May 18, 2026 · 24,168 words · 5 speakers · 668 segments
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. so Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you I remember the setback would be in the Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. We be right back Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. We be right back Thank you. Thank you. Thank you For more information visit www Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Music Music Music Music Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. beautiful blue photo Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you I Thank you. Thank you. . We'll be right back. 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.
Madam Speaker, would you please call the House to order?
The House will come to order Still morning Good morning colleagues Wonderful to see all of you In the absence of clergy we'll have 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 stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice of all.
A quorum being present, the clerk will read the journal of Sunday, May 17th, Ms. People Stokes.
Madam Speaker, I move to dispense with the further reading of the journal of Sunday,
May 17th, and at the same stand, approved. Without objection, so order.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much for the grand, I guess, walk-in that I just had. I really appreciate you all a lot for that. I'm grateful to be in this room again and to have an opportunity to see you all. And so I want to first of all thank those who stood in for me while I was not here, Jen and Charles. Thank you very much. I appreciate you. I saw you two. You did good. Thank you very much. I also want to just mention that given the health considerations that I've recently had, I have experienced some of the best clinicians in all of the world right at ECMC Hospital in the great city of Buffalo. And so I want to extend to them my sincere gratitude. And with that, I would also like to provide a quote that comes from my physical therapist. His name is David Fox. Actually, his name is Daniel Fox, and he works for the Visiting Nurses Association. And he was my physical therapist, and he came every other day. And his words for me, and I hope they are valuable to you as well, is you cannot rush biology, Crystal. That's how he got me this way. You cannot rush biology. And so to Brother Fox, I want to thank him for those words, and I hope they mean as much to you all as they meant to me. Let the Speaker members have on their desk a main calendar and a debate list. But before we do any housekeeping and or introductions, we need to call the following committees to meet. Ways and Means and Rules. These committees are going to produce an aid calendar, which we will take up today. We will then take up the following bills on consent. Calendar number 216 by Mr. Braunstein. Calendar number 309 by Ms. Jackson. and Calendar 368 by Mr. McDonnell. After that, we're going to take up the following bills from the debate list, Madam Speaker. Calendar 271 by Ms. Kellis and Calendar 24 by Ms. Cruz. In addition, we will also be calling the following committees to meet off the floor. So, members, if you are in and around the chambers, if you stay close and these committees are called, they can operate quickly and we can be back to the floor. These committees today are going to be alcoholism, banks, consumer affairs, education, judiciary, libraries, and local governments. There may be a need for additional floor activity. I'm going to speak to you. Should that happen, I'll be happy to advise at that moment. However, majority members should recognize that there's going to be a need for a conference as soon as we conclude our floor work. And as always we will confer with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to determine what needs they may have So that a general outline And where we going Madam Speaker you can begin by calling the Ways and Means Committee to the Speaker's Conference Room.
Yes, thank you. Ways and Means Committee members, please make your way quietly to the Speaker's Conference Room. Ways and Means to the Speaker's Conference Room.
We do have a piece of housekeeping this morning on a motion by Mr. Otis, page 29, Calendar number 280, Bill number A10132A. The amendments are received and adopted. We have several introductions this morning. We will start with...
Make a card, any card. Mr. Jensen, you're up. Purpose of an introduction.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Today I rise to recognize and introduce an extraordinary young woman from the town of Greece in Hilton High School whose actions remind us all that patriotism is not measured by age, title, or position, but by a willingness to remember, honor, and to serve. Joining us is 11th grader Madison Lovato, along with her parents Melissa and Joe Lovato, her grandparents Leo and Jeanette Tidings, grandmother Priscilla Williams, and her aunt Joan Lovato. Last September, after an experience in her 10th grade social studies class, Madison felt that the significance of September 11th and the lives lost that day were not being remembered with the attention they deserved. Instead of simply moving on, she decided to do something remarkable. Over the summer, Madison spent nearly two weeks organizing and creating a memorial display at Hilton High School, honoring every one of the 2,997 lives lost that day. She ordered 2,997 individual flags, each one labeled with the victims' names where they lost their life and symbols recognizing first responders who made the ultimate sacrifice. The display itself was thoughtfully designed to reflect the sights of the attacks, the Twin Towers for the Royal Trade Center, a Pentagon shape for the Pentagon, and a field representing Shanksville in Flight 93. But Madison did not stop there. She created educational materials for students and teachers, a timeline exhibit inside the school, and a banner explaining the memorial so future generations would understand exactly what was being honored. And perhaps most moving of all, while setting up the display, members of an honor guard attending a nearby funeral stopped and crossed the street to thank her and help her to remember. Madison's work reminds us that the legacy of 9-11 must never fade and the young people across our state are capable of extraordinary acts of leadership, compassion, and civic responsibility. I'm proud to recognize Madison Lovato today and thank her and her family for ensuring that we never forget. Please welcome her and her family to the Assembly Chamber and grant them all the cordialities of the floor.
On behalf of Mr. Jensen, the speaker, and all members, we welcome you, Madison, and your family to the Assembly Chamber, extending to you the privileges of the floor. Thank you so very much for your care for your fellow man. You're a young woman, and you could be doing many other things, but your civic engagement definitely deserves congratulations. Thank you for your advocacy and remembrance for the lives lost on September 11th with your memorial display. You are the leader all young people should look towards. Thank you so very much for being here today. Ms. Chandler Waterman for the purpose of an introduction.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Today, as we recognize National Water Safety Awareness Month, I would like to introduce two community stakeholders. Sherman Chambers, Director of Mother's for Safe City, a mother grief support group of 67 Precinct Clergy Council, affectionately known as God Squad. And also, a monarch to Amina Noah, who is the mother of Elijah Chandler, who unfortunately drowned on June 21, 2024. Elijah Chandler and his best friend Christian Perkins went to Reese Beach with a group of friends. What began as a fun day at the beach ended in tragedy when the boys did not return from the water. They did not know how to swim, which left their loved ones in panic and heartbreak. Since then, the mothers, Amina Noah and Cabaret Perkins, have partnered with the Sixth Terepist and Clergy Council, God Squad, through their program, Families for Safe City, a major nonprofit in my district, to unite grieving families as they support one another while they navigate the loss of their loved ones through to drowning, violence, and other tragedies by investing in these families through counseling, retreats, resources, services, and advocacy. In 2025, New York City launched the Elijah and Christian Swim for Life program at Rasmus High School in Brooklyn, where Elijah attended. Today, I'm deeply grateful for the partnership of Assemblymember Jamie Williams as we invest in the first of its kind in our district, the Free New York State Learn to Swim at Hebrew Education Society in Canarsie, Brooklyn, as a tribute to our beloved. We will continue this work with these mothers to bring water safety education programs to prevent drownings. We hope one day to say not another child was lost. I ask you, Madam Speaker, to extend the cordialities of the floor of the People's House as we welcome these distinguished individuals to Albany. Thank you so much.
Thank you.
On behalf of Ms. Chandler Waterman, the Speaker, Ms. Williams, and all members, we welcome our distinguished guests to our Assembly Chamber and appreciate the advocacy work that you've been doing relative to National Water Safety Awareness Month. and appreciate and thank you through your grief. You have worked towards community advocacy for education and safety for all things water. So we appreciate everything that you've been doing, extending to you the privileges of the floor. Hope you enjoy your time here in the proceedings today. Thank you so very much for joining us. Mr. Gandolfo, for the purpose of an introduction.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. We have some great guests joining us in the chamber today who made the trip to Albany as we are celebrating Italian-American culture here in the capital today. And if you get a chance to step out of here, there's the Mulberry Fair going on over in the well. There's great food. So go check it out. But joining us today, we have Bob Fonte, president of the Italian American Action Committee, liaison to the New York State Order Sons and Daughters of Italy in America, and president of the Lieutenant Detective Joseph Pretorino Association in America. Also flanked to his right, or his left, is Anthony Bonomo Jr., also with the Italian American Action Committee. Dr. Joseph Shelza, president and founder of the Italian American Museum in New York City, also with the Italian American Action Committee. Mark Toluto with the Italian American Cultural Museum of Albany and the Italian American Action Committee Laura Morata Venezuelan Ambassador to the Italian American Action Committee and Antonio Nino Vendome Executive Board Member of the Italian American Action Committee. Our guests here today do so much to preserve Italian American heritage and promote our history, so we thank them for joining us today and for all the work they do on behalf of our community. So Madam Speaker, would you please welcome them to our chamber?
On behalf of Mr. Gandolfo, the speaker, and all members, we welcome you, distinguished guests, to our Assembly Chamber, extending to you the privileges of the floor. Thank you, your organizations representing here today, supporting and celebrating our Italian-American Day. So happy Festa Day for all of you celebrating today, and thank you so very much for joining us. Mr. Durso, for the purpose of an introduction.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. And again, to everybody, happy festa day, Italian-American day. Because of today, I get to introduce someone that's no stranger to these chambers, my father, John Durso, who will be receiving our Italian-American Heritage Award today from the Italian-American Conference of Legislators. John Durso is the president of Local 338, the president of the Long Island Federation of Labor, which represents over 300,000 working men and women here in New York State. He's a proud Italian-American and does so much to promote the Italian-American heritage, not only through his work, but also the involvement he has in the Italian-American Action Committee. One story I want to tell about my father, again, is everybody he's met, and I've told you to call him dad before, and you're more than welcome to do so. But my father, John, has also received the Ellis Island Award, which is given to people of descent of other countries that have come here for the American dream and have promoted that. It was something that we went to roughly about 20 years ago, where he got the award, and when everybody sits there and thinks their dad isn't cool when you're younger and everything else, my father was sitting on a dais with people like Jamie Farr, who was from the show MASH. Russell Simmons was also getting that award that day. And a hero of mine growing up was Yogi Berra. And Yogi Berra was receiving the same award that my father was receiving. So just when you sit there and think that when you're younger and your dad's not cool, at the time I was sitting there going, wow, my father's getting the same award Yogi Berra's getting. So as a hero of mine growing up, Yogi Berra was. My father is always my hero. So, Madam Speaker, if you could welcome him to our chamber today, Please, everyone, come to Festa tonight and give him all the cordialities of the house. I would appreciate it.
On behalf of Mr. Durso and the speaker and all members, welcome, Father Durso, to our Assembly Chamber, extending to you the privileges of the floor and hoping you enjoy our proceedings today. And congratulations for the award that you'll be receiving today and all of the esteemed awards you've received, an Ellis Island Award. That's pretty cool. So we really thank you for joining us today, and thank you for the gift of your son being able to represent. We appreciate you being here today. Thank you. Ms. People Stokes.
Madam Speaker, could you please call the Rules Committee to the Speaker's Conference Room? Rules Committee members please make your way to the Speaker Conference Room Rules Committee Speakers Conference Room Ms People Stokes Would you please call our House at ease On a motion by Ms People Stokes
The House stands at ease.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Madam Speaker, can you please call the House back to order?
The House will come to order. Mr. Fall.
Madam Speaker, can you call the Committee on Alcoholism to meet in the Speaker's conference room? Alcoholism Committee members, please make your way to the Speaker's conference room. Alcoholism Committee members, Speaker's conference room, Mr. Morinello, for the purpose of an introduction.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm proud to have my family here today. Today's Italian-American heritage date. I, as the president, we have our Mulberry Street, and then we have tonight's Festa. But this being my last year, I thought it would be appropriate for me to bring my family to the chamber so they can actually see what I've been doing for 10 years. Although my daughter and granddaughter were here last year, but the rest of my family hasn't. And it's such an honor to be able to bring them here. Growing up, I never really understood. I had never been in this building. I wasn't interested. I wasn't interested in politics. Even when I ran for judge, it was like something I thought I could do. But I'll tell you what, I cherish every moment I've been here and the friendships I have. And I just wanted my family to experience this before I left. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
On behalf of Mr. Mornello, the Speaker, and all members, welcome, Mornello family, to the Assembly Chamber. the People's House, extending to you the privileges of the floor. We hope you enjoy the proceedings today and the excitement that is FESTA this evening, seeing the president, this year's president. But please know that your family member, Mr. Morinello, the judge, is a very cherished member of this august body that he is just a wonder and pleasure to be around And as a fellow veteran I will miss you very very much Judge So thank you all so very much for being here today Mr. Fall.
Madam Speaker, members have on their desk an A calendar. I now move to advance the A calendar.
On a motion by Mr. Fall, the A calendar is advanced. Page 3, Rules Report No. 136. Clerk will read.
Assembly No. 11445, Rules Report 136, Committee on Rules, Mr. Pretlow, an act making appropriations for the support of government. On a motion by Mr. Pretlow, the Senate bill is before the House.
The Senate bill is advanced. Governor's message is at the desk. Clerk will read.
