITS STATES FROM ENACTING LAWS THAT IMPAIR THE

OBLIGATION OF CONTRACTS. HOW IS THIS LEGISLATION NOT RUNNING AFOUL OF

THE CONTRACTS CLAUSE OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION?

MR. R. CARROLL: I -- I THINK EVERY DAY IN THIS

HOUSE AND THROUGHOUT THE YEARS THERE'S GOOD CASE LAW THAT SAYS -- THAT

STATES WHEN IT COMES TO A MATTER OF PUBLIC POLICY, ARE ABLE TO ENCUMBER

CONTRACTS AND I THINK THAT THIS IS CLEARLY A PLACE WHERE WE -- WE STAND

ON FIRM GROUND TO -- TO DO JUST THAT.

MS. WALSH: I APPRECIATE YOUR ANSWERS TO MY

QUESTIONS.

MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: ON THE BILL.

MS. WALSH: WHILE I APPRECIATE THE INTENTION -- THE

GOOD INTENTION OF THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION TO TRY TO CREATE BETTER

CONTRACTS THAT WILL HELP TO ENCOURAGE SMALLER BUSINESSES TO BE ABLE TO

LOCATE IN COMMERCIAL AREAS, I JUST THINK THAT THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT WAY TO

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

GO. I -- I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL. I DO THINK THAT IT

VIOLATES THE CONTRACTS CLAUSE AND PROBABLY IT WILL BE TESTED, I WOULD

THINK, IF THIS DOES ACTUALLY PASS. FROM -- FROM THE LOOK THAT I'VE GIVEN,

THE SENATE HAS GOT THIS BILL IN SENATE JUDICIARY. WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE

BREAKING IN A COUPLE OF DAYS; WE DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THIS IS GOING TO BE

A TWO-HOUSE SITUATION, OR IF THIS IS JUST A BILL THAT'S GONNA PASS THIS

HOUSE AND JUST KIND OF END THERE FOR THIS YEAR. BUT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN,

THERE'S NO QUESTION, BECAUSE WE SAY IT ALL THE TIME AND IT'S BEEN SHOWN,

THAT NEW YORK STATE HAS THE ABSOLUTE WORST BUSINESS CLIMATE IN THE

ENTIRE NATION. SO, HOW DO WE MAKE THAT BETTER? IS THIS THE WAY TO

MAKE IT BETTER? I -- I WOULD SAY, NO. I DON'T THINK THAT HAVING THE STATE

STEP IN AND KIND OF UNILATERALLY INTERFERE WITH EXISTING CONTRACTS

BETWEEN, I WOULD SAY, PRETTY SOPHISTICATED INDIVIDUALS. WE'RE NOT

TALKING ABOUT RESIDENTIAL CONTRACTS; WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL

CONTRACTS. TO HAVE THE STATE COME IN AND SAY, ALL RIGHT, IF YOU -- IF YOU

HAVE AN EXISTING MORTGAGE THAT'S ALREADY EXECUTED, IT'S ALREADY BEEN

RECORDED, IT'S ALREADY IN EFFECT, WE'RE GONNA -- WE'RE GONNA CLAW --

CLAW INTO THAT CONTRACT AND WE'RE GOING TO STRIKE OUT AS VOID AND

UNENFORCEABLE AS AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. PROVISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT

IN AND MAYBE -- MAYBE THEY ARE BOILERPLATE, BUT THERE'S AN AMOUNT

THAT'S PUT IN THAT SAYS, YOU HAVE TO AT LEAST CHARGE NO LOWER THAN THIS

AMOUNT. WE'RE GOING TO GO IN AND WE'RE GOING TO SAY, WE DON'T LIKE

THAT PORTION OF THOSE CONTRACTS, ALL THE CONTRACTS, IN THE ENTIRE STATE.

SO, WE'RE GOING REACH IN AND WE'RE GONNA -- WE'RE GONNA JUST CHANGE

THAT AND PURPORTEDLY TO HELP SMALL BUSINESS. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

WAYS THAT THIS STATE COULD GO ABOUT HELPING SMALL BUSINESS -- ANY

BUSINESS IN OUR STATE. I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS GOING TO HAVE ANY

SIGNIFICANTLY POSITIVE EFFECT FOR BUSINESS, AND I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF

OTHER THINGS THAT WE COULD BE DOING AS A BODY TO HELP SMALL BUSINESS.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE NEED -- I DON'T THINK WE NEED THIS BILL. I DON'T

THINK IT'S CONSTITUTIONAL. I DON'T THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA AND I THINK THAT IF

IT IS PASSED, I THINK THAT IT -- IT WOULD CAUSE A MASSIVE AND POSSIBLY

UNMANAGEABLE CASCADE OF BAD CONSEQUENCES. THE LENDERS THEMSELVES

ARE CONTRACTUALLY BOUND TO THIRD-PARTY LENDERS THROUGH A BOND COVENANT

AND ET CETERA, TO ADHERE TO THOSE TERMS AS WELL.

SO, I THINK FOR ALL OF THOSE REASONS, I WILL BE VOTING IN

THE NEGATIVE ON THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION, AS I REALLY BELIEVE THAT WE ALL

SHOULD. SO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: MR. CARROLL.

MR. R. CARROLL: ON THE BILL, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: ON THE BILL.

MR. R. CARROLL: LIMITING BORROWER FLEXIBILITY,

WHETHER IT IS FOR COMMERCIAL SPACE OR IN A LARGE APARTMENT BUILDING,

HURTS AVERAGE NEW YORKERS AND IT ACTUALLY HURTS BOTH BUSINESS AND

INVESTMENT IN OUR STATE. BY ALLOWING THE OWNERS OF THESE PROPERTIES TO

GO OUT AND CHARGE THE RENTS THAT THE MARKET WILL BEAR, THAT IS HOW WE

WILL HELP EASE OUR HOUSING CRISIS, THAT IS HOW WE WILL EASE SOME OF THE

COMMERCIAL ISSUES WE'VE HAD IN DOWNTOWNS THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

THIS ALLOWS FOR BORROWER FLEXIBILITY. THIS IS A GOOD BILL. I HOPE THAT

MY COLLEAGUES WILL VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, AS I. THANK YOU SO MUCH,

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: YOU'RE

WELCOME, MR. CARROLL.

MR. STECK.

MR. STECK: ON THE BILL, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: ON THE BILL.

MR. STECK: SO, EVERY SEVERAL YEARS I HAVE TO

ADDRESS A PROBLEM, WHICH IS THE USE OF THE CONSTITUTION, NOT FOR WHAT IT

MEANS, BUT TO SUPPORT SOMEONE'S NOTION OF WHAT IT SHOULD MEAN.

UNFORTUNATELY, THE IMPAIRMENT OF OBLIGATION OF CONTRACTS CLAUSE HAS A

COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PURPOSE THAN WHAT WAS CITED HERE TODAY. THE

IMPAIRMENT OF OBLIGATION OF CONTRACTS CLAUSE PREVENTS US AS

GOVERNMENT FROM VOID -- VOIDING PRIVATE CONTRACTS WITH THE STATE. SO,

IF WE DECIDE WE DON'T LIKE A CONTRACT THAT SOME CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

MADE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, WE CAN'T PASS A BILL

VOIDING IT. THAT'S WHAT THE IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACTS CLAUSE DOES. IT

HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BILL BEFORE THIS HOUSE AND IT IS

WELL-ESTABLISHED IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW THAT WE DO HAVE THE POWER TO

ENGAGE IN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL REGULATION. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: MS. BAILEY.

MRS. BAILEY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD FOR ONE QUESTION?

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

MR. CARROLL: I YIELD.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MRS. BAILEY: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I JUST HAVE A -- I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. HOW DOES

THIS RELATE TO ASSIGNMENTS OF RENTS AND LEASES ON MANY COMMERCIAL

CONTRACTS OR COMMERCIAL MORTGAGES WHEN AN ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS AND

LEASES IS FILED IN CONJUNCTION WITH SAID MORTGAGE?

MR. R. CARROLL: THE ASSIGNMENT OF A RENT TO THE

BANK?

MRS. BAILEY: THE ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS OR LEASES IN

REAL -- REAL PROPERTY LAW IN WHICH THE -- THE MORTGAGEE COULD THEN,

YOU KNOW, PROCEED WITH FORECLOSURES OR WHATEVER, OR IT WOULD ALLOW

THEM WHEN THERE IS A DEFAULT IN PAYMENT ON -- ON A MORTGAGE PAYMENT

THAT THEY WOULD THEN RECOUP THOSE RENTS DIRECTLY.

MR. R. CARROLL: YOU KNOW, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT

THIS -- THIS BILL DOES NOT SPEAK TO THE ASSIGNMENT. IF I GO TO CONTRACT AS

A BORROWER WITH A BANK AND I SAY THAT I AM GOING TO ASSIGN X RENT TO

THE BANK FOR X YEARS IN LIEU OF A MORTGAGE PAYMENT, I -- I -- THAT IS NOT

WHAT THIS STOPS. WHAT THIS STOPS IS INSIDE MOST COMMERCIAL MORTGAGES,

THEY PUT A MINIMUM SQUARE FOOT: I MUST RENT, YOU KNOW, $100 A

SQUARE FOOT OF -- FOR RETAIL SPACE, OR FOR COMMERCIAL OFFICE SPACE. I

THEN AM PENALIZED OR I IMMEDIATELY DEFAULT IF I LET THAT SPACE FOR, LET'S

SAY, $95 A SQUARE FOOT. IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT I HAVEN'T MISSED A

MORTGAGE PAYMENT AND SO THAT -- WE WOULD VOID THOSE CLAUSES, BUT THIS

HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ASSIGNMENT OF RENT IN LIEU OF A MORTGAGE

PAYMENT OR IN THE CASE OF DEFAULT. AND THIS BILL HAS NOTHING DO WITH

DEFAULT OF MORTGAGES. THAT, OF COURSE, WILL STILL GOVERN ALL COMMERCIAL

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AND RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGES.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: MR. YEGER.

MR. YEGER: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ON THE BILL, PLEASE.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: ON THE BILL.

MR. YEGER: THANK YOU.

MY UNDERSTANDING AND I AM A TENANT, NOT A -- NOT

LANDLORD AND NOT A BORROWER IN MORTGAGES AND NOT VERY WEALTHY, IS THAT

VERY SOPHISTICATED PEOPLE ENTER INTO MORTGAGE AGREEMENTS WITH REGARD

TO COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. THEY ARE DOING THEM, GENERALLY SPEAKING,

ARM'S LENGTH TRANSACTIONS; THEY NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH. BANKS THAT PUT

RENT MINIMUMS IN THEIR MORTGAGES ARE DOING SO TO ENSURE NO DEFAULT.

THE BANKS ARE MAKING A DECISION THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO LEND

SOMEBODY, LET'S SAY, A MILLION DOLLARS FOR A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, WITH

A GENTLEMAN WHO BORROWED THE MONEY, IS THEN GOING TO GO AND RENT THE

PROPERTY OUT FOR A DOLLAR A YEAR AND THEN TURN AROUND TO THE BANK AND

SAY CAN'T PAY YOU BACK. THAT EFFECTS THE MORTGAGE MARKET, THAT EFFECTS

THE BOND MARKET, THAT EFFECTS THE ECONOMY IN GENERAL AND THAT EFFECTS

THE BLIGHT THAT THIS BILL IS APPARENTLY INTENDED TO -- TO HANDLE. AND I

RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH THE NOTION THAT ALL GOOD IDEAS COME FROM

THE NEW YORK TIMES, I DON'T THINK THAT'S TRUE, NOT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD,

AT LEAST, WE DON'T THINK THAT.

THE CONSTITUTION WAS REFERENCED SEVERAL TIMES TODAY

ON THIS FLOOR AND -- AND THE PREVIOUS HOUSE WHERE I SERVED. I FOUND

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MYSELF SOMETIMES GETTING UP AND I'M NOT A -- NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL

EXPERT BY ANY MEANS, BUT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 10 ARE PRETTY CLEAR.

THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT INTERFERE WITH A CONTRACT THAT WAS ALREADY

ENTERED. IF WE DO THINK THIS IS GOOD POLICY, IT COULD BE PROSPECTIVE FOR

MORTGAGES ENTERED INTO AFTER THE DATE OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE STATUTE.

BUT, FOR US TO PASS A LAW THAT WOULD THEN VOID CONTRACTS ENTERED INTO, AT

ARM'S LENGTH, BETWEEN SOPHISTICATED PARTIES, BECAUSE WE THINK IT'S A

GOOD IDEA, IS NOT A GOOD IDEA AND IT'S NOT CONSTITUTIONAL AND I CAN'T VOTE

FOR A BILL THAT IS NOT CONSTITUTIONAL IN MY VIEW. BECAUSE THE OATHS THAT

WE TOOK REQUIRE US TO SAY, I WILL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED

STATES. I INTEND TO VOTE NO ON THIS. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: A PARTY VOTE

HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. WALSH.

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

REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS PIECE OF

LEGISLATION. IF THERE ARE THOSE WHO WISH TO VOTE AFFIRMATIVELY, THEY

MAY DO SO NOW AT THEIR SEATS. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: MS. SOLAGES.

MS. SOLAGES: THE MAJORITY CONFERENCE WILL BE

VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND THOSE WHO WISH TO VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE

CAN DO SO AT THEIR DESKS.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: 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 6, RULES REPORT NO. 206, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A02581-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 206, GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS, EPSTEIN, BURDICK, R. CARROLL,

BARRETT, KIM, HEVESI, DINOWITZ, SAYEGH, O'PHARROW, LUNSFORD, REYES,

BRONSON, CLARK. AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW, IN RELATION TO

THE CREATION OF A WOMEN'S AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES

EDUCATION AND OUTREACH PROGRAM.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: AN EXPLANATION

HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS.

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: OKAY.

THIS BILL WOULD REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO

CONDUCT AN EDUCATION AND OUTREACH PROGRAM RELATED TO WOMEN'S HEALTH

AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES AVAILABLE IN THE STATE INCLUDING BUT

NOT LIMITED TO PREVENTATIVE CARE, CANCER SCREENINGS, ACCESS TO SERVICES

SUCH AS CONTRACEPTIVES AND PREGNANCY TESTING, TESTING AND TREATMENT FOR

STIS AND ANY OTHER REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CONDITION OR INFORMATION

DEEMED APPROPRIATE BY THE COMMISSIONER.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: MS. WALSH.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

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

SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: ABSOLUTELY.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SO, FIRST OF ALL, I WANTED TO JUST ASK YOU -- SO LAST YEAR,

2024, TUCKED IN THE BUDGET WAS A NEW REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM AND

EQUITY GRANT PROGRAM WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. AND THAT WAS

INTENDED TO AND I'M QUOTING, "PROVIDE FUNDING TO ABORTION PROVIDERS

AND NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE OR FACILITATE ACCESS TO

ABORTION CARE, SPECIFICALLY BY INCREASING ACCESS TO ABORTION CARE,

FUNDING UNCOMPENSATED ABORTION CARE AND ADDRESSING THE SUPPORT

NEEDS OF INDIVIDUALS ACCESSING ABORTION CARE." SO, HOW DOES THIS PIECE

OF LEGISLATION WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY JIVE WITH WHAT WAS PASSED LAST

YEAR?

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: SO THIS PIECE OF

INFORMATION -- THIS LEGISLATION IS SIMPLY AROUND PROVIDING EDUCATIONAL

MATERIALS FOR OUTREACH AND EDUCATION FOR THE PUBLIC. SO IT DOES NOT

CREATE ANY SOURCE OF FUNDING. IT DOESN'T -- IT -- IT WILL PERHAPS INCLUDE

INFORMATION ABOUT THE REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM AND EQUITY FUND, BUT

THERE'S NO SEPARATE FUNDING MECHANISM CREATED THROUGH THIS. IT'S

SIMPLY EDUCATION OUTREACH. ACTUALLY, CODIFYING WHAT MOSTLY ALREADY

EXISTS ON THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WEBSITE.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. SO, WHY -- WHY DO WE NEED --

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BECAUSE I KNOW THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ALREADY HAS EXISTING A

HEALTHCARE AND WELLNESS EDUCATION AND OUTREACH PROGRAM, WHY DO WE

NEED THIS ON TOP OF THAT?

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: THIS BILL INCLUDES

REQUIRED INFORMATION THAT HAS TO BE INCLUDED. IT INCLUDES

CONTRACEPTIVES, PREGNANCY TESTING, TESTING AND TREATMENT FOR STIS AND

ANY OTHER REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CONDITION OR INFORMATION DEEMED

APPROPRIATE. AGAIN, THERE IS AN EXISTING WEBSITE, BUT IT REALLY -- IT

CODIFIES A REQUIREMENT TO KEEP THAT AND ENSURE THAT IT'S MAINTAINING

BEST PRACTICES AND KEEPING UP-TO-DATE WITH MEDICAL SCIENCE.

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

NOW, YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR EXPLANATION OF THE BILL

THAT THERE WERE CERTAIN THINGS THAT WERE SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT THAT

WOULD BE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF -- I JUST WANT TO GET IT IN FRONT OF ME, I'M

SORRY. YOU SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED AND I'M LOOKING AT PAGE ONE, LINE

AROUND 8, 9, IT TALKS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT ACCESS TO SERVICES SUCH AS

CONTRACEPTIVES, PREGNANCY TESTING, SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED INFECTIONS AND

THEN IT SAYS, "AND ANY OTHER REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CONDITION OR

INFORMATION THE COMMISSIONER SHALL DEEM APPROPRIATE." SO, WOULD --

WOULD YOU ANTICIPATE THAT THAT WOULD INCLUDE ABORTION SERVICES?

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: YES.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD. I MEAN,

NOT VERY GOOD IN MY VIEW, BUT I UNDERSTAND YOUR ANSWER.

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: IT'S -- IT'S PROVIDING

INFORMATION THAT ANY SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED IN NEW YORK STATE, AND

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THEN ALSO ALLOWING FOR LINKS TO RESOURCES AND HOW TO PAY FOR THOSE

SERVICES AND PROVIDE -- FIND PROVIDERS WHO PROVIDE THAT CARE.

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

AND HOW MUCH -- I MEAN, THIS LEGISLATION SETS OUT

WHAT IT SETS OUT, BUT DOESN'T IT THEN, SORT OF, WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO USE

THE WORD ABDICATE -- DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE COMMISSIONER OF THE

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO THEN CREATE IMPLEMENTING LANGUAGE AND

PROGRAMS AROUND IT; IS THAT ACCURATE?

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: IT REQUIRES THEM TO

PROVIDE INFORMATION ON THE WEBSITE AND PROVIDE OTHER MATERIALS AND

THAT CAN INCLUDE PAMPHLETS, AND YOU KNOW, SIGNAGE, ET CETERA.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD.

I THINK THAT THAT PRETTY MUCH COVERS THE QUESTIONS THAT

I HAD. THANK YOU SO MUCH AND MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: ON THE BILL.

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

SO, VERY BRIEFLY, THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION

HAS OPPOSITION BECAUSE ALTHOUGH IT DOESN'T USE THE WORD "ABORTION"

SPECIFICALLY, IT HAS A PHRASE IN IT "AND ANY OTHER REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH

CONDITION" WHICH, AS THE SPONSOR INDICATED, IS LIKELY TO BE INCLUDING

ABORTION. SO, THERE ARE GROUPS AND ORGANIZATIONS THAT BELIEVE THAT THE

LANGUAGE OF THE BILL STRONGLY INDICATES THAT ABORTION AND MAKING

APPOINTMENTS FOR CHEMICAL ABORTIONS WILL BE AMONG THE TOPICS COVERED

BY THE PROPOSED PROGRAM AND IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH THROUGH DEBATE, THAT

THAT -- THAT WE'VE ESTABLISHED THAT THAT IS GOING TO BE WITHIN THE SCOPE

100

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

OF IT. AND FOR THAT REASON -- AND -- AND ALSO, THERE'S SOME -- SOME FOLKS

THAT REALLY BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A REDUNDANT ATTEMPT TO SPEND TAXPAYER

MONEY TO PROMOTE ABORTION.

SO, FOR THOSE REASONS, THERE WILL BE, I WOULD SAY,

OPPOSITION TO THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION BECAUSE OF IT. YOU KNOW,

ARGUABLY, WHAT WE -- WHAT WE PASSED LAST YEAR THROUGH THAT BUDGET BILL,

WHICH WAS A08806-C IN THE BUDGET, THAT ESTABLISHED THAT REPRODUCTIVE

FREEDOM AND EQUITY GRANT PROGRAM WITHIN THE DOH, THAT THAT -- THAT

WENT FAR ENOUGH AND THAT WE -- IT WOULD BE REDUNDANT TO ALSO HAVE THIS

LEGISLATION, WHICH AGAIN, MIGHT NOT USE THE TERM "ABORTION" FRONT AND

CENTER, BUT IS DEFINITELY WITHIN THE SCOPE OF WHAT THE BILL IS LOOKING TO

DO.

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

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

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: THANK YOU,

MS. WALSH.

MS. GIGLIO.

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

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: YES.

MS. GIGLIO: THANK YOU.

SO, IN THIS HEALTH EDUCATION AND OUTREACH PROGRAM,

WILL THERE ALSO BE LITERATURE AND OUTREACH AND EDUCATION ON PRO-LIFE AND

101

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

LIFE CENTERS THAT WILL EDUCATE PEOPLE ON HOW TO SOURCE -- RESOURCES THAT

ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM IF THEY DECIDED THAT THEY WANTED TO KEEP A CHILD

BUT THEY HAD CONCERNS THAT THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT, OR TO

AFFORD DIAPERS, OR, YOU KNOW, I -- I KNOW THAT WE -- I HAVE A LIFE CENTER

IN MY DISTRICT. SO, I'M -- I'M JUST CURIOUS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEIR

LITERATURE WOULD BE PUT OUT AS WELL.

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: WELL, IT'S NOT POLITICAL, IT'S

REALLY SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION AND IT'S BUILT UPON AN EXISTING PROGRAM

THAT PROVIDES NUMEROUS INFORMATION ABOUT EVERYTHING FROM BREAST

CANCER, MAMMOGRAPHY, CERVICAL CANCER SCREENING, FOLIC ACID

SUPPLEMENTS, STI SCREENING, GESTATIONAL DIABETES FOR SCREENINGS OF

PREGNANT WOMEN. SO THERE'S A LOT OF SUPPORT PROVIDED IN THE INITIAL BILL

THAT WE'RE ADDING TO THAT PROVIDES RESOURCES AND -- AND INFORMATION FOR

PREGNANT PEOPLE.

MS. GIGLIO: OKAY.

SO WILL ONE OF THE HEALTH EDUCATION AND OUTREACH

PROGRAMS INCLUDE OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO KEEP A CHILD AND

RESOURCES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM FOR THAT PURPOSE?

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: THERE'S RESOURCES

AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE PREGNANT.

MS. GIGLIO: BUT WILL IT BE PART OF THE EDUCATION AND

OUTREACH --

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: IT'S ALREADY EXISTING IN

EXISTING LAW.

MS. GIGLIO: OKAY.

102

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SO IF I WERE TO CALL DOH AND SAY, I NEED SOME

LITERATURE, I'M PREGNANT AND I WANT MY OPTIONS, THEY WILL SEND OUT

BOTH?

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: YES, IT INCLUDES

INFORMATION ABOUT PREGNANCY COUNSELING.

MS. GIGLIO: OKAY. THANK --

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: AND THE FULL RANGE. I

WANT TO BE CLEAR.

MS. GIGLIO: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 90TH

DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: A PARTY VOTE

HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. AS I

MENTIONED EARLIER, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WILL GENERALLY BE IN THE

NEGATIVE ON THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION. IF THERE ARE ANY AFFIRMATIVE VOTES,

THEY CAN BE CAST NOW AT THE DESK. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: YOU'RE

WELCOME.

MS. SOLAGES.

MS. SOLAGES: THE MAJORITY CONFERENCE WILL BE

VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THOSE WHO WISH TO VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE CAN

103

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

DO SO AT THEIR DESKS.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: THE CLERK WILL

RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MS. GONZALEZ-ROJAS TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: THANK YOU. I WANT TO

THANK THE SPEAKER FOR ALLOWING ME TO BRING THIS BILL FORWARD.

AGAIN, THIS IS REALLY AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL INDIVIDUALS

TO ENSURE THAT THEY HAVE THE PROPER INFORMATION AND RESOURCES TO GET

THE HEALTHCARE THAT THEY NEED. IN A WORLD WHERE WE'RE SEEING ATTACKS

AND EROSION OF REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS AND ACCESS TO THE FULL RANGE OF

REPRODUCTIVE HEALTHCARE ACROSS THE COUNTRY, THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSING

INFORMATION. AND IN NEW YORK STATE WHERE WE'RE FIGHTING TO ENSURE

THAT EVERYONE HAS ACCESS TO THE REPRODUCTIVE CARE THEY NEED, NO MATTER

WHAT, THAT WE ARE PROVIDING THAT INFORMATION IN RESOURCES AVAILABLE IN

MULTIPLE LANGUAGES AND ACROSS THE STATE.

SO I'M PROUDLY VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND I HOPE

MY COLLEAGUES DO AS WELL. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: MS.

GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

PAGE 9, RULES REPORT NO. 305, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A03038-B, RULES

104

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

REPORT NO. 305, ROSENTHAL, DAVILA, KELLES, WALKER, SHIMSKY, REYES,

BURDICK, STECK, PAULIN, OTIS, HEVESI, TAYLOR, YEGER, GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS,

LEVENBERG, SEAWRIGHT, ALVAREZ. AN ACT TO AMEND THE GENERAL

BUSINESS LAW, IN RELATION TO ESTABLISHING A RIGHT OF ACTION FOR CLAIMS

ARISING OUT OF COERCED DEBTS.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: ON A MOTION BY

MS. ROSENTHAL, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

ADVANCED.

AN EXPLANATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. ROSENTHAL.

MS. ROSENTHAL: THIS -- SORRY -- THIS BILL

ESTABLISHES PROCEDURES FOR VICTIMS OF COERCED DEBT TO DISPUTE SUCH

COERCED DEBT WITH CREDITORS AND HOLD THEIR ABUSERS LIABLE FOR DEBTS

INCURRED DUE TO ABUSE. NINETY-NINE PERCENT OF SURVIVORS HAVE REPORTED

EXPERIENCING ECONOMIC ABUSE WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND 52 PERCENT

OF SURVIVORS HAVE COERCED DEBT WITH 46 PERCENT REPORTING CREDIT

DAMAGE. SURVIVORS OFTEN DO NOT LEAVE ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIPS BECAUSE

THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO BECAUSE OF THE COERCED DEBIT AND SO THIS BILL

ESTABLISHES PROCEDURES FOR THEM TO DISPUTE THE DEBT AND HOLD THEIR

ABUSERS LIABLE.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: MR. MIKULIN.

MR. MIKULIN: THANK YOU. WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YES.

105

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: THE SPONSOR

YIELDS.

MR. MIKULIN: FIRST OFF, GIVEN THAT IDENTITY THEFT IS

ALREADY DEFINED AND ADDRESSED UNDER NEW YORK STATE LAW, IS IT

NECESSARY TO INCLUDE THIS NEW LEGISLATION?

MS. ROSENTHAL: OKAY. SO COERCED DEBT AND

IDENTITY THEFT ARE -- ARE DIFFERENT. AND THERE IS A PROCESS FOR IDENTITY

THEFT VICTIMS TO FOLLOW. FIRST, IT'S -- IDENTITY THEFT IS INSUFFICIENT TO

ADDRESS COERCED DEBT. WITH COERCED DEBT THE SURVIVOR IS AWARE AND

OFTEN HAS TO CONSENT UNDER DURESS OR THREATS OF ACTUAL HARM. WITH

IDENTITY THEFT MOST OFTEN THE PERSON WHO IS USING SOMEONE'S PERSONAL

INFORMATION TO -- TO BUY THINGS, DOESN'T KNOW THE SURVIVOR. SO IT'S --

IT'S -- IT'S A DIFFERENT KIND OF (INDISCERNIBLE).

MR. MIKULIN: OKAY. AND -- AND SHOULD CREDITORS

BE EXPECTED TO INVESTIGATE PERSONAL MATTERS --

MS. ROSENTHAL: I CAN'T -- SORRY. I CAN'T -- I CAN'T

HEAR YOU.

MR. MIKULIN: SHOULD CREDITORS BE EXPECTED TO

INVESTIGATE PERSONAL MATTERS SUCH AS SPOUSAL SPENDING OR

DISAGREEMENTS EVEN THOUGH THEY LACK THE TOOLS OR AUTHORITY TO -- TO DO

SO?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW, I'M SORRY, I CAN'T

HEAR THE SECOND HALF. SORRY.

MR. MIKULIN: EVEN THOUGH THEY -- EVEN THOUGH

THEY LACK THE TOOLS OR AUTHORITY TO DO SO?

106

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

(CONFERENCING)

MS. ROSENTHAL: NO. CREDITORS IN OTHER STATES

HAVE THE ABILITY TO INVESTIGATE AND -- BECAUSE IT'S LAW IN OTHER STATES.

HERE, WHEN WE ESTABLISH THIS AS LAW, THEY WILL DEVELOP PROCEDURES SO

THEY CAN INVESTIGATE AND ACTUALLY PURSUE THE DEBT OF THE PERSON WHO

CREATED THE DEBT INSTEAD OF THE SURVIVOR.

MR. MIKULIN: AND COULD FORGIVING DEBT THAT ISN'T

DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO COERCION UNINTENTIONALLY CREATE A LOOPHOLE OR

ENCOURAGE MISUSE OF THE LAW?

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, DURING THE CREDITORS

DELIBERATION ON -- ON THE DEBT THERE IS AN INVESTIGATION PROCESS. BUT

SURVIVORS HAVE SO MUCH TO CONTEND WITH AND SUCH A TRAUMATIC LIFE,

ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY TRY TO LEAVE THEIR ABUSIVE SITUATION, THAT THEY

DON'T TRY TO SLIP OUT OF THINGS. THEY HAVE WAY TOO MANY THINGS TO

CONTEND WITH IN LIFE THAN TO PRETEND THAT IT'S NOT THEIR DEBT.

MR. MIKULIN: AND COULD THE CURRENT LANGUAGE OF

THE BILL ALLOW DEBTORS TO CLAIM ECONOMIC ABUSE IN CASES WHERE THERE IS

NO ACTUAL COERCION INVOLVED, POTENTIALLY UNDERMINING CREDITOR RIGHTS

AND -- AND OBLIGATIONS? AND CONTRACTURAL OBLIGATIONS, I SHOULD SAY.

MS. ROSENTHAL: NO, NO. THAT -- THAT -- THAT

WOULDN'T HAPPEN. THAT'S NOT REALLY A LOOPHOLE. THAT WOULDN'T HAPPEN.

MR. MIKULIN: COULD SOMEONE LIE AND SAY THEY

WERE ABUSED OR HAD THEIR IDENTITIES STOLEN JUST TO GET OUT OF PAYING A

DEBT THAT THEY REALLY OWE?

MS. ROSENTHAL: THERE -- THERE IS -- SORRY. THERE

107

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

IS AN INVESTIGATION BY THE CREDITOR TO FIGURE OUT HOW THESE DEBTS WERE

INCURRED. AS I SAID, IT'S -- IT'S -- IT'S VERY RARE, IF IT HAPPENS AT ALL, THAT A

SURVIVOR WOULD LIE. AND IN A NATIONWIDE STUDY, 99 PERCENT OF

SURVIVORS REPORTED EXPERIENCING ECONOMIC ABUSE WITHIN DOMESTIC

VIOLENCE. AND 52 PERCENT OF DEVELOP -- OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SURVIVORS

HAD COERCED OR FRAUDULENT DEBT. SO, THIS IS -- THIS IS --

MR. MIKULIN: OKAY, BUT -- BUT THAT DOESN'T --

MS. ROSENTHAL: -- THIS IS A PHENOMENON THAT

UNFORTUNATELY ACCOMPANIES DOMESTIC VIOLENCE WAY TOO OFTEN AND

SURVIVORS DO NOT TRY TO ESCAPE BY LYING -- ESCAPE THEIR DEBTS.

MR. MIKULIN: WELL, BUT I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT

SURVIVORS, I'M TALKING ABOUT JUST A PERSON IN GENERAL.

MS. ROSENTHAL: I CAN'T --

MR. MIKULIN: I'M TALKING ABOUT A PERSON IN

GENERAL, NOT NECESSARILY SURVIVORS OF DOMESTIC ABUSE, BUT SOMEBODY

JUST CREATING THIS SCENARIO TO GET OUT OF A DEBT, NOT NECESSARILY THAT THEY

ARE VICTIMS --

MS. ROSENTHAL: OKAY. WELL --

MR. MIKULIN: -- BUT BECAUSE THIS -- THIS BILL, IF I

READ IT CORRECTLY, I MEAN, ALL YOU REALLY HAVE TO DO IS -- IS FILL OUT AN --

AN AFFIDAVIT, SO THERE CAN BE A LOT OF FALSE AFFIDAVITS FILLED OUT.

MS. ROSENTHAL: I MEAN, IF SOMEONE JUST MADE IT

UP AND LIED AND WAS A TERRIBLE PERSON, THE CREDITOR WOULD NOT FIND ANY

EVIDENCE TO BACK UP THE CLAIM THAT THIS IS A COERCED DEBT.

MR. MIKULIN: BUT COULD THIS BILL MAKE HARDER NOW

108

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

FOR HONEST PEOPLE TO BORROW MONEY IF LENDERS GET WORRIED THAT THEY

WONT BE ABLE TO GET PAID BACK?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I DON'T THINK SO. THERE IS A

ROBUST PROCESS THAT CREDITORS CAN GO THROUGH FIRST. THEY CAN

INVESTIGATE THE CLAIM. IF IT'S DETERMINED THAT IT'S COERCED DEBT, THEN THIS

BILL SETS OUT A PROCESS BY WHICH THE CREDITOR GOES AFTER THE ABUSER WHO

CREATED THIS DEBT AND THEN THEY CAN GO GET THE DEBT THROUGH COURT AND

GET PAID BACK.

MR. MIKULIN: BUT THEN, WHY ISN'T THIS BILL SINGLY

FOCUSED ON THE VIOLENCE ASSOCIATED WITH THE COERCED DEBT?

MS. ROSENTHAL: WITH THE WHAT?

MR. MIKULIN: THE VIOLENCE ASSOCIATED WITH THE

COERCED DEBT. WHY ISN'T THAT THEN THE SOLE FOCUS OF THIS BILL?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I MEAN, ECONOMIC ABUSE IS A

DIFFERENT ASPECT, IT GOES ALONG WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, BUT IT'S -- IT'S A

WHOLE DIFFERENT ASPECT OF THIS SITUATION.

MR. MIKULIN: BUT COULDN'T IT BE THAT YOU'LL BE

FORGIVING DEBT HERE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH COERCION?

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, THEN IT'S NOT -- I MEAN,

COERCED DEBT IS COERCION. THAT'S -- THAT'S THE POINT OF THE INVESTIGATION;

TO DETERMINE IF IT IS COERCED DEBT. AS IN, THE SURVIVOR IS -- THEIR

INFORMATION IS USED BECAUSE OF UNDUE INFLUENCE OVER A PERSON'S

FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR OR DECISIONS. AND THERE ARE MANY

WAYS THAT AN ABUSER THREATENS, COERCES, INTIMIDATES THE PERSON THAT THEY

ARE IN A RELATIONSHIP WITH. AND ONE OF THE WAYS IS THROUGH FORCING

109

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THEM TO SIGN CREDIT CARD APPLICATIONS, FORCING THEM TO TAKE OUT LOANS

UNDER THE THREAT OF VIOLENCE AND OTHER HARM. SO THAT IS PART OF THE

COERCION.

MR. MIKULIN: YEAH, BUT (INDISCERNIBLE) THE WAY OF

ECONOMIC ABUSE AND CAN'T THIS INCLUDE SCENARIOS SUCH AS SPOUSAL'S

REFUSAL TO PAY FOR THINGS SUCH AS HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES OR VACATIONS?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I MEAN, THE -- THE INVESTIGATION

WILL GO THROUGH ALL OF THE EVIDENCE AND SEE THAT. BUT AS I SAID EARLIER,

IT DOESN'T HAPPEN REALLY THAT SURVIVORS WHO ARE TRYING TO GET OUT OF A

TERRIBLE SITUATION, TRY TO REESTABLISH THEMSELVES AND THEN THEY GO -- THEY

GO TO DENY THE DEBT. IF THEY HAVE DEBT, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S CAUSED BY

THEIR ABUSER, THEY REALLY SHOULD NOT BE FORCED TO PAY FOR IT WHEN THEY

HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT AND WHEN IT WAS PART OF THE VIOLENCE, THE

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, TO CONTROL AND ABUSE THEIR VICTIM.

MR. MIKULIN: THANK YOU.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: ON THE BILL.

MR. MIKULIN: IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS BILL DOES

CREATE A ONE-SIDED PROCESS WITH THE PRESUMPTION BEING IN FAVOR OF THE

DEBTOR. I -- I THINK THAT THERE HAS TO BE MUCH WORK ON THIS AND

THEREFORE I'LL BE IN THE NEGATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: MR. BOLOGNA.

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

THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR THREE QUICK QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: WILL THE

110

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SPONSOR YIELD?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: THE SPONSOR

YIELDS.

MR. BOLOGNA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS.

ROSENTHAL.

QUESTION ONE: IF A DEBT IS INCURRED PRIOR TO THE ABUSE

OR THE -- OR THE COERCION, IS THERE A SPECIFIC TIMELINE IN WHICH THE ABUSE

OR COERCION HAS TO HAPPEN TO WHICH TO MAKE THAT DEBT NOT APPLICABLE TO

THE VICTIM?

(CONFERENCING)

MS. ROSENTHAL: IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE COERCED

DEBT, IT HAD TO HAVE OCCURRED WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THAT RELATIONSHIP

AND THAT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SITUATION.

MR. BOLOGNA: SO IF A -- IF A -- IF A COUPLE WOULD

HAVE A JOINT CREDIT CARD OR, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE INCURRED A DEBT LIKE

WHEN THEY WERE OKAY, YOU KNOW, AND THEN SOMETHING WENT SOUR AFTER

THAT DEBT HAD OCCURRED, THAT THEY WOULD BOTH STILL BE ON THE HOOK FOR --

FOR THAT DEBT, CORRECT?

MS. ROSENTHAL: CORRECT.

MR. BOLOGNA: OKAY. SO IT HAS TO BE DONE -- THE

DEBT ITSELF HAS TO BE INCURRED BECAUSE OF SOME TYPE OF COERCIVE ACT.

MS. ROSENTHAL: CORRECT.

MR. BOLOGNA: OKAY. WITH THAT IN MIND -- AND

JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, COULD -- IF IT WAS COERCED, COULD A MORTGAGE BE

111

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

CONSIDERED A COERCED DEBT?

MS. ROSENTHAL: LET ME JUST -- TECHNICALLY IT

COULD. TECHNICALLY IT COULD.

MR. BOLOGNA: OKAY. SO, I MEAN, THAT'S A -- THAT'S

A MASSIVE ITEM THAT -- YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A COUPLE THOUSAND

DOLLARS IN CREDIT CARD DEBT. I MEAN YOU COULD BE TALKING ABOUT A COUPLE

HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN -- IN A MORTGAGE. SO, IN THAT INSTANCE,

WHAT -- WHAT HAPPENS? IS THE BANK OUT THAT -- OR IS THE LENDER OUT THAT

FUNDS?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I MEAN THIS BILL DOESN'T --

DOESN'T GO INTO WHAT HAPPENS DOWN THE LINE EXCEPT IT EMPOWERS

CREDITORS TO GO AFTER THE -- THE ABUSER, THE ONE WHO CREATED THE DEBT.

WHETHER IT IS A MORTGAGE, OR WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, A SHOPPING SPREE

AT BLOOMINGDALE'S, THEY HAVE THE POWER TO GO AFTER IT.

MR. BOLOGNA: OKAY. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION

IS, DOES THIS LEGISLATION OR THE -- DOES A BILL, IF ENACTED, WOULD IT

SUPERSEDE A NON-SEVERABLE CONTRACT? IN OTHER WORDS, IF -- IF -- IF TWO

PEOPLE SIGN A NON-SEVERABLE CONTRACT WHERE BOTH PARTIES ARE

RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE DEBT, SHOULD ONE FALL SHORT IN PAYING,

DOES THIS STILL APPLY TO BOTH PARTIES IF THIS SHOULD BE ENACTED?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I MEAN IT DEPENDS IF IT'S A

COERCED DEBT OR NOT, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THE CREDITOR WOULD HAVE TO

EXAMINE AND FIND FOR.

MR. BOLOGNA: GOT IT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY

MUCH, MS. ROSENTHAL. I APPRECIATE IT.

112

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. ROSENTHAL: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 90TH

DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: A PARTY VOTE

HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. WALSH.

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

MINORITY CONFERENCE WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS PARTICULAR BILL, BUT

IF ANY MEMBERS WISH TO VOTE YES, THEY MAY DO SO AT THEIR SEATS. THANK

YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: MR. FALL.

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

CONFERENCE WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION. FOR THOSE THAT

WOULD LIKE TO VOTE NO, THEY COULD DO SO AT THEIR SEATS.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: THE CLERK WILL

RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MS. ROSENTHAL TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. ROSENTHAL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE.

COERCED DEBT IS A DEVASTATING FORM OF ECONOMIC

ABUSE THAT PREVENTS SURVIVORS FROM SEEKING SAFETY AND CAUSES FINANCIAL

HARM LONG AFTER THE INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP AND THE ABUSE ENDS.

113

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SURVIVORS WHO LEAVE SITUATIONS TO TRY TO REBUILD THEIR LIVES, MOSTLY

FROM THE -- A -- A SHELTER, OFTEN FIND THAT THEY CANNOT MOVE ON BECAUSE

THERE ARE MANY DEBTS THAT THEY OWE THAT WERE NOT CAUSED BY THEM; IT

WAS PART OF THE COERCED DEBT ECONOMIC ABUSE PUT UPON THEM BY THEIR

ABUSER. SO THIS BILL CREATES A PATHWAY OUT OF THAT SITUATION. IT -- IT

ALLOWS SURVIVORS TO SAY, THIS IS JUST ANOTHER IN A SERIES OF THINGS THAT

WERE FOISTED ON ME AND I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE. CREDITORS CAN THEN GO

AFTER THE PERSON WHO ACTUALLY INCURRED THE DEBT. AND I'D LIKE TO THANK

THE MANY GROUPS AND PEOPLE WHO WORKED ON THIS: URI, ECONOMIC

JUSTICE COALITION, HER JUSTICE, CAMBA AND PEOPLE: TEAL (PHONETIC),

LAUREN SCHUSTER, MY CHIEF-OF-STAFF; ERICA OVERTON, MY LEGISLATIVE

DIRECTOR, NICK PERRY. I'D LIKE TO THANK THE SPEAKER FOR ALLOWING THIS TO

GO FORWARD SO THAT WE, IN NEW YORK STATE, CAN HELP SURVIVORS GET OUT

OF SITUATIONS THAT THEY'RE TRAPPED IN AND TRY TO LIVE A MORE FREE LIFE

WITHOUT ANY KIND OF PHYSICAL, EMOTIONAL OR ECONOMIC ABUSE. AND I

VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: ARE THERE ANY

OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL HAS PASSED.

PAGE 9, RULES REPORT NO. 315, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A05234, RULES REPORT

NO. 315, JACOBSON, SHIMSKY, DINOWITZ, OTIS, BURDICK, PAULIN, GIBBS,

KIM, REYES, LEVENBERG, LUNSFORD, BICHOTTE HERMELYN, SHRESTHA,

ROMERO, SCHIAVONI, KAY. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ELECTION LAW, IN

114

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

RELATION TO ELIMINATING THE ABILITY OF JUDICIAL CANDIDATES FOR OFFICE WHO

ARE ENROLLED IN A PARTICULAR PARTY TO AUTOMATICALLY BE ALLOWED TO RUN AS

A CANDIDATE IN ANOTHER PARTY'S PRIMARY ELECTION.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: AN EXPLANATION

HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. JACOBSON.

MR. JACOBSON: THIS BILL ELIMINATES THE ABILITY OF

A TRADITIONAL CANDIDATE TO AUTOMATICALLY RUN IN THE PRIMARY OF ANOTHER

PARTY.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: MR.

SEMPOLINSKI.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR

SOME QUESTIONS?

MR. JACOBSON: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: I THANK THE SPONSOR FOR

YIELDING.

ACTING SPEAKER O'PHARROW: THE SPONSOR

HAS YIELD.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO THIS IS A VERY SHORT BILL. IT'S

SEVEN LINES, BUT I THINK IT HAS SOME VERY BROAD IMPLICATIONS -

PRACTICALLY AND FRANKLY, PHILOSOPHICALLY. SO I -- I WOULD START BY SORT OF

GOING THROUGH WITH YOU HOW CURRENT LAW WORKS ON CERTIFICATES OF

AUTHORIZATION. IT'S A LITTLE PROBABLY OBSCURE FOR THE FOLKS BACK HOME. I

115

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

HAVE ISSUED CERTIFICATES OF AUTHORIZATION, I'VE -- I'VE DONE THIS. SO I'LL

PUT IT THIS WAY: AM I CORRECT THAT CURRENTLY, IF A CANDIDATE, OTHER THAN A

JUDICIAL CANDIDATE, WISHES TO RUN IN THIS CASE, WE'D BE TALKING ABOUT

THROUGH DESIGNATED PETITIONS RATHER THAN THROUGH A CAUCUS, BUT IF A

CANDIDATE WISHES TO RUN ON THE LINE OF A PARTY OF WHICH THEY ARE NOT AN

ENROLLED MEMBER, THEY WOULD HAVE TO RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF

AUTHORIZATION FROM THAT POLITICAL PARTY?

MR. JACOBSON: THAT'S RIGHT. IN ORDER TO FILE -- IN

ORDER TO RUN IN THAT PARTY'S PRIMARY, THEY HAVE TO RECEIVE THAT -- A -- A

CANDIDATE HAS TO RECEIVE THE AUTHORIZATION OF THAT OTHER PARTY, UNLESS

THEY'RE A MEMBER OF THAT PARTY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: AND THE WAY THAT WORKS IS

THEY FILE A DESIGNATED PETITION AND THEN AS ANOTHER FILING THEY WOULD

FILE A CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE AND THEN THE PARTY WOULD FILE A

CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION AND THAT WOULD PUT THEM IN THE PRIMARY;

AND IF THERE IS NO OTHER CANDIDATE, OR NOT MORE CANDIDATES THAN THE

NUMBER OF SLOTS POTENTIALLY IN THE GENERAL ELECTION; AM I CORRECT?

THAT'S THE CURRENT --

MR. JACOBSON: THAT'S -- THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: AND WHO ISSUES A CERTIFICATE

OF AUTHORIZATION?

MR. JACOBSON: THE COMMITTEE THAT UNDER THE

STATUTE UNDER 6-120 SUBDIVISION (3) IS AUTHORIZING THE CANDIDATE TO RUN

IN THE PRIMARY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: AND THAT COMMITTEE IS WHO?

116

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. JACOBSON: THAT COMMITTEE WOULD BE THE

COMMITTEE MEMBERS OF THE JURISDICTION THAT THE JUDGE, CANDIDATE, OR

ANY CANDIDATE IS RUNNING IN. THERE'S A SPECIAL PROVISION IN THE -- IF IT'S

CITYWIDE IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK, BECAUSE THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT

SYSTEM, BUT THE -- IT'S DONE BY THE COMMITTEE BY A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE

COMMITTEE.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: AND TO CLARIFY, THAT IS A PARTY

COMMITTEE? THE FOLKS WHO ARE ELECTED AS PARTY COMMITTEE MEMBERS,

COULD BE STATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, IT COULD BE DISTRICT COMMITTEE

MEMBERS, IT COULD BE --

MR. JACOBSON: WELL, THE WAY IT WORKS, VERY

SIMPLY, IS THAT IF YOU'RE RUNNING FOR TOWN JUDGE AND YOU WANT -- AND --

AND YOU HAPPENED TO BE ENROLLED AS A REPUBLICAN AND YOU WANT TO GET

ANOTHER PARTY'S CONSERVATIVE, WORKING FAMILIES, DEMOCRATIC PARTY,

YOU WANT TO BE ABLE RUN IN THAT PRIMARY, SAY -- AND YOU'RE NOT RUNNING

FOR JUDGE, THE WAY IT STANDS NOW, THAT PARTY'S COMMITTEE FOR THAT TOWN

HAS TO GIVE THE AUTHORIZATION. IF THERE IS NO COMMITTEE IN THAT TOWN,

THEN THE RULES OF THE PARTY WILL DECIDE. SOME PARTIES DON'T ALLOW

(INDISCERNIBLE) -- SOME OF THE MINOR PARTIES DO NOT ALLOW THE LOCAL

COMMITTEE TO MAKE THAT DECISION AND IT'S DONE ON THE STATE LEVEL,

USUALLY AN EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OR A STATE COMMITTEE.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: THAT'S ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING,

BUT JUST TO BE CLEAR, IS PARTY LEADERSHIP OF SOME FORM DEPENDING ON THE

BYLAWS OF THE PARTICULAR POLITICAL PARTY OR THE PARTICULAR JURISDICTION OF

THAT POLITICAL PARTY. IT'S PARTY LEADERSHIP --

117

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. JACOBSON: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: -- (INDISCERNIBLE). OKAY.

NOW -- NOW WE ESTABLISH THE CURRENT LAW, WHAT YOUR (INDISCERNIBLE) IF

I'M CORRECT, IS SIMPLY STRIKING SIX WORDS IN CURRENT STATUTE --

MR. JACOBSON: WE'RE ELIMINATING SIX WORDS TO

GET RID OF THE EXCEPTION FOR JUDICIAL CANDIDATES OR THAT JUDICIAL

CANDIDATES, IF THEY WANT TO RUN IN ANOTHER PARTY'S PRIMARY, HAVE TO GET

THE AUTHORIZATION FOR -- FROM THAT PARTY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO THEN --

MR. JACOBSON: AND THE REASON IS -- THE REASON IS,

IS THAT MOST OF -- MOST VOTERS KNOW LITTLE OR NOTHING ABOUT JUDICIAL

CANDIDATES. THEY RELY ON THE PARTY ON WHICH -- OR PARTIES ON WHICH THE

CANDIDATE IS RUNNING, AND THEY MAKE THE ASSUMPTION THAT THAT

CANDIDATE SHARES THAT PARTY'S VALUES. AND SO BY DOING THIS, YOU'RE

ADDING MORE -- YOU'RE MAKING THE PROCESS BETTER AND MORE TRANSPARENT.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO AM I CORRECT YOUR

STATEMENT WAS JUST YOU TRUST PARTY BOSSES MORE THAN THE PRIMARY

VOTERS?

MR. JACOBSON: NO.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: THAT'S WHAT YOU JUST SAID.

MR. JACOBSON: I DIDN'T, NO. DO YOU KNOW WHAT

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PARTY BOSS AND A PARTY LEADER IS?

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: WHAT -- WHAT -- WHAT DO YOU

CONSIDER TO BE THE DIFFERENCE?

MR. JACOBSON: THE DIFFERENCE IS THE PARTY LEADER

118

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ENDORSED YOU AND THE PARTY BOSS ENDORSED YOUR OPPONENT. WHAT --

WHAT IT IS IS THAT I TRUST THE COMMITTEE TO MAKE THE DECISION. INDIVIDUAL

PEOPLE -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN ON THE COMMITTEE --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: I -- I'M A PARTY CHAIRMAN IN A

COUNTY, ACTUALLY.

MR. JACOBSON: OH. SO OKAY, MR. BOSS.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: I -- I GUESS I'M A BOSS. YEAH.

MR. JACOBSON: SO YOU KNOW -- YOU KNOW THAT

COMMITTEE PEOPLE HAVE TO GO OUT AND GET SIGNATURES --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: YEP.

MR. JACOBSON: -- AND SOMETIMES, IT'S -- IT'S

HAPPEN TO ME, HAD TO RUN A PRIMARY TO KEEP MY COMMITTEES

(INDISCERNIBLE).

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SURE.

MR. JACOBSON: SO, I -- I DON'T BELIEVE -- I BELIEVE

THAT -- SO, THEY ARE -- THE PEOPLE THAT ARE RUNNING FOR COMMITTEE ARE

SUBJECT TO THE PARTY --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: YEP, THEY ARE.

MR. JACOBSON: -- AND THEN THEY KNOW THE PARTY

AND THEY CAN MAKE AN EVALUATION WHETHER OR NOT TO GIVE THIS PERSON

AUTHORIZATION.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: BUT MY -- MY POINT BEING, THE

CURRENT LAW IS THAT FOR JUDICIAL CANDIDATES, WE TRUST THE PUBLIC TO MAKE

THE DECISION, THE MEMBERS -- THE ENROLLED MEMBERS OF THAT POLITICAL

PARTY TO MAKE THE DECISION AS TO WHO THEIR NOMINEE WOULD BE. THIS

119

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

WOULD SAY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BETTING PROCESS BY PARTY LEADERSHIP AS

TO WHO WE'RE GOING TO LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE ON. I -- I WOULD SAY MAYBE

WE TRUST THE PUBLIC, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU -- YOU HAVE A CONSIDERATION

ABOUT MAYBE IGNORANCE OF THE VOTERS.

MR. JACOBSON: NO. I -- I TRUST THE PUBLIC AND

THAT'S HOW I GOT HERE.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: ME, TOO. YEAH.

MR. JACOBSON: SO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IS, RIGHT

NOW, A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE, SAY THE CANDIDATE IS ON -- HAS BEEN ENDORSED

BY THE REPUBLICAN AND CONSERVATIVE PARTY, FOR ONE EXAMPLE. IT COULD

BE DEMOCRATIC, IT COULD BE WORKING FAMILIES, BUT LET'S SAY IT'S A

REPUBLICAN AND CONSERVATIVE. AND NOW, THEY'RE CIRCULATING PETITIONS

FOR THE DEMOCRATIC AND WORKING PARTY LINES. THEY DON'T GO AROUND

SAYING, HEY, VOTER IN THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY, I WANT YOU TO KNOW

I'VE BEEN ENDORSED BY THE REPUBLICANS AND THE CONSERVATIVES, BUT I

AM SEEKING YOUR VOTE IN THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY. NO, THEY COME

TO THE DOOR, SAY I WANT TO RUN, WOULD YOU SIGN MY PETITION? SO, IT'S A

FALLACY. IT'S AN ABSOLUTE FALLACY THAT THE VOTERS ARE -- ARE REALLY

KNOWING WHAT THEY'RE SIGNING IN A PETITION PROCESS FROM SOMEBODY

OUTSIDE THE PARTY. MOST VOTERS ASSUME THAT IF SOMEBODY COMES TO THE

DOOR, THAT THEY ARE A MEMBER OF THE PARTY THAT IS THERE.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: NOW THE CURRENT LAW HAS THREE

EXCEPTIONS. ONE IS FOR PARTY CAUCUSES, THE IDEA BEING THAT THE -- THE

PARTY SORT OF SPEAKS AS ONE AT THAT POINT. THE OTHER IS FOR NOMINATING

THE CANDIDATES FOR THE FIRST TIME, WHICH IS MORE PROCEDURAL, AND THIS

120

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

EXCEPTION WHICH YOU ARE NOW ATTEMPTING TO REMOVE. WHY DO YOU

THINK THIS EXCEPTION IS IN LAW?

MR. JACOBSON: WELL, YOU HAVE THE EXCEPTION FOR

FIRST TIME --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: WELL, I MEAN THIS -- THE ONE

YOU'RE TRYING TO REMOVE. WHY DO YOU THINK THE CURRENT LAW IS PARTY

BOSSES CAN'T VET JUDICIAL CANDIDATES?

MR. JACOBSON: WHY DO I THINK IT'S THAT?

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: YEAH.

MR. JACOBSON: BECAUSE I THINK WHAT HAPPENED

THAT, I THINK FOR -- I DON'T KNOW. I WASN'T HERE IN 1949 I BELIEVE IT WAS

WHEN THE -- THIS SECTION WAS IN. AND WHICH IS WHY -- IT WAS -- IT WAS

SPONSORED BY -- BY SENATOR WILSON AND ASSEMBLYMEMBER

(INDISCERNIBLE), WHICH IS WHY EVERYBODY (INDISCERNIBLE). I WASN'T THERE

THEN. HOWEVER, THE REASON THAT IT WAS PUT IN CONCERNING OTHER

CANDIDATES, WAS THAT THEY DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE PARTY RAIDING. RIGHT?

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: YEP.

MR. JACOBSON: R-A-I-D-I-N-G, NOT R-A-T-I-N-G.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: YEP. I WOULD -- I WOULD AGREE

WITH THAT. BUT THERE'S AN EXCEPTION FOR JUDICIAL CANDIDATES. WHY DO

YOU THINK THEY PUT AN EXCEPTION?

MR. JACOBSON: I THINK IT WAS DONE FOR POLITICAL

REASONS AND I THINK WHAT HAPPENED IS THE SO-CALLED PARTY BOSSES THAT

YOU REFER TO, OR MAYBE THE LEADERSHIP IN THAT REPUBLICAN PARTY THAT WAS

CONTROLLING THE --

121

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO -- SO, YOUR SUPPOSITION IS --

MR. JACOBSON: I'M FINISHING.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: OKAY.

MR. JACOBSON: -- THAT THE LEADERSHIP IN THE

REPUBLICAN PARTY THAT PASSED THAT BILL THOUGHT IT WAS IN THEIR POLITICAL

INTEREST TO LET THEIR CANDIDATES RAID OTHER PARTIES IN JUDICIAL PRIMARIES.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO YOUR SUPPOSITION IS THEY

GAVE THEMSELVES LESS POWER FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES.

MR. JACOBSON: I SAID THAT THEY DID IT BECAUSE THEY

THOUGHT IT WAS IN THEIR POLITICAL INTEREST.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: OKAY. MY FEELING WOULD BE

THAT IT HAD MORE TO DO WITH JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE. DON'T YOU WORRY

THAT GIVING PARTY BOSSES VETO AUTHORITY OVER JUDICIAL CANDIDATES

UNDERMINES JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE? AND IN FACT, WOULD INCREASE

POLITICAL POLARIZATION AND UNDERMINE FAITH IN THE COURTS?

MR. JACOBSON: NO. THIS -- THIS WILL INCREASE

FAITH IN THE PROCESS, BECAUSE IN NOVEMBER THE VOTERS WILL KNOW THAT

THAT JUDICIAL CANDIDATE SHARES THE VALUES OF THAT PARTY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: WELL, IF IN NOVEMBER, NOW IF

A CANDIDATE IS ON THE LINE FOR A PARTY IN NOVEMBER, THEY WON THE

PRIMARY. SO, THEREFORE, THEY HAVE THE FAITH OF THE PEOPLE OF THAT PARTY

AS OPPOSED TO THE FAITH OF THE PARTY BOSSES. DON'T WE ALREADY HAVE THE

PUBLIC SAYING WHO SHOULD BE RUNNING ON THEIR PARTY LINE?

MR. JACOBSON: NO, NOT NECESSARILY. I'LL GIVE YOU

AN EXAMPLE. IN THE CITY OF BEACON WHICH I REPRESENT, IN 2019, THE

122

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

INCUMBENT JUDGE WHO WAS A REPUBLICAN AND ALSO HAD THE CONSERVATIVE

LINE, FILED FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY AND HE FILED FOR THE WORKING

FAMILIES PRIMARY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: MM-HMM.

MR. JACOBSON: HE LOST THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY

BUT HE WON THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY BECAUSE HE GOT A DOZEN

REPUBLICANS TO SWITCH PARTY INTO THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY. SO I

DON'T THINK THAT THE REST OF THE WORKING FAMILY [SIC] PARTY MEMBERS

REALLY DID -- HE DIDN'T -- HE DIDN'T -- HE DIDN'T SAY, YOU KNOW, WHY HE

WAS RUNNING PER SE IN THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY AND YOU HAVE TO

REMEMBER, JUDGES ARE LIMITED IN WHAT THEY CAN SAY IN A CAMPAIGN.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SURE.

