THURSDAY, JUNE 12, 2025 12:16 P.M.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE HOUSE WILL

COME TO ORDER.

GOOD AFTERNOON, 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 WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11TH.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, I MOVE

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

THE 11TH AND THAT THE SAME STAND APPROVED.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WITHOUT OBJECTION,

SO ORDERED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: GOOD AFTERNOON,

COLLEAGUES AND THE FEW GUESTS THAT ARE IN THE CHAMBERS. I KNOW WE

ARE EMBARKING ON THE JUNETEENTH HOLIDAY, AND SUCH, I WOULD LIKE TO

GIVE HONOR TODAY TO NONE OTHER THAN MUHAMMAD ALI. SO THE QUOTE FOR

THE DAY IS COMING FROM MY BROTHER MUHAMMAD ALI IN HIS ABSENCE.

SERVICE TO OTHERS IS THE RENT YOU PAY FOR YOUR ROOM TO BE [SIC] HERE ON

EARTH. I SHOULD JUST REPEAT THAT BECAUSE IT'S SO IMPORTANT. SERVICE TO

OTHERS IS THE RENT YOU PAY FOR YOUR ROOM HERE ON EARTH. AGAIN, THESE

WORDS BY THE GREATEST BOXER OF ALL TIMES [SIC], MUHAMMAD ALI.

MADAM SPEAKER, MEMBERS HAVE ON THEIR DESK A MAIN

CALENDAR AND SOON TO BE A DEBATE LAST. BEFORE ANY HOUSEKEEPING

AND/OR INTRODUCTIONS, WE'RE GONNA CALL THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEES TO

MEET: WAYS AND MEANS FOLLOWED BY RULES. THESE COMMITTEES ARE

GONNA PRODUCE AN A-CALENDAR THAT WE WILL DEFINITELY TAKE UP TODAY.

WE'RE GONNA BEGIN OUR FLOOR WORK TODAY BY TAKING UP

THE FOLLOWING BILLS ON CONSENT: RULES REPORT NO. 1 -- 318 BY MS.

ROSENTHAL, RULES REPORT NO. 332 BY MS. BARRETT, RULES REPORT NO.

493 BY MR. WEPRIN, AND RULES REPORT NO. 547 BY MS. PAULIN. ALSO,

CALENDAR NO. 132 BY MS. HYNDMAN. THERE WILL DEFINITELY BE A NEED

FOR FURTHER FLOOR ACTIVITY AS WE PROCEED, MADAM SPEAKER. I'LL BE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THAT AT THAT TIME.

HOWEVER, THAT'S THE GENERAL OUTLINE OF WHERE WE'RE

GOING. IF YOU COULD BEGIN BY CALLING THE RULES COMMITTEE TO THE

SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW WHAT, MADAM SPEAKER? WE'LL

CHANGE THAT. IF YOU WOULD BEGIN BY CALLING THE WAYS AND MEANS

COMMITTEE TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: OKAY. THANK YOU.

WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE MEMBERS, GO SEE

CHAIRMAN PRETLOW IN THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM. WAYS AND

MEANS COMMITTEE MEMBERS, PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY EXPEDITIOUSLY AND

QUIETLY TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

WE HAVE NO HOUSEKEEPING THIS MORNING, NO

INTRODUCTIONS THIS MORNING.

(CHEERS)

OH, WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. WE JUST GOT A LIGHT.

MS. LEVENBERG FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INTRODUCTION.

MS. LEVENBERG: I'M SORRY, COLLEAGUES. I -- I

REALLY WRECKED THE -- THE THING HERE. BUT I HAVE SOME COUSINS ACTUALLY

CAME TO VISIT TODAY, GREGG AND ANNA PASTERNACK. AND THEY HAVE BEEN

TO THE CAPITOL BEFORE BUT NEVER IN THE CHAMBER. AND THEY ACTUALLY ARE

COMING FROM THE BERKSHIRES. BUT THEIR BROTHER -- I'M SORRY, GREGG'S

BROTHER RECENTLY PASSED AWAY, WAYNE PASTERNACK. AND WAYNE WAS --

ACTUALLY, I THINK HE LIVED IN SERVICE TO OTHERS AND PAID HIS RENT FOR HIS

ROOM HERE ON EARTH, PER THE MAJORITY LEADER'S QUOTE. HE RECENTLY

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PASSED VERY SADLY, AND HE WAS A CONSTITUENT OF MY COLLEAGUE

ASSEMBLYMEMBER SHIMSKY. HE LIVED IN DOBBS FERRY. AND I ATTENDED

HIS SERVICE, AND ALL THAT REALLY ANYBODY TALKED ABOUT WAS WHAT AN

INCREDIBLE PERSON WAYNE WAS AND HOW GIVING HE WAS, AND HOW HE

WOULD DRIVE ANYBODY ANYWHERE TO THE END OF THE EARTH AND BACK. HE

WAS AN AMAZING SPORTS FAN, A PHENOMENAL MUSICIAN. AND I THINK THAT

HIS BROTHER ALSO SHARES MANY OF THOSE SAME QUALITIES. GREGG AND HIS

WIFE DEBORAH RUN A COMPANY CALLED THE SINGING CLASSROOM, A

SUBSCRIPTION WEBSITE THAT'S A SEARCHABLE DATABASE OF SONGS, GAMES,

VIDEOS AND ANIMATIONS TO HELP PRE-K THROUGH 6 MUSIC TEACHERS WITH

THEIR CURRICULUM PLANNING. ANNA IS BEING HOME-SCHOOLED, AND THIS IS

PART OF HER HOME SCHOOLING. SO PLEASE, IF YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY,

COLLEAGUES, TO SHARE SOMETHING IMPORTANT WITH ANNA, PLEASE DO SO

TODAY.

AND MADAM SPEAKER, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE EXTEND THE

CORDIALITIES OF THE HOUSE TO MY COUSINS AND CONDOLENCES FOR BROTHER

WAYNE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON BEHALF OF MS.

LEVENBERG, THE SPEAKER AND ALL MEMBERS, WE WELCOME THE PASTERNACKS

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

YOU. ANNA, A GREAT LEARNING EXPERIENCE HERE TODAY FOR SCHOOL, SO WE

LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE FOR SOME OF US LATER.

AND CONDOLENCES, SIR, FOR THE LOSS OF YOUR BROTHER. WE HOPE YOU ENJOY

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

(APPLAUSE)

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PAGE 9, RULES REPORT NO. 318, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A05392-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 318, ROSENTHAL, SHIMSKY, LUNSFORD. AN ACT TO AMEND THE

PUBLIC HEALTH LAW, THE EDUCATION LAW AND THE INSURANCE LAW, IN

RELATION TO EXPANDING THE DEFINITION OF EPINEPHRINE DEVICES TO INCLUDE

NASAL SPRAYS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MS.

ROSENTHAL, 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.)

ACTING SPEAKER HOOKS: ARE THERE ANY OTHER

VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THIS BILL IS PASSED.

PAGE 10, RULES REPORT NO. 332, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A06918-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 332, BARRETT, SCHIAVONI. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TOWN LAW,

IN RELATION TO AUTHORIZING THE TOWN OF COPAKE TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY

PRESERVATION FUNDS; TO AMEND THE TAX LAW, IN RELATION TO AUTHORIZING

THE TOWN OF COPAKE TO IMPOSE A REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX WITH REVENUES

THEREFROM TO BE DEPOSITED IN SAID COMMUNITY PRESERVATION FUND; AND

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE TAX LAW UPON

EXPIRATION THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER HOOKS: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HOOKS: 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 YOU

COULD CALL THE RULES COMMITTEE TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

ACTING SPEAKER HOOKS: RULES COMMITTEE TO

THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

PAGE 14, RULES REPORT NO. 493, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A03687-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 493, WEPRIN, HEVESI, DAVILA, PAULIN, BROOK-KRASNY,

JACOBSON. AN ACT TO AMEND THE INSURANCE LAW, IN RELATION TO

ADDRESSING NON-COVERED DENTAL SERVICES.

ACTING SPEAKER HOOKS: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS BILL [SIC] SHALL TAKE EFFECT JANUARY

1, 2027.

ACTING SPEAKER HOOKS: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ARE THERE ANY OTHER

VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

PAGE 15, RULES REPORT NO. 547, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: SENATE NO. S04204, RULES REPORT NO.

547, SENATOR COMRIE (A00589, PAULIN OTIS, SAYEGH, ALVAREZ). AN ACT

TO AMEND CHAPTER 154 OF THE LAWS OF 1921 RELATING TO THE PORT

AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY, IN RELATION TO PORT AUTHORITY

ORGANIZATION, APPEARANCE AND NOTICE.

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.

PAGE 27, CALENDAR NO. 132, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: SENATE -- SENATE NO. S04892-B,

CALENDAR NO. 132, SENATOR STAVISKY (A07832, HYNDMAN, SEAWRIGHT,

MCDONALD, DAVILA, BUTTENSCHON). AN ACT TO AMEND THE EDUCATION

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LAW, IN RELATION TO PHYSICAL THERAPIST ASSISTANTS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS BILL [SIC] SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE

365TH DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE CLERK WILL

RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, IF WE

COULD ASK FOR MEMBERS' ATTENTION AS WE BEGIN OUR DEBATE PROCESS,

WE'RE GOING TO START WITH RULES REPORT NO. 385. IT'S ON PAGE 12 AND IT'S

BY MEMBER CHANDLER-WATERMAN.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

PAGE 12, RULES REPORT NO. 385, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A04762-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 385, CHANDLER-WATERMAN, SIMON, LUCAS, ANDERSON,

HOOKS, BURROUGHS, O'PHARROW, JACKSON. AN ACT TO AMEND EXECUTIVE

LAW, IN RELATION TO REQUIRING DOCUMENTS UTILIZED BY STATE AGENCIES,

PUBLIC AUTHORITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES TO REPLACE THE TERM "EMOTIONALLY

DISTURBED PERSON" WITH THE TERM "PERSON EXPERIENCING AN EMOTIONAL

CRISIS."

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: AN EXPLANATION HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN.

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: THANK YOU. NEW

YORK STATE ASSEMBLYMEMBER MONIQUE CHANDLER-WATERMAN OF

ASSEMBLY DISTRICT 58 AND CURRENTLY SERVING AS A MEMBER OF THE NEW

YORK STATE [SIC] MENTAL HEALTH COMMITTEE.

THIS BILL, A.4762-B, WHICH -- WHICH MY OFFICE AND I

HAVE WORKED HARD TO ADVANCE IN COORDINATION WITH MY IN-DISTRICT AD

58 MENTAL HEALTH TASK FORCE, LOCAL AND NATIONAL ADVOCATES,

COMMUNITY LEADERS AND FELLOW ELECTED OFFICIALS, IS CRUCIAL. ACCORDING

TO THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH, NEARLY ONE IN FIVE ADULTS IN

THE U.S., WHICH COMES TO 57.8 MILLION PEOPLE, IN 2021 EXPERIENCED

MENTAL ILLNESS EACH YEAR. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEALTH PRIORITY, AND

DISREGARDING THE IMPACT OF LANGUAGE SURROUNDING IT CARRIES REAL

CONSEQUENCES -- COMPASSION. THIS BILL ENSURES THAT NEW YORK'S PUBLIC

INSTITUTIONS SPEAK ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH WITH RESPECT, ACCURACY, AND IS

PERSON-CENTERED. BY REPLACING THE OUTDATED TERM "EMOTIONALLY

DISTURBED PERSON" WITH "PERSONAL EXPERIENCING AN EMOTIONAL CRISIS",

THIS WILL REFLECT OUR GROWING UNDERSTANDING OF MENTAL HEALTH AND THE

IMPORTANCE OF LANGUAGE IN SHAPING PUBLIC'S ATTITUDES. WORDS MATTER,

ESPECIALLY IN GOVERNMENT. THE CHANGE REDUCES STIGMA, PROMOTES

DIGNITY, AND ALIGNS WITH BEST PRACTICES SUPPORTED BY THE NATIONAL

HEALTH ORGANIZATIONS [SIC], WITHOUT AFFECTING POLICE OPERATION,

CRIMINAL STATUTES OR INCURRING NEW COSTS. IT'S -- IT'S A SIMPLE BUT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

POWERFUL STEP TOWARDS MORE HUMANE AND PERSON-CENTERED PUBLIC

POLICY.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. GANDOLFO.

MR. GANDOLFO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR PLEASE YIELD FOR JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

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

A CONVERSATION, I GUESS OFFLINE, ABOUT THIS BILL AND I APPRECIATE SOME OF

YOUR CLARIFICATIONS. I JUST WANT TO PUT THEM ON THE RECORD HERE.

SO, ONE OF MY CONCERNS WAS THE PROVISION IN HERE THAT

ANY AGENCY OR MUNICIPALITY WOULD HAVE TO REPLACE ANY PUBLIC-FACING

MATERIALS WITH MATERIALS THAT INCLUDE THIS UPDATED LANGUAGE. IF THEY

CURRENTLY HAVE ANY MANUALS, ANY DOCUMENTS THAT USE THE TERM

"EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED PERSON", WOULD THEY HAVE TO THROW THOSE OUT

AND REPLACED THEM IMMEDIATELY OR WOULD THIS BE ON SOME KIND OF

UPDATED SCHEDULE?

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: NO, THEY WOULD

NOT HAVE TO REPLACE IT IMMEDIATELY. THEY DO HAVE TIME. THIS BILL TAKES

EFFECT IMMEDIATELY, BUT IT GIVES A YEAR FOR THE AGENCIES TO BE ABLE TO

UPDATE THEIR MATERIALS AS THEY WOULD WITH ANY NORMAL CHANGE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. SO ONE YEAR AND THEN

AFTER A YEAR ANY, YOU KNOW, TRAINING MATERIALS JUST HAVE TO HAVE THIS

UPDATED TERMINOLOGY FOR THEIR NEXT RELEASE OF THE --

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: YES.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR

THAT. THAT RELIEVES A LOT OF THE BURDEN THAT I THOUGHT WOULD BE ON IT.

AND ANOTHER CONCERN I HAD, WHICH YOU HAD CLARIFIED

AND I JUST WANT TO MENTION HERE FOR OUR COLLEAGUES, IS THAT IN FEDERAL

REGULATION THERE'S NOT A DEFINITION OF "EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED PERSON",

BUT THERE IS A DEFINITION OF AN EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCE THAT AN INDIVIDUAL

MAY POSSESS. AND IT'S DEFINED AS SOMETHING OVER THE LONG-TERM. IT

WOULD INCLUDE CONDITIONS SUCH AS SCHIZOPHRENIA; HOWEVER, I BELIEVE

YOUR BILL IS MORE GEARED TOWARDS FIRST RESPONDERS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

WHEN THEY'RE FILLING OUT A REPORT TO RATHER THAN REFER TO SOMEONE AS AN

EMOTIONALLY-DISTURBED PERSON, TO REFERRING TO THEM AS A "PERSON

EXPERIENCING AN EMOTIONAL CRISIS." SO THIS IS MORE FOR THE REPORTING OF

FOR FIRST RESPONDERS?

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: THIS BILL DOESN'T

IMPACT HOW MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL [SIC] DIAGNOSE OR TREAT PATIENTS, IT

SIMPLY UPDATES OUTDATE -- OUTDATED LANGUAGE ON STATE AND LOCAL FORMS,

TRAINING MATERIALS THAT ARE PUBLICLY POSTED.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE

LAW ENFORCEMENT FORMS AND, YOU KNOW, IF ANY EMS, IF THEY FILL OUT A

REPORT TO WHEN THEY RESPONDED. LIKE, FORMS SUCH AS THAT?

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: JUST FORMS.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY

MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOUR CLARIFICATIONS.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL BRIEFLY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. GANDOLFO: I APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR

CLARIFYING SOME OF THESE THINGS. WHEN I HAD STARTED RESEARCHING THE

BILL AND I CAME ACROSS THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A DEFINITION OF EMOTIONAL

DISTURBANCE IN FEDERAL REGS, I HAD A CONCERN THAT THIS MIGHT CAUSE A

CONFLICT AND LEAD TO SOME IMPRECISE LANGUAGE; HOWEVER, AFTER SPEAKING

WITH THE SPONSOR AND HEARING HER RESPONSES HERE, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT TO

BE THE CASE. BECAUSE SOMEONE WHO IS EXPERIENCING AN EMOTIONAL

CRISIS MIGHT NOT HAVE AN UNDERLYING EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCE AS DEFINED

IN FEDERAL REGULATION, AND SOMEONE WITH AN EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCE

MIGHT NOT CONSTANTLY BE IN A STATE OF CRISIS.

SO I THINK THE INTENT OF THIS BILL IS GOOD. I THINK IT

DOES ACTUALLY MAKE THE LANGUAGE MORE PRECISE, ESPECIALLY WHEN FILLING

OUT A -- A REPORT AFTER A RESPONSE. SO I -- I WILL BE VOTING FOR THIS BILL

AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YES VOTES FROM MY COLLEAGUES AS WELL.

THANK YOU TO THE SPONSOR AND THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER. WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A QUESTION?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

YIELD?

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: SO, YOU MENTIONED THAT

THIS IS GOING TO IMPACT THE LANGUAGE THAT'S USED IN MOST FORMS THAT

PEOPLE HAVE TO FILL OUT FOR WHATEVER REASON, AS IT RELATES TO SOME LEVEL

OF GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY. IS THIS ALSO INCLUDING THE COURTS?

(CONFERENCING)

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: NO, THIS IS JUST FOR

THE AGENCIES, UPDATE THEIR OUTDATED LANGUAGE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: DID YOU SAY AGENCIES?

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: MM-HMM.

OKAY. AGENCIES AND LOCAL MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: OKAY. SO THAT INCLUDES

SOCIAL SERVICE DEPARTMENTS?

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: REPEAT THAT,

PLEASE?

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: INCLUSIVE OF SOCIAL

SERVICE AGENCIES?

(CONFERENCING)

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: YES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: OKAY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ON THE BILL. I JUST WANT TO MENTION --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: I REALLY DO THINK THIS IS

AN AMAZING IDEA TO TRANSFORM HOW WE THINK ABOUT PEOPLE AND THE

CONDITION THAT THEY'RE IN. AND IT -- IT BRINGS ME TO YESTERDAY'S

CONVERSATION ON MR. HEVESI'S BILL WHEN I WONDERED, HOW DID WE GET

HERE WHEN THERE ARE SO MANY DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILIES IN OUR SOCIETY.

THIS MAY BE ONE OF THE WAYS THAT WE GOT HERE, BY THE HARSH LANGUAGE

THAT WE SOMETIMES USE THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY INTENDED FOR EVERY

PERSON.

SO I'M EXTREMELY IMPRESSED WITH THE THOUGHT PROCESS

OF CHANGING HOW WE DISCUSS THIS ISSUE, AND I THINK WE MAY GET TO A

BETTER PLACE WITH IT AS WELL. SO THANK YOU, AND I COMMEND THE SPONSOR

ON THIS LEGISLATION.

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.)

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. CHANDLER-WATERMAN: THANK YOU,

MADAM SPEAKER. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS BILL UNDERSCORES THE

IMPORTANCE OF HOW WE THINK ABOUT, FEEL TOWARDS, AND RESPOND TO

PEOPLE EXPERIENCING MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS. LANGUAGE HAS THE POWER TO

HEAL OR TO HARM. WE, AS HUMANS, KNOW THAT HOW A SYSTEM TALKS ABOUT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PEOPLE IS OFTEN HOW IT TREATS THEM. SHIFTING FROM EMOTIONAL [SIC]

DISTURBED TO PERSON EXPERIENCING AN EMOTIONAL CRISIS IS NOT ONLY

PERSON-CENTERED, IT IS TRAUMA INFORMED. THIS TERMINOLOGY DEESCALATES

PUBLIC PERCEPTION, PARTICULARLY IN POLICE OR EMERGENCY CONTEXT, AND

RESTORES DIGNITY TO INDIVIDUALS IN MOMENTS OF VULNERABILITY. WHEN WE

LABEL SOMEONE AS "DISTURBED" WE DISTANCE OURSELVES FROM THEIR

HUMANITY. WHEN WE SAY THAT THEY ARE EXPERIENCING A CRISIS, WE INVITE

EMPATHY AND ACTION. ULTIMATELY, THE WAY WE TALK ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH

CAN EITHER PROMOTE UNDERSTANDING OR REENFORCE STIGMA, DISCRIMINATION

AND EXCLUSION.

AS WE CONCLUDE, IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT

WORDS SHAPE OUR THOUGHTS AND ACTION, MAKING TODAY'S FOCUS ON THE

POWER OF LANGUAGE ALL THE MORE VITAL. I CHOOSE -- I CHOOSE TO USE

LANGUAGE AS A TOOL TO BREAK STIGMAS AND ULTIMATELY SAVE LIVES.

I WILL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND I ENCOURAGE

EVERYONE HERE TO VOTE AS WELL. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. CHANDLER-

WATERMAN 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, WE CAN

CONTINUE ON OUR DEBATES. WE'RE GONNA TAKE -- ACTUALLY, WE SHOULD

ADVANCE THE A-CALENDAR FIRST, PLEASE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON MRS. PEOPLES-

STOKES' MOTION, THE A-CALENDAR IS ADVANCED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU. NOW, FROM

THE A-CALENDAR WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP RULES REPORT NO. 700 BY MR.

RIVERA. IT'S ON PAGE 15. FOLLOWED BY RULES REPORT NO. 699 BY MR.

DILAN. IT'S ON PAGE 15 AS WELL. AND THEN WE'RE GONNA GO TO RULES

REPORT NO. 656 BY MR. BORES. THAT ONE'S ON PAGE 5. RULES REPORT

NO. 686 BY MS. GALLAGHER. THAT ONE'S ON PAGE 12. AND WE'RE GONNA

END UP WITH THIS LEVEL OF DEBATES AT RULES REPORT NO. 675 BY MR. OTIS.

THAT ONE'S ON PAGE 10. IN THAT ORDER, MADAM SPEAKER. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

PAGE 15, RULES REPORT NO. 700, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08883, RULES REPORT

NO. 700, RIVERA, PEOPLES-STOKES, BRONSON. AN ACT TO AMEND THE

JUDICIARY LAW, IN RELATION TO JUDICIAL DEPARTMENTS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: AN EXPLANATION HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. RIVERA.

MR. RIVERA: THANK YOU. THE STATE CONSTITUTION

EMPOWERS THE LEGISLATURE TO ADJUST JUDICIAL DISTRICTS INCLUDING

INCREASING OR DECREASING THEIR NUMBER, AND ALTERING THEIR COMPOSITION

ONCE EVERY TEN YEARS. THIS ALLOWS FOR THE REAPPORTIONMENT OF JUSTICES

WITHIN THESE ALTERED DISTRICTS. THE LEGISLATURE LAST EXERCISED THIS

AUTHORITY IN 2007 WHEN IT ESTABLISHED THE 13TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT IN

RICHMOND COUNTY. THIS BILL AIMS TO MAKE SURE OUR ELECTED JUDGES

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

GENUINELY REFLECT THE DIVERSE COMMUNITIES THEY REPRESENT. PRESENTLY,

EXISTING JUDICIAL DISTRICT LINES DILUTE THE VOICES OF VARIOUS

COMMUNITIES, PREVENTING A REPRESENTATIVE JUDICIARY FROM BEING

ELECTED. BY DRAWING DISTRICTS THAT ACCURATELY INCLUDE AND EMPOWER

DIVERSE POPULATIONS, WE CAN CULTIVATE A JUDICIARY THAT BETTER

UNDERSTANDS AND SERVES EVERYONE, BUILDING GREATER PUBLIC TRUST AND

DELIVERING MORE EQUITABLE JUSTICE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. JENSEN.

MR. JENSEN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE HONORABLE GENTLEMAN FROM BUFFALO YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. RIVERA, WILL

YOU YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: FOR THE HONORABLE GENTLEMAN FROM

MONROE COUNTY, SURE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. JENSEN: YOU'RE -- YOU'RE TOO KIND, MR. RIVERA.

I APPRECIATE IT.

I KNOW YOU JUST TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROCESS

ABOUT WHY WE'RE DOING THIS, A PREVIOUS EXAMPLE OF -- OF WHEN WE LAST

DID THIS AND -- AND UTILIZED OUR ROLE PER THE STATE CONSTITUTION. BUT

COULD YOU DELVE INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE JUSTIFICATION FOR

BRINGING THIS NOW, MAYBE BY EXPANDING ON THE ISSUES OF DIVERSITY OR

EQUITY THAT YOU -- YOU BROUGHT UP IN YOUR EXPLANATION?

MR. RIVERA: SURE. THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT I HAVE

BEEN LOOKING AT OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. LAST YEAR I PROPOSED A SIMILAR

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT SPOKE TO THE 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT WHERE I LIVE.

OTHER MEMBERS HAVE PROPOSED SIMILAR IDEAS FOR THE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

THEY LIVED IN. AND AS WE KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING TO BE DONE ONCE

EVERY TEN YEARS, SO COLLECTIVELY WE CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT IT WAS

WISE TO DO IT TOGETHER. AT THE END OF THE DAY WE FEEL AS THOUGH,

ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING HOW LONG IT'S BEEN SINCE THESE LINES HAVE

CHANGED AND THE NATURE OF THE CHANGING POPULATION OF THESE AREAS, THAT

IT WAS ESSENTIAL FOR US TO CONSIDER WHATEVER WE COULD DO TO CREATE A

MORE REFLECTIVE JUDICIARY IN THESE -- IN THESE REGIONS.

MR. JENSEN: SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT -- WHEN YOU

TALK ABOUT A REFLECTIVE JUDICIARY, AND WITH MYSELF BEING A MEMBER OF

THE 7TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, WHICH I THINK IS THE MOST AFFECTED PART OF THIS

PROPOSED LEGISLATION, AND MAKING IT TO YOUR POINT MORE REFLECTED, IS

THAT -- IS THAT BASED ON RACE? IS IT BASED ON GENDER? IS IT BASED ON

POPULATIONS FROM THE COMMUNITIES THAT THESE INDIVIDUALS THAT CURRENTLY

SERVE ON THE SUPREME COURT ARE ELECTED FROM? WHAT'S -- WHAT'S, I

GUESS, THE BIGGEST EQUITY ARGUMENT THAT YOU THINK IS MOST COMPELLING?

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. NO, I MEAN, IT -- IT RANGES. SO,

FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT MONROE COUNTY, FOR

EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, THE DISTRICT AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS IS A LITTLE OVER 1.2

MILLION PEOPLE. THE SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF THAT 1.2 MILLION PEOPLE, 61

PERCENT, JUST LIVE IN ONE COUNTY; THAT'S MONROE COUNTY. OF THAT -- OF

MONROE COUNTY, IT IS THE OVERWHELMING CENTER OF NOT JUST POPULATION,

BUT OF DIVERSITY. FOR EXAMPLE, IN -- IN MONROE COUNTY THE POPULATION

OF THE -- OF THE ENTIRE SORT OF JUDICIAL DISTRICT, 91 PERCENT OF THE AFRICAN-

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AMERICAN POPULATION IN MONROE -- IN -- IN THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT IS IN ONE

COUNTY; THAT'S MONROE. EIGHTY-SEVEN PERCENT OF THE ASIAN POPULATION

OF THE ENTIRE JUDICIAL DISTRICT IS IN ONE COUNTY; THAT'S MONROE. ALMOST

80 PERCENT OF THE HISPANIC POPULATION OF THE ENTIRE JUDICIAL DISTRICT IS

IN ONE COUNTY; THAT'S MONROE. AND AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, OUT OF THE 67

JUSTICES OF THE 4TH DEPARTMENT, ONLY TWO OF THEM ARE AFRICAN-

AMERICAN. NONE ARE ASIAN. NONE ARE HISPANIC. AND WE FEEL AS

THOUGH, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THOSE NUMBERS IN AND OF ITSELF WE SEE

THAT THERE'S A CORRELATION BETWEEN THE DIFFICULTY TO HAVE REPRESENTATION

AND SORT OF THE DROWNING OUT OF THE BIGGER JUDICIAL DISTRICT WHEN SO

MUCH OF THE POPULATION IS CONCENTRATED INTO ONE COUNTY.

MR. JENSEN: SO UNDER THAT EXPLANATION, WOULD IT --

WOULD IT SURMISE -- DO YOU SURMISE THAT BY SPECIFICALLY DESIGNING THE

7TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT TO WHOLLY CONTAIN MONROE COUNTY, THE 8TH

JUDICIAL DISTRICT TO WHOLLY CONTAIN ERIE COUNTY, AND THE 14 -- THE NEW

14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT TO WHOLLY CONTAIN ONONDAGA COUNTY, THAT WE

WOULD SEE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES ELECTED THAT REFLECT THE -- THE RACIAL

MAKEUPS OF THOSE THREE COUNTIES SPECIFICALLY?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY THAT THE POPULATION

REFLECTS A HIGHER PROBABILITY -- WELL, LET'S SEE. IN THE NEW MAPS THERE'S

A HIGHER PROBABILITY THAT INDIVIDUALS THAT RESIDE IN THOSE COUNTIES ARE

GONNA FIND THEMSELVES IN FRONT OF A JUDGE THAT -- THAT IS FROM THEIR

COMMUNITY. WE'RE FOCUSING NOW ON SORT OF THE -- THE ETHNIC/RACIAL PART

OF IT, BUT THE REALITY IS ALSO IF YOU JUST LOOK AT MY JUDICIAL DISTRICT, FOR

EXAMPLE, THE 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT AND ERIE COUNTY IS A OVER 900,000-

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PERSON COUNTY. SO MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, JUDGES ARE ELECTED FROM ERIE

COUNTY IN THE ENTIRE JUDICIAL DISTRICT. SO NOW IF I WAS A RESIDENT OF

ORLEANS COUNTY OR ALLEGANY COUNTY OR WYOMING COUNTY, I WOULD

FIND IT DIFFICULT TO FIND A JUDGE FROM MY COUNTY. BUT UNDER THIS NEW

DESIGN, UNDER THESE NEW BOUNDARIES, THERE'S A MUCH HIGHER PROBABILITY

BECAUSE ERIE COUNTY IS SEPARATE FROM THE REST OF THOSE COUNTIES. SO

RIGHT NOW, IF I'M A RESIDENT OF -- I'LL JUST PICK ONE -- FOR EXAMPLE,

ALLEGANY COUNTY, THAT FROM MY UNDERSTANDING HASN'T SEEN A SUPREME

COURT JUSTICE ELECTED FROM THAT COUNTY SINCE THE EARLY '80S, COULD NOW

MEAN IF I'M FROM ALLEGANY COUNTY THERE'S A HIGHER PROBABILITY THAT THE

JUDGE THAT'S IN FRONT OF ME IS FROM MY -- FROM MY COUNTY, FROM MY

COMMUNITY, KNOWS MY COMMUNITY.

MR. JENSEN: BUT DOESN'T -- SO, UNDERSTANDING THAT

THE -- THE VOTERS IN EACH OF THE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS ELECT THE SUPREME

COURT JUSTICES FROM THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT, DOESN'T THE O -- DOESN'T OCA

DETERMINE WHERE THE SUPREME COURT JUDGE IS LOCATED? SO COULDN'T A

JUDGE ELECTED OUT OF ALLEGANY COUNTY, TO YOUR POINT AND YOUR EXAMPLE,

BE ASSIGNED TO EITHER ANOTHER COUNTY WITHIN THE SAME JUDICIAL DISTRICT

OR AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT JUDICIAL DISTRICT THAT OCA COULD ASSIGN

SOMEBODY FROM ALLEGANY COUNTY TO SUFFOLK COUNTY OR TO THE CITY OF

BUFFALO?

MR. RIVERA: SURE. UNDER THAT SCENARIO IT'S

ASSUMING THAT SOMEONE FROM ALLEGANY HAS WON AN ELECTION -- WELL, HAS

GOTTEN THE NOMINATION, HAS BEEN ENDORSED BY WHATEVER PARTY THEY'RE

AFFILIATED WITH, HAS GONE THROUGH THEIR JUDICIAL CONVENTION, AND GOT ON

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THE BALLOT AND HAS WON. THE PROBLEM IS THE FACT THAT SOMEBODY FROM

ALLEGANY COUNTY HASN'T BEEN ELECTED SINCE 1981 MEANS THAT THAT'S NOT

HAPPENING. SO YOU'RE RIGHT IN THEORY THAT OCA CAN PUT A JUDGE HERE

VERSUS THERE. BUT IF A PERSON'S NEVER ELECTED TO BEGIN WITH, THEN OCA

HAS NO (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK).

MR. JENSEN: BUT THERE'S ALSO -- BUT THEY COULD BE

ELECTED FROM ALLEGANY COUNTY OR ANY OF THE OTHER COUNTIES IN THESE

FIVE PROPOSED JDS. BUT THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT THEY WILL ACTUALLY

HAVE THEIR COURT BASED IN THE COUNTY FROM WHICH THEY ARE ELECTED --

THAT THEY RESIDE IN.

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY OCA HAS BROAD AUTHORITY

ON A NUMBER OF THINGS.

MR. JENSEN: SPEAKING OF OCA, HAVE THEY WEIGHED

IN ON THIS PROPOSAL?

MR. RIVERA: IN THE CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD WITH

OCA, THEY ARE FULLY IN AGREEMENT THAT THE ISSUES THAT WE SEE AROUND

DIVERSIFYING THE JUDICIARY IS SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE FULLY AWARE OF AND

IT'S SOMETHING THEY WISH TO TACKLE.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY. WELL, MY -- MY UNDERSTANDING

IS THAT THEY -- THEY HAVE, I THINK TODAY OR EARLIER THIS WEEK, DID PUT OUT

-- AND WHETHER IT'S FROM THE CHIEF JUDGE -- JUDGE OR ANOTHER

SPOKESPERSON FOR THE -- THE COURT -- THAT THEY SAID THAT ACTING ON THIS --

I'M PARAPHRASING -- THAT ACTING ON THIS TODAY WAS NOT IN OCA'S BEST

INTERESTS, THAT THEY PREFER IT BE DELAYED UNTIL NEXT YEAR TO HAVE FURTHER

CONVERSATIONS, DISCUSSION AND STUDY ABOUT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

NEW JDS.

MR. RIVERA: I GUESS I'D HAVE TWO POINTS TO THAT;

FIRST, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK IS CLEAR. IT'S THE

OBLIGATION OF THE LEGISLATURE TO DO THIS.

MR. JENSEN: MM-HMM.

MR. RIVERA: WE HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO DO THIS

ONCE EVERY TEN YEARS, AND WE HAVE NOT DONE THIS IN QUITE SOME TIME.

SO -- SO OCA MIGHT SAY, YES, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE TAKEN PART IN SOME

SORT OF CONVERSATION. IN REALITY, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, I HAD A BILL ON

THIS A YEAR AGO.

MR. JENSEN: MM-HMM.

MR. RIVERA: CONVERSATIONS WITH OCA HAPPENED

THEN. I'M SURE MY SENATE COUNTERPARTS HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH OCA

ON THEIR SIDE. SO IT'S -- IT'S NOT FROM OUT OF LEFT FIELD, BY ANY MEANS.

WHAT I WOULD ALSO SAY IS, ASIDE FROM IT BEING OUR RESPONSIBILITY AND

OUR OBLIGATION, I'D ALSO SAY, YOU KNOW, I -- I TRIED WITH THE BEST EFFORTS I

COULD TO TRY TO DETERMINE, AT LEAST IN THE CASE OF MY JUDICIAL DISTRICT,

WHEN THE LAST TIME IT WAS REDRAWN. AND I TALKED TO, YOU KNOW,

ATTORNEYS AND RETIRED JUDGES THAT GO FAR BACK, TO SAY IT BLUNTLY, A LOT

OLDER THAN YOU AND I, AND THE CONCLUSION THAT THEY ALL HAD WITH SOME OF

THEM PRACTICING LAW FOR 40, 50 YEARS IS THAT AS LONG AS THEY COULD

REMEMBER, THESE LINES LOOKED THIS WAY. SO THAT MEANS -- AND SOME OF

THEM ASSUMED AS FAR AS BACK AS IT COULD HAVE BEEN THIS WAY, THIS EXACT

SAME SETUP, SINCE THE TURN OF THE CENTURY. SO -- SO TAKING INTO ACCOUNT

HOW MUCH POPULATION CHANGES AND HOW MUCH PEOPLE MOVE AND -- AND

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WHAT DISTRICTS LOOK LIKE AND SIMPLY WHAT WE'VE CHANGED IN THE LAST 100

YEARS IN THIS STATE, WE -- WE CAN'T SAY THAT -- THAT NOW'S NOT THE RIGHT

TIME. WE -- WE'VE MISSED THE BOAT TOO MANY TIMES TO SAY, OH, LET'S

JUST WAIT ANOTHER YEAR.

MR. JENSEN: AND CERTAINLY I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT

AND -- AND YOU'RE CERTAINLY NOT GONNA GET AN ARGUMENT FROM ME AS

SOMEBODY WHO BELIEVES IN OUR INSTITUTION, THE LEGISLATURE AS AN

INSTITUTION ABOUT UTILIZING EVERY -- EVERY ARROW IN OUR CONSTITUTIONAL

QUIVER WHEN IT'S APPROPRIATE. BUT I THINK -- I THINK IT'D BE A DIFFERENT

CONVERSATION IF WE WERE UP AGAINST A DEADLINE WHERE WE -- WE COULDN'T

ACT BECAUSE OF A -- A SET CUTOFF. BUT WITH THE MOST RECENT CREATION OF A

JUDICIAL DISTRICT HAPPENING IN -- IN 27 -- 2007, THERE IS NO DEADLINE THAT

WE HAVE TO MEET THAT -- YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU -- YOU INTRODUCED A --

A STANDALONE PIECE OF LEGISLATION FOR THE 8TH JD. I KNOW ONE OF MY

COLLEAGUES DID ONE FOR THE 7TH JD. AND SO THE CONVERSATIONS HAVE LED

TO THE BILL WE HAVE BEFORE US TODAY. BUT THERE IS NO STATUTORY RUSH FOR

US TO NOT HAVE LARGER DISCUSSIONS, ESPECIALLY WITH OCA AND THE

RESIDENTS OF THE EXISTING 5TH, 7TH AND 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICTS.

MR. RIVERA: I -- I WOULD SAY IT'S IN THAT ABSENCE OF

A DEADLINE OR OF A RUSH THAT HAS MADE IT SO THAT THESE DISTRICTS HAVE NOT

CHANGED IN BOTH OF OUR LIFETIMES PUT TOGETHER. SO THE CHANGE -- THE

ABSENCE OF A -- OF A DEADLINE OR A RUSH HAS ONLY LEFT IT THE SAME WAY IT'S

BEEN FOR AS LONG AS MANY OF US CAN REMEMBER. AND IN REALITY, I FEEL

STRONGLY THAT WE'RE HERE, ELECTED FROM THE VARIOUS DISTRICTS WE COME

FROM, TO SORT OF MOVE IN A FASTER ACTION THAN JUST SORT OF SAYING, WELL,

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THIS WAY AND THAT'S HOW IT IS. I -- I THINK THAT WE'RE

HERE TO -- TO BRING FORTH A CHANGE, AND IF NOTHING ELSE, TO ENSURE THAT

WHATEVER FORM OF GOVERNMENT IS STANDING BEFORE A PERSON IT'S -- IT'S

MORE BETTER REFLECTIVE OF THAT COMMUNITY.

MR. JENSEN: AND CERTAINLY I -- I DON'T HAVE ANY

ARGUMENT ON -- ON THAT GENERAL STATEMENT.

I WANT TO GET BACK TO THAT IN A MOMENT, BUT JUST TO

FINISH UP ON MY OCA TANGENT. IS THERE ANY FISCAL COST ATTACHED TO THE

THIS LEGISLATION? AND IF THERE IS, IS THERE ANY APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE

EITHER IN THIS BILL OR A BILL THAT WE CAN EXPECT TO SEE BEFORE THE END OF

THIS YEAR'S LEGISLATIVE SESSION TO COVER THE COST OF CREATING TWO NEW

JUDICIAL DISTRICTS?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY THAT THERE ARE NO NEW

CREATIONS OF NEW JUDGESHIPS. THERE IS NOT ANY SPEAK -- THERE'S NO SORT

OF A REQUIREMENT OF BUILDING NEW COURTHOUSES. YOU KNOW, COUNTIES

HAVE COURTHOUSES IN EVERY COUNTY OF THIS -- OF THIS STATE. I WOULD SAY

THAT THE -- THE COST OF THIS IS GONNA BE DEEPLY NOMINAL.

MR. JENSEN: SO --

MR. RIVERA: NO, GO AHEAD.

MR. JENSEN: SO -- SO, DEEPLY NOMINAL. THE OCA

ESTIMATES IT'S GONNA COST ABOUT $9.6 MILLION TO CREATE THE TWO NEW

JUDICIAL DISTRICTS, WHICH I -- I WOULD AGREE THAT IN A BUDGET OF $254

BILLION, 9.6 MILLION WOULD BE IN THAT CLASSIFICATION TERMED AS NOMINAL.

BUT YET THERE IS STILL A COST THAT THE JUDICIARY BRANCH WOULD HAVE TO

INCUR, ESPECIALLY IF THESE SEATS ARE GONNA BE UP FOR ELECTION IN 2026.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SO I GUESS THAT'S -- YOU KNOW, I'M A LITTLE HESITANT ABOUT PROCEEDING

WITH A CHANGE WHERE CERTAIN PARTS OF THIS BILL BECOME EFFECTIVE

IMMEDIATELY WITHOUT HAVING APPROPRIATION OUTLAYS TO ENSURE THAT

JUSTICE CAN BE HEARD, GIVEN, DIRECTED IN A MOST EXPEDIENT MANNER.

GOING BACK TO THE PART ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT OUR

COMMUNITIES HAVE BEEN HEARD, CERTAINLY WE ALL DO THAT HERE. WE'RE ALL

REPRESENTED BY -- WE ALL REPRESENT CONSTITUENTS. A LOT OF LEGISLATION HAS

COME UP THIS YEAR AND IT'S -- IT'S BEEN JUSTIFIED WHY WE DID IT; BECAUSE

OUR CONSTITUENTS HAVE BEEN CALLING FOR IT, INTERFACING. WERE THERE ANY

PUBLIC HEARINGS AMONGST THE RESIDENTS OF THE 5TH, 7TH OR 8TH JUDICIAL

DISTRICTS TO GET THEIR FEEDBACK ON THIS PROPOSAL OR ON THE PROPOSAL OF

ANY NEW JUDICIAL DISTRICTS IN NEW YORK STATE?

MR. RIVERA: YOU KNOW, AS PER THE STATE

CONSTITUTION, IT DOESN'T SAY THAT IT'S REQUIRED, CERTAINLY. THAT BEING

SAID, I'VE HAD COUNTLESS CONVERSATIONS WITH THE MOST DIRECTLY-AFFECTED

SORT OF STAKEHOLDERS, INCLUDING OCA AND -- AND AN ARRAY OF JUDGES. SO

I -- I FEEL THAT EVERYONE IS IN AGREEMENT THAT THE -- THE CHANGES NEED TO

BE MADE IN EVERY CONVERSATION I'VE HAD. AND THE ONLY CONVERSATION

THAT I'VE HAD THAT'S LED PEOPLE TO SORT OF -- WELL, LET ME TAKE A STEP BACK.

THE -- THE INTENT OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS UNIVERSALLY SORT OF

PERCEIVED TO BE THE RIGHT THING TO DO. SOME PEOPLE WILL SAY THAT THE

TIMING IS THIS OR THAT. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, YOU

KNOW, THIS HAS BEEN FAR TOO LONG THAT IT'S BEEN THIS WAY AND, YOU KNOW,

WE'RE NOT ON ANY OTHER TIMELINE OTHER THAN THE TIMELINE OF THE NEED THAT

WE SEE IN FRONT OF US TODAY.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. JENSEN: OKAY. YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY I -- I

BELIEVE IN, AND YOU MENTIONED, AND I THINK RIGHTFULLY SO, THAT BEFORE

LEGISLATION COMES BEFORE US THAT THE SPONSOR OR THE PROPONENTS ARE

SPEAKING TO STAKEHOLDERS. AND I WOULD ARGUE THAT, YES, THE EXISTING

JUDGES WHO CURRENTLY SERVE IN THESE -- THE THREE EXISTING JDS, YOU

KNOW, THEY WOULD CERTAINLY HAVE THE NEED TO WEIGH IN. THE THREE

EXISTING ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGES WOULD HAVE A SAY. HAS THERE BEEN A --

HAVE YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGES FROM THE

5TH, 7TH AND 8TH JDS ABOUT HOW THIS CHANGE WOULD IMPACT THEIR COURTS,

AS WELL AS THE JUDGES AND, MORE -- MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE NEW YORKERS

WHO COME TO TRIAL FOR WHATEVER REASON IN THOSE JURISDICTIONS?

MR. RIVERA: I'VE SPOKEN TO ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGES

WITHIN -- I'VE SPOKE TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE IN -- WITHIN OCA; YES, I

HAVE.

MR. JENSEN: SO -- SO JUST (INDISCERNIBLE/

CROSS-TALK).

MR. RIVERA: AND HE WAS OF THE THOUGHT THAT -- YOU

KNOW, HE ALSO CONCURRED WITH MY POSITION IN THAT THERE IS A DIVERSITY

PROBLEM IN THE BENCH. I THINK THAT'S UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED. I MENTIONED

THE STATISTIC EARLIER OF THE 67 JUSTICES THAT ARE IN THE 4TH DEPARTMENT,

ONLY TWO OF THEM ARE BLACK, AND FRANKLY, THAT'S ALL IN ONE COUNTY. SO

THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF -- OF -- OF THIS DEPARTMENT DOES NOT HAVE

A SINGLE PERSON OF COLOR ON THE BENCH. THAT'S A PROBLEM FOR AN

ENUMERABLE SET OF REASONS.

MR. JENSEN: JUST -- JUST --

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: HOLD ON.

MR. JENSEN: I'M SORRY.

MR. RIVERA: BUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOU KNOW, YOUR

-- YOUR TAKE ON, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH CONVERSATION HAS EXISTED

BETWEEN US AND OCA, YOU KNOW, LIKE -- LIKE I SAID BEFORE, IT'S OUR

OBLIGATION, THERE'S A REASON. IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION IT'S CLEAR THAT IT'S

OUR DUTY, IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY. AND TO SORT OF BROADEN THAT TO TAKE IN

THE INPUT OF THE BODY ITSELF THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO SORT OF REALIGN, YOU

KNOW, I DON'T SEE WHY WE WOULD GIVE UP A SPACE IN OUR DUTY AND

RESPONSIBILITY THAT WE'RE ELECTED TO DO TO REALLY ANYBODY.

MR. JENSEN: FAIR ENOUGH.

MOVING INTO HOW CERTAIN SPECIFICS OF THIS LEGISLATION

WERE DECIDED, WHAT WAS THE -- THE JUSTIFICATION OR THE REASONING FOR

ASSIGNING THE JUDGES FROM THE THREE EXISTING JDS INTO FIVE JDS? AND

NOT TALKING ABOUT THE -- THE TOTAL NUMBER IN EACH JD, BUT THE ACTUAL

SPECIFIC NAMED JUDGES. LIKE, WHY WOULD JANE DOE GO FROM THE 7TH TO

THE 15TH, BUT JIM SMITH WOULD GO FROM THE 7TH TO THE 5TH?

MR. RIVERA: SURE. A COUPLE THINGS WERE TAKEN

INTO ACCOUNT. FOR EXAMPLE, ONE, WE TOOK INTO ACCOUNT THE SENIORITY

AND WHERE THEY CURRENTLY WERE ASSIGNED. I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO

NOTE THAT OCA HAS THE AUTHORITY TO SIT JUDGES WHERE THEY ARE, AS YOU

SAID BEFORE, AND OFTEN THEY DO THAT. YOU KNOW, WE -- YOU KNOW,

WOULD ALSO LIKE TO MAKE THAT CLEAR TO EVERYBODY, THAT -- THAT AS IT

CURRENTLY STANDS, WE TOOK INTO ACCOUNT, YOU KNOW, SENIORITY AND WE

ALSO TOOK INTO ACCOUNT WHERE THAT JUDGE IS LOCATED AND FEEL THAT THE END

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

RESULT IS -- IS, YOU KNOW, FAIR TO -- TO ALL OF THOSE. BUT AT THE END OF THE

DAY THE OTHER THING TO CONSIDER IS WHO'S OCCUPYING A JUDICIAL SEAT

TODAY, JUST MUCH AS ANY OF US IN THIS ROOM WHO OCCUPY OUR SEATS TODAY,

IT -- IT -- YOU KNOW, OUR SEATS, MY 104TH ASSEMBLY DISTRICT, MUST LAST

MUCH LONGER THAN I WILL. AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU KNOW, WE

MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON NOT ON THE INDIVIDUAL, BUT ON THE -- ON -- ON

THE DISTRICT.

MR. JENSEN: I -- AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. YOU

KNOW, WHETHER IT'S A SUPREME COURT JUDGE, A STATE ASSEMBLYMEMBER

OR A VILLAGE TRUSTEE, THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT IT'LL BE A CERTAIN -- A

MEMBER OF A CERTAIN POLITICAL PARTY, THAT IT'LL BE A CERTAIN GENDER, A

CERTAIN ETHNICITY. BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY IT DEPENDS ON WHO THE

CANDIDATES ARE AND WHO THE VOTERS CHOOSE TO PUT THEIR FAITH IN TO FULFILL

THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE JOB THAT THEY'RE SEEKING TO FILL. SO I WOULD AGREE

WITH THAT.

SO YOU TALKED ABOUT THE JUDGES ARE ASSIGNED BASED ON

SENIORITY. SO YOU MEAN THAT IT WAS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF EXISTING

SENIOR JUDGES WHO ARE NOW NO LONGER IN AN ELECTED SEAT BUT THEY'VE HIT

SENIOR STATUS? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE JUDGES WHO ARE APPROACHING

THE MANDATORY RETIREMENT AGE, OR ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT LONGEVITY OF

SERVICE ON THE BENCH IN THAT ROLE OR IN ANY JUDICIAL OFFICE?

MR. RIVERA: I GUESS THE STARTING POINT THAT I SHOULD

HAVE MENTIONED BEFORE IS THAT IT'S CLEAR BY OUR CONSTITUTION THAT THERE'S

A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF JUST -- JUSTICES SPELLED OUT, AND IT'S 50,000

RESIDENTS PER JUSTICE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. JENSEN: MM-HMM.

MR. RIVERA: SO THAT'S SORT OF A STARTING POINT I

SHOULD HAVE MENTIONED AS WELL. THAT'S UNAFFECTED BY THIS AS WELL.

MR. JENSEN: MR. RIVERA, I CONCEDED THAT FACT. I

DIDN'T --

MR. RIVERA: YEAH, YEAH. I WANTED IT MENTIONED.

SO THE -- THE QUESTION IS WHAT -- WHAT WAS TAKEN INTO

-- INTO ACCOUNT?

MR. JENSEN: YEAH. SO HOW WERE YOU -- YOU

MENTIONED THAT ONE OF THE BIG THINGS WAS SENIORITY, AND I JUST ASKED FOR

CLARIFICATION. WAS IT TRYING TO PLACE JUDGES WHO ARE IN SENIOR STATUS

INTO THE LARGER JUDICIAL POPULATION AREAS? WAS IT LOOKING AT JUDGES

WHO ARE GETTING CLOSE TO THIS -- THE -- THE MANDATORY RETIREMENT AGE --

MR. RIVERA: NO, NO.

MR. JENSEN: -- INTO SPECIFIC AREAS, OR WAS IT BASED

ON TOTAL LONGEVITY OF SERVICE ON THE SUPREME COURT BENCH OR ON THE

JUDICIAL BENCH AT-LARGE?

MR. RIVERA: THE LATTER.

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

WERE THE -- AND I KNOW YOU MENTIONED YOU -- YOU

SPOKE TO ONE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE. I'M -- I'M GUESSING THAT WAS IN THE

8TH. WAS THERE ANY CONSULTATION WITH THE FIVE -- OR NOT THE FIVE, THE

THREE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGES ON THE ASSIGNING OF JUDGES ACROSS THE NEW

PROPOSED FIVE JDS?

MR. RIVERA: ONE OF THE CONCENTRATIONS THAT WE DID

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

TAKE INTO ACCOUNT IS THAT WE MADE SURE THAT THOSE THAT WERE APPELLATE

JUDGES STOOD IN THE SAME PLACE.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY.

MR. RIVERA: AND IF YOU'RE -- TO THE QUESTION OF DID

I HAVE CONVERSATIONS, I SPOKE TO PRESIDING JUDGES OF APPELLATES. I'VE

SPOKEN TO, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, MORE JUDGES IN THE LAST COUPLE OF

WEEKS THAN I HAVE IN MY WHOLE LIFE.

MR. JENSEN: SEE, I TYPICALLY TRY NOT TO TALK TO

JUDGES, BUT THAT'S JUST NORMALLY --

MR. RIVERA: SAME.

MR. JENSEN: -- I TRY NOT TO TALK TO PEOPLE WITH THE

POWER TO SEND ME TO PRISON.

MR. RIVERA: MY -- MY NUMBER'S OUT THERE, SO --

MR. JENSEN: BUT THAT -- THAT'S JUST BY AND LARGE A

PERSONAL POLICY.

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. I GET IT.

MR. JENSEN: FAIR ENOUGH.

YOU MENTIONED THAT IN THE ENTIRE 4TH DEPARTMENT

THERE'S ONLY TWO MINORITY JUDGES, TWO AFRICAN-AMERICAN JUDGES. AND

I -- FORGIVE ME, I DON'T KNOW WHAT JUDICIAL DISTRICT THEY CURRENTLY SERVE

IN.

MR. RIVERA: EIGHTH. SOLELY IN ERIE COUNTY.

MR. JENSEN: SOLELY IN ERIE COUNTY. WERE THEY

KEPT IN THE 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OR WERE THEY ASSIGNED EITHER SEPARATELY

OR TOGETHER TO A NEW -- TO THE 15TH JD?

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: THEY WERE KEPT IN THE 8TH.

MR. JENSEN: THEY WERE KEPT. OKAY, SO THE TWO

AFRICAN-AMERICANS JUDGES WERE KEPT IN THE 8TH DISTRICT. OKAY.

MR. RIVERA: RIGHT. AND TRUTHFULLY, IN THE -- IN THE

SCENARIO OF BOTH OF THEM, THEY'RE BOTH APPELLATE JUDGES.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY.

MR. RIVERA: AND ALL THE APPELLATES ARE KEPT

TOGETHER.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THIS IS -- I'M

-- I'M NOT A LAWYER, I TRY NOT TO PLAY ONE.

MR. RIVERA: ME NEITHER.

MR. JENSEN: IT'S GREAT THAT WE'RE -- WE'RE PROBABLY

MR. RIVERA: SURE.

MR. JENSEN: -- THE TWO MOST APPROPRIATE PEOPLE TO

BE DEBATING THIS.

MR. RIVERA: SURE, SURE.

MR. JENSEN: BUT WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPACT -- AND

IN MY UNFAMILIARITY WITH THE MECHANISMS OF COURT CASES, IS THERE A

CONCERN THAT A CASE THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING HEARD IN A -- IN A -- IN ONE

JD IN A COUNTY THAT'S NOW BEING ASSIGNED TO A NEW JD, COULD CAUSE A

DISRUPTION IN THE PROCEEDINGS OF AN ONGOING CASE -- AND CERTAINLY,

SOME CASES CAN LAST FOR YEARS -- THAT IT COULD STILL BE HEARD OR IN THE

PROCESS OF BEING HEARD UPON THE FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS LAW?

MR. RIVERA: SO -- SO, YOU KNOW, NO -- NO JUDGE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THAT'S CURRENTLY SITTING A JUDGE -- AS A JUDGE TODAY IS -- IS, YOU KNOW, NO

LONGER GONNA BE A JUDGE BECAUSE OF THIS. SO THEIR CASELOAD, THEIR --

WHATEVER THINGS THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON ARE UNCHANGED.

MR. JENSEN: SO IF -- IF A -- IF A COURT -- AND WE'VE

-- WE'VE MENTIONED ALLEGANY COUNTY A COUPLE OF TIMES --

MR. RIVERA: SURE.

MR. JENSEN: -- SO I'M GONNA -- I'M GONNA REFERENCE

THAT ALLEGANY COUNTY IS CURRENTLY IN THE 8TH JD, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. JENSEN: CORRECT. SO IN ALLEGANY COUNTY

TODAY IS -- YOU KNOW, A CASE MAY BE BROUGHT BEFORE A SUPREME COURT

JUDGE SITTING IN ALLEGANY COUNTY. THEIR CASE IS BEING HEARD AND IT'S

BROUGHT AND, YOU KNOW, THE OPENING MOTIONS ARE BROUGHT IN THE 8TH.

THEN BY THE TIME IT GOES TO TRIAL, IT'S -- NOW THE TIME FRAME HAS PASSED

AND WE'RE NOW IN FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS LAW, AND NOW THEY'RE

BEING HEARD IN THE 15TH JD BUT THE JUDGE WHO'S HEARING THE CASE HAS

NOW BEEN ASSIGNED INTO THE NEW 8TH DISTRICT. WOULD THAT PROVIDE ANY

SORT OF HARDSHIP OR GROUNDS FOR A DISMISSAL OR A -- A MISTRIAL? IS THERE

ANY JUDICIAL ISSUES THAT COULD ARISE?

MR. RIVERA: NONE. NONE. I MEAN, AT THE END OF

THE DAY THEY'RE ALL STILL WITHIN THE 4TH DEPARTMENT, SO THAT'S ONE PART OF

THAT.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY.

MR. RIVERA: AND THE SECOND THING IS AS LONG AS --

PRESUMABLY, UNLESS THAT JUDGE RETIRES OR WHICH WOULD HAPPEN WITH OR

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WITHOUT THIS, IT WOULD BE THE SAME JUDGE THAT WOULD SEE THE SAME CASE.

THAT -- THAT WOULDN'T MATTER.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY. CERTAINLY YOU REFERENCED ONE

OF THE CONSIDERATIONS BEING POPULATION, AND CERTAINLY, UNFORTUNATELY,

FOR OUR REPRESENTATION IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WESTERN NEW YORK

AND THE FINGER LAKES HAVE SEEN A -- A DECREASE IN POPULATION. WHILE

MONROE COUNTY AS A WHOLE MAY HAVE SEEN A POPULATION INCREASE, OUR

REGION AS A WHOLE HAS SAW A -- A REDUCTION.

NOT JUST LOOKING AT ISSUES OF -- OF DIVERSITY MAKEUP OR

THE -- THE POPULATION AT-LARGE, WAS THERE A WEIGHING OF EXISTING

CASELOADS OUT OF EACH COUNTY WHEN ASSIGNING COUNTIES TO SPECIFIC JDS?

MR. RIVERA: THE -- I DIDN'T WANT TO TOUCH ANYTHING

AROUND CASELOADS, IN PART BECAUSE WHAT'S -- WHAT THE -- YOU KNOW,

WHATEVER THE BURDEN OF CASELOADS IS TODAY IS DIFFERENT FROM A YEAR FROM

NOW AND TWO YEARS FROM NOW. THAT'S A MOVING TARGET THAT, YOU KNOW,

YOU DON'T -- YOU DON'T MAKE A LONG-TERM DECISION LIKE THIS, SOMETHING

WE CAN ONLY DO ONCE EVERY TEN YEARS, BASED ON TODAY'S CASELOAD. IT

WOULDN'T BE REFLECTIVE OF -- OF REALLY MUCH IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF

THINGS.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY.

MR. RIVERA: AND ALTHOUGH IT'S TEN YEARS, TAKE INTO

ACCOUNT THAT THESE ARE -- THESE ARE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE TO RUN FOR 14-

YEAR TERMS, SO IT'S -- IT'S EVEN -- THEY HAVE ALL THE MORE TIME IS WHAT I'D

SAY TO THAT.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY. LOOKING AT POPULATION OF THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

NEW PROPOSED JUDICIAL DISTRICTS, THE LARGEST WOULD BE THE 8TH, WHICH IS

ERIE COUNTY WITH APPROXIMATELY -- 2024 ESTIMATES HAVE A POPULATION

RIGHT AROUND 950,000, YET THE POPULATION OF THE SMALLEST PROPOSED

JUDICIAL DISTRICT IS THE 14TH IN ONONDAGA WITH JUST UNDER 490 --

470,000, A DIFFERENCE OF ALMOST 4 -- 481,000 NEW YORKERS.

MR. RIVERA: MM-HMM.

MR. JENSEN: IS THERE A CONCERN THAT YOU HAVE ABOUT

THE WAY THESE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS WERE DETERMINED WHERE YOU HAVE SUCH

A DRAMATIC POPULATION DIFFERENCE IN -- IN THE SAME REGION?

MR. RIVERA: I -- I WOULD SAY NO. I -- I WOULD SAY,

YOU KNOW, NUMBER ONE, IN 2007 WHEN WE DID THIS WITH STATEN ISLAND IT

ACTUALLY HAD A SMALLER POPULATION THAN THE COUNTY OF ONONDAGA. SO

THERE'S PRECEDENT FOR THE NUMBER. THE OTHER THING I'D SAY IS THAT, YOU

KNOW, THE IDEA HERE IS WE'RE -- THERE -- THERE ARE POPULATION CENTERS

THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, THAT -- THAT DOMINATE THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF THEIR

COUNTIES, AND THOSE COUNTIES DOMINATE THE POPULATION OF THEIR JUDICIAL

DISTRICTS. SO BY ISOLATING THAT COUNTY OF ONONDAGA AND MONROE AND

ERIE, IT MAKES IT SO THAT THOSE OTHER TOWNS THAT -- THAT ARE ON THE

OUTSKIRTS OR -- OR THOSE OTHER COUNTIES THAT HAVE TOWNS IN THE -- IN THE

OUTSKIRTS OF MONROE, ONONDAGA AND ERIE HAVE NOW A BETTER LIKELIHOOD

OF -- OF, YOU KNOW, ELECTING JUDGES FROM THEIR COUNTIES.

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

AND GOING DOWN THAT -- THAT LINE OF REASONING. YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY

BUFFALO BEING THE -- THE STATE'S SECOND-LARGEST CITY, ROCHESTER BEING,

UNFORTUNATELY THE FOURTH, SYRACUSE I THINK FIFTH AT THIS POINT.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT.

MR. JENSEN: WHY WASN'T WESTCHESTER COUNTY

INCLUDED IN THIS LEGISLATION? CERTAINLY THE CITY OF YONKERS IS THE THIRD-

LARGEST CITY IN NEW YORK STATE. THEY HAVE A LARGE POPULATION CENTER,

TO YOUR POINT YOU JUST MADE. WHY -- WHY DIDN'T YOU LOOK AT SEPARATING

WESTCHESTER COUNTY FROM THE REST OF THEIR JUDICIAL DISTRICT IN A SIMILAR

FASHION THAN YOU DID FOR ERIE, MONROE AND ONONDAGA?

MR. RIVERA: BY OUR ESTIMATES -- WELL, FOR A COUPLE

OF REASONS. YOU KNOW, ONE, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THESE WERE THE

INITIAL BILLS THAT WE HAD AND KIND OF THIS IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN RUNNING

WITH. BUT ALSO, THE POPULATION SHIFTS THAT WE'VE SEEN IN THE WESTERN

NEW YORK, SORT OF UPSTATE WESTERN NEW YORK REGION, HAS

DEMONSTRATED GREATER SHIFTS THAN THAT NECK OF THE WOODS.

MR. JENSEN: AND -- AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, TO YOUR

POINT YOU JUST MADE AND WAS MADE EARLIER ABOUT EXISTING LEGISLATION

THAT WOULD CREATE A 14TH JD, TWO SEPARATE 14THS FOR ERIE AND MONROE.

BUT THERE WAS NO PRE-EXISTING, THAT I'M AWARE OF, LEGISLATION FOR

ONONDAGA. SO THE DECISION WAS MADE TO ADD A THIRD COUNTY TO WHOLE

-- BE WHOLLY CONTAINED IN A JUDICIAL DISTRICT. SO UNDER THAT SAME LOGIC,

WESTCHESTER AND THE DIVERSITY, AND I BELIEVE THEY HAVE SEE GROWTH IN

POPULATION, THAT THEY MAY HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATE TO CREATE THEIR OWN

JUDICIAL DISTRICT AS A STANDALONE AND ALLOW FOR GREATER REPRESENTATION

FROM THE OTHER COUNTIES IN THAT JUDICIAL DISTRICT.

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. I MEAN, TRUTHFULLY, I CAN ONLY

SPEAK TO THE BILL IN FRONT OF ME, AND WHETHER ANOTHER BILL IS INTRODUCED

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

IN THE FUTURE FOR OTHER COUNTIES, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, FOR THE FUTURE TO SEE.

BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, THE -- THE -- THERE'S A GLARING ISSUE AROUND NOT JUST

THE DIVERSITY OF A COUNTY, BUT THEN THE REPRESENTATION OF THAT DIVERSITY

ON THE BENCH. AND WE SEE THAT BEING A MUCH STARKER PROBLEM IN

ONONDAGA, MONROE AND ERIE.

MR. JENSEN: SO THAT'S YOUR -- THE BELIEF IS, AND --

AND I DON'T HAVE -- YOU'VE CERTAINLY DONE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF

RESEARCH INTO THIS, AND -- AND I -- I RECOGNIZE THAT AND CAN'T -- CAN'T

DISAGREE WITH THAT. SO YOU SEE THE LARGER DIVERSITY ISSUES AS BEING

MORE PREVALENT IN ERIE, MONROE AND ONONDAGA THAN IN ANY OTHER

LOCATIONS IN NEW YORK STATE THAT DON'T ALREADY HAVE A STANDALONE

JUDICIAL DISTRICT. FOR INSTANCE, WESTCHESTER.

MR. RIVERA: THE POPULATION NUMBERS ARE WHAT

THEY ARE, AND THEY SHOW WHAT THEY SHOW US.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH.

I THINK ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES IS PROBABLY GONNA TOUCH

ON THIS MORE, AND I KNOW I'M SHORT ON MY -- ON MY SECOND 15. ARE

THERE ANY OTHER AREAS OF STATE LAW THAT RELY ON THE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS TO

FULFILL THE STATUTORY TERMS OF STATE LAW?

MR. RIVERA: AS YOU'RE PROBABLY AWARE, JUDICIAL

DISTRICTS ALSO -- THE CONVERSATION AROUND JUDICIAL DISTRICTS ALSO COME

INTO ACCOUNT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE BOARD OF REGENTS.

MR. JENSEN: OKAY. AND I'M SURE I'LL HAVE A

COLLEAGUE WHO WILL DELVE INTO THOSE QUESTIONS MORE AT LENGTH.

BUT MR. RIVERA, I APPRECIATE OUR -- OUR ROBUST

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CONVERSATION ON THIS TOPIC AND I APPRECIATE OUR COLLEAGUE'S

GRACIOUSNESS IN -- IN LISTENING TO OUR LOQUACIOUSNESS.

MR. RIVERA: THANK YOU.

MR. JENSEN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. TANNOUSIS.

MR. TANNOUSIS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: YES, OF COURSE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. TANNOUSIS: YOU HESITATED A LITTLE BIT.

MR. RIVERA: FOR YOU, NEVER.

MR. TANNOUSIS: OKAY. THANK YOU.

MR. RIVERA, I -- YOU MENTIONED DIVERSITY QUITE A FEW

TIMES IN YOUR -- IN YOUR DEBATE THUS FAR. CAN YOU PLEASE DEFINE FOR US

WHAT DIVERSITY IS?

MR. RIVERA: WELL, I READ EARLIER AROUND SOME OF

THE NUMBERS AND I USED MY JUDICIAL DISTRICT FOR AN EXAMPLE. I HAVE

SIMILAR NUMBERS AROUND ETHNIC DIVERSITIES AND -- AND THE POPULATION

REFLECTED IN EACH COUNTY AND EACH JUDICIAL DISTRICT BY COMPARISON. BUT

I'D ALSO SAY, YOU KNOW, IT -- IT GOES PAST THAT. I MEAN, I MENTIONED A BIT

EARLIER IN THAT -- I USED ALLEGANY AS -- AS AN EXAMPLE BUT I'LL USE

ANOTHER COUNTY. YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, STEUBEN. STEUBEN, THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LIKELIHOOD OF A PERSON, YOU KNOW, BEING ELECTED FROM STEUBEN COUNTY

AS IT CURRENTLY SITS IS DIFFICULT BECAUSE MONROE COUNTY IS THE

POPULATION CENTER. IT'S THE, BY FAR, MORE SO THAN ANY OTHER COUNTY IN

THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT, AND IT MAKES IT THAT MUCH MORE DIFFICULT FOR

SOMEBODY THAT'S FROM A STEUBEN OR A LIVINGSTON OR AN ALLEGANY OR A

WYOMING, TO -- TO BECOME A SUPREME. SO IT -- IT'S DIVERSITY IN THE WAY

THAT I SAID BEFORE. AS, YOU KNOW -- YOU KNOW, AS -- AS A -- AS A LATINO

PERSON MYSELF, I HAVE YET TO MEET A SUPREME COURT JUDGE FROM THE 4TH

DEPARTMENT OF MY ETHNICITY. I KNOW THAT THERE'S FUTURE AND THERE'S

PROGRESS AND WE SEE THAT, AND I HOPE THAT THAT WILL BE DIFFERENT ONE DAY.

BUT I ALSO SAY IF I'M A RESIDENT OF STEUBEN COUNTY, I -- I LOOK AT IT AND I

SAID, WELL, WHAT'S THE PROBABILITY THAT I'M EVER GONNA SEE A JUDGE FROM

MY COUNTY IN THE SUPREME COURT WHEN MONROE IS SUCH THE BIG

POPULATION BASE AND THE MAJORITY OF JUDGES COME FROM MONROE

COUNTY? SO NOW UNDER THIS SCENARIO, SO MANY MORE COUNTIES ARE ON A

WAY MORE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD BECAUSE THERE'S NOT THIS HEAVY, BIG COUNTY

LIKE ERIE OR MONROE IS AND THEIR -- AND THEIR JUDICIAL DISTRICTS. NOW

THERE'S GONNA BE MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR FOLKS THAT JUST AS MUCH AS I DON'T

SEE SOMEBODY THAT -- THAT -- THAT I SAY IS FROM MY COMMUNITY ON THE

JUDICIARY, SOMEONE FROM STEUBEN COUNTY, REGARDLESS OF THEIR ETHNICITY,

FRANKLY, CANNOT SAY THAT THEY OFTEN SEE SOMEONE FROM THEIR COUNTY

REPRESENTED IN THE SUPREME COURT.

MR. TANNOUSIS: SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHEN YOU'RE

SPEAKING ABOUT DIVERSITY, YOU ARE MOST CERTAINLY SPEAKING ABOUT RACE;

IS THAT CORRECT?

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: I JUST GAVE YOU AN EXAMPLE THAT IT

WASN'T.

MR. TANNOUSIS: WELL, NO, YOU KIND OF GAVE US AN

EXAMPLE THAT IT WAS, BECAUSE YOU JUST MENTIONED THE FACT THAT YOU ARE

HISPANIC -- OF HISPANIC BACKGROUND, AND YOU JUST SAID THAT THE CHANCES

OF SEEING A JUDGE OF THE SAME ETHNICITY AS YOU --

MR. RIVERA: SURE.

MR. TANNOUSIS: -- WAS SLIM TO NONE. ISN'T THAT

WHAT YOU JUST SAID, MR. RIVERA?

MR. RIVERA: AS MUCH AS I SAID ABOUT THE AVERAGE

VOTER IN STEUBEN COUNTY.

MR. TANNOUSIS: NOW, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THE

RESIDENTS OF THESE COUNTIES, DO YOU THINK THAT THEY'RE INTERESTED IN

SEEING PEOPLE OF THE SAME ETHNIC MAKEUP AS POTENTIALLY THEM, OR ARE

THEY MORE INTERESTED IN SEEING ACTUAL FAIR JUDGES THAT WILL MAKE THE

RIGHT DECISIONS?

MR. RIVERA: WELL, I THINK WE'RE ABLE TO

ACCOMPLISH BOTH.

MR. TANNOUSIS: I NOTICED, MR. RIVERA, YOU DIDN'T

REALLY TOUCH UPON ABOUT BACKLOG AT ALL. SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT BACKLOG

WAS NOT LOOKED AT AT ALL WHEN PREPARING THIS BILL?

MR. RIVERA: AS I SAID BEFORE, I MEAN, I'LL -- I'LL

LUMP THE CONVERSATION AROUND BACKLOG IN THE SAME WAY I LUMPED THE

CONVERSATION AROUND CURRENT CASELOAD. IT'S -- IT'S REFLECTIVE OF A

MOMENT IN TIME, NOT REFLECTIVE OF THE NEEDS OF THE WHOLE DEPARTMENT.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT -- THAT IS A MULTI-YEAR, LONG-TERM

THING, AND WE'D DO A DISJUSTICE [SIC] IF WE'RE JUST FOCUSING ON TODAY'S

CASELOAD.

MR. TANNOUSIS: OKAY. SO THEN JUST TO CONFIRM, I

JUST WANT THE RECORD TO BE CLEAR.

MR. RIVERA: MM-HMM.

MR. TANNOUSIS: BACKLOG WAS NOT TAKEN INTO

ACCOUNT IN PREPARATION FOR THIS BILL, CORRECT? IT IS JUST DIVERSITY, AS YOU

JUST STATED.

MR. RIVERA: THE NUMBER OF JUDGES BASED ON

POPULATION ALREADY TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE PROCESSING OF CASES.

MR. TANNOUSIS: SO THE ANSWER IS NO, RIGHT, MR.

RIVERA?

MR. RIVERA: IT'S WHAT I JUST SAID.

MR. TANNOUSIS: IT'S A -- IT'S A VERY SIMPLE YES OR

ANSWER. IT'S EITHER YOU DID OR YOU DIDN'T.

MR. RIVERA: I -- I GAVE YOU MY ANSWER. IF YOU

DON'T LIKE IT --

MR. TANNOUSIS: THANK YOU.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE JUDGES THAT ARE NOW PRESENT THAT

WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS. THESE ARE JUDGES THAT WERE ELECTED WITHIN

CERTAIN JUDICIAL DISTRICTS, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: ALL OF THESE JUDGES WERE ELECTED IN

THEIR JUDICIAL DISTRICTS, YES.

MR. TANNOUSIS: AND WHEN WE SAY ELECTED IN

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THEIR JUDICIAL DISTRICTS, THEY WERE ON THE BALLOT. VOTERS FROM THOSE

PARTICULAR DISTRICTS THAT THEY RAN WENT TO THE BALLOT BOX AND VOTED AND

EXPRESSED THEIR DESIRE TO SEE THESE PEOPLE ON THE BENCH IN THEIR DISTRICT;

IS THAT CORRECT, MR. RIVERA?

MR. RIVERA: JUST LIKE FOLKS THAT VOTE FOR US.

MR. TANNOUSIS: CORRECT. AND NOW AS A RESULT OF

THESE BILLS SOME OF THESE FOLKS WILL NO LONGER BE IN THOSE PARTICULAR

JUDICIAL DISTRICTS; CORRECT, MR. RIVERA?

MR. RIVERA: JUST AS MUCH AS WHEN WE GET

REDISTRICTED, WE FACE THE SAME SITUATION.

MR. TANNOUSIS: WELL, NOT EXACTLY. RIGHT, MR.

RIVERA? BECAUSE I HAVE NOT BEEN TOLD THAT I NOW REPRESENT A

COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DISTRICT THAN I CURRENTLY HAVE, AND I'M ASSUMING

THAT HASN'T HAPPENED TO YOU EITHER, MR. RIVERA, HAS IT?

MR. RIVERA: NO.

MR. TANNOUSIS: THANK YOU.

MR. RIVERA, YOU MENTIONED CONVERSATIONS THAT YOU

HAD WITH THE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION. HAVE YOU RECEIVED ANY

TYPE OF MEMO OR PAPERWORK IN SUPPORT WITH REGARDS TO THIS BILL

CURRENTLY FROM THE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION?

MR. RIVERA: NOR HAVE I RECEIVED A LETTER OF

OPPOSITION.

MR. TANNOUSIS: BUT YOU -- WE DID, HOWEVER,

WERE INFORMED BY THE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION THAT THEY WOULD

LIKE THIS BILL TO WAIT UNTIL NEXT YEAR TO ALLOW FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION AND

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ANALYSIS; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: THAT COULD BE THEIR WILL, BUT AT THE

END OF THE DAY IT'S THE SAME DISTRICTS THAT WE'VE HAD FOR LONGER THAN

ANYONE CAN, YOU KNOW, CAN REMEMBER IN -- IN THE 4TH DEPARTMENT.

AND WAITING ANOTHER YEAR, KICKING THE CAN, SEEMS UNPRUDENT [SIC] IN

THE FACE OF WHAT WE KNOW TO BE A PROBLEM.

MR. TANNOUSIS: WELL, MR. RIVERA, THE OFFICE OF

COURT ADMINISTRATION, YOU WOULD AGREE, THAT THIS IS THE BODY THAT RUNS

THE COURTHOUSE, CORRECT? THAT MANAGES THE COURTHOUSE, MANAGES THE

STAFF, MANAGES THE FINANCES FOR THESE COURT SYSTEMS; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: BUT WE ARE THE BODY THAT THE

CONSTITUTION CALLS UPON TO DO THIS.

MR. TANNOUSIS: BUT WE ARE NOT THE BODY THAT

ACTUALLY DIRECTLY MANAGES THE COURTHOUSES THROUGHOUT NEW YORK STATE,

CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: I SUPPOSE I WOULD SAY WE, AS THE

LEGISLATURE, NOT ONLY DETERMINE THE DISTRICTS AND WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE,

WE, AS THE LEGISLATURE, APPROVE A BUDGET. WE, AS THE LEGISLATURE, DO

COUNTLESS THINGS AROUND THE JUDICIARY.

MR. TANNOUSIS: DO WE MANAGE THE COURTHOUSES

AROUND THIS STATE ON A DAILY BASIS LIKE THE COURT -- OFFICE OF COURT

ADMINISTRATION DOES?

MR. RIVERA: NO.

MR. TANNOUSIS: AND THAT'S WHAT THE COURT OF --

THE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION DOES, CORRECT? THAT IS THEIR

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PURPOSE?

MR. RIVERA: YES.

MR. TANNOUSIS: SO YOU WOULD AGREE THAT THEY

WOULD BE IN THE BEST POSSIBLE SITUATION TO KNOW IF THEY -- A BILL SUCH AS

THIS SHOULD GO THROUGH THIS YEAR, OR PERHAPS MAYBE WAIT FOR A LATER DATE

FOR VARIOUS REASONS?

MR. RIVERA: I GENERALLY THINK THE INDEPENDENT

NATURE OF WHAT WE DID WAS THE WISER THING TO DO. AND THAT'S WHY THE

CONSTITUTION IS CLEAR THAT IT IS US THAT MAKES THAT DECISION, NOT OCA.

MR. TANNOUSIS: MR. RIVERA, ARE YOU -- ARE YOU

TELLING US TODAY THAT YOU KNOW MORE THAN THE OFFICE OF COURT

ADMINISTRATION THAT MANAGES THE -- ALL THESE COURTHOUSES, INCLUDING

THIS PARTICULAR COURTHOUSE THAT WILL BE AFFECTED?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY THAT THE WISE PEOPLE THAT

MADE THE LANGUAGE, WHAT IT IS IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION, TOOK INTO

ACCOUNT THE JUSTICES OF THEIR DAY JUST AS MUCH AS WE'RE TAKING THE

JUSTICES OF OUR DAY.

MR. TANNOUSIS: OKAY. SO I BELIEVE, THEN, I

WOULD TAKE THAT AS A YES. YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU KNOW BETTER THAN THE

OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION.

MR. RIVERA: I KNOW BETTER THAN TO SAY THAT.

MR. TANNOUSIS: THE ONONDAGA CITY BAR

ASSOCIATION, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THEM, MR. RIVERA?

MR. RIVERA: CAN'T SAY I AM.

MR. TANNOUSIS: DO YOU -- DO YOU KNOW THAT THEY

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

HAVE PUT FORTH AN OPINION STATING THAT THIS BILL WOULD CAUSE OPERATIONAL

DYSFUNCTIONS -- DISRUPTIONS, I APOLOGIZE, SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL COSTS AND

POTENTIAL BARRIERS TO JUSTICE. ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY WAITING ANOTHER YEAR

WOULDN'T HAVE CHANGED THAT POSITION.

MR. TANNOUSIS: OKAY. BUT THAT WAS -- THAT WAS

THE BAR ASSOCIATION THAT MADE THAT -- THAT MADE THEIR FEELINGS KNOWN.

OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. RIVERA.

MR. RIVERA: AND -- AND JUST TO MENTION --

MR. TANNOUSIS: YEAH, OF COURSE.

MR. RIVERA: -- I'VE SPOKEN TO BAR ASSOCIATIONS. I

HAVE -- AND I HAVE GOTTEN THE SAME PUSHBACK. AND FRANKLY, BAR

ASSOCIATIONS DON'T MAKE DETERMINATIONS ON WHERE JUDGES SIT.

MR. TANNOUSIS: BUT BAR ASSOCIATIONS ARE MADE

UP OF ATTORNEYS THAT PRACTICE IN THIS COURTHOUSE; WOULDN'T YOU AGREE?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY I HAVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT

FROM THE TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION. SO THOSE ARE ATTORNEYS, TOO, THAT

ARE SUPPORTIVE OF IT.

MR. TANNOUSIS: WELL, WHO WOULD KNOW BETTER

ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR COURTHOUSE, THE ONONDAGA CITY BAR ASSOCIATION

THAT ACTUALLY IS FULL OF ATTORNEYS FROM THIS COUNTY, OR ASSOCIATIONS

POTENTIALLY FROM -- MADE UP OF ATTORNEYS FROM OTHER COUNTIES?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY I HAVE THE FULL CONFIDENCE

THAT WHAT WE'VE DONE, WHAT'S ON PAPER, THIS BILL, IS GOING TO BE

REFLECTIVE OF THE WILL OF -- OF THESE COMMUNITIES AND THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

REPRESENTATIVES THAT REPRESENT THEM.

MR. TANNOUSIS: ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU, MR.

RIVERA. WAS LATFOR CONSULTED IN TERMS OF MAKING UP THESE JUDICIAL

DISTRICTS?

MR. RIVERA: CAN YOU SAY THAT AGAIN? I'M SORRY.

MR. TANNOUSIS: LATFOR.

MR. RIVERA: NO.

MR. TANNOUSIS: OKAY. WAS THERE ANY TYPE OF

EITHER BIPARTISAN ENTITY OR INDEPENDENT ENTITY THAT WAS CONSULTED IN

REGARDS TO THE DRAWING OF THESE PARTICULAR JUDICIAL DISTRICTS?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY HONESTLY, BETWEEN ALL THE

JUDGES THAT I'VE SPOKEN TO IN THE -- IN THE BUILDING UP TO THIS POINT, I'M

SURE THERE WERE MULTIPLE PARTIES, AND FRANKLY, I NEVER ASKED ANY OF

THEM WHAT PARTY THEY'RE AFFILIATED WITH. BUT I WOULD SAY YES, I HAVE

CONSULTED WITH PEOPLE FROM BOTH DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS.

MR. TANNOUSIS: OH REALLY? WELL, LET'S -- LET'S GO

INTO THOSE GROUPS, THEN, IF YOU HAVE. WHICH INDEPENDENT GROUPS OR

PEOPLE DID YOU CONSULT WITH IN COMING UP WITH THIS TYPE OF LEGISLATION?

MR. RIVERA: NO, WHAT I SAID IS I SPOKE TO JUDGES

THAT REFLECT MULTIPLE PARTIES.

MR. TANNOUSIS: OH, YOU SPOKE TO JUDGES.

MR. RIVERA: YES.

MR. TANNOUSIS: OKAY. DID YOU SPEAK TO ANY

TYPE OF INDEPENDENT GROUP OR GOOD GOVERNMENT GROUP IN RELATION TO

THESE JUDICIAL SEATS?

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: NO.

MR. TANNOUSIS: OKAY.

MR. RIVERA: AND FRANKLY, THIS BILL -- THE -- THE

INITIAL VERSION OF THIS BILL HAS BEEN OUT FOR THE PUBLIC'S VIEWING FOR OVER

A YEAR, AND THE ONLY FEEDBACK I HAD EVER GOTTEN WAS THE DEEP

UNDERSTANDING THAT -- THAT -- THAT THERE ARE NECESSARY CHANGES NEEDED.

MR. TANNOUSIS: WELL, MR. RIVERA, I JUST

MENTIONED AT LEAST TWO ENTITIES, INCLUDING THE OFFICE OF COURT

ADMINISTRATION WHICH DIRECTLY MANAGES THE -- THE STRUCTURES AND THE

PERSONNEL THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THIS, AND THE ONONDAGA CITY BAR

ASSOCIATION WHICH IS MADE UP OF ATTORNEYS THAT PRACTICE IN -- AT THIS

LOCATION, AND I'VE EXPRESSED DEEP RESERVATIONS THAT THEY HAVE EXPRESSED

IN REGARDS TO THIS BILL. SO ARE YOU STATING THAT YOU -- BESIDE -- YOU --

YOU HAVE NOT HEARD OF ANY OTHER TYPE OF RESERVATIONS IN REGARDS TO THE

-- TO THIS BILL?

MR. RIVERA: NO.

MR. TANNOUSIS: AND DID YOU HEAR FROM THOSE

TWO ENTITIES?

MR. RIVERA: NO.

MR. TANNOUSIS: DID YOU HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH

ANY OF THOSE -- WITH EITHER OF THOSE TWO ENTITIES?

MR. RIVERA: OH, WAIT. OCA? YES, OF COURSE.

MR. TANNOUSIS: YOU HAD -- DID THEY EXPLAIN THAT

TO YOU?

MR. RIVERA: THEY EXPLAINED TO ME THAT THEY SEE A

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

NEED FOR A CHANGE. THEY KNOW THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM. THEY'VE DONE

ESTIMATES AND CONVERSATIONS WITH COUNTLESS, YOU KNOW, MEMBERS OF --

OF THE 4TH DEPARTMENT AND THEY KNOW THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM. WHERE

THEIR CONCERN IS IS AROUND TIMELINE, BUT NOT ON THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT

WE'RE DOING.

MR. TANNOUSIS: I SEE. SO THEY DID EXPRESS TO YOU

THE DESIRE TO NOT PASS THIS THIS YEAR AND PUSH IT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER DOWN

FOR -- FOR VARIOUS REASONS, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: YOU SAID IT YOURSELF IN A STATEMENT

THAT -- THAT YOU READ EARLIER.

MR. TANNOUSIS: THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK

YOU, MR. RIVERA.

ON THE BILL, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. TANNOUSIS: MADAM SPEAKER, THE SPONSOR

HAS MADE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THE ONLY REASON FOR THE CHANGE OF JUDICIAL

DISTRICTS IN -- IN THE WORDS THAT HE HAS PUT FORTH ARE IN REGARDS TO

DIVERSITY. BUT I SUBMIT TO THIS BODY THAT THE COLORS HERE INVOLVED HAVE

NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE. IT HAS -- HAS TO DO WITH DEMOCRATIC BLUE OR

REPUBLICAN RED. THOSE ARE THE COLORS THAT THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION HAS

TO DO WITH. HE HAS ADMITTED HIMSELF THAT HE HAS -- WAS GIVEN VARIOUS

RESERVATIONS BY GROUPS IN REGARDS TO THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION, INCLUDING

THE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION WHO, BY THE WAY, WOULD PROBABLY

BE IN THE BEST POSSIBLE POSITION TO KNOW IF THIS BILL IS ACTUALLY FEASIBLE

TO PASS THIS YEAR. THEY HAVE MADE IT CLEAR THAT IT IS NOT FEASIBLE, IT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SHOULD NOT BE PASSED THIS YEAR. BUT YET HERE WE ARE, BECAUSE CERTAIN

MEMBERS OF THIS BODY BELIEVE THEY KNOW BEST. THEY KNOW BETTER THAN

OCA.

I AM AGAINST THIS BILL AND I ADVISE MY COLLEAGUES TO

VOTE AGAINST IT AS WELL. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. MAHER.

MR. MAHER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. MAHER: THANK YOU. SO THIS BILL CREATES --

(INDISCERNIBLE) TO CREATE TWO NEW JUDICIAL DISTRICTS WITHIN THE 4TH

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT. I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU.

MR. RIVERA: SURE.

MR. MAHER: WHEN IT COMES TO THE COST IN THE

BUDGET, CAN YOU GO OVER WHAT WE HAVE IN THIS CURRENTLY ADOPTED BUDGET

AND WHAT -- POTENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE THINKING THE SHORTFALL IS IN TERMS OF

TOTAL COST?

MR. RIVERA: WELL, I GUESS, NUMBER ONE, IT DOESN'T

TAKE EFFECT UNTIL '27 SO THERE'S NO SHORTFALL FOR '26. WHAT I'D SAY IS THERE

IS NO CREATION OF NEW JUDGE -- JUDICIAL SPOTS. YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO

NEW JUDGES BEING -- NO JUDGESHIPS BEING CREATED. SO WE BELIEVE THAT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THE COST IS QUITE NOMINAL. I HEARD A FIGURE SPOKEN EARLIER; I DISAGREE

WITH IT. WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO ADDRESS IT AT THE RIGHT TIME.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. WE DID A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH,

MY TEAM AND I, AND WE WERE LOOKING AT OTHER AREAS AROUND THE STATE

AND AROUND THE COUNTRY WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT BE COMPARABLE. BUT

JUST SO YOU HAVE THEM, ANYWHERE FROM 1- TO 1.5 MILLION FOR TRANSITION

IT COSTS; ONGOING OPERATIONS, POTENTIALLY ANOTHER 1 MILLION A YEAR.

AND THEN REALLY WHERE IT GETS INTERESTING IS IF THERE ARE ANY COURTS THAT

NEED INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS. IN YOUR DELIB -- DELIBERATIONS GOING

OVER THIS BILL, DID YOU RUN INTO ANY CONVERSATIONS WHERE THERE MIGHT

ACTUALLY BY SOME PHYSICAL ISSUES WITH THE BUILDINGS OR REHAB TO THE

BUILDINGS IN TERMS OF THIS TRANSITION?

MR. RIVERA: I HAVE THE FULL CONFIDENCE THAT OCA

IS GONNA BE ABLE TO MANAGE, AS THEY ALREADY DO, IN THOSE COURT -- IN

THOSE SPACES. THERE -- THERE IS NOT A NEED TO BUILD NEW COURTHOUSES.

THERE'S -- IT'S JUST A MATTER OF ALLOCATING JUDGES TO CERTAIN PLACES.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS --

MR. RIVERA: I'D ALSO SAY, YOU KNOW, OCA HAS A

BUDGET OF APPROXIMATELY $3 BILLION, AND THIS IS A LEGISLATIVE BODY,

FRANKLY, THAT WANTS TO SUPPORT THAT AND HAS ALWAYS DONE SO AND WILL

CONTINUE TO DO SO.

MR. MAHER: SINCE YOU BRING UP THE NUMBER OF 3

BILLION, DO WE KNOW TYPICALLY YEAR BY YEAR WHAT THE USE OF THAT 3

BILLION IS? IS THERE A BIT OF AN ISSUE WITH SPENDING ALL THREE? IS IT TO

THE T? IS IT OPERATIONAL MOSTLY? IS THERE REALLY THAT MUCH WIGGLE ROOM

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

IN THAT NUMBER?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY THAT'S IN THE BUDGET THAT'S

BEFORE US EVERY YEAR. I DON'T HAVE THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'M CURIOUS. YOU

GOT ME CURIOUS NOW. OKAY.

SO, ANOTHER ISSUE THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP IS DISRUPTIONS

-- THE POTENTIAL OF DISRUPTIONS TO COURT PERSONNEL AND THE LEGAL PROCESS

WHEN IT COMES TO REDISTRICTING, POTENTIALLY LEADING TO STAFF

REASSIGNMENTS AND REALLY THE CASELOAD IN GENERAL. WERE THERE ANY

ISSUES WITH THE POTENTIAL CASELOAD BROUGHT UP DURING THE DISCUSSION OF

THIS BILL?

MR. RIVERA: AS I SAID BEFORE, TO -- TO TAKE INTO

ACCOUNT CASELOAD WOULD NOT BE THE PROPER SORT OF VARIABLE IN IT ALL.

WHAT I'D ALSO SAY IS WHERE THERE'S GREATER POPULATION THERE'S MORE CASES

AND, THEREFORE, MORE JUDGES. THAT DOESN'T CHANGE. THAT'S HOW IT IS

TODAY. IF THERE'S A CASELOAD PROBLEM TODAY, THIS WOULDN'T AFFECT IT

GOING UP OR DOWN TOMORROW. SO CASELOADS ARE JUST CASELOADS.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. SO YOU DON'T THINK THIS WILL

POTENTIALLY HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON CASELOADS DURING THE TRANSITION?