I hereby certify to an immediate vote, Kathy Hochul, Governor.
An explanation has been requested. Mr. Pretlow.
Oh, absolutely, Madam Speaker. This is the 13th in a series of extenders, hopefully close to the end. This extender would ensure funding for state operations and other programs through May 20th. The bill includes additional funding for administrative payroll, Medicaid payments, school aid payments, unemployment insurance, OPWDD services, veterans programs, and general state charges. Mr. Palmasano.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will the Chairman yield for some questions? Yes, I will.
Chair yields.
Thank you, Mr. Palmasano. I hope you had a nice weekend.
I certainly did, Mr. Palmasano. I hope you did also.
I did. Thank you. I have several questions. The answer to the first one, I think you know the next two are coming.
I'll wait for the questions.
I know you know them, but they're coming. But this being our 13th extender, how much is the total appropriation of these 13 extenders?
The total is $31.7 billion.
Okay. And this increase above the previous extender is how much?
$8.04 billion.
Okay. Now I have some questions. You might not know the answers, but I'm sure you got good answers for my response. I'd like to start out with, you know, at the end of last week, our colleague down the hall in the Senate said it was a slim chance of passage of a budget before Memorial Day. I'm really kind of more interested, and I think our chamber is more interested in what your take is at this point in time. I know you just had a conference. Is there anything you want to report relative to that?
You can use it however you want. If you want to talk about what anyone is in, is the first pitch thrown yet?
Has the metal start to drop? Is the cloud clearing up?
Where do we stand right now, would you say? I believe the first pitch has been thrown. There's a full count right now. I think that we should be seeing, hopefully, budget bills by the end of this week. I doubt we'll see all nine of them this week, but I'm pretty sure we'll see maybe one or two or three or four.
So right now, just to clarify, if I heard you correctly, You expect sometime this week we will take up some budget bills, but you think...
I am hopeful.
Hopeful? Okay. I know there's that word again, hopeful. I know.
Dusty Springfield used it, wishing and hoping.
Anyway. So hopeful that we'll see some budget bills this week, and is it your anticipation that
we will definitely have to see some budget bills next week? Definitely. Definitely next week we will see more budget bills. We definitely have to see budget bills by next week. We are running out of session.
Okay. I just kind of want to get an idea just for our members, you know, because we hearing stories that we going to do it all this weekend by this weekend but you saying we probably take up some this week and then we have to take up the rest next week after Memorial Day Is that what you mean Well I think it going to take a lot of cooperation
Sure. We're going to need to have agreements between the second floor and the Senate and the Assembly, and then we're going to need agreements between you and I.
Of course.
How long we have our debates for. Sure. No, if we choose to go five hours per bill, that's 45 hours of debate. If we choose to go one bill, we could do a lot more bills in a shorter period of time. But that's all up to the camaraderie that we've come to notice of late.
I appreciate our camaraderie and our collegiality. I will ensure you, regardless of how much time we debate it, that will stay, at least from my end, that we appreciate the dialogue, we appreciate the discussion to be able to discuss the financial impact of this over a quarter trillion dollar document that we're going to be voting on partly this week, maybe some next week as you said. On that take though, and I know I brought this up, would you anticipate that we will be adhering to the three-day rule
or do you expect message of necessity is going to be taken up on all these bills or some of the bills? As I stated to you last week, even though all of us would love to have the bills three days in advance, if that adds an additional three days to the time period in which we get this budget passed, it's going to push us back an additional three days. If we waited for three days for the bill we just passed, that we're going to pass right now, the extender, that would delay the payroll to all of the state entities that would have been paid the after tomorrow.
I understand that, and I do say just that the budget bill is going to be a lot more complex than the extender, but I understand what you're saying. I'm just trying to get an idea if you think we will have the ability to use it three days or if it's going to be a message of necessity, so just so our staff can certainly prepare for that and know how we're going to roll this out. And as you know, I know policy being included into the budget
and reports of things being added to the budget have been frustrating. after these budget proposals are being negotiated. Like, for example, I think it was first reported that the Tier 6 retirement age was going to be adjusted just for teachers only, but it appeared over the weekend it was reported it would apply to everyone. Is that correct?
And what should we expect to see in the final budget agreement when it comes to this?
That hasn't been finalized. I wouldn't go by what I say reported in the press anyway.
That's fair enough. That's why I just wanted to ask. Do you have any information that you could share with us on how the contribution rights might be adjusted?
Are there any details on that yet that you could share, or if not? That's all part of the discussion. All discussions, sir.
And I know we brought this up. Obviously, our taxpayers, you brought this up yourself, that there's going to be a fiscal impact to the taxpayers, state taxpayers, but also a lot of us are really worried about the local taxpayers.
And when we did pass tier 6 back in 2011, there were provisions in that bill that said any enhancements, any increases that would be done, that the state would pick up those costs from the local governments. Do you anticipate that the agreements that are being worked out are going to protect the local property taxpayers
and that the state of New York will absorb all those costs, or is that also going to be borne on the local property taxpayers?
That is part of the discussion right now. I don't know if the state at this point can afford to pick up the local share of the enhancements to all those individuals in Tier 6.
Sure.
But it is being done.
Okay, I appreciate it as part of the discussion. I can understand your concerns relative if the state can afford it. I just, on that point, just in the interest of dialogue, I think we have the same concerns of whether the locals, school districts, local property taxpayers can absorb those costs as well.
And if you recall, the tier six was brought about because, at the request of the school districts and the locals, they're the ones that wanted it because their pension contributions were growing by leaps and bounds.
And now they find that they have difficulty in maintaining employees or hiring people. They want to change it, but they don't want to foot the bill for what they had originally asked for. I understand. I just wanted to clarify, and I appreciate your candor. You know, at the beginning of the year, the governor obviously spoke very regularly of the need to address health care costs and provide coverage for those under the essential plan. I know last week it was said that there might not be enough money to address those issues,
but even members of the health committee said if there are conversations going on about it,
I would know about them, and there are no conversations that I'm aware of. Could you share with this body what the status of those negotiations regarding the health care
and the essential plan are for those individuals?
Anything you could share with us at this point in time?
Yeah, I believe for the essential plan we're good for a year. We're going to continue looking at it to maintain these individuals.
Okay, and then...
Is that good? Yes. I'm sorry. Thank you, Mr. President. Sorry about that.
Appreciate that. You know, when the governor announced the $268 billion budget deal, but then we know we have the Tier 6 changes in the health care coverage that might have a fiscal impact, Do we know yet? Can you share with us what the impact to the enacted financial plan and total spending will be?
Well, we don't have the total financial plan yet, and I wouldn't, you know, lay bets on the $266 billion. It's somewhere between $262 billion and $265 billion, but the number has not been finalized.
Okay. And after the governor's budget deal conference, we were surprised with the announcements of an additional $4 billion bailout for New York City, and the new tax proposals have emerged.
We talked about changes made to the period here.
On that $4 billion, are you in a position, or can you share with us what that $4 billion is constituted of for us to consider with that extra additional savings for New York City?
Is there anything you can share with us? Well, other than giving New York City more of an authority to maintain their own tax base and the rules that they operate under when they need state permission, when they've been given state permission. But that's really not part of this extender.
Okay, and I appreciate that. I guess that might be the next question. As far as the peer-to-teer with the new tax added in,
Do you have any details you can share with us about how that's going to work yet at this point in time? Personally, I can't. I'm pretty sure that is going to be in the final budget. That is something that the governor has said is there. I believe it's been agreed upon. How it's going to work, I will have better information for you at a later date.
I'm sure. I would expect that explanation will also occur, why it was decided to be changed and why the methodology, maybe after two years, is that accurate?
Yes.
Okay. I definitely want to just kind of finish up more on you know when we have talked about the major policy issues sticking points throughout these extenders I guess I just ask you is language finalized or are we close
Agreed upon.
Auto insurance, is it finalized?
Close, very close. Everything is very close.
And my magnet description, that's where we are.
Everything is ready to come together.
So we dropped it or is it still standing?
It's on the way down.
It's hanging there, right?
It's coming down.
It's coming down.
Gravity is doing the job.
It just hasn't hit.
Yeah, OK.
So that would be the same for immigration, close?
Not finalized?
Nothing.
Nothing is final, final.
I know.
Seeker, same thing.
Obviously, tier six we talked about.
And the climate stuff, same thing.
OK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your time, as always, and your courtiality.
Madam Speaker, on the bill. On the bill.
Madam Speaker, my colleagues, you know, while we're sitting around, I went up to a couple of individuals and asked them how they were doing. And the response from one of them was saying, just another day in paradise. And then the response from the other individual sitting there said, is that what you call it? It seems more like purgatory to me. Either way, whatever your perspective, I would say that it's a very sad day for New York. This is our 13th budget extender. we have broken the modern-day record for the most budget extenders needed to be in place for a final budget. This is the latest state budget since 2010. And yet the end does not seem fully in sight. We get the reports, and I really appreciate the Chairman's discussion that it doesn't appear that we're going to finish up anything this week. It looks like it's going to have to go into next week. You know, again, because last week the Senate leader, or one of the leaders from the Senate said a very slim chance is to pass before Memorial Day. So it does look like that's going to come into fruition if what we talked about is true, that we will be passing maybe hopefully, hopefully passing some budget bills this week, and then hopefully passing the rest next week. But we are now seven weeks past the constitutional deadline.
And the only thing this chamber has voted on since April 1st is budget extenders to make the payroll and to keep the lights on. Thirteen separate times. And let me just put a number on this, what we've been doing. And I find this interesting. The combined appropriation authority of these 13 extenders that we've passed is larger than the entire annual budget of 19 states. Think about that. But we have on a weekly rolling basis authorized more spending than entire state governments run for a year. And we still do not seem close to the deal yet. Or maybe close, but who really knows the way things change here. A few weeks ago, the governor announced a budget deal. She announced it before it was written. She announced it before this body voted on it. She announced it before the public saw a single page or word. And last week, we found out a new tax proposal was on the table, a new tax after the deal was announced, excuse me, a new tax after the deal was announced, after the victory lap by the governor. And whatever language does exist for this proposal, if it exists yet on paper, has not been shared with the public yet. Members are being asked to vote on a budget that keeps changing after the governor seemed to say it was done. And last week we learned about a New York City bailout, a bailout announced while the rest of the state waits in line for a budget that still does not yet exist. For nearly seven weeks, our school districts have been waiting. They go to vote this tomorrow Our school districts are voting on their budgets tomorrow and they don know how much aid we getting from the state We are failing them Our nonprofits are still waiting Our local governments are waiting. They're waiting for their chips allocation so they can do their road work. They are still behind schedule because they just don't know. AIM funding, funding for temporary assistance, funding that is certain so they can stay operational. Our families, our seniors, our farmers, our small businesses and manufacturers, they are all making very tough decisions right now. They are all dealing with rising and crippling utility rates. They are dealing with costly regulations and a challenging business and tax climate that continues to hurt them and make things more difficult and less affordable for them. And the message coming from Albany at this time is, oh, let's just wait a little bit longer. We are working on a new tax to help. We are working on a bailout. And please remember, as you're finalizing these details, my colleague, for record level of budget and spending, more taxes, more debt, and bailouts, please, please don't forget, this is the people's money. It's not yours. And yes, of course, I will vote for this extender because we need to keep our government open and running. We need to pay our dedicated state employees who do a great job for us across the state in providing very valuable services to the residents of this state. We need to pay our Medicaid providers who are caring for our individuals who need our assistance. But voting yes on this 13th extender is not an endorsement of the process. We are not governing. We are running on the clock, out the clock, on a budget that the governor said was already done. And it seems like we're going to be dealing with another extender, number 14, later in the week. We really have to start asking ourselves, what kind of records are we setting and on whose behalf? I will vote yes, and thank you, Madam Speaker. Thank you again to the Chairman for your time and discussion. I appreciate it. Thank you, Madam Speaker, my colleagues. Thank you.
Mr. Pirazzolo?
Good afternoon, Madam Speaker. Will the Chairman's sponsor please yield for a few questions? Will the sponsor yield?
Yes, I will.
Sponsor yields.
Hello, Mr. Pretlow. How are you today?
I'm well. Yourself, sir?
Good, good. I'm going to start off with some information you probably didn't know. I consider myself a North Atlantic Islander. Are you familiar with what a North Atlantic Islander is?
That sounds like Staten Island to me.
There you go. That's exactly it. I was going to say, do you know what the Forgotten Borough is?
But you're already there with the Staten Island part.
I have a T-shirt, Statehood for Staten Island. I want to put it on eBay. It's very popular.
No, no, no. Just see me. Maybe we can work out.
