Senate Floor Session — Regular Session

The Senate will come to order. I ask everyone present to please rise and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. (Whereupon, the assemblage recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.)

Reading of the Journal.

Without objection, the Journal stands approved as read. Presentation of petitions. Messages from the Assembly. The Secretary will read.

So ordered. Messages from the Governor. Reports of standing committees. Reports of select committees. Communications and reports from state officers. Motions and resolutions. Senator Gianaris.

Good afternoon.

The Secretary will read.

Move to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed.

Ayes, 52.

I offer the following amendments.

Amendments are also offered to the following Third Reading Calendar bills: By Senator Rivera, page 20, Calendar 590, Senate Print 614A; By Senator Brisport, page 27, Calendar 727, Senate Print 8204.

I now move to adopt the Resolution Calendar, with the exception of Resolutions 1845, 1847, 1934, 1961, and 1981.

Opposed, nay. (No response.)

Please call on Senator Mayer for an introduction.

Thank you, Mr. President. I rise today to proudly introduce a terrific group of students from my district who came to Albany as part of the Voices Unfiltered policy program at the YWCA of White Plains and Central Westchester. These students, if you saw their work, if you came between the LOB and where security is, you would see they shared their research, their very substantive policy proposals, and their advocacy campaigns with legislators and staff. Hopefully you have had the opportunity to see their work today, but their projects tackle critical issues, including the number of unhoused students, housing affordability, and support for our immigrant neighbors. I continue to be impressed by their creativity, their thoughtfulness, and their deep commitment to addressing the challenges facing all of our communities. Programs like this are so important because they empower young people to engage directly in the policymaking process and make their voices and opinions heard. New York's youth bring powerful voices and unique perspectives, and we honor them today. Adam Munoz, Aiden Munoz, Austin Munoz, Benjamin Elkin, Ina Borja, Morgan Bowman, Oliver Chow, Caileigh Coffey, Juliet Anderson Rosen, Marabel Cedeno and Svara Gawde -- along with their chaperone, Lesley Mazzotta -- are here today in the gallery. And I would ask that you extend them all the privileges of the house, welcome them to Albany, and thank them for their work, being civic participants at this young age. Thank you, Mr. President.

Senator Gianaris.

The Secretary will read.

Senator Cleare on the resolution.

To the Consul General, the president of the Senegalese Association, and to our guests from the mighty nation of Senegal, we celebrate your independence and we welcome you to the Senate. I extend to you all of the privileges and courtesies of this house. Please rise and be recognized. (Standing ovation.)

Opposed, nay. (No response.)

Mr. President, let's move on to Resolution 1981, by Senator Sanders. Read its title and call on Senator Sanders, please.

Resolution 1981, by Senator Sanders, memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim April 28, 2026, as MWBE Advocacy Day in the State of New York.

Thank you, Mr. President. A pillar of the American dream is the pillar of equality of opportunity, equality of opportunity. Basically that means that, as we understand it, a person who works hard, plays by the rules, and invests their time and treasure has the same opportunity to make it big in America, to get to the American dream. Sadly, this is really more dream than reality -- not even in New York State. One example of this is that more than 54 percent of New York State is composed of women and people of color. Of the $160 billion or more budget that New York State has, the state share of MWBE has been $3 billion. Now, I'm not the world's greatest mathematician, but that does not sound like 54 percent or anywhere close to it. Yet this meager amount even troubles some. We have an ill wind coming out of D.C. that says that this is too much, that this is not fair and somehow this threatens something -- they never really say what. But we in the Empire State have taken a different position. We say that we are going to stand for all, that we're going to fight and make sure there's equality of opportunity, that everyone gets a fair chance at competing here. We in the Empire State are not going to let these ill winds, this foul-smelling wind, determine what we're going to do here. And I want to take a moment to praise the Governor and to praise this body for standing firm on this. Now, MWBE Day is a day where we get to speak and read that this is part of New York, that everybody here is part of the great culture that we call New York. And we have some of the greatest heroes of MWBE here today. We have -- and I will only read a couple of names, because if I go further we will be here for quite a while. I would not do right if I didn't speak of Jason Clark and Dr. Tammy Pate and Carla Hernandez and Michael Garner and of course the New York Women's Chamber of Commerce and others. Mr. President, I would like for us to give these great guests and this great day the benefit of this great chamber and to reward them for their great efforts. I thank you, and I thank this great chamber for allowing this day to happen. Thank you, sir.

The question is on the resolution. All those in favor please signify by saying aye. (Response of "Aye.")

The resolution is adopted. Senator Gianaris.

The Secretary will read.

Senator Cleare on the resolution.

Thank you, Senator Cleare. Senator Gounardes on the resolution.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Webb on the resolution.

Thank you, Senator Webb. Senator Martinez on the resolution.

Thank you, Senator Martinez. Senator Sanders on the resolution.

