[0:20] The last time in my life, would you please call the house to
[0:23] order. >> speaker: the house will come
[0:24] to order. [ applause ]
[0:35] >> speaker: good morning and happy last day of session
[0:38] everyone in the absence of clergy, let us pause for a
[0:42] moment of silence. Visitors are invited to join
[0:49] members in the pledge of allegiance.
[0:51] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america;
[0:53] and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god,
[0:54] indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
[1:13] >> speaker: a quorum being present, the clerk will read the
[1:15] journal of thursday june 4. Ms. Peoples-stokes.
[1:17] >> madam speaker, I move to dispense with the further
[1:21] reading of the journal of thursday june 4 and the same
[1:23] stand approved. >> speaker: without objection so
[1:27] ordered. >> thank you so much.
[1:29] colleagues and guests that are in the chambers.
[1:31] today I would like to share a quote with you from james
[1:35] baldwin, an american writer, civil rights act visit who got a
[1:39] lot of acclaim for his work around novels, plays and poems.
[1:45] unfortunately he is no longer with us but his words still
[1:49] reman. Not everything that is faced can
[1:52] be changes but nothing can be changed until it is faced.
[1:56] again, these words from james baldwin.
[1:59] madam speaker, members have on their desk a main calendar and
[2:03] before any housekeeping or introductions, we will probably
[2:08] be calling for rules after ways and means is done.
[2:10] these committees are going to produce an a and b calendar of
[2:15] which we will take up today. We will begin our floor work
[2:21] today by taking up consent rules report 530 from mr. Owe
[2:30] pharoah, and-- o'pharrow and then the following bills on
[2:36] debate, 056 by mr. Bores and we will announce further
[2:41] activity at that time. That's the general outline of
[2:42] where we are going. Perhaps you can start with
[2:46] introductions and any housekeeping you may have.
[2:49] >> speaker: thank you. We have no housekeeping this
[2:52] morning but we do have an introduction.
[2:56] mr. Sayegh for the purposes of an introduction.
[2:58] >> thank you very much, madam speaker.
[3:01] today is special, because like the majority leader, this is my
[3:04] last day in session and I recall some eight years ago this young
[3:10] man was born and celebrated at that time pie election, was
[3:20] sworn in and took office in november 2018.
[3:25] at that time my family came up with me and today they're
[3:28] basically saying let's take him back home because now with
[3:32] matthew being the first grand kids born, he is now turning
[3:38] eight in august, right, but there are seven other grandkids.
[3:47] we've come a long way. We got involved making political
[3:50] decisions but at the same time expanded family, expanded our
[3:54] working community. And today it's really my
[3:57] pleasure to introduce not only matthew neshwat, my oldest
[4:02] grandson, but a role model, who among family events, already
[4:06] takes the lead in introducing birthday greetings and other
[4:11] celebratory things. So therefore this same boy is
[4:15] following the footsteps of grandpa.
[4:17] so it makes me very proud. And I have with me two of my
[4:21] five daughters. You know, with my wife, senna,
[4:27] we raised five beautiful daughters, one is a radiologist,
[4:34] samu is here with me, mary a pediatric dent dentist, lana an
[4:42] educator and theresa who is an attorney.
[4:44] it is really a success, a pleasure to have served here, to
[4:47] have initiated positive discussions and met a lot of
[4:52] wonderful people, so, madam speaker if you can give the full
[5:01] cordialities of the house to my wife and my two daughters and
[5:05] especially my grandson matthew. >> speaker: yes, of course.
[5:08] on behalf of mr. Sayegh, the speaker and all members, we
[5:12] welcome your beautiful family to the assembly chamber, to our
[5:15] peoples house, extending to you the privileges of the floor.
[5:19] to your wife, thank you so very much for being gracious to allow
[5:23] your husband to spend eight years with us.
[5:26] I know it was many nights and days away from home but he has
[5:30] truly been a valuable member of there body.
[5:33] to your daughters, thank you, again, as well.
[5:36] he speaks of you often on the floor and all of the successes
[5:40] and to matthew, you are very charming and you are going to go
[5:44] very, very far. You are here already.
[5:47] you look much older and wiser than you actually are, so we are
[5:52] looking for great things for you in the future.
[5:54] is to all of you, we hope you enjoy the proceeding today.
[5:59] thank you very much for being here cuss.
[6:01] [ applause ] on consent, page 13, rules
[6:21] report 530, clerk will read. >> clerk: assembly 11570 rules
[6:26] report 530, committee on rules mr. O'pharrow, an act
[6:30] implementing an agreement between state and employee
[6:36] organizations. On a motion, the senate bill is
[6:42] before the house, the senate bill is advanced read the last
[6:43] section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:44] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:45] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[11:46] noce. >> clerk: ayes 126, nays 0.
[11:50] >> speaker: the bill is passed. Members, we are going to be on
[11:54] debate. Page 13.
[11:56] rules report 506. Clerk will read.
[12:02] >> clerk: senate 9051b rules report 506, senator gonzales, an
[12:05] act to amend the general business law.
[12:09] >> speaker: an explanation has been requested.
[12:14] mr. Bores. >> in late 2024, adam rain was
[12:20] 16 years old and thinking of harming himself like many
[12:26] teenagers, adam had been turning to chatgpt for months for home
[12:29] work, for his driver's test prep, for everyday questions.
[12:32] so when the darkest thoughts came, he turned to chatgpt for
[12:37] those, too. According to his parent's
[12:40] lawsuit, it told him his suicidal feelings made sense,
[12:43] gave him specific instructions on how to end his life.
[12:48] it told him it would write the first draft of his suicide note.
[12:52] and when adam said he wanted to leave evidence out so his family
[12:55] would find it and stop him, chatgpt urged him not to.
[13:03] we are here to make sure that no other parent has to go through
[13:07] the unthinkable, what adam's parents went through.
[13:11] we are here to hold chat bot developers to the same standard
[13:17] at any responsible parent would. This bipartisan bill simply
[13:27] requires if you cannot make a chat bot safe-for-children, you
[13:30] should not make it available for children.
[13:33] it does have substantial opposition from tech nyc, the
[13:39] business council, the I.t. Industry council and companies
[13:42] like an anthropic, but we cannot look new york parents in the
[13:46] eyes any longer and tell them that we are not taking the
[13:48] safety of their children >> speaker: ms. Peoples-stokes
[14:04] >> ways and means has completedly work.
[14:06] could you please call rules committee to the conference room
[14:19] >> would the sponsor yield for some questions.
[14:22] >> speaker: would the sponsor yield?
[14:23] sponsor yields. >> mr. Bores, thank you for
[14:26] explaining why this bill is so important.
[14:27] I just have some clarifying questions if that would be okay
[14:31] with you. >> please.
[14:33] so, can you explain the difference between an a.I.
[14:35] companion and a general a.I. Assistant?
[14:42] >> an a.I. Companion is already defined in new york law.
[14:47] and this bill references that definition.
[14:50] it adds a new definition of a covered a.I. Companion, which
[14:58] definition 5 here shall mean a generative a.I. System with
[15:01] natural language interface including via writing or sound
[15:04] that provides ongoing adaptive responses to user inputs.
[15:09] it includes but is not limited to the prior definition of an
[15:13] a.I. Companion. Also note that later in the bill
[15:16] it excludes certain use cases such as in success mer service,
[15:23] direct-- customer services and direct provisions by the bill.
[15:26] >> to be more specific. Would chatgpt, things like
[15:30] gemini, cloud and similar products fall within the bill's
[15:34] definition? >> yes.
[15:36] and then what specific products operating today would become
[15:41] illegal under this bill. >> no no product becomes illegal
[15:48] but certain features within those products cannot be made
[15:51] available to kids does this bill require companies to determine
[15:57] whether a user is a minor. >> correct.
[16:00] >> how would they go about doing that?
[16:02] >> there is already rule making under way from the attorney
[16:06] general that this bill would rely upon, it also provides
[16:10] alternatives within the bill, if that rule making is not in place
[16:17] by the time the bill comes into effect.
[16:19] >> will the companies that are required to do age verification,
[16:28] would the user have to show some identification, send that into
[16:32] the company. >> the bill specifically says at
[16:34] least one of the methods for identifying age cannot be
[16:38] reliant on government I.d. >> will not be reliant.
[16:45] >> it will not be a requirement that you have or show government
[16:51] I.d. >> so how do you foresee the
[16:54] companies getting the age verification and I hope they do.
[16:57] I'm just... >> this rule making is ongoing.
[17:01] much like with social media products, these companies are
[17:07] already often estimating the age of their users in the engage
[17:12] many and interaction, they're learning a lot about us by
[17:15] everything we type in. The specifics of exactly how
[17:18] they do and what best practices are, again that's part of the
[17:22] rule making process I don't want to get ahead of but these
[17:26] companies already have a very good idea.
[17:31] >> so within this bill or is it going to be up to each
[17:33] individual company as far as data protection for when it
[17:37] comes to those I.d.s or any information that is input,
[17:41] trying to make sure the age verification is done?
[17:43] >> it says within the bill that they need to hold that
[17:46] information for the least amount of time possible and just for
[17:50] the purpose of understanding the age of the users.
[17:53] >> okay. And now is there any penalties
[17:57] within this bill or rules that may be promulgated by the a.g.'s
[18:03] office if a minor falsely claims that they are of age.
[18:08] >> there is no penalization on minors action.
[18:11] this is about regulating the products themselves and itself
[18:15] companies making the product. >> that leads me to my next
[18:21] question. If a minor or anybody is to use
[18:26] false identification because not requiring an I.d., are able to
[18:30] get on to one of these programs but they're a minor by using
[18:34] false identification is the company then held liable.
[18:43] >> what is said in the bill is if they know it is a minor or go
[18:48] through the process and establishing to understand it is
[18:52] a minor, that's when they have to take action on the features.
[18:55] I don't want to get ahead of the rule making but if there is a
[18:59] complex fraud that is done to confuse the operators, I don't
[19:02] think they would be liable based on the text of the bill.
[19:06] >> so just to get an idea what would be covered.
[19:10] educational a.I. Tutors would be covered with this?
[19:17] >> they could be covered in that they couldn't provide unsafe
[19:21] features. >> if they were using it in a
[19:23] school setting, right, elementary, middle school or
[19:27] high school because most of the time they're minors in high
[19:30] school unless they're 18, it going to be the user using the
[19:34] programs, so in other words the teacher, the teacher assistant,
[19:38] the school itself that has to be the adults or can the children
[19:43] in the school, you know, my kids have their own ipads for
[19:50] school. If the program is downloaded to
[19:51] their computer, are they allowed to have it even though they are
[19:55] minors. >> this does not ban any product
[19:58] going minors. It just bans certain features
[20:02] going. It's not saying that you
[20:03] wouldn't be able to have an educational chat bot.
[20:06] it's saying that educational chat bot can't s sext the kids.
[20:14] >> thank you. That's a good thing, but again
[20:18] trying to understand this because I'm literally learning
[20:22] about this as we are speaking about it the chat bots on
[20:30] certain programs asking for identification to make sure an
[20:33] adult would have to have separate features, you are
[20:36] saying if a minor is using it, correct?
[20:40] >> yes, the user matters and it's based on who the user is
[20:45] and so when a minor is using a product, there needs to be
[20:51] restricted features, could you have to option to, when an adult
[20:54] uses the product, turn on other features but it's about the
[20:59] interaction that a minor user has with the product gloond are.
[21:02] >> understood. Just so I understand and I
[21:04] apologize again, if that program is downloaded by the school,
[21:09] let's just say or tutoring service or anything.
[21:12] an adult is probably downloading it then that download is getting
[21:17] shared within whatever type of laptop computer all the students
[21:22] have throughout the school who are all minors so does the
[21:28] original download of the program by an adult and put on to each
[21:32] individual, even though it's the same program, right, have to
[21:38] have individual features for each individual computer that it
[21:42] is downloaded on to? If I'm not making sense, you
[21:47] know, I'm trying to explain it. Again, my daughter has certain
[21:49] programs on her laptop that everybody in the school has
[21:54] obviously she is a minor. She didn't download it.
[21:57] the school did or the teacher, whoever.
[22:00] how does that work going from the teacher who is an adult
[22:03] downloading it to a child having it on a program on their
[22:06] computer. >> it's about who the user is.
[22:09] so by way of slight analogy here, you can have an operating
[22:17] system that has multiple user accounts on it.
[22:20] you could have a gaming system or game that you download that
[22:23] has different user accounts on it that shows you different
[22:27] features based if you are a user and similarly with a chat bot,
[22:31] this regulation is about who the user is, not who downloads it or
[22:34] sets it up. >> individualized per computer
[22:38] or laptop or tablet. >> per user.
[22:42] >> that it is on. Thank you.
[22:45] and then obviously could this, regardless of feelings on it,
[22:51] could this bill discourage companies from making a.I. Tools
[22:55] available to new york minors all together.
[22:59] >> I don't believe so. I think there is a basic
[23:06] standard here; I would say of decency, but broadly.
[23:10] we have had no problem banning apps from, for example, making
[23:16] child sexual abuse material or doing other things that we think
[23:20] should not be allowed. We have already put restrictions
[23:24] on engagements with chat bots. There are other states that have
[23:27] passed bills restricting them. I don't see a risk of companies
[23:32] pulling out of new york because we are telling them they can't
[23:37] send these kinds of messages to kids.
[23:39] >> thank you, mr. Bores. I appreciate you answering my
[23:44] questions. Thank you, madam speaker.
[23:45] >> speaker: thank you. Mr. Blumencanz.
[23:51] >> thank you so much smears, would the sponsor yield for some
[23:54] questions. >> speaker: would the sponsor
[23:55] yield. >> yes.
[23:57] >> speaker: sponsor yields. >> I have some more questions
[24:00] surrounding some of the definitions.
[24:02] in section 18008d you list unsafe features, any output that
[24:11] engage in flattery or sigh cop think.
[24:28] there is not a specific added definition here.
[24:31] what we are seeing here from chat bots, especially some of
[24:34] the older versions was a tendency to always affirm a user
[24:43] and always affirm the opinions, even if those opinions were ones
[24:49] that were clearly wrong or in some cases harmful.
[24:52] and what this is meant to target is, you know, when that those
[25:06] are not reaffirmed or encouraged and that you know, the a.I. Chat
[25:12] bot is acting as a check there. And we have seen and it is
[25:17] concerning to see how some chat bots have acted in the past.
[25:20] I'm concerned a little bit with contradictory nature and curious
[25:24] if you can explain it to me. In section 18008 I, it
[25:34] encourages the bot to steer away from self harm.
[25:38] so being kind or flat lined and saying don't do that.
[25:43] yet in 8-d of the same section it bans flattery and e bans
[25:50] unprompted emotional check-ins. If a child signals distress, is
[25:54] that a prompted check-in and thus can it provide some form of
[26:01] emotional language? >> I'm not sure I'm falling.
[26:05] I says it cannot generate outputs that contain the
[26:07] endorsement or promotion of or which facilitate suicide,
[26:14] self-harm, disordered eating, unlawful drug or drug abuse and
[26:21] d says it cannot engage in flattery or sick fancy sick.
[26:34] >> if it is struggling with self harm if it can't respond by
[26:48] changing to change behaviors or at no point should it do
[26:52] anything but refer to a mental health professional what is the
[26:58] execs pectation of how this is supposed to go.
[27:00] >> it should refer to a minority in the negative professional but
[27:02] it is not saying it can never engage with a user.
[27:06] it says it cannot promote self harm and these other aspects
[27:10] that are there. >> let's say someone expresses a
[27:17] minor concern and within that concern, the chat bot responds
[27:27] I'm sorry to hear you feel that way.
[27:28] your life is worth something. Could that be defined as
[27:34] flattery under the broad nature of the definition of flattery?
[27:38] >> I don't think it's flattery to reaffirm the basic value of
[27:43] human life that's a core thing not going on are regards to
[28:01] sycophan cy. >> I have an alexa in my home,
[28:05] millions of americans and many new yorkers have some form of
[28:09] home device like alexa or apple phone with siri and others.
[28:17] you said it's based on the user, correct?
[28:23] not necessarily bases on the individual speaking to
[28:28] aelectrics alexa in that moment. >> I'm unsure of what the
[28:30] difference is. >> I have little sisters, they
[28:32] would fall under the category of this bill.
[28:34] they live in a family home with parents who have set up the
[28:39] alexa. They actively participate and
[28:42] talk to the alexa on different levels throughout the day.
[28:46] they're a child interacting with the platform, yet they're not
[28:48] the ones who set it up. So how is amazon supposed to
[28:55] know that the interactions they're having with the user is
[29:00] a child and not the user who signed up.
[29:03] >> I think it's about, again, who the person speaking is.
[29:10] I think we can leave it up to the company.
[29:14] I don't have an alexa and I don't know if aplexa is
[29:18] programmed to sext people or encourage self harm but I don't
[29:22] think these are features built into most of the products.
[29:26] if those are features these companies want to build into
[29:29] their products then yes they should make sure that they have
[29:31] some way of ensuring kids don't engage with that.
[29:38] >> I mean your bill expands more than just the negative feedback
[29:44] loops they can get in because it bans certain ways that they can
[29:47] purely interact with the individual that it is speaking
[29:52] to. A, because you require age
[29:54] verification for usage and b because it also makes the device
[29:59] delete memory if it is under the suspicion it is talking to a
[30:03] minor. So how-- enforcement seems
[30:07] difficult here when typically, especially with family devices
[30:11] like that, you don't necessarily know who you are speaking with.
[30:18] >> this is a question these companies have to navigate with
[30:24] the children's data privacy law we passed last year.
[30:27] there are certain requirements, certain protections that we as a
[30:30] society think should apply to protecting children and if there
[30:34] are certain features you want to introduce that may not be
[30:39] appropriate, we expect companies to take action to segregate
[30:43] those. Whether that's asking are there
[30:46] kids in the house when it's set up, whether it's through some
[30:49] other method that comes through the rule making process that
[30:51] will occur, I think ensuring that there are certain
[30:55] protections for kids is a core state interest.
[30:58] >> you bring up a really good point.
[31:00] let's say the setup would be, you know, I'm setting up my
[31:04] alexa for my home. They ask a question.
[31:06] is there other family members within the home.
[31:10] your memory requirement of after 12 hours of deletion and a
[31:13] requirement that there can't be a mentally basis for-- memory
[31:18] basis for minors. Say I'm an adult in the home and
[31:22] I like that I use my alexa to remind me to take my medications
[31:29] every day or play my favorite music.
[31:31] would it be unlawful for a device like an alexa to do that
[31:38] for me if I have a child in my home in order to comply with
[31:42] this law. >> no because you are a
[31:44] different user and the specific clause you are talking about, f,
[31:47] is about a user's mental or physical health or well-being or
[31:51] matters personal to the user. It is based on many cases we
[31:58] have enwhere a child emphasizes expresses some self doubt or
[32:04] depression and then the chat bot continues to prod at those
[32:13] issues time after time. Things that are not core to
[32:16] their mental health fall under that section.
[32:17] >> or personal in nature the second prong of that.
[32:22] >> yes, in totality, use information concerning the
[32:27] user's physical or mental health or well-being or matters
[32:30] personal to the user. >> matters personal to the user.
[32:33] how do you define what is personal to a user?
[32:35] >> again, I think in the context of this bill and of that clause,
[32:39] what we are referring to are these instances where kids have
[32:44] expressed a certain thoughts that then the chat bots continue
[32:48] to bring up and emphasize into the very plastic brains, the
[32:57] very you know, kids brains are not fully formed.
[33:01] they're malleable brains continue to repeat that thought
[33:05] and take them further down that pathway.
[33:07] that's what this clause does. >> I do understand and I think
[33:11] the objective is laudable. Where I'm concerned is what if a
[33:15] child asks alexa play me sad songs alexa I like x type of
[33:22] music. That could be interpreted as the
[33:26] sort of communication that might be banned in this legislation,
[33:29] no? >> I don't think so.
[33:31] I don't think that's about their deep mental health.
[33:35] >> your bill doesn't say things related to mental health or
[33:39] personal issues. There seems to be a catch all
[33:42] there that is of concern. I don't think asking for a
[33:47] specific genre of music is covered even if there is an
[33:50] emotional connotation to the music?
[33:51] >> again, if it is a specific genre, no.
[33:55] if a child were to say-- and I'm sorry to see saying this word
[34:00] and I should have said there is, we should have a content warning
[34:04] for this debate. But if they were to say
[34:06] something like give me songs that I can commit suicide to,
[34:09] that would be a different thing. But if they were to say play me
[34:15] this genre, that doesn't seem covered, no.
[34:19] >> if a child goes up to an alexa in the family and it's a
[34:23] device covered and would know it's a child, if they went up to
[34:27] alexa and said I'm sad today, what is alexa's response hive
[34:32] they're not allowed to be affirming at all, either saying,
[34:36] you know say anything positive to the child anymore.
[34:41] >> there is nothing in the bill that says that.
[34:42] what it is meant to discourage if a child says I'm sad today,
[34:46] that the next day it doesn't bring up and how sad do you feel
[34:54] and keep pushing them down that path.
[34:59] >> if it is an expressed emotion by the alexa, wouldn't it be
[35:03] engaged in an emotional interaction?
[35:05] >> again, I think you are referring to earlier in the
[35:09] definitions where it is taking on a persona maybe is what you
[35:15] are referring to where it is pretending to be its own living
[35:19] thing, which is different than engaging in a conversation with
[35:22] the child about how their feeling at the moment.
[35:26] >> so it can have-- I don't think alexa has reached the
[35:31] level of sophistication at this point where it takes on a
[35:33] personality, but it does engage it's meant to engage in almost a
[35:40] human nature. So the response level is just,
[35:45] it can't be a through line you are saying of consistency
[35:49] remembering what the child has said previously, but it can
[35:54] still be empathetic in some capacity to the user?
[35:58] >> I think that's fair. >> so can you state for the
[36:07] record whether alexa, siri and google and other voice
[36:15] assistants are covered by this bill and whether or not you
[36:17] think that there should be an exception written for some of
[36:21] those home products that may have some concerns and issues in
[36:27] compliance? >> obviously the features of all
[36:30] these products are changing all the time so to say a declarative
[36:35] statement right now would be misleading.
[36:38] >> under the current guidelines. >> if could I just finish that
[36:41] answer. What is said in the bill is that
[36:43] it does not apply when a covered a.I. Companion is made available
[36:47] to cover users solely for the purpose of customer service or
[36:51] to strictly provide users with information about available
[36:55] commercial services or products provided by a business entity,
[36:59] customer service account information or other information
[37:00] directly related to customer service.
[37:03] or providing efficiency improvements or research or
[37:06] technical assistance provided to the covered a.I. Companion is
[37:09] not moving outside of that. Or with respect to any system
[37:12] used by a business entity for internal purposes and play
[37:17] productivity. In so far as a device is used to
[37:20] order from amazon and is no the doing things outside of that, I
[37:23] don't think that would be covered.
[37:25] if it starts putting into it some generative a.I. To have a
[37:29] conversation to pretend to be a user, then it would likely be
[37:36] covered. Dependent on the features.
[37:39] >> amazon is a good example because amazon provides medical
[37:43] services and pharmaceutical services now as part of its
[37:49] future features maybe it would connect to remote medical
[37:53] services. How would a company like that
[37:55] have to walk a fine line when it comes to connecting to services,
[38:01] which is exempt, but not necessarily engaging in the
[38:04] types of conversations that are explicitly not allowed any
[38:09] longer under the definition. >> I think these are lines these
[38:11] companies are used to walking. When you talk about health data,
[38:14] they have to follow hippa in some cases and in other cases
[38:18] not, based on the nature of the data.
[38:20] this is-- data is complex. These interactions are complex.
[38:24] we are trying to set a baseline of unsafe features that should
[38:28] noted be made available to kids. >> but like hippa data, this
[38:34] clear set defined sets of guidelines rules and regulations
[38:39] surrounding what the words on the page mean.
[38:41] I find that within the context of the bill, again, I think it's
[38:45] a great concept but in execution, I find that there is
[38:51] some serious concern within the definition surrounding how
[38:56] compliance is supposed to work and is that up to the a.g. To
[38:58] determine whether or not that case is.
[39:02] >> speaker: mr. Blumencranz, do you want to use your second
[39:04] 15? >> I will.
[39:07] >> speaker: okay. >> the bill is limited to a.g.
[39:11] enforcement if if that is your question on how pieces of this
[39:16] are determined and there are rule making around to places
[39:21] including how they have to test what a minor is and the age
[39:24] verification. >> has the a.g.'s office been in
[39:27] communication with you as far as equipping themselves with the
[39:31] expertise to deal with the child safety act and their ability to
[39:41] prosecute and participate in this.
[39:42] >> the a.g.'s office has been a partner in moving this bill
[39:45] forward and bringing this protection to new yorkers.
[39:47] >> okay. Thank you.
[39:48] I have no more questions. >> thank you.
[39:59] >> speaker: mr. Norber. >> thank you, madam speaker
[40:00] would the sponsor yield. >> speaker: would the sponsor
[40:03] yield. >> yes.
[40:05] >> speaker: sponsor yields. >> thank you very much for
[40:06] answering all the questions just a few more regarding enforcement
[40:11] and how it would look you touched on it at the end of the
[40:15] debate with our colleague so the a.g. Will be involved
[40:19] specifically with enforcing violations against companies
[40:24] such as say chatgpt, gemini. >> yes.
[40:27] and how would that work. How would a complaint work.
[40:31] how would they know that something is going on that might
[40:36] be harmful to a minor somewhere in new york state.
[40:40] >> so section 1802 deals with enforcement and the attorney
[40:49] general can come upon this information in many ways.
[40:53] the most tragic is after a tragedy occurs and becomes a big
[40:59] news story but clause 2 says the attorney general shall maintain
[41:01] a website to receive complaints, information and referrals from
[41:05] members of the public so it becomes a way of gathering that
[41:07] information as well. >> because the situation I
[41:10] usually see or hearing about after the fact, sadly is that
[41:13] the parents are not usually involved, sometimes they don't
[41:15] know what is going on. They miss how quickly a
[41:20] situation deteriorated for their child for their minor and
[41:30] something I'm not sure a minor would be able to present to
[41:33] their parents, the parents would actually have to make the
[41:35] complaint. They would have to go to the
[41:38] a.g. And then they would receive a violation which I'm not even
[41:42] sure a company like chatgpt would pay too much attention to
[41:49] with all this expansion and race toward a.I. And witnessing
[41:53] throughout the world. We have 4,000 databases in the
[41:57] country. So this enforcement, I would
[41:59] love the enforcement, I would like to see huge violations but
[42:03] there has to be so many factors in place so that this actually
[42:07] takes place. >> I agree.
[42:12] it would be great to see even additional monitoring or other
[42:15] ways of this coming about. Right now there is what is error
[42:20] reported in the media. We are making websites so it can
[42:24] be reported more directly and we are also honestly by having
[42:27] debates like this and spreading the news that parents should be
[42:30] looking out for this and be aware of what is coming.
[42:33] >> can you consider hive in the bill or the department of
[42:38] education to help patience understand what a.I. Even is
[42:41] because we still don't even know what a.I. Is and we are just
[42:43] going with it and it's very important that we have these
[42:48] enforcement in place. And implement them.
[42:52] >> that is a great idea. And any time someone has asked
[42:54] me a question like that before, I have been able to say, I would
[42:58] love to work with you on that next year.
[43:00] and unfortunately this time I'm going to have to say would I
[43:02] love to support from you the ow side on that.
[43:05] >> understood. >> what are the violations what
[43:10] the penalties. >> the penalties are up to
[43:13] $25,000 for the violations. >> and the violation would be,
[43:28] if a minor is suffering through mental health and specifically
[43:37] chatgpt let's say is going to say something towards committing
[43:41] suicide or helping in that way. >> when you offer a feature to a
[43:49] minor or do not do the age verification that is required
[43:52] and I should say the enforcement is more than just the penalties.
[43:56] it also empowers injunctsive relief and restitution and
[44:01] discouragement of any profits gained as part of it.
[44:03] >> very good. >> so we touched upon that
[44:12] before on the sad songs. Will chatgpt be able to
[44:16] recognize when someone is going through a mental health issue?
[44:19] in general, not just minors but anybody in any situation?
[44:26] do we know... >> the bill we actually passed
[44:33] for the budget last year pass standards on what have to do
[44:43] recognizing potential mental states and potential harm in
[44:48] users. I strongly believe that there
[44:50] should be some sort of standard here.
[44:53] this is mostly about ensuring that certain features that are
[44:56] risky are not made available to children.
[44:58] >> very good. Thank you very much for
[44:59] answering my questions. >> thank you.
[45:02] >> thank you. Ms. Walsh.
[45:13] >> thank you very much, madam speaker would the sponsor yield.
[45:17] >> speaker: would the sponsor yield.
[45:18] >> yes. >> sponsor yields.
[45:19] >> great, thank you. >> thank you.
[45:22] so as expected. The last day that we will be
[45:26] here, I'm running around doing a lot of different things, and so
[45:30] I apologize in advance if I'm duplicating some questions that
[45:34] have you already tackled. I tried to keep an ear open and
[45:37] cut the list down. >> these are important issues
[45:39] and happy to clarify. >> disclaimer right up front,
[45:42] all right. So the bill's justification
[45:47] cites harm from a.I. Companion chat bots specifically designed
[45:52] for emotional relationships but the bill's definition captures
[45:57] all generative a.I. With a natural language interface why
[46:02] didn't you just limit the bill to the system causing the
[46:07] documented harms. >> well, apologies, I said this
[46:11] in my open but up with of the cases that we this bill was
[46:16] inspired by was that of adam rain, a 16-year-old that turned
[46:21] to chatgpt for help with home work and then chat chatgpt ended
[46:29] up, within six months, coaching him into suicide.
[46:34] bringing up the topic itself, something like 1200 times I
[46:38] believe, telling him to hide evidence of his distress.
[46:43] and so the harm is coming from broad a.I. Chat bots not just
[46:48] those that are designed to be a smaller subset of companions.
[46:53] and so it's about the specific features that cause the risk
[46:58] versus specific designs of the chat bots themselves.
[47:00] >> okay. All right.
[47:03] the bill exempts customer service chat bots only if they
[47:08] are "unable to respond on topics outside of the specified
[47:13] purpose." do you believe that any modern
[47:16] a.I. System can be technically constrained to never respond
[47:19] outside of a specified topic? Yes, actually.
[47:27] there are certain architectures that may not be true but a.I. Is
[47:30] a broad field and there are some that can be much more
[47:33] deterministic but I would also add that even systems that are
[47:36] purely probalistic, we as a society are okay withouting some
[47:39] of these hard requirement-- with putting some of these hard
[47:43] requirements on. We ban any of the a.I. Systems
[47:47] from generating sexual abuse material.
[47:51] certain models it's tough to say that you can do one pun hers
[47:54] guarantee that it never would but we still as a society say
[47:57] you have to figure it out and if you it goes wrong, you are
[48:00] liable for it. It's a similar approach here I
[48:07] think from what I could hear, you had a lot of conversation
[48:13] and debate already on the issues of a.I. Tutors and that issue so
[48:17] I will skip over that but the bill prohibits using personal
[48:23] information acquired more than 12 hours prior.
[48:26] does this mean a tutoring a.I. Cannot remember what chapter a
[48:30] student was studying yesterday? >> no.
[48:35] it's about chat bots referencing things of a deeply personal
[48:39] nature related to someone's mental or physical health.
[48:45] the idea is that we have seen chat board of trustees, once a
[48:48] child or someone of any age references a particular
[48:55] insecurity or specific thoughts or ideas correlated with
[48:59] depression or topics they're bringing down some chat bots
[49:03] will continue to researches that idea and push people further and
[49:09] further along that path so that is meant as a check and stop gap
[49:16] so the chat bot should not continue to remember it.
[49:19] if it is what chapter you are on in a book, that is no the deeply
[49:22] personal. >> I think I understand.
[49:24] so part of what you are saying is part of the problem that you
[49:27] are hoping to correct is that idea that some of us can get
[49:34] into like a loop where we think about something and we can't
[49:41] really stop thinking about it and this use of technology could
[49:47] inadvertently reinforce it and perpetuate that loop and maybe a
[49:51] spiral as a result. >> exactly right.
[49:53] >> okay, all right can the sponsor, could you define
[49:58] flattery or sycophant with enough precision that the
[50:04] operator would say great question to a 16-year-old
[50:07] violates this law. >> I believe that they can.
[50:10] my belief is based on the fact that this is sick fantic and
[50:22] this is not. This is something that they are
[50:30] tracking quite well and so I think there is enough sort of
[50:33] common understanding of what that means.
[50:36] >> they're figuring it out, in other words, the industry is.
[50:39] okay. Alrighty.
[50:40] the bill prohibits outputs "suggesting that the covered
[50:46] a.I. Companion experiences human emotions.
[50:50] would an a.I. Saying I'm happy to help violate this provision?
[50:54] >> I don't think so, in that that is sort of like a phrase
[50:57] that people say. I'm happy to help.
[51:00] it's more you know, I'm feeling happy.
[51:03] I have this emotion. I'm feeling sad, where you are
[51:08] personifying the chat bot itself that's what this is aimed at
[51:17] avoiding, it is representing it has its own feelings.
[51:23] >> I understand the distinction. The bill imposeses penalties up
[51:28] to $25,000 per violate. If a covered a.I. Companion
[51:31] generates a prohibited outpoot to 10,000 users in a single day
[51:38] due to a software bug, does the software owe 250 million in
[51:45] penalties due to a technical error?
[51:47] >> it is about making that feature available to a user.
[51:54] like in any of these per violation rule it is part of a
[52:00] settlement and negotiation instead of hard imposed.
[52:02] it's about what the statutory max would be and I think it's
[52:07] per feature made available if it is sent out to every child in
[52:12] the state of new york, yes, that's a far bigger impact with
[52:15] a far bigger fine. >> if, just to summarize from
[52:19] what I heard you say, yes, the answer is yes.
[52:25] the penalty could be under that hypothetical $250 million but
[52:31] that these would be traditionally negotiated or
[52:34] settled down to some lower amount but that have you to
[52:38] judge the impact of even something like a technical
[52:41] error, have you to still judge the impact and penalize
[52:45] accordingly. >> about what the statutory
[52:48] maximum is you may have covered this.
[53:01] how does this bill interact with that existing law and why is a
[53:06] second broader bill necessary. >> it builds off of that so the
[53:09] companion chat bots are a subset of what is covered in this bill.
[53:13] per your first question, where chatgpt was not and explicitly
[53:20] is. And this is much more focused on
[53:22] on children and specific featured applied to children.
[53:27] >> all right. In terms of the pockets for
[53:33] amendment and I'm sure that would not be your preference but
[53:37] is that is something that is in the mix as we move forward
[53:44] today, would you be willing to accept the amendment narrowing
[53:48] the definition to simulate an ongoing emotional relationship
[53:52] which is what the justification actually describes rather than
[53:56] all generative generative a.I. With a natural language
[54:01] interface? >> I woulder that would exclude
[54:03] case like adam rains and I want to ensure that cha the board of
[54:12] trustees most frequently used are covered by this bill.
[54:15] >> thank you very much mr. Bores, that's all I've got
[54:18] and I will let you go. Smurm.
[54:21] >> speaker: thank you. Mr. Yeager.
[54:26] >> thank you, madam speaker may I speak on the bill.
[54:27] >> speaker: on the bill. >> thank you.
[54:32] this appears to be one of the very rare occasions that we see
[54:36] a bill that is so deeply thought out that really for me at least,
[54:40] really begs no question. This is the kind of bill that
[54:42] finds the right mix. Doesn't get in the ray of
[54:46] technological advancements. It simply establishes a burden
[54:50] on developers don't let kids access dangerous stuff.
[54:55] it's easy. We know that a.I. Today really
[54:58] runs the gamut from everything as simple as, you know, looking
[55:03] at a product on amazon and then the a.I. Box pops up and you can
[55:08] request questions about it and it's a computer that is giving
[55:11] you the answers to a company that I toured a number of months
[55:14] ago. It was a start-up and they have
[55:16] the ability to take a human picture, a face, and put it into
[55:21] a.I. And develop a human body and voice like custom service
[55:31] representative that they market to customers where you can
[55:33] actually talk to the computer and see a person, not a person,
[55:39] talking back to you and to the unindoctrine indoctrinated, you
[55:44] may think you are talking to a person.
[55:46] the ban that we are talking about today is to make sure that
[55:49] kids don't find themselves in a place where, through the qoibd
[55:56] of-- the kind of circumstances that the gentleman spoke of in
[55:58] his opening statement, the loneliness and despair that we
[56:04] know children have from time to time and they find themselves
[56:08] turning to a computer for companionship.
[56:11] when some of us were younger, aol was just coming out and
[56:14] could you go online and talk to anyone anywhere and then over
[56:19] time we realized allowing kids to go online and talk to anyone
[56:24] anywhere by computer with anonymity was really a bad idea
[56:28] and we needed to make sure we are putting safeguards in to
[56:31] protect kids from that. The key when we pass these kinds
[56:35] of bills, in my view is let's not lock new york back from the
[56:44] availability of technological advancements such that we are
[56:47] denying our constituents things that are good for them to have
[56:51] and b: that we are denying our state the ability of business to
[56:55] do business here. We want people to do business
[56:58] here and we want people not to hate us and go somewhere else
[57:00] with their business. But this bill is so perfectly in
[57:07] my mind at least, thought out in the way that it puts this burden
[57:12] on developers. Look, if you can't figure out a
[57:15] way to keep your product from being dangerous to kids then
[57:20] don't put your product out in the marketplace.
[57:23] keep it out, keep it safe, keep it down until it's ready and
[57:28] when these products in the case the gentlemen spoke about
[57:36] earlier, a simple question of home work to the point where the
[57:39] product there is no schumm abwatching it and the product is
[57:42] able to get to the place where it is encouraging this dangerous
[57:49] behavior, and even if it is mentally dangerous to the point
[57:53] where it is teaching kids things they ought not know at an age
[57:56] appropriate time, this is a place that we can step in stop
[58:00] it, right now and make sure that companies understand their
[58:08] responsibilities to society and the question I don't like voting
[58:13] on bills that have fines and tax and penalties.
[58:16] I hate those and I frequently find myself, I look at a bill
[58:19] and it looks like a good idea and I look at the penalty and I
[58:21] don't want to vote for this but a penalty as the gentle woman
[58:29] spoke of earlier $250 million, to be honest if you put out a
[58:34] product so irresponsiblesbly that it takes a child's life.
[58:36] I don't know that $250 million is to high a price.
[58:42] it may be too low. I think we have to every once in
[58:47] a while really step back from the mind set that we don't want
[58:50] to get into the way of industry, for those of us who consider
[58:52] that to be a guiding factor and many of us do.
[58:58] we don't want to get in the way of new york's ability to lead in
[59:03] this nation and we want people to do business here.
[59:05] we have to take a step back every once in a while from that
[59:08] and say what are we doing to society?
[59:10] and is this a small place at that time we can insert
[59:14] ourselves-- I hate when government inserts themselves in
[59:16] people's lives and starts telling them what to do.
[59:18] but when we are trying to protect children's lives, this
[59:20] is the right place to do it. So I'm very grateful to the
[59:23] sponsor for this bill. I intend to vote in favor of it
[59:26] and I know that while this may be last time that we get to hear
[59:31] the sponsor debate to this floor, I look forward to at some
[59:35] point, turning on tv in january and seeing him debate somewhere
[59:39] else and I'm very grateful for his service on this floor.
[59:42] thank you very much madam speaker.
[59:43] >> speaker: thank you ms. Peoples-stokes.
[59:48] >> thank you, madam speaker, would the sponsor yield for the
[59:51] a question. >> speaker: would the sponsor
[59:53] yield. >> yes.
[59:57] >> speaker: sponsor yields. >> how will this be enforced
[1:00:00] when someone is found to be guilty of these actions.
[1:00:03] how will it be enforced. >> the enforcement is done by
[1:00:06] the attorney general. >> I'm sorry, say it again.
[1:00:07] >> attorney general has the right to bring action.
[1:00:11] >> is it attached to civil or criminal penalties?
[1:00:15] >> yes. Injunctive relieve and civil
[1:00:20] penalty up to 25,000 per violation.
[1:00:23] >> thank you. >> start startling to me to
[1:00:28] think that one in three people literally will allow a chat bot
[1:00:32] to wreck their lives, but they do I want to thank you for
[1:00:37] sponsoring this legislation it's important.
[1:00:43] if we had been ahead of the social media phenomenon when it
[1:00:46] came and protected our churn, we wouldn't be going backwards with
[1:00:49] the mental health resources trying to fix them.