It's brand new, unworn. It'll never happen, but I have it. So listen, I'm going to ask you a lot of these questions. I know that you're really not in a position to answer them, and I'm going to put out some numbers, maybe just for informational purposes, so I'm not asking you to verify whether the number is accurate or not. But the reason that I'm asking these questions today is because, you know, being an assemblyman, my only job really is to pass this budget, is to work on this budget. And there are some things I kind of want to put into the record, because we're talking about a $4 billion bailout. I know you didn't want to call it that the other day, but I can see it, and the rest of the state really see it as nothing else other than a bailout. But I just wanted to talk about some of that particular funding so I could put it on the record because a lot of these things, while I speak to you today on them, they may appear as an obscure line in a paragraph somewhere in the budget and not get the notice that I want to kind of bring to them today. So if you don't mind.
Well Mr Perrizola I would love to discuss this with you but unfortunately that not part of this bill in front of us So if you want to go on the bill feel free and the speaker may allow that but as part of this extender that we trying to get done so people can be paid, we have to have this bill passed almost immediately and signed by the governor so the controller can push that magic button so all of the electronic transfers can go through to the bank accounts So your staff and my staff and all the other state workers can get paid on a timely basis, which is just due Wednesday.
So you have me there, Mr. Pretlow. I cannot argue. So if I may then speak on the bill.
On the bill.
Thank you, sir. Madam Speaker, I'm concerned about some of the different things that are going on. And, you know, I'd like to know why we know that the city needs $4 billion. dollars because usually they say because it's a loss of receipts or over or under budgeting, but I don't know if that's ever been verified. So I would like to know how this term or this money amount of $4 billion, I have $5.4 billion, is happening. Some of the things that I'm most concerned about are a $2.3 billion restructuring and delaying pension payments. I know a lot of the unions have said that they're not concerned about that, but I am concerned about that. I know that the city last did it, I think, in 2013 with Mayor Bloomberg, but Mayor Bloomberg isn't the mayor. Mayor Bloomberg had significant financial experience, and I think people were okay possibly with going with that. But I can't speak on behalf of the people that this is affecting in a personal way. There's $508 million from delaying class size mandates. That does not include state funding. There's $500 million projected from a Pierre-Deterre tax. You know, to me, that looks like a money grab looking for a tax. We know we need X amount of dollars. This is how we're going to do it. There's 361 million assorted fiscal action adjustments. So it says unknown here in my notes because we don't know what that means, but we really don't know what that means. When the budget comes in, I bet we don't know what it means either. So I would certainly like to get more clarification on that number, whatever it may be, for the assorted fiscal actions. And, you know, I'm going to give an example of why I'm concerned, and I don't know if Attorney General James should be listening to this or not, but just recently the mayor announced that he was going to give $12 million from the Opioid Settlement Fund to different boroughs throughout the city. But what I didn't like about that and why I'm concerned about the budget is that he announced that the Opioid Settlement Fund would be creating 500 new jobs. That's not the purpose of the Opioid Settlement Fund. The Opioid Settlement Fund is not an economic boost. It's there to help people. It's not to create jobs, and it's not to be supplanted. It has to go to help people in need. So I would love it if the AG looked into that. There's also 150 million state school aid. That is state-funded. There's 300 million for youth diversion, prevention, and other youth justice support, state-funded. I don't have a problem with that other than I don't understand what it means. just like the other tax about fiscal actions. If we don't understand what they mean, then I don't know that it was necessary in the first place, and I don't know if any accountability is going to be held on how we spend that money. So one question I would like to ask to the state when this comes is, are we requiring any accountability to any of this money that's going down to New York City, which it's odd for me to say I don't know we should send that since I'm a recipient of that, but are we spending that money wisely? When we're talking about a lot of things for schools, you know, what happened in Minnesota What happened in Ohio comes up, where we have leering centers and just all sorts of fraud. So I would like some strings attached to all of this money, particularly if it's state-funded, that's going down to New York City so that we can know that it's actually being used to help those people and not for economic development to create jobs for the government that makes government bigger. You talk about the UPK for three-year-olds and the NYC two-year-old program that's coming into existence, I don't necessarily have a problem with that, but if we have to delay the class size mandate, then how are we going to do these child programs? If we don't have the schools and the teachers, we're going to have to open up leering centers. It's possible. So I have a lot of concern there, Madam Speaker. So I bring these things to point because I'd like to know that they're going to be addressed because we will be asking questions specifically about this in the state budget. And I'd also like to say that the fact that we're even considering this bailout to New York City makes me say that it must be very, very difficult to be the mayor and the governor of New York at the same time. because this is something that's completely unheard of in these numbers. The rest of New York State is certainly not happy with it, and I have extreme concerns of the strings, and we need to make sure that the money is being spent properly and not just being given because someone says we have a budget deficit. I'd like to know why we have a budget deficit. I'd like to know how we're going to fill that budget deficit. I'd like to know if the budget deficit came from because we brought in less receipts or we spent too much money, and how are we addressing those particular items, not just giving $4 billion? Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Thank you. Mr. Paul? Madam Speaker, can you please call the Committee on Banks to the Speaker's conference room? Banks Committee members, please make your way quietly to the Speaker's conference room. Banks Committee members, Speaker's conference room, Mr. Smith.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. On the bill?
On the bill.
I'll be very brief. tomorrow New Yorkers from across the state will join to vote on their school budgets. Unfortunately for school districts across the state of New York, they have no idea what funding they can expect from all of us, from the state of New York, from our tax money that's sent by the people we represent up here. How do I know that? Because we don't know that. I hope that my colleagues join me in voting absentee on our school budget votes. But I can tell you, I met with my superintendent immediately after voting on my school budget on Friday, and she was very dismayed. I represent some of the largest suburban school districts in the state of New York. They're looking at 1% minimum increases from the school aid runs that we received in January. Now the governor is saying maybe a 2% minimum increase. When we're discussing these budget, when we're having these budget conversations, there are a lot of issues that are impacting local government and particularly our school districts. The issue of Tier 6, perhaps lowering the age to 58, has a fiscal impact on our school districts. The electric bus mandate, if we do delay that five years, that has an impact. In that case, maybe a positive impact. However, when it comes to electric buses or all these other programs that we're discussing, depending on how a school district interacts with these things, such as, for example, the electric buses, if they contract out for services. They're already seeing an increase if they have their own fleet. I know of one such school district that on the ballot tomorrow is authorizing and asking for permission to buy nine diesel buses because their fleet their existing fleet of electric buses aren standing up And I believe they reported you know 60 days in the last school year their electric buses were not working. So I think that it's an abdication of our duty. I think that we all need to come together and really push a sense of urgency on this. I think it, you know, for the first time in memory, Our school districts will not have those numbers while they had to prepare budgets for the voters. They try to be as fiscally responsible as possible. But we're talking about millions of children across the state. Will they have the same programs as they had this past year? That remains to be seen. And I hope and encourage these conversations, and I hope that we can continue to deliver for our districts. But I have to say it's just very disappointing from where I'm standing to be able to go back to my school districts. And I think I probably share the feeling of a lot of people in this room that that is completely unacceptable. Thank you.
Thank you.
Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. The clerk will record the vote.
Ms. Walsh to explain her vote.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. So here we are again. I just wanted to really give a shout out and thanks to our rancor on the Education Committee for really saying what was on my mind as well. You know, I was just out socially last weekend and was approached by a school board member who said, hey, you know, do you think we're going to get at least a two percent bump in education funding? because that's what we factored in when we did our budget proposal, which is on the ballot tomorrow. And I said, I don't know. I don't know what's going to be in there or not. And then he was saying, well, as far as the – I've heard that maybe there might be a delay in the mandate for the electric school buses. You know, what do you know about that? I'm like, I don't know. I don't have anything to tell you. I've heard the same rumors, but I don't know. And we know that on many of these school budget votes tomorrow, they've got electric buses that are part of the school budget, the proposed school budget. So the longer we wait, the worse it is. I think I'm really glad that our ranker pointed those concerns out. I add to them, I'll continue to support this extension. But, you know, I was listening down the street, down the hall there in the Senate. But one of the members was saying the other day that a no vote was really the only thing that he could think of that would really express his dismay with the way that this whole process has gone. And, I mean, I hear him. But I will vote yes again this time. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Thank you, Ms. Walsh, and the affirmative. Thank you
Thank you.
Are there any other votes? Announce the results.
Ayes 130, nays 0.
The bill is passed on the main calendar, page 25, calendar number 216. Clerk will read.
Assembly number 8675C, calendar 216, Mr. Bronstein, an act to amend the penal law and the general business law. Read the last section. This act shall take effect on the 90th day. The clerk will record the vote. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Ayes 130, nays 0
The bill is passed Page 30, calendar number 309 Clerk will read
Assembly number 329C, calendar 309, Ms. Jackson An act to amend the mental hygiene law Read the last section This act shall take effect immediately The clerk will record the vote Thank you. Thank you.
Announce the results.
Ayes 132, nays 0.
The bill is passed. Page 32, calendar number 368. Clerk will read.
Assembly number 9274A, calendar 368, Mr. McDonald. An act to amend the general business law. Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. The clerk will record the vote. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you.
Are there any other votes Announce the results Ayes 132 nays 0 The bill is passed Mr Fall Madam Speaker can you please call the Committee on Consumer Affairs to the Speaker conference room Consumer Affairs Committee members please make your way to the Speaker conference room Consumer Affairs, please meet Chair Rosick in the Speaker's conference room. We're going on debate. Colleagues, page 28, calendar number 271. Clerk will read.
Assembly number 6666A, calendar 271, Ms. Callas, an act to amend the correction law.
An explanation has been requested, Ms. Callas.
Absolutely. This bill simply requires that the water testing that is done in facilities, prison facilities, correctional facilities, that they put the results of that data on the website for every facility and that if a person who is incarcerated or a staff person wants a physical copy, they are required to print it out for that person.
Ms. Walsh. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will the sponsor yield? Will the sponsor yield?
Sponsor yield.
Thank you very much. Yeah, so I just have a few questions on this.
Can we have quiet in the chamber, please? Thank you.
Okay, so you explained. It's a short bill. I mean, there's really not much to it. But I just want to ask you, does this bill change in any way the type of water testing that's being currently done? Will it change what testing is being done?
No.
Okay. Does the bill change the frequency of the testing at all?
No.
Okay. What is anticipated to be, like, what are the incarcerated individuals going to do with the testing results once they get them?
This is a transparency bill, so seeing the information may be helpful. There have been complaints from people that the water quality is affecting them in negative ways, and this will create transparency.
Okay. So how will the incarcerated individuals make the request for a physical copy of the testing results?
The same way they make any requests of their facility. They would put it in writing or request it verbally, depending on the protocol of the facility.
Is it true that incarcerated individuals are already provided with tablets or some other means of, you know, communication or search?
Yes, but they don't always have the Internet access.
Oh, does that depend on which facility the individual is in? Or which floor or which ward.
I have visited on multiple occasions, and there were several wards that did not have any Internet access while I was there. So it depends.
Okay. All right. So I noticed that in the memo of support, and I'm just looking at the second page, it said, quote, by ensuring that water quality information is readily available, the bill encourages correctional facilities to prioritize sustainable water management practices that reduce pollution,
protect aquatic habitats, and preserve ecosystems.
How is the bill doing that?
Transparency.
But how is it protecting aquatic habitats?
Because transparency often does create responsibility, and responsibility would lead to higher quality water that would be leaving the facility as an effluent, which would improve the impact on the ecosystem. Okay.
And then it also says that it will promote the responsible use of water resources, contributing to long-term ecological resilience.
So how does this bill specifically contribute to long ecological resilience That the same answer to the last question Through transparency I mean you not changing the type of testing how often it being tested or anything
You're saying that just purely through transparency, you're going to be protecting aquatic habitats, reducing pollution and preserving ecosystems? So this is why we do a lot of transparency bills,
because transparency does increase the responsibility, which does ensure follow-through on actions, which does impact the quality, ultimately, of actions that we take, this being one of them, so that is the premise of this. Of course, if we find, ultimately, when we're looking at the data, that it doesn't long-term have that improvement, then we'll revisit. We can have that debate again.
Oh, yeah, we could. Thank you so much for your answers. I appreciate it. Madam Speaker, on the bell.
On the bell.