His home was in Queens. His home was in St. Albans, as a matter of fact. That perhaps this is the soil that gave him the supreme love that we all are speaking of. Perhaps this is where he was able to bring it together. And I invite all of you to discover what John Coltrane discovered, that there's something godly about Queens and that we all should go there. Jazz is noted by many different things. Improvisation is one of the most important things to jazz. And a good jazz concert, you never hear the music the same way twice. Unlike other music. You never are hearing the music the same way twice. You're always going to hear it slightly different or sometimes radically different, depending on your album, depending on what the feel of the day is. John Coltrane took jazz and took it to just a whole 'nother level that we frankly have yet to figure out where it is. People have branched off -- many people have branched off from him and have gone in so many different ways. The Mahavishnu Orchestra quickly comes to mind. And others just gone all over the place with jazz. So I invite everyone to find two different things. First, of course, to find yourself in jazz. John Coltrane is a great way to start. But jazz is so wide, it has room for everyone. And another place that has room for everyone is of course Queens. So find yourself in Queens also, because you'll fit in well with John Coltrane. Thank you very much. I vote yes.

Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to thank Leader Stewart-Cousins, Senator Martinez for being so gracious, Senator Cleare for sharing her views from Harlem, and Senator Gounardes and Senator Webb and Senator Sanders. We talk about the soil that was rooted, but we're going to talk about the soil that John Coltrane came from. He was born in Hamlet, North Country, raised in High Point, which is my state. This one's for North Carolina -- come on and raise up. And North Carolina raised up one of the true legends in music -- not just jazz music, Mr. President, in music. In 40 years this man had created an art form that, as Senator Sanders indicated, has never been replicated. The precision or imprecision in which he's able to play -- I'll get to hip-hop in a second, because there is a fusion. But Rakim noted, he borrowed his delivery when he heard John Coltrane play two notes at the same time. So he pushed the boundaries of music, not just jazz music. And he did a lot of great things. He said, You know what, Sound of Music, but I'm going to make it soulful, with his re-interpolation of "My Favorite Things." "Giant Steps," one of my favorite songs, the frenetic energy. And I would imagine you'd never hear that song played twice, just the frenetic energy. Not so mellow, but mellow at the same time. "Mr. P.C." "A Love Supreme," of course. But, Mr. President, my favorite Coltrane song was "Alabama." Relatively short in comparison to the rest of his magnum opuses. But it plays like the soundtrack to Black Americans because it was, in fact, part of the soundtrack to Black America. It was inspired by the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing. And he actually, without words, Mr. President, took the same rhythm of Dr. King's eulogy and played the sax in that form. That's not genius, that's beyond genius, Mr. President. You know, I learned a lot about jazz music from my dad. And in preparing for this resolution, I listened to a lot of Coltrane over again. And, you know, growing up you don't know the names of the songs, but you know you've heard them quite a few times. So I have to make sure I give due notes to my dad. And now, speaking of him, he talked about growing up in Carolina. That was the first tenor man that he saw that inspired him. And he listened to Blue Train, which was his favorite song. So what my dad says is the seminal song of jazz music, Blue Train. WBGO and Jazz Mobile and all of the places that we've heard jazz growing up, so important to our culture. Hip-hop and jazz, Mr. President, in my opinion are the greatest American art forms. You can argue with me if you wish; I don't think you'll be successful. "Amen" was sampled by Lords of the Underground's "Chief Rocka." "Functional," with Thelonious Monk, was sampled in Method Man. As I mentioned, Rakim, one of the greatest MCs of all time, was a saxophone player in his youth, and he patterned his rhymes -- his flow, one of the most legendary flows in hip-hop history, after the way that Coltrane played the saxophone. Mr. President, there's so much that we can learn. As Senator Gounardes said earlier, if you have not listened to Coltrane, I would implore you -- I'd wonder what you're doing, but secondly, I'd implore you to listen. You can go on whatever streaming service of your choice. I'm not going to advertise for them. But I want you to go on there and pick any Coltrane song, and you will be satisfied. I just want to make sure we recognize the guests that we have who continue to help bring jazz music at a major level: Mr. Charles Wadelington, from Universal Records, and Ken Druker, the senior vice president of jazz development at the Verve Label Group, the preeminent jazz label of our time. And recognize -- even though that his family was supposed to be here, I'm going to recognize them for all that they do to continue the legacy: Ravi Coltrane, Michelle Coltrane, and Oran Coltrane, his children; his late wife, Alice Coltrane, and his late son, John Jr. And I want to leave us with a quote from John Coltrane in 1966. He said: "I know that there are bad forces, forces that bring suffering to others and misery to the world. I want to be the opposite force. I want to be the force which is truly for good." He was truly for good, Mr. President. May his legacy live on. And on his 100th birthday, we celebrate one of the greatest to ever pick up a sax, Mr. John Coltrane. I vote aye on the resolution, Mr. President. And please recognize our guests.

The question is on the resolution. All those in favor please signify by saying aye. (Response of "Aye.")

The resolution is adopted. Senator Gianaris.

Senator Harckham for an introduction.

