Regular Session - June 10, 2002
4229
NEW YORK STATE SENATE
THE STENOGRAPHIC RECORD
ALBANY, NEW YORK
June 10, 2002
3:07 p.m.
REGULAR SESSION
SENATOR RAYMOND A. MEIER, Acting President
STEVEN M. BOGGESS, Secretary
4230
P R O C E E D I N G S
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Senate will come to order.
I ask everyone present to please
rise and join me in reciting the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
(Whereupon, the assemblage recited
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
invocation today will be given by Mathews
Barnabas, Metropolitan of the American Diocese
of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church.
METROPOLITAN BARNABAS: Let us
pray.
Almighty and most merciful Lord
from whom all thoughts of peace and truth
proceed, kindle, we pray Thee, in the hearts
of all peoples of the world the true love of
peace.
Guide with Thy wisdom those who pay
counsel to all nations of the earth, that they
may learn to live as Your children in peace
and harmony. Drive away from them all evil,
hatred, and cruelty, that they may accommodate
and accept one another, with charity to all
4231
and malice to none.
And now, Lord, we commend to Thee
all who are engaged in the government of
New York State, the executive, the
legislative, and the judiciary. Grant to them
pure hearts, clean hands, and sober minds, and
unfailing devotion to duty.
O, Lord, use them as instruments of
Thy will for the uplift of the poor, the
relief of the oppressed, and the eradication
of all social evils.
And finally, Lord, we beseech Thee
to give them Thy grace to think, to speak, and
to do everything for Your glory and the good
of Thy people whom they represent.
We ask all this for Your glory,
amen. God bless America.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Reading
of the Journal.
THE SECRETARY: In Senate,
Sunday, June 9, the Senate met pursuant to
adjournment. The Journal of Saturday, June 8,
was read and approved. On motion, Senate
adjourned.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Without
4232
objection, the Journal stands approved as
read.
Presentation of petitions.
Messages from the Assembly.
Messages from the Governor.
Reports of standing committees.
Reports of select committees.
Communications and reports from
state officers.
Motions and resolutions.
Senator McGee.
SENATOR McGEE: Thank you, Mr.
President. I wish to call up, on behalf of
Senator Leibell, Print Number 7441, recalled
from the Assembly, which is now at the desk.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1279, by Senator Leibell, Senate Print 7441,
an act to amend the Retirement and Social
Security Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
McGee.
SENATOR McGEE: Mr. President, I
now move to reconsider the vote by which this
4233
bill was passed.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll on reconsideration.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 41.
SENATOR McGEE: Mr. President, I
now offer the following amendments.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received and adopted.
Senator McGee.
SENATOR McGEE: Mr. President, on
behalf of Senator Volker, I wish to call up
his bill, Print Number 6663A, recalled from
the Assembly, which is now at the desk.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1045, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 6663A,
an act to amend the Highway Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
McGee.
SENATOR McGEE: Mr. President, I
now move to reconsider the vote by which this
bill was passed.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
4234
roll on reconsideration.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 41.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
McGee.
SENATOR McGEE: Mr. President, I
now offer the following amendments.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received and adopted.
SENATOR McGEE: Thank you, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Thank
you, Senator McGee.
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you,
Mr. President.
Amendments are offered to the
following Third Reading Calendar bills:
Senator Leibell, page 8, Calendar
Number 149, Senate Print Number 5082A;
For Senator Padavan, page number
12, Calendar Number 291, Senate Print Number
4748;
For Senator Larkin, on page number
29, Calendar Number 680, Senate Print Number
4235
4137A;
For Senator Morahan, on page number
38, Calendar Number 840, Senate Print Number
6182C;
For Senator Marcellino, on page 40,
Calendar Number 901, Senate Print Number 6947;
For Senator Seward, on page 44,
Calendar Number 941, Senate Print Number
5524A;
For Senator Hoffmann, page number
44, Calendar Number 949, Senate Print Number
6913;
For Senator Lack, page number 46,
Calendar Number 989, Senate Print Number
5669A;
For Senator Skelos, on page 49,
Calendar Number 1029, Senate Print Number
7153A;
For Senator Seward, page number 55,
Calendar Number 1123, Senate Print Number
2400A;
For Senator Leibell, page number
56, Calendar Number 1126, Senate Print Number
3252;
For Senator DeFrancisco, page
4236
number 62, Calendar Number 1257, Senate Print
Number 7414A;
For Senator Lack, page number 59,
Calendar Number 1170, Senate Print Number
4090.
And, Mr. President, I now move that
these bills retain their place on the Third
Reading Calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received and adopted, and the
bills will retain their place on the Third
Reading Calendar.
Senator Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Thank you,
Mr. President.
On behalf of Senator Velella, on
page number 16 I offer the following
amendments to Calendar Number 371, Senate
Print Number 3663, and ask that said bill
retain its place on Third Reading Calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received and adopted, and the
bill will retain its place on the Third
Reading Calendar.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Mr.
4237
President, on behalf of Senator Volker, I move
for the following bill be discharged from its
respective committee and be recommitted with
instructions to strike the enacting clause:
Senate Print Number 3432.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: So
ordered.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Mr.
President, on behalf of Senator Wright, I wish
to call up Senate Print Number 6136, recalled
from the Assembly, which is now at the desk.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
570, by Senator Wright, Senate Print 6136, an
act in relation to fire protection.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Mr.
President, I now move to reconsider the vote
by which the bill was passed.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll on reconsideration.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 47.
4238
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Mr.
President, I now offer the following
amendments.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received and adopted.
Senator Stachowski.
SENATOR STACHOWSKI: Mr.
President, on behalf of Senator Brown, I wish
to call up his bill, Print 5780, recalled from
the Assembly, which is now at the desk.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1289, by Senator Brown, Senate Print 5780, an
act to amend the Highway Law.
SENATOR STACHOWSKI: Mr.
President, I now move to reconsider the vote
by which this bill was passed.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll on reconsideration.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 49.
SENATOR STACHOWSKI: Mr.
4239
President, I now offer the following
amendments.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received and adopted.
SENATOR STACHOWSKI: Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: If we could go
to the noncontroversial reading of the
calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read the noncontroversial
calendar.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
16, by Senator Seward, Senate Print 4641C, an
act to amend the Insurance Law, in relation to
accounting of certain assets.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 12. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 50.
4240
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
224, by Senator Larkin, Senate Print 2656B, an
act to amend the General Municipal Law, in
relation to the operation of games of chance.
SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
307, by Senator Wright, Senate Print 807, an
act to amend the Real Property Tax Law, in
relation to the taxation of certain state
lands.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
330, by Senator Trunzo, Senate Print 5027A, an
act to amend the Public Authorities Law, in
4241
relation to extending the limitation.
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, 50.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
537, by Senator Morahan, Senate Print 1116A,
an act to amend the Agriculture and Markets
Law, in relation to exempting therapy dogs
from licensing fees.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect on the first day of
January.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 50.
4242
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
586, by Senator Saland, Senate Print 6748A, an
act creating the Hudson Area Public Library.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 8. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 50.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
607, by Senator Volker -
SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
627, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 8735, an act to amend
the Economic Development Law, in relation to
4243
the provision of entrepreneurial assistance.
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, 50.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
665, by Senator Maziarz, Senate Print 6877A,
an act to amend Chapter 433 of the Laws of
1997 amending the Public Health Law.
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.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Duane, why do you rise?
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Mr.
4244
President. To explain my vote.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Duane, to explain his vote.
SENATOR DUANE: I just -- you
know, I always have a problem when we renew a
law so that we can extend the demonstration
program. We keep extending demonstration
programs around here, but we never really find
out what those programs have actually
demonstrated.
So I'm hoping that this will be the
last time we have to extend this and once and
for all do what the law previously had called
for, and that's to get a report on what the
demonstration had shown for portable x-rays
for people who are entitled to Medicaid.
So, you know, I've been here for -
this is the -- coming down on the end of my
fourth year. And, you know, rarely if ever
have I ever seen a demonstration law actually
end up with results. We only ever continue to
extend the demonstrations. So I wish we could
get our acts together and just make sure that
the -- whatever agency is supposed to give us
a report gives us the report.
4245
But I'll be voting yes on this one,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Duane will be recorded in the affirmative.
Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 52.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
748, by Senator Kuhl, Senate Print 4154A, an
act to amend the Education Law, in relation to
the provision of school health services.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 18. This
act shall take effect on the first day of
September.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 52.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
766, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
4246
Assembly Print Number 11254, an act to amend
the Environmental Conservation Law, in
relation to marine resources management.
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, 51. Nays,
1. Senator Duane recorded in the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
832, by Senator Libous, Senate Print 7284, an
act to amend the County Law, in relation to
the assigned counsel representation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
this is Calendar Number 832, isn't it?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Yes, it
4247
is, Senator.
SENATOR PATERSON: Would you lay
that aside, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
953, by Senator DeFrancisco, Senate Print
6498, an act to amend the Real Property Tax
Law, in relation to establishing a permanent
exemption.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Lay it
aside, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1028, by Senator Meier, Senate Print 7152, an
act to amend the General Municipal Law, in
relation to allowing certain shared
purchasing.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
4248
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 52.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1046, by Senator Trunzo, Senate Print 6813, an
act to amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law, in
relation to violations of vehicle weight.
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, 52.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1054, by Senator Padavan, Senate Print 2712,
an act to amend the State Administrative
Procedure Act, in relation to denial,
suspension and revocation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
4249
THE SECRETARY: Section 2 -
SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1059, by Senator Wright, Senate Print 6937, an
act to amend the Executive Law, in relation to
the research development program.
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, 53.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1099, by Senator Marchi, Senate Print 3833, an
act to amend the Navigation Law, in relation
to speed at Crooke's Point in Great Kills
Harbor.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
4250
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 53.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1100, by Senator DeFrancisco, Senate Print
4240A, an act to amend the Navigation Law, in
relation to vessel equipment.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 4. This
act shall take effect on the first day of
April.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 53.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1171, by Senator Alesi, Senate Print 3391A, an
4251
act to amend the Banking Law, in relation to
restricting the parties.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect on the 90th day.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 53.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1251, by Senator Meier, Senate Print 7135B, an
act to amend the Social Services Law, in
relation to application for the food stamp
program.
