Regular Session - May 1, 2000
2606
NEW YORK STATE SENATE
THE STENOGRAPHIC RECORD
ALBANY, NEW YORK
May 1, 2000
3:12 p.m.
REGULAR SESSION
SENATOR RAYMOND A. MEIER, Acting President
STEVEN M. BOGGESS, Secretary
2607
P R O C E E D I N G S
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Senate will come to order.
Will everyone present please rise
and join with me in reciting the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
(Whereupon, the assemblage recited
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: In the
absence of clergy, may we bow our heads in a
moment of silence.
(Whereupon, the assemblage
respected a moment of silence.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Reading
of the Journal.
THE SECRETARY: In Senate,
Sunday, April 30th, the Senate met pursuant to
adjournment. The Journal of Saturday,
April 29th, was read and approved. On motion,
Senate adjourned.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Without
objection, the Journal stands approved as
read.
Presentation of petitions.
Messages from the Assembly.
2608
Messages from the Governor.
Reports of standing committees.
Reports of select committees.
Communications and reports from
state officers.
Motions and resolutions.
Senator Farley.
SENATOR FARLEY: Thank you, Mr.
President.
On behalf of Senator Nozzolio,
would you please remove the sponsor's star
from Calendar 665.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor's star will be removed from Calendar
665.
SENATOR FARLEY: Mr. President,
amendments are offered to the following Third
Reading Calendar bills:
Senator LaValle, Page 7, Calendar
143, Senate Print 2050;
Senator Stafford, page 12, Calendar
296, Senate Print 6157;
Senator Marcellino, page 16,
Calendar 389, Senate Print 4917B;
Senator Nozzolio, page 30, Calendar
2609
639, Senate Print 6445A;
Senator Goodman, page 34, Calendar
694, Senate Print 7148;
And Senator Bonacic, page 40,
Calendar 157, Senate Print 4579A.
And I move that these bills retain
their place on the Third Reading Calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received, and all bills will
retain their place on the Third Reading
Calendar.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: There will be an
immediate meeting of the Finance Committee in
the Majority Conference Room.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER:
Immediate meeting of the Finance Committee in
the Majority Conference Room.
SENATOR SKELOS: I believe there
are some substitutions to be made.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Yes,
there are.
The Secretary will read the
2610
substitutions.
THE SECRETARY: On page 16,
Senator Marcellino moves to discharge, from
the Committee on Energy and
Telecommunications, Assembly Bill Number 9090A
and substitute it for the identical Senate
Bill 4917B, Third Reading Calendar 389.
On page 34, Senator Paterson moves
to discharge, from the Committee on Cities,
Assembly Bill Number 4368A and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill 3473A, Third
Reading Calendar 692.
And on page 36, Senator Hannon
moves to discharge, from the Committee on
Health, Assembly Bill Number 5100 and
substitute it for the identical Senate Bill
2302, Third Reading Calendar 714.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER:
Substitutions ordered.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
there's a privileged resolution at the desk,
2784, by Senator Farley. This resolution was
previously adopted by the Senate on
January 19th. May we please have it read in
2611
its entirety at this time.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read the privileged resolution
in its entirety.
THE SECRETARY: By Senator
Farley, Legislative Resolution Number 2784,
congratulating the Union College Football Team
on their outstanding season and ECAC Northwest
Championship Title.
"WHEREAS, Excellence and success in
competitive sports can be achieved only
through strenuous practice, team play, and
team spirit, nurtured by dedicated coaching
and strategic planning; and
"WHEREAS, Athletic competition
enhances the moral and physical development of
the young people of this State, preparing them
for the future by instilling in them the value
of teamwork, encouraging a standard of healthy
living, imparting a desire for success and
developing a sense of fair play and
competition; and
"WHEREAS, The Union College
Football Team, lead by Head Coach John Audino,
completed the 1999 regular season with a
2612
record of 8 and 2. The team completed their
winning ways by defeating Ithaca to claim the
ECAC Northwest Championship Title, their first
win over Ithaca in four games.
"The 1999 team ranked second in the
country at the Division III level in overall
defense. They were Number 1 against the pass,
Number 5 against the run, and Number 10 in
scoring defense.
"During the decade of the 1990s,
the Union College Football Team achieved a
record of 82 and 18, the tenth best among more
than 200 Division III NCAA football-playing
schools; and
"WHEREAS, The athletic talent
displayed by this team is due in great part to
the efforts of Head Coach John Audino, who is
respected for his ability to develop potential
into excellence.
"The hallmarks of the Union College
Football Team, from the opening game of the
season to participation in the ECAC Northwest
Championship Title game, were a brotherhood of
athletic ability and good sportsmanship.
"The team's overall record is
2613
outstanding, and the team members were loyally
and enthusiastically supported by family,
fans, friends and the community at large; and
"WHEREAS, Sports competition
instills the values of teamwork, pride and
accomplishment, and Head Coach John Audino and
his assistant coaches and their outstanding
athletes have clearly made a contribution to
the spirit of excellence which is a tradition
of their school; now, therefore, be it
"RESOLVED, That this Legislative
Body pause in its deliberations to
congratulate the Union College Football Team
and Head Coach John Audino on their
outstanding season and overall team record;
and be it further
"RESOLVED, That copies of this
Resolution, suitably engrossed, be transmitted
to the Union College Football Team and Head
Coach John Audino."
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Farley.
SENATOR FARLEY: Thank you, Mr.
President.
Let me just say how pleased we are
2614
to have with us today in the gallery the
football team and the coach from Union
College, my neighbor.
Incidentally, also seated up there
is a very distinguished Assemblyman by the
name of James Tedisco, who was an
All-American -- stand up, Jim.
ASSEMBLYMAN TEDISCO: I am
standing.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR FARLEY: He was an
All-American basketball player for Union
College.
And let me just say how proud we
are of the academic excellence of Union
College, but also of their athletic
excellence. This is a remarkable
accomplishment for a Division III school.
Nationally recognized. We're very, very proud
of them.
And, you know, Union College not
only scores well, as I said, athletically, but
all of these young men are scholars which go
to one of finest academic institutions in the
nation.
2615
And of course their coach, who's
really done an outstanding job, is with us,
John Audino.
And, Mr. President, if you would
please extend the courtesies of this house and
congratulations.
And I'd ask the team to stand to
the applause of my colleagues, if you would.
(Applause.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Coach
and members of the team, on behalf of the
Senate we extend to you the courtesies of the
chamber today. And we congratulate you.
We wish you well in all your future
endeavors, whether they're academic, athletic,
or otherwise. Thank you for visiting us.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
if we could take up the noncontroversial
calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read the noncontroversial
calendar.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
185, by Senator Meier, Senate Print 6272A, an
2616
act in relation to adjusting certain state aid
payments.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
187, by Senator Bonacic, Senate Print 6297A,
an act in relation to adjusting.
SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
389, substituted earlier today by the Assembly
Committee on Rules, Assembly -
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Lay it
aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
422, by Senator Leibell, Senate Print 4529, an
act to amend the Penal Law.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Lay the bill
aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
2617
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
486, by Senator Libous, Senate Print 6919, an
act to amend the Mental Hygiene Law.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay it
aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
495, by Senator Velella, Senate Print 6545A,
an act to amend the Insurance Law.
SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
512, by Senator LaValle, Senate Print 2459, an
act to amend the General Municipal Law.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay the bill
aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay it
aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
515, by Senator Stafford, Senate Print 4393,
an act to amend the General Municipal Law.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
2618
bill aside.
THE WITNESS: Calendar Number
537, by Senator Padavan, Senate Print 1400, an
act to amend the Penal Law.
SENATOR HEVESI: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
543, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 3993, an
act to amend the Penal Law.
SENATOR HEVESI: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
556, by Senator Morahan, Senate Print 6938A,
an act to amend the Real Property Tax Law.
SENATOR DUANE: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
560, by Senator Larkin, Senate Print 5676A -
SENATOR SKELOS: Lay it aside for
the day.
2619
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside for the day.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
640, by Senator Kuhl, Senate Print 6740, an
act to amend the Highway Law.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Lay that
aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
675, by Senator Seward, Senate Print 6820A, an
act making certain findings.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
698, by Senator Skelos, Senate Print 5821A, an
act authorizing the assessor.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
699, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 6356, an
act to amend the Local Finance Law.
2620
SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
700, by Senator Hannon, Senate Print 6546, an
act authorizing the assessor.
SENATOR DUANE: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
702, by Senator Balboni, Senate Print 6850, an
act in relation to authorizing.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
707, by Senator Trunzo, Senate Print 6869, an
act to authorize Glory Zone Ministries.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
2621
735, by Senator Bruno, Senate Print 7147, an
act to authorize the Office of General
Services.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Read the last
section.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 5. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 52.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
Senator Skelos, that completes the
reading of the noncontroversial calendar.
SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you, Mr.
President.
There will be an immediate meeting
of the Children and Families Committee in the
Majority Conference Room.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER:
Immediate meeting of the Children and Families
Committee in the Majority Conference Room.
2622
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
if we could return to reports of standing
committees, I believe there's a report of the
Finance Committee at the desk. I ask that it
be read.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Reports
of standing committees.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Stafford,
from the Committee on Finance, reports the
following bill direct to third reading:
Senate Print 7789, by the Senate
Committee on Rules, an act making
appropriations for the support of government.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Skelos.
I'm sorry. Without objection,
directly to third reading.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: May we please
take up Calendar Number 739, Senate 7789.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
739, by the Senate Committee on Rules, Senate
2623
Print 7789, an act making appropriations for
the support of government.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Is there a
message of appropriation at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: There is
a message of necessity and appropriation at
the desk.
