Regular Session - August 5, 1999
6946
NEW YORK STATE SENATE
THE
STENOGRAPHIC RECORD
ALBANY, NEW YORK
August 5, 1999
10:05 a.m.
REGULAR SESSION
SENATOR CHARLES J. FUSCHILLO, Acting President
STEVEN M. BOGGESS, Secretary
6947
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
Senate will come to order.
Please rise and repeat after me the
Pledge of Allegiance.
(Whereupon, the assemblage recited
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.)
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: In
the absence of clergy, please bow your heads.
(Whereupon, the assemblage
respected a moment of silence.)
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Reading of the Journal.
THE SECRETARY: In Senate,
Wednesday, August 4th, the Senate met pursuant
to adjournment. The Journal of Tuesday,
August 3rd, was read and approved. On motion,
Senate adjourned.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Presentation of petitions.
Messages from the Assembly.
Messages from the Governor.
Reports of standing committees.
Reports of select committees.
Communication and reports from
state officers.
6948
Motions and resolutions.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Is there any
housekeeping at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: No,
there is not.
SENATOR SKELOS: We'll just stand
at ease for a moment, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Okay, Senator Skelos.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 10:07 a.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 10:08 a.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: There will be an
immediate meeting of the Rules Committee in
the Majority Conference Room.
The Senate will stand at ease.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
re will be an immediate meeting of the Rules
Committee in the Majority Conference Room.
Thank you, Senator Skelos.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
6949
ease at 10:09 a.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 10:17 a.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
if we could return to reports of standing
committees, I believe there's a report of the
Rules Committee at the desk. I ask that it be
read.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Return to reports of standing committees. The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Bruno,
from the Committee on Rules, reports the
following bills:
Senate Print 4534, by Senator
Hannon, an act to amend the Tax Law;
4998, by Senator Velella, an act
authorizing the City of New York;
5758A, by Senator McGee, an act to
amend the Public Authorities Law;
5762A, by Senator Libous, an act to
amend the Mental Hygiene Law;
6102, by Senator Saland, an act to
6950
amend the Real Property Tax Law;
And 5621, by Senator Sampson, an
act authorizing the City of New York to
reconvey its interest.
All bills ordered direct to third
reading.
SENATOR SKELOS: Move to accept
the report of the Rules Committee.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
motion is to accept the report of the Rules
Committee. All those in favor signify by
saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Opposed?
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
ayes have it. The motion is passed.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
can we take up Senate Calendar Number 60A.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1698, by Senator Hannon, Senate Print 4534, an
6951
act to amend the Tax Law, in relation to sales
and compensating use taxes.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Read
the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Call
the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 37.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
bill is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1699, Senator Velella moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 7986, and substitute it
for the identical Third Reading Calendar,
1699.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1699, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 7986, an act authorizing
the City of New York.
6952
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
There is a home rule message at the desk.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Call
the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 37.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
bill is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1700, by Senator McGee, Senate Print 5758A, an
act to amend the Public Authorities Law, in
relation to enacting.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
There is a home rule message at the desk.
Read the last section.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay the bill
aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Lay
the bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1702, by Senator Saland, Senate Print 6102, an
act to amend the Real Property Tax Law, in
6953
relation to notice.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Read
the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Call
the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 37.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
bill is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1704, Senator Sampson moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 8348 and substitute it
for the identical Third Reading Calendar,
1704.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
substitution is ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1704, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 8348, an act authorizing
the City of New York to reconvey its interest.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
6954
There is a home rule message at the desk.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Call
the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 37.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
bill is passed.
Senator Skelos, that completes the
reading of the -
SENATOR SKELOS: Could you please
take up Calendar Number 1700, by Senator
McGee.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1700, by Senator McGee, Senate Print 5758A, an
act to amend the Public Authorities Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Dollinger, why do you rise?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Will the
sponsor yield to one question, Mr. President?
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
6955
Senator McGee, will you yield for a question?
SENATOR McGEE: Certainly.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President. Does this bill permit the
Sports, Recreation and Cultural Authority to
condemn property?
SENATOR McGEE: No.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: It doesn't.
SENATOR McGEE: No.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: No objection,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
There is a home rule message at the desk.
Senator Wright, why do you rise?
SENATOR WRIGHT: Will the sponsor
submit to a question, please?
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator McGee, will you yield for a question?
SENATOR McGEE: Yes.
SENATOR WRIGHT: Senator McGee,
is there any truth to the rumor that this
authority is intended to relocate the Buffalo
Bills to Chautauqua County?
6956
(Laughter.)
SENATOR McGEE: I should ever be
so lucky. That perhaps would be something we
would certainly investigate, Senator Wright.
Thank you so much for bringing that to my
attention.
SENATOR WRIGHT: Thank you,
Senator.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Wright, are you satisfied with the
response?
SENATOR WRIGHT: I am,
Mr. President. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
There is a home rule message at the desk.
The Secretary will read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Call
the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 37.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
bill is passed.
6957
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
the Senate will stand at ease.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
Senate will stand at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 10:24 a.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 10:27 a.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
on Calendar Number 60, which is the yellow
calendar that's on your desk, would you please
call up Calendar Number 1676.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1676, by Senator Bruno, Senate Print 6048B, an
act to amend the Public Authorities Law.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
is there a message at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Yes,
there is.
SENATOR SKELOS: Move to accept.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
6958
motion is to accept the message at the desk.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Opposed?
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
ayes have it. The motion is accepted.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Call
the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 37.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
bill is passed.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
on Calendar 60A, would you please call up
Calendar Number 1701.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1701, by Senator Libous, Senate Print 5762A,
an act to amend the Mental Hygiene Law.
6959
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Libous.
SENATOR SKELOS: Is there a
message at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Yes,
there is.
SENATOR SKELOS: Move to accept.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
motion is to accept the message at the desk.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Opposed?
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
ayes have it.
Senator Dollinger, could you just
wait one second?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Can I just
have an explanation of this bill?
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Oka
y. One second.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
6960
Senator Padavan, why do you rise?
SENATOR PADAVAN: To provide the
explanation.
(Laughter.)
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Padavan, for the explanation.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Thank you, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Thank you, Senator.
SENATOR PADAVAN: This is a
landmark piece of legislation which certainly
reflects the hard work of not only Senator
Libous, as chairman of the Mental Health
Committee, but the Governor, the Attorney
General, and many other individuals within the
Legislature who have had a compelling if not
serious interest in dealing with individuals
who at one time had been in a facility because
of their mental illness, were placed after a
period of time on drug therapy which would
stabilize them and allow them to mainstream,
but unfortunately, for one reason or the
other, would relapse -- primarily because they
stopped taking their medication, but sometimes
6961
for other reasons -- and then become not only
a danger to themselves but a danger to
society.
And this bill has been named
Kendra's Law to reflect one of those
tragedies. And there have been others you've
read about, people being pushed off subway
platforms in the City of New York, individuals
constantly being in and out of mental
hospitals. And really, they shouldn't be -
the Hoag case comes to mind a couple of years
ago. Really, they shouldn't be, if there'd
been proper follow-up, case management,
oversight, and an assurance that that
individual was doing what prudently he or she
should be doing.
So this bill outlines a process of
providing support, supervision and
coordination of community-based services for
persons with mental illness who are at risk of
relapse, violence and/or hospitalization and
can be recommitted, through court-ordered
assisted outpatient treatment, under a certain
specific list of criteria, of which there are
eight.
6962
First, the patient has to be over
18 and obviously suffering from mental
illness. If the patient is unlikely to
survive safely in the community without
treatment. If the patient has a history of
lack of compliance with treatment programs,
has been hospitalized or incarcerated at least
twice in the past 36 months, or has resulted
in one or more acts of serious physical
violence against themselves or others. If the
criteria specifies that as a result of his
illness, the patient is unlikely to
voluntarily participate in his recommended
treatment plan, and because of his history and
current behavior, he is in need of this type
of implementation of commitment.
Now, there are, of course,
mechanisms in place to ensure that this
particular individual will get all the
protections, both civil and others, that he or
she is entitled to. And the key element
there -- and I'm sure most of you are aware of
the Mental Hygiene Legal Services, which will
represent the patient and -- to ensure that
his rights or her rights will be properly
6963
advanced.
So in effect, we have the result of
an evolutionary process. Back many years ago,
during the Koch Administration, as the mayor
of the city of New York, as a result of some
high-profile cases, we implemented the 48-hour
commitment. This had to do with people who
were out on the streets, sometimes in the
middle of winter freezing themselves, and the
police and the health-care workers could not
involuntarily take that person to a hospital.
And so we passed a bill then called the
48-hour involuntary commitment. And it did
save lives.
But it did not, obviously, go far
enough. We then put in place the Bellevue
program a number of years ago, a pilot program
in the city of New York. And their report on
the results of their efforts were provided to
us this spring, which sought to do, in
essence, the primary components of the bill
before us. And they have been doing it with
generally good results. But again, for a
limited population in the city of New York.
This will be a statewide bill. And
6964
so its benefits -- and, by the way, the
Bellevue project will continue through
September of 2000. So that catchment
population that's in that program will
continue to benefit from it.
Those are the essential ingredients
in this. I think you also know in the
budget -- and it's not in this bill, but I
think it certainly relates to it -
significant sums of money were provided for
residences for the mentally ill, housing and
other support services, as well as for the
retarded. And so I think that is a
supplement, if not certainly a helpful
ingredient, in our overall effort to deal with
people who unfortunately at one point in time
or other are incapable of caring for
themselves.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr.
President, will the sponsor or the spokesman
yield for a question?
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Padavan, will you yield for a
6965
question?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes, I will.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just a couple
of quick sort of understanding questions so I
make sure I fully understand it.
This bill will only allow
involuntary commitment or treatment if it was
determined by the physician who evaluated the
patient that that was the least restrictive
alternative; is that correct?
SENATOR PADAVAN: After an
examination, yes.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay. So -
SENATOR PADAVAN: Now, the
court -- there are certain prerogatives that
the court has. The court must hear testimony
from the physician. The physician must
present and testify to a written treatment
plan, which in many cases include medication
and always include case management.
The court then can order an
examination of the patient if that individual
6966
refuses to be examined. And then a court can
conduct a hearing in the patient's absence
should there be good cause.
So there is that process that must
be followed. But basically the answer to your
question is yes.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay.
Through you again, Mr. President, if Senator
Padavan will continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Padavan, do you continue to yield for
another question?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: This only
applies to individuals who are actually
involved in, as the statute refers to it,
assisted outpatient treatment plans; isn't
that correct? And so that we're taking the
wide sort of universe of people who utilize
or -
SENATOR PADAVAN: Correct.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: -- utilize
drugs or whatever medication -
SENATOR PADAVAN: No, because if
we were to include everybody, it might include
6967
some of us in this chamber.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Correct. But
it only involves those who are actually -
SENATOR PADAVAN: Although I
think we are involuntarily committed right
here.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes, you're
right.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Well, we may
deserve to be committed after today as well.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Again, you're
correct.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay. So
we're taking the broad universe of people with
a particular problem, we're saying if you're
in a particular state-designated program, then
you're in a position where this -
SENATOR PADAVAN: Or a city
program. They could be in, as an example, the
Bellevue program.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay. I
note, Senator Padavan -- again, through you,
Mr. President, if Senator Padavan will
continue to yield.
6968
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Padavan, do you yield for another
question?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Dollinger, can I just request that you
address the President so you can speak into
your mike, so the stenographer can hear your
questions?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Mr. President. I have to get people to
explain things who aren't behind me.
One of the issues that I note very
quickly, Senator Padavan, in looking through
this bill, is there's a reference to a
health-care proxy and a proxy decision-making
for some of these patients. Could you tell me
how that works?
If you've signed a health-care
proxy, is the proxy person, the person who's
acting in your stead, able to commence this
process or participate in this process?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes. I believe
it has to be someone such as a wife, a
sibling, as other proxies that we utilize
6969
would provide for.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: And again,
through you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Padavan, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: This bill
also provides that the outpatient commitment
could not occur without a physician actually
providing the testimony and the evidence -
it's a physician, not any other -
SENATOR PADAVAN: No.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: -- treatment
specialist?
SENATOR PADAVAN: That is the
essential component that I tried to outline
earlier. And that physician would not only do
all the things you just said, but provide
significant input into the judiciary, who
would make the determination.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Again,
through you, Mr. President, if Senator Padavan
will continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Padavan, do you continue to yield?
6970
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: I understand,
Senator Padavan, according to your
explanation, that the Mental Health Services
Legal Services program would provide
representation for the patient in this case.
My question is, does this
provide -- and I notice there's a reference to
the Mental Hygiene Law. Does this provide an
expedited appeal for the patient in the event
that there's an order issued that would allow
them to go to the appellate division for a
quick or immediate review of the case, of the
decision?
