New York State SmartTranscripts:

[Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes (Majority Leader)]: Madam speaker, would you please call the house to order? The

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: house will come to order. Good afternoon colleagues and guests. In the absence of clergy, us pause for a moment of silence. Visitors are invited to join members in the pledge of allegiance. A quorum being present, the clerk will read the journal of Tuesday, March 24, miss Peoples Jokes.

[Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes (Majority Leader)]: Madam speaker, I move to dispense with the further reading of the journal of Tuesday, March, and if the same, she stand approved.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Without objection, so ordered.

[Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes (Majority Leader)]: To colleagues and guests over the chambers, I do have a quote I would like to share with you today. This one comes from Maya Angelou, who was an American essayist, poetess, and a civil rights activist. She published seven autobiographies, three books of essays, several books of poetry, and is credited with a list of plays, movies, and television shows spanning over fifty years. Maya's words for us today, we delight in the beauty of a butterfly, but we rarely admit the changes it has gone through to achieve that beauty. Again, these words from Maya Angelou. Madam speaker, colleagues have on their desk a main calendar as well as a debate list. After you have done any housekeeping and or introductions, we're gonna take up calendar resolutions on page three. We will then continue our work with the gambling package of bills that we have, beginning with calendar number 324 by miss Werner, calendar number 13 by mister Vannell, and calendar three twenty two by mister Steck. After that, we're gonna take up the following bills from the debate list. Those are calendar number 161 by mister Wepprin, calendar 174 by mister Vannell, and calendar number two thirteen by miss Cruz. There could very well be a need for additional floor activity, madam speaker. Should that be the case, we will advise at that moment. However, that's a general outline of where we're going today. If you could begin by calling on housekeeping and or introductions, it would be appropriate. Thank you, ma'am.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. We have no house keeping yet today but we will start with a few introductions. We will start with mister Stern for the purpose of an introduction.

[Assemblymember Steve Stern]: Thank you madam speaker and good afternoon to all my colleagues. Today is a very special day in Albany, in the People's House as we celebrate our annual Vietnam Veterans Day at the New York State Capitol. As the chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee, it is my great personal privilege to introduce and welcome Vietnam veterans from across New York State who've traveled to the People's House today and to recognize and thank them for their service to our great nation. Most who served were drafted into military service. And upon their return, many were not greeted with the gratitude that they deserved. Their families, like all military families, who share the sacrifice of service also did not receive the support that they earned and deserved. So I know that all of my colleagues today share the sentiments of everyone across the great state of New York when we say to all of our veterans with us, we are honored to be in your presence and to have the opportunity to say thank you. Madam speaker, please join me in welcoming our Vietnam veterans to the New York State Assembly. And I ask that you afford them all the cordialities of the house and grant them the privileges of the floor.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: On behalf of mister Stern, the speaker, and all members, we welcome you, Vietnam veterans, to our assembly chamber, the people's house, and extend to you the privileges of the floor. I want to personally thank you. As I had mentioned earlier, it's wonderful to see you en masse here, and this program has grown over so many years. Thank you for your service. Thank you for your dedication to our country. Thank you for protecting and defending our constitution and our freedoms. We will forever be grateful. Thank you for joining us today. Ms. Peoples Stokes for the purpose of an introduction.

[Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes (Majority Leader)]: Thank you, Madam Speaker, for allowing me to introduce a very special guest to our chamber today. She is Doctor. Maritza Dela Rosa, who joins us from Millington, New Jersey. Doctor. De La Rosa is a retired family physician. In addition, she enjoys the very special honor of being the mother of our own counsel to the speaker Elena Siven. Please welcome Doctor. De La Rosa to a very special give her a very special welcome and offer her the cordialities of our floor. On

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: behalf of Ms. People Stokes, the speaker, and all members, we welcome you, doctor, to the Assembly Chamber and extend the privileges of the floor to you. We are so very excited to have your daughter here working with us. She's following, obviously, in very great footsteps. Thank you so very, very much for joining us today, and welcome. Thank you. Mister Simone, for the purpose of an introduction.

[Assemblymember Tony Simone]: I am privileged and honored to introduce the American Folk Art Museum who are celebrating sixty five years as the nation's home for folk and self taught artists highlighting creativity shaped through lived experience. Since 1961, the museum has become a cornerstone of New York City's Lincoln Square community, preserving more than 7,500 works spanning four centuries and cultures around the world. Recently named the best art museum in America by the readers of Newsweek, the museum is completing its most significant renovation in over thirty years as it prepares for a major 2026 exhibition program aligned with the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the United States. Beyond its galleries, the museum is deeply engaged in the community, offering inclusive programming for deaf and blind visitors, supporting New Yorkers with developmental disabilities, and partnering with LaGuardia Community College to provide paid internships for the next generation. As the museum prepares for its May 6 gala, I ask that we extend a warm welcome to Jason T. Bush and his great team for their leadership and commitment to ensuring that the transformative power of art remains accessible for all.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: On behalf of mister Simone, the speaker, and all members, welcome mister t Bush to the assembly chamber, extending to you the privileges of the floor. We applaud all of the hard work that you've been doing with the American Folk Art Museum. Happy sixty fifth anniversary to you, this year. We are blessed to have the arts in our community keep up the wonderful great work. Thank you so very much for joining us today. Resolutions, page three. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number one zero nine zero, miss Bailey. Legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 03/21/2026 as women in agriculture day in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Miss Bailey on the resolution.