SENATOR SKELOS: Move to accept.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: I'm
sorry. There is a message of appropriation at
the desk.
The question is on accepting the
message of appropriation. All those in favor
signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
message is accepted.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 46. This
2624
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 52.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
if we could now go to the controversial
calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read the controversial
calendar.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
185, by Senator Meier, Senate Print 6272A, an
act in relation to adjusting certain state aid
payments.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: If you'd
give me a chance to change my hat.
ACTING PRESIDENT MARCELLINO:
Senator Meier, an explanation has been
requested. If you need a moment, just take
2625
it, please.
SENATOR MEIER: Thank you, Mr.
President.
Mr. President, this is a fairly
routine piece of legislation, the like of
which we frequently see here, involving the
Brasher Falls School District, a small school
district located in my district in St.
Lawrence County.
During the 1996-'97 school year,
New York State overpaid the state aid to
education to that district in an amount of
some $485,000. The amount was not caught
until much later, as the result of an audit.
This bill will permit the school
district to repay that amount over the course
of a period of six years, so as to not bring
about a financial hardship by paying it back
in one fell swoop.
ACTING PRESIDENT MARCELLINO:
Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Will Mr.
President yield to a couple of questions?
ACTING PRESIDENT MARCELLINO:
Senator, do you yield?
2626
SENATOR MEIER: Yes, I do.
ACTING PRESIDENT MARCELLINO:
The Senator yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: What is the
size of the budget -- through you, Mr.
President, what is the size of the budget that
this $458,000 is predicated on, the repayment?
Do you know what the size of the annual
operating budget is?
SENATOR MEIER: No, I don't. I
haven't had the occasion to run for the school
board in Brasher Falls, Mr. President.
But suffice it to say I do know
that requiring the repayment of this amount in
one full year, Mr. President, would occasion
in itself a property tax increase of some
8 percent. By itself.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President, if the sponsor will continue to
yield for one other question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MARCELLINO: Do
you continue to yield, Senator?
SENATOR MEIER: Yes, I do, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MARCELLINO: He
2627
yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Is there
interest on the amount that the school
district owes to the State of New York?
Because I understand, Mr.
President, that this payment was actually made
at least three years ago. My question is, is
the school district going to pay back interest
to the State of New York as well, as any other
debtor would?
SENATOR MEIER: Mr. President, my
understanding is there is no interest, no.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay, through
you, Mr. President, on the bill.
I appreciate Senator Meier's
explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MARCELLINO:
Senator Dollinger, on the bill.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: This is a
problem that has plagued the school districts
of this state for some time, that the process
by which, when an overpayment is made, the
State Education Department demands that it be
repaid within a year of the time that it's
found. So a school district which has been
2628
overpaid, just as the Brasher Falls Central
School District, just as the -- same exact
school district. It's happened in my district
all the time, it happens in other places.
There are errors made, there are
overpayments made, and the policy that we have
in this state is that the state can recover
that repayment in one year. But if it's vice
versa, if the State of New York shortchanges
the school district, like it has shortchanged,
I believe, the City of New York School
District -- Senator Hevesi would know the
number better, but I think it's $800 million
or $900 million in old claims, claims for
underpayments of cash -- under those
circumstances, they pay you back over the
course of six years. Which is exactly what
Brasher Falls would like.
I congratulate Senator Meier for
doing this, because this is good government.
This is a good idea. When a bank error -
when there's an overpayment made to a school
district, they ought to have a period of time
to get it back.
But my complaint is that this
2629
should not only be for Brasher Falls, this
should be the Brighton Central School
District, the Greece Central School District,
the Rochester City School District, the City
School District in the City of New York.
And I would just suggest that what
we're doing for Brasher Falls, if it's good up
there in Brasher Falls, it's even better -- it
could be even better in school districts that
have much larger budgets but also much larger
obligations to pay back.
The six-year payback rule, a great
idea. If it's good for Brasher Falls, we
ought to do it elsewhere. Let's do a
statewide bill that forces everybody to play
by the same rules.
I'm going to vote in favor of this
bill. Senator Meier's explanation is
satisfactory to me. But let's do it elsewhere
as well.
ACTING PRESIDENT MARCELLINO:
There is a local financial impact statement at
the desk.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
2630
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MARCELLINO:
Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 54.
ACTING PRESIDENT MARCELLINO: The
bill is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
187, by Senator Bonacic, Senate Print 6297A,
an act in relation to adjusting certain state
aid payments.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bonacic, an explanation has been requested of
Calendar 187.
SENATOR BONACIC: Thank you, Mr.
President.
This is a bill that is similar to
Senator Meier's bill. This is an overpayment
to a school district -- in this case, it was
the Greenville Central School District -- of a
building aid payment. It was made in -- I
think it was '97-'98. It was an overpayment
of $343,902.
2631
Under our existing law, that school
district would have to repay the state within
one year and would create a burden on the
taxpayers in that school district. And this
legislation allows them to pay it back over a
six-year period. And interest payments are
not included. It's strictly the principal.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President, if the sponsor would yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bonacic, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR BONACIC: I do.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Senator
Bonacic, isn't it true that the taxpayers in
this school district got a $343,000 benefit in
one year when they got this overpayment?
SENATOR BONACIC: That is true.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Under those
circumstances, applying the same logic, if
they get it in one year, shouldn't they pay it
back in one year? I mean, that's the current
rule, statewide, is it not?
SENATOR BONACIC: That is the
2632
present rule.
But what we're trying to do, as we
have in the past, we recognize there is a
hardship to school districts. The state made
the error initially in sending the money out,
and now all the school district wants to do is
to -- well, technically they're not making the
state whole, because they've had the use of
the money and, you know, have not paid
interest on it. But that's a break we want to
give the school district.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay.
Through you, Mr. President, I thank Senator
Bonacic for his explanation. This too touches
on a point that I discussed with the previous
sponsor.
And I would again point out that
what's both good in Brasher Falls and good in
the Greenville Central School District ought
to be good across the state. And I would
point out I don't think the argument is so
much that there's a detriment in paying it
back, because of course they already got a
$343,000 benefit. And from my point of view,
this calls again for statewide legislation.
2633
Let's treat all the school districts the same.
And the one danger, through you,
Mr. President, that I would just point out is
that what we end up with is a group of favored
school districts who have Republican Senators
and Democratic Assemblypeople for which there
is one rule, and then school districts which
have a Democratic Senator and a Republican
Assemblyman, a whole other rule.
How can that be fair to the school
districts of this state when the only thing
that matters whether they pay it back in one
year or six years is who they happen to have
elected or who their voters might have
participated in electing to the New York State
Senate?
This calls for statewide
legislation. We ought to do it on a statewide
basis, treat everybody fairly. What's good
for Greenville, what's good for Brasher Falls
is good for everyone else. I vote aye, Mr.
President.
SENATOR HEVESI: Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hevesi.
2634
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you, Mr.
President. Would the sponsor yield for a
question?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bonacic, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR BONACIC: I do.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you.
I understand the purpose of this
legislation after the fact, and I understand
that the state made a mistake in this
particular instance and in all the other
instances -- and there have been many of them
this year where this particular circumstance
occurred.
My question to you is, does the
Greenville School District or any other school
district in the state, to your knowledge, have
a mechanism by which to catch the mistake when
it happens and obviate the need for this
entire exercise?
SENATOR BONACIC: I think that
goes to, you know, the fiscal people that they
have within their school district that
2635
monitors these things.
I don't know why these mistakes
happen. But it's probably not a bad idea to
treat all schools equally. And I don't know
how frequently these mistakes are made. I
know in my Senate district this is the first
time I've been faced with this problem. And
it's a small school district. There's no
doubt in my mind, for them to make this up,
they have to raise the tax levy.
And what we're trying to do is if
we're going to raise tax levies, let's do it
because we're trying to upgrade the standards
and, you know, promote excellence in
education, and not make them do it because of
a mistake that the state made. That's what
we're asking.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you. Mr.
President, on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hevesi, on the bill.
SENATOR HEVESI: Just briefly.
I'm a little bit concerned because many of
these school districts are not -- either not
catching the mistakes themselves -- and these
2636
are $300, $400,000, $500,000, sometimes
multi-million-dollar mistakes -- or they are
catching them and not doing anything about
them at the time when it occurs, and that
creates a problem down the road.
So I would suggest that although
certainly the burden is on the state to ensure
that the right amount of funding due each
school district is sent to each school
district, there does need to be some
accountability on the part of local school
districts to ensure that they are in receipt
of the correct amounts so that we don't have
this problem in the future.
But once this happens, certainly
these bills are worthy and necessary. So I
vote aye.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: There is
a local fiscal impact note at the desk.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
2637
SENATOR MARCHI: May I explain my
vote, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marchi, to explain his vote.
SENATOR MARCHI: I think that
there have been some good points made here on
both sides of that argument. And it may lead
to some omnibus bill or corrective
legislation.
But we ought to reflect on the fact
that we have fiscally dependent districts,
virtually all districts in the state -- except
a few are fiscally independent, and perhaps
not as well equipped. So I think in
considering legislation in the future that we
come down on that fact. The fiscally
dependent districts are on a somewhat
different footing. And that may be relevant
in the calculation of what we ought to do by
way of correction.
But I vote in favor of this bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marchi will be recorded in the affirmative.
Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just to
2638
explain my vote, Mr. President, very briefly.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger, to explain his vote.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: I would
just -- and it was raised both by the previous
sponsor and by Senator Bonacic that this bill
is designed to prevent a tax increase. My
suggestion to both of the sponsors is that's
not really the issue. Because if they hadn't
gotten the $350,000 in the year they got it,
they would have had to raise taxes then to pay
their bills.
