Joint Legislative Public Hearing on 2017-2018 Executive Budget Proposal: Topic "Human Services" - Testimonies
February 9, 2017
-
ISSUE:
- Human Services
-
COMMITTEE:
- Finance
Hearing Event Notice:
https://www.nysenate.gov/calendar/public-hearings/february-08-2017/joint-legislative-public-hearing-2017-2018-executive
Archived Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pa3NJKaeTvM
______________________
1
1 BEFORE THE NEW YORK STATE SENATE FINANCE
AND ASSEMBLY WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE
2 --------------------------------------------------
3 JOINT LEGISLATIVE HEARING
4 In the Matter of the
2017-2018 EXECUTIVE BUDGET ON
5 HUMAN SERVICES
6 -----------------------------------------------------
7 Hearing Room B
Legislative Office Building
8 Albany, New York
9 February 8, 2017
9:39 a.m.
10
11 PRESIDING:
12 Senator Catharine M. Young
Chair, Senate Finance Committee
13
Assemblyman Herman D. Farrell, Jr.
14 Chair, Assembly Ways & Means Committee
15 PRESENT:
16 Senator Liz Krueger
Senate Finance Committee (RM)
17
Assemblyman Robert Oaks
18 Assembly Ways & Means Committee (RM)
19 Assemblywoman Ellen Jaffee
Chair, Assembly Children and Families
20 Committee
21 Senator Diane Savino
Chair, Senate Children and Families
22 Committee
23 Senator James Tedisco
Chair, Senate Committee on Social Services
24
2
1 2017-2018 Executive Budget
Human Services
2 2-8-17
3 PRESENT: (Continued)
4 Assemblywoman Donna A. Lupardo
Chair, Assembly Committee on Aging
5
Senator Susan Serino
6 Chair, Senate Committee on Aging
7 Assemblyman Michael G. DenDekker
Chair, Assembly Committee on Veterans
8
Assemblyman Mark Johns
9
Assemblywoman Latoya Joyner
10
Assemblywoman Nicole Malliotakis
11
Assemblyman Erik M. Dilan
12
Assemblywoman Michele R. Titus
13
Senator Leroy Comrie
14
Assemblyman FÈlix W. Ortiz
15
Senator Velmanette Montgomery
16
Assemblywoman Shelley Mayer
17
Assemblywoman Patricia Fahy
18
Senator Timothy Kennedy
19
Assemblyman Harry B. Bronson
20
Senator Roxanne J. Persaud
21
Assemblyman David I. Weprin
22
Assemblywoman Didi Barrett
23
Assemblyman William Colton
24
3
1 2017-2018 Executive Budget
Human Services
2 2-8-17
3 PRESENT: (Continued)
4 Assemblywoman Pamela J. Hunter
5 Assemblywoman Tremaine Wright
6 Assemblywoman Vivian E. Cook
7 Assemblyman N. Nick Perry
8
9
10
11 LIST OF SPEAKERS
12 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
13 Sheila J. Poole
Acting Commissioner
14 NYS Office of Children
and Family Services 10 17
15
Michael Perrin
16 Executive Deputy Commissioner
NYS Office of Temporary
17 and Disability Assistance 91 99
18 Roberta Reardon
Commissioner
19 NYS Department of Labor 185 194
20 Greg Olsen
Acting Director
21 NYS Office for the Aging 287 295
22
23
24
4
1 2017-2018 Executive Budget
Human Services
2 2-8-17
3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Continued
4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
5 Kirby Hannon
Legislative Coordinator
6 John Lewis
Legislative Committee Chair
7 Veterans of Foreign Wars
-and-
8 Linda McKinnis
Legislative Coordinator
9 Disabled American Veterans
-and-
10 Bob Becker
Legislative Coordinator
11 NYS Veterans Council 356 369
12 David McNally
Director, Government
13 Affairs & Advocay
AARP New York 383
14
Shelly Nortz
15 Deputy Executive Director
of Policy
16 Coalition for the Homeless 389
17 Sheila Harrigan
Executive Director
18 New York Public Welfare
Association 400
19
Dede Hill
20 Director of Policy
Schuyler Center for
21 Analysis & Advocacy 403
22 Susan Antos
Senior Attorney
23 Empire Justice Center 411
24
5
1 2017-2018 Executive Budget
Human Services
2 2-8-17
3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Continued
4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
5 Gerard Wallace
Director
6 Ryan Johnson
Regional Kinship Navigator
7 NYS Kinship Navigator
-for-
8 NYS Kincare Coalition 420 431
9 Karen Hill
Executive Director
10 NYS Children's Alliance 439 446
11 Jim Purcell
CEO
12 Council of Family &
Child Caring Agencies 450 462
13
Stephanie Gendell
14 Associate Executive Director,
Policy and Advocacy
15 Citizens' Committee for Children
of New York, Inc. 464
16
Jessica Klos Shapiro
17 Director, Policy and
Community Education
18 Early Care & Learning Council 472
19 Jenn O'Connor
Director, Policy and Advocay
20 Prevent Child Abuse New York 478 482
21 Tim Nichols
Executive Director
22 Association on Aging in NY 484
23 Alli Lidie
Associate Executive Director
24 NYS Network for Youth Success 488 496
6
1 2017-2018 Executive Budget
Human Services
2 2-8-17
3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Continued
4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
5 Mallory Nugent
Senior Policy Analyst
6 FPWA
-and-
7 Michelle Jackson
Deputy Director and
8 General Counsel
Human Services Counsel
9 -for-
Restore Opportunity Now 499
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
7
1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Good morning.
2 (Louder) Good morning.
3 AUDIENCE: Good morning.
4 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: All right now.
5 We're practicing. In case anyone comes, we
6 can join them.
7 (Laughter.)
8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Today we begin the
9 eighth in a series of hearings conducted by
10 the joint fiscal committees of the
11 Legislature regarding the Governor's proposed
12 budget for fiscal year 2017-2018. The
13 hearings are conducted pursuant to Article 7,
14 Section 3 of the Constitution, and Article 2,
15 Sections 31 and 32A of the Legislative Law.
16 Today the Assembly Ways and Means
17 Committee and the Senate Finance Committee
18 will hear testimony concerning the budget
19 proposal for human services.
20 I will now introduce members from the
21 Assembly, and Senator Young, chair of the
22 Senate Finance Committee, will introduce
23 members from the Senate.
24 We have been joined by Assemblywomen
8
1 Ellen Jaffee, Donna Lupardo, Latoya Joyner,
2 and with Assemblymen Michael DenDekker and
3 Erik Dilan. And, again, Assemblywoman
4 Shelley Mayer.
5 Senator.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
7 much, Mr. Chairman.
8 Good morning, everyone, and welcome.
9 We welcome the commissioner.
10 I'm joined by several of my
11 colleagues. We have Senator Liz Krueger,
12 Senator Diane Savino, Senator Tim Kennedy,
13 Senator Jim Tedisco, and Senator Roxanne
14 Persaud.
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Before I introduce
16 the first witness, I would like to remind all
17 the witnesses and the members up here on the
18 dais testifying today to keep our statements
19 within the allotted time -- the clocks are
20 everywhere, so you can see your time, when
21 you start and when you end -- within the
22 allotted time limit, so that everyone can be
23 afforded the opportunity to speak.
24 I will now call the first witness, the
9
1 New York State Office of Children and Family
2 Services, Sheila Poole, acting commissioner.
3 Good morning again.
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Good
5 morning. Good morning, Chairwoman Young,
6 Chairman Farrell, Senate Children and
7 Families Committee Chairwoman Savino,
8 Assemblywoman Children and Families
9 Chairwoman Jaffee, and distinguished members
10 of the Senate and Assembly. My name is
11 Sheila Poole, and I'm the acting commissioner
12 of the New York State Office of Children and
13 Family Services. And I'm pleased to have
14 this opportunity to discuss this year's
15 proposed budget for OCFS.
16 The Executive Budget maintains a
17 strong investment in OCFS's core programs
18 that serve to protect New York's most
19 vulnerable citizens in the critically
20 important areas of child welfare, childcare,
21 and juvenile justice. It maintains
22 $635 million for child welfare services,
23 which provides enriched state share
24 reimbursement of 62 cents for every local
10
1 dollar spent on child protective, preventive,
2 aftercare, independent living and adoption
3 services. This funding helps to support
4 community-based services throughout the state
5 and ranks among the highest in the nation.
6 The Executive Budget includes
7 $383.5 million in Foster Care Block Grant
8 funding to support foster care services,
9 including kinship-guardianship programs. A
10 $62 million adjustment is included in the
11 proposed budget, and reflects a proportionate
12 rightsizing in state share funds following
13 the dramatic reduction in New York State's
14 foster care population since this fund was
15 first established in 2002. This change
16 aligns the state's share closer to
17 50 percent, which is consistent with the
18 original intent of the fund.
19 The Governor has shown a steadfast
20 commitment to persons experiencing or on the
21 brink of homelessness in New York State. And
22 to that end, the budget provides greater
23 flexibility to municipalities receiving
24 Runaway and Homeless Youth funds. The
11
1 proposal raises the upper age limit for
2 programs serving at-risk youth in
3 transitional independent living programs from
4 age 21 to age 24, and it allows programs to
5 extend the length of residential services
6 from 18 to 24 months. This is an option for
7 municipalities and is in recognition that
8 finding long-term stable housing for homeless
9 youth and young adults may take longer than
10 is currently provided for in statute.
11 The proposal also allows counties the
12 option of increasing the length of stay for
13 runaway youth in crisis shelters from 30 days
14 to 120 days.
15 The Executive Budget includes
16 authority for OCFS to invest adoption
17 assistance savings of $7 million, which is an
18 increase of $2 million, for preventive
19 services and other post-adoption services as
20 required by federal law for children at risk
21 of entering foster care. OCFS used savings
22 last year to invest in the establishment of
23 eight new Permanency Resource Centers
24 throughout the state to support post-adoptive
12
1 and kinship families. In addition, we used
2 some of the funds to expand Healthy Families
3 NY, which as you all know is our
4 evidence-based home visiting program. This
5 year's additional $2 million will allow the
6 state to establish Permanency Resource
7 Centers in new areas and enable further
8 expansion of our Healthy Families program.
9 Protecting children and keeping kids
10 safe are our core mission at OCFS. I am sure
11 you are all aware of recent high-profile
12 child fatalities and child abuse cases that
13 have occurred statewide. These cases are
14 horrific and always lead us back to the
15 question, What can we do to correct problems
16 within the system, and how can we further
17 protect the children in our state?
18 OCFS's role is to review all of these
19 cases, assess the adequacy of any child
20 welfare services involvement with the family,
21 and determine where there are failures,
22 locally and systemically. We employ a wide
23 range of responses and take aggressive action
24 to address any failures, including the
13
1 appointment of an independent monitor, which
2 we have done in several circumstances and,
3 most recently, in New York City.
4 We are committed to continuing our
5 statewide focus on improving front-line
6 supervision of child welfare staff. We will
7 soon unveil a new state-of-the-art project to
8 improve training for child welfare
9 caseworkers that includes live simulations of
10 the complex environments and critical
11 decision-making processes that they are
12 called to navigate each and every day.
13 We also look to adopt best practices
14 to bring forward new ideas for improving our
15 system of child protection in New York State.
16 We're examining the benefits of new
17 technologies, such as data mining, and
18 policies that show promise. And we plan to
19 launch a child welfare dashboard, which will
20 display key safety and permanency data
21 points, which will assist local districts in
22 their investigations and the state in its
23 oversight role.
24 The Governor's budget includes several
14
1 related proposals to help low-income working
2 families. The Executive Budget maintains our
3 critical investment in the Child Care Subsidy
4 program at $806 million. New York State is a
5 national leader in directing the majority of
6 its entire Child Care Development Fund
7 allocation to support childcare subsidies
8 that are crucial to our providers and our
9 families.
10 The Governor has proposed a
11 $35 million expansion of after-school
12 programs, which is projected to add an
13 additional 22,000 slots statewide. OCFS
14 looks forward to administering this program.
15 In addition, the Governor continues
16 his commitment to pre-K expansion, with an
17 additional $5 million investment in this
18 year's budget.
19 This year's budget proposal also
20 reflects the Governor's continuing commitment
21 to raising the age of criminal responsibility
22 in New York State. It is simply unacceptable
23 that we have yet to raise the age. OCFS has
24 spent the past three years significantly
15
1 modifying our juvenile residential programs
2 by enhancing security, expanding educational
3 and vocational certification programs, and
4 developing a nationally recognized quality
5 assurance system.
6 Youth and staff safety is the first
7 priority, and I'm pleased to say we're seeing
8 an overall decline in youth-on-youth and
9 youth-on-staff violence. We are
10 ever-vigilant in our efforts to further
11 reduce these incidents, and we exceed the
12 national average in staffing our secure
13 facilities.
14 Our youth are required to participate
15 in a full day of school, college courses or
16 vocational programming that will increase
17 their chances of successful reentry into
18 their communities. We currently provide
19 post-release supervision for juvenile
20 delinquents, and we've created juvenile
21 offender specialists who are working to
22 assist parole officers in supervising youth
23 returned to their communities.
24 It is time that we treat all 16- and
16
1 17-year-olds in a system that is specifically
2 and specially designed to address their
3 unique needs. It is time for New York to
4 finally join the rest of the nation in
5 recognizing the potential of our youth, and
6 OCFS will be ready to provide that system of
7 care.
8 Thank you for the opportunity to
9 address all of you today, and I look forward
10 to your comments and questions.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Mr. Chairman, I
12 just would like to introduce Assemblyman Mark
13 Johns, who's joined us.
14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Yes. We've been
15 joined by Assemblywoman Fahy.
16 And first to ask questions, Chairwoman
17 Jaffee.
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you.
19 Thank you very much.
20 And thank you, Commissioner, for your
21 conversation the other day -- we had the
22 opportunity to discuss the issues in children
23 and families -- and for your testimony today.
24 We have so many issues that really are
17
1 impacting our communities at this time.
2 Poverty levels in so many areas are really
3 shocking and impacting families and our
4 children in so many ways. And we really need
5 to consider a very strong response to the
6 issues in New York State.
7 I wanted to just go back for a moment.
8 We had been discussing the situation
9 regarding the federal childcare
10 reauthorization issue, and wanted to know if
11 you could -- I know there was a conversation
12 recently. But if you could address what is
13 happening and what the state will have to do
14 if there is no additional financial
15 assistance provided, or waivers provided to
16 the state.
17 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes,
18 certainly. Thank you, Assemblywoman Jaffee.
19 So just to kind of reset from where we
20 were this time last year, having this
21 conversation, toward the end of 2016 the
22 federal government finally, in the last days
23 of the administration, promulgated final
24 regulations for the Childcare Development
18
1 Block Grant Act that had passed almost two
2 years previously. And those regulations
3 really codified expectations of states,
4 particularly with respect to 12-month
5 guaranteed eligibility and graduated phaseout
6 for families having received subsidy and
7 childcare assistance.
8 Unfortunately, when our federal fiscal
9 year began in October of last year, we
10 received virtually no additional funds to
11 help us really maintain our state's
12 investment of almost a billion dollars in
13 childcare subsidy -- but I think even more
14 importantly, in some respects, paralyzing us
15 from really being able to implement the
16 $550 million impact that it would take for us
17 to implement that act in all of its
18 components in New York State.
19 And so as I sat here and spoke with
20 you last year, our plan was to take advantage
21 of the waivers, the waiver provisions that
22 were contained in the act. In 2016 we
23 applied for 11 waivers, hoping that we would
24 be successful with the administration in
19
1 gathering more money to implement it without
2 having to dip into the $806 million that, you
3 know, today 192,000 children count on every
4 year.
5 So we were successful in receiving
6 approval for 10 of those 11 waivers. The
7 11th waiver was related to health and safety,
8 which they did not grant to any state. And
9 we're planning to implement the required
10 training for that this year.
11 And so, Assemblywoman, at this
12 particular point our intention is, once the
13 incoming HHS secretary is appointed and
14 confirmed by the full Senate, is to really
15 make a case that if not monetary relief to
16 implement the act, then certainly regulatory
17 relief is essential to our state in being
18 able to maintain our current level of
19 subsidies that all of our low-income working
20 families are counting on, and to have them
21 understand that simply crippling states in
22 being able to implement the act is not
23 helping us.
24 So that's our intention, is to seek
20
1 regulatory relief. I also want to be clear
2 as we sit here today, and throughout the
3 remaining year, we will not face any fiscal
4 penalties, so none of our current federal
5 funding, CCDF funding, will be at any risk.
6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: It is certainly
7 a challenge, especially given the need for
8 childcare in our state.
9 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE:
10 Absolutely.
11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: I know the
12 Governor, provided within the context of the
13 budget, a pretty much flat amount, similar to
14 what we had last year, in funding for
15 subsidies for childcare. And that's a major
16 concern, given that, from the numbers that
17 I've seen, that indicates only about
18 17 percent of the children who actually
19 qualify for subsidies in our state are being
20 provided the childcare opportunity.
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Which is, you
23 know, devastating for so many of the families
24 in New York State, and the children and their
21
1 preparedness for the future, and stability in
2 allowing families, and mothers in particular,
3 to work.
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So I would
5 say that from OCFS's point of view, the
6 federal government is really now expecting
7 states to essentially self-subsidize their
8 subsidy program. That's the first thing.
9 The second thing I would also like to
10 say is that I think there are a number of
11 proposed initiatives in the Executive Budget
12 that I think hold the promise of relieving
13 some of the pressure, if not all, but some of
14 the pressure on the current subsidy programs.
15 The Governor is proposing an expansion of
16 pre-K, a $5 million expansion. And then in
17 addition to still having the Earned Income
18 Tax Credit, there is a proposal, which we're
19 really excited about, to expand after-school
20 program slots, 22,000 of them. And again,
21 those are families now who might be relying
22 on a subsidy for part of after-school care.
23 And if we open up more of the school-age
24 childcare program slots, then we could
22
1 potentially relieve some of the pressure at
2 least that we're bearing on the subsidy
3 program.
4 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Another concern
5 for many of our municipalities is the
6 decision to mandate discretionary Title XX
7 funds to be used by the counties, to be used
8 towards childcare. But that then creates a
9 continued burden for our municipalities. So
10 how will the Office of Children and Family
11 Services then assist the districts to be able
12 to eliminate -- let's say, how are they going
13 to respond if there are human services
14 programs like senior centers and other
15 services that they need to provide assistance
16 to as well?
17 So this becomes a major issue,
18 especially since our municipalities, with the
19 2 percent cap, are finding it's very
20 difficult and challenging to be able to
21 continue to respond to the needs of the
22 community.
23 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes. So
24 when we looked at the Title XX -- and it's
23
1 the "all other," it's not the general
2 Title XX which is set aside for domestic
3 violence and adult protective services. But
4 that really remaining $26 million of the
5 Title XX, all other allocation. You know,
6 today 65 percent of local departments of
7 social services already devote part or whole
8 of that allocation of childcare. So again,
9 that's not every place. Certainly New York
10 City has used a portion of that funding to
11 fund the senior centers.
12 And, Assemblywoman Jaffee, I would
13 just kind of explain that I think the concept
14 here in developing this year's Executive
15 Budget was not just looking at one funding
16 stream and its impact, but looking across the
17 spectrum of funding investments that are
18 going to municipalities.
19 And so, you know, with respect to the
20 senior center issue, which is most notable in
21 New York City, you know, I think when you
22 look on the Executive Budget as a whole,
23 there's an additional $400 million that's
24 going to the city, who is also not held to
24
1 the same tax cap as upstate. So the thinking
2 is that the city will have some flexibility
3 within that additional state funding to, if
4 they choose, to decide to support those
5 programs.
6 There are other upstate --
7 Assemblywoman, you know, there are other
8 funding streams that could perhaps be tapped
9 into. If they're using -- for example, using
10 it for some child welfare services part of
11 the budget. You know, part of the budget
12 today calls for the reauthorization of the
13 open-ended Child Protective 6238
14 reimbursement, which you've all supported.
15 And again, you know, that's one funding
16 stream that has some flexibility. That
17 certainly we're more than willing to work
18 with the districts in identifying potential
19 other funding streams.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: That would be
21 very helpful moving forward, because I know
22 that this will be very challenging for them.
23 There also was a decision within the
24 context of the budget to eliminate
25
1 reimbursement for New York City, the CSE
2 placements. Why is that change only focusing
3 on New York City and not the whole state?
4 Actually, I wouldn't want it to be for
5 anyone, but why is it just focused on
6 New York City?
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So there's
8 two parts to that. So one, you know, in my
9 testimony that, you know, we're recalibrating
10 the Foster Care Block Grant because we've had
11 almost a 60 percent decrease in the past 15
12 years in the number of children in foster
13 care, but we've never rightsized the Foster
14 Care Block Grant allocation. And so part of
15 that does pay for the tuition costs for
16 children.
17 The other piece of it are the CSE
18 placements in New York City that, again, in
19 the context of the overall budget, the
20 state's current proposal will bring an
21 additional $300 million in school aid to
22 New York City. And so I think the
23 expectation is that given that dramatic
24 increase in state education funding, that the
26
1 city could pay for tuition and education
2 costs for its youth determined to need
3 placement by the local Committees on Special
4 Education as well as children who are in
5 foster care in the city.
6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
7 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: My time is up.
8 Thank you. We'll continue after a while.
9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: We've been joined
10 by Assemblywoman Pam Hunter and Assemblyman
11 Dave Weprin.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: We've also been
13 joined by Assemblywoman Malliotakis.
14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Senator?
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
16 much.
17 And again, thank you, Commissioner,
18 for being here.
19 I do want to follow up on
20 Assemblywoman Jaffee's questions regarding
21 childcare. You talked about the childcare
22 subsidy financing change, and as you pointed
23 out, the Executive Budget maintains the
24 current $810 million level of childcare
27
1 subsidy funding by requiring the counties to
2 allocate the $27 million they currently
3 receive in discretionary federal Title XX
4 block grant funds to childcare.
5 So you're changing it so that they are
6 mandated to allocate that towards childcare.
7 And as you pointed out in your answer
8 previously, that a lot of the localities are
9 already using those funds for childcare.
10 So if the funding is the same but all
11 of a sudden you're mandating that they
12 allocate that $27 million -- you require
13 them -- toward childcare, isn't that going to
14 result in a reduction of funding to some of
15 the counties if they're already using it for
16 childcare and then you're piling additional
17 costs on top of that?
18 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: The way I
19 would answer that, Senator, is that typically
20 each year the way that the subsidy is funded
21 is a combination of General Fund, CCDF, TANF
22 funding. And every year there's a decision
23 made about where those funding streams --
24 which contribute most to it.
28
1 And so I think at the end the
2 commitment remains to the $806 million. The
3 difference is how those individual funding
4 streams were constructed to add up to the
5 $806 million.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So I do think,
7 however, this could result in an unfunded
8 mandate on some of the counties. So I would
9 urge you to take a look at that.
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Certainly.
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Also, related to
12 childcare -- and again, I thank my colleague
13 for touching on this -- but there was
14 discussion regarding the new regulations
15 coming out of the federal government. And
16 I'm glad to hear that you were able to secure
17 10 waivers. I think that they could have
18 been up to three years, but it's my
19 understanding I just heard that they're only
20 one-year waivers that you were able to
21 secure.
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: That's
23 correct.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So if it's only one
29
1 year, and you talked about trying to get
2 regulatory or monetary relief out of
3 Washington, what are the updated estimates on
4 the costs of implementing the following
5 provisions? If we are aren't able to get any
6 relief out of Washington, I'd like to know,
7 what will it cost for the increased provider
8 inspection requirements, for example?
9 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So the two
10 most expensive pieces of the $555 million
11 total are the 12-month guaranteed eligibility
12 and the second is the graduated phaseout.
13 And those two, combined, account for
14 $441 million of the $555 million.
15 And then there are additional costs
16 for the clearances -- I think that's in the
17 ballpark of $34 million, $36 million -- the
18 background clearance checks, and then the
19 additional inspections, and then staff and
20 provider training.
21 But certainly, Senator, when we look
22 at those two provisions in and of themselves
23 that are most subsidy-related, that's where
24 the large cost is. And that's where, getting
30
1 back to the earlier conversation, it's so
2 problematic for us to really implement the
3 act, given that there's no new federal
4 funding for additional subsidies. That's our
5 challenge.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Will OCFS need
7 additional staff to be able to do the
8 training and the inspections?
9 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes. We
10 would absolutely need additional staff to
11 take on the additional requirements. So, you
12 know, the act calls for additional visits to
13 regulated providers, but part of this act
14 also really focuses on the legally exempt
15 community. And currently we do about
16 20 percent inspections of those. And if we
17 were to implement the act, that would be an
18 additional expense as well.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Have you done an
20 analysis as to what the cost would be?
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Not in the
22 past year, Senator.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Do you envision
24 that the state would take on the
31
1 responsibility for the background checks, or
2 would that be passed along to the providers?
3 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You know,
4 our intention is, to the extent possible, not
5 passing along those costs to providers.
6 Certainly wholly. Or, you know, passing them
7 along to local departments of social
8 services. We recognize, you know, the
9 challenges that they have.
10 And again, that's part of what's been
11 difficult, is not wanting to cut subsidy and
12 not wanting to implement this bill on the
13 backs of childcare providers and on the backs
14 of local departments of social services.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
16 So studies have shown that New York is
17 the most expensive state to obtain childcare,
18 and the costs are already very high. I've
19 heard from a lot of my providers about the
20 increase in the minimum wage and labor costs.
21 So is there anything that OCFS is
22 doing to streamline processes and otherwise
23 reduce the costs for the providers of doing
24 business in New York? Because they need some
32
1 kind of relief.
2 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yeah. So,
3 you know, I think we have -- at OCFS we've
4 adopted the Toyota business reengineering
5 process to try and reduce processes that can
6 delay providers from becoming licensed and
7 expedite their ability to draw down subsidy
8 and payment.
9 But with specific respect to the
10 incremental costs that are the costs of doing
11 business in New York City -- every two years,
12 we are required, Senator, to do what's called
13 a market rate survey. And so we do 25
14 percent of our regulated providers across the
15 state, make sure we cover all of the regions,
16 and we ask them what is the cost, what are
17 they charging to private-pay parents. And
18 there's a very complicated calculation that's
19 done. And based upon that, we set new market
20 rates in the state.
21 So at least in part, those new market
22 rates do reflect the actual costs of doing
23 business for providers. So that's one way,
24 Senator, that we're trying to help, you know,
33
1 mitigate those cost-of-living increases for
2 providers by doing that market rate analysis
3 every two years.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
5 Just switching gears, you and I have
6 had good conversations about Raise the Age.
7 But assuming that the law is passed and takes
8 effect, would 16- and 17-year-olds be placed
9 in existing secure detention facilities,
10 along with the current youth population, or
11 would they be segregated out and placed
12 separately?
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So there's
14 two types of detention that would be used in
15 the new Raise the Age scenario. So one is
16 that 16- and 17-year-olds who are now
17 detained in local jails would be temporarily
18 detained pre-adjudication in locally
19 administered secure detention facilities.
20 So the answer to that is that, you
21 know, we have some underutilization in the
22 state's secure detention facilities that we
23 think is enough to at least get us started
24 with having capacity in January of '19.
34
1 As to the additional, right, the
2 post-placement secure facilities which we at
3 OCFS would operate, we have some
4 underutilization, but we would, Senator, be
5 bringing online several new secure facilities
6 to specifically serve the newly sentenced 16-
7 and 17-year-olds.
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Where would those
9 be located?
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: We haven't
11 made that determination yet, Senator.
12 Certainly there are, you know, many
13 facilities across the state. There's
14 facilities that we and other state agencies
15 have decommissioned over the years. So
16 again, I think, you know, when we get to that
17 point, it's really taking a fresh look at
18 where the physical assets exist throughout
19 the state and where we can implement building
20 those facilities in the most responsible and
21 fiscally prudent way.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: As you know, I've
23 been deeply concerned for a long time over
24 the level of violence in the youth
35
1 facilities. And we know the workers' comp
2 cases were exploding because of the violence.
3 And I'm very happy to hear you say that the
4 incidence of youth-on-youth violence and
5 youth-on-staff violence have declined. But
6 do you have any statistics that you could
7 share with the Legislature in that regard?
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Certainly.
9 I don't have them here with me today, but
10 we'd be happy to provide any information --
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So you could do
12 some kind of comparison of previous years and
13 what the incidents are now?
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, that would be
16 great.
17 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Of course.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Well, we've always
19 had trouble getting that in the past, just so
20 you know.
21 What training do youth development
22 aides in secure detention facilities
23 currently receive with regard to how to
24 handle these violent incidents?
36
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So today
2 in OCFS's system, all newly hired youth
3 development aides receive about 200 hours of
4 training. So we call it academy training.
5 So they learn a variety of skills. They
6 certainly learn about youth development, you
7 know, developmental phases of young people.
8 They learn about trauma, which we've all
9 talked about. The brain research certainly
10 supports that many young people in the
11 juvenile justice system have come from a lot
12 of trauma in their lives.
13 We spend a lot of time, Senator,
14 training staff on deescalation techniques.
15 Our goal, when young people are having
16 trouble in the facilities, is to the greatest
17 degree possible deescalate them, through
18 counseling or through individualized
19 planning, given what an individual youth's
20 triggers might be. But we also certainly
21 employ a wide variety of restraint
22 techniques, and so those are taught as well
23 in our academy.
24 And then within -- you know, every
37
1 year thereafter, there are a set number of
2 additional trainings that we do provide to
3 staff as refreshers and further staff
4 development.
5 So I think, on whole, we have a pretty
6 robust training program for our staff. In
7 fact, I think you all know that DOCCS brought
8 online the Hudson facility last December, and
9 we were very happy to be asked by DOCCS to
10 assist in training their staff, the
11 correction aides and their clinicians, on
12 pieces of our model and our juvenile justice
13 system. So we've got a nice relationship
14 with DOCCS.
15 And likewise, Senator, you know, as I
16 said to you last evening, we are always
17 looking at ways within OCFS facilities to
18 make them more safe and more secure for
19 staff. And so we've partnered with DOCCS
20 where they have demonstrated some techniques,
21 and we've adopted some of those that, again,
22 we are comfortable with, given that we are
23 serving juveniles and young people, right,
24 and not adult prisoners.
38
1 So I think we've struck a really good
2 balance and have a good relationship with
3 DOCCS and DCJS and SCOC as well.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
5 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
6 We've been joined by Assemblywoman
7 Didi Barrett and Assemblyman Bronson.
8 Next to question, Chairwoman Lupardo.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We've been joined
10 by Senator Sue Serino.
11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Thank you,
12 Mr. Chair.
13 Good morning, Commissioner. It's nice
14 to see you. It looks like our paths are
15 crossing over the Title XX issue now that I
16 chair the Aging Committee. Obviously there's
17 a lot of concern about this redirecting of
18 these funds, specifically the New York City
19 senior center issue, which puts probably
20 65 centers in jeopardy.
21 Not to go over questions that have
22 already been asked, but do you have a
23 breakdown of how the counties are in fact
24 spending that? Because I know my county uses
39
1 it on adult protective services and have
2 expressed a concern that with this
3 redirection, it does in fact amount to an
4 unexpected cost on their side, an unfunded
5 mandate.
6 So do we have that breakdown? Because
7 I know you pretty much --
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: We
9 certainly do. We can tell from claims
10 submitted. And again, I want -- you know, I
11 might have confused folks earlier, but
12 there's two -- under Title XX, there's two
13 pots of money. So the total pot is around
14 $96 million, $97 million. Sixty-six million
15 of it has been and continues, in the
16 Executive Budget, to be set aside for
17 supporting protective services for adults as
18 well as domestic violence services.
19 But we can tell, to your question,
20 Assemblywoman, of the Title XX other, from --
21 again, we'll have to do a deeper dive into
22 claims, but which counties are using the
23 Title XX other, the $26 million for other
24 reasons.
40
1 And again, we will work with any
2 county in my finance office to figure out
3 what other potential funding streams there
4 might be to help mitigate some of those local
5 impacts. Maybe there's some FFFS money or
6 some other discretionary pot of money that
7 they could claim for in a different way.
8 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Yeah, it's
9 very hard to analyze the impact without
10 seeing those numbers, so that would be
11 appreciated.
12 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Sure.
13 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: But I can tell
14 you there will be a lot of distress expressed
15 from those seniors, I can tell you that, in
16 New York City. So that will be coming your
17 way, I'm sure.
18 I have a question about the
19 after-school additional appropriation. So
20 obviously that's very good news. And we've
21 worked very hard to get the concern for
22 after-school programing and the need for
23 these slots on the radar for quite some time.
24 So I'm wondering, what was the
41
1 thinking behind allocating the $35 million
2 through the Anti-Poverty Initiative? There
3 are those 15 or 16 communities that have been
4 established, and mine is one of them, so I'm
5 happy about that. But I'm curious, how was
6 it put together that those funds would go
7 through the poverty initiative?
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Quite
9 frankly, I think that the thinking is that
10 those are our most vulnerable communities and
11 that when we have additional funding, that we
12 want to try and point dollars, as much as we
13 can, to those communities who are in many
14 instances very service-poor and who need
15 services like childcare and after-school.
16 But certainly, Assemblywoman, we
17 recognize that if we were in a different
18 place financially, right, there's always a
19 need for more after-school programs. But the
20 intention is to try and be raising up those
21 identified communities across the state who
22 have really profound concerns with
23 homelessness and lack of employment and a
24 need really for more community-based
42
1 services. So that's really the intention.
2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: So how will
3 those funds be administered? Will they be
4 administered through existing programs, like
5 Advantage After School, or will we be
6 creating another entity entirely that will be
7 directed towards those united ways --
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Our goal
9 is not to create yet another, right, another
10 model of program. You know, this money
11 actually will be in the State Ed Department's
12 budget, but it will be suballocated to OCFS.
13 So, Assemblywoman, as we typically do,
14 we would issue a request for proposals.
15 Again, targeted to those 16 anti-poverty
16 communities, and they would be able to
17 respond with proposals.
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Just one other
19 track. If we could go back to the childcare
20 issue. Maybe I'm a skeptic, but I'm not
21 expecting much regulatory or financial relief
22 coming from Washington, especially these
23 days. And you said you were waiting for the
24 new Secretary of Human Services to arrive.
43
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes.
2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: They seem to
3 be more focused on tax credits. And we have
4 an initiative in the budget this year for tax
5 credits. I think some of us have felt that
6 for a long time we've ignored sort of the
7 childcare industry as a whole, where workers
8 are underpaid, centers are closing because
9 they haven't gotten the reimbursements.
10 We've discussed the market survey.
11 So I'm just curious as to -- what is
12 our ballpark plan? Because you know where
13 we're potentially heading. When we have so
14 many kids on a waiting list or so many who
15 are unserved, how do we turn around and cope
16 with that potential looming crisis?
17 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Those are
18 the very kinds of questions, Assemblywoman,
19 that we ask ourselves, you know, at OCFS.
20 And again, given that this is a new
21 administration that we've heard seems to be
22 leaning toward regulatory relief, we are
23 hopeful that we will make some progress.
24 And the other thing I would say is
44
1 that we are carefully watching other states
2 who have gone forward and who have
3 implemented some parts of the Childcare
4 Development Block Grant act. And, you know,
5 it's concerning what we're already seeing in
6 other states. It's not surprising. And it's
7 in fact the reason why we have chosen the
8 path we have in New York today. States like
9 Connecticut and Vermont and even
10 Mississippi -- Mississippi's waiting list --
11 they never had a waiting list prior to
12 implementing the CCDBG Act, but now their
13 waiting list, as we understand it, is almost
14 now as high as the active caseload of
15 families who are receiving subsidy.
16 You know, Connecticut has seen waiting
17 lists for families growing exponentially.
18 And so our hope is that these other
19 states are now going to join us in really
20 pressing for some federal relief, because at
21 some point, right, the bottom is going to
22 drop out and families are going to be waiting
23 for very, very, very long periods of time to
24 be able to access care.
45
1 So again, I think that's a very
2 legitimate question that you ask. But we
3 have got to give this our very best shot in
4 Washington in helping folks really understand
5 what this means to low-income working
6 families.
7 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: I think people
8 are surprised when they learn -- and I want
9 you to correct me if I'm wrong -- that over
10 80 percent of children who are eligible for
11 childcare subsidies are not receiving them,
12 that we really aren't getting ahead in this
13 game. We're not able to add new slots, we're
14 playing catch up. And with this worry, it
15 just compounds it.
16 Is that correct, that we do have
17 almost 83 percent of children who are
18 eligible for subsidies unserved?
19 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes, I do
20 believe that's an accurate figure.
21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Yeah. It's
22 very hard to get ahead when we're playing
23 catch up like this.
24 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: It is. It
46
1 is. And it doesn't help when, again, we are
2 getting almost no additional support from the
3 federal government. And on top of which,
4 good luck, states, with implementing a
5 $550 million Child Care Development Block
6 Grant Act. We're in a very, very tough
7 place.
8 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Thanks for
9 your work.
10 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
11 Senator?
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
13 Senator Persaud.
14 SENATOR PERSAUD: Good morning,
15 Commissioner.
16 Getting back to the childcare
17 financing with the elimination of funding for
18 kids with special needs and payments for
19 tuition, have you spoken with the school
20 districts on how that's going to affect them
21 and how they'll bridge that gap?
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: No, we've
23 not had conversations with the local school
24 districts, Senator.
47
1 But again, you know, as I said
2 earlier, you know, we are -- and the Governor
3 has increased the school aid budgets not only
4 in the New York City area, but certainly
5 statewide. And again, that's the belief,
6 that the local school districts, with the
7 increased aid, can take responsibility for
8 those costs that to date have been falling to
9 the foster care system.
10 SENATOR PERSAUD: We know that foster
11 care has been underfunded, and so now we're
12 cutting more of their funding. How is the
13 municipality going to be able to afford that?
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
15 know what specific aspect of foster care that
16 you're suggesting is underfunded.
17 SENATOR PERSAUD: I think in general
18 the foster care population has been
19 underfunded. There are things that we should
20 be funding -- for example, more of tuition or
21 transportation, more of housing. They're not
22 receiving that. And now we're taking away
23 from another vulnerable part of the
24 population, the special needs population, and
48
1 we're asking those agencies to fund them. So
2 you are telling them to take away the funding
3 from what was already underfunded to take
4 care of them. How should they do that?
5 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Well, the
6 other thing I think that is again
7 important -- and I hear you, Senator. You
8 know, we will never, right, in our lifetimes
9 have enough to do everything that we all know
10 we want to do and could do for our vulnerable
11 families in this state. And I think that's
12 true of every place in the country.
13 But something for us to remember and
14 be proud of is that, you know, we are one of
15 the very few states that funds preventive
16 services in as richly a way as we do in
17 New York State. If you talk to other states,
18 you know, there's virtually very little and
19 sometimes no state support for preventive
20 services. That's why their foster care
21 numbers are exploding, and have been. We've
22 had the exact opposite experience in our
23 state, that because we provide 62 cents of
24 every dollar to local districts, that we've
49
1 been able to keep down the number of kids in
2 foster care and really create across the
3 state I think a very rich array of services
4 for those families who are vulnerable and
5 whose children may be at risk of coming into
6 care.
7 SENATOR PERSAUD: Thanks for saying
8 that New York is, you know, beyond everyone
9 else, because we want to make sure that
10 everyone follows our lead. We don't want to
11 be like the other states.
12 But our foster care population, it's
13 not a population that we should cut funding
14 from. You know, it's a needy population. We
15 have too many foster care kids who are moving
16 to the homeless population. You know,
17 they're moving -- when they're aging out,
18 there are not the services there, and so
19 they're not being prepared.
20 So when we're cutting the funding
21 while they're in the pipeline, we're really
22 pushing them out onto the street, into the
23 homeless population. And we were trying not
24 to do this.
50
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: If I
2 could, Senator, just on that point, just add
3 a couple of things that we are doing.
4 So last year, you know, the Governor
5 had the $2 billion supported housing
6 proposal, so young people leaving foster care
7 and leaving the juvenile justice system are
8 in the population to be served in those
9 programs.
10 I think the other thing that we've
11 been very focused on in New York with respect
12 to our youth aging out of foster care is to
13 make sure that those who are in interested in
14 postsecondary education and college have the
15 opportunity to go to college and to stay in
16 college. And we've really been very grateful
17 for the partnerships that we've forged with
18 the Higher Education Services Corporation to
19 make sure that we in child welfare really
20 understand the types of financial aid that's
21 available for youth exiting care.
22 And we're doing a lot of work with
23 SUNY and CUNY because unfortunately, while
24 we're doing a better job of having young
51
1 people leave care and go to college, there's
2 a lot of drop-off when they're there because
3 they need a lot of wraparound support. And
4 so we're doing a lot with SUNY to try and
5 institutionalize some of those supports that
6 our young people need on the campuses.
7 And just this past December we were
8 able to, working with SUNY and CUNY, we were
9 able at OCFS to allow funding for young
10 people who didn't have a place to go home to
11 for the long holiday break. You'd be
12 surprised how many young people in
13 colleges -- and not just young people in
14 foster care -- have no place to go during
15 college breaks. And so the schools were
16 great in allowing our young people to stay
17 with them.
18 Is that enough? No. We have more to
19 do. But I also think that this is an
20 opportunity for all of you to hear from me
21 about the other pieces of work that we're
22 focused on to try and improve the lives of
23 young people in foster care. And we'll keep
24 at it, Senator.
52
1 SENATOR PERSAUD: Thank you. I just
2 wanted to mention one thing. You talked
3 about the kids not having a place to go over
4 the long holidays. I was a college
5 registrar, and both colleges that I was at,
6 that's something that they did. They were
7 private colleges, but that's something they
8 did. And I think we should encourage
9 colleges across the board to do that for more
10 of the students.
11 Thank you, Commissioner.
12 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you,
13 Senator.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblywoman Fahy.
16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you,
17 Mr. Chairman.
18 And thank you, Commissioner. Thank
19 you for being here today.
20 I just want to mention a couple of
21 things and a couple of questions, couple of
22 comments. And I just want to piggyback on a
23 question earlier from I think Senator Young,
24 regarding the youth violence in prisons. And
53
1 I'm encouraged to hear that you mentioned
2 that the numbers are coming down. Are there
3 new strategies that have been developed
4 that -- I know you said you would follow up
5 with the statistics, and I would welcome
6 those as well. Are there some new strategies
7 that you want to mention?
8 I have a couple of other questions
9 too, so I'll just be brief.
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Sure.
11 Yes. So I'm happy to talk about that. So in
12 our OCFS juvenile justice facilities, we've
13 done a lot of things to strengthen our
14 overall security.
15 So we've spent a lot of time making
16 sure that we have cameras so that we are
17 watching what's going on both with youth and
18 with our staff, making sure that folks are
19 doing the really critically important job
20 that we need them to do.
21 We have made investments in a
22 statewide facility security director, and
23 this person goes about several times a year
24 actually through each facility in great
54
1 detail, again, making sure that contraband is
2 not being hidden, that we don't have other
3 potential physical risk factors in the
4 facilities.
5 We have formed a statewide search team
6 that goes into facilities unannounced to
7 search for contraband. Because again, that
8 is a -- as you all know very well, when
9 contraband starts getting in, that can create
10 a lot of problems in the facility.
11 We are equipping our staff with
12 state-of-the-art radios that have personal
13 safety devices on it, it's almost like a GPS,
14 for staff who are in the facility. So if
15 there's an issue, we can tell with great
16 precision not just what building they're in,
17 but actually what room or closet they may be
18 in.
19 So we have done -- you know, we have
20 instituted a clear-bag policy, we call it, so
21 that both staff and visitors who are coming
22 into the facility can't bring just their big
23 backpack or duffel bag, that there are clear
24 bags that they must put any possession that
55
1 they're bringing into the facility. So
2 again, we're trying to manage contraband.
3 Actually DOCCS, you know, consulted with us
4 on that, and we were happy to share the work
5 that we've done.
6 But most importantly, or equally
7 importantly, Assemblywoman, is -- and I said
8 this to Senator Young last night -- you know,
9 safety in the facility is paramount to doing
10 anything else, right, to running an
11 educational program, to having youth feel
12 safe in vocational settings or participating
13 in treatment. And we have spent a lot of
14 time in the past years really building up our
15 educational programs for young people. I am
16 really proud of the work that we've done,
17 especially in our secure facilities where of
18 course young people stay the longest, right,
19 serving out their sentences with us.
20 So we've had a number of staff obtain
21 their associate's degrees while they are with
22 us, within the walls of a secure facility.
23 We actually have wonderful partnerships with
24 Colombia-Greene Community College. They come
56
1 into our Brookwood secure facility and bring
2 their classroom, professors and students,
3 into the facility so that our youth can
4 participate.
5 And then of course not every youth,
6 right, has an interest or is able to attend
7 college. And we've done a lot of work on
8 creating meaningful certification programs so
9 that when young people leave -- and we're
10 trying to promote successful reentry -- that
11 they have a greater likelihood of getting a
12 job.
13 So we've got an Energy Warrior Program
14 with Cornell Cooperative Extension where
15 young people can actually be certified in
16 installing weatherization -- what do they
17 call that -- insulation that you blow into
18 the walls and that, you know, again, they can
19 get a job. We have a flagger certification
20 that they can use with transportation to
21 assist on road projects. We have an
22 aquaponics certification, which I'd love any
23 of you here to come and visit, particularly
24 our industry -- limited secure residential
57
1 program. We have got a phenomenal aquaponics
2 program where we grow tilapia and lobsters
3 and very expensive lettuce that they're
4 turning around as an industry and selling to
5 local restaurants.
6 So we're really focused on things that
7 are of interest to young people while they're
8 with us, because when they're engaged, right,
9 they're more successful. When you have
10 engaged youth, either in school all day or in
11 enhancement activities, you are maintaining
12 safety in the facility.
13 So we, Assemblywoman, have put
14 tremendous effort into trying to improve
15 those components.
16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you. And I
17 really am pleased to hear you say the focus
18 is on education and training, especially on
19 some of the green jobs, where we know those
20 jobs are growing. And I think it is -- you
21 also took a word right out of my mouth, which
22 is engagement. And the more we have engaged
23 youth, the less we have behavioral issues.
24 So I am encouraged, and I do look
58
1 forward to the statistics.
2 I just -- I know I'm out of time, so I
3 just want to mention a couple of other
4 things. The SUNY CUNY childcare subsidy,
5 that cut is very disconcerting, because that
6 is a need. Again, we can't keep students
7 engaged if those that need it don't have the
8 access to childcare.
9 And it is the same with the childcare
10 subsidy. I know we've heard it already this
11 morning, but I think it is critically
12 important that we not cut the subsidy that is
13 going to our local social service agencies,
14 because again that -- it struck me as another
15 unfunded mandate not to continue that
16 subsidy. And I worry that something else
17 will be eliminated as a result of that.
18 And then, just quickly, I was going to
19 ask the question, but on the after-school
20 program, very pleased to see the Governor's
21 proposal with the additional $35 million.
22 Very encouraging. As you know, there's about
23 a million youth that need after-school slots,
24 not unlike the childcare slots. But it is
59
1 encouraging. My only question there would be
2 how we would consolidate with the other
3 existing ones so that we don't have the
4 nonprofits and the school districts tripping
5 over themselves with the different
6 requirements, because that would bring us up
7 to four, as I understand it, among two
8 different agencies. So that's -- it's very
9 difficult on the providers, community
10 providers, as well as the school districts to
11 monitor different regs, different application
12 procedures, and different regulatory
13 requirements.
14 So I'm out of time, but I just would
15 appreciate you being cognizant of that and
16 open to trying to work together again so that
17 we can serve more and not have additional
18 funds caught up in administrative
19 requirements.
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Good
21 points, thank you.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you so
23 much, Commissioner.
24 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
60
1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
2 Senator.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
4 Senator Tim Kennedy.
5 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you,
6 Chairwoman.
7 Good morning, Commissioner.
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Good
9 morning.
10 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you for your
11 service.
12 I want to talk about Erie County.
13 This year Erie County's allocation for the
14 New York State Childcare Block Grant was
15 $24.6 million. Comparatively, Monroe County
16 received $36.3 million; Nassau County,
17 $52.6 million. There's a clear disparity in
18 funding between counties.
19 Currently in Erie County there's a
20 waiting list of more than 320 families who
21 are eligible to receive childcare assistance,
22 but the county doesn't have the funds
23 necessary to serve them.
24 So I have concerns about the
61
1 methodology that your department is using to
2 determine this funding. And right now a
3 county that begins to receive a reduced
4 funding amount will always receive less
5 funding, unless it dedicates a substantial
6 portion of its own budget to filling that
7 gap.
8 So I want to know what we can do to
9 distribute childcare dollars in a more
10 equitable fashion and how we can update this
11 distribution formula so that it reflects
12 current demand rather than prior usage.
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So I would
14 respond in two ways, Senator, that again, if
15 a county has not been spending the totality
16 of its allocation and we look at their
17 claims, you know, if they're not spending it
18 on a consistent basis, then presumably over
19 time that means, right, that maybe someone
20 else who's spending all of theirs and who has
21 waiting lists should have it to use.
22 I suspect that that has been part of
23 the issue with Erie County. And I'll
24 certainly confirm that when I'm back at the
62
1 office, but I think that there had been a
2 period of years, Senator, where Erie was not
3 expending all of its childcare allocation.
4 And as you know -- do you remember
5 rollover, right, from years ago? We had tens
6 of millions of dollars of rollover. We
7 really cracked down on that and said we can't
8 have rollover, people need to be spending the
9 childcare allocation that we're putting out
10 to counties. So that's the first response I
11 would have.
12 The second is that this year, in 2017,
13 we are going to be opening up our childcare
14 subsidy regulations. So we have not looked
15 at our childcare subsidy regulations in a
16 good number of years. And I know that there
17 have been conversations about methodology,
18 there have been conversations about market
19 rate and how rates are set. And so we will
20 have the opportunity this year, in opening
21 that discussion, for obviously public
22 discourse and stakeholder engagement.
23 And that perhaps, Senator, is an
24 opportunity to have some of your concerns
63
1 spoken about and discussed more fully. But
2 we will be doing that this year.
3 SENATOR KENNEDY: Well, Commissioner,
4 I appreciate that. But what I will tell you
5 is the simple fact is there's 320 families on
6 a waiting list. And that has to be
7 rectified. And I think a constant
8 communication, where we can resolve that
9 issue, I think is imperative moving forward.
10 So whatever the distribution formula
11 is, I think we have to take into
12 consideration the needs of the community,
13 regardless of its geographic location in the
14 state, whether it's Erie County or Monroe
15 County or anywhere in between. But Erie
16 County, I know there's a massive waiting list
17 of needy families, and that just has to be
18 rectified, whatever we have to do to resolve
19 that.
20 Regarding that same waiting list in
21 Erie County, last year's budget included
22 $500,000 for a WDI facilitated enrollment in
23 Erie County, which was badly needed but was
24 just the tip of the iceberg. So due to this
64
1 high demand for the program, not every family
2 between 200 and 275 percent of the poverty
3 level in Erie County has received assistance.
