Gaveled in 10:00 AM · Albany, New York · 2011–12 session
NEW YORK STATE SENATE
THE STENOGRAPHIC RECORD
ALBANY, NEW YORK
March 30, 2012
10:00 a.m.
REGULAR SESSION
SENATOR JOSEPH A. GRIFFO, Acting President
FRANCIS W. PATIENCE, Secretary
P R O C E E D I N G SACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senate will come to order.
I ask all present to please rise and join with me as we recite the Pledge of Allegiance to our Flag.
(Whereupon, the assemblage recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Today we are honored to have with us Imam Ohi Chowdhury, of Parkchester Jame Masjid, Inc., in the Bronx.
Imam.
IMAM CHOWDHURY:(Chanting in Bangla) Good morning, everybody.
"All mankind, verily we have created you male and female and have made you nations and tribes that you may know one another. Certainly the noblest of you in the sight of Allah is the best in conduct. Verily Allah is the best knower." Chapter 49, Part 13 {Quran}.
Thank you, everybody. May God bless America, may God bless New York, may God bless all of us.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Imam, for that invocation.
The reading of the Journal.
THE SECRETARY:In Senate, Thursday, March 29th, the Senate met pursuant to adjournment. The Journal of Wednesday, March 28th, was read and approved. On motion, Senate adjourned.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Without objection, the Journal stands approved as read.
Presentation of petitions.
Messages from the Assembly.
Messages from the Governor.
Reports of standing committees.
Reports of select committees.
Communications and reports from state officers.
Motions and resolutions.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, I believe there's a resolution at the desk by Senator Ranzenhofer, Number 3876. Could we ask that it be read in its entirety and move for its immediate adoption.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Legislative Resolution Number 3876, by Senator Ranzenhofer, mourning the untimely death of Sergeant William R. Wilson III of Getzville, New York, and paying tribute to his courageous actions as a member of the United States Army.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:May I have some order in the chamber, please.
The Secretary will continue to read the entire resolution.
THE SECRETARY:"WHEREAS, The courage and bravery of our military personnel since the United States Armed Forces commenced Operation Enduring Freedom will ensure our continued role as a nation which embodies the ideals of democracy and as a defender of liberty for people throughout the world; and
"WHEREAS, Members of the Armed Services from the State of New York who have served so valiantly and honorably during Operation Enduring Freedom deserve a special salute from this Legislative Body; and
"WHEREAS, It is with feelings of deepest regret that this Legislative Body mourns the untimely death of Sergeant William R. Wilson III of Getzville, New York, and pays tribute to his courageous actions as a member of the United States Army; and
"WHEREAS, Army Sergeant William R. Wilson III was killed in Paktika Province, located in the eastern part of Afghanistan, on Monday, March 26, 2012. The 27-year-old Army squad leader was training Afghan soldiers and police to take over the country's security when the United States withdraws from Afghanistan in 2014; and
"WHEREAS, Sergeant William R. Wilson III enlisted in the United States Army in 2005. Although he was stationed in Germany, he was serving another tour in Afghanistan; and
"WHEREAS, Affectionately known as Billy by his family, Sergeant William R. Wilson III was the loving son of William and Kimberly Wilson; and
"WHEREAS, He is a 2003 graduate of Williamsville North High School and was recently home visiting family in Western New York; and
"WHEREAS, The banner of freedom will always wave over our beloved New York and all of America, the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave; and
"WHEREAS, Residents of this great State must never forget the courage with which these men and women served their country, and must recognize that no greater debt is owed than that owed to those who gave their lives for their beloved nation and to those who continue to be missing in action; and
"WHEREAS, The freedoms and security we cherish as Americans come at a very high price for those serving in the military in times of conflict. It is fitting and proper that we who are the beneficiaries of those who risk their lives, leaving their families behind, express our appreciation and eternal gratitude for their sacrifices and courageous acts; now, therefore, be it
"RESOLVED, That this Legislative Body pause in its deliberations to mourn the untimely death of Sergeant William R. Wilson III of Getzville, New York, and to pay tribute to his courageous actions as a member of the United States Army; and be it further
"RESOLVED, That a copy of this resolution, suitably engrossed, be transmitted to the family of Sergeant William R. Wilson III."
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Ranzenhofer.
SENATOR RANZENHOFER:Thank you, Mr. President.
I'd like to express our gratitude to Staff Sergeant William Wilson for his service and courage that he displayed in service to our country. I'd also like to express our condolences to Kimberly and William Wilson, his parents, and their family and friends.
Sergeant Wilson was a graduate of Williamsville North High School, he graduated in 2003. As a matter of fact, he was a classmate of my son's, who graduated that same year.
He was doing his job, serving his country. He was killed while serving his country. He made the ultimate sacrifice to keep us safe in New York and in the United States.
I'd also like to thank the Governor for directing that flags be lowered to half-mast on Monday for Sergeant Wilson and for others who have served and been killed while in combat and while serving their country.
And again, I'd like to express our gratitude and our thanks for his courage, for his service to our country, and express our very, very deep sorrow and condolences to his parents, his family and friends.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Ranzenhofer.
I ask all to remain silent for a moment of reflection in honor of Sergeant William R. Wilson. Please rise.
(Whereupon, the assemblage rose and respected a moment of silence.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:On the resolution, all in favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Opposed?
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The resolution is adopted.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, I believe that Senator Ranzenhofer would open the resolution up for cosponsorship to all members. If there's any member wishing not to be on the resolution, please let the desk know.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:So ordered.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, there's a resolution by Senator Ball at the desk. Could you have its title read and move for its immediate adoption.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Legislative Resolution Number 3915, by Senator Ball, commemorating the observance of Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day on March 30, 2012.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:All in favor of the resolution signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Opposed?
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The resolution is adopted.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, there's a resolution at the desk, Number 3869, by Senator Diaz. Can we please have it read in its entirety and move for its immediate adoption.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Legislative Resolution Number 3869, by Senator Diaz, celebrating Bangladesh Day.
"WHEREAS, March 26th is the national independence day of Bangladesh. This day is celebrated in Bangladesh and also all around the world in honor of its country's declaration of independence from Pakistan in the late hours of March 25, 1971, and the start of the Bangladesh Liberation War; and
"WHEREAS, This day is also a memorial to the deaths of thousands of students, civilians, political leaders, and unarmed Bengali people. The Bangladesh Liberation War started between West and East Pakistan; and
"WHEREAS, West Pakistan believed they were far superior to those in East Pakistan. They gave East Pakistan no privileges. They had a bad economy, and no rights; and
"WHEREAS, The first election in the history of Pakistan was held on December 7, 1970. There were 300 seats in the parliament; east Pakistan won 160 seats and West Pakistan won 81 seats. Instead of handing over the power to the winning party, they imposed martial law on East Pakistan; and
"WHEREAS, East Pakistani leader Mr. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman urged the Bengali people to turn their homes into resisting forts. He said, "Our struggle is for our freedom. Our struggle is for our independence." This speech is what mainly inspired the nation to fight for freedom; and
"WHEREAS, The West Pakistani army sent a military plan known as Operation Searchlight. It was planned to curb the Bengali's movement by taking control of major cities and eliminating all opposition, political or military; and
"WHEREAS, At this point, March 26, 1971, the Bangladesh Liberation War had broken out in the whole country. This was the day the Bengali people stood up to the Pakistani Army; and
"WHEREAS, After a nine-month-long war, the Pakistani army finally surrendered unconditionally. Many lives were lost, but Bangladesh, as a country, gained its freedom, its independence; now, therefore, be it
"RESOLVED, That this Legislative Body pause in its deliberations to celebrate Bangladesh Independence Day."
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz.
SENATOR DIAZ:Thank you, Mr. President.
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I would like to start by thanking Senator Skelos and Senator Libous for granting me the opportunity and the honor of being the sponsor of this resolution today.
Mr. President and ladies and gentlemen, today I'm proud, I am a proud Puerto Rican and I am the proud sponsor of this legislative resolution celebrating Bangladesh Day for the first time here in this chamber, in this honorable body. This is the first time that we're doing this and honoring the people of Bangladesh, and I feel very proud, very honored to be chosen to do this.
Mr. President and ladies and gentlemen, as you just heard, March 26th is the national independence day of Bangladesh. This day is celebrated in Bangladesh and also around the world in honor of its country's declaration of independence from Pakistan in the last hours of March 25, 1971, and the start of the Bangladesh Liberation War.
Today we commemorate and remember the thousands of people who lost their lives in this war. The first election in the history of Pakistan was held on December 7, 1970. And I'm forced to say that December 7, ladies and gentlemen, is a very memorable day for my family because that was the day that we lost our mother, December 7, 1954. On December 7th also we know what happened in America.
So on December 7th, Pakistan held their election, and there were 300 seats in the parliament. East Pakistan won 160 seats, and West Pakistan, as you said before, won 81 seats. But instead of handing over the power to the winning party, they imposed martial law on East Pakistan.
The leader of East Pakistan, Mr. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, urged the Bengali people to turn their homes into resisting forts. He inspired the nation to fight for freedom with the following words, and you said it before: "Our struggle is for our freedom. Our struggle is for our independence."
Today I'm honored. In closing, I want to acknowledge the leaders from the Bangladesh community that came all the way from New York City. We have here in the Senate chambers Mr. Zakir Khan. We have Mr. Mohbub Alom. We have with us Mrs. Tanmina Chowdhury. We have Imam Ohi Chowdhury, who gave us the invocation. We also have Mohammed Goffer Chowdhury and Giash Uddin. And my lawyer, Luis Sepulveda.
And here, over there in the gallery, we have members of the Bangladesh community that are honoring us today. Thank you for being here.
It's a pleasure for me to introduce this resolution for the first time here in this body, and I hope that every year from now on we continue doing this. Thank you for allowing me.
And thank you, Mr. Giash Uddin, because you gave me my first donation in 1972 to become an elected official. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Diaz.
All in favor of the resolution signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Opposed?
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The resolution is adopted.
Senator Libous, I may note that Senator Ball has also offered up his resolution for cosponsorship. If you choose not to be a cosponsor, notify the desk.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Thank you, Mr. President.
I believe there's a resolution by Senator Huntley, 3518, at the desk. Could we have the resolution read and call on Senator Huntley.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Legislative Resolution Number 3518, by Senator Huntley, honoring Shirley N. Moore posthumously upon the occasion of the co-naming of a section of 150th Street between Rockaway Boulevard and North Conduit Boulevard in Queens, New York, in her honor on March 7, 2012.
"WHEREAS, It is the custom of this Legislative Body to pay tribute to citizens of the State of New York whose lifework and civic endeavor served to enhance the quality of life in their communities and the great State of New York; and
"WHEREAS, On Wednesday, March 7, 2012, a section of 150th Street between Rockaway Boulevard and North Conduit in Queens, New York, will be co-named in Shirley Moore's honor, a fitting tribute to her memory; and
"WHEREAS, Founding member of the Southeast Queens Community Corporation, formerly known as the chairperson of Community Board 12, and founding member of the Southern Queens Park Association, Shirley Moore passed away on September 8, 1997, at the age of 72; and
"WHEREAS, Born on July 14, 1925, Shirley Moore was one of five siblings, the mother of two children, Susan Lina Moore-Jones and Wayne Barnes, and was the wife of Mr. Lee Moore for 52 years; in addition, she was a grandmother of five and great-grandmother of 11; and
"WHEREAS, A community activist, Shirley Moore played the part of a strong and determined woman with the ability to make change and the power to infect her community. An ever-positive figure in her children's lives, Shirley Moore lead by example. Her children reaped the benefits, as she was an involved parent; and
"WHEREAS, Shirley Moore sat on the board of her children's school as an active PTA member. She became a den mother to the Boy and Girl Scouts of her children's chapters, and also sat as a member of the vestry for both St. Margaret's and St. Stephens Church, teaching Sunday school at both; and
"WHEREAS, Fortunately, Shirley Moore was an advocate for all children, and as a result she worked toward making sure that the community recognized the need to facilitate programs in response to its youth. She also served on the board of the New York City Parks Department to ensure that the youth in her community were not left behind; and
"WHEREAS, Shirley Moore established herself over her long career as a staunch community volunteer and activist. She was affiliated with quality organizations such as the Guy R. Brewer United Club, the NAACP of Jamaica, the Board of Directors at the Jamaica Chamber of Commerce and the Advisory Board at York College, to name a few; and
"WHEREAS, A true asset to society, she believed wholeheartedly that she could make a difference throughout her 35 years of volunteering; and
"WHEREAS, Rare indeed is the impressive dedication shown by an individual for the benefit of others which Shirley Moore displayed throughout her life; now, therefore, be it
"RESOLVED, That this Legislative Body pause in its deliberations to honor Shirley N. Moore posthumously upon the occasion of the co-naming of a section of 150th Street between Rockaway Boulevard and North Conduit in Queens, New York, in her honor; and be it further
"RESOLVED, That a copy of this Resolution, suitably engrossed, be transmitted to the family of Shirley N. Moore."
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Huntley.
SENATOR HUNTLEY:Yes, thank you, Mr. President.
Shirley N. Moore was my very, very good friend for 45 years. We volunteered in all aspects of community. She was not selfish. She spent a lot of time away from home, helping other people, as I did. We loved each other because we knew, we knew we could make a difference.
Our children grew up together. In fact, today her daughter Susan and her granddaughter Nadine are with me today.
I'm going to tell you one thing that was not in this that's very funny. Shirley and I started the Christmas parties for the women in Rikers Island. Every year we would go around to the different department stores and collect toys and toiletries and clothing, and we would go up to Rikers Island to have the Christmas party for the women with their children. We even decorated the tree. We dragged the tree up there also.
One Christmas party we're having a great time, everyone is laughing with the kids, and we're talking to the women -- because basically, what we did, we counseled the women to try to show them how to stay out of prison. As we're doing this, we heard this bell and all of a sudden someone screamed, "It's lockdown."
And I looked at Shirley and she looked at me, and she says, "What does that mean?" I says, "I don't know." We went to the gate, and the guard said to us, "Sorry, ladies, you can't come out now."
So I said, "How long will we be here?" So Shirley says, "Oh, I've got to go home. Lee will" -- her husband -- "Lee will think I'm totally crazy." I said, "Herb will kill me. We're locked up in Rikers Island with a Christmas party on lockdown."
We were there nine hours, and what a time.
So Shirley was that kind of person. She just took chances as long as she was helping people.
And I miss her because there are not many Shirley Moores. And she certainly deserves the name of this street. In fact, it should have been done a long time ago.
And I just want to tell her daughter and her granddaughter that I still think about her all the time. And when I pass Southern Queens Park, where she started the park garden, I think about her and think how great the garden is now.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Huntley.
Senator Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you, Mr. President.
I too have great memories of Shirley Moore. And you notice that Senator Huntley and I are smiling, because we knew the real Shirley Moore.
I met Shirley in 1980. We were both working for the Bureau of the Census. Shirley was the assistant district manager in South Queens, and I was the district manager of Northeast Queens. And I came in, I was appointed to lead the census midway through the count. So we would meet for lunch every month, every three weeks with the other district managers. And Shirley sort of took me under her wing.
And I've got to tell you, it was just a lot of fun working with Shirley Moore. She conveyed a community spirit, a depth of understanding, a sense of compassion for others. And I used to see her at -- not often, but at lunches, at the women's lunches. And we just recalled the great memories that we have.
And to her daughter and to her granddaughter, I tell you that we all have great memories, and that's the way we all want to remember Shirley Moore.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Smith.
SENATOR SMITH:Thank you very much, Mr. President.
And let me congratulate my colleague Senator Huntley for this resolution.
There are certain people in politics that you admire, there are certain people that you respect. From time to time you fear them. Shirley Moore was somebody you feared.
While we respected her and while we honor her, fearing her wasn't because she was a violent individual, fearing her was because whenever she stood for a cause, you'd better be clear about the fact if you were going to be on the opposite side. She would rally hundreds of people for a particular cause.
And she was someone who wouldn't hesitate to grab you by the ear -- and I mean that literally, as her daughter is over there laughing. I'm sure you felt that ear every now and then.
But she was loved and still is loved by all of us, and I think it is very fitting that we are naming a street section after her. And I am honored to be on the floor this day to support and second the passage of this resolution by my good friend and colleague Senator Shirley Huntley.
