Regular Session - August 11, 2004
5715
NEW YORK STATE SENATE
THE STENOGRAPHIC RECORD
ALBANY, NEW YORK
August 11, 2004
2:19 p.m.
REGULAR SESSION
SENATOR PATRICIA K. McGEE, Acting President
STEVEN M. BOGGESS, Secretary
5716
P R O C E E D I N G S
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senate will come to order.
I ask everyone present to please
rise and repeat with me the Pledge of
Allegiance.
(Whereupon, the assemblage recited
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: In the
absence of clergy, may we bow our heads for a
moment of silence.
(Whereupon, the assemblage
respected a moment of silence.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Reading
of the Journal.
THE SECRETARY: In Senate,
Tuesday, August 10, the Senate met pursuant to
adjournment. The Journal of Monday, August 9,
was read and approved. On motion, Senate
adjourned.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Without
objection, the Journal stands approved as
read.
Presentation of petitions.
Messages from the Assembly.
5717
Messages from the Governor.
Reports of standing committees.
Reports of select committees.
Communications and reports from
state officers.
Motions and resolutions.
Senator Nozzolio.
SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you,
Madam President.
On behalf of Senator Farley, I wish
to call up Print Number 7710, recalled from
the Assembly, which is now at the desk.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1910, by Senator Farley, Senate Print 7710, an
act to amend the Banking Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Nozzolio.
SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Madam
President, I now move to reconsider the vote
by which this bill was passed.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll on reconsideration.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
5718
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 43.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Nozzolio.
SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Madam
President, on behalf of Senator Farley, I
offer the following amendments.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Amendments received.
SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Senator, my
pleasure.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
there will be an immediate meeting of the
Finance Committee in the Majority Conference
Room.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Immediate meeting of the Finance Committee in
the Majority Conference Room.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
if we could stand at ease.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senate will stand at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
5719
ease at 2:22 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 2:37 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
if we could return to report of standing
committees, I believe there's a report of the
Finance Committee at the desk. I ask that it
be read at this time.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Johnson,
from the Committee on Finance, reports the
following bills:
Senate Print 6050B, Senate Budget
Bill, an act making appropriations for the
support of government;
6056B, Senate Budget Bill, an act
to amend the Insurance Law and others;
And Senate Print 7712, by the
Senate Committee on Rules, an act in relation
to implementing certain provisions.
All bills ordered direct to third
reading.
5720
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Without
objection, all bills are ordered directly to
third reading.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
if we could just stand at ease for about two
moments.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senate will stand at ease for a moment.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 2:38 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 2:42 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you, Madam
President. Would you please call up Calendar
Number 1918.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1918, Senate Budget Bill, Senate Print 6050B,
an act making appropriations for the support
of government: Public Protection and General
Government Budget.
5721
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN:
Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR VOLKER: Madam President,
this is the public protection and general
government bill which has been agreed to
between the Senate and Assembly. And it
provides, among other things, around
$400 million in homeland security funding and
for terrorism funding.
It's broken down in a number of
areas. It also provides money for indigent
parolees, it provides money for district
attorneys and considerable money in the
criminal justice area, diversion money and so
forth.
It also provides money for a number
of the state offices, such as the Office of
Lieutenant Governor, Division of Military and
Naval Affairs. And it also provides for
various spin-ups for cities in upstate
New York, for the cities of Buffalo,
Rochester, Syracuse, and Auburn, Corning, and
so forth.
5722
So it is an extensive bill which
really mirrors public protection and general
government bills which have passed in the last
few years.
In fact, one of the things I
pointed out is that some of the money in this
budget, as relating to specific areas of
training and so forth, actually mirrors the
money that we did in the last conference
committee that we did here a few years ago.
And I just wanted to point that out, since I
was one of the people that ran the conference
committee.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hassell-Thompson.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Yes,
thank you, Madam President.
Madam President, I believe there's
an amendment at the desk. And I ask that the
reading of the amendment be waived, and I also
ask to be heard on the amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
reading is waived, and you may be heard on the
amendment.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank
5723
you.
The first-responders hostile
amendment is given in view of just raising
some very serious and some very interesting
aspects.
If we were to add $20 million more
for state and local first-responders, this
would make a significant difference to the
State of New York. New York remains at the
top of Al Qaeda's list of potential targets.
And as a state where the orange alert has
become the norm for the state and its
institutions, local law enforcement agencies
are being asked to take on more and more
responsibility to protect our communities
across this state.
Following the attacks of
September 11th, police and fire departments
have had to shuffle job assignments, mandatory
overtime, and increasing the numbers of
recruiting efforts. Many police chiefs have
been forced to pay overtime, borrow officers
from other agencies, and put more volunteers
on the streets. Some police departments are
now recruiting retired police officers to fill
5724
the gap.
Police precincts in New York City
have reduced their forces by more than 3,000
officers since the year 2001. And although no
layoffs have occurred, through attrition, we
have not brought in new -- we have not filled
these unfilled positions.
Due to the budget cuts and our
shortfalls, a significant reduction in federal
support, many of our localities are cutting
their police forces and they're closing
innovative law enforcement units that helped
to reduce crime in the 1990s.
From 1995 to 2000, officers hired
in Albany with COPS funds prevented 141
violent crimes and 561 property crimes.
Officers hired in Schenectady with COPS
funding prevented 77 violent crimes and 318
property crimes, while officers hired in
Troy -- and the numbers go on and on and on as
we go from city to city.
Between 1994 and 2002, New York has
reduced crime by 49 percent. And that's not
by accident, but rather that is by the valiant
efforts of our men and women who are police
5725
officers across this state. However, they
need more resources to continue to fight crime
effectively.
Firefighters too have suffered
sharp reductions in funding. In 2003, six
fire stations were closed due to budget cuts,
endangering firefighters, victims and entire
neighborhoods whenever a fire may break out.
Many fire departments still lack adequate
communications systems and other basic
equipment, like breathing apparatus.
Federal funding for grants to local
police, fire, and emergency medical agencies
are being cut from $4.2 billion in fiscal year
2004 to $3.5 billion in fiscal year 2005, more
than a 15 percent decrease.
While these may sound like numbers
to you, it speaks to the fact that violent
crime is now again on the increase and more
funding is needed to maintain the successes
that were achieved in making New York safer in
the 1990s.
Please add $20 million more for our
state and first-responders. They are our
first responders.
5726
Thank you, Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Lachman.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Yes, I rise to
speak in favor of the hostile amendment
introduced by Senator Hassell-Thompson.
I think it's an excellent
amendment, and I will support it. And I will
support it for the reason of greater police
security, which does not exist, unfortunately,
in many working-class, lower-income areas.
The bill would enhance police protection and
fire protection in low-income and
moderate-income areas such as my district,
which includes Staten Island.
I would even go further. We all
suffered during 9/11, but percentage-wise, the
Borough of Staten Island lost more
firefighters, more police officers than any
other borough in the City of New York. And
these are working-class people.
What we need now is greater
strength and security to enable us to hire
more police officers and more firefighters in
Staten Island, in the five boroughs, and in
5727
the entire State of New York.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Brown.
SENATOR BROWN: Thank you, Madam
President.
Let me also rise briefly to support
the amendment that calls for an additional
$20 million for state and local
first-responders.
I think Senator Hassell-Thompson
laid it out well when she highlighted the fact
that Al Qaeda seems to still be very focused
on New York State. And this is not just the
City of New York, this is the entire State of
New York.
I think when you look at our
population centers outside New York City --
Albany, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, where I
come from -- there's a real need to give
first-responders the financial tools that they
require to be able to keep police departments
and fire departments strong and well-staffed
with the appropriate number of personnel.
I know that in Western New York,
5728
when we look at Buffalo and we look at Niagara
Falls, we're on the Canadian border. And when
Secretary Ridge just a few days ago talked
about some of the areas of focus for Al Qaeda,
the border between the United States and
Canada was looked at as a -- was mentioned as
a secondary target.
So I think for those reasons we
certainly have to look at this amendment and
we have to look at the need for this funding
in New York State.
You know, let me also suggest --
and I think it was also pointed out by Senator
Lachman and Senator Hassell-Thompson -- that
the federal commitment, unfortunately, to
important programs that put more police on our
streets and kept fire departments fully
staffed seems to be reduced significantly.
I know that in the City of Buffalo,
through attrition, we too have lost a lot of
police officers. And with the loss of police
officers this year we have seen an
uncomfortable, an unpleasant spike in violent
crime, where our homicide rate has jumped by
astronomical numbers. And I can only tie that
5729
back to the fact that we do have less police
officers on our streets.
I think that this additional
$20 million that the amendment calls for
merits support, and I'm calling on all my
colleagues in the chamber to support this
amendment.
Thank you, Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Madam
President, on the amendment.
We currently have put an extra
strain, a burden on the New York City Police
Department, the NYPD. I represent a district
in Queens County, and there's a special burden
being placed on the NYPD precincts in Queens
County because we have to respond to any
incidents that occur on Roosevelt Island. And
Roosevelt Island, as you know, is attached to
Manhattan. It is part, I believe, of the
Manhattan community planning districts, the
school districts and so on.
And yet, because of the uniqueness
of Roosevelt Island, the precincts in Queens
5730
are the first responders. It is -- the only
way, aside from the tram, that you can get to
Roosevelt Island is by automobile through
Queens County. And therefore, my precincts
are being overburdened, they are losing time
in their responses because we have to service
the people on Roosevelt Island.
And I think this amendment
introduced by Senator Hassell-Thompson is a
very, very constructive step toward
alleviating this municipal overburden, if you
will, on the New York City and the Queens
County police department.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Those
Senators in agreement with the amendment
please signify by raising your hands.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
agreement are Senators Brown, Diaz, Dilan,
Duane, Gonzalez, Hassell-Thompson, L. Krueger,
C. Kruger, Lachman, Montgomery, Onorato,
Parker, Paterson, Sabini, Sampson,
Schneiderman, A. Smith, Stachowski, and
Stavisky.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
amendment is lost.
5731
Senator Montgomery.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, Madam
President, I believe there's an amendment at
the desk. I ask that the reading of the
amendment be waived, and I would like to be
heard on the amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
reading is waived, and you may be heard on the
amendment.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
Madam President, I think that
Senator Hassell-Thompson acknowledged, as I
do, that I'm very pleased with the
restorations that have been made by the
Legislature. And certainly I don't intend to
represent that I do not agree with the passing
of this part of our budget.
However, there is an extremely
important aspect that is missing. And as I
raised yesterday the issue of the funding for
youth employment, today I raise the issue of
funding for alternatives to incarceration.
And I see those as being related.
I have, in my district, a community
court, and the success of that court depends
5732
on the fact that the judge in that court has
access to 14 different agencies, a number of
them offering alternatives to incarceration
where he can assign people to one or the other
or several of those agencies and programs, to
keep us from spending, in the case of a young
person, $90,000 a year or, in the case where
if he were in a regular court and they were
remanded to prison, we would be spending
$40,000 to $50,000.
So these are programs that save
money, offer alternatives for the judges, for
courts, for the district attorneys, and are an
extremely important aspect of reducing
recidivism as well as helping communities to
be able to accommodate people without sending
them to long-term incarceration.
And so I ask that my colleagues on
the other side join me in restoring this
funding. Certainly at least over 150 programs
across the state would benefit tremendously.
This is really money that would be going to
communities. And it would be helping to
strengthen the capacity of communities to
accommodate people in their own communities.
5733
This I recognize, Madam President,
comes from the donkey side of the house, but I
invite the elephants to join the donkeys. Let
us vote together, today in our animal house --
(Laughter.)
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: -- yes on
this amendment.
Thank you, Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Thank
you, Senator Montgomery.
Senator Diaz, you wish to speak on
the amendment?
SENATOR DIAZ: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Diaz, on the amendment.
SENATOR DIAZ: Yes, Madam
President, on the amendment.
Again, I represent the 32nd
Senatorial District in the Bronx. And one
more time we're hearing Senator Montgomery
presenting an amendment to restore money for
our communities. Every time -- this is my
second year in this animal house, as she
called it. And every amendment that has been
presented to restore money for poor
5734
communities has been presented by this side of
the aisle, by us Democrats.
And it is sad to see that every
time that we Democrats present an amendment to
restore money to help our communities, they're
always rejected by our colleagues on the
Republican side. I don't mean to say that our
colleagues on the other side don't care about
our communities. I'm just saying that for
whatever reason, we are the ones presenting
always amendments to restore money.
Yesterday we presented an amendment
to restore $10 million for youth and summer
programs for our youth, and it was declined,
denied, rejected, with the vote of the
Republicans, and only us Democrats voted for
it.
We presented an amendment to
restore money for children and families and
health, and again, that amendment to restore
money for children and families was rejected
by the other side, and only us Democrats voted
in favor of the amendment.
We presented an amendment to
restore $20 million for the first responders,
5735
meaning firemen and firehouses. One more time
we have seen that amendment going down the
drain with the vote of the other side of the
house and only us Democrats voting for it.
Now there is another amendment here
presented by Senator Montgomery. When, when
is it that the other house -- the other side,
the elephant side -- will join us, the
Democrats, in restoring money to help our poor
communities, our communities in need in our
cities? It is a shame to see this amendment
now again going down the drain, like many
other amendments that would benefit our
communities.
So I'm calling on the other side to
join us now, and let's approve this amendment
once and for all. And let's show the whole
state that we are together here and that we
care about our communities.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Those
Senators in agreement with the amendment
please signify by raising your hands.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
agreement are Senators Breslin, Brown, Diaz,
5736
Dilan, Duane, Gonzalez, Hassell-Thompson, L.
Krueger, Lachman, Montgomery, Onorato,
Oppenheimer, Parker, Paterson, Sabini,
Schneiderman, A. Smith, Stachowski, and
Stavisky.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
amendment is not agreed to.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1918, Senator Johnson moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Finance,
Assembly Bill Number 9550B and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill Number 6050B,
Third Reading Calendar 1918.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1918, Assembly Budget Bill, Assembly Print
Number 9550B, an act making appropriations for
the support of government.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
5737
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Krueger, to explain your vote.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: To explain
my vote.
Thank you, Madam President. On the
bill.
I do think that we made some
improvements in this bill over the Governor's
proposed bill. But as I said yesterday on the
budget bill and will stand by today, we should
not be doing expenditure bills before we do
revenue bills for the State of New York. We
don't know what our budget availability is,
and yet we're spending the money.
So I will vote no on this bill.
Thank you, Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Krueger, are you recorded in the affirmative?
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: In the
negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Krueger will be recorded in the negative.
5738
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1918 are
Senators Duane, Hassell-Thompson, and L.
Krueger. Ayes, 51. Nays, 3.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
would you please call up Calendar Number 1919.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1919, Senator Johnson moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Finance,
Assembly Bill Number 9556B and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill Number 6056B,
Third Reading Calendar 1919.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1919, Assembly Budget Bill, Assembly Print
Number 9556B, an act to amend the Insurance
Law and the State Finance Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
5739
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2 --
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Madam
President, very briefly on the bill.