Yeah, so I was just trying to figure out, because it just didn't seem like it really lined up to me. It seemed like the memorandum of support was really making a lot of promises. But the bill itself is really pretty simple. It's just saying whatever water quality testing is already happening, what's being tested, how often it's being tested, that's all staying the same. None of that is changing. All that's happening is that the people who work in the correctional facilities will be able to get a copy or be able to access it online, and so will the incarcerated individuals, which I don't think is a bad thing. I appreciate the answer to the question about I was under the impression that any incarcerated individual would already have a laptop, not a laptop, but a tablet and an ability to go on the doc's website or the facility's website be able to look up the testing without a need to request a copy of it. But, you know, so be it. If they really want a copy of it to see what they've got, or if a staff member does. I mean, they're all drinking that water that's in a correctional facility, so they all really do have – will have an ability now to know how those testing results have been coming out. So I'll support the bill. I just – now that I understand exactly what it's doing. So I'll be in support. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Thank you.
Read the last section. This act shall take effect on the 90th day.
A party vote's been requested.
Ms. Walsh. Thank you, Madam Speaker. the Republican conference generally will be in the negative on this bill, but there may be some exceptions and they may be voted at the desk right now. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Fall. Thank you,
Madam Speaker. The majority conference will support this piece of legislation, but those that would like to vote differently, they could do so here in the chamber. Thank you. The clerk will
record the vote. Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you.
Are there any other votes? Announce the results.
Ayes 97 nays 36 The bill is passed Page 9 calendar number 24 Clerk will read Assembly number 673A calendar 24 Ms Cruz an act to amend the criminal procedure law
On a motion by Ms. Cruz, the Senate bill is before the House, the Senate bill is advanced, an explanation has been requested.
Ms. Cruz. Thank you, Madam Speaker. the purpose of this bill is to fulfill the legislative intent of Section 710.70 by providing defendants with the possibility of an additional level of review on crucial orders regarding the suppression of evidence.
Mr. Molitor. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will the sponsor yield? Will the sponsor yield?
Yes.
Sponsor yields. Thank you. So it's my understanding that when a defendant is charged with a crime and they're arraigned, they are either appointed an attorney or they can hire an attorney. Is that correct?
Yes, either one of those.
Either one.
And then under the discovery laws of this state, the current laws,
the prosecution is required to turn over a number of things,
including material that may be the subject of a suppression motion.
Is that right?
That is correct.
I'm not sure where this question is going,
but neither of the last two questions have anything to do with the subject of this bill.
I would disagree.
Just give me a little latitude.
Okay.
Okay. So, and that discovery material has to be provided within either 20 or 35 days of that initial arraignment, right?
The answer is yes, and I'm going to again say your question has nothing to do with this bill.
We'll see. Hold on a second. So then the defense attorney, with all of that information, if the defense attorney believes it's a meritorious claim, can file a suppression motion asking the court to suppress evidence, right?
That is correct, and I'm going to again add, it has nothing to do with this bill, with the subject of the very specific issue that this bill is dealing with.
I disagree, but we're going to get there. I'm only a couple questions away.
Okay, looking forward to it.
So the defense attorney can file the motion, and then there could be a suppression hearing, and then the judge can decide whether that motion has merit or not, right?
And we finally arrived, correct.
Right. We're there. Now, in the intervening time period, either before that motion is filed or after that motion is filed,
The defendant can plead guilty, and at that plea, the judge is going to go over a lengthy plea allocution with the defendant, including advising the defendant that they may have a meritorious claim to have evidence suppressed, and that they're waiving that right by pleading guilty.
Isn't that correct?
Yes, that's correct.
And sometimes in negotiated plea discussions, as a result of the plea, the prosecution will require a waiver of a right to appeal. Isn't that right?
They can, yes.
Okay But this legislation this bill that before the Assembly would make it an automatic right of appeal for every suppression claim in the state of New York on every single case would it not That not correct It not It not correct It would make it so that the person still has to apply The same process you described earlier, that when you apply to a judge for the appeal, they have to determine if any of your claims have any merit to then move into review.
This would simply give, you might be looking at last year's bill, there have been amendments that we've made so that it becomes, instead of reviewed, it becomes reviewable.
So the person would still have to make an application to the court, and then the court would still have to determine that there's enough merits to move to review the application. But it says shale instead of may, right?
Upon the appeal raised by the defendant.
Right. So you still have to make the application. So in the case where a defendant pleads guilty and waives the right to appeal and then applies to the appellate division to have their suppression claim reviewed, this legislation will make it so that appeal waiver is invalid?
That's correct.
Okay. Thank you. On the bill?
On the bill.
So as I laid out with my colleague, there is a lengthy process in which the defendant can bring a claim to have evidence suppressed. And in New York State, we spend a lot of money on our defense lawyers, whether it's for assigned counsel or indigent legal services. Our defense lawyers are well paid. In fact, in my county, our public defender's office is three times larger than the district attorney's office. And not only that, but defense attorneys are given all of the discovery within 10 to 35 days automatically. So if for whatever reason a defense attorney is not bringing a meritorious suppression claim to the court and allowing their client to plead guilty, we should be asking for a refund because that is one bad defense lawyer. This bill, that's all it's going to do is invalidate negotiated plea agreements. And it's going to send these cases back to court, and it's going to waste a lot of time in the appellate division and in local courts. What we should be doing instead is we should be asking the defense bar in criminal cases to be doing a better job. So for all those reasons, I'll be voting no on this legislation, and I'll ask my colleagues to do the same. Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Fall.
Madam Speaker, can you please call the Education Committee to the Speaker's Conference Room.
Education Committee members to the Speaker's Conference Room. Education Committee members, Speaker's Conference Room. Read the last section. This act shall take effect on the 60th day.
A party vote has been requested. Ms. Walsh.
Thank you Madam Speaker For all the reasons stated by my colleague the Republican conference will be in the negative or take a negative position on this piece of legislation But if there are affirmative votes they may be cast now at member seats Thank you Thank you Mr Fall Thank you Madam Speaker The majority conference will be in the affirmative on this piece of legislation. For those that would like to vote
differently they could do so here in the chamber. Thank you. The clerk will record
the vote.
Thank you. Ms. Cruz to explain her vote.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. I just want to put a couple of things on the record. This bill was previously vetoed, and we amended it to make sure that we were addressing certain concerns that the governor's team had expressed. While we may not agree with them, we wanted to make sure that it was as clear as possible. We've met with OCA, we've met with the governor's office, and it is our understanding that OCA is actually in favor of the language change, which makes it not necessarily a guarantee, but an opportunity for people to actually exercise their right to an appeal. The other thing that I will add is that we have numerous, I think the last time I counted was four or five different appellate attorney associations who were supportive of this legislation to make sure that we are, again, protecting people's constitutional rights. Thank you, and I'll be voting in the affirmative.
Ms. Cruz, in the affirmative. Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.
Ayes 87, nays 47.
The bill is passed. Mr. Fall.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. We'd like to take up a couple more bills on the debate list. Can we turn our attention to Calendar 415 on page 35 by Ms. Tapia, followed by Calendar 408 on page 35 by Mr. DeLon.
Thank you.
Page 35, Calendar number 415. Clerk will read. Assembly number 9297A, calendar 415, Ms. Tapia, an act in relation to requiring host community benefits.
An explanation has been requested, Ms. Tapia.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill requires new data centers or data centers that span beyond 20 megawatts to fund a program to either provide bills credits for tax retake payers in his host community or to fund residential technologies that could reduce electrical demand It also requires the Public Service Commission and the Long Island Power Authority to commence a proceeding to administer this program and allow communities to indicate their preference for either billed credits or the installation of eligible technology.
Mr. Gray.
Madam Speaker, will the sponsor yield? Will the sponsor yield?
Yes.
The sponsor yields.
Thank you very much, Ms. Tapia. I appreciate it. Hold on, let me adjust this. So let me start off by your sponsor memo, and I'm going to go to the last paragraph in the sponsor memo. And it says, and you closed the memo by saying, In doing so, this legislation strikes a practical balance. It allows continued development of critical digital assets while protecting ratepayers, supporting clean energy goals and delivering tangible benefits to impacted communities. That's a pretty robust description of data centers. Agreed?
In doing so, this legislation strikes a practical balance. It allows continued development of critical digital infrastructure while protecting ratepayers, supporting clean energy goals, and delivering tangible benefits to impacted communities.
Correct. Would you agree that that's a pretty robust description of data centers?
Yes, I agree. We agree with that.
Critical data infrastructure, right?
Yes.
It's pretty robust. I would agree, too. So a negative vote on a bill like this may be, people may disagree with the parameters that we're going to discuss in this bill, but an affirmative vote in this would signal some sort of support for data centers. Is that correct?
Yes.
It is to make sure that the community benefits from all those plants that are going to be installed. Correct. So if members in this House support a bill like this, they're signaling support for data centers. Yes?
No, we support it for the community. But in order to get those benefits in the community, you've got to have data centers.
You've got to have the vehicle to provide those benefits.
Yes, yes. I understand what you're saying, but this is actually, it's for the community. It's not to benefit.
Okay, but you've got to get to the benefits.
Yes.
To get to the benefits, you have to have the vehicle, and the vehicle is the data center, correct?
Yes.
Okay, good. So if you're voting for this bill, you're essentially signaling support for data centers and the programs that you are proposing that they pay for.
Our goal is more to make sure that the community gets the benefit that they deserve.
That is correct. I understand what the goal is. And you have to have the vehicle to get there, which means that you have to have a data center in the community. Correct?
Is this the same? The community needs the benefit.
I'm still saying the same?
Yes I think I mean if we continue repeating the same thing I mean we go with the community You know that That an important point to stress That an important point to stress that I want to make here That we are supportive
Legislation like this signals that you want one of these in your community and you want the benefits that you're suggesting that they provide.
That the community would decide exactly what are the benefits and how they want the benefits.
We'll get to that. We'll get to all the benefits. So let me just ask, this bill does not ban CAP or put a moratorium on a single megawatt of data center capacity. Yes or no?
Yes.
It doesn't do any of those, okay?
Yes.
So it assumes data, and again, going back to the original premises, it assumes data centers will operate and will pay into a state-managed offset pool, correct? Is that a fair characterization?
Yes, that's correct.
Okay. We'd also, would you agree that data centers are providing challenges in New York State? They're creating challenges for grid reliability and residential taxpayers. Is that correct?
Yeah. not about the data center, what they do, it's about the community, how they're actually going to run it.
Right. So you want to propose community benefits, but we have to talk about how do we get those benefits. And how we get those benefits are acknowledging data centers. So we have to acknowledge everything about a data center, is that correct?
The data centers are going to do that. It should help the community, so it makes no judgment about the benefits or harms of data centers.
Yeah, if the data centers are going to build and are going to create the data in those areas,
I mean, they're definitely going to have to decide how is that going to work for the benefits for the community. And the community is going to have to say, they make the decision how they're going to use their benefits.
Correct. Correct. Okay. So do you know how many data centers or what the new load growth is projected to be in New York State?
It's hard to project, but it's going to be like in the 30s?
30.
Yeah.
30 what?
30 data centers.
Yes. So it's, well, it's not necessarily hard to respectfully disagree, and that NISO keeps a debt on it. So I believe there's, I could be mistaken, but 48 with 11 gigawatts are in the NISO queue right now. Okay, so let's just see. How do data centers, in your opinion, do they strengthen or weaken grid resilience in New York State?
It's not about the data centers, whether they're going to be good or bad. It's about that the community will benefit, have the benefit that they deserve.
Okay, I do understand the premise of the bill. However, it is
So data centers are the vehicle for the premise of the bill. So we have to continue to talk. I'm going to continue to ask questions on data centers because that is the vehicle to which everything in this bill operates from.
Well, what this bill does is it's actually talking about the community because the community are the ones going to be suffering in that case.
Well, they're going to be the host for the data centers, correct? Okay.
Exactly. So data centers are increasingly understood by utilities and generation developers as anchor tenants, predicting large load customers whose multi-decade purchase agreements for generation actually make new generation financeable. Would that be correct? Would you understand that to be correct?
This is not about data centers and their goder. They have a central community, so we need to talk about the big picture.
Yes.
Well, I'm not talking about the actually big picture.
I'm talking about, it's all about the community that they're going to be,
that's going to be their host for the data centers.
And again, right, I understand that. So, and again, we have to talk about how we get those benefits.
So, you know, they're anchor tenants.
They're going to be anchor tenants for new generation in New York, as well as transmission upgrades. This bill imposes new operational costs on those data centers. and in order to provide the benefits that you say that you list in the bill, we have to locate them. And when we're locating them, they generally do power purchase agreements. Do you think this bill would have any impact on the power purchase agreements that they're going to be signing?
It's not about that, no.
Well, it's not exactly about that.
Okay. Okay, so, yeah, but we still, again, going to continue to say we have to get to where the benefits are for the people, and we've got to talk about the vehicle to get there. There's a mechanism that's in place to get there for data centers.
Well, this is just like the benefits currently provided to renewable projects. It's almost the same.
To renewable projects.
Okay. So let's switch gears for a little bit here. So can you explain how this bill works geographically? For instance, a community 5,000 people versus a community 50,000 people?