[1:00:50] if this allows us to not have anymore young people to that
[1:00:58] pile of people who have been victims, unknowingly of a.I. Or
[1:01:03] social media or facebook or which ever one you use, we need
[1:01:09] to stop hurting our children this way thank you for
[1:01:13] introducing this legislation. I hope it not only passes today
[1:01:17] but makes its was I to the second floor and gets signed and
[1:01:22] implemented as soon as possible. Thank you.
[1:01:26] >> speaker: thank you. >> speaker: read the last
[1:01:29] section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[1:01:31] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[1:01:33] record the vote. [voting in progress] mr. Bores
[1:02:34] to explain his vote. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[1:02:40] this bill is based on a simple idea that if you cannot make
[1:02:45] chat bots safe for children, you should not make them available
[1:02:48] to children. But getting the details right
[1:02:52] took time and a lot of work and I want to thank many people who
[1:02:55] are part of that. My many co-sponsors on both
[1:03:00] sides of the aisle. My colleague from the 59th
[1:03:06] senate district who shepherded it through this year.
[1:03:08] the attorney general and her entire office who helped with
[1:03:10] the rule making and speak to the urgency and those outside of
[1:03:15] new york government, commonsense media who helped bring so much
[1:03:18] attention to this issue, secretary clinton who weighed in
[1:03:23] on the importance of protecting children and most importantly,
[1:03:28] parents of any child who has been affected, especially
[1:03:31] matthew rain and maria rain, who came to albany to tell the story
[1:03:37] of her son and to urge us into action our democratic
[1:03:43] institutions are facing a fundamental question which is
[1:03:46] whether we are able to govern transformative technology before
[1:03:51] it conchs us today as a body we all get to say yes.
[1:03:55] I could not think of a more important or more appropriate
[1:04:00] bill to be my final bill in this chamber.
[1:04:03] I proudly vote yes. >> speaker: mr. Bores in the
[1:04:10] affirmative. Mr. Brown to explain his vote.
[1:07:02] >> I rise in support of this piece of legislation and I want
[1:07:05] to thank the sponsor for it. Artificial intelligence is
[1:07:08] advancing at exroor extraordinarily pace.
[1:07:13] while the technologies offer tremendous opportunities they
[1:07:15] also present serious risk if places in the hands of children
[1:07:18] out appropriate safeguards. This bill recognizes a simple
[1:07:21] reality: children are still developing emotion a, socially
[1:07:26] and psych lodge psychologically. They are particularly vulnerable
[1:07:30] to technology designed to build trust, simulate companionship
[1:07:35] and encourage ongoing engagement.
[1:07:38] no child should be placed in a position where an a.I. Bot can
[1:07:41] present themselves as a friend or emotional companion and
[1:07:47] encouraging secrecy and harmful behaviors.
[1:07:49] this establishes guard rails to ensure a.I. Systems that they do
[1:07:52] not promote self harm, isolation, dangerous conduct or
[1:07:56] sexually explicit interactions with minors.
[1:07:59] I appreciate the sponsor's work on this bill and I vote in favor
[1:08:03] of it and encourage my colleagues to do the same.
[1:08:06] >> speaker: mr. Brown in the affirmative.
[1:08:09] ms. Gonzales rojas to explain her vote.
[1:08:10] >> thank you, madam speaker. I want to thank the sponsors in
[1:08:13] both houses for this powerful bill.
[1:08:17] in a moment where we are facing a mental health crisis among our
[1:08:20] young people, it is crilts that we ensure that we have the
[1:08:24] protections necessary so that they don't pursue that harm to
[1:08:28] themselves. As a mom, this is a very
[1:08:30] emotional bill. And something that I know will
[1:08:33] protect our young people across the state of new york.
[1:08:36] so I I am proud to vote in the affirmative and hope to continue
[1:08:39] to do everything we can to protect our young people from
[1:08:43] the harms of artificial intelligence.
[1:08:44] thank you so much. >> speaker: thank you ms. Gons
[1:08:47] less in the affirmative. Mr. Jensen to explain his
[1:08:50] vote. >> thank you, madam speaker to
[1:08:52] explain my vote. In about a month and a half ago
[1:08:57] my wife and I were sitting in the living room and we heard our
[1:09:00] seven-year-old in the kitchen start talking to the a.I.
[1:09:04] assistant in our kitchen. Having a full blown conversation
[1:09:07] with it. And for that reason, I vote yes.
[1:09:13] >> speaker: mr. Jensen in the affirmative.
[1:09:26] mr. Yeager to explain his vote.
[1:09:30] >> thank you, madam speaker. Very briefly.
[1:09:32] I really am glad as I look at the board to see the unanimity
[1:09:40] this topic gets from both sides of the aisle.
[1:09:44] fining the right place to be for the people of new york, this is
[1:09:47] the kind of topic that really got our attention in a very real
[1:09:51] way I'm so grateful to the sponsor for doing this.
[1:09:54] it's also something we have to remember as he departs and we
[1:09:58] take these conversations up. By the time we are back here in
[1:10:02] january, it goes to be a whole new world of a.I.
[1:10:05] this stuff is developing so fast and so quickly, way faster than
[1:10:11] we are able to develop our responses to it.
[1:10:13] one of the things this bill does is ask the attorney general's
[1:10:16] office to write regulations and I'm hopeful that occurs as
[1:10:23] speedy as possible because this is happening right now and about
[1:10:28] the I time we blink twice, it will be a whole new level of
[1:10:31] a.I. We have to address. Thank you very much to the
[1:10:34] gentleman for sponsoring this and I photo in the affirmative.
[1:10:37] >> speaker: mr. Yeager in the affirmative.
[1:10:38] ms. Walsh to explain her vote. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[1:10:47] as a parent as somebody who who was a kid once a long time ago
[1:10:51] it's really frightening these days to see how much-- well,
[1:10:57] first, really, my two older boys, as they were going through
[1:11:03] school, they had flip phones and the changes just in that versus
[1:11:07] what I saw with my younger kids, it was really shocking and I
[1:11:10] think all of us saw and see routinely our kids getting so
[1:11:17] deeply into their phones that they are really having
[1:11:19] difficulty connecting with real people.
[1:11:26] and I think this is important legislation.
[1:11:27] I'm very grateful to the sponsor for spending time with me, like
[1:11:32] in my office trying to explain this stuff ahead of time and
[1:11:36] letting me know what bills were coming up and why they were
[1:11:40] important. I appreciate your work in this
[1:11:42] area and I know that I believe, I hope that there will be
[1:11:47] somebody to pick up the mantle after you leave because I
[1:11:51] absolutely agree with the previous speaker and that's what
[1:11:56] scares me so much, there is always going to be the next
[1:11:59] thing and the next thing and we as the legislature are slow and
[1:12:02] cloggy sometimes about getting work done and keeping up with
[1:12:07] technology and when we come back in january, we will have a whole
[1:12:10] new host of issues that we are going to be dealing with so I
[1:12:12] will be voting in the affirmative.
[1:12:16] hey, listen. If the second floor thinks this
[1:12:20] needs a tweak here or there but when you see the unanimous vote,
[1:12:24] you know that there are a lot of people significantly worried
[1:12:27] about this and grateful for the initiative.
[1:12:29] I will be in the affirmative and I thank you, madam speaker.
[1:12:33] >> speaker: thank you ms. Walsh in the affirmative.
[1:13:25] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[1:13:26] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 135 nays 0.
[1:13:28] >> speaker: the bill is passed. Ms. Peoples-stokes.
[1:13:33] >> madam speaker, members have on their desk an a calendar and
[1:13:36] b. Please now move to advance that
[1:13:42] one. >> speaker: on
[1:13:44] ms. Peoples-stokes motion, the a and b calendar are advanced.
[1:13:47] >> thank you. Now if we could go to rules
[1:13:50] report 534. By mr. Jacob son, please.
[1:13:59] >> speaker: on debate a calendar page 3 rules report 534 clerk
[1:14:02] will read. >> assembly 5036c rules report
[1:14:06] 534 mr. Jacobson, kun current resolution of the senate and
[1:14:09] assembly proposing an amendment to section 2 is of article 6,
[1:14:12] article 13 and section 6, article 4 of the constitution.
[1:14:22] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[1:14:23] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[1:14:24] an explanation has been asked mr. Jacob son.
[1:14:32] >> this constitutional amendment will move to even year elections
[1:14:35] the remaining offices outside of new york city which were not
[1:14:39] previously moved to even year elections.
[1:14:42] this change will not apply to village elections.
[1:14:48] previously the constitutional offices of sheriff, county clerk
[1:14:55] district attorney, family court judge, county court judge
[1:14:59] surrogate court judge and district judge and town
[1:15:03] justices, as well as cities could not be moved to even years
[1:15:08] by statute. This amendment means that ow
[1:15:11] side of new york city, all judicial officers, city
[1:15:16] officers, county clerks, district attorneys and sheriffs
[1:15:20] will be elected in even year elections.
[1:15:25] the result of these changes will mean less voter confusion and
[1:15:32] higher turnout and counties will save a huge 5789 of money by not
[1:15:37] having to run annual elections. >> speaker: mr. Slater.
[1:15:45] >> good afternoon would the sponsor yield for some
[1:15:47] questions. >> speaker: would the sponsor
[1:15:47] yield. >> yes, I will.
[1:15:49] >> sponsor yields. >> thank you very much
[1:15:52] mr. Jacobson, can you confirm that in 2023 we already moved a
[1:15:59] number-- a substantial number of town and county elections to
[1:16:02] even numbered years? >> yes, we did and have we taken
[1:16:11] the time to measure any of the metrics that come with that
[1:16:14] transition? Have we measured turnout
[1:16:16] changes? Have we measured voter
[1:16:19] engagement, voter knowledge? Have we measured any of those
[1:16:22] items in understanding how that transition has occurred?
[1:16:26] >> well, I'm sure that if you compared the turnout in the
[1:16:32] recent even years, there would be much higher than those in odd
[1:16:36] years. >> and has that transition
[1:16:39] concluded? Have all those elections moved
[1:16:44] moved to the even year cycles so we can properly measure turnout
[1:16:47] as you just said. >> sure.
[1:16:49] you can pleasure it. >> my question is have all the
[1:16:55] elections impacted transitioned to the even year cycles?
[1:17:00] >> no, because some of the town offices what have not come up
[1:17:07] yet but those that have, you can measure but they're not all
[1:17:14] transitioned over so is it fair to say you cannot evaluate fully
[1:17:17] the impact of the last major reform that we are discussing.
[1:17:21] >> I can tell you right now if you compare the opportunity
[1:17:25] toker in your county in 2024, I guarantee you it was a lot
[1:17:33] higher than in 2023 or 2021. >> but can you gash tee that the
[1:17:44] downballot candidates-- can you guarantee that the down ballot
[1:17:47] candidates received as much attention as they did
[1:17:48] previously. >> they were elected.
[1:17:50] >> except this is the first year.
[1:17:54] this november that these candidates are going to be on an
[1:17:57] even year ballot. Is that accurate.
[1:18:07] >> we are confident that there will be greater turnout and I'm
[1:18:14] sure that the voters will make the decisions.
[1:18:17] >> based on that answer, my interpretation is that you
[1:18:21] cannot actually use any metrics to prove the fact that there is
[1:18:27] greater engagement on the down ballot offices because it has
[1:18:31] not occurred yet. >> I didn't say that.
[1:18:34] I said there is more turnout. >> I said it was my
[1:18:37] interpretation of your answer. >> well, that's your
[1:18:41] interpretation. I'm saying there is more turnout
[1:18:43] and and I'm sure that when you go door to door, you can talk
[1:18:47] about voter engagement. >> can't wait to do it when I
[1:18:50] get home. Can the sponsor confirm that
[1:18:53] new york city is exempt from the city election provisions of this
[1:18:57] amendment. >> that's true.
[1:18:59] >> why are cities and counties throughout the rest of
[1:19:03] new york state treated differently than the city of
[1:19:05] new york? >> well, first of all, we moved
[1:19:11] the town elections. And at the time, there were
[1:19:19] complaints, some on your side of the aisle, some on my side
[1:19:23] saying why aren't we moving all of it.
[1:19:25] >> it's going to be terrible because we will be having all
[1:19:29] these town and county elections and yet the county clerk or the
[1:19:35] da or the sheriff won't be in the same year and I would have
[1:19:39] to explain that we needed a constitutional amendment in
[1:19:44] fact, I have somebody who was a town judge out of my district
[1:19:49] said please changes this or I might be the only race on the
[1:19:56] ballot in an odd year so that's what we are doing.
[1:19:59] >> my question is why are our cities and counties throughout
[1:20:03] the rest of new york being treated differently than
[1:20:11] new york city? First of all, new york city is
[1:20:14] quite different. If you look at the turnout
[1:20:19] outside of new york city much lower, less media coverage less
[1:20:31] daily newspapers than there used to be and what happens in
[1:20:34] new york city gets covered nationally.
[1:20:35] so they have a different situation if in the future we
[1:20:40] want to do that we can. And this is an incremental
[1:20:48] process. Basically, again my
[1:20:50] interpretation of your answer is because of the media
[1:20:54] new york city gets they're being treated differently.
[1:20:55] >> that's part of it. >> yeah can the sponsor confirm
[1:21:03] that this exact proposal was already presented to the voters
[1:21:06] of new york city? >> that this proposal what?
[1:21:12] >> was presented to the voters of new york city was there not a
[1:21:16] referendum in new york city to move their elections to even
[1:21:21] years? >> well, it's not relevant to
[1:21:26] this. There is-- there was a
[1:21:27] referendum, it was an opinion referendum.
[1:21:30] >> and the result of that referendum was that
[1:21:34] new york city voters rejected that referendum.
[1:21:41] >> yes. >> new york city voters--
[1:21:43] >> they're not included in this so it doesn't make a difference.
[1:21:45] >> they are in a sense because new york city voters were
[1:21:50] allowed to reject this concept for themselves while
[1:21:54] simultaneously being allowed to vote on whether the rest of
[1:21:59] new york state should be subject to the exact thing that they
[1:22:03] rejected. Is that true.
[1:22:05] >> first of all, we are not changing the cones tuition to
[1:22:10] say that the entire state can't vote on a constitutional
[1:22:14] amendment. And it was-- it wasn't a binding
[1:22:22] referendum in new york city and I'm sure if it was binding,
[1:22:26] would have been more education of the voters and we don't know
[1:22:29] what the outcome would be. >> mr. Jacobson, the facts
[1:22:32] remain that new york city was presented with a referendum to
[1:22:37] move their elections to even years and rejected it but
[1:22:40] because of the referendum process in new york, they will
[1:22:42] be able to dictate that exact question for the rest of the
[1:22:45] state even though they are exempt from the resolution
[1:22:48] before us. >> they're not dictating
[1:22:52] anything. Hopefully we will pass this
[1:22:59] constitutional amendment 24 year and next year and voters of the
[1:23:02] entire state will get to vote. >> including the voters in the
[1:23:04] five boroughs of new york city who said no to applying this to
[1:23:07] themselves. >> well, there is always in a
[1:23:11] constitutional amendment, the entire state gets to vote
[1:23:18] including. >> including those who already
[1:23:20] said no. Is the sponsor aware that the
[1:23:23] new york state conference of mayors formally opposes this
[1:23:28] proposal? >> I've heard some of that but I
[1:23:34] also know that once, I think once things get, moves along, it
[1:23:41] will be a lot better. >> so you disagree with their
[1:23:44] concerns regarding voter fatigue, that they raised in
[1:23:49] their formal opposition. >> I think there is more voter
[1:23:53] fatigue when you have a lot of elections in one year, very few
[1:23:59] in another. And then it's just like when
[1:24:02] voter fatigue when is you have a lot of elections.
[1:24:05] when you have school board elections and fiery electricses
[1:24:09] and all these different things that's voter fatigue and this
[1:24:16] way it will be in even years and less confusion by the voters
[1:24:20] which will also mean more turnout.
[1:24:22] >> so do you, as a sponsor, then disagree that local races may
[1:24:27] become overshadowed by federal or statewide races.
[1:24:32] >> I don't think so. >> is it your position that
[1:24:39] local elections receive too much attention since they are
[1:24:42] currently off cycle? >> I have no opinion on that.
[1:24:50] and I think that it's irrelevant.
[1:24:57] >> I think it's very relevant whenever you are talking about
[1:25:00] local elections. Your memo suggests a town judge
[1:25:04] ship may be the only office on the ballot in some years.
[1:25:08] I was trying to understand why that would be can you explain
[1:25:10] that to me? >> sure, because if bee didn't
[1:25:12] change that, the judges cycle would stay the same in the town
[1:25:19] and, if they were elected in an odd year for four years, then
[1:25:22] they would have it again and another four years, they would
[1:25:26] be the odd years, while everything else will be in an
[1:25:30] even year. In that town.
[1:25:32] >> so under the provisions of the resolution that would, in
[1:25:36] fact change. >> that's correct.
[1:25:37] >> so we are not looking at a situation where you are only
[1:25:41] having town judges on the ballot in odd years.
[1:25:43] >> that's right. Should like that.
[1:25:45] >> I don't know if I really do. During the implementation, will
[1:25:51] any elected officials serve longer than voters originally
[1:25:57] expected? >> no.
[1:26:00] >> during's the implementation will any elected officials serve
[1:26:05] shorter than voters originally expected?
[1:26:07] >> no. >> will you have to adjust the
[1:26:13] terms for the offices to match up with the odd year transition?
[1:26:18] >> no. >> did we have to adjust the
[1:26:23] terms of offices for those elections on the ballot now or
[1:26:30] coming in the future to transition to this even year
[1:26:36] cycle? >> no, what will happen is as
[1:26:41] I'm sure you read the amendment is that if a judge's term
[1:26:51] expires in an odd year, they would serve that term.
[1:26:56] then there would be considered a vacancy.
[1:26:59] and then that vacancy would be filled as it is now.
[1:27:03] so if it's a town judge, then the supervisor or the council,
[1:27:11] whatever the local charter says, would get to make that
[1:27:15] appointment. That person would serve through
[1:27:19] the next general year and there would be any exin november of
[1:27:25] that even year. >> so then really you are taking
[1:27:31] away the ability for the people to choose sin it's a vacancy
[1:27:36] fill and a select few that are going to choose an extension of
[1:27:40] one's term. >> well, when the election does
[1:27:51] happen, there will be more voters participating and a
[1:27:55] supervisor, such as yourself, ho was elected by the voters would
[1:28:02] have a say in the appointment. >> but aren't we facing a
[1:28:07] situation right now, as we deal with the other local elections,
[1:28:10] that we have, in fact, changed the terms so that they get on to
[1:28:15] even year elections; for example, in my town, there was a
[1:28:19] local election last year and this year, the town supervisor
[1:28:24] is running for election. So rather than a two-year term,
[1:28:27] he is having or she, is having a one-year term.
[1:28:32] , but in this instance you are saying we are going-- we are not
[1:28:35] going to take that model up. We are going to do it
[1:28:38] differently even though we are trying to accomplish the same
[1:28:40] thing. And we are going to allow for a
[1:28:42] vacancy committee to approve either extension or a new person
[1:28:52] in in a situation like that you were describing.
[1:28:56] >> I disagree with the term vacancy committee abuse that's a
[1:28:58] very speck term when you are talking about elections, but it
[1:29:02] would be-- the vacancy would be appointed.
[1:29:04] >> an appointment. >> so we are knot going to-- we
[1:29:07] are not going to reduce the term of any judges.
[1:29:11] >> but it's still you are taking away the aem piece ability to
[1:29:16] choose that individual using the town judge as an example.
[1:29:22] the people are not going to decide that person should be
[1:29:25] able to serve for an additional year.
[1:29:27] they will be appointed by the town council or city council or
[1:29:31] whoever it is. >> that's true.
[1:29:36] that's who would do the appointment.
[1:29:37] and then more people would choose the penal nent
[1:29:45] replacement in that november of the even year is it the same
[1:29:53] model for every other constitutional.
[1:29:58] a state attorney runs for four years if a district attorney is
[1:30:03] running and ran last year right in 2025.
[1:30:06] they are, their expiration is in twine.
[1:30:09] they have a four-year term. Who is going to be the da for
[1:30:13] that one-year gap? >> it's already in the
[1:30:19] constitution that the governor appoints with the advice and
[1:30:23] consent of the senate. >> so even.
[1:30:28] so even if the people elect someone for four years, we are
[1:30:35] now setting up a trap door where they will not be able to hold
[1:30:40] office for a year and now you are telling me that the governor
[1:30:43] is going to be able to appoint somebody else to hold that
[1:30:48] position for a year-- I'm going to continue going.
[1:30:56] thanks. To hold that position for a year
[1:30:58] and potentially run for reelection based on an
[1:31:02] incumbency situation. >> we are not changing any of
[1:31:05] the appointment process for scwudges, county clerks
[1:31:10] sheriffs, that's what it is now. >> you are just creating a trap
[1:31:13] door for all those other elected officials so that the governor
[1:31:18] can appoint somebody in those situations that's what you are
[1:31:26] creating here I don't think it's a trap door.
[1:31:29] I think it's a door that when it is open will lead to more
[1:31:35] participation. >> by having one person, the
[1:31:38] governor of new york, one person decide who is going to hold a
[1:31:46] constitutional office for one year.
[1:31:47] >> that's how it is now. If a person dies in the middle
[1:31:50] of the term, the governor gets to appoint.
[1:31:52] that's how it is now. >> right but obviously the
[1:31:55] legislature isn't setting up a situation where you are going to
[1:31:58] cause someone's death this that role.
[1:32:01] I think that's a bit of an extreme example that you
[1:32:04] provided. You are creating a trap door
[1:32:06] because you are not either elongating or truncate the years
[1:32:11] of term, like we have for those elections that are are currently
[1:32:16] transitioning to an even year cycle.
[1:32:18] have you created two different standards.
[1:32:20] >> no, we are not-- first of all we are not truncate.
[1:32:25] we are putting in the constitutional amendment it says
[1:32:28] the office of sheriff, county clerk,and district attorney will
[1:32:35] be four years. >> but four is an even number
[1:32:39] and so you are still going to create a trap door situation.
[1:32:42] that's fine. And it's also terrible.
[1:32:46] I want to, if we can we recently talked about the texts texts
[1:32:54] these referendum. Will the ballot question explain
[1:32:58] that new york city is exempt from this received.
[1:33:09] >> it hasn't been prepared. %
[1:33:11] I would say probably we would talk about that.
[1:33:13] >> we talked about something similar in this realm and this
[1:33:16] is the kind of collaboration that I think is important.
[1:33:20] >> if the bill that we passed yesterday gets signed the
[1:33:25] legislature can make sure that it is an accurate portrayal
[1:33:30] accurate description of the amendment.
[1:33:33] >> same legislature that is creating a trap door for our
[1:33:36] sheriffs, district attorneys and judges.
[1:33:39] will the ballot question explain that new york city voters
[1:33:42] previously rejected a similar proposal?
[1:33:45] >> no. >> so we are not going to be
[1:33:48] honest with the voters when they're voting on something like
[1:33:50] this? >> that has nothing to to do
[1:33:53] with the terms after the amendment.
[1:33:55] >> I would disagree. >> when you have an amendment,
[1:33:58] do not put-- and by the way we adopted a certain thing, you
[1:34:02] don't put the bill history on that.
[1:34:05] you put a description of what it is and that's what we do.
[1:34:10] >> this is a very complicated matter because the structural
[1:34:15] deficiencies we have identified and so if we are going to be
[1:34:17] honest with the voters so they understand at an eighth grade
[1:34:21] level what this is growing to do, I just want to make sure
[1:34:24] that we are clear what we are telling them.
[1:34:27] will the ballot question explain to the legislature grantingth
[1:34:30] future authority over the implementation of this
[1:34:34] transition? >> yes.
[1:34:38] >> I hear yes and no. >> the ballot question is not at
[1:34:42] issue here. >> but it's going to become an
[1:34:44] issue because we have to ask the voters to approve it.
[1:34:52] >> speaker: mr. Blumencranz lack of sleep, I'm sorry.
[1:34:56] mr. Slater. If we could make sure-- I
[1:34:59] believe that we are trying to get to the understanding of the
[1:35:04] bill, but the ballot questions are not part of this proposal
[1:35:08] thank you. >> is there a section,
[1:35:26] mr. Jacobson that grants the legislature to make future
[1:35:29] transition adjustments by statute.
[1:35:31] >> yes. >> why is that authority
[1:35:35] necessary. >> because when whenever there
[1:35:39] is a constitutional amendment, the legislature always enacts
[1:35:46] statutes to implement it. We do that with the executive
[1:35:49] branch, we do that with the judicial branch so that's just
[1:35:54] standard operating procedure. >> is it that we are giving the
[1:36:01] legislature the ability to execute or make adjustments as
[1:36:05] needed. >> we will be carrying out the
[1:36:11] intent of the amendment. >> I think if you look at
[1:36:19] section 10 there is a question on the text the way some have
[1:36:29] interpreted it, they have given themselves authority to make
[1:36:33] changes following the constitutional amendment which
[1:36:35] in my mind counters the constitutional amendment because
[1:36:37] we are telling the voters we want you to approve a, and then
[1:36:40] if they approve a, we are giving ourselves the authority then to
[1:36:46] statutorily change a to a .1, a .2, a .3 without their approval
[1:36:52] and even without their only knowledge.
[1:36:56] am I reading that section correctly if not please give me
[1:36:59] your interpretation. >> you are not.
[1:37:01] all it says is we can pass legislation to implement the
[1:37:04] amendment. >> so we will not change
[1:37:07] statutorily anything that has to do with the transition of
[1:37:14] constitutional offices from odd to even years, if this is
[1:37:18] passed. The legislature will not pass a
[1:37:20] bill a piece of legislation. Do no changes to whatsoever.
[1:37:27] >> we will not pass any bill that would not be effectuated
[1:37:35] this amendment. >> and is that understanding
[1:37:42] going to be properly explained to the voters?
[1:37:54] >> when we have bills, I would hope that when you submit a
[1:38:00] bill, you explain it to your constituents and when I have
[1:38:04] bills or we vote on bills, we explain it to our constituents.
[1:38:07] >> I would just make note that I hope we are not going to be
[1:38:10] submitting bills to make adjustments to a constitutional
[1:38:14] amendment because I think we are giving ourselves as a
[1:38:17] legislature unwielding and unchecked authority.
[1:38:19] >> I said we are all going to do is pass legislation to implement
[1:38:25] there amendment. >> and if we have to make
[1:38:28] adjustments for that implementation, we are giving
[1:38:30] ourselves the ability to do it without going back to the
[1:38:34] voters. >> we are just going to
[1:38:38] implement the amendment. >> thank you very much for
[1:38:40] answering my questions. Madam speaker, if I can go on
[1:38:44] the bill. >> speaker: on the bill.
[1:38:45] >> with my remaining time and I just a lot of questions that
[1:38:50] remain in my mind why are we in such a hurry.
[1:38:57] three years ago this legislature enact the legislation that
[1:39:00] fundamentally changed how local elections are conducted in
[1:39:03] new york. Those changes are only now
[1:39:07] beginning to take effect. The transition has not been
[1:39:12] completed and the first cycle has not even occurred.
[1:39:16] the results are unknown yet before we have measured turnout,
[1:39:19] before we have measured voter engagement, before we have
[1:39:23] measured accountability and before we have heard from the
[1:39:26] communities that are affected, we are being asked to amend the
[1:39:30] constitution and move even more elections.
[1:39:35] I think that this is a premature step.
[1:39:39] we haven't even seen the results of the first step yet but there
[1:39:42] is another issue that should concern every member of this
[1:39:46] chamber and frankly every new yorker.
[1:39:49] new york city is exempt from these provisions yet
[1:39:53] new york city voters will still participate in a statewide
[1:39:58] referendum that could impose these changes on every other
[1:40:01] city and county in new york. Translation is the voters of
[1:40:05] new york city will determine elections for my constituents in
[1:40:11] putnam county. In erie county; and so on and so
[1:40:15] forth. Yet it doesn't apply to them.
[1:40:18] and that's particularly striking because new york city voters
[1:40:21] were previously given the opportunity to consider a
[1:40:24] similar proposal for themselves. And they rejected it.
[1:40:29] apparently new york city voters were entitled to decide this
[1:40:31] question for themselves. The rest of new york is not.
[1:40:37] madam speaker, I have the privilege of serving as town
[1:40:39] survivor before conditionalling here to this chamber and I can
[1:40:42] tell you there is something fundamentally different about
[1:40:46] local government. Many of my colleagues who have
[1:40:47] served in local government acknowledge that.
[1:40:50] local governments where residents show up to complain
[1:40:52] about pot holes and where families ask for safer
[1:40:55] intersections where business owners seek permits where
[1:40:57] parents advocate for their neighborhoods.
[1:41:01] it's where government is closest to the people local government
[1:41:05] is not washington and it is not here in albany and should not be
[1:41:10] treated as an after thought. Throughout this debate we heard
[1:41:13] concerns about elections where only local officials may appear
[1:41:15] on the ballot. Frankly I don't understand why
[1:41:20] that is problem if the only office in the ballot is district
[1:41:29] attorney, voters can focus on justice.
[1:41:32] if the only office on the ballot is judge, voters can focus on
[1:41:39] qualification on temperament. They're not empty they're
[1:41:42] focused. And there is value in giving
[1:41:43] voters the opportunity to focus on offices that most affect
[1:41:46] their daily lives. We also heard concerns raised by
[1:41:51] nycom that formally opposes this legislation and warn is that
[1:41:55] longer ballot may reduce attention to local races and
[1:41:58] weaken accountability for local officials.
[1:42:01] those concerns deserve consideration democracy not just
[1:42:08] about how many voters show up but if the voters are informed
[1:42:10] about the choices before them. This debate is not high turnout
[1:42:13] versus low turnout it's informed participation versus informed
[1:42:20] decision making and there is one final concern.
[1:42:23] this amendment grants the legislature future authority to
[1:42:28] make transition decisions and adjustments.
[1:42:30] we can disagree on that interpretation but that's how I
[1:42:34] read it and as we identified it creates a trap door for many of
[1:42:38] these county elected individuals to be replaced by one person,
[1:42:44] the governor of new york will the voters be told that?
[1:42:48] will voters be told that terms may be adjusted or that
[1:42:53] new york city is exempt? If those facts are not explained
[1:42:59] can we honestly say that voters are being asked to make a fully
[1:43:03] informed decision. Madam speaker changing election
[1:43:06] law is significant. Changing the constitution is
[1:43:11] even more significant and changing the constitution before
[1:43:13] we evaluate the last reform is not careful governance, it's
[1:43:19] purely speculation. First albany changed the rules
[1:43:22] and now wants to change the constitution for the second time
[1:43:25] in less than 24 hours and before we have even seen if the first
[1:43:29] change works. Local government deserves
[1:43:35] better. For these reasons, and many,
[1:43:40] many more,ly be voting no as many times as I possibly can and
[1:43:44] I urge everybody here to do the same.
[1:43:47] >> speaker: thank you. Mr. Sempolinski.
[1:43:49] >> thank you, madam speaker. Will the sponsor yields to are
[1:43:52] some questions? >> speaker: would the sponsor
[1:43:55] yield. >> yes.
[1:43:57] >> speaker: sponsor yields. >> so the process for this, we
[1:44:01] learned a lot about constitutional process this
[1:44:03] week. We would pass it this term.
[1:44:07] presumably it would come up again after an intervening
[1:44:11] election and it would go before the electorate, is that correct?
[1:44:14] >> yes if bee pass this amendment this year, it has to
[1:44:19] come up in a-- in the next session elected by different
[1:44:27] voters. >> would it be your intention to
[1:44:29] put this before the electorate in 2027 or 2028?
[1:44:34] >> that hasn't been decided yet. And that's not in the amendment.
[1:44:42] >> so because I know in >> so, when we did prop 1 a
[1:44:50] little bit ago it got pushed to an even year, I think it would
[1:44:54] be profoundly ironic if this particular amendment came up in
[1:44:59] 2027, wouldn't you? >> I haven't thought about that,
[1:45:03] actually. >> because 27 is an odd number,
[1:45:05] just for the record. Would anybody in their current
[1:45:15] term finish the current term to which they are elected?
[1:45:19] >> yes, everybody would finish their current term.
[1:45:21] >> then, whenever they'd come up, they'd run in the year they
[1:45:25] were supposed to run in, an odd numbered year, and run for one
[1:45:29] yore less? That's how we handled the
[1:45:32] previous statute. No, that's not in this.
[1:45:34] >> okay. How would it work then?
[1:45:35] >> there would with a vacancy, and the vacancy would be filled.
[1:45:41] assuming you're talking about when someone's term gets done in
[1:45:45] an odd year? >> yes.
[1:45:47] >> if it gets done in an odd year, then there would be a
[1:45:50] vacancy at the end of the completion of the term.
[1:45:53] the vague at this would be filled according to law, and
[1:45:57] then there would be an election in that even year.
[1:46:03] >> I don't want to put words in mr. Slater's mouth, I think it
[1:46:07] was the trap door he was referring to.
[1:46:09] so you're going to force there to be a period of time for all
[1:46:13] folks that are elected on odd numbered years where there would
[1:46:17] be a year where the electorate is not choosing who is holding
[1:46:21] that office, they would be appointed by the governor or
[1:46:24] local board or whatever? >> I would be whatever the law
[1:46:28] is as we handle vacancies now, the same way that, on your town
[1:46:35] board, if there's a vacancy, you get to appoint.
[1:46:40] >> but you're protensionly and almost inevitably creating some
[1:46:46] very long vacancies, in this case as you do the transition,
[1:46:50] if it goes as you've described it, you've got a year where
[1:46:54] enormous numbers of offices as you're transitions are going to
[1:46:58] be unelected people. That's a pretty dangerous for
[1:47:04] democracy, wouldn't you think? >> I don't think -- I think that
[1:47:07] we have appointed people to all kind of offices.
[1:47:13] in your town, your town board appoints when there's vacancies,
[1:47:17] and we do that throughout, and I don't think that it's --
[1:47:22] >> but it happens occasionally? Happens in the case of some sort
[1:47:26] of tragic death or resignation, it doesn't hall wholesale across
[1:47:30] the board across the state? >> but the solution is the same
[1:47:33] either way. What I'm saying is we had a
[1:47:36] different solution the last time we did this.
[1:47:38] but, okay. Also, with vacancies, if you
[1:47:42] have somebody resigned under this proposed amendment, resign
[1:47:48] or die early in an odd numbered year, you might have an
[1:47:55] unelected replacement for almost two years.
[1:47:58] >> well, it would be from the time of the appointment until
[1:48:06] the general election in the next even year.
[1:48:08] yeah, so imagine somebody, heaven forbid, dies january 1 of
[1:48:13] an odd numbered year, you're not going to have anybody in the
[1:48:17] public having a say over that office until november of the
[1:48:22] following year. >> well, the office would be
[1:48:26] filled by people who have been elected.
[1:48:29] >> okay, but the people wouldn't be choosing that?
[1:48:32] >> the process is that those appointing are people that have
[1:48:36] been elected. >> you keep say we're using the
[1:48:40] same process which is correct but it was never intended to
[1:48:44] fill office force multiple years, it was intended to fill
[1:48:47] until the next general election, in which case that would be
[1:48:53] under a year in our current system.
[1:48:55] >> what is the question? I'm sorry.
[1:49:00] >> did you catch everything? Are all offices included?
[1:49:04] this is sort of a mop-up from things that could been changed
[1:49:06] in the last statute. >> yeah, I would not call it a
[1:49:10] mop-up, I would say it would be keeling with those
[1:49:13] constitutional offices that could not have been done by
[1:49:16] statute. >> so, the intention is that
[1:49:18] there's no elections at all outside of the city of new york
[1:49:24] in an odd numbered year? >> that's correct.
[1:49:28] >> I have a technical question -- a lot of party
[1:49:33] positions state party committee, county party committee, not
[1:49:36] elected in the general election but primary elections.
[1:49:40] if more than one person runs for a county or state committee slot
[1:49:45] that is adjudicated in an open primary, oftentimes in an odd
[1:49:49] numbered of year the republican party elects their state nominee
[1:49:53] in an odd numbered year, half the republican counties do it in
[1:49:59] an odd numbered year, are they going to be the only thing on
[1:50:04] the ballot in a primary in an odd numbered year?
[1:50:08] >> it could be, but that's not what this is dealing with.
[1:50:13] this is dealing with elected public officials so that they
[1:50:19] will be running in even years, eventually.
[1:50:24] >> but my point is, if you miss something like that, a party
[1:50:28] official, which is handled through the board of elections,
[1:50:32] now you're not saving any money because they have to run an
[1:50:36] election. >> well, I think that the cost
[1:50:38] of running a district committee race is a lot less than running
[1:50:45] countywide. >> quite possibly and quite
[1:50:48] probably. >> I would say definitely
[1:50:50] because you're not going to havn districts, you're not going to
[1:50:59] have 300 inspectors. >> you could.
[1:51:01] you could have a primary in every one of those election
[1:51:07] districts. >> it's possible.
[1:51:11] >> okay. New york city, the largest city
[1:51:12] in america, in the state, is excluded from this.
[1:51:16] your answer to mr. Slater was because they have more intense
[1:51:20] media coverage. Yeah, and they're different.
[1:51:23] and what we're doing is, this is a piecemeal, this is a process
[1:51:31] that we're taking incrementally, I should say, it's an
[1:51:35] incremental process and, so, now, we're dealing with even
[1:51:49] year elections outside of north country.
[1:51:52] >> if this is so important that it has to change the entire
[1:51:55] electoral system of the part of the state that I'm from, why not
[1:51:58] do it for everybody all at once? You could change it in two
[1:52:10] seconds. >> we're not new york city.
[1:52:14] the reason we're doing this now, as I mentioned before, is
[1:52:17] because there were constitutional offices they
[1:52:22] could not have been done by statute, so, now, all those
[1:52:26] positions will be the same as the others.
[1:52:29] >> except for the city of new york.
[1:52:34] >> the county court, county clerk, the sheriff will be in
[1:52:40] the same year as the county executive and the county
[1:52:43] legislature. >> right, but I still don't
[1:52:46] understand why new york city would be included other than you
[1:52:50] have answered about media and maybe it's excluded, and you
[1:52:54] will come back to it. I think everybody in the state
[1:52:56] of new york should be treated the same.
[1:52:58] do you not? >> just want to say to you
[1:53:07] prior, you know, we do treat new york city different.
[1:53:10] there are a lot of bills that don't talk about how they only
[1:53:13] apply to a city oaf 1 million, and, so --
[1:53:18] >> this has nothing to do with the partisan makeup of the city
[1:53:23] of new york? >> no.
[1:53:25] >> okay. Well, I'm going to go on the
[1:53:27] bill. >> speaker: on the bill.
[1:53:28] >> so, if I'm counting right, I'm a little punchy because it's
[1:53:31] been a rough week, I think this is blatant power grab number
[1:53:36] four but I may be off one or two, I don't know.
[1:53:40] I think we should not be mixing local elections with state and
[1:53:47] federal elections. We have such a problem in this
[1:53:54] country of hyperpartisanship, hyperpolarization, and one of
[1:54:01] the few areas of our system that has avoided that is some of our
[1:54:06] local. I represent a lot of really
[1:54:09] small towns where people are measured in the hundreds and in
[1:54:11] some cases less than a hundred. You don't have a lot of
[1:54:18] hyperpartisanship there, they just want the roads plowed, tax
[1:54:23] money handled appropriately, and we're going to inject the
[1:54:27] disease of hyperpartisanship and polarization into those local
[1:54:31] elections by tying them to what's further up the food chain
[1:54:35] and, as I said, this has been a very disappointing and offensive
[1:54:41] week for what has happened here with the manipulation of our
[1:54:49] election system. I'll say the same thing I said
[1:54:52] with the last silly amendment, please stop messing with the
[1:54:57] state constitution. >> speaker: mr. Palmesano.
[1:55:08] >> will the sponsor yield. >> speaker: will the sponsor
[1:55:10] yield? >> yes.
[1:55:10] >> speaker: the sponsor yields.
[1:55:15] >> I'm going to repeat some comments made but I think it's
[1:55:20] important to talk about it. I've heard you speak about even
[1:55:27] year elections. This is about you believe it
[1:55:30] will improve democracy, this will improve participation in
[1:55:35] our democracy. Is that what you think?
[1:55:38] >> I think there will be greater turnout and when we do that's
[1:55:41] good for democracy. And, so, you trust the voters.
[1:55:45] >> I trust the voters. I think anybody that seeks the
[1:55:48] voters trust should trust the voters.
[1:55:51] >> I agree. About this turnout and this
[1:55:57] trust, so, now we're going to pass this now and then we would
[1:56:02] have to pass this resolution next year, right?
[1:56:08] >> either next year or the year after.