[Unidentified Assemblymember ('Ms. Bailey')]: Thank you, madam speaker. It's my honor to bring this resolution forward to recognize the extraordinary contributions of women in agriculture. Women whose dedication, leadership, and perseverance form a vital part of our American heritage. Agriculture has always been central to our national identity and women have played an indispensable role in sustaining and advancing their legacy. Here in New York State, women in agriculture are essential to the strength of our rural communities. They operate family farms, lead agribusinesses, drive innovation in dairy, livestock and specialty crops, and help preserve the agricultural traditions that define our regions. Their work sustains local economics and protects the landscapes we value. Women in agriculture also serve as mentors and educators, preparing the next generation of agriculture leaders through STEM programs, community initiatives, and organizations such as four H, FFA, and Cooperative Extension. By recognizing Women in Agriculture Day, we honor women from every background whose daily efforts feed our families, strengthen our communities and support the economic prosperity of the great state of New York. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed, no. The resolution is adopted.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number ten ninety one, Mr. Bendet, legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 03/22/2026 as Lynch Syndrome Awareness Day in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mr. Bendet, on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Scott Bendett]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Today, I rise to recognize March 22 as Lynch Syndrome Awareness Day. Lynch syndrome is an inherited condition that significantly increases the risk of several cancers. But it is also one where knowledge truly is power. When people know they have Lynch syndrome, they can get screened earlier, monitored more closely, and in many cases, prevent cancer before it starts. No family should have to learn about this before it's too late. This resolution is about making sure that others don't. It's about raising awareness, encouraging conversations, and making sure that people understand the importance of genetic testing and the early detection. If sharing this story helps even one person get tested sooner, talk to their doctor, or take action that saves their life, then it's worth it. Today, we honor those we've lost, support those living with Lynch syndrome, and commit to a future where awareness leads to prevention. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed, no. The resolution is adopted.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number ten ninety three, Ms. Warner. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim March 2026 as Problem Gambling Awareness Month in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Ms. Warner on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Carrie Woerner]: Thank you Madam Speaker. I am proud to bring to this body the first Problem Gambling Awareness Month resolution that we have ever done. So, you know, some of us foresaw the explosion in problem gambling and others of us are awakening to this reality now. But as is often the case, when we put public policy into the real world, we see how it behaves. And we are seeing the increase in problem gambling and I believe that we are unified in wanting to put guardrails in place to to address the rising instances of problem gambling. Problem gambling is a public health issue and the data tells us that from the NCAA's 2023 Sports Wagering Survey, fifty eight percent of 18 22 year olds have engaged in at least one sports betting activity. Account sharing and proxy betting are amongst the most common ways that these young people gain access to gambling platforms despite the statutory age restrictions. We know that problem gaming harms are not just experienced by the player themselves. Families and friends are also affected. For every one person experiencing a gambling harm, at least six other people experience harms. The increased rates of substance use among family members of a person who gambles is something that we should be concerned about. We have a number of veterans with us in the chamber today and I'll just point out that service members experience gambling addiction at twice the rate of the civilian population. Clearly this is a problem that we need to address. And this body has been very very strong in supporting additional funding for problem gambling supports. But the addiction starts with the game design and the solution has to start with the game design. And so as we take up the next three bills in this gambling package, I ask you to support reforming how the games are designed so that we can stop the addictions from even beginning. I want to thank the speaker for bringing the package to the floor. I want to thank the staff who worked amazingly hard to make this happen and all of the bill sponsors who brought forward constructive and great ideas to make this happen. And I want to reiterate for all of us that it really is important that we recognize problem gambling as an important addiction that we have got to address just the same way we address substance abuse. Because its impact is real and it's growing among our young people, people of color, people who are of lower income and people who are unemployed and among our service members. So thank you all for your support of this resolution and for bringing solutions forward to address problem gambling. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Mr. Fitzpatrick on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Thank you Madam Speaker. Thank the sponsor for bringing this forward. But, you know, why is government promoting so much gambling? Video lottery terminals and other things is because government has addicted itself to more spending. So as soon as we get our spending under control, we can no longer maybe rely on gambling and encourage our citizens to throw their money away and fall into the trap that is addiction. So as we look at this budget, one issue in particular is gonna force local governments to raise taxes and that is sweetening pensions, commonly known as fixed tier six. Tier six is not broken, But we will further will be increasing our dependence on the revenue from gambling in order to pay for this so called fix or sweetener, as it should be known. So let's end the addiction to spending so we can help people end the addiction to gambling. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The resolution is adopted.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number one zero nine two, mister Stern. Legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 03/29/2026 as Vietnam Veterans Day in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Stern, on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Steve Stern]: So thank you, madam speaker. As the chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee, it is my distinct privilege to introduce a legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 03/29/2026 as Vietnam Veterans Day in the state of New York in conjunction with the national observance honoring those who served. Today, we are joined by Vietnam War veterans from across the state, and we thank them for traveling to the People's House and for their service to our great nation. 03/29/1973 marks the day when the last United States combat troops left Vietnam. Many of the men and women who served in this conflict, half a world away which lasted more than a decade, came home to hostility, disparagement, and isolation. Many suffered serious physical injuries and PTSD, which was not acknowledged or treated. More than 58,000 made the ultimate sacrifice, those whose names are etched in memory, love and respect on the Vietnam Memorial Wall in our nation's capital. We join here today in our state capital to acknowledge and thank these heroes for their bravery, courage, and their dignity. The members of the New York State Assembly always commit to ensuring that those who wore the uniform and their families will receive the benefits, the assistance, and support that they have earned. Madam speaker, I know my colleagues agree when I say that most importantly to our heroes, thank you and welcome home. I also know that my colleagues would agree with me when I say that there is one of our very favorite Vietnam War veterans who is already quite home. Wayne Patrick Jackson was born in Albany, New York on 03/17/1947. He is the son of Katherine Jackson and James Daniels. In 1966, Wayne answered his country's call and enlisted in the United States Army. He trained at Fort Dix, New Jersey and Fort Riley, Kansas, where he not only completed his advanced infantry training, but qualified as a light weapons specialist to become a sniper with the ninth Infantry Delta of the United States Army. His service as a combat infantryman in Vietnam ended with his contact with a landmine while on duty in Dug Tham in the Mekong Delta that would end his military career and change his life forever. To this day, madam speaker, Wayne is classified as a 100% disabled veteran and must frequently return to the Veterans Administration for therapy on his legs, which still carry parts of that 58 year old mine from Vietnam. Wayne Jackson honorably served our nation receiving a Purple Heart for the sacrifice he made in the line of duty. Citizens across our country and throughout the great state of New York remain indebted to his service. And this man of great dignity and tremendous character serves as an example for all of us and perhaps the best of all that we can do who admire and respect him is to simply and most sincerely say to our sergeant at arms, Wayne Jackson, thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Manktilo on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow]: Thank thank you, madam speaker. Thank you, chairman Stern, for bringing this resolution forward. Well said and well done. Today we had a chance to meet some of these Vietnam veterans and their families earlier. These men and women behind us have given us the freedoms that we have here today because of their commitment to our country, going overseas to a place that a lot of them didn't know what it was all about, but to this day, they will always remember what it was all about. So I wanna encourage us as assembly members in New York State, when you have a chance to sit down or talk with a Vietnam veteran, Sit with them. Maybe it's just a cup of coffee. Maybe it's to talk about what kind of car you have. But I guarantee you, that time that you spend with that Vietnam Veteran and their family will absolutely be a blessing to you because the stories they tell and some that don't tell speak volumes to all of us. So, again, I encourage all of us to remember them each and every day in our prayers, remember their families, and thank them all for their dedication and service and the things that they still carry today. God bless all of you men and women. God bless your families. And thank you for allowing me to say a few words, madam speaker. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mr. Durso, on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Thank you, madam speaker. Thank you for allowing me to take a moment to speak on this very important resolution. Thank you to the resolution sponsor, mister Stern, who's a great advocate for our veterans throughout New York State and especially on Long Island. But today, I just wanted to take a moment to not only thank all of our veterans that are in the chamber today who served in Vietnam, but one of our own, Assemblyman Ken Blankenbush from the Hundred And 17th District served in the United States Air Force from 1968 to 1976. During that time, mister Blankenber served in the Vietnam War at Ben Hwa Air Base from March 1969 to 1970. Assemblyman Blankenberch has was a was a crew chief on a c one twenty three aircraft, supported multiple aerial missions flying low and slow as they say, which no no doubt put him and his members in danger. One of his duties was to handle agent orange drums, which exposed him and so many others of our service members to those dangerous chemicals. Like so many of our service members, mister Blankenbush has maintained strong connections with those who have served. For the last fifteen years, as a member of New York State Assembly, Ken has con continued his work as an advocate for veterans while also serving as a member of the Black River American Legion and as a member of the Association of United States Army at Fourth Drum Chapter, also as a member of his local VFW in Carthage. I want to thank mister bank Blankenbush and all our Vietnam veterans for your service to our country. We appreciate you. We love you. Welcome home, sir.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow]: Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Miss Giglio on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Jodi Giglio]: Thank you, madam speaker. And I would like to thank the sponsor for this legislation and for the veterans committee for making this day so special for our Vietnam veterans year after year. So thank you to all of you. And I want to thank all of our Vietnam veterans for their service and I want to welcome them all home as we did earlier in the parlor. But today, I rise to honor a true American hero, Sergeant Joe Cognitory, in recognition of his distinguished military service and his unwavering dedication to our veterans. Sergeant Cognitory served our nation with honor in the United States Army during the Vietnam War. In one of the most challenging and defining conflicts in our history, he demonstrated extraordinary courage and leadership, serving as both an acting platoon sergeant and acting platoon leader. For his bravery and service, sergeant Cognacori was awarded some of our nation's highest military honors, including the bronze star, the combat infantry badge, and the air medal. These are not just decorations. They represent sacrifice, resilience, and a deep commitment to protecting our country. But what makes sergeant Cognitory's story especially powerful is what he did after he came home. Like so many Vietnam veterans, he returned not to recognition, but to a nation still coming to terms with that war. Yet despite that, he continued to serve. He has been a leader in the veterans of foreign wars wars, serving as commander of the Fisher Hewins post sixty two forty nine in Rocky Point for thirty three years. He was liaison to the New York State Veterans Committee for five years. He has built and is building upon a veterans museum in my district and often invites this local school district and schools to come and visit the museum so he can tell them the stories of war. He has become a tireless advocate for veterans, supporting those in need, organizing efforts for troops overseas and helping build stronger communities here at home. He is a guiding light for many veterans in Suffolk County, which is the second has the second largest population of veterans in the nation. His life is a testament to the idea that service does not end when the uniform comes off. On this Vietnam Veterans Day, we not only recognize Sergeant Cognitory's remarkable record, we recognize his character, his leadership and his lifelong commitment to others. Sergeant Cognitory represents the very best of New York and the very best of this nation. We thank him for his service, we honor his sacrifice and we are deeply grateful for all he continues to do for our veterans and our communities. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Mister Angelino, on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Joseph Angelino]: Thank you, madam speaker, for allowing me to speak on this resolution. And before I begin my words, I want to remind people in the room and particularly those who served in combat that tragedy plus time equals humor. And you guys know what I'm talking about. I rise to bring to your attention a US army Vietnam veteran who walks amongst us daily, humbly. Judge Angelo Moreno, of the Hundred And 45th District, who served in the first infantry division, the big red one. Here's the reason I bring this patriot to your attention today. After graduating from Saint Bonaventure University with degrees in business and finance, his goal and his plans were to attend law school. He applied to, attend Cleveland State University, Cleveland, Ohio for for a law degree, and he waited by the mailbox daily waiting for that, letter. And later that year, on 09/05/1968, the judge's birthday, he was one step closer to his goal when the letter arrived acknowledging that he was accepted into law school at Cleveland State University. But he had one more surprise birthday present that day. A little deeper in the mail, in the pile of mail was a letter, and this one was from Uncle Sam. And Uncle Sam had an invitation for the judge to travel to Fort Dix, New Jersey for induction into the United States Army. So instead of law school, Angelo Morenello was soon to be a one zero six millimeter recoilless rifle gunner. He was traveling to Southeast Asia to the beautiful Republic Of Vietnam. And once in Vietnam, Angelo found out that his unit he was assigned to had no one zero six recoilless rifles. So he was given the job of m 60. This is the famed weapon known as the pig, mainly because of its size, its weight, and also because it ate a lot of ammo. And in true military fashion, the army always gives the biggest weapon to the smallest guy. The judge, a college graduate at this time, would have none of that. He traded his pig machine gun for a backpack radio. He became a RTO, and that's known as a radio telephone operator. Sounds pretty safe. Right? Well, for fifteen months of a twenty year pitch, because he was drafted, not enlisted, for fifteen months of that twenty four, he was in the jungles of Vietnam using his radio telephone to call in air strikes, artillery fire missions, and medical evacuation of his wounded brothers. Over the years that I've been in the assembly, I was lucky enough to have the judge sitting next to me for four of those years. He sat to my left, and we've had a lot of conversations about everything. I probably know more about him than his family does. I know he's heard the sound of the crack of bullets over his head. He's he's seen unthinkable carnage, and his duty required him to do unspeakable acts. But for his sustained performance in his months of combat, specialist Moranello was awarded the bronze star medal, and this is unheard of then and to this day to have a very junior ranking member of any military awarded the bronze star medal. On this day of recognition for Vietnam veterans, I am grateful to this patriot, this man, for putting his life on hold and also for putting his life into harm's way on our behalf. I'm proud to call him a friend and you're a true patriot. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Tague, on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: Thank you, madam speaker. As the grandson of a World War two veteran and a son of a Vietnam veteran, I wanna say to all those Vietnam veterans who are before us today, welcome home. God bless you, and thank you for your dedication and service to this great nation. And lastly, I a couple of things. I think that it's important for all of us to realize here in this chamber that today is the last day during this ceremony that we will be honoring judge Moranello and assembly member Blankenbush as members of this body. I'd like to see them both get another round of applause for their service and dedication. Now both of those gentlemen are very, very close to me. We we go out to dinner after session many nights, and I can tell you that they are genuine, great Americans. And it's been an honor, a privilege to serve, with both of them. And I would also like to acknowledge Wayne Jackson, a true American hero and a true American story. So, mister Jackson, thank you so much, sir, for your service. And in closing, I have two wonderful veterans from my assembly district that I just wanted to acknowledge. First of all, John Levitt. John Levitt is from Carlisle, and he's the town supervisor there, a former state trooper, and a former great American and Vietnam veteran. And also with him, Joseph F. Izzo from Catskill. Joseph also both of these gentlemen were awarded many, many medals during Vietnam and also spent a lot a lot of time in count combat. So I completely 100% support this resolution. Thank you, Assembly Member Stern, for bringing it to the floor. But lastly, thank you to all our Vietnam veterans. Welcome home. God bless each and every one of you, And God bless the greatest nation in the history of the world, our United States Of America. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Mr. Levine, on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Charles D. Lavine]: Thank you. It is fitting that we gather today to honor our Vietnam veterans. Too many of them came home to a nation that had lost faith not in them, but in our political leadership. And they bore the brunt too often of that loss of faith. So I wanna thank them for what they did. I wanna thank them for being here. And I also wanna thank them for something else. Never again will Americans find fault, whether justified or not, and in in their case, was not justified, find fault with our returning service members no matter where our nation sends them. So this is personal to me and it should be personal to each and every one of us here. Every day I remember my childhood friend, Steve Michalski. Steve and I were always the youngest in our class, so we got to, of necessity, hang out together. And for those of us in this room old enough to remember the significance of what I'm going to say now, Steve was the first kid in my high school class to have a Beatles haircut. So sadly, on 04/05/1969 in Khontoum, we lost Steve Michelski. So it is good that we gather today to honor the nearly 60,000 who did not come home. And it is fitting that we gather today to honor the nearly 3,000,000 Americans who served in Vietnam. And let us remember one of the lessons we all learned in those difficult days. America cannot and must not commit our daughters and our sons in service to try to help some political problem. And let us also let us also follow the rule that we do not commit our service members to any armed conflict, our amazing military to any armed conflict without a political strategy for protecting them and making sure each of them comes home safe and sound. So again, thank you for allowing me to speak and sincere and profound thanks to our veterans with us today. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Chang, on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Thank you, madam speaker. Thank you for the sponsor of the resolution. Very important. And, unfortunately, my Vietnam War veteran unable to make it today, but I wanna make a mention sergeant Ray Wrigley of US Marine Corps sergeant served from 1967 to 1969, and he was assigned to Da Nang right before Tet Offensive. And fortunately for him, he came back home safely and soundly. And I welcome our Vietnam War veterans here who are here and we make wanna make sure that our bodies take care of them for for their services and and for their benefits. As a Afghan war veteran myself, served nearly twenty four years, I understand what does it mean by coming home welcoming when I went back home, and unfortunately, not for our veterans of Vietnam war era. So, we will make a do and thank you for the sponsor of this resolution and welcome back veterans. Thank you very much. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you, mister Blankenbush on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Ken Blankenbush]: Thank you, madam speaker. And welcome home. I spoke a little bit at lunch today, but I just want to bring something up a little bit different. And I think my, fellow veterans would agree with this. We're the lucky ones that came home. And if you ever go to Washington DC and you go through the monuments and you see the Vietnam Veterans Monument with over 58,000 names on that wall. And I can remember as a 19 year old, I again, I could they said I worked on a c one twenty three aircraft, And we had a visiting plane that came in that day and, on my base, and they needed someone to park the plane. And as so I parked the plane. On a c one twenty three, the ramp comes down, in the back of that plane. So as I, get the plane ready, the crew chief on that plane dropped that drawer dropped the the back door down. I'll never forget what I saw that day. That cargo compartment was full of body bags. I said to the crew chief, I go, oh my god. He goes, there's nothing. I do this every every week. I don't know how many of our men and women were in that c one twenty that day, but I know that many of them were about my age, and I was about 19 when I parked that plane. Most of them did not get into the political fray of what was happening back in those days. They we just did our duty. We got orders, and we went. The other thing, though, that I mentioned and I every time I talk to the VFWs or the American Legions or wherever I talk about Vietnam, you look at the 58,000 that did not make it back. But sometimes we forget about those who did come back that are not well, that have injuries, that are thinking and mentalism that has happened to them while they were in service in Vietnam. Many of them are still alive. Many of them are still struggling. And as you heard, what I did over there for twelve months was spray Agent Orange. Now everybody in the whole world probably knows what Agent Orange is, or they think they do. And for three hundred sixty five days, I sprayed in my aircraft twice a day a thousand gallons of Agent Orange. Agent Orange, the chemical is dioxin. If no it's a terrible chemical. But we sprayed that twice a day. There was 16 planes that did that day in and day out just at Benoit Air Force Base. Not DaDang, not FanRang, not all the other places that were doing it. So we when we came back, thank god nothing is happening to me, but many of my veteran friends have had the effects of agent orange, and it's still going on today. So as all of our members here who are alive and seem well, we can't forget the veterans that are still hurting, and some of them are still fighting the cancer and this and what the effects of agent orange has done to their bodies and to their families. So, madam speaker, I'm glad that you gave me time to mention this. And, again, welcome home, guys.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister O'Farro. Mister O'Farro on the resolution.

[Unidentified Assemblymember ('Mr. O’Farro')]: Yes. Good afternoon. I rise today not only as a Navy veteran, but also the son of a Vietnam veteran, O'Farrell James l junior, born 05/28/1943. He left this world on 05/08/2001. Dad, I thank you for your service. I thank the sponsor, Steve Stern, for this resolution. Also, thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. But what I want to thank most and take this opportunity is thank you to all the Vietnam veterans that gave the ultimate sacrifice for our nation. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Moranello on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Angelo Morinello]: Thank you, madam speaker. Following up with my colleague and friend, Ken Blankenbush, he spoke about the physical injuries. But what most people don't realize is when you go into the military, especially when you were in the Vietnam area, there were two types of training. The first training was to reprogram your mind, to reprogram your mind from being an average American with sympathy to I don't wanna offend anyone, but they turned us into basic killers. That was it. Kill, no remorse. They then built our bodies up to be strong. The fallacy is when we came back, not only were we not welcome, but they never treated the pretraining, the mental training they gave us. And to this day, they are now starting to recognize it. This past week, there was a ceremony that was the suicide remembrance flag because the number of suicides of military, people kind of hide that fact. They're afraid to talk about it. They don't understand the scarring, but a lot of that is because we were never reprogrammed. I get out of the service, started law school, and I want to apply for unemployment because we were eligible. And I was asked, what did you do in your previous life? I said, was a hired killer. Well, the woman became very outraged. Explained to her the situation. Her answer was, you don't have to ever report again, but don't go find any work, please. Okay? True story. But the point I'm trying to make and not be funny is that the scarring that is done to the minds during that training, and it is necessary for survival, But let's not forget that they have to be retrained to come back in and become citizens, to walk among those that have not been trained like they were. That is one of the things that we Vietnam veterans have been able to push forward, to push forward for the help. The help that the VA gives now is because of Vietnam veterans standing up and fighting for veterans for the future. And I wanna thank my Vietnam veterans. People do not understand what it's like to be a teenager. I was 23 when I got drafted. I was older. But descent to a foreign country, didn't know the language, and it was a hostile situation. So the sacrifices that were made by these gentlemen and ladies, by my colleagues, were to protect the freedoms that we enjoy today. When you see our members go out into the street and lay down and block traffic, that's because we risked our lives so they could continue to do that. They don't understand that. When we want and we're willing to lay down our lives so that we could have individuals that block the halls when we come and try and do the work of the people. Someday, I wish they would get that understanding. Again, thank you for the opportunity, madam speaker. Thank you to my fellow veterans. Thank you to my brothers and sisters. Welcome home. That's what we didn't get and I'm giving it to you now. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Colleagues, we know that our rules say that resolutions are thirty minutes. And we have gotten to our thirty minutes, but this is very important. We want to make sure we have an opportunity to have our colleagues speak. So, we will get through this list, but we are cutting the resolution speaking time to two minutes, please, so that we have an opportunity for everyone to get an opportunity to speak on this important resolution. So, we will go to Mr. Zaccaro now on the resolution.