4 So the proposed budget doesn't add any
5 new appropriations to this program. So I'm
6 just curious what we need to do and how this
7 budget addresses the growing need for
8 childcare costs for families in Erie County,
9 specifically for those making up to
10 275 percent of the poverty level.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So,
12 Senator, as you may know, all legislative
13 adds are removed from the Executive Budget
14 this year, and that is the case. So all of
15 the facilitated enrollment projects that
16 members of the Legislature have put your
17 money toward do not exist in the Executive
18 Budget.
19 To your question about, you know,
20 subsidy, right, it's the question of the day:
21 How, without additional federal funding
22 coming to New York, can we expand capacity
23 for more subsidy? And again, I don't have a
24 great answer for that.
65
1 I would also just add that the Earned
2 Income Tax Credit program, as well as the
3 Governor's proposing the middle-class tax
4 credit for childcare, you know, may be other
5 strategies to help some of those families
6 that -- you know, Senator, I don't have all
7 those details in front of me, but I would be
8 very happy to have a separate conversation
9 with you about that.
10 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you.
11 In Erie County I know you've been very
12 involved, your office has been very involved
13 with some horrible, tragic deaths in some
14 situations. The county has rectified many of
15 the issues within Child Protective Services,
16 with the help of your office. Unfortunately,
17 my district still sees a very high rate of
18 child abuse and a high number of CPS
19 caseloads.
20 So Healthy Families New York works to
21 prevent child abuse, allowing home visitation
22 programs and providing resources and
23 services. Shouldn't we invest more money
24 into this program so we can lower the
66
1 back-end costs associated with these
2 instances of abuse?
3 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes. I
4 mean we're always, Senator, looking to, you
5 know, expand prevention programs. You know,
6 you mentioned Healthy Families. We had an
7 opportunity to expand our Healthy Families
8 program last year using the $5 million of
9 adoption assistance that we had. And then
10 again this year, with the additional
11 $2 million, Senator, we again hope to expand
12 the Healthy Families program.
13 So I think we have some good
14 opportunities on the horizon.
15 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you. And just
16 the last question regarding the CPS issues,
17 the progress that has been made in large part
18 due to the focus and efforts on reducing the
19 caseloads in the county -- again, with the
20 assistance of your office.
21 But what is OCFS doing to ensure, not
22 just in Erie County but statewide, that
23 caseworkers have the resources that they need
24 to reduce these caseloads and properly
67
1 investigate these reports of abuse and
2 neglect?
3 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So I would
4 first of all echo, Senator, your comments
5 about the progress that Erie County Child
6 Protective Services has made. You know, they
7 were the poster child, right, upstate in
8 previous years of high-profile cases and a
9 myriad of issues. And, you know, under the
10 new leadership there, they -- and with a lot
11 of help, frankly, from OCFS -- they have made
12 just tremendous progress, and you should be
13 very proud of that.
14 So with respect to kind of caseload
15 standards, as you all know, the Governor
16 vetoed the caseload standard bill. However,
17 he issued a pretty strong veto message to us
18 at OCFS. And so this year, as part of that
19 veto message, we will be reconvening bill
20 sponsors, other stakeholders, to come back to
21 the table and to talk about a way to better
22 study caseload standards.
23 The last report was done in 2006.
24 Again, that was a different governor, and I
68
1 was not here. So I think we want to really
2 be very careful and pay attention to -- you
3 know, not every CPS case is the same, right?
4 There are sex abuse cases, very complicated,
5 there's ed neglect cases, there could be a
6 childcare investigation where there's
7 25 children who have to be investigated. You
8 know, a case is not a case. They're all
9 different, and I think we need to take that
10 into consideration.
11 The other thing I think that we're
12 also particularly concerned about and we want
13 to have conversations, you know, with the
14 stakeholders in this discussion, is about the
15 issue that we see in our oversight work, that
16 setting caseload standards in and of
17 themselves does not equal quality. In fact,
18 it can sometimes create the opposite, where
19 the workers are feeling tremendous pressure
20 to maintain the 12 or the 15 caseload, and so
21 they are closing cases without a thorough
22 safety and risk assessment, without taking
23 the time to document the work, and without
24 taking the time to have the preventive
69
1 services. And we've seen that. We have seen
2 that. It was an issue in Erie County,
3 frankly, Senator, several years ago.
4 So as we think again about caseload
5 standards, we want to be having a more
6 inclusive conversation and a more statewide
7 conversation about what that means. And
8 again, we'll be doing that this year.
9 SENATOR KENNEDY: If I could just make
10 one request to that point.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Of course.
12 SENATOR KENNEDY: If we could have a
13 representative from Erie County, given the
14 experience that we've dealt with --
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE:
16 Absolutely. Absolutely.
17 SENATOR KENNEDY: -- uniquely in our
18 community, but through the work in your
19 office as well, I think that would be very
20 helpful.
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: It's a
22 great idea.
23 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you, Senator.
24 Assemblywoman Jaffee, to close on this
70
1 side.
2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you.
3 Thank you very much.
4 As you can note, the issue of
5 childcare and providing sufficient childcare
6 subsidies for our communities is a major
7 issue, especially given, as I noted earlier,
8 the poverty issues. And certainly another
9 concern is that those families that are
10 already currently receiving subsidized
11 childcare from funding streams that were
12 associated through facilitated enrollment, or
13 even the SUNY/CUNY childcare subsidies --
14 now, the Governor cut that totally from the
15 budget.
16 So, you know, how do we at this point
17 provide them assistance? Because these are
18 very essential programs that expand the
19 opportunities for childcare, especially those
20 who are continuing their education so they
21 can move forward in the workforce. So that's
22 a very serious issue. As well as, noted
23 earlier, we do not have enough funding for
24 subsidies for the children in our state.
71
1 Eighty-three percent do not get subsidies,
2 and these are very needy families.
3 So I just wanted to ask that other
4 question and continue to raise concerns
5 regarding that. So what do we do about the
6 SUNY/CUNY and facilitated enrollment, zero?
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I think
8 those, Assemblywoman, are all part of our
9 bigger challenge and ongoing discussion. And
10 I don't have the answer for you here today.
11 Again, this is, right, this is the beginning
12 of budget discussions. And we know how much
13 both houses are interested in childcare. And
14 we will continue to be in dialogue with both
15 of you throughout the rest of the budget
16 deliberations. But I appreciate your
17 comments.
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Well, I
19 appreciate that. And I hope that as we move
20 forward, we'll be able to expand the funding
21 for these essential programs.
22 Thank you.
23 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
24 Senator.
72
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Diane
2 Savino.
3 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
4 Young.
5 Thank you, Commissioner, for your
6 testimony. We had an opportunity the other
7 day to meet, so I'm not going to go over some
8 of the conversations we had or reiterate any
9 of the questions that have already been
10 raised.
11 I do want to talk a bit about two
12 things that are important, certainly to me.
13 One of them is the independent monitor that
14 has been appointed to oversee ACS. And I
15 would just like to state that what I would
16 hope to come out of this independent monitor
17 is less of a -- less political
18 recommendations and more substantive changes
19 to the agency.
20 And so what I would hope comes out of
21 this is some changes to what goes on in the
22 CPS field offices, because I don't really
23 think the public has a sense of the work that
24 CPS workers really do, and they confuse it
73
1 with the nonprofit sector that also provides
2 direct service, more direct service to the
3 children and the families than the CPS
4 workers in fact may do.
5 But there is definitely a need in
6 these field offices for social workers.
7 Again, there should be social work units,
8 there should be screening units. You and I
9 had a conversation the other day of the
10 number of false cases that are called into
11 the state central registry. Which
12 unfortunately, every one of those cases has
13 to be treated as if it is a serious abuse
14 case or neglect case, which detracts from the
15 work that the CPS workers have to do.
16 So years ago when I did the work, we
17 had screening units that dealt with the
18 anonymous-anonymous cases, to take those away
19 from the serious cases. So we need to kind
20 of go back to some of that stuff.
21 Obviously, training is always
22 important, but supporting the staff is
23 equally important. So I would hope that
24 that's what comes out of the appointment of
74
1 this independent monitor, as well as
2 potentially some legislative changes. We had
3 a discussion the other day about some of the
4 burdens that I believe the Legislature has
5 placed on child welfare. Whenever there's a
6 crisis, we think we can solve it with another
7 requirement. And sometimes we actually make
8 it worse, we make it harder to do this job.
9 And so I hope that you would be
10 supportive of some of the proposals that I
11 will be moving through the Children and
12 Families Committee to eliminate some of the
13 redundant work that I think does nothing to
14 improve casework practice or to really
15 investigate abuse and neglect.
16 So I look forward to that. And again,
17 I hope the independent monitor is helpful as
18 opposed to purely, you know, looking to
19 penalize an agency that is already struggling
20 on a day-to-day basis and handles tens of
21 thousands of cases.
22 On runaway homeless youth, I was very
23 happy to see that the Governor included what
24 is essentially my bill and Assemblywoman
75
1 Weinstein's bill on the runaway homeless
2 youth, improving it, expanding it to age 24.
3 But if you could -- there's a couple of
4 changes that the Governor made in our
5 proposal that we're a little confused about,
6 where it could be simply drafting, where it
7 appears that they interchange "runaway" and
8 "homeless" from time to time in a way that we
9 don't quite understand.
10 And there's also a requirement -- so
11 on that, you don't have to answer now.
12 Perhaps someone could look at it and see,
13 does it -- it might just simply be poorly
14 drafted.
15 But there's something that maybe you
16 can explain to me and some of the advocates;
17 we don't quite understand why this is
18 necessary. But under the Governor's
19 proposal, it would require that the Runaway
20 Homeless Youth Program contact the local
21 department of social services if it believes
22 that the youth is a destitute child. What is
23 the purpose behind that? What is the value
24 behind that?
76
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I think
2 the value behind it is that a destitute child
3 is without, right, any legal guardian or
4 anyone who is providing any care to them.
5 And so, you know, the local department of
6 social services, if the person is under the
7 age of 18, right, has an obligation to try
8 and make certain that that young person is
9 not destitute and out there on their own but
10 can be, you know, connected with a resource.
11 I think that's the intention.
12 SENATOR SAVINO: You seem a little
13 confused too. Maybe we just don't quite
14 understand what the --
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Okay, we
16 can certainly talk --
17 SENATOR SAVINO: Is there a monetary
18 connection to it? Is it a shifting of the
19 funding? Will someone else pay for the
20 services?
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
22 think it's that. But again, I don't want to
23 misspeak. And we can certainly have
24 conversation about the language in the
77
1 proposed bill.
2 SENATOR SAVINO: Yeah, it just -- it
3 doesn't seem to make immediate sense. There
4 could be some explanation for it, but it
5 doesn't make immediate sense either to
6 myself -- I can't speak for Assemblywoman
7 Weinstein now, but I know she and I both
8 remarked upon it. And in discussions with
9 the advocates for runaway homeless youth,
10 they brought it up as well.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Okay.
12 SENATOR SAVINO: So I think as we move
13 forward, we need to clarify the language in
14 what the Governor has proposed in both the
15 Article VII and in the budget portion.
16 So I want to thank you for your
17 attention, and I look forward to working with
18 you on some of these prospective changes.
19 Thank you.
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Same here,
21 Senator.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Liz
23 Krueger.
24 SENATOR KRUEGER: Good morning,
78
1 Commissioner.
2 You and I also had a chance to meet;
3 there's just a couple of clarifications based
4 on some of the answers you already gave
5 today.
6 So the answer of the Title XX money
7 being shifted into mandatory spending on
8 childcare versus the various options that
9 different locales have taken. And it would
10 mandate that money that currently in New York
11 City is used to fund senior centers would
12 instead have to be used to fund childcare.
13 And I asked you in the meeting, but I'm just
14 going to, for the record, say it now and ask
15 you again. Could your agency please analyze
16 the changing demand for childcare slots in
17 the different funding streams because of the
18 impact of universal pre-K?
19 I can't speak for anywhere else, but
20 in New York City, where this would be a very
21 disturbing impact to take the money away from
22 the seniors to put into childcare, we know
23 for a fact, because we moved over 70,000
24 4-year-olds into UPK -- and I think that
79
1 number is expected to go up in September
2 again -- that there's less demand for daycare
3 slots for 4-year-olds because they're in
4 universal pre-K.
5 So it actually -- I'm not saying we
6 don't need more money for childcare, but I
7 don't believe the demand is there now,
8 specifically because of the significant
9 change in the movement of how people are
10 getting their childcare.
11 And I know that I was advised that a
12 number of the major childcare advocacy
13 organizations in New York City have actually
14 signed onto a letter saying please don't take
15 the seniors' Title XX money away. So it's
16 just a public plea, this needs to be reversed
17 in the budget.
18 But I really do think it's important
19 to get a handle on, because of all the
20 different funding streams in childcare, are
21 there changes that reflect the overall needs
22 in different areas? Because localities use
23 the funds in different ways and have
24 different needs.
80
1 And following up on that, there's been
2 a proposal for several years that I don't see
3 it in the budget, and I'm curious what you
4 think, there's a mandate for women on TANF to
5 perhaps have to do work activities, requiring
6 that the state pay for childcare for 1- and
7 2-year-olds. My understanding is childcare
8 for 1- and 2-year-olds is the most expensive
9 kind of childcare. And there's been a
10 proposal made that if you allow the
11 flexibility of not requiring these women to
12 participate in the work activities, that you
13 could actually use that money to provide for
14 multiple times the number of childcare slots
15 in the subsidized program for poor families
16 who are desperately seeking the childcare to
17 hold the jobs they have with their slightly
18 older children.
19 So has the agency explored that
20 proposal at all?
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You know,
22 Senator, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but
23 that -- I'm going to have to confer with my
24 OTDA colleague, Mike Perrin, around the TANF
81
1 piece. But I took good notes and will
2 absolutely explore that.
3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
4 And then, finally, on the discussion
5 of reducing the reimbursements to New York
6 City only for services for special needs in
7 foster care, you stated the Governor's
8 position that since New York City is getting
9 300 more in education funding, they can pay
10 for it out of that.
11 Am I correct that all school
12 districts are getting some adjusted increase
13 in education funding, it's not just unique to
14 New York City?
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Mm-hmm.
16 Mm-hmm.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: Right? Everybody is
18 getting something?
19 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: (Nodding.)
20 Mm-hmm.
21 SENATOR KRUEGER: And certainly the
22 education advocates would tell us that what
23 they're getting is way below what they each
24 believe they need.
82
1 So how is it that New York City
2 specifically is being told, take the money
3 out of your increasing but still inadequate
4 public education funding stream to pay for
5 this?
6 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: The best
7 answer I can give you now, Senator, is that
8 because the vast -- not the vast, but a
9 majority of the drop in the number of
10 children in foster care by proportion is
11 attributed to New York City, that that
12 accounted for the greater shift to New York.
13 SENATOR KRUEGER: So that New York
14 City has fewer kids in foster care and in
15 these programs, but it's holding onto other
16 monies from the state that it would
17 otherwise -- I mean, are we keeping other
18 money in foster care when we reduce the
19 numbers in foster care?
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: No.
21 SENATOR KRUEGER: We're not. I didn't
22 think so.
23 And so it just seems to me, on the
24 budget logic that's being offered, New York
83
1 City should just try not to have anybody in
2 foster care. And you and I might agree in a
3 perfect world we would want that, but I don't
4 think it's either of our position that the
5 City of New York should stop placing children
6 in foster care who truly need to be there.
7 Right?
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: That's
9 true.
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: All right. So yet
11 again, I do not find a justification for this
12 budget cut to New York City. Thank you.
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you,
14 Senator.
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Senator?
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
17 Senator Sue Serino.
18 SENATOR SERINO: Thank you, Senator.
19 And good morning, Commissioner. Thank
20 you very much for taking our questions today.
21 And as chair of the Aging Committee, my
22 question is going to be about adult
23 protective services. And just to give you a
24 little background, I've done quite a few
84
1 series of elder abuse roundtables, and as we
2 know, 85 percent of those cases go
3 unreported. Because of doing those
4 roundtables, we were able to have Lifespan
5 put in the budget, which are
6 multidisciplinary teams that have been very
7 successful. And even though that doesn't
8 fall under your purview, I'd be remiss if I
9 didn't mention it, because we don't want to
10 lose the funding for that.
11 And it's all kind of hand in hand,
12 because as we know, there's a registry for
13 child abuse victims but there isn't a central
14 registry for elder abuse. So my question
15 regarding that are numbers. Are there any
16 specific statistics that are being documented
17 with respect to the type of cases that are
18 being reported, whether it's physical,
19 financial, sexual or neglect?
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
21 have a full answer for you. But again,
22 Senator, we could go back to the local
23 departments of social services and to my
24 office, that also oversees the adult
85
1 protective services. I don't know if you've
2 met Alan Lawitz. He's really led our work on
3 financial exploitation and oversees the
4 protective service for adults.
5 So I will go back, Senator, and see
6 what kind of data that we can provide to
7 answer your question.
8 SENATOR SERINO: Okay. And I don't
9 know if you'd have the answer to this
10 question too, if there's any consistent
11 documentation of the cases that APS OCFS
12 receives, and what would be the process for
13 follow-up to ensure that they're resolved.
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I'll add
15 that to the list, Senator.
16 SENATOR SERINO: Okay. And in the
17 case where it's sent to a police department
18 rather than APS, will OCFS have any
19 notification? Like if the police are
20 handling the case, do they report to you,
21 OCFS, as regards to the case? Would they
22 give you any information?
23 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Well, they
24 wouldn't report to OCFS. They would report
86
1 to the local department of social services,
2 who administers the local protective service
3 for adults program.
4 SENATOR SERINO: Okay. And how many
5 staffers are responsible for tracking the
6 complaints and following up on them with APS?
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
8 have that exact number, Senator.
9 SENATOR SERINO: Okay. Okay, thank
10 you.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You're
12 very welcome.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. I have
14 some follow-up questions that I'd like to
15 ask, and I'd like to follow up on the
16 independent monitor.
17 New York City Mayor de Blasio was here
18 recently, and I asked him about the numerous
19 tragic deaths that have occurred under that
20 agency's watch. And I know that in your
21 proposal there's an independent monitor. You
22 recently, as OCFS, did a study and identified
23 numerous lapses, multiple failures on ACS's
24 part.
87
1 So when you select the independent
2 monitor and he or she is in place, what
3 exactly would their roles and
4 responsibilities be, number one? And number
5 two. Who actually is going to select the
6 independent monitor?
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So OCFS
8 has identified and made the selection of a
9 monitor that's been presented to New York
10 City, so that process has concluded.
11 But more specifically to your
12 question, Senator, about the specific tasks
13 of the monitor, the monitor will be doing an
14 overall diagnostic, first and foremost, of
15 ACS's child protective program, looking at
16 the adequacy of its policies, looking at how
17 robust its own quality assurance process is,
18 looking at its supervisory oversight
19 structure. That was one of our findings in
20 the report, that there were lapses, serious
21 lapses in supervision.
22 They will be looking at data, they
23 will be doing probes into case records. They
24 will be speaking with caseworkers and other
88
1 stakeholders -- again, to try and pinpoint
2 with more precision where at the core are
3 some of the institutional issues that led to
4 these lapses in the handling of the cases.
5 And then Phase Two of the engagement
6 will be the development and implementation of
7 whatever the corrective action is -- whether
8 it's policies, procedures, more staffing. I
9 mean, we just -- we don't know yet. That's
10 the whole point of the diagnostic.
11 And then the third and final phase
12 will be compliance monitoring. So we want to
13 make absolutely certain this time that
14 whatever changes are made, that they are to
15 scale across that very large and complex
16 agency, and that they are sustainable to the
17 extent possible. So there will be a period
18 of compliance monitoring that will be
19 open-ended, and that monitoring will only end
20 when we at the state are satisfied that
21 there's been compliance and that we won't see
22 the kinds of issues that we unfortunately saw
23 in these high-profile deaths.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I'm very relieved
89
1 and happy to hear that you'll be doing the
2 diagnostics and coming up with policy
3 changes.
4 What happens if New York City doesn't
5 comply or if things don't get better?
6 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Well, we
7 have a number of options at our disposal at
8 the state.
9 You know, certainly us directing them
10 to on-board a monitor signals that we mean
11 business, that we are very focused on helping
12 them and requiring them to make those
13 changes. And we don't have any reason to
14 believe today, at least, that they too are
15 not equally committed to fixing their system
16 and to making children more safe. That's the
17 goal all of us bring here every day.
18 You know, in statute we do have the
19 authority -- which we're very judicious in
20 using, for obvious reasons -- but we could
21 have or would have the authority to withhold
22 funding to the city. Obviously, the other
23 side of that is that they need their funding,
24 right, to have staff and caseworkers and the
90
1 kinds of services.
2 But, you know, in the event that we
3 don't see commitment to this monitor and
4 commitment to change, that, you know, OCFS
5 and the administration will take whatever
6 steps are necessary in order to make sure the
7 kids are safe.
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. We
9 don't need any more fatalities, so thank you
10 very much.
11 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
12 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you.
13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: We've been joined
14 by Assemblyman Colton.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
16 Commissioner, by the way. We appreciate your
17 testimony.
18 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very
19 much.
20 Next, Mike Perrin, deputy
21 commissioner, New York State Office of
22 Temporary and Disability Services.
23 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Good
24 morning, Chairwoman Young, Chairman Farrell,
91
1 and Chairman Tedisco -- I think I saw him
2 here a moment ago. He's Senate chair of the
3 Social Services Committee.
4 My name is Michael Perrin. I'm the
5 executive deputy commissioner for the Office
6 of Temporary and Disability Assistance. And
7 I'm first going to convey the regrets of
8 Commissioner Sam Roberts, who could not be
9 here today. He is sick today and so he -- he
10 has asked me to fill in in his stead today,
11 so I'll be providing testimony and addressing
12 questions and answers from the committee.
13 Our mission here at OTDA is to protect
14 and lift up New York's most vulnerable
15 residents and help them achieve
16 self-sufficiency. Financial independence is
17 a powerful feeling. It gives a person the
18 confidence they need to be able to provide
19 not only for themselves, but for their
20 families. It sets their children on a path
21 of success, helping the next generation to
22 succeed. We want all New Yorkers to
23 experience that feeling.
24 OTDA administers vital programs for
92
1 those temporarily unable to work and for many
2 working families who simply aren't able to
3 make ends meet. These programs include
4 providing food and heating assistance to
5 people who need it and creating supportive
6 housing units that will provide the
7 beginnings of a permanent solution to the
8 homelessness issues in the State of New York.
9 We inspect homeless shelters to ensure
10 safety and security. We oversee the state's
11 child support enforcement program. We also
12 assist refugees and immigrants who are in
13 New York in search of the American dream.
14 All of these efforts share a common
15 goal: to help individuals and families meet
16 essential needs and quickly get back on their
17 feet again into self-sufficiency.
18 OTDA has realized remarkable success.
19 Just this past year alone, OTDA opened the
20 doors to over 540 new supportive housing
21 units. SNAP benefits now enable over
22 1.6 million households to purchase healthy
23 foods at their local grocery store and at
24 more farmers' markets than ever before.
93
1 Progress is everywhere. But we have more to
2 do, and this budget proposal advances our
3 mission.
4 The issue of affordable housing is
5 critical for the persons we serve. Both the
6 Governor and the Legislature have made access
7 to housing a top priority, as evidenced by
8 the state's unprecedented $20 billion
9 investment in affordable housing. Over the
10 next five years, the goal of the program is
11 to provide 100 new units of affordable
12 housing and 6,000 units of supportive
13 housing. The $20 billion plan includes
14 $10.4 billion to combat homelessness in
15 New York State.
16 Along with our partners in Homes and
17 Community Renewal and the Office of Mental
18 Health, we are pleased to announce today that
19 1200 units of supportive housing have been
20 funded, and those projects are underway in
21 various stages of completion. This addresses
22 the Governor's promise late last year to
23 begin providing supportive housing, and he
24 laid out a goal of 1200 units late last year.
94
1 And I'm again happy to announce that we're
2 well on our way to achieving that goal.
3 We're well underway in administering
4 the state's housing plan and overall to
5 combat homelessness in a sustainable way.
6 OTDA is committed to ensuring that persons
7 temporarily relying on emergency shelter have
8 access to a safe and clean living
9 environment.
10 Just this past year, OTDA led an
11 effort to inspect all 916 state-funded
12 homeless shelters. The results were
13 staggering, as well as the response. Nearly
14 97 percent of the surveyed shelters were
15 cited for violations that jeopardized the
16 health, safety, and the quality of life of
17 residents.
18 OTDA's response has been aggressive
19 and will become one of ongoing vigilance.
20 For every violation found, a corrective
21 action plan has been put into place. We
22 continue to work diligently with New York
23 City and the counties of the state to keep
24 the quality of life in shelters higher, and
95
1 have begun a multi-year initiative to get all
2 shelters in the State of New York certified.
3 At Governor Cuomo's direction, OTDA
4 implemented new regulations to enhance the
5 state's ability to oversee the conditions of
6 homeless shelters and more closely monitor
7 shelter security measures.
8 This year the Executive Budget will
9 also improve safety and security at shelters
10 by requiring background checks of shelter
11 workers who are in regular contact with
12 children being served in those facilities.
13 This budget will help low-income
14 working families attain basic necessities
15 through a number of anti-poverty programs.
16 For example, the Home Energy Assistance
17 Program, known as HEAP, is one of the state's
18 most important methods to help low-income
19 individuals and low-income families,
20 especially elderly New Yorkers. HEAP helps
21 qualified individuals and qualified
22 households to afford the cost of heating
23 their homes and to reduce energy needs
24 through energy efficiency programs.
96
1 This year the Executive Budget
2 proposes an additional $14.4 million in
3 HEAP funding to support weatherization
4 services for low-income households. The goal
5 is to make homes more efficient and reduce
6 energy costs, so lower-income households are
7 better able to achieve financial stability.
8 Likewise, the Supplemental Nutrition
9 Assistance Program, known as SNAP, increases
10 the food purchasing power of eligible
11 low-income households in order to improve
12 their nutrition and alleviate hunger.
13 Despite the program's success, there
14 are still thousands of families who do not
15 access the full amount of assistance for
16 which they may be eligible. To address this
17 situation, the Governor is taking steps to
18 increase SNAP outreach -- increase outreach
19 to populations who may be eligible for SNAP
20 but who are simply not taking advantage of
21 it.
22 The initiative will engage foundations
23 and the private sector as well as
24 community-based organizations to develop and
97
1 implement innovative ways to connect
2 households with SNAP benefits. Increased
3 awareness and access to nutritious food will
4 result in a healthier New York, and improve
5 food sales for New York farmers.
6 The Governor recognizes also that the
7 summer provides an opportunity, especially
8 for low-income youth, with the time to have
9 an enriching experience through the Summer
10 Youth Employment Program. To address this
11 problem, to improve and to ensure that the
12 same number of youth are served this year as
13 were served last year, you'll see an
14 additional $5 million appropriation for a
15 total of $36 million to fund this program.
16 This is largely in recognition of the minimum
17 wage increase for which many summer youth
18 will be employed. So we'll continue to fund
19 approximately 19,000 slots, which is the same
20 level as last year.
21 The Governor has been steadfast in his
22 support for immigrants and refugees and
23 believes New York should remain a safe haven
24 for all, no matter race, religion, country of
98
1 origin, or economic status. OTDA provides
2 support to local resettlement agencies, and
3 New York State will continue to welcome new
4 arrivals with open arms.
5 The State of New York and OTDA are
6 stronger than in decades. Unemployment is
7 down, from 8.4 percent six years ago to
8 4.9 percent today. New York State has
9 7.9 million private-sector jobs, the most in
10 the history of the state. Together we can
11 all work towards the end goal of building a
12 better, healthier New York for all.
13 Thank you for your time in letting me
14 provide testimony to these committees, and I
15 welcome any questions you may have.
16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very
17 much.
18 Assemblywoman Jaffee.
19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you,
20 Deputy --
21 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Chairman --
22 chairwoman.
23 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you,
24 Deputy Commissioner.
99
1 I wanted to ask regarding the TANF
2 funding, the Temporary Assistance for Needy
3 Families, initiatives to that. Apparently
4 when reviewing the Executive Budget there was
5 an elimination of the -- in the amount of
6 $19.4 million regarding TANF funding for a
7 variety of community programs.
8 First of all, you know, what was the
9 purpose behind eliminating those initiatives
10 for the people who need it most in order to
11 improve their quality of life? Was there
12 expectations that the counties would provide
13 these services for the TANF, in support of
14 the TANF funds, and that they wouldn't be
15 getting at this point -- and do you have an
16 estimate of the number of individuals and
17 residents and families that would be impacted
18 by the elimination of these programs and
19 initiatives because of the cuts?
20 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
21 Yeah. Thank you very much for the question,
22 Assemblymember.
23 Just to be clear, the TANF program is
24 a block grant, and it will continue this
100
1 year, as it has since 1996, at over
2 $2.4 billion in federal funding. So I think
3 your question -- and correct me if I'm
4 wrong -- your question refers to a number of
5 changes in the Governor's Executive Budget
6 this year over last year.
7 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Could you just
8 speak a little louder? Or put the microphone
9 a little closer. It's hard to --
10 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
11 thought it was pretty close.
12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: That's it.
13 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: So I
14 think you're probably referring to a number
15 of programs that were added in the budget
16 process last year, if I'm not mistaken. I'll
17 stand corrected if I'm wrong.
18 But the Governor's budget is largely
19 consistent from the Executive proposal for
20 this year compared to last year. We're in
21 the early stages of the budget process, so I
22 would expect that some of the changes that
23 were part of the budget process last year
24 might become an issue again this year.
101
1 I would also just add that the fact
2 that those specific programs do not appear in
3 the Executive's budget do not necessarily
4 reflect the position of the Governor that
5 he's in opposition, given the fact that he in
6 fact approved those programs in last year's
7 budget. So I would just encourage the
8 committees to work with the Division of the
9 Budget and the Governor's Office to address
10 the issue.
11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Hopefully we
12 can move forward with a more positive
13 response.
14 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
15 understand the comment. Thank you.
16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Also, in the
17 discussion about homelessness, something that
18 I've had discussions -- I've had
19 conversations with community groups that
20 respond to issues regarding, let's say,
21 domestic violence. And what's one of the
22 prime reasons for families entering the
23 shelter system is the issue regarding
24 domestic violence.
102
1 Is there any action or suggestion or
2 policy to address the rise in domestic
3 violence in our communities?
4 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Well,
5 you're exactly correct, Assemblymember. I
6 think the latest statistics that we've seen
7 show that approximately 28 percent of shelter
8 placements are the result of domestic
9 violence.
10 For one thing, I think the social
11 services community is much more sensitive and
12 there's a greater awareness of domestic
13 violence incidents, so I think they're in
14 some ways -- they're just -- they're simply
15 being identified, and those individuals who
16 are subjects of domestic violence are being
17 served at a rate that is probably higher than
18 they were in the past.
19 As to the actual addressing the
20 reduction in domestic violence, that's
21 primarily a matter for law enforcement. OTDA
22 has no specific programs related to that
23 issue.
24 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: It is certainly
103
1 something that we need to continue to focus
2 on because of the numbers and the increase.
3 And so we obviously need to work on that.
4 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Yup.
5 Agreed.
6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: The
7 anti-poverty initiative, what types of
8 poverty-reducing actions are being proposed
9 by various municipalities and not-for-profit
10 partners? Have there been a number of
11 contracts that have been approved regarding
12 this issue?
13 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
14 Assemblymember, I think you refer to the
15 Empire State Poverty Reduction Initiative.
16 And as you might recall, it was proposed and
17 designed as a two-phase program. So each of
18 the mayors of each of the jurisdictions of
19 the 16 cities have at this point identified
20 their chosen not-for-profit organizers who
21 will coordinate.
22 So we are in -- OTDA is in the midst
23 of approving contracts with those
24 not-for-profit providers who will be taking
104
1 the next step, and in some cases already
2 have -- even before the contracts have gotten
3 executed, they've already taken the steps to
4 form local task forces and come up with plans
5 that will get to your question. So at this
6 point we can't report on what the results of
7 those task force planning activities are, but
8 I also point out that a very key part of that
9 program is for the state, meaning OTDA, to
10 not be prescriptive in what those plans look
11 like.
12 So I think what we find as guidance --
13 as you might be aware from the Rochester
14 initiative, the key component about that
15 program that we recognize in the ESPRI
16 program is really the governance model that
17 emphasizes cooperation, inclusiveness,
18 broad-based membership in the task forces,
19 but also to address the very specific
20 problems that those task forces identify
21 within their community.
22 So we would expect to be seeing plans
23 from each of the task forces coming in over
24 the course of the springtime and early
105
1 summer, for review and approval by the
2 agency.
3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Just going back
4 to the homeless issue that you noted.
5 Throughout the state we have increasing
6 numbers of homeless residents, homeless
7 families, in our communities.
8 As a matter of fact, I had received a
9 call from a local gentleman, he had four
10 children, he had a job -- $40,000 a year he
11 was earning -- and he couldn't maintain the
12 rent he was paying, and he was homeless with
13 four children.
14 And it's a struggle, and we don't have
15 the assistance in our local areas outside of
16 New York City that is necessary to provide
17 the kind of support when you are faced with
18 that kind of situation, and it's growing.
19 And it's becoming a very serious issue.
20 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Yeah.
21 I think you put your finger on it, right on
22 the point of what is probably the underlying
23 base issue of homelessness in the State of
24 New York, and that's the lack of affordable
106
1 housing and the lack of units of affordable
2 housing in the State of New York.
3 You pointed out domestic violence.
4 There's also issues that create
5 homelessness surrounding substance abuse and
6 mental health issues. But the underlying
7 concern, the underlying cause of it is the
8 lack of affordable housing. Which is exactly
9 why the Governor proposed a $20 billion
10 program that, as I mentioned in my remarks,
11 over five years that will create 100,000
12 units of affordable housing and 6,000 units
13 of supportive housing.
14 So -- and it's the supportive housing
15 component that will address those specific
16 issues such as domestic violence, such as
17 substance abuse, such as mental health
18 issues, so an individual or a family can live
19 in a stable housing situation for a long
20 period of time with the services that they
21 would be receiving through that program.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: And it is very
23 necessary. That funding that you're
24 suggesting that's outside of New York City,
107
1 that is for --
2 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Yeah,
3 so just very specifically, OTDA has a program
4 called HHAP, it's the Homeless Housing
5 Assistance Program, that in recent years has
6 been funded at about $63.5 million. While
7 it's not specific to upstate, the majority of
8 those housing units and those projects tend
9 to be developed outside of the City of
10 New York, working in very close partnership
11 with our partner agencies, particularly Homes
12 and Community Renewal.
13 I think Mr. Rubin will be testifying
14 tomorrow, so he could address the
15 affordable-housing side of it better than I
16 can. But the supportive side of the housing
17 programs and projects is very much within
18 OTDA's lane. I'm happy to report that
19 another $63.5 million toward HHAP projects
20 and capital funding is included in the
21 Governor's budget.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Well, I'll be
23 looking into that. Thank you very much.
24 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Thank
108
1 you.
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
3 We've been joined by Assemblyman FÈlix
4 Ortiz.
5 Senator?
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
7 And we've been joined by Senator Leroy
8 Comrie.
9 Thank you for being here today. I
10 just wanted to ask a couple of questions.
11 Although the Governor's budget assumes a
12 continued decline in overall public
13 assistance for this coming fiscal year, 2018,
14 the Executive proposes a $59 million increase
15 in appropriation authority for the Safety Net
16 Assistance Program, which is an increase of
17 12 percent.
18 As you know, the Safety Net Program is
19 partially funded by the state, but 71 percent
20 of the burden is put on local governments.
21 And as you also know, this could be a
22 lifetime situation for people, and they're
23 expected to work if they can, but the
24 assistance can go on for an awfully long
109
1 time. So I wanted to ask what factors
2 increased this amount, and why is it in the
3 budget this way?
4 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Those
5 budget amounts that -- those proposed
6 appropriations that you see in that program
7 are the result of an econometric study that
8 is conducted by the Division of the Budget.
9 So I can't answer your question directly in
10 detail. So it's, again, appropriation
11 authority going forward.
12 But I'm just reminding the committee
13 that the TANF program is 100 percent fully
14 funded by the state for the first five years
15 that folks are on it.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So do you see this
17 as an ongoing trend, based on your study? Or
18 is this an isolated incident?
19 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
20 can't tell you, I can't say that it's an
21 ongoing trend necessarily. But it's a
22 budgeting decision, again, to allow the state
23 the authority, the agency authority to take
24 into account the TANF program, the Safety Net
110
1 Program, going forward over the course of
2 this fiscal year.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: You hear from local
4 governments all the time about the heavy
5 burden that's placed on them through unfunded
6 mandates and so on. So if this is an ongoing
7 trend that your study may suggest, what steps
8 is the agency going to take to address it?
9 Because obviously it's better for people to
10 be -- if they're able to work, to be able to
11 go out and get a job, and be able to improve
12 their quality of life.
13 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
14 So a number of programs that the Governor has
15 proposed this year address particularly
16 working families and the middle class. So
17 we've seen the increase in the minimum wage,
18 that was adopted last year; we're seeing an
19 increase in the amount of SNAP benefits that
20 will be available to SNAP-eligible households
21 through an administrative change that we'll
22 be making; and the HEAP program. And we're
23 seeing the childcare tax credit and also the
24 additional funding in high-poverty areas to
111
1 increase pre-K and after-school care.
2 So each of those programs begin to
3 address and begin to support the temporary
4 assistance -- the TANF program and the Safety
5 Net Program -- by providing extra resources
6 to get people to become more self-sufficient,
7 and then ultimately be able to step off of
8 public assistance.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Is this econometric
10 study that you did, was this just something
11 recent? Or do you plan on doing the same
12 study every year?
13 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: It's
14 my understanding that the Division of the
15 Budget does this annually. So I can't
16 address the question specifically.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So I mean -- but
18 you're talking about increased resources, but
19 yet you think the amount's going to go up.
20 So it will be interesting to come back next
21 year and see whether some of the solutions
22 that you just outlined actually work or not.
23 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: And
24 that's really the importance that the
112
1 Governor has recognized here. We've seen him
2 talk repeatedly over the course of the last
3 few months about supporting working families,
4 and while that is -- the real point of that
5 from a financial point of view is to get
6 people self-sufficient and not have a need
7 for safety net and public assistance.
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. Thank you.
9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
10 Assemblywoman Didi Barrett.
11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN BARRETT: Thank you.
12 Thanks for being here.
13 I just had a question. I listened
14 with interest about your comments about SNAP
15 and the safety net around food, and I am --
16 as are many of my constituents in my rural
17 district -- smarting under the Governor's
18 veto of last year at the end of the year of
19 the Farm To Food Bank tax credit.
20 And I'm just wondering if you all have
21 taken a position on that or are engaged in
22 trying to find a way for our farmers --
23 because we also have serious poverty in our
24 rural areas, and these are farmers who are
113
1 willing to donate travel to get the food to
2 the food banks, make sure that this is fresh
3 off the farm, is made available -- and this
4 tax credit would go a long way to covering
5 some of those costs for them.
6 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: A
7 couple of ways I think that OTDA and the
8 Executive is addressing that concern is,
9 again, to work -- we're looking to expand the
10 amount of eligibility. The amount of SNAP
11 dollars that households can receive is a
12 little bit technical, so we're making an
13 administrative tweak to the HEAP program
14 which would allow additional dollars for
15 eligible families to go toward a heating
16 allowance which is part of a SNAP eligibility
17 application.
18 So -- it's a little bit -- again, a
19 little bit technical, so we're going to
20 expand the HEAP heating season to be
21 yearlong, so individuals who apply for SNAP
22 at the time of year when they would not
23 otherwise have been in the SNAP heating
24 season will be eligible for approximately
114
1 $228 million additional statewide.
2 So that's how we're going to really
3 maximize some of the SNAP benefit dollars, no
4 additional cost to the state. That will be,
5 again, an administrative change that has
6 already gotten a favorable response from the
7 United States Department of Agriculture.
8 Secondly, and more directly to your
9 question, OTDA has made a concerted effort in
10 partnership with the Department of Ag and
11 Markets to connect with and expand the
12 availability and the use of SNAP benefits at
13 farmers' markets very, very specifically.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN BARRETT: So I guess I'm
15 a little confused, when you're talking about
16 the SNAP and HEAP -- but how does that really
17 play out for farmers and getting this fresh
18 food to the food banks?
19 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
20 Between the two items that I just mentioned
21 there will be, first, additional money
22 available for SNAP recipients as a whole.
23 Second, our concern --
24 ASSEMBLYWOMAN BARRETT: So the
115
1 recipients would be able to access that --
2 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
3 Certainly. Yes.
4 So the effort on our part -- and
5 again, Ag and Markets is really carrying the
6 load on this in terms of making sure that
7 farmers' markets are identified, making sure
8 they have the technology that will allow them
9 to use the SNAP benefit cards. We see it as
10 addressing your question directly.
11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN BARRETT: So your
12 control is really only where there's systems
13 like that in place. You're making other --
14 making money accessible that doesn't funnel
15 through a SNAP or some other kind of program,
16 is not something that you can influence?
17 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I'm
18 not quite sure I understand the question, but
19 again, we're working in close partnership
20 with Ag and Markets --
21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN BARRETT: Okay.
22 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
23 Because to --
24 ASSEMBLYWOMAN BARRETT: So that's for
116
1 the farmers' markets. But for the other side
2 of it, for the farmers who want to donate
3 where there's a gap --
4 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Yeah.
5 That's not something that we're closely
6 involved with, that would probably be a
7 question for Ag and Markets. But again, we
8 see the nutrition component of needy families
9 as being kind of a continuum of care, if you
10 will.
11 So we've worked to establish the
12 FreshConnect program in conjunction with the
13 Department of Health, which in part and in
14 some ways puts fresh vegetables from local
15 markets in urban settings by providing simply
16 a refrigeration unit so a small bodega, if
17 you will, can make available fresh foods in
18 their areas. Together, again, with expanding
19 SNAP eligibility through outreach, expanding
20 and maximizing the benefit that we can draw
21 down from the federal government, together
22 with making better connections with farmers'
23 markets.
24 We think, all together, it goes
117
1 toward -- and thank you for that question,
2 because it was right on target. That went
3 off the top of my head --
4 ASSEMBLYWOMAN BARRETT: Okay. I see
5 I'm just about out of time, but I guess I'm
6 still trying to make the link for the safety
7 net that's part of -- that's food banks. And
8 that are -- you know, rather than farmers'
9 markets. So, you know, I would love to
10 continue having that conversation.
11 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
12 Certainly will. And we'll contact our
13 colleagues at Ag and Markets to see if we can
14 get you some more detail on that.
15 ASSEMBLYWOMAN BARRETT: Okay.
16 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: So
17 thank you for the question.
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN BARRETT: Great. Thank
19 you.
20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
21 Senator.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Kennedy.
23 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you very much.
24 Deputy Commissioner, you've already
118
1 touched on the upstate anti-poverty
2 initiative. Last year's budget included
3 $25 million for this initiative. You've
4 discussed how the contracts are being
5 approved as we speak. Can you talk about the
6 funds that the state is looking to commit
7 moving forward to ensure the continuation of
8 these initiatives once they are implemented?
9 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
10 So you may have noticed that there is no
11 additional $25 million in new appropriations
12 in this year's budget. But last year's
13 $25 million is proposed to be reappropriated.
14 So it's simply a timing issue.
15 We think that over the course of this
16 year the lion's share of that $25 million
17 will be committed to each of the anti-poverty
18 designated cities. And hopefully, you know,
19 our view is that if that is successful across
20 the state -- that, in my view, is that if it
21 is successful, the Governor will recommend an
22 additional $25 million in the following
23 fiscal year.
24 SENATOR KENNEDY: And are we talking
119
1 about an additional $25 million planned for
2 next year's budget? Is that the --
3 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Yeah,
4 and I shouldn't pick a specific number,
5 Senator. So we'll see kind of where the
6 program lands over the course of this year.
7 And I think that will provide some guidance
8 to the Governor and to the Legislature as to
9 what that dollar value should be.
10 SENATOR KENNEDY: And the timing for
11 the approval of these contracts with the
12 various municipalities and the organizations
13 that are going to be running these
14 anti-poverty initiatives? What's your
15 timing?
16 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Well,
17 we're contracting agencies, so we're moving
18 the contracts through our agency together
19 with approvals from the Attorney General's
20 office and the office of the Comptroller. We
21 don't see any holdup in our end at this point
22 in time.
23 SENATOR KENNEDY: Okay. Very good.
24 Thank you.
120
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
2 SENATOR KENNEDY: Yeah, I'm sorry --
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Keep going.
4 SENATOR KENNEDY: Last fall, the
5 Help Buffalo II Apartments opened with
6 47 low-income apartments, 15 units of which
7 were for former homeless veterans. And I
8 know that you've spoken to the issue of
9 homelessness and the work that OTDA is doing
10 to do away with homelessness statewide. This
11 was a joint project with your agency. Your
12 efforts are certainly applauded to reduce
13 homelessness overall for veterans
14 specifically.
15 But what resources does the proposed
16 budget set aside specifically for homeless
17 veterans?
18 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: So
19 first of all, I was happy to attend that
20 groundbreaking in Buffalo, and I think you
21 and I had a chance to meet at that event, so
22 it was one of the better projects that I've
23 been a part of.
24 But to get to your budget question
121
1 directly, you know, again, the $63.5 million
2 that will be appropriated again for OTDA's
3 HHAP program is available for veterans'
4 housing. And I can't -- I'll have to go back
5 and check with counsel to see if there's a
6 specific set-aside. But again, OTDA was
7 happy to have a part of funding that project.
8 SENATOR KENNEDY: What else do you
9 believe that we can do collectively to
10 address this issue of veterans' homelessness,
11 specifically veterans' homelessness among
12 females?
13 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: You
14 know, I think that might be a better question
15 for our colleagues at OASAS and OMH, as that
16 really lands on the human services/social
17 services and not the capital projects side.
18 So I'll have to defer to our partner agencies
19 for a direct answer to the programmatic
20 question, Senator.
21 SENATOR KENNEDY: And just one more
22 question I'd like to bring up. The budget
23 proposed includes $35 million to create
24 22,000 new after-school slots. This funding
122
1 is aimed at cities included in this
2 anti-poverty initiative. We discussed this a
3 little earlier with the previous speaker, so
4 I won't go into all the details, but I'm
5 curious if OTDA will be involved in filling
6 these after-school slots.
7 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: OTDA
8 will not have a direct role in implementing
9 this program, even though they are targeted
10 at the Empire State Poverty Reduction cities.
11 And we think that that's a good investment
12 and will go a long way toward alleviating
13 poverty, but I'll leave it to my colleague
14 Sheila Poole to address the programmatic
15 questions behind that.
16 SENATOR KENNEDY: And I suppose that
17 just leads me to another question. Should
18 your agency be involved or more involved in
19 filling these slots, since you're so involved
20 with the anti-poverty initiative?
21 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
22 Again, programmatically, that's a little bit
23 out of our area, except as it may pertain to
24 homeless shelter operations. And we do work
123
1 closely with OCFS on the financial and
2 management side of it, because some of the
3 money does flow through from OTDA to OCFS.
4 SENATOR KENNEDY: Okay. Thank you.
5 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Thank
6 you.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Deputy
8 Commissioner, a few questions.
9 The Summer Youth Program, just could
10 you give a sense of the approximate numbers
11 served through that --
12 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: -- and whether that
14 number is increasing, decreasing?
15 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
16 So thank you for the question. I addressed
17 it briefly in my opening remarks.
18 The number of youth that were served
19 last year, I think, was 18,750 -- that comes
20 to mind. So the trick here for making sure
21 that each and every one of those slots will
22 be available and funded is to take into
23 account the minimum wage increase that the
24 Governor and the Legislature adopted last
124
1 year.
2 So to ensure that that -- to ensure
3 those same number of slots are available this
4 year as were filled last year, you'll see an
5 additional $5 million appropriation for that
6 purpose.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: As someone who
8 represents mostly rural areas, the sense of
9 that being -- you know, I know that's been a
10 successful program. But the sense of that
11 being urban-driven, as opposed to some of
12 our, you know, also low-income unemployed
13 youth, that's certainly something that I
14 think for future policy the state should look
15 at.
16 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
17 appreciate the comment. We'll take a look at
18 that. Thanks.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.
20 There is a proposal in the budget to
21 do a Lottery intercept. Do we have any
22 estimate on what that should provide in
23 dollars?
24 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
125
1 don't have that dollar value in front of me.
2 We'll get that number to you right away.
3 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Okay.
4 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: But
5 the purpose of the proposal is to bring
6 Lottery intercepts in line with other forms
7 of intercepts that are made to recoup public
8 assistance dollars. So child support
9 payments, for example, and tax returns that
10 would be coming in from the federal
11 government.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.
13 We have a number of programs in the
14 state that we continue to focus on trying to
15 serve people who are in poverty and whatever.
16 Is there anything in this budget or
17 initiatives that we're looking -- trying to
18 get people -- to help people leave poverty?
19 You know, it's kind of that challenge, I
20 think, that we have certainly -- people need
21 the services who are there, but getting them
22 beyond is the next step.
23 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Well,
24 overall, that is largely the purpose behind
126
1 the Public Assistance program that is funded
2 largely by the federal government and, as was
3 pointed out, when we get to the safety net
4 assistance with the local share. So that's
5 why as part of those programs there's an
6 employment training component.
7 In addition, I mentioned a couple of
8 other programs that the Governor had
9 initiated that gets to exactly that goal,
10 such as raising the minimum wage, increasing
11 the number of childcare slots, increasing the
12 number of pre-K and after-school slots that
13 are available. Not to mention the SNAP
14 increase that I mentioned a minute ago, on
15 top of expanding, you know, the HEAP program
16 across the State of New York.
17 So we think as a group, together with
18 the minimum TANF requirements, we think as a
19 group that provides a program to get to
20 exactly what you've mentioned.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Senator Kennedy
22 mentioned the poverty initiative, and I know
23 the Rochester area and in that general region
24 is focused some on that.
127
1 I was at a forum recently, Catholic
2 Charities, where we were talking about some
3 of their initiatives and working
4 cooperatively on that. One of the handouts
5 at that event was giving a perspective of
6 what a single mom, two young children, not
7 working -- what benefits might lead to, and
8 all the different things to support her and
9 her family. If she was at minimum wage, and
10 then the chart went out -- if she was at
11 minimum wage, and adding all those benefits
12 up.
13 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Yup.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: And then it goes
15 out, as you make $12, $15, $18, $20-plus an
16 hour. And the issue in there sort of brings
17 up the whole benefits cliff issue in the
18 sense that as you make more money, then you
19 get reduced services.
20 Are we looking at ways to try to
21 address the whole benefits cliff issue in
22 trying to help make it for working
23 individuals who are also trying to support
24 families?
128
1 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: So at
2 the risk of repeating myself, these are the
3 programs that I just outlined that are part
4 of the Governor's initiative that are aimed
5 at doing exactly that, the smoothing out of
6 that cliff and providing supports for folks
7 who are coming off public assistance, for
8 example.
9 So SNAP dollars are available for
10 folks who are not necessarily -- the
11 eligibility rates are different than for
12 public assistance. Eligibility is different
13 for homeless -- for the heating assistance
14 programs, and eligibility is different in
15 some respects for the pre-K and after-school
16 programs.
17 So we are thinking, with these
18 programs, beyond what the basic eligibility
19 levels are for public assistance for that
20 exact purpose, so folks can continue to
21 receive some level of supports in different
22 areas should they -- and hopefully they do --
23 become more self-sustaining and are no longer
24 on public assistance.