Thank you very much, Senator.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The question is on the resolution. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Opposed?
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The resolution is adopted.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Thank you, Mr. President.
Mr. President, I believe there's another resolution by Senator Huntley, 3519. And if you would just read its title only and then move for its immediate adoption.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Legislative Resolution Number 3519, by Senator Huntley, celebrating the life and mourning the passing of Tuskegee Airman William Alexander Samber, Sr.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:All in favor of the resolution signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Opposed?
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The resolution is adopted.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President could we now adopt the Resolution Calendar. We're going a little backwards. Could we adopt the overall Resolution Calendar at this time.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Resolution Calendar is before the house. All in favor of adopting the Resolution Calendar signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Opposed?
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Resolution Calendar is adopted.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Thank you, Mr. President.
At this time could we have the noncontroversial reading of the calendar that is before us.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 478, by the Committee on Rules, Senate Print 6830, an act to amend the Education Law.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Lay the bill aside.
THE SECRETARY:On page 23, Senator DeFrancisco moves to discharge, from the Committee on Finance, Assembly Bill Number 9050D and substitute it for the identical Senate Bill Number 6250D, Third Reading Calendar 480.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Substitution so ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 480, Budget Bill, Assembly Print Number 9050D --
SENATOR BRESLIN:Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Lay the bill aside.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 481, Senate Budget Bill, Senate Print 6251B, LEGISLATURE AND JUDICIAL BUDGET.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Lay the bill aside.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 482, Budget Bill, Senate Print 6253E --
SENATOR BRESLIN:Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Lay it aside.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 483, Budget Bill, Senate Print 6254D, CAPITAL PROJECTS BUDGET.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Lay it aside.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 484, Budget Bill, Senate Print 6256D, an act to amend the Public Health Law.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Lay it aside.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 485, Budget Bill, Senate Print 6257E, an act in relation in school district eligibility.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Lay the bill aside.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 486, Budget Bill, Senate Print 6259D, an act to amend Chapter 540 of the Laws of 1992.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Lay it aside.
Senator Libous, that completes the noncontroversial reading of the calendar.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, we'll have the controversial reading. But what I would like to do is take up Calendar Number 480 first.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:So noted. The Secretary will ring the bell.
The Secretary will read Calendar Number 480.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 480, substituted earlier today, Budget Bill, Assembly Print 9050D, STATE OPERATIONS BUDGET.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you, Mr. President. If the sponsor could please yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you very much.
To start us off, do we have on our desks the report prepared by the Senate to include for the General Fund a summary of proposed legislative revisions to the Executive Budget for the ensuing fiscal year, separately identifying and presenting all legislative additions, reestimates and other revisions that increase or decrease disbursements and separately identify and present all legislative reestimates and other revisions that increase or decrease available resources?
The Legislative Law Section 54 requires this and includes that, where practicable, it display and separately identify all legislative additions, reestimates and other revisions that increase or decrease state funds and All Funds spending, including an estimate of the impact of the proposed revisions on local governments and the state workforce.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It is not presently on the desks, but I understand it's on its way. And I think it basically summarizes what's been out in the public for the last at least three days on each of the bills here. But they're making copies right now.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger.
SENATOR KRUEGER:I will happily revisit that question when that report is made available and on our desks. So I appreciate the sponsor's answer to the question.
Excuse me one second while I just jump to the actual bill for now, since we aren't going to deal with the report right this second.
My understanding is that -- excuse me, Mr. President. Through you, if the sponsor would yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
So my understanding is that there is a difference in the original interchange language and transfer language that was in the Governor's proposed state operations bill and the language that we see before us today.
And specifically, in the Office of Aging the interchange language is included under several federal programs, such as the federal human services fund, the federal operating grants.
Why is the appropriation language necessary in federal program appropriations? And can we find the appropriation language in other state agencies that receive federal funds for state ops?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The reason it's in the appropriation language is because we are going to appropriate the funds and spend those funds from the federal government. And to spend, you have to appropriate.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Mr. President, if through you the sponsor would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
Again, I think I'm really asking about the new powers to interchange language after the budget is passed vis-a-vis certain programs with federal funds. So do we know how many different federal programs throughout the budget have this interchange language where we would be applying a new set of standards to the use of federal money?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: That would be true for all state appropriations.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you, Mr. President.
If the sponsor could continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
Can the sponsor share with me what the total level of appropriations is in the State Operations Budget bill?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I can look it up. I can tell you the total amount of spending is $132.6 billion. I hadn't really broken it down between each of the budget bills, but I'm sure I could find it for you.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Could the sponsor tell me, in the State Ops bill is the appropriations level above or below what the Governor originally proposed?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It is slightly above.
SENATOR KRUEGER:If the sponsor would continue to yield, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
Is there any federal ARRA funding authorized in this bill?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I'm sorry, what was that?
SENATOR KRUEGER:Is there any federal ARRA funding authorized or reauthorized in this bill?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, could the sponsor tell me what amounts and for what purposes?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Approximately $20 billion of previous appropriations.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Twenty billion in previous -- I'm sorry, $20 billion or $20 million? I'm not sure I heard him correctly.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Twenty billion of reappropriations.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Mr. President, if through you the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
That's all within the State Operations bill?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No, it's in that bill plus the Aid to Localities bill. I haven't broken down the actual amounts as far as each of the respective bills.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
Mr. President, if through you the sponsor would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
I certainly want to give the sponsor leeway in my questions because I agree, any number of these questions I have, the answers are actually spread across several state budget bills, and I do understand that.
So in a variety of bills, state debt is increased in this full budget. Can the sponsor tell me how much state debt for 2012-2013 there is and how much that is over what we took on as new state debt in the last budget year?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: We are living within the debt cap for state debt, and there was a slight increase in the MTA authority's debt. But we're still living within the debt cap of the state operations.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:I'm assuming we are within the state debt cap because we would have a big problem if we were passing bills today that went higher than the state debt cap.
But again, my question is, how much state debt are we taking on this year? I guess I will edit that by how close are we to the cap, and how much higher is the debt we are taking on this year than last year?
So it's three questions, Mr. President.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: There's a $1.2 billion increase, and we're $1.2 billion away from the cap.
SENATOR KRUEGER:I appreciate the sponsor's answer. Thank you, Mr. President.
To continue to another section or a section of the bill, the State Operations Budget includes an additional $1.275 million for the Department of Environmental Conservation, and $775,000 is appropriated to expenses relating to the Invasive Species Program.
Can the sponsor help me understand what that money is to be used for and how it will be allocated?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I'm being informed that the dollars for invasive species is dollars throughout the state. They could be in the Finger Lakes, they could be in Lake George, they could be anywhere where invasive species are a problem. And that's what those dollars were allocated for.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Actually it's the eradication of invasive species. We're not trying to create them.
SENATOR KRUEGER:I agree. I'm delighted we're not trying to create more invasive species. We have enough already.
My understanding is this will actually be distributed, as the sponsor said, through a variety of programs around the state. So my question is why isn't this in the Aid to Localities Budget? Is this not itemized for specific localities to deal with individual invasive species problems they are having?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The monies are being taken out of the dedicated Conservation Fund, and there was some issues as to when different parts of the budget were concluded and when they were closed and when the bills were printed. And as well when the eradication has to take place, which is in early spring.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you, Mr. President. If the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
The Executive Budget proposed to decrease $968,550,000 to the General Fund in spending for SUNY state-operated colleges by transferring this amount to the general offset account. Is this transfer still included as part of the agreed-upon budget before us today?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
So can the sponsor help explain to me what the fiscal impact of the transfer of HESC, Higher Education Service Corporation debt collection functions to the Department of Tax and Finance will mean for us in the coming year? How many positions will be transferred, and will there be a change of revenue in this program?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: There is no money attached to it, and there's therefore no fiscal impact.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
In the original Executive Budget the Governor had a line item for a Tenant Protection Unit within the Department of Housing and Community -- DHCR. I'm sorry, I'm blanking on the "R." I don't believe that is in the final budget. Can the sponsor explain to me why that was rejected or why that's no longer in the budget?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes. First of all, the New York City government did not want that program. Number two, the Legislature -- or at least the final budget did not appropriate any funds for that function.
However, the Governor has indicated that out of existing funds he was going to make certain that that organization was funded. And in fact I think an executive director has been hired, a deputy executive director has been hired, and the program is actually beginning, and the Governor is finding the funds from a different source rather than allocating additional funds for that purpose.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger on the bill.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you. I want to thank my colleague Senator DeFrancisco for the answers to the questions of what will no doubt become a long day of questions in order to ensure that everyone in the Senate has an opportunity to ask clarifications and go on the record with the concerns they may have or the happy news they may find in the budget.
This bill, when I look at it, rejects HESC moving functions of college debt collection to the Department of Taxation and Finance; rejects the merger from the original Governor's proposal of the Department of Civil Service and the Office of Employee Relations into a new workforce management department; creates the Office of new Americans in the Department of State, with funding for it; includes additional spending authority to CUNY and SUNY; increases by $1.25 million the Department of Environmental Conservation's Invasive Species Program and another half a million for related fish stocking and game farm operations; and maintains the 11 Department of Transportation regional offices.
Many people in this chamber today on both sides of the aisle, I think, are pleased to see these changes compared to the Governor's original proposed budget.
I am only mildly disturbed that the specific funding line for the Tenant Protection Unit in DHCR has been removed, because I actually agree with the sponsor that the state is committed to making sure that this program is fully running and operational without trying to bill a cost to the City of New York.
Just for the record, I don't think the City of New York is opposed to this important unit, I think they were opposed to being sent the bill for this important unit.
I think that some of my other colleagues may have additional questions for the sponsor on the bill. Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you, Mr. President. If Senator DeFrancisco would yield for some questions.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:The Executive Budget proposed a decrease of $968 million in the General Fund for the SUNY state-operated colleges by transferring this amount into the General Fund, the general offset account. Was this transfer part of the agreement between the -- both houses and the Governor?
I'm sorry, I withdraw that question. I withdraw the question.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Okay.
SENATOR STAVISKY:My mistake.
The Senate proposed to correct an error made last year by eliminating the gradual tuition revenue increase approved by the Legislature, the rational tuition, in 2009. This would have provided support for CUNY in the amount of $11 million and SUNY in the amount of $16.5 million.
Is this included in the bill before us today?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It is not included in this bill. The fix you're talking about is not part of this bill. And in fact it's not part of any subsequent bill either.
SENATOR STAVISKY:It's not in any chapter amendment?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It is not.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Will the Senator yield for another question?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:There is a $28 million restoration for the SUNY hospitals in this bill before us. How is that $28 million going to be appropriated?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: How is it going to be distributed?
SENATOR STAVISKY:Distributed, yeah.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It's going to be distributed among the three teaching hospitals, one-third apiece.
SENATOR STAVISKY:So it's going to be one-third, one-third, one-third?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Correct.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield on this point.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Downstate has unique problems and in fact there are serious questions of its survival. It has to -- it can only survive with SUNY support. Is there any provision to help the special needs of the Downstate facility that's attached -- SUNY Downstate Medical School, I'm talking about the medical center.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: First of all, I understand that some hospitals may have difficulties but I don't believe it's fair to penalize the other hospitals just because they're operating in an effective way. So that's why it's one-third, one-third, one-third.
There is also $400 million in HEAL money that no question that Brooklyn is going to be getting a large portion of that, the Brooklyn Hospital. And there's also, I think, another $60 million of aid to the SUNY hospitals that is also a pot of money that's available generally to SUNY hospitals.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would yield on an additional question on this topic.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:I thought we have gotten away from the flat grant approach, which is really what one third, one third, one third is, and that we're tending to apportion aid based upon need rather than the flat grant, which is somewhat unequalizing.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Except that, as I mentioned before, there is another $60 million that is not allocated. It's subject to the needs of the various hospitals and the decisions made by the Health Department and the Governor's office. So it's not a pure one-third, one-third, one-third, it's just as to that $28 million.
And plus the HEAL grants -- in fact, people in other areas of the state are concerned that Brooklyn Hospital's needs are so great that a lot of the $400 million will be taken by -- or given to the Brooklyn Hospital. And if you look at the rest of the state, they're not too happy about that either.
But the fact of the matter is those are two additional pots.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Because I do want to emphasize that Downstate has not only a unique need but also serves a unique population which does not have access to other healthcare.
If the Senator would yield for one final question.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:The SUNY 2020 plan authorized tuition increases for out-of-state students. Has this been implemented?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I don't know. I don't know. But it's not -- the authorization was given. I don't know -- it's not part of this budget, so I don't really know whether it's been implemented or not.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:It was authorized last year. And I understand they have not increased the tuition for the out-of-state residents. And this is revenue that really should be coming in to us.
But again, I thank you for your answers. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Stavisky.
Senator Peralta.
SENATOR PERALTA:Yes, thank you, Mr. President. Would Senator DeFrancisco yield for a question.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco yields.
SENATOR PERALTA:I would like to read a portion of a contract language that was agreed upon with PEF and then I'd like to ask a question.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Okay. Can you identify the contract, who the parties were?
SENATOR PERALTA:Yes. It's the contract language in the PEF New York State collective bargaining agreement for 2011 through 2015 relating to no layoffs. Section 21.2, the Workforce Reduction Limitation.
There are three provisions in that, the Workforce Reduction Limitation. (A) For fiscal years 2011 through 2012 and 2012 through 2013, employees shall be protected from layoffs resulting from the facts and circumstances that gave rise to the present need for 450 million in workforce savings.
(B) For the term of the agreement, only material unanticipated changes in the state's fiscal circumstances, financial plan, or revenue will result in potentially layoffs.
And (C) workforce reductions due to the closure or restructuring of facilities as authorized by legislation or the SAGE Commission determinations are excluded from these limitations.
So regarding this budget appropriation transfer language, do you feel that its legislative intent -- that reductions in the workforce related to the consolidation of administrative functions authorized in this budget fall within the stated exemptions? And if they do, would layoffs be permitted?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I charge for my legal advice.
But in interpreting the contract, the legislative intent is I don't think relevant here, because the actual management of the state government and the operations budget is the Governor's office. And whether or not there have been -- we have not been informed that there's been any layoffs by the Governor. And it's my understanding that some of the negotiations that took place earlier averted those layoffs.
So I don't think there's a -- there's no legislative intent that I can see that would prohibit the Governor from his normal powers of managing the operations of the state.
SENATOR PERALTA:Still, Section C -- through you, Mr. President, Section C I'll read again: "Workforce reductions due to the closure or restructuring of facilities as authorized by legislation or the SAGE Commission determinations are excluded from these limitations."
So if this is not legislated, does this apply?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The SAGE Commission has not provided us a report yet, so there's nothing the Legislature could act upon.
SENATOR PERALTA:So does this budget language constitute legislative authority?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: This legislation is unrelated to SAGE's operations, which is what is referred to in paragraph C there.
SENATOR PERALTA:It's authorized by legislation or SAGE.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: All right. Does this legislation -- are you asking if this legislation authorizes layoffs?
SENATOR PERALTA:Yes.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No. This legislation is neutral on layoffs.
SENATOR PERALTA:So the legislative intent of this language would not authorize layoffs?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I didn't say that. I just said the language is neutral insofar as there's no indication that layoffs are requested, contemplated or -- we don't know what the Governor is going to do.
This legislation simply provides an appropriation. The Governor has to manage the government.
SENATOR PERALTA:Okay. Thank you very much.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Peralta.
Senator Diaz.
SENATOR DIAZ:Mr. President, on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz on the bill.
SENATOR DIAZ:I'm not going to ask you no questions.
I'm just -- this is the first piece of one, two, three, four, five, six, seven pieces of legislation that we are going to do today. And I see and I hear people asking questions on the first one. So, Mr. President and ladies and gentlemen, I have to ask, why is it that we're asking questions? Is it because we don't know what are we voting for? And if we don't know what are we voting for, then we should vote no.
And my question is, what is it we are asking questions for? If we are asking questions one hour, spending one hour asking questions, that means that we don't know what is in the budget. Because if we know what does the budget include, ladies and gentlemen, we know, we don't have to ask questions. But if we don't know, then vote no.
Or if you have questions, what is the purpose? Because if you are asking questions, one hour asking questions, I imagine, I believe, I assume that you're voting no. But don't please stand here breaking a budget apart, telling and showing the whole world how bad and how rotten this budget is -- and then to vote yes? It doesn't make sense. I cannot understand that.
