New York State SmartTranscripts:

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Madam speaker, may we please call the house back to order?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: The house will come to order. Miss Levenberg for the purpose of an introduction.

[Assemblymember Dana Levenberg]: Thank you, madam speaker. I rise to introduce two student constituents of mine, Bridget Burns from Briarcliffe Manor and Darren Cooney from Croton On Hudson. They are both very interested in politics and what goes on here at the State Capitol. So they are here today. Darren is senior at Croton Harmon High School and is interested in possibly pursuing a career in law, even as he is just going to be a freshman at SUNY Binghamton. And Brigid is a rising junior at Fordham who is majoring in political science and minoring in communications. So I hope that they have a wonderful day here and I hope that you will offer them the cordialities of the People's House.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On behalf of miss Levenberg, the speaker, and all members, welcome Brigitte and Darren to the Assembly Chamber of People's House, extending to you the privileges of the floor. Always wonderful to see our young leaders coming to see how democracy and action works. Continued great success at Fordham and onward to Binghamton. You will have a wonderful time. Thank you so very much for joining us today. Miss Raj Kumar, for the purpose of an introduction.

[Assemblymember Jenifer Rajkumar]: Madam speaker, I am proud to rise today to introduce doctor t Vishnudhatta Jayaraman, a man who represents the American dream. Someone who seized every opportunity, pursued excellence across continents, and used the power of journalism to inform, connect, and uplift communities. Doctor. Jairaman is the founder and editor in chief of the South Asian Herald, a distinguished news platform dedicated to reporting on the South Asian diaspora in The United States. Since its launch in October 2024, South Asian Herald has quickly developed a growing readership nationally and internationally, becoming an important voice for a dynamic and influential community. He has built an extraordinary career covering some of the most powerful and important institutions in the world, including the White House, the US Congress, The United Nations, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. He also had served as the Washington bureau chief for News India Times and DAISY Talk, and he worked with the United Nations Department of Public Information and leading publications such as the Hindustan Times, the Times of India, and the Tribune. His life and career remind us of the highest calling of journalism, to seek truth, deepen understanding, and give voice to communities whose stories deserve to be told. Madam speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in welcoming and honoring Doctor. T. Vishnudhata Jayaraman.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On behalf of Ms. Rajkumar, the speaker, and all members, welcome Doctor. To our assembly chamber, extending to you the privileges of the floor, a continued success to you with your South Asian Herald. And thank you for the work that you're doing in journalism. Now more than ever, we need you to be truth seeker and teller. So thank you very much for all the work that you are doing and for joining us today. Thank you. Miss Walsh, for the purpose of an introduction.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you very much, madam speaker. I'm rising to introduce a gentleman from my district, Art Hunsinger, who's probably best known for all of his years and years of volunteerism with the Clifton Park Fire Department. But he's here today with and and wearing a different hat. He's here today with two young ladies who reside respectively in Assembly Member Santa Barbara's district and Assembly Member Forest's district. Art is the director and executive team member for the Miss New York Volunteer Program which is the official New York State preliminary for the National Miss Volunteer America System. Art is joined by two Miss New York volunteers, Miss Teen New York volunteer Eliza Lisinski and Ms. New York volunteer Shannon Kelly. So Eliza attends Chalmont High School. She is in Assembly Member Santa Barbara's district. She hopes to major in pre dental biology. She's focused her volunteer efforts on raising money for She's collected and donated over 40,000 pairs of used eyeglasses and has helped create the Raise the Roof campaign for the Northeast Association of the Blind. If she wins nationally, she hopes to continue her mission of educating on vision care nationally. Shannon is from Brooklyn and attends the borough of Manhattan Community College. Her goal is to become an actor or director. Her volunteer efforts include educating people about mental health and empowering individuals to prioritize self care, creating product drives to provide self care products to those who can't afford them. Madam Speaker, would you please welcome these three remarkable individuals to the People's House. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. On behalf of Ms. Walsh, the speaker, and all members, welcome to our distinguished guest, mister Hunsicker. Thank you for all of the volunteer work you do with the fire department and this wonderful Miss New York volunteer program organization. And Eliza and Shannon, our royalty here today. We welcome you and extend to you the privileges of the floor. Hoping you enjoy our proceedings today. What a wonderful thing. Volunteering, it's amazing and we have two young people who are doing great works in our community. So thank you all for joining us today and keep up the great work. Thank you.

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Madam Speaker, I would now like to advance the A calendar.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On Ms. Lundsford's motion, the a calendar is advanced. Miss Lunsford?

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Thank you very much. We are going to take up the following two bills, rules report number 216 and rules report number 217. I'm sure we will have additional work to

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: do later in the day.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Page four, rules report two sixteen. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number 10007 c, rules report two sixteen, budget bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Governor's message is at the desk. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: I hereby certify to an immediate vote, Kathy Hochul, governor.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: An explanation has been requested. Mister Prattlow.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Absolutely, madam speaker. The bill before us contains major components of legislation that are necessary for the implementation of the state budget as it pertains to health and mental hygiene. This bill includes legislation to extend the Medicaid global cap, provide increased investments from the healthcare stability fund and to support hospitals and nursing homes and provide a targeted inflationary increase for human service workers.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mr. Palmasano?

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yes, thank you madam speaker. Will the chairman yield for some questions? I will.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: The yields.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Good afternoon, mister Pralow.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Good to

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: see you again.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Hey. Good to see you.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Good to talk to you again. We seem to be getting there. That's a good thing.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Seems like only yesterday.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Seems like only so true. So I guess I just wanted to start out. Obviously, dealing with the health budget today right now. And obviously Medicaid is such a big part of this budget. Could you tell me what this bill appropriates?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: What's the total amount of spending in Medicaid overall? Total Medicaid spending is $117,787,882,000

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Just to clarify on that point, is that just the Department of Health? Because we know there's other outside agencies that are getting Medicaid. Does that 117,000,000,000 include those other agencies?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That is all agencies.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: All agencies total 117,000,000,000? Okay. And of course I know this being the first one, we got the financial plan earlier and the Medicaid scorecard. Are they going to become available to the public? Did the Medicaid scorecard become available to the public?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, everything will become available to the public because we are very transparent in our actions. Sure.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: This budget bill extends the Medicaid global cap while also amending several savings proposals from the executive budget. Does this mean that we remain within the Medicaid global cap with this provision?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: The enacted budget includes $2,100,000,000 or 8% increase to the global caps spending for fiscal year 2627 for the global cap is 28,600,000,000. So it is unchanged from the enacted budget.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: So then we do remain in the global cap then?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Absolutely.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: All right. And just to go over again, what is the expected total Medicaid budget for this fiscal year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It should be what I gave you earlier, 117,800,000,000.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: And how much of this is federal dollars and what is the change from last year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Federal dollars are 74,100,000,000.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. And what is the expected state share of Medicaid for this fiscal year? From a general fund?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That would be $32,000,965,000

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: And what is that change from last year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: $294,000,000.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: It's been I know a common practice to shift spending outside of the Medicaid global cap calculations due to state spending more than the cap will allow. Does this enacted budget shift any new spending outside of the cap? No. No. The executive budget projected that the state spending under the global cap will require a gap closing savings plan to address the cumulative $8,800,000,000 in spending needs through fiscal year thirty. Many of the proposals that were included as saving measures were announced were either amended or restored therefore there's an updated deficit associated with the enacted spending plan, yes? Is there an updated deficit number associated with the enacted budget spending plan? No. No. So it still remains at 8.8?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes. Okay. It actually went down a little bit.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Alright. Does this enacted budget address any savings measures that will reduce these out year global cap deficits?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Like we're going to break down the new MCO tax?

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay, well the funding stream is it will collect about 0.35% assessment on total premium revenues for managed care organizations starting 01/01/2027. The tax is expected to bring in $165,000,000 to net benefit the state for fiscal year twenty seven-twenty eight.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Medicaid spending has increased significantly under the current governor with the state share ballooning over 75%. However the state has not had proportionate increases in fraud prevention efforts with new york ranking very low in fraud investigations per billion spent. Are there any provisions in this budget bill that are aimed at reducing fraud and waste to ensure we are good stewards of this important program that is funded by our taxpayers?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That is being handled by the medicaid inspector general.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. And do you believe the current state efforts to reduce waste and fraud are sufficient given the upward trend in Medicaid spending within the state? Yes.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay. And

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: for clarity, does this budget bill contain the governor's proposal to change Medicaid crossover payments to ambulance providers?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Do these

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: changes to the executive proposal have a fiscal impact?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It's a small increase there. I don't have the numbers in front of me. I'm looking at my notes.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Part X of this budget bill makes changes regarding Medicaid coverage for the undocumented over the age of 65. Are these provisions providing any new benefits to this particular population?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No, there are no new benefits.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Is there any fiscal associated with the provisions?

[Floor Staff/Deputy Presiding Officer]: No additional costs.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: The executive budget Medicaid scorecard included 1,900,000,000 in financial plan resources. Most of this funding was intended to cover the ELISA population under Medicaid however this is no longer necessary. How does this budget reallocate that previously allocated funding? Okay,

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: that money has been reallocated to the general fund. We didn't do anything with it in this budget.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I'd like to pivot to one question relative to the targeted inflationary increase part P of this bill and acts a 2.7% increase for various human service providers. The governor's proposal of 1.7% included $282,000,000 in funding, with $176,000,000 of that being the state share. Can you provide us with a dollar amount of how much of a funding increase this is over the executive budget proposal?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe the state share is $140,000,000.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: $140,000,000?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm sorry. 104,000,000.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: 104. Alright. And

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I think mister chairman, I know a couple of my colleagues have some other questions. At this point, I'll go on the bill and I'll talk to you a little later. Thank you, sir. Madam Speaker, on the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yes. Madam Speaker, my colleagues before us, we have the health bill which is part of our 1 or more than 1 quarter trillion dollar budget. We heard Medicaid is one of the largest shares of our app budget, over $117,000,000,000 as was mentioned. We always ask and request that the financial plan and the Medicaid scorecard be given to us before voting and also be accessible to the public. I think one area that I think we always talk about and we hear about, but what are we doing anything about is waste, fraud, and abuse in the Medicaid program because we know it's a problem. We often see reports that the comptroller has identified that and going after some changes. But as my colleague mentioned, this all falls within the Medicaid inspector general. We actually need to do more in my opinion and many of my colleagues' opinion to support the Medicaid inspector general. What we are going to do is we are going to jeopardize those important services that we are providing to the residents of the state. We really need to do more because I don't feel we are actively increasing the oversight to protect the taxpayers and the important services that these programs provide to them. If we want to address this, it's imperative that we are proactive and not reactive. Because I think we are putting the state more at risk from outside factors which can put a more financial strain on us, increase our possible financial instability. We need to put in place policies to ensure and safeguards so the health coverage that we are delivering is efficient and effective protecting the taxpayers. This will help us ensure that we are working together to protect our state's fiscal stability and the important program like the Medicaid program. I will add one other part that I'm happy to see in here that we did this to 2.7% inflationary increase. That's what our advocates were advocating for. Governor put in 1.7%. Seems like in the past, the governor come in low. We come in where they wanted, and then we'd always fall in between. I'm glad to see that this budget bill actually gets to that 2.7% that the advocates wanted. It's probably still not enough, but at least we're getting and helping them address the needs because those individuals who care for our most vulnerable need to be protected. I mean, budgeting is all about priorities, right? We see all the different interests that are coming around from different individuals and groups. There should be no more important interest than taking care of our most vulnerable citizens, those individuals with developmental and intellectual disabilities. And as someone who once worked in that field a long time ago, it certainly gave me a perspective and an understanding of what those workers do. Those workers, those direct support professionals who work with our most vulnerable population are truly doing God's work. It's not an easy job. And sometimes those individuals are like family to the individuals they're caring for in those homes, in those centers where they're getting services. It's like family to them. And these individuals who do this work do it because they care. They do it because they wanna do this work and take care of our most vulnerable, but they are often pushed out because they can't make ends meet, because they can go work at McDonald's or Burger King and earn a higher wage and get better benefits than they can working for with our most vulnerable citizens. So I'm glad this hits that number that they asked for, but I think we need to be cognizant of this as we move forward when we're addressing budget needs, when we're taking care of our most vulnerable, we have to prioritize that population, individuals with developmental and intellectual disabilities. They need our support. Those individuals who care for them are directly at the forefront of improving their quality of care and their quality of life. And what could what could be more of a priority than that? So I just hope as we move forward, I hope we don't have to ask the governor for a higher increase. Hopefully, she puts it in her budget next year, and then we can add to it, but at least give the groups what they need so we can have those dedicated individuals working as they do, caring for our most vulnerable citizens. I am glad that part is in this budget bill and I thank the chairman for his time during our discussion and I thank you, Madam Speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, Mr. Jensen.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Would the chair yield for some questions?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Will the chair yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, will.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Chair Yelts.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to dive into the essential plan to a degree. I know the federal government recently approved a waiver that would allow New York State to continue receiving essential plan dollars to cover the ELISA population. However, we did have to terminate the thirteen thirty two waiver for individuals between 20250% of the federal poverty level. Is there a provision within this budget bill that would include actions to assist the individuals who are no longer eligible for the essential plan in affording or purchasing commercial coverage?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, in answer to your question, I'll give you a rather lengthy answer. You're absolutely right. The provisions of HR one that was enacted July 2025 disqualifies most of the lawfully present immigrant population from receiving premium tax credits. Due to this, the current thirteen thirty two waiver will lose more than half of its current operating revenue, rendering it insolvent beginning in July 2026. To maintain coverage for as many essential plan enrollees as possible, the state received authority from CMS, Doctor. Oz, to terminate its 1332 waiver and reactivate the previously used thirteen thirty one Basic Health Program effective 07/01/2026. The reactivation of this basic health plan allows the state to access $9,000,000,000 in basic health plan trust fund to offset the loss of premium tax credit revenue and temporarily maintained the solvency of the essential plan for over 1,200,000 enrollees. So by returning to the thirteen thirty one basic plan, 470,000 individuals with incomes between 20250% of the federal poverty level will lose essential plan coverage. The state was not able to offer continued coverage for these individuals due to the immense cost associated with backfilling the loss of billions of dollars in federal funding. So the provision of the health care coverage is a long standing partnership between the state and the federal government. Unfortunately, the actions by our current administration to roadblock long standing eligibility standards have left thousands now ill ineligible for coverage.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Right. So having that all been said

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That's not good, but yes. That's

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Having all that being said, is there anything in this budget bill whether it's premium assistance or is there anything to help mitigate all the things you just brought up in helping those who have been affected in that 200 to 250% of poverty level in affording the purchasing of commercial plans on the marketplace since they are now ineligible to be covered by the essential plan or is the plan by New York State just to let them float off into the ethers?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, think that through our financial plan, we're trying to maintain as many individuals as we possibly can for them to maintain some form of health coverage.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. And then, picking going back to the Alyesa, now that I'm pronouncing it more correctly. The Alyesa population, so to comply with the court order in ensuring coverage for those affected, we're using the reverting back to the original essential plan waiver to ensure that we're complying with the court order?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: And there will be no interruption in coverage for that population?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Hopefully, though.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Hopefully, yes. Okay. Moving on to is there any concern now that we're tapping into the essential plan trust fund, which I think you said $9,000,000,000 was in that trust fund?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, sir. Yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Is there any concern that while accessing that money that we could have the potential that the essential plan does go become insolvent by 2032?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Those numbers are about correct and we're trying to figure out now how to alleviate that. We'll keep it from happening, yeah.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So, we are concerned and we're trying to figure out in the out years how we're going to ensure that this time Absolutely. Six years from now, we're addressing it?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. Moving on to the MCO tax and ICRA. I understand that this budget bill takes the legalized federal money laundering scheme of the MCO tax of 0.35% on total premium from health plans and extends it from the managed care organizations to all entities that offer health coverage including private commercial plans. That Yes. You agree that by taxing health insurance and health care services, it may contribute to things being unaffordable or less affordable for New Yorkers on

[Assemblymember Sam Pirozzolo]: a whole.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, they're already being taxed. There's nothing changing there.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Well, but we're raising we're taking the the tax that was just on

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: the

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: MCOs and extending that point 35% tax rate on

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: health I insurance believe it was

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: already there and this is going be

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: the On the private plans? Yes. But it's an increase on the Hikra that was already in place. So, we're doing an increase in

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I know. I believe it's going to be the exact same number.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Exact same?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yep.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. Is it the most appropriate way of going about things to look at increasing the cost of coverages at a time when, as you just mentioned, we do have close to half a million New Yorkers who are going to be losing their essential plan coverage while they're looking for options on the marketplace. Essentially making them purchase more expensive plans on New York State of Health.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, as you I know are well aware that we used to depend on federal support. Without that support, now we're still trying to find ways to cover these individuals.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. Is there any concern now that we did get a temporary through the work of members of our federal congressional delegation like Congressman Lawler that we did get an extension on the MCO tax? Is extending the tax to include all commercial plans a way to ensure that we're not utilizing it as simply a gimmick but we're doing it equity across the entire ecosystem so that we can ensure that pot of federal money does continue to flow to New York State.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I kind of think based on the individual, you just mentioned a former colleague of ours, they never should have eliminated it. With regards to the extension, they really should have extended it for a longer period of time to give us more time to find a recovery path.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay, is it fair to assume that commercial plans will now be paying a higher tax than they were under the previous MCO tax arrangement?

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: No.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. Is there any concern that this could affect the overall growth in unsustainability for Medicaid funding in the state, ensuring that our out years have a higher need for state costs?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: This is being transferred through the stability fund. You know, we're increasing funding to hospitals and nursing homes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Yep. Okay. So I know we mentioned that we we do have a temporary waiver extension from the federal government, and I think we would have. And I would agree with you that we'd like to see a longer extension just to not have it come into question. But can we assume that if that is again not extended, that we could see an increase in the taxing structure to ensure available dollars through that health care stability fund?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Well, I don't think we're looking to increase any taxes and our investments have been spread out to be sustained over a number of years.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: How many years?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: A number of years. I don't know what that means. Well, there's a of I believe it's like four years.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Four years? Okay. I know that the governor's executive budget financial plan included $750,000,000 in that general fund support in fiscal year twenty seven and $500,000,000 thereafter to support the fund in offsetting

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: The m loss of MCO tax. Is the general fund support still necessary?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. And how much was included is included in this enacted budget?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: $750,000,000.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Oh, that's that's a lot of zeros. Under the new tax structure, how much does the state anticipate in collecting?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: $15,000,100 and

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: dollars.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. We also have you you broke down some of the ways that we're gonna be spending the stability fund. And you may have already said, if you did, I apologize. Could you give a breakdown of these allocations and how they may differ from what the executive proposed in January?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, I'll give you all of the MCO tax reinvestments. Dollars $711,000,000 for hospitals, dollars $451,000,000 for nursing homes, assisted living programs and hospice, 50,000,000 to the physician fee schedule, dollars 50,000,000 to mainstream managed care quality pool, dollars $330,000,000 to the Safety Net Transformation Program, dollars 40,000,000 to clinics and federally qualified health centers, 15,000,000 for FQHC value based payments and $500,000,000 to the global cap offset, which comes to a total of $1,470,000,000

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: thank you very much. Pivoting over to the reforms to the independent dispute resolution provision. This budget bill includes provisions that would exclude Medicaid managed care from the IDR process. It would create payment benchmarks and caps while making changes to the IDR process for the New York State Health Insurance Program. Could you provide the rationale for these changes and any fiscal implications for the state and the individuals enrolled in these healthcare plans.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay, well actually this enacted budget includes savings of $28,500,000 by carving the Medicaid out of the independent dispute resolution process. No other state in The United States allows Medicaid in the IDR process. This proposal brings New York in line with 49 other states and the federal government's surprise billing law.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Do you believe that these changes will make it more difficult to recruit providers in underserved areas of the state or participate in out of network care? No. No? Okay. How effective is the use of the fiftieth percentile benchmark and the eightieth percentile fee cap in balancing fair payments to providers with cost controls for the health plans?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think we're depending on a reduction, I believe it the will next four years, four or five years on the NYSHIP participation. We're going to see how that pans out over the next few years.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Do we have any idea what the implications are for adding NYSHIP to the state IDR process rather than the federal mechanism?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We believe that health insurance premiums will go down as a result.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. And how might this requirement that IDR entities choose the payment closest to the benchmark affect any sort of dispute outcomes?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay, well the goal is to bring the margin closer. There are very few providers that are taking advantage of this. So, it's what we're just trying to get here all together.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: I know in yesterday's conversations surrounding other insurance area reforms, had an idea about how much folks may save. Do we have any idea if this is being done to bring down costs? Do we have any idea what the estimated cost savings are by implementing this reform?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay, think of '21 to '24, the IDEA claims have increased 18 times from seven seventy eight claims to 14,166 claims per year. I can't give you a dollar amount that translates to, but you can see the scope of the number of claims has increased drastically.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And then I just wanted to pivot to the integration of behavioral health services. Part Q of this budget bill would have created a single integrated behavioral health services license for providers serving individuals with co occurring mental health and addiction issues through the Office of Addiction Services and Supports and the Office of Mental Health. What was the opposition to this proposal and why do we not see it in this budget bill?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We're just something we're working on still and it will be done outside of the budget.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So do we expect between now and June 4 that we'll have a standalone piece of legislation addressing this?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe it's already passed this house.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: And with that, no, I'm good. Thank you very much.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Jensen.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Yeah. That's fine. Yep.

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Madam speaker, can we have the social services committee to the speaker's conference room, please?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Social services committee members, please make your way to the Speaker's Conference Room. Social services members, Speaker's Conference Room, mister Sumpulinski.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will the chairman yield for a couple questions?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Will the chair yield? Yes, ma'am. Chair yields.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: Well, thank you, chairman, and I appreciate all the work that you've done on this and your staff and mister Pomisano's staff. And you've always been very professional and collegial and good humor through this process. So I know we all appreciate that. My questions are regarding part p, the targeted inflationary increase. So, we're at 2.7, if I'm correct, and that is approximately give or take the rate of inflation for this particular area. Am I correct? That's sort of where we're at? Yes. And are there any changes from this year to previous years in what is covered in that section?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No, sir. What's that? No, sir.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: All right. Thank you. And there is one adjustment in so far as how the providers have to use this money. And it says that they will submit a written certification attesting the funding we used to first promote the recruitment and retention of support staff, direct care staff, clinical staff, non executive administrative staff, or respond to other critical non personnel services prior to any salary increases or other compensation for executive level job titles. My one question regarding that is, it says, first promote, how would that work practically? What would that do apply?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: How does it calculate?

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: I'm sorry. Say that

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: again, sir. There's no change

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: from last year. All I'm saying is the the restriction on how they have to spend the money to first with employees.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Oh, as far as I know, there's been no change in how they've done it in

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: the past. Alright.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: So thank you very I I'm gonna go on the bill then.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: Alright. I thank the chairman for answering my questions. Obviously, we started in the executive budget at 1.7. We're at 2.7, which is, you know, close to the rate of inflation. There was advocacy from a lot of folks to get to four. I would have loved to get to four. I would certainly would have preferred four. But what I am happy about in this time last year, I was I was very unhappy because we were nowhere close to the rate of inflation and the difference was not even sort of halfway between the executive and the one house budgets. So, whereas last year, I was very mad. This year, my reaction sort of, you know, we're we're trending in the right direction. And that is the positive that I wanna sort of put on this even though I would have obviously preferred to be a four, is if you look over the long term on what was once called the COLA, now the TII. We were in a very shameful, in my opinion position under the previous executive on what he was willing to do. The current executive has been better and in this case, better over time where we've ended up. Where, you know, we went from not getting anything to getting something to to getting close to the rate of on the

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: rate of

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: inflation. Obviously, there's still the backlog from all those years of being behind inflation which is why I think people wanted to get to to get to four. But that trend line of increasingly caring about this issue and increasing investments on this is very positive. And so, wanna also associate myself with some of the remarks that the ranking member on Ways and Means mister Pammasano made about the importance of this particular line item. You know,

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: in my

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: opinion, this is where we should start the budget every year because you're dealing with extraordinarily vulnerable people. Those who are doing god's work, taking care of them, and and people who are in a position to need help through certainly no no fault of their own. So, if I hope this trend line continues, I hope that next year, we start with an executive budget that's more robust. I hope we can continue to make investments in this area that are increasingly positive. So, while I'm I'm not jumping up and down excited, I'm certainly in a better place than I was last year and and I will continue to advocate next year in the budget process for increased investments in this area and and one thing that's very positive about the TII is it tends to be something that brings within the legislature especially Republicans and Democrats together. There was very across the board, across the ideological spectrum feeling that we needed to do more and continue to do more in this area. Well, there are other areas of this bill that I have very strong concerns about and and then we'll sort of dictate where I have to vote on this, I do wanna highlight this sort of moderately very positive situation here and hope that this hope that this trend continues into the future. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Slater.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Thank you madam speaker. Will the chairman yield for a few questions?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Will the chair yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, ma'am.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Chair yields.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Good afternoon, chairman. Thank you. I just have a very few questions, specifically on the medical indemnity fund. Something that we've spoken about a few times in the last couple months and and that we've continued to focus on overall the last several years. This budget bill omits a proposal that would have benchmarked rates for MIP services to other government payment rates while extending the current enhanced rates. Is that correct? Yes. Is this a permanent solution for funding of the MIF?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I wouldn't feel it a permanent solution. It's it's a solution that we have for the time being.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: So this is just a short term fix based on what the governor had proposed in her executive budget? Yes. And its enrollment issues regarding the the accessibility of the fund. Will this require us to go back to the drawing board next year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We I don't believe we made any changes with respect to going back.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: In regards to access to the MIF, do you can you tell us how many members of the MIF there are today? About 1,100. And do we anticipate being able to support additional members with this current plan? Yes. How much additional funding is required for the MIF in this fiscal year as a result of this of this proposal?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: About a $156,000,000.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Is that lined out in this particular budget bill?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No. I think it was an aid

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: to localities. It would be an aid to localities?

[Assemblymember Scott Bendett]: Yeah.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: And I'm sorry. So you said that the total that we are allocating for the MIF is a 156,000,000? Yes. Is that more or less than we did last year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think it's about the same.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: I thought we were at about 213,000,000 last year.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay. There were I believe there were some liabilities from previous years that were paid off that were included in that money.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Okay. And so with the $1.56, we can get into this at that appropriate time if you wish, but just wanna make sure I'm clear while we're on the topic. The one fifty six would allow the myth to continue to be solvent and accept new members if needed.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Very good.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Well, are all the questions that I have. Thank you very much, mister chairman. Thank you very much, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Miss Walsh?

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will chair Pretlow yield for a few questions?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: May the chair yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes ma'am.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Chair yields.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you very much. So I wanted to ask about part x.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Part x.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: The Medicaid for undocumented immigrants 65. It was noted as a technical amendment. Could you explain what that technical amendment does?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We are taking them from managed care and transferring them to fee for service so it doesn't change their eligibility.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Is so much noise I'm behind sorry. It doesn't change their eligibility?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: For benefits, yes.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: And I heard you in response to an earlier question indicate that this change in Part X did not it was cost neutral. There was no additional cost associated with it. Is that correct?

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Correct.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Okay. But but that doesn't mean that New York spends $0 on Medicaid for undocumented immigrants. Right?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No. That doesn't.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Do you happen to know how much New York currently spends on Medicaid

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: for About undocumented $230,000,000

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: See now, was in I've been using Google so you're the authority, I'm not probably. But I I was just I saw a number that was quite a bit higher. I saw $639,000,000 annually on emergency Medicaid for undocumented immigrants.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yeah. That's a different part of money.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: That's a different part. Yes. Okay. The number that you just gave, the 200 or so million, was that just for undocumented immigrants over the age of 65?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: I see. Okay. So the total cost for Medicaid coverage for undocumented immigrants could be more the number that I'm talking about because it would encompass more than just

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Colleagues, can we have quiet in the chamber or take your conversations Thank you.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: There there is a possibility, I would say, people.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: When you look at all ages under Yes, ma'am. The Very good. Thank you for that clarification. The second thing I wanted to talk about was part p, the targeted inflationary increase section. And I definitely echo the comments made by previous speakers about being grateful that we did get up to a 2.7% increase rather than what the governor's proposal had been. I knew that they had looked for 4% Certainly when I met with advocates in my office, the number was 4%. But is it your understanding that the advocates are maybe not as happy as they would be with 4%, but they're satisfied with the 2.7%.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think you're referring to what was in our one house but 3% works out to about $120,000,000 Yeah, every 1% is $104,000,000

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Okay, all right. So one of the things I wanted to just touch on was that when I met with advocates about disability services and OPWDD funding, they were really advocating for the inclusion of care coordination organizations or CCOs in funding increases. And my understanding is that these care coordinators, they assist families to navigate Medicaid and disability services. Do you know whether the targeted inflationary increase will impact in any way positively these care coordination organizations?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I don't believe they they're included.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: You don't believe that they No. Okay. Alright. Thank you very much, mister Pretlow. I appreciate it. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Durso?

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Thank you, madam speaker.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Questions?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Will the chair yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, ma'am.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: The chair yields.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Sorry, mister chairman. You look like you almost got comfortable there for a second. But I just wanted to touch on something that my colleague just spoke about again with the the targeted inflationary increases. We're at 2.7% this year. Correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: And it says here that excuse me. It must be used for recruitment and retention of non executive staff first.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Correct? I believe so. Okay. So,

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: when we talk about recruitment and retention of and using that what you just stated was roughly a $12,020,000,000 dollars. Correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Can you give me an example of what that could be used for for recruitment and retention? So, in other words, are they using it for Signage. I'm I'm sorry.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Pay bonuses, any kind of remuneration that we have to give them?

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Okay. So, it's not so much advertising and online advertisements, billboards, anything like that to recruit and retain. It's going to be used to specifically monetarily retain those workers?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think those items would be very minimal. They have to show exactly how this money is going to be used. It all has to be basically, you know, put in front of, you know, any of the governing body to make sure that they're spending money in the right way.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: But it can be used in those it doesn't have to strictly go towards salaries. Correct? Yes. Okay. Now is there and it has to go towards recruitment and retention first, then it could be used for salaries for those direct care workers? Yes. Okay. Now, can any of that money be used towards taxes, benefits, anything like that? Or is it strictly for salaries?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm pretty sure it can be used for anything including taxes.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Okay. So is that how the money was used last year when it came to direct care workers?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, sir.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Okay. So really, there's there's no sense of who's excuse me. I I apologize. Who's making that decision on how that money is getting spent? What counts as recruitment and retain and Because if we're giving them 2.7%, which is just below the inflationary rate, these are our workers that are doing as said by my other colleague, god's work. But now the money's not guaranteed to go specifically to salaries. They're actually taking a loss from last year and what they got. Correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Maybe in in some cases.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: It can you give me an example of what those cases may be? So, in other words, sorry, I apologize. Let me ask more of a direct question. I don't wanna. How much of this $120,000,000 that is essentially set aside for direct care workers, which we all agree are some of the most important workers that we could have in taking care of our most vulnerable has to go towards actual salaries for some of the lowest paid people in the industry. Do we know how much of it? Because it doesn't seem like to this much of it at all. Well,

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: there's really no public reporting on that. They just have to attest to it. And I don't have the exact number in front of me, but I will be glad to provide it to you at a later date.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: So, this and and not you, sir, but I'm saying there's no there's no public reporting on. So, we have really don't know how much money this 120,000,000 is gonna go towards signage, online recruitment, paper, mailers, anything like that to recruit, and we don't know how much is gonna go towards actual tangible salaries for workers.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, the state agencies that manage this will be looking at it.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: So do we have a a an idea of how much was spent on last from last year's budget and the money that was directed towards those workers, how much was spent in salaries as opposed to

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It's not reported to us, so I would have to say no.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: Do you think that's a problem, sir, as far as the legislative body that's directing this money to go towards direct care workers, which, again, as I'll say, we all think are some of the most important workers and we're all fighting for these workers' salaries, but we don't have numbers on how much is actually going towards the workers?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, sir. To that point, if you are referring to what we had in our one house that was included, but it didn't make the final cut as several of our more stellar suggestions that were in our one house budget did not make the final cut.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: I would agree with you, sir. Just

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: you know,

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: if you want, who could we blame for that? I won't put you on the spot, sir. Thank you, mister Prelo. That's that's all my questions. Madam speaker, on the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Michael Durso]: So I wanna thank the chair for taking my questions. And I it was really one just in regards to the target inflationary increases. Again, and I'll say it again, and I I think there there's nobody in here who would mind saying me saying it. Again, these workers do, as my colleague said, god's work. They are taking care of our most vulnerable, and they are severely underpaid. And everybody in this chamber has fought for these workers to get more money, and now we're getting it, and we're not sure where the money's going, how it's being directed, and it sure as hell is not going into the pockets of those workers. Plain and simple. We should be worried about where this money's going. We should have some kind of report in front of us every single year of how this money is being spent because in all honesty, the money is supposed to go towards, again, the workers that are taking care of these individuals, and it obviously is not. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Levine?