The point of this is not that it
causes a tax increase. The question is an
issue of fairness. And that is when the State
of New York overpays a district and has to be
paid back, it should be paid back over a
six-year period, the same way it is now if
they underpay a district. New York State
ought to be a responsible debtor and a
responsible creditor.
And the thing to do is to create
fairness. And I would strongly suggest that
what needs to be done is all the school
districts in this state should get the same
2639
benefit that Senator Bonacic wants to give to
Greenville, Senator Meier wants to give to
Brasher Falls. Let's give everybody the same
fair deal.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger will be recorded in the affirmative.
The Secretary will announce the
results.
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
389, substituted earlier today by the Assembly
Committee on Rules, Assembly Print Number
9090A, an act to amend the Public Service Law,
the Environmental Conservation Law, the State
Finance Law, and the Public Authorities Law.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino, an explanation has been requested
of Calendar 389.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you,
Mr. President.
I'm pleased to get up and explain
this particular bill, because this particular
2640
bill is to prevent or stop or help to prevent
a problem that has occurred in New York State,
not necessarily totally of our doing, but
partly of our doing. And that's called acid
rain.
There are things called pollution
credits which are given to utilities by the
federal government which tells them how much
pollution they're allowed to emit to qualify
and fulfill their requirements within the
federal Clean Air Act.
Many utilities in New York State
have become very efficient and have cleaned up
their act so that they do not have use all
their pollution credits, they can keep some in
reserve. As a by-product of this process,
they're allowed to sell these pollution
credits to other utilities that might not be
able to meet their requirements, or cannot,
for whatever reason.
The problem that we have, though,
is when we sell our pollution credits in New
York State that are generated by our clean
utilities to out-of-state utilities in some
Midwestern states -- and we've identified 14
2641
of those states in the legislation. When they
burn high-sulfur fuel, the emissions from
their stacks, because of the direction the
wind blows, it literally doesn't land on them,
it lands on us.
So our utilities are spending money
to clean up their sites and their processing.
They then sell the benefits of that -- by the
way, passing the costs on to the ratepayer -
they then sell those credits in some cases to
these Midwestern utilities that burn cheaper
fuel, high-sulfur burning fuel, which emits
greater pollution into the atmosphere, which
then blows back and lands back on us. We get
the negative result of acid rain.
That negative result has cost
certain -- several mountains -- certain lakes
and rivers in the Adirondacks, and certain
mountainsides, and literally forests to be
just taken down. Because of the acidity,
these lakes and rivers do not and cannot
foster and support life as a result, which is
a negative impact on those areas. You cannot
use these rivers.
We on Long Island drink the
2642
groundwater beneath our feet. When this stuff
lands on the ground, percolates its way
through as the water is recharging, this fouls
our water and causes our aquifers to become
problematic and less capable of supporting our
drinking water needs on Long Island.
This is a problem for all of us.
It's time, as the guy said in the movie, that
we stand up and basically say we're mad as
heck and we're not going to take it anymore.
The federal government, frankly,
should be doing something about this. They
have not. There is a bill in Washington, the
Moynihan-Boehlert-Sweeney legislation,
supported by every member of our federal
delegation. If that bill were to pass, the
federal government would take the proper
corrective actions on these Midwestern
utilities and require them to meet clean air
standards that would protect us in their
downwind areas. The federal government has
not acted. Why, anybody can guess. There's
probably a host of reasons. They have not.
New York has taken the lead.
Governor Pataki has negotiated a deal with
2643
then LILCO, now LIPA, to voluntarily do this
sort of thing, voluntarily sign a covenant and
a contract with us not to sell their pollution
credits to these out-of-state areas, these
upwind locations.
We had hoped at the time that other
utilities would do this and join us in this
action. They have not to date. So New York
State is taking its action. The Attorney
General is suing these areas. The Governor
has imposed harsher standards.
We are now taking a step in order
to protect ourselves, the last step that New
York can take to protect ourselves. We are
urging other states in the region -- we've
gotten positive contact from other states in
the Northeast, basically along the same lines,
to take this legislation, use it as a model,
pass it to protect themselves so that we do
not have this problem of acid rain anymore.
Some have suggested problems with
this, that it could cause all kinds of dire
things such as negative financial incentives
and so forth. We don't see any of the
negativity in this thing. We see only
2644
positive moves in this particular piece of
legislation.
If this is passed, we will be
protecting ourselves. Ladies and gentlemen,
my colleagues, even the Hatfields knew enough
not to sell their extra bullets to the McCoys.
By doing this, we will stop the unnecessary
burden on our people, on New York.
We would prefer and we hope that
the federal government will go do the right
thing, pass the bill that's out there now and
protect all the states in the region and make
these Midwestern utilities behave, clean up
their act, burn cleaner fuel, and put them on
an even playing field with our Northeastern
utilities.
Because by being able to burn
cheaper fuel, they have lesser costs. They
have not engendered the costs that our
utilities have. So therefore, selling energy
in those utilities is cheaper. They have an
unfair advantage on our utilities in selling
power. We want to put that on an even playing
field and keep that positive effect.
So we want to encourage clean
2645
utilities, we want to encourage clean air, and
we want to discourage the burning of
high-sulfur fuel and the dumping, literally
dumping of this rain of death on the citizens
of New York State.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Mr.
President, through you, if the sponsor will
yield to a few questions.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you.
The Senate has already acted, I
believe, on this issue and passed a bill
similar to this but not exactly the same as
it. I would request if the sponsor could
explain the difference between this bill and
the bill we've already passed on this issue.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Last year or
last session we passed legislation that is
probably 99 percent the same as the bill we're
2646
looking at. The difference is there was a
date of 2003 in the previous legislation when
the bill would take effect. That bill was
amended to 2001, at one point in time. You'll
notice there are multiple versions on this.
We've been in contact with the
Assembly on this. We've been negotiating
almost by amendment along these lines. The
Assembly, after we matched our bill to their
bill with the 2001 deadline, a few days later
changed it by striking the date clause out
entirely, thereby allowing us to capture
credits that go back to 1995 when these were
initially enacted, when this act was initially
produced. We can, by that act, take into
consideration some 300,000 -- I'm sorry, some
600,000 tons of outstanding pollution credits.
We had our attorneys look at this.
Counsel reported back that we could do this
legally, that we were able to handle this
particular piece. So now we have taken the
Assembly's bill -- which is our bill, in
effect -- and substituted it so we're going to
pass it so there is unanimity, and hopefully
get law.
2647
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you.
Through you, Mr. President.
So am I correct, then, in my
understanding that this bill improves on the
bill we passed last year, because this will
enable us to prevent the sale of these credits
to utilities that might use the credits to
further pollute our air, the credits that are
in the bank right now? Not just we don't have
to wait to some point in the future, but there
are credits in the bank right now, we can
start today preventing this excess pollution
coming from the Midwest and blowing into New
York State?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: You're
absolutely correct, Senator.
And you also have to recognize that
each and every year from now forth, more
credits are issued to these utilities. This
will prevent literally millions of tons,
potentially millions of tons of pollution from
coming back to us in New York State. Of our
own making.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you.
Through you, Mr. President, one
2648
additional question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: I'll be
pleased to.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: One of the
issues that's concerned some of us is that
we're taking this action unilaterally in New
York. There is some concern that some of
these Midwestern utilities may just buy
pollution credits from other states.
And I'm wondering if any
consideration has been given to attempting to
impose some sort of requirement on utilities
that do business in New York but also have
credits available from their operations in
other states that would also prohibit them
from using those credits.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Senator, as
you know, this law would put a covenant
restriction on the existing pollution credits
to prevent them from ever being sold to one of
these 14 states specifically identified in the
2649
bill. It would be like a covenant on a piece
of land, a restriction that will travel with
that land forever.
This will travel with that credit
until that particular credit is either used or
retired. As long as it was being traded, it
could not be traded in any way to one of those
states. If it ever was, this state would have
action, by virtue of the contract law, to
enforce that contract and make sure that they
recovered the amount of money that was
acquired by that particular company from the
sale of this particular pollution credit or
group of pollution credits.
Your question relating to other -
you can't even go -- this would prevent you
from going through a third party and trying to
circumvent our rules.
The idea of taking action against
these utilities, quite frankly, Senator,
that's where the Clinton administration has
to -- Clinton-Gore administration has to step
up to the plate. They have to take action to
make this a cleaner nation with respect to
this trading.
2650
We have a system that was designed
with the best of intentions, to encourage
utilities to clean up their act.
Unfortunately, it hasn't worked the way it was
intended to work. It needs some adjusting.
In some parts of the country, this has been
very good. There has been an overall
improvement in air quality. But not
everywhere. And we're one of those areas that
is negatively impacted.
What we're saying is tweak the law,
change it a little bit so that we don't get
dumped on. We're not second-class citizens
here in the Northeast to the rest of this
nation. And we're just saying to the federal
government, Fix it, don't destroy it. It's a
good program, this trading business. But make
it work for everybody in a positive way.
We think this is the way to go. We
think the federal legislation which is out
there and should be passed if put to the floor
is the way to go. If the Clinton and Gore
administration would get on board on that,
we'd be happy to help them.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
2651
Mr. President. On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Schneiderman, on the bill.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: I thank
the sponsor for the detailed explanation of
what I think is an excellent piece of
legislation.
And I realize that in a situation
when something good is about to happen,
there's always efforts of anyone who was
involved at all to claim credit. And we had a
bill and the Assembly changed the bill, now we
have something that's like their bill. I
would like to claim credit too. I think I was
in a bar with Mr. Brodsky three or four years
ago and I had this idea.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: But, look,
when you get good work done, there's enough
credit to go around. Clearly the Senate moved
first on this. We passed a bill last year.