For example, this piece of legislation today does eliminate the Tenant Protection Unit, division. I mean there is no protection for the tenants in our communities. What are we voting yes for? That, Mr. President, is the reason why I am voting no on the first piece of legislation.
I'm not going to ask you questions, Senator DeFrancisco, because I know what I'm doing and I know who I'm defending. The tenants, at least, they don't have protection in this one.
So I will be voting no in this first one, and then we'll be talking on the other ones. Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Diaz.
Is there any other Senator wishing to be heard?
Senator Peralta.
SENATOR PERALTA:Yes, I believe that the reason that we're asking questions is for clarification.
SENATOR DIAZ:Because we don't know.
SENATOR PERALTA:Clarification on certain statements that we need answers on.
And I believe that if we can get those clarifications then we can make a better decision when it comes to voting on these budget bills.
And I understand the antics. I understand the playing to the cameras. But this is serious work.
SENATOR DIAZ:It is.
SENATOR PERALTA:We need to understand and be clear about what is in these budget bills. And therefore one of our responsibilities as legislators, as Senators, is to clarify, is to ask questions and to ask them on the floor.
So therefore I believe that we're within our right to ask these questions on both sides of the aisle. And that's why we're asking these questions for clarification. And some of us will vote yes and some of us will vote no, but the bottom line is we need to be clear on what we're voting for.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Espaillat.
SENATOR ESPAILLAT:Yes, Mr. President. On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Espaillat on the bill.
SENATOR ESPAILLAT:This bill addresses some of the housing matters in our state.
Last year we passed the extension of rent regulations. There was a very long and contentious debate about tenant protections and rent regulation. Subsequent to that debate, we were encouraged that this year we will get a Tenant Protection Unit implemented to allow tenants to go to in case their rights were being violated, to track down unscrupulous landlords who prey on tenants, hike their rents illegally, or perhaps drag them to court to evict them.
And this bill does not fiscally implement that. In fact, it eliminates that. I know that there have been promises made that the Tenant Protection Unit will be implemented next year or this year administratively within the housing agency. But many promises are made in the hallways of Albany, and very often many of them are not kept.
So until I see the funding for such unit in writing, in this budget, I am compelled to vote no on this particular bill.
SENATOR DIAZ:Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The debate is closed, and the Secretary will ring the bell.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY:Section 2. This act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Perkins, to explain his vote.
SENATOR PERKINS:Thank you very much.
I'm going to have to vote no. I am concerned about the absence of funding for the Tenant Protection Unit. And I do recall, not just in the halls but also in the suites and other areas having discussions that made commitments towards that end, as well as having spent some time in civil disobedience in support of that.
So because of those reasons, I will vote no on this bill in hopes that that promise will be fulfilled sooner than later.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Perkins to be recorded in the negative.
Senator Diaz to explain his vote.
SENATOR DIAZ:Thank you, Mr. President.
I'm glad that some of my colleagues are joining me in voting no because of that reason, because of that reason. We are here, we are here to protect our communities. We are not here to set ourselves up to the Governor or to anybody else. We have a calling, a calling to protect and defend our community.
And this is a -- this is outrageous. There is no tenant protection here. We're going to go back to our community and confront our people and say, Oh, we're going to fight for you to defend your rights as tenants, and then vote yes? No sir, no way, no how.
I'm voting no too.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz to be recorded in the negative.
Senator Parker to explain his vote.
SENATOR PARKER:Thank you, Mr. President. To explain my vote.
Once again, I know this has been a tough process. And congratulations to the staff and to my colleagues who have been working on this difficult thing. Although it's well documented my displeasure with the process, I do appreciate how much it does take to get this thing actually done.
I'm going to stand with my colleagues who are not happy about the fact that we have eliminated a Tenant Protection Unit for the Division of Housing and Community Renewal. This was supposed to be an important thing, especially after last year and doing the rent control thing, that this was supposed to be really the next step to making sure that tenants were really protected in the State of New York.
We also -- the Executive includes interchange language in the state operations appropriation that would authorize OGS to interchange transfer authority. This is not, I think, a proper use of this authority at this time, and so I'm going to be voting no on this as well.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Parker to be recorded in the negative.
Announce the results.
Senator Krueger, excuse me. Senator Krueger to explain her vote.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. President. I think I was on the list.
I appreciate my colleagues' points. I am also disappointed, as I said before, about there being no funding for the Tenant Protection Unit.
But again, because I believe there has been a commitment made by the Governor's office to assure that this unit will be fully staffed and operational in this fiscal year, I am prepared to vote yes on this bill because of my belief that the commitment is there and the ability is there for DHCR to provide the services of this very important unit.
But I share my colleagues' disappointment that I believe it should have been a specific program line item within this budget bill.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger to be recorded in the affirmative.
Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:In relation to Calendar Number 480, those recorded in the negative are Senators Adams, Diaz, Duane, Espaillat, Hassell-Thompson, Montgomery, Parker, Perkins, and Rivera.
Ayes, 51. Nays, 9.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The bill is passed.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, at this time could we take up Calendar 483, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Secretary shall read.
THE SECRETARY:On page 23, Senator DeFrancisco moves to discharge, from the Committee on Finance --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Excuse me, Chris.
Could I have some order, please.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:On page 23, Senator DeFrancisco moves to discharge, from the Committee on Finance, Assembly Bill Number 9054D and substitute it for the identical Senate Bill Number 6254D, Third Reading Calendar 483.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The substitution is so ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 483, Budget Bill, Assembly Print Number 9054D, CAPITAL PROJECTS BUDGET.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The bill is before the house.
Senator Krueger, Senator Stavisky had requested prior to your rising. Do you want to defer to her or would you like to lead?
SENATOR KRUEGER:I would like to defer to her, with one question, Mr. President, through you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Sure.
SENATOR KRUEGER:We have just received on our desks the Enacted Budget Summary. We have not had time to look at it. Is this the document that meets the requirements of the 2007 Budget Reform Act that I referenced earlier requiring a specific summary report with differences from the Executive and the dollar amounts up and down in each appropriation category?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you, Mr. President. I will now defer to Senator Stavisky.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you, Mr. President. If the Senator would yield for several questions.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Through you, Mr. President, does the Capital Projects Budget bill provide for a five-year capital plan for CUNY and SUNY?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No, it does not. The only -- the capital that's referred to in this budget is primarily the $130 million that the Governor first proposed for the Economic Development Councils. During the negotiations, $20 million was put into that program in addition to the $130 million, so a total of $150 million.
And the only other amount for capital projects in economic development is $20 million that is in the Economic Development Fund for ESDC.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Mr. President, if the Senator would yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I do.
SENATOR STAVISKY:The question that I asked was is there a five-year capital plan. And the answer is no, is that correct?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: There is no new five-year capital plan, but there's reappropriations of funds for SUNY that -- or capital funds for SUNY that have been appropriated in prior years.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Through you, Mr. President, is there any funding for critical maintenance in this budget? For SUNY and CUNY.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes. Once again, those are reappropriations from prior years.
SENATOR STAVISKY:So there's no new money?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No new money, correct. The only new money is what I mentioned before.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Through you, Mr. President, is there any new funding for the CUNY capital program associated with science and technology as part of a CUNY 2020 plan?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No, there is no additional funds. As I mentioned, the only additional funds were the $20 million more for the Economic Development Regional Councils and $20 million in the ESDC budget. And there's no 2020 for the university in Syracuse either.
SENATOR STAVISKY:How are those funds going to be distributed?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The economic development funds -- first of all, the reappropriations for the projects that were appropriated for originally, the new dollars, it's the same procedure through each of the Economic Development Councils. The $150 million will be distributed, and the councils will make determinations as to what projects are worthy of those dollars.
SENATOR STAVISKY:There was a proposal in the other house for a CUNY construction -- CUNY capital money corresponding to a similar appropriation for SUNY which made it into the budget. The CUNY capital money I understand did not. Can you tell me why not?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No, there was no additional funds for CUNY.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Is there an explanation?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: First of all, it wasn't in the Governor's budget.
And second of all, all the capital money -- none of the capital money that we're using in this budget is going to be bonded. So the theory was that we can afford what we can afford, pay as you go until we get into a situation where the economy starts providing more funding for us and without getting deeper in debt.
SENATOR STAVISKY:One last area I would like to address, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Is there any funding in this budget for the CUNY Construction Fund?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Once again, it's just the reappropriations of whatever had been appropriated in the past. No new money.
SENATOR STAVISKY:SUNY. Did I say CUNY? I meant SUNY.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Are you asking about the Construction Fund?
SENATOR STAVISKY:The SUNY, State University of New York Construction Fund.
Shall I rephrase my question? Has that construction fund --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stavisky, are you asking Senator DeFrancisco --
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No, I understand the question.
I'm a little confused myself; I'm trying to clarify it in my own mind. (Pause.)
Okay, what I'm informed is once again it's not new money, but there's $15 million from last year that's carried over into this year in the SUNY Construction Fund as part of that 2020 commitment.
SENATOR STAVISKY:So the SUNY Construction Fund still exists?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stavisky, are you asking Senator DeFrancisco --
SENATOR STAVISKY:Yes, I'm asking the Senator to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It's in the bill.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Where? I do not see it in the budget.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It's in the SUNY Capital Budget.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Stavisky.
Senator Stewart-Cousins.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you for your answers.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I'm sorry we were confused. But thanks for the questions.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stewart-Cousins.
SENATOR STEWART-COUSINS:Thank you, Mr. President. If the sponsor would yield for a question.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR STEWART-COUSINS:I was just curious about the reappropriations. And in looking at the reappropriations, it seems like there's just one project that was not reappropriated in full. I'm not going to ask you to guess which one that is, because I'm going to tell you.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Is it in your district?
SENATOR STEWART-COUSINS:How did you conclude that?
The last time we had this kind of conversation, and it got worked out. So that's why I'm happy to have this conversation now.
Yeah, it is in my district. It is the City of Yonkers Saw Mill River Redevelopment Project, which had $24 million allocated to it. And it was the only reappropriation that did not get reappropriated in full, so I was wondering why that was.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: What I'm informed -- because I was not familiar with that particular project. But I've been informed that this project has been on the books for about six years and nothing much has happened. And that's why only $8 million of it was reappropriated, until there's more specifics and there's actually a plan to show that it's actually going to be completed.
SENATOR STEWART-COUSINS:Well, now this is where --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stewart-Cousins, are you asking Senator DeFrancisco to continue to yield?
SENATOR STEWART-COUSINS:Through you, Mr. President, would the Senator continue to yield?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Yes, the Senator yields.
SENATOR STEWART-COUSINS:I can say to you that there has been great progress in that redevelopment, that the saw mill is now uncovered and there are continuing advancements to the redevelopment of that particular initiative.
And so I just wanted you to know -- I guess this is not really a question. I did want you to know that a lot has happened and a lot more can happen. So that is why my concern of the $16 million. Do you know where the $16 million went?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It didn't go anywhere. Probably it went towards some of these increases for the general economic development regional offices, because we're paying as you go. That's probably where it went.
But I guess the -- what I'm informed is the information that you just gave of what's been accomplished so far has already been paid for by the state, and what people are mostly concerned about now is, you know, what's the plan from here and what do you need and when do you need it. And that's why only $8 million was reappropriated this year. And if it -- I suppose next year is another year if you get beyond the $8 million.
SENATOR STEWART-COUSINS:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor continues to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR STEWART-COUSINS:I asked you a question, and I know that you gave what you thought was the best answer. But I can tell you where that money went. The money is now in the bottom line, to be determined by the Temporary President of the Senate in conjunction with the Division of the Budget. So it didn't go anywhere, but it is in, at this point -- it is under the jurisdiction of DOB and the Temporary President of the Senate.
So I would be more than happy to continue this discussion next year, because I think it's important that the project, which is really underway, continues. And I understand that you need to know where we're going forward. But I will, for the record, tell you that there is a great deal to be done and the resources that had been put aside all these years have finally begun to bear fruit, and more will come.
So I just --
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: If I could just add, we have -- you know, we've worked together when you've had another problem last year.
SENATOR STEWART-COUSINS:Absolutely.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I was not aware of this until you asked the question, and I'd be happy to try to get involved in it as well.
SENATOR STEWART-COUSINS:I appreciate that.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Stewart-Cousins.
Senator Rivera.
SENATOR RIVERA:Thank you, Mr. President. On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Rivera on the bill.
SENATOR RIVERA:Thank you, Mr. President.
The bill that we're dealing with right now relates to capital funds across the state. And I want to talk a little bit about what I believe are missed opportunities in this piece of legislation and this budget process.
Now, while this bill does restore $770 million for the MTA capital plan, it does not do much to improve mass transit. I don't believe that with what we're allocating here, I don't think that we will prevent what are really impending transit fare hikes in 2013, which if we're counting -- and many of us that use the train on a regular basis, and the bus, in the city, we have been counting -- that would be the fourth hike since 2007.
Again, I repeat, I believe this is a missed opportunity. The northwest Bronx that I represent, the majority, the great majority of people in my district rely on mass transit every single day.
And when we look at what has happened in the last couple of years where the state has at different times raided the MTA and taken hundreds of millions of dollars that is supposedly dedicated transit funding and instead uses it for all sorts of other things, what this has led to, as we know, is that the MTA has gone into a spiraling hole of debt.
And what this means, ultimately, is that the services get cut. In the last couple of years we had two subway lines that no longer exist, 32 bus routes, 570 bus stops that we don't have anymore. And yet we are not funding the MTA capital plan at the level that we should, which makes the impact on services going to be all that much worse in the next couple of years.
We have to remember that one-quarter, one-quarter of the population of New York State uses mass transit to get to and from work. And I am disappointed that the funds that we're talking about in this bill today, although they do provide funding for highways, bridges, municipal water systems, dams, and even in some cases state parks and historic sites, they do not do enough for the transit system that my constituents use on an everyday basis.
We have to pay attention to things like this because obviously, as I said, a quarter of the population of this state uses transit on a daily basis.
I believe that this particular bill is a missed opportunity when it comes to funding for transit riders, and I will be voting in the negative on this particular piece of legislation.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Squadron.
SENATOR SQUADRON:Thank you, Mr. President. If the sponsor would yield briefly.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR SQUADRON:Thank you.
Just to circle back to some of the CUNY funding that Senator Stavisky was speaking about previously.
In previous years, over $250 million has been allocated for City Tech, the New York City College of Technology, which is a significant portion of a total large project. They were looking for authorization to move forward with that project, start getting those dollars out into the economy this year. Are they given authorization to do so in this year's budget?
Well, let me ask, actually, in the interests of time, why are they not given authorization to do so in the budget?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Because as I mentioned at the end of the outset, we're about a billion-two from our debt cap, and we don't want to raise the debt cap. That's number one.
And number two, there isn't enough additional money to provide capital projects like the state did in the past.
SENATOR SQUADRON:If the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR SQUADRON:Does this suggest that previously allocated capital, allocated by one majority or the other in previous years, is now somehow at risk for recipients?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No. If you're talking about from prior years, all the reappropriations are in the budget.
SENATOR SQUADRON:If the sponsor would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Except for Senator Stewart-Cousins, apparently, her project that she referred to earlier.
SENATOR SQUADRON:The issue is there's a previously allocated $252 million for this project. CUNY is able to move forward with the project at a reduced cost of $252 million. It had previously been a $460 million project had they simply received authorization to begin spending that money -- which shouldn't relate to our debt cap unless there's a concern that previously appropriated dollars are now at risk.
So I'm just trying to understand, are those previously appropriated dollars at risk? Or if they're not, why couldn't they be authorized to be spent this year?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: They are reauthorized. And there's no reason -- they're not at risk, no. They're not at risk.
SENATOR SQUADRON:Thank you.
On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Squadron on the bill.
SENATOR SQUADRON:I'm pleased to hear that promises made in previous years are not at risk.
However, I'm disappointed that in the case especially of City Tech, which was CUNY's number-one capital priority this year -- a critically important institution in my district in Brooklyn, a place where more than four out of five students are the first in their families to attend higher education -- was not given the authorization it sought.
That authorization was not for new dollars. The conversation that the sponsor has had earlier today about the difficulties in this year's budget and the difficulties with capital I know are real. The advantage of this project was it would have cost the state nothing more that was not previously allocated to a project. They simply wanted authorization.