This is the language bill
accompanying the appropriation bill we just
voted on. I also will vote in support of this
legislation. And this bill in particular has
the language in it restoring some of the most
critical cuts that we are -- shortsighted cuts
that the Executive made that we are fixing
with this legislation. In particular, I am
pleased at keeping some of the facilities
open -- the Fulton work-release prison in the
Bronx and others.
And so I will be voting for this
bill, as I did for the bill that we just voted
on. And I'd like to thank the sponsor for an
excellent explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
5740
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 52. Nays,
2. Senators Duane and L. Krueger recorded in
the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
please call up Calendar Number 1920.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1920, Senator Johnson moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Finance,
Assembly Bill Number 11795 and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill Number 7712,
Third Reading Calendar 920.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1920, Assembly Budget Bill, Assembly Print
Number 11795, an act in relation to
5741
implementing certain provisions.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 53. Nays,
1. Senator Duane recorded in the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Hassell-Thompson.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank
you. Thank you, Madam President.
I rise to request unanimous consent
to be recorded in the positive on Calendar
Number S6050B.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Without
objection.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank
you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
5742
there will be a Rules Committee meeting at
3:15.
And if the Senate would stand at
ease now, pending the return of the Rules
report.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: A Rules
Committee meeting at 3:15 in the Majority
Conference Room.
The Senate will stand at ease
pending the report of the Rules Committee.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 3:09 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 3:37 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Rath.
SENATOR RATH: Madam President,
may we return to reports of standing
committees for the reading of the Rules
report, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Bruno,
from the Committee on Rules, reports the
following bills:
5743
Senate Print 973A, by Senator
Farley, an act in relation to affecting the
health insurance benefits;
1803, by Senator Stavisky, an act
to amend the Education Law;
6656C, by Senator Hannon, an act to
amend the Public Health Law;
7720, by Senator Volker, an act to
amend the Criminal Procedure Law;
7733, by Senator Hannon, an act to
amend the Public Health Law;
6473B, by Senator Kuhl, an act
authorizing the City of Corning;
7054B, by Senator Hannon, an act to
amend the Insurance Law;
7633B, by Senator Skelos, an act to
amend the Correction Law;
7658, by Senator Balboni, an act to
amend the Education Law;
7694A, by the Senate Committee on
Rules, an act to authorize the City of Elmira;
7704, by Senator Skelos, an act to
amend the Arts and Cultural Affairs Law;
7709, by Senator Golden, an act to
amend the Real Property Tax Law;
5744
7713A, by Senator Flanagan, an act
to amend the Executive Law and the Criminal
Procedure Law;
7715, by Senator Meier, an act to
amend the Social Services Law and a chapter of
the Laws of 2004;
7717, by Senator Balboni, an act to
amend a chapter of the Laws of 2004;
7718, by Senator Robach, an act to
amend the Corrections Law;
7721, by Senator Maziarz, an act to
amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law;
7726, by Senator Marcellino, an act
to amend the Environmental Conservation Law;
And Senate Print 7729, by Senator
Robach, an act to amend the General
Obligations Law.
All bills ordered direct to third
reading.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Rath.
SENATOR RATH: Move to accept the
reports of the Rules Committee.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All in
favor of accepting the report of the Rules
5745
Committee will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
report is accepted.
Senator Rath.
SENATOR RATH: May we please take
up the noncontroversial reading of the
calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1197, Senator Hannon moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 10834B and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill Number 6656C,
Third Reading Calendar 1197.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1197, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 10834B, an act to amend
5746
the Public Health Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect January 1, 2005.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1921, by Senator Hannon, Senate Print 7054B,
an act to amend the Insurance Law and the
Public Health Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 4. This
act shall take effect on the 60th day.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
5747
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1922, by Senator Skelos, Senate Print 7633B,
an act to amend the Correction Law, in
relation to proceedings.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 7. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 55. Nays,
1. Senator Duane recorded in the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1923, Senator Balboni moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 11649 and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill Number 7658,
Third Reading Calendar 1923.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
5748
1923, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 11649, an act to amend
the Education Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect on the same date and in
the same manner as a chapter of the Laws of
2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1924, by the Senate Committee on Rules, Senate
Print Number 7694A, an act to authorize the
City of Elmira.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a home-rule message at the desk.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 5. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
5749
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1925, by Senator Skelos, Senate Print 7704, an
act to amend the Arts and Cultural Affairs
Law, in relation to exempting.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect on the same date and in
the same manner as a chapter of the Laws of
2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1928, by Senator Meier, Senate Print 7715, an
act to amend the Social Services Law and a
chapter of the Laws of 2004.
5750
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect on the same date and in
the same manner as a chapter of the Laws of
2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1931, by Senator Maziarz, Senate Print 7721,
an act to amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law
and the State Finance Law.
SENATOR RATH: Madam President,
is there a message at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message of necessity at the desk.
SENATOR RATH: Move to accept.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All
those in favor of accepting the message of
necessity will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
5751
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message is accepted.
The Secretary will read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect on the same date and in
the same manner as a chapter of the Laws of
2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1934, Senator Farley moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Civil Service
and Pensions, Assembly Bill Number 4962A and
substitute it for the identical Senate Bill
Number 973A, Third Reading Calendar 1934.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
5752
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1934, by Member of the Assembly Abbate,
Assembly Print Number 4962A, an act in
relation to affecting the health insurance
benefits.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Farley.
SENATOR FARLEY: Pass the bill
now. I just want to explain my vote.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Farley, to explain his vote.
SENATOR FARLEY: This is a very
significant piece of legislation, one that has
been a long time in coming this year. It
passed the Assembly in February.
In essence, what it does is protect
every retired employee in the State of
5753
New York with their health insurance, that
they cannot change the health insurance for
the retired senior unless they change it for
everybody. They can't diminish it. And it's
supported by almost everybody that you can
think of.
The teachers already have that, the
teachers -- retired education people have
this. But this covers every other retired
public employee. It's terribly important,
terribly significant.
I noticed that AARP was here a
moment ago in the gallery. I just wish they
could have been here to see this bill passed,
because it's a very significant piece of
legislation and one that has been a long time
in coming. I urge everybody to support it.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Announce
the results.
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1935, by Senator Stavisky, Senate Print 1803,
5754
an act to amend the Education Law, in relation
to providing a program fee option.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Morahan.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Madam
President, I understand there's several bills
here in front of us that were not on the
calendar. Can I please have the numbers of
the one that came out of Rules that are not on
the calendar so I can understand what it is
we're doing?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: 1197 was
substituted and passed. 1934 was passed.
1935 was passed. And that's the last one you
had that had a question to it; it was Senator
Stavisky's bill.
5755
SENATOR MORAHAN: Take away the
"lay it aside."
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Thank
you very much.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1936, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 7720, an
act to amend the Criminal Procedure Law, in
relation to capital punishment.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Rath.
SENATOR RATH: Is there a message
of necessity at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message of necessity at the desk.
SENATOR RATH: Move to accept.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All in
favor of accepting the message of necessity
will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(Response of "Nay.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message of necessity is accepted.
5756
The Secretary will read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 5. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
SENATOR PATERSON: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker.
Senator Volker, an explanation has
been requested by Senator Paterson, I believe.
SENATOR VOLKER: Sure.
This is a bill that the Governor
sent us the other day relating to the issue of
the deadlock provision of the death penalty.
There's been a lot of discussion on this. And
of course if you're pro-death penalty, I guess
you have an entirely different perspective on
it than if you're anti.
I do have some problems with the
defense attorney, by the way, who are claiming
that this has an ex post facto problem. I
think they probably didn't read the bill.
Because ex post facto provisions really relate
not to sentencing but to convictions. And
5757
what this bill does, by the way, in a
different way -- and I guess the best way to
explain, first of all, what the provision is.
The bill says that the jury, after
a conviction for a capital offense, or a
potential capital offense, then commences a
proceeding which makes a determination as to
what the sentence or the punishment is.
Now, when we did the bill in 1995,
there was considerable discussion over how to
do it. Very honestly, my recollection is that
what the Governor does here is what I really
wanted in 1995. Because what it does is it
gives the jury the maximum ability to make a
decision -- death penalty, life without
parole, or life sentence. You give the jury,
which is traditional American justice, by the
way, the ability to make a decision.
And then if they can't make a
decision, if they're deadlocked -- and there
are provisions in there as to how the judge
does it -- then the sentence would be life
without parole.
Now, under the bill that we passed
in '95, and I was the sponsor, and there was
5758
considerable debate on the issue of the
deadlock provision. And in fact, the Court of
Appeals rather, I think, cleverly used some of
that debate. And Dick -- or Richard -- oh, my
gosh, I'll lose his name. But -- Dollinger,
Dick Dollinger and I, who were debating a lot
in those years, talked about that provision.
And he questioned the deadlock provision.
And what I said was, if I remember
right, personally I thought that the old
deadlock provision, which said that you had
the possibility of death penalty or life
without parole and the alternative in a
deadlock was that you went to the judge, who
could sentence to a life term. Which was 25
years, essentially, to life.
You know, the Court of Appeals, in
what I consider an extremely odd decision, I
always felt that that alternative was much
more favorable to the defendant. And that's
really the reason, if my recollection is
correct, that we decided on that. I didn't
think that there was any constitutional
problem with it. I felt that it was more
favorable to the defendant. And that's why I
5759
have some suspicion as to what the Court of
Appeals did.
But now we're going to go back to
the traditional-type sentencing. And that is,
you give the jury the maximum decision and
then you revert to life without parole. And
that's what the Governor has sent us.
The Assembly actually pretty well
gave us this language in part of the debate.
And the reason they did, by the way, was that
we had a stronger provision in here relating
to remand. And by that I mean the cases that
have already been decided -- and there's only
a couple -- where people have been convicted
and then the death penalty was potentially
authorized and the Court of Appeals has
remanded.
And the LaValle case, as I
understand it, has already been pled out, so I
don't think it will have any -- this will not
have any impact.
And the language that was in one of
the original bills that the DAs wanted is out.
But if you read Section 5, it says: "This act
shall take effect immediately and shall apply
5760
to crimes committed prior to, on or after the
effective date of this act." That refers
really to -- obviously to sentencing, because
you can't go backward and give a sentence that
wasn't there.
The district attorneys will
probably argue: Well, you're giving an
additional sentence. Well, the additional
sentence is a weaker one than was in -- the
jury had in the first place. So it seems to
me that that ex post facto argument is not
valid at all.
Now, if you don't like the death
penalty, if you're opposed to the death
penalty, I'm sure you're probably going to say
this is probably not correct and so forth. If
you're in favor of the death penalty, if you
look at the numbers, if you look at what's
happened since we restored the death penalty,
it seems to me you're going to be in favor of
this.
The next question you're going to
ask me is has the Assembly agreed to this,
even though they gave the language, and the
answer is no. Not so far. My good friend Joe
5761
Messina here tells me it's not even introduced
in the Assembly. However, personally I think
ultimately we will come to an agreement on
this.
But as of right now, this is the
bill that the Governor has sent to us. This
is the bill that the Senate is adopting. But
the Assembly is, at this time, at least, not
agreeing to any death penalty provision that
supposedly corrects the supposed mistake that
we made back in 1995.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: Madam
President, would Senator Volker yield for the
questions that he --
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, will you yield?
The Senator yields.
SENATOR PATERSON: He answered
some of my questions. He has that quality and
that ability to at times anticipate with great
accuracy. So I was wondering if Senator
Volker would yield for --
SENATOR VOLKER: Certainly.
5762
SENATOR PATERSON: Senator, how
does the bill regard any crimes that would
have been committed between June 24th, which
is the date of the court decision -- actually,
June 23rd, and today, being August 11th -- in
other words, that period of time? How does
the bill regard any offenses that would be
committed in that period of time?
SENATOR VOLKER: It will treat it
the same. The provision that I read to you
reads that it shall take effect immediately
and will apply retroactively.
Now, I don't believe there have
been any cases -- since the LaValle case,
there's been no cases that have been decided.
That is, no juries have received any cases.
So there are no new sentencing cases since
then. This, as I said, only applies to
sentencing.
Because the key provision or point
here is we have a two-tiered system which
is -- that most of the country now has, you
first decide guilt or innocence and then you
decide the sentence with a second jury.
SENATOR PATERSON: Madam
5763
President, if the Senator would continue to
yield.
SENATOR VOLKER: Why, certainly.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR PATERSON: So, Senator,
your interpretation is that the sentencing
part of the legislation can be disconnected,
for purposes of legislative review, from the
original bill, but that there is a message or
there certainly is public policy that New York
State has the death penalty should there have
been or should there be a crime committed in
this particular time? Since, as you said, the
Assembly is not going to address this issue
today.
SENATOR VOLKER: Well, I guess
the answer is if a crime -- a murder would
have been committed -- and I don't believe
there were any that were committed that I'm
aware of between June -- that are subject to
the death penalty. I know there were no
trials. But I don't believe -- there could
have been, but I don't really know of any that
were.
5764
But you are right, if there were --
what I think what Senator Paterson is
referring to is let's say that there was a
murder that the DA's looking at after June
whatever it was, the date of the decision.
Then that case could be -- this statute would
be applicable, the sentencing part of it --
because the only change is in sentencing --
would be applicable to that case.
And you are right.
SENATOR PATERSON: Thank you,
Senator.
If the Senator will continue to
yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, will you continue to yield?
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR PATERSON: And on issues
such as the one in the LaValle case, would
this reflect your feeling on this matter that
here, if there was an error -- because there
are many who feel there really wasn't, since
there was a different jury charge in this case
5765
than the one that the law probably would have
called for -- that in that type of situation,
that, since the defendant is already
convicted -- that has already been
established, society has already ruled on the
guilt or innocence -- now the question is what
were the parameters of the sentencing decision
so that there couldn't be any opportunity for
a retrial that would -- might just be another
opportunity to examine the sentencing phase?
Is that correct?
SENATOR VOLKER: That's correct.
And we've done some research on
this whole issue. And because all the
sentencing options were already available --
in fact, what's fascinating about this is that
we're actually giving another sentencing
option. I mean, not only were the options
available to a jury, but now actually we're
giving an additional option.
One could argue that this case is
more favorable to a defendant than the
previous provision because the jury has the
right to look at simply life without parole --
I'm sorry, life sentence, which is 25 to life,
5766
as you know.
One of the things, by the way, I
just want to mention about that a lot of
district attorneys are not aware of, very few
people who are sentenced to 25 years to life
get out after 25 years. Very, very few. In
fact, there's a whole number -- I checked,
because I'd been asked to try to help some
people who have been in for like 35 or 40
years, and parole boards are very reluctant to
let convicted murderers out who have been
sentenced to 25 years to life. And there was
a lot of them years ago, because -- well,
because they're murderers and they are
reluctant to let them out. I just want to
point that out.
SENATOR PATERSON: Madam
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Paterson, on the bill.