Yeah, the Public Service Commission is the one who will decide that, like I said at the beginning.
So we can't tell, we can't predict how much that offset is going to be. The offset mechanism has got to function differently depending upon the size of the community. And we should be able to tell the public that?
It's going to be a public process and the people will be able to say exactly how they're going to and what is exactly what they want working with the Public Service Commission In here and with the Long Island Power Authority in Long Island Through what authority Which one
Yeah, Long Island, yes.
Yeah, the Long Island Power Authority is the one that's going to do it in Long Island, and here it's going to do it, the Public Service Commission.
Okay, so the offset funding that you're proposing, do you propose that it go to the authorities or do you propose that it goes to a community organization that can distribute it more effectively?
Yeah, it will have to go to the community, but the municipalities are going to make decisions in there how it's going to happen.
It has to go to the authority?
Yeah, the municipalities are also going to do it.
I'm sorry, could you repeat that?
Yeah, the municipalities will be the one that's going to do it.
But the money is going to the authority, is that correct?
The money is coming from the authority to the municipalities. The money comes from the data centers, from the authority, through the municipalities.
Okay.
And the municipalities are the ones who are going to give it back to the community.
okay so a small rural community upstate New York where a lot of these data centers are targeted to be located do you know can you describe what the community benefit would be and the offset would be for a small rural community not necessarily saying that it's going to one of the authorities and then it's going to, can you, can we get specific about how a small community hosting a large data center will benefit?
Yeah, the Public Service Commission is going to determine how that's going to work. And this is just like the benefits currently provided to renewable projects, the same process.
Okay. Okay, so does the Public Service Commission have the authority to do this right now versus this legislation?
It's very clear that they can do it.
Without the legislation.
Correct. Yeah, the legislation makes it very clear that they are the ones who are going to take that.
Let's talk about demographics again or geography again. Let's talk about that. Upstate New York, small community versus Brooklyn. Can you describe the benefits in the programming and how they'd apply to each community, small community, upstate?
Yeah, the Public Service Commission is the one who's going to be taking all those decisions, yes.
Okay. So do we know... All right, let's just... All right, let's see. How does this make New York State in terms of competitiveness for the investment versus neighboring states? Do we know what neighboring states are doing and how they competing For instance New Jersey Pennsylvania Ohio actively recruiting these data centers
Yes, it's going to benefit the communities, and I don't think the data centers are going to go away because of that.
Okay, so you don't think instituting an offset cost for programs does anything to make New York State less competitive compared to other states who may be incentivizing them to come and locate?
Yeah, this is just like the benefits currently provided by the, to renewable projects. It's the same process and the same way of doing it.
Okay, renewable projects, are they doing all the residential programming, heat pumps, and things that you're proposing?
They're providing money, yes.
Okay. Do you know what percentage of the offset is going to be proposed for these data centers?
Yeah, that's going to be determined also by PSC, yes.
So we have no idea what percentage you're looking at, what the compliance cost for the operational life of a data center is going to become?
Yeah, we don't know now, but that's going to be public information.
Okay. Okay. So have you consulted with... Excuse me. I have to turn this up and down so I can hear you okay. I'm not echoing my ears. So have you consulted with any economic development officials, IDAs, rural councils, economic development councils, local elected officials, who are actively or may potentially be wanting to recruit one of these in terms of the offset obligations?
Yeah, but I don't think, I mean, the PSA is the one who's going to make all those decisions and provide the renewable projects, the benefits, and the currently, yeah.
Okay, so local development agencies can do what they call HCA's right now, and they can do this very thing that we're talking about. Just the mere premise of them locating in the community, they can have a host community agreement that outlines the very things in this legislation that you're requiring. Do you think that's best legislated here when the PSC can require these and local communities can also require these? but we want to put it in legislation?
You think that's necessary? I think they're going to have to do it.
Yep. Okay. Okay, so how do we, other than the large premises of the programming that you're suggesting, we don't know how much the offset cost is, we don't know the impact to the individual rate payers in their communities, They're hosting these large facilities. Do we know whether this program will be effective? I mean, and how do we measure that? How do we measure the performance metrics here? And how do we vote on something that PSE is generally just deferring everything to PSE?
Yeah the program might be effective but I think I mean that we don know how that going to come out I sorry could you repeat Could you repeat that
He can't hear you. So say it again, the microphone. Take one.
Yes, yes, the program is going to be effective. We know that part.
Okay. How long do you anticipate the rulemaking process to take place?
We don't know. We don't have that number, no.
Okay. So you don't know if it's 12 or 20.
Probably 90 days.
Excuse me, pardon?
Well, after the bill becomes law, it's going to be 180 days.
For the rulemaking process to be complete?
Yes.
I've never seen the PSC move that quick.
Time will tell.
Usually it's 12 to 24 months for the PSC to make the ruleings.
We're praying that that's not what's going to happen.
So we're doing a lot of praying in this bill. Let me just say that.
At least we put it in writing so it could happen like that.
Okay. So, what about data centers that perhaps are under construction? Is it retro? Is it prospective? Retrospective?
What's...
This one?
It's a prospect. Yeah, this is only the prospective, you know that.
The numbers are never all just like it is. Okay. Are you familiar with Energize New York Development Initiative?
Yes, yes, we are. And the PSE is institute of formal proceeding on that?
Of course.
Okay.
Do you think that the Energize New York is similar to what we're doing right here?
No.
Okay. How is the PFC going to coordinate this and this bill, what they're doing under Energize New York and the ACDC Act that we passed earlier? Did we pass that?
Passed in committee. I think that they could do that.
What's that again?
I'm sorry. I think I mean that they could do that.
Okay. So data centers, by their nature, are instruments of interstate commerce. they are they don't abide by boundaries the information that they hold and send and transmit receive are you know throughout the United States throughout the world and so really they don't have any they don't really have any boundaries so do we know how the Commerce Clause in the United States the Constitution United States would pertain to this legislation?
We don't think that's a problem. We don't think that's a problem.
Yeah, we don't think, I mean, that that's going to become a problem, no.
I'm sorry.
Can you repeat?
I'm sorry.
We don't think that that's going to become a problem, no.
Think. We don't know.
But we, OK. So given the fact that the Congress has constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce, would you agree the state's power to regulate data centers is limited?
No.
No. OK. Okay, so if this bill gets challenged in federal court, what do you think the outcome would be?
Yes, yes, yes, yes. What's that? Of course we will win, my dear. We will be victorious. You know that. We will win.
So, let me see. So, I just want to kind of summarize everything here, what we've heard back and forth. The bill creates a program, no defined offset cost ratio, is that correct? No cost parameters, no sunset clause, no performance benchmarks. It discourages potentially anchor tenants for long-term contracts that will finance new generation transmission upgrades. It directs benefits, potentially greater benefits to other communities versus rural communities, potentially making New York State less competitive than its neighbors. duplicates a PSC procedure that has already launched, overlaps three on the federal authority for interstate commerce. So it raises serious questions. Can the sponsor explain, should we pass this bill today or wait for the PSC proceeding?
Yes, I disagree entirely. The bill makes sure that communities will get the benefits.
Okay. So, and again, I just want to recap. A vote in favor of this bill by its very nature, you would be supporting data centers in New York State because they're the vehicle that's going to deliver the benefits that you're suggesting here.
because we have all kinds of conversations going on.
There's bans, there's moratoriums on data centers.
Mr. Gray, I just want to interject for a moment. Just as a reminder, the purpose of our debate is not to characterize what a vote on the bill represents, nor is it to ask the sponsor to speak on behalf of the body. Thank you.
Thank you very much. just characterizing what I think this bill signals.
Okay, thank you, Madam Sponsor.
Okay, the bill is just, let me answer that.
Sure.
The bill is just about parity with data centers and renewables. That's what it is.
Okay, thank you very much. On the bill?
On the bill.
So we know that the growth of hyperscale data centers in New York is a real and serious challenge. 11 gigawatts in the interconnection queue, residential rates are up regardless of whether we have data centers or not. Communities across the state are grappling with that. Residents are grappling with increased power costs. The sponsor has a right to raise issues regarding that. This bill 9297 is a framework really without substance to mandate without coordination and this is state action that may not survive a constitutional review more more fundamentally this bill exposes a contradiction at the heart of our posture of this chamber we cannot in one breath propose a ban and in the next breath propose socializing costs such as this bill does It forces every member to declare. The communities I represent in upstate New York compete for these investments. The rate bearers who bear the cost of policies and the workers who are on these jobs depend upon projects such as data centers. They deserve clarity and not necessarily contradiction. There's a better path to a comprehensive regulatory approach that's possibly under the way through the PSC proceeding. And so I would respectfully encourage a no vote on this bill. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
Thank you. Mr. Paul Masano.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, will the sponsor yield for some questions? Will the sponsor yield?
Thank you.
The sponsor yield. Thank you, Ms. Tapia.
I apologize. I came in a little bit late on the debate. I'm sure my colleague covered it pretty well going into the second 15 minutes. I knew some of the questions he was going to answer. So if I do repeat something, I apologize. It's just some general, just from a perspective. I had a couple questions. First, and I think it probably might have been asked, the PSC, if they deemed this was necessary right now, they could implement a proceeding to go down this road. Is that correct? If they thought it was necessary.
Yeah, the bill is a requirement in the bill.
Yes, okay.
The PSAC is the one who's going to do it.
And you would agree, I've seen a whole host of different bills regarding data centers be introduced. I've seen, you know, the governor has to build your own proposal. You have your bill. There's another bill that would put a moratorium on it. There's a whole host of bills out there about data centers and AI. Isn't that correct?
Yes. Yes.
And it seems to me that we're taking like a piecemeal approach to this. Wouldn't it be better, given that there's so many different ideas and discussions and differences of opinion on this, wouldn't it be better to kind of maybe go through a proceeding and work with the PSC, work with stakeholders, work with the state, work with the agencies, work with utilities to kind of see if they can come up with some kind of plans and frameworks as far from a policy perspective instead of piecemailing, saying you've got to do a host agreement, you've got to do this, then we might have a moratorium. Wouldn't it be a better approach to kind of take that type of approach to a big issue like this, especially given the emergency technology that it is?
I think, I mean, that no, because, I mean, this bill is about communities, and we are just doing it right now. and we know that the municipalities are going to be collaborating, and the people, the community, are going to be also deciding what are the things that they want. So we're doing it now, so we have to finish it.
And I understand. And a lot of times when you have big projects come into a community, a lot of times they work with the IDAs, they do pilots, they do community-type post agreements. Anyway, when you have a bigger project, data centers, I would say, is probably a bigger project because it's using energy, it's using things. So wouldn't that, there's discussions already with host communities to put things in place, but this is kind of laying out specifically what they would have to do, correct?
Yeah. Yeah, this bill is about the community, the community gets the benefits that they deserve.
I understand that.
That's what it is.
I definitely understand that, Ms. Tapia, too. So is the goal of this bill, do you want to have data centers in New York, or if they do, you just want them to have these benefits provided?
Are you trying to restrict them Yeah this is about the benefits for the community that are going to be suffering from it So the intention of this bill is not to restrict data centers at all right Coming to New York? It's about just, yes, helping the community.
Okay. I noticed in your memo you talked about, in the middle, you talked about the environmental impacts, and you talked about how a number of these data centers are used in fossil fuels, which when I hear that, I think natural gas. And these data centers, you require power 24-7, just like other demands, like micron is going to demand power 24-7. Are we trying to ban them from using natural gas? Do you think renewable energy will solve that problem? Is that what the goal of this is try to encourage more renewable energy for data centers or we don't want natural gas to be a part of it?
Yeah, it's not. No, it's not about man or anything else. It's about the community.
No, I understand. Do you think these data centers can work on just renewable power? Do you think they actually need to use natural gas or nuclear?
No, this bill is not exactly about that. It's about the community, how we're going to benefit the community after this. that's offering with all the billions of dollars that those centers are going to be making.
All right. Thank you, Ms. Tapia. Madam Speaker, on the bill?
On the bill.