It would have been a critical project, $252 million could have begun moving immediately. A critical project for CUNY, for jobs in New York, and for students across the five boroughs and across the state.
It's disappointing that authorization is not in here, and I still don't -- I do understand and appreciate the conversation I had with the sponsor. I still do not fully understand what the rationale is not to allocate those dollars unless somehow they are at risk. I'm very glad to hear today on the floor that they are not at risk but disappointed they have not been allowed to be moved forward.
And just briefly to follow up on my colleague Senator Rivera's comments about the MTA, I'd like to both associate myself with concerns about the capital program overall and also add to that the fact that again and again it looks like when we do fund the MTA, the risk is we do it on the backs of riders.
And when you look at the funding for the capital program that is in the budget, I'm pleased that there is a significant state allocation, I'm pleased that this house has agreed to what the Governor and the Assembly both put forward on that basis, but very disappointed that some of that capital program is inevitably going to lead to higher fares put on the backs of riders.
We need a sustainable funding stream for transit. It's not a New York City issue, it's a New York State issue. It's not just a five boroughs issue, it's the entire MTA region. And in fact, as we saw recently, it's jobs everywhere from Plattsburgh to Western New York as well.
So it's very disappointing that the plan for the capital program relies on the backs of riders instead of a sustainable funding stream. I continue to hope that this body will revisit this issue and we will be able to fund an MTA capital plan with a funding stream that makes sense and that doesn't mean higher fares everywhere from Suffolk to Brooklyn to Dutchess.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Kennedy.
SENATOR KENNEDY:Thank you, Mr. President. On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Kennedy on the bill.
SENATOR KENNEDY:This is a great day for the people of New York State, it's a great day especially for the people of Western New York that I represent.
With the focus on economic development and infrastructure investment, I'm confident that this budget is going to help create the jobs we need to get our economy and our workforce sparked again.
The highlights for Western New York start with the state's billion dollars commitment to job creation in the Buffalo region. Governor Cuomo has outlined this investment in this budget as a five-year commitment, and it starts with a $100 million down payment in this year's budget.
We're confident this investment is going to unleash the potential for major economic growth across Western New York. It's going to help us attract new industries and strengthen existing industries.
This budget also invests in our state's infrastructure. The New York Works program is going to put people to work and improve the safety of our roads and bridges in Western New York and across the New York State. It accelerates funds to projects across the state.
There's also a specific focus on enhancing transportation funding for Western New York. In the past our region of Western New York, Region 5, has been shortchanged funding while the west of New York State benefited. This was a result of flawed aid formulas. These formulas are being corrected in this budget.
The funding shortfalls we suffered made it tougher for Western New Yorkers to find work. It caused projects to be delayed or even canceled in the past. It made us miss out on economic activity when the rest of the state benefited to the shortchanging of Western New York. This year Western New York is finally getting its fair share of transportation funding, more funding than we've gotten in Western New York in over a decade. And the state has made a commitment to continuing to take steps toward rectifying the funding shortfalls of the past.
This budget contains significant commitments to economic development and infrastructure improvement in Western New York. With our region finally being heard in Albany, we can be confident that the commitments made will become commitments delivered and jobs created.
This budget sends a message. It says New York State is open for business. And to Western New Yorkers, it also says something long overdue. It says Albany is finally paying attention to the needs of the Western New York community, to the businesses of Western New York, and toward putting people to work in Western New York.
For decades our economy has been struggling, and for just as long we've been making our case for enhanced state support to Western New York and the Buffalo region. Albany is finally working on behalf of all New Yorkers and is committed to helping our region grow.
I want to thank Governor Cuomo for his determined focus on Western New York and the Buffalo economy, and I thank my colleagues from the Western New York delegation who worked with us in helping shift the attention of Albany to the needs of Buffalo and Western New York.
Mr. President, I will be voting aye. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Smith.
SENATOR SMITH:Thank you very much, Mr. President. Very briefly on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:On the bill.
SENATOR SMITH:I believe my colleagues have outlined a number of concerns and issues related to this capital budget bill.
I just want to raise two items, one of which is the importance of having established an infrastructure fund or an infrastructure bank that would be aligned with producing and financing capital projects throughout the state.
I believe Canada has an infrastructure bank and fund operation that has been quite successful. It has allowed a number of projects to go forward, including the P-3 type of an establishment, which many projects throughout our state should be funded through and looking at.
In addition, I would hope, Mr. President, that as we go forward with the remainder of this year, while the Economic Development Councils are provided a certain amount of resources through our budget, that the input of the members would be allowed.
As we know, clearly there has been a restructuring of how dollars have been appropriated to our districts. The Economic Development Councils, while they are one of the Governor's signature projects -- and I agree with how these projects are soliciting and evaluating the different projects that are associated with their funding -- I would hope that as we as a body and our members would take a very serious look at each one of those projects, that we would be in aggressive dialogue with the Lieutenant Governor's office, the Economic Development Councils as well to make sure that, if nothing else, the courtesy of your input is accepted and that those projects, as they are awarded and/or announced throughout the state, that again that courtesy is provided to the members of our conference so that they can show their constituents they have been involved in this process.
I will be supporting the bill, but I do hope as we move forward from this day to the end of session that there will be dialogue, one, on an infrastructure bank, infrastructure fund, and also some means by which members will have the appropriate input into projects that are funded by the councils within their district.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Is there any other Senator wishing to be heard?
Seeing none, hearing none -- Senator Krueger.
SENATOR KRUEGER:I wanted to make sure any other colleague got to rise first. Thank you, Mr. President.
If the sponsor would please yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
So again, I appreciate that we did receive an Enacted Budget Summary. I'm still a little confused about whether it meets the legislative requirement to separately identify and present all legislative additions, reestimates, disbursements or revisions. But since we're on the capital budget, maybe I can use that as an example of questions.
In the capital budget, under Department of Transportation, reading from the document we just received on our desks, it says that the Legislature concurs with the Executive proposal of $5.09 billion, with the following modifications, and then lists approximately a million dollars in restorations.
So is there somewhere a million dollar reduction? Because it doesn't change the $5.09 billion, but it appears to add a specific program. So what was the specific program rejected because it restored some other things?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I've been told that it was a reestimate.
SENATOR KRUEGER:So there was a million dollar reestimate in transportation within the capital bill?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: That's what I'm informed, correct.
SENATOR KRUEGER:And then in another section of the capital budget relating to the State University of New York, again it concurs with the Executive's recommendation of approximately $1.1 billion but then adds $53 million for a repurposed capital reappropriation for Stony Brook Medical and Research Translation Center. Did we subtract $53 million somewhere else?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No. It's not a new project, it's simply repurposed the use of the money. But those monies were already there.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR KRUEGER:What was the $53 million originally for?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The identical project, but there was some changes in the language.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR KRUEGER:I'm not sure I understand that. So it's $53 million repurposed for the same project, a Stony Brook Medical and Research Translation Center, but it's a different project? How is it different?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It's different in language as to who pays for certain portions of the project. But the same capital expenditure for the same project is what is in the budget.
SENATOR KRUEGER:On the bill, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger on the bill.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
So many of my colleagues have raised concerns within this budget bill, and I'm just going to raise a few more rather than ask them as questions.
When we did earlier budget bills, I addressed my concerns around not enough detail on transparency and evaluation or ability to evaluate how economic development funds are spent. In this capital bill there are various proposals for expanding on the regional economic development funds for next year, and yet we still don't have the answer about the monies that were allocated this year and whether or not we think those were good decisions.
We are adding additional money, a $20 million increase compared to the 2011-2012 budget, but we know that we didn't spend $215 million from the year-that's-ending Regional Economic Development Council funding.
So I'm concerned that there are not enough answers for us about how the money is spent, the wins and the losses when we spend that money, and yet we move forward to the next year without getting answers or having an ability for the public to track what is happening and to make their own judgments about successes and failures.
And it's okay to have failures. I don't imagine there's any model of economic where there aren't wins and losses. What I'm disturbed about is we still move forward in this state spending the taxpayers' money on these programs without even being willing as legislators to demand that the questions be asked and the information be made public so that all 19.5 million New Yorkers might make their own judgments and ask those questions.
I'm concerned, on the same theme, that we are creating a New York Works capital project -- I'm not concerned about our creating it, let me be careful in what I say. I am delighted that the Governor recognizes the importance in real investment in the infrastructure of this state. We are way behind where we need to be in ensuring we have infrastructure to be a competitive 21st-century state. What I'm concerned about is that we still don't know, the day we are passing a budget, what the intention of the use of much of this money is or will be.
I know that expanding rail freight in New York is a critical infrastructure issue. I know there are many people who have focused priority on high-speed rail, on upstate transit systems, on providing for transportation alternatives to highways and bridges such as ferries and bus rapid transit. No one in this state has escaped knowing that there is a serious problem with our Tappan Zee Bridge.
And yet the day we are being asked to pass a budget that has 1.$16 billion for a New York Works program, we don't actually know how that money will be distributed. We don't know what the signature projects will be and how the monies are intended to be spent, even though we know that there are signature projects.
I'm concerned that only a year ago we passed a bill to create a lockbox for downstate transit and yet we've already reneged on that agreement. And so there is actually a reduction of $4.7 million to the downstate 12-county regions transportation funds.
I'm concerned that we haven't done enough to understand the impact on not investing in housing. I'm concerned, as Senator Stavisky so well laid out in her questions, what we are doing or not doing with higher education capital money.
And, as two of my colleagues spoke about the impact on the MTA, both Senator Rivera and Senator Squadron, I'm very disturbed that we have a capital budget that provides the MTA the ability to go further into debt and gives them the minimal $770 million they needed this year but guarantees, literally guarantees that they will be further in debt in the coming years, with an estimated 25 cents on the dollar collected from them having to go into debt payments in a few years compared to, I think, the 16 cents on the dollar that they currently have to pay towards debt.
Capital investment, infrastructure are crucial to every county of the state. And yet I don't believe we have enough answers, and I don't believe we're thinking big enough and broadly enough about the demands in front of us.
So I will be voting yes on this bill, Mr. President, but again, for the record, a budget bill should have more details than this.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz, why do you rise?
SENATOR DIAZ:Would Senator Krueger yield for a question or two?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger, will you yield to a question from Senator Diaz?
SENATOR KRUEGER:I will happily yield to a question.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz.
SENATOR DIAZ:Senator Krueger, you are the ranking member on our conference's fiscal department --
SENATOR KRUEGER:Finance, yes.
SENATOR DIAZ:And I heard you say -- you used the word "I'm disturbed," "disturbed," you used that word about the problems with this budget. And you said so much concerned you were with the many things wrong with this capital budget.
Are you are advising us, your Democratic colleagues, to vote against? Or you're voting yes? I heard you're voting yes after you said you are disturbed? You're voting yes, okay.
SENATOR KRUEGER:To answer the Senator's question, yes, he's correct that he heard me say I am voting yes on the bill. He also heard me lay out my concerns that this is not enough information and in fact a capital budget ought to be more detailed in the projects that are going forward so that we, the Legislature, and the public can in fact track the monies that are being invested, the money being borrowed by the state and the money being invested in the state.
It is true that the Senator and I disagree that you can vote yes on a bill while raising concerns about what's not there or what is there. I'm not asking any of my colleagues to vote with me, I'm simply explaining my own vote.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Krueger.
Is there any other Senator wishing to be heard?
Seeing none, the debate is closed. The Secretary will ring the bell.
The Secretary will read the last section.
THE SECRETARY:Section 2. This act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:In relation to Calendar Number 483, those recorded in the negative are Senators Adams, Diaz, Duane, Parker, Rivera, and Stewart-Cousins.
Ayes, 54. Nays, 6.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The bill is passed.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, at this time can we take up Calendar Number 482, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Secretary will read.
Senator Breslin, we're going to have to do a substitution.
THE SECRETARY:On page 23, Senator DeFrancisco moves to discharge, from the Committee on Finance, Assembly Bill Number 9053E and substitute it for the identical Senate Bill Number 6253E, Third Reading Calendar 482.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The substitution is so ordered.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 482, Budget Bill, Assembly Print 9053E, an act making appropriations for the support of government.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin, why do you rise?
SENATOR BRESLIN:Thank you, Mr. President.
I believe there's an amendment by Senator Hassell-Thompson at the desk. I ask that we waive reading of the amendment and allow Senator Hassell-Thompson to speak on the amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin, upon review of the amendment that is before the house, in accordance with Rule 6, Section 4B, I rule the amendment that is at the desk is unconstitutionally drafted and therefore out of order.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Mr. President, I would appeal the ruling of the chair and ask you to allow Senator Hassell-Thompson to explain why she disagrees.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The appeal is so noted and Senator Hassell-Thompson is allowed to speak on the appeal.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:Thank you, Mr. President.
The amendment that I offer today would appropriate an additional $25 million to the Small Business Revolving Loan Fund to create more economic activity and provide greater access to capital for Main Street small businesses. While the economy may be beginning to improve, the credit market, especially for small businesses, continues to be restricted. It is of vital importance that New York State stays true to the message of being open for business and supports the continued growth and viability of small businesses.
The program is targeted to small businesses that have had difficulty accessing regular credit markets, and the fund offers both regular and microloans depending on the business owner's needs. Small businesses are the heart of the American economy, comprising 98 percent of all businesses in New York, and employ more than one-half of New York's private-sector workforce.
Innovation, creativity, determination and perseverance are just a few of the essential qualities small business owners demonstrate every day. And we should do everything that we can to support them and to encourage job creation.
While the economy is improving, there is still a problem for small businesses getting financing. Appropriating additional funds for the Small Business Revolving Loan Fund is a way to make sure that this lifeline to small businesses stays open.
Thanks to the 2010 passage of the Business Diversity Act, which has been slow but gradually has increased in the amount of MWBEs that are obtaining and participating in state contracts -- however, one major obstacle that stands in the way of more MWBEs obtaining state contracts is their ability to obtain and gain financing to believe able to complete those contracts.
This bill would help finance MWBE-performing state procurement contracts. The additional appropriation is set forth separately and distinctly from the original items contained in the Executive's appropriation budget submission and I believe complies with Article 7, Section 4 of the Constitution.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Hassell-Thompson.
The question is on the appeal of the chair. All those in favor of overruling the chair signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Opposed?
Senator Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Can we have a show of hands, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin has requested a show of hands. So ordered.
(Senators raised their hands.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:Ayes, 24.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The ruling of the chair stands.
Senator Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Mr. President, I believe there's an amendment at the desk by Senator Perkins. I request that the reading be waived and that Senator Perkins be allowed to speak on the amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Breslin.
Again, in accordance with Rule 6, Section 4B, I have reviewed the amendment before the desk and do not find it legally or procedurally effectual. So accordingly, it is not appropriately before the house.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Mr. President, I appeal the ruling of the chair and ask Senator Perkins to speak on behalf of why he thinks that ruling is --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin has asked for a ruling of the chair. And, Senator Perkins, you may be heard on that appeal.
SENATOR PERKINS:Thank you very much, Mr. President.
My amendment to this budget bill is germane for the following reasons. Number one, the amendment deals with the same subject matter as the underlying budget bill in the following respects.
The proposed amendment would simply add an additional $930,000 in tuition assistance, a program that is funded in this very bill.
The amendment neither unreasonably expands the object or subject of the underlying bill, nor does it change the purpose, scope or object of the original bill.
The additional appropriation is set forth separately and distinctly from the original items contained in the Executive's appropriation budget submission, and therefore it complies with Article 7, Section 4 of the Constitution.
For the foregoing reasons, the amendment I'm offering today is germane to the bill currently under consideration, and lawful. Period.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Perkins.
The question is on the appeal of the chair. All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Senator Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Yes, Mr. President, I request a show of hands on the amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin has requested a show of hands. So ordered.
(Senators raised their hands.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:Ayes, 23.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The ruling of the chair stands.
Senator Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Thank you, Mr. President.
I believe there's an amendment at the desk by Senator Stavisky. I ask that the reading be waived and that Senator Stavisky be allowed to speak on the amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin, in accordance again with Rule 6, Section 4B, I have reviewed the amendment and find that this amendment is unconstitutionally drafted and therefore out of order.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Mr. President, I appeal the rule of the chair and ask you to allow Senator Stavisky to explain why we believe that ruling is incorrect.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:There is a request to appeal the ruling of the chair.