SENATOR PATERSON: I want to
thank Senator Volker for his answers. I
5767
remember the discussion that Senator Volker
and Senator Dollinger, who was here at the
time, and I had on the record on this issue in
the beginning of the session in 1995 when the
death penalty was first passed. The two of us
opposed it rather virulently. I don't think
that our point of view has changed
particularly much since then.
But in the institutional sense, I
think that I respect our system and recognize
that there can be technicalities to pieces of
legislation which might extinguish it for the
moment, but that the spirit of the feelings of
the people in the State of New York, as much
as they are different from my personal
feelings, that we can see why there's an
attempt to bring this bill before us this
afternoon.
But the idea that this bill was
coming really has been very short-lived.
There haven't been any public hearings on this
legislation. There hasn't been any real
further perusal to see what it is that we're
doing now and to make sure that it's within
the boundaries of constitutionality, where the
5768
ruling has been that in 1995 our action was
not.
As Senator Volker honestly pointed
out, the Assembly is not taking this bill up
right now. And I don't see what the rush is.
And to be perfectly candid, I think even when
we're not in a rush, I'll probably vote
against the bill.
But just in terms of the
collaborative effort that we as a legislature
are making, I think we probably could do a
little bit better job where our constituents
and the citizens of the State of New York are
concerned.
I don't urge a no vote on this
particular legislation. I'm not really sure
if the post hoc, ergo propter hoc element of
the bill, where there is some sort of ruling
after the fact, even when the Court of Appeals
has struck down the bill, would not apply
here.
Certainly I understand that where a
defendant is already convicted, there would be
really no way that I could see that there
would be a retrial. But for a gap where there
5769
is no legislation covering a particular
entity, I think there was a Florida case some
years ago that showed that you really couldn't
invoke the death penalty where there isn't one
in statute at the time of the actual crime.
And those are some of the issues
that I think just need to be resolved and
negotiated with the Assembly before a proper
bill comes to this house. And at that time,
I'll vote against it, but at least I'll feel
that we have gone through all the steps that
probably would be apparent to designate such a
piece of legislation to be within the
framework of our state constitution.
So the only other thing is this is
an issue that Senator Volker has worked on for
a long period of time, probably a discussion
that he and I have had since I got here 19
years ago. And in spite of the fact that we
disagree, his persuasive powers and his
ability to in many ways enlighten the feelings
of those who have lost relatives to the
heinous crimes for which the perpetrators
become eligible for the death penalty is quite
laudatory. He is very outstanding and has
5770
represented these points of view very well and
has at times shaken what I thought were
unalterable positions that I've had on the
legislation. And it's good to know that even
in disagreement that you have a colleague who
accords themself with such dignity and
expresses his point of view with such
accuracy.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Lachman.
SENATOR LACHMAN: On the bill,
Madam Chair.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Lachman, on the bill.
SENATOR LACHMAN: I'd like to
preface my remarks by stating that I am not in
principle opposed to the death penalty. The
death penalty bill was passed a few months
before I entered this chamber. In fact, if I
had been there, I probably would have voted
for the bill.
But I have serious concerns about
the bill in front of us today which I don't
look upon as a litmus test of whether one is
in favor or opposed to the death penalty.
5771
The question is, why are we
rushing? There have been no public hearings.
There has been inadequate public review. The
district attorneys of New York have not been
involved. The major religious organizations
of the state are opposed to this, and yet we
haven't brought them into the process. I
didn't even see the bill before today.
Ladies and gentlemen, I would like
to posit the premise that this can be called
Exhibit A for a dysfunctional state
legislature. Over the last ten years, New
York has spent $170 million on the death
penalty. No one has received the death
sentence.
Three years ago, His Holiness Pope
John Paul II arrived in America and went to
Illinois, specifically to meet with Governor
George Ryan. Governor Ryan was strongly in
favor of the death penalty bill that was being
debated by the Illinois state legislature.
His Holiness spent three hours pleading with
the governor, saying: I don't want you to
give up on your principles in favor of the
death penalty. All I want you to do is
5772
convince a majority of the Republicans in the
state legislature to ask for a moratorium to
review this, to give it more time, to bring
more people into the process before a decision
was made. Especially in light of the new
evidence that DNA has brought to our
attention, and especially, in fact, as well
some innocent people having received the death
penalty.
Governor Ryan had a totally
different point of view before the meeting
with His Holiness the Pope than he had
afterwards. He asked his colleagues in his
party not to be in favor or opposed to the
death penalty but to create a moratorium for
further study, for greater involvement of
agencies and organizations that have not been
involved.
And that is all I seek. For
someone who is not in principle opposed to the
death penalty, I want a moratorium. I want
more information. I want more hearings. I
want greater review. I want individuals and
organizations that have not heretofore been
involved to be involved in the process.
5773
Therefore, I will be voting against
this bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hassell-Thompson.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank
you, Madam President.
For all intents and purposes, my
understanding is right now the State of
New York does not have, does not have a death
penalty bill. The Court of Appeals, in their
June 24th decision ruling that the death
penalty is unconstitutional, put a moratorium
in place, and it gives us a perfect
opportunity to abolish the death penalty
permanently. Life without parole is a fair
and viable option that this house should be
open to, and we should not be doing anything
to fix the death penalty.
This is not a technical fix. It is
asking us to reinstate a death penalty while
one does not legally exist in New York State.
Under the Court of Appeals decision, life
imprisonment without parole is the only
available sanction for first-degree murder if
we do nothing legislatively.
5774
More importantly, 66 percent of
those Democrats who have been polled around
New York prefer a sentence of life without
parole for people who have committed murder,
while only 25 percent preferred the death
penalty.
The statistics go on, but that's
not the issue. What is at issue is that there
are 270 organizations across this state that
have called for a moratorium on the death
penalty. The New York City, Buffalo, Albany,
Mount Vernon, and Rochester City Councils, the
Syracuse Common Council, and other
municipalities have also called for and sent
resolutions calling for such a moratorium.
This call in a sense has been
answered by the Court of Appeals. We should
leave the death penalty alone. It would be
foolhardy to fix it. All the reasons to
oppose the death penalty in 1995 continue and
have grown more significant. Since 1973, at
least 114 innocent people have been sentenced
to death in the United States. New York
taxpayers have spent at least $170 million on
the death penalty, although no executions have
5775
taken place. Think how much good this money
would do if it were reallocated to communities
such as those that I represent.
We must speak with one voice in
this effort, and that voice must say we should
let the death penalty die.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Liz Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Krueger, on the bill.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: I share my
colleagues' concern on the issues that they
have raised, particularly Senator Lachman and
Senator Ruth Hassell-Thompson's points about
why we shouldn't go forward today,
particularly since this is such a critical
issue for the public, for the morality of this
state, and for our role as legislators.
And why would we do this bill
before it's even aged three days, before we've
had public hearings, before we've reviewed the
evidence of the times.
And Senator Paterson and Senator
5776
Volker had a discussion revisiting the debates
of 1995. And I wasn't in the Legislature in
1995; I like to believe I would have voted
against the death penalty bill then. But even
if I had been here and hadn't, we have nine
more years of data since then. And that data
shows that we should not move forward with
this bill today.
One, as was said earlier, we now
have life in prison without parole. We did
not have that as an option in New York State
in '95 when the death penalty was passed.
Two, in the last nine years we've
seen radical changes in the ability to uncover
new evidence through DNA technology, evidence
that is not actually always available to
individuals convicted of murder in our state.
Three, we have data from our own
nine years of the death penalty in this state
documenting that it's not working, even before
the court overturned, on constitutional
grounds, our law.
As Senator Hassell-Thompson said,
we spent $170 million on the death penalty,
dramatically more than the cost of life in
5777
prison for every person who has been on death
row in New York State.
We have documentation that although
upstate New York counties account for only
20 percent of all homicides in the state of
New York, they account for 65 percent of all
capital prosecutions. We know that in six of
62 counties in New York, 65 percent of all
death-noticed cases have gone to court, and
yet since 1995 there were seven death
sentences issued. Three of the seven in
Suffolk County, a misdistribution of the use
of this law.
The death penalty does not act as a
deterrent. That has been documented
throughout this country.
Those who murder whites are more
than twice as likely to face the death penalty
as those who murder blacks, raising serious
questions about the racial discrimination
questions in death-penalty law.
Of the 459 defendants indicted for
first-degree murder in the state of New York
since 1995, 59 percent were black, 19 percent
were white, and 20 percent were Hispanic. Of
5778
the fifty defendants where a death notice was
filed, 48 percent were black, 40 percent were
white, and 10 percent were Hispanic.
That's New York State. But we have
much more data from the country as a whole
where the death penalty been implemented for a
longer period of time, with people put to
death. And in fact, the data from around the
country is truly frightening. The definitive
report on the analysis of death penalty cases
and error in capital cases that was put out
through Columbia University, "A Broken
System," a two-part report, highlights that.
Sixty-eight percent of all death
verdicts imposed and fully reviewed in this
country during the period 1973 to 1995 were
reversed by courts due to serious errors --
68 percent of the cases throughout the
country.
And an analysis presented that
76 percent of the reversals at the two appeals
stages where data are available for study were
because defense lawyers had been egregiously
incompetent, police and prosecutors had
suppressed exculpatory evidence or committed
5779
other professional misconduct, jurors had been
misinformed about the law, or judges and
jurors had been biased.
Eighty-two percent of the cases
sent back for retrial at the second appeal
phase ended in sentences less than death,
including 9 percent that ended in not guilty
verdicts.
The data from throughout the
country for the period '73 to '95 is showing
us why we should not move forward to
reestablish a death penalty in New York State.
The data shows that indiscriminate
use of the death penalty is creating a high
risk of mistakes to occur. It is showing, the
data is showing that race and politics and a
poorly performing law enforcement system leads
to errors. And in fact, having a death
penalty increases the likelihood of errors in
the already overburdened and underfunded state
court systems, even for non-death penalty
cases.
The findings of the reports are
startling. The higher the rate at which a
state or county imposes death verdicts, the
5780
greater the possibility that each death
verdict will be reversed because of serious
error. The more states impose death penalty
sentences in cases that are not highly
aggravated, the higher risk of serious error.
Comparisons of particular counties
and states throughout the country, their
capital sentencing and their capital error
rates, illustrate a strong relationship
between frequent death sentencing and error,
meaning the more you use the death sentence,
the more likely you are to have a higher and
higher rate of error in your decisions.
There are many pressures out there
associated with the overuse of the death
penalty. I would argue that those pressures
are why we are dealing with a bill without it
having even aged three days and no discussion
with the public and no hearings, and no
opportunity for the public to send a message
to us about how they feel about the death
penalty based on all of the data that is out
there.
The states that have used the death
penalty have found that it increased their
5781
costs and kept their system from doing their
job. States have found that the poor quality
of trial proceedings has increased the risk of
serious and reversible error. Chronic capital
error rates have persisted over time. We're
not getting better at it, as many states have
had a death penalty in place now for nearly 20
years. And state and federal appeals judges
cannot be relied upon to catch all the serious
trial errors in capital cases.
I urge this Legislature not to rush
forward. As was said, the decision by the
courts has basically null and voided the death
penalty in New York State. That is a better
position for us to be in, given the evidence
that is out there and growing throughout the
country.
We made a mistake in '95. Perhaps
we didn't have all the evidence then. I
believe that we do now, and we owe it to the
public to give them the opportunity to
participate in hearings with experts about
where New York State should move forward from,
here and now in 2004.
I urge my colleagues to vote
5782
against this bill.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Connor.
SENATOR CONNOR: Thank you, Mr.
President.
I voted against this bill once, or
the predecessor of this bill. And I voted
against Senator Volker's first death penalty
bill from 1978 until 1994, virtually every
year. In the early years, it didn't pass by
so much, nor was it overridden here. In the
early years, in fact -- you know, from '78 to
'82, there were more than a handful of
Republican Senators who were against it. And
virtually everyone on this side of the
aisle -- not everyone -- was against it.
Attitudes change. Political
attitudes change. But certain realities don't
change. In 1995, when we voted on the death
penalty last, I was privileged to still have
living then my grandfather, who was born in
1890 and died in 1995. He was an
Irish-American, born about a year after his
parents emigrated. He was a working man.
5783
Never made more than 90 bucks a week in his
life. That's what he was making when he
retired in 1955.
He grew up poor. He was a
semiprofessional athlete on the weekends. He
was a very religious and pious person. He
loved to hunt. As I've said before, he taught
me how to shoot and hunt and so on. He wasn't
what you'd call a shrinking liberal, although
as a young man he was involved in organizing
attempts at places he worked. He was in the
rubber workers' strike of 1912.
And I remember as a young boy you'd
hear about the death penalty, you'd hear
somebody's going to the chair. And I said to
him: "Gee, what about that?" And he said,
"That's a very bad thing." And we said, "Oh,
are you against that?" And he said yeah.
Because in his experience -- see, today we
focus on black and brown and white and who's
most likely to get the death penalty.
And I'm not suggesting that a
hundred and some years ago black folks in
America did not have this penalty inflicted
upon them disproportionately, because I'm sure
5784
they did. But so did everybody else who was
on the back.
My grandfather pointed out to me --
and you have to know your history, but if you
know what went on in the '20s and the '30s,
Loeb and Leopold lived; Sacco and Vanzetti
were executed. Sacco and Vanzetti were poor.
Loeb and Leopold's families hired the great
Clarence Darrow, at an astronomical fee.
There are various discussions -- some
people -- Darrow tried to let on he got
50,000. There are those who say he got
$250,000 to defend them.
As we know, he pled them guilty and
then spent two or three days pleading for
their life, to the point where he got the
judge crying and they got life in prison. But
they were rich. As John Marchi once said in a
debate on this, show me the millionaire who
went to the chair. It's a rare, rare event.
The fact of the matter is, it's
never been applied fairly on a socioeconomic
basis. There was a column about 25 or 30
years ago in one of the newspapers where the
columnist actually went to the death house, I
5785
don't know if it was Green Haven or Ossining,
in the late 19th and early 20th century. They
had logbooks, they had a logbook of those who
were executed. And the interesting thing is
it's like a social history of New York State.
You look in the 1880s and the
1890s, early 1900s, and you see names like Bat
Shea. I think that means something to someone
who wrote a book about it, our
parliamentarian. But you see a preponderance
of Irish-American names. And shortly
thereafterwards, you see yes, there were
Jewish gangsters. You see Jewish names. And
we all heard of Lepke Buchalter and others who
were executed. And there were
Italian-American names. And then, as you got
into the '40s and '50s, there are names that
sound like they're African-American. And
then, yes, the Latinos as we got into the '50s
start predominating in that logbook, that
running list of death of those killed by the
state.
Murderers? Yes, many or most were
murderers. They certainly were all convicted
of murder. But why the clumping that way?
5786
They weren't the only murderers. Those ethnic
groups weren't producing the only murderers,
they just happened to be the folks on the
bottom, the folks who didn't have a million
bucks for their defense. And they got the
chair.