129
1 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.
2 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Thank
3 you.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
5 Senator Krueger.
6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Good morning.
7 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Good
8 morning, Senator.
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: So many different
10 directions. Let's start with -- Senator
11 Young asked about the Safety Net Program
12 growth. And I'm just curious, is that a
13 statewide growth pattern, or are you seeing
14 that in specific areas?
15 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
16 That's a statewide appropriation. I don't
17 have a geographic breakdown.
18 SENATOR KRUEGER: No, the population
19 growth on safety net. Was there an actual
20 population increase on the Safety Net Program
21 between last year and this year?
22 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: We
23 haven't seen a fundamental geographic
24 breakdown of that, Senator. I could take a
130
1 look and see if we have data that would
2 address that question.
3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. Because one
4 of the things I know about the Safety Net
5 Program is there's disproportionately been a
6 growth in the number of people on it, singles
7 cases and family cases, where an adult or
8 adults are suffering from some kind of
9 disability and they're not really able to go
10 to work. Is that your understanding?
11 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Well,
12 I think -- I think, just broadly -- I think
13 that's probably a fair statement, since the
14 TANF program is a five-year limited and
15 safety net picks up after that five-year
16 eligibility period.
17 So I think it would be fair to say
18 that, you know, a component of the safety net
19 population -- but again, we'll see if we have
20 some data specifically on who among the
21 safety net recipients are in the category of
22 disabled. I have to take a look at that.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: And then if you
24 could also look into and perhaps get back to
131
1 all of us on the amount of money we're
2 putting into disability advocacy to help
3 people move on to SSI/SSD, which is actually
4 the more appropriate benefit for them if they
5 are suffering a long-term disability.
6 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
7 Mm-hmm.
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: And also, of course,
9 it's federally funded, so it's a win for the
10 counties in not having local share. And at
11 least my experience in New York City is the
12 programs have been underfunded, but they're
13 incredibly effective at helping people move
14 onto the correct benefits.
15 So I just -- listening to my
16 colleagues from the rest of the state, I hope
17 your agency will take a look at whether we
18 can do more to help with disability advocacy
19 to move people onto the appropriate benefits.
20 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
21 would say we would broadly agree, Senator.
22 So thank you, and we will take a look at
23 that.
24 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
132
1 You also talked about SNAP and the
2 importance of expanding participation among
3 people who are eligible. I'm a big supporter
4 of SNAP, and I used to do that work before I
5 became a Senator, including under contract
6 with the city and state to assist people to
7 get benefits.
8 The research consistently has shown
9 that an enormous population who are eligible
10 but don't participate are people who actually
11 do come in for healthcare benefits. So
12 they're Medicaid-eligible, they may be
13 Essential Benefits category now through ACA.
14 Have we done anything to try to provide SNAP
15 applications through the sites that are
16 assisting, in the last couple of years,
17 millions of additional New Yorkers to
18 participate in Medicaid or Essential Benefits
19 through the exchange?
20 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
21 So it's my understanding that in the most --
22 in the cities and in the counties that, you
23 know -- SNAP is very much part of an
24 application process should someone come in
133
1 and apply for Medicaid. So the outreach with
2 the social services professionals around the
3 State of New York I think is there.
4 Where I think we do see some shortages
5 and some shortfalls -- and in my own
6 experience, and you might know I spent
7 15 years in county government -- is among the
8 elderly population and also, in some cases,
9 among the rural populations in the State of
10 New York. That's one reason why you've seen
11 the Governor's proposal to make sure that
12 we're partnering with foundations, the
13 private sector, to leverage SNAP outreach
14 dollars in particular for senior citizens,
15 and I think we'll be looking especially at
16 the City of New York over the course of this
17 year.
18 SENATOR KRUEGER: I would add one to
19 your list.
20 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
21 SENATOR KRUEGER: In discussions
22 recently with a group of advocates for
23 hunting in New York State, a discussion came
24 out about people hunting to provide food for
134
1 their families. Why don't we do SNAP
2 applications when we do hunting licenses?
3 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
4 That's a great idea.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: And fishing
6 licenses.
7 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Why
8 don't we talk with DEC about that?
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay, I will. But
10 hunting and fishing licenses -- people are
11 hunting and fishing --
12 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
13 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- both for sport
14 but also for food, and I think that's
15 probably, particularly in rural New York
16 State, a very good way to reach out to a
17 population that might not ever have been
18 exposed to this program.
19 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I'll
20 be sure someone in our agency reaches out to
21 our counterparts at DEC, so thank you.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
23 Homelessness issues -- and for my
24 city, the numbers are terrifying. You talk
135
1 about it in your testimony, work going
2 forward to provide funds for supportive
3 housing and for other services involving the
4 shelters.
5 So in '15-'16 we approved money
6 through a JPMorgan settlement for supportive
7 housing. Last year during this budget
8 hearing, that money had not gone out yet. Do
9 you know if that money's gone out?
10 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: You
11 might be referring to the MOU that was much
12 discussed?
13 SENATOR KRUEGER: No. It was the year
14 before that.
15 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Year
16 before that? I'm sorry, I can't address the
17 specific question, Senator. That was before
18 my time at OTDA. And not to make excuses,
19 but we'll try to get an answer for you.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. So I'll ask
21 you to do some follow-up on even earlier than
22 the MOU, which has of course not been signed
23 and so those monies have not been spent.
24 My understanding is the Governor has
136
1 rolled those unspent monies into this year's
2 budget, with some additional money to go
3 forward. So -- but technically, we're way
4 behind where we ought to be on providing
5 additional funding for supportive housing and
6 other forms of affordable housing
7 specifically for the homeless population.
8 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Yeah,
9 I would respond then, just coming back to my
10 testimony, that some of the supportive
11 housing units -- we are moving forward with
12 supportive housing development in the State
13 of New York, as I pointed out. About 1200
14 units have already been funded and are in
15 various stages of progress through monies
16 that had already been approved.
17 So as to the MOU, that has not yet
18 been fully executed. As you know, the
19 Governor directed the budget director to sign
20 the MOU, so how and why the Senate and the
21 Assembly -- I can't speak to the reasoning
22 behind not to -- to full execution, but OTDA
23 and our partners at HCR and OMH are moving
24 forward pretty expeditiously.
137
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: Next question. And
2 it does tie into all those agencies you just
3 mentioned, but I think I'm going to make OTDA
4 the key agency on this.
5 So my district has Bellevue Men's
6 Shelter in it, the entryway to the singles
7 homeless system in New York City. Bellevue
8 Men's Shelter's, I believe, has approximately
9 750 to 800 beds. There's been a skyrocketing
10 number of people who are released from DOCCS
11 facilities, State OMH facilities, other state
12 institutions, with the only discharge plan
13 being drop them off for entry into the
14 homeless shelter system in my district.
15 That can't be the right answer. And
16 it isn't legally the right answer. And based
17 on discussions with the city, the number has
18 been growing. So it's as if the state
19 agencies have decided we don't have to deal
20 with discharge planning. People will hit the
21 day we decided they legally can leave or we
22 want them to leave, and then they just take
23 them down to 29th Street and First Avenue in
24 Manhattan.
138
1 It's a lousy model. What can we do
2 about it?
3 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Well,
4 thank you for the question, Senator. It's
5 been very much top of mind in the short time
6 that I've been with OTDA, and we're working
7 very closely with our partners at DHS and the
8 city and the other districts around the
9 state. It's a question that came up at the
10 New York Public Welfare Association,
11 primarily attended by the district
12 commissioners from outside of New York City.
13 This matter was brought to our
14 attention when I first walked in the door
15 about a year ago at OTDA. We invited the
16 Department of Corrections to address the
17 association last summer. We began putting
18 forward, together with DOCCS and the Public
19 Welfare Association, a plan to at least
20 notify the counties when a discharge is being
21 planned from the prison system.
22 Moreover, we've been in much more
23 close discussions with DHS and with the
24 Department of Corrections in New York City in
139
1 particular. OTDA's role here is to work with
2 DHS and, more importantly, make the
3 connections with the providers who operate
4 the facilities to make sure that we're
5 facilitating a relationship with the
6 Department of Corrections.
7 I would also add that the Governor's
8 Interagency Council on the Homeless has
9 formed a task force that over the course of
10 this year will be addressing this issue in
11 detail with Corrections, with OTDA, with DHS
12 and the other district providers around in
13 the counties around the State of New York.
14 So it's very much on our radar scope.
15 We don't have any answers yet, but it's a
16 thorny issue. And it's an important one, as
17 you pointed out.
18 SENATOR KRUEGER: And correlated to
19 that, specifically with discharge from DOCCS,
20 how are we doing with programs so that people
21 can have their Medicaid applications started
22 or even completed before they're discharged
23 so that when they return to their local home
24 district, and particularly if they've been
140
1 taking meds for both health issues and mental
2 health issues while in prison, that they
3 don't find themselves literally with a 45-day
4 gap before they're eligible for anything?
5 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
6 understand the issue, but I hesitate to speak
7 for the Department of Corrections or the
8 Department of Health on the matter. But I
9 can tell you that there will very, very
10 likely be an issue specifically on the agenda
11 for the Interagency Council Task Force.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: But it is OTDA that
13 oversees the application process for
14 Medicaid, right?
15 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
16 Medicaid -- in -- through the DSS offices,
17 right. We oversee that and we also
18 tangentially handle fair hearings issues, you
19 know, around Medicaid eligibility. Yes.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
22 We've been joined by Senator
23 Velmanette Montgomery.
24 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
141
1 We have been joined by Assemblywoman
2 Tremaine Wright.
3 Next, Assemblywoman Lupardo.
4 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Hello. Just a
5 couple of quick questions.
6 Let's talk about SNAP just for a
7 minute. I suspect that one group that is
8 underutilizing SNAP benefits are older
9 adults. You alluded to that earlier.
10 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
11 Mm-hmm.
12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: I understand
13 that a simplified SNAP application is a
14 possibility, because it's fairly complicated
15 and I think it's off-putting to older people
16 in general. Can you give us an update on
17 your progress in moving toward a more
18 simplified approach for older adults?
19 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: You
20 may be referring to the IES online system
21 that will ultimately be available to simplify
22 and combine the application process, in this
23 case between SNAP and Medicaid in particular,
24 since the eligibility information is very,
142
1 very similar.
2 So IES, the IES project is progressing
3 very nicely. We have submitted a funding
4 proposal to the federal government, who will
5 provide a significant portion of the funding
6 for the development of that system. But I
7 think more directly, I think part of the
8 solution is ensuring that we have local
9 agencies, such as aging service providers and
10 the districts, who are facilitating the
11 enrollments and undertaking the outreach
12 that's necessary.
13 We understand the complexity behind
14 it. Frankly, I think the SNAP application is
15 one of the easier ones. But we think that --
16 you know, again, SNAP is a key antipoverty
17 program, and the greater we can expand it,
18 the greater chance we have of keeping people
19 healthy and off public assistance.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: There's also a
21 built-in reluctance on their part to be a
22 burden and take advantage of something that
23 they really should. And so any assistance we
24 can provide with education and providing them
143
1 with that comfort level I think would be
2 really appreciated as well.
3 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: You
4 know, it's a priority for the Governor, it's
5 a priority for OTDA. And personally, you
6 know, it's one of, in my time in the county
7 governments, one of my favorites.
8 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Thanks.
9 Could you talk about the HEAP
10 expansion? Because I understand the Governor
11 is suggesting it could be then used for
12 weatherization purposes.
13 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Yes.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Two questions.
15 How much of the HEAP grant is currently used
16 each year? And is it possible that this
17 could detract from its primary use? Just
18 trying to get the overall landscape on the
19 funds and this particular diversion, or this
20 expansion.
21 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: So
22 the thinking behind this proposal is taking
23 $14.5 million and providing it under contract
24 to NYSERDA. NYSERDA has, you know, an
144
1 extensive network of contractors who do
2 relatively low-dollar-value weatherizations
3 in homes. It's not the only weatherization
4 program that's out there. Homes and
5 Community Renewal also has a weatherization
6 program, but their model tends to be more of
7 a whole-house approach.
8 So by taking some of the HEAP dollars
9 and putting it into a NYSERDA program, we
10 hope to serve many, many more households than
11 perhaps were in the past. So the thinking is
12 to not only touch more households, but to put
13 the emphasis on energy conservation rather
14 than simply paying a utility bill.
15 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Understood.
16 And I just have one last question
17 about the Lottery intercept. You said you
18 were trying to align this with child support
19 payments, for example. Do they have a
20 similar 100 percent recoupment for 10 years?
21 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
22 believe that's the case, yes.
23 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: So it's not --
24 we understood that the rationale was to cut
145
1 down on illegal purchases that occur while in
2 receipt of public assistance. So that wasn't
3 the connection?
4 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
5 think there might be two different issues in
6 play here, Assemblymember. The Lottery
7 intercept is really a matter of giving the
8 state another tool to recoup dollars that
9 should be owed back to the state under the
10 Public Assistance Program.
11 The EBT card system and the misuse of
12 EBT cards in locations that are perhaps
13 suspect and where EBT cards are being used in
14 a way that they shouldn't be used --
15 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: To purchase
16 Lottery tickets sometimes, I think that was
17 the --
18 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Oh,
19 I'm sorry, I misunderstood.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: No, I wasn't
21 clear.
22 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
23 misunderstood, yeah.
24 So our enforcement system behind the
146
1 use of EBT cards is really aimed at the
2 vendors. So if we find that an EBT card has
3 been misused in any way -- and we have many,
4 many ways of finding that out -- our
5 enforcement mechanism directly, on top of the
6 investigations that are done by the local
7 districts, is to work very, very closely with
8 some of our state partners. Including the
9 Gaming Commission, which would address the
10 Lottery issue, and also the State Liquor
11 Authority, which would address inappropriate
12 use of EBT benefits in those locations under
13 their jurisdiction.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Okay. Thank
15 you.
16 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Thank
17 you.
18 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
19 Senator?
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
21 Senator Persaud.
22 SENATOR PERSAUD: Thank you, Deputy
23 Commissioner.
24 My first question to you is pertaining
147
1 to the shelters that you evaluated, and
2 97 percent of them had major issues. Did you
3 have the opportunity to close any shelters
4 while you were doing the survey?
5 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Well,
6 first -- let me clarify, first of all, that
7 97 percent of the shelters that we inspected
8 had some level of violation. So each and
9 every one of those violations we kind of
10 assigned a ranking or a score to. We used
11 the numbers 1 through 3, Level 3, Level 2,
12 Level 1, Level 3 being those violations which
13 presented a very immediate risk to health and
14 safety of a resident of that shelter unit.
15 So those issues were -- in some cases
16 we demanded the removal of the family and
17 relocation to another safe location. In some
18 cases, we ordered the immediate remediation,
19 in cases where an issue could be addressed
20 within hours without having to relocate the
21 family. So I think there was a total of
22 approximately 100 units of housing in
23 New York City where one of those two things
24 occurred.
148
1 So the Level 2 and the Level 1
2 violations, being less of a risk to health
3 and public safety, were all put under what we
4 call a corrective action plan. And a
5 corrective action plan is simply a tool, kind
6 of a term of art that we use to hold the
7 local districts accountable. So it would be,
8 in New York City, DHS, and in the county,
9 departments of social services who are
10 directly responsible for ensuring that those
11 violations get corrected. And we used the
12 ranking system as a matter of triaging what
13 was most important.
14 Enforcement tools that the agency has
15 include suspension of payments to the local
16 district should the violations not be
17 corrected; closure of the facilities; and
18 removal of the operators, for example, who in
19 most cases are not-for-profit operators who
20 operate many, many of the shelters in the
21 State of New York.
22 So we've used those tools. I don't
23 think we've done a suspension of payment.
24 Keeping in mind that the overall purpose of
149
1 our enforcement program is one of cooperation
2 and one of -- we're very, very conscious of
3 not taking shelter units offline, and
4 understanding that there is, you know, a
5 shortage of available units, especially in
6 New York City. I mean, you know --
7 SENATOR PERSAUD: Oh, we know.
8 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I'm
9 sure you all heard the term cluster sites,
10 and we've all heard the -- are concerned
11 about the use of hotel-motels. Nobody at
12 ODTA and I'm sure no one at DHS thinks those
13 are the best uses or the best locations for
14 homeless individuals and families. But
15 nonetheless, we're very conscious about not
16 taking units offline, while being very, very
17 diligent about enforcing the correction of
18 violations.
19 So toward that end, we've taken an
20 approach where we will maintain staffing, we
21 will maintain a regulatory structure, and we
22 will maintain an inspection process and
23 schedule that really, really stays on top of
24 each of the shelters, each of the
150
1 jurisdictions in the state that are
2 responsible for these repairs, and ensuring
3 that they do in fact get made.
4 And in most cases I'm happy to report
5 we've had good cooperation, in DHS in
6 particular. We all recognize we're kind of
7 in the same business, we have the same
8 interests in some ways. But OTDA will not
9 hesitate to use the enforcement powers at its
10 disposal.
11 SENATOR PERSAUD: One other thing. It
12 covers the Lottery and the decision that
13 someone winning the Lottery, if they were
14 receiving public assistance, has to repay it
15 a hundred percent. Can you tell us what was
16 the justification for that policy?
17 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
18 Again, it's aligning the ability to intercept
19 income from individuals that would, as I
20 think we noted, include income tax refunds
21 and child support payments that might be
22 paid. So it's simply to give us another tool
23 to recoup more money for the taxpayers that
24 should be paid, that the public assistance
151
1 system should be recouping.
2 SENATOR PERSAUD: Okay. But aren't
3 you afraid that sometimes it will force
4 someone back into a public assistance role,
5 if you --
6 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I'm
7 sorry, Senator? I couldn't hear you.
8 SENATOR PERSAUD: If you're taking the
9 hundred percent, you're asking them to repay
10 a hundred percent, aren't you afraid that in
11 some cases you may be pushing someone back to
12 public assistance?
13 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: You
14 know what, I don't think that's a serious
15 concern on our part. Keeping in mind that
16 the public assistance programs are
17 eligibility-based, to begin with. So if you
18 have a source of income, either from Lottery
19 winnings or an inheritance or, you know, you
20 sell a car or something like that, all those
21 assets are taken into consideration in the
22 eligibility process.
23 SENATOR PERSAUD: Okay, thank you.
24 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Thank
152
1 you.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblyman
4 DenDekker.
5 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Thank you,
6 Mr. Chairman.
7 I'm going to try to stay on the topic,
8 for a moment, of the Lottery intercept. So
9 over the last 10 years, how many New Yorkers
10 have received some sort of public assistance?
11 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
12 Public assistance caseload -- I have that
13 here for you. The public assistance caseload
14 is approximately 559,000 at this point.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: And that's
16 over the last 10 years?
17 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Oh,
18 no, that's in the last -- it was as of
19 July 2016.
20 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Okay, as of
21 July 2016. But this intercept goes back for
22 10 years --
23 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
24 There's a 10-year lookback period, yeah.
153
1 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: There could be
2 many people that 10 years ago were on public
3 assistance, have since gotten off and have
4 gotten jobs and are now working and doing
5 very well and maybe play the Lottery. And
6 they go play a lottery ticket, and they beat
7 the odds and they get $700. And the state
8 wants to take all of that money from that
9 person to recoup the taxpayer money that we
10 spent nine years ago?
11 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
12 think that's an accurate characterization.
13 If you're looking for a number of
14 people this might impact, we can get you that
15 data.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Okay, I
17 appreciate that.
18 So now what I want to know is, do you
19 have on every Lottery terminal in the State
20 of New York a notice to people saying "Before
21 you purchase a lottery ticket, if you
22 received any type of public assistance in the
23 last 10 years and you win, we're going to be
24 taking back the money that we gave you"?
154
1 Because of all those hundreds of thousands of
2 people, which we know the chance of winning
3 the Lottery is so minute -- I would imagine
4 you freely take all of their money, but when
5 it comes time to give it back to them, we
6 don't want to.
7 So don't you think it would be
8 appropriate, then, to put a notice at every
9 Lottery terminal telling residents of the
10 State of New York that if they received any
11 money at all in the last 10 years for any
12 type of public assistance and they win over
13 $600, then you're going to take all the money
14 from them?
15 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Well,
16 we already have -- the intercept already
17 applies to 50 percent of Lottery winnings
18 over $600, so this would simply move it from
19 50 percent to 100 percent.
20 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: I understand,
21 but now you're going to 100.
22 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
23 So -- but to your suggestion about,
24 you know, posting a notice, that's something
155
1 that could be addressed with Racing &
2 Wagering and the Gaming Commission. That's
3 not -- would not be an OTDA responsibility.
4 We do not have any oversight over the Lottery
5 system.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Would that
7 also include the video lottery terminals at
8 the racinos? Because they're technically the
9 Lottery.
10 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Those
11 Lottery winnings would -- they would be
12 subject to this intercept. But again, to
13 your point about notification, I think that's
14 an issue that could be explored with the
15 Gaming Commission.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: So would it be
17 maybe safe to say that we should also notify
18 people maybe if they have gambled at all and
19 lost, that they should get their money back,
20 seeing you were going to take it from them
21 anyway? Or should that money be deducted
22 from any of the public assistance money they
23 received 10 years ago, because they have
24 given money back to the state.
156
1 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I'm
2 not quite sure I understand the scenario
3 you --
4 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: So let's say
5 10 years ago I was on public assistance and I
6 received -- and by the way, I would imagine
7 as people get off of public assistance, we
8 don't give them a bill so they know what that
9 amount would be, because we're going to leave
10 it up to you to someday tell them, after you
11 take their money, how much you gave them.
12 I think if someone gets off public
13 assistance, then you should give them a bill
14 saying, you know, while you were on public
15 assistance, we gave you $45,000, and someday
16 we're going to try to get it back from you
17 over the next 10 years. We should tell them
18 that.
19 And then what we should also do is if
20 they are playing the lottery for nine years
21 and they've lost a thousand dollars a year
22 for nine years, we should deduct that $9,000
23 from the $45,000 that you gave them, because
24 they gave the money back to the state and
157
1 they didn't win.
2 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
3 understand the concern, Assemblyman.
4 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: So do you
5 think we should take that into consideration
6 and follow that data?
7 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: We'll
8 take that under advisement. You know, I'm
9 not prepared to discuss the details of that
10 scenario that you just laid out today.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: I'm just very
12 concerned of the hundreds of thousands of
13 people that are playing lotteries or maybe
14 going to racino that receive some sort of
15 public assistance and have no idea that they
16 could be held liable for it in the future,
17 and that we are not keeping track -- or not
18 advising them to keep track of anything that
19 they spend back to the state that would be
20 considered giving back the money.
21 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Okay,
22 I understand the concern very well now.
23 Thank you.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Okay.
158
1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
2 Senator?
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Montgomery.
4 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you. Good
5 afternoon, or good morning. I want to ask
6 you -- there are so many things that I would
7 like to ask, but because of time constraints,
8 I'm going to just stick with the whole issue
9 of the housing.
10 Obviously, one of the most painful
11 situations that we have going on in the city
12 is the large number of homeless families with
13 children. Half the homeless people in the
14 city are actually children.
15 So in your testimony and in the
16 Governor's plan, you talk about the
17 $20 billion proposed investment in affordable
18 housing, and of the 100,000 units that you
19 anticipate to result from that funding, 6,000
20 of those units will be supportive housing.
21 And you also mention that 540 new supportive
22 housing units have come online. Is that this
23 year, this past year, the 540 units?
24 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: This
159
1 past year. And that 540 is not included in
2 either the 6,000 or 100,000 units.
3 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Okay, so this is
4 over and above the 6,000.
5 And can you give me at some point --
6 maybe not just immediately now, but I would
7 like to know, of those 540 supportive housing
8 units, how many might be in districts like
9 mine in Brooklyn?
10 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
11 Certainly. We keep track of that data very
12 carefully. We'll get that to you directly,
13 Senator.
14 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I would
15 appreciate that.
16 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
17 Certainly.
18 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And you talk
19 about a process that I think is really very,
20 very important and that is that you partner
21 with HCR and OMH, and together you provide
22 housing for people with varying needs in
23 terms of supportive housing.
24 So the Northwell report, which is a
160
1 report to look at ways and proposed ways in
2 which we can improve healthcare delivery in
3 Brooklyn, they include in their
4 recommendations an area that relates to
5 housing. Because according to them, and I
6 certainly agree, that healthcare delivery
7 includes, to some extent -- there are
8 hospitals in my district where people remain
9 in the hospital because they have nowhere to
10 go when they leave. So the hospital becomes
11 a homeless shelter, in a sense.
12 And I know that the model that you
13 talk about really does work. There is an
14 organization that specifically provides that
15 model, and it works very, very well.
16 So my question to you is, how much of
17 the process in terms of looking forward at
18 the 6,000 units -- you mention in your report
19 that you are looking to support -- to bring
20 on 1200 units. So I'm just wondering how
21 much of that reflects this process that we
22 know works, that makes a lot of sense for
23 both providers of services as well as people
24 who are in need of those services. So I'm
161
1 just asking you to talk about that a little
2 bit.
3 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
4 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And also you
5 should know that some people end up going
6 into homeless shelters because it's required
7 that they be in a shelter in order to be
8 eligible for permanent housing. That, to me,
9 is an absolute disgraceful kind of process.
10 So those two issues I would like for
11 you to respond to, if you will.
12 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Okay.
13 Well, thank you. And I'm going to suggest
14 that perhaps you ask the same question of
15 Mr. Rubin tomorrow, because a lot of what you
16 are addressing here has to do with HCR's
17 programs.
18 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Absolutely. I
19 intend to, yes.
20 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: But I
21 think a key point here is that most of the
22 supportive housing projects in the State of
23 New York that I am familiar with are really
24 part of a large partnership. In some
162
1 cases -- I was at a supportive housing
2 groundbreaking in Troy late last year where I
3 think there were 12 separate funding partners
4 tied to it. Together with supportive housing
5 providers, it really must be a
6 community-based effort.
7 So each of the programs has a slightly
8 different application process. HHAP, for
9 example, the program run by our agency, has a
10 rolling RFP process. So over the course of
11 the year, we'll take applications that meet
12 the criteria for the program, and we score
13 them. And it's not a ranking, it's just a
14 pass/fail. So those programs that, you know,
15 pass our scoring test -- which include
16 complete funding, which include an indication
17 that they can continue to operate the
18 supportive programs going forward -- if they
19 pass that test, they get into sort of a
20 first-come-first-served line for approval by
21 the board.
22 So HCR has a little bit of a different
23 model. OMH is operating an RFP process
24 called the ESSHI, we call it; it's the Empire
163
1 State Supportive Housing Initiative, which is
2 their component here. So it's, again, a
3 very, very collaborative process, not just
4 within state agencies but with the
5 communities.
6 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: So will you --
7 since this model really works, and we're
8 hopeful that based on the Northwell report
9 and the possibility of us having
10 opportunities for supportive housing to be
11 developed in Brooklyn, and the tremendous
12 need that we have for it, can you streamline
13 that process a little bit more so that it's
14 not so difficult to actually bring online and
15 implement that kind of program?
16 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Well,
17 first of all, I must confess I'm not familiar
18 with the report you referred to.
19 Secondly, due to the funding streams
20 that I just noted, the different
21 requirements -- particularly where federal
22 money is involved, which is the case with HCR
23 programs -- I would say that what we've done
24 internally to address the streamlining issue
164
1 is -- I know at OTDA we provide very, very
2 hands-on support from our staff to assist
3 with the application process, to assist with
4 the program, assembling the program, and even
5 to keep an eye on the actual project
6 development going forward. So we understand
7 the complexities, we understand the
8 timelines.
9 In OTDA -- I mentioned the scoring
10 process. If a project applicant comes in and
11 does not meet the minimum criteria, we're
12 more than willing to go work with the
13 not-for-profit for the project sponsor to
14 show them where they fell short, suggest ways
15 that they could put together an application
16 process that could ultimately be funded.
17 So I think the way we address the
18 complexity is in a combination of
19 understanding the complexity and, secondly,
20 doing quite a bit of handholding and
21 advisement to the applicants.
22 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And I certainly
23 appreciate that.
24 And I'd just like to say that
165
1 hopefully you are looking at, when it comes
2 to affordable housing in particular,
3 supportive housing and et cetera, that you're
4 looking at the not-for-profit housing
5 community to lead the way to development of
6 these units. Because it just seems that we
7 get more benefit when we remove the profit
8 motive, which is what is, you know, inherent
9 in a private developer's motivation.
10 So hopefully we'll see a lot more of
11 what you just described as your participation
12 in helping people to apply for this, putting
13 together this complicated process as well as
14 relying a lot on the not-for-profit housing
15 community, some of whom are extremely expert
16 in doing this kind of housing and
17 programming.
18 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
19 Absolutely, Senator. Thank you for the
20 comment.
21 Most of the projects that are
22 undertaken by HHAP -- and again, I'm not
23 speaking for my colleague Commissioner
24 Rubin -- most of them are -- the project
166
1 sponsors or the key sponsors are
2 not-for-profits.
3 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And not to be so
4 parochial, but I'm going to ask you and
5 Commissioner Rubin to come to our district
6 and look at some of the projects that we've
7 been able to get you to do that work so well.
8 And I think it's just important for us to try
9 to do as much as we can to eliminate this
10 problem of homelessness by doing quality
11 affordable housing programs that really work
12 for people.
13 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
14 think you're spot on, Senator, so I
15 appreciate that very much. And if
16 Mr. Roberts was here today, he would tell you
17 how many trips, how many miles he's put on
18 his car going to ribbon-cuttings and visiting
19 projects. I wish I could say I've had the
20 time to do the same. But we are very much
21 hands-on at the top levels of our agency, so
22 thank you.
23 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you,
24 Commissioner.
167
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
3 We've been joined by Kimberly
4 Jean-Pierre.
5 And next to question, Assemblywoman
6 Wright.
7 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WRIGHT: Good afternoon.
8 I wanted to ask a few questions regarding --
9 well, I have a few questions that I'm going
10 to lay out for you. So one I didn't fully
11 understand, with the Lottery grab-back, what
12 public benefits are currently recouped at
13 100 percent? And if you could just give us a
14 list of what those benefits are. So if it's
15 HEAP, if it's welfare benefits, if it's SNAP
16 dollars, what -- just so I can get a clear
17 picture of what exactly the grab-back or the
18 recouping effects.
19 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I'm
20 sorry, Assemblymember, I couldn't quite hear
21 the front end of your question.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WRIGHT: Oh, okay. So
23 this is regarding the Lottery recoupment.
24 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
168
1 Lottery intercept, okay.
2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WRIGHT: Yes. I wanted
3 to understand what public benefits are
4 currently being recaptured at 50 percent and
5 that are going to be thereafter captured at
6 100 percent.
7 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: I
8 know the Public Assistance Program is
9 included in that. I will have to get some
10 detail from counsel and program staff as to
11 whether it applies to HEAP or SNAP. Or
12 anything else, certainly.
13 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WRIGHT: Okay, just give
14 us the global picture.
15 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure,
16 absolutely.
17 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WRIGHT: And while I'm
18 asking for lists, I am in a district that
19 overlaps with Senator Montgomery's, and I
20 would also like to -- I know that you're
21 preparing a list of supportive housing units
22 within that district. So if you could please
23 provide one to me, specifically, under
24 District 56 as well.
169
1 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
2 Certainly. Happy to do that.
3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WRIGHT: Thank you.
4 And I wanted to ask you about the
5 supportive housing for our aging community.
6 I know that we said that we have dollars for
7 the actual structure. Do we also have
8 dollars and are you providing or doing a
9 set-aside so that we can have supportive
10 services within the building, be it
11 caretakers, rehabilitation --
12 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Yes.
13 Yeah. So that's a very, very important
14 component of the supportive housing program
15 that the Governor has initiated, and there
16 are two main funding sources.
17 OTDA has a source of funding that
18 provides -- beyond capital, beyond
19 construction services. So we have a program
20 within OTDA.
21 And I mentioned what we kind of
22 short-term call ESSHI, the Empire State
23 Housing Initiative, which was another
24 initiative of the Governor's last year. That
170
1 is being managed by the Office of Mental
2 Health.
3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WRIGHT: And so they're
4 both providing dollars for the --
5 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
6 Actual operating and services within
7 supportive housing, yes.
8 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WRIGHT: Okay. And I
9 think Senator Krueger was asking you about
10 discharge plans for those being released from
11 prisons and jails. And so I wanted to ask
12 you to speak a little bit more fully about
13 the collaborative work that you said that
14 you're going to be doing with DOC, and --
15 because one of the concerns that was raised
16 in our community was that folks who suffer
17 from mental illness, particularly I believe
18 it was bipolar disease, are no longer given
19 prescriptions upon release because we're no
20 longer allowed to, and that they are -- and
21 they also don't have a home to return to, so
22 they're going into the homeless shelters. So
23 they have a prescription waiting at some
24 pharmacy that may be close to where they used
171
1 to live; however, they have no home in that
2 district.
3 And so how are we -- I would like to
4 know, how is that going to be addressed? And
5 what efforts are being made so that we can
6 capture that population and actually keep
7 them on their medications?
8 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
9 I think that's an important point, and I
10 think much more in the lane of the Department
11 of Health, for example, in terms of
12 medications and how and where they're
13 prescribed.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WRIGHT: But aren't you
15 going to do a -- and I might be wrong; I
16 thought I saw something that said it's going
17 to be case management for the formerly
18 incarcerated here?
19 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: We
20 will be putting -- part of that -- I
21 mentioned the task force that will be formed
22 as part of the Governor's Interagency Council
23 on Homelessness. So they will begin their
24 work over the course of 2017, make
172
1 recommendations for the Department of
2 Corrections, for the human services agencies,
3 for the shelter systems. So I would expect
4 that the concern that you mention will be
5 very much part of that agenda.
6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WRIGHT: So who's going
7 to be on this -- I'm sorry if I missed that,
8 but who's going to be on this task force?
9 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: The
10 Department of Corrections, OTDA, I believe
11 DOH and OASAS and perhaps OMH.
12 That task force is still under
13 formation. You might know that the task
14 force is being led by Fran Barrett, directly
15 from the Governor's office, and is staffed by
16 OTDA. So we'll be happy to, you know, get
17 you more information as that task force
18 develops.
19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WRIGHT: Thank you.
20 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
21 You're welcome. Thank you.
22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
23 Senator?
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes, Senator
173
1 Comrie.
2 SENATOR COMRIE: Thank you.
3 Commissioner, I wanted to align myself
4 with the admonitions from the other members
5 regarding the Lottery winnings. I think it's
6 just unfair and it really needs to be looked
7 at. I think that if -- and I hope that there
8 will be some changes made before the
9 Executive Budget. So I just want to align
10 myself with those thoughts, and also bring up
11 some other issues.
12 Number one, in my mind, the Summer
13 Youth Employment Program. I do see a
14 $5 million cost-of-living adjustment, but I
15 haven't seen an increase in the number of
16 slots in the Summer Youth Employment Program
17 for at least 10 years. And I wanted to know
18 why are we still stuck at the same number of
19 slots that we've had for 10 years when the
20 need for summer youth to have job
21 opportunities is consistently increasing?
22 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Well,
23 I would say that as a matter of balancing the
24 budget and maintaining the number of youth
174
1 employment slots that we had last year, it
2 was important to the Governor to add
3 $5 million to the program. So, you know,
4 just in the context of the entire budget --
5 SENATOR COMRIE: But it doesn't
6 increase the number of slots.
7 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Well,
8 that's correct. But if the appropriation
9 stayed flat, that number of slots would have
10 fallen. So at the very least, you know, the
11 Governor wants to maintain the same number of
12 slots that we had last year with the
13 additional appropriation.
14 SENATOR COMRIE: But in every year
15 there's at least a three-to-one or
16 four-to-one number regarding the people that
17 applied and the people that actually get
18 jobs. And hopefully -- you know, I'm a
19 beneficiary of the Summer Youth Employment
20 Program. It gave me my first job experience,
21 my first opportunity to work outside of home.
22 And I just don't understand why we
23 haven't worked to increase the number of
24 slots available, not just to increase to
175
1 adjust for inflation or adjust to deal with
2 the minimum wage. The opportunity for young
3 people especially, all over the state, to
4 have a first work experience that's real and
5 valid is really becoming more and more
6 difficult, because the number of people that
7 are applying and eligible and are frustrated
8 by this continues to grow.
9 So I would hope that we could increase
10 the number of actual slots this year. I
11 don't think the actual number of slots have
12 been increased for 10 years, and we need to
13 take a hard look at that. And I hope that
14 that can be done as well.
15 I'm also concerned about some of the
16 other things in the budget that are looking
17 to be eliminated, actually -- the Wheels for
18 Work program. The ATTAIN program has been
19 eliminated altogether. The Career Pathways
20 program, the childcare opportunities that are
21 in here for both CUNY and SUNY, and the
22 childcare demonstration projects. Could you
23 give us some reasons why those critical
24 programs for especially people that are
176
1 trying to sustain a minimum income are being
2 eliminated?
3 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Sure.
4 And thank you very much for the question,
5 Senator. We understand.
6 But I think the Governor's budget is
7 fairly consistent from last year to this
8 year, and those items, among others, that you
9 just mentioned were added in as part of the
10 budget process last year.
11 So I would point out that the fact
12 that they're not in the Governor's proposed
13 budget does not necessarily indicate
14 opposition to those programs. Indeed, the
15 Governor did in fact approve the budget last
16 year including those programs. So I would
17 leave it to this committee and the budget
18 process, together with the Division of Budget
19 and the Governor's office, to address the
20 concern.
21 SENATOR COMRIE: Okay, so you're
22 clearly saying that you're leaving it up to
23 us to put it back in. I get that. But I
24 would hope that we'd make sure that those
177
1 programs are put in at the front end of the
2 budget so that those people don't have to
3 stress from year and year and be concerned
4 about it and are coming to our offices to
5 express their shock and disdain that they
6 have to be concerned about something, you
7 know, that's basic to their quality of life
8 is not eliminated as well. So I hope that we
9 can get past that quickly.
10 And I just also want to align myself
11 with the issues of trying to make sure that
12 children and family shelters are given better
13 opportunities for a smooth transition in
14 housing. I have a lot of -- unfortunately,
15 one of the highest school districts in terms
16 of foster children and transitional children
17 in southeast Queens, where we have many
18 schools that are actually -- actually,
19 one-third to one-half of the school
20 population every year is transitioning
21 because they're moving from shelter to
22 shelter.
23 And I would hope that we can improve
24 those statistics, working together to make
178
1 that happen.
2 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: We
3 very much appreciate the concern, Senator.
4 It's something that's very much on the radar
5 scope of -- and OTDA, as the regulatory
6 oversight agency, is working with those
7 responsible for running the shelter system --
8 in this case, the Division of Homeless
9 Services in New York City and the providers.
10 So it's a matter that we've brought to
11 their attention, and I can tell you that it's
12 also of concern to New York City DHS.
13 SENATOR COMRIE: Thank you.
14 Is my five minutes up already? Was
15 that the full time? Time flies.
16 (Laughter.)
17 SENATOR COMRIE: Thank you. Thank
18 you, Madam Chair.
19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
20 We've been joined by Assemblywoman
21 Cook and Assemblyman Perry.
22 Next to question, Chairwoman Jaffee,
23 to close on this side.
24 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you. I
179
1 wanted to follow up on a question regarding
2 the public assistance proposal to create a
3 pilot program that would offer case
4 management services for public assistance
5 recipients who are formerly incarcerated.
6 And I wanted to understand a little
7 more in depth, how will the counties be
8 selected for the pilot programs? What kind
9 of case management services do you anticipate
10 for these programs? And what kind of
11 follow-up will there be, and ways to
12 evaluate?
13 I'll tell you, we have an
14 extraordinary program that began in
15 Rockland County in 2014 called MADE, Making A
16 Difference Everyday. And they, you know,
17 really attempt to provide transitional
18 services for formerly incarcerated residents.
19 Is this a program that would be assisted,
20 that type of program providing assistance,
21 through this funding for this pilot program?
22 And it doesn't say specifically where, but
23 how will the counties be determined?
24 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Let
180
1 me just describe the program as best we -- as
2 best it exists right now.
3 So two counties would be selected, and
4 the idea is to select two counties from among
5 those counties that already offer their own
6 rent supplement programs. So the idea here
7 is to focus on the homelessness issue and
8 making sure that folks returning from prison
9 are not left homeless, to some of the
10 concerns that we've heard here today.
11 So understanding that it's $200,000
12 and only two counties, I'd like to just
13 reemphasize that it is a pilot program. So
14 that being the case, we're very much looking
15 for some creative programming. So OTDA does
16 not at this point intend to be prescriptive
17 about what exactly those services are, so we
18 very much look forward to applications and
19 proposals from the counties that will be
20 eligible.
21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: You know,
22 providing them a place to live is
23 certainly -- taking them out of the homeless
24 environment is important, but also assisting
181
1 them in terms of guidance, providing
2 assistance in terms of maybe they need
3 continuing education, assistance seeking
4 jobs, that kind of -- and then counseling as
5 well, and with the family as well, the kind
6 of programs and assistance within the
7 community.
8 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Yeah,
9 I think that package of services that you
10 outline would be well received in an
11 application by the agency.
12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: And I know that
13 would be very helpful, because we can then
14 take the opportunity to turn their lives
15 around and provide them with a positive
16 future and for our community as well.
17 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
18 That's the idea behind the pilot project, so
19 thank you very much.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: And I like the
21 pilot programs, but I think -- hopefully we
22 can then expand and learn that they are
23 making a difference.
24 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Yeah,
182
1 and some of the concepts that you just
2 outlined again are very much subject to the
3 conversations between the Department of
4 Corrections and especially New York City DHS.
5 So, you know, with all those areas of
6 service that I think the community and those
7 of us in the human services world understand
8 contribute to homelessness and contribute to
9 the difficulty of reentry for folks from the
10 prison system.
11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you.
12 And I just want to go back to
13 something that's so essential. You referred
14 to the middle-class tax credit for childcare,
15 which is important. But I also just want to
16 mention that 83 percent of the children in
17 our communities throughout the state that
18 actually qualify for subsidies live in
19 poverty, very, very low income. They are not
20 being provided support. Only 17 percent.
21 So it's something we have to focus on,
22 something we need to address. Because they
23 desperately need the support. The families
24 need it because they need to work, the
183
1 children need it because this will prepare
2 them as they move forward for kindergarten
3 and education in a stable environment. And
4 so I just wanted to mention that because I
5 think it's essential.
6 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: We
7 appreciate the comment, and we understand
8 that it's a key part of the Public Assistance
9 Program, even though it's kind of within the
10 expertise of my colleague Sheila Poole, who
11 you heard from a few minutes ago.
12 But again, we collaborate very, very
13 closely with OCFS on these kind of issues.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: And hopefully
15 we can work together to expand that funding.
16 Thank you. Thank you very much.
17 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN:
18 Certainly. Thank you.
19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
20 Senator?
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We're all set,
22 Chairman.
23 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: That's it. Thank
24 you very much.
184
1 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: Thank
2 you, members, chairs. Thank you to the
3 chairwoman; thank you, Chairman. I'd like to
4 thank the members of the committee.
5 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Tell Mr. Roberts I
6 hope he feels better.
7 EXEC. DEP. COMMISSIONER PERRIN: We
8 very much appreciate the conversation today.
9 So thanks very much.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you for being
11 here today.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Next, Roberta
14 Reardon, commissioner, New York State
15 Department of Labor.
16 Good afternoon.
17 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Good afternoon.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Hi, Commissioner.
19 It's a delight to see you.
20 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
21 Nice to be here.
22 Senator Young, Assemblymember Farrell,
23 and distinguished members of the committees,
24 thank you for the opportunity to appear
185
1 before you today to discuss Governor Andrew
2 Cuomo's proposed 2018 budget and the work of
3 the Department of Labor.
4 During my first year as commissioner,
5 I have taken part in events and visited
6 Department of Labor offices in every region
7 of the state, and I have seen firsthand the
8 dramatic economic progress that's been made.
9 New York State's unemployment rate stands at
10 4.9 percent, down from 8.4 percent, and there
11 are more than 7.9 million private-sector jobs
12 in our state, the most on record.
13 The number of private-sector jobs is
14 up, and unemployment is down, in every region
15 of the state, but there's still much more
16 that we can accomplish together. A great
17 example is the minimum wage. Last year the
18 Governor and the the Legislature took a
19 historic step to jump-start New York's
20 economy and make sure no one works a
21 full-time job and lives in poverty. Raising
22 the minimum wage to $15 will impact about a
23 quarter of the total workforce, more than 2.3
24 million New Yorkers. It will lift more than
186
1 250,000 people and about 110,000 families out
2 of poverty. And it will increase consumer
3 spending power by more than $15.7 billion,
4 which will return to local economies and help
5 sustain even more job growth across the State
6 of New York. And on December 31st, we
7 climbed that first rung on the ladder towards
8 15.
9 One of our core responsibilities is to
10 ensure that workers are being paid the proper
11 wage. First, we educate, by reaching out to
12 businesses, workers, organizations, and
13 advocacy grups. We recognize that most
14 businesses want to do the right thing, so
15 we're working with them to make sure that
16 they know what that is.
17 But there are some bad actors who
18 knowingly profit by taking advantage of their
19 workers. It hurts law-abiding businesses by
20 creating unlevel playing fields and is not
21 what we stand for here in the State of New
22 York.
23 The Department of Labor is a leading
24 member of the Joint Task Force to Combat
187
1 Worker Exploitation, and over the past three
2 years we have recovered nearly $110 million
3 and returned that money to 84,000 workers who
4 have been victimized by wage theft. To put
5 this in perspective, that total is more than
6 double that of any other state in the nation.
7 In the months ahead, we will continue
8 these efforts, making sure that any worker
9 who is cheated out of their proper pay is
10 made whole.
11 We also stand by workers who lost a
12 job through no fault of their own. Since the
13 recession ended, we've continued to see fewer
14 and fewer people needing unemployment
15 insurance, but it is no less important.
16 Three years ago, as a result of the
17 recession, the state's employers owed the
18 federal Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund
19 $3.5 billion. But because you acted on the
20 Governor's reform proposal, we were able to
21 save employers an estimated $200 million in
22 interest costs. The trust fund ended 2016
23 nearly $1.3 billion in the black, and that's
24 more than four times higher than in 2015.
188
1 But more reforms are needed. Current
2 unemployment insurance rules discourage
3 part-time work. For each day a claimant
4 works now, even if for as little as an hour,
5 their weekly benefit is reduced by 25
6 percent. A part-time job serves as a bridge
7 to full-time employment, by allowing an
8 individual to maintain or even improve their
9 skills while they're unemployed.
10 The Governor proposes greater
11 incentives for unemployed workers to work
12 part-time, potentially allowing them to
13 return to work more quickly.
14 Another major part of what we do
15 involves connecting job seekers to jobs and
16 supporting businesses throughout the hiring
17 process. For businesses, we offer a suite of
18 no-cost services, in conjunction with Empire
19 State Development, to both facilitate and
20 incentivize hiring.
21 For job seekers, we offer 96 career
22 centers strategically located in every corner
23 of the state. In each center, we have
24 seasoned career experts that work with job
189
1 seekers of all experience levels. We offer
2 cutting-edge solutions to help people find
3 work, like virtual career fairs, our Jobs
4 Express job bank, the Career Zone tool to
5 help young people plan their future, and an
6 Employability Score, which allows job seekers
7 to explore career openings, assess their
8 employability, and connect with employers
9 online, without leaving home.
10 How do we know these tools are
11 working? Just ask the nearly 200,000 people
12 that we helped get a job last year. And that
13 number accounts for 25 percent of the people
14 hired through all career centers nationwide,
15 and that is far above any other state in the
16 nation.
17 At a time when businesses are
18 demanding workers, we are working to meet
19 that demand. But we are also looking to the
20 future. Middle-skill jobs are those that
21 require more than a post-secondary education,
22 but less than a four-year degree, and they
23 represent a significant share of the labor
24 market in New York and indeed across the
190
1 United States.
2 This is one reason why Governor Cuomo
3 has proposed the first-in-the-nation
4 Excelsior Scholarship, making college
5 tuition-free for New York's middle-class
6 families at all SUNY and CUNY colleges, and
7 why he's making sure that it also applies to
8 two-year colleges. This will help thousands
9 of young people realize their dream,
10 alleviate the burden of student debt, and
11 help New York State address the need for more
12 trained middle-skill workers.
13 Let me end on a note of reassurance.
14 In a time when everyone is doing more with
15 less across the board, we are assessing and
16 responding to our changing landscape,
17 prepared for the future. As the technology
18 sector continues to boom across the
19 United States, we are harnessing its many
20 benefits here in New York State. By planning
21 for 21st-century jobs under the New York Tech
22 Workforce Development Task Force, we will
23 ensure a pipeline of skilled workers ready to
24 grow the businesses and economy of tomorrow.
191
1 We must identify the baseline for tech
2 education and investigate what basic
3 technological literacy should look like. The
4 $5 million Tech Workforce Training Fund will
5 support innovative training and education
6 solutions preparing New Yorkers for
7 21st-century jobs.
8 The same technology that's creating so
9 many great jobs is also changing the
10 workforce as we know it. This change means
11 that millions of people -- those who work as
12 caregivers, independent drivers, programmers,
13 and so on -- don't have reliable access to
14 things like medical and unemployment
15 insurance or worker's compensation. The
16 existing system for supporting workers is
17 simply outdated.
18 Portable benefits would bind things
19 like retirement to each individual, instead
20 of an employer, like in the traditional labor
21 market. And the Portable Benefit Task Force
22 will investigate these issues and make
23 recommendations to make sure all workers,
24 regardless of their industry, have affordable
192
1 access to benefits.
2 The gender pay gap is simply
3 unacceptable. So we are going to continue to
4 lead the nation, studying how to close the
5 gender wage gap. One estimate predicted that
6 closing the gap would add an additional
7 $4.3 trillion to the U.S. GDP by 2025, not
8 including the effects this would have on
9 reducing the cost of social safety net
10 programs and of course the improvements to
11 family life, economic output, and overall
12 productivity.
13 This is a time of great uncertainty,
14 yes, but New York has weathered uncertainty
15 before. And our mission is clear. No matter
16 what happens on the federal level, we will
17 maintain our high level of service. We are
18 going to make sure all workers are protected.
19 If you lost your job, you will still get
20 unemployment insurance benefits. And if you
21 are looking for a job, we are still going to
22 have the resources to help you find it.
23 With your help, the Department of
24 Labor can continue its legacy of leadership,
193
1 which is the pride of this great state.
2 Thank you so much, and I would appreciate
3 your questions.
4 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
5 Questions?
6 Assemblywoman Jaffee.
7 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: There is a
8 New York Youth Jobs Program.
9 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yes, there is.
10 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Do we have a
11 sense of how many of our youth actually
12 participated in the urban youth program since
13 its inception?
14 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I have the
15 statistics for this past year, and I know
16 that when we increased it with an extra
17 $20 million for young people who are living
18 outside of urban areas, that the usage of the
19 tax credit increased 50 percent.
20 So we know that there is great
21 interest in this program. The interest is
22 growing. And as more and more employers are
23 made aware of the benefit, we are sure that
24 it will continue to help young people find
194
1 jobs and employers find good new employees.
2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: That's
3 certainly -- do we have any numbers in terms
4 of --
5 COMMISSIONER REARDON: The numbers
6 are -- let me see. In 2016 we had 20,298
7 hires under the program. And in 2015, we had
8 6,808. So it's a really good increase.