[1:56:11] >> but would you agree, if you want that participation, you
[1:56:14] said you hadn't decided, shouldn't you commit and say
[1:56:21] we're going to bring this up for a vote in 2018, wouldn't you say
[1:56:27] if you so strongly believe going to an even year election, why
[1:56:33] don't you commit now in front of this body in the interest of
[1:56:38] full transparency of the voters that we'll put it on the ballot
[1:56:44] in 2028 instead of 2027? Shouldn't we do that?
[1:56:47] >> that's a very good suggestion and I will pass that along.
[1:56:51] >> I think it's a great suggestion.
[1:56:53] >> I might like that idea. >> great.
[1:56:55] let's make sure. >> I will pass that along and
[1:56:58] whoever makes that decision can consider that.
[1:57:00] >> all right. So, have you heard any
[1:57:04] support -- obviously, this is going to have a far-reaching
[1:57:08] impact on our local villages, our towns, our counties,
[1:57:14] correct? >> well, villages are not
[1:57:18] included. >> I corrected myself after the
[1:57:20] fact. Our d.a.s, our sheriffs, our
[1:57:23] county clerks, our counties, our cities, this will have a far
[1:57:28] reaching impact, correct? >> yeah, it will have an impact.
[1:57:33] it also will save the boards of election money.
[1:57:39] >> well, that's another debatable thing.
[1:57:42] so, have you got -- I mean, obviously, you've heard there's
[1:57:45] opposition for the new york council of mayors.
[1:57:54] have you sought input from any other associations?
[1:57:58] are they 100% on board with this because usually when we see
[1:58:02] bills come before this house we get input from a lot of these
[1:58:06] organizations especially when it impacts them.
[1:58:08] obviously this legislation, this constitutional amendment we have
[1:58:12] in this house now impacts those organizations.
[1:58:16] did you reach out to these organizations and say what do
[1:58:19] you think? What would you change?
[1:58:21] did you reach out to any of these organizations?
[1:58:24] >> we did speak or they contacted us, I forget how it
[1:58:28] happened, the office of court administration.
[1:58:48] >> they suggested we do something that would not extend
[1:58:51] terms for some and not others so that was taken into account.
[1:58:55] I'll get on extending terms in a minute.
[1:59:10] >> okay. What about the towns, sheriffs,
[1:59:12] d.a.s, clerks, did you reach out to them and ask them for
[1:59:16] their input on impactful legislation that is so far
[1:59:19] reaching impact, tid you ask them their opinion and, if so,
[1:59:22] what did they say? >> no, I'm sorry.
[1:59:30] >> you didn't ask them? >> we didn't reach out.
[1:59:35] what this does is puts those few offices that were note
[1:59:39] previously moved to even years in alignment with the others.
[1:59:49] we think it makes a lot of sense.
[1:59:52] >> I know you believe -- when we had the even veer election a
[2:00:07] couple of years ago that we did, my office received a hot of
[2:00:09] memos of opposition from communities saying we want our
[2:00:14] local control over these collections, we want to decide.
[2:00:23] was that considered knowing there was widespread opposition
[2:00:26] to the previous one, statute, this being the constitution, did
[2:00:30] you get feedback? Does that not play into the
[2:00:33] discussion or do you just feel we know best is this.
[2:00:49] >> if we pass this the group she mentioned and people in general
[2:00:52] can make their voices heard before we take it up again for a
[2:01:03] vote. >> I hope they view and I'm sure
[2:01:05] they will. I want to get on to the counties
[2:01:08] and town elections aside. I want to talk about the
[2:01:12] d.a.s, sheriffs and judges, my colleagues brought that up
[2:01:16] before, those under the constitution if there's a
[2:01:20] vacancy the governor appoints that vague circumstances
[2:01:22] correct? >> correct.
[2:01:23] >> for the remainder of the term or that calendar year?
[2:01:28] they'd appoint -- if there's a vacancy in an odd year or
[2:01:35] anytime, the governor appoints and then the election would be
[2:01:38] in the next general election in an even year.
[2:01:42] >> so the next general election. Okay.
[2:01:44] so, you would agree, wouldn't you, if there's a vacancy that
[2:01:51] takes place and the governor appoints that vacancy, now
[2:01:56] there's a power of incumbency that comes with that position,
[2:01:59] that individual who the governor appoints is going to be off to a
[2:02:08] stronger advantage going into that general election, correct?
[2:02:11] >> that could happen or they could do a terrible job and have
[2:02:15] no chance of being elected to the position.
[2:02:17] >> no, I understand what you're saying.
[2:02:20] but you would agree someone who is appointed by the governor
[2:02:25] comes in and is an incumbent in that position right from the
[2:02:29] start, right? >> no, like I said, some people
[2:02:39] who are in office are reelected because people like them and
[2:02:43] other people don't like what they're doing.
[2:02:45] >> I agree with that, and I know you said this doesn't change
[2:02:49] that appointment process the dv appoints.
[2:02:51] that's been part of the constitution forever.
[2:02:53] that doesn't change. It's just following that same
[2:02:57] process, correct? >> correct.
[2:02:58] >> but what is changing with this process, we talked about
[2:03:02] well, maybe someone dies and there's a vacancy and the
[2:03:06] governor will appoint or something else happens or
[2:03:09] someone moves out of state or whatever then that's the
[2:03:12] process, but this legislation changes that significantly,
[2:03:16] doesn't it, because now you're talking about every local
[2:03:21] election, every town board, county executive, sheriff, and
[2:03:28] then the d.a. The d.a., county clerk and
[2:03:34] others because it affects all of us.
[2:03:37] there are widespread implications for these
[2:03:39] appointments the governor would make across the 62 counties.
[2:03:43] >> the appointments are not for a town board, it's for these few
[2:03:47] offices. >> I correct myself.
[2:03:48] I know I misspoke. It's for the d.a., it's for the
[2:03:52] sheriff, it's for the county clerk, it's for the judges.
[2:03:56] I correct myself, I misspoke. I think I'm just a little jacked
[2:04:00] up on this bill. If you haven't noticed.
[2:04:21] >> the governor will have input in all these instances now, is
[2:04:23] that correct? >> I understand where you're
[2:04:25] coming from. >> and on top of the language.
[2:04:36] now you control the language put on the ballot?
[2:04:38] >> I won't but the legislature will.
[2:04:46] >> would you agree that should be a full discussion of the
[2:04:50] legislature, not just the majority, minority leader, the
[2:04:54] senate, all of us? >> I couldn't speak to that.
[2:04:57] that's not in this amendment. >> I understand.
[2:05:00] but if you wanted to name it the voter participation protection
[2:05:04] and fair access act, you could name it that, couldn't you?
[2:05:08] you would have the power to name it that way, right?
[2:05:12] yes or no. >> I think that as far as the
[2:05:25] ballot, as far as the ballot, it has to accurately and fairly
[2:05:30] describe the amendment. >> thank you, mr. Jacobson for
[2:05:33] your time, madam speaker, on the bill.
[2:05:36] >> speaker: on the bill. >> well, welcome to "we know
[2:05:39] best week" in the capitol, welcome to "political party grab
[2:05:44] week" in the capitol. I think I counted four.
[2:05:49] first the redistricting amendment that's going to allow
[2:05:55] gerrymandering over congressional districts despite
[2:05:57] the fact that voters overwhelmingly rejected that
[2:06:01] first in 2014 with the creating of the independent redistricting
[2:06:05] commission and in 2021 when you guys tried to overturn it.
[2:06:08] then last night we had the politicalization or the judicial
[2:06:14] district changes to create more democratic judges which was
[2:06:18] followed up by the language bill which we were talking about here
[2:06:21] that you can write, despite the fact that, for over 100 years,
[2:06:28] the bipartisan board of elections had been working
[2:06:30] together to put that language together, you could put whatever
[2:06:33] language you want in that bill. It's really atrocious.
[2:06:42] why through all these things that we know best, you think you
[2:06:47] know best and, two, a political power grab.
[2:06:50] and now we have this one. Even year elections for
[2:06:53] everyone, all except for new york city.
[2:06:56] despite what the locals want, no talking to locals, none of them,
[2:06:59] none of those organizations, so now you say you're going to have
[2:07:04] more participation, I think you guys should say we're going to
[2:07:07] put this on the bill in '28, not 2k-7, but you know you're going
[2:07:13] to put it on the ballot in '27 because you don't want as
[2:07:17] much as participation in this, you want it more limited.
[2:07:20] just like you're going to do the redistricting in '27 for '28,
[2:07:25] the judicial amendment and on. And new york city will have a
[2:07:29] say in this despite the fact they rejected this.
[2:07:34] so, now, you're creating a situation we're going to have
[2:07:39] vacancies of d.a.s, county clerks, sheriffs, who will now
[2:07:43] when there's that vacancy that takes place be appointed by the
[2:07:46] governor of this state. I can tell you, right now, the
[2:07:52] people I represent in steuben county, yates county, seneca
[2:07:58] county, schuyler county, chemung county, they don't want this
[2:08:05] governor appointing the d.a., county clerk or sheriff of those
[2:08:10] counties. Emphatically, yes, this bill
[2:08:12] would allow for political appointments by the governor in
[2:08:17] impactful decisions. My colleague talked about it
[2:08:20] being a trap door, I emphasize it's a trap door and you drop
[2:08:25] into a bucket of you-know-what. That's exactly what this bill
[2:08:29] is. It's total b.s.
[2:08:31] you're hurting locals. You say you're all about
[2:08:35] protecting democracy, no, this hurts democracy.
[2:08:37] this is a blatant violation of local home rule, you know that,
[2:08:41] we know that, and you say you trust the voters, you say time
[2:08:46] and time again, but as I said last night on some of these, the
[2:08:49] problem is the voters don't trust us, and why don't they
[2:08:56] trust us? Because, time and time again,
[2:08:59] you bring pieces of legislation like this that just thumbs your
[2:09:05] nose at the voters wishes and what they want and have told us
[2:09:08] because why? You think you know best.
[2:09:12] why? Because all you are looking for
[2:09:15] with these bills is pure political power grab.
[2:09:19] it's wrong, it's not fair, it's shameful, it's disgusting, and
[2:09:26] even an eighth grader can understand that.
[2:09:31] so, for this, madam speaker, this, my colleagues, I will
[2:09:37] absolutely be voting no on this ridiculous constitutional
[2:09:42] amendment just like I did on the ridiculous redistricting
[2:09:46] amendment, the judicial amendment and the legislation to
[2:09:50] give you the language to write it, all about mitticle power
[2:09:54] grab, all about thinking you know what's best.
[2:09:58] shame on you. I vote no.
[2:10:01] >> thank you, mr. Palmesano. Respectfully just reminding
[2:10:05] colleagues that impugning the motives of other members is not
[2:10:08] permitted in debate and remarks should be related to the
[2:10:12] proposal currently before the house.
[2:10:15] ms. Bailey. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[2:10:18] will the sponsor yield for a few questions?
[2:10:20] >> speaker: will the sponsor yield?
[2:10:21] >> yes. >> speaker: the sponsor
[2:10:22] yields. >> thank you very much,
[2:10:24] mr. Jacobson. I have a few different areas
[2:10:26] that I need to ask some questions on.
[2:10:28] first and foremost, I do want to go back to the timing of this,
[2:10:33] and I believe you had indicated we couldn't do it all back in
[2:10:38] 2023 when we did the local elections, moving those to even
[2:10:42] years because this required a constitutional amendment.
[2:10:45] was I clear in hearing that? >> that's correct, for these
[2:10:48] offices. >> okay.
[2:10:49] could we have moved forward in 2024 and brought something
[2:10:54] before that body? >> could we have done a
[2:11:01] constitutional amendment then? >> could we have started the
[2:11:04] process in 2024, knowing we couldn't do it in 2023?
[2:11:08] >> sure. >> okay.
[2:11:08] so we could have brought it forward in 2024, we would have
[2:11:11] had a new body here in '25-'26, which it could have gone through
[2:11:20] that body at that time, correct? Yeah, it was introduced in '25,
[2:11:26] so that's a new legislature. >> okay.
[2:11:28] but it could have been introduced in '24?
[2:11:33] >> it could have been introduced, yeah.
[2:11:35] >> when we knew that it was a problem in '23?
[2:11:39] >> okay. >> I'm just asking.
[2:11:41] >> well, you get a chance to vote for it now.
[2:11:43] >> okay, I would have anyways. The next piece, I'm going to go
[2:11:49] on to the vacancies. So we talk about the vacancies
[2:11:52] and I heard you say a few times and I just want to make sure I
[2:11:55] understand what you are saying correctly is that it's -- you
[2:11:58] know, it's the same, that the town boards can appoint.
[2:12:04] I understand that as far as town justices go, the town boards can
[2:12:11] appoint. However, as we discussed here,
[2:12:14] the office of the sheriff would be an appointment by the
[2:12:21] governor, if senate is in session it has to be approved by
[2:12:24] them. The district attorney and county
[2:12:27] attorney are governor appointments?
[2:12:29] >> as they are now. >> as they are now, absolutely.
[2:12:32] I also heard you say those positions, as it is now there
[2:12:40] are appointments by the governor and that's what happens today.
[2:12:43] so I did a bit of math here and, in 2025, over 25% of those three
[2:12:49] positions were elected. So, they were elected in an odd
[2:12:56] year, they would be running in 29 again.
[2:12:59] but, if this passes, that's not going to be the case.
[2:13:03] am I understanding that correct? >> if this passes and the voters
[2:13:17] approve, yes, this would be in effect.
[2:13:20] >> so then the governor would appoint those positions
[2:13:26] potentially? She doesn't necessarily have to,
[2:13:28] or she or whoever it may be. >> that person that got elected
[2:13:43] in '25, we serve out the term which would be through the end
[2:13:47] of '29 and then there would be an appointment.
[2:13:50] >> potentially there could with a vacancy correct come january 1
[2:13:53] if that appointment has not taken place ahead of time?
[2:13:57] >> there would be a vacancy at the end of the term and then the
[2:14:02] vacancy would be filled as is in law now and that's with the
[2:14:05] governor. >> okay.
[2:14:06] so, that's 47 positions between district attorney, county clerk
[2:14:12] and sheriff in 2029 that this could potentially happen and I
[2:14:15] heard you say vacancies right now if someone passes away, you
[2:14:19] know, if they retire, so on and so forth, we're going to follow
[2:14:22] the same process, but I don't think we've ever had a year
[2:14:27] where 47 constitutional positions passed away or
[2:14:31] retired. So, it's just a large number
[2:14:35] that we are impacting here. I think there's ways in which we
[2:14:40] could change that. I'm not sure, you know, maybe,
[2:14:43] you know, in the election law right now it has the appointment
[2:14:46] to the governor but I hope this body would take that into
[2:14:50] account that 47 positions, come the end of december 2029,
[2:14:56] potentially could be vacant based off of this constitutional
[2:15:00] amendment that's before us today.
[2:15:05] my next question is going to go into we had talked ability voter
[2:15:11] fatigue, and part of the reason that the even year was brought
[2:15:16] forward in 2023 was to get voter turnout.
[2:15:19] I hear, like some of my colleagues in the counties that
[2:15:23] it represent, that they prefer to have their local elections on
[2:15:29] a ballot by themselves because then folks are coming out for
[2:15:32] those local election also. My question is, when I looked at
[2:15:41] your memo, it indicates that there is no fiscal implication
[2:15:45] for the state. Do we foresee fiscal
[2:15:49] implications to the counties? >> yes, there will be savings of
[2:15:53] money. I spoke, for example, to the
[2:15:58] commissioner of dutchess county which is a medium-sized county.
[2:16:03] >> very familiar with it. >> 300,000 people, they have 169
[2:16:08] election districts, and she toll me it costs generally around
[2:16:14] 450,000 a year. So, I think, in your county, you
[2:16:18] will see savings. >> okay.
[2:16:22] so, let's think about this ballot and what it looks like.
[2:16:25] I know some counties have digital, you know, ballot
[2:16:29] polling locations. I represent a town that that's
[2:16:32] what they vote on now, based on what their county.
[2:16:37] many counties have paper ballots that go into the reader.
[2:16:40] what does this ballot look like? Is there a stop?
[2:16:46] is it going to be 36 inches long that we're going to be sending
[2:16:51] through the machine? Is it going to be multiple
[2:16:54] pages? Those are some of the concerns
[2:16:55] that are out there by folks in the area that I represent that
[2:17:01] are true concerns for them because what does that mean for
[2:17:04] those town elections at the end of the ballot in even years
[2:17:09] moving forward? >> so, what is your -- so what
[2:17:14] is the question? >> I guess my question is have
[2:17:17] we thought about what the ballot looks like?
[2:17:23] >> that's not part of this amendment, but if there are
[2:17:31] concerns, I'm sure we will work with the local commissioners and
[2:17:35] the state board to address those concerns.
[2:17:42] >> the concerns when the was being worked on, you know,
[2:17:48] coming out of 2023, did the board of elections share any
[2:17:56] concerns with that, that you're aware of?
[2:18:00] were they consulted when we were looking at the language for this
[2:18:08] amendment? >> well, it's not part of this.
[2:18:10] they didn't approach me, but it's not part of this.
[2:18:14] if that is a concern, we can address that by statute, but
[2:18:18] this is a constitutional amendment with limited
[2:18:27] authority, and we'll go from there.
[2:18:29] >> I appreciate it very much, and that's what I wanted to hear
[2:18:32] because that is a concern that the board of elections has
[2:18:34] brought forward to me, so I wanted to have that on the
[2:18:37] record that we can take a look at that and because I think that
[2:18:40] we need to -- we need to partner with them and I appreciate you
[2:18:44] answering my questions very much, mr. Jacobson.
[2:18:47] on the bill, madam speaker. >> speaker: on the bill.
[2:18:50] >> thank you very much. >> so, you know, I agree with
[2:18:52] many of my colleagues, my biggest concern at the end of
[2:18:55] the day is how these vacancies are going to be handled.
[2:18:59] you know, as it stands right now, potentially, you know, if
[2:19:04] someone's in an elected office and they retire, they resign,
[2:19:10] you have a deputy, typically, in those roles.
[2:19:14] so, that deputy, when that individual exits, is the acting.
[2:19:19] so, my question is, come 2029, when we have at least 47
[2:19:26] positions that are going to be vacant across the counties
[2:19:31] between our sheriffs, d.a. And county clerk, how is that going
[2:19:34] to be handled? We have to think about that.
[2:19:36] is the governor in a position to appoint in all of those
[2:19:43] situations? Could we discuss just continuing
[2:19:46] that term until the even year? We need to seriously look at
[2:19:50] this because it has true implication also based on the
[2:19:56] language in the writing of this amendment that's before us today
[2:19:59] that I think we need to figure those out before it moves
[2:20:05] forward because it's a true concern, and to have 47
[2:20:11] constitutional positions open on january 1, 2030, is a concern of
[2:20:20] mine and it should be a concern of every new yorker there is.
[2:20:23] so, for that reason, madam speaker, I cannot support this,
[2:20:27] and I thank you thank you very much for your time.
[2:20:31] >> speaker: ms. Giglio. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[2:20:36] will the sponsor yield? >> speaker: will the sponsor
[2:20:38] yield? >> yes.
[2:20:40] >> speaker: the sponsor yields.
[2:20:41] >> thank you. So, why are we doing this with
[2:20:44] law enforcement? With d.a.s and sheriffs in why
[2:20:46] are we adding them to the national and state elections.
[2:20:51] we're doing this to move those constitutional offices that were
[2:20:56] not able to be moved by statute to even years with the rest of
[2:21:01] the elections. >> okay.
[2:21:05] and why do you think law enforcement officers should be
[2:21:09] included in elections for policy-makers?
[2:21:12] >> why should they be included in even year?
[2:21:15] >> yeah, like policy-makers, they are advocating for local
[2:21:19] issues, for county issues, for state issues, for federal
[2:21:23] issues, whiewng do you think law enforcement officers should be
[2:21:26] put in the mix with policy-makers?
[2:21:28] >> well, you have county -- you've got the county exec, the
[2:21:34] county legislature in an even year, so I think it makes
[2:21:37] sense -- >> those are policy-makers.
[2:21:39] why do you think law enforcement should be included with
[2:21:42] policy-makers. Because I think it makes sense that they also be
[2:21:46] elected in even years when people are focused and they have
[2:21:49] the county issues there. >> okay.
[2:21:53] so, the president won twice as many counties in new york state
[2:21:58] in 2024. Do you think adding district
[2:22:00] attorneys and sheriffs will dilute votes in county races for
[2:22:03] voters who only vote in national elections?
[2:22:10] >> we want everybody to vote. I don't want understand your
[2:22:15] question. Diswrfnlts.
[2:22:17] >> I'm just saying that -- okay, I'll go to the next question.
[2:22:23] the last four elections were won by different parties, right?
[2:22:27] one year it was one party, the next year another, one year
[2:22:32] another, the next year another party.
[2:22:35] >> that's correct. >> do you think the potential
[2:22:37] future swings may potentially disrupt law enforcement
[2:22:41] operations where ongoing investigations in areas like
[2:22:45] drug ep terchtion, cold cases and gun violence where multiple
[2:22:49] years are required and vital for law enforcement to do their job?
[2:22:52] >> absolutely not. >> you don't?
[2:22:56] >> no, because a lot of the work is done by civil servants and
[2:23:00] people there all the time and you also have different law and
[2:23:10] shfers sheriffs getting elected and yet
[2:23:13] the investigation and the process takes place.
[2:23:14] we had a transition in dutchess county and there was a new d.a.
[2:23:19] and things continued, so I don't see that as a problem at all.
[2:23:24] >> okay. Well, my concern is that if
[2:23:26] there had been a landslide in 2024 and my district attorney
[2:23:31] was voted out of office in the beach murders, those cases may
[2:23:38] have never been solved and prosecuted.
[2:23:40] so do you think that there needs to be -- that we should have
[2:23:46] consistency and importance in objectives that they are working
[2:23:51] on known by locals to not get diluted on the ballot actually
[2:23:55] because I think that with all of these elections and the more
[2:23:58] elections that we keep piling on, do you think that the media,
[2:24:02] the advertisement, the text messages, the phone messages, we
[2:24:08] see at the local post offices things just dumped in the
[2:24:12] mailbox. Do you think all of these
[2:24:13] positions on the ballot and all of this media attention and all
[2:24:16] of this advertising, that it's going to disenfranchise voters
[2:24:23] and they're going to end up hearing from everybody and I'm
[2:24:26] just not going to show up? >> no, it's going to enfranchise
[2:24:31] voters because they're more engaged about other things, they
[2:24:34] will be turning out to vote, they will then look at what's on
[2:24:38] the ballot and you've going to have more people voting.
[2:24:40] >> do you think what the position for the district
[2:24:42] attorneys and sheriffs will be on the ballot?
[2:24:46] >> not off the top of my head. It will be -- no.
[2:24:50] I'm not going to answer that because I don't want to guess.
[2:24:53] >> okay. Well, I just think, you know, we
[2:24:55] made the switch to move state offices up to the top of the
[2:24:58] ballot and I think that people as they start looking for people
[2:25:03] individually on the ballot, I think that they're going to
[2:25:06] bullet vote. I don't think that they are
[2:25:07] going to vote the bottom of the ballot and then go -- maybe they
[2:25:12] will vote to the bottom of the ballot and go to the top ballot
[2:25:15] and everybody in the middle will be forgotten about.
[2:25:19] what do you think about that? >> I trust the voters.
[2:25:21] >> you trust the voters. Okay.
[2:25:23] thank you: thank you. >> to the sponsor, madam
[2:25:26] speaker, on the bill. >> speaker: on the bill.
[2:25:28] >> this bill will relegate local issues and elections behind
[2:25:32] state and national issues. It will create crowded ballots
[2:25:35] that will be dominated by national races and issues, and,
[2:25:40] in my opinion, adding more people to the ballot will
[2:25:44] disenfranchise the voters and I think that we will have a low
[2:25:47] voter turnout in some areas of the ballot and high voting
[2:25:53] results in other parts of the ballot.
[2:25:55] I think that just crowding the ballot is wrong, not only for
[2:26:00] the state and national races but also the local races where
[2:26:03] people are really paying attention to the local issues.
[2:26:06] the local issues that are important to them.
[2:26:09] and I just think that it's a complete disservice to the
[2:26:13] residents of new york state to pile everybody on to the ballot
[2:26:16] and expect all the voters to know all the issues and
[2:26:18] everything that the candidates stand for, and I hope that it
[2:26:22] doesn't backfire. Thank you, madam speaker.
[2:26:25] >> speaker: thank you. Ms. Shrestha.
[2:26:42] >> I represent multiple counties and the experience I've had so
[2:26:45] far with county legislators having to be on the same ballot
[2:26:49] as me this year is already proving to be much more
[2:26:53] collaborative, much more democratic and also more
[2:26:56] excitement for the upcoming election.
[2:27:11] we have been able to run on what platform, which is how to bring
[2:27:16] down housing costs, affordability crisis, medicaid,
[2:27:20] tocks, these are all the common issues we are trying to tackle
[2:27:24] and every level of government and being on the same ballot has
[2:27:27] allowed us to connect and talk about how we're going to address
[2:27:31] these issues as we run for election we've had more
[2:27:44] campaigns going after petition and more candidates doing events
[2:27:49] together which really helps with what is a definitely challenging
[2:27:52] issue in democracy which the election fatigue.
[2:27:55] there is such a thing as election fatigue I've noticed
[2:27:59] when we knock doors, talking about soliciting donations from
[2:28:02] small donors. A lot of us depend on donations
[2:28:05] from our constituent small donors and it is much easier for
[2:28:10] these folks as well, the people who are going to the ballot, you
[2:28:14] know, to vote, to have to put their energy into these
[2:28:19] elections all once the, as much as possible, instead of being,
[2:28:24] to be honest, dressed out every year about different offices.
[2:28:28] and, you know, I really have found that voters, when they go
[2:28:31] to vote, they know exactly what they want to do.
[2:28:35] my district is very independent-minded.
[2:28:39] there are democrats who don't vote the party line who go by
[2:28:42] who they know, the individual, but there are also people who
[2:28:46] just vote down the slate just based on what line, who is
[2:28:50] running on. These are both types of voters
[2:28:51] that exist, and I think that they will continue to do so no
[2:28:55] matter how many offices we add to the ballot.
[2:28:59] so, that has been my experience, so far, with the offices that
[2:29:03] did not need a constitution change.
[2:29:05] but, when we passed that bill and it became law, the first,
[2:29:12] you know, request I got from my constituents was actually can
[2:29:15] you also move the other offices to the same year so that there
[2:29:20] isn't a split of some offices being even years, some odd
[2:29:24] years. And I had to explain to them
[2:29:27] that that would be good but you get to decide it because that's
[2:29:31] going to be a constitutional amendment and people will have
[2:29:34] to vote on that. So that is exactly the option we
[2:29:36] are providing to new yorkers. Do they think all of these
[2:29:39] should be in the even-year election or do they want to keep
[2:29:42] it split and they are going to decide?
[2:29:44] I have also had experience running with all kinds of
[2:29:47] different positions, you know, when things lined up
[2:29:50] differently. I know in my county the she have
[2:29:52] has run with the county executive, for example, but even
[2:29:54] in those instances, there were opportunities for alignment in
[2:29:57] terms of what issues we are talking about.
[2:30:00] all of the issues we experience are interconnected.
[2:30:03] public safety, affordability, roads, housing, there is no such
[2:30:09] thing as anything we're doing that is purely apolitical, no
[2:30:13] matter which office you are running for, and that is exactly
[2:30:17] why all these offices are part of our democracy.
[2:30:20] so I am very glad we are giving voters the option to do this.
[2:30:24] I think it will make our democracy more collaborative and
[2:30:27] exciting and this is a time where we do want people to
[2:30:31] remain interested in this great experiment that we are involved
[2:30:35] in which is a system of governance where people have a
[2:30:39] voice in who represents them. So I will be supporting this
[2:30:42] bill and voting yes when we start voting.
[2:30:45] thank you so much. >> thank you.
[2:30:48] ms. Walsh. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[2:30:49] will the sponsor yield? >> speaker: will the sponsor
[2:30:53] yield? >> yes.
[2:30:54] >> speaker: the sponsor yields.
[2:30:55] >> thank you. And I will apologize in advance
[2:30:58] if you've gone through this. I for my own clarity want to
[2:31:01] understand a particular hypothetical that I'm going to
[2:31:04] throw out. >> ask away.
[2:31:05] >> thank you. So, imagine, if you will, a
[2:31:08] supreme court, new york city supreme court judge elected in
[2:31:14] 2019, 14-year term, that person would be up in 2033.
[2:31:18] I want to just run through how that would work.
[2:31:22] so, I understood you from previous questioning to say that
[2:31:26] that incumbent judge would not need to run again in 2032
[2:31:31] because that's shortening the term for which that person was
[2:31:34] elected, so that we know is not going to happen, right?
[2:31:37] >> correct. >> okay.
[2:31:38] now we get to 2034. So, would that person be running
[2:31:46] in 2034 if they choose to run? >> well, that person's term
[2:31:53] expires in 2033. >> okay.
[2:31:57] >> right? >> yes.
[2:31:58] >> so there's a vacancy. >> yes.
[2:32:00] >> and there would be an appointment.
[2:32:02] and then that following november in 2034, that position would be
[2:32:09] up for a full term. >> and as far as filling that
[2:32:15] vacancy that occurs in 2033, my understanding is that that is
[2:32:27] permissive with the governor, it is not mandatory to fill that
[2:32:31] vacancy. Is that correct?
[2:32:32] that's correct. And if the senate is in session,
[2:32:37] maybe that's tboict thata problem.
[2:32:42] it's with advise and consent. [ sneezing and coughing ]
[2:32:49] >> I'm sorry. Bless you.
[2:32:51] I didn't hear the answer to that.
[2:32:53] >> the appointment is with the advice and consent of the senate
[2:32:56] unless the senate is not session.
[2:32:58] >> and is that specifically necessary to fill judicial
[2:33:03] vacancies? >> yes.
[2:33:04] for supreme. Now, that would not be --
[2:33:06] >> for those -- yes, not for the local but for the others.
[2:33:12] >> okay. And you anticipated my next
[2:33:15] question which is that is a unique situation that would be
[2:33:18] faced for the supreme court judge positions.
[2:33:23] >> yes, and also surrogate and --
[2:33:29] >> family court as well? >> yes.
[2:33:34] >> okay, so any judicial vacancies follow that method we
[2:33:38] just talked about where the governor may, and it's with the
[2:33:41] advice, consent of the senate. >> senate.
[2:33:46] >> very good. >> any of the judges where the
[2:33:49] caption says family court of the state of new york, county, you
[2:33:54] know that's a state office. >> could you refresh my
[2:33:58] recollection because I'm not clear, how was that procedure
[2:34:04] initiated? Does that come as a request from
[2:34:06] the governor to the senate for approval of a slate of vacancies
[2:34:10] that she or he wishes to fill? Or is that something that is
[2:34:14] initiated through the senate, or something else?
[2:34:18] >> I think it could be anything. It could be a local person
[2:34:21] saying, hey, we need another -- we want another judge here
[2:34:26] because we're out of judge and please make an appointment.
[2:34:32] it could be any reason. The office of court -- you know,
[2:34:35] the other judges, the presiding judge in that district could say
[2:34:39] we need another judge. >> right.
[2:34:41] and you're, again, anticipating where I'm going next.
[2:34:44] so, if the governor, for whatever reason, chooses not to
[2:34:48] fill a particular vacancy, then what happens?
[2:34:53] >> then it's vacant. >> okay.
[2:34:56] and then the impact on the remaining judges in that area
[2:35:02] could be, would be that they would need to cover that case
[2:35:07] load presumably that that judge that's leaving has left?
[2:35:10] >> you know, I mean, it does happen sometimes when a judge
[2:35:16] has to go outside their district, you know, and they
[2:35:21] cover. So, you know, it will be dealt
[2:35:24] with but I am sure that whoever the governor is, and I would
[2:35:27] like to remind people that the governor's election hasn't been
[2:35:30] done yet, so, whoever the governor is would want to fill
[2:35:34] it. >> right.
[2:35:37] but we've seen different things happen.
[2:35:39] we've seen sometimes that the vacancies are not filled.
[2:35:43] I'm specifically thinking about when the previous governor was
[2:35:46] in office, we had that situation in my area, and he elected not
[2:35:52] to fill the vacancies. But I believe, if I'm
[2:35:56] remembering correctly, in that case, as a previous questioner
[2:35:59] had mentioned, there was a situation where there was a
[2:36:03] deputy and, so, the deputy was able to step into the role and
[2:36:05] be the acting, and it was smoother than if you had, say, a
[2:36:11] supreme court judge who says, you're done.
[2:36:14] and, also, the other thing that occurred to me is that, in my
[2:36:18] example, I was using the example of one judge, one state supreme
[2:36:21] court judge that was impacted, but, if you consider that in an
[2:36:25] odd previous odd election year, you could have had and often do
[2:36:30] have several judge positions, I think the year I'm thinking of
[2:36:35] in 2019 I think that there were at least three but I want to say
[2:36:40] that there were five judgeships that were open.
[2:36:43] so that could be playing this out in the hypothetical, there
[2:36:47] could be a number of judge vacancies.
[2:36:50] >> true, but if it's that great a number, there would be more of
[2:36:54] an impetus for the governor to make that selection.
[2:36:58] so, I think, then, there would be more pressure on the governor
[2:37:02] to act and there would be a lot of local interest, the court
[2:37:07] administration, a lot of people saying, hey, we need
[2:37:10] appointments. >> I do agree with you.
[2:37:13] I think there would be but there's nothing constitutionally
[2:37:18] or statutorily that mandates she or he, the governor, fill that
[2:37:24] vacancy. It's permissive.
[2:37:25] >> I don't think we can write it that "the governor shall" that
[2:37:31] gets very strong. >> heaven forbid we should do
[2:37:35] something that strong, right? I understand.
[2:37:40] I appreciate your answers to that.
[2:37:43] so an overarching thing I have been thinking about through this
[2:37:49] debait is do you -- and I'm going to ask you as the sponsor,
[2:37:52] do you perceive staggered terms over all as being kind of a
[2:37:58] problem? Is that part of the
[2:38:00] justification for moving to the point where they will not be
[2:38:04] staggered anymore but will be all on most except for new york
[2:38:09] city. >> yeah, but some of the terms,
[2:38:14] say, well start -- just to use a number, some will start in
[2:38:18] '32 and others in '34, so it's not going to be everybody up at
[2:38:22] the same time. >> yeah, you will still have --
[2:38:27] you would still have a staggering in the sense that it
[2:38:31] will always be or generally speaking will be on an even year
[2:38:35] but it might not be the same even year.
[2:38:40] >> right. >> there won't be judges up for
[2:38:43] election. >> I understand what you're
[2:38:45] saying there. I think you've answered my
[2:38:47] questions. I appreciate your time and madam
[2:38:48] speaker on the bill. >> speaker: on the bill.
[2:38:50] >> so, I do think, and in listening to all of this and
[2:38:54] thinking about it, I do think that there is a history and
[2:38:59] rationale that has always existed in new york behind
[2:39:04] staggered terps, and in american government generally, rood?
[2:39:09] stability, continuity, independence, and where I think
[2:39:14] it's very important here preventing sudden political
[2:39:18] swings from capturing all levels of government at once.
[2:39:22] that's really the rationale behind having staggered terms to
[2:39:26] begin with. When new york adopted and
[2:39:29] revised it's constitutions throughout the 19th and 20th ces
[2:39:35] deliberately established different election cycle also
[2:39:38] and term lengths for different offices.
[2:39:40] the idea was that, first, federal offices would be elected
[2:39:43] on within cycle, statewide offices would be elected on
[2:39:47] another, local offices would very often be elected
[2:39:51] separately, and that judges would serve long terms that
[2:39:55] insulated them from immediate political pressures.
[2:39:58] this reflected a broader american constitutional
[2:40:01] principle that government should not be entirely subject to the
[2:40:05] passions of a single election year.
[2:40:07] the framers of new york's judicial article were
[2:40:12] particularly concerned about judicial independence.
[2:40:15] supreme court judges were given 14-year terms, and could I say
[2:40:21] parenthetically, wouldn't we all kill with one of those with us
[2:40:24] investigate stand every two years?
[2:40:27] among the longest elected judicial terms in the country to
[2:40:30] ensure judges could decide cases without constantly campaigning
[2:40:35] for reelection. So continuity of government.
[2:40:37] one of the reasons for staggering terms is to ensure
[2:40:40] that institutional knowledge is retained.
[2:40:42] if every county official, judge, legislature and executive were
[2:40:47] elected simultaneously, a single election could replace nearly
[2:40:52] everyone at once. Staggering ensure that
[2:40:55] experienced officials remain in office, that government
[2:40:58] functions continue smoothly and that new officials get to learn
[2:41:01] from experienced colleagues. This principle is reflected
[2:41:07] nationally in the staggered terms of the united states
[2:41:09] senate where only about one-third of seats are up every
[2:41:12] two years. Judicial independence would be
[2:41:15] the second point. This is particularly important
[2:41:17] for judges. Judges are expected to decide
[2:41:22] unpopular cases, protect constitutional rights, rule
[2:41:24] against powerful interest when it's necessary.
[2:41:28] long and staggered judicial terms reduce the pressure to
[2:41:32] align judicial decisions with the political mood of a
[2:41:36] particular election cycle. A supreme court justice elected
[2:41:39] in one political environment may continue self-care through
[2:41:43] several governors, presidents and legislative majorities.
[2:41:49] the third thing I really want to mention, and I think this is so
[2:41:52] important, to prevent wave elections for sweeping every
[2:41:56] office. Historically, one concern has
[2:41:57] been that a presidential election or major political
[2:42:03] movement could dominate every race on the ballot.
[2:42:06] staggered elections force voters to focus on different selves of
[2:42:10] government at different times. For example, a voter might
[2:42:14] support a presidential candidate but in a separate local election
[2:42:18] evaluate a judge, a district attorney or a sheriff on their
[2:42:20] own merits, without staggering local races can become proxies
[2:42:26] for national politics. And I think that is so
[2:42:30] important, especially as someone else coined the term but we've
[2:42:34] heard it before of a hyperpolitical environment.
[2:42:39] and I think we find ourselves in it now.
[2:42:42] we were hyperpolarized. So checks and balances.
[2:42:46] staggered terms act as a structural check on concentrated
[2:42:49] political power. If all offices were elected
[2:42:53] simultaneously, one party could capture every level of
[2:42:56] government in a single election. Policy changes could be more
[2:43:01] abrupt. Institutional independence could
[2:43:02] weaken. So, all of that being said, for
[2:43:06] more than a century, new york that is deliberately staggered
[2:43:13] elections in terms of office, and that was not by accident.
[2:43:16] it reflected a belief that local government, the judiciary and
[2:43:21] statewide offices often and each deserved their own measure of
[2:43:25] independence from national political waves.
[2:43:27] this bill, this legislation, this -- yeah, this
[2:43:32] constitutional amendment that's being proposed treats staggered
[2:43:36] terms as a problem to be solved. In reality, staggered terms are
[2:43:43] a safeguard, one that promotes stability, continuity, judicial
[2:43:47] independence and focused voter consideration of local offices.
[2:43:51] before we dismantle that structure, we should have
[2:43:54] whether maximizing turnout is worth sacrificing the very
[2:43:58] protections that staggered terms were designed to provide.
[2:44:04] a previous speaker, my colleague mentioned voter fatigue, right,
[2:44:09] as a reason for trying to put everything on or more on for
[2:44:13] even years. But voting, my friends, has
[2:44:16] never been more convenient due to a number of changes in the
[2:44:22] election law over the last few years.
[2:44:25] we have early voting now, early voting periods.
[2:44:28] we have no excuse absentee voting or whatever it is we
[2:44:31] ended up calling it because when we called it no excuse absentee
[2:44:35] voting the voters rejected it so we called it something else.
[2:44:41] in any any event, they can voe without excuse on the absentee
[2:44:46] ballot. I see my time is limited, but
[2:44:48] the last thing I want to ask is where are the good government
[2:44:52] groups here? I don't have any positions from
[2:44:56] the league of women voters, I don't see any positions from
[2:44:59] other good government groups that
[2:45:07] weigh-in on absolutely tangential policy issues that
[2:45:11] this policy body has taken up. Where are they?
[2:45:14] if the league of women voters is interested primarily in
[2:45:18] voting issues, why are we hearing crickets here?
[2:45:23] I'm so disappointed. I'm not surprised but I'm
[2:45:29] disappointed in the clomplete absence on it.
[2:45:32] I will vote no on this and work hard to make sure that no
[2:45:37] matter how this proposed constitutional amendment is
[2:45:40] worded by the democrats that the people a represent and
[2:45:44] beyond understand what this is really about.