Senator Stavisky, you may be heard on that. Senator Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you, Mr. President.
This amendment that I introduced today would restart Foundation Aid for the school year 2012-2013 at a higher level than in the bill before us. It would be tied to additional Foundation Aid phased in and restorations to the Gap Elimination Adjustment, with an emphasis on helping high-needs school districts.
Over the past two years, New York's public schools have lost almost $3 billion. School districts are forced to eliminate thousands of teaching positions and reduce or eliminate various important programs. Districts have been put through three years of aid cuts and freezes. Ninety percent of the districts are now receiving less state aid than they were in 2008-2009.
And at the same time, the districts have had to absorb additional costs for pension, health insurance, and other contractual agreements. They have worked hard to keep spending down and limit tax increases in the budgets that they've asked voters to approve. The spending increases in the past two years were about half of the increases in the pensions and other benefits.
The implication is that the districts cut all their other spending, on balance, to hold down the tax increases that they have been forced to approve, and at the same time cutting school aid. And as a result, many districts are using their reserves to cover these increases.
But eventually the reserves are going to run out, and therefore we need to do more to support schools in this state. And for that reason, I tried to introduce this amendment.
The additional appropriation -- and you have, Mr. President, the amendment before you. It sets forth separately and distinctly from the original items contained in the Executive's appropriation, and therefore it complies with Article 7, Section 4 of the State Constitution.
Provisions that may be contained in an appropriation bill are limited to those that relate specifically to some particular appropriation in this budget. But there is a separate provision for an appropriation, and therefore it does not violate Pataki v. The New York State Assembly. And this amendment sets forth a separate line-item appropriation.
Therefore, this amendment is constitutional.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Stavisky.
The question is on the ruling of the chair and overruling the chair. All those in favor -- Senator Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Yes, Mr. President, I request a show of hands on the vote.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin has requested a show of hands. So ordered.
All those in favor of overruling the chair please signify by raising your hand.
(Senators raised their hands.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:Ayes, 23.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The ruling of the chair stands.
We are now on the bill before the house.
Is there any Senator wishing to be heard?
Senator Stavisky. Senator Stavisky yields to Senator Krueger.
Senator Krueger.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you, Mr. President.
So continuing with some questions on the Aid to Localities bill, if the sponsor would yield, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes. I would.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you very much.
So again, starting with our newly printed and on our desks Enacted Budget Summary, in the Aid to Localities bill there are quite a few changes by topic. But maybe just choosing economic development, there's quite a few changes or additions in economic development.
Can you tell me how much additional money has been added for economic development projects in the Aid to Localities bill in total? And I guess to save time, and where we're getting that money, since we're concurring with the Executive but we're adding many items.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The total amount that's added under this bill is $5 million.
And I just want to kind of respond to the original comment by Senator Krueger about the newly copied, just on our desks document summary. I assume we're going to hear that each time she talks.
I just want to remind Senator Krueger what life was like when there was no document at all, when no questions were answered at all, when there was a sheet of paper one page long that was supposed to be the document that complied with the 2007 Budget Reform Act.
So I just wanted to say it once, and I hope we don't have to go through that preface to every question. Because this is more information than anybody has ever had in years in the Senate. And plus we've had three days that these bills have been online for anybody to read any way they want to read it.
So with that said, $5 million and they're listed in the summary.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Mr. President, if through you the sponsor would yield.
Because the two years we sat on the opposite side of the aisle I know that we provided full reports. So which years were it that you didn't get full reports?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: 2009 and 2010. I thought maybe you would remember the engaging questions and answers between me and the former Finance chair, Senator Kruger, where I got no answers, no documents, no anything.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Granted I believe I'm not that Senator Kruger, I'm the other Senator Krueger. But I'm quite sure, according to my Finance staff, that we did provide these documents.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:So noted.
SENATOR KRUEGER:But nonetheless, I'm actually -- I will stop pointing out it's a newly printed document because I think I have made the point.
But there are questions nonetheless about the budget documents. Because it is true we are not doing messages of necessity. We have had three days. And for the record and for the cameras, I can't lift the bills, but it's this entire stack on each of our desks.
So I would make the proposal that even those of us who with full due diligence attempt to review all of these documents in three days and attempt to hold these documents up to the Executive proposed budget, which is --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger, are you on the bill now?
SENATOR KRUEGER:I guess I am on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger on the bill.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Would Senator Krueger yield to a question?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger, would you yield to a question?
SENATOR KRUEGER:I will if I can just finish my thought of what I was saying.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger on the bill.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you. And then I will be happy to yield to my colleague.
I guess my point was it is true, happily there are no messages of necessity, we are allowing bills to age the full three days. But for the record and for the public, who may not always understand the process, these are the budget bills we are dealing with today. It's approximately a foot stack of paper, double-sided. The original Executive Budget was an equivalent-sized set of documents. Oh, and we're not doing all of the budget bills, we did some of them earlier, so it's a higher stack.
And so the assignment is in fact to try to compare how these documents today compare to the original proposed budget of the Governor. It is a complex situation, I think everyone agrees.
And so in fact the value of having a summary report, summary materials, open discussion when we're not on the floor and when we are on the floor, is for any and all of us to ask questions and have a better understanding of what are in these documents, how do these documents compare to another giant set of documents, and to make the best decisions we can on behalf of the State of New York, even when we may find there are things we agree with in any given document and disagree with in any given document.
Which is why a budget summary that actually does a comparison between what the Governor's Executive proposals were and what the final budget bills we're looking at is so valuable, because in fact, only speaking for myself, I find the detail in a document more this size a little easier to review and summarize and cross-check than two giant piles of double-sided budget bills.
And now I'm happy to answer questions from my colleague.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco, do you wish to continue to question?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: There's no point. I'll waive my question, because I've had a request that I be able to make an announcement unrelated to the budget in view of some recent arrivals.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger, you have completed, correct, your -- on the bill?
SENATOR KRUEGER:Oh, no, I did have other questions, but I would be happy to yield to an announcement.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Skelos for an announcement.
SENATOR SKELOS:Mr. President, can we have unanimous consent for Senator DeFrancisco to make a statement on a previously adopted resolution.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Without objection, unanimous consent is granted.
Senator DeFrancisco, you may be heard.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes, thank you, Mr. President.
We are in the process of doing budget bills, so we don't have much time to recognize the group that's here. We have passed a resolution on a previous session for the Baldwinsville Central School District Marching Band, all 100 of them.
And it's perfect that you're here today because we're going to do the budget earlier this year, like we did last year, and it's only appropriate that we have a marching band to announce that throughout the Capitol. So at 1:15 they're going to be in the Concourse and playing music. Maybe we can hear them from here.
But it's wonderful that they came. There's a hundred of them, that's why it took a little time to get them in. But let me just tell you one thing about them.
They won a national competition, and that competition was around the Gator Bowl in -- was it Jacksonville, Florida? And they were the national champions in this, and they got to play before the Gator Bowl, I think it was December 31st, is that correct?
And they also won individual first place for best drum major, best percussion, best guard, best marching, best general effect, and best music and best just about everything.
So we passed this resolution. Each of you will get a copy. Congratulations. And I understand you're all excellent students as well, and you're going to be our future leaders.
And we really appreciate your being here. And maybe if we could move this along a little bit, we could be down there at 1:15 to listen to you. And thank you for joining us.
(Applause.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:We welcome the students, the marching band from Baldwinsville High School. We extend to you a warm welcome and the courtesies of the Senate. Congratulations and welcome.
(Applause.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:We will return to the bill at hand.
Senator Krueger, have you completed?
SENATOR KRUEGER:I am going to first defer to my colleague Senator Stavisky.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you, Mr. President. If the Senator would yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:First let me ask you ask the questions on higher education and then on education itself.
The Senate bill, the resolution that we passed in this house, swept the CUNY and SUNY funds to make restorations. Literally, SUNY and CUNY -- didn't SUNY and CUNY pay out of their own budgets for these restorations?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No.
In this bill, though, nothing was swept from SUNY or CUNY.
SENATOR STAVISKY:In other words, SUNY and CUNY did not have to pay out of their own budgets for the restorations?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: We proposed that in our-house, but that's not how it ultimately turned out.
SENATOR STAVISKY:That was not in the final.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: That's correct.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you.
Mr. President, if the Senator would yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:I must tell you, I was delighted that the budget, both in the Senate and Assembly resolutions, called for increases in base aid to community colleges both for SUNY and CUNY.
However, in the community college childcare centers, that money was restored, but it appears that in subsequent years both SUNY and CUNY will be required to provide a 35 percent match, and I think the wording that's used is from nonstate sources. Is that correct? And can you explain what a nonstate source is?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It's a source other than the State of New York. It could be donations, it could be contributions by the individuals who are using the childcare services. It's just not state revenues.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Would TANF funds be included as a nonstate source?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I guess it's federal money that's just coming through the state government. My opinion would be that it would be nonstate funds.
My opinion would be it would be nonstate funds, because the TANF funds come from the federal government and we're just funneling them through. But that's my opinion of it.
SENATOR STAVISKY If TANF money is not available, and I know obviously these are federal funds, who is going to pay -- what if the student doesn't have the 35 percent? Who is going to pay that 35 percent? Are the localities going to pay it?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No. Then they apparently will not be able to use the services.
There's many universities and colleges that don't have any childcare. I think this is something the state is providing 65 percent of the childcare funding. I think that's a wonderful benefit. It's more than half -- the glass is more than half full. It's just that at some point you don't have enough money to do everything for all people.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Through you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:There are students, older students with children who are returning either because of personal circumstances, the job market, or for whatever reason, and they need a place to leave their children so that they can return to school and pursue a degree and perhaps get a better job, and they don't have the match in private money. These students, then, will be forced out of college, is that correct?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I don't think so. I think people are extremely resourceful. If someone wants a college education and they're being provided with certain benefits, whether it's TAP, whether it's more aid to the community colleges like we're giving, or in this case 65 percent of the cost, that's a benefit. I think if that student truly wants to get through college he'll find -- he or she would find a way.
And I'm just happy that we're able to provide the 65 percent. Many people are losing their jobs that have low incomes. They can't -- they're in the same box, they're in the same problem. So I just think we cannot provide all for everybody.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:On the Aid to Localities portion that deals with the state aid formula. In my budget amendment, which was ruled unlawful, the Governor provided for $289 million for restoration of the gap elimination adjustment. How much does this bill include as a restoration in that Gap Elimination Adjustment?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It's an additional $110 million. The additional funds of approximately $200 million were directed by this formula, but $110 million was for what you had asked about. About 75 percent of this additional amend of money were used for low-wealth, high-need districts.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:The Governor's restoration provided for 76 percent of the total restoration for high-needs school districts. What percentage of this GEA restoration goes to the high-needs districts in the bill before us?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I can't break it down by GEA. But I can tell you overall, 71 percent goes to high-needs, low-wealth districts.
SENATOR STAVISKY:In other words, it's less than the Executive --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stavisky, are you asking --
SENATOR STAVISKY:Yes, I am.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It's less a percentage, more dollars. Each district under the formula would get more dollars. But instead of 76 percent that the Governor had, it's 71 percent.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Can you break it down in terms of high wealth or low wealth or average school districts?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: You know, I can. I think I got that. Surprisingly, I can answer that question.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Well, that's why I asked the question.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I do have a chart here that was prepared for me, if I can find it.
The Big Five districts -- excuse me. Where is it? Well, the increase per pupil by need, the Big Five, the average increase per pupil was $318. High-need urban and suburban districts, the average was about $400. High-need rural, about $470. And average need, $233 per student. And low need, $89 per student.
So I don't know the percentages, but that's per student what the increases were.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Obviously you're aware that the wealth behind each child in a high-wealth district is something in the neighborhood of $2.5 million, and in a low-wealth district it's approximately $151,000.
Does the Foundation Aid satisfy the needs in terms of equity? In other words, are we meeting the needs of the poor rural, the poor urban districts in the same way that we're satisfying the average student needs?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Well, equity is in the eyes of the beholder. I imagine the school districts that are only under our new money getting $90 a student might not think it's equitable when a high-need rural district gets $470 more money per pupil.
So I guess this is a negotiated use of the additional $200 million. From my perspective, I think it's an equitable way to provide the funding. But if you're getting less than you want, I guess you'll think it's unequitable.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Let's switch to the area of the Governor's performance grants proposal. Is there a proposal -- obviously -- how much funding are we talking about in the 2013 budget, in the outyear? The 2013 Governor's performance grants appropriations.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: This year it's $50 million, which is basically a reappropriation from last year's budget. It's at $115 million -- 125 in the outyear that you asked about.
SENATOR STAVISKY:In addition to the Governor's performance grants --
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Let me just add something. Not that I'm suggesting that we're going to do this, but presumably if there's $125 million in an outyear and there's another budget cycle that's going to take place, then things could change just like they are changing this year.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Do you know how many school districts of the 700-some-odd school districts in New York State, how many have applied for these grants?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I don't know, but I know the argument. I know no money has gone out the door. And I know the argument that many districts won't qualify, many districts will never be able to get great performance grants because they don't believe they have enough funding. And that was the whole argument why $200 million was transferred.
Again, as I mentioned before, I think we can reevaluate this plan for the outyear of $150 million just like we reevaluated the plan here to see what's in the pipeline, whether districts are being treated fairly in being able to apply, and then see what happens in the next year's budget.
But this was a negotiated solution to get the $200 million into the budget this year.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Are there any other groups such as BOCES or charter schools or libraries that have applied for these challenge grants?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I don't know. I don't know.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Does the budget bill include an increase in state aid associated with the Foundation Aid?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I'm not sure I understand the question. Would you try again?
SENATOR STAVISKY:Let me go into another area which I'm concerned about, and that's the $20 million appropriation for bullet aid. Can you tell us how bullet aid was allocated last year, and can you compare it to the allocation this year?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The $20 million is in the budget because the budget is not perfect -- excuse me, the State Ed education formula is not perfect and in some instances there are inequities in certain school districts. And the purpose of the $20 million, which includes both the Senate and the Assembly, is that correct -- no, it just goes to the Senate -- is to try to resolve those inequities.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:On page 179 and 180 there's language included as part of the appropriation for bullet aid that would require the Senate to act on a resolution. Does the Assembly have to approve this resolution, or is this sufficient for the Senate?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It's sufficient for the Senate. Because the Assembly also has some money for smoothing out the formula, this bullet aid, and they would presumably have to pass their own resolution.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Can you tell us when the resolution is going to be presented?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I can't. Because I imagine we'll be learning what the inequities are and be learning what the problems are from the various representatives. And at that time, once we know all the problems, at that point there will be a resolution to vote on as to how that money should be distributed.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Since the resolution only needs Senate approval and not the Assembly approval, the Budget Reform Act of 2007 required both houses to concur in passing these resolutions. Wouldn't this violate the Budget Reform Act of 2007?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No, because we are -- both houses will be passing the budget, which will have the dollars in it. And the budget does say that it will be allocated by resolution.
So the Budget Reform Act deals with the passage of the budget, not other items that implement the terms of the budget.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Doesn't the Budget Reform --
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Let me just add something. I didn't know this, and I had forgotten about it. Last year there was a similar situation -- you asked about last year -- where the budget required a joint resolution from the Assembly and the Senate, and the Assembly never passed that resolution. And it caused substantial problems in getting those funds to where they were needed. So that's why it was separated between the two this year.
SENATOR STAVISKY:But -- if the Senator would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Doesn't that prove the point that a joint -- that it would have to be approved in both houses in order to satisfy the mandates of the Budget Reform Act of 2007?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No, it doesn't. Because last year the budget that was passed in accordance with the 2007 Budget Reform Act required those both houses to pass that resolution. This budget has different language. It provides for the Senate to pass the resolution pertaining to their bullet aid and the Assembly too to pass theirs related to their bullet aid.
So by passing this budget, that new procedure will be adopted for this year.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:I have a problem with bullet aid, because to me there's no equity here, it's another example of aid to those with the most power.
And if the Senator would answer -- I'm sorry. I'm sorry. On what basis do you anticipate the allocation of bullet aid? Is it going to be based on need?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: It's going to be based upon a resolution that will be presented by the majority party for review and passage or defeat by the entire Senate.