9 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: That does.
10 What type of jobs does the program generate?
11 COMMISSIONER REARDON: It's a variety
12 of jobs. Some of them are part-time, some of
13 them are full-time. As you probably know,
14 there's an additional incentive to retain
15 them in a second year of employment. There's
16 another tax benefit for that.
17 It's important to remember that
18 part-time work is also very valuable. I know
19 when I began to work, I certainly had a
20 part-time job, that's where I learned to go
21 into the workforce. So we make sure that
22 whatever is available out there -- the main
23 thing is we want young people to be connected
24 to work and understand what the world of work
195
1 is like so they can be successful.
2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: It's a positive
3 incentive, certainly. And providing them
4 with that opportunity and training, it's very
5 important.
6 Do we have any numbers in terms of how
7 many of them actually are maintained in that
8 employment?
9 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I know that we
10 have statistics -- which I don't have on this
11 page right now -- of employers who take
12 advantage of the second-year benefit.
13 But the important thing is --
14 remember, think back to what it was like when
15 we all first started working. We often
16 didn't stay in that first job, but it was the
17 portal to beginning to make our way into the
18 world.
19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: And certainly
20 very helpful. I hope that we can expand
21 that. I know they're increasing it this
22 year, so I'm pleased about that. I think
23 it's important.
24 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
196
1 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Am I correct,
2 from about $20 million to $50 million, that
3 change --
4 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Mm-hmm.
5 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: -- to give them
6 more opportunity? Is it only in the urban
7 areas or --
8 COMMISSIONER REARDON: No, the 30
9 million is for the urban areas, and then
10 another $20 million was for anyone anywhere
11 in the state.
12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Okay. Thank
13 you. Thank you, Commissioner.
14 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Senator.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
17 Welcome, Commissioner.
18 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: It's always great
20 to see you.
21 COMMISSIONER REARDON: It's great to
22 see you.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I do have several
24 questions. I'm so happy you're here, because
197
1 there are several things that we'd like to
2 ask.
3 The first one is about a law that was
4 passed, it was Senate Bill 7967 of 2016,
5 Chapter 325. It was sponsored by Senator
6 Martins. And it requires the Department of
7 Labor to use forward-facing employment data
8 and labor market information. And in the
9 past, employment data was by region and it
10 still was set two years behind.
11 So how is DOL implementing this
12 requirement? Because we need to make sure
13 emerging employment sectors have enough
14 skilled labor to entice businesses to come
15 here. So there was an immediate effective
16 date. I'd like to know where that's at.
17 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We are working
18 on implementing it. I believe we are working
19 with colleges, two-year and four-year
20 colleges in this process. So it's in the
21 pipeline, we are rolling it out, but it's not
22 fully effective yet.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: When do you think
24 it will be in place?
198
1 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I do not know,
2 but I can find out for you.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: If you could let us
4 know, that would be helpful.
5 Another question, in the State of the
6 State that the Governor gave around the
7 state, who is on the Portable Benefits Task
8 Force? Because he referenced it. However,
9 it's not included in the budget, there's no
10 language. And I believe it's for independent
11 contractors dealing with Uber, Airbnb, and so
12 on. So who is on this task force, and what
13 are the plans for that?
14 COMMISSIONER REARDON: So I am
15 actually very pleased to be one of the
16 cochairs. Howard Zemsky and I will be
17 cochairing it. And we have not assembled the
18 task force yet, but I know that we will be
19 looking at people from the insurance
20 industries, people from advocacy groups and
21 labor unions, people from current pension and
22 health plans, people who have experience in
23 this area.
24 There are various -- I know that in
199
1 New York City there's the Black Car Fund,
2 which is a grouped benefit for drivers in
3 various parts of that industry.
4 We are already receiving inquiries
5 from various parts of those communities, and
6 we are going to have to sit down soon and
7 talk about who's actually going to -- there
8 will be people on the task force, and then we
9 of course will be taking a lot of testimony.
10 We want to hear across the breadth of this
11 area what's being done, what's being thought
12 of.
13 As an actor, I participated in a
14 multi-employer pension and health fund, very
15 much like the construction industry has,
16 because we worked for lots of different
17 employers and they paid into one fund, and
18 that's how we got our benefits. That's one
19 way -- that was of course overseen by my
20 union. But that's one way to provide these
21 benefits. It was very significant in my work
22 as an actor, and newspeople are also part of
23 my union; they tend to go from employer to
24 employer. And it was a significant benefit
200
1 to workers in that area that they didn't have
2 16 different pension plans or in and out of
3 insurance plans. It's a great model.
4 But I'm sure there are lots of other
5 models out there. And as we go into -- in
6 the gig economy world, it becomes more and
7 more important to see what we can do to help
8 people who are caught in that limbo of not
9 having one employer but working steadily for
10 many different employers.
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So thank you for
12 that answer.
13 As far as a membership on the Portable
14 Benefits Task Force, I didn't hear two words
15 that we're all fond of here, and that's the
16 Legislature. So would there be
17 representatives from the Assembly and the
18 Senate included on the task force?
19 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I haven't had
20 that conversation. I'm sure we will have
21 that conversation.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Well, I'm sure that
23 everyone here would like to be represented
24 also. So if that could happen, that would be
201
1 great.
2 I do want to ask too about the Minimum
3 Wage Task Force. In early January of this
4 year, the Governor announced a 200-member
5 task force -- you alluded to it -- dedicated
6 to enforcing provisions of the new minimum
7 wage. And you stated that the task force
8 will only pursue willful and egregious
9 violations, not violations that are the
10 result of ignorance or error.
11 So the first question is, who is
12 staffing the task force? Related to that,
13 are there new FTEs necessary? And will these
14 only be employees of the Department of Labor?
15 COMMISSIONER REARDON: So I'm happy to
16 say that it is a multi-agency effort. The
17 DOL is of course the driving force, because
18 our inspectors go out every day and enforce
19 wage regulations, and they're highly trained
20 in that area. But we're also working with
21 the Department of State, with Tax and
22 Finance, with Worker Comp. We are working
23 with the DMV. We're putting palm cards and
24 posters in areas where people normally
202
1 gather, so that the information is available
2 across the state in various areas.
3 The people from the other agencies are
4 being trained in wage issues so that they can
5 have those conversations, so it's not just
6 DOL inspectors. We have not hired any new
7 people to do this. But again, our inspectors
8 go out every day and do wage inspections.
9 We are also working in a lot of
10 different ways to ensure that the business
11 community and workers understand what their
12 proper rate is. So we're doing advertising,
13 we're doing a social media barrage. We have
14 a dedicated page on the New York Gov website.
15 We have trained our call center people
16 specifically about minimum wage issues. Tax
17 and Finance is sending out stuffers in the
18 envelopes that they mail to their customers
19 with information about minimum wage.
20 I'm very happy to tell you -- I was
21 just down in the call center this morning to
22 talk to them because they have had obviously
23 an uptick in calls, and they're doing a great
24 job. And I took them some doughnuts and said
203
1 thank you and asked them how it was going.
2 And they said, you know, it's interesting,
3 for many of the people who call, they already
4 know what the wage is. They've seen the
5 advertising, they've read the newspaper
6 articles, wherever they've gotten their
7 information. They know my rate should be X,
8 I'm not sure I'm getting it, what do I do?
9 So that's good. So the workers know.
10 And a lot of the businesses also know. So I
11 feel confident that the information is
12 getting out there. But we are working doing
13 webinars, we do work with the chambers of
14 commerce. We will go one-on-one. There is a
15 place on the DOL website that an employer can
16 go on and say, I would like to have a
17 personal session with someone to explain this
18 wage rule to me, and we will go out and work
19 with them. It's obviously easier to do if
20 there's a collective of like-minded employers
21 that we can reach out to, but we will do
22 one-on-one counseling if that's what they
23 like.
24 Our objective is not to harm the
204
1 employer, our objective is to make sure that
2 everybody understands what the rights and
3 responsibilities are and, if there's a
4 mistake, we -- you know, they make the worker
5 whole and no harm, no foul. At some point,
6 you know, maybe in a couple of months when
7 we're going out, if there's a pattern, a
8 repeat pattern of underpaying their workers,
9 or if this employer, frankly, has an
10 extensive history of underpaying their
11 employees, then the outcome will probably be
12 different.
13 But we are really concerned to make
14 sure that everybody understands the law and
15 that they have an opportunity to do what's
16 the right thing.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. And so
18 related to that, but switching a little bit,
19 I wanted to explore employer resources. And
20 the department has been very focused on
21 enforcement. And there are questions that we
22 receive in our offices from employers asking
23 for assistance in compliance with the myriad
24 of laws and regulations that are imposed on
205
1 them daily. As you know, there's a heavy
2 regulatory burden in New York State on those
3 who provide jobs.
4 So do you have a dedicated office for
5 employers to use as a resource for
6 compliance?
7 COMMISSIONER REARDON: One dedicated
8 office, no. But we do a number of things.
9 So in labor standards we do have the ability
10 to have compliance conferences in certain
11 areas.
12 Again, we want to make sure that -- we
13 understand regulations can be confusing,
14 often for small businesses. Larger
15 corporations have the wherewithal to
16 understand it, because they have the lawyers
17 to interpret it for them. But for a small
18 business owner, it can be more difficult.
19 And we certainly make ourselves available.
20 We understand that for the overwhelming
21 majority of employers in this state, they
22 want to do the right thing. They don't want
23 to run afoul of the law. They're not looking
24 to cheat their workers. But sometimes it's
206
1 confusing.
2 So we don't have one place. We have a
3 variety of opportunities for people to come
4 to us or for us to go to them.
5 One of the things that I have looked
6 at since I've been here, a little over a
7 year, I'm very interested in the
8 outward-facing face of the Department of
9 Labor. I think we do a lot of really great
10 work, and probably not enough people know it.
11 So I'm looking to improve that kind of
12 communication, because I think -- I believe
13 the employers really want to do the right
14 thing, and sometimes they just need to be
15 able to ask questions.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Anything that you
17 can do to be a resource to them, I think that
18 they would be very appreciative.
19 I wanted to ask you about the Fast
20 Food Wage Board order smoothing. And in this
21 past year's enacted budget, it allowed you,
22 as commissioner of Labor, to smooth wages for
23 fast food workers going forward, to keep our
24 workers on the same minimum wage schedule.
207
1 As you know, there's a lot of disparity, a
2 lot of confusion out there.
3 So that hasn't happened yet. When is
4 it going to happen?
5 COMMISSIONER REARDON: So as you know,
6 the legislation that authorized us to look
7 into the fast food wage issue was a year and
8 a half, I believe, before the minimum wage
9 law was enacted. And that was a separate
10 wage board. They took 2,000 written
11 depositions and interviewed multiple hundreds
12 of people on the issue and reached the
13 conclusion that this was a multi-billion-
14 dollar industry that could absorb a higher
15 wage for their workers.
16 That said, I know that there's
17 language that allows us to do smoothing. We
18 are only five weeks into the minimum wage
19 rollout. We have virtually no data to look
20 at. We are going to continue to monitor the
21 effect not only of the minimum wage, but how
22 it may intersect with the fast food wage as
23 well. And we will look at that and study it
24 as it rolls out. But again, we're barely
208
1 five weeks into the rollout of the new wage
2 order.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Are you planning on
4 doing the smoothing?
5 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We have not
6 made that decision yet. We are going to
7 continue to look at the data and see what it
8 tells us.
9 And I must say that the information
10 that was gathered for the Fast Food Wage
11 Board, to this point, that information has
12 not changed. Should that begin to change,
13 that would be something for us to consider.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: What will the
15 impact on the economy be to have separate
16 minimum wages for employees doing
17 substantially similar jobs? I mean, that's
18 why the smoothing was included in the budget
19 last year. So what's going to happen? I
20 mean, people are doing the same job and
21 they've got different wages.
22 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I think there
23 are probably many areas in our economy where
24 people do very similar jobs and earn
209
1 different amounts of money. It's certainly
2 happened in my industry. But we will
3 continue to monitor this and see what the
4 effects are.
5 I will say that you actually took a
6 great step in helping us begin to deal with
7 this -- what is seen by some people as an
8 inconsistency. Because if we had not managed
9 to raise the minimum wage, the difference
10 between the fast food wage and the lower
11 minimum wage would have been much more stark.
12 So we are in a period, everybody will get to
13 15. It depends on what city you're in and
14 what region you work in, but everyone gets to
15 15, some sooner than later. It is a smaller
16 period of time. And I thank you for raising
17 the minimum wage so we're not struggling with
18 an even bigger gap.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: How are you helping
20 retailers, convenience stores, places like
21 that who have fast food businesses within
22 their business? So, for example, a Subway in
23 a gas station or a Starbucks in a Target
24 store. Because again, there's a great parity
210
1 disparity there. So that's the first
2 question.
3 And must all employees of that Target,
4 for example, be paid minimum wage? Or does a
5 Starbucks have to have its own security and
6 cleaning staff because they must make a
7 different wage? It just, again, seems like a
8 lot of confusion.
9 COMMISSIONER REARDON: The wage board
10 was very clear about the definition of the
11 fast food board impact, 30 franchisees or
12 more in the state. And I think the laws are
13 very clear.
14 There's always competition for better
15 jobs. I will tell you, as the commissioner
16 of Labor, I'm always happy when workers have
17 more money in their pockets. But, you know,
18 this again is a short period of time, and
19 everyone gets to 15.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
21 I wanted to ask also about the
22 overtime salary threshold, which you also had
23 referenced. But until recently, New York's
24 overtime salary threshold was $35,100
211
1 annually statewide. And on December 29th of
2 2016 -- so not that long ago -- the
3 department adopted its proposed rule
4 increasing the threshold beginning on
5 December 31, 2016.
6 So during the seven-week public
7 comment period, how many meetings or hearings
8 were held with the chambers of commerce,
9 business organizations, economists, and local
10 and regional business owners or individual
11 proprietors, to judge their ability to absorb
12 an increase in the statewide minimum wage, a
13 new fast food minimum wage, paid family
14 leave, and an increase to the overtime salary
15 threshold?
16 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I'm not quite
17 sure I -- so let me answer one thing. The
18 increase in overtime in New York State is
19 labor law. It is pegged to the minimum wage
20 law. There are a number of things that are
21 increased when the minimum wage goes up;
22 overtime is one of them. So it's not
23 anything we did.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: There was a
212
1 seven-week comment period; correct?
2 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yes.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. The question
4 is, did you reach out to the employers in
5 New York State to figure out how they were
6 able to absorb all these new changes that
7 were coming down the pike all at once?
8 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We did receive
9 a number of comments during that period. But
10 again, remember that that law is a labor law
11 that we don't have the ability to change.
12 Unless you do something.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: What is the current
14 federal overtime salary threshold?
15 COMMISSIONER REARDON: The current
16 overtime -- the number for federal?
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: The federal
18 overtime salary threshold.
19 COMMISSIONER REARDON: For the federal
20 number, I don't think I have that number.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. So that
22 actually is $23,660 annually. Do you know
23 what the large New York City employer, 11 or
24 more employees, what's the current overtime
213
1 salary threshold?
2 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yes, I have it
3 here. Let me see if I can find it quickly
4 for you.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: That's okay, I do
6 have it, Commissioner. So it's $42,900
7 annually.
8 And the reason I bring this up is that
9 how can New York reasonably attract
10 businesses from states subject to the much
11 lower federal threshold? Because as, again,
12 you can see, there's an enormous disparity
13 there between the two -- between the three
14 thresholds, actually.
15 COMMISSIONER REARDON: The federal
16 laws in many areas are lesser than a number
17 of state laws, not just New York State.
18 And again, I would just say that the
19 overtime law in New York State has been
20 pegged to the minimum wage labor law for
21 quite a while.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, thank you.
23 How many nonprofits -- just one more
24 question -- many of which operate on fixed
214
1 budgets, are subject to this regulation with
2 the overtime salary threshold?
3 COMMISSIONER REARDON: How many
4 nonprofits?
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Right. Are there
6 nonprofits, many of which operate on fixed
7 budgets, subject to this regulation?
8 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I don't know
9 how many there are. But again, it's a law
10 that I do not have the ability to
11 unilaterally change.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. Well, thank
13 you.
14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
15 Assemblywoman Titus.
16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN TITUS: Good afternoon,
17 Commissioner.
18 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Good afternoon.
19 It's good to see you.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN TITUS: Good to see you
21 also.
22 I want to thank you, since you've been
23 commissioner, for taking the time off-session
24 to sit down and meet with me. I look forward
215
1 to our continued partnership as this session
2 progresses.
3 I want to go now to the Executive
4 Budget. The Executive has proposed the
5 creation of a Division of Central
6 Administrative Hearings which would be headed
7 by an administrative law judge appointed by
8 the Governor. This division would be tasked
9 with the consolidation of administrative
10 hearings between 18 agencies, in an attempt
11 to improve efficiency and access.
12 I would like for you to discuss -- how
13 do you intend to make this work? And like
14 what agencies in particular will be included
15 in this proposal? What considerations are
16 being made to ensure that those judges will
17 be properly trained in the areas that require
18 more specialized knowledge? And what type
19 hearings do you believe can be shared between
20 agencies? And will this reduce, in fact, the
21 number of ALJs in the system?
22 COMMISSIONER REARDON: It's a great
23 question. You know, we have two boards, the
24 UI Appeals Board and the IBA. At this point,
216
1 there is no final decision. This thing is
2 being studied. I don't think it was fully
3 fleshed out in the budget.
4 The idea is there. No decisions have
5 been made, and I think the conversations are
6 just beginning. It is a serious question,
7 but we have not really engaged in the
8 drill-down yet. I can get back to you when
9 that begins, but it hasn't happened yet.
10 ASSEMBLYWOMAN TITUS: Okay. I'm
11 finished. Thank you.
12 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Senator?
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Savino.
15 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.
16 Thank you, Commissioner. Good to see
17 you, as always.
18 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Good to see
19 you.
20 SENATOR SAVINO: I want to ask you a
21 bit about the proposal in the budget on
22 expanding the Wage Theft Prevention Act. As
23 you know, it's near and dear to my heart.
24 And I'm just curious, because I'm somewhat
217
1 confused. In my reading of it, it looks like
2 we're going to expand our efforts to pursue
3 out-of-state LLCs. How will we do that?
4 COMMISSIONER REARDON: So this is
5 really an administrative fix. This was
6 changed a number of years ago for
7 corporations that were formed out of state.
8 Remember that this is for a corporation or an
9 LLC that was formed out-of-state -- Delaware,
10 whatever -- but they have businesss in
11 New York. And it allows us to go after --
12 this would allow us to go after the top
13 10 members of the LLC. They would be
14 personally liable for those wages.
15 We've already done that for
16 corporations that are formed out of state but
17 have businesses in New York State. And if we
18 don't change it, it actually has the effect
19 of disadvantaging New York LLCs, which is why
20 I believe it originally was changed for
21 corporations.
22 SENATOR SAVINO: But isn't the purpose
23 of establishing an LLC is to protect your
24 personal assets from the action of your
218
1 business entity? Again, I'm not a lawyer, I
2 don't play one on television --
3 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Me either.
4 SENATOR SAVINO: -- but I would
5 imagine that's what the concept of a limited
6 liability corporation is.
7 I mean, I'm all for it if you can find
8 a way to collect wages that are due to
9 workers. That's the whole purpose behind the
10 Wage Theft Prevention Act. I'm just somewhat
11 confused as to how you're going to accomplish
12 it. I hope you're successful at it, I just
13 question how we're going to accomplish it.
14 But I want to actually talk about the
15 gig economy issue, the portable benefits
16 issue, the tech workforce. You and I have
17 had this discussion. And I have been saying
18 this for years now, the world of work is
19 changing. We can pretend that it's not and
20 do nothing and, you know, abide by the fact
21 that we have two very distinct definitions in
22 labor law -- which in most respects is
23 actually very young. You know, labor law is
24 not that old. Workers are pretty old, but
219
1 labor law is not.
2 But we need -- I believe it's time for
3 us to find a new definition for the workforce
4 that is neither an employee or an independent
5 contractor.
6 And so I have a bill that I've been
7 working on with Assemblymember Morelle, the
8 Handy bill, it's about the -- but I think we
9 need to do something bigger. Because this is
10 not just one sector of the economy, it's not
11 just the Ubers, it's not just -- you know,
12 it's the platform economies, the gig
13 economies, the freelancers.
14 We have a hodgepodge, I think over the
15 years, of people attempting to solve this
16 problem, but I think we have an opportunity
17 to get it right. Work is different now. We
18 have a new workforce that likes the
19 flexibility of the independent contractor
20 model, but yearns for the protection of the
21 employer-employee model. And I think we have
22 a responsibility to find what that sweet spot
23 is and get it right.
24 Because if not, we're going to wind up
220
1 with working people, you know, going in and
2 out of this area and winding up at a later
3 point in their life where they have income
4 insecurity in their later years and they
5 can't make it up, and they become dependent
6 on the state.
7 So I look forward to that. I've had
8 some discussions with the Executive about
9 this. And, you know, I agree with Senator
10 Young, I think the Legislature needs to be
11 involved in this, because we're going to
12 write the next, you know, major step in labor
13 law, I believe right here in New York State,
14 and I think we need to be part of that.
15 And finally on the closing the gender
16 pay gap. I will say this as many times as I
17 can. The best way to close the gender pay
18 gap is to put more money into daycare.
19 Because what keeps women in the workforce is
20 access to quality, affordable childcare.
21 Gaps in our employment history is what leads
22 to gaps in our economic reality. Because if
23 you have to take time off from work, and then
24 you lose seniority, you lose training, you
221
1 lose opportunity -- that's what really hurts
2 us in the long run. It hurts us in our
3 Social Security, in our retirement. That
4 will go a long way towards closing the gender
5 gap a lot faster than doing another study.
6 So I want to thank you for the work
7 you're doing, and I certainly look forward to
8 working with you going forward.
9 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
11 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Shelley Mayer.
12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Good afternoon,
13 Commissioner. Thank you.
14 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Good afternoon.
15 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Questions on the
16 Wage Theft Act. Do you know how much the
17 Department of Labor has recovered in 2016
18 under the Wage Theft Prevention Act?
19 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We have
20 collected, in the last three years,
21 $110 million. Let me see if I have the 2016
22 number. It's -- we have been quite
23 successful, and it's an escalating amount,
24 which is good. I don't know if I actually
222
1 have the breakdown for the individual years.
2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Maybe you could
3 get that. I'd be interested.
4 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I will. I'll
5 get that for you.
6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: How much staff
7 of the department is assigned to work on wage
8 theft issues?
9 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We have the
10 second-largest number of inspectors in the
11 country. These are highly trained, committed
12 professionals. We have, I believe, 125
13 inspectors, and they do an amazing job --
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Not to cut you
15 off, I just want to clarify. They inspect on
16 a variety of labor law violations, not
17 exclusively wage theft, is that correct?
18 COMMISSIONER REARDON: How many of
19 them exclusively do wage theft? Let me get
20 you the number. I don't know what that is.
21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Okay. And some
22 number of these enforcement actions go to the
23 Attorney General, I assume for litigation if
24 they can't get resolved through the
223
1 department. It would be helpful if you could
2 provide the breakdown of the amount that's
3 recovered through the Attorney General's
4 actions versus the amount that's recovered
5 administratively by the department. If you
6 could give that to me.
7 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay.
8 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Second is on
9 this issue of the gender pay gap. And I
10 concur with Senator Savino about the real
11 solution, which is increased investment in
12 childcare.
13 But what do you mean when you say "we
14 are going to study how to close the gender
15 wage gap"? Is there a task force?
16 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We are going to
17 do a study this year. We are committed to
18 doing that. One of the reasons we need to do
19 the study is it's different for different
20 industries and it's different in different
21 regions. And it just seems that it makes
22 sense to understand -- dive into those
23 industries and regions so we can actually
24 come up with a better formulaation.
224
1 You know, when I was a working actor I
2 did a lot of commercials, so I auditioned all
3 the time, and we all took care of each
4 other's children because nobody could afford
5 childcare. And you'd go into an audition
6 room and there would be three baby buggies
7 and one toddler, and they'd go, I'm going in
8 next, and everybody would take care of those
9 children. We were lucky because we had a
10 built-in force of babysitters. That's highly
11 unusual out in the workforce. And I have a
12 great deal of empathy for men and women who
13 struggle everyday to figure out how am I
14 going to take care of my family, and how do I
15 take care of my family. And it is a huge
16 problem.
17 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Right. I just
18 wonder, are the details of the study
19 available yet, or they will be?
20 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Oh, they will
21 be. We've just started, so it's going to be
22 an interesting year.
23 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: And my last
24 questions are on the Workforce Investment and
225
1 Opportunity Act. I think in the Executive
2 proposal the Governor would have 15 percent
3 of these funds for discretionary use, and I
4 believe he did last year as well.
5 Do you know how those discretionary
6 amounts were allocated?
7 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I believe last
8 year there was $3 million dedicated to middle
9 skills. And we've actually put that towards
10 the apprenticeship programs, because that's
11 actually one way to really develop middle
12 skills is through apprenticeships -- not just
13 in construction trades, in many different
14 industries -- and sort of encourage
15 businesses and help build those programs.
16 And this year I think $5 million of it
17 goes to the Tech Training Fund. So he's very
18 -- you know, we're very aware that the
19 training funds are necessary, particularly
20 for these new areas.
21 The apprenticeship program is very
22 promising. And for those of us who know the
23 building and construction trades, they have
24 done a remarkable job at educating their
226
1 workers. And they're multiyear programs that
2 are supported by the employers. People have
3 a job, they're paid a wage, they learn on the
4 job, they have classroom as well. And at the
5 end of that period, they have a certificate
6 and they have a career. And it is a really
7 remarkable program.
8 We would like to expand that across
9 industries. We are looking into home
10 healthcare, IT. There's some advanced
11 manufacturing, optics. And of course the
12 tech industry is a great opportunity to
13 develop apprenticeships. So we are using
14 some of these funds to help workers and their
15 employers figure out how to do that.
16 They have to have -- when you
17 establish an apprenticeship, you're saying to
18 these apprentices, You have a job now, you'll
19 be working in this job, but at the end of
20 your work, when you get the certificate, you
21 will also have a job out there waiting. Now,
22 the worst thing you can do is put someone
23 through an apprenticeship when there's no job
24 at the end of it. So we understand that.
227
1 And it's also -- there's related
2 instruction, which they go to classrooms and
3 they learn the skills that they need to do
4 the work. It is a marvelous way to educate
5 people for a career.
6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: I think you
7 would find that there's a joint commitment by
8 many in the Legislature to expanding
9 apprenticeship programs, particularly as they
10 continue to reflect the diversity of the
11 communities we serve, and as a pathway to a
12 middle-class job. And I would just encourage
13 the department to think of that as a
14 collaborative effort rather than the
15 Governor's discretionary judgment.
16 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I would love to
17 think of it that way. And, you know, as you
18 know, it's an opportunity -- and again, the
19 building trades have been excellent at this
20 recently. The diversity that they have in
21 their apprenticeship programs is remarkable.
22 And it's a way to give opportunity to young
23 people who might not think that that's a job
24 that they could even do.
228
1 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Right. Thank
2 you very much.
3 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
4 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
5 Senator?
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
7 Senator Montgomery is next.
8 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
9 Thank you. Good afternoon.
10 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Good afternoon.
11 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Commissioner,
12 thank you so much for being here and
13 answering our questions.
14 I'm going to just try to stick to the
15 one sector, although there's many questions
16 that I could ask about your presentation.
17 But I want to just talk about what happens to
18 young people.
19 So, you know, there's a lot of talking
20 this session and in times past about what do
21 we do with 16- and 17- and 18- and
22 21-year-olds. And I've talked to a lot of
23 young people in that age category in
24 particular, and some a little bit younger,
229
1 and one of the big issues for them is work.
2 They don't have access to jobs, they are not
3 trained, they have no skills, and so it sort
4 of compounds the problem for them.
5 So now I notice in the Governor's
6 proposal and your presentation you talk about
7 something that is referred to as the Urban
8 Youth Employment program, tax credit program.
9 And it targets private corporations,
10 apparently, that hire at-risk youth.
11 And there's an identification of 13
12 areas where you have targeted for an
13 expenditure of $50 million in tax credits.
14 And it sounds like you are looking to renew
15 that program.
16 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yes.
17 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And of course in
18 the process you have changed the name of it
19 from Urban Youth to New York State Youth
20 Employment.
21 So that then appears from this going
22 forward as New York State is investing
23 $50 million in youth employment programs.
24 However, I have asked, over the years, What
230
1 are the corporations that actually are
2 participating, and how many youth? Because
3 I'd like to see how many of my young people
4 are actually able to participate in that
5 program.
6 And where have you the largest
7 investments? I notice you have most of the
8 Big 5, so to speak, and then some others as
9 well. But what percent of the funding
10 actually goes to the areas where there's the
11 highest need, largest number of young people,
12 and so forth and so on?
13 So I would really like very much to
14 hear what exactly are we getting in the form
15 of youth employment, numbers of young people,
16 and which corporations are actively
17 participating based on this $50 million that
18 we've been spending for the last few years
19 and, going forward, expected to spend for the
20 next five years at least.
21 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
22 So I can get you some specific
23 breakdowns. I don't have them in the book
24 right now.
231
1 As I said earlier, the youth tax
2 credit is expanding. We have expanded it
3 last year -- we didn't, you did -- expanded
4 from urban youth to $20 million for youth
5 anywhere in the state, and we've seen the
6 uptick. It is a really good improvement, so
7 we're very pleased with that. I can get you
8 some specifics.
9 But there's another thing that -- we
10 do a lot of work with young people. We are
11 very painfully aware of the unemployment in
12 young people, both urban and rural. And it
13 is a significant problem.
14 So our career centers around the state
15 are equipped to work with young people,
16 whether they have a degree or not. If they
17 don't have a degree, we can help them get a
18 GED or whatever they need. If they have a
19 degree but they need training, we can assess
20 what their skills are, what their needs are,
21 what their interests are. And we also assess
22 what the businesses are in that area. Who
23 are they looking for? You know, what kinds
24 of skills do they need? And we try to match
232
1 the young people with the jobs.
2 We have the Strike Force, which was
3 started in the Bronx in 2014, where we
4 understood that there was very deep poverty
5 in the Bronx and a lot of it, frankly, was
6 young people. And we went into the Bronx and
7 we did a very focused way of working with the
8 population in the Bronx. We worked
9 intensively with individuals to do that
10 assessment, but really drill down and see
11 what did they need. We also worked with the
12 businesses and did a map of what kinds of
13 jobs were available in the Bronx. And then
14 we began to match them up.
15 That was a very successful effort, and
16 the unemployment in the Bronx came down
17 significantly. Then we expanded it to the
18 counties with the highest poverty. Again,
19 the same approach. It is a successful
20 approach. Last year, in May, we did the
21 Western New York Strike Force, where we did a
22 slightly different approach. So Western
23 New York's economy is beginning to come up
24 again, and unemployment numbers are falling.
233
1 But we knew that there were zip codes with
2 very deep poverty, so we focused on those zip
3 codes.
4 We have five out-stationed centers
5 outside of our career centers. They are in
6 the communities. We're working very closely
7 with the faith leaders in the communities,
8 because they have very tight relationships
9 with the communities. They are helping bring
10 people to us who may -- you know, there are
11 people who won't think to come into a career
12 center because they think, I don't have any
13 hope. Or they think, That's just for people
14 on unemployment, and I'm not on unemployment
15 anymore.
16 We are there for every worker in the
17 state who wants help, at whatever age, at
18 whatever level. And we have worked very
19 hard -- I just spoke to my deputy
20 commissioner for workforce development before
21 I came in, and she said, looking at the
22 strike force numbers -- keeping Western
23 New York aside, because that's a brand-new
24 program -- but for the rest of them, we had
234
1 75 percent placement of people who came
2 through the program and completed the
3 process. It is a very, very powerful tool.
4 And I want to assure you that we learn
5 every day from what we do. You know, the
6 strike force in Western New York is a
7 different approach. It's a zip code
8 approach. It's out-stationing. It's working
9 with community leaders to get people in.
10 It's successful. We're going to be able to
11 take that program and replicate it.
12 At the end of the day -- not the end
13 of the day, at the beginning of the day -- we
14 want New Yorkers to succeed, we want them to
15 thrive. We want them to be able to feed
16 their families and have comfort in their
17 homes and success on the job. And they
18 should never be held back by where they live,
19 the circumstances of their family, the color
20 of the skin or the people they love. We
21 think that everybody needs that opportunity,
22 because New York can't thrive if the citizens
23 don't thrive.
24 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, thank you
235
1 for that.
2 And listen, I have the Brooklyn Navy
3 Yard, and I also have Southwest Brooklyn
4 Industrial Park and all in between. And so I
5 would like to know if the businesses in those
6 particular areas are able to and are in fact
7 participating. And if that's the case, what
8 do we need to do to help them to do more, to
9 reach out to more young people? Because when
10 we talk about workforce development and
11 developing workers with skills that will have
12 careers in the future, those are the kinds of
13 places that we certainly hopefully want to
14 focus on. So I'm very --
15 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I can get you
16 some information. I must say the Brooklyn
17 Navy Yard is an amazing place.
18 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: It is amazing.
19 COMMISSIONER REARDON: There are
20 wonderful innovative industries there --
21 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Absolutely.
22 COMMISSIONER REARDON: -- and they do
23 work with the community.
24 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And therein is an
236
1 excellent opportunity for us to do a lot of
2 this.
3 Lastly, let me just say what about the
4 possibility, through your agency, of doing
5 something like creating a larger expanded
6 opportunity in the cultural institution
7 community for internships, fellowships, and
8 what have you as also a part of your intent
9 to create jobs and opportunities for young
10 people in this category?
11 COMMISSIONER REARDON: So, you know, I
12 come out of the arts and entertainment
13 sector. I'm very familiar with it. And I
14 have often thought that apprenticeships are
15 actually a unique way for people in that
16 industry to get training.
17 And I'm having conversations with some
18 people in the industry -- very early days,
19 not ready to have any public conversations --
20 but there's definitely some interest there.
21 I know that there are two high schools I
22 believe in New York City that focus on the
23 industry, there's the Ghetto School in the
24 Bronx, and then there's another school I
237
1 think in Long Island City, next to one of the
2 studios, and they focus on training
3 inner-city youth for that industry.
4 The tax and film credit has really --
5 it's a booming industry across the state, and
6 they need more workers. So that's a great
7 opportunity to make sure that everybody has
8 an opportunity.
9 When I did some teaching -- you know,
10 all actors teach, and I did some teaching at
11 one point, and you always work with young
12 people. And I used to say to them acting is
13 the door you walk through to this industry,
14 because it's the door you know. But once
15 you're through it, you need to pay attention,
16 because it's a huge and varied industry and
17 you can find wonderful careers that are not
18 necessarily the person in front of the
19 camera.
20 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: So the museums
21 and all of those cultural --
22 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yes, music
23 and --
24 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: -- they do a lot
238
1 already, but we would like to see much more
2 support for that sort of thing. Therein is a
3 whole different world for young people, as
4 well as jobs.
5 And let me say -- I want to thank you.
6 You know, we have a groundswell in the City
7 of New York. Those kinds of programs which
8 offer young people an opportunity to express
9 their talents as well as have a job are
10 extremely important.
11 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I agree.
12 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And as we move to
13 try and address what happens to keep young
14 people out of the criminal justice system,
15 that's I think where we're going to be most
16 successful in that. So thank you very much
17 for your attention to that.
18 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you very
19 much.
20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
21 Assemblyman Bronson.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN BRONSON: Good afternoon,
23 Commissioner.
24 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Good afternoon.
239
1 ASSEMLYMAN BRONSON: Very nice seeing
2 you.
3 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
4 ASSEMLYMAN BRONSON: So I'm just going
5 to chime in on a couple of things that some
6 of my colleagues said and make a similar
7 request.
8 First of all, on the numbers of
9 inspectors in connection with the wage theft,
10 if you could also supply to us the number of
11 inspectors in connection with enforcing
12 prevailing wage as well, so that --
13 COMMISSIONER REARDON: So the public
14 work and the -- yes.
15 ASSEMLYMAN BRONSON: And I would ask,
16 in that area, if you would also make it --
17 well, for all of them, if you could do it
18 geographically, so we know where these folks
19 are going out.
20 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Absolutely.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN BRONSON: Second, the
22 Portable Benefits Task Force, I would concur
23 with Senator Young in that we should have
24 legislative representation on that task
240
1 force, and ask for you and the others to
2 consider that representation.
3 And then the third that has been
4 brought up regarding -- we have a workforce
5 that's in transition. And as I believe
6 Senator Savino indicated, people don't
7 clearly fit in under the employee category or
8 the independent contractor category. And we
9 know that different agencies have different
10 standards for determining that. And so we
11 really do need to do some work on -- and
12 that's kind of tied in with the benefits area
13 as well.
14 So on that, I'm going to turn to
15 workforce development. And in particular,
16 the New York Youth Works tax credit, which is
17 called, once again -- that's what it was
18 called back in 2012. It went to Urban Youth.
19 I presume the changes related to the
20 expansion to all of the State of New York.
21 But do you have any numbers or
22 statistics on the age breakdown of the youth
23 who have been employed under that program?
24 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I'm sure we do.
241
1 I don't have it right here. You know, it's a
2 pretty narrow -- it's 16 to 24. We assume
3 that if they're going to be employed
4 full-time, it's 18 to 24. We don't want to
5 encourage 16-year-olds to drop out of school.
6 But I can find that information for you.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN BRONSON: If you could
8 find that out, along with the average length
9 of time and how many jobs are seasonal, that
10 kind of information.
11 And as I understand, under this
12 program the Department of Labor is required
13 to issue a certificate of eligibility for
14 employers on this. So I would presume in
15 your review of that you're looking -- and
16 then you have to say how much of a tax
17 credit, and that gets sent over to the
18 Department of Taxation. So I presume, under
19 that, we could get more specific data.
20 But also under the statute it requires
21 an annual report from the Department of
22 Labor. And as I can tell, I don't believe
23 that annual report has been done. It
24 certainly hasn't been accessible to the
242
1 public. Can you let me know where we stand
2 on that?
3 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Sure. So I'm
4 here a little over a year, and so I'm not
5 sure that I've seen the annual report,
6 because it may have been done before I got
7 here. But I will find out for you.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN BRONSON: Yeah, that's
9 vitally important, because it really gets
10 into whether or not this is a successful
11 program.
12 But we do have some information from
13 the Department of Taxation that I think
14 challenges whether or not this program is
15 being successful as it's adopted. And the
16 Department of Taxation indicates that -- and
17 by the way, there's a three-year delay in
18 getting information from the Department of
19 Taxation, just because of the way the tax
20 credits can be utilized. But in 2012, of
21 the, at that point, the amount allotted, only
22 $2.3 million was taken advantage of by
23 employers for this program.
24 2013 -- we have numbers for that year
243
1 too -- 700,000. That's it. So we're looking
2 at numbers -- we don't have 2014, we don't
3 have 2015. 2016, for some reason, the
4 Department of Taxation is estimating
5 $20 million, yet I don't see where that's
6 historically based. Can you explain that at
7 all?
8 COMMISSIONER REARDON: As I understand
9 it, it is the phenomenon of people qualifying
10 for the tax credit and then not putting it on
11 their taxes. That's part of it.
12 So we overcommit, because people
13 want -- you know, they put in their paperwork
14 but for some reason they don't do it at the
15 end.
16 My guess is, and this is strictly a
17 guess, if you have a large corporation,
18 you've got tax accountants doing it and they
19 know exactly what it's all about. If you're
20 a smaller industry, you may not be as
21 sophisticated, so they're not putting in for
22 it.
23 But there is a lot of commitment.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN BRONSON: All right.
244
1 Well, I may be missing that, because the
2 Department of Taxation's report actually does
3 have an estimate of the credit claimed and
4 the credit used, and for the 2012 number the
5 difference there was $1.3 million versus
6 $1.2 million. So we're not talking a lot of
7 money there. I'm not sure. We should
8 investigate that.
9 One way we could investigate it,
10 though, is if we could get our hands on the
11 annual reports so we know how many employers
12 are being certified as eligible under the
13 program.
14 That being said, there's also another
15 issue I think we should look at when we're
16 looking at this. Because ultimately the idea
17 here is to get our young people employed,
18 right?
19 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Right.
20 ASSEMLYMAN BRONSON: And so in looking
21 at that, Young Invincibles did a survey at
22 the end of last year and really found that
23 most of the employers didn't feel that a
24 small tax credit was sufficient enough to
245
1 impact their decision whether or not to hire
2 or to retain young employees. And instead
3 they said having a skilled workforce and
4 folks who are willing to dedicate themselves
5 was a more important or significant
6 indicator, if you will.
7 So now I'm going to turn to a topic
8 that you know I love, which is the Empire
9 State Apprenticeship Program, which is a bill
10 I carry. We negotiated it in the budget, it
11 didn't survive the budget last year. But the
12 benefit of that program is it has progressive
13 increases in tax credit if a person who is
14 employed is employed as an apprenticeship and
15 they're actually graduating through the
16 apprenticeship program.
17 And some of my colleagues mentioned
18 hard-to-place youth or people who are trying
19 to work out of poverty. The other benefit of
20 this program is there is an enhanced tax
21 credit if you also have a mentoring program
22 that will help that employee be successful
23 through the apprenticeship program.
24 So what I'm going to ask you to think
246
1 about, and ask the administration to think
2 about, is since we have a situation where
3 we're not utilizing all of the tax credit
4 under the now New York Youth Tax Credit
5 Program, and we have some indication that
6 employers are more interested in having an
7 ability to train a skilled workforce, might
8 it not be a good opportunity for us to use
9 some of those tax credit dollars and try to
10 encourage and incentivize employers to hire
11 young people as apprenticeship.
12 COMMISSIONER REARDON: It's an
13 interesting suggestion. I will certainly
14 look into it. Thank you. You know, I love
15 apprenticeships too. We're together on this.
16 ASSEMLYMAN BRONSON: I know we are. I
17 know we are.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: We're out of time.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN BRONSON: Okay. Thank you
20 very much.
21 Thank you, Mr. Chair.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
23 Senator Persaud.
24 SENATOR PERSAUD: Thank you,
247
1 Commissioner.
2 I just have a couple of questions for
3 you. The first is to do with -- I'm
4 continuing in the vein of the Urban Youth
5 project, the credit. Do you have any
6 evidence as to how many youth have become
7 advanced in their lot in life after going
8 through this program?
9 COMMISSIONER REARDON: That would be a
10 difficult thing to measure because that's a
11 pretty broad measurement. We do know --
12 SENATOR PERSAUD: Well, basically --
13 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We do know that
14 young people -- oh, okay, sorry.
15 SENATOR PERSAUD: -- they move from
16 where they were, really at the poverty level,
17 to higher.
18 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We do know that
19 across the board when young people are
20 exposed to work, whether it's part-time or
21 full-time, that it actually puts them on a
22 better course. And there is a fair amount of
23 study that says if young people are involved,
24 even in the Summer Youth Works program while
248
1 they're in high school, that their
2 advancement through life is better. The
3 earlier we can connect young people to
4 training and to jobs, even a part-time job,
5 the more likely it is that they will succeed
6 in later life.
7 That is some of the thinking behind
8 the tax credit program, because it encourages
9 employers to hire them. It may not be the
10 job they hold forever. It probably won't be.
11 I certainly didn't stay where I started out.
12 But it does give them the experience of
13 getting up and going to work, of having to
14 perform tasks for somebody else, of having
15 some money in their pocket that they earned.
16 It is a self-respect measure as well.
17 And so anything we can do to help put
18 young people on that path I think is very
19 impactful. The Summer Youth Program itself
20 is a great, great program for young people
21 because, again, it gives them a structured
22 environment, work to report to, self-respect,
23 working in a community of other people --
24 very few people work alone -- and it sets you
249
1 up on a good path for life.
2 So I think that the -- although I
3 don't have the data that you're asking for, I
4 think the larger data says that when you
5 connect young people to work, they have a
6 better prospect.
7 SENATOR PERSAUD: Do you have any data
8 as to after the tax period for the company,
9 that these youth remain employed? And for
10 how long do they remain employed?
11 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Chances are,
12 for some of them, they do not stay in that
13 job because they're young. And so they may
14 get a job at local retail store, which helps
15 them understand what that's all about. When
16 they go to get their next job, they've got a
17 resume and they've got some skills and
18 they've got some information to give that
19 employer, and that's very valuable.
20 One of the things we do at the Career
21 Center when people come in -- so let's say a
22 young person comes in and they've been hired
23 under the tax credit and they worked for a
24 year for a local retailer, and they come into
250
1 the Career Center and say, Now what do I do?
2 Our career center person -- and it's a
3 one-on-one experience -- will sit down and
4 look at what exactly did they do on the job,
5 what can we list on a resume, do you have any
6 recommendations from your employer? What
7 were your experiences? What else are you
8 interested in? Do you want to stay in the
9 area or do you want to move? And do you need
10 more training? Do you have your high school
11 diploma? Is there some kind of certificate
12 program that would help you advance? And,
13 interestingly, do you know what the world of
14 work offers you?
15 We have Career Zone, which is an
16 online program at the Career Centers, and
17 young people -- anybody, but mostly young
18 people -- go on, and it has descriptions of
19 jobs and half of them have videos to show
20 this is what you do when you work in a clean
21 room in advanced manufacturing, this is what
22 you do when you work in a pharmacy, this is
23 what you do when you work on a construction
24 site.
251
1 So they get an idea of the job, it
2 tells them what kind of training they have to
3 have, what -- the expectation that you might
4 have to pay for that training in some
5 circumstances. It will tell you what the
6 salary ranges are. And are those jobs
7 available in the area they're in, or will
8 they have to move. It is an incredible tool
9 that I only wish every high school student in
10 New York State used, because I think often
11 young people don't know how to make those --
12 SENATOR PERSAUD: Maybe we should ask
13 the Department of Education to include it.
14 A question for you. I haven't heard
15 you speak to anything on the Youth Build
16 Program. Can you give us some updates on
17 Youth Build? Are we putting additional money
18 in there? What are we doing with the Youth
19 Build?
20 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I'm sorry,
21 which is the program?
22 SENATOR PERSAUD: Youth Build.
23 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Youth Build? I
24 don't think I know it by that name. I might
252
1 know it by another name.
2 SENATOR PERSAUD: It's the program
3 where kids who have to go through the court
4 system, they're given an alternative program
5 and they're taught, you know, sciences and
6 jobs.
7 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Would this --
8 it might be more of an Education problem, not
9 a Department of Labor program.
10 SENATOR PERSAUD: In the Department of
11 Labor and the Department of Education. You
12 collaborate on the program.
13 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I'm sorry, I
14 don't know about it. I'll have to find out.
15 SENATOR PERSAUD: Yeah. Because we
16 just need to know how is the funding on it.
17 And, you know, is there continued funding,
18 and are there any additions to the program.
19 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I'll find out.
20 SENATOR PERSAUD: And finally, there's
21 a program that was zeroed out that's -- OTDA
22 covers it. It's the ATTAIN program. And I
23 see that you have something that's called the
24 Tech Workforce Task Force. Can you give us
253
1 some information on that?
2 COMMISSIONER REARDON: So it's
3 brand-new. It's in this year's State of the
4 State. And the Tech Workforce Task Force is
5 going to look at what are the basic -- what's
6 the baseline that young people need if they
7 want to go into the high-tech sector.
8 So I wish I had my cellphone with me;
9 I used to pick it up and go, "This changed
10 everything." And it did.
11 So we are living in a world that's
12 very connected with digital technology, and
13 there is a wealth of work out there. People
14 often talk about the high-tech sector like
15 it's one sector. It's everything. Everybody
16 has high-tech in their industry.
17 But what do young people need to do at
18 the elementary school level, at the middle
19 school level, at the high school level, in
20 order to be ready to go into that industry?
21 And what's the specialized training that
22 they're going to need? Once they graduate
23 from high school, where do they go? It might
24 be a four-year college program. There are a
254
1 lot of them. But it might also be a two-year
2 certificate program. We want to find out
3 what those needs are so that we can help
4 prepare our citizens for that work, because
5 that is the work of the future.
6 SENATOR PERSAUD: And are you working
7 with SUNY to cultivate the --
8 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We will be
9 working, I'm sure, with everybody in the
10 sector. I mean, it's brand-new. It was just
11 announced in the State of the State, so we're
12 just putting our shoes on. But I'm sure that
13 we are going to be working across the
14 spectrum with everybody in that area, because
15 it's exciting and it's what people want to
16 do. And, you know, in entertainment you can
17 be a CGI illustrator; in medicine, you can do
18 robotic operations. It's not just computer
19 keyboards.
20 SENATOR PERSAUD: In technology now,
21 every kid wants to make an app, to create an
22 app.
23 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yes. And they
24 should.
255
1 SENATOR PERSAUD: Thank you very much.
2 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
4 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Assemblywoman
5 Lupardo.
6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Thank you very
7 much.
8 Hello.
9 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Hello.
10 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Nice to see
11 you.
12 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Good to see
13 you.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: I want to talk
15 about the retirement cliff. So we're hearing
16 a lot about the number of people who are
17 leaving the workforce. And that's why your
18 focus on young people and workforce
19 development is so appreciated. But I'm also
20 interested in the retirement cliff for the
21 people who are retiring.
22 So I understand at one time there was
23 a Mature Worker Task Force or a focus on
24 those mature workers who want to stay
256
1 vibrant, want to stay active, perhaps as
2 mentors, perhaps as new entrepreneurs,
3 because I understand that they're very active
4 in creating new companies -- probably more
5 than any other sector, it turns out. And
6 they also want to basically be a part of
7 their community for as long as possible.
8 So I was curious if the Department of
9 Labor has any initiatives or interest in
10 working with us on that particular topic.
11 COMMISSIONER REARDON: That is a very
12 good question.
13 We all know the baby boomers are aging
14 and starting to retire. And many of the baby
15 boomers I know have no interest in retiring,
16 or at least fully retiring. So there is a
17 wealth of highly skilled people, very
18 connected people. We're not -- you know, 70
19 is not the 70 it was 30 years ago. People --
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: It's the new
21 50.
22 COMMISSIONER REARDON: -- age
23 different. Yes.
24 So it's a great resource that frankly
257
1 is underused. I have had some conversations
2 at the DOL about it. It's something that I
3 want to continue to look into. You know, age
4 discrimination for people -- the terrible
5 thing is if you lose your job in your
6 mid-fifties, you're probably never going to
7 have the chance -- you're rarely going to
8 have a chance to replace it with a similar
9 job, and that's just wrong.
10 But we need to look at -- we talk a
11 lot about how do we help young people, and we
12 should talk about that. But we should also
13 pay attention to the rest of our communities,
14 because people have a lot to offer. Age is
15 just a number.
16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Okay. Let's
17 work on that together, then, shall we?
18 Thanks. I'm good.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Senator?
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Comrie.
21 SENATOR COMRIE: Thank you, Madam
22 Chair.
23 Good afternoon, Commissioner. I
24 wanted to ask you about the workforce
258
1 initiative and what is being done to linking
2 the workforce initiative with the
3 opportunities at the airports. Can you
4 describe for me what is being done to ensure
5 that there -- with the expansion of JFK and
6 LaGuardia, what is being done specifically to
7 link and create opportunities to bring people
8 there?
