Joint Legislative Public Hearing on 2017-2018 Executive Budget Proposal: Topic "Environmental Conservation" - Testimonies

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 Senator Thomas F. O'Mara
Chair, Senate Committee on
20 Environmental Conservation

21 Assemblyman Steve Englebright
Chair, Assembly Committee on
22 Environmental Conservation

23 Senator Patricia A. Ritchie
Chair, Senate Committee on Agriculture
24

1 2017-2018 Executive Budget
Environmental Conservation
2 2-13-17

3 PRESENT: (Continued)

4 Assemblyman William Magee
Chair, Assembly Committee on
5 Agriculture

6 Assemblyman Daniel J. O'Donnell
Chair, Assembly Committee on
7 Tourism, Parks, Arts and
Sports Development
8
Assemblywoman Amy Paulin
9 Chair, Assembly Committee on Energy

10 Senator Diane J. Savino
Vice Chair, Senate Finance Committee
11
Assemblyman Jeffrion L. Aubry
12
Senator Elizabeth O'C. Little
13
Assemblywoman Patricia Fahy
14
Assemblyman Robert Carroll
15
Senator Pamela Helming
16
Senator Brad Hoylman
17
Assemblyman Phil Steck
18
Assemblyman Dan Stec
19
Assemblyman Peter D. Lopez
20
Senator Elaine Phillips
21
Assemblyman Steven Otis
22
Assemblywoman Addie Jenne
23
Assemblywoman Didi Barrett
24

1 2017-2018 Executive Budget
Environmental Conservation
2 2-13-17

3 PRESENT: (Continued)

4 Senator Todd Kaminsky

5 Assemblyman Brian P. Kavanagh

6 Senator Robert G. Ortt

7 Assemblywoman Carrie Woerner

8 Assemblyman Steven F. McLaughlin

9 Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele, Jr.

10 Senator Timothy M. Kennedy

11 Assemblywoman Ellen Jaffee

12 Assemblyman Sean Ryan

13 Assemblywoman Aileen Gunther

14 Senator Terrence P. Murphy

15

16

17 LIST OF SPEAKERS

18 STATEMENT QUESTIONS

19 Basil Seggos
Acting Commissioner
20 NYS Department of
Environmental Conservation 9 18
21
Rose Harvey
22 Commissioner
NYS Office of Parks, Recreation
23 and Historic Preservation 208 217

24

1 2017-2018 Executive Budget
Environmental Conservation
2 2-13-17

3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Continued

4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS

5 Richard A. Ball
Commissioner
6 NYS Department of Agriculture
and Markets 253 259
7
Audrey Zibelman
8 Chair
NYS Public Service Commission 324 330
9
John B. Rhodes
10 President & CEO
NYSERDA 389 396
11
Jeff Williams
12 Director of Public Policy
New York Farm Bureau 434 440
13
Darren Suarez
14 Director of Government
Affairs
15 The Business Council
of NYS 446 456
16
David Haight
17 NYS Director
American Farmland Trust 460 466
18
Jessica Ottney Mahar
19 Director of Policy
The Nature Conservancy
20 in New York 469

21 Sasha Eisenstein
Government Relations Manager
22 Audubon New York 476

23

24

1 2017-2018 Executive Budget
Environmental Conservation
2 2-13-17

3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Continued

4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS

5 Adrienne Esposito
Executive Director
6 Citizens Campaign for
the Environment 480 489
7
Patrick McClellan
8 State Policy Director
New York League of Conservation
9 Voters 493

10 James Meerdink
Project Director
11 Parks & Trails New York 498 506

12 Joseph Brilling
Executive Director
13 Washington County Sewer District
-for-
14 New York Water Environment
Association 508 518
15
Kevin Chlad
16 Director, Government Relations
The Adirondack Council 519
17
Peter Bauer
18 Executive Director
Protect the Adirondacks 525
19
Dan Shapley
20 Water Quality Program Dir.
Riverkeeper 531
21
Andy Bicking
22 Director of Public Policy
Scenic Hudson 539
23

24

1 2017-2018 Executive Budget
Environmental Conservation
2 2-13-17

3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Continued

4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS

5 Erik Kulleseid
Executive Director
6 Alliance for NYS Parks
Senior Vice President
7 Open Space Institute 549

8 Drew Cavanagh
Secretary and Director
9 Forest Rangers Superior
Officers Association
10 John Burke
Director
11 NYS EnCon Police
Superior Officers Assn.
12 Manuel Vilar
VP/CAO and Director
13 Police Park Sergeants
Association
14 -for-
Police Benevolent Assn.
15 of New York State 555 570

16 Mark Dunlea
Chairperson
17 Green Education and
Legal Fund 574
18
Blair Horner
19 Executive Director
New York Public Interest
20 Research Group (NYPIRG) 583

21 David Hartman
President
22 NYS Whitetail Management
Coalition 592 597
23

1 2017-2018 Executive Budget
Environmental Conservation
2 2-13-17

3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Continued

4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS

5 Evelyn Powers
Senior Manager
6 Interstate Environmental
Commission 601
7
Robert Blais
8 Mayor
Village of Lake George
9 David Decker
Director
10 Lake George Watershed Coalition 615

11

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good morning. I'm

2 Senator Catharine Young, chair of the State

3 Standing Committee on Finance. Welcome to

4 the New York State Legislature Joint Budget

5 Hearing on Environmental Conservation.

6 I'm joined by several of my

7 colleagues. We have Vice Chair Senator Diane

8 Savino, Senator Tim Kennedy, and Senator Todd

9 Kaminsky.

10 And I'd also like to welcome my

11 colleague, chairman of the Ways and Means

12 Committee, Assemblyman Denny Farrell.

13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you, Senator.

14 We have been joined by Assemblyman

15 Steve Englebright, Assemblyman Robert

16 Carroll, Assemblyman Philip Steck, and

17 Assemblywoman Patricia Fahy. We've also been

18 joined by Assemblywoman Carrie Woerner and

19 also Assemblyman Brian Kavanagh and

20 Assemblyman Jeff Aubry, and Assemblyman Oaks.

21 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you very

22 much, Chairman. We've also been joined by

23 Assemblyman Dan Stec and Assemblyman Pete

24 Lopez.

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,

2 Assemblyman.

3 Pursuant to the State Constitution and

4 Legislative Law, the fiscal committees of the

5 State Legislature are authorized to hold

6 hearings on the Executive Budget. Today's

7 hearing will be limited to a discussion of

8 the Governor's proposed budget for the

9 Department of Environmental Conservation, the

10 Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic

11 Preservation, the Department of Agriculture

12 and Markets, and the New York State Energy

13 Research and Development Authority.

14 Following each presentation, there

15 will be some time allowed for questions of

16 the chairs of the fiscal committees and other

17 legislators.

18 First of all, I sincerely would like

19 to welcome Basil Seggos, commissioner of the

20 Department of Environmental Conservation. We

21 are so happy to have you here. And I'm glad

22 that you arranged for a break in the weather

23 so that we could all attend today. So

24 welcome, Commissioner.

1 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you,

2 Chairwoman. It was not easy.

3 But good morning, Chairwoman Young,

4 Chairman Farrell, and members of the

5 legislative fiscal and environmental

6 conservation committees.

7 I'm Basil Seggos, commissioner of the

8 DEC. And here with me today are Julie Tighe,

9 who is our assistant commissioner for

10 intergovernmental affairs, as well as Jeff

11 Stefanko, who's deputy commissioner for

12 administration. So on behalf of DEC's nearly

13 3,000 employees, thank you for the

14 opportunity to discuss the Governor's

15 2017-2018 budget.

16 Governor Cuomo has established one of

17 the most aggressive environmental agendas in

18 the nation. The agenda recognizes that a

19 clean environment goes hand in hand with a

20 strong economy. Over the last six years, we

21 have worked tirelessly with you to cement New

22 York's leadership on environmental and clean

23 energy issues. This foundation will serve

24 the state well as we confront serious

1 questions about environmental protection in

2 Washington. New York must and will continue

3 to lead.

4 The Governor's 2017-2018 budget is his

5 most ambitious environmental budget yet. It

6 reflects the state's strong commitment to our

7 core conservation and public health

8 responsibilities, and demonstrates our intent

9 to tackle two of the most pressing threats of

10 our time -- climate change and drinking water

11 protection.

12 The time for debate about climate

13 change is over. Climate change is real, and

14 human activity is the principal cause. Last

15 year, I spoke to you about how 2015 was the

16 hottest year ever. 2016 just surpassed it.

17 In fact, the past 16 years are among the 17

18 warmest on record. The time for action on

19 climate is now, especially in the absence of

20 federal leadership.

21 New York has already set the most

22 aggressive climate goals in the country -- a

23 40 percent reduction in greenhouse gas

24 emissions by 2030, and an 80 percent

1 reduction by 2050. And we intend to have

2 50 percent of our energy from renewables by

3 2030. Later today, NYSERDA will discuss how

4 we'll reach these goals through billions of

5 dollars of investment in clean energy, and

6 through programs like NY Sun, REV, and the

7 Clean Energy Standard.

8 This year, we're doubling down on

9 these goals. First, through RGGI, the

10 Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, we

11 propose to lower the cap on carbon emissions

12 from the power sector by 30 percent between

13 2020 and 2030. Second, DEC and other

14 agencies will implement a comprehensive plan

15 to control methane emissions. And finally,

16 DEC and NYSERDA are undertaking a landmark

17 study to determine how the state can secure

18 100 percent of our energy from renewable

19 sources.

20 This year, we'll begin the critical

21 work of the newly created Ocean Acidification

22 Task Force. We'll also continue grants to

23 municipalities to reduce carbon emissions and

24 develop resiliency in the face of a changing

1 climate. And we'll propose changes to the

2 forest tax credit program to protect more

3 private forestland, sequestering more carbon

4 and protecting our precious water resources.

5 Clean water is vital for America's

6 health and prosperity, yet for too long we

7 have taken it for granted. New York's

8 historic legacy of contamination, coupled

9 with some of the nation's oldest

10 infrastructure, demands that we take bold

11 action now. That's why the Governor has

12 proposed the $2 billion Clean Water

13 Infrastructure Act. This monumental

14 investment over the next five years is in

15 addition to the $175 million remaining in

16 WIIA, the Water Infrastructure Improvement

17 Act, which provides grants to municipalities

18 and leverages low-cost financing through

19 EFC's billion-dollar loan program.

20 With the additional $2 billion, we'll

21 prioritize grants for the following:

22 protecting water at its source, through local

23 land acquisition projects and green

24 infrastructure; mitigating the impacts of

1 road salt and dairy waste; and incentivizing

2 consolidation of services between

3 municipalities. These watershed-based

4 initiatives will also create and sustain

5 jobs.

6 Emerging contaminants are a serious

7 threat to water quality. In 2016, DEC

8 tackled major water pollution challenges in

9 Hoosick Falls, Petersburgh, Newburgh, Owasco,

10 and on Long Island. Our unprecedented

11 responses to PFC contamination across the

12 state have secured clean water supplies,

13 protected private wells, and held polluters

14 accountable. Through the Governor's Water

15 Quality Rapid Response Team, DEC and DOH are

16 proactively identifying drinking water

17 supplies potentially impacted by PFCs and

18 other emerging contaminants like 1,4-dioxane.

19 And this past weekend, the Governor

20 called on the EPA to set a national

21 drinking-water standard for 1,4 dioxane. If

22 the federal government does not, we will.

23 And to ensure that DEC has the

24 resources it needs to effectively respond to

1 water contamination, the Governor is

2 proposing additional funding for the state

3 Superfund program.

4 So these broad goals on climate change

5 and water protection will be bolstered by

6 another historic commitment of $300 million

7 to the Environmental Protection Fund, or EPF.

8 This includes funding for all traditional

9 programs, such as land acquisition and

10 invasive species control, and new programs,

11 such as funding for the disposal of

12 PFC-containing firefighting foam, and

13 hardship grants for DOH's new water-testing

14 programs.

15 Environmental justice continues to be

16 one of my top priorities. As I work to

17 update DEC's own environmental justice

18 policy, we plan to invest $2 million for

19 targeted air monitoring programs and

20 mitigation solutions in low-income

21 communities, as we are doing right now in

22 Albany's South End. We'll also dedicate

23 $1 million to support green job training in

24 EJ areas and $1 million to develop urban

1 environmental education centers.

2 Outdoor recreation and natural

3 resource protection are the pillars of DEC's

4 mission. This year, the Governor is

5 proposing to increase our ability to steward

6 our lands by increasing our NY Works funding

7 to $70 million. Combined with EPF

8 stewardship funding, this will allow us to

9 invest $50 million in the first year of a new

10 program called Adventure NY, which is

11 designed to upgrade DEC's recreational assets

12 across the state. It will also encourage

13 recreation in new areas, in part to curtail

14 overuse in places like the Adirondack High

15 Peaks.

16 In the first three years of

17 Adventure NY, DEC will design and construct

18 projects across the state, including boat

19 launches, duck blinds, and wildlife viewing

20 areas; we'll improve trails, signage and

21 campgrounds in the Adirondacks and Catskills;

22 we'll establish a Gateway to the Adirondacks

23 on the site of the former Frontier Town

24 amusement park; we'll coordinate marketing

1 and tourism initiatives through I Love NY;

2 and we'll expand recruiting and retention

3 efforts for hunters and anglers, and continue

4 our work with the National Archery in Schools

5 program.

6 To support all these initiatives,

7 DEC's budget for the coming year recommends

8 State Operations appropriations of

9 $450.1 million and a capital budget totaling

10 $2.9 billion. The budget maintains DEC's

11 staffing level at 2,946 employees. And for

12 the first time in many years, we're holding

13 back-to-back academies for our Environmental

14 Conservation Officers and Forest Rangers,

15 which just kicked off this past weekend with

16 45 recruits. Day in and day out, our rangers

17 and ECOs perform heroic work on behalf of the

18 state, and I'm personally committed to

19 ensuring they have all the resources they

20 need to carry out their duties.

21 I'm confident this Executive Budget

22 will enable DEC to continue to fulfill its

23 mission to protect public health and the

24 environment. I thank you for the opportunity

1 to testify, and I look forward to your

2 questions.

3 (Interruption by protestors.)

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,

5 Commissioner, for that testimony. We truly

6 appreciate it.

7 We've been joined by Senator Pam

8 Helming and also Senator Tom O'Mara, who

9 chairs the Senate Standing Committee on

10 Environmental Conservation. And he has some

11 questions.

12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Before that, we've

13 also been joined by Assemblywoman Aileen

14 Gunther, Assemblyman Dan O'Donnell,

15 Assemblyman Fred Thiele, and Assemblyman

16 Steve Otis.

17 Thank you.

18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator O'Mara.

19 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you, Senator

20 Young.

21 Good morning, Mr. Seggos and your

22 team.

23 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Senator.

24 SENATOR O'MARA: It's good to see you

1 here this morning. Thank you for your

2 testimony.

3 While we're on the subject of drowning

4 New York, we have voluntarily entered into

5 Plan 2014 for the lake levels of Lake

6 Ontario, where we are in effect raising the

7 level of Lake Ontario, which is undoubtedly

8 going to lead to shoreline impacts, loss of

9 shoreline, property damage.

10 What in this budget is being utilized

11 to address those issues going forward and the

12 impacts of Plan 2014 on the lakeshore

13 residents of Lake Ontario?

14 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right, Senator,

15 so you're referencing a decision by the U.S.

16 federal government as well as the Canadian

17 government made in late December-January.

18 We have been funding, out of the

19 Oceans and Great Lakes line of the EPF, for a

20 number of years a series of lake resiliency

21 projects in coordination with the Department

22 of State. We propose that that continues in

23 this budget. We have several million dollars

24 set aside for Great Lakes work.

1 Our plan, irrespective of Plan 2014,

2 has been to conduct reach by reach analyses

3 of where there's vulnerabilities to flooding

4 in several communities and where there's a

5 need for resiliency projects. So we intend

6 to fund projects -- after we completed a

7 detailed survey of vulnerabilities, we intend

8 to fund those projects in part using the EPF

9 grants to municipalities, where we can, work

10 through the Clean Water Infrastructure Act to

11 upgrade sewage and water infrastructure. As

12 you know that's been an issue for many, many

13 years on Lake Ontario due to the prevalence

14 of storms in the winter and some of the

15 impacts that the shoreline owners suffer.

16 So our budget does provide some

17 funding to address the concerns you've

18 raised. And I would certainly ask and

19 advocate for your help in lobbying the

20 federal government to provide some resources

21 behind the decision that they made. At this

22 point they made the decision to raise water

23 levels through Plan 2014 and didn't bring any

24 funds along with it.

1 SENATOR O'MARA: Did you in your

2 capacity as commissioner, or Governor Cuomo,

3 weigh in, either pro or con, on Plan 2014?

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: We didn't weigh

5 in pro or con. What we did was provide input

6 to the U.S. government and urge them to

7 provide funding for whatever decision they

8 made.

9 SENATOR O'MARA: And they have not

10 provided funding to this point, the feds?

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Not yet.

12 SENATOR O'MARA: Now, you mentioned

13 there may be some relief for municipalities

14 in this expected property damage, shoreline

15 erosion, and the like. What about private

16 property owners that have owned property

17 along the lake, the south and eastern shore

18 of the lake, for generations? Are they just

19 left to fend for themselves? Or what kind of

20 relief can we expect to see coming for

21 private property owners?

22 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, right now

23 the EPF doesn't allow us to provide direct

24 grants to property owners, so that's why we

1 were pushing on the federal government to

2 come up with a program to provide mitigation

3 for homeowners. I haven't given up on that

4 by any stretch. We have to take a run at the

5 new administration on this. And that's

6 something we've heard loud and clear from

7 property owners on the south shore.

8 SENATOR O'MARA: So it would take a

9 change to the criteria of the EPF funding to

10 allow that to be spent through the EPF. What

11 about outside of the EPF?

12 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I'm not aware of

13 other programs outside the EPF that could

14 help provide direct grants to private

15 property owners, but I'd be happy to look

16 into that. And it would be one thing, if we

17 strike out with the federal government, that

18 we'll have to do.

19 SENATOR O'MARA: I'd be happy to work

20 with you on that, Commissioner, as well.

21 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

22 SENATOR O'MARA: Now, with the bond

23 act, the $2 billion as is proposed by

24 Governor Cuomo -- and some of us in the

1 Senate have proposed a $5 billion bond act

2 for clean water infrastructure. Would any of

3 that $2 billion be able to be utilized for

4 Plan 2014 mitigation?

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: It's a good

6 question. I think at this point one of the

7 things we are proposing to fund is source

8 water protection and, setting aside green

9 infrastructure projects -- green

10 infrastructure being an alternative to gray

11 infrastructure -- hardened infrastructure.

12 Those programs, in theory, could be used for

13 some watershed resiliency projects. And that

14 might have an effect on the impacts that

15 homeowners are seeing.

16 SENATOR O'MARA: In my opinion, the $2

17 billion bond act in the budget seems to lack

18 some specificity, categories of where that

19 funding will be spent, and lack of

20 involvement of the Legislature in that

21 process.

22 Can you describe maybe in a little

23 better detail, or will you be forthcoming

24 with a spreadsheet or line items of that

1 $2 billion and how that's proposed to be

2 spent, and what if any role you see the

3 Legislature has in the allocation of these

4 funds?

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Sure. Well just

6 to be clear, it's not -- the Governor hasn't

7 proposed a bond act. So we're proposing our

8 bonding authority be available immediately

9 after the closure of the budget, so not

10 having to go to the voters for it.

11 We will of course be happy to discuss

12 all of the proposals that we included in the

13 book. I can go through some of them today.

14 We've had a very successful few years with

15 the Water Infrastructure Improvement Act, or

16 WIIA, where we've dedicated millions of

17 dollars towards municipalities for water

18 infrastructure upgrades. We would certainly

19 seek to use that mechanism to channel more

20 resources out to those communities for the

21 same kinds of projects.

22 In addition to that, we want to see

23 funds going into salt controls, to help

24 farmers with manure runoff, to repair lead

1 service lines -- that's emerged as a major

2 issue in the wake of the Flint crisis. Now,

3 in New York State, we're seeing places where

4 there are lead service lines.

5 Regional water infrastructure

6 projects, where you have towns that are

7 nearby one another who might be able to share

8 resources, and we can provide funding for

9 that.

10 And certainly what we've seen is that

11 there are limits to the amount of projects

12 that we can spend Superfund dollars on. And

13 we would propose to direct some funds out of

14 the Clean Water Infrastructure Act to enable

15 us to go after contamination.

16 So that's just a general preview of

17 some of the projects and programs that we

18 would seek to fund through this. And we'd be

19 happy to work with you on those lines to make

20 sure there's more specificity.

21 SENATOR O'MARA: Do you have any more

22 specific breakdown for those categories of

23 what percentage of the available funds would

24 be spent, say, towards the clean water

1 infrastructure? Which I would agree with

2 you, over the past couple of years in the

3 budget has been hugely successful and allowed

4 many municipalities to move forward with

5 projects through that grant funding that

6 otherwise would not have been undertaken. So

7 I think we've seen an increase in those

8 projects, which is good for the residents and

9 also good for the environment.

10 So, you know, what -- and you

11 mentioned -- so without asking a second

12 question, I guess, then the breakdown of the

13 dollars for clean water infrastructure, for

14 lead line, main line removing. Do you have

15 some kind of breakdown as to where you would

16 see these monies focused?

17 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: We don't at this

18 time. But that will be something we'll be

19 working through with you in the context of

20 the negotiations over the next few months.

21 SENATOR O'MARA: I've had some

22 conversations with you and met with some of

23 our Environmental Conservation Officers and

24 Forest Rangers, and I commend you on the new

1 class to help build those numbers of

2 employees in the department. However,

3 there's a concern that we've discussed -- and

4 I know the department has been acting on it

5 in recent years -- but a lack of turnover of

6 vehicles and the safety of those vehicles for

7 our officers on the road. I believe over the

8 recent years we've had -- I think three

9 different vehicles have actually had a wheel

10 fall off of the vehicle while they've been in

11 use.

12 I've seen some of these vehicles, and

13 the poor condition doesn't bode well for I

14 think how the office is perceived in the

15 public when officers are driving around in

16 rusted-out vehicles. Can you explain where

17 you're headed on vehicle replacement and

18 where we can see, you know, turnover of these

19 vehicles going in this year, the next year?

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I would agree

21 with you, I believe the vehicle situation is

22 a concern. There was a period of time in the

23 late 2000s -- 2008, 2009 -- where the state

24 stopped buying vehicles, writ large, and our

1 agency was part of that.

2 There was a blip in that time that

3 we're starting to work through and are, I

4 think, in some ways in much better shape now

5 than we were even three or four years ago.

6 So for our ECOs and Rangers, last year

7 we bought 25 vehicles -- or two years ago,

8 25; this year, 60. And we're proposing

9 similar levels for the coming year. So I

10 think what we're doing is working through

11 that backlog, working through that blip that

12 we saw from the 2000s, and are getting back

13 to really where we should be, which is a

14 regular turnover, a more predictable

15 turnover.

16 I've seen some of the vehicles you've

17 referenced, and I find that unacceptable as

18 well. And we've worked through a number of

19 the problematic areas. The ECOs and Rangers

20 are getting new vehicles. We got new spill

21 trucks this year, which is helping us

22 statewide. Now we're getting back into a

23 regular rhythm with our program staff who are

24 using vehicles. So I think that the

1 situation is becoming better and better each

2 year because of the NY Works investments

3 we've had.

4 SENATOR O'MARA: Does the department

5 have any standards or goals as far as years

6 on the vehicle, number of miles on the

7 vehicle, as to when it's expected to be taken

8 out of service? And I also understand these

9 vehicles, they're in the first instance being

10 used by the officers out in the field in

11 responding to emergencies. But then there's

12 a secondhand use for lower, less emergent

13 duties of the department. So they're

14 utilized beyond even that expected life for

15 the officers.

16 But what are your goals or

17 expectations for vehicles as far as number of

18 years and mileage on a vehicle before it's

19 taken out of service?

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I don't have

21 specific numbers for you on sort of where the

22 cutoff might be. I think it will come down

23 to the condition of the vehicle and whether

24 or not it's serviceable and whether or not

1 it's going to be more expensive for us to

2 maintain the vehicle than to just buy a new

3 one or get into a lease. We work very

4 closely with OGS on this. I mean, this is

5 obviously a statewide issue. Statewide

6 questions, typically OGS is in the lead on

7 that. And we are prioritizing where we make

8 our investments in vehicles based on the

9 needs out there and based on the condition of

10 the vehicles that we have in service.

11 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you.

12 And it's my understanding that the

13 maintenance on these vehicles is primarily

14 done in-house. And it's done, I think -- at

15 least in the information I was given in my

16 meeting with a few of the officers, is that

17 it's a pretty effective rate as far as the

18 mechanic's rate on that servicing of the

19 vehicles.

20 However, some of these vehicles have

21 received as much maintenance over the years,

22 just about, as the whole full value of the

23 vehicle. And I don't know if at a certain

24 point whether it -- we're spending good money

1 after bad to keep a vehicle on the road. And

2 I understand the department doesn't undertake

3 any body repairs, which, you know, they're

4 showing rust on some of these vehicles with

5 actual holes in the side panels. So, you

6 know, that just doesn't shine a good light, I

7 think, on the officers in the field and the

8 respect that they should have from the public

9 if they're driving around in a rusted-out

10 vehicle.

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I would

12 agree with you. And to that I would say we

13 are working through the backlog that was

14 effectively given to us because of the lack

15 of investment back in the late 2000s. And

16 we'll get to the point where we no longer

17 have those situations shortly.

18 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you. I'm out

19 of time for now. I'll probably be back. But

20 thank you for your answers, and we can move

21 on from here.

22 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you,

23 Senator.

24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,

1 Mr. Chairman.

2 Chairman Farrell.

3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very

4 much.

5 Assemblyman Chairman Englebright.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Before that, we'd

7 like to announce that we've been joined by

8 Senator Liz Krueger. Thank you.

9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: And we've been

10 joined by Assemblywoman Ellen Jaffee,

11 Assemblyman Sean Ryan, Assemblyman Chairman

12 Bill Magee, and Assemblywoman Addie Jenne.

13 And now Mr. Englebright.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you,

15 Mr. Farrell.

16 Good morning, Commissioner.

17 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Good morning,

18 sir.

19 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: The

20 $2 billion appropriation that the Governor

21 has proposed, does that stand in support of

22 the premise that we really need to be making

23 a substantial infrastructure investment and

24 that this is all that we need to do, or would

1 the agency and the Governor support the $5

2 billion initiative that Senator O'Mara and I

3 are helping to propose?

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, obviously

5 the $2 billion is a start. And just so we

6 get some context for it, the money we've

7 spent so far under WIIA, which amounts to

8 about $400 million, that's already leveraged

9 well over a billion dollars in total

10 projects.

11 So using the same math, our $2 billion

12 over the course of five years is likely to

13 leverage over $10 billion in projects.

14 That's just some context for the amount of

15 spending, because of the loan program we have

16 and the effectiveness of it.

17 I can't speak to the Division of

18 Budget and its ability to withstand more

19 debt. I leave that to them. But there's

20 obviously a need out there. We projected a

21 need of $30 billion over 20 years for

22 wastewater infrastructure. The $2 billion we

23 know will help to address the most serious

24 concerns over that time. And we'll certainly

1 work with you and your staffs and the

2 Division of Budget to see if we can increase

3 that.

4 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: The need

5 is -- if you include water supply along with

6 wastewater disposal --

7 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: It's much bigger

8 than that.

9 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: -- the need

10 is closer to $70 billion to $80 billion.

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: So this is

13 kind of a drop in the bucket, no pun

14 intended. But we seem to at least be pulling

15 in the same direction, which is encouraging.

16 The State Comptroller has said that

17 only $75 million of the $2 billion is

18 projected to be spent in fiscal year

19 2017-2018. Is that correct?

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I am not aware

21 of that calculation. We would certainly --

22 we already have, in 2017-2018, $175 million

23 programmed for wastewater out of the WIIA

24 funding. And we're proposing that the

1 $2 billion is in addition to that. So we'd

2 be making $400 million available this year in

3 addition to that 175.

4 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: The DOB has

5 indicated that it would be about $400 million

6 a year for five years, and yet there are no

7 specifics in here. How do we know that a

8 single item like information technology isn't

9 going to gobble up more traditional DEC

10 investments into wastewater and supply?

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, as I told

12 Senator O'Mara, we will be working with you

13 and your staffs to provide more specificity

14 on each of those programs. There's an

15 unquestioned need on infrastructure. That's

16 where our priority is. There's an

17 unquestioned need on source water protection;

18 that's another huge priority. Obviously, IT

19 infrastructure is important for the

20 department, but that's going to be a much,

21 much smaller priority than our capital

22 expenditures out in the field.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: In a sense

24 of historical perspective and fairness, I

1 should point out that our missing partner

2 here is the federal government, which has

3 been disinvesting in these very important

4 areas. We'd like to work with you to help

5 appeal to our representatives at the federal

6 level for them to do their part.

7 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I think that's

8 incredibly important. There's been a lot of

9 talk about infrastructure at the federal

10 level and the new administration's commitment

11 to infrastructure. And I would stress it's

12 the invisible infrastructure that gets

13 ignored, but that happens to be in some cases

14 the most important infrastructure, and we

15 have to do all we can to remind the feds not

16 to lose sight of that.

17 Just to clarify, half of what we are

18 proposing -- so half of the $400 million a

19 year -- is going to go towards water

20 infrastructure. And the IT concept is a

21 one-year expenditure.

22 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: This year

23 the EPF includes a number of new items that

24 had previously been funded elsewhere. This

1 includes, for example, payment for

2 enforcement of certain local Navigation Law

3 expenses. These items, in aggregate, are

4 worthwhile. However, they decrease the

5 traditional EPF expenditures for items that

6 we've seen the EPF used for in the past.

7 So this is an interesting departure

8 from what we would expect, given the kinds of

9 stresses that the EPF is undergoing. What's

10 the rationale behind these transfers?

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So respectfully,

12 I'd ask you to raise that with Commissioner

13 Harvey, because that's a program that Parks

14 administers.

15 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: That's not

16 just Commissioner Harvey. I mean, there are

17 a whole variety of offloads that are now

18 being placed in the capital expenditures that

19 previously were not capital items.

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I can just tell

21 you that the navigation concept that you

22 brought up is a Parks Department program.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Overall, the

24 DEC staff has remained around 3,000

1 employees. It's down about a thousand, or 25

2 percent, since the early 2000s. But your

3 responsibilities keep growing. Do you feel

4 that you have sufficient staff to perform the

5 many functions of your department?

6 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I do. I do.

7 And having been at the department now for a

8 year, I feel honored to have been able to

9 work with our staff on some of the most

10 challenging issues to come across our agency

11 in many years. The way that we responded in

12 Hoosick Falls -- in addition to Hoosick

13 Falls, we had other areas around the state

14 that had very significant pollution problems,

15 and we rose to the challenge in a very

16 successful way with the staffing that we

17 have.

18 I think what's really important to me

19 is not just how many staff you have, but what

20 resources they have. We've worked now for

21 six years in restoring environmental

22 budgets -- I mean, bringing the EPF from what

23 it was, 134, now up to $300 million. There

24 was no NY Works when we started six years

1 ago. Superfund expired two years ago.

2 Thankfully, we came together and reauthorized

3 Superfund because that gave our staff, our

4 2,946 employees, the chance to go out there

5 and solve some of these incredibly

6 complicated problems for the benefit of New

7 Yorkers.

8 So I think it's a testament to our

9 collective work and the funding we've been

10 able to provide to our staffs to help them

11 carry out their mission. And that's why I'm

12 confident we can continue that moving

13 forward.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Last year,

15 of course, was the first time that we saw the

16 $300 million figure. It was because we had a

17 bunch of settlement money. So going forward,

18 we're probably not going to have settlement

19 money. Is the $300 million level planned on

20 being maintained or increased? And if so,

21 through the use of bonding, would the EPF be

22 responsible for debt service payments?

23 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: The $300 million

24 is absolutely in the financial plan moving

1 forward. We intend to sustain that through

2 bonding. And our Division of Budget has

3 assured us that that is within the state's

4 capabilities moving forward.

5 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Is the cost

6 of the bonding going to be placed upon the

7 EPF, is the question.

8 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: My deputy

9 commissioner for administration has advised

10 me no.

11 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Okay.

12 The land acquisition category in the

13 EPF was reduced this year by $7 million, from

14 $40 million last year. It's only $33 million

15 this year. Why the decrease?

16 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So we have --

17 our Open Space Conservation plan has given us

18 a framework for land acquisition moving

19 forward. We continue to close on properties

20 across the state. We didn't reach the figure

21 that we projected last year, so we've pulled

22 that back in order to prioritize several

23 other categories.

24 However, as I mentioned in my opening

1 testimony, as part of the $2 billion we

2 certainly want to continue and in fact

3 enhance land acquisition across the state,

4 albeit slightly differently. Whereas the

5 state -- be it DEC or Parks, through the

6 EPF -- does land acquisition through the EPF,

7 the Clean Water Infrastructure Act would

8 provide funds for municipalities to do some

9 of that. So the net benefit to New York is

10 going to be more land acquisition moving

11 forward, not less. So that line is somewhat

12 covering up of the fact that more will be

13 purchased.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Okay. The

15 Governor's State of the State message

16 mentioned that the DEC will construct

17 infrastructure at the Boreas Ponds in the

18 Adirondacks and build trails as part of a

19 "hut to hut" system. Does the Executive

20 Budget contain funding for this proposal?

21 And if so, how much? And also, would such a

22 proposal involve the construction of

23 structures on the Forest Preserve? I, for

24 one, would be very concerned about that.

1 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So the Governor

2 has proposed $50 million to go into a new

3 program called Adventure NY. Adventure NY

4 would provide funds for us to do projects all

5 across the state, chiefly in the Adirondacks

6 and Catskills, where we have land. Some of

7 the investments we intend to make around the

8 Boreas property would involve repairing

9 certain assets, trail networks, boat launches

10 and whatnot.

11 There are -- there's nothing in terms

12 of structures planned for the Boreas lands.

13 There's certainly -- we will do our best to

14 make a coordinated trail network, coordinated

15 hut-to-hut network around the Adirondacks

16 that takes advantage of our properties but

17 also helps increase the amount of lodging.

18 In some cases, our campgrounds are the only

19 lodging in municipalities within the

20 Adirondacks. So that's the concept.

21 In addition to the work we'll do to

22 secure the Boreas property, in conjunction

23 with the APA we're also proposing $32 million

24 over time to go into the Frontier Town, which

1 is a new project just off of Exit 29. Some

2 of those funds will come right out of

3 Adventure NY. It will be designed to bring a

4 new gateway to the Adirondacks that doesn't

5 exist right now.

6 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: We had a

7 hard time finding where the $3 million for

8 the southern pine beetle was. Could you tell

9 us, where is this money in the budget?

10 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So within the

11 invasive species line of the EPF, with our NY

12 Works funds, where applicable, and also

13 through the stewardship line of the EPF.

14 In addition to that, we're producing

15 federal grants. We already have some federal

16 grants now, and given the nature of invasive

17 species, the federal government has to have a

18 greater stake in that, and we would seek more

19 funds out of the federal government on that

20 this year.

21 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: We have a

22 number of new Superfund sites. Does this

23 program currently have sufficient assets to

24 address all of the identified and potential

1 sites?

2 And the Executive Budget would also

3 authorize transfer of funding from the

4 $2 billion proposed water appropriation to

5 the same account that funds the Superfund

6 program. Is this funding necessary to

7 maintain the fund's solvency?

8 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So the first

9 part of your question, do we have enough

10 funds now in Superfund, luckily we do. We

11 have $100 million a year to address pure

12 Superfund sites. Those are sites that are --

13 by their nature, they qualify for Superfund

14 based on their hazardous waste status and

15 threats to public health and the environment.

16 You're right, we are proposing to

17 direct a portion of the $2 billion Clean

18 Water Infrastructure Act to address

19 contaminated sites that don't rise to the

20 level of Superfund sites but are nonetheless

21 a threat to drinking water -- such sites as

22 landfills, salt, salt piles. Things of that

23 nature that are not necessarily hazardous but

24 are nonetheless threatening to drinking

1 water, we would propose to use the Superfund

2 mechanism and the staffs that work on those

3 projects to conduct an enhanced amount of

4 work around the state.

5 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you,

6 Commissioner.

7 Mr. Farrell.

8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Senator?

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

10 We've been joined by Senator Betty

11 Little.

12 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Senator.

13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So thank you,

14 Commissioner. I have several questions, and

15 I'd like to follow up.

16 But first of all, I'd like to commend

17 the Governor and you for including $400

18 million for the Water Quality Infrastructure

19 Improvement Act and also $2 billion for the

20 Clean Water Infrastructure Act. And as my

21 colleague Senator O'Mara and my colleague

22 Assemblyman Englebright pointed out, we'd

23 like to actually increase those funds for

24 infrastructure and water, and especially

1 water projects.

2 You know, Albany was first claimed for

3 the Dutch in 1609. And I point that out

4 because New York is such an old state. We're

5 a very historic state that we're all very

6 proud of. We're the Empire State. But we're

7 an old state. We were settled hundreds and

8 hundreds of years ago. And as a result, our

9 communities across the state struggle with

10 infrastructure problems. In many cases,

11 infrastructure is falling apart. We've been

12 faced with some terrible situations of water

13 quality issues in the state, and that's why

14 we need those funds, obviously.

15 But Assemblyman Englebright pointed

16 out the need for the infrastructure and the

17 Superfund. I just was wondering, you talk

18 about the ability to transfer the money over

19 to the Superfund from some of the

20 infrastructure money. But when we've checked

21 in the past, it's never gone over $90

22 million. So you talk about these

23 lesser-of-a-threat sites, but are you

24 concerned that maybe as you investigate these

1 sites, they may rise to a Superfund status?

2 Is that why you want the flexibility or --

3 could you address that?

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Senator, that's

5 certainly a possibility. I mean, we would

6 propose to increase our capabilities into

7 Superfund in part financially, to address

8 those Superfund sites that we come across.

9 So there are many -- you know,

10 certainly many -- probably many sites out

11 there that are not currently characterized as

12 Superfund sites that we know about -- many of

13 the landfills around the state. Certainly

14 our investigations, if they rise to that

15 level, we would be able to classify those

16 differently and more aggressively and conduct

17 more investigations. But that's what those

18 funds are designed to do.

19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Right. Because,

20 you know, there are limited resources.

21 They're scarce. And we have so many needs

22 that if -- so I just wanted to ask that

23 question.

24 Why does the land acquisition portion

1 of the water quality proposal not include the

2 ability of local governments to play a part

3 in the decision-making process?

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, as you

5 know, within the EPF that's worked very well

6 for many, many years, having local government

7 control and local government involvement.

8 And I would say we are certainly willing to

9 entertain that discussion to have local

10 government be a part of the land acquisitions

11 that would come out of this Clean Water

12 Infrastructure Act.

13 I mean, we are making grants directly

14 available to local government to do some of

15 those projects. But even the projects that

16 they aren't necessarily involved in -- if

17 it's going to a nonprofit, for example -- you

18 raise a good point, it might be worthwhile

19 having local government involved at all

20 levels.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I would encourage

22 that. I think the more that you get local

23 governments involved, I think it just makes

24 the project better all around. So that would

1 be great.

2 What specific problems have been

3 encountered in responding to water quality

4 crises using the current emergency rulemaking

5 statutes?

6 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I'm sorry, can

7 you -- can you --

8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So when we've had a

9 water quality crisis -- and we've had those

10 in the state, unfortunately -- are there

11 things in the law that get in the way when

12 you're responding to emergency situations?

13 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, a perfect

14 example of that, obviously, is PFOA, which up

15 until early January of last year was not a

16 regulated contaminant at the federal level or

17 certainly at the state level.

18 We worked very quickly to put out

19 emergency regulations declaring PFOA and PFOS

20 as hazardous contaminants. That enabled us

21 to then go spend Superfund dollars to fix a

22 very, very significant problem in Hoosick

23 Falls and elsewhere.

24 We were able to move quickly. It took

1 an enormous amount of staff time to pull off

2 this emergency regulation within the span of

3 just a few weeks. Typically that takes much

4 longer. But we have the ability at DEC to

5 move quickly if we find something within our

6 own authorities, and then we can turn that

7 around and effectively address it for the

8 benefit of the public.

9 So I would just offer that as an

10 example of our ability to move without

11 hurdle. But that may not be the case with

12 every contaminant we come across. There

13 might be other, you know, hurdles that we

14 address along the way.

15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So with the

16 Governor's proposals that he includes

17 regarding water quality, are there provisions

18 that actually address some of the emergency

19 situations that may arise? Are there other

20 things that can be done to address the

21 situation so that, you know, everybody can be

22 ready if something does happen?

23 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, certainly

24 we are very well coordinated right now with

1 the Department of Health on water issues

2 around the state. The Governor launched the

3 Water Quality Rapid Response Team back in

4 February, about a year ago exactly. And

5 through that, Commissioner Zucker and I have

6 been organizing our staffs very efficiently

7 to respond to situations that come across our

8 tables.

9 So we've obviously started very

10 aggressively in Hoosick Falls, but have

11 worked on enormous responses to places like

12 Newburgh, when the City of Newburgh lost its

13 water supply. And we quickly pivoted and

14 connected it to the New York City Catskill

15 Aqueduct and began treating all the dirtier

16 water coming off the Stewart Air Base. The

17 same thing happened at Gabreski, down on Long

18 Island, Gabreski Air National Guard Base,

19 where we moved very quickly.

20 So the Governor has been giving us all

21 the resources that we need to very

22 effectively respond to these crises as they

23 come up, and I don't foresee any barriers to

24 our ability to move quickly on that moving

1 forward.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good. Great.

3 Thank you.

4 The Governor's proposal allows

5 unilateral expansion of the definition of

6 "solid waste site" beyond its current

7 definition that's in regulation. So what

8 additional types of sites beyond landfills do

9 you anticipate adding to the definition of

10 solid waste?

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, the

12 definition is obviously very broad right now.

13 And not all solid waste sites are necessarily

14 hazardous, but might cause issues to nearby

15 drinking water supplies. And, you know,

16 there are areas where you have high levels of

17 salt or high levels of even naturally

18 occurring materials that would demand that we

19 get in there and move aggressively. So the

20 definition broadens our ability to go out

21 aggressively after those kinds of sites,

22 using Superfund dollars.

23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

24 Again, the $300 million for the

1 Environmental Protection Fund is included

2 again this year. And there's a $40.9 million

3 amount, an increase of $6.1 million, for

4 solid waste programs; $86.8 million, an

5 increase of $5.3 million, for Parks and

6 Recreation programs; $150.6 million, a

7 decrease of $11 million, for Open Space

8 programs, as was pointed out; and $21.7

9 million, a decrease of $350,000 for climate

10 change programs.

11 So we're just discussing solid waste.

12 Under the solid waste account, there are $3

13 million in additional funding for food

14 donation, recycling and organics projects.

15 What is the purpose of these funds?

16 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So food disposal

17 and food waste has become a major issue, not

18 only in New York but nationwide. We waste an

19 enormous amount of food. It just literally

20 is thrown off our plates into the garbage.

21 And that's true not only on the home front

22 but also in many commercial establishments

23 around the state, and institutions.

24 It not only takes valuable resources

1 away from the environment, it costs a lot of

2 money to raise food that you throw away. It

3 absorbs quite a bit of water. What we need

4 to do is a comprehensive approach to reducing

5 food waste by getting more of it to food

6 banks around the state, to the homeless and

7 to the hungry, keeping more of it out of

8 landfills. Food waste in landfills generates

9 an enormous amount of methane and is a

10 significant contributor to our overall

11 climate change footprint. And certainly, you

12 know, the cost of handling waste to landfills

13 is enormous.

14 So our plan announced by the Governor

15 is to mandate that food waste, starting in

16 2021, is redirected, directed away from

17 landfills, from waste, into as much reuse as

18 possible. The grants we're proposing now

19 through the EPF are going to help to generate

20 a market for that waste, whether it's a

21 market with the food banks or certainly a

22 market with anaerobic digestion around the

23 state. The food banks are going to be one of

24 the primary institutions that we start

1 working with right off the bat.

2 But in anticipation of those

3 regulations taking effect, we want to make

4 sure that there are enough places where

5 businesses of all kinds -- grocery stores,

6 businesses, institutions -- can send their

7 materials. And it will be a very effective

8 system once it's up and running.

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

10 Within the climate change account,

11 there's a $14 million allocation for Climate

12 Smart Communities, and it's a competition.

13 Could you tell us about that?

14 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Sure. Well, we

15 actually introduced that last year. And in

16 the first year, we actually gave out

17 $11 million. We announced the program right

18 after the budget in 2016, and made awards in

19 December, Climate Smart grants. These grants

20 went out to communities all across the state

21 for reducing carbon footprints, so making

22 buildings more efficient. They also went

23 towards climate resiliency projects around

24 the state, such as increasing green

1 infrastructure in various communities.

2 It was a very attractive program. We

3 got lots of very fantastic applications. And

4 we turned around great grants for many

5 municipalities.

6 We also had a smaller grant program in

7 that number, the $14 million, for

8 zero-emission vehicle programs. It was also

9 very well subscribed by municipalities.

10 That's what we intend to continue this year.

11 So the Climate Smart Communities is a

12 designation that we give to communities based

13 on their intent to become more resilient for

14 climate change purposes. That helps in the

15 scoring of those projects when they come to

16 us, if you are a Climate Smart Community, but

17 it's not a barrier to it if you are not. So

18 if you've got a good idea and you want to

19 come to us for funding, we will help fund it.

20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

21 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: We've been joined

22 by Assemblywoman Didi Barrett.

23 Now for questioning, Assemblywoman

24 Fahy.

1 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you,

2 Mr. Chairman.

3 And thank you again, Commissioner, for

4 your presentation and your comments. And I

5 commend you and the Governor for putting at

6 the top of your list the climate change issue

7 as well as the drinking water protection. I

8 couldn't agree more.

9 I have a couple of comments, just in

10 the interests of time, and then just a couple

11 of questions. We appreciate that you came to

12 join our Environmental Committee last week,

13 so I did have a chance to ask you a couple of

14 these, so I'm just going to make note of them

15 and get to my other questions.

16 The Port of Albany, as you know, is

17 just a stone's throw from here. And I am a

18 little bit concerned with what we are hearing

19 about with the new berths and anchorage spots

20 proposed for further down the river, which I

21 assume will increase port traffic here with

22 the oil trains that also come into the port.

23 And I understand this is all tied to

24 the lifting of the ban on selling oil

1 overseas. So I'm very concerned. I know it

2 came up last week, and look forward to your

3 comments on that, because we do want to make

4 sure we minimize all risks. We know what has

5 happened in the Mississippi just a year or

6 two ago with shutting down that river for

7 months and months because of oil barge

8 disasters.

9 On that note, also I commend you for

10 the environmental justice work that you are

11 doing -- and thank you for noting it in your

12 testimony -- with the truck traffic right

13 near the port, along Pearl Street. Thank you

14 for awarding the grants to do that air

15 quality. We look forward to the results on

16 that, because that is a very, very serious

17 concern, especially given some of the health

18 consequences of that in that environmental

19 justice community.

20 And tied to that, of course, is the

21 bill I have to increase oil train safety,

22 which I look forward to working with you on.

23 A question, then, back on water. You

24 mentioned in your testimony the $2 billion,

1 and we appreciate that the Governor is

2 proposing that significant increase in water

3 infrastructure grants. Though I want to

4 reiterate the comments from Chairman

5 Englebright that certainly we know it is a --

6 there is so much more need, given the $80

7 billion that is estimated and certainly that

8 the federal government has not been stepping

9 up to the degree that we need them to step up

10 to address the water crisis.

11 You mention that in your testimony

12 that you see that a part of that money would

13 go toward incentivizing consolidation. Can

14 you elaborate on what you mean by that?

15 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Sure.

16 There are many municipalities around

17 the state that share proximate

18 infrastructure. So sewage plants that are

19 nearby, sewage gathering lines that are

20 nearby, water treatment plants that are

21 nearby one another, all of them needing

22 upgrades. The funding we would propose for

23 that would be almost on a separate track to

24 encourage consolidation of those services,

1 knowing in some cases it's far more effective

2 to build a smaller modern plant that can run

3 more efficiently than it is to repair two

4 older ones. So that's what that's

5 specifically designed to get at.

6 We have already -- we know of many

7 plants around the state where this might be

8 an effective dedication of the state's

9 resources, and we'd be happy to share the

10 list of those sites with you.

11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you.

12 I'm also working on legislation to

13 incentivize localities to work more on that,

14 as well as looking at the cap on those funds

15 right now of $5 million, which as you know,

16 just here in this region, there's a $90

17 million project underway, an important one.

18 But certainly a tremendous need is here in

19 our localities.

20 One other comment, and then one

21 question. The staffing issue, I know that

22 again was already raised. I just want to

23 share the concerns about the staffing,

24 particularly with regard to permitting the

1 permit process, which we know has been a

2 contentious one in the past. I recognize

3 that there is no proposal again, but I do

4 want to echo the concerns of if the staffing

5 needs are there so that we don't delay on the

6 inspections, they're very critical -- for

7 instance, the oil train inspections -- as

8 well as any unnecessary delays in the

9 permitting process that is so essential. Or

10 permit reviews, I should say.

11 Second question, Adventure NY. I have

12 read and you mentioned the proposal, the $50

13 million proposal to encourage and to provide

14 upgrades in the Adirondacks and the

15 Catskills, including the Frontier Park. Can

16 you talk about what is included in that

17 proposal to encourage more -- or to target

18 and provide better access to our low-income

19 areas, particularly those in our urban areas?

20 As you know, since the recession, we

21 have had -- well, the recession combined with

22 a decrease in education funding and combined

23 with the increase in testing, we have -- the

24 number of field trips among our youth,

1 school-aged youth, has absolutely plummeted.

2 And it's hard to encourage better stewards

3 among youth and families or to grow stewards

4 of our environment and of our park systems if

5 we don't improve the access, particularly

6 among urban youth and low-income youth.

7 I've addressed this with our Parks

8 commissioner as well, and she's been actually

9 terrific in increasing some proposals. But

10 can you talk about what might be in that

11 Adventure NY proposal that would also

12 increase access for those communities?

13 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes, of course.

14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you.

15 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So we're very

16 excited about all the things that Adventure

17 NY will do for our facilities. We need to

18 upgrade our facilities. In many cases, they

19 haven't had the kind of investment that

20 they've needed over the years. Nonetheless,

21 they're getting heavy use. So we want to

22 make the experience that one gets when they

23 get to these places much, much better.

24 All of our investments are near -- or

1 many of them, at least, are near or within a

2 short driving distance from urban areas. A

3 perfect example is Reinstein Woods, out in

4 Buffalo, which is just 9 miles from the city

5 center of Buffalo. We have Five Rivers,

6 which is just out in Delmar, very close to

7 the City of Albany.

8 Adventure NY will be designed to

9 upgrade those facilities and the campgrounds

10 that we use, the campgrounds that service so

11 many of our visitors from cities.

12 We have great coordination with Rose

13 Harvey on her programs, and the program we

14 actually worked on together, Connect Kids,

15 which is designed to bring kids out of urban

16 areas into some of our wilder places. We've

17 doubled the amount of money in this budget to

18 a million dollars that would be used for

19 Connect Kids, and that's specifically

20 designed to improve our facilities for the

21 use of our facilities by kids in urban areas.

22 We have Adventure NY, and we also have

23 our EJ programs, which are designed really to

24 work in tandem. They're two separate

1 programs, but they really are just one. It's

2 sort of one DEC and one mission.

3 So with the money that we are

4 proposing to direct towards environmental

5 justice organizations around the state, that

6 will help them build their capacity, it will

7 help us address needs within urban areas.

8 And then ultimately, if we are doing a better

9 job of ensuring that environmental justice

10 communities have access to cleaner air and

11 cleaner water, that will a hundred percent

12 involve their ability to get to our wilder

13 places.

14 So I believe this is vital. It's

15 something the Governor has given us the tools

16 to do in this budget. And I'm excited for

17 the next year.

18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you. I

19 look forward to following up with you,

20 particularly on the transportation for

21 school-age children.

22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

23 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

24 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you,

1 Mr. Chairman.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

3 Our next speaker is Senator Kaminsky.

4 SENATOR KAMINSKY: Good morning,

5 Commissioner.

6 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Good morning,

7 Senator.

8 SENATOR KAMINSKY: Many of us on Long

9 Island, in light of recent news stories and a

10 lot of what's come out have been concerned

11 with 1,4-dioxane in the water supply, which

12 you brought up a little earlier. I was

13 hoping you can fill us in on what you and

14 coordinate state agencies are doing to

15 address the problem.

16 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right. So as

17 you know -- and thank you for your work on

18 this -- 1,4-dioxane is a ubiquitous chemical.

19 It was used for many, many years in

20 manufacturing as a solvent. And it is still

21 used very widely today at lower levels in

22 consumer-care products.

23 The EPA in 2013-2014 did testing of

24 wells in Long Island and discovered that

1 though well below EPA guidelines, 1,4-dioxane

2 was showing up in about 71 percent of the

3 wells down there.

4 So we clearly need to get a better

5 sense what the causes are, where the

6 1,4-dioxane is coming from, what the safe

7 levels are for it. Again, while the

8 levels are all very low and below standards

9 right now, we need to find out what the

10 impacts are of it.

11 So over the last year we've been,

12 chiefly on the DOH side, working with Suffolk

13 County to put in a treatment system, a new

14 technology to be used at scale on a drinking

15 water well to see whether or not that type of

16 technology, called advanced oxidation, can be

17 used more widely. It has been used for many

18 years at Superfund sites across the state,

19 but at very low levels of flow. We want to

20 see if it can be used at a higher level of

21 flow. So that project, we should get the

22 results of that in 2017.

23 We're also recognizing the difficulty

24 of treatment. We are also -- the Governor

1 last year announced $5 million for

2 1,4-dioxane treatment technologies to the

3 Center for Clean Water Technology at SUNY

4 Stony Brook. That research is underway right

5 now. And at DEC we are aggressively

6 pursuing, through Superfund and the Clean

7 Water Act and our SPDES permitting program,

8 the potential sources of the 1,4-dioxane in

9 the groundwater.

10 Over the weekend, the Governor wrote a

11 letter to the acting administrator of the

12 EPA, urging her to set an enforceable

13 nationwide limit for 1,4-dioxane in drinking

14 water. And the Governor had said that if the

15 federal government does not do that, then the

16 state will do that, using a body of experts.

17 SENATOR KAMINSKY: You know, the

18 people on Long Island are obviously

19 concerned. It's on the cover of their

20 newspaper. The term "likely carcinogenic" is

21 attached to 1,4-dioxane, and so they would

22 love to see these real aggressive steps and

23 knowing that there's -- you're working as

24 hard as you can on a solution for it.

1 And of course, you know, getting our

2 federal partners involved is important. But

3 I think if we're waiting for this

4 administration to suddenly come down and

5 regulate 1,4-dioxane, I think another plan

6 has to be pursued at the same time. And I

7 hope you continue to do that aggressively and

8 alert the people of Long Island, who have the

9 highest amount of this in their water, as to

10 what you're doing.

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Certainly will.

12 And we look forward to working with you on

13 that.

14 SENATOR KAMINSKY: Definitely.

15 You and I have spoken about the

16 Bay Park outfall pipe, and we've both

17 commonly called it a game-changing project

18 for the South Shore, protecting the bays.

19 Can you give us an update as to where we are

20 with that? It's been a few years now, and

21 still every day there's treated effluent

22 getting pumped out into the waters in some of

23 the great communities on the South Shore of

24 Long Island without any relief.

1 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, without a

2 doubt, figuring out a solution to the Bay

3 Park outfall is going to be a game-changer

4 for water quality in Long Island. It's a

5 massive project. When we started on this a

6 couple of years ago, it was how do we

7 redesign this outfall at Bay Park, with an

8 enormous figure of, you know, over

9 $500 million.

10 Since then, you know, my team has been

11 working very creatively and proactively with

12 Nassau County on alternatives to that. And

13 that involves, as you know, the Cedar Creek

14 outfall. My staff is in negotiations right

15 now with Nassau County, trying to lock down

16 the use of the Cedar Creek outfall, which

17 would be a lower-cost alternative using

18 existing infrastructure to get rid of that

19 waste in an effective and clean manner.

20 So I don't want to characterize

21 exactly where the negotiations are, other

22 than I have some staff that are, you know,

23 pulling their hair out trying to finish it

24 up. And we hope to be able to announce it

1 this year.

2 SENATOR KAMINSKY: Okay, thank you.

3 And lastly, people in my area that

4 rely on the Lloyd aquifer have been troubled

5 by recent reports about saltwater intrusion

6 and other threats to the aquifer, the

7 sole-source pure aquifer that we have. And I

8 know that Chairman Englebright, who's here,

9 has spent a good part of his career working

10 on this.

11 Can you tell us where we are with

12 finding out the state of our aquifers and

13 what plan we have to make sure that they're

14 not being overpumped or harmed in any other

15 way?

16 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Sure. That is a

17 major, major situation down on Long Island.

18 And last year the Governor announced that we

19 are launching a multiyear study with the

20 USGS, a $6 million study over several years,

21 to characterize the full extent of the

22 groundwater on Long Island. That work is

23 underway right now. In fact, we are on the

24 verge of drilling the first pilot well, which

1 is designed to characterize groundwater

2 flows. We have historical inputs from

3 Suffolk County. We would intend to take

4 advantage of the existing information out

5 there and create a new layer of information

6 through this effort.

7 But this is very much underway right

8 now. I think we actually have a meeting

9 tomorrow, a big stakeholder meeting tomorrow

10 on this down in Long Island with USGS and

11 some of the experts that we've convened.

12 SENATOR KAMINSKY: Okay. Well, thanks

13 for your work, Commissioner. I was obviously

14 very pleased to see the work this weekend on

15 1,4-dioxane and hope we continue to push and

16 have New York really lead on this. So thank

17 you.

18 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you,

19 Senator.

20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

21 Chairman Farrell.

22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

23 Assemblyman Dan Stec.

24 ASSEMBLYMAN STEC: Thank you,

1 Chairman.

2 Good morning, Commissioner. Thanks

3 for joining us.

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Good morning,

5 Assemblyman.

6 ASSEMBLYMAN STEC: A couple of quick

7 questions. Mostly I wanted to follow up

8 on -- last year we had a hearing here, I

9 believe it was in this room, on the

10 electronic waste program and the problems

11 that it's had. That law was passed predating

12 my tenure in the Legislature, so it's been

13 kicking around for at least five, six years

14 now.

15 And generally the law requires that

16 manufacturers provide for disposal of

17 household electronic waste. In effect,

18 though, that is not occurring, and there's a

19 lot of people or municipalities that are

20 forced to pay or sometimes go to great

21 lengths to try to find somebody that will

22 take the stuff, either for charge or not.

23 But certainly I think the intent and

24 everyone's understanding of the law was that

1 this was not supposed to cost the consumer or

2 the local municipalities, who are under the

3 gun with the tax cap and more edicts from

4 Albany about, you know, how they should be

5 spending their money, and yet I've got local

6 municipalities in my district that are using

7 taxpayer dollars to subsidize this program or

8 this fiat.

9 What is the current update as far as

10 the regulations and trying to get the --

11 because I know that there are some

12 investigations, there was reports that the

13 department has authority to create and

14 enforce and -- but I think the gist of the

15 hearing last year was that changes need to be

16 made. And I wanted to know if you can update

17 us.

18 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right. Well, I

19 would say this. The e-waste law has been

20 very successful in many ways in keeping

21 e-waste out of landfills and out of many

22 parts of the state where we wouldn't want it.

23 We have seen the trends heading in the

24 right direction on people taking advantage of

1 the program. But I absolutely hear you on

2 the burdens that municipalities have been

3 facing. One of the biggest problems with

4 e-waste is nobody wants the old televisions.

5 It's the old leaded glass that's very

6 difficult to handle. The commodity pricing

7 right now across the board is quite low, and

8 it's harder and harder for businesses to take

9 advantage of the program and actually make

10 money off of these commodities.

11 So last year, as you know, we worked

12 with you to announce a grant forum for munis,

13 and about $1.3 million has gone out from that

14 program to help offset some of the burden

15 that they're facing. There's still $1.7

16 million available and unclaimed; we've

17 actually announced it two or three times. So

18 if there's more we can do to get the word out

19 that there's funding available to offset some

20 of the burdens that they're facing, we need

21 to make that known that this money is

22 available.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN STEC: The law says that

24 the manufacturers are on the hook for this.

1 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right.

2 ASSEMBLYMAN STEC: And if I was here,

3 perhaps I would have debated whether or not

4 that was the right move for the state to make

5 at the time. But that's the move the state

6 made.

7 Are the manufacturers all complying?

8 I mean, are -- you know, there's not a local

9 SONY manufacturer you can just drive down and

10 drop your -- so, I mean, which I always

11 thought it was odd to put the manufacturer on

12 the hook for this. Not that I'm in a hurry

13 to put the retailer on the hook for it

14 either. But, you know, clearly the intent

15 was not for the owner of the electronic waste

16 to be spending money. Maybe that's where we

17 should have landed, but that isn't where we

18 landed.

19 Are the manufacturers all complying?

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I wouldn't say

21 they're all complying. We certainly are

22 managing the program with an eye towards

23 enforcement of the existing law.

24 We are in the midst of reforming the

1 regulatory package that goes along with it,

2 and we'll be putting that out this year to

3 ensure that there's more clarity out there

4 and more adherence with the existing law.

5 And in the meantime, you know, getting the

6 grants out there as quickly as possible to

7 offset some of those burdens is one of the

8 things I want to make sure they're aware of.

9 ASSEMBLYMAN STEC: All right, thanks.

10 And I just want to shift gears quickly

11 with the time I've got left. My district,

12 about a third of the Adirondacks, hundreds of

13 lakes and rivers, lots of water concerns,

14 quality concerns, specifically aquatic

15 invasive species, salt loading.

16 You know, certainly not the only lake

17 in my district but one that's very heavily

18 studied and very frequently visited by all,

19 Lake George. We're seeing, you know, a ton

20 of data available there, increasing trends on

21 chloride loading. It's tripled since 1980.

22 What's in this budget that's new or expands

23 existing programs for both our salt issue but

24 aquatic invasives? I think that, you know,

1 Lake George has got a nice program there,

2 we've got boat-washing stations. But it's

3 really a statewide issue, ultimately. And I

4 think here's an example, if you'll forgive

5 the expression, of a rising tide lifts all

6 boats, you know, as far as if we're

7 addressing it on a statewide basis as opposed

8 to, you know, trying to chase hundreds of

9 individual lakes. What's new in the budget

10 for those issues?

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: No doubt salt is

12 an issue for many of our surface waters. And

13 I've gotten several briefings from the Lake

14 George advocacy community -- and not just

15 advocacy, local government as well, all being

16 very concerned about the trends in those

17 levels.

18 We have a bit of a head start there in

19 the sense we've got the science now. We've

20 got everyone pulling in the right direction;

21 you know, historic opponents that are all

22 concerned about the condition on the lake.

23 And we have multiple state and local agencies

24 that are looking at ways to improve the

1 application of salt on roads.

2 But as you say, this is not just a

3 Lake George issue, it's an issue across the

4 Adirondacks and really statewide. And it's a

5 tough balance. Right? You have to balance

6 the road safety versus environmental and

7 public health. And there's some places that

8 are doing it at the local government better

9 than others. And we have formed a working

10 group within the Rapid Response Team to focus

11 on salt issues. So we're working with the

12 Department of Transportation and others to

13 figure out whether or not we need to do best

14 management practices.

15 Within the budget, in the Clean Water

16 Infrastructure Act, in the EPF, we are

17 proposing specifically to provide grants for

18 municipalities to cover salt storage areas.

19 I think that will have a significant impact

20 on runoff. It doesn't get to the

21 application, it gets to the storage of it.

22 But those grants in the past have been very

23 helpful, particularly in the Adirondacks,

24 really across the board in reducing salt

1 contamination.

2 On the invasive side, we -- again, a

3 unique situation I think in the Adirondacks,

4 where you had everyone pulling in the same

5 direction to address a very significant

6 situation. Where places like Lake Champlain

7 have incredible numbers of invasive species,

8 and yet we've been able to stave it off on

9 Lake George and elsewhere. Great boat

10 stewards program going on right now that we

11 will continue to fund in the Adirondacks.

12 We also, as you know, we put out

13 grants. Last year I heard loud and clear

14 during my hearing the interest in doing

15 eradication, not just prevention. We believe

16 prevention is very important because you want

17 to prevent it from getting there in the first

18 place. But if it gets there, you have to get

19 tools to people to move it out.

20 So those grants we announced in

21 December, I believe, $2 million. The

22 application process is underway right now.

23 Those funds will certainly, I would imagine,

24 flow towards many lake associations and

1 municipalities up in Adirondacks.

2 It's certainly one of my top

3 priorities. We have an inundation in

4 New York State, given who we are. We are the

5 nexus of commerce and tourism. And there's

6 an enormous amount of terrestrial and aquatic

7 invasives coming into the state, and we have

8 to do everything we can across the agencies

9 -- DEC, Ag and Markets, DOT. And we work

10 very well generally in stopping some of these

11 problems. But when we don't, we want to make

12 sure we're in there doing eradications.