MR. JACOBSON: THAT'S WHY -- THAT'S WHY HAVING

THE ASSURANCE THAT A CANDIDATE SHARES THE VALUES OF THE PARTY IS THAT

MUCH MORE IMPORTANT.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: BUT IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE,

COULDN'T THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE HAVE RUN AS THE WORKING FAMILIES

CANDIDATE, COULDN'T A MEMBER OF THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY HAVE RUN?

COULDN'T A -- ANYBODY ELSE HAVE RUN? IN THAT CASE, NOBODY ELSE PUT

THEMSELVES FORWARD.

MR. JACOBSON: YOU CAN ONLY BE A MEMBER OF ONE

PARTY AT A TIME.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT

I'M SAYING, YOU SAID IT WAS A DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE. THE DEMOCRATIC

CANDIDATE CHOSE NOT TO CIRCULATE WORKING FAMILIES (INDISCERNIBLE)

123

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

PETITIONS. ISN'T THAT ON THEM?

MR. JACOBSON: HE WAS -- HE DID RUN IN THAT

PRIMARY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: AND HE LOST THE PRIMARY.

MR. JACOBSON: YEAH, HE LOST THE PRIMARY.

TWELVE -- A DOZEN PEOPLE SWITCHED PARTIES FROM THE REPUBLICAN TO THE

WORKING FAMILIES, WHICH WAS A GOOD POLITICAL TACTIC WHICH I'M SURE

OTHER PEOPLE HERE HAVE ADVISED CANDIDATES TO DO AND I'M SURE IN YOUR

POSITION AS A PARTY BOSS YOU'VE ADVISED CANDIDATES TO DO FOR A PRIMARY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: LISTEN, I -- I -- I -- I APPRECIATE

THAT NOW I'M A BOSS, IT MAKES ME FEEL VERY POWERFUL. BUT I'M GONNA GO

ON THE BILL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: I HAVE GRAVE CONCERNS, EVEN AS

A PARTY BOSS, ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR BILL. AND IT COMES FROM SOME OF THE

MAJOR PHILOSOPHICAL UNDERPINNINGS ABOUT WHY THIS IS CURRENT STATUTE IN

THE STATE OF NEW YORK. I WOULD RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH THE SPONSOR

AS TO WHY THIS WAS PUT INTO LAW. I DON'T THINK THIS WAS PUT IN RESTRICTING

THE POWER OF PARTY LEADERS TO GAIN THE SYSTEM, I THINK IT WAS PUT IN

PLACE BECAUSE WE RECOGNIZE, AS A STATE, THAT JUDGES ARE DIFFERENT THAN

LEGISLATIVE OR EXECUTIVE POSITIONS. THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE

INDEPENDENT. WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE SAYING WHAT THE LAW IS, NOT WHAT IT

SHOULD BE; THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE INJECTING THEIR OWN PHILOSOPHICAL

POSITIONS INTO COURT MATTERS. AND THIS IS A WAY TO INSULATE AND PROTECT

THEM FROM THE ALLEGATION THAT, OH, YOU'RE ONLY A JUDGE BECAUSE PARTY

124

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BOSS SO AND SO PUT YOU THERE. YOU WERE PUT THERE BY THE PEOPLE

THROUGH AN OPEN PROCESS AND THE PEOPLE OF ALL POLITICAL PARTIES COULD'VE

VOTED FOR YOU AND PUT YOU IN THERE. SO I HAVE THAT CONCERN. AND THEN

JUST MORE BROADLY, AREN'T WE AS A SOCIETY DIVIDED ENOUGH? AREN'T WE

POLARIZED ENOUGH? WHY DO WE NEED TO INJECT PARTISANSHIP IN SOME --

ONE OF THE VERY FEW PLACES WHERE IT'S NOT CONTEMPLATED IN OUR SYSTEM?

I STAND FOR KEEPING THE SYSTEM AS IT IS, KEEPING PARTY BOSSES LIKE MYSELF

OUT OF THIS PARTICULAR PART OF THE PROCESS AND LETTING THE PEOPLE DECIDE

WHO THEIR NOMINEE IS FOR ANY PARTICULAR POLITICAL LINE, NOT INSULAR PARTY

LEADERS.

SO I'LL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE AND I ENCOURAGE ALL

MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. RA.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. JACOBSON: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. RA: I -- I WANT TO GO BACK TO SOMETHING THAT YOU

SAID TO MY COLLEAGUE WITH REGARD TO WHEN A CANDIDATE IS PETITIONING FOR

ONE OF THESE BALLOT LINES. SO I -- I -- I BELIEVE YOU SAID SOMETHING TO

THE EFFECT THAT THE VOTER DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE -- NECESSARILY KNOW

WHAT THEY'RE SIGNING?

125

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. JACOBSON: NO. I -- I SAID THAT WHEN

SOMEBODY COMES TO THE DOOR, THEY GENERAL -- THEY ASSUME THAT THE

PERSON'S IN THE PARTY. AND I -- I DON'T --

MR. RA: WELL, THE -- WELL, THE PERSON, RIGHT, THE

PERSON CIRCULATING THAT PETITION EITHER HAS TO BE IN THE PARTY OR -- OR BE

IDENTIFYING THEMSELVES AS A -- AS A NOTARY IN ORDER TO BE TAKING THAT

SIGNATURE.

MR. JACOBSON: RIGHT, BUT THEY -- BUT THE -- BUT

THE PERSON THAT'S IN THE JUDICIAL CANDIDATE SITUATION, THE CANDIDATE WON'T

-- WON'T SAY, HEY, I'M A DEMOCRAT AND I'M SEEKING THE CONSERVATIVE

LINE. THAT WOULD NOT BE A GOOD WAY TO GET A SIGNATURE AND I DON'T THINK

THE NOTARY WOULD SAY THAT AS WELL. THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING AT.

MR. RA: OKAY. BUT I -- I THINK IF WE THINK ABOUT

LIKE -- I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHAT A PETITION LOOKS LIKE AND IT HAS THE

INFORMATION AS TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT PARTY, OBVIOUSLY IT'S THE PARTY THAT

THIS INDIVIDUAL THAT YOU'RE SEEKING THEIR SIGNATURE IS AN ENROLLED

MEMBER OF, IT HAS THE NAME OF A CANDIDATE, THEIR ADDRESS, ALL THAT

INFORMATION AND IT HAS THE OFFICE BEING SOUGHT. SO THERE'S A LOT OF

INFORMATION THERE AND I DON'T, YOU KNOW, I -- I DON'T THINK PEOPLE

GENERALLY SIGN THINGS WITHOUT HAVING SOME IDEA OF -- OF WHAT THEY'RE

SIGNING. SO, PRESUMABLY, IF AN INDIVIDUAL CAME TO MY DOOR AND THEY

SAID, I AM CIRCULATING A PETITION FOR JUDICIAL CANDIDATE BOB SMITH.

HE'S SEEKING THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY DESIGNATION. WOULD YOU BE

WILLING TO SIGN THIS? AND YOU HAVE NOW A MEMBER THAT'S ENROLLED IN

THAT PARTY THAT MAKES A DECISION, YES, I WANT BOB SMITH TO HAVE THE

126

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

OPPORTUNITY TO RUN FOR OFFICE ON -- ON THIS LINE. SO WHY -- I -- I DON'T --

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE IMPETUS IS TO DOING THIS CHANGE IN THE LAW

NOW, BECAUSE AS MY COLLEAGUE SAID, THE REASON WE HAVE AN EXEMPTION

FROM JUDGES IS, I THINK, IT TAKES SOME OF THE POLITICS OUT WITH REGARD TO

JUDGES WHO, AS YOU SAID, CAN'T -- ARE VERY LIMITED IN WHAT THEY CAN SAY

WHEN IN -- IN THE MIDST OF A CAMPAIGN.

MR. JACOBSON: WELL, THE PERSON AT THE DOOR WILL

USUALLY SAY, HEY, THAT'S GREAT. I'M A WORKING FAMILIES PARTY MEMBER

AND NOW I CAN GET SOMEBODY TO RUN ON MY LINE. NOW, THEY DIDN'T ASK

-- THEY -- THE AVERAGE VOTER DIDN'T ASK, HEY, IS THIS GUY -- DOES HE

BELIEVE IN THE PARTY, OR VALUES? IS HE ENROLLED AS A WORKING FAMILY --

NO, THAT -- HE'S JUST HAPPY, GOES ALONG, HE -- MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT --

THAT SIGN PETITIONS HAVE SIGNED IT BEFORE AND WHEN YOU'RE IN A MINOR

PARTY, THEY'RE A VERY VALUABLE COMMODITY BECAUSE, AS WE KNOW, A

SIGNATURE FOR A MINOR PARTY, WORKING FAMILIES OR CONSERVATIVES, SAY IS

WORTH -- IT'S LIKE DOG YEARS. IT'S WORTH EIGHT OR TEN TIMES THE AMOUNT OF

A SIGNATURE OF A REPUBLICAN OR A DEMOCRAT BECAUSE THEY'RE VERY HARD TO

FIND.

MR. RA: YES, THEY ARE.

SO JUST IN TERMS OF THE (INDISCERNIBLE), IS -- IS THERE A

PARTICULAR REASON THAT THIS IS COMING FORWARD NOW? DO YOU FEEL LIKE

WITH SOME OF THE -- AND AS YOU KNOW, AND I KNOW YOU'VE -- YOU'VE

CARRIED MANY BILLS IN THIS AREA, WE'VE MADE A LOT OF CHANGES TO OUR

ELECTION LAWS, I WOULD SAY, IN THE LAST FIVE OR SIX YEARS, RIGHT? SO IS

THERE OTHER CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE THAT YOU THINK NOW

127

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

NECESSITATE THIS CHANGE BEING MADE, OR IS THIS AN IDEA THAT'S BEEN OUT

THERE THAT YOU JUST FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD BE DOING NOW?

MR. JACOBSON: NO, I -- I FILED THIS BILL IN 2020

AFTER THE DEBACLE THAT HAPPENED IN THE CITY THAT I REPRESENTED IN

BEACON, WHAT I -- WHAT I GAVE THE EXAMPLE OF EARLIER. SO I THOUGHT THIS

WAS A WAY TO CORRECT THAT. I NEVER LIKED THIS. I NEVER LIKED THE RATING

OF -- OF A PARTY. AND I'LL ADMIT IN ORANGE COUNTY, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE

DID IT ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE. I NEVER THOUGHT THAT WAS GREAT.

MR. RA: OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. JACOBSON.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. RA: I -- I JUST WANT TO NOTE, YOU KNOW, I JUST

SAID WE'VE DONE A LOT OF ELECTION REFORMS AND -- AND WE'VE, I MEAN, WE

REALLY HAVE COMPLETELY OVERHAULED THE ELECTION LAW OVER THE LAST, YOU

KNOW, FIVE, SIX YEARS. AND THE THING I FIND ODD SOMETIMES IS THAT

THERE'S BEEN MANY BILLS THAT HAVE COME FORWARD AND WHAT I HEAR IS, WE

TRUST THE VOTERS SO MUCH, THEY'RE SO SMART, WE HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING IN

OUR POWER TO -- TO PUT OUR TRUST IN THE VOTERS. AND THEN THERE'S BEEN

BILLS LIKE THIS AND I REMEMBER A BILL A FEW YEARS AGO THAT DEALT WITH

MINOR PARTIES IN TERMS OF TRYING TO BASICALLY ALLOW A PARTY BOSS TO KICK

SOMEBODY OFF A -- A LINE THAT THEY HAD WON IN A -- IN AN OPPORTUNITY

BALLOT. THEN WE -- WE HAVE THOSE TYPES OF BILLS WHERE WE SAY, THE

VOTERS ARE TOO CONFUSED. THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON, WE

HAVE TO PROTECT THEM FROM BEING CONFUSED. SO, I'M NOT SURE WHICH IS IT

[SIC]. DO WE THINK ALL THE VOTERS IN THE STATE ARE -- ARE SHARP? AND

128

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, I DON'T SIGN MY NAME TO SOMETHING

HAVING NO IDEA WHAT I'M SIGNING. USUALLY THE PEOPLE WHO WE GO TO

SIGNATURES, THEY'RE FAMILIAR WITH THAT INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS VISITED THEM

IN THE PAST TO -- TO GAIN THEIR SIGNATURE, SO THERE'S A LEVEL OF -- OF TRUST

THERE. AND IF WE HAVE FAITH IN THE VOTERS OF OUR STATE, YOU KNOW, THEY

MIGHT HAVE TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH AND SAY, HEY, IS THIS PERSON

SOMEBODY THAT SHARES MY VALUES? WHY AM I SIGNING TO PUT THIS PERSON

ON A BALLOT LINE?

SECONDLY, AS MY COLLEAGUE SAID, THIS INTERJECTS POLITICS

MORE INTO JUDICIAL OFFICES THAN THEY ALREADY ARE BY GIVING MORE POWER

TO -- TO POLITICAL LEADERS TO -- TO SELECT THOSE CANDIDATES. AND I -- I

DON'T THINK AT A TIME OF POLITICAL POLARIZATION THAT IS A GOOD CHANGE FOR

US TO BE MAKING.

SO I'LL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE AND I URGE MY

COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. MORINELLO.

MR. MORINELLO: THANK YOU. WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD FOR A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. JACOBSON: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. MORINELLO: WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT EACH

INDIVIDUAL PARTY HAS CERTAIN PLANT FORMS WHICH ENUMERATE WHAT THEIR

129

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

POSITIONS ARE ON CERTAIN ISSUES?

MR. JACOBSON: THAT EACH PARTY DOES.

MR. MORINELLO: WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT IF A

JUDICIAL CANDIDATE WAS RUNNING ON A SPECIFIC LINE, BASED UPON WHAT YOU

WANT THE CHANGE TO BE, THAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC COULD INTERPRET THAT, THAT

THEY WOULD SUPPORT THE PLANT FORM OF THAT PARTICULAR PARTY?

MR. JACOBSON: THAT'S -- THAT'S THE ASSUMPTION,

THAT THEY SHARE THE VALUES. MAYBE THEY DON'T SHARE, BUT THAT WOULD --

THAT WOULD BE THE ASSUMPTION. BUT, UNFORTUNATELY, JUDICIAL CANDIDATES

CAN RUN IN THE PARTY WITHOUT SHOWING THEIR -- THAT THEY SHARE THE VALUES.

MR. MORINELLO: BUT THE MERE FACT THAT YOU ARE

SAYING THEY SHOULD ONLY RUN ON THEIR PARTY LINE, WOULD -- WOULD IT NOT

BE A FAIR STATEMENT THAT THEY WOULD SHARE THE VALUES OF THAT PARTY LINE?

MR. JACOBSON: IT WOULD BE A FAIR STATEMENT IF

THEY WERE ENROLLED IN THAT PARTY, OR IF THEY HAD BEEN ENDORSED OR

AUTHORIZED BY ANOTHER PARTY TO RUN IN THAT PRIMARY.

MR. MORINELLO: THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING IS --

WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, A DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE CAN RUN ON THE

DEMOCRATIC LINE WITHOUT ANY OTHER PERMISSIONS --

MR. JACOBSON: CORRECT.

MR. MORINELLO: -- WHICH WOULD MAKE HIM A

DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE WHO WOULD BE INTERPRETED AS SUPPORTING THE

PLATFORM OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

MR. JACOBSON: OR THEY SHARE THE VALUES. OF

COURSE, YOU KNOW, JUDICIAL CANDIDATES REALLY DON'T -- AREN'T ALLOWED TO

130

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SAY WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN CERTAIN TOPICS.

MR. MORINELLO: WOULD YOU ALSO AGREE TO THE FACT

THAT THERE ARE THREE INDEPENDENT BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT: THE

EXECUTIVE, JUDICIAL AND THE LEGISLATIVE?

MR. JACOBSON: YES, AND IT SHOULD BE THAT WAY.

MR. MORINELLO: OKAY. SO WOULDN'T IT BE A FAIR

STATEMENT TO SAY THAT WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS YOU ARE TAKING THE

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AND INTERPRETING OR INJECTING YOURSELF INTO THE

JUDICIARY BY FORCING A CANDIDATE TO LOOK -- APPEAR TO HAVE A POSITION OF

A CERTAIN PARTY?

MR. JACOBSON: NO. WHAT I'M DOING IS, IS

PREVENTING CANDIDATES FROM FALSELY REPRESENTING TO THE PUBLIC THAT THEY

HAVE THE VALUES OF A PARTY, WHICH THEY DON'T.

MR. MORINELLO: BUT A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE SHOULD

NOT HAVE ANY VALUES. HE SHOULD BE INDEPENDENT; HE SHOULD NOT TAKE

ANY POSITIONS IN WHICH YOU ARE SAYING IS IT'S OKAY FOR THAT CANDIDATE TO

TELEGRAPH A POSITION TO THE POTENTIAL VOTERS.

MR. JACOBSON: THAT'S WHAT IS DONE. BECAUSE

WHEN PEOPLE RUN FOR OFFICE, I MEAN, WHEN YOU'VE HAD PARTICULARLY

JUDICIAL CANDIDATES WHERE PEOPLE REALLY DON'T KNOW THEM AND THEY SAY,

WELL -- AND THEY GET TO THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER AND THEY SAY, WELL, WHAT

PARTY ON THEY ON? WHAT LINE? OKAY, THEN I CAN IDENTIFY WITH THAT

PARTY. BECAUSE OF THE LIMITATIONS ON WHAT JUDICIAL CANDIDATES CAN SAY,

THE -- WHAT PARTY LINE THE PERSON IS ON MAKES EVEN MORE -- IS EVEN

MORE IMPORTANT.

131

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. MORINELLO: WELL, A GOOD JUDGE AND A GOOD

JUDICIAL CANDIDATE SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY OUTSIDE VALUES. THEY MAY HAVE

PERSONAL FEELINGS BUT THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED. IT IS AGAINST THE CANONS OF

JUDICIAL ETHICS TO PORTRAY ANY TYPE OF POSITION EITHER PRIOR TO OR DURING

THEIR JUDICIARY. SO YOUR BILL ACTUALLY MAKES IT LOOK LIKE THEY HAVE A

POSITION BEFORE.

MR. JACOBSON: NO. MY BILL SAYS YOU CAN'T BE A

PHONY ABOUT IT AND -- AND RUN IN A LINE THAT YOU DO NOT SHARE THE VALUES

IN THAT PARTY, OR YOU WANT TO APPEAR THAT YOU DO, BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE

WANNA -- IN SOME AREAS, THAT MAY BE AS MORE -- HARD TO FOR A DEMOCRAT

TO GET ELECTED. I WANT TO BE ON THE CONSERVATIVE LINE BECAUSE THEN I'M

PORTRAYING MYSELF AS MORE CONSERVATIVE AND THAT MIGHT HELP ME GET

ELECTED.

MR. MORINELLO: WELL, I BEG TO DIFFER WITH YOU,

OKAY, BECAUSE I'VE GONE THROUGH THE JUDICIAL ETHICS COURSES AND I SAT ON

THE BENCH 14 YEARS AND NOT ONCE WERE WE EVER TOLD THAT WE ARE ALLOWED

TO BE PART OF A PARTY TO SHOW THAT WE HAVE PREDETERMINED POSITIONS ON

ISSUES. I -- I APOLOGIZE, BUT I DIFFER WITH YOU TREMENDOUSLY AND YOUR --

YOUR -- YOUR ASSERTION THAT THEY ARE FALSELY GIVING A POSITION. THEY ARE

GIVING A NEUTRAL POSITION, WHICH IS THE ONLY THING THEY CAN DO DURING A

CAMPAIGN, PRIOR TO A CAMPAIGN, OR DURING A PRIMARY.

MR. JACOBSON: I AGREE WITH YOU THAT THEY CAN'T

SPEAK ABOUT IT, BUT WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS THE VOTERS. WHEN THEY

LOOK AT A CANDIDATE AND THEY DON'T KNOW THE CANDIDATE PERSONALLY, THEY

WILL MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED ON THE LINE THEY'RE ON. THAT'S ALL I'M

132

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SAYING. NO, THEY CANNOT TALK ABOUT HOW THEY WOULD RULE. YOU CAN'T

SAY YOU'RE A LAW AND ORDER GUY, YOU'RE GOING TO PUT EVERYBODY IN JAIL,

YOU CAN'T SAY ANYTHING ELSE. AND SO PEOPLE MAKE THEIR DECISIONS BASED

ON EITHER THEY KNOW THE PERSON OR PRIMARILY THEY BASE IT ON THE PARTY

THAT THE PERSON IS ON.

MR. MORINELLO: YOU JUST ARGUED AGAINST YOUR

OWN POINT, SIR, BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THEY CAN ONLY TALK ABOUT

THEIR QUALIFICATIONS, BUT YOU'RE PUTTING FORTH THE FACT THAT IF THEY'RE PART

OF A PARTY AND THEY TELL THEM THEY'RE PART OF A PARTY, THEY'RE GIVEN THE

INTERPRETATION THAT THEY ARE FOLLOWING THE PLANT FORM OF THAT PARTY. SO

YOU HAVE JUST CONTRADICTED YOURSELF IN YOUR PREMISE.

MR. JACOBSON: NO, I DIDN'T. NOT THAT THEY'RE

FOLLOWING THE PLATFORM WHERE THEY SHARE THE VALUES. WHEN VOTERS

MAKE A DECISION ON WHO THEY'RE GOING TO VOTE FOR FOR JUDGE AND THEY

DON'T KNOW THE CANDIDATE, THEY WILL SAY, GEE, I'M -- I'M -- I'M

REGISTERED IN PARTY A, OR B, OR C, D, I'M GONNA -- I'M GONNA VOTE FOR

THE CANDIDATE WHOSE LINE I AGREE WITH.

MR. MORINELLO: ALL RIGHT. SO, BASICALLY, AGAIN,

WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS, THEY'RE GOING TO VOTE FOR THE CANDIDATE THAT HAS

THE VALUES OR THE PLANT FORM THAT THEY BELIEVE IN, WHICH IS CONTRARY TO

THE ETHICS OF THE JUDICIARY --

MR. JACOBSON: NO. THE --

MR. MORINELLO: HOLD ON, ONE MORE SECOND.

AND YOU ALSO SAID THAT THEY DON'T KNOW THE CANDIDATE. YOU CAN PUT

FORTH YOUR QUALIFICATIONS. AND ANY CANDIDATE WHO GOES INTO A PRIMARY

133

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THAT DOESN'T PUT FORTH THEIR QUALIFICATIONS, SHOULD LOSE THAT ELECTION.

THAT'S THEIR OBLIGATION AND IT'S ABOUT WHAT ARE MY QUALIFICATIONS, NOT

WHAT PARTY I'M IN.

MR. JACOBSON: I UNDERSTAND THAT AND IN A PRIMARY

IT WOULDN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE, RIGHT, WHEN YOU HAVE TWO REPUBLICANS

RUNNING AGAINST EACH OTHER. WHEN YOU HAVE -- WHEN YOU HAVE A

PRIMARY FOR JUDGE, THE JUDICIAL CANDIDATE IS NOT SAYING HIS POSITION --

HIS OR HER POSITIONS ON ANY OF THE ISSUES. WHAT I AM SAYING IS, THAT

VOTERS IN NOVEMBER WILL MAKE A DECISION, IF THEY DON'T KNOW THE

CANDIDATES, OR THEY ALL SEEM QUALIFIED AND THEY ALL LOOK THE SAME TO

THEM, THEY WILL MAKE A DECISION BASED ON THE PARTY LINE. THAT'S ALL.

MR. MORINELLO: WELL, PARTY LINE WOULD THEN PUT

IT LIKE, GOOD, THEY'RE GONNA GO THE WAY I WANT IT.

ON THE BILL, PLEASE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. MORINELLO: THE JUDICIARY IS AN INDEPENDENT

BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT. IT IS REALLY SAD THAT THEY WERE TRYING TO CHANGE

THE RULES, CHANGE THE LAW, TO MAKE A CANDIDATE FOR THE JUDICIARY APPEAR

TO HAVE THE VALUES OF A PARTICULAR PARTY. THAT IS AGAINST THE CANONS OF

JUDICIAL ETHICS. THE ONLY THING A JUDGE CAN DO, A CANDIDATE CAN DO, IS

TALK ABOUT THEIR BACKGROUND, TALK ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCES, THEY CAN'T

EVEN TALK ABOUT WHAT PARTY THEY'RE WITH. YES, THEY ARE REGISTERED, BUT

THEY CANNOT GO OUT AND SAY, I AM PART OF A REGISTERED PARTY. THAT

WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF THE CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS, AND WHAT THIS BILL

IS DOING IS, IT IS ASSOCIATING A CANDIDATE WITH A PARTY, WHICH WILL THEN

134

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ASSOCIATE THAT CANDIDATE WITH THE PLATFORM OF THAT PARTY, WHICH AGAIN I

SAY IS AGAINST THE JUDICIAL ETHICS. THIS WOULD BRING A JUDICIARY OR A

JUDICIAL ELECTION DOWN TO THE SAME AS A NON-JUDICIAL ELECTION. IT WOULD

CROSS OVER. IN AN ELECTION FOR A NON-JUDICIAL POSITION, A CANDIDATE CAN

SAY ANYTHING THEY WANT, A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE. THIS APPEARS TO BE A

BACKDOOR ATTEMPT BY THIS BODY AND BY THIS SPONSOR TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC

TO ASSOCIATE A CANDIDATE WITH A PLATFORM HOPING THAT CANDIDATE FOR THE

JUDICIARY, IF THEY WIN, WILL VOTE OR DECIDE CASES BASED UPON THE VALUES

OF THAT PARTICULAR PARTY AND NOT INDEPENDENT, BECAUSE THE ONLY WAY A

JUDGE CAN MAKE A DECISION IS THEY TAKE THE FACTS AND APPLY THEM TO THE

LAW, IRRESPECTIVE OF ANY PARTY AFFILIATION, IRRESPECTIVE OF ANY PARTY PLANT

FORMS.

BASED UPON THAT AND THE FACT THAT THE JUDICIARY SHOULD

REMAIN -- IS AND SHOULD REMAIN AN INDEPENDENT BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT,

I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO PLEASE DO NOT DESTROY THE HISTORY OF THE

JUDICIARY. DO NOT DESTROY THE SANCTITY OF THE JUDICIARY BY TRYING TO

MAKE IT LOOK LIKE IT'S PARTY POLITICS AND VOTE NO ON THIS BILL. THANK YOU

VERY MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. PIROZZOLO.

MR. PIROZZOLO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ORIGINALLY IT WAS MY INTENT REALLY TO JUST SPEAK ON THE BILL, BUT NOW I

WOULD LIKE TO ASK IF THE SPONSOR WOULD YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

135

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. JACOBSON: SURE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. PIROZZOLO: THANK YOU, MR. JACOBSON.

SO I'M FAIRLY NEW AT THIS GAME, I'M ONLY HERE ON MY

THIRD TERM. SO FORGIVE ME IF MAYBE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I ASK MAY

NOT HAVE THE DEPTH OF KNOWLEDGE OF -- OF SOME OF THE PARTY BOSSES THAT

SURROUND US. BUT I KNOW THAT WHEN I WALK WITH PARTY PETITIONS, OKAY,

WHETHER THEY'RE FOR MYSELF AND SOMETIMES YOU HAVE A PARTY PETITION

THAT HAS TONS OF NAMES ON IT, YOU KNOW, USUALLY, I KNOW THE PEOPLE THAT

I GO TO. I'VE GONE TO THEM BEFORE, I'M WALKING WITH PEOPLE, OR PARTY

PEOPLE ARE WALKING. VERY, VERY RARELY DO CANDIDATES PULL IN THE

SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF SIGNATURES REQUIRED. IT'S USUALLY ALWAYS

SOMEBODY ELSE. SO YOU TALK ABOUT THESE FALSEHOODS AND I'M REALLY

CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT KIND OF FALSEHOODS. IF YOU COULD GIVE ME A MUCH

BETTER EXPLANATION OF WHAT YOU MEAN BY FALSEHOODS, BECAUSE WHO'S

FALSELY PROMOTING THESE FALSEHOODS WHEN THEY GO TO DOORS AND SAY, THIS

IS ME, BUT I'M NOT THAT. I MEAN, WHERE -- WHERE'S THE FALSEHOOD IN ALL OF

THIS?

MR. JACOBSON: SURE. WHEN YOU HAVE SOMEBODY

AND IF YOU'RE A COMMITTEE PERSON OR YOU'RE RUNNING FOR ELECTION AND

YOU'RE CARRYING ALL THE REPUBLICANS IN YOUR AREA, THEY KNOW YOU AND

THEY'RE ASSUMING THAT THESE ARE ALL GOOD PEOPLE AND THEY'RE

REPUBLICANS AND SO FORTH. WHEN A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE OR A NOTARY

CARRIES PETITIONS IN A MINOR PARTY THAT THEY'RE NOT PART OF AND THEY WANT

TO GET THAT LINE, THEN WHAT HAPPENS IS THE CANDIDATE WHOSE -- I -- I

136

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

GUARANTEE YOU, I GUARANTEE YOU THAT A WORKING FAMILIES PARTY MEMBER

WOULD NOT SIGN A PETITION IF THE CANDIDATE CAME TO THE DOOR, LISTEN, I'M

ON THE CONSERVATIVE LINE AND I'D LIKE YOU TO SIGN MY PETITION. AND

SOMEBODY -- FOR YEARS WE HAD THE RIGHT TO LIFE PARTY AND THEY -- THEY

WANTED TO SEND A MESSAGE ON THAT SO VOTERS WOULD THINK THEY WOULD

VOTE A CERTAIN WAY CONCERNING THAT. SO WHAT HAPPENS IS, WHEN A

NONPARTY PERSON WHO IS NOT AUTHORIZED TO -- TO RUN IN A PARTY PRIMARY

FOR A JUDICIAL SPOT, THEY'RE REPRESENTING AS IF THEY WERE -- THEY SHARED

THAT PARTY'S VALUES. AND WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IT'S NOT THE CAN --

CANDIDATES OFTEN WANT TO PROJECT A CERTAIN IMAGE OR VALUE, BUT MORE

THAN THAT, THE VOTERS WILL ASSUME, VERY SIMPLY, THAT THAT PERSON SHARES

THAT PARTY'S VALUES.

MR. PIROZZOLO: SO I HEARD WHAT YOU SAID AND I'M

REALLY GONNA HAVE TO TAKE EXCEPTION TO WHAT YOU JUST SAID. YOU

GUARANTEED ME THAT A MEMBER OF THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY WOULD

NOT LET'S SAY SIGN FOR REPUBLICAN OR CONSERVATIVE, OR MAYBE ANYONE

ELSE, RIGHT? SO NOW YOU'RE PREDETERMINING THE WILL OF THE PERSON THAT

SOMEONE IS FALSELY TRYING TO GET A SIGNATURE FROM. RIGHT? YOU JUST

GUARANTEED ME THAT THAT WOULDN'T HAPPEN, BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU

DO.

MR. JACOBSON: I SAID -- I SAID SOMEBODY ON THE

CONSERVATIVE LINE. IF SOMEONE CAME TO THEIR DOOR AND SAID, I'M A

CONSERVATIVE -- I'M -- I WANT YOU -- I WANT YOUR SIGNATURE IN THE

WORKING FAMILIES PARTY AND I WANT YOU TO KNOW, I'M A CONSERVATIVE

CANDIDATE. I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD WORK. I THINK THAT A -- IF A -- IF A

137

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

WORKING FAMILIES PARTY PERSON CAME TO A CONSERVATIVE DOOR AND SAID,

HEY, I'M IN THE WORKING PARTY'S FAMILY [SIC] AND -- BUT, I WANT TO GET

THE CONSERVATIVE LINE. SO, I'M TRYING FOR THAT. NOW, SOME PEOPLE

MIGHT SAY, WELL, I DON'T CARE, I'LL SIGN ANYTHING. BUT, I THINK PEOPLE

WOULD NOT DO THAT AND I DON'T -- I DON'T SEE CANDIDATES FOR JUDICIAL

OFFICE BROADCASTING WHAT PARTY THEY'RE IN IF IT'S NOT THE PARTY WHOSE LINE

THEY'RE SEEKING.

MR. PIROZZOLO: SO NOW I HAVE TO SAY I'M A LITTLE

BIT OFFENDED TWICE BECAUSE BEFORE YOU GUARANTEED ME, BUT THEN YOU

CHANGED WHAT YOU JUST SAID TO, I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT THAT WOULD

HAPPEN.

MR. JACOBSON: NO. I WOULD SAY IT WOULD HAPPEN

MOST OF THE TIME, BUT CAN THERE BE AN EXCEPTION TO THE RULE? YEAH, IT

COULD BE SOMEBODY WHO SAYS, ALL RIGHT, I'LL GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO RUN.

MR. PIROZZOLO: RIGHT. BUT, MY POINT IS, THAT

YOU'RE PREDETERMINING THE WILL OF THE VOTER BASED SOLELY ON WHETHER A

PERSON MAY HAVE CONSERVATIVE TIES, NON-CONSERVATIVE TIES, REPUBLICAN

TIES. I MEAN, YOU'VE PRETTY MUCH SAID IT, NOT ONLY TO ME TWICE, BUT TO

EVERYBODY ELSE THAT YOU'VE SPOKEN WITH THAT YOU'RE MAKING THAT

PREDETERMINATION. SO WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO --

MR. JACOBSON: NO. I --

MR. PIROZZOLO: -- THE VOTERS HERE.

MR. JACOBSON: I DIDN'T MAKE A PREDETERMINATION.

WHAT I SAID WAS, WHEN THE VOTER IN NOVEMBER DOES NOT KNOW THE

CANDIDATE, THEN THEY'LL RELY ON THE PARTY THEY'RE ON TO MAKE A DECISION.

138

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. PIROZZOLO: WELL, SO THAT GETS BACK TO MY

OPENING STATEMENT WHICH PRETTY MUCH SAID THAT, I DON'T GET ALL OF MY

SIGNATURES. PARTICULARLY, JUDICIAL CANDIDATES DON'T GET ALL OF THEIR

SIGNATURES. SO THE PEOPLE WHO SIGN FOR ME AND SIGN FOR YOU, 100% OF

THOSE PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW YOU, RIGHT? MAYBE FIVE PERCENT DO. IF

YOU'VE BEEN AROUND A LONG TIME, MAYBE TEN, ALL RIGHT? SO I'M -- JUST

THE PREMISES THAT YOU'RE BRINGING UP, I -- HOW DO YOU COME UP TO THAT

BEING ABLE TO SAY THAT THESE PEOPLE KNOW YOU? WHEN ANY PETITION THAT

GOES OUT, EVERY PETITION THAT WENT OUT IN THIS ROOM, LESS THAN 80

PERCENT OF THE VOTERS OR THE PEOPLE WHO SIGN KNOW THE CANDIDATE. SO I

THINK YOU'RE MAKING A LOT OF STATEMENTS THAT AREN'T BACKED UP BY DATA OR

JUSTIFIABLE.

MR. JACOBSON: WHAT I AM SAYING IS, IF THERE IS

SOMEBODY RUNNING FOR TOWN JUDGE AND HE'S -- AND THAT -- THEY -- AND

THE VOTER AT THE DOOR KNOWS THIS CANDIDATE BECAUSE THAT CANDIDATE

REPRESENTED HIM AT A CLOSING OR IN -- IN JUSTICE COURT, THEY MAY KNOW

THE PERSON. SO THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, OF COURSE I'M GOING TO SIGN FOR

HIM, HE WAS MY GREAT LAWYER. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS, MOST OF THE

TIME, PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE JUDICIAL CANDIDATE. THAT'S ALL.

MR. PIROZZOLO: WELL, I -- I -- I GET IT AND I CAN'T

DISAGREE WITH YOU, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S -- IT'S STUNNING HOW YOUR

STATEMENTS CHANGE FROM "I CAN GUARANTEE" TO "MAYBE" AND THEN "WELL,

YOU KNOW --

MR. JACOBSON: NO, NO, NO. IT'S NOT --

MR. PIROZZOLO: "I KNEW THE GUY BECAUSE HE WAS

139

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MY LAWYER". WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A LAWYER TO CLOSING; WE'RE TALKING

ABOUT A JUDGE, AS WAS POINTED OUT BY SOME OF MY FELLOW MEMBERS, THAT

BEING A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE, YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE ANY POSITIONS

REPRESENTED BY PARTY. THIS IS THE PARTY MAKING A DECISION TO ENDORSE A

CANDIDATE AND THEY'RE JUST SAYING TO THEIR PARTY MEMBERS ON THAT

PETITION, HEY, LET'S VOTE FOR THIS GUY. WOULD -- WOULD YOU PLEASE SIGN

FOR THIS GUY BECAUSE HE'S GOING TO REPRESENT US. THERE'S NO

QUESTIONING AS TO THE LOYALTY, THE DECISIONS, THE PARTY POSITIONS, THE

DECISIONS A JUDGE HAS MADE IN THE PAST AS TO WHETHER HE'S WORTHY TO BE

ON THAT PETITION, IT'S UP TO THE PEOPLE. NOW, IF YOU GET YOUR NAME ON

THE PETITION BECAUSE THE PARTY -- OR YOU BRING YOUR OWN MEMBERS TO THE

PARTY, RIGHT, AT LEAST YOU USED TO BE ABLE TO, THROUGH A -- THROUGH A

CHALLENGE, YOU CAN BRING YOUR OWN PEOPLE TO THAT PARTY, RIGHT? SO,

YOU'RE (INDISCERNIBLE) THAT.

MR. JACOBSON: AND WHAT IS YOUR POINT?

MR. PIROZZOLO: SO, I -- I DON'T UNDERSTAND

(INDISCERNIBLE). IF YOU WANT TO, WHY DON'T YOU JUST CHANGE THE LINES ON

THE PETITION TO SAY, THAT YOU KNOW WHAT, THIS IS A PETITION OF WHATEVER

PARTY AND WE HAVE CHOSEN CANDIDATE A TO BE OUR REPRESENTATIVE.

CANDIDATE A IS A MEMBER OF WHATEVER PARTY RIGHT ON THAT DESIGNATION

-- THE DESIGNATING PETITION, BUT WE'VE CHOSEN HIM AS OUR CANDIDATE. PUT

IT RIGHT OUT THERE SO THERE ARE NO FALSEHOODS. NO ONE CAN SAY. SO

INSTEAD OF MAKING THIS PARTICULAR LAW, WHY DON'T YOU CONSIDER CHANGING

THE VERBIAGE ON ALL DESIGNATING PETITIONS? IT WOULD BE SO MUCH EASIER

BECAUSE IT'S SAYING SPECIFICALLY, YOU WILL -- YOU WILL ELIMINATE THE PARTY

140

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BOSS PROBLEM, YOU WILL ELIMINATE THE UNEDUCATED VOTER SIGNER -- VOTER

SIGNER PROBLEM. IT SAYS RIGHT ON THE PETITION: CANDIDATE A IS, I'M

GONNA USE MY NAME, SAM PIROZZOLO. HE IS A MEMBER OF THE

REPUBLICAN PARTY, BUT THE MEMBERS OF THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY

WANT HIM TO BE ON THE BALLOT, TOO. OKAY? SO, RIGHT THEN AND THERE, ANY

FALSEHOOD THAT COULD POSSIBLY EXIST IS GONE.

MR. JACOBSON: WELL, THAT'S AN INTERESTING

PROPOSAL.

MR. PIROZZOLO: I THINK IT'S A GREAT PROPOSAL.

MR. JACOBSON: IT'S AN INTERESTING PROPOSAL, BUT IN

-- IN THIS SITUATION, ALL I'M SAYING IS, THAT I THINK THAT -- I'M NOT SAYING

THAT JUDICIAL CANDIDATES CAN'T RUN IN ANOTHER PARTY'S PRIMARY; THEY JUST

HAVE TO GET THE AUTHORIZATION FROM THE PARTY, JUST LIKE YOU DO WHEN YOU

RUN ON A SECOND LINE.

MR. PIROZZOLO: NO, YOU'RE NOT SAYING THAT.

YOU'RE SAYING THAT THERE ARE FALSEHOODS THAT ARE GOING ON IN THERE.

THAT PEOPLE ARE MISREPRESENTING THE CANDIDATE, OR MISREPRESENTING

THEMSELVES. THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

MR. JACOBSON: WELL, I SAID THAT AS WELL. I SAID A

FEW THINGS.

MR. PIROZZOLO: WELL, WHICH IS IT? YOU'VE --

YOU'VE -- YOU'VE SAID IT THREE DIFFERENT WAYS. YOU'VE SAID I GUARANTEE

IT, MOST LIKELY, SOMETIMES IT HAPPENS, SOMETIMES IT DOESN'T HAPPEN.

MR. JACOBSON: NO, NO, NO. IF YOU WANT TO KEEP

REPEATING YOURSELF, THAT'S FINE. I'M TELLING YOU WHAT I SAID, SO...

141

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. PIROZZOLO: I'M NOT REPEATING MYSELF. I'M

POINTING OUT THE FACT THAT YOU'RE CHANGING YOUR STATEMENTS EVERY TIME

YOU'RE ASKED A VERY LEGITIMATE QUESTION.

MR. JACOBSON: I'M NOT CHANGING -- I'M NOT

CHANGING THE THEORY OF THE BILL.

MR. PIROZZOLO: ALL RIGHT. WELL, I THINK THAT

WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA.

MADAM SPEAKER, IF I MAY SPEAK ON THE BILL, PLEASE?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. PIROZZOLO: SO I THINK WITH ALL OF THE DEBATES

THAT WE HAD, WE CAN SEE THAT THE PREMISE OF THIS SEEMS TO BE FLUID,

RIGHT? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVING FALSEHOODS AND PEOPLE FALSELY

COMMITTING FALSEHOODS WITH -- I DON'T KNOW. I -- I -- I'M -- I'M

CONFUSED. I'M TONGUE-TIED WITH ALL THE FALSEHOODS HERE. I THINK THAT A

VERY SIMPLE ANSWER WOULD BE TO, ON THE DESIGNATING PETITION, NAME THE

CANDIDATE, NAME THE PARTY THE CANDIDATE IS CURRENTLY ENROLLED WITH AND

THEN SAY THAT EVEN THOUGH -- SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT THAT EVEN THOUGH

THAT CANDIDATE IS ENROLLED WITH THE OTHER PARTY, HE IS ENDORSED,

SPONSORED, WHATEVER THE LEGAL -- THE PROPER LEGAL LANGUAGE WOULD BE,

BY THIS PARTICULAR PARTY AND WE'RE ASKING YOU FOR HIS SIGNATURE BECAUSE

WE'RE BACKING THIS CANDIDATE. ENDS ALL THE POSSIBLE FALSEHOODS THAT

THERE COULD POSSIBLY BE.

SO I'M GONNA VOTE NO BECAUSE I BELIEVE THIS IS A FALSE

BILL WITH FALSE PREMISES AND ANYTHING ELSE FALSE THAT I COULD THINK OF.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

142

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. LAVINE.

MR. LAVINE: WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD? I DON'T KNOW

IF I -- WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. JACOBSON: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. LAVINE: THANKS.

SO, MR. JACOBSON, I HAD A PRETTY GOOD SENSE THAT I

UNDERSTOOD THIS BILL BEFORE ALL THESE DISCUSSIONS THIS AFTERNOON. BUT I

-- I HAVE A FEELING THAT BASED ON THESE DISCUSSIONS -- THANK YOU, CHRIS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT HELP. I HAVE A FEELING THAT SOMEONE'S

GOING TO ASK ME IF THEY VIEW THIS, IS THIS GOING TO OUTLAW

CROSS-ENDORSEMENT OF JUDGES.

MR. JACOBSON: NO, IT WON'T. WHAT IT MEANS IS

THAT IF A PARTY WANTS TO ENDORSE SOMEONE WHO IS NOT A MEMBER OF THAT

PARTY, THEY CAN AUTHORIZE THE PARTY, OR AUTHORIZE THE PERSON TO RUN.

MR. LAVINE: AND THAT IS WHAT THIS BILL IS ALL ABOUT?

MR. JACOBSON: CORRECT.

MR. LAVINE: ALL RIGHT. AND WOULD YOU AGREE WITH

ME MY FRIEND, THAT FALSELY TELLING A FALSEHOOD IS ACTUALLY TELLING THE

TRUTH?

I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. DURSO.

143

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. DURSO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WOULD

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. JACOBSON: SURE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. DURSO: THANK YOU, MR. JACOBSON.

ACTUALLY, MR. LAVINE ACTUALLY STOLE MY LAST QUESTION

WHICH WAS GOING TO BE DOES THIS STOP ANY TYPE OF CROSS-ENDORSEMENT OF

CANDIDATES? BUT, WE HAVE THAT ANSWER NOW. SO, AS FOR SOMEONE WHO

IS NOT POLITICALLY SAVVY WHEN IT COMES TO JUDGES AND JUDICIAL

CANDIDATES, HOW IS IT NOW -- WHAT IS THIS CHANGING? SO WHEN A JUDICIAL

CANDIDATE GOES OUT TO GET SIGNATURES OR A PARTY SENDS OUT PEOPLE TO GET

SIGNATURES FOR A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE, THEY HAVE TO GO UNDER A PARTY LINE,

CORRECT?

MR. JACOBSON: IF THEY WANT TO RUN ON A PARTY

LINE, JUDICIAL CANDIDATES CAN CIRCULATE FOR ANY LINE THEY WANT. THE

PEOPLE WHO ARE CIRCULATING THE PETITIONS MUST BE EITHER A MEMBER OF

THAT PARTY OR A NOTARY THAT'S GETTING THOSE SIGNATURES.

MR. DURSO: RIGHT, BUT ONLY FOR THAT PARTY LINE THAT

THEY'RE RUNNING ON, CORRECT? SO, AND -- AND REALLY MY QUESTION IS AND I

APOLOGIZE, I SHOULD BACK UP. IS THIS ONLY FOR PRIMARIES, OR IS THIS FOR

THE GENERAL?

MR. JACOBSON: WELL, IT -- THE LAW TECHNICALLY

SAYS IT'S FOR THE PRIMARY AND THAT IF THERE IS NO COMPETITION IN THE

144

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

PRIMARY, THEN THE PERSON BECOMES THE NOMINEE OF THAT PARTY IN

NOVEMBER.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO NOW WITH A

CROSS-ENDORSEMENT AND IF SOMEONE IS GETTING A CROSS-ENDORSEMENT,

THEY'RE WALKING AROUND WITH PETITIONS WITH -- WHAT DOES IT SAY ON IT? IF

THEY'RE BEING CROSS-ENDORSED BY LET'S JUST SAY THE REPUBLICAN AND

DEMOCRAT PARTY, BUT THEY'RE GOING AROUND TO GET PETITIONS. ARE

REPUBLICAN PEOPLE OUT THERE WALKING THAT JUDICIAL CANDIDATE'S PETITIONS

AND IT ONLY SAYS REPUBLICAN? AND THEN THERE SOME -- SOMEONE ELSE

GOING OUT AND GETTING SIGNATURES FOR THAT JUDICIAL CANDIDATE UNDER THE

DEMOCRAT LINE?

MR. JACOBSON: USUALLY, THOUGH YOU COULD HAVE A

NOTARY GETTING SIGNATURES FOR BOTH LINES.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO AS OF NOW -- THE WAY IT

STANDS NOW, IT WON'T COME UP THAT ON -- AGAIN, IF -- IF YOU ARE A

DEMOCRAT, RIGHT, SOMEONE COMES TO YOUR HOUSE AND THERE'S A

CROSS-ENDORSED CANDIDATE, IT SAYS THAT CANDIDATE IS RUNNING ON THE

DEMOCRAT LINE, CORRECT? DOES NOT SAY REPUBLICAN.

MR. JACOBSON: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S A DEMOCRATIC

LINE. BUT, NO, IT DOESN'T SAY THAT. WHAT IT -- WHAT -- WHAT IT SAYS IS, THE

PETITION SAYS THAT I -- IT -- IT REFERS TO THE PEOPLE SIGNING (INDISCERNIBLE),

THE ACTUAL VOTER --

MR. DURSO: RIGHT.

MR. JACOBSON: -- AND IT SAYS, I AM A -- AM A

DUALLY-ENROLLED MEMBER OF THE BLANK, WHATEVER PARTY IT IS --

145

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. DURSO: RIGHT.

MR. JACOBSON: -- AND HEREBY CONSENT TO DESIGNATE

-- TO DESIGNATE SO AND SO TO BE IN THE PRIMARY AND THEY PUT THE DATE OF

THE PRIMARY IN THERE.

MR. DURSO: SO IT DOESN'T SAY THAT THE CANDIDATE IS

RUNNING ON A LINE, IT'S JUST SAYING THAT THIS IS FOR THE DEMOCRATIC LINE,

CORRECT? IT DOESN'T SAY WHAT THE PERSON IS, PARTY ENROLLED, OR WHAT

THEY'RE RUNNING FOR, CORRECT?

MR. JACOBSON: NO. IT DIDN'T SAY WHEN YOU RAN

FOR ASSEMBLY EITHER.

MR. DURSO: UNDERSTOOD. SO, IN THIS CASE, AND I'M

NOT TRYING TO REINVENT THE WHEEL, BUT I JUST WANTED YOUR OPINION ON

THIS, BECAUSE IN THIS CASE, ESPECIALLY WITH PEOPLE RUNNING ON A JUDICIAL

LINE, THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE PARTY OPINIONS, RIGHT? SO IF THEY'RE

BEING ELECTED AS A JUDGE, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO ESSENTIALLY SIT ON THE

FENCE. THEY'RE JUST SUPPOSED TO INTERPRET THE LAW THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN,

NOT BY HOW THEY FEEL, OR WHAT THEIR PARTY THINKS. SO, DON'T YOU THINK

IT'D BE BETTER FOR SOMEONE RUNNING AS A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE TO HAVE NO

PARTY AT ALL?

MR. JACOBSON: THEY'RE RUNNING TO BE ON A PARTY

LINE. IF THEY DON'T WANT TO SEEK A PARTY LINE, THEY CAN DO AN

INDEPENDENT NOMINATING PETITION. A SAVE THE WHALES PARTY, OR A -- I --

THAT'S MY OWN PHRASE FOR THOSE.

MR. DURSO: SURE. UNDERSTOOD.

MR. JACOBSON: OR -- OR YOU COULD JUST SAY, YOU

146

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

KNOW, NASSAU COUNTY PARTY. AND -- AND YOU CAN HAVE THAT AS AN

INDEPENDENT NOMINATING PETITION.

MR. DURSO: OKAY.

MR. JACOBSON: THEY -- THEY CAN SAY I DON'T WANT

TO BE ON ANY PARTY LINE.

MR. DURSO: BUT -- BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

BASICALLY FALSE ADVERTISING ESSENTIALLY, RIGHT, IN A CANDIDATE. WHAT

YOU'RE SAYING IS IF I'M A REPUBLICAN RUNNING AS A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE BUT

I'M ON THE DEMOCRAT LINE AND SOMEONE COMES TO YOUR HOUSE FOR

SIGNATURES, EVEN THOUGH I AM NOW SEEKING YOUR VOTE, IT'S -- YOU'RE

SAYING YOU'RE ACTUALLY BEING -- I'M -- I'M BEING FALSELY PRESENTED TO YOU

AS SOMEONE WHO'S A DEMOCRAT AND/OR A REPUBLICAN, DEPENDING ON

WHAT HOUSE YOU'RE GOING TO, AS THEIR CANDIDATE, CORRECT?

MR. JACOBSON: WELL, NO, I DIDN'T SAY AS THEIR

CANDIDATE. WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT WHEN PEOPLE COME TO THE DOOR FOR A

SIGNATURE, RIGHT, WHEN YOU COME TO THE DOOR, THERE'S USUALLY A FEW

PETITIONS, OR THERE ARE A FEW NAMES ON THERE. THEY ASSUME, THE VOTER --

THE ENROLLED VOTER ASSUMES THAT THEY'RE ALL IN THE PARTY. THAT'S WHAT

THEY ASSUME.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO DO YOU AS SOMEONE WHO

WOULD SIGN A PETITION HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASK THE PERSON THAT IS BRINGING

THE PETITION TO YOUR HOME, "WHAT PARTY DOES THIS PERSON REPRESENT?"

MR. JACOBSON: WELL, SURE, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO

DO THAT.

MR. DURSO: SO CAN'T YOU JUST DO THAT?

147

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. JACOBSON: SURE, YOU -- YOU COULD. I'M JUST

TALKING WHAT NORMALLY HAPPENS. MOST OF THAT HAPPENS, PEOPLE THERE IN

45 SECONDS FOR THE PERSON TO SAY YOU SIGNED AND IT'S FREEZING AND THEY

WANT TO GET OUT OF THERE. AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS.

MR. DURSO: UNDERSTOOD. BUT, YOU, AS THE PERSON

SIGNING ANYTHING --

MR. JACOBSON: AS THE VOTER, YEAH.

MR. DURSO: RIGHT, SURE. AS THE VOTER, YOU HAVE

THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK, "WHAT PARTY IS THIS PERSON A PART OF?"

MR. JACOBSON: ABSOLUTELY.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO WOULDN'T IT BE ACTUALLY

EASIER TO JUST EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ON -- THAT SOMEONE THAT MAY BE

COMING TO YOUR HOUSE TO GET SIGNATURES, THAT CANDIDATE MAY NOT BE PART

OF THE PARTY THAT YOU REPRESENT. AS OPPOSED TO REALLY ALMOST LETTING

PARTY BOSSES DECIDE WHO CAN RUN AND WHO CAN'T AND SILENCING THE WILL

OF THE VOTER.

MR. JACOBSON: I'M NOT SILENCING THE WILL OF THE

VOTER. THE VOTER CAN STILL VOTE.

MR. DURSO: BUT I CAN'T COME TO YOUR HOUSE AND GET

SIGNATURES IF I WANT TO RUN. I MAY BE A REPUBLICAN, BUT I MAY BE A

DIFFERENT REPUBLICAN THAN ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES. I WANT TO PRIMARY

THEM, RIGHT? OR, MAYBE, YOU HAVE A DEMOCRAT THAT RUNS ON THE

DEMOCRAT AND CONSERVATIVE LINE. THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, CORRECT?

SO -- WELL, BUT YOU -- YOU ACTUALLY STATED BEFORE THAT NOBODY WOULD

VOTE FOR SOMEONE THAT HAD THE WORKING FAMILIES LINE IF YOU COME TO A

148

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

REPUBLICAN HOUSEHOLD.

MR. JACOBSON: OR A CONSERVATIVE. I MEAN, I'M

JUST SAYING IN GENERAL.

MR. DURSO: WELL, NO. I'M JUST USING THE EXAMPLE

YOU GAVE. SO I KNOW PLENTY OF CANDIDATES AND PLENTY OF PEOPLE IN

AREAS THAT I REPRESENT THAT RUN ON THE DEMOCRAT AND CONSERVATIVE LINE.

WOULD THIS PROHIBIT THEM FROM DOING THAT?

MR. JACOBSON: I DIDN'T CATCH YOUR QUESTION AT THE

END THERE.

MR. DURSO: WOULD IT PROHIBIT THEM FROM RUNNING

ON THOSE LINES? OR WOULD YOU HAVE TO WALK INTO SOMEONE'S HOUSE AND

SAY, THIS PERSON'S A DEMOCRAT RUNNING ON THE CONSERVATIVE LINE?

MR. JACOBSON: NO, THEY WOULD -- THEY COULD GO

TO THE COMIT -- THEY COULD GO TO THE COMMITTEE --

MR. DURSO: RIGHT.

MR. JACOBSON: -- IN YOUR -- SAY SOMEBODY IS

RUNNING FOR TOWN JUDGE. THEY COULD GO TO THE COMMITTEE, THE

COMMITTEE COULD ENDORSE THEM, OR THEY COULD JUST GIVE THEM THEIR

AUTHORIZATION.

MR. DURSO: SO -- OKAY. SO EVEN IN A JUDICIAL RACE,

WE'RE TAKING AWAY THE -- ESSENTIALLY THE GRASSROOTS EFFORT OF PEOPLE TO

GO OUT AND GET SIGNATURES ON A DIFFERENT PARTY LINE THAN MAYBE THEY'RE

REGISTERED AND WE'RE LEAVING IT UP TO PARTY BOSSES. BUT ISN'T THAT WHAT

WE WANT IN A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE, IS SOMEONE THAT KINDA REPRESENTS ALL

PARTIES, ALL PEOPLE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING?

149

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, YOU DON'T WANT THAT. YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE ONLY

WANT JUDICIAL CANDIDATES THAT REPRESENT ONE TYPE OF PERSON.

MR. JACOBSON: NO, I'M NOT SAYING THAT AT ALL. ALL

I AM SAYING IS, JUST LIKE YOU TRYING TO GET THE CONSERVATIVE LINE, SAY,

YOU HAVE TO GET AUTHORIZATION TO RUN IN THAT PARTY'S PRIMARY.

MR. DURSO: WELL, YES, BUT IF I WANT TO PRIMARY A

REPUBLICAN, I DON'T HAVE TO GET PARTY BOSSES' APPROVAL, I JUST HAVE TO GO

OUT AND GET SIGNATURES.

MR. JACOBSON: NO, BECAUSE YOU ARE ENROLLED AS A

MEMBER OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO YOU'RE SAYING -- JUST THE --

OKAY. SO YOU'RE SAYING IF I AM NOT ENROLLED IN THAT PARTY, YOU CAN'T RUN

ON THAT LINE.

MR. JACOBSON: YOU CAN'T RUN ON THE LINE UNLESS

THERE'S THE AUTHORIZATION --

MR. DURSO: RIGHT. BUT YOU'RE --

MR. JACOBSON: -- FROM THAT PARTY.

MR. DURSO: BUT YOU'RE SAYING THIS IS JUST FOR

JUDICIAL CANDIDATES.

MR. JACOBSON: NO, I'M MAKING JUDICIAL

CANDIDATES, JUST LIKE OTHER CANDIDATES, THAT IF THEY WANT TO RUN ON A LINE

THAT THEY'RE NOT ENROLLED IN, THEY HAVE TO GET AUTHORIZATION FROM THE

PARTY.

MR. DURSO: UNDERSTOOD. BUT WHY WOULD WE WANT

JUDICIAL CANDIDATES WHO, AGAIN, ARE SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE MIDDLE AND

150

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SEE ALL SIDES, HEAR ALL SIDES AND JUST FOLLOW THE LAW, PROHIBIT THEM FROM

BEING ABLE RUN ON MULTIPLE LINES TO REPRESENT ALL PEOPLE?

MR. JACOBSON: BECAUSE AS I SAID, IN NOVEMBER

WHEN PEOPLE MAKE DECISIONS, THEY GENERALLY FIRST DECIDE, DO I KNOW

THIS PERSON? IF THEY DON'T KNOW THAT, SOMETIMES THEY DECIDE ON, YOU

KNOW, ON OTHER MATTERS. ETHNICITY, SOMETIMES THEY MAKE A DECISION OR

A GENDER. BUT MOST OF THE TIME WHAT PEOPLE DO IF THEY DON'T KNOW THE

PERSON, IS THEY DECIDE, WELL, WHAT PARTY IS THIS PERSON ON? AND I SHARE

THE VALUES BECAUSE I'VE HEARD JUDICIAL -- THEY BELIEVE THAT EACH PARTY

HAS THEIR OWN JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY.

MR. DURSO: BUT ISN'T THAT AGAINST EXACTLY THE SPIRIT

OF A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE, IS WE'RE RUNNING THEM AS A -- AS A PARTY --

AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S POLITICS IN EVERYTHING. BUT WHAT WE WOULD

HOPE TO ACHIEVE IS ELECT PEOPLE INTO JUDICIAL SPOTS THAT SEE ALL SIDES.

WHAT YOU'RE SAYING WITH THIS IS, WE WANT TWO PEOPLE TO RUN AND CLEARLY

HAVE IT STATED WHAT SIDE OF THE AISLE THEY SIT ON AND THEN WE'LL VOTE.