This bill is better than the bill we passed
last year. And I think that -- I don't know
who the Hatfields and McCoys are, but I know
that the Crips are smart enough not to sell
2652
the Bloods their used razor blades.
So I am in agreement with Senator
Marcellino on the basic principle involved
here. And I think that we will look forward
to further improvements in the federal system
once we elect the finest environmentalist ever
to run for the Presidency this fall.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Onorato.
SENATOR ONORATO: Mr. President,
will the sponsor yield?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: It will be
my pleasure to yield to Senator Onorato.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR ONORATO: Senator
Marcellino, would you explain to me, under the
current law can a utility or a polluter in the
State of New York currently sell some of their
tax credits to existing utility plants that
are operating in the state of New York who do
not meet the Clean Air/Clean Water Act because
2653
they were grandfathered in when they passed
that law?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: It's my
understanding under existing law that that
would be true. You could even sell to one of
your own sub -- one of your own portions of
your own company. So that's true. Under the
law as it is today.
SENATOR ONORATO: Again, through
you, Mr. President, if the sponsor will
continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Do you
continue to yield, Senator Marcellino?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR ONORATO: Last year we
passed the deregulation for siting new power
plants. Currently there is contemplation and
applications in, especially down in the City
of New York, for an additional seven power
plants adjacent to current power plants which
have been identified as some of the worst
polluting plants in the State of New York;
namely, the New York Power Authority's Poletti
2654
plant located in Astoria.
There are two plants now being
contemplated being built right alongside of
those existing plants who do not meet the
current standards. How will this legislation
affect them? And if it doesn't, what can we
do to bring them up to compliance within our
own state?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: I don't
believe this legislation will impact the
siting of any particular power plant at all.
What we can do -- because it's not aimed at
that at all. It's aimed at the credits and
the trading of credits with out-of-state
markets or any other group.
What we produce in this state blows
to some other state. If I lived in New
Hampshire, I would be very upset if my
company -- my utility was selling pollution
credits to a New York State utility, because
it would end up on me. So it behooves New
Hampshire, which is downwind of New York
State, to go along with legislation like this.
With respect to siting, now we come
up to federal regulations and state
2655
regulations as to siting. Every utility
that's put up has to meet those clean air
standards, must be given -- they're given
limited numbers of these pollution credits
each year by the federal EPA. If they're not
in compliance, they have to be closed or they
have to come down on them.
Our problem in this state is power.
Our problem is power. We do need it. There
are locations that are browned out routinely.
The city of New York is one of them. There's
a severe power shortage at certain points in
time as the demand -- you need peak power, and
you've got to supply it. We've got places on
Long Island that cannot meet the needs during
peak seasons when power is in demand. Those
needs have to be met; we have to supply them.
We need conservation, which must be
encouraged and is encouraged. We need
programs like this which restrict the kind of
pollution that dumps on us. And we need very
strict enforcement of the rules.
If a plant is not meeting its
goals, if it's not meeting its rules and it's
through negligence, through not caring,
2656
through not performing what they're supposed
to do, then the force of government should go
on top and lean on them and make them produce
the way they're supposed to, make them clean
up their act, so to speak. I have no problem
with that, Senator.
SENATOR ONORATO: Again, on the
bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Onorato, on the bill.
SENATOR ONORATO: Basically, I'm
completely in favor of this here. But I would
really love for us to go a step further,
again, in view of the fact that there are
additional plants coming on line, which will
be coming on line. And there's no question in
my mind that the newer plants will be in much
better condition to service our community in a
much cleaner fashion.
But the problem exists that they
will -- they're still going to be emitting
pollution. And my greatest problem is that
they're adding to the pollution that's
currently being produced by the plants that
they're going to be located right next to,
2657
adding more pollution to the air. And they
would be in a position to sell credits to the
polluters that are located right next door to
them, without them cleaning up their act. So
basically we'll result in a plus no matter how
you look at it.
So I'd really like to see
legislation -- I am introducing legislation
which is very, very simple in its content. It
basically says that when a new plant comes on
line in the city of New York which has a
population of over one million, that before
that plant can go on line, the adjacent plant
must come up to the government's federal Clean
Air Act or shut down.
Because we cannot afford some of
our areas -- especially in New York City,
which has not met the Clean Air and Clean
Water Attainment Act. So you're going to be
adding on more pollution to the city of New
York, which has almost 8 million inhabitants
and is currently suffering from the worst
scenario of lung-related diseases in the
entire United States.
So I hope that we'll see the light
2658
of day and allow that particular bill to come
onto this floor for a vote. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Oppenheimer.
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: If the
sponsor would yield to a -
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Yes, I do.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Well, I
have two questions.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: I yield
twice, Senator.
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: What was
that, Carl?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: I said I
yield twice.
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Oh, thank
you. Okay.
The first one is, you know, I've
never appreciated sulfur dioxide credits. And
so if you would just give a -- I'll ask both
questions together -- give me a philosophic
2659
reason why you support them. Because I can't
see why, if you're cleaning up your act here,
you should -- I mean, I never understood this
from the very beginning -- why you should be
able to sell it to someone else so that they
can dirty up their atmosphere and then blow it
back at you. That's the first question.
The second question relates more to
what Senator Onorato just questioned, which
was if you have an older plant prior to, what
is it, 1974, and it hasn't -- I forget the
date, but something like that -- and it is not
meeting the standards, then this wouldn't
apply anyway, because it isn't under any
mandate to improve to meet the current
standards and so there would be no need for it
to purchase the tax credits.
So one is just straightening up a
confusion, and the other is questioning a
philosophy.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: The
philosophy, Senator, is simply designed that
this -- this program was designed to encourage
utilities all over the country to clean up
their act and to give them a financial
2660
incentive for doing so. The negative impact
was not foreseen, in effect. A good program
was set up with the best of intentions, to
clean the air and to encourage utilities to
clean up their sites.
Unfortunately, certain parts of the
country don't necessarily benefit, because of
the way nature works. The wind blows in our
direction, and this stuff comes here.
What we're saying, by this
legislation, to the federal government is make
them clean up their act. Make them burn the
same -- or make them come under the same
requirements as the Northeastern utilities,
because they're adding to our problem. And
you've got to stop treating us as second-class
citizens.
The federal government understands
what we're saying. The EPA gives us lip
service. They tell us we're absolutely
correct. Study after study after study after
study has shown that we're absolutely correct,
we're not making this acid rain business up.
It's perfectly true. Yet we can't get federal
action.
2661
Now, we're trying to put pressure
on the feds. We're hoping that the
Northeastern states -- and as I said before,
I've circulated this legislation to other
legislators in our neighboring states. New
Hampshire is looking at it. Maine is looking
at it. Others will take a look at it and
hopefully pass it, so that regionally we will
tell the federal government, this is where we
stand on this. We don't want this stuff
anymore. We're going to deny these people as
many credits as we can deny them.
Currently this bill will deny them
600,000 credits that have been amassed under
New York State utilities since 1995 that have
not been sold, that are being held. If we can
deny them those credits plus the exponentially
increasing numbers that the federal government
keeps on adding on each and every year, we
will protect ourselves and regionally protect
the entire region by literally millions of
tons of potential pollution which we can
prevent.
That's less asthma. That's less
health effects and less respiratory problems,
2662
less problems all over the place. Less water
problems, less problems in our lakes, rivers
and streams.
So that's the reasoning behind
this. I do think that the concept, the idea
of pollution credits, is a good one. I do
believe that we should encourage these. We
need a financial incentive to get people to
move under any circumstances. We tried the
hammer for many years, and that doesn't seem
to work. They can always avoid it. They can
put up shields. They have expensive attorneys
that can defend them in the courts. This
incentive has worked. There has been a
general drop in air pollution nationwide.
What we're suggesting, what we're
saying is we in this region, we in this state
in particular, have not gotten the full
benefit of the program. We feel it has to be
adjusted so that we get the full benefit of
that program. That's why we're doing what
we're doing here today.
And I congratulate our colleagues
in the Assembly for doing the right thing, for
coming up and passing the bill and sending it
2663
to the Senate -- and the Senate has passed it
earlier this year -- so we can pass it at this
point in time, and we'll hopefully get law on
that basis.
With respect to older plants being
grandfathered in other situations, you're in a
catch-22, Senator. I heard from Senator
Onorato you want to close down some plants if
they don't meet the standards. That's good to
say. But if half of Queens blacks out one
night, tell them that that's because we shut
that plant down, if they black out.
So you've got to find a mechanism
to get those plants to clean up their act. If
it's legislative, that's one thing. If it's
the federal government has to come in and do
it, if it's the Public Service Commission that
has to come in and do it, if it's the DEC or
the EPA, I don't really care. I don't think
any of us do. We would like to see their act
cleaned up and force them to do the right
thing and clean up their act, whether they
were grandfathered or not.
The new plants coming on line will
have to meet very stringent standards, very
2664
stringent standards. And they will not add,
you know, tremendously or deal with totally -
you know, in a terrible way to our air
problems. But we do have in this state and in
this region an energy problem. We have a lot
of people -- we have 8 million in the city of
New York, we've got almost 3 million on Long
Island. We've got power shortage concerns and
power needs.
Conservation goes so far. We need
to supply power. Otherwise, you know, it
stops. And the job creation stops and
industries stop and businesses stop and
economically we grind to a halt. Energy is
the root of it all. So clean energy is the
preference, obviously.
We're taking one small step in this
legislation towards that goal. There's many
other steps in the process.
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: If I could
just have clarification of something, through
you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Sure.