13 ASSEMBLYMAN STEC: Thank you.

14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. I'd

16 like to remind all the speakers to try to

17 keep within the time period. You all have

18 clocks that show you where we're at. But we

19 have over 30 speakers scheduled for today.

20 And if we go at this rate, we're going to run

21 into the hearing tomorrow.

22 Our next speaker would be Senator Tim

23 Kennedy.

24 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you,

1 Chairwoman.

2 Thank you, commissioner. Thank you

3 for your service and your testimony today.

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

5 SENATOR KENNEDY: I applaud the

6 Governor's proposal to redevelop the old

7 Bethlehem Steel site in Lackawanna, New York,

8 in my district. As you're well aware, the

9 site has been subject to remediation over

10 decades. Can you elaborate on the current

11 status of that cleanup?

12 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes. Well, a

13 significant industrial site out in Buffalo

14 that for many years was impacted by a variety

15 of chemicals, including simple slag, which

16 underlies most of the site.

17 We've been working very hard with

18 local partners, through the Brownfields

19 Cleanup Program and through State Superfund,

20 to address not only the hotspots but to

21 address some of the land that isn't as

22 heavily impacted and can be turned into

23 productive industrial use, reuse.

24 We want to see the site be restored as

1 a place of commerce and then, where

2 appropriate, provide some public access to

3 waterfronts. Smokes Creek we've talked about

4 being an ideal location to get people down to

5 the waterfront, connect the communities down

6 to the lake. And working with your office

7 and our partners out there, we have a good

8 vision to get that done quickly. We've

9 gotten, obviously, the creek dredged, which

10 will help with some of the flooding issues

11 that you see in Lackawanna.

12 But it's an exciting project, and it's

13 an exciting opportunity for Buffalo to bring

14 an old brownfields site back into productive

15 reuse.

16 SENATOR KENNEDY: Yeah, can you talk a

17 little bit more about what still needs to

18 happen to develop this into this

19 manufacturing campus, this industrial park,

20 as has been proposed, and what sort of

21 timeline we may be looking at?

22 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I can't talk

23 about the timeline exactly. I mean,

24 certainly we've made significant progress

1 over the last few years, and we're nearing

2 the end of remediating some of the most

3 significant sites. The acid tar pits and few

4 other hotspots on the property have been

5 remediated. And we're doing this in

6 conjunction with the local community, so that

7 there's enough buy-in into the ultimate

8 redevelopment of the property.

9 There's work that remains, but I think

10 we're through the worst of it at this point.

11 And it's been a great everyone-

12 pulling-in-the-same-direction effort.

13 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you.

14 The $2 billion proposal for water

15 infrastructure improvement, obviously badly

16 needed across our state. In my district,

17 Scajaquada Creek, as we've discussed on many

18 occasions, has been negatively impacted by

19 sewage overflow issues. And just recently,

20 last year the Town of Cheektowaga received $5

21 million in grants, $15 million in

22 zero-interest loans to update their sewer

23 lines. I appreciate your efforts and support

24 and thank your office for all of their

1 efforts on behalf --

2 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

3 SENATOR KENNEDY: -- in that regard.

4 But this represents funding given to

5 municipalities. We also have many capable

6 nonprofits, such as the Buffalo Niagara

7 Riverkeeper, willing to help with water

8 cleanup, infrastructure improvements, wetland

9 restorations. Will any of the $2 billion be

10 available for nonprofits to access?

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, certainly.

12 As we discussed a little bit about

13 source-water protection and setting aside

14 lands, we want to make not only

15 municipalities eligible to get those funds

16 and setting land aside, but also to enable

17 qualified nonprofits to do some of that work

18 as well.

19 As we see quite often, there's a very

20 thorough engagement. That's a perfect

21 example, Scajaquada Creek and Hoyt Lake.

22 Those are areas where you have very solid

23 engagement from communities and nonprofits,

24 and some of those funds could be channeled

1 through those organizations generally to do

2 source-water protection.

3 SENATOR KENNEDY: Is there more we can

4 do to engage these nonprofits?

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Absolutely. And

6 in fact, I mean, we are very thoroughly

7 engaged with nonprofits across the state on

8 environmental matters. There's -- the Land

9 Trust Alliance already receives grants under

10 the Land Trust Alliance Grant Program in the

11 EPF. There are parks' friends groups that

12 get similar investments. There's also the

13 Water Quality Improvement Program within the

14 EPF that's a larger grant program, $23

15 million. And you see grants like you're

16 talking about right now being applied for to

17 address watershed-type issues.

18 The Buffalo Riverkeeper is emblematic

19 of the kind of group that would apply for

20 those types of grants, and those have been

21 very effective statewide over the last 15 or

22 so years.

23 SENATOR KENNEDY: Great. I have more

24 questions; I will hold until later.

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

3 Assemblyman Aubry.

4 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: Good morning,

5 Commissioner.

6 Flushing Bay in my area is now

7 undergoing a major dredging --

8 UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: Your mic's not

9 on.

10 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: And it doesn't

11 want to go on.

12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Take another one.

13 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: Flushing Bay is in

14 my district and is undergoing a major

15 dredging. Is the department involved in that

16 effort? And what can you tell me about it?

17 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Is it the

18 dredging effort?

19 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: Yes.

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I believe that's

21 primarily an Army Corps project. We would

22 be -- we're involved with some of the upland

23 sources of contamination around Flushing Bay,

24 some of the stormwater issues over the years

1 and some of the issues coming out of the

2 automobile chop shops.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: In Willets Point?

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes.

5 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: Okay. Second,

6 what is your department's responsibility

7 relative to municipal waste trucks? We have

8 in that area a nesting of them, sometimes

9 overnight, sometimes for several days, full.

10 And in the summertime, obviously creating

11 great odors that add to the odor that comes

12 out of Flushing Bay. This was particularly

13 embarrassing when the Mets were going to the

14 World Series, and we invited the world there

15 but the trucks were there first.

16 So could you describe to me what your

17 department does about that and whether or not

18 you have sufficient personnel in the Queens

19 region to handle those kind of problems?

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Sure. Well,

21 typically truck parking and solid waste, for

22 that matter, is typically a local issue. You

23 raised this with us in the past, and we in

24 fact sent out our RECOs to conduct an

1 investigation of the problems you'd raised

2 with us. In Queens and Jamaica, for example,

3 recently we did an Operation ECO Quality.

4 We've done these around the state for many

5 years. We did one here in Albany, where we

6 have our Environmental Conservation Officers

7 actually doing truck pullovers to check with

8 compliance for all kinds of air emission

9 regulations and concerns.

10 Those have been very effective in the

11 past, and they're designed in some ways to

12 promote compliance but also to find bad

13 actors. And we'd be happy to talk with you

14 about other parts of Queens and Flushing, for

15 that matter, where you see persistent

16 problems, because we've been able to address

17 those in the past.

18 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: My understanding

19 is that we have limited resources for that

20 kind of work, though, out of that particular

21 office.

22 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: The way we run

23 our truck inspections is usually not just

24 with the resources in a single office. We

1 usually pool resources for operations. So

2 we'll pull officers from the Albany area,

3 we'll pull them from Western New York to do

4 these operations over a sustained basis. And

5 it's less of whether or not there's somebody

6 based in Queens; more so, how can we move

7 these teams in quickly and effectively to

8 solve comprehensive problems.

9 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: Thank you.

10 And the last is, what is your MWBE

11 program like relative to the money that you

12 spend on capital projects?

13 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, we are

14 obviously one of the agencies complying with

15 the MWBE requirements that the Governor set

16 forth. We are exceeding the MWBE guidelines

17 when it comes to the investments in

18 environmental justice that I detailed

19 earlier. We discussed some of the proposals

20 in the Governor's budget this year, the

21 millions of dollars he proposed to put into

22 environmental justice to help communities of

23 color around the state and disadvantaged

24 communities.

1 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: And it appears, at

2 least in the information that we've been

3 given, that you're now anticipating funding

4 job training and project implementation.

5 What's the relationship between a challenged

6 community of color environmentally and job

7 training relative to it? And how many

8 projects have we in fact implemented as

9 opposed to just studied?

10 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, this year

11 through the EPF we would like to dedicate at

12 least a million dollars to do job training

13 specifically for environmental jobs within --

14 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: How much money,

15 I'm sorry?

16 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: A million

17 dollars, specifically for environmental job

18 training in environmental justice areas, in

19 addition to a suite of grants for capacity

20 building at EJ groups. And also up to

21 $750,000 to do clean energy installations

22 within environmental justice communities.

23 All of that would be -- we would like

24 to see those programs be run in a coordinated

1 manner so that communities that are

2 disadvantaged and need job training are then

3 perhaps doing the work that would then come

4 through a grant program to build, you know,

5 local sources of clean energy.

6 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: And do you have a

7 list of what you consider to be environmental

8 justice communities around the state? Is

9 that a formal designation?

10 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: We do. It's

11 actually a regulatory designation dating back

12 to I believe 1999, when it was first put into

13 law.

14 In addition to that, we have a

15 commissioner's policy, it's called

16 Commissioner's Policy 29, that I have just

17 started the first set of dialogue with

18 environmental justice communities down in

19 New York City, and we're going to roll this

20 out statewide in an effort to modernize our

21 EJ policy, because frankly it's been on the

22 shelf for a while and we need really good

23 feedback from EJ groups and got it at our

24 first meeting last week, or two weeks ago.

1 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: Can we see the

2 list of those communities? Would you send

3 that to us?

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Certainly.

5 ASSEMBLYMAN AUBRY: Thank you.

6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

7 Senator?

8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

9 much.

10 Our next speaker is Senator Diane

11 Savino.

12 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator

13 Young.

14 Thank you, Commissioner. The beauty

15 of going this far in is I've gotten answers

16 to most of the questions that I had on the

17 list.

18 I do want to touch, though, on

19 something I know other members are probably

20 going to speak about, and it's an issue that

21 is of particular importance especially to

22 someone who represents my part of the city,

23 Staten Island and South Brooklyn, because you

24 know we are the entry point to the New York

1 Harbor. It is the issue of invasive species.

2 One of your predecessors had put in

3 place a ballast water proposal that would

4 have essentially crippled the shipping

5 industry in New York State and as far as

6 upstate New York, and we were able to push

7 that back.

8 But we do need a more comprehensive

9 solution to the problem of invasive species,

10 whether it's, you know, coming in on ballast

11 water. I don't think that the proposal in

12 the budget is sufficient. And I know it's

13 one of the things that Senator Kennedy wants

14 to follow up on, so I'm going to let him

15 question you more about that. I want to be a

16 little bit more parochial.

17 We have our own invasive species

18 problem on Staten Island, as your department

19 is well aware of. They are four-legged

20 creatures and winged creatures. You're

21 laughing, because you know the problem that

22 we have. You know, your department has

23 tried, but I'm not sure you're being that

24 successful with the relocation of the

1 turkeys.

2 For those of you watching at home,

3 Staten Island has a tremendous wild turkey

4 problem. And for some reason they have taken

5 up residence on the grounds of the South

6 Beach Psychiatric Facility and around the

7 area. And while some of us think it's

8 quaint, they are a nuisance, they destroy

9 property, and they have become a real problem

10 for the residents in the area around there.

11 And every time we think that you guys

12 have relocated them, suddenly a whole new

13 batch is hatched and they're wandering the

14 streets tying up traffic and destroying

15 property.

16 And then we have the deer problem.

17 These are not indigenous to Staten Island.

18 They are -- we are now up to almost a

19 thousand deer. They are inhabiting the

20 island. They swam across to Brooklyn

21 recently -- two of them literally swam over

22 the Narrows, wound up in Brooklyn in a

23 junkyard in Coney Island. Your department

24 went, picked them up, and brought them back

1 to Staten Island. Which -- they don't belong

2 to us. In fact, if you're going to bring

3 them somewhere, bring them back to Jersey.

4 That's where they came from. They are

5 New Jersey's deer.

6 (Laughter.)

7 SENATOR SAVINO: They really are.

8 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: It's part of our

9 tourism campaign.

10 (Laughter.)

11 SENATOR SAVINO: But this is becoming

12 a bigger problem. As you know, recently

13 there was a graveyard that was found on the

14 south shore of Staten Island where a bunch of

15 deer carcasses were unearthed, and it turned

16 out that some of your staff had buried them

17 inappropriately.

18 So what are we going to do about the

19 deer and the turkeys?

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I'll tell

21 you this. Obviously when you have a

22 situation where the predator-prey

23 relationship doesn't exist and you just have

24 prey out there -- deer, turkeys, other

1 animals -- and nature is out of balance,

2 there has to be some kind of active

3 management on behalf of the government. And

4 that's certainly what we see in

5 Staten Island.

6 Now, when it comes to turkeys, we have

7 tried in the past to do that, you're

8 absolutely right. We can certainly do so

9 again, do our best to get on top of it.

10 The deer situation, yes, is a problem

11 in Staten Island. Obviously we don't have

12 hunting down there, and that's usually what

13 is effective elsewhere around the state.

14 And, you know, again, we have been open to

15 creative thinking on this. The city, as you

16 know, has this program to do --

17 SENATOR SAVINO: Yes, I know.

18 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: -- deer

19 sterilization on a research pilot basis that

20 we gave them a permit to do.

21 While we don't believe that those

22 kinds of programs are effective, it's

23 nonetheless worth our time to see if it has

24 an impact. We certainly take this very

1 seriously. I hear the stories on a regular

2 basis about impacts with cars. A big issue.

3 SENATOR SAVINO: Cars and property and

4 --

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Cars and

6 property. And I will say that we need to be

7 open to many solutions on this, not just the

8 ones we've used so far.

9 SENATOR SAVINO: In the brief time I

10 have, what is the time frame for the

11 evaluation of the city's proposal, which is

12 deer vasectomies? Because now we have -- you

13 know, the female deer, it doesn't prevent

14 them from going into heat, and that's

15 creating other problems. So you have the --

16 whatever. It's just a mess.

17 But, I mean, when will we know whether

18 or not this is a successful program?

19 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, it's

20 underway now. And it will continue for the

21 next three to five years. And I think we'll

22 start to see results of that shortly,

23 probably within Year 2 or 3.

24 SENATOR SAVINO: The expression on

1 your face indicates you're somewhat skeptical

2 of the success of this program.

3 (Laughter.)

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I will say that

5 it's perhaps not the best-designed program.

6 But it is a program nonetheless that we

7 should see what the results come back with.

8 SENATOR SAVINO: So we just have angry

9 and unsatisfied deer. Very unhappy.

10 (Laughter.)

11 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you,

12 Commissioner.

13 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you,

14 Senator.

15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

16 Assemblyman Otis.

17 ASSEMBLYMAN OTIS: Commissioner, thank

18 you. Mr. Chairman, thank you.

19 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Assemblyman.

20 ASSEMBLYMAN OTIS: I want to talk

21 about the water parts of the budget proposal.

22 And, you know, as a matter of reflection for

23 everybody, EPF was 177 two years ago; it's

24 now 300, 300 again this year. And the

1 commitment of --

2 UNIDENTIFIED VOICES: Your mic is off.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: You turned it off.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: You turned it off.

5 ASSEMBLYMAN OTIS: These mics are

6 finicky.

7 So we have $400 million for the next

8 five years proposed by the Governor,

9 including we still have $175 million from our

10 existing water funding. So actually for the

11 upcoming year we're going to have 575 for the

12 '17-'18 year for the different water

13 programs.

14 I want to ask the question a different

15 way. In terms of the new uses that are

16 proposed -- and they're all good and

17 worthy -- has DEC looked at trying to

18 estimate, anticipating what some of these new

19 programs are going to bring in in terms of

20 applications?

21 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I will

22 tell you, through the existing Water

23 Infrastructure Improvement Act that we've had

24 going two years now, there are far many more

100

1 applications coming in for more dollars than

2 are available. And the scoring is such that

3 we're able to move money out very quickly,

4 but we leave some folks, some of the munis,

5 without funding.

6 So what this funding would do is

7 obviously broaden the pot, make it much

8 bigger and make it -- we're not changing the

9 eligibility of the grant program, so that the

10 same grant criteria will be applied moving

11 forward. That will broaden the number of

12 communities that will be able to get into the

13 program.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN OTIS: I'm actually asking

15 about the new uses in the -- like the salt

16 stores and the lead pipes and all that sort

17 of stuff that are new -- in the new $400

18 million a year program.

19 But you're getting to sort of where I

20 was going, is that we could use a good growth

21 just for the water infrastructure, pipes and

22 stuff that we've been doing for the last two

23 years. My compliments to the addition of the

24 intermunicipal regional approach, because

101

1 there's a need for recognizing those. Right

2 now an intermunicipal application almost gets

3 penalized for working with another community

4 because they still have the single

5 application cap.

6 So those are all great, but if we have

7 575 as the total for '17-'18, how much do you

8 anticipate we can keep with these water

9 infrastructure projects, as opposed to the

10 new uses which you're -- some of those

11 getting off the ground new in the current

12 year, or the new year?

13 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I think

14 it's -- we will have about half of the Clean

15 Water Infrastructure Act appropriation go

16 towards the traditional programs that we've

17 been talking about, so wastewater and water

18 infrastructure. Those programs in some

19 respects are constrained by the loan program

20 that we have available. So I just talked in

21 my testimony very briefly about how EFC puts

22 out about a billion dollars a year in loans,

23 low-interest loans and no-interest loans.

24 What these grants have been doing in

102

1 the past -- we used to have a significant

2 delta between the amounts of loans available

3 and the amounts actually taken up. Since we

4 did the grant program, now the loan program

5 is almost fully subscribed. Which is a great

6 thing. We finally are now moving out not

7 only grants but loans across the state, and

8 that gets to my point about the enlarging of

9 the entire pot.

10 But it gets to the point where the

11 grants have now maxed out the loans, and now

12 we have some additional grant monies

13 available for other programs. So if we look

14 at the full, you know, new $400 million,

15 about half of that again will go back into

16 the EFC, the traditional WIIA grants/loans

17 program, and the other half will go into the

18 other issues that we've raised -- lead

19 service lines, expanding some of the

20 Superfund, doing source-water protection

21 grants for municipalities.

22 So it's about fifty-fifty on that, old

23 programs and new. And as I mentioned, we

24 will be working with you all to hone the

103

1 specifics of each of those lines so that you

2 have a better sense of what you're seeing.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN OTIS: That would be

4 great. One suggestion I would have -- and

5 you allude to sort of the incentive that was

6 created in the water grant program. In these

7 new areas, the idea of having a percentage

8 that the grant can provide and having the

9 applicant put in the rest, we can hopefully

10 also incentivize projects that wouldn't

11 happen otherwise in these new areas as well.

12 It's worked quite well. DEC, you and

13 EFC have done a great job on the rollout of

14 the program, and glad to see this great, very

15 significant increase in commitment. So thank

16 you.

17 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Great. Thank

18 you.

19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

20 We've been joined by Senator Elaine

21 Phillips.

22 And our next speaker is Senator Pam

23 Helming.

24 SENATOR HELMING: Thank you,

104

1 Commissioner, for your time and for your

2 efforts to protect the public health.

3 I represent a district that includes

4 quite a significant portion of the

5 Finger Lakes area. And I recently read a

6 report that seven of the Finger Lakes are

7 impacted by blue-green algae. Out of these

8 seven lakes, several of the lakes have

9 harmful algal blooms, which have resulted in

10 threats to public health, the closure of

11 beaches, impacts to tourism dollars,

12 et cetera.

13 So -- and I know in your report you

14 mentioned funding for invasive species, but

15 what I'd like to hear more about, what

16 specific programs and funding is going to be

17 available to address the blue-green algae

18 issue, specifically the harmful algal blooms

19 in the Finger Lakes?

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Sure. Well,

21 first of all, I think the $2 billion water

22 infrastructure money that we've been

23 discussing is going to help address one of

24 the causes for some of these algal blooms,

105

1 which is obviously failing infrastructure.

2 And you see nitrogen getting into the water,

3 creating the blooms, and the blooms then

4 causing problems.

5 So we need to do everything we can to

6 enable municipalities to upgrade their

7 systems. That will be certainly number one.

8 In terms of the other uses for that

9 money, obviously there are many farms around

10 the state. We've been putting money into

11 upgrading manure storage statewide. As the

12 boom in milk is happening, and it's a good

13 thing for our farmers, we want to make sure

14 that they also have the resources to invest

15 in buffers between their properties and

16 streams, and that the manure lagoons are up

17 to spec.

18 So both through the EPF and through

19 the water infrastructure money, we will be

20 continuing that. And we've made that a

21 specific component of the water

22 infrastructure money that we proposed as part

23 of the $2 billion.

24 Grants for setting land aside, source

106

1 water protection is the best money spent,

2 typically. If you can protect water at the

3 source, then you don't have problems

4 downstream. And the $2 billion will help

5 with that. Again, monies through

6 municipalities, and in some cases nonprofits,

7 to fix those problems.

8 And then to get to the very serious

9 issue of harmful algal blooms on Owasco Lake,

10 where you saw the city of Auburn and Owasco

11 drawing water that was impacted by this

12 bloom, the Governor put into the budget

13 $150,000 right now to be available for

14 engineering studies at both those

15 municipalities, to ensure that their plants

16 can be upgraded, and then up to $2 million

17 for the upgrade of the plant, to have new

18 technology to take the otherwise -- the

19 toxins from the harmful algal blooms aren't

20 taken out through the usual means, so we need

21 new technology there. And the $2 million

22 will help to provide those funds.

23 SENATOR HELMING: So what about the

24 water treatment plants at all of the

107

1 facilities along the lakes? Are we going to

2 take what we learned from Owasco and somehow

3 share that with the other communities? Is

4 the DEC involved with --

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Absolutely.

6 SENATOR HELMING: -- inspecting and

7 upgrading the other facilities to make sure

8 that they have what they need? How does that

9 work?

10 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Absolutely. I

11 mean, we are -- we're not approaching Owasco

12 as a one-off. What we're trying to do is

13 understand how Owasco happened, how the water

14 was impacted that way, and begin applying

15 that not just in the Finger Lakes, but

16 elsewhere.

17 But as far as the Finger Lakes are

18 concerned, there was a need for us to think

19 more creatively about how we staff these

20 problems. So we've got -- the Finger Lakes

21 are actually between several different DEC

22 regions. Usually our regional staff are the

23 ones handling these problems directly. But

24 when you have multiple regions, you need

108

1 coordination. So this year we actually

2 created, 2016, a water hub so staff from both

3 offices then -- focusing specifically on

4 water problems. And actually the team in

5 charge of the Owasco response is actually the

6 water hub that is shared between local

7 offices as well as my headquarters staff.

8 So we will be applying that to other

9 Finger Lakes as well.

10 SENATOR HELMING: Thank you very much,

11 because that was -- my second comment was on

12 DEC staffing. I noticed in the report that

13 overall the staffing numbers won't change.

14 But as was said previously, I'd truly like to

15 see a shift so that there's additional

16 staffing at the regional levels to help us

17 with issues.

18 And just quickly to echo on Senator

19 O'Mara's comments, my district also includes

20 a significant portion of Lake Ontario. And

21 again, I'd just say to you it's critically

22 important to provide the necessary resources

23 to protect not only the municipal

24 infrastructure but also the private property,

109

1 especially in communities such as Sodus

2 Point, where the threat of flooding has been

3 documented and is a real threat.

4 So I thank you.

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

7 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

8 Assemblyman Ryan.

9 ASSEMBLYMAN RYAN: Thank you,

10 Chairman. Thank you, Commissioner.

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Assemblyman.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN RYAN: We spoke briefly

13 last week. I gave good credit to your

14 department for your response to the former

15 steel plant fire at Lackawanna. It was a

16 major fire. They could actually see the

17 smoke plume in aerial and satellite

18 photographs as it was proceeding out to the

19 ocean.

20 So your agency did a great job of

21 interacting with the community and really

22 taking a community on high anxiety and

23 bringing it really down to a rational level.

24 So thanks for that work.

110

1 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

2 ASSEMBLYMAN RYAN: But on that same

3 subject which Senator Kennedy spoke of, we're

4 very interested in seeing the plans for the

5 restoration of that steel plant site. We

6 know there's a large chunk of money dedicated

7 towards that. We'd like to work with you as

8 you're rolling that out and hopefully make it

9 as soon as possible.

10 And then with the EPF money and the

11 new money we have coming in, one of my

12 concerns has been for streams and waterways

13 that pass through several municipalities,

14 much like the Scajaquada Creek.

15 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN RYAN: So we were able to

17 come with a real combined effort on the

18 Buffalo River cleanup with a nonprofit sort

19 of in the conductor chair. It seems one of

20 the things delaying the Scajaquada cleanup is

21 that the stream runs through several

22 municipalities, several municipalities dump

23 their waste in it. But there doesn't seem to

24 be a good coordinated effort.

111

1 And I think if we're able to provide

2 funding to nonprofits like Riverkeeper, yet

3 to help coordinate those efforts, we'd be

4 much farther along now.

5 So I wanted to hear your thoughts on

6 perhaps how could we empower nonprofits to do

7 more work in coordination, especially with

8 the smaller towns and villages who don't have

9 big staffs and would have to dedicate, you

10 know, resources of their own to hire

11 environmental engineering companies. But if

12 we were able to have the nonprofits play that

13 role, I think we would push projects along

14 quicker. And I wanted to hear what you had

15 to say about that.

16 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I

17 certainly am very respectful of the

18 nonprofits' mission generally. That's where

19 I started my career, and I know the

20 effectiveness they can have in bringing

21 coordinated voices to problems.

22 I mean, Scajaquada Creek is a perfect

23 example. You're right, obviously it flows

24 through many municipalities. And there's all

112

1 kinds of historic problems along the way,

2 Cheektowaga and other places with their CSO

3 discharges and SSO discharges.

4 So I will say this. I mean, I am

5 committed to making sure that Scajaquada and

6 other places around the state are handled

7 with that sort of team mentality, where you

8 have nonprofit buy-in, you've got local

9 government buy-in, you've got a role for the

10 state. Then you've got sometimes a role for

11 the federal government as well, as we saw

12 downstream in the Niagara River.

13 The grants that we're proposing out of

14 the Clean Water Infrastructure Act for

15 source-water protection I think will help to

16 get at some of that. And we, you know, have

17 lots of history in funding nonprofits through

18 other pots of money and working

19 collaboratively with them.

20 And I've seen the tenor on Scajaquada

21 change a little bit in my year. I think

22 you're absolutely right, maybe it started

23 with not enough coordination through our

24 regional office. And I've spent quite a bit

113

1 of time on that issue. We're starting to see

2 a little bit better coordination now between

3 the towns. Buffalo Sewer Authority has

4 bought into it. You've got, you know, all

5 the various contributors to the problem down

6 there sort of see a light at the end of the

7 tunnel, which is good. And I've been working

8 very hard to ensure that happens.

9 But to your point, nonprofits play a

10 role. And we will ensure that they have a

11 voice whether they get funding or not.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN RYAN: That's great. I

13 appreciate you keeping an open mind to that.

14 And often the issue really is the advocacy,

15 right, helping to shine the light on the

16 issues but also to bring the municipalities

17 along, to educate them on what they can do.

18 I know you're sensitive to this issue. You

19 know, it becomes a real focal point in my

20 community as the upstream municipalities dump

21 their sewage waste into the stream that comes

22 out at historic Olmsted Park in the middle of

23 the City of Buffalo, which happens to be two

24 blocks down from my house, too. So I'm quite

114

1 interested in using that park as a parkland

2 and less as a cesspool.

3 So appreciate your help on that, and

4 we continue to look forward to working with

5 you.

6 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Likewise, thank

7 you.

8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

9 We've been joined by Senator Robert

10 Ortt.

11 And it's now the Assembly's turn --

12 or, I'm sorry, it's the Senate's turn. So

13 our next speaker is Senator Liz Krueger.

14 SENATOR KRUEGER: Good morning,

15 Commissioner.

16 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Morning,

17 Senator.

18 SENATOR KRUEGER: So we had a chance

19 to talk in advance, and you mentioned it

20 already today in your testimony about your

21 goal to decreasing food waste ending up in

22 solid waste, which actually is a methane

23 problem.

24 I asked a question of the OTDA deputy

115

1 commissioner the other day, and he said,

2 "Well, it's a DEC question," so I'm going to

3 give it to you. He was discussing the

4 state's efforts to expand participation in

5 the federally funded SNAP program and that

6 they would be doing more models. And I

7 suggested that you do SNAP applications with

8 hunting and fishing licenses. Many people

9 hunt for food. And not all people who hunt

10 for food are low-income and need additional

11 money for food, but I bet a bunch of them

12 are.

13 So I'm going to encourage you to

14 explore with OTDA the possibility of doing

15 some outreach to the SNAP program through

16 your applications for hunting and fishing

17 licenses.

18 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Okay. That's

19 innovative. I've not heard that one before.

20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. No, I think I

21 might be the first one to come up with it.

22 But anyone else can say no, no, it was my

23 idea. That's fine.

24 Second, there's references to EPF

116

1 funding -- you know, we've been expanding the

2 definition of what we use EPF funding for,

3 and some of it apparently is for projects

4 that are involving private landowners. And

5 how do -- do you just think that there's some

6 questions that should be asked when we start

7 to use EPF with private land purposes? Or

8 was I advised wrong and there aren't any?

9 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I'm not -- I'm

10 not sure what you're referring to.

11 SENATOR KRUEGER: So is there any EPF

12 money being used for either stewardship

13 programs or private activities involving the

14 parks --

15 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: On private land?

16 SENATOR KRUEGER: Yeah.

17 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yeah, I mean I

18 think it would only come into play if we had

19 a conservation easement, for example, on a

20 large tract of forestland. Which we do,

21 around the state, but we typically don't

22 spend EPF dollars beyond conservation

23 easements.

24 ASST. COMMISSIONER TIGHE: And those

117

1 lands would be publicly accessible.

2 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right.

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: So basically you

4 might be doing some kind of project that

5 people are going from parkland to private

6 land, because it was part of a larger

7 project?

8 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right. Yeah,

9 you have a large tract of forest that might

10 be adjacent to the Forest Preserve. One

11 part's purchased and owned by the state,

12 forever wild; the other portion is

13 conservation easement of timberlands. You

14 know, timberlands, they're able to use it for

15 sustainable harvesting. But you couldn't

16 tell the difference between the two unless

17 you were an expert.

18 SENATOR KRUEGER: But there are no

19 other plan -- there's no other plans --

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Not to my

21 knowledge, no.

22 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- to use EPF money

23 for private land? Thank you.

24 Several of my colleagues have asked

118

1 around the questions about with water

2 contamination --

3 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Senator, I mean,

4 there are grants that go out through WQIP and

5 ag nonpoint source to farmers to control

6 sewage runoff. That would be one other

7 example -- I'm sorry to interrupt you -- but

8 one other example where we'd use EPF dollars

9 to control an on-site pollution problem.

10 SENATOR KRUEGER: And so that passes

11 from EPF into Ag and Markets --

12 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes.

13 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- and then gets

14 distributed throughout? All right, so I can

15 ask the Ag and Markets --

16 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: And through the

17 Soil and Water Conservation Districts.

18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay, thank you.

19 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Sure. Sorry.

20 SENATOR KRUEGER: That's okay.

21 Water contamination issues. We look

22 at Hoosick Falls and Newburgh as one set of

23 serious examples. My colleague from

24 Long Island was talking about Long Island

119

1 water.

2 You've gone ahead and asked companies

3 to evaluate for themselves the water

4 contamination; I think it was 40 companies.

5 Have those reports been submitted, and can

6 you share those at some point?

7 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes. So you're

8 referring to the PFOA/PFOS that may have been

9 used statewide. Yes. I mean, we had

10 identified a number of companies around the

11 state that may have used those chemicals in

12 the past, and then compared the results that

13 we got through our outreach to the presence

14 of drinking water supplies.

15 So we didn't just rely on their

16 responses to us, but in fact have gone -- and

17 are still going out proactively to identify

18 company and well. And if there are

19 situations that demand any kind of cleanup,

20 DEC, in coordination with DOH, are putting in

21 place an aggressive system there.

22 We can certainly share with you the 38

23 that we identified, all of the levels well

24 below the federal guideline. Nonetheless,

120

1 the presence of those chemicals detected.

2 We're starting to working on investigations

3 of those potential sources.

4 I think there will be a privacy

5 concern that we'd have to work around and

6 address, because some of the wells we took

7 samples from were within private control.

8 But we can certainly work with your office

9 and the Legislature on that.

10 SENATOR KRUEGER: And I see how

11 quickly my time is up. But I guess never

12 waste a crisis. So Newburgh and the other

13 towns showed us some of the seriousness of

14 problems that can be popping up in small

15 towns without, perhaps, any way to know about

16 it or handle it themselves.

17 Is there a new protocol that your

18 department will be coming up with to help any

19 other communities, not just necessarily with

20 those specific chemicals, but with any kind

21 of chemical contamination in their water

22 system, to help us be better prepared to

23 proactively, all right, here's what you need

24 to study, here's what the agency is going to

121

1 do, here's what the community needs to do,

2 this is how we're going to hold the companies

3 accountable for the cost of cleanup and

4 public education.

5 Is there perhaps some kind of written

6 protocol that you can offer us in the future

7 so that if and when the next crisis comes,

8 we're better prepared from the experience

9 of --

10 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Sure. Well, I'd

11 be happy to share with you just a general

12 protocol of how we'd approach these things.

13 I think we have now had the experience

14 over the last few months of responding to

15 similar situations with different variables

16 here and there, but ultimately finding ways

17 to move very quickly and free up funding to

18 fix problems. And that's something we've

19 sort of perfected across the board.

20 SENATOR KRUEGER: I mean, sharing it

21 with us would be great, but I --

22 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Sure.

23 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- guess I would

24 argue sharing it with every municipality --

122

1 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Absolutely. No,

2 you're right.

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- and county in the

4 state would be actually be really valuable.

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I meant us

6 meaning --

7 SENATOR KRUEGER: Yes, us.

8 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: -- everyone.

9 SENATOR KRUEGER: I agree.

10 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes.

11 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

12 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Sure.

13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

15 Assemblyman Carroll.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN CARROLL: Thank you,

17 Chairman.

18 Thank you, Commissioner, for being

19 here today. My first question is about, as

20 you are probably aware, decentralizing our

21 power grid by incentivizing businesses and

22 homeowners to generate their own power

23 through solar and geothermal power that will

24 create a more resilient, green and

123

1 energy-efficient power grid.

2 What is the state doing to foster this

3 sort of growth in our energy grid?

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Sure. Well,

5 respectfully, I'd ask that you raise that

6 with NYSERDA. That's not really in DEC's

7 jurisdiction. I mean, I can speak as a

8 layperson to it, but I think you'll get a

9 better answer out of John Rhodes, who will be

10 testifying later.

11 ASSEMBLYMAN CARROLL: Fair enough.

12 I think most of my questions you're

13 going to say that, but I'm going to say them

14 anyway.

15 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Okay.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN CARROLL: There are 16

17 power generating plants in New York City that

18 are commonly referred to as peakers. These

19 power plants are used only a few days a year

20 and produce large amounts of carbon emissions

21 as well as higher energy costs. How can the

22 state mitigate this use of power plants in

23 New York City?

24 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So we -- I agree

124

1 that these plants can be a concern if they're

2 being operated. We put out regulations

3 called the Part 222 regulations this year,

4 which are designed to ratchet back on

5 emissions from these plants. Those

6 regulations have been crafted with both input

7 from the regulated community and in

8 particular the environmental justice

9 community.

10 So those plants are not only going to

11 have to comply with the applicable federal

12 law but also our state regulations in terms

13 of discharges or air emissions.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN CARROLL: Thank you.

15 The Indian Point nuclear power plant

16 produces 25 percent of the energy for

17 New York City and Westchester County. That

18 energy is produced with no carbon footprint.

19 How does the state plan to ensure that when

20 that plant goes offline in 2021 that the

21 energy that it's producing right now will be

22 replaced with renewable energy sources?

23 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, again, I'd

24 ask you to raise that with DPS and NYSERDA

125

1 later on today. DEC has been thoroughly

2 involved in the Indian Point situation for

3 many, many years, but primarily on the idea

4 of water intakes and discharges and fish

5 mortality as well as on-site pollution. So

6 we just aren't -- we don't have the

7 jurisdiction to deal with larger questions

8 about energy and reliability and the grid.

9 ASSEMBLYMAN CARROLL: Thank you.

10 That's the end of my questioning.

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

13 Senator John Bonacic.

14 SENATOR BONACIC: Good morning,

15 Commissioner.

16 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Good morning,

17 Senator.

18 SENATOR BONACIC: Good to see you

19 again.

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Likewise.

21 SENATOR BONACIC: My questions are

22 relatively easy, which is unusual when I come

23 here for a commissioner.

24 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: It is.

126

1 SENATOR BONACIC: First of all, the

2 struggle I always see going on is balancing

3 economic development projects and dealing

4 with the DEC bureaucracy and how fast they

5 can move the timeline to closure on

6 decisions. That's always there.

7 The second thing I've been observing

8 in the last few years is that the DEC always

9 wants -- is trying to be lead agency whenever

10 they can. And I would like to see more of

11 the locals, the local counties or the local

12 municipalities that are close to the

13 projects, having more lead agency than the

14 DEC.

15 Now, Senator Amedore, Senator Seward,

16 and I have the New York City Watershed in our

17 district. Dealing with the DEP bureaucracy

18 is insane. And the DEC is better --

19 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

20 SENATOR BONACIC: -- but not all that

21 much better, just so you know.

22 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you, I

23 think.

24 (Laughter.)

127

1 SENATOR BONACIC: Yeah. So getting

2 now to my question. In the line items that

3 I'm looking at in the Executive Budget -- and

4 I don't expect you to pick this out. But on

5 page 133, lines 10 to 12, it says "No state

6 assistance may be provided pursuant to this

7 section to fund any project committed to in

8 any agreement pursuant to a filtration

9 avoidance determination."

10 So I read this to say that you don't

11 want to have state funding replace New York

12 City funding for projects in the New York

13 City Watershed. I agree with that position.

14 That's a good position.

15 But what happens sometimes is that --

16 some of the source water is used by

17 municipalities, and some of it is part of the

18 reservoir to supply the city water supply.

19 So when you have that duplication, does that

20 language mean that there will be no state

21 funding to that municipality that's dealing

22 with that source water for their

23 municipality?

24 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I don't believe

128

1 so.

2 ASST. COMMISSIONER TIGHE: No, it's

3 only intended to not allow -- so New York

4 City itself is required to acquire its lands

5 --

6 SENATOR BONACIC: Could you speak a

7 little louder? Thanks.

8 ASST. COMMISSIONER TIGHE: The intent

9 is that if New York City is required itself

10 to acquire lands under the filtration

11 avoidance determination, that they would not

12 be eligible. But if a town in that community

13 that happens to also be the New York City

14 watershed wants to apply for a grant, that

15 does not mean that they would not be

16 eligible.

17 SENATOR BONACIC: Okay. And then I

18 have one pet peeve. It may sound funny, but

19 it's not. It pertains to my largest town in

20 my Senate district in Orange County, the

21 Village of Florida. It's Glenmere Lake.

22 That's a water supply for all the residents

23 there. And you put this cricket frog on your

24 endangered species list.

129

1 Now, federally, this is not on the

2 endangered species list. And so you know --

3 I've learned more about this cricket frog

4 than I ever wanted to know. But the cricket

5 frog is proliferating in population as you go

6 down the Eastern Seaboard, and now it's

7 starting to go west. Why? Because the

8 weather is warmer. It's more conducive.

9 Now, the people in the Village of

10 Florida -- you have a eutrophication process

11 that's happening in that Glenmere Lake. So

12 they want to address it, but they can't,

13 because this cricket frog hangs out there.

14 So why is that on the endangered species list

15 when they're expanding in population -- and

16 doing very well -- throughout the United

17 States? Why do we take that extra

18 over-the-top step to make this cricket frog

19 endangered when, across most of the United

20 States, it is doing very well?

21 You don't have to answer that question

22 today. I'm sure there are more deeper

23 questions that want to be addressed. But if

24 someone could get back to me, it's very

130

1 important to the people of the Town of

2 Warwick, my largest town in my entire Senate

3 district.

4 Thank you, Commissioner.

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I will

6 certainly have a team get back to you on that

7 with an answer.

8 SENATOR BONACIC: Thank you so much.

9 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.

11 Chairman Farrell.

12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

13 Assemblyman Thiele.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN THIELE: I'd like to

15 follow up on the cricket frog, if I could.

16 (Laughter.)

17 ASSEMBLYMAN THIELE: Just kidding.

18 I want to talk about water quality and

19 the $2 billion that you have proposed.

20 And as was said earlier, there are

21 legislative proposals for $5 billion for

22 water. It's been described earlier that the

23 demand for water quality infrastructure,

24 whether it be supply or disposal, is in the

131

1 neighborhood of $80 billion. So, you know, I

2 hope that we can look at larger numbers

3 during the budget process. But it's pretty

4 obvious we're going to need partners.

5 And I'd like to think maybe the

6 federal government might be a partner, I'd

7 like to think the new administration will be

8 into water quality infrastructure big league,

9 but I doubt it. So our partners are going to

10 be local government.

11 And, you know, whether it's been the

12 water infrastructure program that we now have

13 or prior bond acts, there's always the need

14 for a local share. And if we are looking at

15 the kind of numbers over the next many years

16 that we're looking at, my concern is going to

17 be the ability of local governments to be

18 partners, particularly in light of, you know,

19 the property tax cap and the other

20 limitations on local government.

21 And certainly on Long Island there's

22 been discussions about the maybe non-property

23 tax revenue sources to be devoted to water

24 quality. Of course, they would need state

132

1 authorization. Do you have any feelings

2 about that as far as, you know, developing a

3 full set of partners in addition to just

4 putting out our own bond act?

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I would

6 completely agree with you, we need as many

7 partners as possible to fix this problem.

8 Certainly on the federal side, doing what we

9 can to lobby for more money and make it

10 easier for states to loan and grant money

11 out.

12 As far as the local spending is

13 concerned, I have heard that recently,

14 certainly since we've proposed the

15 $2 billion. On tax cap issues, we'll raise

16 that internally on my end. We certainly

17 don't want barriers to investment. We want

18 to make it as easy as possible for them to do

19 this work and are open to creative solutions,

20 if we can find ways to make that happen.

21 ASSEMBLYMAN THIELE: The second thing

22 with the $2 billion, and that is a lot of

23 focus on water mains and sewage treatment

24 plants and pipes and things of that nature.

133

1 Out on the east end of Long Island, one of

2 the issues that we're dealing with,

3 obviously, is nitrogen. But, you know, most

4 of -- it's mostly septic systems, old septic

5 systems, cesspools.

6 And my question is, you know, we've

7 created a Center for Water Quality Technology

8 at Stony Brook, we're looking for new

9 solutions. And will there be a part of this

10 $2 billion that might be available to provide

11 incentives for local governments to get

12 homeowners to upgrade their cesspool or

13 septic system with this new technology?

14 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So I think the

15 answer to that is out of the $2 billion,

16 there are - there will be aspects of that

17 that I think will begin to get to the

18 concerns you're raising.

19 Certainly when it comes to the green

20 infrastructure, using nontraditional means of

21 disposing of stormwater, those types of

22 grants, we want to get those grants out in

23 the communities.

24 In terms of our support for switching

134

1 homeowners either to better treatment

2 technologies, on-site septic, or connecting

3 them to municipal sewage lines, that's

4 something we've been working very closely

5 with the county on. Through the EPF, we've

6 been funding every year giving monies towards

7 Suffolk County to do some of the work that

8 they are doing on both septics and hookups.

9 We're in the midst of about a

10 $388 million project down in Suffolk County

11 to sewer certain areas, and then -- and

12 that's only the beginning. I think with the

13 county and some of the ideas that they're

14 considering in terms of how to address septic

15 more long-term, we'll be prepared certainly

16 to fund them on the technical side, on the

17 expertise that is coming out of the Center

18 for Clean Water Technology, some of the

19 grants that we're able to make through the

20 EPF and Water Quality Improvement Projects

21 and elsewhere.

22 And then through the $2 billion, you

23 know, getting into funding local

24 infrastructure, funding green infrastructure,

135

1 funding other source-water protection, I

2 think we will be able to, in some cases,

3 either directly or indirectly, deal with some

4 of the serious nitrogen problems that we're

5 seeing down there.

6 ASSEMBLYMAN THIELE: Okay. I'm out of

7 time, but I said this at the Environmental

8 Conservation Committee hearing the other day,

9 but it's a bigger room. I just want to thank

10 you for the extremely quick response that we

11 got at Gabreski --

12 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

13 ASSEMBLYMAN THIELE: -- with regard to

14 dealing with the concerns of the public and

15 coming up with a plan to extend public water.

16 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

17 ASSEMBLYMAN THIELE: It was really a

18 rapid response, and it was greatly

19 appreciated. Thank you.

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, thank you

21 for your help on that too. Appreciate it.

22 ASSEMBLYMAN THIELE: Thank you.

23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

24 Senator Elaine Phillips.

136

1 SENATOR PHILLIPS: Good morning.

2 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Senator.

3 SENATOR PHILLIPS: Thank you for being

4 here. And just so you know, I represent the

5 7th Senate District, which is on the North

6 Shore, on the western part of the Long

7 Island, mid-island, to the North Shore.

8 And also, Commissioner, so you know, I

9 have written you a letter, you would have

10 received it last week, in addition to

11 Commissioner Zucker. So this is in writing

12 what I'm about to say. But last summer, as

13 you know, the USEPA released the results of

14 the third unregulated contaminant monitoring

15 rule, which found detectable levels of

16 1,4-dioxane, a chemical that the agency has

17 determined is likely to cause cancer in

18 humans. And they found it in 70 percent of

19 the samples from drinking-water wells serving

20 millions of Long Islanders. And in fact, the

21 EPA found that dioxane was more prevalent in

22 Long Island's water systems than elsewhere in

23 the state and, even more disturbing,

24 identified wells in two districts, in

137

1 communities that I represent, with levels of

2 the chemical that were higher than in most of

3 the country. Let me repeat that: higher

4 than most of the country.

5 So I have had discussions with

6 representatives of the water providers in my

7 district. They have indicated to me their

8 strong desire for more direction from both

9 the state and federal government as to how

10 that they should respond to these levels.

11 So I wrote to you. I'm asking, please

12 read my letters. We also would like some --

13 I'd like to hear if we have any actions or

14 steps that are in the process to address

15 these levels; the status of remediation,

16 where it stands. My understanding is that

17 there is some sort of prototype that's being

18 designed right now out at Stony Brook. When

19 could we expect to see that? And do we have

20 funding for remediation, particularly on

21 these two wells that are in my district that

22 have exceptionally high levels.

23 And then really to offer to you to

24 work on legislation, if we need legislation

138

1 in place, to address this issue of dioxane.

2 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I'll say

3 this. Certainly -- we discussed this a

4 little bit earlier -- the presence of

5 1,4-dioxane on Long Island is certainly of

6 concern. Luckily, most of -- I think almost

7 all of the wells except for one, which was

8 not a potable source of water, were well

9 below the existing federal advisory, which is

10 I think 300 parts per billion. One came back

11 at 33 parts per billion.

12 SENATOR PHILLIPS: Thirty-three, the

13 other one in my district came back at 12.

14 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: At 12, exactly

15 right.

16 So as we discussed earlier, one of the

17 problems with 1,4-dioxane is that it's very

18 soluble, in that it is hard to take out of

19 water. So you're right, we have a treatment

20 --

21 SENATOR PHILLIPS: Strippers don't

22 work.

23 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: It's not a good

24 thing -- it's not something you want in

139

1 water.

2 We have a program going with the

3 Suffolk County Department of Health and

4 Suffolk County Water Authority to develop the

5 new technology, advanced oxidation, and be

6 able to apply it at scale. It's not a new

7 technology, but it's never been used at full

8 scale, like water district scale.

9 That's underway now. We're going to

10 start to get the results out of that process

11 shortly, certainly in 2017. And we're going

12 to be sharing those results with the public.

13 We're not stopping there. We've also

14 given $5 million to the Center for Clean

15 Water Technology at SUNY Stony Brook to

16 develop other types of technologies to

17 control 1,4-dioxane. At DEC we are tracking

18 down sources of contamination -- again,

19 industrial solvent, used widely, some high

20 levels, but also a ubiquitous product in

21 commercial consumer products -- dry cleaning

22 detergent, personal care products. So we're

23 seeing that there are many potential sources

24 of contamination.

140

1 Over the weekend the Governor convened

2 DEC-DOH to go down to Long Island and listen

3 to a group of stakeholders, and wrote a

4 letter to the EPA asking them to set a

5 national standard or at least an advisory

6 level, a national enforcement advisory level,

7 on 1,4-dioxane. Because right now you don't

8 have that, you have sort of a placeholder

9 number.

10 If the federal government doesn't do

11 that, and I'm not sure that they will,

12 certainly this day, the state will proceed

13 with its own. That would be informed -- we'd

14 put a group together this year of scientists

15 to help us establish what that would be.

16 Now, this is sort of not DEC's

17 responsibility, it's more on the DOH side,

18 but we're certainly going to be at the table

19 on that process.

20 But I take what you're saying very

21 seriously. I think the message to the public

22 is that it's -- right now there are no

23 exceedances in drinking water. But the

24 presence of it means that we need to

141

1 aggressively study this.

2 SENATOR PHILLIPS: Thank you.

3 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

5 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

6 Assemblywoman Jenne.

7 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: Thank you,

8 Mr. Chairman.

9 I think it's one minute till

10 afternoon, so good morning, Commissioner.

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Good morning.

12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: Swinging from

13 Long Island up to the Thousand Islands region

14 and the St. Lawrence River Valley.

15 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes.

16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: First I'll just

17 point out that we have many tools and

18 opportunities to control the deer, turkey,

19 and frog population in my area, and we enjoy

20 using those tools.

21 (Laughter.)

22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: And I have a

23 better appreciation for your job as, you

24 know, it's second nature to us to control

142

1 those populations.

2 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right.

3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: But I will say

4 we could use some other tools to control the

5 coyote population, which I hopefully can have

6 some discussions with you further about.

7 But I also want to start by, you know,

8 being excited about Plan 2014, which some of

9 my colleagues I think are concerned about,

10 and I understand their concern. But my

11 region has suffered a tremendous amount of

12 environmental damage because of the previous

13 regulation regimen, particularly as it

14 affects the St. Lawrence River Valley. And

15 so we're hoping that we'll see restoration of

16 our habitat and better utilization of the

17 natural resources, and particularly be able

18 to have more economic activity as a result of

19 better flows and the fact that our fisheries

20 will be restored.

21 So that is a very important positive

22 that comes out of Plan 2014, and I appreciate

23 whatever your office did in conjunction with

24 the Governor to get that through.

143

1 I'm going to talk a little bit about

2 the Clean Water 2017 plan, which is somewhat

3 intriguing to me. You've mentioned that

4 there will be funding available for municipal

5 storage barns for their salt. Do you have

6 any idea if there will be a pot of money or a

7 bucket of money that then will be shared

8 between state and municipal storage

9 facilities at this point, or is that not

10 hashed out?

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: In terms of salt

12 storage?

13 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: Yes.

14 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes. I mean, we

15 fully expect most of those monies to actually

16 go to municipalities, for their storage. And

17 they've got that. There will still be a

18 statewide --

19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: I've been

20 hearing a lot about that over the last

21 several years, so I appreciate your

22 sensitivity to that issue.

23 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yup.

24 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: I'm also

144

1 wondering about what level of coordination

2 there will be between DOT and DEC. A lot of

3 the pinch points that I have that affect

4 water quality often happen when we're trying

5 to get water under, you know, a road or

6 something like that. I have some serious

7 issues in my district related to that. And I

8 didn't know if this was plans in the works to

9 kind of make sure those silos don't exist in

10 this pot of money, so that when DEC and DOT

11 both see a problem, that it raises the stakes

12 a little bit, I guess, in their score.

13 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I would say

14 this. Certainly Commissioner Driscoll and I

15 talk on a regular basis. We have monthly

16 meetings on all big issues, and we've talked

17 extensively about the investments they're

18 making in bridges and how once we're doing

19 repairs and doing replacements, they're

20 designing for more modern levels of

21 stormwater flow. So certainly, on that end,

22 there's absolute coordination on that.

23 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: I also have a

24 municipality involved in one in Redwood,

145

1 which gets me to the Indian River chain of

2 lakes. You know, first of all I have the

3 issue where several lakes drain in a culvert

4 that's owned by a town underneath the road

5 into the rest of the lakes, which is I think

6 needing some attention, which would require,

7 you know, probably a task force type of

8 approach to it. And I have probably more

9 than just that example to talk about.

10 But we have blue-green algae blooms in

11 the lakes as well as -- I think one of our

12 colleagues from the Finger Lakes was talking

13 about that issue as well. And my colleague

14 here, Mr. Thiele, was talking about septic

15 systems that are feeding these lakes and

16 creating these problems.

17 You know, I'm aware of residential

18 advanced treatment systems. And I know that

19 earlier in your testimony you talked about,

20 you know, combining two septic treatment

21 systems into one, more on the larger

22 municipal scale. But I've got a lot of rock

23 where I am, and we would be a prime location

24 to really start to expand the use of

146

1 residential advanced treatment systems.

2 And I would hope that we would look at

3 areas of the state like mine -- and I guess

4 Mr. Thiele is wanting the same type of

5 treatment. But I would hope that the

6 Thousand Islands region would be part of any

7 effort to bring those types of treatment

8 systems and have our homeowners upgrade.

9 I'd also like to briefly talk about

10 the fact that we've been acquiring a lot of

11 state land, and yet the number of Forest

12 Rangers has continued to stay at very low

13 levels. And as this Adventure NY is trying

14 to bring more people into the state, that we

15 need to ensure that their safety is taken

16 care of by making sure we have officers there

17 to help people when they get in trouble.

18 And I'd just also like to make a pitch

19 that if we're trying to bring people into

20 Adirondack region, certainly coming through

21 the Thousand Islands region is a wonderful

22 way to bring them in. We want to encourage

23 the Canadians to still come over and see us,

24 not just to go to the White House for lunch,

147

1 but to also come to the North Country, the

2 Thousand Islands and the Adirondack region to

3 enjoy themselves, and making sure that we are

4 taking into consideration the opportunities

5 for Canadians to come across the border --

6 there are many crossings in the Thousand

7 Islands region -- into the Adirondacks, and

8 maybe make a loop.

9 That would be greatly appreciated.

10 And I know that that's not just your

11 jurisdiction, but I'll be taking it up with

12 some of your other colleagues as well.

13 Thank you.

14 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Okay. Thank

15 you.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

17 Senator Rob Ortt.

18 SENATOR ORTT: Good morning,

19 Commissioner.

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Good morning,

21 Senator.

22 SENATOR ORTT: Recently the DEC made

23 it --

24 SEVERAL MEMBERS: Mic. Mic.

148

1 SENATOR ORTT: I can just speak really

2 loud to make sure --

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: No, let's get your

4 mic on.

5 (Discussion off the record.)

6 SENATOR ORTT: How's this? All

7 right.

8 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Much better.

9 SENATOR ORTT: I will start over

10 again. Good morning, Commissioner.

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Good to see you,

12 Senator.

13 SENATOR ORTT: Thanks for being here.

14 Recently the DEC made the

15 determination to cut the salmon stock in

16 Lake Ontario by 20 percent. I'm sure you're

17 aware of the millions of dollars that is

18 generated by that industry, certainly in my

19 district and across New York State. We have

20 folks who come from all over the country for

21 the salmon run.

22 And it was done to -- because of the

23 alewives population. But yet we've

24 recognized the alarming survival rates of the

149

1 alewives going back to 2013 and 2014. So my

2 question is when you were making the -- when

3 the determination was made to reduce that

4 stock, was there any other thought given to

5 introducing other prey fish, you know, as

6 opposed to cutting the salmon stock?

7 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right. Well, it

8 was not an easy decision for the department

9 to make. Obviously, to cut any stocking is

10 always -- it rises to the commissioner level.

11 So we talked extensively about whether that

12 made sense.

13 My staff convinced me that the alewife

14 population was -- it wasn't just my staff,

15 frankly, it was multiple states looking at

16 the same question, including Canada -- the

17 alewife population was in danger of collapse.

18 And if that -- it's a very important feeder

19 fish -- goes away, then our long-term outlook

20 for the fishery becomes in greater jeopardy.

21 So the salmon have sort of a voracious

22 appetite for alewife, which is why the

23 decision was made on the salmon side to drop

24 down 20 percent for one year. On the upside,

150

1 wild propagation of salmon is up 10 percent,

2 we expect, so the ultimate -- the actual drop

3 in salmon this year will be probably in the

4 range of 10 percent.

5 So in terms of the economic impact, we

6 don't believe that it will be detectable at

7 the charter fishing level. It's nonetheless

8 a very serious situation. We've been in

9 constant contact. Three big public meetings,

10 and I've got staff who are talking nonstop up

11 there about this.

12 So we looked through all of the

13 opportunities available to us and did

14 everything we could to make this as low an

15 impact as possible, but ultimately determined

16 that the other alternatives, such as

17 introducing other fish, wouldn't have been

18 effective in the short term and would have

19 further jeopardized us.

20 SENATOR ORTT: Is there any discussion

21 to introduce additional fish, no other fish,

22 that will help sustain the industry as far as

23 the fishing industry? Whether like, for

24 instance, the old brown trout or something

151

1 like that?

2 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I think

3 part of what we're going to see is that this

4 is going to be a very short-term issue, in

5 that the stocking we do for one year, the

6 impacts of which won't be detectable for

7 several years and ultimately will be much

8 lower -- sorry, the noticeable impact will be

9 much lower than one would expect because it's

10 not 20 percent, it's really just a 10 percent

11 figure, with the increased chances for

12 natural propagation.

13 So we haven't discussed introducing

14 other types of fish, but we're also not

15 looking to significantly cut the stocking of

16 other fish. Trout that we do stock, we are

17 pulling back some of that stocking, in part

18 because the population is now at a healthy

19 carrying level.

20 SENATOR ORTT: Okay. I would ask,

21 certainly -- you say this is a one-year

22 reduction?

23 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes.

24 SENATOR ORTT: So I could certainly --

152

1 I'm expecting that you would then review

2 after this year --

3 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Absolutely.

4 SENATOR ORTT: -- certainly keep me

5 abreast, but also just the entire

6 Legislature, because it is certainly a larger

7 issue than just an issue for Senator Rob

8 Ortt.

9 And again, I know at your confirmation

10 hearing, and I know you've spoken numerous

11 times about the balance between the

12 environmental side and the regulatory side,

13 but also understanding that there's an

14 economic and business side to almost all of

15 your decisions. And just respecting that

16 balance, especially for communities who rely

17 really heavily on the charter fishing

18 industry and such. And the state, of course.

19 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right.

20 SENATOR ORTT: And then lastly, I

21 noticed in your testimony you did talk

22 about -- I know there was questions asked

23 earlier about energy policy, and you kind of

24 deferred those to the NYSERDA folks who are

153

1 coming in. But in your testimony you do talk

2 about reducing carbon emissions by 2030,

3 going down another 20 percent, I believe, and

4 then looking at a study to be 100 percent

5 dependent on renewable energy.

6 I guess my question is, where did

7 those numbers come up? You know, where does

8 the year come from, where does the percentage

9 come from? And I've heard passing discussion

10 or passing references to the economic

11 impact -- you know, training programs, for

12 instance, for people who are unemployed as a

13 result of these restrictions or these new

14 regulations -- but I haven't heard a lot of

15 detail about the folks who might be, you

16 know, unemployed who work at a coal plant or

17 whatever, as a result of these new policies.

18 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I will ask

19 you to raise the 40 by '30 and 80 by '50

20 questions with NYSERDA, because they have

21 primary jurisdiction over that.

22 What we have on our side is the

23 Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, the RGGI

24 program. And we've made significant progress

154

1 with the power sector over the last 10 years

2 or so, using RGGI in reducing carbon

3 emissions.

4 The effect of the program actually is

5 somewhat positively economically. We're

6 actually seeing not only improvements in

7 ratepayer bills through the RGGI program, but

8 also significant state investments in state

9 clean technologies. So upwards of a billion

10 dollars of economic impact to the RGGI states

11 from the RGGI program itself.

12 So we certainly want to make the

13 adjustment in RGGI in a very careful way so

14 as not to upset any of the ratepayer issues,

15 and certainly so as not to upset the

16 viability of the power producers.

17 And working with the other RGGI

18 states, we meet with them on a regular basis

19 to determine what levels are appropriate.

20 It's something that this proposal is

21 achievable, the 20 percent reduction over a

22 10-year period. It's somewhat in line with

23 the direction that we're on right now. And

24 we believe, at least on the RGGI side, that

155

1 it is going to help channel investments back

2 into New York State, but also ultimately not

3 have a measurable impact or have a positive

4 impact, in fact, on ratepayers.

5 So that's sort of our wheelhouse, if

6 you will, on emissions, is the RGGI program.

7 But we also have, also as part of that, we've

8 launched a Transportation Climate Initiative,

9 to understand the impacts of the

10 transportation sector. We're in the early

11 stages of that. Our methane action plan, as

12 well, is looking at emissions of methane from

13 the oil and gas sector, landfills and farms.

14 And we're starting to get funds in fact

15 directed towards places like farms, where you

16 have farmers willing to put in place

17 anaerobic digesters and take advantage of

18 that energy usage to reduce their carbon

19 footprint, but also to cut down some of their

20 costs.

21 So the approach is sort of all in.

22 It's multi-agency. We believe it's an

23 imperative right now, it's an existential

24 imperative. I firmly believe that climate

156

1 change is real and we have to do what we can

2 to mitigate all impacts and prepare the

3 state. And I think it will be good business

4 for the state in the long run.

5 But I certainly hear you on the rate

6 side and certainly encourage you to raise

7 that with my colleagues, who have a firm

8 grasp on all of their programs.

9 SENATOR ORTT: And I know my time is

10 up. I just would further stress -- you know,

11 I think one of the challenges is New York

12 State does acts other states may not. There

13 is a very real immediate economic impact,

14 while understanding the larger environmental

15 goals. And in a state that's 49th in almost

16 every category when you talk about

17 business-friendliness, you know, I think the

18 DEC very often is an agency that you look to

19 to try to balance the economic initiatives,

20 the economic benefits and all these laudable

21 goals with economic realities in large parts

22 of the state.

23 So thank you very much, Commissioner.

24 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Point well made.

157

1 Thank you, Senator.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.

3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblyman Oaks.

4 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Hi, Commissioner.

5 I know Senator O'Mara asked some

6 questions related to Plan 2014, and Senator

7 Helming mentioned that, and also

8 Assemblywoman Jenne. And, you know, for

9 those of us who opposed it, the agreement,

10 you know, near the end of the Obama

11 administration going out was a bit

12 frustrating. And, you know, the opposition I

13 think comes from the devastation we know is

14 going to happen at some point because we're

15 going to allow higher water. And so there's

16 going to be impact on the south shore

17 property owners, and some on the eastern

18 shore as well, when we have those instances.

19 And certainly that's both public and private.

20 And I know you talked a little bit about the

21 possibility of some public answers with that.

22 I know there are some efforts going on

23 at the federal level to maybe pull back from

24 that. Obviously I support that.

158

1 But just in thinking with that, in

2 proposing 2014 the IJC did a bunch of

3 research. And all that's been publicly given

4 is some summary of that. Did they share with

5 you what the more specific impact of their

6 research says is what's going to happen, so

7 that we know what -- you know, you talked

8 about some mitigation possibilities or

9 resiliency things. Do we know what those

10 are?

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So I personally

12 saw summary information. I'll have to check

13 with my staff to see whether or not we got

14 more extensive information that you're

15 referring to.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: My hope would be

17 that if you haven't, could we try to get

18 that? Certainly if it -- you know, I can see

19 the reason maybe they pulled back when it

20 was -- before. But certainly having that I

21 think could be helpful both in your efforts

22 or any efforts at the local level.

23 The second thing I'd like to ask a

24 quick question about, the mandatory organic

159

1 waste recycling program. One of my -- I get

2 a little nervous when we start out with

3 mandatory and whatever. And certainly we

4 struggle with rules, regulations and whatever

5 that we add.

6 I do think we have a major issue with

7 food waste. And just interestingly, though,

8 in and around my district I've seen some

9 amazing progress in the last couple of years,

10 things I wouldn't have thought about. But

11 kind of the free market is working a little

12 bit. And so we've seen apple and blueberry

13 and cranberry and grape waste that was thrown

14 away, or paid to take away, is now being

15 used, repurposed, dried, put into -- used as

16 additives or other things. And so that

17 market is working.

18 I just -- I guess I hope that -- I

19 know there's some grant money I did see as a

20 part of that program. I hope the

21 incentivized versus the mandate side of it is

22 there in the creativity and the ingenuity of

23 kind of individuals, because I do think --

24 and I guess I'd ask for your, you know, kind

160

1 of thoughts on this.

2 But, you know, there -- I hope that

3 the program, if it goes through, is designed

4 in a way that it's not so narrow that it

5 doesn't allow those who -- where we haven't

6 thought of what the answers might be, that

7 they're allowed. Because I think there are

8 people out there who may create a business to

9 do something with that food waste that ends

10 up being a positive for us that we may not

11 envision.