I certainly understand the intention of the sponsor. When you have these bigger projects come in, you want to make sure the community is protected. I understand that. And I think when we see bigger projects that happen, whether they're economic development projects, there's always an interest in protecting the community. When wind and solar projects come to the community, they look for benefits for the community, but we don't dictate to them what that's especially supposed to be. This is something that I think we should really kind of take a step back, because you've seen there's different proposals. There's a proposal in this house to put a moratorium. The governor's talking about build your own power. This is trying to say you've got to create these specific host benefit agreements, which the PSC is able to do right now if they decided that was necessary. The thing I get concerned about is these data centers are growing technology, And it seems to me it's basically just part of this is just to stop the use of fossil fuels or natural gas. And when you hear that, that just strikes to me so much for the all of the above approach that's been talked about by the governor and others. I'm very, very concerned that with this emerging technology and the opportunities it can create for our communities, this could be a disincentive for that type of investment. What we need to be doing is empowering to make sure our grid has the capacity to provide the power that businesses need, that families need, and the like. That's what we need to be doing. And when we look at things, when these businesses come to the community, they come with, they provide increased taxes, they provide jobs, they provide economic activity. I don't think there's much evidence that data centers locating next to people in those areas are increasing rates. The PSC determines what the rates are. The day ahead market determines what the rates are. And it seems to me like this is a discouragement of natural gas. One of the power provisions that I've talked about, I know the governor talks about build your own power. I'm just speaking for myself. I've talked to people in the data center industry. They want the power. A lot of them want to build their own power. if they say they need 500 megawatts of power instead of just granting the ability to do 500 megawatts of power why not explore the opportunity for them to build out a thousand megawatt power because we know there shortage and grid reliability we know there demand that needs to be met let partner with them and try to get them to build out that bigger capacity We need not to limit we need more natural gas more supply We need not to have the constraints on the pipeline. That's going to help with our rates. And when I hear, again, talking about natural gas, because that's what the memo talks about, less discouragement of fossil fuel. I remind you there's a poll that was conducted that 71% of New Yorkers don't want to ban natural gas, including 76% of independents. Two-thirds of New Yorkers want a balance between renewable resources and natural glass, including 74% of Democrats. So we've got to identify those things. We need to embrace this technology. We need to make sure our grid can handle these projects, like the Micron project. There's going to be extensive grid improvements that need to be met. It's going to need baseload dispatchable generation. That is only natural gas and nuclear for the most part, not wind and solar. And I think with these bills that we keep seeing coming out, these piecemeal bills, it's almost like a discouragement to investment in this technology when other states are looking to do that type of investment. And I just think it's more like picking winners and losers that we need to be more cautious of. And at the end of the day, this bill is not going to do anything to decrease rates for New York residents, families, and businesses. And I think it would be a better approach if we take these ideas and let's have a collaborative approach with this rather than a piecemeal approach. Someone does this, someone does a ban, all that doesn't merge together. So that's why I think it's imperative, maybe under the auspices of the PSC, working with utilities, working with the Economic Development Agency, seeing how we can address this growing emerging technology here in New York so we can embrace it, so we can benefit from the jobs, we can benefit from the taxes that are going to come in to the local community's property taxes, money that's invested in the community, providing those host benefits that will happen. And when you have these types of programs that come into the communities as well, when new development comes in, if there's upgrades to the grid that need to be made, the PSC already mandates that those companies doing the building have to pay for that. So I don't know if this bill is necessary, but we can take that into consideration as far as a bigger approach. But unfortunately, I'm concerned with the approach that we're taking on this issue. It is a piecemeal approach. Someone wants to do, like, you know, host a benefit agreement. Someone wants to ban or put a moratorium in place. We want to pick winners and losers. We need to expand our grid. We need to make sure there's a reliable source of natural gas supply, and there's no constraints on the pipeline that hurts that supply as well. There's so much more we can do on this issue to embrace this technology so we can capitalize on it, to grow jobs here, to grow business here, grow financial investment here, because we already live in a very challenging business climate already, and we already know that utility rates are going through the roof, so we need to do this as a balanced approach. Unfortunately, although I respect the sponsor and what she's trying to do with the legislation, I understand you want to provide those community host benefit agreements, but I think there's a better way we can address this issue, and I just think taking this step now alone without this bigger approach, This collaboration, I think, is not the right approach, especially when the PSC, if they determine this is needed right now, they can work through an order process that would work in a more feasible and a better way. So based on those reasons, Madam Speaker, I'm going to be voting in the negative on this legislation. Thank you.
Thank you. Mr. Foll.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Can you please call on the Judiciary Committee to meet in the Speaker's conference room? Judiciary Committee members, make your way to the speaker's conference room. Judiciary Committee members to the speaker's conference room.
All right. Thank you. Thank you. He's right there. Dan Decker.
Mr. Slater Mr. Speaker, will the sponsor yield for a few clarifying questions? Will the sponsor yield?
Yes, Your Honor.
The sponsor yields. Thank you very much.
So I just wanted to make sure I understood here. So when we talk about a host community who's going to have potentially a data center, as defined in the bill, the bill itself provides in lines 19 through 23 specific technologies that the data center would then have to fund. Is that correct? That's correct.
No, it's not. It's a choice.
The community's choice of one of those things. What happens, is that correct?
It could be a bill credit or a funded project. Or funding a project and only the projects that are detailed in the legislation.
Correct.
That's correct.
What happens if a community says that, in their view, this type of community benefit is not the type of community benefit they're seeking? Does the bill prohibit them from pursuing something like that?
Yes. They cannot do that. They do have money. Which is the credit also.
So I'll give you an example. One of the communities I represent, there was a natural gas pipeline expansion. And the administration of the town was able to work with the developer to build a public park. If the community says that's the community development that we would prefer, do they have the option under your legislation to pursue that rather than one of the technologies that are lined out in your legislation? Yeah.
That could still happen, but it would be outside this bill.
So they could do both, then, is what you're telling me?
Yes.
Understood Understood And in regards to the ratepayer section, can you explain to me again how your bill seeks to protect ratepayers if a data center comes to their community? of this.
Cost cannot be passed on the rate failures.
And that's determined by the PSC?
Yes. That's right now.
Is that correct?
Correct.
And so you get both. Your bill essentially assures that ratepayers don't have the increased costs of electricity passed on to them locally, as well as a choice of technology that the municipality can opt into.
Okay, cost of this and benefits can be passed on.
Cannot be passed on. I'm sorry, say that again?
That the cost of this benefits cannot be passed on. Passed on to the existing rate payer.
So if I'm a homeowner, I will not see my utility bill increase because of a data center in my community. Is that correct?
Because it's benefits, yeah. I'm sorry? Because it is benefits and that's why it cannot be passed. As the host community.
Does this bill infringe in any way on a local municipality's ability to decide for themselves
whether they want to be a host community? No. Does it prohibit a municipality from passing a moratorium on data centers so that they do not become a host community? No. So it continues to to protect home rule for municipalities to decide for themselves if an application that comes before them can proceed and ultimately be approved. And then it gives the municipality the ability and flexibility to choose the technology that it would essentially be invested in for community benefit. Am I understanding that correctly? That's correct.
And as we said earlier, it would continue to allow municipalities, if they wanted to seek an additional community benefit, they can still do that, whether that be improvements to parks or other infrastructure that a municipality may be dealing with. That's correct.
That's correct. Okay.
And can you explain for the LIPA program for data centers, what is the objective in that section of your legislation?
It's the same. It's the same as the rest of the state. It's the same as the rest of the state.
Yep. Got it. Yeah, it is the same as the rest of the state. Same. So just because, so the difference between LIPA and PSC, is that, am I understanding that correctly?
Yes, that's correct. So as PSC would be the one to approve for you know the majority of the state LIPA would be approving the benefit or the credit excuse me the credit for Long Island ratepayers You are right Very good Well thank you for the clarifying questions
I appreciate it. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Thank you. Read the last section. This act shall take effect on the 180th day. A party vote has been requested. Mr. Gindolfo.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Republican conference will generally be opposed to this bill. However, any member who wishes to vote in the affirmative may do so at their desk. Thank you, Mr. Foll. Thank you, Madam Speaker. The majority conference will support this bill. For those that would like to vote differently, they can do so here in the chamber.
Thank you. The clerk will record the vote. Ms. Glick, to explain her vote.
I want to just commend the sponsor for bringing this forward. You know, the jobs are there when it's built. When it's running, there's just somebody who turns on the light and turns off the light. So the job argument is really very limited to the creation. And there are many communities that are concerned about the impact on their area, water, air, increase in electricity rates, if these are not actually self-sufficient. And so I just commend the sponsor and vote in the affirmative.
Let's click in the affirmative. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Are there any other votes? Announce the results. Ayes 93, nays 43. The bill is passed. Mr. Fahl, for the purpose of an introduction.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. On behalf of all of the members, we have the League of Women Voters program participants and students that are here in the chamber. If I could ask for the students and participants to stand up. Some of them are here in the chamber, some of them are shadowing our colleagues or members in this House, in the LOB, in different areas. And the whole reason they're here is to understand how state government works, to understand the legislative process, and they come from all over the state. So if you could be so kind to welcome these wonderful students to the chamber and extend the cordialities of the House, Madam Speaker.
On behalf of Mr. Fall, the speaker, and all members, welcome young leaders to our Assembly Chamber, the People's House, extending to you the privileges of the floor. Hoping you enjoy the proceedings today. Thank you to the League of Women Voters who showcase and host this program every year, really providing an opportunity for our young future leaders to get bird's eye view as far as how the democratic process works. As you go through your day today, make sure you ask lots of questions. Be active participants in this process. One day one or many of you may be sitting in this chamber as a representative, but your voice will always be necessary as a citizen of our great state. So thank you all so very much for joining us here today.
Mr. Ra, for the purpose of an introduction. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have the privilege of introducing a few other of our honorees from Italian American Day here at the Capitol. First, I want to recognize somebody who is no stranger to those of us in the Italian American Conference. Dr. or Dean, I should say, Anthony J. Tambori of the Calandra Institute at Queen's College. Dean Tambori has been really a steady participant in the activities of our conference. He has met with us on several occasions about what's going on at the Calandra Institute, where they continue to promote the Italian language, teaching Italian. He himself has authored more than a dozen books and 100 essays on both subject areas in English and Italian, and is also the editor of more than 30 volumes and special issues of journals. He continues to promote the Calandra Institute around the state, and we are thankful for his work with the Italian-American Conference over the years. We also have joining us today Mark Coppola who is a director actor and DJ He over the years has acted in films like Apocalypse Now Leaving Las Vegas Bel Air and The Bling Ring He is a DJ down in New York City, and he comes from a family, I think, that we all know, who has made tremendous contributions to our society and to the arts. and we're happy to have him joining us today in the chamber. And then lastly, a constituent of mine, Kyle Palmieri, from the New York Islanders. He began his career actually as a youth in New York, in Smithtown, where he was born. He was raised in New Jersey. He played for many years for the New Jersey Devils before being traded to the Islanders. which we are very proud to have him as a member of the New York Islanders. And I have to mention, earlier this year when he unfortunately suffered a season-ending injury, he did what only a hockey player could do. He suffered a season-ending injury and on his way off the ice made a crisp pass that resulted in a goal and got an assist as he went off the ice. Only hockey players are tough enough to do that. So I ask you, Madam Speaker, to welcome all of our guests to the chamber today, congratulate them on this honor, and extend to them the privileges of the floor. Thank you.
Of course, on behalf of Mr. Ra, the speaker, and all members, we welcome our distinguished guests to the Assembly Chamber, extending to you the privileges of the floor, hoping you enjoy our proceedings today. It's always wonderful to see so many different guests come here to celebrate with us for Italian American Day and our festa activity. So thank you, Dean, Mark, and our Islander folks for being here today. We thank you so very much for joining us. Thank you. Thank you.
Mr. Fall, for the purpose of an introduction. Thank you, Madam Speaker. We do have a former colleague here with us today, also our former chair of Consumer Affairs, Mr. Michael Dendecker, who served many, many years here in our house. If you could be so kind to welcome Mr. Dendecker and acknowledge the great work he has done for Queens over the years,
it would be greatly appreciated. On behalf of Mr. Fall, the speaker, and all members, welcome back the Honorable Mike Dendecker to our Assembly Chambers, extending to the privileges of the floor. As you know, once a member, always a member. You have this glow about you, that retirement glow that looks so wonderful. So we're very glad to see you here today, and thank you so very much for joining us. Members, we're going back on debate. Page 35, calendar 408. Clerk will read. Assembly number 5989, calendar 408.
Mr. Dillon, an act to amend the correction law.
An explanation has been requested. Mr. Dillon.
This bill provides for the automatic issuance of identification cards to incarcerated individuals upon their release and requires the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to assist Mr. Gandolfo. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would the sponsor please yield for a few questions? Will the sponsor yield? Absolutely.
The sponsor yields.
But before I do, just seeing everybody for Festa when you're waiting to debate all day, it certainly worked up my appetite, so all I could smell was the food.
I think we have some cookies in the back. They're not perfect.
Can we have quiet in the chamber, please? Ladies and gentlemen, can I have a walk in the table?
All right, so just a few questions on this bill. So this would automatically have an ID card issued to an incarcerated individual upon their release?
Yeah, it changes the language from allowed to automatically required, yes.