[Assemblymember John Zaccaro Jr.]: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: Today, we

[Assemblymember John Zaccaro Jr.]: rise not only to pass a resolution, but to correct a long overdue silence. On March 29, we honor Vietnam Veterans Day, A day that recognizes the courage, the sacrifice, and the service of the men and women who answered their country's call during one of the most difficult chapters of our nation's history. These veterans did not always receive the welcome home they deserved. Many returned to a nation divided and often their service was overlooked or misunderstood, but their bravery was never in question. They served with honor in jungles and rivers far from home under conditions that tested their body and their spirits. And today in this chamber, we have the privilege of standing in the presence of some of those very heroes. To you, we say clearly and we say without hesitation, we see you, we thank you, and we honor you. This resolution today is more than words on a paper. It is a commitment that New York will remember, that they will teach future generations not only about the war, but about the warriors, about their resilience, about their sacrifice, and about their enduring legacy. And so to lay let us not ensure that no veteran ever feels forgotten again. And to our Vietnam veterans here today, welcome home, and thank you for your service. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Miss Warner, on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Carrie Woerner]: Thank you, madam speaker. I want to join my colleagues in acknowledging how very powerful it is for us to recognize our Vietnam veterans today. Gentlemen, you as young men heeded the call of service at a time when you probably didn't know yet what that meant. And you put on the cloth of our country, flew around the world to a place no one even knew where it was. And you engaged in violence to protect our nation's interests. But recognizing veterans for me is also about acknowledging role models. That when you returned home, you brought that spirit of service, of patriotism, of commitment to community back with you. And you live it every day. Our communities are so much stronger because you are a part of our community. And so it is my pleasure to be joined today by two Vietnam veterans from Saratoga County. E-four Corporal Robert Connors, U. S. Army and Sergeant E-five William Herschel Hicks, two hundred and nineteenth RAC, United States Army. Thank you both gentlemen and thank you all for your years of service to our community and welcome home.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Miss Buttonshon on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Marianne Buttenschon]: Thank you, madam speaker. I have the honor to cosponsor this resolution And clearly, to all of our Vietnam veterans that are made the trip to Albany today, I thank you. The ladies and gentlemen from the Utica Center of Development are here today, and I sincerely appreciate it. We honored them earlier at a luncheon. But these are the individuals that continue to serve our community. And a reminder to all of us, as ceremonies are going to be within our district, We will be there to honor you as we should and support you. Thank you so much for your service. God bless you all and God bless The United States Of America.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Miss Kay, on the resolution.

[Unidentified Assemblymember ('Ms. Kay')]: Thank you, madam speaker, and thank you to the sponsor for this very important resolution. And to all the Vietnam veterans in the room, I wanna again say welcome home. Thank you for your service. We know that the trauma didn't disappear when you stepped off that plane for the final time. We know that many of you still carry the weight of those memories. I hope today, here in this chamber, that you feel the sincere gratitude of a nation that has finally matured enough to recognize that you can disagree with the war, but you must honor the warrior. So again, thank you for your service. You showed the world that Americans will answer the call when freedom is threatened. Thank you. And again, and not for the last time, welcome home.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Cashman, on the resolution.

[Unidentified Assemblymember ('Mr. Cashman')]: Thank you, madam speaker. It's an honor and a privilege to stand here today to recognize this important day and so many members that came from around the state. Be it from the North Country to Long Island, from the other corners, I want to share something with you that I had shared earlier. My grandfather was a veteran, an air force veteran, and he lived downstairs, and he taught me many life lessons. Finish your plate, as you can tell. Give thanks. Show appreciation. Stand for the flag. But I could not let this moment go without saying thank you to those that are in the presence of the chamber today. We are in the shadow of heroes. In the shadow of heroes. They have changed lives and they have changed the generations by inspiring us. So from my generation to yours, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your service. Thank you for your love of country as you are an inspiration of example. God bless you. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Colleagues, on the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? No. The resolution is adopted. Thank you all. Thank you for your service.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number 1094, mister McDonald. Legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 04/06/2026 as Missing Persons Day in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Kluginski on the resolution.

[Unidentified Assemblymember ('Mr. Kluginski')]: Thank you, madam speaker. I rise today in support of this resolution. I wanna thank the sponsor of it, assembly member McDonald, for bringing this resolution to the floor. I speak today not just as a member of this body, but from a perspective forged over years in law enforcement. Before coming to this chamber, I served as a detective lieutenant and headed a unit tasked with investigating missing person cases. In police work, you see a lot of difficult things, but there's a specific haunting weight to a missing person's case file that stays on your desk. For a detective, an open case is a professional challenge, but for a family, that open case is a life sentence of what's called ambiguous loss. It's the agony of the unknown. It is the birthday dinner with an empty chair. It is a reflexive jump every time the phone rings, caught in a perpetual state of grieving that can never truly begin because there is no closure. To put this to scale, according to the most recent data from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, while many individuals are thankfully located quickly, we still have nearly 2,700 active missing person cases across the state of New York. That includes over 1,000 children and more than 1,600 adults. Behind every one of those numbers, there is a mother, a father, a sibling, and many times a child who is currently living through their worst nightmare. By memorializing April 6, Suzanne Lial's birthday as missing persons day, we aren't just passing a piece of paper. We're telling these families we see you, we haven't forgotten your loved ones, and we will not stop seeking the answers that you deserve. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution to bring awareness, resources, and hopefully one day peace to thousands of New Yorkers that are still waiting for their loved ones to come home. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Miss Walsh on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Thank you Madam Speaker. I just her name was just mentioned. I just wanted to stand up again and mention Suzanne Lyall and the Lyall family who are from my district, the 112th Assembly District. That family's pain from having their daughter missing for so many years is it is a true tragedy and something that is, I know, something that they think about every day. And I can only imagine other families that are also dealing with the tremendous loss and not knowing and uncertainty of having loved ones who are missing. So I think that this is a very important resolution to remember those who have family members and loved ones who will never forget them and who always in their hearts hold out hope that they will be found. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed, no. The resolution is adopted. Page 40, calendar number three twenty four. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number 9584A, calendar three twenty four, Ms. Warner, an act to amend the racing, pari mutuel, wagering, and breeding law.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Read the last section.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: This act shall take effect immediately.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Clerk will record the vote. Miss Warner, to explain her vote.

[Assemblymember Carrie Woerner]: Speaker, this bill is targeted at two things. One is to to establish some stronger protocols for establishing a sports betting account to ensure that we take protections around increased protections around the age group of the person signing up that there are no account sharing or proxy betting. In many cases it codifies what is already being done by the industry and builds on that. And then secondly, it establishes a framework that is based on evidence and data of risky of a risk profile for players. So that as players perhaps are sliding from gambling as entertainment to compulsive play that we can identify or that the platforms themselves can identify those who are at low risk, medium risk and high risk. And in doing that, that lays the framework for establishing stronger regulations going forward to again deal with the design of the game to address prevention by where the addiction starts. And that's with the game design itself. So, with that I vote in the affirmative. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you, Ms. Wernher in the affirmative. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Ayes, one forty one. Nays, zero.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The bill is passed. Miss Walsh, for the purpose of an introduction.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Thank you, madam speaker, for allowing me to interrupt the proceedings for an introduction on behalf of Assembly members Friend and Palmisano. We rise to, or I rise to warmly welcome distinguished guests to the floor of the Assembly, investigator Michael Thecke of the Chemung County Sheriff's Office. Investigator Thecke is a dedicated law enforcement professional who has served Chemung County with distinction for more than fourteen years demonstrating unwavering commitment to safety, leadership and service to community. He currently serves in the Criminal Investigation Division and has played a vital role in protecting residents and strengthening public trust. In March 2024, investigators think he suffered a severe life threatening injury in the line of duty while courageously pursuing a suspect. He sustained a skull fracture and brain injury and has since undergone extensive hospitalization and rehabilitation, showing remarkable resilience and determination through his recovery. Throughout this difficult journey he has been supported every step of the way by his wife Patrice who also joins us in the chamber today whose strength, devotion and care has been a constant source of comfort and inspiration. We are very honored that she is able to join with him today. His bravery and sacrifice has been recognized across New York State. He was recently honored through legislative resolution for his service and named it recipient of the Order of the Blue Heart Award, a national recognition supporting injured law enforcement officers. Investigator Fecki's commitment to his profession extends beyond his daily duties. He has served as a leader within his department, including as commander of the SWAT team, a trainer for fellow officers, and a trusted voice among his peers, reflecting a deep respect he has earned throughout his career. Madam speaker, would you please welcome on behalf of assembly members, Friend and Palmisano, Michael and Patrice Decky to the assembly chamber and please accord to them all the privileges of the house. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: On behalf of miss Walsh, assembly members Friend and Paul Massano, the speaker and all members, we welcome you investigator and missus Decky to the assembly chamber extending to you the privileges of the floor. We do hope you enjoy our proceedings today. And thank you so very much, sir, for your dedicated community service. It speaks volumes. We thank you so very much for your service and for joining us today. Thank you, sir. Page seven, calendar number 13. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number three eight two a, calendar 13, mister Vannell, an act to amend the racing, paramedial, wagering, and bee breeding law.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: An explanation has been requested. Mister Vannell.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: This bill strengthens the consumer protections in mobile sports wagering by applying the same advertising requirements that already govern casinos to mobile sports wagering licenses. Since mobile sports wagering was legalized in New York in 2022, the industry has grown rapidly along with the volume of advertising reaching consumers on their phones and on other platforms. This bill ensures that mobile sports wagering advertisements are truthful and transparent, that consumers have a simple way to opt out of direct advertising, and that regulators have the tools they need to review advertising and enforce existing standards. These are common sense safeguards that permit the responsible advertising while supporting a fair and well regulated market.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Ms. Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Thank you Madam Speaker. Will the sponsor yield for just a few questions?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Will the sponsor yield? Yes. Sponsor yields.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: And let me apologize in advance since you're behind me, don't mean to give you my back. But I want to get my voice heard in the mic as well. Thank you for yielding for a few questions. So as you mentioned during the introduction, these restrictions that are currently being advanced in this legislation currently apply to commercial casinos, is that right?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: That is correct.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Could you talk a little bit in more detail about what those advertising restrictions would include, like specifically?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: So currently the gaming commission regulates advertising and it builds on you know already existing laws that have you know truth truth truthful and include responsible gaming information. It also strengthens disclosure. It provides you know opt out and it has record keeping requirements.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Now the bill provides that where the advertisement is a video, the gambling hotline number must be visible for the entire duration of the advertisement. Is that correct?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: That's correct.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Okay. And is that something that is currently applicable to any rules involving commercial casino like the existing law or is that a new piece?

