Regular Session - March 8, 1999

                                                              789





                            NEW YORK STATE SENATE



                          THE STENOGRAPHIC RECORD







                             ALBANY, NEW YORK

                               March 8, 1999

                                 3:07 p.m.





                              REGULAR SESSION







                 LT. GOVERNOR MARY O. DONOHUE, President

                 STEVEN M. BOGGESS, Secretary



















                                                          790



                            THE PRESIDENT:    The Senate will

                 come to order.

                            I ask everyone present to please

                 rise and repeat with me the Pledge of

                 Allegiance.

                            (Whereupon, the assemblage recited

                 the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.)

                            THE PRESIDENT:    With us today to

                 say the invocation is Reverend David Miracle,

                 Rector, All Saints Episcopal Church in

                 Brooklyn.

                            REVEREND MIRACLE:    Heavenly

                 Father, we give You thanks and praise for the

                 blessings of this day.  We thank You, Lord,

                 for providing so well for our needs and for

                 giving us another day to love and serve You.

                            As we serve You, Lord, let us

                 always keep in mind the people that we have

                 accepted to serve.  Let us seek Your wisdom,

                 Oh Lord, in decision-making, and not be

                 governed by the whims of society or by the

                 almighty dollar, but base our decision on Your

                 truth and word, which You have made known to

                 us in the scriptures.  And we ask, Lord, for

                 forgiveness when we do not obey Your word.





                                                          791



                            And, Lord, I ask for Your special

                 blessing on the Governor of this state and for

                 each person who shares in the tremendous

                 responsibility of making and carrying out the

                 necessary policies to govern it.

                            And, Lord God Almighty, in whose

                 name the founders of this country won liberty

                 for themselves and for us and lit the torch of

                 freedom for nations then unborn, grant that we

                 and all the people of this land may have grace

                 to maintain these liberties in righteousness

                 and peace.

                            In Jesus's name, amen.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Reading of the

                 Journal.

                            THE SECRETARY:    In Senate,

                 Friday, March 5th, the Senate met pursuant to

                 adjournment.  The Journal of Thursday,

                 March 4th, was read and approved.  On motion,

                 Senate adjourned.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Without

                 objection, the Journal stands approved as

                 read.

                            Presentation of petitions.

                            Messages from the Assembly.





                                                          792



                            SENATOR SKELOS:    Madam

                 President -

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Skelos.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    -- may I

                 interrupt for a minute?

                            Have we received the resolution

                 from the Assembly establishing a time for the

                 election of members of the Board of Regents?

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Yes, Senator, we

                 have.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    Thank you.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Messages from the

                 Governor.

                            Reports of standing committees.

                            Reports of select committees.

                            Communications and reports from

                 state officers.

                            Motions and resolutions.

                            Senator Libous.

                            SENATOR LIBOUS:    Thank you, Madam

                 President.  I'd like to star one of my bills,

                 Calendar Number -- or, actually, two of them,

                 204 and 223.  And -

                            THE PRESIDENT:    So ordered,

                 Senator.





                                                          793



                            SENATOR LIBOUS:    Thank you, Madam

                 President.

                            I have one other.  On page 16 I

                 offer the following amendments to Calendar

                 Number 224, Senate Print Number 2101, and ask

                 that said bill retain its place on the Third

                 Reading Calendar.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    So received.  And

                 the bill will retain its place on the Third

                 Reading Calendar.

                            Senator Farley.

                            SENATOR FARLEY:    Thank you, Madam

                 President.

                            On behalf of Senator Skelos, I wish

                 to -- on page 9, I offer the following

                 amendments to Calendar 118, Senate Print 11.

                 I ask that that bill retain its place on Third

                 Reading Calendar.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Amendment

                 received.  And the bill will retain its place

                 on the Third Reading Calendar.

                            SENATOR FARLEY:    On behalf of

                 Senator Johnson, I move that the following

                 bill be discharged from its respective

                 committee and be recommitted with instructions





                                                          794



                 to strike the enacting clause.  That's Senate

                 Print 1611.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    So ordered.

                            Senator Skelos.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    I believe

                 there's a privilege resolution at the desk by

                 Senator Holland.  I ask that the title be read

                 and move for its immediate adoption.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The Secretary

                 will read.

                            THE SECRETARY:    By Senator

                 Holland, Legislative Resolution Number 574,

                 commemorating the 87th anniversary of the

                 founding of the Girl Scouts of the USA, on

                 March 12, 1999.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The question is

                 on the resolution.  All in favor signify by

                 saying aye.

                            (Response of "Aye.")

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Opposed, nay.

                            (No response.)

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The resolution is

                 adopted.

                            Senator Skelos.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    If we could take





                                                          795



                 up the noncontroversial calendar, please.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The Secretary

                 will read.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 114, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 1455, an

                 act to amend the Private Housing Finance Law,

                 in relation to a limited profit housing

                 company.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Read the last

                 section.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Section 3.  This

                 act shall take effect immediately.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Call the roll.

                            (The Secretary called the roll.)

                            THE SECRETARY:    Ayes, 46.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is

                 passed.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 139, by Senator Padavan, Senate Print 1888, an

                 act to amend the Agricultural and Markets Law,

                 in relation to spectators at exhibitions of

                 animal fighting.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Read the last

                 section.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Section 2.  This





                                                          796



                 act shall take effect on the first day of

                 November.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Call the roll.

                            (The Secretary called the roll.)

                            THE SECRETARY:    Ayes 45; nays 1.

                 Senator Duane recorded in the negative.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is

                 passed.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 148, by Senator Lack, Senate Print 1143, an

                 act to amend the Labor Law.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Lay it aside.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is laid

                 aside.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 151, by Senator Wright, Senate Print 1881, an

                 act to amend the Workers' Compensation, Law in

                 relation to granting civil immunity.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Read the last

                 section.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Section 2.  This

                 act shall take effect immediately.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Call the roll.

                            (The Secretary called the roll.)

                            THE SECRETARY:    Ayes 47.