Thank you, Senator Harckham. To our guests from the Sing Sing Museum, we thank you for coming up here and continuing to impart knowledge upon us. We welcome you on behalf of the Senate. We extend to you all the privileges and courtesies of this house. Please rise and be recognized. (Standing ovation.)

Now let's take up Resolution 1934, by Senator Serrano, read its title and call on Senator Serrano, please.

Resolution 1934, by Senator Serrano, recognizing May 2, 2026, as I Love My Park Day in the State of New York.

Thank you, Mr. President, for hearing me on this resolution. I would like to thank the Senate and my colleagues for adopting this important resolution today recognizing Saturday, May 2, 2026, as I Love My Park Day in the State of New York. I Love My Park Day is a day where everyone can become a steward of their own parks and open spaces. There is always a tremendous amount of sponsorship and volunteers for this vital cleanup. We should treasure our parks and historic sites every day. New York has the best parks system in the nation. New York's public lands and parks are vital resources that shape communities, support wildlife habitats, and benefit both physical and mental health. The safeguarding of these spaces is paramount, as they provide opportunities for everyone to explore, play, wonder, unwind, learn and find inspiration. My colleagues have heard me speak on both the economic and mental health benefits that access to open spaces offers, as well as the lifelong lessons that environmental stewardship, learning to swim, and exposure to the natural world around us provide for people of all walks of life. I would like to thank our parks friends groups, the office of parks, recreation and historic preservation, DEC, and the parks advocates who continue to be fantastic stewards of our state parks and historic sites. Thank you, Mr. President, for hearing me on this resolution, and I thank my colleagues for supporting this today. Thank you.

Opposed, nay. (No response.)

And now it's time for Resolution 1961, by Senator Martinez. Please read that resolution's title and call on Senator Martinez.

Resolution 1961, by Senator Martinez, memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim April 28, 2026, as Animal Advocacy Day in the State of New York.

Thank you, Mr. President. I rise today on this fun day that we have here in our State Capitol, and that's Animal Advocacy Day. I also want to thank Senator Hinchey, our chair of Ag & Markets, for continuing this tradition that has been happening here in the state Capitol for 15 years. And it serves as a tradition to provide our state's animal ambassadors an opportunity to meet with one another and with their elected officials for policies to protect these creatures. This year I am proud to sponsor this resolution, joining a bipartisan legacy of respect and support for those who literally do not have a voice. Today many of us had the opportunity to meet with the people, the organizations who are speaking on their behalf. They came asking that we act on bills pending before us here in Albany to protect the animals both domesticated, wild, those on land, air and sea, which complement our time here on earth. Bills such as 197, Tucker's Law, would allow greater judicial discretion and order consecutive and concurring sentences when an individual is convicted of multiple counts of aggravated cruelty. Bill Number 252, which would prevent wild and exotic animals from being imported, sold and owned. No animals should be removed from their native habitat for the purpose of profit. And for those who visited the Well, I'm sure you saw an octopus around. You didn't get one? Well, every elected should have received one of these. All right, talk to me. But this bill, what it would do, it would prohibit the importation and the environmentally damaging octopus farming. Now, it is not time for us to roll over on these important issues that we protect animals within our state from being abused, killed, as a result of willful negligence and literally just deliberate viciousness against our animals. I thank the leader, my colleagues, all the advocates that were here today for really showing us that animals tend to be a part of our family sometimes. And in honor today, too, of the package that we are about to pass, we also must recognize that some of these animals are also family, and many of our women and men who are victims of domestic violence sometimes do not leave their environment because they do not have a place to go with their animal. So aside from being Animal Advocacy Day and supporting victims of domestic violence, I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this resolution. And thank you for the day.

Opposed, nay. (No response.)

Okay, let's take up previously adopted Resolution 1827, by Senator Webb, read its title and call on Senator Webb, please.

Resolution 1827, by Senator Webb, memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim March 2026 as Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder Awareness Month in the State of New York.

Thank you, Mr. President. I rise to of course thank our Majority Leader for supporting this important resolution to proclaim March 2026 as Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder Awareness Month in the State of New York. This condition, also known as NMOSD, is a very rare autoimmune disease of the central nervous system that attacks the optic nerve, spinal cord, and in some cases the brain stem. NMOSD is often misdiagnosed, and every delay in diagnosis can carry significant and devastating consequences. A single relapse could mean permanent loss of vision, mobility, and independence. I think today of a young man named Ni, who's a constituent from my district who is navigating right now this diagnosis with remarkable resilience. Imagine being a young person pursuing your education and building your future when suddenly your body begins to turn against you. Your vision changes. Your strength fades, and your search for answers is inconclusive. That is the reality for those living with NMOSD. Like so many others, Ni's journey has been filled with uncertainty, setbacks, and challenges that no person should have to face, but he continues to push forward, holding on to hope and showing strength in the face of a disease that can change lives in an instant. In 2022, there were about 22,000 individuals living with NMOSD in the United States. Studies show that up to 90 percent of those diagnosed are women, and that NMOSD is more prevalent among those of African or East Asian descent. We must continue to invest in research and make space in our healthcare system for rare diseases that often go unseen. We also have to ensure that patients have access to timely, accurate diagnoses, specialized care, and treatments that can prevent further harm. This resolution recognizes individuals like Ni and the families who walk in this path alongside their loved ones. Ni, we recognize your strength and, to all those who are impacted by this condition, your resilience and your courage. And we commit ourselves to ensuring that no one facing this disease or any other underrepresented health condition feels invisible, because rare should never mean forgotten. Thank you to Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins for her support. I am very proud to be voting in favor of this resolution, and I hope my colleagues will join me in voting aye and recognizing this month. Thank you, Mr. President.