[Unidentified off-mic member/counsel]: That's new law that we added.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Yeah, that's new law that we added.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Okay. And the gambling hotline number is 18778, is that correct?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Yes, yes it is correct.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Okay. The reason I'm asking is that there's a New York State helpline Correct. But then there are also national hotlines, and I'm wondering if the legislation is specific that the hotline number to be displayed throughout the entire commercial or video needs to be the New York helpline.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Yeah, so we it's intended to be the New York state hotline, yes.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Okay, all right. So there's been some concern raised about specifically that portion of the bill. It's saying that it might be problematic if the mobile sports licensee runs national or regional advertisements and the question being raised is in that instance what good would a New York hotline number be to people in other states?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Again, we find that again, if if, you know, we are licensing New York folks that are hitting New York problem gamblers and New York gamblers, so they should be you know, the phone number should be specific to New York. One of the issue that we have with problem gambling is making sure that we have the proper measurements and know, you know, who's calling or what have you. And the New York specific one, New York specific phone number provides for us to be able to reach the problem gambling in New York State.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Okay. So let's just say

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: that

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: it's advertisement and the national advertisement is going to be broadcast or somehow disseminated through like a whole bunch of states. What this bill would require is that you can list the Pennsylvania number or the Nevada number or any of the other numbers that you want on that advertisement, but you've got to have the New York helpline number.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: No, no, no. This bill states that again, if you're going to advertise to New Yorkers and your platform reaches New Yorkers, you're going to advertise to New Yorkers, that number has to be the New York phone number.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Okay. So are they going to have to create a unique advertisement specifically to the to the market of New York residents that are going to be accessing this?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: So we listen, we're we're regulating we're regulating so, you know, problem get I'm sorry. The these wagering licensees are licensed by the different states. Yeah. And if they want to if they want to participate in New York state, they have to, you know, use and use our the phone numbers here. So we you know so this requirement provides the actual phone the New York problem gambling phone number. We've heard the argument before about having the national phone number what have you. What's really important for us to deal with when it comes to problem gambling is that we get the information for the New Yorkers that have the problem gambling and that is you know we have the infrastructure in place with the New York program.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Okay. So, and I understand that. So, I know that like for example, you mentioned you'd heard this kind of argument before. So the Sports Betting Alliance, they say that they would be fine if it was a national number, but I understand what you're saying that you want this legislation will require the New York helpline number to be on any advertisement for that's going to be shown in New York?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: That's correct.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Okay. So my only question is just as a very practical matter, if you are the if you're creating an advertisement that's going to be played in numerous states, including New York, Would it be okay under this legislation if you list the national hotline number and the New York number and then it has like other state numbers in there as well depending on like, let's say that that ad is going to, you know 50 states, I don't know, whoever's got casinos or global betting, whatever we're doing.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Yeah,

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: prohibit bill other numbers, but it clearly states that the New York phone number has to be on there.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Okay. And does it say at all in the bill, because I didn't see it, that you just required that the New York hotline number is shown. It doesn't does it specify any kind of like certain, you know, font size or certain prominence or does it have to be bolded or does it have to be like are there any other rules around or it just has to be in there somewhere?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: So, the bill requires that it will be clearly disclosed.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: But, it doesn't have a font, you know, it doesn't have a font regulation on it.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Okay. Okay. Very good. Thank you so much Mr. Vidal. Madam Speaker, on the bill. On the bill. So I mean I think that many of us would support the idea of having the same rules that we currently apply to commercial casinos to also be applied to mobile sports wagering. We've been discussing now for a couple of days the increasing concern that many of us share with online sports wagering and the need to try to create some rules around it that are going to help individuals who recognize or realize that they have a problem, that they want to seek some help. So I think providing that New York number is a good one. I think that the industry is just concerned that if they are going to be developing an ad that's going to be circulated in a number of channels, a number of different states, that they would have preferred to just put up the national hotline numbers. So that issue is just out there. That's why there is opposition to this bill. That's really the only opposition that I've seen to the bill. So I think that but I I think despite that, you know, we know with we know in our own line of work that as we're sending messaging out, there are lots of different ways to slice and disseminate that so that unique ad is going to a unique audience. So I don't know if that's really the fact that this bill requires the New York number to appear. They can do it, sounds like they could do it a couple of different ways. They could either list a whole bunch of different numbers at the end, including New York's. I think that would satisfy this legislation. They could put up the national number. They could put up the numbers of other that other states might have. As long as it includes New York, I think that that would not run afoul of this legislation. So but I do mention the fact that there is opposition to the bill on that basis, but I do think that there are certainly ways that the industry can get around it. Maybe they might not prefer it, but there are ways that they can. So I'll be in favor of this bill and I appreciate the sponsor for his answering of my questions. Thank you Madam Speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Mr. Jensen?

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Thank you Madam Speaker. Will the sponsor yield for a few questions?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Will the sponsor yield? Yes. The sponsor yields.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Thank you sir. I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but I did have some further questions based on what our floor leader just asked. There's two really large sporting events that are prime advertising for mobile sports wagering. One that's going to be hosted in New York this year in the World Cup and obviously the Super Bowl. There are national, international sporting events, a lot of eyeballs, and a lot of advertisers pay a lot of money to have their commercials or their product advertised. And certainly, when we have licensed mobile sports gaming businesses that are licensed in our state, buying ads for events like these where they are paying for this national or international advertising, what would be the mechanism? Because certainly in a thirty second ad, you know, they're not gonna list every single state or country's problem gambling hotline. So what would be the circumstance in in that situation?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: So so for this bill, when when we talk about on the on the mobile on the mobile side Yep. Right, that the these national organizations or what have you that are licensed in different states, right, there's no national license. Right? So they're licensed in New York. So their digital New York ads should have should be specific to to New

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So is this only for digital advertisements?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Nope. I'm saying this is this includes a digital advertisement.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So it's but it's all advertising whether it's over cable TV, satellite TV, YouTube streaming, anything that's a video, no matter the platform, would have to have the New York State hotline on it if it's being broadcast in New York. But my question is for something that and echoing what our floor leader just asked, if something isn't only being broadcast in New York, certainly for the, you know, a Mets or a Yankees game or a Rangers game or the Islanders or the Sabres, that's gonna be wholly most likely in New York. But for nationally or internationally televised sporting events, that's not a realistic thing to ask these companies to do. So I guess, in understanding I'm not going get a different answer, what is the punishment if a company does not abide by the terms of this legislation if it becomes law?

[Unidentified off-mic member/counsel]: So

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Actually actually, this is not a new concept to find out that, you know, this is something that all all the all the advertising has to be approved by the gaming commission. So they deal with these kinds of issues.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So if They they

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: So they they have to be approved by the gaming commission. They have they also have to be approved by state law. So this is not something this is this is not a a issue of of first sight.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So if Jensen Sportsbook, which is licensed in New York for mobile sports gaming, wants to buy a Super Bowl ad that's gonna be broadcast nationally, I have to send that advertisement to the gaming commission prior to the Super Bowl or the World Cup?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Oh, interesting.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Yeah.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: I did not aware of that.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Neither that.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So if they do violate the letter of the law, if this becomes law, what is the recourse whether from the gaming commission or the enforcement mechanism? Is there a fine? Are they do they get their license pulled? What does failure to comply result in?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Alright. So, the the bill will take effect ninety days after enactment, and then the gaming commission could enforce the bill using its regulatory authority.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. So, we don't know if it's a fine or if they get their license pulled. It's all up to the

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: gaming commission. But, yeah, keep in mind, the gaming commit the the these ads would have to be preapproved by the gaming commission in

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: first Yeah. But I'm asking so once again, Jensen's sports book. If I'm paying $10,000,000 to run a Super Bowl ad, but I'm gonna get a fine from the New York State Gaming Commission of $10,000 for not running a New York State centric gambling hotline, but I just put the national one on there.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: So again,

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: as a business, I would

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: take a 10,000 hit

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: and run my head. Again,

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: that makes what arguing is a great argument, but you know I wasn't aware neither were you that the gaming commission already preapproved these ads.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Yeah. And I'm just I I guess not knowing that, I guess what's the record? I guess is are they actively approving these now? Or are they only doing it post advertisement if they don't comply with putting on?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: No. No. It wouldn't it wouldn't they would not it doesn't sound it doesn't look like they would not comply with it because it gets it would if it's illegal, it would not get you know, it wouldn't

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: get approved.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: I understand. But if I'm when once again, I'm not an advertising executive, so I don't know how this works. I'm just an idiot who's talking on the floor. But when these ads are being sold, they're not the companies aren't entering into an agreement with New York State. They're entering an agreement with their broadcast partner. The broadcast partner, it's ESPN, NBC, CBS, ABC, they're broadcasting and they're federally regulated. So they don't have to come to every state to get approval on what goes over the airwaves. They only have to get FCC approval. So I guess my question is if a company just chooses to not get this approved by the gaming commission to just run the ad, and they do have the national

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Again, process is that gaming ads have to be approved by the gaming commission prior to them prior being prior to it being published.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: But New York State doesn't approve what goes on airwaves of national television. Do they? Is that an office that I missed we created?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Yeah. So so ads are again, ads are locally tailored and and targeted. But prior to Not

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Super Bowl ads.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Are you sure about

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Some of them are, but I'm pretty sure when I watched that talking singing frog, everybody saw that, not just me in New York.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: I said gaming. Anything. Anything that's dealing with gaming. That an

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: FCC regulation or statement?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: That's New York State Gaming Commission. That's a New York state. But

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: does the FCC abide by that same regulation?

[Unidentified off-mic member/counsel]: No jurisdiction or state controls.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Yeah. So the FCC has and we're dealing with a lot of this stuff now. The FCC has no no jurisdiction over gaming.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: New York state jurisdiction over the nation's airwaves.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Correct.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Yep.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Yes. Yes. They have jurisdiction over the nation's airwaves. Right? Yep. But if all of those airwaves, if there's gonna be ads on gaming, that's New York State.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. Okay. Thank you, I appreciate your answers. Madam Speaker, on the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Certainly, have no, much like our floor leader presented, I have no qualms about ensuring that people know access to, if they do believe that they're having a gambling problem, that they have resources and access to those resources and know the numbers. What my concern or issue with is that if we are truly focused on ensuring that people who may need access to these types of services can get it, New York State can't be sure it can control everything that's being broadcast on video platforms, especially over nationally televised events. And so certainly, if we are concerned with making sure that people have help, rather than just being New York State centric, and there is a national hotline, we should be sufficient with that. And if these mobile sports gaming companies are not abiding by existing New York State law to get their advertisements approved in New York, but rather just taking a potential economic hit, but still running an ad that's gonna be seen by hundreds of millions of people, we should actually have some teeth in the enforcement of these mechanisms. So, I appreciate the sponsor answering my questions. I'm sure he didn't mean to want to get on a merry-go-round with our questions today, but I appreciate him hopping on and going for the ride with us. So, thank you, Madam Speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Ms. Werner?

[Assemblymember Carrie Woerner]: Thank you. Will the sponsor yield for a couple of questions?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Will the sponsor yield? Yes. The sponsor yields.

[Assemblymember Carrie Woerner]: Thank you. So, the New York helpline, if you dial the New York helpline, New York hopes, you get a New York provider, correct?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: That's correct.

[Assemblymember Carrie Woerner]: And if you dial the national hotline, do you necessarily get a New York provider?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: No, that's no, you may not. And chances are you will not.

[Assemblymember Carrie Woerner]: So if you are in a crisis say and you dial the national hotline number, are you going to be able to get somebody close by to assist you?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Most likely not.

[Assemblymember Carrie Woerner]: But would you be able to if you called the New York Hope Lines?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Definitely, you definitely will.

[Assemblymember Carrie Woerner]: And is and and your intent in sponsoring this bill is to make sure that people in New York who are having a crisis get the help and the resources that they need when they need it?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Yes, that's definitely correct, yes.

[Assemblymember Carrie Woerner]: Thank you Mr. Sponsor, that's all.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mr. Moreno?

[Assemblymember Angelo Morinello]: Thank you, madam speaker. On the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Angelo Morinello]: I spoke yesterday on, the concept. I'm speaking today. We spent two days now acknowledging that the underlying law that was passed is not a good one. We spent two days now trying to put a mask over the true issues. We've acknowledged that we've created hardship in families. We've acknowledged that the gambling is a undertone of addiction. Now when we deal with heroin or drugs, we're trying to eliminate them. What we're trying to do here is justify the income to the state because of their reckless spending and take it from those poor individuals that get hooked on what is we call gambling, sports betting, emotional betting. Betting by individuals who have no knowledge of what they're doing. But what are we doing? We're taking time that should be here to force foster the business of the assembly, to work on budgets, to work on that which can be accomplished. We have housing issues. We have individuals with mental problems. We have children in need. We have schools that are failing. And what are we wasting time on? Acknowledging that a bill we passed is troublesome, that it's creating hardships. And instead of saying maybe let's just ditch it and get rid of it, they won't get rid of the income stream. So now part of that income stream is being used to try and overcome the addiction that was caused. Thank you very much. I will support these because they are working towards it. But let's not kid each other. Let's get rid of this because it's not good, it's not healthy, and it's gonna tear down the fabric of our youth. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Mister Fitzpatrick.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Thank you Madam Speaker, will the sponsor yield?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Will the sponsor yield? Yes. Sponsor Thank

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: you Clyde. My concern is with this target market of 18 to 25. It's understood in the field of psychology and medicine that the brain of a young person is not fully developed until roughly the age of 25. So who are these advertisers reaching out to? Are they reaching for that target market or are they reaching for a much broader market?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Can't speak to, again I can't speak to exactly who this bill reaches out to. What this bill provides the guardrails, The guardrails that we have currently provide it for for online. I

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: mean, the advertising. Who is the advertising directed toward? What is that target market? Who

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: And the age is 21, it's not 18. So it target 18 to 21, it's 21 and up.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Okay. So we have a problem in the high schools. Wall Street Journal did a very interesting article a week or so ago about problem, a problem out in California in a high school and how they were trying to deal with it. So when you have young people under the age of 21, these are teenagers, 18 and younger getting involved in sports gambling. And if this child gets into any kind of financial distress, perhaps they are tapping into mom's, mom or dad's account or have a joint account And there is fiscal stress due to the addiction this young person falls into. An 800 number is after the fact. Is there a private right of action for the child or the family of the child to sue these companies for what they've done to the child?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Well, this bill doesn't recover the cost

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: of the treatment that they're going to undergo because of this new addiction? I

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: can sympathize with what you are saying but that's outside the scope of this bill.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Okay. Alright. Well maybe we need to look at perhaps giving people the opportunity to recover the cost of their treatment and just the heartache and the problems that this industry is creating because they are preying on that target market that those young people. And I think we should be paying very close attention to that problem. Thank you. Thank you, Clyde.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Read the last section.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: This action will take effect on the ninetieth day.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The clerk will record the vote. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Ayes, one forty one. Nays, zero.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: DeVilla's passed. Page 40, calendar number 322. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number eighty five eighteen, calendar three twenty two, mister Steck. An act to amend the insurance

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: explanation has been requested. We're on debate if we can have quiet in the chamber.