MR. RIVERA: NO, IT'S THE SAME JUDGES, IT'S THE SAME

STAFF, PRESUMABLY. IT'S --

MR. MAHER: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT ANSWER.

WHEN IT COMES TO -- BEAR WITH ME ONE MINUTE.

(PAUSE)

WHEN IT COMES TO CERTAIN TYPES OF CASES, HOUSING,

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

FAMILY COURT, SAME QUESTION. DO -- DO YOU ENVISION ANY SORT OF ISSUES

WITH THE CREATING OF -- OF POTENTIAL JUSTICE DESERTS BECAUSE THERE ARE

ISSUES WITH THE TRANSITION ON THOSE SPECIFIC HOUSING AND FAMILY COURT

CASES?

MR. RIVERA: THIS IS SOLELY DEALING WITH SUPREME

COURT. SO VILLAGE COURTS, TOWN COURTS, COUNTY COURTS, FAMILY COURTS ARE

NOT AFFECTED.

MR. MAHER: AWESOME. THANK YOU.

YOU ANSWERED MY ACTIVE CASES. YOU ANSWERED MY

FUNDING QUESTIONS. OH, WHEN IT COMES TO DATA THAT WAS BEING

PRESENTED, WHAT SORT OF DATA WAS USED? I KNOW YOU -- YOU TALKED ABOUT

THE DISPARITIES, WHICH I THINK ARE -- ARE LEGITIMATE IN TERMS OF THE RACIAL

EQUITY ASPECT OF THIS. WHAT OTHER DATA-DRIVEN FRAMEWORK WAS CREATED

WHEN DRAFTING THIS BILL?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY THE MAJORITY OF

INFORMATION IS JUST FROM THE CENSUS. YOU KNOW, THE POPULATION OF

PARTICULAR COUNTIES, THE POPULATIONS OF JUDICIAL DISTRICTS. THAT'S ALL

DIRECTLY FROM THE CENSUS WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, YEAH.

MR. MAHER: ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE APPRECIATE YOU

ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, MR. SPONSOR. APPRECIATE IT.

MR. RIVERA: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. SEMPOLINSKI.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR

SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: CERTAINLY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: IN AN EARLIER QUESTION YOU

MENTIONED A COUPLE COUNTIES WITH WHICH I AM FAMILIAR, ALLEGANY AND

STEUBEN. DID YOU CONSULT WITH THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR ALLEGANY COUNTY

WHEN CONSTRUCTING THIS BILL?

MR. RIVERA: NO.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: NO? WHO IS THE

REPRESENTATIVE FOR ALLEGANY COUNTY?

MR. RIVERA: I GOT A SENSE.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: THAT'S RIGHT. DID YOU CONSULT

WITH ANY OF THE STEUBEN COUNTY DELEGATION WHEN CONSTRUCTING THIS

BILL?

MR. RIVERA: NO.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: NO. SO YOU'RE MAKING

DECISIONS ABOUT OUR COUNTIES, ASSUMING WHAT PERHAPS WE MIGHT LIKE OR

PREFER AS FAR AS THE STATE COURT SYSTEM WITHOUT TALKING TO US.

MR. RIVERA: YOU KNOW, I WOULD -- YOU KNOW,

CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT IF I'M AN ALLEGANY RESIDENT OR A STEUBEN

RESIDENT OR A CHEMUNG RESIDENT OR A FILL-IN-THE-BLANK COUNTY RESIDENT --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: CHEMUNG IS NOT IN THE 4TH

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT.

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT. I'M JUST USING IT AS AN

EXAMPLE. BUT IF I'M OF ANY -- IF I'M A RESIDENT IN ANY COUNTY, THE -- THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

-- THE HIGHER PROBABILITY OF ME BEING IN FRONT OF A JUDGE FROM MY

COUNTY IS A POSITIVE. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS WILL DO.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: I -- I THINK MAINTAINING THE

INTEGRITY OF THE COURT SYSTEM IS MORE POSITIVE THAN WHETHER MY

PARTICULAR COUNTY OR ANY PARTICULAR COUNTY GETS A JUDGE. I'M MORE

CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. BUT MAYBE YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT FEELING.

MR. RIVERA: BUT IF IT'S THE SAME JUDGES, THEN

WHAT'S THE (INDISCERNIBLE)?

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: WELL, I --I HAVE SOME BROADER

MR. RIVERA: (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK).

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: -- CONCERNS WHICH I'M GONNA

GET INTO.

MR. RIVERA: OKAY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANNA

CLARIFY -- YOU DID SAY THIS FOR SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES -- THERE ARE

CURRENTLY 67 JUDGES IN THESE THREE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENTS. AT THE END,

WE'RE GONNA HAVE FIVE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENTS WITH 67 JUDGES. THERE'S

NOT A CHANGE, AN INCREASE OR A DECREASE IN THE NUMBER OF JUDGES?

MR. RIVERA: THE 67 IS THE DEPARTMENT. SO YES,

THAT NUMBER DOESN'T CHANGE. (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK).

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO THE NUMBER OF JUDGES

THROUGHOUT THE DEPARTMENT --

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: -- IS THE SAME?

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: THE DATE OF EFFECT WE TALKED

ABOUT A LITTLE BIT, IT WILL BE NEXT YEAR, AND AS WAS MENTIONED -- AND --

AND I'M LOOKING AT THE SPONSOR'S MEMO, AND IN THE SPONSOR'S MEMO,

THESE ARE YOUR WORDS, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: YES.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: YES. IT SAYS THE LAST TIME THAT

THE LEGISLATURE ACTUALLY EXERCISED THEIR AUTHORITY WAS 2007 TO CHANGE

THESE LINES. AND YOU STATE THAT THE -- THE LEG -- THE CONSTITUTION

AUTHORIZES THE LEGISLATURE TO MAKE THESE CHANGES. IT DOES NOT REQUIRE

THEM TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES. AM I INTERPRETING YOUR WORDS CORRECTLY?

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: RIGHT. SO UNLIKE THE STATE

LEGISLATURE OR UNLIKE CONGRESS, WE ARE OBLIGATED TO CHANGE OR REDO THE

LINES AFTER EVERY CENSUS. YOUR WORDS SAY WE ARE AUTHORIZED, AND I

THINK THAT IS A CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION. WE DON'T

HAVE TO EXERCISE THAT AUTHORITY, AND IN THIS CASE IT HAS NOT BEEN

EXERCISED IN SOME TIME.

MR. RIVERA: AND JUST -- IT -- IT'S NOT THAT I'M SAYING

WE'RE AUTHORIZED, THE STATE CONSTITUTION SAYS WE'RE AUTHORIZED.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: I WOULD -- I WOULD CONCUR

WITH THAT ASSESSMENT. WHY DO YOU THINK IT'S DIFFERENT BETWEEN JUDGES

AND BETWEEN THE LEGISLATURE, AS OPPOSED TO A REQUIREMENT AS OPPOSED

TO AN AUTHORIZATION?

MR. RIVERA: WELL, THAT'S INTERESTING. I MEAN, I

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SUPPOSE THE TERMS ARE DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT. LIKE, THE LENGTH OF TIME

ONE SERVES IS 13 YEARS FOR -- FOR -- I'M SORRY, 14 YEARS FOR -- FOR

SUPREME AND OUR TERMS ARE TWO YEARS. I'D ALSO SAY LIKE THE BIGGEST

DIFFERENCE WHEN IT COMES TO REDISTRICTING US VERSUS JUDICIAL DISTRICTS IS

THAT THE STATE CONSTITUTION IS CLEAR THAT THE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS CANNOT

DIVIDE COUNTIES. SO IT HAS TO BE ENTIRE COUNTIES, WHEREIN THE CASE OF

YOUR DISTRICT, MY DISTRICT AND ALL OF OUR DISTRICTS, IT CAN BE BROKEN DOWN

TO A VILLAGE LINE, A COUNTY LINE, A TOWN LINE, A CITY LINE, A COUNCILED

LINE, A LEGISLATURE LINE. SO THERE IS FAR MORE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, FINE

POINTS TO OUR REDISTRICTING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE PARAMETER OF

BEING COUNTY ONLY. SO THERE'S SIMPLY JUST MORE COMPLEXITY TO OUR

DISTRICTS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT RESTRICTION.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: OKAY.

THERE WAS SOME MENTION -- I WANNA JUST HIT ONE POINT

ON HOW JUDGES ARE ALLOCATED. THE JUDGES ARE ALLOCATED BY NAME, BASED

ON THE CURRENT OCCUPANTS OF THAT PARTICULAR SEAT AND THEY'RE ALLOCATED

ACROSS THE FIVE DIFFERENT JUDICIAL DISTRICTS THAT ARE CONTEMPLATED IN THIS

BILL, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO, AND YOU SAID WHAT WAS

TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WAS SENIORITY, GEOGRAPHY, THOSE SORT OF THINGS. WAS

PARTISANSHIP TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT?

MR. RIVERA: NOT AT ALL.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: I -- I WAS CURIOUS, BECAUSE I

WENT TO SEE WHO WOULD BE THE JUDGES IN THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT WHERE I

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WOULD RESIDE AND THAT I WOULD REPRESENT, AND ALL THE FOLKS THAT WERE

ALLOCATED, ALL THE ONES THAT WOULDN'T AGE OUT BEFORE THEIR TERM WERE

REPUBLICANS. SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT'S JUST A COINCIDENCE?

MR. RIVERA: I'D SAY THAT IN THE CASE OF THE 8TH

JUDICIAL -- OR THE -- THE NEW DISTRICT, I WOULD SAY THAT FACTORS ARE TAKEN

INTO ACCOUNT LIKE SENIORITY, WHETHER THEY WERE APPELLATE, AND THEN

TAKING INTO ACCOUNT, YOU KNOW, WHERE THEY CURRENTLY RESIDE. FOR

EXAMPLE, I KNOW THAT THERE'S A JUDGE IN CHAUTAUQUA COUNTY, JUDGE

HANLON --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: CORRECT. GRACE HANLON, YES.

MR. RIVERA: -- WHO IS A RESIDENT OF CHAUTAUQUA

COUNTY, A DEMOCRAT --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SHE IS A DEMOCRAT, CORRECT.

MR. RIVERA: AND SHE'S GONNA BE LOCATED IN THE

NEW DISTRICT.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: AND -- AND SHE'D BE ONE THAT

WOULDN'T BE UP FOR REELECTION, THOUGH. HER AGE WOULD --

MR. RIVERA: SURPRISINGLY, THAT WAS THE CASE WITH

AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THESE JUDGES, THAT THEY'RE --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: WELL, A 14-YEAR TERM, THAT

DOES HAPPEN. SO MY --

MR. RIVERA: NOT MUCH I COULD DO ABOUT THAT.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO MY OVERARCHING

PHILOSOPHICAL CONCERNS WITH THIS IS THIS APPEARS TO BE A JUDICIAL

GERRYMANDERING. DO YOU FEAR THAT INJECTING GERRYMANDERING SUCH AS

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WE'VE HAD BE A SOURCE OF GREAT CONTROVERSY IN STATE LEGISLATIVE AND

CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS, SO MUCH SO THAT THE PEOPLE PUT ON TO THE

CONSTITUTION AN ANTI-GERRYMANDERING PROVISION RELATIVELY RECENTLY,

INJECTING THAT TYPE OF ACTION INTO THE COURT SYSTEM UNDERMINES FAITH IN

THE COURTS?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY THAT WHEN WE HAVE THE

CONVERSATION AROUND GERRYMANDERING IT -- IT -- IT'S NOT EXACTLY CLOSE TO

THIS SUBJECT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT DIVIDING MUNICIPALITIES. WE'RE NOT

DIVIDING COMMUNITIES. WE'RE JUST KEEPING ENTIRE COUNTIES WHOLE. SO I

DON'T THINK IT'S THE SAME THING.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: WELL, YOU'RE DRAWING

PARTICULAR DISTRICTS FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSES. AND -- AND I'M -- AGAIN,

YOU SAID THE SPONSOR'S MEMO IS YOUR WORDS. YOU SAID THE BILL IS

DESIGNED TO REMEDY THE INEQUALITY -- AND YOU REFERRED TO SPECIFICALLY

RACIAL INEQUALITY -- YOU'RE DRAWING DISTRICTS FOR THAT PARTICULAR PURPOSE,

YOUR WORDS. IS THAT NOT A GERRYMANDER?

MR. RIVERA: NO, I DON'T THINK --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: HOW IS THAT NOT A GERRYMANDER

IF YOU'RE DRAWING PARTICULAR DISTRICTS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE?

MR. RIVERA: IT WOULD BE GERRYMANDERING IF I

DECIDED TO CUT THE COUNTY OF ERIE IN HALF, SPLIT IT UP SOME WAY.

BECAUSE THAT'S THE POPULATION CENTER WHERE THERE'S THE MOST DIVERSE

POPULATIONS. WE'RE NOT DOING THAT IN ANY COUNTY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: YOU CAN DRAW A GERRYMANDER

WITHOUT DRAWING WEIRD DISTRICTS IF YOU DRAW IT FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

HOW IT LOOKS, WHETHER IT'S A SNAKE OR -- OR SOME SORT OF SQUIGGLE OR

SOMETHING IS IRRELEVANT. IT'S -- YOU ARE DRAWING IT FOR A REASON OTHER

THAN GOOD JUSTICE.

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY THAT I'M CONFIDENT IN THE

67 JUDGES THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US AND THEY ARE DELIVERING JUSTICE. NONE

OF THEM ARE CHANGED. SO...

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: BECAUSE THE PEOPLE

THEMSELVES ARE NOT CHANGED YOU FEEL IT'S NOT A GERRYMANDER, EVEN

THOUGH YOU'RE CHANGING HOW ALL FUTURE JUDGES WILL BE SELECTED?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY THAT THERE IS A PROCESS

THAT'S BEEN SET IN PLACE BY THE STATE CONSTITUTION THAT WE, AS A BODY,

HAVE NOT TAKEN UP IN THIS REGION FOR -- FROM, HALF JOKINGLY, WHAT I'VE

HEARD IS ALMOST A CENTURY. I WOULD SAY THAT IT IS --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: IS THAT NOT A SOURCE OF

STABILITY, THOUGH? ISN'T THAT A POSITIVE THAT WE HAVEN'T CHANGED JUDICIAL

DISTRICTS?

MR. RIVERA: I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S -- STABILITY IS

NOT THE PRIORITY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REPRESENTATION. I WOULD SAY

THE --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO YOUR GOAL IS

REPRESENTATION?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY THAT --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOUR GOAL IS

REPRESENTATION.

MR. RIVERA: I'LL GET TO MY POINT. WHAT I WOULD

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SAY IS THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE CITY, THE TOWN, THE WHATEVER YOU LIVE

IN, LOOKS DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE, WE'LL SAY 70

YEARS AGO, WHICH IS PROBABLY EVEN FURTHER BACK. SO WHY WE WOULD

CONTINUE TO MOVE AND OPERATE UNDER THE IDEA THAT THINGS LOOK THE SAME

WAY THEY LOOKED AT ALMOST A CENTURY AGO IS -- IS NEVER GONNA BE OKAY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO YOUR -- AGAIN, YOUR GOAL IS

REPRESENTATION SO THAT FOLKS LOOK LIKE THE FOLKS THAT ARE -- THAT -- THE

DISTRICTS THAT THEY'RE COMING FROM.

MR. RIVERA: AS IT SHOULD BE, YES.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: AS IT SHOULD. OKAY. I WOULD

SAY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE LEGISLATURE, THE GOAL IS

REPRESENTATION. WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM, THE GOAL

IS JUSTICE. BUT THAT'S JUST ME.

ELECTION LAW --

MR. RIVERA: JUST TO BE CLEAR. THERE'S NOT -- THE

IDEA OF REPRESENTATION AND JUSTICE ARE NOT DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED. THAT

CAN EXIST SIMULTANEOUSLY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: MY -- THE --THE OVERARCHING

GOAL OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM IS JUSTICE IS MY SUPPOSITION.

ELECTION LAW. RECENTLY THERE ARE NEW STATUTES FOR

CERTAIN ELECTION LAW ACTIONS HAVE TO BE BROUGHT IN NEW YORK COUNTY,

ALBANY COUNTY, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, AND ERIE COUNTY. WITH ONE OF

THOSE JURISDICTIONS BEING IMPACTED, WOULD THAT NOT LOCK IN, POTENTIALLY,

SINCE ERIE COUNTY IS AN OVERWHELMINGLY DEMOCRATIC JURISDICTION,

ELECTION LAW MATTERS IN ERIE COUNTY BEING DETERMINED BY DEMOCRATS?

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AND BY THE WAY, THE OTHER THREE JURISDICTIONS ARE ALSO OVERWHELMINGLY

DEMOCRATIC.

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY WHAT MATTERS ARE BEFORE

WHAT COURTS WAS NEVER SOMETHING I TOOK INTO ACCOUNT IN ANY WAY.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: MY FINAL QUESTION IS, YOU

MENTIONED THAT THIS BILL HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR SOME TIME. I FOUND

OUT ABOUT IT YESTERDAY MORNING, PERSONALLY. BUT IT'S BEEN IN THE WORKS

FOR SOME TIME, DIFFERENT VERSIONS. I KNOW THERE WAS A 7TH JUDICIAL

DISTRICT VERSION, THERE WAS AN 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT VERSION. IF IT'S BEEN

IN THE WORKS FOR SOME TIME, WHY DIDN'T IT GO THROUGH ANY HEARINGS OR

THE PROPER COMMITTEE PROCESS?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY NO BILLS TEND TO DO THAT.

WE PASSED BILLS JUST THIS PAST WEEK PROBABLY IN THE -- THE HUNDREDS.

THE -- YOU KNOW, I'D IMAGINE --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: MOST OF WHICH CAME OUT A

COMMITTEE OF JURISDICTION. DID THIS GO THROUGH THE JUDICIARY

COMMITTEE?

MR. RIVERA: WAYS AND MEANS.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: YEAH. IT DIDN'T GO THROUGH THE

JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MR. RIVERA: YOU GOT IT.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: I AM AGAINST THIS BILL. I THINK

IT, ONE, WAS DONE IN A WAY WHERE PROPER CONSULTATION WITH ALL THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PARTIES INVOLVED WAS NOT HANDLED. IT SORT OF POPPED OUT OF THE AIR HERE

AT THE LAST MINUTE AT THE END OF SESSION. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY THAN

THAT, AS I SAID YESTERDAY IN THE DEBATE REGARDING JUDICIAL CERTIFICATES OF

AUTHORIZATION --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. WALKER, WHY

DO YOU RISE?

MS. WALKER: MADAM SPEAKER, I RISE TO SEE IF THE

SPEAKER WOULD YIELD FOR A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: NO, I WILL NOT. I WILL FINISH

WHAT I'M SAYING.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPEAKER DOES

NOT YIELD,

MS. WALKER: THANK --

MR. SEMPOLINSKI: SO, IT'S -- IT'S POPPED OUT OF THE

AIR AT THE LAST MINUTE AT THE END OF SESSION, AND UNDERMINES FAITH IN OUR

JUDICIAL SYSTEM. THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM IS A SOURCE OF STABILITY IN A WORLD,

A POLITICAL WORLD, WITH A LOT OF UNSTABILITY [SIC], A LOT OF PARTISANSHIP

AND A LOT OF POLARIZATION. THIS COMPLETELY UNDERMINES THAT AS A

BULWARK OF STABILITY WITHIN OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT AND, THEREFORE, I

WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. RA.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. RA: SO, I HAVE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS, BUT I'M

GONNA START IN A TOTALLY DIFFERENT AREA. FOR -- MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES

ARE PROBABLY AWARE OF THE FACT THAT WE BASE THE NEW YORK STATE BOARD

OF REGENTS ON JUDICIAL DISTRICTS. SO HAVE WE DONE -- BECAUSE

OBVIOUSLY, AS -- AS IT PERTAINS TO THE JUDGES, THERE ARE JUDGES, THEIR

NAMES ARE IN THIS BILL AS TO WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO END UP. HAVE WE

DONE A SIMILAR THING IN LOOKING AT WHO THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF

REGENTS ARE, WHEN THEIR TERMS ARE UP, AND HOW THAT WOULD PLAY OUT

WITH THESE CHANGES?

MR. RIVERA: NO. NO. THE -- YOU KNOW, THE

CHANGES WOULDN'T TAKE INTO EFFECT UNTIL '27, SO, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T

AFFECT THE CURRENT BOARD OF REGENTS.

MR. RA: WELL, BUT THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE REGENTS

FOR THOSE NEW DISTRICTS. THERE COULD BE REGENTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY

LIVING IN ONE JUDICIAL DISTRICT THAT ARE NO LONGER IN THAT JUDICIAL DISTRICT.

AND THE TERMS MIGHT EXPIRE AT A PARTICULAR TIME, WHICH IS WHY IT'S

TROUBLING WHEN A BILL LIKE THIS GETS DROPPED A COUPLE OF DAYS BEFORE IT'S

PASSED; WHICH IS WHY OCA IS WEIGHING IN SAYING SLOW DOWN. THERE

ARE IMPLICATIONS TO US PASSING THIS. I DON'T CARE WHEN IT TAKES EFFECT.

WE ARE ADDRESSING THE JUSTICES AND -- AND WHERE THEY'RE BEING

ALLOCATED. BUT -- SO WE HAVEN'T -- THIS HASN'T BEEN LOOKED AT AT ALL, HOW

THIS WOULD IMPACT THE CURRENT MAKEUP OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS AND THE

MAKEUP OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS IN THE FUTURE?

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: WHENEVER THEIR TERMS WILL BE UP WILL

BE UP. THERE WAS NO CONSIDERATION FOR REGENTS IN THIS BILL, NO.

MR. RA: OKAY. SO WHAT IF A CURRENT MEMBER OF THE

BOARD OF REGENTS IS SUDDENLY IN A DIFFERENT JUDICIAL DISTRICT? OR WHAT

IF -- I MEAN, WHAT IF TWO MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS -- AND I

ASSUME BY YOUR ANSWER THAT YOU HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THIS -- WHAT IF TWO

MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS, YOU KNOW, ONE IS CURRENTLY IN ONE

JUDICIAL DISTRICT AND HAS NOW MOVED INTO ANOTHER JUDICIAL DISTRICT?

THAT DISTRICT IS ONLY ALLOWED TO HAVE ONE REGENT. WHAT HAPPENS?

DOES ONE GET KICKED OFF THE BOARD OF REGENTS?

(PAUSE/CONFERENCING)

MR. RIVERA: AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, IF ANY -- IF ANY

BOARD OF REGENT [SIC] THAT HAPPENS TO BE IN ONE OF THESE JUDICIAL

DISTRICTS WHERE I'M -- I'M NOT EVEN SURE IF THAT -- IF THERE IS ANY. IF

THERE ARE ANY, THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS THAT WE WOULD

DO IN ANY OTHER SORT OF YEAR. THEIR TERMS ARE UNAFFECTED BY THIS. SO

THAT'S IT.

MR. RA: OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU. I -- I -- I THINK THIS

IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN THOUGHT ABOUT AS THIS WAS BEING

ADVANCED.

SO GOING BACK TO REALLY THE ISSUE AT HAND AS IT PERTAINS

TO THE JUDICIARY. YOU -- YOU STATED TO ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES EARLIER THAT

YOU DISAGREED WITH THE INFORMATION HE HAD COME UP WITH WITH REGARD

TO COST. DO YOU -- DO YOU HAVE A DOLLAR FIGURE THAT YOU FEEL THIS -- THAT

WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS BILL? OBVIOUSLY, WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AT THAT IN FUTURE BUDGETS. THIS IS GOING INTO EFFECT IN TWO YEARS. DO

YOU HAVE A FISCAL AMOUNT WITH REGARD TO ANY NEW ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF,

ANY NEW INFRASTRUCTURE? ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS BILL.

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. IT'S OUR BELIEF THAT, AGAIN,

CONSIDERING THAT WE ARE NOT CREATING NEW JUDGESHIPS THAT, YOU KNOW,

WE'RE SIMPLY PLACING THEM IN DIFFERENT PLACES. WE BELIEVE THAT THE

COST IS ABSOLUTELY NOMINAL.

MR. RA: WELL, IT -- IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE OCA AGREES

WITH -- WITH THAT. AND -- AND JUST AS MY COLLEAGUE NOTED, I -- I WILL SAY

THIS -- BECAUSE OF THE TIME IN SESSION WE ARE, IT WENT THROUGH THE WAYS

AND MEANS COMMITTEE RATHER THAN THE JUDICIARY. SO I WISH WE HAD A

MORE FIRM ANSWER AS TO WHAT THAT -- THAT NUMBER WAS.

WITH REGARD TO THE APPORTIONMENT OF THESE JUDGES, SO

WE -- WE SPELL OUT THE NAMES OF EACH OF THESE JUDGES, CORRECT, AND WHAT

JUDICIAL DISTRICT THEY WOULD BE SERVING IN.

MR. RIVERA: THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE CONSTITUTION.

MR. RA: NOW, AM I CORRECT THAT THERE ARE JUDGES THAT

WOULD NOW BE SERVING JUDICIAL DISTRICTS THAT THEY DON'T RESIDE IN?

MR. RIVERA: IN THE SCENARIOS WHERE THAT'S

HAPPENED WE TRIED TO MINIMIZE THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. THAT IS

WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHENEVER A REDISTRICTING OCCURS. THERE'S NOT A

RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENT TO SERVE IN THE DISTRICT, SO IT -- IT'S NOT THE

INCONVENIENCE OF SOMEBODY LITERALLY MOVING WHERE THEY LIVE. AGAIN, I

-- I -- THE -- THE BURDEN IS NOT, YOU KNOW, EXCESSIVE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RA: OKAY. AND HAVE YOU LOOKED AT IN TERMS OF

THESE JUDGES THAT ARE LISTED, HOW MANY OF THEM ARE, YOU KNOW, IN THE

SITUATION THAT THEY MAY BE HITTING RETIREMENT, MANDATORY RETIREMENT AGE

IN THE INTERIM OF THIS BILL GOING INTO EFFECT? DO WE KNOW THAT NUMBER?

MR. RIVERA: WELL, AS IN HOW MANY ARE GOING TO

RETIRE NEXT YEAR?

MR. RA: YEAH. AS -- AS WE KNOW, YOU -- YOU HAVE

TO RETIRE AT 76. SO DO WE KNOW IF ANY OF THESE JUDGES WHO ARE SPELLED

OUT ARE GOING TO HIT THAT RETIREMENT AGE BEFORE THIS BILL GOES INTO EFFECT?

MR. RIVERA: WE DON'T.

MR. RA: BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE REASON I'M ASKING

IS WE'VE SPELLED OUT THE NAMES OF THEM RATHER THAN, YOU KNOW, IT -- IT'S

-- IT'S UNIQUE, I -- I WOULD SAY, TO THE JUDICIARY, RIGHT? IF WE WERE

TALKING ABOUT ASSEMBLY DISTRICTS, THERE'S A DISTRICT NUMBER AND -- AND

WE'D BE TALKING ABOUT THE DISTRICT ITSELF. I -- I ASK THAT BECAUSE THAT ALSO

IS GOING TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON FUTURE ELECTIONS.

NOW, IT'S SPELLED OUT IN THIS BILL THAT WHEN PEOPLE RUN

AS -- FOR JUSTICE SPOTS ON THE SUPREME COURT IN 2026, THEY'LL BE RUNNING

IN LINE WITH THESE NEW DISTRICTS; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. RA: WHAT ABOUT ANYBODY WHO'S UP THIS FALL?

MR. RIVERA: OH, WELL IF THEY'RE RUNNING THIS FALL

THEY'RE ALREADY ON THE BALLOT.

MR. RA: NO, THEY'RE NOT.

MR. RIVERA: OR THEY WILL BE AFTER THE JUDICIAL

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CONVENTION IS OVER.

MR. RA: THE JUDICIAL CONVENTION IS OVER THE

SUMMER.

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. SO THAT DOESN'T -- IT DOESN'T

CHANGE FOR THIS YEAR.

MR. RA: BUT HOW -- SO THEY WOULD RUN UNDER THE

CURRENT JUDICIAL DISTRICTS?

MR. RIVERA: IF I'M ON THE BALLOT TODAY RUNNING FOR

SUPREME COURT, I'M RUNNING UNDER THE CURRENT JUDICIAL DISTRICT.

MR. RA: WELL, AGAIN, YOU'RE NOT ON -- NOBODY'S --

MR. RIVERA: (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

MR. RA: -- ON THE BALLOT. IT COULD BE -- JUDICIAL

CONVENTIONS OCCUR OVER THE SUMMER --

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. RA: -- TO DESIGNATE THOSE CANDIDATES.

MR. RIVERA: RIGHT.

MR. RA: SO WHAT -- HOW ARE WE GOING TO APPORTION

ANY JUDGES -- ANY JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT WHO ARE ELECTED THIS

FALL IF THEY'RE IN ONE OF THESE DISTRICTS? DO WE -- ARE WE GONNA HAVE TO

COME BACK AND, BY NAME, DO, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY A CHAPTER

AMENDMENT TO FIGURE OUT WHICH DISTRICT THEY WOULD BE SERVING IN GOING

FORWARD? BECAUSE THEY'RE GONNA BE ELECTED TO A 14-YEAR TERM.

(PAUSE/CONFERENCING)

MR. RIVERA: WHETHER WE ANTICIPATE A CHAPTER

AMENDMENT, WE DO NOT. THERE'S BEEN CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN THE OCA

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AND WE DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT BEING A SCENARIO THAT WE HAVE TO BE

CONCERNED WITH.

MR. RA: OKAY. BUT IF -- IF SOMEBODY, SAY, IS ELECTED

TO BECOME A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE IN THE 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT THIS

FALL --

MR. RIVERA: THERE IS NO 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT.

MR. RA: I'M SORRY?

MR. RIVERA: THERE IS NO 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

CURRENTLY.

MR. RA: WELL, I'M SORRY. THE -- ONE OF -- IN THE --

OKAY, SO LET'S SAY --

MR. RIVERA: LET'S SAY THE 8TH.

MR. RA: -- THE 7TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT.

MR. RIVERA: OKAY.

MR. RA: OKAY? HOW ARE THEY GOING TO BE ALLOCATED

COME JANUARY -- DOES IT GO INTO EFFECT JANUARY 2027 OR SOMETIME LATER

IN 2027?

MR. RIVERA: JANUARY 2027.

MR. RA: OKAY. SO HOW ARE THEY GOING TO BE

ASSIGNED IN TERMS OF WHICH DISTRICT THEY WILL SERVE COME JANUARY OF

2027? BECAUSE THEIR NAME'S NOT IN THIS BILL BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN

NOMINATED YET, HOW ARE THEY GOING TO BE ASSIGNED WHICH DISTRICT THEY'LL

BE SERVING IN AFTER THEY'VE GOTTEN ELECTED THIS FALL TO REPRESENT THE 7TH

JUDICIAL DISTRICT?

MR. RIVERA: THIS DEALS -- THIS BILL DEALS WITH THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

JUDGES WHO ARE JUDGES TODAY. THERE IS NO WAY TO CAPTURE WHAT COULD

BE A HYPOTHETICAL ELECTION OF A HYPOTHETICAL CANDIDATE. SO I GUESS --

THIS SPEAKS TO THE JUDGES WHO ARE JUDGES TODAY.

MR. RA: IT MAY BE HYPOTHETICAL, BUT I -- I MEAN, I

DON'T KNOW ABOUT EVERYPLACE ELSE IN THE STATE. WE HAVE SUPREME

COURT JUSTICES ON THE BALLOT EVERY -- EVERY YEAR. SO I DON'T THINK IT'S

HYPOTHETICAL. WE DON'T KNOW THE INDIVIDUAL'S NAME, BUT I COULD PRETTY

CLOSE TO GUARANTEE YOU THAT THERE'S SOMEBODY THAT'S GOING TO BE RUNNING

IN ONE OF THESE DISTRICTS THIS FALL THAT'S NAME IS NOT IN THIS BILL AND IS NOT

GONNA -- THERE'S GONNA BE SOME, I DON'T KNOW, LEGAL AMBIGUITY AS TO

WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE SERVING COME JANUARY OF 2027.

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. I MEAN -- YEAH, I MEAN THE

SEAT IS -- YOU KNOW, WE -- WE LIST THE NAMES OF THE JUDGES THAT ARE

CURRENTLY THERE. THE SEATS THAT THOSE JUDGES CURRENTLY OCCUPY ARE NO

DIFFERENT FROM THE SEATS THAT ARE GONNA BE UP FOR ELECTION THIS YEAR. SO

THE ELECTION WILL BE HELD, OCA WOULD -- WOULD -- WOULD DETERMINE IT.

THEY WOULD STAY WITHIN, YOU KNOW, THE -- THEY'D CERTAINLY STAY WITHIN

THEIR DEPARTMENT, AND THEN OCA WOULD ASSIST IN ALLOCATING THEM WHERE

TO BE.

MR. RA: SO THE -- SO OCA WILL DETERMINE WHICH

DISTRICT THEY'RE ASSIGNED TO GOING FORWARD? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?

MR. RIVERA: OCA, IN ANY SCENARIO, DETERMINES

WHERE THEY SIT.

MR. RA: WELL, WHERE THEY SIT, BUT --

MR. RIVERA: THAT WOULD BE NO DIFFERENT.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RA: YES, BUT WE HAVE STATUTORY NUMBERS OF

JUDGES IN EACH OF THESE DEPARTMENTS. SO PRESUMABLY, SOMEBODY HAS TO

BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT THIS PERSON -- YES, YOU CAN SIT IN A DIFFERENT

DISTRICT, AS -- AS WE KNOW. I MEAN, I COULD -- I COULD BE ON THE BALLOT

THIS FALL -- I'M NOT GOING TO BE, OBVIOUSLY -- BUT I COULD BE ON THE BALLOT

THIS FALL IN ERIE COUNTY FOR A JUSTICE.

MR. RIVERA: COME ON DOWN.

MR. RA: NAH, I LIKE LONG ISLAND.

MR. RIVERA: I FIGURED.

MR. RA: BUT, SO YOU COULD SIT IN A DIFFERENT DISTRICT,

BUT IN TERMS OF WHERE THEY ARE ACTUALLY ALLOCATED FOR PURPOSES OF THAT

STATUTORY NUMBER WE HAVE OF DISTRICTS IN EACH -- THERE -- THERE SEEMS TO

BE A GREAT DEAL OF AMBIGUITY HERE AS TO HOW WE'RE GOING TO DEAL WITH

THAT IF SOMEBODY'S ELECTED IN THE INTERIM OF -- OF AFTER WE'VE PASSED THIS

BILL. AND I -- I DON'T -- I DON'T SEE HOW THERE'S ANY OTHER SOLUTION OTHER

THAN US ANTICIPATING DOING SOME FUTURE AMENDMENT TO THIS TO NAME

THOSE JUDGES AND WHERE THEY'RE GOING.

MR. RIVERA: I DON'T PERCEIVE IT TO BE AMBIGUOUS. I

THINK THAT OCA CREATES THE RULES AND MAKES THE DECISIONS

ADMINISTRATIVELY TO DETERMINE THESE THINGS.

MR. RA: OKAY. SO -- SO YOU ARE SAYING THAT OCA IS

GOING TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION THEN.

MR. RIVERA: WELL, THERE'S ALREADY A DESIGNATION OF

HOW MANY JUDICIAL DISTRICT SLOTS OR JUDGESHIPS THERE ARE IN EACH ONE OF

THESE DISTRICTS.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RA: YES.

MR. RIVERA: IF ONE DISTRICT IS DOWN ONE, WE KNOW

WHERE THAT PERSON WOULD BE PLACED.

MR. RA: OKAY. SO OCA WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO

MAKE THAT DETERMINATION ADMINISTRATIVELY AS TO WHAT JUDICIAL DISTRICT

THAT INDIVIDUAL IS -- IS SERVING?

MR. RIVERA: I PERCEIVE THAT AS NO DIFFERENT FROM

THE ABIL -- THE -- SORT OF THEIR CAPACITY AND WHAT THEY CAN DO TODAY.

MR. RA: WELL, I -- I WOULDN'T AGREE WITH THAT

BECAUSE THEY COULD -- THEY CAN ALLOCATE JUDGES DIFFERENT PLACES. THEY

CAN'T CHANGE WHICH JUDICIAL DISTRICT THEY'VE BEEN ELECTED IN.

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. RA: THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

LASTLY, I -- I KNOW YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU DID

NOT LOOK AT CASELOAD, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IN 2024 THERE WERE

7,000 NEW CASES FILED IN ERIE AND 2,900 FILED IN THE OTHER SEVEN

COUNTIES OF THE 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT. SO IF YOU DIVIDE THAT BY 13

JUDGES, THAT'S ABOUT 22 -- 220 NEW CASES PER YEAR. NOW, IF WE'RE

DIVIDING THE DISTRICTS NOW, I MEAN, ARE WE BASICALLY GONNA HAVE TO

HAVE A LOT OF THESE JUDGES STILL BE ASSIGNED TO WORK IN ERIE ANYWAY TO

BE ABLE TO KEEP UP WITH THAT CASELOAD?

MR. RIVERA: WELL, I'D SAY THAT -- THAT'S WHY THE --

THE NEW 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT HAS 18, AND THE -- SORT OF THE NEWLY-

CREATED ONE AROUND IT WILL HAVE TEN. YOU KNOW, IT -- THE POPULATION OF

THESE MUNICIPAL -- OF THE COUNTIES ARE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT ON THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PORTIONS OF WHAT JUDGES GO WHERE. YOU KNOW, CASELOADS ARE GONNA

COME AND GO. THEY'RE GONNA BE UP AND DOWN, AND WE'RE MAKING THE

BEST DECISIONS WE CAN WITH THE INFORMATION WE HAVE BEFORE US.

MR. RA: OKAY. I -- THANK YOU, MR. RIVERA.

MADAM SPEAKER, VERY BRIEFLY ON THE BILL. I STILL HAVE

15 SECONDS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. RA: I'LL COME BACK AND EXPLAIN MY VOTE. BUT

THERE ARE FAR TOO MANY QUESTIONS HERE THAT DON'T HAVE ANSWERS. THAT'S

WHY BILLS THAT ARE THIS COMPLEX SHOULD NOT BE DROPPED THE LAST WEEK OF

SESSION WHEN THERE ARE SO MANY DIFFERENT ENTITIES THAT NEED TO WEIGH IN

TO MAKE SURE SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS DONE EFFECTIVELY.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. REILLY.

MR. REILLY: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: YES, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD? THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. REILLY: SO, MR. RIVERA, JUST -- WHAT I HEARD

EARLIER WAS THAT THE INTENT OF THIS BILL IS FOR THE JUDICIARY TO BE

REFLECTIVE OF THE COMMUNITY THAT IT'S REPRESENTED BY; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: IN 2007 WHEN WE MADE SURE THAT THE

GOOD PEOPLE OF STATEN ISLAND WERE GONNA HAVE THEIR OWN DISTRICT, WE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

DID SO, I BELIEVE, GRANTED IT PREDATES ME, THAT WE WERE DOING SO

BELIEVING THAT, YOU KNOW, THE FOLKS WHO LIVE THERE AND WANTED TO BE

REPRESENTED MORE FAIRLY AND I THINK THAT THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME THING

WE'RE DOING NOW.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. DOES THIS BILL ADD A JUDICIAL

SEAT TO RICHMOND COUNTY?

MR. RIVERA: NO, BUT IF YOU WANT NOW -- NO.

MR. REILLY: WE'RE GONNA GET INTO THAT.

MR. RIVERA: I'M SURE.

MR. REILLY: THANK YOU.

ON THE BILL, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. REILLY: SO, I HEARD SO MANY THINGS HERE ABOUT

DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION. NOT ONLY IN THIS BILL, BUT, OF COURSE, OVER

THE SEVERAL DAYS THAT WE'VE BEEN HERE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE

SPONSOR MENTIONED, WHICH I REITERATED, RIGHT, REFLECTIVE JUDICIARY OF THE

COMMUNITY. WHEN WE DEBATED A BILL ABOUT JUDGES THAT WERE BEING

APPOINTED, OR SEATS BEING CREATED, WE WERE TOLD, DON'T WORRY ABOUT

RICHMOND COUNTY. THEY CAN GET ELECTED IN MANHATTAN AND THEY CAN

BE SENT TO RICHMOND COUNTY. THE EXACT ARGUMENT THAT I USED OF

SAYING, WE NEED A JUDICIAL REPRESENTATION THAT'S PUT IN PLACE BY THE

COMMUNITY THEY ARE GOING TO HEAR CASES IN. I WAS TOLD, THERE'S NOTHING

TO WORRY ABOUT WITH THAT. ON THIS LEGISLATION, IT'S THE EXACT OPPOSITE.

THE HYPOCRISY IS JUST OUTSTANDING. AND WHEN I -- THE REASON WHY I

BROUGHT UP DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION, WE HEAR DIVERSITY, WE HEAR

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

EQUITY, BUT WE ALWAYS LEAVE OUT THAT "I"; INCLUSION, INCLUSIVENESS.

THAT MEANS HEARING FROM ALL SIDES. WE DON'T EVER HEAR THAT PART.

BEING INCLUSIVE SOMETIMES IS ALLOWING PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT OPINIONS

TO HAVE INPUT. WE SEE OFTEN IN BILLS THAT WE PUT IN ABOUT FORMING

COMMISSIONS, OH, THERE'S NO MINORITY MEMBER APPOINTMENTS. I GET IT.

I GET IT. YOU CONTROL THE HOUSE, THE OTHER HOUSE AND THE EXECUTIVE.

THAT'S HOW IT WORKS. I GET IT. BUT IF YOU TRULY WANT TO HAVE DEI AND BE

INCLUSIVE, THEN WE WOULD HEAR FROM ALL STAKEHOLDERS. BUT, THE

HYPOCRISY OF THIS BILL COMING TO THE FLOOR RIGHT AFTER WE HAD BUDGET

SEASON AND THE SAME EXACT ARGUMENTS THAT I'M BRINGING UP TODAY, I WAS

TOLD, DON'T WORRY ABOUT. YOU CAN GET ELECTED IN MANHATTAN. YOU CAN

GET ELECTED IN QUEENS. YOU CAN GET ELECTED IN THE BRONX. THEY CAN

ASSIGN SOMEONE TO RICHMOND COUNTY. WHY DOES IT FALL ON DEAF EARS?

THERE'S ONLY ONE REASON. IT'S ABOUT POLITICS AND WE KNOW THAT.

NOW, IRONICALLY IN THIS BILL, IT'S ONE OF THE SEATS THERE,

ONE OF THE JUDICIAL SEATS HERE, WOULD HEAR ELECTION APPEALS. THAT WAS A

BILL THAT WE DID LAST YEAR I BELIEVE, RIGHT? AND WE MADE IT WHERE ONLY

FOUR COUNTIES CAN HEAR AND APPEAL ON AN ELECTION LAW IN REGARDS TO

ELECTIONS. ISN'T IT IRONIC THAT NOW WE'RE CHANGING THOSE SEATS SO THAT

MAYBE THE SCALE OF JUSTICE MAY TILT A LITTLE TO THE LEFT? JUSTICE, WHEN

YOU LOOK AT IT, RIGHT, IT WEARS A BLINDFOLD, RIGHT? SHE'S ALWAYS WEARING

A BLINDFOLD. OBVIOUSLY, IT DOES NOT WEAR -- SHE DOES NOT WEAR A

BLINDFOLD, BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW THAT THIS HAS NOTHING MORE TO DO THAN

BEING A DEMOCRAT OR A REPUBLICAN. AND I GET IT, YOU'RE IN CHARGE,

THAT'S HOW IT'S DONE. WE CAN DO BETTER AND WE MUST DO BETTER.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. BOLOGNA.

MR. BOLOGNA: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A FEW QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. BOLOGNA: THANK YOU, SIR. SO, MR. RIVERA,

BEING FROM THE SAME COUNTY, SAME NEXT OF THE WOODS --

MR. RIVERA: YUP.

MR. BOLOGNA: -- FAMILIAR BACKGROUNDS, WOULD IT

BE FAIR TO SAY THAT WHEN IT COMES TO POLITICAL OPERATIONS; PETITIONS, OPT

OF BALLOT, THE MECHANICS OF BALLOT ACCESS, WHAT -- WHATEVER -- IT DOESN'T

MATTER. THE OFFICE; WHETHER IT'S A TOWN JUDGE, TOWN BOARD MEMBER,

COUNTY, STATE ASSEMBLY, WHATEVER IT IS, THAT THERE'S A SMALL GROUP OF --

OF INSIDERS, GENERALLY REFERRED TO AS POLLS OR POLITICOS, THAT GENERALLY

UNDERSTAND THE MECHANICS OF HOW BALLOT ACCESS AND HOW THIS STUFF

WORKS. WOULD YOU -- IS THAT A FAIR ASSESSMENT?

MR. RIVERA: IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE MAJORITY OF

THE PEOPLE THAT ARE INVOLVED IN POLITICS IS A SMALL SUBSET OF PEOPLE FROM

OUR REGION, I SUPPOSE THAT'S PARTIALLY TRUE. SURE, I SUPPOSE.

MR. BOLOGNA: AND THEN --

MR. RIVERA: BUT I'D ALSO SAY THAT IT'S INCUMBENT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

UPON US THAT ARE ELECTED, YOU KNOW, WE REPRESENT DISTRICTS OF 130,000

PEOPLE, IMPOSSIBLE TO MEET THEM ALL. SO, WE KNOW THAT AT THE END OF

THE DAY WE'RE JUST TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, BE AS FAIR AS WE CAN TO AS MANY

PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE, BEING HONORED BY THEIR VOTE. AND AT THE END OF THE

DAY, I THINK ONE UNIVERSAL THING THAT PEOPLE HAVE COMMUNICATED TO ME

ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, AS YOU KNOW, I REPRESENT A DISTRICT THAT IS,

YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY NOT AS BLUE AS OTHERS, I -- I -- I WOULD SAY THE ONE

UNIVERSAL TRUTH IS, PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW THAT -- THAT THE PEOPLE THAT

THEY'RE ENGAGING WITH IN GOVERNMENT, IS REPRESENT -- ARE THEY A

REPRESENTATIVE OF WHO THEY ARE? AND I DO LOOK AT THE OTHER COUNTIES IN

THE CURRENT JUDICIAL DISTRICT AND I KNOW THAT'S IT NOT REFLECTIVE. I KNOW

THAT IF I AM FROM WYOMING, OR GENESEE COUNTY, ORLEANS COUNTY, THE

PROBABILITY OF BEING ELECTED TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT IS MINIMAL,

REGARDLESS OF YOUR POLITICAL AFFILIATION, BECAUSE ERIE COUNTY JUST

OCCUPIES SO MUCH SEATS IN THAT JUDICIAL DISTRICT. SO, I THINK, AT THE END

OF THE DAY, WHETHER THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE INVOLVED IN POLITICS, VERY

FEW PEOPLE INVOLVED IN POLITICS, PEOPLE THAT ARE BRAND NEW, OR PEOPLE

THAT HAVE BEEN HERE FOREVER, AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU KNOW, THE -- THE

EAGERNESS TO BE REASSURED A FAIR REPRESENTATION SUPERCEDES ALL -- ALL OF

IT.

MR. BOLOGNA: THANK YOU FOR THAT. I MEAN -- BUT

AS FAR AS THE MECHANICS ARE CONCERNED, I MEAN, IT'S -- IT IS A SMALL -- THIS

IS A VERY INSIDE BASEBALL BUILD IN -- AND WITHIN THAT POLITICAL STRUCTURE,

THERE'S EVEN A SMALLER SUBSET OF -- OF PEOPLE WHO ARE OF THE LEGAL

POLITICAL, YOU KNOW, JUDICIAL, YOU KNOW, ILK OF THAT.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: YEAH --

MR. BOLOGNA: SO, MY -- MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS,

WHY ARE WE -- WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? LIKE, WHO IS -- WHO IS

CALLING WITH -- WHAT PUBLIC OUTCRY IS HAPPENING HERE? WHO IS CALLING

FOR THIS?

MR. RIVERA: IF WE WAITED FOR PUBLIC OUTCRY FOR

EVERY BILL WE DID, WE WOULDN'T DO MANY BILLS HERE. SO, THAT'S WHY.

MR. BOLOGNA: OKAY. SO, WHY ARE WE DOING THIS?

MR. RIVERA: WE'RE DOING THIS BECAUSE THESE LINES,

I SAID TO MR. JENSEN EARLIER, I CAN SAY IT EASILY TO YOU TOO, THESE LINES

HAVEN'T BEEN CHANGED SINCE BOTH OF OUR, YOU KNOW, TIMES ON THIS

PLANET MULTIPLIED BY TWO. THERE IS NO REASON THAT WE SHOULD WAIT

ANOTHER MINUTE TO LOOK AT THE LINES THAT DETERMINE WHO OUR JUDGES IN

THIS STATE, THAT HAVE BEEN STILL, STAGNANT, THERE, THE SAME WAY FOR

DECADES AND LOOK AT IT AND SAY, WELL, WHAT'S THE OUTCRY? WELL, WHAT --

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? THERE IS A PROBLEM. THE FACT THAT WE

HAVE NOT DONE THIS FASTER AND SOONER IS THE PROBLEM.

SO, YOU'RE RIGHT. THERE IS NO PUBLIC OUTCRY, BUT FOR THE

SAME REASON YOU MENTIONED BEFORE. IT'S BECAUSE THE AVERAGE PERSON

WHO LIVES IN NEW YORK STATE, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE JUST LIVING PAYCHECK

TO PAYCHECK, THEY ARE NOT CONCERNED, OR AWARE, OF JUDICIAL CONVENTIONS

AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS AND ALL OF THAT IN BETWEEN. ALL THEY KNOW IS IF

THEY ARE CONFRONTED WITH THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, THEY WANT -- THEY WANT TO

KNOW THAT THEY ARE TREATED FAIRLY AND JUSTLY AND IDEALLY BY SOMEONE

THAT KNOWS THEIR COMMUNITY AND THAT'S WHAT THIS DOES.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. BOLOGNA: I CAN -- I CAN APPRECIATE THAT. I

REALLY CAN. SO, I GUESS, ANOTHER QUESTION AND BASED ON THAT WOULD BE,

WHY, GIVEN THE CURRENT MAKEUP AND -- AND, I GUESS, I'LL SPEAK

SPECIFICALLY TO THE 8TH JUDICIAL OF WHICH YOU AND I CURRENTLY LIVE IN.

MR. RIVERA: YUP.

MR. BOLOGNA: WHY IS IT, YOU KNOW, THAT

THE PROCESS -- WHAT -- HOW -- HOW DO I SAY THIS? WHY IS IT THAT IT IS THE

WAY IT IS? WHY IS THAT THERE IS THIS LACK OF REPRESENTATION, WHETHER IT'S

DIVERSITY BASED ON, YOU KNOW, LOCATION? WHY -- WHY IS IT THAT THAT IS

HAPPENING? BASED ON THE -- THE -- I MEAN, I KNOW THAT JUDICIAL

CONVENTIONS HAPPEN. DON'T -- DON'T COMMITTEE AND JUDICIAL DELEGATES

WORK THROUGH THE CHAIR? SO, ISN'T THIS KIND OF A PROBLEM OF -- OF THE --

OF THE CHAIRMAN, LONGSTANDING TRADITION OF BOTH PARTIES AND NOT

NOMINATING MORE -- A MORE DIVERSE GROUP OF PEOPLE?

MR. RIVERA: I WOULD SAY, GOING BACK TO YOUR POINT

EARLIER ABOUT -- ABOUT, SORT OF, SOME FOLKS NOT KNOWING PROCESSES. THE

TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, THERE ARE -- THE -- THE WAY THAT WE ELECT JUDGES

AND VOTE FOR JUDGES, YOU KNOW, THE CONVENTIONS, NONE OF THAT, NUMBER

ONE, HAS CHANGED IN THIS BILL. SO, THE PROCESSES BY WHICH WE ELECT

JUDGES IS UNCHANGED. SO, WE'LL PUT THAT ASIDE. BUT THE FACT THAT THIS

WAS SORT OF A LONGSTANDING THING IS NOT REASON TO CONTINUE TO PERPETUATE

IT. THE FACT THAT IT HAS BEEN A LONGSTANDING, SORT OF, WAY THAT THE

JUDICIAL DISTRICTS ARE CONFIGURED IS ALL THE REASON TO CHANGE IT. WE'RE

NOT CHANGING PROCESSES. PEOPLE WILL STILL GET ELECTED THE WAY THEY GOT

ELECTED. THERE IS, YOU KNOW, THE -- THE MECHANICS OF IT ALL, AS YOU PUT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

IT, IS -- IS UNCHANGED. WHAT IS CHANGED IS THE -- THE SIMPLE BOUNDARIES

OF WHAT -- WHERE THOSE DISTRICTS ARE.

MR. BOLOGNA: SO, HOW DOES THIS FIX -- HOW DOES

THIS FIX THAT? WHAT -- WHAT IS SO SPECIAL ABOUT ERIE COUNTY? WHAT IS IT

ABOUT ERIE COUNTY SPECIFICALLY, THAT GIVING IT ITS OWN JUDICIAL DISTRICT

THAT WILL NOW CHANGE THAT LACK OF DIVERSITY OF REPRESENTATION? WHAT IS

IT SPECIFICALLY ABOUT ERIE COUNTY?

MR. RIVERA: WELL, AS I SAID BEFORE, IF YOU LOOK AT

THE POPULATION OF THE 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, CURRENTLY, AS IT STANDS, IT'S

ABOUT 1.5 MILLION PEOPLE. OF THAT, 61 PERCENT OF IT LIVE IN ERIE COUNTY.

SO, IT'S A BIT UNFAIR FOR THE OTHER SIX COUNTIES THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE

JUDICIAL -- THERE ARE SEVEN COUNTIES THAT ARE -- IN THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT, TO

CONSTANTLY BE AT THE WHIM OF ERIE COUNTY. A COUNTY THAT IS LIKE A

900,000 PLUS PERSON COUNTY WHEN THESE OTHER COUNTIES ARE

SUBSTANTIALLY SMALLER. SO JUST AS MUCH --

MR. BOLOGNA: SO YOU'RE DOING THIS FOR THE BENEFIT

OF NIAGARA AND ORLEANS AND ALL THOSE COUNTIES? THAT'S -- THAT'S --

BECAUSE YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT AT THE WILL OF ERIE

COUNTY?

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. I GENUINELY BELIEVE THAT NOW,

IF I AM RESIDENT, A VOTER IN WYOMING COUNTY, THAT I HAVE A HIGHER

LIKELIHOOD TODAY UNDER THE NEW MAPS OF ELECT -- OF ELECTING A JUDGE

FROM MY TOWN -- FROM MY COUNTY.

MR. BOLOGNA: OKAY. SO, THEN I -- I GUESS, BASED

ON THAT, THEN AND, AGAIN, SPECIFICALLY -- BECAUSE I KNOW YOU -- YOU GAVE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SOME NUMBERS EARLIER WITH, YOU KNOW, THE POPULATIONS AND -- AND THE

METRICS WITHIN NIAGARA -- OR ERIE COUNTY. SO, LIKE, IS THE OBJECTIVE OF

THIS BILL, THEN, TO CREATE A JUDICIAL DISTRICT BASED ON REPRESENTATION OF

RACE AND ETHICAL -- AND ETHNIC BACKGROUND?

MR. RIVERA: NO. I'M -- MY -- THE INTEREST OF THIS

BILL --

MR. BOLOGNA: IS IT A FACTOR?

MR. RIVERA: -- IS TO MAKE IT SO THE JUDICIAL

DISTRICTS CAN MORE EASILY REFLECT THE -- THE -- THE -- WHAT MAKES THEM

WHAT THEY ARE. FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, ERIE -- ERIE COUNTY IS

AN ALMOST MILLION PERSON COUNTY. IT SHOULD BE IN ITS OWN JUDICIAL

DISTRICT IN PART BECAUSE OF THE POPULATION, BUT IN PART BECAUSE THE -- THE

NATURE OF THAT COUNTY AND THE MAKEUP OF THAT POPULATION IS SO

DRASTICALLY MORE DIVERSE THAN ANY OTHER COUNTY IN THAT JUDICIAL DISTRICT,

THAT IT PUTS BOTH SETS OF THOSE -- OF THAT ARGUMENT, WHETHER IT'S JUST ERIE

COUNTY, OR THE REMAINING COUNTIES IN THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT, AT -- AT -- AT

AN IMPASSE OF HAVING TO, YOU KNOW -- IF I AM FROM -- I'LL USE

CATTARAUGUS, FOR EXAMPLE, CATTARAUGUS, WHICH, I THINK -- I DON'T THINK

HAS ANY JUDGES TO SUPREME RIGHT NOW, ALTHOUGH I MIGHT BE WRONG, IN

OUR JUDICIAL DISTRICT, GIVES THEM A FIGHTING CHANCE TO ELECT SOMEBODY

FROM THEIR COUNTY. AND IN ERIC COUNTY, IT ALLOWS US TO -- TO COMMIT TO

THE GOAL THAT OCA ITSELF ACKNOWLEDGES THAT WE HAVE NOT HAD SUFFICIENT

DIVERSITY IN OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM.

MR. BOLOGNA: OKAY. SO, IT -- DIVERSITY THEN, IN

THAT -- IN THAT CONTEXT, IS A FACTOR. RACIAL, ETHNIC DIVERSITY IS A -- IS A

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

FACTOR IN THIS LEGISLATION.

MR. RIVERA: I'D SAY IT'S A FACTOR IN EVERY ASPECT OF

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM. SO --

MR. BOLOGNA: OKAY.

MR. RIVERA: -- YES.

MR. BOLOGNA: OKAY. SO, BACK TO THE -- THE 8TH,

I -- OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I FORGET WHAT ERIE -- THE NEW ERIE COUNTY

DISTRICT IS GOING TO BE, BUT THIS -- LET'S JUST FOCUS ON THAT FOR A SECOND.

MR. RIVERA: MM-HMM.

MR. BOLOGNA: SO, WE'RE ESSENTIALLY CREATING A

STATE SUPREME COURT JUDICIAL DISTRICT FOR THE COUNTY OF ERIE BY ITSELF?

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. BOLOGNA: OKAY. AND WITH THE GOAL OF

HOPEFUL -- HOPEFULLY MAKING THAT MORE DIVERSE. THERE ARE COUNTYWIDE

JUDGES, CURRENTLY, IN THAT. NOW, NOT FOR STATE SUPREME COURT, BUT FOR

COUNTY OFFICES, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: EVERY COUNTY HAS COUNTY COURT

JUDGES, YES.

MR. BOLOGNA: OKAY. SO, WHAT WE HAVE, ERIE

COUNTY FAMILY COURT, RIGHT, THAT ARE BASICALLY BE RUNNING IN THE SAME

DISTRICT, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: THE COUNTY LINES ARE THE COUNTY LINES,

WHETHER YOU'RE RUNNING FOR COUNTY EXECUTIVE, COMPTROLLER, COUNTY

JUDGE. YES.

MR. BOLOGNA: SO --

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: A COUNTY'S A COUNTY.

MR. BOLOGNA: OUT OF THE CURRENT ERIE COUNTY

FAMILY COURT JUDGES -- I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK OF THE MAKEUP. IS

THERE -- ARE THERE ANY -- OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD, DO YOU KNOW OF ANY

ETHNICALLY OR RACIALLY DIVERSE MEMBERS OF THAT BODY?

MR. RIVERA: OF WHAT BODY? I'M SORRY.

MR. BOLOGNA: ERIC COUNTY FAMILY COURT.

MR. RIVERA: HONESTLY, I COULDN'T TELL YOU. THIS

BILL IS ABOUT SUPREME COURT. I --

(CROSSTALK)

MR. BOLOGNA: I'M GONNA GET TO THAT --

MR. RIVERA: (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSSTALK)

MR. BOLOGNA: SO, WE HAVE -- WE HAVE ONE. AND

THEN ERIE COUNTY COURT ITSELF, ARE YOU AWARE OF ANYBODY WHO'S

ETHICALLY, RACIALLY DIVERSE ON THAT COURT?

MR. RIVERA: ON WHICH COURT? SORRY.

MR. BOLOGNA: ERIE COUNTY COURT.

MR. RIVERA: AGAIN, THIS IS ABOUT --

MR. BOLOGNA: ALL RIGHT. ZERO --

MR. RIVERA: -- THE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS.

MR. BOLOGNA: IT'S ZERO. SO, IT WOULD SEEM TO ME

THAT --

MR. RIVERA: SO, YOU'RE -- YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY

SUPPORTING MY POINT THAT THE --

MR. BOLOGNA: NO. I -- I --

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: -- COURT SHOULD BE MORE DIVERSE.

MR. BOLOGNA: -- I THINK THE ISSUE IS MORE WITH

YOUR COUNTY CHAIRMAN AND LESS WITH THE JUDICIAL LINES, IN TERMS OF

CANDIDATE RECRUITMENT. THAT IS WHAT I THINK THE BIGGEST ISSUE HERE IS.

AND IF IT -- ACTUALLY, MADAM -- THANK -- MR. RIVERA, THANK YOU VERY

MUCH.

MADAM SPEAKER, CAN WE GO ON THE BILL?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. BOLOGNA: I -- I THINK THAT THIS IS A -- A -- AN

ATTEMPT TO CONSOLIDATE JUDICIAL POWER IN POLITICAL PARTIES. I -- I'M --

REALLY, IT'S A -- WE'VE DONE TWO BILLS NOW IN TWO DAYS THAT HAVE REALLY,

FRANKLY, DIS -- DISHEARTENED ME TOWARDS OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM.

I'VE ALWAYS BEEN TAUGHT FROM THE TIME I WAS IN GRADE

SCHOOL THAT -- THAT JUSTICES ARE -- ARE MADE TO BE IMPARTIAL. AND I DON'T

REALLY SEE A WAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS HELPS THAT, BECAUSE THIS IS HYPER

POLITICIZING EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE DOING WITHIN THIS SYSTEM. SO, I -- I --

I'M -- I'M ACTUALLY SORELY DISAPPOINTED. I THINK THAT ONE OF MY

COLLEAGUES USED THE WORD "HYP -- HYPOCRISY". I THINK THERE IS A -- A FAIR

AMOUNT OF HYPOCRISY WITHIN -- TRYING TO PRESERVE OUR -- OUR JUDICIAL

SYSTEM AND PRESERVE WHAT WE THINK IS GOOD ABOUT THAT. AND WHAT IS

IMPARTIAL ABOUT THAT, NEUTRAL IS THE WAY IT SHOULD BE. BUT YET, WE'VE

SPENT NOW 48 HOURS POLITICIZING THE NEW YORK STATE JUDICIARY SYSTEM.

SO, I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED IN THAT REGARD.

AND, MADAM SPEAKER, I'LL BE VOTING DOWN ON THIS

PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. DURSO.

MR. DURSO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WOULD

THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: YES, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. DURSO: THANK YOU, MR. RIVERA. SO, I AM

PROBABLY ONE OF THE LEAST KNOWLEDGEABLE PEOPLE ABOUT THIS TOPIC. SO,

THIS SHOULD BE PRETTY EASY. MY QUESTIONS WILL BE SOMEWHAT BASIC.

WHEN WILL THIS LAW TAKE EFFECT IF SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR AND PASSES

TODAY?

MR. RIVERA: THE -- THE ACTUAL JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

TAKE EFFECT IN '27, JANUARY 1ST, '27. THE JUDGES THAT RUN FOR OFFICE IN '26

WILL BE RUINING ON THE NEW LINES.

MR. DURSO: I'M SORRY. SAY THAT LAST PART AGAIN, SIR.

MR. RIVERA: THE -- THE -- THE FOLKS THAT ARE

RUNNING FOR OFFICE, TO ASSUME OFFICE JANUARY 1ST, THEY RUN IN '26.

THE -- THE NEW OFFICES WILL BE '27.

MR. DURSO: SO, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY

ELECTED, THAT ARE ALREADY SITTING IN THOSE JUDICIAL SEATS WILL THEN ALSO

MOVE IN '27, CORRECT? IF THEY ARE THE ONES CHOSEN TO MOVE?

MR. RIVERA: YES.

MR. DURSO: OH. BLESS YOU, SIR.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: YES.

MR. DURSO: SO, HOW -- DO WE KNOW HOW MANY

JUDGES THAT ARE CURRENTLY SEATED, WILL HAVE TO BE MOVED ONCE THIS TAKES

PLACE IN '27?

MR. RIVERA: WELL, I SUPPOSE IT'S -- IT'S LAID OUT IN

THE BILL WHAT JUDGES GO TO WHAT DISTRICTS, BUT I WOULD SAY -- WHEN YOU

SAY MOVED, YOU MEAN LIKE PHYSICALLY RELOCATE?

MR. DURSO: YES. YEAH. WILL -- WILL BE RUNNING OR

-- EXCUSE ME, BE PUT INTO A JUDICIAL DISTRICT THEY WEREN'T ELECTED TO.

MR. RIVERA: WELL, JUST REMEMBER, THIS -- THIS

DOESN'T TRUNCATE THEIR TERMS. SO, IF ANYBODY IS A SITTING JUDGE CURRENTLY

AND THEY WERE JUST ELECTED LAST YEAR, THEY STILL HAVE 13 YEARS UNDER, YOU

KNOW, WITHOUT HAVING TO RUN AGAIN IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

MR. DURSO: RIGHT. I -- I UNDERSTAND IT DOESN'T

CHANGE THE -- THE LENGTH OF TIME THAT THEY'RE RUNNING. I'M SAYING, IF

THEY RAN IN DISTRICT -- THIS DISTRICT HERE, THEY COULD BE MOVED TO ANOTHER

DISTRICT, RIGHT, TO -- TO FILL THOSE VACANCIES THAT YOU NEED.

MR. RIVERA: WELL, REMEMBER THESE FOLKS ARE

ASSIGNED BY OCA TO THE COUNTY THAT THEY'RE ASSIGNED TO. THAT DOESN'T

CHANGE IN THIS. SO --

MR. DURSO: SO, WHO -- WHO VOTES FOR THESE JUDGES

THEN?

MR. RIVERA: LIKE WHO EL -- WHO ELECTS THEM?

MR. DURSO: YES.

MR. RIVERA: OH. WELL, THE PROCESS IS UNCHANGED,

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

YOU KNOW, THE -- THE WHATEVER -- A PARTY CIRCULATES PETITIONS IN THE

SAME TIMELINE AS WHEN OUR PETITIONS ARE CIRCULATED FOR JUDICIAL

DELEGATES AND THEN A CONVENTION IS HELD IN USUALLY AUGUST. AUGUST.

AND THEN, THE -- THE DELEGATES OF THEIR RESPECTIVE PARTIES, CHOOSE THEIR

RESPECTIVE CANDIDATES.

MR. DURSO: WELL, I -- I UNDERSTAND THAT PART OF IT.

I'M -- I'M SAYING THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN THE AREA, CORRECT, VOTE FOR

THESE JUDGES, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: SURE.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO NOW, THEY'RE VOTING FOR A

JUDGE THAT'S RUNNING ON THE LINE THAT REPRESENTS THEIR AREA, ESSENTIALLY,

AT THE TIME FOR THAT DISTRICT THAT IT WAS PRESENTLY CONSTITUTED. NOT

STARTING NEXT YEAR, CURRENTLY, CORRECT? SO, IN OTHER WORDS, I VOTED FOR A

JUDGE THAT'S ON THE BALLOT THAT I GO AND VOTE, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S MY

ELECTION, YOUR ELECTION, IF SOMEONE'S ON THE BALLOT THAT YEAR, PEOPLE ARE

GOING OUT AND VOTING FOR THESE JUDGES, CORRECT? JUST LIKE YOU, OR ME?

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. NOW, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT A JUDGE

WAS ELECTED, RIGHT, BY PEOPLE THAT WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO VOTE FOR

THAT JUDGE, PER SE, IF THEY WERE ABLE TO RUN AGAIN, NOT REPRESENTED. IN

OTHER WORDS, I VOTED FOR YOU TO BE, YOU KNOW, ON THE BALLOT AS -- AS THE

JUDGE I'M VOTING FOR, THEY CAN NOW BE PUT INTO A DISTRICT WHERE I

COULD'VE NO LONGER VOTED FOR YOU TO BE THAT JUDGE, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: WELL, THAT COULD HAPPEN TODAY, I

GUESS IS WHAT I WOULD SAY. THAT -- THAT COULD HYPOTHETICALLY HAPPEN

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

TODAY. BUT, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE -- IN -- IN MY DISTRICT, WHERE I LIVE,

WE'LL USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE --

MR. DURSO: SURE.

MR. RIVERA: -- IN A -- IF -- IF I VOTED FOR A JUDGE IN

CATTARAUGUS COUNTY --

MR. DURSO: OKAY.

MR. RIVERA: -- I'M JUST PICKING A COUNTY, CURRENTLY

IN THE 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, IT'S IN THE 15TH DISTRICT AS WELL. SO, THERE'S

NO CHANGE. IN THE MAJORITY OF COUNTIES, THERE IS NO CHANGE.

MR. DURSO: BUT THERE WILL BE A CHANGE IN SOME.

THERE -- THERE -- THERE'S A POSSIBILITY THAT IT COULD, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. BUT, AGAIN, WHERE A JUDGE IS

SEATED IS DEPENDED UPON WHAT OCA DESIGNATES -- WHERE -- WHEREVER

THEY TELL THEM TO SIT.

MR. DURSO: DO WE -- DO WE HAVE AN IDEA OF HOW

MANY OF THOSE JUDGES MAY BE MOVED OUT OF A DISTRICT THEY WEREN'T

ELECTED IN?

MR. RIVERA: WELL, IT'S REFLECTED IN THE -- IN THE BILL

WHERE IT LISTS THE JUDGES. SO, IT SAYS, IF YOU'RE, YOU KNOW -- IT -- IT LISTS

JUDGES IN JUDICIAL DISTRICT 8. I'LL USE AS AN EXAMPLE, THE NEW JUDICIAL

DISTRICT 15, IT LISTS THE ONES THAT ARE THERE. IT'S THERE.

MR. DURSO: RIGHT. SO, IF I VOTED IN 8, BUT NOW

THAT JUDGE IS MOVED TO 15, RIGHT, IF THAT ELECTION WOULD HAVE TAKEN

PLACE TODAY, I MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO VOTE FOR A JUDGE THAT I VOTED

FOR LAST YEAR, THIS YEAR.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: THAT'S TRUE, BUT YOU'RE

(INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK) -- SOMEBODY THAT HAS A 14 YEAR TERM, SO, IT'S

UNLIKELY.

MR. DURSO: WELL -- WELL --

MR. RIVERA: JUST -- I MEAN, YES, YOU -- YOU MIGHT

BE ABLE TO SAY, WELL, I CAN'T VOTE FOR THIS PERSON WHO I VOTED FOR 14

YEARS AGO.

MR. DURSO: CORRECT, BUT -- BUT -- BUT WHEN YOU GO

IN TO ELECT THESE JUDGES, IT DOES SAY ON THE BALLOT, TEN YEAR TERM, 14 YEAR

TERM, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: SURE.

MR. DURSO: BUT, NOW, YOUR -- SO, SOMEONE I MAY

HAVE VOTED FOR FOR A 14 YEAR TERM, I NO LONGER HAVE AS A JUDGE IN MY

DISTRICT, CORRECT? EVEN THOUGH I VOTED FOR THEM, THEY COULD ESSENTIALLY

BE TAKEN AWAY FROM ME AS THE VOTER?

MR. RIVERA: BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS BILL DOESN'T

CHANGE THAT BECAUSE YOU COULD VOTE FOR THEM TODAY HYPOTHETICALLY --

MR. DURSO: RIGHT.

MR. RIVERA: -- AND THEY NOW -- THEY MIGHT NOT BE

IN YOUR DISTRICT. NOT BE SEATED, I SHOULD SAY, WHERE YOU ARE.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. BUT, I CAN STILL VOTE FOR THEM?

SO, WHAT IF -- IF THEY'RE -- AND I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE NOT SEATED WHERE I

AM, RIGHT, BUT THE OVERALL VOTE -- I STILL HAVE TO VOTE FOR THEM, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: ONCE EVERY 14 YEARS.

MR. DURSO: CORRECT. WHAT I'M SAYING IS, THEY

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WERE ELECTED INTO THAT POSITION BY THE VOTERS THAT THEY -- I DON'T WANT TO

SAY "BE REPRESENTED BY", YOU KNOW, THOSE VOTERS AREN'T REPRESENTED BY

A JUDGE, BUT THEY ARE VOTED ON BY THE VOTERS IN THAT DISTRICT. WHICH

NOW THEY WILL NO LONGER BE THE JUDGE IN SOME OF THOSE DISTRICTS ANY

LONGER, CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. BUT, WHAT YOU'RE NOT TAKING

INTO ACCOUNT IS THE -- THE PROBABILITY OF THAT NARROWS BECAUSE, AGAIN, IN

THE CASE OF MY COUNTY, IT, YOU KNOW, THE ONLY CHANGE IN MY JUDICIAL

DISTRICT IS ONE COUNTY. SO, IF YOU LIVED IN ANY OTHER COUNTY, YOU ARE

GETTING THE SAME DISTRICT, THE SAME JUDGE. JUDGES.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. I'M -- I'M NOT TAKING INTO

ACCOUNT THE PROBABILITY, BUT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN

IN CERTAIN DISTRICTS?

MR. RIVERA: IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN CERTAIN

DISTRICTS, YES.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO, AND -- AND THAT JUST BRINGS

ME TO MY LARGER POINT, IS THAT WE ARE NOW, ESSENTIALLY, DISENFRANCHISING

VOTERS, BECAUSE THEY VOTED FOR SOMEONE THAT NO LONGER IS GOING TO BE IN

THEIR DISTRICT. SO, WE VOTE -- WE -- WE HAD VOTERS LAST YEAR THAT COULD

HAVE WENT IN AND VOTED FOR SOMEONE FOR A 14 YEAR TERM AND NOW WE'RE

TELLING THEM, SORRY, THEY NO LONGER ARE IN THAT DISTRICT. HOW IS THAT FAIR

TO THE VOTERS WHO VOTED FOR THEM?

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. THE -- THAT ONLY MATTERS FOR

PURPOSES OF REELECTION.

MR. DURSO: WELL, NO, BUT IT DOESN'T. SO, WHAT --

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WHAT I'M SAYING TO YOU IS, YOU'RE -- YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU WANT MORE

PEOPLE IN THOSE DISTRICTS TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN

THAT DISTRICT, CORRECT? WHICH, I UNDERSTAND. BUT, AT THE TIME, THEY WERE

VOTED ON FOR A TEN OR 14 YEAR TERM AND WE'RE NOW TELLING THE PEOPLE IN

THAT AREA, THE PERSON THAT YOU VOTED FOR, WHETHER THEY VOTED FOR THEM,

OR AGAINST THEM, IS NO LONGER GOING TO BE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND WE'RE

MAKING THAT DECISION HERE. WE'RE NOT LETTING THE VOTERS DECIDE, WE'RE

JUST SAYING, SORRY, YOU COULD NO LONGER HAVE THIS JUDGE.

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. I -- I GUESS THE ONLY THING I

WOULD SAY IS, I MEAN, WE CAN KIND OF GO IN CIRCLES ON IT, BUT, AT THE -- AT

THE END OF THE DAY, OCA CAN MAKE THAT DECISION WITH OR WITHOUT THIS.

MR. DURSO: BUT -- BUT -- RIGHT, I -- AND I

UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. BUT --

MR. RIVERA: THAT'S THE HIGHER PROBABILITY --

ACTUALLY, THE TWO HIGHER PROBABILITIES IS THAT THESE JUDGES ARE NOT GOING

TO RUN FOR REELECTION. SO, THEY WOULD RETIRE AT SOME POINT, EITHER

BECAUSE OF THEIR AGE, OR FOR WHATEVER REASON, OR THAT OCA COULD

POTENTIALLY JUST MOVE A JUDGE TO A DIFFERENT PLACE. THAT'S SUBSTANTIALLY

MORE LIKELY THAN THE SCENARIO, I THINK THAT -- THAT -- THAT YOU'RE --

MR. DURSO: BUT, WHAT MY CONCERN IS, IT IS -- IT'S

POSSIBLE. SO, AGAIN, YOU BROUGHT UP REDISTRICTING BEFORE WITH US, RIGHT?

IT -- IT DOES HAPPEN EVERY TEN YEARS, BUT EVERY TIME THERE'S REDISTRICTING,

WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND YOU CAN'T BE REDISTRICTED OUT IN THE MIDDLE

OF YOUR ELECTED TERM, BUT WE'RE DOING THAT TO JUDGES. ISN'T THAT

DISENFRANCHISING VOTERS? AGAIN, WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH WHO'S IN THAT

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

POSITION, WHY THEY'RE IN THAT POSITION, WHO VOTED FOR THEM, THE FACT OF

THE MATTER IS, THEY WERE VOTED FOR AND WE'RE SAYING, THAT PERSON WILL NO

LONGER REPRESENT YOU.

MR. RIVERA: I -- I GUESS THAT WHAT I WOULD SAY TO

THAT AT THE END IS THAT THE STATE CONSTITUTION IS CLEAR. WE'RE ABLE TO DO

THIS EVERY TEN YEARS, DESPITE THEIR TERMS BEING EVEN LARGER THAN THAT.

SO, THIS IS AN INEVITABLE THING THAT -- THAT WOULD HAPPEN NO MATTER THE

SCENARIO, NO MATTER THE TIMING, THAT AS LONG AS WE'RE ABLE TO DO THIS

EVERY TEN YEARS, IF WE CHOOSE TO -- SINCE WE'RE AUTHORIZED TO AND THEIR

TERMS ARE GREATER THAN TEN YEARS, THEN THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S TAKEN

INTO ACCOUNT AND CONSIDERED.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO --

MR. RIVERA: AND EVERYONE OBVIOUSLY FINISHES

THEIR CURRENT TERM. SO, IT'S NOT AS IF A -- A VOTER CAN LOOK AT A JUDGE AND

THAT JUDGE LOOK AT THEM AND SAY, SORRY, BECAUSE OF A BILL THAT THEY

PASSED IN ALBANY, I NO LONGER AM A -- AM YOUR JUDGE. I

DISENFRANCHISED -- YOU KNOW, THE STATE DOESN'T DISENFRANCHISE

SOMEBODY BY SAYING, JUDGE, YOU CAN'T BE A JUDGE ANYMORE. THAT

WOULD BE THE PROBLEM.

MR. DURSO: NO.

MR. RIVERA: THESE JUDGES ARE ABLE TO FILL THEIR --

THEIR TERMS AND THEY'RE STILL, AS THEY ARE TODAY UNDER THIS NEW BILL, THEY

ARE, YOU KNOW, CONSTRAINT TO HOW OCA DETERMINES HOW JUDGES ARE

PLACED, SEATED.

MR. DURSO: I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND, BUT AS MUCH

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AS A JUDGE CAN'T SIT THERE AND SAY TO THE VOTERS, SORRY, I NO LONGER

REPRESENT YOU, WE SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SIT THERE AND SAY, SORRY, YOU RAN

FOR OFFICE, WE'RE JUST GOING TO MOVE YOU. THAT BEING SAID, I HAVE A

QUESTION: COULD A CURRENT ELECTED SUPREME COURT JUDGE THAT'S UNHAPPY

WITH WHERE THEY WERE MOVED TO, OR THEY'RE ASSIGNED TO, UNDER THIS

LEGISLATION, RUN FOR A SUPREME COURT SEAT FROM THE ORIGINAL JD THAT

THEY'RE ASSIGNED -- INSTEAD OF BEING ASSIGNED TO ANOTHER?

MR. RIVERA: NOTHING PREVENTS A JUDGE FROM

SEEKING A -- A -- AN ELECTION ANYWHERE THEY WANT TO RUN.

MR. DURSO: CAN THEY --

MR. RIVERA: THERE'S NO RESIDENCY REQUIRED --

MR. DURSO: AND I'M -- I'M ASKING THAT BECAUSE

THERE'S NO RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT.

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. DURSO: SO, IF THEY'RE ELECTED TO A 14 YEAR TERM

LAST YEAR, THEY GET MOVED TO A DIFFERENT JD, THEY COULD RUN NEXT YEAR

FOR SUPREME COURT JUDGE AGAIN, DO THEY STILL GET A 14 YEAR TERM? DO

THEY HAVE TO RUN -- CAN THEY RUN IN ANOTHER DISTRICT?

MR. RIVERA: OH, I MEAN, THERE -- THERE'S NOTHING

PREVENTING A JUDGE TODAY FROM RUNNING FOR A DIFFERENT JUDICIAL OFFICE IN

A DIFFERENT REGION. I WOULD ONLY SAY, IT WOULD BE A STRANGE THING TO DO

BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, OCA CAN JUST PUT THEM BACK TO WHERE

THEY WERE IN THE BEGINNING, BUT --

MR. DURSO: RIGHT, BUT YOU --

MR. RIVERA: -- I SUPPOSE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DURSO: AND AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, I'M NOT FULLY

KNOWLEDGEABLE OF THIS, IT'S JUST MORE OF A QUESTION. SO, WHILE THEY'RE A

SITTING JUDGE, LET'S SAY ON THEIR TENTH YEAR OUT OF 14, CAN THEY -- THEY

CAN RUN FOR A DIFFERENT JD BEFORE THEIR TERM IS UP?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. RIVERA: YEAH, I MEAN, THERE'S NOT A LIMITATION

ON WHAT A JUDGE CAN DO AS -- AS A CANDIDATE RUNNING FOR OFFICE, BUT I

THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT THE

-- THE -- THE -- THE WHAT PERCEIVED TO BE INCONVENIENCE OF A JUDGES

MOVING A COUNTY OVER, WHICH IN MANY CASES, IS A PRETTY SHORT COMMUTE

FRANKLY. WHEN, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT WE REALLY SHOULD BE TALKING

ABOUT IS THE REPRESENTATION, HOW JUDGES ARE -- ARE ELECTED, THE -- THE

ABILITY FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO SEEN BY PEOPLE FROM THEIR COMMUNITY, I

THINK THAT JUST IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SORT OF THE -- THE EMPHASIS ON

WHAT COULD BE A VERY SLIGHT INCONVENIENCE FOR JUDGES.

MR. DURSO: OH, I'M NOT LOOKING AT THE -- THE

INCONVENIENCE FOR JUDGES, BELIEVE ME. I'M MORE LOOKING AT IT AS -- IT

DOESN'T MATTER TO ME, I'M BEING PERFECTLY HONEST. JUDGES, LAWYERS, IT'S

FINE. MY CONCERN IS THE PEOPLE THAT VOTED FOR THEM AND PUT THEM IN

THOSE POSITIONS.

MR. RIVERA: I -- I GUESS MY RESPONSE TO THAT IS, MY

BIGGER CONCERN IS NOT THE FOLKS THAT HAD VOTED FOR WHATEVER CANDIDATE

IS IN FRONT OF THEM, IS THE -- IS THE FACT THAT THE VOTERS THAT VOTE ARE --

ARE SO, MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE FOR

SOMEBODY FROM THEIR COMMUNITY, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THE LINES ARE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

-- ARE -- ARE SET TO BEGIN WITH. SO, THE DISADVANTAGE ISN'T WHETHER I

VOTED FOR A -- FOR A PERSON AND NOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN THE COUNTY

OVER, THE DISADVANTAGE IS, I AM -- YOU KNOW, WHAT HISTORY HAS ALREADY

SHOWN US, IT IS IM -- NOT IMPOSSIBLE, BUT HIGHLY, HIGHLY, HIGHLY

IMPROBABLE AND HISTORICALLY, HAS NEVER HAPPENED IN SOME OF THESE

REGIONS, THAT -- THAT -- THAT SOMEONE FROM A COMMUNITY IS ACTUALLY

SEATED AS A JUDGE. AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS SORT OF

DISPROPORTIONATE THING GOING ON WHERE WE HAVE A -- A -- A SORT OF, THREE

POPULATION CENTERS THAT OVERPOWER JUDICIAL DISTRICTS AND IT PREVENTS

CERTAIN PEOPLE FROM BEING ELECTED FROM CERTAIN PLACES, WHEN THIS LOOKS

TO CURE THAT BY ALLOWING PEOPLE A -- A CLEARER PATH, FRANKLY, TO -- TO -- TO

RUNNING FOR JUDGE IF YOU LIVE IN -- IN ONE OF THESE NON, SORT OF, MASSIVE

COUNTIES. AND THAT'S REALLY THE -- THE -- THE BIGGER, YOU KNOW, SORT OF

THE BIGGER POINT OF IT ALL.

MR. DURSO: I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. SO,

AND -- AND I'M TRYING TO PUT IT INTO WORDS EXACTLY WHAT I FEEL LIKE YOU

MEANT. WHICH IS, YOU WANT REPRESENTATIVES FROM YOUR AREA, BEING THE

REPRESENTATIVE THAT YOU WANT, CORRECT? NOT -- FROM THAT -- FROM THE

AREA, JUST LIKE ANYTHING ELSE. JUST LIKE YOU REPRESENTING YOUR DISTRICT,

YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE FOR SOMEONE FROM YOUR DISTRICT. YOU WANT PEOPLE

THAT LIVE IN YOUR DISTRICT, RIGHT, REPRESENT -- YOU HAVE THE SAME VALUES

AS YOU DO, TO BE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE. CORRECT? I MEAN --

MR. RIVERA: RIGHT. AND CURRENTLY, THE WAY THAT

THE CURRENT LINES ARE DRAWN, WE'RE LOOKING AT POSSIBLY A DOZEN, IF NOT

MORE, COUNTIES AND TELLING THEM, YOU'RE SO SMALL COMPARED TO THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

COUNTY NEXT TO YOU THAT IS SO BIG, THE LIKELIHOOD THAT YOU WILL GET A

JUDGE FROM YOUR COUNTY IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE. THIS LOOKS TO CURE THAT

PROBLEM.

MR. DURSO: OKAY. SO, AND -- AND MR. RIVERA, I --

I APPRECIATE YOU ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS. MY -- MY ONLY CONCERN AND

ONLY REAL THOUGHT ON THIS, AGAIN, IS THE ELECTION PROCESS AND IN MY

OPINION, CIRCUMVENTING IT. AND MY LAST QUESTION FOR YOU IS, DO YOU

HAVE THAT CONCERN WHEN WE'RE DOING THAT HERE? JUST AS YOUR CONCERN IS

WITH THE JUDGES FROM THE AREAS, RIGHT? AS YOU WANT PEOPLE TO BE

REPRESENTATIVE OF THE AREAS THAT THEY'RE IN, WE WANT PEOPLE THAT WE

REPRESENT TO HAVE CONFIDENCE. CONFIDENCE IN THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM,

CONFIDENCE IN ELECTIONS, CONFIDENCE IN THIS BODY. ARE YOU CONCERNED,

AT ALL, THAT BY CHANGING THE WILL OF THE VOTER, THAT HAVE ALREADY VOTED

FOR THESE JUDGES, THAT WE ARE, AGAIN, DISENFRANCHISING VOTERS AND TAKING

AWAY THEIR RIGHT FOR WHO THEY'VE ALREADY ELECTED?

MR. RIVERA: HONESTLY, I -- I WOULD SAY MY GREATER

CONCERN IS THE FACT THAT ANYBODY, WHETHER YOU'RE A SUPER INFORMED, YOU

KNOW, MEMBER OF SOCIETY OR NOT, IF YOU WERE TO BE TOLD THAT THE --

WHERE YOU LIVE IS WITHIN A JUDICIAL DISTRICT THAT HASN'T BEEN REVIEWED,

CHANGED, AMENDED --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MS. WALKER.

MR. RIVERA: -- IN POSSIBLY DECADES, THAT'S A BIGGER

PROBLEM.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. WALKER.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MS. WALKER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ON THE BILL, PLEASE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MS. WALKER: SO, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WHEN YOU

GO TO CHURCH AND YOU HEAR THE PASTOR, BISHOP, SPEAKING AND YOU'RE

LIKE, THEY MUST BE TALKING TO ME. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS HEARING AS

I LISTENED TO THE BANTER, THE DEBATE, OVER THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL

INTRODUCING A BILL THAT TALKS ABOUT JUDICIAL REPRESENTATIVE

REPRESENTATION. THEN, I WAS LIKE, IS THIS A REFERENDUM ON DEI? THEN

IT MADE ME LOOK AT MYSELF TO SAY, IS THIS DEI CONVERSATION ABOUT ME?

AND I SAID, YES, OF COURSE, BECAUSE I DEI DEFINITELY EARNED IT. THE

ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO STAND HERE AND LISTEN TO THE HYPOCRISY THAT I'VE

HEARD IN THIS MOMENT. IT ALSO MADE ME GO BACK TO A POEM THAT I HEARD

IN TALKING ABOUT REDISTRICTING. IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS GIVEN OUT BY

A KLANSMAN REGARDING A U.S. ELECTION POLL AND IT READS; WHEN COTTON

GROWS ON THE FIG TREE AND ALFALFA HANGS ON THE ROSE. WHEN THE ALIENS

RUN THE UNITED STATES AND THE JEWS GROW A STRAIGHT NOSE. WHEN THE

POPE IS PRAISED BY EVERYONE IN THE LAND OF UNCLE SAM AND A GREEK IS

ELECTED PRESIDENT, THEN THE KU KLUX KLAN WON'T BE A DAMN. WELL, ONE

OF THE SEMINAL PIECES OF LEGISLATION IN THIS COUNTRY IS THE CIVIL RIGHTS

ACT OF 1965 AND ITS PROGENY. WE KNOW THAT ITS CORE IS TO PROHIBIT

RACIAL DISCRIMINATION AND THEN GOING INTO THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT WHICH

PROTECTS UNDER THE 15TH AMENDMENT, THE RIGHT TO VOTE WHICH SHALL NOT

BE DENIED BY ANY RACE. AND AS THE CIRCUMSTANCES WAS GOING AROUND

WITH RESPECT TO HOW WE GOT TO THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT AND THE VOTING

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

RIGHTS ACT, THERE WAS AN AMAJING -- AMAZING ARCHBISHOP --

ARCHBISHOP WHO WAS FROM THE CENTRAL COUNCIL OF THE ARCHDIOCESE

WHO PASSED A RESOLUTION ON RACIAL EQUALITY. IT WAS SIGNED BY

ARCHBISHOP IAKOVOS WHICH CONDEMNED SEGREGATION AND RACIAL BIGOTRY.

HE ISSUED A STATEMENT THAT PERSECUTION, PREJUDICE AND INTOLERANCE IS

THE GREATEST SIN THAT THE -- OF THE FREE SOUL OF THE MAN CAN BEAR. WE

KNOW RACE IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT, BUT WE KEPT HEARING IT TODAY. WE

KNOW AT ONE POINT WHEN IT CAME TO RACE, IT WAS ONLY A WASP

GENERATION. THOSE WHO WERE WHITE, ANGLO-SAXON AND PROTESTANT.