SENATOR PADAVAN: To the
appellate division? I really don't know the
answer to that question. I would presume yes.
But we can find out and get that answer to
you.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay. Thank
you, Senator Padavan. I appreciate your -
the explanation is satisfactory. I wish to
address the bill.
6971
Mr. President, this bill, as
described by Senator Padavan, is a landmark
piece of legislation. It is a continuing step
down the path of trying to deal with the
enormously difficult problem of mental
illness, one that has vexed this state for
hundreds of years, and certainly the funding
of which and the problems of which continue to
vex us today.
It seems to me that this bill
balances, as best we can, the two important
needs that Senator Padavan highlighted -- the
need for us to be able to protect society and
to protect our people, not only from those who
may be the victims, as Kendra was, but also
those who are in the enormously difficult and
complicated, vexing situation of suffering
from mental illness.
And it seems to me that this bill
has the procedural safeguards necessary to
support it. I'm concerned, based on Senator
Padavan's comment, that $10 million in the
budget to deal with this problem isn't enough.
I believe that we have historically
underfunded problems for the mentally ill.
6972
Our history with community reinvestment is
frankly a very disappointing one. We have not
given it the -- or fulfilled the promise that
we once articulated in this chamber about
seven years ago.
Despite that, I'm going to vote in
favor of this bill. I think it does have the
protections. I think it does reflect a
balancing of those difficult interests. And
my hope is that we will continue to look
carefully at this issue. This may need more
tinkering. This may need more study. The
Bellevue study, I think, gave us a direction.
This bill, which grows out of the Bellevue
study, continues that direction.
But my hope is that we don't put
this on the books and then forget it. I hope
that we continue to look at this problem, we
evaluate whether it works, we evaluate whether
it's properly funded. And if it does fulfill
the promise, if it does improve the quality of
life both for patients and reduces the risk to
society in general, then maybe Kendra's Law
will have a long-term hope for everyone in
this state.
6973
I vote in favor of this bill
with -- with some reluctance. Not about the
quality of this bill, but about our continuing
commitment to the future of dealing with the
difficult problems of the mentally ill. My
hope is my colleagues will support me, that we
will vote in favor of this bill and continue
to look at this problem into the future.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Read
the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 18. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: Call
the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes -
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Duane, to explain your vote?
SENATOR DUANE: Yes, thank you,
Mr. President.
I'm voting in the negative on this
legislation. And I also want to make the
point that for us to bring this to the floor
for a vote without at the same time dealing
6974
with the issue of providing parity for mental
health services in our state's health-care
delivery is just wrong.
And though I know a lot of people
will be patting themselves on the back for
this, I think in the absence of providing
parity for mental health we're doing the state
a disservice.
I'm voting in the negative on this,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Duane, you will be recorded in the
negative.
Announce the results.
Senator DeFrancisco, to explain
your vote?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
I'm going to vote in the
affirmative. I originally had some reluctance
about this bill in view of the involuntary
commitment procedures. But it does strike an
appropriate balance.
And I think the two key things in
my mind that shows that there's a balance is
that if someone falsely makes a petition
6975
against someone, they're subject to criminal
prosecution. Which I think is a significant
factor in avoiding some petitions that aren't
true and are really brought for some ulterior
purpose. And, secondly, the hearing that's
required to be held before a judge requires
that there be a finding by clear and
convincing evidence, which is a higher
standard of proof that this type of commitment
is necessary.
So with those safeguards, I will be
voting yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator DeFrancisco will be recorded in the
affirmative.
Senator Schneiderman, why do you
rise?
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: To say
good morning, Mr. President, and just to make
sure that I'm also recorded in the negative.
Nice to see all of you.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO:
Senator Schneiderman, you will be recorded in
the negative.
Announce the results.
6976
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 41. Nays,
2. Senators Duane and Schneiderman recorded
in the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
bill is passed.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
we'll just stand at ease again.
ACTING PRESIDENT FUSCHILLO: The
Senate will stand at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 10:45 a.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 11:24 a.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT WRIGHT: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: There will be an
immediate conference of the Majority in the
Majority Conference Room.
ACTING PRESIDENT WRIGHT:
Immediate meeting of the Majority in the
Majority Conference Room.
SENATOR SKELOS: Please stand at
ease.
ACTING PRESIDENT WRIGHT: Stand
6977
at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 11:25 a.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 11:26 a.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Madam President. I call an immediate
conference of the Minority in Room 314.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There
will be an immediate meeting of the Minority
in the Minority Conference Room, immediately,
314.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 11:27 a.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 12:34 p.m.)
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT SEWARD: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: There will be an
immediate meeting of the Rules Committee in
the Majority Conference Room.
ACTING PRESIDENT SEWARD:
6978
Immediate meeting of the Rules Committee in
Room 332.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 12:35 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 12:55 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
if we can return to reports of standing
committees, I believe there's a report of the
Rules Committee at the desk. I ask that be it
read.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: We will
return to the order of reports of standing
committees. There is a report of the Rules
Committee at the desk.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Bruno,
from the Committee on Rules, reports the
following bills:
Senate Print 5114B, by Senator
Rath, an act to amend the Real Property Tax
Law;
2726B, by Senator Stafford, an act
6979
to allow Lawrence E. Strait;
1749A, by Senator Maltese, an act
to amend the Administrative Code of the City
of New York;
2141, by Senator Maltese, an act to
amend the Administrative Code of the City of
New York;
3382A, by Senator Leibell, an act
to amend the Retirement and Social Security
Law;
4288, by Senator Maltese, an act to
amend the Retirement and Social Security Law;
2334A, by Senator Montgomery, an
act authorizing the City of New York to
reconvey its interest;
6095, by Senator Hannon, an act to
amend the Tax Law;
6099, by Senator Libous, an act to
amend Chapter 723 of the Laws of 1993;
6116, by the Senate Committee on
Rules, an act to amend the Tax Law;
6117, by the Senate Committee on
Rules, an act to amend the Social Services Law
and others;
And Senate Print 6123, by the
6980
Senate Committee on Rules, an act to repeal
Section 4 of Chapter 307 of the Laws of 1996.
All bills ordered direct for third
reading.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Move to accept
the report of the Rules Committee.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
motion is to accept the report of the Rules
Committee. All those in favor signify by
saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Rules
report is accepted. The bills are ordered
directly to third reading.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: The calendars on
this agenda are about to be distributed. But
with the consent of the Minority, we'll
6981
proceed.
There's a bill package on your desk
starting with Calendar Number 920.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read Calendar Number 920,
Senate Print 5114B.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
920, by Senator Rath, Senate Print 5114B, an
act to amend the Real Property Tax Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
is there a message of necessity at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There is.
SENATOR SKELOS: Move to accept.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity
on Calendar Number 920. All those in favor
signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
message is accepted. The bill is before the
6982
house.
The Secretary will read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 4. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 49.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1604, Senator Stafford moves
to discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 6367B and substitute it
for the identical Third Reading Calendar,
1604.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
substitution is ordered.
The Secretary will read the title.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1604, by Member of the Assembly Ortloff,
Assembly Print Number 6367B, an act to allow
Lawrence E. Strait to file a request.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
6983
Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 49.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1694, Senator Maltese moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 3019A and substitute it
for the identical Third Reading Calendar,
1694.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
substitution is ordered.
The Secretary will read the title.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1694, by Member of the Assembly Pheffer,
Assembly Print Number 3019A, an act to amend
the Administrative Code of the City of New
York.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There is
a home rule message at the desk.
6984
The Secretary will read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 50.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1695, Senator Maltese moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 3688 and substitute it
for the identical Third Reading Calendar,
1695.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
substitution is ordered.
The Secretary will read the title.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1695, by Member of the Assembly Seminerio,
Assembly Print Number 3688, an act to amend
the Administrative Code of the City of New
York.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There is
6985
a home rule message at the desk.
The Secretary will read the last
section.
SENATOR DUANE: Lay the bill
aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Skelos, are we on controversial calendar?
SENATOR SKELOS: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Duane, do you wish to be recognized?
SENATOR DUANE: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Maltese. Senator Maltese, an explanation of
Calendar Number 1695, Senate Print 2141, has
been requested by Senator Duane.
SENATOR MALTESE: Senator, this
is an act to amend the Administrative Code of
the City of New York, in relation to
establishing the correction officers variable
supplements fund and the correction captains
and above variable supplements fund with
respect to authorizing payments to
beneficiaries receiving a correction
retirement allowance or receiving a benefit by
6986
reason of election of an option by retired
correction officers.
The purpose is to correct an
inequity among uniformed employees in the City
of New York. In 1970, police officers, police
superior officers, firefighters, and fire
officers were granted variable supplement
funds. In 1987, they were also given to
housing and transit police officers and the
police superior officers.
Correction officers, correction
captains, and assistant deputy wardens do not
presently have this fund and should have the
same allowances as the above titles. This -
basically, the justification is to correct an
injustice that exists in the manner in which
this benefit has been granted, by not
previously extending it to the equally
difficult and dangerous New York City
uniformed titles.
SENATOR DUANE: Would the Senator
yield for a question?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Maltese, do you yield to a question from
Senator Duane?
6987
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes, I yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DUANE: In addition to
the various employees who are now receiving
this or who have gotten this, are there any
other employees of the City of New York that
you're aware of?
SENATOR MALTESE: That do not
have it? My understanding is they all have
it. Uniformed law enforcement have it, but
these -- this would be the only uniformed law
enforcement officers that do not have it.
And in addition, I am advised that
the response to your question is that they are
in a unique capacity in that they are the only
law enforcement uniformed officers not
presently receiving it.
SENATOR DUANE: Are there any
nonuniformed service professionals that
receive this?
SENATOR MALTESE: No.
SENATOR DUANE: Do you know how
much this is going to cost the City of New
York?
6988
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes. There was
originally a -- various numbers that were
being tossed around by different actuarial
services. Depending on the point of view,
there seems to be a consensus that the amount
it would cost is $6 million.
SENATOR DUANE: I'm sorry, you
said $6 million?
SENATOR MALTESE: $6 million.
SENATOR DUANE: Does the Senator
have any -- where is that figure coming from,
Senator?
I'm sorry, through you,
Mr. President.
SENATOR MALTESE: That's on the
present fiscal note for the bill itself.
SENATOR DUANE: Through you, Mr.
President.
What fiscal -- whose fiscal number
is that?
SENATOR MALTESE: That's the
actuary. Johnson & Schwartz have come up with
that figure.
SENATOR DUANE: Through you, Mr.
President. Who are Johnson & Schwartz?
6989
SENATOR MALTESE: It's an
actuarial firm I guess that comes up with
fiscal notes.
SENATOR DUANE: Through you,
Mr. President. Are they affiliated with any
particular organization? On whose behalf do
they do this?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Maltese, do you yield to another question?
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes, I do.
SENATOR DUANE: Through you, Mr.
President. Can you tell me on whose behalf
this actuarial firm came up with the number,
who hired them?
SENATOR MALTESE: Yeah. It was
the correction officers, the beneficiaries of
this legislation.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Hevesi.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you, Mr.
President. Would the sponsor yield to a
question?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
6990
Maltese, do you yield to a question?
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR HEVESI: Senator Maltese,
if I was listening correctly, the actuary that
was hired by the correction officers who
benefit from the passage of this legislation
have assessed that the cost to the City of New
York would be $6 million annually; is that
correct?
SENATOR MALTESE: That's correct.
And in addition, Senate Finance concurs with
that figure. The Senate concurs with the
figure of $6 million.
SENATOR HEVESI: Okay.
SENATOR MALTESE: So it isn't
only the beneficiaries.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you, Mr.
President. If the sponsor would continue to
yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Maltese -
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
6991
sponsor continues to yield.
SENATOR HEVESI: Senator Maltese,
are you aware that the Chief Actuary of the
City of New York, who is on the Board of
Trustees of NYCERS, has analyzed this and has
deemed that the cost to the City of New York,
if this legislation was to be enacted, is
$118 million annually, and that the New York
City Comptroller and the Office of the Mayor
of the City of New York have also agreed in
that assessment, that those numbers are
accurate?
SENATOR MALTESE: Mr. President,
I am advised that they concur in that
approximate figure.
But I'm also advised that the
variance is something that comes up depending
on the point of view. And the -- the -- I,
for one, accept the Senate figure as more
accurate.
SENATOR HEVESI: Mr. President,
if the sponsor will continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Maltese, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes.
6992
SENATOR HEVESI: Senator Maltese,
I can articulate for you at least the
conceptual methodology through which the city
has determined that the cost would exceed $100
million a year. If you'd like, I can
articulate them for you, and maybe I'll do
that when I speak on the bill.