12 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I think

13 what we're trying to do with this is to

14 create an all-in comprehensive program that

15 isn't just you must recycle your organics,

16 but in fact help to create a more sustainable

17 and stable market really statewide, because

18 there's so much flow right now going to the

19 landfills. You know, not going to food

20 banks, not going to anaerobic digestion, not

21 going to other productive uses.

22 So the idea of the phase-in, in part,

23 and the changes we're making regulatorily to

24 enable anaerobic digesters to come in, for

161

1 example, proposed changes to SEQR to make it

2 easier to site some of these locations

3 without going through a environmental review,

4 trying to get the market established.

5 And then ultimately, once the program

6 is up and running, if you're a generator and

7 you somehow meet the generator levels but

8 you're more than 50 miles away from a viable

9 receiver of that, then you can get a waiver.

10 And there's also other waivers that can be

11 given through this proposed package that

12 we're putting together that if it's not

13 financially viable for you to do organic

14 recycling, that you can get a waiver.

15 So I think the program we're trying to

16 create is one where we foster a sustainable

17 flow of materials to various sources -- food

18 banks, anaerobic digestion, reuse. But we're

19 certainly open to creating a program that

20 brings in as many actors as possible and

21 incentivizes behavior.

22 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.

23 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

162

1 Senator O'Mara.

2 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you,

3 Commissioner. Back again with a few more

4 questions to finish up. I thank you for your

5 patience and diligence here in answering all

6 these questions.

7 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

8 SENATOR O'MARA: I share Senator

9 Ortt's concerns over the fisheries in

10 Lake Ontario and the stocking programs, and

11 want to keep a close eye on that going

12 forward. But another outdoor sportsman

13 activity is deer hunting, where we have

14 arguably the finest whitetail deer hunting in

15 the country here, particularly in the

16 Southern Tier of New York, where I am

17 fortunate to represent.

18 That we have concerns over antler

19 restrictions and really the lack of

20 motivation from the department in pursuing

21 stronger antler restrictions so that we have

22 more quantity of trophy bucks. You know,

23 whitetail deer hunting I think has the

24 largest impact economically of any outdoor

163

1 activity in the state. And having those

2 trophies available is something that drives

3 certainly tourism from out-of-state hunters

4 into the state to do that.

5 The DEC has worked in years past with

6 Cornell in doing surveys in regions where you

7 have instituted antler restrictions. And

8 those surveys have shown, from the

9 information I've received from Cornell,

10 somewhere in the range of 80 to 90 percent

11 favorability of hunters in those programs to

12 get the trophy bucks and avoid shooting the

13 yearling bucks.

14 Why isn't the program looking to

15 expand on those programs in other regions

16 throughout the state?

17 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Senator, I think

18 what we learned is that you're right, there

19 is support for antler restrictions. There's

20 support for passing on a buck. But --

21 passing on a buck.

22 (Laughter.)

23 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: There's support

24 for enabling deer to get larger and have more

164

1 impressive antlers. But I think what we also

2 heard very loud and clear is that hunters

3 want choice. The majority of hunters that we

4 caucused, through Cornell and through our

5 stakeholder meetings, voiced to us that they

6 supported that but wanted to be able to

7 choose and wanted the hunters out there to be

8 able to make that choice themselves.

9 So what DEC has decided to do is pull

10 back on mandatory antler restrictions and

11 favor a more encouraging approach where we

12 incentivize hunters to go after older bucks

13 but do not require them to.

14 So it's certainly obviously a very

15 passionate debate that's raged within the

16 hunting community for many, many years. We

17 are now in I think year one and a half of

18 this voluntary approach, and it's something I

19 believe in and I believe will work, because

20 my team has been telling me this is the right

21 path forward.

22 SENATOR O'MARA: Can you explain to me

23 how you incentivize passing on an antlerless

24 buck to the hunting community if they have

165

1 the choice to do it or not do it? What's the

2 incentive for them?

3 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, part of it

4 I think is messaging, Senator. I think, you

5 know, that we -- we do believe we've got some

6 of the best hunting in North America. I

7 think the numbers show that out. We've got a

8 significant amount of cash flowing into the

9 state from the hunting community.

10 And within the Adventure NY package,

11 and what we're talking about now with I Love

12 NY this year, is in doing really targeted

13 marketing to hunters to bring more hunters

14 into the state, to retain hunters and to

15 attract hunters back into the market. I

16 think part of that messaging is going to

17 include some of the voluntary encouragement

18 for going after some of the larger bucks and

19 enjoying the experience of just getting out

20 there.

21 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you on that.

22 To follow up on Assemblyman Oaks's

23 questions on the food waste mandate -- which

24 is a solid effort, I think, in looking to

166

1 reuse, repurpose or appropriately recycle the

2 food waste. But I haven't seen any

3 information from the department on what the

4 cost of that will be to a producer of this

5 waste. You're setting an activation level

6 of, I believe, two tons a week for that.

7 What will it cost a restaurant to dispose of

8 two tons of waste?

9 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I think

10 part of what we're doing is trying to make a

11 market for the waste so it's actually a net

12 benefit for them in going after organics

13 reuse, as opposed to just landfilling.

14 Because right now they've got to pay for that

15 waste anyway. They've got to dispose of it

16 anyway. So there's an inherent cost in it

17 now. What we want to do is make the cost in

18 fact a benefit on the organics reuse side.

19 And we're in the middle of a study

20 right now, we're waiting to see results of

21 it, to see what the net benefit to the state

22 will be of an organics program. And once we

23 get that information, we'll be happy to share

24 it with you.

167

1 SENATOR O'MARA: But we don't know

2 what the cost will be to a producer, a

3 generator of this waste. And that concerns

4 me, in coming out with a mandate on business

5 in this state not knowing what the cost of

6 that will be to the generator of that waste.

7 And as you have stated, you're trying to

8 create a market for this recycling of food

9 waste.

10 It seems to me that we should create

11 the market before we mandate the use of a

12 market that doesn't exist, not knowing what

13 the cost and the impacts to the business

14 owners are going to be. We're 49th or 50th

15 in business climate in this state, year in

16 and year out. It's a major concern to me on,

17 again, raising the cost to a certain segment

18 of business, not to mention what the impacts

19 of this will be to our school districts, our

20 hospitals and other public institutions that

21 generate this waste as well.

22 So I have great reservations on moving

23 forward on this without having any real

24 detail on the cost. I know there's a few

168

1 other states that have embarked on this prior

2 to New York. Can you tell us what you're

3 seeing in those states, or is it too early to

4 tell? Why don't we watch what happens there

5 and see what the costs are before we impose

6 this mandate here in New York?

7 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I'm going

8 to let Julie provide some details because

9 she's been hatching this, effectively,

10 working with our staffs, taking the lead on

11 it for a couple of years now.

12 But I will say this. Again, our goal

13 is to build the market. It's to build the

14 market over the next four years, while

15 there's the incentive of a regulatory

16 deadline out there. To provide funding, to

17 provide regulatory relief on the creation of

18 structures that can use this material, like

19 anaerobic digesters. Build the market,

20 ensure that we're providing an option for

21 businesses when the regulations come into

22 effect. And if they don't, there are

23 fail-safes built into the proposal that give

24 businesses an out who would be otherwise

169

1 negatively impacted.

2 And just to clarify one thing. The

3 school districts -- school districts are

4 not -- would not be part of this. It would

5 be just larger institutions.

6 But I'll let Julie provide some color

7 on this, because she's spent a lot of time

8 thinking about other states and what we can

9 do here in New York.

10 ASST. COMMISSIONER TIGHE: So we're

11 actually already undertaking a number of

12 initiatives associated with this program. In

13 2015, we had a food waste study or a food

14 waste roundtable at Wegmans, actually, in

15 Rochester. And we announced at that point in

16 time that there was going to be funding for

17 the Pollution Prevention Institute to

18 undertake food waste audits at large

19 generators. And they've been doing those

20 projects now to evaluate opportunities for

21 smarter purchasing policies by these

22 generators, ways for them to help reduce

23 their costs overall of their programs, and

24 identify what needs they might have if they

170

1 were to have to comply with such a

2 regulation.

3 We are building in the four-year

4 period, as Basil indicated, to allow time for

5 us to get those audits implemented. There's

6 additional funding -- I think $2 million over

7 three years -- through the ESD, the secondary

8 marketing materials line of the Environmental

9 Protection Fund, that will be available to

10 implement some of these capital needs

11 associated with that. For example, if a

12 generator needs bins in order to sort the

13 food waste, similar to what they do for

14 normal recyclables. It will also allow time

15 for contracts for waste management to be

16 addressed.

17 We think that having this time will

18 allow for prices to come down. I think when

19 we've looked at some other states -- and

20 again, as the commissioner indicated, we have

21 a study ongoing now that we're expecting to

22 come out very shortly that will characterize

23 this more specifically -- but it really

24 varies, what the costs will be. From looking

171

1 at Massachusetts, for example, in some cases

2 it's pretty cost-neutral. In other cases it

3 can be more expensive. Which is why, again,

4 we've built in a limiting factor of distance

5 to a recycler that has capacity to take that

6 waste, as well as the opportunity for waivers

7 if there are cost exceedances.

8 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you. My time

9 is up.

10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

11 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

12 Assemblyman Kavanagh.

13 ASSEMBLYMAN KAVANAGH: Thank you,

14 Mr. Chairman.

15 Like several folks before me, some of

16 the questions that I came into the room with

17 have been addressed. So I'm going to sort of

18 do a hodgepodge of following up on a couple

19 of things, and maybe a couple of new issues.

20 First, I just want to -- I'm not going

21 to -- we've discussed the organics waste

22 program with several folks today. I would

23 just say that we'll be looking at the

24 details, but that is a program, as you know,

172

1 that we had some roundtables on, the

2 Environmental Conservation Law, the

3 Agriculture Committee, and the Commission on

4 Government Administration, which I was

5 chairing at the time.

6 And I think it's a very important and

7 fruitful area to reduce waste -- again, no

8 pun intended. And, you know, the approach

9 you're taking where you both create

10 incentives and create a regulation, a

11 prospective regulation, so you're actually

12 creating a market -- because people know they

13 need to start thinking about it

14 differently -- does seem like a good approach

15 and has been productive in other states.

16 But we'll be -- without judging the

17 specifics of what you're proposing, I think

18 it's something we'd like to work with you on.

19 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Great.

20 ASSEMBLYMAN KAVANAGH: I want to

21 follow up on just this -- the 1,4-dioxane

22 issue has been covered by a couple of

23 different participants, but I just want to --

24 the Governor over the weekend said that he

173

1 was calling on the EPA to do standards, and

2 if the EPA doesn't, he will -- the state will

3 act.

4 Can you just talk about what that

5 would entail? You'd have to create some sort

6 of advisory panel to set the standard and

7 then promulgate it in a rule, or how does

8 that work?

9 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Exactly right.

10 So we've given the federal government I think

11 three months to get back to us on this. If

12 they do not, then we would -- yes, we would

13 convene a scientific advisory panel to bring

14 in the best minds so that we could set an

15 enforceable guideline for New York State.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN KAVANAGH: And that would

17 be specific to that substance.

18 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes.

19 ASSEMBLYMAN KAVANAGH: Okay. Are

20 there other candidates for -- I mean, you

21 know, I think this is one of these issues

22 that although we've known about this

23 substance for a long time, its level of

24 carcinogenicity has kind of become a greater

174

1 issue for people recently. Are there other

2 substances that are sort of on the list of

3 things that we might want to be looking at

4 for a greater concern?

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, let me say

6 this. The sort of the prevalence, the

7 widespread nature of this right now, and the

8 fact that it doesn't have good controls at

9 the federal level, mandates that we take a

10 unique approach to it in a short period of

11 time. Plus the fact that EPA came out with

12 their studies last year finding that it was,

13 you know, in certain water districts. So the

14 time is now to obviously take action on that,

15 now that we have that information.

16 I would defer to DOH on other types of

17 chemicals that might be of concern in

18 drinking water. Again, we work very well

19 together, but their jurisdictions are

20 slightly different than ours on the drinking

21 water side.

22 ASSEMBLYMAN KAVANAGH: How long of a

23 process would it take if -- in three months,

24 if the EPA decides not to act, you convene

175

1 the panel. How long would it take to get to

2 the point where it's actually an enforceable

3 standard in New York?

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I couldn't tell

5 you, honestly. I have not convened an

6 advisory panel on a drinking water standard

7 before, and I'm not sure that the DEC has.

8 That would be something, again, that's a DOH

9 matter. But I don't think the intent of this

10 is to have it drag on forever. I think we

11 want some certainty now. I think the

12 Governor has shown that we're there on

13 generating knowledge of potential treatment

14 systems, we're providing money for that,

15 we're providing science on that side. DEC,

16 we're running after potential causes of it in

17 groundwater.

18 So we want a comprehensive approach,

19 we want it fast, and I don't think, you know,

20 a long process would be acceptable to

21 anybody.

22 ASSEMBLYMAN KAVANAGH: And just one

23 more question.

24 We had this conversation in the summer

176

1 during the water quality hearings. But I

2 think a lot of us were surprised to fully

3 understand that systems that serve fewer than

4 10,000 people are essentially untested

5 throughout New York, and that that might

6 account for as much as a third of all the

7 water customers in the state.

8 The Governor mentioned specifically in

9 his remarks that -- he called that a loophole

10 at the federal level. And in calling on the

11 EPA to add this chemical, presumably this

12 chemical and many others would not be

13 adequately addressed by the EPA even if they

14 decided to add it to the list.

15 Has there been any discussion at the

16 state level of strengthening the testing

17 requirements for smaller water systems and

18 what that would cost and who would be

19 responsible for it?

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right. Well,

21 again, DOH is in charge of water testing,

22 testing of drinking water at the state level.

23 But I think the plan that the Governor put

24 out there to require UCMR-like testing for

177

1 all public drinking water sources is going to

2 give us that level of understanding of what's

3 in drinking water. And if you look at the

4 reports that larger drinking water operators

5 generate, you know, they test for a suite of

6 chemicals. Those are generally effective.

7 But occasionally new chemicals are put on the

8 list. Over time, these are -- it's the Safe

9 Drinking Water Act, again, that EPA is

10 charged with and, on the state level, that

11 DOH is in charge of.

12 So that's -- you know, the universe of

13 tests that those municipalities will have to

14 go through will cover a lot of what we're

15 talking about.

16 ASST. COMMISSIONER TIGHE: And to be

17 clear, there is a proposal in the budget, in

18 the health and mental hygiene budget, to do

19 just that.

20 ASSEMBLYMAN KAVANAGH: That has made

21 it into the budget document itself.

22 Just briefly, the EPF, we are

23 proposing a $300 million allocation for that,

24 but allocating about $216 million of it in

178

1 the current year. And that number gradually

2 rises over the next couple of years to

3 $250 million. If we're allocating

4 $300 million a year -- which is, you know, I

5 think something we had had disputes over in

6 the past -- why does the actual disbursement

7 number not rise to $300 million more rapidly?

8 And also, is there an issue with the

9 sustainability of that, given I think some of

10 the revenue sources for the EPF have declined

11 in recent years?

12 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I think I'm

13 going to ask Jeff, who is my deputy

14 commissioner for administration, Jeff

15 Stefanko, to answer some of the cash flow and

16 allocation figures.

17 DEP. COMMISSIONER STEFANKO: Yeah, I

18 think the main reason could be that any time

19 you put that kind of money out in a fiscal

20 year, it takes several years for it to flow.

21 A lot of it's procurement issues. You go to

22 RFP, by the time you got to contract it could

23 be, you know, two, three years. A lot of

24 these grants are reimbursement-based, so by

179

1 the time your municipality spends the money,

2 it's -- and finishes their side of the

3 project, it could be a couple of years. Land

4 acquisition takes several years to go from

5 the very beginning stages through the end of

6 the stage, where we're closing on the

7 project. So last year's $300 million, the

8 spending associated with that is going to

9 take several years to actually get out the

10 door.

11 ASSEMBLYMAN KAVANAGH: But am I

12 correct that --

13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN KAVANAGH: Just one quick

15 follow-up. Am I correct that the level only

16 gets to $250 million in the fiscal 2022

17 budget? It would be six years after we

18 raised it to $300 million.

19 DEP. COMMISSIONER STEFANKO: That

20 sounds about right. I mean, I'm not --

21 ASSEMBLYMAN KAVANAGH: It just seems

22 like a very long runup to -- you know, that

23 at some point the allocation ought to -- you

24 know, you're spending money from prior years.

180

1 It seems like it ought to catch up to

2 $300 million, and that seems like a very long

3 time to wait for that.

4 But thank you.

5 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

6 Senator?

7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Kennedy.

8 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you again,

9 Chairwoman.

10 Thank you, Commissioner.

11 The emerald ash borer has devastated

12 New York's ash trees for years. It's

13 reaching crisis levels. Over 900 million

14 trees across the state are ash. In Erie

15 County, 20 percent of the canopy is ash

16 trees. We've talked about the invasive

17 species control measures, the $12.5 million

18 contained in the budget.

19 My understanding is that these funds

20 would not assist local homeowners, such as

21 the Town of Cheektowaga folks that are

22 suffering. An individual I spoke to had 20

23 dead ash trees in his backyard.

24 What are we doing, what is the DEC

181

1 doing to help individual homeowners with the

2 costs of removing or treating infected trees

3 on their property? Do you see any sort of

4 substantive efforts to implement a tax credit

5 of sorts, or prioritizing biodiversity in

6 tree plantings at the local and municipal

7 level?

8 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I'll tell

9 you this. Right now the grants we put out

10 obviously aren't eligible for use on private

11 property. Overall, our EAB controls are --

12 we have a statewide quarantine in effect.

13 We're working on with Ag and Markets. When

14 it gets down to the local level, no question

15 you have areas where you have ash trees that

16 are of higher concentration and it's a big

17 concern.

18 We do have funding out of the Urban

19 Forestry Program that municipalities can take

20 advantage of to address some of these local

21 concerns, like what you're talking about. So

22 perhaps what we can do is have a conversation

23 with our staff that do the Urban Forestry

24 Grant Program to see how we can target

182

1 specific instances out in your district where

2 you have a kind of prevalence of trees and

3 the threats associated with the new EAB

4 coming in.

5 SENATOR KENNEDY: Great. Also, I want

6 to switch gears back to Lackawanna, the

7 Bethlehem Steel site. Lackawanna is faced

8 with much higher insurance premiums due to

9 being mandated by FEMA to be included in the

10 National Flood Insurance Program, since FEMA

11 considers Smokes Creek to be subject to

12 flooding, despite the fact that there's been

13 recent mitigation efforts, including DEC

14 dredging of the sediments. They also haven't

15 seen a flood in over 60 years from Smokes

16 Creek.

17 What's the DEC doing and what's the

18 DEC willing to do to help remove Lackawanna

19 from this flood plain?

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, you're

21 absolutely right, I think that the dredging

22 that we took part in will help to address

23 many of the concerns about flooding in the

24 area, allow the water to flow out of there a

183

1 little bit easier, because it was plugged up.

2 And you and I have talked about the idea of

3 some kind of a preventative measure to keep

4 storm surge and other waters from flowing up

5 the creek.

6 But we are engaged with our federal

7 partners now in helping them understand what

8 the real flood situation is, and the fact

9 that it's probably well past time to redraw

10 those lines to provide some relief to

11 Lackawanna. So I'm hoping that this year we

12 can at least nail down a solid understanding

13 on the federal level and have them proceed to

14 make some amendments in their maps.

15 SENATOR KENNEDY: That's great to

16 hear. Is the DEC willing to construct a

17 jetty to reduce that sediment buildup?

18 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I will say this.

19 We are certainly interested in the dialogue

20 about it. I don't know that we can commit at

21 this time to actually building a jetty. But

22 I think what I can do is convene my team to

23 understand, you know, groundwater and surface

24 water flows and how best to prevent the kind

184

1 of storms that you're talking about.

2 It might be -- some options might

3 involve either, you know, jetty-type

4 construction or you could broaden the mouth

5 of the creek slightly to cut down on the

6 amount of water that flows up from one

7 particular spot.

8 So there might be ways to do this

9 through other funding sources -- source

10 control, source water control. Yeah, and

11 creating what we've done elsewhere around the

12 state, like on Long Island following

13 Superstorm Sandy, where you just had this

14 incredible surge, is actually rebuilding the

15 shoreline closer to where it was originally,

16 where you have an actual living shoreline

17 with plantings and dunes. I'm not suggesting

18 that necessarily for the property, but there

19 might be some creative thinking we can put

20 into place to create more of a living

21 shoreline, a softer shoreline that can absorb

22 more water that would be blown towards it

23 from the lake.

24 SENATOR KENNEDY: I appreciate your

185

1 engagement at this level, and the residents

2 of Lackawanna along Smokes Creek have been

3 suffering long enough, so that is music to my

4 ears.

5 And one last thing. For the

6 constituents -- just going back to the

7 Bethlehem Steel redevelopment, the

8 constituents are constantly asking us about

9 what is next. Can you just tell, you know,

10 next steps moving forward in the

11 revitalization of that Bethlehem Steel site?

12 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I think

13 the next steps are going to involve getting

14 into the repurposing of the site and how it

15 may change hands -- developers coming in, the

16 county is obviously interested. We want to

17 see the site returned to productive use as

18 quickly as possible. We want to see portions

19 of it remediated more quickly. I mean, there

20 are still some hotspots that need to be

21 addressed.

22 And I'd tell your constituents that

23 now we have a very engaged state agency,

24 multiple state agencies -- CSD as well --

186

1 looking to get this done as quickly as

2 possible. And I think we want to take

3 advantage of what's going on in Buffalo right

4 now, the interest in construction and

5 building, to use this property in a way that

6 benefits everyone in the area.

7 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you very much.

8 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

10 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

11 Assemblyman Phil Steck.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: He's not here.

13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Okay. Assemblyman

14 Lopez.

15 ASSEMBLYMAN LOPEZ: Thank you,

16 Chairman.

17 Commissioner, I give you credit for

18 your perseverance, and I'm very appreciative

19 of your team's thoughtful leadership in my

20 district. They've been very helpful in many

21 different ways.

22 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN LOPEZ: You're welcome.

24 Three quick areas. On the dairy waste

187

1 mitigation that you spoke of in your

2 testimony, can you expand on it a little bit,

3 tell me what you're envisioning there?

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I'm sorry, which

5 waste?

6 ASSEMBLYMAN LOPEZ: The dairy waste.

7 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Dairy waste,

8 CAFOs, right.

9 ASSEMBLYMAN LOPEZ: Yes, page 2.

10 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So we -- after

11 many years of work with the ag community and

12 the environmental community as well, we put

13 out a general permit this year for CAFOs.

14 And that's meant to provide some certainty as

15 to the steps that need to be taken by a CAFO

16 to reduce discharges. It's a sort of a rare

17 example of where you have all sides coming

18 together and effectively coming up with a

19 good permit and a good path forward.

20 So that's step one, is the certainty.

21 Step two is obviously helping them reach

22 their goals. And through the EPF over the

23 last few years, and certainly moving forward,

24 we're going to be moving money out the door

188

1 as quickly as possible to help farms reduce

2 their overall impact to streams.

3 We have a very robust ag non-point

4 source line that's been used extensively for

5 this. That grant program will continue.

6 I've worked very closely with Ag and Markets

7 and Commissioner Ball on it, and it's proved

8 to be effective. As we're sort of seeing the

9 boom in milk production and yogurt

10 production, we want to see that the farms are

11 given the resources necessary to keep the

12 environment clean. And the program has been

13 working fairly well to this point.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN LOPEZ: Thank you. And

15 again, as we all know, dairy farmers continue

16 to struggle with the price of milk. And the

17 critical issue is incentivizing. So if we

18 can reach the environmental goals and help

19 our dairy farmers retain some profitability,

20 I think we all want that.

21 Commissioner, just quickly, back to

22 the Catskill Park, if we could. On the

23 hemlock woolly adelgid, I do know that my

24 colleagues in that region are looking for

189

1 your help to establish a biocontrol

2 initiative. And they're looking for funding

3 to put a beetle that preys on this parasite

4 and control the deforestation that is going

5 to occur in that region.

6 So we're asking for your help.

7 They've made a specific request. I know you

8 have invasive species all over the place, but

9 this particular one is mirroring what I saw

10 with the gypsy moth episode years ago,

11 deforesting the whole region. So I just want

12 to draw your attention to that.

13 Lastly, we had some of our colleagues

14 talk about rangers, access to rangers in the

15 Adirondack Park. Catskill Park has needs for

16 public safety.

17 And just as a point of reference, I

18 made recommendations in the past to look at

19 access to forested lands for environmental

20 thinning and other select harvest. I know

21 you folks work at it aggressively, but my

22 only premise is if we can find a way to

23 manage it sustainably, perhaps we can also

24 make sure it comes back to you for more

190

1 foresters and for more rangers so that we can

2 provide that safety and keep that resource

3 moving. It has many benefits.

4 So I didn't know what -- if you think

5 you're at peak with that or if you think

6 there might be some room to massage that --

7 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I can tell

8 you on the Forest Ranger side we've worked

9 hard over the last few years to replenish

10 their force. We started out back in -- I

11 guess in 2013 we had 111 rangers. And now,

12 as you know, we just got back-to-back classes

13 last year, graduated a class. We have a

14 class that started just yesterday.

15 When this class is completed, we

16 expect to be up to 132. So we've actually

17 built the ranger force back. We've done the

18 same thing with the ECO force, same type of

19 increase.

20 So, I mean, I've made it a priority.

21 I mean, I think there's probably nothing more

22 important we do on a going forward basis than

23 the work of our rangers and ECOs, because

24 whenever they're in action, it's a

191

1 life-saving situation and we don't have time

2 to plan, it's time to act only. So we've

3 been giving them everything we can.

4 ASSEMBLYMAN LOPEZ: So my premise back

5 to the forested lands and opening them up

6 more aggressively is twofold. One, we can

7 generate revenue to target to the department.

8 Plus if we move that product and we give

9 local businesses access, there's a multiplier

10 effect throughout the region.

11 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I fully agree

12 with you. In fact, the last couple of

13 years -- I think last year we actually hit a

14 record on our harvesting from state

15 forestlands. So we continue to increase

16 those numbers and see better production out

17 of our forests.

18 ASSEMBLYMAN LOPEZ: Perfect. Thank

19 you, Commissioner.

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Hoylman.

22 SENATOR HOYLMAN: First, thank you for

23 your --

24 SENATOR KRUEGER: Microphone.

192

1 MULTIPLE VOICES: Mic.

2 SENATOR HOYLMAN: Oh, thank you for

3 telling me about my microphone.

4 I wanted to thank you for your strong

5 words on climate change, obviously. A bitter

6 contrast to your counterpart at the federal

7 level. And I'm appreciative of everything

8 you do.

9 In particular, I wanted to also thank

10 you on your leadership involving General

11 Electric and the Hudson. Have you heard from

12 the EPA in terms of additional testing? This

13 is obviously of concern to my constituents,

14 who live downstream, but the indication may

15 be that PCBs have filtered to even as far as

16 Manhattan.

17 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So as you may

18 know, we're right in the middle of what's

19 called a five-year review. So General

20 Electric had finished what was required or

21 asked of them by the EPA last year. Now

22 we're reviewing that work to see whether or

23 not it actually met the goals of the original

24 Record of Decision from the early 2000s. So

193

1 we're an active participant in that. We go

2 to every meeting. We're in regular dialogue

3 with the EPA on it. And that's the vehicle

4 through which we are then providing our

5 technical expertise.

6 Based on everything we've seen right

7 now, we don't believe the job is done. We

8 see, you know, 60-some percent of the PCBs

9 have been removed from the river; there's

10 still that delta out there.

11 So we actually submitted our own

12 shadow report that kind of tracks where the

13 EPA will be with its five-year report -- we

14 did that back in December -- in an effort to

15 encourage them to look very objectively, use

16 the science to see whether or not the job has

17 been completed. I think what we're seeing

18 now is that it probably hasn't been.

19 We expect a draft report from the EPA

20 sometime late winter, early spring, and then

21 a final decision at some point thereafter.

22 The decision will be whether or not it's been

23 protective. If they say that it has been

24 protective, then they would issue a

194

1 certificate of completion. Well, I think in

2 a few months we might be in a different spot

3 on that.

4 SENATOR HOYLMAN: Thank you.

5 In terms of the $2 billion for the

6 Clean Water Infrastructure Act, do we have a

7 breakdown of how that's going to be

8 distributed and what your priorities are with

9 that?

10 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: We don't at this

11 time. I think what we have is an

12 understanding that about half of it is going

13 to go into the traditional water/wastewater

14 funding, the WIIA funding that we've been

15 working on for the last few years. Half of

16 it will just go right into that kind of a

17 program, and the balance of it will go into

18 some new things that we think are very high

19 priorities for the state. As I committed to

20 your colleagues earlier, we will be working

21 with you to provide some specificity to that

22 in the coming months.

23 SENATOR HOYLMAN: So a draft plan of

24 sorts of action before the budget is passed?

195

1 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: We can work on

2 that, yup.

3 SENATOR HOYLMAN: And then the issue

4 of the last couple of weeks, plastic bags.

5 I'm surprised you haven't been asked about it

6 yet. Do you have thoughts on the city's bill

7 at this point and what the Governor and the

8 second floor and you, I assume, are thinking?

9 And secondly, is there a statewide

10 plan to address the scourge of plastic bags?

11 In New York alone, it's a $8 million to

12 $10 million a year problem involving

13 something like 10 billion, with a B, excess

14 plastic bags.

15 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: You're right,

16 bags are a scourge. There's no doubt about

17 it. We're seeing plastic in waterways all

18 across the world; a lot of that is from

19 plastic bags.

20 So, listen, I think the Governor has

21 spoken for our position on this. And he has

22 recognized the environmental goals are

23 laudable, but there are concerns about

24 impacts to people who have to pay the fee and

196

1 there are also some concerns about where that

2 fee ends up.

3 SENATOR HOYLMAN: Do you have an

4 understanding of how extensive the problem is

5 statewide in terms of cost and pollution?

6 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I can't speak to

7 cost. The statistics I've seen are that in

8 the city it's 9 million; statewide, it's

9 23 billion bags a year. So it's obviously a

10 huge number.

11 And to my knowledge, there is no state

12 law or regulation on this. I gather

13 something has been proposed recently.

14 SENATOR HOYLMAN: Is it something your

15 agency is looking at, like you looked at

16 microbead legislation and how to address that

17 issue?

18 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, we're

19 certainly looking at the problem of plastic

20 bags. I can't get into whether or not we're

21 considering legislation on it, but we're

22 looking at the bags themselves.

23 SENATOR HOYLMAN: Thank you. And

24 thank you again for your leadership.

197

1 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

2 Appreciate it.

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

4 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Mr. McLaughlin.

5 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: Thanks,

6 Commissioner. Thank you, Chairman.

7 Hoosick Falls -- of course, right?

8 The consent order with DEC between

9 Saint-Gobain and Honeywell, you can require

10 them to pay for bio and health monitoring, as

11 I understand it. Do you intend to follow

12 through and have them do that? Or where are

13 we in the process?

14 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I'm not certain

15 that the consent order enables us to require

16 them to do biomonitoring. I think our

17 consent order is more on the -- DEC's consent

18 order with the companies deals more with the

19 contamination, the trackdown, the

20 investigation, and the controls, the clean

21 water controls.

22 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: And so it may

23 be more of a DOH question, then, I guess.

24 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: It probably is,

198

1 yes.

2 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: Okay. VOCs

3 just popping up there. When did they get

4 discovered? When did we know it? Is the

5 data all collected, or are we still in the

6 process of that?

7 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: So as part of

8 our Superfund investigation and our consent

9 order with the companies, we required them to

10 characterize not just the PFOA issue but do a

11 deep dive into problems they had on their

12 properties. And there's a couple of

13 properties, as you know; there's the

14 McCaffrey site and then the John Street site.

15 And in the collection of those groundwater

16 contamination results, we got those tests and

17 recognized that there was a VOC, this TCE, in

18 one of them.

19 And we see this all across the state.

20 I'm not saying this is all across the state.

21 But whenever you have a TCE situation, you

22 have that stuff in groundwater, you want to

23 check quickly to see if it's in people's

24 homes, because VOCs do travel with the

199

1 groundwater, and they can volatize.

2 At this point we have no indication

3 that any of the VOCs are in anybody's home or

4 even if they're off-site from the

5 contaminated area of the property. But

6 last -- I think it was Friday, we put out an

7 announcement that we're forcing Honeywell to

8 go out there, go check out a smaller section

9 of homes, about 39 homes, see if any of them

10 have VOCs, by the installation of these

11 canisters within the homes. We'll get those

12 results quickly.

13 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: Great. And

14 of course we'll get those results when they

15 come out.

16 What makes you think it's just that

17 39-home parcel?

18 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I think it's the

19 groundwater flow from the area. So making

20 assumptions based on where the property is

21 and who's in the path of groundwater flow

22 down towards the lowest-gravity area.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: Okay, great.

24 And certainly I'm getting texts from people

200

1 in Hoosick Falls as we speak.

2 But certainly the main filter's in, in

3 town, working. That's great. Good news. A

4 couple of questions off of that. There's

5 some concern about C6 and the changeout

6 schedule of the filters. Certainly it's

7 effective, and it's working. We're really

8 pleased with that. But there's a concern

9 that if we base it on a C8 filter changeout,

10 does the C6 at some point begin to sneak

11 through? Any thoughts on that at all? I

12 mean, as far as the possibility of that and a

13 way to prevent that.

14 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right. You're

15 asking me something I don't have the

16 expertise really to answer. I think that

17 might be more appropriate for DOH. Because

18 we -- you know, we'll do the installs of the

19 POETS, for example, but DOH really has the

20 expertise in terms of when you see crossover

21 between one tank to the next and what we can

22 do to sort of facilitate better treatment

23 technology.

24 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: Okay. And

201

1 anything -- I don't even want to ask you;

2 this is a DOH question. I was going to ask

3 you about blood testing and a second round,

4 but that's probably more DOH-specific.

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Right. Yes.

6 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: In your

7 opinion -- certainly the GAC filters work.

8 I'm not convinced that they're necessarily

9 state of the art, but they do work, and the

10 water is clean. Do you think that there

11 should be a step beyond, a reverse osmosis or

12 nano, something more than GAC?

13 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I think

14 we've seen GAC be 100 percent effective on

15 this. One of the things that the Governor

16 committed to and that we're actively doing

17 right now is the alternate water supply. And

18 I think that's really -- you know, talk about

19 clean water. Getting to clean water at the

20 source is really our long-term and top

21 priority.

22 So I would say -- I would leave the

23 discussion about, just from my perspective,

24 the technology aside and just talk quickly

202

1 about what we're doing to track down that

2 clean water.

3 As you know, we've spent many months

4 looking at places around the valley where you

5 might have enough flow, and found relatively

6 few locations where you had good water

7 quality and good flow. But we were lucky

8 enough to find one spot in the valley, on

9 farmland, that -- we're literally in the

10 middle of testing, I think this week, the

11 10-inch line to see how much flow can come

12 out of the ground at that point. We have

13 confirmation that the water is good. What we

14 need to know is whether or not it's

15 sufficient enough in flow to actually help

16 the village's long-term needs.

17 ASSEMBLYMAN MCLAUGHLIN: So my only --

18 I'm not a scientist. My only concern could

19 be -- because I've certainly felt we should

20 use the Tomhannock. It's about a 12-mile run

21 up there, so a lot of people to work putting

22 that line in. And we know that water is good

23 and clean. Is there any concern on your part

24 or the department's part that we put in the

203

1 new source -- I think it's near the school,

2 if I'm not mistaken -- and then this stuff

3 migrates, five or 10 years from now? Or do

4 we think it will be dissipated -- I'm not

5 saying that could even happen. But do you

6 have a concern that it could possibly happen?

7 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I think at this

8 point we don't have that concern, just the

9 prevalence of groundwater flow being in a

10 different direction. But we're obviously

11 taking everything into consideration. We've

12 been testing aggressively throughout the

13 entire village and town to find out where all

14 the sources are, using anecdotal information

15 and also just realtime testing that we're

16 doing in wells. So I think we've got a feel

17 where the right places are and where the safe

18 places are to be. This is one of them. And

19 I think if we aren't successful for other

20 reasons not related to contamination, then

21 we'll have to go to Plan B in terms of other

22 surface water, groundwater, or other

23 supplies.

24 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: One last

204

1 question. I know I'm out of time, but it's

2 short.

3 POETS. Who's paying for the ongoing

4 maintenance of the POETS?

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: DEC.

6 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: DEC. And

7 ultimately Saint-Gobain and Honeywell, or --

8 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, I -- let

9 me say this. The polluter ultimately is

10 paying for everything. Right now, through

11 Superfund, we are expending monies. There

12 will be a time and a reckoning, from an

13 accounting perspective, when we go back and

14 recover our cost so the taxpayer is made

15 whole.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: Right. But

17 the changeouts are happening?

18 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes.

19 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: Because we're

20 at that point where they've really got to

21 happen. So we're on schedule for that?

22 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Yes. And we

23 have a contractor, Arcadis, in addition to

24 our staff, and they're regular in the

205

1 community right now.

2 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: Thank you.

3 I'm sorry about the rapid-fire questions --

4 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: No, no, no.

5 thank you.

6 ASSEMBLYMAN McLAUGHLIN: Thank you.

7 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

8 Any more?

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We're done.

10 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: To close,

11 Mr. Englebright. Chairman Englebright.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you,

13 Mr. Farrell.

14 My final question for the day relates

15 to the Article VII language bill on the

16 state's Superfund program. It would amend

17 the provisions of the state Superfund program

18 to remove certain procedural requirements,

19 including a determination of an imminent

20 danger of causing irreversible or irreparable

21 damage to the environment prior to the

22 development of a remedial plan.

23 So what is the rationale for making a

24 change that would apparently weaken -- what's

206

1 the logic behind this proposed change?

2 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: I think it's

3 actually the opposite. It's extending our

4 ability to work on sites that don't yet meet

5 the imminent and substantial endangerment

6 threshold, so that we can address more

7 problems proactively as we see them. You

8 know, from illegal dumping sites or from

9 landfills where we don't have that

10 Superfund-level designation, we want to be

11 able to get out there and stop a problem

12 before it becomes one.

13 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Part 2 would

14 also add petroleum to the list of substances

15 that are hazardous to public health and the

16 safety of the environment. But petroleum is

17 already subject to cleanup and management

18 pursuant to the Oil Spill Fund.

19 Why is this change necessary?

20 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Well, again, I

21 think it's going to help us broaden our

22 authority to go after the kinds of

23 contaminated sites that, again, aren't maybe

24 covered by Oil Spill -- or by Superfund, but

207

1 nonetheless we need an ability to tap into

2 that quickly to protect water.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you,

4 Commissioner.

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

7 Commissioner, thank you so much. And

8 I personally want to thank you and your staff

9 for their responsiveness. You've been great

10 every time we've called, so we truly

11 appreciate it.

12 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you,

13 Senator.

14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And I also want to

15 point out something special, and that's

16 somebody who's special to me, and that's

17 Lieutenant Liza Bobseine, who as you know

18 saved a fellow officer's life, EnCon officer,

19 last November in Columbia County.

20 Unfortunately, there was a shooting.

21 But I wanted to let you know that I'll

22 be honoring her in the State Senate, and I'd

23 like to invite you to come when we do it.

24 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Great. I'd be

208

1 happy to be there. She's quite a hero.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: She really is.

3 That's the second time she's saved someone's

4 life, so I'm really, really proud of her.

5 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Amazing family.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes, exactly.

7 Thank you.

8 COMMISSIONER SEGGOS: Thank you.

9 Thank you all.

10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, our next

11 speaker is Commissioner Rose Harvey, from the

12 New York State Office of Parks, Recreation

13 and Historic Preservation.

14 Welcome, Commissioner.

15 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Thank you.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We're very happy to

17 have you here today, and we look forward to

18 your testimony. So any time you're ready.

19 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Okay. I'm all

20 set.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Could you bring the

22 mic closer, please?

23 Could we also take the conversations

24 outside, please.

209

1 Go ahead.

2 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Good morning,

3 Chairwoman Young, Chairman Farrell, Senator

4 Funke, Assemblyman O'Donnell of the Tourism

5 and Parks Committees, and distinguished

6 members of the State Legislature. And thank

7 you for inviting me to discuss Governor

8 Cuomo's Executive Budget proposal.

9 And I have here with me Andy Beers,

10 executive deputy commissioner. And we both

11 together represent an amazing staff behind us

12 and also in the field.

13 As commissioner of the Office of

14 Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation,

15 I oversee New York's outstanding system of

16 more than 250 individual state parks,

17 historic sites, boat launches and

18 recreational trails. As many of you know,

19 your constituents have a great sense of pride

20 and ownership in their park system. It is

21 one of the most esteemed institutions of our

22 state government, where New Yorkers of all

23 ages and backgrounds come together for fun

24 and friendship, learning and healing, to

210

1 experience New York's great outdoors and

2 history, and build mind and muscle. And as

3 Olmsted noted, our parks are America's and

4 New York State's great melting pots.

5 Thanks to all of you, and thanks to

6 Governor Cuomo's leadership, we're doing much

7 to bring people together, revitalize our

8 facilities, keep parks and historic sites

9 welcoming to all, and provide outstanding

10 experiences for residents and tourists alike.

11 The park system again has had a very busy and

12 successful year in 2016. Attendance at our

13 parks, beaches, and campgrounds continues to

14 climb. Parks hosted major events, concerts,

15 festivals and athletic competitions, which in

16 turn increase the connections, provide a

17 deeper and better experience for our visitors

18 and an economic boost to the local economies.

19 The 2017-2018 Executive Budget will

20 help us continue this success story. The

21 budget will enable us to maintain visitor

22 services and continue the progress we've made

23 renewing our facilities, while embarking on

24 several exciting new initiatives in outdoor

211

1 recreation and the environment.

2 The Governor proposes completing the

3 Hudson River Valley Greenway and the Erie

4 Canalway trails by 2020 to create the Empire

5 State Trail. It will be the largest state

6 multi-use trail in the nation. The state

7 will develop 350 miles of new trail to create

8 a 750-mile pathway. The trail will be an

9 exceptional new resource for recreation for

10 New Yorkers, while driving economic growth

11 and wellness in communities along its route.

12 Studies estimate that for every

13 $1 million invested in multi-use trails,

14 nearly 10 jobs are created and every $1

15 invested yields $3 in direct medical

16 benefits.

17 Also, with $120 million allocated this

18 year, the Executive Budget continues Governor

19 Cuomo's NY Parks 2020 commitment to invest

20 $900 million in State Parks by 2020, helping

21 reverse decades and decades of decline and

22 neglect. And thank you all, each and every

23 one of you, for your support for Parks 2020.

24 Since the Governor launched NY Parks

212

1 2020 in 2012, we have advanced more than

2 383 improvement separate projects within 130

3 parks and historic sites to enhance, restore,

4 and repair public facilities. Last year, I

5 was happy to be out with many of you to

6 dedicate many new parks and new openings at

7 our parks. We opened the West Bathhouse at

8 Jones Beach; we toured the transformed

9 Terrapin Point at Niagara Falls; we opened

10 the Humphrey Nature Center at Letchworth; we

11 celebrated a new partnership with Major

12 League Baseball to teach and to serve 1,500

13 youth at Roberto Clemente State Park; and we

14 reviewed the future gateways to the Walkway

15 Over the Hudson. And there are many, many

16 more in each and every one of your regions.

17 The Executive Budget also continues

18 the historic $300 million investment in the

19 Environmental Protection Fund to help enhance

20 our stewardship of the State's natural and

21 cultural resources. EPF dollars are crucial

22 to State Parks to protect and provide access

23 to the natural and cultural treasures that

24 are sheltered within our park system. This

213

1 includes a proposal to increase the

2 investment in the Connect Kids program, which

3 is in turn trying to increase the number of

4 kids who connect with nature and our parks

5 and, in doing so, deepen their appreciation

6 and awareness of our natural and cultural

7 resources, and in the end will be the next

8 generation of natural stewards.

9 Connect Kids provides small

10 transportation grants to underserved

11 communities for educational field trips to

12 our parks and historic sites. Schools in

13 every part of the state are taking advantage

14 of this program, and our school visitation to

15 our parks is increasing dramatically. And I

16 urge each and every one of you to reach out

17 to your schools to take part in this program.

18 Connect Kids rebuilds environmental

19 and historic education centers and programs

20 near these communities and these schools that

21 have little open space opportunities or

22 educational program opportunities. It

23 provides free Learn-to-Swim programs, adding

24 this to nearly 30 parks last summer that

214

1 offered lessons to thousands of children in

2 communities where free swim opportunities are

3 limited or not available.

4 It also offers a 10-month, hands-on

5 job training program in state parks and on

6 state lands, through the Empire Conservation

7 Corps program.

8 And the EPF also provides continued

9 funding for the Parks and Trail Partnership

10 Program, which with our partner, Parks and

11 Trails New York, we are providing competitive

12 grants to friends groups that then support

13 state parks, historic sites, and new trail

14 initiatives.

15 Our agency also administers one of the

16 strongest historic preservation programs in

17 the country. We continue to lead in the

18 number of listings on the State and National

19 Registers of Historic Places, which provide

20 critical protection and incentives to

21 preserve sites important to New York.

22 Notable places recognized last year included

23 the New York State Barge Canal, which, with

24 support from our partners at the National

215

1 Park Service and the Erie Canalway National

2 Heritage Corridor, was just designated a

3 National Historic Landmark.

4 Stonewall Inn was designated by

5 Governor Cuomo to be a State Historic Site,

6 in coordination with President Obama's

7 Stonewall National Monument designation. And

8 our historic bureau takes the lead in the

9 nation in designating LGBT sites.

10 The Woodstock Festival site was

11 nominated to the National Registers, another

12 sign that we remain a progressive leader in

13 advancing the recognition of diverse sites.

14 Last year, the State Historic

15 Preservation Office reviewed 18,000

16 submissions, representing almost 8,900

17 publicly funded, licensed, or permitted

18 projects, for their potential impacts to

19 cultural resources. It's in response to the

20 growing number of projects reviewed that the

21 office recently introduced the Cultural

22 Resource Information System, an online

23 database which has enabled us to greatly

24 expedite our consultation process, with

216

1 average review times dropping significantly.

2 We believe it in itself will be a great

3 example and a model for the historic

4 preservation world.

5 And make no mistake, New York's

6 embrace of historic preservation is improving

7 the economy. Federal and State Historic

8 Rehabilitation Tax Credit programs have grown

9 exponentially, with steady increases in the

10 number of historic buildings revitalized with

11 the incentive each year of these tax credits.

12 Based on recent figures, in fiscal year 2016

13 our office approved nearly $1.5 billion of

14 investment in the past fiscal year, roughly

15 half of which has been invested in upstate

16 communities, demonstrating that the program

17 has emerged as one of New York's signature

18 economic development, job creation, and

19 community renewal tools.

20 So thank you all very much for your

21 commitment to our magnificent State Park

22 system and our historic preservation

23 programs. As always, I always appreciate the

24 support, the participation that each and

217

1 every one of you provide our agency, and I

2 welcome your questions.

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

4 much, Commissioner.

5 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very

6 much. Sorry I wasn't here, but welcome

7 again.

8 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Thank you.

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So I have a

10 question. The Governor recommends an

11 increase of $54 million, for a total of

12 $208.7 million in total capital funding for

13 the park system. And in recent years, we

14 have done significant increases. You talked

15 about a lot of the openings, which I think

16 were absolutely fantastic.

17 But can you provide a list of the

18 projects that are planned for this coming

19 year? The Legislature always likes to know

20 what we're voting on, so it would be helpful

21 if we got that list.

22 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Happy to provide

23 it.

24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Before the budget

218

1 is passed?

2 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: As soon as we

3 have it.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: That would be

5 great, Commissioner. Thank you so much.

6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Mr. O'Donnell.

7 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Thank you,

8 Mr. Farrell.

9 It's always a pleasure to see you. As

10 you know, I'm new to this committee, so I

11 have a whole bunch of acronyms to learn. And

12 I reviewed what you submitted and was happily

13 but also kind of shockingly surprised about

14 your $200 million commitment to the trails

15 plan. Happy because this is an underfunded

16 agency for the entire time I've been an

17 elected official, but shocked because the

18 second floor, the Governor seems to love

19 RFPs, because RFPs -- if you control the

20 inputs, you control the outputs, so you can

21 dictate where the money goes. Or if there's

22 not an RFP available, he loves competition.

23 So he loves for cities to compete and regions

24 to compete. It's all one big giant football

219

1 game when it comes to spending.

2 And yet, all of a sudden, you're

3 dropping $200 million in capital money for

4 just one thing. Now, it seems to me that the

5 parks across the state have major capital

6 needs and that that $200 million may be

7 better spent if it was divided between the

8 beaches of Long Island, the Adirondacks, the

9 Finger Lakes, the Thousand Islands -- I

10 didn't forget you, Addie -- none of which are

11 places I represent, I want to be very clear,

12 but they're all places that are in desperate

13 need of some capital infusion because of what

14 has gone on.

15 So my first question for you is, is

16 there some sort of cost-benefit analysis that

17 is done before the decision is made to say

18 let's spend $200 million on bike trails?

19 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Well, first of

20 all, the $200 million actually does not come

21 out of our budget. And it is coming out of

22 a -- but the budget, and it will be allocated

23 between the various agencies that will be

24 building the trail.

220

1 And the way to think about it is it's

2 a trail that will be built over three,

3 three and a half years, so it's about

4 $50 million a year, and it's the completion

5 of the Erie Canal Trail. And it's the

6 completion of the Greenway Trail, the Hudson

7 River Greenway.

8 And the trail goes through 27

9 counties, and it touches dozens and dozens

10 and dozens of towns. And it is a -- in every

11 place it is completed, the individual towns

12 have been trying to complete it but unable to

13 do so because maybe it crossed jurisdiction.

14 And it also goes to many, many

15 historic and park and destination points that

16 also will be both great for the economy but

17 also an actual literal connection in the Path

18 through History or the Path to the

19 Environment.

20 So it's -- and paths of this size,

21 because we're finishing what's 50 percent

22 already done in the Hudson River Greenway --

23 and the Hudson River Greenway will do that

24 portion; the Canalway will do the other

221

1 portion. And you will never finish trails

2 like this in this day and age unless you

3 compress it and do it all at one time.

4 So I am also -- it keeps intact all of

5 our other money that we are using out of

6 Parks 2020 to do all the other improvements

7 and all the trail money that is available, so

8 it doesn't siphon out --

9 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Well, no, but

10 it's a choice. It doesn't siphon out. You

11 could choose -- one could choose to do it

12 somewhat differently.

13 And I had the bike and trail people in

14 my office, and they gave me the same exact

15 presentation. But the reality is there are

16 capital needs throughout the state in the

17 parks, and some of those places may in fact

18 be better multipliers of money than this

19 particular one.

20 One of the complaints that was raised

21 in the meeting was that Amtrak, for example,

22 doesn't allow bikes on their trains, and they

23 allow the bikes on the trains in California.

24 Well, okay, that's a federal thing. We can't

222

1 fix the Amtrak problem. But in the end, is

2 the spending of one dollar of capital on this

3 project versus one dollar on capital to help

4 Robert Moses State Park, just as an example

5 -- and what does that mean in terms of the

6 fees that it generates and the interest that

7 it generates in other places in the state?

8 And so I don't think we can look at it

9 just as is this a good or a bad idea. I

10 think we have to look at it from the

11 perspective of is the whole -- is that the

12 best use of every dollar that's committed to

13 it, regardless of where the money comes from.

14 As you probably know, I'm very

15 concerned and supportive of historic

16 preservation. I want to publicly thank you

17 and your office for helping me trying to get,

18 finally, a historic district where I live,

19 Morningside Heights. I had a staffer who

20 spent many, many hours working with your

21 staff to help get us further down the path,

22 and I think it's very important.

23 I also think it's very important that

24 we continue to create more historic sites

223

1 throughout the state, because New York has

2 great history. There are some right here in

3 Albany, there are some in Hudson, there are

4 some north in Washington County which have

5 been brought to my attention. And I'd like

6 to work closely with you about that.

7 Let me ask a provincial question here,

8 because everyone seems to do it. I want to

9 talk about funding for Riverbank State Park.

10 It's technically not in my district, it is

11 20 blocks outside of my district, but it's

12 unique because it wasn't built for its

13 beauty, it was built because -- in exchange

14 for a sewage treatment plant that was put

15 beneath it.

16 And so I would like you to talk a

17 little bit about the funding problems that

18 you've had and get your commitment to address

19 those funding commitments, because in

20 contrast to everywhere else, it's not just

21 there, it's there because the community has

22 the negative health impacts of living with a

23 sewage treatment plant in their neighborhood.

24 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Riverbank State

224

1 Park is a flagship for the New York State

2 park system and actually was the first park

3 that we went in to improve when the first

4 $90 million was made available. And it was

5 the first time in 40 years that State Parks

6 had ever been in the capital budget in a

7 regular and consistent fashion.

8 And I think as Chairman Farrell knows,

9 it was a mess. You know the track, the

10 field, the gym, everything was closed.

11 So it was the first investment. We

12 fixed the gym, the floor, we've opened the

13 track, we fixed the fields, we fixed the ice

14 skating rink that was inaccessible. And

15 we're this year fixing the entrances, the

16 chiller -- which is the infrastructure to the

17 ice skating rink -- for future years, many,

18 many years. We're building a greenhouse for

19 a community garden program with the kids in

20 the community. And it's a pleasure to see

21 the difference. And there's more to go, but

22 a lot has been done.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: And I

24 appreciate that. I want you to continue

225

1 that --

2 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Thank you.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: -- even though

4 it's not in my district.

5 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Okay.

6 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: The last

7 question, the last area, is something that

8 I've raised with you before. As you're

9 aware, there was a massacre of gay and

10 lesbian people in Orlando. Apparently that

11 message never got to Washington, D.C., they

12 think it happened in Bowling Green, but

13 that's okay. It happened in Orlando. And

14 the Governor pledged to build a memorial to

15 do that.

16 So my first question is, were any of

17 the LGBT state elected officials asked to

18 serve on the board of this memorial?

19 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: The -- the

20 commission -- I came in the -- I don't know

21 the background of the selection of the

22 commission. But there are not -- the main

23 representatives are from the not-for-profits

24 and community representatives.

226

1 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Did you make

2 those decisions, or did somebody else make

3 those decisions, who would serve in that

4 capacity?

5 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: I think that it

6 was with the Governor and Alphonso David,

7 who's the chair and very well could have

8 talked to the electeds. But I have also met

9 with many and talked to many of the electeds

10 as we progress with this memorial.

11 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: And what is

12 the status of that memorial, if you know?

13 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: The status of

14 the memorial is that we have a potential

15 site, which is in the Hudson River Park.

16 It's between Bethune and 12th. And we had a

17 competition, a very public competition, and

18 about 40 contestants who submitted. And the

19 commission reviewed all of the submissions

20 and made recommendations to the Governor, and

21 there's a report to the Governor at this

22 point.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: When will that

24 become public?

227

1 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: That will be

2 public probably when he makes a decision and

3 decides on what the next steps are. And the

4 next steps, whatever they are, will include,

5 you know, full community participation.

6 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: I loathe to go

7 over my time. Thank you very much.

8 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Thank you.

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I loathe it too, so

10 thank you very much.

11 (Laughter.)

12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Just kidding.

13 Our next speaker is Senator Kaminsky.

14 SENATOR KAMINSKY: Good afternoon,

15 Commissioner. I'm from the South Shore of

16 Long Island, and the vast majority of my

17 constituents will be visiting Jones Beach

18 State Park for one reason or another. And

19 one of the families in my district had a

20 terrible tragedy in 2015 where a gentleman

21 named Mr. Mullady left a concert at Jones

22 Beach, was on the parkway leaving, and

23 suffered a heart attack. His wife called

24 911, and an ambulance responded 18 minutes

228

1 later. And he had passed in that duration.

2 And so people in my district and the

3 surrounding areas are very troubled about

4 what they see as a lack of emergency response

5 in that area. I've taken the opportunity to

6 show you, in a map, this area. And what you

7 can see is that on the bottom, where Jones

8 Beach is, is a good approximately six miles

9 from the volunteer ambulance services that

10 are supposed to service the routes in and out

11 of Jones Beach State Park.

12 And, you know, my personal opinion is

13 that that is, you know, just completely

14 hazardous for the people that we invite

15 there. I certainly know that we have many of

16 my colleagues from around the state who have

17 miles and miles to travel before, you know,

18 the nearest fire department or hospital. But

19 we're inviting tens of thousands of people to

20 come to Jones Beach State Park for the air

21 show, for concerts, for weekends on the

22 beach. So to know that we may not have

23 enough Park Police to service the area is

24 obviously troubling. And I wanted to know if

229

1 you were aware of this issue and what you

2 might be doing to help address the lack of

3 emergency personnel in that area.

4 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: I am aware of

5 that tragic situation, and we have looked

6 into our emergency medical responses. And,

7 you know, we have and have trained-- we have

8 232 lifeguards that are trained, and many on

9 duty in and around that time, and we have

10 about 25 emergency technicians. And we have

11 20 AEDs, automated external defibrillators.

12 But really what's most important is that then

13 we have a partnership with Nassau County and

14 its fire and its ambulance department.

15 And so when we looked at all of this,

16 we have begun conversations with

17 Nassau County about keeping more ambulances

18 and more personnel on-site, particularly at a

19 concert, because right now they're there from

20 7:00 to 7:00, but I think it would be better

21 if they were there from 10:00 to 10:00, when

22 the concert gets out.

23 So we are talking to them about it.

24 There are contractual issues. But we are

230

1 really looking into this to make sure that

2 we've got enough coverage.

3 SENATOR KAMINSKY: Okay. Well, I

4 definitely appreciate that. I think you

5 focused in on the right issue, which is what

6 do we do after 7:00 when we're inviting

7 people to come for concerts and yet the

8 lifeguards and a lot of the safety personnel

9 you have there have left for the day.

10 I am a state elected official, and I

11 don't have control over the county. But I am

12 under the understanding that, you know, we

13 shouldn't sleep on this thinking that the

14 county is just going to take over on this.

15 So I would really appreciate you

16 focusing in on this. And if there's any way

17 to divert resources, you know, especially

18 during peak times, it would be appreciated.

19 You know, I don't think that this was a freak

20 thing. I think when you're going to invite

21 tens of thousands of people to come to a

22 concert and there are major roadways that you

23 could see in and out, it's going to be hard

24 to get to them if we're waiting for a

231

1 volunteer corps six miles away. And the

2 volunteer firefighters I've talked to would

3 love to help.

4 So I appreciate you looking to Nassau,

5 but I would love if we can get aggressive on

6 this and see what we could do.

7 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Okay. Thank

8 you. We will do.

9 SENATOR KAMINSKY: Thanks for looking

10 into it.

11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

12 Chairman?

13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblyman

14 Englebright.

15 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you,

16 Mr. Chairman.

17 Commissioner, how are you?

18 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Good. Good.

19 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: It's nice to

20 see you.

21 I have a question about the Empire

22 State Trail. Does it include any part of

23 coastal New York, Long Island in particular?

24 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: It does not.

232

1 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: We're part

2 of the Empire State, and we would like to be

3 included in the trail system, which is

4 otherwise a really wonderful idea.

5 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: So we are -- I

6 believe that this trail will be great

7 momentum for other trails, certainly those

8 that connect, those that cross. And we will

9 look into the trail system there, because it

10 starts in the Battery, and see what we can do

11 in terms of connecting.

12 The connections will be -- won't be

13 covered in the current appropriation, but we

14 still have our trail dollars available. So

15 they haven't all been siphoned off for this

16 trail.

17 So we look forward to make more

18 connections, because if we can, it will have

19 a real impact at every part and every point

20 and every part of the state.

21 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: In the first

22 part of his second term, President Washington

23 left from Lower Manhattan and journeyed to

24 visit, among others, the spies on Long Island

233

1 who had saved his life and saved the

2 revolution. We have a Spy Trail -- that's

3 just one of many of our trails on Long

4 Island -- that would make sense to be

5 connected back to Manhattan.

6 So please put us in your planning now,

7 rather than say someday we'll get around to

8 remembering about Long Island. I don't see

9 any reason not to include our existing

10 Greenway Trails. We have a Long Island

11 Greenbelt Trail Conference. We have

12 ready-made not-for-profits who have been

13 manicuring trails and telling people to go

14 take a hike for a long time.

15 But please don't tell Long Island

16 generally to go take a hike in the adverse

17 sense of the use of that phrase.

18 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Right. No.

19 We'll encourage to hike forward, yes.

20 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: So further

21 to that, we also I think have the potential

22 to add to the diversity of experiences that a

23 trail would have. We have a couple of

24 thousand miles of shoreline. If you add all

234

1 the crenellations in, it's really extensive.

2 We could have blue trails with kayaks and

3 canoes into some of our inner harbors. And I

4 think it would add an exciting dimension to

5 your wonderful vision and the Governor's

6 wonderful vision for the Empire State Trail.

7 I also have a question about the

8 offloading that we're seeing in the EPF this

9 year. I was encouraged to ask you this

10 question when I posed it to Commissioner

11 Seggos. One of the more notable offloads is

12 certain local Navigation Law expenses that

13 are, in this proposed budget, being placed

14 into the EPF as a capital expenditure.

15 Now, this is very difficult for me,

16 because we have a 2 percent cap that affects

17 all of our local governments. They are not

18 allowed to offload into capital anything

19 that's part of their ordinary operational

20 budget. Is this part of what the state is

21 doing, however? The state doesn't have the

22 same restrictions with the 2 percent cap.

23 What the impact is, though, of not

24 being able to get any relief for capital is

235

1 that we're seeing a lot of capital

2 investments at the local municipal level not

3 being made. Because they have a terrible

4 choice now, in a tight budget, to either fund

5 personnel and basic operations or maybe put

6 off for another year the investment for the

7 new motor over at the sewer treatment plant.

8 And so we're getting a lot of deferred

9 maintenance impact on our local budgets

10 that -- you know, we receive the complaints

11 on that, but then we turn around and say,

12 well, you know, just hope you don't notice,

13 but we're offloading into capital because we

14 can.

15 And that's what this Navigation Law

16 offload looks like. It looks like something

17 that the state can do because it doesn't

18 follow the same rules that it has imposed

19 upon local municipalities.

20 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: I see these

21 dollars -- as you know, our agency --

22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Commissioner --

23 Commissioner, could you use the mic, please?

24 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Oh, I leaned

236

1 back. Sorry.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

3 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: We oversee

4 boater safety, security, and also monitoring

5 of environmental regulations in the natural

6 resources. And we work closely with all of

7 our local partners to do so.

8 So I feel that this is an appropriate

9 part of our responsibility, to go forward and

10 to help with the local -- the localities that

11 are patrolling the waters for us, and

12 patrolling the natural resources, and who are

13 our eyes and ears to stop dumping and to see

14 if there are any environmental infractions.

15 So I think it's appropriate.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: It's

17 appropriate to be done. It's just a question

18 of whether it's appropriate to place it into

19 the Environmental Protection Fund. But thank

20 you for your response.

21 Mr. Chairman.

22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

23 Assemblywoman Woerner.

24 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WOERNER: Thank you,

237

1 Mr. Chairman.

2 Thank you, Commissioner.

3 I have a variety of questions. As you

4 pointed outside out in your testimony, you've

5 got an expanding number of historic sites,

6 you've got an increasing number of National

7 Register and State Register listings, you've

8 got a very successful tax credit program that

9 requires extensive review from your office.

10 And certainly for all of these projects, a

11 timely review is important. And so my

12 question has to do with the staffing levels

13 in your historic preservation group, both in

14 the technical services and historic sites

15 bureau.

16 Can you talk to me about the current

17 staffing levels, how many slots you have that

18 are empty, and what your plans are for

19 filling them?

20 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Any slots that

21 are empty, we're filling, that have been

22 vacated. And that's just a matter of time

23 and finding the right people.

24 And, you know, with parks and historic

238

1 preservation, great growth requires also

2 great ingenuity. In the bureau launch of

3 CRIS, the automated digital review system has

4 greatly reduced the time frame and the

5 efficiency of the department to review all of

6 the applications that are coming in.

7 We use partnerships with many of the

8 not-for-profits that help us in terms of

9 review and in terms of, with the parks, with

10 you know, park programs, we're also

11 automating across the parks too, with

12 entrances and online reservations. We're

13 also trying to reduce costs, energy costs,

14 because they're a big piece of our operating

15 budget, and that's feeding into the

16 Governor's alternative energy and climate

17 change programs. So that to the extent that

18 we can introduce solar and wind on our roofs

19 and in our parking lots, we can reduce the

20 energy costs that each bureau has to pay.

21 And then our staff is amazingly

22 innovative in terms of efficiency. And we're

23 pooling resources between regions, we're

24 trying to close down silos. And so far so

239

1 good. So --

2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WOERNER: I appreciate

3 that. I'll just conclude that statement by

4 saying that historic preservation takes some

5 particular skills.

6 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Yes.

7 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WOERNER: And while

8 automation can help facilitate efficiency,

9 making sure that you've got the right skills

10 in that bureau I think is really important to

11 ensure that we continue to have a successful

12 historic sites program.

13 My next question is more parochial.

14 The Saratoga Spa State Park is really a gem

15 in the Capital Region and throughout the

16 state. And I know you've been making

17 investments or plan to make investments in

18 upgrading the Peerless Pool Bathhouse. But

19 the Victoria Pool continues to be a source of

20 some amount of concern in my district that,

21 as a historic building, it requires a more

22 regular investment to maintain it in an

23 appropriate manner.