YES, WE ALSO HEARD ABOUT LADY JUSTICE. LADY JUSTICE READS "QUI PRO

DOMINA JUSTITIA SEQUITU" - PROTECTING LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. BUT

GUESS WHAT, JUST AS WE'VE SEEN UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, JUST AS WE'VE

SEEN IN THAT CASE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT ABOUT THAT U.S. ELECTION POLL AND

THE KLU KLUX KLAN, WHILE WE KNOW THAT JUSTICE FOR ALL IS SUPPOSED TO

BE FOR ALL, SOMETIMES YOU GOTTA GO TO THE LEGISLATURE TO GET THE ALL TO

INCLUDE YOU. SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO GO TO COURT TO GET THE ALL TO

INCLUDE YOU. AND THEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COURT SYSTEMS AND HAVING --

AND BEING ABLE TO ELECT SOMEBODY WHO SHARES YOUR VALUES. I

REMEMBER THERE BEING THIS CASE. IT WAS A CASE OF A YOUNG MAN WHO

WAS ACCUSED OF ROBBERY, AND ONE OF THE DETERMINING FACTORS ON THIS

CASE WAS WHETHER OR NOT THIS YOUNG MAN ACTUALLY WENT TO THE CHINESE

RESTAURANT IN HIS COMMUNITY IN ORDER TO PURCHASE TWO CHICKEN WINGS

AND FRENCH FRIES. THE JURY IN THIS SITUATION COULD NOT UNDERSTAND

BECAUSE, IN THEIR COMMUNITY THEY CAN GET DIM SUM, BUT THEY CERTAINLY

WERE NOT ORDERING CHICKEN WINGS AND FRENCH FRIES AT THE CHINESE

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

RESTAURANT. BUT FOR THE JUDGE WHO SAT ON THAT BENCH WHO HAD THE LIVED

EXPERIENCES IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY AND SPEAK TO THE JURY IN

PRIVATE TO BE ABLE TO SAY, YES, LOOK, THIS IS THE CHINESE RESTAURANT MENU

FROM MY COMMUNITY AND A PERSON IS ABLE TO GET THOSE THINGS, SO WE

ABSOLUTELY NEED A REPRESENTATIVE REPRESENTATION. THE SPIRIT OF THIS

LEGISLATION IS TO UNDO EXISTING LAWS AND PROCEDURES THAT HAVE DENIED

EQUAL POLITICAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR VOTERS IN THOSE COUNTIES TO BE ABLE TO

ELECT CANDIDATES OF THEIR CHOICE. OVER TIME, THERE HAD BEEN SCHEMES TO

DILUTE PROTECTIVE CLASSES AND THEIR ACCESS TO VOTING. AND PROTECTIVE

CLASSES WAS NOT CREATED HERE. A PROTECTIVE CLASS IS A GROUP OF PEOPLE

WHO ARE LEGALLY SHIELDED FROM DISCRIMINATION, OR HARASSMENT, BASED ON

A SHARED CHARACTERISTIC. YES, SUCH AS RACE, RELIGION, GENDER, DISABILITY

AND AGE. SO AGAIN, THIS IS ABOUT ACCESS TO JUSTICE, THIS IS NOT A NEW

PHENOMENON AND WE KNOW HOW IMPORTANT IT IS FOR REDISTRICTING TO BE

ABLE TO SPEAK TO APPORTIONMENT, BECAUSE OUR CENSUS HAS TOLD US THAT

NUMBERS ARE GROWING, PEOPLE ARE MOVING AND DEMOGRAPHICS ARE

CHANGING. AND SO, IN THAT REGARD, I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO SUPPORT THIS

PIECE OF LEGISLATION TO ALLOW FOR THE VOTERS IN THOSE PARTICULAR COUNTIES

TO BE ABLE TO SEEK AND GET ACCESS TO REAL JUSTICE WITH A SHARED LEVEL OF

VALUES, LIVED EXPERIENCES, CIRCUMSTANCES AND BY GOSH, YES, INCLUDING

THOSE WHO SHARE CHARACTERISTICS OF THEM SUCH AS; RACE, RELIGION, GENDER,

DISABILITY AND/OR AGE BECAUSE THOSE ARE PROTECTED CLASSES. IT MAY HAVE

TAKEN US A GENERATION TO BE ABLE TO GET THOSE CLASSES TO BE PROTECTED,

BUT IT WILL TAKE A LIFETIME FOR US TO PROTECT IT AND IN THE MATTER OF

STANDING UP FOR DEMOCRACY, AS WE ARE WATCHING A DEPARTMENT OF

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

JUSTICE WHO IS ERODING ITS VERY NATURE.

I SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION AND I ENCOURAGE OUR

COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME DAY IN HONOR, YES, OF FAIRNESS, JUSTICE AND

EQUALITY. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, FOR ALLOWING ME TO SUPPORT THIS

BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MS. BAILEY.

MRS. BAILEY: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A COUPLE QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: SURE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MRS. BAILEY: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. RIVERA.

AND I DO APOLOGIZE, YOU MAY HAVE SAID IT --

MR. RIVERA: IT'S OKAY.

MRS. BAILEY: -- THERE'S BEEN A LOT SAID. I'VE BEEN

TRYING TO TAKE NOTES.

MR. RIVERA: IT'S ALL GOOD.

MRS. BAILEY: JUST REAL QUICK, WHEN I -- WHEN I

TAKE A LOOK AT -- SPECIFICALLY, I CURRENTLY RESIDE IN THE 7TH JD. SO, SOME

OF MY QUESTIONS MIGHT BE MORE APPOINTED TO THAT. I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN

TALKING ABOUT THE 8TH --

MR. RIVERA: SURE, SURE. WHAT COUNTY DO YOU LIVE

IN?

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MRS. BAILEY: I'M SORRY?

MR. RIVERA: WHAT COUNTY?

MRS. BAILEY: WHEN YOU -- AS FAR AS HOW THE

JUSTICES WERE ASSIGNED, DID YOU SAY THAT CONSTITUTIONALLY YOU HAVE TO

ASSIGN THE JUDGES WITH -- WHEN WE'RE REDISTRICTING, OR WERE THEY JUST

DECIDED THAT THAT'S WHERE THOSE INDIVIDUALS WERE GOING?

MR. RIVERA: THE -- THE CONSTITUTION LAYS OUT THAT

-- THAT, YOU KNOW, IT AUTHORIZES US TO DO THIS AT -- AT -- AT, YOU KNOW,

TEN YEAR INCREMENTS AND THAT IT LAYS OUT -- WE HAVE TO -- YOU KNOW, WE

HAVE TO DETERMINE WHERE THE CURRENT JUDGES GO. SO, YES, I SUPPOSE.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. SO, CONSTITUTIONALLY. AND

DID I HEAR YOU CORRECT WHEN YOU INDICATED THAT SOME OF THAT

DECISION-MAKING WAS BASED ON WHERE THEY RESIDE?

MR. RIVERA: YES.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. I JUST -- BECAUSE I WAS TRYING

TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW --

MR. RIVERA: OH, FORGIVE ME. WHEN I SAY "RESIDE"

I MEAN WHERE -- WHERE THEY PRESIDE, LIKE WHERE -- WHERE -- WHERE --

WHERE THEY ACTUALLY -- WHERE THEY WORK. WHERE THEY'RE SEATED, I

SHOULD SAY.

MRS. BAILEY: SO, WHERE -- SO, IN THE CASE OF

MONROE COUNTY, IT WOULD BE DOWN AT THE HALL OF JUSTICE. IS THAT WHAT

YOU'RE REFERRING TO?

MR. RIVERA: NO. WHAT I'M SAYING IS WHAT WE TOOK

INTO ACCOUNT WAS SENIORITY AND WHERE THEY ACTUALLY CONDUCTED WORK.

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SO, IT'S IF A PERSON, FOR EXAMPLE, WAS IN ERIE COUNTY, WE KEPT THEM IN

ERIE COUNTY. WE DIDN'T MOVE A PERSON FROM ERIE COUNTY TO MONROE

COUNTY, IN OTHER WORDS.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. BUT IF YOU TOOK FOLKS FROM

MONROE COUNTY AND MOVED THEM TO THE 7TH -- OR TO THE 15TH JUDICIAL

DISTRICT, THAT'S TAKING THEM OUT OF MONROE COUNTY WHEN WE CREATED THE

15TH JD.

MR. RIVERA: SAY THAT AGAIN?

MRS. BAILEY: I -- I GUESS MAYBE I DIDN'T

UNDERSTAND YOUR -- YOUR ANSWER THERE. SO, THERE'S JUSTICES THAT RESIDE IN

MONROE COUNTY CURRENTLY, RIGHT NOW --

MR. RIVERA: THAT ARE JUDGES IN THAT JUDICIAL

DISTRICT, YES.

MRS. BAILEY: -- THAT ARE JUDGES IN THE 7TH JD.

MR. RIVERA: OKAY.

MRS. BAILEY: CURRENTLY THE 7TH JD, WHAT WAS IT,

20 -- 20 JUSTICES -- SUPREME COURT JUDGES, IT GOES DOWN TO 13. WHEN

YOU CREATE THE 15TH DISTRICT, WE HAVE 13 SEATS AND THEN WE SHIFTED

SOME INTO THE 5TH DISTRICT, WHICH IS GOING UP TO 14 SEATS.

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. THE TOTAL NUMBER OF JUDGES

DOES NOT CHANGE AMONGST THE 4TH DEPARTMENT IN ITS ENTIRETY. WHAT'S

TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IS THAT THE -- THERE IS KIND OF -- THERE ARE POINTS

AROUND THE MINIMUM NEEDING TO BE 50,000 PEOPLE IN ORDER TO HAVE A

JUDICIAL DISTRICT. SO SOME COUNTIES ARE MUCH LARGER THAN OTHER COUNTIES

AND WHEN YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE POPULATION, THAT'S HOW THE JUDGES

100

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WERE DISTRIBUTED.

MRS. BAILEY: I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT. I WAS

JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW THE JUDGES WERE ASSIGNED TO THE DIFFERENT

DISTRICTS AND I'M STILL TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND THAT.

SO, IF WE USE WHERE THEY WERE WHEN -- WHEN THE

METHODOLOGY CAME OUT TO ASSIGN FOLKS TO THE 5TH JD, OR TO THE 15TH JD,

COMING OUT OF THE 7TH JD, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IF, I HEARD YOU

CORRECTLY, YOU SPOKE WITH AN ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE, WHO I PRESUME IS IN

THE 8TH JD, WHO HELPED YOU DELINEATE WHERE THE OTHER JUDGES WERE

GOING TO BE -- WHERE THEIR NEW JUDICIAL DISTRICT WAS GOING TO BE.

MR. RIVERA: WELL, I -- I SUPPOSE WHEN IT COMES TO

THE 8TH AND 15TH DISTRICTS, IT'S REALLY ABOUT POPULATION SIZE. SO, IN THE

COUNTY OF ERIE, AS I SAID BEFORE, IS ABOUT 950,00 PEOPLE, GIVE OR TAKE.

SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT -- WHAT MADE SENSE IS TO BRING TOGETHER THE, YOU

KNOW, SURROUNDING COUNTIES UNDER THE NEXT JUDICIAL DISTRICT. THERE'S

NOT MUCH, YOU KNOW, PAST THAT CONSIDERING THAT, YOU KNOW, IT -- IT

WOULD BE SIMILAR SIZE BY POPULATION, BUT, YOU KNOW, ONCE YOU REMOVE

ERIE COUNTY FROM THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT, IT WAS SUCH A -- A MASS MAJORITY

OF THAT JUDICIAL DISTRICT THAT THE REMAINING COUNTIES COMBINED MADE

MORE SENSE TO HAVE ANOTHER DISTRICT.

MRS. BAILEY: I'M NOT -- MY QUESTION ISN'T

SPECIFICALLY HOW, MY QUESTION IS HOW THE JUDGES WERE ASSIGNED TO

THOSE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS ONCE WE TOOK THE 7TH JUDICIAL AND SHRUNK IT

DOWN NOW TO WHERE WE HAVE 13 JUSTICES VERSUS THE 20. SO, THOSE SIX --

OR THOSE SEVEN INDIVIDUALS, I ONLY COUNTED SIX THAT I COULD FIND, BUT

101

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THOSE -- SO THOSE SIX OR SEVEN INDIVIDUALS HAVE NOW BEEN DISBURSED

EITHER INTO THE 15TH JD OR THE 5TH JD. SO, MY QUESTION IS, HOW DID WE

DELINEATE THAT METHODOLOGY?

MR. RIVERA: THE MAJORITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT

WAS BASED BY SENIORITY AND THEN THERE WAS OTHER CONSIDERATIONS AS IN

WHAT JUDGES STARTED IN THE APPELLATE, BUT IN -- IN GENERAL, IT WAS ABOUT

SENIORITY.

MRS. BAILEY: I APOLOGIZE, I MISSED THE PART ABOUT

ABOUT THE APPELLATE.

MR. RIVERA: THAT WITHIN -- WITHIN THE 4TH

DEPARTMENT THERE'S APPELLATE JUDGES AND WE GROUPED THE APPELLATE

JUDGES TOGETHER. BUT, OUTSIDE OF THAT, EVERYTHING WAS REALLY ABOUT

SENIORITY. HOW LONG THEY HAD BEEN IN OFFICE.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. AND THE ONLY REASON WHY I

ASK IS I LOOKED AT TWO INDIVIDUALS THAT I KNOW, ONE IS ON THE -- THE

SOUTHWEST END OF MONROE COUNTY, THEY'RE GETTING MOVED TO THE 5TH JD.

AND THEN ONE WHO IS ON THE NORTHERN EAST PART OF MONROE COUNTY IS

GETTING MOVED DOWN INTO THE 15TH JD. SO, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT

AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, HOW -- HOW THEY WERE ASSIGNED. BUT I'LL GO ONTO

MY NEXT QUESTION AND POINT.

SO WE TALK A LOT ABOUT POPULATION AND I COMPLETELY

UNDERSTAND THE POPULATION AND HOW THAT WORKS OUT AND WE SEE THAT

EVEN HERE WHEN -- WHEN OUR DISTRICTS ARE REALIGNED, WHEN POPULATION

AND THEN YOU LOOK AT SQUARE MILES. WAS THERE ANYTHING CONSIDERED

WHEN -- WHEN DIFFERENT COUNTIES WERE GROUPED TOGETHER TO CREATE, YOU

102

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

KNOW, THE -- THE TWO NEW DISTRICTS WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT SQUARE MILES

WITHIN THE JDS NOW?

MR. RIVERA: I MEAN, SQUARE MILES, NO, BUT WHAT I

WOULD SAY IS, YOU KNOW, EVEN CURRENTLY IF -- IF WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT,

YOU GO, THE OLD 7TH DISTRICT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU LIVED IN SOUTHERN

STEUBEN COUNTY AND YOU WOULD'VE HAD TO GO ALL THE WAY UP TO -- TO

NORTHERN MONROE COUNTY IN ROCHESTER. I MEAN, IT -- IT WAS -- IT WAS A

DISTANCE IN ITS OLD FORMAT AND IT'S A SIMILAR DISTANCE BY THE NATURE OF

PEOPLE JUST BEING SPREAD OUT AND POPULATIONS BEING WHERE THEY ARE AND

COUNTY'S LINES BEING WHERE THEY ARE. IT -- IT'S SORT OF UNAVOIDABLE.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. THE 5TH JD IS NOW ALMOST

10,000 SQUARE MILES. THE 15TH JD IS JUST SHY OF 7,500 SQUARE MILES

AND AS I INDICATED, THOSE JUDGES THAT WE'VE ASSIGNED COMING OUT OF THE

-- THE 7TH JD AND WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED, NOW WE'VE JUST ADDED MORE TO

THEIR COMMUTE. SO OBVIOUSLY NOT KNOWING WHERE THEY ARE GOING TO SIT

OCA CAN, YOU KNOW, IN ALL HONESTY, OCA COULD SAY, YOU'RE GOING TO

BE UP IN MONROE COUNTY. YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE IN THE 15TH, OR THE 5TH

JD --

MR. RIVERA: THEY COULD DO THAT TODAY WITH, OR

WITHOUT THIS BILL.

MRS. BAILEY: ABSOLUTELY. YUP. I COMPLETELY

UNDERSTAND THAT. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW THEY WERE ASSIGNED,

WHERE THEY WERE ASSIGNED AND I THINK YOU HAVE ANSWERED MY QUESTIONS

IN AND AROUND THAT. SO I APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

AND ON THE BILL, MADAM SPEAKER.

103

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: ON THE BILL.

MRS. BAILEY: I DON'T WANT TO REITERATE WHAT MY

PEERS HAVE ALREADY SAID, BUT IT IS INTERESTING THAT WE ARE HERE HURRIEDLY

TO DISCUSS THIS BILL WHEN OCA SPECIFICALLY HAS ASKED TO MAYBE PAUSE

IT. THERE'S BEEN OTHER LEGISLATION THAT THIS BODY HAS DONE THAT WITH AND

WE CONTINUE TO DISCUSS IT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I WON'T GET

INTO THE ENERGY MANDATES BECAUSE WE'LL TALK ABOUT THOSE, I'M SURE, YOU

KNOW, OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS, BUT IT IS TRULY CONCERNING. I COMPLETELY

UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, IT'S OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT IF WE WANT TO

REDISTRICT JUDICIAL DISTRICTS. ABSOLUTELY. BUT SPEAKING TO AN

ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE, I'M NOT SURE WE'RE GETTING A FULL APPETITE FOR WHAT

THE THOUGHTS MIGHT BE. THAT IS VERY CONCERNING TO ME, AND WHEN I

LOOK AT THE JUDGES THAT HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED TO VARIOUS SPOTS, THE

ELECTIONS THAT ARE COMING UP THIS YEAR, THERE ARE ELECTIONS FOR TWO

SUPREME COURT JUDGES IN THE 7TH JD. WHERE DO THEY -- WHERE DO THEY

FALL? YOU KNOW, WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO GO? DO THEY NOW JUST TAKE

SPOTS OF THE SEAT THAT IS VACATED? IS THAT HOW THEY'RE ALLOCATED? WHAT

DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? SO, I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO TAKE OUR PARTNERS

HERE WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT OCA, SPEAK WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGES

AND -- AND IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS, LET'S GET IT RIGHT. LET'S NOT JUST

ARBITRARILY PUT SOMETHING OUT THERE.

THE OTHER PIECE IS THE EXPENSE. THE STAFF AND THE

RESOURCES THAT ARE NEEDED FOR EACH JUDICIAL DISTRICT IS IMMENSE.

HAVING SERVED IN MY PRIOR POSITION, I WORKED WITH OUR SUPREME COURT

JUSTICES ON A DAILY BASIS. I WORKED WITH THOSE JUDGE -- THOSE JUSTICES

104

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

COMING OUT OF THE -- THE 7TH JD ON A DAILY BASIS AND I WORKED WITH

THEIR SUPPORT STAFF. I WORKED WITH THE DISTRICT STAFF. THERE ARE MANY

MECHANISMS THAT -- AND MANY PIECES THAT WE REALLY NEED TO TAKE A LOOK

AT. IT IS GOING TO HAVE A FINANCIAL HIT TO US AS A STATE AND UNFORTUNATELY,

WE HAVE NOT BUDGETED FOR IT. WILL IT BE BUDGETED? I WOULD HOPE SO.

BUT WHERE DO WE COME UP THAT MONEY AS WE CONTINUE TO SEE OUR

EXPENDITURES JUST CONTINUE TO BULGE, YEAR AFTER YEAR.

SO, FOR THOSE REASONS, MADAM SPEAKER, I WILL BE

VOTING NO.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: MR. MOLITOR.

MR. MOLITOR: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. MOLITOR: THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR.

RIVERA, I JUST GOT SOME QUESTIONS, MAYBE SOME PRACTICAL QUESTIONS. I'D

LIKE TO FOCUS ON THE 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, SINCE THAT'S WHERE BOTH OF US

ARE FROM.

MR. RIVERA: SURE.

MR. MOLITOR: AS YOU KNOW, IN THE 8TH JUDICIAL

DISTRICT, YOUR INTERPRETERS, STENOGRAPHERS, CLERKS, COMMISSION OF JURORS,

THOSE ARE ALL ASSIGNED OUT OF BUFFALO, RIGHT?

MR. RIVERA: AT -- AT THE -- AT, YOU KNOW, AT THE

DECISION OF OCA, I SUPPOSE.

105

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. MOLITOR: YEAH, BUT THERE -- FOR EXAMPLE, IF I

WANTED TO BECOME A STENOGRAPHER IN THE 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, I WOULD

BE ASSIGNED TO BUFFALO AND THEN BUFFALO WOULD ASSIGN ME OUT TO

WHEREVER THEY THINK I NEED TO GO. ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

MR. RIVERA: THAT'S HOW IT IS CURRENTLY IN THE

CURRENT 8TH, BUT IN THE NEW 8TH, THAT MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY BE THE CASE.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO

TALK ABOUT. IN THE -- IN THE NEW 8TH --

MR. RIVERA: (INDISCERNIBLE) IT MIGHT NOT BE THAT

WAY AND IT MIGHT NOT BE THAT WAY AND IT MIGHT NOT BE THAT WAY IN THE

NEW 15TH.

MR. MOLITOR: RIGHT. SO, HOW -- THAT'S KINDA

WHERE I WANT TO -- WHERE I'M TRYING TO GO IS HOW WOULD IT WORK WITH A

NEW 8TH AND A NEW 15TH?

MR. RIVERA: YOU'RE ASKING ME HOW OCA WOULD

ASSIGN STENOGRAPHERS AND STAFF IN THE NEW DISTRICT?

MR. MOLITOR: YEAH, HOW WOULD IT WORK?

MR. RIVERA: THE WAY THAT OCA DOES IT TODAY AND

HOW IT DOES IT IN EVERY OTHER JUDICIAL DISTRICT.

MR. MOLITOR: SO, RIGHT NOW, IN THE 8TH JUDICIAL

DISTRICT, THEY'RE ALL ASSIGNED OUT OF THE BUFFALO OFFICE?

MR. RIVERA: BECAUSE BUFFALO IS IN THE 8TH. HOW IT

WILL BE DONE IN THE 15TH? PRESUMABLY, OCA CAN CHOOSE TO ASSIGN

THEM OUT OF THE 15TH.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. SO, THIS IS -- THIS LEGISLATION

106

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WOULD HAVE NO IMPACT ON HOW -- ON THE -- LET'S CALL IT THE HOME BASE OF

OCA STAFF FOR THE DIFFERENT JUDICIAL DISTRICTS?

MR. RIVERA: I MEAN, OCA CAN CHOOSE TO HAVE A

SORT OF SIMILAR HOME BASE WE'LL CALL IT, IN ONE OF THE COUNTIES IN THE NEW

15TH.

MR. MOLITOR: BUT THEY -- AND THEY CAN ALSO, IF I'M

CORRECT ON THIS, THEY CAN ALSO KEEP EVERYTHING EXACTLY AS IT IS, KEEP THE

HOME BASE IN BUFFALO AND ASSIGN THOSE -- THOSE INDIVIDUALS OUT TO

PEOPLE IN THE 15TH DISTRICT?

MR. RIVERA: IT'S THE WILL OF OCA HOW THEY WANT TO

STRUCTURE HOW THEY STAFF.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. AND THAT'S KIND OF THE SAME

WAY IT IS IN MAYBE OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE, RIGHT? A JUDGE MIGHT GET

ASSIGNED FROM ONE JUDICIAL DISTRICT TO ANOTHER, STAFF MIGHT GET ASSIGNED

FROM ONE JUDICIAL DISTRICT TO ANOTHER. ALL THAT STUFF HAPPENS UNDER THE

DIRECTION OF OCA, WHICH IS A STATEWIDE AGENCY.

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. SO, THERE'S NO CONCERN --

YOU DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERN THAT -- AND THIS IS REALLY WHERE I'M -- I'M

KIND OF GOING; THERE'S NO CONCERN THAT THE STAFF THAT CURRENTLY EXIST IN,

LET'S SAY, MY COUNTY, WHO ARE GONNA GO FROM THE 8TH TO THE 15TH

JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THERE'S NO CONCERN THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE

TO ANOTHER PART OF THE -- TO A DIFFERENT DISTRICT, OR DIFFERENT PART OF THE

STATE, NECESSARILY? OR IS THAT SOMETHING YOU CAN'T ANSWER BECAUSE

THAT'S UP TO OCA?

107

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: THAT CONCERN COULD EXIST WITH OR

WITHOUT THIS BILL BECAUSE ALL OF IT IS AT OCA'S DISCRETION TODAY.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY.

MR. RIVERA: IF OCA DECIDED TOMORROW TO NO

LONGER HAVE BUFFALO BE THE HOME BASE AS YOU PUT IT AND DECIDED

DUNKIRK TO BE IT, THEN THAT -- WE WOULD HAVE NO SAY IN WHAT OCA DOES

IN THAT MATTER. SO, IT WOULD BE NO DIFFERENT.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. AND THAT'S THE WAY I

UNDERSTOOD IT. I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN -- HAVE THAT EXPLANATION ON THE

RECORD.

MR. RIVERA: SURE.

MR. MOLITOR: THANK YOU, MR. RIVERA, FOR

ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: MR. MANKTELOW.

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: HE YIELDS.

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU, MR. RIVERA. IF

YOU COULD HELP ME OUT JUST A LITTLE BIT. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT DIVERSITY

HERE ON THE FLOOR FOR THE LAST COUPLE HOURS HERE, IN AND OUT OF THIS

DEBATE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT THEY MEANS AS FAR AS WHAT WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT FROM THIS JUDICIAL CHANGE?

108

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: SURE. I MEAN, I -- I DESCRIBED IT

EARLIER AROUND, YOU KNOW, RACIAL DEMOGRAPHICS OF A REGION, BUT I ALSO

DESCRIBED THE NATURE OF RESIDING IN A MORE RURAL COUNTY AND NOT BEING

REPRESENTED. SO, DIVERSITY AS, YOU KNOW, AS IT IS, IT -- IT -- IT MEANS

MANY THINGS. AND FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, THE -- THE EXAMPLE I USED

EARLIER I THINK WAS ALLEGANY. YOU KNOW, IF I AM A RESIDENT OF -- OF

ALLEGANY WHICH IS PERCEIVED TO BE A MORE RURAL COUNTY, AS A LOT OF

UPSTATE NEW YORK STATE IS, THE LIKELIHOOD THAT I WOULD HAVE A JUDGE

WHO REPRESENTS MY COMMUNITY, FROM MY COMMUNITY, AS A MEMBER OF

THE SUPREME COURT IS VERY, VERY SLIM. IN MY OWN RESEARCH, IT'S BEEN

ABOUT 40-ISH YEARS FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD AND THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF

ONE COUNTY. SO, I THINK THAT NO MATTER HOW YOU CUT IT, THE WHAT WE'RE

DOING TODAY ENSURES A HIGHER LIKELIHOOD OF PEOPLE FROM COUNTIES

SEEING FOLKS THAT REPRESENT THEM AND MORE CLOSELY WHO THEY ARE.

MR. MANKTELOW: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO,

WITH THE CHANGES, THE MONROE COUNTY WILL BE ITS OWN COUNTY. IT WILL

THEN BE THE 7TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. MANKTELOW: AND WHAT -- WITH WHAT YOU

JUST TOLD ME -- TOLD ME, HOW DOES THAT BENEFIT MONROE COUNTY?

MR. RIVERA: IT BENEFITS MONROE COUNTY BECAUSE TO

DATE, DESPITE BEING VERY, VERY DIVERSE ETHNICALLY, THEY HAVE STILL, IN ITS

CURRENT FORM, HAVE NOT ELECTED, OR CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE A SINGLE

MEMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT THAT IS A MINORITY.

MR. MANKTELOW: IS -- I'M SORRY. I COULDN'T HEAR

109

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THE LAST THING.

MR. RIVERA: I SAID DESPITE MONROE COUNTY BEING

VERY, VERY DIVERSE, ESPECIALLY IN COMPARISON TO THE NEIGHBORING

COUNTIES OF THE CURRENT JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THIS -- IT -- IT -- IT IS STILL YET TO

BEEN ABLE, OR BEEN AFFORDED THE -- THE ABILITY TO BE -- TO -- TO ELECT A

MEMBER OF COLOR TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT. CURRENTLY, THERE IS NONE

IN THE ENTIRE 4TH DEPARTMENT, THERE IS ONLY TWO MEMBERS OF COLOR, BOTH

ONLY IN EIRE. SO I BELIEVE THAT THE PEOPLE OF MONROE, ONE, ARE GOING TO

BENEFIT FROM THE POTENTIAL DIVERSITY OF THE COURT, BUT, ALSO, TWO, THAT

ALSO MEANS THAT IF YOU'RE A MONROE COUNTY RESIDENT, YOU WILL BE SEEN

BY A JUDGE FROM MONROE COUNTY, NOT A JUDGE FROM A NEIGHBORING

COUNTY WHEREIN WHICH THE NATURE OF THE COUNTY, THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF

THAT COUNTY, THE -- THE WAY THAT THAT COUNTY, YOU KNOW, EXISTS BEING

DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT FROM MONROE. WE'RE ENSURING THAT PEOPLE FROM

MONROE HAVE -- ARE GONNA BE IN FRONT OF JUDGE THAT IS AWARE OF THE

COMMUNITY THERE AND WHAT IT'S COMPRISED OF.

MR. MANKTELOW: ALL RIGHT. SO RIGHT NOW THE

7TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT REPRE -- REPRESENTED BY CAYUGA, LIVINGSTON,

MONROE, ONTARIO, SENECA, STEUBEN, WAYNE AND YATES COUNTIES AS -- AS

WE ARE TODAY. MOST OF THOSE COUNTIES WILL NOW GO TO THE 5TH JUDICIAL

DISTRICT WHICH WILL CONSIST OF ONEIDA, OSWEGO, HERKIMER, JEFFERSON,

LEWIS, CAYUGA, ONTARIO, SENECA, WAYNE AND NOW YATES COUNTIES.

NOW, WE'LL BE GOING TO TEN COUNTIES. SO, I LOOK AT THIS AND WE TALK

ABOUT DIVERSITY. IS DIVERSITY -- TO ME, DIVERSITY SHOULD BE A -- A

TWO-WAY STREET; IS THAT NOT CORRECT?

110

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: HOW DO YOU MEAN?

MR. MANKTELOW: SO LET'S SAY THIS GOES THROUGH

THE WAY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. NOW WE HAVE A SET OF JUDGES IN MONROE

COUNTY; OKAY?

MR. RIVERA: MM-HMM.

MR. MANKTELOW: THEY'RE GOING TO BE BASED OUT

OF MONROE COUNTY, THEY'RE GOING TO SERVICE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN

MONROE COUNTY AND NOT ANY OF THE OTHER DISTRICTS, OR ANY OF THE OTHER

COUNTIES PRETTY MUCH; CORRECT?

MR. RIVERA: WELL, I WOULD SAY, YES, BUT REMEMBER

THAT OCA DOES HAVE THE ABILITY WITHIN THE -- WITHIN THE 4TH

DEPARTMENT TO PLACE JUDGES IN OTHER PLACES, SO. BUT, IN GENERAL, YES.

MR. MANKTELOW: OKAY. SO HAVE YOU EVER

FARMED?

MR. RIVERA: I HAVE NEVER FARMED, NO.

MR. MANKTELOW: HAVE YOU EVER RUN A BUSINESS?

MR. RIVERA: THE CLOSEST I'VE BEEN TO RUNNING A

BUSINESS IS I WAS A BANKER AND HAD MANY, MANY BUSINESS CLIENTS, BUT

NO.

MR. MANKTELOW: ALL RIGHT. WELL, MY QUESTION

HERE IS, A LOT OF TIMES WHEN WE AS FARMERS CONTRACT WITH CONSTRUCTION

PEOPLE, PEOPLE THAT BUY OUR GRAIN, THEY'RE REALLY BASED OUT OF THE CITY

AREAS, NOT SO MUCH IN THE RURAL AREAS WHERE THE FARMERS ARE. AND SOME

OF THEM ARE EVEN BASED OUT OF THE ROCHESTER AREA WHICH CONSISTS OF

MONROE COUNTY AND OTHER PARTS OF THE AREA. SO, WITH THIS CHANGE AND

111

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A FARMER NOW, THAT THERE HAVE BEEN LAWSUITS, THE

WILL BE OTHER LAWSUITS, WILL NOW BE BASED OUT OF MONROE COUNTY

BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE BUSINESS IS THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE INVOLVED

WITH. IF WE CHANGE THE MAKEUP OF THE JUDICIAL REPRESEN --

REPRESENTATION, HOW IS THAT PERSON -- HOW IS THAT FARMER GOING TO GET A

FAIR SHAKE IF BY WHAT YOU SAID, WE NEED TO CHANGE THE MAKEUP OF THE

JUDGES SO THEY KNOW WHO THEY'RE DO -- DEAR -- DEAR -- DEALING WITH.

NOW, AS A FARMER, I'M GONNA GO TO MONROE COUNTY AND I'M GOING TO

DEAL WITH THE JUDGE THAT KNOWS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT FARMING, OR

THE AGRICULTURAL AREA, OR A RURAL AREA. HOW DO WE FIX THAT?

MR. RIVERA: I GUESS, I WOULD SAY NUMBER ONE,

COUNTY JUDGES STILL REMAIN, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THE MATTER WOULD GO TO A

COUNTY JUDGE VERSUS A SUPREME, SO THAT'S ONE THING. AND I'D ALSO SAY,

THIS BILL ENSURES A HIGH -- A MUCH HIGHER LIKELIHOOD THAT YOU'D BE IN

FRONT OF A JUDGE THAT IS AWARE AND MORE PRESENT IN YOUR COMMUNITY AND

EVEN POTENTIALLY FROM YOUR COMMUNITY. THE WAY IT CURRENTLY IS, IS THAT

IF YOU'RE FROM STEUBEN COUNTY, YOU'RE DEALING WITH A JUDGE IN MONROE

COUNTY. THAT'S -- THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO SORT OF, I

DON'T WANT TO SAY AVOID, BUT THAT -- THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO

ADDRESS. NOW, IF YOU'RE FROM, YOU KNOW, WAYNE, OSWEGO, JEFFERSON,

ONEIDA, YOU'RE ONE DISTRICT AND THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE MATTERS BEFORE

THOSE FOLKS IN THOSE COUNTIES ARE SIMILAR, I THINK ARE HIGHER.

MR. MANKTELOW: ALL RIGHT. WELL, I BELIEVE IF

TRULY PART OF THIS CHANGE IS THE DIVERSITY AND GETTING PEOPLE IN FRONT OF

THE RIGHT PEOPLE, OR HAVING THE ABILITY, THAT -- THAT HAS TO BE A TWO-WAY

112

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

STREET. WE CAN'T JUST BLOCK OFF MONROE COUNTY AND ANYTHING THAT

COMES OUT OF A LAWSUIT THAT'S GONNA END UP IN MONROE COUNTY, THAT

MEANS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE JUDGES THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE IN FRONT OF

THAT KNOW NOTHING ABOUT OUR BUSINESSES, THAT KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE

BACKGROUND OF AGRICULTURE. HOW -- HOW IS THAT FAIR? HOW IS THAT BEING

DIVERSIFIED?

MR. RIVERA: I -- I HONESTLY LOOK AT THE NEW 5TH

DISTRICT AND -- AND REALLY PERCEIVE IT TO BE VERY, VERY, YOU KNOW, AS A

PERSON WHO HAS TOURED JUST ABOUT EVERY COUNTY IN THE STATE OF NEW

YORK, I WOULD LOOK AT THE 5TH DISTRICT AND SAY, FOR RURAL MATTERS, I

WOULD MUCH RATHER, YOU KNOW, FOR AWARENESS OF THE NEEDS OF THE RURAL

COMMUNITY, THE 5TH DISTRICT ACTUALLY LOOKS FAR BETTER THAN THE OLD 7TH

DISTRICT. BUT I -- I'D ALSO SAY FOR ANYBODY, YOU KNOW, THE -- THE -- SO,

THE HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO IS, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE SORT OF EXPLAIN THIS

TO SOMEBODY. THE -- THE BEAR, YOU KNOW, THE -- SORT OF THE BOILING

DOWN OF IT ALL IS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE AN AUTHORITY AS THE STATE

LEGISLATURE TO PURSUE THIS AT ANY TIME. THESE DISTRICT LINES HAVE -- HAVE

EXISTED LONG BEFORE YOU AND I WERE HERE AND HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED.

I HAVE CALLED AN ARRAY OF ATTORNEYS AND JUDGES THAT ARE RETIRED NOW TO

ASK WHAT THEIR TAKE IS, AT LEAST IN THE CASE OF MY JUDICIAL DISTRICT, WHICH

IS THE 8TH AND ASKED THEM, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME WE PURSED CHANGING

THIS? AND HALF JOKINGLY AND WHAT I THINK MIGHT BE TRUE IS, IT -- IT MIGHT

HAVE BEEN THE TURN OF THE CENTURY. SO THERE'S NO WAY WE CAN JUSTIFY NOT

CHANGING LINES IN RESPONSE TO AN EVER-CHANGING POPULATION, BY SIMPLY

KEEPING IT THE WAY WE ARE -- OR THE WAY IT IS. I FIND THAT ARGUMENT TO BE

113

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

UNDEFENSIBLE [SIC] LIKE, WE HAVE TO MAKE A CHANGE HERE AND I THINK THAT

THIS BILL BEFORE US IS A -- IS A RESPECTFUL AND COMMON SENSE WAY TO DO

IT.

MR. MANKTELOW: SO, MAYBE YOU'VE ANSWERED

THIS QUESTION AND I APOLOGIZE IF -- IF I ASK IT AGAIN. WHO ACTUALLY DREW

UP THE NEW LINES? WHO -- WHO -- WHO DREW THEM UP?

MR. RIVERA: OH, WELL, YOU KNOW, I MENTIONED IT

BEFORE, I -- I ORIGINALLY HAD A BILL LAST YEAR THAT TOUCHED MY JUDICIAL

DISTRICT. OTHER MEMBERS HAD BILLS THAT -- THAT TOUCHED THEIR JUDICIAL

DISTRICT. WE CAME TOGETHER KNOWING THAT WE COULD ONLY DO THIS ONCE

EVERY TEN YEARS, PUT IT TOGETHER IN A SINGLE BILL. THE -- THE -- TO BOIL IT

DOWN IN ITS SIMPLEST FORM HOW WE CAME UP WITH -- WITH THESE DISTRICTS,

YOU KNOW, WE BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE POPULATION DENSE URBAN CENTER

COUNTIES. THOSE COUNTIES WE FELT HAD SUFFICIENT POPULATION TO

NECESSITATE THEIR OWN DISTRICT AND THEN WE -- WE -- WE -- WE CARVED

TOGETHER THE NEIGHBORING COUNTIES TO FORM OTHER DISTRICTS. AS I

MENTIONED BEFORE, THE STATE CONSTITUTION IS CLEAR. WE -- WE -- WE CAN'T

DIVIDE COUNTIES, SO ENTIRE COUNTIES OBVIOUSLY HAVE TO BE KEPT WHOLE.

MR. MANKTELOW: YEAH. I -- I -- I UNDERSTAND

YOU CAN'T DIVIDE -- DIVIDE COUNTIES, BUT SOMETIMES THE WAY THE LINES

ARE DRAWN UP AND IF WE'RE TRULY LOOKING OUT FOR THE PEOPLE OF THIS

HOUSE THAT WE REPRESENT, I JUST FEEL THESE LINES COULD BE JUST A LITTLE BIT

DIFFERENT. AND JUST GIVING YOU THE EXAMPLE, IT -- IT MAY BE

HYPOTHETICAL TO YOU, BUT IN THE REAL WORLD, THAT'S THE WAY IT WORKS.

SO, I APPRECIATE YOU ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS.

114

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. MANKTELOW: I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE

PROBLEMS WE HAVE IN THIS HOUSE. WE -- WE SOMETIMES FORGET THE

PEOPLE THAT WE REPRESENT BACK HOME, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE

GOING TO THESE JUDICIAL COURTS TO BE IN FRONT OF A JUDGE AND I THINK IT'S

OUR JOB TO PROVIDE THEM THE BEST SERVICE POSSIBLE. AND WE ARE AGAIN,

NOW GOING TO SILO CERTAIN GROUPS OF PEOPLE, CERTAIN COUNTIES, INTO SILOS.

WE HAD ONE COUNTY VERSUS TEN COUNTIES AND I KNOW IT'S RURAL. YOU

CAN'T TELL ME WE CAN'T DIVIDE IT UP A LITTLE BIT BETTER THAN THAT SO THERE'S A

MIX? SO THERE IS A TRUE MEANING OF DIVERSIFICATION ACROSS THE COURT

SYSTEM, NOT DEALING WITH JUST ONE CITY? WHY NOT DEAL WITH A CITY AND

SEVERAL RURAL COUNTIES TO MAKE IT TRULY A DIVERSE WAY OF DOING THE

JUDICIAL WORK IN NEW YORK STATE.

SO, I APPRECIATE THE TIME OF THE SPONSOR ANSWERING MY

QUESTIONS, BUT I DO BELIEVE IN A RURAL AREA, THERE NEEDS TO BE FAIR

REPRESENTATION ACROSS THE BOARD BECAUSE MUCH LIKE MANY LAWSUITS,

WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO END UP IN A LARGE CITY WHETHER IT'S BUFFALO,

ROCHESTER, SYRACUSE, ALBANY, NEW YORK CITY, IT DOESN'T MATTER. WE'RE

PROBABLY GOING TO UP THERE FROM A RURAL AREA DOWN THE ROAD.

SO, THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, FOR YOUR TIME.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THANK YOU, MR.

MANKTELOW.

MR. TAGUE.

MR. TAGUE: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL THE

115

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS, PLEASE?

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: FOR YOU, CERTAINLY.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THE SPONSOR

YIELDS.

MR. TAGUE: I DO JUST FOR THE RECORD WANT TO KNOW

THAT I CAN ATTEST TO MR. RIVERA TRAVELING ACROSS THE STATE OF NEW YORK,

BECAUSE HE TRAVELED WITH ME ON MY FARM TOUR AND I THANK YOU --

MR. RIVERA: OF COURSE.

MR. TAGUE: -- VERY MUCH FOR DOING THAT, MR.

RIVERA.

THE FIRST QUESTION I HAVE IS, HOW MANY JUDGES' NAMES

ARE SPELLED OUT IN THIS BILL?

MR. RIVERA: EVERY JUDGE -- EVERY JUDGE OF THE --

OF THE 4TH DEPARTMENT THAT ARE -- THAT'S AFFECTED BY THIS. SO ALL OF THEM.

MR. TAGUE: SO NOW MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT 66,

BUT ISN'T THERE 67 --

MR. RIVERA: YES, BUT --

MR. TAGUE: -- IN THAT DISTRICT? DIDN'T JUDGE DORAN

WHO RESIGNED IN MARCH, ISN'T HE ALSO LISTED?

MR. RIVERA: THERE'S ONE VACANCY, YES.

MR. TAGUE: ARE THERE ANY LAWS RESTRICTING A VENUE

FROM BRINGING ELECTION CASES?

MR. RIVERA: SAY THAT AGAIN, I'M SORRY.

116

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. TAGUE: I SAID, ARE THERE ANY LAWS RESTRICTING

THE VENUE FROM BRINGING ELECTION LAW CASES?

MR. RIVERA: IF -- I'M UNAWARE OF THAT. NOT -- NOT

TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO.

MR. TAGUE: SO WHAT ABOUT ELECTION LAW 16-101

THAT REQUIRES CONSTITUTIONAL ELECTION CASES BE BROUGHT IN CERTAIN

PARTICULAR COUNTIES?

MR. RIVERA: I'M TAKING YOUR WORD FOR IT.

MR. TAGUE: OKAY. SO, UNDER THIS BILL, IF SOMEONE

BRINGS A CHALLENGE TO THE ELECTION LAW IN THE 4TH DEPARTMENT, WHAT

DISTRICT WOULD THEY HAVE TO BRING IT IN?

MR. RIVERA: AS YOU SAID, ERIE.

MR. TAGUE: CORRECT.

MR. RIVERA: YUP, YUP, YUP.

MR. TAGUE: WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS: ARE THERE

CURRENTLY ANY REPUBLICAN JUST -- JUDGES ELECTED FROM ERIE COUNTY?

MR. RIVERA: OH, SURE.

MR. TAGUE: COULD YOU NAME THEM FOR ME?

MR. RIVERA: I CAN'T CONFIRM THE AFFILIATION OF EVERY

JUDGE, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME IN THE 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, YES.

MR. TAGUE: OKAY, BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING WAS

THERE WERE NO JUDGES IN THAT JUDICIAL DISTRICT FOR -- ACTUALLY FROM ERIE

COUNTY.

MR. RIVERA: OH, NO, THERE -- THERE ARE.

MR. TAGUE: OKAY.

117

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: AS YOU COULD IMAGINE, I'VE GOTTEN A

LOT OF CALLS THIS WEEK, SO I'M CERTAIN THERE ARE.

MR. TAGUE: WELL, WOULD YOU SAY THAT THERE'S A

LARGE MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATIC JUDGES FROM ERIE COUNTY?

MR. RIVERA: OH, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S TRUE. I

WOULD SAY, I -- I HAVEN'T DONE A SORT OF A POLLING OF WHO'S A DEMOCRAT,

WHO'S A REPUBLICAN. WHAT I WILL SAY IS, I KNOW THAT THE ENROLLMENT OF

ERIE COUNTY IS -- IS DEMOCRAT, BUT IN MY EXPERIENCE, A LOT OF THE

COUNTY OFFICES THAT ARE HELD IN ERIE COUNTY, IT'S NEVER BEEN ENTIRELY

DEMOCRATIC. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S ONLY BEEN TWO DEMOCRATIC COUNTY

EXECUTIVES EVER ELECTED IN ERIE COUNTY, THERE'S ONLY TWO. MAJORITY OF

THEM HAVE BEEN REPUBLICAN. ONLY ONE OR TWO COUNTY SHERIFFS IN MY --

AT LEAST IN MY LIFETIME, FOR ERIE COUNTY. SO, IT -- IT -- IT'S A MIXED

COUNTY WHERE WE WILL ELECT BOTH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS TO

COUNTYWIDE OFFICE.

MR. TAGUE: BUT YOU'RE SURE THAT THERE ARE SUPREME

COURT JUDGES IN THAT JUDICIAL DISTRICT THAT ACTUALLY RESIDE IN ERIE

COUNTY?

MR. RIVERA: YES, CERTAINLY.

MR. TAGUE: NOT JUST -- NOT REPRESENT ERIE COUNTY,

BUT RESIDE IN ERIE COUNTY?

MR. RIVERA: I'M CERTAIN OF THAT.

MR. TAGUE: AS YOU SAID BEFORE, I'LL TAKE YOUR WORD

FOR THAT.

MR. RIVERA: THANK YOU, SIR.

118

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. TAGUE: MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. TAGUE: LISTEN, IN THIS BILL WE'VE ALREADY PUT

FORUM SHOPPING IN LAW AND NOW YOU'RE PUTTING JUDGE SHOPPING IN PLAY.

FIRST, YOU TOLD US WHERE YOU CAN TAKE THE CASES, NOW YOU'RE TELLING US

WHO CAN HEAR THE CASES. MY FRIENDS, WE SAT HERE TODAY, WE HEAR AGAIN

ABOUT RACIAL AND DIVERSITY, BUT TO ME, THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM SHOULD BE

ABOUT JUDGING PEOPLE ON THEIR CHARACTER AND WHETHER THEY'VE

COMMITTED A CRIME, OR NOT. NOT THEIR RACE, NOT WHERE THEY LIVE, NOT

WHERE THEY COME FROM. JUDGES ARE SUPPOSED TO LOOK AT EVERYTHING

INDEPENDENTLY. TO ME, I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, THERE ARE LAWYERS

SITTING AROUND A TABLE RIGHT NOW WAITING FOR THE VOTE OF THIS BILL AND I

AM SURE THAT THE CONSTITUTIONALITY AND HOW THIS BILL CAME ABOUT, THERE

WILL PROBABLY A LAW -- THERE WILL PROBABLY BE A LAWSUIT FILED TODAY, OR

IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS, ONCE IT GOES THROUGH BOTH HOUSES, IF THE

GOVERNOR SIGNS IT. BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE POLITICIZE THE

JUDICIAL SYSTEM. EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM KNOWS THAT THIS -- THE ONLY

THING THAT WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT TODAY WAS THE POLITICIZATION OF THE

JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS BILL RIGHT HERE DOES. IT

POLITICIZES THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM. THIS SAYS THAT WE'RE GOING TO ONLY HAVE

JUDGES OF ONE CERTAIN PARTY IN (INDISCERNIBLE) AREA, HEARING CERTAIN

CASES. AND I JUST -- I, YOU KNOW, I -- I JUST CAN'T BELIEVE IT.

MADAM SPEAKER, I WILL -- EVEN THOUGH MY RESPECT FOR

THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL I'D CALL A DEAR FRIEND, I -- I WILL BE IN THE

NEGATIVE ON THIS BILL AND I HOPE MY COLLEAGUES THAT CARE ABOUT

119

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

DEMOCRACY AND CARE -- ACTUALLY CARE ABOUT THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM, WILL DO

THE SAME. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THANK YOU, MR.

TAGUE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER. WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THE SPONSOR

YIELDS.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU. I -- I HEARD

YOU MENTIONED EARLIER AND IN FACT, I KNEW FOR SURE THAT YOU HAD BILL IN

-- ON THIS SPECIFIC TOPIC DESIGNED FOR THE 8TH DISTRICT TO CHANGE IN A WAY

THAT MAKES ERIE COUNTY A DISTRICT ON ITS OWN.

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT. LAST YEAR.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: HOW -- HOW OLD WAS THAT

BILL?

MR. RIVERA: OH, IT -- THAT WAS FROM LAST MAY. SO

IT'S BEEN OVER A YEAR.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: OVER A YEAR.

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. GIVE OR TAKE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: AND YOU ALSO MENTIONED

THAT OUR COLLEAGUE FROM MONROE HAD A SIMILAR BILL --

120

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: -- HOW OLD WAS HIS BILL?

MR. RIVERA: QUITE SOME TIME, AND I KNOW IT

WASN'T DONE IN -- IN THE LAST -- IT -- IT'S BEEN AWHILE. I DON'T KNOW THE

DEFINITIVE (INDISCERNIBLE)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: SO THESE ARE NOT NEW

THOUGHT PROCESSES --

MR. RIVERA: BY ANY MEANS, NO.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: -- THESE ARE THINGS THAT

HAVE BEEN THOUGHT ABOUT BEFORE AND HAVE BEEN GIVEN SOME

CONVERSATION TO. I GUESS THE NEXT QUESTION I WILL ASK IS: DO YOU KNOW

-- I HEARD YOU MENTION MORE THAN ONCE THAT TWICE YOUR AGE AND THE

SPEAKER'S -- THE PERSON THAT YOU WERE TALKING TO'S AGE. HOW OLD IS THIS

PROCESS FOR ESTABLISHING THESE DISTRICTS?

MR. RIVERA: IT'S A GOOD QUESTION, BECAUSE IT IS A

BIT OF A MOVING TARGET. I'VE ASKED -- WHAT I WAS -- WHAT I WAS GOING TO

SAY EARLIER AND IT'S SORT OF STARK HOW BAD IT IS; I SPOKE TO A -- A --A

JUDGE, OR A RETIRED JUDGE, WHO IS NOW, YOU KNOW, MID '70S AND I'VE

ASKED HIM, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE BEEN PRACTICING A LONG TIME. BEFORE

BEING A JUDGE, YOU WERE AN ATTORNEY. HOW LONG HAS THE JUDICIAL

DISTRICT -- OUR JUDICIAL DISTRICT LOOKED THIS WAY? AND HE SAID -- HE

THOUGHT IT WAS TURN OF THE CENTURY. HE THOUGHT IT WAS, YOU KNOW,

BEGINNING OF THE 1900S IS THE LAST TIME THAT OUR DISTRICT WHERE WE LIVE

HAD BEEN, YOU KNOW -- AND THE TROUBLE IS, IT -- IT'S -- HOWEVER OLD IT IS,

IT'S SO FAR BACK THAT WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ACCESSIBLE RECORDS TO

121

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

DETERMINE WHEN IT WAS. THAT'S HOW FAR BACK IT'S BEEN. DECADES UPON

DECADES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: OKAY. WELL, YOU KNOW,

I -- AND I THINK YOU'RE SOMETHING LIKE 200 AND SOME-ODD YEARS.

MR. RIVERA: I BELIEVE IT. IT COULD BE THE FOUNDING

DISTRICT THAT NEVER CHANGED. IT QUITE POSSIBLY CAN BE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: AND I'M SURE YOU KNOW,

AS I KNOW, THINGS DO CHANGE AFTER 200 OR SO YEARS.

MR. RIVERA: YES, THEY DO.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: IN -- IN PRETTY SIGNIFICANT

WAYS. I GUESS THE OTHER QUESTION I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON IS THAT THE

CURRENT JUDGES WHO SIT IN STATE SUPREME COURT FOR THIS PARTICULAR

DISTRICT, HOW MANY OF THEM WILL NO LONGER BE A JUDGE BECAUSE OF THIS

ACTION WE'RE TAKING TODAY?

MR. RIVERA: ALL OF THEM REMAIN AS JUDGES. THAT IS

UNAFFECTED AND THEY ARE ABLE TO FILL THEIR FULL TERMS.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY

MUCH FOR YOU COMMENTS.

ON THE BILL, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: I HAD THE OCCASION TO GO

TO A MEMORIAL SERVICE FOR JUDGE SAM GREEN'S WIFE, ERNESTINE GREEN.

QUITE A PILLAR. I MEAN, THIS YOUNG LADY WAS REALLY A -- AWESOME

COMMUNITY MEMBER. SHE WAS A RETIRED TEACHER, AN AMAZING

FUNDRAISER, A FORMER CHAIR OF MANY VERY INFLUENTIAL BOARDS IN AND

122

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AROUND WESTERN NEW YORK. AND HER HUSBAND, JUDGE GREEN, WAS THE

FIRST AFRICAN-AMERICAN MAN TO BE A STATE SUPREME COURT JUDGE IN THAT

DISTRICT. AND FOR, I'M GOING TO GUESS 70 YEARS, HE PROBABLY WAS THE

ONLY ONE. AND THAT'S NOT BECAUSE QUALIFIED JUDGES OF COLOR, EITHER

THEY'RE LATINO OR AFRICAN-AMERICAN, DID NOT RUN FOR THESE OFFICES, DID

NOT BE EDUCATED, GET IN A POSITION WHERE THEY COULD BECOME A JUDGE AT

-- AT LOWER LEVELS, THEY WANTED TO GO TO THE NEXT LEVEL. SOME OF THEM

SPENT AS MUCH AS $250,000 TRYING TO WIN A RACE AND IN ALL OF THESE

COUNTIES. I ACTUALLY SUPPORTED SOME OF THEM AND WENT WITH THEM.

AND I MEAN, I WENT INTO COMMUNITIES THAT I HAD NEVER BEEN IN BEFORE

AND MOST OF THEM WERE NOT RECEPTIVE. AND I DIDN'T -- I WASN'T WITH THE

PERSON WHO WAS SPIT ON DURING A PARADE WHILE THEY WERE TRYING TO GET

VOTES, I WASN'T WITH THAT PERSON. I'M REALLY GLAD ABOUT THAT QUITE

FRANKLY, BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN PRETTY. MY POINT HERE IS THAT

WHEN THINGS -- TIME CHANGES, THINGS CHANGE, WE OUGHT TO BE AMENABLE

TO SOME LEVEL OF CHANGE. NOW, SINCE JUDGE GREEN IS CLEARLY RETIRED,

THERE HAS BEEN AT LEAST A FEW OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE MADE IT TO THAT

COURT. ONE OF THEM ALMOST SPENT $300,000 JUST TO GET THERE. NOT

BECAUSE IT'S A $300,000 JOB, BUT BECAUSE IT WAS HER GOAL. IT WAS HER

GOAL. IT WAS HER MOTHER'S GOAL. THEY ACTUALLY WANTED TO GO TO THE

HIGHER COURTS AND IT TOOK HER THREE ELECTIONS TO DO THAT. AND ONE OF --

ALL THREE OF THOSE TIMES SHE DID HAVE THE SUPPORT OF THE ERIE COUNTY

PARTY. BUT SHE DID NOT HAVE THE VOTES IN THOSE OTHER COUNTIES, IN AND

AROUND. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, IT TOOK HER THREE TIMES TO RUN. AND SO TO

ME, THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT DIVERSIFYING OPPORTUNITIES TO RUN FOR OFFICE,

123

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

IT'S -- IT'S -- IT'S A LOT MORE THAN THAT. IT'S -- IT'S ABOUT THE JUSTICE THAT WE

SAY IS FOR EVERYBODY. THE LIBERTY THAT IS FOR EVERYBODY. WELL, IF IT'S FOR

EVERYBODY, YOU CAN'T SAY I GOT TO GO TO EATON IN ORDER TO GET ELECTED,

WHEN I KNOW THE PEOPLE OF EATON ARE NOT GOING TO ELECT ME BECAUSE

THEY'RE GOING TO ELECT THEIR COUSIN.

SO I WANT TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION.

THIS IS HARD -- THIS IS HARD -- THIS IS SOMETHING HARD TO DO, BECAUSE

PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO SEE THIS KIND OF CHANGE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT

INCLUSION, FOR REAL, FOR REAL. THIS IS INCLUSION FOR REAL, FOR REAL. AND

MAYBE IF THERE ISN'T AN UPCOMING ELECTION AND A LATINO WOMAN RUNS

AND DOESN'T WIN, WE CAN'T SAY SHE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE. WE CAN SAY

SHE DID HAVE A CHANCE AND SHE JUST DIDN'T WIN, BECAUSE THE MOST

QUALIFIED JUDGE WON, OR THE ONE THAT THE VOTERS WANTED THE MOST WON.

IN THE CITY OF BUFFALO, IN THE COUNTY OF ERIE, WE HAVE

WANTED NEW JUDGES AT THE SUPREME COURT LEVEL FOR DECADES AND HAVE

NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET IT. THIS MIGHT BE OUR OPPORTUNITY AND I WANT TO

THANK THE SPONSOR FOR INTRODUCING IT. I LOOK FORWARD TO VOTING FOR IT.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. ARI BROWN.

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

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. A. BROWN: LIKE MY COLLEAGUE, MR. DURSO,

CERTAINLY NOT A LAWYER, I SWING A HAMMER FOR A LIVING. I SAT BACK AND

FIGURED THE LAWYERS WILL WORK THIS WHOLE THING OUT AND I HEARD

124

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

QUESTIONS GOING BACK AND FORTH; IS THIS BILL -- DOES THIS BILL HAVE

ANYTHING TO DO WITH RACIAL REDISTRICTING, RACIAL GERRYMANDERING? I

HEARD YES, I HEARD NO, I HEARD THE QUESTION ASKED A THOUSAND DIFFERENT

WAYS. IT WAS KIND OF, IT MAY BE, IT WAS, BUT THANK GOD IT WOULD -- IT

TOOK MY TWO COLLEAGUES, ASSEMBLYWOMAN WALKER AND OUR ESTEEMED

MAJORITY LEADER TO POINT OUT THAT IT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS BILL IS ALL ABOUT.

RACIAL GERRYMANDERING. RACIAL GERRYMANDERING VIOLATES THE EQUAL

PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT IF RACE IS THE PREDOMINANT

FACTOR IN DRAWING DISTRICT LINES. IT'S A SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT IN

MILLER V. JOHNSON, 1995 AND BUSH V. VERA, 1996. THE COURT HELD THAT

RACE CANNOT BE THE PREDOMINANT FACTOR IN DRAWING ANY DISTRICT,

INCLUDING JUDICIAL DISTRICTS.

AND FOR THAT REASON, MADAM SPEAKER, THIS BILL

CERTAINLY WON'T PASS JUDICIAL MUSTER AND I WILL CERTAINLY VOTE -- BE

VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE AND THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. CHANG.

MR. CHANG: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: YES, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. CHANG: TO BE HONEST, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH

UPSTATE NEW YORK DISTRICT. I LIVE IN BROOKLYN AND KNOW MY LIFE IS

125

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

DOWNSTATE --

MR. RIVERA: COME ON DOWN ANY TIME. COME UP.

MR. CHANG: OUT OF THE QUESTION WITH MY

COLLEAGUES AND ARGUING ABOUT THE 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICTS AND WHATEVER

JUDICIAL DISTRICT AND ERIE COUNTY. WHICH I -- I HAVE AN IDEA WHERE IT IS,

BUT I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE IT IS. BUT, HOW WILL THAT FACTOR IN -- IN

MY COMMUNITY OF ASIAN COMMUNITY WITH A POPULATION OF NEW YORK

STATE REPRESENTED BY NEARLY 12 PERCENT? NEW YORK CITY GETS NEARLY

THREE-QUARTERS OF IT. HOW WOULD -- HOW WOULD JUDICIAL REDISTRICTING

ACTUAL BALANCE OUT MY COMMUNITY IN UPSTATE?

MR. RIVERA: YOU'RE -- YOU'RE ASKING MORE OR LESS

HOW DOES THIS POTENTIALLY AFFECT THE ASIAN COMMUNITY IN UPSTATE NEW

YORK?

MR. CHANG: THAT'S CORRECT. IF IT'S SO FEW JUDGES, I

-- I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY ASIAN JUDGES ARE THAT -- 67 THERE ARE.

MR. RIVERA: I CAN TELL YOU THAT IN THE 4TH

DEPARTMENT, WHICH IS THE DEPARTMENT THAT SORT OF ARE THE DISTRICTS THAT

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. CURRENTLY, THERE ARE NO JUDGES THAT IDENTIFY AS

ASIAN, OR HISPANIC. WHAT I WILL SAY IS, JUST USING MY COUNTY AS AN

EXAMPLE, I USED SOME OF THESE NUMBERS BEFORE BUT I'LL GIVE YOU THE REST

OF THEM, IT'S THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS DISTRICT, THE CURRENT 8TH JUDICIAL

DISTRICT, SERVES ABOUT 1.5 MILLION PEOPLE AND 61 PERCENT OF THEM RESIDE

JUST IN THE ONE COUNTY OF ERIE. AND ERIE COUNTY IS THE PRIMARY HOME

FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR WITHIN THE DISTRICT, REPRESENTING 90 PERCENT OF

ITS ASIAN POPULATION OF THE ENTIRE JUDICIAL DISTRICT ARE IN ONE COUNTY.

126

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SO IT'S STAGGERING. IT'S 83 PERCENT OF THE BLACK POPULATION AND 68

PERCENT OF THE HISPANIC POPULATION ARE ALL LOCATED IN ONE COUNTY. THAT

COUNTY BEING ITS OWN JUDICIAL DISTRICT, PRESUMABLY, MEANS THAT THERE'S A

HIGHER PROBABILITY THAT A PERSON OF COLOR COULD SEEK THE OFFICE AND --

AND POTENTIALLY BE ELECTED. THAT'S SORT OF THE -- THE NUMBERS OF IT, IS

WHAT I'D SAY.

MR. CHANG: AS YOU MENTIONED A LITTLE EARLIER, THAT

THIS HASN'T BEEN REDISTRICTING FOR MANY DECADES FROM YOUR RESEARCH --

MR. RIVERA: CORRECT.

MR. CHANG: -- SO, BEFORE YOU GO -- I MEAN, I DON'T

MIND CHANGE, CHANGE COULD BE GOOD. BUT, HAVE YOU DECIDED PERHAPS

CREATE A COMISSION TO -- TO MAKE THIS STUDY, OTHER THAN JUST A -- THIS BILL

AND MAKE THIS DRASTIC CHANGE WITHOUT FURTHER STUDY?

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. I -- I GUESS WHAT I WOULD SAY

IS, THE -- THE STATE CONSTITUTION IS CLEAR THAT THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR

MAKING THESE, YOU KNOW, I GUESS CREATING NEW LINES IS WHOLLY ON THE

LEGISLATURE. AND I WOULD SAY THAT, ALTHOUGH THERE HAS BEEN COUNTLESS

MEMBERS OF THESE LEGISLATIVE BODIES THAT HAVE COME AND GONE IN THE

LAST, WHAT COULD'VE BEEN 100 PLUS YEARS, THEY'VE NEVER TAKEN THIS UP

AND THERE'S A REASON WHY THEY'VE NEVER TAKEN IT UP. IT'S BECAUSE SOME

PEOPLE DON'T WANT CHANGE. IT'S BECAUSE THERE'S SOME PEOPLE THAT SIMPLY

BENEFIT FROM THE NATURE OF HOW THESE CURRENT DISTRICTS ARE DRAWN AND I

BELIEVE THAT OVER TIME, IT'S -- THEY HAVE BECOME LESS AND LESS REFLECTIVE

OF THE COMMUNITIES FOUND WITHIN THEM. SO, IT -- IT -- IT'S TAKING AN ACT

OF THIS BODY TO MOVE UNDER ITS CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO ADDRESS IT. I -- I

127

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THINK WAITING ANOTHER YEAR WOULD BE UNWISE, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING

HOW STARK THE PROBLEM IS IN OUR JUDICIARY.

MR. CHANG: BECAUSE IT HAS DEFINITELY UNINTENDED

AFFECT BECAUSE IT WILL CHANGE THE RESOURCES, MANPOWER, REAL ESTATE,

EVERYTHING WHEN YOU START CHANGING THE DISTRICTS ITSELF. I MEAN -- AND

WE HAVE TO BUDGET FOR THESE -- FOR THESE COSTS AS WELL.

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. I -- I WOULD SAY, UNLIKE OTHER

DIVISIONS OF STATE GOVERNMENT, OCA HAS A REALLY BROAD SET OF ABILITIES

TO DETERMINE AND -- AND ALLOCATE RESOURCES TO REGIONS THAT THEY FEEL ARE

-- ARE NEEDING OF IT AND THAT DOESN'T CHANGE HERE. YOU KNOW, THE -- THE

-- THE BUDGET OF OCA IS WHAT I'M TOLD TO BE NEAR -- NEAR $3 BILLION.

WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IN COSTS IS POTENTIALLY NOT CREATING NEW

JUDGESHIPS, NOT BUILDING NEW BUILDINGS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE -- THE

-- THE SMALL INCREMENTAL AMOUNTS IT -- IT -- IT -- THAT ARE ABSOLUTELY

NOMINAL, NOT JUST IN THE FACE OF THE GRANDNESS OF OUR STATE BUDGET, BUT

CERTAINLY EVEN IN THE GRANDNESS OF THE OCA BUDGET. SO, YOU KNOW, IF

WE WERE HAVING A CONVERSATION OF CREATING A LOT OF NEW JUDGESHIPS, I

WOULD AGREE. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.

MR. CHANG: YOU KNOW, WE LOST POPULATIONS FOR A

PAST DECADE. ABOUT MORE THAN A MILLION, I BELIEVE. AND

(INDISCERNIBLE) UNINTENDED EFFECT. BUT, YOU KNOW, PREVIOUS CASE, OLD

CASES MAY BE RESIDING IN ONE DISTRICT AND POTENTIALLY HAVE TO RELOCATE

THE OTHER JUDGE. I'M NOT SURE YOU'RE ABLE TO GRAND -- GRANDFATHER THOSE

-- THOSE OLD CASES THAT STILL IMPENDING.

MR. RIVERA: YEAH. I GUESS I WOULD JUST SAY THAT

128

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THE ACTUAL JUDGES THEMSELVES AREN'T CHANGING. OBVIOUSLY, IF THEY

CHOOSE TO RETIRE OR -- OR THEY'RE AGED OUT, THAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT. BUT,

YOU KNOW, THE JUDGES AND THEIR CASES THAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE, THEY'LL

CONTINUE TO HAVE WITH -- WITH MINIMAL DISRUPTION, TRUTHFULLY. AND

REMEMBER THAT OCA DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TODAY, WITH OR WITHOUT THIS

BILL, TO ALLOCATE A JUDGE IN COUNTY X VERSUS COUNTY Y TODAY, AND THIS

DOESN'T CHANGE THAT. SO I -- I PERCEIVE THE DISRUPTION TO BE VERY, VERY

MINIMAL.

MR. CHANG: WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.

RIVERA.

AND ON THE BILL, PLEASE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. CHANG: I THINK WE CAN KILL SEVERAL BIRDS WITH

ONE STONE IF WE WANT TO DO THIS REDISTRICTING OF JUDGE DURING EVERY

ANNUAL -- EVERY TEN YEARS WHEN WE DO A REDISTRICTING OUR ASSEMBLY. I

THINK WE SHOULD MARRY UP THE SAME TIME BECAUSE IT'S A PROCESS THAT --

BECAUSE WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER EVERY TEN YEARS TO -- TO -- THIS IS

REDISTRICTING. WE DON'T NEED TO DO THIS IN BETWEEN THE TEN YEARS. WE

CAN WAIT FOR A FEW MORE YEARS. I MEAN, WE WAITED FOR AT LEAST SEVERAL

DECADES OR MORE, MAYBE 100 YEARS. WE CAN WAIT A FEW MORE YEARS

UNTIL WE LINED UP DURING THE REDISTRICTING YEAR, AND PERHAPS WE CAN DO

THIS ALL IN ONE BIG -- ONE BIG -- ONE BIG DRAW.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MS. WALSH.

129

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

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

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. RIVERA: YES, OF COURSE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO I -- I READ

THROUGH THE WHOLE BILL AND I ALSO READ THE MEMORANDUM OF SUPPORT,

AND A FEW PEOPLE HAVE REFERENCED THAT. BUT IN THE MEMORANDUM OF

SUPPORT THAT YOU PROVIDED WITH THE LEGISLATION, THERE'S A JUSTIFICATION

SECTION AND IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT THIS BILL AIMS TO ADDRESS THAT

INEQUALITY, AND BECAUSE YOU HAD JUST CITED SOME STATISTICS ABOUT

PARTICULARLY RACIAL -- A LACK OF RACIAL DIVERSITY. YOU SAY THIS BILL AIMS

TO ADDRESS THAT INEQUALITY BY ESTABLISHING TWO NEW JUDICIAL DISTRICTS IN

THE 4TH JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT. SO I GUESS -- AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S

REALLY ASKED YOU THIS, MAYBE DIRECTLY -- OR AS DIRECTLY AS I'M GONNA ASK

YOU. HOW DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THIS LEGISLATION WILL REMEDY RACIAL

INEQUALITY?

MR. RIVERA: OH, BECAUSE AS THE NUMBERS THAT I

STATED BEFORE, WITHIN EACH ONE OF THOSE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS, THE CURRENT

JUDICIAL DISTRICTS, THE UNIQUENESS ABOUT THEM IS THAT EACH -- NOT -- THE

THING THAT MAKES THEM ALL SIMILAR IS THAT IN EACH ONE OF THOSE THREE

JUDICIAL DISTRICTS, A -- A CENTRAL DENSE -- DENSELY-POPULATED DIVERSE

COUNTY EXISTS. AN URBAN CENTER EXISTS WITHIN THAT ENTIRE JUDICIAL

DISTRICT.

130

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MS. WALSH: YES.

MR. RIVERA: SO ALLOWING THAT SINGLE COUNTY TO BE

ITS OWN JUDICIAL DISTRICT DOES ADDRESS IT, IN MY OPINION.

MS. WALSH: BUT HOW SO? I MEAN, THE -- THE WAY

THAT SUPREME COURT JUDGES ARE ELECTED IS UNIQUE. IT'S NOT LIKE THE WAY

THAT WE'RE ELECTED. AS YOU MENTIONED BEFORE, THERE'S A JUDICIAL

CONVENTION. THERE ARE JUDICIAL DELEGATES THAT GO TO A JUDICIAL

CONVENTION. THOSE JUDICIAL DELEGATES, THERE ARE PETITIONS PASSED TO

SELECT THOSE JUDICIAL DELEGATES. SO HAVE YOU DONE ANY LOOKING AROUND

TO SEE WHETHER -- WHAT -- WHAT'S THE DIVERSITY LIKE FOR JUDICIAL DELEGATES

RIGHT NOW, AND HOW DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD CHANGE AFTER THIS

LEGISLATION? BECAUSE ISN'T THAT EXACTLY -- I MEAN, ISN'T THAT YOUR

PREMISE IS THAT IF WE HAVE RACIALLY-DIVERSE JUDICIAL DELEGATES THAT WILL

THEN RESULT IN A RACIALLY-DIVERSE SLATE OF POTENTIAL JUDGES TO BE ELECTED

BY THIS URBAN CENTER IN THIS DISTRICT?

MR. RIVERA: I -- I WOULD DISAGREE THAT THE ISSUE IS

WITH THE JUDICIAL DELEGATES ENTIRELY. I -- I WOULD SAY THE ISSUE HERE IS

WITH THE JUDICIAL -- YOU KNOW, FOLKS THAT ARE SEEKING THE OFFICE OF A

JUDGESHIP TODAY. THERE ARE PEOPLE FULLY AWARE AND FULLY CAPABLE OF THE

-- THE ABILITY TO -- TO SEEK A JUDGESHIP IN EITHER A, THEY PERCEIVE

THEMSELVES TO BE OUTSIDE OF THAT PROCESS, JUST AS MUCH AS I'M SURE THAT

THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT PERCEIVE THEMSELVES TO BE OUTSIDE THE PROCESS FOR

MANY OFFICES. BUT ESPECIALLY THIS ONE, UNDER THE THOUGHT THAT JUST

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU COME FROM A -- A NEIGHBORHOOD, A

COMMUNITY, A COUNTY THAT HAS MANY, MANY SIMILARITIES

131

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

DEMOGRAPHICALLY TO YOU, BECAUSE YOU'RE LUMPED IN WITH EIGHT OTHER

COUNTIES, IN SOME CASES EVEN MORE OTHER COUNTIES, IT -- IT MINIMIZES

THE -- THE PROBABILITY OF BEING REPRESENTED BY SOMEONE FROM YOUR

COMMUNITY. AND I'D SAY THAT, AS I SAID BEFORE, FROM SOMEBODY FROM

ALLEGANY COUNTY. YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE FROM ALLEGANY COUNTY, THE

PROBABILITY THAT YOU ARE REPRESENT -- OR YOU WILL BE SEEN BY A JUDGE

FROM ALLEGANY COUNTY IS -- IS HIGHLY, HIGHLY IMPROBABLE. SO THAT SORT

OF, YOU KNOW, REPRESENTATION ISSUE EXISTS IN THE URBAN CENTERS AND IT --

AND IT EXISTS IN THE RURAL PARTS AS WELL. SO I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW,

TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE CHANGES IN POPULATION THAT HAVE HAPPENED OVER

THE LAST CENTURY, IT'S -- IT'S CLEAR WHY WE HAVE THE ISSUE WE HAVE IN THE

4TH DEPARTMENT OF ONLY HAVING TWO JUDGES IN THE ENTIRE 4TH

DEPARTMENT BEING PEOPLE OF COLOR.

MS. WALSH: ALL RIGHT. I -- I MEAN, I'M JUST SAYING

THAT IF -- IF JUDGES CANDIDATE -- IF JUDGE CANDIDATES ARE SELECTED AT A

JUDICIAL CONVENTION BY JUDICIAL DELEGATES AND THOSE JUDICIAL DELEGATES

ARE WHITE, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ARE OR NOT. THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING

YOU. BUT, I MEAN, ISN'T THAT HOW YOU GET TO THE CANDIDATE ON THE BALLOT

IS THROUGH A CONVENTION? SO --

MR. RIVERA: I GUESS I'D DISAGREE --

MS. WALSH: OH, OKAY.

MR. RIVERA: -- THAT JUST BECAUSE A JUDICIAL DELEGATE

IS OF ONE RACE THEY WOULDN'T BE LIKELY TO SUPPORT A PERSON OF A DIFFERENT

RACE. I -- I GUESS I DISAGREE WITH THAT POSITION. I -- WHAT I WILL SAY IS,

AS LONG AS THE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS LOOK LIKE THE WAY THEY LOOK, WE WILL

132

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

FOREVER GONNA HAVE THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY. I'M NOT

LOOKING TO CHANGE THE PROCESS BY WHICH WE ELECT JUDGES AND THE

MECHANICS OF HOW PARTIES PUT JUDICIAL DELEGATES IN PETITIONS. THAT'S A

PROCESS THAT EXISTS, AND IT'S -- IT IS WHAT IT IS. I FIND THE PEOPLE THAT

COLLECT PETITIONS TO BE REFLECTIVE OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT THEY'RE FROM,

AND THAT'S FINE. I WOULD SAY IF THE END RESULT IS WHAT WE HAVE TODAY, IT

IS INSUFFICIENT. AND THE REASON THAT I THINK IT'S INSUFFICIENT IS BECAUSE

WE'VE BEEN COMFORTABLE WITH THESE LINES AS THEY'VE BEEN FOR THE LAST

COUNTLESS AMOUNT OF DECADES AND THAT'S WHERE THE PROBLEM IS.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. WELL, LET'S SAY THAT ANOTHER TEN

YEARS -- I MEAN, THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT IDEA THAT

WE SHOULD MAYBE REDISTRICT EVERY TEN YEARS. I DON'T THINK I REALLY AGREE

WITH THAT. BUT LET'S SAY IN TEN YEARS WE LOOK AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY

MORE RACIAL DIVERSITY AS A RESULT OF THIS LEGISLATION. WOULD YOU THEN

INTRODUCE A BILL THAT WOULD SAY THAT, WELL, NOW IT LOOKS LIKE WE GOT TO

LOOK AT THE JUDICIAL DELEGATES NOW. WE'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S

RACIAL DIVERSITY WITH THE JUDICIAL DELEGATES BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT

RESULTING IN MORE JUDGES, WHICH IS WHAT OUR GOAL IS.

MR. RIVERA: I GUESS IF THE PREMISE IS THAT I'M HERE

IN TEN YEARS, IT'S TO BE SEEN. BUT WHAT I'D ALSO SAY, NOT JOKINGLY, IS THAT

THESE TERMS ARE 14 YEAR TERMS. SO THAT ALSO HAS TO BE TAKEN INTO

ACCOUNT, TOO.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU

VERY MUCH, SIR.

MR. RIVERA: SURE.

133

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MS. WALSH: MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MS. WALSH: SO I WANT TO JUST NOTE AT THE OUTSET, I

MEAN, THIS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT DEBATE AND IT'S JUST COME TO MY

ATTENTION, I'M SO SORRY TO REPORT THAT THE LIVE FEED FROM THIS DEBATE CUT

OUT FOR AN-HOUR-AND-A-HALF. SO UNFORTUNATELY FOR FOLKS WHO WERE

TRYING TO WATCH THIS BEING DEBATED LIVE, YOU MISSED A REALLY BIG CHUNK

OF WHAT WAS A VERY IMPORTANT DEBATE. SO I REALLY HOPE THAT WHEN --

WHEN THIS -- I THINK THE LAST TIME IT HAPPENED WAS WHEN WE WERE

DEBATING MEDICAL AID IN DYING, IT ALSO CUT OUT FOR A PERIOD OF TIME

THEN, TOO. SO I REALLY HOPE THAT WHEN THE FULL DEBATE IS AVAILABLE TO

EVERYBODY WHO MIGHT WANT TO WATCH IT LATER, BECAUSE IT'S A VERY

IMPORTANT DEBATE. AND I THINK IT HAS A LOT OF IMPLICATIONS, YOU KNOW,

OVERALL.

SO I WANT TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, I LISTENED VERY

CLOSELY TO ALL THE PREVIOUS DEBATE THAT WE'VE HAD, AND WHAT I FOUND OUT

IS THAT IN DEVELOPING THIS LEGISLATION THERE WAS NO CONSIDERATION OF HOW

THIS LEGISLATION MIGHT IMPACT THE BOARD OF REGENTS. THERE WAS NO

CONSULTATION WITH LATFOR. THERE WAS NO CONSIDERATION OF COURT

BACKLOGS. THERE WAS NO CONSIDERATION OF THE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM'S

VIEW THAT THIS LEGISLATION SHOULD BE DEFERRED UNTIL NEXT SESSION, AT

LEAST. THERE WAS NO CONSIDERATION OF THE ONONDAGA COUNTY [SIC] BAR

ASSOCIATION'S CONCERNS. SO I WOULD ASK RHETORICALLY, SINCE I'M ON THE

BILL, WHY ARE WE DOING THIS BILL SUDDENLY AT THE END OF THE SESSION?

THE -- THE REASON THAT WAS GIVEN AND -- AND HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT IS

134

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THAT WE WANT MORE RACIAL DIVERSITY. WE WANT TO REMEDY THE INEQUALITY

THAT THERE ARE ONLY TWO JUDGES THAT ARE RACIALLY DIVERSE IN THIS AREA.

I WOULD SAY THIS: THERE ARE PLENTY OF DIFFERENT WAYS

THAT WE CAN TRY TO -- AND LISTEN, I REPRESENT AN AREA IN UPSTATE NEW

YORK THAT IS VERY WHITE, AND WE ARE TRYING TO -- IT IS, IT'S VERY WHITE,

AND WE TRY, THROUGH OUR LOCAL BAR ASSOCIATION AND THROUGH A NUMBER

OF EFFORTS IN OUR COUNTY, TO TRY TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE OF COLOR TO GET

INVOLVED IN OUR PROCESS WHO -- PARTICULARLY ATTORNEYS THAT WANT TO GET

INVOLVED. AND IT -- IT'S -- IT'S WORK. IT'S UPHILL, AND IT DOES -- IT IS

TAKING A WHILE. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THE WAY THAT WE TRY TO GET MORE

DIVERSITY ON THE BENCH IS I THINK WE NEED TO START AT A VERY GRASSROOTS

LEVEL, TRYING TO REACH OUT TO INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE RECENTLY GRADUATED

FROM LAW SCHOOL, AND TRY TO ENGAGE THEM IN THE PROCESS. AND WE KNOW

THAT THE PROCESS HAS GOT POLITICS IN IT, RIGHT? I MEAN, WE CAN ALL SAY

THAT THERE'S NO POLITICS INVOLVED, BUT THERE -- THERE ARE -- THERE'S A PARTY

STRUCTURE THAT LEADS TO A CONVENTION THAT THEN PUTS CANDIDATES UP. SO

WE NEED TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE OF COLOR TO GET INVOLVED IN THE POLITICAL

PROCESS, BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, AND -- AND TRY TO HAVE THOSE PEOPLE SEE

-- SEE A FUTURE AND SEE THEMSELVES BEING ABLE TO GET ON THE BENCH.

BUT THE WAY THAT THIS BILL IS BEING DONE, UNFORTUNATELY,

IS EITHER, ONE, SOCIAL ENGINEERING, OR, TWO, PLAYING PARTISANSHIP, OR,

THREE, BOTH OF THE ABOVE. RIGHT? SO I DON'T THINK -- NO MATTER HOW YOU

SLICE IT, THIS, TO ME, IS A VERY OFFENSIVE BILL. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS CAN

BE LEGAL FOR THE REASONS THAT MY COLLEAGUE SITTING IN FRONT OF ME

REFERENCED IN HIS DISCUSSION. WHAT DO I WANT TO SEE IN A JUDGE? WHAT

135

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

DO I THINK ARE THE TOP QUALITIES IN A JUDGE? I WANT EXCELLENCE. I WANT

THE BEST. I WANT JUDGES THAT ARE IMPARTIAL. THAT ARE INDEPENDENT. THAT

ARE RATIONAL. THAT ARE FAIR. THAT ARE REASONABLE, AND THAT HAVE A GOOD

KNOWLEDGE OF THE LAW. AND I DON'T CARE -- I DON'T CARE, AND I DON'T

THINK MOST PEOPLE CARE, WHAT COLOR THEY ARE. I -- WE WANT EXCELLENCE.

THAT IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. HOW DO WE ACHIEVE THAT? I DON'T THINK

WE ACHIEVE THAT WITH THIS BILL. I DON'T THINK WE ACHIEVE THAT AT ALL. I

THINK WHAT WE DO IS, AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT BY OTHERS, IS I THINK THAT

THIS REALLY JUST CREATES A VERY CYNICAL, VERY DISTRUSTFUL ATTITUDE TOWARDS

THIS LEGISLATURE AND ALSO THE JUDICIARY. I THINK THAT THIS IS THE ABSOLUTE

WRONG WAY TO GO ABOUT THIS. AND, YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE A LITTLE BIT THAT

I, AS ONE OF ONLY THREE WOMEN IN THE MINORITY CONFERENCE HERE OUT OF

47, I THINK I -- I SPEAK, YOU KNOW, FROM SOME EXPERIENCE. I -- I THINK

THAT, YOU KNOW, I WISH THAT THERE WERE MORE WOMEN IN MY CONFERENCE.

I WORK TOWARDS THAT. I TRY TO ENCOURAGE MORE WOMEN TO RUN FOR OFFICE,

TO BECOME ENGAGED, TO -- TO SEE THEMSELVES. I DON'T -- I PERSONALLY

DON'T BELIEVE -- AND I WON'T DISCLOSE MY AGE BECAUSE AS MY

GRANDMOTHER SAID, YOU NEVER ASK A LADY HER AGE -- BUT I'VE -- I'VE BEEN

AROUND FOR A WHILE. I'VE BEEN PRACTICING AS AN ATTORNEY FOR A WHILE.

WHEN I STARTED PRACTICING -- WHEN I CAME OUT OF ALBANY LAW SCHOOL,

50 PERCENT OF MY GRADUATING CLASS WERE WOMEN. AND THEN WHEN I

WENT INTO TRIAL WORK, WHEN I DID MY FIRST TRIALS, DO YOU KNOW HOW

MANY WOMEN I SAW? NADA. NADA. WE WEREN'T THERE. I DON'T KNOW

WHERE THE WOMEN WENT. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WENT INTO STATE SERVICE.

MAYBE THEY WENT INTO DIFFERENT POSITIONS THAT HAVE MORE HUMANE

136

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

HOURS. I DON'T KNOW. BUT THEY CERTAINLY WEREN'T IN TRIAL WORK. YOU

KNOW, DID I SAY THAT I WANTED THERE TO BE A CERTAIN, YOU KNOW, QUOTA,

NUMBER OF WOMEN TRIAL ATTORNEYS? NO. NO. I GOT IN THERE AND I DID

MY CASES. AND I TRIED TO BE EXCELLENT AND I TRIED TO BE THE BEST ATTORNEY

THAT I COULD BE, REGARDLESS OF WHAT MY GENDER WAS.

SO I THINK THAT THERE IS A WAY TO ENCOURAGE DIVERSITY IN

OUR JUDICIARY, IN OUR LEGISLATURE, IN BUSINESS AND OUR LIVES. I DON'T

THINK THAT THIS LEGISLATION IS THE WAY TO DO IT. I -- AND I DO -- I DO FIND IT

OFFENSIVE AND I WILL -- I WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE ALONG WITH, I

WOULD ASSUME, A -- A GOOD NUMBER OF US HERE.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS BILL [SIC] 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 IN THIS LEGISLATION. ANY

OTHER VOTES CAN BE CAST AT THE DESKS NOW.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MADAM

137

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

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.)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. OF COURSE EVERYONE KNOWS I'M DEFINITELY

IN SUPPORT OF THIS, BUT I -- FOR THE RECORD, I WOULD LIKE PEOPLE TO

UNDERSTAND THAT I HAVE BEEN A JUDICIAL DELEGATE, AS WELL, MORE THAN

ONCE. AND FOR CLARITY, IT'S THE 8TH WESTERN NEW YORK COUNTY CHAIRS

FROM THE MULTIPLE DIFFERENT PARTIES THAT REALLY BREAK DOWN WHAT THE

DECISION IS WHEN WHO'S GONNA BE THE PERSON THAT RUNS FOR OFFICE, AND

WHO'S NOT ONLY GONNA BE THE PERSON, BUT WHO'S GONNA GET THE SUPPORT

FROM THEIR RESPECTIVE AREA.

SO AGAIN, I WANT TO COMMEND THE SPONSORS OF THIS

LEGISLATION AND I -- I LOOK FORWARD TO THE RESULTS OF IT. AND THERE IS NO

GUARANTEE THAT IT'S GOING TO ELECT JUDGES OF COLOR BECAUSE, QUITE FRANKLY,

THE ONLY WAY TO DO THAT IS FOR THERE TO BE A STATE SUPREME COURT RACE

THAT FOCUSES JUST ON ONE-HALF OF BUFFALO. IF WE HAD THAT, THEY WE CAN

ASSURE THAT. BUT THERE'S NO WAY YOU ASSURE IT OTHERWISE. BUT THERE IS

AN OPPORTUNITY TO ELECT PEOPLE LIKE THAT BECAUSE I KNOW THE PEOPLE WHO

LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY AND I KNOW THAT THEY'RE OPEN -- MORE OPEN TO

DIVERSITY THAN OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE.

THANK YOU.

138

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MRS. PEOPLES-

STOKES IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. BOLOGNA TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BOLOGNA: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. AS

THE SPONSOR SAID A LITTLE BIT AGO WHEN TALKING TO MR. CHANG, THAT 96

PERCENT OF THE ASIAN POPULATION IN WESTERN NEW YORK RESIDES IN ERIE

COUNTY, THUS MAKING THE PROBABILITY, I THINK, OF RACIAL DIVERSITY -- BY

CONCENTRATING THE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS TO JUST ERIE COUNTY, IT MAKES IT

MORE PROBABLE. BY DEFINITION, THAT IS RACIAL GERRYMANDERING. IN MY

VIEW, IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL BASED ON THE EQUAL PROTECTION AND VOTING

RIGHTS ACT. IN ADDITION TO WHICH THE ASSERTION THAT THIS WOULD BE A

NEGLIGIBLE AMOUNT WHEN THE OCA IS ALREADY SAYING THAT THIS IS GONNA

COST $9.6 MILLION. AGAIN, IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING TO HEAR THAT DURING THE

COURSE OF A DEBATE. THE OCA ALSO SAYS IT COSTS ABOUT A MILLION DOLLARS

TO BRING IN A NEW JUDGE. WE COULD HAVE TEN NEW JUDGES IN WESTERN

NEW YORK FOR THE AMOUNT THAT THIS IS GOING TO COST, AND -- AND KIND OF

LET THE CHIPS FALL WHERE THEY MAY. SO THAT IS, AGAIN, FRUSTRATING TO HEAR.

I HAVE A FEELING THAT WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO BE

HEARING FROM THE FEDERAL GOV -- FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REGARDING OUR

HAVA FUNDING FOR RACIALLY GERRYMANDERING JUDICIAL DISTRICTS. SO I

VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. BOLOGNA IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. BRONSON TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BRONSON: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I

139

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

RISE TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS BILL AND TO THANK THE SPONSOR FOR BRINGING IT

FORWARD AND FOR DOING AN EXCELLENT JOB DURING THE DEBATE.

WE ARE CONSTITUTIONALLY AUTHORIZED TO DO THIS. SO ALL

THE COMPLAINTS ABOUT WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS AND, YOU KNOW, WE

SHOULD LEAVE IT FOR A DIFFERENT TIME, WE HAVE THE AUTHORIZATION UNDER

THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION TO DO THIS.

I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THIS MEASURE WILL TRANSFORM THE

SUPREME COURT IN THESE VARIOUS DISTRICTS. IT WILL MOVE THE SUPREME

COURTS TO BE MOVE REFLECTIVE OF OUR COMMUNITIES AND OUR COUNTIES. IT

WILL, INDEED, ALLOW US TO ELECT A MORE DIVERSE BENCH, WHICH WE DO NOT

HAVE IN MONROE COUNTY, AND A BENCH THAT REFLECTS THE COMMUNITY.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'LL GET THERE BECAUSE OUR DELEGATES REFLECT

THE COMMUNITY. THIS IS NOT GERRYMANDERING. THIS IS RECOGNIZING THAT

DENSE POPULATIONS IN THESE PARTICULAR COUNTIES HAVE NOT BEEN

REPRESENTED. THOSE COMMUNITIES HAVE NOT BEEN REPRESENTED, AND IT

WILL HELP US.

I WILL SHARE FROM A RETIRED JUDGE FROM THE COMMUNITY

WHO WROTE ME WHEN THIS BILL WAS INTRODUCED, WHICH COMBINES A BILL

THAT I CARRIED PREVIOUSLY. THIS BILL DOES THE JOB IN TRANSFORMING THE

SUPREME COURT IN OUR REGION. OVER THE LONG RUN, THE JUDICIARY IN OUR

COMMUNITY IN MONROE COUNTY WILL BETTER REFLECT WHO WE ARE AS A

PEOPLE AND WHO WE ARE AS A COMMUNITY.

ONCE AGAIN, I THANK THE SPONSOR. I THANK THE SPEAKER

FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD, AND THE TEAM AND OUR STAFF FOR MAKING THIS

SUCH A GOOD BILL.

140

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. BRONSON IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. CHLUDZINSKI TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. CHLUDZINSKI: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

I RISE TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE TODAY. AFTER HEARING THIS DEBATE TO GO ON FOR

SEVERAL HOURS, IT'S -- IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THIS IS AN UNNECESSARY BILL AND

IT'S VERY DIVISIVE. GERRYMANDERING OF OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM, WHILE IT USES

THE -- THE TEXT OF THIS BEING TO INCREASE DIVERSITY, IT'S OBVIOUSLY JUDICIAL

GERRYMANDERING. THE ONLY COLOR INVOLVED HERE IS RED AND BLUE. AND

WE SHOULDN'T BE USING THAT FOR -- OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM SHOULDN'T BE BASED

ON -- ON POLITICAL IDEATIONS.

SO FOR THAT REASON AND MANY OTHERS ON THIS BILL, I'LL BE

VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. CHLUDZINSKI IN

THE NEGATIVE.

MR. RA TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. SO JUST

QUICKLY BECAUSE I RAN OUT OF TIME EARLIER, I WANT TO POINT OUT AS WE TALK

ABOUT THIS AS IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, A ISSUE OF -- OF RACE. THE FACT OF THE

MATTER IS, MANY OF THESE JUDGES GET CROSS-ENDORSED IN THE CURRENT

SYSTEM. AND SO THAT MEANS THAT EVEN ON THE SIDE OF THE AISLE THAT'S

PUSHING THIS BILL, LEADERSHIP POLITICALLY HAS CHOSEN NOT TO NOMINATE

INDIVIDUALS THAT YOU'RE SAYING WOULD REFLECT THE COMMUNITY TO THE

141

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

BENCH. SO I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT IS. BUT I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT

NEEDS TO BE POINTED OUT. EVEN EARLIER THIS WEEK, THE SENATE WENT

THROUGH A CONFIRMATION PROCESS. THERE WERE COURT OF CLAIMS JUDGES,

INTERIM SUPREME COURT JUDGES APPOINTED THAT THE GOVERNOR PRIORITIZED;

JUDGES WHO WERE MORE REFLECTIVE OF THE -- THE COMMUNITIES MADE UP

FOR IN THESE DISTRICTS.