MR. JACOBSON: NO. ALL I AM SAYING IS --

MR. DURSO: WELL, NO. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS.

MR. JACOBSON: NO. I'M JUST SAYING IS, IF YOU

WANT TO RUN ON ANOTHER LINE, YOU HAVE TO BE AUTHORIZED BY THAT PARTY TO

RUN, DON'T -- DON'T HAVE TO BE ENDORSED, YOU HAVE TO BE AUTHORIZED TO

RUN. AND THAT IN NOVEMBER, THAT VOTERS WILL REST -- WILL THEN HAVE A

BETTER -- THERE'S A BETTER CHANCE AND I'D SAY ASSURED, THAT THE PERSON

WHOSE BEEN AUTHORIZED AND ON THE LINE, SHARES THE VALUES OF THEIR PARTY,

WHICH THEY'RE MAKING THE DECISION. THAT'S HOW THE VOTERS MAKE THE

151

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

DECISION. ONCE YOU -- ONCE THEY SAY, OKAY, THIS ONE HAS BEEN A LOCAL

JUDGE, THIS BAD JUDGE, THIS ONE'S A LAWYER, THIS ONE'S A LAWYER -- BUT

PEOPLE MAY MAKE DECISIONS. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING.

MR. DURSO: SO -- AND -- AND MY LAST QUESTION FOR

YOU, MR. JACOBSON. WHO -- WHO MAKES THAT DECISION IF THEY CAN RUN

ON THAT PARTY LINE OR NOT?

MR. JACOBSON: NOW?

MR. DURSO: IF YOUR BILL PASSES.

MR. JACOBSON: OH, IF THE BILL PASSES? TO RUN IN

ANOTHER -- ON ANOTHER PARTY'S LINE THERE HAS TO -- IT HAS TO BE AUTHORIZED

BY THE COMMITTEE OF THAT PARTY, COMMITTEE MEMBERS.

MR. DURSO: NOT -- NOT THE PEOPLE THAT VOTE AND NOT

THE VOTERS AND NOT THE PEOPLE THAT REPRESENT THAT PARTY, JUST THE -- THE

PERSON WHO'S IN CHARGE OF THE PARTY.

MR. JACOBSON: THE COMMITTEES WILL -- THE VOTERS

WILL DECIDE IN A PRIMARY.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. JACOBSON.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. DURSO: OBVIOUSLY THERE'S -- THERE'S A -- A LOT OF

INFORMATION IN THIS BILL AND A LOT OF OPINIONS ON BOTH SIDES. I WILL NOT

BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL. AGAIN, I CAN'T SUPPORT A BILL THAT IS LITERALLY AND

FIGURATIVELY MAKING JUDICIAL CANDIDATES POLITICAL CANDIDATES. SO IN THAT

CASE I'LL BE VOTING NO.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. LUNSFORD.

152

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. LUNSFORD: WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. JACOBSON: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MS. LUNSFORD: YOU ARE IN FRONT OF ME. I GIVE

YOU PERMISSION NOT TO FACE ME SO THAT EVERYBODY CAN -- CAN HEAR.

MR. JACOBSON: OKAY. I WANT PEOPLE TO HEAR THIS,

SO...

MS. LUNSFORD: CURRENTLY, DO JUDICIAL CANDIDATES

RUN ON PARTY LINES?

MR. JACOBSON: YES.

MS. LUNSFORD: LET'S SAY I'M A DEMOCRAT -- I'M

GONNA USE DEMOCRATS AS AN EXAMPLE. IF I'M A DEMOCRAT AND I WANT TO

RUN FOR FAMILY COURT, DO I GET DESIGNATED AS THE CANDIDATE BY THE

DEMOCRATIC PARTY AT THE COUNTY COMMITTEE CAUCUS?

MR. JACOBSON: AT THE COUNTY WHAT?

MS. LUNSFORD: AT THE -- DOES THE COUNTY

COMMITTEE DESIGNATE ME AS THEIR CHOSEN CANDIDATE IN FAMILY COURT?

MR. JACOBSON: THE COMMITTEE WILL ENDORSE YOU

AND THEN ONCE THE SIGNATURES ARE -- THE SIGNATURES WILL DESIGNATE YOU TO

RUN IN THE PRIMARY.

MS. LUNSFORD: WOULD I GO THROUGH THE SAME

PROCESS THAT AN ASSEMBLY PERSON WOULD OR COUNTY LEGISLATOR WOULD

WITH THAT PARTY?

153

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. JACOBSON: THAT'S CORRECT.

MS. LUNSFORD: AND THE SAME FOR THE

REPUBLICANS, THE SAME FOR A WORKING FAMILIES PARTY MEMBER IF THEY

WERE RUNNING THEIR OWN CANDIDATE?

MR. JACOBSON: CORRECT.

MS. LUNSFORD: CORRECT. SO DOES THIS BILL

POLITICIZE THE JUDICIARY ANY MORE THAN IT IS CURRENTLY POLITICIZED GIVEN

THAT WE MAKE JUDICIAL CANDIDATES RUN ON PARTY LINES?

MR. JACOBSON: NO.

MS. LUNSFORD: IN A UNIVERSE WHERE I AM NOT A

JUDICIAL CANDIDATE AND I WANT TO SEEK A THIRD-PARTY LINE, I CAN REQUEST

THE DESTINATION OF THAT THIRD-PARTY, CORRECT?

MR. JACOBSON: RIGHT.

MS. LUNSFORD: AND IF THAT THIRD-PARTY DENIES ME,

WHAT IS MY OPTION AT THAT POINT?

MR. JACOBSON: YOUR OPTIONS WOULD BE TO, AT THIS

POINT, THROUGH AN OPPORTUNITY TO BALLOT.

MS. LUNSFORD: IF YOUR BILL PASSES, WOULD THE

JUDICIAL CANDIDATES HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BALLOT?

MR. JACOBSON: THEY WOULD.

MS. LUNSFORD: AND WHAT DOES AN OPPORTUNITY TO

BALLOT ALLOW THE JUDICIAL CANDIDATES TO DO?

MR. JACOBSON: THE OPPORTUNITY TO BALLOT CREATES

A PRIMARY WHERE -- IT CREATES A WRITE-IN PRIMARY AND THE -- AND THAT'S

WHAT WOULD HAPPEN THERE.

154

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. LUNSFORD: WHEN PRESENTED TO THE VOTERS AT A

PRIMARY IN SEEKING SIGNATURES FOR AN OTB, IS THAT PROCESS ANY DIFFERENT

THAN WHAT A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE HAS TO DO NOW WHEN PRESENTING

THEMSELVES TO A THIRD-PARTY FOR PETITION SIGNATURES? IT'S EFFECTIVELY THE

SAME THING, RIGHT? YOU GO WALK UP TO THE DOOR AND YOU GET YOUR

PETITION SIGNATURES.

MR. JACOBSON: RIGHT, BUT OF COURSE, THE ONLY

PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO CIRCULATE THOSE PETITIONS WOULD BE A PARTY

MEMBER OR A NOTARY.

MS. LUNSFORD: CORRECT, AND THAT'S NO DIFFERENT

UNDER EITHER OF THESE TWO SCENARIOS?

MR. JACOBSON: CORRECT.

MS. LUNSFORD: WHY DO WE HAVE POLITICAL PARTIES?

MR. JACOBSON: WHY DO WE HAVE POLITICAL PARTIES?

MS. LUNSFORD: WHY DO WE HAVE POLITICAL PARTIES?

MR. JACOBSON: WE HAVE POLITICAL PARTIES BECAUSE

-- FOR THREE REASONS. ONE, THE PARTIES WILL RECRUIT CANDIDATES. SECOND,

IS THEY ELECT CANDIDATES AND THIRD, THEY ORGANIZE GOVERNMENT. THAT'S

WHAT I LEARNED MY FIRST WEEK OF POLITICAL SCIENCE CLASS.

MS. LUNSFORD: WOULD YOU -- WOULD YOU CONTEND

THAT THE AVERAGE VOTER DOES NOT KNOW THAT THIS EXCEPTION FOR JUDICIAL

CANDIDATES EXISTS?

MR. JACOBSON: THAT'S ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

MS. LUNSFORD: I KNOW IN -- IN MY CIRCULATION OF

VARIOUS PETITIONS, I FIND THAT MOST PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE

155

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BETWEEN A SURROGATES JUDGE -- A SURROGATES JUDGE AND A JUDICIAL -- ANY

OTHER KIND OF JUDICIAL CANDIDATE, CORRECT?

MR. JACOBSON: THAT'S CORRECT.

MS. LUNSFORD: SO IF A VOTER GOES TO THE POLLS AND

THEY SEE SOMEONE ON THE LINE FOR A POLITICAL PARTY, IS IT FAIR TO SAY THEY

MIGHT ASSUME THAT THAT PARTY ENDORSED THAT CANDIDATE?

MR. JACOBSON: THAT'S TRUE.

MS. LUNSFORD: OKAY. UNDER YOUR BILL, IS IT FAIR TO

SAY THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CURRENT WAY WE ELECT JUDGES AND

THE WAY WE WOULD ELECT JUDGES UNDER THIS BILL IS THE WILSON-PAKULA?

MR. JACOBSON: THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S THE

AUTHORIZATION UNDER 6-120, SUBDIVISION (3), THAT THE -- THAT A PARTY MUST

AUTHORIZE A NON-PARTY MEMBER OR SOMEONE WHO -- WHICH INCLUDES

BLANKS TO BE ABLE TO RUN IN THE PRIMARY.

MS. LUNSFORD: THANK YOU.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MS. LUNSFORD: ALL THIS DOES IS FORCE JUDGES INTO A

SITUATION ANY ONE OF US IN THIS ROOM HAS BEEN. I WOULD LOVE FOR JUDGES

TO BE TRULY APOLITICAL. I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD RUN ON POLITICAL PARTY

LINES. I THINK THAT'S SILLY. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD ELECT JUDGES, BECAUSE

I DON'T THINK MOST PEOPLE KNOW WHAT JUDGES DO. BUT THIS IS THE

UNIVERSE WE OPERATE IN. WE HAMSTRING JUDGES BY HAVING THEM RUN AS

NOT POLITICAL CANDIDATES ON PARTY LINES, MAKE THEM RAISE MONEY THEY

CAN'T TAKE WITH THEIR HANDS, IT'S A PREPOSTEROUS SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE.

156

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BUT IN THE WORLD THAT WE OPERATE IN, WHERE JUDGES DO IN FACT RUN ON

PARTY LINES, THEY ARE ALREADY POLITICIZED. THAT'S HOW THAT WORKS. IF WE

WANT THEM TO BE TRULY APOLITICAL, LET'S TAKE THEM OFF THE PARTY LINES. I'LL

SPONSOR THAT BILL. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. BUT HERE WE ARE WHERE

JUDGES ARE ABLE TO WEAR THE COAT OF A PARTY THEY MAY NOT AGREE WITH.

THE IDEA, PHILOSOPHICALLY, THAT A JUDGE COULD BE ON THE WFP LINE AND

THE CONSERVATIVE LINE MAKE ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE. THOSE TWO PARTIES

HAVE DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED POSITIONS. BUT HERE WE ARE, JUST TRYING TO

MAKE THINGS FAIRER AND MORE CLEAR FOR THE VOTER. THIS IS A VERY SIMPLE

BILL. I DON'T THINK IT CHANGES THE WORLD AND TO SUGGEST THAT IT POLITICIZES

THE JUDICIARY ANY MORE THAN IT'S CURRENTLY POLITICIZED IS A FAUX. I'LL BE

VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. TAGUE.

MR. TAGUE: MADAM SPEAKER, WOULD THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. JACOBSON: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. TAGUE: THANKS, MR. JACOBSON. I'M ONE OF

THOSE PARTY BOSSES YOU MENTIONED EARLIER.

MR. JACOBSON: NO, NO. HE MENTIONED PARTY

BOSSES.

MR. TAGUE: WHAT'S THAT? THAT WASN'T A QUESTION,

THAT WAS A STATEMENT, JUST SO YOU KNOW.

157

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

LISTEN, I'M GOING TO BE VERY BRIEF. I -- I DON'T KNOW

ABOUT ANYBODY ELSE IN HERE, BUT I AM CONFUSED AS ALL HELL. WE'RE NOT

TALKING -- THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS TOWN, VILLAGE,

COUNTY JUDGES; AM I CORRECT?

MR. JACOBSON: YEAH. THIS -- THIS DOES NOT -- IT'S

NOT FOR SUPREME AND IT'S NOT FOR JUDGES THAT ARE APPOINTED. IT'S FOR THE

PEOPLE THAT -- HAVE TO CARRY PETITIONS.

MR. TAGUE: NOW, BECAUSE IN THE -- FOR SUPREME

COURT, WE HAVE CONVENTIONS AND THE CANDIDATE'S NAME IS ACTUALLY NOT

EVEN ON THE PETITION. IT'S JUST THE -- THE MEMBERS THAT ARE -- THAT ARE ON

THE COMMITTEE FOR THE CONVENTION --

MR. JACOBSON: RIGHT. JUST THE DELEGATES. THE

DELEGATES IN THE CONVENTION ARE ON A PETITION AND THEY -- AND THEY

NOMINATE AT A CONVENTION.

MR. TAGUE: NOW YOU'RE GONNA FIND THIS STRANGE

BUT MY COLLEAGUE, MS. LUNSFORD, I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH HER ON MUCH OF

WHAT SHE SAID AND ACTUALLY, THIS BILL RIGHT HERE WOULD BE HELPFUL IN MY

COUNTY AND ANY COUNTY THAT IS PARTICULARLY ONE PARTY OR THE OTHER, THIS

BILL IS ACTUALLY GREAT FOR THEM. BUT ANYWAYS, IN MY COUNTY, WE DO

EVERYTHING THROUGH CAUCUS. SO, IF YOU'RE A REPUBLICAN AND YOU'RE

GOING TO RUN FOR JUDGE, OR YOU'RE A REGISTERED REPUBLICAN, YOU HAVE TO

GO TO THE REPUBLICAN COMMITTEE, THROUGH THE CAUCUS PROCESS, YOU'D GET

YOUR NOMINATION THERE. THEN YOU CAN RUN ON ANOTHER LINE, BUT YOU'D

HAVE TO GET A WILSON-PAKULA AND AUTHORIZATION FROM THE STATE PARTY IF

YOU DON'T HAVE A COUNTY PARTY, AND THEN SOMEONE FROM THAT PARTY, OR

158

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SOMEBODY THAT'S A NOTARY HAS TO GO OUT AND GET THE -- THE RIGHT NUMBER

OF SIGNATURES AND THE SIGNATURES HAVE TO BE TURNED IN. THEY -- THEY

HAVE TO BE RIGHT, OR YOU COULD BE KNOCKED OFF THE BALLOT, AS WE ALL

KNOW. SO I'M -- I'M REALLY JUST WONDERING WHAT YOUR PROPOSAL DOES

ANY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING? AND I KNOW THERE'S AN

ANSWER TO IT, BUT I'M -- THAT'S WHEN THE CONFUSION SETS IN.

MR. JACOBSON: OKAY. WHAT IT DOES, VERY SIMPLY

AND IT DOESN'T APPLY TO CAUCUSES BECAUSE CAUCUSES ARE -- ARE DEEMED BY

DEFINITION -- THE REASON THE THEORY BEHIND THAT IS, IT SAYS -- SAYING THAT

ALL THE MEMBERS OF THAT PARTY IN A TOWN ARE VOTING SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO

GET THE AUTHORIZATION. SO WHAT THIS WILL DO AND WHAT IT WILL CHANGE,

THAT IF A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE WISHES TO RUN IN ANOTHER PARTY'S PRIMARY, IN

ORDER TO GET THAT PARTY'S NOMINATION, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET THE

AUTHORIZATION, COMMONLY KNOWN AS A WILSON-PAKULA.

MR. TAGUE: OKAY. SO THAT KINDA SOUNDS SIMILAR TO

WHAT I JUST SAID. I MEAN AND I CAN TELL YOU IN MY OWN COUNTY, AS THE

PARTY BOSS, I DON'T LET ANY OF MY JUDGE CANDIDATES GET SIGNATURES

THEMSELVES. I -- I -- I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH WHAT THE JUDGE SAID, WHAT

YOU SAID. I LET THE MEMBERS OF THE PARTY, OR THE COMMITTEE, GO OUT TO

GET THE SIGNATURES.

SO, AGAIN, MY ONLY CONCERN HERE IS THE DIFFERENCE OF

WHAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING COMPARED TO WHAT WE'RE NOT DOING, AND YOU

KNOW, LOOKING AT THIS -- I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU, IN MY HOME COUNTY,

THIS BILL WOULD BE GREAT FOR ME AND FOR MY PARTY. THAT'S WHY I'M A

LITTLE CONCERNED, YOU KNOW. AND WHAT OTHER COUNTIES AND

159

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

COMMUNITIES WILL THIS BE GOOD FOR THE OTHER SIDE? AND IS IT -- ARE WE

BEING TOTALLY FAIR? I GUESS IS -- IS MY ONLY QUESTION.

MR. JACOBSON: ARE YOU -- ARE YOU VOTING FOR THE

BILL?

MR. TAGUE: I -- I DON'T THINK SO. BUT, I DON'T KNOW,

WE'LL FIND OUT HERE IN A COUPLE OF MINUTES.

MR. JACOBSON: ALL RIGHTY. THANK YOU.

MR. TAGUE: BUT, I -- I WANT TO THANK YOU, AS

ALWAYS, MR. JACOBSON.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. TAGUE: IT'S A GREAT BILL FOR SCHOHARIE COUNTY,

BUT I -- I THINK THAT TODAY I'M GOING TO BE VOTING WITH PROBABLY THE

MAJORITY MEMBERS OF MY CONFERENCE AND I'LL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. STECK.

MR. STECK: ACTUALLY, AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, WE'VE

HAD AN EXPERIENCE --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ARE YOU ON THE BILL,

SIR?

MR. STECK: ON THE BILL. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. STECK: AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, WE HAVE

WITNESSED IN OUR TOWN EXACTLY WHY THIS BILL IS NECESSARY. WE HAD ONE

160

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

JUDGE IN PARTICULAR, BUT IT WAS DONE BY A LARGE NUMBER OF JUDGES AS

WELL WHO WENT AROUND ENROLLING PEOPLE IN THE MINOR PARTIES WHO WERE

THEIR FRIENDS OR WHAT HAVE YOU, HAD NO RELATIONSHIP TO THE PARTY AND

THEN THEY WOULD VOTE THEM BY ABSENTEE BALLOT IN THE PRIMARY -- IN THAT

PARTY'S PRIMARY. IN MANY INSTANCES, THEY WOULD ACTUALLY BE FILLING OUT

THE ABSENTEE BALLOTS FOR THE VOTERS. ONE JUDGE HAD -- WAS DOING IT FOR

ALL THREE PARTIES: WORKING FAMILIES, CONSERVATIVE AND GREEN. AND ALL

I CAN SAY ABOUT THAT WAS, AT LEAST HE HAD ONE RELATIONSHIP TO THOSE

PARTIES, HIS LAST NAME WAS IN FACT GREEN. BUT WHAT ENDED UP

HAPPENING IS THAT PARTICULAR JUDGE BECAUSE OF EXCESSIVE PARTISAN

ACTIVITY, HAD TO RESIGN FROM THE BENCH. THIS BILL WILL PREVENT THOSE

KIND OF SHENANIGANS AND THAT'S WHY I SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: A SLOW ROLL CALL HAS

BEEN REQUESTED. THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE. IF YOU ARE NOT IN THE

CHAMBER, YOU NEED TO MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE CHAMBER. YOU NEED TO

PHYSICALLY BE IN THE CHAMBER TO RECORD YOUR VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. BOLOGNA TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BOLOGNA: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

I'VE HEARD THE -- THE -- THE TERM "WHAT NORMALLY

HAPPENS", "WHAT -- WHAT TRADITIONALLY HAPPENS" AND -- AND THE SPONSOR

-- I'M NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENS WHERE THE SPONSOR LIVES OR ANYONE ELSE'S

161

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

DISTRICT BUT, LIKE MR. TAGUE SAID, THIS -- THIS BILL WOULD ACTUALLY BENEFIT

IN MY NECK OF THE WOODS BECAUSE WHAT WE WOULD NORMALLY HAVE

HAPPEN IS, VERY CORDIALLY, EVERY JUDICIAL CANDIDATE IN ALMOST EVERY

TOWN THAT I HAVE RUNS ON EVERY LINE. AND THAT HAS HAPPENED FOR YEARS

AND IT -- IT KEEPS THE OPTICS OF NEUTRALITY. THE INTENT OF THIS BILL HAS

BEEN SAID TO DEPOLITICIZE. I'M SORRY, I HAVE RUN MORE CAMPAIGNS THAN I

KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH FOR YEARS. THIS BILL WOULD DO NOTHING BUT

HYPER-POLITICIZE. LOCAL TOWN JUDICIARIES, THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS BEING

POLITICIZED. LOOK, I'M NOT A JUDGE, I'M NOT A PARTY BOSS, BUT I HAVE A

PARTY BOSS IN MR. SEMPOLINSKI THAT I TRUST IMPLICITLY, I HAVE A JUDGE IN

JUDGE MORINELLO THAT I TRUST IMPLICITLY AND BOTH OF THEM ARE TELLING ME

THAT THIS IS A BAD IDEA. THIS BILL IS A BAD IDEA FOR KEEPING NEUTRALITY OUT

OF LOCAL TOWN JUDICIARIES. THANK YOU. I'LL BE VOTING NO.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. BOLOGNA IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. LUNSFORD TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. LUNSFORD: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I

JUST WANT TO SAY I'M A HELL YES. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. LUNSFORD IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO, JUST TO REITERATE, I'VE BEEN

A, I GUESS IT'S PARTY BOSS, OR PARTY LEADER, WE'LL CALL IT CHAIRMAN OF MY

LOCAL COUNTY POLITICAL COMMITTEE FOR IT'LL BE NINE YEARS HERE IN A COUPLE

OF MONTHS. AND SO, THERE'S NOBODY THAT STANDS TO BENEFIT MORE THAN ME

162

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

IF THIS WENT THROUGH. IT'S WRONG. THE JUDICIARY IS DIFFERENT. IT IS NOT A

LEGISLATIVE POSITION, IT IS NOT AN EXECUTIVE POSITION. IF WE -- IF THERE'S

A PROPOSAL TO SAY PUT JUDGES IN A NON-POLITICAL SITUATION, I'D BE HAPPY TO

CONSIDER IT. THIS WOULD MAKE POLITICALIZATION WORSE, IT WOULD GIVE --

YOU EITHER TRUST THE PEOPLE TO MAKE THE DECISION OF WHO'S GOING TO BE

THEIR PARTY CANDIDATE REGARDLESS OF THEIR AFFILIATION, OR YOU TRUST OBSCURE

PARTY LEADERSHIP. I TRUST THE PEOPLE AND I WANT TO KEEP THE JUDICIARY AS

DEPOLITICIZED AS POSSIBLE. I VOTE NO.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. SEMPOLINSKI IN

THE NEGATIVE.

MS. SIMON TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. SIMON: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

I AM NOT A PARTY BOSS, BUT I ONCE TRIED TO PLAY ONE ON

TV. HA-HA. AND -- BUT, HERE'S THE THING. WE FORCE JUDGES TO RUN ON

PARTY LINES, AND IF THERE IS NO PARTY ISSUE, WHY ARE WE DOING THAT AND

NOT JUST HAVING APPOINTED JUDGES? THE REALITY IS THAT IF YOU ARE

RUNNING ON ONE LINE AND YOU WANT TO RUN ON ANOTHER LINE, YOU SHOULD

SEEK PERMISSION FROM THE OTHER PARTY AND GET WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS A

WILSON-PAKULA. THERE'S NO REASON FOR JUDGES NOT TO HAVE THAT AND I

WILL TELL YOU THAT IN MY COUNTY WHEN A JUDGE RUNS ON ONLY ONE LINE,

SOMEBODY STEPS UP ON THE OTHER PARTY AND RUNS EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE

NO QUALIFICATIONS, HAVE NO CHANCE OF RUNNING, BUT THEY RUN JUST TO HAVE

SOMEBODY ON THAT LINE. SO WE'RE ALMOST FORCING JUDGES TO RUN ON ALL

PARTY LINES EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE DIRECTLY CONTRADICTORY AND THEY

CONFUSE THE VOTER BY DOING THAT. SO I THINK THIS IS A GOOD, SOLID BILL

163

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD ALL GET BEHIND BECAUSE IF WE

CONSIDER A JUDICIARY TO BE NONPARTISAN, THEN WE OUGHT TO ACT LIKE IT.

THANK YOU. I'LL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. SIMON IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. MORINELLO TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. MORINELLO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

THROUGHOUT THE DEBATES, THERE'S BEEN DIFFERENT DISCUSSIONS. DIFFERENT

MEMBERS HAVE TRIED TO CORRECT OR SUBSTANTIATE CONTRADICTIONS OF THE

SPONSOR. THERE'S TALK ABOUT CROSS-ENDORSEMENTS; THAT HAPPENS IN

SUPREME COURT. IF A PARTY BOSS REFUSES TO GIVE THAT WILSON-PAKULA,

WHAT THEY'VE DONE IS THEY'VE GAMED THE SYSTEM. AND THEY TALK ABOUT

THEY DON'T KNOW WHO THE CANDIDATE IS. WELL, THE PETITION IS ONLY

ALLOWING YOU TO GET ON THE BALLOT TO BE ABLE TO TELL THE VOTER WHO YOU

ARE. JUDICIAL CANDIDATES WILL HAVE PALM CARDS, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO TELL

THEM THEIR BACKGROUND, THEIR EDUCATION, THEIR EXPERIENCE. AND WHAT

THIS DOES, IS IT GAMES THE SYSTEM. LAST YEAR, OR THE YEAR BEFORE, THEY

PASSED A BILL WHERE ELECTION CHALLENGES COULD ONLY GO TO CERTAIN

DISTRICTS AND IT WAS COINCIDENTAL THAT THOSE WERE THE PREDOMINANTLY

DEMOCRATIC DISTRICTS. THERE'S ANOTHER BILL THEY'RE BRINGING IN TO

INCREASE THE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS TO 13, TAKING THE 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT AND

BLOWING IT UP AND MAKING THE CITY OF BUFFALO ITS OWN JUDICIAL DISTRICT.

BASED UPON WHAT I SEE HAPPENING, WHAT IS TRANSPIRING IN THIS CHAMBER

AND WHAT THIS BODY IS DOING TO THE ELECTION SYSTEM FOR AN INDEPENDENT

SYSTEM IS ABSOLUTELY UNCONSCIONABLE. BASED UPON THAT I VOTE IN THE

164

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. MORINELLO IN

THE NEGATIVE.

MR. JACOBSON TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

QUIET IN THE CHAMBER, PLEASE.

MR. JACOBSON: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, AND

THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR A SPIRITED DEBATE.

THIS BILL WOULD ELIMINATE THE ABILITY OF A JUDICIAL

CANDIDATE FROM AUTOMATICALLY BEING ALLOWED TO RUN IN ANOTHER PARTY'S

PRIMARY. JUDICIAL CANDIDATES WOULD STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO RUN ON

ANOTHER PARTY'S LINE, SHOULD THEY GET THE AUTHORIZATION FROM THAT PARTY,

COMMONLY KNOWN AS A WILSON-PAKULA, WHICH ALL OF US HAVE TO DO IF WE

ARE SEEKING A LINE FROM WITH -- THAT WE ARE NOT A MEMBER OF.

UNFORTUNATELY, MOST VOTERS KNOW LITTLE OR NOTHING ABOUT JUDICIAL

CANDIDATES. SO, IF THEY DON'T KNOW THE PERSON, MOST OF THE PEOPLE WILL

MAKE THE DECISION BASED ON WHAT PARTY THE CANDIDATE IS RUNNING ON.

AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, IT'S IN MY MEMO, PEOPLE -- JUDICIAL CANDIDATES

WOULD JUST CIRCULATE IN ANY -- IN ANY OR EVERY PARTY'S PRIMARY, WITH --

WITHOUT REGARD TO THEIR OWN PARTY AND WITH VOTERS NOT KNOWING WHERE

THEY STAND, OR SHOULD I SAY, WHAT THEIR VALUES ARE. NOT WHERE THEY

STAND, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THEY CANNOT TAKE POSITIONS, BUT THEY WILL NOT

KNOW THEIR VALUES. THIS BILL WILL HELP TO RESTORE CONFIDENCE IN OUR

ELECTORAL PROCESS BY ASSURING THAT THE JUDICIAL CANDIDATES THEY VOTE FOR

IN NOVEMBER SHARE THE PARTY'S VALUES THAT THEY RUN ON. I PROUDLY VOTE

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

165

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. JACOBSON IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. BICHOTTE HERMELYN TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. BICHOTTE HERMELYN: THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER, FOR ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE.

I AM THE COUNTY CHAIR OF THE LARGEST COUNTY IN THE

ENTIRE STATE, AND I UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF THIS BILL AND WHY IT'S

IMPORTANT. BUT I DO HAVE TO SHARE THAT IN BROOKLYN IT'S NOT A ONE-SIZE-

FIT-ALL [SIC]. IN THE SOUTH PART MY DISTRICT, THIS BILL WOULD ACTUALLY HURT

THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE TO HAVE JUDICIAL CANDIDATES IN OUR PARTY.

AND WE WANT TO BE REALLY CAREFUL WHEN WE PUT THESE BILLS TOGETHER TO

UNDERSTAND HOW WE CAN CARVE OUT AREAS THAT WILL BE BENEFICIAL IN TERMS

OF HOW WE ELECT OUR JUDICIAL CANDIDATES. BUT I AM A DEMOCRAT, AND I

REPRESENT, AGAIN, A -- A COUNTY THAT HAS 1.2 MILLION DEMOCRATS.

AND SO FOR THAT REASON I WILL BE VOTING IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. BICHOTTE

HERMELYN IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

(PAUSE)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, WOULD

YOU PLEASE HAVE THE CLERK PULL THE ROLLS OF OUR COLLEAGUES THAT ARE ON

ZOOM?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE CLERK WILL CALL

THE ROLL ON ZOOM.

166

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE CLERK: MS. BARRETT, FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE

STATE YOUR NAME AND HOW YOU WISH TO VOTE.

MS. BARRETT: ASSEMBLYMEMBER DIDI BARRETT IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

THE CLERK: MS. BARRETT IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. MAGNARELLI, FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME

AND HOW YOU WISH TO VOTE.

MR. MAGNARELLI: WILLIAM MAGNARELLI IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

THE CLERK: MR. MAGNARELLI IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. MCDONOUGH, FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE STATE YOUR

NAME AND HOW YOU WISH TO VOTE.

(PAUSE)

MS. RAJKUMAR, FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME

AND HOW YOU WISH TO VOTE.

MS. RAJKUMAR: JENIFER RAJKUMAR IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

THE CLERK: MS. RAJKUMAR IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. SLATER, FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND

HOW YOU WISH TO VOTE.

MR. SLATER: MATT SLATER IN THE NEGATIVE.

THE CLERK: MR. SLATER IN THE NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ARE THERE ANY OTHER

VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

167

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE BILL IS PASSED.

PAGE 13, RULES REPORT NO. 411, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00584-C, RULES

REPORT NO. 411, STECK, SANTABARBARA, PAULIN, LEVENBERG, REYES,

SHIMSKY, DAVILA, BORES, JACOBSON, LEE. AN ACT TO AMEND THE LABOR

LAW, IN RELATION TO ENACTING THE "TRAPPED AT WORK ACT."

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: AN EXPLANATION HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. STECK.

WE'RE ON THE DEBATE. CAN WE HAVE QUIET IN THE

CHAMBER, PLEASE?

MR. STECK: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM

SPEAKER.

THIS BILL AROSE FROM A SITUATION I HAD WITH A

CONSTITUENT WHO IS AN ESTHETICIAN. SHE WENT TO BEAUTY SCHOOL, GOT ALL

THE TRAINING SHE NEEDED TO DO HER JOB. GOT HER FIRST JOB WITH A

PARTICULAR EMPLOYER, AND SHE SIGNED AN AGREEMENT SAYING THAT SHE

WOULD PAY $5,000 FOR BEING TRAINED ON THE JOB WHEN, IN FACT, THERE WAS

NO TRAINING ON THE JOB. SHE DECIDED THAT THE JOB WASN'T AS PROMISED.

SHE LEFT THE JOB, SHE GOT SUED AND HAD TO HIRE A LAWYER TO DEFEND HER

AND ENDED UP WITH A $5,000 JUDGMENT.

THIS BILL WOULD PROHIBIT EMPLOYERS FROM USING THESE

TYPES OF PROMISSORY NOTES, IN MOST CIRCUMSTANCES, AS A CONDITION OF

EMPLOYMENT. EXISTING NOTES WOULD BE DEEMED VOID AND PENALTIES ARE

SET FOR VIOLATIONS. PROMISSORY PROVISIONS, ALSO CALLED STAY OR PAY

168

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

PROVISIONS, REQUIRE EMPLOYEES TO PAY THEIR EMPLOYERS BACK IF THEY

SEPARATE FROM EMPLOYMENT, OFTEN WITHIN CERTAIN TIME FRAMES AND

SOMETIMES REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEIR SEPARATION IS VOLUNTARY OR

INVOLUNTARY. THESE PROVISIONS ARE INCLUDED IN CONTRACTS UPON HIRE

BETWEEN EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE, AND THEY ACT AS A STRONG DISINCENTIVE

FOR EMPLOYEES TO LEAVE THEIR NEW WORKPLACE FOR BETTER EMPLOYMENT.

THESE PROVISIONS CAN TAKE MANY FORMS, SUCH AS

TRAINING REPAYMENT AGREEMENT PROVISIONS, OR TRAPS, WHICH IS THE ONE

I MENTIONED WITH MY CONSTITUENT; EDUCATIONAL REPAYMENT CONTRACTS,

QUIT DEEDS, DAMAGES CLAUSES, SIGN-ON BONUSES OR OTHER TYPE OF CASH

PAYMENTS TIED TO MANDATORY STAY PERIODS.

ACCORDING TO THE CONSUMER FINANCE PROTECTION

BUREAU'S OFFICE FOR CONSUMER POPULATIONS, THESE TYPES OF PROVISIONS

HAVE GROWN IN PROMINENCE OVER THE YEARS AND IMPOSE HARMFUL

EMPLOYER-DRIVEN DEBTS ON EMPLOYEES. IN THEIR 2023 REPORT THEY

REPORTED ON TRAPS SPECIFICALLY. EMPLOYERS' USE OF TRAPS BEGAN IN

THE 1990S, PARTICULARLY FOR HIGHER-SKILLED, HIGHER-WAGE POSITIONS SUCH

AS ENGINEERS, SECURITIES BROKERS AND AIRLINE PILOTS. STILL IN USE IN THOSE

INDUSTRIES; HOWEVER, THEY ARE NOW ALSO COMMON IN LOWER- AND

MODERATE-WAGE INDUSTRIES SUCH AS IN THE HEALTHCARE, TRANSPORTATION AND

RETAIL INDUSTRIES. COMMENTATORS NOTED THAT OTHER OCCUPATIONS THAT HAVE

BEEN REPORTED TO USE THEM ARE MECHANICS, HAIRSTYLISTS, BANK WORKERS,

SOCIAL WORKERS AND PILOTS.

WHILE IT'S DIFFICULT TO ESTIMATE HOW COMMON TRAPS

ARE ACROSS THE WORKFORCE, THE STUDY BY THE CORNELL SURVEY RESEARCH

169

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

INSTITUTE FOUND THAT NEARLY TEN PERCENT OF AMERICAN WORKERS SURVEYED

IN 2020 WERE COVERED BY A TRAINING REPAYMENT AGREEMENT, AND THE

STEWARD -- STUDENT BORROWER PROTECTION CENTER ESTIMATES THAT MAJOR

EMPLOYERS RELY UPON TRAPS IN SEGMENTS OF THE U.S. LABOR MARKET THAT

COLLECTIVELY EMPLOY MORE THAN ONE IN THREE PRIVATE-SECTOR WORKERS. A

SURVEY OF REGISTERED NURSES CONDUCTED BY NATIONAL NURSES UNITED

SHOWS A DRAMATIC INCREASE IN THEIR USE; 44.8 PERCENT OF NURSES HAVE

BEEN WORKING FIVE YEARS OR LESS, AND 45.3 PERCENT WHO HAVE BEEN

WORKING BETWEEN SIX TO TEN YEARS REPORTED HAVING BEING SUBJECT TO A

TRAP, AS COMPARED TO 24.3 PERCENT OF THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING

BETWEEN 11 AND 20 YEARS, AND 9.4 PERCENT WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING 21

YEARS OR MORE. SO THESE TYPE OF THINGS ARE ON THE RISE.

TO ADDRESS THE RISE OF THESE NOTES WHICH HARM

INDIVIDUAL WORKERS AND LABOR MOBILITY, THIS BILL WOULD VOID AND

PROHIBIT THE USE OF THESE PROVISIONS IN MOST SITUATIONS. WHILE CERTAIN

EXEMPTIONS ARE PROVIDED, THIS BILL IS A NECESSARY MOVE TO PROTECT

WORKERS. ON A FUNDAMENTAL LEVEL, THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMPLOYER

AND EMPLOYEE IS ALREADY HEAVILY SLANTED IN THE EMPLOYER'S FAVOR. AN

EMPLOYEE'S RIGHT TO LEAVE A WORKPLACE THAT IS A POOR FIT FOR THEM IS ONE

OF THE FEW THINGS AN EMPLOYEE CAN DO. ALSO, THE FREE MOVEMENT OF

LABOR IS ONE OF THE CORNERSTONES OF ANY FUNCTIONAL MARKET, AND

PREVENTING EMPLOYEES FROM LEAVING JOBS THEY ARE NOT A GOOD FIT FOR

HARMS EMPLOYERS AS MUCH AS IT HARMS EMPLOYEES. NOT ONLY ARE

PROMISSORY NOTES EXPLOITATIVE, BUT THEY ALSO UNDERMINE WORKERS' RIGHT

TO SELF-ORGANIZE OR TO FORM, JOIN OR ASSIST LABOR ORGANIZATIONS. FOR THIS

170

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

REASON, THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ISSUED THEIR OWN OPINION

ON THESE PROVISIONS. IN 2024, THEY STATED THE FOLLOWING --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU, MR.

STECK.

MR. DURSO.

MR. DURSO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WOULD

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. STECK: OF COURSE, YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. DURSO: MR. STECK, CAN YOU PLEASE REPEAT THAT

AGAIN?

(LAUGHTER)

MR. STECK: THE STAFF -- THE STAFF DID SUCH AN

EXCELLENT JOB (INAUDIBLE/CROSS-TALK) --

MR. DURSO: I -- I MISSED EVERYTHING YOU SAID.

MR. STECK: THEY GLORIFIED ME WITH ALL THIS DATA

AND INFORMATION THAT I -- I'M VERY HAPPY TO HAVE BROUGHT IT TO THE

ATTENTION OF THE BODY.

MR. DURSO: THANK YOU, MR. STECK. OBVIOUSLY,

UNDERSTANDING THIS I JUST WANTED TO GET SOME CLARITY ON SOME OF THE

QUESTIONS.

MR. STECK: SURE.

MR. DURSO: SO YOU SAID IN THE BEGINNING THIS WAS

171

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED TO A CONSTITUENT OF YOURS, CORRECT?

MR. STECK: YES.

MR. DURSO: HOW DID THAT CASE WORK OUT?

MR. STECK: THE CASE OUT WORKED OUT NEGATIVELY

FOR THE CONSTITUENT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THIS LAW IN EFFECT.

MR. DURSO: THEY CAN'T HEAR YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. STECK, I NEED

YOU TO SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE.

MR. STECK: YEAH, THE -- THE CASE WORKED OUT

NEGATIVELY FOR THE CONSTITUENT. SHE HAD TO INCUR A LOT OF ATTORNEY'S FEES

AND GOT A JUDGMENT ENTERED AGAINST HER.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO MY QUESTION IS, DOESN'T --

WOULDN'T CURRENT LABOR LAW ALREADY PROTECT HER FROM THIS, AND WHY

NOT?

MR. STECK: ABSOLUTELY NOT BECAUSE THERE'S NO SUCH

PROVISION IN THE LAW. THERE ARE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF COMMON LAW,

WHICH IS JUDGE-MADE LAW, THAT TALK ABOUT AGREEMENTS THAT ARE IN

RESTRAINT OF TRADE. BUT OVER TIME, IN THE AREA OF NON-COMPETES -- WHICH

TRAPS ARE SIMILAR TO NON-COMPETES -- THOSE RULES HAVE BEEN WHITTLED

DOWN. AND ONE OF THE WORST THINGS ABOUT IT IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA IS

THE EMPLOYEE GETS PUT IN A POSITION THAT EVEN IF AN AGREEMENT IS

UNLAWFUL, A CERTAIN NON-COMPETE IS UNLAWFUL, THE EMPLOYER SUES THEM

AND THEN THEY'VE GOT TO HIRE A LAWYER AND PAY A LAWYER $20,000 TO

DEFEND THEMSELVES. SO IT'S MUCH SMARTER IN THE AREA OF EMPLOYMENT

LAW TO JUST SAY WHAT THE CLEAR RULES ARE. AND BY THE WAY, WE DID PASS A

172

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BILL ELIMINATING ALL NON-COMPETES, WHICH --

MR. DURSO: YES.

MR. STECK: -- THIS DOES NOT DO, AND IT ENDED UP

BEING VETOED BY THE GOVERNOR. BUT THAT IS THE PROBLEM, IT IS NOT ILLEGAL

(INDISCERNIBLE) --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: CAN WE HAVE QUIET

IN THE CHAMBER, PLEASE? TAKE YOUR SEATS OR BRING YOUR CONVERSATIONS

OUTSIDE. THANK YOU.

MR. STECK: NOT -- NOT UNLAWFUL UNDER EXISTING

LABOR LAW.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO BUT -- AND I GUESS IT WOULD

REALLY BE UP TO A JUDGE, RIGHT, TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS WOULD

BE ENGAGING IN UNFOR -- UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES WHICH, AGAIN, OBVIOUSLY,

IS --

MR. STECK: NOT UNDER THIS BILL. NOT UNDER THIS BILL.

THERE WOULD BE VERY CLEAR RULES AS TO WHEN THESE THINGS ARE ALLOWED

AND WHEN THEY ARE NOT. UNDER CURRENT LAW, I CAN'T EVEN SAY IT'S UP TO

THE JUDGE BECAUSE WHILE THE JUDGE COULD ARGUABLY SAY THAT THESE TYPE

OF AGREEMENTS ARE IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE, AS A PRACTICAL MATTER THAT HAS

NOT OCCURRED.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO CAN YOU GIVE ME ANOTHER

EXAMPLE OF WHAT EMPLOYMENT-BASED DEBT WOULD BE?

MR. STECK: OKAY. WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S

MENTIONED OFTEN IS WHAT HAPPENS A LOT WITH NURSES NOW, BECAUSE THEY

WANT NURSES TO STAY THERE FOR, SAY, THREE YEARS. WE'RE GONNA PAY YOU A

173

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

$10,000 BONUS WHEN YOU COME, BUT IF YOU LEAVE YOU HAVE TO PAY US

BACK THE $10,000. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS IT ENCOURAGES LITIGATION.

BECAUSE IF THE NURSE, IF THE WORKING CONDITIONS DON'T TURN OUT AS

PROMISED AND THE NURSE LEAVES, THE NURSE IS GONNA SAY, WELL, IT'S TRUE I

SIGNED THIS PAYBACK, BUT YOU BREACHED THE CONTRACT SO I DON'T HAVE TO

PAY THAT -- PAY IT BACK. SO WE END UP IN LITIGATION. AND EMPLOYMENT

LITIGATION, GENERALLY BUSINESSES DON'T LIKE IT MUCH AND EMPLOYEES CAN'T

GENERALLY AFFORD IT. SO A FAR BETTER APPROACH IS INCENTIVE

COMPENSATION, WHICH WOULD BE LEGAL UNDER THIS BILL. SO, FOR EXAMPLE,

AT THE END OF -- OF TWO YEARS OF SERVICE YOU GET A $5,000 BONUS, AT THE

END OF THREE YEARS OF SERVICE YOU GET ANOTHER $5,000 BONUS. PERFECTLY

LEGAL. IT'S THE CLAWBACK PROVISIONS THAT CREATE ALL THE PROBLEMS AND THE

LITIGATION AND SO FORTH.

MR. DURSO: SO IN OTHER WORDS YOU'RE SAYING THAT IF

THERE IS A -- A CLAWBACK PROVISION IN AN EMPLOYMENT -- IN OTHER WORDS,

I -- I -- EXCUSE ME, LET ME -- LET ME USE AN EXAMPLE, IT'S PROBABLY

BETTER. SO IF I WANT TO GO TO NURSING SCHOOL AND THE STATE IS OFFERING AN

INCENTIVE, RIGHT, BECAUSE I GO TO A SUNY SCHOOL, AND I HAVE TO GO WORK

FOR A STATE FACILITY FOR FIVE YEARS ONCE I GET OUT OF COLLEGE, THEY WILL PAY

A CERTAIN AMOUNT TOWARDS MY STUDENT LOANS AS LONG AS I STAY EMPLOYED

WITH THAT STATE FACILITY, COUNTY, TOWN, WHATEVER IT MAY BE. WOULD THAT

FALL UNDER THIS? BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF PROGRAMS WITHIN NEW YORK

STATE WHERE WE PAY BACK TUITION. WE ALLOW FOR CERTAIN TRAINING AND

THERE'S GRANT PROGRAMS FOR THOSE. WOULD ANY OF THOSE BE NOW NEGATED

BECAUSE OF THIS LEGISLATION?

174

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. STECK: THOSE PROVISIONS ARE GENERALLY

AUTHORIZED IN SEPARATE STATUTES, SO THEY WOULD SURVIVE. BUT THIS

PARTICULAR -- ONE OF THE AREAS WHERE THIS COMES UP IS -- AND THE BILL WAS

CAREFULLY WRITTEN TO ALLOW FOR THAT BECAUSE, AGAIN, THE CONSTITUENT THAT I

HAD, THAT WAS AN ILLEGITIMATE TRAINING. NO TRAINING WAS PROVIDED, IN

FACT. HOWEVER, IF YOU ARE ACTUALLY SENDING AN EMPLOYEE AND YOU'RE

PAYING AN EMPLOYEE TO GO BE TRAINED IN SOME PARTICULAR ASPECT OF YOUR

EMPLOYMENT THE -- THE -- AND YOU'RE PAYING, YOU KNOW, FOR THE TRAVEL

AND THE TRAINING, THAT CAN BE RECOVERED UNDER THIS LEGISLATION. WE

ALLOWED FOR THAT EXCEPTION.

MR. DURSO: SO IT'S -- IT'S REALLY MORE OF A

WORK-BASED TRAINING. SO IF YOU'RE WORKING WHILE YOU'RE TRAINING AT THE

SAME TIME. SO AGAIN, AND JUST USE THE EXAMPLE, APPRENTICESHIP

PROGRAMS, RIGHT? YOU ARE WORKING, BUT THEN AT NIGHT YOU'RE GOING TO

SCHOOL, YOU'RE DOING WHATEVER, AND YOU DECIDE TO LEAVE THE, YOU KNOW,

THE APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM. THEY OBVIOUSLY -- THEY'RE NOT TAKING THE

MONEY BACK FOR THE TRAINING THAT THEY'VE GIVEN YOU BECAUSE YOU WE'RE

WORKING WHILE YOU WERE TRAINING.

MR. STECK: YOU CAN'T INSULATE AN EMPLOYER -- OR AN

EMPLOYER CANNOT INSULATE THEMSELVES FROM ALL RISK. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IF

WE HIRE AN ASSOCIATE TO WORK IN OUR LAW FIRM, THEY'RE RIGHT OUT OF

SCHOOL, THEY DON'T HAVE A LOT OF PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE. THEY'RE GONNA

GET TRAINED IN SOME PRACTICAL THINGS BY OUR OFFICE. BUT THAT DOESN'T

MEAN THAT WE CAN IMPOSE ON THEM SOME SORT OF PROMISSORY NOTE THAT

THEY GOT TO PAY US BACK WHEN THEY LEAVE. THAT'S ONE OF THE RISKS YOU

175

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

TAKE AS AN EMPLOYER. AND IF YOU WANT TO ENCOURAGE YOUR EMPLOYEES TO

STAY, YOU COULD EITHER DO IT BY PROVIDING THEM WITH A GOOD WORKPLACE

-- IMAGINE THAT -- OR, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN USE MONETARY INCENTIVES. THE

-- THE BILL DOESN'T INTERFERE WITH THAT.

MR. DURSO: IT'S JUST -- AND -- AND AGAIN -- AND I'M

AGREEING WITH YOU, SO I'M NOT ARGUING THE POINT. I JUST WANT MORE

CLARITY. IT'S REALLY THE MORE THE -- THE CLAWBACK PROVISIONS THAT ARE IN

THE BILL TO MAKE IT SAY THAT, I HIRE YOU, WE DO SOME TRAINING, WE SEND

YOU FOR TRAINING, WHATEVER. IT'S TO PROTECT THE EMPLOYEE, AND THE

EMPLOYER, ACTUALLY, FROM LITIGATION ON BOTH SIDES SAYING, YOU OWE ME

MONEY. I GOT TRAINED THIS AMOUNT OF TIME. IT'S THAT IT WOULD BE A

SEPARATION OF SERVICES, A SEPARATION OF SERVICE UNLESS, AS YOU SAID,

THERE'S TRAVEL INVOLVED. YOU'RE SENDING SOMEONE, WHETHER IT'S

OUT-OF-STATE, YOU KNOW, TO A -- A PLANT SOMEWHERE, A -- A

MANUFACTURING PLANT TO SEE HOW IT GETS DONE TO WORK THERE TO BE TRAINED

WITHOUT THEM BEING EMPLOYED. SO IN OTHER WORDS, LIKE A TRAINING TRIP.

YOU COULD CLAWBACK THAT MONEY, YOU'RE SAYING? BUT IF IT'S PART OF YOUR

JOB --

MR. STECK: IF -- IF YOU'RE AN EMPLOYEE AND YOU'RE

SENT FOR ACTUAL TRAINING THAT IS PAID FOR BY YOUR EMPLOYER, THAT WOULD

BE AN EXCEPTION. I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE AN EXCEPTION IF THE

EMPLOYER SAID TO YOU -- OH, I'VE GOT TWO PLACES OF BUSINESS. GO WATCH

AT THE OTHER PLACE. THAT'S NOT REALLY TRAINING OF THE TYPE THAT WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE AN EMPLOYER GOES

OUT-OF-POCKET AND SAYS TO YOU, OKAY, YOU NEED TO LEARN HOW TO USE THIS

176

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

PARTICULAR CHEMICAL AND YOU GOT TO GO TO THE CHEMICAL TRAINING

INSTITUTE AND YOU -- WE'RE GONNA PAY THE CHEMICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE

TO TRAIN YOU, THAT'S THE TYPE OF EXCEPTION WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. WE'RE

NOT TALKING ABOUT GO DOWN TO THE -- TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE

OF NEW YORK AND OBSERVE A TRIAL.

MR. DURSO: OF COURSE. YES, SIR. OKAY. THANK

YOU, MR. STECK. THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAD FOR YOU. I APPRECIATE IT.

MR. STECK: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. WALSH.

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

SPONSOR YIELD FOR JUST A QUICK QUESTION?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. STECK: CERTAINLY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I -- I JUST

WANTED TO PICK UP FOR A MINUTE ON THAT LAST EXAMPLE BECAUSE I THINK

THAT THAT WAS GETTING AT WHAT MY ISSUE WAS.

MANY YEARS AGO I HAD -- THERE WAS A -- I THINK -- I

THINK HE WAS AN ENGINEER AT GE IN SCHENECTADY, AND HE WAS BEING SENT

VERY SIMILAR TO YOUR EXAMPLE OF, LIKE, THE CHEMICAL INSTITUTE TO BE

TRAINED. THERE WAS VERY SPECIALIZED TRAINING THAT HE WAS GOING TO

RECEIVE THAT GE WAS INVESTING IN HIM TO GO TO THIS SCHOOL AND DO THIS.

OKAY. SO IF HE WENT TO THE SCHOOL -- BUT THEN HE WAS ASKED TO SIGN AN

AGREEMENT SAYING WHEN HE CAME BACK FROM THE SCHOOL BECAUSE THEY

177

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

INVESTED, I DON'T KNOW, $20,000 FOR HIM GOING TO THIS SCHOOL, HE CAME

BACK. HE AGREED TO WORK FOR A PERIOD OF TIME WITH GE OR IF HE LEFT

BEFORE THAT PERIOD OF TIME HE WOULD NEED TO PAY BACK ALL OR A PORTION

OR A SLIDING SCALE OR WHATEVER IT WAS, THE COST OF THAT TRAINING. DOES

THIS BILL CHANGE THAT?

MR. STECK: NO.

MS. WALSH: PERFECT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO

MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. ANGELINO.

MR. ANGELINO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD, PLEASE?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. STECK: OF COURSE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. ANGELINO: A SAD STORY OF ME GETTING SUED

BECAUSE I WAS -- I HIRED A POLICE OFFICER FROM ANOTHER AGENCY. AND I

SEE IN HERE IT TALKS ABOUT GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AND I'M CURIOUS. I

KNOW THERE'S A SECTION OF THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW THAT REQUIRES

REPAYMENT. DOES THAT MAKE THIS NULL? WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT

THAT, OR --

MR. STECK: IT -- IT APPLIES TO ALL EMPLOYEES;

HOWEVER, IF THERE IS AUTHORIZATION -- THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF LAW IS THAT

THERE'S SPECIFIC CONTROLS OVER THE GENERAL. SO IF THERE'S A SPECIFIC

AUTHORIZATION WITH RESPECT TO A POLICE OFFICER TRAINING OR SOMETHING OF

178

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THAT NATURE, THAT WOULD CONTROL OVER THE GENERAL.

MR. ANGELINO: AND FOR ANYBODY WHO'S CURIOUS,

THAT'S GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW ARTICLE 5, SECTION 72-C, REQUIRES THE

REPAYMENT IF -- IF A POLICE AGENCY HIRES ANOTHER BEFORE THEIR -- THEIR

MONEY'S BEEN RECOUPED.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT.

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.)

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: MR. STECK TO

EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. STECK: I WAS JUST JOKING. I'VE ALREADY

EXPLAINED IT ENOUGH. THANK YOU.

(LAUGHTER/APPLAUSE)

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: MR. STECK IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE THEN.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

PAGE 14, RULES REPORT NO. 439, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A05898, RULES REPORT

NO. 439, TAPIA, GRAY, DESTEFANO, BORES, BURDICK, CRUZ, PALMESANO,

179

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

LEVENBERG, MORINELLO, ALVAREZ, DE LOS SANTOS, REYES, HYNDMAN,

LUNSFORD, DAIS, DAVILA, KASSAY, K. BROWN, SANTABARBARA, LEMONDES.

AN ACT TO AMEND THE RETIREMENT AND SOCIAL SECURITY LAW, IN RELATION

TO DEATH BENEFITS FOR THE BENEFICIARIES OF CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE

RETIREMENT SYSTEM.

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: ON A MOTION BY

MS. TAPIA, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

ADVANCED.

AN -- AN EXPLANATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. TAPIA.

MS. TAPIA: THANK YOU, MR. [SIC] SPEAKER.

THIS BILL AMENDS THE RETIREMENT AND SOCIAL SECURITY

LAW TO PERMIT THE BENEFICIARIES OF JUDGES WHO DIE WHILE IN OFFICE TO

RECEIVE PENSION LEVEL DEATH BENEFITS. UNDER THE CURRENT LAW, IF A

STATE-PAID JUDGE OR JUSTICE DIES IN OFFICE, EVEN AFTER REACHING FULL

RETIREMENT ELIGIBILITY, THEIR BENEFICIARIES RECEIVE A SIGNIFICANT [SIC]

REDUCED DEATH BENEFIT RATHER THAN THE FULL PENSION THE JUDGE WOULD

HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO IF THEY HAD RETIRED BEFORE DEATH.

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: MR. -- MR. RA.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MS. TAPIA: YES.

MR. RA: THANK YOU. SO --

180

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: SHE YIELDS.

MR. RA: THANK YOU. SO THIS IS A DEATH GAMBLE,

WHICH I THINK WE'VE DONE IN SOME OTHER AREAS. I KNOW WE HAD ONE

EARLIER TODAY FOR A SPECIFIC COUNTY WORKFORCE. WE -- I -- I BELIEVE WE

DID A BILL LAST YEAR THAT WAS ULTIMATELY VETOED REGARDING THIS. BUT SO

ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS A JUDGE PASSES AWAY IN

SERVICE WHO -- THEY HAVE TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR RETIREMENT, CORRECT, BUT NOT

HAVE FILED RETIREMENT PAPERWORK? SO THEN WHAT HAPPENS? THAT JUDGE

DIES IN SERVICE. THE FAMILY NOW HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO ELECT TO EITHER

GET A DEATH BENEFIT OR A PENSION?

MS. TAPIA: NO.

MR. RA: WHAT --

MS. TAPIA: (INDISCERNIBLE). IF -- IF THE JUDGE DIDN'T

HAVE -- DIDN'T RETIRE BEFORE DYING, THEY DON'T -- THEY JUST -- THEY JUST GET

THE -- THE BENEFIT, NOT THE PENSION.

MR. RA: OKAY. SO WHAT -- WHAT -- WHAT NEW BENEFIT

IS THE FAMILY GETTING UNDER THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT THEY WOULDN'T

GET NOW?

MS. TAPIA: WELL, THEY WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY

THAT -- THAT -- THAT THE -- THE FAMILY WILL BE ABLE TO GET THE FULL --

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: MS. TAPIA, COULD

YOU SPEAK IN THE MICROPHONE?

MS. TAPIA: OKAY. THAT -- THAT THE -- THAT THE

FAMILY, ESPECIALLY CHILDREN, WOULD HAVE THE BENEFIT TO -- TO GET THE FULL

PENSION THAT THEY WOULD HAVE IF THEY WOULD -- DON'T DO IT WHEN THEY

181

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

WERE ALIVE.

MR. RA: SO THEY CAN GET -- THEY CAN GET THE FULL

PENSION.

MS. TAPIA: YES.

MR. RA: NOW, I ASSUME IT WOULD BE BASED ON

WHATEVER BENEFICIARY THE -- THE JUDGE HAD DESIGNATED WITH THE

RETIREMENT SYSTEM?

MS. TAPIA: YES, THE CHILDREN OR THE HUSBAND. YES.

MR. RA: OKAY. THE CHILDREN OR A SPOUSE.

MS. TAPIA: OR SPOUSE, YES.

MR. RA: AND THEN -- AND SO IT WOULD BE -- BECAUSE

OBVIOUSLY SOMETIME -- SOMETIMES EVEN IF YOU'RE, RIGHT, IF YOU'RE

COLLECTING A PENSION THEY'RE -- THEY HAVE THAT SURVIVABILITY. SO THEN

THAT BENEFICIARY WOULD GET IT FOR THE REMAINDER OF THEIR LIFE

(INDISCERNIBLE), CORRECT?

MS. TAPIA: YES. LIKE, THEY WILL HAVE IT IF THAT

HAPPENED.

MR. RA: THANK YOU.

NOW AS OPPOSED TO CURRENT LAW, REALLY ALL THAT WOULD

HAPPEN WAS THE -- WOULD -- THE FAMILY WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE DEATH

BENEFIT THAT WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH, WHICH LIKE FOR -- FOR US I BELIEVE IT'S

THREE TIMES OUR SALARY AND IT'S A ONE-TIME THING AND THAT'S IT.

MS. TAPIA: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. RA: SO THAT -- CURRENTLY, THAT'S ALL THEY WOULD BE

ENTITLED TO, CORRECT?

182

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. TAPIA: CORRECT.