[Assemblymember Charles D. Lavine]: Will the members of the local governments committee please meet immediately in the Speakers' Conference Room? Thank you, speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Local governments committee members, please make your way to the Speakers' Conference Room. Local government speakers' room, mister Molitor.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Thank you madam speaker. Will the sponsor yield?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Pretlow, will you yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes madam speaker, I yield.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: The sponsor yields.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Thank you, Mr. Pretlow. I made sure not to make the mistake of asking you to yield based on a limited number of questions. So I want to focus on the MCO tax. How does that work? How does the MCO tax work?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'll give you a breakdown in two seconds. It collects point 35% assessments on total premium revenue for managed care organizations that's starting in January 2027. The tax is expected to bring in $165,000,000 in net benefit to the state for fiscal year twenty seventwenty eight. And of course, these additional funds will be used to maintain health fund investing going forward.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: I'm Mr. Pretlow, I'm having difficulty hearing you. Did you say that it's a tax on insurance premium on insurance premiums or insurance premium revenue?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: On premium revenue.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. So that's a tax that the insurance companies will pay, and they'll pay that to the state?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes. They're already paying it.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Well, how much are they paying right now?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I figured it's a hold on a second. Is it dollar? I I can figure the number out. Okay. Can we start to a dollar 50 to $2 per member per month?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. And so this will increase it by point zero No. Actually decreases. Point 35%.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Point 35%.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. And when that money is collected by the state, what implication does that have with money that we may receive from the federal government?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: This goes into our fund and then we receive a federal match.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. So the higher the tax is, the more money we receive as a match. Is that correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That would be correct.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. And then what do we do with the money that we receive as a match?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Then it goes get spent the same way that the additional money was spent previously.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: So it goes towards what exactly?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Health care. It goes to hospitals, it goes to Like I say, if we spend a dollar on a hospital, we get a dollar from the federal government.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. And this tax is applied across the board for all

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Everyone pays the same, 0.35%.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: So if you are a small business owner and you are buying insurance through the ACA exchange, you are paying, you could be paying an increase in premiums. Isn't that correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: You could, but small businesses are not included.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. So if you're an individual, let's say, who's purchasing on the exchange, you could see a premium increase as a result of the MCO tax increase, couldn't you?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay. So let's say if you're a small group of insurer, you're not seeing an increase. You're not part of this. You're not responsible for paying it.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Well, you just said that it applies across the board to all insurance.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Large groups like the insurance group that most of us belong to. NYSHIP?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. So if you are a county, one of the 62 counties that offers a large group plan, you could see your costs increase. Isn't that right?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes. And they are already paying this under the old method. Right. That's because we want to be in federal compliance. Otherwise, we will be accused of things like fraud which is not the case. So what we are doing now is making across the board everyone pays point 35%. Fiscally, it works out about the same.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. So when the counties have to pay increased costs because of the rise in the MCO tax and they disperse that cost amongst property tax owners, we should just tell them that, hey, we're supposed to do this because we're already doing it. Is that what we should tell them?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think you're trying to infer that we're raising the rate and we are not. We are replacing the old method of calculating the dollars received with a new method, which is more uniform with the rest of the country. So point 35% is what it's worked out to and is similar to what the $1 point five to $2 worked out to fiscally.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. So I am sure someone much smarter than me has calculated what the difference is going to be in changing the previous method from the dollar assessment to this percentage. What is that change going to be?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: There is no change.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: There's no change. It's gonna

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: be As far as I know and I'm not gonna comment on anyone's math skills Yeah. As to how this number was worked out but I trust the person that did figure this out. And as far as I know and what this budget anticipates is that there is no change. Okay.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: I hope you're right, mister Prelo. On the bill?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: So I don't know who the person is who calculated this change and I would like to believe and hope that this is not going to increase costs. But I hope we can all next year, if it is a problem, hold that person or persons responsible if it is because we have some of the highest health insurance premiums in the nation. We spend more on medical care than in any other state. Our Medicaid, the amount that we spend on Medicaid in New York State is larger than both Texas and Florida combined. And just last year, this state tried to raise the MCO tax to increase the federal match and it got struck down because it was extremely problematic and prejudicial. And so I hope what we're not doing here is I hope that we are not going to to increase burdens on our counties, on large group insurance purchasers, on individuals who are buying into the exchange because if we start to see increased premiums, that is not going to make anybody anybody's life more affordable here in New York. It'll just continue the trend of of things being less affordable here in New York. So, you know, here we are passing another budget bill, and my hope is that we're not doing so on a hope and a prayer. So I will be voting negative on this piece of legislation. I encourage my colleagues to do so as well. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Keith Brown?

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: Thank you madam speaker. Will the chairman of ways of means yield for some questions?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Pretlow, will you yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Chair yields.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: Thank you Mr. Pretlow. Just some questions with regard to the intentional omission of co occurring disorder measures in this particular portion of the budget. Do you have any particular reason why the co licensure measures were

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: not included? Okay. This is something that we've already passed. We're waiting for the senate to pass it. We did it outside of the budget.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Oh, really?

[Assemblymember Ari Brown]: So Yeah.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: We expect to have a bill on that within the next week?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We've already had a bill. We've already passed it. The senate has not taken it up yet.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: Okay. And there's a there was a second part of it in the state of the state that the governor mentioned with respect to having OMH and OASIS certified providers meet the highest standards through other changes that will be made to break down the barriers between OMH and Oasis. Was there anything like that included or contemplated in the budget by our house or the senate?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe that was all part of the bill we just mentioned. Okay. It's already been passed.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: Okay. And then with respect to to problem gambling, I didn't see any mention of how we're addressing problem gambling in this state.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, isn't that is included. We give $500 per unit of gambling apparatus to Oasis which is used for problem gambling. I think you have to look at part R. We are expanding the substance use disorder treatment coverage and there are other additions in Part R of this play. I'm sorry, can you say that again? It's in part R of the bill in front of us. It expands the substance use disorder treatment coverage to other addictions.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: And that's the problem gambling is in the other addictions? Yes. Okay. And then a question, was there any money for early intervention and hospice contained in this budget?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I doubt there is any additional monies. Nothing additional? Nothing additional. Okay.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: Just bear with me a second. With respect to, it was mentioned during the budget hearing process about setting up a three tier process for people that present themselves with substance use disorder and other similar affirmities. That there would be a way to set them up so that they had a different treatment level based on what level of substance use disorder they had. There was a baseline, an intermediate level, and then another level. And then the licensure was going to be connected with that. So we matched the person who presents with an issue with the proper licensed therapist. Was there anything mentioned

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: about doing that? I'm not

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: sure if that's mentioned in this bill. I'm sorry? I believe that's part of the bill that we discussed earlier and that's not included in the bill in front of us. Okay.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: All

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: right. And then I'm sure you're aware that there's a major problem in our state when it comes to the reimbursement for therapists with respect to whether they're paid by Medicaid and Medicare or whether they're paid by private insurance. The so called parity that we fixed in one respect, but we're not addressing it in terms of enforcement. The practice still continues that if you are a person with an affliction and you get treatment by private insurance, that therapist has only paid $0.50 on a dollar. Have we done anything to address that issue at all?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Think two years ago we mandated that they pay at least the Medicaid rate for those services.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: Right. And ironically, the problem isn't on the Medicare and Medicaid side, it's on the

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: private Private insurers were paying less than the Medicaid rate.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: I'm Then

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: a mandated that they pay at least the Medicaid rate. We increased it.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: Right. So, the last couple of years, we just heard debate on the raising of what we used to call COLA, now the target inflationary rate, the 2.7. We've been over the last couple of years trying to increase that. But if you're a provider and you provide someone with private insurance, you're still not getting paid 100¢

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: on the dollar.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: And it's a major problem that we're having out there because if a provider is going to treat one person that gets Medicare and Medicaid and another person that has private insurance, they're more apt to treat the person with Medicare and Medicaid. So this has been a problem. We fixed it in the policy several years ago by having reporting to DFS, but we haven't fixed the financial side of the equation. Has there been any attempt in this year's budget to fix that parity problem?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: There is nothing in the budget pertaining to that.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: Sorry, what was the end?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: There is nothing in the budget pertaining to that. Okay,

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: great. Thank you. No further questions, Madam Speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, Ms. Lunsford.

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: You, Madam Speaker. Could we please have the Health Committee to the Speaker's

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Room. Health committee members, Speaker's Conference Room. Read the last section.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: This action will take effect immediately.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: A party vote's been requested. Miss Walsh?

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The Republican conference will generally be in the negative on this piece of legislation. But if there are members who wish to vote yes, now would be the appropriate time to do so at your seats.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Miss Lunsford?

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The majority will generally be in the affirmative on this bill. If you would like to register your vote in the negative, you may do so from your seats. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. The clerk will will record the vote. Miss Walsh to explain her vote.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you very much, madam speaker. So I appreciated the discussion that we had and the debate that we had on this particular bill. I wanted to just explain my vote because I do really although I'm constrained to vote no on this bill because of other reasons, I did wanna say that I thought that as far as the targeted inflationary increase, formerly known as COLA, I'm glad for that 2.7% increase. I I because of the work that I have done historically over the years with the developmentally disabled community, a lot of advocates come and meet with me and I know that they really did want 4% because they've been historically not treated well in previous budgets, I am glad to see the 2.7%. I don't think it's enough. And I would also say that I do wish that there was greater flexibility as to how it could be spent. But I did want to just state for the record that I do agree with my colleagues and all of us agree, I think, that we if we're going to put cuts in this budget, this is not the place to do it. I'm glad to see the increase that we have. I do wish it would it could have been more, but I do think that it will help us to continue to make investments in the workers who take care of our most vulnerable. So I do support that piece of the budget and other pieces as well. Overall though, I can't support the total amount that's that's spent on Medicaid. I think it's just such a huge huge part of our budget, and I I don't think it's sustainable going forward. So I will be a no, but I do appreciate that piece for the COLA. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, miss Walsh and the negative, miss Giglio, to explain her vote.

[Assemblymember Jodi Giglio]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. To explain my vote, I also agree with my colleagues. I was very happy to see in both one house bills the increase to 4% for the COLA. The fact that it got diminished to 2.7%, I agree with my colleagues in that they have been operating at a structural deficit and the rate of inflation keeps rising and the increase that they are given each year don't equate to what they need to run these homes and run these places where our most vulnerable population goes. So I appreciate the efforts of both houses in their one house bill, but I am not happy to see that it was diminished down to 2.7%. And because of many other things in the bill and the spending problem that this state has, especially with the Medicaid budget, that I will not be able to support the bill. But I do appreciate the 2.7% increase. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, miss Gigli on the negative. Miss Lunsford?

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Can we have the governmental operations committee to the Speaker's Conference Room, please?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: GovOps committee members, Speaker's Conference Room. GovOps committee members, make your way to the Speaker's Conference Room. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Aye. It's one zero one. Nay is 41.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: The bill is passed. Page eight, rules report two seventeen, clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number 10009C, rules report two seventeen, budget bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Governor's message is at the desk. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: I hereby certify to an immediate vote, Kathy Hochul, governor.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: An explanation has been requested, mister Pretlow.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, madam speaker. I'm gonna give you a a lengthy explanation and maybe it will then not require many questions on on debate. This bill would enact major pieces of legislation that are required to implement the revenue proposals that are necessary to ensure a balanced state budget. This bill would rise an additional $562,000,000 in state revenues during state fiscal year twenty six-twenty seven. In the out years, revenue will increase by $1,900,000,000 for fiscal year twenty seven-twenty eight, 2,300,000,000 for twenty eighttwenty nine, dollars 1,600,000,000 for fiscal years twenty nine-thirty and $841,000,000 for fiscal year 3031. Major provisions within this bill include language to provide protecting our wallets energy rebate checks, eliminate income taxes on state wages, enact a temporary article nine a corporate franchise tax extension rate for two for two years three years. I'm sorry. Authorize New York City to impose a surcharge on property does that that does not serve as a primary residence, enhance the New York City musical and theatrical production tax credit, increase income eligibility thresholds for scribe and dry programs, streamline the STAR program, enhance tax credits for donations to food pantries by farmers, amend property tax exemption for certain disabled veterans, expand standard testing requirements and provide extensions to various tax credits and exemptions that already exist in current law. With that, madam speaker, I encourage the members to support this piece of legislation.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mr. Palmisano.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yes, madam speaker. Mister Pretlow, will you knew

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: you still have questions.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Yes. Mister Pretlow, will you yield?

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Few. We have a few mister Pretlow.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: The chair yields.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Thank you. You've said I just wanna ask again, I know on committee, how much revenue how much is revenue increased by this bill on a two year basis? I think you said 560 on a one year basis.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Is that correct? Okay. $562,000,000 for, say, fiscal year 2627.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: So for one year, so for two years, it will be double that? I

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: believe it's $1900000000.1.9 fiscal year twenty seven, twenty eight.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. And what about the net tax not the net tax, how much of a tax revenue decrease?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: The only decrease we're doing is for tax on tip wages.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay. And

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: alright. That's okay. I wanna talk about the for a minute. As new search surcharge will put a annual New York City tax on certain high value residential properties. Yes. What specific factors will the New York City Department of Finance use to determine not a primary residence? And how will this provision ensure uniform treatment across buildings and owners avoiding consistencies? Well,

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: beginning with city's fiscal year twenty eight-twenty nine, the tax rate would range from 0.8 to 1.3% for one to three family residences and condos and coops with a market value in excess of $5,000,000 The surcharge applies to a coop unit. Where a surcharge applies to a coop unit, the proposals include language to require the coop corporation to collect the surcharge from the tenant shareholder associated with that unit.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: This proposal has certainly been in the news and it's been talked about pretty extensively I know. Obviously the mayor did a press conference outside one of the homeowners. One of the concerns we keep hearing about is the potential impact on investment and development in the city. Are you concerned about the threat to reduce investment and development in the city that could help grow the city's housing stock, create up more affordable units?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Again, this proposal would only impact a very small percentage of properties in the city. Additionally, the proposal would exempt certain recently constructed properties.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: So are you concerned at this I know you say a few people, but high income, high wealth, are you concerned that that might reduce that investment? Are you are you concerned this might reduce that investment from these individuals who We

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: heard these arguments before, yet the number of high income earners has increased significantly over the past few years. In New York City, New York State even, after raising income taxes a few years ago, People who can afford multimillion dollar second homes are unlikely to relocate simply because of this proposal.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. We know that the city is on is facing severe fiscal challenges in the coming years, and allowing the city to change the amortization schedule is just kicking the can down the road, is the revenue projected for this new tax on sturdy ground?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Was taxpayer behavior a factor in the estimate for how much this tax would generate?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: And if the tax fails to generate its projected revenue, will we be here next year or the year after trying to figure out another way to make this up for

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: This is a New York City issue. This is not really a state issue. We're not doing this statewide. That would be up to New York City. If they don't attain the funds that they think, they may come up with a different idea.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Sure. I understand that. Will the billing the surcharge at the level risk imposing costs on uninvolved tenant stockholders?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I don't believe so.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: What mechanisms are in place to protect against passing this surcharge on to non covered tenant holders?

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Stockholders.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm sorry. So what's the question? Yeah. I could do that.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: What mechanisms are in place to protect against passing the surcharge on to non covered tenant stockholders?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, the language in in the bill says that the coop board will collect this solely from the individuals who own these high value properties and it wouldn't be passed on to the other residents of the coop or condo.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay. I to if I may come back

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: to this, but would like to go to the decoupling provisions of HR1. Yes. This bill includes decoupling measures from certain HR one that passed at the federal level.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: That really affected timing and treatment of research and experimental expenditures and other deductions.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Why

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: is is the state moving to increase near term tax costs on manufacturers when the manufacturing community who I've met with, I'm sure you've met with, has warned that this will directly undermine investment expansion in the modernization in New York State.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well sir, I really don't believe that is the case. What we are doing in this legislation is maintaining current law. H. One took away the requirement to spread R and D expenditures over a number of years to make it fully deductible in year one. What New York State is doing is maintaining what's always been and having that deductibility spread over a number of years. The net effect to the corporations is negligible because they just don't get it all upfront they get it spread over the life of the property.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Wouldn't that be impactful though? Are some states that are decoupling but there are some states that are not decoupling like Ohio is not decoupling. I don't have New Jersey down as not decoupling yet, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, Florida, Texas. Isn't that a risk that we run losing those investments to these states that are more friendly and from an upfront perspective?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I really hate to compare New York State with any other state. For the most part, they don't have as complex a tax system as we have here in New York. Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: What is the counterargument to manufacturers who have argued that this provision makes New York State a less attractive place to start or expand a business because it raises the tax cost of investing, hiring and building here instead of a competitive state that doesn't.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It it does not raise the tax. It maintains what tax is on the board right now. And over the course of the amortization period, the net dollar effect is zero.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Alright. And

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: and so why this burden falling on manufacturers who are buying equipment, building facilities, funding R and D instead of on a broader instead of on broader fiscal reforms.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Because that's what was put into HR one. And those are those are the individuals that got the or received the opportunity to put their r and d cost expense in one year. And

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: there's no concern from obviously, your side, the majority of the governor, that we run the risk of losing these manufacturers and their investment and taking to another state that's not decoupling like other states are?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, not not to anybody under the under the bus, so to speak, but this was a proposal by the executive and we accepted it.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. I want to talk about some of the other business tax impacts. The legislature previously scheduled the higher rates to expire at the end of twenty twenty six. Yes. And this budget now extends them further through tax year '29. Correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Why does it seem every temporary tax imposed by this body never seems to be temporary?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We didn't have the funding available to let this expire due to the increased Medicaid costs that we have experienced because of the massive cuts in Medicaid to this state and our need or our desire to maintain as many individuals covered by health insurance that we couldn't otherwise do if we let the tax increases expire.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Just to counter that argument, if business taxes can be reduced, that increase business activity, possibly increase jobs, possibly increase more investment, which would lead to more tax revenue coming from that perspective of that argument.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I really don't think that the tax revenue gained by those actions would be equal to the tax revenue lost by letting the tax increase of the past expire. And we needed something definite and something definite now because as stated in the previous bill, in the July 1, which is two months from now, hundreds of thousands of individuals are going to lose their health coverage.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yeah. And from a business tax perspective, we know we have one of the highest tax states. We know business climate, competitive, so we're always at the bottom. How do these higher rates make us more competitive? And when lowering tax across the board help provide incentives for businesses to invest and stay here and come here?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That can be argued but I think that our business community in New York right now is very vibrant.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: How much more does it cost taxpayers to provide incentives and how much of a strain does it put on local government budgets to provide exemptions and incentives just to get a business to consider sitting, citing a new construction in the state of New York. Wouldn't just reducing taxes across the board help with that problem?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I really don't have the answer to that. Sorry.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: That's that's alright. I'd like to move over to the power check program for a little bit if I could. Yes. I see that you have this rebate check. How much is that rebate check again?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe we're we're giving the total would be $1,000,000,000.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: 1,000,000,000? Yes. How much would it be for like a family for like income range?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: $200 for joint filers with incomes below $150,000 $150 for joint filers with incomes between 150,300 thousand dollars and $100 for single filers with incomes below $150,000 Thank

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: you

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: for that. I know we had a proposal out to our lower program. That was one part of it. It wasn't the entire piece of it. I know we talked about it. I don't know if it fit here, but when if we really wanna help on the utility side of things, one of that $2,400,000,000 that's sitting in NYSERDA hands, one of them have been a better thing to add to them if we wanted to provide that relief to ratepayers?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That would be presented in this bill.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yes. But there are proposals out there that could fit into this bill. This proposal, in fact, happens to be my proposal Mr. Prelo, maybe we'll consider it a committee before the end of the year. It would basically suspend those taxes, fees, assessments, and surcharges that are actually on the utility bill that sometimes make up as much as 20% of the utility bill. Wouldn't that have been a good thing to include in this bill to provide fast direct immediate relief to ratepayers especially considering that

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It's something under consideration right now and maybe we can get it done in the next two weeks or hopefully we can attack it next year.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: And do you think I know there's a lot of talk about affordability. Do you think this one time rebate is really gonna provide that direct relief on utility bills that New Yorkers want?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It's it's a help. It's a step forward. It's you know, to some people, 200 doesn't mean a license to many people. Dollars is a lot. Mean at the rate we're going now, 200 amounts to maybe a bag and a half of groceries.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Something is better than that, I agree. But we can always do more. On that point too, I was going to ask excuse me, Andrew. I know and I referred to it, New York City is getting a bailout to the tune of billions of dollars for budget problems the city created. Ratepayers didn't create the utility affordability crisis but they are really drowning because of decisions really made in this chamber. And while I appreciate the attempt to help, we really need to do more. Are there any other existing pots of money that could be used to provide some relief to ratepayers during these hot summer months that are coming?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: If there are, they're not in this bill.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. And I think the other point I I want to think I lost my train of thought for a minute. I know we have the rebate. It's something, but another bill we passed that had provided credits for people that purchase electric vehicles, electric, you know, to the tune of $30,000 which we paid for by the rate payer. So now we're giving a little bit here, but we're still taking away from on the other side, aren't we?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, I believe that was a an effect of things that happened in Washington that took away the federal subsidies that were being allocated to electric vehicles. Okay.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: And One moment, mister Palmisano. You can use your second 15, miss Thank

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: you, madam speaker. Could we please have the education committee to the Speaker's Conference Room?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Education committee members to the Speaker's Conference Room. Education committee members, Speaker's Conference Room. Mister Palmisano for your second 15.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yes. Thank you, madam speaker. Thank you, mister chairman. I'm gonna switch if I could to the alternative nicotine products tax that was Yes. Included in this budget. This this puts in place a 75% wholesale tax on nicotine products. Is that correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, it does.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: This would be in line with other cigarette combustible products? Is that right? Yes. Why would we want to categorize nicotine pouches and similar products to be folded in the same category and tax structure as tobacco products?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, nicotine is usually a product of tobacco. I know. It has similar effects. And arguably, it has the same health hazards associated with it in the form of gum, tongue and throat cancers even though the manufacturers claim that's not the case. It is also attractive to young individuals since they have been manufacturing flavored nicotine pouches which we in this house have historically

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: fought against. So, a lot of people are going to these nicotine pouches to switch over from smoking because it's less harmful because smoking causes cancer, nicotine pouches I'm not saying nicotine is not has a health risk, but not compared to smoking. Why we it seems like we're going make this more expensive for them. And then if they're comparing, why would I switch if I can have the cigarette with the same thing? They're going to pay the same expense. Isn't that a concern?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, are other optional alternatives like chewing gum to smoking. Nicotine is classified as a poison. It's used in some weed killers. And to ingest it, which one is doing when they put it in their mouth even though they don't physically swallow it, I don't believe. Only saw one the first time in the past couple of months. But they are ingesting nicotine and it's definitely not a healthy product.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Is there any concern about the I believe there is concern about the illicit sales channels now that you're going to tax this. I know you mentioned your concern for youth, and I saw a study that was national youth tobacco survey said only one point there's a 1.6 youth usage. So what is the rationale for taxing nicotine pouches when doing so creates the risk of an illicit trade market that could expand opportunities for youth use through that illicit market rather than, you know, now not being able to access it through a proper retailer.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We'll use the same apparatus in place for the nicotine enforcement. So, cigarettes on this to make sure that people are not selling untaxed pouches?

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Obviously this is a very regressive tax and already seeing what other states are doing like know Rhode Island after they implemented this tax or projected revenue plummeted following the wholesale, implementing the wholesale tax. Are we prepared to deal with that when that happens and revenue estimates that we're talking about getting from this?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, like you say, most of these same taxes are regressive taxes and the people that can lease the floor are usually the ones that are paying the most because they utilize the products that we're trying to eliminate. But in answer to your question, we're doing the best we can with the current situation that we find ourselves.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Wouldn't it be better to instead of expanding the tax to alternative nicotine products and focus on enforcement against illicit sales or sales to minors. Wouldn't it be better to do that rather than increasing the tax?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, tried that a while ago when we tried to limit indoor smoking and that was replaced by vaping and what we found then is that people use vaping products to attract more kids toward nicotine by introducing all these different flavors, bubble gum and ice cream and all kinds of flavors of vapes. And then we find out that vaping is just as hazardous as smoking. I think all of these nicotine alternatives, if they are using nicotine, are going to be hazardous to one's health?

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: This revenue is certainly dependent on consumer behavior. How are we going to address that as we move forward if it's going to impact consumer behavior, correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm sorry, say it again.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yes, sure. How sensitive is this revenue to changes in consumer behavior especially if the consumer switch to untaxed or lower tax products?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay, I understand that has been anticipated in this bill in front of us and it is in the fiscal plan.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Is it state tax and finance department ready to prepare to administer and force expansion

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: I would hope so.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: What's that?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes. This was their proposal.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: And how will the state prevent product mislabeling and classification games designed to avoid the tax?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No. That will be determined by the authorities.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: And I know there are some other alternatives being proposed by some asking for, you know, to go to a unit based tax. Is there any reason why that wasn't considered? Yeah.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It was considered that they to go along with the proposal of of the tax and finance. Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Thank you mister for your time. Madam speaker, on the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Madam speaker, my colleagues, we're we're in the process of passing a budget of more than a quarter of $1,000,000,000,000. The fact of the matter is, as we take up this revenue bill, we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. I'm very concerned about the continuation of business taxes that were supposed to be temporary, that were supposed to go away, that the impact that will have on businesses that are here, that wanna stay here. I think that's a concern that I have and will continue to have businesses that have. They wanna invest here. You know, they said it was a temporary tax, but yet they're it's not temporary. And we know that we have a challenging business climate already here in this state. I'm also concerned about the this these power rebates. It's nice we're going to send a $200 check to families but that's not just a drop in the bucket to help provide direct immediate rate payer relief there' other things we can do we can refund that $2,400,000,000 I know it' not part of this bill but we can do that get that direct relief rate back to rate payers now instead of letting NYSERDA sit on it for green energy programs We could also in this bill and we have a bill coming that would suspend its taxes, fees, assessments, and surcharges on our utility bills which can constitute up to 20% of our utility bill. So I think that's something we need to look at. This peer to peer tax for New York City, the surcharge, we all saw the mayor hold a press conference outside the home indicating these individuals aren't doing enough, not paying their fair share. These are the very people who invest significant amounts of money in their communities, whether it's real estate investment, whether it's business job creation, they create jobs that bring more income that is taxed to bring more income into the city, into the state. Those are the same people that increase charitable contributions that help people in our community. And as we see more people moving from to Texas, Florida, Tennessee, a more friendly business environment, tax climate, we're gonna see more of those businesses and families leave for a more favorable tax climate. And it's not just the high wealthy in the in the income, it's other people that are leaving the state because they're feeling pinched by the cost of living and not getting enough. The tax regulatory structure God bless you. The tax regulatory structure in the state is too burdensome. And we need to address that. And to think that people aren't going to leave our state because of this tax because they can afford it, I think it's just really kind of bad judgment. I worry about that. I also with relative to the decoupling, we heard from our manufacturers that said this will jeopardize their investment in the state. This could jeopardize new businesses coming here. If you had to choose between a state that didn't decouple and a state that did decouple, you're gonna go to that state where you're gonna get that upfront investment because there's usually those upfront investments that are critical for a manufacturer to locate, for a manufacturer to grow or expand. States like Texas, Florida, Tennessee, Ohio, New Jersey, South Carolina, North Carolina have not decoupled. I think we missed the point with decoupling is not about just it's about allowing the upfront investment, the benefit from that, that's gonna use it you're worried about losing revenue, but what you're losing is that upfront investment that's gonna generate more revenue, more private sector investment, more private sector jobs. From those private sector jobs, income that can be taxed, that's gonna be the response when we look at not decoupling, but we're decoupling. We already know that New York is already a difficult place to do business. The tax regulatory, the climate challenges, the energy costs, workers' comp, all of it. This would have been a way to jump start more private sector investment. This would have been a way to jump start more job creation here in New York State. Unfortunately, we said no because of the federal government. And I think this really is just going to hurt our manufacturers and it's going to hurt our communities as well. I'm just concerned we are losing the opportunity for more job creation, more private sector investment, and yes, which would create more revenue coming into our state coffers so we can pay for these important programs. And I did want to address the alternative nicotine product again, 75% tax to put it on the same tax level as combustible cigarettes. We've heard from people that have done this, made this change because they were smoking and they looked at this as a better alternative for a health perspective. We know it's not as harmful as smoking cigarettes from the perspective of what we're going to do. We know in New York people use this. Now we're going increase cost on these people who want to use this alternative which is going to make it difficult and this is less harmful than combustible cigarettes. Why do we want to increase the cost on them more? And the fact of the matter is in New York State, we spend more than $12,000,000,000 a year on smoking related costs, including more than $7,000,000,000 on Medicaid, which we just dealt with in the last budget. This action will take a less harmful alternative away from people who want to try to improve their health and get off cigarettes and make that alternative much more expensive. And the taxes we are collecting from this, that we're going be paying more, is going to be totally offset by the increased Medicaid cost because those people might not be have the opportunity to switch. And I know people were saying I I remember questioning the health commission or the tax and finance commissioner of the budget hearing saying it's about youth involvement. The the the national youth tobacco survey said 1.6 usage. Unfortunately, I believe this bill was going do is going to create an illicit market for people including younger people. We know that happens. We've seen this illicit market with the sticker stores that come about with people selling cannabis. So younger people are going to have access to this illicit market where they wouldn't be able to get it in a store because you know there's proofing and other things that go on and that if they fall the right way. But we're going to drive people away from a more health alternative. It just doesn't make sense to me. And I know there was another alternative proposed, the unit based tax that people came in and suggested that would make this system and not make it as expensive for the user who they want people want this alternative and that's unfortunate. That was not considered. That was not addressed in here. And as we talked about, this is a regressive tax and a loss of revenue and our neighbor Rhode Island did this and they they saw their revenues plummet. So there are a host of problems with this bill from my perspective. I went down the list the decoupling, the business tax increase continuing, the power check not doing enough, could have went much further, we should have went much further to help on utility costs, and of course this alternative nicotine products tax. I just don't think based on these issues that's why I'm going to be voting in the negative on this bill and why I would urge many of my colleagues to join me and do the same. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Pirizolo?

[Assemblymember Sam Pirozzolo]: Good afternoon, madam speaker. How are you doing today?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Fabulous. And you?

[Assemblymember Sam Pirozzolo]: Okay. I'm just hoping that mister Prella wouldn't mind, but I'm gonna choose to speak on the bill only today.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill, sir.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Alright.