But for our edification, if you
could suggest to us how the actuary that was
hired by the correction officers -- with
concurrence, I assume from Senate Majority
Finance -- what was the methodology that
resulted in the $6 million figure? Because
that is a glaring difference between what the
actuary of the City of New York has estimated
the cost to the city would be.
SENATOR MALTESE: Mr. President,
I think it's obvious in the amount of bills
that come before this house, and the amount of
fiscal notes that we consider, that we do not
have an opportunity as legislators to go into
all the fiscal backgrounds on these notes.
I would be glad to sit down with
Senator Hevesi and have Senate staff sit down
with him after the legislation has passed.
6993
But I think that it is not -- this is not a
unique bill. This is not a situation where
we -- the only situation where we have a
substantial variance between the figures of
the City of New York or the comptroller's
office and Senate and the proponents of the
bill. We have -- we see the same thing
reflected in the Finance and funds available
for various legislative purposes, or we would
not be sitting in this chamber in August
instead of passing a budget by April 1st.
So there can be variances, and
substantial variances, by persons of good
conscience and good purpose. In this
particular legislation, we have a home rule
message, and the matter is presently before us
on what I hope is the last day of the session.
And if we hope to go into the fiscal
background at length, I for one would defer
that to perhaps sometime in September.
SENATOR HEVESI: Mr. President,
will the sponsor continue to yield?
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
6994
SENATOR HEVESI: Senator Maltese,
with respect, we've waited four months for a
fiscal package. And the suggestion that now,
when there is a piece of legislation before us
that could contain a serious financial hit to
the City of New York, that we shouldn't stall
or delay now, having waited four months to
pass a budget, is unacceptable.
And although, you know, I can
appreciate what you're trying to do with this
legislation, your suggestion to me that we
should pass the bill and then have a
discussion as to whether or not the city's
numbers are correct or whether or not the
correction officers' numbers are correct I
think is a little bit disingenuous, since this
is the only opportunity we will have to vote
on the legislation which will have the fiscal
impact that we're discussing here.
So if we pass the bill here and
then we have discussions and then, Senator
Maltese, you agreed that the city's numbers
are correct, we will have then inadvertently
cost the city over a hundred million dollars,
which is unacceptable.
6995
So let me ask the question of you,
Senator, because I know you are concerned, as
a fiscal conservative, with the finances of
the City of New York. And I'll remind
everybody, since in the wake of the commuter
tax debate, when everybody suggested that the
City of New York is just awash in cash and we
can spend, spend, spend -- which is actually
contrary to the philosophy of the Majority
party here in the Senate -- that the city is
looking at multibillion-dollar deficits in the
next few years. Multibillion-dollar deficits.
So my question is, Senator Maltese,
since we're now coming forward with this
legislation, and I know you're concerned about
the fiscal impact for the City of New York and
the city's budgetary condition, doesn't it
trouble you to such -- doesn't the fact that
the city's actuary suggests that this will
cost over a hundred million dollars trouble
you to the extent that you would deem it
necessary to lay this bill aside and then have
the actual discussion on what the fiscal
impact is to the city?
I would request, Senator Maltese,
6996
that you lay this bill aside, and I would
appreciate having a dialogue with you and the
relevant players in this to get to the bottom
of it.
SENATOR MALTESE: Mr. President,
I think it's a little bit disingenuous of my
good and esteemed colleague, Senator Hevesi,
to talk about making the system and the
methodology available. This bill has been
under serious discussion with the
comptroller's office, with the mayor's office.
Their representatives have been to see me
numerous times. The Governor's office has
been involved, the Senate Finance office has
been involved. This methodology could have
been made available to me, as the sponsor of
the bill, prior to today.
So it's disingenuous to talk about
making this material available at this point.
Any special knowledge that Senator Hevesi has
of the workings and the methodology of the
bill as far as systems in the comptroller's
office, I would certainly wish to avail myself
of.
At the same time, we are seeking to
6997
pass legislation in this house, we are ready
to pass the legislation in this house. And
quite frankly, I would not be interested at
this point in time to go over lengthy -
lengthy material rather than pass this
legislation, when it has been the subject of
very serious discussion I know of for at least
four months.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Hevesi.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you, Mr.
President. Would the sponsor continue to
yield?
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
sponsor continues to yield.
SENATOR HEVESI: Senator Maltese,
let me be specific in what the city's position
is. And I respect the fact that you had a
dialogue with the mayor's office and with the
comptroller's office, because here's the
rationale behind their assessment that this
would have a fiscal impact far exceeding what
you have suggested it would be.
The correction officers variable
6998
supplement fund would be funded by amounts
transferred to it by NYCERS. By the way,
that's NYCERS money. And I believe, as the
City of New York believes, that NYCERS should
have a say -- all the members of NYCERS should
have a say in how that money is spent. This
is money out of their pockets.
In effect, the city would be
required to fund the new supplemental benefits
through increased contributions to NYCERS.
Whenever the performance of the NYCERS stock
portfolio would require the skim-off of
pension assets, the city, for all practical
purposes, would be required to replace the
transferred assets. Under these
circumstances, the amount of the city's
contribution necessary to actuarially fund the
liabilities of NYCERS would be increased by
the amounts skimmed off.
And so, Senator Maltese, I will ask
you one final question pertaining to this
legislation. And I do appreciate your
responsiveness in handling these questions.
My question to you is simply if you believed
that the cost to the city of New York of
6999
enactment of this bill that's before us would
exceed a hundred million dollars a year, would
you support such legislation?
SENATOR MALTESE: Mr. President,
I think first I'd like to just respectfully
correct the terminology of my good colleague
from Queens County. He keeps talking about
the City of New York. I am advised that the
City Council is still part of the government
of the City of New York, in addition to the
mayor and the comptroller's office. And I am
further advised that the City Council passed
this -- the home rule message with one
negative vote.
So therefore, I feel that the
legislation certainly appropriately reflects
the will of a substantial portion of the,
quote, City of New York, unquote.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Hevesi.
SENATOR MALTESE: Would I support
it if it was a hundred million dollars in the
actuarial?
I've taken a look at this bill.
I've worked with the correction officers,
7000
certainly Norman Seabrooks and other people
that are very interested in the welfare not
only of the correction officers but the City
of New York. I accept their figure. I think
that's a rhetorical question. I accept their
figure, and I don't have to dwell on whether
or not it would in fact cost $100 million. I
think their figure is much closer to the true
figure of the cost.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you, Mr.
President. Briefly, on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Hevesi, on the bill.
SENATOR HEVESI: Mr. President, I
appreciate Senator Maltese's explanations of
the legislation, and I have the greatest
respect for Senator Maltese and his advocacy
on behalf of correction officers. And I
wasn't being facetious when I suggested that
Senator Maltese is as committed as anybody to
maintaining the structural and fiscal
integrity of the budget of the City of New
York.
But I am indeed concerned about the
impact that this legislation would have. And
7001
while I understand that the City Council did
provide for a home rule message on this
legislation, and I am not aware of the
rationale that the City Council had, I am not
cognizant of any study done by New York City
Council finance staff as to their actuarial
estimations or the reasons or rationale why
they concur with the actuary of the City of
New York -- I'm sorry, why they don't concur
with the actuary of the City of New York and
do concur with the correction officers'
actuary. I don't know why that is.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Hevesi, excuse me just a minute.
Senator Padavan, why do you rise?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Will Senator
Hevesi yield to a question?
SENATOR HEVESI: Certainly.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Senator, I'm
very interested in all the things you've said.
I'm a member of the Finance Committee. I
didn't receive this information that you
referred to that was developed, apparently, by
the City of New York.
My question to you is, do you have
7002
a memo in opposition from the City of New York
in your possession?
SENATOR HEVESI: Yes.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Well, when is
that dated?
SENATOR HEVESI: I'm sorry?
SENATOR PADAVAN: What is the
date on it? Because I never received it.
SENATOR HEVESI: If you'll bear
with me a moment, Mr. President.
Mr. President, I -- the date on the
memo that I have in front of me is May 26th -
SENATOR PADAVAN: May 26th?
SENATOR HEVESI: -- the date that
I received the memo. And I'm not aware of any
other member of the Senate Minority, that they
received a memo prior to today.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Thank you.
Thank you, Senator.
SENATOR HEVESI: Nor, Senator
Padavan, did I have any knowledge that this
legislation would be on the agenda today.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yeah. Thank
you.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you.
7003
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Hevesi, you still have the floor.
SENATOR HEVESI: As I was saying,
Mr. President, I'm not sure why the City
Council rejected the actuarial estimates of
the city's actuary.
But I am very concerned about this.
And in light of the fact that it was so
important that we enact a budget, as we did
two nights ago, that was the best budget that
we could possibly enact -- and the rationale
was if it's a better budget and it took us a
longer amount of time to get there, well,
then, that was the appropriate governmental
action to take. I think in the same vein, we
could have some parallel reasoning which
suggests that if there was a dispute here
which is significant -- the dispute between
$6 million and $100 million is significant,
particularly when it's annualized every year
and the City of New York is facing major
budgetary problems in the future -- that
that's something that should be discussed and
agreed upon.
And I would suggest to Senator
7004
Maltese that if indeed the actuary for the
correction officers used the methodology that
was accurate and the cost really is $6
million, then we need to reevaluate, and I
would likely change my position on this
legislation.
But short of that, it would be nice
if we were able to have a further discussion
about this bill without having passed it. I
think it's unfortunate that we don't have that
opportunity. But I appreciate the advocacy on
behalf of the correction officers. Correction
officers are tremendous, tremendous
individuals who perform a dangerous task on a
daily basis.
This is a matter of fiscal prudence
for the City of New York. I think it
compromises the fiscal integrity of the City
of New York. And in the absence of more time
to evaluate the accuracy and validity of the
actuarial claims that have been made on both
sides of this debate, Mr. President, I am
forced to vote in the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Waldon.
7005
SENATOR WALDON: Thank you.
Would the gentleman yield for a question?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Maltese, do you yield to a question from
Senator Waldon?
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR WALDON: Senator Maltese,
can you tell me, please, if the correction
officers cited in this proposal are the only
ones of the uniformed officers of the City of
New York who do not have available to them the
ability to tap into the variable supplement?
SENATOR MALTESE: Senator
Waldon -- Mr. President, through you, I am
advised that there are law enforcement
personnel who -- uniformed and not uniformed,
detective investigators and district attorney
investigators, that are not within the four
corners of this bill.
SENATOR WALDON: Mr. President,
again, through you, if I may.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Maltese, do you continue to yield?
7006
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR WALDON: Senator Maltese,
to be very specific, my concern is those
people who have traditionally in the City of
New York been considered members of the force,
which includes correction officers, New York
City Police Department. Of those personnel,
are the correction officers in question in
this proposal the only ones outside of being
able to benefit from the variable supplement?
SENATOR MALTESE: Mr. President,
the -- my response is yes.
SENATOR WALDON: Thank you very
much. Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr.
President, would Senator Maltese yield to a
question from Senator Dollinger?
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Senator, I
7007
was intrigued by your discussion with Senator
Hevesi with respect to the first-year cost of
this change. I know the fiscal note suggests
that there's a decade -- that this will
increase on an annual basis, so that the
annual cost by fiscal year 2008, 2009, will be
about 75 million, a tenfold increase.
My question is, if Senator Hevesi
is correct, and the City of New York, the
mayor's office is correct that the first-year
cost is $118 million, can we anticipate that
this will also increase tenfold in the course
of the next decade, and that perhaps by the
year 2009, if Senator Hevesi and the mayor's
office are correct, that this could cost a
billion dollars or more for the City of New
York?
SENATOR MALTESE: Mr. President,
through you. These -- my daughter, who's a
CPA, would be far better equipped than I to
handle some of these questions.
But I think that if we start out
with our figure rather than the mayor's
figure, we arrive at completely different
conclusions. Therefore, if we arrive and -
7008
accept our figure, then obviously the cost in
subsequent years would be far, far less. If
we accept the figure of the mayor of the City
of New York, obviously that cost would be
very, very much enhanced and increased.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just one
other follow-up question for Senator Maltese.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Maltese, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: My question
really deals with the multiplier factor.
Obviously in the fiscal note that is attached
to this bill there is an assumption that there
will be increases over the period of a decade,
proportional increases as this fund expands,
as it applies to more and more people, as
there are greater and greater contributions to
it.
That's why my question is -
there's a dispute about what the first number
is, and there's a dispute about what the last
number is. My question is, do we all agree
7009
that that number will be multiplied up by a
tenfold figure, whether it's $6 million going
to $75 million, or, as Senator Hevesi
suggests, $118 -- and the City of New York
suggests, $118 going to tenfold, a billion and
two, a billion three?