MR. RA: OKAY. THANK YOU.

AND THIS WOULD APPLY TO STATE-PAID JUDGES. SO IS THAT

JUST SUPREME COURT, YOU KNOW, COURT OF CLAIMS?

MS. TAPIA: ALL OF THEM.

MR. RA: WHAT ABOUT LOCAL JUDGES, COUNTY JUDGES,

DISTRICT JUDGES?

MS. TAPIA: I THINK -- I MEAN, THE --

(CONFERENCING)

OKAY. JUDGES -- JUDGE OR JUSTICE OF THE UNIFIED COURT

SYSTEM, INCLUDING A RETIRED JUDGE OF THE COURT OF APPEALS OR RETIRED

JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT WHO IS SERVING AS A JUSTICE OF THE

SUPREME COURT PURSUANT TO CERTIFICATION BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE, YES.

MR. RA: OKAY. AND HAVE WE IN -- BECAUSE LAST --

LAST TIME, THE GOVERNOR SAID THAT THE COSTS WERE NOT ACCOUNTED FOR. IS

THERE SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAT WOULD ENABLE THE GOVERNOR TO NOW SIGN

THIS AND NOT HAVE THAT CONCERN?

MS. TAPIA: YES. THE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM ARE

[SIC] RESPONSIBLE FOR -- TO PUT ALL THE FUNDS THAT ARE NEEDED FOR THAT,

WHICH IS -- I HAVE IT HERE -- WHAT IS IT? HOLD ON. NO, I HAVE IT HERE.

SOMEPLACE WRITTEN. MAYBE HERE? HOLD ON, HOLD ON. I'M LOOKING FOR

THAT. OKAY. EXACTLY. THEY ARE -- THE UNITED [SIC] COURT SYSTEM HAS

CONFIRMED IT CAN FULLY ABSORB THE COST WITHIN ITS CURRENT BUDGET, WHICH

IS ONE-TIME COST OF $4.85 MILLION, AND THEN THE ANNUAL RECOVERING COST

OF 287,000. SO IT'S NOT GONNA BE ANY EXTRA FUNDS PUT BY THE STATE.

183

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. RA: OKAY. THANK YOU. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE

IN TERMS OF QUESTIONS.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: ON THE BILL.

MR. RA: SO I -- I JUST WANT TO MENTION, YOU KNOW,

WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE. LIKE I SAID EARLIER TODAY, WE PASSED A BILL THAT

IS VERY LIMITED IN SCOPE. BUT THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT IMPACTS ALL PUBLIC

EMPLOYEES, AND IT SEEMS TO ME AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO EITHER MAKE A

DECISION THAT SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS GOING TO BE AVAILABLE TO EVERYBODY

OR -- OR NOBODY. THE -- YOU KNOW, TO DO THIS -- IT'S BEEN TALKED A LOT

ABOUT DOING THIS FOR OUR CORRECTIONS OFFICERS WHO ARE IN A SITUATION

WHERE THERE IS A TREMENDOUS LACK OF OFFICERS. THEY CAN'T HIRE, THEY

CAN'T KEEP PEOPLE. AND SOMETHING LIKE THIS WOULD PROTECT THOSE

INDIVIDUALS WHO WANT TO STAY IN SERVICE ONCE THEY'VE REACHED THE POINT

THAT THEY COULD OTHERWISE RETIRE. THESE ARE DIFFICULT DECISIONS THAT --

THAT PEOPLE MAKE AFTER YEARS OF GOVERNMENT SERVICE, BECAUSE THEY RISK

-- AND THAT'S WHY -- YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY IT'S CALLED A DEATH GAMBLE --

THEY RISK THAT IF THEY DIE IN SERVICE, THAT PENSION THEY HAVE EARNED DIES

WITH THEM AND THEIR FAMILY DOESN'T -- DOESN'T GET IT. SO I -- I CERTAINLY

UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULD WANT TO DO THIS. BUT I THINK THERE ARE MANY,

MANY OTHER PUBLIC EMPLOYEES THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THIS TYPE OF

CHANGE, NEED TO HAVE THIS AVAILABLE TO THEM MUCH MORE SO THAN -- THAN

JUDGES. MANY TIMES JUDGES ARE -- ARE IN A SITUATION WHERE, YOU KNOW,

YOU -- YOU LEAVE AND -- AND RETIRE, THERE'S PLENTY OF LAW FIRMS LOOKING

TO HIRE THEM. THERE'S -- THERE'S PLENTY OF PLACES FOR THEM TO GO. SO I

184

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THINK IT'S A VERY DIFFERENT SITUATION THEN, SAY, A CORRECTIONS OFFICER OR

SOME OTHER STATE EMPLOYEE. BUT -- BUT AGAIN, I THINK WE NEED TO THINK

ABOUT THIS MORE HOLISTICALLY IN TERMS OF PENSIONS AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES

THAN DOING THIS PIECEMEAL APPROACH THAT WE'RE SAYING, OKAY, WE'RE

GONNA DO THIS FOR JUDGES OR -- OR WE'RE GONNA DO IT FOR -- FOR SOME OTHER

SECTOR.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: THE CLERK WILL

RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MS. TAPIA TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. TAPIA: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

OUR JUDGES DAY IN AND DAY OUT PROTECT OUR PEOPLE AND

OUR DEMOCRACY. THIS BILL FIXES SOMETIME -- SOMETHING DEEPLY UNFAIR TO

THEM. IT IS CALLED THE DEATH GAMBLE. IF A STATE-PAID JUDGE DIES ONE DAY

BEFORE FILING FOR RETIREMENT, THEIR FAMILY RECEIVES ONLY A BASIC LUMP

SUM DEATH BENEFIT, OFTEN FAR LESS THAN THE -- THAN THE PENSION THEY

EARNED THROUGH DECADES OF SERVICE. HAD THAT SAME JUDGE RETIRED 24

HOURS EARLIER, THEIR SPOUSE OR CHILD WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF WITH A FULL

PENSION BENEFIT.

IN ONE NOTABLE CASE, MATTER OF O'BRIEN V. TREMAINE,

WHICH SPARKED THIS CONVERSATION, THE WIDOW OF A JUDGE WHO DIED ONLY

185

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SIX DAYS BEFORE HIS RETIREMENT WAS DENIED PENSION BENEFITS AND GIVEN A

MEAGER LUMP SUM DEATH BENEFIT. THAT'S THE GAMBLE, AND IT'S WRONG.

THE -- THE CORRECTED -- WE CORRECTED THE JUSTICE FOR --

THE INJUSTICE FOR TEACHERS, POLICE OFFICERS AND FIREFIGHTERS BACK IN 2000.

BUT WE LEFT OUR JUDGES OUT. JUDGES WHO OFTEN ENTER PUBLIC SERVICE LATER

IN LIFE. JUDGES WHOSE EXPERIENCE WE WANT ON THE BENCH, BUT WHO FEEL

FORCED TO RETIRE EARLY TO PROTECT THE FAMILIES FROM THIS EXACT SCENARIO.

THIS BILL --

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: THANK YOU, MS.

TAPIA. HOW DO YOU VOTE?

MS. TAPIA: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: HOW DO YOU VOTE?

MS. TAPIA: IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: THANK YOU. MS. --

MS. TAPIA IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. PALMESANO TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. PALMESANO: YES, MADAM SPEAKER, MY

COLLEAGUES.

EARLIER TODAY WE VOTED TO PASS THE DEATH GAMBLE FOR

COUNTY CORRECTIONS OFFICERS, NOW WE'RE PASSING THE DEATH GAMBLE FOR

JUDGES. I -- I AND MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES ANXIOUSLY AWAIT FOR THE

MAJORITY TO BRING UP THE BILL THAT WILL PASS THE DEATH GAMBLE FOR OUR

STATE CORRECTIONS OFFICERS. WE'VE PASSED IT TWICE, THE GOVERNOR'S

VETOED IT TWICE, SAID WE WANT TO PUT IT IN THE BUDGET. IT NEVER GETS PUT

IN THE BUDGET. I THINK WE NEED TO SEND A STRONG MESSAGE TO THE

186

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

GOVERNOR THIS IS A PRIORITY. WE SHOULD PASS IT. OUR CORRECTIONS

OFFICERS HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT AND DANGEROUS JOB. THERE'S A TREMENDOUS

STAFFING SHORTAGE BECAUSE OF QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES, BECAUSE OF SAFETY

ISSUES INSIDE OUR CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES. THESE INDIVIDUALS, IT'S A 25-

YEAR RETIREMENT. SOME OF THEM DECIDE TO STAY BEYOND 25 YEARS, AS WE

WERE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE PREMISE OF THE BILL. BUT IF THEY DIE WHILE

IN SERVICE AND STILL WORKING, THEIR FAMILY WOULD ONLY GET THREE TIMES

THEIR ANNUAL SALARY. WE NEED TO PROTECT THAT PENSION FOR THEIR FAMILIES.

NUMBER ONE, THEY DESERVE IT. NUMBER TWO, THE SPOUSES, THOSE COS

EARNED IT. SO IT'S UP TO US TO HELP ENSURE THAT THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS GET

THAT BENEFIT THAT THEY'RE ENTITLED TO, THAT THEY DESERVE AND THEY'VE

EARNED. IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. AND LET'S SEND A MESSAGE TO THE

GOVERNOR, THIS IS A PRIORITY. AND -- AND IF SHE VETOES IT AGAIN -- HERE'S A

NOVEL IDEA -- IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, LET'S BRING IT UP AND OVERRIDE THE

GOVERNOR'S VETO. WE'RE AN EQUAL PARTNER. THAT'S OUR LEGISLATIVE

RESPONSIBILITY. WHY DO WE JUST HAVE TO ACCEPT HER VETOES AND THEN GO

ON TO THE NEXT THING.

SO LET'S PASS IT. AGAIN, DO THE RIGHT THING, AND IF THE

GOVERNOR WANTS TO VETO IT, IF SHE'S NOT GONNA PUT IT IN HER BUDGET, THEN

WE SHOULD OVERRIDE IT.

SO I WILL VOTE FOR THIS LEGISLATION, BUT I ENCOURAGE US

TO QUICKLY BRING WITH THE REMAINING DAYS BRING UP THE -- THE DEATH

GAMBLE BILL FOR OUR STATE CORRECTIONS OFFICERS WHO DESERVE IT AND HAVE

EARNED IT.

THANK YOU.

187

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: MR. PALMESANO IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, AS WE

CONTINUE OUR FLOOR WORK ON DEBATE WE ARE GOING TO GO TO RULES REPORT

NO. 544 BY MR. HEVESI, RULES REPORT NO. 550 BY MR. ANDERSON. BY

THE WAY, TODAY IS MR. ANDERSON'S BIRTHDAY. RULES REPORT NO. 588 BY

MS. LEE, CALENDAR NO. 54 BY MS. PAULIN, CALENDAR NO. 85 BY MS.

GLICK, CALENDAR NO. 118 BY MR. EPSTEIN, AND CALENDAR NO. 156 BY MS.

SEPTIMO. IN THAT ORDER, MADAM SPEAKER.

AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE COLLEAGUES IF YOU HEARD YOUR

BILL BEING CALLED FOR DEBATE, PLEASE BE IN THE CHAMBER SO THE STAFF

WON'T HAVE TO RUN LOOKING FOR YOU. IT'S -- IT'S ONLY FAIR TO THE REST OF US

THAT ARE IN HERE. LET'S -- LET'S MOVE ALONG THIS THING QUICKLY.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: THANK YOU.

PAGE 16, RULES REPORT NO. NO. 544, THE CLERK WILL

READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00065-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 544, HEVESI, LAVINE, DINOWITZ, SEAWRIGHT, PIROZZOLO. AN

ACT TO AMEND THE SOCIAL SERVICES LAW, IN RELATION TO THE ESTABLISHMENT

OF A STATEWIDE SUPERVISED VISITATION INITIATIVE TO SUPPORT SAFE AND

188

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

STRUCTURED PARENTING TIME.

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: AN EXPLANATION HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. HEVESI.

MR. HEVESI: GOOD EVENING, MADAM SPEAKER AND

COLLEAGUES, MS. WALSH.

THIS BILL WILL ESTABLISH A STATEWIDE SUPERVISED

VISITATION INITIATIVE TO SUPPORT SAFE AND STRUCTURED PARENTING TIME IN

NEW YORK STATE.

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: MADAM SPEAKER, WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER ROMERO: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. HEVESI: ABSOLUTELY.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I HAVE A LOT OF

THEM, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.

MR. HEVESI: OKAY.

MS. WALSH: FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANT TO SAY FROM THE

BEGINNING THAT THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT THERE IS JUST A, LIKE, A DEARTH OF

OPPORTUNITIES FOR SUPERVISED VISITATION --

MR. HEVESI: AGREED.

MS. WALSH: -- IN THE FAMILY COURT SYSTEM, CERTAINLY

THE COUNTY THAT I PRACTICE IN. AND SO I DON'T -- I DON'T QUESTION THE --

THE DESIRE TO PROVIDE SOME SERVICES HERE BECAUSE SOMEWHERE ALONG THE

189

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

WAY, THE CHURCHES THAT USED TO PROVIDE IT, THE NOT-FOR-PROFITS THAT USED

TO PROVIDE IT, THEY'VE -- THE FOR-PROFIT ONES THAT USED TO PROVIDE IT,

THEY'VE ALL DRIED UP, AT -- AT LEAST IN THE COUNTIES THAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH.

SO LET -- I WANT TO START FROM THERE, YOU KNOW, AND THEN JUST TAKE A LOOK

AT REALLY WHAT THIS BILL DOES AND WHY -- WHY I BELIEVE THAT THIS BILL,

WHILE IT HAS THE VERY BEST OF INTENTIONS, I -- I DON'T THINK IS READY. I --

MR. HEVESI: OH, OKAY.

MS. WALSH: -- DON'T THINK IT'S READY. AND I'LL --

WE'LL --

MR. HEVESI: (INDISCERNIBLE)

MS. WALSH: WE'LL GET TO THAT.

MR. HEVESI: GREAT.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. SO THE BILL REQUIRES THE OFFICE

OF VICTIM SERVICES, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE OFFICE FOR THE -- FOR THE

PREVENTION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, TO ESTABLISH A STATEWIDE SUPERVISED

VISITATION INITIATIVE. I GUESS FIRST QUESTION IS, WHY ARE -- WHY IS IT BEING

RUN THROUGH THOSE TWO OFFICES?

MR. HEVESI: WELL, IF I CAN, I'M GONNA JUST TAKE A

LITTLE LIBERTY AND TAKE A STEP BACK. YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THE DEARTH. I'LL

DO IT VERY QUICKLY.

MS. WALSH: YEAH.

MR. HEVESI: BUT IN 2023 THE OFFICE OF COURT

ADMINISTRATION DID AN ANALYSIS OF HOW MANY SUPERVISED VISITATION

PROVIDERS WE HAVE IN NEW YORK STATE AND FOUND THAT 28 OF OUR

COUNTIES HAVE ZERO. NEW YORK CITY HAS THREE, WHICH CAN

190

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACCOMMODATE ABOUT 850 OF THESE ARRANGEMENTS WHEN THEY NEED TO BE

DOING SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 8- OR 9,000 BECAUSE THEY'RE

HALF THE STATE, AND THEN EVEN THE ONES WE HAVE UP AND RUNNING, IT'S

COST-PROHIBITIVE AND THERE ARE HUGE WAIT LISTS. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE

HERE.

MS. WALSH: ABSOLUTELY. I -- YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET

ANY ARGUMENT FROM ME ON THAT AT ALL.

MR. HEVESI: PERFECT. THANK YOU.

AS TO YOUR QUESTION, THESE SEEM LIKE THE LOGICAL

ENTITIES TO RUN IT THROUGH THE OFFICE OF VICTIM SERVICES, BECAUSE YOU'RE

DEALING WITH FAMILIES THAT ARE SEPARATED PRIMARILY FROM EITHER FAMILY

VIOLENCE OR CHILD PROTECTIVE CASES. SO I THINK THAT'S WHY WE MADE THAT

CHOICE.

MS. WALSH: WELL, WHAT ABOUT JUST RUN-OF-THE-MILL

FAMILY COURT CASES WHERE YOU'VE GOT ALLEGATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT

INTO JUST A REGULAR, YOU KNOW, ARTICLE 6 FAMILY COURT CASE THAT -- WHERE

THERE IS SOME DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OR THERE IS SOME MENTAL ILLNESS OR

THERE'S SOME -- MAYBE IT DOESN'T RISE TO THE LEVEL WHERE YOU'VE GOT A --

AN ARTICLE 10 ABUSE OR NEGLECT CASE. BUT, YOU KNOW -- OR MAYBE IT'S

NOT EVEN AN IDV, OR INTEGRATED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COURT, BUT YOU'VE GOT

SOME ALLEGATIONS AND YOU MAY NEED SOME SUPERVISION. WOULD THOSE

CASES AND THOSE KIDS COME UNDER THIS PROGRAM AS WELL?

MR. HEVESI: ABSOLUTELY. ANY -- ANY COURT-ORDERED

SUPERVISED VISIT -- PROFESSIONAL SUPERVISED VISITATION IS -- WILL BE

COVERED UNDER THIS BILL.

191

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. WALSH: SO ANY TIME THE COURT ORDERS IT?

MR. HEVESI: YEAH. AND -- AND PART OF THE REASON

-- SO THERE'S MULTIPLE PROBLEMS WITH HAVING A LACK OF SUPERVISED

VISITATION. ONE OF THEM IS -- WELL, I'LL GIVE YOU TWO; ONE IS THE COURT

DOESN'T GET THE REPORTS ON THE EVALUATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN

THE PARENT AND THE CHILD, WHICH IS A PROBLEM. I'M SORRY, I JUST LOST MY

TRAIN OF THOUGHT.

MS. WALSH: AS FAR AS ACCOUNTABILITY, THERE'S GONNA

BE --

MR. HEVESI: (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

MS. WALSH: -- THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT OF OVERSIGHT

IN REPORTING ON THE -- IN EACH VISIT, RIGHT?

MR. HEVESI: EXACTLY. THAT'S RIGHT. AND FORGIVE

ME, ONE OTHER THING.

MS. WALSH: YEAH.

MR. HEVESI: THIS IS THE POINT I JUST LOST. BECAUSE

YOU DON'T HAVE SIGNIFICANT SUPERVISED VISITATION, WHEN THE COURT ORDERS

THE FAMILY TO GO HAVE SUPERVISED VISITATION THEY COME BACK FREQUENTLY

NOT HAVING HAD IT, WHICH DELAYS THE COURT PROCESS. THIS IS A PART AND

PARCEL TO THE FAMILY COURT BEING DELAYED.

MS. WALSH: YEAH, RIGHT. SO, I MEAN, WHAT

HAPPENS SOMETIMES IS THE -- THE -- THE PARENTS ARE WARRING, RIGHT?

THEY'RE WARRING, THEY COME INTO COURT AND THEY SAY, YOU KNOW, I DON'T

TRUST MY SPOUSE OR I DON'T TRUST, YOU KNOW, MY -- THE FATHER OF MY CHILD

TO HAVE UNSUPERVISED VISITS WITH -- WITH THAT CHILD. AND I WANT THAT TO

192

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BE SUPERVISED. AND THEN THE COURT SAYS, GREAT. WHO DO YOU HAVE TO

SUPERVISE? WELL, YOU KNOW, THE -- THE DAD OR -- YOU KNOW, THE DAD

SAYS, WELL, I'VE GOT THIS PERSON, THIS PERSON OR THIS PERSON. I DON'T LIKE

ANY OF THOSE PEOPLE. I WANT IT TO BE SUPERVISED. I WANT IT TO BE

SUPERVISED BY THE COURT. AND I DON'T LIKE -- WELL, WHY DON'T YOU LIKE

THOSE PEOPLE? WELL, THAT ONE LIKES THAT PERSON TOO MUCH AND THEY

WON'T CALL. YOU KNOW, THEY WON'T STOP A VISIT IF IT GETS INAPPROPRIATE,

OR, I DON'T LIKE THEM BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THEY WERE MEAN TO ME LAST

CHRISTMAS. I MEAN, IT COULD BE -- WE HEAR ALL KINDS OF THINGS.

MR. HEVESI: I'M SURE.

MS. WALSH: SO IF FOR SOME REASON THOSE PEOPLE'S

NAMES THAT HAVE BEEN THROWN UP AS POSSIBLE SUPERVISORS DON'T MEET THE

REQUIREMENTS OF THE OTHER LITIGANT OR THE CLAIMANT, THEN THE FAMILY COURT

COULD SAY, ALL RIGHT, THEN IT'S GONNA BE SUPERVISED VISITS THEN AND THEN

IT WOULD FALL UNDER THIS.

MR. HEVESI: THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. AND I -- IN MY --

I DON'T PRACTICE IN THE WAY THAT YOU HAVE, SO YOU UNDERSTAND THE SYSTEM

BETTER THAN I DO. BUT I THINK THAT'S A COMMON OCCURRENCE.

MS. WALSH: IT IS --

MR. HEVESI: IT JUST --

MS. WALSH: -- EXTREMELY COMMON.

MR. HEVESI: EXACTLY.

MS. WALSH: THAT IS -- THAT IS PART OF MY CONCERN

WITH THE BILL, IS THAT YOU'RE -- YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT -- I MEAN, GIVEN A

CHOICE ANYBODY, I WOULD SAY, I CAN'T THINK OF AN INSTANCE WHERE

193

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SOMEBODY WOULD COME BEFORE FAMILY COURT AND SAY, YOU KNOW, I REALLY

THINK THAT MY -- MY MOTHER COULD ACT AS A SUPERVISOR AND WOULD BE

CAPABLE OR MY, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBOR. THEY -- THEY WANT TO HAVE STATE

OR -- OR NEUTRAL, THEY WOULD THINK IT WAS NEUTRAL --

MR. HEVESI: YES, THAT'S PERFECT. (INDISCERNIBLE/

CROSS-TALK).

MS. WALSH: -- SUPERVISION. AND SO WHAT I'M

SAYING IS THAT THE COST OF THIS IS GOING TO BE ASTRONOMICAL, IN MY VIEW.

MR. HEVESI: OKAY. SO LET ME TALK ABOUT COST. SO I

-- SO I APPRECIATE THAT. WE BELIEVE IT'S $25 MILLION.

MS. WALSH: $25 MILLION?

MR. HEVESI: $25 MILLION.

MS. WALSH: STATEWIDE?

MR. HEVESI: STATEWIDE, ANNUALLY. YEAH. AND I

CAN BREAK IT DOWN FOR YOU.

MS. WALSH: I -- OKAY.

MR. HEVESI: THAT'S THE -- THAT'S THE NUMBERS WE GOT

FROM THE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION, $25 MILLION ANNUALLY. AND

WHAT YOU GET FROM THAT -- AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ALL

UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. SO THIS IS WHERE YOU WERE LEADING,

MS. WALSH. I'M JUST GONNA FOLLOW UP.

SO THE OFFICE OF VICTIM SERVICES, IN CONSULTATION WITH

THE OFFICE OF PEOPLE WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE [SIC], IS GONNA FUND ONE

PROGRAM PER COUNTY AND EXPAND EXISTING PROGRAMS. SO IF THERE'S

COUNTIES ON THE GROUND, WE'RE GONNA EXPAND. WE'RE ALSO GONNA ALLOW

194

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

COUNTIES, IF THEY'RE GEOGRAPHICALLY APPROPRIATE, TO SHARE ONE OF THESE IF

IT'S -- IF IT'S TOO MUCH OF AN ONEROUS THING ON THE COUNTIES TO -- TO DO

THEIR OWN. BUT WE'RE REQUIRING SOMETHING. WE'RE -- WE'RE MANDATING

SOMETHING FROM THE COUNTIES AS WELL. SO WE'RE GONNA ASK THE COUNTIES

TO GIVE US AN ANALYSIS IN THEIR DISTRICTWIDE CHILD WELFARE SERVICES PLAN.

WE'RE GONNA NEED AN ASSESSMENT OF FOUR THINGS: THEIR LOCAL NEEDS,

THEIR PROGRAM PLANS, THEIR USAGE DATA, AND THEIR PROJECTED COST. AND

THEN HERE'S WHAT THE STATE GETS OUT OF IT: THE STATE IS GONNA MAKE

THESE PROGRAMS COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS, AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO -- THE

STATE IS GONNA MAKE THESE PROGRAMS OFFER FREE WAIVERS FOR LOW-INCOME

FAMILIES, AND THEN PROVIDE THE REPORTS TO O -- O -- OVS AS DIRECTED.

SO THIS MONEY, I WOULD ARGUE, IS INCREDIBLY WELL-SPENT FOR A COUPLE

REASONS; FIRST, IT HELPS THE COURT SYSTEM, BUT LET ME GO BACK TO WHAT IT

DOES FOR KIDS. SO FIRST -- AND YOU KNOW THIS -- FIRST --

MS. WALSH: IT GIVES THEM SAFE SUPERVISION. I

MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THE REASON FOR IT. I -- I WANNA -- CAN I JUST HONE IN

FOR A MOMENT ON THE --

MR. HEVESI: ABSOLUTELY.

MS. WALSH: -- ON THE COST, WHICH I THINK IS

INCREDIBLY LOWBALL, IN MY VIEW.

MR. HEVESI: OKAY.

MS. WALSH: I REALLY DO. AND -- AND I WANNA GET TO

THE POINT WHERE IT'S SAYING IN HERE THAT IT'S GONNA BE USING AVAILABLE

GRANT FUNDING TO SUPPORT SAFE AND STRUCTURED PARENTING TIME. DO YOU

HAVE ANY GRANT MONEY OUT THERE THAT YOU KNOW OF?

195

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. HEVESI: NO. WE'RE GONNA BE DOING THIS IS IN

THIS FUTURE BUDGET. UPCOMING BUDGET.

MS. WALSH: SO, WE WOULD BE PASSING THIS BILL --

HAS IT -- HAS THIS PASSED THE SENATE?

MR. HEVESI: NOT YET.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. SO IF THIS BILL GOT DONE, THEN

THE IDEA WOULD BE, LIKE, NEXT APRIL THERE WOULD BE -- THERE WOULD BE

SOME KIND OF A BUDGET LINE?

MR. HEVESI: YES, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HOPING FOR.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. SO DO YOU KNOW HOW WELL THE

-- DID YOU SAY THAT THERE WERE 28 -- HOW MANY PROGRAMS ARE THERE

CURRENTLY RUNNING OUT OF THE 62 COUNTIES, 20, WAS IT?

MR. HEVESI: SO, I'VE GOT TO DO MY MATH. LAST I

WAS TOLD IT WAS 28 THAT DON'T HAVE IT, MINUS 62.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT

SAID IN THERE -- MAYBE I MISREAD YOUR MEMO OF SUPPORT. I THOUGHT THAT

THERE WERE -- I THOUGHT THAT THERE WERE 20 WHO DID HAVE IT. I -- WHICH

SOUNDED ABOUT RIGHT TO ME.

MR. HEVESI: YEAH, NO, 28 COUNTIES, MY

UNDERSTANDING THAT DO NOT HAVE IT AT ALL.

MS. WALSH: TWENTY-EIGHT DON'T HAVE IT? HOW

MANY DO HAVE IT?

MR. HEVESI: THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. I'LL CHECK,

BUT I BELIEVE THAT'S THE NUMBER.

MS. WALSH: TWENTY -- OH, 20 COUNTIES -- OH, NOW

196

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

IT'S 28. OKAY. WELL, PROBABLY MORE FOLDED THEN. YEAH, I'M LOOKING AT

YOUR JUSTIFICATION.

MR. HEVESI: (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK) IT'S NOT A

GOOD MODEL, RIGHT? SO THESE ARE PROFESSIONAL SUPERVISED VISITATION.

FOR THEM TO STAY IN BUSINESS THEY HAVE TO CHARGE A -- A SIGNIFICANT

AMOUNT. THE CHEAPEST THAT WE FOUND IS ABOUT $75 PER ONE HOUR. SO IF

YOU DO THAT, YOU WANT AN HOUR WITH YOUR KID A WEEK, THAT'S $75 TIMES

FOUR, YOU'RE AT $300 IN A WEEK. THE PEOPLE WHO NEED THIS, THAT'S

COST-PROHIBITIVE. AND HERE'S THE PROBLEM --

MS. WALSH: IS IT GONNA BE MEANS TESTED AT ALL?

MR. HEVESI: WHAT'S THAT?

MS. WALSH: IS IT GOING TO BE MEANS TESTED AT ALL?

MR. HEVESI: YES, ABSOLUTELY.

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

MR. HEVESI: WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO IS DO AN

ANALYSIS OF THESE LOW-INCOME FAMILIES AND SAY, LISTEN, YOU'RE -- YOU

WOULD BE PRECLUDED UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES FROM GETTING

SUPERVISED VISITATION, BUT WE'RE GONNA HELP YOU WITH THOSE FUNDS. AND

-- AND LET ME JUST TOUCH ON ONE OTHER THING --

MS. WALSH: SURE.

MR. HEVESI: -- AND THIS IS -- LET ME SEE IF YOU AGREE

OR NOT.

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

MR. HEVESI: WE'RE AVOIDING -- FOR ME, THIS 25

MILLION IS THE BEST-SPENT MONEY YOU COULD POSSIBLY PUT TOGETHER.

197

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE ALLOWING IS KIDS TO MAINTAIN THEIR CONNECTION

WITH THEIR PARENTS. NOW, NUMBER ONE, PARENTS HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL

RIGHT TO RAISE THEIR KIDS, TO -- TO CHOOSE THEIR EDUCATION, ALL OF THE OTHER

RIGHTS THAT ARE -- COME OUT OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT -- OF THE DUE

PROCESS CLAUSE OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT. SO THAT'S FOR PARENTS.

NUMBER TWO, EVEN IN CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THERE'S ABUSE OR VIOLENCE OR

THE WORST POSSIBLE THINGS, HAVING CONTACT WITH YOUR PARENT IS

EXCEPTIONALLY IMPORTANT FOR THESE KIDS IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT.

OTHERWISE, YOU'RE LEAVING KIDS THE EXPERIENCE OF BEING AWAY FROM

YOUR PARENTS. FAMILY SEPARATION IS A TRAUMA ITSELF. BUT IF IT'S --

MS. WALSH: YEAH.

MR. HEVESI: -- LONGER TERM -- JUST ONE LAST THING --

MS. WALSH: YEAH.

MR. HEVESI: IF IT'S LONGER TERM, THAT TURNS FROM A

KID FEELING ABANDONED INTO DEPRESSED AND LONG-TERM CONSEQUENCES.

MS. WALSH: SO, I MEAN, I -- I WOULD JUST SAY BACK

TO YOU THAT, YEAH, I MEAN, DEFINITELY I'VE REPRESENTED KIDS WHO GET A LOT

OUT OF VISITING WITH THEIR PARENTS. TO ME, IT DEPENDS ON HOW MESSED

UP THE PARENTS ARE. I MEAN, SOMETIMES PARENTS JUST HAVE TO DO SOME

WORK. THEY HAVE TO DO SOME WORK. AND SOMETIMES THEY HAVE SUCH

MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS, AND WE ALL HAVE TALKED IN THIS CHAMBER HOW

MANY TIMES ABOUT THE ABSENCE OF GOOD MENTAL HEALTH CARE THAT'S

AVAILABLE AND THAT'S ACCESSIBLE TO PEOPLE. IT -- IT DEPENDS. SOMETIMES

IT'S A GREAT IDEA. BUT I ALSO HAVE HAD FAMILY COURT CASES WHERE I'VE

REPRESENTED A KID FROM PRETTY MUCH INFANCY UP TO 18. THAT WHOLE

198

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

TIME. SO UNDER THIS BILL, WOULD YOU CONTEMPLATE THAT THAT CHILD, THAT

CHILD I'M GIVING YOU THE HYPOTHETICAL OF, WOULD START GETTING SUPERVISED

VISITS IN INFANCY AND THOSE VISITS WOULD CONTINUE UNTIL 18?

MR. HEVESI: IT'S NOT UP TO ME, IT'S UP TO A COURT.

IT'S JUDICIAL DISCRETION. IF THE COURT DECIDES -- SO I -- AND BY THE WAY, I

COMPLETELY APPRECIATE YOUR POINT ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH. IF THE JUDGE

DECIDES THAT FOR WHATEVER REASON THE PARENT IS NOT IN A POSITION TO BE

INTERACTING WITH THAT KID, THAT IT COULD HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE

CHILD, THEN THE JUDGE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO SAY NO. BUT QUITE THE REVERSE,

MAYBE THE PARENT WILL DO BETTER IF THEY'RE IN CONTACT WITH THE KID.

MAYBE THE PARENT IS --

MS. WALSH: SOMETIMES.

MR. HEVESI: YEAH. MAYBE THE PARENT IS

EXPERIENCING SOME UNDERLYING CONDITIONS THAT ARE EXACERBATED BY, OH

MY GOD, I DON'T HAVE MY KID. MY FAMILY'S NOT HERE.

MS. WALSH: THAT'S TRUE. I'VE SEEN THAT, TOO. YEAH.

MR. HEVESI: SO OVERALL, I'M GONNA ARGUE THAT IT IS

IN THE FUNDAMENTAL INTEREST OF EVERY NEW YORKER FOR THESE FAMILIES TO

BE KEPT TOGETHER AS LONG AS A JUDGE DECIDES THAT IT'S SAFE FOR THE KID.

MS. WALSH: YEAH. AND OF COURSE I'VE GOT PLENTY

OF CLIENTS WHO HIT AROUND 15, 16 WHO THEN WILL GO IN AND DO A LINCOLN

HEARING WITH THE JUDGE AND SAY, I DON'T WANT TO SEE -- I -- I'VE HAD -- IT'S

SAD -- 10-, 11-YEAR-OLD CLIENTS WHO SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT -- WHO ARE

PARENTIFIED, KIND OF, AND THEY SAY, YOU KNOW, MY MOM'S GOT A LOT OF

WORK TO DO.

199

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. HEVESI: YES.

MS. WALSH: AND --

MR. HEVESI: BY THE WAY, CAN I GIVE YOU ANOTHER

THOUGHT THAT JUST OCCURRED TO ME? AND I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T MEAN TO

TAKE YOU OFF TOPIC.

MS. WALSH: THAT'S OKAY. I -- I'M GONNA ASK YOU ALL

THE QUESTIONS --

MR. HEVESI: I KNOW YOU ARE.

MS. WALSH: -- THAT I HAVE, BUT WE'VE GOT TIME.

MR. HEVESI: I KNOW YOU ARE. NO -- NO, MY THOUGHT

IS YOU'RE ALSO PREVENTING FAMILY SEPARATION, WHICH IS COSTLY TO THE

STATE. OKAY? SO IF THERE'S GONNA BE -- IF THE PARENT HAS NO CONNECTION

TO THE CHILD, I WOULD ARGUE IT'S MUCH MORE LIKELY THAT THERE WILL BE

EVENTUALLY A FULL BREAK IN THE LEGAL -- IN THE LEGAL REALM, AND THAT COSTS

MONEY; COURT TIME, FOSTER CARE, ALL OF IT. SO THIS 25 MILLION IS REALLY A

GOOD WAY TO MAKE SURE IT'S PREVENTATIVE. MAKE SURE THAT THESE

PROBLEMS AREN'T HAPPENING, THEY'RE NOT METASTASIZING AND GETTING

WORSE.

MS. WALSH: YEAH. SO, NO, I -- I THINK THAT, LIKE, IF

THE CHILD IS PLACED IN FOSTER CARE THEN VISITS ARE BEING FACILITATED

THROUGH FOSTER CARE CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, DSS. IF THERE'S AN

ARTICLE 10 CASE AND THE CASE IS PENDING, THEN YOU'VE GOT -- THE CPS

WORKERS ARE FACILITATING WHERE -- WHERE APPROPRIATE, VISITATION WITH

PARENTS.

MR. HEVESI: IF -- IF THEY CAN.

200

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. WALSH: IT JUST DEPENDS. THE PEOPLE THAT FALL

WITHIN THE CRACKS, SO-TO-SPEAK, ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN ON A SIMPLE

-- THEY'RE NOT ALWAYS SIMPLE -- BUT CUSTODY MATTER, AND THERE'S -- AND

THERE'S -- IT'S A COMPLICATED ARTICLE 6 CASE, RIGHT?

MR. HEVESI: YOU'RE RIGHT.

MS. WALSH: SO YOU'VE GOT MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES,

YOU'VE GOT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ISSUES. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT

TALKING ABOUT VISITS JUST DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE CASE. IF THERE'S A

FINAL COURT ORDER GOING FORWARD, THAT COULD -- THAT COULD MANDATE

CONTINUED VISITS.

MR. HEVESI: BUT NOT PAID FOR. WE -- WE STOPPED

AFTER A CERTAIN POINT.

MS. WALSH: OH, GOOD. AT A CERTAIN POINT. COULD

YOU POINT THAT OUT? THANK YOU.

MR. HEVESI: ABSOLUTELY. LET ME -- LET ME PULL THAT

TOGETHER.

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

MR. HEVESI: THE WAY IT WAS --

(PAUSE)

NO, I DON'T HAVE IT. SORRY. ASK ME THE QUESTION

AGAIN. I APOLOGIZE, MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: I THINK YOU -- YOU JUST WERE -- YOU

WE'RE JUST VOLUNTEERING A PIECE OF INFORMATION.

MR. HEVESI: THEN FORGET IT.

MS. WALSH: YEAH.

201

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. HEVESI: IT WASN'T WORTH IT.

MS. WALSH: YUP. YUP. OKAY. THAT'S ALL RIGHT.

WE'LL MOVE ON.

MR. HEVESI: MY APOLOGIES.

MS. WALSH: NO, NO. THAT'S OKAY. I'M A STREAM OF

CONSCIOUSNESS PERSON, TOO. SO I GET IT. OKAY.

MR. HEVESI: THANK YOU.

MS. WALSH: SO GETTING BACK TO FUNDING FOR A

SECOND. YOU TALKED ABOUT THE 25 MILLION AT THE STATE LEVEL --

MR. HEVESI: YUP.

MS. WALSH: -- RIGHT, AND YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT

WHAT A GREAT INVESTMENT THAT WAS. AND THEN YOU STARTED TALKING ABOUT

COUNTIES. WHAT -- WHAT WOULD BE THE COUNTY SHARE IN DEVELOPING THIS

PROGRAM?

MR. HEVESI: ALL THE COUNTIES HAVE TO DO IS ADD

BASIC INFORMATION TO THEIR ANNUAL CHILD WELFARE PLANS THAT GIVE THE

FOLLOWING PIECES OF INFORMATION.

MS. WALSH: SO THEY'RE JUST DATA COLLECTING?

MR. HEVESI: YEAH, PRETTY MUCH. SO, ONE, YOU

HAVE TO -- LOCAL NEEDS, PROGRAM PLANS, USAGE DATA, PROJECTED COST. AND

THEN THERE ARE TWO OTHER PIECES THAT WILL BE IN THAT PLAN; EMPHASIS ON

AFFORDABILITY, AND CULTURAL AND LANGUAGE ACCESSIBILITY. SO AS LONG AS

THE COUNTIES -- ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS PUT THAT INFORMATION IN THEIR

ANNUAL PLANS THAT THEY'RE DOING ANYWAY, THEN THEY CAN RECEIVE THESE

FUNDS.

202

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. WALSH: SO THEY'RE -- THIS IS -- THE COUNTIES ARE

GONNA BE ADVANCING THE FUNDS AND THEN THEY'RE GONNA GET REIMBURSED

BY THE STATE?

MR. HEVESI: NO, NO, NO, NO. WE'RE GONNA WORK

THAT OUT IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET. NO, I'M NOT ASKING THE COUNTIES TO LAY

OUT ANY MONEY AND I'M NOT ASKING FOR ANY COUNTY MONEY. I WOULDN'T

PUT UP A BILL THAT DOES THAT.

MS. WALSH: SO THIS IS 100 PERCENT GONNA BE

FUNDED THROUGH THE STATE.

MR. HEVESI: THAT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE. THAT'S WHAT

I'M --

MS. WALSH: SO A BUDGET ITEM IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET

MR. HEVESI: CORRECT.

MS. WALSH: -- IF THIS BILL PASSES AND GETS SIGNED BY

THE GOVERNOR.

MR. HEVESI: THAT'S RIGHT. I WOULD NOT PUT FORWARD

A BILL THAT ADDS EXTRA BURDENS TO OUR COUNTIES.

MS. WALSH: NO, I -- I'M VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THAT.

WHAT -- WHAT -- WHAT -- IN A -- IN A NUTSHELL, WHAT --

AND I SEE I'M RUNNING -- I -- JUST SO THAT WE ALL KNOW, I'M RUNNING OUT

THE CLOCK ON MY FIRST 15. I'M -- I'M GONNA NEED A SECOND TO BE ABLE TO

FINISH UP WITH YOU.

MR. HEVESI: SURE.

MS. WALSH: SO IN THE BILL IT TALKS ABOUT CULTURALLY-

203

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SENSITIVE SERVICES. THAT -- WHAT DOES -- WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

MR. HEVESI: DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES, PEOPLE SPEAK

DIFFERENT LANGUAGES.

MS. WALSH: SO IT'S LANGUAGE (INDISCERNIBLE/

CROSS-TALK) --

MR. HEVESI: IT'S LANGUAGE.

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

MR. HEVESI: YEAH. SO -- SO THE COUNTIES WILL HAVE

TO SAY, WE HAVE THESE, YOU KNOW, POPULATIONS, WE HAVE THESE LANGUAGE

NEEDS. THAT -- THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.

MS. WALSH: SO THE SUPERVISOR WHO'S GONNA BE

SUPERVISING A VISIT WILL BE SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE AS THE PEOPLE

THAT THEY'RE -- THAT THEY'RE SUPERVISING.

MR. HEVESI: THAT'S CRUCIALLY IMPORTANT,

PARTICULARLY IN CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOODS IN OUR LARGER CITIES.

MS. WALSH: YEP. ARE THEY EVEN AVAILABLE? ARE

THOSE --

MR. HEVESI: OBVIOUSLY, YOU USED THE WORD RIGHT IN

THE BEGINNING OF YOUR DESCRIPTION. THERE'S A DEARTH. BUT THAT DEARTH

APPLIES TO EVERYTHING, SO I DON'T THINK SO. WE -- WE ARE SO BEHIND THE

EIGHT BALL ON THIS ONE THAT WE'RE CAUSING OTHER MULTIPLE PROBLEMS.

MS. WALSH: WHY NOT JUST DO A PILOT PROGRAM?

MR. HEVESI: THIS IS.

MS. WALSH: WHY NOT -- NO, THIS IS SAYING THAT

WITHIN SIX MONTHS -- UNLESS I'M WRONG, PLEASE -- BUT THIS IS SAYING THAT

204

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

WITHIN 180 DAYS WE'RE GONNA HAVE A PROGRAM TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S

ONE OF THESE IN EVERY COUNTY THAT DOESN'T HAVE THEM. THAT'S NOT A PILOT

PROGRAM, THAT IS A HUGE, HUGE LIFT, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION. YOU KNOW?

MR. HEVESI: FAIR ENOUGH. OKAY.

MS. WALSH: OKAY? ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

IS THERE ANYTHING -- THERE'S -- IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKE THERE

WAS ANYTHING LIMITING IN HERE. SO LIKE IN CASES WHERE THERE'S FAMILY

VIOLENCE --

MR. HEVESI: YEAH.

MS. WALSH: -- THIS WOULD FACILITATE SUPERVISED

VISITS IF THE COURT ORDERS IT WITH BOTH THE -- THE --

MR. HEVESI: CUSTODIAL AND NON-CUSTODIAL PARENT?

MS. WALSH: OR THE -- THE PARENT THAT HAS

PERPETRATED THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND THE SURVIVOR OF THE DOMESTIC

VIOLENCE.

MR. HEVESI: YES, THE ALLEGED ABUSER. ABSOLUTELY.

MS. WALSH: BOTH.

MR. HEVESI: MM-HMM.

MS. WALSH: IF IT'S ORDERED.

MR. HEVESI: ONLY IF THE JUDGE ORDERS IT. YES.

MS. WALSH: IS THERE -- THERE'S NOTHING IN HERE AS

FAR AS FREQUENCY OF VISITS?

MR. HEVESI: THIS IS ALL JUDICIAL DISCRETION. WE'RE

NOT TOUCHING THAT AREA.

MS. WALSH: YOU MENTIONED EARLIER THAT OUT OF THE

205

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

COUNTIES THAT DO HAVE THIS PROGRAM THEY HAVE LONG WAITING LISTS.

MR. HEVESI: YEAH. NEW YORK CITY HAS A WAIT LIST.

SO IF YOU'RE ORDERED IN NEW YORK CITY FOR SUPERVISED -- PROFESSIONAL

SUPERVISED VISITATION YOU ARE IMMEDIATELY GONNA BE ON ONE OF THREE

WAIT LISTS THAT LAST ANYWHERE BETWEEN SIX MONTHS AND A YEAR. SOME

LONGER THAN THAT. WE ARE NOWHERE NEAR DEALING WITH THE CAPACITY.

MS. WALSH: WHY NOT TRY TO PUT RESOURCES TOWARDS

SOLVING THOSE -- THOSE EXISTING PROGRAMS AND THEIR DIFFICULTIES RATHER

THAN TRYING TO CREATE --

MR. HEVESI: WE ARE.

MS. WALSH: -- SO MANY NEW ONES?

MR. HEVESI: WE ARE. THE MONEY THAT WE ARE

PUTTING FORWARD HERE, THE 25 MILLION THAT WILL BE SUBJECT IN THE NEXT

BUDGET, CAN BE USED TO EXPAND EXISTING PROGRAMS OR WHERE THERE'S A

GAP, SAY -- YOU KNOW, WE -- WE ALWAYS TALK ABOUT CHILD CARE DESERTS.

SO LET'S SAY IT'S A SUPERVISED VISITATION DESERT, THEY CAN PUT A NEW

PROGRAM THERE. BUT THEY ARE GOING TO BE TRYING TO BASE THEIR EFFORTS ON

EXISTING PROGRAMS.

MS. WALSH: AND -- AND THAT'S PART OF MY ISSUE. SO,

I MEAN, HOW MANY TIMES HERE IN THIS CHAMBER HAVE WE TALKED ABOUT

HOW YOU CAN'T FIND ANY DAY CARES FOR YOUR KIDS? THEY DON'T HAVE SLOTS.

YOU CAN'T FIND DIRECT CARE WORKERS. YOU CAN'T FIND COURT INTERPRETERS.

WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO. YOU CAN'T FIND

ANYBODY. HOW ARE YOU POSSIBLY GONNA STAFF SOMETHING LIKE THIS?

MR. HEVESI: WELL, WE'RE GONNA PUT THE MONEY

206

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THERE AND HOPE THAT THESE PROGRAMS CAN EXPAND. AND I BELIEVE ONCE

THE MONEY IS THERE THAT PEOPLE WILL START, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY GROWING

THESE BUSINESSES. THAT'S THE HOPE. IF -- IF IT DOESN'T HAPPEN, THEN WE'RE

STILL IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE WE'RE USING UNSUPERVISED VISITATION

WHERE -- WHERE IT CAN BE A LITTLE DANGEROUS, AS YOU KNOW.

MS. WALSH: SO WHEN IT SAYS AT THE END "THIS ACT

SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 180TH DAY AFTER IT SHALL HAVE BECOME A LAW", SO

HOW IS THAT REALISTIC WITH WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN HERE?

MR. HEVESI: THAT A TERRIFIC QUESTION. SO -- SO THE

ANSWER IS THIS: I'M HOPING THIS BILL GETS SIGNED, OKAY? THERE IS A

CHANCE THAT THE GOVERNOR VETOES IT. ONCE WE PASS THE SENATE THERE'S A

CHANCE THAT THE GOVERNOR VETOES THIS BILL AND THEN WE'LL START BACK IN

THE BUDGET. BUT I WANTED TO HAVE THIS DEBATE PUBLICLY, TACTICALLY,

BECAUSE IF YOU DO IT IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET IT GETS LOST. JUST IN CHILDREN

AND FAMILY SERVICES ALONE THERE'S ABOUT 20, 25 ISSUES THAT DEMAND OUR

ATTENTION; INCREASE CHILD CARE MONEY. YOU KNOW THE REST OF THE STORY.

SO IF I TRIED TO INSERT THIS INTO NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, I WOULD BE COMPETING

WITH NOT ONLY MY OWN PRIORITIES, BUT EVERY OTHER MEMBER'S PRIORITIES,

AND THIS WOULDN'T GET THE DUE DILIGENCE THAT IT REQUIRES. SO BRINGING IT

UP TODAY, NOW ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES KNOW THAT THEY HAVE PROBABLY

(INDISCERNIBLE) COUNTIES WITHOUT SUPERVISED VISITATION, AND WHEN I

COME TO THEM IN MARCH AND SAY WE NEED YOUR SIGNATURE TO HELP US GET

MORE MONEY FOR THEM, HOPEFULLY THEY'LL BE MORE RECEPTIVE.

MS. WALSH: WELL, I'M GLAD I COULD BE A PART OF

YOUR MASTER PLAN STRATEGY HERE.

207

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. HEVESI: I WOULDN'T -- I WOULDN'T CALL IT THAT,

BUT I DO APPRECIATE IT, MS. WALSH. THANK YOU.

MS. WALSH: LET ME JUST REVIEW MY NOTES, BUT I

THINK YOU'VE PRETTY MUCH ANSWERED... ALL RIGHT. YOU TALKED ABOUT FEE

WAIVERS FOR PEOPLE WHO CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY.

MR. HEVESI: YES.

MS. WALSH: WOULD THERE BE -- DO YOU ENVISION

THAT ANYBODY IS GONNA BE ABLE TO PAY FOR THESE SERVICES ON THEIR -- ON

THEIR OWN?

MR. HEVESI: ABSOLUTELY. IF -- IF PEOPLE HAVE THE

MEANS, THEY SHOULD ABSOLUTELY PAY FOR THESE SERVICES. IT'S A BUSINESS.

WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IN THE STATE IS NOT ONLY MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE

THE INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT ALSO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO FAMILIES

WHO HAVE LOW INCOME AND ARE FINDING THEMSELVES IN A CIRCUMSTANCE

WHERE THEY'VE BEEN SEPARATED.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. AND THERE'S NO NEED THAT

PEOPLE -- THEY DON'T HAVE TO PLEAD LIKE A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASE OR

ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN ORDER TO GET THE ATTENTION. THEY JUST HAVE TO -- IT

HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT THE COURT WILL ORDER.

MR. HEVESI: CORRECT.

MS. WALSH: AND THE COURT THAT COULD ORDER IT

WOULD BE FAMILY COURT.

MR. HEVESI: SUPREME AS WELL. FAMILY AND

SUPREME.

MS. WALSH: SUPREME AS WELL, AND A MATRIMONIAL

208

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTION.

MR. HEVESI: I BELIEVE.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. LET'S SEE. OKAY. I THINK THAT I

HAVE -- YOU HAVE DONE A VERY GOOD JOB ANSWERING ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT

I'VE GOT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

MR. HEVESI: SO YOU'RE GONNA VOTE YES?

MS. WALSH: OH, I'M NOT GONNA -- I'M GONNA GO ON

THE BILL NOW AND EXPLAIN --

MR. HEVESI: I JUST GAVE IT A SHOT.

MS. WALSH: -- WHY THIS IS A TERRIBLE IDEA.

MR. HEVESI: THANK YOU, MS. WALSH. I APPRECIATE

IT.

MS. WALSH: WITH GREAT RESPECT.

ON THE BILL, PLEASE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MS. WALSH: SO HERE'S THE THING. WE KNOW THAT

THERE IS A PROBLEM. WE KNOW THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM. YOU KNOW, WE --

WE AGREE ON THAT. THE THING IS HOW DO WE -- HOW DO WE GET THERE.

YOU KNOW, WE JUST COLLECTIVELY PASSED A $254 BILLION BUDGET AND THERE

WAS NO MONEY PUT IN FOR THIS. AND WE ALL KNOW HOW MUCH THE

GOVERNOR LOVES THE IDEA OF US PASSING THINGS AND THEN -- THAT HAVE NO

MONEY THAT'S BEEN -- THAT'S ALLOCATED FOR IT. SO, I MEAN, I WOULD -- I

DON'T -- I CAN'T PREDICT WHAT THE GOVERNOR WOULD DO. I DON'T EVEN KNOW

IF THE SENATE WILL PASS IT. BUT YEAH, WE'RE GETTING THE BALL ROLLING, WE'RE

HAVING THE DISCUSSION. THAT'S A GOOD THING. BUT HERE'S WHY I DON'T

209

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THINK THAT THE BILL IS READY FOR THIS TO ADVANCE. I THINK IT IS -- I THINK IT

IS -- I -- I DON'T WANT TO BE AT ALL DISRESPECTFUL BECAUSE I THINK THAT, YOU

KNOW, THE HEART IS IN THE RIGHT PLACE AND THERE IS A NEED. BUT THIS IS --

THIS IS A -- AN INCREDIBLE LIFT. WHEN A PROBLEM HAS BEEN KICKED DOWN

THE ROAD SO LONG AND IT'S GOTTEN TO BE SUCH A BIG PROBLEM, PUTTING AN

180-DAY EFFECTIVE DATE AND SAYING THAT YOU WANT IT IN EVERY COUNTY IN

THE STATE AND SAYING THAT YOU WANT THE STATE TO PAY FOR ALL OF IT AND,

YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST -- IT'S JUST A LOT. AND I'M TELLING YOU, THE NUMBER OF

CASES, IT -- IT WOULD BE MOST OF THE CASES IN MY FAMILY COURT CASELOAD

WOULD WANT AND ASK FOR -- ASK A JUDGE FOR SUPERVISED VISITS. I'M JUST

SAYING THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE PEOPLE AND WE'RE NOT GONNA GET THE

PEOPLE. I -- I DIDN'T EVEN GET TO TALKING WITH THE SPONSOR ABOUT WHAT

YOU'RE EVEN GONNA PAY THESE PEOPLE TO DO SUPERVISION. AND SOME

SUPERVISION REALLY IS GONNA HAVE TO BE BY TRAINED MENTAL HEALTH

PROFESSIONALS. YOU KNOW, WHEN THE CHURCHES USED TO DO SUPERVISED

VISITS, THEY WERE VERY, LIKE, WELL-MEANING RETIREES THAT HAD A REAL HEART

AND WANTED TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS KIND OF WORK. AND THAT -- AND THAT

WORKS FOR SOME CASES. I HAVE -- I HAVE HAD CASES WHERE -- I HAD -- ONE

-- ONE IS JUST COMING TO MY MIND THAT I'LL JUST SHARE WITH YOU. I

REPRESENTED A LITTLE GIRL FROM THE AGE OF, I THINK SHE WAS PROBABLY SIX

WHEN I STARTED REPRESENTING HER, AND HER FAMILY HASN'T BEEN BACK IN

COURT RECENTLY. I WILL CONTINUE TO TAKE HER CASE UNTIL SHE AGES OUT OF

THE FAMILY COURT SYSTEM BECAUSE I CARE FOR HER. BUT SHE HAS A MOM

WHO HAS REALLY PROFOUND ISSUES WITH LOW IQ AND VERY SERIOUS MENTAL

HEALTH ISSUES, WHO ABSOLUTELY LOVES HER DAUGHTER, WHO CANNOT OBSERVE

210

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BOUNDARIES. WHO CAN'T RESIST THE URGE TO CALL HER, WHICH VIOLATES

ORDERS OF PROTECTION WHICH THEN LANDS HER BACK IN JAIL. THEN SHE GETS

OUT OF JAIL, SHE DOES IT AGAIN. SHE GETS INVOLVED IN TERRIBLE

RELATIONSHIPS WITH SEX OFFENDERS. SHE -- SHE'S JUST NOT BAD ENOUGH TO

TERMINATE HER PARENTAL RIGHTS, AND WE DON'T WANT TO BECAUSE SHE LOVES

HER DAUGHTER. BUT SHE'S -- SHE CANNOT BE EVEN IN A SUPERVISED SETTING

FOR VERY LONG WITH HER DAUGHTER BEFORE SHE'S SAYING OR DOING SOMETHING

THAT IS JUST WHOLLY INAPPROPRIATE. SO SHE NEEDS A TRAINED SUPERVISOR

WHO HAS THE COURAGE TO STAND UP -- AND SHE HAPPENS TO BE A BIG LADY,

TOO -- AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU'RE BEING INAPPROPRIATE. WE NEED

TO TERMINATE THIS VISIT. AND ALL OF THAT -- WE TALK ABOUT TRAUMA TO THE

CHILD TO BE SEPARATED FROM THE PARENT? SOMETIMES BEING EXPOSED TO A

PARENT WHO IS THAT DEFICIENT, THAT'S TRAUMATIZING, TOO. SO WE NEED -- IF

WE'RE GONNA PUT A PROGRAM INTO PLACE, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE VERY

HIGHLY-TRAINED PEOPLE AVAILABLE WHO, OF COURSE, ARE GONNA HAVE TO BE

CULTURALLY COMPETENT, WHO ARE GONNA NEED TO SPEAK WHATEVER LANGUAGE

THE PEOPLE ARE -- THE CHILD AND THE PARENTS ARE SPEAKING.

I MEAN, DO YOU HAVE A SENSE, AM I PAINTING A PICTURE

FOR YOU OF JUST HOW HARD THIS IS? AND I -- I HAVE THE GREATEST RESPECT

FOR THE SPONSOR AND HIS DESIRE TO DO THE RIGHT THING, AND I ALSO WANT TO

DO THE RIGHT THING. THIS BILL IS NOT READY. IT IS NOT READY. TO -- THE

IDEA -- AND I ALWAYS RAIL AGAINST THIS, AND I'M GONNA RAIL AGAINST IT

AGAIN. WE -- WE PUT OUT A -- A FEELING, A SENSE OF WHAT WE WANT TO

ACCOMPLISH, AND THEN WHAT DO WE DO? WE PICK THE OFFICE FOR THE

PREVENTION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND THE OFFICE OF VICTIM SERVICES

211

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AND WE GO, HERE, YOU GOT 180 DAYS. GOOD LUCK. YOU KNOW? SEE WHAT

YOU CAN COME UP WITH, AND WE'LL SEE NEXT APRIL WHAT WE CAN COME UP

WITH FOR -- FOR MONEY. OR APRIL OR MAY OR JUNE OR WHENEVER THE

BUDGET GETS PASSED NEXT YEAR, RIGHT?

SO THIS IS JUST -- IT'S A -- IT'S A GOOD-INTENTIONED [SIC],

BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE THE STRUCTURE. IT DOES NOT HAVE THE FUNDING. IT DOES

NOT HAVE THE PERSONNEL. AND WHAT I'M SAYING TO ALL OF YOU WHO ARE

HERE AND THOSE OF YOU WHO MAY BE LISTENING, IS IT'S VERY DIFFICULT WHEN

YOU HAVE A BILL THAT IS TITLED AND STARTS OUT BY SAYING "SUPERVISED

VISITATION TO SUPPORT SAFE, STRUCTURED PARENTING TIME." ALL RIGHT, WHO

DOESN'T AGREE WITH THAT, RIGHT? WE AGREE WITH THAT.

I'M ASKING YOU TO HAVE THE COURAGE TO VOTE NO TO THIS

BILL NOT BECAUSE WE DON'T CARE ABOUT IT, BECAUSE THIS BILL IS NOT READY.

AND I WOULD LIKE, THROUGH SOME NO VOTES, TO ESTABLISH TO THE GOVERNOR

CONCERNS THAT WE CANNOT JUST CREATE A POLICY, DELEGATE IT TO THESE -- TO

THESE WELL-MEANING, YOU KNOW, AGENCIES, NOT FUND IT FOR A GOOD LONG

WHILE, AND NOT HAVE ANY IDEA OF THE PERSONNEL THAT ARE GONNA BE ABLE TO

STAFF IT. SO I'M ASKING YOU ALL TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF COURAGE AND -- AND

VOTE NO, WITH RESPECT TO THE SPONSOR, WITH GREAT RESPECT AND CONCERN

FOR THIS ISSUE. WE'RE JUST -- THIS IS -- THIS BILL IS NOT READY YET. SO

UNFORTUNATELY, I WILL HAVE TO VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE AND I -- I DO

ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. CHANG.