                                                          797



                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is

                 passed.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 154, by Senator LaValle, Senate Print 1067, an

                 act to amend the Education Law -

                            SENATOR ONORATO:    Lay it aside.

                            THE SECRETARY:    -- and the Public

                 Officers Law.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is laid

                 aside.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 155, by Senator LaValle, Senate Print 1068, an

                 act to amend the Education Law, in relation to

                 the Board of Regents.

                            SENATOR ONORATO:    Lay it aside.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is laid

                 aside.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 156, by Senator Balboni, Senate Print 1737, an

                 act to amend the Education Law, in relation to

                 authorizing memorial awards.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Read the last

                 section.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Section 3.  This

                 act shall take effect April 1st, the year of





                                                          798



                 2000.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Call the roll.

                            (The Secretary called the roll.)

                            THE SECRETARY:    Ayes 47.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is

                 passed.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 177, by Senator Marcellino, Senate Print 1325,

                 an act to amend the Penal Law, in relation to

                 including the theft of dogs and cats.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Lay that

                 aside.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is laid

                 aside.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 201, by Senator Velella, Senate Print 1734, an

                 act to amend the General City Law and the

                 Penal Law in relation to creating the crimes

                 of urinating or defecating in public.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Lay it aside.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is laid

                 aside.

                            Senator Skelos, that completes the

                 reading of the noncontroversial calendar.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    If we could take





                                                          799



                 up the controversial calendar.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The Secretary

                 will read.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 148, by Senator Lack, Senate Print 1143, an

                 act to amend the Labor Law.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Lay it aside

                 temporarily.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill will be

                 laid aside.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 154, by Senator LaValle, Senate Print 1067, an

                 act to amend the Education Law and the Public

                 Officers Law in relation to the Board of

                 Regents.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    May we have an

                 explanation, please.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    An explanation

                 has been requested.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    Lay it aside

                 temporarily.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 155, by Senator LaValle, Senate Print 1068, an

                 act to amend the Education Law, in relation to

                 the Board of Regents.





                                                          800



                            SENATOR DUANE:    Explanation.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    Lay it aside

                 temporarily.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Laid aside

                 temporarily, as with the prior bill.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 177, by Senator Marcellino, Senate Print 1325,

                 an act to amend the Penal Law, in relation to

                 including the theft of dogs and cats.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Read the last

                 section.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Section 3.  This

                 act shall take effect on the first day of

                 November.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Call the roll.

                            (The Secretary called the roll.)

                            THE SECRETARY:    Ayes 48.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is

                 passed.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 201, by Senator Velella, Senate Print 1734, an

                 act to amend the General City Law and the

                 Penal Law.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Explanation.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Velella,





                                                          801



                 an explanation has been requested.

                            SENATOR VELELLA:    Madam

                 President -- yes, Madam President.

                            Those who asked for the explanation

                 are certainly familiar with this bill that we

                 have passed a number of times.  I might point

                 out, the last time 13 members of the

                 Democratic side of the aisle voted against it,

                 and three of them didn't return.  So be

                 careful what you do.

                            (Laughter.)

                            SENATOR VELELLA:    But this does

                 allow -- this does allow for a city or

                 municipal government -- not only the City of

                 New York, but statewide -- to pass legislation

                 in their own local legislative body which

                 would give them the opportunity to address the

                 qualify-of-life issues that are so important

                 to our cities.

                            The first part of a three-part bill

                 would be that they would be able to have

                 commercial zones.  And this originally came to

                 me as a result of the actions of our good

                 former mayor, Mayor Dinkins.

                            If you could remember back to the





                                                          802



                 Democratic Convention when Mayor Dinkins said,

                 "We're going to clean up the streets and get

                 these vagrants that are laying in the

                 storeways and on the sidewalks off the

                 streets, and we're going to let the Democratic

                 delegates see a good, clean New York City."

                            And I said that was an excellent

                 idea that Mayor Dinkins had, so why not have

                 commercial zones in the City of New York where

                 we can put signs up that this is a commercial

                 zone and stop people from laying in doorways,

                 laying on the streets during the hours that

                 are posted, after they've been warned by a

                 police officer to move out of the way, so that

                 we could have a city, as Mayor Dinkins

                 envisioned it, free of these people sleeping

                 in our doorways.  And this bill would provide

                 for that.

                            The second part is just a little

                 bit of a health problem, I guess, within the

                 city.  It provides for criminalizing, in a

                 sense, the public urination or defecation on

                 the streets of the city of New York.  That I

                 think speaks for itself.  I can't see anybody

                 who would be against that.  I don't think





                                                          803



                 anybody in this chamber would dare to say that

                 they are supportive of it.  And certainly we

                 have debated that issue a number of times.

                            The last part of the bill, the

                 third part, would allow cities to establish a

                 law against aggressive begging.  And that is

                 where someone approaches you and puts you in

                 fear of imminent bodily harm that you may be

                 injured if you don't turn over some property

                 to them.

                            Those are the three parts of the

                 bill.  I think most of you are familiar with

                 them.  And I urge its passage.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator

                 Montgomery.

                            SENATOR MONTGOMERY:    Yes.  Thank

                 you, Madam President.

                            I'm not going to ask the sponsor

                 any questions, because I've asked the

                 questions beforehand.  And the main question

                 that I have asked in the past is whether or

                 not there are laws that we -- that already

                 exist on the books that would allow for the

                 arrest of someone who was participating in

                 this kind of behavior and that the law





                                                          804



                 enforcement felt that it was warranted that

                 they be arrested.

                            And in the past -- I have my notes

                 here from the last time that we debated this

                 bill, and I'm assuming that that is still the

                 case -- Senator Velella has said unequivocally

                 yes, that we do have that on the books.  And

                 that -- so that the localities already have

                 that capacity.  So that's -- that's -- that

                 question, I think, is not necessary to be

                 asked.

                            What I want to say is that as I

                 have said in the past, Senator Velella, Madam

                 President, this bill is simply a bill which

                 would criminalize homelessness.