[Assemblymember Sam Pirozzolo]: So listen. As a legislature, you know, we talk about two things. We talk about a lot well, a lot of things, especially this being, an election year. We talk about affordability and we talk about safety. And you're going to hear members standing up after this bill is passed and throughout this entire budget process, and they're gonna be going door to door saying, I am proud that I passed this bill, that I made things more affordable and more safe. So I wanna talk directly to New Yorkers all over the state, but particularly from New Yorkers from New York City and from Staten Island and within my district. Do you actually feel that your life is better? We have a tax here, the Pied a Terre tax, to tax millionaires. And most people will say, well, that's okay. I'm not a millionaire. It's not me. Alright. That might be true. But we also have speed cameras. We also have red light cameras. You own a car? So you're getting taxed there as well. Some people might say, hey. I don't own a car. No big deal. You take a bus? Do you ride the subway? It's $3. Do you think that service that you're getting is worth it? Do you think that the MTA, which has never had an independent audit, is spending your money wisely? Do you think that this legislator or any of these legislators here are spending your money wisely? Yet they're gonna come knock on your door and how and tell you how proud they are to have passed this. Let's talk about the small businesses. I'm a small businessman. When COVID hit, I was asked to pay more, to contribute more because we have to help. That tax was a temporary tax, supposed to come back or supposed to stop. Now we're extending it. How is that right? How is that justified? At a time when small businesses are struggling, we're continuing this tax and adding on with many more taxes, regulations, and fees. If you live in a NYCHA housing complex, do you really feel like this system is working for you? How about when your water doesn't work? How about when your gas doesn't work? How about when there's squalor and rats and vermin throughout your entire complex? Does that make you feel like this legislature has your best interests at mind? I doubt it very much. Let's talk about the money we're throwing into public schools. If you live in a low income neighborhood, if you're a minority, do you really think that the school is taking care of your children? How many children, particularly black and brown children, low income neighborhoods, minority children, cannot read and write at grade level. There are some schools in New York City where 90 to 95%, if not higher, cannot read at grade level. Does that make you think as a parent we are taking care of your child? Because we absolutely are not, and we probably have the highest per student ratio in the country. It's been a generational failure when it comes to education. It's time to stop. And what do we do here as a legislature? I hear people stand up all the time and go, it's not us. It's not me. It's the guy in the White House. Well, I'm gonna tell you this. Anytime an elected official has to point to somebody else for the problem that you're facing, chances are they're the reason that problem exists. If you want change, if you want your life to get better, if you want the money that is collected by New Yorkers to be spent on you in a reasonable way that improves your life, it's time for change. And the only way you're gonna get that change is to vote for change in November. You can no longer continue to vote the way you have for generations because if you continue to do so, you will be in the same position you have been in

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: for generations. Zolo.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: I need to

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: make comments relative to the bill. Sir, thank you. Miss Forrest and, actually, we're gonna go to miss Lunsford first. Miss Lunsford?

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. If you could have the Children and Families Committee, please, to

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: the speaker's Children conference and Families members, we are speaking, asking questions on this specific bill only. Thank you, miss Forrest.

[Assemblymember Phara Souffrant Forrest]: Thank you, madam speaker. On the bill?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill. Okay.

[Assemblymember Phara Souffrant Forrest]: We started this year with families on the brink. Workers and community safety was the goal post and we knew from the federal level no help was to be found. We had one job and one job only, protect New Yorkers from greedy oligarchs posing as federal heads of state. However, now simply stated, this austerity budget falls far short of what New Yorkers organized for, were promised, and what we deserve. In particular, it fails to raise revenues to provide hunt for the hundreds and thousands of New Yorkers who are about to lose their health insurance due to the cuts to the essential plan. And for those who will lose snap benefits due to cuts. And as a nurse, as a mother, and as a representative of thousands of families affected by these cuts, I cannot support this bill. This budget fails to raise the revenue our communities have been fighting to make sure that everyday life becomes a little bit easier. This year I introduced the fair share act to make sure that New York City is able to raise 2% income tax on millionaires and while it received widespread support, it was not included in this budget. We cannot continue to protect millionaires, billionaires, and corporation for another year, but our communities, our communities are left waiting. In the Assembly One House, we included measures to tax the wealthy. Ten weeks later though, governor Kathy Hochul is siding with the ultra wealthy instead of working New Yorkers. This is the reality behind this bill. We have the tools. We have the proposals. But instead of fighting against austerity and protecting New Yorkers, we are accepting these needless cuts and these cruel cuts. This is unacceptable. And I consider it my duty as a legislature to make sure that we are fighting for real solutions. I know exactly what happens when the state fails to raise the revenue we need. The failure shows up in our hospitals that are closing. The failure shows up at the long lines at the food pantry. The failure shows up at the wait list in day care centers. The failure shows up when a family loses health insurance. Revenue is not just numbers on a paper, it's not just numbers on a spreadsheet, it is lives. It is decisions. It is my former patients being able to get their medication that they need today. And it's whether and and it's regardless of the families in my district, my district on Classen Avenue, it's on yours too. Your Main Street and your back streets. And I wonder with a revenue like this, does the governor understand what her cuts will do and who they will hurt. We, the legislature, came into this year's session with real plans to fund social services by generating new recurring meaningful revenue. So many plans to pick to pick from. You could pick any of them. However, we are here stuck with austerity, and next year, we're gonna be in the same position again. New Yorkers will be struggling and we will be working to deliver a balanced and fair budget. The government, the federal government will be delivering more cuts and we won't have the infrastructure to raise more revenue. I cannot stand here and accept a revenue bill that refuses to tax the ultra rip, the ultra wealthy, the one percent. While my people and your people continue to pay the price again and again. I will I will continue to fight to make sure that we tax the rich, but more importantly, I will make sure that I will be included in the number to make sure that all our communities, no matter the issue, get something good out of this and not just austerity. So today, I will have to vote no. Thank you, madam speaker. You can take back my time.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Miss Demancdolo.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Would the chair allow me to ask a few questions in regards to veterans part e

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Pretlow, will you yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Pratlow yields.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Thank you, mister Pratlow. Par par e e in this bill, it's to do with veterans and veterans real property tax exemption. Correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, sir.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Do you know how many veterans are in New York state?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm not sure of the number. No.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: There's about 600,000 veterans give or take depending on the year and and and such things like that. Do you know how many of our veterans actually are VA compensated? No, I don't. About right now, today, around 153,000 veterans are partially or all compensated by the VA. My question is, under section one line 51, you must have a qualifying condition to receive this exemption.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Can you explain to us what a qualifying exemption is?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think the eligibility criteria is a veteran must be 100% disabled or permanently and totally disabled.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: That's it?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: So, what would be a qualifying condition to get to that?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I guess being designated as 100% disabled.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Okay, so let's say I'm a veteran, I get VA services, I'm 30 service connected. I got a bad

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: knee. Yes.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: I ride motorcycle. I have an accident. Now I possibly could be 100% disabled. Would I still qualify for that 100% exemption?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, the disability has to be service connected.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Okay. Let's say I was a diabetic. I was diagnosed during the service. Something happened in service. I became a diabetic or I was around a burn pit, had disabilities. I'm riding my motorcycle and I'm 50% rated and something happens to me, I black out because of my service disability.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, this is all that local option and what we're doing is just increasing the availability for localities to raise the exemption or the discount given to fully disabled veterans. Most communities already have in place the availability for all veterans to get some sort of reduction in their property taxes.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: That I agree with Mr. Fratlow. But the question is, who determines that information? Because I've already heard from several veterans about who is a 100% disabled. The

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: VA would certify as to who is 100% disabled. That wouldn't be up to the locality or definitely not this legislature.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Okay, so it's totally done by the VA? Yes. And if that veteran is 100% disabled, is that the And

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: same then he or she would be eligible for the increase in the exemption that we are allowing the localities to offer to their fully disabled veterans.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Okay. And if I am a veteran and 100% disabled, am I then still allowed to work if I get the exemption?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I am not sure. I'm not sure. I don't know if you're allowed to work if you're fully 100% disabled.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: And who would I ask that question to?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I would imagine the VA. The VA? Yeah.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Okay. But just a little while ago we talked about that would be decided by the locality?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, the locality gives you the ability to make Locality has the wherewithal to provide the availability of the exemption to the 100 disabled vet. Your question was in relation to who determines if a vet is 100% disabled. That is not determined by the locality. That is determined by the VA. Okay, you're correct

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: and I agree with that. So going back to the locality, if the locality decides to give the exemption, school tax, county tax, town tax, village tax. Is there any funding tied into this from the state? No. So what happens if your town decides to give this exemption to their veterans.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, they can. This is local option. If my community wanted to do it, have the wherewithal to do it.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: And I'm next door to your community. My community says, you know something, we can't afford to do that. We just don't have the financial wherewithal to do that.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: You should move to my community.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: That was my next question because that's exactly what will happen. What are we going to do to help those communities if that

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Like I was saying, it's up to the local community, the city council, the county legislature, whoever the governing body is that determines the taxes in that community. It is up to them to make the offer. If they don't feel that they have the capacity to give that tax reduction to their 100% disabled vets, that's on them. So if another community can do it, that is the best interest of that vet if they can to locate. But I don't think the exemptions will be equal to the cost of moving. Think that question is kind of moot.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Right. And if a community decides to opt into this, is there an opt out clause?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That's up to the community also.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: That could be put into the language. That could put into the language they That wouldn't be dictated by the Right,

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: yes.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: I know a lot of us as veterans we work with our county veterans offices back at home. Is there going to be anything from New York state if this passes, which it probably will, is there anything that is going to be sent to them to give them a heads up to educate them on the number, the hundreds of veterans that will come in and say, look I may have 100% disability or I do. Are we going to help educate them to educate our veterans to help them through the process?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, having a close relationship with the Director of Veterans for the State, affectionately known as Mama V, she had told me or informed me that most veterans don't know of a lot of the benefits that are available to them for whatever the reason and one of the things that she is trying the best to do is to inform all of the veterans throughout New York State of all of the opportunities that are available to them, all of the perks that they are entitled to.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: So the directors, you're talking about Viviana DeCone? DeCone, yes. Last year I believe in this house we passed a bill somewhat like this and it was in that bill ahead the same kind of the same language but they had talked about adaptive housing and being unemployable. Is that in the new bill by any chance?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No it isn't. Is what

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: we passed last year still in effect?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe so. You believe so? One second. So what what we're What this bill is doing is actually increasing the eligibility so we are actually enhancing what we did last year.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: So, what we passed last year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It was simplifying it, yes.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: It is simplifying it but it also says that what we passed last year is still in place? Yes. Okay. Chairman, I thank you for the questions or the answers. I appreciate it. Madam chair, on the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: I am sorry, madam speaker, I apologize. I'm a veteran. I'm the ranking member on the veterans committee from the minority side. We all love our veterans. We want our veterans to succeed in life, especially if they're disabled, especially the ones that come back that are maimed, either brain damage, missing limbs, missing arms. We we all wanna protect them. As I look through this, there were a few questions that came up already. And we have veterans that have already asked us that question. What about this what about that? I will absolutely support this part of the budget 100% but I want to make sure we have things defined so when our veterans come to our local county offices and ask those questions or if they come to one of us here on the assembly floor as an assembly member, we should be able to give them those answers. That is why I wanted to ask the questions for a little bit of clarifications and again I'm glad to see this part in the budget and I will definitely support this part of the budget 100%. So thank you, madam speaker. Thank you, chair, for your time and thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Johnson?

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Thank you very much. Thank you very much, madam chair. Would the chairman yield for some questions on part k?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Pella, will you yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: For Part K, absolutely.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mr. Paolo yields.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I just want to revisit the tax on alternative nicotine products. I know my colleague, the ranking member on Ways and Means brought this up.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: And I know

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: that the differentiation between gum, nicotine gum like Nicorette and the pouches was brought up, is there any concern about the inconsistency between treating those types of products differently?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That really wasn't considered. The tax department indicated that they were losing revenues on sales of these pouches and suggested a 75% on the wholesale tax which is what we had done. There were some people that were actually pushing for a unit tax on them. Don't know if you are referring, if you want to go in that direction. But what we have in front of us is a 75% wholesale tax on so called pouches.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Yeah. So, I don't want to get back into the tax rate per se. Just on the inconsistency, was the driver for instituting this tax because of a belief that the nicotine pouches, because of the volume of nicotine in them was harmful to New Yorkers?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I would imagine so.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. So, how could that be the case when you look at the nicotine gum? Can be sold in two different milligram variations, a two milligram and a four milligram. Whereas the pouches are sold in a three milligram and a six milligram. So, you can get a nicotine gum that is untaxed at a higher nicotine content than a nicotine pouch which we believe is more harmful to New Yorkers even though the gum has a higher nicotine volume.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: So, mister Jensen, are you suggesting that we increase the tax on nicotine gum?

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: I'm just looking for an understanding why there's an inconsistency in what we're doing and why

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: we That's treat not addressed in this bill. What we have in front of us is the tax on the nicotine pouches.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So, we're not taking up or have any concern that the nicotine gum is a chew and park product where you put the product, the gum along your gums to take in the nicotine just like you would a nicotine pouch?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Well, is a difference there where the nicotine gum is an FDA approved smoking cessation product where these pouches are not.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So, if the FDA were to rule tomorrow that a nicotine pouch is an FDA approved cessation device, is there a provision in this piece of legislation to

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, don't believe we tax medical devices.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So, what I'm saying is if the FDA approves a pouch, which I believe they have ruled that it can be used for cessation and I believe in other nations, they have also said they can do it and we passed legislation recently that we no longer recognize the FDA's medical advice but we look at other outside health organizations. Is there a provision in this bill that would roll back the tax because it is used for medical purposes?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes. I'm being informed that if the pouches get FDA approval then this tax would be rolled back because then it would be considered a medical device.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. Thank you. And then is there any concern I know in surrounding states that by passing this measure, our neighboring states like Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Vermont do not have this tax and that by instituting the tax on these nicotine pouches,

[Assemblymember Angelo Morinello]: it will

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: drive consumers who will be purchasing other products at a location where they would also buy a pouch and other things to purchase the pouches and those other things at one of those three neighboring states?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, that's always the case. I mean, you know, Jersey doesn't put a nickel deposit on soda cans and New York does. I know that we're not going to stop selling soda in New York because Jersey doesn't require deposit. So I can only deal with what's happening in the confines of the state of New York and not really can be concerned with what individuals do to go outside of New York to sort of prevent whatever laws we have in place in the state.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So we're not concerned about We're always concerned,

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: but I can't I I can't do legislation with that as a driving force. I have to only look at what's effective and what we need in the state of New York which is where we all live.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Alright. Fair enough, mister chairman. I appreciate your answers to my questions. Thank you, madam chair or madam speaker. Thank

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: you, mister Jensen. Miss Gallagher.

[Assemblymember Emily Gallagher]: Madam speaker on the bill. On the bill. I rise today to share my deep frustration with revenue bill that fundamentally fails to meet the moment, protect New Yorkers and ensure that we are a state where working people can thrive. I'm a proud democratic socialist because I believe that everyone deserves to live with dignity. I reject the idea that anyone should be one disaster away from losing everything. Year after year, we see corporations and the executives who run them get wealthier, while everyday New Yorkers struggle to survive. We are the most unequal state in the country and our wealth disparity is growing exponentially. If you or someone in your family gets sick, lives through a natural disaster, is the victim of a crash, your stability is likely ruined. If you're not wealthy, the safety nets available to protect you are few and far between. It doesn't have to be this way. This year's budget reflected a clear and unique moment. New York's millionaires and billionaires are receiving $12,000,000,000 in tax cuts, while nearly half a million New Yorkers are losing their healthcare as a direct result of these cuts. If there was ever a simple and straightforward opportunity to stand with the New Yorkers over oligarchs, this was it. But we are voting on a budget today that does nothing to cover nearly half a million New Yorkers who will lose healthcare on July 1. While the pitaire tax is a good policy and an important first step, it will not scratch the surface of the billions we could raise with modest increases to personal income tax and corporate tax rates. Tax increases that these wealthy people and companies would not even notice because they are receiving such large cuts at the federal level. And indeed because the budget has taken so very long, we will have less than a week to debate and vote on other issues that New Yorkers care about. So I am forced to vote no on this revenue bill and this budget. But I can promise you, we will be back next year and the year after that. We will not stop until we truly tax the rich statewide and make the investments that ensure New Yorkers continue to have a place where working people can thrive and live. Thank you.

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: Thank you Ms. Gallagher. Ms. Srestha.

[Assemblymember Sarahana Shrestha]: Hello? Oh, great. Thank you madam speaker. The number of millionaires in the state continued to grow. The amount of corporate profits in the state continued to grow whereas the households making $75,000 or less make up the biggest group of people who are leaving the state. And they are leaving the state because they can no longer afford to live here and have a decent quality of life. All of this has been made worse by the federal administration's cuts on Medicaid as well as SNAP, which means the most vulnerable people will further find a challenge in continuing to live in this state. But this spending plan for the from the federal administration also gives tax breaks that disproportionately benefit the wealthy. To be specific, collectively the millionaires in this state will be saving $12,000,000,000 every year going forward. And that means the state budget this year had one core function, to of to address the affordability crisis and act as a counterweight to the assault the federal administration is unleashing on the working families of this state. However, the refusal to raise money from those who have it, from those who are hoarding it, so as to not invest in programs that would stabilize the lives of our constituents, has it made it so that people increasingly don't have a reason to truly believe in why they should be excited about democracy. Why they should participate in this process. People need to believe that the government exists to watch out for their well-being. And the message we are sending with this revenue bill, specifically the very explicit refusal from the executive chamber to not make the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes, is basically saying we are going to allow the working families of New York to be the victims of one of the highest wealth disparities that exists in this country. New York State has so much wealth that it is richer than countries like Denmark and Sweden. But at the same time, we are having people fight over scraps, fight over what program can be funded over another, and still have none of these programs fully funded. For example, we do not want people living on the streets. And yet, we do not want to fund housing access vouchers which would help people have stable homes. And that is an ask of only $250,000,000, which is a drop in the bucket compared to how much money people who are the richest in this state are keeping to themselves. The purpose of money is to exchange hands, not to sit there collecting dust. The purpose of money is not to increase the wealth of a few people. It is to fund our collective wealth being. It is to invest in a social infrastructure that gives everybody the opportunity to have a decent quality of life. That includes stable housing, that includes lower utility bills, that includes access to healthcare, that includes access to high quality education, as well as good, well paying union jobs. So to say that we are not going to invest in New Yorkers simply because we do not want to touch the pockets of the wealthy is an abdication of this government's responsibility and for that reason I will be voting no on this revenue bill.

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: Thank you, miss Srestha. Mister Slater.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will the sponsor yield for a few clarifying questions?

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: Will you lee lee will you yield, mister sponsor?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: For mister Slater? Absolutely.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Thank you, mister chairman. You're doing good. You're doing good.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: You Two more hours. Tell us you're opposed to this budget because it doesn't tax the rich?

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Well, that's not really what I wanted to talk about. What I wanted talk about was your there's a couple of questions in here about the child independent care credit. Yes. If we can just have some clarification, just a few questions on that. This is restructured within this particular bill and replaces the current federally linked structure with a new stand alone state credit beginning in tax year 2026. Correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: And, obviously, very happy to see that we're trying to address some of the challenges and financial burdens parents are facing in finding affordable and reliable child care, something our conference has been pushing for. I know this is one of those bipartisan issues that we've seen commonality with and we appreciate that. Has the department estimated how many taxpayers will be impacted by the shift from a federal linked calculation to this new formula?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think we're looking at 230,000 filers.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: 230,000 filers. Yeah. That it would impact.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Which would be 316,000 children.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Understood. And how much will the average benefit for qualifying tax payers go up for the average family of four?

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: $576. And this part allows room

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: and board for caregivers, correct? I believe so. And can you explain to us I just kind of want to make sure I understand exactly when it comes to what we're trying to achieve there for the definition of caregivers. Is that for a live in au pair or who would benefit from that particular provision in the bill?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: The same individuals that are under current law.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Say right. And so can you explain to me who those individuals are?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Susie and Charlie. I don't know who they are.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: I'm just trying to understand when we talk about giving room and board for caregivers, does that entail?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Someone whose position is in place to take care of a young individual.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: So there's no minimum of the number of young individuals that they would be in

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: charge of? I don't believe so.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: And with the benefit, again just to make sure I'm clear, would the benefit go to the caregiver themself or those who are paying the caregiver?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Actually, it's the individual that's paying the caregiver.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: The employer, essentially. The employer. Understood. And the other thing that we saw was there were ancillary costs related to educational expenses that were not allowed when they also enable work. Can you tell me why those costs were not included?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay, we didn't make any changes to the eligibility criteria.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: And so, educational expenses included?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes. As they are under current law.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Understood. How about in regards to some of the regulatory reforms? I know we talked about this, I believe, in one of the previous bills. Is there anything in this bill that speaks to any of the regulatory reforms that I think both sides of the aisle have been trying to examine? Leanne, no. Just making sure there's no other questions that I have there. Alright. Well, you very much mister chairman for answering my questions. Appreciate it as always.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Thank you, sir.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Thank you, madam speaker.

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: Thank you, Mr. Slater. Ms. Valdez.

[Assemblymember Valdez (first name unknown)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Two facts should have motivated defined this budget. One is the 450

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: On

[Assemblymember Valdez (first name unknown)]: the bill? Oh, sorry. Pardon me. On the bill. Thank you. Let me get in. Two factors should have defined this budget. One is the four hundred and fifty thousand New Yorkers who are about to lose their health care because Donald Trump and the Republicans in Congress have taken a buzz saw to our already threadbare social safety net. The second is the $12,000,000,000 in tax cuts that the wealthiest New Yorkers are getting this year from that same Republican Congress. New York State had the opportunity and the responsibility to lead. The overwhelming majority of New Yorkers are demanding that we tax the rich to invest in the working class of the state, to make our lives more affordable and more dignified. But governor Hochul answered to different New Yorkers. That small number of billionaires and CEOs who refuse to pay their fair share and who donate to politicians to keep it that way. So what are we left with? A pieta terre tax on second homes worth more than $5,000,000. It's a start. And against a governor who so beholden to her billionaire donors, she swore she wouldn't allow a penny in new taxes. It is a victory. I want to thank the thousands of New Yorkers who made calls, who canvassed their neighbors, who showed up to rallies in their cities and here in the capital. Your organizing made a difference this year. But in a moment of profound inequality, when the rich have never been richer, when one in four New Yorkers lives in poverty, and hundreds of thousands will lose their health care and their food stamps in a matter of weeks, it is simply not good enough. Make no mistake, this is on austerity budget. But we will continue to organize for a just budget that recognizes that it is the working class that make the state run, not the CEOs and billionaires. I vote no.

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: Thank you, miss Valdez. Mister Bologna.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Would the chairman please yield first a couple questions?

[Assemblymember Monique Chandler-Waterman]: Will the chairman yield?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: So staff.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: He'll limit you to two?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: A couple more, but I'll be brief. A few. I'm gonna I'm gonna be on part k if that's alright. So the the 75% wholesales tax, these and I just again, some these have gone over, but I just want to clarify. These are non combustible products. We're talking about non traditional cigarettes here, right? Yes. Okay. And would you agree that a lot of adults use these products as an alternative to smoking? I'd imagine so. Generally speaking, as we move away from combustible cigarettes, think that would you agree that it's a positive that people are moving away from tobacco to just nicotine, even if it's just a gateway to

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: get off altogether? Possibly. Yes.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. So would you agree well, it's it's data.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I mean,

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: it's from the CDC that that lower income folks already three times higher rate of smoking and using tobacco products than than higher income earners. Let me rephrase that. I guess I'm telling you, according to CDC, lower income earners already three times higher rate to smoke and use tobacco products at income earners. So, would this excise tax then hit lower income earners at a disproportionate rate than people who don't smoke or use tobacco?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: As I stated earlier, that most all of the sin taxes affect poorer people because they utilize these items more than wealthier people. And as a percentage of their income, it's a lot higher.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: So, I mean, in a weird way, we're actually kind of effectively helping balance a budget on the backs of lower income earners. Are we not?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That is not the purpose of what we're doing. Purpose of

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Might not be purpose, but it's

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: the reality maintain of the good health of all individuals and to discourage actually the use of tobacco products.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Mister Rettler, that's all I have. Thank you very much, madam speaker. You. On the bill, if that's alright?

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: On the bill, sir.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Alright. So this bill raises billions in new revenue for New Yorkers that are already struggling with some of the highest tax burden in America. Nowhere is that clearer than in part k, with the 75% wholesale sales tax. Now let be clear. I'm not standing here advocating for nicotine use, But I am questioning the logic of lower risk alternatives that many adults use to get away from combustible cigarettes. As I said earlier that lower income earners are three times more likely to use these products than higher income earners. And I frankly, I find it rich that we are sitting here listening to some folks lose their ever loving minds over higher income earners. But essentially, what we're doing is we're making it more difficult for lower income earners to get off cigarettes, increase their risk of cancer, and put them into the health care system. I I I just I find that a little bit odd. So who's ultimately paying this bill? Working class New Yorkers, lower income New Yorkers, at risk New Yorkers, blue collar people struggling with addiction and trying to quit smoking. And instead of helping them transition away from cigarettes, Albany sees an opportunity to generate revenue. This is a fundamental problem with this budget. Temporary taxes ultimately become permanent. And kinda getting on to the energy thing here with the rebate check. One time rebate checks does not fix the underlying problem of energy. We have our I I appreciate the fact that someone wanted to pick up the ball and run with it from our conference's plan. But at the end of the day, you only got one piece of it. We still need to systematically reduce the cost of energy across the board, and a one time rebate check is kind of a slap in the face to everyday New Yorkers without the additional piece. We're still have the All Electric Buildings Act, All Electric Vehicles Act, the cap and invest, the twenty twenty five building code, the 100 foot rule. We're still systematically getting rid of natural gas, reducing our energy portfolio, and doing nothing to increase the affordability or reliability of our entire energy system. But yet New Yorkers are still supposed to to be happy with a $200 rebate check without the long term benefits of systematic change. It's a change in PR. And really what it is is damage control. And the irony is staggering because our mandates, what we've done in this body, is essentially what has driven up costs to ratepayers across the state. And then we send taxpayers and ratepayers a partial refund and expect to get applause from the very crisis that we helped create. I will die on this hill, but we do not have a revenue problem in New York State. We have a spending problem and a philosophical utility problem. The answer to all this is fiscal discipline. This budget does not do that. We need permanent tax relief, economic growth, and a government that finally learns how to live within within its own means. And I will say this on the on the nicotine tax, madam speaker. While some may laugh about this Indiana Jones searching for the lost nicotine pouch in Albany's newest tax adventure, for the working families across this state, nothing is funny about being treated like an ATM machine by their own government.

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: Thank you, mister Bologna. Miss Metanias. Oh, pardon me. Mister Keith Brown.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: On the bill, madam speaker.

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: Our state is not going in the right direction. While we sit here and debate, we ignore problems we're creating right here in this chamber. We talk about the policies that are coming out of Washington DC. Well, let's look under the hood here. What has New York done since 2019? Where does New York stand in comparison with every other state? We have the second highest total tax burden in the country. We have the highest individual tax burden in the country. We have the fourth highest property tax burden in this country. Our residential electricity rates are 62% higher than the national average. Our commercial electricity rates are 63% higher than the national average. We haven't adequately addressed many social ills. We have a housing crisis. We had over two thousand New Yorkers overdose last year. We have a veteran suicide crisis and a growing problem of problem gambling, especially amongst teens. We have a teen vaping problem and a teen mental health crisis. Child care is 11.4% higher than the national average. We have the worst business climate in the country. The tax foundation ranks us dead last, dead last in tax competitiveness. We're number one, though, in in our migration. We've lost a million of our residents since 2020. One New Yorker leaves this state for somewhere else every two minutes. And what do we do with this bill today and makes it worse? We do nothing about Medicaid fraud. The Empire Center says we spent $2,100,000,000 on non New Yorkers last year. 3,000,000 more people are on the rolls than are financially eligible to medicate in New York State. And in 2000, when I came into this chamber, we spent 177,000,000,000 as a state. This budget is over 268,000,000,000, an estimated 48% increase. That's some austerity budget, I tell you. Inflation is 2.4% this year, and this budget is an operating spending of 6.8%. It's not sustainable. We don't have a revenue problem. We certainly have a spending problem. I'll be voting no. Thank you.

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: Thank you, mister Brown. Now, miss Metanias. On the bill.

[Assemblymember Marcela Mitaynes]: Today, we're voting for a budget that reflects both the possibilities of what working people can win when they organize and fight and the deep failures of a political system that continues to put wealthy interests ahead of the needs of everyday New Yorkers. Year after year, members of this body are expected to vote on a massive budget bill negotiated behind closed doors with little transparency and little meeting participation from the communities we represent. The people of the state deserve a democratic process where working class New Yorkers, immigrants, tenants, families and environmental justice communities have a real seat at the table, not a process dominated by executive power and last minute negotiations driven by political calculation. Because while New Yorkers are struggling to pay rent, afford groceries, keep childcare and stay in their homes, this budget process continues to treat transformative change as something to fear instead of something to fight for. Communities like Sunset Park and Red Hook that I represent know exactly what the environmental injustice looks like. We live with higher asthma rates, we live alongside polluting infrastructure, truck traffic, flooding risks, peaker plants and industrial contamination. Working class black and brown immigrant communities are always the first forced to suffer the consequences when politicians decide to water down climate protections. The consequences will not be abstract. They will impact public health, air quality, flooding, vulnerability, and our ability to transform away from fossil fuels and the urgency the crisis demands. We had an opportunity to tax the rich, an investment that could have represented critical steps toward building publicly owned renewable energy infrastructure that is democratically controlled and centered around public good instead of corporate profit. It creates the opportunity for New York to lead the country in building a renewable energy future that moves away from fossil fuels pollution and racism. We should not have to fight this hard to protect the bare minimum while we have a governor who simultaneously is weakening legislation that's taken this body years to pass. We saw the same dynamic throughout our fight for immigration justice. Our communities fought for New York for all. Real protections that would finally establish clear separation between local governments and federal immigration enforcement and ensure immigrant New Yorkers could live with dignity and safety and continue to contribute into the economy. And then the governor stood in the way. We were forced to settle for weaker measures and partial protections after enormous resistance and reluctance. Even so, immigrant advocates, organizers and legislative allies fought hard to secure meaningful wins in this budget. These victories matter but they don't go far enough. At a moment when immigrant families across this country are living in fear and under increased attack, New York should be leading with courage and clarity, not compromise and hesitation. Immigrant communities should never be treated as bargaining chips during budget negotiations. Our fight does not end here. We will continue organizing, legislating and pushing to strengthen these protections until New York fully lives up to its promise as a safe home for all immigrants. New Yorkers are facing one of the worst affordability crisis in generations. Families are being crushed by rising rents, health care costs, utility bills, food prices while billionaires and major corporations continue to receive enormous tax breaks and protections. We fought to make the ultra wealthy finally pay their fair share. We fought for real progressive revenue solutions that could fully fund housing, healthcare, public transit, climate investments, childcare and public education. And once again, we face constant pushback. Instead of fully taxing the rich, this administration chose to protect wealthy interests and corporate power while asking working class New Yorkers to continue carrying the burden of a broken economy. Now, there are important wins in this budget that deserve recognition but even those victories exist alongside austerity, compromise and missed opportunities that continue to leave too many New Yorkers behind. I recognize the heart for victories won by movements, advocates, organizers and legislative allies. Our communities deserve better than incrementalism during a moment of crisis. Working people are looking for leaders willing to improve their lives. They're looking for leadership willing to confront corporate greed, invest boldly in public goods, protect immigrants without compromise and treat climate change like the emergency that it is. And too often this governor stood in the way of that vision. Despite those barriers, our movement continues to grow stronger. Working class New Yorkers continue to organize and we will continue fighting for a future where housing is guaranteed, healthcare is universal, energy is public, immigrants are protected and our our economy serves the people who make this state run, not the wealthy elite who profit from inequality. This budget did not go far enough but our fight does not end here. I will continue building a New York that belongs to all of us. I vote no on this budget.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, miss Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. On the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: So I've listened as usual with interest to you know, there are a 150 of us here sometimes. Well, it seems like there are lot of us here right now which is kinda good. We're all listening to each other, I hope. And, you know we have a wide difference of opinion on this bill and on this whole topic of revenue. So I want to just use my time to talk a little bit about what's on my mind with this bill. This enacted revenue budget increases state taxes by 2,500,000,000 over two years. It includes an enhancement of the child and dependent care credit, energy rebate checks, taxes on alternative nicotine products, as well as a new surcharge on high value second homes in New York City, an extension of business tax rates, and decoupling from various HR one provisions. So by, you know, some budget bills are very thick with many, many, many sub parts. This has 36 parts. So, you know, we're not going to like it all or if you if you like all of it, you probably should have your head examined. If you hate it all, you probably don't have a heart. So there are definitely parts of the bill that I think are decent. And I'm a glasses half full kind of gal, so I'm going tell you what I like about it so far. I like the tipped wage income exemption. I think that's good. The rebate checks are good as far as they go. I just think that, you know, again, they're a little gimmicky. They're not really when you go to the grocery store, you fill up your gas tank and you think about what these rebate checks are really going to mean to you, it's not going to be that much. It's really not going be that much. I'm grateful, let's put it in a positive spin, I'm grateful that the New York City pied a terre tax did not get imported to Upstate. I'm very grateful that that didn't get into the final enacted budget. I don't think we want it up here, but we'll see how it works in

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: the

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: city. You know, I think when I came here ten years ago, the enacted budget was $153,000,000,000 Last year, it was $254,000,000,000 and this year it will be $268,000,000,000 an increase year over year of $14,000,000,000. And I listened with great amusement to that being described as an austerity budget. I don't see in what realm or reality that is an austerity budget when you're increasing it by $14,000,000,000. It I just think what I'm coming away with, what I've been feeling for some time now is that no matter how much money this legislature has to spend, it will always want more. It will never be enough. It will never be enough. And, you know, that has an impact. The governor promised no new taxes but then over time that became no new broad based income or statewide business tax increases. So it changed a little bit, the messaging, right? That's Albany speak for, there are, you know, there is going to be state tax increases but we're going look at over two years, it's going to be 2 and a half billion dollars. New York City businesses have the highest combined corporate tax rate in the country while statewide business taxes are generally among the highest nationwide. And I won't requote all of the great statistics that were offered by a previous speaker, but suffice it to say that I believe that we are already taxed considerably here. For for those of my colleagues who are very disappointed that we're not taxing the rich, I would say we we do tax the rich. We tax the middle class and we tax the poor. And we already do that. And, you know, I think I think overall I'm just disappointed again that we're it seems as though there are some in the chamber who are taking a victory lap and kind of saying, we didn't make it any worse, you know. We didn't make it any worse. But really in fact it was already pretty bad. And I would say that over the ten years that I've been in office, an increase of well over $100,000,000,000 is a lot of money. And it's it is what it is. Let me say one more good thing though before I close. I was very happy to see in part JJ, which is all the way at the end of this budget bill, very you know, this budget bill. And what this part does, which is very helpful for my district and I did want to point it out because like I said, I believe in calling out the good stuff when it's there is let me get it in front of me. I have a village in my district, Boston Spa, and it's actually where my district office is too. And that they have a a very old brownfield site and we've been wanting to see that get redeveloped for like a long time. And there were some brownfield tax credits that were issued several years ago, but then the pandemic happened and a lot of other things happened and proposals, you know, developers kind of came in with ideas and then those developers went away. To make a very long story short, those Brownfield credits were ready to expire. And that would have really detrimentally impacted the owner of the property and any potential development ideas for the property. It makes it much more attractive to redevelop that property with the Brownfield tax credit. So with this part, JJ, and it's not just for Ballston Spa, but it's for other areas too, those Brownfield tax credits are gonna get extended for a few more years to allow for the appropriate development process to move forward. And hopefully we're going to get a good project in there that's really going to help that village out quite a bit. So I'm very grateful to see that. So to answer colleagues who thought that we should have taxed more, we should have taken more from those who could, in their view, very well afford it, I would just say I think that this bill does plenty enough damage and I can't support it, although there are certain aspects to it, as there would be with 36 parts to it. There are certainly some parts that I'm happy to see. So I'll be voting in the negative, madam speaker. And I thank my colleagues and you for the time.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Tate.