And lastly, but not least, previously adopted Resolution 1399, by Senator Persaud. Read that resolution's title and recognize Senator Persaud, please.

Resolution 1399, by Senator Persaud, memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim April 29, 2026, as Denim Day in the State of New York.

Thank you, Mr. President. Today I rise to speak on Denim Day, as I usually do. As you know, we stand today in solidarity with survivors of sexual violence and reaffirm a simple but powerful truth: No one ever asked to be harmed, and no one should ever be blamed for experiencing this harm. April is considered Sexual Assault Awareness Month. But we should not have to speak about sexual assault awareness, because it's something that should never happen. Denim Day originated in response in 1998, because of an Italian court's decision. It overturned a rape conviction, and the reason for them overturning the rape conviction was because the person who was raped was wearing tight denim. And so the judges, in their infinite wisdom, implied that because the person was wearing these tight denims, that she had had to help the person who violated her. And they threw out that conviction, and the person walked free. The young woman was devastated, as anyone should be, because she was violated. So in response to that decision, women in the Italian Parliament, the next day they all wore jeans in solidarity with the victim. Today, across the world, we wear jeans. And it will be tomorrow, so anyone who wants to wear jeans tomorrow -- not in the chamber, but anyone who wants to wear jeans tomorrow, take your picture to show solidarity with sexual assault victims. April 29th is the day we wear jeans to show that we will not tolerate sexual assault, sexual violence. It is unacceptable. Sexual violence is not an abstract issue in our communities. Survivors are our neighbors, they're our relatives, they're our friends, they're our coworkers, they are people that we see on a daily basis. And many of them are afraid to speak about the violation that's occurred to them. It also affects people from every background. Sexual assault, sexual violence does not discriminate. And so again, we ask that we stand in solidarity with sexual assault victims. But we have to take action. As a state, we have a responsibility to ensure that survivors have access to services, trauma-informed care, and meaningful pathways to justice. We must also continue to strengthen partnerships with our community-based organizations and invest in our prevention efforts. Prevention starts early. Let's have those early conversations. Your voice matters. Please, if you hear of someone who has suffered a sexual assault, don't turn your back on that person. Have the courage to speak up on their behalf. To every survivor, we want them to know, their voice matters. We respect them. We support them. And we will do everything in our power to ensure that it never happens to another person. On Denim Day, again, I encourage you to do more than just wear your denim, but to speak up -- speak up, speak out, be supportive. Again, I want to thank Leader Stewart-Cousins and all of you in this chamber, all of you, my colleagues, who continue to support this resolution every year that we bring it to the floor. Because sexual assault, sexual violence, should not be tolerated, and we should not hide from the realities of what's occurring. So again, I thank you all for your support, and I vote aye. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank Senator Persaud for continuing to lift up this important conversation around Denim Day. I'll just add that it is one of the longest-running sexual violence prevention and education campaigns in history, and is most certainly a testament to how far we've come and the work that has already been done in this space. But it also underscores even more how much further we have to go with respect to preventing sexual assault: 81 percent of women report experiencing sexual harassment in their lifetime, and that statistic is painfully disturbing and unacceptable. Awareness campaigns like Denim Day allow every person to stand together in solidarity with victims of all genders. It creates the time and space for victims and advocates to feel supported, heard and, most importantly, recognized for their truth. No one should be blamed for their sexual assault because of what they were wearing, no article of clothing can ever bear responsibility for the violent actions of another person. Mr. President, I'll be voting in favor of this resolution, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same. Thank you.

Mr. President, the sponsors of today's resolutions would like to open them for cosponsorship.

I have a motion here by Senator Mayer. On page 25, I offer the following amendments to Calendar Number 707, Senate Print 9517, and ask that said bill retain its place on the Third Reading Calendar.

Please take up the calendar.

Calendar Number 199, Senate Print 54A, by Senator Fernandez, an act to amend the Penal Law.

Section 2. This act shall take effect immediately.

Senator Fernandez to explain her vote.

Senator Fernandez to be recorded in the affirmative. Announce the results.

The bill is passed.

Read the last section.

Call the roll. (The Secretary called the roll.)

Ayes, 58.

Calendar Number 386, Senate Print 871, by Senator Bailey, an act to amend the Public Housing Law.