Okay, so currently what is that process like?
Well, they currently assist. They do it now. I guess they work with motor vehicles to get their ID and all that, but it's not a mandate. This would codify the practice into law. The mechanisms of how it works between docs and DMV, I don't know, But I assume we, you know, DMV issues ID every day, and I guess it would be that normal process.
So currently, someone who's incarcerated would have to proactively request that this process get started, and they have that ID card ready for when they're ready to be released.
Yeah, it says allow, so it's not clear. You know, maybe they do, maybe they don't. this would clean up the language that was passed in the budget in 2022 and make it clear that we want it to be automatic.
Okay, so do most prisons, most of our correctional facilities, do they have people who work on this specifically as like a liaison between the facility and the incarcerated and DMV?
I assume they do. Without having the 2022 language in front of me, I'm not sure if it requires them to have someone specific, but I assume they do. Whether it's the same person or they vary personnel, I don't know.
Okay, now in the event that the facility is working on getting all this information together, working on getting that ID card ready for release, but is unable to produce it by the time the release date comes, what would happen? Is there any ramification?
Yeah, you know, in terms of, I don't know that there's been any difficulty in providing the documents. I think state DMV functions pretty well. Docs functions, you know, pretty well in this regard. We haven't heard of any problems, but I think what the focus of the bill was to clean up the language to make clear our priorities that we want it to be an automatic process.
Okay. And that was my main concern with the bill is that if there's an increased volume of ID cards that now have to be produced, if despite best efforts, they can't get it there on time for the release date for whatever reason, maybe it was on short or not.
I guess to the first part of your question, this was the original language came from the governor's proposed budget in 2022.
Right.
So I don't know that they're going to do anything that they contemplate that they can't complete in a reasonable manner and in a reasonable amount of time.
Okay. So I guess if there was any issue with producing them on time, that would, I guess, be handled internally.
Yeah, and then I could also say, you know, I'm not certain of this, but I haven't, and maybe others have, but I haven't heard of, you know, since its inception, any incarcerated individuals stating that they weren't able to get the identification in time at the time of their release.
Okay. So overall, just I guess the overall purpose of the bill, if someone who's being released from a correctional facility has an ID card, it makes them a little easier for them to transition back into their everyday life.
It makes it incredibly easier to transition back.
All right. Those were all the questions I had. Thank you, Mr. Duan. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Thank you. Mr. Durso.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would the sponsor yield for a couple quick questions?
Will the sponsor yield?
Yes.
Sponsor yields.
Thank you, Mr. Dillon. So if this bill was to pass, it would be required, correct, for all correctional facilities to issue an ID to any incarcerated individual that's being released?
Yes.
Is that for state facilities only, or would that be city, town, counties?
Only docks facilities. Only docks facilities.
Okay. And now with the language in it, it says they'll be required to give the individual this identification. Would this be a New York State identification card?
Yes.
Okay. And is it only if you are a New York State resident?
Yes. Yes.
Okay. Well, it doesn't say that specifically in the bill, so I just want to make sure.
it does say everybody's to receive an ID.
You can't receive a New York State resident ID if you're not a New York State resident, correct?
Yeah, I think this can—I see where you're going, but the way I interpret this, this implies only to New York State residents.
Understood, and that's why I wanted a clarification for the interpretation,
because, again, it says all individuals who are leaving the facility are going to receive that.
So my question is, if you are a non-citizen or a non-citizen of New York, Would you be able to get that ID?
Well, I mean...
Because in the language of the bill, it doesn't say no.
Well, that brings into other things, but I mean, without even going that far into it, you know, we also house citizens from other states.
Of course.
And I guess it's... This bill is not in the language of the people.
Yeah, so I guess the way we see it, this bill doesn't amend the language of the original program.
It just cements it to say that instead of it be allowable, that is, it's an automatic right.
Understood. I just wanted on the legislative record that it's obviously only for those who are legal residents of New York State are going to receive this ID. Is there any charge for the individuals who are receiving those IDs when they leave?
No.
Does New York State give out free identification cards to New York residents now?
I'm saying outside. So I assume you mean outside of?
Outside of correctional facilities I saying if I a New York State resident and I go to my DMV do I have to get charged for it I can I imagine there a charge I think I up for renewal so I find out
Just so you're aware, if you live in New York City, right, New York City has it where you can get a free identification card. Anywhere throughout New York State. That's the NYC ID card.
Yes.
The state has no sale. Right, the state doesn't have an equivalent.
So what I'm saying is those that are exiting a correction facility do not have to pay for state-issued IDs, but everybody else does, correct?
That is correct.
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Dillon. I appreciate that.
Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Pirazzolo.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will the sponsor yield?
Will the sponsor yield?
I don't know which way to yield. Yeah, I know.
Enter the microphone, please, Mr. Dillon.
That's all right. Just don't mind my back. I'll look forward. Yeah, no problem. Yeah, go ahead.
The sponsor yields.
Yes.
So I certainly appreciate the bill. I think that anything we can do when a person is coming out of a facility that might help them incorporate back into society, so to reduce their risk of recidivism is awesome. And I wanted to know, like you're doing this particularly for insurance. Would you know if offhand there's a program that can be started in any facility, that no matter whether you're a citizen of another state or an American or a New York State citizen, I'll skip the non-citizen part. where that process can begin six months before an individual is released. This way they can come out, not have to worry about doing it. They can come out with all the documentation they need. Does that exist? Because if it doesn't, please do it.
So I don't know if that exists.
All right, well, so I like your bill. If it doesn't, please come up with another bill that incorporates all that. Thank you. That's it.
Thank you. Thank you.
Read the last action. This act shall take effect April 1st. The clerk will record the vote. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you
Ms. Bailey, to explain her vote.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. To explain my vote, although this piece of legislation may be well intended, I think we're kind of missing the mark here. Having been an individual that worked in Department of Motor Vehicles and helped individuals try and obtain identification for various things, there are already means in place that ensure that many of the incarcerated individuals that are exiting the correctional facility in which they are in, that this is already being taken care of. And really, you know, trying to help individuals who are homebound to renew identification cards and such, you know, that's really where I think we should be putting our focus. I'm not sure why we are not charging a nominal fee for this. There is no other time in which an individual walking in to get identification is going to be exempted from payment. And I think that that would just add a little bit more credibility to the process, that it is something that is being done to help move on. But I just read this, and I really wonder at some point in time, what are we doing for other folks out there? Because this already happens. Thank you.
Ms. Bailey in the negative. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.
Ayes 129, nays 7.
The bill is passed. Mr. Fall.
Madam Speaker, if we can now take up on debate calendar 270 on page 28 by Mr. DeLon. Page 28, calendar number 270. Clerk will read. Assembly number 5957, calendar 270, Mr. Dilan. An act to amend the correction law. An explanation has been requested. Mr. Dilan.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill relates to confidential hearing records on appeal and the rights to an incarcerated individual's access to those records on appeal. Mr. Palmasano. Yes, thank you, ma'am. Will the sponsor yield for a couple quick questions?
Will the sponsor yield?
Absolutely.
Sponsor yield.
Thank you Mr Dilan First can you just really briefly explain what the genesis behind this legislation the need for it Well it a due process matter So currently on an original disciplinary hearing incarcerated individuals are not represented by counsel during that one
But in the case where there is an appeal that disciplinary record or something is on litigation, oftentimes those files are heavily redacted by docs, therefore making the defense of that appeal very difficult for an attorney to combat. So this bill would allow for those attorneys to have greater access to unredacted transcripts. Now, a lot of things that are in those transcripts do remain redacted, but it's really to allow for greater due process.
Can you just kind of maybe just explain a little bit more how the redisclose of the records process works with this bill?
So in terms of the prior, the only thing that I can say is that the items were heavily redacted when an incarcerated individual's attorney would receive a file from docs and a lot of pertinent information to an individual's defense was redacted and therefore made it hard. So what this would do is that it would allow for more information for that attorney to be able to see under the conditions, and it's included in the bill, that they don't redisclose. So there's a certain level of confidentiality that they have to maintain, and it requires them not to redisclose. And as most of the attorneys in the room know, that the ethical standards of an attorney as opposed to a person who is not attorney is obviously higher than someone who isn't.
On that part in the bill, I just want to ask a little bit more. I'll read the part that I want to talk about. It said, shall be provided with a copy of the entire hearing record, but shall not redisclose such records or any information contained in the records to any person not otherwise authorized by law to obtain them. The name, identification number, housing and location, or work assignment of any confidential informant may be redacted from such hearing record. The word may, what if it's not? Who makes that decision on whether that confidential informant is or is not redacted?
Is that, it says May, not? That discretion remains with docs.
Remains with docs, so they'll have to evaluate that and now it. Say that again?
I'm sorry, they'll have to evaluate that and make that determination whether that information on the confidential informant would have to be disclosed? That remains with docs, yes.
Is there any concern relative to the inadvertent release of information that shouldn't, even though, I mean, this is May, Is there any concerns or are there safeguards in place to make sure that does not happen?
So I guess it's still currently DOCS. That's the way DOCS does it now. DOCS has not, to my knowledge, inadvertently disclosed that information. They disclose very little information as it is now on appeal. so it'd be my strong opinion that that would be something that docs would continue to redact. So then we just pay it from your perspective that we just
entrust docs that they can handle
I think that's the concern that might be raised is the inadvertent release of information that shouldn't be released, and we just got to hope that they don't do that.
Is that probably an assessment?
In this case, not just with informants, but other pertinent information that individuals need on appeal. Docs has done a good job at keeping the information redacted.
Okay.
Thank you, Mr. Dillon. I appreciate your time.
Thank you, Mr. Comissional.
Thank you.
Mr. Gandolfo?
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would the sponsor please yield for a few questions?
Will the sponsor yield?
Absolutely.
The sponsor yields.
Okay, so thank you. I appreciate that. I'm reading the bill language here, and my understanding is that names of confidential formants can still be redacted. That's correct?
Well, what I would also say, if the language were different and let's say, for example, the language was a shall, the chances of docs inadvertently releasing some of that information that should have been protected still exists. exists. That would be either error, I don't think it would be a blatant violation of the law, but I think there are certain instances where, let's say, if there is internal cooperation as widely known, everyone knows that, you know, everyone inside the facility or in this circumstance where everyone knows who that third party is, you know, it would give docs discretion to share that information if they so chose. But the discretion remains with docs. And I think docs, you know, we trust them to, you know, protect the, at least at the central level, protect the information of the, of anyone who is an informant.
Okay. And so the attorney can't redisclose the information, whether intentionally or unintentionally, correct?
That is correct.
What would happen if they did? Is there any penalty associated?
Yeah, I guess it would be ethical consequences, potentially loss of license.
Yeah, potential loss of license. Okay, so that would be a professional matter.
there's no violation or criminal penalty of that? Yeah, they could face ethical disbarment.
Okay. All right. That was it. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Thank you. Ms. Bailey.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would the sponsor yield for two questions?
Would the sponsor yield?
Absolutely. Please don't mind my back.
You are absolutely fine. Just a quick question. As it pertains to these hearings, who is hearing this information? Who is hearing this case?
So it's an internal docs process. And it's something that docs organizes themselves. It's up to docs to organize it.
Okay, so you're talking the initial disciplinary hearing, is that correct?
the language in here indicates when it Say it again This is when you applying to the courts It started with DOCS attorney So I think the intent is the initial process before appeals within DOCS.
The appeal then would be organized at the court system. OK, so when I read the language in here, an attorney representing an incarcerated individual in any appeal of a disciplinary proceeding. So this is talking about redacted documentation during that appeal process. Am I correct?
Yes.
Okay. So is there a mechanism currently right now in the law that would allow those attorneys to obtain unredacted documentation?
No, right? That's why I'm doing this.
Yeah.
So currently no, that's the intent of this bill that's before the House today.
They could not request a court order?
They can always request, but then it's at the discretion.
So would a court order then identify specifically what information could be unredacted and who could receive that information?
I'm sorry, could you repeat the question?
So if there is a means currently right now to go forward with a motion for a court order to receive unredacted documentation, could that court order then be specific in what information is unredacted and who would have the ability to view that information?
So like you described in your question, it would be a motion practice order. Therefore, the consistency on appeal would be different from one incarcerated individual to another. What this would do would be to take the appeals process and make it consistent.
But then we would leave the discretion in the hands of docs as to what information is redacted or unredacted potentially?
Yeah, to the degree that's outlined in the bill, there's certain things that the bill allows to remain adacted, which I believe was asked by a previous questioner.
No, and I read that also.
I was just thinking, you know, we have the means currently in our court system that a motion, it's very often used if there's information that needs to be redacted or unredacted, if the attorney is not able to view that. And then the judge will come down with a court order that gives the specifics on what information is available and who can view that.