2665
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: I don't
guarantee to clarify.
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: You usually
do.
The question is, there would be no
need for these grandfathered power plants to
buy the pollution tax -- the credits because
they're already grandfathered, so they don't
need to purchase the credits. Is that not
correct?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Right,
you're correct. They wouldn't necessarily
need it.
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Thank you,
and I appreciate your answer.
I am very supportive of the bill.
I'm on the bill now. I'm very supportive of
this bill. It's just that I think years ago,
when the feds decided to do this, I felt that
it was something that was more appropriately
handled through some kind of subsidy. Not a
stick, because the stick hadn't worked, but a
carrot, some kind of financial assistance to
2666
those power plants that were cleaning up their
act.
Because it -- I found it sort of
working against our goals to be able to sell
the pollution credits to another power
facility that was polluting more than it
should. It wasn't in general, in total,
cleaning up the entire environment; it was
simply selling what was bad in one area to
another area. And philosophically, that
bothered me, and I thought there might have
been another way.
But I agree with you, it has
improved the environment, the air in most of
our nation. And so I think your bill is an
excellent one, Carl.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr.
President, will the sponsor yield to a couple
of questions?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Yes, I will.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
2667
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President.
Senator, how did you get the
definition of the acid precipitation source
states? And I'll cut right to the chase. Why
is it that there are only states that are east
of the Mississippi on the list when you can
build a power plant on the western shore of
the Mississippi River in Iowa or Missouri and
have the exact same effect on acid rain in New
York State?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Basically,
the program comes from the scientists who tell
us where the predominant amount of emissions
are coming from.
They are in fact coming from the
states that we've identified in the
legislation. If they're east of the
Mississippi, so be it. But that's where
90 percent of our acid rain is coming from.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay. Again,
through you, Mr. President, just so I
understand it.
If you build a plant in Missouri,
2668
across the river from Illinois, they're not
affected by this. But if you build one on the
eastern shore of the Mississippi River, which
is in Illinois, they'd be within the
precipitation area.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: All I can
say is repeat the same answer, Senator. These
scientists and those who have studied the
issue have identified this. It's been
consistent over and over again, the same
states are mentioned. They're mentioned in
the federal legislation as well as our
legislation, that most if not all of that
pollution that emanates comes from probably
five major states in core, but there are
others that we can bring into it.
The total comes to about 14 states,
both south and east of us, where the
prevailing winds bring the pollution. And
those are the states that generate the most
emissions.
If the state has minimal population
with a minimal utility, a small utility that
is not going to dump that much on us, it's not
going to have that big an impact, so it might
2669
not record.
But in this situation, these are -
these are Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan,
Illinois. These are heavy production states,
industrial states. And one would expect their
emissions to be much more intense and greater
in the older plants, because those were built
many, many years ago.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President, if the sponsor will again yield
to a question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Certainly.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Your comment,
Senator, leads me to the question that I'm
most interested in.
What about the state of Texas,
which is one of those big industrial states?
Which, according to a lot of commentary, in
view of the presidential campaign that's going
on, where lots of the people have said that
Texas is the dirtiest air polluting state in
2670
the nation. In fact, it has the city of
Houston, which has the worst air quality in
the nation.
Why shouldn't Texas be included in
this list if it's one of those big industrial
states that could get into our airwaves and
pump acid rain into our state?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Senator, my
colleague Senator Schneiderman said that once
the election in November is settled and the
greatest environmentalist that will take
office in the history of this nation -- that
will namely be George W. Bush. This is the
governor of the state of Texas that has
cleaned up that state more than any other
governor in the history of that state.
That being said, the wind just
doesn't blow on New York State from Texas. It
lands in other places, perhaps, but it doesn't
blow on us. I represent the people of New
York State and the people specifically of the
5th Senate District. That's my primary
concern. I am not on the federal level, I'm
on the local -- I'm a state senator.
So I'm trying to protect my
2671
constituency and my state against what happens
in other states where I can impact. If a
state does not impact us, then this
legislation won't impact them.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President, if Senator Marcellino will
continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino, do you yield to yield?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Sure.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: That raises
the other question that I had.
If we don't want acid rain from
anywhere, be it from Texas, a state like
Texas, a big industrial state, it's had
pollution problems, and we don't want it from
Ohio, which is a big industrial state that
burns too much fossil fuels and has too much
sulfur dioxide in the air -- if that's the
case, that we don't want any of that
pollution, why doesn't New York State do the
real responsible thing and buy the credits
itself and retire the credits so that no one
2672
in this state has to face the additional acid
rain obligation or threat to health that I
think you so accurately described?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Well,
Senator, in fact that was a consideration that
we had at one point in time in the workings of
this bill.
However, like all things, there's a
certain amount of money involved. It would be
ideal if we could buy up all the credits and
retire them, but they keep coming back each
and every year. New ones.
So we couldn't -- this is not a
one-shot deal. If we bought up the 600,000
credits which we know are out there, that
would be fine. 600,000 -- you do the math:
600,000 times 150. Nice piece of change. If
we did that, one shot, what happens the next
year when -- when hundreds of thousands more
are added to the mix, and the following year
after that? Is the State of New York prepared
to carry that off in perpetuity? I don't
think so.
So therefore, we take the next best
action. Ideally, it would be great. If we
2673
could afford it, I would say do it. I don't
think we can responsibly afford that burden on
the taxpayers of this state.
However, that being said, this act
costs us nothing.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Again,
through you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Certainly.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: That leads to
my next question. Obviously there is a
cost -
SENATOR MARCELLINO: You've got
to give me a question that doesn't lead to the
next one, Senator, so I'll figure out the
answer to that.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: I appreciate
your answers. They segued into my questions.
My question is, obviously, if the
State of New York doesn't want to pay for
these, we're willing to mandate that
ratepayers pay for them by giving up a
2674
valuable asset; isn't that correct?
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Senator -
Senator, the ratepayers are paying for it
right now. Let's not fool ourselves. Every
time a utility upgrades and spends money, you
don't think, out of the goodness of the
stockholders, that they keep this thing to
themselves. That gets passed directly on to
you.
Every time somebody develops asthma
and has a medical problem, the ratepayers pay
for that. We pay for the medical bills, we
pay for the increased electric costs, we pay
for the cost of repainting our homes more
frequently than we would otherwise because
this acid rain is eating away at the finish on
our houses.
We pay for the infrastructure that
this acid rain is destroying. We pay for the
statuary which is being corroded and literally
dissolved away by this acid rain. We pay for
the forests that are being destroyed
constantly by the trees that are being
denuded.
There is an increase in tree death
2675
in this area that has been directly related to
acid rain, and we can verify that and that's
been shown. Talk to the members of the
Adirondack Council. Talk to the people who
live in this area, the sportspeople who can't
go in certain areas, the fishermen who can't
fish certain lakes, rivers and streams because
they're dead of life because of this stuff.
What's the economic cost to this
state? It's untold, uncountable, billions the
way it is now. I would rather spend a few
bucks cleaning up a couple of utilities and
reduce the cost of asthma and respiratory
diseases on the people of this state. I think
you would too, Senator.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: I couldn't
agree with you more.
On the bill, Mr. President. I'll
be brief.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger, on the bill.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: I appreciate
Senator Marcellino's passion about the issues
and the consequences of acid rain and
environmental problems. And I do agree with
2676
Senator Marcellino.
My only question is, isn't the
right thing to do to solve this problem to
take the enormous cost of acid rain -- be it
asthma, be it degradation of the environment,
whatever that cost is -- and it is enormous,
Senator, I don't deny that. But wouldn't it
make better sense for State of New York to
just buy these credits, retire them forever,
and ensure that it's not -- we're not just
exporting our acid rain problem but we're
actually getting rid of it?
I would suggest, Senator
Marcellino -- I'm going to vote in favor of
this bill, because I think it's a good step.
But the better thing to do is put our money
where our mouth is. Buy these credits
ourselves so that no one in this state, in
this nation, on this planet has to run into
the kind of problem that you describe.
Your description is, it's perfectly
okay for somebody else to get it if we sell
these credits to California or Wyoming or
Washington. It's okay if there's acid rain in
the Rockies, but we shouldn't have it here.
2677
I would just suggest that the real
responsible thing to do is buy these credits
ourselves -- if it costs 900 million, if it
costs 90 million, if it costs 150 million,
whatever that cost is.
Senator Marcellino, I agree with
you. Reduction in asthma, an improvement in
health care, reviving the quality of our
forests up in the Adirondacks, all those
things would be well worth that cost. Let's
do the right thing next time around.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Mr.
President, to close, hopefully, on this issue.
I agree with the Senator's
comments. It would be great and it would be
fine to do all that. We can get all that.
But we need the federal government to step up
to the plate. We need the Clinton-Gore
administration to step up to the plate and do
the right thing.
They haven't done the right thing
on acid rain. They didn't do the right thing
on MTBE. We had to pass that legislation in
2678
this house and in this state to protect
ourselves because the federal government
wouldn't do what they were supposed to do, and
that's protect us overall.
So in that case, we'll be happy -
I'm glad that this is going to move, and
hopefully when we pass this bill it will be
signed into law and New York State will have
done the right thing.
And I thank my colleagues for their
support. And I also would like to thank the
Governor of this state, because he negotiated
and started this process which is the image of
this bill and the mirror for this particular
bill. That was the voluntary deal with LILCO.
And I would like to thank Senator
Bruno for his encouragement and his
willingness to put this bill on the floor and
on the table because he recognizes the import
to the people of this state.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 7. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
2679
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Schneiderman, to explain his vote.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Mr. President.