Section 2. This act shall take effect immediately.

Announce the results.

The bill is passed.

Read the last section.

Call the roll. (The Secretary called the roll.)

Ayes, 58.

Calendar Number 469, Senate Print 6750, by Senator Webb, an act to amend the Retirement and Social Security Law.

Section 8. This act shall take effect on the 180th day after it shall have become a law.

Announce the results.

The bill is passed.

Read the last section.

Call the roll. (The Secretary called the roll.)

Ayes, 58.

Calendar Number 549, Senate Print 6814, by Senator Bailey, an act to amend the Executive Law.

Section 5. This act shall take effect on the 90th day after it shall have become a law.

Announce the results.

The bill is passed.

Read the last section.

Call the roll. (The Secretary called the roll.)

Ayes, 58.

Calendar Number 712, Senate Print 8045, by Senator Bynoe, an act to amend the Executive Law.

Section 2. This act shall take effect on the 90th day after it shall have become a law.

Announce the results.

The bill is passed.

Lay it aside.

Calendar Number 737, Senate Print 9311, by Senator Persaud, an act directing the Department of Environmental Conservation to conduct a study of ecological restoration needs of Jamaica Bay.

Section 2. This act shall take effect immediately.

Announce the results.

The bill is passed.

Read the last section.

Call the roll. (The Secretary called the roll.)

Ayes, 58.

Calendar Number 777, Senate Print 5516A, by Senator Hinchey, an act to amend the Railroad Law.

Section 2. This act shall take effect on the 30th day after it shall have become a law.

Announce the results.

The bill is passed.

Lay it aside.

Calendar Number 797, Assembly Print Number 2239, by Assemblymember Braunstein, an act to amend the Penal Law.

Section 2. This act shall take effect on the first of November.

Announce the results.

The bill is passed.

Read the last section.

Call the roll. (The Secretary called the roll.)

In relation to Calendar 806, voting in the negative are Senators Ashby, Borrello, Canzoneri-Fitzpatrick, Chan, Griffo, Helming, Lanza, Martins, Mattera, Murray, O'Mara, Ortt, Palumbo, Rhoads, Rolison, Tedisco, Walczyk, Weber and Weik. Ayes, 39. Nays, 19.

Calendar Number 816, Senate Print 8234A, by Senator Jackson, an act to amend the Education Law.

Section 2. This act shall take effect immediately.

Announce the results.

The bill is passed.

Read the last section.

Call the roll. (The Secretary called the roll.)

Ayes, 58.

Let's go to the controversial calendar, please.

Calendar Number 730, Senate Print 8877, by Senator Gianaris, an act to amend the Labor Law.

Mr. President, would the sponsor yield for a question, please.

Yeah.

Through you, Mr. President. So I read this bill with some curiosity. I'm trying to figure out what exactly -- what problem it's trying to solve. Could you just kind of explain to me what the genesis -- you know, what brought this bill about?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Mm-hmm.

That's pretty interesting. So we're going to really try to delve into the intent of someone that was intentionally trying to deceive someone. As someone who's hired a lot of people over the years, you know, sometimes jobs don't get filled because the right person doesn't step forward, or you want to just make sure that you're always available to have a good person come forward. So how are we going to determine the bad actors from people that just simply want to make sure that they are, you know, engaging in every opportunity to hire a good person?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Yes.

Well, but aren't you -- by giving a certain fill-by date within 90 days, you're insinuating there has to be some kind of a guarantee. So you have to be guaranteed that you're going to actually fill a position that you're looking for? Sometimes you just don't find the right person or at the -- you know, at an affordable, you know, salary. How are we going to determine that this is a guarantee?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Yes.

So who's going to determine the intent, whether or not it was, you know, actually genuine or not?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Yes.

You know, I was looking at the fines. This is pretty excessive. A $2500 fine, and then that will double? Even if it's remedied within 30 days, that fine still applies, and then it doubles to 5,000 after that? Doesn't it seem excessive and harsh for a job posting?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Yes.

But doesn't your bill say that even if they do take it down, they're still subject to a $2500 fine? If it's beyond 30 days, then $5,000?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Yes.

One of my peeves with a lot of the bills here is they don't distinguish between full-time equivalents, FTEs, and people. You know, this says a hundred people or a hundred employees. So I know you're trying to set a threshold that you have to be a business that employs a hundred people or more. But, you know, there's a lot of companies out there, you know, like myself that are part-time seasonal businesses. Does this contemplate FTEs or just the number of people?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Yes.

So does this apply to just like a minimum-wage job? A part-time, you know, minimum-wage job, this would still apply? There's no threshold where we're -- you know, you're going after a professional person that's making a six-figure salary? What's the determining factor here as to what would be considered, you know, a violation worthy of a punishment of $2500?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Yes.