24 So in the capital plan do you have

240

1 plans to make investments in upgrading the

2 Victoria Pool?

3 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: We do. We

4 actually made $500,000 available last year,

5 and then we added another $400,000 to that.

6 So $900,000.

7 And we have invested in the pool and

8 the pool area. The actual appropriations

9 said for the pool area. And it's -- some of

10 the historic masonry needed to be fixed. The

11 pool actually also, before this, we had

12 already fixed. And also the restaurant was

13 not in code, and the roof was leaking, which

14 then, you know, caused painting problems on

15 all the walls that surround the pool.

16 So we fixed all of that and actually

17 invested about -- we're just finishing some

18 final touches, but we invested close to a

19 million, and we think we've really gotten

20 into the infrastructure and solved some of

21 the source problems.

22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WOERNER: Thank you.

23 And then finally I'd just like to thank you

24 for your support of the Resident Curator

241

1 Program, particularly with respect to the

2 Susan B. Anthony House in Washington County.

3 We're very excited to move forward with that.

4 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Thank you for

5 your support. We really appreciate it.

6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Pat Fahy.

7 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you. Thank

8 you, Mr. Chairman.

9 Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you

10 for your testimony. It's always good to have

11 you back.

12 Just a couple of questions, and I want

13 to start with the EPF funding. And I should

14 start by saying it's been great since last

15 year. It was wonderful to see that increase

16 that is being held this year to that

17 $300 million. A couple of concerns on it. I

18 know a couple were mentioned. But one is the

19 land acquisition, the cut of $7 million in

20 reduction from the previous year.

21 Can you talk about why the land

22 acquisition part -- what's the rationale

23 behind that proposed cut? That's been very

24 popular up here, particularly in a number of

242

1 my towns. Our land conservancy folks have

2 really worked with a number of my towns in

3 some smart growth initiatives, and that's

4 been just a critical piece of it. If you

5 could explain the rationale for the

6 $7 million reduction.

7 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Well, the first

8 thing I want to assure you is that we had a

9 very robust pipeline this year and we have a

10 very robust pipeline next year, and that

11 reduction will not affect any of our land

12 acquisitions. And as you know, land

13 acquisitions, they take about a year or more.

14 And so now we're building the pipeline. And

15 that number was reduced this year, and it

16 won't affect what we have planned for

17 acquisition for this year.

18 And that number, when you think about

19 the EPF, of $300 million in those categories,

20 it can kind of wax and wane as the needs

21 occur. And we split that fund with DEC, and

22 DEC and Parks are fine. We will complete our

23 planned acquisitions this year. And then if

24 we need more next year, it may, you know,

243

1 return.

2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Okay. I may want

3 to follow up with you a little bit more on

4 that. But thank you, Commissioner.

5 Appreciate your attention to that.

6 Tax credits, the historic tax credits

7 that you mentioned. And it's great to see

8 how popular it is. It certainly is really

9 helping just even in our warehouse district

10 here in Albany. It's been critical to

11 helping to bring that neighborhood back and

12 really assist a number of small businesses.

13 You mentioned that about $1.5 billion

14 has been used in credits very successfully.

15 Is there more? Is there something more that

16 we could be doing there to encourage even

17 more historic renovation and --

18 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: I think -- well,

19 there's a bigger federal issue --

20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Sure, yeah. A

21 concern.

22 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: -- which, if

23 that does occur and it is eliminated, then

24 that will affect our state credit law because

244

1 the two are tied.

2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Yes.

3 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: But presuming

4 that the status quo stays as it is right now,

5 it's really basically educating communities

6 as to all the benefits. And we're out there

7 talking it up and explaining it. So anything

8 that you can do to encourage people to come

9 in, we welcome them with open arms.

10 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you.

11 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: And the state

12 tax credit law does sunset in 2019, which

13 means that soon we should be able to look at

14 it and evaluate it for the future.

15 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you. Yeah,

16 we're watching what the feds do on that and a

17 number of areas.

18 One more question, and just a quick

19 comment. I want to commend the Governor for

20 the proposal on our trailways, the Erie Canal

21 and the overall Empire Trail. Despite some

22 of the questions of our new esteemed chairman

23 of the Parks and Tourism Committee --

24 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Just

245

1 questions.

2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Just questions,

3 that's right. I had benefit of learning a

4 lot about the Erie Canal this year, but I

5 also -- while the Erie Canal does not -- the

6 trailway does not actually touch into my

7 district, the 109th, the multiplier effect in

8 terms of what that would bring in tourism I

9 think is rather extraordinary. And as you

10 said, often for every dollar invested,

11 there's a $10 multiplier effect.

12 So I do think it is -- particularly

13 the Erie Canal, which I'm much more familiar

14 with, the fact that there's so little left to

15 finish that trail and what that could do for

16 tourism, which is already in the hundreds of

17 millions.

18 And I will say I learned a lot along

19 the trail this year in terms of some of the

20 pockets of extraordinary poverty in some of

21 those towns that do abut the canal. So I

22 just want to commend you.

23 Last question, also related to parks

24 and trailways. You've been very responsive

246

1 in the past, including through the Connect

2 Kids, for access for youth, particularly

3 low-income and urban youth, to get to our

4 state parks, which are often in more rural

5 areas and not as accessible. And as I

6 mentioned earlier this morning, between the

7 cuts in the recession and what had been the

8 overtesting of our students, we've seen a

9 plummeting of field trips in our schools, and

10 particularly, again, in our urban areas.

11 Can you talk -- you mentioned the

12 success. I'm thrilled to see that you are

13 trying to double that this year. Can you

14 give us any numbers behind that in terms of

15 how many low-income students you have been

16 able to introduce to our park system? Again,

17 it bears repeating, I believe we make good

18 stewards of our parks for the future the more

19 we introduce all youth and families to our

20 extraordinary park system.

21 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Well, first of

22 all, this was not funded by the EPF. But we

23 also launched, in partnership with the

24 National Park Service, Every Kid In a Park,

247

1 which was free entry for all fourth-graders

2 and their families.

3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: That's right.

4 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: So we saw about

5 7,000 fourth-graders come in. And then we

6 launched the transportation programs with a

7 particular emphasis on Title I schools. And

8 we have about 200 applications, 200 schools.

9 And just so you also know, that -- I mean,

10 this goes back some, and we've been working

11 on it, but we had only about 75,000 school

12 kids about five years ago. And it's up to

13 250,000 now. Or 230,000, hopefully, to 250.

14 And we also -- we mapped all the areas

15 of high poverty, obesity, diabetes, you know,

16 health-related. And so many schools are from

17 those, so those are the places that we're

18 building our nature centers and our nature

19 programs. So the teachers don't have to

20 teach, they're not scared to come, we have

21 the programs. Or recreational programs to

22 keep the kids --

23 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you very

24 much.

248

1 Assemblywoman Jenne.

2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you.

3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: Thank you very

4 much.

5 Hello, Commissioner, how are you?

6 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Hi, how are you?

7 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: First I'll just

8 start by saying that I'm happy to see that

9 the free swim lessons are looking to expand

10 throughout the state. I appreciated you

11 coming up to highlight the free lessons that

12 are offered in one of the parks in my

13 district. And also I'm happy about the field

14 trips and the efforts that you're taking to

15 get more people and students into our parks.

16 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: And thank you

17 for all your support and participation in

18 that. We appreciate it.

19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: But now I'm

20 going to move really parochially on something

21 that, you know, has given me quite a bit of

22 concern. In last year's budget the Canal

23 Corporation, the responsibility for that

24 corporation -- which loses about a hundred

249

1 million dollars a year -- was moved to the

2 Power Authority, the New York Power

3 Authority. And I objected to the movement at

4 that time as essentially now a constant drain

5 on the Power Authority to make up this

6 revenue.

7 And so now I see in this year's

8 budget, in addition to the long-term sweep,

9 if you will, of $100 million to support the

10 Canal Corporation, we are now sweeping

11 $77 million from the Power Authority to fund

12 what appears to be investments in the Canal

13 Corporation and the trail along the

14 Erie Canal.

15 And so that troubles me greatly,

16 particularly when I have had projects in the

17 queue. I host one of the Power Authority's

18 biggest generators, up in Massena. I have

19 communities that have been in desperate need

20 of investments in their communities that are

21 directly impacted by the Power Authority,

22 that really could use $77 million worth of

23 investment. And to add insult to injury,

24 this trail, this proposed Empire State Trail,

250

1 just like my colleague from Long Island,

2 completely leaves out the North Country, the

3 St. Lawrence River Valley, and the Thousand

4 Islands region. Even though one of the power

5 dams that is funding the Empire State Trail

6 is located in the Thousand Islands region.

7 And, like I said, we've had a backlog of

8 projects that my communities feel the Power

9 Authority should have funded years ago.

10 And so, you know, we have the Seaway

11 Trail, which has struggled for many years,

12 that could use some investment in its

13 technology and its attractions and what it

14 has to offer. You know, just because a

15 fantastic champion for that trail passes away

16 doesn't mean that the trail should just fade

17 into oblivion. And so, you know, I have --

18 you know, I could submit to your office and I

19 know the Power Authority has already received

20 all of these requests for funding for

21 projects that I think are far more

22 appropriate when we're spending $77 million

23 of the Power Authority's money. You know, we

24 should be funding the projects in the

251

1 North Country or the trail should be skewed

2 to serve the communities that host

3 Power Authority projects.

4 I find it extremely unfair. And, you

5 know, we had to swallow a nasty pill of

6 absorbing $100 million worth of operating

7 expenses for the Canal Corporation -- and I'm

8 sure that somebody is going to tweet out that

9 I'm -- that we need to make this $77 million

10 of investment in the Canal Corporation's

11 trail that goes along it. But frankly, it's

12 appalling to me that we would be using this

13 amount of funds to continue to prop it up.

14 And the argument is going to be made that

15 it's going to enhance tourism. Well,

16 investing in projects in Waddington, New

17 York, is going to enhance tourism in the

18 North Country.

19 And so I am being absolutely

20 parochial. But after we've swept

21 $100 million a year, moving forward, to

22 support the Canal Corporation, to add another

23 $77 million is really more than I can handle

24 at this point.

252

1 So I would ask us to seriously rethink

2 this proposal, because it is bad for the

3 North Country. And we should be investing in

4 the communities impacted by NYPA with NYPA's

5 money.

6 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: So I think I

7 have to defer to NYPA and the Power Authority

8 to talk about this specifically.

9 But one thing I do want to clarify is

10 the Empire Trail, any money for that is not

11 out of those sweeps, it's extra dollars

12 coming in.

13 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: Right. That's

14 my point. It's 77 on top of $100 million.

15 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: It's not 77 from

16 the Empire --

17 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: It says right

18 here, $77 million in the New York Power

19 Authority to cover Empire State Trail.

20 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER BEERS: Those

21 are general capital dollars that are

22 appropriated to NYPA and to the

23 Canal Authority for the construction of the

24 Empire Trail. So they are state capital

253

1 dollars appropriated to NYPA and to the

2 Canal Authority. They are not from NYPA to

3 the trail.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

5 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,

7 Commissioner, for your service to the state.

8 And thank you for all that you do. And I

9 would urge you to continue to pay close

10 attention to Midway State Park, Lake Erie

11 State Park, Long Point State Park,

12 Allegany State Park, Letchworth State Park,

13 and Stony Brook State Park.

14 COMMISSIONER HARVEY: Will do. Thank

15 you.

16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is

18 Commissioner Richard A. Ball, from the

19 New York State Department of Agriculture and

20 Markets.

21 There he is. Hi, Commissioner.

22 Welcome.

23 COMMISSIONER BALL: Good to see you.

24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you for being

254

1 here. Good to see you also. Look forward to

2 your testimony.

3 COMMISSIONER BALL: Well, thank you.

4 Thank you so much. I was going to say good

5 morning, I think I'll say good afternoon --

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: At least it's not

7 good night.

8 COMMISSIONER BALL: -- Chairwoman

9 Young, Chairman Farrell, Senator Ritchie,

10 Assemblyman Magee, members of the

11 agricultural committees, and elected

12 officials. I am pleased to offer my

13 testimony on the 2017-2018 Executive Budget

14 for the Department of Agriculture and

15 Markets.

16 The Executive Budget recommends

17 $207 million for the department, a nearly

18 $37 million increase from last year. This

19 budget will allow us to maintain our core

20 functions while implementing strategic new

21 initiatives to support the agricultural

22 industry.

23 New York State has nearly 36,000 farms

24 that produce some of the best food and

255

1 beverage products in the world. Our

2 producers rank high among the major

3 agricultural states in the nation, ranking in

4 the top 10 in about 30 different commodities.

5 Despite the challenges the industry has faced

6 recently, both weather and market-related,

7 and because of Governor Cuomo's commitment to

8 this sector of the economy and close

9 partnerships with all of you, we continue to

10 reach new milestones and move in a very

11 positive direction.

12 I am proud to say there is no other

13 program in the country like New York State

14 Grown & Certified, the program launched in

15 August by the Governor, with me, in the

16 South Bronx. Grown & Certified helps

17 consumers identify New York agricultural

18 producers who are certified for safe food

19 handling practices of food and for best

20 practices in environmental farm management.

21 The department, working with Empire

22 State Development, recently launched a

23 marketing campaign highlighting the program

24 and our partnerships with retail stores such

256

1 as Tops Friendly Markets to promote New York

2 State Grown & Certified products.

3 The Governor proposes a $5 million

4 grant program to help agricultural producers

5 with capital costs needed to meet the

6 program's requirements. In 2017, the

7 department will continue to expand

8 participation and plans to reach new

9 commodity groups like maple, horticulture,

10 and dairy, helping them also meet the high

11 standards of the New York Grown & Certified

12 program.

13 Taste NY also continues to grow.

14 Sales have almost tripled, from $4.5 million

15 in 2015 to more than $13 million in 2016.

16 Taste NY products are now available in more

17 than 60 retail locations statewide. The

18 Executive Budget proposes to build on the

19 success of the program and support Taste NY

20 through new welcome centers.

21 The industrial hemp industry has great

22 potential also in New York State. Governor

23 Cuomo proposes to build on our pilot program

24 this year, opening the program to more

257

1 farmers who will work with us to research,

2 grow, and process hemp as an agricultural

3 commodity.

4 The Governor will also host the

5 first-ever Industrial Hemp Summit in the

6 Southern Tier to bring together

7 manufacturers, farmers, researchers and

8 stakeholders to identify the challenges and

9 opportunities in the industry.

10 The transformation of the Great

11 New York State Fair will get a boost with a

12 proposed investment of $70 million to finance

13 Phase 2 of the State Fair modernization

14 effort. This includes $50 million to develop

15 a multi-use expo building and exciting new

16 transportation options for visitors and

17 concertgoers. An additional $20 million will

18 be used for parking and highway improvements,

19 establishing the State Fair as a major,

20 year-round tourism attraction and economic

21 driver for the region.

22 I am very proud of our Farm-to-School

23 Program in New York. We continue to increase

24 the amount of fresh, local foods served in

258

1 schools and to connect our farmers to new

2 markets. Since 2015, the state has invested

3 $850,000 for Farm-to-School projects,

4 benefiting tens of thousands of students in

5 New York. With $750,000 proposed in the

6 budget for the Farm-to-School program this

7 year -- triple last year's budget -- we will

8 predict extraordinary success in getting more

9 good foods to our schoolchildren.

10 The Governor is also once again

11 proposing a $300 million investment in the

12 Environmental Protection Fund, which funds

13 several vital agricultural programs.

14 Additionally, the proposed $2 billion Clean

15 Water Infrastructure Fund provides

16 $50 million for on-farm source water quality

17 protection projects.

18 We at the department focus on

19 agricultural education and our next

20 generation of farmers. The Executive Budget

21 includes funding to increase the number of

22 FFA chapters in the state, and funding to

23 increase the capacity of the New York

24 Association of Agricultural Educators to hire

259

1 and train certified teachers to meet the

2 backlog demand for new agricultural education

3 programs.

4 This year's budget is great news for

5 our farmers, our farm communities, and the

6 next generation of farmers, as well as for

7 our specialty food and craft beverage

8 producers. I am confident that all of the

9 proposals laid out today will leverage the

10 good work of the industry, building an even

11 stronger agricultural economy.

12 As the development of a state budget

13 is a partnership with the Legislature, I look

14 forward to hearing what your priorities will

15 be. Thank you very much.

16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

18 We'd like to hear from Senator

19 Ritchie, who is chair of the Senate Standing

20 Committee on Agriculture.

21 SENATOR RITCHIE: Thank you, Senator

22 Young.

23 Commissioner, I want to start off

24 first by saying I very much appreciate the

260

1 great working relationship that we have,

2 appreciate how responsive your staff has

3 been, and look forward to continuing to work

4 with you on a number of projects that

5 certainly will be beneficial to the ag

6 industry in the state.

7 My first question is, of course, on

8 the local assistance programs. I know both

9 yourself and the Executive are supportive of

10 our number-one industry. But each year when

11 the budget comes out, the first thing I look

12 at is the local assistance programs. And

13 once again, most of them are either wiped

14 out, zeroed out, or they've been greatly

15 reduced.

16 Can you explain what causes that to

17 happen?

18 COMMISSIONER BALL: Sure. You know, I

19 had a chance, once the Governor outlined his

20 budget to us, to move around the state and

21 talk about the budget highlights to various

22 groups around the state. And the budget is

23 really a process. It became very clear to

24 me, anyway, as I was doing that. The

261

1 Governor has an opportunity in his budget to

2 make a fiscal statement but also to outline

3 priorities that he has for what he sees as

4 necessary in the State Budget.

5 So the funding of this budget this

6 year is the exact same budget as it was last

7 year in his Executive Budget, with a few

8 exceptions where more money was added. You,

9 all of you, represent constituencies and have

10 changing needs and demands in those regions

11 that you represent, and I think the process

12 is correct for you to adjust that. We look

13 forward to working with you on that to

14 increase those lines that you see are

15 important, so we can have the best possible

16 budget for agriculture going forward.

17 SENATOR RITCHIE: So I would assume

18 that means yourself and the Executive would

19 be supportive in trying to restore these

20 funds, that you believe that this is a good

21 use of taxpayers' money to try to make sure

22 that we're up-to-date and continuing when it

23 comes to cutting-edge research and a number

24 of different programs that we've heard from

262

1 the ag community that they believe are

2 important?

3 COMMISSIONER BALL: Look forward to

4 working with you on that, exactly. Very much

5 so.

6 SENATOR RITCHIE: One of the items

7 that didn't get cut and there is extra money

8 for is, of course, the FFA program that you

9 were speaking of. You know, we've had an

10 opportunity to talk about the language, and

11 I'm concerned that the language looks like

12 it's written so that it will be a competitive

13 grant program. And I've heard that there are

14 over 70 potential groups looking to start up

15 new FFA programs. I think that's wonderful.

16 Each and every time the FFA students come in,

17 so many of them come from outside normal farm

18 families. This is a great way to generate

19 interest for those that are looking for a

20 career in agriculture in the future.

21 But my concern is that those programs

22 that have been in place and manage to make it

23 through tough years with education funding,

24 that they wouldn't necessarily be the

263

1 programs that would have continued funding.

2 So I'd just like to hear how you think that's

3 going to take place.

4 COMMISSIONER BALL: Sure. Well, I

5 think a couple of things about that. One,

6 actually looking at the language, it's

7 noncompetitive with regards to the funding.

8 Secondly, over the last few years the

9 Legislature has graciously added a

10 substantial amount of money to help the FFA

11 program go on.

12 But in speaking about the need there,

13 in speaking about the overall need to

14 increase the number of jobs and the quality

15 of workers that we have in our pipeline for

16 agriculture, the Governor wanted to underline

17 very much and incentivize the growth in FFA

18 chapters. We did hear from over 70 different

19 schools that they would like to increase

20 that, that they would like to have FFA

21 chapters in their schools. And some of them

22 had chapters but lost them.

23 And so I think the goal here is to

24 incentivize that. We would hope to work with

264

1 you on the balance of the funding in FFA,

2 certainly.

3 SENATOR RITCHIE: So the increase

4 would just be for new chapters that were

5 going into -- that were going to actually

6 take part in the program, not exclude those

7 schools that have already been holding FFA

8 chapters and meetings.

9 COMMISSIONER BALL: Correct. It would

10 be to incentivize new chapters, perhaps

11 schools that lost a chapter years ago through

12 lack of funding. Exactly.

13 SENATOR RITCHIE: This past summer I

14 appreciate you taking the tour in several

15 different areas of the state with regards to

16 the issues we were having with drought. Just

17 wondering, as we go forward, there are still

18 some farmers across the state who are dealing

19 with losses because of the drought. Any

20 ideas that you might have that would help us

21 address the drought losses with those

22 farmers, whether it be in the North Country,

23 Western New York, Finger Lakes?

24 COMMISSIONER BALL: You know, the

265

1 irony is not lost on me that you and I

2 visited in Schoharie Valley in 2011, in

3 September, after Hurricane Irene came through

4 and devastated our community. And then last

5 summer we were in your neighborhood -- and

6 indeed I was all across the state -- looking

7 at the effects of drought.

8 So clearly we're facing some

9 challenges in agriculture. I think in our --

10 we have a line now of climate resiliency. We

11 have $2.5 million dedicated there. There's

12 three tracks there. One of them is for

13 manure management, nutrient management on

14 farms; another one of them is -- you know,

15 three of the tracks deal with water

16 management and drought resiliency as well as

17 flood mitigation. So I think there's a

18 source of funds there where we could look at

19 developing irrigation systems and things like

20 that for farms that had a tough time with the

21 drought this year.

22 SENATOR RITCHIE: I think it would be

23 helpful, given some of the feedback that I

24 had received from farmers, if we could find

266

1 ways to use some of that money to look at

2 alternative water sources if we get into that

3 situation again. Besides the additional

4 costs for hauling water, it was very

5 difficult for them to find additional water

6 sources. So that would be helpful.

7 Then moving on, you did address the

8 State Fair. But as far as the capital last

9 year for our local fairs, there was

10 $5 million that was included in the budget.

11 And I know there was just a release about

12 that. Could you give me an update on where

13 we're at with the local fair capital funding?

14 COMMISSIONER BALL: Sure. It was a

15 $5 million investment in county fairs.

16 Letters have gone out to all of the ones that

17 qualify, all of the county fair organizations

18 around the state.

19 I would expect that by this spring --

20 we should have shovels in the ground this

21 spring. They're submitting their plans, and

22 they're under review this winter. I think by

23 this spring we should have shovels in the

24 ground. If they have an aggressive plan, I

267

1 think they have up to five years to spend all

2 of the money.

3 SENATOR RITCHIE: And my last question

4 would be on the minimum wage. That's just

5 taken effect, the increase. Just wondering,

6 since I have heard from a number of farmers

7 across the state on the negative impact that

8 it's having on their business, just wondering

9 on your end what have you heard from farmers

10 across the state on the increase in minimum

11 wage?

12 COMMISSIONER BALL: Well, of course

13 anecdotally I hear from time to time about

14 it. You know, our farmers are incredibly

15 resilient. They had a heck of a year last

16 year. The minimum wage just did go up on

17 December 31st, up 70 cents.

18 We do have, I would point out, two

19 credits there. We have a farmworker tax

20 credit that farms can apply for for workers

21 that work more than 500 hours in the year.

22 We were also successful, in my

23 conversations with the commissioner of the

24 Department of Labor, in getting a New York

268

1 Youth Jobs tax credit to help young people

2 get positions on farms. There's a credit

3 there as well.

4 I think that as we go forward, from my

5 standpoint, our farmers deal with fixed costs

6 every year, and sometimes those change. The

7 cost of energy and the cost of labor

8 certainly are significant there, the cost of

9 infrastructure needs and replacements. And

10 then the double whammy last year, for

11 example, of market and weather affects them.

12 But they're incredibly resilient. Every year

13 we figure out how to juggle things and how to

14 make it all work.

15 So I think, keeping in the context of

16 all of this, I know farmers across the state,

17 the vast majority of them far exceed the

18 minimum wage in their pay to their workers,

19 with the average wage on farms today being

20 close to $12 an hour. So I think they

21 understand that investment in their workers

22 is an investment well made, and they want to

23 keep them.

24 But for me, at the Department of Ag

269

1 and Markets, our efforts have to be focused

2 on what we can do to increase our market

3 share, to increase our market opportunities

4 in the city and around the country, and also

5 promoting New York Grown & Certified, so

6 hopefully we establish a preference for our

7 products and a better margin there.

8 So that's what our focus is going to

9 be on in helping our farmers become more

10 profitable.

11 Thank you.

12 SENATOR RITCHIE: Thank you,

13 Commissioner. And just once again, I do

14 appreciate the responsiveness from yourself

15 and your office, and certainly appreciate the

16 time you spent going out and visiting farms

17 across the state who are dealing with the

18 drought conditions.

19 COMMISSIONER BALL: Thank you very

20 much, Senator. Great to work with you.

21 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

22 Chairman Magee.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN MAGEE: Yes.

24 Commissioner, great to see you.

270

1 COMMISSIONER BALL: Assemblyman, great

2 to see you.

3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Bring up your

4 microphone.

5 ASSEMBLYMAN MAGEE: A couple or three

6 questions, maybe, here. What are the

7 department's priorities in agricultural

8 education, marketing and research?

9 COMMISSIONER BALL: Well, of course

10 our efforts with FFA are really notable.

11 This was the 100th anniversary of the

12 legislation that enabled FFAs to really take

13 off and grow in ag education in the country.

14 I had the opportunity to speak to the FFA

15 group here this week as they celebrated that

16 hundredth-year anniversary.

17 So getting, I think, more young people

18 into the pipelines, more ag educators, and

19 more young people thinking about selecting

20 agriculture as a viable career path I think

21 is clearly a priority this year.

22 Also, with regards to marketing, the

23 New York Grown & Certified program. You

24 know, I've been pretty excited about

271

1 marketing. You know, that is the key for us

2 selling more products in the marketplace. I

3 think this one touches a nerve in the

4 marketplace, because we've seen an increase

5 in the desire for local food, an interest in

6 understanding where the food came from, how

7 it was grown, an interest in food safety and

8 transparency and also, in the vein of knowing

9 who we are, what our environmental

10 responsibilities look like on the farm.

11 So I think with this program we tie

12 all those three together -- local food and

13 food safety as well as environmental

14 stewardship -- and I think it's a winner.

15 And it's off to a great start, so I'm very

16 excited about that opportunity.

17 ASSEMBLYMAN MAGEE: Now, on the

18 education program proposal that the Governor

19 has put forth, there's $380,000 for Ag in the

20 Classroom, an increase of 300,000 over

21 2016-2017. Can you describe this program?

22 COMMISSIONER BALL: Well, we're

23 developing the guidelines as we speak. I

24 think we're all somewhat familiar with the

272

1 potential for ag in the classroom. But we're

2 going to work with Cornell, who runs that

3 program. Obviously we'll await the budget

4 being passed, develop the guidelines.

5 But I think what we're hoping to do is

6 connect, again, with school-age children,

7 which very much dovetails with our

8 Farm-to-School Program, to let people

9 understand at an early age the importance of

10 eating healthy and eating locally, and that

11 there are opportunities in agriculture. And

12 certainly we hope along the way to have

13 better health outcomes. So I think making ag

14 in the classroom a little more vital,

15 especially to our schoolchildren, is the way

16 to go.

17 ASSEMBLYMAN MAGEE: The FFA funding is

18 going to be used to help schools create a

19 program?

20 COMMISSIONER BALL: Yeah, we've had, I

21 think, at least 70 requests from schools who

22 had possibly had a program in the past and

23 lost it, or never had one, who have an

24 interest in establishing one.

273

1 So again, that planting of the seed of

2 the opportunity for a career in agriculture

3 is so important. And as I get around the

4 state and I visit our agricultural

5 businesses, our processing facilities, the

6 need for more workers, more skilled workers,

7 a higher level of training -- you know, we do

8 an excellent job when we get people at our

9 land grant system -- we get them at Cornell,

10 we get them at SUNY Cobleskill, et cetera.

11 We do a great job educating them and

12 preparing them for a career in agriculture.

13 But we need to get more of these young people

14 in the pipeline choosing this option.

15 ASSEMBLYMAN MAGEE: Okay. The farm

16 viability, the Governor proposed a cut. Do

17 you have any feeling for what kind of impact

18 that might have?

19 COMMISSIONER BALL: Well, he's

20 proposing the same level of funding as he did

21 in last year's Executive Budget. You

22 graciously added a substantial amount. I was

23 able to find some federal funding also to add

24 to that.

274

1 I think it's a great program. I like

2 it especially because it's farmer-managed.

3 They work in close contact with and

4 partnership with our land grant universities

5 to look at the right kinds of research that

6 we need on a farm to help farms be viable.

7 So I think it's a good program.

8 ASSEMBLYMAN MAGEE: Another area, the

9 Cornell rabies program, was reduced from

10 $610,000 to $50,000, and North Country

11 low-cost rabies was reduced entirely. What

12 effect will reductions in rabies funding have

13 on the amount of research and testing done,

14 and what effect will it have on rabies safety

15 across the state?

16 COMMISSIONER BALL: Well, clearly

17 rabies is a concern not just for farmers but

18 for everyone. So, you know, the Governor put

19 in the same amount of monies in that

20 direction as he did last year. You were

21 wonderful, the Legislature, in adding to it.

22 I would hope we'd have conversations about

23 that as we go through the budget process.

24 ASSEMBLYMAN MAGEE: One other area

275

1 that the Governor has cut is the migrant

2 workers program. Childcare for migrant

3 workers was reduced by $1 million from last

4 year. What impact will reducing funding for

5 childcare for migrant workers have on the

6 agriculture sector? Does the department feel

7 that the program does not need to be

8 additionally funded?

9 COMMISSIONER BALL: The funding for

10 ABCD is continued at $9 million. You added a

11 million dollars. And some of their funding

12 also comes from the Office of Children and

13 Families.

14 But again, the Governor has lined it

15 out at the same amount, and we would hope to

16 have a conversation about that as we go

17 through the process.

18 ASSEMBLYMAN MAGEE: Thank you,

19 Commissioner.

20 COMMISSIONER BALL: Thank you,

21 Assemblyman.

22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

23 Senator?

24 SENATOR O'MARA: Senator Kaminsky.

276

1 SENATOR KAMINSKY: Good afternoon,

2 Commissioner.

3 On the South Shore of Long Island

4 there was a pretty notorious scandal recently

5 involving animal abuse, where there was a dog

6 trainer who someone took an undercover video

7 of him aggressively jabbing a caged dog. I

8 actually have a picture of it here so you

9 could see what people were seeing on their

10 televisions at night, and it really brought

11 shock and awe to a lot of people in the area.

12 And a lot of them came to me with the

13 question, how is it that people hold

14 themselves out as professional dog trainers

15 if there is no such licensing scheme? And

16 when I began to talk to people about this,

17 you know, obviously people's pets are

18 extensions of their families, if not outright

19 parts of their families. And they thought

20 that they were giving loved ones over to

21 people who had some type of professional

22 training or had some type of oversight where

23 someone was looking to make sure that they

24 were compliant with some type of standard.

277

1 And they were shocked to see none existed.

2 So I've put in legislation that would

3 have Ag and Markets do that. But certainly

4 there's a lot that you could do, short of

5 legislation, in terms of getting involved in

6 this area and whatever that may mean to you

7 in terms of making sure that this is not

8 happening.

9 So I just wanted to ask if you were

10 aware of it and see if you had any ideas that

11 would be able to protect our beloved pets.

12 COMMISSIONER BALL: Yeah, nothing will

13 strike at somebody's heart quicker than

14 watching that. You know, no animal, no dog,

15 certainly, or any animal, deserves to be

16 treated cruelly. And we do have laws to that

17 effect.

18 Currently our jurisdiction doesn't

19 cover obedience training facilities unless

20 they board the animals. Or grooming

21 facilities, for that matter. So I'm not sure

22 whether the jurisdiction would lie with the

23 Secretary of State or not. I'd have to look

24 into that.

278

1 We do monitor shelters and breeders,

2 and we do work with that population to make

3 sure there is sanitation and appropriate

4 safety measures, et cetera, in place there.

5 Enforcement of any challenges is done

6 by local law enforcement or local ASPCA. I'd

7 be happy to speak with you about that,

8 because one of our efforts that we have

9 ongoing is working with the ASPCA as well as

10 criminal justice to help identify what the

11 standards should be, what they look like, and

12 educating them on when they see animal

13 cruelty. But I'd be happy to speak with you

14 further about that.

15 SENATOR KAMINSKY: No, I appreciate

16 that. And I think the whole idea behind any

17 regulatory scheme would be to do something so

18 we're not at the point where the ASPCA and

19 animal cruelty is being discussed, so that

20 people know, you know, where the line is and

21 who has met some sort of rigor that they are

22 allowed to be given your animal.

23 So I'd love you to explore the

24 boundaries of your jurisdiction and what you

279

1 think could be done all in the name of

2 protecting our pets.

3 COMMISSIONER BALL: Understood. Thank

4 you, sir.

5 SENATOR KAMINSKY: Thank you for your

6 time.

7 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

8 Assemblywoman Jenne.

9 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: Good afternoon,

10 Commissioner. How are you?

11 COMMISSIONER BALL: Good afternoon.

12 Great to see you.

13 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: I have a quick

14 question about Taste NY before I get into the

15 meat of what I want to talk about. That's a

16 $1.1 million line item. Is that for capital

17 or to start up new stores, or is that to

18 cover operating expenses of these stores?

19 COMMISSIONER BALL: Generally,

20 operating expenses, up and getting the

21 program working and facilitated in the area.

22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: All right. I

23 assume we're looking at these stores to make

24 sure that they at least break even, or else

280

1 they wouldn't make sense to be operating it.

2 I drive by one on the Thruway every week

3 that's closed, has closed signs on it. So

4 I'm just wondering, you know, if that program

5 is working optimally at this point or if we

6 should take a look at that.

7 COMMISSIONER BALL: You know, it's

8 working exceedingly well. I'm not sure what

9 you're driving by. We should talk about

10 that.

11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: It's at a lock.

12 COMMISSIONER BALL: Okay. E-13?

13 That's seasonal. Yeah, that one is seasonal.

14 That -- that's a new one. It's actually kind

15 of a nice story because that's operated by

16 the Montgomery County ARC. It's a

17 heartwarming story. They're doing a

18 marvelous job there.

19 But it's located next to the lock on

20 the Erie Canal. And that's why, there's a

21 seasonality there.

22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: Okay. All

23 right, thank you.

24 I'd also like to join the concern of

281

1 my colleague Senator Ritchie about the local

2 assistance programs being lined out. We have

3 the North Country Farm-to-School program,

4 which I thought is a perfect complement to

5 the Governor's Farm-to-School Program. He

6 pays for training and equipment, primarily,

7 in your budget. But this actually gets money

8 to the schools so that they can purchase food

9 from farmers. So I hope that we'll be able

10 to have a discussion about increasing the

11 role of that type of program to ensure that

12 farmers are able to sell to the markets at

13 our schools.

14 But the bulk of what I really would

15 like to talk about is -- oh, I also have a

16 little note here that the Jefferson County

17 Fair is the longest continuously operating

18 fair, and they're celebrating their 200th

19 anniversary this year. So I'd like to give a

20 little shout-out for the local fair funding

21 and also for Jefferson County. Maybe you'll

22 be able to make your way up this summer.

23 COMMISSIONER BALL: Yup. Love to.

24 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: But my biggest

282

1 concern right now is the plight of our dairy

2 farmers. I know that there are some

3 proposals out there for farm investment tax

4 credits and for enhancing the minimum wage

5 tax credit. But at its base, my concern is

6 that the price of milk is so low that my

7 farmers can't even hire a minimum wage worker

8 that they probably desperately could use, and

9 I'm not sure how they're going to be able to

10 make a tremendous amount of investment in

11 their farm with the price of milk being so

12 low without having to essentially be run by a

13 bank.

14 And so, you know, as we talk about

15 helping our farmers get to market and

16 certifying New York's foods and those types

17 of things, and also looking at the Regional

18 Economic Development Councils' less than

19 super stellar record of trying to reboot the

20 upstate economy, I'd like our dairy farmers

21 to win the regional competition. I'd like

22 them to be able to win the $100 million or so

23 of economic development funds. I'd like us

24 to fund a state premium payment to our

283

1 farmers for the quality of their milk, to

2 help adjust for the fact that they do not get

3 paid anywhere close to what it costs to

4 produce milk, that we know is a very

5 important part of anyone's diet.

6 I think we should be looking at a

7 quality premium that allows our farmers to

8 compete. I can't expect them to be able to

9 invest in their farms or to be sustainable

10 moving forward and pass their farms on to the

11 next generation of students that Chairman

12 Magee and you just had a discussion about, if

13 we don't do something to stabilize our dairy

14 farmers' bottom line.

15 We're at a crisis point. And, you

16 know, I think we've been searching for

17 something that will actually move the dial on

18 the upstate economy. When our dairy economy

19 is doing well, our communities are doing

20 well.

21 And I'm just wondering what your

22 thoughts are on looking at, you know, using

23 quality measures to invest in our farms.

24 COMMISSIONER BALL: Interesting

284

1 concept. Of course, we've used quality as a

2 measure through the co-ops for many, many

3 years. You know, it's a perplexing problem.

4 It's a difficult one. And it was certainly a

5 double whammy for our dairy farmers last

6 year, adding weather to the issue.

7 The dairy issue is not just a New York

8 issue, it's not just a Northeast issue, it's

9 a national issue and, in fact, even a global

10 issue. And, you know, they had a couple of

11 years ago the biggest year we'd ever seen,

12 the most amount of milk, the highest prices,

13 better margins. And it was followed by a

14 period where our exports dropped by a couple

15 of percents. China bought less milk, the EU

16 had a big year, New Zealand had a good year,

17 and suddenly we had an oversupply of milk,

18 which has led us into this difficult time

19 that we're in right now.

20 I talk to dairy farmers every day,

21 seven days a week. I come from a dairy

22 farmer family. And it's very challenging for

23 them right now.

24 We've taken on a couple of

285

1 initiatives. One is -- I meet with the

2 co-ops every year on a regular basis now. We

3 reformed the Milk Marketing Advisory

4 Committee, where we brought in not just the

5 co-ops, not just the processors, but also the

6 dairy farmers -- Cornell, experts in the

7 area, and consumers -- and talked about this

8 issue.

9 I have to say that, you know, the

10 general consensus of opinion is that we're

11 still in a good place in New York. We're

12 still in the right geography. We have good

13 land, we have good farmers, we have access to

14 water. And there's something about the

15 ingredients, the way we mix them together,

16 that we make awesome milk.

17 Surprisingly, the number of cows has

18 actually been very stable over the last four

19 or five years. It's actually that our

20 farmers are getting more milk from each one

21 of the cows.

22 So we have a crossroads. We do have a

23 challenge here. That Milk Marketing Advisory

24 Committee, we're going to keep meeting. We

286

1 met last fall. You know, and one of the

2 takeaways from that was we need continued

3 investment in the processing capacity inside

4 New York State to help utilize the milk that

5 we produce here in New York State. I

6 couldn't agree more.

7 And I think we have an opportunity

8 with the REDCs, as you brought them up. And

9 we have had some success in that regard. We

10 have invested a few hundred million dollars

11 over the last few years towards agricultural

12 products, through the REDC process. But it's

13 something I talk to Commissioner Zemsky about

14 on a regular basis. There are some pretty

15 interesting opportunities about to befall us

16 here with regards to processing. But we need

17 more opportunities to process the milk that

18 we have here in New York State.

19 We have the advantage of being next to

20 the biggest, most diverse marvelous

21 marketplace in the world. We need to take

22 better advantage of that. That's investment.

23 And I've told all our co-ops that, you know,

24 when they're ready to do something, we're

287

1 ready to assist them. And again, I'm

2 optimistic that we're going to get out of

3 this.

4 We do see the price of milk increasing

5 here as we go into this year. It's not going

6 to be anything stellar. It will get a little

7 above the cost of production for people. I

8 just think the glut worldwide and the trade

9 issues now -- we have additional concerns

10 about trade. You know, 25 percent of all our

11 dairy exports in the United States go to

12 Mexico, and now we have a question mark on

13 that trade arrangement. Last October, I

14 visited with the Tri-National Accord. I

15 represented New York State there, with the

16 rest of the commissioners from the country,

17 in conversations about NAFTA with Canada and

18 Mexico. Canada is seeking to exclude some of

19 our products through a new class system to

20 try to protect their dairy farmers. We spoke

21 very strongly about that. The Governor sent

22 a very strong letter to the prime minister in

23 that regard. You know, we don't need one

24 less place to go with our milk in New York.

288

1 And that alone is worth $60 million worth of

2 milk just to New York State, that trade

3 situation there.

4 So we're watching all of these things

5 very closely, as you know. You have dairy

6 farmers in your neighborhood. But I think

7 long term we're going to be okay, and I'm

8 hopeful that we can invest in processing

9 capacity here in the state as the price

10 improves and our market conditions improve.

11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: Well, I think

12 looking at quality and taking advantage of

13 our gold standard in quality in this state is

14 one sure way to ensure that our export

15 markets remain strong.

16 Thank you.

17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

18 COMMISSIONER BALL: Thank you,

19 Assemblywoman.

20 SENATOR O'MARA: Senator Krueger.

21 SENATOR KRUEGER: Good afternoon,

22 Commissioner.

23 COMMISSIONER BALL: Great to see you.

24 SENATOR KRUEGER: So as I frequently

289

1 say, New York City residents, where I live,

2 love to eat the food grown in the rest of

3 New York State. So I'm always very

4 interested in what we're doing to expand the

5 opportunities.

6 So I think at the beginning of 2016,

7 the Governor announced the $20 million for

8 the South Bronx Food Hub, to build a building

9 to support greater quantities of farm produce

10 and products coming into New York City for

11 both institutional sale and smaller-store

12 sale. How is that project going, and where

13 are we in the timeline?

14 COMMISSIONER BALL: Contracts, land

15 negotiations, plans being drawn up. It's a

16 very exciting project. It was really

17 heartwarming to be a part of that. I was

18 with the Governor in August in the South

19 Bronx, literally in view of the property.

20 It's been talked about for many, many years.

21 It was a project outlined in the Regional

22 Food Hub Task Force, which was co-chaired by

23 me and the deputy mayor of New York City.

24 And this is a 120,000 square-foot

290

1 facility, a refrigerated space, home for a

2 wholesale farmer's market, and really a great

3 destination for New York Grown & Certified

4 product to be found by restaurants and by

5 consumers alike.

6 But I think the thing that excites me

7 the most about that is, frankly, that

8 Greenmarket Co. last year, through their food

9 box program in the South Bronx, in parts of

10 Brooklyn, parts of Harlem, was able to move

11 350,000 tons of food. And that could easily

12 be a million if they had the capacity, and

13 here's the capacity.

14 SENATOR KRUEGER: Right. So what's

15 your estimated time for getting your new hub

16 up and running? Which I agree could increase

17 dramatically the quantity of food.

18 COMMISSIONER BALL: Sure. I think

19 we're going to look at getting the contracts

20 and the work done on the plans and being

21 ready to start building here late this fall,

22 early next spring.

23 SENATOR KRUEGER: And copackaging

24 facilities and other farm hubs to help

291

1 farmers aggregate their food for movement

2 around the state -- I know there's a number

3 of them that have started. Have those been

4 successful, and can those be replicated?

5 COMMISSIONER BALL: Sure. And

6 actually that Regional Food Hub Task Force

7 was kind of tasked with that mission. You

8 know, what are the market opportunities in

9 the city, whether it be Manhattan or Brooklyn

10 or the South Bronx or Queens, and how do they

11 need the product, what kind of product do

12 they need.

13 And then, looking upstate, where do we

14 have the capacity to produce that, what are

15 the obstacles to actually connecting the

16 dots? In many cases it's transportation. It

17 may be infrastructure, loading docks. And so

18 the food hub in the South Bronx is one

19 example of the infrastructure needed there to

20 distribute.

21 But also we're going to need it

22 upstate. We have a number of new food hubs

23 that have come online here in the last few

24 years. A lot of enthusiasm about food hubs.

292

1 We had a terminal market system all over the

2 state and all over the country for many

3 years, and I think reinventing those, making

4 them more efficient, learning where the

5 production is coming from but, more

6 importantly, who's the customer, is going to

7 be critical to the success of those food

8 hubs.

9 But I'm excited about the

10 opportunities, I really am.

11 SENATOR KRUEGER: And we talked about

12 a while ago my belief that the incredible

13 cultural diversity of people eating foods in

14 New York City called for New York State to be

15 more innovative in helping farmers know what

16 products would be successfully sold

17 downstate.

18 So one of the examples I gave you was

19 the fact that there are not enough

20 slaughterhouses in upstate New York that

21 actually do kosher or halal meats, and that

22 when I surveyed in the city, we're importing

23 our halal meats and our kosher meats from

24 other states. And it seems to me we're

293

1 really missing an opportunity for New York

2 State producers. So I'm wondering whether

3 you've had any success in expanding on that

4 program.

5 COMMISSIONER BALL: We certainly have

6 talked about it. I had a great conversation

7 with you, as you recall, on more than one

8 occasion. I think you're absolutely correct,

9 there's markets there that we have not

10 traditionally sought out or understood.

11 And that was one of the goals of the

12 upstate-downstate summit, was to come

13 face-to-face and build those relationships.

14 We like to think of food as being a food in

15 box business, but it's actually a

16 relationship business. You actually have to

17 have eye contact with people and build a

18 relationship and understand the quality.

19 They need to know that they don't have to

20 look in every single container to make sure

21 it's what it says it is, and a farmer doesn't

22 need to worry about whether or not he's going

23 to get paid for his product. Those are

24 relationship things.

294

1 And so largely our effort has been

2 connecting the dots by building those

3 relationships, helping our farmers that

4 produce, for example, beef upstate to know

5 what the opportunities are, not just

6 accepting an auction price.

7 SENATOR KRUEGER: And then quickly,

8 because I'm at zero, we had also talked at

9 one time about the state's pollination

10 protection plan and that there was a joint

11 task force, I guess between you and DEC. I'm

12 curious what kind of progress has been made

13 to ensure we're protecting our bees and

14 butterflies so that they can continue to

15 pollinate and our farmers can continue to

16 grow.

17 COMMISSIONER BALL: Yeah. Well, I'm

18 pretty happy to tell you that I think

19 New York State has one of the best pollinator

20 protection plans in the country. And I've

21 heard so from several other states and one

22 foreign country. We met, we came together

23 with a plan. I think we got you a copy of

24 that plan.

295

1 We outlined a couple of things, best

2 management practices for our farmers, best

3 management practices for our landowners, best

4 management practices for state-owned lands

5 and agencies, and best management practices

6 for beekeepers. Also we put some money

7 behind it last year, and we got some research

8 underway at Cornell. I got a briefing on the

9 extent of the research they've done so far,

10 and it's as we suspected. It's not just one

11 thing that's causing the issues, it's a

12 variety of things.

13 And one of the other benefits to the

14 funding was we were able to invest in tech

15 teams, Cornell Extension people going out,

16 visiting with beekeepers, commercial

17 beekeepers, analyzing their hives, helping

18 them understand exactly what's going on with

19 their hives and making some improvements

20 there. That was a $500,000 investment in the

21 EPF. Some of that was money spent by DEC,

22 some of it with us.

23 But I'm excited at the progress. A

24 few eyebrows raised at what they're finding.

296

1 They haven't compiled all of the research

2 data yet, but it shows that there's far more

3 going on than what some people expected was

4 going on. It's very good research, it's

5 cutting-edge research, it's going to be

6 nationally recognized research. So it was an

7 effort well spent, and I think we're going to

8 have excellent results to show.

9 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

10 COMMISSIONER BALL: Thank you,

11 Senator.

12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

13 Assemblywoman Woerner.

14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WOERNER: Thank you,

15 Mr. Chairman.

16 Thank you, Commissioner. It's always

17 a pleasure to see you.

18 COMMISSIONER BALL: Great to see you.

19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WOERNER: I've got a

20 number of questions, and I'll start with -- I

21 noticed that the Governor has included new

22 language in his budget related to beginning

23 farmers and connecting farmers looking for

24 land with non-farming landowners. Will you

297

1 need additional staff and resources to carry

2 out these initiatives?

3 COMMISSIONER BALL: I don't think so.

4 We've looked at our staffing and the people

5 who were already dealing with the issues in

6 the office, and I think between what we have

7 here in Albany and what we have in Western

8 New York and with the additional personnel we

9 have in our New York City office, that we can

10 be effectively kind of a one-stop shop.

11 With that regard, we identified the

12 challenges there as access to land, access to

13 capital, access to training in some cases,

14 but also more importantly, I think for me,

15 was the opportunity to navigate through those

16 systems. Who's got what, where am I entering

17 the system, you know, I have money I don't

18 have land, et cetera.

19 So I think we're going to be able to

20 accomplish that and help connect the dots

21 much faster without additional funding.

22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WOERNER: Would you work

23 with organizations like Cornell or farm

24 groups or land trusts that are already sort

298

1 of in this space to aid you in this effort?

2 COMMISSIONER BALL: Oh, absolutely.

3 Absolutely. We need the land trusts in a

4 very big way, because they have a very good

5 pulse on some of the land that's available.

6 They're very good at land acquisitions. As

7 you know, you've got some very active land

8 trusts in your neighborhood in the

9 Hudson Valley, and statewide with American

10 Farmland Trust.

11 We've also taken on a practice of

12 every year bringing in all the stakeholders

13 that are in that sphere and sitting down and

14 talking about the process, the system, what

15 we can do to help it work better. But the

16 biggest thing is to have a consistent source

17 of funding, make it a regular program, and

18 the Governor has once again put $20 million

19 in our budget for that.

20 I know everybody would like it to work

21 a little faster. I agree, but I think the

22 most important thing is to have consistent

23 funding and dedication to it so that it

24 becomes easier for the land trusts, easier

299

1 for us, but more importantly becomes a tool

2 that's in a farmer's mind so that when they

3 enter into the process, they're kind of ready

4 to go into it.

5 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WOERNER: Thank you.

6 My next question, I'll turn my

7 attention to the Taste NY program. How many

8 producers are currently participating in the

9 program, and what are your plans for

10 expanding the number of producers?

11 COMMISSIONER BALL: Over 1100

12 producers last year participated in Taste NY,

13 which I think is amazing. And they're local

14 to the Taste NY store that they're working

15 out of. Some of them are big enough to be

16 statewide, but many of them are local to

17 where that particular Taste opportunity is.

18 So we want to continue doing that.

19 The Governor's excited about welcome

20 centers. I don't know if you had a chance to

21 get to Long Island to see the Long Island

22 Welcome Center, but it's absolutely amazing.

23 That's a tourism and an agricultural

24 touchstone right there. And that kind of

300

1 contact with that many people is just

2 extraordinary.

3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WOERNER: I think it's

4 terrific. The question is how many -- how do

5 the producers connect with the program so

6 that more producers can participate?

7 COMMISSIONER BALL: Sure. Typically

8 in this -- our banner Taste NY operations --

9 Todd Hill for example, the first one that I

10 got to cut a ribbon on, there's over 50

11 producers in that area. Dutchess County

12 Cooperative Extension manages that. They

13 have a relationship with the grower

14 community, and they're local to that grower

15 area. So I think that's the best vehicle to

16 do that.

17 We've had great success with Cornell

18 Cooperative Extension because they are in

19 every county and they have the relationships

20 with the growers. Couple that with the

21 New York Grown & Certified and our contact

22 with producers that meet those criteria, and

23 I think we're able to find the producers.

24 And again, over 1100 of them last year. We

301

1 sold over $13 million worth of product.

2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WOERNER: Terrific.

3 Thank you.

4 Different topic: hops and barley. We

5 have an explosion of the farm brewery

6 licenses, and the increase in the local

7 contents requirement will increase over the

8 next several years. We continue to have a

9 dearth of hops and barley grown in this

10 state, and I -- can you speak to incentives

11 or supports to farmers to make the investment

12 in those crops and then, on the other side,

13 the enforcement to ensure that the licensees

14 are in fact meeting their requirement to buy

15 local?

16 COMMISSIONER BALL: Sure. It's

17 exciting to be a part of this. For me, since

18 I walked in the door on my Day One, I think

19 the industry has grown 178 percent. It's

20 just mind-blowing. And we have no idea where

21 the top of that market is, except that we

22 haven't seen it yet.

23 It's wonderful, but it does create

24 some challenges -- but some wonderful

302

1 opportunities -- for our growers. I had a

2 distiller come to me and say he wanted me to

3 find him 1,000 acres of rye to keep his

4 distilling business going. And we have

5 certainly producers who grow rye. We have

6 double the acreage in hops, but we're still

7 just scratching the surface of what we need.

8 And with regards to barley, we need

9 significantly more investment in barley

10 acres. So it's a little bit of a learning

11 curve for a lot of our growers.

12 We've been working very closely with a

13 craft beverage group, bringing in, for

14 example, maltsters and brewers and Cornell,

15 looking at varieties and evaluating

16 varieties. Before Cornell is comfortable

17 with endorsing a variety, they need to see

18 about three years of research to feel

19 comfortable.

20 So we're advancing all of those things

21 just as fast as we can. It is creating a

22 real challenge for us to meet the demand of

23 this growing industry, but we're feeling

24 pretty good about it. Of course, throw in

303

1 weather, throw in all the other things that

2 come at you -- but I think we're in a good

3 place.

4 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WOERNER: I'll just

5 quickly echo my colleague Senator Ritchie on

6 expanding the minimum wage tax credit to help

7 farmers meet their rising labor costs.

8 And I will conclude by saying thank

9 you so much for highlighting the importance

10 of the equine industry in my district this

11 summer, and supporting the thoroughbred

12 industry. It's a big part of our

13 agricultural economy, and I appreciate your

14 bringing attention to it and your support for

15 that. Thank you.

16 COMMISSIONER BALL: Thank you so much.

17 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you.

18 I guess I'm next.

19 Commissioner, thank you for being here

20 this afternoon. It's a pleasure to be with

21 you.

22 COMMISSIONER BALL: It's great to see

23 you.

24 SENATOR O'MARA: I want to assure

304

1 Senator Krueger that we are leading the way

2 in New York State in our pollinator

3 protection. The work being done at Cornell,

4 which we're fortunate to have in the Senate

5 district I represent, is leading the way

6 globally on this issue. And the resources

7 devoted last year, a half a million dollars,

8 are going a long way to do that. So I thank

9 your department's involvement in that process

10 as well as Cornell University, and I get

11 regular updates on that as well.

12 I also want to thank you for coming

13 out and touring the drought in the Southern

14 Tier and Finger Lakes region this summer. I

15 am disappointed in the budget to not have any

16 direct relief in there for our farmers that

17 sustained these severe drought conditions

18 over this summer, and I'm wondering if you

19 can shed some light, Commissioner, on where

20 you stand in evaluating what losses there

21 were by a variety of farmers throughout that

22 region last year. I know it impacted dairy

23 farmers differently than it impacted crop

24 farmers. Some crops made out okay, some did

305

1 not.

2 Where are we in evaluating what that

3 loss was, and how come there are no

4 recommendations in the budget to provide

5 direct relief to the farmers for those

6 impacts?

7 COMMISSIONER BALL: Sure.

8 Well, I'm sorry to say that I dug out

9 some potatoes in your neighborhood and then

10 went back to my farm and saw the same size

11 potatoes. You know, potato yields across the

12 state, for example, in many cases were about

13 a third of what they should have been, a

14 third to a half. Size was off in the hot and

15 dry.

16 For dairy farmers, I know it was a

17 double whammy. In many cases forages were

18 25, 30 percent of what they should have been

19 at each cutting. We saw a lot of grain corn

20 cut. I don't have exact numbers on all those

21 things; those are things that our partners at

22 NAS -- Ag Statistics -- accumulate, and we'll

23 have some information on that shortly. But

24 there was no question that it was a real

306

1 challenge.

2 I know that virtually every county in

3 the state was impacted by the hot and dry

4 weather last year. Many of them declared

5 disaster areas. And even in the wintertime,

6 we're still experiencing drought situations

7 of low groundwater tables, et cetera. But

8 we're down to where as recently as a month

9 ago, 40 percent of our counties were

10 suffering and still had some sort of drought

11 effect. It's now down to 25 percent that are

12 affected, and we're getting up to normal

13 snowfall in this area. So I don't have the

14 exact numbers for you.

15 I can't date it exactly correctly, but

16 we will work with NAS, we will work with

17 Farm Credit on accumulating that information.

18 Clearly we don't want to do that again.

19 Going forward, you know, we do have in

20 our climate resiliency budget -- there's

21 $2.5 million there to help with the water

22 management, irrigation systems, and whatnot.

23 And our CS has got some funding available to

24 locate and allocate water sources, resources

307

1 on farms. We'll just have to look in all

2 those areas as we can.

3 FSA basically can't do much other than

4 the low-interest loans. Or if a farm lost

5 some livestock, there's some indemnification.

6 But it clearly shows some gaps in our crop

7 insurance system, especially for the

8 vegetable industry.

9 SENATOR O'MARA: Wouldn't it be wise

10 on our part in this budget process to

11 allocate some resources for that? Once we

12 get through the budget, there won't be a

13 mechanism for us to do that until a year from

14 now.

15 COMMISSIONER BALL: Yeah.

16 SENATOR O'MARA: So, you know, I guess

17 I'm looking to you for some kind of input.

18 COMMISSIONER BALL: Yeah.

19 SENATOR O'MARA: I don't know whether

20 that's a wise direction to take or how to

21 quantify what would be a reasonable amount to

22 set aside to provide some relief.

23 COMMISSIONER BALL: Sure. You know,

24 I've heard some discussion. I'd be happy to

308

1 explore it with you further. I've heard some

2 discussion about loan guarantees, you know,

3 some farms just need a little bit of funding

4 to get through, to get over the hump and get

5 back into production. They're having a hard

6 time paying their bills, whether they be

7 dairy farmers or crop production farmers, and

8 some guarantee function -- that's been talked

9 about, discussed.

10 I haven't seen any formal proposal on

11 that, but guaranteeing a loan to help tide a

12 farmer through is something that's been

13 suggested, and it's certainly an available

14 tool for beginning farmers with their

15 existing banks. Sometimes it's been

16 guaranteed by the Farm Service Agency. I'd

17 be happy to discuss the idea of the state

18 doing that, and it would take a little bit of

19 funding. But as I think our investment

20 through our soil and water districts and

21 climate resiliency and our efforts with

22 promotion that our soil and water guys are

23 doing so well is our best current avenue.

24 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you.

309

1 With regards to a couple lines in the

2 budget relative to agritourism, I believe

3 there's a line in general for agritourism for

4 $1.45 million, and another line for marketing

5 and advertising expenses related to

6 agritourism for $850,000. Can you describe

7 what those two lines are expected to support?

8 COMMISSIONER BALL: Okay. That's in

9 the state operations budget.

10 SENATOR O'MARA: I have --

11 COMMISSIONER BALL: Okay, that's a --

12 SENATOR O'MARA: I don't have them

13 broken out here in front of me, but I've

14 got -- there was two different lines.

15 COMMISSIONER BALL: Okay. The

16 $850,000 one is Taste NY promotion.

17 Actually, they're both Taste NY and tourism

18 intertwined there.

19 So Empire State Development, of

20 course, our colleagues over there, handle I

21 Love NY and the promotion of tourism. And

22 the synergy between what we're doing in Taste

23 NY and what they're doing to promote tourism

24 around our state -- we actually have some

310

1 funding coming from three different lines for

2 Taste NY. We have some in our budget to help

3 facilitate getting stores up and running, but

4 the bulk of the money comes through Empire

5 State Development, with the tourism angle and

6 the idea of getting more people moving around

7 the state. And to help with marketing.

8 SENATOR O'MARA: No specific criteria

9 or programs you're looking at funding with

10 those dollars?

11 COMMISSIONER BALL: Development of the

12 welcome centers is certainly a big part of

13 that for Empire State Development. That

14 $850,000 would largely be directed towards

15 the welcome center component.

16 SENATOR O'MARA: Are those uses of the

17 welcome centers something that's permitted by

18 the federal government and the issue that

19 we've run into with the signage along the

20 interstates and certain functions at the rest

21 areas?

22 COMMISSIONER BALL: Yes. There are

23 some challenges with the Federal Highway

24 Administration currently about some of that.

311

1 Actually, the Federal Highway Administration

2 asked for comments about that existing

3 statute, which has been on the books for 40

4 or 50 years, I think.

5 And, you know, the intentions

6 originally for the statute as it exists were

7 to make sure that federal highways didn't

8 steal business from main streets. But I

9 think we're having quite the opposite effect

10 with our Taste and welcome centers. We're

11 actually driving people to main streets by

12 giving people a taste.

13 And so we did comment, and many other

14 states in the country did as well. I raised

15 it with all the commissioners around the

16 country about updating that. In the

17 meantime, we will comply with the federal

18 highway rules about it, but certainly

19 promoting products wherever we have a chance

20 to interact with people, and in many cases

21 that's not on a federal highway system. We

22 need to do it, and we need to do more of it.

23 SENATOR O'MARA: One last area I'd

24 like to ask you about, and that's with

312

1 regards to the State Fair and an allocation

2 of $50 million in capital fund appropriations

3 this year.

4 Over the last couple of years we've

5 invested a lot into the state fairgrounds,

6 and that's been important work that's been

7 done. What is the need for this additional

8 $50 million? And, you know, where do we

9 stand on what's left or hasn't been spent

10 from the prior allocations that we've done in

11 the last couple of years?

12 COMMISSIONER BALL: Yes. Well, it was

13 great to be with you at the State Fair. And

14 I think you saw from the Governor and from

15 some of your colleagues that day that there

16 was a lot of enthusiasm about the changes at

17 the State Fair. By all accounts, it was a

18 successful investment. As you know, we fixed

19 up the front gate and overall changed the

20 appearance and feel of the fair. There was a

21 lot of enthusiasm that day, and he was

22 encouraged by some of your colleagues that we

23 should do more. And he turned around and

24 looked at me and looked at the county

313

1 executive and some of your colleagues and

2 said, "Well, if we were going to do more,

3 tell me what it would be. If you had another

4 bite at the apple, if you had another source

5 of funds, what would you do differently going

6 forward?"

7 And so we put together a task force

8 and we brought in some experts and we looked

9 at it and we gave him, the Governor, a report

10 right about Christmastime. And he said if he

11 liked the plan, he would put in the budget

12 another $50 million.

13 He liked what he saw. We wanted to

14 continue some of the projects that we had

15 thought about, dreamed about in the first

16 phase, which included moving people around

17 inside the fairground from one end to the

18 other end, developing more of the New York

19 experience with the hybrid building where we

20 could hold horse shows, where we could hold

21 trade shows, meetings, the opportunity for an

22 approximately 80,000-square-foot building

23 that could meet lots of needs, and overall to

24 have the fair be a resource for Central

314

1 New York, more than just 12 or 13 days out of

2 the year when the fair was going on.

3 He liked that very much, and then a

4 very exciting idea of a gondola connecting

5 the amphitheater, which is up near the orange

6 lot, to the fairgrounds. Something that --

7 not just to move people around at fair time,

8 but something that would become a destination

9 and an exciting attraction for Central

10 New York.

11 So coupled with that, our Department

12 of Transportation came up with some thinking

13 about alleviating some of the traffic

14 concerns. When you attract 1.1 million

15 people to come visit you in a short period of

16 time, it creates some concerns, and on 690

17 those are backups, parking, et cetera. They

18 were able to come in with some reappropriated

19 funds to help alleviate some of those things.

20 So overall, over the last couple of

21 years, we're looking at a pretty substantial

22 investment in Central New York. I think it

23 serves as a platform for the growth of

24 upstate New York and kind of a metaphor for

315

1 what upstate investment should look like.

2 SENATOR O'MARA: What portion of that

3 $50 million is for the proposed gondola?

4 COMMISSIONER BALL: I think

5 approximately $16 million.

6 SENATOR O'MARA: How do attendees get

7 from the fairgrounds to the amphitheater at

8 this point in time?

9 COMMISSIONER BALL: That's a good

10 question. They can walk. They have put

11 together shuttle buses to get people up to

12 the orange lot. I don't know if you've

13 parked in the orange lot, but it's gravel,

14 it's a little bit uneven. When it rains,

15 there's a loss of parking areas.

16 The amphitheater is clearly a great

17 asset to the region, and clearly there's an

18 opportunity for a continued synergy between

19 the fair and the amphitheater, and I think we

20 need to capitalize on that. But currently

21 it's a little awkward to get back and forth.

22 We need to make it easy for people so that

23 it's an enjoyable experience.

24 SENATOR O'MARA: Yeah, because you

316

1 pretty much have to cross a four-lane road,

2 correct?

3 COMMISSIONER BALL: You're crossing

4 690, and it's a hike. It's over a mile.

5 SENATOR O'MARA: Yup.

6 Have you benchmarked this type of

7 spending against other states in the country

8 on their fairground premises, and where do we

9 stand in where other investments -- states

10 are making in their state fairs?

11 COMMISSIONER BALL: We have.

12 Actually, we have one of the top five state

13 fairs in the country. I visited three other

14 state fairs in my history as a farmer. And

15 we did bring in a consultant who has worked

16 with many other state fairs.