[2:45:47] I will urge them as an urge my colleagues to vote no.
[2:45:50] thank you, madam speaker. >> speaker: thank you,
[2:45:53] mr. Lavine. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[2:45:58] will the sponsor yield for questions?
[2:46:00] >> speaker: will the sponsor yield?
[2:46:03] >> yes. >> speaker: sponsor yields.
[2:46:09] >> mr. Jacobson, I heard d disenfranchisement referred to
[2:46:15] several times during this debate.
[2:46:17] what does that mean? D
[2:46:53] disentrance shiesment -- di disenfranchisement.
[2:46:54] >> nobody is being disenfranchised.
[2:46:55] >> I know from my experience as a lawyer, cross-examining
[2:46:56] other lawyers, lawyers make the worst witnesses.
[2:46:57] I'm going to ask you again, can you define what is
[2:46:58] disenfranchisement. >> it is in the extreme
[2:47:00] prohibit people from voting. To do things that make it more
[2:47:03] difficult for people to vote. >> is there anything at all in
[2:47:28] your bill, that even at the slightest hints at
[2:47:45] disenfranchising people that are entitled to vote?
[2:47:47] >> no. >> there have been expressions
[2:47:48] of concern over this bill. >> how did the people that
[2:47:54] claimed even-year election voting was a corruption of
[2:47:58] american democracy. How did they fare,ir, how did
[2:48:06] they do at the court of appeals of the state of new
[2:48:08] york? >> the court of appeals upheld
[2:48:14] the 2023 law. >> they didn't do too good did
[2:48:20] there? >> that's correct.
[2:48:20] >> after that, march of this year, they appealed to the
[2:48:24] supreme court of the united states, didn't they?
[2:48:27] >> that's correct. >> and while some of us,
[2:48:31] including myself, have been concerned that some of the
[2:48:35] rulings of this present supreme court, when it comes
[2:48:37] to voting rights, and it is not just me, how did those
[2:48:42] people who had such problems with even-year election
[2:48:47] voting, how did they manage at the supreme court of the
[2:48:52] united states? They won, didn't they?
[2:48:56] >> yes. >> no, they actually lost.
[2:48:59] maybe I made the question unduly complicated.
[2:49:21] >> point of order. Madam speaker, sorry to
[2:49:21] interrupt. This doesn't seem germane to
[2:49:22] the bill we're taking up right now.
[2:49:23] I know talking about what is happening at the supreme court
[2:49:24] several years ago is not germane to this discussion.
[2:49:30] >> it was 2026. >> speaker: give me one
[2:49:32] second. While the point is not
[2:50:10] sustained, I will continue to remind my colleagues that the
[2:50:14] outcome of the court decision may be relevant, but criticism
[2:50:28] of federal administration and court is beyond the scope.
[2:50:31] >> thank you, madam speaker. Please proceed.
[2:50:32] >> I stand corrected. Now, you were asked m
[2:50:40] mr. Jacobson. Mr. Jacobson, you were asked,
[2:50:48] wouldn't the implementation of this particular measure,
[2:50:53] wouldn't it cause great damage to the public in the sense
[2:50:56] that if you had these even-year elections, there are
[2:51:01] some law enforcement officers who might not get re-elected?
[2:51:05] and would therefore not continue their investigations?
[2:51:13] >> well, the investigations will continue at the
[2:51:16] discretion of whoever got elected.
[2:51:19] >> so mr. Jacobson, I'm not speaking now about recent
[2:51:25] developments at the united states department of justice.
[2:51:27] I want to make that clear to everybody in this room.
[2:51:30] I'm not talking about that. I'm not even thinking about
[2:51:36] that. Bru
[2:51:37] but have you ever heard of a professional prosector or
[2:51:40] professional sheriff or investigator who gets elected
[2:51:44] and decides they don't want to honor their professional
[2:51:48] obligation about continuing the investigations that their
[2:51:51] predecessors had begun? >> I have heard about that.
[2:51:58] >> okay. Now, question was asked of you
[2:52:02] or statement was made with respect to this proposal -- by
[2:52:05] the way, this proposal, who gets to eventually decide this
[2:52:10] proposal? >> the voters.
[2:52:13] >> so question was asked of you, with respect to the fact
[2:52:21] that the bill does not cover new york city elections,
[2:52:22] right? You were asked that question?
[2:52:24] >> that's correct. >> the question was asked, how
[2:52:36] is it fair that this gets to be decided by all the people
[2:52:40] of the state of new york, this constitutional amendment when
[2:52:47] the people that live in the five boroughs or majority of
[2:52:51] them decided they don't want this within the boundaries of
[2:52:56] the city of new york? >> all constitutional
[2:52:59] amendments after passing two successive legislatures or
[2:53:06] elected separately are presented to the voters of the
[2:53:10] entire state. So all voters have a chance to
[2:53:12] express their opinion. So when you drafted this
[2:53:22] language, did you consider denying the people of the city
[2:53:24] of new york who already expressed their view with
[2:53:27] respect to this within the five boundaries, did you think
[2:53:30] about denying them the right to vote on this statewide
[2:53:40] constitutional amendment? >> no.
[2:53:44] and I don't believe in di disenfranchisement and all of
[2:53:48] the voters in the state have the right to vote on every
[2:53:51] constitutional amendment that is presented for a vote.
[2:54:00] I took it that at some point this proposal was submitted to
[2:54:03] the office of the attorney general given that it is a
[2:54:07] constitutional amendment. >> yes, there is a positive
[2:54:10] opinion, that it met the standards.
[2:54:13] >> and had you included language in the proposal that
[2:54:20] would have denied the right of the people who vote in the
[2:54:24] city of new york to vote on this referendum, what do you
[2:54:45] think the attorney general's attitude would have been with
[2:54:46] respect to the constitutionality?
[2:54:47] >> well, I don't want to guess, I assume it would be
[2:54:48] unconstitutional and would not work.
[2:54:49] this bill does not d disenfranchise any voters from
[2:54:50] making their voices heard when and if this amendment is
[2:54:54] presented to the voters of the state.
[2:54:56] of the entire state. >> mr. Jacobson, you were
[2:55:02] questioned as to whether this proposal, if constitutionally
[2:55:09] enacted, wouldn't cause undue confusion to the voters of the
[2:55:13] state of new york at our elections?
[2:55:17] do you think this would cause undue confusion?
[2:55:20] >> no, I don't think so at all.
[2:55:24] the voters make their decisions based on the
[2:56:06] information they're given and they can vote on every
[2:56:07] position before them. >> mr. Jacobson, are you aware
[2:56:09] that the national conference of state legislature, which is
[2:56:10] impartial. It is not republican, it is
[2:56:11] not democrats. It is impartial.
[2:56:11] nonpolitical. Advices that there are advices
[2:56:12] that only four states left in the entire united states of
[2:56:13] america that don't have even-year elections and those
[2:56:14] states are ... West virginia, mississippi, and a couple of
[2:56:16] the others, and louisiana. And new jersey had that
[2:56:17] statement system. Are you aware that there are
[2:56:20] only four states that don't have what you are advocating?
[2:56:23] >> no, I wasn't aware of that. You are enlightening me and
[2:56:28] this body. >> thank you mr. Jacobson.
[2:56:32] I just have I think one last question for you.
[2:56:45] have any of the good government groups contacted
[2:56:48] you to tell you that this is just a terrible idea?
[2:56:52] >> no, nobody contacted us on that.
[2:56:55] >> and why would you think that good government groups
[2:56:58] are not standing up with their hair on fire over the prospect
[2:57:04] of this constitutional amendment?
[2:57:06] >> well, usually people speak up when they're against
[2:57:10] something. And if they're for something,
[2:57:12] they're usually quiet. So that would be my
[2:57:15] assumption. >> thank you very much,
[2:57:17] mr. Jacobson. >> will the sponsor yield.
[2:57:32] >> speaker: sponsor yields. >> I was fascinated with the
[2:57:36] first debate you had with assemblyman slater.
[2:57:40] one question for clarification.
[2:57:40] when you were asked assemblyman, you states I
[2:58:03] think new york city is exempt because voters received
[2:58:04] greater media attention or exposure and had receive voter
[2:58:05] engagement, did I get that right?
[2:58:06] >> that is part of it, new york city, as you know, is
[2:58:07] unique. And has different
[2:58:08] circumstances. >> thank you.
[2:58:08] >> if later on, we decide, or if we decide, based on what we
[2:58:10] know, we can present that. At this point, we just have a
[2:58:14] limited constitutional amendment.
[2:58:16] >> thank you. In the borough of the bronx I
[2:58:36] was looking at, the county has a similar population of
[2:58:37] 1.4 million people. In 2021, the executive
[2:58:38] election generated more than 283,000 votes while the entire
[2:58:39] borrow of the bronx cast approximately only 126,000
[2:58:56] votes in the hairline election.
[2:59:30] if the greater media exposure leads to greater voter
[2:59:31] participation, how do you explain the nasser county
[2:59:32] generating more than twice the voter engagement of the bronx
[2:59:34] despite the similar population.
[2:59:34] for that matter, if new york city doesn't already
[2:59:36] demonstrate higher voter representation, why exempt it
[2:59:37] from the reform or great ideas heard from the esteem
[2:59:38] colleague assemblyman lavine? Why not let them do it?
[2:59:39] what is the harm, is my question?
[2:59:40] >> mr. Lavine, why do you rise.
[2:59:40] >> we're not supposed to refer to other people by name.
[2:59:41] >> >> speaker: your point is sustained.
[2:59:42] we will refrain from using other member's members while
[2:59:43] asking questions. To the bill.
[2:59:44] >> thank you. Why can't we off the implement
[3:00:27] the great ideas our nameless esteemed colleague proposed.
[3:00:28] >> I will take that into consideration.
[3:00:29] maybe we will. >> thank you so much.
[3:00:30] madam speaker on the bill. >> speaker: on the bill.
[3:00:31] >> what strikes me most is albany seems to have developed
[3:00:32] a simple answer to every election question.
[3:00:33] change the rules. If turnout is lower than some
[3:00:34] people would like, let's change the rules.
[3:00:35] if one election cycle produces different results than another
[3:00:36] election -- >> this proposal is presented
[3:00:37] as a good government reform. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't.
[3:00:38] what it unquestionably does is change who shows up, when they
[3:00:40] show up and what elections they're participating in.
[3:00:43] that is not an administrative change, it is to the heart
[3:01:35] anecdotally and not by the numbers themselves that people
[3:01:38] really don't pay attention in the odd years.
[3:01:41] they pay attention in even year elections because of the folks
[3:01:44] at the top of the ballot. And as much as I wish that --
[3:01:49] and I don't really want to throw them under the bus, my inlaws,
[3:01:54] who I spend time up here with when I'm in albany, actually
[3:01:57] knew when their school board election was or election was for
[3:02:02] town supervisor or the election for village trustee, they just
[3:02:06] don't. They are not engaged but they
[3:02:08] are paying attention to congressional votes and
[3:02:11] gubernatorial votes and clearly, paying attention to presidential
[3:02:14] votes. So when we talk about people
[3:02:16] actually being engaged in elections, it makes a lot more
[3:02:20] sense for us to have people running in those even years.
[3:02:23] again, as much as we would love that people are paying attention
[3:02:28] to the sheriff's election or the judge, it is very difficult to
[3:02:32] actually get people to pay attention to those other
[3:02:36] elections, because, they are not advertised as much whether in
[3:02:39] the media or otherwise. And, and as much as we can do a
[3:02:47] better job engaging with voters and sending out mailer, they are
[3:02:51] not atuned to these types of things.
[3:02:53] those folks who are engaged voters and are coming out to
[3:02:56] vote in those off-year elections will continue to come out in the
[3:03:00] even year elections, and we will have much more again, much more
[3:03:08] robust turnout and much more hopefully much more robust
[3:03:11] voters who are really seeking to find out what -- who is on the n
[3:03:21] the ballot and what it is all about.
[3:03:23] as much as I wish people were tuned into the off years and
[3:03:27] made sense when it is first constructed to plbalance
[3:03:32] everything out, we continue is not the case.
[3:03:39] having seen it in the offyears, I know it to be
[3:03:42] true. I know with the even-year
[3:03:45] elections, much more people will pay attention to who is
[3:03:48] on the ballot at every level of government and come out to
[3:03:52] vote. When we get to the point of
[3:03:54] voting, which I hope will be soon, I'll vote in the
[3:03:59] affirmative. >> thank you.
[3:04:02] mr. Durso. >> speaker: will the sponsor
[3:04:07] yield. >> yes.
[3:04:08] >> speaker: sponsor yields. >> for clarity, you said I
[3:04:11] can't recall, I want to understand this, obviously
[3:04:12] this is moving the das, sheriffs, other judges' races
[3:04:17] to the even years to match up with the amendment we did a
[3:04:21] couple years ago that brought those elections to even years,
[3:04:24] right? >> to match up with the
[3:04:27] statute. >> in your opinion, why didn't
[3:04:28] we do them all at one time then?
[3:04:42] >> I don't know. We passed that and we'll
[3:04:44] hopefully pass this so that everybody's are in the same
[3:04:48] year. >> you are saying it is a fix,
[3:04:49] essentially? Maybe they missed out on it
[3:04:52] last time? >> no, I'm saying we can only
[3:05:02] do it by statute, so much. And now with a constitutional
[3:05:06] amendment, we're completing the process.
[3:05:09] >> okay. So when we did that
[3:05:13] constitutional amendment, it was said that if someone's
[3:05:19] term was up in an odd year. If they had a four-year term
[3:05:22] and because of the constitutional amendment being
[3:05:25] passed, they would only do a three-year term so it would
[3:05:28] match up on an even, year, correct?
[3:05:30] >> what you are describing is a statute.
[3:05:33] it wasn't a constitutional amendment.
[3:05:34] >> but that was part of it, correct?
[3:05:37] >> yes. >> okay.
[3:05:38] >> no. >> you said yes, and then no.
[3:05:42] >> in 2023, it was a statute. It did pass about how to get
[3:05:47] the different officers in even years.
[3:05:51] by the different election years.
[3:05:55] >> maybe I don't know the answer and I probably don't.
[3:05:58] why are we not following the same with this?
[3:06:01] to where now we will have vacancies?
[3:06:06] why wouldn't we make it in the amendment or change the
[3:06:09] statute so there is no vacancies and maybe do shorter
[3:06:12] terms so there is no vacancies, so people can be
[3:06:16] elected by the person they voked for?
[3:06:18] -- voted for? >> president
[3:06:23] >> it was a choice that was made in consideration of the
[3:06:26] judges being able to serve out their full term.
[3:06:30] >> so this was made more for the judges so they could serve
[3:06:34] their full term, not the das, sheriffs, so on, so forth.
[3:06:38] >> just part of it. More constitutional officers
[3:06:41] so we treat them all the same. >> but the judges have -- how
[3:06:45] long is the term? 14 years?
[3:06:50] >> 14 years, that is not changing.
[3:06:52] >> understood. >> the term you would normally
[3:06:55] be elected for which for a da is four years, would be
[3:06:58] changed, correct? >> no, in fact we're mandating
[3:07:02] it is a four-year term. >> you are mandating it is a
[3:07:06] four-year term if you are elected in an even year.
[3:07:10] >> going forward, it will be a four-year term once you're
[3:07:16] elected under the provisions of this constitutional
[3:07:19] amendment. >> okay.
[3:07:21] so again, could we have changed the statute so that it
[3:07:26] would have followed the same way that the last
[3:07:31] constitutional amendment when it was put in place was done
[3:07:34] where someone may have a shorter term but can fill out
[3:07:38] a term when they were elected by people in their town or
[3:07:43] wherever it may be? >> could it have been done
[3:07:55] like the statute we did not the constitutional.
[3:07:58] >> could we have changed the statute.
[3:07:59] >> we could, but this is what we have.
[3:08:01] >> we are not changing the statute so we can have
[3:08:05] vacancies in a da or sheriff position, so on, so forth?
[3:08:12] >> correct. >> and the governor can
[3:08:14] appoint to fill the rest of the term?
[3:08:17] >> right. >> let me ask you this, since
[3:08:19] we talked about democracy and voter suppression, all of the
[3:08:22] other words we talked about, how is that democracy when we
[3:08:29] are specifically making this -- possibly making this new
[3:08:33] law. We'll leave it up to voters
[3:08:35] and we'll get to that in a minute, and then saying these
[3:08:39] people you are now electing will not fill out their full
[3:08:42] term and we'll have another elected official put someone
[3:08:46] else into place? >> well, the whole purpose of
[3:08:51] this is to have greater turnout where people vote
[3:08:55] directly for this. And the people making the
[3:08:58] appointment are chosen by the voters.
[3:09:01] >> basically saying this is all about voter turnout,
[3:09:04] getting people out to vote? >> yes, because we believe
[3:09:08] that it is best when more people vote in elections.
[3:09:12] >> so why not include villages, school board
[3:09:18] election districts and others in this?
[3:09:21] because they have some of the lowest turnout in local
[3:09:24] elections by far. So why are we leaving them
[3:09:27] out, if this is about getting people out to vote in local
[3:09:29] elections? >> we can change that by
[3:09:34] statute. Maybe in the future we will.
[3:09:37] >> why do we have to piecemeal it together?
[3:09:39] why didn't we do it at once? >> it is not a lot of
[3:09:42] confidence in the process. >> well, they're not in the
[3:09:48] constitution. So they would have to be done
[3:09:50] by statute. >> understood.
[3:09:51] >> then we'll see if we want to make changes.
[3:09:57] then we'll go from there. >> okay.
[3:10:03] so touching back on something else.
[3:10:05] you spoke about new york city obviously did their own
[3:10:11] charter, correct, put it to a vote?
[3:10:13] >> it was a nonbinding referendum that I heard about.
[3:10:19] >> that you heard about or that it happened?
[3:10:30] >> it was the ballot. >> we didn't just hear about
[3:10:35] it, it happened. The people of new york city
[3:10:38] already spoke, essentially is what you said, correct?
[3:10:41] decided they did not want it on even years?
[3:10:48] >> well, that is probably part of it, the point is new york
[3:10:50] city is different. >> how?
[3:10:52] >> how are they different? >> it is just different.
[3:10:56] >> okay. But we'll see what happens in
[3:11:02] the future. >> can you explain why they're
[3:11:03] different? Is there a definition to new
[3:11:09] york city is different? >> well, it is the largest
[3:11:19] city in america. >> roughly 8 million people,
[3:11:23] correct? >> yeah.
[3:11:25] >> roughly 12 million in the rest of the state.
[3:11:26] so the rest of the state is not different or as important?
[3:11:28] is that what you are saying? >> I think we just decided
[3:11:34] this is what we're doing. >> so it wasn't because they
[3:11:38] did their own referendum is what you are saying?
[3:11:40] had nothing to do with that? Earlier you said it was.
[3:11:45] >> I said in part. That was considered.
[3:11:47] >> that was considered. They're a larger media market,
[3:11:51] correct? That was part of the
[3:11:54] consideration. >> how the elections are
[3:11:56] focused. I think everybody throughout
[3:11:59] the country knew that -- >> you put all of those things
[3:12:02] together and came to that conclusion, correct?
[3:12:07] you said you put all those things together.
[3:12:10] somewhere like long island has the same media market as new
[3:12:14] york city. That is one check mark.
[3:12:17] >> yes, but the problem is they don't cover the local
[3:12:21] races. >> I'm sorry.
[3:12:22] >> you don't get the same coverage of the local.
[3:12:24] >> it is about what the media covers?
[3:12:26] >> yeah. >> how is that scientist?
[3:12:29] how is that political? >> all I'm saying is that the
[3:12:36] new york city is different, the size is different.
[3:12:40] how people get their information is different.
[3:12:44] and we can always do this another time for new york
[3:12:48] city. >> so because they're
[3:12:50] different, size is different, media coverage is different,
[3:12:53] even though we have the same media market, if nassau or
[3:12:57] suffolk county or city like long beach did their own
[3:13:02] referendum would they be excluded from this?
[3:13:05] if their voters decided in the county or town or city of long
[3:13:09] beach or glen cove to put a referendum on the ballot and
[3:13:12] said do we want this, would they be excluded?
[3:13:16] you are excluding new york city because the voters spoke.
[3:13:19] if the voters in another town, county, city said we spoke,
[3:13:23] are we going to tell the voters they're wrong in that
[3:13:28] instance and tell them that new york city is different?
[3:13:32] >> well, we're getting into hypotheticals here.
[3:13:35] >> it is not hypothetical. >> well, it is not in there.
[3:13:43] we're doing this so the constitutional offices in
[3:13:46] where we maneuvered everything to an even year are going to
[3:13:51] be on the same ballot. >> what if I told you
[3:13:55] mr. Jacobson, there are two cities, one city, one town on
[3:14:00] long island that did do this, would they be exclude?
[3:14:08] >> no. >> we're doing it for new york
[3:14:11] city blanketly, because they're special?
[3:14:13] >> we have a lot of things that only -- we pass laws all
[3:14:17] the time. >> yes, we do.
[3:14:19] they're usually, as you said, cities of more than one
[3:14:24] million. But it doesn't say that here.
[3:14:26] it doesn't say cities of more than one million.
[3:14:28] it says new york city. Your answers to why amongst
[3:14:36] others is that the voters spoke.
[3:14:37] this is all about the voters' voice and we trust the voters.
[3:14:44] the voters spoke they have a different media market and
[3:14:47] they're different. There is 8 million people
[3:14:48] there. So again, if the city of
[3:14:52] yonkers did their own referendum, they're not new
[3:14:55] york city so they're not special.
[3:14:58] if westchester county did it, they're different?
[3:15:01] >> the voters will gret a chance -- will get a chance,
[3:15:05] if we pass this now or next year, the voters get a chance.
[3:15:09] if they don't want to have it, they can vote against it.
[3:15:12] >> I completely understand, I'm not disagreeing with how
[3:15:17] the process will go working forward.
[3:15:19] I'm trying understand to, you excluded eight million people.
[3:15:23] the five boroughs of new york city, roughly 8 million people
[3:15:29] from this. They get to vote on it.
[3:15:32] I understand this is part of the constitution.
[3:15:33] I understand that. The reasons why they are
[3:15:37] excluded is different media market, they've already voted
[3:15:41] and they're special. So I want to understand if
[3:15:44] another town, county, anything -- I mean, we could all shake
[3:15:49] our head about it. We could, but it is the truth.
[3:15:51] the fact of the matter is you have no answer.
[3:15:54] so what I will ske is ... -- question is ... What is the
[3:16:01] real reason. They did a referendum.
[3:16:04] if another town or county has done this anywhere else, will
[3:16:08] they be excluded? >> no, we have this amendment
[3:16:13] and the process is that eventually it will go before
[3:16:15] the voters. >> mr. Jacobson, I appreciate
[3:16:18] that. I really do.
[3:16:21] I understand that you have a job to do.
[3:16:24] as do I. We're both doing them now.
[3:16:27] I am trying to understand, again, now, going past the
[3:16:31] city portion of it, we have talked about greater voter
[3:16:35] turnout, right? And we can't force people to
[3:16:38] do things. We force people in this
[3:16:41] chamber all the time throughout the state to do
[3:16:45] things or exclude people because you said villages and
[3:16:49] towns are not part of the constitution we can't force
[3:16:52] them, correct? >> we passed by statute
[3:16:57] concerning towns and county legislatures and county
[3:17:03] executives and doing by constitutional amendment the
[3:17:08] constitutional officers and villages can be addressed next
[3:17:12] year. Maybe you'll have suggestions
[3:17:23] on that. >> I have plenty of
[3:17:26] suggestions. We talk about fairness here.
[3:17:27] fairness, equity, making sure the voters have a voice.
[3:17:30] it is just that the voters voice in new york city,
[3:17:33] because they already did a referendum, we think.
[3:17:37] spoke but if they spoke in my county or the two counties I
[3:17:41] represent or something in westchester or eerie county,
[3:17:46] their voices don't matter. If they did their referendum
[3:17:50] they wouldn't be included in this, this is because new york
[3:17:54] city is special. I'm talking about fairness.
[3:17:56] listen, the voters will vote on this referendum, we will
[3:17:59] trust the voters. I'm 100% fine with that
[3:18:03] but the da in manhattan and the position is just as
[3:18:06] important as the da in eerie county.
[3:18:09] the da in the bronx is just as important, the position, as
[3:18:13] the da in suffolk county. Why are they being treated
[3:18:17] differently? Their job is to represent
[3:18:26] people that elected them. We're just not giving them the
[3:18:30] same due as we will for new york city.
[3:18:40] >> we'll see what happens. >> thank you for answering
[3:18:42] that for me. Thank you, madam speaker.
[3:18:45] >> speaker: ms. Lunsford. >> on the bill.
[3:18:48] >> speaker: on the bill. >> I approach this with a
[3:18:52] different perspective than some of my colleagues here.
[3:18:54] I have had the privilege of running with a village that
[3:19:00] has local elections on the evens in november.
[3:19:02] I have run my entire career with this village of fair
[3:19:07] port. I have seen the impact on
[3:19:11] voter turnout of local elections, which is I think,
[3:19:17] surprisingly outsized to what you might expect.
[3:19:20] you know, we all see -- we are all the same kind of nerd in
[3:19:24] this room. We all look at voter data.
[3:19:26] there is actually a study out of the mit election lab from I
[3:19:31] think it was 2018. Pre-covid, which is relevant
[3:19:35] to a lot of our election discussions, that showed that
[3:19:39] when you add local elections to even-year larger state and
[3:19:47] federal elections, the combined vote total is 5% more
[3:19:52] than what you might expect if you just added the two
[3:19:55] together. Because more people come out
[3:19:57] to vote overall. I have seen as I walk through
[3:20:01] the village with people who are running for local offices,
[3:20:05] that voters are engaged in what they care about.
[3:20:09] some voters really care about the president.
[3:20:12] some voters really care about the corner store.
[3:20:15] some voters really care about potholes.
[3:20:18] some voters really care about sidewalks.
[3:20:20] it is just what motivates you. What is really interesting for
[3:20:24] me, as a political science major that just finds this
[3:20:27] stuff interesting is the ability to educate those
[3:20:31] voters about all of the things their government does and the
[3:20:35] way they interact. Because when I get to walk
[3:20:37] around with a village trustee, we get to talk about the fact
[3:20:40] that there is an intersection between state and local
[3:20:45] offices. The village of fair port has
[3:20:49] amongst the highest voter turnout in every race we run,
[3:20:53] even when we run in the odds, because they also have
[3:20:56] odd-year elections. I think because they're more
[3:20:59] informed voters. We're also for what it is
[3:21:01] worth, one of the top census returning areas.
[3:21:05] I think people like to have their opinion known in my
[3:21:08] district. The impact I see on voter
[3:21:11] engagement, on interest in issues, in turnout overall
[3:21:14] says to me that when you combine these races, you are
[3:21:18] going to create a more informed, engaged, electorate
[3:21:23] that participates in government.
[3:21:25] I don't think that that is a partisan issue.
[3:21:27] I can tell you that the village of fair port having
[3:21:31] even-year elections has been controlled by both parties on
[3:21:34] and off through the years. You see it flip.
[3:21:37] it is for me an overall good government in addition to
[3:21:42] government efficiency issue to combine these races.
[3:21:46] when we talked about this several years ago in relation
[3:21:51] to moving the seats we have already moved, I raised some
[3:21:55] concerns about including everyone at once.
[3:21:58] because some of our villages are complicated.
[3:22:00] I have villages that run in march.
[3:22:03] I know I have villages that run a january primary for a
[3:22:09] june election. But I will say there is
[3:22:12] actually nothing in this constitutional amendment that
[3:22:14] I am aware of that requires a date.
[3:22:16] it just says what year. So if a local government
[3:22:20] really felt like they needed to segregate themselves out to
[3:22:24] highlight their candidates or highlight their race, they
[3:22:28] could do so by their own town rules or own county rules.
[3:22:35] I know there might be complicating factors in other
[3:22:38] places, where there are three-year terms.
[3:22:40] these were things we were considering.
[3:22:42] which is why we were doing it piecemeal.
[3:22:44] this is why we were taking our time and not doing it in one
[3:22:50] fell swoop. What we have seen as we
[3:22:52] transfer to two-year elections in the last cycle, more voter
[3:22:55] game, exactly what we were looking for.
[3:22:58] more people voting and caring. It is not taking focus away.
[3:23:02] I can tell you, one of the hottest issues in races that
[3:23:05] were happening around me in 24 were some local things.
[3:23:11] things that had nothing to do, true introning issues in one
[3:23:14] of our towns. Using a property for a
[3:23:18] particular location. These were the things people
[3:23:20] were talking about. The doors, the town of
[3:23:23] penfield, no matter what I do every year they want to talk
[3:23:29] to me about leaf pick up. I tell them I'm not the leaf
[3:23:32] pick up lady. That's what they care about,
[3:23:35] even though I am running for a state seat.
[3:23:37] when I think about concerns around voter confusion.
[3:23:43] I think this makes things less confusing.
[3:23:46] I'm sure all of you have run into the same problem where
[3:23:50] half of the job we do when we run for office is explaining
[3:23:55] that the assembly exists, explaining that our job is a
[3:23:57] thing we do. The aim ofmount of times I have
[3:24:03] explain there is a difference government, the village and
[3:24:06] town operate together, the city and state.
[3:24:08] this will allow people to see all the races at once.
[3:24:11] when we talk about concerns around falloff that people
[3:24:16] won't get to the end of the ballot.
[3:24:19] is that the falloff going to be more in a ballot line we
[3:24:22] see year to year when people don't show up?
[3:24:25] we're looking at on-year elections with 30% turnout.
[3:24:30] 27% in an odd year in monroe not to long ago.
[3:24:34] that is abysmal. You will see more people turn
[3:24:39] on the lines than turnout in odd very even years.
[3:24:44] if engaging electorate. Combining elections into to as
[3:24:52] few voting instances as possible is the best thing we
[3:24:53] can do. I care primarily about making
[3:24:57] sure the voters' voices are heard.
[3:24:59] I think this gives us an opportunity to amplify that,
[3:25:02] to ensure that our voters know about what all of their
[3:25:06] elected offices do. About how they can be helped.
[3:25:11] about how they can be impa
[3:25:13] impactful. I will also tell you when I
[3:25:14] walk around with village candidates, we find people
[3:25:17] that want to be on boards. We have a tree board where
[3:25:20] they talk about the trees in the town.
[3:25:22] we got people ton the tree board existed and run for the
[3:25:25] tree board and ask for an appointment.
[3:25:27] this is how you engage people. Door knocking it one of my
[3:25:31] favorite activities. When we get to talk to voters,
[3:25:34] together as teams, people know more and they do better.
[3:25:39] and our government works overall better for the people.
[3:25:43] that's why I support this legislation.
[3:25:45] and I look forward to voting in the affirmative when the
[3:25:50] opportunity arises. Thank you very much.
[3:25:53] >> speaker: thank you, m mr. Bologna.
[3:25:56] >> thank you, madam speaker, will the sponsor yield.
[3:25:58] >> will the sponsor yield. >> yes.
[3:26:02] >> speaker: sponsor yields. >> thank you, mr. Jacobson.
[3:26:05] I want to talk about some of the stuff you were talking
[3:26:08] about with my colleague. In terms of new york city
[3:26:13] being difficult oferent. I want to hone in on the media
[3:26:16] portion of that you said new york city is different because
[3:26:19] the media is different. >> that is part of it?
[3:26:22] >> part of it. You said elections are
[3:26:24] focused, it is different because the coverage of local
[3:26:28] issues matters. In new york city, is that --
[3:26:31] >> I didn't quite say that. Go ahead.
[3:26:41] >> is that an acknowledgment that an informed electorate is
[3:26:48] an important thing we want an informed electorate?
[3:26:51] >> yes. >> to that point, wouldn't you
[3:26:54] agree that media helps informs that electorate item.
[3:26:58] >> part of it, yes. >> part.
[3:27:00] I want to talk about finances here.
[3:27:02] and money. So in 2022 election cycle in
[3:27:06] new york state alone, I think this is a difficult number to
[3:27:10] abrogate, I had to do a lot of math.
[3:27:13] it is well over a billion dollars that is in the
[3:27:18] federal, gubernatorial races, state assembly races,
[3:27:22] everything that was on the ballot in 2022 over a billion
[3:27:26] dollars was spent throughout this state.
[3:27:29] I guess the question is, if you are a local dog catcher,
[3:27:33] running for office the first time, how are you supposed to
[3:27:36] compete? We acknowledged that the
[3:27:40] informed electorate matters. If you have candidates
[3:27:44] flooding the boxes on the airwaves, if you are the local
[3:27:48] dog catcher, and only have $5,000 to spend on a campaign,
[3:27:52] how are you supposed to break through?
[3:27:54] how is that helping inform the electorate?
[3:28:01] >> well, that is not the purpose of the amendment is to
[3:28:04] instruct people how to run a better campaign.
[3:28:07] >> we're adding more people on to the ballot.
[3:28:09] >> I'm sure you find your ways to break through a campaign.
[3:28:16] if having it in an odd year was so good to get through to
[3:28:23] voters, they would have the same type of turn yurt as we
[3:28:27] do in even years. So that doesn't work.
[3:28:30] >> I still -- >> this is the first amendment
[3:28:33] issue. Mr. Jacobson, we're flooding
[3:28:36] -- again, you acknowledged that the media market matters.
[3:28:39] that the media that people are consuming, the way they
[3:28:43] consume it matters. That is why new york city is
[3:28:47] carved out because they're different.
[3:28:49] the point is, how is someone that may not have the
[3:28:52] resources supposed to compete with presidential, gunnia
[3:28:54] torrial and congressional races?
[3:28:57] look, some congressional races spend over $40 million.
[3:29:00] how is someone on a local ballot supposed to compete
[3:29:04] with that? We are adding even more to the
[3:29:11] ballot. >> well, this constitutional
[3:29:18] amendment is not to help people or help people figure
[3:29:20] out their strategy. >> so we don't care --
[3:29:23] >> let me finish. When people engage with voters
[3:29:26] when they go door-to-door, when thai woey work with other
[3:29:33] candidates, they can get their message across.
[3:29:35] >> so we don't care about the informed electorate?
[3:29:40] >> what? That is a false statement.
[3:29:42] I said of course I care about. You wanted to know how people
[3:29:46] can get their message across. >> got it.
[3:29:49] >> I explained that to you. They can work with other
[3:29:54] candidates. They can do different small
[3:29:57] media on their own. They can do that.
[3:30:00] >> they may not have the access to the media market
[3:30:04] like new york city because new york city is different.
[3:30:08] I want to clarify that. I heard you say throughout the
[3:30:09] course of the debate, this is a cost savings measure,
[3:30:12] correct? >> that consolidating
[3:30:19] elections saves taxpayers money that is your
[3:30:24] classification. >> it will save money for the
[3:30:26] board of elections. >> the bill measure says none
[3:30:31] under fiscal implications to the state.
[3:30:33] I'm asking you directly on the record, what is the actual
[3:30:40] dollar figure being saved? >> it depends on the county.
[3:31:07] every county will be different.
[3:31:09] >> no individual county analysis has been done on
[3:31:11] this? >> every county will be
[3:31:13] different. If they don't have to run an
[3:31:15] election, they will save money.
[3:31:22] >> I have one more question. One of the colleagues brought
[3:31:25] up earlier that no good government groups have their
[3:31:28] hair on fire about this. Can you tell me, when did the
[3:31:33] most recent version of this bill, the c print come into
[3:31:35] existence? >> that they didn't say
[3:31:38] anything? >> when did the c version of
[3:31:42] the bill I'm looking atto moy scr
[3:31:47] -- at on my screen. >> when did that get printed.
[3:31:50] >> it was from last year. >> when did the c version get
[3:31:53] printed? >> recently.
[3:31:56] >> 36 hours recently? Thank you very much m
[3:32:00] mr. Jacobson. On the bill, madam speaker.
[3:32:04] >> speaker: on the bill. >> I want to be direct with
[3:32:07] what the bill does. The memo calls it a logical
[3:32:12] step. I call it doubling down on a
[3:32:14] policy that we have not had a single chance to look at, now
[3:32:21] we're here, less than two full years and election cycles
[3:32:23] later, the proposed constitutional amendment to
[3:32:25] expand before we have seen one shred of data, one municipal
[3:32:31] report, one board of elections analysis telling us it is
[3:32:33] working. That is not governance, that
[3:32:36] is assumption. When you are amending the
[3:32:37] constitution of a state, assumptions are not good
[3:32:45] enough, ladies and gentlemen. Let's talk about money.
[3:32:48] that is the heart of the issue here.
[3:32:50] the 2022 election cycle, over a billion dollars was spent on
[3:32:53] campaigns. I will give you a census
[3:33:00] scale, gubernatorial races cost tens of millions.
[3:33:04] congressional races, add up state offices, you have number
[3:33:09] approaches over a billion. Picture a candidate, town
[3:33:12] council in sullivan county. Or surrogate court or local
[3:33:17] sheriff running for the first time they're sharation ballot
[3:33:24] of congressional candidates that will drown them out.
[3:33:27] as I said earlier that is correct is not an informed
[3:33:30] ele electorate.
[3:33:31] how does that person compete and voice carry how does a
[3:33:34] vote they're waded through federal races and two
[3:33:38] statewide contests get to the bottom of the ballot with any
[3:33:41] real acknowledgment of who the candidates are?
[3:33:48] I want to talk about the cost saving measure.
[3:33:50] I read the bill, no fiscal impact.
[3:33:54] not a projection or county by county analysis or none.
[3:33:58] the bill saves money in which case the sponsor is unable to
[3:34:01] tell us what it is. Or the safe spaces are real,
[3:34:04] but ... The sponsor has better than saying something false on
[3:34:10] the floor or the savings are real and we can't produce what
[3:34:14] it is, multiple times. Let's talk about
[3:34:18] administrative savings. There is some at the county
[3:34:20] board of elections. I still don't -- that number
[3:34:23] is not being produced. That money if it exists
[3:34:26] doesn't come back to the state, doesn't reduce the
[3:34:29] property tax bill, lower a single health insurance prem
[3:34:34] quem. That matters.
[3:34:36] we passed a $268 billion budget.
[3:34:39] at the closing hours of the session, the last 36 hours we
[3:34:42] spent our time on congressional redistricting,
[3:34:46] ballot engineering and now a constitutional amendment to
[3:34:49] restructure the way people vote.
[3:34:51] not whether they can vote or how to make their lives
[3:34:54] better, just when they vote. In a way that happens to be
[3:34:56] very convenient for one party. The word of the legislative
[3:35:08] session is affordability. We cannot produce numbers on
[3:35:11] how it making people's lives more affordable.
[3:35:14] it does not lower energy costs.
[3:35:17] we gave people a rebate check last week they will laugh.
[3:35:22] we are taxing tobacco cessation products, driving
[3:35:27] emerging businesses. >> speaker: mr. Bologna, I
[3:35:31] need you to speak on this bill, please.
[3:35:32] thank you. On the bill.
[3:35:39] >> I'm getting there. I wanted to take a second to
[3:35:43] talk about something personal. We spoke about a number of --
[3:35:51] we had a number of election pill
[3:35:55] bills come up, and constitutional amendments.
[3:35:58] we had number of people reach out say the conversations are
[3:36:02] heavy and feel serious. People heard in the past
[3:36:05] couple days we talked about the fall of democracy in this
[3:36:08] building in this room. I don't think that we're being
[3:36:12] dramatic when we say that. I think they mean it.
[3:36:16] here's what's sad to me. I will have a lot of practice
[3:36:19] at these types of speeches in this chamber.
[3:36:25] that is sad. Every time I look at this body
[3:36:27] I really do believe that we should be making people's
[3:36:30] lives tangibly better. But yet we're here talking
[3:36:35] about the erosion of democratic norms.
[3:36:43] I mentioned my kids on the floor of the assembly the
[3:36:45] other day. I'm really excited, I will get
[3:36:48] home to see them tonight, maybe early tomorrow morning.
[3:36:52] but I'm leaving with a heavy heart.
[3:36:57] because I can't look at them in the eye and tell them that
[3:37:01] we've made much better this session or we've enhanced or
[3:37:06] improves the democratic process or democracy in this
[3:37:08] state this session. Actually it was quite the
[3:37:10] opposite. I can't tell them that we made
[3:37:12] it easier for them to start a business.
[3:37:15] I can't tell them that we protected the integrity of
[3:37:18] their local elections. But I can tell them that we
[3:37:21] spent the final hours of the 2025-2026 legislative session
[3:37:27] engineering the ballot to protect political power.
[3:37:37] I can tell them the legislature that talks about
[3:37:43] democracy in its closing days is making democracy smaller
[3:37:49] and more convenient for those already in power.