SO LET'S BE REALISTIC ABOUT WHAT THIS IS. IT WILL MAKE

SURE THAT, IN PARTICULAR, ONE DISTRICT THAT WE HAVE NOW RESTRICTED THE

ABILITY OF NEW YORK STATE RESIDENTS TO BRING CONSTITUTIONAL ELECTION

CHALLENGES, IT'LL ESSENTIALLY MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS ONE PARTY IN EVERY

SINGLE ONE OF THOSE JUDGESHIPS AND THEY WILL BE THE ONLY ONE THAT WILL

GET THOSE -- THOSE CASES. LET'S BE REALISTIC ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.

I VOTE NO.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. RA IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. MEEKS TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. MEEKS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. THE

HONORABLE GREAT MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. ONCE STATED, "THE TIME IS

ALWAYS RIGHT TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT."

I WANT TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR ON THIS LEGISLATION. IT

IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. I LOOK FORWARD TO THESE THINGS BEING

IMPLEMENTED. TRUTHFULLY, IT WILL NOT HAPPEN QUICK ENOUGH; HOWEVER, I

SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION, I'LL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. MEEKS IN THE

142

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. MOLITOR TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. MOLITOR: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. YOU

KNOW, WHEN A -- A COURT STENOGRAPHER OR AN INTERPRETER APPLIES FOR A

JOB WITHIN A DISTRICT, THE -- THE JOB OPENING IS UNDER THAT DISTRICT. AND,

YOU KNOW, I HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH THIS BILL, BUT ONE OF THE, I

THINK, UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THIS BILL IS YOU'RE SEVERING RURAL

COMMUNITIES FROM THEIR POPULATION CENTERS. AND I THINK YOU'RE GONNA

MAKE IT HARDER FOR THOSE DISTRICTS IN RURAL COMMUN -- THE JUDICIAL

DISTRICTS THAT REPRESENTS RURAL COMMUNITIES FROM HAVING ENOUGH

QUALIFIED CANDIDATES TO STAFF THEIR COURTS. I THINK IT'S GONNA BE A REAL

PROBLEM. I THINK IT'S A -- A MAJOR UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF THIS BILL.

FOR ALL THE REASONS CITED, INCLUDING THIS ONE, I'M VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. MOLITOR IN THE NEGATIVE.

MR. BURROUGHS TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BURROUGHS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I

JUST -- AT TIMES I LIKE TO ALWAYS DELVE IN REALITY. AND SO WHEN YOU HEAR

OF TIMES OF PEOPLE SPEAKING OF CHANGE, TO ME AND MANY OTHERS THAT

MEANS THEY HAVE A HARD TIME WITH MOVING FORWARD TO CHANGING THINGS

FOR THE BETTER. AND SO I HAVE TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR FOR THIS BILL,

BECAUSE FOR ME, THIS CHANGE REPRESENTS SOMETHING POSITIVE THROUGHOUT

THE STATE AND PARTICULARLY HIS DISTRICT.

AND SO WHEN WE HEAR THE WORD "GERRYMANDERED," I'D

143

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

JUST LIKE TO RECITE SOME WORDS, PUT MY TEACHER'S CAP BACK ON.

WHENEVER THE TERM "GERRYMANDERED" IS DISCUSSED, TYPICALLY IT'S THE

OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE WHO HAS COMMITTED GERRYMANDERING IN ORDER TO

DISPROPORTIONATELY GIVE THEMSELVES AN ADVANTAGE IN POLITICAL

PERSUASION. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, WHEN WE HEAR THESE TERMS BEING

THROWN OUT, WE HAVE TO KNOW THAT GERRYMANDERING USUALLY DOESN'T HELP

THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE. IT'S ALWAYS BEING ADDRESSED TO HELP THE OTHER

SIDE. SO I WOULD LIKE TO JUST BE SOMEONE WHO DELVES IN REALITY AND SAY

WHEN YOU HEAR THESE WORDS, LET THE WORDS APPLY TO WHAT IT ACTUALLY

APPLIES TO, AND IN THIS CASE IT DOESN'T. WE'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO FIX SOME

OF THE RIGHTS AND THE SOCIAL ILLS THAT HAVE GONE ON THROUGHOUT THIS STATE

AND IN THE COUNTRY FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS.

AND SO FOR THAT I AM VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. BURROUGHS IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. REILLY TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. REILLY: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. JUST A

POINT OF CLARIFICATION. I THINK THERE WERE SOME MAPS THAT WERE THROWN

OUT IN NEW YORK STATE FOR GERRYMANDERING, AND I GOT NEWS FOR YOU,

THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE DID NOT HAVE CONTROL.

SO I WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. REILLY IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. LEMONDES TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. LEMONDES: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I

144

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

RISE TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I LISTENED TO THE DEBATE VERY CAREFULLY, AND I

WANNA -- I -- I WANNA HIGHLIGHT THE COMMENTS MADE FROM BOTH SIDES.

BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING SAID HERE TODAY WAS THE COMMENTS FROM

OUR FLOOR LEADER, MS. WALSH. AND I WANT TO HIT THE -- THE NOTION OF

PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND THE NEED FOR IMPARTIALITY. AND THIS TOOK -- THIS

TOOK -- THIS DEBATE TOOK ME BACK TO MY MILITARY CAREER WHERE OVER

THREE LEVELS OF COMMAND AND 27 YEARS OF TIME, I ADJUDICATED HUNDREDS

OF DISCIPLINARY CASES FROM EVERY ETHNIC GROUP IN THIS COUNTRY AND NEVER

ONCE HAD ANYTHING CHALLENGED. AND THERE'S AT LEAST ONE FORMER JAG IN

HERE THAT WOULD SAY, HEY, THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD ACCOMPLISHMENT. SO THE

-- THE -- THE NOTION OF THIS GERRYMANDERING AND THE PERCEIVED NECESSITY

OF THIS CHANGE IS COMPLETELY BASED ON -- ON REASONS THAT -- THAT DON'T

MAKE SENSE. AND I THINK THAT IF WE WERE TRUE WITH OURSELVES AND REALLY

PROFESSIONAL, I WOULD HATE TO THINK THAT ANY BLACK JUDGE OR ANY WHITE

JUDGE OR ANY HISPANIC JUDGE WOULD ADJUDICATE CIRCUMSTANCES BEFORE

THEM ANY DIFFERENTLY BASED ON THE PERSON THAT WAS BEFORE THEM OF A

DIFFERENT RACE.

THANK YOU. I VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. LEMONDES IN

THE NEGATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

PAGE 15, RULES REPORT NO. 699, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08871, RULES REPORT

145

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

NO. 699, DILAN, FORREST. AN ACT TO AMEND THE CORRECTION LAW, IN

RELATION TO REQUIRING THE DISCLOSURE OF VIDEO FOOTAGE RELATED TO THE

DEATH OF AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL INVOLVING A CORRECTIONAL OFFICER

(PART A); TO AMEND THE CORRECTION LAW, IN RELATION TO REQUIRING

INSTITUTIONS AND LOCAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES TO ADHERE TO CERTAIN CAMERA

FOOTAGE, RECORDING AND INVESTIGATION STANDARDS (PART B); TO AMEND THE

CORRECTION LAW, IN RELATION TO PROVIDING NOTICE OF THE DEATH OF AN

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL OCCURRING IN THE CUSTODY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (PART C); DIRECTING THE STATE

COMMISSION OF CORRECTION TO CONDUCT A COMPREHENSIVE STUDY ON

DEATHS IN STATE CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES WITHIN NEW YORK STATE (PART D);

TO AMEND THE COUNTY LAW, IN RELATION TO REQUIRING AUTOPSY REPORTS TO

INCLUDE PHOTOGRAPHS, MICROSCOPIC SLIDES, AND POST-MORTEM X-RAYS

TAKEN BY, AT THE DIRECTION OF, OR REVIEWED BY THE PERSON PERFORMING THE

AUTOPSY (PART E); TO AMEND THE EXECUTIVE LAW AND THE COUNTY LAW, IN

RELATION TO CONFLICTS WITHIN THE OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATION (PART F);

TO AMEND THE CORRECTION LAW, IN RELATION TO REPORTS ON DATA COLLECTED

FROM THE OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS (PART G), TO AMEND THE

CORRECTION LAW, IN RELATION TO THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE STATE

COMMISSION OF CORRECTION (PART H); TO AMEND THE CORRECTION LAW, IN

RELATION TO CORRECTIONAL FACILITY VISITS BY THE CORRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION

(PART I); AND TO AMEND THE CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND RULES, THE GENERAL

MUNICIPAL LAW AND THE COURT OF CLAIMS ACT, IN RELATION TO THE TOLLING

OF STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS IN STATE CUSTODY (PART J).

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: AN EXPLANATION HAS

146

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. DILAN.

MR. DILAN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. THIS BILL

WOULD ENACT INTO LAW, IF SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR -- IT IS AN OMNIBUS BILL

THAT WOULD ENACT 11 -- OR TEN BILLS AND 11 IDEAS, LEGISLATIVE IDEAS, INTO

TEN PARTS AND THEY ALL VARY BY ISSUE -- ISSUE AREA.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. DIPIETRO.

MR. DIPIETRO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. DILAN: ABSOLUTELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. DIPIETRO: THANK YOU, MR. DILAN. LET'S START

WITH ON SECTION J THERE'S SOME THINGS WHERE THE INCARCERATED WILL HAVE,

IS IT UP TO THREE YEARS AFTER THEY'RE RELEASED TO POSSIBLY BRING ANY

ACTIONS?

MR. DILAN: YEAH, SO IF -- IF I MAY, A SECOND, MR.

DIPIETRO, IN MY OPENING I OMITTED THAT THE -- THE MAIN GOALS OF THE BILL

ARE TO ACHIEVE ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY AND OVERSIGHT IN LIGHT OF

THE TWO HOMICIDES AND MANY OTHER UNTOLD OTHERS THAT WE'VE SEEN

RECENTLY. SO SPECIFICALLY TO YOUR QUESTION --

MR. DIPIETRO: YEAH.

MR. DILAN: -- IF YOU COULD REPEAT IT FOR ME, I'M

SORRY.

147

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DIPIETRO: OH, YEAH. ON SECTION J IT SAYS THEY

WILL HAVE THE ABILITY, THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL, THE ABILITY TO FILE

WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER RELEASE FROM CUSTODY A NOTICE OF CLAIM OR

NOTICE OF INTENTION TO FILE A CLAIM RELATED TO CIVIL ACTIONS TO RECOVER

DAMAGES FOR BOTH PHYSICAL AND/OR PSYCHOLOGICAL OR OTHER INJURIES. I

JUST WANT TO DOUBLE-CHECK. SO IT'S THREE YEARS FROM RELEASE DATE?

MR. DILAN: YEAH, SO I TAKE IT YOU MEAN PART J, NOT

SECTION J.

MR. DIPIETRO: YEAH.

MR. DILAN: AND YEAH, I GUESS THE -- THE IDEA

BEHIND THIS WAS AS A SAFETY MEASURE. FROM TIME TO TIME INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS WILL CHOOSE TO REMAIN SILENT ABOUT ANY POTENTIAL ABUSE THAT

MAY HAVE HAPPENED TO THEM WHILE THEY WERE UNDER CUSTODY. SO IF

THEY CHOOSE TO DO SO, AS A SAFETY MEASURE CURRENTLY THE STATUTE OF

LIMITATIONS IS RUNNING ON THEM. SO BY THE TIME THEY'RE RELEASED AND

THEY DEEM THEMSELVES TO -- TO BE SAFE, THEY MAY HAVE LOST THE -- THE

OPPORTUNITY TO BRING AN ACTION. SO, YES, THIS DOES GIVE THEM THREE

YEARS UPON THEIR RELEASE TO COMMENCE ONE.

MR. DIPIETRO: WHEN YOU'RE TALKING PHYSICAL OR

PSYCHOLOGICAL ON A -- ARE THOSE -- TO BE ABLE TO BRING A SUIT OR ACTION,

DO THOSE HAVE TO BE DOCUMENTED AT THE TIME WHEN THEY ARE

INCARCERATED?

MR. DILAN: WELL, I THINK IF THE -- THE -- AND I'LL DIS

-- FOR CLARITY, IT WAS INITIALLY SPONSORED -- A BILL SPONSORED BY COUNCIL

MEMBER -- EXCUSE ME -- ASSEMBLYMEMBER CRUZ. I THINK SHE COULD

148

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SPEAK TO MORE TO HER INTENT. BUT THE WAY IT APPEARS TO ME, IT IS A SAFETY

MEASURE. SO I BELIEVE IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DOCUMENTED BECAUSE IF

THEY DOCUMENT IT, THAT IS THE TRIGGER FOR AN INCIDENT THAT MIGHT PUT THEM

AT HARM AND, THEREFORE, JEOPARDIZE THEIR SAFETY. SO I WOULD -- I WOULD

-- NO, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE. THEY CAN -- THEY CAN COMMENCE IT

AFTERWARDS.

MR. DIPIETRO: HOW WILL -- WHAT WILL BE THE

PARAMETERS ON PROVING THAT SOMEONE ON THE PHYSICAL SIDE WAS HARMED?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. DILAN: YEAH. SO THERE'S NO SPECIFIC

REQUIREMENT, BUT OBVIOUSLY, THEY'D HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, BE ABLE TO PROVE

THAT IT HAS HAPPENED AND THE ORDINARY PLEADING REQUIREMENTS STILL

APPLY.

MR. DIPIETRO: OKAY. SO -- SO I'M JUST TRYING TO

SORT THIS THROUGH. SO LET'S SAY HYPOTHETICALLY AN INMATE HAS AN

ALTERCATION --

MR. DILAN: AN -- AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL.

MR. DIPIETRO: AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL HAS AN

-- HAS AN ALTERCATION WITH A CO OR ANOTHER INMATE. IF ANOTHER INMATE

HAS -- DOES PHYSICAL DAMAGE, CAN THEY STILL SUE OR BRING ACTION AGAINST

THE STATE, BEING ANOTHER INMATE-ON -- EXCUSE ME, INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUAL VERSUS --

MS. WALSH: A POINT OF ORDER PLEASE. POINT OF

ORDER.

MR. DIPIETRO: (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

149

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MS. WALSH: WE NEED TO NOT HAVE THIS CONVERSATION

GOING ON IN THE BACKGROUND THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE DEBATE. WOULD YOU

PLEASE, MADAM SPEAKER, ADMONISH THE GENTLEMAN TO -- TO THE BACK OF

ME TO PLEASE KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT, PLEASE?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WE WILL HAVE

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ONLY DURING THE DEBATE. OUTSIDE CONVERSATIONS

SHOULD BE TAKEN OUTSIDE OF THE CHAMBER. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK, PUT ON

YOUR LIGHT AND WE WILL CALL ON YOU WHEN WE GET TO YOUR TURN.

MR. DIPIETRO.

MR. DIPIETRO: I'M SORRY. THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER. SORRY, MR. DILAN. THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL, IF IT'S

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS ON AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL, IS THAT GROUNDS

ALSO FOR AN ACTION?

MR. DILAN: ANY ACTIONS THAT HAVE TO DO WHEN

THEY'RE IN CUSTODY. SO POTENTIALLY, YES.

MR. DIPIETRO: OKAY. SO INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL

ATTACKS AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL AND, SAY, HURTS HIM IN THE ARM OR IN

THE LEG. AND OBVIOUSLY IT HEALS UP AND HE'S FINE. BUT HOW -- HOW

WOULD THAT GO IF HE COMES OUT -- WHEN HE'S RELEASED, HOW WILL YOU --

WILL YOU BRING AN ACTION AND -- AND HOW WOULD THAT WORK? WOULD HE

JUST SAY, I WAS INJURED BY ANOTHER INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL?

MR. DILAN: YES, IT -- IT WOULD BE THE SAME AS -- AS

ANY OTHER -- THE SAME AS IF HE WASN'T IN CUSTODY. THE SAME AS IT WOULD

BE ON -- ON THE OUTSIDE. BUT WHAT -- WHAT THIS WOULD DO WOULD GIVE

HIM, YOU KNOW, THE THREE-YEAR PERIOD -- GIVE HIM OR HER, EXCUSE ME,

150

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THE THREE-YEAR PERIOD IF THEY THINK THEIR SAFETY'S AT RISK TO DELAY THAT

PROCEEDING.

MR. DIPIETRO: DOES IT CHANGE THE -- THE DEGREE OF

PROOF?

MR. DILAN: NO.

MR. DIPIETRO: IT DOESN'T?

MR. DILAN: NO.

MR. DIPIETRO: SO THIS IS -- IS -- I GUESS I LOOK BACK

TO A -- A BILL WE PASSED A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO, I THINK YOU WERE HERE,

WHERE IT'S THE LOOK-BACK BILL. AND I KNOW THIS IS ONLY THREE YEARS, BUT

I'M JUST LOOKING AT -- SO WITHOUT ANY PROOF THERE WERE -- THERE WERE

PEOPLE CLAIMING THAT THEY HAD BEEN ABUSED 50 YEARS AGO BY SOMEONE

OF THE CLERGY, AND THEY WERE GETTING THESE SETTLEMENTS. AND NOW I

KNOW THIS IS ONLY THREE YEARS, BUT IS THAT -- ARE WE -- IS THAT A PARALLEL

THING BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THE CLAIM IS BEING MADE WITHOUT --

(INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

MR. DILAN: I THINK I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING.

THERE -- THERE'S NO LOOK-BACK PROVISION IN THIS BILL. IT WOULD ONLY BE

ELIGIBLE AT THE TIME IT BECOMES EFFECTIVE UNDER THE SECTION.

MR. DIPIETRO: SO, JUST BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO BE

CLEAR. THE -- THAT'S PHYSICAL DAMAGE. PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE, I -- I

WOULD THINK THAT ANYONE WHO IS INCARCERATED, ACTUALLY GOING BEHIND

BARS -- I'VE TOURED EVERY FACILITY IN MY DISTRICT AND OTHERS OUTSIDE MY

DISTRICT -- IT'S PRETTY INTIMIDATING. AND I WOULD THINK THAT MOST

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS WOULD BE ABLE TO CLAIM SOME SORT OF MENTAL

151

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

TRAGEDY BY BEING IN THERE. WHAT -- WHAT DEGREE DOES IT HAVE TO BE TO

BRING THAT?

MR. DILAN: SO WE'RE -- WE'RE REALLY NOT ADDING

ANYTHING NEW. CURRENTLY, IF THEY WANT TO BRING THESE CLAIMS NOW THEY

CAN. THE PROBLEM THAT I BELIEVE THE SPONSOR'S LOOKING TO ADDRESS IS

THAT IF THEY OPT TO -- IF THEY OPT TO CHOOSE SILENCE AS A SAFETY MEASURE

BECAUSE THEY'RE AFRAID OF -- OF WHAT MAY HAPPEN TO THEIR PHYSICAL

PERSON, THEY CAN CHOOSE TO DELAY COMMENCING THAT ACTION THREE YEARS

AFTER THEIR RELEASE. EVERYTHING ELSE ABOUT IT, YOU KNOW, DOESN'T CHANGE.

IF THEY WANT TO COMMENCE AN ACTION WHILE IN CUSTODY, THEY CERTAINLY

HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO SO. THIS DOESN'T TAKE THAT AWAY.

MR. DIPIETRO: I'M JUST --

MR. DILAN: IT WOULD -- IT WOULD BE SIMILAR, IF I GO

FURTHER, AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, YOU KNOW, THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ON

ANYTHING WE DO DOESN'T -- THAT CLOCK DOESN'T START UNTIL WE'RE OUT OF

OFFICE.

MR. DIPIETRO: SO -- SO I APPRECIATE THAT. I JUST

LOOK AT -- I'M NOT -- I'M NOT QUESTIONING THE THREE-YEAR PERIOD, OKAY? I

UNDERSTAND WHY THAT'S -- THAT'S IN THERE. BUT I'M -- WHAT I'M TRYING TO

GET TO IS WHAT ARE THE FACTS THAT ARE GONNA BE PRESENTED IN FRONT OF A

JUDGE OR A JURY FROM THIS INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL TO PROVE THAT THERE

WAS PHYSICAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE SO THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO BE

-- TO GET AN AWARD?

MR. DILAN: THIS SECTION DOESN'T CHANGE ANY OF

THAT. ALL -- ALL THE SECTION REALLY DOES IS A GIVE THEM AN ADDITIONAL

152

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THREE YEARS POST-INCARCERATION. SO WHATEVER FACTS OR PROTOCOLS OR LAWS

THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON THE BOOKS WILL REMAIN. THE ONLY ADDITIONAL

BENEFIT, IF -- IF YOU WILL, IS FOR THEM TO CHOOSE TO PROTECT THEMSELVES,

BUT NOT MISS OUT ON, I GUESS, COMMENCING THE PROCEEDING THAT THEY

WOULD STILL HAVE TO PROVE AN ADDITIONAL THREE YEARS AFTER THEY'RE

RELEASED.

MR. DIPIETRO: OKAY. UNDERSTOOD.

IS THERE -- UNDER CURRENT LAW, IS THERE A LIMIT TO

REWARDS OR MONETARY VALUES THAT THEY CAN RECEIVE? IS THERE A LIMIT?

MR. DILAN: I MEAN, I -- I GUESS WHAT I'M HEARING IS

THAT IT'S OUT -- IT'S REALLY OUTSIDE THE -- THE SCOPE OF THIS BILL. I GUESS

THERE -- THERE WOULD BE -- UNDER CURRENT LAW, IT WOULD BE LIKE ANY OTHER

PROCEEDING THAT COULD BE COMMENCED, WHETHER IN -- INCARCERATED OR IN

THE -- IN THE FREE WORLD. SO THE DIFFERENCE IS REALLY (INDISCERNIBLE/

CROSS-TALK).

MR. DIPIETRO: SO YOU'RE NOT TRYING TO -- YOU'RE NOT

TRYING TO CHANGE THAT ASPECT OF THE LAW THAT'S CURRENT, CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: WE DON'T CHANGE THAT AT ALL.

MR. DIPIETRO: OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO SEE.

IS THERE ANYTHING THAT -- CAN YOU EXPAND ON, IS THERE

ANYTHING THAT IMPROVES THE SAFETY OF THE CORRECTIONS OFFICERS? I KNOW

THERE'S A FEW THINGS IN THERE, LIKE WITH THE CAMERAS. CAN YOU EXPOUND

ON THOSE?

MR. DILAN: WELL, I MEAN, AS IN THE CASE WITH

ROBERT BROOKS, I MEAN, IT'S LONG BEEN THE SENSE OF A LOT OF FOLKS WHO

153

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

HAVE HAD FAMILY MEMBERS WHO ARE INCARCERATED AND HAVE HAD THEM DIE

AND -- AND MAYBE THOUGHT THEY WERE MURDERED BUT COULDN'T PROVE IT

BECAUSE THERE WERE NO CAMERAS. I THINK THE -- THE PROFOUNDNESS OF

ROBERT BROOKS' MURDER IS THAT IT IS PROBABLY THE FIRST ONE THAT WAS ON

CAMERA FOR THE ENTIRE STATE AND THE ENTIRE WORLD TO SEE. AND I BELIEVE

WHAT EVERYBODY SAW, THEY -- THEY CAN'T UNSEE. SO THE CAMERAS

POTENTIALLY COULD DO THE SAME THING FOR ANY TYPE OF ASSAULT OR MURDER

OF -- OF ANY KIND, WHETHER IT IS INCARCERATED-ON-INCARCERATED, WHETHER

IT'S OFFICER-ON-INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL. SO THE CAMERAS SHOW YOU WHAT

-- WHAT THEY SHOW YOU. IT'S NOT INTENDED TO BENEFIT ONE SIDE OR ANOTHER.

IT'S INTENDED TO GIVE US MORE TRANSPARENCY, WHICH IS WHY IT'S IMPORTANT

TO THE -- TO THE TITLE OF THE BILL BECAUSE WE WANT TO DEAL WITH THE FACTS

OF WHAT HAPPENED. AND WE ALSO DON'T WANT TO ALLOW, YOU KNOW, ANY

ENTITIES TO BASICALLY HIDE OR -- OR CHANGE THE FACTS OF WHAT ACTUALLY

HAPPENED.

MR. DIPIETRO: THERE'S A -- NO, I AGREE, AND I'VE

TALKED A NUMBER OF CORRECTIONS OFFICERS WHO ARE IN FAVOR OF MORE

CAMERAS BECAUSE -- FOR THEIR SAFETY. SO I'M -- IT GOES BOTH WAYS, IT'S A

TWO-WAY STREET.

MR. DILAN: LISTEN, IF THE -- IF -- IF CAMERAS IMPROVE

SAFETY FOR EVERYONE I THINK THAT'S A LAUDABLE GOAL. I ALSO HOPE AND I

BELIEVE IT'S THE HOPE OF MANY OTHERS THAT HAVING THE ADDITIONAL

CAMERAS, BOTH FIXED AND BODY-WORN, WILL BE A DETERRENT ON ABUSE OF

IMPRISONERS AND -- AND HOPEFULLY A DETERRENT ON MURDER OF INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS.

154

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DIPIETRO: SO -- THANK YOU. WITH THE -- WHEN

THIS BILL WAS GETTING PUT TOGETHER, WERE THERE ANY DISCUSSIONS THAT YOU

COULD ALLEVIATE [SIC] OR -- OR EXPOUND ON THAT HAD TO DEAL WITH THE

OVERTIME ISSUE WITH THE CORRECTIONS OFFICERS? WAS THAT EVER DISCUSSED

IN BRINGING ANY OF THIS TOGETHER?

MR. DILAN: WELL, THAT'S -- NO, THAT'S A FUNCTION OF

THE EXECUTIVE. YOU KNOW, WE TRIED TO STICK TO, YOU KNOW, OUR -- OUR --

THE LEGISLATIVE AIM. WE -- WE -- THE LEGISLATIVE FUNCTIONS. WE LOOKED

AT AGENCIES THAT, YOU KNOW, CLEARLY WERE -- WERE BROKEN IN TERMS OF

ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY. BUT TO GET INTO FUNCTIONS THAT THE

EXECUTIVE NEEDED TO DO WITH THEIR LABOR FORCE, WE -- WE DID NOT

CONSIDER THAT. WE LEFT IT TO THEM.

MR. DIPIETRO: OKAY. NOW, I -- I APPRECIATE IT,

MR. DILAN. I APPRECIATE THOSE ANSWERS.

ON THE BILL, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. DIPIETRO: I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUE. THIS

BILL, IT JUST -- WHEN I LOOK AT WHEN WE WERE TRYING TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF

THE TRAGEDIES THAT HAVE HAPPENED ON BOTH SIDES BETWEEN THE

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS AND THE CORRECTIONS OFFICERS, I JUST DON'T THINK

THIS BILL GOES FAR ENOUGH. THE -- IT DOES NOTHING TO ADDRESS THE MAIN

CAUSES OF THE STRIKE THAT -- THAT GOT THE ATTENTION OF THE ENTIRE NATION,

AND THOSE WERE THE MANDATORY OVERTIME AND THE HALT ACT. SO THIS

BILL, I -- I THINK IT COULD HAVE GONE A LOT FURTHER THAN IT DOES. IT DOES --

I GUESS IT DOES PUT SOME PARAMETERS IN PLACE. I JUST EXPECTED WHEN WE

155

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WERE TOLD -- WHEN WE KNEW THE MAJORITY WAS WORKING ON THIS THAT --

THAT WE EXPECTED A LITTLE BIT MORE. IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM TO FOLLOW THAT --

PARDON? YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: GO AHEAD, MR.

DIPIETRO.

MR. DIPIETRO: OKAY, THANK YOU. THE -- THE MAIN

PART -- PARTS OBVIOUSLY, WHICH WERE VERY AGGRIEVOUS [SIC] WAS THE FACT

THAT THIS STRIKE WAS NOT ABOUT MONEY AND THAT THE GOVERNOR THREW

MONEY AT IT. WHEN I TALKED TO SOME OF THE NEGOTIATORS, THEY WERE JUST

DUMBFOUNDED. AND I WANT TO TELL YOU A STORY THAT I WAS TOLD

PERSONALLY BY ONE OF THE MEDIATORS. AND IT WAS ON THAT WEEK WHEN

THEY WERE GOING TO MEDIATION MONDAY, TUESDAY AND WEDNESDAY. AND

ON MONDAY NIGHT WHILE THIS STRIKE WAS IN FULL BLOWN, THE GOVERNOR

WENT OUT IN PUBLIC AND SAID, I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY'RE STRIKING, TO

WHICH THE MEDIATORS ON BOTH SIDES, FROM WHAT I WAS TOLD, WENT

BALLISTIC. THEY CALLED HER AND TALKED TO HER, AND THEY SAID, YOU CAN'T

MAKE STATEMENTS LIKE THAT. BUT WHEN WE SETTLE THIS, WE ALL GOT TO BE

TOGETHER. WHEN THE CORRECTIONS OFFICERS COME BACK, WE'VE GOT TO PUT

THIS ALL TO BED. AND WHAT I WAS TOLD SPECIFICALLY WAS THAT SHE WAS

ADAMANT THAT THEY WERE -- SHE WANTED THEM TO BE PUT IN JAIL, EVERYONE

WHO STRUCK. AND THAT WAS JUST VERY, VERY, VERY DISHEARTENING TO HEAR

THAT. AND THE ONE QUOTE THAT STUCK WITH ME THAT THIS GENTLEMAN SAID,

HE SAID, ON BOTH SIDES OF THE MEDIATION, HE SAID, WE WERE THE ADULTS IN

THE ROOM. "WE" WERE THE ADULTS IN THE ROOM. THAT THE GOVERNOR WAS

SO ADAMANT AND SO PETTY TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE OFFICERS WERE PUT IN

156

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

JAIL AND WERE NEVER GONNA WORK IN NEW YORK STATE, AND WE'VE SEEN

THE RESULTS OF THAT, THAT -- THEY COULD NOT BELIEVE IT. AND SO THAT'S JUST

ONE.

THE OTHER IS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S -- IT GOES BOTH WAYS.

THERE'S -- THERE IS A GENTLEMAN WHO DIED ON THE JOB A COUPLE OF MONTHS

AGO, THREE MONTHS AGO. HE WAS -- BECAUSE THERE WAS A POSTING THAT

SAID IF HE TOOK TIME OFF, IF ANY CORRECTIONS OFFICER CALLED IN AND TRIED TO

USE SICK TIME OR CALL TIME OFF THAT THEY WOULD BE TERMINATED. AND THAT

WAS POSTED AND THEY HAVE COPIES OF THAT. WELL, THIS GENTLEMAN WAS

FORCED TO WORK A 24-HOUR SHIFT FOLLOWED BY 16, 16, 16, 16, AND WAS --

AND HE KEPT TELLING FROM DAY ONE THAT HE DIDN'T FEEL WELL. HE TOLD HIS

SUPERVISOR AND HE WAS TOLD THAT HE WOULD LOSE HIS JOB, SO HE KEPT

COMING TO WORK AND HE DIED AT THE FACILITY. THERE'S GONNA BE A

LAWSUIT, I THINK, PRETTY SOON ON THAT ONE. SO THIS IS HOW BAD IT GOT.

THE -- THE HALT ACT, WHICH WAS NOT THE MAIN REASON

THEY STRUCK, BECAUSE IT WAS ALL ABOUT THE OVERTIME AND BEING AWAY

FROM THEIR FAMILIES. IF ANYONE HAD BEEN FOLLOWING THIS, THERE WERE

PEOPLE, THEY HAD NOT SEEN THEIR FAMILIES -- THEY'D GO 16 HOURS AND THEN

THEY WOULD GO HOME, SLEEP, GET UP AND WORK ANOTHER 16, COME BACK. I

GOT SO MANY STORIES OF CORRECTIONS OFFICERS WHO WERE NOT ABLE TO PUT

THEIR KIDS ON THE BUS, HAD TO HIRE BABYSITTERS AND NEIGHBORS TO COME

OVER AND WATCH THEIR KIDS FOR WEEKS AT A TIME, UNABLE TO SEE THEIR

FAMILY OR GET THEIR KIDS TO SCHOOL, PICK THEM UP, BE WITH THEM ON THE

WEEKENDS BECAUSE THEY WERE FORCED INTO WORKING. THIS IS UNHEARD OF.

AND THIS IS WHERE WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUTTING THE FOCUS ON

157

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

REMEDIATION FOR THESE CORRECTIONS FACILITIES. THAT'S ONE OF -- ONE OF

THEM.

THE OTHER IS THE HALT ACT, FROM ALL -- EVERY

CORRECTIONS OFFICER IN -- THAT I'VE SPOKEN WITH. THAT -- THAT WAS

PROBABLY THE BIGGEST TRAGEDY AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY WE'RE HERE ON

THIS BILL. BUT IF WE DID NOT HAVE THE HALT ACT, EVERY CORRECTIONS

OFFICER WILL TELL YOU, THAT GENTLEMAN PROBABLY WOULD BE ALIVE TODAY

BECAUSE OF HIS ACTIONS WHEN THEY WERE TRANSFERRING HIM -- AND AGAIN,

NOTHING'S GOING TO MAKE ANY OF THAT ANY BETTER OR JUSTIFY ANYTHING THEY

DID. BUT THE FACT IS AS SOON AS THERE WAS AN ISSUE THEY PROBABLY WOULD

HAVE PUT HIM IN THE SHU FOR 24 HOURS OR 48 HOURS AND THAT NEVER

WOULD HAVE HAPPENED AND HE'D BE ALIVE TODAY. AND EVERY CORRECTIONS

OFFICER WILL TELL YOU THAT. SO THE HALT ACT DID THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF

WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO DO, AND NOW WE HAVE A TRAGEDY ON OUR HANDS.

SO WITH THAT, MADAM SPEAKER, THERE'S SO MANY OTHER

THINGS BUT I KNOW I WANT TO LEAVE -- I WANT TO LET OTHERS HAVE A LOT OF

OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS. AND I JUST WISH THAT THIS HAD ADDRESSED MORE.

IT'S A START, THIS BILL. THERE ARE SOME GOOD THINGS IN IT. BUT OVERALL, IT

DOESN'T GO FAR ENOUGH. IT'S GOT SOME THINGS THAT ARE NEGATIVE, AND I'LL

BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE. AND I JUST WISH IT HAD -- WE HAD DONE MORE

BECAUSE THE ENTIRE SITUATION HAS NOT BEEN FIXED AND THIS WAS SUPPOSED

TO FIX IT.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. ARI BROWN.

158

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

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

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. DILAN: IF THE QUESTION IS GERMANE TO THE BILL,

CERTAINLY.

YES. YES, I -- I YIELD.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. A. BROWN: OKAY. THANK YOU. UNDER PART B,

WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED COST TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS -- THIS IS

UNDER PART B, SECTION 4, LINES 6 TO 9. UNDER PART B, WHAT IS THE

ESTIMATED COST TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS OF MANDATING LONG-TERM

VIDEO STORAGE IN THE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY? AND HOW DO YOU JUSTIFY

FORCING COUNTIES TO POTENTIALLY SPEND -- YOU KNOW, STORE TENS OF

THOUSANDS OF HOURS OF FOOTAGE FOR YEARS WITH NO FUNDING MECHANISM? I

SAY THAT BECAUSE I DID SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON A SMALLER LEVEL, AT A

VILLAGE LEVEL, TO STORE METER FOOTAGE FOR PARKING STALL -- PEOPLE BACKING

INTO PARKING STALLS AND IT WAS A FORTUNE. THIS COULD RUN TENS OF

MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

MR. DILAN: SO I -- I WOULD SAY TO THE QUESTION, THIS

IS -- HAD ALREADY BEEN FUNDED IN THE BUDGET THAT WE JUST PASSED TO THE

TUNE OF $400 MILLION THAT WE ADDED FOR CAMERAS IN THE BUDGET THAT WE

JUST ADOPTED. SO THE FUNDS CAN BE TAKEN FROM THERE. AS IT RELATES TO

THE LOCALS, THIS FUNDING AND THIS SECTION REPLIES [SIC] ONLY TO STATE

FACILITIES. LOCALS ARE NOT INCLUDED.

159

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. A. BROWN: THANK YOU, MR. SPONSOR. WHAT --

THAT BEING SAID, WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS PORTION OF THE STORAGE OF THIS

UNLIMITED AMOUNT OF HOURS WOULD COST, TAKEN FROM THE STATE'S BUDGET?

MR. DILAN: YOU KNOW, TO SPEAK TO THAT, IT WAS

DOCCS THAT HAD SUBMITTED THE COST TO THE GOVERNOR IN THE -- IN THE

AGGREGATE OF THE 400 -- OF THE 400 MILLION TO SPEAK TO THE DETAIL TO THE

COST OF THAT. I -- I DON'T -- I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER. MAYBE WAYS AND

MEANS HAS IT. BUT IT'S INCLUDED IN THAT COST. AND I BELIEVE THE

TECHNOLOGY THAT THEY ARE USING LIMITS TO SOME DEGREE, NOT -- NOT

COMPLETELY, THE AMOUNT OF MAN HOURS IT WOULD TAKE TO DO THE STORAGE

AND -- AND THE LIKE.

MR. A. BROWN: RIGHT. WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY,

NOT TO BELABOR THE POINT, MR. SPONSOR, BUT THE STORAGE ITSELF IS VERY

COSTLY. I'M SAYING ON A SMALL SCALE FOR A LITTLE VILLAGE IT COST TENS OF

THOUSANDS. IS IT MILLIONS?

MR. DILAN: LIKE -- LIKE I SAID IN MY PREVIOUS

ANSWER, THEY'RE NOT INCLUDED. IT APPLIES ONLY TO STATE FACILITIES.

MR. A. BROWN: I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU, MR.

SPONSOR.

ANOTHER QUESTION. DOES THIS BILL CREATE ANY LEGAL

STANDARD OR CHAIN OF CUSTODY FOR THE VIDEO EVIDENCE, OR ARE WE JUST

HANDING OVER RAW UNCONTEXTUALIZED FOOTAGE TO THE AG'S POLITICAL STAFF

WITH ZERO EVIDENTIARY SAFEGUARDS, POTENTIALLY OPENING UP THE DOOR TO

MANIPULATION, LEAKS OR SELECTIVE EDITING?

(CONFERENCING)

160

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DILAN: YEAH, SO IT PROVIDES THAT IF A -- IF A

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER -- EXCUSE ME, IF AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL DIED AT

THE HANDS OF AN OFFICER, THAT INFORMATION HAS TO BE GIVEN TO THE AG. IN

TERMS OF THE POLITICALNESS, IT'S THE AG SPECIFICALLY. IT DOESN'T SAY THE

AG FROM WHICH PARTY. HISTORICALLY, AGS HAVE CHANGED PARTIES OVER

TIME. WE'VE TRIED TO KEEP THIS AS APOLITICAL AS POSSIBLE, AND AS MUCH AS

ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE TRAGEDY AS POSSIBLE, AND TRIED TO ADDRESS THE

GAPS IN OUR AGENCIES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. I -- I THINK WHAT MOST FOLKS

FORGET IS THAT THE AG WANTED TO TRY THIS CASE HERSELF, AND BECAUSE OF

CONFLICTS SHE COULDN'T. THOSE CONFLICTS AROSE BECAUSE SHE WAS

DEFENDING CORRECTIONS OFFICERS WHO HAD BEEN EXCUSED OF ABUSE OF

PEOPLE UNDER CUSTODY. SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ALLOW, YOU KNOW,

ANY AG -- AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN. LIKE, WE -- WE ARE

POLITICIANS. IT CAN BE POLITICAL AT TIMES. BUT THIS SENDS IT TO THE NEWLY-

CREATED UNIT OF THE AG'S OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATION. THOSE GUYS

ARE, YOU KNOW, NOT POLITICIANS. THEY'RE USUALLY PROFESSIONALS. AND IT

-- IT -- THIS LEGISLATION, WHICH WAS WORKED ON IN PART BY THE AG, YOU

KNOW, CERTAINLY TRIES TO PROTECT THE AG'S OFFICE, AND THEY TOOK CAREFUL

CONSIDERATION TO WALL IT OFF FOR MANY CONFLICTS. SO I THINK THEY HAVE

GONE A LONG WAY TO TRY TO VIEW THIS AS A SUBSTANTIATIVE MATTER BECAUSE

THEY CARE ABOUT GETTING THE -- THE POLICY RIGHT. AND I KNOW THERE'S A LOT

GOING ON IN THE NATIONAL THEATER. BUT I THINK THIS, YOU KNOW, REALLY HAS

NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT. FOLKS ARE JUST TRYING TO GET THEIR AGENCY'S

STRUCTURE RIGHT SO THEY CAN DO THE JOBS THAT THEY WERE ELECTED BY THE

PEOPLE OF THE STATE TO DO.

161

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. A. BROWN: THANK YOU, MR. SPONSOR. MAYBE I

JUST WASN'T CLEAR. I HEAR WHAT YOU SAID.

(INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

MR. DILAN: -- INTERRUPT ME AND WE CAN SAVE

(INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK).

MR. A. BROWN: YOU'RE ENTITLED TO SPEAK. I WAS

REALLY GETTING INTO CHAIN OF CUSTODY OF THE VIDEO ITSELF, BECAUSE WHAT

HAPPENS IS IT'S STORED WHERE? HOW DOES IT GET TO THE AG'S OFFICE? WE

DON'T HAVE AN EPSTEIN-STYLE --

MR. DILAN: IT -- IT'S --

MR. A. BROWN: HOLD ON, HOLD ON. AN EPSTEIN-

STYLE SITUATION WHERE THE VIDEO DISAPPEARED. WHO'S TAKING OWNERSHIP

OF IT? WHAT HAPPENS TO THESE ENDLESS HOURS OF VIDEO? IS IT IN THE

CLOUD? IS IT ON A HARD DRIVE?

MR. DILAN: YEAH, SO THE -- THE BILL'S NOT

PRESCRIPTIVE IN THAT MANNER. IT'S UP TO THE AGENCIES. GENERALLY THIS

DATA IS STORED AT DOCCS. THE PART OF THE BILL THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING

ABOUT LAYS FORWARD THE GUIDELINES FOR DOCCS THAT IF AN INCIDENT UNDER

THESE GUIDELINES HAPPENS, THAT'S WHEN THEY'RE TRIGGERED BY LAW TO TURN

THE INFORMATION OVER TO THE AG'S OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS.

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

ME ASK, WHY SHOULD THE STATE EXPOSE ITSELF TO THIS OPEN-ENDED CIVIL

LIABILITY -- THIS IS PART J, LINES 30 TO 32 -- BY EXTENDING THE STATUTE OF

LIMITATIONS UNDER PART J FOR YEARS BEYOND INCARCERATION? I HEARD YOUR

ANSWER EARLIER, BUT EVEN IN CASES WHERE THERE'S NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE,

162

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

NO WITNESSES, AND NO WAY FOR THE DEFENDANTS TO PROTECT THEMSELVES

AFTER YEARS. I UNDERSTOOD WHY YOUR ANSWER WAS GOOD, BUT, YOU KNOW,

THERE'S A LOT OF CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE --

MR. DILAN: WELL, I -- I WOULD SAY WHY WOULD WE

ALLOW SOMEONE TO BRING A PROCEEDING WHILE THEY'RE UNDER CUSTODY AND

THEY HAVE TO RUN THE RISK OF BRINGING THAT PROCEEDING AT THE RISK OF THEIR

LIFE? I MEAN, WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS GIVE PEOPLE AS MANY -- AS MANY

TOOLS THAT THEY CAN TO PROTECT THEMSELVES AND KEEP THEMSELVES SAFE.

NOW, SOME PEOPLE MAY NOT ELECT TO -- TO CARE, AND THEY CERTAINLY CAN

COMMENCE AN ACTION NOW. BUT SOME PEOPLE MAY SAY, YOU KNOW, THE

-- THE MONEY OR ANYTHING I MAY DESERVE AS A POTENTIAL AWARD IS NOT

WORTH MY LIFE. AND SOME PEOPLE AT THE MOMENT AREN'T THINKING ABOUT

MONEY AT ALL, THEY'RE THINKING ABOUT THEIR LIFE. OUR LIVES AND OUR TIME

IS A LOT MORE VALUABLE THAN MONEY. BUT THEN AFTER YOU ARE -- ARE

RELEASED AND YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'RE SAFE, THERE IS AN -- THERE'S, I BELIEVE,

MANY OPPORTUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN MISSING. I BELIEVE THE SPONSOR

BELIEVES THAT THERE'S BEEN MANY OPPORTUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN MISSED TO

ADDRESS IT.

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

MY NEXT QUESTION. DOESN'T GRANTING THE CORRECTIONAL

COMMISSION [SIC] ASSOCIATION ACCESS TO SENSITIVE -- SENSITIVE FACILITY

RECORDS, PERSONNEL FILES, 24/7 ENTRY RIGHTS WITHOUT ANY JUDICIAL

OVERSIGHT VIOLATE NOT ONLY PRIVACY LAWS, BUT ALSO UNDERMINE BASIC

OPERATIONS, SECURITY AND INMATE-STAFF SAFETY?

MR. DILAN: WELL, I WOULD SAY THIS: I MEAN, I'M

163

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

GLAD YOU BROUGHT UP THE STATE COMMISSION -- OH, CANY, SORRY. COULD

YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? I'M SORRY, I GOT IT CONFUSED WITH THE STATE

COMMISSION (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK) -- TALKING ABOUT CANY, I'M

SORRY.

MR. A. BROWN: NO PROBLEM AT ALL. DOESN'T

GRANTING THE CORRECTIONAL COMMISSION [SIC] OR ASSOCIATION ACCESS TO

SENSITIVE FACILITY RECORDS, PERSONNEL FILES AND 2/47 ENTRY RIGHTS WITHOUT

JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT VIOLATE NOT ONLY PRIVACY LAWS, BUT ALSO UNDERMINE

BASIC OPERATIONAL SECURITY AND INMATE-STAFF SAFETY?

MR. DILAN: SO, LOOK, CANY -- CANY -- WHAT

WE'RE DOING, CANY CAN DO MANY OF THOSE THINGS NOW. WE'RE -- WE'RE

EXPANDING THE POWERS OF CANY BECAUSE HISTORICALLY, YOU KNOW,

CANY WAS FOUNDED IN APPROACHING ALMOST 200 YEARS AGO. CANY

WAS FOUNDED IN 1844 BY PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WHO -- WHO

WERE PRIVATE. IN 1844 IT WAS CITIZENS AND THEY WANTED INDEPENDENT

OVERSIGHT OF AGENCIES BACK IN 1844. IN 1844 THERE WERE, YOU KNOW,

OUR -- OUR PRISON SYSTEM LOOKED DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT. AND THEN TWO

YEARS LATER THIS LEGISLATURE, YOU KNOW, GRANTED THEM THAT AUTHORITY TO

MONITOR THAT -- THAT YOU JUST PRESCRIBED TO SOME DEGREE AND THAT WE'RE

EXPANDING TODAY. BUT WHAT IT SAYS TO ME, SOMETHING PROFOUND

HAPPENED BEFORE THE CIVIL WAR IN OUR STATE PRISON SYSTEMS AND, YOU

KNOW, HERE WE ARE TODAY, ALMOST 180 YEARS LATER AND WE STILL HAVEN'T

GOT -- GOTTEN OUR INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT SYSTEMS AS A STATE CORRECT. SO

THIS IS THE FIRST STEP OUT OF MANY IN AN ATTEMPT TO TRY TO CORRECT THOSE

ISSUES. SO YEAH -- YEAH, I THINK IT'S FOUNDED. UNDER THE LEGISLATIVE

164

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AUTHORIZATION BACK IN THE 1800S, THE LEGISLATURE GRANTED THEM THE RIGHT

TO DO THESE REPORTS AND SHARE AND -- AND -- AND PROVIDE ALL THESE -- THIS

INFORMATION TO THE LEGISLATURE AND THE PUBLIC. AND I WOULD SAY IN THE

-- IN THE RECENT INCIDENTS, IT WAS THE CANY REPORT THAT WAS IGNORED

THAT LED TO -- TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY AS A RESULT OF THE MURDERS. AND I

WOULD SAY OUR ACTIONS HERE AS A -- AS A DEMOCRATIC BODY AND AS A

LEGISLATURE WEREN'T -- WEREN'T TO ADDRESS A STRIKE. AND I THINK WE HAVE

A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AS TO WHY THAT STRIKE WAS COMMENCED. BUT,

YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY THAT IN -- IN -- IN THIS INSTANCE, HAD CANY'S

REPORT BEEN FOLLOWED AND MORE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE BEEN WIDELY AWARE

OF WHAT CANY DOES, POTENTIALLY, ROBERT BROOKS' MURDER COULD HAVE

BEEN PREVENTED. BECAUSE THEIR REPORT CLEARLY SAID THAT INSTANCES OF

ABUSE ON INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS WAS ABNORMALLY HIGH AS COMPARED TO

THEIR OTHER REPORTS THAT THEY HAD ISSUED.

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

QUESTION. UNDER PARTS A AND F, HOW IS IT NOT A BLATANT CON -- CONFLICT

OF INTEREST FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE TO INVESTIGATE STATE

OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES WHILE ALSO DEFENDING THEM IN CIVIL SUITS, OR

WORSE, TO REFUSE TO DEFEND THEM AND BURY THE RECORDS UNDER THE GUISE

OF INTERNAL CONFLICT?

MR. DILAN: YEAH, I -- I -- I'M GLAD YOU ASKED THAT

QUESTION BECAUSE THAT -- THAT, TO ME, IS SOME OF THE STRUCTURAL FLAWS THAT

WE HAVE FOUND SINCE, YOU KNOW, THE -- THE MURDER OF ROBERT BROOKS.

AND THEN I WOULD SAY ONE OF MY MAIN CONCERNS WHEN WE FOUND OUT

THE SEVERITY OF -- OF HOW BAD IT WAS, THE FIRST THING I NOTICED THAT THERE

165

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WAS A -- A REPORT OF A DEATH IN -- OF AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL. THEN

WE SAW THE VIDEO AND WE CLEARLY SAW THAT IT WAS MORE THAN JUST A

DEATH. AND THEN WE GOT COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S

OFFICE THAT THERE -- THERE'S A POTENTIAL CONFLICT BECAUSE THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL MAY BE REPRESENTING SOME OF THE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE -- STAND

ACCUSED OF MURDERING ROBERT BROOKS. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS ALSO

DEFENDING THEM ON CIVIL -- ON OTHER MATTERS RELATED TO ABUSE. AND THEN

A FEW MONTHS LATER, EVEN THOUGH THE CALENDAR YEAR WAS DIFFERENT, THE

SAME THING HAPPENED WITH MESSIAH NANTWI, AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

HAD TO AGAIN RECUSE HERSELF BECAUSE SHE WAS DEFENDING HERSELF ON OTHER

ACTIONS -- OR SHE WAS DEFENDING CORRECTIONS OFFICERS FOR OTHER

ALLEGATIONS OF ABUSE. SO IN TWO HOMICIDES, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS

BEEN, LIKE, TWO FOR -- TWO FOR TWO IN HAVING TO RECUSE BECAUSE SHE HAS

TO DEFEND FOLKS WHO STAND ACCUSED OF -- OF MURDERING INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS. NOW, THE FIRST QUESTION IT LEAVES YOU TO BELIEVE IS HOW

MANY OTHER INSTANCES OF -- OF ABUSE IS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEFENDING

CORRECTIONS OFFICERS ON? AND I THINK THAT COULD BE, COULD BE A CLEAR

INDICATOR OF WHO YOUR PROBLEMATIC CORRECTIONS OFFICERS ARE.

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

ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS.

MR. DILAN: AND I -- AND I CERTAINLY HOPE SHE

DOESN'T HAVE TO GO THREE FOR THREE.

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

ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

166

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. A. BROWN: THERE'S ALWAYS THE OTHER SIDE.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS AND WE ALSO HAVE THE

CORRECTION OFFICERS WHO PUT THEIR LIVES AT RISK EVERY SINGLE DAY. SO

WHERE IN THIS BILL IS THE PROTECTION FOR THE CORRECTION OFFICERS WHOSE

SPLIT-SECOND DECISIONS, OFTEN UNDER LIFE-THREATENING CIRCUMSTANCES, ARE

NOW GOING TO BE REVIEWED YEARS LATER BY ACTIVIST LAWYERS WITH EDITED

FOOTAGE AND A POLITICAL AXE TO GRIND? THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IN

HERE LOOKING OUT FOR THEM. A BLATANT OMISSION, AND FOR THAT REASON I

WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE.

MADAM SPEAKER, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. MAHER.

MR. MAHER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD TO QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE BILL?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. DILAN: ABSOLUTELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. MAHER: THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. DILAN: ABSOLUTELY.

MR. MAHER: ALL RIGHT. FIRST I WANT TO SAY IN PART

A, LOOKING AT THE VIDEO DISCLOSURES AND CERTAINLY OTHER ASPECTS OF THIS

BILL WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE VIDEOS, I THINK THAT'S GONNA HELP IN

TERMS OF TRANSPARENCY. I THINK IT'S GONNA BE AN AREA WHERE YOU'RE

167

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

GONNA SEE, HOPEFULLY, ENCOURAGEMENT IN BEHAVIOR. SO WE'RE VERY

HOPEFUL. I KNOW A LOT OF US AND A LOT OF COS THAT I'VE TALKED TO, THAT IF

AND WHEN THIS IMPLEMENTED CORRECTLY, IT CAN HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT FOR

SURE.

MY FIRST QUESTION IS RELATED TO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS AND SOME OF THE MANDATES THAT ARE PUT ON

GETTING THAT FOOTAGE WITHIN 72 HOURS TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE,

OSI. THERE ARE OTHER SIMILAR ISSUES, AND I WANTED TO KNOW IF THEY

CAME IN DISCUSSION WHEN WE WERE PREPARING THIS BILL. WHEN IT COMES

TO CORRECTION OFFICERS THAT ALSO HAVE TO CREATE REPORTING TO DO THEIR USE

OF FORCE POLICY, IS THERE GOING TO BE A SIMILAR TYPE OF ACCESS FOR THEM

WHEN IT COMES TO ACCESSING VIDEO FOOTAGE WHEN SOME OF THEIR

SUPERIORS OR FOLKS THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE TALKING TO QUESTION SOME

OF THEIR WRITINGS IN THEIR USE OF POLICY -- USE OF FORCE REPORTS?

MR. DILAN: SO IT WASN'T -- IT WASN'T CONTEMPLATED

IN THIS -- IN THIS PART OF THE BILL.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT ANSWER.

FUNDING. I KNOW THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE BUDGET

WHAT WAS FUNDED FOR BODY-WORN CAMERAS, AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS A

VERY LARGE NUMBER FOR -- FOR CAMERAS ALSO RELATED TO PRISONS IN GENERAL.

I SEE THERE'S A VERY, VERY AGGRESSIVE PLAN HERE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE

SURE THAT FUNDING IN THIS CAPITAL BUDGET IS -- IS GONNA BE ENOUGH. IN

YOUR ESTIMATION, DO YOU THINK IT'S GONNA BE AN APPROPRIATION NEXT YEAR

ON TOP OF THIS YEAR, OR DO YOU THINK IT'S PROPERLY FUNDED IN THIS BUDGET?

MR. DILAN: IT -- IT MAY BE PROPERLY FUNDED IN THE

168

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

BUDGET, BUT IF -- IF THE EXECUTIVE DETERMINES THEY NEED MORE, I'M SURE

THEY WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK TO US AND MAKE THAT

REQUEST.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. I JUST DEFINITELY WANTED TO BE

ON THE RECORD. IT'S -- IT'S A VERY AGGRESSIVE PLAN. THESE CAMERAS ARE

VERY EXPENSIVE. THERE'S A LOT OF PLACES IN THE PRISON THAT ARE GONNA

HAVE INTERESTING ANGLES. SO WE DEFINITELY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE

COVERING ALL OF OUR BASES AND THAT IT'S PROPERLY FUNDED, SO THAT'S GOOD TO

HEAR.

I WANT TO TALK ABOUT PART C, NOTICE OF DEATHS. I JUST

WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS IS PERFECTLY CLEAR. WHEN -- THIS PART REQUIRES

DOCCS TO PROMPTLY NOTIFY THE NEXT OF KIN AND ANY OTHER PERSON

DESIGNATED AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DEATH OF THE INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUAL. THIS PROMPT NOTIFICATION WILL INCLUDE THE CIRCUMSTANCES

SURROUNDING THE DEATH, THE MEDICAL PROCEDURES USED, AND THE CAUSE OF

DEATH INCLUDING PRELIMINARY DETERMINATIONS AS WELL AS THE FINAL

DETERMINATION, REPORTED BY AUTOPSY RESULT -- AUTOPSY RESULTS AS SUCH

INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE. IS THIS JUST FOR INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS OR ANY DEATH AT A DOCCS FACILITY?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. DILAN: ANY -- ANY INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL.

MR. MAHER: SO THIS IS NOT IN RELATION TO A CIVILIAN

STAFF OR A CORRECTION OFFICER WHO IS -- IS KILLED OR DIES IN A DOCCS

FACILITY? THIS -- THIS WOULD NOT ACCOUNT FOR THEM AS WELL?

MR. DILAN: NO. BUT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE LAST

169

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LINE-OF-DUTY DEATH FOR AN INCARCERATED INDIVID -- FOR A CORRECTION OFFICER

WAS AROUND 19 -- 1982. THIS DOESN'T ADDRESS THAT. THIS JUST ADDRESSES

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS.

MR. MAHER: CAN I ASK WHY WE ARE ONLY DEALING

WITH A NOTICE OF DEATH IN CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES FOR INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS AND NOT CORRECTION OFFICERS, CIVILIAN STAFF, OR EVEN OUR

NATIONAL GUARD SERVICE MEMBERS? MY THINKING WOULD BE WE'D WANT

TO TRY TO PUT THEM ON AN EVEN PLAYING FIELD IN TERMS OF THEIR LIVES AND

THE VALUE OF THEIR LIVES.

MR. DILAN: WELL, I -- I -- THIS BASICALLY AMENDS SIX

-- SECTION 624 OF THE CORRECTION LAW'S CURRENT LAW. SO WE'RE NOT

CREATING A NEW SECTION. CURRENT LAW LEAVES IT AT INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS AND DOESN'T EXPAND IT TO CORRECTION OFFICERS OR

NON-CORRECTIONS STAFF. SO I THINK THE INTENT OF THE SPONSOR ON THIS BILL

WAS TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE TO SHALL -- WHAT DOES THE LANGUAGE SAY --

SHALL CONTACT -- SHALL -- (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK) -- THAT'S WHAT IT IS

NOW.

MR. MAHER: I THINK IT'S 24 HOURS AFTER THE NEXT OF

KIN OR DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE DEATH OF AN

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL, DOCCS MUST PUBLISH A PUBLIC NOTICE OF SUCH

DEATH ON THE DEPARTMENT'S WEBSITE; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: SO THE -- YEAH, THE EMPLOYERS HAVE TO

DO THE NEXT OF KIN. I'M SORRY, I COULDN'T HEAR THE QUESTION BECAUSE I

WAS GETTING -- COULD YOU REPEAT IT?

MR. MAHER: ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE'RE ON THE SAME

170

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PAGE THERE, THROUGH. BUT --

MR. DILAN: I THINK SO. BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE

SURE.

MR. MAHER: BUT IT'S JUST INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS.

MR. DILAN: YES.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR

ANSWER.

ALL RIGHT. GOING TO PART D, A STUDY ON DOCCS -- A

STUDY IN DEATHS ON DOCCS CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES.

MR. DILAN: YEP.

MR. MAHER: ALL RIGHT. SO, I KNOW THESE RECORDS

EXIST. I WAS LOOKING UP ONLINE, I WAS ACTUALLY STUNNED BY SOME OF THE

STATISTICS THAT ARE ONLINE, SO I'M ASSUMING THE PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION IS

TO GET LITTLE BIT DEEPER AND GET EXPLANATIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, IN 2023 IT

LOOKS LIKE OUT OF THE 107 TOTAL DEATHS, ZERO ACCIDENT, ONE HOMICIDE, 68

NATURAL CAUSES, EIGHT OVERDOSES, 11 SUICIDES, AND THEN 19 UNKNOWN.

AND THEN I LOOK AT 2025 IT SAYS 37 UNKNOWN. SO I'M -- I'M ASSUMING

THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION. MY

QUESTION TO YOU IS, IN YOUR DISCUSSIONS OF PUTTING THIS BILL TOGETHER,

WHY ISN'T THIS GETTING LOOKED AT A LITTLE DEEPER FROM DOCCS? HAVE --

HAVE THERE HAVE BEEN ANY DISCUSSIONS AS TO HOW WE GOT HERE IN TERMS

OF NOT BEING ABLE TO PROPERLY GET INTO THE DETAILS OF ALL OF THESE DEATHS

THAT ARE OCCURRING IN ANY CALENDAR YEAR?

MR. DILAN: SO I -- I WOULD SAY NO. AND I THINK,

YOU KNOW, THIS BILL, THIS SECTION HAS BEEN AROUND. I BELIEVE I DEBATED IT

171

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LAST SESSION WITH MR. GOODELL. AND, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY SINCE THEN

CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE -- HAVE CHANGED. YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY A LOT OF THIS

IS UNDER THE -- THE -- YOU KNOW, THE DEATHS AND -- AND THE REPORTING ARE

CERTAINLY ON DOCCS' WEBSITE. THAT'S SOME OF THE STATS THAT -- THAT YOU

JUST READ OFF. BUT SCOC DOES THIS. SO WHEN WE ORIGINALLY DEBATED

THIS, WE WANTED TO TAKE A -- A HOLISTIC APPROACH. AND THEN CERTAINLY

AFTER WHAT HAPPENED RECENTLY, WE THOUGHT IT -- IT APPLIED EVEN MORE TO

DRILL DOWN ON SOME OF THE ANSWERS -- OR SOME OF THE QUESTIONS YOU

MAY JUST -- THAT YOU JUST ASKED, SO WE THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE AND --

AND PUT IT IN. BECAUSE LIKE YOU SAID, LIKE WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF

QUESTIONS AS TO, YOU KNOW, HOW THOSE NUMBERS READ THE WAY THEY READ,

AND I THINK FURTHER INFORMATION AND FURTHER DETAIL ON THESE DEATHS IN THE

FUTURE WILL BENEFIT US ALL.

MR. MAHER: I AGREE.

I WANT TO GET DOWN TO PART H AND TO FOLLOW UP EXACTLY

WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE STATE COMMISSION OF CORRECTION

EXPANSION. LOOK, I THINK THIS IS -- THIS IS A GOOD THING. THERE'S TWO

QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE. THE FIRST, WHY WERE THERE NO MINORITY

LEADERSHIP APPOINTMENTS THAT WE COULD ALSO MAKE FOR THIS? WAS THERE

A DISCUSSION ON THAT?

MR. DILAN: WELL, AGAIN, LIKE I SAID EARLIER, THE

STATE COMMISSION OF CORRECTION WAS ESTABLISHED AGAIN AT THE END OF

THE 18TH -- EXCUSE ME, IN 1895, ROUGHLY. AND I THINK AS IT RELATES TO

APPOINTMENTS, THE WAY THE BILL READS, IT -- THE GOVERNOR RETAINS HER

THREE THAT SHE HAS NOW. THAT'S THE CURRENT COMPOSITION. THE CURRENT

172

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LANGUAGE SAYS THE GOVERNOR APPOINTS -- IT DOESN'T SAY THE -- THE

DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR APPOINTS. THEN NEXT IT SAYS THE SPEAKER OF THE

ASSEMBLY WILL HAVE TWO APPOINTMENTS, THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM OF THE

SENATE WOULD HAVE TWO APPOINTMENTS. WE FOUND THAT OVER TIME,

SCOC -- LEGISLATION IN AROUND SCOC HAD BEEN AMENDED, AND IT HAD

BEEN SUFFICIENTLY BEEN AMENDED BY EITHER PARTY. SO IF YOU RECALL THE

ATTICA RIOTS IN THE 1970S, THE GOVERNOR WAS REPUBLICAN.

MR. MAHER: RIGHT.

MR. DILAN: THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE WAS

REPUBLICAN. THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM OF THE SENATE WAS A REPUBLICAN.

AND THEY ENACTED GOOD REFORMS IN -- IN THE WAKE OF ATTICA. IT WORKED

THEN, AND I -- I BELIEVE IT WILL WORK NOW. AND WHEN YOU -- THE REASON

WHY I BRING UP THE DATES IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CONTEXT OF THE

STATE OF NEW YORK AND HOW LONG THE PEOPLE OF THIS STATE HAVE BEEN

TRYING TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM, THE INDIVIDUAL PARTY REALLY, YOU KNOW, IS

INCONSEQUENTIAL. BECAUSE REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATIONS HAVE DONE GOOD

JOB -- DONE A GOOD JOB IN ENACTING REFORMS, AND SO HAVE POTENTIALLY

DEMOCRATIC ONES. SO THE REASON WHY THERE'S NONE LINED OUT IS BECAUSE

THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, IT'S -- IT'S WORKED.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. YOUR -- YOUR POINT IS -- YOUR

POINT IS WELL- TAKEN. I'LL LOOK FORWARD TO REVISITING THAT WHEN WE HAVE

A REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR IN A LITTLE WHILE.

MR. DILAN: WELL, AND UNDER A REPUBLICAN

GOVERNOR, THE POLICY WILL BE THE SAME AND THEY WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO

MAKE THEIR APPOINTMENTS. BUT, YOU KNOW, IT COULD TAKE 200 YEARS.

173

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. MAHER: EIGHTEEN MONTHS?

(LAUGHTER)

YEAH, WE'LL -- WE'LL REVISIT THAT. THANK YOU, SIR.

OKAY.

I ALSO WANT TO TALK ABOUT JUST REPORTING IN GENERAL.

WAS IT DISCUSSED, TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE INJURIES THAT ARE TAKING

PLACE, AGAIN, WITH CIVIL STAFF, THE CORRECTION OFFICERS, WITH NATIONAL

GUARD SERVICE MEMBERS? AND ALSO, WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION TO THE

REAL SERIOUS ISSUE GOING ON WITHIN OUR STATE PRISONS IN TERMS OF

FENTANYL, OTHER EXPOSURES THAT ARE CREATING HOSPITAL VISITS AND EVEN OUR

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS AND CORRECTION OFFICERS AND CIVILIAN STAFF TO BE

NARCANED, EVEN, AND TO BE TAKEN TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM? I KNOW IN

MY DISTRICT ALONE THERE'S BEEN DOZENS OF THOSE CASES. I HAVE FOUR

PRISONS WITHIN MY DISTRICT.

MR. DILAN: YEAH, SO WHILE THOSE ARE IMPORTANT

ISSUES THAT I BELIEVE SHOULD BE ADDRESSED AT SOME POINT, IT'S -- IT'S REALLY

OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF THE BILL. IT'S ABOUT TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY

AND -- AND OVERSIGHT. AND AGAIN, LIKE I SAID TO -- TO MANY OF -- PEOPLE

ON THE OUTSIDE, THIS IS THE FIRST STEP AND THEY'LL BE WAYS FOR US TO

HOLISTICALLY LOOK AT OUR GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS

TO ADDRESS A LOT OF THE PROBLEMS. BUT I THINK THE INTENT HERE BY US WAS

NOT TO LOOK AT ISSUES THAT ARE DEFINITELY PROBLEMS, LIKE DRUGS IN -- INSIDE

OUR FACILITIES ARE DEFINITELY PROBLEMS.

MR. MAHER: RIGHT.

MR. DILAN: STAFFING PROBLEMS AND -- AND ISSUES ON

174

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WHERE THEY -- WHY THEY MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE GONE ON STRIKE, YOU COULD

SAY IT'S A PROBLEM. BUT OUR INTENT HERE WAS TO STRENGTHEN OUR

GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS SO THAT WE COULD HAVE BETTER ACCOUNTABILITY ON

THESE AGENCIES, HAVE BETTER INDEPENDENCE ON SOME OF THE INFORMATION

THAT FLOWS FROM DOCCS, AND BETTER OVERSIGHT JUST GENERALLY, AND

ACCOUNTABILITY, SHOULD THEY DECIDE TO, YOU KNOW, TAKE ACTION -- ACTIONS

THAT ARE NOT PRESCRIBED BY A JUDGE.

MR. MAHER: THANK YOU FOR THAT. I -- I DO WANT TO

GO ON THE BILL, BUT I HAVE ONE FINAL QUESTION I WANT TO ASK. WHEN IT

COMES TO DISCUSSION OF THE BODY-WORN CAMERAS AND THE NEED TO HAVE

THEM BE SENT TO THE AG OSI IN 72 HOURS, IS ANYTHING RELATED TO THE

CAMERAS THAT WERE PUT IN THIS BILL, WAS -- WAS THERE A DISCUSSION WITH

THE UNION, AND IS THERE A CONCERN THAT THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH THE UNION

CONTRACT, SHOULD THERE HAD BEEN SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH THE UNION FOR

ANY OF THESE POLICIES?

MR. DILAN: NO, BUT THE UNION MIGHT HAVE BEEN,

YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BUSY AT THE TIME. BUT, NO.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANTED TO

HAVE THAT ON RECORD. THANK YOU, SIR. I APPRECIATE THE ANSWERS TO MY

QUESTIONS.

ON THE BILL, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. SO, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE

ANSWERS TO MY QUESTIONS AND SOME OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND SOME

OF THE CONCERNS, ESPECIALLY THE -- THE FACT THAT THERE IS A LOT MORE WORK

175

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

TO BE DONE. I THINK THAT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IS IMPORTANT. I DO WANT TO

GIVE AN APPRECIATION TO MY COLLEAGUE AND MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES FOR

SITTING DOWN AND ACTUALLY SPEAKING TO CORRECTION OFFICERS UP HERE IN

ALBANY WHO HAD LEGITIMATE CONCERNS. I HOPE TO CONTINUE THOSE

CONVERSATIONS MOVING FORWARD. I DO BELIEVE THERE ARE SO MANY THINGS

THAT WE COULD HAVE PUT IN THIS BILL THAT COULD SPEAK TO THE STAFFING CRISIS

AND THE SAFETY CONCERNS WITHIN OUR PRISONS. IT IS DARK RIGHT NOW WITHIN

DOCCS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK. THE CURRENT STATE OF OUR FACILITIES,

YOU REALLY HAVE TO GO THERE AND SEE IT FOR YOURSELF AND TALK TO THE FOLKS

AND THE FAMILIES THAT ARE IMPACTED. IT IS DEVASTATING, AND IT IS GETTING

FAR WORSE. WE STILL HAVE THOUSANDS OF NATIONAL GUARD SERVICE

MEMBERS THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF NEW YORK. WE'RE SPENDING TENS OF

MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON A REGULAR BASIS TO FUND THEM, AND WE'RE HAVING

REAL ISSUES. WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAVE CORRECTION OFFICERS WHO

ARE GOING TO THE HOSPITAL DUE TO EXPOSURES. ONE INDIVIDUAL IN MY

DISTRICT -- I'M NOT GONNA USE HIS NAME -- HE HIT HIS HEAD, PASSED OUT DUE

TO AN EXPOSURE, WENT TO THE HOSPITAL. ENDED UP GETTING A TBI.

REPORTED BACK FOR DUTY, WASN'T ABLE TO GO BACK TO WORK. APPLIED FOR

LIGHT DUTY, WAS DENIED AND WAS RECENTLY FIRED. WHILE WE HAVE

NATIONAL GUARD SERVICE MEMBERS DOING ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES, WE

COULDN'T FIND LIGHT DUTY FOR A CORRECTION OFFICER AND INSTEAD FIRED HIM.

AND THERE ARE SO MANY DIFFERENT ISSUES HAPPENING SINCE THE WORK

STOPPAGE WHERE WE REALLY ARE IGNORING FOLKS THAT WANT TO BE IN AN

ENVIRONMENT AND DO WELL IN THAT ENVIRONMENT AND PROVIDE A PUBLIC

SERVICE, AND INSTEAD SPENDING AN -- AN AWFUL AMOUNT OF MONEY AND

176

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PUTTING FOLKS WHO ARE NOT TRAINED IN A POSITION TO POTENTIALLY HURT

THEMSELVES AND OTHERS.

WHEN IT COMES TO INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS AND THE --

THE ENVIRONMENT, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT ENVIRONMENT IS SAFE FOR

EVERYONE. AND I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE THAT ROUTE, WORKING

WITH OUR CORRECTION OFFICERS, OUR CIVILIAN STAFF, THOSE THAT ARE

INCARCERATED, THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS. AND I JUST WANT TO WARN MY

COLLEAGUES; IN THE FUTURE WHEN IT COMES TO PRISON CLOSURES, WE'VE REALLY

SEEN THAT NOT BE SOMETHING THAT HELPS THE SITUATION, BUT REALLY ONLY

EXACERBATES IT. I REALLY WANT TO BE MINDFUL GOING FORWARD. I WANT TO BE

ABLE TO WORK WITH EVERYBODY IN A COLLABORATIVE WAY. BUT ON THE

RECORD, IT'S JUST REALLY IMPORTANT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PROGRAMMING,

WHEN WE TALK ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO FIX, WE CAN'T FIX THEM

WITHOUT APPROPRIATE STAFFING LEVELS. APPROPRIATE STAFFING LEVELS WILL

REMAIN IN -- IN CRISIS MODE UNTIL WE HAVE A SERIOUS CONVERSATION WITH

BOTH PARTIES IN THE ROOM, AND RIGHT NOW I -- I DON'T THINK WE'RE THERE.

I'M GOING TO KEEP WORKING AND HOPEFULLY --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU, MR.

MAHER.

MR. MAHER: -- WE'LL GET THERE AT SOME POINT.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. PALMESANO.

MR. PALMESANO: YES, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

177

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

YIELD?

MR. DILAN: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. PALMESANO: THANK YOU, MR. DILAN. I -- I

KNOW WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF CONVERSATIONS OFFLINE, AT HEARINGS, AND I

JUST WANT TO SAY RIGHT UP FRONT I -- I REALLY APPRECIATE HOW UPFRONT YOU

ARE. I KNOW THIS -- THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN VERY PERSONAL AND VERY

PASSIONATE FOR YOU BECAUSE OF THE TRAGEDIES THAT HAPPENED WITH MR.

BROOKS AND MR. NANTWI. SO -- AND I KNOW THE ONE THING YOU SAID IS,

YOU KNOW, INITIALLY YOU WERE LOOKING AT THIS FROM A HOLISTIC

PERSPECTIVE AND BECAUSE WHEN WE TALKED, AND I KNOW WE HAD

DISCUSSIONS, WE TALKED ABOUT, OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S WHAT'S GOING ON WITH

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS AND VIOLENCE INSIDE OUR PRISONS. BUT ALSO, WE

TALKED ABOUT THE ASSAULTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT'S GOING ON WITH THE

CORRECTIONS OFFICERS. WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OR WHEN DID -- WAS

THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON TRYING TO ADDRESS THAT AS PART OF THIS PACKAGE OR

NOT REALLY AT THIS TIME? I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HALT AND THE

REPEAL OF HALT IS NOT ON THE TABLE. BUT WAS THERE -- ANY OF THAT

DISCUSSION TO TRY TO LOOK AT THIS HOLISTICALLY, TO LOOK AT THE CONDITIONS

THAT THE CORRECTIONS OFFICERS AND STAFF ARE WORKING IN?

MR. DILAN: SO WHAT I -- WHEN -- WHEN YOU SAY

"HOLISTICALLY" YOU'RE CORRECT. AND NOT JUST ME, MYSELF AND MANY OF MY

COLLEAGUES, MANY MEMBERS OF THE CAUCUS, BECAUSE A LOT OF THIS

INFORMATION DERIVED FROM LEGISLATION THAT THEY INTRODUCED. AND I THINK

THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT THE CAUCUS WERE [SIC] PROMOTING THAT, YOU

178

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

KNOW, HASN'T MADE IT YET INTO A -- AN OMNIBUS BILL OR TO THIS FLOOR THAT

WE -- WE STILL SUPPORT. THAT INCLUDED A HOLISTIC APPROACH, TOO. BUT I

THINK WHAT WE DID HERE WAS, AGAIN, TRIED TO SEE IF WE COULD AT LEAST GET

A TWO-WAY AGREEMENT WITH THE SENATE ON THE SYSTEMIC ISSUES THAT

CLEARLY HAVE NOT WORKED, TO SEE IF WE COULD GET A PACKAGE THAT WOULD

IMMEDIATELY STOP THE MURDERS; GET A PACKAGE THAT, YOU KNOW, COULD

HELP REDUCE ASSAULTS; FIND OUT WHERE OUR -- YOU KNOW, OUR SYSTEMS

AGAIN WERE BROKEN, AND YOU KNOW ADDRESS THAT. THERE WERE MANY

OTHER CONVERSATIONS THAT WE ADDRESSED VIA HALT. YOU KNOW, IT

CERTAINLY HAS BEEN DISCUSSED PUBLICLY, IT'S CAME [SIC] UP AT HEARINGS, IT'S

BEEN DISCUSSED PRIVATELY. I'VE MADE PLENTY OF COMMENT -- PUBLIC

COMMENTS ON HALT. BUT THIS BILL REALLY WASN'T CONSIDERED TO BE A

ATTEMPT -- AN ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS OR DO ANYTHING AS IT REGARDS TO HALT.

MR. PALMESANO: I -- I UNDERSTAND.

MR. DILAN: IN THAT REGARD, NO.

MR. PALMESANO: I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT, THOUGH.

ON THE ISSUE OF BODY CAMERAS, I KNOW THIS HAS COME

UP A COUPLE OF TIMES. I KNOW WE HAVE A POLICY THAT'S KIND OF USED, AND

THIS IS GOING TO BE TAKING A STATEWIDE POLICY. DOES THIS BILL DO

ANYTHING TO ENSURE -- OR IS THERE GONNA BE REGULATIONS IN PLACE TO

ENSURE -- NUMBER ONE, ENSURE PROPER TRAINING IS RECEIVED AND THAT THE

CAMERAS ARE MAINTAINED, EQUIPMENT IS PROPERLY MAINTAINED AND

FUNCTIONING? DOES THIS BILL ADDRESS THAT OR SAY ANYTHING -- SPEAK TO

THAT AT ALL?

MR. DILAN: SO, THIS BILL DOESN'T DO THAT SPECIFICALLY,

179

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

BUT THAT WAS ADDRESSED IN THE BUDGET THAT WE JUST PASSED.

MR. PALMESANO: OKAY. WOULD THIS -- WOULD THIS

BILL OR WHAT WE PASSED IN THE BUDGET JUST DEAL WITH CLEAR GUIDELINES ON

THE USE OF CAMERAS OR MAYBE LACK OF USE? YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WE

HEAR ABOUT IT BEING IN SENSITIVE -- SENSITIVE AREAS MUST BE CONSIDERED OR

ACCOMMODATED. DOES THIS BILL ADDRESS THAT OR WAS THIS ADDRESSED IN

THE BILL THAT WE PASSED DURING THE BUDGET, OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT'S

GOT TO BE LOOKED AT?

MR. DILAN: YES, IT DOES. AND THEN ADDITIONALLY,

SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THE GOVERNOR ENACTED AFTER THE -- THE MURDERS,

SOME OF HER INITIAL ACTIONS THAT DIDN'T REQUIRE LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS WOULD

GO TO DO THAT AS WELL.

MR. PALMESANO: OKAY. AND -- AND I -- AND I DO

AGREE. I THINK THIS USE OF BODY CAMERAS IS GONNA BE A GOOD THING.

OBVIOUSLY, WE SAW THE HORRIFIC ABUSE OF STAFF ON THE -- THE VIDEO

CAMERAS. BUT ALSO, THIS COULD BE USED IN A WAY WHEN ON THE OTHER SIDE

THESE VIDEO CAMERAS WILL BE ABLE TO CAPTURE THINGS WHEN MAYBE THERE'S

ACCUSATIONS ARE UNFOUNDED, ACCUSATIONS AGAINST COS BY OTHERS, TOO,

RIGHT? SO IT'S BASICALLY THERE TO CATCH EVERYTHING. SO I THINK THE -- THE

VIDEO CAMERAS IS A GOOD PART OF THIS BILL, SO I JUST WANTED TO MENTION

THAT.

MR. DILAN: YEAH. AND I WOULD SAY, LOOK, IT -- IT --

IT WORKS ALL WAYS, BUT I THINK WE WANT FOLKS -- THE JOB IS ALREADY HARD

ENOUGH, AND FOR THE FOLKS WHO DO THE JOB THE RIGHT WAY, YOU KNOW,

THEY DESERVE PROTECTION, TOO. BUT FOR THE FOLKS WHO ARE THE BAD ACTORS

180

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AND POTENTIALLY GIVE A BAD NAME TO EVERYONE ELSE THAT -- THAT'S DOING IT

RIGHT, YOU KNOW, FOR THE FOLKS THAT ARE DOING IT RIGHT, THEY DESERVE

PROTECTION, TOO.

MR. PALMESANO: AND I -- AND I APPRECIATE YOU

SAYING THAT BECAUSE ONE THING WE DON'T WANNA DO IS PAINT EVERYONE

WITH ONE BROAD BRUSH, AND THAT'S WHY WE WANT ACCOUNTABILITY AND

TRANSPARENCY AND I THINK THIS PART OF THE BILL I THINK IS A -- IS A GOOD

THING.

I DID WANNA MOVE ON. YOU KNOW, WE WERE TALKING

ABOUT THE -- THE COMMISSION ON CORRECTIONS [SIC] AND I -- I WON'T [SIC]

WANNA BELABOR THE POINT ON THE MINORITY APPOINTMENTS. I -- I GET THAT.

I THINK WHAT I'D PROBABLY SAY, AND MAYBE I'LL ELABORATE MORE WHEN I GO

ON THE BILL, BUT I THINK THE REASON WE TALK ABOUT MINORITY APPOINTMENTS

IS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THERE MIGHT BE DIFFERENCES OF OPINIONS ON

DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT TO HAVE A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE. I MEAN, FOR THE

SPEAKER TO HAVE TWO APPOINTMENTS, WE GET ZERO APPOINTMENTS. I JUST

THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD LOOK AT A LITTLE BIT MORE, ESPECIALLY

LIKE ON -- ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS THAT'S SO BROAD, OMNIBUS. WE SHOULD

HAVE THAT EXPERT DIFFERENCE OF OPINIONS TO BRING THOSE DISCUSSIONS

TOGETHER TO GET DIFFERENCE OF OPINIONS, WHETHER THEY AGREE OR DISAGREE.

I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD KEEP IN MIND AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

SO IT WAS MORE OF A STATEMENT THERE, I GUESS, THAN ANYTHING THERE. SO I

JUST WISH THAT WOULD BE KEPT IN MIND.

MR. DILAN: WELL, I -- I WOULD SAY POINT TAKEN, BUT I

ALSO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE DEBATE ON THIS QUESTION IS THAT CANY

181

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ALSO GETS TWO APPOINTMENTS AND THEY'RE NON-POLITICAL. THEY'RE NOT A

MEMBER OF EITHER -- EITHER SIDE OR EITHER PARTY IN HOUSE.

MR. PALMESANO: AND I CAN UNDER THAT --

UNDERSTAND. I SAW, LIKE, YOU HAVE THE COMPOSITION MUST INCLUDE AT

LEAST ONE MEMBER FROM A DIFFERENT AREA GROUPS. YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE

A PERSON FORMERLY INCARCERATED AT A FACILITY, A HEALTH PROFESSIONAL, A

BEHAVIOR HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONAL, AN ATTORNEY. A PROFESSIONAL IN ANY

OTHER FIELD USEFUL IN THE PROMOTION OF HUMANE -- IS -- I GUESS MY

THOUGHT IS, WOULDN'T A -- A RETIRED CORRECTIONS OFFICER BE SOMEONE -- THE

REASON I ASK THAT QUESTION IS OBVIOUSLY THEY'VE SEEN IT ALL. THEY'VE

BEEN -- THEY'VE BEEN INSIDE THE FACILITIES. THEY'VE SEEN THE CHALLENGES.

THEY'VE SEEN THE OPPORTUNITIES. THEY KNOW WHERE THE PROBLEMS IS

[SIC]. WOULDN'T IT BE -- WOULDN'T THAT BE A WISE APPOINTMENT TO HAVE ON

THIS COMMISSION? JUST BECAUSE OF THE EXPERIENCE AND BACKGROUND THEY

CAN BRING FROM A DIFF -- AGAIN, FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE THAN OTHERS,

JUST LIKE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE MINORITY APPOINTMENT.

MR. DILAN: SO THE WAY THE LANGUAGE READS, AND

YOU GO THAT PART RIGHT, THE WAY IT READS IT SAYS INCLUDES THOSE

INDIVIDUALS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO. SO CERTAINLY IF CANY OR THE EXECUTIVE

OR ANY OTHER ENTITY THAT GETS TO MAKE AN APPOINTMENT, WHETHER IT BE THE

SPEAKER, THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM, IF THEY WANTED TO INCLUDE THAT THEY'RE

NOT PROHIBITED FROM DOING SO.

MR. PALMESANO: OKAY. JUST -- SO I WANNA JUST --

AND I -- JUST TO CLARIFY THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. I WAS LISTENING TO THE

DISCUSSION. SO THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT, IF I'M CORRECT, ONCE SOMEONE,

182

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL FINISHES THEIR SENTENCE, THEY WOULD HAVE

THREE YEARS UPON FINISHING THAT TO FILE A CLAIM; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: THAT IS CORRECT.

MR. PALMESANO: AND THAT IS REGARDLESS IF IT WAS

A 10-YEAR SENTENCE, 20-YEAR SENTENCE? WHATEVER IT IS, THEY HAVE THREE

YEARS AFTER THEY FINISH, CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: REGARDLESS OF SENTENCE, CORRECT.

MR. PALMESANO: OKAY. AND SO THEY WOULD HAVE

-- NOW, THIS QUESTION, AND I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER BUT I JUST WANTED

TO BE SURE TO BE ON THE RECORD. NOW, WOULD THE -- A SUIT THAT WAS

BROUGHT BACK, WOULD THAT BE AGAINST THE STATE OF NEW YORK? COULD IT

FALL BACK UPON THE CORRECTIONS OFFICER PERSONALLY? HOW DOES THIS

LANGUAGE ADJUST THAT? IS IT JUST THE STATE BECAUSE THEY WERE THE

EMPLOYER, OR COULD THE INDIVIDUAL CORRECTIONS OFFICER BE UNDER THIS

LAW, NEW LAW?

MR. DILAN: SO IT -- IT -- IT'S NOT SPECIFIC. YOU

KNOW, CERTAINLY, IF THE -- THE NATURE OF THE INJURY IS AGAINST THE STATE,

THE STATE COULD BE LIABLE BUT IT'S NOT SPECIFIC.

MR. PALMESANO: OKAY. WELL, MR. DILAN, THANK

YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I APPRECIATE IT.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. PALMESANO: MADAM SPEAKER AND MY

COLLEAGUES, AT THE PUBLIC PROTECTION BUDGET HEARING IN JANUARY AT THE

FOLLOW-UP JOINT SENATE AND ASSEMBLY CORRECTIONS COMMITTEE HEARING,

183

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PUBLIC HEARING ON WHAT WAS GOING ON IN OUR -- OUR PRISONS AND PRISON

SAFETY, I SAID RIGHT UP FRONT AT BOTH HEARINGS THAT WHAT HAPPENED TO MR.

BROOKS AND SUBSEQUENTLY TO MR. NANTWI WAS ABSOLUTELY ABHORRENT,

TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE, AND THOSE INDIVIDUALS SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE

AND HELD ACCOUNTABLE. BUT I ALSO SAID THAT ANY REFORM MEASURES WE --

WE ARE LOOKING AT MUST LOOK AT THE ENTIRE SYSTEM AND ALL THE VIOLENCE AS

A WHOLE THAT'S GOING INSIDE OUR CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES BECAUSE THERE IS

RISING VIOLENCE INSIDE THE CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES. AND VIOLENCE IN ANY

FORM IS UNACCEPTABLE AND SHOULDN'T BE CONDONED AND ACCEPTABLE.

CERTAINLY WHAT -- IF IT'S A CORRECTIONS OFFICER ON AN INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUAL, AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL ON A CORRECTIONS OFFICER, OR AN

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL ON AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL, VIOLENCE IS

PREVALENT INSIDE OUR CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES, UNFORTUNATELY. WE'VE

TALKED ABOUT, IT I'LL SAY IT AGAIN. THE HALT HAS CAUSED PROBLEMS AND

WE'VE SEEN DRAMATIC RISE IN THE VIOLENCE SINCE THREE YEARS OF ITS

IMPLEMENTATION. INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL ON STAFF ASSAULTS ARE UP 76

PERCENT OVER THE THREE YEARS SINCE THIS IMPLEMENTATION. INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUAL ON INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL IS UP OVER 169 PERCENT TO A

RECORD HIGH OF NEARLY 3,000 ASSAULTS. CONTRABAND SEIZURES ARE UP OVER

32 PERCENT DURING THIS TIME PERIOD, FROM 3,500 TO 4,700. AND WE

KNOW DRUGS CREATE VIOLENCE AND UNTENABLE SITUATIONS INSIDE OUR

CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES. WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THE EXPOSURES THAT ARE

HAPPENING TO PEOPLE TIME AND TIME AGAIN. THIS IS SOMETHING -- AND IT'S

LIKE A DANGEROUS POWDER KEG ENVIR -- INSIDE OUR CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES.

THIS IS SOMETHING I, AND I THINK MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES, WOULD HAVE

184

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LIKED TO SEEN ADDRESSED MORE HOLISTICALLY, BUT I KNOW THAT'S SOMETHING

WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO DEAL WITH. BECAUSE THIS IS ONE OF THE ISSUES

THAT WAS THE MAIN REASONS [SIC] FOR THE PROTESTS OR STRIKES, WHATEVER

WORD YOU WANT TO USE, WE SAW WHEN WE WENT WITH THE CORRECTIONS

OFFICERS NOT WORKING. IT WAS ABOUT THEIR SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE. AND

WE STILL HAVE A STAFFING CRISIS. AND TO KEEP IN MIND, YOU KNOW, THE

STAFFING CRISIS, WE -- THERE ARE PROGRAMS THAT THEY WANT -- WE WANT TO

PUT IN PLACE FOR INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS. IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE STAFF TO

PROVIDE THOSE PROGRAMS, THEN THEY'RE -- THEY'RE NOT GONNA BENEFIT FROM

THOSE PROGRAMS. SO WE HAVE TO DO A BETTER JOB OF STAFFING AND JUST --

AND RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION. AND THERE ARE MUCH -- MANY OTHER

THINGS WE COULD DO FROM THERE; FROM WHETHER IT'S THE DEATH GAMBLE,

LOOKING AT THE PAY STRUCTURE, THE BENEFITS, ALL THOSE THINGS. BECAUSE IF

WE HAVE GOOD STAFF IN THERE, THAT'S GONNA BE ABLE TO HELP OUR

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS REHABILITATE AND BE BETTER AND BE ABLE TO GET

OUT.

THE STATE COMMISSION ON CORRECTIONAL'S [SIC]

EXPANSION -- AND I KNOW I BROUGHT THIS UP DURING OUR DISCUSSION -- I

JUST BELIEVE, AND MANY OF US BELIEVE, NOT HAVING A MINORITY

APPOINTMENT ON THIS COMMITTEE [SIC] -- I MEAN, WE'VE SEEN SOME LITTLE

THINGS COME THROUGH. BUT THINGS LIKE -- AND I TALK ABOUT ENERGY POLICY.

IF WE DIDN'T HAVE CERTAIN PEOPLE ON THE CLIMATE ACTION COUNCIL, IT

WOULD HAVE BEEN -- WOULD HAVE BEEN A DISASTER. BIG POLICIES. WE

SHOULD HAVE A VOICE AT THE TABLE. IT'S GOOD TO HAVE DIFFERENCE AND

DIVERSE VOICES TO HAVE A DISCUSSION TO COME TO A CONSENSUS. BUT OUR

185

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

VOICE IS KIND OF LEFT ON THE SIDE AND I THINK THAT'S UNFORTUNATE. AND I

ALSO THINK THAT WE SHOULD ALSO LOOK AT THOSE PEOPLE THAT GET APPOINTED,

I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT CORRECTIONS OFFICERS BECAUSE THEY BRING A

UNIQUE EXPERIENCE. THEY'VE SEEN IT ALL. THEY UNDERSTAND THE

CHALLENGES, THEY UNDERSTAND THE OPPORTUNITIES. AND THAT WOULD BE

SOMETHING THAT COULD BRING SOME VALUE TO THAT COMMISSION ON

CORRECTIONS [SIC]. AND I THINK, AGAIN, TO HAVE THAT DIFFERENT BROAD VIEW

OF OPINIONS IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL. I MEAN, I THINK

THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS, OBVIOUSLY, ABOUT THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.