                            If you are a person who has -- a

                 person of means, you have a job, you have a

                 home to go to, you are comfortable.  When you

                 need to go to the bathroom, you have a

                 restroom in your place of work, a restroom, a

                 bathroom in your home.  There is no need for

                 you to go and defecate or urinate on the

                 streets.  There is no need for you to go and

                 beg for nickels and pennies and quarters at

                 the -- at the corner -- the corner, in the





                                                          805



                 streets and what have you.

                            But if you are a person who is

                 destitute -- and as we have a number of people

                 who are working every day who have no place to

                 live in the city of New York.  They live in

                 shelters.  There are working people, thousands

                 of working people who live in shelters because

                 they have no home.  They have been priced out

                 of their homes and so forth and so on.

                            So that means that with this

                 legislation, the meanness of it is that we're

                 going to criminalize the people who find

                 themselves in that position.

                            So Senator Velella knows how I feel

                 about this.  I talk about it all the time.  We

                 live in the same city.  I live in the same

                 city as Senator Velella.  And he knows that I

                 certainly don't want someone doing that in my

                 front yard or in -- where I live.  I

                 understand you don't want that to happen in

                 your yard or your neighborhood.  I really

                 deplore seeing people sleeping -- in front of

                 City Hall, people are sleeping under their

                 blankets or in their box -- in their boxes

                 that they've made into houses and what have





                                                          806



                 you.

                            So yes, we have a problem.  It's an

                 issue that we have to deal with.  But I don't

                 think that the solution is criminalizing them.

                            So I urge my colleagues to vote

                 against this, because it really sends a

                 message that I don't think we want to send to

                 poor, homeless people in our state, that we

                 don't care anything about them, the only thing

                 that we -- only answer we have to their

                 problem is to put them in jail.

                            Thank you.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Read the last

                 section.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Section 8.  This

                 act shall take effect on the first day of

                 November.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Call the roll.

                            (The Secretary called the roll.)

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Results.  The

                 Secretary will read.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Those recorded in

                 the negative on Calendar Number 201 are

                 Senators Breslin, Connor, Duane, Montgomery,

                 Paterson, Santiago, Schneiderman, and Waldon.





                                                          807



                            Ayes 45; nays 8.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is

                 passed.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 148, by Senator Lack, Senate Print 1143, an

                 act to amend the Labor Law, in relation to

                 direct sellers.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    Lay it aside for

                 the day, please.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is laid

                 aside for the day.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 154, by Senator LaValle, Senate Print 1067, an

                 act to amend the Education Law and the Public

                 Officers Law, in relation to the Board of

                 Regents.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator LaValle.

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Yes.  Madam

                 President, Senator Paterson has asked for an

                 explanation.  And I'd like to just talk about

                 1067 and 1068 at the same time.

                            These are two bills that we have

                 considered in this house on certainly last

                 year and the year before.  And the two bills

                 are basically to reform a system that just is





                                                          808



                 not working in how we select members of the

                 Board of Regents, the time in the legislative

                 session that we consider members of the Board

                 of Regents, and what the members of the Board

                 of Regents do and how they interact with the

                 Legislature and the stakeholders in the

                 various areas that they are involved in.

                            And just to remind everyone that

                 the Board of Regents -- who are volunteers, do

                 not receive a salary -- have an enormous

                 number of areas on their plate.  They deal

                 with elementary and secondary education,

                 higher education, the libraries, the museums,

                 the professions, and the archives.  And they

                 are the policymakers for this broad range of

                 areas.

                            We in this legislation talk about

                 how we elect members to the Board of Regents.

                 Right now we have codified here in the

                 Legislature, by agreement, that the four

                 chairs get together and hold meetings or

                 hearings with members of the respective

                 committees to ask questions of the prospective

                 members that we are considering.

                            And I would tell you that probably





                                                          809



                 no one in this body can tell me how any of the

                 three candidates who we will be considering

                 tomorrow for the Board of Regents got into the

                 process.  You would be hard-pressed.

                            I am calling for a similar process

                 to how we elect members to our Court of

                 Appeals.  And that is by a bipartisan,

                 blue-ribbon commission that would screen

                 various applicants and then send to the

                 Legislature, for hearings, the members that

                 the blue-ribbon commission would send to us.

                            We would consider those members on

                 the third Tuesday in May.  That's the same day

                 that school districts vote on a school budget

                 and elect school board members.  Hopefully -

                 and I say hopefully -- far away from the

                 budget process that we are currently involved

                 in.

                            Members of the Board of Regents

                 should be treated very, very seriously because

                 they play very important roles -- very

                 important roles -- in our government.  And yet

                 we are considering it at one of the busiest

                 times of the year, the time of the year when

                 we do the budget.





                                                          810



                            That may have been great years ago

                 when the Legislature was a part-time

                 Legislature, dealt with the state budget and

                 actually passed the state budget -- many

                 times, before the April 1st deadline -- and

                 then before they left town would consider

                 electing members of the Board of Regents.

                            Today our budget is a much busier

                 process, a much more intense process than it

                 was years ago.  And so members of the Board of

                 Regents deserve a point in time in the

                 legislative process that is less hurried,

                 where we can give those members that would

                 like to be Regents -- an important position -

                 greater scrutiny, greater attention that it -

                 that it deserves.

                            The process of how you elect a

                 chancellor and a vice chancellor needs to be

                 revised and reviewed.  I think we -

                 regardless of who the Governor is, or what

                 party, the Governor is disconnected totally

                 from the process of the Board of Regents and

                 the state Education Department.

                            One wonders why -- whether the

                 governor is Mario Cuomo, Hugh Carey, or George





                                                          811



                 Pataki -- when we look at the budget for the

                 state Education Department, why that budget,

                 Governor's budget, looks kind of lean for the

                 department.  Because it's the only way an

                 executive can get some attention from the

                 bureaucracy, some attention from the members

                 of the Board of Regents.