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: Thank you, madam speaker. And, on the bill, please?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: I saved you a little time, mister chairman. I didn't, ask you any questions this year. There's no white smoke, so we're good. I'm gonna be very brief, madam chair. This is just ridiculous. Here we are all this time late on a budget spending a $100,000,000,000 more than what we did back when I first got to this chamber. And I hear people whining and crying and blaming the governor, blaming the federal government. No. The blame is in here. The blame is on the 2nd Floor. There is no one paying attention to what the heck is going on. How can we spend a 100,000,000,000 more dollars in ten years when we have less businesses, less people living in this state? What is what are we doing? And then we attack people that have been successful? Let me tell you what, a lot of those people that you're talking about that are millionaires and billionaires now,

[Majority Leader Crystal Peoples-Stokes]: a lot

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: of them grew up poor, started with absolutely nothing, absolutely nothing, and they made their way the American way. New York should and never ought to be a socialist state nor America. I can't believe that we have people in this room that think it's okay to just give away the store and let everybody else pay for it. That is not how this country came to be. Sure in the heck, not the way I wanna live. So, I mean, I hear all this. Some people are voting for it. Some people everything I've seen so far is absolute junk. A matter of fact, I ought to tear it up and just throw it in the garbage can. This is not responsible. This is being a this is afraid of saying no to people. And when you're in business and you're running and and when you're here and you're running government, sometimes you have to say no. We can't afford it. The people we represent can't afford it. As long as we have our priorities, our emergency services, our law enforcement, and we keep the wheels of government going, that's priority. I I just I I don't get it. I don't get it. I guess I've just I live in an area of the state where people work hard every day and expect to get something back for the fruits of their labor. But what we're doing to people and and you know what? You wanna talk about being rich or whatever? You have to have a million dollars to be able to live in this state. Because over the last ten years, we've made it so unaffordable for every single person to live here that if you don't have a million doll if you don't make a million dollars, you can't live comfortably here. And it's all because of the things that happen in this chamber, that chamber down there, and the 2nd Floor. People are out of touch with the real world. They're out of touch how hard people work and how hard people struggle to pay the bills. That's where I came from, blue collar. I started with nothing. Didn't have rich parents. Didn't have parents give everything to me. I got up at 03:30 every morning, and I worked my tail off, and I paid my fair share of taxes in the last fifty plus years. You wanna really do something for the people that you represent? Start thinking about them. Not giving away story, but start thinking about programs and things that can really help them get going. While cutting the budget and lowering people's taxes. Why don't we think about that one time? I could never support anything like this. This is just absolutely ridiculous. Almost $300,000,000,000 with a b. Where the heck is it coming from? And the nonsense about Washington DC and the federal government, that's been happening since Obama was in office. So I don't wanna hear that. And the same thing with health the health insurance. There's been a problem with health insurance for the last thirty years. Nobody's fixed it. I don't care what side of the aisle you're on. So ridiculous. Put your money where your mouth is. Get a set. Get some guts, and do what we're supposed to do here. Make the people in the state of New York's lives better by doing the right thing and never mind the politics. I vote no.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Tague. Let's make sure we use appropriate language.

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: I'm not really

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Well, getting something is not appropriate. Miss Giglio.

[Assemblymember Jodi Giglio]: Thank you, madam speaker. On the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Jodi Giglio]: New York doesn't have a revenue spec problem. It has a spending problem. Spending is out of control as my colleague stated earlier. The budget went from 175,000,000,000 to today's 268,000,000,000 in less than ten years. Taxing, taxing, and taxing is not sustainable. Corporate greed taxed the rich and now we're extending taxes on small businesses for three more years and that's the flow. When you run out of the money at the top, it starts trickling down to the bottom to the businesses and to the middle class. Money flows into New York City from our state budget. While the state legislature or the city legislature, the financial plan from 2026 to 2029 shows a 16% salary increase for the elected officials in New York City with 13 fringe benefits and a mere 3% increase for the 80,000 workers that make the city work. What will we do to stop the exodus? New York share of millionaires is falling compared to other large states. Wall Street to Y'all Street is real. More than 100 companies are duly listed in New York and Texas and they're planning their exodus. JPMorgan Chase employs more in Texas now than New York. Goldman Sachs is building an 800,000 square foot building in Dallas for 5,000 employees. Wells Fargo opened a new campus in Las Colinas bringing 4,500 workers there from New York. Charles Schwab moved corporate headquarters to Westlake, Texas with 7,000 employees. Bank of America 5,000 employees to Texas. Scotiabank Regional Office in Dallas a thousand workers there. What will we do to create a better business environment in New York so that we stop leaving and losing these large companies that are paying these taxes that we're all talking about here today? The structural deficit and unsustainable revenue source will affect our bond rating in the future. The well will dry out. This spending is out of control and the Wall Street to Yaal Street is real. They're leaving and it will fall on the middle class. The spending has to stop and for that reason I'll be voting in the negative. Thank you madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Otis.

[Assemblymember Steve Otis]: Thank you madam speaker and thank you all. You know I think

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On something the bill?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: On the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill sir.

[Assemblymember Steve Otis]: I think something that's been left out of the discussion is where the money is going. The money in this budget is going not to state government, but mostly back into the pockets of our communities and our institutions. Health care, hospitals and nursing homes needed help. They're getting some relief in this budget, especially Upstate hospitals very much at risk because of what's going on in Washington. We're doing the best we can to help. It may not be enough for some institutions. Money is going back into what we're doing with foundation aid and school aid, back to the taxpayers. We increased in this budget the minimum a school district could get in aid from 1% to 2% for those that are on save harmless, an increase that school districts asked for repeatedly, we did it. Increases in childcare, increases in school breakfast and lunch funding, Assistance to utility rate payers, not just with the rebate program, as has been mentioned somewhat disparagingly, it's a billion dollars, but also in changing, more importantly, the rules by which rate increases are approved by the Public Service Commission. Hopefully, we'll see better results on those applications. Increases in AIM and other kinds of transportation assistance to local governments back into the pockets that will help buffer property tax increases. $1,000,000,000 for our sustainable futures fund, will help us do some of the energy efficiency kinds of programs that we need to do. $1,000,000,000 is not enough, but it's what we looks like in this budget we can afford. We added 25,000,000. So total 525,000,000 for clean water programs, which has provided to local governments in this state these programs over $3,000,000,000 of assistance since those programs were created. And we have a new $175,000,000 for clean water related to housing. We will see how that program works out, but that is a potential money out the door that helps at the local level. And with it, it's just too easy to say too much spending without reflecting on the fact that very little of it, most of our state agencies are at zero increases for their budgets. It's out the door to help people help affordability in this state. So I vote I on this budget. As with any budget, we're not all happy with every element, and that comes with the territory. But we're doing real things to lower costs for the people that we serve. That's something we should all be proud of. I'll be voting I. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Smollin. Thank

[Assemblymember Robert Smullen]: you, madam speaker. On the bill? On the bill. So here we are with another budget and more new taxes for New York. The new state taxes this year benefit New York City to the tune of a half $1,000,000,000. Yet New York continues to have the number two overall tax burden in our nation. We have the most state and local taxes in the whole country at 12,500 per person in New York State. But meanwhile, the tax foundation ranks New York number 50, dead last in the whole United States. The budget itself is up 5.6%, but inflation last year was only 2.6%. What gives? Why are we spending more than we need to? This spending is at historical levels. It's up from a $170,000,000,000 in 2019 to almost $270,000,000,000 here in 2026. And this spending, as we can we spend more than any other big state in the country. California spends $349,000,000,000, but they have 40,000,000 people. It's outrageous. That's because Texas spends only a $169,000,000,000, and they have 31,000,000,000 people. And sunny Florida spends a $114,000,000,000 with 23,000,000 people. So is it any wonder that a million people have left Upstate New York in the last few years? Is it any wonder that people realize that New York is on the wrong track and they are voting with their feet. We need to stop this insanity. I vote no on this bill. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Chang.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Thank you, madam speaker. This budget has both positive

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: and negative.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: On the bill. Yes.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill. Sorry.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: On the bill. This budget has both positive and negative. And there is as the previous as mister Smullen says that we lost nearly a million people for the past five or six years and our budget has ballooned. So why are we increasing the budget while we're losing people and we're paying more per person than not. If we have find a way to just to find a fraud, waste, and abuse in the system, we don't even need to increase the taxes. We could even cut the taxes and bring back the business itself. This bill doesn't address that, especially for useless wasteful homeless program that doesn't help. Education, we lost in New York City not even a million kids enrolled. Not too long ago, it was over 1,000,000, but it's less than 1,000,000 now. And and and a cost per per students in New York City nearly 42,000 in education level were in the middle of the pack not in the top of the pack but in the middle. So this budget as as my previous colleague is is not a a a tax problem or revenue problem, but it's a spending. It's the priorities that we spend on this that is wasteful, that is not accounted to all those nongovernmental programs that need to be ordered, need to be need to account for. Are they successful or not? We're just pumping useless money. And I am debating on this bill. Should I vote yes or no? Because there's a lot of positive in this bill. There's some tax releases in there. There is expanding or decreasing on government regulations. So there are a lot of greatness and goodness on this bill. So that's all I have and that's my thought on this bill. Thank you madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you miss Moreno.

[Assemblymember Moreno (first name unknown)]: Madam speaker, on the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Moreno (first name unknown)]: As one of the newest members of this body, I was elected less than four months ago as a proud democratic socialist, ready to fight for my constituents at a pivotal moment for New York and our country. I've had countless conversations with my neighbors who are worried about not being able to afford the rent or childcare while watching Trump gut government agencies slash social programs and threaten the very fabric of our democracy to line his own pockets and the pockets of his billionaire oligarch friends.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Madam speaker, point

[Assemblymember Sarahana Shrestha]: of order, please.

[Assemblymember Moreno (first name unknown)]: For office precisely because I saw that our state

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: of government point of order.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Has Point of order. Miss Moreno, please stop talking for one moment, please. What is your point?

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: My point is that the comments of the speaker deviate from not only our decorum, but are also not related to the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Okay. Your point on decorum not sustained relative to speaking on the bill, it is sustained. We will speak on the bill in front of us today, please.

[Assemblymember Moreno (first name unknown)]: Sounds great.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Miss Moreno.

[Assemblymember Moreno (first name unknown)]: I ran for office precisely because I saw that our state government has a unique opportunity and a responsibility to protect New Yorkers from the class warfare and attacks on our democracy from the federal government. Unfortunately, I have been deeply frustrated and frankly shocked by the undemocratic process by which this budget has been negotiated. Witnessing a budget process that feels completely divorced from the lived reality of my constituents has been disappointing. We have watched our executive co op the language of affordability and our budget process to insert her own policy priorities of auto insurance industry giveaways and climate law rollbacks while ignoring the vast majority of New Yorkers who wanted to increase taxes on the ultra wealthy. But we know that a real affordability agenda means taxing the rich to fund the essential programs that working people need need to live. Our governor refused despite the fact that a majority of New Yorkers supported these measures. It was through our movement and the advocacy of thousands of everyday New Yorkers that we did win a pied de terre tax for New York City. This is an initial and important step towards taxing the ultra wealthy. But the reality is that we have failed to protect New Yorkers from the federal government's egregious budget cuts. In July, 450 New Yorkers will lose their health insurance. An additional 300,000 households will see cuts to SNAP food assistance, and tens of thousands more will lose the housing access vouchers they depend on to keep a roof over their head. New York State had a chance to reverse these devastating cuts by having the wealthiest corporations and individuals pay their fair share. While the legislature was ready to take action this session, governor Hochul refused. This was not a negotiation. This was a complete capitulation to billionaires and corporations by governor Hochul at a time they're already receiving 12,000,000,000 in tax breaks from the Trump administration. This budget does not address the urgent need of New York's working families, which is why I will be voting no. But I refuse to give up. We up. I know that many of my colleagues are ready to fight to raise the essential revenue that we will need to protect vulnerable communities, take on the billionaire class and deliver an affordable future. And I encourage working New Yorkers to join us. It will take all of us. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Tanussis.

[Assemblymember Michael Tannousis]: Thank you, madam speaker. On the bill?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Brian D. Miller]: You know,

[Assemblymember Michael Tannousis]: since I joined the assembly five years ago, the budget has increased dramatically, almost 40% more than when I started here in 2021. And this budget does nothing more than increase taxes and increase fees and does not do much of anything in incentivizing families to stay here and businesses to stay here. As we continue, we hear more and more, people are fleeing the state. They are going to safer, more affordable places to live. And as I sit here in this chamber and I hear some of my colleagues say that this budget didn't go far enough because it didn't tax enough and try to villainize people because they are successful. I am proud to represent a district of immigrants. My parents are immigrants. Came here for that American dream. We are the land of opportunity. We are not here to villainize success. What we needed this year were tax cuts to put more money in people's pockets, not tax increases that will continue to make living in New York State unmanageable. I won't know.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Moranello.

[Assemblymember Angelo Morinello]: Thank you, madam speaker. I've stated this, yesterday. I'm gonna state it again today.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Bill, sir?

[Assemblymember Angelo Morinello]: Yes. It's on the bill. I am sorry. As an attorney and a retired judge, we work on definitions. There's two terms that have been utilized, both in the budget debates and in the, on the bills. One is immigrant. Two is what is the fair share? I only ask that at some point those definitions be put in and be stated. We have different categories of immigrants and I'd like to know which ones they're referring to. Number two, I'd like to know what a fair share is. Thank you very much.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Norber.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Thank you, madam speaker. On the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: I know that we said this a few times today about and we're comparing New York to Florida, but I think we should reiterate it a little bit more. There are 3,000,000 people living in Florida today than there are in New York state. And it's not that we have a little bit of a difference in terms of the budget. Their budget is a $113,000,000,000. Ours is now $270,000,000,000. They don't have different type of people. They have the same type of working class, the same type of middle class, the same type of rich peep and same type of people that need to be taken care of. It's not a magic recipe that we have to look into. This is actually happening in our country. They are able to maintain a budget probably about 40% lower than ours and at the same time, probably cutting property taxes. So if we really cared about our working class I'm not talking about the rich right now. Even though they're paying what our top 1% is paying 40 percent of our tax revenue. But if we really cared about our working class, our middle class, our business owners, our small business owners, we could take that $160,000,000,000 discrepancy and give it back to them if we really wanted to, if we cared about the affordability. So I think we should really look at ourselves and not be willfully blind to the solutions that we have here in our country. So I'll be voting in a negative. Thank you very much.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you.

[Assemblymember Scott Bendett]: Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Miss Lunceford?

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. You know, while we wait

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: for bill.

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Oh, thank you. On the bill. While we wait for our friends in the senate, I just wanna rise to add some of my comments to what I've heard today. I've just got a little bugaboo about state comparisons since maybe I'm a little raw from this budget. But I think it's worth noting that New York actually has more people than it's ever had. We're growing slower than we used to, but our total population is still bigger by every measure. The total percentage loss of our population is a fraction of a percent. Just want to correct some of the record there. Also, you're comparing New York to other states, it's hard to compare New York where it snows to states that have concrete roads that are simply easier to maintain, to states that don't provide as much health care as we do, to states that have substantially fewer modes of public transportation, things like that. I just like to point out that New York is an expensive state because we have awesome stuff that people like. If you look at where our population growth has come from, it's come from natural growth, not migration, because people move here, stay here, and multiply. People wanna raise their kids here. People like to live here. My community has been is bigger than it's ever been. I'm voting for this budget. There's things I don't like. There's things that I do. But I know that we can support New Yorkers here by giving them everything that they need, and some of that is through revenue raising. With that, I vote in the affirmative, and thank you very much.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Miss Callis?

[Assemblymember Aileen M. Gunther or MaryJane Shimsky (uncertain)]: Thank you. On the bill?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Aileen M. Gunther or MaryJane Shimsky (uncertain)]: Thank you, madam speaker. This budget is about values. Who bears the burden and who we ask to contribute more in a moment of extraordinary crisis. Just because working class New Yorkers make less, does that mean they should pay more relatively? Because that is our current reality. At a time when working families across New York are struggling under the cost of housing, child care, groceries, health care, transportation and rising utility bills, we did not go far enough in asking the wealthiest New Yorkers and profitable corporations to pay their fair share. Meanwhile, we are told there is not enough money to fully protect health care coverage for hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers. Not enough money to stabilize hospitals, nursing homes, hospice providers, EMS systems and rural healthcare infrastructure already at risk of closure. Not enough money to truly fund universal childcare with living wages for childcare workers. Not enough money to adequately support public schools, our teachers, or fully address the inequalities of the tier six pension system. We have the largest number of billionaires of any state in the country, yet half of renter households are paying more than 30% of their income just to keep a roof over their heads. And we did not adequately fund the housing supports needed to keep people housed in the first place, including programs like HIVP that help low income New Yorkers facing eviction, homelessness, domestic violence, or unsafe housing conditions stay housed and avoid falling deeper into crisis. We also failed to meet the scale of the climate crisis at a moment when communities across New York are already experiencing flooding, extreme heat, infrastructure damage, rising utility costs, crop losses for farmers, and worsening public health impacts. But some somehow there is always enough money for tax breaks at the top. According to the Fiscal Policy Institute, New York millionaires received roughly 12,000,000,000 annually in federal tax savings from Trump's tax policies. And yet the modest proposals many of us carried to increase taxes on ultra wealthy individuals and highly profitable corporations would not even have clawed back the full windfall they already received. Across the state, hospitals are warning about service reductions. EMS systems are operating on the brink. Child care centers are losing workers. And working families are leaving New York because they simply cannot make the math work anymore. This is the affordability crisis and working people did not create it. The nurse working double shifts did not create it. The child care worker making poverty wages did not create it. The teacher buying supplies out of pocket did not create it. Yet they are the ones repeatedly asked to absorb the consequences while billionaires and multinational corporations continue accumulating extraordinary wealth, with many of these large corporations not paying any taxes at all. And when New Yorkers are asked, the majority of people across the political spectrum support higher taxes on the wealthy and profitable corporations to fund public services and affordability measures across the political spectrum. We must come back to fight for health care, child care, housing, schools, climate action, and public services. We must come back and insist that in one of the wealthiest states in the wealthiest nations, working people should not be the ones carrying the burden while the wealthiest continue receiving billions in tax breaks. This process is not about simply spending less while somehow getting more. That is not reality. It is about who and where the money is coming from and on whom and where it is being spent. This year we did not go far enough. While I support the good in this bill and vote yes, I will join the majority of New Yorkers moving forward who demand that we do better. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Sampolinski.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: Thank you, madam speaker. On the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: So I I'm glad that the assistant majority leader brought up state to state comparisons because that's where I wanted to go. And she said correctly that New York state is bigger than it has been. However, since 2020, the population of the state of New York has grown approximately 1,000,000 people. Since I'm sorry. Since the year 2000, the population of the state of New York has grown approximately 1,000,000 people. That's over twenty six years. Over that same period of time, the population of the state of Florida has grown approximately 7,500,000 people. The population of the state of Texas has grown approximately 11,000,000 people. So, while it's technically true, we are bigger than we used to be. We are growing at a dramatically reduced rate to our peer group states. Over that same period of time, the net migration over the last twenty six years out of the state of New York has been over 4,000,000 people from state to state. The net migration into the state of Florida has been over approximately four and a half million peep I'm sorry. Three and a half million people and the net migration into the state of Texas has been approximately 3,000,000 people. So, clearly, the weather isn't that much different now than it was in 2000. What we make the roads in different states hasn't changed that much over the last twenty six years. What has increased dramatically over that time is our spending, and we spend approximately with those two states spend together, and they are cleaning our clock. So the governor can talk all that she wants about affordability, and some of my colleagues can talk about austerity. When we spend that much more compared to peer group states and we tax that much more in this bill compared to peer group states, that's not an austerity budget. And you don't increase affordability in the state of New York by ripping funds out of everybody across the income spectrum and then saying somehow we're gonna give it back to you. Just leave it in people's pockets, cut spending, cut taxes, and we would do a lot better compared to other states.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Thank you

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: very much.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Miss Gonzalez Rojas.

[Assemblymember Jessica González-Rojas]: Thank you, madam speaker. On the bill?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Jessica González-Rojas]: Today, we're being asked to make choices about what kind of New York we wanna be and whose side we're on in this moment of deep economic uncertainty and growing inequality. First, I wanna commend the speaker and my colleagues in this chamber for as advancing an assembly one house budget resolution that recognized the urgency of this moment and included the proposals to tax the wealthiest New Yorkers so that we can make meaningful investments in our communities. That vision acknowledged what many New Yorkers already know. We cannot continuing balancing our priorities on the backs of working families while a stream wealth continues to grow unchecked. And while New York City tax included in this budget was a step in the right direction, it was only that, a first step. We must not stop until we truly tax the rich statewide and make transformative investments in housing, health care, education, and affordability. At a moment when the federal government, under the occupant in the White House, escalating attacks on our health care system, New York had an opportunity to lead. Instead, we did not go far enough. An estimated 400 and 400, nearly half a million people could lose health care coverage on July 1. And this budget does not do nearly enough to protect them. We should be expanding access to care, strengthening our safety net, and ensuring no New Yorker loses health care because of decisions made in Washington. Governor Hochul must take action to ensure these New Yorkers are not left behind. We have the means to do it by taxing the ultra wealthy and asking those who have benefited most from New York's economy to contribute their fair share. We can protect health care and invest in the people and communities that make this state strong. This budget was a step in the right direction to help address New York City's fiscal challenges, but it could have gone further to protect health care and fully invest in an affordability agenda that meets the scale of this moment. New Yorkers deserve bold action. They deserve a state willing to fight for affordability, for dignity, and as health care for as a human right. And we are going to keep fighting to tax the rich and win a truly affordable New York. And for these reasons, I respectfully vote no on this bill. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. On a motion by mister Pretlow, the senate bill is before the house. The senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: This action will take effect immediately.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Party votes been requested. Mister Gandolfo.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: Thank you, madam speaker. The Republican conference will generally be opposed to this budget bill. However, any member who wishes to do vote in the affirmative may do so at their desk.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, miss Lunsford.

[Assemblymember Monique Chandler-Waterman]: Thank you.

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The majority conference will generally be in the affirmative. If anybody would like to vote no, they may do so at their desks. Desks.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. The clerk will record the vote. Mister Pierzola to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Sam Pirozzolo]: Thank you, madam speaker. So as I said before and and the members are mentioning, we're talking about $260,000,000,000. That's a $100,000,000,000 more than ten years ago. The governor likes to say we're open for business, and I have to agree. We're open in the business of keeping your children undereducated. We're in the business of keeping people homeless. We're in the business of keeping people unaccountable for their crimes and their actions. We're in everything that's a bad business, madam speaker. I'm not trying to say that there's nothing good out of this budget because there has to be. Everything can't be all bad. But to pretend that this is all good and we have the socialist members here standing up and they're very gleeful at how we're going after people's money and their fair share and you know, no one has any idea. It's all happy and and fun. We're gonna get the rest of your money too in the future. People really need to wake up in New York State and they have to understand that, you know, as I said before, you can't blame president Trump for everything. And if you want change, you're the only thing that can make a change as you have to change the way you vote. Thank you. I'm voting no.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Perrozzolo in the negative, mister Levine to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Charles D. Lavine]: If we've seen anything today, we've seen that politics can make strange allies. The rugged individualists who have prospered by pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps are voting no. At the same time, the utopian socialists are voting no. I simply represent communities that are middle class and struggling at a time when consumer confidence in our nation is at an all time low. I am proud that New York, with all its described faults, is a place that I love. I wanna live nowhere else and that we remain the land of upward mobility. So I want to simply say that we have provided as best we can for education and health care, and that's important to my communities. And I am happy to remain at the pragmatic center at a time when the pragmatic center realizes all too well that our nation faces daunting and unparalleled and unprecedented challenges. The center must hold. I'm pleased to vote in the affirmative.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Levine in the affirmative, and before anybody else clicks and puts their light on, when you speak on the bill and or explain your vote, you should be speaking for yourself, not referencing other members, not referencing what other members are voting, what they're doing. This is your explanation of the vote. This is your speaking on the bill. We're not talking about national politics and we are not speaking about how each other are voting. We will be shutting that down. So, speak on your own behalf, please. Miss Tapia to explain her vote.

[Speaker 43]: Thank you, madam speaker. I support this budget bill because it advances some strong progressive priorities at a time when New Yorkers are still struggling with affordability, housing costs, child care costs, and economic uncertainty. This bill continues our effort to expand the child and dependent care credit, provides a one time power credit to help households with utility costs, supports food insecurity, farm to farm pantry, and student's meal provisions, and expand protections for seniors and people with disability to screen and drive. I also want to highlight the amazing achievement we have made together by pushing for a second home surcharge for high value non primary residents in New York City at a time when ordinary renters and homeowners are being squeezed, it is fair to ask the owners of luxury second homes worth more than $5,000,000 to contribute more. That is common sense and it belongs in this budget. The governor has said this could raise at least 500,000,000 annually through the controller has raised questions about whether the final number might be lower, which is exactly why implementation and transparency will matter. There are more revenue raisers we must continue to explore. Thankfully, we are continuing to preserve revenue by extending the higher corporate tax rate on larger corporations with more than 5,000,000 in income because there is not reason why we should be giving large corporations a quiet tax cut.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, miss Tapia. How do you vote?

[Speaker 43]: Are struggling.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: How do you vote?

[Speaker 43]: I vote in the affirmative.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Miss Tapia and the affirmative. Mister Chang, to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Thank you, madam speaker. As each bills present to each of our colleagues, never is perfect. No bills are perfect that satisfy us all. Even for me, I look at the balance, what's good and what's bad, and I always think about what's my constituents was best benefit for this bill. And there are many in this bill and there are many are not. The one I wanna highlight is why this bill is good is for the Medicaid to pay for our medical health professions, make sure that our hospitals and doctors' offices stay afloat. That's very important. And a few other tax deductions and child care credits involved. So I looked at it as a positive. So overall, I look at this bill. I will support this bill as a positive. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Chang. In the affirmative, mister McDonald to explain his vote.

[Speaker 44]: Thank you madam speaker, sorry about that. I just want to say that I am supporting this legislation. There are a lot of great attributes to this and yes, always there's some things we may not care for. A lot of them actually don't apply to the areas I represent, but what I want to speak about specifically is our support for Upstate cities, both small and large. They are struggling. They're struggling for a variety of different reasons. Although they're forewarned about the ARPA funding going away, sometimes it's difficult to slide away from some of those programs because they are not only well intentioned but they are effective. Same token, what we are doing is recognizing that these legacy cities is what built this state and we need to continue to provide them the support. They're under a lot of pressure because the market for employees has gotten much more challenging which is causing upward pressure. Healthcare premiums at the local government level continue to rise. So I know it's you know cliche to say this but we need to continue to work on helping to support our Upstate cities. We need to find out what we can do to continue to make them sustainable. I want to thank the speaker for his leadership in making sure that we're delivering for these cities particularly in Upstate New York. And by the way, that funds helps minimize future tax increases. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, Mr. McDonald, the affirmative. Ms. Glick to explain her vote.

[Assemblymember Deborah J. Glick]: Thank you, Ms. Speaker, to explain my vote. As we've discussed how New York continues to fund essential services like schools, higher education, nursing homes, hospitals and to provide some relief to utility rate payers, it's not really out of line to talk about how the cuts from the federal government have added pressure to our state. And that our state, to some extent, has been targeted as some others have on a political partisan basis. While we see those people who have been aligned with the federal administration doing quite well. Now I don't don't seek to villainize successful people. I think that's great. But facts demonstrate that extremely wealthy people have continued to benefit from extraordinary tax cuts that forced middle class Americans and New Yorkers to shoulder the burden. So I actually think, almost in a religious way, that greed should be villainized. Now, a famous New Yorker said, the test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. And the former governor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, had it right and was a president who sought to balance the needs of people who were hardworking people, middle class people, and was called a traitor to his class because of it. So I I I will be voting for this even though I think we need to do more and I vote in the affirmative.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you Ms. Glick in the affirmative. Ms. Levenberg to explain her vote.