Any penalty that so discriminates
that way can't be fair, can't be a real
deterrent to all who would wantonly murder.
Because if you're rich, first of all, forget
whether you get the chair. Your likelihood of
being convicted if you're rich is less because
of the kind of defense you can mount. And
then if you are convicted, your likelihood of
being executed goes down.
Secondly, Madam President, we've
learned so much since 1995. You know, in all
those debates that I participated in from 1978
to 1994, people would say on the floor,
opponents would say: It's a final,
irrevocable penalty. And when we make a
mistake, and you know it's bound to happen,
we're going to execute an innocent person, you
can't give them their life back. Someone
who's getting life in prison, if later proven
5787
to be innocent, can be released.
And we would be assured by the
sponsor -- and the sponsor I have the utmost
respect for -- that, oh, those instances where
people are wrongly convicted are minuscule.
And frankly, I believed that then. We all
believed that then. While we all acknowledge
that our criminal justice system, which we
think is probably the best, certainly better
than anything else that's been created to give
decisions of guilt, innocence and so on -- it
is the best, but we all acknowledge it's a
human system and it's fallible and it can make
mistakes. But we all believed, those who were
against the death penalty and its supporters,
of, oh, the possibility of a wrongful
conviction was so slight. Yes, it happens,
but it's a rare instance; certainly a risk
worth taking to protect the public at large.
But what have we learned since
then? Ah, DNA. I won't say there wasn't DNA
then. Hell, there was DNA from back to the
apes and before. But DNA was a term in our
biology textbooks. Nobody had been able to
measure it, use -- computers to compare
5788
strands of DNA hadn't been built.
What happened once that was
accomplished? In those cases where there was
physical evidence -- and not just murder
cases, but other sorts of cases -- we have
found a shockingly high number of instances of
the criminal justice system convicting
innocent persons. And thankfully, in those
cases that weren't capital cases, we had the
ability to release the person. And indeed,
I'm sure the states involved compensated those
persons too for their wrongful conviction.
You know, why is it, why is it
there's such fallibility in our system? Well,
I did make this argument years ago. Under our
system of criminal justice, we've all heard
the term circumstantial evidence: Oh, there's
circumstantial evidence. It's only a
circumstantial case. And, yes, you can be
convicted on circumstantial evidence. But our
criminal justice system has always said direct
evidence is the best evidence.
What is direct evidence?
Invariably, direct evidence are eyewitnesses.
Yet -- and it's there in the literature. And
5789
I wish we could have hearings and explore this
with those who have conducted the surveys and
studies. But it's in the literature.
Fifty people in a small auditorium
with a stage, told: "In one minute, you're
going to witness a crime. Then you will be
asked questions about it. Please pay
attention." They all focus on the stage.
Someone comes out on the stage. Someone else
comes out, whacks them over the head,
whatever. They pretend to fall. The person
runs.
They then quiz the 50 people:
Identify the person. Eighty percent of them
will pick the wrong person out of a lineup.
They just saw it five minutes before. They
were told watch, pay attention. Yet they
couldn't do it accurately.
Yet we convict people on the
eyewitness testimony of persons to a real
crime where they weren't prepared for it to
happen, it sprang, as it were, out of nowhere,
they had all of 30 seconds or 60 seconds to
observe. Unlike the people in that audience,
they were actually in fear, very often,
5790
themselves of the person waving the gun or the
knife, or the armed robber or whatever.
So they're surprised, it takes 30
to 60 seconds, they're in fear themselves.
And a month later or two weeks later or two
days later in a lineup, they pick a person out
and say: That's the person. And we in our
criminal justice system allow that that is the
strongest, most reliable evidence of guilt.
Read the appellate decisions.
They'll find procedural flaws but say:
Listen, they couldn't have affected the
outcome, there were two eyewitnesses who said
whatever-whatever, who picked this person out.
That's why, Madam President and my
colleagues, that's why we have such a high
rate of wrongful convictions. But we could
only prove it once there was this scientific
test of DNA that could show, frankly, how
shockingly high the rate of wrongful
conviction is where you're able to use that
kind of evidence.
Now we have the ultimate penalty.
We know it's been used against the poorest in
our society; historically, always been true.
5791
We know those who are wealthy enough for the
best defenses can almost always avoid it even
when they qualify for it. And we now know
from scientific evidence that our criminal
justice system convicts people wrongfully in a
much higher rate or percentage than we ever
believed was possible. I think we know why,
too.
So what do we do? Do we -- are we
presented with a death penalty bill? You see,
what we're being presented with was this
solution that the sponsor offered to us nearly
three decades ago for the problem of three
decades ago. This was a hot topic in the late
'70s and the '80s.
But we're in a new century now,
with new problems, new concerns, and, yes, new
ability. The very sponsor of this bill has
sponsored the use of DNA to capture the
guilty, to identify the guilty in other
legislation we've done. So are we presented
with a bill -- and I'd be against it because
of my inherent moral aversion to the death
penalty.
But, and I don't want to help the
5792
sponsors, but I don't see a bill here that
says, okay, we're only going to use the death
penalty where there's indisputable scientific
DNA evidence that the person is guilty. We
have that ability to be sure. And if someone
feels so morally and practically committed to
death penalty as just and right, why not at
least limit it to those cases where there can
be virtually no doubt that the person is the
perpetrator of the murder?
Madam President, this bill leaves
us back where we were three decades ago, with
a system that will convict the innocent over
and over and put the burden on the condemned
to then surmount all the procedural barriers
to get a hearing, new trial, whatever and be
exonerated.
I say no to this. I don't
understand why we didn't take this opportunity
to do what was done 30 or 40 years ago, what
was done 40-some years ago before they
repealed the death penalty. And that is hold
hearings, hear from the experts, yes, hear
from victims, hear from psychologists on both
sides. I'm sure there is evidence about why
5793
the final penalty, the death penalty, may, for
victims or their families, be of consolation.
There may be some evidence it's a deterrent.
I seriously doubt it. But let's hear all the
evidence is. And let's hear about what we can
do to ensure, particularly when the penalty is
a final, irrevocable penalty, that we got the
guilty people.
Illinois, look at the experience
there. It was shocking. It wasn't shocking
that the governor commuted the sentences; it
was shocking that in the cases that were
looked at there was such a high rate of
wrongfully convicted people sitting on death
row.
But a process -- it's time. It's
decades since we've had hearings on this. And
frankly, it's nearly a decade since we had a
death penalty on the bill. No one was ever
executed under that death penalty. It's very,
very hard for anybody to convince me or anyone
else that look, see, crime is down because we
adopted the death penalty.
Crime is down because we have
better policing. Crime is down because we
5794
have longer sentencing for certain crimes that
keep people in who otherwise would be
recidivists. And crime is down because if you
look at your population trends, we hit a
decade where the number of males in the
population between the ages of 15 and 25 took
a big dip. And if you look at your
statistics, that's who commits most of the
violent crime, that demographic group, young
males. Not older males, not women in any age
demographic. It's young males, unfortunately,
who are committing the crime.
We've, in our state's population,
had a big dip in the number of people who fit
into that category. That's why crime is down.
Better policing. Certainly I do believe that
eight years of a great economy helped keep
crime down from 1992 through 2000. And the
other factors certainly being the population
dip and the policing.
So let's hear the evidence. I'd
like to know what the evidence about
conditions today is, not three decades ago. I
want to address the problems of today and
tomorrow, not three decades ago. This bill
5795
patches up a supposed solution to problems of
two and three decades ago.
I'm against it. I'm voting no. I
urge my colleagues to vote no.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Any
other member wishing to speak on the bill?
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 5. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Smith, to explain your vote.
SENATOR ADA SMITH: In the past,
I have voted against the death penalty, and I
will continue to do so. And in all of the
literature that we have received, is one quote
that is very poignant, and that is made by
David Kaczynski, the executive director of
New Yorkers Against the Death Penalty, when he
states that at least 114 innocent people have
been sentenced to death in the United States:
"New York's law is full of disparities and is
inequitable in its application."
I nor my colleagues will want to be
responsible for any one person being put to
death that was innocent. Therefore, I vote
5796
no.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
SENATOR VOLKER: To explain my
vote.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, to explain his vote, I'm sorry.
SENATOR VOLKER: You know, I --
since this is not the final chapter of this
bill, I will not respond.
But I just have to quickly say to
you, Marty, please. I mean, this business of
114 innocent people and all those people in
Illinois. As a good friend of mine who's a DA
said, there's a hell of a lot of murderers
walking around the streets of Illinois.
You know, of the 11 people that
were -- it's what, 11 people who were
supposedly exonerated because of DNA, there
was a lot of other evidence. You know about
double killers? You know about two people and
they use DNA, they use evidence on one, it
turns out to be with the other one? There's
an awful lot of strange things going on in
Illinois.
5797
And I can tell you, there's going
to be a study someday -- because nobody does
studies of pro-death penalty, they only do
them on anti. But let me tell you, in
New York there is not one case in the history
of this state -- and I challenge professors
who went out and you should have seen the
cases they found that shows that an innocent
person was executed. And I've heard all these
stories and all that -- no, we're explaining
our votes. I know about the book you're going
to tell me about. Yeah, I know. But it was
baloney. And there's a reason for it, and I
understand it. Not his, by the way; there's
another guy.
But my point is this. The murder
rate in this state is down again, just as it
was after -- when we restored the death
penalty years ago, it went down. Then we got
rid of it, and the murder rate shot up,
particularly in New York City. Now it has
gone down. Somebody said we spent
$170 million. A lot of that money was spent
defending people. We have the best defense
counsels in the country here in New York.
5798
Nobody spends as much money as we do, because
I want to make sure nobody gets executed
improperly either.
And we have people, more people
that have pled guilty to life without parole
and 80 years to life -- why did they do that?
Because they were petrified of the death
penalty. We have saved hundreds of millions
of dollars in trials because of the fact that
we had a death penalty out there that made
people plead to life without parole and huge
sentences.
I vote aye.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Duane, to explain his vote.
SENATOR DUANE: Some would like
to believe that we are a civilized society.
We are not. The death penalty is morally
wrong. I vote no.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Madam President.
To explain my vote.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
5799
Schneiderman, to explain his vote.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: I know
feelings are strong about this issue and
tempers run high. But I think that the
evidence presented is consistent and really
unrebutted in one critical respect. And I
would urge that, as we continue this debate --
because this debate will continue -- the
respected sponsor to view the evidence
objectively.
There is no correlation from state
to state or from country to country between
the death penalty and a reduction in crime.
It's never been demonstrated. I realize that,
you know, we can say it, but it doesn't make
it true.
And I think those of us who
actually have spent time working in prisons
and spent time with prisoners know, frankly,
the notion that the most violent criminals
that we're most afraid of are deterred by the
death penalty is absurd. It's just absurd.
You know.
And if you spent time with the
people that you purport to be most concerned
5800
about -- you know, if you wanted to make an
argument that you could eliminate securities
fraud if you had the death penalty for
securities fraud, that's an argument. I would
be opposed to it, but at least that's a group
of people you could deter. We'll have the
cleanest markets in the world. But the people
you're concerned about for violent crime are
not deterred.
And, finally, I don't think it's an
argument for the death penalty that people are
so petrified of it that they give up their
right to go to trial because they're afraid
that if they lose they may be executed. There
may be some innocent people who are giving up
their right to trial because they're afraid of
that.
So I'm going to vote no. I'd urge
everyone to vote no. And as we continue this
debate, let's try and stay objective about it.
I think the facts are on the side of those who
favor a moratorium.
Thank you, Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
5801
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 36. Nays,
22.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Point of
order. Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Point
of --
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I didn't
hear him say who voted no.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Point of
order. Please announce the no votes.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Announce the
no votes, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will announce the no votes.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1936 are
Senators Andrews, Breslin, Brown, Connor,
Diaz, Dilan, Duane, Gonzalez,
Hassell-Thompson, L. Krueger, Lachman, Mendez,
Montgomery, Oppenheimer, Parker, Paterson,
5802
Sabini, Sampson, Schneiderman, A. Smith,
M. Smith, and Stavisky.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Madam President,
could we call up Calendar Number 1929.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1929, Senator Balboni moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 11787 and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill Number 7717,
Third Reading Calendar 1929.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Move the
substitution.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1929, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 11787, an act to amend a
5803
chapter of the Laws of 2004 relating to
creating the New York State Veterans' Cemetery
Siting Committee.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Could we now
take up Calendar Number 1926.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1926, Senator Golden moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 11788 and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill Number 7709,
Third Reading Calendar 1926.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
5804
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1926, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 11788, an act to amend
the Real Property Tax Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect on the same date and in
the same manner as a chapter of the Laws of
2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Madam President,
could we call up Calendar Number 1927.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1927, by Senator Flanagan, Senate Print 7713A,
5805
an act to amend the Executive Law and the
Criminal Procedure Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Madam President,
is there a message at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message at the desk.
SENATOR HANNON: Move to accept
the message, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All in
favor of accepting the message of necessity
will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(Response of "Nay.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message is accepted.
Read the last section.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Lay it
aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is laid aside.
SENATOR HANNON: Madam President,
5806
would we be able to take up Calendar Number
1933.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1933, by Senator Robach, Senate Print 7729, an
act to amend the General Obligations Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Is there a
message on that bill, Madam President?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message of necessity at the desk.
SENATOR HANNON: Move to accept
the message.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All in
favor of accepting the message of necessity
will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(Response of "Nay.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message is accepted.
The Secretary will read the last
5807
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect on the same date as a
chapter of the laws of 2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Madam President,
could we now return to the order of motions
and resolutions.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Motions
and resolutions.
SENATOR HANNON: I'd like to call
up Senate Print 7704.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1925, by Senator Skelos, Senate Print 7704, an
act to amend the Arts and Cultural Affairs
Law.
SENATOR HANNON: Madam President,
5808
I move to reconsider the vote by which this
bill was passed and ask that the bill be
restored to third reading.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll on reconsideration.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
SENATOR HANNON: Madam President,
I now move to discharge, from the Committee on
Rules, Assembly Print Number 11784A and
substitute it for the identical bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
Senator Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Can we now read
that bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1925, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 11784A, an act to amend
the Arts and Cultural Affairs Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
5809
act shall take effect on the same date and in
the same manner as a chapter of the Laws of
2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Could we now
call up Senate Bill 7694A, recalled from the
Assembly.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1924, by the Senate Committee on Rules, Senate
Print Number 7694A, an act to authorize the
City of Elmira.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Move to
reconsider the vote by which this bill was
passed and ask that the bill be restored to
third reading.
5810
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll on reconsideration.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: I would now move
to discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 11781A and substitute it
for the identical bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1924, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 11781A, an act to
authorize the City of Elmira.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a home-rule message at the desk.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 5. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
5811
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Madam President,
may we stand at ease for the moment.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senate will stand at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 4:52 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 5:04 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Madam President,
would you be able to call up Calendar Number
1927.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1927, by Senator Flanagan, Senate Print 7713A,
an act to amend the Executive Law and the
Criminal Procedure Law.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN:
Explanation.