SENATOR STAVISKY:I'm sorry, I didn't hear that last sentence.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The way it's going to be distributed is a resolution will be prepared by the Majority Leader and the majority party to be presented to the entire Senate for a vote.
But the purpose, as I mentioned before, is to try to ease the pain in those districts that have substantially more problems than other districts.
SENATOR STAVISKY:My question was the basis on which it is awarded. And I guess you've answered that question.
I have one more area that I would like to question, if the Senator would yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Taking this Aid to Localities Budget in its entirety, does it satisfy the court requirements of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity? And if so, how?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Well, I don't know the answer to that question because there's been a ruling of the court on that Campaign for Fiscal Equity several years ago, and I don't think the amounts that were contemplated by that court decision ever have really been accomplished.
So I don't -- I didn't check this budget against that particular court ruling, but ultimately the Legislature can only provide what it's got and provide it in the fairest way it could possibly provide it.
So whether it technically satisfies what the court contemplated, I'm not sure. But I don't think it ever has.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Then my last question is, is it moving toward the target that the court has set for us?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I think so. Because what we're doing, even by the additional $200 million, we're driving more towards low-wealth, high-needs districts. And as we keep going, moving in that direction, I think we're getting closer to the intent of the court decision.
SENATOR STAVISKY:And you're suggesting that bullet aid also helps in that direction?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Hopefully.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you. And thank you for your patience.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes, no problem.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Rivera.
SENATOR RIVERA:Thank you, Mr. President. On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Rivera on the bill.
SENATOR RIVERA:I wanted to stand up, Mr. President, and talk about a couple of issues that are in this bill. I will be supportive of this piece of the budget for a couple of different reasons.
First of all, I'll talk about SNUG funding. SNUG is a program that exists across the state. It was started in Chicago a few years ago as a way to deal with gun violence. It has proven to be very effective in Chicago, it has come to New York and exists both in Yonkers and Niagara Falls and a couple of different places around the state.
We put $1 million in the budget to be able to fund SNUG in the State of New York. I'm very -- I think that that is a good thing. It helps us to deal with gun violence in different parts of the state.
Still, I would make the approach to the Executive that we need to make sure that this happens in the Bronx. We don't have a SNUG program right now in the Bronx. And I know that there's many members of the Democratic Conference that believe the same thing, particularly my colleagues in the Bronx. We need to make sure that it comes here.
But that is one thing that happens in this budget that I am supportive of.
Second, we restored the Neighborhood and Rural Preservation Programs, the NPP and the RPP programs. Both of those are incredibly important across the State of New York, all the way from Senator Young's district -- because she's made clear many times that it is a very important part of the rural parts of the state -- and the NPP program is very important in parts of the state downstate.
We were able to take those programs and put them back in the budget. I am appreciative of that. We should have more funding for housing preservation, but this funding was restored. I think that is a positive thing that we did in this budget.
Domestic violence programs. There was restoration through DCJS for domestic violence programs, for civil and legal services for victims of domestic violence and for Family Court domestic violence services, all of which were not in the -- you know, I'm glad that through negotiations between the two chambers and the Governor's office we were able to put this back. This restoration is incredibly important for families all across the state.
I'm also very happy that there is an establishment for an Office of New Americans in this budget. It is an office that will exist within the Department of State in the Executive.
And the purpose of this office is to engage legal permanent residents across New York and certainly in the northwest Bronx that I represent, make sure that we can expand access to much-needed English language education services and citizenship services.
It is an office that is going to be dedicated to reaching out to new immigrant communities, much like the Bangladeshi community that we had in this chamber just earlier today, and making sure that, in particular, new American business owners and entrepreneurs have access to services in the Executive.
So this office that will be created in the Department of State, I am very much looking forward to its creation and looking forward to working with the Department of State so that it can serve folks in the northwest Bronx, my constituents in the northwest Bronx.
As far as higher education is concerned, I have two CUNY campuses in my district, both Lehman College and Bronx Community College.
While I continue to be concerned, as Senator Stavisky expressed, about the fact that we are, I believe, not making a true commitment from the state to what is public higher education -- I believe that we need to make public universities less dependent on the tuition of individual students and more on state funding. So while I will continue to make the argument that we need to fund them at a higher level, I am glad that we were able to increase state aid from $178 million to $184 million. It is a modest increase but certainly one that is a positive.
I do say again that I am concerned that when we include language that says that in future years these universities will have to rely on nonstate resources -- this is the discussion that Senator Stavisky and Senator DeFrancisco had a bit earlier. I am concerned when we insert that language into the budget, it makes it harder for us to make sure that we fund these institutions as the public higher education institutions that they are.
On K-12 education, there has been discussions about the competitive grants. I was certainly disappointed that at the beginning of this process there was an allocation of $250 million on these performance-based grants. But I definitely want to credit, on the record, the parents, the students and the teachers who visited legislators, who visited Albany and pushed hard to make sure that we would get -- that not all this money would be allocated to competitive grants.
Negotiations brought $200 million of that back into the General Fund and general state aid, and I'm very, very glad that we were able to do that. Because I do not believe that competitive grants should be a substitute for school aid, particularly when, as we've discussed before, the neediest school districts, you know, are not likely to win competitive grants, which makes them less likely to be successful in the future.
So finally, I think that there's many things in this part of the budget that maybe we could have done a little bit more, but certainly addressed a lot of the concerns for folks in my district, in the northwest Bronx and across the State of New York. And I will be voting in the affirmative on this piece of legislation.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Rivera.
Senator Addabbo.
SENATOR ADDABBO:Thank you, Mr. President. Briefly on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Addabbo on the bill.
SENATOR ADDABBO:I rise to support today the Aid to Localities Budget bill. It provides essential funding for our schools throughout the state, including New York City. It provides for the first Foundation Aid phase-in since 2008-2009. It continues the Contract for Excellence requirement for the City of New York, which should encourage the city to honor its obligation toward our students.
The school aid run provides an overall increase of $292 million for the City of New York. And the city will receive a Foundation Aid increase of $47 million, which restarts a process that was started by advocates and parents in New York City back in the early 1990s.
I also support the increase of $4 million to our libraries. Given the increase in use of our libraries for everyone throughout the state, this is a much-needed funding and important contribution for those who work in the libraries and use our libraries.
The $7 million increase in the funding for the comprehensive attendance programs will help the nonpublic schools meet their burden, their financial burden throughout the state, and again will help the nonpublic schools reach their increasing financial burden.
Mr. President, in closing, education is an extremely important issue for our residents throughout the state. These restorations and the Foundation Aid increase should continue to assist the school districts in their rising costs and the student needs.
I'm grateful to have been a part of the Education Conference Committee. I wish well our Senator, Suzi Oppenheimer, and her speedy recovery. And again standing in for her, those are big shoes to fill on the Education Conference Committee, so I do wish her well.
I want to thank the Education chair, Senator Flanagan, for his work and the work of all the staff on the education portion of our state budget. And I will be voting aye.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Addabbo.
Senator Espaillat.
SENATOR ESPAILLAT:Yes, Mr. President, on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Espaillat on the bill.
SENATOR ESPAILLAT:Yes, Mr. President.
Last year I voted against the Education bill because I felt that it leveled very serious budget cuts on an educational system in the City of New York which cries out for additional funding.
This year, however, I rise in support of this Aid to Localities Budget for several reasons. First, because the school aid formula, for the first time it provides an increase, a down payment of $111 million that hopefully will serve to restart the multiyear plan to fulfill our promise with the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit, a lawsuit that was started in my district over 15 years ago.
Second, the school aid formula gives particular attention to the need of limited English proficiency students, the LEP students. Foundation Aid also recognizes LEPs, and the new phase-in recognizes LEPs. The Governor's original restoration formula and the additional restoration formula also recognize the LEP students. So this is a good measure that I am very much in support of.
Additionally, community colleges are also receiving an increase in base aid. Community colleges are the backbone of higher education and the front line in the fight to educate our students. In many cases community colleges continue to be a window of opportunity for many folks that find themselves unemployed during this economic crisis. The $150 per full-time student increase will assist community colleges in reducing some of the financial burdens on their students.
Fourthly, the opportunity programs funded through the State Education Department are restored. HEOP, STEP, C-STEP and the Liberty Partnership Programs help economically disadvantaged students realize the dream of higher education and expanded opportunities in different fields.
Let me just say that whereas this budget provides increased help in education, both elementary school, intermediate school, high school, and college education, it fails to do one thing, Mr. President. It fails to include the DREAM Act.
And although I recognize that the DREAM Act is a separate piece of legislation that is carried in different forms, one by Senator Perkins and myself in this house, I am hopeful that it will be our highest priority when we come back from recess.
I will be voting in support of this bill, and I do really hope that when we come back we'd add that additional piece that was left out, the DREAM Act that will help thousands of undocumented young people have access to higher education.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Smith.
SENATOR SMITH:Thank you, Mr. President. On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Smith on the bill.
SENATOR SMITH:As Senator Rivera spoke earlier, I too am pleased that the agreement was made to continue to support the SNUG program, which has been very effective throughout the state. I do hope that as we move forward with the rest of this year there is opportunity for the Bronx to be added to that program.
As you know, Mr. President, I am one who continually will champion the importance of One New York. However, over the last several budget cycles there has been a consistent level of performance not to provide AIM to the City of New York.
And I believe that while there has been some discussion around the Medicaid absorption increased cost over the next three cycles that the state will do for localities, there's been some discussion that that would seek to mitigate the challenge of no AIM money to New York City, I would hope, in the spirit of fairness as we move forward, that we would begin to recognize that New York City is part of the entire state. And in the spirit of One New York that we recognize the resources that New York City gives to the State of New York and in turn should be returned to New York as well.
So there are good things in this particular budget. I do hope that we do more with SNUG, we do more with the AIM for New York.
And finally, Mr. President, as one who was part of an area that was ground zero for the foreclosure area, I know there is $9 million in there for foreclosure. I know they are looking at the Attorney General's success in another $15 million.
But I would hope that we recognize the significance of the foreclosure challenge in this state and, as we move forward with some of our cleanup bills before the end of the year, as we look to do some corrective measures before now and the end of the year, that we recognize the fungibility within this budget and move to appropriate in some other categories, such as the foreclosure issue in this budget.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz.
SENATOR DIAZ:Thank you, Mr. President. On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz on the bill.
SENATOR DIAZ:Before, this is the third -- this is number three, Mr. President, out of seven that we are doing today. This one is called Aid to Localities.
And I asked before, why are we asking questions. And the answer, I said to myself, maybe because we don't know. If we don't know, then we vote no.
Before, a few minutes ago, Senator Krueger mentioned the bigger -- what we're dealing with today. And Senator Krueger even said that it's impossible for us to understand and to read those things.
This thing, ladies and gentlemen -- ladies and gentlemen, this thing today, this is bigger than Obamacare. Obamacare is 2700 pages. And for one year already, almost a year, and people don't even understand or know throughout the state and throughout the Congress what Obamacare entails.
So they want to us read this in two days and understand all of this and vote on this. It's impossible for anyone to read this in two days and understand everything.
However, I know, Mr. President and ladies and gentlemen, even as Adriano Espaillat said, that this section, Aid to Localities, do not include the DREAM Act. Even through Adriano says that it could be another bill, a separate bill. No. This is something that was supposed to be fought and supposed to be -- do everything possible to be included here. It's not included.
The DREAM Act, ladies and gentlemen, is not included in this piece of legislation, 6253, called Aid to Localities. There's not even money here included for the Small Business Revolving Loan, according to Senator Hassell-Thompson.
So what are we voting for? What is it my colleagues are voting for? For something that nobody could tell me exactly what it is?
The bare fact, the bare fact that this piece of legislation do not include, that the Governor and the members of the Legislature refuse to include the DREAM Act -- this does not even include money for -- this does not even include money -- this does not even include money to help the students with any kind of help.
So I'm not asking questions, I'm just going to use Senator Krueger's word. I am -- what was the word that she used? She used a word -- disturbed. And because I'm disturbed, I'm voting no. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you, Mr. President. If the sponsor would please yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you. I just want to make sure he hears my question, so I want to wait until he's ready.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I'm sorry. Go ahead.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
Actually my colleague Senator Stavisky was asking a series of questions earlier about the sections in the Aid to Localities bill that appear to violate the Budget Reform Act of 2007.
SENATOR LaVALLE: Mr. President --
SENATOR KRUEGER:I yield.
SENATOR LaVALLE: Thank you, Senator.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator LaValle, why do you rise?
SENATOR LaVALLE: Can we have unanimous consent to have a brief recess? Stand at ease.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Without objection, the Senate will stand at ease briefly.
SENATOR LaVALLE: Thank you.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at ease at 12:49 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened at 1:23 p.m.)
SENATOR SKELOS:Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS:If we could return to the debate on Aid to Localities.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:We shall return to the debate. Senator Krueger has the floor.
Senator Krueger.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you. I believe before recess I was asking the sponsor to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco yields.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
And I was saying, but to repeat myself, that earlier in discussion around this bill Senator Stavisky had asked some questions about the changed use -- excuse me, a change in the language in legislation around education funding that I believe violates the 2007 Budget Reform Act because it would no longer require lined-out resolutions to come before both houses and be passed by both houses.
I believe that Senator DeFrancisco said yes, this year we changed that in the language.
So my question, having reminded us about what I thought the dialogue was, my question is does he believe that this is a violation of the Budget Reform Act as we passed it in 2007.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Mr. President, if he could continue to yield, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Yes, sir. Yes. Why is it not a violation of the Budget Reform Act?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Because we are passing a budget, and that budget changes the procedure as far as that bullet aid over the budget of last year. Last year that budget that we passed required a joint resolution by the Senate and the Assembly to distribute that bullet aid, and that this budget changes it to split up the bullet aid and require only individual resolutions of each house.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Mr. President, if through you the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
Is there any other section of the budget, either in this Aid to Localities bill or in some other bill we're going to be dealing with later, where parallel language is applied or in fact the old budget reform language remains?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I don't think there's any similar provision to the bullet aid other than this one.
Except there's many provisions in there that give the Governor broader discretion as far as moving money, for example, in the IT area and back-office areas, without further action on behalf of the Legislature. So that's different than it was in prior years. And I think that's the only thing I could think of that may be different than prior years.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Mr. President, will the sponsor continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
While it's -- sorry, I'm just making sure I have the right question. Mr. President, I think clarification. I believe that in the Aid to Localities bill, under the section for criminal justice services, there is a similar language where it only requires the vote of one house on specific items. I don't have the page -- oh, I think -- I'm sorry, I don't have the correct page numbers, but it's Division of Criminal Justice, Aid to Localities, Federal Operating Grants Fund, Edward Byrne Memorial Account, then Domestic Violence Account.
Am I correct that those also lay out specifically a resolution only of one house to determine how those lump-sum monies should be distributed at a later date?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I'll take your word for it. I am not sure. But the same answer would apply: It doesn't violate anything because that provision is being voted upon by the entire body, and that's the procedure set for the distribution of those funds by this body in passing the budget bill.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Mr. President, on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger on the bill.
SENATOR KRUEGER:So I looked at these sections, and Senator DeFrancisco is correct, we use the fabulous wonderful word "notwithstanding" in each of these sections of the budget. And so, for the record, "notwithstanding" is a term that lets us do away or ignore or some might say violate agreements that we have made, statutes we have passed, statements we have made to the public about what we are committing to do in future.
So for the record, Senator DeFrancisco is correct, the "notwithstanding" sentence is there in each case. And for the record, I object. We made a commitment to the public in the Budget Reform Act that we were going to go forward with certain agreements around MOU lump sums --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Would Senator Krueger yield to a question.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Certainly, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:She yields.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Senator Krueger, in the years 2009 and 2010 did you have a similar commitment to follow the 2007 Budget Reform Act?
SENATOR KRUEGER:Yes.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: And with that commitment, did you follow it there were?
SENATOR KRUEGER:There were some flaws. I think probably you're going to discuss conference committees.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: There were some flaws, that's the way you describe the procedure in 2009-2010?
SENATOR KRUEGER:No, you may describe it as you wish.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Okay. One more question.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR KRUEGER:Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: So in this budget we're making a "notwithstanding" clause for a couple of provisions and you're concerned that that violates the Budget Reform Act, is that correct?
