Assembly Live Stream

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Music Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you I Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Music Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Music Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Music Music Music Music Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

The House will come to order. Good morning, colleagues and guests. In the absence of clergy, let us pause for a moment of silence. Visitors are invited to join members in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. A quorum being present, the clerk will read the journal of Monday, June 1st. Mr. Fall.

Without objection, so ordered. We have a quote this morning from Henry Ford, who many of us are familiar with. And the quote says, coming together is a beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together is success. And again, these words are from Henry Ford. Madam Speaker, members have on their desk a main calendar. Before any housekeeping and or introductions, we will be calling for the following committees to meet in the speaker's conference room. Ways and means and rules. These committees will produce an A calendar, which we will take up today. We will begin our floor work by taking up on consent Rules Report 252 by Ms. Morano. We will then take up the following bills on debate. Calendar 280 by Mr. Otis. Rules Report 264 by Ms. Reyes. And Rules Report 224 by Mr Bronson I will announce any floor activity as we proceed So with that as a general outline Madam Speaker let us begin by calling for the Ways and Means Committee to meet in the Speaker Conference Room Thank you, Ways and Means Committee members. Please make your way to the Speaker's Conference Room, Ways and Means Speaker's Conference Room. We have no housekeeping this morning, but several introductions. We will start with Mr. Keith Brown for the purpose of an introduction.

Of course. On behalf of Mr. Brown, the Speaker and all members, welcome Brown family to our Assembly Chamber, of the People's House, extending to you the privileges of the floor. Hoping you're able to enjoy our proceedings today. It really has truly been a great time to have your husband here in the short amount of time he's been in the Assembly, always contributing to the good works that we are doing for the state of New York. So thank you for your generosity in providing your dad and husband here in the Assembly. Best wishes to both of you in your college endeavors, and thank you so very much for joining us today. Mr. Tague, for the purpose of an introduction.

Thank you. Yes, of course. On behalf of Mr. Tague, the speaker, and all members, welcome, Dana, to the Assembly Chamber. We extend to you the privileges of the floor. This may be the first time I've ever seen Mr. Tague speechless, so you are doing wonderful works, ma'am. We hope you enjoy our proceedings today. Really a blessing to have you here today. Thank you so very much for joining us. Mr. Burdick, for the purpose of an introduction.

On behalf of Mr. Burdick, the Speaker, and all members, we welcome our young leaders here today. I welcome you to our Assembly Chamber, the People's House, extending to you the privileges of the floor. It is always wonderful to see students from all backgrounds coming together, and I congratulate you on deciding to do almost anything else, but you decided to contribute your internship time to public service, and that is commendable. Best wishes to all of you for your continued academic success and thank you all so very much for joining us today Mr. Reeder for the purpose of an introduction.

Thank you. On behalf of Mr. Weider, the speaker, and all members, we welcome you, Mr. Friedrich, to the Assembly Chamber, extending to you the privileges of the floor. We congratulate and thank you so very much for all of the work that you are doing, empowering those with different abilities. We thank you for your lifelong work, and thank you so very much, sir, for joining us today. Mr. Steck, for the purpose of an introduction.

On behalf of Mr. Steck, the speaker, and all members, we welcome our young future leaders here to the assembly chamber, extending to you the privileges of the floor. This is amazing to see young people academically striving, achieving, competing in science. This is working. Thank you so very much for doing everything you're doing. It's a great accomplishment, all the science bowl competitions, regional competitions, going to national competitions. You exemplify everything that we love to see in our young people. So keep up the great work, and thank you so very much for joining us today. Mr. Bradmanek, for the purpose of an introduction.

On behalf of Mr. Brebenick, Rockland County Delegation, the speaker, and all members, we welcome our distinguished guests here to the Assembly Chamber, extending to you the privileges of the floor. Thank you sir for all of the advocacy work that you doing and enthusiasm bringing groups to Albany to view and participate in the democratic process And to your young sons who are very joyful today being here We love to see them and we look forward to seeing you all again in the near future Thank you so very much for joining us here today. Page 10, Rules Report 252.

Thank you. Thank you Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

The bill is passed. Congratulations, Ms. Moreno. This is your first bill. We're coming on debate. Colleagues, page 32, calendar number 280.

An explanation has been requested. Mr. Otis.

Mr. Molitor.

Thank you, Mr. Otis. Sponsor yields.

Well, any product that requires a connection to the internet to provide service. So it is intended for consumer use depends upon its functioning in part or in whole on a connection to the Internet So for example maybe someone has a password manager software on their Apple devices It's a product that they've purchased separately and downloaded onto their devices to be used across multiple platforms. Would that be considered a connected consumer product because it uses the Internet to maintain this service? This legislation deals with the purchase of the device itself where the device is connected to the product. So I do not think that a product that is provided not by the manufacturer would come under the definition in this bill. So it has to be a physical product that also uses the Internet and has a service sort of attached to it.

So many of these devices now actually have an online connection that helps maintain and upgrade the functioning of the device.

Well, I'm not sure I understand what you're describing. Maybe you could just...

Let's talk about how the bill functions. The bill functions is that when you purchase a product and you're at the store or you're online, you would be provided a statement by the manufacturer, generally, of what the length of which they're going to provide the online updates and service. So it could be three years, it could be five years, it could be ten years, depending upon the product. That's the disclosure that... would be there. And under the bill, a manufacturer could not decrease the amount of time that they made the commitment for.

And if you're coming up to the expiration date of that commitment for service, there is a requirement that the consumer also then again receive prior notice that the service is about to be terminated. and on the day the service does end notice again could be provided within the device itself through the communication tools that way.

Well, they could, but the consumer would be now in a position to say, maybe I don't want to buy that product. Right. And so there is no minimum requirement of how much time they're making the commitment for.

So we're empowering a consumer to have a little more information about the commitments that manufacturers are making regarding their service, Internet service and technical support and cybersecurity protections for a product. And a consumer is now empowered to choose between competing products and the services that those companies provide.

all of those different forms of notice Because it the notices it required that the manufacturer provides all three levels of notice but a manufacturer might not have like for example a website

I think if you're providing Internet-connected services and you're a company that has a sophistication to do that with the technologies that are involved today, we want them to have multiple ways that they let a consumer know when the Internet service functions are going to be supported. And, yes, they should have a website. Okay.

Good for the website business, yes. Let's see.

That is not part of this bill.

Well, if they, in the case of this section, this section relates to we don't want them putting something on the market that they know is going to be superfluous within a year, and that's to protect the consumer.

I think they're going to have to fulfill the commitments in the bill regardless, but people generally don't buy technology items for such short period of times. And so I don't see this section as a problem. I see it as a protection for the consumer that you don have people you don have companies putting out the door a product they know is going to become obsolete just because they want to get it off of their shelves. They have a responsibility to provide some sort

I think that's correct.