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: Thank you, madam speaker. Our committee on alcoholism and substance abuse held a joint hearing with the committee on wagering racing and wagering, and one of the most poignant pieces of testimony was that the Europeans have had sports betting for quite a long time. They have a lot of controls in place to deal with this problem whereas New York has become a wild west show. And I would like to quote briefly from Friends of Recovery which strongly supports the bill before you. While these platforms generate significant revenue for New York, they also introduce measurable public health risks, particularly for young men, individuals with substance use disorders and those vulnerable to addiction. Notably, New York became the largest legal sports betting state by monthly handle by 2025 and set a new national record for gross gaming revenue in December 2025 generating $260,400,000 in a single month. We have a crisis in this area and this bill helps people who are in need of recovery from gambling addiction get treatment. All the bill does is put gambling addiction on the exact same footing as coverage for as coverage for alcoholism and substance use disorders. Finally, I would note that I am a big believer in an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. This bill does not prevent. It does try to cure, but we have a lot of other bills that do deal with the prevention issue including banning sports betting during sporting events. So we did listen very carefully to mister Fitzpatrick's speech the other day concerning this problem and I certainly thought his remarks were on point, but we do have a crisis and this bill helps to address that.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Gandolfo?

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will the yield? Absolutely. Will the

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The sponsor yield.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: I appreciate that. Thank you. And, I don't have too many questions because looking at this bill, it's pretty simple. It's adding in the language and problem gambling to the insurance law here. So, my first question is, is there any definition in law anywhere of what a problem gambling service is?

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: So, problem gambling is like all the other addictions. They are in the DSM five. One of the things that we did, because I'm mindful of your conference's concerns having served on the insurance committee for a number of years about undueling and increasing the cost of insurance, the governor's version would have covered every addiction in the DSM five. We limited it. This is a crisis situation and and that's how it's addressed.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. Now, my understanding is that, as you mentioned, problem gambling is recognized in the DSM. So, health plans currently not covering these services? I thought they had to be in compliance with the mental health parity laws that we have on file.

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: Well, health parity has been a largely illusory if you have ever experienced a family member go through this get. One of the real problems with that is finding the services. So, and the people qualified to treat it. The AwaySAS does have regulation of people qualified to treat problem gambling and so we are hoping that with this bill more people will be able to get treatment because it's not explicitly covered in existing requirements.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. Are there any particular problem gambling services that you are finding or I know you mentioned the hearing. Are there any particular problem gambling services that insurers are not covering?

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: I don't have any information on whether they are or they aren't. It would shock me knowing insurers that they've been covering things they're not required to cover. It may vary from insurer to insurer. As we all know in health insurance, some some insurances are much more receptive to the needs of the public than others. But I can't tell you which ones might be covering it if there are any at all at this time.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. I appreciate that. And, those were my only questions. Madam speaker, on the bill please.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Thank you, madam speaker. I certainly appreciate the intention of what we're trying to do here. As we've spoken about a lot over the last few days, the issue that is problem gambling and how it keeps growing especially among the youth, more specifically young men. My concern is that as the DSM recognizes problem gambling, that health plans are already required to cover these services under the state mental health parity laws that are already on the books. So, in my view, it may be duplicative. And I just wanted to add in and add to that conversation we've been having. I have a very good friend who suffers from gambling addiction. He has sought services, support meetings. And when I was speaking with him about the troubles that he's been having, is that you a lot of these addiction services almost treat gambling addiction like a substance abuse, but the problem is it's always following you around on your phone. It's always in your pocket. You're always getting beaten over the head with the advertisements. So until we can try to address those issues, I don't think we are doing enough to prevent us from getting to a point where people are suffering from these problems. So, again, thank the sponsor for his answers to my questions, and I thank you for your time, madam speaker.

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: Bill?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Stack, on the bell.

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: So very briefly, certainly this law, if there are some insurers that already covered this, does no harm but again, I think this issue of mental health parity has been largely illusory. I think Oasis is trying to beef up the number of people who are specifically trained in problem gambling and don't see it as simply another version of alcoholism or substance use. So we will continue in our committee to make sure that Oasis is responding to this need as they have asserted and we also want to work on prevention issues as well.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you, Ms. Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will the sponsor yield?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Will the sponsor yield? Yes. The sponsor yields.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Thank you. Just a quick question. I see that this bill, it says that there's likely no increase in cost for state or local governments as a result of this bill because this bill is asking insurers to pay. My question just simply is, should the state which legalized this have some kind of responsibility to take some of the money that the state is realizing, which from what I understand was a pretty good year for the state in terms of realizing money from this kind of betting and put it towards trying to treat addiction?

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: Well, gambling is a tax on the poor and the middle class. That's what it is and

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: the

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: state does in the sports betting law have a specific set aside for revenue that goes to treating this problem. I think if I'm not mistaken this year, 12,000,000 were automatically transferred for this purpose. I do think that should be increased. I do join in those who feel that the state profiting off this is, certainly something that the state needs to take further responsibility for. I would note that the governor had, issued a press release saying that she was giving a $5,000,000 tax credit to Fanatics, a sports betting platform to locate in New York City on the grounds that it would create jobs. I don't think these companies are short of money. I don't think they need subsidies from the state of New York. Quite the contrary, I think we need to be more active in measures to prevent these problems from arising. As I indicated but in direct answer to the question, there is a stream of revenue that comes from the sports betting that goes directly into treatment.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: My only other question is, yes, or maybe it's more of a statement, there is money that's been earmarked for the state to be doing some of this, but since we know that requiring insurance companies to cover this kind of treatment could be expensive and from everything that we've been discussing over the last couple of days, it sounds like more and more people are going to be impacted and are going to require treatment, wouldn't it make sense to increase that $12,000,000 to something else so that we're not just simply laying it at the feet of insurers which is then going to trickle down to everyone who is paying for insurance?

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: Well, completely agree and as I indicated, I think that amount should be increased. So, also the other factor is we've got to do more on prevention, so this problem does not continue to multiply.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Thank you very much. Thank you madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Read the last section.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: This act shall take effect immediately.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The clerk will record the vote. Ms. Warner to explain her vote.

[Assemblymember Carrie Woerner]: Thank you Madam Speaker. I would just explain my vote by connecting the prior bill with this bill that those who call the New York hotline, New York Hopes, they are connected to services free of charge and that is funded by the monies that come from mobile gaming and go through the state budget. And with that, I vote in the affirmative.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Ms. Warner in the affirmative, Mr. Fitzpatrick to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Explain my vote, when someone gets into the trap of addiction and they spend their child's college account on this addiction and they spend their own retirement fund tap into it to meet this addiction or they forego paying the mortgage or other responsibility to feed this addiction, an 800 number does nothing for those people. The damage is done and now they their lives are shattered. So understanding that the target market for a lot of this gambling is the eighteen to twenty five age group, I'm not one to add more of a burden on the insurance side. I voted no in the past, but I am very passionate about this and I think this is a wise move. And maybe that will wake some people up. Look, government has its own addiction. It's reaping in millions of dollars. I have a casino in my district. Jake's fifty eight. To me, it's a malignant tumor growing out of the Long Island Expressway at Exit 58. They advertise that they reap millions of dollars for local government and education, yet my school taxes have not stabilized nor have my county taxes. It's more money for government to spend. So, in fact, they're going to double in size from a thousand VLTs to 2,000. So, even more people can become addicted to this activity. So, you know, this is this is a huge problem. It's only going to get bigger. And the easier we make it for people to gamble, the more problems and social costs we're going to have. So I thank the sponsor for putting this legislation forward. You wanna solve the problem? Ban online gambling. That's the answer. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Fitzpatrick in the affirmative, mister Pierzzolo to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Sam Pirozzolo]: Thank you, madam speaker. Unfortunately, I'm kinda voting yes on this bill because I don't really feel I have a choice but to vote yes along with my colleagues. What I'm objecting to is several things, and one is this is requiring a private business to pick up the pieces that we're kind of creating on not only this bill, but a lot of bills that the house does. You know, if we're talking about gambling, we're creating gamblers and then we're requiring somebody else to go fix the problem. If we're talking about marijuana or drug use, we're promoting that and then we're requiring somebody else to go fix the problem. We have the conversations in the hallways about legalizing sex work and prostitution, and then we're gonna have to have somebody else go fix the problem. The problem is here, as my colleagues have said, the addiction is in this chamber. What is going to happen when the day comes, and it probably will, when the casinos get too large, the marijuana farms get too large, everything else gets too large, and the income starts to decline? Is this chamber going to begin start promoting advertisements to increase uses in these substances? It's really immoral what we are doing here or the animal that we have created. And the fact that we have to pressure other companies to clean up our mess, which is that cost that's going to be passed on to the consumer, should be illegal. So I am voting yes, although I'm against everything that we just spoke about.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Pierzola in affirmative. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: It's one thirty two. Nay is 10.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The bill is passed. Page 26, calendar number 161. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number 64 84 a, calendar 161, mister Wepprin, an act to amend the insurance law.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: An explanation has been requested. Mr. Wepren.

[Assemblymember David I. Weprin]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill amends a number of sections of the insurance law to limit co payments for physical and occupational therapy services at the co pay rate for primary care services plus 25%. Under current law, an insurer may charge a specialty rate cost share, for physical and occupational therapy. This specialty rate is much higher than the primary care rate. While other specialties require a single or sparse visit, physical and occupational therapy services are often prescribed for weeks or months at a time and sometimes even multiple times per week. This high cost share rate can render physical and occupational therapy services cost prohibitive to many New Yorkers. By limiting the co payment for these services, this bill will ensure that physical and occupational therapy services remain affordable and accessible to New Yorkers. A prior version of this bill that set the cost share at the same cost for primary care was vetoed in 2024 by governor Hochul, citing that the bill would prevent health plans from designing their plans in a way that encourages insureds to seek care first from their primary care provider. We believe these amendments address our veto message. Physical and occupational therapy are proven cost effective interventions that help patients recover, function, manage pain, and maintain independence, often avoiding the need for surgery, reducing reliance on medications, including opioids, and preventing costly complication. Early access to physical or occupational therapy can improve outcomes for musculoskeletal injuries, chronic conditions, and post acute recovery. Helping patients return to work and daily activities faster. By addressing the root cause of impairment rather than just symptoms, physical and occupational therapy lowers overall healthcare spending while delivering better, safer patient outcomes.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mr. Gandolfo.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Thank you, madam speaker. Would the sponsor please yield for a few questions?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Will the sponsor yield? Certainly. The sponsor yields.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Thank you, Mr. Weperin. So, first question, my understanding is that the Affordable Care Act as well as New York law already places caps on the out of pocket expenses for the insured. Is that correct?

[Assemblymember David I. Weprin]: My understanding is not for occupational or physical therapy.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: So, if an insured reach their maximum co pays, maximum amount out of pocket for co pays for the year under their insurance plan, would they would still be on the hook for occupational therapy? Correct. Okay. So, that just does not count towards that cap at all? Correct. Okay. My understanding was that had a patient and insured reach that maximum cap that the insurer would have to pick up any further co payments or co insurance payments. But we can move on from that. Now, removing the co payment, it doesn't necessarily remove the cost. Is there any concern that it would just shift the cost into the premium paid by all the policyholders?

[Assemblymember David I. Weprin]: My understanding is that this will increase more access to occupational and physical therapy services that are not currently being done? Okay.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: My concern was that insurers, consumers and employers would have to pick up that cost. And in turn, the insurer might increase the premiums that they're charging consumers and employers who are providing the insurance for those working for them. Has there been any cost benefit done on that on the impact to the premiums?