                            And so we would involve the

                 Governor in the selection of the chancellor

                 and the vice chancellor, with the advice and

                 consent of the Senate.

                            While those members of the Board of

                 Regents, because our debates and our

                 discussions here on this floor -- in more

                 recent years, I believe the members have been

                 of a higher quality, have been better

                 motivated, have been more focused on their

                 position.  However, I still feel a disconnect

                 between members of the Board of Regents and

                 those who serve, those 14 members who serve -

                 12 members who serve in a judicial district.

                            And so we say that there needs to

                 be some sort of a hearing process, some sort

                 of members, stakeholder members, that come

                 together with that Regent to discuss issues





                                                          812



                 pertaining to elementary and secondary

                 education, higher education, the libraries,

                 the professions, the archives, and the

                 museums.  Locally.  And so we make for such a

                 recommendation.

                            We also ask that the chancellor and

                 the commissioner come before the Legislature

                 to discuss their education plan, to have an

                 intense debate and discussion over what is

                 taking place.

                            And lastly, Madam President, and

                 the last bill really -- the second bill really

                 brings together in a concurrent way the terms

                 of the members of the Board of Regents and

                 those that are elected to the local boards of

                 education, where their term begins on

                 July 1st.  So that there is a compatibility in

                 what is happening above in the system, with

                 the election of the Board of Regents, down to

                 the local school board members.

                            I believe that there is a

                 disconnect between what goes on in the

                 selection process of the Board of Regents,

                 what they do -- and what they do is very

                 important to the future of our children, those





                                                          813



                 that are going on, higher education

                 institutions, those who practice in the 38

                 professions, and the libraries and the museums

                 and the archives.

                            And so I think reform, reform is

                 the operative way.  Whether every detail in my

                 bills is perfect, I think not.  But I would

                 hope that at some juncture the Assembly would

                 join us in an effort to reform a system that

                 really doesn't work very well.  And if we are

                 to remain the Empire State in the areas that I

                 have repeatedly mentioned, then I think we

                 need to have a process of inclusion rather

                 than exclusion.

                            This house and this body should be

                 involved in the process.  We are irrelevant to

                 what goes on tomorrow.  We are not needed to

                 form a quorum.  We are not needed to elect, by

                 a majority vote, members to the Board of

                 Regents.

                            And so this process really says the

                 joint session should not take place.  Like

                 every other endeavor that we have, whether

                 it's the budget or a piece of legislation, the

                 bicameral process, by a majority vote in each





                                                          814



                 house, should be the process in which we

                 select members to the Board of Regents.

                            And I think that is very critical

                 and the underpinning through all of the

                 reforms that I try to make in how we select

                 members of the Board of Regents and what they

                 do.

                            Thank you, Madam President.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Lachman.

                            SENATOR LACHMAN:    Yes.  With due

                 deference to the -- my distinguished

                 colleague, the chairman of the Higher

                 Education Committee of the New York State

                 Senate, I would have to vote against these

                 measures.

                            And I would have to vote against

                 them because I also believe, Senator LaValle,

                 that reform is necessary.  But not through

                 this process.  Not a day before the electoral

                 process takes place for the selection of the

                 members of the New York State Board of

                 Regents.

                            And we've gone through this for the

                 last three or four years since I've been here,

                 and it ends up with no reform whatsoever.





                                                          815



                            Now, I know and you know -- and in

                 fact, it was the one governor that you did not

                 mention -- that there was a governor 30 years

                 ago -- whose name I will not mention, but

                 whose edifices adorn the Capitol -- who would

                 send one day the name or names of members of

                 the Board of Regents to this chamber, and

                 within 24 to 48 hours, those names would be

                 approved.

                            Now, this process, as imperfect as

                 it is, is an improvement over the last

                 process, of that governor.  I would still like

                 to see, as you would, Senator LaValle, an

                 improvement of this process.  But the only way

                 that can take place is if the majorities as

                 well as the minorities of both chambers of

                 this Legislature sit down together -- not 24

                 hours before a selection process, but months

                 before that process -- and iron out

                 differences and create a vehicle by -- a means

                 by which we can truly reform the process that

                 exists today.  Which is imperfect but better

                 than what existed 30 years ago.

                            And I am looking forward to a real

                 reform involving the majorities of both houses





                                                          816



                 of the state Legislature in the near future.

                            Thank you.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Read the last

                 section.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Section 12.  This

                 act shall take effect immediately.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Call the roll.

                 (The Secretary called the roll.)

                            THE PRESIDENT:     The Secretary

                 will announce the results.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Those recorded in

                 the negative on Calendar Number 154 are

                 Senators Breslin, Connor, Duane, Kruger,

                 Lachman, Markowitz, Montgomery, Nanula,

                 Onorato, Oppenheimer, Paterson, Schneiderman,

                 Smith, Stachowski, Stavisky, and Waldon.

                            SENATOR LACHMAN:    Two more.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Also Senators

                 Rosado, Hevesi, Seabrook, and Santiago.

                            Ayes 34; nays 20.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is

                 passed.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Calendar Number

                 155, by Senator LaValle, Senate Print 1068, an

                 act to amend the Education Law, in relation to





                                                          817



                 the Board of Regents.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Read the last

                 section -- Senator Paterson.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Madam

                 President, if Senator LaValle would come back,

                 would he yield for a question or two?

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator LaValle,

                 do you yield for a question?

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Yes.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Go ahead, Senator

                 Paterson.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    I'm sorry,

                 Senator.  I know that you explained basically

                 the text of both bills in your original

                 statement.

                            But if we could just turn to the

                 bill at hand.  By changing the date, you don't

                 have any provision at all for what should

                 happen, where the bill right now is clear.  It

                 says that there should be a concurrent

                 resolution of both houses if the two houses

                 can't agree by concurrent resolutions.

                            Your remedy is not to -- is to have

                 the legislative mandate be silent on the

                 issue.  And I was wondering if you thought





                                                          818



                 that was -- how that could be a better way,

                 since now there's actually no explanation, so

                 that our different houses of government can

                 fight over it presumably for another few

                 years.