Is maybe a manufacturer wants to offload this product, sell it, lease it, or whatever,

Actually, this section has a different purpose. This section relates to products that are leased. And so there's a commitment, a requirement in this section that if you're leasing for that period of time and you want to change the product, you have to provide to the person who's leasing the product a replacement product to fulfill the time period.

Correct.

Yeah. And it specifically states that a manufacturer shall not do that after the date that is one year before the minimum guaranteed support time frame end date for such product.

Mr. Molitor, you want your second 15? If you could just hold on one moment, please, sir.

Rules Committee members, please make your way to the Speaker's conference room. Rules Committee, Speaker's conference room, Mr. Molitor.

Mr. Otis, I won't be offended. I know from practicing in court that the stenographer is the most important person here So we should all be most respectful to them first and foremost I think you are the most important person here No no definitely not So yeah you can turn your back to me that no problem

we don't want them marketing and selling a product that is going to become superfluous in less than a year where they know it.

I'm not aware of any federal protection. There is some interest in other states in working on this issue. Our bill is uniquely drafted the way it is,

And we made sure with our bill that the burden here is on the manufacturer more than the retailer. And so even if the retailer has to make sure you get the material, but the burden of providing at point of sale the clear material falls on the manufacturer.

Correct.

that that might be an issue?

A civil penalty can be not more than $5,000 for each violation. a broader kind of violation for which you're dealing with interference with the market, the penalty can be $15,000. But this just tracks the existing section that we have in the general business law for a variety of areas where the Attorney General's office has the power of enforcement. We make no changes to those sections.

Actually, this phenomenon is quite common. If you have a cable modem or an Internet modem in your house, the continuity of those devices expires at a certain point. They may contact you and say, we need you to replace the device with our phones, with our computers, with other kinds of appliances. This is very common. So I would say that this is actually something that every one of us is experiencing in some way now. And I think that this is really a very simple proposition that a consumer should be told up front how long the company is going to the manufacturer is going to stand by providing those internet connected services and then the consumer is in a position to choose which product including those services they will choose to buy.

Thank you. Always a pleasure.

Thank you.

And so I think some people are going to support this legislation for that reason. My concerns, as I laid out, is that this is going to put some restrictions on the manufacturers of certain products, I think that want to sell, maybe realize that a product is nearing the end of its life and want to sell that product to another company so it can be serviced by that company, so that service can be extended. And if enough manufacturers get together to challenge this law, I think they do have a viable Commerce Clause violation claim, Whether the courts agree with that or not remains to be seen. So for those reasons, I think some people will be down. And again, I'd like to thank the sponsor for answering my questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will the sponsor yield? Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Well, the section you're reading from only applies to products that are leased. So it's not the whole bill. But I would say, I would make one distinction. Because the cable TV, which is a very common thing, And it is in the interest of the cable TV company or the Internet provider to have successful service. They don't benefit if you're not getting service. So in some sense, that's going to take care of itself naturally now, even without this bill. But if you have a cell phone that has let say cybersecurity protections that are provided by the manufacturer and they're going to expire and not necessarily be continued, but the phone still works, but you're losing those protections, we want you to know that those protections might go away. theoretically with your cable TV modem you may have diminished service or no service at all it's in everyone's interest for them to do that upgrade so they're less the target of this but providing communication which they do they did with Mr. Molitor clearly and I say I have one and I've not replaced it yet. I've ignored the warning, but in the case of a leased item, which is the section you're talking about, it's just there's a lease and there's a commitment in that lease to provide the service. This section only is saying they have to replace it so they're continuing to fulfill the obligations of the lease that they entered into.

They would have to replace that functioning Internet connection, which does get upgraded in cars. But the answer is yes.

Yeah. This one section of the bill is basically saying that if you're leasing something and they were providing that service, they have to fulfill that obligation as part of the lease. That's all.

Read the last section.

The clerk will record the vote.

The bill is passed. Ms. Walsh, for the purpose of an introduction.

Yes, on behalf of Ms. Walsh, Mr. Klujinski, the speaker, and all members. Congratulations to the Lady Wildcats. We welcome you to our assembly chamber, extending to you the privileges of the floor. Always exciting to see repeat champions here in our assembly chamber. Thank you to the coaches and parents who uplift our young students. We wish you the best for your continued athletic and academic endeavors. And Thank you so very much for joining us today. Congratulations again, ladies. Page 10, Rules Report 264.

This bill would standardize food safety and quality date labeling on food products for human consumption. It also requires that manufacturers and producers use a scientifically valid method to estimate the shelf life of their food products to determine the food date labels. These standards will be determined by the Department of Agriculture and Markets in consultation with the Department of Health. It also requires that the Department of Agriculture and Markets will promulgate rules and regulations requiring wholesalers, retailers, and grocery stores to post signage on the meaning of food data labels and prepare educational materials to be posted on their website regarding the meaning of terms on the food date labels.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would the sponsor yield for a question? Will the sponsor yield?

Sponsor yield.

So any produce would not fall under this at all If they currently don use date labels then no they don't have to.

I'm listening, I'm listening.

If the packages currently use labels, the only requirement we are making is that we streamline the labels. So we're only using use by or best if used by labels. Currently, the labels can be confusing. So we're trying to make it easier for consumers to be able to determine what those labels mean.

Not individual products, but we've looked at some products throughout the state.

No, this is not a mandate, and we are not trying to change how they produce and package or anything like that. We just want to streamline some of the labeling. because consumers are very confused by what some of the labels mean. We have over 40 different labels that can be used, and there is a lot of food waste. When something is perfectly adequate to consume, people look at a label, and because it says, you know, expired by or used by or sell by, and people throw out food that is perfectly good to consume. So we just want to make sure that there's less food waste, both for the manufacturers, the packaging companies and all of that, and for consumers as well.

Well, they're promulgating the rules. So they are going – I'm sorry, go ahead. They're promulgating the rules on the signage requirement for stores, the educational component. So I'll read what I have here. The Department of Agriculture and Markets will promulgate rules and regulations requiring wholesalers, retailers, and grocery stores to post signage on the meaning of food data labels and prepare education materials to be posted on their website regarding the meaning of terms on the food date labels. Because what we're trying to do, since we're trying to streamline the process, we also want to make sure that we educate consumers on what it means so people stop wasting so much food Sure absolutely I think it a great idea I know this isn part of the bill it probably not germane to the bill but one thing I would love to see is a lot of our producers here in New York State

I couldn't agree with you more. And one of the things that we've heard from food pantries is the fact that oftentimes these food labeling, the food labeling that is used ties their hands as well because you might put something in a food pantry that says sell by, and people might think that they're getting spoiled food when it's not actually spoiled. So this streamlining of the labeling, they're in favor of for that very reason. And nothing in this bill says that it would change the food that is in compliance with being allowed to be donated.