17 Some of the fairs have taken the same

18 tack of trying to expand the use of their

19 fairgrounds like we are doing, and we are

20 right in line with the kind of investment

21 that they're doing. Some states have done a

22 little less, some have done a little bit

23 more. But from my standpoint, to have

24 invested $120 million in that region is

317

1 unbelievable.

2 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you,

3 Commissioner. It continues to be a pleasure

4 to work with you and your hands-on approach,

5 getting around the state very frequently. We

6 do appreciate that.

7 COMMISSIONER BALL: Oh, thank you for

8 your hospitality.

9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblywoman

10 Paulin.

11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Does this work?

12 Is it working?

13 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes, we've

14 got you.

15 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Welcome. I'm

16 happy to be here to listen to your

17 presentation.

18 I have just one question regarding the

19 Fuel NY program. In the past that program

20 was funded by NYSERDA, and this year we saw a

21 transfer of $150,000 to your department. And

22 I wondered, is that a new responsibility?

23 And why -- why the transfer occurred this

24 year, if not.

318

1 COMMISSIONER BALL: Yes, thank you for

2 the question. That's been since, obviously,

3 Hurricane Irene and Sandy. The needs down

4 there are unbelievable. It's been a

5 partnership since the beginning with NYSERDA

6 to try to find stations, get them the

7 transfer switches and the generators that

8 they need to be able to service the

9 population down there.

10 So the relationship with NYSERDA is

11 not new at all. The transfer of funds is

12 just to help us facilitate the generators and

13 the switches, getting them in place, and

14 working with the gas stations that are

15 participating, that have been identified. I

16 believe now we're over 900 stations in that

17 area that are successfully ready to go.

18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: So did the

19 department bear that cost before? You know,

20 what is the -- is there any -- you're saying

21 that the relationship has been ongoing and

22 the work has been ongoing, so what's the

23 rationale for the transfer?

24 COMMISSIONER BALL: I'd have to dive

319

1 into that.

2 Lisa? Sorry.

3 The funding has not come through the

4 department traditionally. It was intended to

5 be short term, thought it would be

6 short term, but because it's been ongoing and

7 there've been more stations involved -- and,

8 you know, then additional funding needed to

9 be transferred. But it hasn't been our

10 responsibility for the funding.

11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Thank you.

12 COMMISSIONER BALL: Thank you.

13 SENATOR O'MARA: Senator Krueger with

14 one more question.

15 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

16 I ran out of time before. Sorry, let

17 me just read this one sentence to you.

18 Excuse me. Well, actually I lost it now.

19 But a recent report by the National

20 Farm Bureau Institute said that there are

21 between 1.5 to 2 million farmworkers in this

22 country, of which 50 to 70 percent don't have

23 legal status. Do you -- I have no reason to

24 believe it's any different in New York than

320

1 the national data. So what's the potential

2 impact on New York State agriculture if we

3 start to see massive deportation of

4 undocumented people, a disproportionate

5 number of them working in the farm sector?

6 COMMISSIONER BALL: The potential

7 impact is very significant. I believe

8 New York is probably representative of the

9 same numbers that you have quoted there.

10 Unfortunately, because of the failure

11 of our national government to develop a guest

12 worker program, we're essentially enabling a

13 black market in moving people illegally into

14 the country. Things are very tough in

15 South America. People don't have a source of

16 income. Five dollars a day is a wage that

17 people have gotten used to in some areas

18 there, and there's threats to their families

19 from some of the corruption and the crimes

20 that are going on.

21 So this is a real concern. People are

22 looking to find a job, any kind of job, to

23 feed their families. And so there's an

24 opportunity to buy a driver's license, buy a

321

1 Social Security number, and come into the

2 country illegally and find a job. We know

3 that that's the case around much of

4 agriculture. Agriculture's actually the

5 poster child for this, but it's actually

6 largely employment in construction,

7 restaurants, and hospitality where the

8 biggest numbers of people are.

9 So we need to wrestle with this, and

10 there needs to be -- and the Governor has

11 pointed this out on numerous occasions -- a

12 pathway to legal status for people who are

13 here, in many cases who came here as children

14 and have gone to our high schools and gone to

15 our colleges and are now making a living.

16 It's a concern, something that the

17 country has got to come to grips with. I

18 know the new administration has come in, I

19 know the Prime Minister from Canada is

20 talking today with him. Canada has put

21 together a program and figured this out. But

22 we need more workers in our businesses in the

23 country. We need skilled labor, and it's a

24 problem on a national level that we need to

322

1 reconcile.

2 SENATOR KRUEGER: But you agree that

3 if we were to lose a mass number of the

4 farmworkers in this state, farmers would have

5 a crisis with this. They would have no one

6 to pick their crops and get them to market.

7 COMMISSIONER BALL: Sure. It would be

8 very challenging.

9 There's a couple of odd things that

10 juxtaposition here. You know, one is that

11 it's suspected up to 50 percent of the

12 workers may not have legal papers to be here.

13 So if they were suddenly not here, that would

14 mean half the workforce was not here.

15 The second thing is the level of

16 unemployment between 18- and 24-year-olds is

17 18 percent, and to me that's intolerable. We

18 need to get our young people working, which

19 is why the FFA conversation, the Ag in the

20 Classroom conversation, the continuing

21 education, getting those people in our

22 pipeline to find careers in agriculture is so

23 critical. So we need to wait and see what

24 our national posture will be. But I'm

323

1 hopeful that we have an opportunity in the

2 face of this crisis to go forward.

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you. Thank

4 you, Commissioner.

5 COMMISSIONER BALL: Thank you.

6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

7 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you,

8 Commissioner. We're all set.

9 COMMISSIONER BALL: Oh. I appreciate

10 all your work. Thank you so much.

11 SENATOR O'MARA: Next up, we have our

12 12:30 p.m. agenda witness.

13 (Laughter.)

14 SENATOR O'MARA: Chairwoman of the

15 New York State Public Service Commission,

16 Audrey Zibelman.

17 (Conversation off the record.)

18 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: I brought lunch.

19 SENATOR O'MARA: Should we say, "Good

20 day, mate"?

21 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Good day. Good

22 day.

23 SENATOR O'MARA: You may proceed when

24 you're ready.

324

1 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: It could be

2 worse. It 4:30 in the a.m. somewhere.

3 SENATOR O'MARA: Right.

4 (Laughter.)

5 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Good afternoon,

6 Senator Young, Chair Farrell, and the other

7 distinguished members of the committee. My

8 name is Audrey Zibelman, and I'm CEO of the

9 Department of Public Service and chair of the

10 Public Service Commission.

11 The department, as you know, ensures

12 the safe, reliable, and affordable access to

13 electric, gas, steam, telecommunications, and

14 water services for all New York consumers,

15 and advises the PSC on a wide range of

16 decisions, ranging from setting rates and

17 protecting consumers to siting infrastructure

18 and reviewing mergers.

19 Our top priorities this year will be

20 to continue Governor Cuomo's efforts to

21 modernize our utility systems. We are

22 implementing the Clean Energy Standard to

23 meet 50 percent of our electricity needs from

24 renewable resources by 2030, and value the

325

1 carbon-free benefits of the upstate nuclear

2 fleet. Our utilities are investing in their

3 networks so we can use distributed energy

4 resources like solar and storage better to

5 reduce consumer costs and improve resiliency.

6 Our utilities are working with

7 municipalities to make street lighting more

8 efficient, support community-based

9 distributed generation and energy supply

10 options, thereby lowering municipal costs and

11 setting the stage for smarter cities. We've

12 adopted the state's first ever Energy

13 Affordability Policy, which will provide

14 nearly 2 million low-income New Yorkers with

15 utility discounts. And we are targeting

16 clean energy solutions to low-income

17 households, demonstrating that clean energy

18 and affordability go hand-in-hand.

19 That is the essence of the Governor's

20 Reforming the Energy Vision, or REV: Using

21 demand reduction and clean energy solutions

22 as a core strategy to meeting energy needs.

23 Past approaches resulted in an inefficient

24 system. REV will introduce cutting-edge,

326

1 modern technology in our utility system,

2 which will result in more customer choice, a

3 cleaner and more resilient grid, and a more

4 cost-effective means to achieve our

5 reliability and climate change objectives.

6 REV principles have been and will

7 continue to be folded into utility rate cases

8 as a means to stabilize rates. In 2016,

9 there were seven major rate cases decided by

10 the PSC. The utilities requested rate

11 increases totaling nearly $685 million, but

12 through the department's rigorous review

13 process, the PSC reduced those requests by

14 $245 million, a 35 percent reduction. We

15 will also represent New Yorkers at the

16 Federal Communications Commission and the

17 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, where

18 decisions can have profound impact on

19 New York consumers. Last month, for example,

20 we secured a victory at FERC that reduced

21 energy costs in New York by $160 million per

22 year.

23 The state budget will also provide

24 rate relief. In 2014, the enacted budget

327

1 included a three-year phase out of the

2 Temporary Utility Assessment, saving

3 ratepayers $775 million through the current

4 fiscal year. On March 31, 2017, the

5 assessment will expire, and save ratepayers

6 $122 million in fiscal year 2018.

7 We will continue to focus on gas

8 safety, among our most important

9 responsibilities. We've strengthened our gas

10 safety regulations, accelerated the

11 replacement of older pipelines, and will

12 continue our vigorous oversight of gas

13 utilities.

14 As a result of Governor Cuomo's Clean

15 Energy Standard initiative, applications to

16 construct renewable energy facilities have

17 accelerated. As of January 2017, there were

18 17 wind farm proposals totaling nearly 30,000

19 megawatts pending before the Board on

20 Electric Generation Siting and the

21 Environment, which I chair. This development

22 activity will spur clean energy jobs, provide

23 new revenues to local governments -- but not

24 all projects, as you know, are being greeted

328

1 with open arms. Our process gives local

2 communities opportunities to be heard, and

3 our siting rules ensure negative siting

4 impacts are addressed.

5 In the telecommunications sector, we

6 will oversee substantial investment in

7 broadband buildout, helping achieve the

8 Governor's vision for universally available

9 broadband. As part of our recent approval of

10 cable mergers, we required substantial

11 investment in broadband infrastructure,

12 increasing broadband speeds, and new

13 low-income broadband programs throughout

14 New York.

15 Next year, reforming the ESCO market

16 will be a priority. As many of you know,

17 utility customers can sign up with energy

18 service companies, or ESCOs, to supply them

19 with energy. We have heard complaints from

20 many consumers and their representatives

21 about ESCOs grossly overcharging and using

22 deceptive marketing practices.

23 Our focus will be in three areas. We

24 are prohibiting ESCOs from serving low-income

329

1 customers in New York; we are thoroughly

2 exploring larger ESCO market reforms to

3 better define what services are of value to

4 consumers, give consumers more information to

5 make better choices, and remove opportunities

6 for ESCO abuses; and third, we will hold

7 individual ESCOs accountable if existing

8 rules are violated.

9 Last year we secured $4 million in

10 consumer refunds from ESCOs. We have

11 revitalized our complaint-handling process

12 and our public outreach efforts to maximize

13 public involvement in our proceedings. Last

14 year our agency answered more than

15 60,000 complaints, including more than

16 53,000 calls. We received and reviewed

17 nearly 32,000 written public comments, more

18 than 600 a week on average. We held

19 84 public statement hearings that were

20 attended by thousands of people.

21 Transparency and public involvement remain an

22 integral component of our work.

23 The fiscal year 2017-2018 Executive

24 Budget continues support of $87.1 million for

330

1 operations, $3.04 million for cable TV,

2 $5.75 million for intervenor funding, and

3 $5.5 million for federal funds, or

4 $101.4 million in total. The full-time

5 equivalent position count is expected to

6 remain at 520, the same as the current state

7 fiscal year. We are well-positioned to

8 deliver our core mission and continue the

9 Governor's ambitious agenda.

10 This concludes my brief overview of

11 the key initiatives and budget drivers for

12 the upcoming year. I welcome your questions.

13 Thank you.

14 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you,

15 Chairwoman.

16 (Interruption by protestors.)

17 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you.

18 Senator Krueger has a question.

19 SENATOR KRUEGER: Hi.

20 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Good afternoon.

21 SENATOR KRUEGER: It's nice to see

22 you. Our loss will be Australia's gain. I

23 don't know if you're going to like it down

24 there.

331

1 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: It's hot, I

2 understand.

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: So I'm delighted to

4 hear you're continuing your focus, or PSC

5 will continue their focus, on reining in and

6 limiting ESCOs, because, as you know, that

7 has been one of my issues for many years.

8 They're ripping off people and increasing

9 rates, even as they claim that they're not.

10 I know that they have countered with a

11 lawsuit or two. Can you tell me what the

12 status of those cases are and where we are?

13 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Sure. So there

14 are -- there have been a couple of lawsuits.

15 So this is what's going on. So there's one

16 set of lawsuits that is looking into the

17 commission's authority to rein in rates.

18 That's on appeal, and we're pursuing that.

19 The second set of litigation was

20 concerning -- and this is not sort of legally

21 specific, but one of the things that the

22 commission did was we said that we really

23 don't want ESCOs to serve low-income

24 consumers who are on some form of either

332

1 ratepayer assistance from the utilities or

2 federal assistance, because it made

3 absolutely no sense to us for low-income

4 folks to pay more for electricity than they

5 would pay for the utilities because that just

6 ate into the subsidy that was otherwise

7 available.

8 They sued on that, and they're -- and

9 what -- that suit was on a procedural issue

10 in terms of SAPA. The commission just went

11 ahead and reissued the SAPA and had

12 additional proceedings and ruled on it in

13 December, but the ESCOs are claiming that was

14 also inappropriate for us to act, so we're

15 litigating that.

16 In the meantime, we've started our own

17 administrative proceeding on the portion of

18 the order about just what are the rules. And

19 here's the crux of it. When the commission

20 looked at deregulation in the 1990s, the

21 expectation was that ESCOs would come in and

22 they would offer services in addition to just

23 electricity and gas services, things like

24 energy efficiency or pricing schemes that

333

1 would give people some budget guarantees or

2 certainty. And we just weren't seeing that

3 develop.

4 We also have the real concern to make

5 sure that customers, when they're buying from

6 ESCOs, have the ability to say, Is this a

7 fair price or not? So we have to look at

8 what's a fair reference price.

9 I mean, think about it, we're all

10 consumers, we go to the drugstore, we see

11 10 different versions of ibuprofen, we see

12 the various prices, we can make a decision:

13 Do we want to buy the brand, do we want to

14 buy this, do we want to buy that? But

15 everything's there. It's transparent.

16 If we go buy a car, we go online now,

17 we take a look at the car prices, we see what

18 different people are charging for the car.

19 That's where we want to drive this

20 market, so that we have consumers with energy

21 literacy, they know what they're looking for,

22 and we're ensuring as the regulator that what

23 people are telling people they're charging is

24 what they're going to charge.

334

1 So the proceeding at the commission is

2 really to try to get the rules right around

3 how to manage these markets.

4 In the meantime, we've been very

5 aggressively looking at all the ESCOs to see

6 ones that have complaints, to review those.

7 And we've also been reviewing all of them to

8 see their procedures. So we're -- it's sort

9 of a three-pronged attack. We're defending

10 ourselves in court, we're continuing to work

11 to try to get the rules right, and we're

12 aggressively going after ESCOs for

13 misbehavior.

14 I want to say, too, that there are a

15 number of --

16 SENATOR KRUEGER: You know what, I'm

17 actually going to stop you, only because I

18 only have five minutes.

19 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Yeah, yeah, I'm

20 sorry. Okay. All right.

21 SENATOR KRUEGER: And I have more

22 questions.

23 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: That's it. All

24 right.

335

1 SENATOR KRUEGER: In a second round,

2 we might go back to ESCOs.

3 So in your testimony -- I'm shifting

4 gears -- you talk about that the state budget

5 will provide rate relief, an assessment will

6 expire from previous years and save

7 ratepayers $122 million in the next state

8 fiscal year. But because of the subsidy

9 being provided nuclear energy plants in the

10 state, if it's $7.6 billion over 12 years,

11 that's a subsidy of $633 million a year.

12 So wouldn't you agree that while one

13 assessment is disappearing, a new assessment

14 will come that will significantly increase

15 the rate for ratepayers?

16 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: I don't agree

17 with that.

18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay.

19 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: And let me

20 explain.

21 The ZEC program -- first of all, the

22 dollar amount over 12 years is -- there's

23 different -- there's sort of various

24 estimates, so I like to look at near term.

336

1 Because if in fact prices of gas go up, that

2 dollar amount will go down.

3 But the point of the matter is that

4 the CES, the ZEC program was developed by the

5 commission, because we thought it was

6 absolutely essential that we have a

7 transition for the upstate nuclear plants.

8 We knew that those upstate nuclear plants

9 were going to close because gas prices are so

10 low.

11 If those upstate plants close, the

12 energy would have to be replaced most likely

13 by fossil fuel, and most likely what would

14 happen in the markets is prices would go up

15 because you would have a scarcity of supply,

16 and so that the replacement energy would be

17 more expensive than the nuclear energy

18 themselves.

19 So that the issue is this, and I think

20 this is the challenge. The gas and fossil

21 units, as you know, are suing us. They're

22 suing us because they're saying this program

23 is actually suppressing prices. They would

24 like to get rid of this program so prices

337

1 would go up and they would have higher

2 profits and they could put more gas in.

3 Other folks are concerned -- the

4 environmental folks, of course, are very --

5 are okay with the program because they

6 understand this is the way we can get to our

7 20 by '30 goals around emission reduction

8 without having to increase fossil fuel in the

9 state.

10 And then there are people who don't

11 like the program. But the concern I have

12 there is that there's no -- is that they're

13 worried about the environment, but there's

14 absolutely no way to replace these nuclear

15 units with energy efficiency and renewables

16 in this timeframe. What we saw in Germany,

17 what we saw in England and every other

18 country or place where they've done very

19 quick closure of nuclear, is we just increase

20 fossil fuels.

21 And so this program is really, in my

22 way of thinking, the least-cost way we can go

23 to get where we want in the environment.

24 Right? And also I think it's just -- it's

338

1 just a false assumption to assume that you

2 could close this amount of megawatts and lose

3 it in the market and not see a price

4 increase, because it's the law of supply and

5 demand.

6 SENATOR KRUEGER: And given the

7 rapidity by which renewables are coming to

8 the market at lower and lower cost, do you

9 think it's possible we could do all of this

10 in less than the 12 years laid out in the

11 plan that's started?

12 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: I think that the

13 goal we have to get to 50 percent renewables

14 by 2030 is a very significant goal. You

15 know, and one never says never on what could

16 happen in the future, but on the other hand,

17 if we don't -- the way we constructed this,

18 if we didn't have the 12-year arrangements,

19 the problem we would have had is the nuclear

20 plants, because they're under a long time

21 cycle, would likely have closed because of

22 the uncertainties.

23 So I think that -- that if -- getting

24 the plan around 2030 to 50 percent renewables

339

1 is a very significant lift for the state.

2 It's going to take everything that we're

3 doing under REV, under energy efficiency,

4 under offshore wind. And in my view, in this

5 timeframe, the ability then to be able to

6 close those plants at the end of the contract

7 period and know that we're still achieving

8 where we want to be on emissions is really a

9 positive outcome for the state. And I would

10 suggest we just try to focus on achieving

11 that goal.

12 SENATOR KRUEGER: I've run out of

13 time, so perhaps I will ask for a second

14 round. Thank you.

15 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Thank you.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Assemblywoman

17 Paulin.

18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Thank you.

19 Thank you so much.

20 So just to -- I find it a little

21 curious, I just have to say, that -- and I'm

22 not expecting a comment -- that we would

23 close Indian Point for 2,000 megawatts and

24 there's no expectation of rates rising, but

340

1 if we closed the three other nuclear plants,

2 we would. I just mention that, you don't

3 have to comment.

4 I think that we're going to have a

5 hearing specific to Indian Point, and we can

6 talk about rates. And I understand, I've

7 been briefed why you don't believe that might

8 be the case.

9 To follow up on what Senator Krueger

10 was saying on ESCOs, I'm curious about -- you

11 know, there's a lot of ESCOs. And it's very

12 difficult to monitor everything that each of

13 them are doing, and so many of the abuses

14 come down to the way they solicit business.

15 And myself, I've been solicited, so I

16 know firsthand how inappropriate they can be

17 and how much inaccurate information that they

18 give to potential consumers. So part of the

19 problem with having so many is that most --

20 you know, I told you about my issue, my

21 solicitations. I don't think most people do.

22 And therefore, how -- you know, if it's an

23 expense -- if it's solely based on hearing

24 people making complaints, if it's a

341

1 complaint-driven system, what are some of the

2 other things that can be done or that you're

3 looking at specifically during the upcoming

4 different processes that you're going through

5 that are going to be able to address in a

6 more uniform way, so we don't rely on a

7 complaint-driven system solely to fix some of

8 those abuses?

9 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: So there are a

10 number of things that we're going to be

11 looking at through this process. One of the

12 areas is in terms of credit posting. So when

13 we looked at -- when we did -- so in other

14 words, if you put people -- have companies

15 put up money, that will help, because then

16 you will have better-funded companies who are

17 actually investing and will be more concerned

18 about losing their license. That would be

19 one piece.

20 The other elements that we're looking

21 at is in terms of products and services. And

22 the third element we're looking at is some

23 way of doing reference pricing for fixed

24 products. All of these should allow us --

342

1 and that's what we'd seen as a lot of

2 fly-by-night companies who don't have a big

3 investment.

4 And one of the things I was going to

5 mention to Senator Krueger, I'll answer it

6 now, is that we're -- you know, there's like

7 the bad actors, and then there a number

8 companies who have made major investments in

9 this space. And what we need to do, like in

10 any other situation, is sort of get the rules

11 right so the bad actors really can't play.

12 And then folks who are really interested in

13 creating legitimate businesses will be here.

14 The other element we did -- you know,

15 and you encouraged it -- was community

16 aggregation. Because then at least, like

17 you're seeing in Sustainable Westchester, you

18 have a third party between the consumer and

19 the ESCOs, and they're doing a more

20 competitive process. So it allows another

21 level of protection for consumers.

22 So those are various pieces. But

23 you're absolutely right, we have to have the

24 rules right, we have to be able to act

343

1 quickly, we have to have significant

2 penalties, and we need to think about making

3 sure that the licensing essentially --

4 practices are such that we weed out the bad

5 actors.

6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: And you brought

7 in, you know, the link that I was going to

8 make next. And community aggregation has a

9 lot to do with it. You know, they use an

10 ESCO, and some of the products that they

11 offer are 100 percent renewable. And so

12 they're struggling to explain to their

13 constituency that, you know, this is of good

14 sound mind, you know, to pay more to help the

15 environment. And people are doing it. They

16 actually have, in some communities, no

17 choice, because the community has actually

18 opted to do a 100 percent renewable product.

19 But they're now feeling the extra

20 burden of the ZECs. And I wondered if

21 there's going to be any accommodation made

22 for either 100 percent renewable offered by

23 an ESCO to an individual, or through the

24 community aggregation program, so that we

344

1 encourage or further encourage, you know, the

2 goal 50 by 2030.

3 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Thanks for the

4 question.

5 And one of the things that the

6 commission did in the Clean Energy Standard

7 program is identify that if in fact we had a

8 community who was willing to go 100 percent

9 renewable -- but we didn't want it to be just

10 RECs, but actually develop new in-state

11 renewables -- we would look at granting an

12 exemption for the REC program because the

13 goal is only 50 percent.

14 So if you had communities who were

15 interested in actually developing 100 percent

16 renewable, that would be helpful, because

17 then we would meet our goal and over time we

18 would expect the REC program to be more

19 expensive than the ZEC program, so everyone

20 would benefit.

21 So to the extent -- and these programs

22 I know are more about buying RECs. But if we

23 could morph them into developing solar and

24 wind or things like that, I think that

345

1 there's a definite win/win around those, both

2 from the community choice aspect and thinking

3 about how to reduce the overall cost of the

4 CES program.

5 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: So there's no

6 consideration to -- because X is based on

7 load, there's no consideration to looking at

8 that as well?

9 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Well, it would

10 be the load, but it -- you know, and again,

11 it would be the ESCO, because it's the ESCO's

12 responsibility if they offer 100 percent

13 green, but they can tie it back to actual

14 renewables developed in this state. As

15 opposed to, you know, just buying wind from

16 Vermont or something like that.

17 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Understood.

18 So I was curious. You know, the

19 Buffalo -- you know, is that related to ZECs,

20 or is that related to a rate case? You know,

21 the group that came and did their little --

22 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Oh, oh, oh,

23 there's a pending rate case in front of us

24 with National Fuel Gas, and so there's a

346

1 concern about their proposed rate increase.

2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Okay. And

3 there was an article today, a lot of

4 curiosity in the Daily News, about the

5 transfer of decommissioned funds in the case

6 of Fitzpatrick and in the case of

7 Indian Point to Entergy. Or I guess to

8 Exelon in one case and Entergy in the other

9 case.

10 So not knowing a lot yet about how the

11 decommissioning process works, the concern

12 that was voiced by some of the consumer

13 groups had to do with losing some control.

14 And I wonder if you could just address how --

15 you know, what -- whether or not we would

16 lose control and what that control would look

17 like.

18 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Yeah, I saw the

19 article as well.

20 Typically, in my experience, nuclear

21 decommissioning funds are administered by the

22 owner of the facility. Our case was unique

23 in New York because NYPA owned the facility.

24 But transferring it to Exelon to manage it

347

1 because they manage their own funds would

2 make sense.

3 And secondly, the NRC heavily

4 regulates the use of those funds. And so the

5 idea that somehow or another those funds

6 could be put to some other use I think is

7 wrong. And that's one of the things the NRC

8 will look -- so I was -- I don't think there

9 should be a concern that somehow there's

10 going to be a misuse of funds and that -- and

11 we wouldn't oversee the spending anyway, it

12 would be the NRC.

13 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Well, and I

14 just want to add, we're going to miss you,

15 and we wish you well. And that concludes my

16 questions.

17 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: You're all

18 invited to visit. My husband keeps saying

19 that's going to be a little crazy, but --

20 (Laughter.)

21 SENATOR O'MARA: All expenses paid?

22 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: No.

23 SENATOR O'MARA: Senator Murphy.

24 SENATOR MURPHY: Madam Chairwoman, how

348

1 are you? I'm Senator Murphy, I represent

2 Buchanan, where Indian Point is supposed to

3 be closing. A few quick questions that maybe

4 you could help me out on.

5 Was your agency, or anything that

6 your -- you guys had involved or any notice

7 was given to you about the closing of Indian

8 Point so suddenly?

9 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Well, we were

10 certainly involved in the discussions. Not

11 directly in terms of the closure, but we were

12 asked as part of -- by the Governor to

13 understand what the implications of the

14 closure would be on local reliability.

15 And as you know, beginning -- even

16 before I arrived in 2013, the commission was

17 looking at developing a no-regrets policy so

18 that we could support the closure of the

19 plant without compromising reliability, and

20 issued a number of decisions with respect to

21 that.

22 So we've been heavily engaged in

23 understanding and helping advise the

24 administration on the implications of the

349

1 closure. But obviously the discussions were

2 part of the litigation which we were not a

3 party to.

4 SENATOR MURPHY: Okay. So 2030,

5 50 percent renewables. That's the goal,

6 correct?

7 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Correct.

8 SENATOR MURPHY: And we're saying that

9 it's extremely difficult -- like you just

10 said previously, it's going to be very

11 difficult to do.

12 What is our plan, or is there a

13 plan -- because I haven't heard anything --

14 about getting the 25 percent to Westchester,

15 New York City -- where is this energy

16 miraculously going to come from?

17 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Sure.

18 SENATOR MURPHY: Because I haven't

19 heard anything about it.

20 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: I can help you

21 with that.

22 So in 2013, the commission issued an

23 order where we tried -- we looked at what

24 would be the implications of a closure and to

350

1 put the state in what we call a "no-regrets"

2 policy. Out of that, we approved four

3 separate transmission projects which have now

4 been completed. They're called the TOTS

5 project, and they provided about

6 600 megawatts more transfer capability for

7 the region.

8 In addition, we improved a number of

9 demand response programs in Con Edison which

10 also reduced demand.

11 So that, together, has already been

12 done, and we're close to about 900 megawatts,

13 almost half has been completed already in

14 terms of transfer capability.

15 We also approved what has been known

16 as the AC transmission, which is

17 1,000 megawatts of transfer capability, so we

18 can take advantage of generation already

19 located in upstate New York, the nuclear

20 plants, as well as Western New York, and move

21 that energy into the region. That project is

22 well underway.

23 We've been working with the New York

24 Independent System Operator, we used a

351

1 competitive process. We've been able to

2 really arrive at, I think, some really good

3 solutions, and we'll be going through a

4 siting process on that. But that also helps.

5 We also have 1,000 megawatts of

6 proposed transmission which we've already

7 approved for -- it's certificated to move

8 1,000 megawatts of hydro from Hydro-QuÈbec

9 directly into the city, under a DC

10 transmission project that's going to be

11 merchant -- so ratepayers don't have to pay

12 for it. But it's essentially the equivalent

13 of taking 1,000 megawatts of hydro and

14 putting it in the middle of New York City

15 once it gets done.

16 We also have about 1700 megawatts of

17 generation that's been fully certified, and a

18 number are under construction. Because once

19 we announced that we are looking at the

20 closure, the market responded, and we're

21 seeing these merchant generators -- again,

22 ratepayers won't pay for them, which is

23 partly why we're saying the difference and

24 why we're doing this Clean Energy Standard --

352

1 because in Indian Point, we planned for this.

2 And as a result of planning for it, we have

3 solutions that are not going to cost

4 ratepayers money.

5 In the case of the upstate nukes, we

6 hadn't planned for it, and our concern was in

7 the absence of a plan we were going to cost

8 ourselves and not to get to our goals.

9 So this is all part of when we look at

10 REV, when we look at emissions, knowing that

11 we weren't going to rely on Indian Point

12 anymore and that we needed to start looking

13 at the alternatives and do it in an effective

14 way that was really -- looked out to the

15 future. Because these things obviously, as

16 you know, can't happen overnight.

17 SENATOR MURPHY: How can you guarantee

18 me that these rates aren't going up? Because

19 I -- this is -- after some of these other

20 nuclear facilities have closed, that hasn't

21 been the case. They've actually quadrupled,

22 and in Westchester County it's one of the top

23 five highest tax brackets in the United

24 States of America. And people are living

353

1 by -- check by check, and having their energy

2 costs skyrocket, which are already some of

3 the highest in the country. I need help. I

4 need some answers.

5 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: So let me tell

6 you a few things that allowed me to make the

7 decision.

8 One is I have to say I don't think we

9 want to lose sight of the fact that the

10 difference between Indian Point and the

11 upstate nukes was about safety. And so --

12 SENATOR MURPHY: I -- we can't all

13 agree more.

14 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Okay.

15 SENATOR MURPHY: Safety is of utmost

16 importance. I get that.

17 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: So the question

18 then is how do we know. Well, one is because

19 gas prices are lower and we have these plants

20 coming in; the second is because we're

21 looking at building the transmission and

22 looking at additional assets; and the third

23 is that if the Hydro-QuÈbec facility goes in,

24 that's 1,000 megawatts that could be under an

354

1 agreement which would then reduce the demand

2 on the other parts of the state.

3 So all of these in combination -- and

4 I'm happy to -- because it's hard to do this

5 very quickly -- is really what allows us to

6 say that in contrast to an immediate closure

7 of three nuclear plants that we weren't

8 counting on, a planned closure where the

9 market has a chance to respond allows us to

10 get there in a much more economically

11 efficient way.

12 SENATOR MURPHY: So there'll be no

13 environmental factors of taking that hydro

14 from Quebec and bringing it down to New York

15 City? Through the Hudson River, through

16 upstate New York, there's going to be no

17 environmental impact on any of the other

18 counties in the state?

19 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: We've looked at

20 that --

21 SENATOR MURPHY: No other lawsuits, or

22 the environmental part of it, or anything

23 like that?

24 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: It's been

355

1 permitted, and it's also received the federal

2 permit. And Hydro-QuÈbec has a lot of excess

3 energy that it's able to send down to the

4 states and really wants to, without new

5 entailments.

6 SENATOR MURPHY: So will some of my

7 colleagues that live in that upper area up

8 there, will they be able to tap into it?

9 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Well, it will be

10 a DC tie, so whether they -- but there's

11 other transmission that's under consideration

12 where NYPA's working with Hydro-QuÈbec so

13 that it could be imported through typical

14 imports. DC is -- it's just a direct --

15 think about it as an extension cord.

16 SENATOR MURPHY: Right. That will

17 come from Quebec, all the way down.

18 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Right. But

19 there's other transmission that we're looking

20 at to allow for energy to be moved into the

21 state through normal means.

22 SENATOR MURPHY: Okay, I know my time

23 has run out. Would you mind -- could I get a

24 copy of those reports that you -- what was

356

1 that, the TOTS project or something?

2 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Oh, yeah.

3 Absolutely.

4 SENATOR MURPHY: Would you mind having

5 that sent --

6 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Yes.

7 SENATOR MURPHY: Thank you.

8 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Sure.

9 SENATOR MURPHY: Appreciate your time.

10 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblywoman

11 Jenne.

12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: Thank you.

13 Good afternoon. How are you?

14 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Good. How are

15 you?

16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: Good.

17 I just want to start off by saying

18 that I appreciate all of the time and effort

19 that you've put into trying to balance all of

20 the energy issues and demands of a very

21 diverse state with an aging infrastructure.

22 And so you've talked about upgrading the AC

23 types of lines. Are you getting at the major

24 congestion points that prevent electricity

357

1 that's generated up in my neck of the woods

2 to get down to the suburbs and the city? Is

3 that what you were referring to?

4 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: There were some

5 limiting factors, and that was addressed by

6 these TOTS projects, to improve that.

7 The AC is more west to east, and it's

8 really what we call the Marcy. But it's not

9 so much the north to south at this point.

10 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: All righty.

11 One of the concerns I have about the

12 ZEC program is -- you probably can recall I

13 represent three munis, I've lived in two,

14 currently still live in one. And I wondered

15 if there -- you know, whether we're going to

16 take into account the fact that the majority

17 of their electric usage is hydro, it's a

18 long-standing contract, and they're not

19 typically subject to a lot of these fees and

20 assessments in the state. And they also

21 don't receive benefits of these types of fees

22 and surcharges sometimes, you know, like

23 energy efficiency types of programs and

24 things like that. We've traditionally carved

358

1 out munis.

2 And also the dramatic impact -- I

3 mean, is there some sort of equity that's

4 built into the ZEC program for munis?

5 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: So the way the

6 commission made a decision on this -- and

7 you're correct, historically these programs

8 were not placed on munis when we looked at

9 things like the system benefit charges

10 because of the NYPA relationship.

11 But in this case, what the commission

12 was looking at is the fact that the closure

13 of the nuclear power plants would result in

14 an increase in carbon emissions of millions

15 of tons a year throughout the state, and that

16 it would have been inequitable because we're

17 really talking about the ability to maintain

18 a portfolio to not have -- because all state

19 users contributed to that -- to not spread

20 the costs throughout the state.

21 And so that's why we asked NYPA and

22 LIPA as well as the munis to do their fair

23 share so that all state consumers, since all

24 state consumers get the environmental

359

1 benefit, all state consumers should pay their

2 fair share.

3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: But just like

4 Chairwoman Paulin said, there are some

5 communities that made a historical decision

6 to be green and to organize themselves in a

7 way to save their customers money. And I'm

8 very concerned that the amount that our munis'

9 customers are going to be expected to pick up

10 will double or triple what their bill is. We

11 have people that have chosen to live in these

12 communities and to pay taxes there based on

13 the fact that there is a municipal electric

14 utility there. And is there a limiting that

15 the bill can't go up more than a certain

16 percentage?

17 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: The way we're

18 looking to moderate this is actually through

19 the REC program. And so we have designed the

20 REC program so that in terms of renewables

21 themselves, we take advantage of what we see

22 as continuing to decline in costs and look at

23 the creation of a voluntary market.

24 In terms of the ZEC program, I

360

1 appreciate the concern. The issue is is that

2 it's hard not to allocate those, because if

3 not, then you're going to have other

4 constituents in the state who are paying more

5 than their fair share.

6 The other piece, I would say, is that

7 a lot of municipals that did take the

8 advantage of having low-cost NYPA power --

9 and so to ask consumers who didn't have

10 access to that power to now pay for the ZEC

11 program seemed to us another equity issue.

12 So these are challenging issues. But

13 it really comes down to -- and as you know, a

14 lot of people downstate said: Why should we

15 be paying for it? And our answer is because

16 we're talking about a statewide environmental

17 benefit, and it just seemed the most

18 equitable for us to say since everyone in the

19 state's going to be benefiting from the

20 reduction in carbon, everybody should pay

21 their fair share.

22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: Well, I would

23 respectfully suggest that we carve out munis

24 because of the huge impact that it's going to

361

1 have on people's budgets, and people do live

2 on fixed incomes upstate. A lot of these

3 munis are very small, they would have a very

4 negligible impact on the distribution of the

5 entire amount of money that is needed to be

6 recouped, and they shouldn't be penalized for

7 making a smart decision many years ago.

8 And I would also like to make sure

9 that I talk about my concern that hydro,

10 existing hydro, really has been given no

11 place at the table in terms of being able to

12 invest in themselves, receive incentives to

13 be able to update their equipment and to

14 generate more zero carbon energy in this

15 state. It is very upsetting to me.

16 We produce a lot of hydroelectric

17 energy in the North Country in particular,

18 and we are not seeing any state investment

19 really flow their way, that I can see, to

20 help them to solve our problems of 50 percent

21 renewable by 2030.

22 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Assemblywoman

23 Jenne, you know, the issue that is

24 confronting the nukes is the same issue

362

1 that's confronting existing hydro and almost

2 every generator, frankly, in the state. And

3 one of the things that the commission did in

4 the Clean Energy Standard order that we

5 issued in December, the rehearing order, we

6 acknowledged the fact that we need to have a

7 program that to the extent we have existing

8 resources -- who are hydro, biomass, who are

9 struggling economically, and that to replace

10 them would be more expensive than to maintain

11 them -- that we needed a program so that they

12 can continue to invest and we can retain

13 them, because it made no sense to pay more to

14 replace them than to maintain them.

15 So the staff is working with NYSERDA

16 to develop that program because we heard

17 them, that there was a concern, and we agreed

18 that it makes no sense to lose these assets.

19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: And as we lose

20 you to Australia, I just want your staff to

21 know that I'll be watching for that program.

22 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Okay.

23 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JENNE: And

24 congratulations, and good luck.

363

1 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Thank you.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

3 much.

4 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Senator Young,

5 hello.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: It's so great to

7 see you, Chairwoman.

8 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Good to see you.

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you so much

10 for being here. And I know that this is

11 probably one of your last official acts

12 before you leave us, and I just wanted to

13 say, first of all, congratulations. You will

14 be missed.

15 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Thank you.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And we wish you

17 well in your new endeavors, so thank you for

18 everything that you've done.

19 I just wanted to ask, real quickly,

20 could you give us a quick update on the Clean

21 Energy Standard and REV? I know you talked

22 about REV, I think a little bit. You touched

23 on it earlier. But could you give us a

24 briefing on that?

364

1 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: On the Clean

2 Energy Standard?

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And REV.

4 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: And REV?

5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes.

6 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: We are

7 proceeding in REV. We just -- right now,

8 we're at a point now where the commission has

9 issued its policy decisions and is in the

10 process of implementing them through the

11 various rate cases -- we just decided the

12 Con Ed rate cases -- where there are a number

13 of programs that were put in place to

14 implement that.

15 We've also done, as you know, a number

16 of demonstration projects that are underway

17 to show how consumers can gauge more. We

18 also have an ongoing process to look at how

19 we price-distributed energy resources better,

20 that should be decided this year.

21 So I feel very good about where we are

22 in the state in terms of implementing the

23 future. I mean, New York is clearly leading

24 in terms of recognizing that moving into the

365

1 21st century, the power system is not just

2 going to be around large central station

3 power plants -- they'll still have a role,

4 but it will also include distributed

5 resources such as distributed solar, fuel

6 cells, CHP, as well as renewable-type

7 resources so that demand itself can be made

8 more efficient.

9 And that's a lot of what we're seeing,

10 is sort of that coming together. I feel like

11 the state has certainly set the policy and

12 now the market is moving forward very quickly

13 to help us implement it.

14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

15 Is there any kind of written document

16 or report out there, kind of like a status

17 update, with that? That might be something

18 that would be helpful to the Legislature.

19 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Okay. I think

20 that's something we'll take back and -- to

21 develop a report on sort of ongoing

22 activities. That's a good idea.

23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Now --

24 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: I can promise a

366

1 lot now.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I know you can. I

3 know you can.

4 And speaking of that, you know, now

5 that you're leaving and Commissioner Acampora

6 is looking to retire from the five-member

7 board, we are concerned that the board may be

8 compromised as far as completing its work,

9 may not be able to have a quorum, for

10 example. So are there open orders, how many,

11 and are there actions that require the

12 commission's approval?

13 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Thank you for

14 the question, Senator Young. We actually

15 researched that question.

16 Under the Public Service Law -- and

17 there's a legal memo, but basically the way

18 it works is that the two remaining sitting

19 commissioners can constitute a quorum. So

20 it's the majority of the sitting

21 commissioners who constitute the quorum. So

22 as long as both commissioners vote in favor

23 of an item, it can move forward.

24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. Thank you.

367

1 I would like to see those positions filled,

2 however, so -- just one final question.

3 Consumer complaints, I know the

4 Comptroller had asked for information. Is

5 there a tracking system on those, or how does

6 that work?

7 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: We do have a

8 tracking system on consumer complaints.

9 And the question that the Comptroller

10 asked about, Well, what about when you file a

11 complaint and it's not necessarily a consumer

12 complaint, it's another matter? But we do

13 track those, we just track them in a

14 different system. That's what was -- the

15 discussion that we had back and forth with

16 him.

17 But they're all tracked.

18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I see. Okay.

19 Thank you.

20 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Sure.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Are you all set?

22 Senator Savino.

23 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you,

24 Senator Young.

368

1 Thank you for your testimony. Thank

2 you for your service. I just want to ask you

3 simply, now that you're on your way on to

4 your next step in life, perhaps you might

5 have an opinion on a piece of legislation

6 that I've been carrying for the last couple

7 of years. And I know it's a priority for

8 AARP, and in fact if it were passed and

9 enacted in New York State like it is in

10 40 other states, you might not have spent so

11 much time today answering questions from some

12 of my colleagues.

13 It's about the establishment of a

14 utility consumer advocate. As you know,

15 New York is one of the few states that does

16 not have a utility consumer advocate that

17 helps deal with rate issues. We don't have

18 anyone on the PSC that just basically

19 advocates on behalf of the consumers. While

20 you do a wonderful job, there's a sense that

21 consumers really don't have someone at the

22 PSC that is -- it's not a level playing field

23 for the consumers.

24 And as Senator Young talked about the

369

1 number of complaints from consumers, and I

2 heard Senator Murphy speak about some of the

3 concerns that people have about rate hikes

4 and how we can explain them, and we all know

5 that Con Ed has now just jacked up their

6 rates downstate -- do you think the

7 establishment of a utility consumer advocate

8 in New York State might help us as it's

9 helped in other places, particularly like

10 California, where they were able to help

11 consumers in California save almost

12 $4 billion in the past few years?

13 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Thank you,

14 Senator Savino. First of all I, you know,

15 obviously, even though I am leaving, will not

16 comment on pending legislation.

17 (Laughter.)

18 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: But I will tell

19 you that two years ago I established a

20 consumer advocate role within the agency. We

21 have a consumer advocate, his name is Michael

22 Corso. The Consumer Services Division

23 reports to him. But as we established him,

24 we always -- we put together a Consumer

370

1 Advisory Committee that's made up of many of

2 the people that you're aware of, such as

3 PULP, AARP, and the PIRGs and the UIU. And

4 he works very closely with them to make sure

5 that consumer interests are represented in

6 our rate cases.

7 As a result of that, that's -- you

8 know, it was out of that work -- the first

9 thing I heard from this consumer advisory

10 group is they wanted an Energy Affordability

11 Index. And we put that in, so that now we're

12 getting to a 6 percent energy burden.

13 And then in each rate case, the

14 consumer advocacy group will work very

15 closely with the external advocates to make

16 sure that their voices are represented.

17 The other thing that we did is we --

18 Michael is to -- reports directly to me. And

19 so he's one of my chief advisors, so we

20 wanted to make sure that every issue that we

21 did at the agency had a consumer focus. So

22 without -- again, I can't agree with you any

23 more that this is all about the consumer.

24 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm.

371

1 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: And we need to

2 make sure that there's a loud consumer voice

3 in everything we do.

4 And we can do that within the agency.

5 And our folks know that they're absolutely

6 empowered to make sure that when we're making

7 decisions, we understand the consumer

8 perspective. All consumers.

9 SENATOR SAVINO: There's no doubt

10 that, you know, the work you've done has

11 improved circumstances. I just think that --

12 and I'm not alone in this -- that we can do

13 better. And so we're going to continue to

14 push for the establishment of a utility

15 consumer advocate, and hopefully we'll

16 convince some other people so that we can

17 take New York State a step further and

18 become, I guess, the 41st state that has a

19 utility consumer advocate.

20 But thank you for your service. Good

21 luck in your future endeavors.

22 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Thank you.

23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

24 Senator O'Mara.

372

1 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you,

2 Chairwoman.

3 Thank you for being here. You

4 mentioned in some of your prior testimony

5 about upstate transmission, connecting some

6 of our power sources upstate to downstate,

7 which I think the Governor's talked about for

8 the last six years as the Energy Highway.

9 It comes as news to me that there's

10 any work being done on any of those

11 transmission projects that you generally

12 described in your prior testimony. Can you

13 tell me what's going on with developing

14 transmission to get electricity from

15 upstate to downstate to connect those power

16 sources, and where they stand? I'm not aware

17 of anything being approved, I'm not aware of

18 anything being built. Where are we on this?

19 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Sure. So the

20 projects that I referred to that have been

21 constructed are projects that we did to

22 reduce local constraints downstate, the TOTS

23 projects and some upstate -- those were part

24 of what we call the "no-regrets" around

373

1 Indian Point.

2 In terms of the AC transmission, after

3 we started this process, there was an order

4 that came out of FERC called Order 1000 which

5 allowed for basically ratepayer approval in

6 the federal tariffs of transmission that

7 served the public policy. And we determined

8 that that would be actually the best thing,

9 because then it would become part of the

10 New York State ISO tariff.

11 So we put the AC transmission through

12 a process so the ISO can review it. They've

13 completed their review and sent it back to us

14 and said the project would be a good idea.

15 We have then said we can -- we had to then

16 vote on that, we did that in December and

17 said we agree, and now we sent it back to

18 them so they can select the best project in

19 terms of cost and meeting the needs of the

20 system. We would expect that back from them,

21 we will then have to go through our normal

22 Article VII.

23 But the expectation, which has been

24 the expectation all along, is that that

374

1 project would be commissioned during the

2 2018-2019 -- or start construction during

3 2018-2019, with full commissioning in 2022.

4 So it's on track. It's just because

5 this is sort of a shared jurisdiction between

6 us and the federal government, we had to use

7 both processes.

8 SENATOR O'MARA: So is that going to

9 help connect and move power from, say,

10 Nine Mile, Ginna upstate to the downstate

11 metropolitan region?

12 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Yes. This is to

13 remove the constraints.

14 The other piece that this does, by the

15 way -- is our expectation is with this

16 transmission -- if you recall, there was a

17 new capacity zone set up in Central Hudson.

18 Getting this transmission built will also

19 help eliminate the need for that capacity,

20 so -- so that's the other reason we want to

21 do it, because we're essentially creating a

22 pipe so that power can be moved freely from

23 upstate to downstate.

24 SENATOR O'MARA: Is this transmission

375

1 proposal, is that taking into account the

2 development of new renewables across the

3 state, to help move that power to the

4 higher-demand areas of the state?

5 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: It will support

6 that. So, you know -- and we should think

7 about the fact that New York, the supply is

8 located upstate, a lot of the demand is

9 downstate, and we need that transportation

10 system.

11 SENATOR O'MARA: And I fully agree

12 with that and support that. Are we

13 undertaking any examinations to determine how

14 communities along that path should be

15 incentivized to accept that transmission

16 going through their communities as we are

17 certainly incentivizing renewable power

18 sources to be constructed? What are we

19 providing to these communities along the way

20 to put up with or host transmission going

21 through the communities?

22 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: So one of the

23 things that the commission did, and this came

24 out of I think it was the 2014 State of the

376

1 State, was to take a look at building

2 transmission on existing highways. So I'm

3 really pleased to say actually the projects

4 that we're considering are using existing

5 right-of-ways and actually are creating

6 modern towers so that in fact the sight

7 impact is really de minimis.

8 We've also really reduced the Hudson

9 crossing -- the crossing over the Hudson

10 River. So the idea, and that was part of

11 this process, was to build transmission so

12 that we can use existing right-of-way and

13 make better use of it.

14 SENATOR O'MARA: Would that

15 transmission be primarily above ground? Or

16 are you also examining ways to run

17 transmission underground, which might be more

18 acceptable to certain communities?

19 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: We gave all of

20 the bidders an opportunity to take a look at

21 that. But for this size of transmission, the

22 voltage, it would be cost-prohibitive. And

23 by using, again, the existing right-of-way --

24 and we're moving away from the big lattice

377

1 towers, we're hoping -- it's actually

2 reducing some of the visual impact that you

3 would have seen otherwise.

4 SENATOR O'MARA: Okay. With regards

5 to the Hydro-QuÈbec line and running that

6 down, is there any interest in the industry

7 right now in actually undertaking that

8 construction with investors? That's a big

9 hurdle to get over, isn't it?

10 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: There is. But I

11 think there's interest in the New York City

12 area to maybe -- to looking at that. And so

13 we're hopeful, again, with the Clean Energy

14 Standard and the announcement of

15 Indian Point, you're creating a market

16 incentive for people to enter into a

17 long-term agreement on that on a voluntary

18 basis.

19 SENATOR O'MARA: It was my

20 understanding that with the Clean Energy

21 Standard, this power coming in from

22 Hydro-QuÈbec would not count towards our

23 Clean Energy Standard. Can you comment on

24 that?

378

1 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: No, incremental

2 does. It counts towards Tier 1. And then so

3 it would have some advantage.

4 SENATOR O'MARA: How much?

5 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Let me check.

6 SENATOR O'MARA: I've heard it

7 wouldn't count towards our Clean Energy

8 Standard of whatever the goals are,

9 50 percent initially. Then that's not going

10 to help us. Or how much of that --

11 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Under -- yeah,

12 under the Clean Energy Standard anything

13 that's incremental to existing hydro

14 imports -- we didn't want to count existing

15 imports, but if it's incremental hydro that's

16 coming in, it does count towards the Clean --

17 and incremental that doesn't involve an

18 impoundment, so it's sort of increasing the

19 capacity of what they already have and coming

20 into the state.

21 SENATOR O'MARA: Okay. With regards

22 to that Hydro-QuÈbec line again, and not

23 having any inputs or outputs along the line

24 throughout upstate New York as it comes

379

1 through, it seems to me to be a waste to not

2 have some -- I know it takes conversion

3 stations to convert the DC and AC, but why is

4 that not being a requirement of this

5 proposal, to at least have some of those

6 along the way so that it can help move some

7 of our upstate excess power downstate, and

8 help create New York State jobs rather than

9 Canadian jobs?

10 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: You're talking

11 about conversions on the DC system itself, to

12 allow for more sort of local development? Or

13 local hydro?

14 SENATOR O'MARA: Both. Both in and

15 out.

16 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Yeah. I think

17 the -- it's a good question in terms of the

18 economics of that.

19 When we approved the line, we approved

20 it as a merchant facility, so none of it hits

21 rates. As a result, it would be very

22 difficult for us to impose any requirements

23 without guaranteeing recovery. So we would

24 have to -- if the state were to do that, we'd

380

1 have to go back and re-look at the line as

2 something that would go into rates, which we

3 decided not to because they said they would

4 take merchant risk.

5 SENATOR O'MARA: Okay. My time's up.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

7 Senator Krueger.

8 SENATOR KRUEGER: All right. Thank

9 you.

10 Going back to, I think, where we were

11 discussing -- so I said it's going to cost --

12 or it's been reported it will cost

13 $7.6 billion to ratepayers over a 12-year

14 period. You said not necessarily. And then

15 I've been doing some more reading since then

16 which seems to show that it would be about

17 2 billion a year for individual ratepayers, a

18 billion to municipalities, which follows up

19 on the Assemblywoman's question.

20 So who pays the rest? And how do we

21 get an understanding of how much would it

22 actually be per year under this deal that

23 you've made?

24 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: For the ZEC

381

1 program?

2 SENATOR KRUEGER: Yes.

3 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: So our -- what

4 we did is we calculated the ZEC program over

5 the first two years of the program.

6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Two or three? I'm

7 sorry --

8 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Two.

9 SENATOR KRUEGER: Two.

10 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Two years of the

11 program.

12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay.

13 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Because under

14 the way we've approved the ZEC program, the

15 amount of payments really will depend on what

16 the forecasted gas prices are going to be.

17 So if gas prices are forecasted to go

18 up, under the way the program works, that

19 would suggest that the amount that gets paid

20 under the ZECs for the avoided carbon would

21 go down. And so the total dollar amount

22 really depends on what's happening on energy

23 prices.

24 But we also looked at it from the --

382

1 so for the first couple of years of the

2 program, we're looking at that, on average,

3 about $2 per residential customer for the

4 program. But the other side of it is the

5 program itself, which is $950 million in the

6 first two years with savings at that

7 1.4 billion in terms of avoided environmental

8 costs, et cetera.

9 So the challenge we have, right, is

10 that what we're looking to do is look at the

11 avoided cost to carbon. The whole price of

12 the ZECs is about -- on the avoided cost of

13 carbon. If we allow the carbon emissions to

14 come in, societal costs are going to go up.

15 So it is a total cost savings if you're

16 concerned about climate change.

17 And that's where I have had -- we've

18 had this debate with some of the folks who

19 have written about the program and saying

20 it's a bad program. Like I said, the fossil

21 guys don't like it because they think it's

22 going to suppress prices, and the people who

23 are worried about the environment -- the fact

24 of the matter is, if we don't do this, we're

383

1 going to increase fossil emissions, which is

2 going to be a higher cost to society.

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: So where would

4 people probably smarter than me go to review

5 what the deal is and how to hold it up for

6 transparency, over each year, what actually

7 is happening and what the rate changes will

8 be? Is there a contract that was signed?

9 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: There is a

10 contract between NYSERDA and Exelon, the

11 owners. But there is -- you have our

12 proceedings, and under the commission order,

13 every three years we're going to have a

14 review of the proceeding and we'll be doing

15 an update.

16 So the best place really for folks who

17 are interested is really at the agency, and

18 to work with our staff and look at

19 essentially our various orders as well as the

20 various PowerPoints that we posted and things

21 like that on the website.

22 SENATOR KRUEGER: But is there

23 someplace for people to look at the contract?

24 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: The contract

384

1 itself is confidential. And I don't believe

2 it's been made public yet, but I can

3 double-check. And John will be following me,

4 and he'll be able to answer that.

5 SENATOR KRUEGER: Because your agency

6 won't have any analysis until three years

7 down the road. Is that correct?

8 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Correct. But

9 again, the contract really just implements

10 the order. What the order does is it -- it

11 just -- and it's like we do with wind

12 development and solar development. These

13 contracts that NYSERDA signs are really on

14 execution. The terms of the contract are

15 really set out in the commission's order

16 approving the ZEC program.

17 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. Then since

18 you actually jumped to the importance of

19 carbon reduction and the argument for this

20 plan, quite a few of us signed a letter

21 urging the Governor to increase the RGGI

22 cap from 2 percent to 5 percent in order to

23 try to actually reduce carbon in our

24 atmosphere. And he ultimately, I believe,

385

1 went to 3 percent, is that correct, in his

2 recommendation for where we go --

3 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Yes.

4 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- with the RGGI

5 carbon tax?

6 So since we are all interested in

7 ensuring that we do whatever we can to reduce

8 our greenhouse gas pollution, why -- well,

9 one, did PSC support an increase beyond the

10 3 percent? And if not, why not?

11 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: So thank you for

12 the question. As you know, I'm a member of

13 the RGGI board, and the state has -- New York

14 has been one of the strong advocates of

15 increasing the cap so that we have the

16 ability to price out carbon.

17 But RGGI is an agreement among

18 multiple states, and the states were in

19 different positions, you have different

20 governors taking different views. And so,

21 you know, I think 3 percent is aggressive for

22 a number of states.

23 But it really turns back to -- and I

24 think this is why what we're doing in the

386

1 Clean Energy Standard is so important.

2 New York, by moving towards the 50 by '30 and

3 the 40 percent reduction in emissions,

4 continues to lead, and it really shows really

5 why we have to be very aggressive in looking

6 at this, because that's our biggest leverage

7 with the other states, is that we're going

8 there, you need to go there with us. And I

9 think it's the combination of the two.

10 But I would suggest that this

11 discussion about RGGI will continue and, you

12 know, as everyone here in this room knows,

13 the states really need to lead on carbon now.

14 And I think New York is one of the states

15 that's truly leading, because we just don't

16 know where the federal government's going to

17 be.

18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Mm-hmm.

19 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: And that's the

20 other reason why the ZEC and REC programs are

21 so important, because they are based on

22 avoiding carbon, and we designed them very

23 specifically to be able to resist federal

24 challenge. And I think it's -- these pieces

387

1 all need to fit together.

2 So, you know, I would just sum up this

3 way. I don't think there's anyone, certainly

4 among the energy team, that disagrees with

5 you. We need to be as aggressive as we can.

6 We think that the 50 percent is a very

7 aggressive goal. We think we need to keep

8 the nukes, have a transition to make sure we

9 can hit that 50 percent along with the

10 emissions, and we need to continue to really

11 push our neighboring states to go with us in

12 this direction because it's going to be

13 state-driven, I think, for the next several

14 years.

15 SENATOR KRUEGER: And even though we

16 still don't have access to the contract, but

17 hopefully we will get to -- is there anything

18 in anything that PSC has done or NYSERDA or

19 the contract that commits that there won't

20 just be a continuing deal with nuclear energy

21 past the 10-to-12-year mark? Is there

22 something that's a guaranteed drop-dead?

23 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Yeah. The

24 contract is a 12-year agreement, so

388

1 there's -- you know, there would be -- there

2 would have to be a new agreement after

3 12 years.

4 SENATOR KRUEGER: Because there's

5 nothing in anything now that says "and we can

6 never continue this."

7 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: There's -- it's

8 only -- I said it's only a 12-year agreement,

9 so it wouldn't continue after 12 years unless

10 some other action happens.

11 But as you know, it -- we can't bind

12 future commissions, an administration can't

13 bind future administrations, so it would have

14 to take a future action to extend it.

15 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

16 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Thank you.

17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I think that

18 concludes it.

19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Yup.

20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. Well, thank

21 you so much.

22 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Thank you.

23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And again, good

24 luck with your endeavors.

389

1 CHAIRWOMAN ZIBELMAN: Thank you.

2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is

4 President and CEO John B. Rhodes, from the

5 New York State Energy and Research

6 Development Agency, NYSERDA.

7 Welcome.

8 PRESIDENT RHODES: Good afternoon.

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good afternoon.

10 It's still afternoon, good.

11 (Laughter.)

12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Go ahead.

13 PRESIDENT RHODES: Am I on?

14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: You're on.

15 PRESIDENT RHODES: Thank you.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: It's your big

17 moment.

18 PRESIDENT RHODES: Thank you.

19 Good afternoon, Chairwoman Young,

20 Chairman Farrell, and members of the

21 committees. Thank you for the opportunity to

22 testify before you today. I am John Rhodes.

23 I am president and CEO of the New York State

24 Energy Research and Development Authority,

390

1 NYSERDA.

2 NYSERDA continues to play its critical

3 role in advancing Governor Cuomo's

4 comprehensive policy for a clean, more

5 affordable, and resilient energy system

6 called Reforming the Energy Vision, or REV.

7 In 2016 the Governor launched the $5 billion

8 Clean Energy Fund, or CEF, providing

9 solutions to reduce harmful greenhouse gases,

10 improve resiliency, and make energy more

11 affordable, delivering $39 billion in

12 customer bill savings for New Yorkers over

13 the life of the fund.

14 Currently more than 20 new CEF

15 initiatives are underway that further our

16 progress toward these goals. The CEF

17 consists of four portfolios: market

18 development, innovation and research, NY-Sun,

19 and NY Green Bank.

20 The first, market development, is

21 focused on reducing costs and accelerating

22 uptake of energy efficiency as well as other

23 on-site consumer solutions, while increasing

24 private investment levels. Market

391

1 development also specifically supports

2 initiatives that benefit low-to-moderate-

3 income households, including a commitment of

4 at least $230 million over the first three

5 years of the CEF.

6 The innovation and research portfolio

7 drives clean energy business development,

8 promoting a robust clean energy ecosystem

9 that will accelerate the growth and scale of

10 new business enterprises. Since 2009,

11 New York State has invested $14 million in

12 six NYSERDA-sponsored incubators. These

13 incubators have assisted 153 companies,

14 generated more than 1100 jobs in the clean

15 tech industry, raised more than $270 million

16 in private investment, and brought dozens of

17 new clean energy products and solutions to

18 the market.

19 The third element of the portfolio,

20 NY-Sun, is a $1 billion investment in solar,

21 and continues to stimulate a self-sustaining

22 solar industry, gradually reducing incentives

23 as the industry builds to scale. NY-Sun is

24 an example of REV in action, and shows clear

392

1 results. Since the beginning of 2012, solar

2 deployed in New York State has grown over

3 750 percent. New York is on pace to reach

4 1.5 gigawatts of solar energy deployment,

5 with more than 700 megawatts installed and

6 over 800 megawatts in the development

7 pipeline. More than 8,100 New Yorkers worked

8 in the solar industry in 2016. Our

9 strategies in the solar energy sector are

10 working in New York.

11 NY Green Bank, the largest green bank

12 in the nation, works to leverage

13 private-sector capital into clean energy. As

14 of December 2016, NY Green Bank has closed

15 18 transactions totaling $305 million of

16 Green Bank money, which will result in

17 approximately $1.26 billion in total clean

18 energy projects in New York State. This

19 includes investments that will advance energy

20 efficiency, wind power, solar, and fuel cell

21 projects, among other technology types, which

22 are difficult for the private sector to

23 finance on its own today.

24 NYSERDA also administers the Clean

393

1 Energy Standard, or CES, which requires that

2 50 percent of New York's electricity come

3 from renewable energy resources by 2030.

4 This is the most comprehensive and ambitious

5 clean energy goal in the state's history. In

6 January of this year, $360 million in awards

7 for 11 large-scale renewable energy projects

8 was announced. These awards will leverage

9 almost $1 billion in private-sector

10 investment and are expected to generate

11 enough clean energy to power more than

12 110,000 homes and reduce carbon emissions by

13 more than 420,000 metric tons.

14 The projects are spread across seven

15 regions and include wind farms, fuel cell and

16 hydro-electric projects, and one 50 megawatt

17 utility-scale solar project, the largest of

18 its kind in the state. This is the kind of

19 progress we must make to meet the

20 Clean Energy Standard goals.

21 Offshore wind will also help New York

22 meet the Clean Energy Standard. As recently

23 announced, the state's objective is to

24 develop up to 2.4 gigawatts of

394

1 cost-effective, appropriately sited offshore

2 wind by 2030, offering an enormous

3 opportunity to spur economic development

4 through new construction, manufacturing, and

5 supply chain growth.

6 The LIPA Board of Trustees recently

7 approved a 90 megawatt development 30 miles

8 southeast of Montauk, the nation's largest

9 offshore wind farm, and the first in

10 New York. This South Fork Wind Farm will

11 provide enough clean, renewable electricity

12 to power 50,000 Long Island homes, and is out

13 of sight from Long Island's beaches.

14 In December, the federal Bureau of

15 Ocean Energy Management conducted an auction

16 of federal water development rights for wind

17 energy that was won by Statoil Wind. The

18 record-setting auction results demonstrate a

19 robust market interest in developing wind

20 resources off New York's coast.

21 NYSERDA is developing an Offshore Wind

22 Master Plan which will be released by the end

23 of 2017, this year. NYSERDA will work with

24 our partners and stakeholders as we outline

395

1 specific steps the state will take to ensure

2 potential sites are developed responsibly,

3 and with the interests of New Yorkers as the

4 utmost priority.

5 The 2017-2018 Executive Budget

6 recommends $19.7 million in funding for

7 NYSERDA to continue energy research and

8 development, and statewide energy planning

9 and analysis activities. In addition to our

10 work under the Clean Energy Fund and Clean

11 Energy Standard, the Governor has called on

12 NYSERDA and the Department of Environmental

13 Conservation to undertake a comprehensive

14 study to determine the most rapid,

15 cost-effective, and responsible pathway to

16 reach 100 percent renewable energy statewide.