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Senator, this

                 bill was filed, I think, with some input from

                 your side on the fact that there was

                 recognition that there was a better time to

                 have this discussion than in the middle of the

                 budget process.

                            And so this, as other measures that

                 I've talked with Senator Lachman -- Senator

                 Lachman and I were sponsors on one bill

                 together.  We pulled out various pieces to try

                 and make -- go from making big changes, major

                 reforms, to smaller things that seem to make

                 some sense.

                            You know, as I have said, the most

                 important underpinning is to move away from

                 the unicameral session, to do it by concurrent

                 resolution.  That's the period, end of story.

                 But I feel just as strongly that it's madness

                 to be -- to talk about selecting members of

                 the Board of Regents at this time.





                                                          819



                            I mean, if we took -- went around

                 this room and asked who are the three

                 candidates that people are going to be voting

                 on tomorrow, I think we would have very few

                 answers from the members, the 61 members in

                 this house.  And that is not because of a lack

                 of interest; it's because the members are very

                 involved in the budget process.  That's number

                 one on everyone's agenda, as it should be.

                            So what we're merely saying here is

                 that taking an imperfect process, we should at

                 least consider members who are very, very

                 important to the people of this -- of this

                 state, and at least do it at a more sober

                 time.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Madam

                 President.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Paterson.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    I hope that

                 Senator LaValle is aware that we have the

                 deepest respect for the amount of work that he

                 did, and that we agree with a great deal of

                 it.

                            Speaking to the previous bill that

                 we just passed, if I might just for a moment,





                                                          820



                 he has a lot of interesting reforms in

                 there -- open meetings, advisory committees,

                 what I think is a new view of how government

                 should interact with people, particularly in

                 the area of education, a process that is far

                 more inclusive.

                            And we are particularly impressed

                 with the organized and certainly specific way

                 that he's documented these changes.  Our

                 objection to the last legislation was that we

                 just felt that regardless of who the governor

                 is, that to give the executive branch the

                 choice of picking the head of the Board of

                 Regents politicizes the process.

                            Now, in the current bill, we agree

                 completely the third Tuesday in May would be a

                 far more apt time.  Unfortunately, too many of

                 our budgets have even passed that period of

                 time.  But hoping that we can come to an

                 agreement on a budget and with our new

                 remedies that the Speaker and the Majority

                 Leader have brought in with the conference

                 committees, bringing us all together,

                 hopefully after the experience last year, our

                 budget process will be shorter.





                                                          821



                            And Senator LaValle is right, and

                 we should commend him.  The third Tuesday in

                 May would be an apt time to pick the Regents'

                 chair.

                            And I'm certainly glad because I

                 know two of them, but I couldn't name all

                 three of tomorrow's candidates.  So, Senator

                 LaValle, I want to go on record and say that

                 you were quite gracious with me, because you

                 could have asked me what their three actual

                 names were.  And I think that further affirms

                 how correct you are.

                            But what I was pointing out -- and

                 this is leading up to my question, Madam

                 President, for Senator LaValle -- is that by

                 putting in this new statute, we are removing

                 the language that allowed for a concurrent

                 resolution of the two houses of government,

                 settled, if there's some disagreement, by a

                 joint session.

                            And even before our disagreement

                 about how that process should work, Senator

                 LaValle, you haven't replaced it with

                 anything.  And as specific and detailed and

                 organized as you were in writing both bills, I





                                                          822



                 was just asking why you didn't at least put

                 your solution into the legislation.

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Senator, I

                 thought I answered that the first time.

                            I would have loved to have put my

                 solution into the -- into the mix.  But I

                 think here we're just basically focusing on

                 the time of the year.  That's the -- that's

                 the thrust of this bill.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Madam

                 President -- Madam President, if the Senator

                 would continue to yield.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator LaValle,

                 do you yield for an additional question?

                 Senator LaValle -

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Yes, I -- yes,

                 I do, Madam President.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Go ahead, Senator

                 Paterson.

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Senator, I see

                 what you're talking about with -

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Paterson,

                 do you have an additional question?  Senator

                 LaValle has yielded.  Go ahead.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Yes.  I think





                                                          823



                 Senator LaValle is answering my question.

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Yeah.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    All right.  Go

                 ahead, Senator LaValle.

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Yeah.  We kept

                 in the concurrent resolution, and then we took

                 out in brackets all the language on the first

                 Tuesday.  And then the joint ballot, we took

                 that out.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Senator, my

                 question is -- even before we get to our

                 perhaps disagreement -- is that it's my

                 opinion that there's a technical flaw in the

                 bill itself, in that you've removed the

                 concurrent session to be followed, if an

                 agreement can't be reached, by a joint

                 session, and you haven't replaced it with

                 anything.  So now the law is silent on the

                 issue.  And I -

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    No, no,

                 Senator.  This is -- this is -- this is what I

                 have said, you know, over and over again, that

                 the period should be after the concurrent

                 resolution.  Because that allows for the

                 bicameral process.  That allows for the





                                                          824



                 majority votes in each of the houses.

                            And what we're trying to get away

                 from is what I feel is unconstitutional, is to

                 go into a unicameral legislative session.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Thank you,

                 Madam President.

                            Senator, I stand corrected.  You

                 are right.  The joint session is removed, but

                 the concurrent resolution stands.

                            My question is, in the case of

                 Regents as opposed to other areas of

                 government, how do we resolve that situation?

                 In other words, if we have a budget and the

                 two houses don't agree, along with the

                 Governor, then we just don't have a budget.

                 But in the case of the Board of Regents, the

                 Board of Regents is still acting, what is the

                 way to resolve a concurrent -- two concurrent

                 resolutions that don't have any agreement, and

                 then at that point we're just going to go on

                 ad infinitum without anyone being placed on

                 the Board of Regents?

                            In other words, how do we break the

                 tie?  How do we resolve that problem?