My pleasure. Thank you.

On the bill. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I appreciate the sponsor's answers. we have sometimes in ag we have an abundance of food that we could share with a lot of other people people that don't have a lot of food and this is one step in moving that forward I hope to work with the sponsor hopefully down the road to to get some of our Wayne County apples down in New York City get the applesauce down there all of our products across the state so thank you for allowing me to ask a few questions very much appreciated thank you madam Speaker. Mr. Tay. Would the sponsor yield for a couple of questions, please?

because I actually believe that I signed on to this bill, and, but my colleague here was mentioning about the food banks, and to be quite honest, one of the reasons why I signed

Yes.

Not certain.

I sort of do, but I have not.

I did not see the memo.

Thank you, Mr. Tate.

Thank you.

The clerk will record the vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise to explain my vote. I heard about this bill on the Task Force of Farm, Food, and Nutrition, to which the chairman of that task force has done a fantastic job. And I heard Mrs. Reyes talk about it, and I think this is really a fantastic bill. And I encourage all my colleagues to support it.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

The bill is passed. Page 8, Rules Report 224. Clerk will read.

As you know, in 1914, we established the Workers' Compensation Board, which was there to create a no-fault system for workers to receive payment for their medical treatment as a result of an injury on the job and to receive wage replacement if they lost wages. In 2007, when I was a staff person, that was the last time we actually made a substantial change to the workers' comp system. We changed it a little bit more in 2013, but it's been a long time since we have modernized and changed the system. So this bill, knowing that we want to make sure that the workers' comp system is there to really provide for workers who are injured on the job, we want to know what's happening in that system so that we can make informed policy decisions as a result. So this would require a supplement to the current annual reporting from the workers' comp board to be submitted so that we can analyze the system.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will the sponsor please yield for a few questions? Will the sponsor yield? Yes, I will, Madam Speaker.

Thank you very much. So I got a chuckle because I was looking at your memorandum of support, and it describes the Workers' Compensation Board. It's become a, quote, cumbersome, Byzantine, and confusing system for New Yorkers to navigate. And, you know, I don't disagree with you. I think what I want to try to get a hold of in my mind is, because we already require annual reporting, as you said, and that annual reporting states in detail the work that's been done in hearing and deciding cases and otherwise. Now, this bill would add that supplemental report that you mentioned. Why do we specifically need the information that's going to be contained in the supplemental report?

Okay. Well, I mean, I see that it's specific to modernization efforts, that there's a modernization effort to transition from paper-based transaction to go digital, cloud-based, on a system called Onboard, and that will allow for electronic billing and online form submission and virtual hearings and stuff. So is the supplemental report trying to really inform on the modernization efforts? It sounds almost like from what you just said, you're taking a very broad look at the effectiveness of the whole system, not just the modernization piece.

Yeah, I mean, I would say that my office, I'm sure many of your offices have received constituent complaints and concerns around the Workers' Compensation Board and that whole process. We're all getting, I'm sure, calls about that. Now, I see that the annual report that's under current law that's required is provided to the governor. this supplemental report will be provided to the governor, the speaker of the assembly, and the temporary president of the Senate. But it doesn't include any provision of the report to the minority party, which, you know, are our leader, which is a concern because, as I said, all of our offices, regardless of party, are being contacted by constituents, and we would all like to be able to report back to them about what is going on with the board. So is there a reason for that?

I mean, that's great news. I mean, so you just didn't want to go through and come up with a B print and maybe delay the bill by not including us? Or, you know, the other thing is, we probably would have faced a chapter issue at that point since, again, it was just last year that we changed the current, I think it's Section 153 of the workers' comp law, to say that instead of just the governor, it would be the governor and the two majority houses. Okay, but still not the minority? Not the minority, correct. Yeah, I mean why not

Okay. All right. Well, very good. Thank you very much, Mr. Bronson. I appreciate it.

On the bill. I mean, that's really my biggest issue with it is – and that was really, frankly, the reason that we laid the bill aside for a few questions, because – which, you know, it's unfortunate. I think, you know, regardless of the party, of the individual representing the district, we all are representing around 135,000 or so plus or minus people in our districts. They all have workers' comp concerns when they contact our office or if they contact our office. And we all should be able to see and understand what is going on with the workers' comp board, what is going on with modernization efforts. And, you know, we've raised this issue so many times on the floor. I feel like I'm blue in the face kind of talking about it. Some drafters of legislation have changed the wording, even in their bills, to say that a report will be submitted to the legislature. You know, it doesn't even talk about that it's only going to be provided to the majority. But I mean, I just I would ask for some some sensitivity and consideration when bill drafting or when you do have a bill idea idea that obviously has overall interest to the entire body and all of the people that we represent. So, I mean, and then I've also heard, not on this bill so much, but on other bills, well, as the person that you're debating, Ms. Walsh, I promise that I will provide the report to you, which sounds great. And, I mean, it sounds, it's very collegial, but, you know, none of us know who's going to be, many of us don't know who's going to be around come the new year or what changes could happen. That person might not be there next year or the year after. So I think it's a lot cleaner and better to just put it in the language of the law and the rules that we're following. And so for that reason, there may be a few people who, despite the admirable intention behind doing a supplemental report, better understanding the Workers' Compensation Board, there may be a few members who just strictly on principle and not being provided the report to the minority will be voting in the negative. So thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately.

Thank you.

Mr. Jacobson in the affirmative. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you Thank you.

Ayes 138, nos 0.

Madam Speaker, members have on their desk an A calendar. I now move to advance the A calendar, and I will take it up immediately. Thank you. I'm Mr. Fall's motion.

Page 3, Rules Report 330. Clerk will read. Assembly number 269A, Rules Report 330. Ms. Paulin, an act to amend the correction law and the social services law. On a motion by Ms. Paulin, the Senate bill is before the House. The Senate bill is advanced. This bill is laid aside. Assembly number 494, Rules Report 331. Mr. Magnarelli, an act to amend the vehicle and traffic law. On a motion by Mr. Magnarelli, the Senate bill is before the House. The Senate bill is advanced. Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. The clerk will record the vote. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Are there any other votes? Announce the results. Ayes, 138. Noes, 0.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill makes a common sense change by extending the recovery period for school energy performance contracts from 18 to 25 years, aligning state law with federal standards and with the lifespan of many energy projects. Energy performance contracts allow schools to upgrade facilities without major upfront costs by paying for improvements through future energy savings. A longer repayment period makes more projects financially feasible, helping districts invest in modern, efficient infrastructure. Lower energy bills mean long-term savings for school districts and more resources that can be directed towards students and classrooms. Expanding these projects will create good-paying green jobs for skilled workers across New York, from electricians and HVAC technicians to engineers and construction workers. These investments support New York's growing clean energy economy while strengthening local communities and by helping schools reduce energy use and emissions. This bill advances and strengthens New York's environmental and climate goals. This is a win for taxpayers, a win for schools, a win for the environment, a win for workers, and a win for the clean energy economy. I want to thank Speaker Hastie, Jen Best, and the rest of program and council staff for their work in reviewing and getting this bill to the floor. I also want to thank Assemblymember Bill Conrad for advocating so strongly for this bill, all of the co-sponsors for their support, as well as the wide coalition of school districts, environmental advocates, labor organizations, renewable energy companies, and more. I urge all my colleagues to vote yes. Thank you.