5812
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Flanagan, an explanation has been requested by
Senator Eric Schneiderman.
SENATOR FLANAGAN: Thank you,
Madam President.
This bill basically started last
year with Assemblyman Morelle, through the
efforts of the Association of Counties. We
tried to do some work with the probation
people with our colleagues in the Assembly.
We were unable to reach an agreement last
year. This has been part of the budget
process but in some respects has been pulled
out now to what in many respects was the
original bill that we had discussed.
I would respectfully suggest a
couple of different things that this bill
does. It expands opportunities for our
localities, in particular our counties, to
impose certain fees for drug testing,
electronic monitoring, and for administrative
fees. There are caps on those fees. There
are hardship provisions in case of a person's
inability to pay.
This has been done in consultation
5813
with probation personnel. This is supported
by the counties. This would provide some form
of tax relief to our counties for the cost of
administering these programs.
And I would also add that this
really started as a result of one of the
counties in the State of New York going to the
Attorney General inquiring as to whether or
not these programs were legal, because there
were a number of counties who were actually
doing them. The Attorney General came back
and said: No, you don't have the authority to
do this. I believe you should have the
authority to do this. The Legislature should
move to correct it.
So this would codify the actions of
some of our municipalities throughout the
state. The Attorney General's office has
offered an opinion on that subject, believes
that this should be done. And again, it's
supported by the Association of Counties.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Montgomery.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, Madam
President, as I wipe the tears from my eyes.
5814
I would like to ask if Senator Flanagan,
through you, would yield for a question.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Flanagan, will you yield?
SENATOR FLANAGAN: Sure.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes.
Senator Flanagan, I see that your bill would
allow the localities to charge up to $30 per
month per probationer for the cost of their
drug test, not to exceed $600 per year. Is
that correct?
SENATOR FLANAGAN: No, that is
incorrect.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Which part
did I get wrong?
SENATOR FLANAGAN: The part that
you reference in relation to drug testing is
not to up to $30 a month, it's up to $8 per
test. The $30 per month is related to the
administrative fee that may be charged for
probation in general.
I would offer to Senator Montgomery
too that these types of provisions exist right
5815
now in relation to DWI cases, for an
administrative fee to be imposed. This is an
extension beyond that.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Okay. Thank
you.
Madam President, if Senator
Flanagan would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Flanagan, will you continue to yield?
SENATOR FLANAGAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Okay. Thank
you, Senator.
So the correction that I should
note is that it's $30 for administrative
fees -- an administrative fee, and
additionally $8 per test. And the fees for
the drug testing is not to exceed $600?
SENATOR FLANAGAN: Correct.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And the
administrative fee of $30 per month is $360,
is that correct, per year?
SENATOR FLANAGAN: Yes.
Senator Duane is obviously coming
5816
to your aid here to help wipe away the tears.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Because I'm
just about to cry.
All right. So in addition to that,
am I correct in reading that it also imposes a
fee of $8 per day for electronic monitoring,
not to exceed $900 per probationer per year?
Is that correct?
SENATOR FLANAGAN: Yes.
Well, let me make one
clarification. This is at local option. So
it does not mandate that this be done; it
provides our counties with the option of doing
so if they choose.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: All right.
If Senator Flanagan would continue to yield,
Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, thank
you.
Senator Flanagan, is there anything
in your bill -- or should I ask, what is the
penalty for people who are unable to meet the
requirements of $30 per month and/or $8 per
5817
test and $8 per day for their electronic
monitoring?
SENATOR FLANAGAN: Well,
anyone -- the probationer has an opportunity
to petition. First of all, they have to be
properly notified. They have to be told what
the fee is, they have to be given it in
writing, and they do have to be given the
opportunity to come in and suggest that that
would create an undue hardship based on their
ability to pay. So they certainly can make an
attempt to have any of these fees waived.
I would suggest, although I can't
say with a hundred percent clarity, that if
one were to violate any of these fees, the
person would be subject to the same penalties
or issues that they would face under existing
law. A violation of probation I'm sure at
some point could end you back up in court
before a judge.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Madam
President, through you, would Senator Flanagan
continue to yield.
SENATOR FLANAGAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
5818
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: So, Senator
Flanagan, is it possible that depending on the
provisions of your probation, you could
theoretically -- if you're unable to pay, that
becomes a problem and the locality decides
that you have violated your probation, you
then go back to court to be remanded once
again based on violation of your probation?
Is that the case? Is that a possibility?
SENATOR FLANAGAN: I would
suggest that you're taking a leap of faith.
It may not necessarily be the case. Simply
because somebody goes back to court doesn't
necessarily mean that they're going to be
remanded.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: But if you
violate probation, it's very possible that you
can be.
Madam President, if Senator
Flanagan would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: I'm sure
the Senator would continue to yield.
SENATOR FLANAGAN: Yes.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
5819
One last question, Senator
Flanagan. In the event that a person is
unable to pay because they are on some sort of
public assistance -- maybe Social Security, I
don't know -- does this money come directly
out of their Social Security check or whatever
their assistance might be? Is that your
intent?
How will it -- if -- assuming that
maybe they're working, maybe they don't earn
enough, is there any limit in terms of an
income that is required in order for you to
get this money from them? Or it doesn't
matter how little they make, they still pay?
Is there any graduating fee?
How do you determine what percent
of this gets paid over what a person's income
is? Is there any income standard attached to
this fee?
SENATOR FLANAGAN: I believe it's
a sliding scale based on federal poverty
guidelines. It's certainly not -- it wouldn't
be my intent -- I'm not going to tell you that
I know exactly with 100 percent clarity what
existing law is. It's certainly, I don't
5820
think, our intention to suggest if you can't
pay this fee, they're going to take away your
food money. And I don't think people on
probation are looking to do that.
I mean, there's a specific
provision that allows somebody to come in and
say, here's my situation. And I would like to
believe -- and I can certainly check. I don't
want to just say yes to you and be wrong. I
will check.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: All right.
Thank you. Thank you, Senator Flanagan.
Madam President, on the bill
briefly.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Montgomery, on the bill.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes. Madam
President, this obviously is a bill that
Senator Flanagan says he intends for it to be
revenue enhancement for the localities, a tax,
if you will, that will be paid specifically by
those people who are on probation.
Now, my assumption is if the rest
of the state is anything like where I
represent, a large number of those
5821
probationers are also young people. So this
is essentially going to be a tax that falls
very heavily on young people.
And we just -- I did an amendment
yesterday to -- just to raise $10 million to
provide for employment, summer youth
employment. And then, of course, that was
voted down. And while we don't want to
support youth employment in our state, we do
want to institute a program which really will
heavily tax young people over and above what
they already -- the burden that they already
have to bear in terms of not having access to
employment, not having other opportunities and
so on and so forth.
This really is, I think, a bill
that does not have a lot of thought.
Certainly it doesn't reflect any compassion.
It doesn't reflect an interest in
supporting -- moving people away from
probation, supporting the fact that we don't
want them to go further into the criminal
justice system so we would like to give more
incentive, as opposed to punishing people and
essentially creating a form of entrapment so
5822
that they will permanently remain
poverty-stricken and more inclined not to
break the cycle of crime in society.
So I think this is a very bad bill.
And in fact, I'm not sure, I can't figure how
much revenue is going to be raised based on
this bill. Because if we're talking about
poor people, I can't imagine a lot of these
people have a lot of money. I can't imagine
that you're in fact going to collect anywhere
near twelve, fifteen, $2,000 a year from this
group of people. So what is it going to
merit?
And by the time we spend the
additional money bringing them back to court,
perhaps further incarcerating them and so
forth and so on, we will lose any sense of
what the bill is purported to do, and that's
to raise revenue.
So I'm going to vote no, and I hope
that my colleagues will join me in rejecting
this idea because it's very bad for our
communities, it doesn't help us in any way. I
don't believe it's going to be
revenue-producing. And in fact, it goes
5823
against whatever we've tried to do in terms of
reforming the criminal justice system. This
is the exact opposite.
So I vote no.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Any
other Senator wishing to speak on the bill?
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Flanagan, to explain his vote.
SENATOR FLANAGAN: Thank you.
Senator Montgomery, now the tears
are in my own eyes. You cut me to the quick
suggesting that this bill has not undergone a
lot of thought.
I wanted to clarify two things. On
page 3 of the bill, Section 7, lines 32
through 45, they speak to 200 percent of the
federal poverty level. It speaks to
regulations being created that would look for
indicia of one's ability to pay. I don't
5824
believe that there's any goal here to simply
go after someone who doesn't have a lot of
money. Quite the contrary.
And I would also just add that this
bill has been negotiated with the Assembly,
with Assemblyman Morelle. Some concerns that
I know Assemblyman Aubry in particular had
last year in relation to this issue I hope and
I do believe have been addressed. And I'm
comfortable that a great deal of thought went
into this bill and that it is the right thing
to do.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Announce
the results.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1927 are
Senators Breslin, Connor, Duane, Gonzalez,
Hassell-Thompson, L. Krueger, Onorato, Parker,
Paterson, Schneiderman, A. Smith and M. Smith.
Also Senator Stavisky. Also Senator Sabini.
Also Senator Montgomery. Ayes, 44. Nays, 15.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Hannon.
5825
SENATOR HANNON: Madam President,
there will be an immediate meeting of the
Finance Committee in the Majority Conference
Room.
We'll stand at ease awaiting the
report of the Finance Committee.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Immediate meeting of the Finance Committee in
the Majority Conference Room.
The Senate will stand at ease
awaiting the report of the Finance Committee.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 5:20 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 5:32 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Balboni.
SENATOR BALBONI: Madam
President, can we please call up Senate
Calendar 1344.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1344, by Senator Kuhl, Senate Print 6473B, an
act authorizing the City of Corning.
5826
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Balboni.
SENATOR BALBONI: Is there a
message of necessity at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message of necessity at the desk.
SENATOR BALBONI: I move that we
accept the message.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All
those in favor of accepting the message of
necessity will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message is accepted.
There is a home-rule message at the
desk.
The Secretary will read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 7. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
5827
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Balboni.
SENATOR BALBONI: Yes, Madam
President. Could we please take up Calendar
Number 1937.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1937, by Senator Hannon, Senate Print 7733, an
act to amend the Public Health Law, in
relation to the fee-for-service continuing
care retirement communities.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Balboni.
SENATOR BALBONI: Is there a
message of necessity at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message of necessity at the desk.
SENATOR BALBONI: I would move to
accept the message.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity.
5828
All those in favor will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message is accepted.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 13. This
act shall take effect on the same date and in
the same manner as a chapter of the Laws of
2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Balboni.
SENATOR BALBONI: Yes, Madam
President. If we could return to the reports
of standing committees, I believe there's a
report of the Finance Committee at the desk.
I ask that it be read.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
5829
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Johnson,
from the Committee on Finance, reports the
following bills:
Senate Print 6051A, Senate Budget
Bill, an act making appropriations for the
support of government: Legislature and
Judiciary Budget;
6054B, Budget Bill, an act making
appropriations for the support of government:
Health and Mental Hygiene Budget;
6055B, Budget Bill, an act making
appropriations for the support of government;
6058B, Budget Bill, an act to amend
the State Finance Law;
6059B, Budget Bill, an act to
authorize the Dormitory Authority;
And Senate Print 6060B, Budget
Bill, an act to amend Chapter 101 of the Laws
of 2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All
bills ordered direct to third reading.
Senator Balboni.
SENATOR BALBONI: Madam
President, at this time I'd like to announce
5830
an immediate Majority conference in the
Majority Conference Room, with the expectation
that we will return sometime approximately
6:30 p.m.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Without
objection, all bills are ordered directly to
third reading.
There is presently a call for the
Senate Majority Conference in the Senate
Majority Conference Room.
The Senate will return at 6:30 p.m.
SENATOR BALBONI: Please
recognize Senator Gonzalez.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Gonzalez.
SENATOR GONZALEZ: Yes, Madam
President. There will be an immediate meeting
of the Minority Conference in Room 314.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There
will be an immediate meeting of the Minority
Conference in Room 314.
The Senate stands at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 5:35 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
5831
at 6:52 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
I believe the calendar is being distributed
right now. And if we could take up
Supplemental Calendar Number 64A.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Would you please
call up Calendar Number 1940.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1940, Senate Budget Bill, Senate Print 6055B,
an act making appropriations for the support
of government: Transportation, Economic
Development and Environmental Conservation
Budget.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Is there a
message of necessity at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Yes,
there is a message of necessity at the desk.
5832
SENATOR SKELOS: Move to accept.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
motion is made to accept the message of
necessity at the desk. All in favor will
signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(Response of "Nay.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message is accepted.
Read the last section.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN:
Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Skelos, an explanation has been requested.
Senator Volker, an explanation has
been requested.
SENATOR VOLKER: Madam President,
this is a bill that has been negotiated with
the Assembly that relates to a series of areas
including the Agriculture Department, the
Adirondack Park Agency, Department of Housing,
Division of Lottery, Motor Vehicles, Public
Service Commission, and provides various
5833
funding for the agencies and for affiliated
programs that are connected with the agencies.
As was said, this bill has been
agreed with the Assembly, and we expect that
the Assembly will pass this bill either later
on tonight or tomorrow.
Questions?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Liz Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. Briefly on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Krueger, on the bill.
Senator, would you -- just one
moment.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Certainly.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: You may
proceed.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President.
Well, again, we are now dealing
with a new group of budget bills for tonight.
Or I assume we are, starting with this one. I
just, for the record, want to point out that
this is a bill that we've received a message
5834
of necessity on from the Governor, it is not a
bill that has aged for three days.
And in fact, I carry a bill that
says that we should allow budget bills to age
for ten days, given how complicated they are
and how much they impact the State of
New York.
And I suppose we could argue that
nothing impacts from a broad base the State of
New York more widely than decisions about
transportation, economic development -- which,
as we know, is an enormous portion of the
state budget -- and environmental
conservation.
So I object to the fact that this
is a bill that has not aged for three days.
There's been no public discussion, there's
been no opportunity for anyone to really
evaluate what is or is not in this bill.
Having said that, and while I will
be voting against it on those grounds and the
fact that there's so many other questions to
be asked, I will say that I am very pleased to
see that there is $57 million of new money for
housing capital spending in this budget. It's
5835
the first time we've seen any new money in the
state budget to expand affordable housing
through capital funds for an extended period
of time. And that certainly, I believe, is
something very important to the State of
New York.
However, we still don't address so
many of the issues, particularly when it
involves the MTA and the absence of money for
the MTA and the absence of funds that are
desperately needed for mass transit and public
transit in the State of New York.
It raises more questions than it
answers about how we spend economic
development money, both on budget and through
off-budget authorities and through the Urban
Development Corporation.
I would hope that my colleagues
would agree with me that one should have more
time to evaluate such a complex set of
proposals, the pluses and minuses of such, and
what's not there. And I will be voting
against the bill.
Thank you, Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Thank
5836
you.