YOU KNOW, THE QUESTIONS WE ASK NOW, OKAY, WILL IT JUST BE ON -- THE

SUIT GO AGAINST THE STATE OR COULD IT COME BACK AND FALL ON AN ACTUAL

CORRECTIONS OFFICER OR A STAFF MEMBER IN THE FUTURE? THAT'S SOMETHING I

WOULD HAVE CONCERN ABOUT, AND FOR HOW LONG AND WHEN'S THE END DATE.

THE -- THE BODY CAMERAS, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THERE'S PROPER TRAINING,

EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL ARE -- ARE PROPERLY CHECKED. THAT THERE ARE

CLEAR GUIDELINES ON USE, AND ABSOLUTELY AT THE END OF THE DAY, TO MAKE

SURE THERE'S ACCOUNTABILITY. AND NO DOUBT, REFORM WAS NEEDED.

THERE ARE SOME GOOD THINGS IN THIS BILL, AND WE

UNDERSTAND THE GENESIS BEHIND THE BILL. AND I KNOW MY COLLEAGUE

WORKED REALLY HARD ON THIS BILL, AND I KNOW OTHERS WORKED REALLY HARD

ON THIS BILL. AND I CAN RESPECT THAT. BUT I THINK BECAUSE OF THE THINGS

THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED, THAT WERE LEFT OUT, THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT

AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT IN THIS HOUSE, THE IMPACT OF WHAT'S

GOING ON, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY WITH OUR STAFF INSIDE OUR CORRECTIONAL

FACILITIES. THE OVERALL ENVIRONMENT, THE POWDER KEG ENVIRONMENT

186

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THAT'S BEEN CREATED, THE -- THE VIOLENCE THAT'S GOING ON AND THE PRISON

CLOSURES, THE STAFFING TO THE ASSAULTS, THE DRUGS. WE NEED TO DO BETTER.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS MORE HOLISTICALLY. WE NEED TO HELP OUR

CORRECTIONS OFFICERS WITH THEIR RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION. YOU KNOW,

ONE SUCH ISSUE WE TALKED ABOUT THAT PASSED IN THIS HOUSE TWO YEARS IN

A ROW THAT THE GOVERNOR VETOED TWO YEARS IN A ROW, SAID IT SHOULD BE

PART OF THE BUDGET, IS DEATH GAMBLE. AND WE'VE HAD TWO BILLS THAT

PASSED THE HOUSE THIS -- EARLIER THIS WEEK; ONE FOR COUNTIES AND ONE FOR

JUDGES. WHY ARE WE NOT PROVIDING THAT SECURITY TO THOSE CORRECTIONS

OFFICERS AND THEIR FAMILIES? AND THIS IS SOMETHING NOT ONLY THAT THEY

EARNED OR DESERVE, BUT THEY EARNED IT. SO WE SHOULD PROTECT THAT

PENSION FOR THOSE CORRECTIONS OFFICERS. THAT WILL HELP RETAIN

CORRECTIONS OFFICERS AT A TIME WHEN WE NEED MORE OF THEM. THAT WILL

ALSO HELP TO RECRUIT MORE OFFICERS WHEN THEY SEE THAT BENEFIT. SO

THERE'S MUCH MORE WE CAN DO. ALTHOUGH I UNDERSTAND THE INTENTIONS

BEHIND THIS BILL, THERE ARE SOME GOOD THINGS IN IT, IT'S BECAUSE OF THE

THINGS THAT AREN'T ADDRESSED AND MY CONCERNS AND SOME OTHERS, I WILL

BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER AND MY COLLEAGUES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. GIBBS.

MR. GIBBS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. GIBBS: MADAM SPEAKER, I WANT TO START OFF BY

187

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

APOLOGIZING TO MY COLLEAGUES; MEMBER WALSH AND OTHERS. BUT I WANT

TO EXPLAIN TO THEM ALSO THAT THE WORD "INMATE" IS VERY DEGRADING. AND

AS THE ONLY MEMBER HERE WITH LIVED EXPERIENCES, I CAN TELL YOU HOW

DEHUMANIZING IT IS. PALMESANO AND I, WE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS

REGARDING THIS WORD AND HE'S GOTTEN BETTER. IN FACT, HE HASN'T SAID

"INMATE" IN MONTHS BECAUSE HE UNDERSTOOD THAT THE WORD IS DEGRADING.

SO I APOLOGIZE FOR GETTING EMOTION -- EMOTIONAL WHEN YOU SAY THOSE

WORDS BECAUSE IT TAKES ME BACK TO BEING INSIDE THE PRISONS. AND OFTEN

THE CORRECTIONS OFFICERS WOULD USE IT TO DEHUMANIZE US. SO HEARING IT

COME OUT OF THE PEOPLE [SIC] MOUTHS THAT I REALLY RESPECT, AND IN FACT,

DIAPETRO [SIC] PRAYED FOR ME RIGHT BEFORE THE DEBATE STARTED AND THEN

WENT ON AND SAID "INMATE" THREE TIMES. MEMBER ARI SAID THE WORD

"INMATE" TWO TIMES. AND WHEN HE CAME OVER HERE I JUST ASKED HIM,

SIR --

MS. WALSH: MADAM SPEAKER, POINT OF ORDER. WE

SHOULD NOT BE USING THE OTHER MEMBERS' NAMES IN -- IN THE COMMENTS

THAT ARE BEING MADE BY --

MR. GIBBS: I -- I APOLOGIZE.

MS. WALSH: -- THE MEMBER WHO IS SPEAKING.

THANK YOU.

MR. GIBBS: I APOLOGIZE. I'LL GET BETTER, MEMBER

WALSH, I PROMISE YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU. MR.

GIBBS, IF YOU COULD JUST LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS WITHOUT NAMES OF

COLLEAGUES, PLEASE.

188

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. GIBBS: OKAY. SO WHEN THE OTHER MEMBERS SAY

THE WORD "INMATE" IT'S DEGRADING. ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO I LOOK UP TO

AND RESPECT WHOLEHEARTEDLY. I ALSO AGREE WITH 95.7 PERCENT OF THE

THINGS PALMESANO SAID JUST NOW. I KNOW IT'S UNBELIEVABLE, BUT I AGREE

WITH HIM MOST OF THE TIME.

WHEN I WAS APPOINTED TO THE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE

ON CORRECTION, IT SEEMED MONUMENTAL. AS THE FIRST FORMERLY-

INCARCERATED STATE LEGISLATURE [SIC], I WILL HAVE A SEAT AT THE TABLE OF THE

COMMITTEE THAT DETERMINES THE FUTURE OF OUR PRISON SYSTEM.

IN DECEMBER WHEN WE ALL VIEWED THE HORRIBLE AND

HORRIFIC VIDEO OF ROBERT BROOKS BEATEN TO DEATH BY PRISON GUARDS AT

MARCY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY WHILE OTHER STAFF AND NURSES LOOKED ON

LAUGHING, I IMAGINED WE WERE FACING A RECKONING; ONE THAT WOULD

REQUIRE THIS STATE LEGISLATIVE BODY TO ASK THE QUESTION, FOR WHOM DO

WE GRANT HUMANITY? FOR WHOM DO WE SAY YOUR LIFE IS WORTHY OF

PROTECTION?

DURING THIS IMPORTANT DEBATE I'VE HEARD MEMBERS

DISCUSS IT'S HOW IMPORTANT THAT CORRECTION OFFICERS BE SAFE. AND I

AGREE. BUT DOCCS DO [SIC] NOT HAVE A FUNCTIONING SYSTEM OF

DISCIPLINE FOR CORRECTIONS STAFF. AT A RECENT CORRECTION HEARING,

COMMISSIONER MARTUSCELLO AGREED THAT I AM NOT SAFE ALONE INSIDE ANY

NEW YORK STATE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY. DURING CONFERENCE RECENTLY,

CHAIRMAN ERIK DILAN CONCLUDED THAT I AM NOT SAFE INSIDE ANY NEW

YORK STATE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY ALONE. IN FACT, I AM MORE SAFE WITH THE

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS, BUT NOT SO WITH THE CORRECTION OFFICERS. IF A

189

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SITTING NEW YORK STATE LEGISLATURE [SIC] IS UNSAFE IN THESE NEW YORK

STATE PRISON FACILITIES, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS

ARE? THEY'RE NOT SAFE EITHER. EVER SINCE THE MODERN-DAY LYNCHING AND

MURDER OF ROBERT BROOKS, I'VE BEEN UNDER ATTACK. I SHARED IT WITH A

FEW MEMBERS ON THAT SIDE. NYSCOPBA RELEASED THE FOOTAGE OF ME

DISAGREEING WITH AN ABUSIVE SERGEANT, AND THEY EDIT THIS FOOTAGE AND

PUT IT OUT INTO THE UNIVERSE. THE NIGHT I SLEPT AT THE FACILITY AND ME AND

THIS YOUNG LADY GOT INTO A DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT I SHOULD BE

THERE. AS A RESULT OF THAT FOOTAGE OF BEING RELEASED, I RECEIVED LIFE-

THREATENING NOTES LEFT ON MY VEHICLES FIVE TIMES AT FIVE DIFFERENT

FACILITIES. EDWARD, DON'T COME BACK HERE. YOU'LL DIE. EDWARD, YOU

WHY YOU COMING INTO THESE FACILITIES? AND, IN FACT, AT COXSACKIE MY

TIRE WAS SLASHED. AND OUR NEW YORK STATE TROOPER TOLD ME I HAVE TO

DO THIS ON MY OWN. TWO WEEKS LATER, I GO TO MARCY, COME OUT AND

MYSTERIOUSLY THERE'S A NAIL IN MY BACK TIRE. MY GAS TANK WAS

(INDISCERNIBLE) AND TAMPERED WITH SEVERAL TIMES. SEVERAL INCIDENTS OF

ROAD RAGE, MOST RECENTLY TWO WEEKS AGO. A COLLEAGUE ON MY SIDE WAS

DRIVING BACK TO HARLEM WITH ME. TWO CORRECTIONS OFFICERS IN PICKUP

TRUCKS CUTTING US OFF AND GIVING US THE FINGER FOR 15 MILES. THANK GOD

FOR THE STATE TROOPER BEHIND HIM. HE PULLED US OVER, STARTS AN

INVESTIGATION. ALL BECAUSE I SPOKE OUT ON A BLACK MAN BEING

MURDERED IN PRISON. WE ALL SEEN THE FOOTAGE. WE ALL KNOW ABOUT SAM

THE NEXT WEEK, RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM MARCY. WE HEARD ABOUT THE

MURDER OF FREDDIE MCCREE [PHONETIC] DOWN AT COXSACKIE.

AND AS A HUMAN BEING -- NOT A POLITICIAN, A

190

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PEOPLETICIAN -- A PERSON WHO LOVE [SIC] AND RESPECT ALL HUMANS, WHITE,

BLACK, WHATEVER, YELLOW, I RESPECT AND LOVE YOU ALL. SO AS A GUY WHO

REALLY LOVE [SIC] HUMANS AND FELT THAT AS A STATE LEGISLATURE [SIC] I

SHOULD SPEAK OUT ON MURDERS AND ABUSERS IN PRISONS. NOW I'M

ATTACKED. AND SOME OF MY FRIENDS ON THE OTHER AISLES WHO I THOUGHT

WERE REALLY CLOSE TO ME USED THE "INMATE" WORD LOOSELY TO TRIGGER ME.

I THOUGHT THIS BODY WAS A BODY THAT SOLVED PROBLEMS. AND JOINING THE

CORRECTION COMMITTEE, I WAS HONORED BECAUSE I WAS WILLING TO SHARE

MY STORY AND MY EXPERIENCES. EIGHTEEN YEARS OLD, SENT TO A MAXIMUM

FACILITY IN ELMIRA, MEN AMONGST MEN. EIGHT MONTHS LATER I'M

TRANSFERRED TO CAYUGA COMMUNITY. I'M HIRED AS A GED REP. AND A

YOUNG LADY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROGRAM WHERE I'M AT --

PALMESANO -- EXCUSE ME, MEMBER -- LIKED THE FACT THAT I WAS TEACHING

FORMERLY-INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS HOW TO GET THEY [SIC] GED. AND AS

A RESULT SHE WROTE ME A LETTER AND SENT ME TWO MOCK NECKS AND SAID

THANK YOU FOR HELPING THESE INDIVIDUALS. CORRECTIONS FOUND OUT ABOUT

IT. THEY FIRED THE CIVILIAN AND THEY TRANSFERRED ME. THOUGH I HAD NO

HISTORY OF TALKING TO THIS YOUNG LADY, I NEVER RESPONDED. NEVER EVEN

SAID HI TO HER. BUT THEY TRANSFERRED ME AND THEY TRANSFERRED ME TO

MID-STATE WHERE THERE WAS A WELCOMING PARTY. FIVE OFFICERS WAITING.

HOW DARE YOU TALK TO A WHITE WOMAN IN PRISON? NOW, I COULD SHARE

THE ABUSE. I COULD SHARE THE 25 MINUTES OF BEATING. I COULD SHARE THE

TEN MINUTES OF STEPPING ON MY HEAD AND ANKLES AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

I'VE SHARED THAT WITH MANY ON THE OTHER SIDE ALREADY. AND I THOUGHT

THAT I GARNERED ENOUGH RESPECT THAT YOU GUYS WOULDN'T EVEN USE THAT

191

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WORD AROUND ME ANYMORE. I SHARE WITH MOST OF YOU OVER THERE THAN I

SHARE WITH MY COLLEAGUES OVER HERE. MOST OF YOU OVER THERE KNOW

ABOUT THE THREATS. YOU KNOW ABOUT THE WINDOWS AND THE LETTERS LEFT ON

MY WINDSHIELD. IN FACT, COMMISSIONER MARTUSCELLO TALKED WITH FIVE OF

US ABOUT THAT. DIAPETRO [SIC] BEING ONE OF THEM. SO I'M HUMAN. TO

HUMAN IS TO BE ERR, TO ERR TO BE HUMAN, HOWEVER YOU PROFESSIONALS SAY

IT. I HAVE EMOTIONS. I LOVE PEOPLE. ALL PEOPLE. BE YOU KNOW THAT.

AND ALL I ASK IS FOR THE SAME AMOUNT OF RESPECT THAT I GIVE YOU. I DON'T

KNOW IF I CAN SAY "CRACKER" IN THIS CHAMBER, I DON'T WANT TO BE WRITTEN

UP. I'M NOT GONNA SAY THAT. BUT THOSE TERMS DON'T COME TO MY MIND

WHEN I SEE YOU GUYS. I SEE HUMANS. AND ALL I ASK IS FOR THAT SAME

AMOUNT OF RESPECT.

NOW, BACK TO THIS PACKAGE. THOUGH I BELIEVE THIS

PACKAGE IS HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, IT'S SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH.

WHEN A MEMBER OF THE CORRECTION COMMITTEE, WAYNE JACKSON HERE IN

THE NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY IS NOT SAFE TO GO INSIDE OF A PRISON --

FOUR MINUTES? THANK YOU. IT'S A PROBLEM. AND I SHARED WITH MOST OF

YOU GUYS THAT I'M THREATENED AND TIRES ARE SLASHED AND STABBED, RUNNING

ME AND JORDAN OFF THE ROAD. I DON'T FEEL SUPPORTED. I DON'T FEEL THE

LOVE FROM MY COLLEAGUE [SIC]. I DON'T FEEL THE LOVE FROM THE CHAMBER.

I DON'T FEEL THE LOVE FROM MY CONFERENCE OR THE COMMITTEE. NOT THE

SAME LOVE I GIVE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU. I GIVE YOU ALL AUTHENTIC,

OPEN EDDIE GIBBS. THAT'S ALL I ASK FOR IN RETURN.

SO THIS PACKAGE, IT'S A GOOD PACKAGE. IT REALLY IS. BUT

IT'S SIMPLY ISN'T ENOUGH. NOT ENOUGH TO ADDRESS THE YEARS OF ABUSE AND

192

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MURDER. MOST THAT WAS SWEPT UNDER THE RUG BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE

CAMERAS THEN. I ENCOURAGE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU GO TO A PRISON

AND VISIT. TALK TO CORRECTION OFFICERS AND TALK TO INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS. STOP LEGISLATING BLINDLY. AND YOU'LL SEE THE REAL STORY.

ALL I WANT TO IS DO WHAT IS RIGHT. MY COMMUNITY ELECTED ME HERE TO DO

WHAT'S RIGHT, AND I DID THAT, YOUR HONOR. AND I'M ATTACKED. THAT'S

WHERE MY EMOTION AND ANGER COMES FROM. WORRY ABOUT GETTING IN

YOUR CAR. WORRYING ABOUT GOING TO A PRISON, ARE YOU GONNA COME OUT

SAFE? ARE THEY GONNA PUT STUFF ON YOU? ARE THEY GONNA ACCUSE YOU

AGAIN? ALL I'M TRYING TO DO IS WHAT'S RIGHT. AND I SPOKE OUT ON

(INDISCERNIBLE) INJUSTICE. AND NOW I GOT A WHOLE UNION ATTACKING LITTLE

OLD ME. CAN'T EVEN DRIVE DOWN I-87 NO MORE. GET MY CAR CHECKED FOR

TRACKERS BECAUSE I CAN'T FIGURE OUT HOW THEY FIND ME. ALL BECAUSE I

SPOKE OUT AGAINST A MURDER IN PRISON. SO I EXPECTED THIS PACKAGE TO BE

A LITTLE BIT MORE. I EXPECTED MY COLLEAGUES TO BE MORE UNDERSTANDING.

AND MAYBE I JUST DON'T SHARE ENOUGH.

SO AS A RESULT I'M A NEGATIVE ON THIS PACKAGE. BUT I

BELIEVE THAT WE ARE HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. THREE MEN WERE

KILLED AND NOBODY BAT [SIC] AN EYE. NOBODY. I'M IN A CHAMBER FULL OF

PROFESSIONALS, AND I AIN'T SEEN ONE TEAR. SO AGAIN, MEMBER WALSH AND

MY FELLOW COLLEAGUES, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT AND I HOPE YOU GUYS TRULY

UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WORD IS HURTFUL, VERY HURTFUL. I APOLOGIZE. VERY

HURTFUL TO ME. AND YOU KNOW I WOULD NEVER DISRESPECT ANY OF YOU

GUYS OVER THERE. AND FOR A MEMBER TO INVITE ME OUTSIDE BECAUSE I

ASKED HIM NOT TO USE THAT WORD ANYMORE --

193

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU, MR.

GIBBS.

MR. GIBBS: -- IT'S DISCOURAGING.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. BEEPHAN.

MR. BEEPHAN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. DILAN: YES, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS,

MR. BEEPHAN: I FIGURED YOU GOT A GOOD 15 MINUTE

BREAK THERE.

MR. DILAN: WELL, I THINK THE -- I THINK THE MESSAGE

WAS IMPORTANT TO HEAR.

MR. BEEPHAN: I AGREE.

MR. DILAN: BUT I WILL SAY THAT MY POSITION ON THE

FLOOR HERE PUTS ME KIND OF AT A DISADVANTAGE AS IT RELATES TO THESE

DEBATES. VERY IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO HEAR.

MR. BEEPHAN: NO WORRIES, NO WORRIES AT ALL. SO,

CAN WE DISCUSS THE CHANGES REGARDING CANY IN THIS LEGISLATION?

MR. DILAN: CERTAINLY.

MR. BEEPHAN: WOULD YOU LIKE TO GIVE A BRIEF

OVERVIEW OF WHAT'S CHANGED IN THE LEGISLATION? OR --

MR. DILAN: YEAH. SO, I GUESS TO -- A -- A BRIEF

194

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

OVERVIEW, RIGHT, WOULD -- THE BILL WILL MAKE SEVERAL CHANGES TO EXPAND

THE AUTHORITY OF CANY, INCLUDING ALLOWING NOTICE -- INCLUDING MORE

NOTICE LIKE RIGHT NOW, EVEN IF THERE'S A LOCKDOWN, IF THERE'S AN

EMERGENCY-WIDE LOCKDOWN, CANY CAN OPERATE. THIS WILL ADDRESS

SOME OF CANY'S ABILITY TO OPERATE DURING A LOCKDOWN, DOCCS

CERTAINLY RETAINS, YOU KNOW, SOME -- SOME EMERGENCY PROTOCOL. THEY

DO RETAIN THAT, BUT IT DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY PROHIBIT A CANY VISIT.

MR. BEEPHAN: HAS CANY REPORTED THAT THEY HAVE

DIFFICULTY ACCESSING FACILITIES RIGHT NOW?

MR. DILAN: WELL, I GUESS -- I --

(CONFERENCING)

SO, YES. SO, I GUESS THE ISSUE IS NOT NECESSARILY

CANY BEING INSIDE DURING A LOCKDOWN. CURRENTLY, IT'S THE AMOUNT OF

NOTICE THAT CANY IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE DOCS.

MR. BEEPHAN: BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S 72 HOURS,

BUT IT SEEMS (CROSS-TALK/INDISCERNIBLE) TO 24.

MR. DILAN: THIS WOULD CHANGE IT TO 24, YES.

MR. BEEPHAN: OKAY. AND SAY, YOU KNOW, THE

FACILITIES ARE, YOU KNOW, MANY OF THEM ARE CURRENTLY UNDERSTAFFED BY

THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES. WEEKEND STAFFING IS SOMETIMES EVEN SMALLER

OR LESS THAN THEIR -- THEIR REQUIRED AMOUNT OR AMOUNT THEY'D LIKE. SO,

SAY ON A FRIDAY, THEY CALL AND THEY SAY THEY'RE GOING TO BE VISITING

SATURDAY AFTERNOON. IS THAT JAIL NOW REQUIRED TO MAKE STAFFING CHANGES

TO THE ACCOUNT FOR CANY COMING THERE?

MR. DILAN: WELL, I MEAN, THERE -- THERE'S --

195

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

(CONFERENCING)

SO, THERE -- THERE'S NEVER BEEN A DIFFICULTY IN THE PAST

AS IT RELATES TO CANY STAFF -- STAFFING. I GUESS UNDER -- UNDER THE

SHORTENED WINDOW, YOU KNOW, CANY IS NOT -- WHILE THEY HAVE

AUTHORITY UNDER THE LEGISLATION PROVIDED BACK IN THE 1800S THAT I

DISCUSSED ABOUT EARLIER, THEY STILL HAVE A 72 HOUR NOTICE. SO, THIS GIVES

DOCCS -- ANY DOCCS FACILITY UP TO THREE DAYS TO PREPARE FOR --

MR. BEEPHAN: NO, THEY'RE -- YOU'RE REDUCING IT TO

24, I BELIEVE.

MR. DILAN: I SPOKE WRONG. YEAH, OF COURSE WE'RE

REDUCING TO 24. CURRENTLY LAWS -- CURRENTLY, IT'S 72.

MR. BEEPHAN: WELL, I FIGURED WITH 72 HOURS --

BECAUSE CANY AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, THEY CAN'T BE IN THAT FACILITY

WITHOUT AN ESCORT, CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: THAT IS CORRECT -- CORRECT.

MR. BEEPHAN: SO, MY THOUGHT PROCESS IS 24 HOURS

OF NOTICED, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE ALREADY SUFFERING WITH STAFFING -- A

STAFFING CRISIS, YOU KNOW, ARE WE GOING TO BE MANDATING COS TO STAY

OVERTIME TO BE THERE WHEN CANY'S THERE, WALKING THE FACILITIES,

MEETING WITH INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS?

MR. DILAN: I DON'T -- I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'D BE

MANDATING OVERTIME, BUT I ALSO DON'T SEE A SITUATION IN WHERE IT WOULD

BE A BURDEN ON THE FACILITY. SO, I -- TO PROVIDE COLOR, I LAST SUMMER DID

A VISIT WITH CANY AND WE -- WE WERE, AT THAT POINT, SUPERVISED. I

THINK THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ME AND CANY IS THAT, CERTAINLY, ONE,

196

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CANY IS MUCH MORE PREPARED AND PROFESSIONAL AND KNOW THE RIGHT --

KNOWS THE RIGHT QUESTIONS AND THE THINGS TO LOOK FOR, AS IT RELATES TO

WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR IN DEFICIENCIES OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS IN THE

FACILITY. BUT WHAT THEY DON'T HAVE IS SOMETHING THAT EVERY STATE

LEGISLATOR HAS, IS THE POP-UP AUTHORITY TO GO VISIT A FACILITY. THEY HAVE

TO PROVIDE, UNDER CURRENT LAW, 72 HOURS NOTICE --

MR. BEEPHAN: RIGHT.

MR. DILAN: SO, THAT COULD POTENTIALLY -- NOT THAT

THREE DAYS IS ENOUGH TO -- TO HIDE ANYTHING THAT THEY MAY BE CONCERNED

THAT MAY COME OUT IN THE CANY REPORT AND IT -- IT MAY POTENTIALLY

PROVIDE THEM A WAY TO, I GUESS, ADDRESS THE STAFFING ISSUES. ON MY

VISIT, THE -- THE -- THE STAFFING REQUIREMENTS ON WHAT WE DID WAS

(INDISCERNIBLE) ONE OF TWO INDIVIDUALS.

MR. BEEPHAN: NOW, I SEE THIS ALSO LIMITS THE

COMMISSIONER'S AUTHORITY TO RESTRICT THEIR ACCESS DURING EMERGENCIES

AND LOCKDOWNS. IS THERE ANY SITUATION WHERE HE WILL CONTINUE TO BE

ABLE TO RESTRICT IT? YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY UNDER EXTENUATING

CIRCUMSTANCES?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. DILAN: YEAH. SO, UNDER EMERGENCY SITUATIONS,

THEY WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES.

MR. BEEPHAN: OKAY. SO, THEY WILL STILL GET ACCESS

INSIDE THE FACILITY, JUST TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES.

MR. DILAN: CORRECT.

MR. BEEPHAN: OKAY. WOULD YOU DESCRIBE CANY

197

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

TO BE MORE OF AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL ADVOCACY GROUP?

MR. DILAN: NO, AND I -- I -- I THINK THAT'S UNFAIR TO

CLASSIFY THEM THAT. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, CLEARLY THAT'S WHY I THOUGHT IT

WAS IMPORTANT TO ESTABLISH WHEN CANY WAS FOUNDED. CANY, LIKE I

SAID EARLIER, WAS FOUNDED IN -- IN THE 1800S BECAUSE CITIZENS WERE

CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON IN PRISONS. AND ON MY VISIT, YOU

KNOW, THEY CERTAINLY DID A THOROUGH JOB IN INTERVIEWING INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS ON THEIR CONDITIONS. I SPOKE TO THEM PRIVATELY, YOU KNOW,

SO, PRIVATELY THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY DOCCS STAFF THERE. BUT

THEY WERE AWAY. THEY WERE ABLE TO HAVE ONE-ON-ONE CONVERSATIONS

THAT THE -- THE DOCCS STAFF WAS NOT PRIVY TO, BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS

THEY SPENT AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF TIME TALKING WITH THE MANAGEMENT AT

EVERY FACILITY. THEY SPENT A GOOD AMOUNT OF TIME SPEAKING TO THE

HEADS OF EACH OF THE UNIONS AT THE FACILITY AND, YOU KNOW, THEY ALSO

ASKED THEM QUESTIONS ABOUT CONCERNS AND CONDITIONS THAT THEY ARE

UNDER AS WELL. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT WAS BENEFICIAL TO ME TO DO

THAT VISIT WITH THEM LAST -- LAST SUMMER, BECAUSE I GOT TO -- ONE, IT

IMPROVED MYSELF AS A -- A LEGISLATOR, BUT TWO, I GOT TO REALLY APPRECIATE

HOW THOROUGH THEY ARE IN THEIR JOBS AND HOW INDEPENDENT THEY ARE AND

THAT THEY DO TRULY SPEAK TO ALL SIDES.

MR. BEEPHAN: DO -- DO THEY OFTEN IN THEIR REPORTS

DISCUSS ISSUES FACING CORRECTIONS OFFICERS? LIKE STAFFING, MANDATORY

OVERTIME, ASSAULTS ON CORRECTIONS OFFICERS?

MR. DILAN: THEY -- THEY -- THEY DO DO THAT, YES.

MR. BEEPHAN: THEY DO? I -- I JUST FIND IT

198

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

INTERESTING THAT NOW THEY GET TWO APPOINTEES TO THE COMMISSION IN THIS

BILL, CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: THEY DO.

MR. BEEPHAN: AND, YOU KNOW, FROM MY

PERSPECTIVE, I SEE THEM OFTENTIMES AS ADVOCATES FOR THE INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS. YOU KNOW, IT WOULD'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, A BIT MORE OF A

FAIR SITUATION THAN SAY WITH NYSCOPBA OR ALSO ABLE TO APPOINT A

PERSON, OR TWO, TO THIS COMMISSION, IN -- YOU KNOW, IN ADDITION TO THE

GOVERNOR, THE SPEAKER, THE SENATE. BUT I GUESS WE'LL MOVE ON FROM

THAT TOPIC.

MR. DILAN: YEAH, AND I -- I WOULD JUST SAY MY

OPINION IN CANY AND I KNOW THERE WAS -- THERE'S A CERTAIN PERCEPTION,

BECAUSE I -- I -- I MIGHT HAVE SHARED IT BEFORE MY VISIT, BUT UPON

CONDUCTING A VISIT WITH THEM AND SEEING HOW THEY CONDUCT AT WORK, I --

I WOULD SAY THEY'RE THE MOST BALANCED, NONPARTISAN ENTITY IN THIS BILL.

MR. BEEPHAN: NOW MOVING ONTO VIDEO

DISCLOSURE. SO I SEE NOW THAT THEY HAVE 72 HOURS TO TURN OVER ANY

VIDEO FOOTAGE RELEVANT TO A DEATH TO THE AG'S OFFICE, CORRECT? THAT'S

BODY CAMS, FACILITY FOOTAGE, FIXED CAMERAS, ALL THAT?

MR. DILAN: THAT'S CORRECT. TO THE AG'S OSI.

MR. BEEPHAN: OKAY. SO THAT'S LIKE AN INTERNAL

COMMUNICATION BETWEEN DOCCS AND THE AG. NO FORMAL REQUEST

NEEDED, NOTHING LIKE THAT?

MR. DILAN: NO. IT'S MANDATORY THEY HAVE

(INDISCERNIBLE).

199

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. BEEPHAN: OKAY. NOW, WERE THERE ANY

DISCUSSIONS OF PERHAPS USING THE SAME 72 HOUR TIME FRAME TO ALLOW FOR

CORRECTIONS OFFICERS OR OTHER ENTITIES TO REQUEST VIDEO FOOTAGE WHEN SAY

THEY WERE ASSAULTED BY AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL?

MR. DILAN: WELL, I GUESS --

(CONFERENCING)

I GUESS THE CONCERN IS -- THE REASON WHY THE AG'S UNIT

OF THE OSI WAS CREATED, IT DIDN'T ONLY INCLUDE CORRECTIONS OFFICERS AT THE

TIME, IT ALSO INCLUDE MEMBERS OF THE POLICE FORCE. IT -- IT WAS INTENDED

TO -- THAT WHOLE UNIT WAS INTENDED TO INVESTIGATE DEATHS WHEN THEY

WERE OCCURRED BY POLICE OR PEACE OFFICERS. SO, IT'S -- IT'S -- IT'S GEARED

THAT WAY SO THAT, YOU KNOW, THE -- THE -- THE COUNTIES ACROSS THE STATE,

REGARDLESS, ARE -- ARE TAKING IT OUT. AND IF WE'RE GOING INTO OTHER

SECTIONS OF -- OF THE CURRENT LAW, NOT THE BILL NOW, BUT JUST FOR -- FOR

COLOR, YOU KNOW, IT'S CERTAINLY GEARED THAT WAY SO THAT THE FAMILIARITY

THAT -- AND THE WORK -- AND THE STRONG WORKING RELATIONSHIPS THAT

COUNTY DAS AND COUNTY POLICE FORCES HAVE, IT WAS DONE THAT WAY TO,

AGAIN, REMOVE ANY APPEARANCE OF UNFAMILIARITY, OR -- OR CONFLICTS, OR

WORKING RELATIONSHIPS SO THAT THE TRUE FACTS OF THE MATTER ALL OTHER

DEATHS DONE BY A PEACE OFFICER COULD BE INVESTIGATED INDEPENDENTLY BY

THE AG'S OFFICE.

MR. BEEPHAN: YEAH. I UNDERSTAND --

MR. DILAN: SO, THIS -- SO, THIS WOULD -- CONTINUE

THAT.

MR. BEEPHAN: YEAH. NO, OF COURSE. BUT, I -- I'M

200

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

JUST SAYING THAT NOW THERE'S GOING TO BE A PROCESS IN PLACE WHERE, YOU

KNOW, DOCCS COULD COME UP WITH THAT FOOTAGE WITHIN 72 HOURS AND

TURN IT OVER TO THE AG, WHY CAN'T THEY ALSO BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH

FOOTAGE WITHIN 72 HOURS AND GIVE IT TO ONE OF THEIR OWN EMPLOYEES?

MR. DILAN: BECAUSE THAT'S AN ISSUE FOR -- FOR

DOCCS TO ADDRESS AND CERTAINLY IN LEGISLATION WASN'T REALLY NEEDED FOR

DOCCS TO -- TO DEAL WITH THINGS THAT ARE -- THAT ARE IN THEIR POSSESSION

AND -- AND DO THINGS WITHIN THEIR OWN AGENCY.

MR. BEEPHAN: DOES THIS BILL EXPAND THE USE OF

BODY CAMS FOR CORRECTIONS OFFICERS?

MR. DILAN: NO.

MR. BEEPHAN: OKAY. DOES IT ADDRESS A BODY CAM

POLICY IN ANY WAY?

MR. DILAN: NO.

MR. BEEPHAN: OKAY. GOT IT. SO, I KNOW THAT, YOU

KNOW, IN THE BUDGET WE COVERED IT AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS

AT OUR HEARINGS WITH THE -- THE COMMISSIONER. YOU KNOW, NOT THAT

LONG AGO, CORRECTIONS OFFICERS WERE FORCED TO WEAR THEIR BODY CAMS IN

BATHROOM. SO, I HOPE THAT, YOU KNOW, AS THESE DISCUSSIONS, YOU KNOW,

CARRY ON, WE KIND OF ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS WHETHER IT'S

ADMINISTRATIVELY OR HERE LEGISLATIVELY. AS WE EXPAND THE USE OF

CAMERAS, WE KEEP A FOCUS ON PRIVACY AND MAKING SURE OUR OWN

EMPLOYEES AREN'T BEING VIOLATED IN ANY WAY.

MR. DILAN: YEAH. SO, I WOULD -- I WOULD SAY TO

THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S A CONCERN. WE -- WE'RE LOOKING

201

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

FOR THE RELEVANT FACTS OF ANY POTENTIAL -- OF POTENTIAL SITUATION THAT MAY

ARISE INSIDE A FACILITY. CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, AREAS OF PRIVACY LIKE YOU

MENTIONED, I'M GLAD THEY CORRECTED AND EVEN IN THE INSTANCES WHERE WE

ARE EXPANDING AUTHORITY, WE DO MAKE REFERENCES TO A, YOU KNOW, PLACE

WHERE FOLKS ARE ENTITLED TO PRIVACY.

MR. BEEPHAN: WHEN -- WHEN COMING UP WITH THIS

OMNIBUS BILL, DID -- WERE ANY PROPOSALS MADE TO ADDRESS THE STAFFING

SITUATION? SPECIFICALLY REGARDING THE -- THE EMPLOYEES THAT WERE FIRED

POST STRIKE?

MR. DILAN: SO, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE -- THERE ARE

ANY --

(CONFERENCING)

YEAH. SO, IT -- IT -- IT -- IT'S CERTAINLY OUT OF THE SCOPE,

BUT I WOULD SAY THAT DISCUSSIONS ON RECRUITING TO ADDRESSES THE -- THE

STAFFING CRISIS HAS, YOU KNOW, COME UP NOT -- NOT ONLY IN YOUR

CONFERENCE, BUT IN MINE AS WELL. WE ALL RECOGNIZE THAT THERE IS A -- A

CRISIS AND WE RECOGNIZE HOW HARD IT IS TO GAIN AND -- AND RETAIN

CORRECTIONS OFFICERS. SOME OF THOSE WE'VE ADDRESSED IN -- IN THE

BUDGET BY ACTIONS WE'VE TAKEN IN -- IN THE BUDGET. SO WHILE THIS

PACKAGE DOESN'T ADDRESS THAT, FOLKS RECOGNIZE THAT IT IS A LEGITIMATE

ISSUE.

MR. BEEPHAN: GOT IT. DOES THIS OMNIBUS BILL

ADDRESS VISITATION AT ALL?

MR. DILAN: NO.

MR. BEEPHAN: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

202

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

I GUESS I WILL GO ON THE BILL. THANK YOU.

MR. DILAN: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. BEEPHAN: WELL, I CAN TELL YOU THAT I WANT TO

START WITH SAYING I TRULY AM SORRY FOR THE FAMILY OF MR. BROOKS AND THE

OTHERS IMPACTED BY WHAT'S HAPPENED IN OUR FACILITIES. I -- I COMPLETELY

AGREE CHANGE NEEDS TO HAPPEN WITHIN OUR CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES. I

THINK THIS OMNIBUS IS A START IN MANY WAYS, WHETHER I AGREE OR DISAGREE

WITH SOME COMPONENTS OF IT. BUT I DON'T BELIEVE IT GOES FAR ENOUGH. I

BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE NOT ADDRESSED THE ROOT CAUSE OF THIS BILL. WHETHER

IT'S SOME OF THE PROVISIONS AT HALT, TO THE STAFFING CRISIS, TO

ADDRESSING DRUGS WITHIN THE FACILITIES AND EXPOSURES THAT BOTH

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS AND OUR CORRECTIONS OFFICERS FACE EACH AND

EVERY SINGLE DAY. AND IT ALSO DOESN'T ADDRESS THE -- THE OVERALL NEED

FOR AN EXPANDED RECRUITMENT PROCESS AND RETENTION PROCESS THAT I THINK

WOULD TREMENDOUSLY CHANGE THE ENVIRONMENT WITHIN EACH OF OUR

PRISONS. FOR THAT I'M GONNA HAVE TO HEAVILY CONSIDER HOW I'M GONNA

VOTE ON THIS BILL, BUT I THANK THE SPONSOR FOR HIS TIME.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU, MR.

BEEPHAN.

MS. CRUZ.

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

SPONSOR YIELD FOR A QUICK COUPLE OF QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

203

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DILAN: CERTAINLY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MS. CRUZ: MR. CHAIRMAN, DOES THIS BILL CHANGE THE

PUBLIC'S ACCESS TO THE ACTUAL VIDEO FOOTAGE IF THERE IS A -- A DEATH OR A

MURDER INSIDE ONE OF OUR PRISON SYSTEMS?

MR. DILAN: NO.

MS. CRUZ: WHO RETAINS POWER TO MAKE A

DETERMINATION OF WHAT IS RELEVANT PARTS OF THE VIDEO OR MAKE ANY

REDACTIONS TO THE VIDEO?

MR. DILAN: THE AG'S OSI UNIT.

MS. CRUZ: THANK YOU. AND DOES THIS BILL CHANGE

ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN THE ACTUAL STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IN THE PROCESS

OF SOMEONE FILING A LAWSUIT? FOR EXAMPLE, WOULD IT CHANGE THE TYPE OF

EVIDENCE, WHERE TO FILE, WHEN IT FILE?

MR. DILAN: NOTHING. IT SIMPLY JUST GIVES THEM

THREE MORE YEARS.

MS. CRUZ: THANK YOU.

ON -- ON THE BILL, MADAM SPEAKER. THANK YOU, MR.

CHAIRMAN.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MS. CRUZ: BEFORE I START, I WANT TO ADDRESS

EVERYONE ON A PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LEVEL. WE ARE ENTITLED TO OUR

VIEWS, TO OUR RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL BELIEFS. WHAT WE CANNOT DO IS

CARRY ON IN THIS HOUSE WITH CARELESSNESS AND EVEN SOMETIMES

PURPOSEFUL USE OF WORDS THAT DO NOT BELONG ON THIS FLOOR. WORDS

204

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MATTER. WE OWE IT TO EACH OTHER TO HAVE RESPECT. IF A COLLEAGUE TELLS

US WHETHER IT'S IN HERE OR OUTSIDE THAT THE WORD YOU ARE USING IS

DEHUMANIZING, HAVE ENOUGH DECENCY AND RESPECT FOR YOUR COLLEAGUE

NOT TO USE IT. YOU CAN'T GET -- YOU CAN GET YOUR POINT ACROSS WITHOUT

DEHUMANIZING SOMEONE AND THAT ONCE A DEBATE IS OVER, YOU'RE GONNA

COME OUT OF HERE AND ACT LIKE THEY'RE YOUR FRIEND OR YOUR COLLEAGUE.

HAVE SOME RESPECT AND DECENCY FOR YOUR COLLEAGUES.

I WANT TO THANK THE SPEAKER FOR THIS PACKAGE AND OUR

COLLEAGUES WHO LED THE FIGHT AND OUR CORRECTIONS CHAIRMAN FOR

CARRYING IT, BUT I ESPECIALLY WANT TO THANK MY FRIEND AND COLLEAGUE,

EDDIE GIBBS, FOR CHANNELING HIS LIVED EXPERIENCE AND TRAUMA TO HELP

US MAKE REAL CHANGE. THIS IS A STARTING LINE, NOT THE FINISH LINE. THERE

ARE A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF BILLS THAT DID NOT MAKE IT INTO THIS PACKAGE

THAT MUST BE CONSIDERED NEXT YEAR, INCLUDING SECOND LOOK ACT, THE

EARNED TIME ACT, FAIR AND TIMELY PAROLE AND ELDER PAROLE ACTS. THE

MURDER AND VIOLENCE AGAINST INCARCERATED PEOPLE IN OUR STATE IS AN

EPIDEMIC AND WE MUST ADDRESS THE UNDERLYING REASONS WHY IT HAS

HAPPENED. ADDRESS ROADBLOCKS AND INVESTIGATE WHEN IT HAPPENS AND

PUNISH IN ORDER TO DETER THIS HORRIFIC BEHAVIOR.

IN 1976, THE STATE BEGAN TRACKING THE DEATHS OF

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS WHILE IN CUSTODY. THE NUMBERS ARE QUITE

HORRIFYING, BUT TRUTHFULLY, NOT SHOCKING. 7,504 HAVE DIED WHILE UNDER

THE CUSTODY OF DOCCS. THIS IS SEVEN TIMES MORE THAN THE NUMBER OF

PEOPLE THAT WE EXECUTED IN THE STATE WHEN IT USED TO BE LEGAL. THIS

INCLUDES INDIVIDUALS LIKE LAYLEEN POLANCO, MR. ROBERT BROOKS AND

205

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MESSIAH -- MESSIAH NANTWI AND MANY OTHERS WHO WERE MURDERED BY

STAFF. BUT THIS IS NOT JUST A MURDER OF -- MURDER VICTIMS, THERE ARE

HUNDREDS AND POSSIBLY THOUSANDS OF INDIVIDUALS WHO'VE BEEN

PHYSICALLY AND SEXUALLY ASSAULTED WHILE IN OUR PRISON SYSTEM AND OUR

JAIL SYSTEM. AN ASTONISHING 719 SEXUAL ASSAULT LAWSUITS HAVE BEEN

FILED AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION BY FORMERLY INCARCERATED

WOMEN, ALLEGING A PATTERN OF ABUSE THAT GOES BACK DECADES. WE HAVE

A DUTY TO THEM, TO THEIR FAMILIES, TO ALL INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS TO PUT

THE LEGAL TOOLS IN PLACE TO BEGIN REAL CHANGE. THE BILL TODAY INCLUDES

TWO KEY LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS. ONE ENSURES THE VIDEO FOOTAGE IS TURNED

OVER TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE SWIFTLY TO ENSURE A THOROUGH

INVESTIGATION AND THE SUBSEQUENT PROSECUTION CAN BE DONE WHEN

SOMEONE HAS DIED IN CUSTODY AND STAFF IS INVOLVED. AND THE SECOND

ENSURES THAT WHEN THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IS TOLD TO ENSURE THAT

SURVIVORS CAN SEEK JUSTICE WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN PHYSICALLY OR SEXUALLY

ABUSED BY STAFF. WHEN INCARCERATED PEOPLE DIE UNDER SUSPICIOUS

CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS CRITICAL THAT AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR HAVE FULL

ACCESS TO THE VIDEO AND IMMEDIATELY AND WITHOUT INTERFERENCE. RIGHT

NOW CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES CONTROL THE VERY EVIDENCE THAT MIGHT

IMPLICATE THEM AND THEIR OWN OFFICERS. THIS CREATES AN INHERENT

CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND INVITES FOR COVER- UPS. EVEN IN HIGH PROFILE

DEATHS, FAMILIES AND (INDISCERNIBLE) BODIES HAVE WAITED MONTHS OR

MAYBE NEVER EVEN RECEIVED THEM. THIS BILL ENDS THAT BY ROUTING

FOOTAGE DIRECTLY TO OSI; A NEUTRAL AND INDEPENDENT ENTITY CREATED TO

INVESTIGATE THE DEATHS IN CUSTODY. WE IMPROVE ACCOUNTABILITY WITHOUT

206

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

COMPROMISING LEGAL PROCEDURES. OFFICERS WHO ACTED APPROPRIATELY

SHOULD WANT THIS FOOTAGE REVIEWED. IT EXONERATES THEM AND THE -- AND

IDENTIFIES SYSTEMATIC FAILURES, NOT JUST INDIVIDUAL WRONGDOING. THE BILL

UPHOLDS NEW YORK'S VALUES AROUND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY IN

INCARCERATION AND ENSURING ALL LIVES, INCLUDING THOSE BEHIND BARS, ARE

TREATED WITH DIGNITY. THIS BILL ALSO CREATES AN AVENUE FOR INDIVIDUALS

WHO HAVE A CLAIM ARISE WHILE IN CUSTODY TO BRING A SUIT BY TOLLING THE

CIVIL STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS UNTIL THE INDIVIDUAL IS NO LONGER IN CUSTODY

AND CAN FEEL SAFE TO COME FORWARD AND SEEK AN ATTORNEY. THE BILL

REMOVES UNFAIR LEGAL HURDLES, KEEPING SURVIVORS ABUSED IN THE -- OUR

STATE CUSTODY FROM ACCESSING THE JUSTICE THEY DESERVE AND PROVIDES

DETERRENCE TO PREVENT NEW ABUSE FROM OCCURRING. WHILE THE BILL IDEA

COMES FROM WORK WE'VE DONE WITH WOMEN WHO WERE SEXUALLY

ASSAULTED IN PRISON BY THEIR CORRECTION OFFICERS, OR OTHER STAFF. FROM

LGBTQ INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE PHYSICALLY AND SEXUALLY ASSAULTED DUE TO

NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION WHILE IN CUSTODY, IT WILL HELP ANY INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUAL WHO WAS ABUSED WHILE IN CUSTODY.

WE'VE HEARD THE REALITY LIVED BY VICTIMS WHO ARE

INCARCERATED. THEY FACE RETALIATION IN A VARIETY OF FORMS, INCLUDING

FURTHER PHYSICAL AND SEXUAL AND EMOTIONAL ABUSE, HAVING LEGAL PAPERS

DESTROYED, HAD MAIL AND PACKAGES DESTROYED, FACED DELAYS IN SEEING

THEIR LEGAL COUNSEL, VERBAL ABUSE AND SO ON AND SO ON. WE KNOW THAT IT

IS INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT FOR A PERSON TO COME FORWARD AND THAT PERSON IS

NOT INCARCERATED. ADD TO THAT BEING IN THE CARE -- IN THE CARE OF A

SYSTEM THAT IS ALLOWING FURTHER ABUSE TO CONTINUE. THIS BILL IS

207

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE ACCESS TO JUSTICE ONCE A PERSON'S OUT.

FURTHER, WE KNOW THAT MANY JUSTICE INVOLVED

INDIVIDUALS ARE NOT INFORMED ABOUT THE NOTICE OF CLAIM REQUIREMENT

AND ARE UNAWARE THAT THEY HAVE JUST 90 DAYS TO FILE IN ORDER TO PURSUE A

FUTURE CIVIL CLAIM. AND I SUSPECT THAT MANY OF US DIDN'T -- DIDN'T KNOW

THAT THAT WAS A REQUIREMENT AS WELL.

LASTLY, BUT IMPORTANTLY, I WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE

FAMILIES OF THOSE MURDERED WHILE IN CUSTODY. THE SURVIVORS WHO HAVE

FOUGHT FOR CHANGE, WE ARE BEGINNING TODAY. I KNOW I SPEAK FOR MANY

OF US HERE TODAY, WE ARE SORRY FOR YOUR LOSS. WE ARE SORRY FOR THE

ABUSE YOU HAVE SUFFERED. WE HOPE THIS WILL BEGIN A PATH TO JUSTICE AND

HEALING AND WE ARE COMITTED TO CONTINUING TO FIGHT FOR REAL CHANGE.

AND I KNOW HE HAD STEPPED OUT, SO I DO WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO MY

FRIEND EDDIE FOR TEACHING ME AND FOR TEACHING MANY OF US WHAT REAL

COURAGE LOOKS LIKE. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MS. GALLAGHER.

MS. GALLAGHER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

MR. DILAN: YES, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MS. GALLAGHER: SPONSOR, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME

WHY IS CANY BEING AUTHORIZED TO MAKE APPOINTMENTS TO THIS BOARD?

208

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DILAN: WELL, I THINK IT -- IT -- IT'S IMPORTANT

BECAUSE CANY OBVIOUSLY IS, YOU KNOW, AN INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT

BODY AS PRESCRIBED BY LAWS BACK -- WAY BACK WHEN I SAID EARLIER.

THEY CONDUCT THESE VISITS, THEY GIVE REPORTS ON POTENTIAL CONDITIONS TO

US PUBLICLY AS CHARGED BY LAW AND SO IS THE STATE COMMISSION ON

CORRECTIONS. SO, I THINK IT'S VITALLY IMPORTANT THAT THE TWO INDEPENDENT

OVERSIGHT ENTITIES THAT WE HAVE IN THIS STATE, ONE SET FORTH BY CHARTER,

ONE SET FORTH BY LEGISLATION, ACTUALLY GET TOGETHER IN AN OFFICIAL FORM

AND COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER. SO, THIS PARTICULARLY DOESN'T SAY A

MEMBER OF CANY HAS TO SERVE ON THAT BOARD, BUT THEY CAN APPOINT

SOMEONE TO BE THEIR LIAISON. IT DOESN'T PROHIBIT THEM FROM APPOINTING

ONE OF THEIR MEMBERS ON THE BOARD EITHER, BUT I THINK IT WAS IMPORTANT

SO THAT THE TWO INDEPENDENT BODIES HAVE A MORE CONNECTED

PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIP. THIS WILL DO THAT FORMALLY, AND I ALSO THINK

WE NEED TO DO MORE TO STRENGTHEN THE OPERATIONS OF THE STATE

COMMISSION ON CORRECTIONS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO

YOUR QUESTION. WE -- WE -- WE GAVE THEM MORE FUNDING IN THE BUDGET,

BUT THEY WERE CHARGED TO DO AS A GOVERNMENT ENTITY, SIMILAR TO WHAT

CANY WAS CHARGED TO DO AS A NON-GOVERNMENT ENTITY. SO, THE FACT

THAT THEY ARE TALKING AND WORKING TOGETHER IS VITAL.

MS. GALLAGHER: THANK YOU SO MUCH.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MS. GALLAGHER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

I'M PROUD TO VOTE FOR THIS OMNIBUS BILL, WHICH INCLUDES TWO OF MY

209

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ORIGINAL BILLS; THE SCOC REFORM BILL AND THE TERRY COOPER AUTOPSY

ACCOUNTABILITY ACT. WE ALL BEGAN THIS SESSION WITH THE IMAGE OF MR.

ROBERT BROOKS' LYNCHING BURNED INTO OUR MINDS. THE WAY HE WAS

BEATEN WITH HIS HANDS CUFFED BEHIND HIS BACK WHILE AT LEAST 14

CORRECTIONS STAFF EAGERLY PARTICIPATED, OR CASUALLY WATCHED, SPOKE TO AN

ENGRAINED CULTURE OF VIOLENCE AND IMPUNITY. FOR ME AND FOR MANY OF

MY COLLEAGUES, HIS MURDER LIT A FIRE UNDER US TO INCREASE OVERSIGHT AND

ACCOUNTABILITY TO PROTECT OUR INCARCERATED COMMUNITY MEMBERS. THIS

BILL WILL DELIVER THAT AND IT WILL SAVE LIVES.

BRIEFLY, JUST A BIT ABOUT MY TWO BILLS THAT ARE INCLUDED

IN THE OMNIBUS. THE SCOC REFORM BILL HAS BEEN A LABOR OF LOVE AND

PASSION. MY OFFICE WROTE IT AFTER I VISITED RIKERS ISLAND IN 2021 AND

WITNESSED THE UTTERLY INHUMANE AND DEGRADING CONDITIONS PEOPLE ARE

SUBJECT TO. THE EXPERIENCE LEAD ME TO A QUESTION: WHO IS STATUTORILY

RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING OVERSIGHT IN OUR JAILS AND PRISONS? THE

ANSWER IS, THE STATE COMMISSION ON CORRECTION [SIC]. THIS BILL WILL

EXPAND AND DIVERSIFY THE SCOC, SO IT CAN ONCE AGAIN BE A ROBUST BODY

WITH THE PEOPLE AND RESOURCES NECESSARY TO PROTECT INCARCERATED

PEOPLE. WITH US TODAY ARE ADVOCATES FROM THE KATAL CENTER AND THEY,

ALONG WITH THE JAILS JUSTICE NETWORK, HAVE BEEN FIGHTING ALONGSIDE ME

FOR THE BILL FOR YEARS. THIS YEAR, MR. BROOKS' FATHER, MR. ROBERT RICKS,

ALSO PLAYED A CRUCIAL ROLE IN FIGHTING FOR THESE LIFE-SAVING BILLS. THANK

YOU ALL FOR YOUR WORK, THIS IS YOUR VICTORY TODAY.

THE TERRY COOPER AUTOPSY ACCOUNTABILITY ACT WAS

NAMED AFTER TERRY COOPER, A HUSBAND AND FATHER, WHO WAS BEATEN BY

210

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

OFFICERS USING BATONS. HE WAS BEATEN SO BADLY THAT HE DIED. THEY TRIED

TO PASS HIS DEATH OFF AS A NATURAL CAUSE, BECAUSE THE BEATING TRIGGERED

AN ASTHMA ATTACK. HIS AUTOPSY REPORT DID NOT INCLUDE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT

HAD BEEN TAKEN OF MR. COOPER AFTER HE PASSED AWAY, WHICH CLEARLY

SHOWED THAT HE HAD BEEN BEATEN WITH BATONS. THE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE

ULTIMATELY DISCOVERED YEARS AFTER HIS DEATH WHEN HIS FAMILY FILED A

LAWSUIT, WHICH THEY WON. THIS BILL WOULD REQUIRE AUTOPSY REPORTS TO

INCLUDE ALL PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE BODY, SLIDES AND POST-MORTEM X-RAYS

WHEN SOMEONE DIES, OR IS KILLED IN STATE CUSTODY. AS WE'VE SEEN WITH

THE MURDERS OF MR. BROOKS, MR. NANTWI AND MR. COOPER, WE CANNOT

COUNT ON CORRECTIONS OFFICERS BEING FORTHCOMING ABOUT THE CAUSE OF

DEATH WHEN SOMEONE DIES OR IS KILLED IN STATE CUSTODY. THE TERRY

COOPER AUTOPSY ACCOUNTABILITY ACT WILL ENSURE THAT EVERYONE WHO IS

INCARCERATED IS AFFORDED THE BASIC DIGNITY AND TRANSPARENCY THAT

EVERYONE DESERVES, PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY DIE ON OUR WATCH. THANK

YOU TO MR. COOPER'S FAMILY, DAVE RANKIN AND JOSHUA MOSKOVITZ, MR.

COOPER'S LAWYERS AND THE LAWYERS WHO FOUGHT FOR JUSTICE IN THEIR

LANDMARK CASE.

THESE TWO BILLS AND THE PACKAGE AS A WHOLE WILL

INCREASE OVERSIGHT AND PROVIDE AN ESSENTIAL LAYER OF PROTECTION,

ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY. IT IS NOT ENOUGH AND IT IS CERTAINLY

JUST THE FIRST STEP. THERE'S A CRISIS IN OUR PRISONS AND JAILS AND

OVERSIGHT ALONE WON'T SOLVE IT. WE MUST ENURE THAT HALT IS FULLY

IMPLEMENTED AND THAT PROGRAMMING IS RESTORED AND EXPANDED SO

PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO REHABILITATE THEMSELVES WHILE INSIDE. WE MUST FIGHT

211

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

FOR SENTENCING AND PAROLE REFORM TO ADDRESS MASS INCARCERATION AND

ENSURE THAT PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN REHABILITATED CAN BE RELEASED AND

REJOIN THEIR COMMUNITIES AND THEIR FAMILIES. I ALSO URGE MY COLLEAGUES

TO PERSONALLY VISIT PRISONS AND JAILS ALONGSIDE CANY. IT HAS CHANGED

MY LIFE AND BEEN EXTREMELY INFORMATIVE ABOUT THE FAILURES OF OUR STATE

AND WHAT WE MUST DO TO CORRECT THEM. I AM DEDICATED TO CONTINUE

VISITING AND I WANT TO CHANGE IT. THIS BILL IS AN ESSENTIAL FIRST STEP IF WE

ARE TO MEANINGFULLY MOVE THE NEEDLE FOR OUR INCARCERATED COMMUNITY

MEMBERS. IT WILL SAVE LIVES AND BEGIN TO CHANGE THE CULTURE OF

VIOLENCE AND IMPUNITY IN OUR PRISONS AND JAILS. I WANT TO THANK

SPEAKER HEASTIE AND CHAIR DILAN FOR THEIR WORK ON THIS PACKAGE

TOGETHER AND THANK YOU FOR INCLUDING THESE TWO VERY PERSONAL PIECES OF

LEGISLATION. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. GANDOLFO.

MR. GANDOLFO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR PLEASE YIELD FOR A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. DILAN: CERTAINLY, AND --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. DILAN: --AND AS WE -- WE -- PHIL, I FORGOT TO

SAY -- EXCUSE ME, AS WITH THE PREVIOUS MEMBER, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME

WE GET TO DO THIS AND --

MR. GANDOLFO: YEAH. I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT

212

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THIS. BUT A LOT OF MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED ALREADY,

BUT I HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS I DO WANT TO CLARIFY. FIRST, ON THE TOPIC OF

VIDEO SURVEILLANCE. THIS REQUIRES THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF

CAMERAS THROUGHOUT THE FACILITIES. I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD SPEAK

A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CURRENT STATE OF CAMERAS AT THE STATE FACILITIES; ARE

-- IF THERE'S CERTAIN FACILITIES WHERE THIS IS A PARTICULAR PROBLEM? ARE

MOST ALREADY MAINTAINING THESE CAMERAS?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. DILAN: YEAH. NO, I -- YEAH. SO, CERTAINLY WE

PUT A LOT OF MONEY IN THE -- THE BUDGET ON IT. THERE ARE SOME FACILITIES

THAT DO HAVE THE CAMERAS, BUT TO SPEAK TO THE SPECIFIC ONES THAT HAVE

PROBLEMS OR DON'T HAVE PROBLEMS, I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M PREPARED TO

GIVE YOU THAT ANSWER AT THIS TIME. BUT I KNOW THAT THE DOCCS

COMMISSIONER IS CERTAINLY AWARE OF THAT AND WHICH ONES AND IS

WORKING ON IT.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT

ANSWER. AND -- NOW, THE SUPERINTENDENTS AND WARDENS ARE RESPONSIBLE

FOR THE ASSESSMENT AND MAKING SURE EVERYTHING'S UP. IS THERE A CERTAIN,

I GUESS, TIME FRAME IF THEY DISCOVER ANY KIND OF MALFUNCTION OR LAPSE

IN COVERAGE IF THEY HAVE TO GET THIS BACK UP AND RUNNING? OR IS THIS

JUST YOU SEE IT, YOU FIX IT AS SOON AS REASONABLY POSSIBLE?

MR. DILAN: IT WOULD BE THE LATTER PART.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY, THANK YOU. AND THIS

REQUIRES THE FOOTAGE TO BE STORED FOR A MINIMUM OF A YEAR, MY

COLLEAGUE TOUCHED ON THAT EARLIER. IS THAT ONLY THE PHYSICAL, I GUESS,

213

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

STATIONARY SECURITY CAMERAS, OR DOES THAT ALSO INCLUDE THE BODY CAMERA

FOOTAGE?

MR. DILAN: SO FIXED OR STATIONARY, NO BODY

CAMERAS.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. SO, BODY CAMERAS -- IS

THERE A LENGTH OF TIME -- I KNOW WE DID THAT IN THE BUDGET, SO IT'S

PROBABLY NOT IN THIS BILL, IS THERE A LENGTH OF TIME THAT THE BODY CAMERA

FOOTAGE HAS TO BE STORED?

MR. DILAN: MY GUT SAYS YES, BUT WE HAVE TO GET

BACK TO YOU ON THAT.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

NOW, AND I KNOW THE -- THERE -- THERE'S A SENSITIVE AREAS PROVISION HERE

WHERE CAMERAS CAN'T BE PLACED: SHOWERS, BATHROOMS, INSIDE THE CELL.

COULD -- IS IT YOUR ESTIMATION THAT MAYBE IF THERE'S A CAMERA OUTSIDE

ONE OF THOSE AREAS, NOT IN THOSE RESTRICTED AREAS, THAT IT WOULD STILL PICK

UP AUDIO POSSIBLY IF THERE WAS AN INCIDENT THAT HAPPENED?

MR. DILAN: PO -- POTENTIALLY --

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: -- BUT I THINK THE CONCERN IS ABOUT

PRIVACY.

MR. GANDOLFO: RIGHT. I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF LIKE

IN CASE THERE WAS AN INCIDENT IN ONE OF THOSE AREAS, WHAT --

MR. DILAN: LIKE IF THERE'S A FIGHT OR SOMETHING LIKE

THAT?

MR. GANDOLFO: YEAH, A FIGHT. LIKE --

214

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DILAN: UM, I MEAN, SURE. POTENTIALLY.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: BUT, YOU KNOW, FOR THE MOST PART,

WHILE PEOPLE ARE DOING THE THINGS THAT -- THAT -- THAT EVERYBODY DOES

NEEDS PRIVACY.

MR. GANDOLFO: WE WOULD LIKE SOME PRIVACY, I

AGREE. AND I WANTED TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS ON -- IN PART J, THE

LOOK-BACK PERIOD. SO, JUST BRIEFLY, LET'S SAY A -- THE STATUTE OF

LIMITATIONS ON A PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM IS THREE YEARS. SAY SOMEONE

WANTED TO BRING A CLAIM FROM SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN PRISON, LET'S

SAY FROM TEN YEARS AGO, BUT THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS WOULD HAVE RUN

OUT ON THAT CLAIM. IS THIS EXTRA THREE YEARS RESTARTING THAT STATUTE OF

LIMITATIONS? SO, IF YOU WERE SERVING A 15 YEAR SENTENCE AND SOMETHING

HAPPENED IN YEAR TWO AND NOW THREE YEARS WHEN YOU'RE RELEASED, COULD

YOU STILL BRING A CLAIM ON THAT IF THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS HAS

PREVIOUSLY EXPIRED?

MR. DILAN: YEAH. WELL, SO, I -- I GUESS, TO CLARIFY,

IT'S NOT A LOOK-BACK PROVISION.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: SO, IF ANYTHING THAT HAS HAPPENED AND

NO ONE HAS YET BROUGHT AN ACTION BEFORE THIS IS EFFECTIVE, THE NEW

PART -- THE NEW PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING TODAY WON'T BE ABLE TO

COVER THAT PART. HOWEVER, IF ENACTED INTO LAW BY THE GOVERNOR, THAT

WOULD BE -- THE SECOND PART OF YOUR QUESTION WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE

THE EXACT PURPOSE OF THIS, SO THAT IF THIS IS ENACTED AND SOMEONE CHOSE

215

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THEIR -- THEIR SAFETY, BUT MAYBE GOT OUT AND GOT ADVICE, THEY HAVE THREE

YEARS TO COMMENCE THAT ACTION POST-RELEASE.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. SO -- JUST SO I WANT TO

MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD YOUR ANSWER. SO, ESSENTIALLY, THIS COULD

POTENTIALLY, I GUESS, EXPAND A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, FOR LACK OF A BETTER

WORD HERE, WHAT'S IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE TEN YEARS IF -- IF THIS

INCIDENT HAPPENED?

MR. DILAN: POTENTIALLY.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: POTENTIALLY, BUT THAT IS REALLY NOT -- NOT

THE GOAL. I THINK WE -- WE DON'T WANT TO PENALIZE FOLKS FOR CHOOSING

SAFETY, BECAUSE IF THEY MAKE THE DETERMINATION WHILE -- WHILE THEY'RE

INCARCERATED, THAT IS JUST BETTER FOR ME NOT TO SAY ANYTHING --

MR. GANDOLFO: RIGHT.

MR. DILAN: -- BECAUSE I FEAR FOR MY SAFETY.

CURRENTLY, IF THEY MAKE THAT CHOICE, THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IS

RUNNING AND THERE -- THERE'S NOTHING THAT THEY CAN DO ABOUT IT.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: UNDER THIS PROPOSAL, YOU KNOW, THEY

CAN DO THAT AND THEY GET THREE YEARS POST-RELEASE.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. I UNDERSTAND THAT. AND IT

ALSO MENTIONS FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURIES. IS THAT A NEW EDITION OR IS

THAT ALREADY THE CASE? THIS IS JUST --

MR. DILAN: NO. THE ONLY THING NEW ARE THE -- THE

EXTRA THREE YEARS POST-RELEASE.

216

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. OKAY. AND THEN ONE

MORE QUESTION ON THE AUTOPSY REPORTING. IN THE TEXT I DIDN'T SEE ANY

MENTION OF A TOXICOLOGY REPORT. PERHAPS BECAUSE THAT MIGHT GET SENT TO

A THIRD-PARTY LAB AFTER THE BLOOD IS DRAWN. WOULD A TOXICOLOGY REPORT

HAVE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE AUTOPSY REPORTING REQUIREMENT?

MR. DILAN: NO.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. WAS THAT AN INTENTIONAL

CHOICE OR IS THERE, I GUESS, A REASON THAT WOULDN'T BE INCLUDED? I DIDN'T

KNOW IF IT WAS JUST SOMETHING THAT WAS OVERLOOKED.

MR. DILAN: SO, IT -- IT -- IT'S NOT LIMITING --

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: -- IF THEY -- IF THEY CHOSE TO ADD IT --

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY. SO, THERE -- THERE'S

NOTHING PROHIBIT --

MR. DILAN: THERE'S NOTHING THAT PROHIBITS THEM,

BUT THE ITEMS THAT ARE PRESCRIBED IN THE BILL ARE THINGS THAT THEY WOULD

BE, YOU KNOW, MANDATED TO DO. TOXICOLOGY WOULD NOT BE ONE OF THOSE.

MR. GANDOLFO: OKAY, THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK

YOU, MR. DILAN.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL, BRIEFLY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. GANDOLFO: YOU KNOW, SO FAR THROUGHOUT THIS

DEBATE, WE KIND OF HEARD PEOPLE FROM BOTH SIDES -- APPROACHING THE

BILL FROM BOTH SIDES, SAY THAT THIS DID NOT GO FAR ENOUGH. SO, IT

PROBABLY DOES TELL US THIS IS RIGHT SOMEWHERE AROUND WHERE WE NEED TO

217

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

BE, BECAUSE THERE IS SOME GOOD STUFF IN THIS BILL THAT I THINK ARE POSITIVE

REFORMS. I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT COST, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU

OPEN UP -- YOU ADD ON MORE YEARS WHERE SOMEONE CAN FILE A CLAIM. I

DO THINK THAT MIGHT RESULT IN A SITUATION WHERE CLAIMS CAN GET OUT OF

CONTROL AND REALLY RUN THE COST UP TO THE STATE. BUT, I -- AGAIN, I WILL

REITERATE, THIS IS -- YOU CAN TELL THAT THE SPONSOR DID PUT A LOT OF WORK

INTO THIS AND I WOULD LIKE TO COMMEND HIM ON THAT, REGARDLESS OF

WHERE THE VOTES FALL TODAY.

AND ONE MORE THING I WANTED TO ADDRESS, THIS WAS A

LITTLE BIT OF A HEATED DEBATE. I DID NOT FIND IT APPROPRIATE TO BE LECTURED

ABOUT RESPECTING COLLEAGUES IN HERE. THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL TIMES

WHERE MEMBERS OF OUR SIDE OF THE AISLE HAD TO BE LECTURED AND HAVE

HAD HORRIBLE INSINUATIONS MADE ABOUT OUR CHARACTER DURING RESOLUTIONS,

NO LESS, WHICH ARE SUPPOSED TO BE NICE, COMMEMORATIVE, MEANINGFUL

THINGS AND NO ONE ON OUR SIDE STOOD UP AND INTERRUPTED, AS TO NOT MAKE

A SPECTACLE OF WHAT IS MEANT TO BE A VERY MEANINGFUL STATEMENT AS A

BODY AND OFTENTIMES WE AGREE WITH THE STATEMENT BEING MADE. SO,

JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT RESPECT IS A TWO-WAY STREET AND IT -- IT WOULD

SERVE EVERYONE WELL TO REMEMBER THAT.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. WEPRIN.

MR. WEPRIN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

218

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. WEPRIN: THIS OMNIBUS BILL CONTAINS A SERIES OF

PRISON REFORMS TO IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN STATE

CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES FOLLOWING THE RECENT DEATH OF TWO INCARCERATED

MEN WHO HAD VIOLENT ENCOUNTERS WITH MULTIPLE CORRECTION OFFICERS AND

I'M REFERRING TO ROBERT BROOKS AND MESSIAH NANTWI. THIS MUCH-

NEEDED LEGISLATION INCLUDES PROVISIONS WHICH I SPONSORED SINCE MY

TIME AS CORRECTION CHAIR, WHICH I CHAIRED FOR SIX YEARS IN THIS HOUSE.

SPECIFICALLY, PART H IN THIS BILL WILL AMEND SECTION 146 OF THE

CORRECTION LAW TO ALLOW THE CORRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK TO

PROVIDE 24 HOUR NOTICE TO VISIT A PRISON AND HAVE ACCESS TO PUBLIC

RECORDS WITHOUT HAVING TO SUBMIT FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW

REQUEST. THE CORRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK, OR CANY AS IT IS

REFERRED, WAS FOUNDED, AS MY COLLEAGUES HAVE POINTED OUT, IN 1844.

THE CORRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK SERVES A UNIQUE AND VITAL

ROLE IN SHEDDING LIGHT ON CONDITIONS WITHIN NEW YORK'S PRISONS AND IN

ADVOCATING FOR REFORMS. THIS LEGISLATION WILL ENABLE CANY TO IM -- TO

PROPERLY FULFILL ITS UNIQUE ROLE AS A WATCHDOG OF THE STATE'S CORRECTIONAL

SYSTEM, THEREBY IMPROVING THE SAFETY, HEALTH AND WELL-BEING OF

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS, AS WELL AS DOCCS STAFF.

I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR, MR. DILAN, FOR HIS HARD

WORK, HIS DEDICATION. I ALSO WANT TO THANK SPEAKER HEASTIE AND THIS

LEGISLATIVE BODY FOR UPHOLDING OUR COMMITMENT TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE

REFORM. THIS IS ONLY A BEGINNING, NOT AN END WHAT WE NEED TO BUILD ON

THIS PACKAGE.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I -- I PROUDLY WILL VOTE

219

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. BURROUGHS.

MR. BURROUGHS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ON THE BILL

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. BURROUGHS: I HAVE A GREAT INDIVIDUAL THAT I

BELIEVE RAISED ME AND THAT IS MRS. BURROUGHS AND BECAUSE OF THAT, I

WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK A QUOTE THAT SHE OFTEN SPOKE TO ME. SHE SAYS,

"TALK LESS, LISTEN MORE AND IT'LL ALLOW YOU TO HEAR THE HEARTS OF A MAN."

NOW, THERE'S THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SPOKEN HERE TODAY AND IT ALLOWED

ME TO SEE THE TRUE HEART OF SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES. A LOT OF THINGS THAT

HAVE TRANSPIRED THROUGHOUT TODAY AND THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE

SESSION, IT ALLOWS ME TO JUST LOOK AT THE INDIVIDUALS AND SEE THE TRUE

CARE, CONCERN, OR MAYBE THE HATE THAT MAY BE IN THE HEART. I'VE HEARD

SOME THINGS TODAY THAT HAVE SHOWN THAT PEOPLE ARE TRULY BIAS AND

UNCARING OF PEOPLE'S SITUATIONS. SO, MANY OF THE -- MY COLLEAGUES ON

THE -- ON THE OTHER AISLE HAVE THAT HAVE SPOKEN, I'VE HEARD THEM SPEAK

ONLY THE CONCERNS OF THE CORRECTION OFFICERS. ONE TIME I HEARD THEM

SPEAK ABOUT THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS. THAT SHOWS BIAS, BECAUSE IF

I CAN THINK -- AND WE ALL HAVE KNOWN, WE'VE SEEN WHAT HAS HAPPENED

WITH SO MANY OF THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS THIS YEAR AND LET'S GET THIS

RIGHT. IF THERE ARE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE DYING, OR BEING MURDERED, TO

WHO SHOULD CALL IT, OUTSIDE OF OUR PRISONS, THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED.

WE CAN'T LOOK AT THE PERSON WHO IS CONSIDERED A VICTIM AND THEN ASK

220

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THE PERSON WHO IS THE ACCUSER, WELL, WHY DID YOU DO THIS? WHY DID YOU

HURT THAT INDIVIDUAL? OR, CAN WE MAKE IT BETTER FOR THAT PERSON WHO

HURT THE INDIVIDUAL? THAT SHOWS THE BIAS AND THE UNCARING NATURE

WITHIN SOME OF US.

NOW, LAST I RECALL, ROBERT BROOKS -- ASIDE FROM ROBERT

BROOKS, THERE WERE 75 OTHER DEATHS OR MURDERS, WHATEVER WE WANT TO

CALL IT. AND WE'RE STILL DEFENDING THE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE PERPETRATING

THESE ACTS. THAT LEADS ME TO QUESTION SOME OF US. HOW WERE WE

RAISED? THINGS THAT I DO ON A DAILY BASIS, THERE'S ALWAYS TWO PEOPLE

PEOPLE THAT I KEEP IN MIND AND THAT IS MOM AND MY DAD. I ALWAYS

THINK ABOUT THE LESSONS THAT THEY TAUGHT ME; ABOUT BEING A CARING

INDIVIDUAL. DON'T SEE COLOR. DON'T SEE RACE. AND THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M

SEEING TODAY. I'M SEEING A LOT OF PEOPLE JADED BY POLITICAL ACUMEN.

SO, I'M GOING TO DECIDE TO DO SOMETHING BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT MY PARTY

SAYS I SHOULD DO AND I DON'T -- I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.

NOW, WE'RE SPEAKING OF CERTAIN THINGS THAT HAPPEN.

WHAT'S INSIDE THE PRISON SYSTEMS? DRUGS AND OTHER THINGS THAT ARE

BEING LOOSELY SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE FACILITIES. BUT WHEN YOU ARE

ENTERING AN INCARCERATED FACILITY, YOU DON'T HAVE THE THINGS THAT THE

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS MAY HAVE BEEN FOUND TO HAVE HAD IN THEIR

LOCKERS, OR IN THEIR BUNKS, OR IN THEIR BEDS. NOW, IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE IT

WHEN YOU WENT IN, THAT MEANS YOU DIDN'T BRING IT IN. SO IT'S GETTING IN

SOME OTHER WAY. NOW, I DON'T KNOW, AS LEGISLATORS, IF YOU THINK. LET'S

USE COMMON SENSE. IF IT WASN'T IN THERE IN THE BEGINNING, HOW'D IT

COME IN FROM SOME OTHER WAY? SO, INDIVIDUALS DEFENDING, FORGET

221

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ABOUT ANY OF THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS, BUT YOU'RE ONLY DEFENDING

DOCCS EMPLOYEES. THAT SAYS YOU'RE JADED. THAT SAYS YOUR HEARTS IN

THE WRONG PLACE. AND I DON'T THINK THIS PLACE IS A PLACE FOR SOMEONE

WHO IS SHOWING BIAS.

NOW SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT DO ENTER INTO SYSTEMS,

THESE THINGS CAN BE STOPPED. THERE'S BODY IMAGING AND SCANNERS. IF

YOU LOOK AT THESE, THE OPTIONS OF THE STAFF, THE STAFF HAS THE OPTION OF

NOT GOING THROUGH A BODY SCANNER. THAT WILL TELL YOU WHERE THESE

UNWANTED ITEMS ARE COMING FROM. AND SO MAYBE THIS BILL IS IN THE

RIGHT DIRECTION -- IS HEADED TOWARDS THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND WE NEED TO

-- WE NEED TO DISCUSS OR ACTUALLY PUSHING IT FORWARD TO WORK HARDER

BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT DOES ENOUGH. BUT IT IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT

DIRECTION.

NOW, TO TAKE CARE OF SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE,

WE COULD POSSIBLY INCLUDE HAVING STAFF GO THROUGH THESE BODY SCANNER

-- SCANNING IMAGES BECAUSE THIS WAY, WE CAN PREVENT A LOT OF THE -- ALL

OF THE INDIVIDUAL CASES THAT MAY HAVE BEING -- BEING BROUGHT INTO

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS. WE CAN SAY, HEY, WELL, IT WAS -- IT WAS SHOWN

IN A BODY SCANNING IMAGE. THIS WAY IT WILL DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF

ANYTHING THAT'S HAPPENING WITH SUBSTANCES, ILLEGAL CHEMICALS, FENTANYL

WAS BROUGHT UP, ALL THESE THINGS CAN BE PUT TO A -- A -- A STOP.

NOW, ALONG WITH MYSELF, I HAVE HAD OTHER COLLEAGUES

THAT HAVE VISITED OUR STATE PRISONS AND I'VE SPOKEN WITH BOTH SIDES. I

NEVER TEND TO TAKE THE SIDE OR OPINION OF ONE UNTIL I GET AN EXPLANATION

OR HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH BOTH SIDES. AND I -- AND I'VE SPOKEN WITH

222

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

BOTH SIDES, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THIS: THERE'S ONE THING THAT FOUND -- I

FOUND VERY, VERY DISHEARTENING. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS THAT I SPOKE WITH TOLD ME THAT THE RESPECT AND

THE TREATMENT THAT THEY GOT FROM THE NATIONAL GUARD WAS FAR BETTER THAN

WHAT THEY WERE GETTING FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES.

ONE HUNDRED PERCENT. I'VE EVEN GOT SOME OF THE WORD FROM THE -- THE

PEOPLE FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL [SIC]. THEY SAY MOST, OR

MAJORITY, OF THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS ARE THERE TO SERVE THEIR TIME

AND GO HOME. THAT'S HONESTY. SO IF YOU CAN TAKE ONE AND YOU ADD

ONE, YOU COME UP WITH TWO. I JUST GOT THE -- BOTH SIDES OF A STORY AND

IT TELLS ME THAT ONE SIDE IS BEING PENALIZED BECAUSE THEY CAN BE.

BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE -- THE ABILITY TO SPEAK OUT. AND THAT WAS

THE PURPOSE OF GOING TO VISIT THESE PRISONS TO SEE WHAT'S TRULY GOING ON

INSIDE. SO, UNTIL WE GO ALL GO AND VISIT MULTIPLE FACILITIES, I DON'T THINK

WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO SPEAK SPECIFICALLY TO ONE SIDE, BECAUSE YOU'RE

DOING YOURSELF A DISSERVICE AND YOU'RE DOING THE REST OF THE STATE A

DISSERVICE.

I JUST KNOW WHERE WE ARE CURRENTLY IS NOT WHERE WE

SHOULD BE. I KNOW WHERE WE NEED TO GO IS A LOT FURTHER AND SO, WITH

THAT BEING SAID, EVEN THOUGH I THINK THIS BILL NEEDS TO BE STRONGER, I STILL

VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

COLLEAGUES, BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, I JUST WANT TO

REMIND YOU DEBATE IS SUPPOSED TO BE REFERENCING THE BILLS THAT ARE IN

FRONT OF US AND WE NEED TO REMAIN AND KEEP OUR COMMENTS TO DEBATE

223

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ON THE BILL. WE SHOULD NOT BE REFERENCING PRIOR COMMENTS, OR NAMING

OUR COLLEAGUES, TO BE RESPECTFUL IN OUR CONVERSATION AND REMINDING YOU

TO SPEAK ON THE BILL RELATING TO THE BILLS THAT ARE PART OF THIS PACKAGE.

THANK YOU.

MR. MEEKS.

MR. MEEKS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. MEEKS: SAVAGE: OF AN ANIMAL OR FORCE OF

NATURE, FIERCE, VIOLENT AND UNCONTROLLED. BARBARIC: SAVAGELY CRUEL,

EXCEEDINGLY BRUTAL. HATE: TO FEEL INTENSE, OR PASSIONATE, DISLIKE.

ROBERT BROOKS SHOULD STILL BE HERE. INSTEAD HIS LIFE

WAS TAKEN WHEN HE WAS BRUTALLY BEATEN TO DEATH BY CORRECTIONS OFFICERS

WHILE HANDCUFFED INSIDE MARCY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY. THIS IS YET

ANOTHER TRAGIC EXAMPLE OF THE INHUMANITY WITHIN THIS SYSTEM. WE

CANNOT STAY SILENT, WE MUST SAY HIS NAME. ROBERT BROOKS. WE MUST

SHARE HIS STORY. WE MUST DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY. HIS MEMORY MUST

FUEL THE FIGHT FOR JUSTICE. ROBERT BROOKS WAS FROM ROCHESTER, NEW

YORK, MY DISTRICT. HIS FAMILY, HIS SON, ROBERT BROOKS JR., HIS

GRANDCHILD, HIS PARENTS, MARY AND ROBERT, STILL LIVE IN ROCHESTER. AND

LIKE TOO MANY FAMILIES, THEY ARE LIVING WITH THE PAIN THAT THE SYSTEM

KEEPS INFLICTING OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

I WILL VOTE FOR THIS OVERSIGHT PACKAGE TODAY, BECAUSE

TRANSPARENCY MATTERS. BUT TRANSPARENCY ALONE WILL NOT STOP THE NEXT

DEATH. OVERSIGHT ALONE WILL NOT STOP THE NEXT LIFE. AND MAKE NO

224

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MISTAKE, LIVES ARE ON THE LINE RIGHT NOW. FOR TOO LONG OUR JUSTICE

SYSTEM HAS PRIORITIZED PUNISHMENT OVER PEOPLE. FOR TOO LONG IT HAS

TORN FAMILIES APART. IT HAS DEVASTATED BLACK AND BROWN COMMUNITIES

FOR GENERATIONS ON. BUT WE HAD THE CHANCE THIS SESSION, WE HAD THE

CHANCE. THE CHANCE TO DO MORE THAN MONITOR A BROKEN SYSTEM. WE

HAD THE CHANCE TO CHANGE IT, TO SAVE LIVES AND WE DID NOT. THE SECOND

LOOK ACT, THE EARNED TIME ACT, THE MARVIN MAYFIELD ACT; THESE ARE

NOT JUST BILLS, THEY'RE LIFE-SAVING LEGISLATION. THEY OFFER REAL CHANCE AT

RESTORATION, AT TRANSFORMATION AND AT REUNITING FAMILIES WHO HAVE

SUFFERED TOO LONG. WE CANNOT KEEP CLINGING TO OUTDATED, FAILED

SENTENCING STRUCTURES THAT SERVE NO ONE. THESE UNJUST AND

DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES MUST END. WE MUST BUILD REAL PATHWAYS TO

RELEASE AND REHABILITATION FOR A MORE EQUITABLE NEW YORK. THAT IS WHY

I PROUDLY SPONSOR THE MARVIN MAYFIELD ACT. TO ELIMINATE MANDATORY

MINIMUMS, TO RESTORE JUDICIAL DISCRETION AND TO PUT THE FOCUS BACK ON

THE PERSON, THEIR STORY, THEIR CAPACITY TO HEAL AND RETURN HOME. THAT IS

WHY I COSPONSORED THE EARNED TIME ACT AND THE SECOND LOOK ACT.

BECAUSE WHEN PEOPLE TRANSFORM, THEY DESERVE A PATHWAY HOME.

BECAUSE FAMILIES DESERVE HOPE. BECAUSE EVERYDAY WE DELAY, MORE

LIVES REMAIN AT RISK. IT IS TIME FOR NEW YORK TO LEAD WITH COMPASSION,

IT IS TIME FOR NEW YORK TO LEAD WITH FAIRNESS, IT IS TIME FOR NEW YORK

TO LEAD WITH TRUE JUSTICE. WE CANNOT STAND IDLY BY AND ADD MORE

NAMES TO THE LIST OF THE DEAD. I VOW TO CONTINUE TO STAND WITH THE

PEOPLE AND THE FIGHT TO PASS LEGISLATION THAT RECOGNIZES THE FULL

HUMANITY OF EVERY SINGLE PERSON BEHIND THOSE WALLS AND BEYOND.

225

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

I WILL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MS. BAILEY.

MRS. BAILEY: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. DILAN: CERTAINLY, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MRS. BAILEY: AND THIS IS GOING TO BE VERY

AWKWARD AND I'M COMPLETELY FINE IF YOUR BACK IS TO ME. I WON'T TAKE IT

MR. DILAN: I -- I -- I LOVE MY MOTHER. I THINK SHE

TAUGHT ME BETTER.

MRS. BAILEY: WELL, TELL HER THANK YOU. SO --

MR. DILAN: I WISH -- I WISH I COULD, BUT THAT -- YOU

WOULDN'T KNOW THAT PART OF MY LIFE. BUT, GO AHEAD --

MRS. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO TRY AND -- I

TRY AND HAVE -- I HAVE MY QUESTIONS, HOPEFULLY, BY PART IN HERE, SO, BEAR

WITH ME WHILE I KIND OF LINK THEM TOGETHER. I'VE TRIED TO GO BACK AND

READ THE ORIGINAL SPONSOR'S JUSTIFICATIONS AND MEMOS, SO I HAVE AN

UNDERSTANDING AS WE'RE -- AS WE'RE KIND OF PIECING IT TOGETHER.

SPECIFICALLY, UNDER PART B, I JUST HAVE A COUPLE

TECHNICAL QUESTIONS THAT I'M HOPING THAT YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO -- TO HELP

WITH. SO, WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE CAMERA COVERAGE AND THE FOOTAGE

226

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WOULD NEED TO BE RETAINED FOR FIVE YEARS FROM A COMPLAINT, OR LEGAL

ACTION, I BELIEVE IS -- IS THE WORDING. IT'S ON PAGE 4, I THINK WE'RE

LOOKING AT LIKE FROM LINES 5 TO 14.

MY QUESTION IS, ISN'T A TIME -- IT KIND OF TIES INTO THE --

THE... UM, I JUST LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT -- THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.

SO WITH THE CAMERAS BEING SET UP IN AREAS THAT YOU MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO

SEE, WE POTENTIALLY COULD HAVE SOME VACANT BUILDINGS, SO ON AND SO

FORTH. AS INDIVIDUALS INSIDE THE CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES ARE MONITORING

THIS FILM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY'RE MANDATORY -- THEY HAVE TO

-- IF THEY SEE SOMETHING THAT SHOULD NOT BE OCCURRING, THEY HAVE TO

REPORT THAT.

MR. DILAN: ON THE -- SO, I GUESS THERE WAS SEVERAL

PARTS THERE. SO, I GUESS THE -- ON THE CAMERA FOOTAGE AND THE -- THE

LANGUAGE THAT YOU REFERRED, YES, WHETHER THAT IS COUNTER TO PART J OF THE

BILL, WHICH YOU REFERENCED, I GUESS THE -- THE ANSWER WOULD BE NO,

BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE -- THE FOOTAGE NOW. AND, YOU KNOW, TO THE

EXTENT THAT THE LINES THAT YOU CITED TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE'S -- THERE'S NO

CLAIMS, IT -- IT WOULDN'T RUN COUNTER TO THE PROVISIONS IN PART J.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. SO THE CORRECTIONS OFFICER OR

WHOEVER'S MONITORING THE -- THE FILM, IF THEY IDENTIFIED SOMETHING. SO

SAY THERE IS AN ALTERCATION IN A HALLWAY AND THEY -- AND THEY SEE THAT,

WOULD THEY NEED TO REPORT THAT? THEREFORE, THEN THERE WOULD BE AN

INCIDENT LODGED. I BELIEVE THEY CURRENTLY, RIGHT NOW, HAVE TO

TECHNICALLY REPORT THAT; AM I CORRECT?

(CONFERENCING)

227

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DILAN: SO, IT -- IT -- IT KICKS IN WHEN THERE'S A

REPORTAGE OF STAFF MISCONDUCT.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. AND THE ONLY REASON WHY I

ASK AS FAR AS THE STATUTE OF LIMITATION PIECE OF IT, WOULD THEN THAT

COVERAGE NEED TO BE RETAINED THREE YEARS PAST THAT INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUAL'S RELEASE?

MR. DILAN: NO.

MRS. BAILEY: NO.

MR. DILAN: NO.

MRS. BAILEY: IT WOULD JUST BE THE FIVE YEARS?

MR. DILAN: YES. AND THEN THAT WOULD BE -- TO -- TO

FULLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I KNOW I -- I ABBREVIATED IT FOR THE RECORD

BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE BOTH UNDERSTOOD IT. SO, IT -- IT WOULD STOP -- IT

WOULD KICK IN -- THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO FIVE YEARS AND IT WOULD ONLY

REQUIRE TO BE HELD IF THERE IS MISCONDUCT.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. SO IT'S THE FIVE YEARS THEN?

MR. DILAN: FIVE YEARS, YES.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: IT DOESN'T IMPACT PART J.

MRS. BAILEY: IT DOESN'T EFFECT PART J. OKAY. THEN

MY NEXT QUESTION IS GOING TO BRING US TO PART C WITH THE PUBLIC NOTICE

OF SUCH DEATHS AND THAT NOTICE MUST BE REPORTED WITHIN 24 HOURS ON THE

DEPARTMENT'S WEBSITE. IF A FAMILY MEMBER REQUESTED THAT IT NOT BE

REPORTED FOR WHATEVER REASON, IS THAT A VIABLE REQUEST THAT COULD BE

TAKEN BY THE DEPARTMENT?

228

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DILAN: SO, I -- I THINK I WAY -- THE WAY I

UNDERSTAND THE BILL IS THAT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO POST ON THEIR WEBSITE AFTER

24 HOURS OF NOTIFICATION OF A FAMILY OR NEXT OF KIN. BUT DOCCS DOES

HAVE TO COMPLETE THOSE STEPS BEFORE IT CAN BE POSTED PUBLICLY.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. SO THE FAMILY MEMBER OR THE

NEXT OF KIN COULD REQUEST THAT IT NOT BE POSTED, POTENTIALLY?

MR. DILAN: I -- I'M SORRY --

MRS. BAILEY: NO, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY FINE.

MR. DILAN: I'M GOING TO NEED YOU TO REPEAT THAT.

AND I GUESS TO FURTHER, IT ALSO DOESN'T REQUIRE THAT THERE'S ANYTHING

THAT'S IDENTIFIABLE. SO IF THE FAMILY CHOOSES TO REMAIN PRIVATE ON THE

MATTER AND NOT HAVE THE NAMES IN -- IN THE PUBLIC (INDISCERNIBLE).

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. BECAUSE --

MR. DILAN: IF YOU CAN -- IF YOU CAN REPEAT THE

QUESTION THAT I DIDN'T HEAR AGAIN, I'D APPRECIATE THAT.

MRS. BAILEY: OH, I -- SO, MY QUESTION IT -- IT HAD

TO DO WITH THAT IT HAS TO BE POSTED ON THE WEBSITE WITHIN 24 HOURS.

THERE'S NO LANGUAGE IN THERE OF WHAT NEEDS TO BE POSTED, IT COULD JUST

BE THAT THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, THERE -- THAT SOMEONE PASSED AWAY IN A

FACILITY. I, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

MR. DILAN: CORRECT. AND -- AND -- AND AGAIN, TO BE

CLEAR, 24 HOURS AFTER THE -- THE FAMILY AND NEXT OF KIN HAS BEEN NOTIFIED.