Through you, Mr. President. So you're going to allow -- you're basically going to task the Department of Labor -- this could be very I think labor-intensive, no pun intended, for the Department of Labor, because you're allowing really any aggrieved person to report this, and an investigation has to be, you know, commenced after that. I mean, so you see a job posting for a job that maybe you weren't even going to apply for, and now we're going to create an investigation by the Department of Labor? Is that what this bill would do?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Yes.

You're an attorney, I'm not. But doesn't this bill kind of create some legal ambiguity around what an employer intends to do?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Yes.

Why?

A few. Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

No. Uh, yes, I'm sorry. (Laughter.)

It's not that late.

Through you, Mr. President. So I know you say we don't want to -- you know, if somebody did something unintentionally, that we don't want to punish them for it. But again, I'm not a legal expert here, but what is to stop -- who is determining whether or not it was intentionally done or not? You know, I just think that's an ambiguity in itself. You could have, you know, someone that -- you know, whatever, the job posting company or the publication that they use left it up longer, or maybe they're using a company that hires people for them, a head hunter. Who's liable, then, if that was the case --

-- the company or the company hired?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Yes.

I think this is my -- I guess this is my last question here. Has there been an outcry about ghost jobs? Where have we heard this -- you know, this is the first time I'm hearing about this. I'm an employer, I'm a member of the NFIB, the New York State Restaurant Association. I'd never even heard of ghost jobs before I saw this bill. So is there a real outcry? Are we really looking -- is this a problem that's really out there to be solved?

That long question, I only get one word for a response? All right. Mr. President, on the bill.

You know, this bill does what a lot of other bills that we've passed in this chamber do, and that is create a private right of action. So I'm not much concerned, quite frankly, about someone who is truly, you know -- I guess duped, if you will, that they thought the job was open, they applied for the job and they never heard. But I am worried about, once again, creating an opportunity for someone to create a class-action lawsuit and getting a lot of small companies in particular, because 100 FTEs wouldn't necessarily mean 100 full-time employees, it might mean 10 or 20 employees. You know, it might mean somebody, quite frankly, that, you know, doesn't necessarily have a huge business but has a lot of labor, like a restaurant. I can speak from personal -- I guess personal experience there. But what we're really doing here is we're in search of a solution for a problem that really doesn't exist, in my opinion. And at a very, very hefty fine. This is going to create what I would consider to be a bounty hunter situation, where we're going to have attorneys out there combing through all the job postings, whether it be on social media or in a newspaper or some kind of a job site, and then we're going to start creating lawsuits and, you know, issues like that that make it harder and harder and more expensive to do business here. This is why New York State is consistently at the bottom of every list when it comes to businesses, as a friendly place to do business. We rank 41st out of 50 states in the country for starting a new business, 41st for the great Empire State. We make it harder and harder for people to be able to just have a business, be profitable, employ people, and have a -- make a living for themselves and the people and the families that they support in their business. And this is just another step in that direction, unfortunately. I just don't see this as something -- a problem that is worthy of such a hefty, severe fine -- $2500, $5,000 for posting a job for a little too long? That seems excessive to me. As a small business owner, I can tell you -- as a member of the NFIB, who also has big problems with this, I can tell you this is already a difficult place to do business. Let's not make it even more difficult with such a heavy burden like this bill. So I'll be voting no. Thank you.

Through you, Mr. President, would the sponsor yield for a couple of questions?

I do, yes.

Thank you. Through you, Mr. President. Just for clarification, I'm trying to get ahold of the time frames on -- so when it says that they must be clear about whether it's to be filled before 90 days or after 90 days, would that be solved easily by them simply saying "immediate openings"?

So when the -- I'm sorry, through you, Mr. President --

Sure. So in the -- you're placing an ad, you have some openings, and you start your ad with "immediate openings." Would that cover the time frame?

Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield?

Yes.

Thank you. Through you, Mr. President. I also just wanted to cover the fines, where it says a violation for each print publication or digital platform. Many times you'll have a print publication that also offers the digital platform as one. So when you purchase the ad, it will go in the print, also on the website or on the digital platform. Would that count -- if there's a violation, would it count as one or two?

Sure. Through you, Mr. President --

So many times when you place a help wanted ad, there is a print publication as well as a digital platform. And you get it as one. You purchase one ad, it goes on both. For the violation purposes, if you were to be found in violation and you had it on both, is that one violation or two?

That would be two separate. Thank you, Mr. President. On the bill.