We are in a mental health crisis, and today is a historic step forward. Over 40 states have already expanded access to mental health care by joining the Psychology Interjurisdictional Compact, PSYPACT. Patients lose access to care when they move for a job, travel to an away game like our New York Knicks, go to college out of state, or a senior that relocates for health or medical reasons, or active military. The impact of losing access to your therapist can be devastating and far too often tragic. This bill will ensure continuity of care across state lines. This requires zero state funding. This expands access immediately. It supports students, working families, and mobile populations. It strengthens our workforce, and it keeps New York competitive. This bill doesn't create new providers. It unlocks the ones we already have. The demand is real. The workforce exists. The model works, and the cost is zero. This is a vote we should all be proud of. I keep all those who have lost their lives due to lack of access to mental health care as I vote today in the affirmative.

Yes, thank you, Madam Speaker, and I certainly appreciate the sponsor's comments. Yes, we have a mental health crisis, no doubt about it. We need to do a better job to access mental health care. My only question and concern with this bill, there's a couple concerns I have, and hopefully they can be addressed as we move forward, is there's really no uniform government oversight of the practitioners in this compact. There have been no other compacts done before with other professions, and I think some of these things need to be worked out. As far as what kind of recourse this area might be if there are damages that could happen, I think that needs to be addressed. And when we look at the procedures and the practices also with this know there are some differences between states For example some states psychologists have prescription authority In New York State, they do not. So if a psychologist is practicing remotely, how does New York State prohibit that activity, even if it's outside the scope of practice here in New York? So I just think there are some questions, unanswered questions that should be answered, But I do think this idea of the compact is something we talk about and have heard. We need to have more collaboration. I just hope some of these points that I met up about that uniform oversight recourse for damages and given the fact that there's not allowed for other practices and professions, I just think those are some things hopefully moving forward we can address with this legislation. But I certainly applaud the sponsor and the intention behind this legislation. I know there's a lot of yes votes up there. But just because of the concerns I've raised, I'm going to vote in a negative on this just to address those concerns. And hopefully when there are discussions moving forward, some of these things can be addressed to make sure this is done to address those concerns and done in a proper way. So thank you, Madam Speaker. Thank you to the sponsor. And, Madam Speaker, I vote in a negative.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I, too, would like to thank the sponsor for introducing this piece of legislation. I've heard from mental health care professionals. I've heard from the psychologists and psychopharmacologists in my district, in my community. And I've heard from parents who've dealt with this struggle. When their children go away to school and their children can no longer receive the mental health services they were getting. This is something that, with a stroke of the pen from the governor, could fundamentally change lives and even save lives for those who want continuity in their mental health care. So I thank the sponsor, and I support this piece of legislation. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I want to commend the sponsor for bringing this bill forward. As someone who represented young people for years who were going to college who had psychiatric conditions, I know how important it is for them to be able to get the telehealth services they need. Anybody who is involved with this is going to have to conform to New York law. They won't be able to do things you can't do as a psychologist in New York. This is something that's very, very needed because the consequences of not doing it are horrific. This is something that is just so critically important today. So thank you very much, and I'll be voting in the affirmative.

Thank you, Madam Seeker. Well, it's that time of year again where we start passing benefit sweeteners. And I have no problem with improving benefits, but this one is going to be very expensive. and I do not believe it is unfair nor unreasonable to ask that this be done through collective bargaining. It wouldn't be unfair to ask the other side to put something on the table to offset the cost of this benefit in perpetuity to assist the taxpayers. So for that reason, I'll be voting no. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. However, across the state, judges show up every single day to protect our people and uphold our democracy. Yet, if a state judge dies one day before filing for retirement, their family receives only a basic lump sum death benefit. often a fraction of the pension that judge spent decades earning. Had that same judge retired 24 hours earlier, their spouse or children would be entitled to their full pension benefits. We corrected this injustice for teachers, police officers, and firefighters in 2000. We fixed it for correctional officers in this year's budget. We left our judges behind. These are men and women who often enter public service later in life, whose experience and judgment we want on the bench, but who feel forced to retire early, not because they are ready to stop serving, but because they cannot risk leaving their families with nothing. This bill does not create new benefits. It simply ensures that when a judge dies in active service, their family can access the pension that that judge already earned. The United Court System support this bill. Judges, associations, and bar associations across the state support this bill. Let us stop making public service a gamble. Let us honor what our judges give to this state and make sure their families are protected when it matters the most. I vote in the affirmative.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair. I rise today to support the trustees of the freeholders of the commonality of the town of Southampton. Established in 1686, they are the oldest continually elected board on North America. Their continued charge is the stewardship of more than 25,000 acres of undivided colonial-era lands consisting mostly of Southampton shores, waterways, marshes, and bottomlands. The bill today is a good government bill which would, after a public referendum, establish a staggering system of the trustees in the town of Southampton. I'd like to recognize the trustees, Jimmy Mack, President, and trustees Joe McLaughlin, Hannah Pell, Sarah Topping, Matt Parsons, for their continued stewardship and fighting for our natural environment and their commitment to good government. I vote in the affirmative. Thank you.

nays zero. The bill is passed. Assembly number 10481A, Rules Report 366, Mr. Jacobson, an act to amend Chapter 294 of the laws of 2023. On a motion by Mr. Jacobson, the Senate bill is before the House. The Senate bill is advanced. Home rule message is at the desk. Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. The clerk will record the vote.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

The bill is passed. Assembly number 10611A, Rules Report 367. Ms. Warner, an act to amend the insurance law. Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. The clerk will record the vote.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

The bill is passed. Assembly number 106. Mr. Fahl.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Assembly number 10660, rules report 368, Mrs. People Stokes, an act to amend the local finance law.

Thank you Thank you. Thank you.

Ayes 129, nays 10.

. Thank you. Thank you.

Ayes 139, nays 0.

Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you.

Ayes, 139, noes, 0.

Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you.