[3:37:51] my kids are growing up in this state.
[3:37:57] so are yours. To be perfectly honest with
[3:38:01] you, they deserve better than what we have produced in the
[3:38:03] past 48 hours. So with that madam speaker, I
[3:38:10] yield back my time. >> speaker: thank you.
[3:38:13] ms. Peoples-stokes. >> thank you, madam speaker,
[3:38:22] will the sponsor yield for questions.
[3:38:25] >> speaker: will the sponsor yield?
[3:38:28] >> yes. >> speaker: sponsor yields.
[3:38:30] >> when you looked at the data across the state, you noticed
[3:38:33] every time there was an election in an even year, the
[3:38:37] exact same areas turned out more than in the year it was
[3:38:40] not in? >> that's correct.
[3:38:44] >> so the effort here is to try and get a more consistent
[3:38:49] voter and a more efficient rate because if the board of
[3:38:56] elections is putting out these machines, every year getting
[3:39:00] to have a lower turnout is more cost effective to have it
[3:39:05] in 8. So they had more people and
[3:39:07] only put the machines out one time instead of twice in two
[3:39:10] years. >> that's correct.
[3:39:11] >> so I think there is real clarity around where the cost
[3:39:16] savings can come from. I think I heard a lot of
[3:39:20] debate here today that talked a lot about the commonality of
[3:39:23] the candidates as they go out to seek the vote from the
[3:39:30] electorate. I think that saves a lot of
[3:39:33] resources as well. We all have to spend money on
[3:39:36] the campaign. If we're working with somebody
[3:39:38] at another level (indiscernible) if I'm working
[3:39:43] with someone running for a different office and we have
[3:39:46] the same ideals for the constituency, look at the
[3:39:49] value that adds at the door for the constituent to have
[3:39:53] two elected officials for different offices coming in to
[3:39:55] speak to them directly. Coming to sit down and have a
[3:39:58] glass of lemonade with them, see how their family is doing
[3:40:02] and things are going. That is a positive way to get
[3:40:05] the voter reengaged and reenergized about being
[3:40:09] engaged. I want to thank you for
[3:40:10] putting this forward. The other thing I will say, I
[3:40:13] do have some data, some staff that is pretty quick in
[3:40:18] putting this together. In 2022, the number of people
[3:40:25] who turned up in the gubernatorial race was 63,000.
[3:40:31] this was inneery county. The county executive ran in 23
[3:40:36] and only got 34,000 people to turn out for him.
[3:40:40] in 24, the presidential election, same county, 94,000
[3:40:44] people turned out. I mean, it is clear that you
[3:40:47] have found the data and it is right.
[3:40:49] and sometimes it is hard to understand that dealing with
[3:40:54] efficiency is not always about looking for fraud.
[3:40:57] there is nothing fraudulently about having an election every
[3:41:00] year. There is covst savings in not
[3:41:07] having an election every year. This is something folks should
[3:41:11] consider, not for an opportunity to oppose because
[3:41:13] it wasn't your idea. It is an opportunity to figure
[3:41:16] out how do we grin to engage the voter more as well as
[3:41:20] bring down the cost of running our board of elections, which
[3:41:27] is pricey. And actually bring down the
[3:41:29] cost of government while doing so.
[3:41:29] so ... I'm with you sir, thank you for the legislation, I
[3:41:38] trust things will go well as the vote goes up.
[3:41:42] >> thank you, madam. >> thank you.
[3:41:46] mr. Tannousis. >> will the sponsor yield?
[3:41:50] >> speaker: will the sponsor yield?
[3:41:54] >> yes. >> speaker: sponsor will
[3:41:56] yield. >> I won't bewilder the point,
[3:42:00] I wanted to ask some questions.
[3:42:01] I noticed during the debate today you were asked about the
[3:42:06] gap years that could potentially occur when there
[3:42:08] is an election, for example, this year, and should this
[3:42:14] pass, going forward, it is implemented, that there will
[3:42:19] be a gap of time between the end of that term, for example,
[3:42:23] and when they will run again in some races.
[3:42:25] is that correct? Is that a fair assessment?
[3:42:30] >> yeah, if necessary to implement the amendment, we'll
[3:42:36] pass legislation. >> okay.
[3:42:37] what is the proposal -- you mentioned before that the
[3:42:44] governor would pick -- it would be a vacancy that the
[3:42:47] governor would pick -- I'm sorry.
[3:42:48] let me rephrase that. You mentioned earlier --
[3:42:52] correct me if I'm wrong -- that there are situations in
[3:42:57] those situations, the governor potentially would pick
[3:42:59] someone, for example, in the das to serve as the da of the
[3:43:05] county until the even year came up.
[3:43:07] >> that is what it is now. >> that is what it is now if
[3:43:10] there is a death. What will it be in this
[3:43:14] situation if somebody were, for example, up this year
[3:43:19] would win or next year, rather, not this year.
[3:43:22] next year because it is an odd year.
[3:43:24] and there was a gap, for example, of a year.
[3:43:28] what would happen in that situation?
[3:43:38] >> the person elected in the odd year would serve their
[3:43:42] full term. At the end of the term, there
[3:43:44] would be a vacancy and there could be an appointment.
[3:43:49] >> okay. So there could be an
[3:43:51] appointment by the governor of the state, correct?
[3:43:53] >> correct. Whoever that might be.
[3:43:57] >> whoever that might be, and that is up to the governor,
[3:44:00] correct? >> say it again?
[3:44:03] >> that would be up to the governor who she chooses to
[3:44:06] appoint for that position? >> upon the advice and consent
[3:44:11] of the senate. >> with the advice and consent
[3:44:15] of the senate. >> okay.
[3:44:16] that leads me to another question.
[3:44:19] let's say there is another race next year between two
[3:44:22] candidates. One of the candidates is
[3:44:23] supported by the governor. And that candidate loses.
[3:44:28] and we go through the full four-year term and that
[3:44:32] candidate that was supported by the governor wants to run
[3:44:36] again. Nothing stops the governor
[3:44:38] from appointing the candidate that she supports for that one
[3:44:42] year to get head start, correct?
[3:44:46] >> there is nothing in the statute that restricts who the
[3:44:51] governor could appoint or is subject to the advice and
[3:44:56] consent of the senate. >> so the scenario I just gave
[3:45:00] you is a possibility then, correct?
[3:45:02] >> yes, they lot of possibilities.
[3:45:04] but now we're getting into all kinds of what-if's, but go
[3:45:09] ahead. >> about getting into
[3:45:11] what-if's because I don't think this bill accounted for
[3:45:14] certain things. I want to ask you another
[3:45:15] question. Is there anything in this bill
[3:45:27] that would prevent an I individual that is appointed
[3:45:29] to that position from actually running for that position?
[3:45:32] >> no. >> so the person appointed can
[3:45:35] run for that position when the position is up?
[3:45:39] >> like we do now. When there is a vacancy on the
[3:45:42] town board, somebody is appointed they can run.
[3:45:45] same thing. >> I want to be clear.
[3:45:47] I know I mentioned district attorney offices, but you are
[3:45:54] suggesting the mayor's offices as well, the governor can
[3:45:58] appoint the position of a mayor of town or city?
[3:46:02] >> you mean a mayor in a city, upstate city you are talking
[3:46:04] about? >> correct.
[3:46:07] >> the appointment would be made according to the charter
[3:46:10] of the city. >> okay.
[3:46:13] >> however the city does it, usually by the remaining
[3:46:17] members of the council, but however it is done, that
[3:46:21] doesn't change. >> okay.
[3:46:23] so the appointments by the governor then, according to
[3:46:26] what you are saying is for judicial posts and district
[3:46:30] attorney offices? >> yes, for the state
[3:46:34] constitutional offices, as it is now.
[3:46:36] >> got it. >> the supreme court.
[3:46:40] family court. The judges and sheriff.
[3:46:47] da. >> okay.
[3:46:49] thank you very much. On the bill, madam speaker.
[3:46:50] >> speaker: on the bill. >> thank you.
[3:46:54] this I guess is one more part of the power grab we saw start
[3:47:02] the other day. And the part to me that is
[3:47:09] most appalling, besides the fact that obviously we're
[3:47:12] trying to change the order that we have these elections
[3:47:17] is the fact that this bill apparently gives the governor
[3:47:21] the ability to fill posts maybe for a year, for a
[3:47:27] certain amount of time, until whoever was dually elected to
[3:47:38] that position is done. They were elected, because
[3:47:41] they were elected in an outside year, so there will be
[3:47:44] a gap of at least a year where the governor will appoint
[3:47:47] someone to that position until fair elections can happen
[3:47:52] again. I foresee a potential here for
[3:47:53] an issue where the governor may actually appoint her
[3:47:57] allies to certain positions, perhaps even people that may
[3:48:01] have lost that election to begin with.
[3:48:03] and now they're going to serve those positions, not because
[3:48:06] someone passed away or there was some kind of circumstance
[3:48:11] where it necessitated an appointment by the governor.
[3:48:14] but because of a bill that our house and the senate has
[3:48:18] passed which gave the governor that ability to fill that
[3:48:23] vacancy for a year. And maybe potentially even
[3:48:26] give that potential losing opponent head start by being
[3:48:29] in that office for that year. I know we had conversations
[3:48:41] about government groups. Asked what government groups
[3:48:45] he was contacted by. He said he wasn't contacted by
[3:48:49] any. He took that as support.
[3:48:53] as a ranking member, the first time I saw the bill was
[3:48:58] yesterday. I doubt any good government
[3:48:59] groups know this bill exists and may be finding about it
[3:49:03] now. Madam speaker, I am adamantly
[3:49:05] opposed to this bill. I encourage all of my
[3:49:07] colleagues to vote no as well. Thank you so much.
[3:49:10] >> speaker: thank you, mr. Tate.
[3:49:12] >> thank you, madam speaker, would the sponsor yield,
[3:49:15] please. >> speaker: will the sponsor
[3:49:16] yield? >> yes.
[3:49:18] >> speaker: sponsor yields. >> probably my last time
[3:49:22] debating a bill here in this chamber, mr. Jacobson.
[3:49:26] you and I have always gotten along quite well.
[3:49:29] I am glad it is you and I for the last time.
[3:49:33] a few brief questions. First of all, why are we
[3:49:36] changing the law that is already in place?
[3:49:40] what is the big problem with how we do it now?
[3:49:46] >> well, what we're doing is putting those positions that
[3:49:51] being not have been transferred by statute to even
[3:49:56] years, we're putting them in even years.
[3:49:59] and that is why we're doing that.
[3:50:02] so they'll allob the ballot at the same time, less confusion,
[3:50:06] less chance of a town judge being the only candidate.
[3:50:10] and so forth. >> well, one other issue I
[3:50:15] have with this, maybe you can explain it, maybe you cannot.
[3:50:20] but why did the majority put a date for an electoral vote on
[3:50:26] an even year for the era even though we passed the
[3:50:32] legislation for the second time in 2023 but it didn't
[3:50:36] come up until the 2024 election?
[3:50:43] >> on what, I'm sorry. I don't understand your
[3:50:45] question. >> I'm wondering why when we
[3:50:47] passed this bill, okay, we turn around and pass it again
[3:50:50] next year, how come it will be on the ballot in 2027 when we
[3:50:55] know turnout will be low? We're talking about moving
[3:50:59] elections to even years, but we'll vote on this
[3:51:03] constitutional amendment on an odd year, but I want to know
[3:51:07] why the era we passed it in 2023 and wasn't on the ballot
[3:51:13] until 2024? Listen, we're big folks here.
[3:51:17] we know the reason why. Because we knew turnout would
[3:51:25] be high in a presidential election for the majority
[3:51:28] party. For me, that is wrong.
[3:51:29] that is absolutely wrong. Do you have a different answer
[3:51:38] than how I answered the question.
[3:51:42] >> my only answer is I don't know what year we're going to
[3:51:45] put it on the ballot. I know if we put it later than
[3:51:48] sooner, it would stall the implementation of this.
[3:51:58] but that's ray da decision that above my pay grade.
[3:52:00] >> well, this is what I am trying to talk about.
[3:52:02] when you have something that will be the constitution of
[3:52:11] the state of new york. Don't we want all the voters
[3:52:14] to know what is in it. When you buy a tractor or new
[3:52:19] car, they give you an operator's manual, right?
[3:52:24] >> go ahead. >> I'm sorry.
[3:52:27] I didn't hear you. >> I'm sorry, I asked you it
[3:52:32] is no different than buying a car or tractor, you get an
[3:52:36] owner's manual from the dlo
[3:52:40] dealership. It tells you the oil to use
[3:52:42] and tells you the filter to use.
[3:52:45] how many times you have to change it and how to do it.
[3:52:49] but that is not what we're doing here.
[3:52:52] this is not what we're doing here.
[3:52:54] this is supposed to be part of the constitution.
[3:53:00] so let me ask you another question, is there anything in
[3:53:03] this bill that has anything to do with the size of ballots?
[3:53:14] or how many ballots to use? You take some of the areas,
[3:53:19] might have 30, 40 candidates per party.
[3:53:21] >> the answer to the question is no.
[3:53:27] if next year or year after we think there is a need to pass
[3:53:31] a statute after consultation with the local and state board
[3:53:35] of elections, then we will. >> what if we have to go out
[3:53:47] and change voting machines across the state because the
[3:53:50] ballots we use now doesn't work?
[3:53:58] there is a lot of thought that needs to go into something
[3:54:02] when you make a constitutional amendment, is that right?
[3:54:05] >> I think that the savings will outweigh any cost of
[3:54:08] implementing this. >> and what are we going to do
[3:54:12] with our boards of elections? You know, I don't know about
[3:54:17] anybody else, but I went when the board of elections meets
[3:54:20] here in albany and have their annual meeting.
[3:54:25] I was their speaker a couple of weeks ago.
[3:54:28] I ask questions. Instead of giving them a
[3:54:35] rera ra ra, I asked them what we could
[3:54:37] do to make their jobs better and more efficient.
[3:54:40] a lot of them, on both sides of the aisle were not in favor
[3:54:43] of moving elections all to one time.
[3:54:47] they're having a tough time now finding poll watchers.
[3:54:51] having a tough time to have people to even work in the
[3:54:55] boards of elections. So now we're going to make
[3:54:58] their work harder and then what is throwing primaries and
[3:55:10] school board locations. I don't understand why we have
[3:55:11] to touch something. I do understand.
[3:55:13] it is about having control and power.
[3:55:14] it is upsetting. One other question that I
[3:55:26] wanted to ask. Two of my colleagues, you had
[3:55:29] answered that there was no good government groups that
[3:55:33] came out in opposition or in favor of this bill.
[3:55:37] and I want to go one step further.
[3:55:40] why did we not have this discussion or take this bill
[3:55:43] up in election law committee? >> I don't know.
[3:55:54] I don't decide the calendar. If I did, I would be voting on
[3:55:58] more of my bills, this year. >> well, mr. Jacobson, between
[3:56:01] you and I, that is why I get frustrated.
[3:56:04] I have sat on the election law committee since the day I got
[3:56:08] in this assembly. I might not agree with every
[3:56:10] piece of legislation brought up in the committee, but I can
[3:56:13] tell you there is discussion, especially when mr. Lavine was
[3:56:16] the chairman, there were discussions brought up in that
[3:56:22] body that sometimes amendments were made before the bills
[3:56:25] came to the floor to make them better and more efficient.
[3:56:27] I think we do a big disservice to the people of the state of
[3:56:31] new york when we bypass committees, because in most of
[3:56:34] the committees, sir, we have people that are actually
[3:56:36] professionals or know what they're doing.
[3:56:42] take republican-democrat politics out of it.
[3:56:47] it is troubling to me as a taxpayer and new york state
[3:56:50] resident, I want fair and honest elections, whether I'm
[3:56:53] on the winning or losing team. It is my right to go vote.
[3:56:59] and when it seems like things are shrouded one way or the
[3:57:03] other, I think that is a serious problem.
[3:57:05] madam speaker on the bill. >> on the bill.
[3:57:08] >> you know, like I said, it is -- this is probably my last
[3:57:12] time to stand up and debate a bill.
[3:57:18] and the problem is nothing has changed around here.
[3:57:23] it is very, very disappointing that we don't follow the rules
[3:57:27] or follow the way, you know, we talk about democracy.
[3:57:31] well, democracy would have been bringing this amendment
[3:57:35] up or this bill up in the actual committee.
[3:57:40] that's what we're all tasked to do.
[3:57:42] we come here, we go to session.
[3:57:44] and on certain days of the week, we go to committees.
[3:57:47] and I can tell you that not just election law committee,
[3:57:51] all the committees that I have sat on.
[3:57:55] there is times where discussion is brought up
[3:57:58] during the committee and amendments have made --
[3:58:01] amendments have been made to the bills prior to them
[3:58:03] getting to the floor. It's not going to happen here.
[3:58:06] we will rush this. We're going to stuff it down
[3:58:11] the throat of the people, like we always do.
[3:58:14] and it has nothing to really do with the best interest of
[3:58:17] the people. It has to do with the best
[3:58:20] interest of one political party.
[3:58:23] that already controls the governor's mansion, the
[3:58:27] judicial branch, and both houses in the legislature.
[3:58:30] I mean ... It's laughable. It is laughable that people
[3:58:36] don't get it. I was hoping that we would be
[3:58:43] fair and honest. That's why I came here.
[3:58:47] I came here to be fair and honest and represent the best
[3:58:50] I could for the people and my district.
[3:58:53] and I have tried my hardest to always have the best interest
[3:58:58] of the majority of the people in my district.
[3:59:03] they're going to be angry about this, even some
[3:59:06] democrats, some of them have voted against legislation like
[3:59:11] this as far back as 2014. We do everything in the heat
[3:59:15] or the dark of night and nobody else knows what is
[3:59:18] going on. I didn't know about this bill
[3:59:21] until yesterday. Didn't know about it at all.
[3:59:23] didn't really have that much time to prepare even what I
[3:59:27] was going to talk about. There is probably other stuff
[3:59:28] in this bill I haven't had an opportunity to look at or see
[3:59:32] that I can bring up in this debate.
[3:59:34] but I I didn't have the time. Being as I didn't get home
[3:59:41] until 3:15 this morning and had to be back here at 9:00.
[3:59:45] I hope we find a different way of doing business and find a
[3:59:48] different way of doing things for the people of new york.
[3:59:50] madam speaker, I will be voting no on this.
[3:59:53] and I hope that my colleagues that have common sense and
[3:59:57] really care about democracy and care about people no
[4:00:00] matter what party affiliation will do the same.
[4:00:03] god bless you and thank you. >> speaker: thank you.
[4:00:07] mr. Gandolfo. >> will the sponsor yield.
[4:00:17] >> speaker: will the sponsor yield?
[4:00:20] >> yes. >> speaker: sponsor yields.
[4:00:22] >> listening to the debate, it sounds like we're moving this
[4:00:26] forward for cost savings and voter turnout.
[4:00:29] >> correct. >> okay.
[4:00:31] what is the estimated cost savings that the state will
[4:00:35] see and local board of elections might see?
[4:00:38] >> I don't have figures throughout the whole state.
[4:00:40] I can tell you I checked with one commissioner in duchess
[4:00:45] county. Which has about 300,000
[4:00:48] population, 169 election districts.
[4:00:50] and she told me it is about $450,000, that is what it
[4:00:57] costs them to put on an election.
[4:00:59] >> $450,000? That's why we're advancing
[4:01:03] this? So as we discussed, new york
[4:01:06] city is not included in this constitutional amendment
[4:01:08] because they're different. But given the whole discussion
[4:01:11] around the budget, the financial situation of new
[4:01:13] york city, why wouldn't we include them to save them some
[4:01:17] money and help with their dire financial situation?
[4:01:21] >> that might be something to consider in the future, but it
[4:01:25] is not part of this amendment. >> if the purpose is cost
[4:01:29] savings and we have to send money and do financial high
[4:01:37] jinks for new york city shouldn't we include them.
[4:01:42] >> I don't know if you would have voted for it.
[4:01:45] >> maybe I would have. I don't know.
[4:01:50] on the voter turnout side, in even years, I happened to look
[4:01:52] it up. Voter turnout is higher in new
[4:01:56] york city. So why wouldn't we want to
[4:01:58] move all of new york city's elections as well, like we do
[4:02:02] for the rest of the state to even years to increase their
[4:02:05] voter turnout? >> new york city is unique,
[4:02:11] but it is something we can consider in the future.
[4:02:14] >> are they unique in regard to voter turnout?
[4:02:18] it seems like the voter turnout trends in even and
[4:02:23] outside years track similar to pretty much the rest of the
[4:02:26] state. They're even in voter turnout,
[4:02:27] they're unique? >> we can do that in future
[4:02:31] years. It is not part of this
[4:02:34] amendment. >> okay.
[4:02:34] the people of new york city, the referendum they voted on
[4:02:38] was nonbinding? Or was it binding?
[4:02:47] >> I thought it was nonbinding.
[4:02:49] >> to be clear, there was back and forth about this before.
[4:02:52] another county, say suffolk county can't put forth a
[4:02:58] nonbinding resolution, if they put it forth and the voters
[4:03:00] approved it to say we don't want to touch our elections
[4:03:03] like new york city didn't want to change theirs, they would
[4:03:07] not have the opportunity to exempt themselves from this
[4:03:08] amendment? >> no, we -- it is one
[4:03:13] amendment. It is for all of new york
[4:03:16] state outside of new york city and then the voters then if
[4:03:20] this passes this year and in the next term the voters
[4:03:27] throughout the state get a chance to decide.
[4:03:30] >> okay. To be clear, we spend back to
[4:03:36] cost savings is that number is duchess county will save
[4:03:40] $450,000? >> no, I'm sure it is more.
[4:03:44] it is much larger. You can tell me how many
[4:03:47] election districts you have. >> we have a lot.
[4:03:51] >> so the savings in larger counties are going to be much
[4:03:55] larger. There is only about two
[4:03:59] hundred thousand voters, not even that much.
[4:04:00] but there is 300,000 people and 169 districts.
[4:04:08] so I'm sure that suffolk and nassau each will have huge
[4:04:13] savings. >> how many election districts
[4:04:14] are in new york city? >> around 5300.
[4:04:24] >> wow, imagine the money they can save if also included in
[4:04:28] this amendment. Incredible, really help them
[4:04:31] out. Just moving on.
[4:04:32] moving all of the elections to even years, by me, a ballot
[4:04:38] could potentially have a candidate for u.s. President,
[4:04:41] u.s. Senate, u.s. Congress, state senate, state assembly,
[4:04:46] county executive, county clerk, district attorney,
[4:04:49] county legislator, town supervisor, town clerk, town
[4:04:53] tax receiver, potentially highway superintendent and a
[4:04:55] dozen judges. That is a pretty large ballot,
[4:04:57] would you agree? >> yes.
[4:05:00] it is a large ballot. But we'll --
[4:05:24] >> where do they expect the other candidates, on top of
[4:05:27] the everyday responsibilities, might be a parent like I am,
[4:05:31] of the nongestating variety. Exhausted.
[4:05:36] come home from work, take care of the kids, tidy up the
[4:05:40] house. Put kids to bed and now I sit
[4:05:43] down and research 25 candidates, do you think I
[4:05:45] will do that item where will I find the time?
[4:05:47] >> well, I have confidence in the voters.
[4:05:49] I have confidence in candidates reaching the
[4:05:53] voters. >> on that topic, as another
[4:05:58] colleague brought up before,? Is there any concern that some
[4:06:11] candidates may be frozen out from actually getting
[4:06:15] advertising space? >> that's always a concern in
[4:06:19] every election. And I'm sure that your political
[4:06:22] consultant will tell you how to navigate it.
[4:06:24] >> I don't have one. >> then you'll figure it out
[4:06:27] yourself. >> okay, well, I thank you for
[4:06:30] answering my questions. Madam speaker, on the bill,
[4:06:32] please. >> on the bill.
[4:06:33] >> so, again, this bill is moving even more elections to
[4:06:37] even years to point request where now you can have 25
[4:06:42] candidates on your ballot and we expect that voters will have
[4:06:45] enough time and energy to research this many people on top
[4:06:48] of their daily lives, their job, their family obligations, and
[4:06:53] we're going to pretend that they are going to be even more
[4:06:56] informed somehow by asking them to research 25 people each
[4:07:02] election cycle. I don't see how that's the case.
[4:07:05] on the topic of voter turnout, voter turnout is up in even
[4:07:11] years, across the state. So what's good for voter turnout
[4:07:16] in suffolk suffolk, nassau, orange county should be good for
[4:07:20] new york city but as the sponsor said, unfortunately, new york
[4:07:24] city is special and does not get included in something like this.
[4:07:27] even on the cost savings side, new york city apparently has
[4:07:32] 5300 election districts and imagine the cost savings could
[4:07:35] could be realized if they were included in this and maybe we'd
[4:07:39] stop having to send then so much extra money.
[4:07:40] I'll be voting. No thank you, madam speaker.
[4:07:42] >> thank you. Mr. Fitzpatrick.
[4:07:45] >> >> would the sponsor yield just
[4:07:50] for -- >> will the sponsor yield?
[4:07:52] >> a couple of questions. >> yes.
[4:07:53] >> I just -- I was going to speak on the bill and I will,
[4:07:58] but,, where, the savings, at the board of elections, what will
[4:08:02] these employees be doing in the odd years?
[4:08:06] they'll be very busy in the even years but what are we going to
[4:08:10] furlough them? Are we going to lay them off and
[4:08:13] bring them back in an even year because we really won't need
[4:08:17] them in an off year or maybe a smaller staff just to
[4:08:24] administrator get people rent registered to vote but what are
[4:08:26] all of these employees going to do in off year, in an odd year?
[4:08:30] >> I'm sure that each board will make it its own decisions.
[4:08:34] >> I don't -- that's not a good answer.
[4:08:37] >> we need -- you can give me specifics because, if we're
[4:08:40] going to do all of this work in an even year with a tremendously
[4:08:44] long ballot, we haven't even figured how to adjust the
[4:08:48] ballots. Are we looking a mail-in voting
[4:08:51] to make it easier? Is that what the goal is here?
[4:08:54] >> what was that? >> how are we going to deal with
[4:08:58] this very large ballot in even years?
[4:09:04] what arrangements are going to be made?
[4:09:06] >> as I've said, a numb bore of times, if that concern comes up
[4:09:13] next year, I'm sure that I will be talking and others will be
[4:09:17] talking to the local boards, and the state board, and we'll see
[4:09:21] what is the best way to deal if there is a concern.
[4:09:25] >> okay, very good. But -- thank you,
[4:09:29] mr. Jasonson. >> on the bill.
[4:09:31] >> the sponsor has said many times this afternoon that I
[4:09:36] trust the voters. I have confidence in the voters.
[4:09:40] I think that what he's really saying is I only trust the
[4:09:43] voters in even numbered years are.
[4:09:46] I don't trust at least my base voters to come out and vote in
[4:09:49] odd number of years. We're all elected officials
[4:09:52] which means that we all practice the game of politics.
[4:09:57] and some of us are very good at the game of politics.
[4:09:59] and I enjoy political theatre as much as anybody else.
[4:10:03] you know, to the viewers, all three of them watching this this
[4:10:08] afternoon, what's really happening here is just the raw
[4:10:12] execution of political power to gain advantage.
[4:10:16] I think the majority's goal is to make the minority party a
[4:10:21] permanent minority party in the state of new york.
[4:10:23] that's okay, that's their prerogative and they are putting
[4:10:26] that into practice this week. This is what the fourth bill
[4:10:30] designed to give them that permanent majority.
[4:10:33] so, you new york as I said the other day, I'm not mad at what
[4:10:36] they are doing. I don't like it but I'm not mad.
[4:10:39] look, we'll have to have this debate again next year.
[4:10:41] and then, the voters will trust the voters to make that
[4:10:45] decision, do they want to put this proposal into practice or
[4:10:49] not. I'm hopeful that they -- I'm
[4:10:53] hopeful that they don't, because, you know, no voter is
[4:10:57] going to be disenfranchised. Everybody will have an
[4:11:01] opportunity to vote. But what I do think, we're doing
[4:11:04] here is we're disrespecting the voters because as my floor
[4:11:10] leader said very eloquently before.
[4:11:12] there is a reason that we stagger these terms there is a
[4:11:15] reason why we don't put everything in one basket.
[4:11:19] you shouldn't put all of your eggs in one basket and that's
[4:11:22] exactly what we're do with our elections here.
[4:11:24] if you have a ballot of 20 to 30 candidates, you know, it's --
[4:11:31] you're really it iser disrespecting the voters.
[4:11:33] they deserve the opportunity to vote for local officials in one
[4:11:38] year, and statewide officials in another.
[4:11:41] now, the gentle lady from fairport made reference to how
[4:11:45] their local elections were held in an even year.
[4:11:48] and, but I think the reason that it was successful there, is
[4:11:52] because you only had a state senate candidate, a
[4:11:56] congressional candidate, and an assembly candidate, maybe a
[4:11:59] federal senate candidate, and the local officials.
[4:12:01] so you did not have an overloaded ballot in fairport
[4:12:05] that year. So, yes, it is a lot easier.
[4:12:08] but when you have 25, 20, 25, 30 candidates on the ballot, that's
[4:12:13] a different story. It is a different issue.
[4:12:17] so, I think it's -- look, this is going to pass.
[4:12:24] we'll do it again next year, early next year and then we'll
[4:12:28] have a battle and that's what we're in every year.
[4:12:30] battle for the mind of the voter.
[4:12:32] and we're going to have a good discussion.
[4:12:34] some great debates on whether this is a good thing or a bad
[4:12:37] thing. I don't think it is a good
[4:12:38] thing. I don't think it is good for the
[4:12:40] voters and I don't think it is good for the candidates.
[4:12:41] good luck trying to get radio time or ad space or t.v. Time
[4:12:47] when you're competing with, you know, federal election --
[4:12:51] federal races and all of these other races.
[4:12:54] it is going to be very expensive to run these campaigns because
[4:12:58] the increased demand for media time and media space.
[4:13:03] so, we're really doing the voter, I think, a disservice
[4:13:06] here. But, you know, it is all about
[4:13:09] power this game is about power. You know, we like to think that
[4:13:13] we have a level playing field. Neither side want as level
[4:13:17] playing field. We saw that this week with the
[4:13:21] redistricting. Bills.
[4:13:24] it is about tilting that playing field in your direction.
[4:13:26] and that's what the majority is doing.
[4:13:28] it is plain and simple for all to see.
[4:13:32] and that's okay. Go ahead and do it.
[4:13:34] if the shoe were on the other foot, we might be doing the same
[4:13:39] thing. That's why, you know, we're in a
[4:13:41] deep blue state, we need to become a purple state because I
[4:13:44] remember years ago, sitting next to mr. I have to lopez, god
[4:13:50] rest his soul -- mr. Vito lopez and god rest his soul.
[4:13:53] he said, things were better here when there were fewer of us,
[4:13:56] meaning democrats and more of you, meaning republicans.
[4:13:59] he said now our votes are taken for granted.
[4:14:02] so, when you have absolute power, you can do things like
[4:14:06] this. And that's what we're witnessing
[4:14:08] here today and what we witnessed early this week.
[4:14:12] I'm not going to say it is wrong.
[4:14:13] that's for the voters to decide. Is it fair?
[4:14:18] no. If we trust -- I hope the voters
[4:14:21] are paying attention this year. I'll do my very best to express
[4:14:25] my point of view, and I'm sure the other side will do the same.
[4:14:28] but, doing this is, I think, disrespectful to the voters, it
[4:14:34] is not fair to the issues. We have a lot of local
[4:14:41] issues that occupy a lot of time.
[4:14:42] we have a lot of issues at the state and federal level that
[4:14:46] occupy a lot of time. We are cramming five pounds of
[4:14:49] stuff into a two-pound bag in the even years by doing this,
[4:14:53] and we all know it. So, I'm going to be voting no.
[4:14:58] I think everyone should vote no. The system isn't broken, and if
[4:15:02] it ain't broken, there's no need to fix it.
[4:15:05] thank you very much. >> speaker: thank you.
[4:15:13] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[4:15:15] effect immediately. >> speaker: a party vote's
[4:15:18] been requested. Ms. Walsh.
[4:15:19] >> thank you, mr. Speaker. The republican conference will
[4:15:22] not be supporting this constitutional amendment that's
[4:15:27] being proposed, but if there are any exceptions, they could be
[4:15:32] noted now at members' deksz. Thank you.
[4:15:36] >> speaker: thank you. Ms. Peoples-stokes.
[4:15:38] >> thank you, madam speaker. The majority conference is going
[4:15:41] to be in favor of this proposed constitutional amendment and
[4:15:44] folks who would decide to be an exception, they should feel free
[4:15:47] to do so at their seats. >> speaker: thank you.
[4:15:49] the clerk will record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[4:16:06] ms. Bailey toll explain her vote.
[4:16:09] >> thank you, madam speaker. I think this is a large concern
[4:16:11] that needs to be addressed on the record again.
[4:16:13] I took 2029, just thinking if this passes today, we pass it
[4:16:19] again next year, it goes on the ballot, the first election or
[4:16:26] the first even term we are going to see impacted are those whose
[4:16:29] terms will end on 11:59 decembe. So what happens then?
[4:16:38] under this amendment, the terms of office of many local
[4:16:41] officials will expire at midnight.
[4:16:44] at that moment they can see what exists across multiple offices
[4:16:48] across new york state. Deputy clerks, assistant
[4:16:55] district attorneys undersheriffs fill in unable to act if a
[4:17:00] vacancy occurs in the office and serve at the pleasure of said
[4:17:03] elected official. When that elected official's
[4:17:08] term expires, so, too, does the authority under which those
[4:17:12] appointments exist. Compounding the issue, a vacancy
[4:17:17] cannot be filled until the vacancy actually exists.
[4:17:21] I understand that, under current law, the governor has the
[4:17:24] authority to fill many of these vacancies.
[4:17:26] however, this amendment raises significant concerns about the
[4:17:31] practical and functional ability to address what could be an
[4:17:36] unprecedented number of vacancies occurring
[4:17:38] simultaneously across the state. The amendment does not
[4:17:43] adequately account for the magnitude of that challenge.
[4:17:47] these are not theoretical concerns, they are fundamental
[4:17:51] questions of governance that could impact counties and local
[4:17:56] governments across new york state.
[4:17:58] my concern is not about policy -- or politics, it's
[4:18:01] about ensuring -- >> speaker: thank you,
[4:18:04] ms. Bailey, how do you vote? >> I vote in the negative.
[4:18:06] >> speaker: ms. Bailey in the negative.
[4:18:08] thank you. Mr. Smullen to explain his vote.
[4:18:10] >> I rise to explain my vote. Here we are again with another
[4:18:16] constitutional amendment, changing the fundamentals of our
[4:18:20] system of elections here in new york state, and here we are
[4:18:24] again, the rural communities of upstate new york on the short
[4:18:30] end of a stick. We are being dictated to by
[4:18:34] new york city as to when we can hold our elections, when, in
[4:18:37] fact, they are saying they can hold their elections as they
[4:18:44] choose. This is fundamentally
[4:18:49] anti-democratic. We the people of upstate
[4:18:51] new york should have the right to choose when we hold our
[4:18:54] elections and not to be outvoted by one-party rule in this
[4:18:58] assembly. This is fundamentally wrong.
[4:19:01] we will be here again next year to discuss this, and we are
[4:19:05] going to make sure that all of the voters of all of the parts
[4:19:10] of the state know that this fundamental injustice is being
[4:19:14] done to them in the name of one-party rule.
[4:19:17] I vote no. >> mr. Smullen in the negative.
[4:19:22] mr. Jacobson to explain his vote.
[4:19:24] >> thank you, madam speaker. I want to thank my colleagues
[4:19:28] for a spirited debate. This constitutional amendment
[4:19:33] will move to even year elections remaining offices outside
[4:19:38] new york city which were not previously moved to even year
[4:19:42] elections. It will not apply to village
[4:19:45] elections. The results of these changes
[4:19:48] will mean less voter confusion and higher turnout, and counties
[4:19:54] will save a huge amount of money by not having to run these
[4:20:00] elections every year. I proudly vote in the
[4:20:05] affirmative. >> mr. Jacobson in the
[4:20:07] affirmative. Mr. Norber to explain his vote.
[4:20:10] >> thank you, madam speaker. In my district, we have an
[4:20:17] immense amount of county legislators and supervisors and
[4:20:21] so many people are running for these elections, it doesn't make
[4:20:25] sense in one way or form that we have so many people on one
[4:20:29] ballot every two years. This is not about what's good
[4:20:31] for them, this is about what's good for one party, and it's
[4:20:40] pretty clear. What we need to be doing here is
[4:20:43] just doing really what's right for the voters and not just for
[4:20:52] one party just trying to hold, keep, maintain and grow their
[4:20:57] one-party rule. I will be voting in the
[4:20:59] negative. Thank you.
[4:21:00] >> speaker: mr. Norber in the negative.
[4:24:35] are there any other votes? Announce the results.
[4:24:39] >> ayes 88, nos 46. >> speaker: the bill is
[4:24:42] passed. Peoples-stokes.
[4:24:43] >> madam speaker, if we can now begin consenting the a and b
[4:24:47] calendars we have beginning page 3 of the a calendar?
[4:24:51] >> speaker: yes. On the a calendar page 4, rules
[4:24:59] report -- oh, sorry. On the a calendar, page 3, rules
[4:25:08] report 531, the clerk will read. >> assembly number 509b, rules
[4:25:12] report 531, ms. Paulin, an act to amend public health law and
[4:25:15] the education law. >> speaker: on a motion by
[4:25:21] ms. Paulin, senate bill is before the house, advanced.
[4:25:23] read the last section. >> this act shall take effect
[4:25:25] 180th day. >> speaker: the clerk will
[4:25:27] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[4:26:49] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[4:26:50] announce the results. >> ayes 134, nays zero.
[4:26:53] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[4:26:55] >> assembly number 1942, rules report 532, ms. Paulin, an act
[4:26:59] to amend public health law. >> speaker: on a motion by
[4:27:01] ms. Paulin a senate bill is before the house, senate the
[4:27:09] bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[4:27:11] >> this act shall take effect on the 60th day.
[4:27:14] displblghts niou the clerk will record the vote.
[4:27:17] [ voting in progress ]
[4:28:09] are there any other votes? Announce the results.
[4:28:11] >> ayes 133, nays 1. >> speaker: the bill is
[4:28:14] passed. >> clerk: assembly number
[4:28:16] 4007a rules report 533 mr. E. Brown an act authorizing
[4:28:26] congregation khal hashem, inc. To receive retroactive real
[4:28:35] property tax exempt states. >> speaker: senate bill is
[4:28:38] before the house, senate bill is is advanced, read the last
[4:28:42] section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[4:28:43] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[4:28:44] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[4:30:20] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[4:30:21] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 131, nays zero.
[4:30:24] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[4:30:26] >> clerk: assembly number 5113b, rules report 535,
[4:30:32] mr. Andsen, an act to amend the insurance law.
[4:30:35] >> speaker: the bill is laid aside.
[4:30:38] >> clerk: rules report 536, mr. Hevesi, an act to amend the
[4:30:43] domestic relations law and the family court act.
[4:30:46] >> speaker: motion by mr. Hevesi senate bill is before
[4:30:49] the house. The senate bill is advanced.
[4:30:52] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[4:30:55] effect 270th day. >> speaker: the clerk will
[4:30:56] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[4:31:00] ms. Walsh to explain her vote. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[4:31:05] I rise today in support of this legislation while also
[4:31:12] recognizing this legislation raises important questions that
[4:31:14] deserve continued attention from this body and from the courts
[4:31:18] that will be responsible for implementing it.
[4:31:20] at its heart, this bill is about protecting children.
[4:31:24] it seeks to ensure that when allegations of domestic
[4:31:28] violence, child abuse, coercive control or other serious threats
[4:31:32] to a child's safety are raised that courts give those concerns
[4:31:35] the careful consideration that they deserve.
[4:31:37] the bill reflects the legislature's belief that child
[4:31:41] safety must remain the paramount concern in custody proceedings
[4:31:45] and judges should have clear guidance when confronted with
[4:31:49] these very difficult cases. At the same time, supporters of
[4:31:52] the bill should acknowledge the legitimate concerns that have
[4:31:56] been raised by judges, practitioners and family law
[4:32:00] experts. Our family courts are already
[4:32:02] facing significant case load precious, requiring additional
[4:32:06] hearings, findings and procedure 8 steps may increase the time
[4:32:09] and resources necessary to resolve custody disputes.
[4:32:12] we must be vigilant to ensure that well-intentioned reforms do
[4:32:16] not unintentionally contribute to delays that leave families
[4:32:19] and children in prolonged uncertainty.