17 For nearly four decades, NYSERDA has

18 protected New York State interests at the

19 West Valley Demonstration Project in

20 Cattaraugus County. The Executive Budget

21 recommends $15.6 million for ongoing nuclear

22 waste cleanup at West Valley, an increase of

23 approximately $2.1 million over last year's

24 budget. Our costs at West Valley are largely

396

1 dictated by a federal match requirement, and

2 this reflects the funding level necessary to

3 meet the federal appropriation during the

4 2016-2017 federal fiscal year.

5 A clean, affordable, resilient energy

6 system is essential to the growth of New York

7 State's economy. We have the talent, the

8 natural resources, the global financial

9 markets, and a history of innovation. Under

10 Governor Cuomo, we are putting these

11 resources to work for all New Yorkers.

12 This concludes my opening remarks, and

13 I would be happy to take any questions that

14 you may have.

15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. We'll

16 start with Senator O'Mara.

17 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you.

18 Good afternoon, Mr. Rhodes. Thank you

19 for being here. I've got a few questions on

20 all these projects, power projects that

21 you're talking about, and basically how

22 they're funded.

23 Your funding comes from the

24 ratepayers, correct? Various surcharges on

397

1 everybody's utility bills?

2 PRESIDENT RHODES: That's principally

3 the case. And for the projects I believe

4 you're talking about, yes, that is the case.

5 SENATOR O'MARA: How much does NYSERDA

6 collect annually in the form of surcharges

7 from the ratepayers' bills?

8 PRESIDENT RHODES: This year I believe

9 we are collecting $580 million. That

10 represents a drop of $91 million from the

11 peak. Under the Clean Energy Fund, the

12 $5 billion commitment that I mentioned, we

13 are committed to reducing ratepayer

14 collections by $1.5 billion over the next

15 10 years.

16 SENATOR O'MARA: Yet you're still --

17 you're collecting $580 million this year --

18 PRESIDENT RHODES: Correct.

19 SENATOR O'MARA: -- which is in

20 addition and a surcharge on ratepayer's

21 bills; that is, over and above what the cost

22 of the commodity and the delivery is?

23 PRESIDENT RHODES: That's right. And

24 we put that money to work in investments to

398

1 reduce ratepayer collections -- ratepayer

2 expenditures, excuse me.

3 SENATOR O'MARA: How much of that

4 annual surcharge collected from ratepayers

5 goes towards improving the transmission of

6 electricity from upstate to downstate?

7 PRESIDENT RHODES: None of it. These

8 monies go to solutions that are listed, so

9 those are typically behind the meter. It

10 would include energy efficiency, which is a

11 direct benefit in energy bill savings. They

12 include solar, photovoltaic, this would

13 include fuel cells, anaerobic digesters,

14 which we heard about this morning -- but

15 these are distributed energy solutions.

16 SENATOR O'MARA: So you're not

17 focusing on transmission, then, from larger

18 suppliers or from larger wind farms or solar

19 farms being developed in upstate New York?

20 PRESIDENT RHODES: We generally are

21 not focused on transmission. There's a

22 modest exception to that which I can go into.

23 SENATOR O'MARA: How much does NYSERDA

24 have in reserve, or what is the balance of

399

1 funds that's been collected from ratepayers

2 over the years that has not been spent on the

3 projects you've described?

4 PRESIDENT RHODES: So the Public

5 Service Commission order which established

6 the Clean Energy Fund includes a

7 bill-as-you-go approach for NYSERDA ratepayer

8 collections. Under this approach, Clean

9 Energy Fund ratepayer collections and

10 previously approved collections held by the

11 utilities, the electric and the gas

12 utilities, are used to reimburse NYSERDA for

13 program expenses through a monthly

14 reimbursement process.

15 The mechanism is for NYSERDA to

16 maintain a sufficient cash balance for an

17 anticipated two-month period with collection

18 amounts approved in the order. This approach

19 is leading to a substantial reduction of the

20 cash and investment and net position over the

21 past -- over the last year, cash balances

22 from ratepayer programs have been reduced

23 from $1.1 billion down to $761 million, and

24 they're continuing to go down under this

400

1 pay-as-you-go approach.

2 SENATOR O'MARA: So is that a --

3 pay-as-you-go, would that be the same as

4 collect-as-you-go in what you need to

5 collect? Or who's holding on to these --

6 PRESIDENT RHODES: Yes.

7 SENATOR O'MARA: -- reserves during

8 the period before you spend it?

9 PRESIDENT RHODES: The reserves are

10 generally held at the utilities in

11 effectively escrow accounts. And we are

12 moving those numbers down.

13 SENATOR O'MARA: Do you have an

14 estimation, then, of what those reserves are

15 in those accounts of the utilities?

16 PRESIDENT RHODES: I believe they are

17 $760 million.

18 SENATOR O'MARA: Just sitting there?

19 PRESIDENT RHODES: Sorry?

20 SENATOR O'MARA: Just sitting there in

21 the escrow accounts of the utilities?

22 PRESIDENT RHODES: And subject to

23 ongoing commitment as we make further

24 investment commitments.

401

1 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Assemblywoman

4 Paulin.

5 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Thank you.

6 Hi, John.

7 PRESIDENT RHODES: Hi.

8 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Just a couple

9 of questions.

10 First, I asked the commissioner for

11 the Department of Ags, you know, why there

12 was that transfer for what looks like it's

13 about a $2 million program, the -- maybe you

14 weren't in the room yet -- the Fuel NY

15 program.

16 And, you know, I was just curious

17 about why -- you know, it's always a

18 NYSERDA -- completely funded by NYSERDA. And

19 now NYSERDA's transferring $150,000 over to

20 the Department of Ags for them to participate

21 in a way that they claim to have participated

22 in the past. And I just wondered, you know,

23 what the rationale for making that transfer

24 was.

402

1 PRESIDENT RHODES: So the transfer

2 this year is to support -- is for $150,000 to

3 support the ongoing costs at Ag and Markets

4 for their continued work under the Fuel NY

5 program. The bulk of the expenditures under

6 Fuel NY are borne by NYSERDA.

7 Up until now, this has been a portable

8 generator program where we've solicited

9 around 720 gas stations -- I'm sorry, we have

10 solicited 630, and another 90 were doing it

11 on their own -- gas stations around

12 downstate -- Westchester, Rockland, the five

13 boroughs, Nassau, Suffolk -- to be made

14 ready, portable generators in the event of an

15 emergency storm.

16 We are now, with a FEMA grant,

17 pursuing a permanent generator solution and

18 expect to have approximately 180 generators

19 installed by the end of this year. And that

20 is a $12 million item in our budget. So the

21 bulk of the money is being run through

22 NYSERDA.

23 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: So what's the

24 role that the Department of Ags plays in that

403

1 program?

2 PRESIDENT RHODES: They have a role as

3 effectively a licensing authority interacting

4 with the individual gas stations. So they

5 are of invaluable assistance in getting us

6 into conversations with the individual gas

7 stations, or with the chains that can speak

8 for them, and getting to the point where

9 contracts are in place so that we can install

10 the switches and, in the event of an event,

11 deploy the generators.

12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Having lived

13 through that, I'm very appreciative of that

14 program.

15 So RGGI. This year's Executive

16 proposal again includes a transfer of

17 $23 million from RGGI to the General Fund for

18 clean energy tax credits and carbon reduction

19 programs. How much is uncommitted RGGI

20 monies -- remains in NYSERDA's accounts? Is

21 that -- that's different than the monies that

22 we were talking about, the assessments.

23 PRESIDENT RHODES: That's correct,

24 that is a separate source of funds.

404

1 I -- may I get back to you with the

2 answer on our RGGI balances?

3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Mm-hmm,

4 absolutely.

5 PRESIDENT RHODES: Thank you.

6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Electric

7 vehicles. Last year we included a new

8 program that would have provided a rebate for

9 eligible vehicle purchase. I'm wondering

10 where we are on that, and have any rebates

11 been issued pursuant to the program?

12 And related to the electric vehicles,

13 the hybrid vehicles program, we have

14 committed in this budget -- or the Governor's

15 committed -- 500 new workplace charging

16 stations by 2018.

17 And I just wondered, you know, what

18 progress -- you know, what's the program

19 going to look like? Is there certain areas

20 of concentration or roadways of

21 concentration?

22 PRESIDENT RHODES: So first with

23 respect to the vehicle rebate program, the

24 commitment -- which we will absolutely

405

1 meet -- is to have this in place by the end

2 of the first quarter. I can assure you that

3 we are -- there's no question about our being

4 able to meet that commitment. The program is

5 nearly done, and it will fit exactly as set

6 forth in the budget agreed last year --

7 rebates up to $2000, depending on the make

8 and the model, and the like.

9 With respect to the charging stations,

10 the 500 charging stations are essentially an

11 expansion of some existing charging station

12 programs where NYSERDA, but also our sister

13 agency NYPA for certain locations, have

14 installed about 1,600 to date. And so the

15 500 will be a natural extension -- the 500

16 workplace charging stations that you

17 reference will be a natural extension of the

18 same mechanisms.

19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Are they in

20 certain geographic areas, or are we spreading

21 them out? I mean, you know, what is the

22 goal?

23 PRESIDENT RHODES: We are working that

24 out. We're trying to achieve the right

406

1 balance. The way electric vehicles work, you

2 have the chicken-and-the-egg issue of

3 charging stations and vehicles, and it's hard

4 to justify a lot of charging stations without

5 a lot of vehicles, and vice versa. That

6 leads to a value to densification. On the

7 other hand, you want to cover the white

8 spaces.

9 So we're trying to strike the right

10 balance and doing some analysis to that

11 effect.

12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Is there any

13 consideration when those decisions are made

14 to look at businesses that -- you know, for

15 example, restaurants that might open at

16 night, you know, when energy is cheaper and

17 you're not looking at the highest-priced,

18 dirtiest energy produced by a -- you know,

19 when charging vehicles, is there any

20 consideration toward, you know -- even though

21 we don't do timed use, to do our own timed

22 use to some degree?

23 PRESIDENT RHODES: We're beginning to

24 introduce those considerations. In the past

407

1 we've been focused mainly on trying to get --

2 well, for workplace stations, it's relatively

3 straightforward, the employer agrees it's a

4 good thing. For home charging stations, it's

5 relatively straightforward.

6 For the so-called third-place charging

7 stations, we've been working to develop

8 business models that can appeal to the host.

9 So a Price Chopper may decide that, you know,

10 they like it for X, Y, Z reasons and can

11 support the investment. Or a Starbucks may

12 decide it -- so we've been focused mainly on

13 helping hosts arrive at investment decisions,

14 that this would be good for me.

15 But we are -- you're obviously right

16 to point out that electric vehicle and

17 electric vehicle charging can be of value to

18 the energy system if you time it right. And

19 that's especially true as we get to the era

20 of larger numbers.

21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: I would just

22 suggest that, you know, electric car owners

23 are usually buying them because they are

24 environmentally minded. So you want to

408

1 encourage use during nighttime, which is

2 probably more home use than it is in actual

3 work stations.

4 So I get the goal of wanting to

5 promote electric cars, I would just like to

6 also at the same time keep in mind who the

7 owners are and that we want to promote the

8 proper use of energy generally.

9 PRESIDENT RHODES: Absolutely. We do

10 realize that.

11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Finally,

12 there's -- well, actually two more questions.

13 One, there was a study that was

14 proposed that NYSERDA would join with DEC,

15 and I wonder if you could talk about, you

16 know, the study -- it's to getting to

17 100 percent renewable energy statewide. So

18 there wasn't a lot of specificity.

19 PRESIDENT RHODES: Thank you.

20 So that, as you say, is a study to be

21 undertaken jointly with the Department of

22 Environmental Conservation. We are going to

23 get it done by the end of this year.

24 We have -- there are a couple of

409

1 things to mention. We already have some

2 existing work underway that is highly

3 relevant to that under our State Energy Plan

4 process. We are called on to provide

5 biannual updates, and this is a year of a

6 biannual update, so we will be reporting on

7 our progress towards our State Energy Plan

8 goals, which in this context -- greenhouse

9 gases are 40 by '30, on the pathway to 80 by

10 '50. We already have some highly relevant --

11 what we call pathways analysis.

12 They talk about the technical options

13 to get to 80 by '50, and so we are building

14 on those building blocks and extending them.

15 Because 100 is not just a higher number than

16 80 or 50, but it's also qualitatively

17 different, and we're taking those qualitative

18 differences into consideration. But this is

19 one where DEC staff and NYSERDA staff and

20 stakeholders and experts are already engaged.

21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: And the

22 timetable for this study? Or --

23 PRESIDENT RHODES: Before the end of

24 the year.

410

1 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Before the end

2 of the year.

3 PRESIDENT RHODES: Yes.

4 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: And just

5 finally, the 11 projects that you've already

6 funded, there's 35 -- I believe 35 more to

7 go. I just wondered if there's any areas in

8 particular, or just good projects, you know,

9 for large-scale renewables out there that --

10 you know, obviously wind is new, and that's

11 great.

12 So I just wondered what was on the

13 horizon and if you were looking at certain,

14 again, geographic areas or specific renewable

15 models.

16 PRESIDENT RHODES: So we are -- we're

17 trying to strike the right balance between

18 being thoughtful and anticipatory and being

19 market-reactive to where people who put their

20 own money at risk tell us that the

21 opportunities are.

22 So we are in the process of looking at

23 areas that have -- that seem to be

24 underrecognized in terms of wind resource and

411

1 may also be areas that are more welcoming to

2 a wind project being sited there. And it's

3 too early to get specific, but there are some

4 promising parts of the state where I think we

5 can get more done.

6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: I just have one

7 final question. You know, last year we

8 talked a lot about -- and we continue to talk

9 a lot about -- worrying that people who can

10 least afford their utility bills are offered

11 programs to help them conserve. And I wonder

12 if you could just speak to some of NYSERDA's

13 programs specifically about that market and

14 what you're doing to help low-income

15 ratepayers pay less.

16 PRESIDENT RHODES: So our -- this is a

17 little bit of a portfolio effort. I think

18 you heard Audrey, Chair Zibelman, talk about

19 some of the work that Mike Corso is making

20 happen at the commission that is about

21 reducing the energy burden broadly.

22 NYSERDA's tools are really energy

23 efficiency, so we go in and try to get

24 projects done. Our programs, one of them is

412

1 called Empower, which is for the very lowest

2 incomes, below 60 percent of area median

3 income. We provide 100 percent of the cost

4 for an energy efficiency upgrade. It's

5 highly -- there's a lot of kinship with

6 Housing Community Renewable Program, the

7 Weatherization Assistance Program. The

8 Governor instructed WAP and Empower together

9 to get to 20,000 homes this year. So that's

10 on our docket.

11 In addition, we have assisted programs

12 for slightly higher bands of income. Sixty

13 to 80 gets 50 percent cost-share under

14 something we call Assisted Home Performance.

15 And then we have a Green Jobs-Green New York

16 financing instrument which provides highly

17 affordable interest rates for loans related

18 to those projects. Obviously not for the

19 below 60, because with no cost share there's

20 nothing to get a loan for. But for the 60 to

21 80 and 80 up to 120, and even a little bit

22 higher, we provide subsidized -- we provide

23 below-market interest to support those

24 households, specifically in those areas where

413

1 private financiers are not yet ready to go.

2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PAULIN: Thank you very

3 much.

4 PRESIDENT RHODES: Thank you.

5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

6 I just have a couple of questions. I

7 wanted to ask the second part of

8 Assemblywoman Paulin's question about the

9 RGGI transfer to the General Fund. And I was

10 wondering, is there a specific purpose

11 provided for this transfer?

12 PRESIDENT RHODES: The purpose of the

13 $23 million, if that's what you're referring

14 to --

15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes.

16 PRESIDENT RHODES: -- is for

17 energy-oriented tax credits, and they are

18 centrally in line with the use of the -- the

19 directed use of RGGI funds, which is carbon

20 abatement. So these are investments that are

21 entirely consistent with the goals of RGGI

22 and entirely consistent with the work to

23 continue New York's leadership in reducing

24 carbon emissions.

414

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

2 What are the parameters of awarding

3 those grants?

4 PRESIDENT RHODES: We transfer them, I

5 believe, to -- ultimately to the EPF and

6 within the boundaries that are set forth for

7 the EPF at the time.

8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. Thank you.

9 PRESIDENT RHODES: I can verify that

10 and get back to you.

11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: That'd be great,

12 John.

13 PRESIDENT RHODES: Thank you.

14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Can you explain the

15 suballocation of $150,000 worth of 18-a

16 assessments to Fuel NY? Could you address

17 that, please?

18 PRESIDENT RHODES: Right. So

19 that's -- I think Assemblywoman Paulin asked

20 a related question. So Fuel NY is our

21 resiliency program that keeps gas stations on

22 in the event of a power outage. Ag and

23 Markets is a really important partner in

24 allowing us to work with individual gas

415

1 stations and the chains that can speak for

2 them. And so this is to support them in

3 their work supporting our work deploying

4 initially the switches for portable

5 generators and, in the future, actual

6 permanently-at-the-gas-station-installed

7 generators.

8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. So is this a

9 one-time allocation, or is this going to be

10 an ongoing expense, is what I'm getting at.

11 PRESIDENT RHODES: I don't know the

12 answer to that. But it's -- and the -- if we

13 get the numbers of permanent generators

14 installed -- which I think we are expecting

15 186 -- that may do it for the requirement to

16 be protective and provide resiliency

17 downstate. And that might be enough to

18 signal a victory.

19 If we have to continue because we

20 determine we need a few more or we determine

21 that -- we realize we didn't get them all

22 done in this year, that kind of support may

23 continue into next year. But it's a bound --

24 it's a time -- it's a mission-bounded bit of

416

1 transfer.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

3 Could you just address NY Prize a

4 little bit? What is the status of it?

5 PRESIDENT RHODES: So NY Prize is

6 Governor Cuomo's $40 million community grid

7 competition. It's foreseen to take place in

8 three rounds. In the first round, I believe,

9 we awarded 83 prizes of $100,000 each for

10 some initial design. Most of those 83 came

11 forward and submitted applications in their

12 Round 2. We are finalizing the awards of

13 those and expect to be very close to that

14 very soon. And so that will be a number that

15 is smaller than 83, and they will get about

16 $1 million for really pretty thorough design

17 work, which will then make them eligible to

18 go on to Round 3, which will be final awards

19 of -- you know, to help with the actual

20 construction of the project.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

22 Of those 83 projects in the first

23 phase, how many of those have been completed?

24 PRESIDENT RHODES: Well, none. The

417

1 first phase was really a preliminary planning

2 activity. A microgrid project is a multiyear

3 initiative, and you move through increasingly

4 thorough levels of planning and design. So

5 we're working our way through the, you know,

6 through the maturing cycle of the project.

7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. So I

8 understand that it's a long-term proposition.

9 Have any of the 83 not started yet?

10 PRESIDENT RHODES: Well, none of them

11 have started. We're still doing design work,

12 increasingly detailed design work both on the

13 technical aspects, on the interconnection

14 aspects, and on the organizing aspects in

15 terms of what would the role of the critical

16 facilities, say the hospital, be in the

17 project.

18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: But has the design

19 started on all 83 projects?

20 PRESIDENT RHODES: Yes. Yes.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. That's

22 what I was trying to get at.

23 PRESIDENT RHODES: Sorry.

24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: What's the timeline

418

1 for Phase 2?

2 PRESIDENT RHODES: Phase 2 should be

3 awarded shortly. And then it will be I

4 believe mid-2018 before we're at the end

5 of -- at the Phase 3 awards.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: All right. Thank

7 you.

8 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Assemblyman

9 Carroll.

10 ASSEMBLYMAN CARROLL: Thank you.

11 And thank you, Mr. Rhodes, for coming

12 this afternoon.

13 My first question is about what is

14 NYSERDA and the state doing to incentivize

15 homeowners and business owners and co-ops and

16 condominiums to retrofit their buildings so

17 that they become more energy efficient. As

18 you're probably aware, 75 percent of New York

19 City's greenhouse emissions come from

20 buildings.

21 PRESIDENT RHODES: So energy

22 efficiency is central to NYSERDA strategy,

23 it's central to the State Energy Plan and

24 it's central to the Clean Energy Standard.

419

1 The arithmetic says that if you reduce

2 the amount of energy you consume, it's easier

3 to get to 50 percent of what's left. And

4 energy efficiency is what we call the first

5 resource in New York. It's not especially a

6 new-construction state compared to some of

7 our Western states, so it's a retrofit

8 market. And we have programs that attack, if

9 I can use that word, the retrofit challenge

10 across sectors and across geographies.

11 So big sectors for us are commercial,

12 they have the multifamily sector, they are

13 the residential sector, and they are the

14 industrial sector, and there are other

15 sectors as well -- ag and the like. We have

16 active programs in each of those that provide

17 cost share.

18 We have active programs in each of

19 those that provide technical assistance. And

20 then we have tailored programs that are

21 particularly suited to the attributes of

22 specific sectors. We work closely with local

23 governments that are active on this front;

24 New York City is one example. And we work

420

1 very closely with the utilities that are

2 engaged in parallel work on the same agenda.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN CARROLL: In that same

4 vein, do you have a specific program that

5 incentivizes homeowners or businesses to use

6 solar panels or geothermal to heat and cool

7 their homes?

8 As you know, this will not only create

9 real carbon emission reductions but it will

10 also decentralize our power grid, it will

11 make it more resilient and efficient when

12 mitigating future global warming impacts.

13 PRESIDENT RHODES: So it's kind of a

14 first premise of doing a retrofit that you

15 rightsize the energy need. So to the extent

16 that a renewable solution can offset or take

17 down the energy need, you want to do that

18 first or at least calculate that first.

19 With respect -- you mentioned two

20 technologies, solar and geothermal. Under

21 Governor Cuomo, we've had NY-Sun up and in

22 action for I believe three years, four years

23 now. That is getting solar deployed in many

24 different configurations, but importantly on

421

1 many rooftops. And with the advent of

2 community solar, which is permitted as of

3 last April, or April 18 months ago, we are

4 now making solar accessible to homes and

5 households that would not have had access

6 otherwise -- renters, multi-families, people

7 with inappropriate roofs and the like.

8 Geothermal is a more recent area of

9 activity for us. I believe it was last week

10 that the Governor announced a $15 million

11 program to accelerate the deployment of

12 geothermal for homeowners -- well, for all

13 kinds of customers, but specifically

14 expecting the biggest uptick among

15 residential homes and among commercial

16 customers.

17 ASSEMBLYMAN CARROLL: Switching notes,

18 in New York City -- there are 16

19 power-generating plants in New York City that

20 are commonly referred to as peakers. These

21 power stations have an oversized carbon

22 footprint and also cost customers much more

23 when they are used in those few days in the

24 summer when they turn on. Does NYSERDA or

422

1 the state have a plan to shut down these

2 plants or to find renewable sources so that

3 we stop using them?

4 PRESIDENT RHODES: Well, the premise

5 of REV, which is the premise that leads to

6 NYSERDA's focus on investing in energy

7 efficiency and heat pump geothermal and solar

8 and anaerobic digesters and the like, is to

9 offset the need for expensive alternative

10 investments, which can include both

11 transmission and distribution investments,

12 substations and copper, and can also include

13 generating capacity.

14 As these distributed solutions get

15 deployed -- and they will get deployed

16 increasingly as costs come down, which they

17 are, and as we advance towards our 50 by '30

18 goals and our energy efficiency goals,

19 23 percent -- we will see the market diminish

20 for peakers.

21 ASSEMBLYMAN CARROLL: Also, according

22 to NYISO, 5,000 miles of high-voltage wires

23 are going to need to be replaced by 2030, at

24 a cost of $25 billion. What is NYSERDA's

423

1 plan to make sure that those are as

2 energy-efficient as possible, and has the

3 state contemplated those costs and is it

4 prepared to outlay that much money in capital

5 expenditures?

6 PRESIDENT RHODES: So the state is

7 fully aware of the required infrastructure

8 investments that our aging and constrained

9 grid require. It's a premise of REV that

10 couldn't we find what we call demand-side

11 alternatives that locally provide a cheaper,

12 more cost-effective, more

13 customer-choice-providing solution.

14 So one other premise of REV is that if

15 we're going to spend dollars, can we spend

16 them smartly and cleanly. So that is going

17 on.

18 NYSERDA generally has a very limited

19 role in transmission. We are really about

20 energy solutions. The one area where we do

21 touch it is that we are committed to a

22 10-year program of $150 million in what we

23 call Smart Grid, which is really bringing

24 intelligence to the system, and some of the

424

1 solutions will be smart solutions on the

2 transmission grid. And I could name some

3 technologies that are particularly relevant,

4 but I don't actually know a whole lot more

5 than their names, so -- PMUs and the like.

6 So we are supporting technology

7 innovations that will get there, but other

8 than that, we have a very limited role in the

9 investments.

10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Krueger.

11 SENATOR KRUEGER: Hi. How are you?

12 Thank you for all your testimony.

13 So we're all talking about renewable

14 electricity and the Governor's goal to get to

15 100 percent. Right, renewable electricity,

16 is that correct?

17 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: He's asked

18 for a plan to get to 100 percent.

19 SENATOR KRUEGER: What are we at now?

20 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: I would

21 have to get back to you. I believe it's 27

22 or so percent.

23 SENATOR KRUEGER: Twenty-seven? So

24 it's a -- we have a big jump to make to get

425

1 there.

2 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: We have a

3 line of sight to 50 by '30 and know we can

4 get there.

5 SENATOR KRUEGER: And there were

6 questions about the electric cars before, and

7 the rollout of proposals from last year. And

8 then this year -- I'm not sure it's in your

9 budget -- but a plan for 500 more charging

10 stations plus 60-something additional on the

11 Thruway?

12 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: Sixty-nine

13 on the Thruway, I believe.

14 SENATOR KRUEGER: So where are we in

15 the sort of, I guess, time frame of what you

16 were hoping to get to for electric vehicles?

17 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: We have

18 about 15,000 electric vehicles on the road.

19 We need to and expect to accelerate the

20 penetration of electric vehicles into the

21 fleet. We know the technology and the

22 economics that flow from technology are

23 working in our favor. But we are -- we're

24 researching, you know, the most

426

1 cost-effective approaches we can take to

2 accelerate that, as NYSERDA and also

3 statewide.

4 SENATOR KRUEGER: Jumping back to my

5 first question, so we're at 27 percent, give

6 or take -- your estimate. We want to get to

7 50 percent by 2030. Is that the Governor's

8 commitment? Is that right?

9 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: Yes.

10 SENATOR KRUEGER: What is on the

11 horizon that's going to give us our biggest

12 jumps? Is it the solar plants? Is it the

13 wind offshore? What?

14 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: (Pause.)

15 I'm sorry, I'm doing some math.

16 SENATOR KRUEGER: That's okay.

17 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: A very big

18 contributor will be energy efficiency. As I

19 sort of said, you know, math works for you.

20 If you only have to get to 50 percent of 80

21 instead of 50 percent of 100, that's easier.

22 So that's a big one.

23 We are really heartened by the

24 progress that Governor Cuomo's NY-SUN is

427

1 making and expect to beat the numbers, which

2 is 3 gigawatts under NY-Sun, probably by, I

3 don't know, 2023 or '24, with more flowing

4 than that because the market is now, on its

5 own, self-sustaining and booming. We know

6 this could work because it's been about

7 10 months since we've paid our last incentive

8 on a rooftop on Long Island, and the market

9 hasn't missed a beat, and they're still

10 deploying there even without NY-SUN

11 incentives.

12 That will be an important and critical

13 wedge. We certainly expect that to, if

14 anything, go up from where we're looking now

15 because of community solar, which, as I

16 mentioned, opens a whole new set of

17 customers. For the near term, the first half

18 of our period to 2030, the biggest

19 contributor -- or the second, behind energy

20 efficiency, is going to be large-scale

21 onshore wind. By the time we get to the

22 second half of our time period to 2030 -- so

23 the mid-'20s or so, we expect to see

24 utility-scale solar come into play and we

428

1 expect to see offshore wind come into play on

2 the path to Governor Cuomo's 2.4 -- up to

3 2.4 gigawatts spinning by 2030.

4 Those are the -- so efficiency, solar,

5 large-scale onshore wind, utility-scale

6 solar, and offshore wind.

7 SENATOR KRUEGER: And what's the

8 biggest efficiency model we have for going

9 forward?

10 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: The

11 biggest?

12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Efficiency

13 improvement model.

14 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: Did you say

15 model?

16 SENATOR KRUEGER: Yeah. Or just give

17 me an example of what the biggest win will be

18 from efficiency, since we're depending on

19 that so much.

20 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: We -- we --

21 if you'll pardon the unprofessional language,

22 we expect to make the first and fastest

23 progress in big buildings. So this is

24 commercial office, institutional, and

429

1 especially an acceleration in multifamily

2 buildings, where we believe the market is

3 ready, we believe that solutions are coming

4 into their own and, you know, the economics

5 are just getting better and the awareness on

6 the customer side is increasing that this is

7 smart building management.

8 We have a lot of residential homes in

9 the state, and fully expect to make great

10 progress on those.

11 And, you know, I don't want to leave

12 the industrial sector as kind of a last but

13 not least. The good news/bad news is that

14 they're relatively sophisticated energy

15 managers as it is, especially if they have a

16 high energy component. And they're doing

17 quite well, which is obviously a good thing

18 if you're looking at where you are, but it

19 means that the next steps are harder.

20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

21 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Assemblyman Otis.

22 ASSEMBLYMAN OTIS: Hi, Mr. Rhodes.

23 Nice to see you, President Rhodes.

24 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: Thank you.

430

1 ASSEMBLYMAN OTIS: Thank you for all

2 the interesting, innovative programs you have

3 to get all of this going. I think that

4 NYSERDA has come a long way under your

5 leadership.

6 A question about one specific area,

7 which is the programs that you offer for

8 local governments and school districts, which

9 are good programs. But the problem that I'm

10 hearing is they often would like to do good

11 energy efficiency things -- solar, bring

12 solar on -- and even with the technical

13 expertise, could use more of a financial help

14 to get them to be able to fit into their

15 budgets.

16 Is there -- can you go back with your

17 folks at NYSERDA and think are there other

18 ways to think about those activities and grow

19 those programs with maybe some grant money or

20 other incentives to make the move by those

21 public entities towards more energy

22 efficiency more possible?

23 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: Yes, we

24 can. I think one important element of that

431

1 will be continued increasing collaboration

2 with NYPA, the New York Power Authority,

3 which in many cases has these local

4 governments and school districts as their

5 customers. So that's a natural partner.

6 But we absolutely appreciate the

7 importance of local government both as a

8 consumer who can reduce their energy as well

9 as an agitator for local energy action.

10 ASSEMBLYMAN OTIS: The Power Authority

11 and also the private utility companies offer

12 programs at times for municipalities in these

13 areas, but the affordability factor to make

14 more of this activity happen just isn't

15 there. And I hear that frustration from some

16 of the locals.

17 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: We'll look

18 harder.

19 ASSEMBLYMAN OTIS: Okay. Thank you

20 very much.

21 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: Thank you.

22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

23 Just one more question. You

24 referenced something in my district in your

432

1 testimony, and that was the West Valley

2 Demonstration Project. And certainly I've

3 represented West Valley for many years and

4 understand the situation.

5 But are there any new updates? And I

6 know it's a federal issue driven by the feds,

7 but also we have a very strong participation

8 in the project. So are there any new

9 developments that you could share?

10 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: I -- I

11 could -- I'd rather find time to brief you on

12 the specific issues associated with the

13 demonstration project and the work. I know

14 that everything is going well in terms of the

15 decommissioning work that we were aiming for

16 and the site management and the like. I also

17 know that we're -- I think this is germane --

18 in healthy discussions with the Town of

19 Ashford on kind of helping them arrive at a

20 community solar project for --

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. I was

22 hoping you would bring that up. That's

23 something that I know the town is very

24 interested in. And of course they have

433

1 struggled with having the site within their

2 town for many, many years, and it certainly

3 has stymied any kind of economic development

4 as far as bringing in new business or

5 opportunities.

6 So that would be great if you continue

7 to work with them --

8 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: Well --

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: If you could brief

10 me too at some point --

11 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: We'll brief

12 you, and we'll continue with the Town of

13 Ashford.

14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you so much.

15 We appreciate it.

16 Okay, I think that wraps things up for

17 you today, so thank you for your

18 participation.

19 NYSERDA PRESIDENT RHODES: Thank you.

20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is

21 Director of Public Policy Jeff Williams, from

22 the New York Farm Bureau. Coming from the

23 top. That's what we call a grand entrance.

24 MR. WILLIAMS: Sorry for the wait.

434

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Welcome.

2 MR. WILLIAMS: So thank you for

3 listening to me after this long day. I will

4 make my comments very short, but obviously

5 open up to questions if you have any

6 afterwards.

7 First of all, I want to thank you,

8 Senator Young, obviously Mr. Oaks, and our

9 chairs in both the Assembly and Senate of the

10 Agriculture Committees for all the work you

11 did last year in restoring budget

12 restorations for the Ag and Markets budget,

13 EPF, things like that. It was a tremendous

14 amount of work. We couldn't be happier with

15 the $300 million EPF.

16 Likewise, we're extremely happy for

17 the $300 million EPF this year, but also for

18 $5 million for fair infrastructure, which was

19 truly a godsend for local fairs across the

20 state. Fairs are our first line of defense,

21 our first -- you know, on the ground,

22 boots-on-the-ground promotion of the

23 agricultural industry, and $5 million to

24 rehab that kind of an effort is tremendous.

435

1 So now we're looking forward,

2 obviously, to the new budget, the Governor's

3 Executive Budget. And we're terming it as a

4 good start, but obviously more work needs to

5 be done. You heard the questions for

6 Commissioner Ball earlier today. But we need

7 to layer the Governor's budget with the fact

8 that over the past couple of years, we've had

9 a tremendous decrease in our dairy industry

10 in prices. We're headed into a third year of

11 a tremendous dairy decline in prices. Farm

12 Credit East, our major lender in the

13 Northeast, found that in years '15 and '16,

14 the industry lost a billion dollars just from

15 the dairy prices. The global economy is not

16 what it was. Consumption is way down.

17 So for the past two years, dairy

18 farmers have been producing milk way above,

19 in cost, what they get back for their

20 product. Prices are below cost of

21 production. We're entering into a third year

22 of that trough. So things aren't looking up

23 as well. So we're tremendously concerned

24 about that.

436

1 Then you add the drought last summer

2 to that mix, and things are bleak in the farm

3 industry across the state.

4 In the Governor's budget we're very

5 happy that he has continued his trend of

6 fully funding mainline public health and

7 agricultural health programs, typically run

8 by Cornell. Whether it's our poultry

9 industry, with avian disease protection,

10 dairy, with Johne's disease, the diagnostic

11 lab -- he doesn't mess around with that, and

12 we're thankful for not politicizing those

13 funding streams.

14 As far as research and promotion of

15 our industry, we don't rely on ESDC for those

16 promotional funds. Ag and Markets is our

17 ESDC when it comes to research and promotion.

18 So when our apple industry, maple industry,

19 berry industry, and others get money in the

20 budget -- and all of them do not have money

21 in the budget right now -- that money goes

22 directly to their promotion of their

23 industry, not just in the state but across

24 the world, which is great to see.

437

1 Likewise, research. We have a

2 tremendous amount of research that needs to

3 be done to keep farms operating on a global

4 level with competition. And so the funding

5 for research has not been included in the

6 Governor's budget, and we're relying,

7 hopefully, upon the Legislature to restore

8 funding for those things.

9 Commissioner Ball did talk about the

10 FFA program and the needs there in the

11 Governor's budget. We're happy the Governor

12 dedicated $350,000 for grants to new FFA

13 programs, but he didn't add any other money

14 to support core programming for the FFA

15 program. So $300,000 will be needed actually

16 just to keep the administrative efforts going

17 to support current and ongoing efforts in

18 expansion for the FFA, especially when those

19 FFA kids at the high school level, secondary

20 level, are our bridge to the next generation

21 of farms. They're the people who go to

22 Cornell, Morrisville, Cobleskill, Alfred

23 State, and then carry on in transition to the

24 next generation of farmers.

438

1 As far as the EPF goes, we're very

2 happy with what the Governor has proposed so

3 far. It's a toolbox of environmental

4 programs that help water quality, protect

5 land, combat invasive species, and work on

6 the ground with our soil and water

7 conservation districts.

8 New last year in the EPF, which we're

9 happy is continued, is $1 million for the IPM

10 program, is which basically is a full

11 complement of strategies to help farmers

12 combat pests on their farms without using

13 pesticides right off the bat. Going out and

14 scouting and looking to see what the problems

15 are and then using the right product in the

16 end helps reduce pesticide use in the state.

17 Likewise, pollinator protection plans,

18 funding for that. Farmers rely on

19 pollinators, obviously, for their crops. We

20 need healthy bees and a healthy environment.

21 And new this year, a Clean Sweep

22 Program, which we've relied on for decades,

23 that came from a settlement funding at DEC to

24 help farmers get rid of used or unwanted or

439

1 unregistered pesticides. That has been put

2 into the EPF, and we're thankful for that.

3 And two more things we're watching

4 very closely, the $2 billion Clean Water

5 Infrastructure Act. We've heard from the

6 Governor's office that a substantial fund of

7 money from that will be going to help large

8 dairy farms meet the very strong and strict

9 regulatory guidelines to protect water

10 quality, otherwise known as CAFO. So we are

11 hoping at the end of March, in the final

12 budget, that that funding will be included.

13 Because to put in, let's say, a manure lagoon

14 to control and store your manure for four to

15 six months, that costs $300,000 to $500,000.

16 Again with the aforementioned dairy prices,

17 farmers cannot pay that kind of cost. This

18 is a cost-sharing program for them, so we're

19 watching that very intently and are very

20 supportive.

21 And I guess I would be remiss if I

22 didn't mention two things outside of this

23 table, the purview of this table, which are

24 much more revenue-oriented. We're very

440

1 supportive of a refundable investment tax

2 credit, again to combat the drought, dairy

3 prices, to allow farmers to reinvest

4 much-needed funding into their farms and then

5 receive some money on the back end in their

6 taxes as an incentive to do so.

7 The second one is we're grateful for

8 the minimum wage tax credit for farms to help

9 offset the cost of minimum wage increases,

10 and there's a schedule of five years per

11 employee, how much a farmer can deduct on

12 their taxes. We're strongly advocating

13 doubling that regime. And so it makes it

14 more meaningful for a farmer to have

15 employees, especially at a time when they are

16 not making money at all.

17 But again, I thank you very much for

18 the time today. I thank you for all your

19 work on the budget and concern for the

20 agricultural industry.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Director

22 Williams.

23 I'm very concerned about the plight of

24 the dairy farmers. They are so crucial to

441

1 our upstate economy. And as you know, I was

2 chair of the Ag Committee in 2006-2007 when

3 we had a severe crisis. And milk prices go

4 up and milk prices go down, but it seems like

5 when they go down, they go way down and they

6 stay there.

7 We used to tie it to the Chicago

8 Mercantile Exchange and the situations that

9 happen in regards to that. But you're

10 talking now about a global economic situation

11 where it's market conditions, and there seems

12 to be a glut of milk worldwide. Why is that?

13 Are there more producers in different

14 countries? Are we not marketing our milk

15 well enough from the USA? Are there trade

16 conditions that are factors? What's going

17 on?

18 MR. WILLIAMS: The answer is yes, all

19 of the above. There is too much milk on the

20 market on a global basis.

21 Typically -- and we hate to hope for

22 these things -- there's a drought in

23 Australia, a weather disaster someplace else

24 in the world that then reduces the production

442

1 of milk. We don't hope for that, but that's

2 typically what helps drive increases in farm

3 prices.

4 So we have a lot of milk which we just

5 can't get off our hands and, frankly, not

6 enough processing in New York State to

7 process. And then you layer on other unique

8 situations, like a dry protein plant, milk

9 protein plant in Central New York that is a

10 $100 million plant, and their whole reason

11 for being, their business plan, is to ship to

12 Canada. And Canadians have become entirely

13 provincial when it comes to their dairy

14 production, and they don't like other people

15 playing in their backyard, and they're

16 basically shutting down the border.

17 And so that plant uses a lot of milk,

18 it's a major employer in Western New York,

19 and it's -- they're in jeopardy of closing

20 the doors.

21 So it's a lot of different things.

22 But I agree with you, the dairy troughs used

23 to be quicker. We used to get out of them in

24 a year. And now we're going into Year 3, and

443

1 it's tough, tough, tough. Especially when

2 you layer on increased labor costs and other

3 increases.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So you talked about

5 a refundable tax credit for farmers and you

6 spoke of minimum wage tax relief to help them

7 be able to afford the minimum wage hike.

8 What else can we do? Obviously some of the

9 worldwide factors are under the purview of

10 the federal government. But what can we do

11 as a state to try to help the dairy farmers

12 get out of where they're at right now?

13 MR. WILLIAMS: Yeah, that's the

14 $800 million question.

15 Certainly tax credits help prime the

16 pump. I certainly think that increased

17 capacity for processing, to get more milk

18 from the farms processed and then out the

19 door, especially in the Southern Tier. I

20 know there's some really aging plants in

21 Campbell, Savona, and other areas of that

22 region of the state that we need to

23 reinvigorate. I know Ag and Markets is

24 investing in upstate New York. But in the

444

1 end, it's a big shakeout. And hopefully we

2 can all ride it out.

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. I

4 assume the Farm Bureau is lobbying Washington

5 as far as some of these issues too?

6 MR. WILLIAMS: Yeah.

7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And hopefully with

8 the new administration you're able to find a

9 sympathetic ear to be able to maybe change

10 some of the trade policies.

11 MR. WILLIAMS: Yeah. I mean, there's

12 some very close friends of New York Farm

13 Bureau and Farm Bureau itself that are, you

14 know, very prominently placed in the Trump

15 administration. So we're hopeful that

16 they'll carry that message, especially with

17 the whole Canadian issue.

18 Obviously we're very concerned for the

19 presidential administration's viewpoints on

20 immigration. We had a conversation earlier

21 about access to foreign labor. We always

22 have been a major proponent of immigration

23 reform, and we continue to carry that message

24 this year.

445

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. Thank you.

2 MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Just a quick

4 question, Jeff.

5 I know you talked about the

6 billion-dollar reduction basically in dairy

7 income. I've seen some headlines, you know,

8 that said agriculture was down a billion

9 dollars. Is that accurate, in looking at the

10 rest of agriculture outside of dairy, it was

11 about flat for '16, or not?

12 MR. WILLIAMS: That's a good question.

13 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: I know dairy is

14 like half of the overall income for --

15 MR. WILLIAMS: Right. Yeah, exactly.

16 That number incorporates all aspects of

17 agriculture. Obviously, dairy being

18 60 percent of our industry, it contributes a

19 lot to that. And that's just for '15-'16.

20 We haven't seen the 2016 numbers yet. We

21 expect it to be down even further when those

22 numbers come out. A lot of it is dairy,

23 because we've lost our export market.

24 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Well, I do hope

446

1 that we're able to, you know, as a part of

2 the budget, restore a number of things, work

3 with you on that, and hopefully find some

4 ways -- Senator Young, you know, asked for

5 some direction -- but how we can help work

6 together to strengthen agriculture in

7 New York.

8 MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you very much.

9 It's very complicated when it comes to dairy

10 because there's so many different federal --

11 it's a federally regulated system, so to ask

12 the state to get involved in that, it's a

13 tough ask. And so we rely on the state to

14 deal more on the cost side, to help mitigate

15 those -- those troughs in pricing.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.

17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

18 MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you very much.

19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is

20 Darren Suarez, director of government affairs

21 for the Business Council of the State of New

22 York.

23 Welcome, Darren.

24 MR. SUAREZ: So thank you very much

447

1 for having me here this afternoon, or early

2 evening. And I'd like to share with you some

3 of the thoughts regarding the 2017-2018

4 environmental and energy Executive Budget.

5 The Business Council recently issued

6 our "Back to Business" advocacy agenda for

7 2017, with an emphasis on legislation with

8 broad positive impacts on the state's

9 economic climate. Our comments today are

10 strongly influenced by the advocacy agenda as

11 it relates to energy and environmental

12 issues, and today my testimony will focus

13 purely on water quality issues, making it

14 much shorter.

15 New York State, like other states,

16 faces real challenges to our water

17 infrastructure. Our water treatment and

18 delivery systems provide public health

19 protection and are valuable components to

20 both manufacturing processing and food

21 preparation, and also have resulted in a

22 higher quality of life for residents of the

23 state.

24 The New York Legislature and the

448

1 Governor deserve credit for first

2 acknowledging that we have significant water

3 infrastructure deficiencies and for

4 committing resources to address those

5 deficiencies.

6 This year, as part of the Clean Water

7 Infrastructure Act of 2017, the Executive

8 Budget proposes a $2 billion, multiyear

9 commitment to support capital investments in

10 water and sewer infrastructure. Legislation

11 was also introduced in the Senate and

12 Assembly that would authorize the creation of

13 a $5 billion Clean Water Bond Act. The

14 Business Council applauds the Executive and

15 the Legislature for their continued

16 commitment to drinking water and wastewater

17 infrastructure improvements, and we strongly

18 support efforts to provide additional funding

19 for critical investment in drinking water

20 infrastructure, wastewater infrastructure,

21 and drinking water protection.

22 The Executive Budget's Part II,

23 labeled the Clean Water Infrastructure Act,

24 includes a number of statutory programs and

449

1 amendments to current remedial programs. The

2 Business Council recommends this part be

3 amended specifically to address matters

4 related to drinking water.

5 Section 4 includes a new Title 12 to

6 Article 27 of the Environmental Conservation

7 Law that would grant the DEC the power to

8 compel the cleanup and abatement of solid

9 waste sites and drinking water contamination

10 without due process protections or public

11 input. New York already has a number of

12 remedial programs, including the state

13 Superfund Program, the Oil Spill Program, to

14 mandate the remediation of different types of

15 pollutants. Those programs have not only

16 resulted in the cleanup of thousands of

17 sites, but also the abandonment of thousands

18 of properties throughout the state because of

19 the fear of liability. The newly proposed

20 Title 12 will create significant uncertainty,

21 as it would allow the DEC to enter any

22 property to investigate and remediate any

23 discarded material. The owner or operator of

24 the site then is required to implement all

450

1 remedial measures deemed necessary by the

2 DEC. If the owner fails to implement the

3 measures, the DEC may implement the

4 remediation and place a lien on the owner or

5 operator's real property.

6 The DEC could do all this without

7 commencing a hearing or issuing an order.

8 There is no limit to the size or the level of

9 the remediation that the DEC could conduct,

10 and the owner or operator would be afforded

11 no statutory defenses to liability like the

12 secured creditor or third-party polluter

13 exemptions. Furthermore, the public is

14 provided no opportunity to provide input on

15 the remedial design.

16 In addition, Title 12 would allow the

17 Commissioner of Health to require that all

18 reasonable measures be taken to reduce

19 exposure to a contaminant. The provision

20 does not require the contaminant exceed a

21 health-based standard, merely the presence of

22 contaminant is enough to require action.

23 Furthermore, a contaminant can include any

24 physical, chemical, microbiological or

451

1 radiological substance that the Commissioner

2 of Heath declares may have the potential to

3 be a health hazard.

4 The required remedial measures may

5 include the installation of a drinking water

6 treatment system and source removal.

7 Municipal drinking water treatment systems

8 can cost anywhere between $1 million and

9 $100 million. The DEC is required by

10 Title 12 to recover the full amount of the

11 cost of the remedial system and any

12 associated remediation from any owner,

13 operator, or party that contributed to the

14 contamination.

15 Past experience has demonstrated that

16 in many cases, particularly where the

17 contamination may involve multiple sources or

18 substances and multiple potentially

19 responsible parties, liability for the

20 proposed disposal may not be traceable to a

21 particular source. Consequently, remedial

22 enforcement targets for liability the party

23 who may be most readily identifiable --

24 typically, the current owner or operator --

452

1 or who may have the deepest pockets. The net

2 effect is that a party with only a slight

3 relationship to the site, or to the hazardous

4 substance disposed there, may be held

5 responsible for a disproportionate share or

6 even all of the response costs of the

7 cleanup.

8 An essential tenet of the American

9 justice system is that a person should not be

10 held responsible and compelled to pay for

11 injuries which that person did not cause.

12 Because the proposed liability framework in

13 Title 12 is grounded not on causation, but on

14 the status of the party as an owner or

15 operator, many innocent landowners could face

16 strict liability even though they may have

17 done nothing to contribute to the contaminant

18 of concern.

19 Moreover, the innocent landowner

20 cannot conduct meaningful due diligence prior

21 to purchasing the property, given the broad

22 latitude that Title 12 provides for the DEC

23 and DOH to determine what is a contaminant

24 and to establish remedial action levels based

453

1 on a declaration that a contaminant may be

2 harmful to human health.

3 The failings of Title 12 are too many

4 to amend, as it would require at minimum the

5 establishment of standards, due process, and

6 statutory protections of the innocent. The

7 Business Council instead recommends current

8 laws and programs be amended to increase

9 protections for drinking water in the state.

10 Title 4 of Article 56 of the ECL, the

11 landfill closure program, could be expanded

12 and fully funded. In 2010, the State of

13 New Hampshire found 67 sites contained

14 1,4-dioxane. Thirty of these sites were

15 solid waste landfills.

16 Title 13 could be amended to provide

17 DEC with a similar authorization that EPA

18 has, pursuant to CERCLA, that allows EPA to

19 respond to the release or substantial threat

20 of release of any pollutant or contaminant

21 that may present an imminent and substantial

22 danger to the public health or welfare.

23 And we'd also recommend developing a

24 new program that contains a rapidly awardable

454

1 allocation for planning and implementation

2 grants for emergency drinking water issues,

3 whether caused by a chemical or biological

4 condition.

5 Section 2 of the proposals would

6 establish a new land acquisition program

7 dedicated to the protection of state water

8 resources. The newly proposed land

9 acquisition program does not contain the

10 detail, review and planning required under

11 current law for open space projects, and does

12 not require that projects be directly related

13 to drinking water protection or state land

14 acquisition projects that are consistent with

15 a plan developed by the public water system.

16 This program should be amended to

17 ensure that the interests of local

18 governments and local public water systems

19 are being considered and the land

20 acquisitions would protect drinking water.

21 The Business Council strongly supports

22 efforts to provide additional funding for

23 critical investment in drinking water

24 infrastructure, wastewater infrastructure,

455

1 and drinking water protection. We support

2 the development of a lead service line

3 replacement program contained in the

4 proposal, but we have concerns with many of

5 the other provisions contained in Part II.

6 The Business Council believes that

7 decisions regarding drinking water,

8 wastewater treatment, remediation, and

9 enforcement should be guided by scientific

10 understanding. Currently, significant data

11 gaps exist regarding the human health effects

12 of detectable levels of contaminants in

13 drinking water, and scientists have

14 difficulty predicting the effects of drinking

15 small amounts of contaminants for many years.

16 Furthermore, standards do not take

17 into account the presence of multiple

18 chemicals, which may increase or decrease the

19 toxicity of a particular contaminant. More

20 research should be conducted on contaminants

21 and their health effects, and this research

22 should be conducted at a national level and

23 should be done quickly, as our current rate

24 of review of these contaminants needs to

456

1 occur in a more timely manner.

2 Thank you very much for your

3 consideration in this matter.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,

5 Director. And it's great to have you here.

6 We appreciate your testimony.

7 I just had a couple of questions. You

8 talked about the hidden taxes regarding

9 energy, and I fully support you in your

10 comments. The 18A tax surcharge, as you

11 know, is almost close to being phased out,

12 and it was the Senate majority that pushed to

13 do that.

14 But what are your thoughts about, you

15 know, additional taxes? Could you expound on

16 that a little bit? Because you talk about

17 everyday New Yorkers and families and

18 seniors, and these hidden taxes seem to hit

19 them hard, in addition to the businesses

20 across the state. So could you expound on

21 that a little bit?

22 MR. SUAREZ: Sure. First off, thank

23 you, Senator, for all your work basically on

24 helping to address 18A, and all of the

457

1 members here. As you're aware, 18A --

2 basically, the temporary assessment, which at

3 one point in time was close to half a billion

4 dollars, is being completely phased out on

5 March 31st this year. So that's great news.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Very positive.

7 MR. SUAREZ: Unfortunately, there are

8 certainly other taxes and hidden fees that go

9 on our energy bill. The largest one actually

10 is real property tax. And so the Legislature

11 again has addressed that by putting a cap on

12 the real property tax. That actually will

13 help to actually lower our energy prices.

14 What we do notice is that when we

15 produce -- basically are manufacturing a

16 product, we're at a competitive disadvantage

17 when our energy costs are higher than

18 competitive states, or they're projected to

19 be. So sometimes we actually may be

20 receiving a lower energy cost right now, but

21 we could have projections that see

22 significant increases.

23 And we've seen a lot of the social

24 programs that are being put on the energy

458

1 bill right now, whether it's the Clean Energy

2 Fund or the Clean Energy Standard or

3 otherwise, that may have positive effects but

4 they will increase the cost of energy

5 immediately.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. It

7 certainly seems like a step backward when we

8 have the 18A almost phased out, by the end of

9 March, and then there are new taxes added to

10 utilities. It doesn't seem like the right

11 direction to take.

12 You talked about your concerns with

13 Section 4 of the new Title 12 to Article 27

14 of the Environmental Conservation Law. And

15 we are concerned about blanket authority

16 without due process of law. And can you

17 think of any other instance where this

18 situation is utilized in New York State where

19 somebody doesn't have any recourse in such a

20 situation?

21 MR. SUAREZ: In most cases they do

22 have an opportunity at least to have an

23 Article 78 proceeding. But under larger

24 remediations under the Superfund program,

459

1 there's plenty of opportunity for all parties

2 to have a say. So there really isn't

3 anything equal to this.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So this is

5 unprecedented.

6 MR. SUAREZ: It truly is

7 unprecedented.

8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Krueger.

11 SENATOR KRUEGER: So you just answered

12 Senator Young that you object to the

13 assessment on utility bills. But do you

14 support or oppose the new assessment on

15 utility bills for the continuation of the

16 nuclear energy plants for 12 years?

17 MR. SUAREZ: So it's a great question.

18 And we certainly have a variety of different

19 opinions in our membership on that particular

20 piece. I think in the Clean Energy Standard

21 and the assessment associated with nuclear

22 assessments, there was a feeling that maybe

23 that cost was pretty large, but there was

24 clearly a direct return in terms of the

460

1 reduction of the wholesale cost for energy

2 users. So there was much more acceptance of

3 that cost because we weren't going to be able

4 to keep these nuclear assets in place

5 otherwise.

6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

8 Anyone?

9 Okay, well, thank you so much.

10 MR. SUAREZ: Thank you.

11 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.

12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Great to see you.

13 The next speaker is David Haight,

14 New York State director of the American

15 Farmland Trust.

16 Welcome, Director.

17 MR. HAIGHT: Thank you.

18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: You've been here a

19 while.

20 MR. HAIGHT: Good evening, Chairman

21 Farrell, Chairman Young. I appreciate this

22 opportunity to speak with you. I commend

23 your endurance.

24 I have four points that I want to make

461

1 about the Governor's Executive Budget

2 proposal.

3 First, thank you for the Senate and

4 the Assembly's leadership last year in

5 helping to establish the record funding for

6 the Environmental Protection Fund. That

7 $300 million threshold was a really important

8 milestone, and we strongly encourage you to

9 sustain that level of commitment to the

10 environment in this year's budget.

11 Second, our state's Farmland

12 Protection Program celebrated its 20th

13 anniversary last year. It has become very

14 popular with farmers because it provides them

15 with a financially competitive alternative to

16 having to sell their farm for real estate

17 development. And last year there was nearly

18 $50 million in applications submitted to the

19 state for that funding.

20 The Governor has proposed that that

21 funding be $20 million out of EPF this year.

22 We believe that is a good start, but we would

23 encourage the Senate and the Assembly to

24 increase that to at least $22 million in this

462

1 year's State Budget so that we can stay on

2 track to help protect another 100,000 acres

3 of farmland by 2026.

4 The other thing I want to mention

5 about the Farmland Protection Program is we

6 deeply appreciate the Legislature's attention

7 to making sure that dollars aren't just

8 appropriated but that they're spent. And we

9 very much appreciate that the Legislature has

10 been working with the Governor and with

11 Commissioner Ball and the Department of

12 Agriculture and Markets that farms that are

13 awarded these funds actually get those

14 dollars and their farms are permanently

15 protected in less than two years. And we're

16 making a lot of progress, but we need to

17 remain diligent in that.

18 The third area I want to touch on is

19 one that's already brought up in others'

20 testimony, and that's the need to help bring

21 a new generation into agriculture. New York

22 is a state with 10,000 farmers over the age

23 of 65. These senior farmers -- some might

24 call them master farmers, or alpha farmers --

463

1 but these farmers that are over 65 manage

2 nearly 2 million acres of land, and

3 90 percent of them do not have a young farmer

4 working with them in the management or

5 ownership of their farm. So we know that

6 these farms are going to change hands in the

7 coming years, and too often in the past these

8 farms have been purchased by real estate

9 developers.

10 At the same time, we know one of the

11 biggest barriers to new farmers, whether they

12 grew up on a farm or didn't, is finding land

13 at an affordable price and under conditions

14 that enable you to succeed. We greatly

15 appreciate that Governor Cuomo and

16 Commissioner Ball have proposed creation of a

17 Beginning Farmer Program and suggested that

18 there would be support for local efforts to

19 connect farmers with landowners that have

20 land. But we did not see any new staff at

21 the Department of Agriculture and Markets,

22 and we do not see any new dollars to act on

23 this important need. And that is a big

24 concern for us.

464

1 We have worked for the last three

2 years with 15 different organizations in the

3 Hudson Valley, Cornell Cooperative Extension,

4 local land trusts, GrowNYC, who runs the

5 green markets in New York City; through our

6 shared efforts, we've helped 105 farmers find

7 land. But we recognize that helping to

8 connect farmers with land is not as simple as

9 creating like match.com for farmers. It

10 really takes people that can sit down with a

11 farmer and work through the difficult issues

12 that are in their personal situation.

13 And so that's why we have suggested

14 one avenue to put the resources into next

15 year's budget is to allocate $700,000 from

16 the Farmland Protection Program for a

17 Farmland for a New Generation Program, to

18 foster a partnership between the Department

19 of Agriculture and Markets, the American

20 Farmland Trust, Cornell Cooperative

21 Extension, land trusts, to really address

22 this issue head-on. And we look forward to

23 working with the Legislature and with

24 Commissioner Ball and Governor Cuomo to make

465

1 sure there are real resources put forward in

2 next year's budget to address this critical

3 need.

4 The last area I want to touch on is

5 the opportunity to help bring more food

6 that's grown in New York into institutions

7 that use public dollars to feed New Yorkers.

8 Specifically, I want to touch on the

9 Farm-to-School. Nearly 1.7 million children

10 get a lunch in a cafeteria every school day

11 in New York. Nearly $370 million is spent

12 annually by schools in buying food. If we

13 could help our institutions that get public

14 dollars -- specifically, state dollars -- to

15 buy food, if we could help them keep at least

16 25 percent of those dollars here in New York,

17 that's going to create more economic

18 opportunities for our farmers and it's going

19 to help improve the health of many of our

20 most needy New Yorkers.

21 So the Governor has proposed $750,000

22 in funding for a Farm-to-School grants

23 program. We think that is a wise move, and

24 we would encourage you to support that.

466

1 Additionally, last year the

2 Legislature added in funding for a

3 procurement incentive for schools in the

4 North Country to buy healthy, minimally

5 processed fresh fruits, vegetables, other

6 locally grown products. We would encourage

7 you to look closely at that model in the

8 North Country and look for opportunities to

9 help to expand that pilot program in next

10 year's budget.

11 So I thank you so much for your

12 attention and look forward to any of your

13 questions.

14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

15 Senator Krueger.

16 SENATOR KRUEGER: Hi. Just one quick

17 question on the new farmers proposal.

18 MR. HAIGHT: Sure. Yes.

19 SENATOR KRUEGER: So I remember

20 probably a decade ago that Ag and Markets was

21 working to support immigrants to New York

22 State who came from countries where they were

23 farmers to become farmers in New York State.

24 And I'm wondering whether, one, that program

467

1 ever continued or, two, that's a model you

2 would look into in moving forward. Because

3 as I remember, it was small but very

4 successful.

5 MR. HAIGHT: So I can't talk about the

6 department's program per se, because I'm not

7 familiar with the one you're referring to.

8 But I can say the next generation of

9 New York's farmers are going to be very

10 diverse. Some of them grew up on a farm and

11 are in FFA and 4-H and go to Cornell or

12 another ag college, but others didn't grow up

13 on a farm. Some emigrated to this country,

14 some have moved to New York from other

15 states. And so our proposal would be one

16 that hopefully would be nimble enough to

17 address those diverse needs.

18 So, for example, in our partnership in

19 the Hudson Valley, GrowNYC, who runs the

20 green markets in New York City, has a

21 fantastic program for beginning farmers that

22 are immigrants and offers training and

23 support. And with their help, we, for

24 example, have hosted a number of workshops

468

1 about finding land and farm leasing and have

2 offered them both in English and in Spanish.

3 And so we're trying to address the needs of

4 those diverse communities.

5 So our proposal would offer some

6 central resources with, then, potentially

7 grant funding to an organization, potentially

8 like GrowNYC, for their local efforts to work

9 with those diverse communities of the next

10 generation of New York's farmers.

11 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. And

13 thank you for all the good work you do.

14 MR. HAIGHT: Thanks, Senator.

15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is

17 Director of Policy Jessica Ottney Mahar,

18 The Nature Conservancy.

19 I feel like it's when we were in

20 school and everybody sat in the back row.

21 Maybe people want to come down a little bit

22 closer. We're not as mean as we look, okay?

23 MS. OTTNEY MAHAR: The on-deck circle.

24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

469

1 MS. OTTNEY MAHAR: Thank you very much

2 for waiting this long. Your endurance is

3 admirable. I am Jessica Ottney Mahar, the

4 policy director for The Nature Conservancy in

5 New York. And on behalf of our 85,000

6 supporters, we really appreciate the

7 opportunity to speak with you today.

8 I wanted to thank you for the work you

9 did in last year's budget. As a few

10 speakers have noted, we reached a historic

11 funding level for the Environmental

12 Protection Fund last year, $300 million. And

13 you also led the way in creating the Water

14 Infrastructure Grant Program, which was

15 doubled last year and really set us on the

16 course to the proposal in the Executive

17 Budget this year for $2 billion for water

18 infrastructure funding.

19 I wanted to also, in addition, before

20 I really get started, to take a moment and

21 thank the staff behind you, who this is the

22 beginning of some of their long days. But

23 they do a lot of work, and we really

24 appreciate working with all of them, in

470

1 addition to all of you.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

3 MS. OTTNEY MAHAR: Right now there's a

4 lot of change going on at the federal level,

5 and we think this is a really amazing

6 opportunity this year to continue New York's

7 national leadership in addressing a lot of

8 environmental issues. And we're lucky here

9 in New York State that we have leaders like

10 you. These issues are truly nonpartisan, and

11 they're important in every corner of our

12 state. And we think that this is a moment

13 where we can continue to provide that

14 national leadership.

15 This year, once again, the Governor is

16 continuing or proposing to continue the

17 $300 million EPF, and I'm here to

18 respectfully ask that you support that. This

19 is funding that touches down in every county

20 of New York State. He's also proposing some

21 major capital investments for New York State

22 Parks and DEC through the continuation of the

23 Parks 2020 program, which is a 10-year

24 billion dollar investment in our world-class

471

1 state parks infrastructure and state parks

2 system, and the Adventure NY program, which

3 is aimed at upgrading DEC's outdoor

4 recreational facilities.

5 He's also proposing funding for a new

6 multi-use trail that will connect Western

7 New York to the Adirondacks to New York City,

8 the Empire State Trail, and we support that.

9 And on the EPF, there are two areas

10 that I did want to mention a bit of concern

11 over. One is the inclusion of a $2 million

12 program under the Parks account called

13 Navigation Law. Our understanding of this

14 proposal is to pay for reimbursement to

15 localities for enforcement of different laws

16 and standards. And this is generally

17 something that was paid for with General Fund

18 revenue, and we consider this an offload into

19 the EPF, which is a capital fund. So we

20 don't support that proposal.

21 In addition, the land conservation

22 funding of the Environmental Protection Fund

23 has been reduced by $7 million to

24 $33 million. This was once a program that

472

1 had $60 million of funding annually. And as

2 we're working to become a more resilient

3 state to deal with storm protection and flood

4 resilience, this is an important program for

5 New York State. So we would urge you to find

6 ways to maintain funding for that program in

7 this year's budget.

8 And on water quality, again, there's

9 been some amazing proposals in the Executive

10 Budget, and then you all in the Legislature

11 went even further. So we have a $2 billion

12 proposal in the Executive Budget for water

13 quality infrastructure and source water

14 protection. And then the Legislature, there

15 are a few proposals now, went ahead and

16 proposed a $5 billion Water Quality Bond Act.

17 So we now have a total of $7 billion of water

18 quality funding on the table.

19 And if you could have told me a few

20 years ago when we were struggling to avoid

21 deep cuts and sweeps to the EPF that we would

22 be sitting here talking about a year when we

23 would have a $300 million EPF, huge capital

24 investments in our agencies, and a potential

473

1 multi-billion-dollar Water Quality Bond Act,

2 I wouldn't have believed you. So this is

3 really exciting.