I disagree with Senator Marcellino
about one aspect of this, which is he said
earlier that this is a very small step. I
don't think this is a small step. I think
this is a big step. And I see another big
step, shaking hands with Assemblyman Brodsky
on the way out, which is also good.
This is -- and I want to mention,
in response to comments made by Senator
Dollinger, the five biggest importers of these
credits are all states that will be covered
under this legislation: Illinois, Indiana,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky.
This is a huge step. It will
potentially protect us from 6 million tons of
pollution over the next twenty years. And I
think, in addition to everyone else who's
already been thanked, we have to acknowledge
the work of the Attorney General, Eliot
2680
Spitzer, on this, who brought a lawsuit about
it.
And I'm very pleased that we were
able to take action on this important issue.
This is, in my view, one of our finest
accomplishments this year. Congratulations.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Schneiderman will be recorded in the
affirmative.
The Secretary will announce the
results.
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
The Secretary will continue to
read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
422, by Senator Leibell, Senate Print 4529, an
act to amend the Penal Law, in relation to
unlawful defilement.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Leibell, an explanation has been requested of
Calendar 422 by Senator Lachman.
SENATOR LEIBELL: Yes, Mr.
2681
President. This bill would establish a new
article of -- 270.08 of the Penal Law, to
create a new crime of unlawful defilement of a
water supply.
Pursuant to this bill, a person
would be guilty of this new crime if he
intentionally introduces, places, or causes to
be introduced or placed into the water supply
a defiling agent, with the intent to cause
sickness, physical injury, severe
disfigurement or death of another human being,
or with the reckless disregard of causing the
sickness, physical injury, severe
disfigurement or death of another human being,
or with the intent to cause irreparable harm
to such water supply or to disturb the public
peace.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Lachman.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Mr. President,
through you, will the distinguished sponsor of
the legislation yield for a question?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Leibell, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR LEIBELL: Yes, I
2682
certainly do.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR LACHMAN: The explanation
was quite clear. Except the title of the
legislation is a little unclear in terms of
its language. How does one differentiate the
crime of unlawful defilement of the water
supply to the crime of lawful defilement of
the water supply?
SENATOR LEIBELL: Well, the use
of the terminology "unlawful defilement" is to
emphasize that it would be an unlawful act.
It's conceivable that you could have something
that would in some way defile the water supply
that might not be unlawful; for instance,
fluoridation.
So in order that there be no
inconsistencies, and to make sure it's as
clear as possible, that was the reason for the
use of the terminology there. It might seem
redundant, but it was felt to be necessary.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Mr. President,
2683
if the sponsor would yield for a question.
SENATOR LEIBELL: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Leibell, do you yield for a question from
Senator Stavisky?
SENATOR LEIBELL: Yes, Mr.
President.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Through you,
Mr. President. Is it now permitted for an
individual to defile our water supply?
SENATOR LEIBELL: No, it
certainly would not be.
What we are attempting to do here
is to bring this crime up to a level of public
safety, where it should be.
SENATOR STAVISKY: In other
words, if I were to go -- Mr. President, if
the sponsor would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Leibell, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR LEIBELL: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY: If I were to
go to Croton, for example, and dump some PCBs
or whatever into the water supply, I would not
be prosecuted?
2684
SENATOR LEIBELL: It might be a
criminal tampering, which would be a D felony.
This is a B felony.
So yes, it would still be a
criminal act, but this raises it.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Mr. President,
one more question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Leibell, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR LEIBELL: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Would this be
a violent felony?
SENATOR LEIBELL: No, it would be
a crime against property.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Thank you, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect on the first day of
November.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
2685
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
486, by Senator Libous, Senate Print 6919, an
act to amend the Mental Hygiene Law, in
relation to including persons.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation,
please.
SENATOR SKELOS: Lay it aside
temporarily.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside temporarily.
The Secretary will continue to
read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
495, by Senator Velella, Senate Print 6545A,
an act to amend the Insurance Law, in relation
to health insurance coverage.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Velella, an explanation has been requested of
Calendar 495 by Senator Lachman.
SENATOR VELELLA: Yes, Mr.
President. This is a follow-up bill to a bill
that we did last year which was signed into
2686
law that provides for the -- in the event that
a student who is presently enrolled under
their parents' plan, like a member of the
Legislature may have a student who has
continued on with their health benefits, that
they withdraw from school because of an
illness -- should they withdraw and they be
over the age limit that they normally would
have been covered, they're only being covered
because they're a student, a full-time
student, if they withdrew because of illness,
they would be dropped from your policy.
Last year we changed that so that
if it was medically necessary that they
withdraw from school, they would be continued
for one year.
As a result of that bill, some
questions were raised as to interpretation.
And there are several areas that this bill
clarifies. And the purpose of this bill is
merely to supplement what we did last year and
clarify the situation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Lachman.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Mr. President,
2687
will the distinguished Senator yield for a
question?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator,
do you continue to yield?
SENATOR VELELLA: I will begin
to, not continue. I was asked to explain.
And if I'm asked for a question, yes, I'll
yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Velella will yield for a question.
SENATOR LACHMAN: I believe that
this bill does clarify the provisions of
Chapter 574 of the Laws of 1999 in a positive
sense.
The question I have is, does this
bill clarify the rate charge for the
continuing coverage of a medically dependent
full-time students at all levels of his or her
university career?
Should I explain my -- let me
explain my question.
SENATOR VELELLA: I'm not sure
what the question is.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Let me explain
my question.
2688
In community college and as an
undergraduate, students attend college on a
full-time basis or a part-time basis. But
when you attend, for example, Stony Brook or
Binghamton or Albany or the Graduate Center of
CUNY, you have doctoral students who are
working on their Ph.D. degrees or E.D. degrees
on a permanent basis and are considered, to
all intents and purposes, of being full-time
students, even though they do not take the
credits of undergraduate students.
Will this important measure also
include these doctoral students who will be,
in the future, important members of our
society and contributors to the growth of our
economy?
SENATOR VELELLA: That's a very
good question. And let me say that this bill
does not get into the issue of who will be
covered at what point in their academic
career.
What this bill says is that if you
are covered as a full-time student and have to
leave because of an illness, you will be
continued coverage for one year. And whether
2689
or not you initially get that coverage will be
dependent on the particular policy
circumstances and facts -- if you're not a
full-time student, if it's not an accredited
college. Each different policy, each
different program will determine whether or
not you're eligible.
However, if you are eligible and
you get sick and you lose your status as a
full-time student simply because of the
illness, when your doctor gives you a note you
will then be covered for one year.
So we don't go back to ab initio,
the very beginning of the policy, and
renegotiate the policy. What we do do is say
that if you are covered, you won't lose that
coverage, because of the fact that you happen
to be ill and can't attend school, for one
year.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Lachman.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Through you,
Mr. President, will the Senator continue to
yield to another question in this area?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
2690
Velella, do you yield for another question?
SENATOR VELELLA: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Fine. What I
was referring to were the different tiers of
college or university education. And there's
a distinct demarcation from those students who
are working on their doctorates, in whatever
area, as against those students who are
undergraduates and who are community college
students or undergraduate, four-year-college
students.
I was happy to hear the candor of
my distinguished colleague that he wasn't
sure, I gather, that this would cover doctoral
students who might not be attending on a
full-time basis.
If it does not, can we further
clarify this and improve this important piece
of legislation in the future to include all
levels or all tiers of university education?
SENATOR VELELLA: Yes.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
2691
Duane.
SENATOR DUANE: If the sponsor
would continue to yield, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Velella, do you yield for a question from
Senator Duane?
SENATOR VELELLA: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you. Under
this bill, there's a provision that you can
still age out of the policy; isn't that
correct?
SENATOR VELELLA: I'm sorry,
what?
SENATOR DUANE: This bill
contains a provision that would make it so a
student could still age out of a policy; is
that not correct?
SENATOR VELELLA: Yes. If they
would have aged out before, they would still
age out now.
As I said to Senator Lachman, the
only provision is that this will now prevent
someone from being dropped from a policy
2692
simply because they got sick and were not a
full-time student, not able to attend because
of that very illness that you're insuring them
for. It doesn't make sense.
SENATOR DUANE: Through you, Mr.
President, if the sponsor would continue to
yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Velella, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR VELELLA: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DUANE: I'm wondering if
the sponsor thinks, though, that it's not good
public policy that a student could lose their
insurance if they age out, even if they're in
the middle of a serious illness like cancer.
In other words, they might be
covered for the first half of treatment for
their disease but, because they turn 21, lose
coverage and have to pay for the rest of their
treatment out-of-pocket.
SENATOR VELELLA: What is the
question? Do I think that's a good thing?
SENATOR DUANE: Good public
2693
policy.
SENATOR VELELLA: No, I think
it's a terrible thing when that happens.
SENATOR DUANE: Through you, Mr.
President, then.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: You want
Senator Velella to continue to yield?
SENATOR DUANE: Please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Velella, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR VELELLA: Yes, I do.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DUANE: Then I'm hoping
that the sponsor would be willing to look at
making it so that a person who does have a
catastrophic or serious illness, that they
could keep their insurance if their treatment
had started while they were insured, even if
their treatment was not completed at the time
that they aged out.
SENATOR VELELLA: Is the question
would I look at that? Yes, I will.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Mr.
President.
2694
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect on the same date as
Chapter 574 of the Laws of 1999.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
512, by Senator LaValle, Senate Print 2459, an
act to amend the General Municipal Law, in
relation to granting.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger, why do you rise?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Will Senator
LaValle yield to just one question, brief.
SENATOR LAVALLE: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Senator,
could you describe how this extra points
program affects the municipal obligation to
2695
provide funds into the benefit program and, if
so, what the anticipated cost of this program
might be to local communities?