[Assemblymember Dana Levenberg]: Thank you, Madam Speaker, to explain my vote. We finally voted on the state's revenue bill today, almost two full months after the deadline and once again there was some good, though it does not go far enough in my opinion. We did get the utility rebates included which will return a bit of the money we have all been spending on energy. We've extended and continued some necessary tax credits including the phasing in of increases to our child tax credit. We also made some changes that will make it easier for residents to apply for and receive enhanced star rebates, which I know is very important to my constituents. But we could have and should have done much more to raise taxes on the ultra wealthy New Yorkers who are, as we have heard multiple times, collectively receiving a $12,000,000,000 windfall from the federal government. That windfall is being paid for by snap cuts, healthcare cuts and other new holes in our social safety net. New Yorkers deserve better than this. We could have gone so much further to make this state more affordable, child care, health care, and so much more. It's unfortunate because both assembly and senate majorities agreed on sensible increases to the personal income tax for people earning over 5,000,000 annually and the corporate tax rate for highly profitable companies doing business in New York, regardless of where they are headquartered. I'm voting yes because there is good in this bill that must go forward. I'm going to keep fighting alongside my colleagues to ensure that the wealthy finally pay their fair share and we win a more affordable New York. Thank you. I vote yes.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Miss Levenberg in the affirmative, mister Eckes to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Chris Eachus]: Thank you, madam chair. To explain my vote, if for no other reason, I would have voted yes on this because of part e e. In Part EE, what we've done is we've corrected a, law that we had passed last year which actually didn't allow any veterans to really qualify. And, today, I wanna thank the speaker. I wanna thank chairman Stern and the veterans committee for taking this into serious consideration. Part e e, it states that a county, a city, a town, a village, or a school district may adopt a local law in a res or resolution that will allow the primary residence of any seriously disabled veteran to be fully exempt from taxation and special district charges, assessments, special ad valorem levies. The the qualification for this is that veteran be a 100% disabled. And let me tell you, if a veteran is a 100% disabled, we should be doing everything in our power to give back to that veteran and to their family. And so, again, I wanna thank them very much, and I wanna indicate that I am definitely voting in the affirmative.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Ikis in the affirmative. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: It's 93. Nay is 49.

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

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you very much Madam Speaker. So we have a very special guest joining us today who some may remember. To my left is Tom McKevitt who is currently the Nassau County Deputy Presiding Officer, Legislator for the 13th District. But we all remember Tom from his time serving in the Assembly from 2006 to 2017. He was in my chair as floor leader. And mister Mickalyn, who's not here today, is the person who is attempting to fill mister McKevet's shoes. But Tom was absolutely just one of the most brilliant floor leaders, was always really on top of his game, very meticulous, very energetic, and very happy to serve, and he was very much missed when he when he left us. I'm so glad to have him back today. So, Madam Speaker, would you please extend to him a warm welcome and a welcome back to the people's house. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Yes, of course. On behalf of Ms. Walsh, the speaker and all members, welcome back Mr. McKevin. It's wonderful to see you. Once a member, always a member. We know that extending to you the privileges of the floor. And it is very, very good to see you. That smile you have is what I remembered when I first started and you were floor leader. So it's wonderful to have you back. Congratulations on all the good works that you've been doing in the community. Don't be a stranger. It doesn't seem like you come back very often. So it's very wonderful to see you here today. Thank you for joining us today. Miss Lunsford?

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. We're going to continue our floor work with rules report number two fourteen on page three followed by rules report two fifteen also on page three.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Page three rules report two fourteen. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number one zero zero three d rules report two fourteen budget bill, an act making appropriations for the support of government aid to localities budget.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Governor's message is at the desk. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: I hereby certify to an immediate vote Kathy Hochul, governor.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: An explanation has been requested. Mister Pretlow.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, madam speaker. I have a longer explanation for us today. After many weeks of hard work and nearly as many extenders, today we are concluding the process of adopting a budget for the state fiscal year twenty six-twenty seven. The input of our members has guided the discussions that have led to this legislation. I would like to extend my gratitude to the many individuals who have helped us get to this point. On behalf of the speaker and myself, I thank you for your consideration and contributions throughout the process. The enacted budget is expected to authorize approximately $268,100,000,000 in spending, which is 5,400,000,000 over the executive's proposal. This legislation includes a package of revenue proposals that will generate a total of $1,600,000,000 in state fiscal year twenty six-twenty seven and $1,900,000,000 in twenty seven-twenty eight. The package also includes $1,000,000,000 for utility rebate checks. It is an important step forward to provide the people that we all represent some relief in an otherwise turbulent economic climate. Some of the major tax provisions contained in the overall budget framework include elimination of income taxes on tipped wages, authorizing the City of New York to impose a surcharge on property that does not serve as a primary residence, providing a property tax exemption for certain disabled veterans and enhancing tax credits for donated food to plantaries and farmers. Through these proposals, the legislature demonstrates our continued commitment to assisting working families. This budget provides $39,000,000,000 in general support for public schools, an increase of $1,700,000,000 over the prior fiscal year. It includes changes to improve the foundation aid formula, updating metrics as well as guaranteeing a minimum 2% annual increase for all school districts. The budget also includes $1,600,000,000 to implement universal pre k statewide and by the twenty eight-twenty nine school fiscal year. The budget expands free tuition at SUNY and CUNY schools for individuals pursuing associate degrees in high demand fields to include those studying at four year institutions and increases opportunities for those seeking a nursing degree. Additionally, operating and capital investments are also included for public colleges and universities. In healthcare, the budget invests $2,200,000,000 in support from the Healthcare Stability Fund, including increased rates for hospital and nursing homes and increased funds for federally qualified health clinics. The budget provides $1,300,000,000 in multi year support for the SafetyNet Hospitals Transformation Program and added $500,000,000 for distressed and safety net hospitals. This budget continues funding of the $34,500,000,000 for the DOT five year capital plan as well as increases of $50,000,000 for local roads and $30,000,000 for upstate transit. In addition, the budget allocates a new $1,000,000,000 in funding for climate mitigation capital projects including investments to school districts, residential buildings and municipalities in transforming to clean energy. The enacted budget will include $25,000,000 of increases to the Environmental Protection Fund over the prior year and an additional $25,000,000 for a total of $525,000,000 for clean water infrastructure. In order to keep up with increasing enrollment in the state's child care program, This budget includes $3,000,000,000 for child care subsidies, an increase of $830,000,000 over fiscal year twenty five-twenty six. The enacted budget makes meaningful changes for public employees who are tier six members, investing $146,300,000 to support state costs associated with improving pension benefits. And finally, we are recognizing the importance of ensuring wages for human service workers continuing to rise, including $279,500,000 to provide a 2.7% inflationary salary increase. With that, Madam Speaker, I will conclude my remarks and I'm happy to answer any questions.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Palmisano.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yes, madam speaker. Will the chairman yield?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Well, mister Patlow, will you yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I will yield for any questions, but I believe my my remarks would answer every question that he could possibly have.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: You were certainly very thorough mister Prabhu. I will give you that but I do have

[Assemblymember Keith P. Brown]: a few extra questions here for you.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Actually, one quick question for you. Where where where we where where is your assessment? Where we are in this game now? What inning? We're getting there. Know we're getting there.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We're in fifth inning.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Fifth inning. Okay. Just curious. Four innings to go. The medals coming together?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Medals coming together. Batteries are charged up. We are in good shape.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Good. I shouldn't

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: have mentioned batteries. I'm sorry. I

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: don't want to

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: get you one.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: You don't want get me going.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Good point.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Actually, what I would like to get going on here is I know we finally have the financial plan.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: So, I would like to talk by going over some of those

[Assembly Sergeant-at-Arms Wayne Jackson (speaking through member references)]: numbers if we could.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. First, how much does the enacted budget spend on an all funds basis?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: All funds is $268,100,000,000 which is 5,500,000,000 or 2% over the executive's proposal. And that 9,200,000,000 over last year, which is 3.5 percent.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. How about for state operating funds?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: State operating funds, the estimate is $161,500,000,000 which is an increase of 2,600,000,000 or 1.7% over the executive's estimate and $12,700,000,000 or 8.6 percent over state fiscal year twenty five-twenty six.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Is it possible for

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: you to

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: give us a breakdown of how this additional spending will be allocated?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I guess I can. $2,400,000,000 in Medicaid and Health, 1,000,000,000 in Social Services, $543,000,000 for Local Government Assistance, $469,000,000 in Education, dollars 300,000,000 for capital projects, $2.00 5,000,000 in general public protection, 184,000,000 for higher education, 127,000,000 in general state charges, dollars 52,000,000 for housing, 47,000,000 for economic development, dollars 13,000,000 for the environment, 10,000,000 for transportation, and $10,000,000 for mental hygiene.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Alright. Thank you mister Prelov. How about our out year budget gaps for twenty twenty six twenty seven?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: For '26 We have a balanced budget for 2627.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: It's balanced. Say that? No. Alright. And then twenty seven, twenty eight, twenty eight, twenty nine, twenty nine, thirty.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Give me a second. Cumulative is $30,000,000,000 2.4% above the executive.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. I'd like to talk about reserve funds now. Our conference has always advocated for making deposits into our reserves funds for the purpose of helping the state in true economic downturn. Does this budget include any increase in our reserves? No, it doesn't. How much is

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: The current rainy day reserve is $8,138,000,000.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Alright. How about the economic uncertainties total? 4,200,000,000. And the tax stabilization total?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: 1,618,000,000.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay. Thank

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: you. The governor has consistently highlighted her success in bolstering the state's reserves to unprecedented levels, providing a strong safeguard against unforeseen economic downturns or so called rainy days. With significantly lower reserves than previous years, is the state maintaining the 15% reserve level? Yes. How will the state respond to a potential economic downturn if the reserve levels drop below 15%? Don't expect that

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: to happen but we will handle it as the need arises.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Are reserve funds being used to help with additional spending needs in this budget?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: For the current fiscal year, yes.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Anything from that you can break down specifically? How that's being used?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think we used like $2,500,000,000 for We are moving $2,500,000,000 into our fund balance for this year.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Has there been any discussions about making the economic uncertainties fund a statutory reserve fund that has a specific use and payback provisions instead of a cash fund that can be used for any purpose?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That's not being contemplated.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: All right.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I want to talk about debt now if I could. When passing the debt service bill, the numbers are still in flux. Do we have an updated debt outstanding number for fiscal year twenty seven?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: You said for fiscal year twenty six, twenty seven? Yes, please. 71,800,000,000. And There's a state supported.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: How's that compared to the governor's number and compared to last year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Last year, it was $61,600,000,000 We are projecting for fiscal year twenty seven, dollars 71,800,000,000 going up in fiscal year twenty eight to $80,800,000,000 and fiscal year twenty nine, 89,500,000,000.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: The liquidating financing measure was put into law to address cash flow needs during COVID-nineteen. Why do we continue to extend this authorization when the state's receipts are coming in higher than forecasted and we continue to increase spending each year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay. We're still handling some of the state obligations that have been around since COVID.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Now the state will come close to breaching the statutory debt cap in fiscal year thirty one with only about $832,000,000 left under the cap. Are there any measures within this budget that would reduce the state's overall debt burden?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe just prepayments.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: For this bill, how much does this bill before we get into more detail, how much does this bill appropriate?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: The total appropriation for the aid to localities. Okay. $242,300,000,000.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. And is there a fiscal impact or actual amount to be spent?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: The old funds is 208,200,000,000.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: For programs funded within this bill, particularly discretionary or newly established ones, are they subject to performance audits by the state controller to measure actual outcomes, or do they solely undergo basic internal agency financial compliance reviews? The latter. I didn't hear what you said. Thought you were waiting. No, the latter. Didn't hear what you said. How?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: What? The latter.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay, got you. Sorry, thank you. So, to ensure the taxpayer dollars are achieving their intended outcomes, can you commit to sharing all the internal evaluation reports, statutory compliance data?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I don't have access to all of that.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay, that's fine.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Just wanted to ask. I would definitely like to talk about education for a moment if I may. Based on the enacted budget data, 64 districts across the state will see a decrease in their UPK aid because of changes we are making to the UPK program. Can you explain in simple terms why these districts are seeing a cut?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I don't believe that is accurate, sir.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: When the executive budget was released The way

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: it's reported is being changed. The data hasn't changed. They're not getting any less money.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Because I guess from looking at our numbers, we're worried about how the districts are supposed to move towards mandated universal pre k in two years if their UPK allocation is not

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: up to where it should be. Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: When the executive budget was released, we were told that the UPK changes would generate an additional $130,000,000 in claims for reimbursement through the UPK that was not reflected on the school aid runs. Has that estimated change has that estimate changed as we received feedback from district during budget cycle about their ability to scale up their programs? That hasn't changed.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: No? Okay. I just want to

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: ask about prior year claims. We know that's always an issue at a time when districts are struggling to find new revenue and tax payers are already paying some of the highest property taxes in the nation, what's the justification for not providing even modest appropriations to take care of some of these backlogs?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, I don't think we have the funds for that.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We had it in our one house. It wasn't it didn't make the final cut.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Alright. I wanna talk about the energy affordability guarantee real quick. In here, know it says it's a for those individuals who electrify their homes through the NYSERDA Empower program, they do not spend more than 6% of their income on electric bills. How is this quantified? How is this determined to make sure that they know there's only 6% of their income, and if they don't, if they meet that 6%, exceed that 6% threshold, what happens?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay. It's being used it's being calculated based on income tiers similar to how tiers on your income tax forms are.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Also, I know that the budget provides $33,000,000 in new funding to provide participating utility customers including their service territory and the Long Island Power Authority a $25 per month credit on the utility bills utilizing eligibility criteria to be established by the department of public service. Can you provide any details concerning eligibility thresholds for this funding?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Is this I based don't on have that available to me. No?

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay. I'm gonna I'd like

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: to pivot to some funding relative to migrants and also new Americans. Can obviously, we know the migrant crisis that we had going on in the city, and the funding concerns. Can you provide an update on how much the state has spent overall the last few years on the migrant crisis in New York City?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: How much the state has spent? Approximately 2,000,000,000.

[Assemblymember Jenifer Rajkumar]: Reimburse New York City.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: How much will

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: the state Oh, we reimburse New York City.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Right.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: For about $3,000,000,000 So, $4,000,000,000

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: how much will the state spend this fiscal year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: There's nothing in the current appropriations.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. So, just the $2,000,000,000 we've given them?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: From last year.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Now,

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: has the new Mayoral Administration been seeking reimbursements to help with the migrant costs?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, monies that we were referring to earlier was by law in New York City was responsible for providing housing and that money was used to pay for housing for them.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I have one question I want to ask you on raise the age. Does this budget remove any barriers preventing counties outside New York City from receiving raise the funds?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We didn't change anything here.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Does it address county's concerns that without upfront funding they may struggle to implement raise the age and cannot wait to be reimbursed by the state for such spending?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No, the reimbursement methodology has not been changed.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I know but the problem still exists. Are there any changes allowing counties to access raise the age related program funding before they spend their own county funds? No. No. I'd like to go to local government assistance a little bit here. I know there's a how much is in here for we have AIM funding and then we also have the temporary municipal assistance funding. Yes. How much is in a temporary municipal assistance funding?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I 150

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: know we had the question about taxes. Is it always temporary taxes? Will this mean this is going be temporary permanent assistance or no?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Hopefully. Hopefully? Hopefully.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Alright. There any way that given is the majority confident that we're going to be given enough to help those many municipalities to stop so they don't have to increase local taxes to shore up their budgets with the assistance we're giving them? That is the aim. Okay.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No pun intended. No pun.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Relative to New York City aid, I know they're we know they're getting a lot of assistance from the state throughout this budget. But in this bill we have a clear picture of cash assistance to the city, the 500,000,000 to help close the budget gap, a refund of $150,000,000 in intercepted sales tax revenue, 45,000,000 to offset certain public health costs that have shifted to the city, and we know that the state and city have no problems generating revenue but the forecast consistently underestimate actual results and I know that this language here requires attestation from the city that the aid will be used to help close the budget gap and avoid further burdening city taxpayers. Shouldn't this assistance this extra assistance this ballot however you want to refer to it come with more contingencies to ensure the recipient of the funds take the steps to mitigate the need for future assistance?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay, there's oversight involved. Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: And do we foresee that we're gonna need to continue this level of assistance for the city in the future?

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Hopefully not. I

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: know also notice that this this budget also has other cities around the state are getting some extra assistance, ballot assistance for their budgets including Albany, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Mount Vernon, and Yonkers. This aid all comes with the same language imposed on New York that would require an attestation that the aid has helped close the budget gaps. Any idea why so many cities around the state are struggling to maintain their budgets?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: The general cost of living, fringe benefits on municipal payrolls, are a lot of things that cause cities to the inability to collect proper property taxes, the need to reval property housing. There are many issues that are causing several of the cities in our state to be on the brink of fiscal disaster.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: And certainly they are dealing with rising utility costs like families, businesses as well. And certainly they are going to be dealing with rising pension costs because of some of the enhancements that were passed too, right? So they are going have to deal with that. Given that, and I know I asked with New York City, you don't see this as a recurring issue. Are going have to continue to provide extra assistance to these other municipalities, are you?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Don't foresee anything but it wouldn't surprise me.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Know many local

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: This is short term.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. I know many local governments across the state are managing these inflationary pressures, stagnant AIM funding, obviously we got the temporary assistance, growing service demands. Isn't there a more holistic approach we can take to relieve these burdens such as working to make the state more competitive to attract business to bring businesses to these communities so we can increase our tax base? Wouldn't that be a good approach to help deal with these fiscal crisis? It may be. I'm sorry, what did you say? It may be. Maybe?

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: All right.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I have a question I want to ask. There's a program grants to counties on emergency response equipment in vehicles. It was $50,000,000 that provided for grants to counties for emergency service equipment. Does this program differ or how does this program differ from the volunteer fire infrastructure and equipment grant program?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay. I think you're referring to what's only to volunteer fire departments And this new funding can be allocated for any municipal municipally used vehicles. Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I know there's a question I want to ask you on agriculture for tariff relief. I know the enacted budget includes $30,000,000 in local assistance funding for relief from federal tariffs on agricultural products, how do we envision this $30,000,000 tariff relief getting into the hands of our farmers who need it and what safeguards are going to be in place to prevent fraud, waste and abuse?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think that will be administered through Ag and Markets.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Let Ag and Markets handle the administration.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm pretty sure that any farmer that's entitled to it will know how to get it.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I have one housing question, the housing access voucher program. The budget provides another $50,000,000 for the housing access voucher pilot program. How has the roll out of this program gone since March 1?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, as just stated, there is 50,000,000 in there now and nothing new has been allocated.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Has there been any issues administering the vouchers?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think we are expecting a report this coming November to see how the program is working and if it needs to be tweeted.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Do voucher recipients need to be state residents at the time of their application? No. How long does it take for recipients to receive their voucher after applying? That

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: will be determined in the report.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I want to go back that I didn't get to before a little bit on the preamble language at the beginning. The preamble language within this bill once again authorizes the division of director of budget to withhold payments in the event of a structural imbalance.

[Assemblymember Jenifer Rajkumar]: What

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: payments are exempt from this withholding authority? It's the same.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No, they'd be the same as last year.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Same as last year. And what happens if there is a structural imbalance of less than $2,000,000,000?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: If it is less than $2,000,000,000 I think we will just continue on the path. If it is more, then we have to take corrective actions.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Know past budget bills used a different mechanism to identify a structural imbalance during a given measurement period. Why wasn't that measurement used here?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: This is the same as last year.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: All right.

[Speaker 48]: Me just check here.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: You know, mister Prevost, thank you very much for your time. I appreciate it. I'm gonna go on the bill now, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Madam speaker, my colleagues, certainly, when we're spending more than a quarter of $1,000,000,000,000, there's going to be good things in here. I'm glad we finally got a chance to talk about the financial plan and walk through that. I appreciate the chairman's time. You know, some things in this budget that are this bill are good as obviously education increase, aid increase, We wanted the governor proposed 1%. We wanted to at least get that back to that 2% base and we were able to do that. Obviously to see an increase in library funding is a good thing. To see this the temporary assistance, municipal assistance for local municipalities. Hopefully the word assistant temporary in this case means it becomes permanent like it seems like the tax increases, temporary tax increases have been. I was very glad I didn't get a chance to ask a question but I was very glad to see the appropriation for donate life. That's a very important issue for myself, a lot of people in this house. But my concerns are much more broader. Again, when you're talking about a quarter of $1,000,000,000,000 budget, think about it. That's 60,000,000,000 more than when the governor took office. That's nearly 100,000,000,000 more than when one party control took over Albany chambers in the governorship. Again, will remind you, we do not have a revenue problem in this state. We have a spending problem. But what do we do? We continue to increase spending. We continue to increase debt. We continue to grow and increase our our year budget gaps. We continue to have more taxes, more extensions of temporary taxes, not adopting tax relief that would help encourage private sector investment and job creation. We should be looking to reduce taxes, regulations, spending. Let's really get it to the heart of these rising energy costs. You know, property taxes are burdensome. We need to be fiscally responsible. That's what the people want us to do. That's what the people need us to do. We need to encourage private sector investment in job growth and job creation. This will help turn our economy around here. This will help businesses come here. This will help businesses stay here. This will help families stay here. We're continuing our nation leading out migration of more families, farmers, small businesses, manufacturers leaving the state. This fiscal path we are on, this spending path we are on, is not sustainable. It's certainly not feasible. It's certainly not wise or smart. We have to do better. We must do better for those individuals, families, seniors, veterans, disabled, businesses that we serve. Listen, our families and businesses are making difficult decisions each and every day. They don't spend their way out of a problem. They make tough choices. They cut their budgets. They pay down their debt. We don't do that. We just keep spending. We just keep taxing. We keep just putting more burdensome and costly regulations on families and on businesses. We just keep increasing our debt. Why? I think the answer is, I think sometimes, and I've said this on this chamber, I think to my friends on the other side, yeah, I think sometimes you think this is your money and forget it's the people's money. It's sad and it's wrong. For these reasons and many other reasons, I'm going be voting in the negative on this bill, although I'm happy with some of the things that are in here, but the bigger structural problem of where we're heading with this overall budget, a budget of more than, again, a quarter of $1,000,000,000,000. I mean, that's a very large budget. So for that reason and not having more controls on spending and not making the proper decisions, I'm gonna be voting in a negative, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Thank you very much.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Denson?

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Thank you, madam speaker. Would the chairman yield for some questions?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Will the chair yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, I will.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Chair yield.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Thank you, mister chairman. Before I get into health questions, I do have one education question. I'll give time for the line change. Correct me if I'm incorrect. Is there a $100,000,000 being allocated in this budget appropriation for three year old UPK in New York City?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I don't believe there's a line item for that.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: There's no line item for a $100,000,000 appropriation to fund the three year old UPK in the City Of New York?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, there is funding available if they increase the number of seats they're already providing.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. So, if that's there are more seats that are increased in New York City, there is a subsequent appropriation based on the formulaic change to help New York City schools afford

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No, that's all part of the foundation aid.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Foundation aid.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It's not a separate line item today.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay, fair enough. So, we're doing that for New York City. But, there are 73 school districts across the state that also offer three year old UPK. Do those school districts have the equivalent increase to their foundation aid to help cover the costs for any new enrollments they face?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No. Why? Well, believe they're getting the flat $10,000 per student for all of their young people.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So, they're getting 10,000. How much would it be?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: For four year olds, yeah.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Well, but then 73 offered for three year olds. So, New York City gets it but the rest of New York State doesn't?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. Nice for New York City, not nice for the rest of us upstate. As we noted now shifting to health. As we noted throughout the budget process and earlier today, I know that a lot of the specific details surrounding the Medicaid funding aren't directly in Article seven language or appropriation language. Before we took up this bill, was there a financial plan published or an available public Medicaid scorecard?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I don't believe it's been public.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Not public?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No, not yet.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: On double secret probation? In the executive budget proposals Medicaid scorecard, it was included approximately $1,900,000,000 in financial plan resources for the Medicaid global cap due to anticipated changes with the essential plan. However, since the executive budget we have had, the waiver we talked about earlier approved, making that portion of the financial plan unnecessary. Do we know what is the total amount of the financial plan resources being used in this budget to offset Medicaid global cap?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe it's zero. Zero?

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Terrific. And without the Medicaid scorecard being publicly available yet Well, believe it's been given to you already.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, yeah. It's public, but you have it.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Well, but for seven people watching. Special, Mr. Jensen.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: You You're have a

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: very sweet boy, Mr. Fratlow. Could you walk us through some of specific funding that we would see based in Medicaid for a couple different items? First of all, the reallocation for nursing home without that funding.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: You're referring to $20,000,000 Yes. Okay. That was used to pay for capital rehabilitation?

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. So, was we reallocated that to the tune of 20,000,000?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. For the health home qualifying conditions reform.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Pardon? Say it again please, I'm sorry.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: I'm speaking not directly into my microphone. Health home qualifying conditions reform.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We restored that. To 5,000,000?

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: I believe so.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. How about aligning personal care fee for service administrative reimbursement at 15%?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We're experiencing a $7,500,000 of savings there.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: $7,500,000 okay, thank you. In the health and mental hygiene budget, there was an amending of the governor's proposed changes to biomarker coverage, which was a proposed saving of $50,000,000 Is there a new fiscal attached with the proposal due to the amendment?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No. There not? No.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. Moving to the MCO tax, HMH legislation we took up earlier lined out approximately $1,300,000,000 in health stability fund investments. And I know we talked about it a little bit earlier, but for those seven people watching, just want to get into it again. Is this the full amount of revenue that we received that was received under the previous MCO tax extension? No. No? What's the difference?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It's about a billion dollars of additional spending.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: A billion in additional. Okay. Also in HMH that we took up earlier, we authorized a new MCO and HICRA tax framework. Could you provide the amount the state projects to receive under this new tax for fiscal years '27 and '28?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It's about $165,000,000,000

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: In which fiscal year? '27.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: '27. What would it be for '28? 2728. Yeah. Combined or both years?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It's a whole fiscal year. It's it's one year.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Yes. But then we have one fiscal year and then another fiscal year.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: What you'd ask for 2627.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: No. I asked for '27 and then '28.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: 2728 fiscal year is $165,000,000 Nothing in 2627.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. Is there any overlap between the previous MCO tax arrangement and the one we approved a few hours ago?

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: No.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: No? Okay. Moving to the essential plan, we're no longer receiving the funding for ALESA population enrollees under the essential plan. Could you provide a projection of federal revenue compared to the expenses for the essential plan moving forward?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Are you referring to tax credits that we would have received?

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: The revenue versus the expenses.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I don't have that information, sorry.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Would that be something that we would see on the financial plan or the Medicaid scorecard once it is public?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: More than likely the financial plan when it's public.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. And I know we brought this up that earlier today that I believe it was mentioned that there's $9,000,000,000 in the essential plan trust fund.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: How much do we anticipate after this fiscal year will remain in the trust fund?

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: About

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: 6,000,000,000. So 3 we're we're

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We're drawing down around $33,000,000,000 a year.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. And, we we anticipate to be consistent over the next few out years, the $3,000,000,000

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. And, I know earlier today we talked about that there is a concern that the plan could become insolvent as soon as 2032 and we're going to be looking in future to address that. But do we have any idea that in the event that the plan does become insolvent, do we know what sort of resources from the general fund would be required to continue providing coverage for the essential plan?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, 2032 is a long ways away. We really haven't looked at it that closely at this point, but I'm pretty sure that arrangements will be made to ensure that this insolvency does not come to fruition.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: So, we will cross that bridge as we approach it?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We're approaching it now. We're not going to wait until we get there. But, we do know that there is a situation in the future we have to address.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. I know earlier my colleague from Yorktown brought up the medical indemnity fund. This budget bill includes $155,500,000 in funding for the fund which is a little over $55,000,000 less than last year. Will this funding be adequate to ensure services for those currently receiving MIF services?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe so, yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: As well as prospective enrollees?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Okay. And I know that the HMH budget bill extended the current rates and excluded the governor's proposed benchmarking of rates to Medicaid and Medicare. Is there a possibility that funding issues for the myth reoccur and that there could be a need for new proposal to keep the myth solvent this year or in future years?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Not this year, maybe in future years.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: In future years, could become another bridge we have to cross. Good. Okay. I know that our record on Ways and Means was very passionate along with a lot of members on on both sides of this house for Donate Life. How much was included in this appropriation for Donate Life?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe it about $1,000,000

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: A million dollars. How does that compare to last year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Same.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: Same? How much is included for spina bifida?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think it was about 75,000.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: 75,000, okay. Is there any funding for the Alliance for Safe Kids? No. Is there any appropriation to fix the long term inequity of early intervention services across the state and clear backlogs?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: There is no additional.

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: No additional?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: And No,

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: I know that in the Health Civility Fund, we talked about earlier that there was some hospice funding. Is there any money directly appropriated to hospice care in this budget appropriation? No. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your answers. Madam Speaker, thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Molotore?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will the sponsor yield?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Pollo, will you yield? Yes. Sponsor yelps.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Thank you, mister Pretlow. So I wanted to ask you on this bill. This is one of our appropriation bills. Where in this bill is there funding for the new convertible pistol ban that will be in effect?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Department of Criminal Justice?

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: What is what Do you see JS?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: What's the exact line item for that one?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Do you want me to go through the bill and find the line? Would I like to

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: how much money this particular bill appropriates for the new convertible pistol?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It's $500,000 half $1,000,000.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Where can I find that?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: In the DCJS budget. It's not a separate line for it but that's how much we are assuming will be utilized out of their general funds balance.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: So $550,000 is gonna be allocated for what exactly?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: For a task force.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: A task

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: force Because the creation of a task force. Yes.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: That's gonna do what?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: To evaluate the technological aspects of the bill that we're passing.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Well, but the the bill that we've already passed adds a new criminal penalty. So how does that have anything to do with this appropriation bill that we're passing?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay. So the task force has to come up with a program to evaluate the feasibility of how we can control or oversee three d printers and the blocking technology that we think exists.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: I understand. I'm not talking about three d printers.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: I'm talking It's all part

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: of the same program. We're trying to keep illegal guns off of the streets and we're trying to keep ghost guns, three d printed guns and guns with other technologies that we think that we can utilize to keep criminals off the streets.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Well, the bill that we passed just a couple days ago, that creates a new criminal penalty for someone that sells, transfers, or possesses a gun that is currently legal but will not be legal as of 05/31/2027?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, but that's not in this bill.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: No, but what I'd like to know, and maybe your answer is this, is there anything in this bill that appropriates money for that new criminal penalty?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No. Okay. Thank you.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Is there anything in this bill that supports the local cops, local crimes act?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: For this particular program you're referring to or in general?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Anything in this appropriation bill that we are discussing supports? No. Is there anything in this appropriation bill that supports the New York State Bivens Act? No. Is there anything in this appropriation bill that supports restrictions on immigration enforcement by state employees and municipal governments?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That would be in the state ops bill.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay but not this bill?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Not in this bill.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. There anything in this bill that supports the prohibition of immigration enforcement in schools?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Not in this bill. State ops also.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Is there anything in this bill that supports the enforcement of sensitive location protections from immigration No. Anything in this bill that supports the prohibition for law enforcement face coverings? No. And anything in this bill that supports the office of immigrant trust?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. Thank you mister Pretlow for answering my questions. Mister

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Manktolo.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Would the chair yield?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Prattlow, will you yield? Madam Thank

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: you mister Prattlow. I'm sorry I had to get you back out of your chair so quick. I just want to go over a few numbers with the veterans benefits I in this part of the just got a chance to look at this first thing this morning for the first time. I just want to make sure I'm clear. Is it $9,700,000 that we have in the budget this year for veterans benefits?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe that's the correct number.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Is that an increase or a decrease from last year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay, if you are comparing numbers this year versus last year, it will look as though there is a decrease. But it's really not the case when money was transferred to Department of State to handle certain programs that were handled at the Department of Veterans Services used to handle.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Yes, I believe that was the 415,000 for the Alex R. H.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: 525,000.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: 525,000?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Right. It's for the Alex R. Ramirez. Alright. Legacy policy. Yeah.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Alright. Thank you. So I kind of went through the numbers really quick myself along with our Ways and Means staff and it looks like it's about three quarters of a million dollars less from last year from last year to this year. Yes. Do you agree? I'm wondering, year after year, Chair, we see the veterans budget come through and year after year, I always refer to it as a pawn on the chessboard. The governor uses it to negotiate. Why do you think the governor constantly wants to either negotiate or gut these benefits for our veterans?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, it's really by doing that, just transferring some of the expenditures that were formally made at a division of veteran services to the Department of State. The legislature actually added money to the veterans programs. The total amount that was shifted was $525,000 for the Alex J. Ramirez immigrant legacy program and $250,000 for the Military Family Relief Fund.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Yes, did see that and there is another one too as well. So, let's talk a little bit about the military relief fund, family relief fund. Why was the decrease from last year to this year?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay, this is a check off and doing it this way reflects better as to how much money is being allocated toward it.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: I am sorry,

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I did not It is a tax check off, like on your income taxes. And doing it this way better reflects how much money the state is putting toward the programs.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Have we ever took a look at how these families are getting that information?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I haven't, no.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Has the state?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I would imagine they do, but not through the legislature.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Would you suggest I reach out to find that information? The Department of Veterans Services. Secondly, also our Vietnam Veterans of America New York State Council, they were at 100,000 last year. Now they are at zero this year. I was wondering why.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe that they are no longer operating the program. They are no

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: longer operating?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: They backed away from it, yeah.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: So, the case? They did back away?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes. They called us and said we are no longer going to administer

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Alright, the chair. Thank you for answering my questions. Madam speaker, on the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: Just one last thought. Again, we constantly shift the money for our veterans. Our New York State veterans department is probably one of the smallest funded departments in New York State government. We constantly see that money getting cut or moved around I wonder why we do that. As I look back to our local districts back home we have the veterans outreach center of rochester in Monroe County madam speaker and they were at $350,000 last year they were at $350,000 again in this budget. I' thankful that they weren' cut but I know with the amount of money that we've cut from our veterans organizations from our from this veterans budget we could use that money to help fund the veterans outreach center at a higher level. I know talking with the director and many of her staff and many of the veterans that go there, men and women, they do so much for the veterans short term and long term. And again, with a budget that's increased so much, why are we not funding them a little more this year? We've advocated for that. We went through the budget process, but yet still, it's a flat line stagnant number. But I hope next year when we get back to this budget that you all will take a hard look at what we do for our veterans and make sure we fund them at a proper level. So thank you madam speaker, for allowing me to say a few words on the bill.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: On the bill? Mister

[Floor Staff/Deputy Presiding Officer]: Sapolinsky?