Senator Malcolm Smith.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: Yes,
Madam President, I believe there's an
amendment at the desk. I ask that the reading
of the amendment be waived, and I ask to be
heard on the amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
reading is waived, and you may speak on the
amendment.
SENATOR MALCOLM SMITH: Thank
you, Madam President.
This amendment is asking for
$10 million to be added for an Indian Point
decommission feasibility study, for a study by
the Public Service Commission to establish a
safe and environmentally viable alternative
energy source to enable the orderly
decommission of the Indian Point nuclear power
plant.
The amendment further requires that
the Public Service Commission, in cooperation
with the Department of Labor, is further
directed to develop a program to fund
appropriate job-retaining programs to ensure
5837
stability and continuity among the local
workforce.
And I urge a yes vote on this
amendment from all my colleagues, specifically
my good friend over here, Senator Marcellino
his handsome self.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you,
Senator.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All
those in agreement with the amendment please
signify by raising your hand.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
agreement are Senators Breslin, Brown, Duane,
Gonzalez, Hassell-Thompson, L. Krueger,
Montgomery, Onorato, Paterson, Sabini,
Sampson, Schneiderman, A. Smith, M. Smith, and
Stavisky.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
amendment is not agreed to.
Read the last section.
Senator Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Madam President. Just very briefly.
Senator Krueger referred to several
problems with this proposed bill that's
5838
supposed to address issues of transportation.
I would urge all of my colleagues that with
this bill we're digging ourselves deeper into
a hole that is going to be very hard to get
out of. This bill provides not one dollar of
capital support for the MTA.
We have gone through a period in
the 1970s where the greatest transit system in
the world was in decline. Through a
bipartisan commitment to capital, through the
work of many talented administrators through
several administrations in City Hall and in
the Capitol, we've rebuilt the MTA into a
great system again. Over the last ten years,
we have moved in the opposite direction.
We have to deal with this. We're
now raising fares, we're facing cutbacks, the
agency is in debt. We should not be passing a
budget that neglects our primary
responsibility to the businesses of New York,
much less the people, put aside the personal
costs. This is the most antibusiness move you
can make as a legislature to defund the
transit system on which all of our downstate
businesses rely in the city and suburbs.
5839
I will be voting no for that reason
alone, among the others that have been
referred to.
Thank you, Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 5. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1940 are
Senators Duane, L. Krueger, Sabini,
Schneiderman, and A. Smith. Also Senator
Diaz. Ayes, 53. Nays, 6.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, there will be an immediate meeting
of the Judiciary Committee in the Majority
Conference Room.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Immediate meeting of the Judiciary Committee
5840
in the Majority Conference Room.
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, at this time can we take up
Calendar Number 1942.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1942, Senate Budget Bill, Senate Print 6059B,
an act to authorize the Dormitory Authority.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Is there a
message of necessity at the desk, Madam
President?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message of necessity at the desk.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Move that we
adopt the message.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity.
All those in favor will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Those
opposed will say nay.
5841
(Response of "Nay.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message of necessity is accepted.
Read the last section.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN:
Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino, an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, I would defer to the esteemed
legislator Senator Volker for an explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR VOLKER: Madam President,
this is the language bill on transportation,
economic development and environmental
conservation.
As I pointed out yesterday, since
we were -- the constitution was changed by the
courts some years ago, we now have to pass two
bills for one. And this bill follows up on
the previous bill, which dealt with the actual
funding. And this is the language that goes
along with the funding in the Article VII
bills.
5842
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Liz Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. I have an amendment at the
desk. I'd like to waive reading and ask to be
heard on the amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
reading is waived, and you may be heard on the
amendment.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President.
So as I mentioned in my earlier
statement, I was very pleased to see that we
put $57 million in for capital in the previous
bill for capital for new affordable housing.
But if we don't move forward to do something
about the loss of Mitchell-Lama housing
throughout the State of New York, anything
that that $57 million in new money would buy
us would pale in comparison to the loss of
housing we are anticipating because we have
still not passed this Mitchell-Lama buyout
prevention bill that has been asked for by the
City of New York and by the Mayor.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
5843
President, if the Senator would indulge me.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Certainly.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: There was
previously a call for members of the Judiciary
Committee to report to the Majority Conference
Room. If they would do so, that committee can
meet as quickly as possible and do their
business.
So again, would the members of the
Judiciary Committee please report to the
Majority Conference Room so that a meeting can
be held. And we'd appreciate that.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Will all
members of the Judiciary Committee report to
the Majority Conference Room immediately.
Senator Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Certainly,
Senator Marcellino.
Thank you, Madam President. Our
amendment would amend the Private Housing
Finance Law by authorizing municipally aided
Mitchell-Lama rental developments in New York
City to pay dividends or interest in excess of
6 percent with the approval of the city's
Department of Housing Preservation and
5844
Development. Such developments would then
remain in the Mitchell-Lama program, and their
rents would be subject to annual increase by
the -- established by the New York City Rent
Guidelines Board.
This bill would also provide rent
stabilization protection for tenants and real
property tax relief for owners of
Mitchell-Lamas where post-1974 Mitchell-Lama
rental developments voluntarily dissolve on or
after the effective date. Under the Private
Housing Finance Law, Section 35, Mitchell-Lama
housing companies may voluntarily dissolve or
buy out after 20 years. Many housing
companies are opting to buy out in order to
increase their return on their investment
because we have not passed this law.
This proposed language is designed
to encourage housing companies to remain in
the Mitchell-Lama program by authorizing
returns in excess of the current statutory
limit.
To highlight how important this is,
let me just reference that there are 66,997
Mitchell-Lama cooperative and 57,994
5845
Mitchell-Lama rental units in limited dividend
housing remaining in New York City. There are
35,995 units of Mitchell-Lama limited dividend
rental housing that will be able to charge
market rents upon leaving their respective
programs if we don't pass this bill and give
ourselves some alternatives.
Since the inception of the program,
more than 24,000 units of housing are no
longer regulated under the Mitchell-Lama
programs. We've already lost those units
because of the failure of the Legislature to
move. It is anticipated that by the year
2015, a minimum of 59 additional Mitchell-Lama
developments, representing more than 40,000
units of affordable housing, are scheduled to
retire from their subsidized mortgages,
removing a last significant hurdle to their
leaving the Mitchell-Lama program.
We are so many years too late in
not passing protections for Mitchell-Lama
tenants to assure the continuation of
affordable housing in the City of New York. I
urge us not to allow another year to go by
without passing legislation such as this, the
5846
Mitchell-Lama buyout prevention bill. It is
at the request of the City of New York. It is
urged that we pass this by the Mayor. It
would have its impact on the City of New York.
I hope that my colleagues will join me in
supporting this amendment.
Thank you, Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hassell-Thompson, on the amendment.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank
you. Very briefly.
This house, as well as the
Assembly, has just passed a bill that would
allow major repairs and redevelopment of the
Co-op City Mitchell-Lama, which is in my
district, which represents 15,000 units of
affordable housing.
I cannot tell you the struggle that
we had for several months prior to this bill
with attempts to privatize. And even now,
there are rumors that even after this money is
being made available that there will continue
to be attempts to privatize these units.
This language is very critical.
And it was very interesting that this language
5847
became available, because just two days ago
Senator Liz Krueger and I were having a
discussion from the Housing Committee on the
necessity for us to monitor so carefully how
this money is spent and to ensure that the
state gets the appropriate investment but,
more than that, the constituents who need
affordable units, they will always be made
available to them.
I support this amendment, having
gone through the last 2 years of a serious
struggle with the largest single Mitchell-Lama
in the country. And still those attempts are
being made to privatize.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Madam President. I also rise to speak in
support of the amendment.
I think that we have to be very,
very careful in this house about continuing
the policy that has been in effect for the
last ten years or so of reducing our
investments in critical needs for the working
men and women who make our state run.
5848
I spoke earlier about the fact that
we have systematically defunded the greatest
transit system in the world. But it's also
important for us to recognize that we do not
have an effective, affordable housing program
in this state.
And when you look back at a program
like the Mitchell-Lama program, it really
reminds us of the great things that used to be
done in this state for working men and women.
It reminds us that New York State led the
country in the development of labor laws to
protect working men and women, healthcare
programs, of building housing. Our public
housing system was an absolute gem. The
Mitchell-Lama program, a great way to leverage
government resources, working with the private
sector to provide affordable housing.
Somewhere over the course of the
last twenty years we've gotten off track. And
our state now is lagging the nation we used to
lead in passing laws to make ordinary working
men and women's lives better.
It's time for us to renew that
commitment, which was, again, a bipartisan
5849
effort, on behalf of governors from Al Smith
on, to really make this state the best state
to live in and work in. People wanted to move
here, people wanted to live here, people
wanted to raise their children here. And the
Mitchell-Lama program is the last major
affordable housing program that we passed in
this state. And how many years ago was that?
We are not living up to our
responsibilities. We are not living up to our
responsibilities to house our citizens, to
make sure they can afford to live here, to
provide them with decent schools -- and we've
discussed that at great length -- to provide
an affordable mass transit system so they can
get to and from work.
And that has got to stop. Because
if you don't invest in your human
infrastructure, you cannot have a successful
economy, you cannot have a successful state.
So I would urge all of you that as
with schools, as with transit, this is not a
matter of charity, this is a matter of
essential investment for the long-term
economic health of our state as well as a part
5850
of our moral responsibility to our citizens.
I would urge everyone to vote in
favor of the amendment. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Those
Senators in agreement with the amendment
please signify by raising your hand.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
agreement are Senators Andrews, Breslin,
Connor, Diaz, Duane, Gonzalez,
Hassell-Thompson, L. Krueger, C. Kruger,
Lachman, Montgomery, Onorato, Parker,
Paterson, Sabini, Schneiderman, A. Smith,
M. Smith, Stachowski, and Stavisky. Also
Senator Brown.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
amendment is not agreed to.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1942 are
Senators Duane, L. Krueger, Parker, Sabini,
5851
Schneiderman, and A. Smith. Ayes, 53. Nays,
6.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, can you recognize Senator Diaz,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Diaz.
SENATOR DIAZ: Yes, thank you,
Madam President. I request unanimous consent
to be recorded with a yes vote on Calendar
1940.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: You wish
to be recorded in the negative?
SENATOR DIAZ: In the positive.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: In the
positive.
SENATOR DIAZ: 1940.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Without
objection.
SENATOR DIAZ: Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
5852
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, can we now call up Calendar Number
1939.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1939, Senate Budget Bill, Senate Print 6054B,
an act making appropriations for the support
of government: Health and Mental Hygiene
Budget.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Is there a
message of necessity at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message of necessity at the desk.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Move to
accept the message of necessity.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All
those in favor of accepting the message of
necessity will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(Response of "Nay.")
5853
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message is accepted.
Read the last section.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN:
Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, an explanation has -- I'm sorry,
Senator Hannon, an explanation has been
requested.
SENATOR VOLKER: Madam President,
could I defer to Senator Hannon to explain the
bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hannon, an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR HANNON: This bill deals
with public health, Medicaid, HCRA, in regard
to the health budget for the State of
New York.
The highlights of this, because of
the vastness of the appropriations in regard
to ensuring that we have good health for our
citizens, I'll just address some of the
specific highlights that the Legislature has
focused on.
I think primary among them all is
5854
the state takeover of the Family Health Plus
system in order to provide local relief for
our localities. And the initial cost of this
for the fiscal year will be $25 million, and
thereafter rising sharply.
This was one of the two main goals
in regard to our Medicaid Task Force, the
other being to make the rest of the Medicaid
system more rational and more efficient, for a
better delivery of health to our citizens.
Along with that, what we have
provided for is an enhancement of the tax
credit for long-term-care insurance so that we
will focus the purchase of that insurance by
those who need it, less reliance on the
Medicaid system, and have the baby boomer
generation be able to support its own aging
process.
Along with that, we have focused
the instance of Senator Rath and Senator
Golden on the point of access, the promotion
of information about long-term-care insurance,
working through the Office of Aging throughout
the state, as well as the Health Department.
Some other significant aspects of
5855
this bill have been to reject the "sick tax,"
the proposal by the Executive in regard to
monies that would be imposed upon hospitals
and nursing homes throughout the state.
Is that sufficient, Madam
President?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Any
other Senator wishing to speak on the bill?
Senator Meier.
SENATOR MEIER: Thank you, Madam
President. Just very briefly on the bill.
The Medicaid portions of this bill
are really the beginning of a process. This
is by no means the end of the process. There
are some important measures in here. This is
the first attempt at significant fiscal relief
for local governments. That effort started in
this house when the Majority Leader appointed
the Medicaid Reform Task Force. And that was
a bipartisan effort where people reached
across this aisle and worked together on that
effort.
As Senator Hannon explained, there
are some other measures in here. One of the
things that we're going to have to revisit
5856
next year, and perhaps the year after and the
year after, is this entire issue of cost
containment. There is no more daunting
challenge fiscally to this state or to the
municipalities that compose the rest of this
state than this Medicaid program. And there
should be no mistake about this debate, that
the other house wasn't interested in engaging
us on cost containment.
And some of this is pretty shocking
and pretty disappointing, including, in my
view, the preposterous and slanderous notion
that there's something racist about a
preferred drug list when the whole rest of the
insured private-sector world operates under
that kind of a system, including the
preposterous notion that there is somehow
something wrong with taking a look at a menu
of benefits to see if we can't bring it into
line into something that is reasonable and
humane but tracks other insurance, that it's
available in the private sector.
We need to come back and to take a
look as we lay the groundwork to help people
find alternatives to disposing of all their
5857
assets -- through access to private capital,
through access to insurance -- to provide in
part, at least, for their own long-term care.
So that when the baby boom generation, my
generation, starts hitting this long-term-care
system, that we don't collapse both Medicaid
and the long-term-care system itself.
We are going to revisit Medicaid
cost-containment in this Legislature in coming
years for one of two reasons. We will revisit
Medicaid cost-containment and do more on it
because we have come to the conclusion that we
must do it, that it's the right thing to do,
that there are ways of containing costs and at
the very same time to more intelligently and
humanely program the way we provide health
care in this state and at the same time give a
break to taxpayers and give more quality
health care to those who rely upon this
Medicaid system.
Or we will do it when this state
stares over the edge of the cliff into a very
black fiscal abyss and do it because we will
have no alternative.
And what I would suggest is it
5858
would be far better if we can, when we revisit
this, do it before we get to the point of that
cliff. Because decisions that we make at the
point of crisis tend not to be as well thought
out or as well organized, and they tend to be
decisions many times that wind up hurting
people who are the most vulnerable and the
most in need of help.
This is an excellent start. It's
an excellent start because the Majority Leader
appointed a task force. It's an excellent
start because members on both sides of the
this aisle worked very cooperatively and voted
for a bill that we passed in this house very
much earlier in the year.
We need to do more. We have at
least started. And I'm going to vote for this
bill very gladly.
Thank you, Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Thank
you.
Senator Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Madam President. If the explainer would yield
for one question.
5859
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: I think
the explainer is Senator Hannon.