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Senator, I





                                                          825



                 would say to you if you look back in history,

                 the members of the Board of Regents from 1784

                 to 1904 were elected for life.  So the only -

                 the only time that you really had a vacancy in

                 the Board of Regents was upon death.

                            And at a much kinder time -- I

                 think from 1904 into the 1970s -- the

                 Legislature pretty much agreed by concurrent

                 resolution.

                            One of the years, however -- and

                 that's how we got into March -- the leaders

                 could not agree by concurrent resolution.  And

                 the people at that time said, Well, we can't

                 agree.  And then rather than just let the

                 deadline go -- because legislatures at that

                 time, dates were very important to them.  When

                 you said something was to happen on

                 such-and-such a date, the members at that time

                 believed it had to happen at that time or you

                 changed the date.

                            And that's how we got into March,

                 by the way.  We changed it from February into

                 March.  And the reason I know that is because

                 I was director of the Education Committee that

                 was called up to write that statute to change





                                                          826



                 the date.

                            So people changed the date.  And

                 that's how they -- that's how they did things

                 back -- up until the '70s.  As we got into the

                 '80s, we became more contentious, and of

                 course we relied more on the joint session

                 than we did by concurrent resolution.

                            But history will show that

                 legislatures and those people that served in

                 the Legislature were much kinder and gentler

                 to one another, were much more respectful, and

                 were able to come to a decision easier,

                 despite whether the houses were controlled by

                 one political party or not.

                            And so I have -- and in the oral

                 arguments on the litigation that we've -- you

                 and I have talked about, it has been mentioned

                 that legislatures find methodologies but

                 agree, whether it's on the state budget or

                 other things, even though it goes beyond a

                 particular point in time, a particular date.

                            So I don't use -- and I know we had

                 this discussion last year, that the joint

                 session is the breaker, the tiebreaker of how

                 you get away from a disagreement.  I would





                                                          827



                 rather think that if you just had a concurrent

                 resolution process and no joint session, we

                 would be forced into coming up with the

                 agreement on who should be seated on the Board

                 of Regents.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Madam

                 President, if -

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Paterson.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    -- Senator

                 LaValle would continue to yield.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator, do you

                 continue to yield?

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Madam

                 President, while he's wearing me down, I will

                 graciously concede, yes.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Paterson,

                 you may proceed.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Madam

                 President, my question to Senator LaValle is,

                 isn't it true, Senator, that when we come to

                 executive appointments, that quite often we

                 understand that there's a seasonalness, a

                 timeliness to legislative approval, and so

                 that we don't have this problem with respect

                 to other appointments made by the Governor -





                                                          828



                 that the Senate, this chamber, actually

                 resolves that by offering advice and consent

                 in confirming executive nominations?

                            So if you look at the whole picture

                 and not just how it is resolved when it is

                 applied to the Board of Regents, would it not

                 be fair to say that in this instance, the

                 concurrent resolution not being agreed upon,

                 that joint session -- which does, and I

                 concede, contain in it 150 Assembly members to

                 the 61 Senators -- but that that process is

                 more inclusive of the entire Legislature than

                 the confirmation of appointees by the Senate

                 where only we decide?

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Senator, I'll

                 answer the last part of your question.

                            I guess I'm just an institutional

                 person.  And I believe that the members of

                 this body deserve the respect of their office,

                 in the fact that close to 300,000 people send

                 us to Albany to represent them, and that we

                 have one vote, and that in our Senate

                 districts there are two and a half or more,

                 maybe more, Assembly members who have the same

                 vote as we do.





                                                          829



                            You do not need this body for a

                 quorum.  You do not need this body to elect,

                 by a majority vote, members to the Board of

                 Regents.

                            The first part of your question,

                 getting into executive appointments, is that

                 the constitution crafts that out and says that

                 these appointments shall be done with the

                 advice and consent of the Senate.  Whereas

                 members of the Board of Regents are elected.

                 And the methodology, by 202 of the Education

                 Law, a statute.

                            And so you're comparing apples and

                 oranges.  One a constitutional basis, and the

                 other a statutory basis.

                            And so I really am, Senator,

                 concerned that this house does not really have

                 standing when it comes to the process of

                 selecting and electing members to the Board of

                 Regents.

                            And I would think you would be

                 equally concerned about that, from an

                 institutional perspective and from a

                 perspective of the people who send you to

                 Albany, that you should have a greater voice





                                                          830



                 in the selection process.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Madam

                 President, if I was going to address all the

                 areas that I'd like to have a greater voice

                 here, that would be certainly on the list.

                            There are a number of concerns that

                 we have, particularly here in the Senate

                 minority, about representing 300,000 people

                 and not necessarily having a voice.

                            But that aside, on the bill -

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator, are you

                 on the bill or do you have a question?

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    No, I'm on the

                 bill.  Thank you, Madam President.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Go ahead.

                            SENATOR PATERSON:    Senator

                 LaValle does raise what I consider to be a

                 constitutional issue.  He aptly describes

                 himself as an institutionalist.  And he

                 graduates from some of the finer institutions

                 that we have in this state -- namely, Touro

                 Law School, which I have an affiliation with.

                 And way back when, I believe we're the only

                 two senators to graduate from the same high

                 school, neither of which represents that





                                                          831



                 district now.

                            So that's an open question.  If

                 anyone can figure out the answer to it, we

                 might confer a gratuitous benefit on them.

                            But on the bill, I'd like to say

                 that when I used the comparison of executive

                 appointments, it was not necessarily to make a

                 direct comparison with this situation, but

                 rather to establish how the constitution might

                 speak on this issue.  If anything, it was to

                 recommend to the Senator that there is

                 certainly a relationship and a dicta with

                 which the Constitution might give us some

                 bearing as to how to resolve this issue.

                            And it's my conclusion that both of

                 our houses of the Legislature -- which at the

                 time, the Senate was and Assembly were not of

                 the same party as it is right now -- they

                 nonetheless agreed that this would be a good

                 way to resolve a concurrent resolution process

                 where there was not agreement.