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, 53.
4252
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1298, by Senator Saland, Senate Print 7419, an
act to amend the Criminal Procedure Law, the
Family Court Act, the Penal Law and the Public
Health Law, in relation to testing.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 8. This
act shall take effect immediately.
SENATOR DUANE: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
Senator Skelos, that completes the
noncontroversial reading of the calendar.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
if we could go to the controversial reading of
the calendar at this time.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read the controversial
calendar.
THE SECRETARY: On page 10,
Calendar Number 224, by Senator Larkin, Senate
4253
Print 2656B, an act to amend the General
Municipal Law, in relation to the operation of
games of chance.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Larkin, Senator Dollinger has requested an
explanation of Calendar 224.
SENATOR LARKIN: Richard, this is
a bill we've had before in this house. And
we've worked out the differences between the
Governor's office, the Assembly, and ourself.
This bill permits games of chance
to be conducted by licensed, non-for-profit
organizations, such as our volunteer fire and
ambulance, no more than three times a year at
a private catering or restaurant.
The basis for this was in
discussion with the volunteer firemen and
ambulance units across the state. One of the
biggest problems in our rural areas, as you
know, is they do not hold title to a facility
large enough so that they can meet their
obligations, pay off their debts, and meet the
requirements of OSHA and everybody else.
4254
The numbers that we're using were
those that were negotiated on a three-way
negotiation.
At one time this year there was an
objection by the City of New York. They have
withdrawn that because in there we have
eliminated New York City at the request of the
city. So this only pertains to those units
outside of New York City.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Will the
sponsor yield to a question, Mr. President?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Larkin, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR LARKIN: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: My concern
with this bill, Senator Larkin, is that what
we will do is establish, in essence,
not-for-profit gambling centers, that there
will be halls that will engage in
not-for-profit gaming every night of the week
4255
or every weekend of the year around the clock.
Is there anything in this bill that
prevents that from happening?
SENATOR LARKIN: Yes, Richard.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: And could you
point me to that language?
SENATOR LARKIN: Well, first of
all, in the language there they cannot have
more than 12 in a given year, that respective
catering house or restaurant.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue
to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Larkin, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR LARKIN: Yes, Richard.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: And I hate to
be picayune, but could you just tell me where
that language is in the bill so I can
reference that?
SENATOR LARKIN: Section 7, line
50.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
4256
Mr. President, what line number was that
again?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Line 50.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Section 7,
line 50.
SENATOR LARKIN: Section 7,
Richard. Richard (indicating).
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just on the
bill briefly, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger, on the bill.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: I appreciate
the sponsor extending me not only the courtesy
of an answer, but extending the courtesy of
pointing out the line. I haven't had that
happen before, but I appreciate it.
Mr. President, I'm going to still
vote against this bill. I think that the
effect of an increased concentration of gaming
activities even under the banner of
not-for-profit activities is not a good idea.
I continue to think that as we create a
greater and greater chance that there will be
more halls that become identified as places
where gaming, even for not-for-profit
4257
purposes, can occur, I think that
concentration is unwarranted.
It seems to me that we continue to
move down this path toward encouraging people
to raise money not just for not-for-profits,
but Lord knows we've now encouraged people to
raise money for the State of New York -
supposedly, someday billions of dollars
through gaming.
I continue to think this is a bad
idea. I think encouraging it, increasing it,
feeding the beast of gaming in this state is
not the right thing to do. This may be a
somewhat benign step down that road, but it's
not even an itsy-bitsy, teeny-weeny step that
I want to take, Mr. President. I'll vote no.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Does any
other Senator wish to be heard on the bill?
Debate is closed.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 10. This
act shall take effect on the 180th day.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
4258
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 224 are
Senators Dollinger, Duane, L. Krueger, and
Padavan. Ayes, 51. Nays, 4.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
307, by Senator Wright, Senate Print 807, an
act to amend the Real Property Tax Law, in
relation to the taxation of certain state
lands.
SENATOR PATERSON: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Wright, Senator Paterson has requested an
explanation of Calendar 307.
SENATOR WRIGHT: Thank you, Mr.
President.
The bill provides for an amendment
to the Real Property Tax Law that would
require for the payment of taxations to the
Town of Parish in the County of Oswego on
state-owned conservation land.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
4259
Mr. President, if the sponsor will yield to a
question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Wright, do you yield to a question from
Senator Dollinger?
SENATOR WRIGHT: I do, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: I know we
debated this bill partly last year, Senator
Wright. And maybe you could just refresh my
recollection. Approximately -
SENATOR WRIGHT: Would you like
me to read the debate verbatim to refresh your
memory?
(Laughter.)
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Through you,
Mr. President, I haven't refreshed my
recollection with the debate from last year.
But the question I have is about
the Town of Parish. What percentage of the
real property tax base is actually covered by
the reforestation tax exemption?
SENATOR WRIGHT: Ten percent.
4260
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Ten percent.
Just briefly on the bill, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger, on the bill.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Senator
Wright and I, I think perhaps with Senator
Paterson, debated this bill at some length
last year.
The concern I have about this bill,
the reason why I voted against it and I'm
going to continue to vote against it this
year, is that I think we're dealing in a
hodgepodge, happenstance manner with the issue
of what happens when there are significant
properties located in communities that are
tax-exempt.
Senator Wright's point is perhaps
well-taken with respect to the Town of Parish.
But as the President knows, and I'm sure
everybody else knows, in our major cities like
the city of Rochester there are enormous
tax-exempt properties. A major portion, a
growing portion of the properties in these
communities are consumed by educational
4261
institutions, philanthropic institutions, and
health care institutions, none of which pay
real property taxes, putting a further drain
on municipal resources.
It seems to me that the way to do
this is to adopt a policy that would be
applicable statewide that would say when the
percentage of real property tax exemption
becomes -- say the Town of Parish, if it
exceeds 10 percent, if the not-for-profit and
tax-exempt property exceeds 10 percent of the
tax base, then there is an adjustment made or
additional payments or something done to
shield the municipality from the extra cost.
I know in the community I
represent, I believe in the city of Rochester
the number is about 35 percent of the real
property tax base is exempt from taxation
because it meets tax-exempt status. It seems
to me that that's something we should do
across the board rather than just doing it for
the Town of Parish.
I voted against it before. I do
because I think it's unfair to do it
piecemeal. I would strongly support a bill
4262
that would adjust, for communities across the
state when they reach a certain percentage,
let's give them some additional form of
relief.
That might be something
conveniently to include in a bill that would
deal with the partial property tax exemptions,
so that we could end the troubling the Senate
for the 20 bills that we've done this year
that involve partial property tax exemptions,
all of which stem from Nassau County.
Mr. President, let's do a real
property cleanup tax bill. We could do the
partial tax bill, the partial property
exemption, and we could also do an emergency
aid or a special funding when certain
communities exceed a fixed percentage of their
real property tax base. Until we do that
complete cleanup bill, I'll continue to vote
no.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Does any
other Senator wish to be heard on the bill?
The debate is closed, then.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
4263
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 307 are
Senators Connor, Dollinger, Gentile, Hevesi,
Paterson, A. Smith, and Stavisky. Ayes, 49.
Nays, 7.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
607, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 2305A, an
act to amend Penal Law, in relation to
assaults against transit employees.
SENATOR HEVESI: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Volker, Senator Hevesi has requested an
explanation of Calendar 607.
SENATOR VOLKER: Mr. President, I
regret, Senator Hevesi, that you won't be here
next year. But I -- anticipating that, I have
tried to make sure that this bill passes this
year.
So that I have reached over to the
4264
Assembly and had some discussions with them.
And this bill, if you'll notice, has been
amended. And actually I have a different
sponsor than I had last year. Roger Green is
the sponsor. I've had discussions with the
Assembly.
And not only does this bill now
amend the law to raise the penalty for
assaults against bus operators, bus
dispatchers, and so forth -- in other words,
transit employees -- and provide that it's a
second degree assault, which means it's a
Class D felony, but it also provides, as
requested by the Assembly, that signs be
posted in conspicuous places on the public
transportation vehicles and so forth, and sets
up the lettering to point out that an attack
on any transit employee is a serious offense,
a felony, and would subject a person to the
possibility of seven years in jail.
And the concept that the Assembly
asked for, they believe that this would help
maybe to protect some of the people who are on
the transit facilities and so forth.
So that's the difference in this
4265
bill from last year, which I remind you passed
55 to 2 last year.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hevesi.
SENATOR HEVESI: On the bill, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hevesi, on the bill.
SENATOR HEVESI: Just briefly. I
don't want to rehash the debate we had last
year.
I'm surprised to hear that -- and
I'll just infer from what Senator Volker said
that it's possible that the Assembly failed to
pass this bill two years in a row because
there was not a provision regarding the
posting of the potential penalty.
I thought that the Assembly shared
my concerns with the problem with this bill,
which evidently they don't, and which remain
primarily that we are taking a Class A
misdemeanor and increasing it to a D felony,
not an E felony, and affording individuals
protections that I don't know why it's
justified. It's certainly justified for
4266
police officers and peace officers and what
have you, but not for all categories of
transit workers.
And just again, briefly, I gave the
example of this last time when we debated it.
If this bill passed into law the following
scenario could happen. I'm assaulted and am
injured badly. My assailant can face only,
under current law, a maximum of up to a year
in jail. But if a sweeper on the subway in
New York City is assaulted, his assailant can
get up to seven years in jail. I don't
understand it.
What we should do -- and I think
Senator Volker agreed to it, but there are
other problems from doing this -- is to raise
second-degree assault to a Class E felony for
everybody, and that way you don't have the
disparity where you're now providing
additional penalties -- not for emergency
service workers, who I think we all agree need
the additional penalties -- but you're not
taking transit workers, who I don't believe
are any more likely to be assaulted.