Senator Hannon, will you yield?
SENATOR HANNON: Yes, Madam
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Through
you, Madam President, just to clarify things
in light of Senator Meier's remarks, there is
no preferred drug list in this bill or the
next bill, is there?
SENATOR HANNON: No. There is --
regretfully, in my view. But there is none.
Factually, there is no preferred drug list in
this bill.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Thank
you.
Any other Senator wish to speak on
this bill?
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
5860
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1939 are
Senators Duane, L. Krueger, and A. Smith.
Also Senator Stavisky. Also Senator Andrews.
Also Senator Schneiderman.
Those recorded in the negative on
Calendar Number 1939 are Senators Andrews,
Duane, L. Krueger, Sabini, Schneiderman, A.
Smith, and Stavisky. Ayes, 52. Nays, 7.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, can we call up Calendar 1941.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1941, Senate Budget Bill, Senate Print 6058B,
an act to amend the State Finance Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Is there a
5861
message of necessity at the desk, please?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message of necessity at the desk.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Move to
accept the message of necessity.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity.
All those in favor of accepting the message
will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(Response of "Nay.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message is accepted.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN:
Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino, an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: I will defer
to my esteemed colleague from Long Island,
Senator Hannon.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hannon, an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR HANNON: Madam President,
5862
this is the Article VII language bill
accompanying the appropriation bill that we
just passed. It implements, where there is
needed, statutory changes to go along with the
policy changes we've already appropriated
money for.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Thank
you, Senator Hannon.
Senator Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN: Madam
President, I believe there's an amendment at
the desk. I ask that the amendment reading be
waived and I be allowed to speak on the
amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
reading is waived, and you may be heard on the
amendment.
SENATOR BRESLIN: Thank you,
Madam President.
The amendment is an amendment which
would cap all Medicaid expenses at the 2003
level. I in fact have a bill that I
introduced a couple of years ago that would
cap it at the 2001 level.
We have to, as a legislative body,
5863
stop passing down to localities. I applaud
Senator Meier and Senator Hannon for their
work on the task force, but we also have to
collectively get together to make sure we
protect the localities.
If you took every state in the
union, every state in the union and added up
the local costs for Medicaid, the entire local
cost for Medicaid, New York State pays
84 percent of all local costs nationally.
Over the last four years, Medicaid
costs to the localities have increased by
57 percent. In my own county, the entire
property tax, the entire property tax leaves
Medicaid $14 million short. This is at the
same time when we have 3 million uninsured in
New York State.
The health care system is broken.
And we have to bring it together to make sure
that we allow the localities to reduce its
Medicaid cost, have it absorbed by the states,
so those localities can go on and create
business and do what they're supposed to do
and not be so concerned and overburdened with
Medicaid.
5864
Therefore, I would request all of
my brethren to support this amendment.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Those
Senators in agreement with the amendment --
SENATOR BRESLIN: My sisters and
brothers.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Those
Senators in agreement with the amendment
please signify by raising your hand.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
agreement are Senators Breslin, Brown, Diaz,
Duane, Gonzalez, Hassell-Thompson, L. Krueger,
Lachman, Montgomery, Onorato, Parker,
Paterson, Sabini, Sampson, Schneiderman,
A. Smith, M. Smith, Stachowski, and Stavisky.
Also Senator Connor.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
amendment is not agreed to.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 4. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
5865
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
DeFrancisco.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: To explain
my vote.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
DeFrancisco, to explain his vote.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I think if
each of the Senators' districts are like my
district, this is probably one of the biggest
issues that the localities are concerned
about; namely, the cost of Medicaid.
I too want to also say that our
bill has been a first step to make it better
for the localities. I don't believe just by
the state picking up the whole cost of
Medicaid or capping the level of the local
shares is going to solve the problem. The
problem is the runaway cost of the system.
And I would hope that as we
continue this discussion, more of the
recommendations by the Senate task force be
adopted by both houses so we can control the
expense not only for the localities but also
for the State of New York, because it is
running out of control at this point in time.
5866
So I support this first step and
hope that we can get more and much more
substantial reforms in the days to come.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Announce
the results.
Senator Hannon, I'm sorry.
SENATOR HANNON: To explain my
vote, Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Hannon, to explain his vote.
SENATOR HANNON: One of the most
significant things we did through this is the
takeover of Family Health Plus.
And when there were a number of
proposals suggested to the task force as to
what could be done -- whether the state could
take over Medicaid entirely, take over the
increase in Medicaid, take over the
long-term-care system -- we had a question of
how quickly could we get relief to the
counties, how quickly could we afford that
relief, and how could we make sure that we
could be as fair in shifting the burden.
And we made the choice, in
consultation with the Association of Counties,
5867
that we would come up with the takeover of
Family Health Plus, because we felt that met
all the tests. And that's what is implemented
in this legislation today.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Brown.
SENATOR BROWN: Yes, to explain
my vote.
I too think that this is a good
first step, and I commend the members of the
Senate that have served on the task force.
I'm disappointed that the amendment
to cap Medicaid expenses didn't pass, though,
because I think that this first step doesn't
go far enough. We've heard members talk about
the Medicaid expense and how it is choking
local governments all across this state, while
in Western New York I know that Erie County
and Niagara County governments are really
suffering under the weight of the Medicaid
burden.
And when you look at the fact that
the City of Buffalo is under the authority of
a control board and Erie County's fastest
5868
growing expense is Medicaid, I think something
has to be done sooner than later. And I wish
we had taken the opportunity, I wish we had
seized the opportunity to cap Medicaid
expenses at the 2003 level.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Brown, how do you vote?
SENATOR BROWN: I vote yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Meier.
SENATOR MEIER: Madam President,
briefly to explain my vote.
I'm disappointed that we weren't
able to cap the counties' expenses also. And
I'm really terribly disappointed that the
Assembly would not seriously engage in the
cost-containment that's necessary to take that
over.
We cannot sustain, within this
budget, with the requirements facing us in
terms of education and anything else, anything
more than we have done today. And that's one
of the reasons why I say we need to come back
again next year to get some responsible
5869
cost-containment that gets this program under
control, makes it more efficient, gives the
people the assistance that they need.
And if the Assembly would like to
engage in some serious cost-containment, we'll
be back here next year giving the counties
more relief. But we have to be responsible.
We have to have a balanced budget as well.
And I say that as a former county executive.
And the counties in this state I think do
understand that. We can send more help. The
Assembly needs to engage on cost-containment.
I vote aye.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Meier will be recorded in the affirmative.
Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1941 are
Senators Duane, L. Krueger, Sabini,
Schneiderman, and A. Smith. Ayes, 54. Nays,
5.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Madam
5870
President, if I may have unanimous consent to
be recorded in the affirmative on Calendar
1939, Senate Bill 6054B.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Without
objection.
SENATOR STAVISKY: Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, can we call up Calendar Number
1943.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1943, Senate Budget Bill, Senate Print 6060B,
an act to amend Chapter 101 of the Laws of
2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Is there a
message of necessity at the desk, Madam
President?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Yes,
there is a message of necessity at the desk.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Move to
5871
accept the message.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
motion is to accept the message of necessity.
All those in favor will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Those
opposed will say nay.
(Response of "Nay.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message of necessity is accepted.
Read the last section.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN:
Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR VOLKER: Madam President,
this is what we used to call -- now it's not
the "Big Ugly," it's the "Big Handsome."
And it's a revenue bill that
provides extenders. My colleague to my right
is really upset because the extenders of
certain things are in this bill, on Quick
Draw.
I believe the rebates for New York
City are in this bill. And a whole series of
5872
areas including the tax-free week, film tax
credit, and a series of other benefits to the
taxpayers of this state. The extender, I
think, of the Empire Zones is in this bill
too, for one year.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Onorato.
SENATOR ONORATO: Will the
sponsor yield to a question, please? Senator
Volker.
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes, I will,
sir.
SENATOR ONORATO: Senator, I'm
concerned with the part of the Empire --
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Just --
Senator Onorato.
Thank you.
SENATOR ONORATO: Thank you,
Madam President.
I'm concerned about the Empire
State film production credit. According to
that, there's going to be a 10 percent credit
for production costs for new films and
television series that are produced in
New York State. Does this apply to the
5873
existing firms or only to new firms coming
online?
SENATOR VOLKER: The answer is
yes, it does apply to existing firms as well
as to new firms.
SENATOR ONORATO: Thank you.
SENATOR VOLKER: You're welcome.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Liz Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. If the sponsor would please
yield to a question.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, will you yield?
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. Thank you.
So this is the revenue bill for the
State of New York. How much revenue is in it?
SENATOR VOLKER: Good lord.
SENATOR PADAVAN: A lot. A lot.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: I don't
5874
know if Senator Volker wants to defer to
Senator Padavan on this one.
SENATOR VOLKER: The net amount
in it -- and the reason is that in the bill
actually there are some -- because this is a
language, Article VII bill, some of the
numbers that were in there originally are
removed. I think the net is about
$670 million.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Madam
President, if, through you, the sponsor would
continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, will you continue to yield?
SENATOR VOLKER: Why, certainly.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senator continues to yield.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
So this entire bill adds up to
670 million new dollars?
SENATOR VOLKER: I believe it is
new dollars, yes. Monies requested by the
Governor -- now, the Governor had more than
that, and we have included in this bill
$670 million -- that's why I said net. It's
5875
additional. But we rejected some of the
Governor's requests and added some of our own.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Madam
President, if, through you, the sponsor would
continue to yield.
SENATOR VOLKER: Sure.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, will you continue to yield?
SENATOR VOLKER: Sure.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
So today we did a series of other
expenditure bills. How much new money do they
add up to?
SENATOR VOLKER: I believe it is
between a billion-two and a billion-three,
depending on how you count. But let's say it
was about a billion-two.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: About a
billion-two.
Madam President, if you would ask
the sponsor if he'd continue to yield, please.
SENATOR VOLKER: Sure.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
5876
Senator yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
So as I understand it, Senator,
this revenue bill you say has about
670 million in new revenue, but we've passed
bills throughout the day that have actually
added between $1.2 and $1.3 billion.
So technically, if I understand
this correctly, what we are passing today in
expenses versus what we are being asked to
pass today in revenue don't balance out? It's
not a balanced revenue/expenditure budget?
SENATOR VOLKER: It is the
opinion of the Senate and Assembly fiscal
people that it does balance out, because there
is growth in revenue, estimated growth and so
forth.
One of the things about a budget,
and I do know a little about a budget, even
though I'm not the real chairman of Finance.
But when you submit a budget, you submit
estimates of what the revenue is going to be
and you submit estimates of what the
expenditures are going to be.
You know, I -- I give a
5877
for-instance. I know for a fact that there
was additional money in the capital gains tax
at the end of last year, which we didn't
really anticipate because there were bonuses
paid on Wall Street, unexpected bonuses at the
end of the year. It's been told to me that
there may be some additional revenue because
we haven't hired hardly anybody in this state
in the last year.
So the truth is that the estimates
relate to guess -- guesstimates. Remember,
this is a $101 billion budget. So it's pretty
hard to say this is exactly what it is. In
fact, not only is it pretty hard, it's
impossible. Because we're guessing what
revenue is going to come in versus what's
going to go out.
And remember, we are in a late
budget. And interesting about late budgets is
we don't spend near as much money because
we've been spending at a lower level until
now. There are some people that allege that
we save a lot of money when budgets are late,
because the investments and so forth and -- we
won't get into that, because the budget people
5878
tell me we don't talk about that.
Sales tax revenues are coming in
very strong, it was just told to me. I happen
to know that in Western New York sales tax
revenues are at a very high rate. And the
other thing I happen to know is that the
Comptroller just informed me personally that
the numbers on Medicaid are finally beginning
to go down for the first time since 9/11.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Madam
President, if the sponsor would yield to an
additional question.
SENATOR VOLKER: Sure.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: So as I
understand it, Senator, we're guesstimating
what the revenue will be and, I suppose, the
expenditures will be.
I believe you have a revenue table
that at least breaks down some of the analysis
in the revenue bill of what you project that
$670 million is coming from. Could we have --
can we make that available to the members?
SENATOR VOLKER: Yeah, we can
5879
make it available.
But, Senator, every time we do a
budget, we are doing, in a sense, a
guesstimate. The media sometimes thinks that
this is an exact science. What they don't
realize is that it can't be an exact science.
Because there's no way we can say exactly for
sure. We know the economy is getting better,
we know the numbers are getting better, we
know expenditures are down in some places
because we haven't spent as much money. So we
do have a book that shows the numbers, but we
believe that -- well, the Senate I think
believes that the numbers are actually -- our
expenditure numbers are actually down from
what we projected and that our revenues are
up.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Madam
President, on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Krueger, on the bill.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: I
appreciate Senator Volker's candor with me in
answering my questions. This is a bill that
we got tonight with a message of necessity
5880
from the Governor. It's the revenue bill.
It's the bill I have argued all week we should
have started with, rather than starting with
expenditure bills.
Having said that, now that we have
it -- although we still haven't seen any of
the details, just some language -- we're being
told that New York State guesses what our
budget will be. We guess about our revenue,
we guess about expenditures. And he's right,
there's no hard, perfect science. Budgets are
fiscal plans. They are projections for the
year. I suppose an irony, and the Senator
pointed out, is we are starting this so late
in the year.
But I would argue this is exactly
why New York State ought to be following GAAP
procedures, Generally Accepted Accounting
Procedures, for government. I think it should
be disturbing to the people of New York, as it
is disturbing to me, that we don't have any
rules for our budget. We clearly don't have a
rule about when we pass the budget. And we
also don't have any rules about what goes into
the budget.
5881
We're guessing. We're guessing
even the night we pass the budget. We're
guessing what the revenue might be without any
numbers in front of us, just a language bill
we've just received. We're guessing, or I
suppose we're hoping that the expenditures and
the revenue somehow match somehow, almost
perhaps by magic, rather than by accounting
procedures.
But we do know what we have failed
to do. One, we have failed to be able to show
and say to the people of New York that we have
a balanced budget or that we've got a balanced
set of revenue and expenditure documents in
front of us that we're passing today, because
we admit we're just guessing on where
everything might be.
Senator Volker referenced sales tax
is stronger than projected. Well, perhaps one
of the reasons sales tax is stronger than
projected in Western New York or anywhere else
is originally we had promised the people of
New York that we would end the sales tax on
clothing and footwear priced below $110, and
yet we failed to meet that promise.
5882
So I'm not surprised sales tax
revenue is higher than projected, because we
never followed through on our commitment to
the people of New York from last year's budget
that if we put back the sales tax of $110 and
below for clothing and footwear, we would
sunset it. We are not sunsetting it. We have
not done it up until today, and we do not do
it in this budget.
However, we did decide to follow
through on our commitment to wealthier
New Yorkers when we had scheduled a personal
income tax rate reduction for people earning
$150,000 to $500,000 a year, and that we did
make good on. So we gave wealthy New Yorkers
the tax cut we told them we would do from last
year's budget, and we have not given
lower-income and working New Yorkers the sales
tax cut that we promised them.