SENATOR MALTESE: I think -
Mr. President, through you -- Senator, the -
it's obvious that there is a cost each
subsequent year. And I -- I'm not in a
position to speculate on what that cost is.
Obviously, and I go back to my
first response, if we accept the $6 million
figure, we're talking about a much less -
much less cost. There's no question that the
cost is -- it's not necessarily increased, but
that the cost is additional every year. If
you multiply two times the cost, and ten
years, certainly you'd have ten years times
your initial cost.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Again,
through you, Mr. President, if I could, just
one other question.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Maltese, do you yield to another question?
7010
SENATOR MALTESE: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: The source of
the funds, Senator Maltese, to pay for these
variable supplements, will it be the general
fund of the City of New York? Will this be a
cost assessed against the general fund? Will
it transfer monies from the general fund into
this variable supplement fund?
SENATOR MALTESE: Mr. President,
I'm advised that the money is transferred not
from the general fund but from the pension
fund.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: The City of
New York's pension fund?
SENATOR MALTESE: Pension fund,
yes.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Senator Maltese. I also appreciate your
candor in responding.
I, however, have to agree with
Senator Hevesi on this, without necessarily
even agreeing with his number. What I agree
is it appears as though there's a very
7011
significant dispute about the cost of this
from our own fiscal note versus the fiscal
accounting of the City of New York. And I
would suggest that, at least from my
perspective, the mayor of the City of New York
has no reason to inflate this number, since it
appears as though his pension fund -- or the
pension fund of the city will have to dig into
its pockets to come up with this money.
And since we don't have an
agreement on the starting number, but
apparently we have an agreement that it will
increase more than tenfold -- if Senator
Hevesi is correct, that this is more like a
hundred million that can grow to a billion and
a half -- then, as we've often noted in this
chamber, I guess we're talking about real
money. And I would suggest that, given the
absence of an agreement on the starting point,
we're in a position where we should not pass
this bill. Especially when the mayor of the
City of New York says this could be
$118 million the first year.
We all acknowledge, we all agree
that it might have a tenfold multiplier over
7012
the course of a decade. I would suggest that
Senator Hevesi's warning about the impact of
this on the future budget and the future
pension viability of the City of New York is
well-taken. And without a definitive answer
to the question of the starting point, it
would be irresponsible to do it.
I side with Senator Hevesi on this
one, although I concur with his comments with
respect to Senator Maltese's advocacy on
behalf of correction officers.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There is
a home rule message at the desk.
The Secretary will read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 4. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Record
the negatives and announce the results.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1695 are
Senators Dollinger, Duane, Hevesi, Montgomery,
7013
and Schneiderman. Ayes -- excuse me, Senator
Montgomery in the affirmative.
Ayes, 47. Nays, 4.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
Senator Bruno.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
will you please call up Calendar Number 1711.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read Calendar Number 1711.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1711, by the Senate Committee on Rules, Senate
Print 6123, an act to repeal Section 4 of
Chapter 307 of the Laws of 1996.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
is there a message at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There is.
SENATOR SKELOS: Move to accept.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity
on Calendar Number 1711. All those in favor
signify by saying aye.
7014
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
message is accepted. The bill is before the
house.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: An
explanation has been requested by Senator
Dollinger.
Senator Larkin.
SENATOR LARKIN: Yes, Mr.
President. This bill contains two extenders,
one for the Loft Law and one for the Quick
Draw, and extends the period of time to 31
March, the year 2001.
The other provisions in here are
similar to the ones that we've already
adopted.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Dollinger, explanation satisfactory?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
7015
Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 6. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Padavan, to explain his vote.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes, very
briefly, Mr. President.
Yesterday or -- I think it was
yesterday, I outlined to you why I felt Quick
Draw should not be extended. We talked
briefly about the National Study Commission's
report, our own State Council on Problem
Gambling, the failure of OMH to give us the
study that we mandated when we adopted Quick
Draw in the first instance, which was then
done as part of a bill dealing with tax cuts.
It's unfortunate now we have gone
beyond where we were the other day, where
Quick Draw was going to sunset on March 31st
of the year 2000, to extend it for
approximately two years. To couple that with
the continuation of the Loft Law, which I
7016
strongly support, and once again, we are
participating in something that could be very
closely aligned to the word "blackmail."
And I simply will not participate
in that process, Mr. President. There is a
compulsion, an addiction that flows from the
floor beneath us relevant to gambling. And
this is part of it. I vote no.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Padavan will be recorded in the negative.
Announce the results.
Senator Montgomery, to explain her
vote.
Would the negatives raise their
hands, please, so the Secretary can record
them.
Senator Montgomery, you have the
floor to explain your vote for two minutes.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Mr.
President, this -- obviously this bill places
me in a very uncomfortable position, as it
does, I would imagine, many of us. It pits
people who live in lofts, in my district and
in other districts, against poor people who
lose money that they don't have gambling with
7017
Quick Draw.
But I'm going to support this
legislation, because I am -- I have to be
concerned about people who will possibly be
forced out of their homes without an extension
of protection as loft dwellers. So I'm voting
in the affirmative.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Montgomery will be recorded in the
affirmative.
Senator Dollinger, you were
negative.
Senator Schneiderman, you're
negative? You wish to explain your vote?
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Yes,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: You have
two minutes to do so.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Mr. President.
I concur in the statement of
Senator Montgomery. I think the extension of
the Loft Law is tremendously important, but I
think that Senator Padavan is absolutely
correct about gambling.
7018
And I also would urge my colleagues
that we are -- as we approach the very end of
this session, it looks as though we are trying
to take all sorts of steps to balance the
books of the State of New York, not with tax
cuts, not with returning money to the people,
but in fact with gambling programs that take
money away from those least able to pay.
And that if we are going to expand
the pool of money going into the state from
gambling while we're attempting to cut taxes
in other areas, we really have to look at
that. It is not any different than a tax, and
it's a tax on those with the least ability to
bear its cost.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: How do
you vote, Senator Schneiderman?
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: I vote in
the affirmative.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: You vote
in the affirmative? Senator Schneiderman will
be recorded in the affirmative.
Senator Oppenheimer, to explain her
vote.
7019
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: I'm going
to be voting in the negative, even though I
must say I feel that the people living in
lofts deserve protection.
But I believe that Quick Draw is an
abomination and that it is a quick-fix
addiction and it deserves to die, and
therefore I have to vote in the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Oppenheimer will be recorded in the negative.
Senator Dollinger, to explain his
vote.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr.
President, I rise and I'm going to also vote
in the negative, because I think that it's
time to draw the line on Quick Draw.
What I find most discouraging about
this bill extending Quick Draw for another
year is that we now know for sure that there
is one party in this state absolutely addicted
to video crack, and that's the State
Legislature. We now need it to balance our
budget. We have to have it. And we're acting
just like an addicted, compulsive person.
What we're saying is we don't like
7020
it -- please tell me not to do it. I don't
want to do it. Please hold me back, don't let
me do it. But we continue to do it time and
time again. Gambling is creating addictive
behavior right here in this house. And all
the dangers of compulsive gambling on a
personal level are present in this house
today.
Please stop us from renewing Quick
Draw. Please stop us from renewing Quick
Draw. We don't want to do it. We don't. We
have to. We're going to do it. We're just -
the same addictive, compulsive behavior that
we condemn in gamblers, we've got right here
present in the State Legislature.
It's terribly sad, Mr. President,
that we balance our budgets for another year
on the backs of compulsive gamblers. I vote
no.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Dollinger will be recorded in the negative.
Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1711 are
Senators Dollinger, Oppenheimer, and Padavan.
7021
Ayes, 48. Nays, 3.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
Senator Skelos.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
can we proceed with the calendar in regular
order, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1696, Senator Leibell moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 5390A and substitute it
for the identical Third Reading Calendar,
1696.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
substitution is ordered.
The Secretary will read the title.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1696, by Member of the Assembly McEneny,
Assembly Print Number 5390A, an act to amend
the Retirement and Social Security law.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
7022
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 51.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1697, Senator Maltese moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 7374 and substitute it
for the identical Third Reading Calendar,
1697.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
substitution is ordered.
The Secretary will read the title.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1697, by Member of the Assembly Seminerio,
Assembly Print Number 7374, an act to amend
the Retirement and Social Security Law.
Calendar Number 1697.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is before the house. The Secretary will read
the last section. Calendar Number 1697.
7023
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 51.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1705, Senator Montgomery moves
to discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 4148A and substitute it
for the identical Third Reading Calendar,
1705.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
substitution is ordered. The Secretary will
read the title.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1705, by Member of the Assembly Vann, Assembly
Print Number 4148A, an act authorizing the
City of New York to reconvey its interest.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There is
a home rule message at the desk.
The Secretary will read the last
section.
7024
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 51.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1706, Senator Hannon moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 9005 and substitute it
for the identical Third Reading Calendar,
1706.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
substitution is ordered.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1706, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 9005, an act to amend
the Tax Law.
SENATOR BRUNO: Lay it aside
temporarily.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Lay the
bill aside temporarily.
7025
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1707, by Senator Libous, Senate Print 6099, an
act to amend Chapter 723 of the Laws of 1993.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 51.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1708, by the Senate Committee on Rules, Senate
Print Number 6116, an act to amend the Tax
Law, in relation to the tax on sales and
compensating use tax.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Is there a
message at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There is.
SENATOR BRUNO: Move we accept
the message.
7026
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity
on Calendar Number 1708. All those in favor
signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
message is accepted. The bill is before the
house.
Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: One question,
Mr. President, for whoever would answer it.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Bruno, who do you wish to handle Calendar
Number 1708 in response to a question -- a
question -- from Senator Dollinger?
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: The information
that we have is that it is not in the bill.
We'll verify that.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
7027
Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 50. Nays,
1. Senator Dollinger recorded in the
negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1709, by the Senate Committee on Rules, Senate
Print Number 6117, an act to amend the Social
Services Law and others.
SENATOR BRUNO: Is there a
message at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There is.
SENATOR BRUNO: Move we accept
the message.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity
on Calendar Number 1709. All those in favor
signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
7028
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The ayes
have it. The message is accepted. The bill
is before the house.
The Secretary will read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 59. This
act shall take effect immediately.
SENATOR DUANE: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
Senator Duane, do you wish to be
recognized?
SENATOR DUANE: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: That's
usually asked for on your feet, Senator.
You're asking for an explanation of Calendar
Number 1709?
SENATOR DUANE: Yes, I am.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Bruno, an explanation of Calendar Number 1709
has been requested. Who would you like to
handle -
7029
SENATOR BRUNO: The entitled bill
is child support. Our esteemed Senator
Saland.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Saland will respond to your question.
SENATOR SALAND: Thank you, Mr.
President.
Mr. President, some of you may
recall -- in fact, all of us may well recall
earlier this year we did a bill dealing with
child support enforcement. This bill is a
modified version of that particular bill, in
which a number of the provisions which
questions had been raised about have been
either modified or, in some instances,
eliminated.
The felony -- there was a felony
provision in the preceding bill which has been
eliminated. The registration information with
respect to children who are born out of
wedlock has been eliminated.
The prior bill permanentized
certain of the features that we had managed to
adopt here in this house over the course of
the past couple of years, including the
7030
license suspension program. That in effect
will be continued as an extender.
The bill also provides that
criminal penalties in instances of criminal
nonsupport will now include where if someone
quits a job or lowers their income to
purposely avoid child support.
There are some other provisions
similarly which have been amended or modified.
This bill I think addresses any number of the
issues that were raised during the course of
the prior debate.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Duane.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you. If
the sponsor would yield to a couple of
questions.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Saland, do you yield to a question?
SENATOR SALAND: Yes,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DUANE: In the present
form of the bill before us, is there a
7031
sanction to the family if the name of the
father is not released?
SENATOR SALAND: That was in the
prior bill. It has been eliminated in this
bill.
SENATOR DUANE: And -
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Saland, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR SALAND: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR DUANE: Could you
describe to me what the penalties are for a
father who is providing support who is -
finds himself making less money?
SENATOR SALAND: This bill does
nothing to deal with that subject.
Under the existing law, the father
would make application to the court for a
downward modification. And that would
certainly be a question for the court or the
hearing officer to determine on the facts of
the case.
SENATOR DUANE: Through you, Mr.
7032
President, if the sponsor will continue to
yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Saland, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR SALAND: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR DUANE: If the sponsor
could describe potentially, however, what the
penalties could be under a Class E felony.
SENATOR SALAND: I'm sorry, would
you repeat your question?
SENATOR DUANE: If the sponsor
could tell me potentially what the penalties
could be in a Class E felony if a
breadwinner's level of support were to be
diminished.
SENATOR SALAND: I don't have my
penal chart in front of me. But I think an E
is generally an indeterminate sentence of one
to three years.