[Assemblymember David I. Weprin]: My understanding is it should not affect it. But again, right now there hasn't been that coverage.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. Now, my understanding is that cost sharing arrangements are reviewed and approved by DFS, is that correct? Yes, absolutely. Do you feel that process has been, I guess, insufficient? And if so, is it something that DFS can handle internally without us imposing these cost sharing restrictions? My understanding is not. That so if we have to put the restriction in, does that mean DFS isn't doing the proper job of approving the cost sharing arrangements for small group policies? My

[Assemblymember David I. Weprin]: understanding is not.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Weppard. Madam speaker on the bill please.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Thank you. Again, everyone wants to make sure that the people we represent are able to afford the healthcare that they need. But there are already measures in place that do cap the out of pocket expenses to the insured. And what we're doing here by imposing a rigid cost sharing restriction on the cost sharing arrangement, I believe that we're just going to shift that cost back into the premiums, that employers are going to be paying more, and consumers who seek out insurance policies will just be paying more and the prices will go up for all covered under those policies. Additionally, DFS does review the cost sharing arrangements that we're speaking about right now. So, if there is an issue, it is something that I believe DFS can handle internally with their processes as they do their yearly reviews of these arrangements. So, for that reason, I will be voting in the negative. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Read the last section.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: This act shall take effect 01/01/2027.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The clerk will record the vote. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Ayes, one thirty five. Nays, seven.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The bill is passed. Page 28, calendar number one seventy four, clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number 6766, calendars one seventy four, mister Vannell, enact to amend the general business law.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: An explanation has been requested. Mister Vannell.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: This bill authorizes the Department of Financial Services to establish reasonable limits on ATM transaction fees at casinos and colleges. Where people often have no practical alternative to access cash. It prohibits casinos and colleges from hosting ATMs that charge fees above the established limit if they are aware of violation. Upon receiving consumer complaints, casinos and colleges are required to investigate and address noncompliance. This bill ensures that students and casino patrons are not exploited by predatory fees simply for withdrawing their own money. By allowing the Department of Financial Services to set fair limits and requiring institutions to respond to complaints, this bill promotes financial fairness, consumer protection, responsible oversight in setting where it is most needed.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Lamondis.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will the sponsor yield?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Will the sponsor yield? Yes. The sponsor yields.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: Thank you. Could you describe are there any changes or updates to this versus the version that was put forth last year?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Do we have any changes? No. There are no changes.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: Same same exact bill. Okay. And then could you describe or identify the amount of of authorized or what we've what you view as an authorized surcharge for an ATM,

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: as an as an authorized surcharge. So that that would be under regulation. The Department of Financial Services will set what the reasonable fees are.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: Right. That's I understand. But but the the essence of my question is, do we have that schedule so we can discuss it?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: That would be made through rule making. So that is so this this bill is the law, then those the the the if it's going to be a schedule, it's gonna if it's going to be amount, that will be provided by the Department of Financial Services in the rulemaking process.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: And that's my point precisely. Is the cart not before the horse here? If we don't know the schedule of the fee and how to define excessive, how are we saying that we're protecting from excessive fees if we don't have the schedule that determines them to be so?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: No. The the cart is not before the horse. So we know that there are excessive fees that are being that that are being charged in the in the in the casinos and at on these college campuses. We found that the average cost for ATM fees at casinos in New York state is is $10. We find we find that we found that on certain college campuses, ATM fees exceed $5. So what this bill says is this bill allows for reasonable fees and then the the the Department of Financial Services will set a ceiling, set a cap for what the what the reason what the fees would be for these different places.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: So that does that mean that there is is there criteria for determining that regionally? If if so, could you describe what that criteria would be?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: I can't.

[Unidentified off-mic member/counsel]: States are consistent with prevailing future norms and standards as designed to as designed to address regional differences?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: So in the bill in section two, it states that the Department of Financial Services will set up a fee that's fair and reasonable to consumers and consistent with prevailing industry norms and standards. And the superintendent of the department of of financial services may periodically review and adjust such monetary amount.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: Understood. However, in protection of the business entity, what if that established fee was less than the cost structure of the business?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Again, the the Department of Financial Services would be done through rulemaking. So that part of the, you know, part of the the process of of the New York State administrative rulemaking process is providing proposed notice of rulemaking, a comment period, and then stakeholders are able to hash that out.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: Understood. However, what I what I'm driving at is I would not want to see the increase of ATM deserts as a result of this law. I would want, as a consumer, to be able to have the opportunity to make the decision on the spot if I'm going to if I'm going to pay that fee regardless of what it is. And and and I'm sure you and I both have gone to ATMs and said, I'm not gonna pay that. It's too high.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: That that's correct. But as exactly what you're saying, stakeholders have the opportunity to to figure out to to to contribute on figuring out what these regulations would look like. So the before the Department of Financial Services comes out with the regulations, they have to provide a notice of of regulations, and there's gonna be a comment period to be able to to to hash these kinds of issues out.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: So understood. However, more directly, is it not good enough to have proper disclosure of what the fee is gonna be before you hit the final button of finish the transaction or

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: not? I'm sorry, Jack. Can you repeat that again?

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: Yes. So is it not good enough to have the to have the opportunity as a consumer to see the disclosure before you finish the transaction? We all see that's the last step in an ATM transaction. Do you wanna go through with this or not? Yes or no?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: No. Because in this situation, this situation is provides for specific situations like on in a casino where you have no other opportunities. Right? Where or on a college campus.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: I understand. What I what I am trying to get at is there are many places in in the conduct of life, business, recreation where we are faced with the decision to either purchase or not multiple things. One that immediately comes to mind is parking. You know? I I mean, park there are egregious parking fees sometimes. Egregious to you might be different than egregious to me or any number of our colleagues.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: But

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: but, John, in this case here, we have we have a you know, it's not to find we have a captive audience. You're in the casino. You have you don't have options or other places to go. You're stuck in that place or on a college campus. So we're what we're saying here is that we you know, that these places are supposed to provide reasonable fees, not no fees. Reasonable means, again, and the the reasonable process and what that fee is gonna be, you know, it'll come out in the rule making process with Department of Financial Services. But at a casino, right, you can't go across the street to the other bank or what have you. You're you're stuck inside the casino.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: Right. You're stuck inside of the casino because of choice to enter that facility. That's right.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: That's right. But but even though whether you like casinos or not, whether we like gambling or not, even if that's the case, right, there should be reasonable fees. It should be a reasonable amount for you to be able to take to transact with the bank for you to take your money out.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: I don't disagree. But, again, without seeing without having the structure to debate what's reasonable or not, I don't know how we could pass this bill demanding reasonableness without knowing the structure.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: John, we do it all the time. Again, this is this this bill, right, would describe would define that says that these fees have to be reasonable. Right? It would it would we could do a law that puts a number on it, that puts a cap on that. But if we do that, it could it could there could be differences in region. There could be differences in time. What's gonna happen three years from now when if we put a if we put a specific number in the bill right now, what's gonna happen in a couple of years from now, what have you. That's why we have the laws which provide the reasonableness standard, but then the regulations, which are more nimble, can be changed easier. And and so different process where more where there's a process where there's a a notice of rule make notice of rule making, and people have the opportunity and stakeholders have the opportunity to be able to provide, you know, their, you know, their opinions on what it should be.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: Again, I I understand your perspective, but I wanna transition to to violations or suspected violations and the fees or fines per violation. Do we have that schedule so that businesses could plan if this were to if this were to pass?

[Unidentified off-mic member/counsel]: $250 per violation for no violation.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: So it's $250 per violation for a and the the standard is a knowing violation. Right? The the the offender would have to know about the violation.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: And does it apply to anything other than campuses and casinos?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: No. This bill does

[Unidentified Assemblymember ('Mr. Blarney')]: not. Okay.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: The the the the comment that I have on that is, I, like you, have gone to multiple educational institutions, and I have never not been able to find choice of ATM. So I so it's a to me, this is a relevance issue. I I see see what you're trying to do, but I I I don't see the I think it actually limits limits commerce and can impose if if if businesses were to not like this and react by removing themselves. Again, I go back to my comments about ATM deserts. I don't think we would ever see that, but it's possible we might if if businesses decide to say, you know what? I I need $5 per transaction at that particular ATM. They're gonna fine me $250. If I don't lower it, I'm taking it out. Like, we see you know, we lost 5,000 businesses in this state last year alone because of overzealous, egregious, burdensome problems and regulations.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Again so, again, John, that's why we're gonna go through the that's why we're I'm a assembly member. That's why we're going through the process of making sure that we have rulemaking where, again, stakeholders are able to participate on what the reasonable regulation is going to be. I've been on college campuses also haven't been on a college campus in a long time, but one of my in actually, one of the folks that work with me is on a college campus and they were stating how, you know, they're getting charged nearly $5 for, you know, for ATMs on their campus. Now they don't have car. They can't drive. You know, luckily, we have a car. We could drive somewhere, and we could drive to the closest ATM or what have you. But these college many of the college students don't have that option.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: Thank you, Clyde. I appreciate the the discourse on this bill. Madam speaker, on the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember John Lemondes Jr.]: Thank you. I I would urge my colleagues, just look at this. I I I personally will not vote for this because I think it impacts consumer choice. I think there's enough notices out there. Every consumer has the opportunity to either finish the transaction or not. If they find it to be too egregiously expensive, then they don't finish the transaction. I I think imposing these fines, $250, is is overly egregious as well. The last thing we wanna do is create more policies, burdens, laws, and regulations that force more businesses out of our state. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Mister Blarney?

[Unidentified Assemblymember ('Mr. Blarney')]: Thank you, madam speaker. With the sponsor yield?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Oh, the sponsor yield?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Yes. I will yield.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The sponsor yield.

[Unidentified Assemblymember ('Mr. Blarney')]: I just have a few of them. So, in here, this is specific to universities and casinos. Correct? Yes. And, why is it? Why because how you talk about it is that you're stuck in some place once you're there. Right? But, I mean, I guess you could technically leave a casino. You could technically leave a campus. But, like, let's say something like, I don't know, like, Highmark Stadium in Buffalo or Madison Square Garden. Like, when you're at a sports game, you're like, you're really stuck there because there's no reentry. So why not something like that as well?

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Right now, again, there's a bill captures what it captures now. It doesn't capture all of those, you know, those, you know, you know, I'm very interested in looking at stuff like that probably in the future. You know, I went to, you know, a place and, I was somewhere and I had to spend $10 on a small drink. But this bill is specific to casinos and colleges.

[Unidentified Assemblymember ('Mr. Blarney')]: Okay. That's fair. Trust me, there's been situations where I've been at a Sabres game and there's only one game in town. And sorry. Just lost my train of thought. Anyway, I was I was gonna ask sorry. You know what? I'm I'm all set. Thank you very much, credit for bringing it.

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: He's a fool.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Read the last section.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: This act shall take effect immediately.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: A party vote has been requested. Mister Gandolfo.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Thank you, madam speaker. The republican conference will generally be opposed to this piece of legislation. However, any members who wanna vote yes can do so at their desks at this time.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Miss Heinemann.

[Unidentified Majority designee ('Ms. Heinemann')]: Thank you, madam speaker. The majority party will be in the affirmative on this piece of legislation. If any of our colleagues wish to vote in a negative, they may make their way to the chamber. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. The clerk will record the vote. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Ayes, one zero two. Nays, 39.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The bill is passed. Miss Peoples Stokes.

[Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes (Majority Leader)]: Madam speaker, if we could now bring our attention back to our debate list. We're gonna start with calendar number 18, bill number a fifty five nine three, and it's by miss Pollan. Then we're gonna follow that one with, calendar number 43, assembly bill twelve nineteen by mister Denowitz. And then we're gonna follow that one with calendar number 74, assembly bill nineteen zero six by mister Colton. In that order, madam speaker. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Page seven, calendar number 18. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number five ninety three, calendar 18, miss Pollan, an act to amend the vehicle in traffic law.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: An explanation has been requested. Ms. Fallon.

[Assemblymember Amy Paulin]: Yes, of course. The bill would require DMV inspection stations to display a sign notifying customers that the station is not authorized to inspect limousines and instructs customers to get the limousine inspected by the DOT.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mr. Tate.

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: Thank you, madam speaker. Would the sponsor please yield?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Will the sponsor yield?

[Assemblymember Amy Paulin]: I would be happy to.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The sponsor yields. This

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: might be the last time that you and I ever debate this bill.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: I hope so.

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: Me too. I was hoping that we wouldn't have to debate it again this year.

[Assemblymember Amy Paulin]: Me too. Well,

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: I'm gonna be very brief, Ms. Pollan. First of all, I I always enjoy having a discussion with you even when we disagree. I appreciate your candor and honesty. As you know, this the situation behind this is something very near and dear to me. It happened about two miles from my home. And the fact that I have been during my employment years, I was involved with inspections, heavy highway construction vehicles and regular commuter cars. So I guess the biggest question I have to ask, what has changed in this bill since the last discussion you and I had on debate during con during session last year?

[Assemblymember Amy Paulin]: The bill is identical.