SENATOR KRUEGER:I'm concerned that we are violating the agreement we made in budget reform having an impact on the distribution of over $40 million of tax money, yes.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: One last question.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Yes, certainly.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: With respect to the failure to have the timeline that's required on the 2007 Budget Reform Act, the failure to have conference committees, the failure to have the budget on time, the failure to have a detailed summary of the budget and the financial plan, did you complain about any of those things in 2009 and 2010?
SENATOR KRUEGER:Actually, in response, I did actually complain that we failed to do certain things. Yes, I did, Mr. President.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Okay.
SENATOR KRUEGER:We actually did provide the summary reports as requested. And I have sent staff to go find those copies for you, Senator DeFrancisco, since you mentioned that twice. But yes, there were not conference committees and hence they were not on time.
I think it's legitimate for both sides to raise issues when we are in fact violating law or agreements that have been made in the past. So I will accept that there were violations in the past, and I object to this violation today.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Krueger.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
On the bill, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger on the bill.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
Oh, I apologize, I had one additional question for the sponsor. Would the sponsor please yield?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco, do you yield?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
So this is our Aid to Localities bill which drives the vast majority of state and federal pass-through funds to our localities to run the programs -- education, human services, assortments of transportation, health. I mean, an endless list of programs go through the Aid to Localities bill.
Does the sponsor know what the impact on our localities would be from the budget that the Congress passed yesterday in Washington, what that impact would have on our localities in the upcoming budget year?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I don't know, and it's irrelevant. The fact that one house of the federal government passes a budget bill that's not the budget, I don't know what relevance it would be for us to know what's in it since it's not a final budget. And we haven't had a final budget for some time in the federal government.
So the point is that that information should not and does not affect our budget today.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Now on the bill, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger on the bill.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
We are state government, and so we have to factor in the impact of what federal monies we may or may not have to pass through to our localities or to spend ourselves in planning for a year ahead.
So I do agree the Congress as a whole has not passed the budget bill that was submitted by the Republicans in the House of Representatives yesterday. But in fact it was passed in the House of Representatives yesterday, and it would have a devastating impact on the localities and on almost every domestic program in this country, devastating to the effect that we could see 63 percent reductions in domestic spending for programs that impact the elderly, the disabled, and low-income New Yorkers.
This at a time when unfortunately our unemployment rate continues to be unacceptably high, our poverty rate is growing, the documentation of lack of access to healthcare is causing severe impact and disproportionate impact to low-income New Yorkers.
And in fact beyond the proposal in Washington by the Republicans in the House of Representatives and the impact, if it became law, it would have on this state and our localities, I don't believe that the bill before us, the Aid to Localities bill, in any way adequately funds critical programs in each of our counties, in each of our communities.
The fact that it is a better budget bill than last year or the year before doesn't make it a good budget bill, does not mean it's addressing the needs for education, for higher education, for human services, to deal with issues of homelessness, to prevent evictions, to provide protections for people in the fundamental responsibilities that I believe government should have.
So this will be an on-time budget. There are portions of this budget that I am proud of and I applaud. But I do believe that I came to Albany to ensure that our state reprioritized our focus in our budget to address the needs at the local level that are the most fundamental needs of a state government and its responsibilities. And this isn't as bad a bill as the year before or the year before that, but it's not a good bill. And it's not a bill I can vote for.
So I'll be voting no. Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Is there any other Senator wishing to be heard??
Seeing none, hearing none, debate is closed. The Secretary will ring the bell.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY:Section 2. This act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz to explain his vote.
SENATOR DIAZ:Yes, Mr. President, thank you.
I'm just -- again, this is a big piece of -- package that we're doing today. And I'm glad that Senator Krueger is voting no. As I was saying, I think that you, when you have reason to vote no, you could take hours to explain why, all the reasons in the world why you're voting no. If you're voting yes, there's no reason to take too much time to say "I'm voting yes."
And I'm voting no, Mr. President, because this piece of legislation does not include the DREAM Act legislation. And my colleagues should have fought and should have held their votes to force the Governor to include the DREAM Act in this bill. There is not even money for small business revolving loans. So how could we vote for something like this?
That's why I'm voting no. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz to be recorded in the negative.
Senator Perkins to explain his vote.
SENATOR PERKINS:Thank you very much.
I just want to, for the record, establish that clearly, as has been noted, there is no DREAM Act. And of course that's a great concern of mine.
And for the record, I would just like to point out that according to the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy, undocumented immigrants paid over $662 million in taxes to New York State in 2010, making it the state with the fourth-highest revenue in taxes from undocumented immigrants. They paid approximately $104.4 million in personal income taxes, $95 million in property taxes, and over $463 million in sales taxes.
It is unjust, unfair, and un-American to collect over a half a billion dollars in tax revenue from undocumented immigrants only to deny them financial support that is granted to other New Yorkers.
Actually, it is universally accepted that those who pay taxes should benefit from those taxes, whether those benefits be public safety or access to higher education.
Plainly speaking, the DREAM Act would respect the dignity and contributions and of undocumented youth in New York. While this bill does not acknowledge that, I'm nevertheless going to be voting for the bill, with the expectation that we will sooner than later legislate a DREAM Act that will respect the Dreamers.
Thank you so much. I vote aye.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Perkins to be recorded in the affirmative.
Senator Stavisky to explain her vote.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you, Mr. President. And I thank Senator DeFrancisco for his responses.
There were a number of areas that I have problems with in this budget. For one thing, for the SUNY and CUNY childcare centers, I was not satisfied that nonstate sources next year are going to pick up the slack and force the people who make use of the CUNY and SUNY childcare centers, force them to pay the 35 percent copayment. I don't know if TANF is available, as I asked.
Secondly, I regret that you ruled my hostile -- it's not a hostile amendment, it's an enhancing amendment to make a budget better -- that you ruled it unconstitutional, the question of Foundation Aid increases, because clearly it was constitutional.
The question of Foundation Aid I think should be based upon need, it should be based upon the resources that we have. And I was not at all satisfied with the answer on bullet aid, because I think Senator Krueger is correct, it certainly does violate the 2007 budget agreement that we came together on. We agree that budget reform is important, and yet it's important except when it's not.
And I do have a problem with the allocation of the $20 million in bullet aid, because I don't know where it's going. Unfortunately, education in this state --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stavisky, how do you vote?
SENATOR STAVISKY:-- is based too often on where the child lives.
With all of these caveats, I vote yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stavisky to be recorded in the affirmative.
Senator Ruth Hassell-Thompson to explain her vote.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:Thank you, Mr. President.
I think it's been stated on this floor that if you're unhappy with the bill you ought to vote against it.
There are too many areas within this, including the base aid to my community that is included -- and certainly I could never vote against anything that is favorable to my constituency.
But having said that, I am very displeased about the fact that small businesses, which is very much the heart of the American economy, is being ignored, particularly in a chamber where we have espoused constantly the need to develop jobs. And the importance of small business to job development in this state is historic.
So I think that we're doing a disservice to our small businesses and to the arguments that we continue to make if we fail to make the appropriate appropriations to enhance the ability of small businesses to grow.
Therefore, Mr. President, as ambiguous as that statement may be, I will be voting in favor.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Ruth Hassell-Thompson to be recorded in the affirmative.
Senator Parker to explain his vote.
SENATOR PARKER:Thank you, Mr. President. To explain my vote.
As everybody has indicated, with an omnibus bill like this there's always good and bad. And you have to unfortunately either take the good with the bad or sometimes throw the baby out with the bathwater.
In this particular case, I don't think there's enough of a baby in there for me to vote for this bill, and so I'm throwing out the bathwater.
There's a number of things that I thought we could have done a little bit different in this budget. One of which, there's no increase to TAP. And certainly that's something that we could have done.
And the DREAM Act legislation -- you know, I represent a district that is very largely immigrant, particularly, you know, representing one of the largest concentrations of Caribbean people outside the Caribbean in the world. I represent the largest Pakistani community outside of Pakistan in the world. Much of the parts of Borough Park that I represent represents an orthodox Jewish community, many of which are immigrants as well. And so the DREAM Act legislation certainly would have provided a step up, as Senator Perkins indicated.
And the bill certainly does not do what we ought to be doing as both a city and state of immigrants. Understand this, in the context of the census, that we lost population upstate. And the only reason why we gained population in New York City was actually because of the immigrant population. So any time that we try to delude ourselves that Americans don't include new Americans, we should just look at the numbers. The numbers never lie.
And so, you know, there's some things that we did good here, but not enough me for me to vote for it. I vote nay, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Parker to be recorded in the negative.
Senator Smith to explain his vote.
SENATOR SMITH:Yes, thank you, Mr. President.
My colleagues have indicated more or less the challenges to this piece of legislation. But again, for the record, while I will be voting yes, I do hope, in the fairness of a One New York theme, that we recognize the importance of New York City at some point receiving adequate AIM money relative to the amount that it gives.
And also, as our conference for years has put a tremendous effort into the foreclosure area, I would hope that as we begin to clean up some of our appropriation legislation as well as some of the categories that need to be revisited, we will once again recognize the importance of the foreclosure area and bring that appropriation amount up from the $9 million.
I'll be voting yes, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Smith to be recorded in the affirmative.
Senator Squadron to explain his vote.
SENATOR SQUADRON:Thank you, Mr. President.
I just want to point out that in this bill, in the funding for children and families and OTDA, I want to, in the spirit of bipartisanship, commend and congratulate Senator Gallivan, the chair of Social Services, Senator Savino, Senator Montgomery, the ranking member of Children and Families. There is actually a lot in here you would not know which party, on some of these issues, is in the majority. And we don't do that enough.
And I particularly want to point out that the Nurse Family Partnership, which is a program that we created on the state level a couple of years ago, is funded at $2.5 million, including another half million in the health bill that we'll get to; that settlement houses are funded significantly; and that homeless prevention programs were all increased from the Executive Budget.
It was a pleasure to work in a bipartisan way. I appreciate the spirit of bipartisanship and the focus on the safety net in this bill. So I will be voting yes, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Squadron to be recorded in the affirmative.
Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:In relation to Calendar Number 482, those recorded in the negative are Senators Adams, Diaz, Duane, Krueger, and Parker.
Ayes, 56. Nays, 5.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The bill is passed.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, can we return to motions for a moment, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:We will return to motions.
SENATOR LIBOUS:On page 5 I offer the following amendments to Calendar Number 38, Senate Print 1998, and ask that said bill retain its place on the Third Reading Calendar. That's on behalf of my friend and colleague Senator Fuschillo.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:So ordered, and the bill will retain its place on the Third Reading Calendar.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:If we could go back to the calendar, at this time I would like to take up Calendar Number 481.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Calendar Number 481 is before the house, and the Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 481, Senate Budget Bill, Senate Print 6251B, LEGISLATURE AND JUDICIARY BUDGET.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Is there any Senator wishing to be heard?
Hearing none, the debate is closed. The Secretary will ring the bell.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY:Section 5. This act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY:Ayes, 58. Nays, 3. Senators Diaz, Duane and Parker recorded in the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The bill is passed.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, we're going to take up Calendar 485. But I would just like to, in the spirit of cooperation, ask the members to please be in the chamber.
And if for whatever reason you have to use the phone, go no further than maybe the lounge or the areas where the phones are, because we do want to move along here and get this budget done early.
So, Mr. President, based on that, we will now take up Calendar Number 485.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The bill is before the house, and the Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 485, Budget Bill, Senate Print 6257E, an act in relation to school district eligibility.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin, why do you rise?
Could I have some order, please, in the chamber.
Senator Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Thank you, Mr. President.
I believe there's an amendment at the desk. I request that the reading be waived and we allow Senator Hassell-Thompson to speak on the amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin, I have reviewed the amendment, and under Senate Rule 6, Section 4B, I believe this bill to be nongermane and therefore out of order.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Mr. President, I respectfully appeal that ruling and ask that Senator Hassell-Thompson be allowed to explain.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:There is a request for an appeal of the ruling of the chair. Senator Hassell-Thompson, you may be heard on that appeal.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:Thank you, Mr. President.
The amendment that I offer today would amend the Education, Labor, and Family Assistance bill, and it would reinstate the Senior STAR Rebate Program.
Real property taxes are a serious burden for many senior homeowners with limited incomes. School taxes represent a substantial portion of the property taxes that these homeowners pay. This bill would give additional help to senior homeowners who are on limited incomes and who are struggling to afford to remain in their homes. I hope everyone will join me in supporting this amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Hassell-Thompson. We are --
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:I'm sorry. In 2007 the middle-class STAR rebate program was enacted as part of the Education, Labor, and Family Assistance Act, which is Article 7, budget bill, to become Chapter 57 of the Laws of 2007.
In addition, the Senate majority included a senior STAR rebate proposal in their one-house budget bill this year, in Senate Bill 6257D, Alpha, Article 7 bill, Part A through 3.
Let me be clear, Mr. President, that a vote against this germaneness is a vote against reinstating the STAR rebate program.
For the foregoing reasons, the amendment I am offering today is germane to the bill currently under consideration.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Hassell-Thompson.
I want to reiterate that the vote is strictly on the motion of the chair and the appeal of the motion that was made before the chair.
All those in favor of overruling the chair signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Opposed? Senator Breslin, why do you rise?
SENATOR BRESLIN:I request a show of hands, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin has requested a show of hands. So ordered.
(Senators raised their hands.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:Ayes, 25.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The ruling of the chair stands.
The bill is before the house. The Secretary will ring the bell.
Is there any Senator wishing to be heard on the bill? Senator Stavisky, then Senator Diaz.
Senator Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you.
If the sponsor would rise for several questions.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stavisky, would you yield to Senator Hassell-Thompson? She rose and would like to be heard.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Absolutely.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hassell-Thompson.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:Thank you, Mr. President. On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hassell-Thompson on the bill.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:Just a few comments that I'd like to make on the bill, Mr. President.
The Senate Democrats proposed to reinstate the Senior STAR Rebate Program beginning in the 2012-2013 school year and for every year thereafter. This amendment provides $275 million in property tax relief to senior citizens for this school year who are eligible for the enhanced STAR property tax exemption.
Under this amendment, the Department of Taxation and Finance would issue STAR rebates to those entitled to receive such rebates. Nearly 640,000 senior citizens received the enhanced STAR property tax exemption. The average enhanced STAR rebate check was $458 in the last year that they were effective.
New York's property tax ranks among the highest in the nation. Real property taxes are a significant burden for our many senior homeowners with --
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, with all due respect to the Senator, is there a rebate bill before the house?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:There is not. That bill is not before the house. We're dealing with budget bills, Senator Ruth Hassell-Thompson.
So your point of order is well-taken.
Senator Hassell-Thompson, under the rules of the Senate, please be germane.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:Are you saying I'm out of order, Mr. President? Are you saying I'm out of order?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hassell-Thompson, I would like you to speak to the bill before the house. And there's a specific bill --
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:I was offering background information on the bill that is before the house and why my recommendation --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:You had the opportunity, Senator Hassell-Thompson, to speak on that appeal and the amendment before the chair. Now I would ask you just to put your comments onto the specific bill, please.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Hassell-Thompson.
Senator Stavisky.
SENATOR STAVISKY:I have some questions, if the sponsor would yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:During the budget hearings I asked both the chancellor of SUNY and the chancellor of CUNY about the need for remediation and the fact that at the CUNY community colleges approximately 75 percent of the students need remediation in one of the three areas where remediation is provided.
Can you tell me why we need a study when newspaper accounts, testimony at the budget hearings -- there's so much evidence that there is a serious remediation problem, why is a study needed?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The question isn't, I don't believe, whether or not students need remediation. What the question is is how do we provide that remediation at the lowest possible cost.
Presently the SUNY colleges -- we spend $80 million on remediation. So the purpose of -- and I also learned -- I also know that in high schools very often seniors in high schools are allowed to leave early during their senior year. They've got the right credits, they don't have to worry about additional credits, there's some justification that I don't believe in to get them back in the workforce, to show them how to get a job.
I think what has to be done is how to provide the remediation at the least possible cost. And to me, it means instead of giving them a test when they enter college, give them a test right when they enter the senior year, and then be in a position at that time to remediate instead of letting them out early because they've got all their credits.