SENATOR DUANE: And finally -
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Saland, do you continue to yield?
7033
SENATOR SALAND: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR DUANE: I'm wondering
whether the other members of the state
legislative troika, the Governor and the
Assembly, have agreed to this version of this
bill.
SENATOR SALAND: I think I could
say very comfortably that this version is a
lot more along the lines of what has been
discussed previously by the Assembly. I don't
think we're entirely there. But I will also
tell you that as we speak, there are ongoing
negotiations to try and bring closure to this.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you. Thank
you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 59. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
7034
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Record
the negative and announce the results.
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 50. Nays,
1. Senator Duane recorded in the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
Senator Bruno, that completes the
reading of the Supplemental Calendar 60B.
SENATOR BRUNO: Can we stand at
ease for just a few moments.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Before we
do that, Senator Saland, why do you rise?
SENATOR SALAND: Mr. President,
I'd like to request unanimous consent to be
recorded in the negative on Calendar 1711,
Senate 6123.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Without
objection, hearing no objection, Senator
Saland will be recorded in the negative on
Calendar Number 1711.
The Senate will stand at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 1:45 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 1:47 p.m.)
7035
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senate will come to order.
The Chair recognizes Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
can we at this time take up Calendar Number
1706.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read Calendar Number 1706.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1706, substituted earlier by the Assembly
Committee on Rules, Assembly Print Number
9005, an act to amend the Tax Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 51.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
can we call an immediate meeting of the Rules
7036
Committee in Room 332.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There
will be an immediate meeting of the Rules
Committee, immediate meeting of the Rules
Committee in the Majority Conference Room,
Room 332. Immediate meeting of the Rules
Committee in the Majority Conference Room, in
Room 332.
The Senate will stand at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 1:56 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 2:05 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senate will come to order.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
can we at this time return to reports of
standing committees. I believe there's a
report from the Rules Committee at the desk.
I ask that it be read at this time.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: We'll
return to the order of reports of standing
committees. There is a report of the Rules
Committee at the desk. The Secretary will
7037
read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Bruno,
from the Committee on Rules, reports the
following bills:
Senate Print 6072B, by Senator
Wright, an act to amend the Public Service Law
and the Environmental Conservation Law;
6114, by the Senate Committee on
Rules, an act to amend the Civil Service Law
and others;
6118, by the Senate Committee on
Rules, an act to enact the Public Protection
Act of 1999;
6120, by Senator Seward, an act to
amend the Insurance Law;
And Senate Print 6121, by the
Senate Committee on Rules, an act to amend the
Public Authorities Law and Chapter 738 of the
Laws of 1988.
All bills ordered direct for third
reading.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
motion is to accept the report of the Rules
Committee. All those in favor signify by
saying aye.
7038
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Rules
Committee report is accepted. The bills are
ordered directly to third reading.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
can we have the noncontroversial reading of
the calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read Calendar Number 1703 and
the rest of the Rules report.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1703, by the Senate Committee on Rules, Senate
Print 6114, an act to amend the Civil Service
Law and others.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity
which is at the desk on Calendar Number 1703.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Opposed,
7039
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is before the house.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay it aside,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: You want
controversial reading or noncontroversial
reading, Senator Bruno?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Mr.
President, let's go to the controversial
reading.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Dollinger, you have a question about Calendar
Number 1703?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: An
explanation of Calendar Number 1703 has been
requested, Senator Bruno. Who do you wish to
have entertain the discussion?
Senator Leibell, an explanation of
Calendar Number 1703 has been requested by
Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR LEIBELL: Thank you, Mr.
7040
President.
This bill would provide the state's
approximately 12,000 unrepresented employees
who are prohibited from collective
negotiations with benefits and compensation at
levels that are comparable to the benefits and
compensation received by employees represented
by employee organizations.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Dollinger, is the explanation satisfactory?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: One question
to make sure I understand it, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Leibell, do you yield to a question from
Senator Dollinger?
SENATOR LEIBELL: Yes, I do, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: This reflects
those who are not represented by collective
bargaining organizations, is that correct -
SENATOR LEIBELL: Correct.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: -- and
creates a parity for them with their
7041
collective bargaining counterparts?
SENATOR LEIBELL: That's correct.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: No further
objection.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 18. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 51.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
The Secretary will continue to read
the Rules report.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1710, by the Senate Committee on Rules, Senate
Print 6118, an act to amend the Public
Protection Act of 1999.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President, is
there a message of necessity at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Yeah,
there is.
SENATOR BRUNO: Move we accept.
7042
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity
on Calendar Number 1710. All those in favor
signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
message is accepted. The bill is before the
house.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: An
explanation of Calendar Number 1710 has been
requested.
Senator Wright.
SENATOR WRIGHT: Thank you, Mr.
President.
What you have before you is a bill
that's generally referred to as a siting bill,
or revisions to the Article X that's intended
to address the issue of what's referred to as
a jurisdictional gap as a result of 1992
legislation and the delegation of federal
7043
authority relative to EPA permitting.
More importantly, what we have not
done with this legislation is we have in no
way diminished any of the environmental
standards or obligations that were included in
the 1992 legislation that in fact was cited -
Senator, I hope you were listening
so that when I go back to this later, you'll
pick up on 1712.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Senator.
SENATOR WRIGHT: Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: A couple of
questions on the bill that is before the house
that I believe is Senator Volker's bill.
SENATOR ONORATO: Mr. President.
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: What bill are we
on presently?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: We're
7044
trying to determine that right now, Senator.
(Laughter.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: For the
benefit of the members, there are five bills
on your desks, the last Rules Committee
report. We've passed Calendar Number 1703,
which is Senate Print 6114, a Rules bill. We
are now on Calendar Number 1710, which is
Senate Print 6118, a Rules bill, which is
being discussed. We also have yet to do
Calendar Number 712, which is -- or, excuse
me, 1712, which is Senate Print 6072B, by
Senator Wright. We also have to do Calendar
Number 1713, Senate Print 6120, by Senator
Seward. And we also have 1714, Senate Print
6121, which is a Rules bill.
Again, we're on Calendar Number
1710, which is Senate Print 6118. And Senator
Volker will respond to Senator Dollinger's
request for an explanation.
Senator Volker.
SENATOR VOLKER: Do you want an
explanation or do you want a question?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr.
President, I'll waive the explanation if
7045
Senator Volker will yield to a -
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
explanation is waived. Senator Dollinger, you
have the floor for a question of Senator
Volker.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: If Senator
Volker will yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Volker, do you yield to a question from
Senator Dollinger?
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes. Yes, I
yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
May we have some quiet in the
chamber. Senator Saland, if you have a
discussion, please take it out of the chamber.
Otherwise, sit in your seat.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr.
President, if Senator Volker -
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Excuse
me, Senator Dollinger. Excuse me.
There's still too much noise in the
chamber. There are four bills left to do.
Senator Dollinger, now it's quiet
7046
enough to hear.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: A quick
compound question, Mr. President, for Senator
Volker.
Could you explain to us how this
bill differs from the earlier version of the
stalking bill and what they've referred to as
the Clinic Access Bill and the false bomb
threat bill, those three pieces for starters?
SENATOR VOLKER: Primarily, the
clinic access piece of this bill is identical
to the bill that passed here several -- what,
a month and a half ago or whatever.
The stalking bill has been revised
primarily in language that relates to -- on
page -- primarily page 6, 120-45, that
describes stalking in the fourth degree. And
it basically tightened up the language there
that deals with how a stalking offense is
determined.
You'll see there where it says a
person is guilty of stalking in the fourth
degree when he or she intentionally, and it
goes on. And number 1 says "is likely to
cause reasonable fear of material harm to
7047
physical health, safety," and so forth. And
then "or is likely to cause or in fact causes
material harm to mental or emotional health of
such person."
Essentially the language, I guess
you could say, was cleaned up and revised to
make it clearer as to what the offense is.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: And the final
part of that question, Mr. President, was with
respect to the false bomb. Has that changed
in any way from -
SENATOR VOLKER: The false bomb
changes -- I believe it is the penalty, I
think, was increased to a Class E felony,
which is one and a third to four years, I
think. Minimum one and a third to four.
That's the primary changes, is that the
penalty was increased to a Class E felony.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President, if Senator Volker will continue
to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Volker, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
7048
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: With respect
to the clinic and religious issue that's
contained in this bill, do I understand
correctly that this creates civil
responsibilities for district attorneys to
enforce the injunctive relief provisions? And
do we have any other provisions in state law
where we allow district attorneys -- who, as
you know, have exclusively criminal
responsibilities -- to be involved in a civil
matter?
SENATOR VOLKER: Well, first of
all, the language was in the original bill.
And, Senator Dollinger, it's been determined
that DAs already have that -- it is believed
that they already have that authority.
Although it was to -- to make it clear, that's
why it was specifically put in this bill.
But the reason it's been determined
that is to enforce the criminal authority.
There's been some opinions that both the
attorney general and district attorneys do
have certain civil enforcement powers. But
this legislation makes it specific, you're
7049
correct.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just a final
question, through you, Mr. President, if
Senator Volker will continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Volker, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes, I do.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: With respect
to the DNA evidence portion of this bill, I
understand that there are continuing
discussions with the Assembly about the DNA
portion of this bill. Could you just describe
briefly for me what the discussion centers on,
which part of this -- is there a part of this
bill that is not agreed on? And if so, what's
the nature of that dispute?
SENATOR VOLKER: Well, yeah, the
discussions have broken down entirely. In
fact, there was an attempt very, very recently
to get an agreement.
I think the Assembly basically -
and I hate to characterize the discussion, but
I think they were basically on the question
7050
of -- I think the Assembly wanted to limit the
scope of DNA testing. And there has not been
any agreement on that.
This bill is, by the way -- or this
provision in this bill is essentially the same
bill provision that passed this house several
months ago.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Mr. President.
Just briefly on the bill,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Dollinger, on the bill.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: This bill is
a culmination of a lot of effort on a lot of
people's part to get it to this point. It
involves work by Senator Volker, by Senator
Rath, by others -- Senator Balboni, who's not
here today -- to bring this together.
I understand that when we get to
the end of the session, we have to get our
scissors and glue and glue these things
together to make them work. This is a
glued-together job that deserves a
commendation to people who have put a lot of
7051
time and effort in getting us to this point.
I'm somewhat disappointed to hear
that the final piece of this appears to have
broken down with the Assembly. At least from
this Senator's perspective, the notion of DNA
evidence is an important component of our
criminal justice system. It is really the -
at the end of this millennium, it's really the
fingerprint discovery of the earlier part of
this century.
And as I've told a number of
people, I don't have a problem with government
or Big Brother knowing who you are and being
able to identify you. Whether they should
know what it is you do, that's an entirely
different question. If you're engaged in
criminal activity, the notion of what you do
and who you are, government should know and be
able to enforce its laws accordingly.
But I don't think this takes us
down that road. I think it's a step in the
right direction. And at least from this
legislator's perspective, I commend those who
have been involved in all the parts of
bringing this together.
7052
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Duane, why do you rise?
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you for
your anticipation, Mr. President. I was
wondering if the sponsor would yield to a few
more questions.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Volker, do you yield to a question from
Senator Duane?
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you. I
just want to clarify some things.
The -- I understand that this bill
includes a version of stalking legislation
which we previously passed. Also, clinic
access legislation similar to what we had
passed before.
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes, that's
correct.
SENATOR DUANE: And the DNA
identification index, I have a question about
that part of this.
Can you tell me what the rationale
7053
is -- through you, Mr. President -- of -
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Volker, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR VOLKER: The rationale?
SENATOR DUANE: For including
nonviolent felony offenders.
SENATOR VOLKER: Well, I think
the rationale is that in the DNA testing area,
that I think the Governor's bill -- which is
what it is, it's the Governor's Program bill
which is built into this -- is its rationale
is that if you're going to do a DNA database
and you're going to look to convicted felons,
then the way to do it is to do all convicted
felons. Because, as you know, Senator, it's a
way in fact of tracking people who do commit
crimes.
Very often, by the way, some of
those people who have committed minor crimes,
maybe, so-called minor property crimes, but
have been involved in much more serious
crimes. Many of the -- for instance, drug
7054
offenders, most drug offenders that go to jail
actually have some violence in their
background.
But that's the reason for it, I
think, is that -- to develop a database to
deal with all those that commit serious
offenses, whether they're nonviolent or
violent.
SENATOR DUANE: And I also just
want to make sure, the legislation also
includes the falsely reporting -- I'm sorry,
falsely placing -- or is it falsely reporting?
Through you, Mr. President, I'd just like a
clarification on that.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Volker, do you yield to another question?
SENATOR VOLKER: Sure.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields to a question, Senator Duane.