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: Okay. So I am not going to sit here and continue to beat a dead horse of all the reasons why I think that this is a ridiculous bill. So I think what I'm going to do to save everybody from that, Madam Speaker, on the bill?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: You know, we have covered this time and time again. Those of us that have been in the business where we do New York State inspections understand that all these vehicles are in a computer system. So if you were to bring a vehicle to one of the inspection places and you try to inspect a vehicle that you were not certified to inspect, the DOT the the DOT would get a notice that says that you're trying to inspect one of these vehicles. The computer will not allow you to do it. In today's world, when you put the VIN number and the information from that vehicle in the computer, it comes back and says, it red flags it. You cannot inspect that vehicle. If you walk into any of our repair shops or companies that do their own work and their own inspections, we have already made requirements. We have already had mandates. We have if you walk in there right now, you can't even find a clear wall on one's in one's office because we require them to have everything but everybody's birth certificate attached to the wall. It's it's just ridiculous. It's not needed, and that's my guess why this bill has never passed the senate, why the governor has never signed it. Because in all honesty, it's a waste of our time and money. We have a good system with the Department of Motor Vehicles in place right now. We have a good system with the Department of Transportation right now. We have a good system with all the people across this New York State that do certified inspections, that we know that you cannot put a sticker or put the information in a commune a computer stating that this vehicle is safe for the road unless it fits all that criteria. And you have to be a certain type of inspector to inspect some of these vehicles. Now I don't know. Maybe some of this has changed when this bill first came out. I I don't know. Because there is a back when I was a certified inspector, there was a group of vehicles that I couldn't inspect. But most inspectors now are able to or certified to inspect every group. And then, of course, you do have some special groups, like in the case of vehicles that have been altered. And, by the way, those altered vehicles also have to have been altered by someone who is a certified fabricator or a certified welder. You can't just take the vehicle home and do it yourself, and it has to be inspected before it goes on the road. The the whole thing behind what happened in the limo accident in in Schoharie was they did everything wrong. Okay? They it was a backroom deal. The vehicle was okay, and they put it on the road. That had nothing to do with the system that was in place. It had nothing to do whether there were signs whether signs were up. People did bad things and created a very, very bad situation. And I think that we've seen through the news, those bad people have paid the price. Maybe not as much as they should have, but at least they've paid the price. The most important thing about this is that we never forget we never forget those who were killed and the families that suffered because of this tragedy. But I will be voting no, madam speaker. I would ask my colleagues to do the same. This is just putting more more work on our inspectors, more work on DMV, more work on the state to make sure that these posters are up. It just, to me, doesn't and and with all due respect, I I understand what the sponsor's doing, and I I I applaud her for for trying to to do something good, but it's really not necessary. We gotta stop doing that here. Just not necessary things because it looks good. We got people right now that are suffering at home, that are doing everything they can do to afford to put gas in their cars, food on the table, get to and from work. And we're standing here debating bills like this that have sat here since 2022 with nothing being done. I mean, come on. Let's work on priority. Let's get back to the work of the people of the state of New York. I vote no. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Read the last section.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: This act shall take effect on the sixtieth day.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: A party vote has been requested. Miss Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Thank you, madam speaker. The minority conference will be in the negative, generally speaking, on this piece of legislation. Should there be anybody who wishes to support it, they may do so now at their seats. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Miss Peoples Stokes.

[Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes (Majority Leader)]: Madam speaker, the majority conference is gonna be in favor of this piece of legislation. However, there may be a few of us that would desire to be an exception. They should feel free to do so at their seats.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. The clerk will record the vote. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Ayes, 98. Nays, 30 43.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The bill is passed. Page 11, calendar number 43. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number twelve nineteen, calendar 43, mister Dinowitz, an act to amend the civil practice law and rules.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: An explanation has been requested. Mister Dinowitz.

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: The purpose of the bill is to clarify the intent and protect the purpose of existing laws regarding arbitration by creating a definition of the term arbitration and it would require neutral arbitrators in all arbitration matters by default and it establishes, as I said, definitions and it avoids contracts mandating biased arbitrators. Mister Gandolfo.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Thank you, madam speaker. Would the sponsor yield, please?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Will the sponsor yield? Yes. Sponsor yields.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Thank you. So my first question is, why do we need this bill?

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: Because we want these arbitration contracts to be fair and we wanna make sure that everybody is treated fairly. And that means that if there is an arbitrator who may not be neutral, he may have a personal bias or is familiar with one or more of the parties, may have a financial interest, that needs to be disclosed so that a party has the opportunity to say no, don't want that person, get somebody else.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay, so that's currently not happening. There's no disclosure requirement of potential conflicts of interest?

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: As far as I know, yes.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. And how how is an arbitrator appointed to a case?

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: Well, often it's in the a contract that somebody signs.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: And would both parties have to agree to that particular arbitrator to move forward?

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: They don't necessarily it's not that they have to agree to the same arbitrator. The the the contract would provide to the method or the way an arbitrator is selected. But when you have two parties, one of whom is a big corporation, the other is the little person, the little person, I don't mean in size obviously, would be at a disadvantage. And so people all too often sign these contracts just kind of like automatically and they don't always know what they're getting themselves into. And we just want to make sure that if they do sign such a contract that the person who's making a decision for them in lieu of a judge basically has no stake in it.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. Sure. And surely we want to ensure fairness for everyone involved. Now would this also apply in instances of a panel arbitration? A what? I'm sorry. Of a a panel arbitration where there's more than one arbitrator? I I don't see why that would make a difference. Okay. Because my understanding is that in a situation with a panel of arbitrators, each opposing party will choose one arbitrator that's kind of representing them and then the two opposing arbitrators would agree on a third neutral arbitrator. So now, in this case, if each one had to be neutral, would that prevent the current practice where each side picks one who then agree on a neutral party?

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: Well, in in the case I don't know how often that happens by the way, but in the case that you described, obviously, the two people chosen by the two parties presumably wouldn't be so neutral. Otherwise, they wouldn't have chosen them. But certainly, the third person would have to be neutral.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Right. So would this prevent let's say there's my understanding that it's not uncommon for, let's say, a labor union to choose an arbitrator who typically deals with that issue, who would then go to the other arbitrator chosen by the opposing side and they'll agree on the third neutral arbitrator. Would that prevent a labor union from using their preferred arbitrator?

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: I I don't think that's what we contemplate. And and frankly, I know there were some issues that have been brought up concerning unions. Regardless of how the vote turns out today, we're certainly gonna try to address those issues at some point because we want to make sure it passes two houses.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. Now, think there's current laws on the books that govern the vacating of awards from arbitration, specifically the Federal Arbitration Act. Has that shown to be insufficient protection here in New York?

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: Well, I I think anything that allows for an award to be determined based upon a biased arbitrator that the party losing party didn't know was biased is is a problem. So, this would address that and I'm sure everybody involved here wants to see, you know, fairness. I know everybody on this floor does, which is why I expect a unanimous vote.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Oh, we can't make any guarantees here. Now, what is considered a neutral arbitrator? Is that defined in the bill?

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: What the bill indicates is certain things that would suggest that a person is not neutral and I think it says let me just find it. Here. So if the person has a financial or personal interest in the outcome of the arbitration or there's an existing or past relationship with any of the parties to the agreement. Those are those are some examples of of bias or an indication that the person is not neutral.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. So I guess disclosures would have to be made in each party to the case would have to agree that the arbitrator or arbitrators are all neutral. Right. And and

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: if one of the parties that let's say the losing party agrees to that and then loses, I mean, you agree to it, but it but it has to be after a disclosure so that they at least have knowledge. If after that they're fine with it, so be it. But they have to have the opportunity to know if there's any reason to consider the person not neutral and then be able to object to it before the matter is heard.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. What would constitute I know sometimes financial interests are more cut and dry than let's say personal relationship. What would constitute a pre existing relationship?

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: The arbitrator is somebody's cousin. Okay. They're friends. They worked together previously. I mean they can be any one of a number of things. Essentially they shouldn't know each other. I mean they could know who that person is, but if they have like a personal as opposed to you can know a judge at the courthouse, that doesn't mean they're not going to be neutral. But if you work with somebody, if you've had a financial relationship, then if you've had a romantic relationship with somebody, I mean there were just a lot of things that that could entail and all those things would be covered by that provision.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. So in a situation where the it was agreed that the arbitrator was neutral, but it's later disclosed or discovered that they happen to be in a room at a retirement party, a Christmas party with someone who has interest in the case. Would that now be grounds to vacate the award since it was not previously disclosed? Maybe not purposefully, but a photo resurfaces, they were at a reception and

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: I mean, guess that's a matter of fact that somebody can object to but it would seem to me that simply running into somebody doesn't mean that you have a personal relationship with that person.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. Now after arbitrators are agreed to be neutral, do the parties then waive their right to dispute the award if they previously agreed that the arbitrator or arbitrators were neutral and no new facts were discovered? I believe that would

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: be true.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. So they would waive the right to dispute?

[Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz]: If you don't object and there's no reason afterwards to suggest that the person was not neutral, you have to object. There is a certain burden on that party but the information has to be disclosed and if the information is not disclosed then the burden is no longer theirs.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. I appreciate that. Those are all my questions. Thank you, mister Denowitz. Madam speaker, on the bill?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Thank you, madam speaker. My concern with this bill is that we're almost upending a long established practice of panel arbitration here whereby each party has an opportunity to choose an arbitrator and then those two arbitrators can agree on a neutral arbitrator. Therefore, each party has themselves somewhat represented and then there's a neutral arbitrator to make sure that the award is fair. By mandating that every single arbitrator involved in the case is neutral, I fear that this practice will no longer be allowed to continue. So, for that reason, I will be voting in the negative. Again, I thank the sponsor for answering my questions, but I would encourage everyone to vote in the negative on this. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Read the last section.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: This act shall take effect immediately.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: A party vote has been requested. Miss Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Thank you, madam speaker. The minority conference will be in the negative on this piece of legislation. If any members wish to vote yes, can do so now at their seats. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. Miss Peoples Stokes.

[Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes (Majority Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Majority conference is in favor of this piece of legislation. However, there may be a few that desire to be an exception. They should feel free to do so.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you. The clerk will record the vote. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Ayes, 97. Nays, 44.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The bill is passed. Page 15, calendar number 74. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number one nine zero six, calendar 74, mister Colton. An act to amend the public authorities law.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: An explanation has been requested. Mister Colton.

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Thank you, madam speaker. The bill would require the MTA to inform customers of a bedbug infestation on any subways, trains, buses within twenty four hours of discovery.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mister Gandolfo.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Thank you, madam speaker. Would the sponsor please yield?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Will the sponsor yield? The sponsor yields.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Thank you. I appreciate that. So does the MTA currently have a means to provide mass notifications?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Yes, they have they they on a regular basis have set up systems to notify riders of delays or any particular problems and they have they can do it by email. They also have a system of doing it by text messages. So, have a number of systems to communicate with riders.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: So, this would just tack the bed bug notification onto the existing alert system?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Yeah. The MTA would have discretion as to what particular one of their many means of communication they would use to do this.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. And what types of notifications are distributed on the current system? Is it delays, service interruptions?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Generally speaking, delays and service interruptions and breakdown of trains because of some you know, somebody is sick on the train, so the train is delayed. So they do notify people of many different interruptions and problems that may exist on one of their trains, buses or

[Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes (Majority Leader)]: Okay. Other means.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: So with this, is there any requirement that the train gets bused, whatever vehicle gets taken out of service to be treated for the bedbugs? Is it just alerting riders that there may be bedbugs on

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Well, basically, the MTA is going to follow its procedures in terms of what may be necessary. It may depend upon the degree of the infestation, but they would have the, obviously, the duty to once they notice, they they see there are bed bugs, of taking some action that they believe is appropriate.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. But that doesn't necessarily mean they have to immediately remove that bus or that train from service?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: No. The bill is not imposing that upon the MTA. It's leaving it to their discretion as to what would be the proper procedure.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. And in terms of the process of reporting the infestation, what does that look like? Is that discovered by an MTA employee? Is that reported by a rider?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: In in general, it's usually discovered either by a rider who then tells an MTA employee or by an MTA employee who may be cleaning the train or may be on the train for, you know, forming their duties.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Is there a system where the rider can do they have to go find a physical in person employee or that can they report it through an app through

[Assemblymember William Colton]: There are apps where you can communicate to the MTA. There's also the citywide app of 311. And there are very there are on most stations, they have a a communication device where you can actually contact it, the people, you know, in the MTA by simply pressing a button and telling them.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: And if a rider reports a potential bed bug infestation, before the alert goes out, is that verified by an MTA employee? Is there any requirement there or can it

[Assemblymember William Colton]: specific requirements. We are assuming and I think that the law would assume and require that when something is reported that it will be acted upon. And, I would believe that the MTA will act upon a report, check it out, and if it's found to be credible, then they will take the necessary actions to deal with that report.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Is there any, level of specificity required in the alert system such as bedbugs were seen on this particular train car or on a particular bus that's running on the bus line?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Generally speaking, the MTA will notify you of the line, the train line or the bus line where the problem was detected and they also will generally indicate what action they are taking. But there is a certain amount of common sense here that obviously the MTA is running a system of public transportation and if there is a problem, they need to find a way to deal with it. We don't want to impose upon the MTA how they should deal with it because they are the ones that should have the expertise of dealing with problems that may be reported to them. And that's basically what the bill does is is it requires them to notify the public. This is a matter of transparency.

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: Mhmm.