212

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. CHANG: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WOULD

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. HEVESI: ABSOLUTELY, SIR. HOW ARE YOU?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. CHANG: WELL, THANK YOU FOR THIS BILL. IT'S VERY

BOLD. AND -- IN MY COMMUNITY IN SUNSET PARK AND BOROUGH PARK IT'S A

HUGE, HUGE ISSUES ABOUT THESE PARENTAL SUPERVISION ITSELF, ESPECIALLY THE

JEWISH COMMUNITY AS WELL. AND -- AND I HAVE NO FAITH OPWDD WERE

ABLE TO BE FAITHFULLY TO EXECUTE THIS -- THIS BOLD INITIATIVE YOU HAVE.

BECAUSE HOW WOULD YOU ABLE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES? HOW DO -- ARE

THERE ANY -- HOW DO WE CLASSIFY THEM? WHAT'S PROFESSIONAL OR NOT?

ARE THEY CERTIFICATION OR NOT, SIR?

MR. HEVESI: SO -- SO FIRST, THANK YOU FOR -- FOR THE

QUESTION. THE -- THE ANSWER IS WE ARE RELYING ON THE OFFICE OF VICTIM

SERVICES, THAT'S THE -- THE GROUP WE PICKED, AND THEY ARE HOPEFULLY --

AND THIS IS OUR HOPE, I DIDN'T WANT TO PUT THIS IN THE LEGISLATION -- THERE

WAS A FEDERAL BOOK OF GUIDELINES DONE ON WHAT YOU NEED SPECIFICALLY

FOR SUPERVISED VISITATION, AND I MEAN I'M TALKING DOWN TO IF YOU HAVE

TO LEAVE A KID IN ONE DOOR AND OUT -- COME IN THE FRONT DOOR, THE ABUSER

COMES OUT THE OTHER DOOR. SO I'M GONNA BE HOPING THAT THE OFFICE OF

VICTIM SERVICES FOLLOWS THOSE FEDERAL GUIDELINES. I DID NOT WANT TO

PUT THEM IN THE BILL TO TIE THEIR HANDS, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE THE

APPROPRIATE ENTITY TO HANDLE THIS.

213

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. CHANG: AND DO YOU EXPECT ANY, LIKE,

CERTIFICATION OR PROCESS FOR THESE PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION ITSELF?

MR. HEVESI: I'M -- I'M NOT EXPECTING CERTIFICATION.

I DON'T -- I DON'T THINK THESE ARE CERTIFIED POSITIONS. BUT I'M EXPECTING A

LEVEL OF PROFESSIONALISM THAT I KNOW THAT WE DON'T HAVE NOW. AND BY

INFUSING STATE MONEY INTO THIS SYSTEM AND BY REQUIRING THEM TO DO A

NUMBER OF THINGS, WE'RE HOPING TO PROFESSIONALIZE WHAT IS CLEARLY --

AND I'LL USE MY COLLEAGUE'S TERM -- A DEARTH OF APPROPRIATE SERVICES FOR

OUR CONSTITUENTS.

MR. CHANG: BECAUSE AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, IN -- IN

NEW YORK CITY THERE'S A SHORTAGE OF THE PROFESSIONAL STAFFING ITSELF,

AND YOUR BOLD ENOUGH TO BE ALL THROUGHOUT THE STATE, AND UPSTATE HERE

IS EVEN LESS OF THE SERVICES --

MR. HEVESI: YES, SIR.

MR. CHANG: -- ARE TRAINED. SO PERHAPS IT SHOULD

BE STRUCTURED MAYBE SOME PROFESSIONALISM ON A SUPERVISED LEVEL SO

THEY CAN --

MR. HEVESI: SO, LET ME ANSWER YOU THIS WAY

BECAUSE I -- I THINK YOU'RE ON TO SOMETHING. SO, THERE'S SEVERAL TYPES OF

VISITATION. SO THERE'S UNSUPERVISED -- WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THAT,

THAT'S FAMILY. THERE'S -- THERE'S REGULAR SUPERVISED VISITATION, WHICH I

THINK IS JUST EVALUATIVE. BUT THEN I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT, THERE'S

THERAPEUTIC SUPERVISED VISITATION WHERE THE JUDGE SAYS, NO, WE GOT TO

HAVE A PROFESSIONAL IN THE ROOM. SO IT WILL BE A COMBINATION OF THOSE

TWO.

214

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. CHANG: OKAY. AND HOW WOULD THAT BE

COMPETING AGAINST FOSTER CARE? BECAUSE THAT COULD BE A FINE LINE OF

FOSTER CARE, A SUPERVISED VISIT; WOULDN'T THAT?

MR. HEVESI: YOU MEAN YOU'RE TAKING PEOPLE FROM

THE FOSTER CARE INDUSTRY --

MR. CHANG: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. HEVESI: -- TO THIS? TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I

HAVEN'T THOUGH ABOUT THAT, ALTHOUGH THAT'S A HUGE PROBLEM IN THE FOSTER

CARE INDUSTRY. BECAUSE WE, UNDER THE FORMER GOVERNOR, STOPPED

PAYING THE PEOPLE IN THE FOSTER CARE INDUSTRY. THEIR TURNOVER RATES ARE

RIDICULOUSLY HIGH. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT PROPPING UP SUPERVISED

VISITATION AND MAKING IT MORE PROFESSIONAL IS GONNA SIGNIFICANTLY ADD

TO THE -- TO THE TURNOVER RATE. JUST BECAUSE COFCCA, THE GROUP THAT

SUPPORTS ALL OF THOSE AGENCIES, IS, I BELIEVE, FOR THIS. OR I CAN

GUARANTEE THEY DID NOT COME OUT AGAINST IT.

MR. CHANG: YES. AND ESPECIALLY IN DOMESTIC

VIOLENCE ENVIRONMENT. AND GENERALLY, PARENTS AND KIDS ARE OUTSIDE

FROM -- FROM THE -- FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. GENERALLY YOU DON'T

CONGREGATE IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY ALWAYS GO TO THE DIFFERENT

NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THAT'S HARD TO DO. AND YOU WANT TO BE CULTURALLY

SENSITIVE, ESPECIALLY IN A JEWISH NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE YOU NEED

KOSHER FOOD, YOU NEED ALL THOSE SUPPORT SYSTEM. IF -- IF THERE'S A

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ISSUE THEY HAVE TO BE RELOCATE SOME OTHER AREA THAT

MAY NOT BE CULTURALLY SENSITIVE.

MR. HEVESI: WELL, IT'S A -- IT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT,

215

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AND PARTICULARLY -- LOOK, YOU AND I ARE FROM NEW YORK CITY WITH THE

MOST ETHNICALLY AND CULTURALLY-DIVERSE CITY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD.

AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE GONNA ASK THE CITY TO SEND OUT IN THEIR ANNUAL --

THAT THEY DO THIS EVERY YEAR -- CHILD WELFARE PLAN AND TELL US EXACTLY

WHAT THEY NEED AND THEN THE STATE WILL HOPEFULLY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE IT.

MR. CHANG: OKAY. AND 25 MILLION, TO BE HONEST,

THAT'S NOT ENOUGH MONEY.

MR. HEVESI: IT'S THE BEST MONEY WE'VE EVER SPENT.

AND -- AND I'M TELLING YOU, I WOULD SPEND MORE THAN THAT TO KEEP THESE

FAMILIES TOGETHER. TO -- TO TAKE AWAY THE ADVERSE CHILDHOOD

EXPERIENCES AND THE TRAUMA OF FAMILY SEPARATION THAT GOVERNMENT IS

DOING, WE ARE PART AND PARCEL TO -- LET ME TAKE THAT BACK. WE ARE

EXACERBATING FAMILY SEPARATION WITH OUR -- WITH OUR INCOMPETENCE AND

THIS IS OUR -- A WAY TO FIX IT.

MR. CHANG: WELL, MY COLLEAGUES MADE A VERY

GOOD POINT THAT THIS IS A VERY BOLD PROGRAM, AND I APPLAUD YOU TO -- TO

PUT THIS, BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY NECESSARY IN THIS CURRENT AGE RIGHT NOW.

MR. HEVESI: THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. CHANG: BUT I WOULD THINK OUR CURRENT

STRUCTURE ADMINISTRATIVELY IS ABLE TO HANDLE THIS -- THIS NEW PROGRAM

ITSELF UNLESS YOU COULD IMPLEMENT LIKE A PROJECT ITSELF THAT CAN GROW

OUT.

MR. HEVESI: YEAH, I -- I UNDERSTAND THAT. SO LOOK,

THIS IS ABOUT GETTING THE -- THE BALL ROLLING. THE NEXT STEP -- SO FIRST OF

ALL, IF THE GOVERNOR SIGNS IT I'M SURE THERE'LL BE AN AMENDMENT PROCESS

216

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

WHICH YOU COULD ADDRESS SOME OF THESE THINGS. OR WORST CASE, SHE

VETOES IT AND I'M HERE BACK ASKING YOU GUYS TO -- TO VOTE FOR THIS NEXT

YEAR. BUT WE'VE GOT A JUMP START FOR ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES

UNDERSTANDING THE PROGRAM.

MR. CHANG: OKAY. AND THE ONLY THING MORE

PRESSING ISSUE FOR ME IS HOW TO KEEP CULTURALLY-SENSITIVE AND TO KEEP

THE FAMILY AND THE ENVIRONMENT THAT THE KIDS NORMALLY GO TO SCHOOL

LOCALLY, FAMILIARIZING WITH THEIR -- WITH THEIR FRIENDS. AND AGAIN, IT'S

TRAUMATICALLY JUST TO STRIP AWAY FROM THEIR PARENTS, BUT ALSO STRIPPED

AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, FROM THE KIDS THAT THEY HAVE FRIENDS AND

NEIGHBORS THAT THEY ASSOCIATE.

MR. HEVESI: I -- I AGREE. SO -- SO KIDS UNDER THE

CIRCUMSTANCES ARE HAVING EXTREME DIFFICULTY. THIS IS TRAUMATIC. THIS

COULD BE LIFE-CHANGING. SO WHAT WE'RE DOING IS TRYING TO MAKE SURE

THAT THE PARENTS HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR KIDS, AND THAT'S GOOD FOR NEW

YORK FAMILIES, THAT'S GOOD FOR THE TAXPAYERS IN THE LONG RUN.

MR. CHANG: THANK YOU.

MR. HEVESI: THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. CHANG: ON THE BILL. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. CHANG: I APPLAUD THE SPONSOR FOR THIS BILL. IT'S

A VERY BOLD MOVE AND WE REALLY NEED THAT. BUT I HAVE NO CONFIDENCE

OUR CURRENT ADMINISTRATIVE OPWDD TO ADMINISTRATIVE THIS BILL

ADEQUATELY. BUT IT'S A START. AND I WISH WE HAVE A PROJECT, A PILOT

PROGRAM SO WE EXPEND WHAT WE HAVE AND NOT TO -- NOT TO DUPLICATE

217

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SOME OF THE SERVICES ITSELF.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. MANKTELOW.

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A FEW QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. HEVESI: ABSOLUTELY, SIR. HOW ARE YOU DOING?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU, MR. HEVESI.

WHO'S DOING THIS RIGHT NOW?

MR. HEVESI: NON-PROFIT PROVIDERS MOSTLY.

MR. MANKTELOW: SO DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE COST

IS RIGHT NOW ACROSS THE STATE FOR DOING THIS?

MR. HEVESI: YEAH. SO IT -- WELL, IT'S -- $75 IS THE --

THE CHEAPEST WE COULD FIND IS $75 PER ONE-HOUR SESSION. AND BY THE

WAY, THAT'S THE CHEAPEST. THERE ARE THOSE THAT -- THAT RUN UP HIGHER

THAN THAT.

MR. MANKTELOW: AND -- AND WHO'S FUNDING

THAT? WHO'S PAYING FOR THAT?

MR. HEVESI: SO RIGHT NOW IT'S THE -- IT'S -- IT'S THE

PARENTS. IT'S THE PARENTS WHO ARE FINANCIALLY ABLE TO DO IT ARE ABLE -- ARE

-- ARE TRYING TO -- TO DO IT AND PROP UP THESE BUSINESSES. BUT THE

BUSINESS IS NOT ENOUGH. YOU CAN SEE COUNTIES DON'T HAVE THESE. AND

218

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SO WE ARE TRYING TO SOLVE TWO PROBLEMS AT ONCE WITH THE SAME THING.

BY INVESTING MONEY HERE, YOU'RE HELPING THE COURT SYSTEM, YOU'RE

HELPING THESE FAMILIES, AND YOU'RE ALSO HELPING THESE KIDS. SO IT SEEMS

TO MAKE SENSE.

MR. MANKTELOW: SO -- SO WHAT IS THE PRICE TAG

RIGHT NOW THE WAY IT IS TODAY? DO YOU KNOW?

MR. HEVESI: OH, FOR THE STATE? RIGHT NOW IT'S

ZERO.

MR. MANKTELOW: NO, I MEANT, LIKE, WHAT --

WHAT ARE PARENTS PAYING FOR ACROSS THE STATE? WHAT DOES THAT -- WHAT

DOES THAT DOLLAR NUMBER LOOK LIKE?

MR. HEVESI: SO, IT'S $75 PER -- PER ONE HOUR.

MR. MANKTELOW: NO, I GOT THAT PART.

MR. HEVESI: OKAY.

MR. MANKTELOW: I'M AT WHAT'S THE TOTAL COST

RIGHT NOW PARENTS ARE PAYING ACROSS THE STATE? WHAT'S --

MR. HEVESI: I HAVE NO IDEA. AND THE REASON IS

BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON THE SERVICES THAT ARE AVAILABLE, IT DEPENDS --

SOME -- SOME OF THESE NON-PROFITS DON'T OFFER ALL OF THE SERVICES, SOME

HAVE PARTICULARLY HIGH, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE COUNTIES THAT HAVE

NOTHING. SO THERE'S NO WAY FOR ME TO ESTIMATE THAT, SIR.

MR. MANKTELOW: WELL, THE REASON I ASKED WAS I

WAS WONDERING WHERE YOU CAME UP WITH THE $25 MILLION.

MR. HEVESI: I AM SO SMART THAT I GOT IT FROM THE

OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION.

219

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. MANKTELOW: I MAY BELIEVE THAT.

MR. HEVESI: YOU SHOULD. YOU SHOULD.

MR. MANKTELOW: SO -- SO YOU THINK $25 MILLION

WILL COVER THIS TO START WITH?

MR. HEVESI: THAT -- THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AS --

AS OF THIS POINT. BUT AGAIN, WE HAVE PROCESS TO GO THROUGH HERE. IT'S

GOT TO GET THROUGH SENATE FINANCE, THE GOVERNOR'S GONNA HAVE TO

WEIGH IN. SHE MIGHT KICK IT OUT TO THE BUDGET. AND THEN MY

EXPERIENCE WITH OUR FRIENDS AT THE DIVISION OF BUDGET, THEY ARE ALWAYS

A LOT BIGGER WITH THE COST ESTIMATE THAN WHAT IT ACTUALLY IS. SO WE'LL --

WE'LL WORK IT THERE, BUT I THINK 25 MILLION IS A GOOD BALLPARK FOR US TO

GET OUR HEAD AROUND.

MR. MANKTELOW: WELL, I HAVE A LOT OF FAITH IN

YOU, SO IT'S POSSIBLE.

MR. HEVESI: I APPRECIATE IT.

MR. MANKTELOW: BUT -- SO LET'S SAY IT GOES

THROUGH THE WAY IT IS --

MR. HEVESI: YEAH.

MR. MANKTELOW: DO YOU SEE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

OR COUNTIES GETTING INVOLVED IN THIS?

MR. HEVESI: NO. ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY HAVE

TO, IN THEIR CHILD WELFARE PLANS THAT THEY DO ANNUALLY, ADD SIX PIECES OF

INFORMATION REQUESTING WHAT THEIR NEEDS ARE. THAT'S IT. NO COUNTY

MONEY. I WOULD NOT PUT A BILL ON THE FLOOR -- I MEAN, I'VE BEEN HERE FOR

CLOSE TO 20 YEARS AND I'VE SEEN THE FORMER GOVERNOR, IN PARTICULAR, BEAT

220

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE HELL OUT OF THESE COUNTIES FOR NO REASON. I WILL NOT BE PART OF THAT.

MR. MANKTELOW: ALL RIGHT. WE -- WE'VE TALKED

ABOUT DAY CARE PROVIDERS BACK HOME TAKING CARE OF OUR CHILDREN --

MR. HEVESI: YES, SIR.

MR. MANKTELOW: -- AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT

NEW YORK STATE HAS PUSHED WAS WE WANT TO GET OUR DAY CARES [SIC]

PROVIDERS MOVING TO GROW TO GET PEOPLE BACK TO WORK. WELL, WE

ACCOMPLISHED THAT, BUT NOW THAT THE STATE SEES JUST HOW MUCH THAT COST

IS GONNA BE, THEY'RE PULLING THE REINS BACK ON THAT.

MR. HEVESI: YEAH, BUT WE'RE NOT DONE YET.

MR. MANKTELOW: OKAY. I GOT YOU. I -- I -- AS I

SAID, I HAVE A LOT OF FAITH IN YOU, SO --

MR. HEVESI: THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT.

MR. MANKTELOW: SO I'M HOPING SO.

MR. HEVESI: I HOPE TO LIVE UP TO IT.

MR. MANKTELOW: MY CONCERN IS IF WE PUT THIS

25 MILLION IN THERE, I JUST DON'T WANT FUTURE LEADERSHIP, FUTURE

ADMINISTRATIONS TO --TO PULL THAT MONEY BACK. BECAUSE WE -- WE SEEM

TO DO THIS IN NEW YORK A LOT. WE GET THE BALL ROLLING, THINGS ARE

MOVING FORWARD. WE GET OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENTS GEARED UP TO -- TO

DO STUFF SUCH AS THE DAY CARE PROVIDING SERVICES OR, YOU KNOW, FUNDING

IT. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, WELL, WE'RE SPENDING WAY TOO MUCH

MONEY. WE GOT TO PULL IT BACK. AND WHO ARE WE HURTING? THE YOUNG

CHILDREN, THE FAMILIES. FAMILIES OF LOW-INCOME.

MR. HEVESI: (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

221

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. MANKTELOW: AND WE'RE GETTING THEM BACK

TO WORK WHEN WE'RE HAVING A -- AN ISSUE IN NEW YORK STATE OF NOT

BEING ABLE TO FILL ALL THE JOBS THAT ARE OUT THERE. SO THAT'S JUST MY

CONCERN IS IF THIS MOVES FORWARD --

MR. HEVESI: THAT'S A LEGIT POINT. I APPRECIATE THAT.

MR. MANKTELOW: WILL -- WILL WE BE ABLE TO FUND

IT, HOW -- HOW WE WILL BE ABLE TO FUND IT. AND --

MR. HEVESI: SO -- SO MY ANSWER WOULD BE -- SO

FIRST OF ALL, ABSOLUTELY A LEGITIMATE POINT. WE'RE GONNA DO OUR BEST TO

NOT ONLY GET THIS MONEY APPROPRIATED, BUT EVERY YEAR KEEP COMING

BACK AND MAKING SURE LIKE WE DO IN OTHER YEARS, EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE

TONS OF OTHER AREAS OF NEED THROUGHOUT THE STATE THAT YOU AND I DISCUSS

ALL THE TIME, TO NOT LET THIS BE RAIDED BECAUSE WE UNDERSTAND THE

SIGNIFICANT TENTACLES THAT THIS HAS. WHEN THIS IS SCREWED UP LIKE IT IS

NOW, IT'S PROBLEMS ALL OVER THE PLACE; BAD COURTS, BAD FOR YOUR KIDS,

BAD FOR THESE PARENTS. IT'S A MESS. SO YEAH, WE'RE GONNA LOOK TO GET

THE MONEY IN AND KEEP IT AND MAKE SURE NOBODY ELSE RAIDS IT.

MR. MANKTELOW: I -- AS -- AS THE PREVIOUS

SPEAKER SAID, HE LIKED HOW BOLD YOU ARE DOING THIS. I -- I THINK IT'S A

GREAT INITIATIVE. I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE FUNDING. I DO HAVE

CONCERNS ABOUT OUR -- OUR INITIAL SPEAKER -- OUR INITIAL PERSON ASKING,

YOU KNOW, WHERE WE GONNA GET THE PEOPLE, HOW ARE WE GONNA MAKE

THIS ALL HAPPEN. AND IN 180 DAYS, I JUST DON'T SEE THAT HAPPEN --

HAPPENING LOCALLY. I JUST DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE ARE THERE OR THE

EXPERTISE IS THERE. AND I KNOW WE COULD PUT THE MONEY THERE, BUT IT'S

222

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

STILL TAKES TIME TO FILL THOSE POSITIONS AND GET THE GAME PLAN ON THERE.

SO --

MR. HEVESI: I APPRECIATE THAT AND I UNDERSTAND THAT

CONCERN. I'M -- I'M HERE TO TELL YOU I'M GONNA DO MY BEST TO MAKE SURE

THAT THIS DOESN'T BECOME A PROBLEM, BUT I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN.

MR. MANKTELOW: ALL RIGHT. MR. HEVESI, THANK

YOU FOR ANSWERING MY FEW QUESTIONS --

MR. HEVESI: THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. MANKTELOW: -- AND I WISH YOU THE BEST ON

THIS BECAUSE I DO HOPE IT GOES THROUGH. SO THANK YOU.

MR. HEVESI: I HOPE IT GOES THROUGH. IF NOT, WE'LL

BE BACK HERE NEXT YEAR TALKING ABOUT IT, MY FRIEND. SO THANK YOU.

MR. MANKTELOW: ALL RIGHT. I'M LOOKING

FORWARD.

MR. HEVESI: I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

MR. MANKTELOW: MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. MANKTELOW: AGAIN, LIKE MY COLLEAGUES SAID

BEFORE ME, I THINK WE ALL FEEL THAT THIS IN GOOD -- WE HAVE GOOD

INTENTIONS TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN FOR THESE FAMILIES, FOR THESE YOUNG

CHILDREN. THE FUNDING IS THE QUESTION; THE FUNDING LONG-TERM FROM THE

STATE SIDE IS A QUESTION. SO, BUT I HAVE HOPE.

SO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO ASK A FEW QUESTIONS

THIS EVENING. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

223

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER. WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. HEVESI: BE MY PLEASURE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: I ACTUALLY WAS VERY

INTRIGUED BY THE FIRST COMMENTS MADE BY OUR COLLEAGUE ON THE OTHER

SIDE OF THE AISLE, IS THAT THE ACCESS TO RESOURCES TO PROVIDE THESE

SERVICES HAS DRIED UP. AND THEN WHEN I, YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT -- I -- I

LISTENED TO -- AND I -- I KNOW THAT THIS IS AN AREA THAT SHE'S WORKED IN

FOR YEARS, AND SO I -- I TRUST HER COMMENTS ON IT. HOW -- HOW DID WE

GET HERE TO A PLACE WHERE WE HAVE SO MANY FAMILIES THAT ARE

DYSFUNCTIONAL TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY NEED THE COURTS OR THE SYSTEM TO

HELP TAKE CARE OF THEIR CHILDREN AND WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO PAY FOR

IT? I MEAN, I -- I DON'T -- YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE I'M OLD ENOUGH TO KNOW

THAT THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN AND OUR SOCIETY WASN'T

LIKE THIS. SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO

HAVE THOUGHT THROUGH ALREADY OR EVEN HAVE THE DESIRE TO LOOK INTO, BUT

HOW DID WE GET HERE?

MR. HEVESI: THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. I WISH -- I

WISH I HAD AN ANSWER THAT WAS SUFFICIENT. AND I DON'T WANT TO MAKE

ONE UP. THE ANSWER IS I DON'T KNOW. BUT I UNDERSTAND THE

CIRCUMSTANCE THAT WE'RE IN NOW, AND I'M LISTENING TO THE PROFESSIONALS

224

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

WHO ARE TELLING US THIS IS THE SOLUTION TO -- TO ADDRESS THIS CHRONIC

PROBLEM THAT, YOU'RE RIGHT, HAS METASTASIZED. AND MS. WALSH IS RIGHT,

THERE'S THIS DEARTH OF SERVICES. SO I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW WE GOT TO

THIS POINT. IT'S GOT TO BE A -- A MULTIPLE REENFORCING ISSUES THAT ARE

COMBINING. BUT WE ARE HERE NOW AND I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS THE

APPROPRIATE SOLUTION.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: WELL, THANK YOU.

ON THE BILL, MADAM SPEAKER.

MR. HEVESI: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: I -- I WANT TO JOIN MY

COLLEAGUES IN COMPLIMENTING THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION BECAUSE IF

WE NEVER FIGURE OUT HOW WE GOT HERE, IT'S GONNA BE KIND OF HARD TO FIX

IT, IN A WAY. BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS GONNA COST MORE AND MORE AND MORE

IF WE DON'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO GO BACK AND FIX THE TRAUMA-INFUSED LIVES

THAT PEOPLE HAVE LIVED IN OUR SOCIETY. AND SO I HOPE THAT AT SOME POINT

WE CAN GET TO THAT. BUT IN THE MEANTIME, YOU REALLY HAVE TO

COMPLIMENT THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION FOR FIGURING OUT THAT WE --

WE HAVE -- WE HAVE TO DO THIS. WE HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE BOTH

PARENTS AND CHILDREN COMFORTABLE ENOUGH TO GET TO A PLACE WHERE THEY

CAN START GETTING THE KIND OF QUALITY SERVICE THAT THEY NEED THAT COULD

PERHAPS MOVE US AWAY FROM THESE DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILIES TO A LIFE

WHEN WE ARE BACK INTO A SOCIETY WHERE FAMILIES FUNCTION PROPERLY.

AND EVEN IF SOME OF THEM DON'T, WE WANT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THEM TO.

AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT WE HAVE TO PROVIDE THEM SERVICES.

225

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SO I DON'T KNOW. I REMEMBER DAYS WHEN CATHOLIC

CHARITIES WOULD ALWAYS BE AVAILABLE TO PROVIDE THESE SERVICES. I

REMEMBER WHEN CHURCHES WOULD ALWAYS HAVE THEIR DOORS OPEN TO

PROVIDE THESE TYPES OF SERVICES. I REMEMBER WHEN PEOPLE WENT INTO

FOSTER CARE AND WEREN'T ABUSED BY THEIR FOSTER PARENTS. I MEAN, LIFE IS

SO -- CHANGED SO MUCH IN OUR SOCIETY, AND I THINK SOMETIMES OUR

FRIVOLOUS DEBATES AROUND RESOURCES ADDS TO THAT NEGATIVELY AS OPPOSED

TO POSITIVELY.

SO I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE GONNA MAKE THIS 25

MILLION HAPPEN TO GET THIS DONE IN THE NEXT BUDGET, BUT I KNOW IT NEEDS

TO HAPPEN. AND I CONGRATULATE THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION AND I

LOOK FORWARD TO VOTING FOR -- IN THE AFFIRMATIVE ON IT.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. BURROUGHS.

MR. BURROUGHS: YES. JUST WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD FOR A FEW QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. HEVESI: ABSOLUTELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. BURROUGHS: YES. FIRST COMMENT IS THAT I

WOULD LIKE TO AGREE WITH MADAM SPEAKER -- MAJORITY LEADER, AND WE

DO HAVE TO FIND -- FIGURE OUT A PLACE HOW TO FIX THIS. SAD -- SADLY, I

DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE LEGISLATING THE WAY PEOPLE RAISE CHILDREN, OR

AT LEAST SHOULD COPARENT CHILDREN. BUT HERE WE ARE, AND WE HAVE TO

226

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

FIND WAYS TO FIX IT.

BUT SUPERVISED VISITATION IN SOME RESPECTS SOUNDS LIKE

IT SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S POSITIVE. BUT A LOT OF TIMES IT PENALIZES

ONE PARENT BASED ON THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THE AUTHORITIES FROM

ANOTHER PARENT. AND SO NOW WE HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO PAY FOR

SOMETHING THAT MAY NOT BE TRUE. I'VE SEEN PLENTY OF DADS AND MOMS

HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OR HAVE TO GO THROUGH A COURT SYSTEM IN

ORDER TO JUST SPEND TIME WITH THEIR CHILDREN, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT.

I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR. SO DOES THE LEGISLATURE TRY AND FIGURE OUT A WAY

TO EFFECTIVELY GET INFORMATION? DOES IT MAKE -- DOES IT VERIFY IT'S

ACCURATE? BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA PUT MONEY TOWARDS SOMETHING AND WE

DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TRUE.

MR. HEVESI: YEAH. I TOTALLY APPRECIATE THE

QUESTION, THANK YOU. SO THE ANSWER IS THAT THESE PROGRAMS ARE GONNA

BE REQUIRED TO BE PART OF THE (INDISCERNIBLE) -- FIRST OF ALL, YOU'RE

ALLOWING THE CHILDREN AND FAMILY TO BE TOGETHER, WHICH I THINK WE BOTH

AGREE IS A POSITIVE STEP. BUT IT ALSO -- YOU'RE ABLE TO SEND INFORMATION

TO THE COURT, SO THE COURT WILL NOW UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON.

BUT TO YOUR INITIAL POINT, WHICH I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH, THIS IS UP TO

THE JUDGES. AND IF SOMEBODY COMES IN WITH FALSE INFORMATION AND

THEY FOOL THE JUDGE, THERE'S NOTHING THAT WE, IN THE LEGISLATURE, CAN DO

ABOUT THAT. WE RELY ON THE JUDGES TO MAKE THESE DETERMINATIONS. SO

WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS WHEN THE JUDGES MAKE WHATEVER

DETERMINATIONS BASED OFF OF WHATEVER FACTOR, PROVIDE THE INFRASTRUCTURE

IF SUPERVISED VISITATION IS NEEDED. BY THE WAY, IT'S MOSTLY NEEDED IN

227

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ABUSE CASES OR FAMILY VIOLENCE CASES.

MR. BURROUGHS: THANK YOU. I CAN APPRECIATE

YOU SAYING YOU'RE -- YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T -- YOU'RE NOT SURE IF WE CAN

ENFORCE SOMETHING THAT WAS TOLD THAT WE FIND OUT TO BE SOMETHING THAT

WASN'T TRUE. SO IF -- IF THE CUSTODIAL PARENT SAYS SOMETHING THAT DIDN'T

HAPPEN, AND NOW THE NONCUSTODIAL PARENT HAS TO SUFFER THE

CONSEQUENCES OF THAT, AND ON TOP OF THAT WE'RE FUNDING THAT.

MR. HEVESI: WELL, THAT'S THE EXISTING SYSTEM

ALREADY, RIGHT? THAT HAPPENS NOW. SO THE FACT THAT WE'RE FUNDING IT,

WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT MORE PROFESSIONAL. AND IF THERE'S BAD

INTERACTIONS BETWEEN THE FAMILY, YOU KNOW, THE POTENTIAL ABUSER AND

THE CHILD OR THE OTHER -- ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE FAMILY, THAT'S BEING

REPORTED BACK TO THE COURT. WHAT WE'RE DOING IS TAKING -- AND YOU'RE --

YOU'RE NOT WRONG ABOUT THE CIRCUMSTANCE, RIGHT? I -- I APPRECIATE THAT.

WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS PROFESSIONALIZE THE OPERATION THAT HAS TO

HANDLE THESE THINGS.

MR. BURROUGHS: SO WAS THERE A THOUGHT TO PUT A

PROVISION -- ADD A PROVISION TO, I'D SAY, PENALIZE? HAD THERE BEEN A

STORY THAT WAS TOLD THAT WE FOUND OUGHT TO BE INACCURATE, IS THERE A

PROVISION THAT'S SET FORTH IN THIS -- THIS BILL TO PENALIZE A PERSON FOR

TELLING A NON-TRUTH?

MR. HEVESI: SO -- SO THE ANSWER IS, IN THIS -- SO I'M

A LEGISLATOR DOING MY BEST TO CREATE A -- FUND A PROGRAM. THAT KIND OF

ANALYSIS HAS TO BE DONE BY THE JUDICIAL BRANCH. THAT'S -- THAT'S NOT UP

TO ME. AND IF A PARENT IS LYING TO THE JUDGE, THAT'S UP FOR A JUDGE TO DO

228

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE REPRIMANDING. BUT THAT'S -- THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS BILL. WE'RE JUST

TRYING TO CREATE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IF THE JUDGE DETERMINES THAT IT'S

UNSAFE FOR A CHILD TO BE WITH A PARENT, THAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY HAVE

PARENTING TIME WITH THEIR KID IN A SAFE, SUPERVISED ARENA.

MR. BURROUGHS: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

MR. HEVESI: THANK YOU, SIR.

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.)

MR. LAVINE TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. LAVINE: WE OFTEN RISE TO RECOGNIZE THE

CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE SPONSORS OF THESE BILLS, AND WHILE WE'RE ALWAYS

EXERCISING CANDOR WHEN WE DO THAT, I WANT TO MAKE A SPECIAL

RECOGNITION FOR THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL. THE SUBSTANCE OF THIS BILL IS

THE RESULT OF TESTIMONY TAKEN DURING A JOINT HEARING OF THE CHILDREN AND

FAMILIES COMMITTEE AND THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE IN DECEMBER OF

2024. THE HEARING WAS COMPELLING. IT WAS GUT-WRENCHING. AND THE

SPONSOR IS NOW PRESENTING US WITH A PLAN TO FORMULATE A STATEWIDE

PLAN. THIS IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. AND IT IS THE BEST THING WE CAN DO

RIGHT NOW TO TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT KIDS ARE PROTECTED.

NOW, IS IT GONNA COST MONEY? EVERYTHING COSTS

229

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MONEY. IT WILL COST MONEY. BUT IF WE DON'T ADVANCE THIS PLAN,

MAHATMA GANDHI WOULD BE VERY ANGRY AT US, BECAUSE IT WAS MAHATMA

GANDHI HIMSELF WHO SAID, IF YOU DON'T ASK, YOU DON'T GET. SO WE ARE

ASKING. AND IF WE CAN DO THIS, WE WILL SAVE CHILDREN'S LIVES, AND THAT'S

A DARN GOOD THING FOR US TO DO.

SO I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. LAVINE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. NORBER TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. NORBER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I WANT

TO THANK THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL. IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT BILL.

I BELIEVE THAT MANY OF THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE HERE

IN OUR STATE STEM FROM THE MILLIONS OF FAMILIES WHO SUFFER FROM

DYSFUNCTIONALITY AND FROM INSTABILITY. OUR -- OUR SOCIAL PROBLEMS THAT

WE HAVE AND WE WITNESS HERE EVERY DAY AND THAT WE DEAL WITH EVERY

DAY HERE IN THIS CHAMBER, ORIGINATE FROM THE FAMILIES WHO ARE

SUFFERING. SO I BELIEVE THAT ANY INITIATIVE THAT WE CAN COME UP WITH

HERE IN -- IN OUR CHAMBER WOULD BE -- WHICH HELPS THESE FAMILIES, NO

MATTER WHAT THE COSTS ARE, SHOULD BE ON TOP OF OUR AGENDA EVERY DAY.

SO WE OWE IT TO THESE KIDS.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. NORRIS IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. FORREST TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. FORREST: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, FOR

230

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ALLOWING ME TO STAND AND EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I AM STANDING HERE TO SAY

THAT WHEN I BECAME A MOM I DID NOT GET A SET OF INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO

BE A PARENT. AND I'M SURE EVERYONE IN THIS -- IN THIS CHAMBER WHO

DECIDED TO BECOME A PARENT DIDN'T GET AN INSTRUCTION EITHER. AND SO

SOMETIMES IT'S LITERALLY SOMEBODY ELSE STEPPING INTO MY HOUSE,

STEPPING INTO MY LIFE AND STANDING IN MY SHOES THAT ALLOWS YOU TO GIVE

THE -- ALLOW YOU TO GET -- RECEIVE FEEDBACK ON HOW YOU CAN MAKE YOUR

FAMILY JUST A TAD BETTER, TO SUPPORT YOU IN THAT SENSE. AND SO WHILE I

WOULD RATHER IT NOT HAPPEN DURING A COURT PROCEEDING, BUT ONCE IT GETS

THERE THIS IS THE TIME FOR INTERVENTION. AND IF THERE IS -- I DON'T SEE ANY

REASON TO COUNT THE NUMBERS OR COUNT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY IT TAKES TO

HEAL A FAMILY. WHEN -- WHEN THAT CHILD COMES OUT IN THE END, THEY'LL

BE A BETTER PERSON FOR THE SOCIETY.

SO I'M WHOLLY, WHOLLY GOING TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE

FOR THIS AND I THANK THE SPONSOR FOR THEIR [SIC] HARD WORK. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. FORREST IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. MAHER TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. MAHER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I DID

WANT TO ALSO MENTION THE HEARING THAT WAS SET, THE JOINT HEARING. THERE

WERE SOME UNBELIEVABLE STORIES TOLD. THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK TO BE

DONE. THIS IS CERTAINLY AN IMPERFECT SITUATION; WE DO NOT KNOW ALL THE

ANSWERS. WE DO NOT HAVE ALL THE NUMBERS. BUT IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE

REALLY FIGURE OUT TO THE CLOSEST DEGREE POSSIBLE HOW MUCH THIS WILL

COST. AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE THERE WAS A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT

231

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

CAUSED THIS PROBLEM. WELL, I'LL TELL YOU WHAT WON'T MAKE IT BETTER IS THE

CURRENT SITUATION WE'RE IN WITH OUR CHILD CARE SUBSIDY OF UNDERFUNDING

IT TO THE POINT WHERE NOW YOU HAVE COUNTIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF

NEW YORK CANCELING OR PUTTING ON WAITING LISTS FAMILIES THAT

DESPERATELY NEED CHILD CARE ASSISTANCE. THAT CERTAINLY ISN'T GOING TO

HELP FAMILIES CREATE LESS PROBLEMS THAN WE HAVE RIGHT NOW.

SO GETTING THE MONEY RIGHT IS IMPORTANT. I DO ENJOY

WORKING WITH MY COLLEAGUE, THE SPONSOR AND THE CHILDREN AND

FAMILIES COMMITTEE. THIS IS AN AREA WHERE WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING.

AND THIS IS THE SOMETHING THAT'S IN FRONT OF US, SO I WILL BE VOTING IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE. BUT WE CERTAINLY HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND SOME OF THOSE

REASONS THAT THESE FAMILIES ARE IN THE POSITION THEY'RE IN ARE BECAUSE WE

NEED TO DO A LITTLE BIT BETTER IN CALCULATING HOW WE ASSIST AND FUND

PROGRAMS AND DON'T PULL THE RUG FROM UNDERNEATH FAMILIES THAT ARE IN

DESPERATE NEED OF ASSISTANCE.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I'LL BE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. MAHER IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

PAGE 17, RULES REPORT NO. 550, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A01962-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 550, ANDERSON, SEAWRIGHT, CUNNINGHAM, WEPRIN, CRUZ,

232

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

DINOWITZ, EPSTEIN, SCHIAVONI, GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS, LAVINE, ROMERO,

O'PHARROW, GLICK, GRIFFIN, BURDICK, ROSENTHAL, LASHER, SIMON,

BURROUGHS, BICHOTTE HERMELYN, HEVESI, COLTON, SHIMSKY, ZACCARO,

SOLAGES, JACKSON, WIEDER, ZINERMAN, TAPIA, TAYLOR, SIMONE,

CHANDLER-WATERMAN, KASSAY, LUNSFORD, DAIS, STECK, SAYEGH, ROZIC,

STERN, PAULIN, TORRES, ALVAREZ, RAMOS, GIBBS, P. CARROLL, BENEDETTO.

AN ACT TO AMEND THE PENAL LAW, IN RELATION TO ENACTING "FRANCESCO'S

LAW"; TO AMEND THE EXECUTIVE LAW, IN RELATION TO ANNUAL REPORTS BY

THE NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION; AND PROVIDING

FOR THE REPEAL OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE PENAL LAW RELATING TO SAFELY

STORING RIFLES, SHOTGUNS, AND FIREARMS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: AN EXPLANATION HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. ANDERSON.

MR. ANDERSON: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

THIS BILL IS A VERY SIMPLE BILL THAT WOULD AMEND SAFE STORAGE, TO MAKE

IT A VIOLATION FOR ANYONE WHO FAILS TO SAFELY STORE A FIREARM, A SHOTGUN,

OR A RIFLE AND ESTABLISH A -- A MISDEMEANOR FOR FAILURE TO STORE WHEN

ACCESSIBLE BY A MINOR OR A PROHIBITED PERSON. MOST IMPORTANTLY,

MADAM SPEAKER, THIS BILL MOVES US TO THE GOLD STANDARD OF GUN SAFETY.

THERE ARE SEVERAL STATES, WHICH I'M SURE I'LL SHARE DURING TODAY'S

DEBATE, THAT IF ADOPTED, THIS LEVEL OF STANDARD, TO ENSURE THAT YOUNG

PEOPLE DO NOT GET ACCESS TO FIREARMS. THIS BILL ACCOMPLISHES THAT IN

THREE WAYS. I CREATED A COOL LITTLE ACRONYM TO HELP YOU ALL UNDERSTAND

HOW THIS BILL ACCOMPLISHES THAT. NUMBER ONE, IT CREATES

233

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACCOUNTABILITY. NUMBER TWO, IT CREATES DATA COLLECTION. AND NUMBER

THREE, IT CREATES DETERRENCE. AND I THINK THAT THOSE THINGS ARE

IMPORTANT. JUST TO ADD SOME MORE STATISTICS, BETWEEN 2016 AND 2021,

SUICIDES ACCOUNTED FOR 36 PERCENT OF FIREARM-RELATED DEATHS AMONG

CHILDREN BETWEEN THE AGES OF 10 AND 19. AND WHAT MY BILL DOES, AND

IT'S NAMED AFTER FRANCESCO, WHO TRAGICALLY TOOK HIS OWN LIFE ON

OCTOBER 21, 2021, WITH AN UNSECURED FIREARM. AND SO, WHAT MY BILL

DOES IS NOT ONLY PROVIDE THAT ADDITIONAL EDUCATION AND RESOURCES

NEEDED, BUT IT ENSURES ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT PROPERLY

STORE THEIR FIREARMS. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. ANGELINO.

MR. ANGELINO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. ANDERSON: ONLY FOR YOU, MR. ANGELINO.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. ANGELINO: THANK YOU, SIR. YOUR -- YOUR TIE

IS VERY STRAIGHT.

MR. ANDERSON: WELL, YOU HELPED ME OUT EARLIER.

(LAUGHTER)

MR. ANGELINO: THE --

MR. ANDERSON: IT WAS A GOOD BIRTHDAY GIFT. I

APPRECIATE IT.

MR. ANGELINO: THE -- FIRST OFF, ANY OF MY LINE OF

234

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

QUESTIONING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TRAGEDY INVOLVED WITH THE

PERSON THAT ACT IS --

MR. ANDERSON: CERTAINLY.

MR. ANGELINO: -- NAMED FOR. AND ACTUALLY, MOST

OF THE QUESTIONS I'M GONNA ASK WILL BE QUESTIONS THAT ARE ASKED OF ME

WHEN I RETURN BACK TO MY -- MY BIG RURAL DISTRICT. SO, WHATEVER COMES

OUT OF YOUR MOUTH, IS LATER GONNA COME OUT OF MINE TO EXPLAIN. ALL

RIGHT?

MR. ANDERSON: AWESOME.

MR. ANGELINO: SO, FIRST OFF, WE HAD A SAFE STORAGE

BILL --

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MR. ANGELINO: -- THAT I -- I'M LOOKING AT NOW, HAS

A LOT OF IT REPEALED OR DELETED IN RED. WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THAT?

WHAT -- WHAT HOLE OR GAP ARE YOU TRYING TO FIX?

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. SO, WHAT WE DID IN MY

LEGISLATION HERE, FRANCESCO'S LAW, WE REMOVED SOME AMENDMENTS FOR

FELONY PENALTIES AND WE LOOKED AT ADDITIONAL SUPPORTS FOR INFORMATION

SO THAT -- ENSURE THAT PEOPLE CAN GET INFORMATION. SO, MY BILL ACTUALLY

REQUIRES THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT -- THE NEW YORK STATE DCJS

TO BE ABLE TO COLLECT DATA, RIGHT, WHICH IS REALLY IMPORTANT SO WE CAN

KNOW HOW MANY OF THESE SUICIDES, OR INSTANCES WHERE PEOPLE GET

ACCESS TO FIREARMS WHO ARE UNDERAGED. NUMBER TWO -- SO IT CREATES

THAT CAMPAIGN. NUMBER TWO, IT ENSURES THAT MINORS -- THIS IS THE MOST

IMPORTANT THING OF THE BILL, MR. MORINELLO [SIC], THE MINORS WON'T HAVE

235

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACCESS. IF -- IF A MINOR GETS ACCESS TO A FIREARM, THERE ARE PENALTIES

IN -- IN PLACE THERE AS -- AS HIGH AS A CLASS A MISDEMEANOR.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. SO I CAN SEE WHERE THE

GREEN PORTION TALKS A LOT ABOUT THAT STUDY PORTION OF THIS, BUT LET'S TALK

ABOUT THE RED THAT YOU DELETED OR REPEALED. WAS THERE SOMETHING

WRONG WITH THAT THAT -- THAT NEEDED TO BE FILLED IN?

MR. ANDERSON: CAN YOU JUST REPEAT THAT?

MR. ANGELINO: THE GREEN PORTION, I'M LOOKING ON

HERE --

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MR. ANGELINO: THE GREEN PORTION IS NEW AND

THAT'S A LOT ABOUT THE STUDY AND SOME EXCEPTIONS.

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE

ADDITIONS WE MADE.

MR. ANGELINO: YES --

MR. ANDERSON: AND SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE

ADDED REPORTING AND DATA COLLECTION.

MR. ANGELINO: RIGHT.

MR. ANDERSON: IF YOU LOOK AT THE FINAL SECTION OF

THE BILL, PAGE 3, WE ADDED AND GAVE DIRECTIVES TO DCJS TO BE ABLE TO

COLLECT DATA SO THAT WE CAN KNOW. AND THIS IS IMPORTANT -- JUST -- LET

ME JUST FINISH. THIS IS IMPORTANT, BECAUSE ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL, WE'RE

NOT COLLECTING DATA PRESENTLY BECAUSE THAT OFFICE OF GUN VIOLENCE

PREVENTION IS NOT -- NO LONGER IN EXISTENCE. AND SO, WHAT MY BILL DOES

IS IT ADDS AND GIVES DIRECTIVES TO DCJS TO BE ABLE TO COLLECT DATA ON

236

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THAT.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. SO THAT'S WHAT YOU ADDED.

(CONFERENCING)

OKAY. AND THE RED SECTION THAT YOU DELETED, THAT --

THE STRIKEOUT OR THE REPEAL --

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MR. ANGELINO: -- WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THAT?

MR. ANDERSON: NO, NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH IT

AND I THINK THE REASON WHY WE MADE THAT CHANGE IS WE WANTED TO MAKE

AN ALIGNMENT WITH THE GOLD STANDARD. THERE ARE SEVERAL STATES

PRESENTLY: CALIFORNIA, COLORADO, CONNECTICUT, HAWAII AND MINNESOTA

THAT HAS SIMILAR LAWS AND SO WE JUST WANTED TO MATCH THAT STANDARD.

MR. ANGELINO: ALL RIGHT. SO THE -- THERE'S --

THERE'S A SECTION IN THERE, I THINK IT'S THE "EXCEPTIONS." ONE OF THEM IS

"UNLAWFUL ENTRY". WHAT -- WHAT IS "UNLAWFUL ENTRY"? DOES THAT MEAN

BURGLARY, OR DOES THAT MEAN ACTUALLY DEFEATING THE LOCKING DEVICE OR

THE SAFE?

MR. ANDERSON: SO -- SO YOU'RE ASKING ME -- SO --

SO UNLAWFUL ENTRY COULD BE BURGLARY, RIGHT? THAT A CHARGE HASN'T

BEEN -- I MEAN, THAT'S A -- THAT'S A CRIMINAL CHARGE, RIGHT? SO YOU'D

HAVE TO GIVE ME MORE SPECIFICS ON THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF SOMEBODY

ENTERING A PROPERTY UNLAWFULLY.

MR. ANGELINO: THE -- THE NEW SECTION, IN GREEN,

LINE 40, (READING) IF A PERSON OBTAINED THE FIREARM, SHOTGUN, WHAT --

WHATEVER, AS A RESULT OF UNLAWFUL ENTRY. DOES THAT MEAN INTO THE SAFE

237

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

OR LOCKING DEVICE, OR JUST INTO THE HOME?

MR. ANDERSON: INTO THE HOME.

MR. ANGELINO: SO IF SOMEBODY UNLAWFULLY -- AND

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE SOMEBODY WHO RESIDES THERE OR WHO'S

PROHIBITED, IF THEY UNLAWFULLY ENTER THE SAFE OR GUN VAULT, THAT'S NOT

COVERED?

MR. ANDERSON: NO, IT CAN BE BOTH.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY.

MR. ANDERSON: IT CAN BE BOTH. AND JUST -- AND

JUST KEEP IN MIND, I -- I KNOW YOU USED THE WORD "SAFE," BUT THERE ARE A

VARIETY OF DIFFERENT WAYS THAT YOU CAN SECURE YOUR FIREARM. IT DOESN'T

NECESSARILY BE A SAFE.

MR. ANGELINO: AND WE WILL GET TO THAT.

MR. ANDERSON: I -- I -- I'M AWAITING IT.

MR. ANGELINO: AND THE NEXT EXCEPTION IS

(READING), A PERSON OBTAINS THE FIREARM, RIFLE OR SHOTGUN IN A LAWFUL ACT

OF SELF-DEFENSE, OR A DEFENSE OF ANOTHER PERSON. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN

IN YOUR MIND? I -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT SITUATION THAT WOULD MEAN.

(CONFERENCING)

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. I MEAN, LIKE, THERE'S A

VARIETY OF DIFFERENT EXAMPLES OF SELF-DEFENSE. IF SOMEBODY BREAKS IN

YOUR HOME AND YOU'RE ABLE TO STILL USE, YOU KNOW, YOUR FIREARM AND NOT

BE TARGETED, OR THE TARGET OR SUBJECT MATTER THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO

REGULATE WITH THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

MR. ANGELINO: OR EVEN ONE OF THE PROHIBITED

238

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

PEOPLE OR A 15-YEAR-OLD, THEY CAN THEN POSSESS THIS. IT SAYS (READING),

A PERSON OBTAINS IT IN A LAWFUL ACT OF SELF-DEFENSE.

(CONFERENCING)

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. SO, I MEAN, IF YOU -- IF

YOU LOOK AT THE FOLLOWING SECTION, IF A MINOR OBTAINS THE FIREARM FOR

SELF-DEFENSE, THAT'S ALSO PERFECTLY OKAY IN -- IN THIS INSTANCE OF THIS

PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

MR. ANGELINO: THAT'S -- THAT'S IN THERE? I --

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. ANGELINO: -- I GUESS I MISSED THAT. OKAY --

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. ANGELINO: THANK YOU.

MR. ANDERSON: YUP.

MR. ANGELINO: WHERE I LIVE, YOU ARE VERY

ACCUSTOMED TO HANDLING FIREARMS. WE HAVE A LOT OF HIGH SCHOOL

FIREARMS TEAMS OF VARIOUS SIZE AND STYLE.

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MR. ANGELINO: IS THERE ANYTHING IN HERE THAT SAYS

YOU CANNOT OR IS -- IS ILLEGAL TO STORE YOUR FIREARM LOADED?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. ANDERSON: THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. SO

THERE'S NOTHING PARTICULARLY IN THE BILL THAT SAYS THAT THE FIREARM HAS TO

BE STORED LOADED OR UNLOADED.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. SO IT DOESN'T -- IT'S -- THAT'S

NOT COVERED. SO A LOADED FIREARM STORED SECURELY IS LEGAL?

239

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. ANGELINO: THANK YOU. SO, IF I LIVE ALONE, I

DON'T HAVE TO STORE MY WEAPON ANY PLACE. I CAN LEAVE IT RIGHT ON MY

BED STAND? OR, IF IT'S JUST ME AND MY WIFE, WHO'S OVER 18 --

MR. ANDERSON: NO. NO. YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE --

THE LEGISLATION THAT WAS PASSED PRIOR THAT REQUIRED SAFE STORAGE, THAT

ENSURES THAT -- THAT A FIREARM IS STORED SAFELY, IS THE SAME -- THE SAME

STANDARDS ARE THERE. AGAIN, MY BILL ONLY FOCUSES ON -- PRIMARILY,

EXCUSE ME, FOCUSES ON MINORS AND THOSE MINORS GETTING ACCESS TO THE

FIREARM.

MR. ANGELINO: SO WHAT IF THERE'S A --

MR. ANDERSON: SO IF YOU -- IF YOU PRESENTLY STORE

IT IN A SAFE, IF YOU USE A LOCKING MECHANISM THAT IS APPROVED, YOU'RE --

YOU'RE STILL ABLE TO DO THAT.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. BUT, THAT'S SOUNDS LIKE I

MUST DO THAT. SO, IF I LIVE HOME ALONE, I STILL HAVE TO SECURE MY LOADED

WEAPON IN SOME SORT OF MANNER?

MR. ANDERSON: ABSOLUTELY. A HUNDRED PERCENT.

AND THAT'S PRE THIS BILL, IN THAT REGARD.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. AND DOES THIS MENTION

OWNER? I SAW SOMETHING ABOUT CUSTODIAN? WHAT DOES "CUSTODIAN"

MEAN?

MR. ANDERSON: I THINK IT'S SAFE TO SAY THE

CUSTODIAN'S AN OWNER, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE I DOUBLE-CHECK MY

NOTES. GIVE ME ONE SECOND.

240

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

(PAUSE)

YEAH. SO THIS BILL DOESN'T CHANGE WHAT'S IN CURRENT

LAW IN TERMS OF OWNERSHIP --

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. AGAIN --

MR. ANDERSON: -- AND CUSTODIAN. SO THAT

WHATEVER PRESENTLY EXISTS, THIS DOESN'T CHANGE THAT. REMEMBER, WE'RE

ONLY DEALING WITH MINORS HERE, FOR THE MOST PART, THIS LEGISLATION.

MR. ANGELINO: RIGHT, BUT ADULTS HAVE TO OWN THE

FIREARM.

MR. ANDERSON: I'M SORRY?

MR. ANGELINO: ONLY AN ADULT CAN OWN THE

FIREARM AND WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT MINORS FROM OBTAINING IT.

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. ANGELINO: SO -- SO ADULTS ARE INVOLVED IN

THIS.

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. SO AM I RESPONSIBLE FOR

MY FIREARM IF I'M GOING ON VACATION AND I TAKE IT TO A FRIEND'S HOUSE,

PLEASE SECURE THIS WHILE I'M AWAY SO NOTHING HAPPENS. AM I STILL

RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT AS THE OWNER? OR IS HE NOW THE CUSTODIAN AND

RESPONSIBLE?

MR. ANDERSON: THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. LET ME

LOOK AT MY NOTES. IT'S A -- VERY GOOD HYPOTHETICAL. VERY IMPORTANT.

MR. ANGELINO: YEAH. THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT

HAPPEN WHERE I LIVE.

241

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. OH, YEAH.

(PAUSE)

SO, LET ME JUST COUNTER THAT WITH A QUESTION, JUST SO I

CAN GET TO YOU -- TO A BETTER ANSWER. IS THE PERSON WHO'S WATCHING THE

FIREARM THE OWNER OF THE FIREARM? OR IS THE PERSON -- IT IS ALMOST LIKE

A -- I DON'T WANT TO USE THE WORD "BABYSITTING", BUT --

MR. ANGELINO: NO. I -- I -- YOU'RE MY NEIGHBOR,

I'M GOING ON VACATION --

MR. ANDERSON: SURE.

MR. ANGELINO: -- HEY, I'M BRINGING OVER MY

EXPENSIVE JEWELRY AND THIS IS MY PRIZED SHOTGUN. CAN YOU PLEASE

SAFEGUARD THIS? I'LL BE BACK IN A WEEK. AM I NOW RESPONSIBLE, OR ARE

YOU?

MR. ANDERSON: THE -- THE ONUS IS ON THE OWNER

TO -- TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S SECURE.

MR. ANGELINO: THAT'S A PROBLEM. BUT --

OTHERWISE, I CAN'T TAKE IT WITH ME. TSA REALLY FROWNS ON THAT. SO,

AGAIN, ANOTHER COMMON THING: FIREARMS DISPLAYED IN THE OPEN. FAMILY

HEIRLOOM THAT'S STILL A WORKING HUNTING RIFLE OR SHOTGUN, UP ABOVE THE

FIREPLACE AND HAS A TRIGGER LOCK ON IT. IS THAT SAFELY STORED?

MR. ANDERSON: NO, IT WOULD NEED TO BE SAFELY

STORED.

MR. ANGELINO: IN HERE SOMEPLACE, IT -- I READ

WHERE IT HAS TO BE -- A TRIGGER LOCK IS CONSIDERED A LOCKING DEVICE.

MR. ANDERSON: THAT'S ONE OF MANY.

242

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. ANGELINO: BUT THAT'S A STORAGE DEVICE IN HERE

IF IT'S TRIGGER LOCKED.

MR. ANDERSON: ONE MOMENT, I'M GOING TO CHECK

MY NOTES.

(PAUSE)

MR. ANGELINO: I'LL BE GOING OVER 15. THANK YOU.

MR. ANDERSON: SO WHEN WE'RE -- I'M SORRY? SO,

WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT "SAFE DEPOSITORY," IT IS DEFINED AS A SAFE

OR OTHER SECURE CONTAINER WHICH, WHEN LOCKED, IS INCAPABLE OF BEING

OPENED WITHOUT THE KEY, KEYPAD, COMBINATION, OR OTHER UNLOCKING

MECHANISM AND IS CAPABLE OF PREVENTING ANY UNAUTHORIZED PERSON

FROM OBTAINING ACCESS TO THE POSSESSION OF THE WEAPON CONTAINED

THEREIN, AND THEY'RE -- AND SHALL BE FIRE, IMPACT, OR TAMPER RESISTANCE.

SO THAT'S WHAT'S ON STATUTE PRESENTLY.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. THE -- AND LET ME JUST GET

THIS ONE OUT OF THE WAY BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO BE A QUESTION I'M

GONNA GET ASKED.

MR. ANDERSON: CERTAINLY.

MR. ANGELINO: FIREARMS DISPLAYED IN MUSEUMS?

MR. ANDERSON: FIREARMS DISPLAYED IN MUSEUMS?

MR. ANGELINO: YES.

MR. ANDERSON: DO THEY REQUIRE -- ARE YOU ASKING

IF THEY'RE REQUIRED TO BE SAFELY STORED? OR WHAT THE SAFE STORAGE

STANDARDS ARE FOR FIRE --

MR. ANGELINO: CAN THEY STILL BE DISPLAYED 24/7

243

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AND WHEN THE MUSEUM IS CLOSED? THAT'S GONNA GET ASKED.

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. TECHNICALLY, YES. SO

YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT A MUSEUM, IT'S THERE FOR HISTORICAL PURPOSES, IT'S

THERE FOR INDIVIDUALS TO STUDY, YES.

MR. ANGELINO: YES, IT HAS TO BE --

MR. ANDERSON: YES, IT HAS TO BE STORED --

(CONFERENCING)

YES.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. THIS IS CAUSING A LOT OF

HANDLING OF FIREARMS AND THAT -- YOU KNOW, THAT -- THAT'S A DANGEROUS

SITUATION, TOO, THE MORE THEY GET HANDLED. SECTION 4, LINE 32, THAT

REPEALS -- CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, PEOPLE UNDER 18 WITH HUNTING

LICENSES.