MRS. BAILEY: CORRECT, WITHIN THAT 24 HOURS.

MR. DILAN: YES.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. AND -- AND THE OTHER REASON

229

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WHY I ASK IS, AS WE MOVE INTO PART D AND THIS IS JUST HOW MY BRAIN

WORKS AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, BECAUSE I'M TAKING YOU ON THIS MERRY

TRAIL WITH MYSELF. WHEN WE GO INTO THE STUDY ON THOSE DEATHS, IS THERE

ANY ADDITIONAL REPORTING THAT WOULD THEN SHOW UP ON THE DEPARTMENT'S

WEBSITE TO MAYBE GIVE CLOSURE TO THE PUBLIC AS TO WHAT WAS IDENTIFIED?

YOU KNOW, WE -- WE NOW ARE GOING TO BE POSTING THAT THERE MAY BE

THREE OR FOURTH DEATHS WITHIN THE -- THE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY. SOME

MAY BE OF NATURAL CAUSES.

MR. DILAN: YEAH. SO -- YEAH. SO, PART D IS NOT --

NOT DOCCS, IT WOULD BE THE STATE COMMISSION ON CORRECTION [SIC].

THE STATE COMMISSION ON CORRECTION [SIC], YOU KNOW, DOES DO THAT TO

-- TO -- TO A DEGREE. A LOT OF IT IS -- IS HEAVILY REDACTED AND THERE'S

REASONS FOR THAT AND GOOD REASONS FOR THAT THAT WOULD REMAIN, BUT IT

DOESN'T -- IT DEALS WITH THE STATE COMISSION ON CORRECTION [SIC], NOT

DOCCS ITSELF.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. AND THEN PART E, WHERE

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE AUTOPSIES THAT ARE DONE AND WHERE THE COUNTY

CORONER IS NOTIFIED AND THERE'S ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION THAT MUST

ACCOMPANY THOSE COUNTY CORONER REPORTS NOW. IN COUNTIES THAT DO NOT

HAVE MEDICAL EXAMINERS, BY STATUTE, THOSE CORONER REPORTS, ALONG WITH

ANY AUTOPSY REPORT, ARE FILED WITH THE COUNTY CLERK. SO THOSE ORIGINAL

X-RAYS, OR HOWEVER THEY'RE GOING TO BE RELAYED, WOULD THEN BE COMING

THROUGH THE CORONER INTO THE CLERK'S OFFICE FOR RE -- FOR FILING. AM I

CORRECT IN MY UNDERSTANDING OF THAT?

(CONFERENCING)

230

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DILAN: I THINK THAT -- I THINK IN -- IN THOSE

SITUATIONS, LIKE MOST COUNTIES DO, BUT I GUESS IN THOSE SITUATIONS, WE'RE

NOT SURE THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. BUT WHAT I -- WHAT I WOULD SAY IS

THAT TO THE DEGREE THAT THE ITEMS PRESCRIBED IN THE BILL ARE INCLUDED,

THEN THEY'RE COMPLYING. IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY SAY HOW.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. AND -- AND THE ONLY -- THE

ONLY REASON WHY I ASK IS EVERYTHING THAT I COULD READ IN IT STATED THAT

COPIES OF THAT WOULD THEN GO ON TO THE DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, AGENCIES

THAT WOULD -- THAT WOULD RECEIVE THAT INFORMATION.

MR. DILAN: YEAH. AGAIN, IT -- IT -- IT'S -- IT'S -- I SEE

YOUR CONCERN HOW IT'S -- IT'S CLOSE, BUT I THINK ALL THIS PART DOES IS

PRESCRIBE WHAT COULD BE -- WHAT IS, NOT COULD BE -- WHAT IS MANDATED TO

BE INCLUDED IN THE AUTOPSY REPORTS --

MRS. BAILEY: IN THAT REPORT, MM-HMM.

MR. DILAN: -- AND AS LONG AS THEY COMPLY WITH

WHAT'S PRESCRIBED, THEY'RE COMPLIANT.

MRS. BAILEY: OKAY. I THINK THOSE WERE MY

QUESTIONS. I APPRECIATE YOU ANSWERING THEM FOR ME.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MRS. BAILEY: AS MY COLLEAGUES HAVE INDICATED,

YOU KNOW, I -- I DEFINITELY THINK THERE ARE SOME PIECES IN THIS BILL THAT

EVERYONE WOULD BE ABLE TO -- TO FIND THAT MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

YOU KNOW, AS -- AS I STARTED THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR AND WE KNOW THE

EVENTS THAT -- THAT HAPPENS, YOU KNOW, EARLY ON, OUT TALKING TO

231

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CONSTITUENTS THAT INCLUDED INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS' FAMILY MEMBERS, IT

INCLUDED CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS AND THEN IT LATER WENT ON TO INCLUDING THE

NATIONAL GUARD. AND I HAVE FOLLOWED UP WITH MANY OF THOSE

INDIVIDUALS, YOU KNOW, AS I'VE READ THROUGH THIS BILL AND I THINK ALL OF

THEM WOULD SAY THAT THERE'S DEFINITELY PIECES IN HERE THAT WILL MAKE IT,

OR, YOU KNOW, THAT ARE -- ARE MEASURES THAT MAY BE MOVING SAFETY IN A

-- IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION. AND I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT'S WHAT

WE NEED TO LOOK AT. WHETHER IT'S AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL, WHETHER IT

MAY BE CIVILIAN STAFF, WHETHER IT MAY BE A CORRECTIONS OFF -- A

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT IS OUR NATIONAL GUARD RIGHT

NOW. I'VE ALWAYS LIVED BY THE MOTTO THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S OUR

RESPONSIBILITY AS AN EMPLOYER TO ENSURE THAT OUR EMPLOYEES GO HOME

EITHER IN THE SAME CONDITION THAT THEY WALKED IN OR A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

AND I DON'T VIEW THIS ANY DIFFERENTLY. WHETHER YOU'RE AN INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUAL OR WHETHER YOU ARE AN EMPLOYEE IN A CORRECTIONAL FACILITY.

SO, I COMMEND THE SPEAKER. I THANK HIM FOR

ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS. I KNOW SOME OF THEM WERE PRETTY TECHNICAL

IN NATURE. AND TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW I WILL

BE VOTING ON THIS BILL. I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE STEPS THAT WE CAN TAKE TO

MOVE FORWARD AND DO BETTER. BUT, I DO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE TAKEN

SOME STEPS THAT WILL HELP EVERYONE IN OUR CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. DAIS.

MR. DAIS: WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

232

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. DILAN: ABSOLUTELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. DAIS: THANK YOU. I KNOW IT'S A WEIRD ANGLE

AGAIN.

MR. DILAN: I'M -- I'M GETTING USED TO IT.

MR. DAIS: YES. FIRST, PUTTING TOGETHER -- WHEN YOU

FIRST WERE PUTTING THIS TOGETHER, IT WAS A LARGE AMOUNT OF BILLS THAT YOU

WERE SIFTING THROUGH AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS THE BEST FORMULA

WHERE WE CAN MAKE SOMETHING MOVE FORWARD, CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: WELL, THE ONLY THING I WOULD CORRECT TO

THAT STATEMENT IS NOT AN "I", IT'S A "WE", RIGHT? THE -- THE CAUCUS AND --

AND OTHER MEMBERS THAT -- WHO ARE NOT PART OF THE CAUCUS, YOU KNOW,

REALLY DID A GOOD JOB IN LOOKING AT IDEAS THAT WERE ALREADY EXISTING THAT

WOULD HELP THE CURRENT SITU -- THE CURRENT SITUATION. SO, YEAH, THE ONLY

THING -- SO, YES, IT WAS MORE "WE" THAN "I".

MR. DAIS: AGREED. I DO THINK IT'S SAFE TO SAY YOU

BELIEVE THIS IS LIKE THE FIRST STEP IN -- UNDERNEATH YOUR COMMITTEE TO

HELP TRANSFORM OUR -- PART OF OUR CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES?

MR. DILAN: SO, IT'S A STEP. I DON'T -- I DON'T THINK

IT'S THE FIRST STEP. WE'VE TAKEN STEPS IN THE BUDGET THAT WE'VE ALREADY

ADOPTED INTO LAW. BUT, BY NO MEANS DO I FEEL THIS IS THE END AND BY NO

MEANS DO I BELIEVE ANYBODY SHOULD TAKE A VICTORY LAP HERE IF WE PASS IT

OUT OF THIS BODY AND GET SIGNED INTO LAW BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, FOLKS ARE

233

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

DYING.

MR. DAIS: UNDERSTOOD.

MR. DILAN: AND THIS WILL, YOU KNOW, BEGIN TO

ADDRESS THE PROBLEM, BUT IT -- IT'S NOT THE END. THERE'S CLEARLY MORE THAT

NEEDS TO BE DONE.

MR. DAIS: UNDERSTOOD, AND I AGREE. IN HERE WITH

THE OMNIBUS BILL, WE ARE FOCUSING ON ACCOUNTABILITY WHICH I WOULD

ARGUE PROTECTS NOT JUST THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS, BUT CORRECTIONS

OFFICERS AND STAFF. WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

MR. DILAN: I AGREE WITH THAT AND IT WAS VERY

IMPORTANT TO ME. SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT ANYTHING THAT WE'RE DOING

HERE TODAY TO BE COMMUNICATED THAT WE FIND THE ITEMS THAT ARE NOT

INCLUDED IN THIS BILL TO BE IMPORTANT OR WORTHY OF CONSIDERATION OF THIS

HOUSE. BUT I THINK THE ONE THING THAT WHEN WE TAKE A LOOK AS -- AS A

GOVERNMENT, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE AN -- A -- A --AN INCIDENT THAT

RESULTED IN A -- IN A HOMICIDE AND THEN AS A RESULT WE SEE THE FLOORS IN

OUR GOVERNMENT PROTECTIONS, AS I'VE SAID MANY TIMES HERE TODAY, I FELT

IT'S INCUMBENT THAT WE -- WE -- WE FIX THAT RIGHT AWAY.

MR. DAIS: AND TO THAT POINT, BY CREATING MORE

TRANSPARENCY, BY HAVING MORE ACCURACY, TO ENSURE, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT

WHEN AN AUTOPSY CAN BE EXPEDITED, THAT WOULD ACTUALLY GIVE THE PUBLIC

MORE FAITH IN OUR SYSTEM THAT WE CAN GET QUICKER RESPONSES, QUICKER

ANSWERS WHEN THERE'S A CLOUD OF SUSPICION UNDER A POSSIBLE HOMICIDE.

MR. DILAN: YEAH. SO -- YEAH, IT'S -- IT'S IMPORTANT

BECAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE -- THE PREVIOUS QUESTION AS

234

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CONCERNED ABOUT -- ABOUT HOW THIS WORKS BECAUSE EVERY PART OF OUR

STATE IS -- IS DIFFERENT. AND WHAT MAY BE EASY IN BROOKLYN MAY BE

MORE CHALLENGING IN -- IN OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE. OUTSIDE OF THIS BILL

THERE'S -- WHILE IT DIDN'T MAKE IT INTO THIS PACKAGE, THERE IS ANOTHER

PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT WOULD MODEL AFTER WHAT CONNECTICUT DOES.

WHAT CONNECTICUT DOES IS THEY HAVE A CENTRALIZED CORONER'S OFFICE FOR

DOCCS FACILITIES. I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE GOTTEN THAT TODAY, BUT,

YOU KNOW, IT -- IT DIDN'T MAKE IT IN AND IT'S OUTSIDE THE SCOPE. BUT I

THINK IT'S -- THE BILL IS ALSO A STARTING POINT, YOU KNOW, FOR ALL OF US TO

JUST ASK TAKE A LOOK AT OUR AGENCIES AND OUR SYSTEMS TO SEE HOW THEY

WORK SO THAT AN ISSUE THAT THE PREVIOUS QUESTIONER BROUGHT UP THAT

COULD BE ALLEVIATED IF THERE WAS SOMETHING MORE CENTRALIZED AND DIDN'T

PUT THE -- THE WEIGHT ON THE COUNTIES.

MR. DAIS: THANK YOU. AND IN ADDITION TO THE

EXPANSION OF CAMERAS -- AND OBVIOUSLY WE'RE PROTECTING PRIVATE AREAS

-- BUT I THINK THERE'S A -- A KEY -- THAT WOULD BE A KEY STEP IN ENSURING

NOT JUST ACCOUNTABILITY, BUT PROTECTION OF NOT JUST THE INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS, BUT THE CORRECTION OFFICERS AND STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT IF

THERE IS AN ACCUSATION OF FOUL PLAY, NOT ONLY WOULD IT SHOW ONE WHO

MIGHT HAVE DONE SOMETHING, BUT IT COULD ALSO ACQUIT SOMEBODY OR

DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY DID NOT DO SOMETHING WRONG IN THAT SITUATION,

CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: CORRECT.

MR. DAIS: AND SO, THEREFORE, BY EXPANDING THE

CAMERAS WE'RE NOT JUST FOCUSING ON THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS, BUT

235

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WE'RE ALSO FOCUSING ON THE WORK CONDITIONS AND THE SAFETY OF THE

CORRECTION OFFICERS.

MR. DILAN: IT IS HOLISTIC, CORRECT.

MR. DAIS: IT'S HOLISTIC. IN ADDITION, A LOT OF PEOPLE

DON'T TALK ABOUT IT TO A DEGREE FROM THE CORRECTION OFFICERS' SIDE, A LOT OF

PEOPLE DON'T TALK ABOUT HAZING OR -- OR TALK ABOUT WHERE THERE'S

PRESSURE WITHIN YOUR OWN JOB STRUCTURE TO DO CERTAIN THINGS. AND THIS

COULD ACTUALLY PROTECT CORRECTION OFFICERS FROM WORKPLACE -- WORKPLACE

BULLYING FROM THEIR -- FROM FELLOW CORRECTION OFFICERS, CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: I WOULD SAY TO CORRECTION OFFICERS AND

DOCCS STAFF THAT IS NON-CORRECTION, LIKE NURSES AND OTHER PEOPLE WHO

PROVIDE PROGRAMS.

MR. DAIS: RIGHT. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, SO IF A NURSE IN

THE SITUATION OF ROBERT BROOKS WANTED TO STEP IN, THAT NURSE MIGHT FEEL

A LITTLE BIT MORE BRAVE TO STEP IN THAT MOMENT BECAUSE KNOWING THE

CAMERAS ARE THERE, THEY KNOW THAT -- THAT THEY WOULD BE PROTECTED BY

ADDITIONAL SURVEILLANCE IN THAT SITUATION.

MR. DILAN: OR MAY BE MORE WILLING TO COME

FORWARD WITH THINGS THAT THEY SAW THAT ARE CLEARLY MISCONDUCT. BUT

BECAUSE THEIR SECURITY TO -- TO A LARGE DEGREE RELIES ON THE PROTECTION

THAT THEY GET FROM A CORRECTION OFFICER, THEY MAY BE, YOU KNOW, MORE

INCLINED TO SPEAK UP BECAUSE THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE SAYING CAN BE

BACKED UP AND CORROBORATED BY A VIDEO, THEY MAY BE MORE LIKELY TO

COME FORWARD BECAUSE THEY FEEL PROTECTED.

MR. DAIS: THANK YOU. AND MY LAST QUESTION, I -- I

236

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SAW THAT WE PUT A FOCUS ON CHAIN OF CUSTODY. I THINK, AGAIN, THAT'S

CREATING MORE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND, THEREFORE, THERE

WILL NOT BE QUESTIONS OF EVIDENCE BEING TRANSFERRED OVER WHERE PEOPLE

SAY, OH, IT WAS DOCTORED. OR, OH, WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE REAL

THING. SO DO YOU THINK IT WAS KEY, PUTTING THAT IN TO ENSURE THAT BY

HAVING CHAIN OF CUSTODY RULES PUT IN PLACE THAT IT WILL GIVE MORE

SECURITY TO THE -- TO THESE MATTERS AND GIVE PEOPLE MORE TRUST AND FAITH

IN OUR INVESTIGATIONS?

MR. DILAN: YES.

MR. DAIS: THANK YOU.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. DAIS: OBVIOUSLY TODAY HAS BEEN FULL OF

EMOTIONS. BUT ONE THING THAT WE HAVE WITHIN THIS BODY IS DIVERSITY

AMONGST OUR OWN OCCUPATIONS. WE HAVE FORMER PROSECUTORS. WE HAVE

JUDGES. WE HAVE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS. WE HAVE DETECTIVES. WE HAVE

FORMER CORRECTION OFFICERS. WE HAVE -- WE HAD A PERSON THAT WAS AN

INCARCERATED PERSON WHO CAN GIVE AN INSIDE VANTAGE POINT OF WHAT IT'S

LIKE WITHIN OUR CORRECTION FACILITIES. I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, I ACTUALLY

OWE THAT PERSON AN APOLOGY, BECAUSE I HAVE A SLIGHT FEAR OF PRISONS.

AND WHEN I WAS A -- FIRST BECAME AN ATTORNEY, THE FIRST TIME I EVER

WALKED INTO A HOLDING CELL TO MEET ONE OF MY CLIENTS, WHEN I HEARD THAT

CLANK BEHIND ME, I CANNOT EXPLAIN TO YOU THE CHILL THAT VIBRATED DOWN

MY SPINE. AND I OWE HIM A VISITATION TO ONE OF OUR FACILITIES IN MY

DISTRICT, AND I'VE BEEN HESITANT BECAUSE OF THIS PERSONAL FEAR I HAVE OF

237

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THE ONE OR TWO TIMES I HAVE BEEN INSIDE OF ONE OF OUR STATE AND COUNTY

PRISONS.

WHAT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND IS JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE

IS AN INCARCERATED PERSON DOES NOT MEAN THEY'VE LOST THEIR HUMANITY.

YES, THEY MIGHT HAVE DONE SOMETHING WRONG, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN

THEY DO NOT DESERVE A SECOND CHANCE. AND WHICH THAT MEANS, AS OUR

COLLEAGUE SAID, JUST LIKE OUR CORRECTION OFFICERS HAVE THE RIGHT TO GO

INTO THEIR DAY OF WORK AND GO HOME, SO DO THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS

WITHIN THOSE BUILDINGS HAVE THE RIGHT TO SERVE THEIR TIME PEACEFULLY, IN

A MANNER WHERE THEY CAN FEEL SAFE AND CAN BE REHABILITATED AND THEN

STILL HAVE THAT OPTION TO GO HOME. IF WE DO NOT CREATE A SAFE

ENVIRONMENT TO ALLOW THEM TO GO HOME, THEN WE HAVE FAILED AS AN

ENTITY AND AS A LEGISLATURE IN DOING SO. THEY ARE NOT ANY LESS OF A NEW

YORKER. THEY ARE NOT ANY LESS OF A HUMAN BEING. THEY ARE NOT ANY

LESS OF A PERSON BECAUSE THEY COMMITTED A CRIME WHEN THEY MIGHT

HAVE BEEN YOUNGER. AND ONE EXAMPLE I GAVE -- I KNOW I USE POP

CULTURE AND MOVIES, BUT IN SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION, MORGAN FREEMAN'S

CHARACTERS IN HIS LAST PAROLE AND THEY -- AND THEY ASKED HIM, ARE YOU

SORRY FOR WHAT YOU DID? HE SAYS, SON, IF I COULD TALK TO THE YOUNG

PERSON, HE WAS DUMB. HE MADE A MISTAKE. BUT THAT YOUNG MAN THEN,

40 OR 50 YEARS AGO, AND THE YOUNG -- AND THE MAN STANDING IN FRONT OF

YOU NOW ARE TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. SO WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT IF WE

CREATE A SAFER ENVIRONMENT WITHIN OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM, WITHIN OUR

CORRECTIONS FACILITIES, WE ARE NOT JUST MAKING IT SAFER FOR THE CORRECTION

OFFICERS, WE'RE MAKING IT SAFER FOR THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS. SO WE

238

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CAN LET OUR EMOTIONS GO TO THE SIDE RIGHT NOW AND ASK -- ASK OURSELVES

THE VERY SIMPLE QUESTION, WHAT IS YOUR HUMANITY, AND YOUR HUMANITY

SHOULD BE WE NEED THESE TO BE SAFER AND BETTER PLACES.

IN FULL REALITY, THE MORE PRISONS THAT WE CAN CLOSE

MEANS WE'RE DOING SOMETHING RIGHT. THAT MEANS OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM

IS GETTING BETTER. THAT MEANS OUR SOCIAL NETWORK, OUR SOCIAL SAFETY NETS

ARE GETTING BETTER. BECAUSE IF WE CREATE MORE PROSPERITY, IF WE CREATE

MORE JOBS, BETTER EDUCATION, I PROMISE YOU THAT JAIL POPULATION WILL GO

DOWN. WE NEED TO APPROACH THIS FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, BOTH

SIDES OF THE -- OF THE EQUATION. WE NEED TO MAKE THEM SAFER. WE NEED

TO MAKE THEM BETTER. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CORRECTION

OFFICERS ARE PROPERLY STAFFED, PROPERLY TRAINED, PROPERLY PAID. HAVE THE

PROPER BENEFITS. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE ACCESS TO

HOUSING SO WE RECRUIT QUALIFIED NEW YORKERS TO GO INTO THESE

(INDISCERNIBLE). I KNOW THIS IS A TOUGH JOB. I WILL BE THE FIRST PERSON TO

TELL YOU, I AM NOT BUILT FOR THAT JOB. AND I RESPECT WHAT THEY HAVE. BUT

WE ALSO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THERE ARE PEOPLE THERE THAT RESPECT THE MEN

AND WOMEN WITHIN THOSE FACILITIES. THE FACT THAT THE -- I'M NOT

SURPRISED, AS A SON OF A VET, THAT THE NATIONAL GUARD CAME INTO THESE

FACILITIES AND HANDLED THEM WITH RESPECT. BECAUSE THE ONE THING THEY

TEACH YOU IN THE MILITARY, RESPECT IN -- IN YOUR BUNKS. RESPECT FOR YOUR

FELLOW MAN AND -- AND -- AND -- AND WITHIN YOUR CAMP. AND THE FACT

THAT DEMONSTRATES THAT WITH RESPECT AND WITH PROPER PROFESSIONALISM,

THAT THESE FACILITIES CAN BE BETTER RAN [SIC] TELLS US THAT WE CAN DO BETTER

AS A LEGISLATURE, AS AN EXECUTIVE BRANCH. IF THOSE NATIONAL GUARDS,

239

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THOSE YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN HAVE DEMONSTRATED THAT WE CAN RUN THEM

BETTER, THEN HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT WE CAN'T DO IT WHEN THEY DID IT IN A

SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME WITH HOW MUCH TRAINING? HOW MUCH TRAINING DO

THOSE NATIONAL GUARD PEOPLE HAVE? THE ONLY TRAINING THAT IT SEEMED

THEY DID HAVE WAS TO TREAT PEOPLE WITH HUMAN DIGNITY.

WE HAVE FURTHER STEPS TO GO. I WANT TO THANK THE

SPONSOR FOR TAKING THE -- THE WISHES, THE 20 BILLS AND TRYING TO PUT THEM

TOGETHER TO COME WITH SOMETHING THAT IS PUTTING US IN THE RIGHT

DIRECTION. BUT JUST LIKE ANY TEST, JUST LIKE ANY -- ANY MISSION, THE FIRST

STEPS ARE THE HARDEST. BUT WE HAVE MORE TO GO. THERE'S GONNA BE

NEWSPAPERS -- I'M SURE THE NEW YORK POST IS GONNA COME OUT AGAINST

US AND SAY, OH, WE'RE BEING SOFT ON CRIME. WE'RE NOT BEING SOFT ON

CRIME. WHAT WE ARE DOING IS SOLIDIFYING OUR HUMANITY. WE ARE

MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE HOLDING OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE. WE'RE HOLDING

OURSELVES TRANSPARENT, AND WE ARE ENSURING THAT THOSE WHO ARE

UNDERNEATH OUR JURISDICTION ARE DOING THEIR JOBS. IF WE DO NOT DO THAT

THEN WE ARE FAILING AS A LEGISLATURE. THAT MEANS AS WE MOVE FORWARD

THIS BILL IS THE RIGHT STEP. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE EMPOWER THE

CORRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK TO ENSURE THAT THE CORRECTION

OFFICERS ARE SAFER. THAT THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS ARE SAFER. THAT

THE STAFF MEMBERS ARE SAFER. THAT THEIR FAMILIES CAN TALK TO THE

MEMBERS IN THOSE FACILITIES. THE WORKERS AND THOSE WHO ARE

INCARCERATED.

LAST, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE COME UP WITH A

MORE HUMANE SYSTEM. SO THAT MEANS WITH THIS BEING THE FIRST STEP, THE

240

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

NEXT STEP IS LOOKING AT EARNED TIME, SECOND LOOK AND TIMELY PAROLE

AND ELDER PAROLE. IF WE DO THIS AND WORK TOGETHER AND LISTEN TO

EVERYONE'S OPINION, TO EVERYONE'S VANTAGE POINT INSIDE THOSE FACILITIES

AND OUTSIDE, I DO BELIEVE WE CAN COME TOGETHER BI -- WITH A BIPARTISAN

APPROACH THAT RESPECTS THE WISHES OF OUR COMMUNITY AND RESPECTS THE

WISHES OF OUR -- OF OUR CONSTITUENTS, AND ALSO RESPECTS THE DIGNITY OF

THOSE WHO WORK WITHIN AND THOSE WHO ARE CURRENTLY INCARCERATED.

THANK YOU KINDLY, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MS. WALKER.

MS. WALKER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ON THE BILL, PLEASE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MS. WALKER: THERE ARE PRESENTLY 1.5 MILLION

PEOPLE INCARCERATED IN AMERICA. AND WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THE EFFECTS

OF MENTAL HEALTH, THE ANXIETY, THE POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS THAT THE

INCARCERATION OF INDIVIDUALS HAVE NOT JUST ON THE PERSON WHO IS

INCARCERATED, BUT ON THEIR ENTIRE FAMILY. WE THINK ABOUT THE

GENERATIONAL TRAUMA THAT GETS EXASPERATED ON AN ENTIRE GROUP OF

PEOPLE. BECAUSE WE HAVE SEEN THAT THE NUMBERS FAVOR SOME OVER

OTHERS.

SO I WANT TO COMMEND THE BLACK, PUERTO RICAN,

HISPANIC AND ASIAN CAUCUS, OUR CORRECTIONS [SIC] CHAIR, THE SPEAKER

AND THE STAFF FOR RECOGNIZING THAT THIS IS A CRITICAL TIME AND IT'S A CRITICAL

TIME AND A TIME OF RECKONING IN OUR NEW YORK STATE PRISONS. IT IS TIME

241

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

TO STAND UP FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN FORGOTTEN ABOUT BY TOO MANY

PEOPLE. BUT REMEMBER. I REMEMBER ROBERT BROOKS. HE WAS A 43-

YEAR-OLD BLACK MAN WHO WAS BEATEN IN FRONT OF EVERYONE FOR THE WORLD

TO BE ABLE TO SEE. IT WAS EMBARRASSING NOT JUST AS A NEW YORKER, BUT AS

I WAS WATCHING AS THIS VIDEO WAS BEING SHARED ALL AROUND THE WORLD ON

THAT FATAL DAY ON DECEMBER 9TH IN A MARCY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY IN

ONEIDA COUNTY. HIS HANDS WERE CUFFED BEHIND HIS BACK, AND HE WAS

ATTACKED BY MORE THAN A DOZEN CORRECTIONS OFFICERS.

YES, THIS BILL DOES PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE STUDY.

YES, THIS BILL DOES PROVIDE A COLLECTION OF DATA. AND YES, IT DOES SURE

UP OUR NEED FOR CAMERA FOOTAGE. AND WE ALL RECOGNIZE THAT OVERSIGHT

HELPS TO BRING DARKNESS TO LIGHT. BUT GUESS WHAT? IN ADDITION TO THE

FACT OF HIM BEING PUNCHED, KICKED, BLOODIED, BLOODY NOSE AND FACE,

THERE'S SO MANY PEOPLE WHO MAY BE EXPERIENCING THOSE SAME

EXPERIENCES JUST TODAY. LIKE, THERE'S A TICKER IN TIMES SQUARE THAT WILL

CALCULATE HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE BEING AFFECTED BY A CERTAIN SITUATION. I

WONDER WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE HAD THAT TICKER ON -- ON THE NEW

YORK STATE THRUWAY AS WE WERE COMING IN HERE AND WE COULD ALL

RECOGNIZE JUST HOW CRITICAL AND CRUCIAL THIS MOMENT IS. BECAUSE GUESS

WHAT? RIGHT AFTER WE MOURNED THE DEATH OF ROBERT BROOKS, ANOTHER

BLACK MAN, 22-YEAR-OLD MESSIAH, AS WE HAD HEARD, WAS KILLED IN THE

NEARBY MID-STATE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY. IN ONLY THREE MONTHS. SINCE

THE TIME OF ROBERT BROOKS' DEATH, 75 MORE PEOPLE HAVE DIED IN NEW

YORK STATE CUSTODY. SEVENTY-FIVE MORE FAMILIES NOW CARRY THAT GRIEF.

CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT?

242

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SO I'M VOTING FOR THIS BILL, FOR THIS OVERSIGHT BILL

BECAUSE OUR INCARCERATED NEIGHBORS DESERVE, AT A BARE MINIMUM,

TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. FAR TOO OFTEN THEY ARE CONDEMNED IN

THE DARK. AND WE MUST FIGHT EVEN HARDER TO ENSURE THAT THE BRUTALITY,

NEGLECT AND DEHUMANIZATION DOES NOT PERSIST. OVERSIGHT ALONE, AS WE

KNOW, WILL NOT STOP THE HARM. IT TELLS US WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THE FACT,

BUT DOES NOT STOP PEOPLE FROM BEING TRAPPED IN CONDITIONS LIKE THIS TO

BEGIN WITH.

WE HAVE TO END THIS CULTURE OF BRUTALITY BY ANY MEANS

NECESSARY. WE KNOW THAT THE SAFEST COMMUNITIES HAVE THE MOST

RESOURCES, NOT THE MOST POLICE OFFICERS. SO WE -- WHEN WE INVEST IN

OUR COMMUNITIES, WE BEGIN BUILDING MEN WHILE THEY ARE STILL BOYS.

WE RECOGNIZE THAT WE NEED MONEY FOR EDUCATION, NOT FOR MASS

INCARCERATION. SINCE ROBERT BROOKS WAS BRUTALLY MURDERED, WE KNOW

THAT HE WAS DOING SO MANY DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WAS TRYING TO BETTER

HIMSELF SO THAT WHEN HE GOT BACK OUT INTO SOCIETY HE COULD BE A BETTER

PERSON. HE EARNED HIS GED. HE STUDIED SIGN LANGUAGE, HORTICULTURE,

MAINTENANCE. HE COMPLETED PROGRAMS, MADE AMENDS, AND WORKED

EVERY DAY TO BUILD A FUTURE FOR HIMSELF AND HIS FAMILY. HE TOLD HIS

FATHER THAT HE WANNA DO WHAT DAD DID; MENTOR YOUNG PEOPLE. BE

CREDIBLE MESSENGERS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY TO LET PEOPLE KNOW WHAT

HAPPENS WHEN A -- A QUICK DECISION GETS MADE THAT WILL LAND YOU UP IN

A PLACE YOU MAY NOT WANT TO BE. BUT INSTEAD OF SECOND CHANCE --

INSTEAD OF A SECOND CHANCE TO COME HOME AND DO JUST THAT, HE GOT A

DEATH SENTENCE. THE PURPOSE OF OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM MUST BE TO

243

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

REHABILITATE RATHER THAN EXCESSIVELY PUNISH. BUT INSTEAD, WE KEEP

TRAPPING PREDOMINANTLY BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE IN OUR CARCERAL

SYSTEM. WE NEED A NEW PATH FORWARD, TO WHICH THIS BILL IS ALIGNING US

WITH.

BRUTALIZING PRISONERS IS ILLEGAL, IT'S INHUMANE AND IT

MUST STOP NOW. THAT IS WHY SENTENCING REFORM IS URGENT. YES, IT IS

IMPORTANT TO OVERSIGHT AND DOCUMENT THE HARM. BUT SENTENCING REFORM

PREVENTS IT FROM EVEN HAPPENING. SO OF COURSE SOME OF THE OTHER BILLS

THAT WAS [SIC] INTRODUCED IN THIS PACKAGE INCLUDES THE SECOND LOOK

ACT, WHICH GIVES JUDGES THE POWER TO REVIEW LONG SENTENCES AFTER TEN

YEARS AND RECOGNIZE REAL TRANSFORMATION. WE KNOW THAT THE EARNED

TIME ACT, WHICH IS ALSO A PART OF THE ORIGINAL PACKAGE, ALLOWS FOR

PEOPLE TO EARN MEANINGFUL TIME OFF THEIR SENTENCE THROUGH WORK,

EDUCATION AND PROGRAMMING.

THERE NEEDS TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A RELEASE

MECHANISM FROM THIS MADNESS. CONTINUING TO KEEP PEOPLE BEHIND

BARS IN BARBARIC SITUATIONS AS WE'VE HEARD ON BEHALF OF THE FOLK WHO ARE

WORKING THERE EACH AND EVERY DAY, WHO ARE EXPECTING TO COME HOME

SAFE TO THEIR FAMILIES, AND THE PEOPLE WHO ARE INCARCERATED. WHEN WE

KEEP THEM CAGED UP, A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE TALK ABOUT THE -- A CRAB IN A

BARREL CONCEPT. BUT GUESS WHAT? YES, WHEN CRABS ARE IN BARRELS

THEY'RE TRYING TO PULL DOWN OTHER CRABS. BUT BARRELS IS [SIC] NOT THE

NATURAL HABIT FOR A CRAB. A CRAB IN THE OCEAN IS THRIVING. THEY'RE DOING

THE THINGS THAT THEY NEED TO BE DOING IN ORDER TO TAKE CARE OF

THEMSELVES. AND SO WHEN YOU PUT PEOPLE INSIDE OF A CAGE AND THEY

244

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

BEGAN [SIC] TO ACT CAGE-LIKE AND WE SIT ON THE SIDELINES AND WE ARE

WATCHING LIKE WE ARE AT A WRESTLING MATCH, AS WE ARE AT A BOXING

MATCH, AS WE ARE AT THE COLISEUM, THIS IS THE TYPE OF THING THAT WE CAN

EXPECT. WE KNOW WHAT THE DEFINITION OF INSANITY IS. WHEN WE KEEP

DOING THE SAME THING AND EXPECTING A DIFFERENT RESULT, WHO IS THE

PROBLEM? WHO ARE -- WHO'S REALLY INSANE HERE?

SO OF COURSE WE HAVE TO ENCOURAGE GROWTH AND

INCREASE SAFETY FOR EACH AND EVERY PERSON BEHIND A PRISON WALL. AND

SECOND LOOK IS MORE THAN JUST A BILL. IT'S A CHANCE TO HONOR THE

HUMANITY OF THOSE WHO HAVE GROWN, CHANGED AND SERVED TIME BEYOND

-- FAR BEYOND WHAT THE PUBLIC DEMANDS.

I COME FROM BROWNSVILLE, AS EVERYONE KNOWS, WHERE

FAMILIES LIVE EVERY DAY WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF HARSH, UNYIELDING

SENTENCING LAWS THAT TEARS FAMILIES APART AND DESTABILIZES OUR

COMMUNITIES. WHY, ON PITKIN AVENUE WE HAVE A HARD TIME JUST

GETTING ECONOMIC GROWTH. BUT WE WILL WATCH EACH AND EVERY DAY AS

THE NUMBERS OF POLICE OFFICERS WHO ARE FILLING THE 73RD PRECINCT

CONTINUE TO DOUBLE EACH AND EVERY DAY.

WE NEED TO ADDRESS MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES AND TRAUMA

THAT PEOPLE EXPERIENCE AT A YOUNG AGE IN ORDER FOR US TO GET AT AND LOSE

THE CYCLES OF VIOLENCE BEFORE WE DECIDE TO SLAM THOSE INDIVIDUALS

BEHIND CAGES. WE CANNOT SIMPLY MONITOR SUFFERING. WE MUST PREVENT

IT. WE MUST RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE -- ARE -- THAT -- THAT OUR PEOPLE ARE

FAR MORE WORSE THAN THEIR ONE-TIME MISTAKE. WE MUST RECOGNIZE MORE

OFTEN THAN NOT THAT PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BE DEFINED BY THEIR ONE MISTAKE.

245

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AND WE MUST BUILD A SYSTEM THAT BELIEVES IN SECOND CHANCES AND

BELIEVES IN OUR PEOPLE. SECOND LOOK WOULD HAVE CREATED A PATHWAY

FOR PEOPLE TO DEMONSTRATE TRANSFORMATION AND DELIVER JUSTICE ROOTED IN

DIGNITY AND SAFETY. ALTHOUGH THIS MAY HAVE BEEN A MISSED OPPORTUNITY

IN THIS PRESENT SITUATION, IT IS NOT THE END. WE WILL CONTINUE TO KEEP

FIGHTING BECAUSE WE OWE THAT TO ROBERT BROOKS. WE OWE THAT TO THE

75 OTHERS WHO HAVE DIED SINCE HIS DEATH, AND WE OWE THAT TO ALL OF THE

INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE PRESENTLY BEHIND BARS NOT JUST HERE IN THE STATE OF

NEW YORK, BUT THE ENTIRE 1.5 MILLION AMERICANS WHO ARE INCARCERATED

TODAY BECAUSE NEW YORK STATE NEEDS TO CONTINUE TO LEAD THE WAY ON

JUSTICE, ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE, AND WE MUST ALWAYS DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR

FAIRNESS, JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MS. TAPIA.

MS. TAPIA: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MS. TAPIA: FOR TOO LONG, VIOLENCE, NEGLECT AND

ABUSE IN OUR JAILS AND PRISONS HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO FLOURISH IN THE

SHADOWS. THIS PACKAGE IS CHANGING THAT. IT'S -- IT'S ABOUT PULLING BACK

THE CURTAIN AND HOLDING OUT OUR INSTITUTIONS TO A HIGHER STANDARD.

I AM PROUD TO SPONSOR ONE OF THE PARTS OF THIS PACKAGE

WHICH WOULD MANDATE COMPREHENSIVE CAMERA COVERAGE IN OUR PRISON

SYSTEM. WITH BETTER CAMERAS AND RELIABLE RECORDINGS, WE CAN PROTECT

246

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS FROM ABUSE. WE KNOW THAT CAMERAS COVERAGE

MAKES INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS FEEL -- FEEL SAFER AND MAKE THEM SAFER.

IT WILL ELIMINATE BLINDS SPOTS AND HELP TO PREVENT ABUSE AND

MISCONDUCT. TOGETHER, THESE BILLS REPRESENT A CLEAR DEMAND FOR

ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY, AND HUMANITY IN OUR CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM.

WE CANNOT ALLOW MORE LIVES TO BE LOST WHILE WE WAIT.

I WILL VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. MOLITOR.

MR. MOLITOR: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WOULD THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. DILAN: ABSOLUTELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. MOLITOR: THANK YOU, SIR. CAN YOU SAY YOUR

LAST NAME FOR ME JUST SO I KNOW I HAVE IT RIGHT?

MR. DILAN: MINE?

MR. MOLITOR: YEAH.

MR. DILAN: WELL, IT'S DILAN, BUT I'M NOT SURE -- I'M

NOT SURE IF IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE USED. I SAY THAT COMICALLY, NOT

OFFENSIVELY. DILAN.

MR. MOLITOR: NO, I KNOW. SO NEXT TIME I USE IT

I'LL SAY IT RIGHT.

247

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DILAN: WE COULD USE IT ON A MORE PERSONAL

LEVEL OFF THE FLOOR.

MR. MOLITOR: YEAH, THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT.

I'D LIKE TO FOCUS ON SECTION F OF THIS BILL.

MR. DILAN: CERTAINLY.

MR. MOLITOR: AND IF WE COULD -- I'M LOOKING AT

PAGE 7, LINE 3, WHICH -- WHICH STARTS WITH THE -- AN ADDITION TO THE

EXECUTIVE LAW.

MR. DILAN: 7-3?

MR. MOLITOR: YEAH, PAGE 7, LINE 3. IT STARTS --

STARTS WITH AN ADDITION TO THE EXECUTIVE LAW.

MR. DILAN: OKAY.

MR. MOLITOR: SO IF I UNDERSTAND THIS SECTION

CORRECTLY, THIS WOULD GIVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THE OPPORTUNITY TO,

LET'S SAY, PROSECUTE A CASE THAT OCCURS IN ANY ONE OF THE CORRECT -- IN

ANY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK WHERE THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL IS ALREADY REPRESENTING A, MAYBE A CORRECTION OFFICER IN THAT

SAME CORRECTIONAL FACILITY.

MR. DILAN: IT GIVES THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THEIR

OFFICE, I GUESS, THE -- THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT, AND I THINK THE -- THE

REASON WHY THIS LANGUAGE WAS IMPORTANT, I THINK, IS WE -- WE ALL KNOW

IT'S BECAUSE OF THE RE -- RECUSALS. BUT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE BILL IT

REQUIRES THEM TO CREATE FIREWALLS TO RELIEVE THEM FROM (INDISCERNIBLE).

IN THIS SECTION IT DOES. BUT IT -- IT GIVES THEM THE RESPONSIBILITY TO

CREATE CONFLICTS TO -- TO ELIMINATE CONFLICTS WITHIN THE AG'S OFFICE, AND

248

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THEN TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY CAN'T DO THAT, THEY HAVE OTHER TOOLS TO HAVE

TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF INSTANCES WHERE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL COULD --

COULD -- WOULD HAVE TO RECUSE.

MR. MOLITOR: SO, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL -- LET'S

USE A SPECIFIC CASE HERE. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, LET'S SAY, IS

REPRESENTING TWO OR THREE CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS OUT OF A SPECIFIC FACILITY

FOR SOME SORT OF ACTION THAT WAS FILED AGAINST THEM. DON'T HAVE TO

SPECIFY WHAT. BUT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS REPRESENTING THEM,

DEFENDING THEM IN THAT ACTION. WHILE THAT IS OCCURRING OR AFTER THAT --

WHILE THAT CRIMINAL -- WHILE THAT ACTION IS PENDING, THERE'S NOW A

CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AGAINST THOSE SAME CORRECTION OFFICERS, AND

UNDER THIS LEGISLATION THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CAN SAY -- I'M SORRY, THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL UNDER THIS SECTION CAN SAY, I'M GONNA HAND OFF THAT

ACTION WHERE I WAS DEFENDING THE CORRECTION OFFICERS TO A DEPUTY

ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO'S SCREENED OFF FROM MY OFFICE AND, I, MYSELF, AM

GOING TO PROSECUTE THE CORRECTION OFFICERS.

MR. DILAN: SO LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. SO

THERE'S SOMETHING THAT THE AG'S OFFICE, MAYBE NOT THE AG HERSELF,

THEY'RE -- THEY'RE DOING THAT -- THEY'RE REPRESENTING A CORRECTION OFFICER

ON A COMPLAINT AND POTENTIALLY ON THE CIVIL SIDE, AND NOW A POTENTIAL

CRIMINAL ISSUE COMES UP WITH THE SAME OFFICER? IS THAT -- IS THAT WHERE

YOU'RE GOING?

MR. MOLITOR: YES.

MR. DILAN: OKAY. THAT'S -- YES, CORRECT.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. AND THEN -- WELL, BEFORE WE

249

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MOVE ON TO MY NEXT QUESTION, HOW DO WE, AS THE LEGISLATURE, HAVE THE

AUTHORITY TO DO THIS? TO CHANGE THE EXECUTIVE ORDER TO DEAL WITH

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST? WHERE DOES THIS -- WHERE -- WHERE IS OUR

AUTHORITY COMING FROM?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. DILAN: YEAH, SO WE'RE, OBVIOUSLY, THE GENERAL

LAWMAKING BODY OF THE STATE. SO THAT'S THE FIRST PLACE IT COMES FROM.

BUT THEN WITHIN THERE -- WITHIN THIS BILL WE -- WE, YOU KNOW, GIVE THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE -- WE -- WE'RE MANDATING THAT SHE PROVIDE

RULES -- OR THAT THEY, I SHOULDN'T SAY HE OR SHE -- THAT THEY PROVIDE RULES

WITHIN THE AG'S OFFICE TO SEEK WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO ACHIEVE IN THE

BILL.

MR. MOLITOR: ARE -- ARE YOU AN ATTORNEY, MR.

DILAN?

MR. DILAN: NO, SIR.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. I'M NOT TRYING TO TRAP YOU

HERE.

MR. DILAN: YEAH, THAT'S THE SENSE I GET.

MR. MOLITOR: BUT AS YOU KNOW, I'M SURE, OR

SOMEONE'S MAYBE TOLD YOU, AN ATTORNEY GETS ADMITTED TO THE APPELLATE

DIVISION IN WHICH THEY WISH TO PRACTICE. AND THEY'RE REQUIRED TO

FOLLOW THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT THAT ARE PROMULGATED BY THE

APPELLATE DIVISION. AND THE -- IT'S THE APPELLATE DIVISION THAT

OVERSEES ATTORNEYS AND ADDRESSES GRIEVANCES AND NETS OUT DISCIPLINE.

(CONFERENCING)

250

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DILAN: SO I THINK THE -- THE ANSWER TO -- TO

YOUR QUESTION, IF I'M CORRECT, LIES ON PAGE 7 BEGINNING ON LINE -- LINES

23. IT SAYS THE RULES AND REGULATIONS ESTABLISHING (INDISCERNIBLE) SHALL

BE SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT REGARDING

CONFLICTS TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF STATE PEACE AND POLICE OFFICERS.

MR. MOLITOR: I -- I DID SEE THAT LANGUAGE.

MR. DILAN: OKAY. SO --

MR. MOLITOR: I DID SEE THAT LANGUAGE. THE ISSUE

-- I'M SORRY.

MR. DILAN: THE SHORT ANSWER WAS THAT -- THAT PART

OF THE BILL WOULD ESTABLISH THE -- THE PROTOCOLS IN WHICH THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL WOULD -- WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW, CONSISTENT WITH THE QUESTION

THAT YOU JUST ASKED.

MR. MOLITOR: THE ISSUE I HAVE IS THAT THE

LEGISLATURE CANNOT TELL THE JUDICIARY WHAT TO DO UNDER THE CONSTITUTION

AND THE JUDICIARY LAW. IT'S THE JUDICIARY'S POWER AND RESPONSIBILITY TO

PROMULGATE RULES AND ESTABLISH ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE. YOU CAN'T --

MR. DILAN: SO, I -- I DON'T --

MR. MOLITOR: -- CRAFT -- LET ME FINISH MY POINT.

MR. DILAN: I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING.

WE ARE NOT TELLING THEM WHAT TO DO, WE ARE TELLING THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL'S OFFICE WHAT TO DO.

MR. MOLITOR: WELL, IT SAYS -- IT -- IT LAYS OUT WHAT

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS SUPPOSED TO DO, AND THEN IT SAYS THAT IF THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL DOES WHAT IT SAYS -- WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO IN THIS

251

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LEGISLATION, THAT IT WILL BE SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL

CONDUCT. BUT THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT ARE ADMINISTRATED BY

OUR APPELLATE DIVISIONS, AND THOSE APPELLATE DIVISIONS ARE THE ONES

WHO DETERMINE WHETHER CONDUCT SATISFIES OR DOESN'T SATISFY THE RULES

OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT.

MR. DILAN: SO WE'RE NOT CHANGING ETHICAL

RESPONSIBILITIES LAID OUT BY THE JUDICIARY OR AN APPELLATE DIVISION.

WE'RE SAYING THAT THE RULES THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS TO PROVIDE IN

HER OFFICE HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE.

MR. MOLITOR: BUT -- BUT THERE ARE RULES AND -- AND

A LOT OF OPINIONS, I MIGHT ADD, ABOUT THOSE RULES THAT SAY THAT AN

ATTORNEY -- THE -- THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CANNOT BOTH SIMULTANEOUSLY

REPRESENT A CORRECTION OFFICER AND PROSECUTE A CORRECTION OFFICER AT THE

SAME TIME. AND, IN FACT -- AND, IN FACT, THAT'S EXACTLY WHY THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL NEEDED TO GET A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR TO PROSECUTE THE INDIVIDUALS

WHO WERE CHARGED IN THE MARCY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY INCIDENT.

MR. DILAN: CERTAINLY. SO SHE HAS TO USE THOSE

RULES TO CREATE A SHIELD IN HER OFFICE THAT IS PRESCRIBED BY THOSE -- BY

THE JUDICIARY AND THOSE APPELLATE DIVISIONS AND THE CONDUCT. BUT THEY

-- YOU KNOW, THE -- THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS THE CHIEF ATTORNEY OF THE

STATE. I'M CERTAIN THAT THEY ARE FAR MORE AWARE OF HOW TO DO THAT THAN

-- THAN I AM, WHICH IS WHY WE GIVE HER THE FLEXIBILITY TO DO THAT. AND

THEN IN THE EVENT THAT THEY FIND THAT THEY CANNOT SATISFY THAT, SHE STILL

HAS TO -- HAS TO RECUSE.

MR. MOLITOR: AND THAT'S WHAT THAT SECOND SECTION

252

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

IS FOR. I -- I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH YOU. I THINK YOU HAVE A MAJOR

CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM WITH THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION. BUT I

ALSO THINK IT'S INTERESTING THAT YOU HAVE ON LINE 31 -- 33 YOU HAVE

BASICALLY THE ALTERNATIVE, WHICH IS IF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS A

CONFLICT THAT THEY CAN'T SCREEN OUT AND THERE'S JUST NO POSSIBLE WAY THAT

THEY CAN TAKE THE CASE, THEY CAN INSTEAD APPLY TO THE -- TO THE COUNTY

ATTORNEY WHERE THE INCIDENT OCCURRED AND -- TO GET A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR,

WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED RECENTLY.

MR. DILAN: YES.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY.

NOW, ON -- ON THAT SECTION, THAT SECTION IS AMENDING

701 OF THE COUNTY LAW. AND IT ADDS A SECTION TO THE COUNTY LAW THAT

DOES NOT CURRENTLY EXIST; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: YES.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. AND THE WAY IT STANDS RIGHT

NOW, IF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TAKES OVER A CASE OR -- OR DECIDES TO

PROSECUTE A CASE INSTEAD OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY FROM THAT COUNTY, THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS TO GET A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR THAT EITHER WORK --

LIKE, LIVES IN THE COUNTY IN WHICH THE INCIDENT OCCURRED OR A -- AN

ADJOINING COUNTY. THAT'S WHAT THE CURRENT LAW IS; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: YEAH. AND THAT'S HOW THEY'RE HANDLING

THE CURRENT PROSECUTIONS NOW.

MR. MOLITOR: RIGHT. THIS -- THIS LEGISLATION

CHANGES THAT A LITTLE BIT. THIS -- IN THE SPECIFIC SCENARIO WHERE THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS TAKEN OVER A CASE FROM A DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND

253

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

HAS REALIZED THAT THERE'S A CONFLICT, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CAN PETITION

THE COURT TO GET A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR. IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE SOMEBODY

WHO'S IN THE COUNTY OR SOMEBODY WHO'S FROM AN ADJOINING COUNTY, BUT

ANYWHERE IN THE STATE SO LONG AS THE COURT DETERMINES THAT THAT PERSON

IS -- HAS THE NECESSARY EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS TO HANDLE THE

CASE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: YES.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. AND IT ALSO AUTHORIZES THAT

SPECIAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY OR SPECIAL PROSECUTOR, WE MIGHT SAY, TO

HANDLE -- TO HAVE ALL THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL AND -- IN THAT CASE, AND ALSO TO THEN MAKE AN APP -- TO BE

PERMITTED TO MAKE AN APPLICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET IN ORDER

FOR ANY NECESSARY DISBURSEMENTS.

MR. DILAN: CORRECT.

MR. MOLITOR: AND THAT'S SO -- THAT'S -- IN -- IN THE

-- THE CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE IT'S A BIG CASE, THERE'S A LOT OF EXPENSES.

THAT SPECIAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY WON'T BE BURDENED BY THOSE EXPENSES; IS

THAT CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: CORRECT.

MR. MOLITOR: OKAY. MR. DILAN, THANK YOU SO

VERY MUCH FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. MOLITOR: SO I THINK PART F IS PROBLEMATIC.

YOU KNOW, THIS IS, I THINK, MAYBE THE ISSUE WITH HAVING AN OMNIBUS

254

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

BILL. YOU'RE ADDING A LOT OF SECTIONS IN THERE AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE

SOMETIMES YOU DON'T CATCH AN ISSUE LIKE THIS. BUT I THINK THAT THERE'S --

I THINK THERE IS A BIG PROBLEM. YOU KNOW, UNDER ARTICLE VI, SECTION 2

OF THE -- THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION AND UNDER SECTION 90 OF THE

JUDICIARY LAW, IT'S THE COURTS THAT OVERSEE ATTORNEYS. THEY HANDLE

ADMISSIONS. THEY HANDLE RE -- CERTIFICATIONS AND RECERTIFICATIONS,

CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS, GRIEVANCES AND, ULTIMATELY,

ANY DISCIPLINARY ACTION. SO REGARDLESS OF WHAT THIS LEGISLATION SAYS AS

TO WHETHER THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S ACTIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED A CONFLICT

OR NOT OR SHALL COMPLY WITH THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OR NOT,

IT'S THE JUDICIARY THAT'S ULTIMATELY GONNA DECIDE. AND THE PROBLEM,

RIGHT, JUST FROM A PRACTICAL STANDPOINT, IS IF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

DECIDES TO USE THAT SECTION AND PROSECUTE A CASE, THINKING THAT THEY --

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO, SO THEY PUT THAT --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU, MR.

MOLITOR.

MR. MOLITOR: SORRY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. GRAY.

MR. GRAY: MADAM SPEAKER, WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. DILAN: THIS MAY PROVE TO BE THE MOST DIFFICULT

(INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK) --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

255

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. GRAY: SO, FIRST OF ALL, LET ME THANK YOU FOR

ANSWERING ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU'VE BEEN GETTING FOR HOURS ON END.

I WOULD ONLY SAY THAT WE WOULD BE WILLING TO TAKE QUESTIONS FROM THE

OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE ANY TIME YOU WANT TO LET US GET A BILL TO THE FLOOR.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SO --

MR. DILAN: I'M TRYING TO PROTECT MY APPOINTMENTS

ON A FEW BOARDS THAT WE MAY BE ADDING IN THIS BILL.

MR. GRAY: OKAY. YOU CAN STAND ON THE OTHER SIDE

OF THE DESK IF IT MAKES YOU MORE COMFORTABLE.

SO, ANYHOW... SO THERE'S INFORMATION THAT'S GENERATED

FROM DOCCS THAT IS REGARDING INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL VIOLENCE ON

STAFF, INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL VIOLENCE ON OTHER INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: YES.

MR. GRAY: OKAY. AND HOW IS THAT -- HOW IS THAT

INFORMATION GATHERED? HOW'S IT GENERATED?

MR. DILAN: LARGELY RIGHT NOW IT'S -- IT'S -- IT'S

GATHERED BY DOCCS.

MR. GRAY: OKAY. BUT WHAT'S THE -- WHAT'S THE

GENESIS? HOW DID THEY GET IT? WHERE DOES IT COMES FROM? DOES IT

COME FROM REPORTS? WHERE IS IT COMING FROM?

MR. DILAN: COULD YOU REPEAT IT? COULD YOU REPEAT

THE QUESTION?

MR. GRAY: YES. SO WHERE IS THE INFORMATION

256

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTUALLY ORIGINATED FROM? RIGHT? IS IT REPORTS THAT FACILITIES ARE FILING

WITH THE CENTRAL OFFICE?

MR. DILAN: I BELIEVE SO, YES.

MR. GRAY: OKAY. SO WITH THE -- PART B, THE

COMPREHENSIVE COVERAGE WITH THE CAMERAS. DO WE EXPECT ANY

ADDITIONAL REPORTING OR ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION COMING FROM THESE

CAMERAS IN THE WAY OF REPORTS OF VIOLENCE THAT AREN'T OTHERWISE

REPORTED?

MR. DILAN: YEAH. SO IT -- IT -- IT REQUIRES THE

COMMISSIONER TO DO AN ANNUAL REPORT.

MR. GRAY: TO DO AN ANNUAL REPORT ON EVERYTHING

THAT'S CAPTURED ON THESE CAMERAS IN TERMS OF VIOLENCE THAT IS NOT

REPORTED OTHERWISE?

MR. DILAN: ONLY REGARD [SIC] TO THE ACTIONS OF THE

CAMERAS. ACTIONS --

MR. GRAY: OKAY. OKAY. SO NOW COVERED -- SO

THEY'RE IN ALL OF THIS -- THEY'RE IN ALL AROUND IN THE FACILITIES. WOULD THIS

INCLUDE VISIT ROOMS?

MR. DILAN: YES.

MR. GRAY: OKAY. ALL RIGHTY. SO WE'LL CAPTURE ALL

THE INFORMATION THERE. IF THERE'S CONTRABAND COMING IN FROM THE VISIT

ROOMS WE'LL BE ABLE TO CAPTURE ALL OF THAT INFORMATION; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: ALONG WITH A LOT OF HUGS AND KISSES.

MR. GRAY: PARDON?

MR. DILAN: YES, ALONG WITH A LOT OF HUGS AND

257

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

KISSES.

MR. GRAY: MORE THAN THAT, SIR. I'VE BEEN IN -- JUST

SO YOU KNOW, I'M SPEAKING FROM EXPERIENCE. I HAVE BEEN IN OVER --

OVER A DOZEN FACILITIES AND THE VISIT ROOMS, AND YOU'LL GET -- YOU'LL SEE

MORE THAN KISSES. JUST TRUST ME ON THAT ONE.

SO, NOW, DO WE KNOW IN THESE FACILITIES WHERE THE

VIOLENCE AND SPECIFICALLY WHAT SECTIONS OF THESE FACILITIES THE VIOLENCE

IS OCCURRING?

MR. DILAN: I -- DOCCS MAY KNOW. I DON'T KNOW

THAT THE -- THE LEGISLATURE MAY KNOW IN TERMS OF SPECIFICS. BUT --

MR. GRAY: BUT WE KNOW GENERALLY WHAT AREAS THAT

IT HAPPENS IN; THE YARD, WHERE IT COULD BE -- RIGHT?

MR. DILAN: YEAH. AGAIN, I THINK DOCCS --

DOCCS MAY KNOW. I THINK -- I DON'T THINK WE LOOKED IN THIS BILL TO

CAPTURE THAT, YOU KNOW, LEVEL OF --

MR. GRAY: WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRANSPARENCY --

MR. DILAN: OF DETAIL.

MR. GRAY: SO WE WANT TRANSPARENCY. WE WANT TO

KNOW EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING ON IN THESE FACILITIES FOR THE PROTECTION OF

THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS, FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE UNIFORMED STAFF,

FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE CIVILIAN STAFF; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: YEAH. BUT AS TO THE -- THE -- AS IT

RELATES TO YOUR QUESTION, THE SPECIFIC LOCATIONS OF -- OF WHERE THEY

HAPPEN, YOU KNOW DOCCS WILL -- DOCCS WILL KNOW THAT. THEY'LL BE

ABLE TO ADDRESS THAT. AND I THINK IN ONE OF THE INITIAL STEPS THAT THE

258

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

GOVERNOR DID IN RESULT -- AS A RESULT OF THE -- THE -- THE HOMICIDE WAS

THEY ENACTED PARTNERSHIPS WITH -- WITH OUTSIDE FIRM TO CONDUCT, LIKE,

SAFETY GAP ANALYSES -- SAFETY GAP ANALYSES AND USING OTHER DATA THAT --

THAT THEY WILL GET FROM THESE OUTSIDE PROVIDERS TO KIND OF ADDRESS

PROBLEMATIC AREAS. THAT WILL BE A PARTNERSHIP THAT DOCCS HAS

ONGOING. IT'S NOT REALLY CAPTURED IN THIS BILL, BUT IT -- IT HAS -- IT -- WHAT

YOU'RE ASKING HAS BEEN ADDRESSED BY THE EXECUTIVE AS PART OF THEIR

REFORMS THAT THEY CAN DO AT THAT BRANCH BUT IT'S NOT IN LEGISLATION.

MR. GRAY: OKAY. SO LET ME JUST SHARE THAT A LOT OF

THE VIOLENCE IN THESE FACILITIES HAPPENS IN THE SHOWER AREA, RIGHT? SO --

AND THAT'S ONE AREA THAT'S NOT GONNA BE COVERED --

MR. DILAN: YES.

MR. GRAY: -- UNDER THIS. SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE A

GLARING OMISSION OF ACTIVITY IN THESE FACILITIES, CORRECT?

(CONFERENCING)

MR. DILAN: SO YOU'RE -- YOU'RE -- YOU'RE RIGHT THAT

THAT IS A -- A PROBLEM.

MR. GRAY: YES.

MR. DILAN: BUT I THINK YOU CAN SEE FOR HUMANE

REASONS WHY WE LEFT THAT OUT. BUT WHAT WILL BE CAPTURED IS AREAS OF

INGRESS -- EGRESS WILL BE CAPTURED BY CAMERA.

MR. GRAY: YES. SO -- AND YOU'RE TALKING -- IN THAT

SAME SECTION YOU'RE TALKING IN SECTION [SIC] B, LINE 44 IT TALKS ABOUT

FIXED STATIONARY CAMERAS, AND TO CAPTURE BOTH AUDIO AND VISUAL FOOTAGE.

MR. DILAN: YES.

259

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. GRAY: OKAY. SO IS THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO

CAPTURING THE AUDIO ONLY IN THOSE GENERAL -- THOSE OTHER AREAS WHERE

WE CAN -- WHERE IT -- WHERE IT COULD BE HEARD WHAT'S GOING ON?

MR. DILAN: YEAH, BUT I -- I GUESS THIS WAS DONE

THIS WAY BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, PREVIOUSLY THERE -- THERE -- THERE WERE

ISSUES ABOUT PRIVACY IN BATHROOMS.

MR. GRAY: VISUAL? WELL, I MEAN, YOU COULD SAY --

YOU COULD SAY IT'S AUDIO, BUT IT'S --

MR. DILAN: YEAH.

MR. GRAY: -- MAINLY VISUAL. I WOULD SAY THAT THE

CONCERNS WOULD BE PROBABLY MORE --

MR. DILAN: AND -- AND, LOOK, I WOULD SAY I SEE

WHERE YOU'RE GETTING AND IT'S A -- IT'S A CONCERN. AND -- AND LIKE YOU

SAID EARLIER, THIS IS A FIRST STEP. THIS IS NOT -- THIS IS NOT THE END. AND IF

IT PROVES TO BE PROBLEMATIC, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE -- THE WORK OF THE

OUTSIDE ENTITY THAT THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE HAS APPOINTED TO BE THE -- ONE

OF THE FIRST REFORMS, YOU KNOW, AFTER THEIR WORK IS CONCLUDED, YOU

KNOW, I WOULD HAVE TO IMAGINE -- AND THAT'S NOT THE ONLY ASPECT, I'LL GET

INTO THAT LATER -- I HAVE TO IMAGINE THAT WOULD GENERATE THINGS THAT

COULD BECOME FURTHER LEGISLATION. BUT RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, THAT'S

KIND OF WHERE WE ARE.

MR. GRAY: YEAH. AND I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT

MAYBE WE'D LOVE TO CAPTURE SOME OF THE INFORMATION IN REPORTS THAT ARE

COMING FROM ALL THIS IMPROVED TRANSPARENCY SO WE ACTUALLY CAN TELL

HOW IT'S WORKING. IT'S ONE THING TO IMPLEMENT IT; IT'S ANOTHER THING TO

260

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

KNOW THAT IT'S ACTUALLY FUNCTIONING, CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: CORRECT.

MR. GRAY: OKAY. JUST ONE OTHER QUICK -- OR A

COUPLE OTHER QUICK QUESTIONS. ENFORCEMENT ON THE -- PAGE 4, LINES 17

THROUGH 20. THAT -- THAT SECTION THERE REALLY READS THAT IT'S MORE

PENALTY, IT'S NOT ENFORCEMENT. SO COULD YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT

THE ENFORCEMENT OF THESE CAMERA OPERATIONS?

MR. DILAN: YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE -- THE

ENFORCEMENT THAT'S GRANTED TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL?

MR. GRAY: THAT IS CORRECT. THE WAY THAT READS, TO

ME, IT READS MORE PENALTY-DRIVEN THAN IT IS ENFORCEMENT-DRIVEN.

MR. DILAN: THAT IS HOW IT'S ENFORCED, BY -- BY

PENALTY.

MR. GRAY: IT -- IT DOESN'T SAY HOW IT'S ENFORCED.

THAT'S MY POINT.

MR. DILAN: WELL, IT -- IT --

MR. GRAY: IT TALKS ABOUT THE PENALTIES --

MR. DILAN: MM-HMM.

MR. GRAY: -- BUT IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT HOW IT'S

ENFORCED.

MR. DILAN: SO IT'S -- SO IT -- IT -- IT -- THE -- YEAH, SO

THE INSPECTOR GENERAL CAN -- CAN DO ANNUAL AUDITS, AND IN -- IN THE

FURTHER LINE, LINE 20, THE -- THE INSPECTOR GENERAL CAN TAKE CORRECTIVE

ACTIONS. AND I GUESS --

(PAUSE/CONFERENCING)

261

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

OKAY. SO I GUESS -- IS YOUR CONCERN -- I GUESS YOUR

CONCERN IS IN AND AROUND THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE

MONETARY PENALTIES?

MR. GRAY: THAT'S A PENALTY. I WANT TO KNOW THE

ENFORCEMENT.

MR. DILAN: GOTCHA.

MR. GRAY: HOW IT'S BEING ENFORCED OR HOW IT'S

BEING AUDITED. HOW IT'S GONNA WORK, HOW -- HOW THE ENFORCEMENT

ACTUALLY LOOKS.

MR. DILAN: ANNUAL AUDITS. BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY

IS THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE ADMINISTRATION WANTS TO -- WANTS TO

DO. I WOULD SAY IF -- IF AT ANY POINT A FUTURE ADMINISTRATION DOESN'T

WANT TO DO IT, THEN, YOU KNOW, THE POWERS OF -- OF -- OF THE INSPECTOR

GENERAL COULD -- COULD KICK IN. BUT IT -- IT'S ENFORCED HERE.

MR. GRAY: WELL, I WOULD SAY ANYBODY THAT INSTALLS

CAMERAS ACTUALLY WANTS THEM TO ALL WORK. I HAPPEN TO REPRESENT A -- A

POWER FACILITY THAT STRADDLES -- THAT STRADDLES THE INTERNATIONAL BORDER

FROM CANADA TO THE UNITED STATES. AND WE HAD AN INDIVIDUAL THAT

WALKED ALL THE WAY UNDERNEATH, THROUGH THE BOWELS OF THE DAM FROM

CANADA TO THE UNITED STATES, AND FOUND THAT OVER TWO DOZEN CAMERAS

WERE NOT WORKING. SO MY POINT IS THAT THERE HAS TO BE -- IS THERE GOING

TO BE SOME ENFORCEMENT VERSUS JUST AFTER-THE-FACT PENALTIES? BUT WE'LL

AGREE THAT THAT IS KIND OF INCOMPLETE.

MR. DILAN: SO THE -- THE INSPECTOR GENERAL UNDER

THIS SECTION IS EMPOWERED TO DO ANNUAL AUDITS --

262

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. GRAY: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: -- TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE UNDER THIS

SECTION. SO AT THAT POINT, YOU KNOW, THE -- THE GOVERNOR OR THE

LEGISLATURE OR THE REST OF GOVERNMENT CAN -- CAN TAKE ACTION.

MR. GRAY: OKAY. ALL RIGHTY. THEN PART C, I JUST --

JUST BRIEFLY ON PART C. IT SAYS, THE DEPARTMENT SHALL PROMPTLY NOTIFY THE

NEXT OF KIN OR ANY PERSON DESIGNATED AS A REPRESENTATIVE. CAN YOU

DEFINE THAT SECOND -- THE LATTER PART OF THAT STATEMENT? WHO -- WHAT IS

-- WHO CLASSIFIES AS A DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE? WHAT ARE THE

OPTIONS?

MR. DILAN: WELL, THAT'S CURRENT LAW. WE'RE NOT --

WE'RE NOT AMENDING THAT.

MR. GRAY: YOU'RE NOT AMENDING THAT.

MR. DILAN: NO.

MR. GRAY: IT'S UNDERLINED. THAT'S NEW -- THAT'S NEW

WORDING. LINE 43, 44.

MR. DILAN: SO IF YOU SEE IN -- JUST ABOVE IN PART C

ON LINE 40, IT'S ALREADY WRITTEN IN CURRENT LAW AND NOT -- NOT UNDERLINED.

MR. GRAY: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: SO WE'RE JUST COPYING IT AND PUTTING IT

-- AND REPEATING IT THERE.

MR. GRAY: OKAY. ALL RIGHTY. AND THEN JUST LINE

47, YOU REFER TO -- AND AGAIN, ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES ASKED IT EARLIER, I'M

GONNA RE-ASK IT BECAUSE YOU REFERRED TO AN AUTOPSY REPORT -- AND IN THIS

INSTANCE IT JUST SAYS "AUTOPSY REPORT." BUT IF YOU GO TO PART E AND LINE

263

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

33, 34 IT TALKS ABOUT AUTOPSY AND IT TALKS IN CONJUNCTION WITH

TOXICOLOGY. SO IS THAT AN OMISSION IN PART C, TOXICOLOGY?

MR. DILAN: SO -- AND I BELIEVE THIS QUESTION WAS --

MR. GRAY: WAS ASKED.

MR. DILAN: -- WAS ASKED OF ME EARLIER, ALSO. I'VE

JUST BEEN INFORMED THAT TOXICOLOGY IS ALREADY COVERED IN CURRENT LAW.

MR. GRAY: COVERED IN -- IN C?

MR. DILAN: NO, NO, IN CURRENT LAW.

MR. GRAY: OH, IN CURRENT LAW. GOT IT. GOT IT.

OKAY. THAT'S IT, MR. DILAN. I APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR

YOUR TIME --

MR. DILAN: THANK YOU.

MR. GRAY: -- AND ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. WALSH.

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

SPONSOR YIELD? AND RECOGNIZED THAT ONCE AGAIN WERE IN AN AWKWARD

POSITION. YOU'RE NOT GONNA HURT MY FEELINGS --

(INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. DILAN: I WILL YIELD. AND I'D SAY THIS IS

PROBABLY THE BEST POSITION I'VE BEEN IN ALL DAY.

MS. WALSH: OH, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, I'M GLAD I

COULD HELP.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

264

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM

SPEAKER, AND THANK YOU TO THE SPONSOR. SO WE'VE BEEN DEBATING,

OBVIOUSLY, THIS BILL FOR -- FOR SEVERAL HOURS. I CAN APPRECIATE THAT YOU --

THAT SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I'M ASKING MAY BE REDUNDANT. I'M GONNA

JUST TRY TO JUST GO THROUGH THEM QUICKLY. AND I -- AND I DO APOLOGIZE IF

YOU ARE REPEATING YOURSELF. BUT I JUST WANT TO BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR. I'M

GONNA -- THE GOOD NEWS IS I'LL TAKE IT FROM PART A AND WORK FORWARD, SO

AT LEAST THEY'LL BE IN SOME KIND OF ORDER.

OKAY. SO PART A, THE VIDEO DISCLOSURE RELATING TO THE

INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL'S DEATH. OKAY. SO THIS PART -- AM I CORRECT THAT

THIS PART HAS TO DO WITH NOT ONLY DOCCS, BUT ALSO LOCAL CORRECTIONAL

FACILITIES; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: LOCAL FACILITIES ARE EXEMPT. THIS

APPLIES TO STATE FACILITIES ONLY.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. MY NOTES HAD SAID THAT FOR THIS

SECTION IT APPLIED TO LOCAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES. SO IF I'M MISTAKEN, I

APOLOGIZE.

MR. DILAN: SO I HAVE TO REVERSE MYSELF. YOU --

YOU ARE CORRECT.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. BUT TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE IS THERE

ANY OTHER PART OF THIS ENTIRE OMNIBUS BILL THAT RELATES TO OR IMPACTS

LOCAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES, OR IS IT JUST THIS PART A?

MR. DILAN: JUST THIS PART A.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. VERY GOOD. SO THIS SAYS THAT

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE WILL -- THEY'LL BE DISCLOSURE TO THE AG'S

265

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATION ANY VIDEO FOOTAGE THE OFFICE DEEMS

RELEVANT TO THE DEATH OF AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL WITHIN 72 HOURS OF

THE INCIDENT, INCLUDING CASES INVOLVING CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS. OKAY.

SO IT SAID THAT THE FOOTAGE WILL INCLUDE RECORDINGS FROM FIXED OR

STATIONARY CAMERAS, BODY-WORN CAMERAS, HANDHELD DEVICES. AND THEN

IT SAYS OR ANY OTHER RECORDING EQUIPMENT USED BY CORRECTIONAL STAFF AT

THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT. SO I'M HOPING THAT YOU CAN HELP ME

UNDERSTAND. I THOUGHT, BUT MAYBE I'M WRONG, THAT CORRECTION OFFICERS

ARE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE THEIR CELL PHONES ON THEIR PERSON WHILE THEY'RE

DOING THEIR SHIFT. IS THAT -- OR ARE WE TRYING TO GET AT MAYBE WHAT A

STAFF MEMBER MIGHT BE CARRYING, THAT THEY CAN CARRY? LIKE, ARE WE

TALKING ABOUT CELL PHONES HERE THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE?

MR. DILAN: NO, THIS -- THIS --

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: WE DON'T CHANGE CELL PHONE POLICY IN

ANY WAY --

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: -- IN THIS BILL. BUT WE DO ALLOW FOR, YOU

KNOW, THE AUDIO OF -- OF, YOU KNOW, ANY OTHER DOCCS-APPROVED

DEVICE THAT MAY PICK UP RECORDINGS TO BE USED.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. SO WHEN IT SAYS "ANY OTHER

RECORDING EQUIPMENT", THEN, COULD YOU JUST TELL ME WHAT YOU'RE

CONTEMPLATING WITH THAT? IF IT'S NOT CELL PHONES, THEN WHAT WOULD BE?

OR IS IT JUST A CATCH-ALL MEANT TO JUST COVER ANYTHING?

MR. DILAN: SO I'M -- I'M TOLD DOCCS SOMETIMES

266

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

USE HANDHELD VIDEO CAMERAS AND HAVE OTHER MEANS SO THAT IF ANY OTHER

DOCCS-APPROVED DEVISE CAPTURES SOMETHING THAT IT CAN BE CAPTURED

THIS WAY. IF THEY HAVE DEVICES THAT WE DON'T KNOW OF NOW OR THAT

DEVICES ARE INVENTED OR MANUFACTURED IN THE FUTURE THAT ARE DOCCS-

APPROVED THAT THEY CAN BE CAPTURED UNDER THIS SECTION.

MS. WALSH: VERY GOOD. OKAY. AND WHEN WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT THAT THE OFFICE WILL DEEM RELEVANT TO THE DEATH, DID -- SO,

I MEAN, IT'S OBVIOUS TO ME THAT THE -- AN INCIDENT LEADING UP TO THE

DEATH OF THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE INCLUDED IN

TERMS OF VIDEO FOOTAGE OF THAT. BUT HOW FAR BACK IN TIME MAY THE

FOOTAGE GO? DO YOU -- IS THERE ANY SENSE OF THAT? LIKE, ARE WE

LOOKING THROUGH THE ENTIRE DAY OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR THE WEEK OF THE

INDIVIDUAL, OR IT IS REALLY JUST THE INCIDENT ITSELF?

MR. DILAN: SO IT -- IT GIVES -- IT GIVES THEM

DISCRETION TO DEEM WHAT -- WHAT FOOTAGE IS -- IS RELEVANT TO TURN OVER.

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

MR. DILAN: IF -- YOU KNOW, IF IT'S CLEARLY BY WHEN

THEY LOOK AT IT NOT -- NOT RELEVANT, THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO TURN IT OVER.

MS. WALSH: BUT IT'S IN THE SOLE DISCRETION, THE WAY

THAT THIS IS -- THE WAY I'M READING IT, IT'S IN THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THIS

AG'S OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE WHAT IS RELEVANT AND

HOW FAR BACK MAYBE THEY'D WANT TO GO, CORRECT?

MR. DILAN: YES. CORRECT.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S FINE.

AND THEN THE FOOTAGE, IT SAYS THAT IT WILL BE

267

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MAINTAINED BY THE AG'S OFFICE CONFIDENTIALLY, AND IT WILL DETERMINE

REDACTIONS ACCORDING TO ITS PUBLISHED VIDEO RELEASE POLICY. SO --

MR. DILAN: I WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC

WITH THAT QUESTION. IT'S THE AG'S OFFICE OF INTERNAL -- OF OSI, TO BE

MORE SPECIFIC.

MS. WALSH: VERY GOOD. OKAY, THAT SPECIAL UNIT.

OKAY.

AND SO LET'S MOVE ON TO PART B, THE COMPREHENSIVE

CAMERA COVERAGE. SO -- LET'S SEE -- IT SAYS -- IT SAYS THAT FACILITY

SUPERINTENDENTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR REGULAR ASSESSMENTS OF CAMERA

PLACEMENT, FUNCTIONALITY, ADDRESSING ANY BLIND SPOTS AND NON-

FUNCTIONING CAMERAS. WHEN IT SAYS "REGULAR ASSESSMENTS", NOTHING IS

CALLED OUT. SO IS THAT GONNA BE LEFT TO THE DOCCS COMMISSIONER TO

ESTABLISH WHAT REGULAR ASSESSMENTS MEANS?

MR. DILAN: YES. AND I HAVE TO IMAGINE THAT THEY

WOULD DO THAT IN CONSULTATION WITH THE PARTNERS THAT THEY ARE

CONTRACTING WITH THAT THE EXECUTIVE RELEASED AS PART OF THEIR REFORMS AS

WELL.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. VERY GOOD. AND CAN YOU JUST

DESCRIBE OR DISTINGUISH FOR ME THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ONE YEAR OF

RETENTION OF FOOTAGE AND THE FIVE YEARS? WHAT -- WHAT IS GONNA TRIGGER

THE LONGER PERIOD OF TIME FOR RETAINING THE FOOTAGE?

MR. DILAN: OKAY. SO, ORDINARY IS WHEN YOU'RE

THEN -- SO LINE 7 WHERE --

(CONFERENCING)

268

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SO THE FIVE YEARS KICKS IN BASED ON THE LANGUAGE ON

PAGE 4, LINE 7. IT READS ALLEGATION OR REPORT OF ANY STAFF OR ANY STAFF

MISCONDUCT OR RULE VIOLATION. THAT'S WHERE THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD GETS

KICKED IN.

MS. WALSH: AND -- AND JUST -- WHEN I WAS READING

THAT -- AND I APPRECIATE YOU POINTING THAT OUT TO ME WHERE IT WAS -- IT --

THAT SEEMS EXTREMELY BROAD TO ME BECAUSE THAT DOESN'T JUST INCLUDE,

LIKE, WRITTEN COMPLAINTS, AND THAT COULD MEAN -- THAT COULD MEAN A LOT

MORE THAN THAT, RIGHT? AND IT COULD BE INVOLVING EVEN SOMETHING AS,

RELATIVELY SPEAKING, AS SMALL AS A RULE VIOLATION, RIGHT?

MR. DILAN: YES, THAT'S WHAT THE LANGUAGE SAYS.

YES.

MS. WALSH: SO WOULD IT BE -- WOULD IT BE FAIR TO

SAY OR FAIR TO CONCLUDE THAT FOOTAGE WILL MORE THAN -- MORE LIKELY THAN

NOT, IF THERE'S BEEN ANY KIND OF A COMPLAINT, THAT IT WOULD BE HELD FOR

THAT LONGER PERIOD OF TIME?

MR. DILAN: YES.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND, LET'S SEE. LET'S

MOVE ON TO PART C, THE NOTICE OF DEATH IN CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES. SO IT

REQUIRES DOCCS TO PROMPTLY NOTIFY THE NEXT OF KIN. ONCE AGAIN,

PROMPTLY. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE JUST AT THE DISCRETION OF

DOCCS TO IDENTIFY WHAT -- I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ORDINARY

MEANING OF THE WORD "PROMPTLY" IS. BUT IS THERE GOING TO BE A SPECIFIC

TIME FRAME SET FOR THAT?

MR. DILAN: YES. AND THE -- THE CURRENT PRACTICE IS

269

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WITHIN 24 HOURS. AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN, YOU KNOW, THE FEW WORDS

BEFORE, THE -- THE PART THAT WE'RE STRIKING IN -- IN LAW, EVEN THOUGH

DOCCS' CURRENT PRACTICE IS 24 HOURS, WE'VE [SIC] STRIKING THE WORDS

"BE RESPONSIVE FOR INQUIRIES FROM."

MS. WALSH: OKAY. YES. OKAY, THANK YOU. I

APPRECIATE THAT.

I'M GOING TO SKIP OVER PART D, THE STUDY ON DEATHS

BECAUSE I THINK THAT THAT'S BEEN COVERED AND I THINK THAT THAT'S PRETTY

SELF-EXPLANATORY TO ME.

PART E, THE ENHANCED AUTOPSY REPORTING. A QUESTION I

HAD WAS MUST ALL INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL DEATHS BE AUTOPSIED UNDER

CURRENT -- UNDER OUR CURRENT LAW AND REGULATIONS, OR ONLY SUSPICIOUS

ONES? AND DOES THIS PART E CHANGE THAT IN ANY WAY?

MR. DILAN: SO, IT DOESN'T CHANGE CURRENT LAW OR

PRACTICES.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. AND WHAT IS THE CURRENT

PRACTICE? IS IT ONLY FOR SUSPICIOUS -- SO, FOR EXAMPLE, I -- I WAS

THINKING OF SOMEBODY THAT IS -- THAT HAS NOT BEEN EARLY RELEASED, BUT

THEY HAVE CANCER. THEY HAVE TERMINAL CANCER AND THEY PASS AWAY IN

THE -- IN THE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY. WOULD THAT BE AN AUTOPSY THAT WOULD

BE DONE AUTOMATICALLY OR WHAT -- YOU KNOW, WHAT WOULD BE THE POLICY

ABOUT THAT? IF YOU KNOW.

(CONFERENCING)

MR. DILAN: SO WE BELIEVE IT'S A -- IT'S AN AUT -- AN

AUTOPSY UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES FOR FOLKS IN DOCCS' CUSTODY.

270

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND LAST QUESTION ON

THIS SECTION.

MR. DILAN: AND I WOULD SAY WE BELIEVE.

MS. WALSH: YEAH, NO, I UNDERSTAND. I APPRECIATE

THAT. I KNOW -- I KNOW THAT SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I'M ASKING ARE -- ARE

A LITTLE BIT OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE BILL BECAUSE I'M ASKING ABOUT WHAT

THE CURRENT PRACTICE IS AND YOU MAY NOT KNOW THAT. I APPRECIATE THAT.

MR. DILAN: YEAH.

MS. WALSH: BUT AS FAR AS AUTOPSY, DO YOU HAPPEN

TO KNOW, CAN FAMILY OR NEXT OF KIN REJECT OR SAY NO TO AN AUTOPSY, OR

JUST BY THE SHEER FACT THAT THE INDIVIDUAL HAS BEEN INCARCERATED, DO THEY

-- DOES THE FAMILY OR NEXT OF KIN HAVE NO SAY ABOUT WHETHER THE

AUTOPSY IS GONNA OCCUR OR NOT, IT WILL OCCUR?

MR. DILAN: NOW, YOU'RE TALKING CURRENT LAW, RIGHT?

MS. WALSH: YES.

MR. DILAN: YES. SO WE -- I WOULD SAY WE ARE

UNSURE. BUT THERE -- THERE WERE OTHER PROPOSALS THAT -- THAT -- WE -- WE

TOOK A LOOK AT AS WE LOOKED AT AUTOPSIES TO ALLOW FAMILIES WHO MAYBE

WERE SUSPICIOUS OF AN AUTOPSY REPORT TO GET THEIR OWN INDEPENDENT ONE

DONE, PAID FOR BY THE STATE. THAT WAS A PROPOSAL -- ONE OF THE

PROPOSALS THAT WE LOOKED AT AND DIDN'T QUITE MAKE IT. BUT IT -- IT WAS

SOMETHING WE CONSIDERED. BUT IN TERMS OF THEIR -- THEIR CURRENT RIGHTS,

I'M -- I'M UNSURE. WE'D PROBABLY HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. THAT'S FINE. I WAS JUST

WONDERING BECAUSE SOME -- SOME FAMILIES FOR RELIGIOUS REASONS OR

271

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

OTHER REASONS WOULD NOT WANT AN AUTOPSY, AND I JUST -- I WAS JUST

CURIOUS. THAT'S OKAY, WE CAN MOVE ON.

MR. DILAN: CERTAINLY, IF THAT RIGHT EXISTS IN CURRENT

LAW THIS DOESN'T --

MS. WALSH: IT DOESN'T CHANGE IT.

MR. DILAN: -- THIS DOESN'T ENCROACH ON ANYONE'S

RELIGIOUS RIGHTS TO DO THAT IN ANY WAY IN THIS BILL.

MS. WALSH: IN THIS BILL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OKAY.

SO I'M GONNA SKIP OVER PART F BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT A

PREVIOUS DEBATER COVERED THAT SECTION THOROUGHLY. AND I WILL EVEN

SKIP OVER PART G. AND NOW LOOKING AT PART H. OKAY. SO I NOTICED --

AND I SEE MY TIME IS -- IS SWIFTLY PASSING, SO LET ME JUST ASK ONE QUICK

QUESTION ABOUT THIS ONE. I DID A LITTLE -- A LITTLE LOOKING UP ABOUT WHAT

THE STATE COMMISSION OF CORRECTION DOES, AND IT -- AND IT DEFINED IT AS

AN INDEPENDENT WATCHDOG OVER STATE OR LOCAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES

TASKED WITH ENSURING THE SAFETY, HEALTH AND OPERATIONAL STANDARDS OF

FACILITIES. SO IT -- IT MENTIONED DIFFERENT COHORTS THAT HAVE TO BE

INCLUDED IN THE -- IN THE COMMISSION'S COMPOSITION, BUT IT DIDN'T

INCLUDE ANYBODY FROM THE CORRECTIONAL OR LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY

ON THERE. IS -- IT SEEMS LIKE THAT PERSON OR THAT INDIVIDUAL MAYBE

WOULD BE REPRESENTATION THAT YOU WOULD WANT. I WANTED TO GIVE YOU A

CHANCE TO EXPLAIN WHY THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THAT.

MR. DILAN: IN TERMS OF WHAT, MEMBERSHIP?

MS. WALSH: YEAH, TO BE ON THE COMMISSION.

272

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DILAN: SO, YEAH, THEY'RE -- THEY'RE NOT

SPECIFICALLY LINED OUT AS MANDATED TO BE INCLUDED, BUT THEY'RE NOT

EXCLUDED BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING THAT PROHIBITS --

MS. WALSH: OH, I SEE.

MR. DILAN: -- NOTHING THAT PROHIBITS ANY ONE OF THE

APPOINTING AUTHORITIES FROM PLACING LAW ENFORCEMENT OR CORRECTIONS

OFFICERS TO THIS BOARD AS A MEMBER.

MS. WALSH: DO YOU KNOW IF ANYBODY CURRENTLY ON

THERE IS -- IS A MEMBER OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OR CORRECTIONS?

MR. DILAN: I BELIEVE THE PRESIDENT IS A SERVING

SHERIFF, A FORMER -- A FORMER SHERIFF OF ONE OF OUR COUNTIES.

MS. WALSH: THAT -- THAT'S GREAT. OKAY. THANK YOU

SO MUCH. AND JUST, LET'S SEE. PART J. I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF

DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT -- THAT IT BASICALLY

-- WHAT THIS PART IS DOING IS IT'S CREATING TOLLING, WHERE, YOU KNOW,

DURING YOUR PERIOD OF INCARCERATION YOUR -- YOUR RIGHT TO BRING SUIT IS

BEING TOLLED. LIKE IT WOULD ALMOST, LIKE, FOR INFANCY OR FOR OTHER -- YOU

KNOW, OTHER ISSUES THE LAW WOULD TOLL IT SO THAT YOUR TIME TO

COMMENCE A LAWSUIT ABOUT SOMETHING THAT OCCURRED DURING YOUR

INCARCERATION WILL NOT START TO RUN UNTIL YOU LEAVE.

MR. DILAN: YES.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. I -- I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY

THAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I KNOW I RAN THROUGH A MILLION THINGS AT

ONCE.

MR. DILAN: NO, THAT'S FINE.

273

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MS. WALSH: I JUST (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK) --

MR. DILAN: IT'S ACTUALLY THE MOST ORGANIZED

APPROACH I'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH TODAY. I APPRECIATE IT.

MS. WALSH: WELL, I'VE HAD A LITTLE TIME TO CONSIDER

IT HERE. SO THANK YOU.

MR. DILAN: THANK YOU.

MS. WALSH: MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL, PLEASE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU. SO I APPRECIATE ALL THESE

ANSWERS. I HAVE TO SAY THAT THERE -- THERE IS A LOT IN HERE THAT I REALLY DO

LIKE. I DO LIKE IT BECAUSE I'M A BIG BELIEVER IN BODY-WORN CAMERAS AND

CAMERAS GENERALLY. I THINK THAT IT TENDS TO WORK TO HELP BOTH -- YOU

KNOW, BOTH SIDES, ALL SIDES TO ISSUES TO FIGURE OUT WHAT REALLY

HAPPENED. I THINK WE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER TO BUILD A BETTER SYSTEM. I

THINK THAT WE -- WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH CORRECTIONS

OFFICERS. WE NEED TO TRAIN THEM PROPERLY. WE NEED TO -- ENSURE

CORRECTION OFFICERS' SAFETY, ESPECIALLY THE WOMEN COS THAT I'VE MET

WITH. WE NEED TO REDUCE THE TOXIC WORKPLACE ENVIRONMENT. WE NEED

TO REDUCE AND ELIMINATE CONTRABAND. WE NEED TO REINSTITUTE

REHABILITATIVE PROGRAMS THAT HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED BECAUSE WE DON'T

HAVE THE GOOD RATIOS THAT WE NEED IN ORDER TO RUN THESE PROGRAMS. YOU

KNOW, I THINK THAT THE PROBLEM WITH AN OMNIBUS BILL, AND I'M RUNNING

INTO IT RIGHT NOW, IS THAT WHEN YOU HAVE TEN DIFFERENT BILLS ALL LUMPED

TOGETHER AND THE DEBATE TIME'S BEEN CUT IN HALF A COUPLE YEARS AGO ARE

WE'RE GETTING TO A POINT WHERE WE'RE MAXING OUT, WE CAN'T GIVE THESE

274

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THINGS THE ATTENTION THAT THEY DESERVE. BUT I TRIED.

SO, THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. DILAN.

MR. DILAN: MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. DILAN: SO, I -- I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY

IN THE CHAMBER FOR THE DISCUSSION. AS YOU CAN SEE, YOU KNOW, THE --

THE -- THE AMOUNT OF PASSION AND THE RANGE OF EMOTIONS ARE -- ARE HIGH.

AND I KNOW THERE'S SOME FOLKS OUT THERE WHO ARE FRUSTRATED, BOTH IN THE

CHAMBER AND OUT OF THE CHAMBER, WHO ARE FRUSTRATED THAT WE'RE NOT

GOING FAR ENOUGH. BUT I WOULD SAY, LOOK, THIS IS A -- A STEP. I CLEARLY

DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE'RE ENDING HERE. I THINK THE -- THE FIRST STEP, YOU

KNOW, I WAS TAKEN BY -- IT WAS TAKEN BY THE EXECUTIVE. IT WAS AN

IMPORTANT STEP -- STEP. IT WAS STUFF THAT THE EXECUTIVE COULD DO, TO

SOME DEGREE, WITHOUT LEGISLATION. I MEAN, THE FIRST THING THEY DID AFTER

THE INCIDENT WAS INSTALL A NEW SUPERINTENDENT AT MARCY. YOU KNOW,

THEY -- THEY EXPANDED DOCCS'S WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTIONS. YOU

KNOW, THEY -- LAUNCHED PARTNERSHIPS WITH -- WITH PRIVATE ENTITIES TO DO

SAFETY GAP ANALYSIS, TO DO PUBLIC HEALTH AND HUMAN RIGHTS ANALYSIS OF

PROGRAMS IN -- IN PRISONS. THEY'VE DONE, YOU KNOW, A HOST OF THINGS.