9 COMMISSIONER REARDON: To those jobs.
10 So there's a very thoughtful
11 program -- we are the first state in the
12 nation to have a state-sponsored
13 preapprenticeship program. That was in last
14 year's budget, I believe. And we have named
15 six training providers for that
16 preapprenticeship program.
17 And the idea is that young people at
18 risk will be put into these preapprenticeship
19 programs, where they receive the kind of
20 training -- often they have educational
21 deficits for the work that they want to do.
22 So math, reading, whatever it is, they come
23 up to skill level, as well as some basic
24 skilling. And they are able, in the
259
1 preapprenticeship program, to preview all of
2 the various trades that are available in
3 apprenticeship programs.
4 When they graduate from the
5 preapprenticeship program, they go into --
6 they have a direct entry into an
7 apprenticeship program where they have that
8 wonderful opportunity to have a job, make a
9 living, and learn at the same time.
10 And they will be placed on work sites
11 at those places. So JFK, LaGuardia,
12 Penn-Farley, Javits. We are going to be
13 placing those young people in those jobs so
14 that they have access to that work. It's a
15 really great opportunity to use the resources
16 of the state and help young people at the
17 same time.
18 SENATOR COMRIE: And do you have any
19 numbers on how many people have gone through
20 the apprenticeship program for JFK or
21 LaGuardia?
22 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We just started
23 the preapprenticeship program, so there's
24 nobody -- nobody has graduated from it yet.
260
1 But of course these buildouts are years long,
2 so there will be a significant number of
3 people. There may be a number of -- the
4 number 800 sticks in my mind, but I'm not
5 sure if that's right -- proposed into this.
6 SENATOR COMRIE: Right. Do you have
7 the location in Queens that it's being done,
8 or is it being done at your existing
9 workforce centers?
10 COMMISSIONER REARDON: The people who
11 are working now at the airports, that's --
12 SENATOR COMRIE: No, where do you plan
13 on doing these training apprenticeship
14 programs?
15 COMMISSIONER REARDON: The
16 preapprenticeships, we've just granted the
17 six training providers. I assume they're
18 downstate because the work is downstate. And
19 then the apprenticeship programs for the
20 various unions are located down there as
21 well.
22 SENATOR COMRIE: Okay. Also, as you
23 know, there's still a lot of problems with
24 the issue of minimum wage being provided by
261
1 subcontractors at the airport, and we still
2 have regular demonstrations from the labor
3 unions that it hasn't trickled down yet.
4 Can you let us know what the
5 Department of Labor has done in monitoring
6 that, or if there's any enforcement from your
7 agency regarding the fact that people at the
8 airports, despite an agreement with the
9 Governor, are still not getting paid proper
10 wages?
11 COMMISSIONER REARDON: If they're not
12 being paid their proper wage and they have
13 lodged a complaint, we will absolutely
14 investigate it. And I know we have been out
15 at the airports. But absolutely, if a worker
16 feels that they've been cheated of their
17 wage, all they have to do is call the contact
18 center and give them their information, and
19 the case will be handed over to our
20 inspectors and we inspect it. Because we
21 take that very seriously.
22 SENATOR COMRIE: But you don't have
23 any specific inspections that you've done out
24 at the airport recently?
262
1 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Oh, I'm sure we
2 do them on an ongoing basis if there's a
3 problem.
4 SENATOR COMRIE: Okay, great.
5 And then just finally, you've
6 mentioned the Excelsior program in your
7 testimony. Do you have any details on how
8 the Excelsior Scholarship Program for -- the
9 tuition-free idea from the Governor, is going
10 to help you in the Department of Labor? And
11 how would that be exampled? Have you spoke
12 about it regarding middle-skill workers?
13 COMMISSIONER REARDON: It actually
14 offers us a great opportunity. So
15 middle-skills workers are people with more
16 than a high school diploma and less than a
17 four-year college degree. And the Excelsior
18 scholarship offers free tuition to
19 middle-class families in the State of
20 New York at SUNY and CUNY, and that includes
21 the two-year colleges. So they'll have the
22 opportunity to go to school, get their degree
23 without crushing student debt, which we all
24 realize is just off the charts. We need
263
1 those skilled workers. So the Excelsior
2 Scholarship Program really enables young
3 young people across the spectrum, across the
4 state -- you don't have to live in New York
5 City, you can live anywhere. And in fact I
6 think the overwhelming majority of families
7 that will really benefit from this actually
8 live upstate.
9 But it's a wonderful opportunity for
10 young people to get an education, have a
11 career path, and not be burdened with
12 $20,000, $30,000, $40,000, $50,000 of debt.
13 SENATOR COMRIE: So you're going to be
14 advocating for middle-skilled workers that
15 are in two-year programs to get the Excelsior
16 program? Because my understanding, it was
17 geared for four-year graduation. So I would
18 hope that you are advocating for two-year
19 opportunities for especially community
20 colleges to take advantage of the program,
21 because I find that most of the people that
22 are in need are people that are working
23 parents or working adults that are trying to
24 get a leg up. So I hope that is something
264
1 that is done as well, so that those part-time
2 students can be able to take advantage of the
3 scholarship so --
4 COMMISSIONER REARDON: It's a great
5 opportunity.
6 SENATOR COMRIE: -- it would truly be
7 an opportunity for all students, and not just
8 these students that are already excelling and
9 could get scholarships anywhere else to do
10 any other endeavor.
11 Thank you.
12 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
13 SENATOR COMRIE: Thank you, Madam
14 Chair.
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
16 Assemblyman Oaks.
17 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you,
18 Commissioner.
19 Actually, just a quick question on the
20 unemployment insurance, the plan to allow
21 individuals to work and not have their
22 benefits totally impacted like they would be
23 today. A number of people -- I'm interested
24 in seeing that proposal going forward, and
265
1 hopefully that will make an impact.
2 Do we have any sense, though, of -- an
3 estimate if that's going to have an impact on
4 the fund, whether we're going to then be
5 paying out more because of that or not? Have
6 we done that analysis?
7 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We have done
8 that analysis, I can assure you.
9 One thing I should point out is that
10 New York State is the only state in the union
11 now that does the 25 percent deduction for
12 one day of work. Every other state does the
13 income disregard. So it seems to be working
14 pretty well other places. But we've looked
15 very closely at our own fund, and the
16 determination was that it would be neutral,
17 which was great.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Okay. Thank you
19 very much.
20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Senator.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
22 Senator Montgomery.
23 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you,
24 Commissioner. Thank you, Madam Chair.
266
1 (Inaudible comment.)
2 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I did. This is
3 my second time.
4 I just want to ask -- I want to follow
5 up, if I may, on the Youth Build program. It
6 may not be familiar to you, but I certainly
7 would welcome an opportunity to talk to you
8 more about it. And I just want you to know
9 that it has been around for a very long time,
10 but formerly basically funded through the
11 federal process. It is statewide, they have
12 programs across the state. Not nearly
13 enough, but the ones that do exist are
14 extremely important and effective.
15 And the thing about this program is
16 that it combines an opportunity for young
17 people to develop skills in certain areas --
18 the one in Brooklyn that I'm aware of, I've
19 visited any number of times, young people are
20 gaining skills in the building trades. So --
21 and they're also in the process of rebuilding
22 their own communities. And I met a young man
23 who went through the Youth Build program who
24 now, based on his experience there, was able
267
1 to be hired by a housing developer, a
2 for-profit developer, in fact, was mentored
3 by him and is now doing electrical work in
4 his own community, based on the skills that
5 he gained.
6 COMMISSIONER REARDON: That's great.
7 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes. And these
8 are young people who, but for the Youth Build
9 experience, would have gone further into the
10 criminal justice, juvenile justice system.
11 And so it is an extremely important
12 program, and several of us have been
13 communicating, we're trying to figure out --
14 it doesn't fit neatly in one place or
15 another. It is obviously -- you know, it's
16 monitoring, it's a diversion program for
17 young people, it's a work program. Young
18 people have a stipend that goes along with
19 their participation in it. Very, very
20 important, because many of them absolutely
21 need it. And it's part of workforce
22 development. So trying to fit it one place
23 or another is sometimes difficult.
24 But it seems that it would be very,
268
1 very important for your department to really
2 be supportive in spearheading it. We
3 certainly wish that it would. And what has
4 happened in the last few years is that that
5 the Legislature has put in a small amount, it
6 doesn't go nearly far enough. The New York
7 City Council has put funding into it. But we
8 don't have a place where our state actually
9 is preparing to fund and support this
10 important program.
11 So I would really -- we would ask, and
12 I'm just taking the liberty of including my
13 colleagues up here, because we've put money
14 in, we talk to each other every year,
15 scrounge up a little money for it. But this
16 really is something that we would like to see
17 done.
18 COMMISSIONER REARDON: It sounds
19 fascinating. I'll look into it. Thank you.
20 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you very
21 much.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Assembly?
23 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Yes. Assemblyman
24 DenDekker.
269
1 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Thank you very
2 much, Commissioner. I also want to thank you
3 for your service when you served as
4 co-president with Ken Howard. I'm a
5 SAG-AFTRA member myself, --
6 COMMISSIONER REARDON: That's right.
7 Thank you.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: -- and I
9 appreciate the service that you gave us
10 during that time of transition.
11 So I wanted to ask a question
12 specifically about when unionized labor and
13 management in a non-public-employee
14 relationship in the private sector are --
15 during a dispute. For example, I know CWA up
16 in Waterford right now is having an issue.
17 Is there any specific period of time when
18 those two parties don't meet that the
19 Department of Labor will get involved and at
20 least try to get management and labor to the
21 table?
22 COMMISSIONER REARDON: That's an
23 interesting question, actually. There are
24 federal mediators, so they may actually be --
270
1 they may ask for a federal mediator. I know
2 that when we had the commercial strike in
3 2000, we had a federal mediator for that
4 strike. So that may happen. Sometimes it's
5 imposed on them; sometimes it's asked for.
6 The Department of Labor, we do not go
7 into that area. But I do know that -- you
8 know, anything we can do, of course, to
9 facilitate conversations, we would do. But
10 to officially mediate, I don't think that
11 would be a position we could do.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Okay. So I'm
13 just going to make a recommendation, rather
14 than put it into a bill format. But maybe
15 you could look at just looking when these
16 actions are taking place between management
17 and labor, and not necessarily mediating, but
18 just requiring them, like after 30 days of no
19 communication, that they have to at least sit
20 down and talk for an hour and then they can
21 leave. But just to force them, both sides,
22 to come to the table and at least have a
23 talk.
24 Because when you're going on strike or
271
1 having a labor dispute for 90-some-odd days,
2 and in many cases it can be even longer, for
3 someone not to hold one side or the other
4 side accountable to at least sit at the table
5 and have a discussion, I think we're doing a
6 disservice to those employees and those
7 employers. First of all, they need the
8 employees back at work to do their job, and
9 the employees want to go back to work in some
10 cases. But I just think we should look at
11 that. It would be an interesting thing.
12 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: The other
14 thing I wanted to ask is the Executive Budget
15 proposes the creation of a Division of
16 Central Administrative Hearings. Is that
17 under the Department of Labor?
18 COMMISSIONER REARDON: The ALJ --
19 that's not under us. That's separate.
20 We have two boards that might
21 potentially be involved in that, but that's
22 in very early stages, the discussion is just
23 starting. I think there's a discussion about
24 doing a test with maybe a selection of the
272
1 boards, but not all of them at first. But
2 we're very, very early in the conversation.
3 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: The only real
4 concern I have about this is that many
5 agencies that have -- and those judges that
6 have expertise in a specific area, whether it
7 be environmental issues or labor issues, that
8 these administrative judges are going to get
9 lost in the system and we're just going to
10 have people with some sort of general
11 knowledge and not have the expertise that is
12 required of those judges.
13 And that's what I'm afraid we're going
14 to lose, and I think we should leave it the
15 way it is. And if -- I don't see why the
16 consolidation would be so great to now have
17 someone whose expertise in an environmental
18 issue is now going to be maybe hearing cases
19 in labor. I just -- I would be afraid that
20 there wouldn't be proper representation and
21 it wouldn't be there.
22 So those are my two major concerns.
23 And my last concern is I'm the chair of
24 Veterans in the Assembly, and we are working
273
1 on a program -- I'm glad you like the
2 apprenticeship programs in the building
3 trades. Both of my children graduated from
4 those programs --
5 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Excellent.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: -- and have
7 jobs that pay more than me.
8 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yes, of course.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: So I'm very
10 very happy for them --
11 COMMISSIONER REARDON: You're a happy
12 father.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: -- that my
14 children are making more than me.
15 However, there's a program called
16 Helmets to Hardhats in New York City --
17 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yes, excellent
18 program.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: It's a great
20 program. And actually last year we got some
21 funding, in the veterans portion under the
22 Division of Veterans, to support that project
23 to expand outside of New York City. However,
24 this year that so far has been cut.
274
1 So I would like to know, is the
2 Department of Labor doing anything for
3 veterans specifically that may not have --
4 you maybe haven't communicated to me. Or, if
5 not, maybe we could look at taking this
6 project out of the veterans area and putting
7 it into the labor area and somehow creating
8 more opportunities for veterans.
9 And the reason why I am so concerned
10 about that is the expense that we have or
11 that we could incur when we find out -- our
12 studies and our hearings have shown that
13 veterans that don't get a job when they
14 return run into sometimes other issues, which
15 can cost us, as a state and as a society,
16 much more damage. And anything we can do to
17 help them when they transition back would be
18 the best thing.
19 And it's all about jobs. Every single
20 group I go to, the first word out of a
21 veteran's mouth is I just want to work. I
22 just want to work.
23 So I don't know why we have to have
24 cuts like this, but I'd love to know any
275
1 programs that are specifically designated to
2 veterans under your department.
3 COMMISSIONER REARDON: We have a lot
4 of programs at the DOL for vets. We have --
5 in our Career Centers, we have dedicated
6 career counselors for returning vets and then
7 for disabled vets. That's two separate
8 programs. And we make sure that they get
9 their individual appointments so they're not
10 coming -- they have first service, they come
11 to the front of the line. We are very
12 focused on that.
13 I should tell you that before I was
14 here, I did some consulting with the AFL-CIO,
15 and they have the Veterans Council, and a
16 good friend of mine became their executive
17 director when I got this job. And I said,
18 "Tell me what we can do." He said, "New York
19 State DOL does better than most states,
20 period, when it comes to veterans."
21 So we take it very seriously. There
22 are a lot of programs. There are tax credits
23 for hiring vets, there are training programs
24 for vets. And they do step to the front of
276
1 the line in any Career Center that they come
2 into, because we all really respect the
3 service they have given us. And it's the
4 least we can do to make sure we help them.
5 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Okay, thank
6 you very much.
7 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
9 Senator Krueger.
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
11 Afternoon, Commissioner.
12 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Good afternoon.
13 SENATOR KRUEGER: So many of my
14 colleagues brought up the Urban Youth Jobs
15 Tax Credit, or the newly titled model. But I
16 don't think we've talked about another
17 program, the Minimum Wage Subsidy Program for
18 youth employment, and that's costing the
19 state almost the same amount of money. And I
20 was never really big on that program, I will
21 say that to you now. But I'm curious, since
22 we're running two programs of approximately
23 the same dollar cost to the state, both
24 targeting youth, tell me a little bit about
277
1 the Minimum Wage Subsidy Program and how it
2 contrasts or compares to the Urban Youth Job
3 Tax Credit.
4 COMMISSIONER REARDON: So they are
5 different. The minimum wage subsidy says
6 that if you hire youth I believe up to -- I
7 don't know if it's up to 19 --
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: I think 16 to 20,
9 maybe?
10 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yeah, something
11 like that. And they are paid the minimum
12 wage, you can get $1.35 an hour in a tax
13 break.
14 So an interesting story, actually,
15 with Commissioner Ball from Ag and Markets;
16 we've had this conversation. The farmers use
17 this, and some of the farmers have come and
18 said, "You know, the problem with that
19 particular tax credit is I can't give them a
20 raise. Because if I give them the raise, I
21 lose the tax credit."
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: Exactly.
23 COMMISSIONER REARDON: So that's one
24 difference.
278
1 The New York Youth Works is not simply
2 for minimum wage. It's for being hired. So
3 we're not saying you can only make this
4 minimum wage in order to qualify, we just
5 want you to hire the youth, employ them. If
6 they stay a second year, you get a second tax
7 credit. It really is about keeping that
8 youth on the job.
9 So they are very different. They are
10 both useful. And they kind of serve slightly
11 different purposes. For some industries,
12 where they feel that the minimum wage is a
13 burden, they can take advantage of this tax
14 break. The New York Youth Works is a
15 different kind of program, really encouraging
16 people to look at youths that they might not
17 normally think of hiring.
18 SENATOR KRUEGER: And can you tell
19 us -- so I have the same concern, that this
20 was not the supplemental program for minimum
21 wage but it was a never-can-get-above-
22 minimum-wage model.
23 And second was that it would be used
24 by the large institutional fast food
279
1 companies who want to hire youth anyway, and
2 were going to hire youth anyway, and would
3 just be the people of New York giving $1.35
4 an hour towards the wages that they were
5 paying.
6 So can you tell me what industries
7 besides farmers -- because I had not thought
8 about farmers -- are actually using that
9 credit?
10 COMMISSIONER REARDON: I don't have
11 that information. I can find out.
12 I mean, I've had the conversation with
13 Commissioner Ball because we have a lot of
14 conversations, and that was part of it. And
15 I honestly have not read the law, so I don't
16 know if there's any bar to the size of the
17 company that gets to use it. I don't know.
18 SENATOR KRUEGER: So there's also been
19 a number of discussions about annual reports
20 coming or not coming. And I'm not always so
21 big on making enormous demands on annual
22 reports, but it seems to me on both of those
23 programs the questions we really want to
24 know, since we're putting more money into
280
1 them, we're continuing the programs, is
2 what's working? Are they continuing to keep
3 these jobs after the credit is used up? Are
4 they -- is it just a way for some companies
5 to figure out how to use the tax dollar to
6 subsidize the wage they would have paid the
7 exact same people anyway? I think that's
8 actually very important information for us to
9 know.
10 COMMISSIONER REARDON: That's an
11 interesting question. Yeah, thank you.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Finally, most of
13 your job training and workforce development
14 money is federal. What happens if and when
15 it gets cut out at the federal level? What
16 are you going to be closing?
17 COMMISSIONER REARDON: It's a serious
18 question. As you know, a very large part of
19 the DOL budget is the federal budget, because
20 of unemployment insurance and various
21 programs. Of course we're concerned about
22 that. It's hard to plan for a future when
23 you don't know -- you know, we're so early in
24 this new administration we don't know what to
281
1 expect. So we're thinking about it. But
2 until something more develops, it's hard to
3 really plan anything.
4 I will say if we think about the
5 majority, frankly, of our training programs,
6 the training dollars that we get from the
7 federal government, these are programs that
8 are there to train people in need and lift
9 them into the middle class. And the
10 conversation in the election was lifting
11 people into the middle class. And it is
12 continuing to be a conversation. And I just
13 think -- I hope, I pray -- that people will
14 not do something that will actually eliminate
15 those opportunities to lift people into the
16 middle class.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: And if the WIA fund,
18 say, disappeared, how much money is that to
19 the State of New York each year?
20 COMMISSIONER REARDON: The WIA funds
21 are a lot of our training dollars. I don't
22 have -- I can look at it, it's in here.
23 But I would be very surprised if the
24 money disappeared. It would be a huge impact
282
1 across the country. I mean, every state in
2 the union depends on these funds to train
3 their citizens. So you're the politicians, I
4 think you can assess the risk. But it might
5 get cut. That's a real possibility.
6 SENATOR KRUEGER: I think that it's a
7 real possibility, and it's a very disturbing
8 one for this -- you're right, every state in
9 the nation, but particularly for us. Because
10 I think that you have been successful in
11 redirecting and using these funds very
12 effectively, and it would be a tragedy for
13 the efforts we're making to lose that federal
14 money at this time.
15 Thank you.
16 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
18 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
19 Assemblywoman Jaffee, to close.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you,
21 Commissioner.
22 I wanted to just briefly thank you for
23 your incentives for jobs for our youth and
24 for our communities. There was a
283
1 conversation here, or a comment, about gender
2 equity in terms of pay equity, something
3 we've been discussing --
4 COMMISSIONER REARDON: For a long
5 time.
6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: -- in the
7 Assembly for a long time. But I wanted to
8 just raise awareness of a piece of
9 legislation that I passed several years ago,
10 which it's not just about pay equity, it's
11 about opportunity as well. In too many of
12 our employment sites, they were not providing
13 women with the knowledge about various jobs
14 that might be available because they were
15 setting aside those jobs for the men. And
16 primarily women were given information about
17 secretarial jobs and that kind of job status.
18 So the legislation really requires
19 that the state, at these sites, provide women
20 with the same opportunities that are offered
21 to men, as well as making them aware that
22 training is also available. That will expand
23 our workforce for women as well as providing
24 the kind of pay equity that is absolutely
284
1 necessary.
2 So I wanted to share that with you.
3 And hopefully we can take a look at whether
4 or not -- how that has been implemented and
5 what kind of impact that has had for women
6 and job availability.
7 COMMISSIONER REARDON: You know, those
8 are really important opportunities. We know
9 probably personally how important those
10 opportunities are.
11 I will say in the construction trades
12 in New York City, there's a group called
13 Nontraditional Employment for Women, because
14 the construction trades offer incredible
15 opportunities for a solid career path. But
16 that's a path that many women would not
17 choose for a variety of reasons -- their own
18 bias, to start with: I don't want to swing a
19 hammer. But it's a preapprenticeship program
20 that brings them in, they are introduced to
21 the trades, they make a selection, they go
22 into an apprenticeship and they have a
23 career. And the more programs that we can do
24 like that, which doesn't exclude men, it just
285
1 simply says women should think about being an
2 electrician as well, or a painter or
3 whatever.
4 So I'm very supportive of those
5 programs.
6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Well, I would
7 have wanted to be an electrician or work like
8 that, but they didn't suggest that happen.
9 So when I got married, my husband bought me a
10 tool kit, because he knew I liked to do that
11 kind of thing, and I started to build things
12 in the house.
13 But thank you. That's an interesting
14 idea. I will certainly take a look at that.
15 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you.
16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
18 Commissioner. I think we're done. So again,
19 thank you for being here.
20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very
21 much.
22 COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you very
23 much.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good job.
286
1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Greg Olsen,
2 New York State Office for the Aging.
3 We did a lot of it today.
4 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: I know. I'm
5 impressed. I'm impressed that you guys are
6 still hanging with me here.
7 Well, good morning, Chairpersons Young
8 and Farrell and all the distinguished members
9 of the Senate Finance and Assembly Ways and
10 Means Committees. Chairperson Serino, it's
11 good to see you. And Chairperson Lupardo,
12 welcome to Aging. I'm really excited to be
13 working with you.
14 I am Greg Olsen, I am the acting
15 director of the New York State Office for the
16 Aging, and I'm really honored to testify on
17 the portions of Governor Cuomo's proposed
18 budget that affects older New Yorkers.
19 The New York State Office for the
20 Aging administers programs and services for
21 New Yorkers 60 years of age and older, as
22 well as their families, friends, and
23 neighbors who help them remain as independent
24 as possible, for as long as possible, in
287
1 their homes and communities of choice.
2 NYSOFA provides leadership and
3 direction to an integrated, coordinated
4 network of 59 county-based area agencies on
5 aging and more than 1,200 public and private
6 organizations that serve to help empower
7 older adults and their families. Further,
8 Governor Cuomo's priority to de-silo state
9 agencies to reduce duplication, strengthen
10 service delivery, increase efficiencies, and
11 improve outcomes has created very strong
12 working partnerships and relationships with
13 the Department of Health, Office of Persons
14 with Developmental Disabilities, Mental
15 Health, Office of Children and Family
16 Services, Alcoholism and Substance Abuse
17 Services, Victim Services, Division of
18 Veterans' Affairs, and the Office of Court
19 Administration, among others.
20 The 2018 Executive Budget includes a
21 host of initiatives that address primary
22 areas of concern for older New Yorkers and
23 their families. Governor Cuomo's Executive
24 Budget helps older adults and their families
288
1 by expanding transportation options
2 throughout the state by proposing to expand
3 rideshare; extending the Home Energy
4 Assistance Program season to increase access
5 to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
6 Program; leveraging additional federal funds
7 to significantly increase outreach for SNAP
8 to reduce the number of older New Yorkers who
9 are eligible but not receiving the benefit;
10 increasing the number of low-income homes
11 that are weatherized to reduce energy costs,
12 save money, and prevent dangerous home
13 heating situations, such as the use of ovens
14 and stoves -- carbon monoxide, which can
15 certainly -- fire hazards and health hazards;
16 advancing a "Health Across all Policies"
17 approach that includes lower prescription
18 drug costs; increasing access to healthy
19 foods and locally-grown commodities;
20 increasing opportunities for physical
21 activity via the Empire State Trail; and
22 encouraging healthy behaviors; taking
23 additional steps to make New York State the
24 first Age Friendly/Livable Community state,
289
1 as designated by the World Health
2 Organization and AARP, and building the
3 elements of Age Friendly/Livable Communities
4 into the second round of Downtown
5 Revitalization grants; modernizing the
6 workforce by focusing on skills development
7 and training for the jobs of today and
8 tomorrow, which will benefit older workers
9 and workers of all ages; advancing efforts to
10 combat financial exploitation of older
11 adults, modernizing cybercrime and identity
12 theft laws and safeguarding older adults from
13 the risks of reverse mortgages; eliminating
14 the wage disparity, which will have a
15 significant positive impact for future older
16 New Yorkers in terms of retirement income;
17 and implementing a "Silver Line" program
18 modeled after the United Kingdom to reduce
19 social isolation and the negative health
20 outcomes that result from it.
21 The 2018 Executive Budget honors the
22 state's commitment to ensuring that those who
23 are served by NYSOFA across the state have
24 access to cost-effective, high-quality,
290
1 coordinated services that support
2 independence. The budget preserves key
3 programs including the Expanded In-Home
4 Services for the Elderly Program, which
5 provides non-medical in-home services, case
6 management, respite, and ancillary services
7 to those who are just above the Medicaid
8 limit but can remain in their homes and
9 communities. The Wellness in Nutrition
10 Program funds home-delivered and congregate
11 meals and provides nutrition counseling and
12 education to frail older adults who may be
13 unable to shop or prepare meals for
14 themselves.
15 The Executive Budget includes the
16 $1 million increase that was added last year
17 to the Community Services for the Elderly
18 Program and consolidates the $1.121 million
19 transportation appropriation into the CSE to
20 streamline reporting. CSE is designed to
21 improve the ability of communities to
22 identify priorities, gaps, and needs, and
23 assist older adults who need help to remain
24 in their homes and communities for as long as
291
1 possible.
2 The Governor's budget proposal also
3 makes a significant investment in NY Connects
4 sustainability, which is our state's No Wrong
5 Door, by a partnership with the Department of
6 Health. NY Connects is a statewide, locally
7 based no-wrong-door system that provides
8 one-stop access to free, objective, and
9 comprehensive information and assistance on
10 accessing long-term services and supports.
11 The partnership with the Health Department
12 will provide an investment of almost $20
13 million to the 59 county-based area agencies
14 on aging, and an additional almost $6 million
15 to our five regional disability partner
16 organizations.
17 The Executive Budget increases the
18 Health Insurance Information Counseling and
19 Assistance Program to meet increased demand
20 for objective, personalized, one-on-one
21 counseling and assistance. HIICAP is
22 available to all Medicare beneficiaries of
23 all ages, providing free, confidential
24 counseling about Medicare and health
292
1 insurance benefits, options, paperwork, and
2 resources; programs that can help pay for
3 Medicare and prescription costs; Medicare
4 covered costs, deductibles, and programs;
5 information on insurance products that can
6 help wrap around such as a Medigap; and how
7 to evaluate Medicare plans, Part B
8 prescription drug programs, and so on.
9 These state-certified counselors,
10 along with our MCAP partners, helped
11 low-income Medicare beneficiaries realize
12 $104 million in savings last year by helping
13 them apply for the Medicare Savings Program
14 and the low-income subsidy. More than 20,000
15 applications were approved by CMS.
16 NYSOFA has and will continue to build
17 partnerships with our sister agencies to
18 increase access to services and meet needs
19 that are across systems. One such
20 partnership -- and I'd really like to thank
21 Commissioner Cronin -- is with the Office of
22 Victim Services, to increase statewide
23 funding for our elder abuse mitigation. This
24 partnership, when fully realized, will
293
1 utilize $7.5 million over three years to
2 expand our very successful federal pilot over
3 the last three and a half years to expand the
4 Enhanced Multi-Disciplinary Teams to combat
5 financial exploitation along with other
6 efforts, as I mentioned earlier, with the
7 Department of Financial Services.
8 Almost 700,000 older adults last year
9 received services through our network. They
10 received home and congregate meals; received
11 care and other services in their homes to
12 help them remain independent and autonomous;
13 accessed transportation services to medical
14 appointments, dialysis, pharmacies and other
15 community outlets; received legal assistance
16 and legal services; received Medicare plan
17 and prescription counseling and assistance;
18 and received support services such as respite
19 and other caregiver support so they can
20 continue to care for a husband, a spouse, or
21 other loved one.
22 We will continue to work smart by
23 engaging other state agencies,
24 not-for-profits, and community-based
294
1 organizations to serve all of New York's
2 older population.
3 And with that, as always, I'm thankful
4 for your ongoing support, and I'm happy to
5 answer any questions that you have.
6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very
7 much.
8 We begin with Ms. Lupardo, chair.
9 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Thank you,
10 Mr. Chair.
11 Well, thanks for your testimony. In
12 the 10 minutes that I have, we have together,
13 I want to quickly go through some basic
14 budget questions and then I want to ask you
15 some bigger-picture questions as well.
16 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Sure.
17 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: So let's
18 quickly just try to get through some easy
19 stuff, I hope, which is the rationale for
20 moving that senior transportation operating
21 expense into the Community Service for the
22 Elderly program.
23 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yeah, so one
24 of the things that we've been engaging in to
295
1 try to reduce the administrative burden on
2 the counties is making their reporting and
3 responsibility to us a little bit more
4 streamlined and easier.
5 So one of the requirements that the
6 counties have to fulfill each year is
7 providing us with a plan. It used to be a
8 very, very large, labor-intensive, really
9 thick document talking about how they were
10 going to meet federal and state regulations,
11 laws, their fiduciary responsibility,
12 monitoring, oversight, targeting for specific
13 populations that are included under the elder
14 law. So this move to move the transportation
15 in there is a reporting efficiency.
16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: I'm a little
17 concerned about the shift of ongoing
18 operations funding for NY Connects, which you
19 just spoke about, from the SOFA budget to a
20 pool of federal funding. I'm nervous about
21 that.
22 It seems, under current circumstances,
23 a risky move, given how critically important
24 this is, connecting people up, as you
296
1 mentioned, to long-term-care services. So
2 why would we want to potentially jeopardize
3 that funding at this point?
4 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: You know, I
5 think if we looked three years ago, the
6 entire pool of funding to support the
7 operations of NY Connects was $3.35 million.
8 What's going out the door in this fiscal
9 year, '17-'18, is a combination of BIP funds,
10 the Balancing Incentive Payment program, and
11 funds contained under the global Medicaid
12 cap. That is going to equal about $26
13 million.
14 So it's not that the money has
15 disappeared. We're using two sources that
16 are contained within the Health Department,
17 because the Health Department is a major
18 partner in designing, developing, and helping
19 implement, along with the Office of Mental
20 Health, the Office of Substance Abuse
21 Services, and OPWDD.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: So -- but it's
23 possible that that Balancing Incentive
24 Program fund could run out, in which case --
297
1 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Well, they
2 will run out. And so we have a --
3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Sure.
4 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: -- we have a
5 sustainability plan that was part of the
6 deliverables in receiving the grants to begin
7 with. So we have a multiyear plan that we
8 have put together. This year the BIP funds
9 run out in '18, March of '18, and that's when
10 the global Medicaid cap dollars kick in. And
11 then we have again a sustainability plan
12 further on.
13 I mean, I think what's really
14 important to point out about this system --
15 this is really a systems change and not a
16 program -- is really what it's designed to do
17 and how important it is, I think, for all of
18 you to help us get the word out about it,
19 because it's a really great constituent
20 service for people of all ages to utilize to
21 help with their benefits.
22 As I was listening to some of the
23 other testimony, how do we increase some of
24 the benefits that people are eligible for but
298
1 aren't participating in? That's one of the
2 core deliverables of what the No Wrong Door's
3 designed to do. And so, you know, we can be
4 very helpful throughout the state, because
5 this system's reform is happening in every
6 county in helping your constituents access
7 some of those services.
8 So we didn't build something to see it
9 fall apart. This is a major systems change,
10 again, that not only involves five state
11 agencies but regional disability
12 organizations and then a variety of other
13 partners that are delivering services that
14 are underneath the level of the area agencies
15 on aging.
16 And so, you know, as I had mentioned
17 as part of the sustainability of
18 deliverables, we had to develop a
19 sustainability plan.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: So speaking of
21 sustainability, a lot of us are alarmed about
22 the Title XX shift and the impact that will
23 have not only on New York City's senior
24 centers but on counties that rely on that
299
1 funding for Adult Protective Services. I
2 know that's not in the budget, but it
3 certainly is going to have a big impact on
4 your constituency. What are your thoughts on
5 this?
6 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Well, I think,
7 you know -- and listening to Commissioner
8 Poole's response this morning, I have had a
9 conversation with her about this issue. You
10 know, I think that they're willing to take a
11 look at some of the other funding structures
12 and mechanisms to potentially offset that.
13 My understanding is there is a net plus for
14 the city and some counties because of some of
15 the Medicaid admin takeover actions and some
16 other tax. But this is an issue that I think
17 isn't going to be settled today --
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: No.
19 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: -- and it's
20 going to be a subject of conversation over
21 the next month and a half.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: No, we were
23 just highlighting how important it is to the
24 members, that this particular issue be on the
300
1 front burner.
2 A couple of other quick budget items.
3 On the COLA, I'm a little confused about
4 that. Our understanding is that it was
5 discontinued because it was considered too
6 difficult to administer and get out.
7 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: So you're
8 talking about the direct care worker funding?
9 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: I'm sorry,
10 yes.
11 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yeah.
12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: The direct
13 service workers.
14 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: You know, in
15 the original budget appropriation, the
16 estimate for our agency was about
17 $7.4 million. And that was an estimate based
18 on the titles that were included within the
19 direct care worker proposal.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Right.
21 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: That was a
22 large overestimate, to say the least. And a
23 lot of our counties opted not to participate,
24 due to title-matching issues and some other
301
1 issues.
2 So we are in the process now of, you
3 know, looking at the counties, looking at the
4 vouchers to gauge what the impact of that is.
5 But a lot of our counties opted not to take
6 advantage.
7 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Okay. And one
8 other question about the multidisciplinary
9 teams. So it looks as if that funding was
10 not continued. And I'm wondering, what's
11 your assessment on how it has gone so far?
12 Because it seems, again, I'm just learning
13 about these programs. It seems very
14 important.
15 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yeah, and this
16 is one of the most exciting projects for an
17 area that is frankly horrific. Right? We
18 had been successful in getting the only grant
19 in the country that tested an enhanced
20 multidisciplinary team model.
21 And, you know, multidisciplinary team
22 is really what it says it is. It's pulling
23 the expertise of a variety of different folks
24 from, you know, the court system to the DA to
302
1 law enforcement, APS, human services,
2 housing, so on and so forth. What makes the
3 enhancement is the funding of a coordinator
4 for the -- to keep that group together, a
5 financing forensic accountant, and a
6 geropsychiatrist.
7 The funding that was -- so we did a
8 three-year pilot in eight upstate counties
9 and then in Manhattan. That was very, very
10 successful.
11 That we're still -- you know, groups
12 are still meeting and talking and figuring
13 out ways to expand. The $500,000 that was
14 added last year was really a great first step
15 in the expansion. We weren't able to
16 obviously go statewide with $500,000, so part
17 of that money was used to sustain the two
18 pilot programs and then begin the process,
19 over a three-to-five-year period, of looking
20 at how we could expand. The partnership that
21 we have with OVS is going to turn this
22 program into a $7.5 million program.
23 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: OVS?
24 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Office of
303
1 Victim Services.
2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Got it.
3 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: So that was
4 really why I was thanking Commissioner
5 Cronin, who is jumping in right with us. I'm
6 sending her a proposal, in fact, this
7 afternoon.
8 But this would be over a three-year
9 period, to really take that next step in
10 expanding some regional hubs and then the
11 EMDTs within the counties throughout the
12 state.
13 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: I would very
14 much like as many details as you can provide
15 us on that. That sounds like a very positive
16 move.
17 I may ask for additional time later,
18 but I'd like to hear your thoughts on two
19 programs that to me seem like hugely
20 important investments, and a big money saver
21 to the state. That would be, of course, the
22 CSE program and EISEP programs.
23 So how cost-effective are those? And
24 surely I'm going to be making a case that we
304
1 should be investing more, not less, in those
2 programs.
3 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: I think the
4 people that utilize those programs -- they're
5 mostly individuals in their eighties for
6 EISEP, late seventies for CSE. CSE is the
7 most flexible funding stream, so whether
8 you're in your community or anywhere else in
9 the state, you have the opportunity to
10 identify locally determined needs and then
11 fill those gaps. So it's a real important,
12 flexible funding stream.
13 But I think, you know, the value of
14 the network, the area agencies, and the
15 various entities that they work with, whether
16 they be faith-based organizations, other
17 vendors, community action, town and municipal
18 government agencies that provide similar
19 services, is that the intervention line for
20 many of the people that might need some
21 assistance in their home is earlier. So you
22 can get in and you can stop somebody from
23 declining, you can prevent hospital
24 readmissions.
305
1 You have a network that's built from
2 the ground up -- when you're discharged from
3 a hospital or from rehab, that they can
4 succeed when they get back into the
5 community, you know, get out of bed in the
6 morning, make sure they're taking their
7 medications, get to the doctors appointment,
8 those types of low-budget high-yield
9 services.
10 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: How low of a
11 budget? What's the average that you spend or
12 we can see across the state that's spent on
13 someone in this type of setting?
14 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: So if you took
15 the average EISEP client, you know, they
16 would have some personal care or home health
17 care in their home to do those tasks that I
18 had mentioned, and they all are provided with
19 case management. You're looking at under
20 $10,000, which is shared jointly, which is
21 another great way that this partnership is --
22 it's a federal/state/local partnership, and
23 also a partnership with the customer
24 themselves to share the cost. So it doesn't
306
1 cost a lot of money.
2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: That's
3 amazing. Just one more time -- under
4 $10,000, as opposed to the high cost of
5 long-term care in a facility?
6 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Well, they
7 haven't triggered that need for that
8 higher-level cost yet.
9 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Sure. Because
10 it's been -- they've been taken care of in
11 that setting. Thanks.
12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
13 Senator?
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
15 Mr. Chairman.
16 Our first speaker will be the chair of
17 the Senate Standing Committee on Aging, and
18 that's Senator Sue Serino.
19 SENATOR SERINO: Thank you, Senator.
20 Hello, Acting Director.
21 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Hi.
22 SENATOR SERINO: Thank you very much
23 for being here today.
24 As I was appointed to serve as the
307
1 chair of the Aging Committee in 2015, since
2 that time I have seen the waiting list for
3 the Community Services for the Elderly grow
4 by thousands. In fact, despite adding funds
5 to CSE, we have seen the list grow by at
6 least one-third in one year's time, from
7 9,700 people to an estimated 15,000 this
8 year. And as I understand it, this number
9 could actually be much larger, as not all
10 counties keep and/or report the number of
11 individuals on their waitlist.
12 Given that the waiting lists continue
13 to grow, it astounds me that more money is
14 not allocated to provide these services. And
15 in your estimation, how much do you think
16 would be needed to eliminate having elderly
17 individuals on a waitlist for basic services
18 such as meals, in-home services, and
19 transportation?
20 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: So let me
21 answer that by saying two things, what a
22 waiting list is and what a waiting list is
23 not in our network.
24 So I believe that the data that you
308
1 have would probably be the most recent data
2 from the counties from December of 2015.
3 Their plans that are submitted to us have
4 estimates based on a snapshot in time of
5 individuals that may or may not be able to be
6 served by the waiting list. So there were
7 additional resources put into CSE last year
8 and some other strategies that we have
9 undertaken both within our network and with
10 some of the other sister agencies, too, that
11 I think will have an impact on trying to
12 reduce any waiting list.
13 What a waiting list doesn't mean,
14 though, in our network is that older adults
15 and their families are not being served. So
16 let me give you an example. If an individual
17 is in need of a home-delivered meal, it goes
18 through the assessment and is deemed
19 eligible. If that community does not have
20 the resources to provide that meal based on
21 that assessment, there are other things that
22 the network can and does do.
23 So, for example, we could have
24 transportation to bring that individual to a
309
1 senior center or a congregate meal site to
2 get a meal there and then to, you know,
3 interact with others. There's other
4 programming, there's health promotion and
5 other types of real important evidence-based
6 interventions going on in the centers.
7 If that individual is eligible or
8 appears to be eligible for SNAP, Supplemental
9 Nutrition Assistance Program, we would help
10 that individual apply and receive those
11 benefits. Those benefits could actually be
12 used to pay for the cost of the
13 home-delivered meal. Or, again, you could
14 use a volunteer corps -- which the counties
15 really rely on the volunteers extensively --
16 for service delivery to possibly shop and
17 prepare meals for that individual.
18 So that's just an example of ways
19 that, you know, just because a person may not
20 be able to receive that service, that there's
21 not other ways to do it.
22 Now, what gets reported back to us is
23 probably, in terms of data, maybe a third of
24 what actually is going on out there. So
310
1 there are town programs -- the Town of
2 Colonie, all of Long Island -- where the
3 whole aging infrastructure is done by towns
4 who are providing similar types of services
5 that we don't get data from them in terms of,
6 you know, what they're able to do or what
7 they're reporting.
8 But those are other avenues that we
9 can refer people to to try to meet their
10 needs.
11 SENATOR SERINO: Because that is what
12 I worry about. You know, I have -- my area
13 is pretty rural, and I can't even imagine
14 upstate. Transportation is a huge issue. So
15 I think that there are probably a lot that
16 aren't reporting. They might just say "We
17 don't have the dollars for this function for
18 you," and that's what I'm really concerned
19 about.
20 With the Executive Budget removing the
21 25 percent waiver on the CSE program, it
22 places an undue fiscal burden on counties.
23 This proposal also rolls the transportation
24 services into the CSE line, also making it
311
1 subject to the local match. And I was very
2 happy that my Assemblywoman Donna Lupardo,
3 who co-chairs the Aging Committee with me,
4 mentioned about the direct care workers. And
5 you said it was $7.4 million, which was a
6 large overestimate on -- a lot of the
7 counties didn't participate, but I can see
8 this -- going forward, that they're not going
9 to participate if they have to make that
10 match, because already they're stretched to
11 the limit.
12 We cannot have this waiver go by the
13 wayside. So I really hope that we're going
14 to reconsider that. And especially
15 transportation is the number-one issue, I
16 think, in all of our counties, and we
17 really -- we can't afford to do that to our
18 seniors.
19 And then also you spoke about -- no,
20 this is about the Adult Protective Services.
21 And I don't know if you were in the hearing
22 room earlier today when I asked the
23 commissioner of OCFS a few questions
24 regarding APS and the staff allocated to
312
1 elder abuse cases. She was unfortunately
2 unable to answer my questions on the data
3 collected or the staffing available in her
4 agency assigned to address the number of
5 elder abuse incidents alleged and
6 investigated statewide. I was very
7 disappointed with that.
8 I bring this up because, as you know,
9 I and many others fought hard to include
10 funding to expand Lifespan, which I know
11 you've talked about the multidisciplinary
12 teams going through OVS. Will they be
13 working with Lifespan too, or how is that
14 going to work?
15 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yeah, so your
16 first question -- the Offices for the Aging
17 work very closely with local APS, for obvious
18 reasons. I mean, not every individual that
19 touches APS winds up being an APS client.
20 And then what other resources are there that
21 are -- again, are across systems, that can
22 assist that individual, depending on what it
23 is. Lifespan is our primary partner in all
24 things elder abuse.
313
1 You know, our model in federal grant
2 was a partnership with Lifespan as well as
3 the New York City Elder Abuse Coalition,
4 Weill Cornell Medical Center. There's no
5 reason to not go and support an
6 infrastructure that has experience in this
7 very complicated area and a successful track
8 record. So I would anticipate that Lifespan
9 would continue to be a major partner in that
10 as well.
11 You know, Commissioner Poole and
12 myself and the Commissioner of DFS have done
13 a couple of regional listening sessions on
14 elder abuse globally, financial exploitation
15 specifically. We have just completed a model
16 MOU not only in how we work with the state
17 APS, but also how the local AAAs can be
18 working and sharing information where --
19 obviously, with HIPAA compliance, standards
20 being met -- but how we can tighten those
21 relationships a little bit better so that
22 we're serving individuals holistically.
23 SENATOR SERINO: Okay. And also,
24 there's no case managers assigned if people
314
1 are on a waiting list for CSE? That's a
2 question I failed to ask earlier.
3 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: You know, in
4 some counties there are, actually.
5 SENATOR SERINO: Okay.
6 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Case
7 management is a -- you know, I'm glad you
8 raised that. It's a really, really important
9 service for somebody who can help people not
10 only navigate extremely complex systems but
11 also to help them apply for some of the
12 benefits or entitlements that they are
13 eligible for.
14 So you hear that we have 59 different
15 area agencies throughout the state, including
16 two Native American reservations. While they
17 all meet similar standards, they all do it
18 very differently. And so I don't have at my
19 fingertips which ones do and which ones
20 don't. But some of them absolutely do.
21 And as a former case manager myself,
22 in Monroe County, we did have waiting lists
23 for EISEP 20 years ago when I worked there.
24 And there were things that we were able to do
315
1 with the people that might have been on a
2 waiting list to ensure that they were still
3 receiving other types of services.
4 SENATOR SERINO: Okay. And finally,
5 regarding the Long-Term-Care Ombudsman
6 Program, which relies on dedicated
7 volunteers, it remains flat in this year's
8 budget. What is the coordination between the
9 LTC Ombudsman office and the Department of
10 Health?
11 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: So you will
12 remember, Senator, that we completed a
13 regionalization and reorganization of the
14 program. What we were finding at the time
15 was, you know, counties were struggling,
16 vendors were struggling to provide the
17 service based on, you know, the scale. So we
18 went through a regionalization proposal that
19 significantly expanded the resources and
20 allowed us to make some major improvements in
21 terms of dedicated staff that didn't occur
22 prior to, and some of the other tasks that
23 the ombudsmen have to do.
24 We do have a new state ombudsman that
316
1 at some point I'd love for you to meet.
2 But in addition to the funding that
3 was retained this year that was added last
4 year, you know, we are working with the
5 Health Department for another two-year
6 commitment to have -- the Assisted Living
7 Reform Act of 2005 has funding dedicated from
8 the assisted living licenses in it provided
9 into the budget. There's a couple of other
10 discretionary federal pots that we provide
11 additional resources in. So there is a
12 couple hundred thousand, up to $600,000 more
13 than what you might see in the appropriation
14 line.
15 On the second part, in terms of
16 working with the Health Department, you know,
17 we work very closely with the Health
18 Department in a lot of different areas,
19 whether it be the AIDS Institute, on chronic
20 diseases, lowering sodium intake for our
21 meals and things of that nature, as well as
22 all the NY Connects and Medicaid-type
23 long-term-care-related issues.
24 This one is one that we have regained
317
1 speed in terms of what the value is of the
2 program in terms of what the state is trying
3 to accomplish. We have upwards of 800 paid
4 and highly-trained volunteers that are
5 visiting facilities every day during the
6 year, through most of the nursing homes and
7 enriched housing and assisted living
8 facilities. They can be the quality eyes and
9 ears for the state. And so we're in
10 conversations now on how we can kind of ramp
11 that up a little bit more.
12 SENATOR SERINO: Yeah, I know that's
13 such a great program.
14 So the new person that you hired, are
15 they charged with overseeing the long-term
16 care facilities?
17 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: No, they're
18 responsible for overseeing the Long-Term-Care
19 Ombudsman Program, which --
20 SENATOR SERINO: Just the ombudsman
21 program?
22 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: -- which is a
23 federal requirement under the Older Americans
24 Act that is contained within our office.
318
1 Yeah.
2 SENATOR SERINO: So who is charged
3 with overseeing the long-term care
4 facilities?
5 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: The Health
6 Department.
7 SENATOR SERINO: The Health
8 Department, okay.
9 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Which is why
10 that partnership is so important.
11 SENATOR SERINO: Okay.
12 Okay. Thank you very much.
13 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Sure. Thank
14 you, Senator.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
17 Assemblyman DenDekker.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Thank you,
19 Director. I really appreciate your answering
20 just a couple quick questions.
21 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Sure.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: The money for
23 the NORCs, which is the Naturally Occurring
24 Retirement Communities, I noticed the funding
319
1 is there, but the extra $700,000 that was put
2 in last year through the Mortgage Insurance
3 Fund has been cut now. And I don't
4 understand why we put in $700,000 last year
5 to expand services to then just cut it this
6 year. I'm wondering if you can give me some
7 information on that.
8 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: I think that
9 that was a one-time amount that came from the
10 trust fund that you talked about for 375 for
11 each of the pots, the Neighborhood NORCs and
12 the NORCs. So our appropriations remain as
13 they were last year.
14 As you had raised it, I think it's
15 going to be a topic of conversation and
16 something that will play itself out in the
17 next month and a half.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Yeah, because
19 it's going to be difficult. If we gave them
20 that funding to expand the services, and now
21 we're just going to stop the additional
22 services that we provided for one year, I
23 don't think that's a good way to go.
24 I think it's very dangerous to the
320
1 elderly community that is using those
2 services now, and who now are going to find
3 out that the services that I just got are not
4 going to be available anymore. I think it
5 was a very bad message to send. I hope we
6 can reach an agreement on that so that we can
7 continue the funding somehow.
8 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yeah, and I
9 think that's a good conversation to have.
10 I also think that the modernization
11 proposal that was passed in last year's bill
12 will help expand some of the services. So
13 what's happened over the last 20 years with
14 the traditional NORC program, and since 2004
15 with the Neighborhood NORC program, is they
16 were bid once -- in 1995, where NORC is
17 concerned, and never again until actually the
18 RFA that's out now -- and with the
19 Neighborhood NORCs in 2004.
20 I think one of the things that we
21 learned -- and this is certainly not
22 suggesting that any program is not doing what
23 it was supposed to be doing -- but there were
24 some areas where I think the intent of what
321
1 the NORC was -- in terms of a bottom-up
2 community organizing health and social
3 services partnership that leveraged
4 resources, that included older adults in
5 terms of what services are provided, how
6 they're provided -- got lost in some places.
7 And so this gave us an opportunity to,
8 you know, take the demonstration out of it,
9 because we demonstrated that it worked for
10 20 years, and memorialize some of the lessons
11 that we learned over time.