                            So hopefully one day, perhaps to

                 Senator LaValle's satisfaction, there will be

                 some judicial ruling on this matter.  And

                 although I think that Senator LaValle might be





                                                          832



                 disappointed by what the ruling might be, I

                 still think that it is in our best interest to

                 include all the members of the Legislature at

                 some particular point.

                            The Senate and the Assembly are

                 separate bodies but do not have separate and

                 distinct points of view.  We cannot assume

                 that the Assembly is going to have a similar

                 point of view to each other's when voting on

                 members of the Board of Regents.

                            So with that in mind, all of us

                 being individual legislators, the actual

                 weight of the vote, when it comes to comparing

                 the Senate and Assembly, may not really have

                 the relevance when one considers the fact that

                 it may in fact be better than this being voted

                 upon in one house or agreed upon by leadership

                 where presumably we haven't even been aware of

                 what all the votes of the members actually is.

                            And so this is the reason that many

                 of us are unable to support this legislation,

                 in spite of the fact, as I said before, that

                 we are very much in favor of changing the

                 date.

                            We feel that Senator LaValle has





                                                          833



                 absolutely hit the nail on the head, that the

                 middle of May is better than the middle of

                 March to resolve it.  And his other measures

                 that he has put into the previous bill that we

                 discussed are really welcomed at this point -

                 opening up government, opening the process,

                 establishing public attendance at meetings,

                 which we wholeheartedly endorse.

                            Other than the issue of who would

                 appoint the chair of the Board of Regents and

                 which way the Regents would be elected, we

                 commend Senator LaValle for his work but must

                 urge a no vote on this legislation until such

                 time as it's understood that the joint session

                 of the Legislature is probably the best way to

                 elect members to the Board of Regents.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Waldon.

                            SENATOR WALDON:    Madam President,

                 thank you very much.  If the gentleman would

                 yield to just one question.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator LaValle,

                 do you yield to a question?

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Yes, I do.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    You may proceed.

                            SENATOR WALDON:    Thank you, Madam





                                                          834



                 President.

                            Senator, I just want to make sure

                 that I am on the same page with you.  It is my

                 understanding that 155 will eliminate the

                 process, as we understand and function now,

                 where we have a joint session to elect

                 Regents.  Is that correct?

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Yes.

                            SENATOR WALDON:    Thank you very

                 much.

                            Thank you very much, Madam

                 President.

                            SENATOR LACHMAN:    Madam Chair.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Lachman.

                            SENATOR LACHMAN:    Madam

                 President, I'd like to ask the Senator to

                 yield.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator LaValle,

                 do you yield?

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Yes.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Go ahead, Senator

                 Lachman.

                            SENATOR LACHMAN:    Senator

                 LaValle, the words in brackets this year, were

                 they in brackets last year which removed





                                                          835



                 the -

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    I'm sorry,

                 Senator, I can't hear you.

                            SENATOR LACHMAN:    I'm sorry.  Let

                 me get closer to my microphone.

                            The words that are in brackets in

                 this bill at the bottom of the page -

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Yes.

                            SENATOR LACHMAN:    -- were they

                 similarly in brackets last year, or is this

                 something new?

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    Last year it

                 was -- it was pointed out that -- in the

                 debate that the brackets should have taken out

                 what the brackets have taken out this year.

                            SENATOR LACHMAN:    But they were

                 not there, it was pointed out in debate -

                            SENATOR LAVALLE:    That's my

                 recollection, Senator, yes.

                            SENATOR LACHMAN:    On the bill,

                 Madam Chair.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Go ahead, Senator

                 Lachman.

                            SENATOR LACHMAN:    I commend the

                 Senator for moving in the right direction in





                                                          836



                 terms of achieving positive change.  But

                 because of the language that is now removed by

                 the brackets, that there will not be a joint

                 session, I regret that I cannot support this

                 measure.

                            But I do hope in the future to work

                 with the distinguished chairman of the Higher

                 Education Committee and our colleagues in the

                 Assembly to really move towards a reforming of

                 the process that needs to be reformed.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Stavisky.

                            SENATOR STAVISKY:    May I remain

                 seated, Madam President?

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Yes, of course,

                 Senator.  Go ahead from your seat.

                            SENATOR STAVISKY:    Thank you.

                            I believe it is important to point

                 out that the method of resolving the impasse

                 has been taken out.  Instead of having the

                 joint session, at which time members of both

                 houses would have the opportunity to vote,

                 that has been taken out of this bill.

                            Are we so enamored of the idea that

                 the Governor and the Majority of this house

                 shall have control over this process?  Why do





                                                          837



                 we take out the method of resolving the

                 impasse?  I think that that's a mistake.  I

                 think that that causes me to be opposed to the

                 bill in the way it is drafted here.

                            There are a few things that the

                 Legislature has the primary role in dealing

                 with, and the election of Regents is one of

                 those.  It's not a gubernatorial appointment

                 with confirmation by the Senate that we are

                 taking out.  We are substituting selection by

                 the Governor and confirmation by the Senate,

                 the Majority of this house.  Which means that

                 those of us who believe that there should be

                 the opportunity to resolve the issue in a

                 legislative way, through a joint session, have

                 been given short shrift.

                            I think that's a mistake.  We are

                 not confirming a traditional gubernatorial

                 appointment.  We are instead substituting the

                 Governor and the Majority of this house in

                 place of the existing procedure, which is for

                 a joint session that would enable everyone in

                 the Legislature to participate.

                            There are too many situations -

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator, are you





                                                          838



                 on the bill or do you have a question, sir?

                            SENATOR STAVISKY:    I'm on the

                 bill.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Go ahead, sir.

                            SENATOR STAVISKY:    There are too

                 many situations where the Governor and the

                 Majority of this house control the process.

                 The Legislature is given short shrift by the

                 omission of the joint legislative session.

                 And I think that's a mistake.  I think it's a

                 mistake for all of the members of the

                 Legislature.