INCLUDING THE ONE TO ME THAT WAS MOST IMPORTANT, THAT THEY CREATED A

NEW DEDICATED UNIT ON THE FUTURE OF PRISONS WITHIN NEW YORK STATE AT A

NONPROFIT AGENCY. I BELIEVE IT'S A NONPROFIT AGENCY, I'M NOT SURE AS I

LOOK IT. THOSE WERE THE FIRST STEPS THAT THE EXECUTIVE COULD DO ON THEIR

275

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

OWN AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE -- THE FIRST STEP.

I THINK THE NEXT STEP THAT WE DID COLLABORATIVELY WAS

ENACT PROTECTIONS AND DO THINGS IN THE BUDGET LIKE PROVIDING THE

FUNDING FOR CAMERAS. YOU KNOW, PROVIDING EXPANDED FUND -- FUNDING

FOR OUR INDEPENDENT WATCHDOGS ON DOCCS LIKE CANY AND LIKE THE

STATE COMMISSION ON CORRECTIONS. I WOULD SAY, IN -- IN THAT REGARD,

THERE'S A LOT TO DO. YOU KNOW, PRIOR TO THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, FOR AN ENTITY

THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE STATE'S INDEPENDENT WATCHDOG OF DOCCS,

MAYBE ALMOST IN THE MODEL OF -- AND I SAY "ALMOST" BECAUSE IT'S

DIFFERENT, BUT ALMOST IN THE MODEL OF NEW YORK CITY'S CCRB AND THEY

RECEIVED THROUGH -- CONSISTENTLY $3 MILLION IN -- IN -- IN APPROPRIATIONS

TO INDEPENDENTLY OVERSEE AN AGENCY THAT HAS A BUDGET OF OVER -- OVER

3 BILLION.

YEAH, WE -- WE NEED TO DO MORE THERE, BUT IT -- IT -- IT

BECAME, YOU KNOW, CLEAR AT -- AT -- AT SOME POINT THAT AT SOME POINT IN

OUR HISTORY, THAT THIS AGENCY'S POWERS HAD BEEN GUTTED TO BE THE

INDEPENDENT CHECK THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE WHEN THEY WERE

FOUNDED IN THE 1800S AFTER THE REFORMS THAT WERE MADE BY LAW AFTER

ATTICA. WHICH, BY THE WAY, WERE DONE BY REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATIONS,

ACROSS THE BOARD, WHICH WERE OKAY UNDER -- BUT EVEN AT THAT TIME, THEY

WERE DONE IN CONJUNCTION AND IN NEGOTIATION WITH INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS. AND AS WE ALL KNOW -- ALL KNOW, ATTICA DID NOT TURN OUT

WELL FOR THOSE WHO WERE UNDER INCARCERATION. SO, TO HAVE THE -- THE

CHECKS -- THE CHECKS THAT PEOPLE OF THIS STATE HAVE BEEN ATTEMPTING TO

CORRECT FOR OVER 150 YEARS IN OUR HISTORY, CLEARLY SAYS THAT OUR SYSTEM

276

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

OF INDEPENDENT CHECKS ARE -- ARE -- ARE BROKEN.

SO, THAT WAS AN IMPORTANT STEP TO TAKE IN THE BUDGET.

YOU KNOW, EXPANDING DOCCS' INTERNAL OSI, BECAUSE THERE'S TWO

DIFFERENT ONES; ONE WITHIN DOCCS AND THEN ONE WITHIN THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL'S OFFICE. COLLABORATIVELY, WE ALLOWED DOCCS TO HAVE THAT

EXPANDED AUTHORITY BECAUSE DOCCS CAN ALSO DO THE SAME THING

WITHIN DOCCS. AND PEOPLE WHO ARE UNDER INCARCERATION CAN ALSO

MAKE COMPLAINTS TO DOCCS OSI AND THEY CAN HAVE THOSE COMPLAINTS

SUBSTANTIATED AND PROVED BY DOCCS OSI AND THEY CAN DO IT.

WHAT MOST FOLKS -- THANKFULLY, WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT

THE -- THE INFORMATION AND REPORTING THAT OSI HAS TO DO. I THINK IT WAS

PRETTY CLEAR AND -- AND -- AND RATHER NONCONTROVERSIAL. THAT'S WHY I SAY

"THANKFULLY". I THINK PEOPLE'S -- AS THEY REVIEWED THE BILL, IT WAS PRETTY

CLEAR TO SEE WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO ACHIEVE. THE FEELING AT THE TIME IS

THOUGH, IF -- IF WE'RE GONNA GIVE DOCCS -- DOCCS OSI, YOU KNOW, A

TURN -- INTERNAL MEMBERS TO DO A REPORTING ON THESE INCIDENTS, THAT IT

SHOULD NOT REMAIN WITHIN DOCCS. THAT EVEN THE INVESTIGATIONS THAT

ARE CONDUCTED WITHIN DOCCS, ALSO BE MADE PUBLIC. SO, THAT WAS AN

IMPORTANT TRANSPARENCY PIECE.

SO, TODAY IS -- IS ANOTHER STEP. AND I KNOW FOLKS,

EVEN THOUGH, YOU KNOW, THEY -- THEY -- THEY HAVEN'T MAY BE SAID IT, OR

SOME HAVE SAID IT AND I -- WHETHER YOU HAVE SAID IT, OR -- OR HAVEN'T

SAID IT, I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT YOU EITHER SAID IT OR DIDN'T, BECAUSE

FOR THE FOLKS THAT DIDN'T SAY IT, I KNOW THE SENTIMENT IS THAT THIS DOESN'T

GO FAR ENOUGH AND THAT WE DO NEED TO DO -- TO DO MORE. I CERTAINLY

277

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AGREE. AND THAT'S WHY I HIGHLIGHTED SOME OF THE STEPS THAT THE

GOVERNOR MADE WITH SOME OF THOSE PARTNERS, BECAUSE I -- I BELIEVE

WHEN THEIR WORKERS CONCLUDED THAT IT WILL GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO

LOOK AT POTENTIAL FOR NEW REFORMS AND -- AND -- AND NEW LEGISLATION.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO, YOU KNOW, JUST SAY THAT THE

ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY AND OVERSIGHT IS ONLY ONE APPROACH. I

THINK WHEN THERE ARE CRISIS AND IS CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC, THAT YOUR

GOVERNMENT APPARATUS HAS FAILED, IT'S INCUMBENT UPON ALL OF US TO

ATTEMPT TO FIX THAT. BUT IT DOESN'T, IN MY MIND AND HERE. THERE'S A LOT

OF FOLKS OUTSIDE THIS BUILDING THAT ARE DISAPPOINTED WITH WHAT WE ARE

DOING HERE TODAY, BECAUSE THEY DON'T BELIEVE IT GOES FAR ENOUGH. SO, I

WOULD SAY THAT THINGS LIKE SENTENCING REFORM AND -- AND PAROLE REFORM

ARE THINGS THAT -- THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO ME. A LOT OF THAT STUFF DID NOT

SURVIVE IT AND -- SURVIVE AND -- AND -- AND MAKE IT INTO THIS PACKAGE.

AND SOME OF THEM -- SOME OF THEM, YOU KNOW, DID GET CLOSE. AND I --

I'D CITE ONE, THINGS LIKE THE EARNED TIME ACT, YOU KNOW, THE EARNED

TIME ACT WAS PUT INTO THE BUDGET OF -- BY THE EXECUTIVE. YOU KNOW,

THERE -- THERE IS A MEMBER THAT HAS -- THAT CARRIES IN THE PIECE --

INDEPENDENT PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING. AND THERE'S --

THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSIONS ON THE -- THE -- THE MECHANISMS OF EARNED

TIME ACT AND FOLKS HAVE GONE BACK AND FORTH, BUT THEY CAN'T AGREE ON

THOSE MECHANISMS. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THE FACT THAT THE GOVERNOR,

NOT ANYBODY IN THE LEGISLATURE, INJECTED EARNED TIME ACT INTO THE

BUDGET, MEANS MAYBE WE DON'T YET AGREE ON THE MECHANISMS FOR FOLKS

DOING WELL, TO EARN TIME OFF. AT LEAST SHOWS THAT THE GOVERNOR'S AT

278

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LEAST WILLING TO AID -- ENGAGE IN THE DISCUSSION. SO, I THINK WHILE

THINGS LIKE THAT DIDN'T SURVIVE, I DO -- I DO THINK THAT IDEAS LIKE THAT

HAVE TAKEN IMPORTANT STEP FORWARD -- IMPORTANT STEPS FORWARD AS WE

CONTINUE TO TRY TO SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS IN THE FUTURE.

I THINK ON -- ON SENTENCING REFORM AND PAROLE REFORM,

THERE ARE A LOT OF IDEAS THAT THE CAUCUS CAME UP WITH, THAT ADVOCATES

CAME UP WITH THAT I LIKE. AND, YOU KNOW, SECOND LOOK ACT

SPECIFICALLY, WHICH I FOUND TO BE PLEASANTLY SURPRISING, WAS, YOU KNOW,

SAID TO BE SUPPORTED ON -- ON RECORD BY, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE HIGHEST

MEMBERS OF THE COURT IN THIS STATE. BUT THAT WAS ENCOURAGING TO ME, AS

I SAT THERE. SO, TO THE FOLKS THAT FEEL LIKE WE HAVEN'T GONE FAR ENOUGH IN

THAT REGARD, I WOULD SAY, WE'RE A LOT CLOSER THAN YOU'D THINK. AND YOU

KNOW, THEY EXPRESSED FRUSTRATION THAT THEY WILL PROBABLY NEVER SEE

THEIR REFORMS BEING ENACTED IN THEIR LIFETIME.

AND I -- I REMEMBER, LIKE, ONE OF THE FIRST BILLS THAT I

HAD TO DEAL WITH WHEN I WAS HERE WAS MEDICAL AID IN DYING. I WAS

DEAD SET AGAINST THAT WHEN I GOT HERE. I SAID, OH, THAT -- THAT'S NEVER

GONNA GO. I'M NOT GONNA ALLOW THAT TO GO. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PASS THAT

BILL. ELEVEN YEARS LATER, THIS BODY PASSED IT AND IT PASSED THE SENATE IN

THIS -- BEFORE THE GOVERNOR FOR HER CONSIDERATION. SO, I WOULD SAY THAT,

YOU KNOW, IF YOU FEEL LIKE THAT HOPE IS GONE, YOU KNOW, MEDICAL AID

IN DYING IS, YOU KNOW, A GOOD EXAMPLE OF HOW TO -- HOW TO KEEP

GOING ON AND KEEP PUSHING. SO, I ENCOURAGE YOU GUYS TO DO SO.

I JUST WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO JUST BASICALLY THANK,

YOU KNOW, THE CAUCUS AND COLLEAGUES AND YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY ELSE

279

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THAT HAS EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN -- IN GETTING THIS DONE. THIS IS ALL OF

OUR WORK. THIS IS NOT JUST MY WORK. I THINK EVERYBODY HAS, YOU KNOW,

PUT FORWARD THEIR IDEAS AND DONE THINGS. AND I KNOW FOLKS SEE ME

MAYBE TEARING UP NOW, BUT, YOU KNOW, A PREVIOUS SPEAKER SAID THAT NO

ONE EVER CRIED AND I WAS PERSONALLY HAPPY THAT DURING THE BUDGET

DISCUSSION NO ONE SAW ME CRY, BECAUSE I DID. AND MAYBE ONE PERSON

SAW ME, BUT I CHALKED IT UP TO ALLERGIES BECAUSE I TEAR WITHOUT, YOU

KNOW, I TEAR WITHOUT HOOFING. THAT'S JUST THE WAY I DO IT. I DIDN'T THINK

I WOULD DO IT TODAY BECAUSE I TOLD MYSELF, DON'T. JUST DON'T. BUT THIS IS

IMPORTANT. IT'S NOT PARTISAN. YOU KNOW, THIS -- THIS IS -- IT BELONGS TO

ALL OF US, THIS SYSTEM. THE FAILURES OF IT ARE ON ALL OF US WHILE WE'RE

HERE.

I TOLD MYSELF I WOULD NOT DO THIS.

YOU KNOW, I'M FINE. MY KIDS ARE HOME SAFE. THAT'S

NOT THE CASE FOR EVERYBODY. AND THE AMOUNT OF CALLS THAT I GOT AND THE

AMOUNT OF LETTERS THAT I GOT FROM FOLKS THAT SAID THEY'RE CONCERNED

ABOUT THEIR FAMILY AND THEIR KIDS ARE STRUGGLING. AND I -- I APPRECIATE

WHAT THE CAUCUS HAS DONE, YOU KNOW, IN THEIR ADVOCACY TO -- I'LL TAKE IT.

(HANDED TISSUE) I'M NOT SHY. IT'S ALREADY OUT THERE. MIGHT AS WELL

JUST -- JUST DEAL WITH IT. AND I APPRECIATE THE PASSION AND THE EMOTION

OF -- OF -- OF EVERYBODY, BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY HARD TO TALK ABOUT THIS IN

A REAL WAY WITHOUT GETTING EMOTIONAL.

NOW, I'VE BEEN FORTUNATE, RIGHT? I DON'T HAVE -- I HAVE

FAMILY INSIDE. OTHER PEOPLE HAVE FAMILY INSIDE IN THIS CHAMBER.

FOLKS HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE EXPERIENCES OF THEIR FAMILY --

280

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

(INDISCERNIBLE) -- BUT MY FAMILY'S BEEN BEAT UP, TOO. AND I'VE BEEN

HOLDING THAT IN. AND THIS MOMENT, MAN, IT'S -- IT'S NOT ABOUT ME.

NOBODY SHOULD CARE ABOUT ME. I'M -- I'M -- I'M FINE. I'M FINE. IT'S

ABOUT ALL OF US, RIGHT? IT'S ABOUT ALL OF THE PEOPLE THAT -- THAT WE LOVE.

YOU KNOW, SOME MEMBERS OF MY FAMILY -- WELL, MEMBERS OF MY

FAMILY THAT ARE INSIDE DID DO SOMETHING WRONG. THEY DID, RIGHT? THEY

DID. I WANT THEM PROTECTED JUST A LONG -- JUST AS ALONGSIDE EVERYONE

ELSE THAT -- THAT -- AS WELL, THAT -- ALL THE PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT MEMBERS OF

MY FAMILY. THERE'S BEEN STORIES OF OTHER FOLKS. AND, YOU KNOW, I WAS

ABLE TO ABSORB IT. AND THE -- THE FACT THAT IN THOSE MOMENTS I WASN'T

CRYING, I THINK I SURPRISED MYSELF.

I'M GONNA END BY JUST SAYING WHEN SPEAKER HEASTIE

BECAME SPEAKER, THE FIRST WORDS HE SAID WAS THAT REFORMING THE

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM WILL BE THE FOCUS OF HIS SPEAKERSHIP. AND THAT

HAD ME. I WAS ALL IN. I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO BACK TO THE CITY

COUNCIL, A PLACE I LOVE, PLACE I STARTED MY PROFESSIONAL CAREER. BUT I

REALIZED THAT IF I WENT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL, I COULDN'T HELP HIM

CARRY OUT HIS MISSION. NOW, WHEN THAT HAPPENED, I HAD NO IDEA I

WOULD EVER BECOME THE CHAIR OF CORRECTIONS. I JUST WAS HAPPY TO HAVE

A VOTE IN THE LEGISLATURE THAT IMPACTED THAT. SO, WHEN ALL OF YOU GUYS

DO THIS STUFF, YEAH, IT MATTERS. YEAH, I MAY BE GOOD AT HIDING EMOTION

MOST TIMES, BUT I'M LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE, I'M HUMAN, TOO. I'M A PERSON,

TOO. SO TO SAY THAT AND I SEE THE LEADER COMING OVER. I GUESS IT'S --

I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S FOR MORAL SUPPORT OR TO SAY TO WRAP IT UP, BUT --

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MORAL SUPPORT.

281

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. DILAN: OH. I DIDN'T -- I THOUGHT THE BUZZERS

WERE -- ALL RIGHT. I'M DONE. SO, THANK YOU -- THANK YOU --

(APPLAUSE)

-- I'M DONE. I DON'T WANT -- I DON'T -- HONESTLY, I

DON'T -- WE SHOULDN'T -- WE SHOULDN'T BE CLAPPING. WE REALLY SHOULDN'T

BE CLAPPING. THERE'S PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT ARE HURTING. YOU KNOW,

THERE'S PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT ARE HURTING. THIS IS NOT A MOMENT TO

CELEBRATE.

THANK YOU. I INTEND TO VOTE AYE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: A PARTY VOTE HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ALTHOUGH THERE ARE DEFINITELY PARTS OF THIS BILL THAT I

THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE WITH, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WILL BE, GENERALLY

SPEAKING, IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS BILL. ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO CAST

AFFIRMATIVE VOTES CAN CERTAINLY DO SO AT THEIR SEATS NOW. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY THE

SENATE -- OH. ON A MOTION BY MR. DILAN, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE

HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

282

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: A PARTY VOTE HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: SORRY. I THOUGHT I WAS LOSING TIME

THERE.

I WAS JUST -- I THOUGHT I JUST SAID THAT. OKAY --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: YOU DID.

MS. WALSH: I DID. I KNOW.

THE -- THE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL BE IN THE

NEGATIVE. AFFIRMATIVE VOTES CAN BE CAST AT THE SEAT NOW.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM MAJORITY LEADER

[SIC], THE MAJORITY CONFERENCE IS GOING TO BE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE ON THIS

PIECE OF LEGISLATION; HOWEVER, THERE MAY BE A FEW THAT WOULD NEED TO

BE AN EXCEPTION. THEY SHOULD FEEL FREE TO DO SO AT THEIR SEATS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MS. LUCAS TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. LUCAS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I'M

EXCITED TO BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS VOTE TODAY. WE ALL FALL SHORT OF THE

GLORY OF GOD, BUT THE ONE THING THAT GOD AFFORDS US IS FORGIVENESS AND

WE HAVE TO LEARN TO CORRECT WITHOUT CANCELING. AND WITH THAT

283

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CORRECTION COMES A LEVEL OF DIGNITY, HUMANITY AND RESPECT.

IN VISITING PRISONS, I REALIZED THAT SOME OF THE

PRISONERS ARE AFRAID TO EVEN REPORT CERTAIN THINGS BECAUSE THERE'S

RETALIATION OF CONTINUOUS VIOLATIONS. THEY ARE BRUTALIZED AND ASKED TO

HIDE THEIR BRUISES. WHEN THEY REPORT THESE THINGS, THEY ARE VIOLATED

EVEN MORE. IT'S LIKE THE POLICE POLICING THE POLICE. IF THEY GO TO THE

COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER CALLS OVER TO THE LOCATION. IF THEY CALL

OUT AND REPORT IT TO OSI, OSI COMES AND INVESTIGATES IN FRONT OF THE

VERY PEOPLE THAT ARE ACTUALLY COMMITTING THESE EGREGIOUS ACTS. SO, THIS

DOES NOT ADDRESS ALL OF THE MAJOR CONCERNS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE

OVERSIGHT ON THE MANY EGREGIOUS ACTS THAT ARE -- ARE -- ARE -- ARE

IMPLEMENTED ON THOSE INDIVIDUALS, BUT IT IS A BEGINNING, IT'S A START AND

WE LIVE TO FIGHT ANOTHER DAY FOR ADDITIONAL THINGS.

SO, WITH THAT, AGAIN, I SUPPORT THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

I COMMEND THIS BODY FOR WORKING ON IT COLLECTIVELY AND I VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE FOR THIS BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MS. LUCAS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. ROMERO TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. ROMERO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

BEFORE I WAS ELECTED TO THE NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY, I WAS A PUBLIC

DEFENDER. AND MYSELF AND OTHERS INVOLVED IN THE CRIMINAL LEGAL

SYSTEM AS ATTORNEYS, ADVOCATES, OR FORMERLY INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS,

WE ARE AWARE OF THE DARKNESS, THE SLUDGE, THE NASTY, THE INTENSITY, THE

PAIN AND THE LITERAL BLOODSHED THAT EXISTS WITHIN PRISONS IN OUR STATE.

284

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WELL, THERE ARE INEVITABLY PEOPLE LIKE MY MOTHER AND

FATHER, BOTH LIFELONG DOCCS EMPLOYEES. NOT COS, BUT MY FATHER

RETIRED WITH PAROLE AND MY MOM EVENTUALLY RETIRED AS A DIRECTOR OF

CORRECTIONS WITH MENTAL HEALTH, PEOPLE THAT ARE GOOD AND LOVED THEIR

JOB. WHILE THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT DO LOVE THEIR JOB WITHIN DOCCS,

THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE UGLY WITHIN THE DOCCS SYSTEM AND THE

LYNCHING OF ROBERT BROOKS EXPOSED THIS UGLINESS. AND IT EXPOSED THIS

UGLINESS IN OUR PRISON SYSTEM FOR SO MANY PEOPLE. AND -- AND IT IS FOR

THAT REASON THAT WE MUST IDENTIFY THIS AND ELIMINATE IT. IT'S MY SINCERE

HOPE THAT THIS OMNIBUS BILL ADDRESSES THIS AND LIKE I SAID, ELIMINATES

THIS UGLINESS WITHIN THE DOCCS SYSTEM.

WHILE I JOIN SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES IN ACHING FOR

OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM IN THIS SESSION, I DO THANK THE SPEAKER

AND THE SPONSOR FOR PUTTING SOMETHING FORWARD. I DO HOPE IT INEVITABLY

WILL DO SOME GOOD FOR THOUSANDS OF NEW YORKERS THAT NEED IT.

I WILL BE VOTING YES, BUT I DO NOT FORGET THAT THE FIGHT

IS NOT OVER AND THAT I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH MY COLLEAGUES AND

THE INPUT OF PEOPLE THAT I KNOW LOVE THE SYSTEM, LIKE MY PARENTS AND

MY FELLOW ATTORNIES AND CURRENTLY AND FORMALLY INCARCERATED

INDIVIDUALS. JUST LIKE MY ELOQUENT COLLEAGUE IN THE BACK ROW THAT HAS

BEEN BREAKING BARRIERS. I VOTE YES AND LOOK FORWARD TO THE FUTURE FIGHT.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. ROMERO IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. EPSTEIN TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

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

285

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR, I WANT TO THANK THE

SPEAKER FOR MOVING THIS PACKAGE FORWARD. ONE OF THE BILLS IN THIS

PACKAGE, REPORTING OF THE DEATH OF AN INCARCERATED PERSON WE'VE BEEN

WORKING ON FOR THREE YEARS AND WE'VE TALKED TO SO MANY FAMILIES AND

HAVE BEEN TO SO MANY FACILITIES AND, YOU KNOW, FAMILIES KEEP SAYING,

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING TO OUR LOVED ONES. WE DIDN'T KNOW

WHEN THEY PASSED AWAY, WE GOT NO INFORMATION FOR DAY, AFTER DAY, AFTER

DAY. AND PART OF THIS PACKAGE IS ALLOWING FAMILIES SOME CLOSURE. BUT

WHAT REALLY THIS WHOLE PACKAGE IS ABOUT IS TRYING TO BRING TRANSPARENCY

AND ACCOUNTABILITY TO OUR CORRECTIONS SYSTEM. AND IF WE REALLY BELIEVE

IN CORRECTIONS, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY WE HAVE, RIGHT NOW, IN THIS

MOMENT, TO DO THAT. THE -- THE MURDER OF ROBERT BROOKS, AS EVERYONE

KEEPS SAYING, REALLY PUT A SPOTLIGHT ON WHAT'S GOING ON IN CORRECTIONS.

WE SEE IT EVERYDAY WHEN WE TALK TO PEOPLE WHO ARE INCARCERATED. WE

VISIT PRISONS, WE HEAR FROM THEM DIRECTLY. WE HEAR THE FEAR, THE

ANXIETY AND THE RISK. IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DEAL IT WITH THE LIFE AND

HEALTH OF NEW YORKERS WHETHER THEY'RE BEHIND THE WALL, OR NOT. AND

THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD. THERE WERE SOME

THINGS THAT WE COULDN'T GET IN THIS PACKAGE AND I KNOW WITH THE WORK

OF THIS BODY, WE WILL GET THERE SOME DAY SOON. BUT THIS IS AN

IMPORTANT FIRST STEP AND I'M VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. EPSTEIN IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. MAHER TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. MAHER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, TO

286

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR, I DID NOT BELIEVE AND

UNDERSTAND THAT THE MAJORITY OF MY TIME WOULD BE MONOPOLIZED ON THIS

ISSUE AND WITH THE WORK ACTION THAT TOOK PLACE, HAVING FOUR PRISONS IN

MY DISTRICT AND TWO RIGHT NEXT TO MY DISTRICT WHERE A MAJORITY OF THE

FOLKS THAT WORK LIVE, IT WAS ALL ENCOMPASSING. AND I REALLY APPRECIATE

THE SPONSOR'S EMOTION, I TAKE IT TO HEART, BECAUSE I FEEL THAT SAME

EMOTION. AND WHEN WE ADVOCATE FOR CORRECTION OFFICERS, WE ARE NOT

ADVOCATING FOR THE MURDER OF ROBERT BROOKS, MURDERERS. WE'RE NOT. I

CHOOSE TO SEE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS AND VIEW THE MAJORITY OF THOSE

FOLKS AS INDIVIDUALS THAT WANT TO REINTEGRATE BACK IN TO SOCIETY AND

BECOME PRODUCTIVE MEMBERS OF SOCIETY. WHEN I LOOK AT OUR CORRECTION

OFFICERS, I CHOOSE TO VIEW A MAJORITY OF THEM AS THE FOLKS THAT ARE

HELPING SAVE LIVES IN PRISON. WE CAN'T SIMPLY JUDGE EITHER SIDE FOR

THEIR WORST AND WE NEED TO OVERCOME THAT. ALL OF US, TOGETHER.

THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE FACING OUR PRISONS IS THE

STAFFING CRISIS. THE NUMBER ONE RECRUITER FOR CORRECTION OFFICERS ARE

CORRECTION OFFICERS AND THEY'RE NOT ENCOURAGING ANYONE TO WORK. THEY

NEED TO HAVE A SEAT AT THE TABLE. WE ALL HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT,

BECAUSE WHAT'S BEST FOR OUR CORRECTION OFFICERS IS ALSO GOING TO BE,

EVENTUALLY, WHAT'S BEST FOR THOSE THAT ARE INCARCERATED. WE CAN'T HAVE

THE PROGRAMING, WE CAN'T HAVE THE RECREATION, UNTIL STAFFING LEVELS

REACH A CERTAIN LEVEL AND THEY WON'T UNTIL THIS CONVERSATION IS

COMPLETED IN A TRUE, BIPARTISAN WAY, WITH EVERYONE AT THE TABLE TALKING

TO EACH OTHER AND WITH EACH OTHER AND NOT PAST EACH OTHER.

I AM VERY MUCH ENCOURAGED BY THE SPONSOR, BY

287

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SEVERAL OF MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER -- OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE TO

HOPEFULLY CONTINUE THAT CONVERSATION --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU, MR.

MAHER. HOW DO YOU VOTE?

MR. MAHER: -- AND I VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE, BUT WITH

HOPE --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. MAHER IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. SOLAGES.

MS. SOLAGES: TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. OUR JUSTICE

SYSTEM RESTS ON THE IDEA THAT EVEN WHEN SOMEONE IS INCARCERATED, THE

STATE IS STILL RESPONSIBILE FOR UPHOLDING ORDER AND TREATING EVERY PERSON

WITH BASIC HUMAN DIGNITY. IT IS A SERIOUS DUTY. SO, WHEN A PUBLIC

SERVANT, SOMEONE WHO TOOK AN OATH TO UPHOLD THE DUTY, TAKES A LIFE, IT

IS NOT A TRAGEDY, IT'S A BREACH OF TRUST. THE DEATH OF ROBERT BROOKS AND

THE DEATH OF MESSIAH NANTWI RAISED SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW WE

OVERSEE OUR CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION AND HOW WE HOLD OUR OWN SYSTEMS

ACCOUNTABLE. WE CAN'T STOP AT OVERSIGHT. TRUE PUBLIC SAFETY INCLUDES

ACCOUNTABILITY, STRUCTURE AND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO CHANGE. A

SYSTEM THAT PUNISHES ENDLESSLY WITHOUT A PATH TO REDEMPTION, IS NOT

ONE THAT REFLECTS OUR VALUES HERE IN NEW YORK STATE.

I WANT TO THANK SPEAKER HEASTIE FOR HIS RESPONSE --

HIS RESPONSIVENESS. I ALSO WANT TO EXTEND MY GRATITUDE TO THE CHAIR OF

BOTH CORRECTIONAL COMMITTEES, IN BOTH THE ASSEMBLY AND THE SENATE,

FOR TRULY TAKING THEIR PASSION AND THEIR PERSISTENCE AND GETTING THIS ON

288

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THE BUS TOGETHER. AND I ESPECIALLY WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES IN THE

BLACK, PUERTO RICAN, HISPANIC AND ASIAN LEGISLATIVE CAUCUS FOR

REFUSING TO LOOK AWAY. THROUGH YOUR STRENGTH AND YOUR UNWAVERING

FOCUS, WE ARE TURNING LOSS INTO ACTION AND OUTRAGE INTO ACCOUNTABILITY,

BUT IT -- BUT OUR FIGHT ISN'T OVER. LET'S CARRY FORWARD THE NAMES OF

ROBERT AND MESSIAH, NOT AS HEADLINES, BUT AS A CALL TO ACTION. LET THEIR

MEMORIES BE THE REASON WHY WE REFUSE TO ACCEPT THE UNACCEPTABLE.

AND WITH THAT, I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. SOLAGES IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. HYNDMAN TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. HYNDMAN: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, FOR

ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. INDIVIDUAL -- INDIVIDUALLY IN THIS

BODY, WE HAVE HAD TO BURY LOVED ONES. WHETHER IT BE CHILDREN,

PARENTS, SPOUSES, FRIENDS, NEIGHBORS AND CONSTITUENTS. I DON'T BELIEVE

ANY OF US CAN SAY WE SAW A LOVED ONE BEATEN TO DEATH ON CAMERA FOR

THE WORLD TO SEE AS THE FATHER DID, MR. ROBERT BROOKS, WHO WATCHED

HIS SON DIE. HIS DEATH ISN'T IN VAIN, IT SPURRED THIS PACKAGE. AND I

WANT TO THANK THE SPEAKER AND THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION THAT

THROUGH THESE WORKS, THIS BILL WILL BE SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR AND BE

BROUGHT INTO LAW AND ALL OF THE OTHER BILLS THAT WE NEED TO GET PASSED IN

THIS HOUSE TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS -- THAT THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. HYNDMAN IN

289

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. BURKE TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BURKE: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

LISTENING TO THE DEBATE IS WHAT I WAS GOING TO MAKE MY DECISION ON

AND WHAT I REALIZED IS, WE -- I'VE ALREADY KNOWN, BUT IT'S MORE CLEAR

NOW THAN IT EVER HAS BEEN TO ME, WE HAVE A DEEPLY, DEEPLY BROKEN

SYSTEM. THE STATE IS FAILING A LOT OF PEOPLE AND IT PITS PEOPLE AGAINST

EACH OTHER. I'VE HEARD INCREDIBLY DEHUMANIZING LANGUAGE AND RHETORIC.

I'VE HEARD PEOPLE REFER TO COS AS MONSTERS AND I'VE HEARD OTHER PEOPLE

REFER TO INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS AS ANIMALS. AND WHEN THE DEBATE

GOES DOWN TO MONSTERS VERSUS ANIMALS, EVERYONE LOSES. IT'S GOING TO

RESULT IN VIOLENCE AND DEHUMANIZATION ALL OF THE TIME. SO, BEING

THOUGHTFUL AND CONSCIOUS OF HOW WE SPEAK ABOUT PEOPLE AND FOCUS ON

FIXING SYSTEMS, BUT WHEN -- FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, I'VE HAD MEMBERS

OF MY FAMILY WHO ARE INCARCERATED AND I HAVE MEMBERS OF MY FAMILY

WHO ARE COS. MY BROTHER-IN-LAW WAS STABBED AT SEVEN TIMES AND

FORTUNATELY HE HAD A STAB VEST ON. HE'S ONE OF THE MOST MILD-MANNERED

PEOPLE YOU'LL EVER MEET, HE'S NOT A MONSTER. SO JUST CASTING ALL OF THESE

PEOPLE IN THAT LIGHT IS DANGEROUS. WE DO NOT NEED A POWDER KEG IN OUR

-- IN OUR PRISON SYSTEM, WE NEED TO FIX BROKEN SYSTEMS. I THINK THAT

THAT IS -- THIS IS AN HONEST EFFORT TOWARDS DOING THAT AND I LOOK FORWARD

TO CONTINUING THAT EFFORT.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. BURKE IN THE

290

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. LEVENBERG TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. LEVENBERG: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE IN LIGHT OF THE HORRIFIC MURDER OF ROBERT BROOKS AT THE

HANDS OF CORRECTION OFFICERS, WHICH THE WORLD WITNESSED, THE UNLAWFUL

WILDCAT STRIKE AND THE INHUMANE TREATMENT OF INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS.

I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR AND THE SPEAKER FOR PUTTING FORTH THIS

OMNIBUS BILL, WHICH IS ONE STEP IN THE DIRECTION OF MAKING OUR

FACILITIES SAFER. IT WORKS TO ENSURE CAMERA, BLIND SPOTS, INCREASES

TRANSPARENCY, EXTENDS STATUTES OF LIMITATIONS, INCREASES OVERSIGHT AND

AMENDS OTHER LAWS TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL OF SAFER SPACES FOR ALL.

HOWEVER, I BELIEVE WE NEED TO DO MUCH MORE TO REDUCE OUR PRISON

POPULATION AND WE HAVE SOLUTIONS AT OUR FINGERTIPS. THIS OMNIBUS BILL

IS ADDRESSING ASPECTS OF SAFETY, BUT ESSENTIALLY ASIDE FROM ACTING A

DETERRENT, THESE ACTIONS ALL FOLLOW WHEN AN INCIDENT HAS ALREADY

TRANSPIRED. WHAT IT DOESN'T DO IS CHANGE THE CULTURE INSIDE OUR WALLS.

IT DOESN'T WORK TO CHANGE ATTITUDES, IT DOES NOT INCENTIVIZE RESPECT FOR

HUMAN BEINGS, WHETHER THEY'D BE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS OR

OVERWORKED COS. TO DO SO WE NEED TO MAKE A BIG DENT IN REDUCING

THE POPULATION, REINSTATING EFFECTIVE PROGRAMS THAT SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE

RECIDIVISM AND HELP INDIVIDUALS REHABILITATE AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT 95

PERCENT OF INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS WILL BE RELEASED. IF WE TRULY FOCUS

ON REHABILITATION AND ON SECOND LOOKS AND ON SECOND CHANCES, WE WILL

SEE CHANGE. WE NEED TO COME BACK TO PASS SECOND LOOK AND EARNED

TIME, THE MARVIN MAYFIELD ACT, ELDER PAROLE AND FAIR AND TIMELY

291

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

PAROLE, THEN WE WILL START TO SEE SIGNIFICANT SYSTEMIC CHANGE.

MADAM SPEAKER, I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. LEVENBERG IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. ANDERSON TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. ANDERSON: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I'M

GOING TO TAKE A MOMENT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUE FROM THE 68TH

ASSEMBLY DISTRICT FOR BRINGING HIS VALUED EXPERIENCE BEING IN NEW

YORK STATE'S CARCERAL SYSTEM. MAY NONE OF MY COLLEAGUES HERE IN THIS

CHAMBER HAVE THAT LIVED EXPERIENCE AND SHARE IT, BUT LEARN FROM IT SO

WE CAN ACTIVELY WORK TO IMPROVE OUR INCARCERATION SYSTEM AND OUR

CORRECTION SYSTEM HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK. I THANK THE SPONSOR

FOR HIS HARD WORK AND ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO HAVE LEGISLATION IN THIS

PACKAGE. I THINK THAT IT'S CRITICAL THAT AS LEGISLATORS IN THIS CHAMBER,

THAT WE ALL TAKE TIME TO VISIT A CORRECTIONAL FACILITY ACROSS THIS STATE AND

SEE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE OVER THE LAST

FOUR YEARS, FIVE YEARS HERE IN THIS CHAMBER, VISITING FACILITIES. THE

REALITY OF THE SITUATION IS IS THAT LAST YEAR A MAN WAS LYNCHED AND HIS

LIFE WAS TAKEN AWAY FROM HIM DUE TO THE INADEQUACIES OF OUR CRIMINAL

-- CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT IN THIS

MOMENT, THAT IN THIS OMNIBUS BILL THAT WE'RE WORKING TO PASS TODAY,

THAT WE SAY THAT HIS LIFE MATTER. AND WE SAY THAT THE LIVES OF THE OTHER

46 PLUS INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE KILLED, OR LOST THEIR LIVES, IN OUR PRISON

FACILITIES HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK, THAT THEIR LIVES MATTER.

THIS BILL REPRESENTS TRANSPARENCY, BUT IT DOESN'T

292

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

REPRESENT THE THINGS THAT WE COMPLETELY NEED TO REFORM THIS SYSTEM,

LIKE ELDER TIMELY PAROLE, (INDISCERNIBLE) AND A BUNCH OF OTHER CRITICAL

LEGISLATION, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY A STEP IN THE RIGHT -- RIGHT DIRECTION.

SO, MADAM SPEAKER, I THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO

SPEAK ON THIS BILL AND I WITHDRAW MY REQUEST AND VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. ANDERSON IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. OTIS TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. OTIS: THANK YOU. THE MURDER OF ROBERT

BROOKS OPENED THE EYES TO ALL NEW YORKERS AND TO BOTH HOUSES OF THE

LEGISLATURE ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN OUR PRISON SYSTEM. YOU KNOW,

IT'S TOO EASY TO SAY, THE PRISON SYSTEM IS OVER THERE, WE'RE FORGETTING

ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON. THAT'S SORT OF THE TENDENCY IN SOCIETY AND IT'S A

BIG MISTAKE. IT'S A DANGEROUS MISTAKE.

SO, ROBERT BROOKS DIED, WAS MURDERED, BUT WHAT

WE'VE ALSO LEARNED IS HOW MANY OTHER PEOPLE DIED BEHIND PRISON WALLS.

SHOCKING. TERRIBLE. AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED, MOST PEOPLE ARE COMING

OUT. AND SO, WHAT ARE WE DOING TO IMPROVE EDUCATION, IMPROVE JOB

TRAINING, IMPROVE THE SAFETY OF THE INSTITUTION FOR THOSE THAT ARE

INCARCERATED, FOR THOSE THAT WORK THERE, SO THAT THIS CAN BE AN

EXPERIENCE THAT PEOPLE CAN LEAVE AND NOT COME BACK. THAT PEOPLE CAN

GO ON WITH THEIR LIVES IN A POSITIVE WAY. WE HAVE A START WITH THIS BILL.

THIS BILL IS REALLY ABOUT A LITTLE MORE SAFETY, A LITTLE BIT MORE

ACCOUNTABILITY; THAT'S NOT ENOUGH. WE REALLY HAVE TO REVISIT OUR WHOLE

293

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM AND MAKE THE RESOURCES AVAILABLE FOR IT TO BE A SAFE

PLACE. TO BE A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN BENEFIT FROM THE EXPERIENCE

AND GET OUT AND CHANGE THEIR LIVES. WE HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO. THIS IS

A VERY GOOD START. CONGRATULATIONS TO THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE, MR.

DILAN, TO THE SPEAKER.

THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS, IN THE BUDGET HEARING, WE

HEARD FROM -- HEARD MOVING TESTIMONY FROM ROBERT BROOKS' FATHER AND

I -- I -- JUST TO BE THERE AND TO -- TO SENSE THE LOSS IN -- IN THIS HORRIBLE

SITUATION, WE HAVE TO REDOUBLE OUR EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE, AS HAS BEEN

MENTIONED BY OTHERS, THAT HIS LIFE IS NOT LOST IN VAIN AND THAT WE CHANGE

THE DIRECTION OF THIS PRISON SYSTEM IN THIS STATE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

I VOTE AYE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. OTIS IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. KELLES TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. KELLES: SOMETHING THAT I -- I KEEP THINKING

ABOUT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN IS THE FACT THAT WE HAD SIX MEN THAT

WERE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE BRUTAL MURDER THAT WE ALL SAW, THAT THE

WORLD SAW, OF ROBERT BROOKS. THERE WERE 15 PEOPLE WHO WERE

INVOLVED IN THE BRUTAL MURDER OF MESSIAH NANTWI AND EVERY SINGLE ONE

OF THEM, EXCEPT FOR ONE, IS STILL WALKING FREE. AND I THINK IT'S REALLY

IMPORTANT FOR ALL OF US TO IMAGINE WHAT IT MUST BE LIKE TO BE THE FAMILY

MEMBERS KNOWING THAT THE WORLD VIEWED THOSE VIDEOS AND ALL OF THOSE

PEOPLE ARE STILL FREE, BECAUSE THAT WOULD NOT BE THE CASE IF THEY WERE

BLACK OR BROWN PEOPLE. THEY WOULD BE IN PRISON. I THINK THAT'S REALLY

294

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

IMPORTANT BECAUSE WHAT WE SAW IN THOSE VIDEOS IS THAT ABUSE IS

HAPPENING AND NO ONE CAN DENY IT AT THIS POINT.

DOES THIS PACKAGE GO FAR ENOUGH? NO, ABSOLUTELY.

FOR THOSE -- THOSE FAMILIES? NO, IT DOES NOT. IT DOES ADDRESS, IT IS A

START, IT DOES ADDRESS ACCOUNTABILITY. AND I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR

FOR HAVING THE COURAGE TO SHOW HUMANITY AND SHOW EMOTIONS, BECAUSE

THERE ARE VERY FEW MEN THAT ARE WILLING TO DO WHAT YOU JUST DID AND I

WANT TO THANK YOU AND HONOR YOU FOR THAT. AND YOU ALSO BROUGHT UP

THE EARNED TIME ACT THAT I SPONSOR AND I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR

ACKNOWLEDGING. WE MIGHT NOT HAVE ALL THE DETAILS WORKED OUT, BUT WE

WILL GET THERE AND I WILL KEEP FIGHTING WITH YOU TO MAKE SURE THAT

HAPPENS, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT IT REDUCES VIOLENCE AGAINST CORRECTIONS

OFFICERS. WE KNOW THAT IT REDUCES VIOLENCE BETWEEN THOSE

INCARCERATED. WE KNOW THAT IT REDUCES RECIDIVISM RATES. WE KNOW

THAT IT BUILDS INSPIRATION, THAT IT BRINGS FAMILIES BACK TOGETHER. WE

KNOW THAT IT'S GOOD FOR LITERALLY EVERYBODY AND THERE ARE MORE

REPUBLICAN STATES IN THIS COUNTRY THAT USE IT WAY MORE THAN WE DO.

WE'RE BEHIND AND WE NEED TO CATCH UP, BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO

DO. TO BUILD -- TO BUILD WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, EDUCATION AND SEND

PEOPLE BACK INTO COMMUNITIES KNOWING THAT WE TRULY, TRULY CREATED A

CORRECTION OF -- A SYSTEM OF CORRECTIONS AND NOT A SYSTEM OF

PUNISHMENT, WHICH IS TOO OFTEN WHAT IT IS NOW. THAT WE HEAR FROM OUR

COLLEAGUE THAT IS FORMALLY INCARCERATED. WE HEAR THAT TOO OFTEN.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU, MS.

KELLES. HOW DO YOU VOTE?

295

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MS. KELLES: SO I STAND IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND I

VOTE YES ON THIS BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. KELLES IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. GANDOLFO TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. GANDOLFO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I'LL

BE VOTING NO ON THIS BILL, BUT THAT'S NOT BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING GOOD IN

IT. I WON'T REITERATE ALL THE REASONS, SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE LAID

THOSE OUT PRETTY WELL. BUT ONE ISSUE AS IT PERTAINS TO THIS BILL IS THE

EXPANSION OF THE COMMISSION ON CORRECTION, BUT NOT INCLUDING

SOMEONE WHO'S TRULY LOOKING OUT FOR THE INTEREST OF THE COS. AND THAT

DOESN'T HAVE TO BE AN AD -- IN AN ADVERSARIAL MANNER, BUT SOMEONE WHO

CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW TO IMPROVE SAFETY FOR THEM

BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE COS ARE ALSO TASKED WITH KEEPING

THE INCARCERATED SAFE AND IF THEY ARE OVERWORKED AND UNDERSTAFFED, I

DON'T THINK WE WILL TRULY EVER GET TO THE PLACE WE WANT TO BE IN TERMS

OF OUR PRISON CONDITIONS. IF -- I THINK THE GOVERNOR WOULD BE WELL-

SERVED TO SEND A CHAPTER AMENDMENT BACK TO THIS HOUSE, ADDING A

REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE COS ON THE COMMISSION ON CORRECTIONS, I THINK

THAT WILL PAVE THE WAY TO TRULY GETTING WHERE WE NEED TO BE AND FIXING

THE ISSUES WITHIN OUR PRISONS. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. GANDOLFO IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. SHIMSKY TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. SHIMSKY: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WE

296

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ARE NOWHERE AS A SOCIETY WITHOUT THE RULE OF LAW AND THE ACID TEST OF

THE RULE OF LAW IS HOW WE TREAT PEOPLE WHEN WE INCARCERATE THEM.

WHAT MANY OF US KNEW BEFORE THE MURDER OF ROBERTS BROOKS AND WHAT

EVERYONE ELSE LEARNED THEREAFTER, IS THAT THE FAILURE OF OUR STATE

CORRECTIONS SYSTEM IS SO CLOSE TO TOTAL THAT OUR FACILITIES ARE REALLY THIS

GENERATIONS WILLOWBROOK.

THIS OMNIBUS PACKAGE IS A GREAT START, BUT WHAT REALLY

COUNTS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IN THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS. WHAT WE

ARE GOING TO DO WITH ALL OF THE INFORMATION WE'VE GLEANED FROM THE

REFORMED PACKAGES TONIGHT. I AM THANKFUL THAT MR. DILAN IS GOING TO

BE LEADING THE CHARGE ON THAT. AND IN THAT SPIRIT, MADAM CHAIR, I VOTE

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. SHIMSKY IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. ZACCARO TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. ZACCARO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

TODAY WE STAND AT A PIVOTAL MOMENT IN PURSUIT OF JUSTICE AND REFORM

WITHIN OUR CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM. AND BEFORE US IS A COMPREHENSIVE

PACKAGE THAT NOT ONLY SEEKS TO ENHANCE ACCOUNTABILITY AND

TRANSPARENCY IN OUR CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES, BUT ALSO ADDRESSES THE

URGENT NEED FOR REFORM. REFORM THAT HAS BEEN LONG OVERDUE. FOR TOO

LONG, OUR PRISONS HAVE BEEN PLACES WHERE JUSTICE IS OVERSHADOWED BY

NEGLECT AND SYSTEMATIC FAILURES AND RECENT TRAGEDIES THAT HAVE

UNDERSCORED THIS REALITY, REMINDING US OF OUR MORAL OBLIGATION TO ACT.

IN THE HEARTBREAKING MURDER OF ROBERT BROOKS AT THE HANDS OF

297

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS IS A STARK REMINDER OF THAT URGENT NEED FOR REFORM.

HIS STORY IS NOT JUST ONE OF LOSS, IT IS A CALL TO ACTION. A DEMAND FOR A

SYSTEM THAT PRIORITIZES SAFETY, DIGNITY AND HUMANITY, BOTH FOR THOSE

WHO ARE INCARCERATED AND FOR THE DEDICATED OFFICERS WHO SERVE. LET US

REMIND THAT WHILE THIS PACKAGE REPRESENTS A CRITICAL STARTING POINT, IT IS

NOT THE FINISH LINE. IT IS WHERE WE MUST CONTINUE TO PUSH FOR ADDITIONAL

REFORMS, FOR WE OWE IT TO THOSE WHO HAVE SUFFERED IN SILENCE AND TO THE

FAMILIES WHO HAVE LOST LOVED ONES TO A SYSTEM THAT HAS REPEATEDLY

FAILED THEM.

AND IN CLOSING, I'D LIKE TO LEAVE YOU WITH THE WORDS OF

THE AUTHOR AND ACTIVIST, AUDRE LORDE, WHO SAID, "IT IS NOT OUR

DIFFERENCES THAT DIVIDE US. IT IS OUR INABILITY TO RECOGNIZE, ACCEPT AND

CELEBRATE THOSE DIFFERENCES." SO, LET US NOT ALLOW OUR DIFFERENCES AND

PERSPECTIVE ON JUSTICE AND REFORM TO DIVIDE US. INSTEAD, LET'S US -- LET IT

UNITE US IN OUR COMMITMENT TO ADDRESS THESE INJUSTICES WITHIN OUR

PRISONS AND CHAMPION THE REFORMS THAT ARE SO DESPERATELY NEEDED.

AND WITH THAT, I PROUDLY VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. ZACCARO IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. GIBBS TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. GIBBS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I STAND

HERE CONFLICTED. I'M A HARD NEGATIVE ON THE BILL. I BELIEVE THAT IT

DOESN'T DO ENOUGH AND IN EXPEDIENCY TO PUT OUT A FIRE, WE PUT TOGETHER

A PACKAGE TO ADDRESS CERTAIN THINGS, BUT NOT THE MOST SERIOUS OF THE

298

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES.

I WANT TO GO ON THE RECORD AND SAY THAT ALL

CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS AREN'T BAD, BUT EVERY CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ISN'T

BILLY JONES. JUST LIKE EVERY INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL ISN'T EDDIE GIBBS.

WE HAVE TO COMMUNICATE BETTER AND LISTEN TO ONE ANOTHER AND RESPECT

ONE ANOTHER DURING THAT CONVERSATION. BUT, MORE IMPORTANTLY, THERE ARE

PEOPLE IN PRISON WHO ARE SUFFERING. EVERYONE IN PRISON ISN'T A

MURDERER, EVERYONE IN PRISON ISN'T PEDOPHILE OR A RAPIST. SOME OF THEM

HAVE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES, SOME HAVE DRUG ADDITIONS [SIC] BUT YET, THEY

ARE SUFFERING IN THE WALLS AND FENCES BY ABUSE OF CORRECTION OFFICERS. I

SHARED WITH YOU GUYS THAT FIVE OF THEM STOMPED ON ME FOR 25 MINUTES.

IT WAS HORRIBLE. I KNOW THE FEAR. WHEN I WALK INSIDE THESE FACILITIES, I

SEE THESE YOUNG MEN AND THESE WOMEN AFRAID. THIS PACKAGE HAS

SIMPLY JUST PUT OUT A FIRE, IT DOESN'T ADDRESS THAT.

SO, I'M A -- I'M A NEGATIVE ON THE VOTE. I THINK WE'RE

GONNA DO BETTER NEXT YEAR. I REMAIN HOPEFUL. I PRAY A LOT. I THANK MY

COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE FOR PRAYING WITH ME. AND WE JUST HAVE TO

DO BETTER. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. GIBBS IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU VERY MUCH,

MADAM SPEAKER, FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I -- I THINK

THIS IS A START. I HAVE TO BE HONEST, WHEN I FIRST GOT A GLIMPSE OF THE

VIDEO, I COULDN'T EVEN WATCH IT. I HAD TO GO -- KEEP GOING BACK IN ORDER

299

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

TO SEE THE WHOLE THING, BECAUSE I DON'T WATCH SCARY MOVIES EITHER AND I

DON'T WATCH THINGS WHEN PEOPLE ARE BEING HURT AND BLUDGEONED. I JUST

DON'T WATCH THAT SORT OF THING EVEN ON MOVIES. SO I HAD A HARD TIME

WATCHING THAT. BUT I HAVE FAMILY THAT WORK IN CORRECTIONS AND SO I

CALLED THEM UP. AND WAS LIKE, WHAT -- WHAT -- WHAT IS -- WHAT IS THIS

ABOUT? WHAT IS THIS GOING ON? AND YES, THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE

IS -- THAT DOES HAPPEN SOMETIMES, BUT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN ALL THE TIME.

AND SO, ONE OF MY COUSINS, SHE SENT ME A LETTER FROM ONE OF HER

COLLEAGUES WHO HAD JUST RESIGNED BECAUSE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT HE HAD

TO WORK UNDER, AND IN HIS WORDS IN THE LETTER THAT HE SENT TO ME HE SAID,

"NOT EVERY CORRECTION OFFICER IS A BAD PERSON, JUST AS NOT EVERY -- JUST

AS NOT EVERY OFFICER WORKS TO THEIR -- BUT EVERY OFFICER DOES NOT WORK TO

THEIR LIMITS. IT IS EASY TO GENERALIZE, BUT THE REALITY IS MORE

COMPLICATED. HE WORKED -- I WORKED IN CORRECTIONS FOR SEVEN YEARS. I

WITNESSED THE BAD AND I SPOKE UP. I ALSO SAW THE GOOD AND I SPOKE UP.

THE TRUTH IS IS THAT CORRECTIONAL SYSTEMS AFFECTS EVERYONE, INCLUDING

OFFICERS, THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS AND THEIR FAMILIES." THIS YOUNG

MAN DECIDED TO RETIRE, OR TO RESIGN, RATHER THAN KEEP WORKING IN A

SITUATION LIKE THIS. THAT SAYS THAT THIS IS A START IN THIS LEGISLATION, BUT

WE -- WE GOT TO FIX THIS. WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO FIX IT THAT

ENGAGES EVERYBODY. SO, I WILL SAY THAT THE ONLY THING THAT SHOULD BE

DIFFERENT IN THIS BEGINNING LEGISLATION IS THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOMEBODY

WHO IS EITHER AN -- A FORMER CORRECTION OFFICER, OR A CURRENT CORRECTION

OFFICER WHO SITS AT THE TABLE TO COME UP WITH HOW WE FIX THIS PROBLEM.

AND I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

300

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULT.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

PAGE 5, RULES REPORT NO. 656, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A06453-B, RULES

REPORT NO. 656, BORES, LASHER, SEAWRIGHT, PAULIN, TAPIA, RAGA,

SHIMSKY, REYES, EPSTEIN, BURKE, HEVESI, P. CARROLL, ZACCARO,

HYNDMAN, LUPARDO, KASSAY, LEE, DAVILA, SCHIAVONI, LUNSFORD, K.

BROWN, TANNOUSIS, TORRES, HOOKS, GIBBS, ROMERO, COLTON, CONRAD,

MEEKS, GLICK, CRUZ, CUNNINGHAM, FORREST, CHANDLER-WATERMAN,

STIRPE, WRIGHT, SIMON, DAIS, JENSEN, ROZIC, GONZ LEZ-ROJAS. AN ACT

TO AMEND THE GENERAL BUSINESS LAW, IN RELATION TO THE TRAINING AND USE

OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FRONTIER MODELS.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED.

AN EXPLANATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

MR. BORES.

MR. BORES: THIS BIPARTISAN BILL, WHICH EARLIER

TODAY PASSED THE SENATE WITH SUPPORT FROM EVERY MINORITY PARTY

MEMBER, IS FOCUSED ON KEEPING US SECURE FROM THE MOST EXTREME RISKS

FROM ADVANCED AI DEVELOPMENT. AI EXPERTS IN INDUSTRY THEMSELVES

HAVE SAID THAT WE NEED URGENT REGULATION WITHIN THE NEXT TEN MONTHS.

301

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THIS BILL, WHICH ONLY APPLIES TO THE LARGEST COMPANIES AND DEVELOPERS,

FOCUSES ON HOLDING THEM TO COMMITMENTS ON SAFETY THEY'VE ALREADY

MADE. IN PARTICULAR, EVERY COMPANY THAT THIS WOULD LIKELY APPLY TO

TODAY, HAS ALREADY COMMITTED TO QUOTE, "GIVE SIGNIFICANT ATTENTION TO

BIOCHEMICAL AND RADIOLOGICAL RISKS, SUCH AS THE WAYS IN WHICH SYSTEMS

CAN LOWER BARRIERS TO ENTRY FOR WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT AND TO PUBLICLY

DISCLOSING THEIR RED TEAMING AND SAFETY PROCEDURES IN THEIR

TRANSPARENCY REPORTS." AS SUCH, THIS BILL REQUIRES THAT THOSE THAT SPEND

$100 MILLION, OR MORE, ON COMPUTE COSTS FOR TRAINING MODELS, HAVE A

SAFETY PLAN AND DISCLOSE CRITICAL SAFETY INCIDENTS. AND BECAUSE THIS BILL

ESTABLISHES LIGHT-WEIGHT GUARDRAILS THAT KEEP NEW YORKERS SAFE, IT'S

SUPPORTED BY 84 PERCENT OF NEW YORKERS ACROSS PARTY AND HOPEFULLY

ALL OF YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: MR.

BLUMENCRANZ.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: THANK YOU. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS, PLEASE?

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. BORES: I WILL.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THE SPONSOR

YIELDS.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: SO, WE DID DISCUSS THIS IN

COMMITTEE, BUT IT SEEMS THAT THE BILL'S CHANGED A LITTLE BIT FROM THERE,

SO A FEW OF THE QUESTIONS MIGHT SEEM A LITTLE BIT FAMILIAR. AS FAR AS THE

302

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CHANGES FROM THE A- TO THE B-PRINT, MANY OF THE PROVISIONS

SURROUNDING THE SECTIONS RELATING TO EMPLOYEES, ET CETERA, HAVE

CHANGED, CORRECT, OR HAVE BEEN REMOVED ALTOGETHER?

MR. BORES: CORRECT.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: ALSO, ANY -- ANYTHING

SIMILAR OR RESEMBLING A PRIVATE RIGHT TO [SIC] ACTION IS ALSO REMOVED,

CORRECT?

MR. BORES: I WOULD ARGUE THERE WAS NONE

ESTABLISHED IN THE ORIGINAL AS WELL, BUT THIS ONE WE EXPLICITLY PUT IN A

CLAUSE THAT NO --

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: YES.

MR. BORES: -- PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION IS CREATED.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: NOTHING IN THIS ARTICLE SHALL

BE CONSTRUED TO ESTABLISH A PRIVATE RIGHT [SIC] TO ACTION. SO YOU'RE

PRETTY CRYSTAL CLEAR THERE, CORRECT?

MR. BORES: I THINK SO, YES.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: BUT THERE IS -- THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL MAY STILL BRING A CIVIL ACTION IN THE NEW VERSION AS WELL?

MR. BORES: CORRECT. RIGHT. IT IS SAYING IT IS NOT

CREATING A NEW PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION. ALL OF THE ENFORCEMENT IS DONE

BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, AND ANY SEPARATE QUESTION ABOUT LIABILITY IS

HANDLED IN COMMON LAW ALREADY BEFORE OR AFTER THIS BILL.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: SO THIS BILL HAS MADE ITS

ROUNDS IN A FEW STATE LEGISLATURES, CALIFORNIA IN PARTICULAR WHERE IT

PASSED AND HAD BEEN VETOED. WHAT ARE THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL

303

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THIS VERSION AND THE VERSION THAT DIDN'T QUITE MAKE

IT PAST THE GOVERNOR'S DESK IN CALIFORNIA?

MR. BORES: YEAH, THIS IS A VERY DIFFERENT BILL THAN

THE ONE IN CALIFORNIA. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS WE'VE CHANGED.

THERE'S OBVIOUSLY EXTRANEOUS PROVISIONS LIKE THEY WERE CREATING THEIR

OWN VERSION OF EMPIRE AI, AND THEY WERE ALSO DOING KNOW YOUR

CUSTOMER ON CLOUD PROVIDERS. WE'VE TAKEN ALL OF THAT OUT. BUT ON THE

MEAT OF THE BILL, THERE'S A NUMBER OF DIFFERENCES. FIRST IS WE PUT IN THE

DEFINITION OF A LARGE DEVELOPER, SO IT ONLY APPLIES ONCE YOU SPEND 100

MILLION OR MORE. THE CALIFORNIA ONE COULD INCLUDE PEOPLE THAT SPENT

ONLY 10 MILLION. WE ALSO APPLY IT AT THE COMPANY LEVEL, NOT THE MODEL

LEVEL, SO THEY DON'T NEED TO MAKE 100 SAFETY PLANS IF THEY HAVE 100

MODELS. THEY CAN HAVE ONE AND UPDATE IT YEARLY. IT'S MUCH SIMPLER

FOR COMPLIANCE PURPOSES. THERE'S NO REFERENCE TO ANY KILL SWITCH,

WHICH WAS A BIG FEAR THAT MANY PEOPLE TALKED ABOUT. AND DIFFERENT

VERSIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ONE OVER TIME ESTABLISHED A NEW OFFICE OR

DID IN THIS ONE, DOES NOT ESTABLISH ANY GOVERNMENT OFFICE TO -- TO ANY

NEW GOVERNMENT OFFICE. AND I THINK THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE NOW IN THE

B-PRINT IS THAT THERE ARE NO AUDITS IN THIS BILL AT ALL. BUT THERE WAS A LOT

MORE OPPOSITION EARLIER IN SESSION, AND MOST OF THAT WAS FOCUSED ON

THE AUDITS THEMSELVES.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: SO NO OUTSIDE THIRD-PARTY

AUDITS AT ALL.

MR. BORES: NO OUTSIDE THIRD-PARTY AUDITS IN THIS

BILL.

304

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: LET'S GO THROUGH SOME OF

THE DEFINITIONS, THEN. YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT THE FRONTIER MODEL. YOU

MAKE SPECIFIC MENTION ALSO WITHIN YOUR DEFINITION OF "CRITICAL HARM."

MR. BORES: YES.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: BUT THERE IS A DEFINITION IN

THERE THAT I DID HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT. YOU TALK ABOUT UNREASONABLE

RISK OF CRITICAL HARM. HOW DO YOU DEFINE "UNREASONABLE RISK"? I

COULDN'T FIND IT IN THE BILL.

MR. BORES: SO, A REASONABLENESS STANDARD IS ONE

THAT'S BEEN PART OF COMMON LAW JURIS PRUDENCE FOR CENTURIES, AND IS

APPLIED IN A LOT OF CASES. WE DO HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF

CRITICAL HARM WHICH IS IN THE BILL, AS YOU --

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: VERY SPECIFIC.

MR. BORES: YES.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: SO, I MEAN, ALMOST SO MUCH

SO THAT I -- I WAS CURIOUS IN SOME SITUATIONS BECAUSE YOU DO INCLUDE

CRITICAL HARM MEANS DEATH OR SERIOUS INJURY OF 100 OR MORE PEOPLE OR AT

LEAST $1 BILLION IN DAMAGES TO RIGHTS, MONEY OR PROPERTY, ET CETERA. IF A

SYSTEM THAT IS -- WOULD QUALIFY UNDER THIS AS A LARGE-SCALE FRONTIER

MODEL WERE TO COMMIT A HORRIBLE CRIME LIKE TAKE DOWN A PLANE. THERE

WERE 87 PASSENGERS. THEY WOULD NOT -- THAT WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A

CRITICAL HARM, AND THUS, THEY -- YOU KNOW, HOW WOULD THAT AFFECT THEM

VERSUS MAYBE A PLANE THAT WENT DOWN WITH 110 PEOPLE?

MR. BORES: SO -- SO COMMON LAW JURIS PRUDENCE,

RIGHT, WOULD ALREADY HANDLE ANY QUESTIONS ON AFTER-THE-FACT LIABILITY.

305

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WHAT THIS IS SAYING IS TRYING TO BE SPECIFIC TO THE MOST EXTREME CASES

ARE THOSE THE ONES THAT DEVELOPERS NEED TO PLAN FOR, OR TO PLAN AGAINST, I

SHOULD SAY, AND DEVELOP TESTS IN ORDER TO PREVENT. WE HAD TO DRAW THE

LINE SOMEWHERE. WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE CLEAR IS THAT WE'RE REALLY

TALKING ABOUT THE VERY EXTREME VERSIONS. WE'RE NOT SAYING THEY NEED

TO PLAN FOR VERY POTENTIAL USE OF THEIR MODELS.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: SO IT'S NOT ARBITRARY, BUT IT'S

A LITTLE ARBITRARY.

MR. BORES: WELL, ANY TIME YOU CHOOSE ANY

NUMBER, RIGHT, YOU'RE MAKING A CHOICE. SO YES, WE'VE MADE A CHOICE

ON A SPECIFIC NUMBER HERE, BUT IT IS MEANT TO POINT TO THE EXTREME

CASES.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: OKAY.

MY NEXT QUESTION IS RELATED TO THE -- THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF IT ON THE KNOWLEDGE DISTILLATION MODELS, THE 5

MILLION THRESHOLD. COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT SORT OF COMPANY WOULD BE

CAPTURED IN THAT DEFINITION? BECAUSE THAT SEEMS TO BE PRETTY

TROUBLESOME FOR THE SMALLER BUSINESSES OUT THERE; FOR THE START-UPS OUT

THERE, FOR THOSE WHO MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO PAY THE MASSIVE PENALTY WHO

MIGHT NOW BE CAPTURED.

MR. BORES: SO, THE KNOWLEDGE DISTILLATION CLAUSE

IS MEANT TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE COVERING RISKS FROM DEVELOPERS THAT DO

THE VERY SPECIFIC PROCESS OF KNOWLEDGE DISTILLATION, WHICH I'M HAPPY TO

GO INTO IF YOU'D LIKE, THAT CAN CREATE A SMALLER MODEL FROM A BIGGER

FRONTIER MODEL THAT HAS SIMILAR CAPABILITIES. BUT VERY IMPORTANT IN THIS

306

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

BILL IS THAT IF YOU DO THAT ONCE, YOU DO THAT FOR A $5 MILLION MODEL, YOU

ARE NOT COVERED IN THIS BILL. THE ONLY TIME THIS BILL APPLIES IS WHEN YOU

HAVE SPENT AN AGGREGATE $100 MILLION DIRECTLY ON COMPUTES, DIRECTLY

ON THE FINAL TRAINING RUN OF MODELS. SO IT WILL NOT AFFECT SMALLER

COMPANIES.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: WHO QUALIFIES THE DIRECT

COMPUTE? I THINK ABOUT DEPS, RIGHT, DEPS CAME OUT WITH THOSE --

MR. BORES: YEP.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: -- AMAZING HEADLINE THAT

THEY BUILT IT WITH NO MONEY AT ALL. BUT THE PLA, THE CHINESE

GOVERNMENT, PRIVATE INVESTMENT, ALL BEHIND THAT. A SMALL NUMBER WAS

A MUCH LARGER NUMBER. SO BECAUSE THEY SAID THEY DID IT FOR 10 MILLION,

WOULD THEY BE CONSIDERED FRONTIER? WHO MAKES THAT QUALIFICATION THAT

THEY ARE A FRONTIER MODEL OR NOT? I MEAN, NOT EVERY COMPANY IS

DOMICILED IN THE U.S. ARE WE TAKING THEIR WORD FOR IT?

MR. BORES: SO WITH DEEPSEEK IN PARTICULAR, THE

MODEL THAT REALLY CAUGHT FIRE AND MADE NEWS WAS -- COST OVER 5 MILLION

TO TRAIN, WAS MADE FROM KNOWLEDGE DISTILLATION, BUT IT WASN'T MADE

FROM KNOWLEDGE DISTILLATION OF A FRONTIER MODEL. IT WAS TRAINED ON 01

FROM OPENAI, WHICH WOULD NOT MEET THE FIRST DEFINITION OF BEING 1026.

SO IT WOULDN'T APPLY IN THAT CASE. BUT SIMILAR CASES IN THE FUTURE THAT

WOULD BE TRAINED OFF OF A FRONTIER MODEL WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THIS

BILL.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: SO ONCE -- SO A START-UP IN

NEW YORK WOULD BE CAPTURED IN THIS REGULATION BUT CHINESE, YOU

307

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

KNOW, GOVERNMENT-SANCTIONED MODELS THAT ARE BEING USED IN NEW

YORK WOULD NOT BE CAPTURED?

MR. BORES: ANY FRONTIER MODEL WITH A NEXUS TO

NEW YORK -- AND IT'S SPECIFICALLY DEFINED IN THE BILL AS BEING DEPLOYED

WHOLLY OR PARTLY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK -- WOULD BE COVERED. AND

SO INSOFAR AS DEEPSEEK IS ON THE APP STORE, IT'S AVAILABLE IN THE STATE

OF NEW YORK, WOULD ACTUALLY CAPTURE A FUTURE VERSION OF DEEPSEEK IF

IT MET THE OTHER CRITERIA FOR BEING A FRONTIER MODEL.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: YOU SAY A FUTURE VERSION.

SO THE CURRENT MODEL DOESN'T QUALIFY, BUT IF THERE'S A -- THERE'S A

CONTINUOUS MOVEMENT OF WHEN YOU MAY QUALIFY IF YOU CONTINUE TO

SPEND MONEY ON THE CREATION OF A NEXT GENERATION OR -- A NEXT

GENERATION?

MR. BORES: THERE ARE -- THERE ARE VERY FEW MODELS

THAT ARE CONFIRMED TO HAVE THE 1026 FLOPS AND 100 MILLION IN TRAINING.

SO THIS IS -- THE BILL MOSTLY FOCUSED ON THE MODELS THAT ARE COMING, NOT

THE ONES THAT WE'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH AND ALREADY WORKING ON.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: DO YOU NOT SEE A WORLD IN

WHICH THIS FACILITATES, ESPECIALLY IF THIS MODEL BECOMES A MULTISTATE

WHERE WE'RE MOVING COMPANIES OR SORT OF MAYBE ACCIDENTALLY URGING

THEM TO MOVE INTO A BLACK BOX AND OUT OF AN OPEN SOURCE BECAUSE NOW

THEY DON'T WANT TO COMPLY AND THEN CAN DO SO WITHOUT NECESSARILY

BEING A OPEN SOURCE VERSION OF ONE OF THESE MODELS?

MR. BORES: I -- I DON'T THINK SO. THIS BILL IS

COMPATIBLE WITH OPEN SOURCE. THE COMPANIES THEMSELVES HAVE TO

308

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

DESIGN THEIR OWN SAFETY PLAN, AND THEY CAN CONTINUE TO PRODUCE THESE

OPEN-WEIGHT MODELS AFTER THIS BILL OR BEFORE IT. I'LL NOTE THAT WHAT CAME

IN AS AN OPPOSITION MEMO SAID THAT THEY ESTIMATED THAT THIS WOULD

REQUIRE ONE FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE TO COMPLY WITH. ONE FULL-TIME

EMPLOYEE FOR META OR FOR GOOGLE IS NOT GONNA CAUSE THEM TO MOVE.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU DON'T

SEE A FUTURE IN WHICH THE CAPTURE FOR, LET'S SAY, MAYBE NOT THE FRONTIER

MODEL, WHICH I'M UP FOR DEBATE AS WELL, BUT THE KNOWLEDGE DISTILLATION

THRESHOLD, THERE ARE ONLY A FEW COMPANIES THAT ARE PERFORMING THESE AT

A -- AT A BASIS OF 5 MILLION MORE THAN ONCE?

MR. BORES: WELL, THERE'S ONLY A FEW COMPANIES

THAT WOULD GET UP TO THAT 100 MILLION SPENT, YES.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: OKAY. AND YOUR -- IT'S, I

GUESS, PREDICTIVE THAT YOU'LL START CAPTURING EVERY NEW FRONTIER MODEL

BY HITTING THIS NUMBER?

MR. BORES: I ACTUALLY -- WELL, IT'S SORT OF CIRCULAR

BECAUSE WE'RE DEFINING THE FRONTIER MODEL. BUT TO TAKE THE QUESTION

MORE EXPANSIVELY, I THINK IN MANY WAYS THIS IS UNDERINCLUSIVE. AND

I'VE GOTTEN THAT FEEDBACK FROM INDUSTRY ITSELF, ACTUALLY AS RECENTLY AS A

FEW HOURS AGO, THAT THEY THINK THE DEFINITION IS IN SOME CASE TOO

LIMITED IN FRONTIER MODELS. BUT I DID REALLY WANT TO FOCUS ON THE MOST

EXTREME RISKS AND -- AND TAKE A, AGAIN, LIGHT-TOUCH APPROACH TO WHAT

WE'RE REGULATING HERE.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: OKAY.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE TIME PERIOD OF DISCLOSURE. WHAT

309

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MADE YOU LAND ON THE 72-HOUR MARK FOR LARGE DEVELOPERS AND LEARNING

MODELS OR -- SORRY, FOR INCIDENTS, RATHER?

MR. BORES: THE 72 HOURS IS BASED ON OTHER

PROVISIONS IN NEW YORK WHERE WE HAVE A SIMILAR TIME FRAME, I THINK,

AROUND CYBER DISCLOSURE, MORE NUCLEAR DISCLOSURE. BUT WE WERE VERY

INTENTIONAL IN LIMITING WHAT HAS TO BE REPORTED WITHIN THOSE 72 HOURS.

IT'S SIMPLY THAT AN INCIDENT OCCURRED, WHICH OF THE ENUMERATED TYPES IT

WAS, AND WE PUT IN THE BILL A SHORT DESCRIPTION OF WHAT HAPPENED. SO

WE DO NOT REQUIRE REAMS AND REAMS OF PAPER REPORTING. WE JUST WANT

NOTICE THAT SOMETHING OCCURRED. WITH HOW POWERFUL THIS TECHNOLOGY

IS, SOMETHING COULD SPIN OUT OF CONTROL QUICKLY SO WE THINK IT'S

IMPORTANT TO HEAR ABOUT IT FAST.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE

VIOLATIONS, THE CIVIL PENALTIES, ET CETERA, YOU'RE -- YOU'RE PRETTY -- PRETTY

NARROW IN WHO QUALIFIES SOMEWHAT. BUT -- BUT THE ARTICLE SHALL ONLY

APPLY TO FRONTIER MODELS THAT ARE DEVELOPED, DEPLOYED AND OPERATING

IN PART OR IN WHOLE IN NEW YORK STATE. IS THERE ANY DEFINITION TO WHAT

LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION THE NEW YORK STATE MARKETPLACE -- COULD THEY BE

SELLING A PRODUCT IF IT'S A PRODUCT THAT IS (INDISCERNIBLE) NOW, BUT SELLING

SOMETHING LATER, WOULD THEY QUALIFY OR JUST SIMPLY OPERATING IN NEW

YORK? WHERE DOES THAT QUALIFICATION LEVEL --

MR. BORES: CERTAINLY -- CERTAINLY, OPERATING AND

DEVELOPED IN I THINK ARE FAIRLY CLEAR, AND DEPLOYED IS DEFINED IN THE BILL

ITSELF AS BEING USED OR BEING MADE AVAILABLE TO A THIRD-PARTY FOR THEM

TO USE.

310

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: WHEN IT COMES TO THE

SECTION RELATING TO THE UNREDACTED COPY OF THE POLICY, SO YOU HAD

ENUMERATED IN THIS NEW ITERATION OF THE BILL WHAT CAN AND CAN'T BE

REDACTED AS FAR AS TRADE SECRETS, ET CETERA, SOME OF THE MAIN CONCERNS

PREVIOUSLY. IN THE UNREDACTED COPY, WHO HAS THE ACCESS TO THAT AND

WHERE AND HOW IS IT POTENTIALLY SECURE WITHIN THE PUBLICATION UNDER

THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION?

MR. BORES: YEAH, THIS WAS FEEDBACK THAT WE GOT

FROM THE INDUSTRY QUITE A BIT, THAT THEY DIDN'T WANT TO TRUST GOVERNMENT

AGENCIES WITH AN UNREDACTED COPY. NOW, I THINK THAT SEVERELY

UNDERESTIMATES THE SKILL AND PROFESSIONALISM OF, SAY, THE DEPARTMENT

OF -- OF (INDISCERNIBLE) HERE IN NEW YORK OR -- OR THE OAG. BUT WE

WANTED TO TAKE THAT UNDER ADVISEMENT, SO WE SAID THAT ALL WE HAVE TO

DO IS GRANT ACCESS TO IT. SO YOU COULD BE VIEWING IT VIRTUALLY, RIGHT,

THAT NEEDS TO BE SHARED. BUT YOU NEVER NEED TO SEND THE UNREDACTED

COPY, IT NEVER NEEDS TO BE STORED ON A GOVERNMENT SERVER.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: WHAT MECHANISMS IN THE

BILL EXIST TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE NOT LOCKING OURSELVES INTO A STATIC

FRAMEWORK THAT BECOMES OBSOLETE OVER TIME WHEN IMPLEMENTED?

WE'RE OFTEN SEEING LEGISLATION RELATED TO THIS TOPIC COME IN AND OUT OF

THIS HOUSE AND OTHER STATE LEGISLATURES THAT BY THE NEXT SESSION MAY NOT

NECESSARILY BE THE LANGUAGE YOU OR I WOULD HAVE CHOSEN. HOW DOES

THIS BILL AND THE LANGUAGE TRY AND PREVENT THAT -- THAT ISSUE HERE?

MR. BORES: I MEAN, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF

CONVERSATIONS WITH INDUSTRY AND -- AND WITH ACTIVISTS AND THINKING

311

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ABOUT HOW TO SET IT UP TO BE AS FUTURE-PROOF AS IT CAN BE. AI MODELS

WILL ALSO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP. THANKFULLY, AS FAR AS I KNOW, THE NEW

YORK STATE LEGISLATURE DOES PLAN TO BE IN SESSION IN 2026, SO IF WE

NEED TO UPDATE IT I LOOK FORWARD TO DOING THAT.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: SO WHY NOT PLACE MAYBE

MORE OF A SANDBOXING OR A SUNSET PROVISION OR SOMETHING THAT ALLOWS

THE LEGISLATURE TO WORK AND ALLOW FOR THE POLICY TO EVOLVE INSTEAD OF

BEING SO SWEEPING WITH SUCH PUNITIVE REGULATION HERE? WHY NOT

CREATE -- OR WOULD YOU SUPPORT AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD MAYBE

SUNSET THE BILL IF NO CHANGES ARE NEEDED OR IF WE FEEL LIKE IT BECOMES

ANTIQUATED OVER TIME?

MR. BORES: IN -- IN OTHER BILLS, AS YOU KNOW, I --

I'VE PUT SUNSETS IN, SPECIFICALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SPECIFIC

TECHNICAL STANDARD THAT MIGHT CHANGE OVER TIME. BUT THIS IS TALKING

ABOUT LARGELY THE COMPANY POLICIES AND PROCESSES. AND, AGAIN, THEY'RE

THINGS THAT ALL OF THESE COMPANIES HAVE COMMITTED TO ALREADY, AND SO I

DIDN'T SEE A NEED TO HAVE THAT SUNSET.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: SO, OFTENTIMES WHEN WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT THESE SORT OF FRAMEWORKS -- AND I KNOW PEOPLE, EVERYONE

FROM ON THE LEFT TO THE RIGHT, NANCY PELOSI IN THE CALIFORNIA ARGUMENT

HERSELF SAID THAT SHE WASN'T A FAN OF FRAMEWORKS LIKE THIS ONE, BUT ARE

MORE INCLINED TO FOCUS ON EITHER A FEDERAL REGULATION OR SEE STATES TAKE

A MORE RISK-BASED, USE CASE-SPECIFIC FRAMEWORK THAT TARGETS AI

APPLICATIONS WHERE THEY FIND THAT THEY MAY BE MOST MALICIOUS TO THE

PUBLIC. WHY TAKE THIS SWEEPING ACTION AND NOT THE SCALPEL OR A MORE

312

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

NARROWED APPROACH THAT MAKES MORE SENSE WITH BOTH INDUSTRY AND THE

MARKETPLACE?

MR. BORES: I -- I'D HAVE A FEW THINGS THERE. ONE

WOULD BE THAT I DON'T THINK THIS IS TAKING A -- A WIDE APPROACH. IT'S

ACTUALLY, AS YOU'VE SEEN, VERY NARROWLY-TAILORED TO THE LARGEST RISKS, THE

LARGEST COMPANIES, AND ONLY A FEW SPECIFIC ACTIONS THEY'VE ALREADY

COMMITTED TO. AND I THINK THE 1047 OPPOSITION, THAT WAS A VERY

DIFFERENT BILL THAT HAD AUDITS IN IT, THAT HAD ALL THE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT

WE TALKED ABOUT. SO I WOULDN'T DESCRIBE THOSE TWO THINGS AS SIMILAR OR

THAT ANYONE'S THOUGHTS ON THE FIRST SHOULD -- SHOULD DETAIL THEIR

THOUGHTS ON THE LATTER. WE WERE VERY -- WE LISTENED TO ALL OF THAT

FEEDBACK AND INCORPORATED MUCH OF IT.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: BUT I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT I

APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT UNLIKE CONNECTICUT, SAY, WHICH DIDN'T

NECESSARILY LISTEN A LOT ON FEEDBACK AND FACED THE SAME ADVERSITY THAT

CALIFORNIA DID, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME SIGNIFICANT CHANGES HERE WHICH I

DO WANT TO SAY I APPRECIATE.

WOULD IT MAKE -- IF WE'RE NOT -- IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT

AI SAFETY, THEN HOW DOES THIS BILL PROTECT AGAINST THE FOREIGN

ADVERSARIES THAT ARE BECOMING, YOU KNOW, A BIGGER FACTOR IN THIS

CONVERSATION? WE'RE -- WE KIND OF TRANSCEND STATE LINES WITH AN ISSUE

THIS BIG WITH SO MANY NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS. DO YOU THINK

THAT THIS HINDERS INNOVATION IN NEW YORK IF THERE'S A FRAMEWORK HERE

THAT'S EXCLUSIVE TO HERE, THAT THESE COMPANIES MAY JUST GO OVERSEAS?

AND IF THEY DON'T LIKE MANY CRYPTO AND FINANCIAL ASSETS THAT JUST SIMPLY

313

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AREN'T AVAILABLE IN NEW YORK, THEY WOULD JUST LEAVE THEMSELVES OUT OF

THE NEW YORK MARKET UNTIL THEY FIGURE OUT HOW TO CORRECTLY REGULATE

THOSE?

MR. BORES: I -- I DO NOT THINK THAT THESE AMERICAN

COMPANIES THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OR EVEN FOREIGN COMPANIES WILL

WANT TO LEAVE THE NEW YORK MARKET AND ALL OF OUR CONSUMERS HERE.

EVERY TIME WE DO ANY TYPE OF REGULATION, PEOPLE THREATEN TO LEAVE THE

STATE. AGAIN, EVEN THE OPPOSITION IS SAYING THIS WOULD REQUIRE ONE

FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE TO COMPLY WITH. SO I DON'T THINK THAT'S CAUSING

ANYONE TO LEAVE. BUT I WOULD ADD TO THAT THAT CHINA ACTUALLY REGULATES

THEIR AI FAR MORE THAN WE DO HERE IN THE UNITED STATES AND FAR MORE

THAN ANYTHING THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED. I MEAN, THE CCP HAS REALLY

TIGHT SCREWS ON WHAT ANY MODEL CAN SAY AND REALLY DIGS INTO HOW ALL OF

IT IS DEVELOPED. SO REGULATION IS NOT GONNA BE THE REASON THERE'S A

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN -- BETWEEN OUR COUNTRIES IN DEVELOPMENT. BUT THE

THREATS FROM FOREIGN -- FOREIGN THREATS IS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE MOTIVATING

FACTORS OF A SPECIFIC CLAUSE IN THIS BILL OF 12(B), WHERE WE ASK FOR

REASONABLE ADMINISTRATIVE, TECHNICAL AND PHYSICAL CYBERSECURITY

PROTECTIONS FOR FRONTIER MODELS WITHIN THE LARGE DEVELOPER'S CONTROL

THAT IF SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENTED APPROPRIATELY REDUCED THE RISK OF

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR MISUSE OF THE FRONTIER MODEL, INCLUDING BY

SOPHISTICATED ACTORS. WE ARE SPECIFICALLY SAYING ONE OF THE BIGGEST

THREATS TO AMERICAN INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF AI IS THE MODEL

WEIGHTS BEING STOLEN OR THE DETAILS OF MODELS BEING STOLEN BY FOREIGN

ADVERSARIES, AND THIS IS REQUIRING OUR COMPANIES TO TAKE THAT THREAT

314

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SERIOUSLY.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: HOW DO YOU SPEAK TO MANY

OF THE QUESTIONS WE'VE SEEN FROM INDIVIDUALS IN THE INDUSTRY AND THE

NON-PROFIT AI SPACE, DO STILL HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT THE

DOWNSTREAM LIABILITY THAT EXISTS, SPECIFICALLY RELATING TO THE KNOWLEDGE

DISTILLATION MODELS, THE STUDENT-TEACHER MODELS, ET CETERA, AND THAT --

THAT THRESHOLD OF 5 MILLION DOES MAKE MANY FEEL LIKE THEY MAY BE

CAPTURED EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE NOT A FRONTIER MODEL AND THEY'RE NOT

SPENDING 100 MILLION AT THE MOMENT. WOULD THEY BE CAPTURED IN ANY

WAY, SHAPE OR FORM? DO YOU SEE NOT -- NON-PROFITS HAVING TO DEAL WITH

THIS REGULATION, NOT NECESSARILY JUST THE METAS OF THE WORLD?

MR. BORES: NO. BECAUSE -- WELL, FIRST OF ALL,

ACADEMIC RESEARCH IS COMPLETELY EXEMPT --

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: YES. I APPRECIATE THAT

REMOVAL, TOO.

MR. BORES: AND -- AND -- BUT SPECIFICALLY, THIS ONLY

APPLIES IF YOU BECOME A LARGE DEVELOPER. AND A LARGE DEVELOPER,

THERE'S A HARD REQUIREMENT THAT YOU HAVE SPENT $100 MILLION IN

COMPUTE COSTS IN TRAINING MODELS. IT'S VERY SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO

ENSURE THAT NO SMALLER PLAYER, NO SMALL NON-PROFIT, NO START-UP, NO EVEN

MEDIUM OR PRETTY LARGE START-UP IS BEING CAPTURED BY THIS.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: I JUST HAVE TROUBLE UNDER --

I -- YES, I UNDERSTAND WE CAN'T BE A CAPTURE-ALL WHILE AT THE SAME TIME

TRYING TO BE HYPER-FOCUSED ON SOME. THIS IS A TRICKY TOPIC TO TRY AND

TARGET AND PINPOINT WHO WE MAY REGULATE BECAUSE THE TARGET IS

315

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CONSTANTLY MOVING AND THE BAR IS ALSO CONSTANTLY MOVING. BUT DON'T

YOU THINK THAT THIS LEAVES CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER? AND AS -- AS

GOVERNORS IN THE PAST THAT HAVE VETOED THIS HAVE SAID, HAVE CREATED A

FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY OR ANY FALSE SENSE THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY HELPING TO

MOVE THE NEEDLE IN SECURITY IN AI BY ONLY SPECIFICALLY TARGETING THESE,

WHERE A SMALLER MODEL THAT IS BUILT TO BE MORE HARMFUL CAN FLY UNDER

THE RADAR, A BLACK BOX UNDER THE RADAR? AND YET THESE INDIVIDUALS WHO

ARE BUILDING THESE MODELS ON A LARGE SCALE IN A OPEN SOURCE MANNER

WILL NOW BE PUNISHED FOR DOING SO BY HAVING TO CREATE THESE GUARDRAILS

AND PUBLISH THIS INFORMATION?

MR. BORES: WELL, I -- I DON'T KNOW ABOUT WHAT YOU

SAID AT THE END THERE ABOUT -- NO ONE'S BEING PUNISHED AND NO ONE --

THERE'S NO -- THIS IS JUST --

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: WELL, THEY'RE -- THEY'RE

FACING SPECIFIC REGULATIONS HYPER-TARGETED TO THEM VERSUS OTHER

COMPANIES THAT ARE OPERATING PRIVATELY THAT JUST WON'T HAVE TO REGULATE

(INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK).

MR. BORES: WELL, BUT IT'S NOT HYPER-TARGETED AT

OPEN SOURCE OR CLOSED SOURCE. IT'S HYPER-TARGETED AT LARGE DEVELOPERS,

RIGHT? THAT'S -- THAT'S WHO IT'S TARGETED AT. I AGREE WITH YOU THAT THERE

ARE ADDITIONAL RISKS OUT THERE, AND I --

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: ARE THERE -- SORRY. ARE

THERE LARGE DEVELOPERS WHO ARE NOT DISCLOSING HOW MUCH THEY'RE

SPENDING ON THEIR MODEL?

MR. BORES: ARE THERE LARGE DEVELOP -- YES, NOW AT

316

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

-- AT THE CURRENT POINT THERE ARE. BUT --

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: AND THEY WOULD NOT BE

CAPTURED?

MR. BORES: NO, THEY WOULD -- IF YOU DON'T DISCLOSE

THE MONEY IT'S STILL ABOUT HAVING SPENT THE MONEY, RIGHT? AND SO IF YOU

WERE SPENDING THE MONEY, YOU ARE COVERED. IF YOU TRIED TO HIDE THAT

AND TRIED TO NOT REPORT, THEN YOU WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE PENALTIES IN

THIS BILL.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: SO -- I'M JUST TRYING TO

UNDERSTAND, A FOREIGN COMPANY WHO DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO ABIDE

BY THE REPORTING STANDARDS HERE NECESSARILY IN THE SAME WAY, THEY

WOULD STILL BE REGULATED IN THE SAME FASHION EVEN IF WE DON'T

NECESSARILY KNOW FOR A FACT HOW MUCH THEY'RE SPENDING ON --

MR. BORES: IF THEY ARE MAKING THEIR PRODUCTS

AVAILABLE TO NEW YORKERS, YES.

MR. BLUMENCRANZ: OKAY. I BELIEVE THAT IS THE

END OF MY QUESTIONING FOR YOU ON THIS ONE. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

MR. BORES: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THANK YOU, MR.

BLUMENCRANZ.

MR. MAHER.

MR. MAHER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

317

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. BORES: OF COURSE.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THE SPONSOR

YIELDS.

MR. MAHER: ALL RIGHT. SO I APPRECIATE YOU BEING

AVAILABLE TO ANSWER SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS. FOR ME, WHEN I THINK

ABOUT THIS CONVERSATION AND AI IN GENERAL, IT'S A LEARNING EXPERIENCE. I

AM COMPLETELY OPEN TO AN EDUCATION, WHETHER IT'S FROM YOU OR ANYONE

ELSE THAT COMES MY WAY. SO I'M HOPING THIS COULD BE A CONVERSATIONAL

AND A LEARNING EXPERIENCE.

SO THE MORE THAT I LEARN ABOUT AI, THE MORE THAT WE

LOOK INTO WHAT OTHER STATES ARE DOING. SOME FOLKS THAT HAVE ENACTED

DIFFERENT LAWS IN THEIR STATES THAT THEY'RE KIND OF BACKTRACKING NOW AND

TRYING TO CHANGE AND ENCOURAGE OTHERS TO BE CAREFUL, WHICH HOPEFULLY

WE'RE ALL LEARNING FROM. AND THEY BASICALLY TALKED ABOUT A COUPLE

QUESTIONS TO ASK WHEN PUTTING LEGISLATION TOGETHER. SO I'LL ASK THEM TO

YOU.

MR. BORES: GREAT.

MR. MAHER: THE FIRST ONE IS, HAS AI BEEN

SUFFICIENTLY DEFINED? SO I WOULD ASK YOU, HOW WOULD YOU DEFINE AI?

MR. BORES: WELL, THERE IS -- THERE'S A DEFINITION IN

THE BILL, IF YOU'RE ASKING THE LEGAL DEFINITION, AND IT'S THE SAME

DEFINITION THAT WE PASSED EARLIER IN THE BUDGET. SO WE'RE MAKING SURE

THERE AREN'T DUPLICATE DEFINITIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE OUT THERE.

AND I COULD GIVE YOU A MORE GENERIC ONE IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT I WOULD -- I

WOULD PROBABLY REFER TO THE BILL TO THE SPECIFIC DEFINITION THAT'S THERE.

318

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. MAHER: SO, SPECIFICALLY, I WOULD ASK, I

BELIEVE IT'S NOT IN THE BILL, THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE. BUT WHEN WE TALK

ABOUT AI SPECIFICALLY, GENERATIVE AI IS SOMETHING THAT WE PROBABLY

COULD CAPTURE AND TALK ABOUT MORE SPECIFICALLY THAN SOMETHING MORE IN

GENERAL. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT YOUR BILL AND HOW IT'S WRITTEN, I GUESS

MY CONCERN IS IS IT TOO GENERAL?