12 So what I'm actually hoping, as the
13 RFA plays itself out, is that we're going to
14 see additional services being able to be
15 provided because of the clarity of the intent
16 of what the program design is supposed to
17 look like.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: I just will
19 reiterate that I hope that we find a way to
20 continue those services. I have a NORC in my
21 community, it's extremely successful, it's
22 vibrant, the seniors in that community rely
23 on the services that they get, it actually
24 saves us money because it keeps them in their
322
1 own home.
2 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Which one's in
3 your district?
4 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Northridge/
5 Southridge.
6 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Okay. Thank
7 you.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: So -- and I'm
9 just concerned that any cut to the NORC
10 program would affect those seniors directly,
11 and I don't want to see that happen.
12 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Okay. I'll
13 take that back.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: The other --
15 the one thing I want to just touch on quick
16 is you mentioned about the transportation
17 issues.
18 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yes.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: So I want to
20 know if I got this right, because I was told
21 by a couple of entities that they're very
22 concerned about something that they said was
23 going to happen, and I want to know if this
24 is coming from that area.
323
1 So currently right now they contract
2 with a transportation company that is picking
3 up seniors or clients and bringing them in
4 for their services, whether it be daycare
5 services or whatever, and they've been told
6 that now, starting I believe in October, that
7 there's a Governor's proposal that will now
8 be like a community way of getting services
9 and transportation so they wouldn't have the
10 same company picking them up every day. It
11 might be a different company, it might be a
12 different driver, et cetera, et cetera.
13 There's real concern, both in the
14 elderly community as well as my veteran
15 community that relies on those services, that
16 they want the same company and the same
17 driver to pick them up every day. That's the
18 way it's always been. They know where they
19 are, they know them by name, and especially
20 seniors as well as my veteran population are
21 extremely concerned about any change that --
22 I don't know who this person is now, and I
23 don't feel comfortable getting in that
24 vehicle. And also the previous company knew
324
1 exactly where to pick me up, et cetera,
2 et cetera. Are those concerns --
3 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: That proposal,
4 I've got to be honest, I'm not aware of.
5 It's not our proposal.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Okay.
7 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: So I'm not
8 sure exactly what that might be. I really
9 don't know. That is not us.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: I will want to
11 find out more about it --
12 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: I think the
13 big thing that has been raised in this
14 hearing is the move of our $1 million of
15 transportation into CSE. That is a drop in
16 the bucket in terms of what's provided around
17 the state in terms of transportation for all
18 older adults, but that's a decision that's
19 made by, in the city, the Department for the
20 Aging, and then in the rest of the state, the
21 county Offices of the Aging.
22 So this -- the proposal that you
23 described, and the concern, is not --
24 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Okay. That's
325
1 what I wanted to know. Thank you very much.
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
3 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Thank you.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
5 Thank you for being here, Director
6 Olsen.
7 I have several questions that I just
8 want to drill down a little bit deeper on a
9 couple of the topics that we may have touched
10 on already. And the first has to do with the
11 discontinuation of the direct care worker and
12 service provider cost of living adjustment,
13 COLA.
14 And as you know, the 2015 enacted
15 budget provided for a wage increase for
16 direct care workers and service providers.
17 In the 2018 Executive Budget, it proposes
18 that the elimination of funding for direct
19 care workers and service providers is
20 warranted. According to the Governor, DOH
21 and the State Office for the Aging providers
22 have underutilized this COLA, citing the
23 complexity of identifying eligible workers.
24 Direct care workers and service
326
1 providers have low salaries, as you know, and
2 would be negatively impacted by this cut.
3 According to the Governor, elimination of the
4 COLA would save the state $2 million in this
5 fiscal year of 2018.
6 So first of all, can you explain the
7 primary reasons why the State Office for the
8 Aging providers have not adopted this COLA
9 for direct care workers and service
10 providers? And can you provide the COLA
11 amount and an estimate of how many direct
12 care workers and service providers would be
13 impacted by this discontinuation?
14 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yeah, so the
15 latter two questions are information we're
16 also gathering, so my staff behind me or
17 watching on TV are jotting that down, we'll
18 get that information to you.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: When do you --
20 Director, when do you think we can get it?
21 Because as you know, the clock is ticking and
22 we have to pass a state budget on time. So
23 today's a hearing, but when can we get that
24 information?
327
1 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: I think that
2 what we're trying to figure out among our
3 counties is why were the titles -- why didn't
4 the titles match, and why was it difficult to
5 implement. We are reviewing the vouchers
6 that are coming in to see who did and who
7 didn't.
8 Our anecdotal information from our
9 fiscal department, who talks to the counties,
10 is that it's been underutilized. So it's
11 something that I can try to get to you as
12 quick as we have it, but we need to reach out
13 to our counties as we have been doing to try
14 to get what the impact is.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So you're reaching
16 out to the counties now. But this was passed
17 in 2015. So has there been outreach, you
18 know, when you started to see signals that
19 maybe it was being underutilized?
20 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: The direct
21 care worker part for our agency, after the
22 getting out the program instruction, doing a
23 training, answering questions, et cetera,
24 took some time to implement. Not all the
328
1 counties voucher on a monthly basis or even
2 on a quarterly basis, and so -- but it's --
3 sometimes by the time you get your reports in
4 in terms of where there may be an issue and
5 where there's not an issue, some time has
6 gone by.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. So if
8 there is a time element here, and it sounds
9 like there is, if the direct care worker and
10 the service provider COLA were extended for
11 one year, would that give you ample time to
12 reexamine and approve the process for
13 targeting potential workers?
14 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: I think if we
15 understood, you know, why the titles were
16 difficult to identify and what part of the
17 program was difficult to implement, that
18 could provide some guidance.
19 But again, as I've been listening to
20 the hearings the last week or two and
21 certainly this morning, I know this is an
22 issue that's been raised at multiple areas
23 and, you know, is of concern to --
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Can I -- I know you
329
1 care about seniors deeply, I know the
2 Governor cares deeply about seniors. We want
3 to deliver the best services possible, and we
4 want to help the counties. So if there's a
5 way that you could work this out, I think it
6 would be very beneficial.
7 Can you provide details on the savings
8 for this initiative, specifically for the
9 state and the localities? So where would the
10 savings be around the state?
11 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yeah. I
12 believe we can.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: You can get that
14 for us too? Okay, that would be great.
15 Switching gears a little bit, I would
16 like to discuss the NY Connects. And as you
17 know, the 2018 fiscal year Executive Budget
18 proposes a funding shift for NY Connects from
19 the General Fund to the Medicaid global cap
20 and the federal Balancing Incentive Program.
21 So it's called BIP funding?
22 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yes.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yup. NY Connects,
24 as you know -- and I remember when it was
330
1 established in 2006 -- it's an information
2 hub that provides access to comprehensive
3 information and assistance for people of all
4 ages that require long-term services and
5 support.
6 So this funding shift would remove NY
7 Connects from the SOFA budget and place it in
8 the DOH budget. And according to the
9 Governor, the shift would create
10 $3.35 million in savings for this year.
11 So the questions are these.
12 Approximately how many individuals are
13 annually served in the NY Connects program?
14 And do you see this number increasing in the
15 future?
16 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yes. There
17 are about 200,000 --
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: That's a lot.
19 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: -- contacts
20 this past year. We do expect the volume to
21 rise. We hope it does rise, and our
22 sustainability -- the longer-term
23 sustainability plan that we've constructed
24 with the Department of Health and our
331
1 partners there recognizes that.
2 I don't necessarily look at it
3 necessarily as a shift but as a
4 sustainability effort. So the BIP funds run
5 out, we all knew that those were going to run
6 out in March of '18. One of the deliverables
7 of receiving the $600 million for BIP was to
8 develop the sustainability plan, which we
9 have.
10 As you mentioned, you know, this
11 program was originally put into place in
12 2006. It's not really a program anymore,
13 it's a major systems change and reform. And
14 in this state fiscal year, the allocation to
15 the counties and our regional disability
16 partners is almost $26 million.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
18 If there's a decrease in the Medicaid
19 global cap, however, which very well could
20 happen, what happens to NY Connects?
21 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Well, I think
22 that's a larger conversation. That's a big
23 cap. There's priorities under that cap. I
24 think that this systems reform is also a
332
1 priority because of what it does, who it does
2 it to, and what it potentially saves. In
3 addition to consumers and family members that
4 utilize the No Wrong Door, about 25 percent
5 of the contacts are from providers who have
6 difficult individuals that they're trying to
7 get served. And, you know, a lot of those
8 happen on Friday when people are being
9 discharged from the hospital.
10 So I think that by connecting people
11 with the right service at the right time in
12 the right place, helping individuals get
13 screened for SNAP and veterans' benefits or
14 Medicaid to be able to do home visits, to
15 intervene earlier, that that has tremendous
16 cost savings. And that's really what this
17 systems reform is designed to do, is to get
18 people to where they need to get to, to make
19 sure that we have very strong partnerships
20 with our specialized hubs in mental health
21 and substance abuse.
22 So I would hope, and I don't have any
23 reason to believe otherwise, that this
24 systems reform is a state priority.
333
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We have a large
2 increase in the aging population in New York.
3 Could you talk about what the projections
4 are?
5 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yeah. And I'm
6 glad you asked that question, because I think
7 when we're in the helping profession, we have
8 a visual of what we mean by older people.
9 And unfortunately it often takes a negative
10 turn.
11 And that's not necessarily what aging
12 is globally. There are certainly individuals
13 with need, and that's a lot of what our
14 agency does, but there's a lot of very
15 active, healthy people over the age of 60 in
16 the Legislature --
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Now, watch it here.
18 (Laughter.)
19 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: -- in
20 Congress, leading businesses -- and I mean
21 that with all due respect. I've seen
22 positive aging and negative aging in my own
23 immediate family and surrounding family.
24 So at this point we have about
334
1 3.7 million people over the age of 60. In
2 the next 15 to 20 years, that will go to
3 about 5.2 million. This is a population that
4 is very -- brings a lot of social,
5 intellectual, and economic capital to their
6 communities, which is why we're so excited
7 about the age-friendly livable community
8 pieces in the Governor's budget that really
9 recognize how communities ought to be
10 structured for positive aging regardless of
11 age.
12 But it's not -- my point is it's not
13 all doom and gloom. These are individuals
14 that are important, and we should see them as
15 much in the positive instead of in a negative
16 light.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Right. We all want
18 seniors to be able to enjoy healthy
19 longevity, be able to participate in
20 communities, stay at home, everything that is
21 positive for them. But at the same time, the
22 reality is that with many more seniors in the
23 population, there's going to be a greater
24 need for long-term care. Would you agree
335
1 with that?
2 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: I would agree
3 with that based on the numbers. I think that
4 the efforts of not only our agency but some
5 of our other partners and community partners
6 are trying to help stave some of that off,
7 with preventing hospitalizations and
8 premature discharges, embedding the highest
9 level of evidence-based interventions in the
10 community to help control chronic diseases,
11 fallen injury preventions, ensuring good
12 nutrition.
13 If you're socially isolated, the
14 impact that that has on mental health and
15 physical health, how we can engage healthier
16 individuals to volunteer and be civically
17 engaged, all that has a very positive impact
18 on your longevity. And I think that those
19 are important strategies for overall
20 population health.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Now,
22 just a couple more topics.
23 I wanted to explore the changes in the
24 Community Services for the Elderly, the CSE
336
1 program. And as you know, this year's budget
2 proposes to combine $1.1 million in
3 transportation funding into the CSE program.
4 And it was separate this past year, so the
5 action doesn't result in a decrease in
6 funding.
7 However, the Governor also proposes
8 removing 25 percent of the county share
9 exemption of the $3.5 million in funding that
10 has been invested into the CSE program for
11 the past couple of years. So as you know
12 very well, this program serves approximately
13 122,500 people annually in New York State and
14 supports many service options for the
15 elderly, and I hear about this program all
16 the time locally. These options include
17 transportation and home services, meals, and
18 access to case management.
19 So many problems could result from
20 these proposed changes. Moving the
21 25 percent waiver will shift costs to local
22 municipalities, which already face
23 significant pressure because of the property
24 tax cap. This action may prevent additional
337
1 CSE funding enacted in past years from being
2 accepted by local governments, which will
3 negatively affect the elderly who rely on
4 these services.
5 The Governor's proposal to consolidate
6 the $1.1 million into distinct transportation
7 funding makes that funding subject to a local
8 match. And so therefore when you have
9 localities already under pressure because of
10 the property tax cap, because of unfunded
11 mandates and other issues that they face
12 every single day, we could have a reduction
13 in services to our most vulnerable
14 population.
15 So right now there are 15,000 older
16 adults waiting for community-based aging
17 services in New York State. Do you have
18 plans in place to help decrease the number of
19 older adults on this waiting list?
20 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Well, I think
21 that was a similar question that Senator
22 Serino had raised in terms of other ways that
23 we assist people who may or may not be on a
24 waiting list.
338
1 So there's a laundry list of things
2 that may not appear in our budget that help
3 provide additional resources to the county.
4 So for example, we were notified last week
5 that we're going to be receiving almost a
6 2 percent increase in our federal funding,
7 which is great, because our federal partner
8 frankly has been --
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: That is great. We
10 like to hear that.
11 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: -- has been
12 the least of our partners in providing
13 services.
14 And I gave a couple of examples of if
15 an individual might be on a waiting list, how
16 we can assist with, you know, getting SNAP
17 benefits, with volunteers getting an
18 individual to a senior center so that we can
19 still provide services.
20 We do a lot of applications and
21 benefits assistance. We serve 12,000
22 veterans over the age of 60 in New York
23 State, so we have a project that we're
24 working on with DVA to identify those
339
1 veterans and make sure they get to the
2 Veterans Administration, because there's a
3 ton of supports and funding and benefits that
4 they're eligible for.
5 The Health Department last year and
6 the year before put out $15 million in grants
7 to provide caregiver and respite support, for
8 example, to the Alzheimer's chapters. Those
9 Alzheimer's chapters turned around and
10 contracted with our county Offices for the
11 Aging --
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Like the
13 Legislature was very supportive of the --
14 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Absolutely.
15 Absolutely. We have invested, in my
16 office -- one of the things I'm really
17 interested in is there's a respite training
18 model called REST out of Chicago. And it's a
19 train-the-trainer type of proposal to train
20 master trainers to train others to provide
21 respite and caregiving support.
22 So in just the last couple of weeks
23 I've met with Commissioner Camara at the
24 Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, the
340
1 New York State Office of National Community
2 Service, to look at how we can begin to not
3 only reach areas that we potentially haven't
4 before, but to gain some volunteers. Because
5 I'd really like to believe, despite what you
6 hear and watch on TV, that people are
7 inherently good and want to do good for
8 others, for the most part. And I think
9 expanding our relationships with faith
10 communities, faith leaders, where we could
11 tap individuals that are within those
12 structures who want to volunteer, who want to
13 give back, that there's other ways that we
14 can provide service. So we're constantly
15 looking for those opportunities.
16 The enhanced multidisciplinary teams,
17 part of those dollars will be to be able to
18 fund things like EISEP and transportation and
19 CSE. So we have a litany of those types of
20 things that we are constantly trying to work
21 on, facilitate, and expand, knowing that
22 there are needs across the board no matter
23 who comes up and talks. There's something --
24 there's needs everywhere. But we don't stop
341
1 based on the amount of funding that we get.
2 We're looking for partnerships, and I think
3 that's what we do very well.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. So
5 we're hopeful that you'll work with the
6 Legislature to try to mitigate any negative
7 impact on county budgets so that they will
8 continue to provide the services that are
9 necessary.
10 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yeah, and I'm
11 glad you raised that as well. You know,
12 you're going to hear more about the shift of
13 the $1 million, that money's going to be left
14 on the table and counties aren't going to be
15 able to afford it.
16 You know, Senator, the numbers really
17 just don't bear that out. The counties have
18 been a great partner to the Executive and the
19 Legislature in terms of understanding the
20 value of these programs and putting resources
21 there. The counties are way overmatched at
22 this point to the point where, practically
23 speaking, a million dollars added to CSE
24 would result in a match requirement of about
342
1 $350,000. Forty-five percent of that 350
2 would be responsible for New York City, who
3 is overmatched by $180 million at least. So
4 they already are meeting -- they're already
5 overmatched. The next 10 big counties would
6 take a large chunk out of that; they're
7 already overmatched. The overwhelming
8 majority of counties, and I would say in the
9 98 percent, are overmatched.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: What about little
11 counties? Poor counties? Rural counties?
12 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Those as well.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. So Allegany
14 County, for example?
15 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yes. So I
16 really don't anticipate any additional
17 financial hit on the counties through that
18 proposal.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
20 And then just one final thing, and I
21 know it's Department of Health too, but
22 telehealth services. They can be very
23 valuable in helping people age in place, stay
24 at home, avoid costly long-term care, which
343
1 in many cases people -- I don't hear people
2 saying "Pick me, pick me, I want to go to the
3 nursing home tomorrow."
4 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Right.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: They only go if
6 they have to.
7 So are you involved in telehealth
8 services? And could you tell us how those
9 things are going as far as improving people's
10 lives?
11 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yeah, I mean,
12 I can just tell you -- we're not really all
13 that involved on the health side in putting
14 telehealth in.
15 I can tell you, just philosophically,
16 it's absolutely the future. I've seen some
17 physicians' practices, for example, up in
18 Maine who are using not exactly telehealth --
19 parts of it could be telehealth, but also
20 even just being able to monitor somebody over
21 a 24-hour period that doesn't need to be in a
22 nursing home, and you surround those
23 individuals with a core support of what could
24 be family members or volunteers that are able
344
1 to keep people at home.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Plus technology.
3 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Right.
4 Absolutely. So, you know, philosophically,
5 absolutely, we're supportive.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
7 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Sure, thank
8 you.
9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
10 Mr. Weprin.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN WEPRIN: Thank you,
12 Mr. Chairman.
13 Director Olsen, good afternoon.
14 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: How are you.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN WEPRIN: In our great
16 concern about the $17 million cut,
17 $17 million to Title XX --
18 (Microphone not working.)
19 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: I can actually
20 hear you the best without that.
21 (Laughter; cross-talk.)
22 ASSEMBLYMAN WEPRIN: -- the
23 $17 million cut to Title XX money, and I get
24 contacted by a number of seniors' advocates
345
1 who have indicated that that will result in
2 about a 30 percent closing of senior centers
3 in New York City.
4 I have a large senior population. Can
5 you comment on that cut? And, as you know,
6 the Democratic Assembly majority is majority
7 New York City-based, despite the leadership
8 of our chair, who's north of New York City,
9 but we certainly in our conference are very
10 concerned about that cut.
11 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yeah, and I
12 know it came up this morning and it came up a
13 little earlier.
14 You know, again, it is an issue that I
15 have spoken with Commissioner Poole about. I
16 think her answer this morning was -- and I
17 agree with -- that within her structure I
18 know that they're going to be looking at are
19 there other ways within their funding streams
20 to offline some of their funding or voucher
21 differently.
22 I think that, you know, this isn't the
23 last time this issue will come up. So I
24 think it will -- you know, it's going to be a
346
1 conversation over the next month and a half.
2 My understanding is, and I'm not an
3 expert on New York City budgeting, is that
4 there are -- there is going to be a net plus
5 for the city in terms of, you know, Medicaid
6 admin, state takeover of Medicaid admin, some
7 of the sales tax changes. But if the city
8 took no action, then certainly those Title XX
9 funds do support the ongoing operations of
10 the centers.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN WEPRIN: Yeah, and kind of
12 as a follow-up on that, I have a very large
13 immigrant population in my Assembly district,
14 particularly a large South Asian population
15 from Bangladesh and India in particular. And
16 we have a lot of culturally sensitive senior
17 centers, and I've supported working very
18 closely with my Councilmember as well as
19 New York City.
20 For example, we have a senior center
21 in the Jamaica Muslim Center which mostly
22 serves a Bangladeshi population, and special
23 halal food and culturally sensitive
24 activities, and we also work very closely
347
1 with India Home for a lot of Indian-based
2 services and vegetarian food at that
3 particular senior center. And of course we
4 have, you know, kosher food at our JASA
5 Senior Center.
6 What can the state do in particular to
7 help some of these immigrant seniors who are
8 particularly afraid of some of the
9 pronouncements and executive orders that are
10 coming out of Washington? I know my
11 Bangladeshi population, and particularly that
12 particular senior center -- I mentioned that
13 it's in Jamaica Muslim Center -- are very
14 concerned about the anti-immigrant -- from
15 Muslim countries -- Bangladesh is not on that
16 list, but I spoke at that senior center
17 recently and, you know, they expect --
18 they're fearful that Bangladesh will be next.
19 What can the state do to help out with
20 some of these special immigrant senior
21 centers and activities and programs? Can the
22 state, you know, get involved in that?
23 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: You know,
24 Assemblyman, I think the issue that you're
348
1 raising is beyond unfortunate. I can't tell
2 you exactly what we can do.
3 What I can promise you, though, is
4 that we should have a follow-up conversation.
5 Because if there is a role for our agency, if
6 there's a role for the Office for
7 New Americans -- which we've started a
8 partnership with -- you know, I'd love to be
9 a part of that.
10 So what I can commit to doing is to
11 understanding a little bit deeper what some
12 of the concerns are. I mean, what we're here
13 to do is help, and that's both at the state
14 level and certainly our counterparts at the
15 local level. And that's what we'll do. So
16 I'll commit to following up with you
17 personally and getting some folks together
18 that can express more in terms of -- when you
19 say what can we do to help, maybe they can
20 articulate a little bit more of that and
21 figure out a way for us to be helpful.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN WEPRIN: Thank you,
23 Mr. Olsen. I will follow up with you.
24 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
349
1 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Okay. Thank
2 you.
3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
4 Senator?
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
6 Senator Liz Krueger.
7 SENATOR KRUEGER: Hi.
8 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Hi, Senator.
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: Good afternoon.
10 Just following up, now, on a number of
11 questions. You were asked about the shift
12 from the federal BIP, Balancing Incentive
13 Program, to -- excuse me, shifting from
14 General Fund money to the federal BIP
15 balancing fund. How much money would be
16 shifted?
17 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: So that's --
18 let me clarify that. So the General Fund
19 allocation for the No Wrong Door is
20 $3.35 million. When we received the
21 Balancing Incentive grant, that was a
22 $500 million -- almost a $600 million grant.
23 Not all of it was for the No Wrong Door, but
24 that was one of the three components that had
350
1 to be implemented.
2 So we've been using BIP money, and a
3 substantial amount of BIP money, to meet the
4 deliverables of BIP, which is to expand and
5 enhance it statewide. We didn't have No
6 Wrong Door in New York City, we do now.
7 There are a couple of upstate counties, but
8 then there's additional tasks and
9 deliverables that have to go along with that.
10 We built a statewide reporting system. We
11 enhanced a statewide resource directory --
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: No, that's okay.
13 Skip that. Just -- what are we not paying
14 for anymore with BIP because we're going to
15 use this BIP money instead of our own money?
16 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: So the BIP
17 money runs out in March '18 --
18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Yeah.
19 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: -- which was
20 the plan. Part of our sustainability plan
21 was how do we sustain it after those BIP
22 dollars go. And so the sustainability
23 dollars -- so we will continue to use BIP
24 funding through March 31 of '18, and then
351
1 there's dollars to take us the rest of the
2 fiscal year through the global Medicaid cap.
3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you. Okay.
4 In the Governor's Article VII language
5 there is a requirement for banks to stop
6 financial transactions if it believes that
7 vulnerable adults' assets may be at risk.
8 Explain to me what will happen, exactly, at
9 that point. So a bank determines: We think
10 someone's trying to take this elderly
11 person's money out of their account, so they
12 say, No, we won't do it. Then what do they
13 do?
14 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: So I think,
15 Senator, that's a question for our Department
16 of Financial Services friends. That's
17 legislation that's under their jurisdiction.
18 I can tell you, from our perspective,
19 that the conversation on that language has
20 just begun, so I don't have an answer to how
21 that's going to be operationalized or
22 implemented at this point.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: But would you agree
24 that we need that language operationalized
352
1 before we complete the budget process?
2 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: I would agree
3 that if we're looking for banks to play a
4 more proactive role in good faith to stop the
5 draining of resources when it potentially is
6 identified, that that's an important policy
7 for New York State.
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: And I think the
9 language is critical, because I've
10 experienced both sides of the story -- where
11 banks don't, and I think perhaps they should,
12 and times when banks do and they absolutely
13 should not, and they disrespect the rights of
14 senior citizens to make decisions over their
15 own money.
16 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Right. Which
17 is why I don't want to comment on how that's
18 written, because there's lots of --
19 SENATOR KRUEGER: But you and I agree
20 it's important how that language is written.
21 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yes. Yes.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. And I would
23 argue that needs to be carefully written and
24 seen before vague language is passed in an
353
1 Article VII bill. Okay.
2 The number-one issue I get from
3 seniors that I have no answers for: "I'm
4 looking for a job, and no one will hire me.
5 I need the job because I can't afford to
6 continue to live in my home without a
7 supplemental wage because I'm not making it
8 on Social Security and savings." And I won't
9 say it's the number-one question I get; the
10 number-one question is "Help, I'm being
11 evicted from my home because I can't afford
12 it."
13 So -- but this Part 2 is, Help me find
14 a job. I can't find any programs in the City
15 of New York that actually operate and try to
16 assist seniors to move back into the labor
17 market. Do you have a secret stash?
18 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: There isn't a
19 secret stash, but there is a program that
20 I'll connect you to. It's called Title V. I
21 know it didn't come up when the Commissioner
22 of Labor was here, but we work very closely
23 with the Department of Labor in terms of --
24 we have a certain number of slots in New York
354
1 State. So there are some national sponsors,
2 like NCOA, AARP, and some others, that
3 operate 80 percent of the state's slots. Our
4 office is responsible for about 20 percent of
5 the slots in the state. And these are for
6 individuals who are age 55 and older who are
7 re-entering or having trouble with jobs, so
8 it's skills development and so on.
9 We have some good relationships with
10 the One-Stop centers, but I can definitely
11 connect you with our city Title V program.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. Because in my
13 experience, people who are supposed to have
14 these programs tell you there's nothing they
15 can do and there's no more people they --
16 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Okay.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- can even talk to.
18 All right? Thank you.
19 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Yes. Thank
20 you.
21 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
22 That's it.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: That's it.
24 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Great.
355
1 Well, hey, thanks for hanging with me.
2 I appreciate that.
3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
5 Director, for coming. And thank you for
6 everything you do for seniors.
7 ACTING DIRECTOR OLSEN: Thank you.
8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: New York State
9 Veterans Council, Kirby Hannon, legislative
10 coordinator, the VFW; Linda McKinnis,
11 legislative coordinator, Disabled American
12 Veterans; John Lewis, legislative committee
13 chair, VFW; Bob Becker, legislative
14 coordinator, New York State Veterans Council.
15 And they have 10 minutes. Somebody on
16 my staff has a good sense of humor.
17 (Laughter.)
18 MR. BECKER: Good afternoon, sitting
19 chairs and members of the Human Service
20 Budget Subcommittee. I am Bob Becker. I'm a
21 retired Marine and legislative chairman for
22 the New York State Council of Veterans
23 Organizations.
24 I'd like to thank you for the
356
1 opportunity to bring the veterans issues
2 identified by the New York Veterans Council
3 before you for consideration. The New York
4 Veterans Council consists of about 25
5 veterans associations, and we meet monthly to
6 discuss the key issues of importance to
7 veterans. It is the 25 member organizations
8 and associations that have ultimately
9 developed our budget request today. These
10 requests are to strengthen and sustain
11 critical programs that have proven essential
12 to caring for the sometimes very unique needs
13 of veterans.
14 With me today are fellow veterans
15 Kirby Hannan, John Lewis, Linda McKinnis and
16 Scott Westcott. Kirby will frame the issues.
17 Kirby?
18 MR. HANNAN: Thank you. You probably
19 have our testimony in front of you, so I'm
20 not going to read it to you. I'm going to
21 kind of run through this quickly. I'm the
22 volunteer legislative coordinator for the
23 VFW, as Chairman Farrell, a veteran himself,
24 has said.
357
1 The Veterans Defense Program is for
2 veterans who get themselves into serious
3 trouble with the law, as distinguished from
4 veterans treatment courts, where it tends to
5 be more of a lower level, perhaps a
6 misdemeanor. The program's working. You're
7 going to hear more about it from Scott
8 Westcott. But the program is working, and my
9 job here is to try to show you some
10 interdependency between these four things
11 that we want to talk about, even though they
12 don't appear related. All right?
13 That's a $1.4 million ask, but it can
14 save a lot of incarceration time at the other
15 end, and we can demonstrate that.
16 The Veterans Service Officer funding.
17 Linda McKinnis is both a veteran service
18 officer and a peer-to-peer mentor, a
19 certified peer-to-peer mentor. What she does
20 is she's an ombudsman, or an ombudswoman.
21 And what she does is basically act as a
22 traffic cop. She fields what's going on at
23 the post level. She interfaces with the
24 Joseph Dwyer Peer-to-Peer Program. There's
358
1 about 15 of them out there, and we'd like 15
2 more. We'll put them in spots where they're
3 not there now. All right?
4 The Joseph Dwyer Peer-to-Peer, you
5 funded that -- and by the way, you funded the
6 Veterans Defense Program to the tune of
7 $500,000 for the last couple of years. So we
8 want to thank you very much for that. That's
9 made a big difference. And thank you.
10 You've also funded the Joseph Dwyer
11 Peer-to-Peer. And I believe that's
12 somewheres in the neighborhood of $300,000
13 for the last probably five or six years.
14 Highly successful program. And Linda can
15 actually get into a little bit of detail.
16 She's done some back-of-the-envelope figuring
17 on how it's working out, how it's getting
18 distributed. And she can also tell you that
19 at the post level, this is where the
20 mentoring occurs.
21 So when I mention the Veterans
22 Treatment Court and I talk about the million
23 dollars that the Governor has set aside for
24 mentoring in the Peer-to-Peer -- he calls it
359
1 peer mentoring -- that's great. But we want
2 to make sure that that mentoring has a feeder
3 line from the mentoring that's actually going
4 on in an anonymous fashion at the post level.
5 You know, in other words, if it's just tucked
6 away in the court, then we don't know whether
7 we've got people like Linda, John, and
8 everybody around here who's actually talking
9 to the vet, you know, and getting them where
10 they need to be. Sometimes coaching them
11 where they need to be.
12 All right, so having said that, what
13 are we talking about charitable gaming for in
14 this -- what am I saying here? Well, what
15 I'm saying is that all these programs have
16 been in place for the last 50 years. And
17 charitable gaming in many, many, many
18 posts -- most -- is the sole source of
19 funding for all of these things that we're
20 asking for additional money for now.
21 So I'm going to suggest to you that --
22 and by the way, the revenue has dropped
23 $54 million, the charitable gaming revenue
24 has dropped $54 million in the last 15 years.
360
1 And that basically is why we're here asking
2 you for money. We did an RSL and self-funded
3 long before this.
4 So what we want -- the Governor
5 mentions modernization of charitable gaming.
6 We hope that we can follow up with you folks
7 and give you some specific proposals that are
8 actually already sponsored. Assemblyman
9 Pretlow, Assemblyman Cusick, Senator
10 Bonacic -- there's things that have been
11 going on in the Legislature for a while.
12 We would hope that you could make that
13 budget process a little more specific with
14 the language that largely comes from those
15 two bills that we talk about. One is an
16 enhanced bell jar machine, which we already
17 have in the posts, and the other is charity
18 poker.
19 So there's my pitch. They all
20 interrelate. And I'd like to turn it over to
21 Scott Westcott for a little bit more about
22 the Veterans Defense Program.
23 MR. WESTCOTT: Good afternoon. My
24 name is Scott Westcott. I'm a Marine
361
1 veteran.
2 I'd also like to tell you that I'm
3 extremely supportive of the Veterans Defense
4 Program, or the VDP, as we call it. The VDP
5 has stepped in and helped a number of our
6 most vulnerable veterans who have suffered
7 from PTSD, traumatic stress or stress-related
8 disorders. Currently 152,000 veterans in
9 New York State are estimated to have mental
10 health problems related to their service.
11 And unfortunately, less than half of those
12 are getting assistance with that.
13 I can tell you firsthand that some of
14 the VDP provides a second chance for veterans
15 who have lost their way, either through
16 criminal behavior or what results in some
17 civilian court interaction. I can relate
18 stories of depression so severe that one
19 service member contemplated suicide as he was
20 traveling around with a gun in his car.
21 The Veterans Defense lawyers and case
22 managers help the courts fully realize that
23 veteran's circumstances and understanding, so
24 that they can provide a more tailored
362
1 sentence and a better disposition for him and
2 for his family.
3 Last year, for the second time, you
4 folks in the Legislature were able to provide
5 $500,000 of funding for the VDP. Today we're
6 here asking for an additional $950,000. This
7 additional funding would go toward a
8 downstate office and provide four family
9 court and criminal court defense attorneys
10 and a related support staff member. It would
11 also increase our Batavia office, which is
12 overburdened, with one more attorney and an
13 additional staff member.
14 I'd like to turn it over now to John
15 Lewis for further comments.
16 MR. LEWIS: Yes, good afternoon. I am
17 John Lewis. I'm the legislative chair for
18 the VFW Department of New York and a 22-year
19 Navy veteran. I am also a post commander.
20 And I'm here to talk about the role of the
21 accredited Veteran Service Officers and to
22 explain why we are asking for $1 million in
23 order to bolster our service officers.
24 Too often the Veterans Defense Program
363
1 is the first point of assistance contact for
2 the returning veteran. Ideally, it should
3 come last. The job of the accredited Veteran
4 Service Officer is to act as an ombudsman,
5 creating synergy with the highly successful
6 Veterans Defense Program and with an equally
7 successful peer-to-peer mentoring process at
8 the post level.
9 The Veteran Service Officer submits
10 claims based on the veterans service
11 connection and assists with coordination to
12 other veteran service agency resources in
13 each county. Peer mentoring in the post
14 identifies the needs during anonymous
15 sessions. Anonymous mentoring must continue
16 in the post, because it works.
17 There are approximately 15 active
18 accredited Veterans Service Officers in place
19 in organizations such as the VFW, Disabled
20 American Veterans, the American Legion,
21 amongst others. Funding for these officers
22 comes from VSOs themselves, and the state.
23 Our request would double that cadre of
24 officers and create ground-level, properly
364
1 staffed, geographically diverse service
2 officer placement. It would be in a manner
3 completely compatible with existing veteran
4 service agencies in each county. The funds
5 would be budgeted and disbursed by the
6 Division of Veterans Affairs.
7 Linda?
8 MS. McKINNIS: Good afternoon,
9 everyone. My name is Linda McKinnis. I am
10 an Army veteran and, as my comrades have
11 said, I am a peer officer. I am also an
12 advocate for veterans services, and I am an
13 ombudswoman.
14 I'm here today to talk about two
15 issues. Again, my comrade here talked about
16 the VSOs. I am also a VSO in the Rensselaer
17 area, so I take care of all my Troy areas and
18 every city within the Troy area. So I do
19 take care of my veterans.
20 As that individual and that VSO, I go
21 out of my way to be an advocate. So what I
22 mean by that is I actually do the benefits, I
23 actually try to get whatever DD214 forms that
24 they need. I make sure that whatever
365
1 resources are in that community, these people
2 get their resources, and also link them up
3 with the nearest VA system. If for any
4 reason they have any problems with the VA
5 system, again, this is where I come in as
6 being an advocate.
7 As far as the Peer-to-Peer Program is
8 concerned, again, the Peer-to-Peer, which is
9 called now the Joseph Dywer program, is a
10 successful program. How do I know? I've
11 been through the program myself. You
12 understand? When I first came here, I
13 suffered with all the ailments of being out
14 of the military, and I happened to get into
15 the Dwyer program, and they helped me
16 significantly. So I know that the outcome is
17 greater. And a lot of men and women that
18 have gone through this program, they have a
19 successful life. I am one of those
20 successful stories.
21 At this moment there has been budgeted
22 $300,000 for this program. Well, at this
23 moment there's 14 counties -- if you do the
24 math, there's 14 counties that money has to
366
1 be distributed to. If you look at the math
2 on that, that's really not much funding for
3 all 14 of these counties. And I'm asking,
4 along with this, that $1 million also be
5 advocated to these counties as far as the
6 whole budget, so that these 14 counties can
7 get these resources that they need.
8 These veterans need help. And the
9 only way to get these veterans is a veteran
10 must reach another veteran. Okay? With this
11 money, we not only service the veterans, but
12 we get them out of the house. And you know
13 for sure that one of our problems that we
14 have with veterans is isolation and
15 depression. You know what I'm saying? So
16 with the Peer-to-Peer program, what we do is
17 we actually go in, we talk with the veterans,
18 we see what their needs are, we see how we
19 can service the need, we get them out of the
20 house, we get them to do volunteer services,
21 we get them to do activities that they
22 normally wouldn't do. But that's okay,
23 because it gets them out and doing something
24 instead of being at home.
367
1 If you haven't noticed lately, the
2 count for suicide has gone down from 22 down
3 to 20. I do give credit to the VA system,
4 but also to the Peer-to-Peer program because
5 we're going out there, reaching these
6 veterans, and making sure that they're not
7 doing -- committing suicide and also not
8 being a repeat offender in the court systems
9 also.
10 We also, as the Peer-to-Peer program,
11 work with the VDP program. One of my
12 questions that I have is when the VDP program
13 comes along and when we do this, one of the
14 my questions is, where do we get these
15 mentors? Well, where do we get these
16 mentors? From the Peer-to-Peer program.
17 Okay? So the Peer-to-Peer program works
18 alongside with the VDP program so that we can
19 get these veterans back into society, we get
20 the resources that they need and do what we
21 can over a period of time, and hopefully you
22 will have better successful stories with
23 these veterans.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.
368
1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very
2 much.
3 Questions?
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Any questions?
5 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Yes, Mr. DenDekker.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Thank you,
7 Mr. Chairman.
8 First of all, thank you all for your
9 service, and I greatly appreciate that.
10 I have to tell you I am a little
11 ashamed and embarrassed that there is nobody
12 here from the Governor's office for us to
13 talk about the veterans budget. Because as
14 you have identified, there is a great need
15 for increases in funding. However, the
16 proposed budget that the Governor has made
17 has decreased overall funding by 1 percent.
18 It has cut all of the money that you just
19 talked about. The New York State Veterans
20 Defenders Program has been completely cut.
21 Helmets to Hard Hats. The funding to Vietnam
22 Veterans of America. The Veterans Medical
23 Center. Warriors Salute. All those programs
24 have been completely zeroed out. And I have
369
1 nobody to sit here in front of me to ask them
2 why they did that and why they make proposals
3 in the budget to do things that we would like
4 to know how they're being handled.
5 So for example, we put in $250,000 for
6 the burial of indigent veterans two years
7 ago. None of that money was ever disbursed.
8 There was no mechanism that was ever put in
9 place for the congressionally chartered
10 organizations to get access to the funds.
11 And now, in this proposal, he says,
12 oh, but I'm putting $100,000 into the burial
13 services of indigent veterans. But there was
14 no mechanism on the 250; none of it was ever
15 disbursed. Now he's lowered it to 100. So
16 did he cut $150,000? Because he's never
17 disbursed a dime of the money.
18 So I have no idea, because there's no
19 one on the other side of the table sitting
20 there that can answer all these questions
21 that I have about the veterans budget. And
22 when you all come to me on a regular basis
23 and explain to me how those programs are
24 successful and how they're helping veterans
370
1 and how we need more money, unfortunately I
2 don't have an answer for you.
3 So on the first hand, I want to
4 apologize that there is nobody here and that
5 I can't answer the questions. I can only
6 read all this off a piece of paper that the
7 Governor has given us in a proposed budget.
8 And I think it's shameful, shameful that
9 there's nobody here from the Governor's
10 office representing this division of the
11 budget. I think it shows disrespect to the
12 approximately 900,000 veterans -- 5 percent
13 of the total population of the State of
14 New York. There's no one here to answer to
15 them, there's no one here to give a question,
16 to explain. There's just no information at
17 all. And I do apologize. And I think it's
18 total disrespect of our veterans that there's
19 no one here to answer those questions.
20 I can tell you the members of the
21 Veterans Committee are dedicated to trying to
22 find every penny we can to bring more
23 services to veterans, direct services to
24 veterans. And the problem that we have with
371
1 the veterans is they fall over so many
2 different areas of the budget. Some of it is
3 in mental health, some of it is in aging,
4 some of it is in housing. So because it's so
5 spread out, that's why we would require
6 someone from the Governor's office to
7 specifically talk about how all of this is
8 going to work for our veterans and how they
9 can access those services.
10 I would love for you, if you can, just
11 to spend a minute and just explain to me how
12 the Dwyer Peer-to-Peer Program would be
13 expanded if we gave an additional million
14 dollars. And if you could start that, that
15 would be helpful.
16 MR. HANNAN: Can I just -- I think
17 Linda's got the -- and I would definitely not
18 want to steal her thunder. But she has the
19 grassroots side of this.
20 From the other side of it, from kind
21 of like your side of it, looking down at how
22 services are delivered, the one thing to
23 remember is that any monies that come into
24 the veteran community, particularly in the
372
1 Peer-to-Peer Program, save the government
2 money. All right? Because it's counseling
3 that would have to be given by other
4 agencies. It's a Department of Health
5 saving, it's a Labor Department saving, it
6 just goes on and on and on.
7 You know, but Peer-to-Peer
8 specifically? Yes, it should be funded. And
9 the million dollars, I think -- in the first
10 instance, going into the court system, I
11 don't know how that would work. But if we
12 had a million dollars going into
13 Peer-to-Peer, it should go to the counties,
14 it should be distributed by the Division of
15 Veterans Affairs. Budget it however you
16 want, but I would make it a -- go into a
17 sensitive agency where they know where the
18 Peer-to-Peer mentoring needs to be bolstered.
19 And I think that's the Division of Veterans
20 Affairs. So I hope I answered your question.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: I don't know
22 how we're going to get the attention of the
23 Governor, and we had talked about this.
24 Maybe it's time for some of the 900,000
373
1 veterans to come over to the Capitol one day
2 and explain to the Governor that not only are
3 you here, but that you also vote and you
4 would like to have some more services and
5 you'd like to at least have a representative
6 sitting here.
7 I know the Director of Veterans
8 Services has been going around the state
9 doing budget presentations for the Governor.
10 It would be nice if he was here in front of
11 us so we could ask him how we're going to
12 move this budget going forward and how we're
13 going to be able to bring more services
14 directly to our veterans. If you have
15 anything else to add --
16 MR. HANNAN: I hope your office is on
17 the third floor, because we'll jam the
18 elevators for you.
19 (Laughter.)
20 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: You know where
21 my office is, because you were there
22 yesterday.
23 (Laughter.)
24 MR. HANNAN: I know. I know where
374
1 your office is. I'm just kidding.
2 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: And as you ask
3 for more money, I tried to explain to you --
4 MR. HANNAN: You did. You did a hell
5 of a job.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: -- I have no
7 idea how we're going to get it --
8 MR. HANNAN: And we appreciate it.
9 Thank you.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: -- and we're
11 trying. That's all I can tell you.
12 MR. LEWIS: And we thank you for your
13 steadfast advocacy. We really appreciate
14 that, sir.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Well, thank
16 you all for coming. And again --
17 MR. LEWIS: And we will continue to
18 fight. It won't be our first fight.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: -- thank you
20 for your service.
21 Mr. Chairman, I don't know if anybody
22 else has any question, but thank you.
23 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Senator?
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes.
375
1 Senator Velmanette Montgomery.
2 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, just very
3 quickly. Thank you for your service to each
4 and every one of you.
5 PANEL MEMBERS: Thank you.
6 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And my question
7 is -- I think I've asked you this before, so
8 I just keep asking my same question every
9 time I see you. You know, I have a VSO
10 organization. And it's Black Vets for Social
11 Justice. I don't know how connected you are
12 to them, they are to you. So that's one
13 question.
14 And what -- how much of this activity
15 could be also part of what they offer
16 veterans in Brooklyn, at least, and in the
17 city. And also a very, very large number of
18 the homeless men, especially, that I've met
19 in my district -- and I have several very
20 large homeless shelters for men
21 specifically -- so many of them are veterans.
22 So are you talking to us about doing
23 something targeting housing for veterans as
24 well?
376
1 MS. McKINNIS: As far as the
2 homelessness for veterans, upstate does have
3 an issue, just like downstate does also. And
4 it's shameful -- don't get me wrong, it is
5 shameful that our veterans, they come home
6 and they don't have a place to live and they
7 end up in the streets. And it's for a long
8 period of time until someone discovers that
9 they are a veteran.
10 I can tell by experience, because I've
11 been there and done that and I've lived on
12 the streets myself. But because I had people
13 that helped me, which was a good thing, what
14 I would say is that most of these men that
15 are homeless, have them get into a program.
16 The VA system now has a homeless department
17 in the VA system. I know the Albany Stratton
18 one does now. They have a homeless agency in
19 their building, and they will help you right
20 on the spot as soon as you come there. Not
21 only will they help you with some type of
22 housing you for the moment, but they will
23 also help you with the basics. Okay?
24 They also have a coordinator there
377
1 that can help you if you have legal problems.
2 So if you have whatever legal problems, they
3 have somebody in the VA office, again, that
4 can help you. If you need counseling, either
5 you can go to the VA -- and that's your
6 choice if you choose to, okay, or if not, you
7 can go through the Dwyer program, okay, which
8 will also do that.
9 If these veterans end up staying in a
10 certain community or county or such, again,
11 the 14 counties, wherever he or she may go,
12 okay, there's a Dwyer program there. All
13 they would have to do is just link up with
14 them, and the representative will walk them
15 through everything, whether it be
16 unemployment, whether it be housing, whether
17 it be trying to just get around in their
18 community. That's what the Peer-to-Peer
19 Program is. It's not just, you know, we sit
20 around and we talk. No, it's trying to
21 figure out what do you need at this moment.
22 And then not only what do you need, they set
23 goals for you so you can get to that
24 well-being of your life so you don't have to
378
1 turn back and be homeless again.
2 MR. LEWIS: If I may add --
3 MR. HANNAN: Candidly, the 14 counties
4 are mostly upstate.
5 MR. LEWIS: Yeah. You know, if I may
6 add --
7 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: That's what I
8 thought, and I wanted to --
9 MR. LEWIS: If I may add, the
10 underlying fundamental issue must be
11 addressed of why these folks, why these
12 homeless veterans are homeless. And I can
13 speak for the VFW. We only have two
14 accredited Veteran Service Officers, and
15 they're located out of Buffalo. We lost our
16 Veteran Service Officer here in Albany, and
17 she covered all the way down in the New York
18 City area. And that veteran service officer
19 is now not down and available into the city
20 to help and assist with some of those claims.
21 So we're happy to partner with and
22 work with any agency in the State of New York
23 in filing claims and holding hands, if need
24 be, to ensure that these veterans are made
379
1 whole once again.
2 MR. HANNAN: And right now those VSOs
3 are actually being paid out of our service
4 officer funding. That's self-funded. We do
5 get some help from the state, but it's a
6 complicated application process and we're
7 still kind of waiting on stuff that happened
8 three years ago. So -- and I'm not
9 complaining, you know --
10 MR. LEWIS: I am.
11 (Laughter.)
12 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I join my
13 colleague in saying this is embarrassing and
14 shameful. And I just wanted you to know that
15 I will be asking to what extent the
16 organization certainly that's in my district
17 and serves a lot of the people down there,
18 how do they -- are they able to join with you
19 in trying to get more funding. I appreciate
20 the defense project that you're talking
21 about.
22 And just as an aside, I have a brother
23 who is a veteran. He lives in Texas. I sent
24 him some of your information. He was ever so
380
1 grateful, because the information for
2 veterans -- wherever they are, it's very
3 important that they have the information. So
4 thank you very much for what you do.
5 MR. BECKER: I'll just add one thing.
6 So our veterans don't have time to complain
7 about the state. We have to take care of
8 veterans, the ones that really need it.
9 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I understand.
10 MR. BECKER: That's our job today.
11 That's what we're doing, we're asking for
12 some help.
13 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you. I
14 understand.
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblywoman
16 Lupardo.
17 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Yeah, I don't
18 have a question, I just wanted to thank you.
19 Thank you for your service, but also thank
20 you for taking the time to come up and make
21 this very impassioned plea. You have a very
22 strong advocate here. And all of my
23 colleagues are very supportive.
24 It's really astonishing what you are
381
1 proposing to deliver for the amount of money
2 you're asking for. And I'm just thinking
3 what more you could do with even twice that
4 amount. So I'm personally committed to
5 helping the cause, and I'm sure the rest of
6 us will try as well. So thank you very much.
7 PANEL MEMBERS: Thank you, ma'am.
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. And I
9 too want to give my personal regards and
10 deepest gratitude to all of you and all of
11 the veterans that you represent across the
12 entire state. You are the best of the best.
13 We owe you just the deepest debt of gratitude
14 for everything that you've done to protect
15 our freedom.
16 And I'm glad that you spoke about very
17 important programs -- for example, our
18 Peer-to-Peer Program that the Senate started
19 several years ago. I mean, there's really
20 good things going on. But there's a lot more
21 work to do. And in the Senate, in our
22 conference, we're very committed to
23 continuing to support our veterans. So I
24 just want to let you know that.
382
1 MR. BECKER: We're very aware of that,
2 Senator.
3 PANEL MEMBERS: Thank you.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you so much
5 for your testimony.
6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very
7 much.
8 MR. HANNAN: Thank you, sir.
9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: David McNally,
10 director of governmental relations, AARP.
11 MR. McNALLY: Good afternoon.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good afternoon.
13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Good afternoon,
14 sir.
15 MR. McNALLY: I have provided you
16 riveting, lengthy testimony which I'm not
17 reading today, but I'm sure you'll enjoy
18 reading it. I have a brief statement to
19 make, however, summarizing our
20 recommendations and concerns.
21 Good afternoon, Senator Young,
22 Assemblyman Farrell, and members of the
23 committee. My name is David McNally and I'm
24 the director of government affairs and
383
1 advocacy for AARP New York. I would like to
2 submit the following testimony regarding the
3 human services portion of the Executive
4 Budget and issues facing older New Yorkers
5 and their families.
6 Unfortunately, the Executive Budget
7 would require the discretionary $27 million
8 to support childcare subsidy costs, enabling
9 the state to maintain the current level of
10 childcare subsidies while reducing the
11 General Fund cost for this program. It is
12 our understanding that the hardest hit by
13 this shortsighted budget proposal would be
14 New York City's senior centers. I've heard a
15 lot of talk about it today; I'm sure you're
16 well aware of the issue. So I won't go into
17 any further detail, except that our
18 recommendation is the Legislature should
19 reject the Governor's change to Title XX and
20 allow discretionary spending to continue and
21 be allowed to fund much-needed senior center
22 services.
23 I'd now like to talk a little bit
24 about help for the middle class. The
384
1 Governor's fiscal year 2017-2018 Executive
2 Budget does not provide sufficient funding
3 for the New York State Office for the Aging's
4 non-Medicaid-funded home and community based
5 programs for older persons and their family
6 caregivers. These programs are vital for
7 keeping older persons out of expensive
8 taxpayer-funded institutions and are a great
9 value to the millions of caregivers in our
10 state as well as those receiving the care.
11 Unfortunately, there is a statewide
12 waiting list. Today I heard the number
13 15,000; yesterday I heard the number 17,000.