Thank you, Senator Gianaris. The problem is real. I was in this business, I owned an employment newspaper and website. The problem is real, in that -- and it is very, very frustrating. Some companies will place ads that either aren't real or for a ghost position. Sometimes they'll place ads to gather information, to gather data that later they sell. I'm not saying this is right to do this. I'm just wondering if the punishment may far exceed what's happening. The problem is, as I said, frustrating. That's about as far as it goes. It's not illegal. It's not -- it's not putting anybody in jeopardy or anything. It's just frustrating. You see an ad, you send a resume in, you didn't hear anything back. Two months go by, you still see the ad. Well, what happened? Why didn't they get back to me? So yes, it is frustrating. Is it worth punishing people who are employing people? I'll give you an example. You've got a company that gets a big contract, they're a manufacturer. They've got multiple positions that they're hiring for, and they put that ad in there that they have these multiple positions. Well, they may fill some of them. They may want to do it within 90 days. They just can't. Or maybe they're just going through the resumes very, very carefully and they want to get more. I'll give you another example. Some publications, when it comes to employment, some are biweekly publications, some are monthly publications. If you place an ad in a monthly print publication, once that ad is placed, you can't magically pull it out. So if in fact it's found that the position was filled but the deadline passed, you're still running that ad for a full other month. You didn't do anything wrong, you just missed the deadline because it was a monthly publication. So 30 days really isn't very realistic. But I'll tell you what, $2500 is very realistic to the pockets of people -- of companies that are trying to employ New Yorkers. So I do think we should continue to look at the problem, at the situation, and I appreciate that that's what's being done. But I think the punishment here far, far outpaces the so-called problem here. So I'll be voting no. Thank you.

Yeah, will the Met fan -- I mean Senator Gianaris rise?

I am both of those things, yes.

The Senator yields.

Both.

Senator Tedisco, are you on the bill or are you asking the sponsor to yield?

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Only if you're hiring more than a hundred people.

Yes.

It's a pretty big operation at that point.

It's a big lawn, Senator Tedisco.

You know, in the city we don't have lawns that need 100 people to mow them. Maybe in Saratoga you do. Yes, I yield.

So one of the things that upsets our constituents to the extent that -- they think we treat ourselves differently than we treat them sometimes. Like, they have deadlines and when they have to get something done, they get it done on a deadline. We have budgets. When we've got to get it done in the last five years, we haven't got it done, we're late now. I'm wondering, the State of New York, in all our divisions, and all of us in this room, when we put out advertisements to hire people, these stipulations would relate to us and the State of New York also, right? Although we're not a business, we shouldn't treat ourselves any differently than the employees we want to hire. So all the stipulations in this bill relate to like the director of some organization here, or a staffing need that we put out advertisements, and they'd have the same stipulations? And you or I, if we wanted to hire a staff person and we put an advertisement out there, we'd have the same stipulations as the businesses would? Does that bill cover that?

Okay, thank you. This is another illustration --

Yup.

-- another illustration of how we treat others in our state, which has forced them to walk out of the state and vote with their feet. I mean, I can't express it enough. You know, you're going to treat businesses like this, but then you're going to treat the employees that we hire in the state and have the opportunity to put these advertisements in there -- and you know what? I have my constituents call me, and they say they go for interviews, and the same thing you're talking about that businesses might do, they're ghosting and doing to some of my constituents in my district. So why would you treat yourselves differently, or the State of New York differently, when you hire people? You are employers, you're also elected officials, you're also representatives. You're telling businesses: You'd better not make any mistakes, you've got a certain number of days to get this done, you'd better be truthful, but you're treating the constituents, all the state people who we hire here, potentially, a little bit differently. We can ghost them -- you can ghost them when you become their employer, with the employees, but the businesses in the state, they've got to have specific guidelines and mandates. And these specific guidelines and mandates are the reason why people are voting with their feet. And remember what the situation is. You're projected to lose two or three in the next counting procedure, census. And every two minutes and 24 seconds, somebody leaves the State of New York, because of this. You're an employer, everybody who hires somebody in our state agencies are employers. You want to treat businesses like this, give them guidelines, give them more mandates, and they're going to pack up and walk out. And then the Governor last year, who says I don't care if millionaires leave the State of New York, what do I care if they don't like -- but then last week she was on her knees, please come back, we need your dollars. Why do they need the dollars and their money? Because of spending that takes place, because of the taxes in New York State, because of energy policies that are ridiculous. And she's pointed them out with a memo from her own office. And that's part of why we're here today with a late budget, the fifth year in a row. We couldn't do the number-one thing that's probably most important by our constitution: A good, balanced, on-time budget to keep people in New York State and attract them to come here. And again, I'll tell you, it's not to South Carolina or Florida or Texas. Things like this bill, what you're doing to businesses and jobs in New York State -- it's Connecticut, it's Pennsylvania, it's New Jersey. They're leaving the state in droves. Stop this. Please, treat yourselves in the State of New York like you're treating your constituents, or do better for them like you're doing better for yourself. Thank you, Mr. President.

We've agreed to restore this bill to the noncontroversial calendar.

Section 2. This act shall take effect immediately.

Senator Gianaris to explain his vote.

Senator Gianaris to be recorded in the affirmative. Senator Murray to explain his vote.

Senator Murray to be recorded in the negative. Announce the results.

The bill is passed.

Senator Walczyk, why do you rise?