4 The Nature Conservancy is particularly

5 enthusiastic about the inclusion of source

6 water protection in all of these water

7 infrastructure proposals. Our green

8 infrastructure is one way that our

9 communities at a low cost can protect water

10 quality. And cited in my testimony is a

11 report that The Nature Conservancy reported;

12 It's a global study of 4,000 cities showing,

13 quantifying how they've used source water

14 protection to improve water quality and

15 protect drinking water for the citizens in

16 4,000 cities around the world.

17 Here in New York, we can continue to

18 do that. So investing a portion of this

19 funding in source water protection is a great

20 idea.

21 On the infrastructure side, we're also

22 very supportive of updating our wastewater

23 and drinking water infrastructure, including

24 septic systems. Long Island and other areas

474

1 are having severe problems because of

2 outdated septic systems and cesspools, and

3 it's creating significant water quality

4 concerns. So we would urge you to make sure

5 that that's part of the mix as well.

6 And, as you're thinking about how to

7 proceed with all of this in the budget, we

8 would urge you to think about how localities

9 are going to match this. So to bring this

10 funding and pull it down to the ground,

11 they're going to need a local match. And

12 right now with the property tax cap, it's

13 very difficult for localities to generate the

14 revenue they need to match to bring that

15 funding into their community.

16 One strategy could potentially be

17 authorizing a statewide community

18 preservation fund. The East End of

19 Long Island in Suffolk County, the five

20 East End towns this election cycle just

21 reauthorized their community preservation

22 fund. Those five towns decided to use

23 20 percent of their funds for clean water,

24 for the first time ever. They reauthorized

475

1 it for 20 years. This will raise about a

2 billion dollars for conservation in those

3 five towns alone, and about $600 million of

4 that can go to water quality. So they'll be

5 in a good position to leverage this funding

6 and any federal water infrastructure funding

7 that might be realized with a potential

8 infrastructure package in D.C.

9 And then finally there's an Article

10 VII bill that we support. We supported a

11 different version of this last year. It's I

12 think done better this year, and more simply,

13 to amend the Local Waterfront Revitalization

14 Program of EPF so that the cost share is

15 75 percent state. We support that program,

16 or that proposal. We think that that will

17 allow the program to deploy the funds more

18 efficiently in communities throughout the

19 state, and we would urge you to support that

20 as part of the budget.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

22 Any questions?

23 Thank you very much for your

24 testimony.

476

1 MS. OTTNEY MAHAR: Thanks.

2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Next is Executive

4 Director Erin Crotty, from Audubon New York.

5 Thank you for being here.

6 MS. EISENSTEIN: I'm actually Sasha

7 Eisenstein, the government relations manager

8 for Audubon New York. I'm Erin's fill-in,

9 snow day fill-in today.

10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

11 MS. EISENSTEIN: So first let me thank

12 you for the opportunity to speak today.

13 We've submitted detailed written testimony

14 from our executive director, Erin Crotty, for

15 your consideration, and I'll just provide a

16 brief overview.

17 Audubon New York is a state program of

18 the National Audubon Society, and our mission

19 is to protect birds and the places they need

20 to survive and thrive. We achieve our

21 mission by connecting our vast and powerful

22 network of members and advocates along the

23 migratory flyways of the Americas through

24 science, advocacy, education, and

477

1 on-the-ground conservation programming.

2 Before I go into the budget proposal,

3 I would like to extend our thanks to you and

4 your colleagues for the significant

5 environmental achievements from last year.

6 Through your leadership and partnership with

7 the Governor, New York achieved unprecedented

8 levels of funding for our state's

9 environment, providing critical resources to

10 protect our communities, people, and birds.

11 This year the Governor's Executive

12 Budget proposal once again includes an

13 historic investment that safeguards our

14 environment. Of particular importance to

15 Audubon is the rededication of at least

16 $300 million to the Environmental Protection

17 Fund.

18 In addition, we encourage you to

19 include in the enacted budget programs to

20 further conservation on privately held lands.

21 The majority of wildlife habitat in New York

22 is privately owned.

23 A high priority of ours, which was

24 included in the Governor's State of the

478

1 State, is the Empire Forest for the Future

2 Initiative. This is a program for private

3 forest landowners to reduce the conversion of

4 forests to non-forest uses and encourage

5 sustainable forest management practices on

6 privately held lands, which in fact account

7 for 75 percent of forested lands in New York.

8 This proposal includes modifications to

9 forest tax law, grants to help landowners

10 implement best forest management practices,

11 and grants to support local governments and

12 nonprofits to acquire and manage community

13 forests.

14 Audubon New York is part of a diverse

15 coalition of 24 organizations representing

16 environmental, conservation, business, and

17 forestry interests that requested the

18 Governor include funding for the Empire

19 Forest for the Future Initiative in his

20 upcoming amendments to the Executive Budget

21 proposal. Our organizations, which are

22 national, regional, and statewide in breadth,

23 believe that this a comprehensive and

24 forward-thinking package which will serve as

479

1 a national model for preserving privately

2 held forested lands while stimulating a

3 robust forest economy. We are hopeful that

4 the Governor will include funding for this

5 package in his 30-day amendments due later

6 this week, and we encourage you guys to

7 support funding for this program as well.

8 Audubon also supports the continued

9 capital investments in New York's historic

10 places and outdoors, as well as the

11 Governor's new proposal to create the Empire

12 State Trail.

13 Additionally, as many of you noted,

14 few issues are as important to our health,

15 economy, and environment as safe, reliable,

16 clean water. In recent years, with the

17 Legislature's support and leadership, our

18 state has provided additional resources for

19 drinking water and wastewater infrastructure

20 through the Water Infrastructure Improvement

21 Act. Despite these significant investments,

22 additional funding is still needed.

23 Audubon commends the Governor and

24 Legislature for their bold commitment to

480

1 water infrastructure funding proposed in the

2 coming year. We are encouraged to see the

3 prioritization of this issue by both branches

4 and are encouraged to see the Governor's

5 $2 billion, five-year Clean Water

6 Infrastructure Act proposal and the

7 Legislature's $5 billion Clean Water Bond Act

8 proposal.

9 We look forward to working with our

10 colleagues, the administration, and the

11 Legislature to achieve record levels of

12 funding for clean water.

13 So thank you for your time today, and

14 for your patience. We appreciate it.

15 Any questions?

16 SENATOR KRUEGER: Any questions?

17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Any questions?

18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.

19 MS. EISENSTEIN: Thank you very much.

20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Next up is Adrienne

21 Esposito, Citizens Campaign for the

22 Environment.

23 MS. ESPOSITO: Good evening, members

24 of the Senate and the Assembly. Thank you

481

1 very much for still being here, sticking it

2 out all day long. We appreciate that. I

3 know it's not easy, and your time and effort

4 is appreciated.

5 My name is Adrienne Esposito. I'm the

6 executive director of Citizens Campaign for

7 the Environment. I will not be redundant.

8 You've heard a lot today. So let me make

9 some points that you actually have not heard,

10 if you can believe that, but there are

11 several.

12 One is that, you know, we are one of

13 the organizations that helped usher along the

14 establishment of the Environmental Protection

15 Fund over 20 years ago. So we're thrilled

16 that it's up to $300 million. That's a win

17 for all New Yorkers. One small thing we're

18 going to ask you to kindly consider

19 delineating out in that $300 million, and

20 that is that you may or may not know that all

21 of the water suppliers throughout New York

22 State are sending their water samples when

23 they need to be tested for the PFCs or the

24 PFOAs, all of those samples go to the

482

1 Wadsworth Lab here in Albany. Because of

2 that, there's a backlog. And so it's taking

3 water suppliers or health departments longer

4 to get test results than they actually should

5 have to wait.

6 In addition, you also may not know --

7 but you may, Wadsworth is taking water

8 samples from outside of the state as well.

9 All of that means we need a second lab

10 or a satellite lab. The Suffolk County

11 Department of Health has a state-of-the-art

12 laboratory. All they need is the ability to

13 include testing for PFOAs and PFCs. It makes

14 perfect sense, since one of the first

15 Superfund sites or the second Superfund site

16 for that chemical is in the middle of Suffolk

17 County.

18 We're asking you -- and I've produced

19 a memo on this -- to, in the EPF, under the

20 water quality line item of $20 million, to

21 delineate out $500,000 to the Suffolk County

22 Department of Health to be able to ascertain

23 the technology and the ability to provide

24 that testing. That would allow for water

483

1 samples to move quicker, for communities to

2 know quicker if they should not be drinking

3 their water, and we shouldn't have a backlog

4 of water samples to be tested for this known

5 chemical.

6 The next thing I just want to mention

7 also, switching from the EPF, is for the

8 Governor's $400 million for the WIIA. We

9 agree with many of you who have said you

10 would like to see more delineation. We're

11 asking for no less than 60 percent of those

12 funds to be allocated for sewage treatment

13 infrastructure and wastewater infrastructure

14 upgrades.

15 We agree that source water protection

16 and Superfund sites are extremely important.

17 You'll know -- I mean today, again, as we've

18 all been sitting here, the Comptroller

19 released a report talking about our deficit

20 in sewage treatment and wastewater

21 infrastructure needs.

22 The next thing, the bond act. I want

23 to say this. You know, we have two bond act

24 proposals currently in the Senate, one by

484

1 Senator Hannon and one by Senator LaValle.

2 We have a same-as bill by Senator Hannon

3 submitted by Assemblyman Englebright. We

4 would ask you -- we would almost beg you --

5 to include in any bond act a portion of funds

6 to be used for septic and cesspool

7 changeouts. This is desperate.

8 Now, some have said to me, We can't do

9 that. We can't use bonded money to help

10 homeowners. I would say to you that if

11 New York State is clever enough to figure out

12 a way to use taxpayer dollars to help

13 corporations keep nuclear plants open, then

14 we should be clever enough to use taxpayer

15 dollars to help taxpayers protect drinking

16 water and surface waters. We have a nuclear

17 bailout because it's for the greater good; I

18 heard the testimony here today. Well,

19 there's a greater good in keeping our

20 drinking water and our surface waters and our

21 bays and estuaries and our lakes and our

22 tributaries clean as well, from blue-green

23 algae to brown algae to red tide, which is

24 lethal.

485

1 So we're asking that any bond act

2 contain such a mechanism, which is exactly

3 what we need to address water quality in so

4 many areas throughout New York State, but

5 particularly Long Island.

6 The next thing is the Sewage Pollution

7 Right to Know Bill. It was a bill that was

8 only passed a few years ago, but it is a good

9 one, if I do say so myself. With that bill,

10 now municipalities have to report within four

11 hours for a sewage spill in a water body. So

12 the public knows if they're swimming or

13 fishing or recreating in the middle of

14 untreated or partially treated sewage.

15 One thing that was very good last year

16 is that the DEC issued about 10

17 municipalities grants for upgraded technology

18 so they can comply with that law. That's

19 great. But we need to do more of that.

20 There was a half a million dollars that was

21 allocated a couple of years ago, finally

22 spent. We need another half a million

23 dollars to continue to do that.

24 Municipalities unfortunately have old

486

1 technology and they're just not able to keep

2 up with today's needs, and that's a problem

3 for us and for public health.

4 The next thing I wanted to just

5 mention also is something that is missing

6 from the budget. Two years ago in the

7 Department of Health there was $350,000 for

8 the safe disposal of pharmaceutical drugs.

9 Last year it was $300,000. This years it's

10 zero. Did we solve the problem? Is it all

11 done? Because if we did, we're not aware of

12 that.

13 In that Department of Health line

14 item, it is almost unbelievable the amount of

15 work that got done on safe disposal of

16 pharmaceuticals. And I'm not able to say

17 this enough to government, but it was a great

18 job. King Kullen grocery stores on

19 Long Island, for instance, which received a

20 state grant, in the last two and a half years

21 in their 11 stores that have pharmacies -- I

22 just got a report this morning --

23 5,000 pounds of pharmaceuticals were dropped

24 off at the grocery stores. That's two and a

487

1 half tons that are not being flushed.

2 Erie County, 4,000 pounds of

3 pharmaceuticals. A countywide program was

4 done. Onondaga County, for the first time in

5 the history of New York State, put in drop

6 boxes.

7 And yet it was left out of the budget.

8 So I'm not sure if we don't like progress or

9 it was just an oversight or what happened.

10 But drug disposal options, the need for them

11 is increasing, it's not decreasing.

12 The last thing I want to just mention

13 to you which hasn't been spoken about yet is

14 New York State's pesticide reporting law.

15 This law needs to be modernized and updated

16 in the budget process. Why do I say that?

17 Right now it is required that pesticide

18 applicators report once a year how much

19 they've used and where they've applied it.

20 Only they have to respond to the law either

21 in paper or diskette. Now, most of the

22 people behind me who are under 35 don't even

23 know what a diskette is.

24 So we think that the law needs to be

488

1 modernized and people can -- I know hold on

2 to your seats -- actually report

3 electronically to the pesticide reporting

4 law.

5 It seems crazy that we should have to

6 ask for this in the year 2017, but some have

7 suggested getting rid of the law because it's

8 not working. It's not working because we're

9 using reporting forms from the 1990s. We

10 need to update it, use the computer, use

11 electronic technology, so we can ascertain

12 where stuff is being applied, in what

13 quantities, and go back to the original

14 reason the law was created in the first

15 place, which was to create scientific data so

16 we can ascertain information and make

17 scientific assessments based on real data.

18 So I just wanted to raise those as

19 things that have not been raised, you know,

20 to date. And we do appreciate your time, and

21 we look forward to working with you during

22 this very important budget process.

23 Thank you very much.

24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

489

1 Any questions?

2 Senator Savino.

3 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. I just

4 have one question.

5 Back on the issue of the water testing

6 and the laboratory, you said Wadsworth is the

7 only lab because they're the only ones that

8 have the equipment?

9 MS. ESPOSITO: Yes, because it's a new

10 emerging chemical, it's -- Wadsworth has

11 state-of-the-art technology where it can test

12 for this chemical, but the other

13 laboratories, that -- water suppliers or the

14 municipal governments that are sent to do not

15 have it.

16 SENATOR SAVINO: Interestingly,

17 Wadsworth is also the only laboratory in the

18 state that is testing medical marijuana

19 products, and they're also backed up there

20 too. So I was just curious as to why.

21 So perhaps, since they're handling

22 both, they're backed up on both issues.

23 MS. ESPOSITO: Well, that very well

24 could be. I mean, we have these new emerging

490

1 needs, and we need to keep up with that.

2 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.

3 MS. ESPOSITO: Thank you.

4 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: No, we have

7 Mr. Englebright.

8 MS. ESPOSITO: Oh, I'm sorry.

9 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you,

10 Mr. Farrell.

11 First I just want to say thank you for

12 cutting to the heart of the matter, because

13 that actually sharpens your message. And

14 your message is important to all of us --

15 especially to myself, though, because you're

16 so very active in the bi-county region of

17 Long Island.

18 So thank you for your suggestion for

19 the Suffolk County Health Department testing.

20 We ought to look into that. I think that's a

21 terrific idea.

22 MS. ESPOSITO: Thank you. I

23 appreciate that.

24 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: And in terms

491

1 of the cesspool and septic changeout, I agree

2 with you, we have to find a way to fund that.

3 I also agree with you that water source

4 protection is important. And that symmetry

5 is vital going forward.

6 I did have a meeting about a week ago

7 with the folks from Stony Brook who are doing

8 work on this, and they shared some very

9 optimistic thoughts in terms of some of the

10 progress they're making. One of the things I

11 learned -- I almost had to pull it out of

12 them -- is that they're being held up in some

13 of their research by the bureaucracy of the

14 Health Department. So there's a couple of

15 reasons that, perhaps following your

16 testimony here, we can -- I'm certainly going

17 to be interested in having a meeting with the

18 county officials. Treating the researchers

19 at Stony Brook, who we fund, along with the

20 Health Department in a joint program --

21 having that Health Department require the

22 researchers to go through the same hoops that

23 for-profit companies have to go through is

24 wasteful.

492

1 Anyhow, thank you for your testimony.

2 MS. ESPOSITO: I think a meeting of

3 the minds is -- when you get people around

4 the same table, it's always productive. I

5 believe that. Levels of government,

6 researchers, when we're all at the same

7 table, then we get change.

8 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Sometimes

9 change is a forest fire; sometimes change is

10 the dawn of a new day. I hope for the

11 latter.

12 MS. ESPOSITO: I'm hoping for a dawn.

13 I see a lot of progress. We're making a lot

14 of progress, and I have great hope.

15 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you

16 for your testimony.

17 MS. ESPOSITO: Thank you.

18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

19 Our next speaker is New York State

20 Policy Director Patrick McClellan, New York

21 League of Conservation Voters.

22 If you know you're next, by the way,

23 maybe it would speed things up if you came a

24 little bit closer so you're in the queue.

493

1 Thank you for being here.

2 MR. McCLELLAN: Thank you.

3 I'm sorry, I was sitting at the top.

4 I want to start by thanking you for

5 your endurance and patience today. So out of

6 respect for that, I'll try and just hit the

7 highlights of my testimony.

8 And before I continue, I want to thank

9 you for your support and leadership on the

10 environment over the last several years. To

11 have $300 million for the Environmental

12 Protection Fund for two years in a row is

13 really remarkable.

14 So we strongly support the Governor's

15 proposed $2 billion Clean Water

16 Infrastructure Act. We're particularly

17 pleased that it authorizes funding for a wide

18 variety of initiatives, including

19 infrastructure projects as well as source

20 protection projects.

21 We're also pleased by the $300 million

22 for the Environmental Protection Fund, as I

23 said, particularly funding for environmental

24 justice initiatives, including $1 million to

494

1 connect children with the outdoors,

2 $2 million in community impact grants, and

3 funds to monitor air quality at hotspots to

4 be identified.

5 We also support the EPF's funding for

6 parks, particularly $20 million for municipal

7 parks, $30 million for state land

8 stewardship, and $16 million for waterfront

9 revitalization. We're also supportive of the

10 Governor's proposed legislation to increase

11 the state match for the Waterfront

12 Revitalization Program from 50 percent to

13 75 percent of a project's cost.

14 And finally, as always, we support the

15 EPF's funding for climate change mitigation

16 and adaptation, and we thank both the

17 Governor and leaders in both houses of the

18 Legislature for your leadership on the EPF

19 over the years.

20 The Executive Budget's proposal to

21 require large generators of food waste to

22 donate excess edible food and recycle food

23 scraps is a thoughtful, well-crafted policy

24 that will benefit emergency food providers,

495

1 reduce the amount of compostable waste going

2 to landfills, and create a statewide organics

3 recycling infrastructure that will make it

4 easier for municipalities to adopt their own

5 organics recycling programs should they

6 choose to do so. By delaying implementation

7 of the mandate until 2021, the state ensures

8 that organics recycling facilities will have

9 time to establish themselves and undergo a

10 careful siting process.

11 NYLCV also supports the Governor's

12 proposal to reform the 480-a forest

13 management tax credit and add a new 480-b tax

14 credit. Taken together, these reforms would

15 lower the threshold for participation from

16 50 acres to 25 and allow up to 50 percent of

17 the credit to be applied to open space.

18 Current beneficiaries of the 480-a

19 program would be grandfathered in. And the

20 Governor also proposes to provide grants for

21 best forest management techniques and

22 acquisition of community forests, and to

23 provide financial relief to local governments

24 most impacted by 480-a.

496

1 And in keeping with the league's

2 commitment to open space and the benefits of

3 spending time in nature, we also support the

4 Empire State Trail and Adventure NY

5 proposals, and we continue to support

6 investments in the Parks 2020 initiative.

7 We firmly believe in the importance of

8 protecting New York's farms and farmland and

9 connecting residents across the state with

10 healthy, locally grown food. So we're

11 pleased by the proposed $500,000 expansion of

12 the Farm-to-School grant program, which

13 connects farms with school districts, as well

14 as funding for Agriculture in the Classroom

15 to teach students about where their food

16 comes from and the importance of healthy

17 eating, and more money for the New York State

18 Grown & Certified program as well as, of

19 course, the EPF-funded programs to preserve

20 and provide technical assistance to farms.

21 We also support electrification of the

22 transportation sector as an important

23 component of reducing our greenhouse gas

24 emissions, so we're supportive of anything to

497

1 reduce barriers to electric vehicle ownership

2 and operation. We're supportive of the

3 proposal to extend the Alternative Fuels

4 Property and Electric Vehicle Recharging

5 Property Credit for five years, to add 500

6 new workplace charging stations, and to add

7 69 electric vehicle charging stations along

8 the Thruway. And we continue to support the

9 electric vehicle consumer rebate that was

10 authorized last year; we eagerly await its

11 implementation.

12 And finally, we support the Governor's

13 proposal -- although this is not budgetary,

14 of course, to further reduce the Regional

15 Greenhouse Gas Initiative cap by 30 percent

16 between 2020 and 2031. We do note, however,

17 that $23 million in RGGI funds were

18 transferred to the General Fund last year,

19 and we believe that RGGI is stronger when its

20 funds are dedicated to clean energy programs.

21 Thank you very much.

22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

23 MR. McCLELLAN: Thank you very much.

24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

498

1 much.

2 Our next speaker is Executive Director

3 Robin Dropkin, Parks & Trails New York.

4 Thank you for being here also.

5 MR. MEERDINK: Hi. I'm actually James

6 Meerdink. I'm a project director with Parks

7 & Trails New York.

8 Chairpersons Young and Farrell and

9 members of the committee, thank you for the

10 opportunity to speak to the impact of the

11 budget on New York's outdoor recreational

12 resources, especially its magnificent state

13 park system and its thousands of miles of

14 biking and walking trails.

15 Since 1985, Parks & Trails New York

16 has been the state's leading advocate for the

17 expansion, protection, and promotion of our

18 park and trail network. Our mission and our

19 vision is to ensure that all New Yorkers,

20 regardless of where they live, socioeconomic

21 status, or physical or mental disabilities,

22 should have close access to outdoor

23 recreation.

24 Through our work -- including

499

1 promotion of our outdoor resources, our

2 popular bike tours, and our cycling

3 guidebooks -- we also promote sustainable

4 tourism in all regions of the state.

5 So I'll start with the budget proposal

6 that has captured the imagination of trail

7 users and outdoor enthusiasts from across the

8 state and beyond: The Empire State Trail.

9 The Governor has proposed funding for a

10 statewide, multi-use trail called the Empire

11 State Trail, and it would connect New York

12 City to the Canadian border, and Buffalo to

13 Albany.

14 This bold plan responds to more than a

15 decade of advocacy by Parks & Trails New York

16 and other partners to close the gaps in the

17 Erie and Champlain Canalway Trails, and to

18 build a connected trail in the Hudson Valley.

19 The Governor's budget will do that, with a

20 proposed $53 million to be split between the

21 Erie Canalway Trail and the Hudson River

22 Greenway. To say that we're supportive is an

23 understatement, and I'll give you a little

24 bit more about why we think this is a great

500

1 idea before moving on.

2 Upon completion, the 750-mile Empire

3 State Trail will be the nation's longest

4 multi-use trail, securing New York's place as

5 a national and international destination for

6 outdoor recreation and heritage tourism.

7 Building the trail will also add a unique

8 asset to the state's tourism portfolio, one

9 that caters to modern tourists who seek

10 adventure, outdoor recreation, and authentic

11 cultural experiences.

12 Visitors to the trail create positive

13 economic impacts for local communities. And

14 we've seen this on the Erie Canalway Trail,

15 where the trail currently is estimated to

16 generate $253 million in annual economic

17 benefit and to support over 3,000 jobs.

18 That's just the Erie Canalway Trail, Buffalo

19 to Albany. We believe the impact of the full

20 Empire State Trail will dwarf this figure.

21 It's not just tourism, either. The

22 Empire State Trail will create a community

23 recreation space in 26 counties and hundreds

24 of communities across the state, providing a

501

1 safe and accessible place to walk, ride, jog,

2 push a stroller, rollerblade -- pretty much

3 you name it in terms of outdoor activities.

4 The trail will also serve as the spine for

5 other hiking and biking trails. This network

6 really will touch all parts of the state, and

7 we think that the Empire State Trail will

8 serve as a catalyst for trail development

9 throughout the network.

10 Another point, the trail supports

11 public health efforts to increase physical

12 activity and screen-free time that we all

13 need more and more these days.

14 The Empire State Trail will also

15 create a new way to experience New York's

16 rich history and unique heritage, providing a

17 seamless off-road connection to many of the

18 state's important historic and cultural

19 assets, truly a Path Through History.

20 I'll tell you one more trail-related

21 stat, and then I'll move on to a couple of

22 other parts of the budget. Homebuyers rank

23 off-road trails as one of the most important

24 community assets when purchasing a home, so

502

1 the Empire State Trail supports the state's

2 goal of attracting and keeping residents,

3 especially millennials and young families.

4 So I'll move on the state parks

5 briefly. Through the leadership of the

6 Governor and Legislature, since 2011 state

7 parks have received $470 million in capital

8 funding through the New York Parks 2020

9 initiative. They've used this to restore and

10 rebuild aging infrastructure. Three hundred

11 eighty-three park improvement and enhancement

12 projects have been completed or are underway

13 at more than 130 parks and historic sites in

14 every region of the state. The Governor and

15 members of the Senate and Assembly deserve a

16 lot of credit for this.

17 So we're happy to report that this

18 year's Executive Budget expands on this

19 theme, with a proposed allocation of

20 $120 million to OPRHP for capital. This

21 includes the scheduled $90 million

22 installment of Parks 2020 funding, as well as

23 an additional $30 million for capital

24 projects that are meant to spur private

503

1 investment in some of the state's

2 high-profile parks. We fully support these

3 investments.

4 While great progress is being made,

5 challenges do remain. State parks, despite

6 experiencing rising attendance, operate with

7 the same staffing levels as they did in

8 previous decades, when visitation was

9 significantly lower. We think we shouldn't

10 waste the momentum we've created with capital

11 funding since 2011. Instead, we should seize

12 the opportunity for State Parks to engage

13 increased numbers by increasing the agency's

14 operations budget.

15 We don't believe that the $1 million

16 increase in operations funding for OPRHP

17 proposed in the Executive Budget meets the

18 needs that exist throughout the system.

19 Taken together, the renaissance in the

20 state parks system and the opportunities for

21 growth in our multi-use trail network are

22 moving us closer to Parks & Trails New York's

23 vision for close access to outdoor recreation

24 for all New Yorkers. There's a couple of

504

1 other funding sources I want to mention that

2 are also moving us along in this regard.

3 Adventure NY has been mentioned

4 previously. Parks & Trails New York fully

5 supports DEC's goal of improving access to

6 recreation, and the funding allocated for

7 this program.

8 Finally, the Environmental Protection

9 Fund is a critical source of funding for a

10 variety of programs, including capital

11 improvements at parks and campgrounds,

12 restoration of historic sites, and management

13 of trails and public lands. The EPF supports

14 more than 350,000 jobs across a spectrum of

15 industries, including outdoor tourism. We

16 are very pleased that the Executive Budget

17 proposes full funding for the Environmental

18 Protection Fund at $300 million in this

19 budget.

20 And then, finally, just one point

21 about a line item within the EPF. For the

22 third year, included in the EPF budget

23 proposal is a $500,000 capacity-building

24 grants program. This is targeted to

505

1 organizations that promote and support the

2 state's parks, trails and historic sites.

3 These nonprofit "friends groups" --

4 oftentimes made up entirely of volunteers --

5 already contribute significantly to the

6 promotion of these venues, in addition to

7 doing things like building kiosks, clearing

8 trails, leading programs, and raising

9 significant money for capital projects. The

10 capacity-building grants program,

11 administered by Parks & Trails New York,

12 unlocks the potential of these organizations

13 by increasing their effectiveness,

14 productivity, and volunteer and fundraising

15 capabilities.

16 In March 2016, the first round of Park

17 and Trail Partnership funds was awarded to

18 20 friends groups at parks and historic sites

19 across the state. These friends groups in

20 turn pledged nearly $242,000 in matching

21 funds. The demand for the program in the

22 first year was significantly high, with

23 36 percent of all eligible organizations

24 submitting applications, and these

506

1 applications totaled $966,000.

2 The second round of grant awardees

3 will be announced in March of 2017.

4 Parks & Trails New York looks forward

5 to working with the Governor and Legislature

6 on this transformative program.

7 Thank you for the opportunity to speak

8 today.

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

10 much.

11 Any questions?

12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

13 MR. MEERDINK: Thank you.

14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Oh, I'm sorry, we

15 have a question.

16 MR. MEERDINK: Sure.

17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Mr. Englebright.

18 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you

19 for your testimony.

20 I agree with the priorities that

21 you've laid out and congratulate you -- I'm a

22 former board member of your organization some

23 years ago, when I still had bell-bottoms and

24 brown hair. We were working on this trail

507

1 vision then, and your organization has paved

2 the way, really, for this Empire State Trail.

3 I would just ask that you use your

4 good office to advocate for the inclusion of

5 Nassau and Suffolk counties as part of the

6 Empire State. You mentioned Jones Beach

7 State Park. It's not part of the reach of

8 this at least initial proposal. Neither is

9 Montauk nor Orient nor Brookhaven or any of

10 the other great state parks -- Hither Hills,

11 and I could go on. We have the greatest

12 concentration of state parks for a given

13 square mile of territory than any other part

14 of the state. It should be a part of the

15 initial planning.

16 Other than that, though, I just want

17 to again say thank you for the work you do

18 and for the pioneering effort for trails

19 throughout the state that Parks & Trails has

20 initiated.

21 MR. MEERDINK: Thank you. We

22 definitely work with lots of groups on

23 Long Island, so we'll take it under

24 advisement.

508

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

2 much.

3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is

5 Washington County Sewer District Executive

6 Director Joseph Brilling, from the New York

7 Water Environment Association.

8 And I would ask that Kevin Chlad,

9 director of government relations from the

10 Adirondack Council, come forward so that he's

11 ready. Are you ready?

12 MR. CHLAD: I'm ready.

13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: You're ready,

14 great. So, Mr. Brilling, welcome.

15 MR. BRILLING: Thank you.

16 As noted, my name is Joseph Brilling.

17 I'm a wastewater professional with over

18 27 years of experience protecting public

19 health and the water environment. I also

20 have the privilege of serving as the

21 executive director of the Washington County

22 Sewer District, that is responsible for the

23 operation, maintenance and administration of

24 a treatment plant with a permitted flow of

509

1 2.5 million gallons per day and a collection

2 system of approximately 80 miles of pipe,

3 with a large percentage of combined sewer

4 area.

5 I am involved in NYWEA as a utility

6 member of the New York Water Environment

7 Association. NYWEA is a member association

8 of the Water Environment Federation, which is

9 the leading international organization

10 dedicated to the wastewater industry. NYWEA

11 is a nonprofit professional organization that

12 serves the best interest of the public by

13 promoting sustainable clean water quality

14 management through science, education, and

15 training. It is made up of over 2,500

16 members across the state with great

17 diversity, ranging from treatment plant

18 operators from small villages, top-level

19 officials in New York City government,

20 academics and students, regulators, engineers

21 of all types, environmental scientists, and

22 other interested professionals.

23 NYWEA also has a robust Utility

24 Executives Committee with broad statewide

510

1 representation that provides unity and

2 strength to address the growing regulatory

3 and financial challenges facing wastewater

4 utilities.

5 NYWEA members are seeing a shift in

6 terminology to better reflect what physical,

7 chemical and biological processes take place

8 at wastewater treatment plants, now also

9 referred to as water resource recovery

10 facilities. The important work these

11 utilities carry out 24 hours a day, seven

12 days a week, saves lives. Water resource

13 recovery facilities receive the sewage we all

14 produce and recover valuable resources from

15 it, principally water.

16 In addition to protecting public

17 health and the environment, many water

18 resource recovery facilities generate energy,

19 extract and find uses for nutrients, use the

20 treated effluent in beneficial ways, and

21 innovate with technological and financial

22 partners.

23 Organizations like NYWEA, Washington

24 County, and all wastewater utilities in the

511

1 state recognize the critical role that proper

2 sanitation plays in protecting public health

3 and improving the water environment while

4 promoting economic development and

5 recreational opportunities. We are also

6 keenly aware of the fiscal challenges faced

7 by local governments when attempting to

8 budget or finance clean water infrastructure

9 projects. Local governments understand their

10 fiscal responsibilities, but we cannot fund

11 these needs without financial assistance.

12 Washington County Sewer District was

13 formed in 1984 to maintain improvements to

14 water quality and to meet new regulatory

15 requirements. Our district has tremendous

16 clean water infrastructure needs, including

17 approximately $26 million for our combined

18 sewer overflow long-term control plan

19 implementation alone. That $26 million cost

20 is for a district that provides wastewater

21 treatment and collection to a population of

22 approximately 15,000 users.

23 Washington County Sewer District is

24 one of over 600 wastewater treatment

512

1 facilities in New York State that serve 1,610

2 municipalities, providing wastewater

3 treatment for more than 15 million people

4 across the state. Functioning clean water

5 infrastructure is vital to a community's

6 viability, future economic prospects, and

7 competitiveness. Deferring maintenance of

8 sewer and water assets leads to rapid

9 deterioration, reducing service life and

10 greatly increasing the cost of repairs.

11 According to the NYSDEC 2008 report

12 "Wastewater Infrastructure Needs of New York

13 State," the conservative costs of repairing,

14 replacing and updating New York's aging and

15 deteriorating wastewater and water

16 infrastructure over the next 20 years are

17 $36.2 billion and $38.7 billion,

18 respectively. It should be pointed out that

19 this report is now nine years old, so it is

20 expected that current costs are likely higher

21 than the 2008 report stated. This report

22 also indicated that 30 percent of the state's

23 sewage collection systems are beyond their

24 expected useful life.

513

1 In the face of this tremendous need,

2 New York has stepped up as a national leader

3 with the creation of the Water Infrastructure

4 Improvement Act of 2015, a $400 million,

5 three-year grant program in the New York

6 State budget. The Governorís budget proposes

7 an additional $20 billion investment in the

8 WIIA through the year 2022, with potential

9 uses proposed beyond infrastructure

10 investment. NYWEA is appreciative of the

11 proposed extension and increase in funding

12 for this program, but we also realize the

13 needs are much greater.

14 NYWEA also supports the proposed

15 $5 billion Clean Water Bond Act.

16 Some statistics that highlight the

17 fiscal needs and constraints faced by local

18 water resource recovery facilities:

19 Under 10 percent of total local

20 government expenditures have been directed

21 toward infrastructure for the past 10 years.

22 It has not kept up with the rate of inflation

23 for construction costs and materials. In

24 addition, municipalities are subject to the

514

1 tax cap constraints, further reducing

2 infrastructure reinvestment, which results in

3 deferred maintenance of sewer and water

4 assets, leading to rapid deterioration,

5 reducing service life, and greatly increasing

6 the cost of repairs. It would be desirable

7 to have clean water capital projects exempted

8 from the tax cap.

9 A disproportionate share of the

10 wastewater financial burden is borne by

11 metropolitan areas which are financially

12 distressed with low household median incomes

13 and mandated implementation of combined sewer

14 overflow long-term control plans.

15 Municipalities from across the state

16 rely on the New York State Environmental

17 Facilities Corporation for low-cost loans.

18 The New York State EFC develops a list of

19 annual and multiyear projects that

20 municipalities and other entities have deemed

21 necessary to meet continued environmental

22 protection, compliance, and efficient

23 operation and maintenance of water

24 infrastructure. While the lists are a

515

1 representative compilation of pertinent

2 projects, they are not a compilation of the

3 entire universe of projects within New York

4 State, since there are additional projects

5 that the municipalities have not submitted to

6 EFC.

7 Municipalities are frequently

8 reluctant to take advantage of loan

9 obligations, as they are subject to the

10 property tax cap fiscal constraints that

11 limit their ability to borrow funds for

12 critical water and wastewater infrastructure

13 projects.

14 Over 20 years, each $1 invested in

15 sewer and water infrastructure returns $2.03

16 of local, state and federal tax revenue.

17 Over time, clean water investments pay for

18 themselves and produce tax revenue for future

19 spending.

20 Besides the normal operation and

21 maintenance of these utilities, natural

22 disasters or other emergency situations --

23 such as toxic spills, discovery of harmful

24 contaminants in water supplies -- have

516

1 adversely impacted New York's infrastructure.

2 These costs are in addition to already

3 strained finances hindering municipalities

4 from investing in necessary water and sewer

5 infrastructure needs.

6 Investment in water infrastructure not

7 only protects public health and the quality

8 of our lakes, rivers, streams and open water

9 bodies, it is a significant driver of

10 economic development and job creation.

11 Nationwide, local governments are the

12 main investors in water and sewer systems.

13 For all public spending on water and

14 wastewater facilities, state and local

15 governments account for 96 percent. The

16 federal share is 4 percent. In the future,

17 it will take funding coming from federal,

18 state, and local governments together to

19 improve water quality and sustain our

20 utilities.

21 Investment in clean water

22 infrastructure shouldn't just be local

23 government's responsibility, as it is

24 appropriate to represent that cleaner water

517

1 doesn't just benefit the adjacent locality,

2 but the entire State of New York. It is time

3 to reinvigorate the past practices,

4 partnerships and investments between state

5 and local government that enhance the quality

6 of life of all New Yorkers.

7 In 1966, the Rockefeller Pure Waters

8 Program led the nation with an investment of

9 $1 billion, of 1966 dollars, towards

10 wastewater infrastructure that provided an

11 unquestioned partnership between state and

12 local government. New York State once again

13 has an opportunity to set an example for the

14 entire nation with the creation of a

15 dedicated fund. Investment in water is the

16 right thing for local government, public

17 health, the environment, the economy, job

18 creation, and recreational opportunities.

19 I thank you for listening to me and

20 the opportunity to be here today.

21 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very

22 much.

23 Any questions?

24 Mr. Englebright.

518

1 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you

2 very much. Very powerful testimony.

3 I had the privilege of being with your

4 organization on Wednesday at your annual

5 meeting, and I just want to congratulate you

6 and the entire organization of professional

7 water managers. You keep our communities

8 healthy, and you keep our waters pure.

9 MR. BRILLING: Thank you.

10 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: And so I

11 just want to underscore how important your

12 testimony is.

13 I know that the people here at this

14 moment have heard this, but I'm going to

15 share your testimony with my colleagues, all

16 of the members of the Environmental

17 Committee. I think it's that important.

18 MR. BRILLING: Thank you.

19 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you

20 very much.

21 MR. BRILLING: Please take note of

22 this too, if you'd look at that. Basically,

23 the testimony is that (indicating brochure).

24 Thank you.

519

1 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you.

2 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

4 Next, Kevin Chlad from Adirondack

5 Council.

6 And then prepare yourself. Adirondack

7 Mountain Club afterwards, and Protect the

8 Adirondacks after that. And we will know

9 everything we need to know about the

10 Adirondacks.

11 MR. CHLAD: Yes, you will.

12 All right. Well, good evening,

13 everybody, honored legislators. My name is

14 Kevin Chlad. I'm the director of government

15 relations for the Adirondack Council. The

16 Adirondack Council is a nonprofit dedicated

17 to ensuring the ecological integrity and wild

18 character of our Adirondack Park. We

19 envision a park with large core wilderness

20 areas, clean air, water, working farms and

21 forests, and vibrant communities. And we do

22 not accept any public funding.

23 You've heard a lot of important

24 testimony today, and you have my full

520

1 comments in front of you, so I will be brief.

2 First I just wanted to share a little

3 bit about our Adirondack Park, this

4 incredible asset that we have as New Yorkers.

5 It's over 6 million acres. It is the largest

6 park in the contiguous United States. It's

7 right -- it's just two hours to the north of

8 us, and it's ours.

9 Half of this land is "Forever Wild"

10 Forest Preserve. It is protected by our

11 state's Constitution. And it is an asset to

12 the people of the State of New York. It's

13 also half private land, and this is

14 intermixed in a patchwork quilt. And those

15 private lands include working farms and

16 forests and vibrant communities. This park

17 also contains 2,800 lakes and ponds and an

18 estimated 30,000 miles of brooks and streams.

19 Water is a centerpiece for the park.

20 The park's combination of clean water,

21 wilderness, and vibrant communities makes it

22 a national treasure and attraction.

23 So I would be remiss if I did not

24 thank you for your collective action last

521

1 year on our environmental budget. You made

2 history with a $300 million EPF, also strong

3 increases in clean water infrastructure grant

4 funding, and increases in tourism funding.

5 And the park is stronger for your efforts.

6 So I just want to thank you for that.

7 Just a couple of other points I'd like

8 to emphasize. First I want to talk about the

9 power of the EPF. And you can see on the

10 cover of your testimony this magnificent

11 photo. This place is the Boreas Ponds, and

12 the Governor acquired the Boreas Ponds in the

13 spring of last year, using Environmental

14 Protection Fund monies, monies that you

15 helped appropriate. And so I encourage you

16 to look at this picture and realize the

17 impact that you have made. It is truly

18 powerful.

19 This property is roughly the size of

20 Manhattan, and it's part of the

21 second-largest acquisition in the park's

22 history. This land has been purchased, but

23 now it must be protected. And so the

24 Governor and his APA will now decide the fate

522

1 of this parcel, and that will likely occur in

2 the spring of this year. Your actions have

3 set the table for what could become a

4 timeless Adirondack legacy and a gift to

5 generations yet unborn.

6 It's our hope that the Governor and

7 his APA protects this investment with a

8 wilderness classification for the pond and

9 with a one-mile buffer to the south of that

10 pond.

11 The second point I want to touch on is

12 the issue of state land stewardship. Our

13 state, through this purchase, has acquired

14 65,000 acres of land over the last five or

15 six years. It's truly historic. And these

16 acres are a valuable addition to our Forest

17 Preserve. These state lands are both an

18 environmental asset and an economic asset.

19 Through the Boreas Ponds classification, we

20 saw common agreement amongst all stakeholders

21 that the state can and should do more to

22 manage the lands that we have. This means

23 staffing and stewardship funding.

24 The third point that I want to make is

523

1 with regards to water infrastructure funding.

2 We are absolutely thrilled to see the

3 Governor and the Legislature championing

4 water infrastructure funding with various

5 proposals this year. We've heard so much

6 today about the need in our state. The

7 Adirondack Council released a report just

8 this last fall that identified over

9 $100 million in current identified wastewater

10 infrastructure needs in the Adirondack Park

11 alone. These are communities that are very

12 small in population, but they serve

13 incredibly large populations of visitors.

14 We're talking 10 million visitors a year to

15 the park, and a resident population of just

16 130,000 year-round. Plus 260,000, give or

17 take, seasonal residents. So a small

18 population serving a very large population.

19 This places a heavy burden on their

20 infrastructure, and it's something we should

21 pay attention to, given the fact that the

22 parks communities are an integral part of the

23 Adirondack Park model and therefore an asset

24 to the protection of the park.

524

1 So with that, with all the competing

2 proposals that are out there, we're very

3 excited to see this conversation taking

4 place, and we urge you all to do absolutely

5 everything that you can this year to fund

6 water infrastructure. And we know that you

7 will.

8 And with that, I just thank you so

9 much for this opportunity. Thank you.

10 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.

11 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.

12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

13 MR. CHLAD: Thanks, everyone.

14 SENATOR KRUEGER: So next we have Neil

15 Woodworth, from Adirondack Mountain Club.

16 And get ready after him, Peter Bauer,

17 from Protect the Adirondacks.

18 MR. BAUER: I don't see Neil.

19 SENATOR KRUEGER: Oh, you don't see

20 Neil? Does anybody here represent Neil?

21 Okay, we've lost them.

22 So thank you, Peter Bauer from Protect

23 the Adirondacks.

24 Thank you, and following is Dan

525

1 Shapley from Riverkeeper.

2 (Discussion off the record.)

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: All right, if you're

4 ready, you go right ahead.

5 MR. BAUER: I don't want to be accused

6 of jumping in front of the Mountain Club,

7 so -- those folks are tough. They climb

8 mountains. They would step all over me.

9 I thank you all for your stamina

10 today, for the Senators and for the

11 Assemblymembers that are here. Thank you

12 very much for your work protecting the

13 environment.

14 I also thank your staffs for their

15 great work in putting all of this stuff

16 together, and helping to protect our

17 environment in the state, seated behind you.

18 I also thank all of my brother and sister

19 advocates seated behind me who do such great

20 work.

21 I also thank you for stepping up this

22 legislative session. And we have some

23 interesting bond act proposals, and those

24 will be deliberated --

526

1 SENATOR KRUEGER: And before you

2 continue, I'm sorry. (To staffer.) So you

3 just handed out Adirondack Mountain Club,

4 which is great, but they're not here. So can

5 you now hand out Peter Bauer's testimony,

6 because he's the gentleman testifying.

7 Thanks. So sorry.

8 MR. BAUER: You're welcome.

9 There's some very interesting bond act

10 proposals on your docket which will help

11 immensely for New York's environment. So I

12 look forward to seeing more work done on

13 those in the future.

14 I will be brief. You've had a lot to

15 deal with today, you've had a lot of

16 information presented to you. And I just

17 want to talk about four things very briefly,

18 mostly that you haven't heard before.

19 One, we want to express our support

20 for the Environmental Protection Fund.

21 Important fund, $300 million second year in a

22 row. We think the EPF is underfunded, and we

23 think it should be a billion dollars a year

24 or more to really focus on the key challenges

527

1 facing the environment of this state.

2 The land acquisition monies that are

3 there are the bare minimum. The invasive

4 species monies that are there, the bare

5 minimum. The state land stewardship monies

6 that are there are the bare minimum. We need

7 more resources for the EPF.

8 I think the Legislature could do a

9 couple of things. I'm not sure that we've

10 had oversight hearings on how effective the

11 EPF has been, what the major environmental

12 priorities are for the State of New York. I

13 think that would be a very useful set of

14 hearings for advocates and for people across

15 the state, for local government and others,

16 to really focus on what the key challenges

17 are for our environment in New York. I think

18 many of our key challenges -- for clean

19 water, for municipal infrastructure, for land

20 protection, for invasive species -- are

21 critically underfunded.

22 Secondly, I would like to point to one

23 thing that's not listed in the EPF and not

24 dealt with really in the state land

528

1 stewardship program, and that's funding for

2 the High Peaks.

3 The High Peaks Wilderness Area is the

4 most heavily used area of our Forest

5 Preserve. Certain trails in the High Peaks

6 are now seeing 33,000, 35,000, 36,000 hikers

7 a year. On some fall weekends we have a

8 thousand people on a summit at any one time.

9 The High Peaks is not getting the

10 investment it needs. There's funding going

11 to other places in the Adirondacks, but we're

12 not getting the funding we need for really

13 the most successful wild-lands area we have

14 in the Adirondacks. The High Peaks is a key

15 draw for the Lake Placid tourism economy --

16 arguably, after Lake George, the most dynamic

17 tourism economy we have in the park, and very

18 successful. So we need to focus in our EPF

19 funding on funding for the High Peaks. We're

20 five years behind on trail maintenance and

21 infrastructure, and that's something I would

22 encourage you to look at.

23 I would also draw your attention to

24 funding in the NY Works program. We're very

529

1 concerned about funding for a couple of

2 projects in NY Works, and I think the

3 Legislature should really take a very close

4 look at it. One, the Governor has come out

5 and called for $32 million of spending at

6 Exit 29 on the Adirondack Northway to create

7 a new campground, a new tourism complex, a

8 new visitor center. There are two private

9 campgrounds within a mile of this new state

10 campground. There are three state

11 campgrounds a short distance away. While we

12 certainly appreciate the Governor's effort to

13 put $32 million into building this new

14 complex, we think it bears a really hard

15 look, and folks should look at whether that's

16 the best way to spend this amount of money.

17 We have a lot of questions about it, and in

18 many ways it's a real head-scratcher.

19 Last, I want to draw your attention to

20 other funding in the Adventure NY program.

21 They talk about hut-to-hut funding, and we're

22 concerned about buildings on the Forest

23 Preserve. We're concerned about the state

24 trying to build cabins on the Forest Preserve

530

1 or the state trying to build temporary

2 yurt-like structures on the Forest Preserve.

3 In our minds, that issue was settled decades

4 ago with a public vote on the Closed Cabin

5 Amendment, a constitutional amendment that

6 went to the voters. The voters voted it

7 down.

8 We don't think that the Governor and

9 the DEC should be trying to build buildings

10 on the Forest Preserve through administrative

11 fiat. If that's something that they really

12 want to do, they should go for a

13 constitutional amendment and let the voters

14 determine if that's the best use of the

15 Forest Preserve and if that's their vision

16 for the Forest Preserve.

17 So thank you very much for the

18 opportunity to bring these issues to your

19 attention, and thank you all for your good

20 work.

21 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,

23 Executive Director Bauer.

24 Our next speaker is Water Quality

531

1 Program Director Dan Shapley from

2 Riverkeeper, Inc.

3 And in the queue is Director of Public

4 Policy Andy Bicking, from Scenic Hudson. So

5 if you could be ready, please.

6 Welcome, Mr. Shapley.

7 MR. SHAPLEY: Thank you. Thank you

8 for having me. Thank you for hearing from

9 Riverkeeper. And to echo my colleagues,

10 thank you for your past and continuing

11 support for the Water Infrastructure

12 Improvement Act and the EPF, both critical

13 sources of funding that we're very much in

14 support of.

15 I want to try to bring to you some

16 perspective. I'm not going to try to recite

17 my testimony in any way. My main job is not

18 to come and speak to you all, frankly, but

19 it's to get out and gather water quality

20 samples. So I'm going to give you some

21 perspective on what Riverkeeper does and what

22 its found and why some of these investments

23 we've talked about today are going to be so

24 meaningful.

532

1 We, with partners, gather data from

2 400 locations each year as of 2016. Working

3 with over 160 individuals, we took over 4700

4 samples of water throughout the Hudson River

5 Watershed last year. And what I always say

6 is, that's 4700 votes for clean water. These

7 are individuals who give up some time on

8 their weekend to go out and measure water

9 quality in the Hudson River or in the local

10 creek that runs by their house. And what

11 we've found has given us a really unique

12 perspective on some of the issues that we

13 face.

14 When it comes to infrastructure

15 investment, we're very supportive of the

16 Governor's proposal and very supportive of

17 some of the proposals that have come out of

18 the Legislature to go even beyond that with

19 some of the bond act proposals. The

20 $80 billion in need that you've heard about

21 for water infrastructure, what that looks

22 like on the ground is that over half of the

23 sites that we've sampled in the Hudson River

24 over the past almost 10 years failed to meet

533

1 federal safe swimming guidelines. Over half.

2 We want a Hudson River we can swim in.

3 And in fact, we have a Hudson River that many

4 people do swim in. This is just one example,

5 but this is the Eight Bridges Swim. It's a

6 photo from it. That's the longest open-water

7 swim event in the world, and it happens in

8 the Hudson River every year. In fact, the

9 Hudson is the playground for people who live

10 in and enjoy the Hudson River Valley.

11 And yet we know that the region has

12 over $2.5 billion worth of wastewater

13 infrastructure needs outside of New York

14 City, within the Hudson River Watershed.

15 That's for wastewater alone. And we know

16 it's based on only about 30 percent of

17 communities having accounted for their needs.

18 So we know that the need in fact is much

19 greater.

20 So we know that whatever you can put

21 into that infrastructure spending pot will

22 get spent well, and we want to make sure that

23 it can be spent in the Hudson River

24 Watershed, which has the greatest wastewater

534

1 impacts of any estuary in our country, we

2 believe. It has more population than any

3 other watershed. And yet the funding

4 formulas for some of the grant programs and

5 loan programs disadvantage the Hudson River

6 Valley because of our relatively high median

7 household income, but it doesn't take into

8 account things like our high cost of living,

9 our high cost of housing. So our actual

10 buying power may not be any higher than

11 communities with a lower household income,

12 but we are disadvantaged because of the

13 funding formulas in some cases.

14 So I encourage you to think about how

15 the money can be spent in a way to benefit

16 the Hudson River, this great resource that we

17 have, central to our state.

18 I do want to mention in the EPF the

19 Water Quality Improvement Projects line is a

20 critical source of infrastructure spending.

21 It's been there for many years and funds

22 critical projects. It keeps getting carved

23 up in little bits. And we really feel that,

24 as much as possible, it should be spent

535

1 competitively, because that's such a strong

2 source of infrastructure spending that's been

3 around independently of the more recent

4 investments that have come out.

5 On source water protection, this is

6 something that Riverkeeper has been a strong

7 advocate of, from again an on-the-ground

8 understanding of the impacts through our work

9 in Newburgh. Which, as you know, it's a city

10 of 30,000 people that has toxic water

11 contamination in their primary reservoir.

12 What you may not have heard about Newburgh is

13 that their drinking water shed is

14 fundamentally unprotected. It is a

15 suburbanized, commercial development ringing

16 the watershed. So it's an example of what

17 happens when we don't have good source water

18 protection.

19 And we're working hard in Newburgh to

20 make their new source water assessment

21 robust, comprehensive, so it can be a model

22 for the state for how we reorient around

23 protective strategies to ensure long-term

24 water quality for our cities and villages.

536

1 And those costs, I want to point out,

2 are largely unaccounted for. The

3 Comptroller's report that came out today

4 assessing $40 billion, I believe, in drinking

5 water needs, does not get at the source water

6 protection need, that need to protect

7 watersheds and the streams flowing into water

8 reservoirs, and protecting wellheads, to

9 ensure that the water quality before it

10 reaches the plant or touches a pipe is of

11 high quality.

12 And as we know in New York City and

13 the experience we have protecting New York

14 City's drinking water supply, that's the key

15 to having world-class water supplies. And

16 it's what we need to start helping more of

17 our villages and cities around the state

18 achieve, starting with Newburgh.

19 And we know, of course, that the cost

20 of failing at source water protection -- we

21 know very well now from Hoosick Falls and

22 Newburgh, and we want to avoid as much of

23 that as possible.

24 Finally, I'll wrap up with one other

537

1 short anecdote, and that is the Wallkill

2 River, which runs out of New Jersey, through

3 Orange County and Ulster County, and meets

4 the Hudson near Kingston after joining the

5 Rondout Creek. It's one of the largest

6 tributaries of the Hudson River. And this

7 summer, 30 miles turned bright green and

8 produced toxins. The river itself became

9 toxic because of a harmful algal bloom that

10 persisted for over 60 days.

11 Now, around the state we know that

12 there are a lot of these harmful algal

13 blooms, primarily, though, affecting lakes

14 and ponds. This was a river, flowing water,

15 affected for over 30 miles. And there's a

16 DEC study that has been proposed, it would

17 cost $300,000 this year, $500,000 the next,

18 to really get at the underlying causes of

19 that episode and other problems that the

20 river faces.

21 So we feel strongly that that should

22 be funded, but we think that this also points

23 to the real need to increase staff and budget

24 for the DEC. Which, as you know, has been

538

1 just stripped to the bone over many years,

2 and there is no real proposal that I see to

3 increase staff. And if we don't have

4 assessments and we don't have watershed

5 protection plans and we don't have all of the

6 fundamentals of the Clean Water Act, then we

7 really are not spending our money as wisely

8 as we could.

9 All of the infrastructure and source

10 water protection, those capital improvements,

11 is absolutely essential. But enforcing our

12 clean water laws really is as fundamental to

13 achieving what we all want, which is clean,

14 safe drinking water and water that's safe for

15 recreation and healthy for wildlife.

16 So with that, I will close my remarks.

17 I'm happy to take any questions if you have

18 any.

19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

20 Questions?

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Any questions?

22 Thank you so much.

23 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.

24 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.

539

1 MR. SHAPLEY: Thank you.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is

3 Director of Public Policy Andy Bicking, from

4 Scenic Hudson.

5 And following Mr. Bicking is

6 Erik Kulleseid, from the Open Space

7 Institute. So please be ready.

8 Welcome, Mr. Bicking.

9 MR. BICKING: Thank you, Chairwoman.

10 And thank you, everyone, for this opportunity

11 to speak to you today.

12 And thank you for your historic

13 support of so many strong environmental

14 outcomes in budgets of the past. Your

15 leadership has really helped deliver what we

16 love most about New York, and that is our

17 clean air, our clean water, protected

18 parklands, working farms, and good quality

19 jobs. So we appreciate all the work that you

20 have done.

21 My name is Andy Bicking. I'm director

22 of public policy for Scenic Hudson. I'm

23 honored to follow my colleague Dan Shapley at

24 Riverkeeper. Scenic Hudson is to the Hudson

540

1 Valley's land and waterfront what Riverkeeper

2 is to the water itself, and we work in

3 partnership on many important issues.

4 I want to speak today to three major

5 elements of the State Budget: The

6 Environmental Protection Fund, of course,

7 which you've heard quite a bit about; the

8 Water Infrastructure Act; as well as the

9 Empire State Trail. I'll be skipping through

10 my testimony to really focus on those

11 elements that I think are so unique that

12 maybe you haven't heard them from advocates

13 yet today. But rest assured that we support

14 all three of these proposals, for many of the

15 reasons which have been stated.

16 With respect to the Environmental

17 Protection Fund, we strongly support the

18 $300 million proposal from the Governor. In

19 particular, looking at programs within the

20 fund, we wish to express support for Hudson

21 Estuary Management. The Executive has

22 proposed $5.5 million for the Hudson Estuary

23 Management Program. That's a $500,000

24 increase from last year's budget. This

541

1 includes $800,000 for implementation of the

2 Mohawk River Action Plan.

3 We see this allocation in this year's

4 proposal from the Executive as a very

5 important step to rebuilding all that the

6 program has to offer through its action

7 agenda, which is a stakeholder-driven plan

8 that is held with high accountability within

9 the department and our local communities,

10 that helps get funding out to local

11 governments and community organizations that

12 implement the plan.

13 However, we do note that in the 2008

14 and 2009 fiscal year, when EPF totaled $255

15 million, the program actually received more

16 money than it does under the proposal we see

17 today for a $300 million EPF. So we are very

18 much appreciate of the modest increase which

19 has been received.

20 I'd also like to comment on the open

21 space land acquisition line item within the

22 EPF. Scenic Hudson is a land trust, and the

23 Executive Budget proposal includes

24 $33 million for open space conservation. We

542

1 would note that this represents a $7 million

2 increase from the $40 million in last year's

3 budget. So we are understandably concerned

4 about this reduction, especially given that

5 the program had received $60 million in

6 appropriations, again, when the EPF was at

7 $255 million in 2008-2009.

8 Scenic Hudson has a plan for

9 conserving the region's landscapes. It's

10 known as Saving the Land that Matters Most.

11 It's a data-driven plan that scientifically

12 arrives at goals for the region looking at a

13 variety of conservation priorities, including

14 access to recreation and parks, including

15 access to the water, including protecting our

16 scenic ridgelines, as well as important

17 habitat.

18 One of the key things of our Saving

19 the Land that Matters Most plan is farmland

20 protection, which you have heard quite a bit

21 about from us in the past. I'd like to thank

22 you for your work, I guess it was two years

23 ago, for the Hudson Valley Agricultural

24 Enhancement Program, which in conjunction

543

1 with the statewide Farmland Protection

2 Program has really done an incredible amount

3 of work helping local farmers to conserve the

4 land and then taking the money they often

5 receive for conservation easements and

6 reinvesting those into their businesses and

7 the local economy.

8 The Executive Budget includes

9 $20 million for statewide farmland protection

10 projects. This is something that we do

11 support. Again, demand remains incredibly

12 high. According to our partners, the

13 American Farmland Trust, in 2016 alone,

14 approximately 65 applications totaling

15 $49 million were submitted to the Department

16 of Agriculture and Markets. And so I think

17 this underscores the immense popularity of

18 the program.

19 We have urged the department to

20 maintain an annual request for proposals for

21 projects. I would note that at one point in

22 time the department was considering coming

23 out with RFPs every other year, which is

24 something we have been concerned would affect

544

1 the agricultural community's feeling of

2 confidence in the fund. So we encourage the

3 Legislature and Executive to do everything

4 they can do to keep the program moving on an

5 annual basis.

6 The next section of the EPF I'd like

7 to address is the navigational law category.

8 You have heard about this from others today.

9 In short, we see this as an offload from the

10 Aid to Localities budget and would

11 respectfully request that you do what you can

12 to place it back into the program which it

13 originally came from.

14 We have seen some really exciting

15 legislation, Article VII legislation, related

16 to the Waterfront Revitalization Program,

17 which Scenic Hudson is a strong supporter of.

18 As you've heard earlier, this would reduce

19 the amount of local share for grants local

20 governments receive from the Department of

21 State.

22 We applaud this proposal, as we see it

23 as making the development of local waterfront

24 revitalization plans, which are so critical

545

1 for our local and regional economy in the

2 region, more possible and more feasible for

3 communities who are fiscally challenged to be

4 able to step up and make a plan for their

5 future.

6 The final item in the EPF I'd like to

7 address also comes with a note of thanks to

8 the Legislature. The Executive Budget

9 includes new funding for natural resource

10 damage assessment in the Hudson River. There

11 is an increase of approximately

12 $1.285 million. This is critically important

13 to enable the state to conduct research to

14 assess the damages to the Hudson River as a

15 result of contamination of toxic

16 polychlorinated biphenyls. This is an issue

17 I know that is very important to many of you.

18 Chairman Englebright, I know you in

19 particular showed some incredible leadership

20 on this last spring when we asked members of

21 the Legislature to write to the Governor and

22 General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt. The

23 good news is your advocacy has paid off and

24 it has made a difference. We saw this past

546

1 September the State DEC and the Attorney

2 General's office stepped up in a public

3 statement calling for additional dredging of

4 toxin hotspots in the Hudson River, and have

5 been very strong advocates for this cause in

6 Washington. The fight is not over yet, but

7 we remain optimistic and committed to this

8 important goal.

9 The Clean Water Infrastructure Act has

10 received a lot of praise today. This is

11 something that we support. We applaud the

12 executive branch for recognizing that there

13 is not a one-size-fits-all solution to

14 addressing water quality issues. As a land

15 trust, we are very excited to see the source

16 water protection category included. This is

17 one of the most cost-effective means of

18 protecting water quality that we know of.

19 And because of this, we are responding to

20 begin to do the work to identify where

21 regional priorities in the Hudson Valley

22 might be and where we might be able to

23 partner to help leverage this fund for public

24 benefit.

547

1 I would now just like to jump to the

2 final section of the testimony, which is the

3 Empire State Trail. We're very excited with

4 this proposal as well. Phase One will cost

5 about $53 million and create the most

6 extensive multi-use trail network in the

7 nation. This builds on years of legislative

8 leadership and support for the Hudson River

9 Valley Greenway as well as other elements of

10 the trail.

11 The project is largely shovel-ready.

12 And there is so much that can be done to

13 create jobs and create this amenity for local

14 communities, which I'm sure will help enhance

15 home values, increase tourism, and create

16 something that all New Yorkers can be proud

17 of.

18 We do recognize and we have heard,

19 sitting in Hudson River Valley Greenway

20 Community Councils' meetings, that there are

21 some members in the region and throughout the

22 state that are questioning if this proposal

23 will benefit their local trail. And I would

24 just say in response to this that I think the

548

1 vision of a statewide trail network is

2 outstanding, and it really requires a trunk

3 or a skeleton, if you will. And an

4 investment over the next three years in the

5 Empire State Trail I believe will create some

6 common ground for and opportunities for

7 greater connectivity for many other local and

8 regional trail networks. And we welcome an

9 ongoing discussion about how to achieve that

10 in many other regions of the state.

11 So with that, I'll conclude my

12 testimony. Thank you again for the

13 opportunity to speak before you today. And

14 if you have any questions, I'd be happy to

15 answer them.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

17 much. We appreciate it.

18 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

19 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

20 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is

22 Erik Kulleseid, senior vice president for the

23 Open Space Institute and executive director

24 of the Alliance for New York State Parks.

549

1 Welcome.

2 And we have, following that, several

3 members of the Police Benevolent Association

4 of New York State, and we look forward to

5 their testimony.

6 Thank you.

7 MR. KULLESEID: Am I on?

8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes.

9 MR. KULLESEID: So I feel like I have

10 very good company here. I have Senator Clay

11 Pit Ponds, Senator Almost Four Freedoms,

12 Senator Allegany --

13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Cattaraugus,

14 Chautauqua --

15 MR. KULLESEID: -- Letchworth, Long

16 Point, Midway -- lots of parks -- Assemblyman

17 Riverbank, Assemblyman Fair Haven and Chimney

18 Bluffs. Assemblyman Englebright, you are the

19 steward of them, all through the Parks and

20 Tourism Committee, so you get all of them.

21 And Assemblyman Stec, for Crown Point and

22 really almost Moreau Lake State Park, right?

23 You all get the state park system.

24 And thank you for letting me come here today

550

1 to talk about the Governor's budget proposal.

2 I will not read through my testimony.

3 Suffice it to say I think that our parks and

4 public lands are going through the kind of

5 renaissance that happens once a generation,

6 and I really support and congratulate you all

7 for your fine stewardship and partnership

8 with the Governor to make sure that our

9 public lands are as good as they can be for

10 the people of the State of New York. It's

11 really been an exceptional period.

12 I note, obviously, full support for

13 $120 million for the New York Parks 2020 in

14 2017. I think the corresponding program at

15 the DEC in Adventure NY, and the $30 million

16 that's been put in the budget there, is only

17 apt for places like the Adirondacks, which

18 are huge destinations, different kinds of

19 places than some of the other parks, but

20 still just as worthy of getting this kind of

21 investment.