14 It's probably much more than that. These are
15 people seeking non-Medicaid-funded home and
16 community-based services through programs
17 such as the Expanded In-Home Services for the
18 Elderly program, senior transportation, and
19 home-delivered meals.
20 This may sound familiar to you because
21 we come every year and have this discussion
22 about this issue. There are 500 New Yorkers
23 turning 65 every day. These lists continue
24 to grow, and the costs continue to grow. We
385
1 have to get ahead of this problem. We have
2 to address these needs to keep the middle
3 class in the middle class, in their homes and
4 out of expensive taxpayer-funded
5 institutional care.
6 And this year we're asking that you
7 find $25 million to invest in non-Medicaid
8 home and community-based care that would not
9 only assist the older persons but also their
10 family caregivers as well.
11 The next topic I'd just like to
12 briefly touch on is senior financial
13 exploitation. The Executive Budget proposal
14 includes an initiative to train and legally
15 authorize bank employees to place a hold on
16 the bank account of a vulnerable adult if
17 there is a reasonable basis to believe that
18 the adult is a victim of actual or attempted
19 financial exploitation. We support this
20 initiative, and we strongly recommend that
21 DFS and SOFA chair a task force on elder
22 exploitation to lead a multidisciplinary
23 approach that could bring a more concerted
24 approach across service systems and agencies,
386
1 as well as creating emphasis on cross-system
2 collaboration to ensure that the limited
3 resources are used wisely to identify and
4 serve elderly abuse victims.
5 Finally, two other quick items that
6 are very important to us. To further empower
7 New Yorkers in their retirement, AARP
8 supports a proposal championed by Senator
9 Savino and Assemblyman Rodriguez to create a
10 state-facilitated retirement savings option,
11 known as the Secure Choice Savings Program
12 Act, to help many of the more than
13 3.5 million private-sector workers who have
14 no way to save for retirement through their
15 employer. That leaves more than half the
16 state's 18-to-64-year-old private-sector
17 workforce without access to a retirement
18 savings plan at all at the workplace.
19 In addition, workers are 15 times more
20 likely to save for retirement if their
21 employer offers a plan, according to the
22 Employee Benefits Research Institute. That's
23 why it's vital that all workers in the state
24 have access to a payroll deduction savings
387
1 plan.
2 We strongly recommend the Legislature
3 include language in the final State Budget
4 that includes the Secure Choice Savings
5 Program Act.
6 Kinship care. Kinship care refers to
7 non-parents, grandparents, and other
8 relatives who care for children when parents
9 are unavailable. The major cause of kinship
10 care is parental drug abuse.
11 Many of these families need access to
12 additional resources, especially when they
13 first take on the responsibility of caring
14 for children. Grandmothers usually assume
15 the role of raising their grandchildren.
16 We recommend that in order to maintain
17 the progress the state has made in the last
18 three years in kinship services, and to
19 address the opiate crisis in rural New York,
20 it is important for the state to maintain
21 level funding for kinship support services at
22 $1.9 million in about 22 programs across the
23 state, and add $89,500 for Kinship Navigator
24 outreach to rural counties.
388
1 And I thank you for taking this time
2 to hear our testimony.
3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
5 much.
6 MR. McNALLY: Thank you.
7 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Shelly Nortz,
8 deputy executive director, Coalition for the
9 Homeless New York City.
10 MS. NORTZ: Good afternoon, and thank
11 you for inviting us to testify today. I have
12 abbreviated my presentation and will try to
13 respect the time limits here.
14 Thank you again. My name is Shelly
15 Nortz, and since 1987 I have had the
16 privilege of working for the Coalition for
17 the Homeless in Albany to secure state
18 support for programs and policies that
19 prevent and address homelessness and the
20 socioeconomic problems that cause
21 homelessness.
22 Last year I reported to you that none
23 of the new JPMorgan settlement funds
24 programmed to address homelessness via
389
1 supportive housing in the 2015-2016 budget
2 year were spent, nor had the New York City
3 plan for rent supplements related to the
4 allocation of youth facility reimbursement
5 savings been approved by the state.
6 Therefore, the two largest state budget
7 initiatives to address homelessness were not
8 actually available to help homeless
9 New Yorkers move out of shelters into
10 housing.
11 Much the same as last year, the great
12 majority of the $2 billion that you approved
13 in last year's budget to build supportive and
14 affordable housing lies idle, due to
15 political disputes about unrelated matters.
16 It is unsurprising, therefore, that the
17 shelter census in New York City has continued
18 to climb.
19 As we have previously warned, city
20 investments alone are not sufficient to bring
21 the shelter census down substantially, and
22 greater state investments are required.
23 I want to make sure that you
24 understand this fact and that it sinks in.
390
1 Many of you have heard it before. New York
2 State informed the United States Department
3 of Housing and Urban Development that over
4 19,000 more people enter homelessness each
5 year than exit homelessness each year.
6 Nineteen thousand. That is as if everyone in
7 Oswego moved into a homeless shelter last
8 year, and everyone living in Plattsburgh
9 moved into a shelter this year, and
10 two-thirds of the population of Glen Cove
11 were to move into a shelter next year. This
12 is simply unsustainable on multiple levels.
13 I'm going to focus on the crisis in
14 New York City today, and I'm going to take
15 you through a series of tables and charts.
16 We had another record year of
17 homelessness in New York City: over 62,000
18 men, women and children in shelters, equal to
19 the population of Utica. The unduplicated
20 number of people using New York City shelters
21 rose 52 percent between 2002 and 2016, to
22 over 127,000 individuals -- more than the
23 population of Smithtown.
24 The single largest subset of the
391
1 New York City homeless shelter population:
2 the 24,000 children in shelters. That's the
3 population of Rockville Centre. Their
4 companions at school were the 63,000 children
5 living in doubled-up families -- a little
6 more than the population of White Plains.
7 Nearly 16,000 homeless families in
8 December; half of them in regulated shelters,
9 the rest in hotels and cluster sites.
10 Roughly the population of Binghamton or
11 Niagara Falls.
12 We had a record number of single
13 adults in shelters. Some also now in hotels,
14 because there are too few shelter beds for
15 the newly homeless population coming in.
16 About half the population of Poughkeepsie.
17 So why new record after new record
18 after new record? I'm going to take you
19 through the reasons why.
20 The cumulative deficit in the number
21 of federal housing placements, for one. The
22 last multiyear decrease in the New York City
23 shelter census occurred in 2004 and 2005.
24 The number of public housing and Section 8
392
1 placements for homeless families then
2 averaged about 5,000 per year. These are by
3 far the most stable housing placements, and
4 therefore these families rarely return to
5 shelters. The shelter census then was about
6 half its present size. In 2016, the number
7 of such placements was only 2,612 in New York
8 City. The result is that federal housing
9 placements are still down by half compared
10 with 2004-2005.
11 And we have the lost decade. As we
12 recently reported in our family policy brief,
13 from 1999 to 2005, New York City provided an
14 average of 3,989 federal housing placements
15 per year for homeless families. From 2006 to
16 2014, only a few hundred units were provided.
17 On average, 3,548 fewer homeless families
18 received stable housing placements over nine
19 years. And that's an accumulated deficit of
20 31,935 fewer federal housing placements made
21 over the nine-year period in which that
22 policy was in place with the Bloomberg
23 administration.
24 You can see on the next chart the
393
1 absolutely devastating effect that that had
2 on access to housing. And as a direct result
3 of that, the shelter census in New York City
4 doubled.
5 We also have, as was discussed
6 earlier, persistently high rates of eviction
7 and rising shelter demand due to domestic
8 violence, as well as institutional
9 discharges, as Senator Krueger was
10 discussing.
11 We have reduced supportive housing
12 placements because the supportive housing
13 pipeline has been effectively frozen for the
14 last three years. There were 545 fewer
15 people in homeless shelters to receive
16 supportive housing placements last year,
17 compared with 2014.
18 And then we had, despite the happy
19 talk earlier about employment, we had a very
20 sudden spike in unemployment in New York City
21 this last year -- 35,000 more unemployed in
22 October than in June. The drop in employment
23 left 129,000 out of work, and only a third of
24 those jobs have been recovered as of
394
1 December.
2 And I would point out that the August
3 unemployment rate for the Bronx, where
4 homelessness among families is concentrated
5 more than any other borough, reached an
6 alarming 7.8 percent, up dramatically from
7 its low of 6.1 percent last May. There's no
8 doubt that that is in part why we've seen
9 such a great increase in the shelter
10 population starting this fall.
11 In addition, rapidly rising income
12 inequality causes housing instability and
13 homelessness. A fundamental of the economics
14 of homelessness is that in cities with low
15 vacancy rates, high housing costs, and
16 extreme income inequality, the people at the
17 lowest end of the income spectrum fall out of
18 the housing market entirely. New York City
19 is such a city.
20 According to the Fiscal Policy
21 Institute's budget analysis, the percentage
22 of all income going to New York City's top
23 1 percent has grown from 12.2 percent in
24 1980, when modern mass homelessness emerged
395
1 as a serious problem, to 40.9 percent in
2 2015, as the crisis of homelessness again
3 became a cause for widespread concern, as you
4 can see on the following chart. Income
5 inequality in New York City is the worst in
6 the nation.
7 And then lastly, the New York City
8 population has reached a level projected for
9 2020 in 2015, five years early, and it could
10 surpass the 2025 projection as early as this
11 year. And yet we're not really prepared to
12 build the kind of housing that we need to
13 accommodate a population that is growing that
14 quickly. It grew at nearly 71,500 per year
15 between 2010 and 2015. And so if we keep on
16 that pace, as you can see, we are going to be
17 in very, very dire trouble.
18 My last table: With rising
19 homelessness, we also have rising reported
20 deaths among homeless New Yorkers. And that
21 increased recently as a direct result of the
22 increase in homelessness and displacement in
23 New York City.
24 The Governor replaced the expired
396
1 executive order on Code Blue protections
2 during inclement weather for homeless people
3 with a proposed regulation, an emergency
4 regulation. And we're pleased that there is
5 an emergency regulation, although it is
6 pegged to a temperature of 32 degrees,
7 including wind chill, which is far too low to
8 protect people from hypothermia, which can
9 hit people in the 50s and 60s. And it also
10 does not require that shelters be open 24/7.
11 So to the extent that shelters are just night
12 shelters, it's little protection during the
13 freezing cold days.
14 So we are urging that the regulation
15 be modified to a higher temperature
16 threshold, and that it protect people better
17 during the day.
18 As we indicated last year, the
19 coalition is also very pleased that the
20 Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance
21 is taking the issue of shelter conditions
22 seriously. We're glad that the state is
23 seeking to play a greater role, and we have
24 no doubt that there will be a need for much
397
1 greater investments in the capital needs of
2 some of these aging facilities.
3 You can see my budget recommendations
4 at the end. I think I'm going to probably
5 skip over the first three, and you can read
6 those at your leisure. And we'll just talk
7 about the two big items on the agenda, the
8 first being that we are urging the inclusion
9 of Assemblyman Hevesi's Home Stability
10 Support rent subsidy program to help families
11 keep their homes and avoid displacement into
12 the shelter system, and also to help them
13 leave shelters.
14 And then also we're really asking that
15 the Governor and the Legislature release the
16 $2 billion appropriated for affordable and
17 supportive housing last year. We've got to
18 get this housing built. And if my
19 presentation doesn't argue for that, I don't
20 know what does.
21 And lastly, Senator Young, you were
22 asking about the safety net assistance
23 increase. I just wanted to make sure that
24 you understood that the reason for that is
398
1 really structural and relates to how the
2 funding shift happened a few years ago when
3 the Safety Net Assistance Program went from
4 being a 50/50 state-local split to being the
5 71 percent local/29 percent state split.
6 It's structural because the TANF time
7 limit is five years. There are no local and
8 state shares on TANF anymore; it's all
9 100 percent federally funded for that
10 caseload until we hit Year 5. And then, over
11 time, that means that the TANF population
12 gets shifted to localities.
13 And so the very first time this was
14 done, it was said to be a cost relief to
15 localities that was then replaced by saving
16 the state from having localities have too
17 much of a windfall if you didn't change the
18 safety net formula. But the long-term effect
19 of that is to shift more of the caseload cost
20 to the Safety Net Assistance Program, and
21 therefore to localities.
22 So that's why that's happening.
23 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
24 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
399
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
2 MS. NORTZ: Thank you very much.
3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Just a little
4 information. Tomorrow's program will not be
5 on. We are going to do it on the 17th of
6 February, which is next week, Friday. We
7 think the weather is not very good for us to
8 be here tomorrow. So that will just be for
9 the record. Thank you.
10 Sheila Harrigan, executive director,
11 New York Public Welfare Association.
12 MS. HARRIGAN: Good afternoon, and
13 thank you. I'll just make a few points.
14 I represent the 58 local departments
15 of social services across the state. We look
16 at every policy issue in terms of its impact
17 on vulnerable people and on taxpayers.
18 I'll bring a few issues to your
19 attention. The first has to do with everyone
20 needs a place to call home. So our written
21 testimony includes our recommendations for
22 what you as legislators can do to further
23 support local efforts to address
24 homelessness, prevent homelessness, and
400
1 provide emergency placements when they're
2 needed. In order to address homelessness, we
3 really need better permanent housing options.
4 And I know both the Assembly and Senate are
5 very dedicated to that goal.
6 In addition, when there are new
7 requirements such as the expansion of SNAP
8 and HEAP, we look to the Legislature and to
9 the Governor to provide the administrative
10 dollars for implementation. These programs
11 are not funded by the state in terms of
12 administration, so the federal government
13 pays part of the cost and the rest is all
14 local. So when there's an expansion, it is a
15 new burden.
16 On the child welfare/childcare side,
17 the Executive proposal would restrict
18 $26.1 million of Title XX for childcare.
19 Currently this funding is used by counties in
20 many different ways. It was mentioned
21 earlier that New York City uses it for senior
22 services. Most counties use it for
23 preventive services and child welfare. So by
24 targeting childcare, it is creating cuts in
401
1 other programs.
2 And certainly we support the state's
3 commitment to childcare subsidies, but that
4 should happen with ongoing state and federal
5 resources, not through a cost shift.
6 In terms of foster care, the Executive
7 proposal would decrease funding by
8 $62 million statewide. Our position is why
9 mess with success, this program is working.
10 Counties use those savings to fund preventive
11 services to keep kids out of foster care or
12 to reduce the length of time in placement.
13 So by cutting $62 million, they're certainly
14 hurting our abilities to do that. We'd like
15 to see that funding restored.
16 Raising the age of juvenile
17 jurisdiction to age 18, we simply ask for a
18 commitment, a guarantee of 100 percent state
19 funding. The Executive made that commitment
20 last year; that commitment is not made in his
21 proposal this year. There's lots of loops to
22 go through. None of our suggestions for
23 adding language to secure the financing last
24 year were included in the proposal.
402
1 So in closing, I appreciate the
2 legislative leadership and the leadership of
3 this committee on child welfare and social
4 services. We have our complete testimony for
5 your review. And I'd be happy to answer any
6 questions at another time. I know you're
7 running late.
8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very
9 much. Any questions?
10 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Thank you.
11 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
13 much.
14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Kate Breslin,
15 president and CEO, Schuyler Center.
16 Hello.
17 MS. HILL: Hello. I am not Kate
18 Breslin, although I would be very flattered
19 to be mistaken for her. I'm Dede Hill, and
20 I'm policy director for the Schuyler Center
21 for Analysis and Advocacy. Thank you so much
22 for your fortitude. This has been a long
23 day. And thank you so much for allowing me
24 this opportunity to testify.
403
1 The Schuyler Center is a 145-year-old
2 statewide nonprofit organization that engages
3 in analysis and advocacy in support of
4 policies that improve the lives of all
5 New Yorkers, particularly low-income children
6 and families.
7 I'm just going to hit few points. You
8 have our written testimony.
9 We're deeply concerned about the child
10 poverty rates in New York State. Even as the
11 economy in New York has steadily improved,
12 nearly 22 percent of New York children live
13 below the federal poverty level. New York
14 children of color experience poverty at even
15 greater rates, with 32 percent of
16 African-American children and 34 percent of
17 Latino children living below the federal
18 poverty level. And yet the Governor's budget
19 mainly flat-funds or cuts programs that
20 support and strengthen these children and
21 their families.
22 We acknowledge there are a few bright
23 spots, including the new after-care funds and
24 a slight increase in pre-K funding, but
404
1 largely, this budget flat-funds programs for
2 low-income children and families. And this
3 underinvestment is particularly worrisome
4 given that the new federal administration has
5 promised steep cuts in social services and
6 health services that serve low-income
7 children and families. So really now more
8 than ever, it's up to the state to protect
9 these families.
10 I'm going to just jump to -- one other
11 point I think I want to make is that many of
12 the funding decisions in the Executive Budget
13 are without a real discernible rationale. In
14 fact, the budget proposes to flat-fund or cut
15 funds in some of the areas where the need is
16 arguably the greatest. And this is certainly
17 the case in two areas that I'm going to focus
18 on in my remarks right now. The first is
19 early care and learning, in particular
20 childcare, and the second is in the area of
21 child welfare.
22 I will not belabor the childcare
23 issue. We've heard about that a lot. But I
24 would just say that in our mind the crisis in
405
1 childcare is not looming, it is here. This
2 number has been said many times, and it is
3 true: 83 percent of families with incomes at
4 less than 200 percent of the poverty level
5 are receiving no subsidies, very little
6 assistance.
7 And the Governor's proposed budget
8 does nothing to help these families. In
9 fact, the budget allows for no new subsidies.
10 And this will actually likely result in fewer
11 subsidies because of rising costs, and
12 particularly if the federal regulations need
13 to be implemented.
14 In fact, the only proposed new funding
15 comes in the form of a very modest
16 enhancement to the Child and Dependent Care
17 Tax Credit, and that does not touch any of
18 these families who are eligible for
19 subsidies. That's just for families making
20 more than $50,000 a year.
21 So we urge the Legislature to support
22 an additional investment of $100 million in
23 childcare subsidy funding. This would
24 restore subsidies lost due to escalating
406
1 costs and also increase the number of
2 children served. And we also call for the
3 restoration of the $27 million of General
4 Fund support for childcare, and leave
5 counties to use their Title XX discretionary
6 funds to support other vital social services.
7 I want to just talk quickly about home
8 visiting. This is another critical support,
9 a proven support for young children and their
10 families. It's an intervention that's been
11 recognized to strengthen families, improve
12 children and families' health, well-being,
13 economic security. It's exceptionally
14 cost-effective, but yet it's been
15 continuously underinvested in. This year is
16 no different.
17 The Schuyler Center, along with
18 Healthy Families New York, Nurse-Family
19 Partnership, Parents As Teachers, and
20 Parent-Child Home, urge the Legislature to
21 increase state investment in home visiting to
22 $36.3 million. This would allow for the
23 maintenance of existing programs and also
24 allow for the expansion of services to more
407
1 families.
2 Another area of deep concern is the
3 area of child welfare. The Governor's
4 proposed budget would make significant cuts
5 to child welfare services. And these
6 proposed cuts seem particularly unwise given
7 recent tragic fatalities of children under
8 state care and also last month's release of a
9 federal report, the Child and Family Services
10 Review, which finds New York to rank near the
11 bottom nationally on a number of child
12 welfare safety and permanency measures.
13 We would certainly acknowledge there
14 are many strengths in New York State's child
15 welfare system, chief among them the state's
16 commitment and investment in open-ended
17 preventive services. So we urge you to build
18 upon these strengths.
19 First we join many others who have
20 called for -- who have already spoken, and I
21 know some who follow -- please maintain
22 funding for the Foster Care Block Grant. The
23 Executive Budget would cut $62 million from
24 this block grant. We urge that this be
408
1 restored.
2 We also urge restoration of the state
3 share for preventive services from 62 percent
4 in the Executive Budget to 65 percent.
5 That's as written in statute. And we urge
6 that the additional 3 percent be used for
7 primary prevention. Those are services that
8 help children before there's any formal
9 involvement with the child welfare system.
10 We also ask you to strengthen the
11 housing subsidy for foster families. We urge
12 support of AB259 and SB1291, sponsored by
13 Assemblymember Hevesi and Senator Avella.
14 This would increase the housing subsidy,
15 which hasn't been increased since 1988, to
16 $600 per month. And the result will be that
17 this will help many of our young people who
18 are aging out of foster care to have stable
19 housing and not fall into homelessness, which
20 is all too common with this population.
21 We also urge a strengthening of the
22 Kinship Guardianship Assistance Program.
23 This is a program that allows kin families to
24 exit the foster care system yet continue to
409
1 receive financial support while still caring
2 for their relative children.
3 The Executive Budget continues to fund
4 through the Foster Care Block Grant, and this
5 diverts scarce funds from foster care. This
6 is a permanency option. It should be funded
7 as such.
8 We'd also, finally, like to call for
9 the restoration of Kinship Caregiver services
10 to the funding level of $2.3 million and
11 increase fundings for the Kinship Navigator
12 Program to $410,000. These services offer
13 critical supports for kin who step in to care
14 for children, relative children. Many of
15 these kin caregivers are grandparents of
16 limited means. They need supports.
17 And we would just point up two issues
18 that are sort of looming on the horizon --
19 well, one is here, right here, which is the
20 opioid crisis has led to many children in the
21 care of kin. And there's also the looming
22 threat of the new federal administration's
23 pledge to increase dramatically deportations.
24 And we are concerned that there will be more
410
1 children who need to go into the care of kin
2 because their families are disrupted in these
3 ways. So we urge restoration and an increase
4 in investments in these two important
5 programs.
6 Thank you so much for your time, and
7 I'm happy to answer any questions.
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
9 MS. HILL: Thank you.
10 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you. I
12 just wanted you to know that we are
13 attempting to be very firm in the advocacy
14 for many of the programs that you have noted
15 that are so essential, and we are pushing to
16 increase the funding. And thank you so much.
17 MS. HILL: Thank you. And we look
18 forward to working with you. Thank you.
19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Empire Justice
20 Center, Susan Antos, senior attorney.
21 MS. ANTOS: Good afternoon, and thank
22 you to the chairpeople, the Assemblymembers
23 and the Senators here today. Thank you for
24 the opportunity to testify.
411
1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
2 MS. ANTOS: We have submitted 28 pages
3 of testimony, and I'm just going to highlight
4 what each of the categories are so that you
5 can read it in depth at your leisure.
6 I'd like to start out with mentioning
7 the Disability Advocacy Program, and I want
8 to thank Senator Krueger for raising that in
9 her questioning. I want to point out that
10 the Disability Advocacy Program, called DAP,
11 is actually a money saver for the State of
12 New York. For every dollar invested in DAP,
13 at least $3 are generated to the benefit of
14 state and local government, because people on
15 public assistance then go into the federally
16 funded SSI program.
17 The Executive Budget funded DAP at
18 $5.26 million, and we seek restoration to
19 last year's level of $8.26 million.
20 The next item that I want to
21 highlight -- I'm going to jump around because
22 there's so many topics in our testimony -- is
23 a matter that has been touched on briefly
24 here today, but I want to underscore it,
412
1 which is the proposed creation of a
2 centralized administrative hearing division.
3 Assemblymember Titus asked a question
4 of I believe it was Commissioner Perrin about
5 some details about the program, and his
6 response was, "Well, our conversations are
7 continuing. We haven't drilled down yet."
8 Administrative hearings are the
9 touchstone of due process rights for people
10 on public assistance benefits, on
11 unemployment benefits, on many, many
12 benefits. And the conduct of these hearings
13 is critical to a correct result for them.
14 We believe this proposal is premature.
15 It's very important to us that administrative
16 law -- we're assured that administrative law
17 judges have subject matter expertise, legal
18 experience, that there are protections such
19 as developing the record, that the
20 administrative law judges are independent,
21 and that due process requirements are
22 observed. So I wanted to highlight that for
23 you.
24 I want to also jump forward. This was
413
1 not given a lot of attention today. I wanted
2 to mention the Lottery intercept proposal,
3 because there are a couple of things about
4 that that did not come up today that are
5 very, very important for you to know.
6 Number one, the Court of Appeals at
7 the end of the 2015 said if you're on public
8 assistance and you win the Lottery, before
9 the state can recover the amount of the
10 public assistance debt that you have
11 received, it has to credit the value of your
12 work. That makes sense, right? You went and
13 cleaned the park, you should get the minimum
14 wage times the number of hours you worked
15 credited against your public assistance debt.
16 The Court of Appeals agreed with us. And to
17 date, the Office of Temporary and Disability
18 Assistance has not implemented the holding of
19 the Carver case, which I've attached to your
20 testimony so you can see that the decision of
21 the Court of Appeals in Carver was in no
22 uncertain terms.
23 So that's number one. The state
24 should not be allowed to take more in Lottery
414
1 winnings from former public assistance
2 recipients until it obeys the law of the
3 Court of Appeals in Carver and credits them
4 for the work they did.
5 I attached a Lottery intercept
6 statement under the current law, where
7 50 percent is taken. And I wanted to remind
8 everybody that Lottery winnings are taxable.
9 Federal, state and local income taxes are
10 taken out. We don't know from this proposal,
11 if the entire amount of the Lottery is
12 intercepted, are people going to be walking
13 around with a tax liability on their head for
14 that amount?
15 The gentleman who received the notice
16 in this case won $10,000. He hadn't been on
17 public assistance for seven years. The state
18 took $5,000, $3500 was taken in federal,
19 state, and New York City taxes. His $10,000
20 prize ended up being $1400. If the entire
21 amount had been taken from him and he had a
22 $3500 debt, that would be a very, very unfair
23 result.
24 So I think that -- and one other
415
1 point. And actually, Assemblymember
2 DenDekker mentioned this. He asked if people
3 had notice of what their debt was. And I
4 have to say that, thanks to the Senate and
5 the Assembly, last year an accounting bill
6 was passed for public assistance debt but it
7 only applied to people who have public
8 assistance mortgages. If you own a house and
9 you go on public assistance, the county can
10 take a lien against your house. And the law
11 now requires that these folks get a biennial
12 accounting of their public assistance debt.
13 Why is that important? Because
14 districts make mistakes. I tell the story of
15 someone who had a $40,000 lien against her
16 house and it was supposed to be $20,000. The
17 executive deputy commissioner couldn't answer
18 when the question was posed to him what
19 benefits are recoverable. I can tell you
20 that SNAP, HEAP and childcare are not
21 recoverable. But my client in the story had
22 all those benefits charged against her public
23 assistance debt. If she had had an
24 accounting -- I mean, luckily, we caught it
416
1 at the last minute. But people aren't going
2 to understand it unless they get an
3 accounting. And we believe all public
4 assistance debtors should get notice of their
5 debt.
6 I also want to mention Home Stability
7 Support. Deputy Commissioner Perrin
8 mentioned the lack of affordable housing as a
9 problem. My colleague Shelly Nortz went into
10 great detail about that. The Empire Justice
11 Center strongly supports the Home Stability
12 Support program. We hope that you will
13 support it as well. The executive deputy
14 commissioner noted that 28 percent of shelter
15 placements are the result of domestic
16 violence, and Home Stability Support would
17 address the needs of those homeless folks as
18 well. So I hope you will consider that
19 proposal.
20 One other thing that I -- because it's
21 a budget issue, and I'm just going to touch
22 on it. Briefly there is a bill pending in
23 the Legislature right now, it's Assembly
24 1590, which would eliminate the ability of
417
1 social services districts to take a mortgage
2 against a public assistance recipient. Most
3 public assistance recipients that own homes
4 are often women who have been divorced and
5 the only asset is a home, and the taking of a
6 lien is just adding insult to injury.
7 We are one of only two states in the
8 entire country that do this, and we would ask
9 that that be repealed. The bill has been
10 drafted in a way so that it does not have a
11 big fiscal impact. It's prospective only.
12 All the liens that are in existence right now
13 will be in place. And there's data about the
14 number of liens that are in existence and
15 that will still be recoverable in our
16 testimony.
17 I want to quickly jump to childcare.
18 We have a lot of pages in our childcare. We
19 support the Winning Beginning New York
20 recommendation of $100 million. I believe it
21 was Senator Krueger who asked the question
22 about maximizing the use of funds by
23 exempting public assistance recipients with
24 children under the age of one from the work
418
1 rules. In our testimony we have detailed
2 calculations showing how, for every child
3 that's exempted, there would be three slots
4 created, with the freeing up of $9.34 million
5 of additional dollars for childcare. That's
6 at the end of our testimony on pages 24
7 through 26.
8 We also think that -- I'm getting
9 close to the end here. I also wanted to
10 mention the importance of, particularly in
11 these times, a commitment to children of
12 immigrants. I wanted to follow up on what
13 SCAA said about the real danger of U.S.
14 citizen children whose parents are going to
15 be deported.
16 We have a recommendation in our budget
17 testimony that money be allocated for legal
18 assistance. We think the Kinship Navigator
19 is well-positioned to provide that for the
20 kind of planning that families need if
21 children are going to be left with other
22 relatives if and when the parents are
23 deported.
24 Finally, I would like to point out
419
1 that a big piece of our testimony is on
2 foreclosure prevention. And again, this ties
3 in with the homelessness crisis. I had some
4 quick data for you, but I can't find it now.
5 But I did want to let you know that -- oh,
6 here it is, sorry -- that we're seeking
7 $10 million to replace a program that is
8 effectively ending as of 2017 because of no
9 more funding. We were funded through
10 Attorney General services, and these services
11 have been provided since 2008.
12 There is still a foreclosure crisis.
13 There were 34,000 new filings in 2016 and
14 72,000 pending foreclosure cases.
15 Foreclosures constitute 26 percent of the
16 Supreme Court's caseload.
17 So we would ask that you continue to
18 fund foreclosure preventions so that people
19 can stay in the homes that they own.
20 Thank you.
21 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you, Susan.
22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very
23 much.
24 Gerard Wallace, director of Kinship
420
1 Navigator, Catholic Family Center, Rochester,
2 New York.
3 MR. WALLACE: Chairpersons Young and
4 Farrell, committee members and chairs, thank
5 you very much for the opportunity. We are
6 certainly at the end of the day here, and I'm
7 under the wire. And I made it this year.
8 Sometimes I'm back there and it doesn't
9 happen. So I appreciate the last-minute
10 opportunity.
11 We will encapsulate what we have to
12 say, and hopefully the gist of the matter
13 will be sufficient to have you understand our
14 interest and our concerns.
15 I am the director of the New York
16 State Kinship Navigator. This is a statewide
17 program serving all 62 counties. We're in
18 our 11th year of operation. We're a line
19 item in the Governor's budget. We provide
20 information, referral, education and advocacy
21 to the kinship community across the state.
22 That includes the 44 rural counties in the
23 state where there really aren't any other
24 services but ourselves. We run a helpline,
421
1 an extensive website with many, many legal
2 fact sheets, and we do educational forums,
3 legal trainings. We're out in the field,
4 we're doing presentations in the community
5 and intending to reach caregivers across the
6 entire state.
7 I'm here with Ryan Johnson, who is our
8 MSW. And he, if he has a minute, will just
9 go over a typical case to give you a sample
10 of what we really go through on a daily
11 basis.
12 Reflecting on kinship care. Kinship
13 care is grandparents and relatives raising
14 children. I'm going to highlight some data
15 that's recently been published by OCFS, and
16 some national data, and not go through my
17 usual here are the barriers, oh, woe for us.
18 I think this will just highlight enough to
19 maybe give you the interest to go forward and
20 consider our recommendations.
21 In May in the New York Times there was
22 a report, "Children of the Heroin Crisis Find
23 Refuge in Grandma's Arms." It points out
24 that there are 2.6 million grandparents who
422
1 are responsible for grandchildren in this
2 country. Translating that into New York
3 State, 130,000 grandparents are responsible,
4 aunts and uncles, family siblings, and even
5 family friends. And then looking at what
6 that means for the number of children, we
7 could have as many as 300,000 children in
8 New York State living with relatives.
9 Are they in foster care? No. Only
10 4,000 or so of that number are in foster
11 care. These families are on their own. The
12 only specialized services dealing with them
13 are my program and the 22 locally funded
14 programs that, thanks to the added funding in
15 the past two years, has bumped up to what I
16 just said, 22 programs.
17 Now, a couple more facts about kinship
18 families. They are similarly situated to
19 foster families. Obviously the opioid crisis
20 is highlighted in that article. We recently,
21 the navigator, had a federal grant, and we
22 had the Research Foundation of New York do
23 the study connected with that grant. And in
24 a cohort of 455 children in five upstate
423
1 counties, 80 percent of them had Child
2 Protective Services records. There but for
3 the intervention of their family members,
4 these children could be in foster care.
5 Going down with the data, the other
6 data that came out recently is that finally,
7 after years of advocacy, OCFS released, in
8 July, "Trends in Relative Placements." And
9 the cite is here in the handout. And the
10 important thing to note in that "Trends" is
11 that we are a tale of two states: New York
12 City and then the rest of the state.
13 In New York City, highlighting the
14 number of children who went into foster care
15 with kin, in 2015 in New York City, 3,905
16 children were placed in foster care in New
17 York City. Of that, 1,025 were placed with
18 relatives. Twenty-seven percent of foster
19 care in New York City is relative care. In
20 the rest of the state, where it was
21 4,866 children went into foster care, in the
22 rest of the state 351 were placed with
23 relatives. Seven percent. Twenty-seven
24 percent versus 7 percent. To go to the
424
1 videotape -- as someone you might recall,
2 okay, if you're old enough -- I'm going to go
3 to individual counties to let you know what
4 that means.
5 Let's start here in Albany: 167
6 children admitted to foster care in 2015,
7 zero went into care with their relatives.
8 Zero. Instead, they used something that goes
9 under the rubric "diversion."
10 How do we divert kids to be placed
11 with their family members but we don't make
12 them foster parents? One of the key
13 techniques is something called direct
14 custody. I could belabor it. It's in the
15 notes here, and you can read about it. But
16 direct custody, 35 families. Essentially you
17 can call this foster care on the cheap. We
18 don't pay for foster care, but the families
19 get the kids. And they're on their own, and
20 we serve them.
21 How many kids went into KinGAP? We
22 don't have time to talk about that here. In
23 Albany County, one.
24 Let's just point out a few other
425
1 counties upstate, big counties. Broome, 105
2 kids admitted into foster care; three went
3 into relative foster care; two went into
4 direct custody -- not so bad -- and three
5 into KinGAP.
6 Erie County, 617 children went into
7 foster care, 15 were placed with relatives,
8 512 were into foster care on the cheap.
9 Proceeding, the Article X continues
10 when children go off to live with relatives
11 and they don't get any services. I can go
12 on. This is available -- the link is there
13 for you to look at it. We really are a tale
14 of two states in New York. And the only
15 answer for these families who are not in
16 foster care are for them to come to us and
17 get served by them {sic}.
18 Now, what do we do? Ryan will give
19 you a minute on that in a second here. But
20 I'd like to point out that we need to reach
21 them, and reaching them is not easy,
22 particularly in rural New York, where this
23 opioid crisis is causing an increase.
24 So in our budget ask, we're asking you
426
1 to continue the funding that the Legislature
2 has put in over the past two years, which is
3 essentially to fund at $2,238,000 the
4 22 kinship programs that are local entities,
5 that serve 22 counties. And then for us, we
6 got $100,000 more last year. We're asking
7 for $89,500 more to implement a technique
8 that we perfected in our federal
9 demonstration project that resulted in a
10 600 percent increase in referrals in five
11 upstate rural counties.
12 We want to reach these counties and
13 get them to the bare minimum services that
14 are available to them that are at least of
15 some help. You can help us do that if you
16 will fund our recommendations.
17 There also is Social Services Law 392,
18 enacted in 2011, that says that the local
19 counties are to provide information to
20 kinship caregivers, to relative caregivers
21 regarding services. But it's to provide
22 information. Most of them don't do it. We
23 are asking that you amend that Social
24 Services Law to require them to connect the
427
1 caregivers to kinship services.
2 The other recommendations are in our
3 draft. And I would like, if there's one
4 minute, if Ryan could give you a typical
5 instance of a caregiver family. If not,
6 we'll just say that's it.
7 You folks okay? Go ahead, Ryan.
8 MR. JOHNSON: Great, I'll be very
9 brief. In my role as a regional kinship
10 specialist for the New York State Kinship
11 Navigator, I get an opportunity to connect
12 with caregivers and professionals on a weekly
13 basis.
14 Imagine for a moment you get a call
15 from child welfare services letting you know
16 that your grandchildren are going to be taken
17 into state custody unless you come and get
18 them.
19 Oftentimes caregivers who are faced
20 with this situation are the ones that are
21 calling us. Oftentimes these are elderly
22 caregivers; 56 years old is the average age
23 of kinship caregivers in New York State.
24 SENATOR SAVINO: Did you just say
428
1 elderly is 56?
2 (Laughter.)
3 SENATOR KRUEGER: You lost us.
4 (Laughter.)
5 MR. JOHNSON: Oftentimes these folks
6 are on a fixed income --
7 (Laughter.)
8 MR. JOHNSON: -- they are living in
9 a --
10 SENATOR SAVINO: That just went right
11 over you.
12 MR. JOHNSON: It did not go over me.
13 I totally understand.
14 (Laughter.)
15 MR. JOHNSON: Gerry told me I had one
16 minute.
17 (Laughter.)
18 SENATOR KRUEGER: He was doing better.
19 You probably should have stopped.
20 MR. WALLACE: I'm telling you, I'll
21 talk to him afterwards, I promise.
22 (Laughter.)
23 MR. JOHNSON: Very good, thank you.
24 Glad my mother's not watching, that's all I
429
1 can say about that.
2 (Laughter.)
3 MR. JOHNSON: What I can say is that
4 oftentimes these folks are on fixed incomes,
5 they live in apartments that are often too
6 small. And so when they're faced with caring
7 for a child that comes into their life
8 unexpectedly, they need services like: Where
9 can I find a bed for this child? This child
10 came to me with only the clothes on their
11 back, and I have nothing to feed them.
12 Other services that they might need
13 are, How can I get this child to school?
14 It's 10 o'clock at night and this child is
15 supposed to be at school at 7:30 tomorrow
16 morning.
17 These are the types of situations that
18 kinship caregivers face when they're given a
19 child. So what our program does is connects
20 them to local services. We partner with
21 local agencies. As Gerry mentioned, there's
22 22 kinship care programs that cover 22
23 counties. We partner directly with them.
24 Those programs are able to serve those
430
1 families, get them connected to -- we can
2 find you a bed, we can find you clothes, we
3 can find you a local food pantry.
4 Our program specifically helps
5 caregivers in the 40 counties that don't have
6 any services. We also serve the 22 counties
7 as well. We can help caregivers get
8 connected to financial resources as well as
9 other mental health resources and legal
10 resources in their county available to them.
11 As a kinship system of care, the
12 navigator and local programs are able to help
13 stabilize kinship families and increase
14 positive long-term outcomes for children
15 while operating these services at a fraction
16 of the cost of placing these children in
17 foster care.
18 Thank you. I'm sorry if I offended.
19 (Laughter.)
20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblywoman
21 Jaffee.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you for
23 the service that you provide. I've heard the
24 stories, and they really are very telling in
431
1 terms of the need for support. And so thank
2 you. And I am requesting for additional
3 funds so that you can continue your efforts.
4 MR. WALLACE: Thank you. Thank you
5 very, very much, yes.
6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senator Savino.
7 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. Thank
8 you, Gerry and Ryan.
9 MR. WALLACE: The old guy.
10 SENATOR SAVINO: Believe me, you'll be
11 our age before you know it.
12 I'm somewhat confused, though, about
13 the number -- I shouldn't say confused --
14 somewhat concerned about the number of these
15 cases that are being dropped off with
16 families as opposed to a more formal setting.
17 And as you know, Gerry -- and I see Jim
18 Purcell sitting behind you, and others who
19 have done this work for years -- you know,
20 there's a landmark lawsuit that was brought
21 against the City of New York 30 years ago
22 around this very issue, you know, in the case
23 of Eugene F. It's what created kinship
24 foster care.
432
1 And while we definitely don't want to
2 see every family dragged through the family
3 court system -- if you can place children
4 with a relative and provide them the type of
5 supports to help stabilize them, I think
6 that's the way to go. I'm wondering, though,
7 do we see more placements in kin care or this
8 less formal setting because it's cheaper and
9 then --
10 MR. WALLACE: Well --
11 SENATOR SAVINO: Yeah, I see, right,
12 you're shaking your head. But then what is
13 the follow-up with the parent? Because the
14 parents don't disappear, right? So you've
15 taken the child, they're with their
16 grandparent, you guys exist to try and
17 provide them some support, some financial
18 stability, maybe help them get through the
19 court system, get a custody arrangement. But
20 the parents are still there. What's going on
21 with these families as we move forward?
22 MR. WALLACE: The word is diversion.
23 There are many ways in which it's done. And
24 why is it that it's done? Yes, there's a
433
1 suspicion that there's a financial factor
2 involved: Families will do it on their own,
3 and we couldn't have all these children come
4 into the formal system, it would break the
5 system.
6 So yes, families need to be doing it
7 on their own, but they also don't need to be
8 abandoned.
9 A typical story beginning with
10 diversion is an investigation is made,
11 there's some reason to have a child removed.
12 Instead it's asked, Will a relative take the
13 child? Grandma says yes. The kid goes off
14 to grandma's. There never is an Article X,
15 it's in the case records. No one knows the
16 number of instances of this. All right?
17 And I would say that what we hear is:
18 "Child Protective Services gave me this child
19 eight years ago, this is the first time I've
20 found out there's help." It's brutal on
21 someone who may be on a fixed income.
22 SENATOR SAVINO: And that's what
23 Eugene F. was all about.
24 MR. WALLACE: Well, yes, but it's a
434
1 downstate case. And there have been lawsuits
2 upstate, but it's a decentralized county --
3 you've got to have a lawsuit in every county
4 to address the practices if you're going to
5 defeat it.
6 There was a case Debra VV v. Johnson
7 in 2006, here in Albany County, in which an
8 aunt was told there's no such thing as
9 kinship foster care in this county. And yes,
10 it went there and that practice was ended and
11 she became a foster parent.
12 But the consequences beyond that have
13 not been to solve the bigger issue. The
14 bigger issue is we remove the child, we start
15 the Article X. Family Court Act 1017 offers
16 you three ways to give that child to a
17 relative: Tell the relative to go out on
18 their own and get custody; let them do foster
19 care on the cheap, which is direct custody;
20 or make them a foster parent.
21 In the conversations that occur
22 between Child Protective Services and child
23 welfare agencies, there are many ways to
24 dissuade you. Indeed, the commentary in the
435
1 McKinney's 1017, written by a Hofstra law
2 professor, uses the word "ruses" the counties
3 do to perpetuate diverting kin from becoming
4 foster parents. Oh, you don't want to become
5 a foster parent. We'll be in your home every
6 week. You can't have them now. We won't
7 place them until you're certified, and you
8 can't get certified for four months.
9 Give me the kid, I don't care.
10 There are many ways -- we are asking
11 not to -- we understand the financial
12 constrictions, but the worst thing is that
13 children that should get into foster care may
14 not be getting into foster care.
15 SENATOR SAVINO: And the parent that
16 you remove the child from is not getting any
17 follow-up service either.
18 MR. WALLACE: Well, if the Article X
19 is on, yes, there will be reunification
20 efforts.
21 SENATOR SAVINO: But if there's not --
22 MR. WALLACE: If there's that other
23 informal situation, it just goes up in the
24 air.
436
1 I'd like to give you one instance in
2 Dutchess County that drives home, because I
3 get to use that lawyerly word "egregious."
4 Okay?
5 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: You have one
6 minute, just to --
7 MR. WALLACE: Really quick. Dutchess
8 County, four or so years ago. Boyfriend
9 lures girlfriend to motel, beats her to death
10 with a baseball bat in front of her
11 5-year-old. The child is -- you know, CPS is
12 in, the cops are in. Grandma gets a call:
13 "Come down to court." She runs down to
14 court. Oh, my God, the family is a mess.
15 Right? And she's told by CPS, "Go get
16 custody on your own and take care of the
17 child." Not even offered a chance to be a
18 foster parent.
19 They get in touch with us eight months
20 later: "We can't afford the mental health
21 needs of this child. What are we going to
22 do?" It became a cause cÈlËbre, and it was
23 back-doored and she got to be a foster
24 parent.
437
1 But it shows you just how egregious it
2 can be in circumstances where a kid may need
3 to go into foster care and may be avoided
4 because of these informal policies.
5 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.
6 MR. WALLACE: Thank you very much.
7 SENATOR KRUEGER: One more question,
8 sorry.
9 We were on the exact same train, so
10 let me just double-check. There's nothing in
11 the work that your organizations do that
12 prevents you from trying to ensure that there
13 is a kinship foster care placed in these --
14 that the family is --
15 MR. WALLACE: During the first six
16 months, when it is still possible under the
17 federal rule, which says you look back to
18 where the initial removal was in order to be
19 qualified for Title IV-E funding. And then
20 you have to look at the AFDC income
21 requirements of 1996.
22 We will intervene on a one-to-one
23 basis and ask counties to do this. But the
24 resources are pretty limited. And most of
438
1 the time we're finding out after the fact,
2 you know: "I got this child and now I don't
3 know what to do." And you can call up the
4 county, and the standard answer is it's too
5 late.
6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you. Thank
7 you.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.
9 The next presenter, New York State
10 Children's Alliance, Karen Hill.
11 The Children's Aid Society has
12 submitted, so the one after that will be
13 Jim Purcell, the Council of Family and Child
14 Caring Agencies, on deck.
15 Thank you.
16 MS. HILL: Good afternoon, members of
17 the Assembly and Senate.
18 The New York State Children's Alliance
19 is the membership organization for New York
20 State's 40 Child Advocacy Centers. It's my
21 privilege to be here on behalf of our
22 membership to share with you and provide you
23 some information regarding the work that we
24 do at a Child Advocacy Center.
439
1 On behalf of our board of directors, I
2 want to thank the Legislature for your
3 history of strong support over the years.
4 Every year you have voted to add legislative
5 appropriations to help Child Advocacy
6 Centers, ranging from $2.2 million to
7 $2.57 million. This has greatly helped our
8 centers provide vital services to the most
9 vulnerable population, we believe, in
10 New York State -- children who are abused.
11 We're here once again to ask for your
12 support, because unfortunately the proposed
13 2017-2018 budget does not include these
14 funds, and we are very concerned that this
15 will put us in jeopardy of closing some of
16 our doors.
17 The Child Advocacy Centers in New York
18 State serve our most vulnerable population,
19 children who are exposed and victimized by
20 severe physical abuse, sexual abuse,
21 commercial sexual exploitation, trafficking,
22 and fatalities. This year we respectfully
23 request a legislative appropriation of
24 $3.2 million in the state's adopted budget to
440
1 continue our work.
2 Since 2007, New York State has
3 supported 40 Child Advocacy Centers. That
4 leaves 22 of our counties underserved by a
5 CAC. We understand that there's limitations
6 in available funding, so we have worked with
7 the Office of Children and Family Services to
8 regionalize some of our centers, and we now
9 serve 51 counties within the state. This
10 year we are hoping to add another four
11 counties. We still only have 40 sites,
12 though, 40 programs operating.
13 So we understand that we have a role
14 in this fight to end child abuse. And we
15 also understand that where you decide to put
16 your state dollars, that you need a return on
17 your investment. And so what I want to talk
18 to you about today is the proven, effective
19 response of a Child Advocacy Center. We use
20 that multidisciplinary response that so many
21 people have talked about today. We have
22 incorporated that in our history since 1985,
23 in New York State since 1984. So we work
24 together, as law enforcement, child
441
1 protective, prosecution, medical providers,
2 mental health providers, victim advocates,
3 and center staff, to collect evidence,
4 investigate cases, prosecute offenders, and
5 bring much-needed treatment to children who
6 are victimized by abuse.
7 We do this in a child-friendly
8 environment, so children don't have to go to
9 hospitals, they don't have to go to police
10 stations, and they don't have to go to CPS
11 agencies. We provide a warm environment for
12 them to be able to talk about their abuse and
13 to tell their story.
14 What you may not be aware of, though,
15 and what I want to quickly share with you, is
16 some of the other initiatives that our
17 centers have taken on to end child abuse in
18 New York State. And here's just a sampling.
19 The START Child Advocacy Center of
20 Rensselaer County provides additional mental
21 health assessment screenings for children
22 entering foster care.
23 The Oswego Child Advocacy Center has
24 developed a non-offending caregiver group to
442
1 help support non-offending caregivers and
2 educate them on the dynamics of child abuse,
3 trauma, so that we can better help our
4 non-offending caregivers help their children.
5 The Bivona Child Advocacy Center in
6 Monroe County hosts the largest child abuse
7 conference in New York State, bringing
8 experts in the field from all over the
9 country to train our teams on best-practice
10 response.
11 The McMahon/Ryan Child Advocacy Center
12 of Onondaga County has developed a child
13 abuse prevention curriculum for
14 schoolchildren and has currently trained
15 11,000 children in the Syracuse area.
16 In the Southern Tier Child Advocacy
17 Center, we facilitated a statewide committee
18 in the development of a first responder
19 curriculum so that we could help law
20 enforcement identify and respond in a way
21 that was trauma-informed and effective. We
22 have worked with the Division of Criminal
23 Justice Services to make this an online
24 program, and we have to date trained
443
1 approximately 5,000 first responder and law
2 enforcement officers.
3 We have also worked with the Office of
4 Children and Family Services to create a Less
5 is More program, which is an advanced
6 mandated reporter program to help people to
7 understand how to respond and recognize in a
8 way that is trauma-informed.
9 We're making incredible progress. Our
10 programs have made tremendous impacts on our
11 communities. But it's because of your
12 support that we have been able to do that.
13 We need to continue to invest in these
14 efforts, now and into the future.
15 I served as the director of the
16 Southern Tier Child Advocacy Center for
17 10 years, and it was my honor to be in that
18 role. And Senator Young is a huge supporter
19 of our center.
20 Just this week I transitioned to the
21 role of executive director for the New York
22 State Children's Alliance, and as I was
23 packing up my office, I was packing up
24 several pictures and notecards that I
444
1 received from children over the years. And I
2 wanted to share one with you, because I don't
3 know if you often have the opportunity to see
4 the outcome of your work.
5 But this is a case that we had, and I
6 was the advocate that responded on the case
7 that night. We had a 6-year-old girl -- the
8 call came in a 6-year-old female was molested
9 by a 13-year-old young man in her home. And
10 we were called out at 1 o'clock in the
11 morning. Our doctors came, our law
12 enforcement came, child protective came, and
13 we all worked together with this family.
14 And about two weeks later I received a
15 card from this little girl that said: "Dear
16 Karen, thank you for getting up in the middle
17 of the night to play games with me and to
18 help me. I love the blanket and the animal
19 that I received. I named my bulldog Cutter.
20 Your friend, Megan."
21 I received this message from Megan,
22 but it's because of you that I was able to be
23 there, that I was able to be part of this
24 system that helped this little girl. And I
445
1 cannot thank you enough for all you do.
2 We are here today to ask for your
3 continued support for this very, very
4 important work. And I will take any
5 questions that you have.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Montgomery.
7 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, thank you.
8 Thank you for your testimony. And I
9 just -- I certainly support the concept of
10 the Child Advocacy Centers.