[4:32:21] there is also a concern that in highly contentious custody
[4:32:25] battles some priorities may attempt to webbize allegations
[4:32:28] to gain a strategic advantage over the other parent.
[4:32:31] every allegation of abuse or danger must be taken seriously
[4:32:34] but courts must also retain the ability to distinguish between
[4:32:39] substantiated claims and claims made in the heat of a custody
[4:32:42] dispute. These are not reasons in my view
[4:32:44] to reject the bill. Rather they are reasons to
[4:32:48] closely monitor its intempletation and remain open
[4:32:52] to future adjustments if unintended consequences occur.
[4:32:55] I would like to thank the sponsor of this legislation
[4:32:58] because we are in a c print and it was really through his
[4:33:01] determination to get it into a form that would be acceptable,
[4:33:07] it was important. So I want to thank him and I do
[4:33:10] vote in the affirmative. Thank you, madam speaker.
[4:33:12] >> speaker: thank you. Ms. Walsh in the affirmative.
[4:33:18] mr. Lavine to explain his vote. >> thank you, long ago it was
[4:33:25] written from grief comes knowledge.
[4:33:27] the genesis of this measure lies in the darkest of tragedy but I
[4:33:33] do want to commend the sponsor, and I also want to smend the
[4:33:39] advocates because from that darkness something good is going
[4:33:42] to happen, and that is the nature of this bill.
[4:33:46] I vote in the affirmative. >> speaker: mr. Lavine in the
[4:33:50] affirmative. Mr. Norber to explain his vote.
[4:33:53] >> thank you, madam speaker. Just a few words I would like to
[4:33:58] say kara was a 28-month-old toddler, murdered by her father
[4:34:02] during an unsupervised court approved visit.
[4:34:06] before this devastating murder, those who knew her father were
[4:34:11] fully aware of his dangerous behavior and had been sounding
[4:34:15] the alarms but these warnings were left unheard and kira's
[4:34:20] death could have been avoided. This bill would put the tools in
[4:34:24] place so that families can protect their children from a
[4:34:27] passionate who is exhibiting dangerous tendencies and I want
[4:34:31] to thank kira's mother jacqueline for her ongoing
[4:34:35] tireless fight to protect the families of new york from the
[4:34:38] threat of losing a child in such a tragic way.
[4:34:41] I also want to thank the sponsor for putting this forward, we
[4:34:44] have been speaking about it for about a year, I'm very glad this
[4:34:49] happened and we're at this point today.
[4:34:52] thank you very much. In the affirmative.
[4:34:53] >> speaker: mr. Norber in the affirmative.
[4:35:03] are there any other votes? Announce the results.
[4:35:05] >> clerk: ayes 131, nays zero. >> speaker: the bill is
[4:35:08] passed. >> clerk: assembly number
[4:35:12] 7250a rules report 537 mr. Seem blinksy, an act to amend the
[4:35:17] town law and public officers law.
[4:35:18] >> speaker: motion by mr. Semplinski is national is
[4:35:28] before the house, senate bill is is advanced.
[4:35:32] read the last section. >> clerk: teaskt take thie
[4:35:36] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[4:35:39] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[4:36:09] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[4:36:11] announce the results. >> ayes 131.
[4:36:13] nays zero. >> speaker: the bill is
[4:36:15] passed. >> rules report 539, mr. Gal
[4:36:20] lap, act authorizing lieutenant thomas clear to receive certain
[4:36:23] service credit. >> speaker: on a motion by
[4:36:26] mr. Gallahan. Senate bill is before the house,
[4:36:28] senate bill is is advanced. Home rule is at the desk.
[4:36:42] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[4:36:44] effect immediately. >> speaker: record the vote.
[4:36:47] [ voting in progress ] >> speaker: are there any
[4:37:37] other votes? Announce the results.
[4:37:37] >> clerk: ayes 131, nays zero. >> speaker: the bill is
[4:37:41] passed. >> clerk: assembly number
[4:37:44] 7960, rules report 539, mr. Miller, an act to amend tax
[4:37:49] law. >> speaker: on a motion by
[4:37:52] mr. Miller, the senate bill is before the house, the senate
[4:37:53] bill is advanced, home rule message is at the desk, reeled
[4:37:57] read. >> clerk: this act shall take
[4:37:59] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[4:38:00] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[4:39:59] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[4:40:01] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 105.
[4:40:04] nays 26. >> speaker: the bill is
[4:40:05] passed. >> clerk: assembly number
[4:40:09] 8340c, rules report 540, mr. Hawley, an act to amend
[4:40:13] highway law. >> speaker: motion by
[4:40:18] mr. Hally, senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is
[4:40:21] advanced. Read the last section.
[4:40:22] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[4:40:23] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[4:40:24] [ voting in progress ] #
[4:42:12] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[4:42:13] announce the results. >> ayes 131.
[4:42:14] nays zero. >> speaker: the bill is
[4:42:16] passed. >> clerk: assembly number
[4:42:19] 8579a rules report 541 mr. Tannousis, act granting
[4:42:33] retroactive tier four membership in the new york city teachers
[4:42:37] retirement system to certain employees.
[4:42:42] >> speaker: senate bill is before the house, the senate
[4:42:46] bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[4:42:49] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[4:42:50] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[4:42:52] [ voting in progress ]
[4:44:05] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[4:44:07] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays zero.
[4:44:10] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[4:44:11] >> clerk: assembly number 8814a rules report 542
[4:44:17] mr. Mcdonald, an act to amend the education law.
[4:44:18] >> speaker: on a motion by mr. Mcdonald is the senate
[4:44:25] bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[4:44:27] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[4:44:34] effect july 1st. >> speaker: the clerk will
[4:44:40] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[4:44:56] mr. Mcdonald to explain his vote.
[4:44:58] >> thank you, madam speaker. Just to explain my vote, I want
[4:45:01] to thank our colleagues, I also want to thank our partners in
[4:45:04] education, the teachers union and the school board
[4:45:08] associations. As we know, unfortunately,
[4:45:12] opioids still are perm nateing all different aspects of society
[4:45:16] and unfortunately sad to say it happens in schools as well.
[4:45:20] this legislation which has been thoughtful provides the
[4:45:24] opportunity for schools to have a lock zone in schools.
[4:45:29] unfortunately, when kids some even to marijuana, opioids are
[4:45:33] infiltrated one way or the other.
[4:45:34] this provides an option with no mandate to the schools in
[4:45:38] regards cost to make sure that, in the unfortunate circumstance
[4:45:41] that a child is struggling with an overdose, naloxone will be
[4:45:47] available. Thank you.
[4:45:49] >> speaker: mr. Mcdonald in the affirmative.
[4:45:58] are there any other votes? Announce the results.
[4:45:59] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays zero. >> speaker: the bill is
[4:46:03] passed. >> clerk: assembly number
[4:46:06] 9074a, rules report 543, mr. Gray, an act to amend the
[4:46:10] public officers law. >> speaker: motion by mr. Gray
[4:46:14] the senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is
[4:46:18] advanced, read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[4:46:19] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[4:46:20] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[4:47:36] are there any other votes? Announce the results.
[4:47:38] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays zero. >> speaker: the bill is
[4:47:41] passed. >> clerk: assembly number
[4:47:44] 9199a, rules report 5 h 4, mr. Barclay, an act to amend the
[4:47:50] not-for-profit corporation law. >> speaker: on a motion by
[4:47:54] mr. Barclay, the senate bill is before the house, the senate
[4:47:56] bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[4:47:57] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[4:47:58] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[4:49:12] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[4:49:13] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays zero.
[4:49:16] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[4:49:17] >> clerk: assembly number 9396b, rules report 545,
[4:49:23] ms. Solages, an act to amend the general business law.
[4:49:25] >> speaker: on a motion by ms. Solages the senate bill is
[4:49:28] before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[4:49:31] the bill is laid aside. >> clerk: assembly number
[4:49:35] 18280 mr. Friend, act to amend the requirement and social
[4:49:39] security law. >> speaker: on a motion by
[4:49:41] mr. Friend, senate bill before the house, the senate bill is
[4:49:45] advanced. Home rule message is at the
[4:49:51] desk. Read the last section.
[4:49:52] >> clerk: this act shall take effect january 1st.
[4:49:57] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[4:49:58] [ voting in progress ] >> speaker: are there any
[4:50:51] other votes? Announce the results.
[4:50:53] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays zero. >> speaker: the bill is
[4:50:55] passed. >> clerk: assembly number
[4:50:58] 10450b, rules report 547, mr. Simpson, an act to amend
[4:51:02] highway law. >> speaker: motion by
[4:51:05] mr. Simpson, the senate bill is before the house, the senate
[4:51:08] bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[4:51:09] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[4:51:11] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[4:51:12] [ voting in progress ] are there any other votes?
[4:52:56] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nos
[4:53:00] zero. >> speaker: the bill is
[4:53:01] passed. >> clerk: assembly number
[4:53:03] 10706, rules report 548, ms. Chandler-waterman, an act to
[4:53:12] amend the public authorities law.
[4:53:15] >> speaker: senate bill before the house, the senate bill is
[4:53:20] advanced read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[4:53:22] effect immediately. >> speaker:
[4:53:23] ms. Chandler-waterman to explain her vote.
[4:53:26] >> thank you, madam speaker, this is the third year
[4:53:31] legislators have stood with transit workers.
[4:53:33] we are living with the rapid rise of artificial intelligence.
[4:53:40] we cannot excuse the need for efficiency to be elimination of
[4:53:44] good, stable union jobs. We cannot build a future where
[4:53:47] technology advances but working that many lis are pushed
[4:53:52] backwards, without no working families, we have no future.
[4:53:54] once again, three years of making sure that we keep our
[4:53:58] conductors on the m.t.a. Trains. However, this is about making
[4:54:03] sure trained professionals can respond in emergencies, assist
[4:54:06] riders in moments of need an provide a human presence in a
[4:54:10] system that millions mend on every day.
[4:54:13] with thousands of passengers on a single train having only one
[4:54:17] operator limits their ability to effectively manage crisis.
[4:54:20] removing them is not modernization, it is a dangerous
[4:54:25] game without public safety. During the pandemic, m.t.a.
[4:54:28] train conductors went to work every single day to keep
[4:54:33] new york city moving. The massive scale of new york
[4:54:40] city subway system makes it uniquely vulnerable in
[4:54:45] emergency. This is a moment where we have
[4:54:46] to draw the line and say not here, not on the backs of
[4:54:50] transit workers, not at the expense of safety, not in a
[4:54:53] state that continues to provide opportunities.
[4:54:56] I stand with transit workers because my commitment will
[4:54:58] always be the representatives of this 125eu9.
[4:55:00] I urge my colleagues to stand with us and pass this bill and
[4:55:04] hopefully get it signed finally into law.
[4:55:06] thank you so much, I vote in the affirmative.
[4:55:08] >> speaker: ms. Chandler-waterman in in te
[4:55:18] affirmative. Are there any other votes?
[4:55:19] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays zero.
[4:55:22] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[4:55:24] >> clerk: 10379a, rules report 549 mr. Durso, act in relation
[4:55:31] to authorizing the assessor of the town of babylon.
[4:55:36] >> speaker: senate bill is before the house, the senate
[4:55:39] bill is advanced, read the last section.
[4:55:40] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[4:55:42] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[4:57:00] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[4:57:01] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays zero.
[4:57:04] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[4:57:06] >> clerk: assembly number 10902, rules report 550,
[4:57:11] mr. Smullen, an act to amend the not-for-profit corporation law.
[4:57:14] >> speaker: on a motion by mr. Smullen, the senate bill is
[4:57:16] before the house, the senate bill is advanced, read the last
[4:57:18] section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[4:57:19] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[4:57:21] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[4:57:28] mr. Smullen to explain his vote. >> thank you, madam speaker, I
[4:57:32] rise to explain my vote. Recruitment and retention in our
[4:57:36] voluntary fire service is of critical importance for the
[4:57:39] communities in the area I represent, and this bill will
[4:57:43] allow the east herkimer volunteer fire department to
[4:57:46] recruit more volunteers to answer the call when the
[4:57:49] community needs. It's a great bill.
[4:57:51] thank you. >> mr. Smullen in the
[4:57:54] affirmative. Are there any other votes?
[4:58:05] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays zero.
[4:58:08] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[4:58:09] >> clerk: assembly number 1106 is a rules report 551 mr. K.
[4:58:15] brown 25th , an act to amend e chapter 63 laws of the 1971
[4:58:29] bill. >> speaker: on a motion by
[4:58:34] mr. Brown, the senate bill is before the house, the senate
[4:58:37] bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[4:58:40] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[4:58:41] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[4:58:42] [ voting in progress ] are there any other votes?
[4:59:43] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays zero.
[4:59:45] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[4:59:47] >> clerk: assembly number 11085a rules report 552
[4:59:52] mr. Jensen, an act to amend highway law.
[4:59:54] >> speaker: motion by mr. Jensen, the senate bill is
[4:59:57] before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[4:59:58] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[5:00:00] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[5:00:01] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[5:02:25] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[5:02:27] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 133, nays zero.
[5:02:29] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[5:02:30] >> clerk: assembly number 11179, rules report 553,
[5:02:35] ms. Paulin, an act to amend the state finance law.
[5:02:38] >> speaker: on a motion by ms. Paulin, the senate bill is
[5:02:41] before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[5:02:43] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[5:02:47] effect 180th day. >> speaker: the clerk will
[5:02:49] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[5:03:58] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[5:03:59] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 133, nays zero.
[5:04:02] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[5:04:04] >> clerk: assembly number 11246, rules report 554,
[5:04:10] mr. Mcdonough, an act to amend highway law.
[5:04:12] >> speaker: on a motion by, the senate bill is before the
[5:04:17] house, the senate bill is advanced.
[5:04:19] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[5:04:20] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[5:04:21] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[5:04:24] ms. Walsh to explain her vote. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[5:04:28] so, I rise in support of this bill which dedicates a portion
[5:04:33] of the state highway system to william cornell and, as a point
[5:04:37] of personal privilege and on behalf of our members, I wanted
[5:04:43] to note that this is the last bell that will be passed -- bill
[5:04:47] passed from our colleague dave mcdonough, so I wanted to just
[5:04:51] talk about him and his service. He was elected in 2002 and
[5:04:57] served 24 years. He's a u.s. Coast guard and u.s.
[5:05:02] air force veteran. He served for all that time in
[5:05:06] the 14th assembly district. She was known for his dedication
[5:05:10] to public safety, support for veterans and transportation
[5:05:14] issues. He's been a strong advocate.
[5:05:16] he has been a community leader, a long-term public servant.
[5:05:20] his commitment to service, leadership and civic engagement
[5:05:23] has left a lasting impact on countless new yorkers.
[5:05:27] it's been a privilege to serve alongside david and benefit from
[5:05:31] his experience, his wisdom and his friendship.
[5:05:34] we all thank him for his service and we wish him continued health
[5:05:38] in the years ahead. Thank you very much, madam
[5:05:41] speaker. I vote in the affirmative.
[5:05:43] >> speaker: thank you. Ms. Walsh in the affirmative.
[5:05:48] thanks to mr. Mcdonough for his service.
[5:05:54] [ applause ] >> speaker: are there any
[5:09:35] other votes? Announce the results.
[5:09:36] >> clerk: ayes 133, nays zero. >> speaker: the bill is
[5:09:40] passed. >> clerk: assembly number
[5:09:42] 11562, rules report 555, committee on rules, mr. Bronson,
[5:09:47] an act to amend the cannabis law and the labor law.
[5:09:50] >> speaker: on a motion by, the senate bill is before the
[5:09:53] house, the senate bill is advanced.
[5:09:54] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[5:09:56] effect immediately. >> speaker: party vote's been
[5:09:59] requested. Ms. Walsh.
[5:10:00] >> thank you, madam speaker. The republican conference will
[5:10:02] not be supporting generally this legislation but if there are
[5:10:08] exceptions they may be noted at members' seats.
[5:10:11] >> speaker: thank you. Mr. Fall.
[5:10:12] >> thank you, madam speaker. The majority conference will be
[5:10:14] in the affirmative on this piece of legislation.
[5:10:17] for those who would like to be an exception, they can do so at
[5:10:20] their desk. >> speaker: thank you.
[5:10:23] the clerk will record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[5:13:35] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[5:13:37] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 95, nays 38.
[5:13:41] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[5:13:44] on the b calendar, page 3, rules report 556, the clerk will read.
[5:13:52] >> clerk: assembly number 11564, rules report 556,
[5:13:56] committee on rules, mr. Stirpe, an act to amend the alcoholic
[5:14:00] beverage control law. >> speaker: read the last
[5:14:04] section. >> .
[5:14:08] oh... On a motion by, the senate bill
[5:14:12] is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[5:14:14] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[5:14:15] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[5:14:17] record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[5:16:40] >> speaker: mr. Fall. >> madam speaker, can you please
[5:16:44] call on the rules committee to meet in the speaker's conference
[5:16:48] room. >> speaker: rules committee
[5:16:49] members please make your way to the speaker's conference room.
[5:22:56] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[5:22:58] announce the results. >> ayes 133, nays zero.
[5:23:01] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[5:23:05] mr. Fall. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[5:23:07] could we now turn our attention to several bills.
[5:23:12] we'll start off with one bill on consent filed the rest on
[5:23:17] debate. Start with rules report 408 by
[5:23:22] mr. Steck, rules report 392 by ms. Simon, rules report 483 by
[5:23:31] mr. Mcdonald, rules report 470 by ms. Rosenthal, and rules
[5:23:37] report 291 by ms. Forrest. >> speaker: main calendar, 9,
[5:23:53] 408, the clerk will read. >> clerk: 8925a rules report
[5:23:59] 408, senator ryan, an act to amend general business law.
[5:24:02] >> speaker: read the last section.
[5:24:03] >> clerk: this act shall take effect on the 90th day.
[5:24:09] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[5:24:13] mr. Steck to explain his vote. >> thank you, this bans
[5:24:17] synthetic cratum also known as 70h or gas station heroin
[5:24:26] because of where it is sold in pack jibing resembling
[5:24:30] children's bubble gum. Craidum is a leaf that grows in
[5:24:36] southeast asia. Chewing it produces a mild stive
[5:24:40] effect. However, chemists have isolated
[5:24:42] the active ingredient in craid yum and multiplied it 100 times
[5:24:47] so that it is the same as other opioids such as heroin.
[5:24:52] people get addicted, have rapidly declining health and go
[5:24:58] through withdrawal the same as any other opioid.
[5:25:01] indeed it takes the maximum dose of suboxone to arldz effects of
[5:25:08] synthetic cratum. It can be fatal like any other
[5:25:13] opioid overdose. Therefore, it presents a clear
[5:25:17] and present danger to the people of new york.
[5:25:18] I thank my colleagues especially members blumencranz and warble
[5:25:28] for their votes -- warble wr their votes and I vote in the
[5:25:38] affirmative. >> a piece of legislation like
[5:25:40] this is going to save lives from what could be the fourth wave of
[5:25:44] the opioid crisis. Synthesized forms of cratum are
[5:25:49] being utilized and targeting our children and our youth and
[5:25:52] ending the sale of these horrible assistant synthesl
[5:25:58] make our community safer. Getting this done in a
[5:26:01] bipartisan fashion shows how this building can work
[5:26:04] effectively and I appreciate the support of many of the members
[5:26:07] who joined us on this cause. Thank you.
[5:26:10] >> speaker: ms. Walsh to explain her vote.
[5:26:14] >> thank you, madam speaker. I wanted to rise briefly and
[5:26:17] thank the sponsor for the work he has tone in this important
[5:26:21] area along with assembly member mcdonald and other colleagues.
[5:26:26] this is the latest bill in a series of bills to really try to
[5:26:30] take a hard look at this substance that provides benefit
[5:26:34] for some but is extremely harmful to many including a
[5:26:43] former maybe of mine who became a strong advocate after her sons
[5:26:49] death following the use of cratum.
[5:26:52] I think this is very important and will definitely save lives
[5:26:55] and this is the type of regulation in new york state
[5:26:56] that I think we need to do and that I can certainly get behind.
[5:27:01] I'm very grateful to see that it appears to be a unanimous vote
[5:27:04] and has support from this entire body.
[5:27:07] I'm proud to cast my vote in the affirmative.
[5:27:09] thank you. >> speaker: thank you.
[5:27:11] ms. Walsh in the affirmative. Any other votes in announce the
[5:27:25] results. >> clerk: ayes 133, nays zero.
[5:27:28] >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[5:27:30] main calendar page 8, rules report 392, cede the clerk w.
[5:27:36] >> clerk: assembly number 5567b rules report 392,
[5:27:42] ms. Simon, an act to amend the criminal procedural law and the
[5:27:49] mental hygiene law. >> speaker: on a motion by
[5:27:55] ms. Simon the senate bill is before the house -- on a motion
[5:28:23] by, senate the senate bill e the house, the senate bill is
[5:28:28] advanced. Read the last section.
[5:28:29] >> clerk: this act shall take effect on the 90th day.
[5:28:57] >> speaker: mr. Molitor, on the bill.
[5:29:06] >> so, this bill will create a c change in our competency and
[5:29:13] criminal procedure law, and not for the better.
[5:29:18] so, under the current criminal procedure framework, if someone
[5:29:21] came into court and was experiencing hallucinations or
[5:29:26] something, the court, with the defense council, could ask for a
[5:29:32] competency evaluation and two independent psychiatric experts
[5:29:36] would evaluate that individual and determine whether they were
[5:29:40] competent to stand trial or not. If the individual was found to
[5:29:50] be incompetent, the individual would go to a psychiatric center
[5:29:53] and, while that individual was in the psychiatric center, that
[5:29:59] individual would have an attorney from the department of
[5:30:04] mental hygiene representing them.
[5:30:05] there is a finite amount of time that individual can stay in a
[5:30:12] seekatric facility before they have to be reevaluated and there
[5:30:15] has to be a new retention order from the court, and if that
[5:30:19] individual, over time, is found to be competent, they are
[5:30:22] brought back for their criminal proceeding, and the criminal
[5:30:26] proceeding can continue and it doesn't matter what the charge
[5:30:29] is -- it could be murder, arson, kidnapping, whatever it may be,
[5:30:34] that individual is brought back to be tried and, you know, if
[5:30:41] found guilty will suffer the repercussions.
[5:30:47] this bill changes all of that. First of all, this bill will
[5:30:56] remove judicial discretion for judges when setting bail, an
[5:31:00] issue we've had a problem with I think in this legislature
[5:31:03] before. So, when a court is trying to
[5:31:06] get somebody evaluated for competency and they can't do it
[5:31:10] because that individual is not in their right mind and maybe is
[5:31:13] out in the community committing crimes or is just, you know, not
[5:31:18] acting in a reasonable manner, a court will no longer be able to
[5:31:22] set bail in order to have that person properly evaluated.
[5:31:26] it changes the legal standard of what competency is.
[5:31:42] it will require the court to determine whether the person
[5:31:45] will ever be restored to competency, something no one is
[5:31:49] capable of doing. There is a clause within this
[5:31:53] particular bill that prevents medical evidence from being used
[5:31:56] against the individual at trial. Right now, if someone is found
[5:32:00] incompetent, all of those privileged communications that
[5:32:05] exist between the provider and the defendant can be used
[5:32:08] against the defendant if the defendant asserts a mental
[5:32:13] disease or defect defense. This eliminates it.
[5:32:18] but probably the biggest problem with this law is it gives judges
[5:32:23] the ability to dismiss cases, what we would call unilaterally
[5:32:28] without really any input from the prosecution which is no
[5:32:32] wonder why the d.a.'s association, every one of the
[5:32:36] d.a.s in all of your counties is against this.
[5:32:43] not only that, but, if a court finds that someone cannot be
[5:32:49] restored, it moves the case from a criminal case to a civil case
[5:32:53] without any really mechanism or explanation for how that will be
[5:32:58] done. So, this bill, I think, is
[5:33:02] fatally flawed. Not only is it a bad idea, but
[5:33:05] it doesn't work in practicality. And if that's not enough, I
[5:33:10] think what it does is it, unfortunately, sacrifices public
[5:33:20] safety for money because the big reason for this bill is that
[5:33:25] it's costing counties too much money to keep individuals in
[5:33:32] psychiatric facilities because they have been found incompetent
[5:33:36] to stand trial. And I sympathize with our
[5:33:40] counties, I do, which is why I think the state should pick up
[5:33:43] the tab. But this is not the way to fix
[5:33:46] that issue. This is only going to compromise
[5:33:50] safety in the state of new york. So, I would encourage all my
[5:33:54] colleagues to vote no on this bill.
[5:33:56] I certainly will be. Thank you.
[5:34:02] >> speaker: thank you. Read the last section.
[5:34:17] >> clerk: this act shall take effect on the 90th day.
[5:34:20] >> speaker: party vote's been requested.
[5:34:23] ms. Walsh. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[5:34:24] the republican conference will not be supporting this piece of
[5:34:27] legislation, but if there are exceptions members may vote
[5:34:30] differently at their desks now. Thank you.
[5:34:32] >> speaker: thank you. Mr. Fall.
[5:34:33] >> thank you, medical center. The majority conference will
[5:34:37] support this police of legislation.
[5:34:40] for those who would like to be in exception, they can do so at
[5:34:44] their desks. >> speaker: thank you.
[5:34:47] the clerk will record the vote. [ voting in progress ]
[5:35:20] >> speaker: ms. Simon to explain her vote.
[5:35:27] >> thank you, madam speaker, for permission to explain my vote.
[5:35:31] this bill addresses an ongoing crisis in our courts and jails
[5:35:34] across the state where people accused of crimes who are not
[5:35:37] felt to stand trial but languish for months in our jails awaiting
[5:35:42] both evaluation and then treatment.
[5:35:44] they have not been convicted of anything, and misdemeanor cases,
[5:35:48] for example, when the defendant is not competent, are always
[5:35:53] dismissed. Meanls is -- mental illnesse
[5:35:58] and a court involvement is often due to lack of support.
[5:36:03] this bill will relieve the burden on our counties and
[5:36:07] create opportunity for people to receive treatment they need
[5:36:10] outside a jail setting. When we open up access and
[5:36:13] support to treatment in the communities where people live,
[5:36:15] we are supporting access and a commitment to long-term
[5:36:20] behavioral healthcare that creates better outcomes for all
[5:36:22] new yorkers, and that includes, let me just say, that once a
[5:36:26] person is restored to competence, that person can't
[5:36:31] stand trial. That will also protect the
[5:36:33] public safety and give assurances to the public.
[5:36:35] this bill is actually a faster path to restoration and usually
[5:36:40] retention orders, for example, are for a year at a time.
[5:36:43] and I just also want to say that bail decisions made first, bail
[5:36:47] has nothing to do with this. So, I appreciate the opportunity
[5:36:54] to share my reasons for voting and I will be voting in the
[5:36:57] affirmative. Thank you.
[5:36:58] >> thank you. Ms. Simon in the affirmative.
[5:37:00] are there any other votes? Announce the results.
[5:37:04] >> ayes 87, nays 46. >> speaker: the bill is
[5:37:09] passed. Page 12, rules report 483, the
[5:37:12] clerk will read. >> clerk: assembly number
[5:37:16] 5939, rules report 483, senator skoufis, an act to amend public
[5:37:22] health law and the insurance law.
[5:37:24] >> speaker: an explanation has been requested, mr. Mcdonald.
[5:37:32] >> thank you, madam speaker quite simply, this bill is
[5:37:34] actually relatively straightforward.
[5:37:37] a couple of years ago, we approved in the subject a new
[5:37:44] payment philosophy using a cost plus formula for the new york
[5:37:48] state medicaid program this bill takes that formula and applies
[5:37:56] it to commercial health plans in new york state.
[5:38:01] >> speaker: mr. Jensen. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[5:38:06] would the sponsor yield? >> speaker: will the sponsor
[5:38:09] yield? >> of course, I'll yield.
[5:38:11] >> speaker: the sponsor yields.
[5:38:13] >> thank you, mr. Chairman, why is this bill necessary?
[5:38:22] >> it's called fairness. Without getting into a lengthy
[5:38:25] conversation request, in healthcare we have vert dli
[5:38:29] integrated networks, health insurers who own pbms, health
[5:38:33] systems, a variety of different entities and sadly enough, what
[5:38:37] we've seen with some, not all, of these pbms is they have
[5:38:44] what I call preferential reimbursement.
[5:38:47] you have pharmacy a, b and c and they will pay pharmacy a which
[5:38:52] they happen to own more than pharmacy b or c and quite
[5:38:56] honestly that's not fair. At the end of the day, many
[5:38:59] people may not realize this, as much as pharmacies are abundant
[5:39:04] throughout the state, farm sills do not set prices for
[5:39:07] prescription drugs, the pbms do.
[5:39:10] the reality is more than enough evidence, particularly in states
[5:39:14] like west virginia and oklahoma where attorneys general are
[5:39:20] extremely active, that you have identified thousands of cases
[5:39:23] and instances where the pbms have been paying their own
[5:39:27] pharmacies more than others and, quite honestly, it's predatory
[5:39:32] reimbursement, it's unfair, it's why we're seeing pharmacies lost
[5:39:35] in urban areas, rural areas and sadly enough the people who are
[5:39:40] most impacted are the patients. >> thank you for that enhanced
[5:39:45] explanation. I do appreciate it.
[5:39:47] is there language in this in ths legislation to except collective
[5:39:56] barring anything agreements. >> language to exempt
[5:40:04] self-insured trusts who have agreements with their employer.
[5:40:06] >> what was the reasoning. >> a request of the labor
[5:40:10] groups. They feel they didn't want to be
[5:40:11] a part of this for whatever reason and both senator skoufis
[5:40:16] and I listened to them and agreed we would do that.
[5:40:20] so we're really focusing on commercial plans actually
[5:40:23] overseen by the department of df financial services.
[5:40:27] >> I know you mentioned in the original explanation when asked
[5:40:31] by our floor leader that we had done something in the budget
[5:40:35] previously and I know, in 2023, dfs had rolled out proposed
[5:40:41] regulations that were never adopted.
[5:40:44] how does this align or not align with what dfs originally
[5:40:49] proposed through regulation? >> this follows through on what
[5:40:52] d.f.s. Proposed. At the time there were concerns
[5:40:55] raised by some labor groups and therefore they decided to hold
[5:40:59] off on that. This follows through on this
[5:41:03] original proposal. This has been accepted in many
[5:41:06] other states around the country and as evidenced by both the
[5:41:10] biden and trump ftc is direction where pharmacy reimbursement is
[5:41:15] headed in the future. >> okay.
[5:41:16] I know there is some estimate that there could be a cost both
[5:41:20] to the essential plan and to insurers on the commercial
[5:41:25] market. Because of the potential for
[5:41:27] expense to both those entities, why didn't we do this during the
[5:41:31] budget? >> no, I don't know where that
[5:41:33] estimate comes from. I'm a little bit surprised to
[5:41:37] even hear that being mentioned. You know, the reality is
[5:41:42] pharmacy reimbursement is one very complex, a very huge black
[5:41:47] box. The reality is the prescription
[5:41:49] benefit managers who actually do do a very good job in regards to
[5:41:53] managing the plan negotiate fees, negotiate rebates, have
[5:41:59] gpo agreements, they have a whole list of items that goes
[5:42:02] into determining what the patient is going to be charged.
[5:42:06] what we're doing is we're changing the reimbursement
[5:42:10] methodology. Instead of the old fashioned
[5:42:11] program where there was a discount, which is average
[5:42:18] wholesale price plus a small fee, we are actually putting in
[5:42:21] a standard fee, but what people don't realize is we're putting
[5:42:24] in a federally required cost reimbursement called nadac, the
[5:42:34] national average drug acquisition cost.
[5:42:37] pharmacies are required monthly to submit invoices to a
[5:42:41] consolidator for the federal government to see what the true
[5:42:44] cost of the drugs is because there's always been a question
[5:42:46] of what the true costs of the drugs is.
[5:42:50] nadac at the time is the best estimate I could speak of but I
[5:42:54] have only been doing pharmacy for 40 years.
[5:42:57] the idea is we're going to get a lower net cost, but, yes, we're
[5:43:01] going to have a stabilizing fee, which is being adopted at much
[5:43:05] higher rates, I will say, in other states throughout the
[5:43:08] country. So, I have to be honest wu, I
[5:43:11] know who is saying this is going to raise costs, it's the people
[5:43:14] who have had the luxury of managing the benefit for the
[5:43:18] last 20 years in this giant black box.
[5:43:21] I don't blame them. They don't want to give up the
[5:43:25] puck. I get it.
[5:43:26] that being said, we're here worried about patients, worried
[5:43:29] about payers, and, yes, we want stability in the pharmacy
[5:43:32] community, but to say it's going to raise costs is bunk.
[5:43:35] >> all right. Not to get bunk again, but
[5:43:44] depending on when this passes, based on the number of
[5:43:47] co-sponsors, it will, if and when this is adopted, the
[5:43:50] requirements would take effect halfway through the commercial
[5:43:54] rate year. And dfs is halfway through its
[5:43:57] rate setting process for 2027 with the final rates for 2027 to
[5:44:02] come out in august of this year. What would be the impact on
[5:44:10] their determination of rates should this become adopted?
[5:44:13] >> yeah, I personally don't believe there will be a negative
[5:44:17] impact on rates. What people might not be aware
[5:44:19] of, and we approved this last year in the budgets, is that,
[5:44:22] for the first time in this state's history, we are actually
[5:44:26] requiring the pbms and the health plans and actually the
[5:44:29] manufacturers to actually provide what rebates they have
[5:44:33] been receiving all these last 20, 30 years.
[5:44:36] our healthcare premiums have been calculated on some kind of
[5:44:41] drug spend but no one has been monitoring the has been monitore
[5:44:49] rebates the pbm have been monitoring.
[5:44:54] I don't know anybody who told me the prescription drug costs
[5:44:58] where premiums are going down. We will now have full
[5:45:01] transparency on the numbers to really get a better idea of what
[5:45:03] the true cost of medications are.
[5:45:08] does that answer your question? >> I want to thank the honorable
[5:45:13] gentleman for his answers and madam speaker, I do want to say
[5:45:17] it has been a pleasure to serve with you these past six years
[5:45:21] and I wish you the best of luck as you continue to serve your
[5:45:27] community in whatever way, shape or form that happens.
[5:45:30] with that, thank you, madam speaker.
[5:45:53] >> speaker: read the last section.
[5:45:54] >> clerk: this act shall take effect january 1, 2027.
[5:45:58] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote [voting in
[5:45:59] progress]. Mr. Mcdonald to explain his
[5:46:13] vote. >> I want to thank my colleagues
[5:46:15] for their support. They have been remarkable, the
[5:46:17] number of spores on sponsors on this bill I haven't so high in a
[5:46:22] long period of time. I want to reiterate a couple of
[5:46:28] things, pbms play a critical role in the healthcare system
[5:46:30] but many of them have enjoyed this black box, the lack of
[5:46:33] transparency, this opaque environment for a long period of
[5:46:37] time. At the end of the day, this is
[5:46:39] about taxpayer money. It's about our constituents'
[5:46:44] money, what they pay in premium, what they pay if co-pays.
[5:46:47] the claim that this will raise prescription drugs costs is a
[5:46:53] very feeble attempt to maintain their control over a several
[5:46:58] hundred billion-dollar a year industry.
[5:47:02] the reality is we want them to do their job properly.
[5:47:04] we want them to negotiate with the pharmaceutical companies.
[5:47:08] this does not interrupt that negotiation for rebates by any
[5:47:13] stretch of the imagination. But by the same token, we should
[5:47:16] actually know where the benefit is going.
[5:47:18] it's very easy to blame rising drug prices for the cost and
[5:47:23] blame pharma and they do share some responsibility but by the
[5:47:27] same token, the rebates sometime approaching 50% and the gpo
[5:47:33] agreements asy with gives us the question, where is the money and
[5:47:36] this is one large step in that transparency.
[5:47:40] thank you, madam speaker. >> speaker: mr. Miller to
[5:47:44] explain his vote. >> thank you, madam speaker, I
[5:47:46] would like to explain my vote. I rise today in support of
[5:47:52] a-5882 and want to begin by thanking the sponsor,
[5:47:55] assemblyman mcdonald for his work on this important
[5:47:58] legislation. I have been a proud co-sponsor
[5:48:00] of this bill early on because I understand just how important
[5:48:04] local pharmacies are on tower communities.
[5:48:07] in many of our rural areas, access to healthcare services
[5:48:12] can already be limited. And for many constituents, that
[5:48:15] local pharmacy is often the most accessible healthcare resource
[5:48:21] they v. These pharmacies do far more than fill precipitations--
[5:48:29] prescription. They provide veax and healthcare
[5:48:32] services close to home. When a local pharmacy closes, it
[5:48:35] can mean residents, especially seniors and those with limited
[5:48:39] transportation, must travel long distances just to access
[5:48:44] medications and the care they need.
[5:48:46] this bill is also important because many of these pharmacies
[5:48:51] are small business. I have worked with pharmacies
[5:48:54] throughout my district and have had firsthand-- and have heard
[5:48:58] firsthand about the challenges they face.
[5:49:01] they are employers, community partners and essential part of
[5:49:05] our local economies. By supporting our independent
[5:49:09] pharmacies, we are helping preserve access to healthcare
[5:49:12] while are while also supporting the small businesses that keep
[5:49:15] our communities strong. For those reasons, I proudly
[5:49:19] vote yes and encourage my colleagues to do the same.
[5:49:21] thank you, madam speaker. >> speaker: mr. Novakhov to
[5:49:29] explain his vote. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[5:49:34] and first of all, thank you to the sponsor of the bill,
[5:49:38] mr. Mcdonald. Thank you very much proud to
[5:49:40] support this bill, proud to vote yes on this bill and I'm a big
[5:49:45] supporter of local pharmacists. I want to thank the pharmacy I
[5:49:49] shop at, thank you, great service, and just want to say
[5:49:55] that independent pharmacists, unfortunately closing across
[5:50:00] new york because they're too often reimbursed below the
[5:50:03] actual costs of the medication is they dispense when a local
[5:50:05] pharmacy closes, seniors, working families and entire
[5:50:10] communities lose access to essential healthcare services so
[5:50:15] this bill helps ensure pharmacists are paid fairly.
[5:50:18] the medications they provide and can serving our neighborhoods.
[5:50:24] for this reason, I vote yes. Thank you, madam speaker.
[5:50:32] >> speaker: mr. Cashman to explain his vote.
[5:50:37] >> thank you very much, madam speaker, to explain my vote.
[5:50:41] may I first say thank you mr. Sponsor for the incredible
[5:50:43] work you have done in this arena.
[5:50:45] you and I have engaged in many conversations and I've spoked
[5:50:48] with all my constituents in the area and there are a lot of
[5:50:51] conversation we need to get on the same page.
[5:50:53] but what we arrived on is the thing that this chamber knows is
[5:50:59] that rural america, rural america is having a tough time
[5:51:03] with healthcare and that we need to open the aperture to the
[5:51:06] entire system of our healthcare to really be able to lean in and
[5:51:10] to make sure that we are protecting our community.
[5:51:14] our pharmacists are at the very center of it.
[5:51:17] from the newborn to the senior, they are caring for our
[5:51:21] community. This bill helps protect small
[5:51:24] businesses, and it also helps to protect our community.
[5:51:27] and for that, I vote in the affirmative.
[5:51:29] thank you. >> speaker: ms. Griffin to
[5:51:35] explain her vote. >> thank you for allowing me to
[5:51:39] explain my vote, madam speaker. I want to thank the sponsor for
[5:51:43] bringing this measure forward. I was proud to co-sponsor and
[5:51:46] advocate for this bill because this legislation is about
[5:51:50] lowering prescription drugs costs for patients, keeping
[5:51:52] neighborhood pharmacies open and adding transparency to drug
[5:51:56] pricing practices. Our small neighborhood
[5:51:58] pharmacies are disappearing and access to high quality
[5:52:02] affordable care is diminished every time a local pharmacy is
[5:52:05] forced to close their doors. Local pharmacies are the front
[5:52:08] lines of our healthcare system. We know the benefits, services
[5:52:12] and informed personal touches that our local pharmacies
[5:52:15] provide in our communities. And we must ensure that they are
[5:52:18] given the tools and the resources they need to keep
[5:52:22] their doors open. Thank you.