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will the chairman yield for a couple questions?

[Floor Staff/Deputy Presiding Officer]: Will the chairman lead yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes. I will.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Yes. Thank

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: you. So my questions regard, the line item on tribal state compacts.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Could you repeat the question, please? Yeah.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: My my I haven't asked. I just wanna

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: make sure you

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: had the staff on. So our tribal state compacts is the topic of the line of question. So we're to go? Yes. Okay. So am I correct that the the payments in this line item this year, we're looking at $306,000,000? Yes. And that's 55,000,000 more than the previous enacted budget? Yes, sir. Alright. And am I also correct that the Seneca Gaming Compact expired over two years ago?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes. It did.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: And am I also correct that the line item in question for the New Year for the year we're about to enact assumes because of those numbers that I just cited that it'll be status quo for this coming fiscal year regarding the payments.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I don't know what the state of the negotiations are right now with the Seneca Nation and the the 2nd Floor, the the executive.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: That's fair. Hopefully,

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: they do come to some sort of an agreement before the next fiscal year.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: I I concur with you. Thank you for answering my question.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: We're gonna

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: go on the bill briefly.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: On the bill?

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: Yes. So this is something that very disproportionately affects my district. I represent, you know, the vast majority of the Seneca nation and the fact that we've been more than two years in extensions on the compact. I think is indicative that executive is not negotiating in good faith on this. I would hope that we I concur with the chairman that I hope this comes to some sort of resolution far sooner rather than later. This is a major portion of the economy in my district and the Seneca certainly employ a lot of people who are Senecas, but they employ thousands of people that are not Senecas. And so they're an intrinsic part of the economic fabric of the Southern tier in Western New York. And and the reason I bring up the line of questioning I did is my concern is when we assume in the budget as we have for the last couple years that the state is going to continue to receive the type of revenue exactly as it would if the existing compact continues in further extensions. That gives me pause that perhaps that's what the state is assuming will happen. So I continue to urge the governor to negotiate a fair compact with the with the Senecas and it would benefit every one of my constituents across the board. Thank you very much.

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: Mister Fitzpatrick.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Thank you, madam chair. Would the sponsor yield for a couple of questions after he's, finished chewing?

[Floor Staff/Deputy Presiding Officer]: Will the sponsor

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: yield? I can chew and talk.

[Floor Staff/Deputy Presiding Officer]: The sponsor yield.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is there any appropriation in this budget bill for a benefit fund operated by SEIU eleven ninety nine?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm not sure. The

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: healthcare stability fund, that's operated by November?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, sir.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Okay. Is Medicaid funding being used to

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, is.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: It is. Okay. How much?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: But was around $1,000,000

[Assemblymember Ed Ra]: I am

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: sorry, dollars 100,000,000. Okay. Will this require approval by the federal government? No. I don't believe so. No. Okay. And what is the purpose of this line item?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm looking up the line in the bill now. It's for health and health insurance.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Just for health and health insurance, not for any type of lobbying or

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: anything like that? No. Not.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: No. Would it in in In your opinion, is it appropriate to use any Medicaid funding for any type of lobbying to increase Medicaid spending?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: In my opinion, no.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: No? Okay, very good. And is there any language in the budget bill that would prevent that type of activity? Is there any mention of

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: that? I don't believe so.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Oh, okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Very good.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: All right. Mister chairman, thank you very much. Thank you. Alright. Thank you,

[Assemblymember Josh Jensen]: madam chair.

[Floor Staff/Deputy Presiding Officer]: Thank you. Ms. Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will chair Pretlow please yield? Will the chair yield?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Yes, I will. Chair yields.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you so much. So I would hold the two volumes up of over like around 2,300 pages, but I might be accused of using a prop, so I will not. But I was wondering if you could let me know how much money has been appropriated in this budget bill for the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the birth of our nation?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I would have to find that out if you give me a second. If it's in here, I'll find it for you. I believe around $7,000,000.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: That's what I saw too. $7,000,000. And I think that that is consistent with what was in the governor's proposal maybe and the one house budgets, but I I wasn't completely sure what the genesis was. It seemed like it was around the same amount of money consistently.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Yeah. And that money is I believe earmarked for improvements at Peoples Island to improve I think some of the kiosks and some of the sidewalks and stuff around that area, around People's Island. Is that correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm not sure what it's gonna be used for.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: I I believe it is earmarked for there. Okay. Just by way of contrast, how much are we through this bill providing to the Buffalo Bills?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: There was a contract with the Buffalo Bills that's a reoccurring contract.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Yeah. But this year, aren't we providing $6,700,000

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: In total, yes.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Okay. And the FIFA World Cup which is not unlike the two and fiftieth anniversary of the birth of our nation occurring once in New York this year. How much are they getting for marketing?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe maybe $20,000,000

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: $25,000,000

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Isn't that something?

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Yeah. Makes perfect sense, right? Yeah. Okay. So the public campaign finance board is going to get $100,000,000 right?

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: Yes. Yeah,

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: that seems pretty high. One thing that really struck me were all the bailouts of a bunch of cities that are closing gaps. Living, you know, and working in this area, I'm following my local news about the city of Albany, we knew that the city of Albany was looking for $20,000,000 and then lo and behold, now it's 40,000,000 Does that concern you at all that that amount of money doubled?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well you know, if you look at that list, we have new administrations that when they got into office they found a lot of skeletons in those closets.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Yeah, looks that way. It looks that way. Okay. I saw that public radio and public TV are each going to get $2,000,000 each for a total of four. Yes. And that's going to be kind of spread among the different public radio and public television stations?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Okay. That am I correct in remembering that last year we did something kind of similar only it was for newspapers, wasn't it? No. No, I thought

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: we I think we for radio last year.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Oh was it radio last year? Okay. I remember the New York Press Association was really psyched that they had gotten some kind of money in the budget. Thought it was last year, maybe it was the year before. I don't know. Okay. Let me just go through my notes here. So many things have already been covered. I don't want to be too repetitive. I think at this point you've answered my questions very well, mister Pretlow, and I I would like to at this point just go on the bill, madam speaker. On the bill? So this is just a lot of pages to this bill. There's a lot of great stuff in this bill. I mean you've got library aid, school aid, UPK, the 4,201 schools, school meals, AIM funding. It supports the county sheriffs. I mean it's got so much good stuff in it. But I did want to point out and I did get it confirmed from the Chairman, I am continuously shocked by the complete lack, really almost complete lack of funding for such an amazingly important statewide and national event like the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the birth of our nation. It's astounding to me. I mean we're putting $7,000,000 in. Do you know what other states are putting in? Like, states that can't even claim nearly as much history as we can in the state of New York. And I'm not just although I do represent portions of Saratoga County and we do claim an an awful lot of history as being arguably actually the turning point in the American revolution. I'll take that up with one of my assembly colleagues who believes that it was the Battle of Oriskany, but I'm gonna say it was Saratoga. And I just think that $7,000,000 to improve a kiosk and some walkways at People's Island, it's shameful. It's absolutely shameful at a budget this big and a one time event. And especially when you put that up against $25,000,000 to do marketing for the FIFA World Cup. Now similarly, I mean that's going to be a big draw. People are going to be coming in probably from all over the world for the FIFA World Cup. And I think that's great. I think it's great for New York to be hosting it. But we're going be getting a lot of historic international tourism coming to New York State because of the two fiftieth. And I know that our state historians, our county historians are going to do the very best they can with the funds that they have. But I think we're really missing a tremendous opportunity here to to encourage that kind of history tourism and to really mark a once in a lifetime event. I mean I was alive when we celebrated the bicentennial and that was a huge deal. This just seems to be not really being marked as well I think by New York. So I think that's really unfortunate. I don't care for that. And as far as the skeletons in the closet and the reason why the city of Albany and some other cities need so much more than we had originally expected, That's concerning. I mean I'm not saying that we have our budgetary house in order here. We've been complaining about it now for days and for probably years for some of us. But to go from a $20,000,000 ask to $40,000,000 in order to close budget gaps for one city in the city of Albany? Come on. I mean somebody needs to be taking, I hope that they're taking a very hard look at that. So anyway, I that's all I'll say about this bill. There is an awful lot to like. There's an awful lot of things that I do support in here. I don't know how my vote is actually going to come out because there are some things that still are concerning in the bill. So thank you very much, madam speaker.

[Deputy Presiding Officer]: Thank you. Mister Chang?

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will the chairman yield for a question?

[Floor Staff/Deputy Presiding Officer]: Will the sponsor yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: For a question? That's one.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Very simple question, mister mister chairman. And thank you for your persistence and your perseverance for today. Thank you very much. This is regarding on education, on foundation aid. Right. Okay. So the total education bill is 39,000,000,000 and an additional 1,700,000,000 over last year.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: The foundation aid is increased for 1,000,000,000. So, does it because last year, many of my schools didn't have any foundation aid, especially after school. Does it also fill up the

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, every school is guaranteed at least 2% of an addition in foundation aid. And some of the differences in the foundation aid and the total education increase have to do with special categories that were given additional school aid like English language learners and the poverty rate or homelessness rate of individuals in a particular school district.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: And has a formula for those school foundation aid, have that changed or remains the same?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: The formula basically is the same with the creation of foundation aid.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Because from the blowback I received for those who did not receive it, they felt that they were slighted and they felt that the formula wasn't fair. So, I hope this increase will balance it out compared to last year.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Are you referring to the New York City's formula versus the state formula? Because I can assure you that in the state formula, no one has been slighted. The number is what the number is and it always comes out the same if the formula is followed. New York City always has some special circumstances. It does have almost half of the total student population in the state. It has several 100 schools, several thousand teachers and it also has some special requirements that it has to contend with.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Thank you. On the bill, speaker.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: On the bill?

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Thank you. This bill has many lot of good and not so good. For education, I always support that. In particular, the universal of free school meal for lunch and for and for breakfast for all, including charter school and non non public school, which I wholly agree to. And I wish we could include this budget that combating school food waste. And I've been to many schools that food are not being eaten and cannot be donated or destroyed. I mean, sour milk can be destroyed, but there are many good food that cannot be donated kids who don't eat. Sometimes I do look at some type of food that I wouldn't even eat it myself, but can be donated as good food. I wish we include that part of this program that we paid for it in our taxes. And then if there is school waste, if this school extra food should be donated to a designated food pantry instead of just throw out in the garbage. I wish we include that as a policy. There is a and that's all I have, but thank you very much. I'm also wrestling to how to vote for this bill. And thank you, madam speaker.

[Floor Staff/Deputy Presiding Officer]: Thank you. Mister Levine.

[Assemblymember Charles D. Lavine]: Thank you. Thank you. So I just wanna highlight some provisions of this bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Is it on the bill, sir?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Yes, certainly.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Charles D. Lavine]: On the bill. So I would like to highlight some of the provisions that I think the folks in my part of the country will like. Glen Cove Senior Center, 50,000 Glenhead Glenwood Business Association, 15,000 Glen Cove Boys and Girls Club, 49,000 Glen Cove Youth Bureau, 49,000 Glen Cove CDA, 5,700 Roslyn Youth, 49,000 Roslyn Rescue, 5,000 Tana Oyster Bay to protect shell fishing, that's 75,000 Island Harvest, 300,000. Long Island Cares, 300,000. Youth and Family Counseling in Oyster Bay, 49,000. The Oyster Bay Railroad Museum, 4,500. Town of Oyster Bay, 40,000. Westbury Amateur Baseball, 5,000. Mill Neck Manor School for the Deaf, half $1,000,000. Sea Cliff Fire Department, 25,000. Plainview Chamber of Commerce, 2,500. Plainview American Legion Post eighteen twelve, 3,500. EAC Nassau Senior Respite, almost $120,000. Nassau County Cornell Cooperative Extension, almost $400,000. Law enforcement, Nassau and Suffolk, dollars $05,000,000. Nassau Suffolk Law Services, 120,000. Nassau Coalition Against Domestic Violence, almost $46,000 Pre K for Nassau BOCES, dollars 750,000. After school grants for Nassau and Suffolk, $2,000,000. High needs districts, Nassau and Suffolk, half 1,000,000. Nassau Suffolk irrigation programs, 150,000, almost done. Visiting nurses for Nassau, 200,000. Nassau Suffolk guardianship, half 1,000,000. Building trades pre apprenticeship programs for Nassau, 200,000. Nassau County itself, almost 200,000. The Nassau County Museum Of Art, 15,000. Central Nassau Bay Baseball, 10,000. The Holocaust Memorial and Tolerance Center, at least 2,000. And if they're listening, they know it's gonna be a lot more than that. The Nassau County Auxiliary Police, $3,750. Nassau Bus Service, 3,000,000. The Belmont Park neighborhoods, 5,000,000. Hempstead housing, 215,000. Hempstead Nassau auxiliary police, $3,750. Town of Hempstead itself, $25,000. And finally, the Hempstead American Legion post three ninety, that's $37.50. These are not all. So I just have the sneaky suspicion that the folks that I'm privileged to represent would not be terribly pleased if I were to consider voting against this bill. So just a little preview. Chances are I'm voting for it, and thank you for letting me address this particular measure. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Bendet?

[Assemblymember Scott Bendett]: Thank you, madam speaker. Wow. That was pretty impressive.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill, sir?

[Assemblymember Scott Bendett]: I'm on the bill. Yes. I apologize. That was really impressive. I sit here really jealous, really jealous of, my colleague who was able to rattle off millions and millions of dollars for the people in his, community, his wealthy community. I know where Sea Cliff is. I've been there. That's a really, really high end area. And I have fire departments that are really struggling that have to host a roast beef dinner just to pay for their banquets. As I, as I just sat here listening to that, I'm really, really insulted really insulted that, so many people in our communities are disenfranchised. I pay a lot of taxes, a lot. So do my people that live with me, you know, live in my communities. And for them to not get their fair share is, very insulting. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On a motion by mister Pretlow, the senate bill is before the house. The senate bill is advanced. Read the last section.

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

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: A party vote's been requested. Miss Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The Republican conference will generally be in the negative on this piece of legislation, on this budget bill. But if there are guest votes, now would be the time to cast them at member seats. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, miss Lunsford.

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The majority conference will generally be in the affirmative on this vote. If you would like to vote no, you may do so from your seats. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. The clerk will record the vote. Mister Sempolinsky to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Joe Sempolinski]: I'm voting no on this. I just wanna highlight something. We have in this bill $887,600,000 in miscellaneous financial assistance through a variety of cities. Sort of chosen, picked out nice cities. I just wanna pick out one of them. $55,000,000 to the city of Buffalo. The population of the city of Buffalo is two hundred and seventy eight three hundred forty nine. You take $55,000,000, divide that among that, that's $197.59 per person in the City Of Buffalo in additional funding. Largest city in my district is the City Of Olean. And if you do the same math, City Of Olean should get $2,753,862.96. People in my district are gonna pay for these bailouts for these cities that are wildly irresponsible. Where where does where do my constituents what's the form they fill out? Where do they apply for their money? Because they gotta pay for this. Seems like it's unfair to me. I don't know.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Sempolinsky in the negative. Mister Ikest, to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Chris Eachus]: Madam chair, to explain my vote, when we take a look at this bill, it's many, many pages long, but I immediately go towards the veterans section. And it's just amazing what we are doing for our veterans here in New York State. We're appropriating more than 17,000,000 for this year, reappropriating 31,000,000. One of the famous programs is the Cohen's Veterans Network and a half a million there. And then to assist our county sheriffs, we have a 20,000 for Orange County Sheriff's Department and a 100,000 for the Rockland County Sheriff's Office. I'm also very pleased to say that we are recognizing SUNY Orange, which is a community college, as a center of excellence and we are giving it $250,000 to start its program with AI and those types of things. We also are working with mental health and the Veterans suicide program with $1,000,000 and peer to peer, which we all know is very successful in veterans programs with 2,000,000. It's just amazing. One of the most famous programs that all of my justice departments and sheriff's departments, police departments do is the Joseph P. Dwyer program, which we're putting another $8,000,000 into. And finally, I've been asking for this, and finally, it's here. Again, for the veterans, they do support Girls State and Boys State, we're and giving them each a $150,000 each. And I thank the the speaker for this and all the folks that work to get this money into the budget. I know that these folks who are in need will really appreciate it. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Ikis in the affirmative, mister Chang to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Thank you, madam speaker. There's a lot of good things in the in this budget earlier as I say, and there's a lot of bad things. One thing is I'm encouraged that the veterans are getting their fair share of our education budget. A lot of localities, in New York City, Brooklyn that I represent, there's many, many funds that are supporting many of these programs. Unfortunately, there's one program I haven't seen very much. It's teaching civic class, Americanism, patriotism. And many classroom that I walk through in my district, many of them don't even have an American flag. I used to grow up with an American flag inside a classroom, but I don't see them now. I don't know. Is Americanism is being being being further away? So I believe in teaching as a basic course as a civic, especially for new immigrants, what is Americanism and being patriotic in this country. Other than that, I will support this bill because of many good things that have that that my constituents would benefit the most. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, Mr. Chang and the affirmative. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Ayes one zero eight, nays 34.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: The bill is passed. Page three, rules report two fifteen, clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number one zero zero zero four d, rules report two fifteen budget bill, an act making appropriations for the support of government capital projects

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: budget. Governor's message is at the desk. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: I hereby certify to an immediate vote, Kathy Hochul, governor.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: An explanation has been requested. Mr. Pretlow. Yes,

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: madam speaker. Before us today, we have the capital projects bill. This appropriation bill provides $23,500,000,000 for state fiscal year twenty six-twenty seven while authorizing disbursements up to 21,400,000,000 on an all funds basis for capital projects in the same year. The capital projects bill makes critical investments in transportation, health, education, economic development, public protection, social welfare, housing and other areas. Transportation and economic development capital obligations for $10,700,000,000 or 50% of the total spending for state fiscal year twenty six-twenty seven. Capital spending over the next five years is expected to average $22,200,000,000 And with that, Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to fully support this bill. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mr. Polmosano.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yes. Thank you madam speaker. Will the chairman yield for some questions?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Padlo, will you yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, I will.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: The chair yields.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Thank you mister Pratt. Well, good evening.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It is evening. Good evening, sir.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: So before I get into a lot of detailed questions, I'll just start out with some top line questions. How much does this bill appropriate? Appropriate.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: This bill is appropriating $23,500,000,000. What is the physical impact or actual amount to be spent in this bill? We're going to spend $21,400,000,000.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. How much in new debt is authorized in this bill?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: New debt? 11,400,000,000.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Alright. How much debt will be issued in fiscal year twenty seven?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: You talk about new debt? The new debt is 11,400,000,000.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Can you identify the appropriations or programs in this bill that are discretionary funds supported by the governor and the majorities that do not have a set recipient or are not distributed by a formula?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm not sure I understand your question. Do you want me to know what the appropriations include? Sure. Okay. For transportation, it's $6,200,000,000 or an increase of $80,000,000 over last year. Health and mental hygiene is $1,800,000,000 Education and higher education is $2,000,000,000 Economic development is $2,800,000,000 General government and public protection is $1,900,000,000 Parks and environment is $3,700,000,000 housing is $1,300,000,000 social welfare is $110,000,000 and all other capital appropriations amount to $3,700,000,000

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. I see there's the CREST Resiliency Economic Sustainability and Technology. The CREST program has over $1,800,000,000 in reappropriations. With that amount reappropriated, why is it necessary to authorize an additional $385,000,000 in bonded capital?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: The trust program is an ongoing program to help our health facilities and many of the applications that have been put in for past allocations have not been drawn down or they have not drawn down the fund. So, what you see before you is an increase for this year and you also see what is residual from prior years.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. So you think what we have in the reappropriation is not enough to meet our needs without having to add another $385,000,000? Yes. Okay. I see that this bill is also transferring

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: a

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: $156,000,000 in uncommitted economic development funds to the local community assistance program. What were these funds originally designated for and why are they no longer needed for these original programs?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: They may be for prior allocations or allocations that were requested by individuals that no longer have appointing authority. There are various reasons for those monies to be transferred.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. I see that this bill is breaking these funds into two separate pots, one for the statewide local community assistance program and one for the adaptive local community assistance program. Can you explain what the difference is between the two? And why is one program getting over 125,000,000 more than the other?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: This is a consolidation of all the older programs and putting it into one big number rather than have a lot of orphan numbers all throughout the year budget.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I'd like to pivot to transportation for a minute if I could. Certainly. Certainly the issue of chips is something I've been very vocal about. Our entire conference has been very vocal about. I know some of your members have been very vocal about it. I do see this does have a $50,000,000 increase. Is that correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, it does.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Now, I know when we did the I can't remember what was in the one house, but I remember the senate did a $250,000,000 increase. Do we understand, I I know it's a negotiation, why we ended up with just $50,000,000 and not more?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: This is what came out after the negotiations. I'm pretty sure our one house had more, but this is what we finally fleshed out too.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Do you believe that $50,000,000 is enough to meet the needs of our local communities for the

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Oh, I I think 100,000,000 would be better.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yeah. Can't argue with that, mister Prevost. I agree. But but it's 50. Counties and municipalities continue to report growing backlog of local road repairs. I guess my concern is at what point does the state acknowledge that flat or near flat infrastructure aid is effectively a funding cut after inflation? The reason I say inflation, there was a study that came out that said the three year federal highway cost index over the past three years was 70%, so any amount we're giving to our local municipalities is being eaten away by inflation. Should we be looking to take that into consideration maybe in the future hopefully?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, inflation is always a concern and that's why you are seeing an increase in this year's allocation. The infrastructure of all of our state roads, be they county roads, state roads or local municipal roads are all in real need of repair. We had a really horrendous winter this year We had a lot of rain and then freezing and thawing which caused numerous potholes which are extremely expensive to repair. Patching a pothole really doesn't work. The patch usually comes apart. So if you have a series of potholes on a street, it's usually more cost effective to redo the entire street. But we spend over $1,000,000 a mile trying to do streets and localities really don't have the wherewithal to do that, nor does the state or the counties.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Certainly. Obviously you know I've been a very vocal critic of the CLCPA and I'll talk about a portion of that in here in a minute, But when we see how much we're spending on this program, we know that program alone is more than a quarter of $1,000,000,000,000, probably I think there's a billion dollars of additional funding for the sustainability program, we'll talk about. Wouldn't it be better to use more of that money for at least some of that money of that billion dollars for chips to boost up and meet that inflationary increase? Wouldn't that be a better way to do that? For bonding that much money?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, I think you can't change the purpose of funding existence now.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Alright. Well then I will move here a second. Yes, water infrastructure. I know under environmental conservation the budget includes $175,000,000 for water infrastructure in support of more housing and it says $50,000,000 is focused on rural areas. Could you tell me what specifically this new funding is intended to address that hasn't been addressed through the normal water infrastructure mechanism? Is there something new about this?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Water infrastructure that will become hookups to new housing.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay, so it's for

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: new housing? Right, basically.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Alright. Now, I'd like to go to that sustainable future program we talked about, if I may. Sure. The enacted budget, as I understand, restored the governor's sustainable future programs from last year, which allocates $1,000,000,000 for climate resiliency initiatives, which also while also introducing additional legislative oversight and specific funding allocations, including the appropriations from last year, the total amount of this funding comes to $2,000,000,000 How is this program being paid for?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, the billion dollars is made up of $500,000,000 for greenhouse gas emissions reduction and then from that you have $300,000,000 for renewable energy projects, dollars 75,000,000 for zero emission transportation, 50,000,000 for methane reduction programs, up to $50,000,000 for any of the above privilege program purposes and $25,000,000 for the environmental protection fund. The bulk of this is gained through bonding.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. And how is this accounted for in the financial plan? Pardon? How is this accounted for in the financial plan? As bonded capital. Bonded capital. And I'm sure you generally support enhanced legislative oversight for climate related expenditures both within this proposal and across other climate focused programs, correct? Yes. And how do you believe such oversight can ensure effective use of these funds and accountability in achieving the climate goals?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, that's the purpose of oversight to ensure that things are being done correctly.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Has any of the prior funding been spent yet? And if so, on what?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm not sure. It's been allocated. I'm not sure if it's been spent.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: That's okay. Last year's enacted budget, as we said, provided $1,000,000,000 for this program, all of which is reappropriated. Now it seems we're adding another billion dollars. Can you tell me why this funding is necessary when last year's funding wasn't touched?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, like I said, the money has been allocated but it has not been spent. So you do a reappropriation to cover the allocations that were made in the prior year. When the money is spent, that's charged against the reappropriations and we have another $1,000,000,000 that's coming in online this year.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: A significant portion of the sustainable future funding supports electrification initiatives such as EV chargers, thermal energy networks, and electric school buses. With hundreds of millions of dollars going towards electrification incentives, what assurances does the state have that New York's electric grid can handle the additional demand these programs will create?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We have energy grants out. A lot of what our plans were in the past were negated by actions where wind and solar reimbursements from the federal government no longer existed. We still have a program in place to ensure that these electrical components are in place when we get back online.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: So should we because the concerns with the grid, and the reason I bring it up is I've talked about it on the floor, the NISO has said we have both short term and long term reliability gaps that are out there that need to be addressed. But yet we continue this march towards full electrification of everything, heat pumps, vehicles. Shouldn't really we be prioritizing grid reliability investments before expanding these electrification mandates?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think they are being done concurrent with one another. Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: All right. I wanted to go over the portion of the bill that deals with the electric fleets, vehicles for the fleet, 17,000,000, it's my understanding, million, the same as the governor, same as last year to support the conversion of light duty vehicles in New York State fleets. Is that correct?

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: I believe so.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Do we know right now how big the state fleet is for light duty vehicles?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm sorry, I didn't

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: hear you. I'm sorry, Mr. Parlov. Do we know how big the current state fleet is for electric vehicles on light duty?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I don't have that information, sorry.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. I guess I would ask the same question on heavy duty. You probably don't have that then.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No, don't.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: That's okay. Do we know how big our state fleet is of vehicles?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I include like police vehicles and trucks for highway departments. It is large. I don't know the exact number.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: But I can assure you that it is substantial.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Now, my understanding when we passed this in the statute, by 2035, our entire light duty fleet has to be converted to electric. Is that correct? That's the plan. And then by 2040, the medium and heavy duty fleet would have to be converted. Is that correct? That's the plan. Alright. And it's also my understanding that the state, if a couple years ago we had benchmarks that had to be in place, I remember in 2025 it was supposed to be 25% of the fleet, 2030, 50% of the fleet, 2035, the entire fleet as we acknowledge. Do we know how much of our fleet has been converted? We don't know what percentage of the fleet has been

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: converted. I'm not sure what percentage is, but we did push those numbers back in the bill we did, the CLCTA. Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: That's fine. The other thing on this I I would like to point out, then I'll probably emphasize when I talk to, it's my understanding in the language of the statute, if the state of New York has issues on converting the fleet by 2035 or 2040 for the heavy duty fleet even, issues of cost, issues of feasibility, issues of reliability, practicality, they could pause that because it's mandate, not it's a goal. Is that correct? Is that accurate what I'm Yes. It is? Okay. And isn't it I mean it's a different issue, but isn't it interesting that the state has that out for cost, feasibility, reliability, practicality. So if they can't make their twenty thirty five goal line or the twenty forty for heavy duty, then they just don't have to do it. But our school districts and thank god we pushed back the timeline to 2040 for the conversion of their fleets, but if our school districts can't have if they have concerns for cost, affordability, reliability, practicality, they won't have that same option, correct? They will have to begin buying them until

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: No, you

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: do have a waiver system in place that if they reach any hardships in purchasing or attaining electric school buses, they can apply for a waiver.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. With this $17,000,000 that we have there, which was the same amount as appropriated last year, is there any requirements in the law, in the legislation that would require the materials to sourcing even be sourced here in The US? Any like by American requirements in the law that they have to follow or no? I don't believe so.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Not this way. Just

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: No. Okay. And you

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: probably know the reason why I asked you that question.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, I do.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Should we dive into it a little bit? Maybe no.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We shall not. We shall not.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Maybe I'll just do it on

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: You're Bill of perfectly welcome, Mr. Paloszano.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I know, Mr. Paloszano. I appreciate it. I just think it is kind of ironic. Mr. Praful, I really appreciate your time in answering some of my questions here. Madam Speaker, I will go on the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: As I said with the last bill, know, when we're spending a quarter of $1,000,000,000,000, there are going to be good things in it. When you're borrowing money to buy things or support things, there are going be some good things. You know, I point to library construction grant, that's an important program that we talked about. And we talked about CHIPS. CHIPS is something we've been advocating year after year. It's an important program to our local municipalities. Unfortunately, think $50,000,000 is just a drop in a bucket, although I'm appreciative of the increase. I know they'll be appreciative of the increase. What I'm concerned about is it's not going to meet the need because as I said earlier, according to the Federal Highway Cost Construction Index, the inflationary increase for our municipalities has increased over 70% over the past three years. So any money that we're giving to them is being eaten up by inflation. And I think a stronger, more vibrant commitment from us, a stronger partnership from us, and maybe if we would have done what we did in our one house and what the Senate did, that would have showed a much more stronger commitment to address that. And I will tell you because you see it. We have deteriorating roads and bridges all across our state. And when we push for these local roads and bridges and culverts, it's warranted and justified. Why? Because 87% of the roads in New York State are owned and maintained by our local municipalities. 52% of the 18,000 bridges in New York State are owned and maintained by our local municipalities and 48% of the miles driven are driven on our local roads. And when we see the reports that come out like trip came out that said it's costing New York drivers over $40,000,000,000 annually, more than $3,700 a person in driving with damage to vehicles, less fuel efficiency, problem after problem. And but we don't make the critical investments we do. We're just kinda pat like my colleague was saying, we're just patching potholes. That's not gonna solve the problem. The costs are gonna go even higher. And I just think that that investment, that commitment could have been better. And I think when I think of the sustainable futures program, we put 1,000,000,000 in last year. It doesn't seem like we appropriated much from it, and we're we're appropriate. Now we're putting another billion in. And when I've been critical to CLCPA in this program is what how it impacts rate payers. We're now borrowing money to pay for some some of these things. You know, we got the electric vehicles, you know, higher electric rates. These policies continue to hit New York families, seniors, pocketbooks, whether it's through more taxes, whether it's through higher electricity rates, whether it's through higher bonding costs that are being bonded to pay for these programs, it just doesn't make sense. It's not affordable, It's not feasible. It's not reliable. And when we talked about the electric vehicles when I had the conversation with the chairman, how interesting is that when we look at the fleet, the I'll compare it to the heavy duty fleet. The state of New York's heavy duty fleet has to be converted by 2040. And now because of that pushback on the electric school bus, they got we did something like that, and it should be repealed in my opinion, but at least we pushed it back to give them a little bit of breathing room. So now our school districts have to have their fleets converted by 2040, and supposedly the state of New York has to have their fleets converted by 2,040. Here's the kicker though, the language in the bill for the state says it's a goal for the state to convert their fleet. Not a requirement. What does the language say in the statute for our school districts? They have to convert their fleet by 2040. It's a requirement. Sure there's waivers and the waiver process, and I know if you were talking to your schools during this process, they were complaining about the waiver process. It wasn't helpful. It wasn't getting us to where we go. And now so we got a little bit of a pause, but the problem doesn't go away. The problem is still there. The fact of the matter is in a few short years, the school districts are gonna have to buy electric school buses again. The infrastructure is still not there yet. The capacity is still not there. The costs are still expensive. The range issues are still issues. This is problematic, but yet we're gonna ask them to do this and complete the conversion. And, oh, yeah, like I said, the state of New York has an out if they can't afford it, if it's not feasible to do it, if it's not practical to do it, if the energy grid infrastructure is not there for it to take place, but yet our school districts and local property taxpayers don't have that same luxury or privilege. So, yeah, we gave them a little bit of pause, but the train's still coming down the tracks, Adam, full speed. And when it hits, it's gonna hit hard. It's it'd be nice if it was a goal for the school districts too instead of a mandate. So as I'll conclude my comments, yeah, there's some good things in here. But remember, this is more borrowing. This is more debt to go on top of record levels of spending, to go on more taxes, to go on more regulations. Madam speaker, my colleagues, this financial path, as I've said over and over again during these budget discussions, it's not sustainable. It's not feasible. It's not workable. It is not in the best interest of the people we represent back at home. It's not in the best interest of trying to encourage more businesses to stay here, to invest here, to grow here, and not leave here like we continue to see businesses leaving time and time again because of the policies that we enact. When I talk about energy policy, if you talk to businesses, they care about two things. Is there energy affordable, and is it reliable? And I'm telling you, if they can't get affordable and reliable energy in New York, they're gonna go elsewhere, and they are. My one colleague, when we talked about the financial services industry that have left the state of New York to go to states that don't have as much bureaucracy, don't have as much on taxes, don't have as much on problems that make it more difficult. Where are they going? They're going to Florida. They're going to Texas. Going and taxing this capital, taxing businesses that we want to invest here and create jobs here is not gonna make them stay here. It's gonna make them leave here. And they already are. And certainly holding a press conference outside of the apartment throughout part of the home of an individual who does invest in these communities, does invest in these businesses, does create jobs, does create economic activity. It's just another tax on top of more spending, on top of more debt. And as I said, madam speaker, my colleagues, this is not feasible. It's not sustainable. It's uncontrollable, and we really have to stop and look at what we're doing with the policies that we implement in this house. So for that reason, madam speaker, my colleagues, I will be voting in the negative on this bill and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Thank you so very much.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Miller?