SENATOR VOLKER: It's falsely
reporting and falsely placing. That is one of
the -- there was legislation that passed this
house, several pieces that dealt on the one
hand with false reporting and on the other
hand with falsely placing -- in other words,
7055
phoney bombs and things of that nature. And
this bill, this provision deals with both of
those areas.
SENATOR DUANE: Through you, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Volker, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR VOLKER: Sure.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR DUANE: Could you
describe to me the penalties for falsely
reporting and falsely placing for adults and
for juveniles?
SENATOR VOLKER: It provides for
an E felony. And of course, as you well know,
there's still the possibility of a YO, or a
youth offender. But it is an E felony, and
that's the main, I think, provision of this,
that it provides a serious offense, which is
one and a third to four years, for such an
offense.
SENATOR DUANE: Mr. President, is
that -
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
7056
Volker, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes, I do.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR DUANE: That's for both
reporting and placing?
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes, for both
reporting and placing, right.
SENATOR DUANE: And through you,
Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue
to yield.
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes, I yield.
SENATOR DUANE: What is the adult
penalty for those -
SENATOR VOLKER: It's the same.
It's an E felony.
SENATOR DUANE: The same.
SENATOR VOLKER: The penalty for
this conduct is an E felony, which is one
and -- essentially, one and a third to four
years in jail.
SENATOR DUANE: And through you,
Mr. President, I have another question -
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Volker, do you continue to yield?
7057
SENATOR DUANE: -- on this
section.
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR DUANE: I had heard talk
of driver's license suspension, although I'm
not -- I can't find that in the bill right
now. I was wondering if you had knowledge of
that as well.
SENATOR VOLKER: There's a
one-year suspension of the driver's license,
which is part of the bill. I'm sorry, I
didn't -
SENATOR DUANE: I'm just having
some trouble locating it, I'm sorry to say.
If you could just tell me the section, I would
appreciate it.
SENATOR VOLKER: Page 13, line 8.
That's the beginning of it. And then see
application of mandatory revocation or
suspension, and so forth.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you.
And if the sponsor would yield to
one final question.
7058
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Volker, do you yield to one final question
from Senator Duane?
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes, I will
yield for the final question.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DUANE: Since we're
putting together four bills at one time, I'm
wondering if thought had been given to
including the bias crime bill in this bill as
well.
SENATOR VOLKER: No one suggested
that.
These are all, by the way, bills
that have previously passed this house in one
form or another. So that's the binding force
behind them. The bias-related crime has not
passed this house. That's -- that's a
different issue.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you.
Through -- on the bill,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Duane, on the bill.
7059
SENATOR DUANE: I do want to note
and in the strongest possible way voice my
disappointment and anger that even after yet
another terrible incident occurred in our
nation, where someone drove from state to
state murdering Asians and Jewish people and
gay people, we still don't have it in our
mettle here in the State of New York to pass
bias crimes legislation. It's really the
shame of this year's Senate session, I
believe.
In addition, I'm planning on voting
in the negative on this bill, in large part
because of my objection to the too-rapid
expansion of the DNA identification index,
particularly to persons -- nonviolent
offenders. But also because in fact there is
no way in this that -- though oftentimes
people make the argument, well, this will help
innocent people to not be convicted, or this
would help innocent people who are languishing
in our jails to be allowed to be freed from
jails, in fact there is nothing in this DNA
identification legislation that makes it
possible for those who have been falsely
7060
convicted and imprisoned to be able to have
their DNA matched.
So if in fact that is one of the
goals of this bill -- and I would hope it
would be, and people have said that it is -
in fact, that's not part of this legislation.
And I don't think anyone could
question my commitment to clinic access or to
stop stalking, but I refuse to vote for this
legislation with all of the elements in the
forms therein. And hope that people will know
that I'll continue my commitment to wanting to
protect our family planning health centers and
to protect people from stalking, but in good
conscience I cannot vote for those elements of
this bill in this form.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Mr. President. On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Schneiderman, on the bill.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: I
appreciate the work that's gone into this.
7061
And I am -- I'm extremely disappointed that as
we come to the conclusion of this session, we
don't have a final agreement on this piece of
legislation.
I appreciate the progress we've
made in this house. And I gather, from
talking to the advocates who have been
lobbying for the clinic access provision, that
the Senate has been there ready to deal, ready
to get the business done. And there's
really -- no one has anything but praise,
really, for Senator Bruno and for our counsel
who have been doing the negotiations in our
efforts to get a clinic access and stalking
bill passed. I think the revised stalking
bill reflects excellent improvements, and I am
really saddened that we haven't gotten a final
deal with the Assembly.
Frankly, I do not share my friend
and colleague Senator Duane's concern with the
DNA evidence pool. I think DNA evidence is a
tremendous resource for exonerating the
innocent and for moving law enforcement ahead.
I will vote for this bill, but it
is with a great degree of disappointment that
7062
we haven't finally resolved this. I hope we
will continue our efforts, and maybe after Mr.
Messina gets some sleep we can renew our
efforts in this regard. But I do appreciate
the work that has gone in from this house, and
I think this is a fine piece of legislation.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section of
Calendar Number 1710, Senate Print 6118.
THE SECRETARY: Section 35. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Record
the negatives. Negatives raise their hands
and keep them raised until the Secretary
records your votes.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1710 are
Senators DeFrancisco, Duane, Maltese, Meier,
Padavan, and Waldon.
Ayes, 45. Nays, 6.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
7063
The Secretary will read Calendar
Number 1712. Now, that is Senate Print 6072B,
erroneously marked as 1710 on your -- the
bills that are on your desk.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1712, by Senator Wright, Senate Print 6072B,
an act to amend the Public Service Law and the
Environmental Conservation Law.
SENATOR ONORATO: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Bruno.
The motion is to accept the message
of necessity which is at the desk on Calendar
Number 1712. All those in favor signify by
saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
message is accepted. The bill is before the
house.
An explanation has been requested
by the Acting Minority Leader, Senator
7064
Onorato, Senator Wright.
SENATOR WRIGHT: Thank you, Mr.
President.
Senator Onorato, I hope you've
heard my earlier explanation to Senator
Dollinger, who was acting leader at that
particular juncture. I will pick it up from
there.
The intent of the bill is to
address issues in Article X relative to
jurisdictional siting, in conformance with
federal requirements. More importantly, when
that is accomplished, it will enable us to
site electrical generating facilities in New
York State in a fashion that is competitive
with the surrounding states.
In the absence of legislation that
resolves those issues, we open ourselves up to
those facilities being sited on our borders
and New York losing the economic benefit and
the economic impact of taxes, jobs -- both in
construction and operation -- and a number of
related issues.
As I pointed out earlier, this
legislation does nothing, nothing whatsoever
7065
to diminish the high environmental standards
that the State of New York established in 1992
when it passed Article X. There is nothing in
here that reduces those standards or
diminishes them in any way.
When Article X was enacted and
cited for leading the nation in its
environmental impact and environmental
standards, that remains true to this day. The
timeliness of the procedure, the length of the
review, the extensiveness of the review will
exceed all of the adjoining states, and again
remains number one in the nation.
Other changes include increases in
the intervenor's fees, substitution of the
State Energy office with the now New York
State Energy Research and Development
Authority.
There are two provisions that we
have worked out with the Assembly. One adds a
provision addressing the cumulative effect of
air emissions from existing facilities and the
potential for significant deterioration in
local air quality. And the second is a major
study of reliability issues that relate to
7066
electrical transmission and distribution
systems, and that study to be conducted by an
independent and competitively selected
contractor.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Onorato.
SENATOR ONORATO: Mr. President,
will the Senator yield for a few questions?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Wright, do you yield?
SENATOR WRIGHT: Certainly,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR ONORATO: Senator, has
this current bill before us been agreed upon
by the two houses?
SENATOR WRIGHT: I don't believe
we can characterize it as that at this point.
There have been ongoing negotiations. There
are a number of issues that we have had
agreement on that have been incorporated in
this bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Onorato.
7067
SENATOR ONORATO: Do you continue
to yield, Senator?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Yes, I
will, Mr. President.
SENATOR ONORATO: Unlike the
previous bill that you have introduced
earlier, Senate 5968, which requires us to
ensure that there's a net environmental
benefit resulting in new expanded facilities,
this current bill does not ensure that that
will happen.
SENATOR WRIGHT: That is correct.
SENATOR ONORATO: And is there
any study made that we are in fact in need of
these additional eight facilities? Currently,
they plan on building one -- right now there's
a meeting going down in my community, adjacent
to the Astoria and Ravenswood generating
plant, which is operated by the Astoria, Con
Edison, and by the New York Power Authority.
Now, there's nothing in this bill
that states that the older existing plants
must clean up their act before we allow
additional facilities to be placed in the same
area.
7068
SENATOR WRIGHT: That is correct,
Senator, there is no language that
specifically requires that. We are now in a
competitive energy market. And in the absence
of new capacity being generated, that will
slowly increase the demand and the dependency
upon those old facilities, many of which now
only deal with peak capacity needs.
However, in the absence of new
facilities, in the absence of new capacity,
those older plants will be utilized more and
more. And in fact, you will have a situation
where they will be contributing further to the
air quality issues, if those are of particular
concern.
So it is our interest and our
intent to bring new generation facilities
on-line that are truly more operationally
efficient, more environmentally clean, using
new generation and new technologies, and
thereby diminishing the demand on the older
facilities.
In terms of the adjacency issues,
we have incorporated the language that I
cited, and that's reflected in lines 25 and 26
7069
on page 4, to be concerned about that
cumulative air-quality impact of siting new
facilities adjacent to existing facilities.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Onorato.
SENATOR ONORATO: Again, through
you, Mr. President.
Currently there's a study that
indicates that the power plant emissions from
1997 and 1998, under the old plants that are
in existence right now, pollution increased
with the nitrogen oxides by 12 percent and by
sulfur dioxides by 21 percent.
Now, there's no new assurances in
this legislation that in fact, if and when
these plants go on-line, that the old plants
that are creating all of these problems will
go off-line. Is that the intent of your bill?
SENATOR WRIGHT: No, the intent
of my bill is to facilitate siting and new
generating capacity within the state of New
York. That intent is not to diminish the
environmental impact or the environmental
quality. The intent is to increase the
economic impact of new generating facilities,
7070
increase the state's capacity, increase the
employment and the tax base as a result of
that.
I believe when you have new
capacity on-line, it will not only be
operating more environmentally soundly, it
will also be operating economically more
soundly. And consequently, in a competitive
market, that cleaner energy will be purchased
in the first instance, as opposed to the more
expensive, dirtier energy, if you will.
And so the marketplace that we're
trying to facilitate will accomplish what
you're looking for, a reduction in the overall
impact on air quality.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Onorato.
SENATOR ONORATO: You're sort of
confusing me there a little bit, Senator.
SENATOR WRIGHT: That's not my
intent, Senator.
SENATOR ONORATO: I can't
understand how you feel that the older
generating plants that are operating now -
some of them are actually still burning coal,
7071
as against burning gas or oil -- that the
coal-burning facilities operate more
expensively than burning gas or oil. I think
that's -- I don't think that that's a fact at
all.
And what's to prevent more plants
above the older plants going into the
coal-burning facilities that they were looking
for -- to do when the supply of oil was at a
low ebb? Why would this newer plant be more
efficient and cheaper than the older plants?
SENATOR WRIGHT: Well, because I
believe they take advantage of the
technologies that make them more operationally
efficient, reduce the cost of employment
involved.
And I believe in a competitive
energy environment, which we have not
experienced to date and only are now entering
into, you will see the benefits of those
impacts.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Onorato.
SENATOR ONORATO: Senator, on the
bill, the -
7072
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Onorato, on the bill.
SENATOR ONORATO: The
Environmental Protection group -- this is a
three smokestack bill.
And I would urge my colleagues to
vote against this legislation until we have it
cleaned up to ensure that the older operating
plants that are currently in existence live up
to the new standards of the Clean Air Act, so
that we don't -- my particular area is
subjected to the highest rate of emphysema,
asthma, and lung-related diseases in the
entire United States. And I don't think by
siting additional plants in my community is
serving them to the best the way we should be,
without guaranteeing that there will be less
pollution and not more.
And until there are some amendments
made on this particular piece of legislation,
I would urge all of my colleagues to vote
against this bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Oppenheimer, why do you rise?
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: I also am
7073
going to be voting against this bill.
Much of what it has I find good.
But -- but it's really a big step backward in
eviscerating a few of the really positive,
though small, environmental provisions that
were present in the first bill that Senator
Wright presented us with.
You know, most of the power plants
that were built before 1970 are taking
advantage of the loophole in the federal Clean
Air Act. And I think the reason we exempted
them was because we felt that they would be
gone, they would be obsolete, they would be
finished. Well, that hasn't happened. And
the older plants are emitting pollution at
levels four to ten times higher than the
modern plants, and that equals thousands of
tons of excess sulfur dioxide and nitrogen
oxides.