And I know that the unions want it,
4267
and I know nobody wants to go against the
unions because there could be retribution
there. But I see no reason why because
individuals who work for the transit authority
or are in transit-related positions who are in
contact with the public quite a bit are more
likely to be assaulted as a consequence of
their job.
And just as a matter of equity, I
think this is a bad idea. So I'm going to
continue to vote no. No disrespect, Mr.
President, intended to the hardworking men and
women who work on buses and what have you.
And I know that they are assaulted sometimes.
So are people who are not transit workers and
who are not emergency service workers.
And for those who are emergency
service workers, we have the protection. For
other individuals, I agree an A misdemeanor is
insufficient. But the way to remedy that is
not to take one class of people and give them
much greater protection than anybody else even
when they don't really deserve it. It's to
give everybody else a greater protection by
providing an E felony for a second-degree
4268
assault.
I'll be voting no.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Mr. Chairman,
if the sponsor would yield to one question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Volker, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR VOLKER: Certainly.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Mr. Chairman,
my question is this. Are there restrictions
to the time and place -- or not the time, but
the place of the assault?
In other words, let's say a transit
worker were not doing the performance of his
or her job and were assaulted. Would this
apply?
SENATOR VOLKER: Senator, I think
the answer to that is it's a question of fact.
But I think you're right, that this
would have to be in the importance, obviously,
of their duties. Because the reason for the
protection is -- and I guess I would only
4269
disagree with what Senator Hevesi said, is
that there is a lot of studies that have been
done on transit employee assaults, which are
extremely high, particularly in New York City
and in Buffalo.
But the answer is that they would
have to be related to what they're doing.
Because quite clearly, if you're going to
designate a group, the fact that they were
assaulted, for instance, in their own home
would have no relation to the transit
authorities.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Thank you.
Mr. President, on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Stavisky, on the bill.
SENATOR STAVISKY: I recall
reading in the newspaper about, oh, maybe a
month ago, or within the past month, that two
transit employees, two women transit employees
in the city of New York were indeed assaulted.
This is a very serious problem.
It's hard enough to drive a city bus, for
example. And they certainly should be
afforded all of the protection that the law
4270
provides. And I certainly will be supporting
Senator Volker's bill.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Any
other Senator wish to be heard on the bill?
Debate is closed.
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, 55. Nays,
1. Senator Hevesi recorded in the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
832, by Senator Libous, Senate Print 7284, an
act to amend the County Law, in relation to
the assigned counsel representation.
SENATOR PATERSON: Explanation.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Lay it aside
for the day, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
4271
bill aside for the day.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
953, by Senator DeFrancisco, Senate Print
6498, an act to amend the Real Property Tax
Law, in relation to establishing a permanent
exemption.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER:
Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
DeFrancisco, Senator Liz Krueger has requested
an explanation.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Presently
there's a provision of the law that allows for
individuals to increase the value of their
property by making improvements while not
being taxed for the cost of those
improvements. The problem with that bill is
that the tax exemption for the improvements, I
believe it's up to $80,000, phases out after
seven years.
In discussions with housing groups
in Syracuse, Assemblywoman Christensen and
myself prepared this bill that would allow for
4272
a lesser exemption for improvements up to
$40,000, rather than $80,000, but allow the
property to be exempt during the entire
ownership of the property for that
improvement, up to $40,000.
And the purpose is obviously to
improve the housing stock in our area and in
urban areas.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
If the sponsor will yield to a question.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
How is this publicized, Senator
DeFrancisco? How do people know about this
option in different communities?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The same
way they know about any other law. They
either read about it being passed, they are
told by their representatives in mailings or
4273
in brochures, or they learn from housing
groups that this particular option is
available.
But on the other hand, it doesn't
become available unless it's passed.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Okay, thank
you.
If the sponsor would continue to
yield, Mr. President, through you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
DeFrancisco, do you yield?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
Since you mention there's an
existing law that allows for $80,000 up to
seven years, is this an alternative to -
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: -- or a
replacement for?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No, this
would be an alternative.
It's a smaller exemption, but a lot
of low-income individuals who are trying to
4274
cling on to their home and make improvements
most likely will keep their home for a much
longer period of time. It's not to flip the
piece of property over.
And the concept here is for
individuals that own a home that's -- and
they're low-income individuals, they don't
have to have a big tax kick-up for that, up to
$40,000 as long as they hold that home.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Mr.
President, if the sponsor would continue to
yield to an additional question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
DeFrancisco, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Senator.
I was fascinated by this bill, and
I was not familiar with this model. So now
they would have an alternative, they could
choose whichever locality.
Could a locality say yes to me and
no to you under the same circumstances once
4275
the locality had taken this option?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Well,
first, the locality has to say yes to the
option in the first place.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Right.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: And I would
think that if they -- well, I know that if
they accept the option and pass it with a
local ordinance, unless they want to get sued,
they have to make it applicable to all people
that are covered by the bill.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
If the sponsor would continue to
yield, through you, Mr. President.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
Senator DeFrancisco, why does it
apply only to single-family homes as opposed
to any residence in a community?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Well, you
know, you can modify a bill any way you
choose. But what we're mostly concerned about
is owner-occupied properties, rather than
4276
multiple residence. Multiple residence, at
least in our area, even two-family homes, are
mostly owned by absentee landlords or
landlords that are not living in the property.
And as a result, we're trying to
get this benefit not so somebody can make
money but, on the other hand, for people who
are residing in their home to improve it and
improve the quality of housing in the city.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: I'm sorry.
Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue
to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Does the
sponsor yield?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: He
yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
There seems to be -- in Section 6
of the bill, it allowed for the sponsor to, it
seemed, pass along the right for the spouse to
stay in the home while they went off to a
separate residence. Is it your understanding
that I could conceivably have two homes under
this tax deduction scenario?
4277
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Let me read
the section. One second.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Just a
second, Senator DeFrancisco.
Can we have some quiet, please.
Senator DeFrancisco has the floor.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Well, once
again, the exemption is for people so that
they -- individuals who decide to hold their
home. I mean, to keep the home. And it
ceases once the home is sold.
But that's -- this provision is to
accommodate for if one of the two, a husband
and wife, one of them has to go to a nursing
home or one of them cannot reside there any
longer. Say the woman had the exemption, she
owned the property. She goes into a nursing
home. It allows for the woman to transfer to
her husband the property and still maintain
this exemption.
So the rule is basically that once
you sell it, the exemption is over, the new
person has to pay at the higher value. But to
accommodate a husband-and-wife situation where
one is no longer able to live in the
4278
residence, that provision was put in.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Mr.
President, if the sponsor would yield to one
final question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
DeFrancisco, do you yield?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: He
yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Senator.
Why does the bill apply only to
localities of below a million people?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Well, the
existing law that I talked about before about
an exemption over a period of seven years, up
to $80,000, that also applied to locations
other than a million people.
There's a whole series of other
benefits that are particular to New York City
that are in the law. But I just modeled this
bill over the -- after the last one.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
Mr. President, if I could just
speak on the bill.
4279
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Krueger, on the bill.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Excuse me;
I just thought of this. $40,000 probably
wouldn't buy much in New York City.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: That's
true, it doesn't.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Just
kidding.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: No, no, I
think it's accurate. You're right, it
doesn't.
I was fascinated by the bill, and I
think that while on the one hand there are
some concerns of localities of giving up their
property tax money depending on how widely
this option might be chosen by people, Senator
DeFrancisco did clarify for me another concern
that I had that it would be used with
selection by a locality; that if they liked
Candidate One who applied for it, they could
give it to them as a tax deduction, and if
they didn't like Candidate Two, they could
refuse that. So I appreciate the
clarification.
4280
I think, overall, giving localities
the option to make their own decisions about
how they use their flexibility over property
tax to encourage expansion and redevelopment
and I guess improvement in their housing stock
is a good model. And I will vote for this
bill.
I wish that we would imagine
expanding this to include other than
single-family owners. Because in fact, as the
housing market continues to tighten for people
throughout the state of New York, not only in
my own city -- certainly in Long Island we
hear frequently about the problems of
overcrowding and inadequate housing
arrangements -- that we would allow the same
options for localities, whether it be in
property tax reductions or in zoning
ordinances and changes, to address the issue
of multifamily housing models as well as
single-family houses.
I think that my one concern with
this bill is that it continues a pattern of
inequity in the state of New York between how
we treat single-family houses and how we treat
4281
multifamily dwellings. I understood the
Senator's point that we don't want this to be
an option for people who are, say, absentee
landlords or simply people who are in the real
estate business.
But, in fact, in multifamily
dwellings you often have someone who's an
owner trying to assure that they can both get
a return on their property investment in order
to continue to afford their own housing and
also be able to assure additional housing in
their community.
So I wish that I could recommend
that in the next incarnation of this bill that
it's amended to include multifamily housing as
well.
And I would argue also that I think
that we should make this statewide, since it
is local option. And there's probably good
arguments why the City of New York might not
be interested in going down this road. I
don't see why the State of New York should
pass a bill that would limit the City of
New York's option to do this.
So with the recommendations that
4282
sometime we might explore expanding to
multifamily as well as single-family, and
including the City of New York, I will vote
for this bill, and I thank you for the
clarification, Senator.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Any
other Senator wish to be heard on the bill?
Debate is closed.
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.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Duane, to explain his vote.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Mr.
President.
I'm going to vote in favor of this
bill. But I do also want to make the point of
how important it would be for the City of New
York for us to be able to extend a tax credit
for people who are fixing up their landmark
buildings. That would do a great deal to help
4283
beautify our neighborhoods in a time like
this. Particularly when New York City needs
more visitors, our historic districts are
perhaps our greatest attraction.
So I'm hoping that before the end
of this session we will see that legislation
come to the floor.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Duane will be recorded in the affirmative.
Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
Senator Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Mr. President. I would request unanimous
consent to be recorded in the negative on
Calendar 224, Senate 2656B.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Without
objection, Senator Schneiderman will be
recorded in the negative on Calendar 224.
The Secretary will continue to
read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
4284
1054, by Senator Padavan, Senate Print 2712,
an act to amend the State Administrative
Procedure Act, in relation to denial,
suspension and revocation of a license.
SENATOR PATERSON: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Padavan, Senator Paterson has requested an
explanation of Calendar 1054.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Thank you,
Senator Paterson.
The employing of individuals by
licensed entities in the State of New York who
are not authorized to work in this country is
and can be a serious problem.
I believe, and I'm sure you agree,
that a license issued by our state to any
entity, of which there are many, is a serious
issue. And a person who applies for that
license should be in compliance with all
federal and state laws. To issue a license to
someone who is not I think is patently wrong.
This bill prevents the issuance of
a license to someone, some entity that has
violated federal law, specifically the Federal
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, on
4285
two or more separate occasions. At that
point, an administrative procedure would take
place and that state agency which issues the
license has the opportunity of suspending or
revoking the license.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
if Senator Padavan would yield for a couple of
questions.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Padavan, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR PADAVAN: A couple?
That's two. And I'd be delighted.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor is delighted and yields.
SENATOR PATERSON: Well, Mr.
President, I chose the number two because I
was wondering why Senator Paterson chose two
violations, being that -- the volume of
individuals that come through the system.
And often in these situations
people come to our country, they want very
much to work. Sometimes the people who are
using the documents are not the actual people.
4286
In other words, they're using aliases. Other
times, the documents themselves are sometimes
fraudulent.
Isn't it a rather severe
encumbrance on the employer to weed through -
I think most of the time most employers can do
it. But this is a tremendous number of
applications that they look at and people that
come through there. And this is a rampant
problem. You've identified a problem,
Senator.
I'm just asking you if two
violations should be the threshold. And if
not a specific number, perhaps a pattern and a
practice of conduct.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Keep in mind,
Senator, the federal statute that we're
referring to has no such threshold. Either
you violate it or you don't. And the hiring
of illegal aliens and the continuation of
employment of illegal aliens is in violation
of federal law.
We are being somewhat pliable, in a
sense, by allowing an employer at least that
first mistake. And should it occur again,
4287
then we feel the license should be put in
jeopardy.
Also keep in mind, we don't mandate
that the license be revoked. We provide an
opportunity for the state agency to consider
that possibility.
First question. Second one coming.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
I think that I'm going to grant Senator
Padavan a reprieve. One question ought to do
it. And I'll speak on the bill. Anxious as
he may be, though, to answer another question.
I was not aware that the federal
standard doesn't even require for there to be
two violations. I think the reason I raised
this objection is just that I hope that there
won't be a chilling effect on the part of
employers where people are really denied the
opportunity to work because of the fear that
the employer would have about running a
violation of the Federal Immigration Act.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Any
other Senator wish to be heard on the bill?
Debate is closed, then.
Read the last section.
4288
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: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1054 are
Senators Duane, Mendez, Paterson, and
Schneiderman. Ayes, 52. Nays, 4.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
Senator Smith.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: Yes, Mr.
President. I request unanimous consent to be
recorded in the negative on Calendar Number
224, Senate Print 2656B.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Without
objection, Senator Malcolm Smith will be
recorded in the negative on Calendar Number
224.
The Secretary will continue to
read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1298, by Senator Saland, Senate Print 7419, an
4289
act to amend the Criminal Procedure Law, the
Family Court Act, the Penal Law and the Public
Health Law.
SENATOR DUANE: Explanation,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Saland, Senator Duane has requested an
explanation of Calendar 1298.
SENATOR SALAND: Thank you, Mr.
President.
Mr. President, some of us may
recall in 1995, as part of the then budget
agreement, we provided that, postconviction,
the victim of an assault or sexual assault,
more properly, would have the ability to make
application for and in turn require his or her
assailant to be HIV-tested.
This chamber, both prior to that
date and since that date, has proposed and
passed legislation in this house to expand
that right of a victim to include
preconviction testing and to expand it to all
sexually transmissible diseases, or certainly
a number of enumerated sexually transmitted
diseases.
4290
What this bill would do would be to
say that a victim of a sexual assault would
effectively be empowered, by way of his or her
choice, to request, by way of application of a
court, to have his or her assailant tested for
a sexually transmissible disease where in fact
there had been an indictment or some
accusatory instrument, that indictment or
accusatory instrument effectively providing
the threshold of reasonable cause to permit
the state to have an interest in a
preconviction testing.
What this bill would do would be to
expand the number of crimes for which such
testing could occur. The bill would require
state funding for the testing.
The bill would require that, as
part and parcel of any application that might
be made by a victim, that that application
provide that the applicant had been advised
of -- and here I'm reading from the bill at
page 4 -- "the limitations on the information
to be obtained through a blood test on the
proposed subject: current scientific
assessments of the risk of transmission of a
4291
disease from the exposure he or she may have
experienced; the need for the applicant to
undergo testing to definitely determine his or
her status with regard to any disease; and the
availability of prompt, readily accessible and
scientifically recognized laboratory testing
of the applicant, including, where
appropriate, polymerase chain reaction (PCR),
or other advanced testing technologies for the
diagnosis of transmissible disease at state
expense."
What originally brought me to this
subject a number of years ago was reported
instances in which defendants refused to
permit themselves to be tested; in fact, using
a refusal to be tested as a means to try and
derive a better plea bargain.
Some of you may recall as recently
as -- I believe it was April 30th of this
year, an editorial by the Daily News entitled
"Raped Again, By the Law." And that
particular editorial goes on at some length to
describe a situation involving a woman in the
city of New York who had been the victim of a
sexual assault who in fact has undergone a
4292
number of tests and who, and I'm quoting here,
at a press conference with the New York State
Federation of Taxi Drivers stated: "As a
precaution, I have to take four different
medicines to help protect against HIV,
chlamydia, herpes, and other sexually
transmissible diseases. And I was told that
unless this guy volunteers for the test, I had
to wait until he was convicted."
"Stating the obvious" -- and here
I'm quoting from the editorial -- "obvious to
all but the criminal justice system in Albany,
she added, 'If you are assaulted, you should
have the right to know whether or not this
person has infected you with anything.'"
We have worked to provide a bill
which I believe is balanced, which reflects
the current state of the law, recognizing that
both state and federal courts have recognized
the right to preconviction testing.
I have worked very closely with
Senator Velella, having a number of meetings
with him with regard to this measure, and I've
greatly appreciated his assistance in helping
to put this together.
4293
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Duane.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Mr.
President. On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Duane, on the bill.
SENATOR DUANE: I'm not going to
debate the sponsor on this bill, because I
don't really want to indicate that this bill
is in any way helpful or in fact worthy of
debate.
Mandatory testing of defendants has
not and never will be the answer. Of course I
agree that victims of crimes, if they wish to
be tested, should be allowed to, at no cost to
them and should be -- the cost of the test
should be paid for by the state.
I also think that counseling and
mental health services should be provided at
no cost to the victim, and also to their
spouses and to their domestic partners.
But testing defendants -- and
remember, this bill also includes juveniles.
This isn't just adults, this is also
juveniles -- is wrong and ineffective. Now,
4294
remember, this tests defendants. Not those
who have been convicted, but defendants. And,
as I say, it includes juvenile defendants.
Now, I know that some would say
that certain sex crimes should demand this
kind of testing of defendants. I disagree
with that. But this bill goes even further
than that. This bill includes crimes of
aggravated assault and harassment, harassment
in the second degree. I don't understand why
harassment is -- a defendant accused of the
crime of harassment should be mandatorily
tested for HIV.
Also -- also, this bill is also a
backhanded way of testing inmates people who
are incarcerated. The bill includes
aggravated harassment of an employee by an
inmate.
So rather than making it a bill
which is about mandatory testing of people who
are incarcerated, this bill -- because, you
know, aggravated harassment in a correctional
facility is like if you push someone. And
even at that, people are charged with
aggravated assault in facilities without
4295
anything actually happening. But even if
there was an inmate pushing a correctional
officer, this subjects them to mandatory
testing.
This also subjects juveniles in
juvenile facilities -- this bill also includes
mandatory testing of defendants in juvenile
facilities who might be accused of pushing one
of the people who works in that facility. I
don't understand what would necessitate giving
an HIV test to a juvenile who may have gotten
into an altercation in a juvenile facility.
You know, the shocking thing here
is that, you know, I've been here for four
years. I really think what I need to do is to
have a class that we'll call HIV 101, and I'll
invite everybody to come -- my colleagues,
their staff members.
Because again, you know, this is
another -- this is one of those bills this
could be like a feces and urine bill.
Remember feces and urine day here in the State
Senate? We have that every year, where, you
know, mentally ill, incarcerated people -- who
probably shouldn't be incarcerated, because
4296
they are mentally ill -- but if they throw
feces or urine, you know, they get punished
even more.
Mentally ill inmates who are
actually in the psych ward of a correctional
facility, if they throw feces and urine, they
get a bigger punishment, even though they're
already in a mental health facility. Which
proves how absurd our positions are in this
body on the criminal justice system.
But this just, you know -- because
remember, aggravated assault is throwing feces
and urine. Which, while, you know,
disgusting, is not a way that AIDS is spread.
In fact, I would urge my colleagues to look at
our own -- the state's Department of Health
regulation on what it is that causes
significant risk of contracting HIV, which
does not include exposure to urine, feces,
sputum, nasal secretions, saliva, sweat,
tears, vomit, et cetera.
So, you know, if you had a juvenile
who was in a juvenile facility who threw feces
and urine or if you had a mentally ill person
in an adult prison or a youth prison who did
4297
that, then they would be charged with, because
of what we do here, aggravated harassment.
And thereby, they would be forced to have an
HIV test.