[Assemblymember Brian D. Miller]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will the chairman yield for a few questions?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Patlow, will you yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, I will.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Chairman yields.

[Assemblymember Brian D. Miller]: Thank you, mister Patlow. I'd like to stay on the transportation section of this.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Which section?

[Assemblymember Brian D. Miller]: Transportation.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Assemblymember Brian D. Miller]: And I have a few questions for you on this. The first one is, do you feel our roads, bridges, and transportation infrastructure is in good shape?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think I stated earlier, I know it can use some improvement. Okay.

[Assemblymember Brian D. Miller]: But with the 50,000,000 in CHIPS funding increase?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I think I said earlier, 100,000,000 would be better.

[Assemblymember Brian D. Miller]: Yes, would. How did we come up with the figure of $50,000,000

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: when you We know what last used the resources we have at hand and the availability of other resources and how much we can bond for. Have bridges that are in dire need of help right now.

[Assemblymember Brian D. Miller]: This Thank you for agreeing with me on that. But there but there are places in the budget we may have been able to find some some additional funding for our roads. And I know the the raker of ways and means our raker of ways and means touched

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: But on think there are other things we could have done. We could have done something to look at the usage of salt on our roads because the misuse, as I'll put it, of salt on our roads is causing the deterioration of our bridge infrastructure and it's also causing the salination of some of our fresh water. That's something that I personally feel should fall under chips. Will probably come under clean water which is also part of this bill. But I'm not in charge of all of that. I'm just trying to get the finances passed.

[Assemblymember Brian D. Miller]: Okay. Madam speaker, on the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill, sir.

[Assemblymember Brian D. Miller]: Every year, we have a sea of orange here from from our local highway superintendents, our county highway superintendents talking about the roads, our bridges, our infrastructure, and how we've watched a decline here in New York State, not only for this the year we talk about, but over the last fifty years, we've watched the watched the decline. You know, as we drive in here and we drive over a bridge system coming off I 90 over here to the capital, just think of what that replacement and that maintenance is gonna cost us. Well, you know, let's just look at the, the appropriations here. We got Bridge New York, 200,000,000, same as last year. Ships. Luckily, we're able to put another 50,000,000 in. But every year, the highway superintendents come, and they ask for 250,000,000. You know, this isn't a linear function on on the decline of our roads and bridges. It's an exponential function. So every year that we can't fund to the proper level, we're getting farther and farther and farther behind the eight ball. Extreme winter recovery. We talk about our extreme winters every year. And right now, we're still experiencing the thaw cycle as our roads are still heaving. You know, I drive 40,000 miles a year all over New York State and Central New York, And we're watching these roads fall apart more and more and more. Pave New York. Luckily, we have a 150,000,000 here for it. Same as last year, and last year was same as last year. Pave our potholes. And we all get emails and, pothole alert. What are we doing about those? A 100,000,000. That won't even touch half of them in the southern tier. In our state touring routes, 140,000,000, same as last year. You know, 87% of our roads are local roads, and we all drive on them. Not only do we all drive on them, our business our businesses rely on them. Our economic development relies on them. Our safety for our residents, our safety for our school children rely on them. And we can't put enough money in there to maintain our highway infrastructure. It's really sad that we all talk about this every year. And every year in March, we have that sea of orange and how we're gonna we're here fighting for our roads, our infrastructure, and, you know, in in in the senate one house bill, there was $250,000,000 additional for CHIP's funding. Luckily, we're able to find 50,000,000. Madam speaker, I hope in the future we can fund to maintain the decline here in New York because right now, we are not funding to maintain the decline on our infrastructure. We need to do better than this. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Molotore?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Thank you, madam sponsor. Will the or madam speaker, will the sponsor yield?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mr. Pretlow, will you yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, I will.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Sponsor yields.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Thank you, Mr. Pretlow. So this is our second appropriations bill. And I'm going to ask you some similar questions. Does this bill contain any funding for the new convertible pistol prohibition that will go into effect on 05/31/2020.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm not following. What are you looking for? Is it capital funding for?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Does this bill contain any funding for the new penal law section regarding convertible pistols?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No. Okay.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Does it contain any appropriation for I won't go through the entire immigration omnibus as I did before.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: There is no capital law for any of the immigration issues that you mentioned earlier, sir. I'm sorry. Didn't There is no capital funding for any of the immigration issues that you mentioned earlier.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: In this bill or?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: In this bill, yes.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. That's all the questions I have. Thank you, Prelo.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Alright. Mr. Simpson.

[Speaker 48]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would Chair Prelo yield?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mr. Pratlow, will you yield? I will. You, I

[Speaker 48]: want to start with under Ag and Parks, humane societies and animal shelters. There' 10,000,000 appropriated in the budget and the last sentence not less than $500,000 is earmarked for projects in underserved municipalities or regions. Is there a map or anything that has been developed to identify those underserved regions?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I know but there's a definition for underserved regions though. I don't have I've never seen a map that drew that out.

[Speaker 48]: It's not tied to any of the other programs that are on it. It's specifically for this program, right? Where it's underserved by humane societies or shelters?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Right. If they don't have a humane society, which we're referring to humane societies and animal shelters, so an underserved would be an area that does not have an existing animal shelter.

[Speaker 48]: I understand that. This funding is also available for capital improvement grants to existing humane shelters.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Speaker 48]: So it would make sense that some of these regions would. But I live in an area that's pretty rural. It's very sparsely populated with a humane shelter, but there is a great need. So I'm just wondering how I could find out if that's an underserved area. That was the premise of my question. And then under environmental conservation and energy, Under the clean water infrastructure, know, 150,000,000. I know in past budgets and budget discussions that we've had over the years, you know, there's been an issue of a question of how quickly we're able to get the money out the door to address the issue.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Right.

[Speaker 48]: Do you know the status of last year's funding?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No. I I do not. That would probably go go through I personally don't know. The money is awarded annually and that does not come through the legislature. It probably goes through Dasity or some other

[Speaker 48]: It goes through I couldn't hear.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I said it probably goes through DASD or some other governmental agency but it does not go through the legislature.

[Speaker 48]: Yeah, I was referring to like the EFC within DEC.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes.

[Speaker 48]: Okay. Alright. Well, thank you. Thank you for your answers.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'll

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: read the last section.

[Assemblymember Aileen M. Gunther or MaryJane Shimsky (uncertain)]: This act shall take effect immediately.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Party vote's been requested, miss Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The Republican conference will generally be in the negative on this legislation. But, yes, votes may be recorded now at member seats. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, miss Lunsford.

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The majority conference will generally be in the affirmative on this bill. If you would like to deviate from that position, you may do so at your seats. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. The clerk will record the vote. Mister Anderson to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Khaleel M. Anderson]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'd like to explain my vote on the capital projects budget. Tonight in this budget bill specifically, there is a $1,000,000,000 fund for sustainable futures. And the fund according to the language of the budget bill is supposed to help to protect communities that are struggling either with storm surge, flooding and all of the other impacts of climate change. Madam speaker, it is my hope that the dollars that are reallocated from last year and allocated again this year will actually be spent on communities like the ones that I represent. I represent a community that is surrounded by water, a peninsula, Whether it is a high water table with high ground with high ground water or our beach and or bay that needs to be protected. The reality of the situation is is that Madam Speaker, we're nearly two decades post Superstorm Sandy and there's not a single leg of protection along Jamaica Bay. But we are seeing projects continue to advance along our beach which is very important which is very important to protect, but there are a lot of homeowners who are black and brown who live along the bay and I'm always wondering if that's the reason why that they're not receiving dollars. So I'm grateful that this sustainable future fund that is in this capital budget bill will make it through, and it's my hope that those dollars will find their way to the Rockaways and other communities that are impacted by storm surge. Thank you, madam speaker. I withdraw my request and proudly vote in the affirmative.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Anderson in the affirmative. Mister Cashman to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember D. Billy Jones or Scott Gray (uncertain; North Country member)]: Madam speaker, to explain my vote, Tupper Lake has been dealing with a water crisis for far too many years. And while the people of Tupper Lake have been resilient, they should not have to shoulder this alone. And many residents have been forced to rely on portable water, but I am increasingly proud to being to be able to help in this situation with a critical and historic investment in Tupper Lake. All New Yorkers deserve clean water. They can drink, that they can bathe in, and cook. And this is one step forward towards a safer and healthier North Country. There are no democratic or republican water lines. These funds directly impact the health and safety of this community and that is a universal benefit. This is a monumental investment and it will also further the economic development of the village and surrounding area. It will breathe new life into this region. We need sustainable solutions to bring resources to the North Country, and this investment is one of the best examples in this budget. It has been a great pleasure to work with leadership as well collaboratively, excuse me, with Mayor Fontana through this process and I vote in the affirmative. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mr. Cashman in the affirmative. Ms. Kay to explain her vote.

[Assemblymember Anil Beephan Jr. or Aileen M. Gunther (uncertain 'Ms. Kaye')]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My district is predominantly rural and we really have a crisis of healthcare in the 1 Hundredth District. And I am so proud to be able to say that two organizations, the Center for Discovery and Evergreen Meadows for Middle School Girls in Crisis have been funded with this budget. This healthcare funding is really going to be transformational and I thank leadership for everything that they have done.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Miss Kane, the affirmative. Miss Kasay to explain her vote.

[Assemblymember Jodi Giglio or Jarett Gandolfo (uncertain; Suffolk County member)]: Thank you. I rise today in support of this capital projects budget bill. I am particular, I wanna speak to the $20,000,000 that was has been allocated for resiliency projects within the county of Suffolk and more specifically even at least 6,500,000 of that which will go towards the the Stony Brook Mill Pond Dam project. This has been a project that has gone too long, unrepaired, and this funding from the state will absolutely help with moving that timeline along and making sure that the community's economic engine, public safety, and environment are restored as they should be. And I'm very proud to have helped bring this across the line and proud to vote yes on this capital project budget bill. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Ms. Kasay in the affirmative. Ms. Shimsky to explain her vote.

[Floor Staff/Deputy Presiding Officer]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. We spend a lot of time at Budget Time here talking about investing in

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: the

[Floor Staff/Deputy Presiding Officer]: future. Often that means things like education, social services, libraries, and so on. But the fact of the matter is, nothing can happen unless we take care of the underlying physical reality, which means our infrastructure, our buildings, our roads, our utilities, our water and wastewater provision. We know that we are way behind where we need to be to make sure our infrastructure is functioning property properly and is well maintained. New York state's roads rank forty seventh among 50 states in their in their quality at this point. We have all kinds of problems in the c to d range with various parts of our infrastructure. We need to plan for the future. This budget will help to some degree. We've taken the some of the edge off of inflation, for example, with the extra $50,000,000 in chips fund funding, and we've done that with some of our own state responsibilities as well. But in order to take care of everything and to transition into the future with clean, sustainable energy sources that will save us money and all kinds of other innovations that are needed in transportation, building systems, and so on. We are going to have to take a serious look when we look at how we are going to tackle affordability issues, child care, and everything else. We are also going to have to look at long range planning to make sure our infrastructure becomes second to none again. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, Ms. Shimskaya.

[Floor Staff/Deputy Presiding Officer]: I voted the affirmative.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, Mr. Chang to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. As I mentioned previously, this this budget bill has a lot of positive, a lot of negative budgets in there. But let me emphasize the the the positiveness of this bill that I support. First is infrastructure. This is a ready need to be done current to maintain the physical infrastructure of New York City and the state because we need that to be run. We need to have transportation, roads, and people to move effectively and efficiently. And the small increase to support the 2nd Avenue subway system, improvement of the National Guard facilities. They definitely need to be done. Many facilities are well over a century old. Supporting libraries, very extensive in New York City. And even though there's very small increase of $10,000,000, but in my borough of Brooklyn I represent is the botanical garden, the aquarium, and a zoo that this funds will support that, which I do know that many of my constituents' children do go to that using their facilities. Overall, unfortunately, this budget is not broad enough to to completely upgrade our infrastructure, our bridges to a current standard. More need to be done. But again, there's some budgets in there. There's some allocation that is not, I call it, wisely spent. But overall, I have think about our our community and my constituents and I support this bill. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Chang, in the affirmative, miss Walsh to explain her vote.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. So I'm going to support this bill, and I wanted to just call out a couple of the things that I think are really important for for my region. The county infrastructure grants are really important. The emergency medical services or EMS modernization that needs to take place is being supported here. The Volunteer Fire Infrastructure and Response Equipment grant program I think is very important. And I could name a lot of other things. And then lastly, as many people have said, the CHIPS funding I think is really important. I'm glad to see it increase. I also share the concern that many people voice that I I just don't think it's gonna be sufficient. Everything that I'm hearing from my highway superintendents, the counties that are dealing with increased weather events and the strain of all the EV and the heavier, you know, vehicles and everything on the roads, it's it's gonna need more money as we move forward. But I am glad to see that it was increased somewhat and that at least extreme winter recovery, Bridge New York, paved New York, paved our potholes, all that stuff remained at least at the same levels as last year. So I really do think that if as we look big picture at our state spending plan as a list of our priorities, I think that our priorities really need to be in maintaining our infrastructure. So I'm pleased to support this bill. I I would just note that legislative additions are of 490,000,000. I don't think any of that's coming back to my district, unfortunately. But I'm sure it will do a lot of good in other people's. So I'll be in the affirmative. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Miss Walsh in the affirmative, are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assemblymember Aileen M. Gunther or MaryJane Shimsky (uncertain)]: Ayes 107, nays 35.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: The bill is passed. Ms. Lunsford.

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Thank you Madam Speaker. I am delighted to announce our two final budget bills. Rules report number two twelve and rules report number two thirteen on page three. I would like to note sun sets at 08:22. Let's see what we can do.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you very much. Page three, rules report two one two. Clerk will read.

[Assemblymember Aileen M. Gunther or MaryJane Shimsky (uncertain)]: Assembly number 10000D, rules report number two one two, budget bill, an act making appropriations for the support of government.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Governor's message is at the desk. Clerk will read.

[Assemblymember Aileen M. Gunther or MaryJane Shimsky (uncertain)]: I hereby certify to an immediate vote governor Kathy Hochul.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: An explanation has been requested. Mister Pretlow.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: The bill before us contains major components of the legislation that is necessary to implement state operations bill. This bill includes $64,900,000,000 in appropriations or $44,000,000,000 in all fund spending to support the essential functions of state agencies.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mr. Palmisano.

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: Sorry about that.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Madam speaker, will this chairman yield for some questions?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Will the chair yield? Yes. I will. Chair yields.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Thank you, mister Pralow. Top of the ninth, bottom of the eighth?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Actually, it's the bottom of the eighth.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yeah. Swing big here, then I guess.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: No. I'm just kidding. Well, I predict a grand slam at the bottom of the ninth. So Yes. Have

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: some. Sorry,

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I have a little inside joke over here. Something. Sorry. How much does this bill

[Assemblymember Matt Slater]: appropriate? I

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: thought I just told you. I know I'll

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: tell you again. I'm sorry.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: That bill includes $64,900,000,000 in appropriations.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. And what is the fiscal impact or actual amount to be spent?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: 44,000,000,000 in all fund spending.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Thank you. I want to ask a couple of questions on agricultural, specifically around the office of renewable energy city, if I may.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Absolutely.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: The budget contains continues to pride fighting for ORIS to facilitate the sitting and approval of renewable energy projects across the state. Given the continued state investment in these efforts, do we know how many acres of agricultural land have been converted for wind and solar development over the past five years? Do we track that? Do we monitor that? Do we have that dot data? That would be helpful to have if you have it.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Sorry, sir. I do not have that data.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: No? Maybe that's something we can ask of them to track so we know. Because you would agree that taking of prime agricultural land is not a good thing or a healthy thing for these projects, wouldn't you?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Not being a farmer or a person in agriculture, it seems to be a lucrative investment for many individuals. So it may not be beneficial to excess food production, but if it's for increasing one's wealth, it may be the direction they want to go.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Sure. Certainly, don't blame the farmer because unfortunately some of the policies in the house have really punched him on the chin in a number of ways. I don't blame the farmer. But it is a concern that we've had about the prime farmland. But I'll go on. Is there anything in this budget bill that will help the Department of Ag and Markets to address the health and safety consequences of damage to wind and solar facilities on these agricultural lands? Anything here that will help address those issues or concerns or problems?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Not to my knowledge.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. And do you know to your knowledge any information, has the state ever conducted any analysis on the long term economic impacts of taking thousands of acres of agricultural land out of production for industrial scale energy products? Do you have any data or information on that? No. Okay. Do we know how many of these renewable energy projects approved through Auris have have well, we know many that have approved have faced opposition from local governments and with that wide volume of opposition that we continue to see in many local communities, particularly in Upstate New York, why does the state continue to override these local concerns and opposition?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, are pursuing the goals of the climate goals. These voters of the state of New York when they passed the environmental bind act committed billions of dollars for clean energy and for clean air and clean water. And what we are trying to do is to follow through with our commitments to the people of New York that did authorize us to do the environmental bond.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I understand that. And I know the bond act was approved to do some funding but that was for a host of issues.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: And what we're discussing right now are part of one of those issues or Sure. Some of those And

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: when I look at that and I know how you said to approve for the climate bills that we passed to address that need. Are you possibly aware you might not know, that's fine. This is 90% of our generation in Upstate New York is already emission free while 90% of the generation in Downstate New York City is fossil fuel based. Are you aware of those statistics?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Unfortunately, do not have a Niagara Falls in New York City.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: No, that's true. We nuclear and we do have wind and solar. Yes. But I guess with that, isn't it something maybe we should be saying if more of the emissions are coming from downstate, shouldn't we do some of the more of the work downstate where we take prime farmland and things of that nature?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, I think in a previous debate, I had indicated that 51% of the population of the state of New York lives on 2% of the land. That means the bulk of the state is actually, I use the word empty, the empire state, there's a lot of area for these facilities that you are referring to.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I understand. I understand where you coming from. Regarding environmental conservation and energy, concept, I know you know the has continued to raise the alarm, and I mentioned in our previous debate, about grid reliability. And we really have put ourselves in a position because of the support of the CLCPA, the closing of Indian Point which was clean energy bringing 2,000 megawatts of power to 25% of the population in New York City. Can you tell me, is there anything in this bill that supports the development of re reliable baseload power such as natural gas or nuclear power in this bill or this budget?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, the governor has proposed of building, I think, three or four nuclear power plants in the distant future.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: K?

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: All right. Bear

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: with me Mr. Prabhu. Have all day sir.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Oh, okay. Public protection, correctional facility funding. As we know, I think we talked about before, we know because of the staffing crisis we have in our correctional facilities, the governor fired 2,000 corrections officers. I believe there's a shortage of over 4,000 corrections officers, so they had to resort to put our emergency national guard inside our correctional facilities, correct? Correct. Is correct. And they've been there for over a year now. Correct? Yes. They have. And we spent was it about $535,000,000 last year. Is that correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm not sure of the number, but I think we'll probably spend the same amount this year.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. And then so we're probably looking at over $1,000,000,000 in in funds to have the National Guard in there.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Over the period of the two years.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Yes. Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: And do you with that funding that we've spent in there, do we have any reports from the governor back or do we know what, you know, what specifics can be provided on plans to stabilize the system with this funding? Are we getting any specific plans back? Because obviously they're not trained to be corrections officers.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Do we understand? Right. Okay. Well, we've done several things to try to alleviate the problem. Most recently, yesterday we did a pension bill. We also get away with the death Which

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: is great.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Is called, which the correction officers wanted. We spent $3,000,000 on recruitment. What else do we have to do? We have $150,000,000 in hiring and retention benefits that were being offered to new recruits. So the Governor is doing all she can to fully staff up the docks facilities with actual fully trained correction officers.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay. Do

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: we know how many national guards

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: The 3,000 guards have been currently deployed.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: 3,000 guards?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I shouldn't anticipate your questions.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: No. You're you're good, mister Paulo. So you you're good. So 3,000 guards. Okay.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: So it's 4,600 vacancies.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Since we're on corrections, have a question on what I know that on the commission of corrections, there's there's $3,000,000 in additional funding that's provided to the commission on correction, but the board of it this commission currently can't do anything because they don't have enough members. Do we know

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Are you referring the $3,000,000 that is set aside for recruitment?

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: No. I'm sorry. This is on the commission on corrections. There's it's my understanding. There's $3,000,000 in additional funding to provide the commission on provided to the commission on corrections. And but it's hard for them to do anything because the board currently can't do anything because they don't have enough members. So my question was gonna be on that front. Do you know or do we know when the governor plans to fully staff this commission? Okay.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I'm not sure that I I do know that there's a commission for the establishment of a medical examiner's office, but I'm not sure of the commission you're referring to. Okay. Alright. Commission The members are still being appointed. Okay.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: One second I'm sorry. There's one question on health I want to ask because I know we were talking about we talked about the nicotine pouches before. This budget bill does not include 4,700,000 for vapor product enforcement that was in the executive proposal. Should we assume this is due to the emission of other vapor product tax proposals?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: So, did reject the article seven that was in the governor's original submission.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Okay.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Then We didn't think that they needed any additional funding.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: And then, a little bit I want get into the Office of Cannabis Management for a minute if I could. I'm sorry to keep making you guys get up like that, I apologize. I promise I'm not doing it on purpose. We've obviously seen problems with the office of cannabis management. Yes. We've seen as far as enrolling problems with when they had the distance set up. I'm just kind of curious, do we know how they're dealing with the issue of the illegal, is it sticker stores, you know, that are still operating? Is that are we just empowering the locals to deal with that? Or is the state office of Kansas? Are they doing anything on that? Are we hearing any feedback from them on that?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: We we we passed legislation last year giving the office additional enforcement powers and I have noticed several so called smoke shops in my travels through Westchester and farther upstate that were closed for the sale of illegal cannabis. Okay. I think

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: one more question on that. I know this budget provides $79,800,000 to support the Office of Cannabis Management, which is really $11,700,000 more than last year. This increase is supposed to support contractual services for implementing Office of Cannabis Management's seed to sale, pack and trade system. Can you tell us the status of enrolling all the active licenses within the SDS system and how does the SDS system work?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay. They're in the process of staffing up up right now. If you ask me the same question in a month from now, I'll give you a better answer.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I promise I won't be asking you the question in a month now. How about that?

[Assembly Sergeant-at-Arms Wayne Jackson (speaking through member references)]: Where was I?

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: I want to ask a question on the Office of Child Care and Early Education. It's my understanding this new Office of Child Care and Early Education is being allocated 1,500,000 to implement universal child care. Yes. Will this office do we have any idea how this office will intend to implement this? Is there a time frame for its implementation?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: There is no time frame set at this point. We are just making the money available and believe you are talking about what's happening in New York City. I know there are several school districts outside of the city that are going to be doing under the guise of pre k early childcare.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Okay. Will this office be responsible for providing any cost estimates for the universal childcare? Will they be doing that? No. No. Do we know how much would implementing do we have how much implementing universal child care in New York state will

[Assemblymember Jenifer Rajkumar]: cost? Not

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: specifically for that, but that number would be in the 8 total.

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: Okay. That's fine. Mister I'll just

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: well, mister Pradlo, you know, I appreciate your time very much. Thank you. I'm just gonna go on the bill now for the rest of thank you, mister Pradlo. Madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Madam speaker, my colleagues, the end is in sight. One more bill after this, our state operations budget bill. Just a couple points that I kinda talked about in in the during the debate. I just want to highlight, it's very unfortunate that we still have to spend probably over $1,000,000,000 now to staff our correctional facilities with our national guard individuals who really never wanted to do that, and they were forced into doing it, don't have experience being inside our correctional facilities. We know working inside our correctional facilities is a dangerous job, but they're there to help. This happened because, you know, the governor fired 2,000 of our corrections officers and because of the situation inside our correctional facilities, the violence inside our correctional facilities, the mandatory overtime, the other challenges that they were facing was problematic. One way to get more corrections officers I mean, will say on a positive note, what we did yesterday in passing the death gamble legislation was probably one of the most positive and significant pieces of legislation this house has done to support our corrections officers. I'm glad we did that. I was proud that was part of that bill. Was something we have been advocating, especially after we passed unanimously three times and the governors two different governors vetoed several times. But what we wanna do, if we wanna take care of the staffing crisis inside our correctional facilities, we need we really need to double down and and pay these corrections officers more money, give them better benefits, give them more staff, make the work environment inside the correctional facilities safer, whether it's, you know, screening of contraband. You know, we've seen stories after stories. We see about the assaults happening inside our correctional facilities on a regular basis. We also see about stories of corrections officers and other civilian staff being overcome by substances that are getting inside our correctional facilities so we can make the system inside our correctional facilities even better so we just have people working there, not just having to deploy the National Guard at a cost, like I said, over $1,000,000,000 over the past two years. I will talk about ores again for a minute just because we see them time and time again. Ores, I mean they are taking prime farmland and as the chairman said, could be lucrative for our farmers. I don't have any problem with the farmers looking out for their best interest. Because what this body has done to our farming community over the years has not been positive. It goes back to the farm labor act, it goes back to other provisions that we've done that have made it very difficult and challenging to farm. So we we allow them to put solar and wind on their farm. We didn't allow them to to get natural gas out of their own land for some reason because we thought that was a bad idea, especially to the farmers in the southern tier who were screaming for it to happen on the PA border. They stole a stone. It happens to them and they can do it in the PA border, they can't do it in the southern tier of New York. But that's another discussion. But we continue to prioritize wind and solar, which is not a reliable base load generation. The ORAS continues to override local input, local control. If a local community doesn't want solar or wind in their community, why are they being forced to have it just to meet these clean energy mandates?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: And

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: the problem with this too is the amount of land this is taking up. When you talk about baseload generation, natural gas and nuclear is reliable baseload generation. And just to put into perspective the land use matter of this, for solar and the Climate Action Council plan says you need eight acres per megawatt. And the climate action council plan calls for 60 gigawatts of solar. That is 480,000 acres of land. You know where that land is going to come from? It's going come from Upstate New York because we have the land as the chairman acknowledged. But if you look at nuclear, which is energy dense, Indian Point, which the previous governor thought was a great idea to shut down, that was 2,000 megawatts on two forty acres of land. So eight acres per megawatt or two forty acres for 2,000 megawatts. Up Fitzpatrick up in Central New York it's 800 megawatts on 900 acres of land. So when it comes to a land use perspective, nuclear far is far far superior to wind and solar. From a land use perspective, it's a far far superior alternative from a reliable dispatchable base load generation and when you levelize those costs out over the entire lifespan of the projects because nuclear facilities last longer than wind and solar projects, those panels, those windmills, they last longer. When you levelize those costs, it's even more cost efficient. And with the technology advancing the way it is, when we get there, it's gonna be even better. But until we get there, because the the nice we said we we aren't there yet, the technology is not there yet. We need natural gas. But we continue to see this hostility of natural gas. That's why it'd be nice to see some things from the state support on that side of it. I know the governor calls for the all of the above, but policy after policy we continue to see doesn't show that all of the above approach. It just seems to have more of a hostility, really designed to dismantle the affordable and reliable natural gas infrastructure supply and delivery system, designed to take away consumer choice on how you heat your home, cook your food, power your building, the vehicle you drive. It will jeopardize reliability grid and lead to more nation leading out migration. But for the host of reasons, like others, you know, the amount of money we're spending in this budget, the amount of debt we're taking on, taxes as part of this whole package with the state operations bill, I will be voting in a negative, and I ask my colleagues to do the same. Thank you, madam speaker. Thank you, mister Prevost.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Molotar.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will the sponsor yield?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Patlow, will you yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Absolutely.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Sponsor yields.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: And mister Molotow, I'm going to anticipate your questions. Are you filing on the right bill?

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Here we are. This bill,

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: 4,500,000 is assigned to the Attorney General's Office of Management of Immigrant Trust.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. And it's my understanding that the Immigrant Trust Office is basically to enforce subpart A, subpart C, and subpart D of that immigrant omnibus

[Unidentified Member/Staff]: bill.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I believe so.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: So you would agree with me that that money that you just referenced does not have any connection to the other sections of that bill?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Well, the office of immigrant trust is supposed to do a complaint review and investigation. They do training and defense of representatives for state employers I'm sorry, employees.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Right. But, like, for example, subpart B of the Immigration Omnibus Act creates the New York State Bivens Act, which is a cause of action. And that has really nothing to do with the immigrant trust office. Isn't that correct?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: It has nothing to do with this, no.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Okay. And is there anything in this bill that or any appropriation in this bill that's connected to the convertible pistol ban? No. Okay. Alright. I I don't have any further questions. Thank you, mister Prelo.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister r Carroll.

[Assemblymember Brian Manktelow (Ranking Member, Veterans’ Affairs)]: On the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Robert C. Carroll]: Last year, this body passed a piece of legislation that created a statewide dyslexia and dysgraphia center at the state education department. This was important legislation to address the literacy crisis and to help some of our most vulnerable children who struggle with language based learning disability. This year, in this budget, we provide $1,500,000 of direct state funding to make sure that center can do its necessary work by hiring professionals to promulgate best practices, professional development, and guidance to schools throughout the state. I thank the leadership here in the assembly, particularly speaker Hasty, as

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: well

[Assemblymember Robert C. Carroll]: as governor Hochul for making sure that this necessary funding for the dyslexia and dysgraphia center happened this year. I want to again thank governor Hochul for her leadership on literacy and evidence based practices in our classrooms to solve and to address the the literacy crisis in our state. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, miss Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will chair Pretlow just yield for

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Pretlow, will you yield?