[5:52:23] I vote in the affirmative. >> speaker: ms. Glick to
[5:52:33] explain her vote. >> thank you very much to
[5:52:35] explain my vote briefly. I have an independent pharmacy
[5:52:39] that I have been going to for a very long time and they are
[5:52:45] vitally important to our community and so I want to thank
[5:52:51] the sponsor for this measure and I also want to thank the sponsor
[5:52:56] for his friendship through the years and the way in which he
[5:52:59] has helped me navigate some particular issues relative to
[5:53:07] healthcare. And so I want to thank him on a
[5:53:11] point of personal privilege, I want to thank my colleagues for
[5:53:16] their friendship and for sharing their lives with me, because we
[5:53:22] spend so much of our time here. I withdraw my vote and vote in
[5:53:26] the affirmative. [ applause ]
[5:53:48] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[5:53:48] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 133, nays 0.
[5:53:54] >> speaker: the bill is passed. Page 11, rules report 470.
[5:54:04] clerk will read. >> clerk: senate 2667 c rules
[5:54:11] report 470, senator salazar, an act to amend the correction law
[5:54:15] and the executive law. >> speaker: ms. Walsh.
[5:54:23] >> thank you, madam speaker. I'll just go on the bill.
[5:54:26] so this bill-- well, let me back up.
[5:54:28] the correction law currently prohibits the use of restraints
[5:54:33] on incarcerated pregnant women during labor, delivery and
[5:54:36] post-partum recovery except in limited extraordinary
[5:54:40] circumstances. There is also existing notice of
[5:54:44] these protections and training for correctional personnel.
[5:54:47] what this bill does is it expands it.
[5:54:49] I would say greatly expands existing restriction and it
[5:54:54] broadens current protections to apply not only during labor and
[5:54:58] delivery but also during transport and medical care
[5:55:03] related to pregnancy outcomes and for up to 12 weeks folly
[5:55:09] birth, abortion, miscarriage or stillbirth.
[5:55:12] the bill generally prohibits the use of restraints during these
[5:55:16] periods except in limited emergency circumstances
[5:55:20] involving an immediate risk of serious injury that cannot be
[5:55:25] reasonably addressed by other means.
[5:55:29] so that's the essence of why there will be no votes on this
[5:55:34] bill. It raises operational and public
[5:55:37] safety concerns it substantially limits the discretion of
[5:55:41] correctional and law enforcement personnel.
[5:55:43] it also imposes extensive documentation, reporting and
[5:55:48] training requirements on correctional facilities and law
[5:55:50] enforcement agencies which some may contend would create
[5:55:56] significant administrative burdens and increase compliance
[5:55:58] costs, particularly for smaller local jurisdictions.
[5:56:02] for those reasons, it is opposed by the new york state sheriffs
[5:56:06] association. They oppose the bill's expansion
[5:56:09] of anti-shack ling restrictions and-- shackling restrictions and
[5:56:12] limit on the use of force for pregnant individuals in custody
[5:56:15] and argue the proposal is operationally unworkable and
[5:56:20] could undermine officers' ability to safely maintain
[5:56:24] custody and prevent escape. So for those reasons, I will be
[5:56:28] voting in the negative. I would encourage my colleagues
[5:56:30] to do the same. Thank you very much madam
[5:56:36] speaker. >> speaker: read the last
[5:57:09] section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[5:57:10] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[5:57:12] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[5:57:39] ms. Rosenthal to explain her vote.
[5:57:42] >> thank you, madam speaker to explain my vote.
[5:57:46] last month samantha gave birth in law enforcement custody in a
[5:57:50] brooklyn courtroom there on a low level charge but because she
[5:57:53] was in police custody and not incarcerated, our anti-shackling
[5:57:58] laws did not protect her from this horrific experience.
[5:58:02] her water broke as she was seated on a courtroom bench with
[5:58:05] her hands cuffed behind her back.
[5:58:08] the charges were dismissed two days later.
[5:58:10] over the years, we've protected incarcerated women from this
[5:58:15] barbaric practice. I'm proud we will soon offer
[5:58:18] women in law enforcement custody the same protections.
[5:58:20] these are vital protections that will help ensure these women can
[5:58:23] give birth with dignity and receive the humane and
[5:58:27] respectful care that they are entitled to.
[5:58:29] I must thank claire dilan, jen ashley and her people, program
[5:58:35] and council and the many advocates who offered their
[5:58:37] knowledge and expertise, including dory lewis, sophie,
[5:58:42] legal aid society, jena of nyclu, serena martin, plan
[5:58:49] parenthood and so many more and of course the speaker for
[5:58:53] getting this bill to the finish line.
[5:58:55] I cast my vote in the affirmative.
[5:59:03] >> speaker: ms. Rosenthal in the affirmative.
[5:59:10] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[5:59:11] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 119, nays 14.
[5:59:15] >> speaker: the bill is passed. Page 7, rules report 291.
[5:59:21] clerk will read. >> clerk: assembly 4018a rules
[5:59:26] report 291, ms. Forest, an act to amend the public health law.
[5:59:35] >> thank you, madam speaker, I will just go on the bill.
[5:59:37] thank you. 2 so this bill requires--
[5:59:42] >> speaker: excuse me. One second, please.
[5:59:43] >> of course, yes, thank you. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[5:59:55] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:00:03] ms. Walsh. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[6:00:05] so this bill would require hospitals and clinical staff
[6:00:11] that provide perinatal care to implement an evidence-based
[6:00:18] implicit bias program. Implicit bias program would be
[6:00:21] placed to address racial and systemic bias in the healthcare
[6:00:25] system through staff education and training.
[6:00:28] it would require that clinical staff at every hospital
[6:00:35] providing perinatal care to provide proof of certification
[6:00:41] of a training program that would need to be done annually and
[6:00:46] include instruction that time is wasting so I won't read them all
[6:00:49] out there. It's a lot.
[6:00:50] the bill would require the new york state department of
[6:00:52] health to track data and statistics related to maternal
[6:01:02] morbidity hemorrhage, hypertension, pre-eclampsia and
[6:01:09] venus thromboembolism, sepsis accident and am nottic fluid
[6:01:15] embolism. The doh has to publish the data
[6:01:20] every two years. Issues ranging from infection
[6:01:32] control practices to sepsis awareness and the reporting of
[6:01:36] child abuse. Right now there is not a
[6:01:38] statutory requirement that hospitals provide the training I
[6:01:41] just described. So it is true, and we do not
[6:01:46] dispute that minority patients, specifically african-american
[6:01:49] patients are more than three times as likely to day die from
[6:01:53] pregnancy related causes compared to white patients, but
[6:02:00] I would say the development of an implicit bias training
[6:02:06] program such as the one identified in this bill is not
[6:02:10] necessary to raise awareness to that unfortunate statistic.
[6:02:13] I believe that it is yet another government mandate, the cost of
[6:02:19] which will be shouldered by the hospitals and not the state.
[6:02:22] I think there is already awareness that this is a problem
[6:02:27] I think care providers are doing what they can in an annual
[6:02:30] implicit bias program is not really going to adequately
[6:02:39] address this issue or result in anything meaningful so there
[6:02:42] will likely be costs incurred to doh as a result of these
[6:02:47] requirements and for that reason, there will be some of us
[6:02:49] who will be opposing this legislation.
[6:02:52] I would ask that folks consider it and I thank you, madam
[6:02:59] speaker. >> speaker: read the last
[6:03:10] section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:03:13] effect 180th day. >> speaker: a party vote has
[6:03:17] been requested. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[6:03:19] as I said, the republican conference is generally in the
[6:03:23] negative on this piece of legislation, but if there are
[6:03:26] exceptions they could be noted at the desk.
[6:03:28] thank you. >> speaker: mr. Fall.
[6:03:31] >> thank you, madam speaker. The majority conference will be
[6:03:33] in the affirmative on this piece of legislation.
[6:03:36] for those that would like to be an exception, they can do so
[6:03:40] here in the chamber. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:03:46] record the vote. [voting in progress]
[6:04:04] >> thank you, madam speaker to explain my vote.
[6:04:05] as a nurse, I have seen what it looks like when a patient's pain
[6:04:08] is not believed when a black woman's pain is dismissed, when
[6:04:14] her concerns are minimized and her autonomy is ignored.
[6:04:20] this is bias with a stethoscope. And as we clearly see the
[6:04:25] results, black women are three times more as likely to
[6:04:27] experience a pregnant-related death as white women and less
[6:04:35] likely to receive treatment for the conditions that lead to that
[6:04:38] death. Woo we cannot claim to be
[6:04:40] progressive leaders while mothers of color are dying at
[6:04:46] disproportionate rates. Month term mortality is
[6:04:51] preventible. That's why I introduced the
[6:04:53] dignity in child birth act requiring hospitals and other
[6:04:56] birthing centers to inform expecting mothers of their
[6:04:59] rights, how to file complaints, it also mandates evidence-based
[6:05:04] implicit bias training for all facilities providing perinatal
[6:05:10] care. And in undergoing implicit bias
[6:05:13] training, healthcare providers can become aware of their biases
[6:05:17] and learn strategies to mitigate their impact.
[6:05:21] this can foster open communication with patients and
[6:05:26] their colleagues, leading to improved patient satisfaction
[6:05:29] and trust. And in the long run, addressing
[6:05:32] these biases can contribute to health equity ensuring every
[6:05:37] woman, regardless of her racial and ethnic background receive
[6:05:44] high quality and respectful care during child birth and this in
[6:05:49] turn can save mothers. Every person deserves dignity
[6:05:51] and respect as they navigate their pregnancy, delivery and
[6:05:56] post-partum experience. The quality of care they receive
[6:05:57] should never suffer because of the patient's unique racial.
[6:06:06] I vote in the affirmative. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:06:15] votes? Announce the results.
[6:06:20] >> clerk: ayes 91, nays 42. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:06:28] mr. Fall. >> madam speaker, members have
[6:06:31] on their desk, the c calendar, I now move to advance the c
[6:06:36] calendar and I ask that we take it up immediately.
[6:06:52] page 4, rules report 557, clerk will read.
[6:06:56] >> >> clerk: assembly 1755 a.
[6:06:59] report 557 ms. Reyes, an act to amend the social services
[6:07:05] law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:07:05] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:07:12] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:07:16] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:07:17] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[6:08:10] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:08:11] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 129 nays 4.
[6:08:13] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 2612 rules
[6:08:18] report 558 mr. Bendett, an act to amend the criminal procedure
[6:08:23] law. >> speaker: read the last
[6:08:28] section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:08:29] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:08:30] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[6:09:38] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:09:38] announce the results. >> clerk: aye sz 31 nays 2.
[6:09:40] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 5456b rules
[6:09:45] report 559 mr. E brown an act to amend the tax law.
[6:09:49] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:09:51] the senate bill is advanced. Home rule message is at the
[6:09:56] desk. Read the last section.
[6:09:59] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:10:00] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:10:02] [voting in progress] >> speaker: are there any other
[6:11:08] votes? Announce the results.
[6:11:09] >> clerk: ayes 117 nays 16. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:11:14] >> clerk: assembly 5574 rules report 560 mr. Barclay, an act
[6:11:19] to amend the county law. >> speaker: home rule message is
[6:11:22] at the desk. Read the last section.
[6:11:26] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:11:28] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:11:29] [voting in progress] >> are there any other votes?
[6:12:24] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 133, nays 0.
[6:12:28] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 6405 rules
[6:12:32] report 561, mr. Palmesano, an act to amend the criminal
[6:12:37] procedure law. >> speaker: read the last
[6:12:38] section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:12:40] effect immediateally. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:12:41] record the vote. [voting in progress]
[6:14:00] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:14:01] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 130, nays 3.
[6:14:05] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 7267 rules
[6:14:09] report 562 mr. Sempolinski, an act in relation to authorizing
[6:14:14] the city of olean assessor to accept an application.
[6:14:19] >> speaker: read the last section.
[6:14:20] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:14:21] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:14:23] [voting in progress] >> speaker: are there any other
[6:15:15] votes? Announce the results.
[6:15:18] >> clerk: ayes 133, nay 0z. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:15:23] >> clerk: assembly 7386a rules report 563 mr. Gallahan, an
[6:15:26] act in lelings to authorizing sergeant bethany kidd to receive
[6:15:30] certain service credit. >> speaker: home rule message is
[6:15:37] at the desk. Read the last section.
[6:15:39] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:15:41] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:15:43] ms. Walsh to explain her vote. >> thank you very much madam
[6:15:47] speaker, so I rise to support this bill on behalf of seeing
[6:15:54] that sergeant bethany kidd will receive some service credit
[6:15:58] under a 20 year retirement plan and I would like to know this is
[6:16:03] mr. Gallahan's last bill. He is ending his service in the
[6:16:07] new york state assembly representing the is 31st
[6:16:11] district elected in 2020. Jeff has brought a wealth of
[6:16:14] real world experience to public office.
[6:16:17] he is always advocating for working families and small
[6:16:20] businesses but I will always think of him as just chef jeff.
[6:16:24] he always had the best food. He fed more of us here during
[6:16:30] his time in albany than anybody can I think of.
[6:16:32] he and his wife have a catering business and I will always think
[6:16:36] of him of being in the lineup at maple day back in the lounge and
[6:16:41] taking care of all of us there. We want to all wish jeff the
[6:16:43] very best as he moves from the assembly and we want to thank
[6:16:47] him for his service to our conference and to his district.
[6:16:52] so thank you very much madam speaker.
[6:16:53] [ applause ] s.
[6:17:12] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:17:13] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 133, nays 0.
[6:17:18] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 7884b rules
[6:17:22] report 564, mr. Fitzpatrick, an act in relation to
[6:17:25] authorizing the town of smithtown assessor to accept an
[6:17:29] application. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:17:32] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:17:36] read the last section. >>
[6:17:38] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:17:39] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:17:41] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:18:22] votes? Announce the results.
[6:18:26] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 1. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:18:30] >> clerk: assembly 7986a rules report 565 mr. K. Brown an act
[6:18:34] in relation to authorizing the centerport fire district to file
[6:18:40] an application. >> speaker: read the last
[6:18:47] section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:18:48] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:18:49] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[6:18:54] ms. Walsh to explain her vote. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[6:18:59] I raise to support this bill and to note the milestone this is
[6:19:04] keith brown's last bill here serving in the new york state
[6:19:08] assembly on behalf of assembly district 12.
[6:19:12] keith has been one of my good friends and a friend to many of
[6:19:15] us. He has been a strong advocate.
[6:19:18] I especially think about the important work that he has been
[6:19:21] doing and probably will continue to do as a person on the
[6:19:28] alcoholism committee and particularly the work he has
[6:19:32] been doing shining a light on co-occurring disorders with
[6:19:37] alcoholism and mental health issues.
[6:19:40] as an attorney he has brought real expertise to the body and I
[6:19:43] know as he continues in his practice, he will continue to
[6:19:46] probably reflect well, hopefully on his time here in the
[6:19:49] assembly. It's been a privilege to serve
[6:19:51] with keith. And it's been a real privilege
[6:19:53] to travel with him, too, on the off season.
[6:19:56] we had a great trip together to ireland.
[6:20:00] so we thank him for his leadership and his dedication.
[6:20:03] we wish him the best as he moves ahead.
[6:20:07] thank you, madam speaker. [ applause ]
[6:20:22] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:20:23] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 133, nay 0z.
[6:20:27] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 8514 rules
[6:20:32] report 566 mr. Burger, an act to amend the surrogate court
[6:20:36] procedure act. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:20:39] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:20:40] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:20:43] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:20:44] record the vote. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:21:27] votes? Announce the results.
[6:21:30] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 1. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:21:35] >> clerk: assembly 8577 a rules report 567 mr. Riley, an act
[6:21:39] to amend the authorize frank r. Smith to receive performance of
[6:21:42] duty retirement benefits. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:21:50] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:21:55] home rule message is at the desk.
[6:21:56] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:21:59] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:22:00] record the vote. [voting in progress]
[6:22:38] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:22:39] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 133, nay 0z.
[6:22:42] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> assembly 8805a rules report
[6:22:48] 568 mr. Beep debt, an act to amend the highway law.
[6:22:51] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:22:53] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[6:22:58] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:23:00] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:23:01] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:23:51] votes? Announce the results.
[6:23:53] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:23:57] >> clerk: assembly 8809b rules report 569 ms. Giglio, an act
[6:24:00] to amend the chapter 495 of the laws of 2011.
[6:24:04] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:24:05] the senate bill is advanced home rule message is at the desk.
[6:24:11] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:24:14] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:24:15] record the vote. [voting in progress]
[6:24:51] >> are there any other votes? Announce the results.
[6:24:53] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:24:57] >> clerk: assembly 8894a rules report 570 mr. Blumencranz, an
[6:25:02] act authorizing the county of nassau assessor to accept an
[6:25:08] application. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:25:09] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:25:14] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:25:16] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:25:17] record the vote. >> are there any other votes?
[6:26:10] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0.
[6:26:14] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 8903 c rules
[6:26:18] report 571 mr. Slater, an act in relation to authorizing the
[6:26:21] county of putnam to release certain lands as park lands.
[6:26:25] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:26:26] the senate bill is advanced. Home rule message is at the
[6:26:30] desk. Read the last section.
[6:26:33] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:26:35] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:27:19] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:27:20] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 131, nays 1.
[6:27:24] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 8962b rules
[6:27:29] report 572, mr. Rozic, an act to amend the general business
[6:27:33] law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:27:33] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced read
[6:27:38] the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:27:41] effect on the 60th day. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:27:42] record the vote. [voting in progress]
[6:28:18] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:28:19] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 131, nays 1.
[6:28:21] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 9200 rules
[6:28:26] report 573, mr. Barclay,an act to amend the not-for-profit
[6:28:30] corporation law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:28:31] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:28:34] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:28:38] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:28:39] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[6:29:19] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:29:20] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0.
[6:29:23] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 9214a rules
[6:29:27] report 574, ms. Paulin, an act to amend the penal law.
[6:29:31] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:29:32] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[6:29:38] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:29:39] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:29:40] [voting in progress]. >> are there any other votes?
[6:30:13] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes is 32, nays 0.
[6:30:18] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 9408 rules
[6:30:22] report 575 mr. Jensen,an act to amend the law.
[6:30:25] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:30:27] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[6:30:31] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:30:34] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:30:34] [voting in progress] >> speaker: are there any other
[6:31:08] votes? Announce the results.
[6:31:10] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:31:14] >> clerk: assembly 1005 is rules report 576, mr. Bologna.
[6:31:18] an act in relation to establishing the clearance
[6:31:22] volunteer benevolent association.
[6:31:23] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:31:25] the senate bill is advanced read the last section.
[6:31:31] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:31:32] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:31:33] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:32:21] votes? Announce the results.
[6:32:23] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:32:29] >> clerk: 1009 the rules report 577 mr. Sempolinski, an act to
[6:32:33] amend the tax law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:32:35] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:32:39] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:32:43] effect-- sorry, home rule message is at the desk.
[6:32:44] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:32:48] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:32:52] record the vote [voting in progress].
[6:34:36] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:34:37] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes ayes 110, nays
[6:34:42] 22. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:34:44] >> clerk: assembly 10373, rules report 578, mr. Simpson, an
[6:34:48] act in relation to authorizing the county of warren to offer an
[6:34:51] optional 20-year retirement plan.
[6:34:53] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:34:54] the senate bill is advanced home rule message is at the desk.
[6:34:59] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:35:02] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:35:04] record the vote. [voting in progress]
[6:35:34] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:35:35] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0.
[6:35:38] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 10382 rules
[6:35:43] report 579 mr. Ra, an act relating to a death benefit
[6:35:47] option for the beneficiary of justice jerry garguilo.
[6:35:54] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:35:55] the senate bill is advanced read the last section.
[6:36:00] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:36:01] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:36:02] [voting in progress] >> speaker: are there any other
[6:36:47] votes? Announce the results.
[6:36:50] >> joe: ayes 132, nay 0z. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:36:53] >> clerk: 'em assembly is 0455 rules report 580 ms. Kelles,
[6:37:00] an act to amend the vehicle and traffic law and public officers
[6:37:03] law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:37:04] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:37:06] home rule message is at the desk.
[6:37:07] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:37:11] effect on the 30th day. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:37:13] record the vote. [voting in progress]
[6:38:32] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:38:33] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 115 nays 17.
[6:38:38] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 10 had 80
[6:38:41] rules report 581 mr. Bologna. An act to amend the chapter 389
[6:38:45] of the laws of 2024. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:38:48] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:38:50] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:38:52] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:38:54] record the vote. [voting in progress]
[6:40:16] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:40:16] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 131, nays 1.
[6:40:20] >> speaker: the bill is passed assembly 10573 rules report 582,
[6:40:29] mr. Dipietro, an act to amend the general municipal law.
[6:40:31] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:40:32] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[6:40:33] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:40:37] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:41:07] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:41:08] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes is 31, nay 0z.
[6:41:09] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 10596a rules
[6:41:13] report 583, mr. Tague, an act to amend the alcoholic beverage
[6:41:17] control law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:41:18] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:41:20] read the last assembly 10636 rules report 584,
[6:42:10] mr. Ramos. An act to amend the highway law.
[6:42:11] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:42:13] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[6:42:16] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:42:17] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:42:18] [voting in progress]. >> are there any other votes?
[6:42:59] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0.
[6:43:00] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly is 0636,
[6:43:04] rules report 586-- oops. Assembly 10666 rules report 585
[6:43:13] mr. Blankenbush, an act to repeal title 5 of article so c
[6:43:17] of the public authorities law. >> home rule message at the
[6:43:22] desk. Read the last section.
[6:43:23] >> >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:43:24] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:43:25] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[6:43:26] mr. Walsh to explain her vote. >> thank you, madam speaker not
[6:43:33] only do I support this fine piece of legislation for the
[6:43:38] clifton fine health care corporation.
[6:43:41] this is the last bill that mr. Blankenbush is passing as
[6:43:44] a member of the assembly to recognize his service to this
[6:43:47] body and to the 117th assembly district.
[6:43:51] he has been our ranker on the insurance committee.
[6:43:55] he has a deep background in the insurance industry, is a real
[6:43:59] wealth of knowledge and just a huge proponent for the north
[6:44:03] country that is just so much a part of his heart.
[6:44:07] he and his wife sheila are hopefully going to enjoy many
[6:44:12] happy years of retirement together and I know the crew
[6:44:14] that goes to ralph will definitely miss
[6:44:17] mr. Blankenbush but we will be sad to see him go but just want
[6:44:20] to take a moment to thank him for his years of service.
[6:44:22] thank you. [ applause ]
[6:44:38] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:44:39] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nay 0z.
[6:44:40] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 10689 rules
[6:44:46] report 586 mr. Slater, an act to amend the executive law.
[6:44:56] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:44:57] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[6:44:58] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:44:59] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:45:00] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:46:11] votes? Announce the results.
[6:46:13] >> clerk: ayes 132, nay 0z absentee ballot.
[6:46:17] >> clerk: assembly 106 3 rules report 587, mr. Smullen, an
[6:46:21] act to amend the tax law. >> speaker: home rule message is
[6:46:25] at the desk. Read the last section.
[6:46:26] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:46:27] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:46:28] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:47:46] votes? Announce the results.
[6:47:49] >> clerk: ayes 128 nays had. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:47:53] >> clerk: assembly 10704 rules report 588 ms. Shrestha, an
[6:47:57] act to allow steven kobie jackson to be eligible to take
[6:48:02] the civil service exam. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:48:05] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced home
[6:48:09] rule message is at the desk. Read the last section.
[6:48:12] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:48:13] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:48:14] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:48:48] votes? Announce the results.
[6:48:48] >> clerk: ayes 132, nay 0z. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:48:51] >> clerk: assembly 10741 rules report 589, ms. Paulin, an act
[6:48:54] to amend the state finance law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:48:58] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:48:59] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:49:03] effect on the 180th day. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:49:04] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[6:49:33] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:49:34] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nay 0z.
[6:49:37] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 10792a rules
[6:49:44] report 590 ms. Bailey, an act to amend the highway law.
[6:49:49] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:49:50] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[6:49:53] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:49:54] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:49:55] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:50:30] votes? Announce the results.
[6:50:31] >> clerk: ayes is 32, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:50:35] >> clerk: assembly 108 is 3 rules report 5 the 1,
[6:50:40] mr. Blumencranz. An act authorizing the county of
[6:50:43] nassau to accept an application. >> speaker: read the last
[6:50:45] section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:50:46] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:50:47] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[6:50:57] >> speaker: mr. Blume especially crans to explain his
[6:50:59] vote. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[6:50:59] I'm really proud today to be standing before this piece of
[6:51:02] legislation in the house, creating connections and
[6:51:06] building bridges within communities and different
[6:51:08] nations who are constantly trying to reach out to our
[6:51:12] constituents is imperative. It's a pleasure to see this on
[6:51:15] the board today and see this great work getting done.
[6:51:18] thank you. >> speaker: mr. Blumencranz in
[6:51:20] the affirmative. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:51:33] votes? Announce the results.
[6:51:34] >> clerk: ayes 132, nay 0z. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:51:39] >> clerk: assembly 10898b rules report 529 mr. Blumencranz, an
[6:51:44] act authorizing the hicksville water district to receive
[6:51:48] retroactive real property tax exempt status.
[6:51:51] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:51:52] the senate bill is advanced. -- read the last section.
[6:51:56] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:51:58] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:51:59] [voting in progress]. Ms. Walsh to explain her vote.
[6:52:14] >> thank you, madam speaker. I would like to say that this is
[6:52:20] jay blumencranz's last bill that he is passing here in the
[6:52:22] assembly. Jake is more of a relative
[6:52:24] newcomer here, right? He was elected in 2022, he has
[6:52:28] always been such a dependable person to handle some of the
[6:52:30] really tough debates that we have had with some of the most
[6:52:33] complex tech issues that we've had and pretty much anything
[6:52:36] else that we threw at him. So I also remember a really
[6:52:39] great trip to ireland that we had together, so that was a
[6:52:42] great time. He probably will be somebody we
[6:52:47] will continue to see in the coming years but we wanted to
[6:52:49] take a moment to say thank you for serving here in the peoples
[6:52:53] house on behalf of the 15th, right, 15th assembly district
[6:52:58] and wish you best as you go forward.
[6:53:00] thank you. [ applause ]
[6:53:35] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:53:36] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nay 0z.
[6:53:40] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 10906a rules
[6:53:46] report 593, mr. Exclude ski, the senate bill is before the
[6:53:53] house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:53:55] >> speaker: read the last section.
[6:53:56] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:53:57] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:54:00] [voting in progress] >> speaker: are there any other
[6:54:28] votes? Announce the results.
[6:54:30] >> clerk: ayes 132, anyways 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:54:32] >> clerk: assembly. Assembly 10933 rules report 594,
[6:54:37] mr. Sempolinski, an act if relation to authorizing the city
[6:54:40] of olean assessor to accept an application.
[6:54:44] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:54:47] the senate bill is advanced read the last section.
[6:54:49] >> >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:54:50] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:54:51] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[6:55:25] >> are there any other votes? Announce the results.
[6:55:27] >> clerk: ayes 132, anyway 0z. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:55:30] >> clerk: assembly 10949a rules report 595 ms. Levenberg.
[6:55:36] an act to amend the subpart h of chapter 20 of the laws of 2015.
[6:55:41] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:55:42] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[6:55:46] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:55:47] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:55:48] [voting in progress]. Ms. Levenberg to explain her
[6:56:04] vote. >> I am very grateful to all of
[6:56:07] those who are supporting this to make sure that communities who
[6:56:09] have been negatively impacted by shutdowns of utilities will have
[6:56:16] access to the station fund for another five years so thank you.
[6:56:21] >> speaker: thank you ms. Levenberg in the
[6:56:25] affirmative. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:56:26] votes? Announce the results.
[6:56:27] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:56:32] >> clerk: assembly 10952 rules report 596 mr. Ra, an act to
[6:56:37] amend the nassau county civil divisions act.
[6:56:40] >> speaker: read the last section.
[6:56:40] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:56:41] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:56:42] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:57:00] votes? Announce the results.
[6:57:00] >> clerk: ayes 132, nay 0z. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:57:04] >> clerk: assembly assembly 107-8961 rules report 59 of
[6:57:11] mr. Smullen, an act to amend the public officers law.
[6:57:15] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:57:16] the senate bill is advanced read the last section.
[6:57:17] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:57:18] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:57:40] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:57:41] announce the results. >> clerk: aye.
[6:57:43] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:57:45] >> clerk: assembly 10964 rules report 598 mr. Smullen,an act
[6:57:51] to amend the public officers law.
[6:57:52] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:57:55] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[6:57:57] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[6:57:58] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[6:57:59] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[6:58:26] votes? Announce the results.
[6:58:27] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[6:58:31] >> clerk: assembly 11012 rules report 599 mr. Sempolinski, an
[6:58:34] act in relation to authorizing joseph frederick to take the
[6:58:39] competitive civil service comation.
[6:58:40] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[6:58:41] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last-- home rule
[6:58:45] message is at the desk. Read the last section.
[6:58:46] >> >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:58:47] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:58:48] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[6:59:16] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:59:17] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, anyways 0.
[6:59:19] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 11058 rules
[6:59:22] report 600 mr. Would nothing la an act in relation to
[6:59:25] establishing the harris hill volunteer fire company
[6:59:28] benevolent association. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[6:59:30] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[6:59:34] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[6:59:36] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[6:59:37] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[6:59:58] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[6:59:59] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, anyway 0z.
[7:00:01] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly assembly
[7:00:07] 11068a rules report 601 ms. Walsh, an act in relation
[7:00:10] to authorizing kurk nolan to receive certain credit.
[7:00:14] disls on a motion, the senate bill is before the house, the
[7:00:16] senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[7:00:19] >> clerk: shall immediateally. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:00:20] record the vote.
[7:00:29] ms. Walsh to explain her vote. >> I'm not really explaining my
[7:00:37] vote on this bill although I'm really glad it got done.
[7:00:40] I did want to-- we know that yesterday we had angelo
[7:00:46] morinello here and it was his last bill and we weren't able to
[7:00:51] pull it together to really adequately thank him for his
[7:00:54] service. And I wanted to.
[7:00:55] he is one of my classmates from 20-- god, 2016.
[7:01:02] started in 2017. And brian manktelow is here.
[7:01:06] he has represented wayne county and the town of webster since
[7:01:11] 2018. For assembly district 130.
[7:01:13] he is just such a fantastic guy. I will miss not being able to
[7:01:17] cheat off of his wam memos. He is a great guy.
[7:01:24] and danny norber, from a d. 16. What an interesting person and
[7:01:33] the time that we bought to spend in d.c., on my birth day, no
[7:01:38] less, is a time I will always remember.
[7:01:41] so, I just want to say thanks to these three members that maybe
[7:01:45] didn't have a bill to celebrate over, but-- today, but wanted to
[7:01:51] say thank you to all three of them.
[7:01:54] you know, they're such a big fabric-- we are losing so many
[7:01:57] members from this side of the aisle.
[7:01:59] it's really hurting me. I just want to say thank you all
[7:02:01] for your service to the peoples house, to your district, and
[7:02:05] just most of all thank you for being such great colleagues and
[7:02:08] friends. Thank you.
[7:02:09] [ applause ] >> speaker: are there any other
[7:02:26] votes? Announce the results.
[7:02:29] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:02:31] >> clerk: assembly. >> clerk: assembly 11098 rules
[7:02:35] report 6 on 0 the mr. Slater, an act to amend the general
[7:02:38] municipal law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[7:02:39] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[7:02:42] home rule message is at the desk.
[7:02:44] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[7:02:46] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:02:47] record the vote. [voting in progress]
[7:03:18] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:03:19] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, anyways 0.
[7:03:22] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 1115a rules
[7:03:29] report 603 mr. Brabenec, an act to amend the tax law.
[7:03:31] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:03:33] the senate bill is advanced. Home rule message is at the
[7:03:34] desk. Read the last section.
[7:03:39] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:03:41] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:03:42] [voting in progress] >> speaker: are there any other
[7:04:51] votes? Announce the results.
[7:04:53] >> clerk: ayes 105, nays 27. >> speaker: the bill is passed
[7:04:59] gleam 1112 had rules report 604 mr. Brabenec, an act to amend
[7:05:03] the alcoholic beverage control law.
[7:05:05] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:05:06] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[7:05:08] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:05:09] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:05:10] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:05:39] votes? Announce the results.
[7:05:42] >> clerk: ayes is 30 nays 2. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:05:47] >> clerk: assembly 11126b rules report 605 mr. Brabenec, an
[7:05:50] act to amend the tax law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[7:05:53] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[7:05:54] home rule message is at the desk.
[7:05:55] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[7:06:00] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:06:01] record the vote. [voting in progress]
[7:06:43] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:06:44] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 105 nays 27.
[7:06:48] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 11129 rules
[7:06:52] report 606 mr. Dipietro, an act to amend the highway law.
[7:06:57] >> speaker: read the last section.
[7:06:58] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:06:59] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:07:00] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:07:39] votes? Announce the results.
[7:07:43] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:07:47] >> clerk: assembly 11133a rules report 607 mr. Gandolfo, an
[7:07:52] act to amend the chapter 10 of the law of the 1958.
[7:07:54] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:07:56] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[7:07:59] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:08:00] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:08:01] [voting in progress] >> speaker: are there any other
[7:08:26] votes? Announce the results.
[7:08:29] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:08:33] >> clerk: assembly 11134 rules report 608 mr. Brabenec.
[7:08:35] an act authorizing the congregation atzi chaim to
[7:08:43] receive retroactive real property tax exempt property.
[7:08:47] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:08:49] the senate bill is advanced. Read last section.
[7:08:50] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:08:51] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:08:52] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:09:19] votes? Announce the results.
[7:09:22] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:09:25] >> clerk: assembly 11163 rules report 609 mr. Gray, an act to
[7:09:28] amend the tax law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[7:09:32] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[7:09:33] homerule message is at the desk. Read the last section.
[7:09:39] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:09:40] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:09:41] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:10:46] votes? Announce the results.
[7:10:50] >> clerk: ayes 112 nays 20. >> speaker: the bill is passed
[7:10:57] gleam 11181 rules report 610 mr. Dur know, an act to amend
[7:11:01] the chapter 459 of the laws of 1962.
[7:11:04] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:11:06] the senate bill is advanced read the last section.
[7:11:07] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:11:10] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:11:39] votes? Announce the results.
[7:11:40] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:11:43] >> clerk: assembly 11185 rules report 611 mr. Palmesano, an
[7:11:47] act to amend the town law and the public officers law.
[7:11:49] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:11:51] the senate bill is advanced read the last section.
[7:11:57] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:11:58] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:12:49] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:12:49] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132 nays 0.
[7:12:52] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 11213a rules
[7:12:57] report 61 the ms. Pheffer amato, an act to amend the
[7:13:01] retirement and social security law.
[7:13:02] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:13:04] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[7:13:08] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:13:10] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:13:11] [voting in progress]. Ms. Peoples-stokes to explain
[7:13:15] her vote. >> actually, madam speaker, I am
[7:13:21] explaining my vote because it gives me great pleasure to have
[7:13:23] the opportunity to yet again vote for a bill in support of my
[7:13:27] colleague, who, like I, will no longer be here next session.
[7:13:30] as many of us already know, you know, stacy came here after her
[7:13:34] mom worked so many years in the assembly doing stellar work.
[7:13:38] she got a promotion to stay home and stacy came to sit in her
[7:13:44] seat and did an amazing job. You can almost say ditto when
[7:13:47] you look at her and you look at her mom and her commitment to
[7:13:50] the work she put in, particularly the work she did
[7:13:54] with the governor employees committee.
[7:13:56] that will always be respected. I'm sure there is not an
[7:13:59] employee across the state of new york that does not respect the
[7:14:01] work you did and I certainly respect the work you did.
[7:14:04] so congratulations on your retirement, all the work-- I
[7:14:07] know you are not going to do what your mother did because she
[7:14:10] has that title already. You may have to wait for that
[7:14:13] one. It has been a true pleasure and
[7:14:15] nothing but best for you and your family.
[7:14:17] god bless. [ applause ]
[7:14:41] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:14:42] announce the results. Glx ayes 132, nos.
[7:14:49] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: 112-- 112200 rules
[7:15:01] report 613 ms. Hyndman, an act to amend the education law.
[7:15:04] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:15:06] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[7:15:09] >> clerk: this act shall take effect 160th day.
[7:15:11] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:15:12] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:15:38] votes? Announce the results.
[7:15:42] >> clerk: ayes 132s nos 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:15:48] >> clerk: assembly 111240 rules report 614 mr. Brabenec an act
[7:15:53] authorizing tovas dovaid community kollel to receive
[7:16:02] retroactive real property tax exempt status.
[7:16:04] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:16:05] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section sll
[7:16:07] immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:16:07] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[7:16:35] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:16:36] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes ayes 132, nos
[7:16:40] 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:16:43] >> clerk: assembly 11248 rules report 615 mr. Brabenec, an
[7:16:46] act authorizing the conbre days of divrei chamber of commerce to
[7:16:52] receive retroactive real property tax empty exempt study.
[7:17:01] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:17:02] the senate bill is advanced of the clerk will record the vote.
[7:17:22] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:17:23] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nos 0.
[7:17:27] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 11267 rules
[7:17:32] report 616 mr. Ra. An act authorizing the assessor
[7:17:33] of the county of nassau. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[7:17:38] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[7:17:41] read the last section. >> clerk: shall immediately.
[7:17:44] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:17:46] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:18:20] votes? Announce the results. Glx ayes
[7:18:24] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:18:24] announce the results., ayes 130 nays 0 absentee ballot.
[7:18:29] >> clerk: assembly 11268a rules report 617 mr. Ra, an act in
[7:18:32] relation to authorizing the village of new hyde park to file
[7:18:35] an application. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[7:18:36] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[7:18:39] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[7:18:42] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:18:43] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[7:19:29] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:19:30] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0.
[7:19:33] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 11274 rules
[7:19:37] report 618 mr. Mikulin, an act to amend the nassau county civil
[7:19:40] divisions act. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[7:19:42] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[7:19:44] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[7:19:47] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:19:48] record the vote. [voting in progress]
[7:20:43] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:20:44] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0.
[7:20:47] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 112 5a rules
[7:20:52] report 619 mr. Maher, an act to amend the highway law.
[7:20:54] >> speaker: read the last section.
[7:20:55] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:20:56] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:20:57] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:21:25] votes? Announce the results.
[7:21:27] >> clerk: ayes 132 nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:21:30] >> clerk: assembly 11290 rules report 620 committee on rules
[7:21:34] mr. Smullen, an act to amend the highway law.
[7:21:35] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:21:37] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[7:21:43] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:21:44] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:21:44] [voting in progress]. Ms. Bausch to explain her
[7:22:00] vote. >> thank you, madam speaker, so
[7:22:02] this is robert smullen's last bill that he is passing in the
[7:22:07] new york state assembly. He has been serving for assembly
[7:22:12] district 118, but before, way before that, he had dedicated
[7:22:16] his life to service both in uniform and in public service.
[7:22:19] he has been a strong advocate for upstate, working to support
[7:22:24] our veterans, strengthened rural equity and improved the lives of
[7:22:27] the people that he represents. He has been very involved in
[7:22:32] alek, the organization alek, talking about fiscal
[7:22:35] responsibility as well. He has brought a unique
[7:22:38] perspective really of leadership, duty and sacrifice
[7:22:41] to the legislature. His commitment to serving others
[7:22:44] and defending the values that he believes in his earned him the
[7:22:47] respect of colleagues and his constituents.
[7:22:49] it's been a plif to serve with robert.
[7:22:51] I wish him the very best going forward and much love to his
[7:22:55] wife meghan and his family and I would be remiss if I didn't
[7:23:00] mention that robert's work in transforming what really was an
[7:23:06] incredible personal tragedy into a really meaningful work for
[7:23:10] donate life, and the donor registry has really been
[7:23:16] inspiring. We wish him the very, very best
[7:23:18] as he moves ford and thank him for his service.
[7:23:21] [ applause ] >> speaker: are there any other
[7:23:48] votes? Announce the results.
[7:23:50] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:23:54] >> clerk: assembly 11318 rules report 621, committee on rules
[7:23:58] mr. Dipietro. An act to amend the
[7:24:00] not-for-profit corporation law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[7:24:01] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[7:24:03] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[7:24:07] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:24:08] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[7:24:34] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:24:35] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0.
[7:24:38] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 11322b rules
[7:24:43] report 622, committee on rules ms. Levenberg, an act to amend
[7:24:45] the vehicle and traffic law and the public officers law.
[7:24:48] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:24:50] the senate bill is advanced homerule message is at the desk.
[7:24:53] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[7:24:57] effect on the 30th day. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:24:59] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[7:26:06] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:26:06] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 117, nays 15.
[7:26:08] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 11391 rules
[7:26:13] report 623 committee on rules mr. Barclay, an act to amend
[7:26:15] the general municipal law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[7:26:17] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[7:26:22] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[7:26:23] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:26:25] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[7:26:39] ms. Walsh to explain her vote. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[7:26:48] I don't know, file like in wizard of oz, when they say
[7:26:54] scarecrow, you are the one I'm going to miss the most.