Now remember, testing a person who
commits a crime of any sort does not in any
way make it -- or it is not proof-positive by
any sense of the word that the person who is
assaulted will become HIV-positive. And
certainly if someone has feces or urine or
if -- you know, if a juvenile spits at one of
the people who's working in a juvenile
facility, they could be charged for harassment
or assault and be subjected to a test, even
though you don't get HIV from being spit at.
I mean, it's unpleasant, it's nasty, but it's
not how HIV is spread.
So I know that there are people
here who disagree about mandatory testing of
defendants in sexual assault. And, you know,
I disagree with that. But I understand why
people might think that. But to mandatorily
test a kid who spits at someone? Ridiculous.
Completely and totally and utterly absurd.
So, you know, maybe there's a bill
4298
here which you know people who disagree with
me could in good conscience vote for. But
this bill is not that bill. And again, I'm
constantly frustrated; you know, people throw
around, you know, criminalizing people with
HIV very lightly in this body.
And the other thing that people do
in this body is assuming that people who are
in like juvenile facilities have HIV as
compared to someone who lives down the block
from you.
I mean, if we're going the way of
mandatorily testing people here and there and
everywhere, for whatever reason we can slip
them in, well, let's do what they do in Cuba
and just test everybody. When you go to the
doctor, everybody get tested. But then let's
do that, and let's not just test certain
segments of the population because they're a
captive audience for it.
And let's not let this -- you know,
this is the New York State Senate. I still, I
cannot believe that people are so stupid that
they think that you can get AIDS from being
spit at.
4299
You know, last year we had a bill
about you could get AIDS by, you know, having
sex in a taxicab, and everybody voted for it.
SENATOR SALAND: Mr. President.
Mr. President, would Senator Duane yield to a
question?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Duane, will you yield for a question?
SENATOR DUANE: No, Mr.
President.
Last year we had a ridiculous bill
that assumed that taxi inspectors and parking
violation specialists got AIDS on the job.
You know, for your homework this
summer I would encourage all of you to take a
class on HIV and how it's transmitted. And
then next year when we come back, maybe we
won't have any more of these stupid bills in
this body.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Saland.
SENATOR SALAND: Thank you, Mr.
President.
I greatly appreciate Senator
4300
Duane's zeal for the cause that he so
admiringly and admirably does so well. But I
was rising for purposes of asking him perhaps
to look at the section and do a little reading
in the bill.
Because if you read the bill,
Senator Duane, you will realize that by
definition, by definition, there's no way
under this bill that somebody spitting at
somebody could possibly be, in any way, shape
or form, the subject of an application dealing
with a question of whether someone is
HIV-positive. It's black and white. Take a
look at the definition section. That would
have saved you some time and perhaps some
characterizations. It's a relatively simple
thing to do.
Now, if I may, Mr. President, this
bill is not about HIV. And I certainly -
when I say "about," not exclusively about HIV.
And I certainly can appreciate, as I said
earlier, Senator Duane's passion. And he is
really to be credited for it.
This bill is about sexually
transmissible diseases, and it also includes
4301
HIV. And if you look at the definition of
what's a transmissible disease, page 2 of the
bill, subsection D, it says transmissible
disease means the human immunodeficiency virus
(HIV) or any of its derivatives -- syphilis,
gonorrhea, lymphogranuloma venereum, herpes,
genital warts, or hepatitis and any of its
derivatives.
It goes on, in another section,
body fluid. "Body fluid shall have" -- and
this is subsection F, same page -- "shall have
its ordinary meaning, except that where the
specified transmissible disease for which
testing is sought is human immunodeficiency
virus (HIV) or any of its derivatives, bodily
fluids shall mean blood or semen." It shall
not have anything to do with saliva.
Why is aggravated harassment in
this bill? We tried to be very selective
about the crimes that we included in this
bill. Aggravated harassment in the second
degree would cover an instance where somebody
would bite somebody else.
That's not intended to deal with
somebody -- at least not intended to deal with
4302
somebody who might attempt or allege that
somehow or other by spitting on somebody it
might make them HIV-infected.
Why is aggravated harassment of an
employee by an inmate included? That's
Section 240-32, also referred to in the bill.
Because that requires, as one of its elements,
that the aggravated harassment provides that
attempts to cause such employee to come into
contact with blood, seminal fluid, and also
urine or feces.
So the definitions, the language
don't comport themselves well with the
argument we just heard. Not that, from
Senator Duane's vantage point, there is not
reason for him to state his position. I
welcome that. We've gone through this before.
But I'd be more comfortable, and I would like
to think the house would be more comfortable,
if we were all working off the same page.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Mr. President. On the bill, really very
4303
briefly.
My concern here is not -- I share
some of Senator Duane's concerns. What really
bothers me about this bill is I think
unintentionally it is, in fact, a bill that
will do harm to people.
The reason it will do harm to
people is that it suggests that if someone who
is a defendant or accused of -- say, someone
who is accused of assaulting you or committing
any of the other crimes set forth here, and
tests negative for HIV or tests positive for
HIV, that that tells you whether or not you've
got HIV.
And that is a message that
misleads, in a very dangerous way, the public.
If you think you've been exposed to HIV, you
get yourself tested. I don't care how the
defendant tests. You take prophylactic
measures. If it tests negative, it doesn't
mean you're home free. If you test positive,
it doesn't mean you've got it.
And I think we really need to
rethink the very, very harmful public health
message we are conveying in this. There are
4304
measures now available to keep people alive
who have been exposed to HIV, who have HIV.
If you think you've been exposed, take those
measures, get yourself tested. And the fact
of however a defendant tests should not affect
your thinking on those steps one bit.
I think we send a bad message with
this bill. I urge everyone to vote no.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Any
other Senator wish to be heard on the bill?
Senator Duane.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Mr.
President.
The bill, in the definitions
section, says that a petitioner means a person
who alleges he or she was exposed to bodily
fluid of a defendant. Now, bodily fluid does
not say blood or semen. It says bodily fluid.
Now, section -- New York State
Department of Health Regulation 63.10 states
that there are three factors necessary to
create a significant risk of contracting or
transmitting HIV infection: The presence of a
significant-risk body substance, a
circumstance which constitutes significant
4305
risk for transmitting or contracting HIV
infection and, three, the presence of an
infectious source and a noninfected person.
Significant-risk body substances
are blood, semen, vaginal secretions, breast
milk, tissue, and the following body fluids -
you know, brain fluid, peritoneal fluid,
pericardial fluid, et cetera.
Now, circumstances which constitute
a significant risk of transmitting or
contracting HIV infection are sexual
intercourse -- vaginal, anal, oral -- which
exposes a noninfected individual to blood,
semen, or vaginal secretions of an infected
individual; sharing of needles and other
paraphernalia used for preparing and injecting
drugs between infected and noninfected
individuals; the gestation, birthing or
breast-feeding of an infant when the mother is
infection with HIV; transmission or
transplantation of blood, organs, or other
tissues from an infected individual to an
uninfected individual, provided such blood,
organs or other tissues have not tested
conclusively for antibody or antigen and have
4306
not been rendered noninfective by heat or
chemical treatment.
Other circumstances are during
which a significant body risk substance other
than breast milk of an infected individual
contacts mucous membranes -- that is, eyes,
nose, mouth, nonintact skin, open wounds, skin
with a dermatitis condition, abraded areas, or
the vascular system of a noninfected person.
Such circumstances include but are
not limited to needle-stick or puncture-wound
injuries and direct saturation or permeation
of these body surfaces by the infectious body
substance.
Circumstances that involve
significant risk shall not, shall not include
exposure to urine, feces, sputum, nasal
secretions, saliva, sweat, tears or vomitus
that does not contain blood that is visible to
the naked eye; human bites where there is no
direct blood-to-blood or blood-to-mucous
membrane contact; exposure of intact skin to
blood or any other body substance; or
occupational settings where individuals use
scientifically accepted barrier techniques and
4307
preventive practices and circumstance which
would otherwise pose a significant risk if
such barriers are not breached and remain
intact.
Now, those are significant risk -
those are things that are not of significant
risk.
Now, I believe I have shown that
the petitioner means -- which the bill says
means a person who alleges he or she was
exposed to bodily fluid of a defendant
during -- or whatever. Body fluid, that's
what it says.
Now, maybe I'm wrong. I don't
think I am. But I am -- but, you know, last
year we voted on two bills that said that a
taxi inspector could get HIV by inspecting a
taxi. They didn't even have to like prove
that the taxicab was HIV-positive. It was
just assumed that they were.
The same thing with a parking
violation specialist, which I guess means that
a parking meter could be HIV-positive. And
if, you know, you fooled around with a parking
meter without using protection, you might get
4308
HIV infection.
Ridiculous, right? But that's the
kind of bills we have here. Last year when we
voted on those bills, everybody just sat here
like that made sense. It was completely
ridiculous.
And then the group of people that
tried to move the bill along went after me,
the labor unions, like there was -- that it
was anti-labor that I was against it. What I
was was anti-stupidity on how it is that HIV
is transmitted.
So in a body like this where people
are so stupid on how it is that HIV is
transmitted, call me crazy or call me, you
know, mentally impaired for being skeptical
about this. But I stand by it. A kid that
spits at someone in a juvenile facility under
this bill faces being mandatorily tested, and
that's wrong and ridiculous. And I don't
know -- I don't know why it even came to the
floor in that form.
And, yes, it is true I am
passionate about this. So maybe we could have
a chat about it before a bill like this comes
4309
to the floor. You know, there aren't that
many people here listening to the debate, so
they're missing being educated on this.
But if the sponsor wants to chat
about this kind of legislation, I'm in the
book at home, I'm in 415 in the LOB, you can
come and talk with me, you can come talk to
the New York AIDS Coalition, you can come talk
to doctors, you could come -- I'll blow up the
New York State Department of Health
regulations on how it is that HIV is
transmitted. We can study it together. We
can see if there are problems with that, if we
think that that should be changed.
But until that time, you know, call
me a fool for resisting voting for bills which
potentially perpetrate myths on how HIV is
contracted and spread.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Saland.
SENATOR SALAND: Thank you, Mr.
President.