[Assemblymember William Colton]: This is a matter of the public being confident that if this problem exists, then they will be notified and then they will decide what they need to do in response to it.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. But if there's no requirement to notify, let's say, the particular bus that it was on. Let me just ask you. How many buses run on a particular bus line? Like, at any given day?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: It varies by bus lines, but as many buses.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Right. So, if I'm given a notification that somewhere on the bus line, but that we don't know which bus, what am I supposed to do with that information to protect myself if I don't know which bus I might find these bugs on?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Well, if you're notified that the b six bus in Brooklyn, a a problem has been detected with beg bug infestation, then the first thing you have certain options. You can make a decision. You can decide, well, I'm not going to take the B 6 line. I can also get there by going on the B 82 bus and and decide that I'll take that bus instead. You can also, you know, know that when you get on the bus, you're going to look at the seat, you're going to look around you, there may be you know upholstery in a bag that somebody is carrying or a package. And you're going to look and make sure that there's no bed bugs near you. You have that option where you might otherwise not do that. But most importantly, it gives you the confidence that if there is a bed bug problem, the MTA will be dealing with it by notifying you. They be aware of it and you will know about it.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: So then it's just people riders should just avoid that entire transit line to be safe?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: If that is their decision. You know, there's millions of people on the trains every day and on the buses. And, you know, bed bugs if somebody has a bed bug infestation in their home or in their place of work, bed bugs may jump on you you transport them. When you get on the train, there's lots of people on the train. They can jump from person to person. So you want to be diligent if in fact that there is a bed bug infestation on a particular train line or bus line.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. Now, let's say the MTA is notified they act very quickly. The requirement for the notification is within twenty four hours. What if this problem is solved before the notification goes out, but it's sent out? Within think that twenty four hours.

[Assemblymember William Colton]: The MTA would, when they do the notification, also include details that the notification has, that the infestation has been dealt with, that the train was removed from service, the bus was removed from service and it was treated. So, but again, that gives confidence to the public. It's a matter of transparency. The public needs to have confidence in their public transportation system. And if they don't know whether there was ever any bedbugs there, then they may worry about that. But, they will know that if there was a problem, that the law requires that a notification be posted and they therefore realize and recognize that the MTA is dealing with it, not simply ignoring it.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Right. But my reading of the bill, there was only there's only the notification to alert that bedbugs were present on the subway, the bus, but there's no requirement for a follow-up notification about the action taken or when it might be safe to ride again.

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Well, leaving that to the discretion of the MTA. I think it would be a good business practice if they also, you know, include in the notification what action they took. But it would not it's gonna require specific words.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. And could the MTA already now alert about bed bugs if they chose to? If they chose to, they could.

[Assemblymember Clyde Vanel]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Is there a reason why they have decided not to put out those alerts?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: It may simply be because they don't feel it's necessary. It may be because they feel the problem has been resolved. But it's the public that this notification is going to. And it's important that this the public be assured that there is a method in law whereby if there was a problem that there will be a notification from the MTA. So that they have a confidence that when they go on a train a bus, this requirement of law exists and that the MTA will notify them if there's a problem on that particular line or that particular bus.

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: Okay. I appreciate the responses. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Mr. Durso?

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Thank you, madam speaker. Would the sponsor yield for a couple of questions?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Will the sponsor yield? The sponsor yields.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Thank you. Thank you, mister Colton. So may touch on a couple of questions that my colleague asked prior. But you said the notification has to be within twenty four hours. Correct?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Yes. That's correct.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Now is that twenty four hours of it being reported that there was possible bedbugs on a bus train subway or is it between or is it twenty four hours since it has now been taken care of?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: No. It's twenty four hours from when the MTA becomes aware of it.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: So now is now how is the MTA becoming aware of that there may be bedbugs on one of these bus trains?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: There be various ways that they may become aware of it. It might be a rider reporting to a member of the train crew, the conductor for example, that they've seen bedbugs crawling on this train. It might be a matter of a train crew member when the train is being cleaned noticing it. It might be a matter of, you know, somebody calling 311 and reporting it.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: So it's not so if if if I'm a rider and I make that report to someone that's working on the bus on the train, within twenty four hours of that has to be notified, right, to all riders, right, because I think we debated this last year. It's gonna go out as a general, whether it's email put on their website. However, they're going to notify the customers that there may have been bedbugs on one of these vehicles, again, train, subway, car. Correct? But what if it wasn't? What if it wasn't bedbugs? So in other words, I report to a bus driver, I believe you have bedbugs on the bus, and it find out later that there wasn't. Right? What is the protocol in place during in this bill stating that the MTA no longer needs to notify? When how long do they have to figure out if it is bug bugs excuse me, bedbugs?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: The crew would be trained to, you know, follow-up certain procedure if this report is made to them.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Is that training

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Plus, I would believe the crew would then get on a telephone communication system and say that a customer is reporting bed bugs. And then I would assume that the dispatcher would send or have the bus checked by a cleaning person or a dispatching person who would meet the bus and see whether or not if he determines that there is in fact bedbugs, then again we're leaving it to the MTA to decide what procedure they will follow. This bill is intended more as a matter of transparency and giving the public confidence that it will not be ignored.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: I I I appreciate that and I agree with you. The transparency is key. But my confusion is is we are legislating that the MTA let the public know that there may have been or there was bedbugs on one of these vehicles, again, trains, bus, but we're not instituting any type of cleaning precautions, any type of training that you mentioned, you had said that they have to be trained in that. Who is now paying for them to be trained in knowing whether or not they're these are bed bugs? They could be fleas. They could be ticks. They could be ants. Who is doing that training for the MTA to identify if they are bed bugs or not? Because in all honesty, I don't think you want a car cleaner or a bus driver. Right? I'm a teamster. Right? I drove a truck. You don't want me to let you know if those are bed bugs or not? I have no clue. So who is saying that those people are trained in that to then clean it?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: This bill does not address that. We're assuming that already the MTA should have procedures in effect in terms of dealing with any problems or emergencies that may come up. So the same procedure and the MTA has had many complaints of bed bugs in the past. New York City has a very serious problem with bed bugs and so therefore the MTA is part of their regular training which I would certainly assume that they are doing right now. I don't think we have to over govern them by setting specific steps that they must take in order to do the training. I think the MTA is in charge of administering, running the public transportation system and that part of their obligation to do that would be to deal with any emergencies that may come up. So just as they would deal with a problem with the switches in the subway system or with a passenger becoming ill and needing medical attention. So they also should be currently trained in how to deal with a problem with bed bug infestation. Mister Colton. This doesn't deal with that. This deals with transparency of making sure the public is assured that it is being dealt with and that they will be notified.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Mister Cole, are they trained? Is the MTA trained to know if there's bedbugs on a train, bus, subway car?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: I think they're trained to know what procedure to follow if they're if they are told there's bed bugs if they see them.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: But we don't know if they're trained. Correct?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: I would I would certainly hope that I would hope so runs millions of people being transported would certainly know that this is a problem in New York City and would therefore deal with it.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Mister Colton, so I I understand that and I agree with you. And as you said, we don't wanna over govern the MTA, but we do give them billions upon billions of dollars every year in this chamber. You wrote a bill stating what they have to do, but you don't know if they're trained to do it. So don't you think this bill is a little premature? Don't you think we should be doing legislation or giving the MTA even more funding to train them in something maybe later on we'll find out they're trained in or not before we force them to do something they they have no clue how to do?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Well, this deals with a different issue. This doesn't deal with the issue of how does a transportation system deal with the problem. This deals with assuring the public because of transparency that they will notify people if there's a problem.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: So can we notify the public?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Bill on that other. You know, you could introduce it

[Assemblymember Jarett Gandolfo]: to the

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: I'd love to. But but, again, we are now essentially legislating what the MTA has to do because we're assuming they're trained in this, but now we've passed this bill. Is this the second or third year in a row?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: Second year.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: And we still don't know if the MTA is actually trained to do this. Don't you think we would have looked into that prior to this bill being reintroduced?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: I think that where there's been serious problems, the MTA does make an announcement very often. But we don't know if they make it every time because the legislation right now does not require them to make a notification. So, they have had this experience in the past and they have dealt with it in the past and you know I think we can't legislate every single responsibility and obligation of the MTA. We can if we have reason to believe that they are failing to meet that. But this is dealing with a different issue. This issue deals with transparency and the public's confidence that the MTA will deal with this properly And it it kind of edges the MTA on to making sure they deal with it properly because they have to announce they have to do a notification.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: But it's not requiring them to have anybody trained in identifying if those are bedbugs or not. So what we're really saying to them is you have to notify the public about something that you have no experience, knowledge, or training in. Don't we think that that's not transparent? That is over governing. And what we should do is the other way is get the MTA trained in identifying these emergency situations, one being bedbugs, so we don't spread it through millions of people throughout New York City and New York State prior to telling them, you have to do this with no consequences in place. We're not saying they have to be trained. We're just saying you have to let people know that there were bedbugs, but the people that are let I might as well let them know. And I'm not trained in bedbugs. I'm not an exterminator. We're not legislating assemblyman Mike Durso has to let everybody know that took the train. Right? We're just saying the MTA does, but we're not saying they have to be trained in it either. I think we're kinda putting the cart before the heart horse, mister Cole. Don't you?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: No. I believe that as an elected official, we have a responsibility to protect our constituents.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Agree. And

[Assemblymember William Colton]: and with the bed bug problem, we are aware that there is a bed bug problem in New York City. One survey in 2023 said that New York was number two in the country, Chicago being number one in terms of presence of bed bugs.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Is Was that on transit?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: It I don't know. It specifies on

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: But transit and people in the

[Assemblymember William Colton]: we do know that millions of people use the transit and we do know that bed bugs can be carried on people's clothing. They can be carried on luggage and and other things that people bring, backpacks for example, and they they can jump from one person to another. So this is not an onerous requirement, you know, that the MTA has to do a b c d. This is a simple notice of transparency and common sense that people need to be assured that the transit system is is going to be dealing with a problem because they are aware of it and they are notifying people that they are aware of it and that it is common sense that the the transit authority will therefore deal with specific good procedures, steps that we don't have to mandate those steps to them. I think that would be over governing.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: So mister Colt, just just to finalize this. So what we are doing is legislating the fact that the MTA has to notify customers that there may have been a bed bug bed bug infestation on one of these trains, buses, subway cars, but we're not legislating the fact that someone has to be trained in what the heck they're talking about. Correct?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: What we're what we're actually legislating is that they shall establish a system to notify customers of bed bug infestations. And, you know, we're not legislating what specific remedies that they need to follow. That's left to their discretion.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: So it's just a a system. In other words, so if I'm on the bus number 19, I took bus number 19 today. I don't know if that's an actual bus, but let's just say it is, and I'm not saying there's bedbugs on it. But if they find out that there was bedbugs on bus number 19, they have to then put it up on social media, on their website. However, they decide that they're gonna inform the public. Right? Is there in in in this bill stating that they have to say which bus on what bus line had the infestation, or is it just saying they have to inform saying we had bedbugs on a bus in New York City?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: They have to diligently follow what the intention of the law is.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: What is the intention of the law?

[Assemblymember William Colton]: The intention is to give transparency that the public can be assured that if there is a problem that the MTA will make itself will deal with that problem, will be aware of it. And by giving the notice, it shows they are aware that there is such a problem and therefore the MTA is dealing with it. We don't have to, you know, give them all the specifics. As legislators, we may not be the experts in terms of how to treat a big bug problem. Can tell you that in a person's home it is a very serious thing. There's a lot of steps that have to be taken. The mattress might have to be thrown out. The clothing and the the bed coverings and the clothing might have to be put in a plastic bag that is sealed and may have to be put in boiling water to kill any bed bugs that are in there. An exterminator might have to be hired to come. There's specific things that have to be done. But in terms of the transit authority and its system, they are the best ones to judge what specific techniques that they must use to deal with that problem. The public needs to be assured and confident that the MTA is doing it and by letting the public be notified that the MTA is aware that there was a bed bug problem on this particular line, well the public is going to assume. And if that doesn't happen, if if the problem becomes greater, then we may have to look at Well, thank being more specific.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Thank you, mister Colton. But I just so you're aware, and I'm sure you are, if the MTA was to make the public feel comfortable about anything or do the right thing by the public, it would be the first time. So thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Read the last section.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: This act shall take effect immediately.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: A party vote has been requested,

[Assemblymember Angelo Morinello]: miss Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The minority conference will be in the negative on this bill but there may be some exceptions. If you wish to vote yes, please do so now at your seats. Thanks.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Thank you, Ms. People Stokes.

[Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes (Majority Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Majority conference is gonna be in favor of this piece of legislation.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: The clerk will record the vote. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Ayes one zero one, noes 40.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: Nobella's passed. Miss pupil strokes.

[Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes (Majority Leader)]: Madam speaker, do you have any further housekeeping or resolutions?

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: We do have a piece of housekeeping on a motion by mister Weider, page 40, calendar number three twenty six, bill number a one zero zero eight zero a. The amendments are received and adopted. We have a number of resolutions before the house. Without objection, these resolutions will be taken up together. On the resolutions, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? No. The resolutions are adopted. Miss People Stokes.

[Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes (Majority Leader)]: I now move that the assembly stand adjourned and that we reconvene at 10AM, Thursday, March 26. Tomorrow will be in a session day.

[Acting Speaker (Chair, female)]: On miss People Stokes' motion, the house stands adjourned.