MR. ANDERSON: IF YOU LOOK FURTHER DOWN ON PAGE

3, IT'S RE-ADDED FURTHER DOWN IN THE BILL.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. WHICH BRINGS ME TO

THE NEXT --

MR. ANDERSON: SO --

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY.

MR. ANDERSON: OKAY. GO AHEAD.

MR. ANGELINO: SO THAT BRINGS ME TO THE NEXT.

CURRENTLY, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW ALLOWS 16- AND 17-YEAR

-OLDS TO HUNT ALONE. IS THAT STILL GOING TO BE ALLOWED?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. ANDERSON: SO IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 3,

244

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SECTIONS 20 TO 23, A RIFLE OR SHOTGUN FOR LAWFUL USE AS AUTHORIZED BY

ARTICLE 11 OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW, WHEN SUCH PERSON

LESS THAN 18 YEARS OF AGE IS THE HOLDER OF A HUNTER'S LICENSE OR PERMIT,

SUCH RIFLE OR SHOTGUN IS USED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUCH LAW. SO THAT

ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.

MR. ANGELINO: SO THAT'S AN EXCEPTION --

MR. ANDERSON: UH-HUH.

MR. ANGELINO: -- BECAUSE IF IT'S SAFELY STORED AT

HOME, THERE IS A 16 OR 17 YEAR OLD THAT DOES HAVE ACCESS, CORRECT?

THEY CAN HUNT ALONE. THEY HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS TO IT.

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. THANK YOU. IN MY DISTRICT,

THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE --

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MR. ANGELINO: -- FROM YOUR NECK OF THE WOODS,

THAT OWN COLLECTIVE HUNTING CAMPS. AND, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL SHOW UP,

MAYBE FIVE OR SIX OWNERS AND THEY'RE A FAVORITE TARGET OF BURGLARY. IT

DRIVES US NUTS. PEOPLE LEAVE THEIR FIREARMS THERE LEGALLY LOCKED IN A

SAFE AND A WINDOW GETS BROKEN AND THE SAFE GETS CARRIED AWAY. ARE

THEY RESPONSIBLE? THERE'S A BURGLARY, THEY WERE LOCKED IN A GUN VAULT

AND STILL STOLEN. AND IS --

(CONFERENCING)

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. SO -- SO IF THE -- AND I'M

JUST ASSUMING IN THIS -- IN THIS EXAMPLE, THAT THE OWNER PROPERLY

SECURED THEIR FIREARM, THEN THEY WOULDN'T BE INVOLVED IN THIS IN THE

245

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

TERMS OF THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

MR. ANGELINO: THIS IS THE UNLAWFUL ENTRY

SECTION -- EXCEPTION.

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. THAT -- THAT HAPPENS A LOT.

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MR. ANGELINO: I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I

HAVE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GO ON THE BILL BRIEFLY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL. AND

YOU'RE --

MR. ANDERSON: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: -- GONNA BUZZ. SO

YOU COULD GO OVER AFTER THE BUZZER.

MR. ANGELINO: I THINK I WENT OVER LIKE TWO

SECONDS AGO. THANK YOU --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: NO, NOT YET.

MR. ANGELINO: OKAY. THANK YOU, MA'AM.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. ANGELINO: I KNOW EVERYBODY'S THINKING THAT

WHERE I LIVE, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE SHOOTING OTHER PEOPLE.

HOWEVER, WHAT IS NEEDED AND GETS USED OFTEN AND FIREARMS ARE NEED

READILY-AVAILABLE, A LOT OF MY FARM FAMILIES HAVE VERY VALUABLE ANIMALS

AND THEY HAVE ALARMS SET UP IN BARNS AND AREAS LIKE THAT. AND WHEN

THAT ALARM GOES OFF, A MOTION OR WHATEVER, THEY HAVE TO QUICKLY

246

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

DISPATCH A PREDATOR. AND THAT HAPPENS OFTEN. AND THIS -- I -- THEY'RE

PROBABLY JUST GOING TO IGNORE THIS BECAUSE THOSE ANIMALS ARE WORTH A

MISDEMEANOR CHARGE. YOU KNOW, THEY'RE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS; EITHER

HORSE, SHEEP OR LIVESTOCK AND CATTLE. BUT I'M NOT GONNA GET ON THE

TANGENT OF SELF-PROTECTION BECAUSE THAT'S A -- THAT'S A WHOLE 'NOTHER

GAME. I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT OF THIS. IT'S -- IT -- A LOT OF PEOPLE WHERE

I LIVE WILL CONSIDER THIS AN INFRINGEMENT. BUT I YIELD BACK MY TIME,

MADAM SPEAKER. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. GALLAHAN.

MR. GALLAHAN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. ANDERSON: ONLY IF YOU COOK FOR ME, MR.

GALLAHAN.

(LAUGHTER)

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. GALLAHAN: EVERYBODY (INDISCERNIBLE) MANY

TIMES?

MR. ANDERSON: ALL RIGHT.

MR. GALLAHAN: ABSOLUTELY.

MR. ANDERSON: YES, SIR.

MR. GALLAHAN: I -- I JUST NEEDED A COUPLE OF

QUESTIONS ANSWERED FOR CLARIFICATION.

247

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. ANDERSON: CERTAINLY.

MR. GALLAHAN: PAGE 1, LINE 45, THIS IS

CONSIDERED A VIOLATION. AND THEN ON PAGE 3, LINE 24, IT IS CONSIDERED A

CLASS A MISDEMEANOR. THERE'S SOME CONFUSION THERE FOR ME.

(CONFERENCING)

MR. ANDERSON: SO A MISDEMEANOR ACROSS THE

BOARD IN TERMS OF LACK OF SAFE STORAGE, WHICH IS A NEW ADDITION, VERY

IMPORTANT -- VIOLATION, EXCUSE ME. AND THEN THE MISDEMEANOR COMES

INTO PLAY IF A MINOR GETS ACCESS TO THE FIREARM.

MR. GALLAHAN: OKAY.

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MR. GALLAHAN: THANK YOU. THIS PERTAINS TO

FIREARMS IN THE HOME. IN 2000 -- WHAT -- WHAT -- FROM WHAT I

UNDERSTAND, IN 2018 I STARTED A TEAM, A TRAP TEAM AT OUR LOCAL HIGH

SCHOOL AND IT'S THE NEW YORK STATE HIGH SCHOOL TRAP SHOOTING

ASSOCIATION. AND WE HAVE KIDS FROM 12 TO 18 OR -- OR SENIORS COULD BE

19 YEARS OF AGE -- THAT ARE PART OF THIS PROGRAM.

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MR. GALLAHAN: WE HAVE 30 SHOOTERS. AND I'M

WONDERING IF ANY OF THIS PERTAINS TO STORAGE WHEN THOSE MINORS HANDLE

FIREARMS AT THE GUN CLUB?

MR. ANDERSON: NO, SIR, MR. GALLAHAN. THIS DOES

NOT CHANGE CURRENT LAW IN THAT REGARD.

MR. GALLAHAN: SO THE 16 AND 17 YEAR OLDS THAT

HAVE DRIVER'S LICENSES THAT GO HOME, PICK UP THE FIREARM FROM THE SAFE

248

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AND DRIVE THAT FIREARM IN THEIR VEHICLE TO THE GUN CLUB, ARE NOT IN

VIOLATION?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. ANDERSON: SO TO YOUR POINT, MR. GALLAHAN,

IF THEY'RE AT THE RANGE WITH SUPERVISION, THEN THEY'RE TOTALLY FINE WITH

THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION. THE ISSUE COMES INTO PLAY WHEN TRAVELING

WITH THE FIREARM.

MR. GALLAHAN: (INDISCERNIBLE) -- I'M SORRY?

MR. ANDERSON: WHICH IS NOT OKAY UNDER CURRENT

LAW.

MR. GALLAHAN: CAN -- CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? I -- I

DIDN'T HEAR YOU, I'M SORRY.

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. SO, IF A 16 -- IN YOUR

EXAMPLE, IF A 16 OR 17-YEAR-OLD IS DRIVING WITH A FIREARM NOT PROPERLY

SECURE, THAT'S NOT -- IN -- THIS LAW WOULDN'T CHANGE ANYTHING THAT

PRESENTLY EXISTS WITH -- WITH TRAVELING.

MR. GALLAHAN: SO AS LONG AS IT'S PROPERLY STORED

IN THE VEHICLE, TRANSPORTING IT FROM THE HOME TO THE GUN CLUB, ALONE, AS

A MINOR, IS -- IS LEGAL?

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. SO, AGAIN, THIS -- MR.

GALLAHAN, THIS DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING UNDER CURRENT LAW. A 16 OR A

17-YEAR-OLD CAN'T DRIVE WITH A FIREARM IN THE CAR PRESENTLY --

PRESENTLY -- PRESENTLY.

MR. GALLAHAN: I WOULD BEG TO DIFFER THAT. I

CHECKED WITH OUR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT WHEN -- WHEN I -- WHEN I

249

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

STARTED THIS CLUB, BECAUSE WE HAD KIDS DRIVING AND WAS TOLD BY OUR

LOCAL SHERIFF THAT IF THEY HAVE A VALID DRIVER'S LICENSE, THEY HAVE THE GUN

STORED IN THE VEHICLE IN A CASE, THAT IS LEGAL.

MR. ANDERSON: IN THIS -- BUT IN THIS EXAMPLE, IS

THE -- IS THE TEEN SUPERVISED OR UNSUPERVISED?

MR. GALLAHAN: UNSUPERVISED.

MR. ANDERSON: NO ADULT WITH THE -- WITH THE

TEEN?

MR. GALLAHAN: NO, SIR.

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. MY -- I MEAN, MY

LEGISLATION DOESN'T INTERACT IN THAT -- IN THAT WAY.

MR. GALLAHAN: IT DOES NOT INTERACT --

MR. ANDERSON: THIS IS NOT -- NO.

MR. GALLAHAN: SO, THE SAME THING WOULD GO FOR

A -- A -- A -- A MINOR THAT WOULD BE GOING SQUIRREL HUNTING.

TRANSPORTING THE -- THE -- THE FIREARM IN THE VEHICLE, TO THE FIELD THAT HIS

PARENTS OWN OR WHATEVER. HE HAS A VALID HUNTING LICENSE, HE HAS HIS --

HIS TRAINING -- NEW YORK STATE HUNTING TRAINING CERTIFICATE, FULLY LEGAL

TO -- TO HUNT SMALL GAME BY HIMSELF AFTER THE AGE OF 16 -- OR 17- OR

18-YEAR-OLD KID, SAME THING WOULD APPLY THERE, CORRECT?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. ANDERSON: THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION AGAIN, MR.

GALLAHAN. SO, JUST TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR, THIS DOESN'T CHANGE CURRENT

LAWS RELATING TO HUNTING. IF YOU LOOK AT PAGES 2 AND 3, THERE'S

CARVEOUTS SPECIFICALLY FOR HUNTING IN INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE UNDER THE AGE

250

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

OF 18 AND HUNT. AND IT JUST MAKES SURE THAT THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE NOT

ENCAPSULATED BY THIS LEGISLATION.

MR. GALLAHAN: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR

ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS. I APPRECIATE IT.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. GALLAHAN: I ALSO HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS

THAT -- THAT MY COLLEAGUE THAT JUST DEBATED THE BILL HAS. AND QUITE

FRANKLY, WE HAVE A LOT OF OLDER FOLKS IN MY NEIGHBORHOODS. NO

CHILDREN IN THEIR HOMES. THEY -- THEY FEEL THE NEED FOR PROTECTION

AND -- AND I KNOW SEVERAL OF MY CONSTITUENTS HAVE FIREARMS BEHIND

THEIR BEDROOM DOORS AND I -- I JUST DON'T SEE THEM TRYING TO CONFORM

WITH THIS LAW. BUT I -- I WILL BE ABLE TO FULLY EXPLAIN THIS TO THEM NOW.

AND -- AND I APPRECIATE THE -- THE SPONSOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS SO

THAT I KNOW THERE'S NO CHANGES TO THE -- THE SYSTEM THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY

USING. I CHECKED WITH LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE

WERE WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE LAW WITH OUR DRIVABLE STUDENTS. AND I

HAVE TO PUT A SHAMELESS PLUG IN: SUNDAY AFTERNOON I DID TAKE THAT TEAM

TO CICERO, NEW YORK, FOR THE NEW YORK STATE TRAP SHOOTING

CHAMPIONSHIPS. AND OUR LITTLE SCHOOL THAT GRADUATES 55 KIDS FINISHED

SECOND IN THE STATE. SO, THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

(APPLAUSE)

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: CONGRATULATIONS.

MR. MOLITOR.

MR. MOLITOR: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

251

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. ANDERSON: CERTAINLY, MR. MOLITOR.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. MOLITOR: THANK YOU, MR. ANDERSON. SO I -- I

WASN'T HERE WHEN THIS ORIGINAL LEGISLATION GOT PASSED, BUT I -- I GOT

SOME QUESTIONS THAT MOSTLY HAVE TO DO WITH PAGE 2 AND SOME OF THE

EXCEPTIONS THAT WERE ADDED INTO THE LAW.

MR. ANDERSON: CERTAINLY. BUT -- JUST -- I WASN'T

HERE EITHER.

MR. MOLITOR: ALL RIGHT.

MR. ANDERSON: THAT MAKES TWO OF US.

MR. MOLITOR: TWO OF US. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE

SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS. IF I HAVE A FIREARM IN MY HOUSE, IT HAS TO BE IN

SAFE STORAGE AT ALL TIMES?

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT. CORRECT.

MR. MOLITOR: AND "SAFE STORAGE" MEANS WHAT

AGAIN?

MR. ANDERSON: I CAN READ THAT DEFINITION FOR YOU.

GIVE ME ONE SECOND.

(PAUSE)

ALL RIGHT. (READING) A GUN MUST BE STORED IN A SAFE

STORAGE DEPOSITORY OR RENDERING INCAPABLE OF BEING FIRED BY USE OF A

GUN LOCKING DEVICE APPROPRIATE TO THAT WEAPON. THIS COULD INCLUDE

252

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SIMPLE DEVICES SUCH AS A CABLE LOCK, WHICH OFTEN COME WITH GUNS

WHEN THEY ARE SOLD, OR IF YOU DON'T HAVE ONE, THEY COST AS LITTLE AS $10

AND CAN BE LOCKED WITH A KEY. A SAFE STORAGE DEPOSITORY, IN TERMS OF

ITS LEGAL DEFINITION, WHICH I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT, MR.

MOLITOR, IS DEFINED AS A "SAFE OR OTHER SECURE CONTAINER WHICH, WHEN

LOCKED, IS INCAPABLE OF BEING OPENED WITHOUT THE KEY, KEYPAD,

COMBINATION, OR ANY OTHER LOCKING MECHANISM AND IS CAPABLE OF

PREVENTING AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON FROM OBTAINING ACCESS TO THE

POSSESSION OF THE WEAPON CONTAINED THEREIN, AND SHALL BE FIRE IMPACT

AND TAMPER RESISTANT." SO, IF YOU WANT, YOU CAN GET BIOMETRICS, TOO.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY.

MR. ANDERSON: BIOMETRIC SAFE.

MR. MOLITOR: AND IF I --

MR. ANDERSON: THOSE ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE

EXPENSIVE THAN THE $10 LOCKS.

MR. MOLITOR: I UNDERSTAND. AND IF I DON'T

COMPLY WITH THAT LAW, IT'S A NONCRIMINAL VIOLATION; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

MR. ANDERSON: YES, IT'S A NONCRIMINAL VIOLATION

IF YOU DON'T COMPLY WITH THE LAW. AND THEN THE MISDEMEANOR COMES

IN WITH A CHILD, WHEN A CHILD IS INVOLVED.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. AND ONE OF THE EXCEPTIONS

TO THAT VIOLATION IS ON -- ON PAGE 2, LINE 40, (READING) IF A PERSON

OBTAINED THE FIREARM, RIFLE, OR SHOTGUN AS A RESULT OF UNLAWFUL ENTRY BY

ANY PERSON.

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

253

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. MOLITOR: SO --

MR. ANDERSON: AND SELF-DEFENSE IS -- IS ANOTHER

ONE OF THE --

MR. MOLITOR: YEAH. WELL --

MR. ANDERSON: -- RIGHT BELOW IT.

MR. MOLITOR: -- WE MIGHT GET THERE. WE'LL SEE --

MR. ANDERSON: OKAY. OKAY.

MR. MOLITOR: I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HERE. SO --

MR. ANDERSON: LET ME NOT GET AHEAD OF YOU,

MR. MOLITOR.

MR. MOLITOR: SO IN THE -- IN THE EVENT THAT THERE'S

UNLAWFUL ENTRY INTO MY HOME, I'M ALLOWED TO OBTAIN A WEAPON THAT

DOESN'T NECESSARILY NEED TO BE IN SAFE STORAGE AT THAT MOMENT?

MR. ANDERSON: I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION,

MR. MOLITOR. CAN YOU REPHRASE IT?

MR. MOLITOR: YEAH. SO LET'S SAY EVERY DAY I KEPT

MY, YOU KNOW, HANDGUN ON MY NIGHTSTAND.

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MR. MOLITOR: EVERY DAY OF THE YEAR I WOULD BE IN

VIOLATION OF THIS LAW, EXCEPT THAT ONE MOMENT IN WHICH SOMEBODY

ENTERS MY HOME UNLAWFULLY. UNDER THIS, THAT I WOULD NOT BE IN

VIOLATION OF THE LAW; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. ANDERSON: THAT'S CORRECT. AND I JUST WANT

YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS -- WE'RE NOT HAVING POLICE GO INTO

EVERYBODY'S HOUSE AND CHECK AND -- AND -- AND PROACTIVE IN THAT SENSE.

254

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. MOLITOR: YEAH.

MR. ANDERSON: WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CREATE A

CULTURE WHERE INDIVIDUALS KNOW TO LOCK UP THEIR FIREARMS, TO STORE

SAFELY, ET CETERA. SIMILAR TO THE CAMPAIGN THAT WAS RUN BEFORE MY TIME

AROUND SEAT BELTS, MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE

OF WEARING A SEAT BELT. THIS IS EXACTLY THE CULTURE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO

PROMOTE IN TERMS OF SAFE STORAGE.

MR. MOLITOR: AND SO LET'S TAKE THE SECOND

EXCEPTION -- AND I UNDERSTAND ALL THAT, LET'S TAKE THE SECOND EXCEPTION.

EVERY DAY OF THE YEAR THAT I KEEP MY HANDGUN IN MY CAR, I WOULD BE IN

VIOLATION OF THE LAW, EXCEPT FOR THAT CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE SOMEBODY

MAYBE TRIES TO TAKE MY CAR FROM ME AT GUNPOINT. AND THEN, IN THAT

CASE, BECAUSE I'M DEFENDING MYSELF, I'M COMPLYING WITH THE -- WITH THE

SELF-DEFENSE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, I WOULD NOT BE IN

VIOLATION OF THE LAW.

MR. ANDERSON: SO I THINK -- I THINK YOUR

HYPOTHETICAL GOES OUT OF THE BOUNDS OF THE EXCEPTIONS THAT I'M TALKING

ABOUT. THIS IS REALLY ABOUT SAFE STORAGE.

MR. MOLITOR: SO BOTH OF MY HYPOTHETICALS --

MR. ANDERSON: NO. JUST THAT LAST ONE.

MR. MOLITOR: THAT LAST ONE DOES NOT?

MR. ANDERSON: YES --

MR. MOLITOR: ISN'T ROB -- ISN'T -- ISN'T SELF-DEFENSE

FOR ROBBERY A PERMISSIBLE USE OF --

MR. ANDERSON: NO. THE -- THE EXAMPLE YOU

255

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

GAVE WAS WITH TRAVELING, NO?

MR. MOLITOR: YEAH. I -- UNDER YOUR LAW, I'M

REQUIRED TO KEEP MY FIREARM IN -- IN STORAGE WHEN I'M IN A VEHICLE; AM

I NOT?

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. MOLITOR: BU, IF SOMEONE'S TRYING TO ROB ME

OF MY VEHICLE, I CAN USE THAT WEAPON IN SELF-DEFENSE. AND IF IT'S NOT --

MR. ANDERSON: SELF-DEFENSE, CORRECT.

MR. MOLITOR: -- AND IF IT'S NOT IN SAFE STORAGE, I

WOULD NOT BE IN VIOLATION OF THIS LAW?

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT. SELF-DEFENSE EXCEPTION.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR

ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS, MR. ANDERSON.

MR. ANDERSON: CERTAINLY.

MR. MOLITOR: ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. MOLITOR: SO, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THE

PURPOSE OF THIS LAW. AND I -- YOU KNOW, I -- I DO THINK MAKING THE --

THE PUNISHMENT FOR VIOLATING THIS LAW A VIOLATION INSTEAD OF A

MISDEMEANOR, MAKES THIS LAW BETTER. MY CONCERN IS THAT YOU'RE ASKING

NEW YORKERS IN THIS BILL TO MAKE A JUDGMENT CALL. SHOULD THEY, YOU

KNOW, PUT A LOCK ON THEIR WEAPON, ON THEIR FIREARM, OR PUT, YOU KNOW,

THEIR FIREARM IN -- IN A -- IN A BIOMETRIC SAFE? WHICH, BY THE WAY,

DOESN'T WORK ALL THE TIME. I HAVE ONE, IT DOESN'T WORK ALL THE TIME.

AND YOU'RE ASKING THEM TO MAKE A JUDGMENT CALL ABOUT SOMETHING THAT

256

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THEY CANNOT PREDICT. YOU CANNOT PREDICT WHEN SOMEBODY ELSE IN THIS

WORLD IS GOING TO PERPETUATE VIOLENCE AGAINST YOU AND THIS PUTS PEOPLE

IN INCREDIBLY COMPROMISING SITUATIONS. YES, NOBODY WANTS A FIREARM

TO BE USED BY A MINOR IN A TERRIBLE SITUATION LIKE SUICIDE. I MEAN,

THAT -- THAT'S JUST TERRIBLE. NOBODY WANTS THAT TO HAPPEN. BUT, YOU

KNOW, IF YOU'RE TRYING TO PROTECT YOURSELF AND YOU'RE TRYING TO PROTECT

YOUR HOME AND YOUR FAMILY, YOU SOMETIMES HAVE TO MAKE -- YOU

SOMETIMES MAKE THIS JUDGMENT CALL THAT I WOULD RATHER HAVE MY

WEAPON EASILY ACCESSIBLE TO ME SO THAT I CAN DEFEND MY HOME AND MY

FAMILY, THEN, YOU KNOW, MAYBE PUT A SAFETY DEVICE ON IT THAT ISN'T

NECESSARILY -- OR THIS -- THAT'S GONNA CREATE MORE PROBLEMS.

YOU KNOW, AS I MENTIONED MANY TIMES, I -- I'VE BEEN

A PROSECUTOR. BURGLARIES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT FROM COMPLETE

STRANGERS HAPPEN MORE OFTEN THAN YOU THINK. THEY'RE TERRIFYING

SITUATIONS. IF YOU'VE NEVER SEEN NIGHT STALKER ON NETFLIX ABOUT

RICHARD RAMIREZ, I SUGGEST YOU WATCH IT. YOU WILL PURCHASE A FIREARM

AFTER WATCHING THAT.

SO FOR ALL THOSE REASONS AND BECAUSE I ALSO THINK THIS

VIOLATES THE 2ND AMENDMENT, I'LL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE. THANK

YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MS. BAILEY.

MRS. BAILEY: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

257

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

YIELD?

MR. ANDERSON: ONLY FOR YOU, MS. BAILEY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MRS. BAILEY: WELL, I'VE HEARD YOU SAY THAT ONCE

BEFORE, BUT I'LL --

MR. ANDERSON: UH-OH --

MRS. BAILEY: -- I'LL JUST PRETEND THIS IS THE FIRST

TIME I HEARD IT TODAY.

MR. ANDERSON: -- OH, I'M GETTING IN TROUBLE NOW.

I'M CHEATING.

(LAUGHTER)

GO AHEAD.

MRS. BAILEY: SO I -- I JUST -- AS I SIT HERE AND

LISTEN, I JUST -- I JUST NEED SOME CLARITY. SO IN 2022, CCIA CAME OUT

AND THAT IS WHERE THIS SAFE STORAGE PORTION OF THIS LEGISLATION CAME INTO

PLAY UNDER 265 THAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TO. ASIDE

FROM THE REPORTING AND THE DATA THAT WILL BE COLLECTED, ASIDE FROM

CHANGING THE FAILURE TO SAFELY STORE RIFLES, SHOTGUNS AND FIREARMS FROM A

FIRST DEGREE -- CLASS A MISDEMEANOR, NOW IT'S A VIOLATION AND THEN

ADDING PIECES AS TO WHEN YOU COULD DO IT, I -- I'M STUCK ON THE "MINOR"

PORTION OF IT. AND -- AND AS MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SAID, IT'S ABSOLUTELY A

TRAVESTY WHAT HAPPENED, BUT WHEN I'M READING THE LEGISLATION THE WAY

THAT IT WAS WRITTEN IN 2022, WAS THAT NOT ALREADY THE INTENT OF THE -- OF

THE LEGISLATION THAT WAS PUT FORWARD?

MR. ANDERSON: CERTAINLY. AND SO, IN ADDITION TO

258

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THAT, GOING BACK TO MY COOL LITTLE ACRONYM THAT I MADE UP WITH THIS BILL,

ADD; ACCOUNTABILITY, DATA, DETERRENCE, RIGHT? AND SO, WHAT THIS PIECE

OF LEGISLATION DOES IS IT ALIGNS IT WITH THE GOLD STANDARD OF SAFE STORAGE.

SO WE ALREADY HAVE SAFE STORAGE LAWS, BUT THIS FURTHER PERFECTS IT SO

THAT INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN HOUSEHOLDS -- LET'S SAY I'M AN INDIVIDUAL,

AND I VISIT A FRIEND'S HOUSE. I'M COVERED UNDER THIS LAW IF AN INDIVIDUAL

WHOSE HOUSE I GO AND VISIT DOESN'T PROPERLY, YOU KNOW, LOCK THEIR

FIREARM. THAT WAS A LOOPHOLE THAT WASN'T COVERED PRIOR. AND IN -- IN

THIS INSTANCE, IF -- IF YOU LOOK AT THE -- THE SPONSOR'S MEMO, I TALK ABOUT

THE STORY OF FRANCESCO, WHERE THIS PAINFUL INCIDENT TOOK PLACE. AND --

AND SO, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS JUST PROTECT, TO ENSURE THAT -- THAT THAT

TYPE OF INSTANCE DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. SO THEN, I GUESS MY NEXT

QUESTION IS GOING TO LEAD ME TO DURING -- WHEN CCIA WAS ENACTED, THE

STATE POLICE, ALONG WITH DCJS, WERE CHARGED WITH MAKING MANY

IMPLEMENTATIONS. ONE THING THAT THEY DID A GREAT JOB WITH WAS SOME

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS, PIECES OF IT. SO SPECIFICALLY, I GUESS WHAT

I'M -- I'M LOOKING AT TO HELP GUIDE RESIDENTS BACK AT HOME, WHEN WE'RE

LOOKING AT THE FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS THAT THEY HAD PUT OUT UNDER:

"HOW AM I REQUIRED TO STORE MY GUNS IN MY HOME?" IT SPECIFICALLY

SAYS, "IF ANYONE YOUNGER THAN 18 YEARS OLD OR ANYONE WHO IS

PROHIBITED FROM POSSESSING A GUN RESIDES IN THE HOME, ALL FIREARMS --

ALL FIREARMS, RIFLES AND SHOTGUNS, NOT IN YOUR IMMEDIATE CONTROL, MUST

EITHER BE" BUT THEN IT GOES ON TO STATE THAT YOU ARE -- YOU ARE

RESPONSIBLE EVEN IF THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE IN YOUR HOME. SO I GUESS

259

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

YOUR INTENT IS TO MAKE IT CLEARER IF I HAVE -- IF MY SON INVITES A FRIEND

OVER WHO IS A MINOR, TO ENSURE THAT OUR GUNS SAFELY STORED?

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MRS. BAILEY: IS THAT -- THAT'S THE PART THAT I'M

STRUGGLING WITH. I THOUGHT --

MR. ANDERSON: SURE.

MRS. BAILEY: -- THAT THE LEGISLATION ALREADY

COVERED THAT.

MR. ANDERSON: SURE. SO, "CLARIFIES," NUMBER

ONE AND NUMBER TWO, IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 3, LINES 40 TO 47, SPECIFICALLY

WE'RE LOOKING TO COLLECT DATA --

MRS. BAILEY: ABSOLUTELY.

MR. ANDERSON: -- IN THESE INSTANCES. SO THAT'S

IMPORTANT, RIGHT? PRESENTLY WE DON'T COLLECT DATA. SO WHAT MY BILL

DOES IS IT DIRECTS THE DCJS, THE OFFICE OF GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION,

WHICH IS NEWLY MOVED INTO THAT AGENCY RESPECTIVELY, TO BEGIN TO

COLLECT DATA. AND ALSO TO BEGIN A CAMPAIGN OF SORTS TO EDUCATE

INDIVIDUALS. SO THAT KIND OF ANSWERS ONE OF YOUR OTHER -- ONE OF THE

OTHER QUESTIONER'S QUESTION ABOUT HOW, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD EDUCATE

THE -- THE MASSES, IF YOU WILL, OUR CONSTITUENTS, IF YOU WILL, ABOUT THE

SPECIFICS AND THE PARTICULARS. SO IT CHARGES THAT AGENCY TO DO THAT AS

WELL.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. THANK YOU. I HAVE ANOTHER

QUICK QUESTION. SO --

MR. ANDERSON: SURE.

260

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MRS. BAILEY: -- I SEE THAT WE'RE ONLY AMENDING

SECTION 265 WITH THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION. ALSO UNDER PENAL LAW

400.18, AS FAR AS NOTICE UPON ISSUANCE OF A LICENSE, SPECIFICALLY IN AND

AROUND PISTOL PERMITS. THERE IS COMMUNICATION THAT MUST BE HANDED

OUT TO ALL PERMIT HOLDERS. BASED ON YOUR LEGISLATION, DOES -- IS THAT --

DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT THAT COMMUNICATION IS GOING TO BE ALTERED AS FAR

AS OF THE WORDING THAT IS IN IT?

MR. ANDERSON: NO.

MRS. BAILEY: SO YOUR BILL MEETS -- IT -- IT ALIGNS

WITH THAT --

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MRS. BAILEY: -- CORRECT? OKAY.

MR. ANDERSON: YUP.

MRS. BAILEY: AND I BELIEVE THAT -- THOSE WERE MY

QUESTIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MR. ANDERSON: THANK YOU, MS. BAILEY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. REILLY.

MR. REILLY: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. ANDERSON: I SAID -- WE WON'T PUT IT ON THE

RECORD. GO AHEAD --

MR. REILLY: YOU CAN. YOU CAN.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

261

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. REILLY: I ACTUALLY HAVE -- I ACTUALLY JUST HAVE

TWO QUESTIONS.

MR. ANDERSON: SURE.

MR. REILLY: AND IT'S BASICALLY PIGGYBACKING OFF OF

WHAT MS. BAILEY SAID. SO THE LAW MANDATES DISTRIBUTION OF SAFE

STORAGE MATERIALS.

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. REILLY: WHO'S GONNA BE RESPONSIBLE --

MR. ANDERSON: DCJS, OFFICE OF GUN VIOLENCE

PREVENTION.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. IS THERE -- IS THERE FUNDING

ALLOCATED FOR THAT?

MR. ANDERSON: NO. THIS IS A FUNCTION OF THE

OFFICE ALREADY, TO -- TO DO PUBLIC INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS AND PSAS.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. WHO ARE THEY GOING TO -- WHO'S

THE -- WHO IS THE CAMPAIGN GOING TO TARGET? IS IT GOING TO BE MAILERS?

IS IT GOING TO BE TV?

MR. ANDERSON: I -- I CAN'T GET INTO THE SPECIFICS

OF THE DIFFERENT STRATEGIES THAT THE AGENCY USES. THEY HAVE VARIETY OF

DIFFERENT TOOLS. IT COULD BE PSAS, IT COULD BE COMMERCIALS, IT COULD BE

MAILERS, IT CAN BE PAPERCLIPS. IT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, KEY CHAINS. I

DON'T KNOW HOW THEY'RE GONNA DO IT.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. SO WE'RE NOT -- WE'RE NOT

DELINEATING IN THIS LEGISLATION --

MR. ANDERSON: NO.

262

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. REILLY: -- WHAT THEY'RE GONNA -- HOW THEY'RE

GONNA DO IT?

MR. ANDERSON: NOPE.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. SECOND PIECE --

MR. ANDERSON: BUT I HOPE THEY DO --

MR. REILLY: I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD.

MR. ANDERSON: -- I HOPE THEY DO A GOOD JOB,

BECAUSE THAT'S GONNA BE THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN GETTING THE

INFORMATION OUT.

MR. REILLY: ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY. SO THE DATA

COLLECTION MANDATE.

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MR. REILLY: SO STATES IN THERE THAT THE OFFICE OF

GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION, RIGHT, IS GOING TO COLLECT THE DATA.

MR. ANDERSON: CERTAINLY.

MR. REILLY: WHAT SPECIFIC DATA ARE WE LOOKING AT?

WILL IT BE THOSE INCIDENTS THAT HAPPEN WITH -- WITH LICENSED-OWNED

FIREARMS AND THOSE FIREARMS THAT ARE LEGALLY HELD, TOO?

MR. ANDERSON: INSTANCES WHERE AN INDIVIDUAL IS

CHARGED WITH EITHER A VIOLATION OR A CLASS A MISDEMEANOR FOR THE

WRONGFUL ACCESS TO UNSAFELY STORED FIREARM. SO THAT -- THAT DATA, WE

WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE STATE IS COLLECTING IT SO THAT WE'RE

CONTINUING TO ACTIVELY COURSE CORRECT. IF WE SEE A CLUSTER OF THIS ISSUE

HAPPENING IN THE AREA, THE AGENCY WILL COME OUT, DO EDUCATION AND

THINGS OF THAT LIKE.

263

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. REILLY: OKAY. SO IT'LL -- IT'LL ENCOMPASS ANY

INCIDENT INVOLVING A FIREARM, WHETHER IT WAS LEGALLY OWNED OR ILLEGALLY

OWNED.

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WILL LOCAL LAW

ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THAT DATA TO ANY -- TO THE

OFFICE OF GUN VIOLENCE?

MR. ANDERSON: PRESENTLY, LOCAL LAW -- SO, DCJS

SERVES AS THE CENTRAL POLICE AGENCY FOR THE STATE. SO ALL DATA FROM ALL

POLICE FORCES GO TO DCJS PRESENTLY. SO THIS WILL JUST BE ADHERED TO

THAT.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. SO THE -- THE MECHANISMS

ALREADY THERE?

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

MR. ANDERSON: I'M -- I'M TIGHT HERE. WE'RE WELL

WRAPPED.

MR. REILLY: ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU, MR.

ANDERSON. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

MR. ANDERSON: THANK YOU, MR. REILLY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. LEMONDES.

MR. LEMONDES: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

264

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

YIELD?

MR. ANDERSON: ONLY IF YOU TAKE ME TO YOUR

SHEEP FARM, MR. LEMONDES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. LEMONDES: I FULLY INTEND TO, MR. ANDERSON.

THANK YOU. A COUPLE OF THINGS WITH REGARD TO THIS BILL. IF I UNDERSTAND

CORRECTLY BASED ON EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S TAKEN PLACE, IF I'M DEFENDING

MYSELF, MY WEAPON DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SECURED, CORRECT? WITHIN MY

HOME.

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. LEMONDES: SO HOW DOES ONE KNOW WHEN

THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN THE ACT OF DEFENDING THEMSELF FROM A HOME

INVASION? TYPICALLY PEOPLE THAT ARE BREAKING IN DON'T TELEGRAPH AND

TELL YOU IN ADVANCE.

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. YOU KNOW, WITH THIS

HYPOTHETICAL, MR. LEMONDES, I JUST WANT TO BE REALLY CAREFUL. POLICE IN

MY LEGISLATION -- WE'RE NOT HAVING POLICE GO DOOR TO DOOR TO CHECK IF

FOLKS ARE SAFELY STORING AND SECURING THEIR FIREARM. WE'RE TRYING TO

MERELY ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO DO THE RIGHT THING. AND OF COURSE, IF YOU

KNOW SOMEBODY THAT'S NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING, AS LEGISLATORS, WE'RE

ALL MANDATED REPORTERS.

MR. LEMONDES: SO LET ME ASK THE QUESTION

DIFFERENTLY THEN.

MR. ANDERSON: SURE.

MR. LEMONDES: AND I WAS GOING TO GET TO WHO IS

265

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

RESPONSIBLE FOR ENFORCEMENT AND HOW WOULD ENFORCEMENT --

MR. ANDERSON: UNDERSTOOD.

MR. LEMONDES: -- BE -- UNDERTAKEN. I'LL COME

BACK TO THAT. AGAIN, SO, I GO TO MY HOME TONIGHT, I GO TO SLEEP BECAUSE

YOU'RE COMING OVER TO VISIT MY FARM TOMORROW MORNING --

MR. ANDERSON: IF THEY LET ME OUT OF HERE.

MR. LEMONDES: -- AND SOMEBODY INVADES --

SOMEBODY INVADES MY HOME, BUT MY WEAPONS ARE SECURE. DO YOU

KNOW WHAT THE HOME INVASION STANDARD IS BEFORE THE ADVANTAGE GOES TO

THE PERSON BREAKING IN VERSUS THE -- THE INHABITANCE OF THE DWELLING?

MR. ANDERSON: I DON'T -- I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S

GERMANE TO THE BILL, MR. LEMONDES. I THINK WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR AND

-- AND WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IS, AGAIN, THE SAFE STANDARDS AS IT

RELATES TO SECURITY. OF COURSE, YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET A HEADS-UP ABOUT A

INVASION, JUST AS MUCH YOU WON'T GET A HEADS-UP ABOUT AN EARTHQUAKE

AND -- AND WE STILL HAVE TO PURCHASE EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE OR FLOOD

INSURANCE. SO, I MEAN, THAT'S -- THAT'S THE CHALLENGES THAT STAND IN THE

WAY.

MR. LEMONDES: RIGHT. WE CAN DISAGREE ABOUT

THE GERMANENESS. IT'S LESS THAN TEN SECONDS, FOR THE RECORD. SO, I DON'T

KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT I COULDN'T FLIP THE DIAL ON MY GUN SAFE FROM MY

BED IN LESS THAN TEN SECONDS WHEN SOMEBODY'S INVADING MY HOME.

MR. ANDERSON: WELL -- WELL -- AND -- AND KEEP IN

MIND THOUGH, MR. LEMONDES, AND I ACTUALLY HAVE A LITTLE PHOTO HERE,

THERE ARE MANY, MANY DIFFERENT TOOLS THAT YOU CAN USE TO SAFELY STORE

266

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

YOUR FIREARM. IT COULD BE BIOMETRICS, WHICH I THINK ONE OF YOUR

COLLEAGUES SAID IS A LITTLE DIFFICULT, IT COULD BE THE $10 LOCK. THERE'S A

VARIETY OF DIFFERENT WAYS YOU COULD USE THE TECHNOLOGY THAT EXISTS

PRESENTLY IF YOU NEED TO ACCESS YOUR FIREARM IN -- IN A QUICK MANNER.

MR. LEMONDES: I'LL TELL YOU, THIS IS NOT GERMANE.

I'M GONNA PUT THIS QUESTION OUT VERY SIMPLY WITHOUT EXPECTING AN

ANSWER. IF YOU HAVE EVER HAD YOUR HOME INVADED, IT'S VERY STRESSFUL

AND I CAN SPEAK FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. I HAVE. THIS BILL WOULD

PREEMPT ONE FROM PROTECTING THEMSELF AND THEIR FAMILY. IF IT WAS

FOLLOWED TO THE LETTER, IT WOULD PREEMPT THAT, OR PRECLUDE THAT, EXCUSE

ME.

MR. ANDERSON: I -- I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE, MR.

LEMONDES.

MR. LEMONDES: OF COURSE, I WOULD EXPECT SO.

BUT I'LL TELL YOU, EVEN WITH ALL OF MY TRAINING IN THE MILITARY, EVERYTHING

THAT I'VE DONE, A HOME INVASION WHEN YOU'RE HOME, HOME HOME HOME,

RIGHT HERE IN NEW YORK, IS VERY, VERY STRESSFUL. AND IT TAKES A LOT OF

DISCIPLINE THAT THE AVERAGE PERSON DOESN'T HAVE, TO DEAL WITH THAT

SUCCESSFULLY. ANYWAYS, I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT OF THIS. I THINK THE

INTENT IS NOBLE; HOWEVER, THE EXECUTION, I BELIEVE, IS FAULTY. ONE OTHER

QUESTION, IN THE SPONSOR'S MEMO, IT MENTIONED DATA COLLECTION. WHO IS

COLLECTING DATA FROM WHOM AND TO WHOM?

MR. ANDERSON: YEAH. SO, NUMBER ONE, DCJS

PRESENTLY, AGAIN, IS THE CENTRALIZED POLICE FORCE -- THE POLICE DATA

COLLECTION ENTITY FOR THE STATE OF NEW YORK. SO FOR -- FOR THE FIRST PART

267

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

OF YOUR QUESTION, POLICE FORCES ALREADY ACROSS THE STATE ARE REPORTING TO

DCJS THAT DATA. NUMBER TWO, DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ARE A PART OF THAT

ECOSYSTEM, SO DATA WILL BE REPORTED BY THEM AS WELL AND THIS WILL HELP

INFORM US WHERE INSTANCES OF THIS ISSUE IS EXISTING.

MR. LEMONDES: OKAY. LET ME PEEL THAT BACK A

LITTLE FURTHER. DOES THIS BILL REQUIRE FIREARM OWNERS TO REPORT EVERY

FIREARM, BY TYPE, THAT THEY HAVE IN THEIR HOME?

MR. ANDERSON: IT DOES NOT. THAT'S NOT GERMANE

TO THIS BILL. IT DOES NOT.

MR. LEMONDES: IS THERE ANY OTHER DATA THAT'S

REQUIRED THAT THE -- THAT THE FIREARM AND/OR HOMEOWNER IS REQUIRED TO

REPORT?

MR. ANDERSON: NO.

MR. LEMONDES: OKAY. MR. ANDERSON, THANK YOU

FOR YOU QUESTIONS.

MADAM -- MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER MR. EACHUS: ON THE BILL.

MR. LEMONDES: I SIMPLY CAN'T SUPPORT THIS FOR

MULTIPLE REASONS. I THINK IT DEFEATS THE PURPOSE AND AS HAS BEEN SAID

BY ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES ALREADY, I BELIEVE THAT IT'S IN VIOLATION OF THE

SECOND AMENDMENT. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: THANK YOU.

MR. MANKTELOW.

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD?

268

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. ANDERSON: I WILL YIELD.

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU, MR. ANDERSON.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: HE YIELDS.

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU, MR. ANDERSON.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. JUST FOR A COUPLE POINTS OF CLARIFICATION, JUST

SO I UNDERSTAND THIS. SO I HAVE MY GRANDFATHER'S SHOTGUN THAT WAS

GIVEN TO ME. IT'S ABOVE THE MANTLE ABOVE MY WOOD STOVE. CAN IT BE UP

THERE?

MR. ANDERSON: YUP. IT CAN BE UP THERE AS LONG

AS IT HAS A SAFETY LOCK ON IT.

MR. MANKTELOW: SO AS LONG AS IT HAS A SAFETY

LOCK ON IT OF SOME SORTS, IT CAN BE UP THERE?

MR. ANDERSON: CORRECT.

MR. MANKTELOW: PERFECT, THANK YOU. MY

SECOND QUESTION --

MR. ANDERSON: SURE.

MR. MANKTELOW: YOU HAD TALKED TO I THINK MY

COLLEAGUE EARLIER ON ABOUT MUSEUMS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

MR. ANDERSON: CERTAINLY.

MR. MANKTELOW: AND DID I HEAR YOU -- WHAT --

WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE GUNS THAT ARE AT A MUSEUM AT THE CLOSE OF -- OF

THE MUSEUM?

MR. ANDERSON: NOTHING. THIS IS NOT GERMANE TO

269

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE BILL ON THAT SPECIFIC EXAMPLE THAT YOU'VE GIVEN AND THE REASON

BEING IS BECAUSE, WHEN YOU HAVE THE FUNCTIONS OF A MUSEUM, IS FOR

LEARNING AND HISTORY, IT'S NOT FOR USE AND THOSE GUNS WOULDN'T BE

ACTIVATED OR BE ABLE TO BE USED. YOU CAN'T USE THEM, THEY'RE JUST FOR

SHOW.

MR. MANKTELOW: OKAY. SO LIKE -- LIKE THE ONES

THAT ARE AT THE NEW YORK STATE MILITARY MUSEUM UP IN SARATOGA.

MR. ANDERSON: SURE.

MR. MANKTELOW: THEY'RE IN GLASS CASES. THAT'S

ALL ACCEPTABLE?

MR. ANDERSON: MM-HMM.

MR. MANKTELOW: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR

ANSWER. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: THANK YOU.

A PARTY VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. GANDOLFO.

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

REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL GENERALLY BE OPPOSED TO THIS PIECE OF

LEGISLATION; HOWEVER ANY MEMBERS WHO WISH TO VOTE YES MAY DO SO AT

THEIR DESKS.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MR. LAVINE.

MR. LAVINE: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. SO THE

MAJORITY CONFERENCE WILL GENERALLY BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE ON THIS

PARTICULAR BILL AND IF ANY OF THE MAJORITY MEMBERS WANT TO VOTE

OTHERWISE, THEY ARE INVITED TO GO TO THEIR DESKS AND VOTE IN THE

270

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

NEGATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: THE CLERK WILL

RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. ANDERSON TO EXPLAIN YOUR VOTE.

MR. ANDERSON: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

FRANCESCO DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE TO THE AGE OF 18 AND AS --

IT'S PAINFUL THAT WE EVEN HAVE TO HAVE THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF

LEGISLATION IN HIS MEMORY. AND AS HIS PARENTS AND LOVED ONES SITS IN

THIS CHAMBER AND LISTEN TO TODAY'S DEBATE, I KNOW IT'S HEART-WRENCHING.

BUT THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION ENSURES THAT WE CAN HOLD INDIVIDUALS

ACCOUNTABLE AND THAT WE CAN ENCOURAGE SAFE STORAGE IN THE STATE OF

NEW YORK. NEW YORK SHOULD BE LEADING THE WAY. WE SHOULD BE

LIVING AT THE GOLD STANDARD HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITH SAFE

STORAGE, AND I THINK THAT MY PIECE OF LEGISLATION ACCOMPLISHES THAT AND

I COMMEND THE FAMILY FOR SHARING THEIR TRAUMA, THEIR PAIN AND THEIR

STRUGGLES FOR THE WEEKS THAT THEY SPENT HERE IN ALBANY. I THANK MY

COLLEAGUES AND THEIR VARIETY OF OPINIONS AND I THANK ONE OF MY

COLLEAGUES WHO WORKED TIRELESSLY TO ENSURE THAT WE CAN HAVE THIS FIGHT

HERE TODAY. I WITHDRAW MY REQUEST AND PROUDLY VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MR. ANDERSON IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN.

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: MR. SPEAKER, AS

271

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

WE RECOGNIZE JUNE AS GUN VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH, WE MUST TAKE

IN ACCOUNT ALL INCIDENTS WHERE GUN VIOLENCE IS AT PLAY WITH ILLEGAL GUNS

AND LEGAL GUN OWNERSHIP. WE MUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT AND ADDRESS THAT

ILLEGAL GUNS ARE INFILTRATING OUR COMMUNITIES, WHICH UNFORTUNATELY ARE

USED FOR MOST SHOOTINGS IN DISTRICTS LIKE MINE. WE ALSO MUST ADDRESS

LEGAL GUN OWNERS AND ENSURE THAT GUNS ARE SAFELY STORED, ESPECIALLY

WHERE MINORS ARE PRESENT. FRANCESCO WAS A YOUNG MAN WITH A BRIGHT

FUTURE AND IF WE HAD THIS LAW IN PLACE, HE WOULD BE WITH US TODAY.

FRANCESCO DIED BY SUICIDE IN 2021 WITH AN UNSECURE FIREARM. HE WAS

JUST 17 YEARS OLD AND WAS A VICTIM OF BULLYING BECAUSE OF HIS SEXUAL

ORIENTATION. BETWEEN 2020 -- 2016 AND 2021, SUICIDES ACCOUNTED FOR

36 PERCENT OF FIREARM RELATED DEATH AMONG CHILDREN AGES TEN TO 19

YEARS OF AGE. IMPLEMENTING AND ENFORCING SAFE STORAGE LAWS PROMOTE A

CULTURE OF RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERSHIP. FURTHERMORE, 66 PERCENT OF

UNINTENTIONAL, FATAL FIREARM SHOOTINGS INVOLVING CHILDREN OCCURRED

WHEN THE FIREARM WAS BEING HANDLED OR SHOWN BY SOMEONE ELSE. NO

ONE HERE WOULD EVER WANT TO BE IN A SITUATION AS A GUN OWNER WHERE

THEIR GUN IS USED BY A CHILD OUT OF CURIOSITY OR A MOMENT OF CRISIS AND

THEN DIE. I APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK OF THE SPONSOR, MY COLLEAGUE,

ASSEMBLYMEMBER, KHALEEL ANDERSON, AND FOR HIS FAMILY. HIS MOM

WHO'S HERE TODAY, WHO TURNED HER PAIN INTO PURPOSE SO WE CAN SAY ONE

DAY, NOT ANOTHER CHILD. I WILL VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND I ENCOURAGE

ALL MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MS.

CHANDLER-WATERMAN IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

272

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. DINOWITZ TO EXPLAIN YOU.

MR. DINOWITZ: I AM -- I AM SO HAPPY WE ARE

PASSING THIS TODAY. WHILE IT'S TOO LATE FOR FRANCESCO AND OTHER PEOPLE

WHO SHOULD NOT HAVE DIED, THIS BILL CAN HELP MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE

OTHER PEOPLE WHO WON'T DIE IN THE FUTURE. AND FOR FRANCESCO'S FAMILY

AND FOR THOSE WHO WORKED SO HARD TO MAKE THIS BILL HAPPEN, JUST KNOW

THAT SOME LIVES, WE WON'T KNOW WHOSE, WILL BE SAVED WHEN THIS IS

SIGNED INTO LAW. AND I ALSO WANT TO SAY, I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THE

INCREDIBLE WORK DONE BY THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL. HE SHOULD BE VERY

PROUD. I VOTE YES.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MR. DINOWITZ IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. SEAWRIGHT TO EXPLAIN YOUR VOTE.

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

ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. FAMILIES ALL ACROSS OUR STATE DESERVE

THE GREATER PROTECTIONS THAT FRANCESCO'S LAW WOULD PROVIDE FROM

IMPROPERLY STORED AND UNSECURED FIREARMS. FRANCESCO WAS A BRILLIANT,

KIND AND TALENTED YOUNG MAN WHO YOU'VE HEARD GREW UP ON LONG

ISLAND. AND IN OCTOBER OF 2021, HE TOOK HIS OWN LIFE WITH A FAMILY

MEMBER'S UNSECURED FIREARM AFTER EXPERIENCING RELENTLESS BULLYING

OVER HIS BISEXUALITY. HE WAS ONLY 17 YEARS OF AGE. TOO MANY CHILDREN

AND YOUNG PEOPLE HAVE DIED ACROSS OUR NATION AS A RESULT OF GAINING

ACCESS TO A LOADED FIREARM THAT WAS LEFT UNSECURED. NO PARENT LIKE

FRANCESCO'S MOTHER, DIANA, WHO'S IN THE CHAMBER TODAY AND

GODMOTHER, JENNIFER, WHO'S HERE WITH US, SHOULD EVER HAVE TO GO

273

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THROUGH THE PAIN OF LOSING THEIR CHILD BECAUSE A GUN OWNER CARELESSLY

FAILED TO SECURE AND STORELY SAFE THEIR GUN. I AM PROUD TO CAST MY VOTE

TODAY IN HONOR OF FRANCESCO'S LAW AND I THANK THE BILL'S SPONSOR FOR ALL

OF HIS HARD WORK AND THE ADVOCATES AND THE MOTHER AND GODMOTHER FOR

THEIR WORK IN MAKING THIS BILL A REALITY. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MS. SEAWRIGHT IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS TO EXPLAIN YOUR VOTE.

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

FRANCESCO'S STORY HIT ME HARD AS A PARENT OF A TEENAGER WHO'S ALSO

BISEXUAL AND ALSO BULLIED AND THE FACT THAT HE HAD ACCESS TO AN

UNSECURED FIREARM SHOWS THE CHALLENGES THAT WE FACE IN THIS COUNTRY.

WE'RE FACING BOTH AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE CHILDREN ARE RELENTLESSLY

BULLIED FOR THEIR GENDER AND SEXUALITY AND THEIR EXPRESSION AND WE'RE

FACING A MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS AMONGST OUR YOUNG PEOPLE. ALL THE WHILE

WHERE FIREARMS ARE NOT LOCKED AWAY AND SECURED. I WANT TO THANK THE

SPONSOR FOR HIS RELENTLESS ADVOCACY FROM THE HEART AND HIS PARENTS WHO

SHARED THEIR PAIN, OVER AND OVER AGAIN, TO MAKE SURE THAT NO FURTHER

CHILD WOULD EXPERIENCE THIS AND IN HONOR OF FRANCESCO AND THE

COUNTLESS OTHER CHILDREN WHOSE LIVES WERE LOST DUE TO AN UNSECURE

FIREARM. I'M PROUD TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND I URGE MY COLLEAGUES

TO DO SO AS WELL. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS

IN -- IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. GALLAHAN TO EXPLAIN YOUR VOTE.

274

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. GALLAHAN: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I HAVE

SEVERAL FIREARMS, EVERY ONE OF THEM IS SECURELY SECURED AND THE REASON

FOR THAT WASN'T A LAW 50 YEARS AGO WHEN I -- WHEN I HAD MY FIRST

FIREARM. THE REASON FOR THAT WAS EDUCATION. EDUCATION WHEN I TOOK

MY HUNTER SAFETY COURSE. EDUCATION THAT HAS BEEN -- BEEN IMPROVED

OVER THE YEARS AND NOW MANDATED WHEN YOU HAVE AN APPLICATION FOR A

PISTOL PERMIT. TWO-AND-A-HALF DAYS OF TRAINING. THE SAME THING WITH A

SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE, TRAINING. I WOULD ASK, THIS IS THE SECOND ASK I'VE

HAD THIS -- THIS -- THIS YEAR, MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE TO SIT DOWN

WITH ME AND CONSTRUCT EDUCATION IN HIGH SCHOOLS, JUST LIKE THE HEALTH

CLASS, THAT TEACHES EACH AND EVERY CHILD IN OUR SCHOOL SYSTEM FIREARM

SAFETY. NOTHING IS A SUBSTITUTE FOR EDUCATION. NOTHING. RESPONSIBLE

GUN OWNERS LOCK THEIR GUNS AWAY AND THEY'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO LOCK

THEIR GUNS AWAY. BUT THESE CHILDREN THAT COME UP THROUGH, WHEN THEY

FIND A FIREARM, OR THEY SEE A FIREARM AND THEY'RE NOT TRAINED, DO THEY

KNOW WHAT TO DO? DO THEY KNOW WHAT NOT TO DO? DO THEY KNOW WHO

TO REPORT IT TO? THEY WILL IF WE EDUCATE THEM. AN EDUCATION IN OUR

SCHOOLS WILL SAVE MANY LIVES. THANK YOU, MS. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: HOW DO YOU VOTE?

MR. GALLAHAN: I'LL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MR. GALLAHAN IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. LUNSFORD TO EXPLAIN YOUR VOTE.

MS. LUNSFORD: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. YOU

KNOW, I WAS TRYING TO FIND SOME STATISTICS ABOUT HOW MANY SHOOTINGS

275

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THERE ARE IN HOME INVASIONS VERSUS CHILDREN WHO ACCIDENTALLY SHOOT

THEMSELVES AND I REALLY COULDN'T FIND STATISTICS. SO I THANK THE SPONSOR

FOR PUTTING DATA COLLECTION IN HERE BECAUSE WE DON'T REALLY HAVE THIS

INFORMATION, WE JUST HEAR ANECDOTAL STORIES. BUT WHAT I DO KNOW, IS

THAT 80 PERCENT OF GUN OWNERS SUPPORT SAFE STORAGE LAWS. RESPONSIBLE

GUN OWNERS SAFELY STORE THEIR WEAPONS, THAT'S WHAT YOU DO. BUT YET,

ACCORDING TO A STUDY LAST YEAR, 43 PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS STILL STORE

LOADED GUNS AND JUST UNDER HALF HAVE GUNS LOADED WITH AMMUNITION

NOT IN LOCKERS. DON'T RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS WANT EVERYBODY TO BE

RESPONSIBLE? DON'T WE WANT THIS FOR PEOPLE? FOR EVERYONE TO ACT THE

WAY RESPONSIBLE PEOPLE WOULD? THIS MANDATE WILL NOT ONLY ALLOW US

TO PROVIDE MORE EDUCATION AND TO PUT SOME TEETH BEHIND IT, BUT IT WILL

ATTACH LIABILITY FOR SITUATIONS WHERE PEOPLE ARE NOT BEING RESPONSIBLE

AND IT LEADS TO UNINTENTIONAL DEATHS. THAT'S WHAT THIS IS FOR. IT'S

IMPORTANT. AND I'VE SAID THIS ON THIS FLOOR BEFORE AND I'M GONNA SAY IT

AGAIN, THE REASON SO MANY TODDLERS SHOOT THEMSELVES IS BECAUSE THEIR

INDEX FINGERS ARE TOO WEAK AND THEY TURN THE GUN AROUND TO USE THEIR

THUMB. AND IF THAT DOESN'T HAUNT YOU, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, IN ADDITION TO ACCIDENTAL FIREARM

DEATHS AND SUICIDES, ACCORDING TO A DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ARTICLE ABOUT

SAFE STORAGE GUN LAWS FOR 2023, THE MAJORITY OF INDIVIDUALS WHO

CARRIED OUT A K-12 MASS SHOOTING OBTAINED THE FIREARMS USED IN THE

SHOOTING FROM A FAMILY MEMBER IN AN UNSECURED GUN. FURTHER,

BETWEEN 2005 AND 2010, IN HOME BURGLARIES AND OTHER PROPERTY

CRIMES, 1.4 MILLION FIREARMS WERE STOLEN. SAFE STORAGE HELPS THAT, TOO.

276

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

I DON'T KNOW WHY ANYONE WOULD OPPOSE US SAFELY STORING GUNS. IT

SAVES LIVES AND IT KEEPS ILLEGAL GUNS OFF THE STREET. I'LL BE VOTING IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MS. LUNSFORD IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES TO EXPLAIN YOUR VOTE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU,

MR. SPEAKER, FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I WANT TO

CONGRATULATE THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION. FIRST OF ALL, I THINK YOU DID

AN AMAZING JOB OF DEBATING A VERY WELL-CRAFTED BILL AND AS A DAUGHTER

OF A MASON, SOME MASONS WERE IN OUR CHAMBERS A FEW WEEKS AGO, I

WAS TRAINED AND EDUCATED ON HOW TO USE A WEAPON. WE WENT TO THE

BIG HILL HUNTING AND FISHING CLUB ON A REGULAR BASIS. NOT ONLY DID

WE RUN TRACK AND PLAY DODGEBALL, BUT WE ALSO LEARNED HOW TO SHOOT

WEAPONS AND AS A RESULT OF THAT, I, AS AN ADULT, AM LICENSED, BUT I'M ALSO

GONNA LOCK THEM UP AND KEEP THEM LOCKED UP. AND SO, IT WAS

MENTIONED ON THIS FLOOR ALREADY ONCE, I WILL MENTION IT AGAIN: A

RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNER HAS NO PROBLEM SECURING THEIR WEAPONS. NONE.