With all due respect, we're
obviously talking over each other. And for us
to be able to talk, we have to start on the
4310
same page. And that page requires you to read
the bill. It requires you to look at the
language of the bill.
And notwithstanding what you just
read, please take a look at the definition of
bodily fluid here and see how clearly it
eliminates anything, in the case of HIV,
anything but blood or semen. I mean, it's as
plain as the nose on your face.
Now, let me suggest to you, if you
want to follow me through this bill a little
bit, and I'll just stick to the language here,
over on page 4, starting at line 31, it says
"In the case of an application pursuant to
paragraph B" -- and that's for the
preconviction testing -- "of subdivision 2 of
this section, the application must state that
the petitioner may have been exposed to bodily
fluid of the defendant during or as a
proximate result of the commission of or in
the course of flight from an offense described
in such paragraph, in a manner that may have
involved transmission of a specified
transmissible disease from the defendant to
the petitioner."
4311
If you then look at page 5,
subsection E, lines 40 through 49: "For the
purpose of paragraph C of subdivision 5 of
this section, the petitioner has been exposed
to bodily fluid of the defendant when (1) an
element of the qualifying offense allegedly
committed by the defendant includes
intercourse or the deviate sexual intercourse
with the petitioner; or (2) the skin or mucous
membrane of the petitioner has been punctured
by a hypodermic instrument which was in the
possession, custody, or control of the
defendant; or (3) the defendant's semen,
vaginal secretions or any bodily substance
containing blood visible to the naked eye may
have come into contact with the mucous
membrane, ruptured or broken skin, or the
vascular system of the petitioner."
Now, let me just suggest to you
that I'm not the only one that has been
interested in this subject. And you may
recall, although you didn't serve with him,
our prior governor, Governor Cuomo. He had a
task force, and that task force in 1990 issued
a report. And that task force recommended
4312
preconviction testing.
And let me read, if I may, from the
report submitting to the governor dated April
of 1990. It reads as follows: "While the
results alone may not be determinative, some
victims, after consultation with their
physician or an HIV counselor, may want to
begin immediate treatment with prophylactic
drugs. Where the assailant's first test is
positive, the victim may want to begin
immediate drug therapy, even though she or he
might not have been actually infected. Even
if the offender's first test turns out to be
negative, the victim may nevertheless want to
proceed with drug therapy, since she or he may
have been exposed.
"The question of how and when to
test the alleged sex offender remains. The
task force considered and rejected waiting
until an accused is convicted. While a
convicted defendant is no longer presumed
innocent and has fewer procedural rights,
there are two problems with waiting for
conviction.
"One, extensive delay is inevitable
4313
because it takes weeks for conviction by plea
and months for conviction by verdict. And,
two, there are a number of acquittals and
dismissals where the defendant may have
nevertheless infected the victim. In either
case conviction is not an adequate triggering
event.
"For similar reasons, indictment is
not a good marker. Indictment can be delayed,
particularly when the defendant is at liberty.
Furthermore, a prosecutor may be unable to
obtain an indictment for reasons unrelated to
whether the accused is the true perpetrator.
"The task force therefore suggests
that an efficient process be developed in the
civil court system to allow a victim to obtain
court-ordered tests to obtain an alleged
offender's HIV status. Access to this process
should be available to all victims regardless
of their ability to afford the costs of
testing or other court-related costs. Under
this process, a victim might move for the
court order immediately after the rape or
sexual assault."
So certainly this is not something
4314
that I was the first one to visit. There are
others. And that task force, if I remember
correctly, was comprised of a number of
medical and health-related personnel -
physicians, registered nurses, psychologists,
and people otherwise similarly expert in the
area.
The bottom line here is that while
we've spent a lot of time talking about HIV,
this is not limited to HIV, nor is it intended
to be limited to HIV.
And as is so often the case, the
parameters of what we should be discussing can
be readily found within the bill. And none of
us -- whether it's those who Senator Duane
condemns for perhaps being judgmental, and he
uses the term "stupid" -- none of us should be
so glib and so righteous, particularly when we
haven't taken the time to read the bill.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hassell-Thompson.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank
you, Mr. President. Just one question, if the
Senator would yield.
4315
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Saland, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR SALAND: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:
Senator Saland, I won't pretend that I've had
as much of an opportunity to view this bill as
you have had. But I have attempted to read
the bill. And my question really has to do
with the next stage.
You talk about the state paying for
the testing. But when or if the victim -- to
use your definition of "victim" -- may be
found to be positive, what does the bill do in
terms of providing any kind of therapy for the
for this victim?
SENATOR SALAND: The bill
provides first, initially, that the victim
must understand that he or she has to engage
in, as condition precedents, a number of
things.
And I would take you to page 4 of
the bill. And I think in my prior comments I
4316
mentioned those conditions. And you'll find
them beginning at line 38 and running through
line 52.
The bill provides in the concluding
several pages that the Commissioner of
Health -- and I will try and find you the
language. Somewhere in the last several pages
of the bill, and I'm not finding it readily,
it provides that the commissioner will
promulgate the rules and regulations necessary
to effectuate the intent of this legislation.
The testing would be provided at
state expense. The therapy, to the extent
that it would be covered by the Crime Victims
Compensation Board, would be available through
that source.
Therapy might be available through
insurance; therapy might be available through
employee benefits. But this bill does not
provide for the therapy at state expense. It
provides for the costs of the testing at state
expense.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hassell-Thompson.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: I had
4317
said one question, and I will leave it at one
question. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Thank
you, Senator.
Senator Liz Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
If the sponsor would yield for a question, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Saland, do you yield to a question?
SENATOR SALAND: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Senator Saland.
So I've listened to this discussion
and debate, and it is a one-house bill. So I
suppose my question -- I'm trying to make it
one question, again, because the time is
getting longer.
But I think there are real concerns
in this bill, both from a civil liberties
perspective of requiring testing prior to any
4318
confirmation of guilt by the courts.
I think there is a real question
here about whether in fact it is the
best-practice model of science to argue for
this kind of testing. You referenced a report
by a task force by Governor Cuomo, and that
was from 1990. And of course the science
around both testing and outcomes for sexually
transmitted diseases and other blood diseases,
particularly HIV, has advanced dramatically
between 1990 and the year 2002.
Because I'm looking at a reference
from a task force, an advisory council from
Governor Pataki, Governor Pataki's AIDS
Advisory Council. And his public health
experts actually recommended that the testing
of defendants occur only if it provides
information of substantial medical benefit to
a victim.
And so for me, listening to this
debate and trying to read through the entire
bill as the debate was going on, it seems to
me that I would ask you whether you would
consider withdrawing the bill and going back
and looking at this in relationship to both
4319
civil liberties issues, what is the best
approach for testing.
I know if I was, God forbid, the
victim of a rape or other sexual attack, my
response would be I need myself to be tested.
It's not so much the concern of testing the
criminal. Because in fact, as we know, tests
can have false negatives, false positives,
change over time on any disease.
My interest would be assuring that
I had the right to have myself tested, not
only immediately but on an ongoing period, to
assure that I did not have, as a result of
this attack, some additional problem to deal
with in the future.
And it seems to me that we do have
many open-ended questions here. And I believe
that we're close to the end of session this
year, there's not an Assembly sponsor -- or
not in the materials that I have -- and I
think that issues on both sides have been
raised here.
And I would ask whether you would
reconsider some of the issues within your
bill, because I think we will be addressing
4320
this again past this session.
SENATOR SALAND: Let me see if I
can address some of your comments.
Number one, technically this is a
one-house bill. There is a comparable bill
that has been introduced by Assemblyman
Kaufman. And hopefully we will be able to
negotiate with him some agreement on this
legislation.
Secondly, while you may feel that
there are civil liberties questions -- and
that certainly is a subjective standard -
there will be nobody who will be able to tell
you there are any constitutional questions
with this.
Whether it's under the U.S. Supreme
Court case I referred to earlier, "Schmerber,"
whether it's the New York State Court of
Appeals case, "Matter of Abe," there is,
beyond any question, the ability in the state
of New York to test preconviction. It's
absolute. I will stand on that, I will stake
anything on that.
As long as there's probable cause
and the filing of the accusatory instrument -
4321
or the indictment constitutes that probable
cause. That's what takes it out of the realm
of concern that you have. There has to have
been the filing of an instrument.
There was one other thing, and I'm
trying -- I didn't write it down.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Mr.
President, may I clarify?
I believe it was the recommendation
of Governor Pataki's AIDS Advisory Council.
SENATOR SALAND: And I find that
very interesting. And interestingly enough, I
find it interesting because I view this bill
as clearly a matter of choice, an issue which
I assume is valued rather dearly, more so on
your side of the aisle, perhaps, than on my
side of the aisle. It's a matter of
empowerment.
What it says is after you've had
all of those conditions precedent, after
you've been advised of the fact that you have
to be tested, after you've been given a
scientific risk -- you've been told of the
risk assessment, after you have been told that
you must have undergone counseling, you have
4322
the ability, should you choose, to say: Okay,
I guess I don't want to go any further.
But you also have the ability, as a
matter of choice, to say -- as did this
unidentified woman known as Jane in the piece
I read from the Daily News editorial -- you
have your choice to say: Why shouldn't I be
able to test my assailant? Why do I have to
wait for him to be convicted?
It's about choice. It's about
empowerment. And it's about people making
intelligent decisions based upon the use of
their own inherent abilities to reason.
There's no cookie-cutter approach.
It just says we will give you that option
where it's important to you. And if in the
process of making that victim whole or
attempting, if you can ever make that victim
whole, bringing that victim back to someplace
close to where she or he may have been before
being violently, violently assaulted, this
seems to me to respect that choice, to give
that sense of empowerment.
There are no civil liberties
questions that could be resolved negatively.
4323
And it basically says, after you've been
counseled and you know the state of the
science, if that's what you want to do, by
God, you should be permitted to do that.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
if Senator Saland would yield for a question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Saland, do you yield for a question?