SENATOR LAVALLE: The -- first of
all, we should start by saying, so that
everyone is aware, that in 1988 we established
a service award program for volunteer
firefighters. In that program we indicated
that each local community would make a
decision whether they would enter such a
program, a service award program.
We established under that
legislation that each active firefighter had
to earn 50 credits. And in the legislation we
put specific activities in order to earn those
50 credits, such as answering alarms, fighting
fires, marching in parades, doing various
things around the firehouse and so forth.
And here, we are adding teaching
fire prevention classes that would be
requested by the fire district or the fire
house or the chief, and that they could only
accumulate up to five points.
So in other words, within the
context of the 50 points, we are now saying
2696
there is another activity that you could do
within the 50 points to achieve that, and that
is teaching classes in fire prevention.
Each fire district handles -- now,
to answer with specificity your question, each
fire district -- or, as you had indicated, it
could be a municipality -- takes out and funds
the service award program in a different way.
But it's basically an annuity or an annuity
with a specific benefit plan. So that an
individual knows that if they put in 10 years,
they will get so much per month from the
service award.
So the cost to the municipality
does not change. Whatever that cost is today,
it would continue. This bill merely adds
another activity to qualify for the 50 points
in order to secure the award.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Mr. President.
As I understand it -- and I
appreciate Senator LaValle's very accurate and
detailed explanation -- this simply
2697
accelerates the process by which they get to
award the bonus program based on their
teaching fire safety or other classes.
I think it's a great idea. I'll
vote in favor.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
The Secretary will continue to
read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
515, by Senator Stafford, Senate Print 4393,
an act to amend the General Municipal Law, in
relation to provisions.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger, why do you rise?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just -- will
the sponsor yield to just one question, Mr.
2698
President?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Stafford, will you -
SENATOR STAFFORD: I will.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President, this concept of allowing fire
districts to privately contract with
ambulances is something we've discussed on a
statewide basis. Is there anything particular
about Clinton County that makes it appropriate
there?
And why shouldn't we do it on a
statewide basis when I know there are other
counties that have the same demographic and
geographic aspects that Clinton County does?
Shouldn't we do this on a statewide basis?
SENATOR STAFFORD: I think that's
a very, very good point, and I'd be glad to
work with you on that. There is legislation
that's been suggested.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President, I appreciate Senator Stafford's
explanation. This too is an issue that we've
2699
debated on a statewide basis.
With the declining number of
volunteers and greater pressure on our
volunteer ambulance corps, the question of
whether we should allow them, the fire
districts, to contract with private ambulance
services is, I think, a critically important
one.
I understand the exigencies of
Clinton County, how it drives you to do this.
But I think this bill ought to be done on a
statewide basis, or at least have a statewide
debate about it, whether rural communities
need it and urban communities don't.
I think that should be a part of
our discussion, and I hope Senator Stafford
will lead the charge in making this happen, or
at least considering it on a statewide basis.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: There's
a home rule message at the desk.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
2700
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
The Secretary will read Calendar
486.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
486, by Senator Libous, Senate Print 6919, an
act to amend the Mental Hygiene Law, in
relation to including persons who are
developmentally disabled.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: May I just
have a brief explanation, Mr. President?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Libous, an explanation has been requested by
Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR LIBOUS: Thank you, Mr.
President. I knew when I introduced this bill
that it would be extremely controversial and
that someone of Senator Dollinger's character
might ask for an explanation. I'd be happy to
give it to him.
Basically, Mr. President, this is a
bill that adds a provision to Article 15 of
the Mental Hygiene Law to clarify that Article
2701
15 refers not only to persons who are mentally
retarded -- and I apologize for the
hesitation, I have a bit of a sore throat and
laryngitis -- but also to persons who are
developmentally disabled.
And that's basically what we're
doing here, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President, if the sponsor will just yield
to one question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Libous, will you yield for a question?
SENATOR LIBOUS: Absolutely, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: There's a
reference in the bill memo to the settling of
a class action, a federal class action. Would
you just explain to me how this bill will
affect the settlement of that action or
accommodate that action?
SENATOR LIBOUS: Learned counsel
2702
here, Mr. President, tells me without the
authority in statute that the judge will not
let them proceed with the referral.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr.
President, if the sponsor will just continue
to yield.
Is it the passage of this
legislation -
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Whoa,
whoa. Wait. Senator Libous, do you yield for
a question?
SENATOR LIBOUS: Absolutely.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Now,
Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Is the
passage of this legislation an ingredient, a
condition of that settlement of that class
action lawsuit that we're given the power to
make those referrals?
SENATOR LIBOUS: I don't believe
so.
But at the same time, this
definition needs to be included in the law.
2703
Because if you look at the definition, Mr.
President, of mental retardation and
developmental disability, that it's important
that this clarification be in there for just
total clarification of this particular
article. But it would also help in that
particular class action suit.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation
satisfactory, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
537, by Senator Padavan, Senate Print 1400, an
act to amend the Penal Law, in relation to
possession of gambling devices.
SENATOR HEVESI: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
2704
Padavan, an explanation has been requested of
Calendar 537 by Senator Hevesi.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Mr. President,
thank you. I'm going to read the memorandum
in support from the City of New York which
describes the bill in detail.
"This bill would amend Penal Law
Article 225 to impose realistic penalties upon
those who profit from unlawful gambling
activity. It would create two degrees of the
crime of possession of gambling devices, with
the top charge constituting a Class E felony
where five or more devices are possessed.
"The bill would also amend the
Penal Law with respect to the crime of
promoting gambling, by making it a Class E
felony to profit from gambling activities,
such as casino-type gambling, where the take
is more than $5,000 in any one day.
"Penal Law 225.32, possession of a
gambling device, would be amended to reflect
the creation of the new crime. The bill would
also make two conforming amendments to the
Real Property Law and to the Real Property
Actions and Proceedings Law, to add the newly
2705
created crime of possession of a gambling
device in the first degree to the list of
crimes which are deemed presumptive evidence
that illegal activities are occurring in a
leased building or apartment, which form the
basis for legal proceedings to evict the
tenants conducting such activities.
"At present, notwithstanding how
many gambling devices a person possesses or
how much cash is received through running an
illegal gambling casino, the top charges
available are misdemeanors. This bill would
remedy that anomaly by making a degree of
charge reflective of the degree to which a
person profits from illegal activity.
"In the case of possessing slot
machines or coin-operated gambling devices, a
person could presently possess 1,000 such
devices and he or she would still only be
guilty of a misdemeanor. An enhanced penalty
for possession of five or more reasonably
addresses the aggravated nature of the offense
and should have a salutary deterrent effect."
SENATOR HEVESI: Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
2706
Hevesi.
SENATOR HEVESI: Would the
sponsor yield to a few questions, please?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Padavan, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR HEVESI: Mr. President, I
was wondering if Senator Padavan could tell us
whether the bill that we're looking at is an
amended print or Print 1400 not amended.
SENATOR PADAVAN: This is 1400
not amended.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you.
Through you, Mr. President, if the
sponsor would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Padavan, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR HEVESI: Senator Padavan,
I don't see where the Real Property Law is
amended in this print. Could you point that
2707
out, please?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Bear with me
just a moment.
Well, Senator, I'm not sure what
part you're looking for, but the bill stands
as it is. The memo that I read is based on
Senate 1400, the memo in support from the City
of New York. Maybe you could be more specific
as to what part of the bill before us you have
a question on.
SENATOR HEVESI: Mr. President,
the conforming sections that involve the Real
Property Tax Law, as stated in the sponsor's
memo and the city's memo, I don't see where
the legislation amends that section of law.
And if we're going to be asked to
vote on it, I would just like to have it
pointed out to me, if you would, where it does
that. Or if the memos are indeed flawed. And
then we can move on.
SENATOR PADAVAN: The memo must
be flawed. The bill is as you see it.
SENATOR HEVESI: Okay, thank you.
Mr. President, would the sponsor
continue to yield?
2708
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR HEVESI: Senator Padavan,
I believe that this is -- I like the direction
in which this legislation moves.
My question for you is, in creating
two different offenses for possession of a
gambling device, one in the second degree and
a more stringent penalty in the first degree
if the individual possesses more than five
gambling devices, my question to you is if
someone continues to possess -- is convicted
of more than one misdemeanor offense in the
second degree, are there escalating penalties
for that individual?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Not to my
knowledge. Not in this bill.
SENATOR HEVESI: Okay. Mr.
President, would the sponsor yield to another
question, please?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR HEVESI: If I can turn
2709
your attention to Section 4 of your bill,
which amends Section 225.10 of the Penal Law,
your -- let me also draw to your attention the
next bill that is coming up on calendar, which
is Senator Volker's legislation.
There is a fundamental conflict
between your legislation and Senator Volker's
legislation, in that Senator Volker's
legislation would amend Subsection 1 and 2 of
Section 225.10, which you then address.
But -
SENATOR PADAVAN: Since he comes
after me, you'd better address that to him.
Right now we're dealing with this bill.
SENATOR HEVESI: Well, Senator,
you and he both add a Subsection 3 of the same
section.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Well, then,
you'll have to discuss that with him. Ask me
about this bill.
SENATOR HEVESI: Okay, let me ask
you about this bill.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Okay.
SENATOR HEVESI: Presuming that
Senator Volker's bill passes -
2710
SENATOR PADAVAN: I will make no
such presumption, Senator. Ask me about this
bill.
SENATOR HEVESI: Okay. Your
Subsection 3 that you choose to add would
provide a qualifying offense or circumstance
under which somebody is guilty of promoting
gambling in the first degree if they receive
from any unlawful gambling activities more
than $5,000 in any one day; is that correct?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Right.