AND SO, IF THERE'S SOMEONE WHO HAS A PROBLEM WITH THAT, THEN THAT

MEANS THEY'RE NOT RESPONSIBLE AND THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE THE WEAPON. SO

I LOOK FORWARD TO VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE ON THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. GRIFFIN TO EXPLAIN YOUR VOTE.

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

277

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. THANK YOU TO ASSEMBLYMEMBER

ANDERSON FOR SPONSORING THIS IMPORTANT LEGISLATION. I'M PROUD TO BE A

COSPONSOR AND SUPPORT THIS MEASURE THAT WILL SAVE LIVES. SAFE GUN

STORAGE IS VITAL AND THIS MEASURE WILL PAVE THE WAY. THANK YOU

FRANCESCO AND HIS AMAZING FAMILY. THE COURAGE HIS MOM SHOWED

WHEN SHE MET WITH ME TO SHARE THE TRAGEDY OF LOSING HER SON WAS TRULY

HEARTBREAKING, BUT ALSO INSPIRING THAT SHE COULD COME TO ALBANY, VISIT

SO MANY PEOPLE AND TALK ABOUT THAT STORY OVER AND OVER AGAIN. SO, I

JUST WANT TO SAY, THANK YOU FOR COMING HERE, THANK YOU FOR SETTING AN

EXAMPLE, THANK YOU FOR YOUR ADVOCACY AND I WANT TO SAY, LOVE TO

FRANCESCO, HIS MEMORY AND LOVE TO HIS FAMILY. THANK YOU. I VOTE --

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MS. GRIFFIN IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. SCHIAVONI TO EXPLAIN YOUR VOTE.

MR. SCHIAVONI: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. AND I

WANT TO APPLAUD THE -- THE SPONSOR FOR BRINGING THIS LAW FORWARD. I -- I,

TOO, BELIEVE IN EDUCATION; IN FACT, I MADE A CAREER AS AN EDUCATOR

DEALING WITH PEOPLE WHOSE FRONTAL LOBES ARE NOT FULLY DEVELOPED. I

KNOW TEENAGERS. THEY'RE IMPULSIVE. COUPLED WITH OUR MENTAL HEALTH

CRISIS THAT OUR CHILDREN ARE FACING, I BELIEVE THAT THIS LAW IS MORE THAN

APPROPRIATE AT THIS TIME. AND I THINK ABOUT THE PEOPLE, THE CHILDREN

THAT I'VE KNOWN OVER MY CAREER WHO HAVE DIED BY SUICIDE. IT'S TOUGH.

IT ROCKS A COMMUNITY. AND I DO BELIEVE THAT SAFE STORAGE LAWS DO SAVE

LIVES, THAT THEY WILL SAVE LIVES. AND HAD THEY BEEN IN PLACE THEY WOULD

HAVE SAVED THE LIVES OF THE YOUNG PEOPLE THAT I'VE KNOWN.

278

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THANK YOU. I WILL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MR. SCHIAVONI IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

(APPLAUSE)

PAGE 20, RULES REPORT NO. 588, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08463-E, RULES

REPORT NO. 588, LEE, KIM, TAYLOR, BURDICK, GLICK, LEVENBERG, COLTON,

DE LOS SANTOS, ZACCARO, SOLAGES, BUTTENSCHON, EPSTEIN,

GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS, REYES, BRAUNSTEIN, KASSAY, ROZIC, RIVERA, PAULIN,

BORES, BURROUGHS, WEPRIN, RAJKUMAR, ROMERO, HOOKS, JACKSON,

SIMONE, GRIFFIN, CHANG, RAGA. AN ACT IN RELATION TO AUTHORIZING THE

COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION TO CONDUCT A SURVEY REGARDING INSTRUCTION

ON ASIAN AMERICAN, NATIVE HAWAIIANS AND PACIFIC ISLANDER HISTORY

WITHIN THE STATE; TO AMEND THE EDUCATION LAW, IN RELATION TO

ESTABLISHING AN ASIAN AMERICAN, NATIVE HAWAIIANS AND PACIFIC ISLAND

HISTORY ADVISORY COMMITTEE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF SUCH

PROVISIONS UPON THE EXPIRATION THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: AN EXPLANATION HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. LEE.

(PAUSE)

ON A MOTION BY MS. LEE, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE

279

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.

MS. LEE FOR AN EXPLANATION.

MS. LEE: THANK YOU. THIS BILL WOULD AUTHORIZE AND

DIRECT THE COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION TO CONDUCT A STATEWIDE SURVEY

OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO DETERMINE THE EXTENT OF INSTRUCTION RELATED TO

ASIAN AMERICAN, NATIVE HAWAIIAN AND PACIFIC ISLANDER HISTORY,

INCLUDING CURRICULUM CONTENT, GRADE-LEVEL INSTRUCTIONAL TIME AND

TEACHER TRAINING.

THIS BILL WOULD ALSO ESTABLISH A TEMPORARY ADVISORY

COMMITTEE TO RECOMMEND INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCES AND WAYS TO

STRENGTHEN K THROUGH 12 EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN AANHPI HISTORY.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: MS. WALSH.

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

SPONSOR YIELD FOR JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MS. LEE: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SO, I NOTICED THAT THERE -- AS YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR

EXPLANATION THERE ARE TWO COMPONENTS; THERE'S A REPORT THAT WILL BE

GENERATED OF THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPLEMENT OR

STRENGTHEN SUCH INSTRUCTION, AND THAT'S GONNA BE DELIVERED TO THE

GOVERNOR, THE TEMPORARY PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE, THE SPEAKER OF THE

ASSEMBLY, THE MINORITY LEADER OF THE SENATE AND THE MINORITY LEADER

280

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

OF THE ASSEMBLY BY THE FIRST OF JANUARY FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE,

CORRECT?

MS. LEE: THAT'S CORRECT.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. SO -- AND THANK YOU FOR

INCLUDING THE MINORITY LEADERS IN THE RECEIPT OF THAT REPORT.

MY QUESTION IS, WHEN IT COMES TO THE COMPOSITION OF

THE HISTORY ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WHICH IS COMPRISED OF FOUR EXPERTS

ON THE TOPIC, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY MINORITY APPOINTMENTS ON THAT. SO I

WAS JUST WONDERING WHY THAT IS.

MS. LEE: WELL, THESE APPOINTMENTS ARE NOT POLITICAL.

I MEAN, THEY ARE ABOUT SELECTING EXPERTS ON THE SUBJECT MATTER THAT IS

RELEVANT TO THIS BILL. AND THE MINORITY -- YOU OR ANYONE ELSE AS

MEMBERS OF THE MINORITY ARE WELCOME TO PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS

FOR APPOINTMENTS.

MS. WALSH: WE WOULD PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS

TO THE SPEAKER OF THE ASSEMBLY WHO DOES HAVE AN APPOINTMENT?

MS. LEE: SURE. THE SPEAKER OF THE ASSEMBLY, THE

MAJORITY LEADER. AND REALLY, THESE ARE APPOINTMENTS FOR SUBJECT

MATTER EXPERTS. THEY CAN BE REPUBLICANS, THEY CAN BE DEMOCRAT. THE

MOST IMPORTANT THING ABOUT THESE APPOINTMENTS IS THAT THEY ARE SUBJECT

MATTER EXPERTS IN AANHPI HISTORY AND CURRICULUM.

MS. WALSH: WAS THERE A REASON WHY YOU -- YOU'VE

GOT FOUR EXPERTS? I MEAN, IF YOU HAD SIX EXPERTS THEN YOU COULD

ACCOMMODATE THE DESIRE FOR THE MINORITY TO PARTICIPATE IN BEING ABLE

TO PUT APPOINTMENTS ON AS WELL. THEN YOU'D HAVE SIX HEADS; ISN'T THAT

281

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BETTER THAN FOUR HEADS?

MS. LEE: WELL, THE WAY THE BILL IS WRITTEN, CURRENTLY

THE GOVERNOR GETS AN APPOINTMENT, THE MAJORITY LEADER OF -- OF -- THE

PRESIDENT GETS -- OF THE SENATE GETS AN APPOINTMENT, THE SPEAKER GETS

AN APPOINTMENT AND THE COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION ALSO GETS AN

APPOINTMENT.

MS. WALSH: RIGHT.

MS. LEE: BUT I GUESS WHAT -- I MEAN, YOUR INTEREST --

I REALLY APPRECIATE DEEPLY YOUR INTEREST IN THIS BILL AND IN AANHPI

CURRICULUM BECAUSE IT IS A BILL ABOUT DEI; DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND

INCLUSION. SO I ASSUME THAT YOUR INTEREST IN THIS BILL ALSO IS AS THE -- FOR

SUPPORT OF DEI IN OUR -- IN OUR STATE.

MS. WALSH: WELL, I THINK IT'S ALWAYS A LITTLE BIT

IRONIC THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT MINORITIES THAT A LOT OF TIMES YOU FORGET

-- NOT YOU PERSONALLY, BUT SOMETIMES MEMBERS OF THE MAJORITY PARTY

TEND TO FORGET ABOUT THE MINORITY PARTY AND WHATEVER INSIGHTS THAT

COULD BE BROUGHT INTO ANY TOPIC. IT FEELS A LITTLE A LONELY SOMETIMES,

AND SO I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN YOUR

THINKING ON THIS, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR ANSWERS.

AND NOW, MR. SPEAKER, I'D LIKE TO GO ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: ON THE BILL.

MS. WALSH: YEAH, AT THE RISK OF SOUNDING LIKE A

BROKEN RECORD, AND I -- I GET THE -- THE IRONY A LITTLE BIT THAT'S BEING

BROUGHT UP ABOUT TRYING TO BE CULTURALLY-COMPETENT AND TRYING TO

ENCOURAGE CULTURAL COMPETENCE WHEN WE ARE IN, IN SOME WAYS, AN

282

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

EXTREMELY DYSFUNCTIONAL GOVERNMENTAL SETUP HERE SOMETIMES. AND WE

COULD USE A LITTLE BIT OF -- A LITTLE BIT OF COMPETENCE AND RESPECT FOR OUR

SIDE OF THE AISLE. AND I THINK THAT HAVING A MEMBER OR TWO FROM THE

MINORITY TO BE ABLE TO NOMINATE PEOPLE THAT WE KNOW THAT ARE EXPERTS

ON THIS TOPIC I THINK WOULD BE A REALLY REFRESHING THING. SO I DIDN'T ASK

THE SPONSOR IF SHE WOULD BE AMENABLE TO AMENDING HER BILL TO ADD

THOSE MEMBERS BECAUSE IT JUST DIDN'T SOUND LIKE SHE WOULD. SO I DIDN'T

WANT TO JUST ASK THAT ADDITIONAL QUESTION. BUT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT.

AND AS YOU SEE IN A NUMBER OF BILLS THAT COME UP, THESE STUDY BILLS,

YOU'RE GONNA BE HEARING THIS SONG BEING PLAYED AGAIN AND AGAIN. AND

I -- WHEN IT GETS LISTENED TO, YOUR BILLS MOVE WITHOUT ANY OPPOSITION

AND WE'RE HAPPY TO SUPPORT THEM. WE'RE JUST SAYING THAT WE WANT TO

MAKE A RECORD AND SAY THAT WE -- WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO BE HEARD. WE

WOULD ALSO LIKE TO BE ABLE TO OFFER UP OUR IDEAS, NOT THROUGH A CONDUIT

LIKE THE SPEAKER OR THE MAJORITY LEADER, WHO ARE BOTH WONDERFUL

PEOPLE, BUT BY OUR OWN LEADERSHIP.

SO FOR THAT REASON THERE MAY BE SOME OF US WHO MAY

VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE, ALTHOUGH I THINK THAT THE -- THE IDEA ITSELF FOR THIS

SURVEY IS A GOOD ONE.

SO I THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, AND I THANK THE SPONSOR

FOR HER TIME. THANKS.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: THANK YOU.

MR. CHANG.

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

SPONSOR YIELD?

283

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MS. LEE: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER EACHUS: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. CHANG: THANK YOU, MS. LEE. APPRECIATE THAT

YOU AND SENATOR LIU HAVE COME OUT WITH THIS -- WITH THIS BILL ITSELF TO

MAKE IT -- OUR COMMUNITY, OUR ASIAN COMMUNITY, INTO EDUCATION.

NOW, HOW WILL YOU PROPOSE THIS FOR EXPERT ITSELF?

BECAUSE ASIAN IS SUCH A LARGE, VERY LARGE CULTURE. IT'S IN AT LEAST THREE

DIFFERENT CONTINENTS. AND IT'S VERY HARD TO HAVE EVEN FOUR EXPERTS JUST

TO -- JUST TO DECIDE ON WHAT CURRICULUM AND TOPICS.

MS. LEE: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANT TO THANK MY

COLLEAGUE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE FOR BEING A COSPONSOR ON THIS

BILL AND SUPPORTING -- SUPPORTING THIS INITIATIVE ON AANHPI

CURRICULUM IN OUR STATE. WE WILL HAVE -- THE FOCUS REALLY IS ON SUBJECT

MATTER EXPERTS OF AANHPI CURRICULUM. THE EXPECTATION IS THAT THEY

ALSO HAVE -- YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE BEEN -- THEY'RE -- THEY'RE EXPERTS OF

THIS FIELD. SO ASIAN AMERICAN IS A BROAD DEFINITION. IT INCLUDES MANY

DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES WITHIN THE AAP -- AANHPI COMMUNITY. AND

THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN -- WHO SPENT THEIR LIVES, DEDICATED

THEIR LIVES TO STUDYING THESE COMMUNITIES, AND THAT IS WHAT WE WILL BE

LOOKING FOR. OR THAT'S WHAT I HOPE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SET TO MAKE THE

APPOINTMENTS WILL BE LOOKING FOR AS THEY MAKE THOSE APPOINTMENTS.

MR. CHANG: WELL, I HOPE WE CAN, AS MY FELLOW

COLLEAGUES, WE'D LIKE TO SEE IT BROADENED ITSELF BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO SEE

284

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SOME CONSERVATIVE FAMILY VALUE ITSELF. AND DEI IS SUCH A BROAD

CONCEPT. AND I DON'T BELIEVE IN THAT, I BELIEVE IN JUST WHO WE ARE, WHAT

WE ARE, INSTEAD OF JUST PUTTING A LABEL ITSELF.

BUT NO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. LEE, ABOUT THIS --

ABOUT THIS BILL. YES, I COSPONSORED THIS BECAUSE WE NEED TO HAVE THE

SCHOOL SYSTEM TO, ESPECIALLY IN AN AREA THAT DOESN'T HAVE THAT MANY

ASIANS AMERICANS AND UNDERSTAND OUR COMMUNITY. WE'RE -- THE

CHINESE HAVE IMMIGRATED IN THIS COUNTRY ABOUT LESS THAN 200 YEARS

AGO; MAYBE 1830-ISH TO 1850. SO IT'S NOT THAT LONG. AND THEN ONLY THE

PAST 50, 60 YEARS THAT WE HAVE AN INFLUX OF DIFFERENT COMMUNITY COME

IN. SO MAYBE CERTAIN COMMUNITIES MAY NOT ABLE [SIC] TO SEE WHAT WE

ARE, WHAT THE DIFFERENCES ARE IN KOREANS AND THE VIETNAMESE. AND I

HOPE THE -- OUR MAINSTREAM WILL MAYBE HAVE A CHANCE TO UNDERSTAND

WHERE OUR DIVERSE CULTURE AND COMMUNITY ARE. BECAUSE IN THIS WORLD

WE REPRESENT THE ASIAN COMMUNITY. WE REPRESENT MAYBE 60 -- 60

PERCENT OF THE POPULATION, SO IT'S NOT SMALL. BUT IN THE UNITED STATES

WE REPRESENT ONLY 12 PERCENT -- 12 PERCENT IN NEW YORK, LESS THAN 4

PERCENT IN -- IN THE UNITED STATES. SO WE'RE SMALL BUT WE'RE GROWING.

AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ON THE BILL, MA'AM.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. CHANG: YES. THANK YOU FOR THE SPONSOR TO

PRESENT THIS, AS WELL AS THE SENATE, JOHN LIU. AND -- AND I JUST HOPE

WE HAVE A MORE EXPERTISE TO DECIDE WHAT SUBJECT AND WHAT TOPIC THAT

CAN BE IN THE CURRICULUM, BECAUSE IT'S SO BROAD. EVEN FOR ME, IT'S SO

285

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MUCH TO WRAP DIFFERENT ASIAN CULTURES -- AND THERE'S A LOT -- EVEN

THOUGH I TRAVELED AND LIVED IN ASIA FOR -- FOR OVER A DECADE, AND I'M

STILL LEARNING DIFFERENT ASIAN CULTURES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. LEE.

(PAUSE)

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. LEE TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. LEE: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ONE OF THE MOST UNFORGETTABLE MOMENTS OF MY TIME IN

ALBANY WAS MEETING A GROUP OF YOUNG ASIAN AMERICAN STUDENTS WHO

CAME UP FROM NEW YORK CITY TO ADVOCATE FOR INCLUSIVE CURRICULUM TO

LAWMAKERS HERE IN ALBANY. THEY SPOKE PASSIONATELY ABOUT WHAT IT

WOULD MEAN TO SEE THEIR HISTORIES REFLECTED IN THE CLASSROOM TO LEARN

ABOUT THE STRUGGLES, CONTRIBUTIONS AND STORIES OF ASIAN AMERICANS AS

PART OF THE AMERICAN NARRATIVE. THIS BILL, THE AANHPI EDUCATION

EQUITY ACT, IS INSPIRED BY THEM AND BY SO MANY OTHERS ACROSS NEW

YORK WHO ARE DEMANDING A MORE INCLUSIVE CURRICULUM.

ASIAN AMERICANS HAVE HELPED BUILD THIS COUNTRY,

GENERATION AFTER GENERATION. BUT OUR HISTORY HAS TOO OFTEN BEEN

IGNORED, MARGINALIZED OR ERASED, AND NOW IN STATES ACROSS THE COUNTRY,

286

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THAT ERASURE IS BEING WEAPONIZED. BOOKS ARE BEING BANNED, HISTORY IS

BEING CENSORED, AND PEOPLE IN POWER ARE TRYING TO SILENCE OUR VOICES,

INTIMIDATE OUR COMMUNITIES, AND STRIP OUR COMMUNITIES OF DIGNITY.

BUT WE ARE STILL HERE AND WE WILL NOT BE SILENCED.

WE REMEMBER WON KIM ARK, WHO TOOK HIS CASE TO

THE SUPREME COURT TO AFFIRM THAT CHILDREN BORN IN THIS COUNTRY ARE

CITIZENS, REGARDLESS OF THEIR PARENTS' NATIONALITY. WE REMEMBER FRED

KOREMATSU, WHO RESISTED THE INCARCERATION OF JAPANESE AMERICANS

DURING WORLD WAR II, AND STOOD UP FOR JUSTICE EVEN WHEN HIS

GOVERNMENT FAILED HIM. AND IN THIS MOMENT WHEN ANTI-ASIAN HATE IS

ON THE RISE AND OUR CIVIL RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WE CANNOT LET FEAR OR

REVISIONISM DICTATE WHAT OUR CHILDREN LEARN. EDUCATION IS ONE OF OUR

MOST POWERFUL TOOLS AGAINST HATE. WHEN WE TEACH TRUTH WE BUILD

UNDERSTANDING. WHEN WE REFLECT ALL OF OUR HISTORIES, WE CREATE

BELONGING.

THIS BILL IS NOT JUST A POLICY STEP -- STEP. IT'S A

STATEMENT THAT OUR STORIES MATTER. THAT OUR COMMUNITY DESERVES TO BE

RECOGNIZED AND SEEN, AND THAT WE ARE NOT GUESTS IN THIS HOUSE, WE ARE

BUILDERS OF IT.

I WILL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. LEE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. GALLAHAN TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. GALLAHAN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

I WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS BILL FOR THE

287

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MERE FACT THAT THERE IS NO REPRESENTATION FROM THE MINORITY

CONFERENCE. BY NOT HAVING PARTICIPATION FROM THE MINORITY

CONFERENCE IN THIS COMMITTEE, WE'RE OMITTING SIX MILLION VOTERS, OR

RESIDENTS, FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK FROM REPRESENTATION. I WOULD

ENCOURAGE EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM TO SUPPORT MY BILL, A.01353, WHICH

WOULD REQUIRE CERTAIN BILLS WHICH ESTABLISH A COMMISSION, TASK FORCE,

BOARD, COUNCIL OR ANY SIMILAR BODY WILL HAVE NOT LESS THAN ONE POSITION

APPOINTED BY EACH OF THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS. THAT WAY YOU WON'T BE

ELIMINATING SIX MILLION VOICES FROM OUR STATE IN THESE COMMISSIONS.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. GALLAHAN IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. TAGUE TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. TAGUE: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

I, TOO, WILL BE VOTING -- BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE

BECAUSE THE MINORITY AGAIN HAS NO PERSON ON THIS COMMISSION TO BE

ABLE TO PICK PEOPLE. I BELIEVE WE ACTUALLY HAVE PEOPLE WITHIN OUR

CONFERENCE THAT ARE OF CHINESE DESCENT. IT'S A SHAME.

I ALSO WAS A LITTLE TAKEN ABACK BY THE SPONSOR AND THE

WAY SHE TREATED OUR FLOOR LEADER DURING THE DEBATE WHEN JUST A SIMPLE

QUESTION WAS ASKED.

FOR THOSE REASONS AND MANY OTHERS, IT'S A REAL SHAME

BUT I'LL BE VOTING NO.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. TAGUE IN THE

NEGATIVE.

288

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. LUNSFORD TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. LUNSFORD: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I'D

LOVE TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR. AND IT'S NICE TO HEAR SO MANY PEOPLE

CONCERNED ABOUT REPRESENTING MINORITY POINT OF VIEWS AND

UNDERSTANDING THAT PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT LIVED EXPERIENCES CAN

CONTRIBUTE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES.

SO THIS BILL IS, I THINK, TIMELY AND APPROPRIATE TO THE

SITUATION AND I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. LUNSFORD IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. MEEKS TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. MEEKS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, FOR AN

OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I WANT TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR ON

THIS LEGISLATION. THEY SAY IF YOU WANT YOUR STORY TOLD, YOU BETTER TELL IT

YOURSELF. THAT WAY YOU MAKE SURE WE GET IT RIGHT. AS IT RELATES TO THE

DEBATE ON THE FLOOR, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH LIVED

EXPERIENCE, SOMETIMES EMOTIONS MAY TAKE A HOLD. BUT THE GOAL IS TO

DO SOMETHING FOR YOUR COMMUNITY. AND NOT ONLY FOR YOUR COMMUNITY,

BUT FOR ALL OF US AS THE STATE OF NEW YORK. I FEEL ONCE WE HAVE A BETTER

UNDERSTANDING OF ONE ANOTHER, OF OUR CULTURE, OUR BACKGROUND, OUR

EXPERIENCE, WE DO BETTER BY ONE ANOTHER.

I'LL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. MEEKS IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. DIPIETRO TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

289

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. DIPIETRO: IT WAS ANSWERED. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. DIPIETRO IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER. I'M NOT SURE HOW WE GOT SO FAR AWAY FROM THE TOPIC HERE OF

DISCUSSION, BUT I DO WANT TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION.

AND I DO THINK SHE HANDLED HERSELF IN A -- IN A VERY DIGNIFIED AND

INSPIRING WAY IN HER RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS. IT'S HARD TO UNDERSTAND

SOMETIMES HOW PEOPLE ALWAYS WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN WHATEVER THE

DISCUSSION IS, BUT WHEN THERE ARE DISCUSSIONS GOING ON AT OTHER LEVELS

THAT MINIMIZE THE SAME PEOPLE THAT THEY WANT TO SIT AND DISCUSS WITH,

THERE'S SILENCE. AND SO AT SOME POINT IT MAKES SENSE FOR HER TO RAISE

THE COMMENTS THAT SHE RAISED.

AND SO I WANT TO THANK HER FOR DOING THAT, AND I LOOK

FORWARD TO VOTING FOR HER LEGISLATION.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MRS. PEOPLES-

STOKES IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. BURDICK TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BURDICK: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, FOR

ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE.

THIS REALLY IS A VERY SIMPLE BILL. IT SIMPLY AUTHORIZES

THE COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION TO CONDUCT A SURVEY. A SURVEY ON

INSTRUCTION FOR ASIAN AMERICAN, NATIVE HAWAIIANS AND PACIFIC ISLAND

-- ISLANDER HISTORY, AND TO ESTABLISH AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THAT'S ALL

290

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

IT DOES. AND, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS JUST SOMETHING THAT WE, AS NEW

YORKERS, CELEBRATE OUR DIVERSITY. WE CELEBRATE THAT AS OUR STRENGTH.

AND THIS IS SIMPLY FURTHERING OUR ABILITY TO DO IT WITH SOMETHING

IMPACTFUL. THIS SIMPLY LAYS THE GROUNDWORK TO MAKE SURE THAT

EDUCATIONAL INSTRUCTION ALIGNS WITH THE NEEDS OF THESE SO OFTEN

MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES.

SO I WISH TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR FOR HER

PERSEVERANCE, HER TENACITY IN MOVING THIS BILL FORWARD, AND WISH TO

THANK THE SPEAKER FOR BRINGING IT TO THE FLOOR. I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. BURDICK IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS: THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER.

I ALSO WANT TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR FOR HER RELENTLESS

PURSUE [SIC] FOR EQUITY AND DIGNITY, AND ELEVATING THE VOICES OF THE

AAPI COMMUNITY. I REPRESENT A DISTRICT THAT IS NEARLY 20 PERCENT ASIAN

AMERICAN, PACIFIC ISLANDER, AND THEIR STORIES ARE NOT BEING TOLD. AND

IT'S REALLY CRITICAL THAT WE ARE ENSURING THAT WE HAVE AN EDUCATION

SYSTEM THAT LIFTS THE EXPERIENCES OF ALL THE COMMUNITIES THAT REPRESENT

WHO WE ARE HERE IN NEW YORK. AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE

THAT ARE PART OF THAT EFFORT HAVE A COMMITMENT TO ENSURING FAIRNESS AND

EQUITY IN THAT PROCESS.

SO AS A PROUD MEMBER OF THE APA TASK FORCE AND,

AGAIN, SOMEONE WHO REPRESENTS A DIVERSE COMMUNITY OF THE AAPI

291

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

COMMUNITY, I'M VERY, VERY PROUD TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND I HOPE

MY COLLEAGUES DO THE SAME.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. GONZÁLEZ-

ROJAS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

PAGE 24, CALENDAR NO. 54, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00544-B, CALENDAR

NO. 54, PAULIN, SEAWRIGHT, MCMAHON, LEVENBERG, JACOBSON, GRIFFIN,

SAYEGH, SHIMSKY, OTIS. AN ACT TO AMEND THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW,

IN RELATION TO REQUIRING POLICE OFFICERS TO TAKE TEMPORARY CUSTODY OF

FIREARMS WHEN RESPONDING TO REPORTS OF FAMILY VIOLENCE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MS.

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

ADVANCED.

AN EXPLANATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. PAULIN.

MS. PAULIN: THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THE LEGISLATION REQUIRES LAW ENFORCEMENT TO TAKE

TEMPORARY CUSTODY OF FIREARMS WHEN RESPONDING TO A REPORT OF FAMILY

VIOLENCE WHEN SUCH REMOVAL IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE VICTIM OR OTHER

PERSONS PRESENT.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. WALSH.

292

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

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

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MS. PAULIN: HAPPY TO.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SO THIS BILL WAS FIRST INTRODUCED IN 2021, BUT TODAY

WILL BE OUR FIRST VOTE ON IT. OKAY. SO I WANTED TO SAY FIRST THAT

PROTECTING VICTIMS FROM GUN VIOLENCE IS A LAUDABLE LEGISLATIVE

OBJECTIVE. BUT I WANT TO -- I WANT TO KIND OF START OUT BY JUST REVIEWING

OUR CURRENT STATE OF THE LAW. SO UNDER THE CPL CURRENTLY, POLICE, WHEN

RESPONDING TO A FAMILY OFFENSE, CAN TAKE TEMPORARY CUSTODY FOR AT LEAST

48 HOURS OF FIREARMS IN PLAIN SIGHT OR WHEN DISCOVERED VIA A

CONSENSUAL OR OTHER LAWFUL SEARCH, BUT REQUIRES POLICE TO TAKE

TEMPORARY CUSTODY OF FIREARMS WHEN THEY ARE IN THE POSSESSION OF A

PERSON BEING ARRESTED FOR A FAMILY OFFENSE OR SUSPECTED OF COMMITTING

A FAMILY OFFENSE. ALREADY IN THE LAW. UNDER CURRENT LAW, IF A POLICE

OFFICER THINKS THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT A PERSON IS AT RISK

OF HARMING THEMSELVES OR OTHERS, THE OFFICER MAY APPLY FOR A TERPO,

A TEMPORARY EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER, TO A STATE SUPREME

COURT JUDGE OR AN ACTING STATE SUPREME COURT JUDGE. THE JUDGE WILL

REVIEW THE APPLICATION ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS 24/7, AND WILL ISSUE THE

TERPO FOLLOWED BY A DUE PROCESS HEARING WITHIN A FEW DAYS TO

DETERMINE IF THE TERPO SHOULD BECOME AN ERPO AFTER CLEAR AND

293

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

CONVINCING EVIDENCE IF IT'S SHOWN.

WE ALSO HAVE ORDERS OF PROTECTION. IF AN ORDER OF

PROTECTION IS ISSUED BY A COURT, THEN LAW ENFORCEMENT WILL GO OUT

IMMEDIATELY TO THE HOME AND TAKE ANY FIREARMS FROM THAT PERSON.

ALL RIGHT. BIG LEAD UP. SO NOW MY FIRST QUESTION.

WHAT DOES THIS LEGISLATION DO THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE ALREADY

HAVE?

MS. PAULIN: OKAY. SO I WORKED WITH THE -- THE

OFFICER WHO TRAINS POLICE ON WHEN TO TAKE GUNS OUT OF THE HOME IN --

WHEN THEY GO INTO A SITUATION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

MS. PAULIN: AND WHAT HE SAID WAS THAT IN NEW

YORK CITY THEY USE THIS MODEL THAT WE HAVE IN THE BILL. WHEN THE

PERSON -- THEY USE THE -- THE DOMESTIC INCIDENT REPORT TO ESTABLISH THE

GROUNDS UNDER WHICH YOU WOULD TAKE A GUN. HE LIKED THAT MODEL, AND

THAT'S WHAT NEW YORK CITY IS TRAINING THEIR OFFICERS TO DO. THE REST OF

THE STATE, AS WE KNOW, BECAUSE WE DON'T LIVE IN THE CITY, YOU KNOW,

HAVE A VARIETY OF POLICE DEPARTMENTS AND THEY DO A VARIETY OF THINGS.

AND HE THOUGHT THAT WHEN HE'S TRAINING THE POLICE, BECAUSE THE

LANGUAGE IN THE LAW WAS SO VAGUE WHEN, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY TAKE A

GUN, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY SEE THAT -- IT WAS JUST -- IT WAS DONE VERY

DIFFERENTLY IN EVERY SINGLE JURISDICTION NO MATTER WHAT KIND OF TRAINING

HE GAVE. SO HE THOUGHT IF WE CODIFIED WHAT WAS IN NEW YORK CITY,

WHAT THEY WERE DOING IN PRACTICE, WHICH IS WORKING, WE WON'T HAVE

INCIDENTS WHERE GUNS ARE LEFT IN VERY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS.

294

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE SECOND PART OF THE BILL, OF COURSE, IS HOW LONG

WE'RE GONNA HOLD THE GUN BEFORE WE GIVE IT BACK. AND HIS THINKING,

AFTER BEING PART OF THIS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GUNS WORLD AFTER -- FOR MANY,

MANY YEARS WAS THAT 48 HOURS WAS NOT A LONG ENOUGH COOLING OFF

PERIOD AND WE'RE GIVING THE GUNS BACK. BUT THE COOLING OFF PERIOD

NEEDED TO BE A LITTLE LONGER, AND THAT'S THE SECOND PART OF THE BILL.

MS. WALSH: ALL RIGHT. THAT'S A WONDERFUL

EXPLANATION. SO THAT WAS ONE OF MY QUESTIONS, WAS GOING TO 120

HOURS, OR FIVE DAYS, VERSUS THE 48 HOURS UNDER CURRENT LAW, WAS THERE --

HOW WAS THAT NUMBER DETERMINED? JUST A SENSE THAT THAT -- THAT FIVE

DAYS IS AN APPROPRIATE --

MS. PAULIN: I DON'T -- I DON'T THINK THAT WE DID IT

SCIENTIFICALLY. WE JUST -- YOU KNOW, WE JUST PICKED A NUMBER THAT WAS

LONGER THAN TWO DAYS AND SAID LET'S SEE HOW THIS WORKS. BECAUSE WE

KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, MANY -- YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THERE'S

BEEN A POLICE INCIDENT IN A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HOME, THE -- THE

ESCALATION IS ALMOST IMMEDIATE. YOU KNOW, THE REACTION OF THE ABUSER

TO THE VICTIM IS ESCALATED AND VERY PROBLEMATIC. AND SO WE KNOW THAT

THERE NEEDS TO BE A BIT OF A COOLING OFF PERIOD. AND SOMETIMES THE --

THE ABUSER IS REMOVED FROM THE HOME, AND THAT COULD BE THE ENTIRE 48

HOURS WORTH OF TIME AND THEN THEY'RE GOING BACK IN, POTENTIALLY, TO A

VERY VOLATILE SITUATION. SO WE PICKED 120 DAYS [SIC]. YOU KNOW, IF WE

SEE THAT THAT'S TOO LONG OR TOO SHORT, WE MAY COME BACK AND REVISIT IT.

BUT IT'S A BIT OF -- YOU KNOW, THERE'S A BIT OF ARBITRARINESS, I'M -- I'M

GONNA ADMIT.

295

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. WALSH: YEAH. WELL, THAT'S FAIR. I APPRECIATE --

I APPRECIATE YOU SAYING THAT.

SO THE BILL AUTHORIZES THE SEIZURE OF A FIREARM BY THE

POLICE WHEN THEY BELIEVE THAT DOING SO WOULD PREVENT THE RISK OF

VIOLENCE OR THREAT. COULD YOU PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE OF WHEN THAT WOULD

HAPPEN? I MEAN, ISN'T IT LIKELY THAT IF SOMEONE IS THREATENING VIOLENCE

WITH A FIREARM, THEN THAT PERSON IS LIKELY ALREADY COMMITTING A CRIME?

MS. PAULIN: WELL, AGAIN, WE -- WE -- I POINT TO THE

-- THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INCIDENT REPORT, AND A POLICE OFFICER, WHEN

THEY GO INTO THESE HOMES, IS REQUIRED TO ESSENTIALLY CHECK OFF. AND THE

CHECKOFF THAT THEY USE IS THEY -- THEY -- THE FIRST THING IS IS THERE A

SUSPECT OF THREATS, YES OR NO? IF YES, THREATS TO THE VICTIM, THREATS TO

THE CHILDREN, THREATS TO THE PET, THREATS TO COMMIT SUICIDE, OTHER --

OTHER. AND SO THEY HAVE TO CHECK THAT OFF. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE

CHECKOFFS THAT WOULD BE USED TO CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT -- IF THERE'S A

YES, THEY WOULD TAKE THE -- THE GUN IF IT WAS VISIBLE, OBVIOUSLY, YOU

KNOW.

MS. WALSH: RIGHT.

MS. PAULIN: THE -- I'M LOOKING FOR MORE. THEN,

YOU KNOW, HAS THE SUSPECT EVER -- THIS IS QUESTIONS THAT THEY WOULD ASK

THE, YOU KNOW, THE PERSON WHO WAS CLAIMING THAT THE OTHER PERSON WAS

ABUSING THEM -- HAS THE SUSPECT EVER THREATENED TO KILL YOU OR YOUR

CHILDREN, YES OR NO? HAS THE SUSPECT EVER STRANGLED OR CHOKED YOU, YES

OR NO? HAS THE SUSPECT EVER BEATEN YOU WHILE YOU WERE PREGNANT, YES

OR NO? HAS THE SUSPECT -- IS -- DO YOU BELIEVE THE SUSPECT IS CAPABLE OF

296

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

KILLING YOU OR YOUR CHILDREN, YES OR NO? IS THE SUSPECT VIOLENTLY AND

CONSTANTLY JEALOUS OF YOU, YES OR NO? AND HAS THE PHYSICAL VIOLENCE

INCREASED IN FREQUENCY OR SEVERITY OVER THE PAST SIX MONTHS? SO THOSE

ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT THEY WOULD ASK THE VICTIM. YOU KNOW, THEY ASK

NOW. AND IF THERE WAS A YES ANSWER, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IN NEW YORK

CITY THE GUN IS REMOVED. AGAIN, UPSTATE OR OUTSIDE OF THE CITY IT'S

ERRATIC. IN SOME PLACES -- I WAS TALKING TO A FORMER POLICE OFFICER,

RIGHT, IN THIS CHAMBER AND HE WAS SAYING THAT THEY ALWAYS REMOVE

GUNS IN A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INCIDENT BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT IT COULD

BE PROBLEMATIC. THIS GIVES GUIDANCE TO THOSE POLICE OFFICERS THAT HAVE

THAT HESITATION.

MS. WALSH: AND SO IS THAT CHECKOFF FORM, THE ONE

THAT YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS AN INDIVIDUAL THAT DOES TRAINING THAT

YOU WERE WORKING WITH IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BILL, I MEAN, IS THAT

-- IS THAT WHAT NEW YORK CITY DOES NOW, THAT FORM? BUT IS THAT

STANDARDIZED THROUGHOUT THE STATE?

MS. PAULIN: THIS FORM IS STANDARDIZED THROUGH THE

ENTIRE STATE.

MS. WALSH: IT IS.

MS. PAULIN: DCJS IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FORM.

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

MS. PAULIN: AND THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT, YOU KNOW,

IN NEW YORK CITY THE GUIDANCE THAT THEY TELL THE OFFICERS, IF THEY CHECK

OFF YES, TAKE THE GUN. WHERE THEY DON'T -- ALSO IN NEW YORK CITY IS,

YOU KNOW, ONE POLICE DEPARTMENT. IT'S A LITTLE EASIER TO HAVE A UNIFORM

297

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

POLICY.

MS. WALSH: THAT'S VERY TRUE.

MS. PAULIN: SO THAT'S, YOU KNOW, SO -- YOU KNOW,

IT'S THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ADVOCATES IN NEW YORK CITY THINK IT'S

WORKING REALLY, REALLY WELL, AND SO THAT'S WHY WE CAME UP WITH THIS

IDEA.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. SO THERE -- THERE IS A LONG LIST

OF FAMILY OFFENSES, I NOTICED, WHICH INCLUDES SOMETHING LIKE IDENTITY

THEFT IS A FAMILY OFFENSE. I MEAN, COULD IT BE AN ALLEGED CRIME NOT

INVOLVING VIOLENCE LIKE IDENTITY THEFT, OR ARE YOU -- WOULD YOU REDIRECT

ME BACK TO THAT FORM?

MS. PAULIN: I WOULD REDIRECT YOU BACK HERE.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WHEN POLICE

RESPOND TO A FAMILY OFFENSE THERE'S USUALLY AN ATTEMPT TO DEESCALATE THE

SITUATION. IS THERE ANY CONCERN THAT THERE COULD BE AN UNINTENDED

CONSEQUENCE OF WORSENING THE ENVIRONMENT OR HEIGHTEN STRESS AND

UPSET WHEN -- WHEN THE FIREARMS ARE BEING TAKEN?

MS. PAULIN: SO, I MEAN, I'M -- I'M NOT A POLICE

OFFICER AND I'VE NEVER BEEN IN THESE SITUATIONS PERSONALLY, SO I -- THAT'S

A LITTLE HARD FOR ME TO ANSWER. BUT I KNOW THAT POLICE OFFICERS DO

BELIEVE THAT WHEN THEY TAKE A GUN AWAY, IT MAY NOT DEESCALATE IT, BUT IT

PREVENTS POTENTIAL USE OF THAT WEAPON.

MS. WALSH: WELL, RIGHT.

MS. PAULIN: SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THE STATISTIC

IS SOMETHING LIKE 500 PERCENT. THERE'S A 500 PERCENT CHANCE OF KILLING

298

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THE VICTIM IF THERE'S A FIREARM PRESENT IN THE HOME WHEN THERE'S

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

MS. WALSH: YEAH, I -- I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE

SAYING. I JUST -- WHAT I WAS ASKING WAS KIND OF LIKE BY THE -- BY THE

TAKING OF THE FIREARM, COULD THERE BE AN UN -- UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE

OF ACTUALLY HEIGHTENING THE -- OR ESCALATING THE RISK OF HARM? IT MIGHT

NOT BE LETHAL FORCE, IT MIGHT NOT, YOU KNOW -- BUT THERE'S A LOT OF WAYS

TO HURT SOMEBODY. WAS THAT -- WAS THAT FACTORED IN OR WAS THE GOAL JUST

SIMPLY GET THE FIREARMS OUT? THAT'S THE GOAL AND THAT'S --

MS. PAULIN: SO, IF YOU HAVE A SITUATION WHERE YOU

HAVE TWO PEOPLE WHO ARE -- ONE WHO IS VICTIMIZING THE OTHER ONE AND

THE POLICE OFFICER COMES IN, NO MATTER WHETHER THEY TAKE THE GUN OR NOT

THERE'S GONNA BE AN ESCALATION BECAUSE THAT POLICE OFFICER WAS THERE.

MS. WALSH: RIGHT. OKAY.

MS. PAULIN: SO IT'S MUCH BETTER TO REMOVE THE GUN

BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT THE ESCALATION TO INCLUDE USING THE GUN.

MS. WALSH: I HAD -- I HAD A COUPLE OF

HYPOTHETICALS THAT I CAME UP WITH, AND I JUST WANTED TO THROW THEM OUT

AND JUST GET YOUR -- GET YOUR TAKE ON IT. SO, A MAN OWNS A HOUSE, AND

IN THAT HOUSE HE HAS MULTIPLE FIREARMS AND A LICENSE TO CARRY THEM.

THE MAN'S SON AND GIRLFRIEND ARE LIVING TEMPORARILY IN THE HOUSE, AND

THEY GET INTO A HUGE FIGHT. THE POLICE ARE CALLED. UNDER THIS

LEGISLATION, ARE POLICE REQUIRED TO TAKE THE HOMEOWNER'S FIREARMS AND

LICENSE? EVEN THOUGH HE WASN'T PART OF THAT FIGHT AND HE DIDN'T DO

ANYTHING WRONG.

299

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. PAULIN: THAT -- THAT'S A VERY INTERESTING

HYPOTHETICAL. I -- I THINK IF -- IF THE VICTIM SAID I FEEL THAT KIND OF THREAT

AND THOSE GUNS WERE IN AN OBVIOUS PLACE, I -- YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU

CAN'T SEARCH WITHOUT A WARRANT, THEN YEAH, I THINK THAT THE GUNS WOULD

HAVE TO BE REMOVED. BUT THAT'S -- YOU KNOW, BUT IT -- MAYBE THAT

WOULD NEED TO BE TESTED IN COURT, I'M NOT SURE. BUT -- BUT I DO THINK

UNDER THAT SCENARIO, YES, YOU WOULD HAVE TO REMOVE THE GUN.

MS. WALSH: SO WHAT I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT --

MS. PAULIN: I HAVE AN ANSWER HERE.

MS. WALSH: OH, YOU'VE GOT -- YOU'VE GOT -- YOU'RE

CONFERRING. OKAY. VERY GOOD.

(CONFERENCING)

MS. PAULIN: SO WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS -- AND AGAIN,

THIS IS THE VAGUENESS -- IF IT'S IN THEIR POSSESSION, YOU KNOW, BUT I DON'T

-- YOU KNOW, BUT I -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT POSSESSION MEANS, BECAUSE IS IT

OWNERSHIP OR NOT? SO I GUESS IF THEY WERE ABLE TO GET TO THE GUN. YOU

KNOW, IF IT WAS LOCKED UP -- OR, YOU KNOW, OUR LAST -- OUR LAST DEBATE --

AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE A KEY AND THEY COULDN'T GET ACCESS, THEN PROBABLY

THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO TAKE THE GUN. THAT WOULD BE MY TAKE ON IT. BUT

IF THEY HAD A KEY AND THEY COULD GET POSSESSION OF THE GUN, THEN THEY

WOULD.

MS. WALSH: SO I -- AND I WAS CURIOUS TO KNOW YOUR

ANSWER TO THAT BECAUSE I WAS THINKING THAT -- THAT THAT COULD POTENTIALLY

BE AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL SEIZURE, VIOLATING THE U.S. AND NEW YORK STATE

CONSTITUTIONS BECAUSE THE LEGISLATION DOESN'T JUST LIMIT IT TO THE BAD

300

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTOR'S FIREARMS. YOU KNOW, THAT -- THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING THE

QUESTION, AND -- AND IT KIND OF --

MS. PAULIN: BUT REMEMBER, IT'S STILL ONLY

TEMPORARY.

MS. WALSH: YEAH.

MS. PAULIN: YOU KNOW, SO THEY DO GET IT BACK.

AND IT'S ONLY -- YOU KNOW, AND I FEEL VERY CONFIDENT IN THIS ANSWER NOW

-- IT'S ONLY IF THE ABUSER WOULD HAVE AN ABILITY TO GET TO THE GUN. SO IF IT

WAS -- IF THE OWNER LOCKED IT UP, YOU KNOW, AND THE ABUSER DIDN'T HAVE

THAT ACCESS, THEN THEY WOULDN'T TAKE IT.

MS. WALSH: SO EVEN THOUGH THE -- THE WORDING OF

THE BILL CHANGES IT FROM "MAY" TO "SHALL" SO IT BECOMES MORE OF A

DIRECTION TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT, THE RESPONDING OFFICER TO DO THAT.

MS. PAULIN: (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK). UNDER

VERY LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SECOND HYPOTHETICAL, AND I THINK IT'S THE LAST ONE.

MAN IS DRIVING IN HIS CAR WITH HIS ADULT SON AND SON'S WIFE. THE SON

STARTS BEATING UP THE WIFE IN THE BACK SEAT OF THE CAR. THE CAR IS PULLED

OVER FOR SPEEDING AND SWERVING. OFFICER SEES MARKS ON THE WIFE AND

THE WIFE CONFIRMS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. IS THE OFFICER REQUIRED TO TAKE

THE DRIVER'S FIREARM WHICH IS IN THE VEHICLE SAFELY SECURED?

MS. PAULIN: I THINK IT'S VERY SIMILAR. YOU KNOW, IF

THE -- IF -- IF THE GUN WAS LOCKED AND THE -- THE PERSON WHO WAS BEATING

UP THE WIFE DIDN'T HAVE THE KEY, THEN IT'S NOT IN THEIR -- IT'S NOT IN THEIR

301

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

POSSESSION, IT'S IN THE OTHER GUY'S POSSESSION.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. I SEE THE DISTINCTION THAT YOU'RE

DRAWING. THAT -- THAT MAKES ME FEEL A BIT BETTER. OKAY.

IN THE MEMORANDUM OF SUPPORT IT SAYS THAT THE

NYPD PUBLIC PATROL GUIDE AND NEW YORK STATE UNIFIED COURT

SYSTEM'S 2020 PROTOCOLS ALREADY MANDATE, RATHER THAN PERMIT, FIREARM

SEIZURE. SO IF THAT'S ALREADY IN THESE GUIDELINES, WHY DO WE NEED TO

LEGISLATE THIS? AND YOU'RE SAYING -- I THINK YOU ALREADY ADDRESSED THIS

BECAUSE YOU SAID THAT IT'S BEING INCONSISTENTLY APPLIED THROUGHOUT THE

STATE AND YOU WANTED TO HAVE A MORE UNIFORM STANDARD; IS THAT -- IS

THAT RIGHT?

MS. PAULIN: YES.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. OKAY. I THINK THAT YOU'VE

ANSWERED THOSE QUESTIONS FOR ME, AND I THINK AT THIS POINT I'LL JUST GO

ON THE BILL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MS. PAULIN: THANK YOU. OKAY.

MS. WALSH: MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MS. WALSH: AND I WILL CONTINUE TO GO ON THE BILL.

THANK YOU.

SO, I BELIEVE THAT IN A TRUE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

SITUATION, SAFETY IS ILLUSORY. I THINK THAT POLICE CAN REMOVE FIREARMS,

BUT KNIVES, HAMMERS, OTHER SHARP OBJECTS, FISTS, STEEL-TOED BOOTS

REMAIN, JUST AS TERPOS HAVE BECOME A HUGE COVER-YOUR-BEHIND

EXERCISE IN MANY PARTS OF THE STATE FOR OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT. I COULD

302

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SEE THIS BECOMING THE SAME.

TO PREVENT RISK OF FURTHER VIOLENCE OR THREAT IS

EXTREMELY BROAD. IT MAY LOOK LIKE WE'RE GIVING LAW ENFORCEMENT

DISCRETION HERE TO DECIDE, BUT REALLY, THEY ARE GOING TO ERR ON THE SIDE

OF REMOVING ALL FIREARMS FROM THE BAD ACTOR, AND POTENTIALLY FIREARMS

OWNED BY OTHERS IN THE HOUSE WHO HAD NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH

THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE CONSTITUTIONALITY

OF THAT, ALTHOUGH I DO APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR'S ANSWER ON THAT.

I WANT TO JUST, I GUESS, CLOSE WITH -- WITH A THOUGHT.

WHEN WE WERE TALKING, THE SPONSOR AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT THE IDEA

OF PROVIDING A COOLING OFF PERIOD. IT JUST MADE ME THINK OF THE -- THE

BAIL SO-CALLED "REFORM LAWS" THAT WERE PASSED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO

AND ALL OF THE CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED BY ADVOCATES IN THE -- THAT

WORK WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SURVIVORS WHO ARE -- WERE REALLY

CONCERNED THAT YOU COULD DO AN ARREST OF AN INDIVIDUAL AND THEN YOU'RE

-- YOU'RE JUST PROCESSING THEM AND PUTTING THEM RIGHT BACK OUT THERE

AGAIN. AND I JUST THINK THAT INSTEAD OF FIXING SOMETHING LIKE BAIL

REFORM WHICH LETS THESE INDIVIDUALS OUT RIGHT AFTER PROCESSING, WE'RE

DOING SOMETHING LIKE THIS BILL. AND I -- I DON'T THINK IT'S -- I -- I

APPRECIATE WHAT THE SPONSOR IS TELLING ME ABOUT THIS BILL, BUT IT HAS

QUITE A BIT OF OPPOSITION BECAUSE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED.

AND I DO THINK THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER THINGS THAT WE COULD DO THAT

WOULD TRULY SUPPORT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SURVIVORS AND ALL THE PEOPLE

THAT DO REMARKABLE WORK WITH THEM.

SO A NUMBER OF US MAY BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS

303

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

PARTICULAR BILL. BUT I DO THANK THE SPONSOR FOR HER RESPONSES TO MY

QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, 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. PAULIN: SURE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. MOLITOR: I'M BEHIND YOU TO THE RIGHT.

MS. PAULIN: YES.

MR. MOLITOR: YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TURN AROUND,

THOUGH.

MS. PAULIN: THAT'S OKAY.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. SO I JUST WANT TO FOCUS ON

THE "SHALL" SECTION. SO IN THE EVENT THAT THERE'S A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

SITUATION AND SOMEONE'S ARRESTED FOR A FAMILY OFFENSE, THE POLICE SHALL

TAKE TEMPORARY CUSTODY OF THE ENUMERATED WEAPONS IN THIS SECTION,

RIGHT? AND -- BUT THEY CAN ONLY DO SO WHERE THOSE CERTAIN SECTIONS ARE

MARKED OFF IN THE DIR, RIGHT, OR IF THERE'S A REASONABLE BELIEF THAT IT IS

NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE VICTIM -- I'M SHORTENING THIS A LITTLE BIT -- OR TO

PREVENT RISK OF FURTHER VIOLENCE OR THREATS.

MS. PAULIN: RIGHT. WELL, THE -- THE "MAY" PART,

YOU KNOW, THAT SECOND PART THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT IS ALREADY THE

304

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

LAW.

MR. MOLITOR: RIGHT.

MS. PAULIN: SO, YES, THE "SHALL" PART IS THE PART

WE'RE ADDING, WHICH IS THE CHECKOFF, AS YOU SAID.

MR. MOLITOR: AND THE -- AND THE "SHALL" IS IN

THOSE -- THOSE TWO -- REALLY TWO CIRCUMSTANCES; THE ONE WHERE THE

VICTIM MARKS OFF THE CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE DIR, OR THERE'S A

REASONABLE BELIEF FROM THE OFFICER THAT THERE'S A VIOLENT SITUATION, RIGHT?

MS. PAULIN: MM-HMM.

MR. MOLITOR: I'M -- I'M, YOU KNOW, SHORTENING

THAT A LITTLE BIT.

BUT NOW I JUST WANT TO FOCUS ON THE -- THE TIMELINE A

LITTLE. SO THE DIR, THE DOMESTIC INCIDENT REPORT, I'VE SEEN MANY OF

THOSE, PROBABLY THOUSANDS OF THOSE. WHEN ARE THOSE DIRS ACTUALLY

COMPLETED?

MS. PAULIN: WELL, THOSE QUESTIONS ARE ASKED ON

THE SPOT, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY FILL OUT THE FORM LATER, I DON'T KNOW.

BUT THE QUESTIONS IN THE DIR ARE ASKED ON THE SPOT.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. SO I'M SURE, AS YOU KNOW,

NOT EVERY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SITUATION IS IMMEDIATELY REPORTED. SO

WHAT ABOUT THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE A VICTIM IS FINALLY ABLE TO GET

AWAY FROM THEIR ABUSER AND THEY COME TO THE POLICE STATION TO FILL OUT A

DIR. IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE, WHAT IF -- WHAT IF -- I WANT TO GIVE YOU A

VERY SPECIFIC SCENARIO -- WHAT IF THAT HAPPENS AND WE'RE, LIKE, THREE

DAYS AFTER THE INCIDENT? WHAT ARE THE POLICE SUPPOSED TO DO IN THAT

305

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SITUATION?

MS. PAULIN: WELL, THE POLICE WOULDN'T BE PRESENT

IN THE HOME, RIGHT --

MR. MOLITOR: RIGHT.

MS. PAULIN: -- IN THAT SITUATION. SO THEY DON'T SEE

THE GUN, IT'S NOT BEFORE THEM. THEY CAN'T TAKE IT AWAY.

MR. MOLITOR: BUT THIS -- BUT THIS LEGISLATION

DOESN'T REQUIRE THEM TO SEE THE GUN, DOES IT?

MS. PAULIN: THE GUN HAS TO BE IN THEIR -- YOU

KNOW, YES, THEY HAVE TO EITHER SEE THE GUN OR IF -- BECAUSE THEY CAN'T

SEARCH A HOME WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM THE PARTIES.

MR. MOLITOR: RIGHT.

MS. PAULIN: SO IF, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, I -- I

WOULD PRESUME, LET'S -- LET'S JUST TAKE THE -- THE EXAMPLE WHERE THEY

COULD TAKE A GUN POTENTIALLY. IF THEY FILL OUT THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

INCIDENT REPORT AND THERE WERE ALL THESE THREATS AND, YOU KNOW, HE'S

GONNA KILL ME AND THIS AND THAT, AND THE QUESTION IS ASKED AND THERE ARE

GUNS IN THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW, THE POLICE OFFICER COULD SAY TO THE

VICTIM, YOU KNOW, CAN I SEARCH? AND IF SHE'S THE ONLY ONE PRESENT,

THEN I GUESS HE COULD. BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS REALLY

ALLOWS THEM TO GO BACK INTO THE HOME IF THEY'RE NOT THERE. SO I WOULD

-- I WOULD SAY THAT THAT'S NEVER GONNA HAPPEN. YOU KNOW, THE

LIKELIHOOD IS THAT THEY WOULD SEEK A WARRANT TO SEARCH THE PREMISES IF

THEY THINK THAT THERE'S REAL DANGER.

MR. MOLITOR: OR GET A TERPO --

306

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. PAULIN: YEAH.

MR. MOLITOR: -- IN THAT SORT OF SITUATION. OKAY.

WHAT ABOUT THE SITUATION WHERE THE POLICE ARE ON THE SCENE AND THEY'RE

ASKING THESE QUESTIONS OF THE VICTIM, THE VICTIM'S GIVING THEM THE

ANSWERS THAT ALLOW THEM TO CONDUCT THE SEARCH, BUT THE VICTIM IS NOT --

DOES NOT HAVE ANY LAWFUL AUTHORITY TO CONSENT TO A SEARCH, AND --

MS. PAULIN: WHAT -- WHAT DO YOU MEAN?

MR. MOLITOR: WELL, LET'S SAY THAT THE VICTIM DIDN'T

LIVE AT THAT LOCATION, RIGHT? LET'S SAY -- LET'S SAY A BOYFRIEND AND

GIRLFRIEND, THE GIRLFRIEND JUST HAPPENS TO BE THERE FOR DINNER, THERE'S A

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SITUATION. THE POLICE ARE CALLED, AND THE VICTIM HAS,

YOU KNOW, ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS THAT GIVE RISE --

MS. PAULIN: WELL, I THINK YOU'VE ANSWERED IT. IF

THE -- IF THE VICTIM DOESN'T HAVE THE LAWFUL ABILITY TO AGREE TO A SEARCH

THEN THE POLICE OFFICER CAN'T SEARCH.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. SO THIS IS -- THIS IS REALLY

ONLY CONSTRAINED TO THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE THE VICTIM HAS -- HAS LAWFUL

AUTHORITY TO CONSENT TO A SEARCH, OR THE POLICE SEE ONE OF THE

ENUMERATED WEAPONS IN PLAIN VIEW.

MS. PAULIN: I MEAN, IF BOTH ARE PRESENT AND THE

ABUSER SAYS YOU CAN'T SEARCH, THEY CAN'T SEARCH.

MR. MOLITOR: RIGHT.

MS. PAULIN: RIGHT? THEY CAN ONLY SEARCH IF THE

VICTIM'S THERE WITHOUT THE ABUSER AND THEY HAVE LAWFUL ABILITY TO SAY,

YOU CAN SEARCH THIS HOUSE.

307

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR

CLARIFYING THAT.

NOW, WHEN THE POLICE DO SEIZE THESE WEAPONS -- AND

LET'S JUST USE A HANDGUN AS AN EXAMPLE -- WHERE ARE THE POLICE

SUPPOSED TO STORE THESE GUNS FOR THE TEMPORARY PERIOD OF TIME? I THINK

IT'S 120 HOURS, RIGHT?

MS. PAULIN: I -- I BELIEVE THEY ALL HAVE PLACES

WHERE THEY STORE WEAPONS NOW, AND THIS WOULD JUST BE ADDED TO THAT

ARSENAL OF WEAPONS.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. SO IN MY DISTRICT THERE'S -- I

HAVE A LOT OF SMALL POLICE DEPARTMENTS, MUCH SMALLER THAN NYPD, AND

THEY HAVE --

MS. PAULIN: ME, TOO.

MR. MOLITOR: -- VERY, VERY LIMITED STORAGE SPACE

FOR THEIR -- THEIR EVIDENCE ROOMS.

MS. PAULIN: HOPEFULLY THEY HAVE LIMITED DOMESTIC

VIOLENCE INCIDENTS AS WELL.

MR. MOLITOR: I -- I KNOW THAT NOT TO BE TRUE.

THERE'S A LOT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, UNFORTUNATELY. SO, YOU KNOW, AS

YOU CAN IMAGINE, BECAUSE THERE A LOT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE THERE COULD

END UP BEING A LOT OF THESE WEAPON SEIZED FOR A FIVE-DAY PERIOD, WHICH

COULD BE VERY OVERWHELMINGLY FOR EVIDENCE OFFICERS. IS THERE -- YOU

KNOW, BUT THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT UNDER THE LAW THAT THEY SECURE THEM

IN AN EVIDENCE ROOM, RIGHT? THEY COULD HAVE SOME OTHER PLACE TO

SECURE THEM AS LONG AS THEY'RE SECURED.