Ayes 126, nays 13.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise today in support of my bill, A11348, a bill that will help protect the true East Harlem institution, Ricardo's Steakhouse. For more than two decades, Ricardo's has been part of the fabric of our community. It is more than a restaurant. It is a place that helped build community on Second Avenue, created jobs, supported the local economy, and gave East Harlem a gathering place that people are proud to call their own. For East Harlem, this matters. Our neighborhoods need strong local businesses. We need restaurants, gathering places, and employers that reflect the character of the community. And at a time when small businesses are already facing rising costs, changing neighborhoods, and enormous pressure just to survive, we have a responsibility to protect the places that have been there for our families, our neighbors, and our community. This bill helps ensure that Ricardo's can continue serving the East Harlem community for years to come. I want to thank my assembly staff, I want to thank my team and everyone who helped move this bill forward. I also want to thank the Ricardo family for their commitment to the East Harlem community I urge my colleagues to vote yes and I probably vote in the affirmative Thank you Madam Speaker Thank you Mr Gibbs Mr Gibbs in the affirmative

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

The bill is passed. Assembly number 11360, Rules Report 376, Committee on Rules, Ms. Lee, an act to amend the general business law. The bill is laid aside. Assembly number 11386A, Rules Report 377, Committee on Rules, Mr. P. Carroll, an act in relation to authorizing the town of Clarkstown in Rockland County. Home rule message is at the desk. Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. The clerk will record the vote.

Assembly number 11388, Rules Report 378, Committee on Rules, Ms. Romero. An act to amend the judiciary law. Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. The clerk will record the vote.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

The bill is passed. Assembly number 11389, Rules Report 379, Committee on Rules, Mr. Levine, an act to amend the civil practice law and rules and the criminal procedure law. Read the last section. This act shall take effect July 1st. The clerk will record the vote.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

The bill is passed. Assembly number 11457B, Rules Report 380, Committee on Rules, Mr. Fall. and act to amend the alcoholic beverage control law. Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. The clerk will record the vote.

Assembly number 11472, Rules Report 381, Committee on Rules, Mr. Cashman. An act to amend the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law. Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. The clerk will record the vote.

Assembly number 11474, Rules Report 382, Committee on Rules, Mr. Magnarelli. An act to amend Chapter 519 of the Laws of 2024. Home rule message is at the desk. Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. The clerk will record the vote.

Court 383, Committee on Rules, Ms. Chimsky, an act to amend Chapter 573 of the Laws of 2025. Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. The clerk will record the vote.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

The bill is passed. Assembly number 11529, Rules Report 384, Committee on Hooks, Ms. Cooks, An act to amend the private housing finance law. List bill is laid aside.

Page 14, Rules Report 384. Clerk will read.

Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. A party vote has been requested. Ms. Walsh.

Thank you, Mr. Fall.

Thank you. The clerk will record the vote.

Ms. Walsh to explain her vote.

Thank you, Ms. Walsh, in the negative.

Are there any other votes? Announce the result.

The bill is passed.

Thank you.

Assembly number 11144B, Rules Report 243, Ms. Cassei, an act to amend the general business law.

Gladly. Thank you. So this bill would prohibit the manufacture, exchange, sale, or distribution of any chatbot toy in New York. We need this because due to the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence legislation is needed to protect youth from potential risks associated with the chatbot toys Chatbot toys consist of stuffed animals robots dolls and voice devices integrated with artificial intelligence technology Studies have shown that chatbot toys are designed to create and sustain emotional attachment through constant availability and personalized responses. These chatbot toys can pose a significant risk of harm to children who cannot yet distinguish AI from humans, which can impact emotional regulation, conflict resolution, and relationship building at the most vulnerable stages of development.

Sure. So an AI companion is defined as a, it has the means to have a system using AI and or emotional recognition algorithms that are designed to simulate human or human-like relationships through retaining information on prior interactions, asking unprompted or unsolicited emotion-based questions, or sustaining ongoing dialogue concerning matter personal to the user. A chatbot toy refers to an AI companion embedded or integrated with the children's toy, and a children's toy shall mean a consumer product designed or intended for the manufacturer to target towards children 12 years of age or younger for play. Thank you.

In this bill and in the extensive conversations I've had, because I, like you, it's been a while since the toys of my day, and I'm feeling older by the minute with these conversations, the best way I've found to say is the electronic toys that are closed loop, so they're sold to you and they have all the information and all the ability to do whatever it is they can do, cannot do, can say, cannot say, that is not an AI toy. An AI toy is something that utilizes interactions. It has to build upon what the interactions look like over time and is connected to the Internet and has that AI companion in it.

I think those are included. Part of the concept of the moratorium is for us to understand better as a state and as a society the potential impacts so that we can set guardrails around toys like this. Something concerning I found in my research was that as interactions went on with the toys that already exist on the market, The toys demonstrated weaker safety guardrails as the conversations continued. And so that, to me, speaks to the concerns that we have broadly about AI, that we don't even particularly know how to implement guardrails because it's such a vast unknown technology. And so the moratorium says, let's hit pause because it's so important to not risk our children's safety with these toys and better understand as the technology develops and as we continue to study it how to put guardrails on so we're sure that the toys that we're giving to our children are safe.

That's what's happening with these toys. And so Furby, I don't even remember what it said, if even it spoke any English. But that's the distinction there. You can have electronic toys, but not toys that are responding and in a vacuum, as we've seen with AI, giving responses that can theoretically not be harmful. But in the context, especially, of a child, or in the context of in Florida, we saw someone using AI to ask questions to prepare themselves to go shoot up a school. Those are, you know, we, that's a great, a terrible example of how we don't even know until these technologies play out how to set guardrails to be sure that we're

Sure. It's a good question. The examples I have all mostly referenced that there were some attempted guardrails put in place, and so that's a valiant effort by the toy makers. But, you know, it still ended up with conversations identifying locations where children could find knives, pills, matches, and plastic bags. Emotionally, having manipulative emotional engagement features designed to encourage continued interaction and in fact guilting children into stopping playing with them so even with guardrails this is this is the result we are looking at right now so just with this bill apply

and to make sure it's only tutoring on the subject or subjects that it's meant to. And similarly similar kind of question but would the bill apply to

If it has that AI component where, again, it builds on conversations, then that would fall into this auditorium. Because, again, I'm thinking about, and not to mention brands or anything,

That's it. And those would still be allowed. Those do not fall under this moratorium.

I guess, again, it depends on if it's going outside of the toy itself up to the cloud to get and learn information Correct yes if it has an AI component to it How should retailers determine whether a product crosses the line into prohibited territory I think retailers, and we did have a productive conversation with the folks at the toy association, and the Toy Association does have in their rules or engagement for their members, they do have guardrails within the Toy Association to say, we are not promoting toys like this, or I forget it might even go as far to say we don't allow our members to be creating toys like this. So we appreciate that. Sorry, go back to your question.

We have to make sure that any toys that are AI companion toys are labeled as such, and I think that's one of the things we're looking to understand in the moratorium. But these toys, they do clearly say, I don't want to start naming names, but any of the toys that we've seen promoted say that they have an AI component to them. With the passage of this law, I would say that retailers should be very alert and aware in asking questions about the toys that they're selling, not just because it's law, but also because this is something that maybe they weren't understanding is so important to our children and our families. Okay. All right.