SENATOR HEVESI: Okay. Senator
Volker's bill, Senator Padavan, reduces the
threshold for Subsection 1 of 225.10 down to
$2,500 and Subsection 2 from 500 to $250.
I believe that we should enact the
more stringent threshold, the lower threshold.
Your bill fails to do that.
And in the event that Senator
Volker's bill passes, there will be an
inconsistency within the same section where
the legislation you have just added,
Subsection 3, is much less stringent than
Senator Volker's. And my question to you is,
is that the situation that you had intended?
2711
SENATOR PADAVAN: Senator, I will
answer the question again. We are dealing
with the current bill before us. I am not in
a position to comment on the efficacy of a
bill to follow, with due respect to my
esteemed colleague Senator Volker, chairman of
the Codes Committee, wherever he is.
Let us deal with this bill. Now,
the penalty of $5,000 is obviously a
subjective one. You could make it ten, you
could make it twenty. We think $5,000 is a
deterrent, and a reasonable deterrent, and one
that could be enforced. And the City of New
York and the New York City Police Department
feels it's an appropriate level to be at.
SENATOR HEVESI: On the bill, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hevesi, on the bill.
SENATOR HEVESI: Mr. President, I
appreciate the efforts to combat illegal
gamble and crack down in this area. But it's
quite obvious -- and I have the highest
respect for Senator Padavan and Senator
Volker -- that they never discussed the
2712
legislation that they have both introduced,
that are both active today, and that are
absolutely contradictory.
And I believe, since I know both of
them to be firm believers in creating a more
stringent environment to create a greater
deterrent to criminal activity, that this
inconsistency is one which was unintended by
both sponsors.
And just in the questions that I
have posed to Senator Padavan, there are three
technical problems to this legislation. And I
don't know -- I'm very loath to support or to
vote in favor of flawed legislation.
And I understand Senator Padavan
doesn't want to get into the specifics of
Senator Volker's bill. But the fact is, every
bill that's come active this year that has not
been laid aside for the day has passed. And
so I have every expectation that Senator
Volker's bill will pass this house and Senator
Padavan's bill will pass this house.
And Senator Padavan I disagree with
in a number of areas on his legislation,
because of Senator Volker's bill, because
2713
Senator Padavan's bill will be less stringent.
I believe that the threshold should not be
$5,000, it should be $2,500 -- even lower,
perhaps. Particularly if we're amending the
same sections of the same law creating for
lower thresholds.
In addition, there are other
sections of this legislation that I think need
strengthening, particularly dividing the
offense of possessing five or more gaming
devices to a first and a second degree, making
the first degree more stringent. That's
terrific. But it doesn't address the
underlying fact that if you traffic in under
five gaming machines, you can do it 10, 15, 20
times and only get hit with misdemeanor
offenses. It's lenient.
And I would suggest that we amend
Senator Padavan's legislation to include
another category for possession of gaming
devices in the first degree, the E felony
degree, if someone has committed possession in
the second degree and commits it and has
committed the same offense, possession in the
second degree, within the past five years.
2714
So, frankly, I think Senator
Padavan's legislation is weak. Not tough on
crime, weak. And I would prefer a more
stringent measure.
However, I don't know which of
these two measures, if they both pass, will
become law. And since both of them on their
own are acceptable, I'm going to vote in
favor, but understanding that I have
reservations.
Because if both of these were to
become law, I don't know what would occur.
Aside from the fact that we would have an
inconsistent section of the Penal Law,
particularly as it pertains to the creation of
two Subsections 3s of Section 225.10 that are
completely different. And I don't even know
as a matter of law what happens in that
circumstance.
So I will vote yes on this
individual piece of legislation with those
reservations.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Malcolm Smith.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: Thank
2715
you, Mr. President. Will the sponsor yield
for a question?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Padavan, do you yield?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: Senator
Padavan, if you can explain what -
SENATOR PADAVAN: I'm sorry,
Senator Smith, you'll have to speak louder.
I'm having trouble hearing.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: I seem to
have a problem with this mike here.
SENATOR PADAVAN: I know. That's
why you have to speak louder.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: I
understand my predecessor had the same
problem. So I'll do the best I can.
In the legislation, it talks about
devices. Could you please explain what
devices you're talking about? What does that
mean?
SENATOR PADAVAN: What kind of
devices? Slot machines, Joker Poker machines,
2716
that sort of thing.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: Is it
specifically -- Mr. President, through you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Padavan, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: Are we
specifically talking about mechanical devices
only, Mr. President?
SENATOR PADAVAN: I'm sorry,
would you repeat that?
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: Are we
talking about mechanical devices only?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Well, it says
here, right on -- if you take a look at the
bill, beginning on line 9, "a slot machine or
any other gambling device, believing that the
same is to be used in the advancement of
unlawful gambling activity. A coin-operated
gambling device with intent to use such device
in the advancement of unlawful gambling
activity."
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: Mr.
2717
President -
SENATOR PADAVAN: That is the
definition, the categorization of the kinds of
devices we're talking about.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: Mr.
President, through you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Does the
sponsor continue to yield?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: Does it
only refer to these two or these three items
and no other kind of device?
SENATOR PADAVAN: It refers -
this bill before us refers only to the
definition of devices as defined in this bill.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: On the
bill, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Malcolm Smith, on the bill.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: I also
believe that the bill itself, while its
intentions are good for specific
neighborhoods, such as myself, we do not -- I
2718
would not have a problem if the bill was a
little stronger. In that there are other
devices that are not mechanical in nature but
that also provide and proliferate illegal
gambling, such as dice, such as 3-card monte.
And while that might not be a major
concern of the Senator from the standpoint of
the actual proprietary stores that I think
he's concerned about, I would hope that at
some point down the future the bill also could
be a little tougher. While it does have some
toughness on crime, there are in some areas -
in particular, in my district -- that that
type of activity goes on and we do need some
help in terms of getting that stuff off the
street.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Montgomery.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Mr.
President, will the sponsor yield for -
SENATOR PADAVAN: Of course. Of
course.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
2719
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes. I'm
just -- in line with Senator Smith's question,
I just want to make sure that we're not
talking about the people who have their
little -- their little dice game going -
SENATOR PADAVAN: Little dice
game? How would you know about that, Senator?
(Laughter.)
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And the
dominos. You know, there's a lot of people
who play a little dominos in -
SENATOR PADAVAN: Oh, dominos.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: -- and
little tabletop games that they may -- they
may, you know -
SENATOR PADAVAN: No, no, we're
not interfering with those folks at all.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: They're not
big-time gamblers, they're just people in the
park.
SENATOR PADAVAN: No, we're not
interested in those kinds of people -
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: No, we're
not talking about those people.
SENATOR PADAVAN: -- or those
2720
activities at all, Senator.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Okay. I
just -- Mr. President, I'm supporting this
legislation based on the fact that Senator
Padavan is on the record that he is not
meaning to come into my district and sweep up
the little-domino-game people, et cetera, and
haul them off to upstate, to Senator Volker's
district.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Thank
you, Senator Montgomery.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 5. This
act shall take effect on the first day of
November.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
543, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 3993, an
2721
act to amend the Penal Law, in relation to
gambling.
SENATOR CONNOR: Read the last
section.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 8. This
act shall take effect on the first day of
November.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
556, by Senator Morahan, Senate Print 6938A,
an act to amend the Real Property Tax Law, in
relation to making Gold Star Parents eligible.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
2722
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
640, by Senator Kuhl, Senate Print 6740, an
act to amend the Highway Law, in relation to
designating.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
675, by Senator Seward, Senate Print 6820A, an
act making certain findings and determinations
with respect to certain bond anticipation
notes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: There is
a home rule message at the desk.
2723
SENATOR CONNOR: Read the last
section.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 5. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
698, by Senator Skelos, Senate Print 5821A, an
act authorizing the assessor of the County of
Nassau.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59. Nays,
1. Senator Dollinger recorded in the
2724
negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
699, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 6356, an
act to amend the Local Finance Law, in
relation to the sale of municipal obligations.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: 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 MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
700, by Senator Hannon, Senate Print 6546, an
act authorizing the assessor of -
SENATOR DUANE: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
2725
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Lay it aside
for the day.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside for the day.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
702, by Senator Balboni, Senate Print 6850, an
act in relation to authorizing.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58. Nays,
1. Senator Dollinger recorded in the
negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
707, by Senator Trunzo, Senate Print 6869, an
act to authorize Glory Zone Ministries.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
2726
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58. Nays,
1. Senator Dollinger recorded in the
negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
Senator Marcellino, that completes
the reading of the controversial calendar.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you,
Mr. President.
Is there any housekeeping at the
desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Yes,
there is.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Take care of
it, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
McGee.
SENATOR McGEE: Thank you, Mr.
President.
On behalf of Senator Bonacic,
please place a sponsor star on Calendar Number
2727
686.
On behalf of Senator Fuschillo,
please place a sponsor star on Calendar Number
503.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: So
ordered, with regard to both bills.
Senator Alesi.
SENATOR ALESI: Mr. President, on
page 30 I offer the following amendments to
Calendar Number 636, Senate Print 4117A, and
ask that said bill retain its place on the
Third Reading Calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received, and the bill will
retain its place on the Third Reading
Calendar.
The desk is clean, Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you,
Mr. President.
There being no further business to
come before the Senate, I move we adjourn
until Tuesday, May 2nd, at 3:00 p.m. sharp.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: On
2728
motion, the Senate stands adjourned until
Tuesday, May 2nd, at 3:00 p.m.
(Whereupon, at 5:00 p.m., the
Senate adjourned.)