SENATOR SALAND: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR PATERSON: Senator, were
you referring to Governor Cuomo or Governor
Pataki's advisory committee -
SENATOR SALAND: If I remember
correctly, 1990 predates Governor Pataki.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President.
SENATOR SALAND: An attempt at
humor, Senator.
SENATOR PATERSON: Yes, Senator.
That's the way I remember it.
And that particular task force at
4324
that time -- first of all, it took, for a
person to theoretically have the virus from
six to nine months to be diagnosed in the
first place. They really didn't know very
much about P24 antigens. The only way they
really measured was by a T-cell count. It was
far antiquated to the standards that are used
today.
But the one thing that the task
force did apparently say, according to the
New York State Pride Agenda, is the fact that
there would be a qualifying benefit to the
victim that would be established before we
would realize the petition.
And my question is, what would be
the benefit to a victim to have the alleged
perpetrator take a test? What would be the
benefit to the victim?
SENATOR SALAND: I would say that
that's very subjective. For some victims,
they may decide, as I've said several times
today, after they've gone through all the
conditions precedent, they may decide that for
them there's no benefit.
Other victims may believe, and very
4325
much so, whether it be something that's
physical, whether it's emotional, whether it's
psychological, they may believe that it's
critical for their well-being and their, as I
said earlier, return to as close to their
preassault status, that they have that test.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
if the Senator would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Saland, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR SALAND: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR PATERSON: Now, Senator,
in Section F of subdivision 1 of the bill you
refer to the actual definitions of what bodily
fluids are. But it's actually in Section E
where you talk about what the actual
qualifying offenses are that would mandate
that somebody be tested because they were
either convicted or charged with an actual
offense.
4326
Now, you seemed to make a
connection in Section C earlier, where you
talk about the actual bodily fluids and what
the actual diseases are that would come from
those particular bodily fluids. My question
to you is, why wouldn't you take the whole
issue of HIV and the AIDS virus out of this
bill?
Because if you want to test for
bodily fluids and feces and other sexually
transmittable and also other transmittable
diseases that don't involve sex, you're
talking about two different types of things.
So I can start to see where some of
anxiety comes from when what we really have
here is an omnibus mandatory testing bill,
when we clearly have two different types of
results that can occur.
One is if someone spits on someone
or someone throws something at someone, that
they might in a sense be at risk for a certain
type of disease. The other would be those
precursors to HIV, which are an entirely
different type of interaction.
So what I'm saying, since they're
4327
so different, so that there be not any
confusion -- and I think some of the anxiety
that you have heard today comes from a
frustration with the fact that twelve years
after the report of Governor Cuomo's task
force in 1990, you're still hearing people
push it all together and making it all seem as
if, if you pass by and touch somebody, that
they could receive HIV.
HIV is obviously the most dangerous
of the infections that you talk about. It's
obviously the one that's the most publicized.
It's also the one that's created the greatest
stigma for people that are afflicted by it.
And so I hope you would
understand -- and this is the reason why I
asked that you might separate all this, so
that in addition to empowering the victim such
that they might want to find out what the
alleged perpetrator's medical status is, you
might also be adding some clarity to the
medical evidence that's really long-held at
this point but seems to fall back into that
aura of confusion as the result of the way -
the composition of the bill itself.
4328
SENATOR SALAND: I think I
understand the question. Let me -
SENATOR PATERSON: I'll state the
question in a sentence. Why don't you write
two bills?
SENATOR SALAND: Let me suggest
to you that what would be the -- there would
be no difference if I wrote two bills.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Excuse
me.
Senator Morahan.
SENATOR MORAHAN: If I may
interrupt the debate, I'd ask that the last
section be read and a roll call be called so
that Senator Farley may cast his vote.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 8. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
SENATOR FARLEY: Thank you for
your courtesy, Senator Saland, Senator
Paterson.
4329
I vote aye.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Withdraw the
roll call, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Farley will be recorded in the affirmative.
Withdraw the roll call.
Senator Saland.
SENATOR SALAND: Let me just
hopefully clear up some, at the very least,
misconceptions. I find it hard to believe
there's anybody within the sound of my voice
who, notwithstanding some of your comments,
could possibly believe that HIV could be
contracted by casually being touched by
somebody or some mere contact.
Let me also say to you that it
would really be of little or no difference, it
would just be a variation on a theme were I to
divide this bill. We would go through this
very same exercise all over again.
I understand, as I said earlier,
the passion that this particular topic evokes.
This is a bill that's intended to be an
omnibus bill. This is a bill that's intended
to be a victim's rights bill. This is a bill
4330
which takes great pains to make sure that any
victim is aware that he or she will not get
any quick or easy answer regardless of which
avenue that person may pursue.
It is, as I said earlier, an effort
to try and secure for the victim, under her or
his own individual decision-making process,
the ability to secure a test, the ability to
learn whether in fact the court will permit
the test by making the application and then to
have whomever his or her assailant may be
tested.
Will that provide the medical
guarantee that will ensure a resolution? I
don't think anybody here can say that. But if
it's important to 10 percent of the victims -
and there's, what, 4600 reported rapes and
sexual assaults in this state for the last
reporting year? If 10 percent of them, if
2 percent of them, if 1 percent of them
believe that that's important and it has value
to them, then I say I don't have one iota of
problem with that.
Because, quite candidly, my
sympathies and my desire to assist lies with
4331
the victims. The individual who's the
assailant has been indicted, has stood accused
under some accusatory instrument. There's the
probable cause threshold. I'm not saying
indiscriminately, I'm saying there has to be a
threshold that's crossed.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Paterson, on the bill.
SENATOR PATERSON: The reason I
think the bill should be divided is because of
the debate we've heard today, because of the
confusion and the inability of this bill to
address these issues.
Senator Saland said that he thought
it would be ridiculous for anyone to think
that being touched by a person with HIV could
create an infection. In 1984, which was not
that long ago, we had a case in the Queens
DA's office. I was standing right there, we
brought a defendant into the courtroom, the
court officers would not touch them.
Now, that was a belief at that
particular time. It's taken a while to
4332
educate the public to the actual ways in which
a person can become infected with HIV. It's
my opinion that there are a number of people
who really do believe what Senator Duane was
trying to dissuade in his comments earlier,
which is that you would be able to get it from
tears or from saliva or from feces or urine or
some other form that actually is not a
promulgator of the HIV virus.
And that's the reason I think that
for clarity's sake that these issues be
defined separately in a separate bill, because
of the stigma that exists in our society.
On the issue of the benefit to the
victim, I don't know of any measurable medical
benefit to the victim. And I think there's a
mountain of evidence to the contrary that it
would be good to suggest, to codify, or in any
way to allow any person who thinks they were a
victim of an act that would cause the HIV
virus to even think about having the alleged
perpetrator take the test, for the simple
reason that in many cases -- and there is
substantial research to prove this -- the
victim was measured to have received the HIV
4333
virus prior to the perpetrator.
So the only thing we would be
giving the victim is a pyrrhic victory. And
it would really be a shock to those
individuals who were already under a great
deal of stress and anxiety to find out later
on that they were testing an individual who
tested negative for HIV at a time when they
were HIV-positive and should have been
receiving immediate treatment.
This is not really a case of moral
victories or empowerment. This is a very
serious life-threatening illness that a person
could contract. And I don't think that anyone
affiliated with the medical profession, with
the psychological profession, or any
legislator should be doing anything to
contribute to it.
If it were just a situation of
allowing people to speak at the phase of a
trial where there's a sentencing or something
that does actually create an issue of
empowerment or a moral victory, or perhaps
extending the statute of limitations to create
an opportunity for victims of perhaps child
4334
sexual abuse as adults to sue the perpetrator,
those, I think, are moral victories.
But here we're talking about
allowing an individual to for some reason be
soothed in feeling that there would be some
way to actually make the perpetrator create
evidence where the perpetrator cannot.
As Senator Schneiderman said
earlier, the only way to find out whether or
not there is possible harm to the victim is
for the victim to be tested. And I think any
other information to the contrary really
diminishes the importance of the actual test.
And I'm not even worried about
whether the perpetrator is indicted or
convicted. This is a case of science. This
is a case of quality of health care. And it's
the only conclusion I think that you can come
to when the victim feels that his or her life
is at stake.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Any
other Senator wish to be heard on the bill?
Debate is closed.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 8. This
4335
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
SENATOR PATERSON: Slow roll
call, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: More
than five Senators have arisen. The Secretary
will ring the bells.
The Secretary will call the roll.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Alesi.
SENATOR ALESI: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Andrews.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Balboni.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Bonacic.
SENATOR BONACIC: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Breslin.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Brown,
excused.
Senator Bruno.
(Senator Bruno was indicated as
voting in the affirmative.)
4336
THE SECRETARY: Senator Connor.
(Senator Connor was indicated as
voting in the negative.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator
DeFrancisco.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Duane.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Duane, to explain his vote.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Mr.
President.
I have to say that I have had many
advocates come and ask for free rape kits and
prophylactics for those who have been
victimized by sexual assault. I've never had
a victim come to me and say that they wanted
the testing of the defendant.
I was listening to Senator Saland
when he said that, you know, if there's
1 percent of the victims that would want this
legislation to pass, well, then, they should
have that choice. But I don't understand why
4337
it is that we should create state policy based
on the 1 percent of victims who have erroneous
information. I mean, more than 1 percent of
the people of the State of New York want SONDA
to be passed, and apparently that hasn't been
enough to change state policy.
Also, you know, this bill obviously
is very important. I don't understand why it
came out of Rules. If this bill has been
cooking for so long, why didn't it go through
the regular committee route? I must have
missed the hearing on this bill. I think that
would have been a good place to have hashed
this out.
And I also want to hark back to the
days of 1989. That was when Ricky Ray and his
brothers and their family were having their
trailers burned down in a rural area in
another state. That was a different time.
So that we can move forward on what
our AIDS policies are and what our criminal
justice policies should be, I urge my
colleagues to vote no, and I'll be voting no,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
4338
Duane will be recorded in the negative.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Espada.