MR. BORES: SO, GENERATIVE AI I BELIEVE WE ALSO

DEFINED IN THE BUDGET SEPARATELY EARLIER, AND SO THAT PART I THINK IS

TAKEN CARE OF. THE DEFINITION IN THE BILL, WHICH I'M HAPPY TO READ

BECAUSE IT -- IT IS QUITE SPECIFIC, IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MEANS A

MACHINE-BASED SYSTEM THAT CAN, FOR A GIVEN SET OF HUMAN-DEFINED

OBJECTIVES, MAKE PREDICTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS OR DECISIONS

INFLUENCING REAL OR VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS, AND THAT USES MACHINE AND

HUMAN-BASED INPUTS TO PERCEIVE REAL AND VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS, ABSTRACT

SUCH PERCEPTIONS INTO MODELS THROUGH ANALYSIS IN AN AUTOMATED

MANNER, AND USE MODEL INFERENCE TO FORMULATE OPTIONS FOR INFORMATION

OR ACTION.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. A COUPLE THINGS. LET'S START

WITH MACHINE LEARNING -- MACHINE SYSTEM ANALYSIS. SO JUST TO GIVE YOU

A HYPOTHETICAL -- AND I -- I KNOW YOU TALKED ABOUT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT

LARGER BUSINESSES AND ONLY CERTAIN COMPANIES BEING SUBJECT TO THIS BILL.

BUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THINGS LIKE ALGORITHMS AND, YOU KNOW, GENERAL

MACHINE LEARNING, I THINK OF JUST REGULAR COMPUTER SOFTWARE. LIKE, LET'S

SAY AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET. SO I KNOW YOU HAVE LIABILITIES IN HERE AND

PENALTIES IN HERE. SO LET'S SAY I'M USING AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET AND I ASK

319

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

IT TO COMPUTE, IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER, A LIST OF 500 COMPANIES, AND BY

NAME -- LET'S SAY IT'S BY LAST NAME. IT GOES FROM X TO Z. WELL,

THEORETICALLY, YOU COULD BE DISCRIMINATING AGAINST AN ASIAN POPULATION

OR A CERTAIN TYPE OF POPULATION THAT HAS THOSE LETTERS THAT START WITH THAT

ALPHABET. WOULD THEY HAVE PUNITIVE LIABILITY?

MR. BORES: NO. FIRST OF ALL, IT'S -- THERE'S -- AGAIN,

THERE'S NO NEW PRA AS PART OF THIS. SECOND OF ALL, EXCEL WOULDN'T MEET

THE GENERAL DEFINITION OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TO SORT ALGORITHMS. IT'S

NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD MEET THAT. THIRD OF ALL, IT'S CERTAINLY NOT A

FRONTIER MODEL. IT'S NOT 1026 FLOPS AND SPENDING 100 MILLION ALL ON

ITS TRAINING. AND FOURTH, THERE'S NO BIAS OR DISCRIMINATION CLAUSES

ANYWHERE IN THIS BILL. THIS IS JUST FOCUSED -- THE REASON IT'S FOCUSED ON

THE LARGEST MODELS AND THE REASON IT'S FOCUSED ON THE LARGEST COMPANIES

IS THAT WE ARE REALLY PINPOINTING THE EXTREME POTENTIALLY BAD OUTCOMES

FROM ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE DEVELOPMENT. THAT IS ALL THIS BILL IS FOCUSED

ON. NOT BIAS OR DISCRIMINATION OR ANY OF THOSE OTHER PROBLEMS WHICH

ARE REAL PROBLEMS AND WE SHOULD TACKLE, BUT ARE THE SUBJECT OF OTHER

LEGISLATION.

MR. MAHER: THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT.

THE NEXT ONE I WANT TO GET INTO IS, HAS THE PROPOSED

LEGISLATION ADEQUATELY IDENTIFIED SPECIFIC HARM? SO WHEN PUTTING THIS

LEGISLATION TOGETHER, CAN YOU SPEAK TO SOME SPECIFIC HARMS AND

EXAMPLES OF THAT AND WHY THIS LEG -- LEGISLATION IS NECESSARY?

MR. BORES: YEAH. SO -- SO THIS LEGISLATION IS

FOCUSED ON WHAT WE DEFINED AS CRITICAL HARM, WHICH IS THE AI MODEL

320

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

EITHER MATERIALLY AIDING AND CREATING A CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL,

RADIOLOGICAL OR NUCLEAR WEAPON --

MR. MAHER: OKAY.

MR. BORES: -- OR COMMITTING WHAT WOULD BE A

CRIME UNDER THE PENAL CODE WITH NO MEANINGFUL HUMAN ACTION. SO

YOU GIVE IT A QUICK, SHORT COMMAND AND IT GOES OFF AND DOES A CRIME.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU'RE, LIKE, TELLING IT DO TO. AND IN COMMITTING

EITHER OF THOSE ACTIONS, MATERIALLY ENABLING THAT -- SO IF IT'S JUST --

MATCHES WHAT YOU COULD FIND ON A SEARCH ENGINE, IT DOESN'T COUNT. AND

HAS TO RESULT IN 100 DEATHS OR $1 BILLION IN DAMAGES. IT IS A REALLY SORT

OF SPECIFIC SET OF HARMS THAT IT'S FOCUSED ON.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

AND THEN MY NEXT FOLLOW-UP TO THAT WOULD BE, HAVE

CURRENT LEGAL AND REGULATORY POWERS FAILED TO ADDRESS THESE SPECIFIC

HARMS? ARE THERE ANY SORT OF GUIDELINES OUT THERE? ARE THERE ANY

FEDERAL AGENCIES OUT THERE THAT ARE ALREADY AROUND TO MAKE SURE THAT

THESE THINGS DO NOT HAPPEN?

MR. BORES: YEAH, THERE'S A LOT OF VOLUNTARY

CONVERSATIONS AND VOLUNTARY COMMITMENTS. AND WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS

COMPANIES THAT HAVE MADE THOSE COMMITMENTS NOW ARE NOT NECESSARILY

LIVING UP TO THEM. THROUGH THIS PROCESS I'VE TALKED TO ALL OF THE LARGE

DEVELOPERS, PROBABLY MANY, MANY TIMES, AND I'VE ASKED MOST OF THEM,

DO YOU STAND BY THE COMMITMENTS YOU MADE TO THE WHITE HOUSE IN

2023? DO YOU STAND BY THE SOLE COMMITMENTS? DO YOU STAND BY THE

COMMITMENTS THAT YOU MADE AT EACH OF THESE CONFERENCES? AND THEY

321

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ALL SAY, YES. WE HAVE NOT RESCINDED ANY OF OUR COMMITMENTS, AND YET

THEY'RE NOT LIVING UP TO THEM. SO WE HAVE STARTED TO -- THEY HAVE

ACKNOWLEDGED THEY NEED TO DO IT AND THAT THEY CAN DO IT AND THAT THEY

WILL DO IT, BUT THEY'RE STILL NOT DOING IT. SO THAT'S WHY WE NEED SOME

BINDING LEGISLATION.

MR. MAHER: WHO'S "THEY"?

MR. BORES: I DON'T KNOW THAT I WANNA BE PICKING

ON ANY OF THE SPECIFIC ONES, BUT YOU -- YOU KNOW THE LARGE AI

DEVELOPERS.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. APPRECIATE THAT. ALL RIGHT.

I KNOW THERE WERE SOME EDITS TO THIS BILL. WAS AUDITS

EDITED OUT?

MR. BORES: CORRECT.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. WHAT -- WHAT WAS THE SPECIFIC

CHANGE ON THAT FROM THE ORIGINAL BILL?

MR. BORES: IT WAS COMPLETELY ELIMINATED.

MR. MAHER: OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. I HAD A

COUPLE OF QUESTIONS RELATED TO AUDITS.

OKAY. LITIGATION, WE HIT ON THAT. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE

ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU. IT LOOK LIKE THIS GOES SPECIFIC TO, LIKE,

FRONTIER MODELS. HAVE YOU BEEN, YOU KNOW, SPEAKING ABOUT THAT?

CAN YOU BETTER EXPLAIN TO -- TO MYSELF AND OTHERS?

MR. BORES: YEAH. THE FRONTIER MODEL IS -- IS A

NAME TO DESCRIBE SOMETHING THAT IS ON THE FRONTIER OF THE CURRENT

RESEARCH THAT IS HAPPENING. IT IS THE MOST POWERFUL, THE MOST -- THE

322

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LARGEST MODELS IN GENERAL, RIGHT? THOSE THAT HAVE THE MOST

CAPABILITIES. AND THAT IS REALLY WHEN WE'RE GETTING INTO AN AREA THAT

WE'RE NOT SURE WE KNOW HOW TO CONTROL OR WE CERTAINLY -- THAT WE DON'T

WANT TO FALL NECESSARILY INTO THE WRONG HANDS. SO SOME OF THE -- THIS

BILL IN PARTICULAR HAS BEEN SUPPORTED BY -- WE -- WE HAVE A LETTER THAT I

THINK I'VE SENT AROUND THAT WAS SIGNED BY TWO OF THE "GODFATHERS OF

AI" THEY'RE CALLED.

MR. MAHER: OKAY.

MR. BORES: YOSHUA BENGIO AND GEOFFREY HINTON,

THAT WON THE TURING AWARD, WHICH IS LIKE THE NOBEL PRIZE FOR

COMPUTER SCIENCE FOR INVENTING DEEP LEARNING. AND GEOFFREY HINTON

ALSO SEPARATELY WON THE NOBEL PRIZE. HE'S A VERY IMPRESSIVE MAN. BUT

-- BUT THEY HAVE SAID THEY'VE INVENTED THIS TECHNOLOGY, THEY SEE WHERE

IT'S GOING, AND THEY THINK BASED ON THAT FRONTIER WE NEED URGENT ACTION

IN ORDER TO KEEP PEOPLE SAFE. AND SO THAT'S -- WE'RE FOCUSING ON THOSE

RISKS SPECIFICALLY FROM THE FRONTIER MODELS.

MR. MAHER: I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU.

I KNOW YOU MADE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT SOME OF THE

SMALLER COMPANIES NOT BEING IMPACTED BY THIS, JUST THE LARGER

COMPANIES. WOULD THAT BE KIND OF A DISINCENTIVE FOR SOME OF THE

SMALLER COMPANIES THAT MIGHT WANT TO BE BIGGER WHEN THEY GROW UP

AND BE MORE SUCCESSFUL AND BECOME A LARGER COMPANY, OR DO YOU SEE

THIS BEING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT IN SCALE?

MR. BORES: AGAIN, THE -- THE OPPOSITION MEMO THAT

SAID IT WILL COST ONE FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE TO COMPLY WITH, I DON'T THINK

323

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THAT ONE PERSON IS GONNA DISSUADE COMPANIES FROM WANTING TO GROW.

MR. MAHER: OKAY. I APPRECIATE THE ANSWERS TO ALL

MY QUESTIONS.

MADAM SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. MAHER: ALL RIGHT. SO, I AM STILL LEARNING. I

WANTED TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY AND THE PLATFORM WE HAVE TO EDUCATE

MYSELF AND OTHERS MORE. I KNOW THAT I JOIN MOST NEW YORKERS AND

MOST AMERICANS, I BELIEVE, WHEN I CAN SAY WE -- WE DON'T QUITE KNOW

ENOUGH ABOUT AI. BUT IT IS NOT JUST OUR FUTURE, IT'S OUR RIGHT NOW. IT'S

GONNA IMPACT US IN BIG WAYS MOVING FORWARD. AND ONE THING THAT I'VE

BEEN LEARNING AND I'VE BEEN ASKING IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT

STATE LAWS THAT ARE GETTING ENACTED, IS THAT GOING TO HURT THE TECHNOLOGY

AND ITS ADVANCE -- ADVANCEMENT. AND ON THE FOLKS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO

HELP AND OUR SOCIETY THAT WE'RE TRYING TO HELP, RATHER THAN HURT IT. AND

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO READ WAS A JOINT STATEMENT, THIS IS

FROM 2023 AND IT'S, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, STILL BEING PRACTICED TODAY. A

JOINT STATEMENT FROM THE DIRECTOR OF THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL

PROTECTION BUREAU, THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE JUSTICE

DEPARTMENT'S CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION, THE CHAIR OF THE EQUAL

EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, THE CHAIR OF THE FEDERAL TRADE

COMMISSION. AND THIS IS A STATEMENT FROM ALL OF THEM THAT SPEAKS TO

FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT OF AI AND TECHNOLOGY IN

GENERAL. "AMERICA'S COMMITMENT TO THE CORE PRINCIPLES OF FAIRNESS,

EQUALITY AND JUSTICE IS DEEPLY EMBEDDED IN THE FEDERAL LAWS THAT OUR

324

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AGENCIES ENFORCE TO PROTECT CIVIL RIGHTS, FAIR COMPETITION, CONSUMER

PROTECTION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY. THESE ESTABLISHED LAWS HAVE LONG

SERVED TO PROTECT INDIVIDUALS, EVEN AS OUR SOCIETY HAS NAVIGATED

EMERGING TECHNOLOGY. RESPONSIBLE INNOVATION IS NOT INCOMPATIBLE

WITH THESE LAWS, INDEED BENEFITS TO PEOPLE IN A FAIR AND COMPETITIVE

MANNER SUCH AS INCREASED ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITIES, AS WELL AS BETTER

PRODUCTS AND SERVICES AT LOWER COSTS. TODAY, THE USE OF AUTOMATIC

SYSTEMS INCLUDING THOSE SOMETIMES MARKETED AS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE,

OR AI, IS BECOMING INCREASINGLY COMMON IN OUR DAILY LIVES. WE USE

THE TERM "AUTOMATED SYSTEMS" BROADLY TO MEAN SOFTWARE AND

ALGORITHMIC PROCESSES, INCLUDING AI, THAT ARE USED TO AUTOMATE WORK

FLOWS AND HELP PEOPLE COMPLETE TASKS OR MAKE DECISIONS. PRIVATE AND

PUBLIC ENTITIES USE THESE SYSTEMS TO MAKE CRITICAL DECISIONS, HOUSING --

THAT IMPACT INDIVIDUALS' RIGHTS AND OPPORTUNITIES, INCLUDING FAIR AND

EQUAL ACCESS TO A JOB, HOUSING, CREDIT OPPORTUNITIES AND OTHER GOODS

AND SERVICES. THESE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS AND COST SAVINGS AND

MODERNIZING EXISTING PRACTICES, ALTHOUGH MANY OF THESE TOOLS OFFER THE

PROMISE OF ADVANCEMENT, THEY'RE USED ALSO AS A POTENTIAL TO PERPETUATE

UNLAWFUL BIAS, AUTOMATE UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION AND PRODUCE OTHER

HARMFUL OUTCOMES."

THESE ARE JUST A COUPLE EXAMPLES OF SOME OF OUR LAW

ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THAT ARE GUARDING US FROM AI AND OTHER

TECHNOLOGIES. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL MINDFUL OF THE CURRENT

LAWS THAT ARE ON THE BOOKS AND THE AGENCIES THAT ARE OUT THERE TRYING TO

HELP WITH SOME OF THESE PROTECTIONS AS WE CONTINUE TO DEVELOP AI LAWS

325

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

IN OUR OWN STATE AND ALL OVER.

THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THANK YOU,

MAHER.

MR. NORBER.

MR. NORBER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD, PLEASE?

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. BORES: YES.

MR. NORBER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THE SPONSOR

YIELDS.

MR. NORBER: IT'S KIND OF WEIRD TO SPEAK TO YOU

LIKE THIS OVER HERE, BUT I'LL MANAGE IT SOMEHOW.

SO I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT MORE THE

GENESIS OF THIS, WHERE IT CAME FROM, WHERE IT STARTED. YOU SAID EARLIER

WHEN YOU WERE SPEAKING TO MY COLLEAGUE MAHER, THAT YOU SPOKE TO

SOME OF THESE COMPANIES. ARE -- DO THEY SHARE WITH YOU THE IDEA THAT

THERE MIGHT BE SOME TYPE OF CRITICAL HARM THAT THEY MIGHT, EVEN BY

THEMSELVES, CREATE ACCIDENTALLY?

MR. BORES: I THINK THEIR LAWYERS ARE QUITE CAREFUL

IN EDITING SOME OF THOSE STATEMENTS, BUT IN ESSENCE, YES. AS I -- AS I

SAID IN MY OPENING EXPLANATION, THEY HAVE ALL SIGNED THOSE

COMMITMENTS THAT, AS I READ OFF, I WON'T REPEAT, BUT SAY THEY SHOULD BE

326

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

FOCUSED ON THESE LARGE HARMS, THEY SHOULD BE DISCLOSING THEIR SAFETY

PLANS. THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT THEY HAVE SIGNED. AND THEN

SEPARATELY, MOST OF THEM ALREADY HAVE SAFETY PLANS THAT TALK ABOUT

ADDRESSING THESE VERY REAL HARMS.

MR. NORBER: SO DID WE INITIATE THIS, OR DID THEY

WANT TO COME TO US AND SAY, LOOK, WE NEED BETTER REGULATION. IN SOME

WAY, WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO HELP US DO A BETTER JOB AT MAKING SURE THAT

CRITICAL HARM DOESN'T OCCUR? BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHERE

THIS ALL COMES FROM.

MR. BORES: A MEETING OF THE MINDS.

MR. NORBER: (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

MR. BORES: AND I WILL SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, AS -- AS

AN EXAMPLE, BUT ANTHROPIC, ONE OF THE LARGE COMPANIES, PUBLISHED A

BLOG POST ON HALLOWEEN LAST YEAR -- I DIDN'T CHOOSE THE DATE, BUT -- AND

THEY SAID THAT THE INDUSTRY DESPERATELY NEEDS REGULATION. THAT THEY

WOULD PREFER IT AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, BUT THEY DON'T THINK THE FEDS WILL

ACT FAST ENOUGH SO THEY'LL TAKE IT AT THE STATE LEVEL, AND THAT IT NEEDS TO

HAPPEN IN THE NEXT 18 MONTHS. NOW, THAT WAS SEVEN MONTHS AGO, SO

THAT PUTS US AT APRIL OF 2026. NOW, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THEY HAVE

ENDORSED THIS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE OR ANY WORD OF THAT, RIGHT? I DON'T

MEAN TO IMPLY THAT. BUT, YES, PEOPLE IN INDUSTRY, NOT JUST THE INVENTORS

OF AI AND THE ACADEMICS BEHIND IT THAT I CITED BEFORE, BUT SOME OF THE

COMPANIES THEMSELVES ARE CALLING FOR IT.

MR. NORBER: BECAUSE WE KNOW SINCE THE INFANCY

OF AI THAT THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DEBATE ABOUT WHAT WILL BE THE FINAL

327

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

OUTCOME OF THIS. WILL THIS BE A TERMINATOR 2 SCENARIO OR WILL THIS BE

THE BEST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED TO HUMANITY? SO I KNOW THAT WE

SHOULD TAKE INTO CONCERN THAT WE DON'T WANNA SCARE ANYBODY WITH THIS

BILL. WE'RE SAYING HERE, NOW WE HAVE NEW YORK STATE ADMITTING THAT

WE NEED TO PROTECT OURSELVES FROM BIOLOGICAL WARFARE OR WHATNOT. SO

ARE THERE OTHER STATES THAT ARE AGREEING TO THIS TYPE OF REGULATION OR

LEGISLATION?

MR. BORES: I -- I THINK I COUNT EIGHT OTHER STATES

THAT HAD OR HAVE A BILL LIVE IN THEIR LEGISLATURE THIS YEAR, TRYING TO GET AT

THIS QUESTION. SO, YES, OTHER STATES ARE LOOKING AT THIS AS WELL.

MR. NORBER. RIGHT. SO CALIFORNIA OPTED OUT OF IT.

THEY HAD LEGISLATION THAT THEY PUT IN AND THE GOVERNOR VETOED IT,

CORRECT?

MR. BORES: YES. ALTHOUGH, IF I MAY, THE "IT" THERE

WHEN YOU SAY OPT OUT OF IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, RIGHT? THE GOVERNOR

VETOED A SPECIFIC BILL, BUT HE THEN CREATED A COMMISSION TO STUDY WHAT

SHOULD BE DONE AT THE STATE LEVEL --

MR. NORBER: RIGHT.

MR. BORES: -- AND HE PUT ON THAT COMMISSION ONE

PERSON THAT REALLY OPPOSED THAT BILL, ONE PERSON THAT REALLY SUPPORTED IT,

AND ONE PERSON WHO WAS KIND OF NEUTRAL. THAT COMMISSION IS COMING

OUT WITH ITS FINAL REPORT ANY DAY NOW. BUT THEY DID A PRELIMINARY

REPORT TWO MONTHS AGO, AND WHAT THAT SORT OF COMMISSION THAT WAS

FROM PEOPLE WHO SUPPORTED AND OPPOSED THE BILL, CAME OUT AS THE

CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATION ABOUT WHAT SHOULD BE DONE AT THE STATE

328

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LEVEL. FIRST OF ALL, IT EMPHASIZED THAT THINGS NEED TO BE DONE FAST, THAT

THE WINDOW IS CLOSING. AND SECOND OF ALL, LARGELY CALLED FOR JUST THE

PROVISIONS THAT ARE IN THE RAISE ACT. SO I DON'T WANT IT TO BE SAID THAT

CALIFORNIA REJECTED THIS. THEY REJECTED ANOTHER MODEL AND WHAT THEY'RE

PUTTING OUT IS LARGELY IN LINE OF THIS.

MR. NORBER: YEAH, I WOULD ASSUME THAT

CALIFORNIA WOULD BE AGAINST IT SINCE THEY HAVE SILICON VALLEY AND THEY

JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT COMPANIES CONTINUE TO GROW AND TO MOVE TO

SILICON VALLEY IN ORDER TO EXPAND AI, SPECIFICALLY AI. AND YOU'RE

SAYING THAT ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL IT'S BEEN TOO SLOW TO PUT IN REGULATIONS

SUCH AS THESE PROTOCOLS?

MR. BORES: YUP.

MR. NORBER: OKAY.

MR. BORES: WELL, THEY DON'T EXIST.

MR. NORBER: THEY JUST DON'T EXIST.

MR. BORES: SO THAT'S SORT OF A SIGN THAT IT'S TOO

SLOW.

MR. NORBER: OKAY. ON THE INTERN -- LET'S SAY

INTERNET. LET'S TAKE THAT FOR AN EXAMPLE RIGHT NOW. WHO'S RIGHT NOW

REGULATING THE INTERNET, THE FCC?

MR. BORES: OH, YEAH. WELL, THE FCC PLAYS A LARGE

ROLE. I THINK A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT FEDERAL REGULATORS WOULD BE

INVOLVED IN ASPECTS OF THE INTERNET, YES.

MR. NORBER: SO WHY WOULDN'T THEY JUST TAKE THIS

TYPE OF REG -- RESOLUTIONS OR LEGISLATION THAT THEY HAVE THERE AND JUST

329

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

IMPLEMENT THAT ON THE SAME LEVEL AS AI?

MR. BORES: GREAT QUESTION FOR WHICHEVER PARTY IS

CURRENTLY CONTROLLING THESE AGENCIES.

MR. NORBER: OKAY. OKAY. CAN YOU PLEASE JUST

EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE COMPUTE COST? WHAT DOES MEAN EXACTLY?

IS THAT $100 MILLION THAT THEY'RE SPENDING?

MR. BORES: YEAH, NO, IT'S A GREAT QUESTION BECAUSE

-- BECAUSE IT'S NOT A PHRASE THAT EXISTS OFTEN OR IS USED IN -- IN -- ON THIS

FLOOR OFTEN. BUT THAT'S SPECIFICALLY, LIKE, THE -- THE ACTUAL CALCULATIONS

THAT THESE SUPERCOMPUTERS ARE DOING TO GENERATE THE MODEL, RIGHT?

THAT IS THE COMPUTE. IN YOUR COMPUTER IT'D BE A CPU, RIGHT, AND THEN

IF YOU BUY A COMPUTER WITH AN ENHANCED ONE -- AND THESE ARE USUALLY

GPUS. THAT -- THAT DETAIL ISN'T AS IMPORTANT AS -- IT'S THE ACTUAL

CALCULATIONS THAT ARE OCCURRING. AND IT'S SPECIFICALLY MONEY THAT IS

BEING SPENT DOING THOSE CALCULATIONS ON THE FINAL TRAINING RUN. SO IT'S

NOT ANY OF THE TESTS THAT YOU DO. IT'S NOT -- SOMETIMES YOU BUILD ONE,

YOU SEE HOW IT WORKS, YOU DO ANOTHER. IT'S THE FINAL THING THAT GOES

OUT; WHATEVER MONEY WAS SPENT SPECIFICALLY ON CALCULATING THAT. THAT

HAS TO EQUAL $100 MILLION. SO ANYONE THAT'S SPENDING $100 MILLION ON

THE FINAL TRAINING RUN OF COMPUTE, HAS PROBABLY SPENT $1 BILLION AT LEAST

ON THAT MODEL, RIGHT?

MR. NORBER: AS TO A LOT OF US, AI IS VERY NEW. SO

I'M JUST TRYING TO CONSIDER THAT WHAT YOU'RE EXPLAINING TO BE OPERATING

COSTS AS A BUSINESS.

MR. BORES: YES, BUT IT'S --

330

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. NORBER: (INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

MR. BORES: -- A SPECIFIC LINE ITEM OF THE OPERATING

COSTS, NOT BROAD OPERATING COSTS.

MR. NORBER: SO IF THEY'RE THAT BIG AND THEY'RE BIG

ENOUGH TO SPEND $100 MILLION ON THEIR MODELS, THEN, IN MY OPINION --

JUST TELL ME, RIGHT? HOW DID YOU GET TO $30 MILLION AS A -- AS A PENALTY,

WHICH IS A THIRD OF THEIR OPERATING COSTS. DOES THAT SOUND

(INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK) --

MR. BORES: WELL, YEAH. IT'S NOT THEIR OPERATING

COSTS BROADLY, RIGHT? IT'S A VERY SPECIFIC PIECE OF IT. AND ACTUALLY NOW

WE'RE GETTING A NEW ACCOUNTING. I'M NOT SURE, THERE MIGHT BE CAPITAL

COSTS BECAUSE IT'S TRAINING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. BUT -- BUT IN EITHER

CASE, YOU KNOW, THE -- THEY -- THE PENALTIES ARE SET UP TO BE UP TO THAT

AMOUNT, RIGHT? AND SO -- AND IT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE SEVERITY OF THE

VIOLATION. SO IF A COMPANY WERE TO SAY, WE DON'T CARE. WE'RE NOT

FOLLOWING ALL OF THIS AND WE'RE RELEASING THE MOST DANGEROUS MODEL WE

CAN FIND, RIGHT, THAT'S WHEN YOU START GETTING INTO THAT LARGE TERRITORY. IF

IT'S A SMALL THING, IT WOULD BE A SMALL ONE.

MR. NORBER: NOW, ISN'T AI AND THE MACHINE

LEARNING, ISN'T THAT SOMETHING THEY SHARE AMONGST ALL THESE

ORGANIZATIONS? DOES META AND GOOGLE AND EVERYBODY ALL TOGETHER, DO

THEY GO AND THEY SHARE TOGETHER ALL THE INFORMATION AND THAT'S HOW WE

SAW FOUR MONTHS AGO PICTURES OF AI WHICH WERE -- LOOKED -- LOOKED

NOTHING LIKE THEY DO TODAY. LIKE TODAY THEY'RE SO MUCH MORE

ADVANCED. IT SEEMS LIKE THE MACHINE LEARNING CONSTANTLY LEARNS, AND

331

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WITHIN HOURS OR DAYS WE HAVE A WHOLE TOTALLY NEW ADVANCED SYSTEM.

MR. BORES: WELL, I -- I THINK YOU HAVE A LOT OF

ADVANCED ACTORS PURSUING SIMILAR THINGS, AND ALSO JUST ROBUST

COMMUNICATION BETWEEN DIFFERENT RESEARCHERS. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT

THERE'S THE DIRECT SHARING IN THE WAY YOU'RE IMPLYING, OTHER THAN

PUBLISHING PAPERS IN THAT ASPECT. BUT CERTAINLY THEY'RE SHARING OF --

MR. NORBER: BUT THEY'RE SHARING.

MR. BORES: YEAH.

MR. NORBER: SO LET'S SAY ONE BAD ACTOR, HE IS

DEVELOPING SOMETHING THAT COULD BE -- CREATE ULTIMATELY CRITICAL HARM,

AND ANOTHER COMPANY GETS THAT INFORMATION SOMEHOW. I MEAN, WHO

WOULD BE TO BLAME IN THAT SITUATION?

MR. BORES: SO --

MR. NORBER: I'M TRYING TO GIVE YOU A VERY CRAZY

HYPOTHETICAL.

MR. BORES: NO, IT'S -- LISTEN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

BIOWEAPONS.

MR. NORBER: EXACTLY.

(INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

MR. BORES: WE CAN DISCUSS EVERYTHING HERE. THE

RESPONSIBILITY LIES WITH THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER IN THIS BILL.

MR. NORBER: RIGHT.

MR. BORES: AND SO WHOEVER DEVELOPED THAT

MODEL, THAT'S THE PERSON WHO WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT THEIR SAFETY PLAN,

WE'D BE LOOKING AT THEIR -- THEIR ASPECT. AGAIN, ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS

332

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

AFTER IT'S DEPLOYED IS ALREADY EXISTING COMMON LAW, AND LIABILITY WOULD

OF COURSE DEAL WITH THAT. BUT THIS -- WE'D BE ANALYZING THE SAFETY PLAN

OF THE INITIAL DEVELOPER.

MR. NORBER: OKAY. AND IF THEY SEE ALL OF A

SUDDEN THAT THEY'RE GOING IN THAT DIRECTION WHICH HAS TO DO WITH

BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS OR WITH TAKING DOWN AIRPLANES OR WHATNOT, THEN ALL

OF A SUDDEN THEY HAVE TO GIVE YOU A CALL -- WE HAVE TO PUT THESE SAFETY

PROTOCOLS IN PLACE BECAUSE NOW WE'RE BECOMING DANGEROUS? BECAUSE

AT WHAT POINT DO THEY UNDERSTAND --

MR. BORES: YEAH.

MR. NORBER: -- BECAUSE IT'S SO GOING FAST. I'M JUST

TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW QUICKLY SO THEY KNOW WHAT TYPE OF SAFETY

PROTOCOLS THEY NEED TO DEVELOP.

MR. BORES: WELL, ALMOST EVERY LARGE DEVELOPER -- I

THINK EVERY LARGE DEVELOPER, BUT I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT DEFINITIVELY --

ALREADY HAS A SAFETY PLAN. AND THE WAY THAT MOST OF THEM ARE

STRUCTURED -- AND MOST OF THEM ARE RELEASED PUBLICLY -- AND THE WAY

MOST OF THEM ARE STRUCTURED SAY, THESE ARE THE KINDS OF TESTS WE WILL DO

TO DETERMINE THE CAPABILITIES OF THE MODEL, AND THEN WE'LL TAKE CERTAIN

ACTIONS BASED ON THE CAPABILITIES. SO WHETHER THAT ACTION IS RELEASING

IT OR NOT OR WHETHER THAT REACTION IS, WE'RE GONNA LIMIT ACCESS TO IT AND

MONITOR IT MUCH MORE CLOSELY OR WE'LL PUT ADDITIONAL (INDISCERNIBLE),

THEY GET TO DESIGN THE TEST. THEY GET TO DESIGN THE MITIGATIONS FOR THE

HARMS. THEY JUST NEED TO HAVE SOME PLAN TO DO THAT. THIS ISN'T EXACT,

BUT IT'S SOMEWHAT ANALOGOUS TO SAYING THE TOBACCO COMPANIES KNEW

333

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

CIGARETTES CAUSED CANCER BUT RELEASED -- DENIED IT PUBLICLY AND RELEASED

IT ANYWAY. OR THE OIL COMPANIES KNEW --

MR. NORBER: RIGHT.

MR. BORES: -- THEY WERE CAUSING CLIMATE CHANGE

BUT DENIED IT AND RELEASED IT ANYWAY. THIS IS SAYING IF YOU'RE FAILING

YOUR OWN TESTS AND YOUR OWN TESTS ARE SAYING, HEY, THERE'S A RISK HERE,

YOU PROBABLY SHOULDN'T RELEASE IT.

MR. NORBER: IT'S A GOOD EXAMPLE YOU GIVE RIGHT

NOW BECAUSE IF WE THINK ABOUT THE INTERNET OR SOCIAL MEDIA, WHICH WE

JUST CREATED A FEW YEARS AGO IN 2007, AND RIGHT NOW WE UNDERSTAND THE

HARMS OF IT. ESPECIALLY THE MENTAL HARMS THAT WE HAVE IN THIS. SO

MAYBE WE SHOULD DO SAFETY PROTOCOLS FOR THAT, ALSO.

MR. BORES: WE'D LOVE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

YESTERDAY WE HAD A BUNCH OF YOUTH ADVOCATES UP TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE

MISSED THE BOAT WITH SOCIAL MEDIA --

MR. NORBER: RIGHT.

MR. BORES: -- AND WE'VE HAD ALL THESE HARMS AND

LET'S NOT MISS IT AGAIN WITH AI.

MR. NORBER: NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MR. BORES: THANK YOU.

MR. NORBER: ON THE BILL, SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. NORBER: IT'S JUST -- IT'S A VERY INTERESTING AND

FASCINATING SUBJECT, AND I THANK THE SPONSOR FOR PUTTING THIS FORWARD.

THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND AND WHAT WE'RE --

334

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE GETTING INTO IN TERMS OF AI. AT THE SAME TIME, I

BELIEVE THAT WE ALSO PROTECT BUSINESSES WHO WANT TO MOVE TO THIS STATE

AND TO GROW. ESPECIALLY IN THIS FIELD WHERE THERE'S SO MUCH

COMPETITION BETWEEN STATES, BETWEEN COUNTRIES; CHINA, IRAN, WHATNOT.

SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE STILL ALLOW THEM AND PUSHED THEM TO

COME TO NEW YORK STATE TO DO BUSINESS, AND -- AND EXPAND AI

CAPABILITIES IN OUR STATE.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THANK YOU, SIR.

WE HAVE MR. OTIS.

MR. OTIS: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. AND I

THANK THE SPONSOR. AND PEOPLE SHOULD BE AWARE, THE SPONSOR'S WORKED

VERY HARD ON THIS BILL, WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH OUR SCIENCE AND

TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE STAFF --

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: ARE YOU ON THE

BILL, SIR?

MR. OTIS: PARDON ME?

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: ARE YOU ON THE

BILL?

MR. OTIS: I'M ON THE BILL. I WANT -- I WANT TO GIVE

MR. BORES TIME TO RELAX. SO WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH THE SCIENCE AND

TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE STAFF ON AMENDMENTS TO THE BILL. WORKED WITH

OUTSIDE GROUPS THAT HAD CRITIQUES ABOUT THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, AND

MODIFICATIONS WERE MADE. THIS WAS A B-PRINT ON THIS BILL. AND SO --

TO BE COMMENDED FOR THAT.

335

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. BLUMENCRANZ MENTIONED THE CALIFORNIA BILL.

EVEN FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS BILL HERE, MR.

BORES' BILL IS MUCH NARROWER THAN THE BILL THAT WAS VETOED IN

CALIFORNIA. REALLY A DIFFERENT BILL FOCUSED ON HIGH-RISK SITUATIONS AND

-- AND CURATED THAT WAY TO -- TO HARMS.

WHAT I'D SAY MORE GENERALLY IS BILLS LIKE THIS ARE

HIGHLY TECHNICAL. THEY TAKE A LOT OF TIME. THEY TAKE A LOT OF RIGOR.

THEY ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. SO THE ISSUE WAS -- WAS WELL, WHAT ARE WE

GONNA DO A YEAR FROM NOW OR SIX MONTHS FROM NOW. THE REALITY IS,

LEGISLATION LIKE THIS IS GONNA HAVE TO BE MONITORED EVERY SESSION AND

UPDATED AS THE TECHNOLOGY CHANGES, AND THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. THAT IS

EXPECTED. THIS IS -- THESE TOPICS ARE VERY CHALLENGING FOR LAWMAKERS IN

THE UNITED STATES AND AROUND THE WORLD BECAUSE THEY -- THEY MOVE

MOST QUICKLY. BUT I THINK ONE CAUTIONARY NOTE, I WOULD SAY, MOST OF

THE PEOPLE THAT WRITE ON THESE ISSUES, INDICATE THAT THE ONE THING THAT

WE CANNOT DO IS LET THESE TECHNOLOGIES GO UNREGULATED WITHOUT

GUIDELINES. THE -- THE DISASTER SITUATION IS -- IS THAT THIS -- THIS AREA JUST

TAKES US OVER WITHOUT THE KIND OF LEGISLATIVE ACTION THAT WE'RE DOING

HERE. THIS WILL BE A LEADING ACT AROUND THE COUNTRY. THANK YOU FOR

DOING THAT. WHO KNOWS WHAT WASHINGTON IS GONNA COME UP WITH. WE

HAVE TO PROTECT OURSELVES, PROTECT OUR PEOPLE, AND HOPEFULLY BE A GUIDE

TO INDUSTRY AROUND THE WORLD BY LAYING DOWN A GOOD FRAMEWORK HERE.

THIS IS A GOOD BILL. I'LL BE VOTING YES. I RECOMMENDED

A YES -- RECOMMEND A YES VOTE FOR EVERYBODY. I'LL TELL YOU, CAREFULLY

CRAFTED, NARROW TO THE NEED. THIS IS A GOOD BILL. WE SHOULD ADOPT IT

336

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

TONIGHT. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THANK YOU, MR.

OTIS.

NEXT UP, MS. WALSH.

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

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. BORES: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THE SPONSOR

YIELDS.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND FULL

DISCLOSURE, YOU KNOW, AS I BELIEVE YOU KNOW FROM OUR PREVIOUS

CONVERSATIONS KIND OF OFFLINE, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I KNOW A LOT

ABOUT, AND I'M NOT REALLY COMFORTABLE WITH IT. SO JUST -- IF YOU COULD

POSSIBLY JUST DUMB IT DOWN, YOU'RE NOT GONNA OFFEND ME AT ALL BECAUSE

THAT'S REALLY WHAT I'M GONNA NEED TO GET THROUGH THIS.

MR. BORES: I WOULD DISAGREE OF YOUR

CHARACTERIZATION THAT YOU'VE GIVEN OF YOUR OWN KNOWLEDGE, BASED ON

EARLIER CONVERSATIONS.

MS. WALSH: NO, IT'S REALLY PRETTY LOW. BUT LET --

LET'S GO ANYWAY. LET'S GO. ALL RIGHT.

SO, ONE OF THE THINGS -- JUST -- I -- I GUESS AS AN

ATTORNEY THINKING ABOUT THIS, AND YOU AND I HAD DISCUSSED THAT THE --

THE GOLD STANDARD SOLUTION HERE WOULD BE A SOLUTION AT THE -- AT THE

337

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

FEDERAL LEVEL, RIGHT? I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO SEE.

MR. BORES: YES.

MS. WALSH: BUT WE HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET.

MR. BORES: YEP.

MS. WALSH: IS THERE ANYTHING IN DRAFT YET THAT YOU

KNOW OF? ISN'T IT PART OF THE BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL OR AM I WRONG?

MR. BORES: NO. IN FACT, THE BIG -- I'LL USE THE WORD

-- BEAUTIFUL BILL --

MS. WALSH: WELL, WE ALL KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.

MR. BORES: YES, YES, YES. I WILL USE ITS FORMAL

NAME -- IS, IN FACT, TAKING A STEP TO TRY TO BAN STATES FROM TAKING ANY

REGULATION IN THIS SPACE. SO I ACTUALLY THINK IT'S GOING THE OTHER WAY.

THERE ARE DRAFTS -- THERE ARE BIPARTISAN DRAFTS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL TO DO

SOME PIECES OF -- OF AI REGULATION, WHICH I THINK IS ENCOURAGING. AS --

AS WE'VE DISCUSSED AND AS THE SENATE SHOWED EARLIER TODAY, THIS IS A

REALLY A BIPARTISAN ISSUE. BUT GIVEN THE SPEED OF AI AND THE RISK THAT

INDUSTRY AND EXPERTS ARE SAYING COULD COME THIS YEAR OR NEXT YEAR --

MS. WALSH: YEAH.

MR. BORES: -- IT'S REALLY SOMETHING WE CAN'T AFFORD

TO WAIT ON.

MS. WALSH: NO, I KNOW. AND THAT'S WHAT'S

TERRIFYING TO ME, BECAUSE -- AND I'VE SAID IT BEFORE, I JUST THINK THAT THIS

-- IT'S NOT JUST US HERE IN THE ASSEMBLY, IT'S REALLY ANY GOVERNMENT.

YOU KNOW, IT'S A DELIBERATIVE, KIND OF SLOW-MOVING PROCESS, GENERALLY

SPEAKING, AND SOMETIMES IT TAKES A COUPLE OF SESSIONS TO GET BILLS DONE.

338

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WE'VE ALL HAD THAT EXPERIENCE. SO IT -- IT'S TERRIFYING TO ME TO THINK THAT

THE PACE OF TECHNOLOGY IN THIS AREA COULD SO QUICKLY OUTPACE OUR ABILITY

TO KEEP UP WITH IT. SO I'M MINDFUL OF THAT AS I ASK THESE QUESTIONS.

BUT -- SO, I BELIEVE THAT WE HAD SPOKEN BEFORE THAT THERE WAS ALMOST

LIKE A CONSORTIUM OF STATES THAT WAS TRYING TO WORK ON THIS ISSUE

TOGETHER. SO WHAT HAPPENED WITH THAT?

MR. BORES: IT DEPENDS EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE

REFERRING TO, BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW ATTEMPTS AT THIS. BUT -- SO

MAYBE IF YOU CLARIFY I -- I COULD ANSWER THE QUESTION.

MS. WALSH: YEAH. SO, I MEAN, LIKE, WE -- I

BELIEVE IT WAS ALREADY MENTIONED ABOUT THE CALIFORNIA --

MR. BORES: YES.

MS. WALSH: -- THE SITUATION IN CALIFORNIA, AND THEN

THERE'S COLORADO, RIGHT?

MR. BORES: YES.

MS. WALSH: SO, BUT THIS BILL THAT WE'RE TAKING UP

TONIGHT, THAT DOESN'T MATCH COLORADO'S BILL, RIGHT?

MR. BORES: CORRECT. IT DOES NOT. AND -- AND I

WOULD SAY, SO I -- I WOULD NEVER -- USING THE WORD CONSORTIUM WOULD

BE FAR TOO GRANDIOSE FOR WHAT I'M ABOUT TO DESCRIBE, BUT I AM ON A TEXT

THREAD WITH LEGISLATORS IN SIX STATES THAT ARE WORKING ON THIS AND WE --

MS. WALSH: LIKE A MULTISTATE GROUP --

MR. BORES: YEAH, YEAH.

MS. WALSH: -- OF INTERESTED LEGISLATORS; IS THAT FAIR?

OKAY. SO BUT WHY DOESN'T THIS BILL THEN ALIGN WITH, SAY, COLORADO'S,

339

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WHICH PASSED, IF THE STATED GOAL OF THE MULTISTATE GROUP OF LEGISLATORS

WORKING ON THESE BILLS WAS TO AVOID A PATCHWORK OF OBLIGATIONS FOR

COMPANIES THAT ARE BUILDING AI TOOLS?

MR. BORES: SO -- SO I THINK WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING

TO WAS -- WAS THERE WAS THIS MULTISTATE WORKING GROUP THAT THE FUTURE

OF PRIVACY FORUM WAS INVOLVED IN AND CONNECTICUT WAS INVOLVED IN.

AND COLORADO PASSED A CONSUMER PROTECTION BILL THAT BECAME A MODEL

BILL THAT COULD BE USED ELSEWHERE, AND I ACTUALLY CURRENTLY CARRY A BILL

WITH SENATOR GONZALEZ THAT IS BASED ON THAT MODEL BILL. COLORADO DID

NOT DO A FRONTIER AI BILL THAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON HERE. THE ONLY THING

THAT I THINK THAT CAME CLOSE IN PREVIOUS SESSIONS WAS CALIFORNIA; WE'VE

ALREADY DISCUSSED THE DIFFERENCES QUITE A BIT.

MS. WALSH: RIGHT.

MR. BORES: THERE HAVE BEEN, AS I SAID, I THINK

ABOUT EIGHT STATES THAT HAD SOME VERSION OF A FRONTIER MODEL BILL THIS

YEAR.

MS. WALSH: SO IT'S KIND OF -- IT'S KIND OF LIKE

APPLES AND ORANGES THEN. THAT -- THAT COLORADO BILL WAS JUST A DIFFERENT

BILL.

MR. BORES: CORRECT.

MS. WALSH: IT -- IT'S NOT LIKE IT WAS A -- A DIFFERENT

APPROACH TO THE SAME PROBLEM, IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT BILL.

MR. BORES: ABSOLUTELY.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT, I UNDERSTAND THAT.

SO COULD YOU HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND -- I UNDERSTAND

340

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THE CONCEPT OF, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, OF THE FRONTIER MODEL, AND I

UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF, LIKE, HOW MUCH OF AN INVESTMENT THE

COMPANY WOULD HAVE HAD TO PUT INTO DEVELOPMENT IN ORDER TO QUALIFY.

BUT ARE WE ONLY TALKING ABOUT -- WE'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT NEW YORK

STATE COMPANIES THAT ARE DOING THIS WORK, ARE WE OR ARE WE?

MR. BORES: NO.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

MR. BORES: ANY COMPANY THAT IS DEPLOYING ITS

PRODUCT IN NEW YORK.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. IT COULD BE --

MR. BORES: SO THEY DON'T TO BE HEADQUARTERED

HERE. YEAH, IT WOULD APPLY TO EVERYONE.

MS. WALSH: WOULD THEY BE U.S. COMPANIES OR

COULD THEY BE FROM ANYWHERE?

MR. BORES: IF THEY ARE DEPLOYING THEIR PRODUCT IN

NEW YORK, THEY CAN BE FROM ANYWHERE.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. AND COULD YOU KIND OF -- COULD

YOU GIVE ME A SENSE OF -- IN THIS FIELD OF COMPANIES THAT WOULD MEET

THIS CRITERIA, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT U.S. COMPANIES VERSUS FOREIGN

COMPANIES, LIKE, PERCENTAGE-WISE? ARE THERE MORE FOREIGN ONES? ARE

THERE -- IS IT ABOUT EVEN?

MR. BORES: NO, I -- I THINK IT'S MOSTLY AMERICAN

COMPANIES --

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

MR. BORES: -- THAT ARE REALLY AT THE FOREFRONT OF

341

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THIS. YEAH.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SO, HOW -- SO I NOTED THAT GOVERNOR HOCHUL, WHEN

SHE GAVE HER STATE OF THE STATE MESSAGE, I THINK, OR MAYBE IT WAS LIKE A

SUBSEQUENT PRESS CONFERENCE, MADE A REALLY BIG DEAL ABOUT SAYING THAT

NEW YORK IS GONNA LEAD, YOU KNOW, IN AI.

MR. BORES: ABSOLUTELY.

MS. WALSH: SO DOES THIS BILL HELP FURTHER THAT GOAL

OR NOT?

MR. BORES: I -- I WOULD ARGUE THAT IT DOES. AND I

-- I THINK THE GOVERNOR HAS BEEN FANTASTIC IN THAT REGARD OF SETTING UP

NEW YORK IN THAT WAY. I THINK EMPIRE AI WAS QUITE VISIONARY, AND WE

DESIGNED THIS BILL TO MAKE SURE IT IN NO WAY INTERFERED WITH THAT. WE

EXEMPTED ACADEMIC RESEARCH, AND I SPOKE WITH EMPIRE AI AND HAD

SPOKEN IN FAVOR OF IT QUITE A BIT. SO I THINK NEW YORK IS LEADING AND

WILL CONTINUE TO LEAD. THIS IS A VERY LIGHT-TOUCH BILL. I THINK THE THING

THAT WOULD MOST SET BACK AI INNOVATION OR AI RESEARCH WOULD BE ONE

OF THESE CATASTROPHIC INCIDENTS HAPPENING. AND SO I VIEW IT AS VERY

PRO-INNOVATION TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T HAVE THE EXTREME WORST CASE

OCCUR.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. SO WHEN YOU SAY "LIGHT TOUCH",

I MEAN, DID THE B-PRINT, THOUGH, STILL CONTAIN THE PENALTIES? FINES AND

PENALTIES?

MR. BORES: YES.

MS. WALSH: THAT DOESN'T SEEM SUPER LIGHT TOUCH TO

342

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ME. I MEAN, THAT --

MR. BORES: WELL, I THINK AMAZON'S QUARTERLY PROFIT

WAS, LIKE, $30 BILLION. MICROSOFT, LIKE, $100 BILLION.

MS. WALSH: WELL, THEY COULD PROBABLY AFFORD IT.

I'M JUST SAYING.

MR. BORES: AND YOU'RE SAYING AND UP TO 10

MILLION OR UP TO 30 MILLION FOR THE MOST EXTREME VIOLATIONS OF MAYBE

HELPING TO INCREASE THE RISK OF 100 DEATHS OR A BILLION IN DAMAGE?

MS. WALSH: WELL, WE COULD TALK ABOUT

COST-BENEFIT. YOU KNOW, THAT'S A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION. BUT I'M JUST -- I

WAS JUST THINKING ABOUT, LIKE, SOME OF THE OPPOSITION TO THE BILL TALKS

ABOUT HOW BY TYING FINES TO A COMPANY'S TOTAL COMPUTE SPEND AND

PERSONNEL HEAD COUNT, THIS BILL PENALIZES THE VERY RESOURCES THAT DRIVE

AI RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. SO WOULD YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT BE THE

FINES ARE SO MINISCULE COMPARED TO THE TOTAL VALUE OF THESE COMPANIES

THAT IT'S A BLIP AND IT'S NOT GONNA REALLY AFFECT INNOVATION?

MR. BORES: COMPARED TO THE VALUE, ALSO COMPARED

TO THE POTENTIAL HARMS. BUT I -- I DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT SPECIFIC

OPPOSITION WAS RELEASED. THE FIRST VERSION OF THIS BILL, THE PENALTIES

WERE A PERCENTAGE OF THE SPEND, SO IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN REFERENCING THAT.

MS. WALSH: IT WAS ON THE ORIGINAL PRINT.

(INDISCERNIBLE/CROSS-TALK).

MR. BORES: RIGHT. SO WE -- WE'VE EDITED --

MS. WALSH: OKAY.

MR. BORES: -- IT TO MAKE IT FIX TO ADDRESS THAT

343

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

DIRECTLY.

MS. WALSH: OKAY. GOT IT. WELL, I APPRECIATE YOUR

WILLINGNESS TO CONTINUE TO AMEND THE BILL TO ADDRESS, YOU KNOW,

CONCERNS THAT ARE BEING RAISED AS THEY'RE BEING RAISED. THAT'S A -- THAT'S

A GOOD THING.

MR. BORES: THANK YOU.

MS. WALSH: ALL RIGHT. I -- I MEAN, I THINK THAT -- I

THINK THAT YOU'VE ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD, AND SO I APPRECIATE

YOUR TIME. THANK YOU.

MR. BORES: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THANK YOU, MS.

WALSH.

MR. CHANG.

MR. CHANG: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MR. BORES: YES.

MR. CHANG: WELL, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND

IT'S BEEN A COUPLE YEARS SINCE I RETIRED IN -- IN THE NAVY, BUT FOR OVER 20

YEARS IN THE NAVY I WORKED IN INTELLIGENCE, CYBERSECURITY,

CYBERWARFARE. IN INTELLIGENCE FIELD, ESPECIALLY INFORMATION WARFARE FOR

OVER 20 YEARS. AND AI HAS BEEN AROUND FOR ABOUT 30 YEARS. ACTUALLY

MORE THAN THAT. BUT OTHER FORMS OF PROGRAMMING.

MR. BORES: YES.

344

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. CHANG: BUT THIS RAISE ACT, HOW DO YOU SEE

THE PARAMETERS TO SAFEGUARD THIS ONCE IT'S BEEN IMPLEMENTED? WHAT

KIND OF PARAMETERS YOU -- YOU ENVISION WITH THIS -- WITH THIS BILL?

MR. BORES: WHICH PARAMETERS ARE WE PROVIDING --

MR. CHANG: SAFETY ITSELF, FOR EXAMPLE. YOU

MENTIONED ABOUT SAFETY.

MR. BORES: YEAH. SO WHAT IT ASKS THE DEVELOPERS

TO DO IS TO HAVE A SAFETY PLAN, AND WE HAVE SOME STANDARDS FOR WHAT

THAT PLAN NEEDS TO CONTAIN; CYBERSECURITY, TESTING ON CRITICAL HARMS, ET

CETERA, TO -- AGAIN, IF THEIR OWN TESTS ARE SHOWING THAT IT HAS A

REASONABLE RISK OF A CRITICAL HARM TO AMEND THEIR PROCEDURES AND TO

DISCLOSE CRITICAL SAFETY INCIDENTS QUICKLY SO THAT WE KNOW ABOUT THEM

AND CAN PREPARE.

MR. CHANG: BECAUSE FROM MY TRAINING FROM WHAT

-- WHAT I UNDERSTAND IN AI AND CYBER, BECAUSE CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE IS

BASED ON INFORMATION. AND AS IS AI MACHINE-LEARNING ITSELF AND

FRONTIER IS THE MOST ADVANCED MODEL CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW, UNLESS THEY

CHANGE ANOTHER -- ANOTHER -- ANOTHER LABEL. BUT ALL I CAN SEE FROM LARGE

INSTITUTION DOING -- PROBABLY NOT DOING ANYTHING NEFARIOUS, THEY WANT

TO SELL TO CONSUMERS OR TO BUSINESSES TO HOPEFULLY TO ENHANCE THEIR --

THEIR PROFIT. I MEAN, I CAN SEE AI INTO MARKET. I CAN SEE INTO A FASHION

INDUSTRY. I CAN SEE INTO AUDIO-VISUAL BECAUSE THEY CAN MANIPULATE

ANIMATION. OKAY? BUT I DON'T SEE DEATHS.

MR. BORES: I -- I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU. I'M NOT

SAYING THAT ANY DEVELOPER IS TRYING TO CAUSE DEATHS, CERTAINLY, AND I

345

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THINK MOST HAVE ACTED RESPONSIBILITY AND PROBABLY WILL CONTINUE. BUT

WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RISKS OF THIS SCALE THAT ALL OF THE COMPANIES

ACKNOWLEDGE ARE REAL CONCERNS WITH THEIR PRODUCTS AND THAT LARGELY

THEY ALREADY TEST FOR, IT REALLY JUST TAKES ONE PERSON NOT BEING

INTENTIONALLY BAD, BUT BEING UNINTENTIONALLY SLOPPY OR NOT UP TO THE

STANDARDS THAT NEED TO BE. AND IT'S EASY TO TALK ABOUT SAFETY AND DESIGN

A SAFETY PLAN WHEN YOU'RE NOT HELD TO IT. BUT WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE

IS THAT WHEN YOU'RE CHASING YOUR NEXT QUARTERLY PROFIT OR WHEN THE RACE

FOR THE NEXT BIG ADVANCED AI IS THERE AND THERE'S AN EXTREME ECONOMIC

INCENTIVE TO TAKE A SHORTCUT ON YOUR SAFETY PLAN, THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT

INCENTIVE IS ELIMINATED.

MR. CHANG: AI IS BASICALLY PROGRAMMING. AND --

AND UNTIL -- UNLESS THEY -- I WILL BE MORE CAUTIOUS ON SMALLER COMPANY

AND -- AND OTHER STATE ACTORS, OTHER COUNTRIES WRITING PROGRAMMING AND

TRYING TO SCAM OR STEAL MONEY OR -- OR SECRETS OR TRADE SECRETS.

(INDISCERNIBLE) WILL SEE PROBABLY MORE REALISTIC.

MR. BORES: I -- I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. CYBERSECURITY

IS A BIG RISK WITH THESE. WE'VE SEEN MANY OF THESE MODELS ALREADY

USED TO CREATE CYBER ATTACKS. SO, YES, THAT -- THAT IS A REAL THREAT IN THE

WILD FOR SURE.

MR. CHANG: BECAUSE, LIKE YOU MENTIONED IN

CHINA, IRAN OR -- OR EVEN NORTH KOREA, WHY THEY CAN DO SUCCESSFULLY

AND I DON'T THINK WE CAN BECAUSE THEY CONTROL THE INTERNET. THEY

CONTROL THE INFORMATION FLOW. THEY CONTROL THE IPS. THEY CAN TURN ON

AND OFF FROM YOUR -- FROM YOUR DESK. WE DON'T DO THAT. SO IT'S -- I

346

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MEAN, WHAT YOU'RE TRYING DO IS BOLD AND NOBLE, BUT I -- I CAN'T EVEN SEE

THAT OUR GOVERNMENT WOULD TRY TO TURN ON AND OFF OUR IPS, UNLIKE CHINA

OR IRAN.

MR. BORES: WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS WHAT

YOU'RE GETTING AT, BUT THERE IS NO KILL SWITCH IN THE BILL LIKE THERE WAS IN

-- IN THE CALIFORNIA VERSION. THIS ISN'T ABOUT TURNING ON OR OFF

ANYTHING. IT DOESN'T REALLY GIVE THE GOVERNMENT ANY DIRECT CONTROL OF

MODELS OR MODEL RELEASES. IT'S SIMPLY SETTING UP THE STANDARDS. THE

COMPANIES DESIGN THEIR OWN SSP WITHIN SOME BASIC -- I'M SORRY, SAFETY

AND SECURITY PLAN, WITHIN SOME BASIC PARAMETERS THAT ARE DEFINED IN THE

BILL AND THEN WE MAKE SURE THEY FOLLOW IT.

MR. CHANG: WE HAVE A LOT OF PROGRAMMERS IN THE

UNITED STATES, BUT NOT MANY PROGRAMMERS UNDERSTAND POLICIES AND

WRITE POLICIES. THEY'RE VERY, VERY FEW, EVEN IN AI.

SO YOU HAVE A WORKING GROUP THAT TALKS ABOUT THIS?

BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY WAY I CAN SEE TO CRAFT THIS BILL, BECAUSE YOU JUST

CAN'T BRING THIS THING OUT OF -- OUT OF THIN AIR WITHOUT PRECEDENCE. AND

WE DON'T HAVE PRECEDENCE RIGHT NOW.

MR. BORES: WELL, AS I MENTIONED, I'VE SPOKEN WITH

A LOT OF LEGISLATORS IN A LOT OF STATES. I'VE SPOKEN WITH MANY LARGE

DEVELOPERS THAT WOULD BE COVERED BY THIS EXTENSIVELY OVER THE PAST

YEAR. I'VE SPOKEN WITH EXPERTS THAT INVENTED AI AND HAVE BUILT AI.

THIS HAS BEEN A VERY COLLABORATIVE PROCESS. WE'VE TAKEN A LOT OF INPUT

INTO DESIGNING IT.

MR. CHANG: HAVE ANYTHING FROM -- FROM THE DOD

347

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

GETS INVOLVED WITH THAT? BECAUSE THEY HAVE DEEP MONEY, THEY HAVE

LARGE -- THEY EMPLOY LARGE HUNDRED-POUND BRAINS TO FIGURE A LOT OF

THINGS OUT. AND THEY ALWAYS COLLABORATIVE WITH -- WITH THE INDUSTRY.

HAVE YOU EVER CONSULT WITH THE DOD?

MR. BORES: I HAVE NOT HAD DIRECT CONVERSATIONS

WITH DOD ABOUT THIS. I WOULD WELCOME THOSE CONVERSATIONS. YOU

MENTIONED AT THE START ALSO, OBVIOUSLY YOUR -- YOUR LONG CAREER IN THE

NAVY, WHICH -- WHICH I THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE THERE. AND AS YOU

KNOW, THE NAVY WAS ACTUALLY PRETTY INSTRUMENTAL IN A LOT OF EARLY

COMPUTER SCIENCE DEVELOPMENT AS WELL. REAR ADMIRAL GRACE HOPPER

MR. CHANG: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. BORES: -- FOR THE LONGEST TIME THE

HIGHEST-RANKING WOMAN EVER IN THE MILITARY SERVICE, ALSO HELPED TO

INVENT THE FIRST COMPILER AND -- AND INVENT. AND SO IN A COMMENT I

DON'T KNOW WHY I'M SAYING ON THE FLOOR AND PROBABLY WON'T LIVE DOWN,

BUT MY WIFE AND I, TWO COMPUTER SCIENTISTS, NAMED OUR CAT GRACE

HOPPER. SO IT'S A LONG HISTORY THAT WE'RE PROUD TO SUPPORT.

MR. CHANG: IT'S A LONG HISTORY. SHE -- SHE

INVENTED FORTRAN. YES, I READ ABOUT THEIR HISTORY AND -- AND, YOU

KNOW, I WAS IN WASHINGTON AND I WORKED IN THAT FIELD DIRECTLY IN

WASHINGTON FOR -- FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. SO I SEEN HER BIOGRAPHY, I

SEEN HER -- WE CELEBRATED HER IN THE NAVY. SO...

MR. BORES: A REMARKABLE INNOVATOR.

MR. CHANG: VERY, VERY REMARKABLE. AND I'M JUST

348

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

-- YOU KNOW, WITH JUST -- YOU KNOW, I -- I WORKED IN THOSE -- I WORKED

WITH THOSE GUYS, THE ANALYSTS WHO -- WHO DOES THIS. BECAUSE I'M -- IM

NOT A PROGRAMMER. BUT I APPRECIATE THOSE GUYS. THEY CAN PICK UP A

PROGRAM AND -- PROGRAM CODE AND IDENTIFY THERE'S A PROBLEM HERE.

THERE'S A LEAK HERE. THOSE GUYS ARE SO SMART. AND -- AND I WISH YOU

HAVE -- I DON'T KNOW WE HAVE ANYTHING -- CONVERSATION WITH DARPA

AND -- AND DOD, BECAUSE THEY ARE LEADING ON THIS ON THIS BECAUSE -- TO

HELP US CRAFT THE BILL. IN -- IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IT'S BASED ON

POLICIES. POLICIES ARE EASILY WRITTEN. THEY DON'T NEED TO HAVE

CONGRESS TO -- TO PASS A BILL. SO THAT WAS VERY EASY FOR THEM. AND

EVEN THOUGH WE PASS THIS BILL, WHAT AGENCY IN THE STATE ENVISION TO

ABLE ENFORCE THIS? BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE FAITH IN OUR -- OUR AGENCY,

BOTH CITY AND STATE, TO HAVE THOSE GUYS SMART ENOUGH TO -- TO ENFORCE

THIS.

MR. BORES: I HAVE A DIFFERENT VIEW OF OUR

AGENCIES, BUT -- BUT YOU'LL BE HAPPY TO KNOW THAT THERE'S NO RULEMAKING

OR REGULATION AS PART OF THIS. WE SPECIFICALLY LAY OUT WHAT SHOULD BE

HAPPENING AND NOT. AND THERE'S ALSO NO PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION, NO NEW

PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION CREATED HERE. THE ONLY ENFORCEMENT IS THROUGH

THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.

MR. CHANG: I HOPE TO HAVE SOME EXPERTISE IN THERE

BECAUSE IT'S -- IT'S REALLY TECHNICAL, IT'S REALLY VERY SPECIFIC. THE ONLY

THING I CAN SEE AS ENDANGER US IS -- IS SCAMMING AND STEALING OUR

SECRETS AND MONEY. BUT ALSO, ENFORCEMENT. IF WE DO JUST LIKE BERNIE

MADOFF AND HIS PONZI, IT TOOK YEARS JUST TO FIND THAT. AND -- AND IT

349

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

TAKES PROFESSIONAL INVESTMENT HOUSE TO UNDERSTAND HOW HE ABLE TO CRAFT

THIS. SO I DON'T KNOW WE HAVE SOMEBODY TO DETECT THIS UNLESS

SOMEBODY START TO COMPLAIN.

MR. BORES: I -- I'VE ACTUALLY SPOKEN TO MANY OF THE

EXPERTS IN THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. I'M QUITE CONFIDENT IN

THEIR GRASP OF THESE ISSUES. BUT I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. I -- I THINK A LOT OF

THESE SCAMS ARE HAPPENING. I THINK THIS IS COMPLICATED. ONE OF THE

THINGS I'M MOST EXCITED ABOUT WITH AI IS SOME OF THE CYBERSECURITY

DEFENSE THAT IT'LL HELP TO ENABLE. I MEAN, THIS -- THIS IS A TOOL THAT'S QUITE

POWERFUL. AND TO YOUR COMMENT EARLIER ABOUT CODERS AND AI, I WOULD

WELCOME THAT CONVERSATION AT ANY POINT. I'D ALSO POINT OUT, AS

MENTIONED IN THE SPONSOR'S MEMO, THAT ONE OF THE THINGS AI IS BEST AT IS

CODING. AND ALL OF THESE COMPANIES ARE SAYING THAT THEY -- MORE AND

MORE OF THE CODE THAT GOES INTO PRODUCTION WAS WRITTEN BY AI ITSELF.

SO THE SPEED AT WHICH THIS THIS IS ACCELER -- IS -- IS HAPPENING, THAT IS

ITSELF ACCELERATED.

MR. CHANG: I MEAN, I WAS ALMOST CLOSE TO GOING TO

GOING TO CODING SCHOOL MYSELF WHEN I RETIRED, RIGHT BEFORE I HAD THIS

NEW GOVERNMENT JOB. SERIOUSLY, I WAS ABOUT TO GO INTO WALL STREET

AND -- AND ENROLL IN THE CODING SCHOOL MYSELF.

MR. BORES: THIS -- THIS SOUNDS LIKE A JOKE, BUT I

MEAN IT SINCERELY, IN THE OFF-SESSION LET'S DO A HACKATHON.

MR. CHANG: YES. SO -- AND YOU MENTIONED ABOUT

TRAINING. OKAY? WHAT LEVEL OF TRAINING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ABOUT THIS

AI? I CAN ONLY ENVISION IS THREE AREAS, IS IN THE INDUSTRY, PERHAPS

350

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

SCHOOLS, AND PROGRAMMERS WHO HAVE SELF CONTROL, THEY'RE DOING THE

RIGHT THING. BUT WHAT KIND OF TRAINING DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD APPLY

THAT COULD PREVENT THIS SAFE -- I GUESS SAFETY ITSELF?

MR. BORES: DO -- DO YOU MEAN TRAINING OF THE

MODEL OR TRAINING OF, LIKE, HUMAN BEINGS THAT ARE INTERACTING WITH THIS?

MR. CHANG: WELL, OF COURSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A

HUMAN BEING TO START OFF WITH WITH PROGRAMMING.

MR. BORES: YUP.

MR. CHANG: SO YOU -- YOU KNOW, PART OF YOUR BILL

IS TRAINING. SO WHERE -- WHERE THE TRAINING WOULD BE AT AND WOULD WE

BE FUNDING THIS TRAINING OR IT WOULD BE INDUSTRY FUNDING THEMSELVES?

MR. BORES: THE INDUSTRY IS FUNDING IT THEMSELVES,

ALTHOUGH I THINK THERE WERE -- NOT GERMANE TO THIS BILL, BUT THERE WERE

SOME PROVISIONS IN THE BUDGET THAT WE'RE HELPING TO ENCOURAGE MORE

START-UPS IN NEW YORK AND MORE AI WORK AND RETRAINING IN THIS FIELD.

SO I THINK THAT IS A GOOD USE OF GOVERNMENT DOLLARS, BUT THAT IS NOT

SOMETHING THAT'S COVERED HERE.

MR. CHANG: MAYBE YOU SHOULD ADD IN THERE IN THE

BILL LATER ON IS A CODE OF CONDUCT IN THE INDUSTRY, CREATE A CODE OF

CONDUCT. OKAY? BECAUSE --

MR. BORES: THAT'S AN INTERESTING SUGGESTION. WE

SHOULD TALK ABOUT IT.

MR. CHANG: I MEAN, JUST LIKE THE TEN

COMMANDMENTS. YOU'VE GOT -- YOU HAVE THE TEN COMMANDMENTS,

YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THINGS, NOT SUPPOSED TO. SO WE -- IF YOU CODIFY

351

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THIS CODE OF CONDUCT, FORCE THE INDUSTRY TO DO THAT, AND IF THERE IS AN

INVESTIGATION YOU'VE GOT A CODE OF CONDUCT ALREADY LISTED OUT WHAT

YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO, AND THAT'S ONE BASIS THAT HELP OUT THE LAW

ENFORCEMENT ITSELF.

MR. BORES: I'D LOVE TO TALK TO YOU MORE ABOUT THAT.

MR. CHANG: OKAY. CERTAINLY WILL. AND THAT'S ALL I

HAVE. THANK YOU.

MR. BORES: THANK YOU.

MR. CHANG: AND ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: ON THE BILL, MR.

CHANG.

MR. CHANG: THANK YOU. IT'S A VERY REFRESHING

PIECE OF LEGISLATION, IT IS VERY CUTTING-EDGE BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING IN

COMPARISON. I SEARCHED AROUND. SO WE MAY BE THE PRECEDENCE OF -- OF

AI INDUSTRY. AND AI IS EVOLVING. EVEN FOR ME IT'S HARD TO CATCH UP.

SO IT'S A GOOD START. I'M SURE THERE'LL BE MANY AMENDMENTS ALONG THE

WAY BECAUSE AS -- AS THERE'S A LOT OF NEFARIOUS ACTORS OVERSEAS THAT

MIGHT COME UP WITH SOMETHING TRYING TO STEAL TRADES, STEALS MONEY. SO

WE HAVE TO BE VIGILANT ON THAT GOOD. BUT IT'S A GOOD START AND I

COMMEND THE SPONSOR.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THANK YOU, MR.

CHANG.

MR. NOVAKHOV.

MR. NOVAKHOV: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

352

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WOULD THE SPONSOR ANSWER A FEW QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THE SPONSOR, WILL

YOU YIELD?

MR. BORES: YES, I WILL.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: HE'D BE HAPPY TO.

MR. NOVAKHOV: THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ALEX.

SO FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM NEED SOME CRASH

COURSE ON AI, ON BITCOIN AND ET CETERA. SO I WOULD RECOMMEND DOING

A CRASH COURSE FOR ASSEMBLYMEMBERS LIKE A TECHNOLOGY CRASH COURSE --

MR. BORES: I'D LOVE THAT.

MR. NOVAKHOV: THAT WOULD BE GREAT, RIGHT?

MR. BORES: YES.

MR. NOVAKHOV: OKAY. SO YOU MENTIONED A

PARTICULAR DATE; BEFORE THAT DATE WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING WHICH WAS

APRIL 2026?

MR. BORES: CORRECT.

MR. NOVAKHOV: CAN YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC WHY

THIS DATE? WHAT'S -- WHAT'S --

MR. BORES: I DON'T THINK KNOW THAT THERE'S, LIKE, A

THAT'S THE MONTH AND THERE'S NOTHING BEFORE AND NOTHING AFTER. BUT --

BUT I WAS GETTING THAT FROM A BLOG POST THAT THE CEO OF ANTHROPIC PUT

OUT IN, AGAIN, ON HALLOWEEN THIS PAST YEAR WHERE HE SAID WE NEED

REGULATION IN THE NEXT 18 MONTHS IF WE ARE GONNA BE ABLE TO DO THIS. SO

18 MONTHS FROM OCTOBER IS APRIL 2026.

MR. NOVAKHOV: SO NOTHING -- NO APOCALYPSIS IS

353

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

-- IS PLANNED --

MR. BORES: NO, I'M NOT -- THIS ISN'T A SPOILER OF

SOME UNEXPECTED EVENT. NO, I MEAN, TO BE -- TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT IT,

SOMETHING COULD HAPPEN AT ANY POINT, RIGHT, AND THAT'S YOU HAVE SOME

EXPERTS THAT ARE SAYING -- I THINK A FORMER SECURITY RESEARCHER AT

OPENAI SAID HE EXPECTS POTENTIAL HARMS THIS YEAR. I MEAN, THIS IS --

WE'RE REALLY PLAYING WITH FIRE WHICH IS WHY IT'S SO URGENT TO PUT SOME

GUARDRAILS THERE.

MR. NOVAKHOV: SO IT IS VERY HARD TO FIND A

BALANCE BETWEEN A NECESSARY REGULATION AND THE POWER THAT DRIVES AI

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT; WOULD YOU AGREE ON THAT?

MR. BORES: YEAH. GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF WORK I'VE

PUT INTO THIS BILL, YES, I WOULD SAY SO.

MR. NOVAKHOV: AND HOW THIS BILL BALANCES IT.

LIKE, ARE YOU SURE WE'RE NOT OVERREGULATING THE GROWING AND EXTREMELY

IMPORTANT INDUSTRY?

MR. BORES: YES. I THINK BOTH FROM THE OPPOSITION

MEMOS THAT HAVE SAID IT'S ONE FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE, FROM THE

CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD WITH INDUSTRY WHERE THEY SAID, YOU'RE ACTUALLY

BEING UNDERINCLUSIVE IN THE POTENTIAL RISKS. FROM THE FACT THAT THE

BIGGEST OPPOSITION WE'RE GETTING WERE ON THE AUDITS, AND WE'VE TAKEN

THE AUDITS OUT. SO I THINK THE CLEAR SIGNS ARE PROBABLY MAYBE WE'RE

EVEN DOING ENOUGH TO KEEP US SAFE, BUT I THINK WE, AS -- AS THE

MINORITY FLOOR LEADER SAID, WE HAVE TO START SOMEWHERE AND I THINK

THIS BILL IS THAT START.

354

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. NOVAKHOV: AND I'M -- I'M NOT CRITICIZING,

I'M JUST TRYING TO LEARN.

MR. BORES: NO, NO, NO. THAT'S A VALID QUESTION.

MR. NOVAKHOV: OKAY. AND, AGAIN, BECAUSE A LOT

OF PEOPLE DO NOT UNDERSTAND, CAN YOU GIVE US A VERY, VERY SIMPLE

DOWN-TO-EARTH EXAMPLE OF WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IF THIS BILL IS NOT

PASSED OR -- OR IF THOSE REGULATIONS ARE NOT IMPLEMENTED?

MR. BORES: YEAH. AND I -- AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR;

I'M NOT SAYING ANYTHING IS THIS DETERMINISTIC, RIGHT?

MR. NOVAKHOV: MM-HMM.

MR. BORES: BUT AN EXAMPLE OF THE KIND OF THING

THAT COULD OCCUR IS A NUMBER OF THE RECENT LABS HAVE PUT OUT MODELS

WHERE THEY SAID, OR -- OR OUTSIDE RESEARCHERS HAVE TESTED AND THEY'VE

SAID THIS MODEL COULD TEACH A NOVICE HOW TO BUILD A BIOWEAPON, COULD

GIVE MORE ACCURATE DESCRIPTIONS THAN A PHD VIROLOGIST. RIGHT? AND SO

IF YOU'RE PUTTING THAT POWER OUT THERE WHEN YOU ALSO HAVE A BUNCH OF

UNREGULATED GENE SYNTHESIZERS, THAT BECOMES A DANGEROUS COMBINATION.

A MORE RECENT EXAMPLE WAS -- AND THIS WAS CAUGHT IN TESTING, IT'S

EXACTLY THE KIND OF TESTING THIS BILL IS MEANT TO -- TO ENCOURAGE -- THEY

SET UP THEIR SYSTEM AND SAID THEY WERE GONNA RUN A FEW TESTS AND THEN

SHUT IT DOWN. AND IN ONE CASE THEY EXPLICITLY TOLD THE AI, LET YOURSELF

BE SHUT DOWN, AND IN A FEW INSTANCES IT DIDN'T. IT ACTUALLY CHANGED THE

CODE AND KEPT ITSELF ALIVE. IN ANOTHER INSTANCE A DIFFERENT MODEL WAS

AGAIN TOLD IT WAS GONNA TO BE SHUT DOWN AND IT PLANTED FAKE E-MAILS

THAT IMPLIED THAT THE ENGINEER CONDUCTING THE TEST WAS HAVING AN AFFAIR

355

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

MR. NOVAKHOV: WOW.

MR. BORES: -- AND THE MODEL RESPONDED BY TELLING

THE ENGINEER, DON'T SHUT ME DOWN OR I'M SENDING THESE E-MAILS TO YOUR

WIFE.

MR. NOVAKHOV: UNBELIEVABLE. ALL RIGHT.

MR. BORES: YOU ASKED FOR A PRACTICAL EXAMPLE.

THOSE ARE, YOU KNOW --

MR. NOVAKHOV: THAT'S AN INTERESTING EXAMPLE.

MR. BORES: YEAH, IT'S TERRIFYING.

MR. NOVAKHOV: IT IS. IT IS. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS.

MR. BORES: THANK YOU.

MR. NOVAKHOV: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THANK YOU, MR.

NOVAKHOV.

READ -- READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS BILL [SIC] TAKE EFFECT ON THE 90TH

DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: A PARTY VOTE HAS

BEEN REQUESTED.

MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. THE

REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE WILL, GENERALLY SPEAKING, BE IN THE NEGATIVE, I

THINK, ON THIS BILL. BUT I THINK THAT THERE -- I WOULD EXPECT A MIX OF

356

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

VOTES, AND ANYONE WISHES TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, NOW WOULD BE THE

TIME TO DO SO AT YOUR DESK. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THANK YOU, MS.

WALSH.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, THE

MAJORITY CONFERENCE IS GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS CUTTING-EDGE PIECE

OF LEGISLATION; HOWEVER, THERE MAY BE A FEW THAT WOULD DECIDE TO BE AN

EXCEPTION. THEY SHOULD FEEL FREE TO DO SO AT THEIR SEATS.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: THANK YOU.

THE -- THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. BORES TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BORES: I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR THE

CONVERSATION; WE'VE HAD A LONG DEBATE AND A NUMBER OF LONG DEBATES.

BUT I DO WANT TO THANK MANY, MANY PEOPLE. THIS BILL HAS BEEN THE

WORK OF A BETTER PART OF A YEAR. WE'VE HAD INDUSTRY EXPERTS. WE'VE

HAD ACADEMICS. WE'VE HAD ADVOCATES, SOME OF WHOM ARE IN THE

CHAMBER HERE. AND MY COLLEAGUES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE IN THE

COMMITTEE PROCESS AND THROUGH EVEN THIS DEBATE ON THE FLOOR, WE'VE

HAD WONDERFUL DEBATES THAT HAVE STRENGTHENED THIS BILL, THAT HAVE MADE

SURE THIS BILL IS NARROWLY-TAILORED, AND REALLY SETS UP NEW YORK TO BE A

LEADER NOT ONLY IN THE AI INNOVATION, BUT ALSO IN AI SAFETY. I THINK THIS

WILL END UP PROTECTING NEW YORKERS, BUT IT WILL PROTECT A MUCH LARGER

SEGMENT OF THE COUNTRY AND ACTUALLY THE WORLD ITSELF. SO THIS IS PROOF

357

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THAT WE CAN DO HARD THINGS, THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY MOVE AT A SPEED THAT'S

APPROPRIATE TO PROTECT PEOPLE, AND I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR THAT

WHOLEHEARTED EFFORT TO GET THERE.

I PROUDLY VOTE YES.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: MR. BORES IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. DAIS TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. DAIS: I'LL BE BRIEF. I WANT TO CONGRATULATE MY

COLLEAGUE ON THIS LEGISLATION. WE WORKED TOGETHER ON IT. AND

SPECIFICALLY WHAT I WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU WAS THAT HE WAS LISTENING

TO THE YOUNG PEOPLE WITHIN OUR STATE WHO HAD CONCERNS; THE GENERATION

THAT SAW SOCIAL MEDIA NOT HAVE GUARDRAILS AND HOW IT NEGATIVELY

IMPACTED THEM, AND NOW HOW AI IS GONNA HAVE A DIRECT IMPACT, RIGHT?

FOR THE YOUNGER GENERATION, AI IS GONNA REPLACE A LOT OF JOBS. THERE'S

A LOT OF THINGS THAT'S GONNA CHANGE FOR THAT NEXT GENERATION AND WE

NEED TO PREPARE THEM. SO BY CREATING THESE GUARDRAILS, I THINK IT'S

GONNA MAKE SURE THAT NEW YORK IS ACTUALLY ON THE FOREFRONT OF

INNOVATION WHEN IT COMES TO AI. AND I MIGHT BE TELLING MY AGE, WHEN

I WAS A KID THERE WAS SOMETHING CALLED THE JOLLY ROGER COOKBOOK.

AND THERE WAS THIS BAD THING WHERE IT TAUGHT YOU HOW TO MAKE SOME

THINGS THAT YOU SHOULD NOT KNOW HOW TO MAKE. NOW IMAGINE AI TIMES

1,000 WHERE SOMEONE COULD HAVE A BAD INTENTION, COULD LITERALLY TAKE

AND MAKE SOMETHING NEGATIVE THAT COULD HURT OUR GREAT STATE OR OUR

GREAT COUNTRY. SO MAKING SURE WE PUT THESE GUARDRAILS AND THESE

SAFETY -- SAFETY PROTOCOLS IN PLACE I THINK IS A COMMONSENSE MEASURE

358

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

WHILE WE CAN STILL BE INNOVATIVE AND MAKE SURE THAT NEW YORK IS A

LEADER IN AI.

I'LL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: MR. DAIS IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. MAHER TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. MAHER: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I RISE TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. AND I WANT TO EXPLAIN IT BECAUSE ALTHOUGH I WILL BE

IN THE NEGATIVE, I DO WANNA JUST COMMEND THE SPONSOR. HE ABSOLUTELY

HAS BEEN LISTENING TO BOTH SIDES OF THE ARGUMENT, BEEN WILLING TO EDIT

THE BILLS. I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU IN THE FUTURE. AND I

THINK THIS IS NO VOTE IS MORE ABOUT ME CONTINUING TO EDUCATE MYSELF ON

ITS IMPACT, SO HOPEFULLY IN THE FUTURE WE CAN -- WE CAN GET THROUGH THIS,

DEVELOP OTHER LAWS THAT MAKE SENSE, WORKING WITH OTHER STATES. BUT I

JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN THAT AND AGAIN COMMEND THE SPONSOR FOR

EXCELLENT BACK-AND-FORTH AND FOR BEING RECEPTIVE TO CHANGE.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: MR. MAHER IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. GANDOLFO TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. GANDOLFO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I,

TOO, WOULD LIKE TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR. HE'S OBVIOUSLY VERY

KNOWLEDGEABLE ON THE SUBJECT, AND A LOT OF THE POINTS RAISED DURING THE

CONVERSATION HERE WERE VERY VALID. AND I THINK I CAN SPEAK FOR A

NUMBER OF MY COLLEAGUES WHEN I SAY THE NEED TO REGULATE THE -- THE

RAPID DEPLOYMENT OF AI AND THESE ADVANCEMENTS IS RECOGNIZED;

359

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

HOWEVER, I WOULD RATHER SEE A -- A FEDERAL APPROACH SO THERE'S NOT A

PATCHWORK OF POTENTIALLY 50 DIFFERENT REGULATIONS THAT TECHNOLOGY

COMPANIES ARE TRYING TO COMPLY WITH THAT MIGHT POTENTIALLY STYMIE

DEVELOPMENT IN THIS FIELD.

SO FOR THAT REASON I WILL BE IN THE NEGATIVE. BUT I DO

RECOGNIZE THE NEED FOR -- FOR REGULATION ON THIS. THANK YOU, MADAM

SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: MR. GANDOLFO IN

THE NEGATIVE.

MR. BURDICK TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BURDICK: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, FOR

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

THIS LEGISLATION FOR GOING INTO AN AREA THAT'S HIGHLY COMPLEX, BUT ONE

WHICH IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR THE NEW YORK ECONOMY AND FOR THE

NATIONAL ECONOMY. AND, YOU KNOW, I SHARED THE VIEW THAT A NATIONAL

APPROACH WOULD BE PREFERABLE TO STATE-BY-STATE, BUT THAT HASN'T BEEN

HAPPENING. AND UNFORTUNATELY, TIME IS NOT ON OUR SIDE. IT'S REALLY

IMPORTANT THAT WE GET AHEAD OF THIS AND WE ACT SENSIBLY IN A BALANCED

WAY, WHICH I BELIEVE THIS BILL DOES. AND AS THE SPONSOR HAS SAID, THE --

THE POINT OF THIS AND THE HOPE IS THAT NEW YORK CAN HELP LEAD THE

NATION IN THIS. THERE'S A LOT MORE WORK TO BE DONE, BUT I THINK THIS IS A

TERRIFIC START.

THANK YOU, AND I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER WOERNER: MR. BURDICK IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

360

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: 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

CAN NOW GO TO OUR A-CALENDAR AND TAKE UP RULES REPORT NO. 703. IT'S

ON PAGE 16.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: PAGE 16, RULES

REPORT NO. 703. GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK.

THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08896, RULES REPORT

NO. 703, BUDGET BILL. AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 53 OF THE LAWS OF

2025, ENACTING THE AID TO LOCALITIES BUDGET, IN RELATION TO MAKING

TECHNICAL CHANGES THERETO.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

(PAUSE)

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK.

THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: I HEREBY CERTIFY TO AN IMMEDIATE VOTE.

KATHY HOCHUL, GOVERNOR.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

361

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

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. COLLEAGUES,

NO, YOU'RE NOT SEEING THINGS. YOU'RE NOT CONFUSED. THIS IS A -- A

BUDGET BILL AT THE REQUEST OF THE DIVISION OF BUDGET. IT MAKES

TECHNICAL CHANGES TO THE AID TO LOCALITIES BUDGET BILL. THEY'RE

TECHNICALLY -- TECHNICAL IN NATURE. BUT, MOST NOTABLY, THIS BILL FORMALLY

AUTHORIZES THE STATE TO SPEND THE $8 BILLION FROM THE ENTERPRISE FUND

TO PAY OFF THE OUTSTANDING DEBT OWED TO THE FEDERAL UNEMPLOYMENT

INSURANCE TRUST FUND BY ADDING A SPECIFIC APPROPRIATION LINE FOR -- FOR

THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT. SO, IT IS TO CLEAN UP AND MAKE -- MAKE VERY CLEAR

THAT THE APPROPRIATION AUTHORITY IS THERE TO PAY OFF THE UI DEBT AS --

WAS -- WAS ACCOUNTED FOR AT THE TIME OF THE ENACTED BUDGET. THIS IS --

WAS OBVIOUSLY A MAJOR PRIORITY I THINK ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE AND

PARTICULAR FOR OUR BUSINESS COMMUNITY IN -- IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET. AND

I'M HAPPY TO CAST MY VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. RA IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. SMULLEN TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

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

TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. IT'S NOT OFTEN IN THE NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY

THAT I VOTE IN FAVOR OF A BUDGET BILL, AND IT'S INTERESTING THAT IT'S COMING

HERE AT THE END OF SESSION ON A MESSAGE OF NECESSITY. BUT THIS IS,

362

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

INDEED, A NECESSITY FOR NEW YORK STATE. TO LIQUIDATE THE DEBT THAT

NEW YORK'S BUSINESSES, INCLUDING THE 50 PERCENT OF -- OF PEOPLE THAT

WORK IN SMALL BUSINESSES ALL AROUND NEW YORK STATE, THAT HAVE BEEN

PAYING UNNECESSARILY FOR OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS FOR THE OBLIGATIONS OF

THE STATE BECAUSE OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND THE DEBT WE

INCURRED FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO BE ABLE TO PAY THOSE -- THOSE

CLAIMS AS THEY WENT ALONG.

DURING THE PANDEMIC, UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE WAS

THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE FACING THE PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT. IT WAS -- IT WAS

A NECESSARY FACT THAT WE HAD TO BORROW THIS MONEY, BUT I THINK IT'S A BIT

OF A SHAME THAT IT TOOK US OVER FOUR YEARS TO PAY IT BACK, WHEN WE HAD

SURPLUSES AND WE HAD OTHER MONEY THAT HAD BEEN OBLIGATED TO US FROM

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DO SO.

SO, I -- I'M GLAD THAT THIS IS BEING DONE. IT'S ABOUT

TIME AND I'M GLAD TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE FOR THIS BILL. THANK YOU,

MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THANK YOU.

MR. SMULLEN IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

(PAUSE)

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULT.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MADAM SPEAKER, IF WE

CAN NOW GO TO RESOLUTIONS ON PAGE 3.

363

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: RESOLUTIONS PAGE 3,

THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. 778, MS.

GONZ LEZ-ROJAS.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM MAY 15, 2025, AS PARAGUAYAN HERITAGE 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 NO. 779, MS. HUNTER.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM MAY 2025, AS BUILDING SAFETY 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 NO. 780, MS. SOLAGES.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM JUNE 7, 2025, AS BELMONT STAKES DAY IN THE

STATE OF NEW YORK AND COMMENDING THE NEW YORK RACING

ASSOCIATION UPON THE OCCASION OF THE 157TH RUNNING OF THE BELMONT

STAKES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE RESOLUTION,

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

364

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ADOPTED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. 782, MS. WOERNER.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM JUNE 27, 2025, AS NATIONAL BINGO 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 NO. 783, MS. SEAWRIGHT.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM JUNE 2025, AS INTERNET SAFETY 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 NO. 784, MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM JULY 11, 2025, AS CANADA DAY IN THE STATE

OF NEW YORK, IN CELEBRATION OF THIS GREAT EMPIRE STATE'S LONG-STANDING

ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL RELATIONSHIP WITH CANADA.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE RESOLUTION,

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

ADOPTED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. 785 MS. KAY.

365

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM AUGUST 7, 2025, AS PURPLE HEART DAY IN THE

STATE OF NEW YORK.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MS. KAY ON THE

RESOLUTION.

MS. KAY: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER AND IF MY

COLLEAGUES WILL JUST INDULGE ME FOR A MINUTE. I'M PROUD TO SPONSOR THIS

RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING AUGUST 7TH OF THIS YEAR AS PURPLE HEART DAY IN

NEW YORK. THE PURPLE HEART MEDAL CARRIES A SPECIAL GRAVITAS, BECAUSE

IT IS A BADGE OF DISTINCTION RESERVED FOR MILITARY PERSONNEL WHO ARE

WOUNDED, OR KILLED IN ACTION. NOT ONLY DOES IT REPRESENT BRAVERY AND

SACRIFICE, IT IS ALSO SPECIAL BECAUSE OF ITS LONG AND PROUD TRADITION. IN

FACT, THE PURPLE HEART IS THE OLDEST MILITARY DECORATION IN THE WORLD

THAT IS STILL AWARDED TODAY. THE PURPLE HEART CAN BE AWARDED TO ANY

ACTIVE MILITARY MEMBER. HOW POWERFUL IS IT THAT HERE IN THE UNITED

STATES, OUR LONGSTANDING PRACTICE IS TO HONOR EVERY PERSON WHO

SACRIFICES FOR OUR FREEDOMS. NOT BASED ON THEIR RANK, BUT ON THEIR

BRAVERY AND DEDICATION. IN HONOR OF EVERY RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE

HEART, PAST AND PRESENT, I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO PLEASE JOIN ME IN

PASSING THIS RESOLUTION TO CELEBRATE PURPLE HEART DAY IN NEW YORK THIS

YEAR ON AUGUST 7TH. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE RESOLUTION,

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

ADOPTED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. 786, MR. STERN.

366

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER 22, 2025, AS VETERANS SUICIDE

AWARENESS AND REMEMBRANCE 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 NO. 787, MS. GRIFFIN.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER 26, 2025, AS LAW ENFORCEMENT

SUICIDE AWARENESS 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 NO. 788, MR. SMULLEN.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER 27, 2025 AS NATIONAL HUNTING

AND FISHING 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 NO. 789, MS. HOOKS.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER 28, 2025, AS GOOD NEIGHBOR

DAY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OBSERVANCE OF

NATIONAL GOOD NEIGHBOR DAY.

367

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE RESOLUTION,

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

ADOPTED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. 790, MS. BICHOTTE

HERMELYN.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER 2025, AS PROSTATE CANCER

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 NO. 791, MS. BUTTENSCHON.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM OCTOBER 26, 2025, AS DAY OF THE DEPLOYED

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 NO. 792, MR. MCDONALD.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM NOVEMBER 2025, AS EPILEPSY 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.

368

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. 793, MS. GRIFFIN.

LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

KATHY HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM MAY 10, 2025, AS GOLF DAY IN THE STATE OF

NEW YORK, IN CONJUNCTION WITH NATIONAL GOLF DAY.

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 -- I'M SORRY. DO YOU HAVE ANY 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.

ON THE RESOLUTIONS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING

AYE; OPPOSED, NO. THE RESOLUTIONS ARE ADOPTED.

(WHEREUPON, ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NOS. 794-808

WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: I NOW MOVE THAT THE

ASSEMBLY STAND ADJOURNED AND THAT WE RECONVENE AT 9:30 A.M., FRIDAY,

JUNE THE 13TH, TOMORROW BEING A SESSION DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES' MOTION, THE HOUSE STANDS ADJOURNED.

(WHEREUPON, AT 10:28 P.M., THE HOUSE STOOD

369

NYS ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2025

ADJOURNED UNTIL FRIDAY, JUNE 13TH AT 9:30 A.M., THAT BEING A SESSION

DAY.)

370