                            It's a mistake that we should not

                 allow to happen.  It is a mistake that causes

                 me grave concern that we are abdicating a

                 method of resolving the issue that is

                 presently in the law and we are substituting

                 the judgment of the Governor and the Majority

                 of this house without any input by the

                 Minority or the other house.

                            This is a legislative function that

                 should not be abdicated by the deletion of the

                 existing language.  And for that reason, I am

                 opposed to the bill in its present form.  I

                 have no problem with other provisions of the





                                                          839



                 bill.  But let's deal with the changing of the

                 date in a separate bill, a clean bill, one

                 that does not intrude upon the powers of the

                 Legislature to resolve a dispute.

                            And what is being done here is a

                 subterfuge to eliminate all participation by

                 the minority, all participation by those who

                 may have a different perspective than the

                 Governor and the Majority of this house.

                            And I believe that that is not the

                 intention.  This is a legislative function,

                 one of the few occasions where the Legislature

                 has primary responsibility.  And we should not

                 be abdicating that primary responsibility for

                 the Legislature.  All the members of the

                 Legislature have a right to vote on the

                 settling of the impasse.

                            And for that reason, I will oppose

                 the bill and urge my colleagues to oppose it

                 as well.

                            Thank you, Madam President.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Marchi.

                            SENATOR MARCHI:    Madam President,

                 I went on for years under the system -- and

                 I'm not fully persuaded by Senator LaValle





                                                          840



                 yet -- that it is indeed a question that was

                 to be resolved by the Legislature.  And it

                 functioned well, and then we came up to where

                 there was a split in the two houses.

                            And I remember that we brought up

                 the question of one-man-one-vote on a quorum

                 call; it was not squarely on the issue.  And

                 Governor Wilson, your predecessor, ruled

                 against this house at that time and said that

                 under the plain significance of the language

                 that we have that governs us, each person,

                 each individual, was entitled to one vote

                 equally in the two houses.  So that

                 effectively knocked out the Senate, where you

                 weren't able to establish a concurrence.

                            I'm going to support this bill,

                 because I believe that he has opened up the

                 question -- and I would hope a dialogue

                 generally -- that would accommodate the larger

                 view of how we dispose of it.  And I'm still

                 of the opinion that it should be legislative.

                 But we are effectively locked out of that

                 process under the present circumstances.

                            So I understand how, you know, you

                 folks may oppose this legislation.  And





                                                          841



                 perhaps you feel more secure that the decision

                 will be made over in the Assembly.  But it

                 effectively negates meaningful participation

                 by this house.  It's absurd.  I don't know how

                 it -- we just circumvent this or get around

                 it.

                            But I compliment Senator LaValle on

                 at least opening up the question to other

                 alternatives.  So I'm going to support it in

                 the hope that it engenders -- because

                 obviously we're not going anywhere here,

                 except as it expresses a deep-felt sentiment

                 of this house that we're not really wholly

                 satisfied with the present process, much as

                 you may agree with the results that will

                 probably follow.

                            So I do hope that we -- this bill

                 is supported by everyone and it opens the door

                 to what all of us desire, and -- which I

                 believe is Senator LaValle's primary aim, is

                 to open up the dialogue to the wider issue of

                 our exclusion.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Read the last

                 section.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Section 2.  This





                                                          842



                 act shall take effect immediately.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Call the roll.

                            (The Secretary called the roll.)

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The Secretary

                 will announce the results.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Those record -

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Seabrook.

                            SENATOR SEABROOK:    I'll wait

                 until the vote.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Thank you,

                 Senator.

                            The Secretary will announce the

                 results.

                            THE SECRETARY:    Those recorded in

                 the negative on Calendar Number 155 are

                 Senators Breslin, Connor, Duane, Gonzalez,

                 Hevesi, Lachman, Markowitz, Montgomery,

                 Nanula, Onorato, Oppenheimer, Paterson,

                 Rosado, Santiago, Schneiderman, Seabrook,

                 Smith, Stachowski, Stavisky, and Waldon.

                            Ayes 36; nays 20.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The bill is

                 passed.

                            Senator Seabrook.

                            SENATOR SEABROOK:    Yes.  Madam





                                                          843



                 President, with unanimous consent, I'd like to

                 be recorded in the negative on Calendar Number

                 201.  That's Senate Bill 1734.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Without

                 objection, you are so recorded, Senator.

                            Senator Stavisky.

                            SENATOR STAVISKY:    I too would

                 like to be recorded in the negative on

                 Calendar Number 201, Senate 1734.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Without

                 objection, you are so recorded in the

                 negative.

                            Senator Skelos, that completes the

                 controversial reading of the calendar.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    Madam President,

                 is there any housekeeping at the desk?

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Yes.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    Please recognize

                 Senator Smith.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    I'm going to

                 recognize Senator Smith first.

                            Go ahead, Senator Smith.

                            SENATOR SMITH:    Thank you, Madam

                 President.  I request unanimous consent to be

                 recorded in the negative on Calendar Number





                                                          844



                 201.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    Senator Smith,

                 without objection, you are so recorded.

                            We have two substitutions at the

                 desk, Senator Skelos.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    Please make the

                 substitutions.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The Secretary

                 will read.

                            THE SECRETARY:    On page 10,

                 Senator Maziarz moves to discharge, from the

                 Committee on Aging, Assembly Print 3480 and

                 substitute it for the identical third reading,

                 134.

                            On page 15, Senator Hannon moves to

                 discharge, from the Committee on Health,

                 Assembly Bill 5100 and substitute it for the

                 identical third reading, 205.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    The substitutions

                 are ordered.

                            Senator Skelos.

                            SENATOR SKELOS:    Madam President,

                 there being no further business, I move we

                 adjourn until Tuesday, March 9th, at 3:00 p.m.

                            THE PRESIDENT:    On motion, the





                                                          845



                 Senate now stands adjourned until Tuesday,

                 March 9th, 3:00 p.m.

                            (Whereupon, at 4:15 p.m., the

                 Senate adjourned.)