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: I guess I will.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: A little bit.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Pretlow yields.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Really, my questions out of just pure curiosity have to do with the emergency response funding under correctional facility emergency response. Do you know how much longer we're going to be doing things this way where we have the National Guards people in there doing this instead of corrections

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: on this? Have 4,600 vacancies in our penal system right now. Right. We have have assigned 3,000 national guards, men and women, to fill some of those or most of those vacancies. We put several things in place to try to recruit and retain several of the existing employee retain existing and recruit new employees so that we can reduce the number of National Guards people that are now assigned in our system. Okay. I can't give you a date. They all went to a job fair tomorrow. We hired 4,000. They will be going to Hampton tomorrow.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Okay. Thank you so much, chair Pretlow. Madam speaker, on the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Yes. So I mean, one of my biggest problems with this particular bill is this section. And really what it is, I mean, everyone talks about the Wildcat strike and everything that happened, you know, last year that precipitated the firing of all the corrections officers. I mean, here we are. We're in another year of having national guardsmen in doing the work that trained skilled corrections officers had done and should be doing because I mean the National Guardsmen are great. Actually I know one of them that's doing it and you know, but they're not trained for this. And I don't know I I don't know how the cost compares between the $535,000,000 that's appropriated in this section of the budget versus what it would cost to be fully staffed with corrections officers. But in a way it really that that's secondary to me than the fact that when you have incarcerated individuals, they want to be able to use programs that are available for them while they're in and they they can't do them because they don't have proper staffing within the correctional facility. And so in a way, there's a lot of finger pointing on this issue. You know, is it the corrections officer's fault for the wildcat strike? Is it is it the state's fault for creating an environment that made it so unpalatable that they decided to walk off? Is it a self inflicted wound on the part of the state by allowing this to I mean, do we are we do we have a complete lack of thousands of positions that aren't filled? It's not just simply because we have corrections officers that don't feel like working. They were told that they could not be rehired. I believe the ones who walked off and didn't come back when they were supposed to. So now we've got this just huge gap and this is creating a huge gap in the communities that host correctional facilities as well. I mean this is a huge part of their economy that's just shot. So I really am hoping that there would be some kind of an end in sight, but I don't really see anything to draw any comfort from out of this section of the budget. It just seems like it's becoming like a new normal. Well, just we'll throw $535,000,000 at it, same as we did last time. And I guess last year, 514,900,000 of last year's emergency funding has been spent. So it's it's getting spent. But this is this is not this is not the solution. So I I just wanted to bring that up. That's that's one of my big problems with this bill. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Read the last section.

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

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: A party vote has been requested. Miss Walsh?

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Yes. Thank you, madam speaker. Once again, the Republican conference will be generally speaking in the negative on this piece of legislation, but affirmative votes may be cast now at members' desks. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Miss Lunsford.

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The majority conference will generally be in the affirmative on this bill. If you would like to cast a no vote, you may do so from your desks. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Clerk will record the vote. Mister Chang, to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Aye, please.

[Assemblymember Lester Chang]: Thank you, madam speaker. I would like to explain my vote. There's a lot of good, a lot of bad, and a lot of pork I've seen, a lot of self licking ice cream program that is, I believe, a duplicate. And when I look at my district, in education side, veterans, support of military, I look at overall, that it will benefit, then I vote for the affirmative for this bill. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Chang and the affirmative. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

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

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: The bill is passed. Page three, rules report two thirteen. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number one zero zero zero one a, rules report two thirteen, budget bill, an act making appropriations for the support of government, legislature, and judiciary budget.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Governor's message is at the desk. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: I hereby certify to an immediate vote, Kathy Hochul, governor.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: An explanation has been requested. Mister Pretlow.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Yes, madam speaker. The bill before us contains major components of legislation that is necessary to enact the legislature and judiciary budgets for state fiscal year twenty six-twenty seven. This includes an all funds appropriation of $4,800,000,000.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Paul Massano.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: Yes, madam speaker. On the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill, sir.

[Assemblymember Philip Palmesano (Ranking Member, Ways and Means)]: And I wanted to go on a bit instead of explaining my votes in case I need a little bit more than two minutes. Not a lot more, but just so I have it. I really just wanted to start out my comments to say, first, thank you to my colleague, Pratlow, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. Thank you, Mr. Pratlow. It's been an honor and a privilege to work with you when I got put in this position and sitting next to you during the budget hearings. I've enjoyed our conversations. I've enjoyed our debates. I've enjoyed our banter. I've enjoyed that we can laugh a little bit while we have these discussions. I just wanted to say thank you to you first and foremost. I also want to say thank you to your staff, Phil and your team. First, I apologize for making you guys run back and forth when we bring up different issues. I just want to say thank you to all of you guys for what you do. I know the incredible work you do for Gary and your conference. And thank you for the relationship you have with our Ways and Means team too. I know how much they appreciate it and we appreciate that you have that relationship with them. So thank you and we salute you too. And certainly, when I look up there and I see that word legislature, I think of our staff in the minority conference. Every person, every department, every role, every position. I truly hope you know what a vital part you are of our conference, that we need you and we thank you. We simply do not function without you. Thank you so much for all you do. And if you'd allow me a little per point of personal privilege here, I'd like to speak about the men and women sitting behind me, and I hate that my back is turned to them. When leader Rob entrusted me with this position, it was a great honor, and I knew I was lucky, and I knew how great our ways and means team was. But the privilege I've had to work so closely with all of you for these more than three months, I've been able to see up close firsthand how simply incredible you are, your steadfast commitment and dedication is, your incredible and tireless work ethic, your perseverance, the long hours with little sleep, and you always, always have a smile on your face. When we say thank you, we say we're here to help, and you help. I'm amazed watching you. It's amazing to work with you. Listen, you shine all the time, but you especially shine this time of year. And I hope you never ever question how much I, how much the leader, how much all of us appreciate you, and the words I'm saying here today does not do the justice to express it. And I will say, in the past, when votes come out, when I'm down negatively on a lot of budget bills, I kinda vote no on the whole package. And many of our members do the same thing, and I understand that, but not this year. Not this year. This for this bill, when I see the word legislature up there, I see our incredible staff behind me. I see our incredible staff that we work with, and I just wanna say thank you to all of you. God bless all of you. Madam speaker, I vote yes.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister. Mister Molotore?

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Will the sponsor yield?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Pretlow, will you yield? Yes. Sponsor yields.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Thank you. Mister Pretlow, I'm assuming that in this bill, are no appropriations for the convertible pistol ban or for the immigration

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: There are absolutely no appropriations for pistol bans, immigrants, anything. This is strictly the legislature or the judiciary.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: Thank you. On the bill.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the bill.

[Unidentified Member (Republican)]: So, this bill funds the legislature. And, over the final four appropriation bills, I pulled out two pieces of policy legislation and established that there isn't any appropriation related to those policies. Why is this important? We all swore an oath to uphold the New York State constitution. Many of us on both sides of the aisle have lamented that there is policy in this budget and in previous years. We've had there's a lot of policy in this budget that has not gone through the committee process, and it should have, of course. But most importantly, those policies that I've pulled out, and I'm sure there's others, violates article seven, section six of the New York state constitution. And we can say, ah, Silver v Pataki. But this session's not over. And if we're really serious about doing something about policy in the budget where it shouldn't be, we should propose a constitutional amendment to change it. We could do that this year. That's what we should be doing. And for that reason, I'll be voting no. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Miss Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. On the bill. On the bill. So while I do, support the part of the bill that talks about the legislative spending because it's a 4.5% increase over last year. I don't appreciate the additional monies that are going in for the independent redistricting commission. But my real problem with this bill is the judiciary spending. Oh my god, it's huge. Have you guys seen this? I'm sure you've seen it. I just got briefed on it this morning. But it's up 8.8% over last year. It's $359,200,000 more than last year. Okay? It includes 15 new judgeships. Where? Not in the 4th Judicial District, I'll tell you that. I think that they're all downstate. They're not helping us standing up here. And a salary increase of 2% for all judges and justices. So I think the portion of the spending, I think it's appropriate and I'll support that but I can't vote up on this bill because of the judiciary spending. I think it's ridiculous. I don't know. But let's not end on a down note. Let me end on a happy note here. Mr. Palmisano just got up and he spoke and in true Phil Palmisano fashion thanked every other person in this room including his fantastic WAM staff. He thanked Philip. He thanked else. I'd like to thank him. I mean, he stepped into some big shoes at the beginning of this session and he stepped in and he's performed very admirably. I think that his back and forth with chair Pretlow has been very respectful, very productive. It's been just a very honest debate and conversation and I think that's the way it ought to be. And I really want us to all thank Phil. He didn't mention The Congo very much. Little bit. Little bit. But he was was great. He was really great. He did a great job and I just would like for myself and I think from our members and hopefully from some of yours, all of yours, we could all just say thank you to to Phil Pomisano and the entire WAM staff for all the wonderful work that they did.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Pretlow.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Thank you, madam speaker. First of all, madam leader, I don't know how advisable it is to talk about judge's salaries being an attorney, but I won't go I won't go there. Back in February, the Governor gave us a budget, her version of a budget, which was then followed by thirty day amendments. We had 14 public hearings in which leadership changed. I first sat next to Mr. Ra and then was transferred to Mr. Polisano. I got along perfectly with both of them. Here we are fifty six days past the April 1 deadline, but we are now finalizing a budget and I think this is a good budget. Since this is a moment of thanks, I have to first thank the speaker, first for giving me this position and secondly trusting me with the debate and defending the Governor's budget. Secondly, have to thank the Ways of Means staff. As your Ways of Means staff is great, my Ways of Means staff is fantastic And, you know, we're under the leadership. It's hard when you start calling names, but Phil's name has been called several times. I don't know how he does it, Phil knows every number and there's thousands of pages of budget. You ask him a number, he somehow knows the right answer. I don't know how he does it. But him and Marie and Victor and everyone below them, just his team leaders, they're all just fantastic. Everybody did their thing. It's kind of difficult when doing the curly shuffle here, so I would appreciate it more if we stick to one subject at a time. But anyway, I think we did great. I think this is a good budget. I'm glad that it's finally done. We have one week and two days of session left and we have to do hundreds, maybe even thousands of bills in the next time. I would appreciate if you guys didn't lay the bills aside so we can get them. Vote yes, vote no but don't lay them aside. Didn't think the program accounts, Jen Bess and her crew. Where are you, Jen? She's somewhere here. Oh, there she is. Do the other half of this. I think we did. This is a good team. And think that we as a group, all of us, our colleagues have a good camaraderie together. We've all worked together. We don't have any crazies on either side, which I think is a good thing. And if you do, you're not showing them on the floor. That's okay. I don't know what goes on in your conference, but I do know when the floor everybody is most respectful and we get what we have to get done. So with that, I guess we can read the last section or is it time?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: We have a bit more work mister Pretlow.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Okay.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, sir. Miss People Stokes.

[Majority Leader Crystal Peoples-Stokes]: What an amazing opportunity to be here. I have been watching for the first time in my entire career as an assembly member, the budget being debated virtually. I'm not sure how people watch that on TV, But I watched it obviously because you, one, wanna keep up with the issues and two, you wanna support and honor your colleagues the way you should be and paying attention to what they're saying and doing. I certainly, at this point, wanna really honor the speaker for his ability to pull everybody together and make something out of it. This is how the sauces are made. It's not cute. In fact, it's ugly, but it gets done. So congratulations to everybody who had a part in this. But I particularly wanna honor this young man right here. Gary is such a cool person too. You can't tell if you upset him or not. He just nicely responds and pretty much shuts down the conversation as he does so. And so I'm really very, very proud of how you've managed to be the chair of Ways and Means. I when I got here, Denny Farrell was the man who was standing stellar and tall and making it happen. And to see you follow his footsteps in the way you are is impressive. Thank you very much. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, madam majority leader. Read the last section.

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

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Party votes been requested. Miss Walsh.

[Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (Republican Floor Leader)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The republican conference will generally be in the negative, on this bill. But, if there are affirmative votes, now is the time to cast them at one seats. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, miss Pipo Stokes.

[Majority Leader Crystal Peoples-Stokes]: Thank you, madam speaker. The majority conferences generally are gonna be in favor of this peace alert decision. However, as you know, sometimes some of us are not. And if you are not, you should feel free to do so at your seat.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. The clerk will record the vote. Mr. Steck to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Phil Steck]: Thank you, madam speaker. I wish to thank member Walsh for talking about a taboo subject. In this year's budget hearing, I was asked as Chair of the Committee on Alcoholism and Substance Abuse that we provide $44,000,000 in further funding for drug court. I asked the speaker whether she had sought the money from the Office of Court Administration. She replied that OCA said to get the money from OASAS. The OASAS budget increase is 0.1% while OCA is getting an 8% increase. Clearly OCA can afford to fully fund drug court. We keep ceding legislative authority and funding to OCA without sound reason. OCA claims they are an independent branch of government. They misconstrue what judicial independence means. It means independence in deciding the cases before them. No one is interfering with that, but they are no different than any other state agency in relation to legislative authority over the budget. It is a rule of government that bureaucracy tends to expand its power unless it is reigned in. I see the need to bring this ever expanding giant octopus under control. I vote in the negative.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Stack in the negative. Mister Beep Bend to explain his vote.

[Assemblymember Anil Beephan Jr.]: Thank you, madam speaker. To recap, I could tell you this is probably the first that I voted for majority of the 10 budget bills, but so much of what we've been advocating for is a conference in the community within them. From delays to the CLCPA and the bus mandate that my schools have been asking for, to the inclusion of the death gamble bill for our corrections officers. I'm proud that Dutchess County is one of the counties that's included in the universal child care pilot program, and on top of that, the increased ability for the PSC to regulate utility rate increase and these are all things that my community has been asking for over the years. So with that madam speaker, I vote aye.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Beepin in the affirmative. Are there any other votes? Announce the results.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Aye, it's 98, and aye's 44.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: The bill is passed. My colleagues, we have more work

[Assemblymember Marcela Mitaynes]: to do here.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the main calendar, resolutions page three, clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen forty five rules at the request of miss Kaye legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 08/07/2026 as Purple Heart Day in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Miss Kay on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Anil Beephan Jr. or Aileen M. Gunther (uncertain 'Ms. Kaye')]: Thank you, madam speaker. Purple Heart Medal is the oldest military decoration in the world in present use and is awarded in the name of the President of The United States to members of the United States military who have been wounded or killed in action. From the days of George Washington, our nation's military leaders have been awarded the Purple Heart in the name of the president to honor almost 2,000,000 Americans who have been wounded and battled or killed in action. The National Purple Heart Hall of Fame is located in New Windsor, New York and is an officially recognized state park under the jurisdiction of the Palisades Interstate Park Commission. The freedoms and the securities that we cherish as Americans come at a very high price for those serving in the military. It is fitting and it is proper that we, who are the beneficiaries of their courage, of those who risk their lives, leaving their families behind, express our appreciation and eternal gratitude for their sacrifices and courageous acts. I would be remiss if I did not mention the late former Sullivan County District Attorney, Stephen Lundin, a Purple Heart recipient, and of course, members in this chamber today, Joe Angelino, and our very own, the one and only, sergeant Wayne Jackson, who are both recipients, and we are so grateful for your sacrifice and service.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Eakus on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Chris Eachus]: Thank you, madam chair. The National Purple Heart Hall of Honor is in my district. And the one thing

[Assemblymember Michael Tannousis]: that I did want to mention is that the Purple Hearts do not have a national registry. So there are a number of folks out there who have received Purple Hearts that are out and unknown. And so I would encourage all of us, if we run into somebody who has received the Purple Heart, to encourage them to take their stories to the Purple Heart Hall of Honor. They are trying to put all of the folks who were given this this medal recognition. So I just wanted to let you know that. It's not

[Assemblymember Chris Eachus]: like the medal of honor or anything else which there

[Assemblymember Michael Tannousis]: is a national listing for. Thank you very much.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Bendet, on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Scott Bendett]: Thank you, madam speaker. I want to thank the sponsor of this resolution for bringing this to all of our attention. I think it's really important. I also want to thank my colleague, John McDonald, for last year passing the Purple Heart Bill and making our state a Purple Heart Bill. And, I also want to say that I'm grateful that my grandfather, Technical Sergeant Julius Bendet, not only had a combat infantry badge, a bronze star, a good conduct medal, but he also earned a Purple Heart as well.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Angelino on the resolution.

[Assembly Sergeant-at-Arms Wayne Jackson (speaking through member references)]: Thank you, madam speaker. On the resolution, I rise to, support Purple Heart Day in the state of New York with my humble words and voice. As was said, the purple heart medal is the oldest decoration in the united states military. Under the hand of general george washington in 1782, the Purple Heart was first awarded in New Windsor, New York, much to the chagrin of Newburgh. Every military member is eligible to receive the Purple Heart Medal, but none want to receive it. It is not awarded for merit, for achievements, your rank, or recognition of any good deeds you have done. It is awarded for sacrifice. Every volunteer member of the United States military raises their right hand, takes an oath, and those magic words are actually a blank check to The United States Of America. And sometimes that blank check is cashed. And sometimes it's a limb, sometimes it's bloodshed, and sometimes it's a life. But behind every Purple Heart medal awarded to a soldier, an airman, a marine, or a sailor, that's actually somebody's son or daughter, a neighbor, a nephew, a loved one. It's not just as abstract as that. Young men and women, all volunteers, have been awarded this medal. As legislatures as legislators here in this chamber, that's a good reminder for us to to think back and the people who were awarded this medal are the ones who allow us to come in here and debate bills for the people of the state of New York. Americans put themselves in harm's way so that we can do the jobs we do here. It's more than a medal. It's a symbol of solemn courage, of sacrifice, and to every Purple Heart recipient in New York State, and on behalf of our sergeant in arms who doesn't have a microphone to say these things, on behalf of everybody in America who wears this award, thank you very much for your selfless sacrifice. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you, mister Antonio. Mister Ari Brown on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Ari Brown]: Thank you, madam speaker. Speaker Hasty was so kind to arrange for tomorrow that we can donate blood. And I I'm in the, I don't know, 50 gallon mark blood donor over the last forty years. A couple years ago, I got a call. You matched for someone for a kidney and there's a lot of testing and everything like that. He said you made your decision so quickly to say yes. It was anonymous. They told me a little bit about the person. When they told me he was a purple heart veteran, said, wow. I can finally give back to the real heroes, Joe Angelino, certainly our sergeant at arms, Wayne Jackson. It was the least we can all do. We thank them each and every day whether a tax benefit or getting up and applauding during Veterans Day or Memorial Day. But to be able to give back in that way, I'm so grateful and blessed to have done so. So I wanna thank all of our men in service whether they received the Purple Heart or not, but especially those that gave sometimes life and limb. So thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Mister Tague on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Chris Tague]: Thank you, madam speaker. I too just wanna say thank you to people like Wayne Jackson and especially my good friend, Joe Angelino. My grandfather was also a Purple Heart recipient during World War two. But most importantly, I just wanted to say, Joe, please shave. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: 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 fourteen forty six rules at the request of mister Sayej legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 05/25/2026 as Jordanian American Heritage Day in the state of New York.

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

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen forty seven rules at the request of mister Gandalfo. Legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 09/01/2026 as Police Dog Day in the state of New York.

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

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen forty eight rules at the request of miss Delevingne resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim September 2026 as Urological Health Awareness Month in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? No. The resolution is adopted.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen forty nine rules at the request of mister Jensen legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 10/06/2026 as Danish American Heritage Day in the state of New York.

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

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen fifty rules at the request of Mr. Ra, Legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 10/08/2026 as site day in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Ra on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Ed Ra]: Thank you, madam speaker. Thank you to my colleagues for giving me the opportunity to speak quickly about this. This resolution came about a few years ago and we had the opportunity to pass it last year. And I just want to quickly mention amongst the things that are mentioned in this resolution is a congenital eye condition called coloboma, which is where normal tissue in and around the eye is missing, which essentially creates a gap or a hole. It occurs during fetal development when a specialized fissure in the eye fails to close completely. It can lead to various levels of blindness from almost complete to, you know, people that are able to, you know, have a little bit better vision. I have had the opportunity to to come to know about it over the last few years because my nephew, Antonio, was was born with with this condition. And when he was about six months old during a, you know, routine doctor appointment, they realized that he wasn't kind of reacting to things with his eyes and had him go get checked out. But he is going to be five years old this fall. He's in school. He's doing very well. He's the happiest kid you you'd ever wanna meet. But, you know, it's a challenge that he'll he'll carry with him throughout his life, and I and I one of the great things about serving in this chamber is us having the opportunity to bring stories of whether constituents of family members to create awareness for for these types of things. I I do wanna mention, if anybody is a fan of the Olympics, if you remember the pommel horse guy from the summer Olympics last year, Steven Neroznik, he actually has coloboma as well. And he would take off his glasses and go do these world class routines and help The United States to a medal. So people can have very productive lives despite having vision impairments and I'm proud to have the opportunity to talk about my nephew Antonio and spread awareness for this disease. So, thank you to my colleagues.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Resolution is adopted.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen fifty one rules at the request of Mr. Mangtilo. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 10/21/2026 as Pets for Veterans Day in the state of New York.

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

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen fifty two rules at the request of mister Lamandes. Legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 10/31/2026 as Hug a Sheep Day in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Lamone is on the resolution.

[Speaker 57]: Thank you, madam speaker. I know it's been a long day for everyone, myself included. Let me give everybody a reason to leave here with a smile today. National Huggers Sheep Day is a unique celebration bringing people closer to these fluffy, lovable farm animals. Think the sheep detective movie. If you haven't seen it, please see it. This special day has grown into an international event with farms opening their gates for people to come and hug sheep, promoting kindness and compassion towards these gentle creatures. Celebrated since the mid nineteen nineties, the day aims to appreciate the significant roles sheep play in our lives from providing wool for our clothes to contributing to excellent food and solar grazing, etcetera, and other uses across the domain of agriculture. It's a chance to learn more about sheep, their intelligence, and their ability to remember faces and voices for years. Engaging activities such as farm visits, petting zoos, and knitting classes are often done on this day. There's something for everyone whether it's learning about their rectangular pupils or simply enjoying the warmth of a sheep hug. National Hug a Sheep Day not only celebrates the bond between humans and sheep, but also highlights the importance of animal welfare and ethical treatment. It's a gentle reminder of these animals' joy and comfort in our lives and the need to treat them with love and respect. Embark on a farm adventure by finding a local farm that's open to visitors. This is your chance to get up close and personal with sheep and give them a gentle hug. It's an authentic way to experience the warmth of these woolly friends in their natural setting. Gather your friends for a cozy get together, knitting or crocheting with sheep's wool while exchanging interesting sheep facts. It's both a creative and informative way to spend a family friendly day with wonderful animals. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying I. Opposed. No. The resolution is adopted.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen fifty three rules at the request of mister Maher. Legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim October 2026 as respiratory care week in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? No. The resolution is adopted.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen fifty four rules at the request of Mr. Brabanek. Legislative resolution memorializing Governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim October 2026 as German American Heritage Month in the state of New York.

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

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen fifty five rules at the request of mister Bendett. Legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 11/17/2026 as Young Entrepreneur Day in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? No. The resolution is adopted.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen fifty six rules at the request of miss Rosenthal legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim November 2026 as pancreatic cancer awareness month in the state of New York.

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

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen sixty rules at the request of mister Ramos. Legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 05/27/2026 as Taiwan Heritage Day in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? No. The resolution is adopted.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen sixty one rules at the request of mister Ecas. Legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim 05/27/2026 as senior health and fitness day in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mister Eckis on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Chris Eachus]: Thank you, madam speaker. I rise today in support of this resolution being a super senior myself and constantly need reminding about my health and my fitness. So I proclaim that, today, May twenty seventh twenty twenty sixth is senior health and fitness day in the state of New York on the last Wednesday in May. We celebrate and recognize the efforts to increase health awareness and promote involvement in physical activity amongst our senior citizens. Participating in Senior Health and Fitness Day has numerous health benefits. Being active can decrease fall risk, reduce blood pressure, and help maintain healthy bones and muscles. Our senior citizens have a vast wealth of experience and knowledge that they pass on to the next generations. It's important that we support the activity for people to be happy and healthy. Senior Health and Fitness Day is an opportunity to boost the health and wellness of our aging population and to provide necessary educational resources to promote the benefits of being active. I hope my colleagues will join me in voting for this resolution.

[Assemblymember Gary Pretlow (Chair, Ways and Means)]: Thank you.

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

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen sixty two rules at the request of miss Simon. Legislative resolution memorializing governor Kathy Hochul to proclaim May 2026 as Mental Health Awareness Month in the state of New York.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Miss Simon, on the resolution.

[Speaker 58]: Thank you, madam speaker. I rise in support of this resolution. May is Mental Health Awareness Month. And as chair of the Mental Health Committee, I have been inundated with information about the way our state provides services, the good work that our state does to help people with mental illness, and the work that we still need to do. I know that you join me in recognizing that mental illness affects all of us. It affects all of our communities. It is a crying need that is becoming a greater need every day in our society. And I am, just very grateful to have the support for an issue that I know is truly bipartisan. In my committee, we have very few questions about the votes because everybody cares about mental health and we need to do more. I'm very happy that we're doing more on youth mental health this year in the budget and all the work that we've done to help people with mental illness with community based services which are so much more effective than the more institutional based services. So I want to thank all of you again for your work and for your help and your support. And I encourage you all to vote yay on this resolution. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Ms. Chandler Waterman on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Monique Chandler-Waterman]: Thank you Madam Speaker. Today I rise to recognize May as Mental Health Awareness Month and we wear green. As a member of the Mental Health Committee and the co chair of the Anti Gun Violence Subcommittee of the Black Puerto Rican Hispanic Asian Caucus, the work the state carries out to support communities is crucial. We need to make sure we underscore the strong need for real investments in holistic mental health solutions for our communities as we work to destigmatize and decriminalize mental health. We need to ensure we are person centered in our approach, peer led and culturally responsive, increasing the very effective clubhouse model around the state. We have taken steps for it as a state by dedicating a three digit number, 988, a crisis and suicide prevention hotline in an effort to remove a police response and have mental health professionals to support. We also changed the term emotionally disturbed person, EDP, to a person experiencing an emotional crisis, PC. Language is very important. How you talk about a person is how you treat them. We also took great steps in strengthening oversight like incident review panels to ensure mental health incidents are thoroughly investigated and results are transparent so we can learn from these situations to improve. So, individuals living with mental health conditions, mental health professionals and caretakers are all protected and supported. This year, along with our amazing chair, Simon of Mental Health, the sponsor of this resolution, we requested the Office of Mental Health to activate the incident review panel to look into lieutenant Michael Lynch, a retired FDN and NYPD officer that died in the police involved shooting at the hospital while displaying signs of acute mental health crisis. We need to understand what happened in this incident to prevent other individuals, families, and health professionals and hospital staff from experiencing traumatic experiences like this. A hospital is supposed to be a safe space and we have a tool to assess and restore hope. We also made great strides by investing $8,000,000 in Daniel's Law, this session pilot program to ensure we have peers and community stakeholders leading the conversation on what mental health services, resources and programs should look like in our communities. The trauma of gun violence and domestic violence have a severe impact on families and communities. We have to ensure we support survivors in a real way. We must also focus on survivors of violence who deal with the trauma long after their loved one is buried. This session, we need to take significant steps to ensure that there is expansion of support of Office of Victim Services to assist survivors who are recovering from trauma and rebuild their lives. Barriers have prevented the families of the victims of violence from receiving necessary claims and support. It's not just burial reimbursement, but mental health support, victim compensation programs to help survivors pay for costs, medical bills, mental health and family council, crime scene clean up and so much more. No family after dealing with tragedy of losing a loved one should further be further traumatized by having to figure out funds to bury their loved one or being denied because they are told their loved ones contributed to their death or being denied because of GoFundMe account that helps cover funeral costs. Millions of Americans struggle with mental health challenges every day and are subject to stigma, systematic barriers to care, insurance issues, a shortage of providers, discrimination, expensive treatment, so much more issues we won't even know about because these individuals feel they do not have a voice. And this is the reality of many New Yorkers and communities of colors. I vote in affirmative and we have so much work to do, but we have done so much great steps in the state. So I encourage my colleagues to do the same. Thank you to the sponsor on this resolution. Thank you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? No. The resolution is adopted. Miss Lunsford.

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: Madam speaker, do we have any further housekeeping or resolutions?

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: We have both. On a motion by mister Baras, page 30, calendar number one sixty three, bill number a six five four zero d, the amendments are received and adopted. On a motion by miss Pollan, page 39, calendar number three seventy nine, bill number a one zero three zero seven. The amendments are received and adopted. A resolution by mister Fitz Patrick. Clerk will read.

[Assembly Reading Clerk]: Assembly number fourteen fifty seven, Mr. Fitz Patrick. Legislative resolution mourning the untimely death and paying tribute to the life and heroic service of Nassau County Police Officer, Patricia Espinosa, who died on Saturday, 01/31/2026.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Mr. Fitzpatrick on the resolution.

[Assemblymember Michael J. Fitzpatrick]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This legislative resolution mourns the untimely death and pays tribute to the life and heroic service of Nassau County Police Officer Patricia Espinosa, who died on Saturday, 01/31/2026. Police Officer Espinosa tragically died in a car accident on her way to work that morning when she was struck by a truck driven by a young man who was later arrested and charged with drunk driving. Though I did not know police officer Espinosa personally, she and her family lived around the block from me At her funeral mass held at St. Patrick's Church in Smithtown, community support was overwhelming. The outpouring of the law enforcement family and friends who came to honor her life and mourn her death was a tribute to the respect they had for her. A tragedy that never should have happened by a reckless individual who cut her life short in an instant. Police Officer Espinosa was the wife of Nassau County Police Officer Francisco Malaga and the mother of their two year old daughter, Mia. Police Officer Espinosa emigrated from Quito, Ecuador, when she was 21 years of age. She previously served as a New York State Correction Officer prior to becoming a police officer in 2017. Police Officer Espinosa Patricia Espinosa worked in the fifth Precinct of the Nassau County Police Department, was actively involved with the Nassau County Police Hispanic Society, served as a training officer, and participated in youth mentorship initiatives and community outreach. May this resolution express the sincere condolences of this legislative body to the family of police officer Patricia Espinosa who served the community and this state with integrity and courage. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. Miss Selaj, on the resolution.

[Speaker 59]: Thank you, madam speaker. Today, I rise with a heavy heart to honor Nassau County Police Officer, Patricia Espinoza, and recognize a life of service that ended far too soon. For me, this resolution is especially personal because Patricia served in the 5th Precinct that covered the communities that I know and represent, including Elmont, South Floor Park, Franklin Square, and Valley Stream. In so many ways, she personified what community policing was. She showed up consistently to community members. And for them, they never saw a uniform. They saw a person who cared, who came to community events, who came to school events, who talked to young people in such a beautiful way. She was a mother, a wife, a colleague, a neighbor and spirit to so many families in the 5th Precinct and beyond. She was an active member of the Nassau County Police Hispanic Society and did so much work with the Make A Wish Foundation where she really made a difference in so many people's lives. Her work reflected a powerful idea that communities are strongest when people feel seen, respected, and protected. And every day she put on that uniform, she made a decision to serve our community in such a special way. This is why this loss feels so profound. To her family, thank you for sharing her with our community. Public service is something that you never carry alone, and families make a sacrifice too, and we recognize that today. Today's resolution cannot erase the loss, but I wanna ensure that officer Espinosa's legacy endures. May we remember her as someone who embodied service, strengthened community trust, and remind us that behind the badge is a human committed to making sure that we are all protected in a way that we deserve. May her memory be a blessing to us all, and thank you so much. We will miss you.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: Thank you. On the resolution, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? No. The resolution is 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. Opposed? No. The resolutions are adopted. Miss Lunsford.

[Assemblymember Jen Lunsford (Majority Floor Leader)]: I now move that the assembly stand adjourned that we reconvene at ten a. M. Thursday, May 28, tomorrow being a session day.

[Acting Speaker (Presiding Officer)]: 10AM tomorrow on miss Lunsford's motion. The house stands adjourned.