So why was a ban selected over something like parental consent requirements or disclosure rules, data privacy protections, or age-appropriate use standards?

Yeah, that's great because I was thinking about that, that there was no study component. And one of my questions, which you kind of anticipated, is during that five-year period, what are we hoping to come out of that with, you know, what additional information and how are we going to get it. So I appreciate your answer to that. Why five years? I noticed that California is considering similar legislation, but they're looking at four years. Was there any magic or reason to doing five?

I also heard about that. I think we probably listened to the same podcast about that. It was a little terrifying. I know. How will the, as far as enforcement, how will the Attorney General determine whether a toy qualifies as a prohibited chatbot toy?

Okay. So will any other, besides what's within the four corners of the bill, will there be any other regulations or guidance that will be issued before enforcement begins?

Okay. All right. As far as, I'm thinking about one particular toy store that's not in my, or retailer that's not in my district but very close by. If a small retailer was relying upon what the manufacturer is representing, and then it's later determined that that toy is deemed prohibited, what protections exist for retailers that would be acting in good faith? Especially like a small retailer.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, all right. That's really good to know. I appreciate that. I'm just going to take a look through here. I wanted to bring up a lot of times in the work that I've been doing as an assembly member, I work a lot with the intellectually and developmentally disabled community and advocates. So the next question kind of have to do with that. So some AI companions are marketed for developmental, educational, or social support purposes. Does the bill intend to prohibit those as well?

I need to see that.

That's good to know.

I'd like to continue, please.

No worries.

Okay. And then I had a question about, you know, under our existing law, New York already regulates AI companions, you know, under existing law. So why are those protections insufficient in the toy context? Why did we have to go further with this law?

Well, thank you very much, Ms. Casse. I appreciate your answers to all those questions.

Madam Speaker, on the bill. On the bill.

Thank you. Mr. Chang.

Will the sponsor yield? Yes, glad sponsor yields.

I don't mind losing a market share if it's harmful to our children.

Well, I implore representatives in other states to also join us in stepping up and making sure that, and heck, our federal-level representatives step up and join us in making sure that we're understanding these toys before they're prolific in our communities.

Yes. That's also restrictive. If you put AI into a Furby, it would be restricted.

Because they're definitely not human. If it's like dogs or cats or raccoons, they're not human, but they're interactive?

Sure, and I think that we, in looking at the regulations and guardrails that we want to put on, as the previous member and I were discussing. There can be positive outcomes, and these toys maybe will be able to hit the market in a way that is safe for children. But right now it just so it is the wild west of technology and putting that into a child bedroom with no supervision is something that I taking a stand against Are there any laws in different countries similar to what you propose or derivative of

Because children are children no matter where they are.

I agree.

Yeah, and hopefully across the world research is being done. We will absolutely look at that research during the span of the moratorium. And I would encourage even beyond the United States folks to step up and protect their kiddos.

On the bill. On the bill.

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Thank you.

Thank you Thank you Ms Cassay to explain her vote

Ms. Kassane, affirmative. Thank you. Thank you.

Senate 614B, Senator Rivera, an act to amend the correction law and the social services law.

Yes, of course. The bill would direct state and local correction facilities to take necessary steps to enroll incarcerated individuals in Medicaid or other health insurance programs as they were leaving.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would our colleague from Westchester County yield for some questions?

I would be happy to.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So just want to, I know you just put in the explanation, but just for the legislative record, this would apply to state and local correctional facilities? Yes. Okay. And when we talking about enrolling incarcerated individuals in Medicaid upon release how soon or what the timeline between when they have a release date that the process would be started either in the county jail or the state facility? I'm really not that sure. I think probably a month before, just to guarantee or whatever the time frame is. DOCS is already doing this at the state level and they're doing it successfully. So I'm sure that they would just continue to do whatever they're doing because it's working. It's the local jails that really have to step up and do this more. So if that's of interest, I could call DOCS and we can certainly convey the information to the local jails. I'm sure they're watching and will get all that information to us. Too sweet. So would the idea be that the county jails would have a policy that would mimic what's going on at state correctional facilities? Exactly. And many of them are doing it as well. Okay. And has there been any response from, with county sheriffs being the one who operate the jails, has there been any communication about any, whether they're in favor of this, not supportive, if they have concerns about an administrative burden that their jail deputies or administrative staff would have to take on, adding another piece of the release planning purposes? We haven't heard that they have any objection. Have you heard any support for this? No, we've heard nothing. Okay. And the bill's been on for a long time. It's 269. It's an early number. So, thank you. We have a support memo. Is it from the local jail cell? Is it the county? Oh, okay. So we do have sporadic support. So not from the state sheriff's association, but from some counties? Some counties. Some counties? Yeah. Okay. Is there a presumption of eligibility for every incarcerated individual who's being released? No, that's actually another bill. This bill assumes that most will be, or we assume most will be. Therefore, this process will probably enroll most of the individuals. But there might be some that are eligible for other kinds of health insurance. that might have a spouse or someone else that they're going home to that might have eligibility that way. So what the bill basically says is enroll them in Medicaid, and if they're not eligible, because they are eligible for a different health insurance program, to help them through that process as well. So just to read between the lines a little bit on that response, So the administrative staff in a state correctional facility or a local jail would help begin the enrollment process in the Medicaid for an incarcerated individual if they were enrolled in Medicaid at their time of incarceration? Then, yes, then that's easy. But for example, there might be someone who was incarcerated that wasn't enrolled that might still be eligible, and therefore they would go through that application process with them. And if they were enrolled during their incarceration, whether through social services districts or through the New York State of Health, the navigator I'll use that as a blanket term. In the correctional facility would help them to enroll in Medicaid because they're going from a place of being able to afford insurance on the marketplace to obviously not having income, being incarcerated. So they would be presumptively eligible for Medicaid. Yes, I mean, that would be a word that we'd use. There's actually a legal meaning for that. So, you know, so I would say that we're using the common definition, you know, of presumptive eligibility, because we would assume, as would the facilitator or the navigator, right. But again, there might be an enrollee or, I mean, an incarcerated person who was just released that, you know, has health insurance through a family. So they wouldn't automatically be enrolled if they had evidence that a spouse, or if they were a child, or not a child, but an adult under the age of 25 who would still be covered by a parent's insurance plan. Perhaps, and then they would, again, help navigate, facilitate their enrollment in those plans. Okay. Is there any provision in this legislation that would require the Department of Health Office of Medicaid to follow up with any of the released individuals after a certain period of time to see if they've gained employment or have met a situation in reentering society where they no longer be eligible for Medicaid? Is there a, they have to resubmit or is it just? It would be the normal process. Normal process. Once they're out, they're, you know, going to be treated like everyone else in society. Okay. Thank you very much, Chairwoman.