So I was just wondering if this piece of legislation was necessary or redundant to a process we already have.
Well, it's necessary because there's a lot of cases where those motions don't get granted, and attorneys have difficult times even reading the documents that are given to them by docs because they're redacted, therefore they can't mount a proper defense. And I would say that due process still remains, even if you are incarcerated. And there been problems on appeal where as I said earlier where attorneys can get the proper information to defend their clients And while they can motion to a judge to get it that can be inconsistent because it at human discretion
Thank you to the sponsor. Madam Speaker, on the bill.
On the bill.
You know, reading through this piece of legislation, I really do question, is it necessary? There's already a process in which this information can be made available to attorneys or to any other party that should be receiving it. Our judges in many cases have that means to do that. They know the information. They know the case before them. But in one breath we're saying we might not use discretion or something may or may not happen. But now we're putting it back in the hands of docs to maybe it gets redacted, maybe it doesn't get redacted. Who potentially has it? How is that information utilized? So I guess I would just question, do we really need to include this piece, this language in the law, or could we allow what currently is in statute to make a motion work in this case? Therefore, I will be voting in the negative on this piece of legislation as I feel it's unnecessary and redundant. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Thank you.
Read the last section. This act shall take effect immediately. A party vote's been requested.
Ms. Walsh.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Republican conference will not be supporting this legislation, but if there are exceptions, members may vote differently at their seats.
Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Fall?
The majority conference will be in the affirmative on this piece of legislation. For those that would like to vote differently, they could do so here in the chamber.
Thank you.
The clerk will record the vote. Thank you. Thank you. Mr Fall Thank you Madam Speaker would you be so kind to call on the Libraries Committee to meet in the Speaker Conference Room Libraries Committee members please make your way to the Speaker Conference Room Library Committee members to the Speaker's Conference Room. Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. Amen. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Mr Paul Thank you Madam Speaker Can you please call on the local government committee to meet in the speaker conference room Local government committee members make your way to the speaker conference room local government speaker's conference room. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. an introduction. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Speaker. On behalf of our colleague, Mr. Steck, we have some constituents of his here. That includes Simi Amari, who is a student at Shaker High School. And she is here with her family, along with the superintendent for the district, Kathleen Scales, and Asimi Amari accomplished something pretty cool and pretty significant by being the winner of the inaugural New York State Poetry Prize, and her selection will be published in the New York State of Poetry. If you could be so kind to congratulate Asimi, welcome her family, and extend to her the cordialities of the house. On behalf of Mr. Fall, Mr. Steck, the speaker, and all members, we welcome Ms. Amari and her family and superintendent to the assembly chamber, extending to you the privileges of the floor. Hoping you enjoy our proceedings today, and congratulations to you, our inaugural New York State Poetry Prize winner. This is a great accomplishment. We look forward to all of your literary accomplishments in the future. Congratulations to you, and thank you so very much for joining us today. Thank you Resolutions page 3 clerk will read Assembly No. 1373 rules at the request of Mr. Vanell. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim April 20th through the 26th, 2026 as Space Week in the State of New York. Mr. Vanell on the resolution.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For decades, New York State has been the silent backbone to our country's lunar and deep space missions. Over the years, New Yorkers have contributed significantly towards the development of space exploration. New Yorkers helped design and build the only vehicles to ever carry humans on the surface of the moon. The lunar module was designed and assembled by Grumman and Bethpage in Long Island. New Yorkers in Buffalo helped develop the steering system for the Saturn V rocket, along with the steering systems for Artemis II. Moog, headquartered in East Aurora, Buffalo, ensured that both the Apollo and Artemis missions reach their orbit safely. Kodak helped lunar mapping and the Apollo missions. Based in Rochester, New York, Kodak helped NASA select landing sites for the Apollo mission by providing high-resolution images of the moon. New Yorkers offer, New York State offers unique opportunities for the aerospace development ecosystem, and this initiative also spans the entire state's geography. We look towards the future. New York produces one of the highest numbers of domestic engineering graduates throughout the SUNY system and some of its private institutions, such as Cornell, RPI, and more. The local growth, grown talent pipeline is essential for New York's role in deep space exploration. We do not need to launch pads in New York, but we will have the intellectual and the industrial infrastructure. And so we are hoping to promote the aerospace industry in New York, and we thank the governor for recognizing this proclamation. Thank you.
Ms. Giglio on the resolution.
Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I'd like to thank the sponsor for this resolution. And I'd like to talk about American innovation, local pride in aviation history in Calverton in my district, and the legacy of Grumman. Many great things were created there, and many things could and should have been done better to protect the environment and the residents who surround the former aviation site in my district. But Calverton history didn't just happen, it took flight. The Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation was more than a company. It was a symbol of American ingenuity, determination, and excellence. During the height of its operation, the Calverton facility stood as one of the largest manufacturing plants in the world, a place where ideas became aircraft, and aircraft helped shape the course of history. Grumman's contributions during World War II were extraordinary. Their aircraft, including the legendary F6F Hellcat, played a pivotal role in securing victory in the Pacific. These planes were built with precision, resilience, and the spirit of men and women who worked tirelessly on the production lines. But Grumman didn't stop there. As Americans set its sights beyond the skies and into space, Grumman rose to the challenge once again. The company became the prime contractor for the Apollo Lunar Module the very spacecraft that carried astronauts to the moon surface during the historic Apollo 2 moon landing It is awe to think that part of humanity greatest achievement in exploration has roots on Long Island and in my district The Calverton site itself once home to the Naval Weapons Industrial Reserve plant was a hub of activity innovation and employment Generations of Long Islanders found not just jobs there, but purpose, contributing to something larger than themselves. This legacy is not just about machines or milestones, it's about people. It's about the engineers who designed, the workers who built, and the families who supported them. It is about a community that helped propel a nation forward. Today, as we look to the future of aerospace in the state of New York, we need to protect these jobs and create the workforce development that's needed in order to make it come to life in New York once again. So I want to thank the sponsor, and I look forward to working with him to making sure that we have defense contracts here in New York State and that we are moving in the aerospace direction. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Thank you.
On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. No, the resolution is adopted. Assembly number 1374 rules at the request of Ms. Reyes. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim May 15, 2026 as Water Safety Day in the state of New York. Ms. Chandler Waterman on the resolution.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise today as we recognize May as National Water Safety Awareness Month. Water safety is not just a seasonal concern. It's a public health priority, an issue of equity, and a matter of saving lives. I'm proud to support the sponsor of this resolution, recognized May 15th as Water Safety Day, and to stand alongside organizations that are doing the critical work of education, prevention, and community engagement. Today I introduce a mother, Aminatu Aminanoha, who lost her son Elijah Chandler due to drowning on re-speech. Elijah and his friend Christian Perkins lost their lives because they did not know how to swim. This month and with this resolution, we pay tribute to those who unfortunately drowned as we also look towards advocacy and solutions. I'm proud to invest in programs like the Free Learn to Swim program with the Hebrew Education Society in Canarsie area of my district and partner with Kingsborough College to do a free summer program at sea to learn about water safety on the beach. I also stand proud as a soror of the new Sigma alumni chapter of Sigma Gamma Rose sorority who have been at the forefront of this mission. SWIM 1922 continues the legacy by addressing the alarming disparities in the water safety education and drowning prevention, particularly within underserved historically marginalized communities. Through our dedicated dry and wet clinics, they provide comprehensive education that meets families where they are. Whether this is on land, learning, life-saving theory and CPR, or in the water, gaining practical swim skills. These grassroots efforts are vital in breaking down barriers to access and ensure our local youth are equipped with the tools to stay safe. Far too many families lack access to swim instruction and water safety resources despite drowning being one of the leading causes of accidental death among children. As we recognize Water Safety Day and celebrate National Water Safety Month, let us all recognize those organization advocates, educators, and volunteers who are ensuring that the more children and families have the skills and confidence needed to stay safe in and around water and educate our community on water safety. As beaches begin to open next weekend, I urge all New Yorkers to stay safe, listen to lifeguards, and find a free swimming program near you Thank you Thank you On the resolution all those in favor signify by saying aye Opposed no The resolution is adopted Assembly number 1375 rules at the request of Ms Salage
Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim May 18th, 2026 as Haitian Flag Day in the state of New York. On the resolution, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed, no. The resolution is adopted. Assembly number 1376 rules at the request of Mr. Morinello. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim May 18, 2026 as Italian American Day in the state of New York. Mr. Morinello on the resolution.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Today we recognize and celebrate the tremendous contributions Italian Americans have made to our communities, our state, and our country. Italian Americans help build the fabric of New York through hard work, faith, family values, and deep commitment to community. From small businesses and public service to education, law enforcement, and the arts, Italian Americans have played an important role in shaping our nation's success. This day is also about preserving traditions and passing cultural values down to future generations. New York is home to a proud and vibrant Italian-American community that continues to make a lasting impact every day. Italian-American Culture Day is an opportunity to honor the sacrifices of past generations while accomplishing and celebrating the accomplishments of today. Family perseverance and pride in one's roots remain central value that continue to strengthen our communities. I'm proud to recognize Italian American Heritage and Culture Day and celebrate the generations of Italian Americans whose hard work, traditions, and commitment to family and community have helped shape New York and our nation. Throughout history, Italian Americans have made lasting contributions in public service, business, education, the arts, and countless other fields, leaving an enduring impact on communities across New York State and beyond. This day serves as an important reminder to honor the legacy, preserve those traditions, and recognize the values of faith, perseverance, and service that continue to inspire future generations. Thank you.
Thank you. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. No. The resolution is adopted. Assembly number 1377 rules at the request of Ms. Rajkumar. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim May 29, 2026 as Mount Everest Day in the state of New York. On the resolution, All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. No, the resolution is adopted. Assembly number 1378, rules at the request of Ms. Buttonshaw. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim May 17th through the 23rd, 2026 as Eosinophil Awareness Week in the state of New York. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. No, the resolution is adopted. Assembly number 1379 rules at the request of Mr. McDonald. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim May 2026 assistance Fibrosis Awareness Month in the state of New York. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. No, the resolution is adopted. Assembly number 1380 rules at the request of Mr. Ekas' legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim May 2026 as Foster Care Month in the state of New York. Mr. Ekas, on the resolution.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Having had 13 foster brothers and sisters growing up, I can tell you that the fostering program here in New York saves literally tens of thousands of New York children, giving them an ability at a full life and actually achieving and getting ahead. It is my hope that everybody here will vote yes on this resolution. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Thank you. Mr. Carroll on the resolution.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. I stand in support of this resolution and thank the sponsor for recognizing the special people that foster parents are. They are heroes among us. They create not just a stable, safe environment, but they create a place filled with love and stability that these children so dearly need. So I want to thank him for it. I also want to recognize two foster parents who I'm very close with, Dan Johnson and his wife, Kim, who some of you know, who work with my office. But they have four foster children in their home. And I know that on a day-to-day basis, they give those children so much love, it's heartwarming. And I know also there's been times that at noon on a day, they'll get a phone call about a child in need, and by dinner time that child is at their table enjoying a warm meal with the family So thank you to all the foster parents We indebted to their service Thank you Thank you On the resolution all those in favor signify by saying aye
Opposed. No, the resolution is adopted. Assembly number 1381 rules at the request of Mr. Alvarez. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim August 16, 2026 as Hispanic Media Day in the state of New York. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed, no. The resolution is adopted. Assembly number 1382 rules at the request of Mr. P. Carroll. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim August 22, 2026, as Model Aviation Day in the state of New York. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed, no. The resolution is adopted. Assembly number 1383 rules at the request of Mr. Brabenek. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim September 17th through the 23rd, 2026 as Constitution Week in the State of New York. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. No, the resolution is adopted. Assembly number 1384 rules at the request of Ms. Pfeffer Amato. legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim October 15, 2026 as Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day in the state of New York On the resolution all those in favor signify by saying aye Opposed No the resolution is adopted Mr. Fall.
Madam Speaker, do we have further housekeeping or resolutions?
We have no housekeeping, but several resolutions before the House without objection. These resolutions will be taken up together. On the resolutions, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed, no. The resolutions are adopted. Mr. Fall.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. On behalf of our Chair for the Majority Conference, Ms. Clark, I am proud to announce there will be an immediate conference following session in the Speaker's Conference Room. Immediate Majority Conference in the Speaker's Conference Room in the adjournment of session.
Mr. Fall.
I now move that the Assembly stand adjourned and that we will reconvene at 10 a.m. Tuesday, May 19th, tomorrow being a session day.
10 a.m. tomorrow. I'm Mr. Files' motion. The House stands adjourned.
Thank you Thank you. Thank you.