It's a regressive tax, the sales
tax. It hits poor New Yorkers and working
New Yorkers much, much harder than well-to-do
New Yorkers. So one of the reasons we have
some flexibility in our revenue is because
we're not following through on the commitments
5883
we made to the majority of New Yorkers.
We also are not following through
on the commitment we made to New York City in
last year's budget to provide them the
$170 million per year to help them resolve
their MAC debt problem. We so failed to do it
this year that they had to spend another
$500 million, unanticipated in the city
budget, because we didn't pass a budget in
time to give them the $170 million of added
Local Government Assistance Corporation money
that we promised in last year's budget. And
we don't fix it in this budget, because while
we move forward with 170 million for the
coming year, we don't give them the
170 million we owe them from the year that has
now come and gone.
We do give New York City some of
the things they asked for, although in
comparison to the monies that they need from
the state and failed to get in education
funding and failed to get through any of the
budget bills that are moving through this
house tonight or this afternoon, we have
certainly failed the City of New York. And
5884
we've gone over those issues extensively over
the last several months.
We also are deciding to give
additional tax cuts in this bill when we're
not sure what the revenue and expenditures
are. Again, as I raised earlier in the year
when this came up as part of a separate
tax-cut bill, we've not moved forward on our
commitments for education funding, we've not
moved forward on any number of commitments to
the people of the State of New York in every
county. We've certainly been shortchanging
New York City in any number of ways, and
working-poor and poor people in the State of
New York.
But we decided in this bill to do a
sales tax exemption on private jet fuel, a
sales tax exemption on aircraft-parts service
and storage.
We are not doing our job. A
revenue bill not only should have numbers
attached, it seems relatively obvious, not
only should be passed before you start to
spend the money in expenditure bills, a
revenue bill should also ask the question not
5885
only where are we getting our tax revenue and
where are we choosing to cut taxes, but what
have we been doing with our tax expenditures
up until now? Over $20 billion a year is not
collected by the State of New York through tax
exemptions and credits and expenditures that
we have passed, in some cases decades ago, and
never reevaluated the impact of.
We have failed completely in our
assignment on revenue to the State of New York
and to the people of the State of New York
with this bill. I don't believe any of us
could accept passage of this bill and believe
that we've gone home saying we have a balanced
budget for the people of New York State.
I will be voting against this bill.
I don't know how anyone can vote for it.
Thank you, Madam President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Sabini.
SENATOR SABINI: Thank you, Madam
President. If Senator Volker would yield for
a question.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, will you yield?
5886
SENATOR VOLKER: Yes.
SENATOR SABINI: Through you,
Madam President, I was just -- in this bill,
is there any expansion of video lottery
terminals in the language of this bill?
SENATOR VOLKER: The answer is
no, there's no expansion of video lottery
terminals.
SENATOR SABINI: Okay.
Madam President, if, through you, I
could ask Senator Volker another question.
SENATOR VOLKER: Certainly.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker yields.
SENATOR SABINI: Does the revenue
bill anticipate revenue from locations at
Yonkers Raceway and Aqueduct Racetrack?
SENATOR VOLKER: Not for this
year it doesn't, because they're not open. We
do anticipate at some point, we hope, to get
some revenue, but there's no revenue actually
in here because they're not open yet.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Will you
excuse the interruption for just one moment,
please.
5887
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Yes, Madam
President. There will be an immediate meeting
of the Rules Committee in the Majority
Conference Room, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Immediate meeting of the Rules Committee in
the Majority Conference Room, please.
Thank you very much, gentlemen, for
the interruption. Please continue, Senator
Sabini.
SENATOR SABINI: That's quite all
right, Madam President. I actually have to go
to the Rules Committee now, so it's part of
the interruption.
Thank you very much, Madam
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
5888
the negative on Calendar Number 1943 are
Senators Andrews, Duane, L. Krueger, Kuhl,
LaValle, Padavan, Sabini, Schneiderman, and
A. Smith. Also Senator Parker. Ayes, 49.
Nays, 10.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you,
Madam President. Can we now call up Calendar
Number 1938, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1938, Senate Budget Bill, Senate Print 6051A,
an act making appropriations for the support
of government: Legislature and Judiciary
Budget.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Is there a
message of necessity at the desk, Madam
President?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message.
5889
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Move to
accept.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
motion is made to accept the message of
necessity. All those in favor will signify by
saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(Response of "Nay.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
motion is accepted.
Read the last section.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN:
Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Volker, an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR VOLKER: This, I believe,
is the last of the major budget bills. It is
the legislative and judiciary budget. And it
includes the numbers that were sent to us by
the judiciary that -- with a small increase,
and includes our numbers, including something
we have not seen since April 1st, which is
pay. And this is the bill.
5890
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 6. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, can we return to reports of
standing committees.
I believe you have a report of the
Judiciary Committee at the desk. I ask that
it be read.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator
DeFrancisco, from the Committee on Judiciary,
reports the following nomination.
As a justice of the Supreme Court
of the Fifth Judicial District, Donald A.
Greenwood, of Jamesville.
5891
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
DeFrancisco.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Madam
President, I'm very proud to rise to move the
nomination of Donald A. Greenwood, of
Jamesville, for Supreme Court justice for the
Fifth Judicial District.
I've known soon-to-be Judge
Greenwood for many years. And I mentioned in
the Judiciary Committee the breadth of
background that he has in the practice of law,
from prosecuting cases in the district
attorney's office, from handling county
attorneys' type work, by being a town attorney
for one of the largest towns in the state,
from civil actions that he dealt with, whether
it be a trial of a case or whether commercial
transactions -- just an incredible breadth of
experience in the practice of law.
Which is obviously needed for a
Supreme Court justice who presides over trials
over all of these types of cases, maybe even
as importantly as the judicial demeanor that I
know he is going to have, and the sense of
fairness that he has in dealing with the
5892
people and in dealing with the cases that he's
been involved with.
So I'm very pleased to move the
nomination of Donald Greenwood, and I praise
Senator -- excuse me, former Senator and now
Governor Pataki for this nomination.
And I should mention that with
Donald Greenwood is his wife, Paula, who's due
with her second child any minute now -- and
I'm glad the budget bills passed as quickly as
they did -- daughter, Teresa; mother, Mary;
and stepfather, Bill Glazier.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All in
favor of the confirmation of Donald A.
Greenwood, of Jamesville, as a justice of the
Supreme Court of the Fifth Judicial District
will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
nominee is now confirmed.
We are joined this evening in the
gallery by Judge Greenwood. And he is
5893
accompanied by his wife, Paula, his daughter,
Teresa, and his parents, Mary and Bill
Glazier.
On behalf of the New York State
Senate, may I say congratulations, Your Honor,
it's good to have you aboard.
(Applause.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, may we adopt the Resolution
Calendar at this time.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All in
favor of adopting the Resolution Calendar will
signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Resolution Calendar is adopted.
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, can we take up Calendar 1932.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
5894
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1932, by Senator Marcellino, Senate Print
7726, an act to amend the Environmental
Conservation Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Is there a
message of necessity at the desk, Madam
President?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message of necessity at the desk.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Move to
accept.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
motion is made to accept the message of
necessity. Those in favor will signify by
saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message is accepted.
The Secretary will read.
5895
THE SECRETARY: Section 16. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, can we call up Calendar Number 1910
at this time.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1910, by Senator Farley, Senate Print 7710A,
an act to amend the Banking Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Is there a
message of necessity at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
a message of necessity at the desk.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Move to
accept, please.
5896
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
motion is made to accept the message of
necessity. All in favor of accepting the
message will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
message is accepted.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 7. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, at this time can we return to
reports of standing committees.
I understand you have a report of
the Rules Committee at the desk. I ask that
5897
it be read now.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Bruno,
from the Committee on Rules, reports the
following bills:
Senate Print 5348B, by Senator
Duane, an act to amend Chapter 292 of the Laws
of 1904;
6100B, by Senator Volker, an act to
amend the Real Property Law;
7278, by Senator Saland, an act to
amend the Education Law;
7492A, by Senator Marcellino, an
act to amend the Education Law;
7691, by Senator Fuschillo, an act
to amend a chapter of the Laws of 2004;
7725, by Senator Marcellino, an act
to amend the Environmental Conservation Law;
And Senate Print 7736, by Senator
Padavan, an act to amend the Tax Law and the
Administrative Code of the City of New York.
All bills ordered direct to third
reading.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
5898
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Move to
accept the report of the Rules Committee.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: All in
favor of accepting the report of Rules
Committee will signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
report is accepted.
Senator Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, can we stand at ease momentarily,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Senate will stand at ease momentarily.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 8:04 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 8:09 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Would you
5899
recognize Senator Krueger, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Liz Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. We did a vote when I was at
Rules. I would like unanimous consent to be
voted in the negative on Calendar 1938, Budget
Bill 6051A.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Without
objection.
Senator Duane.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Madam
President. If I too could have unanimous
consent to be recorded in the negative on
Calendar Number 1938.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Without
objection.
Senator Sabini.
SENATOR SABINI: Madam President,
I too was in Rules, and I'd like unanimous
consent to vote in the negative on Calendar
Number 1938.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Without
objection.
Senator Marcellino.
5900
SENATOR MARCELLINO: If I could
have just one second, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: One
moment.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: At this
time, Madam President, can we move Calendar
64B, noncontroversial reading.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1944, Senator Duane moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Corporations,
Authorities and Commissions, Assembly Bill
Number 8697B and substitute it for the
identical Senate Bill Number 5348B, Third
Reading Calendar 1944.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1944, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 8697B, an act to amend
Chapter 292 of the Laws of 1904.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
5901
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1945, Senator Volker moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Judiciary,
Assembly Bill Number 76B and substitute it for
the identical Senate Bill Number 6100B, Third
Reading Calendar 1945.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1945, by Member of the Assembly John, Assembly
Print Number 76B, an act to amend the Real
Property Law, in relation to establishing.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect on the 365th day.
5902
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1946, Senator Saland moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Finance,
Assembly Bill Number 11203 and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill Number 7278,
Third Reading Calendar 1946.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1946, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 11203, an act to amend
the Education Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect on the first of June.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
5903
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1947, by Senator Marcellino, Senate Print
7492A, an act to amend the Education Law and
the Executive Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 4. This
act shall take effect on the 90th day.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Balboni, to explain his vote.
SENATOR BALBONI: Madam
President, I rise to explain my vote on this
bill.
This is a bill that has been
introduced by Senator Marcellino in response
to the school scandals. I represent Roslyn
School District, and this is of enormous
importance to the residents of my district and
5904
I believe for the residents of this state.
This approach is clever, this
approach is creative. It provides a funding
stream that is provided by the school
districts themselves.
However, I'm sorry that we do not
have a two-house bill. I'm sorry that we've
not been able to give the Comptroller a
transitional funding pot to be able to move
forward on the funding of the audits that are
out there right now.
However, as Senator Ken LaValle has
acknowledged, and Senator Marcellino, there's
going to be more work on this issue. And I
hope that we will come back and do a more
comprehensive effort to try to reform how
audits are done and how school districts
perform in this state in the near future.
I'm going to vote in favor of the
measure. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
LaValle.
SENATOR LaVALLE: Thank you,
Madam President.
This bill is a good beginning in
5905
dealing with a very, very complex problem, a
problem that many have read about, school
scandals on Long Island. But they could be
anywhere in the state.
The problem is one that will
require focus on the part of the school
superintendents and the school boards to find
out statewide what kinds of changes need to be
done by their own initiative and new
procedures and controls within the school
district.
Strengthening whistle-blower laws.
Strengthening and additions to establishing
something like an audit committee whose sole
function will look at and oversee the local
audits, whether they be done by the district
or the Comptroller. Involvement of the
district attorney's office, the Comptroller's
office, the Education Department.
And so I'm sure before this year is
over we will see other pieces of legislation
that will supplement the Marcellino
initiative.
I would say, on Long Island,
Senator Marcellino, Senator Balboni, myself
5906
and others, and also Assemblyman DiNapoli and
Assemblyman Sidikman, really sitting down,
meeting with school board members and
superintendents to come up with a
comprehensive approach that will give the
school districts the kinds of instruments they
need to prevent those who have a larcenous
mind and heart and to protect our taxpayer
dollars that should be going to our children's
education.
I vote in the affirmative.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: You will
be recorded in the affirmative, Senator
LaValle.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: To explain
my vote.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Marcellino, to explain your vote.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Madam
President, I agree with my colleagues
wholeheartedly. This is a first step. It is
5907
not the end of the line. More needs to be
done with respect to making sure that
taxpayers' dollars are protected and that the
young people who are going to school for an
education get the benefit of every dollar
that's been appropriated by the taxpayers for
their education.
So we look forward to the future on
this bill, and we look forward to working with
our colleagues and creating even more, so that
this can be done in an appropriate manner.
This bill is a good first step, and we're
pleased and we hope the other house would move
on this bill.
Thank you. I vote aye.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Announce
the results.
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1948, Senator Fuschillo moves
to discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 11765 and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill Number 7691,
5908
Third Reading Calendar 1948.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1948, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 11765, an act to amend a
chapter of the Laws of 2004 amending the
General Business Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect on the same date as a
chapter of the Laws of 2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: In relation to
Calendar Number 1949, Senator Marcellino moves
to discharge, from the Committee on Rules,
Assembly Bill Number 11753A, and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill Number 7725,
5909
Third Reading Calendar 1949.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE:
Substitution ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1949, by the Assembly Committee on Rules,
Assembly Print Number 11753A, an act to amend
the Environmental Conservation Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 4. This
act shall take effect on the same date and in
the same manner as a chapter of the Laws of
2004.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: The bill
is passed.
Senator Skelos, that completes the
noncontroversial reading of Calendar 64B.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
is there any housekeeping at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There is
5910
no housekeeping at the desk.
SENATOR SKELOS: On behalf of
Senator Bruno, I'd like to announce that there
will be a meeting of the Majority at
10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning, and that
session -- Senator Gonzalez.
SENATOR GONZALEZ: Yes, Madam
President, there will be a meeting tomorrow
morning at 10:00 a.m., Minority conference.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: There
will be a meeting of the Majority in the
Majority Conference Room at 10:00 a.m.
tomorrow morning.
There will be a meeting of the
Minority in Room 314 at 10:00 a.m.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
would you recognize Senator Saland, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Senator
Saland.
SENATOR SALAND: Thank you, Madam
President. I would like unanimous consent to
be recorded in the negative on Calendar 1945,
Senate Number 6100B.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: Without
5911
objection.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
I'd like to recommit to the Committee on Rules
the balance of the calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: So
ordered.
SENATOR SKELOS: And there being
no further business to come before the Senate,
I move we stand adjourned until Thursday,
August 12th, at 10:30 a.m.
ACTING PRESIDENT McGEE: On
motion, the Senate stands adjourned until
Thursday, August 12th, at 10:30 a.m.
(Whereupon, at 8:20 p.m., the
Senate adjourned.)