Thank you. I thank the Chair for answering my questions. And certainly when you look at the state budget we passed last year, or last week, certainly the state's Medicaid obligations take up a very large proportion of our state expenditures between federal funds and state funds. And I think there is a concern by some members of this body of maybe not complete, insufficient oversight in ensuring that those who are on our Medicaid system and accessing that aspect of our social safety net are truly the ones who need it the most. And I think there will be some concern and some members of this side of the room who do vote in the negative because of those concerns. However, on the other hand, certainly I think that in this legislation, there is enough safeguards built into it to ensure that those incarcerated individuals who, upon release, would be eligible, would be the ones, in fact, who are enrolling in Medicaid. And I think this has the potential to ensure that when incarcerated individuals reenter society, look to become contributing members of society, having that aspect of the social safety net already addressed, my hope would be that it would make it easier for them to reintegrate into communities more successfully, limit any possible mechanism to try to recommit and find themselves back in a situation where they could be facing other charges or incarceration or violations of the terms of release But I do think that we have to ensure that if this legislation is signed into law that the Department of Health and the state Medicaid office is closely scrutinizing the process to ensure that it is truly just as we would on Medicaid as a whole, ensuring that we're scrutinizing those who are eligible are the ones being enrolled. And for that, I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Read the last section. This act shall take effect on the 180th day.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Republican conference is generally going to be not supporting this legislation, but if there are members that wish to, now would be the time to cast your vote at your seat.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. The majority conference will generally be the affirmative on this vote. If you would like to vote no, you may do so from your seat.

Announce the results. Ayes 98, nays 42.

Clerk will read. Senate 8622, Rules Report 333, Senator Brooke, an act to amend the public health law.

Ms. Bichotte-Hermelin. Yes, this bill would require the Department of Health to conduct a doula-friendly workplace study to examine and evaluate the integration of doula care and service within birthing centers, hospital, and other health care delivery facilities. This bill should assess strategies for increasing the integration and inclusion of doulas within maternal health care settings, including engagement with doula-led and doula-centered organizations. It also review, it's a review of existing doula intervention programs, identification of hospitals and birthing centers that support doula involvement, And also it evaluates successful doula integration models. So this study would actually make recommendations to best practices for integration to help the facility, doula integration, and doula friendly list in hospitals and birthing centers.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would our colleague from the borough of Brooklyn yield for some questions?

Of course.

Thank you very much, Madam Sponsor, for yielding. And I just want to, before we start speaking about this legislation, I want to just make it clear that when my wife and I, our twins were born seven years ago, we had a doula. So certainly I come from this place and ask these questions as a parent who understands and utilized this type of asset in the health care field. Recently, I think last year and the year before, we passed legislation and the governor signed a law, bills centralizing and focusing and clarifying what sort of access doulas have in the health care process and in the health care environment And you sponsored many of those bills if I remember correctly Exactly I did Have they all fully gone into effect

Okay. But as we're rolling out these programs, you know, there's different aspects of the doula program that we have not assessed yet.

Is there any concern about potentially passing this sort of study bill before all of the components of previously enacted legislation would have fully gone to effect or complete the pilot program to fully assess whether or not it's working before it's actually fully had the opportunity to work?

and the fact that we do have a maternal death rate as high as it is should be an embarrassment for the state and is unacceptable. We're failing mothers and we're failing families that we're not doing enough to address it and get on top of it and bring those rates down. One of the things I have a concern about, and I will be supporting this bill, is that while some of these previously enacted statutes are still going through the process, I guess I have a concern that we may get a false response to a study if we've fully given previously enacted laws the ability to actually bet in and get their desired result. And so that if we start a study too early, it may not be fully integrated, and we could pursue future policies without fully understanding the previous work we've done on its level of effectiveness. And I guess that's one of the concerns I have about moving forward today as it's written before we give it full effect.

Well, it's funny, we talk about, I'm sure she's going to love this story that I'm talking about it on the floor of the New York State Assembly and putting it on a record. But that was one of the things, we had our doula and she was late till arriving to the birth because my wife had went into labor five weeks early and she had to have an emergency C-section. and that was a process that we were not prepared for. And our doula actually missed the birth because she wasn't able to get there on time. And so I think that is one of those things where we do have to do more, we do have to understand. But moving on, has there been, despite some of the other legislation we've done, have you heard of some health care facilities, providers who are still reluctant to allow doulas to be incorporated into the birthing process with mothers and families?

Well, unfortunately, across the state of New York, downstate, upstate, that's not the case. Many, many doulas are being dismissed. They're not taken seriously. They don't understand the purpose of doulas. While nurses and doctors are medically trained to kind of help on the medical side, these doctors are not around to kind of give some support to a lot of the women who are expected. These doctors have to go from one room to another room, while a doula can be the spoke person, the mouthpiece for that patient who's anxious, who, you know, could be in despair. I can tell you, I know for me, when I lost my son during childbirth, I didn't have a doula. And the health care providers just could not understand my pain. They just couldn't. And they would not even allow a doula to come in. But my second time, when I had a second chance in having a baby, I had a doula. I had a doula, her name is Allegra White, who was there and who was able to speak for me. Because I was just as nervous and anxious like the first time, because I was afraid of losing my life again. And I was afraid of losing my child. And I can tell you, after I had my baby, I was in the hospital for three hours. I didn't even know I was in surgery for three hours because of other complications, blood transfusion, all of that. And so we need this study because many facilities don't understand that the doulas are part of the comprehensive care network. And very often they just don't understand how to integrate. And so when we do this study, while we're executing these other pilot programs and so forth, it's very important to also address these areas of how they integrate. So would part of this study not just look at the rate of access, the types of locations, where doulas may or may not be welcome what sort of access they have but also looking at some of the regulations that healthcare institutions have on the books regarding doula access and potentially having the Department of Health establish regulations or make a recommendation to us in the place down the hall about legislation that we could pursue to standardize that access. Is that part of that?

Were you part of writing this legislation?

But that, so that would be part of that, part of this then. Okay. Yes. Okay.

Thank you. Ms. B. Schott-Hermlin on the bill.

Thank you.

Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

The bill is passed. Page 4, Rules Report 336. Clerk will read.

An explanation has been requested. Ms. Levenberg.

Mr. Morinello. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will the sponsor yield for a few questions? Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields. Why is this bill needed at this time?

Thank you. I appreciate that. In reviewing the bill and the memos, what I found interesting is this seems to focus almost more on co-signers,

You are correct. This absolutely does. Yes. And I know you gave a great explanation, but I personally am a little confused as the difference between a private education loan as compared to a loan guaranteed under the Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965. Is there a simple explanation of the differences between the two?

Thank you. So would it be fair to categorize this more on the style of a personal loan as opposed to, but for school purposes, rather than a federally guaranteed?