308

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. PAULIN: I THINK THAT THERE ARE POLICE PROTOCOLS

THAT THEY HAVE TO USE TO STORE THOSE WEAPONS. THAT WOULD BE THE SAME

FOR THIS.

MR. MOLITOR: AND I'LL -- I'LL DEFER TO MY POLICE

OFFICER FRIENDS ON THAT QUESTION AS WELL.

NOW, WHAT ABOUT THE -- THE PROCESSING OF THOSE

WEAPONS? IN -- IN MY -- IN MY DISTRICT, IF THE POLICE SEIZE A HANDGUN,

FOR EXAMPLE, THEY'RE GONNA DO BALLISTICS TESTING ON IT. THEY'RE GONNA

DO -- PROBABLY THEY MIGHT DO DNA TESTING ON IT. THEY MIGHT DO

FINGERPRINT ANALYSIS. AND THE REASON WHY THEY DO THAT, SPECIFICALLY

BALLISTICS TESTING, IS THEY ENTER THAT INTO A STATEWIDE DATABASE AND THEY

MIGHT FIND THAT THAT GUN WAS USED IN ANOTHER -- IN ANOTHER CRIME

SOMEWHERE IN THE STATE. WOULD THIS LAW PREVENT THEM FROM DOING THAT

SORT OF TESTING ON THE WEAPON?

MS. PAULIN: WHATEVER THE LAW CURRENTLY IS WHEN

WEAPONS ARE IN THEIR POSSESSION WOULD BE THE SAME FOR THIS. WE DON'T

SPEAK TO THE -- WE DON'T DIFFERENTIATE THIS BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, AMONG

ALL OF THE OTHER REASONS THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE A GUN IN THEIR POSSESSION.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY.

AND MY LAST QUESTION, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, I

UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHY THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION IS BEING

BROUGHT FORTH -- BROUGHT FORTH. AND SORT OF PIGGYBACKING OFF -- OFF THE

FLOOR LEADER HERE, WHY -- WHY LIMIT IT TO JUST THESE ENUMERATED

WEAPONS? WHY NOT EXPAND IT TO THE PENAL LAW DEFINITION OF ILLEGAL

WEAPONS AND DANGEROUS INSTRUMENTS? AND THEN THAT WAY IF THE POLICE

309

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ARE IN -- YOU KNOW, THEY RESPOND TO A SCENE AND THE VICTIM IS NOT -- YOU

KNOW, THE ABUSER DOESN'T HAVE GUNS, THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE. MAYBE IT IS A

HAMMER OR A KNIFE OR A LEATHER BELT OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, THE POLICE

COULD SEIZE THOSE THINGS AS WELL. WHY LIMIT IT IN THIS PARTICULAR

(INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK).

MS. PAULIN: YOU'RE GIVING ME AN IDEA, BUT I DIDN'T

THINK OF IT FOR THIS -- FOR THIS BILL.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR

YOUR QUESTIONS. I APPRECIATE IT.

MS. PAULIN: THANK YOU.

MR. MOLITOR: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: 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 BILL. IF THERE ARE

ANY YES VOTES, YOU CAN CAST THEM NOW AT YOUR DESK.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER. THE MAJORITY CONFERENCE IS GONNA BE IN FAVOR OF THIS PIECE

310

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

OF LEGISLATION. THERE MAY BE A FEW THAT WOULD DECIDE TO BE AN

EXCEPTION, THEY SHOULD FEEL FREE TO DO SO AT THEIR SEATS.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. ANGELINO TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. ANGELINO: TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. MY CONCERN

WITH THIS IS WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT THE SEIZING AND THE

TAKING AND THE STORING, BUT NOBODY MENTIONED THE GIVING BACK. SO AT

SOME POINT THERE'S TWO THINGS THAT CONCERN ME; SOMEBODY'S GONNA

COME TO THE POLICE STATION AFTER 100-AND WHATEVER IT IS HOURS, AND A

POLICE OFFICER IS GONNA HAVE TO GIVE THEM BACK THEIR FIREARM. HE'S

ALREADY UPSET, OR SHE. AND, HERE'S YOUR -- HERE'S YOUR FIREARM.

THE NEXT THING THAT CONCERNS ME IS THERE'S NOTHING IN

THERE THAT PROTECTS THE POLICE OFFICER WHO SEIZED IT. BECAUSE THE LAST

PERSON WHO HANDED THAT GUN TO A PISSED-OFF MAN WHO'S GONNA GO BACK

HOME IS THE POLICE OFFICER. AND THESE POLICE OFFICERS ARE GOING TO BE

SCRUTINIZED, WHY DID YOU GIVE IT BACK? YOU KNEW WHAT HE WAS GONNA

DO. AND I JUST DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF -- OF "SHALL" SEIZE ANYBODY'S

PROPERTY IN THE LAW WHEN THE CONSTITUTION HAS AN AMENDMENT THAT

SPECIFICALLY SAYS YOU CAN'T.

SO I'LL BE VOTING NO.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. ANGELINO IN THE

NEGATIVE.

311

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. GRIFFIN TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. GRIFFIN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, FOR

ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I APPRECIATE THE ASSEMBLYMEMBER

FOR CARRYING THIS IMPORTANT LEGISLATION.

IT IS WELL-DOCUMENTED THAT DOMESTIC CALLS BY POLICE

PRESENT A HIGH RISK TO ALL AT THE SCENE. IN THE AFTERMATH OF A POLICE

RESPONSE IT HAS BEEN PROVEN THAT THE DANGER DRASTICALLY ESCALATES. SO

HAVING THE POLICE TAKE TEMPORARY POSSESSION OF FIREARMS IS KEY. IT IS

CLEAR THAT THIS MEASURE WILL SAVE LIVES, THAT IS WHY I'VE COSPONSORED

THIS LEGISLATION AND VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. GRIFFIN IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED. PACK 7.

PAGE 25, CALENDER NO. 85, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A01179, CALENDAR NO.

85, GLICK, BURDICK, LEE, COLTON, LEVENBERG, KELLES, OTIS. AN ACT TO

AMEND THE ENVIRONMENT CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO PROHIBITING

THE LEASE OF STATE FORESTS, REFORESTATION AREAS, WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT

AREAS AND UNIQUE AREAS FOR GAS AND OIL PRODUCTION.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY

MS. GLICK, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

ADVANCED.

312

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

AN EXPLANATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. GLICK.

MS. GLICK: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE PURPOSE OF

THIS BILL IS RATHER MODEST. IT SEEKS TO PROTECT CERTAIN LANDS FROM OIL AND

GAS PRODUCTION, LEASING. CURRENTLY, WE PROHIBIT THE EXPLORATION AND

DEVELOPMENT OF OIL AND GAS LEASES ON -- IN STATE PARKS AND THE LANDS

UNDER THE WATERS OF LAKE ONTARIO AND ALONG THE SHORELINE. THIS WOULD

SIMPLY ADD TO THAT; STATE-OWNED STATE FORESTS, REFORESTATION AREAS,

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREAS AND UNIQUE AREAS. AND THE UNIQUE AREAS

ARE DEFINED AS LANDS OF SPECIAL NATURAL BEAUTY, WILDERNESS CHARACTER,

GEOLOGICAL, ECOLOGICAL, OR HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE. AND THAT IS ALL IT

DOES. A -- PROTECTING THOSE ADDITIONAL TYPES OF LAND FOR WHICH WE HAVE

SPECIAL NEEDS, TO PRESERVE OUR FORESTS, WILDERNESS AREAS, SO THAT THE

NATURAL AREAS AND THE WILDLIFE RESOURCES OF THE STATE ARE PROTECTED AND

THESE UNIQUE AREAS AND REFORESTATION AREAS THAT WE HAVE SPENT TIME AND

ENERGY ENSURING ARE, IN FACT, REFORESTED.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. SIMPSON.

MR. SIMPSON: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE BILL SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MS. GLICK: FOR YOU, MR. SIMPSON, ALWAYS.

MR. SIMPSON: (INDISCERNIBLE) --

(CROSS-TALK)

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

313

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. SIMPSON: I JUST HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. IN THE

SUMMARY -- IN THE -- YOUR EXPLANATION, YOU TALKED ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL

AREAS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THIS BILL THAT AREN'T ALREADY COVERED AND YOU

MENTION WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREAS. COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT A

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA IS?

MS. GLICK: YES. THE WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREAS

ARE LANDS THAT ARE OWNED BY THE STATE AND ARE UNDER THE CONTROL OF

DEC; SPECIFICALLY, THEIR DIVISION OF FISH, WILDLIFE AND MARINE

RESOURCES. AND THEY HAVE BEEN SPECIFICALLY ACQUIRED AND MAINTAINED

BY DEC, PRIMARILY FOR THE PRODUCTION AND USE OF WILDLIFE, WHICH ARE

THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE -- OF THE STATE AND WOULD BE INCOMPATIBLE

AND WOULD BE VERY DISRUPTIVE TO MAINTAINING WILDLIFE IF THERE WERE

THESE OTHER ACTIVITIES.

MR. SIMPSON: IS THAT THE SAME AS THE WILDLIFE

MANAGEMENT UNITS THAT NEW YORK STATE DEC HAS THAT ENCOMPASSES

EVERY BIT OF NEW YORK STATE?

MS. GLICK: NO. THESE ARE SPECIFIC AND YOU'LL SEE

SIGNS, "WILDLIFE --

MR. SIMPSON: OKAY.

MS. GLICK: -- MANAGEMENT AREA", LIKE --

MR. SIMPSON: ALL RIGHT. THANKS FOR THE --

MS. GLICK: -- BEAR SPRING, WHICH, I SUSPECT, IF

MR. ANGELINO WAS HERE, HE WOULD KNOW. IT'S A VERY SPECIFIC AND

RELATIVELY CONTAINED AREA.

MR. SIMPSON: ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT

314

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

CLARIFICATION. I ALSO WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT -- THERE -- THERE ARE EXISTING

WELLS, GAS WELLS, GAS OPERATIONS, IN NEW YORK STATE, ON STATE LAND,

RIGHT NOW.

MS. GLICK: THIS IS PERSPECTIVE.

MR. SIMPSON: RIGHT, BUT THERE -- BUT, I AM CORRECT

IN SAYING THAT THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 100 WELLS THAT ARE STILL IN

OPERATION IN NEW YORK STATE.

MS. GLICK: I DON'T --

MR. SIMPSON: ON STATE LAND.

MS. GLICK: -- I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT

THIS WOULDN'T AFFECT THEM.

MR. SIMPSON: OKAY. SO, NOW WE CLARIFIED WHAT'S

COVERED. I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS COVERED IN THE BILL, BUT DOES THIS BILL

INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOLAR OR WIND

GENERATION FACILITIES, BATTERY STORAGE FACILITIES, OR TRANSMISSION RIGHTS?

RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN STATE AND RE -- REFORESTATION AREAS, RATHER DEFINED

AREAS OF THIS BILL?

MS. GLICK: NO, BUT THAT IS A GOOD IDEA.

MR. SIMPSON: WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK

YOU, IS WHY NOT?

MS. GLICK: WELL, THIS BILL'S BEEN AROUND A LITTLE BIT

AND WE FOCUSED ON THE GAS AND OIL DRILLING, BECAUSE THAT WAS WHAT

WAS -- AT THE TIME THAT WE STARTED WITH THIS SOME YEARS AGO, THAT WAS

THE -- THE FOCUS. BUT, WE'LL -- WE'LL THINK ABOUT IT.

MR. SIMPSON: YEAH. 'CAUSE IT WOULD SEEM TO

315

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

CONFLICT WITH OUR OTHER GOALS; YOU KNOW, THE 30 BY 30 --

WHOOPS (KNOCKED OVER MIC) -- CARBON SECRET -- SEQUESTRATION, YOU

KNOW, ALL OF THE OTHER -- THIS SEEMS TO CONFLICT BY NOT HAVING THAT

INCLUDED IN IT. IT JUST KIND OF SEEMED ODD.

MS. GLICK: WELL, I -- I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I -- I THINK IT'S PROBABLY NOT THE BEST LOCATION FOR SOLAR, CERTAINLY, IN THE

FOREST. I'M JUST SAYING. BUT, WE'LL -- WE'LL CERTAINLY THINK ABOUT THAT.

MR. SIMPSON: NO, BUT IT SAYS "STATE LANDS" AND NOT

ALL STATE LANDS ARE JUST --

MS. GLICK: NO. I UNDERSTAND --

MR. SIMPSON: -- COVERED IN THERE --

MS. GLICK: -- AND WE WILL LOOK -- WE WILL THINK

ABOUT THAT.

MR. SIMPSON: -- AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENTS AREAS

AS WELL. SOME OF THOSE INCLUDE, I ASSUME, LARGE OPEN FIELDS.

GRASSLANDS.

MS. GLICK: THAT -- THAT'S CURRENTLY NOT PART OF THE

BILL AND THE BILL BEFORE THE HOUSE IS FOCUSED ON OIL AND GAS, BUT WE WILL

TAKE THAT UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR FUTURE LEGISLATION.

MR. SIMPSON: OKAY. WELL, I APPRECIATE YOU

ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

MS. GLICK: WELL, THANK YOU, MR. SIMPSON. I

APPRECIATE THAT.

MR. SIMPSON: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

316

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

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

MINORITY CONFERENCE WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS BILL, BUT IF ANYONE

WISHES TO VOTE YES, THEY MAY DO SO NOW AT THEIR SEATS. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, THE

MAJORITY CONFERENCE IS GOING TO BE IN FAVOR OF THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

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.

PAGE 26, CALENDAR NO. 118, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: BILL NO. A08067-A, CALENDER

NO. 118, EPSTEIN, DE LOS SANTOS, BURDICK. AN ACT TO AMEND THE

BANKING LAW, IN RELATION TO AN EXEMPTION FROM THE LICENSING

REQUIREMENTS FOR SERVICERS OF STUDENT LOANS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: AN EXPLANATION HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

317

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. EPSTEIN.

MR. EPSTEIN: THANK YOU. THIS BILL AMENDS THE

BANKING LAW 711 TO REQUIRE STUDENT LOAN SERVICERS THAT ARE EXEMPT

FROM LICENSING TO COMPLY WITH THE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS UNDER

ARTICLE A -- 9-A OF THE -- THE FINANCIAL SERVICES LAW.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. BOLOGNA.

MR. BOLOGNA: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR ONE QUICK QUESTION?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. EPSTEIN: HAPPY TO.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. BOLOGNA: THANK YOU, MR. EPSTEIN. IT IS MY

UNDERSTANDING THAT SINCE OUR COMMITTEE LAST TOOK THIS UP, THE BANKING

COMMITTEE, THERE HAS BEEN AN AMENDMENT MADE TO THE LEGISLATION?

WOULD YOU JUST BRIEFLY TOUCH ON THAT AMENDMENT?

MR. EPSTEIN: YEAH. WE'RE JUST MAKING IT CLEAR

THAT THEIR ONLY -- THE ONLY OBLIGATIONS THAT THEY HAVE, THE LOAN -- STUDENT

LOAN SERVICERS, ARE TO REPORTING, NOTHING ELSE BEYOND REPORTING, IF

THEY'RE CURRENTLY EXEMPT UNDER THIS STATUTE FOR A LICENSING REQUIREMENT.

MR. BOLOGNA: AND SPEAKING WITH ALL OF THE -- THE

STAKEHOLDERS THAT WOULD BE INVOLVED, THEY SEEM SATISFIED WITH THE --

WITH THE CHANGES?

MR. EPSTEIN: I -- I DON'T KNOW IF I SPOKE TO ALL THE

STAKEHOLDERS, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING THAT --

318

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MR. BOLOGNA: THE ONES YOU HAVE.

MR. EPSTEIN: YEAH. THE ONES WE TALKED TO SEEM

LIKE THEY'RE IN GOOD SHAPE.

MR. BOLOGNA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND VERY QUICKLY, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. BOLOGNA: YOU KNOW WHAT, THIS IS A GOOD

EXAMPLE OF KIND OF WORKING THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AND

MAKING AMENDMENTS AS WE GO ALONG. I -- I'M VERY PLEASED TO SEE THAT

THE AMENDMENTS WERE MADE SINCE THE COMMITTEE. AND I WILL BE VOTING

UP ON THIS LEGISLATION.

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.)

MR. EPSTEIN TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. EPSTEIN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I --

THIS IS A REALLY JUST A SIMPLE BILL THAT REQUIRES PEOPLE WHO ARE SERVICING

STUDENT LOANS, THROUGH A REPORTER REQUIREMENT TO DFS, TO MAKE SURE WE

HAVE GOOD INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THOSE LOANS; YOU

KNOW, MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE AREN'T DEFAULTING ON THOSE LOANS. IF

THEY ARE, WHAT THOSE DEFAULT RATES ARE TO BETTER INFORM THE PUBLIC AND

319

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

INFORM US IN LEGISLATIVE DUTIES. THANK YOU AND I'M VOTING IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. EPSTEIN IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

(PAUSE)

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

PAGE 28, CALENDAR NO. 156, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: BILL NO. A06455, CALENDAR NO. 156,

SEPTIMO, FORREST, GALLAGHER, EPSTEIN, GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS, HEVESI, KELLES,

KIM, JACKSON, LEVENBERG, MAMDANI, RAGA, SEAWRIGHT, SIMON,

JACOBSON, REYES, WALKER, ROSENTHAL. AN ACT TO AMEND THE CRIMINAL

PROCEDURE LAW, IN RELATION TO THE ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY ORDERS OF

PROTECTION WHEN AN ACTION IS PENDING IN A LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: AN EXPLANATION HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. SEPTIMO.

MS. SEPTIMO: THIS BILL WOULD -- WILL ADD A SECTION

TO THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW THAT WILL CODIFY RECENT CASE LAW

ENABLING ACCUSED PARTIES IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS TO REQUEST A HEARING

WHEN TEMPORARY ORDERS OF PROTECTION ARE ISSUED AGAINST THEM. THESE

TEMPORARY ORDERS CAN CAUSE HOMELESSNESS, JOB LOSS, IMMIGRATION

CONSEQUENCES AND FAMILY SEPARATION. THIS CHANGE WILL GIVE JUDGES THE

OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESS INFORMATION AND DETERMINE WHETHER TEMPORARY

320

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ORDERS ARE NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PARTIES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. WALSH.

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

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MS. SEPTIMO: CERTAINLY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU SO MUCH. I DO HAVE A FEW

QUESTIONS JUST TO GET AT THE SCOPE --

MS. SEPTIMO: SURE.

MS. WALSH: -- OF -- OF WHAT KINDS OF TEMPORARY

ORDERS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND WHAT COURTS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

SO, DOES THIS -- THIS LEGISLATION LOOK TO -- THINK ABOUT ORDERS OF

PROTECTION THAT ARE ISSUING FROM LOCAL COURTS, IS THAT CORRECT?

MS. SEPTIMO: YES. IT DOES INCLUDE LOCAL COURTS,

BUT IT DOES NOT INCLUDE FAMILY COURT.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. SO WHAT I --

MS. SEPTIMO: BUT LOCAL CRIMINAL COURTS.

MS. WALSH: LOCAL CRIMINAL COURTS. YES --

MS. SEPTIMO: YES.

MS. WALSH: THAT'S THE WAY I READ IT AS WELL. OKAY.

AND THEN THERE ARE DIFFERENT KINDS OF ORDERS OF PROTECTION. SO, YOU'VE

GOT FULL STAY-AWAY ORDERS OF PROTECTION. YOU'VE GOT REFRAIN FROM AND

YOU SEE THAT A LOT OF TIMES IN -- WELL, YOU SEE IT -- I'VE SEEN THEM AT A

321

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

FAMILY COURT, BUT THE IDEA IS THAT YOU ARE BEING ORDERED -- YOU'RE BEING

ORDERED NOT TO COMMIT ANY OFFENSE AGAINST THE OTHER PERSON AND THAT'S

WHAT THE ORDER IS. THAT'S THE REFRAINING FROM. AND I KNOW THAT I'VE

SEEN LIKE ORDERS OF PROTECTION WHERE THEY HAVE CARVEOUTS FOR LIKE

TRANSFERRING KIDS BACK AND FORTH, OR DOING VISITS. THINGS LIKE THAT. SO,

WHAT KINDS OF ORDERS OF PROTECTION DOES THIS PARTICULAR BILL COVER?

MS. SEPTIMO: SO, THIS BILL ACTUALLY JUST ESTABLISHES

THE PARAMETERS FOR THE EVIDENTIARY HEARING, WHICH WOULD ALLOW THE

JUDGE TO TAKE IN MORE INFORMATION BEFORE ISSUING AN ORDER. A JUDGE'S

ABILITY TO ISSUE ALL OF THOSE TYPES OF ORDERS REMAINS COMPLETELY

UNCHANGED. THEY CAN DO LIMITED ORDERS, THEY CAN DO REFRAIN FROM

ORDERS. THE GAMBIT OF ORDERS REMAINS THE SAME. THIS IS JUST

STANDARDIZING THE PROCESS FOR THOSE HEARINGS ACROSS THE STATE.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. SO, THE -- BUT THE EVIDENTI --

EVIDENTIARY -- IT'S GETTING TO BE A LONG NIGHT --

MS. SEPTIMO: SURE.

MS. WALSH: -- HEARING PROCESS COULD BE USED, THEN,

AND UTILIZED FOR ANY OF THESE TYPES OF ORDERS OF PROTECTION THAT WE'VE

TALKED ABOUT? IT'S NOT LIMITED TO, FOR EXAMPLE, A FULL STAY-AWAY ORDER OF

PROTECTION --

MS. SEPTIMO: CORRECT.

MS. WALSH: -- CORRECT?

MS. SEPTIMO: THE JUDGE, AGAIN, WOULD BE TAKING

IN THE INFORMATION AND DECIDE TO ISSUE WHATEVER ORDER THEY THINK IS

APPROPRIATE.

322

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. WALSH: OKAY. AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S INTERESTING,

I -- I WAS READING THAT CRAWFORD DECISION; MATTER OF CRAWFORD V. ALLY,

FROM 2001 [SIC] --

MS. SEPTIMO: '21.

MS. WALSH: '21, RATHER. YUP, '21. LIKE I SAID, IT'S

GETTING LATE. WHERE -- WHERE THERE HAD BEEN A FULL STAY-AWAY ORDER OF

PROTECTION AND APPARENTLY THERE WAS A DELAY IN ACTUALLY GETTING A

REVIEW OF WHETHER THAT TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION OUGHT TO BE

TURNED INTO A PERMANENT ORDER OF PROTECTION. AND IN THAT INTERIM,

THE -- THE -- THE WOMAN WAS COMPLETELY, LIKE, BARRED FROM HER HOUSE,

RIGHT? AND SHE HAD --

MS. SEPTIMO: SHE LOST HER KIDS --

MS. WALSH: -- LOST HER KIDS --

MS. SEPTIMO: SHE LOST HER APARTMENT.

MS. WALSH: YEAH. AND SO, LIKE, WHEN YOU --

WHEN YOU WERE TALKING AT THE BEGINNING -- OR WHEN YOU EXPLAINED THE

BILL AT THE BEGINNING, YOU TALKED ABOUT THE -- YOU KNOW, THE ENORMOUS

HARDSHIPS THAT CAN REALLY FALL UPON INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE -- HAD THESE

TEMPORARY ORDERS OF PROTECTION THAT ARE SO COMPLETE, THAT IT JUST REALLY

TURNS THEIR LIFE UPSIDE DOWN. AND I CAN -- I CAN REALLY RELATE TO THAT. I

RAN INTO -- A FEW YEARS AGO, BEFORE -- ACTUALLY, BEFORE THAT CRAWFORD

DECISION WAS -- CAME DOWN AND I WAS SPEAKING WITH ONE OF OUR LOCAL --

THE LOCAL ATTORNEYS THAT I'VE -- I'VE KNOWN FOR YEARS, WHO DOES A LOT OF

WORK IN LOCAL COURTS AND SURROGATE COURTS AND FAMILY COURT. AND SHE

SAID, I HAVE A BILL IDEA FOR YOU AND IT WAS ALONG THESE LINES. SHE HAD --

323

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

SHE HAD A CLIENT WHO WAS -- HAD A FULL STAY-AWAY ORDER OF PROTECTION

FROM A GIRLFRIEND THAT HE WAS COHABITING WITH --

MS. SEPTIMO: MM-HMM.

MS. WALSH: -- AND SO HE GOT KICKED OUT OF HIS OWN

HOUSE --

MS. SEPTIMO: MM-HMM.

MS. WALSH: -- AND THEN, IN THE INTERIM, BEFORE HIS

MATTER COULD BE HEARD, SHE TRASHED THE WHOLE HOUSE. SHE WRECKED IT

AND THEN HE FINALLY GOT AN ABILITY TO GO BACK IN THE HOUSE AND SHE WAS

RIGHTLY, YOU KNOW --

MS. SEPTIMO: SURE.

MS. WALSH: -- EVICTED. BUT -- BECAUSE IT WASN'T

HER PLACE TO BEGIN WITH, BUT THE DAMAGE WAS DONE. I MEAN, A LOT OF

DAMAGE WAS DONE. SO, I CAN COMPLETELY APPRECIATE, UNDER THAT KIND OF

CRAWFORD THEORY, WITH A FULL STAY-AWAY ORDER OF PROTECTION, THAT YOU

WANT TO HAVE THOSE HANDLED WITHIN, YOU KNOW, A VERY SHORT TIME FRAME

AND GET A FINAL DECISION. BUT DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERN WITH THE FACT

THAT THE SCOPE OF THIS EVIDENTIARY HEARING REQUIREMENT WOULD COVER

THINGS AS SIMPLE AS A REFRAIN FROM ORDER OF PROTECTION? AND THOSE ARE

ROUTINELY ISSUED, THERE'S A LOT OF THEM FLOATING AROUND. DO YOU HAVE

CONCERNS ABOUT, LIKE, CLOGGING, OR OVERWHELMING THE COURT SYSTEM, TO

HANDLE THOSE?

MS. SEPTIMO: WE DON'T BECAUSE THIS HEARING CAN

BE REQUESTED BY THE DEFENDANT. AND IN THOSE SITUATIONS, PRESUMABLY, IF

IT'S NOT SO DISRUPTIVE, IF PEOPLE ARE AGREEING THAT THIS IS A MINOR

324

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ADJUSTMENT, THEN MAYBE IT'S THE CASE THAT THEY WAIVE THE DECISION TO

HAVE THE HEARING. BUT, THIS IS REALLY, AGAIN, FOR THOSE INSTANCES WHERE

THERE IS GOING TO BE A MEANINGFUL DISRUPTION AND IT'S NOT ONLY FOR THE

FOLKS WHO ARE ACCUSED, BUT IT'S ALSO FOR THE PARTIES WHO ARE SEEKING TO

BE PROTECTED BY THE ORDERS. EXAMPLE, LET'S SAY THAT YOU HAVE A

GRANDMOTHER WHO LIVES WITH A GRANDSON WHO'S 16 -- LET'S MAKE HIM 18

JUST FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY.

MS. WALSH: MM-HMM.

MS. SEPTIMO: HE'S 18, THINGS GET A LITTLE OUT OF

HAND, HE CALLS THE COPS, THEY'RE IN COURT. GRANDMA SAYS, I WANT HIM TO

BE ABLE TO COME BACK HOME. THERE IS NO FORMAL SPACE FOR THE

GRANDMOTHER TO MAKE THAT KNOWN ON THE RECORD BEFORE THE COURT RIGHT

NOW. THIS BILL WOULD MAKE IT SO THAT EVERY MEMBER, IF THEY'RE -- EVERY

PARTY TO THE CASE, IF THEY'RE WANTING TO BE HEARD, COULD DO THAT. SO IT'S

REALLY CREATING A SPACE FOR VICTIMS, FOR THE ACCUSED AND FOR EVERYONE IN

BETWEEN.

MS. WALSH: YEAH, AND -- AND I AGREE WITH THAT

EXAMPLE. THAT'S A -- THAT'S ANOTHER GREAT EXAMPLE OF WHY WE WOULD

WANT TO HAVE THIS EVIDENTIARY HEARING. I'M THINKING ABOUT -- YOU KNOW,

YOU TALK ABOUT THE GREAT DISRUPTION THAT CAN BE CAUSED FROM ORDERS OF

PROTECTION. BUT IF IT'S A -- A SIMPLE REFRAIN FROM ORDER OF PROTECTION,

YOU GO ON. YOU LIVE YOUR LIFE. YOU CARRY ON, YOU GO TO WORK, YOU LIVE

YOUR LIFE; JUST DON'T COMMIT ANY OFFENSE AGAINST THAT INDIVIDUAL. JUST

STAY OUT OF THEIR WAY, YOU KNOW? DON'T -- DON'T HARASS THEM. DON'T

325

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ANNOY THEM. DON'T MAKE CALLS WHEN YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO. DON'T GO

AROUND THE HOUSE. DON'T BREAK INTO THEIR HOUSE. DON'T DO THOSE THINGS

AND YOU CAN JUST GO ON AND LIVE YOUR LIFE. AND MAYBE YOU DON'T NEED

TO GET A HEARING WITHIN FIVE DAYS BECAUSE, REALLY, ALL WE'RE ASKING YOU

TO DO IS TO NOT COMMIT AN OFFENSE AGAINST THAT PERSON. SO --

MS. SEPTIMO: SURE, BUT IF I -- IF I MAY, I THINK --

MS. WALSH: SURE. YEAH.

MS. SEPTIMO: -- THE -- THE POINT OF THIS IS THAT, THE

NATURE OF A TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION, HOWEVER LIMITED, IS THAT

YOU'RE LIMITING SOMEONE'S LIBERTY, SOMEONE'S DUE PROCESS, RIGHT? AND

IT REQUIRES --

(CROSS-TALK)

MS. WALSH: YOUR LIBERTY TO OFFEND AGAINST A

PERSON --

MS. SEPTIMO: YOUR LIBERTY --

MS. WALSH: YEAH.

MS. SEPTIMO: PERIOD.

MS. WALSH: YEAH.

MS. SEPTIMO: AND -- AND I THINK WE'RE INTERESTED

IN A JUSTICE SYSTEM THAT RECOGNIZES THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE BALANCE AND

THERE NEEDS TO BE DUE PROCESS AT EVERY STEP, IRRESPECTIVE OF HOW SMALL

OR INSIGNIFICANT IT MIGHT SEEM TO ME, OR TO YOU, I THINK TO THE PERSON

HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY. AND, AGAIN, IF IT'S INSIGNIFICANT AND THEY DEEM

IT SO, THEN THEY WON'T HAVE THE HEARING. BUT THIS IS CODIFYING IT TO THAT

THEY CAN IF THEY NEED IT.

326

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. WALSH: WELL, IT'S -- YOU -- YOU WILL GET THE

HEARING IF THERE'S A REQUEST FOR A HEARING. AND YOU WILL --

MS. SEPTIMO: CORRECT.

MS. WALSH: -- GET IT FAST --

MS. SEPTIMO: CORRECT.

MS. WALSH: -- RIGHT?

MS. SEPTIMO: BUT IF YOU'RE -- IF YOU DECIDE THAT

YOU DON'T NEED IT, THEN YOU WON'T HAVE IT.

MS. WALSH: RIGHT. WELL, WHAT ABOUT IF YOU'RE

REPRESENTED BY AN ATTORNEY AND THAT ATTORNEY THINKS THAT THERE MIGHT BE

SOME TACTICAL, OR STRATEGIC, ADVANTAGE TO -- TO BRINGING AN APPLICATION

LIKE THAT? YOU'RE GOING TO -- YOU MAKE THAT REQUEST, YOU'RE GOING TO

GET THAT HEARING, RIGHT?

MS. SEPTIMO: CERTAINLY, AND I THINK THAT THE -- THE

STRATEGIC, TACTICAL ADVANTAGE TO MAKING SURE YOUR DUE PROCESS IS

PROTECTED, SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD ATTORNEY.

MS. WALSH: YEAH. I COULD JUST SEE -- I COULD JUST

SEE HOW IT COULD BE MISUSED. BUT -- I MEAN, LET'S MOVE ON BECAUSE

THERE'S ONE MORE PIECE I'D REALLY LIKE TO HIT AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH --

THERE'S -- THERE'S A DE NOVO REVIEW PROCESS IN THE BILL THAT DEALS WITH

BAIL APPLICATIONS. CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THAT SPECIFICALLY? WHAT THAT

DOES?

MS. SEPTIMO: IT -- IT ACTUALLY MAKES IT SO THAT THE

DISTRICT ATTORNEY WOULD HAVE TO BE ALSO CONSULTED BEFORE ANY OF THOSE

CHANGES COULD BE MADE.

327

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. WALSH: OKAY. AND AGAIN, SOME CONCERN HAS

BEEN RAISED THAT THE ABILITY TO GET A -- A FAST DE NOVO REVIEW OF THE BAIL

APPLICATION COULD ALSO HAVE AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OVER

BURDENING COURTS. BUT, I -- I SUSPECT THAT YOU --

MS. SEPTIMO: WE -- I -- I -- I HEAR YOU RAISING THAT

CONCERN.

MS. WALSH: YEAH.

MS. SEPTIMO: WE HAVE MORE THAN 20 LETTERS OF

SUPPORT. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ONE MEMO OF OPPOSITION ON THIS BILL

AND IT'S BEEN AROUND SINCE BEFORE THE CRAWFORD CASE, ACTUALLY. SINCE

ABOUT 2019. SO I ASSUME THAT IF THERE WAS APPREHENSION COMING FROM

THE COURTS, THAT WE WOULD HAVE HEARD IT BY NOW AND IN FACT, THERE ARE

SEVERAL JUDGES ON RECORD, IN THEIR DECISION, ASKING FOR CODIFIED

GUIDANCE AROUND THIS HEARING.

MS. WALSH: THAT'S SO INTERESTING. SO, IT'S LIKE, THAT

YOU GOT ALL THAT -- ALL THOSE LETTERS OF SUPPORT AND YET THE BILL'S BEEN

KICKING AROUND SINCE 2021. IT HADN'T BEEN DONE UNTIL NOW. SO

TONIGHT WILL -- TONIGHT WILL BE THE FIRST VOTE ON THAT BILL. SO -- OR THIS

BILL.

MS. SEPTIMO: AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO IT.

MS. WALSH: WE'RE ALMOST THERE. WE'RE ALMOST

THERE. I THINK AT THIS POINT I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING --

MS. SEPTIMO: SURE.

MS. WALSH: -- MY QUESTIONS AND JUST BRIEFLY GO ON

THE BILL.

328

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MS. WALSH: SO I THINK THAT THE CONCEPT -- AS I

MENTIONED, I HAD THAT ONE EXPERIENCE TALKING TO ANOTHER PRACTITIONER, I

THINK THAT WHEN THERE IS A FULL STAY-AWAY ORDER OF PROTECTION, I THINK

THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING AND FAST BECAUSE, I THINK

THAT WHETHER YOU ARE LOSING CONTACT WITH YOUR KIDS, YOU'RE KICKED OUT

OF YOUR HOUSE, POSSIBLY THERE'S BEING DAMAGE DONE TO YOUR HOUSE WHILE

YOU'VE BEEN BARRED FROM IT BECAUSE SOMEBODY ELSE IS LIVING THERE. WE

CAN ALL THINK OF EXAMPLES WHERE WHEN THERE'S A FULL STAY-AWAY ORDER --

OR A FULL STAY-AWAY ORDER OF PROTECTION, I -- I TOTALLY AGREE THAT THIS

EVIDENT -- EVIDENTIARY HEARING -- I STILL AM HAVING TROUBLE SAYING IT -- IS

A GOOD IDEA. WHERE I THINK I HAVE SOME RESERVATIONS, WHICH I TRIED TO

BRING UP WITH THE SPONSOR, IS WHEN YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING THAT IS A LITTLE

BIT MORE SIMPLE, TRUE TO THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IT DOESN'T FEEL

INSIGNIFICANT, OR IT'S SUBSTANTIAL AND I RESPECT THAT, BUT I THINK THAT

SOMETHING LIKE A SIMPLE -- SIMPLER REFRAIN FROM ORDER OF PROTECTION,

THOSE ARE ROUTINELY ISSUED. CERTAINLY, IN FAMILY COURT WHERE, I

PRIMARILY PRACTICE, BUT IN OTHER COURTS AS WELL. LOCAL CRIMINAL COURTS

ISSUE THEM WITH A LOT OF FREQUENCY. IF YOU'RE ALLOWING A -- AN

EVIDENTIARY HEARING WITHIN FIVE DAYS OF JUST SIMPLY UPON THE REQUEST OF

THE -- THE DEFENDANT, OR THE PARTY, OR IF YOU JUST WANT A DE NOVO REVIEW

PROCESS OF A BAIL APPLICATION, I COULD SEE THERE BEING A SIGNIFICANT

UPTICK IN -- OF THESE -- A -- IN BURDEN UPON THE COURT SYSTEM AND WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT LOCAL COURTS. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT -- IN -- IN THE AREAS

THAT WE ALL REPRESENT ARE VARIOUS AND -- AND THERE'S -- THERE'S A LOT OF --

329

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THERE'S AN AMAZING QUALITY OF THE FACT THAT WE ALL REPRESENT AROUND THE

SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE, BUT WE ALL REPRESENT VERY DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE

STATE. BUT I CAN TELL YOU, SPEAKING AS AN UPSTATE MEMBER, THAT OUR

LOCAL CRIMINAL COURTS ARE -- ARE ALREADY PRETTY OVERWHELMED AND YOU'RE

GONNA MAYBE PUT THAT ON TOP OF IT. IT'S TO SOMETHING CONSIDER. I WOULD

FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE IF THE BILL WAS AMENDED SO IT REALLY JUST

ADDRESSED THESE FULL STAY-AWAYS AND -- TOPS AND DO THOSE. HAVE

THOSE -- HAVE AN EVIDENTIARY PROCEEDING FOR THOSE, WITHIN A QUICK

PERIOD OF TIME AND MAYBE LEAVE THE REFRAIN FROMS [SIC] AWAY AND THE --

AND TAKE THE BAIL APPLICATIONS OUT THEM FOR RIGHT NOW.

BUT, ANYWAY, I APPRECIATE THE -- THE SPONSOR'S ANSWERS

TO MY QUESTIONS. I WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS BILL BECAUSE I DO

THINK THAT THE SCOPE IS LITTLE BIT BROADER THAN I'D LIKE, BUT OTHERS MAY

FEEL DIFFERENTLY. SO, THANK YOU, 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 --

MS. SEPTIMO: SURE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: -- YIELD?

MS. SEPTIMO: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. MOLITOR: THANK YOU. SO IF A LOCAL CRIMINAL

COURT ISSUES AN ORDER OF PROTECTION AND THE DEFENDANT IN THE CASE

330

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

REQUESTS A HEARING, THAT LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT MUST, UNDER THIS PIECE OF

LEGISLATION, MUST HAVE THAT HEARING WITHIN FIVE DAYS OF THAT REQUEST; IS

THAT CORRECT?

MS. SEPTIMO: FIVE BUSINESS DAYS.

MR. MOLITOR: FIVE BUSINESS DAYS. OKAY. AND --

MS. SEPTIMO: I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT

DISTINCTION.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. AND I -- I'M SURE AS YOU'RE

AWARE, IN MANY OF OUR -- MANY OF OUR COMMUNITIES ACROSS UPSTATE, WE

HAVE LOTS OF TOWN AND VILLAGE COURTS.

MS. SEPTIMO: MM-HMM.

MR. MOLITOR: AND SOME OF THOSE TOWN AND

VILLAGE COURTS, ESPECIALLY IN RURAL COMMUNITIES, THEY ONLY MEET ONCE A

MONTH.

MS. SEPTIMO: MM-HMM.

MR. MOLITOR: SO, IN THOSE PARTICULAR COURTS,

SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO MEET AND HAVE

ADDITIONAL COURT APPEARANCES, THAT -- THAT COULD CREATE AN ADDITIONAL

COST BURDEN; WOULDN'T IT NOT?

MS. SEPTIMO: WE -- IN THEORY, CERTAINLY. BUT, THE

COURTS CAN SCHEDULE THESE HEARINGS AS NEEDED. SO, WE HOPE THAT THEY

WILL DO EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO COMPLY.

MR. MOLITOR: BUT -- BUT THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE

DISCRETION, RIGHT? LIKE IF A DEFENDANT SAYS, I WANT THIS HEARING, THEY

HAVE TO DO IT WITHIN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS. THERE'S NO EXCEPTIONS.

331

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

(CONFERENCING)

MS. SEPTIMO: SO THE -- IF YOU GO TO -- THIS IS ONLINE

-- IF YOU GO TO LINE 39, YOU WILL SEE THAT -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THE

BILL IN FRONT OF YOU. I'M SORRY TO ASSUME THAT.

MR. MOLITOR: I DO. I DO, YEAH.

MS. SEPTIMO: OKAY. GREAT. IF YOU GO TO LINE 39,

YOU'LL SEE THAT THE -- IF THE LOCAL COURT DENIES THE REQUEST, THEN THE

SUPERIOR COURT ACTUALLY WILL HAVE THE HEARING.

MR. MOLITOR: I'M SORRY. I COULDN'T HEAR YOU.

MS. SEPTIMO: IF THE LOCAL COURT DENIES THE REQUEST

FOR THE HEARING, THEN A SUPERIOR COURT WILL HAVE THE HEARING IN ITS PLACE.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. SO IF -- SO A LOCAL COURT

COULD SAY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THE HEARING AND THE SUPERIOR COURT

WILL THEN HAVE TO DO IT --

MS. SEPTIMO: CORRECT.

MR. MOLITOR: WOULD THE -- WOULD THE SUPERIOR

COURT HAVE TO DO IT WITHIN THAT FIVE DAYS AS WELL?

MS. SEPTIMO: YES.

MR. MOLITOR: ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT IF YOU HAVE A

SITUATION AND THIS IS A REAL SITUATION, BECAUSE THIS WOULD HAPPEN IN MY

COUNTY, WHERE YOU MIGHT HAVE ONLY ONE SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE AVAILABLE

AND THAT SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A TRIAL AND THEY'RE

UNABLE TO DO IT, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THAT SITUATION?

MS. SEPTIMO: AGAIN, I THINK THIS IS WHERE THE

COURTS WOULD HAVE TO WORK TO SCHEDULE THESE HEARINGS AS NEEDED,

332

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

BECAUSE IT WOULD BE THE LAW AND THEY'D HAVE TO SORT OF FACILITATE. YOU

NOW, IN YOUR EXAMPLE, HAVE A LOCAL COURT DENYING IT AND NOW A

SUPERIOR COURT ISSUE. WE WOULD HOPE THAT BETWEEN TWO LEVELS OF COURT,

THERE'S AN EFFORT TO COMPLY.

MR. MOLITOR: BUT -- BUT IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE

SUPERIOR COURT MIGHT NOT BE AVAILABLE TO TAKE THE HEARING AND THEN

WE'RE STUCK.

(CONFERENCING)

MS. SEPTIMO: THE COURT, CERTAINLY, ASSUMING THAT

YOU HAVE BEEN AT A TRIAL BEFORE, THE COURT CAN CERTAINLY MAKE THE EFFORT

TO SCHEDULE A HEARING DESPITE THE FACT THAT IT'S HAVING A TRIAL, BECAUSE

THE COURT MANAGES ITS OWN SCHEDULE.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. NOW, WHAT HAPPENS IF THE

CASE -- THIS -- THIS HEARING CAN ONLY BE REQUESTED WHEN THE MATTER IS

PENDING IN LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT, RIGHT?

MS. SEPTIMO: CORRECT.

MR. MOLITOR: SO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE CASE IS

SORT OF IN LIMBO? AND LET ME GIVE YOU --

MS. SEPTIMO: YOU'LL HAVE TO BE MORE SPECIFIC --

(CROSS-TALK)

MR. MOLITOR: -- LET ME GIVE YOU -- I'LL GIVE YOU AN

EXAMPLE. ON A FELONY, THE CASE FIRST STARTS IN LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT --

MS. SEPTIMO: MM-HMM.

MR. MOLITOR: AND THERE IS -- THERE CAN BE A

PRELIMINARY HEARING. IF THAT PRELIMINARY HEARING IS WAIVED, OR THE

333

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

HEARING IS RUN, THEN THE CASE IS HELD FOR ACTION BY A GRAND JURY.

MS. SEPTIMO: MM-HMM.

MR. MOLITOR: IF A DEFENDANT IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE

REQUESTS A HEARING, UNDER THIS LEGISLATION, THEY WOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO

ONE; AM I CORRECT?

(CONFERENCING)

MS. SEPTIMO: UNDER THAT CIRCUMSTANCE, THE

QUESTION THAT I ANSWERED BEFORE --

MR. MOLITOR: SORRY.

MS. SEPTIMO: -- FOR OUR OTHER COLLEAGUE, UNDER THAT

CIRCUMSTANCE THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY WOULD ALSO HAVE TO AGREE TO THE

HEARING.

MR. MOLITOR: I'M SORRY FOR RE-ASKING THAT

QUESTION.

MS. SEPTIMO: THAT'S OKAY.

MR. MOLITOR: I MUST HAVE BEEN OUT OF THE ROOM.

MS. SEPTIMO: THAT'S OKAY. WELCOME BACK.

MR. MOLITOR: DO YOU ANTICIPATE THERE BEING A LOT

OF THESE HEARINGS?

MS. SEPTIMO: I COULDN'T -- I'M NOT A FORTUNE TELLER

AND I WON'T PRETEND TO BE.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY.

WOULD YOU AGREE WITH ME THAT THIS LEGISLATION MAKES

IT EASIER FOR DEFENDANTS TO SORT OF GET, LIKE, AN INITIAL CRACK AT A CASE OR

MAYBE TO REVICTIMIZE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SURVIVORS, AS WE'RE CALLING

334

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THEM (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK).

MS. SEPTIMO: I DO NOT. AND I'VE MENTIONED THAT

THERE WERE SEVERAL MEMOS OF SUPPORT; ONE OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS THAT

HAD WRITTEN A MEMO OF SUPPORT IS ACTUALLY THE NEW YORK STATE

COALITION AGAINST SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND THERE ARE OTHER VICTIMS GROUPS

AS WELL. AGAIN, THIS IS ESTABLISHING THE GUIDELINES FOR AN EVIDENTIARY

HEARING WHERE BOTH THE ACCUSED AND THE VICTIMS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO

PRESENT EVIDENCE ON WHY AN ORDER SHOULD BE ISSUED, THE SCOPE OF THE

ORDER, ET CETERA.

MR. MOLITOR: SO I'M SURE YOU REMEMBER EARLIER

TODAY, I THINK IT WAS TODAY, WE HAD A BILL ABOUT NURSES IN PARTICULAR OR

HOSPITAL STAFF MAYBE NOT FEELING SAFE IN GIVING A STATEMENT BACK AT THE

POLICE STATION AND FEELING LIKE THEY'RE REVICTIMIZED BECAUSE OF THAT.

MS. SEPTIMO: I'M SORRY, I -- I MAY NOT HAVE BEEN

HERE FOR THAT, BUT I'D LOVE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THIS BILL.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. THE REASON I BRING THAT UP IS

BECAUSE BY -- BY CODIFYING THIS EVIDENTIARY HEARING, WE'RE -- YOU KNOW,

THE COURT HAS ALREADY DONE AN INITIAL ANALYSIS. THEY'VE DETERMINED THAT

AN ORDER OF PROTECTION IS NECESSARY. THEY'VE ISSUED AN ORDER OF

PROTECTION. AND THEN THE DEFENDANT, SAY THE DEFENDANT IN A DOMESTIC

VIOLENCE SITUATION COULD SAY, I DISAGREE. I WANT THE VICTIM TO TESTIFY.

SO I'M GONNA REQUEST A HEARING IN THE HOPES THAT THE VICTIM WILL HAVE

TO TESTIFY.

MS. SEPTIMO: WELL, IN THIS BILL, ACTUALLY, THERE IS

HEARSAY EVIDENCE. HEARSAY EVIDENCE IS ADMISSIBLE AS LONG AS IT'S DONE

335

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

THROUGH A WITNESS. SO A POLICE OFFICER WHO IS RESPONDING ON THE SCENE

COULD BE THE PERSON WHO COMES TO TESTIFY. THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR

VICTIMS TO APPEAR AT ANY POINT IN THIS HEARING IF THEY DON'T WANT TO.

MR. MOLITOR: SO HOW DOES THIS ACTUALLY PROTECT

SOMEBODY WHO HAS AN ORDER OF PROTECTION AGAINST THEM AND HAS BEEN

LOCKED OUT OF THEIR PROPERTY? IF, FOR EXAMPLE, I, AS A PROSECUTOR, CAN

JUST PUT A POLICE OFFICER ON THE STAND TO READ WHAT THE VICTIM HAS

ALREADY SAID ABOUT THE CASE.

MS. SEPTIMO: AGAIN, AS I TOLD YOUR COLLEAGUE A

FEW MINUTES AGO, THIS WOULD MAKE IT SO THAT THE JUDGE WOULD HAVE AN

OPPORTUNITY TO RECEIVE EVIDENCE FROM ALL PARTIES. AND SO THAT WOULD

GIVE THE DEFENDANT ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE ANY EVIDENCE THAT'S

RELEVANT. IN THE CASE OF MISS CRAWFORD, WHICH IS THE COURT CASE THAT

LED TO THE DECISION WHICH IS LEADING TO HOPEFULLY US CODIFYING THIS NOW,

MISS CRAWFORD DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE THE DETAILS THAT

WOULD HAVE BEEN RELEVANT FOR THE JUDGE TO KNOW. IT RENDERED HER

HOMELESS, IT SEPARATED HER FROM HER KIDS FOR THREE MONTHS. ON THE

OTHER SIDE, THE ORDER WAS ULTIMATELY DISMISSED. IF THERE WERE MORE

INFORMATION ON THE FRONT END, ONE COULD ANTICIPATE THAT THE JUDGE

WOULD HAVE DECIDED DIFFERENTLY, BUT THERE JUST WAS NOT A VENUE. THIS IS

CREATING A VENUE FOR INFORMATION TO MAKE ITS WAY INTO THE COURT.

MR. MOLITOR: BUT ISN'T THAT THE DEFENDANT -- THE

DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY'S JOB AT ARRAIGNMENT TO BE SHARING ALL THAT

INFORMATION WITH THE JUDGE SO THAT ORDERS OF PROTECTION AREN'T ISSUED,

YOU KNOW, IRRESPONSIBLY?

336

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MS. SEPTIMO: THIS IS STANDARDIZING THAT PROCESS TO

GIVE JUDGES THE SPACE TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS WITH A VENUE TO ENTER

EVIDENCE. RIGHT NOW IT DOESN'T EXIST.

MR. MOLITOR: SO WHY NOT REQUIRE THAT AT

ARRAIGNMENT INSTEAD OF FIVE DAYS AFTER THE PROCESS?

MS. SEPTIMO: WELL, JUST A MOMENT AGO YOU

MENTIONED WANTING TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THESE HEARINGS TO

HAPPEN IN A WAY THAT WAS NOT BURDENSOME AND THAT WOULD GIVE FOLKS

THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET THE EVIDENCE THAT THEY NEEDED. IF YOU ARE TO

HAVE A POLICE OFFICER TESTIFYING, IT MIGHT BE DIFFICULT TO HAVE THEM THERE

FOR EVERY ARRAIGNMENT.

MR. MOLITOR: YEAH, BUT IT'S -- WE'RE JUST TALKING

ABOUT HEARSAY EVIDENCE ANYWAY, RIGHT?

MS. SEPTIMO: BUT IT NEEDS TO BE PRESENTED THROUGH

A LIVE WITNESS. IF YOU HAVE THE BILL IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU'LL SEE THAT.

MR. MOLITOR: WHICH COULD BE ANYBODY.

MS. SEPTIMO: SOMEONE WHO PRESUMABLY IS

CONNECTED TO THE CASE, LIKE A POLICE OFFICER.

MR. MOLITOR: DOES IT SAY THAT IN THIS LEGISLATION?

I THOUGHT THE EXCEPTION IN THE LEGISLATION WAS JUST IT COULD BE PRESENTED

-- HEARSAY COULD BE PRESENTED AS LONG AS IT WAS THROUGH A LIVE WITNESS.

MS. SEPTIMO: CORRECT.

MR. MOLITOR: SO IT COULD BE ANYBODY.

MS. SEPTIMO: IN THEORY.

MR. MOLITOR: THANK YOU.

337

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. MOLITOR: SO AS A FORMER DEFENSE LAWYER --

I'M GONNA PUT MY DEFENSE LAWYER HAT ON -- I'M REQUESTING THIS HEARING

IN EVERY CASE IN WHICH AN ORDER OF PROTECTION WAS ISSUED. I'M DOING IT

SO THAT I CAN GAIN A STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE OVER THE CASE, TRY TO GET ANY

PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT I WANT -- THAT I'M HOPING TO RECEIVE AT THAT

EVIDENTIARY HEARING, TRY TO FIGURE OUT THE PROBLEMS THAT THAT PIECE OF

EVIDENCE MIGHT HAVE SO THAT I CAN USE IT TO BREAK DOWN THE CASE.

THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN. IT'S GONNA HAPPEN CARTE BLANCHE. IT'S GONNA BE

AN AUTOMATIC THING IN EVERY CASE WHERE AN ORDER OF PROTECTION IS

ISSUED. I'M GONNA TRY TO GUM UP THE WORKS. THAT'S MY JOB. I'M TRYING

TO ZEALOUSLY ADVOCATE FOR MY CLIENT.

I THINK THAT THIS IS GONNA BE A REAL PROBLEM FOR

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS. EVEN IF THEY DON'T HAVE TO TESTIFY AT A

HEARING, THEY ARE GOING TO BE STRUGGLING WITH THE FACT THAT THAT ORDER OF

PROTECTION THAT THEY'RE RELYING UPON TO PROTECT THEM FROM THEIR ABUSER

MIGHT END UP GETTING THROWN OUT IN COURT FIVE DAYS AFTER IT WAS ISSUED.

AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A SCARY PROPOSITION.

I THINK THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, SUBSTANCE PROBLEMS WITH

THIS BILL. THAT THERE -- THERE REALLY AREN'T -- IT REALLY ISN'T AS CLEAR AS IT

PROBABLY SHOULD BE. I THINK IT CREATES A LOT OF EXTRA WORK FOR OUR LOCAL

COURTS, ESPECIALLY IN RURAL COMMUNITIES. AND I ALSO THINK IT CREATES A

LOT OF EXTRA WORK FOR OUR SUPERIOR COURTS. I THINK THERE'S A WAY TO

CODIFY CRAWFORD. YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO GO THROUGH THE

338

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW. I THINK THERE'S -- JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW, IF

PROPERTY'S TAKEN IN A CRIMINAL CASE, A -- THE -- THE PERSON WHOSE

PROPERTY IS TAKEN FROM THEM, THEY CAN HAVE A REPLEVIN ACTION IN -- IN --

IN A -- A CIVIL COURT. I THINK THERE'S A WAY THAT WE COULD DO THIS IN A

CIVIL COURT THAT GIVES PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHALLENGE AN ORDER OF

PROTECTION. I KNOW ORDERS OF PROTECTION ARE OFTEN MODIFIED IN FAMILY

COURT.

SO I THINK THIS IS PROBLEMATIC AS WRITTEN AND

UNNECESSARY, AND I'LL BE VOTING NO AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERYONE

ELSE TO VOTE NO AS WELL.

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.

MR. GANDOLFO.

MR. GANDOLFO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

THE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL GENERALLY BE OPPOSED TO THIS BILL;

HOWEVER, ANY MEMBERS WHO WISH TO VOTE YES MAY DO SO AT THEIR DESKS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, THE

MAJORITY CONFERENCE IS GONNA BE IN FAVOR OF THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

THERE MAY BE A FEW THAT DESIRE TO BE AN EXCEPTION. THEY SHOULD FEEL

FREE TO DO SO AT THEIR SEATS.

339

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MS. SEPTIMO TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. SEPTIMO: I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THIS PIECE OF

LEGISLATION CAME TO BE BECAUSE OF A WOMAN NAMED SHAMIKA CRAWFORD,

WHO WENT THROUGH AN INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT EXPERIENCE OF BEING RENDERED

HOMELESS, OF LOSING HER CHILDREN FOR MONTHS, AND HAVING TO REBUILD HER

LIFE AFTER THAT. MISS CRAWFORD HAS BEEN HERE IN ALBANY TO ADVOCATE ON

THIS ISSUE MANY TIMES, AND I PERSONALLY WANT TO EXTEND MY GRATITUDE TO

HER FOR TURNING HER PAINFUL EXPERIENCE INTO A POWERFUL ONE THAT WILL

HELP EVERYONE IN OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM GET A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO REALIZING

WHAT JUSTICE ACTUALLY MEANS HERE IN NEW YORK. AND THAT MEANS

HAVING YOUR VOICE HEARD WHETHER YOU ARE ACCUSED OR WHETHER YOU'RE A

VICTIM. THIS BILL WILL MAKE IT SO THAT EVERYONE HAS A CHANCE TO WALK

INTO A COURTROOM AND HAVE THEIR STORY HEARD FOR WHAT IT IS AND HAVE

JUDGES MAKE DECISIONS ACCORDINGLY.

SO I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE WHO HAS ADVOCATED ON

THIS BILL, BUT ESPECIALLY MISS CRAWFORD. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. SEPTIMO IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

340

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, IF WE

COULD NOW GO TO PAGE 3 AND TAKE UP OUR RESOLUTIONS FOR THE DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: RESOLUTIONS, PAGE

3, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 759, MS.

GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM JUNE 17, 2025, AS LATINA HISTORY 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. 760, MS.

ROMERO.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM JUNE 2025, AS MYASTHENIA GRAVIS

AWARENESS MONTH 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. 761, MS.

HOOKS.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM AUGUST 5, 2025, AS NIGHT OUT IN THE STATE OF

NEW YORK, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OBSERVANCE OF NATIONAL NIGHT OUT.

341

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

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. 762, MR.

MAGNARELLI.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER 15-21, 2025, AS DIAPER NEED

AWARENESS 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

ADOPTED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 763, MS.

SOLAGES.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM OCTOBER 17, 2025, AS BLACK POETRY 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. 764, MS.

HUNTER.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM OCTOBER 2025, AS CAREERS IN CONSTRUCTION

MONTH IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE RESOLUTION,

342

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

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

ADOPTED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 765, MR.

STERN.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM NOVEMBER 2-8, 2025, AS VETERANS

AWARENESS 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

ADOPTED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 766, MR.

SANTABARBARA.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM NOVEMBER 2025, AS ALPHA-1 AWARENESS

MONTH 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.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, I NOW

MOVE THAT THE ASSEMBLY STAND -- OH, DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER

HOUSEKEEPING OR RESOLUTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WE HAVE NO

HOUSEKEEPING. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF RESOLUTIONS BEFORE THE HOUSE.

WITHOUT OBJECTION THESE RESOLUTIONS WILL BE TAKEN UP TOGETHER.

343

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 11, 2025

ON THE RESOLUTIONS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING

AYE; OPPOSED, NO. THE RESOLUTIONS ARE ADOPTED.

(WHEREUPON, ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NOS. 767-777

WERE UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED.)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: I NOW MOVE THAT THE

ASSEMBLY STAND ADJOURNED AND THAT WE RECONVENE AT 10:00 A.M.,

THURSDAY, JUNE THE 12TH, TOMORROW BEING A SESSION DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON MRS. PEOPLES-

STOKES' MOTION, THE HOUSE STANDS ADJOURNED.

(WHEREUPON, AT 9:52 P.M., THE HOUSE STOOD ADJOURNED

UNTIL THURSDAY, JUNE 12TH AT 10:00 A.M., THAT BEING A SESSION DAY.)

344