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President. It adds two groups to the language minority and protected class, language minority groups, to the language assistance requirement. Those two groups are the Haitian Creole and Middle Eastern and North African, which has been recognized by the federal government as its own separate category worthy of recognition.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President. In the instance of Middle Eastern/North African or MEAN, as it is affectionately called, we have in this bill not specified all of the languages, as it is not on the federal level exhausted in the explanation of where those countries of origin or languages may be. However, if you look at where the State of New York is on the top languages that are spoken, Arabic happens to be one of those top languages. And if we approximate the information already provided by OGS on its Language Diversity Dashboard, I would just note that the state already provides language access in 50 state agencies for these top languages, of which Arabic is one. We would add some counties to this language assistance requirement.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President. This is not wholly tied to the census numbers. It refers to the census by way of the American Community Survey, as ACS defines language minorities and limited English proficient. That is the language that is used in the statute, and that would be how we would categorize.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President. I think I understand the question now, and I think it is a determination that would have to be made by the boards of elections. The requirement of providing materials, et cetera, that would make it easier for eligible voters to access the ballot I think could be determined by the Board of Elections' own experience with limited English proficient voters and speakers. And I think we have some of that information by way of what the state already collects through its language access requirement for all of the other state agencies. So it could be the case that there would be more than one language under the MEAN requirement, should this become law, but that would be a determination made by the local board.

Senator Walczyk on the bill.

Will the sponsor again yield?

The sponsor yields.

Yes. Through you, Mr. President. In both cases, whether it is a language minority group or a language by way of limited English proficiency, both of those make reference to language and what is spoken. And it is our intent that if you are a limited English proficient speaker, if you speak another language but are eligible to vote, and you hit certain thresholds, that you would have the materials provided by the Board of Elections to help you. So if that happens to be other languages that grow, as the Haitian Creole speaker population has grown, as the Arabic-speaking population has grown, and certainly as other language speakers will be growing in our electorate, it is our intent to provide as much access as they are eligible for.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President, I welcome my good colleague from the other side of the aisle, should he be so moved to open up language access for as many New York voters as possible, to introduce legislation to that effect. This is not meant to be a limiting principle, but to recognize growing population and language speakers in this state. And it is not meant or intended to be an exhaustive or final list. It is a a list that recognizes the current growing patterns in our state.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President, this bill addresses two growing language-speaking populations. I am happy to hear that you support a New York for All and, again, would welcome you to introduce legislation to that effect that would open up access to more languages more specifically. This is not a limiting bill. This would not prevent us from expanding this list. But if you look at the languages that are spoken in this state, the languages that we already are required to provide language access for outside of ballot access, these are two languages that are growing. And that's why we are trying to provide more access.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President. We are matching what the federal definition of MEAN is.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President, yes.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President, there may be. It depends on what the demographic changes that may occur in the future. But if you reference the OGS Language Diversity Dashboard and look at both of these groups, whether it's Haitian Creole or Arabic, for instance, you would see that in Kings County, Queens County, Rockland County and Nassau County, they potentially might have a Haitian Creole-speaking population that would be triggered. For Arabic, the two -- or the three, rather, would be Kings, Queens and potentially Erie County that might be included. But I don't want to say that with any finality. This would be up to the local boards of elections to determine.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President. I was using Arabic to be illustrative in response to your question. As I have stated previously, the definition here, and referenced in the bill, refers to the federal definition, because for a long time MEAN was not its own category and MEAN was looped in with categorizing yourself as white for purposes of data collection. Because this was a recent change on the federal level, we thought it important for us to incorporate that for language access purposes in this bill.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President. There has not been a fiscal analysis done. We believe that the responsibilities placed on the boards of elections would be able to be resourced. And as I have for the entirety of my career here in the Senate, I continue to advocate for more money for our local boards of elections.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President, we cannot anticipate that.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President. We continue to advocate for more resources for our local boards. I think this majority, by way of budgets of years past, have increased the funding going to our local boards of elections. We make changes to the Election Law every single year, in some years more than others, and our boards of elections have done their best to keep up with those changes and to try to comport with the law. And we don't anticipate that this would be any different.

Will the sponsor yield?

The sponsor yields.

Through you, Mr. President. The requirement from the federal government in the Policy Order SP 15 is a request for agencies to inform them on how they plan to comply. It is not a -- it does not require them to wait a year until they implement, but simply to by the year's end inform them how they have either implemented or plan to implement. So I don't think that SP 15 serves as a barrier to our local boards of elections determining what languages may fulfill this bill.

Senator Walczyk on the bill.

Thank you, Senator Walczyk. Are there any other Senators wishing to be heard? Seeing and hearing none, debate is closed. The Secretary will ring the bell. Senator Gianaris.

On consent, it has been agreed that this bill will be restored to the noncontroversial calendar. Read the last section.

Call the roll. (The Secretary called the roll.)

In relation to Calendar 789, voting in the negative are Senators Borrello, Canzoneri-Fitzpatrick, Chan, Gallivan, Griffo, Helming, Lanza, Martins, Mattera, Murray, O'Mara, Ortt, Rhoads, Walczyk and Weik. Ayes, 43. Nays, 15.

Is there any further business at the desk?

I move to adjourn until tomorrow, Wednesday, April 29th, at 11:00 a.m.