And by exempting these old power
plants from the new standards, I think we are
just asking for a continuation of the many
health problems that we have experienced in
our state.
I heard someone earlier talk about
7074
the economic benefits. And I would like to
cite the 1997 EPA study that says for every
one dollar spent to comply with the Clean Air
Act, $42 is saved in health-related costs.
We spend an awful lot of money in
this state on health-related costs. And I
believe a large reason for these health
problems is the pollution that exists in our
state. And maybe it will cost more to bring
these old plants up to better standards, but
it will certainly save us a bundle in our
health costs.
So I'm urging a vote against this.
It was already mentioned that the
Environmental Advocacy PL does have three
smokestacks on this particular bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
Senator Duane -
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: -- you're
on your feet. Why do you rise?
SENATOR DUANE: I'm just
surprised you hadn't anticipated it as well as
7075
you had been doing earlier today.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: I did,
but I was trying to look to the last section.
SENATOR DUANE: Oh, well.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: You wish
to speak to the bill?
That's what I was -- my sentiments
exactly, Senator.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR DUANE: If the sponsor
would yield just to a couple of final
questions.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Wright, do you yield to a question from
Senator Duane?
SENATOR WRIGHT: I will,
Mr. President.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you.
Even if the siting board were to,
as I assume they will, allow permission for
new plants to move forward, I don't see any
teeth in it to see that environmental
mitigation will actually occur. What teeth
will the siting board have to make sure that
mitigation promises have been kept?
7076
SENATOR WRIGHT: Well, first of
all, Senator, I think you need to recognize
that we're only changing a very small number
of the elements of Article X. And I would
refer you to Article X to review that
extensively, and you will find that the
involvement of the Department of Environmental
Conservation is extensive, the permitting
process is extensive, all of which conforms
with state and federal statutes that very much
parallels the existing SEQRA statutes in the
State of New York.
The Article X proceeding is in fact
a model of environmental quality and siting in
the nation. This bill in no way diminishes
that. And in fact, this bill does not in any
way exempt any plant from any existing
standards.
SENATOR DUANE: Through you, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Do you
yield to another question, Senator Wright?
SENATOR WRIGHT: Yes, I do.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
7077
SENATOR DUANE: I'm wondering if
the sponsor is concerned that the state ceding
its SEQRA review in this would in a way set a
precedent for other times when we would cede
our SEQRA responsibilities and powers.
SENATOR WRIGHT: No, in fact, I
do not. And I do not see this consolidated
procedure as any ceding of the SEQRA
procedure. And in fact, it very much models
the existing SEQRA statute. It very much
incorporates the various interests that are
involved in siting. It very much provides for
public participation.
As I previously stated, the
existing statute is in fact a model, and one
that leads the nation and one that New York
State can be proud of. And I quite candidly
saw no reason whatsoever to diminish, amend,
or do anything other than correct the
jurisdictional issue that needed to be dealt
with.
SENATOR DUANE: And finally,
through you, Mr. President -
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Wright, do you yield to another question?
7078
SENATOR WRIGHT: Yes, sir,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DUANE: Is the concept of
need now to be left totally up to the
utilities and not subject to any other review
of need?
SENATOR WRIGHT: Obviously, we
now move to a competitive environment. Much
of that need will be a determination relative
to investment, relative to risk that is
entailed.
Clearly, given the other related
issues, there is a role for the board to
review all of those considerations relative to
the public interest. That's the very essence
of why we have public boards reviewing these
issues.
SENATOR DUANE: Just on that, as
my final question. Is that in statute,
that -- the consideration of need?
SENATOR WRIGHT: I don't believe
that we specifically have that language in
this bill, no.
7079
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Morahan.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Yes, Mr.
President. Would the sponsor yield for a few
questions?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Wright?
SENATOR WRIGHT: Yes,
Mr. President.
SENATOR MORAHAN: It's been
difficult to hear some of the debate and some
of the answers, and therefore some of my
questions may be redundant or have been asked
in a different form or in the same form.
What is the change in the role of
the DEC as it is now involved in this process
and how it will be changed in the new process?
SENATOR WRIGHT: It does not
change the role of the DEC. The DEC is
inherently involved in the siting process.
DEC follows a procedure very similar to SEQRA.
This simplifies codifies a jurisdictional
issue relative to EPA and conforms DEC
7080
issuance with the EPA requirements.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Thank you.
Would the sponsor yield for another
question, Mr. President?
SENATOR WRIGHT: I will,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR MORAHAN: The board
that's now being constituted under this
particular proposal, there are two ad hoc
members; is that correct?
SENATOR WRIGHT: Yes, I believe
there is.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Okay. And one
will be from the county wherein the proposal
or proposed plant would be sited?
SENATOR WRIGHT: Actually, the
language on page 14 talks about the resident
of the judicial district.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Okay. I also
believe that there is another person who would
be appointed by the Governor who will be a
resident ad hoc member for the term of that
proposal who will reside in the county in
7081
question.
SENATOR WRIGHT: That is correct.
That's the following line 1 on page 2.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Yes, okay. Is
there any requirement that you may know of of
any member of the board's being especially
qualified in environmental techniques or -
SENATOR WRIGHT: Well, there's no
specific requirement as it relates to those
public employment appointments. Obviously,
the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation
is a member of that board. The other
appointees of that board, in terms of the
Public Service Commission, NYSERDA, are
certainly knowledgeable on environmental
issues.
And my assumption -- and it's
certainly not an assumption I can guarantee -
but certainly when appointments are being
made, that would be a consideration in making
those appointments.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Is there any
changes to the rights or authorities of the
towns or villages or counties wherein a sited
plant may be proposed vis-a-vis planning or
7082
zoning or what have you?
SENATOR WRIGHT: No, there is
not, Senator.
And as I again pointed out, we very
intentionally have not modified the
preexisting conditions and standards that are
contained in Article X. Our intent is simply
to resolve a problem identified by the EPA and
to maintain New York's high level of standards
that it currently has on the books.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Would the
sponsor yield for another question?
SENATOR WRIGHT: I will, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Mr. Wright -
or Senator Wright, is there any change in this
law to the requirements vis-a-vis the Clean
Air Act or any of those federal environmental
protection laws now on the books?
SENATOR WRIGHT: There is not,
Senator. We do not have the authority to
change that federal statute.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Thank you, Mr.
7083
President.
Thank you, Senator.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 17. This
act shall take effect immediately.
SENATOR ONORATO: Party vote in
the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
SENATOR BRUNO: Party vote in the
affirmative.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Record
the party line votes. Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 34. Nays,
17. Party vote.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
The Secretary will continue to read
Calendar Number 1713, Senate Print 6120.
SENATOR ONORATO: Explanation.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1713, by Senator Seward, Senate Print 6120, an
act to amend the Insurance Law.
7084
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity
on Calendar Number 1713. All those in favor
signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
message is accepted. The bill is before the
house.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Dollinger, are you asking for an explanation?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Yes, I will,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: An
explanation has been requested, Senator
Seward, on Calendar Number 1713.
SENATOR SEWARD: Certainly,
Mr. President.
This legislation is the so-called
commercial deregulation legislation. This
bill would amend the Insurance Law to exempt
certain commercial policies from regulations
7085
pertaining to rate and forms.
Under the bill, an insured would
have to meet the -- certain requirements and
criteria which are outlined in the bill which
would show their sophistication in order to be
able to purchase one of these deregulated
policies. The insured would be required to
have an aggregate annual premium of at least
$10,000 for policies issued prior to
January 1, 2002, and $5,000 after that date.
In addition to the premium
thresholds, the policyholders would be
required to meet at least one of another set
of criteria which are outlined in the bill,
such as having a net worth of at least $7.5
million, annual gross revenues exceeding
$15 million, employing a risk manager, being a
not-for-profit organization or a public entity
with an annual budget of at least $10 million
or a municipality with a population of at
least 25,000 people.
In order to write insurance
pursuant to this proposed new law, the insurer
would be subject to additional oversight on
the part of the Superintendent of Insurance.
7086
And also including enhanced solvency
requirements and greater penalties for any
violation of this section of the Insurance
Law.
The reason that this bill is before
us, the problem we're attempting to solve is
this. Currently, many of these larger, more
sophisticated insureds who are looking for
flexible, tailor-made-type insurance coverage
now are leaving New York State and in fact
even going offshore to obtain this type of
coverage.
Because of the fact that every
deviation from a normal insurance policy would
have to go back to the Insurance Department
for approval, in many cases that takes a great
period of time -- in some cases, months -- to
get approval. And rather than wait that
length of time, they're going outside New York
State -- and, as I said, even in some cases
outside the country. And those premium
dollars are leaving New York State.
So what we're attempting to do
under this bill is to bring those premium
dollars back to New York State, with the
7087
ability to provide some measure of flexibility
for these larger commercial insureds.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Dollinger, is that explanation satisfactory?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Yes.
I believe Senator Breslin has a few
questions, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair
recognizes Senator Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN: Mr. President,
through you, would the sponsor yield to a
question?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Do you
yield to a question, Senator Seward?
SENATOR SEWARD: Certainly.
SENATOR BRESLIN: Senator Seward,
on the bill, on S12, Subsection B of 2307 -
and it's on page 19, where it talks about
filing with the Department of Insurance. And
it talks about if a policy isn't reviewed
within a certain period, a four-month period,
it automatically becomes accepted,
automatically becomes accepted.
And it would seem as though that if
the department were overworked and a policy
7088
that needed to be reviewed under the law sat
there for a period of time, it would be
automatically accepted, despite the fact that
that policy might not be valid under the law
if it had been reviewed.
SENATOR SEWARD: Well,
Mr. President, I would respond to Senator
Breslin in this way. We have been consulting
the Insurance Department regarding that
particular section, and they are fully
confident to be able to deal with the matters
before them in a timely manner. So I do not
feel that would be a problem.
SENATOR BRESLIN: On the bill,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Breslin, on the bill.
SENATOR BRESLIN: With that one
concern, and if the department does feel
comfortable and there's a good monitoring
process to make sure that policies that are
received are in fact reviewed within the
statutory time, so if there is problems with
the policy they can be identified and worked
out.
7089
But on the bill itself, I think the
bill is an excellent bill. It's a bill that
makes us -- as Senator Seward says, makes us
competitive with adjoining states and really
puts us in a position to be competitive and
not be interfering with businesses that are
fully capable of competing and agreeing within
and among themselves.
And for that reason, I will vote
for this bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
Senator Dollinger, for a second
time.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Yes, a second
time. Just one question of Senator Seward.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Seward, do you yield to a question from
Senator Dollinger?
SENATOR SEWARD: Certainly.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Is there any
provision in this bill that provides a study
of the impact of deregulation in this
7090
commercial market and a report back to this
Legislature after a period of two or three
years to determine whether the benefits that
both you and Senator Breslin have described
actually transpire in the marketplace?
SENATOR SEWARD: Yes,
Mr. President and Senator Dollinger, there is,
on page 4 in -- there is a -- outlined in the
bill a requirement by -- on or before
January 1, 2002, the Superintendent of
Insurance should issue such a report to this
Legislature and, obviously, to the Governor.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: A final
question, Mr. President. Just one thing I saw
as I was going through the bill.
There's a reference in here to -
again, assuming Senator Seward will continue
to yield -- there's a reference in here to
brokerage fees and agent fees. Does that
change current law? It's obviously a new
provision, but does it alter -- how does it
modify current law?
SENATOR SEWARD: Mr. President,
the reference that Senator Dollinger is making
does allow certain additional commission and
7091
fees to be collected, because of the -- the
idea behind that is that under the bill, there
is additional, obviously, workload on the part
of such brokers and agents because of the
tailor-made policies that will be issued. And
there's just much more work involved. And so
that's why that reference is in the bill.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay. And
this requires them all to be signed, the
written documents, then, agreeing on the
commissions, much like there would be in other
areas?
SENATOR SEWARD: Oh, certainly.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 14. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 51.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
7092
The Secretary will continue to
read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1714, by the Senate Committee on Rules, Senate
Print 6121, an act to amend the Public
Authorities Law and Chapter 738 of the Laws of
1988.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Is there a
message at the desk, Mr. President?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There is.
SENATOR BRUNO: Move we accept
the message.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity
on Calendar Number 1714. All those in favor
signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
message is accepted. The bill is before the
house.
7093
Senator Padavan.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Mr. President,
when we created the School Construction
Authority a number of years ago, one of the
components of that new entity, one of the
conditions of its creation was waiving the
Wicks requirement.