11 The question I have for you is child
12 abuse does not happen in a vacuum, so it's
13 not just the child that needs very often
14 support. So how do we, in order to avoid
15 hopefully some of the deaths of children that
16 we've experienced, especially in New York
17 City, how can we utilize your model to
18 address the larger issues, often, of domestic
19 violence, of homelessness, of other issues in
20 a family that result in a child being killed,
21 ultimately?
22 MS. HILL: Excellent question.
23 And it's working together. It's
24 talking to --
446
1 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Together with
2 what other?
3 MS. HILL: With our team. So that is
4 probably the biggest asset that we have as a
5 Child Advocacy Center. We have everyone at
6 the table investigating and knowing every
7 step of this process along the way. Our
8 advocates are sitting at the table and they
9 are with that family from the outset of an
10 outcry all the way through prosecution and
11 treatment. And they're able to help engage
12 caregivers in the system response and help to
13 engage them so that we can then help their
14 children to get into treatment.
15 It's a really difficult process,
16 engaging a caregiver, because sometimes they
17 have so many different barriers that are in
18 the way to being able to understand that this
19 has happened to their child, to figure out
20 how do I respond in a way that helps my
21 child. And as a multidisciplinary team, from
22 the onset we are with that caregiver
23 explaining every step of the way. We are
24 explaining the process. We are that support
447
1 for them.
2 And we're working with each other so
3 that law enforcement knows what CPS is doing
4 and the prosecutor knows what all of us are
5 doing. Our medical providers are there
6 saying, yes, we should perform a medical exam
7 just to make sure this child has a healthy
8 body.
9 So it's that communication, that
10 collective collaboration that really makes
11 the difference in these cases.
12 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Well, I certainly
13 look forward to -- obviously, time is so
14 late, but I look forward to talking to you.
15 I think it's a wonderful model that we can
16 build an even stronger system upon so that we
17 don't continue to have issues where we find
18 2-year-olds and 4-year-olds and 6-year-olds
19 beaten to death by someone in the family
20 because there's just a total disorganization
21 of a family. And many, many of the issues
22 that cause that, that resulted in that --
23 child abuse very often is a symptom of much
24 deeper and broader issues.
448
1 So thank you for your testimony.
2 MS. HILL: Yes, absolutely. Thank
3 you.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Thank
5 you, Senator Montgomery.
6 I just would like to say a couple of
7 things. And I know that you also, because of
8 the involvement of CPS and other agencies,
9 you probably do referrals to appropriate
10 other resources that may help with parent
11 education, nutrition, some of the other
12 issues that may arise during an
13 investigation; is that right?
14 MS. HILL: That is correct. And we
15 are conducting assessments with families from
16 the onset. So that's what our advocates do.
17 As they're meeting with the caregivers,
18 they're looking at needs assessments, mental
19 health assessments. And if a child does
20 disclose abuse or if the caregiver identifies
21 that the child is having trauma symptoms,
22 we'll conduct a trauma assessment that day,
23 while the child first comes in for their
24 forensic interview.
449
1 So it definitely is a holistic
2 approach, and it's ensuring that we are
3 covering all facets of that approach.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Well, you know my
5 involvement with the Child Advocacy Centers
6 over the years. And I was surprised to see
7 you here today, and I'm delighted because I'm
8 very happy for you in taking on this new
9 responsibility. But I have to say, we're
10 going to miss you a lot in Olean because of
11 all the absolutely wonderful work you've done
12 over the years and the lives that you've
13 touched and the children that you've helped.
14 And I know you're taking that on at a
15 statewide level now, which is great, and we
16 need your leadership. But don't be a
17 stranger. And congratulations on your new
18 position.
19 MS. HILL: Thank you. Thank you very
20 much.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.
22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Jim Purcell, CEO,
23 Council of Family and Child Caring Agencies.
24 MR. PURCELL: My staff are betting on
450
1 what time I would get to testify, and it
2 appears 5 o'clock is going to win after all.
3 Let me just run through a few things
4 that we like in the budget and we want to
5 commend to your attention.
6 And it's nice to meet you, even at a
7 distance, Chairwoman.
8 First, COFCCA, the Council of Family
9 and Child Caring Agencies, we represent about
10 105 child welfare agencies that provide
11 foster care, preventive services, adoption
12 across the state.
13 The best thing in the budget this year
14 is the continuation of the open-ended funding
15 for preventive services and child protective
16 services. I am in close touch with my
17 colleagues around the country, and I will
18 tell you that it makes New York unique. We
19 could not have the preventive service system
20 we have, particularly in New York City, and
21 to some extent in all the other counties,
22 without that open-ended funding.
23 There's a $2 million increase in the
24 budget for post-adoption services, which is
451
1 really terrific. I think it will probably
2 allow OCFS to fund post-adoption programs
3 that cover all the counties in the state, to
4 provide supports to those families who have
5 taken on kids who have often had a difficult
6 and challenging upbringing until they got to
7 those foster homes and then adoption homes.
8 We strongly support Raise the Age, for
9 all the reasons that you've heard. We know
10 there's some questions about the funding
11 between the state and counties, and frankly I
12 defer to the counties and the state to figure
13 that out.
14 And finally, there's Article VII
15 language which will authorize the Department
16 of Health, with OCFS, to create a new
17 licensure class. Our foster care agencies
18 have been providing basic health services and
19 certainly mental health services for kids for
20 I believe at least 40 years, frankly without
21 any oversight or licensure. And now that
22 we're looking at going into managed care for
23 these programs, the managed care companies
24 cannot fund them without having some kind of
452
1 a license they can point to. So the language
2 will allow the state to develop standards,
3 and we look forward to working with them on
4 that.
5 So much for the good news.
6 The cuts to the Foster Care Block
7 Grant are troubling. First, it's clearly
8 just a cost shift to the City and the
9 counties. I admit to being particularly
10 offended by the complete removal of state
11 support for the tuition costs, the education
12 costs for about 650 or 700 kids who live on a
13 campus because they come from New York City.
14 You're looking at a budget that the Governor
15 says has a billion-dollar increase for
16 education -- except for these kids.
17 And it's been explained to me, I think
18 Commissioner Poole did a nice job this
19 morning of explaining that it's really about
20 balancing the shares in the budget. That's
21 nice. And I'm sure the shares in the budget
22 have to be balanced in some way. But to say
23 that these kids don't get any state
24 support -- I simply say that 10 years from
453
1 now nobody will remember that it was to
2 balance some shares in 2017, and there will
3 be some big outcry about why are these kids
4 getting any schooling. So I'm concerned
5 about that.
6 The other $40 million cut in the block
7 grant -- I frankly have never been a fan of
8 the block grant. I think it's really damaged
9 the state/county relationship. But the only
10 rationale that's ever been given for it is to
11 reduce the use of foster care. So now that
12 we've reduced the use of foster care, we're
13 going to cut the funding from the people who
14 reduced the use of foster care, which makes
15 no sense to me at all.
16 And frankly, we're looking at
17 situations across the state of increased
18 placements in foster care, specifically
19 related to the opioid use. There's a state
20 monitor now in New York City to look at their
21 practices because there are questions about
22 maybe some kids should be in foster care. So
23 at the very time that the state is asserting
24 its concern about the system, it's also
454
1 removing $62 million from it. So that is of
2 concern to us.
3 There's a second proposal which some
4 of you asked about today, which relates to
5 the room and board costs for handicapped kids
6 being placed in residential settings by
7 school districts. And again, it's a cut
8 that's targeted only at New York City. The
9 funding formula is strange to begin with, but
10 it removes about 18.474 percent of the
11 funding and will shift it to the city.
12 And the last piece I would call your
13 attention to is the FYSA, which is the
14 program which you and your colleagues have
15 been so terrific about supporting over the
16 last few years. And again, we heard this
17 morning that the cut was because it was a
18 legislative add and the Executive always cuts
19 legislative adds. Well, that's not
20 necessarily true. A few years ago the first
21 FYSA money was added by the legislature, and
22 the Governor put it in his budget.
23 The concern we have about this is that
24 the money is being used to support cohorts of
455
1 kids. So two years ago, you provided money
2 for the first time for a group of kids in
3 foster care to get support to go to college.
4 Those kids are still in college, they're
5 probably juniors now, or sophomores and
6 juniors. Last year we had money to do
7 another million and a half dollars, so a
8 group of freshmen started.
9 And so now the question is if we leave
10 it at $1.5 million, do we defund some of the
11 kids who we've been funding to go to college?
12 I don't want to be there when somebody tries
13 to explain that. Or do we say, well, we're
14 not going to fund any new kids this year?
15 Even though some of the kids you met
16 yesterday as they were lobbying here in the
17 Legislature are those very seniors in high
18 school who, frankly, took the initiative to
19 be able to graduate because they saw a
20 future.
21 So this is one where you worry that
22 we're either in it or we're not. And so I
23 hope that you'll join us in being in it.
24 Our asks in the budget are four at
456
1 this point. One is that last year the
2 Legislature specifically, through the budget
3 conferences, added some relatively minor
4 funds for overtime costs in the OMH/OPWDD and
5 special schools systems, but not in foster
6 care. This year the Executive Budget picks
7 up on that and has some funding for minimum
8 wage costs for those sectors, but it doesn't
9 do anything at all for our agencies.
10 I will tell you that the impact of the
11 January 1, '16, increase in the minimum wage
12 on our programs is pretty minimal. We were
13 paying minimum wage, we were paying just
14 above that. But by next year, this starts to
15 bite. And we have no money to pay these
16 costs. And what we're being told by the
17 Executive is that in a hardship case, they
18 would come in and help fund it. And I've
19 suggested that the definition of a hardship
20 case really realistically is any nonprofit
21 that has a contract or a rate from the state,
22 that those are the hardship ones. Because
23 these are mandated costs that have to be
24 covered.
457
1 By the way, the New York State Labor
2 Department issued new overtime guidelines on
3 December 28th which raised the income level
4 at which people become eligible for overtime.
5 The long story short is we believe virtually
6 all of our caseworkers will now be eligible
7 for overtime pay. That's a really good
8 thing, except we don't have any money to pay
9 them. So we'll tell them they can't work
10 overtime. And now the question will be do I
11 go to the family court hearing at 9 in the
12 morning and not do the home visit that I'm
13 supposed to do tonight to make sure the child
14 is doing okay in the foster home, or do I do
15 the home visit to make sure the child is
16 okay, because I'm required to do so, or go to
17 the family court session? Which can go on
18 for hours and hours in family court.
19 So we're going to have a problem with
20 overtime in both preventive services and
21 foster care, and we don't even know what --
22 people keep saying, What's it going to cost?
23 And our answer is we don't know because we
24 haven't been there before.
458
1 The second is that we've had great
2 support from all of you in the last couple of
3 years in signing onto a letter to the
4 Governor after the budget passes asking for
5 increases in the rates that we get paid.
6 It's an administrative rate process that
7 happens after budget. And we're this year
8 asking you for a 4 percent increase. We know
9 that's a little higher than what we've been
10 getting, but we've got these minimum wage and
11 overtime and other issues to deal with.
12 We'd like to see a $15 million capital
13 appropriation for the deferred maintenance
14 that agencies couldn't do on their
15 residential programs during the seven years
16 that we had no increases. So the boiler
17 broke, or one of the kids punched a hole in
18 the wall, we've got to replace it because
19 that's a reminder to all the kids about the
20 trauma. And so we're looking for $15 million
21 in capital funding.
22 And finally, a million dollars for
23 loan forgiveness and scholarships for people
24 working in the child welfare field so that
459
1 they can begin to see this as a career that
2 will support them as they go on.
3 I'm almost out of time, but I wanted
4 to spend a little time telling you about our
5 biggest problem. I've been working in
6 juvenile justice and child welfare for over
7 40 years, which means I'm over 56 years old,
8 which means that Ryan, who said that, that I
9 didn't train him very well when he worked in
10 our office to respect his elders, if nothing
11 else.
12 (Laughter.)
13 MR. PURCELL: I've never seen, I've
14 never seen a workforce crisis like our
15 agencies are facing right now in our field.
16 They cannot find staff to hire. There are
17 500 families waiting for preventive services
18 in the City; we can't hire caseworkers. We
19 will see, in the coming year, residential
20 agencies begin to close units because I as
21 the executive director can't sleep at night
22 thinking about the two childcare workers I
23 just hired and their skill level with those
24 particular kids.
460
1 Clarence Sundram, when we wrote the
2 report that created the Justice Center,
3 pointed out that firing people for making
4 simple mistakes means you go back to the same
5 job pool that you faced in the first place
6 and hire the next-best candidate, not the
7 best candidate.
8 And that's what we're facing now. We
9 are seeing this all across the state, where
10 we are simply unable to find staff who we
11 feel are able to provide the services to --
12 frankly, a very sophisticated set of services
13 to kids. As the foster care population has
14 shrunk, it's not the random foster child
15 who's no longer placed in care. It's the
16 kids with the most complex problems, the
17 families with the most complex problems. And
18 particularly in residential care we see this
19 as a mix of kids without the kids who maybe
20 got with the program better in the past and
21 provided some guidance to their peers.
22 So the system is under huge challenge.
23 I could give you other examples, but I'll
24 pass on that.
461
1 The last thing I would note, with just
2 one second, is I refer you -- and you'll be
3 particularly interested in this, Senator --
4 there's a terrific op-ed piece today in the
5 Daily News by Steve Burghardt.
6 SENATOR SAVINO: I've seen it.
7 MR. PURCELL: I'm going to call Steve
8 and say, why didn't you include us in it,
9 but -- I'm sure he would.
10 It's a really terrific statement about
11 the real pressures that people are under in
12 this field and the consequences of that. And
13 it's not just about people who don't want to
14 do their job.
15 With that, I'll thank you and of
16 course be happy to answer any questions.
17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very
18 much.
19 Questions?
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senator Velmanette
21 Montgomery.
22 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I just want to
23 make a quick comment. I fully support the
24 request for the college career, the college
462
1 students. This is just so exciting. And of
2 course I met some of the young people
3 yesterday, so it's very fresh in my mind and
4 I understand it.
5 And if we're going to really talk
6 about changing the trajectory of young people
7 in our state, this is the way that we're
8 going to be able to do that. Because in the
9 past, foster care was part of the pipeline to
10 prison. So you've changed that. And I want
11 to compliment you that this really is
12 something to be supported. And that you're
13 partnering with the higher ed opportunity
14 programs to make it a more fully supportive
15 experience for young people makes all the
16 sense in the world to me. So thank you very
17 much.
18 MR. PURCELL: Thank you.
19 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And look forward
20 to --
21 MR. PURCELL: Continuing.
22 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: -- us being able
23 to get that funding for you.
24 MR. PURCELL: Thank you.
463
1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Yes.
2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: I too have met
3 the young men and women last year, as well as
4 this year. They're very impressive and
5 clearly deserve this kind of support, and I
6 also am going to support this. It's
7 extraordinary, it really is.
8 MR. PURCELL: These kids have an
9 amazing resiliency to them that if we just
10 pay attention to that a little bit, they can
11 do really well.
12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you.
13 MR. PURCELL: Thank you.
14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
15 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Next, Stephanie
17 Gendell, associate executive director,
18 advocacy and policy, Citizens' Committee for
19 Children. 1:20.
20 And Jessica Klos should move closer,
21 Jenn O'Connor closer, Tim Nichols. If you
22 come down, you can get there quickly. So if
23 you're all the way upstairs, come on down.
24 MS. GENDELL: Good evening, or
464
1 afternoon. My name is Stephanie Gendell.
2 I'm the associate executive director at
3 Citizens' Committee for Children.
4 I want to first thank you for this
5 opportunity to testify and also thank you all
6 so much for staying this long into the
7 evening so that we're actually testifying in
8 front of people. It really is nice to do
9 that, and I really appreciate it. And in
10 return, I will keep my remarks as brief as
11 possible. Jim Purcell and I often testify
12 one after each other, in either order, both
13 here and in the City, and so I'll say what he
14 would say, which is "I support everything Jim
15 said."
16 I did want to start, though, by
17 talking about child welfare. This is my 10th
18 time testifying at the Human Services budget
19 hearing about child welfare, and in all
20 previous times I've always asked the state
21 for an increased investment in child welfare.
22 And unfortunately, now when we're seeing
23 child welfare in the news every day and the
24 Governor has come forward expressing his
465
1 concerns about child welfare, I'm actually
2 here urging everyone not to take money out of
3 child welfare, which is not the position I'd
4 really want to be in.
5 To be very clear, the cut to the
6 Foster Care Block Grant is $62 million total;
7 $39 million of that is statewide -- about
8 half would be for New York City -- and then
9 another $23 million just to New York City.
10 Plus the $19 million cut we've talked about
11 on the Committee on Special Education
12 Placements, which also comes out of the child
13 welfare agency budget. So the city cut is
14 also, on its own, about $62 million.
15 And foster care is a mandatory
16 service, although it sounds like upstate
17 they're not using it as much as they should
18 for kin. But it's technically a mandatory
19 service. And so when ACS is trying to figure
20 out what to do with its budget to accommodate
21 a $62 million cut, they're going to have to
22 cut from somewhere. It could be protection,
23 it could be prevention, it could be
24 caseloads, it could be the services that
466
1 foster parents and foster children get. It's
2 a really deeply disturbing cut.
3 And I realize it's a very large amount
4 to be asking for, but we're asking for it
5 anyway.
6 In addition, we've had this
7 long-standing issue of the KinGAP program
8 also being funded out of the Foster Care
9 Block Grant. Those are children no longer in
10 foster care. It should be funded in the same
11 way as adoption subsidy, so that children no
12 longer in foster care are not taking money
13 away from foster children.
14 We support the maintaining open-ended
15 on prevention. We urge restoring that
16 3 percent continued cut since 2008 and
17 investing it into primary prevention, which
18 would allow preventive services before
19 families came to the attention of child
20 welfare.
21 We also support the housing subsidy
22 bill that's now introduced in both houses
23 that would increase the amount as well as the
24 age for youth. And we hope that can pass in
467
1 the legislative session.
2 I'm not going to reiterate everything
3 that we just talked about FYSA, but I
4 appreciate all of your support for that.
5 Turning to childcare, we object to the
6 $27 million essentially swap of childcare
7 state money for Title XX federal money. So
8 childcare is not actually getting any
9 increased funding, and senior centers and
10 other services are losing funds. I find this
11 actually to be a distraction from the real
12 issue. We are all going to fight to bring
13 back the $27 million of state funds so that
14 TANF can continue to support senior centers.
15 The real issue is that childcare is
16 not funded sufficiently, and we're no longer
17 really talking about that. But there are
18 many, many children who are eligible for
19 childcare and not receiving childcare. It is
20 the best preventive service. If we want to
21 help families and prevent child abuse, we
22 need to give parents childcare options.
23 The other thing is that the federal
24 government has passed, several years ago now,
468
1 2014, new child safety regulations that we
2 sought a waiver from so that we didn't have
3 to pay for them. They require background
4 checks on childcare providers. And we got a
5 one-year waiver. If we do not get another
6 waiver, we need funding so that we don't have
7 to cut childcare.
8 Interestingly, the budget requires --
9 has an Article VII bill that would have
10 required background checks for those working
11 in homeless shelters working with children,
12 but we're still seeking this waiver for those
13 working in childcare.
14 Speaking of homelessness, we support
15 Assemblymember Hevesi's Housing Stability
16 Support Program. The homelessness crisis in
17 New York City is severe, as well as other
18 parts of the state, and this would help
19 alleviate some of that.
20 We are in the process of cochairing a
21 family homelessness task force, and due to
22 release recommendations about how to better
23 meet the needs of children and families and
24 their well-being while in the shelter system,
469
1 and keeping them out, in the next month or
2 so, and we can keep you in the loop on those
3 recommendations once we have them.
4 On food and economic security, we
5 support increasing the funding for emergency
6 food programs. Last year you passed and the
7 Governor signed a great piece of legislation
8 that enables families to directly put a
9 portion of their state tax refund into a 529
10 college savings account. So we're now -- the
11 counter piece to that would be to allow those
12 on public assistance to be able to have 529s
13 waived from the asset limit test so they can
14 actually take advantage of that law that
15 passed last year.
16 And speaking of public assistance
17 families, we object to the proposal to take
18 100 percent of their Lottery winnings. And
19 if that is to go forward, there needs to be a
20 real PR campaign so that people on public
21 assistance know that they shouldn't buy
22 Lottery tickets because the state's going to
23 take their winnings.
24 On juvenile justice, we urge you to
470
1 pass Raise the Age this session in a
2 comprehensive manner. We've included in our
3 testimony seven principles and concepts that
4 we believe are equivalent to true Raise the
5 Age legislation. I won't go through all of
6 them now, because we've been talking about
7 them now for many years and we haven't
8 changed our position.
9 But I will say that every year that we
10 don't pass Raise the Age is another year of
11 16- and 17-year-olds at Rikers not receiving
12 services, receiving permanent criminal
13 records. As you know, we're one of only two
14 states that does this. So a child from
15 New Jersey who did the exact same thing as
16 someone from New York, applying to a job in
17 New York or a school in New York, will have a
18 leg up against the child from New York. We
19 should be doing better by our own children.
20 And then finally, I just want to
21 support what Jim talked about with regard to
22 better supporting the human service sector.
23 And, finally, say that we're concerned that
24 there is language all throughout the budget
471
1 that essentially says that if there are any
2 reductions in federal aid, that the
3 Department of Budget can unilaterally cut the
4 allocations to the counties without your
5 approval or really notice to anybody. That
6 will make it very hard for counties to plan,
7 and we're deeply concerned that there could
8 really be federal cuts and that we would want
9 a transparent process for how we handle that.
10 Thank you.
11 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Questions? All
14 right, moving right ahead.
15 Jessica Klos, director, policy and
16 community education, Early Care & Learning
17 Council.
18 MS. KLOS SHAPIRO: Hi. Thank you for
19 the opportunity to provide comments and for
20 staying to listen to them.
21 So the Early Care & Learning Council
22 is a statewide not-for-profit that represents
23 the childcare resource and referral agencies
24 that are embedded in the communities
472
1 throughout the state. There are 34 of them
2 in total. We are also part of Winning
3 Beginning NY, which is the larger early
4 childhood advocacy organization.
5 My comments today will mostly focus on
6 childcare. And while some of these stats
7 will sound repetitive, they're even things
8 that the commissioner addressed this morning.
9 When we talk about that only 17 percent of
10 eligible children and families are served
11 with childcare subsidies, there's a lack of
12 money in the system.
13 So some of those things that I will
14 read is I did want to emphasize a study that
15 our organization did earlier last year. And
16 also recently released from our national
17 organization is the reasons why this is so
18 important, what happens when parents don't
19 have childcare. And it's alarming the sheer
20 cost of childcare in New York State. The
21 average is $9100 a year for infants, $8,341
22 for a toddler, $7,629 for a preschooler,
23 $4,413 for school-age care. If it's a single
24 parent, they pay 55 percent of their income
473
1 for infant care and nearly 100 percent of
2 their income for center-based care for two
3 children. Married parents of two children
4 living at the poverty line pay 129 percent of
5 their income for center care, which basically
6 a lot of parents can't afford to do and,
7 without assistance, could not.
8 So we also found in our survey -- it
9 did not include New York City and Long
10 Island. It was largely an upstate survey
11 that showed that 93 percent of families
12 earning less than $50,000 and receiving a
13 subsidy, as well as 80 percent of families
14 earning less than $50,000 and not receiving a
15 subsidy, faced difficulty paying for
16 childcare. Parents who struggle to pay for
17 childcare are forced to make hard financial
18 decisions. And these are things like
19 borrowing money from friends and family, and
20 creditors, and compromising basic needs.
21 They cut back on work hours, the hours that
22 they can have their children in care, and
23 they assemble a patchwork of solutions that
24 families cobble together. And my colleagues
474
1 just talked about child welfare and
2 prevention, and we know that these are the
3 situations when parents are scrambling --
4 they're well-intentioned, but these are when
5 abuse and neglect happen, because they are
6 stressed.
7 So we are fully in support of the
8 $100 million ask for subsidies. With these
9 facts really backing them up, there's a need.
10 In addition to that, our agencies help
11 parents to find childcare. And the industry
12 in New York State of childcare is a
13 $4.7 billion industry, and it provides
14 120,000 jobs. So it's an industry that's not
15 going away and one that's very much needed.
16 So strengthening an investment into the CCR&R
17 agencies would provide continued education to
18 parents as well allow as the provider
19 community to continue to provide quality
20 care. And this can be anything from what's
21 best for parents -- they could be online,
22 in-person, on the phone. But for providers
23 that could also be training sessions that are
24 off-site, on-site at the childcare center,
475
1 online, and also methods that are coaching,
2 mentoring, and technical assistance.
3 We want to make sure that in these
4 vulnerable years -- I did not include the
5 stuff that we've gone over in the past years,
6 which is the brain development and knowing
7 that in those critical years, if we catch
8 children from zero to 3, we will definitely
9 prepare them better for the future.
10 One of the other budget asks that I
11 would like to emphasize is we are also in
12 full support of restoring the $27 million to
13 the General Fund and not having that swap of
14 money. We're fearful that in the end,
15 childcare in certain counties will get
16 reduced. Because if it's already required to
17 be there, then they're not really gaining
18 anything and it could be a loss.
19 I also just wanted to quickly add that
20 we are in full support of expanding the
21 investment in QUALITYstarsNY, because we know
22 that that really bolsters the full quality of
23 the program and lets us know that these are
24 definitely investments that are competitive
476
1 and are being spent in the right places.
2 And we also would like a continued
3 investment in high-quality after-school and
4 expanded learning. My colleagues that are
5 speaking after me will speak more to this.
6 But specifically, a restoration to Advantage
7 After School, which was chopped down to what
8 the Executive level was last year. And we
9 thank the Legislature for the multiple years
10 we know you've put funding in, but we're
11 afraid that if that doesn't happen again, we
12 actually know that programs will be forced to
13 shut. And while the Governor is putting in
14 $35 million in certain cities and we're very
15 supportive of that, other programs can't be
16 cut at the same time. It doesn't make sense.
17 So I just would like to thank you for
18 allowing me to provide these, and I can
19 answer any questions.
20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
21 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Just -- I want
23 to thank you and thank early childcare. I
24 see this as a very strong economic
477
1 development initiative for us to be able to
2 move forward with. It provides jobs, it
3 provides an assurance that our children have
4 the kind of support and the opportunity to
5 have the exposure to very strong social
6 skills, academic skills, and a safe
7 environment.
8 So it's something that is very
9 essential and important. As a matter of
10 fact, in this room several years ago, we had
11 a huge hearing that I ran for QUALITYstarsNY,
12 and I heard parents talk about what that did
13 for their children. So we need to support
14 it. And thank you very much.
15 MS. KLOS SHAPIRO: Thank you for your
16 support.
17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Jenn O'Connor,
18 director of policy and advocacy, Prevent
19 Child Abuse New York.
20 MS. O'CONNOR: Hello. Thank you for
21 having me this afternoon. I also want to say
22 that I am cochair of Winning Beginning NY as
23 well; Jessica mentioned that coalition.
24 Prevent Child Abuse New York recently
478
1 put out a series of position papers on
2 everything from increasing economic stability
3 to protecting reproductive health. Those are
4 attached to my testimony; you have those in
5 front of you. But I will focus on just two
6 programs today that are germane to this
7 group.
8 One program is maternal, infant, and
9 early childhood home visiting. There's
10 65,000 children in our state who are abused
11 or neglected each year. We know that
12 research-based home visiting could cut that
13 number in half. That's why we're asking you
14 to maintain $26.8 million in funding and
15 increase funding for programs by $9.5
16 million. If that budget ask sounds familiar,
17 that's because it's very similar to last
18 year's request.
19 In short, New York State funding for
20 those programs has been flat for nearly a
21 decade, since 2008. Which means that
22 programs have cut essential services and are
23 able to serve fewer children.
24 I won't describe in detail what that
479
1 investment would mean for specific programs.
2 You can see that in my lengthier testimony.
3 I will ask that you consider those 65,000
4 children when you're making your funding
5 decisions.
6 The second program that I want to
7 discuss is childcare. The Executive Budget
8 does not include any new funding for
9 childcare subsidies for low-income working
10 families. It also does not include new
11 funding to implement the requirements of the
12 federal Childcare and Development Block
13 Grant, which you know as CCDBG.
14 In fact, the Governor's budget
15 actually reduces General Fund support for
16 childcare, replacing it with $27 million in
17 Title XX funding. This funding is used by
18 local social services districts for critical
19 programming. You've heard today over and
20 over again about the senior services that
21 would be impacted by that transfer of funds.
22 This pits one vital service against
23 another and would result in a net loss for
24 counties. We oppose this transfer of funds
480
1 and urge you to find money for subsidies
2 elsewhere. As Stephanie said, we believe
3 this is just a distraction from the fact that
4 childcare is woefully underfunded.
5 We also ask that you increase funding
6 for subsidies by $100 million. Currently
7 only 17 percent of eligible children receive
8 a subsidy, leaving 83 percent of low-income
9 parents to struggle to pay out of pocket or
10 leave their child in unsafe, possibly illegal
11 care.
12 We feel strongly that it's time to
13 create an Early Learning Fund with a
14 dedicated revenue stream for childcare
15 subsidies. We are in a crisis that is not
16 only going to negatively impact children's
17 development, but result in job loss. You
18 know this. Working parents cannot work
19 without childcare. And when parents are
20 stressed about their childcare, when they
21 don't have childcare or the care that they do
22 have is unreliable, they sometimes take that
23 stress out on their children. That's why
24 it's a priority for Prevent Child Abuse
481
1 New York.
2 I will, as cochair of Winning
3 Beginning NY, just mention one last program.
4 While the Executive Budget adds $35 million
5 for new after-school programs in high-poverty
6 cities, it also cuts Advantage After School
7 by $5 million. We need to restore that in
8 order to keep existing programs open.
9 I thank you for your time, and I'm
10 happy to take any questions.
11 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Senator Montgomery.
13 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Just very
14 quickly, certainly, you know, we have a lot
15 of discussion around the issue of child
16 abuse. And as I said before, earlier,
17 obviously child abuse is not, in and of
18 itself, the issue solely.
19 MS. O'CONNOR: Correct.
20 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: So treating the
21 child or treating that particular aspect of a
22 child's life is not necessarily ...
23 So I just want to say that I'm hopeful
24 that we can begin as a network of
482
1 organizations like PCANY to identify what the
2 symptoms represent and to go deeper and to
3 begin to create a community-strengthening
4 response to this issue. It's a very, very
5 difficult and terrible one.
6 And I'm not sure that -- I know
7 everybody talks about home visiting, and this
8 is a throwback to a time when the social
9 worker appeared at your home and you were
10 punished or penalized for whatever was
11 happening in your home. That is a problem in
12 some cultures.
13 So I'm not sure how to really support
14 that, and if I should or -- I'm not totally
15 comfortable, necessarily, with it as an
16 answer to the fact that there are such dire,
17 stressful situations that families encounter.
18 And we're not addressing these issues, we're
19 just addressing a symptom. And it's not
20 really working. It hasn't worked, especially
21 in New York City.
22 MS. O'CONNOR: Right. Yeah, thank
23 you, Senator. We're very focused in my
24 organization now on the root causes of
483
1 prevention, so getting away from that, you
2 know, one piece and getting more into
3 economic instability and housing and those
4 sorts of things.
5 I will say that home visiting as it
6 stands in the state now is a voluntary
7 program. It's not for everyone. We can
8 certainly understand that some families are
9 anxious about having people come into their
10 homes. But I do think, you know, there are
11 huge gaps around the state where it could be
12 a valuable tool. But it is just one of
13 several services available.
14 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
15 MS. O'CONNOR: Sure.
16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
17 Tim Nichols, executive director,
18 Association on Aging in New York.
19 MR. NICHOLS: Good afternoon.
20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Good afternoon.
21 MR. NICHOLS: Thank you, Assemblyman
22 Farrell, and Senator Young, and all the
23 members of the committee for your work today.
24 I know the hour is late, so I will keep my
484
1 comments brief.
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
3 MR. NICHOLS: My name is Tim Nichols.
4 I am the executive director of the
5 Association on Aging in New York. Our
6 association represents the 59 mostly
7 county-based area agencies on aging
8 statewide.
9 In addition to our written testimony
10 that we are submitting to you now, yesterday
11 our association joined with Lifespan and
12 LiveOn NY in an advocacy day in which we met
13 with many members in both the Senate and
14 Assembly, including Senator Serino, the chair
15 of the Aging Committee in the Senate, and
16 Assemblywoman Lupardo, the chair of the Aging
17 Committee in the Assembly. And we will
18 continue our advocacy efforts moving forward.
19 But what I'd like to do right now is
20 just bring to your attention to some of the '
21 key areas of the budget that we are most
22 concerned with. And the first part is the
23 recommendation to remove the 25 percent match
24 exemption in the community services for the
485
1 aging part of the budget. We are extremely
2 opposed to that, very worried that that
3 exemption language was not included. And we
4 urge the Senate and Assembly to consider
5 restoring that language in your budget
6 resolutions.
7 We also are worried and concerned
8 about the transportation funding, the
9 $1.1 million that was recommended by the
10 Executive to be included in the CSE part of
11 the budget. We would prefer to see that as a
12 stand-alone line item. We think when we see
13 line items in, in this case, the Office for
14 the Aging budget, it's important, it's an
15 important statement that there's state
16 support for these types of programs.
17 The second part of the budget that
18 we're very worried about is the NY Connects,
19 shifting the $3.5 million to the global
20 Medicaid cap and the BIP pot of revenue.
21 What we feel if we -- by doing that, that
22 really jeopardizes that very important
23 program that serves about 230,000 New Yorkers
24 every year. It has been operational for
486
1 almost 10 years now. And having that funding
2 separated from the budget and put into the
3 Department of Health's global cap really puts
4 that program at grave risk. And, you know,
5 that is something that we're clearly opposed
6 to. We ask that you not accept that in your
7 budget resolutions.
8 With respect to the $700,000 proposed
9 cut for the elderly abuse portion of the
10 budget, we too would request that that be
11 restored. This is a program that has been
12 shown to be effective as well. Elder abuse
13 is a serious concern to us. It affects an
14 estimated 260,000 older New Yorkers annually.
15 It's estimated that this type of crime costs
16 New Yorkers statewide $1.5 billion annually.
17 We like seeing the ideas that were
18 suggested by Governor in the budget to expand
19 programs to identify and prevent financial
20 exploitation. But again, it doesn't really
21 make sense when at the same time there's a
22 proposal to cut $700,000 in funding.
23 And the last item that we want to make
24 sure that we emphasize that we oppose is the
487
1 shifting of the Title XX funding. In
2 New York City alone, that would result in the
3 closure of 65 senior centers, a $17 million
4 cut in support for senior centers in New York
5 City. We think that's a shortsighted
6 proposal, and we urge you to reject that as
7 well.
8 I kind of went through this quickly.
9 If you have any questions, my contact
10 information is on the testimony that was
11 provided for you.
12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
13 MR. NICHOLS: Thank you.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you.
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Alli Lidie,
16 associate executive director, New York State
17 Network for Youth Success.
18 MS. LIDIE: Thank you for the
19 opportunity to present testimony to you
20 today. I am Alli Lidie. I'm the associate
21 executive director at the New York State
22 Network for Youth Success, formerly known as
23 the New York State After-School Network.
24 I am joined by today by Emily
488
1 Hofelich-Bowler, the executive director at
2 the Addison Youth Center, and by Quinn
3 Bowler, a student at Corning High School.
4 First I would like to thank you for
5 your recent investments in the Advantage
6 After School program. That resulted in
7 $5 million in increases over the last two
8 years, and these increases have helped to
9 serve an additional 3600 students across the
10 state.
11 We would also like to bring attention
12 to the fact that the Governor's proposed
13 budget includes a $5 million reduction to
14 Advantage over last year's final budget.
15 Unfortunately, if the final budget maintains
16 this cut, it will leave the Office of
17 Children and Family Services without enough
18 uncommitted funds to release a new
19 competition for funding this year. And 56 of
20 the programs that are served under Advantage,
21 with an estimated 5,000 students, are set to
22 expire this coming November. And so those
23 programs would end without something else to
24 apply for.
489
1 One note of clarification. We've
2 heard today about the Governor's proposal for
3 the Empire State After-School Program. Which
4 is $35 million in the education budget. And
5 this would expand access to approximately
6 22,000 students across the state in
7 high-needs areas in the 16 Empire State
8 Poverty Reduction Initiative areas.
9 We're fully supportive of investing in
10 and growing this proposal, but as proposed,
11 it's not a replacement for the Advantage
12 After School programs that will be cut if
13 funding is not restored. There are over
14 3,000 students served in programs outside of
15 those 16 ESPRI cities that are ending this
16 year. And so those programs and those
17 students would not have anything else to
18 apply for, even if this new proposal for
19 after-school programming goes through.
20 So we are requesting that the
21 Legislature appropriate $32.8 million to the
22 Advantage After School Program. This would
23 restore the $5 million that was cut and then
24 add an additional $10.5 million to expand the
490
1 number of students served back to the
2 pre-recession level of 20,000 students, and
3 also provide enough funding for the Office of
4 Children and Family Services to raise the
5 per-student allotment rate for students from
6 $1,375 to $1,600. And that would align this
7 funding stream with the other after-school
8 funding streams currently in the state as
9 well as the proposed funding stream for
10 Empire State After-School, and it would allow
11 programs to meet the demands of the rising
12 minimum wage without cutting back on program
13 hours or supplies or curriculum.
14 And to talk more about these programs,
15 I'd like to introduce Emily.
16 MS. HOFELICH-BOWLER: Hello, my name
17 is Emily Hofelich. Thank you for having me.
18 I run after-school programs for Advantage in
19 Addison, New York. It's a small rural
20 community in Steuben County. We currently
21 serve about 140 students a day. That's about
22 21 percent of our targeted population. And
23 we do have waiting lists, so we would take
24 more kids if we had more funding.
491
1 Addison has a population of
2 approximately 2500 people. Sixty-two percent
3 of students are considered economically
4 disadvantaged, and a lot of our parents work,
5 multiparent families with -- multiparent
6 working inside the home {sic}. And
7 after-school programs provide a safe place
8 for their children after school.
9 One example I can give is we have a
10 mother of four. All of her children are
11 school-age. One is in high school; he works
12 for me at Advantage. And then three of her
13 children are also part of our Advantage
14 program. Her husband is an on-the-road
15 trucker. She's trying to go to school and
16 work at the same time to help support her
17 family. And without Advantage, she would not
18 be able to do that.
19 We also have a lot of high school
20 students. We have a bit of a drop-out rate.
21 One example I can give you is a student that
22 we had at our program, and she did not
23 graduate. We were really trying to get her
24 to go back for her fifth year and graduate
492
1 and pass those Regents exams. We as an
2 organization, I personally met with the
3 principal, her mother, and the student and
4 made an agreement that if she went to school,
5 she could work for me at Advantage. I am
6 happy to say she has graduated and she is
7 still working for the program, and hopefully
8 she will be continuing her education.
9 So that's just a couple of examples.
10 Another issue is the impact of the minimum
11 wage increases. We every year are cutting
12 our program shorter. There are weeks we're
13 having to close because we can't afford it.
14 Right now we have a teen center, which it's
15 hard enough to attract 13-and-overs to come
16 to an after-school program, but we have about
17 a $90 supply budget for a month. And with
18 the increases in the minimum wage, we're
19 going to struggle with that budget again
20 trying to find these supplies to keep these
21 kids engaged and having a good time.
22 So I know that $35 million has gone
23 into after-school; that will not affect our
24 program. And I just would encourage you to
493
1 not overlook our small rural communities. We
2 don't have a lot of access to resources, and
3 these resources are very important.
4 So now I'll introduce my son. This is
5 Quinn Bowler.
6 MR. BOWLER: My name is Quinn Bowler,
7 and I'm a freshman at Corning High School.
8 I'm here today to share why after-school
9 programs matter and why these programs should
10 be available to more students across the
11 state, because I benefited directly from
12 participating in one myself.
13 I participated in after-school
14 programs every year up until this year, and
15 even attended an Advantage program throughout
16 middle school. At my program I received a
17 healthy snack when I arrived, had an
18 opportunity to complete my homework or
19 participate in an activity, and then,
20 depending on the weather, of course, would
21 have a chance to go outside and play.
22 While I'm definitely a fan of gym and
23 sports, especially hockey, I found that I
24 benefited most from homework help I received
494
1 after school. I struggled with math quite a
2 bit and sometime found it hard to follow what
3 my teacher was explaining during class. My
4 after-school program provided time to
5 complete any homework assigned during school
6 and also offered tutoring help for anyone
7 that needed it.
8 Because of this, I was able to work
9 with a staff member one-on-one and receive a
10 different perspective on math than my teacher
11 provided, which helped me better understand
12 what I was doing. The homework and tutoring
13 help I received during this program was a big
14 reason why I received an A-plus in math this
15 past school year.
16 My after-school program provided a
17 relaxed setting where students and staff had
18 a chance to talk about schools, sports,
19 hobbies and life. One program staff member
20 that I really connected with was Brian.
21 Brian was someone who was very easy for me to
22 talk to. This connection is something that
23 students in programs everywhere benefited
24 from. Program staff can act as mentors or
495
1 can simply provide someone to talk to to help
2 students like myself understand how to deal
3 with school or life.
4 My story is not unique. And I know
5 I'm one of the lucky kids that got to
6 participate in these programs, when so many
7 other kids still do not have access to one.
8 We need more funding for these programs so
9 that more students have the opportunity to go
10 somewhere safe and productive after school
11 and have the chance to build relationships
12 with staff members who can help them deal
13 with life as a middle school or high school
14 student.
15 Thank you guys, and I hope my global
16 teacher will give me extra credit.
17 (Laughter.)
18 MS. LIDIE: Thank you. We're happy to
19 answer any questions.
20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Actually, I just
22 have one quick one.
23 I had one of the local after-school
24 programs come and say that some of the
496
1 regulatory issues of -- teachers, for
2 instance, you know, might not be able to
3 interact with students if they're not
4 approved to be in the after-school program,
5 even though it might be held at the school,
6 it might be in a different part.
7 I'm not sure if that's specifically
8 the Advantage ones or maybe some of the other
9 after-school programs. But I'm just
10 wondering quickly if there are some
11 regulatory issues or concerns that you have
12 that we might be able to respond to.
13 MS. LIDIE: So the regulations apply
14 to almost all of the after-school programs.
15 Any one that's run by a community-based
16 organization like Emily's would have a
17 school-aged childcare registration through
18 the Office of Children and Family Services.
19 We actually were able to work with the
20 Assembly and with the Office of Children and
21 Family Services and State Education
22 Department over the last year, through a
23 series of roundtables, to deal with some of
24 the issues for the physical plant
497
1 requirements for programs operating in school
2 buildings.
3 And so that really opened a dialogue
4 with providers they hosted across the state,
5 and that was largely due to a lot of the work
6 from the Legislature in getting that to the
7 attention of, and to the work from OCFS and
8 SED.
9 And so we're hoping to further those
10 conversations around some of the other
11 issues, what you raise around the staff
12 member background checks and some duplicative
13 background checks and fingerprinting are
14 still issues on the table that are being
15 discussed.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Okay. Thank you
17 for your work on that. And hopefully we can
18 be helpful as well.
19 MS. LIDIE: Thank you.
20 MS. HOFELICH-BOWLER: Thank you.
21 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you for
24 coming. I hope you get extra credit.
498
1 (Laughter.)
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Allison Sesso,
3 executive director, Human Services Council,
4 for Restore Opportunity Now. Oh, yes, and
5 you have with you Mallory Nugent, senior
6 policy analyst, and Ron Deutsch --
7 MS. NUGENT: I've been deserted, so
8 it's just me. I'm Mallory Nugent, from FPWA.
9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Which one are you,
10 are you Allison?
11 MS. NUGENT: Mallory Nugent, senior
12 policy analyst at FPWA.
13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Oh, Mallory, okay.
14 MS. NUGENT: Thank you so much for the
15 opportunity to testify tonight. I know it's
16 towards the end of the evening, so I'll try
17 and keep it short. I provided you with
18 lengthy testimony that I will not read from
19 directly.
20 As I mentioned, I'm a senior policy
21 analyst at FPWA. FPWA is an antipoverty
22 policy and advocacy membership organization
23 based in New York City. FPWA, along with
24 Human Services Council and the Fiscal Policy
499
1 Institute, are cochairs of the Restore
2 Opportunity Now campaign. Restore
3 Opportunity Now is a statewide campaign to
4 ensure the strength and stability of the
5 human services sector, supported by more than
6 350 nonprofits from across the state.
7 In talking with providers across the
8 state, we've seen the tremendous impact a
9 lack of resources in the sector has had on
10 the ability to provide crucial services --
11 everything from childcare to senior services,
12 and all the other programs that we've heard
13 about today. Underfunding in this sector has
14 always been an issue, but we've reached a
15 critical point.
16 From 2007 to 2011, funding for human
17 services grew at a modest 3 percent average
18 per year. Since 2011, it has steadily
19 declined at an average of 1.3 percent per
20 year adjusted for inflation. This means that
21 the sector had $500 million less last year
22 than it would have if the growth pattern had
23 continued. We see the impacts of this
24 divestment play out in the workforce, in
500
1 contracts, and in programs.
2 As a first step to shore up the
3 workforce, we ask that the state provide
4 funding in both direct contracts and Medicaid
5 reimbursements to cover the minimum wage
6 increase. This unfunded mandate is a major
7 burden to organizations already stretched
8 thin. One member of our coalition stated
9 that even if they got rid of their entire
10 executive team, it would only cover a quarter
11 of the cost of the minimum wage to their
12 organization.
13 We estimate that for direct contracts,
14 the cost for this fiscal year would be
15 approximately $12 million. This does not
16 include Medicaid reimbursements, which we do
17 recommend be covered, and some of that
18 funding has already been allocated. But
19 there has been no funding allocated for
20 direct contracts. Ah, my sidekick is joining
21 me.
22 In terms of workforce, we see chronic
23 underpayment beyond the minimum wage,
24 compounded by a steady decrease in quality
501
1 and affordability of benefits. Many of these
2 positions should not be minimum wage work.
3 Approximately two-thirds of this workforce
4 has some level of college education. This
5 has let to a crisis in recruitment and
6 retention. Experienced staff leave to
7 increase their earning potential to
8 industries like government, hospitals, and
9 universities, and vacancies go unfilled.
10 Turnover is particularly problematic
11 for populations served by these
12 organizations, who often experience trauma or
13 have specific needs.
14 The Executive Budget does little to
15 alleviate the workforce struggles facing
16 nonprofits. In addition to absence of
17 funding for the minimum wage, the
18 Executive Budget eliminates the planned
19 0.8 percent COLA, the human services
20 cost-of-living adjustment, and discontinues
21 the COLA enacted in 2015 for certain direct
22 care workers. Changes to the DOL overtime
23 exemptions are also unanswered in terms of
24 funding.
502
1 And I'll turn it over to Michelle to
2 talk about how this plays out in contracts.
3 MS. JACKSON: Great.
4 And thank you so much. Thank you
5 especially for making the long haul, for
6 staying this late, and for letting me scoot
7 in back at the last second.
8 I'm Michelle Jackson. I'm the
9 associate director of the Human Services
10 Council. We're a human services organization
11 of about 170 New York City-based human
12 service providers, and we're also part of the
13 Restore Opportunity Now coalition.
14 I'm going to talk about really the
15 nuts and bolts of the contracts that
16 nonprofits have with the state, and some of
17 the underfunding. So the workforce tends to
18 be the sexier issue. When we talk about
19 infrastructure and indirect rates, it gets a
20 little bit more dry. But I will be brief and
21 make sure that I keep your attention.
22 As other agencies -- and you've seen
23 the state agencies when they testified today.
24 The state relies heavily on nonprofits to
503
1 carry out vital services, and yet drastically
2 underfunds these contracts, so that
3 nonprofits are left to fill the gaps with
4 private dollars. And what we've found is
5 that the gaps have become too great.
6 Eighteen percent of New York
7 City-based human service providers are
8 insolvent, based on their 990 data. Which
9 means that their deficits outsize their
10 revenues, meaning that they're not making
11 ends meet. And one of the reasons that
12 that's happening is because these contracts
13 are underfunded -- not just for the program,
14 but they don't provide an appropriate
15 overhead rate and they don't allow for
16 funding like necessary repairs.
17 So one of the things that we're really
18 asking for is for the state to really come
19 together with nonprofits and start funding
20 the indirect rate at an appropriate level.
21 There's federal OMB guidance -- I will
22 not bore you with the 300-page details of
23 that -- but I will just say that there's a
24 federal directive that all contracts that
504
1 have federal dollars in them are supposed to
2 pay 10 percent indirect rate. The State of
3 New York, along with all other 49 states, are
4 all out of compliance with this as of a year
5 ago. If nonprofits were paid at least a
6 10 percent rate, they'd be able to make some
7 of the necessary repairs and also make
8 investments. There's more and more evidence
9 that nonprofits who have appropriate overhead
10 rates are actually better organizations.
11 They are able to invest in security and
12 metrics and CFOs and accountants who can
13 catch fraud and make things more safe and
14 make sure their programs are working.
15 So we're asking for the state to
16 adopt, similar to Governor Cuomo's Executive
17 Order 38, a 15 percent indirect rate so that
18 our providers can kind of get back where they
19 need to go and start funding these contracts
20 at an appropriate level and funding the real
21 organizations that are making a difference in
22 communities.
23 The other thing that we're asking
24 for -- and if these contracts were fully
505
1 funded in the first place, we wouldn't need
2 it -- is a nonprofit infrastructure fund. It
3 was funded two years at $50 million, again
4 last year at another $50 million, and the
5 awards were bundled into one set of
6 $100 million awards.
7 This is a really great capital
8 investment program for nonprofits. A lot of
9 them have leaky roofs, they need
10 generators -- especially in New York City,
11 after Sandy, a lot of groups realized they
12 either needed generators or had to replace
13 them. We're talking about senior centers
14 that are heating and cooling centers, that
15 they don't -- they need to upgrade their
16 HVAC. We have a homeless service provider
17 who provides services to people with
18 disabilities; it only has one of their two
19 elevators that work.
20 These are really important
21 investments. And this investment of
22 $100 million -- over 600 organizations put in
23 applications for over $300 million worth of
24 projects, and there was only $100 million to
506
1 go around. So obviously there's a greater
2 need out there, so we'd like to see that
3 capital infrastructure fund put back at
4 $100 million.
5 In closing, especially in the current
6 federal environment, there's been a lot of
7 talk about New York as a sanctuary. There's
8 been a lot of talk about social justice and
9 our need to help different communities.
10 Nonprofits are in the front lines of doing
11 that work. When you talk about helping
12 immigrants, when you talk about helping
13 low-income communities, when we want to stand
14 together and we have a social justice agenda,
15 it's nonprofits who are on the front lines.
16 And we need to take care of them.
17 And by funding our workforce so that
18 we can do the work that we need to do and pay
19 it at an appropriate level. And when we fund
20 these contracts fully, we're able to do our
21 work and we're able to step up and meet the
22 agenda that we need to.
23 Thank you.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
507
1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
2 Questions, comments?
3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you for
4 staying so long.
5 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
6 MS. NUGENT: Thank you.
7 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you. And we
8 are finished. And we will be back here
9 Monday, not tomorrow. Tomorrow is canceled.
10 (Whereupon, at 5:57 p.m., the Senate
11 adjourned.)
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24