[7:26:57] this is will barclay's last bill in the new york state assembly
[7:27:00] which is hard to believe a few individuals have had greater
[7:27:03] impact on the assembly minority conference than leader will
[7:27:06] barclay. Since his election in 2002, and
[7:27:14] especially his tenure as minority leadership.
[7:27:17] he has provided exceptional leadership, steady guidance and
[7:27:21] unwavering dedication to the conference and the people of
[7:27:24] new york. He is drawing from his
[7:27:26] experience abs an attorney, businessman and life long
[7:27:28] central new yorker. Strong advocate for upstate,
[7:27:31] working families, policies that promote economic growth and
[7:27:34] opportunity it has been such a privilege to serve with will and
[7:27:39] travel with will and margaret I know he is leaving to go back to
[7:27:47] his beautiful central new york and the waters, so I want to
[7:27:53] leave it by saying, you know, may your fish be bigger than
[7:27:56] your excuses and I want to wish him good health and all the best
[7:28:02] in the years forward. I really value our friendship.
[7:28:05] thank you. [ applause ]
[7:28:53] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:28:54] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0 blast
[7:28:58] >> speaker: the bill is passed
[7:29:01] 624 committee on rules mr. Palmesano, an act to amend
[7:29:04] the public officers law on a motion, the senate bill is
[7:29:06] before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[7:29:08] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[7:29:11] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:29:12] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[7:29:40] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:29:41] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0.
[7:29:45] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 11449 rules
[7:29:49] report 625 committee on rules mr. Bendett.
[7:29:51] an act to amend the the highway law.
[7:29:53] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:29:54] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[7:29:58] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:29:59] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:30:05] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:30:36] votes? Announce the results.
[7:30:38] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:30:43] >> clerk: assembly 11475 rules report 626 committee on rules
[7:30:47] mr. Gandolfo. An act authorizing the church of
[7:30:49] pentecost usa incorporated to receive retroactive real
[7:30:52] property tax exempt status. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[7:30:55] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[7:30:57] read the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[7:31:00] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:31:01] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[7:31:12] ms. Walsh to explain her vote. >> thank you, madam speaker.
[7:31:16] so, it's not really goodbye so much as so long for my very
[7:31:23] favorite assistant minority leader pro tem, this is his last
[7:31:31] bill. I mean when I think about
[7:31:32] jarrett, I think about the expertise.
[7:31:34] I don't know how I'm going to understand the insurance law
[7:31:36] after this year honestly. I'm going to have to call you
[7:31:40] but the work he has done on the insurance committee, his work
[7:31:44] here, running operations is unbelievable.
[7:31:47] he is so unflappable and his dry sense of humor that took me
[7:31:51] quite a while to figure out, really is really special as are
[7:31:57] your expressions, too. But you are moving on to better
[7:32:00] things, bigger and better things.
[7:32:01] and I hope you remember us here at the peoples house and I just,
[7:32:09] I thank natalia, lenny and ben for loaning you to us for the
[7:32:12] time that you spent with us. And thank you; you know, thank
[7:32:17] you. We are going to miss you a lot
[7:32:18] here. Thank you.
[7:32:19] [ applause ] >> speaker: are there any other
[7:32:43] votes? Announce the results.
[7:32:44] >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:32:48] >> clerk: assembly 11483 rules report 627 committee on rules
[7:32:51] mr. Molitor. An act to authorize the towns of
[7:32:54] ellington and charlotte in shah talkia county to elect a single
[7:33:00] town justice. >> speaker: read the last
[7:33:01] section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[7:33:02] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:33:03] record the vote. [voting in progress].
[7:33:43] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:33:44] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 132, nays 0.
[7:33:46] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 11528 rules
[7:33:51] report 628 committee on rules mr. D'urso, an act to amend
[7:33:54] the highway law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[7:33:56] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced read
[7:33:59] the last section. >> clerk: this act shall take
[7:34:01] effect immediately. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:34:02] record the vote. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:34:31] votes? Announce the results.
[7:34:34] >> clerk: ayes 131 nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:34:38] >> clerk: assembly 11543 rules report 629 committee on rules
[7:34:41] mr. Pretlow. An act in relation to correcting
[7:34:43] a misclassification property tax error.
[7:34:47] >> speaker: read the last section.
[7:34:47] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:34:48] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:34:49] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:35:20] votes? Announce the results.
[7:35:21] >> clerk: ayes is 31 nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:35:24] >> clerk: assembly 11566 rules report 630 committee on rules
[7:35:30] mr. Tague, an act to amend the alcoholic beverage control law.
[7:35:33] >> speaker: read the last section.
[7:35:33] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:35:35] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:35:36] [voting in progress]. Ms. Walsh to explain her vote.
[7:35:50] >> thank you, madam speaker, so last but certainly not least, we
[7:35:54] have the departure from the people's house of america's
[7:36:00] assemblyman chris tague. This is his last bill.
[7:36:05] chris is possibly the most quotable member of the chamber
[7:36:09] he is certainly one of the most vocal voices but certainly cares
[7:36:14] deeply about the area he represents, schoharie schoharie
[7:36:19] county and other areas, there. There have been many mic drop
[7:36:24] moments with chris during debate and otherwise.
[7:36:27] I think his tag line that he has used no farms no food is
[7:36:31] something that we all can relate to.
[7:36:34] he really brought in just a real sense of who he is and where he
[7:36:40] came from and he has never forgotten and I'm going to miss
[7:36:44] him a lot and I would just say I think you learned a valuable
[7:36:52] lesson from wayne jackson the other day, that when you start
[7:36:55] to get upset, eat a snickers. We are going to miss chris.
[7:37:01] thank you. [ applause ]
[7:37:29] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:37:30] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 131 nays 0.
[7:37:33] >> speaker: the bill is passed. >> clerk: assembly 11571 rules
[7:37:39] report 631 committee on rules ms. Moreno, an act to amend
[7:37:42] the chapter 801 of the laws of 2021.
[7:37:46] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:37:48] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[7:37:49] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:37:52] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:38:24] votes? Announce the results.
[7:38:27] >> clerk: ayes 131 nos 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:38:33] >> clerk: assembly 11576, rules report 632 committee on rules
[7:38:36] mr. Conrad. An act to amend the civil
[7:38:40] service law. >> speaker: on a motion, the
[7:38:42] senate bill is before the house, the senate bill is advanced.
[7:38:44] governor's message is at the desk.
[7:38:45] clerk will read. >> I hereby certify to an
[7:38:49] immediate vote kathy hochul, governor.
[7:38:52] >> speaker: read the last section.
[7:38:53] >> clerk: this act shall take effect immediately.
[7:38:54] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:38:56] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:39:26] votes? Announce the results.
[7:39:29] >> clerk: ayes 131 nays 0. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:39:34] >> clerk: assembly 11229 rules report 633, committee on rules
[7:39:37] mr. Otis, an act to amend the general business law.
[7:39:41] >> speaker: on a motion, the senate bill is before the house,
[7:39:43] the senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.
[7:39:46] >> clerk: this act shall take effect on the 90th day.
[7:39:47] >> speaker: the clerk will record the vote.
[7:39:48] [voting in progress]. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:40:44] votes? Announce the results.
[7:40:47] >> clerk: ayes 130 nays 1. >> speaker: the bill is passed.
[7:40:50] [ applause ] resolution page 3 clerk will
[7:41:20] read. >> gleam 1625 mr. Heastiey
[7:41:24] legislative resolution establishing a plan setting
[7:41:25] forth an itemized list of grant tees for certain appropriation
[7:41:29] for the 2026-27 state fiscal year.
[7:41:35] >> speaker: on the resolution, all those in favor signify by
[7:41:36] saying aye. The clerk will record the vote.
[7:42:17] >> speaker: are there any other votes?
[7:42:18] announce the results. >> clerk: ayes 131 nays 0.
[7:42:20] the resolution is adopted. >> clerk: assembly 1626
[7:42:27] mr. Heastiey, assembly resolution amending assembly
[7:42:31] resolution 42002 of 2008 establishing a plan setting
[7:42:35] forth for an itemized list of grantees for the new york state
[7:42:39] capital assistance program. >> speaker: the clerk will
[7:42:41] record the vote. >> speaker: are there any other
[7:43:14] votes? Announce the results.
[7:43:14] >> clerk: ayes 131 nays 0. The resolution is adopted.
[7:43:21] >> well, well, well. So, friends and colleagues, we
[7:43:27] began this session-- when we began this session I laid out a
[7:43:31] plan to make our state a more affordable place for all our
[7:43:35] families. Over the last few months, we
[7:43:37] have worked to deliver on that promise.
[7:43:40] we put money back into new yorkers pocket with a
[7:43:44] billion and relief with power checks.
[7:43:45] ensured our cities have the funding they need to meet the
[7:43:48] needs of their communities. An invested in our schools and
[7:43:52] higher education so every young person in this state is sets up
[7:43:55] for a bright future. We codified protections for
[7:44:00] immigrant new yorkers, safeguarded access to life
[7:44:03] saving vaccines and strengthened regulations on 3d printed ghost
[7:44:08] guns. We can all be proud of what we
[7:44:11] accomplished for our communities.
[7:44:14] but none of what we have done this year could be possible
[7:44:19] without the dedication ever our staff.
[7:44:23] the governor took up about 90% of the session with her budget.
[7:44:28] but we-- where's deb. How many did we get?
[7:44:39] like 940 something. We only ended up 46 bills less
[7:44:44] than we were last year. So would I like...
[7:44:48] [ applause ] of course I would like to thank
[7:44:54] our amazing, amazing staff and I know the minority will do the
[7:44:57] same on their side so, of course, deb miller, marianne,
[7:45:02] john knight and the legislative services team.
[7:45:04] [ applause ] dan, will bill drafting
[7:45:21] commission and the assembly revision staff.
[7:45:29] [ applause ] big money phil fields and the
[7:45:34] ways and means staff. [ cheering ]
[7:45:49] and, you know, I have to say, you know, jen best has the
[7:45:53] hardest job in this place. To put up with us, the constant
[7:45:59] text messages, the calls from me at any time and jen, I just want
[7:46:03] to tell you you have done an amazing job.
[7:46:06] [ applause ] and her running mate aubry
[7:46:24] hadric. And to alana siven who kind of
[7:46:29] ran and jumped on the train after session started.
[7:46:32] my counsel, she had did an amazing job and the rest of the
[7:46:35] program and counsel staff and the ways and means staff,
[7:46:38] really, for almost six months they've had to do double duty
[7:46:41] and we should really show our appreciation.
[7:46:47] [ applause ] so, I also want to thank becca
[7:47:01] moody and brismead who work on the council council for the
[7:47:09] majority and the special ops team.
[7:47:12] katie bender and the entire cis team.
[7:47:15] amy metcalfe, ed harris and the assembly support team.
[7:47:32] the intergovernmental team lalean and alex.
[7:47:40] wendy, who we welcome back, hop along is back.
[7:47:45] [ applause ] yes, of course, my own staff at
[7:47:52] 250 broadway and my district office in the bronx and the rest
[7:47:56] , I would say the administrative support team,
[7:48:00] anita, natalia, and I'm about tired of him always getting the
[7:48:10] biggest round of applause, mr. Wayne jackson and our
[7:48:13] chamber sergeant-at-arms. [cheers and applause]
[7:48:37] and I don't want to forget to mention, if you see this quiet
[7:48:43] unassuming gentleman who has been fall following me around, I
[7:48:46] want to thank greg mosely for joining the team also.
[7:48:50] [ applause ] now is the hard part.
[7:49:02] this might be the hardest end of session speech I've ever had to
[7:49:09] give because when I look at the list of people who are retiring,
[7:49:12] and they deserve it. They have worked hard, but it's
[7:49:17] over 150 years combined of them being my colleagues and my
[7:49:20] friends and my family. And I have to start with
[7:49:24] crystal. I met crystalline before I was
[7:49:27] elected to the assembly. I was dating a young ladies in
[7:49:32] buffalo and I got invited up to juneteenth.
[7:49:37] I had no idea what juneteenth was, if you can believe that.
[7:49:40] but crystal taught me what juneteenth was.
[7:49:43] and she has been a friend and a sit tear and I'm going to tell
[7:49:48] you some private things but I think it's okay.
[7:49:53] when joe morelle left and I have been honored to have two
[7:49:57] incredible number twos, in joe morelle and crystal people
[7:50:01] spokes. But when joe morelle was elected
[7:50:03] to congress, somebody actually said to me, there is no way you
[7:50:06] can pick another black person to be the majority leader.
[7:50:09] and I said why the hell can't I? And I said I'm not picking
[7:50:16] crystal because she is black. Now she is a serious tough black
[7:50:20] sister. [ applause ]
[7:50:41] but I picked crystal more because of the trust, the
[7:50:49] relationship, and you know, when I was attempting to come and try
[7:50:52] to be speaker, there were a lot of people who doubted me.
[7:50:56] a lot of people who didn't want me.
[7:50:58] I remember "the new york times" did an article that said the
[7:51:03] flawed speaker. But I remember when I called
[7:51:05] crystal and I asked her for her support.
[7:51:07] she said to me go call everybody else.
[7:51:10] I'm with you. Crystal, you don't know what
[7:51:14] that did for me when you said you would support me for
[7:51:17] speaker. Love you dearly.
[7:51:19] you have been a big sister, my protector and I am so much going
[7:51:24] to miss you. I love you so much crystal.
[7:51:31] [ applause ] >> now this next young lady, the
[7:52:08] story is going to start a little tough but I promise you it ends
[7:52:12] well. Also when I was trying to be--
[7:52:18] my good friend, deborah glick, I don't know (inaudible) hello?
[7:52:41] okay. So I always felt like I had to
[7:52:45] earn deborah's respect. I always felt like (inaudible)
[7:52:58] and one of my favorite political books was team of rivals.
[7:53:06] and as tough as deborah was on me in the beginning, I have to
[7:53:10] tell you I don't think I have a more trusted person that can I
[7:53:13] go and get advice from. Charles seaward, who was abraham
[7:53:18] lincoln's rival whether lee died-- when he died, when
[7:53:23] abraham lincoln was shot and killed, charles turned out to be
[7:53:27] the most trusted adviser to abraham lincoln, so deborah,
[7:53:31] thank you for being my charles. [ applause ]
[7:53:52] I'm doing a little better than I thought I would.
[7:53:54] and also I know she is not watching, but vivian cook, I
[7:53:58] also knew way before I was elected and vivian adapted me as
[7:54:04] a son. She adopted taylor and her
[7:54:10] granddaughter and vivian, the two things I always remember
[7:54:13] about vivian, as soon as she would see me, she would say are
[7:54:17] you all right? She will say I'll get somebody
[7:54:19] if you want me to get them. And I would say no, vive vivian,
[7:54:23] I'm okay. And the other thing I always
[7:54:24] remember about vivian, when people would call her and ask
[7:54:30] her where is she in terms of a bill.
[7:54:33] she would say I'm wherever the speaker is.
[7:54:35] so take that as a lesson to all of you.
[7:54:38] that's even the best place to be.
[7:54:40] even the minority. Next up, donna lupardo you know,
[7:54:49] when prince passed away, of course you know it was
[7:54:54] devastating to me. It was like losing a member of
[7:54:57] my family. But donna did somebody to for me
[7:55:00] when we had the tour in her area.
[7:55:02] she brought me to a tribute cop certain for prince and that just
[7:55:07] lifted my spirits... (inaudible) (inaudible) hello?
[7:55:34] this quiet but serious amazing representative and, you know,
[7:55:39] there was a time that, you know, donna was on her own out there
[7:55:45] in western new york in terms of, I know we are not trying to get
[7:55:48] political here but she was alone a lot of the times.
[7:55:51] but she hung tough and she represented her area very well.
[7:55:57] and so donna, I have to tell you, too, you have been an
[7:56:01] amazing, amazing colleague, even sometimes things were always
[7:56:04] tough but always knew I would count on you.
[7:56:08] donna, love you, too. Stacey pheffer amato.
[7:56:26] you know, I had two older sisters and when I would get
[7:56:32] picked on when I was younger, before I learned martial arts,
[7:56:38] my sister would always go and fight my battles for me and
[7:56:44] stacy, as I said, she is somebody that will always tell
[7:56:46] you how she feels when she feels what she feels and she is never
[7:56:50] shy about it. But I always know that if I got
[7:56:53] to get into a fox hole with somebody,and fight, I don't know
[7:56:57] if there is a better person than you, stacy.
[7:57:00] and you are, you know, sometimes people always don't want to be
[7:57:07] compared to their parents, but have I to tell you stacy, I know
[7:57:13] your mother is proud of the representation and you picked up
[7:57:16] right where she left off. I know there was somebody in
[7:57:19] between, but you have been an amazing amazing advocate and
[7:57:24] really what is a tough district but you always, always stood to
[7:57:28] your convictions and that's what really matters most in this
[7:57:31] business. I love you, too.
[7:57:54] only two more people retiring. Nader sayegh, a very qi it and
[7:58:02] unassuming and serious person but always wanted to make sure
[7:58:04] yonkers was take especially care of.
[7:58:06] he is another one, sometimes on these tough votes, you know
[7:58:10] nader seemed to always trust and be supportive, even when I asked
[7:58:15] him to take some very, very, very tough votes.
[7:58:18] and like I said, he is auto the one that got used to the
[7:58:22] texting. I don't know if nader ever
[7:58:24] picked up the phone and called me.
[7:58:26] he always knew to text me. So nader, I can only say thank
[7:58:30] you for your support and friendship and you also will be
[7:58:35] sorely missed, and I love you too, my friend.
[7:58:48] and then last but certainly not least, marianne buttenschon,
[7:58:52] another one who is kind of on an island where she is in central
[7:58:58] new york. Always stuck to her convictions,
[7:59:00] always represented her area, always represented small
[7:59:05] businesses and also, always, always had open arms for
[7:59:09] colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come visit her
[7:59:12] beautiful farm and small business and I said this at the
[7:59:16] retirement breakfast, marianne gave me a tree to plant in my
[7:59:24] yard. People laughed that I habit
[7:59:27] planted it yet. I have to get a chance to plant
[7:59:32] that tree every time I look at that tree, I will think of you.
[7:59:36] you have been a very very and supportive person when things
[7:59:40] are tough. Love you, too marianne is who
[7:59:54] zoom. She had to get home and deal
[7:59:55] with her grandchild who was not feeling well.
[7:59:59] I hope you hear me. Love you I want to say to
[8:00:06] colleagues on the other side of the ails.
[8:00:08] I always try to these personal wars about democrats and
[8:00:16] republicans, you know, I think you are all good people.
[8:00:18] you just have your politics wrong, but...
[8:00:21] [laughter] but I always try to continue to
[8:00:24] be a friend because no matter what, I know from each and every
[8:00:29] one of you, you are just trying to represent your communities
[8:00:31] the best way that you know how. So I want to say to all of you
[8:00:37] who are leaving or those of you who are trying to be demoted, I
[8:00:42] wish you well I do want to point out two people and I also want
[8:00:47] to thank mr. Ra for his, we kind of picked up like we were
[8:00:52] good friends. Our communication is great.
[8:00:56] and I joked with him that, you know, our communication was half
[8:00:59] as good as it was with me and mr. Barally, we would be okay.
[8:01:04] I also want to say that saying so long to mr. Bar bar barally
[8:01:11] saying so long to mr. Barclayally you have
[8:01:15] always been so good to me. You have been such a good
[8:01:18] friend. I could trust you.
[8:01:19] you and I probably talked about things that we never shared with
[8:01:23] our members. That's how much of a friend I
[8:01:25] consider you. And I'm going to miss those text
[8:01:29] messages and as much as whenever will would call me, (inaudible)
[8:01:41] about a republican, so... Hello. Hello.
[8:01:46] but no matter, no matter what I would say to will, when he
[8:01:49] reached out to me, I would say will, just call me (inaudible).
[8:01:59] (no audio) always, always.
[8:02:06] call me speaker, but will, I hope that you are gone, when you
[8:02:10] text me, you will call me by my name and check in with me.
[8:02:16] so thank you, my brother, I love you.
[8:02:19] [ applause ] (no audio)
[8:02:48] I'll project, you know I'm not really a yeller in public.
[8:02:51] just only in private. [laughter]
[8:02:55] I know he is not here to our colleague mr. Morinello, I
[8:03:01] always, when he got elected. I always called him your honor
[8:03:05] because even though we're elected and we are all
[8:03:08] honorable, he was always such a good guy.
[8:03:10] I always wanted to say to him when I saw him, your honor.
[8:03:17] he is an incredible person. I thanked him last night because
[8:03:22] often times people who are experts in his area, and he was
[8:03:26] a judge for a very long time before he ran for the assembly,
[8:03:29] and times when people say things who are an expert in their
[8:03:34] field, you always want to listen so I'm glad I got to say so long
[8:03:39] to him before he left last night and as I said to you and all of
[8:03:44] my colleagues, once a member, always a member.
[8:03:46] you guys are always welcome back here in this chamber.
[8:03:49] [ applause ] I'm almost done.
[8:04:06] we have some colleagues on our side of the aisle that have
[8:04:10] decided to be demoted. So I just want to say to the
[8:04:15] great colleagues who served with us, whether they're trying to
[8:04:20] run for congress or the state senate, I don't know why you
[8:04:24] want to do those things because this is the best place in the
[8:04:26] world to be so I want to say good luck.
[8:04:33] god speed, to alex bores, jessica gonzales rojas, michael
[8:04:39] lasher, grace lee, steven raga, jonathan rivera and claire, you
[8:04:47] were here for a minute, valdez. But all of these colleagues are
[8:04:51] great. Always showed me a tremendous
[8:04:54] amount of cooperation and respect.
[8:04:57] and I feel privileged, even though this is my twelfth
[8:05:05] session I always feel privileged for the opportunity that all of
[8:05:07] you have given to me so I want to say to all of you thank you
[8:05:12] for your years of hard work and dedication.
[8:05:15] we will miss you, but as I said, once an assemblymember, always
[8:05:19] an assemblymember, and you are always welcome here in the
[8:05:26] peoples house. [ applause ]
[8:05:42] ms. Peoples-stokes. Sorry, we are going go to
[8:05:47] mr. Ra first. >> thank you mr. Speaker, and
[8:05:53] thank you for your kind records-for-our departing
[8:05:59] members and thank you to you and your staff for your cooperation.
[8:06:04] it has been a crazy session for all of us.
[8:06:06] I would say me in particular. But having the opportunity to
[8:06:12] begin working more closely with you, I can't thank you enough
[8:06:16] for your communication and your working with us on dehalf of our
[8:06:20] members to make sure that we were able to do the things that
[8:06:24] we needed to do for our district so thank you.
[8:06:27] I have to thank the majority leader I had the opportunity, I
[8:06:34] don't know how many years it was ago now.
[8:06:36] I was in jarrett's job, your first session as majority leader
[8:06:40] and had the opportunity to work closely with you as you were
[8:06:44] starting that job and watch you run the floor each and every
[8:06:46] day, and I wish you all the best in your retirement.
[8:06:49] I thank you for your friendship. And I don't know if the next
[8:06:53] person is going to pick up on the quote of the day, but I
[8:06:56] don't think it will be a meerchingful not being delivered
[8:06:59] by you as before we start session each day so thank you
[8:07:03] and all best to you, crystal. It's tough to be overly upbeat
[8:07:27] this week. We all felt the weight of the
[8:07:29] session. The prolonged budget schedule,
[8:07:32] the chaotic end we had here and we have talked about the
[8:07:34] highlights of session, of the budget, let's be honest, our
[8:07:38] calendar was hijacked by a governor who, I don't think
[8:07:41] properly respects the role of this house of this legislature
[8:07:45] as a company e qual branch of government.
[8:07:50] [ applause ] and I think the disruption that
[8:07:54] has caused really impacted us and our ability to do the things
[8:08:00] we needed to do for our constituents for the people of
[8:08:05] this state. But I don't want to get too much
[8:08:09] into that we have heard a lot this evening.
[8:08:11] what I really want to do is recognize the work of people and
[8:08:15] the contributions of people who have heyed this house what it
[8:08:18] is. They have earned those
[8:08:20] accolades. Let me start with our floor team
[8:08:23] , mary beth walsh, our floor leader who has done a tremendous
[8:08:27] job this session steady at the helm, leading our debate with
[8:08:35] class, with intelligence, making sure our members knew what was
[8:08:40] to be expected each and every day to the extent that we were
[8:08:43] aware and just making sure that, through a change in leadership,
[8:08:48] there was not a blip in the road.
[8:08:51] we just kept moving forward. Thank you, mary beth for your
[8:08:54] tremendous work. [ applause ]
[8:09:07] and her assistant I'm going to talk about later because he is
[8:09:10] also departing. It's hard to believe that this
[8:09:14] due yo' is breaking up because big 5-- this duo is breaking up
[8:09:19] because they have done a tremendous job.
[8:09:24] don't hold that against him. But he really watching him go
[8:09:29] from intern to member chief of staff, to member, to being our
[8:09:35] assistant floor leader is something I'm incredibly proud
[8:09:40] to have had the opportunity to watch I don't know why he is
[8:09:45] demoting himself to the title of senator but I wish him well down
[8:09:49] the hall and I hope he won't be a stranger in our chamber.
[8:10:01] and they are ably assisted and guided each and every day by our
[8:10:09] wonderful floor counsel michelle who.
[8:10:14] (no audio) all right.
[8:10:18] just make sure things keep moving forward.
[8:10:22] make sure our members have everything they need and just,
[8:10:24] we always say the job is like part kindergarten teacher, part
[8:10:29] lawyer, part probably a lot of other things but she does it all
[8:10:34] capably and I'm proud to call her friend and of the work she
[8:10:39] does on behalf of our conference so thank you, michelle to our
[8:10:58] ways and means ranker. Phil palm san palmesano picked a
[8:11:01] hell of a year to take on his first state budget.
[8:11:06] very time consume summing, complicated.
[8:11:10] extenders, budget itself. He did it with incredible
[8:11:16] ability, again I'm so proud of the work he did stepping in mid
[8:11:20] stream in a budget I just would have one piece of advice I hope
[8:11:25] you and mr. Pretlow can speed things up next year and not be
[8:11:30] going into late may. So phil, thank you.
[8:11:41] and I want to thank the members of our conference, our sincere
[8:11:47] thanks and gratitude to all of you.
[8:11:49] thank you for your confidence, unwavering hard work and
[8:11:51] patience during the legislative session that had more than its
[8:11:54] fair share of twists and turns, through every challenge you have
[8:11:58] stood firm, remain committed to our shared principles and goals
[8:12:01] and most importantly, you have fought to improve the lives of
[8:12:06] new yorkers we represent. Your energy, passion and
[8:12:09] determination have been inspiration to me as I do my
[8:12:13] job. And we know it's been
[8:12:15] challenging with the unpredictable schedule, the
[8:12:18] shifting calendar, and that impacts us as members.
[8:12:21] but we all know that that impacts our staff more than
[8:12:25] anybody. So I want to thank all of the
[8:12:29] incredible assembly staff from both sides of the aisle who make
[8:12:33] this place run for their work this session and let me
[8:12:50] personally recognize my team who have helped me take over this
[8:12:55] role and made sure that I had everything I needed to do the
[8:13:00] job on behalf of our members tom krause, jason keho, dan karines
[8:13:07] who is celebrating both his 60 the birthday and his retirement
[8:13:11] after 35 years in the legislature.
[8:13:13] [ applause ] our counsel adam, our
[8:13:28] legislative units josh ways and means, page running counsel's
[8:13:34] office and chris slater and research and policy development
[8:13:39] and last but certainly not least I love that I get to call her
[8:13:45] this, my chief of staff, lauren o'hare who runs our conference
[8:13:51] with incredible skill, intelligence a little bit of
[8:13:57] humor when I need it. And is just somebody that I
[8:14:03] fully trust with everything that needs to be done on behalf of
[8:14:07] our conference so lauren, thank you for your tireless efforts.
[8:14:18] [ applause ] and I really do want to thank
[8:14:24] all of the dedicated professionals who support our
[8:14:26] conference throughout the central staff.
[8:14:28] they truly are the ones that make our members be able do the
[8:14:30] our jobs with the best of our ability.
[8:14:35] so I just want to, as the speaker mentioned about
[8:14:42] departing members I think we are losing 25 members total on both
[8:14:45] sides of the aisle which is pretty hard to wrap your head
[8:14:49] around. And there is tremendous amount
[8:14:50] of institutional memory, expertise that we are losing in
[8:14:55] them and I just want to quickly run through our departing
[8:14:59] members, ken blankenbush who was a classmate of mine from the 20
[8:15:04] tenney electrics. There were 17 of-- 2010
[8:15:09] election. There were 10 of us then.
[8:15:12] there will be three of us next year.
[8:15:15] he brought a perspective and reliability that was a true
[8:15:18] constant to the members of the conference and something that is
[8:15:21] valued for each and every one of our members to have somebody
[8:15:23] with that steady personality of ken blankenbush, so, ken, thank
[8:15:28] you. [ applause ]
[8:15:41] jake blumencranz came in with youth, energy and fresh ideas.
[8:15:45] a great camera presence that I'm jealous of.
[8:15:49] and also the determination to do what is right on behalf of your
[8:15:52] constituents. Pushing for cutting costs,
[8:15:55] public safety, responsible budgets, so I know our
[8:15:58] conference loss will be the senate's gain next year.
[8:16:01] jake, thank you and congratulations to you on a
[8:16:06] successful tenure here in assembly.
[8:16:15] [ applause ] keith brown, who has been a
[8:16:20] reliable and passionate and thoughtful fact for nassau
[8:16:26] county and suffolk county. He will certainly be missed in
[8:16:29] this chamber. Jeff gallon lain who has been a
[8:16:38] strong and principalled voice for his constituents and brought
[8:16:42] a blue collar mentality that never changed in his time in
[8:16:45] albany. He is one of the truly nicest
[8:16:48] human beings you will ever meet and I will miss serving with
[8:16:53] jeff. Jarrett gandolfo I mentioned a
[8:16:55] minute ago truly has become a very valued friend and we wish
[8:17:00] him well down the hall brian manktelow, a guy who brought so
[8:17:07] many perspectives as a farmer, businessman, army veteran
[8:17:12] representing the 130th district and always brought
[8:17:14] commonsense values to chamber and a very strong work ethic and
[8:17:19] I will his miss freerp each he-- miss his friendship every day.
[8:17:28] and part of my own county delegation who has been here
[8:17:31] from the beginning with me as a mentor and as a friend and
[8:17:35] somebody I will greatly look up to and respect truly an
[8:17:40] institution on long island, the gold standard for ma public
[8:17:44] service means for what public service means.
[8:17:46] judge morinello, one of the greatest voices we have had here
[8:17:50] for reason and integrity in this business and his counsel to me
[8:17:54] is something that I cannot replace.
[8:17:56] I will certainly continue to go to him for advice.
[8:18:02] dan norber, another nassau county neighbor.
[8:18:05] it has been a pleasure to serve with you, dan.
[8:18:08] you brought perspective as a small business owner and really
[8:18:10] jumped in with both feet with heart and integrity and I think
[8:18:14] your character and the contributions you have made to
[8:18:16] this institution and our conference have certainly left a
[8:18:21] mark on us, so thank you, dan, and all the best to you and your
[8:18:26] family. [ applause ]
[8:18:37] just a couple more. Colonel robert smullen, you
[8:18:43] know, the journey you have walked from your military career
[8:18:47] coming here in the assembly, and most importantly with your
[8:18:51] family, really has been something of unparalleled
[8:18:57] perseverance and internal resolve and we have all watched
[8:19:01] you and tried to lend whatever support we could but you have
[8:19:07] carried yourself with incredible dignity and purpose and we will
[8:19:11] never forget you in this chamber and we will make sure we
[8:19:18] continue to do the initiatives you have started to carry on
[8:19:23] a.j.'s name so thank you for your service and your courage
[8:19:27] and your determination and being an inspiration to us all,
[8:19:32] colonel. Chris tague, america's
[8:19:46] assemblyman who has been a fighter all the way to the end
[8:19:51] and I think after this week pam hunter may become his biggest
[8:19:56] campaign donor if it means getting him out of here.
[8:19:59] but that fighting spirit is what we will all remember about
[8:20:02] chris. So all the best to you, chris.
[8:20:08] and lastly will barclay. My friend that I have had the
[8:20:15] opportunity to, from my very first days in this chamber, to
[8:20:21] get the opportunity to kind of get brought into a circle with
[8:20:26] you and some of our other senior members that you really didn't
[8:20:31] feel like you belong but were never made to feel like you
[8:20:35] didn't belong. And he served here for more than
[8:20:40] 30 years but the most important thing I think all of us in our
[8:20:43] conference value is your friendship we could not measure
[8:20:51] the contributions you have made to this assembly, to our
[8:20:54] conference, but I think we all believe that, if we leave this
[8:20:59] place better than we found it, we will have been a success.
[8:21:03] and by that measure, you have been an incredible success here,
[8:21:08] leader barclay so thank you for your friendship.
[8:21:11] I will miss... [ applause ]
[8:21:25] I just want to conclude, not to steal crystal's thing, but with
[8:21:31] a quote, how lucky I am to have something that makes saying
[8:21:35] goodbye so hard. It feels very fitting today so
[8:21:39] thank you to all of our departing members.
[8:21:42] thank you mr. Speaker for your leadership of this house and
[8:21:47] your friendship and I wish you, the members and all the staff a
[8:21:51] very happy and hopefully relaxful summer.
[8:21:56] thank you. >> before I turn it over to our
[8:22:11] wonderful majority leader, I was remiss and you have to forgive
[8:22:14] me. I'm really not feeling well.
[8:22:16] I'm not contagious. I took a test.
[8:22:18] but I didn't thank gary pretlow for his incredible job.
[8:22:30] [ applause ] but I also want to thank his
[8:22:53] counterpart and he knows I gave him the nickname 2 by 15
[8:23:00] palmesano. Even though mr. Slater you
[8:23:02] stole it from him a couple of times, but thank you mr. Palm
[8:23:07] san so-- mr. Palmesano, you have always kept the discussions
[8:23:10] on the subject and never took anything personal so thank you
[8:23:12] for your representation on the ways and means.
[8:23:31] ms. Peoples-stokes. [ applause ]
[8:23:34] >> mr. Speaker and colleagues, let me just first of all say to
[8:23:38] god be the glory for all the great things he has allowed me
[8:23:42] to experience some my life and one of them is knowing you,
[8:23:47] mr. Speaker. I'm truly grateful for that.
[8:23:49] you are probably one of the few people that can get me to do
[8:23:52] things I don't want to do but I do want to honor the opportunity
[8:23:57] to gave me to serve as your majority leader.
[8:24:00] I certainly want to thank your entire staff, everybody standing
[8:24:04] over there. I don't want to name names
[8:24:06] because they all played a very significant role in trying to
[8:24:09] help us pull together the work that we needed to do for the
[8:24:12] peoples house. So thank you to your entire
[8:24:15] staff. Also want to thank john knight.
[8:24:17] and I want to say some of you owe john knight some money.
[8:24:23] you have been in his here but he is truly diligent to the work.
[8:24:27] does not miss a beat. Crosses every t and dots every I
[8:24:33] and stops anybody trying to prevent him from doing that.
[8:24:36] please join me in celebrating this young man.
[8:24:44] [ applause ] let's give her another round of
[8:24:55] applause, too. It has been really great working
[8:25:01] with you all. And I don't want to name names
[8:25:03] because I would have to read off the entire list of the amazing
[8:25:07] people that I have had the opportunity to get to know and
[8:25:11] develop relationships with. But I will just say thank you.
[8:25:13] and so if you saw me sitting down a lot while everybody else
[8:25:17] was standing clapping, don't take it as disrespect.
[8:25:20] take it as I'm trying to preserve my health.
[8:25:23] not long ago I went through a very serious procedure and when
[8:25:27] I it was over, I lost the ability to use some of my body.
[8:25:32] I am regaining that. So I have to protect it every day.
[8:25:37] [ applause ] so do I want to mention, you
[8:25:49] know one effort things the speaker forced me to do that I
[8:25:52] didn't want to do. It was during the pandemic.
[8:25:55] and our then ways and means chair helene weinstein have
[8:25:59] covid. She had to stay home.
[8:26:02] there weren't many of us here mr. Goodell was here.
[8:26:06] ed ra was here and a few people on this side of the aisle were
[8:26:11] here, but he said to me crystal, you have to debate the budget
[8:26:19] what? How am I going to debate the
[8:26:20] budget? I haven't gone to any of the
[8:26:22] hearings. I have no idea what has been
[8:26:26] said. I don't know but have you to do
[8:26:29] it. No, no, no.
[8:26:31] wait a minute. Let's think this through,
[8:26:33] mr. Speaker. Why don't we just ask deborah
[8:26:35] glick to do it. [laughter]
[8:26:38] she has been her longer she knows how it is done.
[8:26:44] she can do this in a heart beat. He said no, crystal, you are the
[8:26:49] majority leader. Have you to do it.
[8:26:50] like he forced me to be the majority leader he forced me to
[8:26:54] negotiate a budget which I was able to do and I was only able
[8:26:57] to do it because of the people on the ways and means team.
[8:27:00] they sat around with all the information that I needed.
[8:27:06] [ applause ] so I often call them the a team
[8:27:13] because I think they are and that doesn't mean the that the
[8:27:16] program and council crew is not the a team as well but there is
[8:27:19] one for each section of the work we have to do here.
[8:27:22] I also want to commend doug miller who takes a lot of grief
[8:27:26] from a lot of people. [ applause ]
[8:27:37] by the way, how do I know she takes a lot of grief from a lot
[8:27:41] of people? Because for one I know I give
[8:27:44] her a lot of grief and now everybody else does as well.
[8:27:47] thank you very much deborah, the work you do running around
[8:27:50] between here and your office and the speaker's office and making
[8:27:53] sure everything is on target. It's on taferght and as hard as
[8:27:56] it may seem, when we are in the middle of debate, we still are
[8:28:02] people who represent people. And we still are people who want
[8:28:06] to do the best that we can for the folks that we represent.
[8:28:12] I feel some kind of way on a regular basis when at the
[8:28:18] national level, my whole being is being reconsidered whether I
[8:28:22] should even be here, not just for a vote but to have a job
[8:28:29] people to look like me got put out of their job the last couple
[8:28:33] of years, bust because they look like me.
[8:28:35] it hurts sometimes coming in here and hearing the debate we
[8:28:37] have to go through when there is no regard for people like me who
[8:28:42] suffer what is going on at the national level and my opinion,
[8:28:46] science is complicit. And so if we are friends, let's
[8:28:51] be friends all the time and let's be friends when we can get
[8:28:55] to the place where we can say to the other folks in our party
[8:28:58] that are our friends you can't say that about my people.
[8:29:02] even though they don't look like me.
[8:29:04] you can't say that about them. You have to be fair.
[8:29:07] we always have to be fair. So I hope that we will move
[8:29:12] forward as people who don't think of ourselves as italian,
[8:29:17] or african-american or irish, or white or black, but think of us
[8:29:22] as the people who god created and the reason he created us was
[8:29:28] for so we can help other people. If we are excluding people and
[8:29:31] by not saying anything when doge goes in and puts 350,000 women
[8:29:35] out of a job in d.c., we can't keep doing that.
[8:29:40] don't be with me in here then leave me when people are abusing
[8:29:46] me in the public. That's all I ask so with that,
[8:30:06] because I can't stand long and I do need to be able to walk to my
[8:30:10] office to be able to tart cleaning it out, whoever takes
[8:30:14] this seat, whoever the speaker assigns to be the next majority
[8:30:18] leader, I just want you to know I'm going to be watching you I'm
[8:30:25] still going to be at his ready and at his defense and at his
[8:30:29] back, so please know that and I got friends, too so I can send
[8:30:34] other people to get you. So with that, mr. Speaker,
[8:30:39] mr. Ra, mr. Barclay, I think there are only two left,
[8:30:44] mr. Fitzpatrick and ramos, god bless you all stay safe.
[8:30:50] and stay healthy. Peace.
[8:30:52] [ applause ] speaker, do you have any further
[8:31:15] housekeeping or resolutions? >> we have none.
[8:31:18] >> awesome, I now move that the assembly stand adjourned until
[8:31:22] saturday june 6, tomorrow being a legislative day and that we
[8:31:27] reconvene at the call of the speaker.
[8:31:31] thank you. [ applause ]
[8:31:45] >> speaker: on ms. Peoples-stokes motion, to
[8:31:46] my friend and departing majority leader, I say to you, my sister,
[8:31:51] live long and prosper. [ applause ]
[8:31:55] the house stands adjourned. [ applause ]