The theory being that by waiving
Wicks, which means direct contracts with a
variety of subcontractors that had been the
rule -- electrical, heating, ventilating,
plumbing, and so on -- that you would then be
able to give supervisory responsibility and
coordinating responsibility to general
contractors, you would save money, and you
would expedite the construction process. And
whether or not that's happened is the subject
of a great deal of study and analysis.
But it is deemed appropriate to
continue the Wicks exemption, as it's referred
to, for another three years. I will say that
the new executive director of the SCA has,
from my view, made some major strides in
improving the SCA and its performance. And
what this bill simply will do, as I say, is to
7094
allow the Wicks exemption to continue for
another three years. I'm advised that this is
agreed upon by both houses.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Connor.
SENATOR CONNOR: Thank you, Mr.
President.
You know, I remember when, in the
1980s, repeal of the Wicks Law was a big
issue. And I thought, what's the Wicks Law?
And I read a little history and found out that
it was first enacted to combat several things,
including corruption in construction as well
as shoddy construction work by unqualified
people.
And it was a big issue through the
'70s, late '70s and early '80s. Mayor Koch
was pushing for repeal of the Wicks Law, said
it could save New York City untold hundreds of
millions of dollars. There were all sorts of
studies, newspaper stories and what have you,
contending that, gee, the Wicks Law was making
New York construction so much more expensive
and suggesting that if we did away with it we
could really do great-quality construction on
7095
the cheap and be so much better for it.
The one concession, finally, was
ten years ago, with the School Construction
Authority, when the Legislature and
then-Governor agreed that on an experimental
basis -- I think it was initially for five
years and then extended thereafter for another
five -- we would exempt the School
Construction Authority from the Wicks Law.
The reason was the absolute dire need for new
school construction in New York City and the
feeling and insistence of the then-mayor that
we could save a whole lot of money and build a
lot more schools a lot better and a lot
cheaper without the Wicks Law.
So we established the School
Construction Authority. It's spent, since
then, somewhere between $8 billion and
$10 billion. It's never achieved its goal in
terms of the number of classrooms constructed.
And there have been press reports year after
year of problems covering the gamut of
everything that the original supporters of the
Wicks Law said would happen without it,
everything from corruption to great cost
7096
overruns to much more concern -- that is,
brand-new, paid-for-in-full at top-dollar
shoddy construction. School structures that
develop cracks within a year or two in the
walls. Nearly new schools that anyone in
examining them would think, gee, this is never
going to last for a generation of
schoolchildren.
So we did this great experiment, it
failed, and yet we stubbornly plunge ahead,
extending it and extending it and saying it
will get better.
Why do we do these experiments if
we refuse to listen to the lesson they teach
us? For example, in a 1994 study by the
Senate Committee on Investigations, Taxation
and Government Operations -- that's here,
that's this Senate's staff and members -
found that 85 percent of the new construction
performed by the School Construction Authority
up through that date had major problems.
85 percent. 85 percent. Eight to $10 billion
spent, and 85 percent had serious problems.
The study found that 68 percent of
the renovation work was inferior. Eight
7097
billion dollars supposedly to put schools
on-line for our schoolchildren, and your
committee found that 68 percent of the
renovation was inferior. Unlicensed
contractors, inferior workmanship, improper
bonding and insurance protections, building
code noncompliance, and bloated bureaucracy
with little oversight were all found to be
endemic to the SCA.
Oh, let's chase another $10 billion
after them to produce schools we can't use,
not enough schools. Oh, let's give them -
let's extend this exemption. It's been such a
wonderful ten years.
A 1997 audit by Comptroller McCall
revealed the non-Wicks experiment at the SCA
to be a failure eight years after it began.
Work was still found to be inferior. In fact,
principals of schools where SCA work was
performed criticized the results in 34 to
68 percent of the time.
Now, I've told you what the
Republican Majority in the Senate said about
it, what the Democratic comptroller says. And
you may want to take with a grain of salt the
7098
next findings, because they come from within
the industry, they come from the people who
support, by and large -- not in every case -
the continuation of the Wicks Law in general.
In other words, they come from the people who
actually know how to do plumbing, electrical,
heating, and other construction work.
So studies performed by the local
New York City electrical, plumbing, and
mechanical contracting associations on
specific SCA jobs found unlicensed and
unqualified contractors performing specialized
work, general contractors defaulting on work,
bid shopping and out-of-state workers being
paid less than the prevailing wages required
under our State Constitution and State Labor
Law.
Who are we kidding? Why do we have
blinders on? We tried a noble experiment. It
sounded so good back then. Save all this
money, build all these schools of such great
quality. And every study -- not two or three
weeks ago, the New York Times had a story
about the failure of the School Construction
Authority. Why do we think it's not broke?
7099
Why do we just want to go plunge ahead, give
them another three years, another three years,
another $3 billion, $4 billion?
So we get shoddy construction, and
Lord knows what else is going on there. Every
job has come in way over cost. We're supposed
to save money, remember? So we get the worst
of both worlds, shoddy construction that costs
more instead of quality construction that
costs less.
We were hoodwinked ten years ago.
Let's admit it. Every study, including our
own, has found that. And let's do something
different. Let's not just give them this
license to go forward again and do whatever
they want without the safeguards and
protections of the Wicks Law.
I'm voting no. I've had it with
extending it. I've had it with the School
Construction Authority. It's been nothing but
a boondoggle to begin with. It's been a
failure and a disgrace, and we still have a
crying need for school construction and repair
that obviously are beyond the capacity of the
SCA to carry out. And there's no reason to
7100
have this kind of exemption.
If we're going to keep the SCA
going, let's go back to the law that forces
them to use qualified, licensed subcontractors
on specialty work, so at least when they spend
the money the job gets done and the result is
a safe, lasting, quality-built school
classroom.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Padavan.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Mr. President,
very briefly.
If you listen carefully to Senator
Connor, you'd think that we're extending the
SCA for three years. Now, much of what he
said to you is absolutely correct, except for
one thing. We were not all hoodwinked. There
were a handful of us here, myself included,
who voted against the creation of a School
Construction Authority, because we thought it
would be a bureaucracy not worth what they
were attempting to achieve.
However, that being said, what
we're talking here about is the Wicks
provision. Now, in saying to any governmental
7101
building authority that you can now negotiate
with the general contractors who must then
deal with the subcontractors does not waive
the requirement, at least in the city of New
York, that those subcontractors -- let's say
electrical, as an example. They must be
licensed by the City of New York, subject to
all of the requirements, code requirements,
regulatory requirements of a licensed
electrician. The difference here is that when
the bidding process take place, instead of all
these individual bids coming in, you get one
bid from the GC.
Now, I can tell you some things
that Senator Connor didn't tell you about.
When they eliminated that duplicity and waived
Wicks, we assumed that then that the GCs would
be the coordinators of the project. No, they
went out and hired construction coordinators,
at 5 to 10 percent of the work, adding again
to the cost, which was going in the opposite
direction.
But these things are historical in
nature. In the last two years, roughly, there
has been, in my view -- Senator Marchi and I
7102
had a hearing about a year or so ago; there
have been other inquiries since. Much of what
you read in the New York Times story is
historic.
I have gone to some of the schools
currently in construction and major renovation
in my district in Queens, and I will say to
you that under the new leadership of the SCA,
they have cleaned house. They have eliminated
the construction coordinators. They have
cracked down on the GCs. They have done many
things internally. And they have a man there
who comes from the private sector, who's well
respected, as opposed to some of his
predecessors, who came from divergent
political quarters.
SENATOR CONNOR: And the
military.
SENATOR PADAVAN: And the
military. And the military, that's correct.
I hesitate to remind myself, the Corps of
Engineers. A general, no less.
But nevertheless, those are
historical in nature. Now, I said to you a
moment ago when I explained the bill that the
7103
Wicks aspect -- does it save money, does it
save time -- that debate still continues. But
I also say to you that if the SCA is to enter
a contract tomorrow to build a school in your
district, they have to enter a contract and
provide specifications with the general
contractor or with all the subcontractors.
Now, to go back and do it the old way at this
juncture, in my view, would be detrimental.
I'm not thrilled with the Wicks
issue, but I also accept the practical aspects
of continuing it at least for this period of
time. And let me say parenthetically, it's
not Wicks that provides the highest cost of
public construction anywhere in the state, if
not in the country, in the city of New York,
it's the prevailing wage of the Labor Law. It
costs twice as much to build a public
building -- I don't care if it's a firehouse,
a police station, or a school -- in the city
of New York as it might anywhere else in this
state because of that prevailing wage. But
that's another whole issue.
We have to allow them to continue
at least in the direction they're going, with
7104
some very careful oversight on our part. We
have to revisit it, we have to make them prove
to us that this waiving of Wicks is -- we met
with the director. He seems to indicate quite
clearly that he needs this in order to
continue to move forward, as he's been doing
in the last year or two, in a very positive
way.
So that's why I support the bill.
But I do so without backing away and without
not acknowledging many of the things that you
heard from the Minority Leader.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr.
President, just very briefly.
I'm going to vote with Senator
Connor on this bill. I think the great
problem with the elimination of Wicks, whether
it's from the SCA or statewide, is that what
it does is, quite frankly, it creates
temptation. And the temptation is that
because the subcontractors are under the
influence of the general contractor, they
don't have a direct agreement, the general
7105
contractor is going to squeeze them to get the
job done as quickly and as efficiently as
possible.
And that unfortunately leads to the
temptation to do two things, both of which
show up in the School Construction Authority.
They do shoddy work because they can do it
quicker and cheaper, or they cheat on the
prevailing wage laws, through classifications
or misclassifications.
And Lord knows that there's an
ample series of case law, both -- certainly
throughout this state, that shows given those
temptations, the general contractor, under
tremendous pressure to get it done on time,
under tremendous time constraints, under money
pressures, the temptation gets too large.
The whole point of the Wicks Law,
as I understand, is to eliminate that
temptation to do shoddy work or to cut corners
on the Labor Laws. I continue to support
Wicks. I think a change perhaps in the amount
of money in Wicks would be appropriate.
But I think that the experience of
the School Construction Authority as a
7106
microcosm of how Wicks works demonstrates that
in the debate about whether Wicks has worked
for the people of the state of New York or
not, the answer is yes, and to discontinue it
here would be wrong.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Stachowski, to explain his vote.
SENATOR STACHOWSKI: Mr.
President, briefly to explain my vote.
I happen to concur with Senator
Connor's remarks. I can understand Senator
Padavan's explaining of the vote. It kind of
scares me to no end, though, to hear him make
detrimental comments about the prevailing wage
law after all the work it took and all the
hearings it took to finally get the men and
women in the state of New York, and in
particular in the city of New York, to be able
7107
to get paid a decent wage where they could
support their families.
It wasn't that long ago when -
during those hearings when we heard all the
stories, particularly in the city of New York,
where the contractor would get people to work
for him, tell them that they had to turn the
check that they got from the City Housing or
the State Housing that included prevailing
wage back to them, at which time they would
pay them with their own personal check at a
much lower level.
So rather than ever even go near
that -- I hope that's not what Senator Padavan
is planning to do. I can understand him
defending his bill. I vote against this bill
and hope that we don't see a bill that's going
to try to eliminate the prevailing wage.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Stachowski will be recorded in the negative.
Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1714 are
Senators Breslin, Connor, Dollinger, Duane,
Gentile, Hevesi, Montgomery, Schneiderman,
7108
Stachowski, and Waldon. Also Senator
Seabrook. Also Senator Sampson. Also Senator
Kruger.
Ayes, 38. Nays, 13.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
can we go back to the regular calendar and
call up Calendar Number 1686.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1686, Senator Johnson moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 8920B and substitute it
for the identical Third Reading Calendar,
1686.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
substitution is ordered.
The Secretary will read the title.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1686, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 8920B, an act to amend
the Vehicle and Traffic Law.
7109
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The
Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 9. This
act shall take effect in 180 days.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 51.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill
is passed.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Is there any
housekeeping at the desk, Mr. President?
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There is
none, Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: There is none.
Mr. President, Senator Onorato
has -- needs to be recognized.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator
Onorato, why do you rise?
SENATOR ONORATO: Mr. President,
I would like unanimous consent to be recorded
in the negative on the Wicks bill, please.
Calendar Number 1714.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Without
7110
objection, hearing no objection, Senator
Onorato will be recorded in the negative on
Calendar Number 1714.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
there being no further business to come before
the Senate, we are going to conclude this
session. And, as we do, want to wish everyone
the remainder of a very pleasant, safe and
happy August.
And move that we stand adjourned,
subject to the call of the Majority Leader,
with intervening days to be legislative days.
ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Without
objection, the Senate stands adjourned,
subject to the call of the Majority Leader,
intervening days to be legislative days.
(Whereupon, at 3:27 p.m., the
Senate adjourned.)