22 Sort of on the rest of the budget, I

23 think it's hard -- you know, both of these

24 agencies are being held flat. And as I say

551

1 in the testimony, they're facing a triple

2 whammy these days, and that is budget cuts

3 over the past nine years now of over

4 20 percent since the late aughts, rising

5 fixed costs that are out of their control,

6 and a growing number of visitors. I think we

7 all are aware that last year 70 million

8 people visited the state park system, which

9 is a record attendance. And how do we

10 maintain that system at a level of excellence

11 that people keep coming back and wanting to

12 be in them?

13 We also do support the EPF. We are

14 very pleased about the $300 million EPF this

15 year. There are four categories that OSI is

16 particularly interested in. That's the State

17 Land Stewardship line and its New York State

18 Park and Trail Partnership Program funding --

19 that's the funding to build the capacity of

20 friends groups to help parks. We also are

21 very invested and dependent on the Municipal

22 Grants line to help us fund our capital

23 projects that we're doing in the state parks.

24 And we also feel strongly about the Open

552

1 Space and Land Conservation account.

2 Really nothing but good to say about

3 State Land Stewardship and the Park and Trail

4 conservation program. It enables groups like

5 ours -- and we've really done projects now,

6 we have done fundraising projects in

7 Letchworth now, we helped build the

8 Letchworth Nature Center. We are at Thatcher

9 here in this area, we've been doing things at

10 Minnewaska -- and that is all work that we

11 could not do without the support of many of

12 these state programs.

13 I would say -- like others before me,

14 I won't dwell on it -- we also question

15 closely the inclusion of $2 million for the

16 Navigation Law in the budget. It seems like

17 an offload, and that it should be reversed

18 during budget negotiations.

19 We also see the drop in the Open Space

20 Conservation account to $33 million as

21 something that is somewhat troubling. We

22 understand that there is intended to be land

23 acquisition dollars in the water

24 infrastructure $2 billion initiative. But

553

1 having not seen the details on that, we can

2 only say let's really hope that it's money

3 that is accessible and spendable and that we

4 can move out the door to continue, maintain

5 the momentum for land conservation that

6 New York has been so good at and so proud of.

7 We also are actually supportive, we

8 support the new Adirondack Gateway at

9 Frontier Town in the Adirondacks. A previous

10 testifier was concerned about $32 million. I

11 think that's actually a combination of

12 private and public dollars. But we think

13 that any kind of initiative in that area that

14 brings people, creates another way to get

15 into the park is a good thing.

16 And then finally -- and, Assemblyman

17 Englebright, you've been focusing on this

18 today -- the Empire State Trail. We really

19 do feel it's a very great catalyst for

20 building a network. You know, we are

21 building trails that will tie into that. I

22 think that's one of the pieces of magic

23 you'll see, is that many communities will tie

24 into this trail, it will knit together the

554

1 state in a great, great web.

2 Yes, Long Island should be brought in.

3 Yes, the Thousand Islands region ought to be

4 brought in. But since you do have these

5 really fairly well formed trunks, we ought to

6 go with it and then pull in Long Island. I

7 think what they're doing on Long Island with

8 the Ocean Parkway and the -- what is the W

9 one, the park? Wantagh. Wantagh, sorry.

10 That work is really fabulous, right? It's

11 really making those south barrier islands

12 available to bikers.

13 So really, just in summary, we are

14 very happy about this budget. A couple of

15 red flags in that budget that I hope you will

16 work through. We look forward to seeing the

17 details on the water infrastructure

18 $2 billion. But other than that, really,

19 again, thank you for letting me be here

20 today, and we look forward to working in many

21 of your parks to build infrastructure.

22 Assemblyman Farrell, we've got things

23 we want to do at Riverbank as well. So it's

24 all good.

555

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Questions?

2 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

3 MR. KULLESEID: Thanks.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you so much

5 for being here.

6 MR. KULLESEID: My pleasure.

7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So next I'm very

8 pleased to introduce Drew Cavanagh, secretary

9 and director of Forest Rangers Superior

10 Officers; Manuel Vilar, vice president/CAO

11 and director of Park Police Sergeants; and

12 John Burke, director, New York State EnCon

13 Police Superior Officers. And they are from

14 the Police Benevolent Association of New York

15 State.

16 Thank you so much for being here

17 today.

18 DIRECTOR CAVANAGH: Thank you, and

19 good evening.

20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good evening.

21 DIRECTOR CAVANAGH: My name is Drew

22 Cavanagh. I'm the secretary of the PBA and

23 the director of the Forest Rangers Superior

24 Officers Association.

556

1 As you said, I'm here with Manny

2 Vilar, who is our founding president and the

3 director of the Park Police Sergeants

4 Association, and John Burke, the director of

5 the Environmental Conservation Superior

6 Officers Association.

7 We're here to offer testimony on

8 behalf of our 1200 members and specifically

9 to address the budget priorities of the

10 Department of Environmental Conservation's

11 Forest Rangers, Environmental Conservation

12 Officers, and the Office of Parks, Recreation

13 and Historic Preservation's Park Police.

14 We thank the Legislature for the

15 opportunity to present our concerns on behalf

16 of the men and women who put their lives on

17 the line protecting the people and resources

18 of the State of New York.

19 We begin by discussing the critical

20 public safety role played by Forest Rangers.

21 Forest Rangers protect our public lands and

22 the people who use them. We respond to plane

23 crashes in remote areas, airlift hikers

24 stranded on mountaintops, rescue people who

557

1 have fallen through the ice, search for lost

2 children, the elderly, or anybody who needs

3 help. Last year there were over 350 rescue

4 missions, and every year the number goes up.

5 While I was sitting up here waiting to

6 testify, I was trying to coordinate with -- I

7 wasn't doing the work, but I was talking to

8 my lieutenants in the region who are rescuing

9 an injured snowmobiler on Raquette Lake right

10 now. So we're doing it.

11 We thank the Legislature for their

12 past support. The missions are important,

13 they matter, and we're honored to do our part

14 here.

15 We're encouraged and thank Governor

16 Cuomo and the DEC and the Legislature for the

17 joint Environmental Conservation

18 Officer/Forest Ranger academy that started

19 yesterday. We have 44 new recruits, future

20 ECOs and Forest Rangers, and we're really

21 excited about that. Anytime we get new

22 staff, we're excited about it.

23 It's a start, but our numbers are far

24 too low. We just need to replenish them

558

1 somehow. Unfortunately, simply having

2 sufficient staff to accomplish our division's

3 mission has become an overriding concern.

4 There are not enough Forest Rangers. We just

5 don't have enough people.

6 I have a few facts and figures I just

7 want to mention. In 1970, there were 143

8 Forest Rangers, and they were patrolling

9 3.5 million acres of public land, most of

10 which was in the Adirondack and the Catskill

11 Preserves. Today, even with our recent

12 hiring yesterday, there are 129 Forest

13 Rangers, and now we have 5 million acres of

14 state land. So the numbers are going the

15 wrong way.

16 While the majority of this is Forest

17 Preserve, the DEC now administers thousands

18 of acres of State Forest, conservation

19 easements. And we say -- I heard someone

20 earlier talking about the New York City

21 Watershed. We protect the New York City

22 Watershed. We're the ones who actually

23 patrol the lands around the New York City

24 Watershed. That's work that Forest Rangers

559

1 are now doing. And it's all new work without

2 new staff.

3 Once there was 28,000 acres a Forest

4 Rangers was patrolling; now it's over 53,000

5 acres, which is a big difference. Now, as

6 we've accumulated land, what we've had happen

7 is a shell game. The DEC moves Forest Ranger

8 positions around the state from one new

9 purchase to another. Previously acquired

10 lands are no longer adequately protected, and

11 new lands never receive the attention they

12 deserve.

13 It's important that the Legislature

14 partner with us in recognizing that

15 additional Forest Rangers must be added when

16 property is purchased. We are asking the

17 Legislature to add an additional Forest

18 Ranger for every 30,000 acres that are

19 acquired going forward. This appropriation

20 for a new Forest Ranger will be included in

21 the budget of the acquisition of the new

22 property and added to the DEC's budget in the

23 Civil Service/Forest Ranger count.

24 This is reasonable, and our citizens

560

1 expect this, as they want us to protect our

2 lands and we've got to do it.

3 Finally, I want to point out that

4 while I'm talking about Forest Rangers and

5 our challenges in staffing, it's really no

6 different for the folks I'm here with. The

7 Park Police and the Environmental

8 Conservation Officers have the same problem.

9 We're fighting simply to have enough members

10 to accomplish our mission.

11 I've been a Forest Ranger for 24

12 years, and I took this job because I love it.

13 And I still love it now. And I think what I

14 do is important, and I'm honored to do it.

15 We wish to thank the members of the New York

16 State Legislature who have been strong

17 supporters of the Department of Environmental

18 Conservation Forest Rangers. We ask for your

19 continued support so that we may serve the

20 people of the state.

21 Thank you for this opportunity to

22 present testimony.

23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

24 DIRECTOR BURKE: Thank you, Chairs. I

561

1 appreciate you providing me the opportunity

2 to talk on behalf of the PBA of New York

3 State members regarding our extreme need for

4 investment in patrol vehicles.

5 My name is John Burke, and I am the

6 director of the EnCon Police Superior

7 Officers Association.

8 For years the state has made do with

9 equipment without an eye on investment in

10 updated technology or replacing wear and tear

11 on personnel. Failure to keep a replacement

12 schedule for equipment and personnel results

13 in the inevitable requirement for significant

14 investment over and above the annual budget

15 funding.

16 We have reached that inevitable

17 moment. Appropriations specifically

18 designated to support our ability to protect

19 the public have continued to fall short.

20 The patrol cars of our officers are in

21 desperate need. We experience chronic

22 breakdowns, wheels have fallen off the

23 vehicles, cars are being repaired with

24 component parts that exceed the value of the

562

1 car being repaired. We are purchasing used

2 body parts at salvage yards to replace doors

3 and tailgates. Not only are the repairs high

4 in cost, but officers lose valuable patrol

5 time bringing broken-down vehicles to

6 department maintenance centers or auto repair

7 shops.

8 The public needs to have confidence in

9 the police force. However, that becomes

10 difficult when the patrol car is stranded,

11 loses parts, or is rusted out.

12 The infusion of cars and funding to

13 properly outfit them needs to be aggressively

14 increased in the DEC budget. The agency is

15 chasing from behind to catch up with the

16 advanced-age fleet. Of our fleet,

17 48.9 percent of the cars exceed 125,000

18 miles. To bring the fleet up to par would

19 require an initial infusion of 100 vehicles

20 this year, to allow for an appropriate

21 vehicle replacement schedule.

22 The state did not replace any cars for

23 three years, 2009-2011. This breakdown now

24 has come to roost, and we are asking the

563

1 Legislature to look closely at increasing the

2 DEC budget to accommodate the need of EnCon

3 officers for appropriate vehicles and a plan

4 for scheduling replacement that allows for

5 safety for our officers, public, and

6 advancements in technology.

7 In 2012, the department resumed

8 purchasing police vehicles. However, the

9 budget did not follow for adequate

10 procurement -- usually only 25 to 50 cars

11 were purchased per year -- to keep up with

12 the depreciation of the fleet.

13 In 2016, the department purchased 60

14 police vehicles, which are still being

15 retrofitted and have not been fully deployed

16 yet. However, that only accounts for five or

17 six cars per region, and each region has

18 approximately 30 or 40 cars. And there are

19 nine regions in the State of New York.

20 With the infusion of 100 additional

21 cars in the fiscal year, DEC would be able to

22 replace the cars for officers on a five-year

23 cycle. The average mileage a year on a

24 vehicle is 25,000 miles. After five years,

564

1 the vehicles will have 125,000 miles. To

2 maintain the replacement schedule, the DEC

3 would need to replace 60 cars a year, and

4 ample funding is required by the state for

5 that goal to be achieved.

6 The five-year replacement also allows

7 for the timely update of technology available

8 in our vehicles, allowing us to be much more

9 efficient as advancements are made in the

10 automotive and law enforcement industry.

11 Finally, I have been discussing the

12 EnCon Officers' needs. However, both the

13 Forest Rangers and the Park Police suffer

14 from the same unsatisfactory investment in

15 their aging fleets.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

17 DIRECTOR VILAR: Good evening.

18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Good evening.

19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good evening.

20 DIRECTOR VILAR: Thank you for

21 allowing me the opportunity to speak to you

22 today. My name is Manny Vilar, and I'm the

23 founding president of the Police Benevolent

24 Association of New York State. I'm a

565

1 sergeant with the New York State Park Police,

2 having completed 32 years of service.

3 I'm here today to encourage support of

4 the legislation that the PBA is going to be

5 submitting in the coming weeks, to merge the

6 State Park Police with the New York State

7 Troopers.

8 For years the PBA, on behalf of the

9 State Park Police, has spoken to the

10 Legislature about the chronic underfunding of

11 the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic

12 Preservation, the lack of competitive salary

13 and benefits, and the direct impact it has on

14 the State Park Police.

15 The agency, in an effort to meet the

16 Governor's requirement for budget reductions,

17 deferred replacement of vehicles, equipment,

18 and academies for far too long, and we are

19 now running from behind with no real

20 opportunity to catch up without truly

21 significant investment from the state.

22 In addition to the State Park Police

23 being underfunded, lower salaries and

24 substandard retirement benefits compared to

566

1 that of State Troopers has created a perfect

2 storm and hemorrhaging of personnel. The

3 average attrition rate per year for the past

4 three years for new recruits is 30 percent.

5 Currently the State Park Police are at 259

6 members, which includes the State Park Police

7 academy class of 28 scheduled to graduate

8 later this year.

9 In 2008, the staffing level was at

10 282. The civil service staffing level is

11 387. After 17 years, from 2000 to present,

12 after 17 years and 13 academies producing

13 over 390 police officers at a cost of tens of

14 millions of dollars, we've lost a total of

15 413 officers. So we've actually lost more

16 people than we've graduated.

17 In an October 2012 report by Brian A.

18 Reeves, a statistician with the U.S.

19 Department of Justice's Office of Justice

20 Programs, found the national average

21 attrition rate for police agencies to be

22 7 percent.

23 We believe at this time it's necessary

24 for the Legislature to find creative

567

1 solutions to prioritize public safety by

2 rectifying the crisis of aged equipment and

3 hemorrhaging of Park Police officers. We

4 believe at this point the only viable option

5 is the merger of the State Park Police with

6 the New York State Troopers. The State Park

7 Police have full law enforcement authority

8 and statewide jurisdiction. In fact, we

9 frequently respond to calls beside and

10 alongside State Troopers. The PBA of

11 New York State and its members believe the

12 merger of these two departments will provide

13 enhanced police protection in both our state

14 parks and throughout the state.

15 Additionally, the State Park Police

16 bring with them added expertise and training,

17 including swift water and marine as well as

18 high-angle and steep-terrain rescue,

19 snowmobile patrol, and counterterror tactics.

20 This additional expertise is part of the

21 rigorous training that the State Park Police

22 officer is required to complete while at the

23 academy.

24 Interestingly, State Troopers may

568

1 receive similar training, but only after

2 graduating its very well regarded academy.

3 Merging the two units immediately

4 increases the statewide deployment capacity,

5 allowing for efficient and appropriate

6 coverage throughout the state. The size of

7 the State Park Police has dipped too far to

8 recover, and the academies have been unable

9 to maintain its ranks.

10 As you likely know, Governor Cuomo and

11 Commissioner Harvey frequently cite that

12 there are over 69.3 million visitors a year

13 to New York State parks, and its economic

14 impact is over $2 billion annually to the

15 state. The State Park Police patrol the

16 busiest state parks in New York, such as

17 Jones Beach, which will see more than

18 1 million visitors on Memorial Day weekend

19 flocking to its shores; the recently upgraded

20 New York State Fair, which can now

21 accommodate 1.1 million visitors over 10 days

22 each summer; and the Saratoga Performing Arts

23 Center, which boasts large crowds for

24 classical music events and Live

569

1 Nation-managed rock concerts.

2 It's unfortunate to note that these

3 types of mass gatherings are also targets for

4 potential terrorist attacks and present their

5 own unique law enforcement challenges.

6 Niagara Falls State Park remains one

7 of the world's most popular destinations,

8 irrespective of season. The winter brings

9 families to snowshoe, ski, and ice fish in

10 dozens of upstate locations.

11 If the Legislature cannot find

12 adequate funding to assist the State Park

13 Police, we ask for a bold, creative solution,

14 and we propose the merging of the State Park

15 Police with the State Troopers.

16 We appreciate all your efforts over

17 the past couple of years, but unfortunately,

18 I'm sorry to say the situation has only

19 gotten worse. It is now at critical mass.

20 The cars are falling apart. We are

21 constantly losing people. A 1992 class of 65

22 recruits have yet to hit the retirement age

23 of 65, and there's only eight people left.

24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

570

1 DIRECTOR VILAR: Thank you.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: As an avid

3 supporter of you and all of your members,

4 first of all, I want to say thank you for

5 everything that you do to protect people from

6 New York and actually visitors from other

7 states and from around the world.

8 And I'm glad to see the three of you

9 appearing together, because when you add to

10 the list of dangerous sites in New York State

11 that are beautiful, you could add

12 Zoar Valley, which spans Cattaraugus and Erie

13 counties in my district, and it's a 500-foot

14 gorge in some spots, 3,000 acres. And we

15 have brave officers from the Park Police,

16 from EnCon, and from the Forest Rangers who

17 respond to rescues every single year. And

18 you're talking about swift-water rescues,

19 you're talking about high-angle rescues in

20 some cases. You work very cooperatively with

21 the local first responders, the State Police,

22 and the sheriff's deputies.

23 But every year somebody gets

24 themselves into trouble, and unfortunately we

571

1 have fatalities there every year. So you put

2 yourselves in danger.

3 And I do want to say to you too, you

4 know, for example, an EnCon officer -- I

5 brought her up earlier today to the

6 commissioner -- Lieutenant Liza Bobseine, who

7 just saved a life in Columbia County.

8 Officer Davey was shot. And I think that

9 sometimes the public doesn't appreciate all

10 of the dangerous situations that your

11 officers go into.

12 So your points about training, about

13 recruitment, about academies are right on the

14 money. About equipment. And you may have

15 heard Senator O'Mara speak earlier, asking

16 the commissioner questions about, for

17 example, the vehicles that are so dangerous

18 with wheels even falling off.

19 So I just want to say that we truly

20 are appreciative of you and everything that

21 you do for us every day. And certainly we'll

22 work to try to achieve some good outcomes

23 during the budget process.

24 DIRECTOR VILAR: Thank you.

572

1 DIRECTOR CAVANAGH: Thank you very

2 much.

3 DIRECTOR BURKE: Thank you.

4 SENATOR KRUEGER: I do have a

5 question.

6 I also want to thank you. I'm just

7 curious. So your closing statement about if

8 we can't fix it within the DEC budget, you

9 would prefer to be merged into the State

10 Troopers --

11 DIRECTOR VILAR: Yes, ma'am. We at

12 this point -- I'm here 32 years. It's been a

13 battle of attrition all along. I am a rarity

14 that I'm actually here that long. It's a

15 constant revolving door. NYPD, at a

16 7 percent attrition rate, would think they

17 have a recruitment crisis. We're 30 percent.

18 It's -- you know, it's -- it's

19 unattainable, unfixable. And unfortunately,

20 you know, between the underfunding, the lack

21 of comparable salaries and benefits -- we

22 train really great officers, and they move

23 on. They move on to municipal police

24 departments. Downstate, they go to New York

573

1 State PD, they go to Nassau, Suffolk.

2 Upstate, they go to Erie County sheriffs,

3 Niagara County sheriffs. We can't maintain

4 the staff.

5 SENATOR KRUEGER: And on the public

6 protection day I had raised the point that

7 the Governor's budget was putting another

8 200 State Troopers into New York City. And I

9 questioned the need for 200 additional State

10 Troopers in New York City, given the size of

11 NYPD.

12 But if the three of you had the funds

13 for 200 additional staff, it seems to me you

14 could have dramatic change in what's going on

15 in the parks all over the State of New York.

16 DIRECTOR CAVANAGH: If you gave us

17 10 -- if they gave me 10, I'd be thrilled.

18 SENATOR KRUEGER: You'd take 10.

19 COMMISSIONER BURKE: And it's not just

20 the staffing, it is the equipment as well.

21 Because the vehicles, I mean, basically

22 you're driving vehicles with 200,000 miles;

23 2006s, 200,000 miles.

24 We have a replacement policy, and

574

1 we're in violation of our own replacement

2 policy that says four to five years for law

3 enforcement vehicles. We're driving cars

4 from 2006 with 200,000 miles.

5 SENATOR KRUEGER: So we're in

6 violation of our own policies?

7 COMMISSIONER BURKE: We are.

8 SENATOR KRUEGER: Hmm. Thank you.

9 Thank you all.

10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

11 DIRECTOR CAVANAGH: Thank you.

12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is

13 Mark Dunlea, chairperson of the Green

14 Education and Legal Fund. And following him

15 will be Blair Horner, executive director of

16 NYPIRG.

17 Welcome.

18 MR. DUNLEA: Good evening, and thank

19 you for all staying so late.

20 My name is Mark Dunlea. I'm chair of

21 the Green Education and Legal Fund, and I

22 also coordinate the statewide campaign to

23 move to 100 percent clean energy by 2030.

24 My biggest concern with this budget is

575

1 that it continues to lock us into

2 catastrophic climate change. And it was

3 interesting to recently read the updated

4 figures from DEC that you mandated as part of

5 the Community Risk and Resiliency Act, but

6 their conclusion officially is that New York

7 State is locked into catastrophic climate

8 change. They didn't quite put that into the

9 headline, but they predict, for instance,

10 that by the end of this century that we will

11 see temperature rise between 4.2 degrees

12 Fahrenheit to 12.1 degrees Fahrenheit.

13 And according to the agreement made in

14 Paris, in order to avoid catastrophic climate

15 change, we need to keep the temperature rise

16 below 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit. So they're

17 saying we're at 4 to 12 degrees.

18 They also estimate that sea level rise

19 may be as much as 6 feet by the end of 2100.

20 Six feet is going to be a little bit

21 difficult for New York City and Long Island

22 to deal with. Dr. James Hansen and the

23 National Oceanic and Atmospheric

24 Administration earlier this year came out and

576

1 said by 2050 that it is possible that based

2 on how rapidly the ice shelfs are melting,

3 that we're going to see sea rise as high as

4 9 feet. And that's in 35 years.

5 And when Cornell and Stanford did a

6 study a number of years ago as part of the

7 anti-fracking effort, they laid out what

8 would be needed to move New York State to

9 100 percent renewable energy. The price tag

10 was $460 billion. That's a fair amount of

11 money. Now, granted, most of that money

12 comes from reprogramming the amount of money

13 we're wasting right now in building out the

14 fossil fuel infrastructure and the

15 investments we need to upgrade the

16 transmission lines. But it still means we

17 have to be putting an extra $4 billion,

18 $5 billion, $10 billion a year on the table

19 just in New York State if we're going to move

20 to 100 percent clean energy.

21 Another report that came out just last

22 week is that how much carbon do we have left

23 to put into the atmosphere before we go above

24 the 1.5 degrees. The worst-case scenario is

577

1 that we will exhaust our carbon budget in one

2 year. One year we have to stop it. The

3 best-case scenario was we had four years.

4 This budget doesn't move us to that.

5 And I thought it was very interesting, when

6 Senator Krueger asked NYSERDA can you

7 articulate for us some numbers on how you're

8 actually moving to 50 percent renewable

9 energy by 2030 -- that was a stunning

10 question. And he kind of fumbled. And I'm

11 really glad to hear, for instance, that we

12 were going to move more energy retrofits and

13 buildings, but that's not the 50 percent

14 renewable electricity goal. And if NYSERDA

15 cannot articulate that, that's a concern.

16 We'd like to see the State Legislature

17 hold hearings on what exactly is the state's

18 plan. It is very good that the Governor in

19 his State of the State did announce, as we

20 had requested last year and the Assembly had

21 put into its budget, that the state is now

22 going to do a study on how fast we can move

23 to 100 percent clean energy. And that is

24 based on science, not based on the political

578

1 and economic considerations. But we do hope

2 that you put some attention to that.

3 We also need to see more of an

4 investment in offshore wind. Obviously it

5 was very good to finally see LIPA after so

6 many years agree to a small offshore wind

7 project, 90 megawatts. You know, according

8 to the Jacobson report, we need about

9 40 percent of our energy to come from

10 offshore wind. What the advocates have been

11 asking for is 5,000 megawatts by 2025 and

12 10,000 megawatts by 2030. What the Governor

13 has proposed is much smaller than that, a

14 goal of 2400 by 2030, much less than 5,000 by

15 2025. And there was no actual commitment to

16 do that. There was no commitment on money on

17 the table, there was no power purchase

18 agreement to make that occur. And stating

19 goals is a lot different than putting money

20 on the table.

21 How do we pay for some of this? Well,

22 you know, it was interesting to see that

23 senior Republican leaders last week sat down

24 with Donald Trump and said, What we need to

579

1 do as good conservative businesspeople who

2 believe in the free market system, is we need

3 a carbon tax. And we need a carbon tax of at

4 least $40 a ton.

5 Now, we have RGGI in New York State.

6 RGGI is about $6 to $8 a ton, depending upon

7 what the thing is. And it's not across the

8 board. There is legislation with about 20

9 cosponsors in the New York State Legislature,

10 in both houses, to support a carbon tax

11 starting at $35 a ton. In this year's

12 budget, we would like at a minimum to see at

13 least a feasibility study done on what a

14 state carbon tax could do. Oregon has

15 already funded and done a feasibility study

16 on carbon tax, as has Massachusetts.

17 You know, one thing we always

18 appreciated with -- oh, she's left -- with

19 Senator Young was that she had introduced our

20 bill a number of years ago to create a New

21 York State Council on Food Policy, which does

22 now exist through executive order. And what

23 we wanted the food policy to do, among other

24 things, was to look at how do we have to

580

1 change our agriculture system in order to

2 react to the climate. And it's not been

3 happening.

4 But we are very happy that

5 Assemblymember Barrett has introduced

6 legislation, based on what California has

7 done, to create a tax credit for farmers to

8 put carbon back into the soil. We need to

9 reduce the amount of carbon we're putting

10 into the atmosphere -- that's by stopping

11 fossil fuels -- but we also have to take

12 carbon out. And one of the ways you can do

13 that is by putting that back into the soil.

14 And agriculture in the United States accounts

15 for about 9 percent of the carbon

16 footprint -- much higher in the rest of the

17 world, but about 9 percent in the United

18 States -- and we do not really pay a whole

19 lot of attention to how we can sort of reduce

20 that.

21 Just to quickly finish up, I think my

22 next colleague is going to talk more about

23 this. Honestly, we are very concerned, as a

24 lot of New Yorkers are, about the

581

1 $7.6 billion nuclear subsidy that was put in

2 place. It dwarfs the amount of money in the

3 Clean Energy Standard, you know, for

4 renewable energy. How you go from a

5 $59 million subsidy in a matter of weeks to

6 $7.6 billion is, you know, a little bit

7 beyond me. Even Darren Suarez at

8 The Business Council did have to sort of

9 admit that "It did seem a little high to me,

10 $7.6 billion."

11 Now, we'll also point out, to go

12 backwards, The Business Council actually, at

13 Mr. Englebright's Climate Change Task Force

14 hearing last year, did come out in support of

15 a carbon tax. Now, granted, they want it

16 done internationally, but they did support

17 the concept.

18 Probably not in the budget, but we

19 support Senator Krueger's bill to divest the

20 state pension plans from fossil fuels.

21 And finally, one of the issues I

22 helped draft four years ago in New York City,

23 with the New York City Council, was this

24 restriction on plastic bags. Now, I wanted a

582

1 ban on plastic bags. You know, there's a

2 limit as to how much authority the City

3 Council has. We ended up with a fee. We did

4 exempt, you know, people making purchases

5 with WIC and with food stamps. We didn't

6 have the power to have a tax, so we gave the

7 money to the store owners.

8 You guys didn't like that. And you're

9 about to -- you passed a bill against it,

10 probably the Governor is going to sign it.

11 And we hope in the budget you fix it. You

12 didn't like our bill? Do a better bill. Do

13 it statewide. You have more power than the

14 New York City Council does. Ban plastic bags

15 statewide, and then put a fee or a tax -- you

16 can call it a tax now, because you guys have

17 the power to tax -- put a tax on all other

18 bags, paper bags and returnable bags. And

19 just do it statewide, and let's get this over

20 with.

21 But plastic bags are bad for marine

22 animals, they're bad for litter, they cost

23 taxpayers a lot of money, and they're made of

24 fossil fuels.

583

1 So we need more in this budget to deal

2 with climate change. We don't expect much

3 from President Trump in the coming year on

4 climate change. That means you all here at

5 the state level are going to have to, you

6 know, think about our children and

7 grandchildren and save the planet.

8 Thank you very much.

9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

10 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you, Mark.

11 Next up, Blair Horner, from the

12 New York Public Interest Research Group.

13 And getting in line, Jim Slevin of the

14 Utility Workers Union of America, followed by

15 David Hartman, New York State Whitetail

16 Management Coalition.

17 MR. HORNER: Good evening.

18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Good evening, Blair.

19 MR. HORNER: Senators,

20 Assemblymembers, thank you for the

21 opportunity to testify on the Governor's

22 proposed budget dealing with energy and the

23 environment. My name is Blair Horner, I'm

24 the executive director of NYPIRG. With me

584

1 today is Robert Semon, a NYPIRG policy

2 assistant and a student at the College of

3 Staten Island.

4 We're here today to comment on the

5 Governor's budget. You have in front of you

6 detailed comments that we have. We'll

7 summarize and focus on two topics in our

8 testimony. The first will be looking at the

9 need for better water protections in New York

10 State, and the second will be in the sense an

11 off-budget item, which is the need for

12 Legislature to hold the administration's feet

13 to the fire for its plan to jack up

14 electricity rates by a staggering

15 $7.6 billion to bail out three aging,

16 inefficient power plants in upstate.

17 So first Rob will talk a little bit

18 about the comments on water quality. I'll

19 come back on the issue of power plants. And

20 then we can take any questions you might

21 have. Rob?

22 MR. SEMON: Thank you very much,

23 Blair.

24 So the Governor's budget proposal

585

1 includes a proposal to spend $2 billion for

2 drinking water, wastewater, and source

3 protection projects over the next five years.

4 NYPIRG supports proposals to direct billions

5 of dollars towards water infrastructure:

6 examination, testing and repair of water

7 storage or transport apparatuses that are

8 necessary to the state's nearly 20 million

9 residents and their most basic need for

10 potable, clean water. The estimated price

11 tag for drinking water improvements alone is

12 an estimated $38.7 billion in 2008 dollars,

13 far beyond that contemplated by the Executive

14 Budget.

15 Moreover, the state needs to do more

16 to monitor drinking water quality.

17 Currently, only public drinking water

18 supplies in New York are tested regularly for

19 contamination. It is estimated that nearly

20 2 million New Yorkers rely on private wells

21 for their drinking water and may unknowingly

22 be drinking water that is not safe for human

23 consumption. Groundwater can be contaminated

24 by leaking fuel tanks, chemical spills,

586

1 agricultural runoff, industrial activities,

2 and other sources, both manmade and naturally

3 occurring.

4 The Article VII legislation would

5 ensure that prospective buyers and tenants of

6 a property know what is in their drinking

7 water and enable them to take precautions to

8 protect their health, as well as provide

9 valuable data concerning potential

10 environmental threats that could be occurring

11 within the vicinity of the well.

12 MR. HORNER: While not part of the

13 budget, the administration's bailout of

14 aging, inefficient power plants located in

15 upstate will have a huge financial impact on

16 every resident, local government, nonprofit

17 group and business in the state, and divert

18 funds away from more rapidly transitioning to

19 a green, clean, renewable energy.

20 We urge that you use the budget to

21 stop and demand accountability on this

22 enormous increase in electricity costs to

23 bail out these plants and instead use a full

24 public process to discuss how best to meet

587

1 the state's electricity needs while doing

2 what it can to help the workers and the

3 communities impacted by the eventual shutdown

4 of these plants.

5 Now, you heard in earlier testimony

6 from the Public Service Commission that they

7 didn't really know what the estimated cost

8 was going to be for their plant. They said

9 there are things that they didn't know and

10 that they couldn't give you numbers beyond

11 the first two years. And that's fair, it's

12 understandable.

13 But we think when you're asking the

14 public to fork over billions of dollars, you

15 should come up with some sort of estimate.

16 So relying on work done by the Public

17 Utilities Law Project, as you'll see on the

18 chart on page 3 of our written testimony, the

19 estimated cost, based on their analysis, is

20 enormous. So on page 3 you'll see that the

21 analyses done by PULP breaks it down by the

22 every-two-year period called a tranche in the

23 bailout proposal that the PSC has approved.

24 And on the bottom, you'll see, for the

588

1 12-year period, $7.6 billion in total

2 estimated costs, based on their analysis.

3 Now, it could be higher, it could be

4 lower. But that's a reasonable --

5 unfortunately, in our view -- estimated cost

6 that will be paid by everyone in the State of

7 New York.

8 Now, not every ratepayer is a

9 residential ratepayer. And so you'll see on

10 the top of page 4 an analysis also done by

11 PULP that analyzed the impact on residential

12 ratepayers by utility region. So, for

13 example, in Con Ed, there's 2.8 million

14 residential consumers; they'll pay over

15 $700 million in increased rates as a result

16 of this agreement. Assuming, on their

17 estimates -- and you can see on the bottom

18 here, the total is $2.3 billion. So of the

19 7.6, $2.3 billion will be paid by residential

20 ratepayers, the rest will be paid for by

21 municipal governments, businesses,

22 industries. And we don't know what those

23 numbers are, frankly. But it's a lot. If we

24 were talking about a tax increase of

589

1 $7.6 billion, everyone's ears would be perked

2 up.

3 Now, the money is going to be going to

4 a company. What makes it different from a

5 tax is that it goes to a private company, a

6 company based in Illinois, Exelon. And they

7 will be the beneficiaries of the money, there

8 will be power generated for the State of

9 New York.

10 And for many of us, we may think that

11 the individual impact on our residential

12 rates is not going to be that big of a deal

13 and we can absorb it. But as you'll see on

14 page 4, the last chart of my testimony,

15 there's an analysis done on the number of

16 ratepayers who are in arrears 60 days or more

17 by utility region, and it totals over

18 800,000 New Yorkers are currently 60 days or

19 more in arrears, based on the estimates

20 provided by the Public Service Commission,

21 which is roughly one in eight residential

22 ratepayers. There's a lot of people that are

23 currently having a hard time paying their

24 utility bills, and this deal isn't going to

590

1 make it any easier.

2 So our view is that New York's energy

3 future lies in more efficiency, smarter

4 grids, solar and wind. These approaches cost

5 less, create more jobs, and result in

6 healthier communities. As you'll see also in

7 our testimony in footnote 11 on page 5, we

8 refer to a report done by a Stanford

9 professor who did an analysis for New York

10 State of if you were to invest that money

11 into renewables, the impact it would have in

12 terms of jobs, lower carbon emissions, and

13 greater reliance on renewable power.

14 So we think that this is -- that

15 the -- we don't like the deal. We understand

16 that there are needs in the communities that

17 are affected, and there are certainly

18 policies across the country where communities

19 have transitioned with state support. But

20 $7.6 billion is a huge hit to ratepayers, and

21 we believe it's the result of basically an

22 opaque and deeply flawed policy.

23 As Mark mentioned when he testified

24 before, initially, roughly a year ago, the

591

1 bailout was estimated at anywhere from

2 $59 million to $680 million. Three weeks

3 before the vote on August 1st, it goes to

4 $7.6 billion. And then in the middle of the

5 summer, the vote goes down.

6 So we think it's important that this

7 issue get addressed. We urge that you use

8 your power in the budget process to push the

9 reset button. The Public Service Commission,

10 as you also know, will soon be down to two

11 commissioners. This is a good time to

12 reevaluate public policy in this area and the

13 impact that these policies have on the rates

14 for New Yorkers.

15 Thank you for your attention.

16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you both.

19 MR. HORNER: Thank you again. Hang in

20 there.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: The next speaker is

22 James Slevin, Local 1-2 president, from the

23 Utility Workers Union of America. Is he

24 here? No? Okay.

592

1 Following him is David Hartman,

2 president of the New York State Whitetail

3 Management Coalition. And then after that is

4 Evelyn Powers, senior manager, from the

5 Interstate Environmental Commission.

6 Please go ahead.

7 MR. HARTMAN: So good evening,

8 Chairpersons Senator Young, Assemblymember

9 Farrell, and Assemblymember Englebright, and

10 members of the Senate and Assembly. Thank

11 you for the opportunity to speak today.

12 My name is David Hartman, and I am the

13 president of the New York State Whitetail

14 Management Coalition. Our membership

15 represents people in 56 different New York

16 counties who range from 14 to 86.

17 Since the dawn of time, adult bucks

18 have fascinated humans. Cave drawings from

19 thousands of years ago depict these

20 magnificent creatures. The fascination

21 continues today. Our road signs depict adult

22 bucks with large racks, as do nature shows.

23 The New York State Hunting Guide has only two

24 pictures of immature yearling bucks and

593

1 44 images of adult 3Ω-year-old bucks.

2 However, wildlife viewers, hunters and

3 citizens of New York are not getting to

4 experience a natural deer herd with adult

5 bucks in the population. This is because of

6 a law from 1911 designed to protect female

7 deer and restore a depleted population, which

8 are no longer New York's objectives but still

9 the law of the land. This 1911 law defined a

10 legal buck as one with one 3-inch antler.

11 The law makes every immature yearling buck

12 legal to harvest.

13 As a result, today New York has the

14 highest yearling buck harvest rate in the

15 nation. It is unnatural and inappropriate to

16 have such a disproportionate impact on

17 wildlife.

18 Hunting-related expenditures in

19 New York totaled $1.6 billion, and wildlife

20 watching expenditures totaled $4.1 billion in

21 2011. New York is losing hunters at an

22 alarming rate. We have lost half our hunters

23 since 1990, and half of the hunters now are

24 over the age of 50.

594

1 Everyone remembers the days when

2 hunters filled restaurants and hotels in

3 rural towns. Losing hunters is extremely

4 costly. First, we lose the important revenue

5 in upstate communities and the hunting

6 licenses funds for environmental programs.

7 Then we have no way to control the deer

8 populations on a landscape scale, resulting

9 in environmental, agricultural, and

10 automobile collision damage.

11 What to do? When a business is losing

12 customers, the first thing to ask is, are

13 customers satisfied with the product or

14 service?

15 DEC/Cornell studies have found that

16 most hunters are dissatisfied with their

17 hunting experience. Further, that hunters of

18 all ages throughout the state widely support

19 a regulation to protect most yearling bucks

20 from harvest. In addition, a recent survey

21 shows that 69 percent of hunters find it

22 important to protect yearling bucks. There

23 is no question hunters want to see and

24 harvest adult bucks.

595

1 The solution is adopting an

2 appropriate size limit to protect yearling

3 bucks with regulation or legislation so they

4 can reach adulthood. Since 2005, antler

5 restrictions to protect yearling bucks have

6 been adopted successfully four times in

7 New York. The current New York antler

8 restriction program is among the most

9 successful in the country at protecting

10 yearling bucks and increasing the adult bucks

11 in the population.

12 Seventy-seven to 90 percent of hunters

13 in the area support continuing the antler

14 restriction program. Hunters highly value

15 this program. However, this program is only

16 in place in a small portion of the state,

17 which has lower-quality habitat.

18 In March of 2015, DEC's analysis found

19 that the expansion of mandatory antler

20 restrictions to most of the state would best

21 satisfy hunter values and interests in the

22 long term. However, the program's expansion

23 has not been adopted.

24 There is no cost to implement this

596

1 program. It only requires changing a few

2 words in the hunting guide. We have a

3 winning lottery ticket for a vastly improved

4 buck herd -- the best soils and the right

5 species of whitetail deer. The only missing

6 part is a modern size limit that allows bucks

7 to get a year or two older and reach

8 adulthood. There is only an economic upside

9 to recruiting new hunters and increasing

10 hunting and wildlife viewing activity.

11 Hunters are recruited by one-on-one

12 communication. When hunters see adult bucks,

13 it excites them and they transfer their

14 enthusiasm to other hunters, lapsed hunters,

15 and future hunters -- youth. Every extra day

16 that hunters go afield generates additional

17 revenue.

18 It is time to give New York hunters

19 the hunting experience they deserve. It is

20 time to update this hundred-year-old relic of

21 a law of one 3-inch antler and move forward

22 with protecting yearling bucks throughout the

23 state. We cannot afford to wait any longer;

24 the economics are just too critical.

597

1 It takes more than stating New York is

2 a premier hunting destination. It takes

3 changing a 100-year-old law -- created before

4 the science of deer management was

5 invented -- which no long makes any sense.

6 We look forward to the expansion of

7 yearling buck protection. Thank you for the

8 opportunity to speak to you today, and I'm

9 happy to answer any questions.

10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

11 much.

12 SENATOR SAVINO: Can I ask something?

13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Sure.

14 Senator Savino.

15 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.

16 I have one question, besides can you

17 come to Staten Island. But no, seriously,

18 why are we losing hunters? Is it that --

19 what is it -- because I didn't make the

20 connection between the antler size and the

21 fact that less people are actually, I guess,

22 getting hunting licenses and participating in

23 the sport of hunting.

24 MR. HARTMAN: Well, 33 percent of all

598

1 hunters cite loss of interest in hunting.

2 And I think if you keep seeing the exact same

3 animals all the time, you don't have an

4 interest in going out and hunting anymore.

5 And hunters are actually really

6 wildlife viewers, because only 15 percent

7 kill a buck each year. So when you have

8 antler restrictions, you have adults in the

9 population, you get to see all kinds of

10 behavior that you don't see when you don't

11 have adults, which -- you know, scrapes,

12 rubs. They grunt, they chase each other

13 around. It's actually extremely exciting.

14 And that is what hunters want. We

15 know the Hunting Guide has 44 images of adult

16 bucks. Hunters go out to see adult bucks,

17 and we're not providing those adult bucks.

18 In Staten Island, you probably have

19 adult bucks, because there's no hunting

20 pressure.

21 SENATOR SAVINO: Yeah. Do we know if

22 hunters are going to other states, then? Are

23 they -- those who would be here, are they

24 going to New Jersey, are they going to

599

1 Vermont or somewhere else where they would

2 have a more enjoyable hunting experience?

3 MR. HARTMAN: Hunters absolutely leave

4 the state. Lots of them, usually to the

5 Midwest. The harvest rates in New York, you

6 know, we have the highest yearling buck

7 harvest rate but we also have the lowest

8 3Ω-year-old harvest rate because they don't

9 get a chance to grow up. There are many

10 other states where they have very high

11 3Ω-year-old harvest rates, and those are the

12 states where hunters go.

13 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.

14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

15 Assemblyman?

16 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: I'm just

17 curious. We have whitetail overrunning our

18 communities on Long Island. I have, you

19 know, like a very small piece of property; I

20 have frequently found three or four deer in

21 my backyard when I pull into the driveway.

22 So one of the concerns -- maybe you

23 can answer this -- is that if we were to

24 implement for two or three years not taking

600

1 the yearling bucks but letting the antlers

2 become very exciting trophy-sized, what would

3 the environment in our communities be like if

4 we stopped taking deer of that age and that

5 sex for three years? Are we going to have

6 more car collisions? Will there be a hazard

7 to people in the community if we let the

8 antlers get bigger?

9 MR. HARTMAN: Deer populations are

10 controlled by the harvest of female deer. So

11 removing female deer is what brings the

12 populations down and resolves issues like

13 that.

14 Removing bucks, there's just one. The

15 females can produce many, and they

16 geometrically increase the herd very quickly.

17 So you would prefer to harvest females.

18 Harvesting yearling bucks does not bring the

19 population down.

20 Long Island is somewhat of a different

21 circumstance because you don't have perhaps

22 the hunting access and pressure that you

23 need. And for what we're proposing

24 currently, we're not proposing to do it in

601

1 Long Island, only in the areas upstate.

2 And the DEC controls the total number

3 of deer by issuing doe tags to remove female

4 deer, and that's what will keep the

5 population under control. We're just

6 advocating for changing the age structure of

7 the male section of the population.

8 ASSEMBLYMAN ENGLEBRIGHT: Thank you

9 very much.

10 MR. HARTMAN: You're welcome.

11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

12 Our next speaker is Evelyn Powers,

13 senior manager, from the Interstate

14 Environmental Commission.

15 And following her is our last speaker,

16 Robert Blais, mayor of the Village of

17 Lake George.

18 Welcome.

19 MS. POWERS: Thank you. Thank you,

20 Chairwoman Young, Chairman Farrell, Senator

21 O'Mara, Assemblyman Englebright, members of

22 the legislative fiscal and environmental

23 committees. Thank you for this opportunity

24 to offer testimony on behalf of the

602

1 Interstate Environmental Coalition in regards

2 to the Governor's proposed budget for state

3 fiscal year 2017-2018.

4 The Interstate Environmental

5 Commission would first like to commend

6 Governor Cuomo for continuing to demonstrate,

7 as others have mentioned, through the

8 Executive Budget, his commitment to

9 protecting New York's environment. In

10 particular, the $2 billion Clean Water

11 Infrastructure Act, as well as the

12 maintenance of the state fiscal year

13 2016-2017 increase in the Environmental

14 Protection Fund, are vital to protecting

15 New York's natural resources.

16 The funding appropriated through these

17 budget actions demonstrates New York's

18 understanding of the need to build resiliency

19 into environmental protection in order to

20 adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate

21 change. It is especially reassuring, during

22 this time of transition in the federal

23 administration, to know that New York remains

24 committed to investing in clean water.

603

1 The Interstate Environmental

2 Commission, or IEC, is a tristate

3 environmental agency committed to protecting,

4 conserving, and restoring New York's

5 environment, particularly in the area of

6 water quality.

7 In brief, the IEC district runs west

8 from a line between Port Jefferson, New York,

9 and New Haven, Connecticut, on Long Island

10 Sound; west and south of the Hudson River at

11 Bear Mountain, south encompassing all of New

12 York Harbor, and embraces a portion of the

13 Atlantic Ocean out to the Fire Island Inlet

14 on the south shore of Long Island. Our

15 entire district is either in New York State

16 water or water that is shared with our

17 neighboring states of New Jersey and

18 Connecticut.

19 Just like water knows no state

20 boundaries, the IEC is committed to taking a

21 regional approach to water quality

22 management, yet recognizes that water quality

23 protection needs vary across our member

24 states and in fact across different regions

604

1 within the state.

2 The IEC's mission is to protect and

3 enhance environmental quality in the

4 Interstate Environmental District through

5 monitoring, cooperation, regulation,

6 coordination, and mutual dialogue between

7 government agencies and citizens. The IEC

8 fulfills this mission through a number of

9 strategies developed to meet our regional

10 water quality needs.

11 The first strategy is that IEC

12 strategically fills geographical, temporal,

13 or analytical gaps in regional monitoring

14 programs in coordination with the states, the

15 EPA, and our regional partners.

16 Recently, in response to the

17 increasingly critical need to document summer

18 hypoxic conditions in western Long Island

19 Sound and its embayments, IEC has monitored

20 dissolved oxygen, as well as key

21 water-quality parameters relevant to hypoxia,

22 in far western Long Island Sound every summer

23 since 1991.

24 In 2015, in conjunction with New York

605

1 State DEC, IEC began a pilot program

2 expanding the sampling scope at one of its

3 western Long Island Sound stations to

4 incorporate it into New York State DEC's

5 routine network of monitoring stations

6 associated with the Rotating Integrated Basin

7 Study program, or RIBS. The incorporation of

8 this station allows DEC's routine monitoring

9 network to include the only station south of

10 Poughkeepsie in New York State DEC's routine

11 monitoring network.

12 In addition, IEC has the capability to

13 perform short-notice inspections -- sampling,

14 monitoring, and analyses -- in response to

15 regional environmental emergencies, concerns,

16 or natural disasters. In the past, IEC has

17 assisted local environmental agencies to

18 determine environmental impacts after natural

19 or manmade events, has investigated elevated

20 pathogen levels in local waterways, such as

21 Sparkill Creek at the request of New York

22 State DEC Region 3, in Coney Island Creek at

23 the request of concerned citizens, and has

24 assessed variation in pathogen concentrations

606

1 across transects of the upper East River at

2 the request of EPA Region 2.

3 IEC's ability to mobilize quickly and

4 perform sampling and associated analyses

5 quickly at the request of local, state and

6 federal agencies makes IEC a valuable state

7 resource.

8 Since October 1994, the commission's

9 laboratory has been located on CUNY's College

10 of Staten Island campus in Staten Island,

11 New York. The laboratory routinely analyzes

12 our water quality samples collected

13 throughout IEC's district. Since 2000, the

14 laboratory has held accreditation through the

15 National Environmental Laboratory Approval

16 Program. The IEC laboratory holds primary

17 NELAP accreditation through the New York

18 State Department of Health's Environmental

19 Laboratory Approval Program.

20 The commission's laboratory is

21 dedicated to producing technically defensible

22 environmental data, through sound science and

23 a comprehensive quality control and quality

24 assurance program. Through adherence to and

607

1 continual improvement of its established

2 quality system, the commission's laboratory

3 continuously strives to generate high-quality

4 data to be used in decision making by

5 environmental managers and researchers.

6 Further, IEC performs coordinated,

7 tailored inspections and projects designed to

8 assist rather than duplicate compliance

9 efforts of the New York State DEC. IEC has a

10 robust, coordinated, and tailored inspection

11 program which includes inspections at

12 SPDES-permitted wastewater treatment plants

13 industrial dischargers, pump stations,

14 combined sewer systems, as well as municipal

15 separate storm sewer (MS4) systems. These

16 inspections focus on state priorities

17 designed to complement efforts of the

18 regulatory authorities.

19 IEC's staff conducts inspections with

20 sampling at industrial facilities and

21 municipal wastewater treatment plants

22 year-round. These inspections, which are

23 planned in coordination with regional New

24 York State DEC staff, include effluent

608

1 sampling and an inspection of processes,

2 equipment, and plant records at the plant.

3 Samples collected at these facilities are

4 analyzed in the IEC's certified laboratory in

5 Staten Island to determine compliance with

6 the IEC's water quality regulations as well

7 as with each facility's specific SPDES

8 permit.

9 In New York State, IEC is frequently

10 the only agency performing effluent

11 compliance monitoring at SPDES-permitted

12 dischargers. Thus IEC's compliance

13 monitoring is, in many cases, the only

14 verification of data reported by permittees

15 on discharge monitoring reports.

16 The IEC facilitates, coordinates, and

17 participates in workgroups and projects with

18 regional partners, including participating in

19 existing and coordinating new citizen science

20 monitoring efforts.

21 In 2016, IEC partnered with the

22 New York-New Jersey Harbor Estuary Program

23 and EPA to promote citizen science through

24 participation in HEP's citizen science grant

609

1 program. In 2017, IEC plans to expand this

2 effort, with the implementation of a

3 coordinated volunteer water quality

4 monitoring program in the shared marine

5 waters of the IEC district. This effort will

6 recognize state and EPA priorities and will

7 be modeled on existing state volunteer

8 programs already in place, such as WAVE and

9 CSLAP, but it will also emphasize synergies,

10 efficiencies, and the desire of the public

11 for consistent efforts in recreational

12 waters.

13 The program will target areas which

14 are not routinely monitored by regulatory

15 agencies or other established monitoring

16 programs and will focus on water quality

17 parameters, such as pathogen indicators, that

18 are of particular concern as they relate to

19 recreation in the shared marine waters.

20 Again, having an ELAP-certified

21 laboratory located in Staten Island, IEC is

22 uniquely positioned to assist citizen

23 scientists with the analyses and quality

24 assurance oversight needed for their data to

610

1 be used to inform monitoring and actions

2 performed by local, state and federal

3 agencies.

4 Since 2014, IEC has coordinated a

5 Shared Waterways Monitoring Workgroup

6 consisting of agencies and organizations

7 involved in monitoring the ambient waters

8 within IECís district. The goal of the

9 workgroup is to allow regional monitoring

10 partners an opportunity to share updates on

11 their ambient water monitoring activities,

12 identify any gaps in monitoring programs,

13 share and assess their data, incorporate

14 citizen science into monitoring initiatives,

15 and discuss monitoring related to emerging

16 water quality issues.

17 While the majority of the IEC's

18 funding comes from other sources -- primarily

19 federal Clean Water Act Section 106 grants --

20 state funding is critical to enable the

21 commission to implement the work plan of the

22 grants and to meet the match required for the

23 Section 106 grant. In federal fiscal year

24 2016, IEC received $745,000 in 106 funds.

611

1 Since 2014, IEC has also received funding of

2 approximately $50,000 annually from EPA

3 Region 1's Long Island Sound office to

4 support its work in western Long Island

5 Sound.

6 New York had a long history of

7 supporting the work of the IEC until 2009,

8 when financial stresses caused the state to

9 cut previous appropriations, which were in

10 excess of $300,000, to the statutory minimum

11 level of funding of just $15,000, as set

12 forth in the Tri-State Compact of 1936.

13 Unfortunately, the State of New Jersey

14 followed suit two year later and in 2011 also

15 reduced its annual IEC appropriation to the

16 statutory minimum of $15,000, while

17 Connecticut has, to date, continued to

18 contribute at a level well above its

19 statutory minimum.

20 By 2012, IEC's reserve funds were

21 depleted and we were unable to independently

22 meet the non-federal match requirement of

23 $214,000 required to apply for and receive

24 Section 106 federal funding.

612

1 In 2008, IEC had a staff of 19. IEC

2 began the year 2016 with a staff of just

3 three. We are now, today, up to five

4 full-time, incredibly dedicated staff

5 members.

6 Despite the reductions in resources

7 and staff, IEC has persevered. We tightened

8 our belts, consolidated and focused available

9 resources to accomplish what was most

10 important -- maintaining the ability to

11 address the most pressing water quality needs

12 in our District and of our member states.

13 In order to preserve the ability to

14 receive federal funding, IEC entered into a

15 five-year memorandum of understanding, or

16 MOU, with the New England Interstate Water

17 Pollution Control Commission in May 2012.

18 Under terms outlined in the MOU, NEIWPCC

19 provides administrative and fiduciary

20 oversight to the IEC, and applies for and

21 receives IECís Section 106 funding on IEC's

22 behalf. NEIWPCC also meets the federal match

23 requirement. Funding made possible through

24 the MOU currently supports IEC's staff and

613

1 has enabled IEC to continue its important

2 water quality monitoring work in New York

3 State.

4 The MOU with NEIWPCC ends October

5 2017, and EPA headquarters has indicated they

6 intended this to be a finite agreement and

7 will not approve an extension of the current

8 arrangement.

9 While IEC recognizes and appreciates

10 its appropriation increase to $41,000 in the

11 fiscal year 2018 Executive Budget, we

12 respectfully urge the Legislature to increase

13 the funding appropriation to IEC in the

14 New York State fiscal year 2018 budget to the

15 amount of $200,000. This level of funding

16 will ensure IEC's continued eligibility to

17 apply for and receive federal funding of

18 approximately $745,000 annually, yielding

19 New York State a significant return on its

20 investment, and will allow IEC to expand its

21 activities related to water quality

22 monitoring and citizen science.

23 On behalf of the IEC, I would like to

24 thank the Legislature and, in particular, the

614

1 legislative committees on environmental

2 conservation, for their continued leadership

3 and diligent oversight of state environmental

4 policy. The IEC genuinely appreciates this

5 opportunity to testify at today's budget

6 hearing, is hopeful that the Legislature will

7 consider our request, and looks forward to

8 continuing our important water quality work

9 in support of New York State.

10 Thank you.

11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,

12 Ms. Powers, for your testimony. Your

13 concerns were duly noted. And we appreciate

14 you being here today.

15 MS. POWERS: Thank you.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: The next speaker,

17 final speaker, is Mayor Robert Blais from the

18 Village of --

19 MALE VOICE: Lake George.

20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Lake George. Lake

21 George, I'm sorry. Tired. Here it is, the

22 Village of Lake George.

23 SENATOR KRUEGER: We all know where it

24 is.

615

1 MAYOR BLAIS: That's good.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good evening.

3 MAYOR BLAIS: Thank you very much.

4 It's a real honor and a privilege to be the

5 only mayor today, particularly from a small

6 community, to perhaps tell you about not only

7 our project but to give you some insight on

8 what a small community faces in a way to

9 protect the environment on behalf of the

10 entire State of New York.

11 It's a pleasure for me today to

12 provide testimony specifically in support of

13 the announced New York State Infrastructure

14 Improvement Program announced by the

15 Governor. I am particularly pleased, having

16 watched the comments made earlier this

17 morning and most of this afternoon, for the

18 committee expressing support for increasing

19 the budget in this crucial initiative.

20 Our entourage today includes Ron

21 Conover, the chairman of the Warren County

22 Board of Supervisors; David Harrington, my

23 director of public works; Village Attorney

24 Matt Fuller; and Dave Decker, who is the

616

1 director of the Lake George Watershed

2 Coalition, which represents nine local

3 governments, three counties, five state

4 agencies, and five not-for-profit

5 organizations that are very passionate

6 interested stakeholders in the Lake George

7 Basin.

8 As part of my presentation today, I've

9 asked Mr. Decker to speak specifically to

10 some issues facing our great state resource

11 known as the Queen of America's lakes.

12 We're here today really to discuss our

13 plans to construct a new wastewater treatment

14 plant that services the entire southern basin

15 of Lake George. Our current plant, which was

16 constructed in 1930, is presently under a

17 consent order from DEC to correct

18 deficiencies that would be extremely harmful

19 to our pristine lake and the entire region's

20 economy.

21 Lake George arguably is one of New

22 York State's premier family tourist

23 destinations. It's the magnet that attracts

24 tourists from all over the world, generating

617

1 millions of dollars in revenue for our local,

2 county and state coffers.

3 Our needs are entirely unique, as our

4 small village, with a population of less than

5 1,000, plays host to over 40,000 inhabitants

6 on a daily basis during our summer season.

7 Over 2,800 rooms, 1,500 homes, 560

8 businesses, two state campgrounds, and the

9 popular Million Dollar Beach are all serviced

10 by our antiquated treatment plant.

11 We also service a great portion of the

12 Town of Lake George and their Caldwell Sewer

13 District.

14 Our plant is estimated to cost

15 approximately $17 million. Bonding alone,

16 which is all we have heard from so far, would

17 exceed our constitutional debt limit and

18 raise our real property taxes by over

19 71 percent.

20 Lake George is the water that we all

21 drink, the gifted natural resource that

22 attracts tourists, residents, and economic

23 development. Just last year, we had two

24 major chain hotels constructed in the village

618

1 that created more than 60 year-round jobs and

2 another 74 seasonal opportunities. Because

3 of our problem, we've had to impose a

4 building moratorium until we can find the

5 money to build our new treatment program.

6 In 1971, which was my first year in

7 office, DEC approached the village, asking us

8 to accept wastewater from their failing

9 system at Hearthstone Park campsite, which is

10 the largest campsite on Lake George. That

11 campsite is over three miles away from our

12 wastewater treatment plant, yet the village

13 agreed to go in with the state on a pipe and

14 take the sewage from Hearthstone Park, which

15 again is over $3.5 million away {sic}.

16 Today we need your assistance, as a

17 partner in 2017, for this year or for over

18 the next three years, as we not only seek to

19 comply with our consent order, but protect

20 Lake George for the next 100 years with a new

21 wastewater treatment plant. New York State

22 and the Queen of America's Lakes deserve no

23 less than that.

24 Dave Decker will take you through,

619

1 very briefly, some of the issues that are

2 outlined in the flier that we brought with

3 us.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Mayor.

5 MR. DECKER: Thank you, Mayor.

6 Following Mayor Blais's comments on

7 the specific needs of the village in seeking

8 a partnership with the state in protecting

9 the state's natural treasure that indeed is

10 Lake George, I wanted to take a brief moment

11 of your time with a simple illustration of

12 what the lake is facing.

13 Our message is straightforward: Lake

14 George is a natural asset that serves as an

15 engine of economic activity that is without

16 parallel in upstate. As the mayor mentioned,

17 the 25-member institutions of the Lake George

18 Watershed Coalition came together under the

19 leadership of the New York State Secretary of

20 State in 2001, in recognition of this premise

21 and with the focus to protect and preserve

22 the waters of Lake George.

23 I would like to convey to the members

24 here today a single illustration of the

620

1 challenges faced by the lake that the

2 proposed funding for the Clean Water

3 Infrastructure Act of 2017 will help

4 mitigate. Recognizing that a picture is

5 worth a thousand words, I figure I'm going to

6 save you about 4,000 words in the next two

7 minutes.

8 So I'm going to direct your attention

9 to pages 7 through 10 of the handout that you

10 have there in front of you and give you a

11 brief overview of what the issues are facing

12 Lake George.

13 The first graphic there depicts not

14 just a simple sampling activity that's taking

15 place on Lake George. Actually, as

16 Assemblyman Stec mentioned earlier today in

17 opening comments, Lake George is probably one

18 of the most tested, prodded, poked and

19 examined lakes in the State of New York, and

20 possibly the country.

21 What this first graph demonstrates is

22 actually 30 years of water quality

23 sampling -- month in, month out, over a

24 period of 30 years. And you can take a look

621

1 at and see that there's a trend that's been

2 forming over 30 years. It is a disturbing

3 trend. Unless we do something to bend the

4 curve, if you will, that trend looks to

5 continue on into the future.

6 The next page, page 8, is a graphic

7 display of the lake, three different

8 depictions. To the left you'll see that the

9 lake actually is made up of five sub-basins.

10 There are actually five lakes within the

11 lake. The lake itself is 32 miles long.

12 You'll note that on this particular

13 depiction, we are looking at the -- something

14 called chlorophyll A. Now, what is

15 chlorophyll A? It's a measure of the

16 biologic activity in the lake, and it's

17 measured basically by presence of nutrients,

18 particularly nitrates and phosphates.

19 You can see that -- and we've

20 highlighted here three different decades of

21 how chlorophyll A has migrated from the south

22 end of the lake to the north. The lake flows

23 from south to north. We exit out of the

24 LaChute River into Lake Champlain.

622

1 You will see that over time there has

2 been a definite progression of chlorophyll A

3 concentrations, year in and year out, in

4 these particular decades. Again, a

5 disturbing trend that, unless we take some

6 action, that trend is going to continue.

7 I then move on to the next, on page 9,

8 another same depiction of the lake. This is

9 measuring the chlorides. Now, chlorides come

10 from a whole host of sources, be it road salt

11 application around the watershed roads, be it

12 the functioning or malfunctioning of

13 treatment plants that are discharging into

14 the wetlands up in the watershed area, and

15 significant operation of on-site waste

16 treatment facilities throughout the lake.

17 You'll see in the 1980 to 1999 time

18 frame we have graphically depicted the

19 chloride levels in the lake as between 6 to

20 8 parts per million. Again, not a disturbing

21 number.

22 As the progression has gone from the

23 1980s up until the present time, up through

24 2010 on the by-decade basis, you can see

623

1 there's been a significant progression -- and

2 yes, we've color-coded it to show -- but the

3 significant progression of chloride

4 concentrations up the lake. Again, this is

5 not a small farm pond, this is a lake that is

6 32 miles long. So for these kinds of

7 concentrations to show up in these levels

8 over that time period, we are in a process of

9 what I call titrating the lake.

10 The last illustration I would give you

11 is remember back to your general science days

12 in middle school or entering high school when

13 your favorite teacher was standing up in

14 front of your class and you had a simple

15 pipette in front of you with a clear liquid

16 in it and a beaker of clear liquid down

17 below. And the teacher was up there

18 basically going drip, drip, drip into that

19 beaker. And at one point in time, the last

20 drip turned that beaker blue. In effect,

21 that's what we're doing. We are titrating

22 the waters of Lake George. We do not want to

23 get to the point that we turn the lake

24 something other than what it is right now.

624

1 Make no mistake, Lake George is still

2 the cleanest, by far the biggest and cleanest

3 lake in the state. But the disturbing trends

4 that we are seeing, we need to shut down the

5 nutrient flows into the lake. And as

6 mentioned, there's several sources.

7 And we're here today to absolutely

8 support the Governor's proposal and,

9 moreover, your proposal to increase the

10 infrastructure program and how it can fund

11 programs like this in Lake George and others

12 throughout the state.

13 We thank you for your time.

14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,

15 Mr. Decker.

16 MAYOR BLAIS: Thank you very much.

17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And thank you,

18 Mayor.

19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And thank you for

21 participating today, because you bring

22 forward very serious concerns. And we

23 obviously need to continue to work on

24 invasive species through the Environmental

625

1 Protection Fund, work on nutrient flows, and

2 also make sure that we have the

3 infrastructure dollars available so that we

4 can protect our lakes all across the state,

5 including yours.

6 So thank you so much.

7 MAYOR BLAIS: Thank you. Thank you

8 very much.

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: That concludes the

10 joint legislative hearing on environmental

11 conservation. And tomorrow we have a

12 hearing, it's -- tomorrow is Valentine's Day.

13 We love our schools, so our hearing is on

14 elementary and secondary education. So I

15 look forward to another long day.

16 Thank you so much.

17 (Whereupon, at 8:14 p.m., the budget

18 hearing concluded.)

Share this Article or Press Release