Am I correct on that?

Okay. And would it be fair to say that the bower that has to go to a private education loan may not be as creditworthy as someone who is eligible for a federal loan?

The reason I asked it is the need for a cosigner and the focus on the cosigner raises a different focus from a legal standpoint.

So if I understand a federal loan, the government's guaranteeing it. A private loan, you're dealing with, in most instances, someone who hasn't hit the work market yet that is probably in a position where they might have other student loans so that they need some assistance. Would that be almost a fair categorization?

You misunderstood my question.

If it was a federal loan, it was guaranteed by the government.

So this particular loan, because there's no government guarantee, they're asking for a cosigner, which is almost a private guarantor.

Correct? Okay.

Thank you.

I also notice that there a prohibition against acceleration of this loan And I reading through I didn really see a definition but in most instances loans that are in default can be accelerated

All at once. All right, but it would prohibit an acceleration because of a missed payment or some other default on that particular loan, correct?

Okay, thank you on that. Is there a high likelihood that this type loan will be sold in the open market?

Okay, so it's my understanding, and I've got a couple other questions, that there are protections for the borrower similar to if it wasn't for student loan purposes.

Okay, correct?

Now, it seems that when it comes to the cosigner and actually the borrower,

Yes. Okay, and this is kind of what it seems like the focus is more going to than the actual loan itself. If there's a situation where there's a default and it gets turned over, this is where it gets really dicey. Would that be a fair statement?

Yes, but also sometimes you're pushed prematurely to debt collectors, I believe,

So this is putting more protections in for the borrower. Now, one of the protections here is to make sure that the cosigner knows what their obligations are going to be. Because I would assume many times a cosigner is a parent or a grandparent.

And that they're doing it.

Okay.

That's why it's your bill.

Or one of the reasons. But, you know, what I found interesting is one of the opposition memos that was attached to it talked about paperwork and backup, okay, and it's not required anywhere. Well, would it be fair to say that any good practice of any lender is going to have backup documentation?

Absolutely.

We're debating to make sure everyone understands what it is.

Yes, thank you.

They should have all that documentation, whether it was the original lender or they took over the loan from another lender. If they didn't, they didn't do their homework, if they don't have all that backup.

Well, and let us go one more step into where it has to be a collection, okay? Many of these debts, would it be fair to say, are sold on the open market. for maybe pennies on the dollar.

Okay. Now my previous life because I had many lives was I had to make judgments as the judge on these type of loans And I don mean just the student loan but loans in general okay And one of the defenses which always held up was they had no assignment. They had no copy of the assignment of loan. So there was a chain broken.

Would I be correct in that?

As to the authorization to collect this particular loan.

Thank you. I want to thank the sponsor for her answers. And on the bill, please. On the bill. I find this a very worthwhile bill. And the reason I do that is my experience has been that you get overzealous debt collectors that have purchased these, and there may be two or three collectors down the line that are now trying to collect this type of bill. Number one, up front, they never really, without this bill, they don't really explain to co-signers, to parents, to grandparents. And you end up with individuals that are going to put themselves in a financial disadvantage because of that when the entire purpose was to assist but not to impede themselves. I find this a bill that I think is timely. I think it should go forward. I thank the sponsor. And I will vote in the positive, and I urge my colleagues to vote the same. Thank you.

Read the last section. This act shall take effect on the 180th day. The clerk will record the vote. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, to explain my vote. First, I would just like to thank the New Yorkers for responsible lending, Protect Borrowers Institute for College Access and Success Mobilization for Justice Consumer Reports and AARP for their support The key requirements of this bill are creating clear disclosure of key loan terms to both borrowers and co-signers, ensuring co-signers receive notice of their rights, responsibilities, and release options, requiring lenders to verify loan ownership before attempting to collect a debt, mandating accurate and complete record keeping by lenders, protecting co-signers by releasing them from obligations if they become totally and permanently disabled, prohibiting auto-defaults triggered by events like a co-signer's death or bankruptcy if payments remain current, and it creates a meaningful release for co-signers after 12 consecutive on-time payments by the borrower. Co-signers often being parents, grandparents, and family members who are helping a student should not be trapped indefinitely in a loan when they qualify for a release. This is a common sense bill with common sense protections for private student loan borrowers, which is a growing, growing population here in New York State. I'm pleased to vote aye, and I encourage my colleagues to join me.

Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. 40 nays 0. The bill is passed. Ms. Lunsford. Thank you Madam Speaker. We're now going to

what I want. Page 6, Rules Report 345. Clerk will read. Assembly number 7594C, Rules Report 345, Ms. Lunsford, an act to amend the environmental conservation law.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill prohibits the sale of certain playground equipment that contains intentionally added toxins like PFAS It requires that manufacturers alert sellers to the intentional addition of PFAS and that they are prohibited from sale here in the U.S. or here in the state of New York prior to December of 2027.

Happily.

Thank you.

Yes.

It does not. It only includes surfacing materials.

Yes. A splash pad would be considered a playground.

It would still be the surfacing of the play area, I suppose, if there were a pretty epic splash pad where there was, say, foam on the top of something. Most splash pads I'm aware of, being a splash pad frequenter myself, you typically don't see things kids are climbing up on, as you would in, say, a water park. But to the extent that there are surfacing that your feet are supposed to go on, I suppose it would apply to all things feet go on.

Yeah, I assume to the extent that that material contained intentionally added PFAS or PHAs, PHAs too, right?

Yeah. Then, yes, it would.

Yeah, there's any number of alternative materials available on the market made from a variety of different materials. This really just deals with materials that have intentionally added PFAS, which I think typically you see more in outdoor surfacing because of the water repellent qualities of it, but there are other materials on the market now and hopefully this will encourage diversification and innovation. Okay, and just for clarification also, we

be excluded from this legislation? Yeah, but athletic field is different than a playground. This applies only to playgrounds. Okay, all right. And then I

I mean, that's going to affect New York manufacturers. I did a short search a few minutes ago and found there are many New York manufacturers and with such a short timeline how will how do you expect manufacturers to deal with the amount of material, playground components that they have backstocked? Okay. So first, it's December of 27, which I think is a, it's not like it's December of this year. But there's going to be two sections where if it is intentionally added, that needs to stop. If there is accidental additions, there is an additional time for that. and to the extent that a seller is found to have sold material with PFAS that they reasonably could not have known, they will not be held liable for that. So we are building in parameters for the sellers and those who don't have control over that process in this bill.

Yes.

I don't think so.

Those are standard. This is taken from other legislation that we've passed that similarly limits PFAS. So that's standard across our legislation, but also don't poison our kids.

They will. Is it zero?

No, they will establish that. At some point, we do this all the time. Once this bill is in effect, they will then take those steps.

Thank you. It's been a pleasure.