SENATOR ESPADA: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Farley
voting in the affirmative earlier.
Senator Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Gentile.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Gonzalez.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator
Hassell-Thompson.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Hevesi.
SENATOR HEVESI: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Hoffmann.
SENATOR HOFFMANN: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Johnson.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator L.
Krueger.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
4339
Liz Krueger, to explain her vote.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Mr. President.
I raised some issues earlier. I
will be voting no on this bill. I think that,
while it has pieces in it that are important,
it is overall not a bill that I can support.
But I want to thank Senator Duane
for so many things he educated us on today.
And in his last comments when he was speaking
on the bill, he reminded me of other things
that I think are equally important that we
have failed to do in this house.
And given the concern of Senator
Saland on the importance of addressing
victims' rights, I would argue that we need to
pass, before we leave session this year, the
bills that would guarantee a woman the right
to emergency contraception in emergency rooms
if she's been raped, the right of rape victims
throughout the state of New York to have rape
kits paid for so that DNA cross-tests can be
done. They are piling up in warehouses
throughout this state.
And that we also need to address
4340
the fact that we still require rape victims in
hospitals to fill out cumbersome paperwork at
the time of their rape in order for the
hospital to be get reimbursement for the care
that they are delivering. And that there are
serious issues for victims of sexual crimes
that go unaddressed in this house.
And so I would hope, based on the
education we all got today about victims'
rights and the importance of the State Senate
addressing these concerns, that we might be
passing these bills this year before we end
our session.
And I will vote no on this. Thank
you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Liz Krueger will be recorded in the negative.
The Secretary will continue to call
the roll.
THE SECRETARY: Senator C.
Kruger.
SENATOR CARL KRUGER: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Kuhl.
SENATOR KUHL: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Lachman.
4341
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Lack.
SENATOR LACK: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Larkin.
SENATOR LARKIN: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator LaValle.
SENATOR LAVALLE: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Leibell.
SENATOR LEIBELL: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Libous.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Maltese.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Marchi.
SENATOR MARCHI: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Maziarz.
SENATOR MAZIARZ: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator McGee.
SENATOR McGEE: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Meier.
SENATOR MEIER: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Mendez.
4342
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator
Montgomery.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: No.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Morahan.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Nozzolio.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Onorato,
excused.
Senator Oppenheimer.
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: No.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Padavan.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: No.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Rath.
SENATOR RATH: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Saland.
SENATOR SALAND: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Sampson.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Santiago.
SENATOR SANTIAGO: No.
THE SECRETARY: Senator
4343
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: No.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Seward.
SENATOR SEWARD: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator A. Smith.
SENATOR ADA SMITH: No.
THE SECRETARY: Senator M. Smith.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: No.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Spano.
SENATOR SPANO: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator
Stachowski.
SENATOR STACHOWSKI: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Stafford.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY: No.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Trunzo.
SENATOR TRUNZO: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Velella.
SENATOR VELELLA: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Volker.
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes.
4344
THE SECRETARY: Senator Wright.
SENATOR WRIGHT: Aye.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will call the absentees.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Andrews.
SENATOR ANDREWS: Nay.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Balboni.
SENATOR BALBONI: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Breslin.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator
DeFrancisco.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Gentile.
SENATOR GENTILE: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Gonzalez.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator
Hassell-Thompson.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hassell-Thompson, to explain her vote.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank
you, Mr. President.
To Senator Saland, this is -- in
continuing to read this bill, I have a sense,
4345
a better sense of what I think the bill's
intent is. But I, like many of my colleagues,
believe that this is not the way to go about
it.
I have some great concerns when we
look at what we call transmittable diseases
and then suddenly stick HIV into the same
category with other diseases that might in
fact be transmittable by casual contact. HIV
is not a casual-contact disease.
And it becomes very important -
and it may sound like we're being casual or
flip when we say that we need to be
better-educated, but we do. It's a sad state
of affairs that we believe that the ability to
transmit such a horrendous disease can be so
easily transmitted. It cannot.
What this bill attempts to do I
think is the reverse of what our concerns
should be. As we begin to talk about how do
we ensure that people become tested and
receive treatment quickly and immediately,
this is not the way to go about doing that.
And I would hope that Senator
Saland would take this opportunity to rethink
4346
some of the concerns that have been raised and
asked for. And I know that he would get the
help and support of people on this side of the
aisle who have a little bit more experience
than some of the people on the other side of
the aisle just in the practice. So that when
we do a bill such as this, it will not appear
that one side of this house is insensitive to
victims.
And I think that we get ourselves
caught too often in the belief that we are
soft on crime and that we soft-pedal issues,
when the real intent of the bill completely
escapes some of the people that sit in this
chamber.
So, Mr. President, I will be voting
no on this bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hassell-Thompson will be recorded in the
negative.
The Secretary will continue to call
the roll.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Johnson.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Lachman.
4347
SENATOR LACHMAN: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS: Yes.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Maltese.
SENATOR MALTESE: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Mendez.
(No response.)
THE SECRETARY: Senator Nozzolio.
SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Aye.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Sampson.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will announce the results.
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 41. Nays,
13.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
Senator Montgomery.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, Mr.
President, I would like unanimous consent to
be recorded in the negative on Calendars 607
and 1054.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Without
objection, Senator Montgomery will be recorded
in the negative on Calendars 607 and 1054.
4348
Senator Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Mr. President,
I would appreciate unanimous consent to be
recorded in the negative on Calendar 1054.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Without
objection, Senator Stavisky will be recorded
in the negative on Calendar 1054.
Senator Hassell-Thompson.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank
you, Mr. President. I would like to have
unanimous consent to be recorded in the
negative on Calendar 307 and Calendar 1054.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Without
objection, Senator Hassell-Thompson will be
recorded in the negative on Calendars 307 and
1054.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS: Thank you, Mr.
President.
On behalf of Senator Stafford, Mr.
President, on page 36 I offer the following
amendments to Calendar Number 814, Senate
Print 3820B, and ask that said bill retain its
place on the Third Reading Calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
4349
amendments are received and adopted, and the
bill will retain its place on the Third
Reading Calendar.
SENATOR LIBOUS: Mr. President,
on behalf of Senator Marcellino, on page 33 I
offer the following amendments to Calendar
Number 762, Senate Print 6210, and ask that
the bill retain its place on the Third Reading
Calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received and adopted, and the
bill will retain its place on the Third
Reading Calendar.
SENATOR LIBOUS: And, Mr.
President, on behalf of Senator Skelos I wish
to call up his bill, Print Number 425,
recalled from the Assembly, which is now at
the desk.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
158, by Senator Skelos, Senate Print 425, an
act to amend the Agriculture and Markets Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Libous.
4350
SENATOR LIBOUS: Thank you, Mr.
President. I now move to reconsider the vote
by which this bill was passed.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll on reconsideration.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
SENATOR LIBOUS: Mr. President, I
now pass up the following amendments.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received and adopted.
Senator Morahan.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Yes, Mr.
President. Is there any other housekeeping at
the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: No, no
other housekeeping, Senator.
SENATOR MORAHAN: For the
information of the members, there will be an
immediate meeting of the Rules Committee in
the Majority Conference Room, Room 332.
And the Senate will stand at ease.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: There
will be an immediate meeting of the Rules
Committee.
4351
Senator Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
following the Rules Committee there will be a
meeting of the Minority in the Minority
Conference Room.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: All
right. Senator Paterson, we're going to
receive the report. I assume you mean after
session.
SENATOR PATERSON: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Is that
correct, Senator Paterson? Conference of the
Minority immediately following session.
The Senate will stand at ease
pending the report of the Rules Committee.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 5:15 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 5:25 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Morahan.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Yes, Mr.
President. Could we return to reports of
standing committees.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Reports
4352
of standing committees.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Bruno,
from the Committee on Rules, reports the
following bills:
Senate Print 417B, by Senator
Skelos, an act to amend the Criminal Procedure
Law;
2714, by Senator Padavan, an act to
amend the Executive Law;
3078, by Senator McGee, an act to
amend the New York State Urban Development
Corporation Act;
3920, by Senator Stafford, an act
to amend the Public Officers Law;
3927, by Senator Stafford, an act
to amend the Public Officers Law;
3928, by Senator Stafford, an act
to amend the Public Officers Law;
4525A, by Senator Nozzolio, an act
to amend the Correction Law;
4925, by Senator DeFrancisco, an
act to amend the Civil Practice Law and Rules;
5206A, by Senator Wright, an act to
amend the Public Service Law;
4353
5842A, by Senator Velella, an act
to amend the Retirement and Social Security
Law;
6121, by Senator Maltese, an act to
amend the Education Law;
6508, by Senator Lack, an act to
amend the Judiciary Law;
6951, by Senator Velella, an act to
amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law;
6966A, by Senator Farley, an act to
amend the Public Officers Law;
7157, by Senator DeFrancisco, an
act to amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law;
7334B, by Senator Velella, an act
to amend the Retirement and Social Security
Law;
7445, by Senator Nozzolio, an act
to amend the Town Law;
And Senate Print 7451, by Senator
Wright, an act in relation to authorizing the
town of Hannibal.
All bills ordered direct to third
reading.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Morahan.
4354
SENATOR MORAHAN: Move to accept
the report of the Rules Committee, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: All
those in favor of accepting the report of the
Rules Committee signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Those
opposed, nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
report of the Rules Committee is accepted.
Senator Morahan.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Yes, Mr.
President. There being no other business in
front of the Senate, we move to adjourn until
June 11th, at 3:00 p.m.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Ada Smith.
SENATOR ADA SMITH: Thank you,
Mr. President. There will be an immediate
conference of the Senate Minority in the
Minority Conference Room.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER:
Immediate conference of the Senate Minority in
4355
the Minority Conference Room.
On motion, the Senate stands
adjourned until Tuesday, June 11th, at
3:00 p.m.
(Whereupon, at 5:29 p.m., the
Senate adjourned.)