So I'm not the answer. So the question is what the real answer. That's my thought, a study would be necessary to see how we provide that remediation in the least expensive way. That's why a study is needed.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:There are programs, particularly at CUNY community colleges -- in fact, I think each of the community colleges in the CUNY system offer what is known as the ASAP program. Are you familiar with that program?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I'm familiar with it. But the point is that why spend any money at a SUNY college, we could use the money for other college purposes if the kids have a more intense program before they leave high school.
SENATOR STAVISKY:I'm not in disagreement. I've made it very clear that I think the high schools -- but my question is are we limiting accessibility to the colleges as a result of this --
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No, the study doesn't limit anything. Hopefully after the study maybe we'd be in a position to make sure kids are prepared and need less remediation at the university expense.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Are you inferring, then, that there will be additional aid provided if the study concludes that additional funding is necessary at the community college level?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: That depends on what the study says. And if the majority of this house believes that -- and the majority of the Senate believes that that's the solution, then maybe that is the solution.
I kind of believe that we need more work at the high school level and -- but we'll see what the study says.
SENATOR STAVISKY:I'm in total agreement with that.
I have a couple of other areas, if the Senator would yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:You also provide for a study commission for the charge-backs to both the community college and the local government. This is a concern, rather, for the community colleges and the local governments.
Why do we need a study to determine the implication if we already have laws that would help some of the counties with the reimbursements that the charge-backs provide?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I'm not quite sure. Maybe Senator LaValle can indicate why that study was necessary.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Without objection, Senator LaValle.
SENATOR LaVALLE: Actually, Senator DeFrancisco, I'm going to start with the remediation question briefly and then roll into this.
We wanted to fully get engaged in the remediation -- and I know you and I spoke about that -- and had conversations with both chancellors, with the State Education Department, the independent sector. Everyone felt that we needed to identify best practices in the system and then take those best practices -- and if you notice, the study has people coming back before we leave at the end of this year, so conceivably we could get engaged in the remediation. We will have time to flesh that out in a proper way.
The same issue came up with the charge-back issue, where we wanted to do something with the charge-backs. When we looked at this question there were some community colleges that would benefit by some of the things that we had on the table, and some of the community colleges across the state would have problems since they were very highly dependent on the students that they get from outside their own county.
So both Assemblymember Glick and I felt that we needed to engage both questions in a methodical way. And in order to do that, we needed people to get fully engaged. And here again, they will come back to us, the Board of Trustees, with recommendations on how we deal with this.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield. Because the question that I'm asking involves -- second area, whoever wants to answer -- involves the charge-backs. And they talk about -- let me get the right words. They talk about the efficiency and the fiscal impact of implementing such modifications to the students, the counties, and state.
Why is the fiscal impact to the institution not included? In other words, they're talking about the charge-back issue in terms of the students, the localities, but not the fiscal impact on the institution itself.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Well, it seems to me, what from Senator LaValle explained about this particular study, that it would be broad enough to include impacts in all directions. And the fact that maybe that word was omitted I don't think limits them in studying what the proper solution to the problem is.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The Senator yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:In terms of the SUNY community colleges, is there one institution in particular where there would be a negative impact on the charge-back issue?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Senator LaValle is saying several. And maybe he should answer this question; it's his area of expertise.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The chair recognizes Senator LaValle.
SENATOR LaVALLE: I don't think there's any more to say than there are several community colleges that would be impacted, some upstate in the western part of the state, some in the middle part of the state, and some downstate.
SENATOR STAVISKY:But if the Senator would continue to yield.
SENATOR LaVALLE: And by the way, Senator, it is implied, when you look at the funding of the community colleges, that the institution is the beneficiary of the study in putting the pieces together. We don't move away from that commitment to the institution.
SENATOR STAVISKY:But wouldn't you agree, if the Senator would yield, that of those chartered as community colleges in the SUNY system, one stands out for having the largest negative impact in terms of the charge-back? And that institution is located in New York City, and of course I'm referring to FIT.
SENATOR LaVALLE: Senator, I would tell you that there are other institutions that are impacted besides FIT.
And we focused, the committee and members in working gave a great deal of focus on FIT. The amount of time that I spoke with President Brown and her staff and both the Assembly and Senate staffs, we just did not have the time to put it together.
But I will tell you that putting aside FIT, there are other community colleges that are impacted by the charge-back issue. So I think you're being myopic, and I'm trying to get you into a broader statewide view.
SENATOR STAVISKY:I beg to disagree. I am not myopic. Even though I'm wearing glasses.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR STAVISKY:If Senator DeFrancisco, or whoever, would like to yield on the last area.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Okay.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco yields.
SENATOR STAVISKY:I too am concerned with people who are in the United States who are undocumented. And let me preface by saying that we permit undocumented students to qualify for in-state rates for the public colleges and universities, even if they're not here with the proper papers.
Don't you think we should extend the tuition benefits of TAP and other financial benefits to these students? And if not, why not?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: My personal opinion is no. My personal opinion is no because we have a limited number of benefits and those benefits will have to be spread away from citizens of the State of New York and citizens from the State of New York who would be receiving less money, whether it's TAP, whether it's any other government program that helps students in college.
And that's my personal opinion. I know there's a lot of people who disagree with that. And since we've been -- that issue has come up on many, many different occasions already this year, but that's my personal opinion.
SENATOR STAVISKY:If the Senator would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Are you aware that the cost is under a million dollars? It's $980,000, roughly.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I would find that absolutely impossible to believe.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Those are the State Education Department figures.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Well, I don't care if it was the Regents. The fact of the matter, it's impossible to believe that would only be a million dollars in view of the other funding that goes to students to help them pay for college in TAP programs.
But whether it's a million dollars or whether it's $10 million, I think the principle is basically the same.
SENATOR STAVISKY:So if the Senator would yield. Then you would also withdraw the in-state tuition rates for undocumented students?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Would I withdraw it? I would. But I'm not a majority of this house, nor -- the bill has already been passed, the policy is already in place. I would, for the same reasons.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Thank you.
On the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Stavisky on the bill.
SENATOR STAVISKY:Well, I thank the Senator. I have some reservations, obviously, on this, but I will defer to my colleagues. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you.
Senator Diaz.
SENATOR DIAZ:Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:On the bill, Senator Diaz, are you?
SENATOR DIAZ:I have no questions for you, senator DeFrancisco. I never have questions. I've read this piece of -- and I know exactly what's in here. But I would like to commend Senator -- on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz on the bill.
SENATOR DIAZ:I would like to commend Senator Stavisky for her desire to protect the undocumented and to find a way in which we could solve the problems in education. So thank you, Senator Stavisky.
Ladies and gentlemen, again, again and again, this is Bill Number 5 today. We have two more to go. Two more. So far -- three to go? So so far, so far, we have passed some of the bills. And so far we have rejected, the Governor has refused and you have voted for one of the pieces of legislation that reject to include the DREAM Act.
So there's no DREAM Act. And that's why I voted no, because there is no DREAM Act. We could have done better on that. We have voted to eliminate, to eliminate the Tenant Protection Unit. There are no protections for our tenants. That's why I voted no. We have voted not to include money for Small Business Revolving Loans. Poor small business, no help. That's why I voted no.
And now in this one, the senior citizens are hurt one more time because there is no -- there is no property tax relief for homeowners in this one. And as you know, the property tax relief is very important to homeowners across New York State. New York State has among the highest property taxes in the nation. But this piece of legislation that we are voting on now rejects to include tax relief for our senior citizens. No tax relief, ladies and gentlemen.
So you're going to vote yes because the Governor says "I need you guys." Ladies and gentlemen, we have a calling. Even though I might be the lonely voice in the desert, in the wilderness, I'm going to continue saying it. One day we have a higher someone to answer to. You have been chosen to protect, you have been chosen to fight, and you have been chosen to have a voice for those that don't have a voice.
But you continue rejecting your calling and you continue supporting the one that has against the one that has not. And one day, one day, ladies and gentlemen, you might be -- and I'm the one that you make fun of, I am the one that you call crazy, I am the one that you call all kind of things. I'm the one that you call fanatic or whatever. But one day, ladies and gentlemen, one day, one day you are all going to answer for all the abuses and all the disrespect and all the selling out of our members of our community that needs your support, that needs your protection. You come here and you forget about them.
Mr. President, I am proudly, proudly voting no.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Is there any other Senator wishing to be heard?
Seeing none, hearing none, the debate is closed. The Secretary will ring the bell.
The Secretary will read the substitution.
THE SECRETARY:On page 24, Senator DeFrancisco moves to discharge, from the Committee on Finance, Assembly Bill Number 9057D and substitute it for the identical Senate Bill Number 6257E, Third Reading Calendar 485.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The substitution is so ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 485, Budget Bill, Assembly Print 9057D, an act in relation to school district eligibility.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY:Section 2. This act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Parker to explain his vote.
SENATOR PARKER:To explain my vote, Mr. President.
There's nothing more important than education. You know, as some of you know, I used to work for Carl McCall, who was fond of saying that education was not just a key to unlock the door of opportunity, it was a sledgehammer to knock the door of opportunity down. And certainly we ought to be giving every high-needs school district an opportunity for their children to succeed, just like the low-needs school districts.
We have not fulfilled our need for CFE. I know everybody wants to pretend that, you know. And we've had lawsuits on that hotly debated issue. Long story short, we owe them money, we haven't paid it, we're literally in violation of a court order saying that we owe high-needs school districts, particularly in New York City, money. But the money we actually agreed, as we started doing our budgets a number of years ago, to put it in every single high-needs school district, from Buffalo to Bath, New York, from Brookhaven to Brooklyn, should have gotten some of that money. That money is not here.
In addition, we need to be looking at ways to do some different things. One of the things the Governor, when he ran, talked about are the 10,000 governments that we have in New York State. We ought to start reducing some of those governments. Myself and Kevin Cahill have a bill that would create essentially a Berger Commission for schools and start looking at school district consolidations. That should have been done in this budget, and I'm urging that that bill be brought forth.
We ought to be looking at higher education consolidations, and we ought to be talking about why do we have a separate SUNY system from a CUNY system. I have a bill that would actually create one system under SUNY that we would merge the City University system into SUNY. I want that bill to come to the floor. That's something we should be doing now. We could save money, disband the CUNY board, put everything under SUNY, we could consolidate, save money, and continue to educate our young people in the best way.
So I'm going to be voting no on this bill and hoping that we do better for the young people of our state in the next budget.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Parker to be recorded in the negative.
Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:In relation to Calendar Number 485, those recorded in the negative are Senators Adams, Diaz, Duane and Parker.
Ayes, 57. Nays, 4.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The bill is passed.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, at this time could we take up Calendar Number 478.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Calendar Number 478 is before the house. The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 478, by the Committee on Rules, Senate Print 6830, an act to amend the --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Can I have some order in the house, please.
The Secretary will continue to read.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 478, by the Committee on Rules, Senate Print 6830, an act to amend the Education Law.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:An explanation has been requested.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Which bill is it?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:We're on Calendar Number 478, technical changes to references --
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: This was the bill where, when the original bill was drafted, the date references were wrong. So this changes the date references from 2011-2012 to 2012-2013. But you knew that, because you gave me the explanation.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Well, someone else asked, but I was trying to be helpful.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: That's the explanation. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Is there any other Senator wishing to be heard??
Seeing none, hearing none, the debate is closed. The Secretary will ring the bell.
I would ask the members again to remain in the chamber and that there be order in the house.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY:Section 2. This act shall take effect on the same date and in the same manner as Section 12-c of Part A of a chapter of the Laws of 2012.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:In relation to Calendar Number 478, those recorded in the negative are Senators Diaz, Duane and Parker.
Absent from voting: Senator Espaillat.
Ayes, 56. Nays, 3.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The bill is passed.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, can we now take up Calendar Number 484, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Calendar Number 484 is before the house.
Again, I'm going to ask for some order in the chamber, please. We have several bills remaining.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 484, Budget Bill, Senate Print 6256D, an act to amend the Public Health Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin, why do you rise?
SENATOR BRESLIN:Mr. President, I believe there's an amendment at the desk. I ask that the reading be waived and that I allowed to be heard on the amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin, I will waive the reading and you may be heard on the amendment.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Thank you, Mr. President.
The amendment I offer today, which would establish the New York Health Benefit --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Excuse me, Senator Breslin.
Once again, please, if we can please have some order in the chamber.
Senator Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Again, the amendment I offer today is the New York Health Benefit Exchange, a public benefit corporation that will serve as a marketplace for the purchase and sale of qualified health claims in the State of New York, in accordance with the Affordable Care Act.
Creating the health exchange will make health rates more affordable. It will give consumers and small businesses real help in comparing insurance products and choosing one that is right for them. It will let consumers and small businesses better navigate insurance paperwork and changes relating to things like new jobs or changing family circumstances, bringing greater transparency and accountability to healthcare plans.
If New York does not have a health exchange up and running by January 1, 2013, the federal government will intercede and give us that change and charge us for it. I do not understand why the Majority here refused to accept the Governor's proposal to include this in the budget, and therefore I am making a final appeal to my colleagues.
The Affordable Care Act is here. We've seen kids in homes up to 26 years of age being afforded coverage. We see preexisting conditions, part of the Affordable Care Act, now not being denied healthcare coverage. We've seen the doughnut hole all but plugged totally.
So I urge the entire body here today to think about this amendment and its importance to setting up a healthcare exchange which will dramatically change the way healthcare is delivered in the State of New York and provide a way for businesses, particularly small businesses, and the 2.8 million New Yorkers that at any one point in time who do not have health insurance, they'll be able to come to that exchange and change the dynamics relative to healthcare and make it more affordable.
Thank you, Mr. President. I urge a yes vote.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Breslin. All those in favor of the amendment signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Opposed?
(Response of "Nay.")
SENATOR BRESLIN:Can we have a show of hands, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin has requested a show of hands. All those voting for signify by raising your hands.
(Senators raised their hands.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:Ayes, 24.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The amendment is not adopted.
Senator Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Thank you, Mr. President.
I believe there's an amendment at the desk. I ask that the reading be waived and that Senator Krueger be allowed to explain the amendment.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Breslin.
In accordance with Rule 6, Section 4B, I have reviewed the amendment and rule that it is nongermane to the bill and therefore out of order.
SENATOR BRESLIN:Mr. President, I would appeal that decision and request that you allow Senator Krueger to be heard on that appeal.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin has appealed the ruling of the chair. And, Senator Krueger, you may be heard on that appeal.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you, Mr. President.
I have to disagree with your finding that this is not germane. This proposal for a full state takeover of the total local Medicaid cost share is extremely germane to the Health and Mental Hygiene Article 7 bill for the following reasons.
Part F of Senate Bill 6256D, the bill we are on, includes a partial state takeover of the local Medicaid costs, as originally proposed in the Executive Budget. This proposal in my amendment before you simply extends what is already in the Health and Mental Hygiene bill which authorizes reimbursements for expenditures made by or on behalf of social service districts for medical assistance for needy persons and the administration thereof, and seeks a state assumption of local Medicaid costs.
This amendment proposes a 10-year phased-in state takeover of the total local cost share of Medicaid beginning in fiscal year 2015-2016, New York City and all counties outside of New York City.
If you were to accept this proposal, this would represent the single largest mandate relief initiative anyone has proposed in the history of our state. It would result in crucial property tax relief for the localities throughout the state.
For the record, New York State is the only state with large Medicaid programs that requires localities to significantly assist in paying for the cost of the program. Our localities finance their portion of the Medicaid program through their property taxes, and Medicaid payments are the most costly mandate expenditure for our localities.
In fiscal year 2011-2012 it was estimated that localities will have spent nearly $7.3 billion on Medicaid, or approximately 15 percent of the program's total cost for New York State.
This proposal will provide fiscal relief to localities by taking over the full local responsibility for payments over a 10-year period. This proposal would provide a total of $42 billion in savings to counties and the City of New York over that 10-year period beginning in 2015-2016 and ending in fiscal year 2024-2025, a $7.6 billion dollars in local savings for each year thereafter.
This proposal, if we were to accept it, would help local governments balance their budgets with associated savings being able to be used to provide additional services to local citizens and property tax relief.
Further, this proposal is very timely in recognition of the gradual state takeover of the local administration of the Medicaid program described within the bill before this house, and the shift in responsibility will assist the state in becoming a singular entity in charge of administration.
The Governor's own Medicaid Redesign Team called for a full state takeover as an official recommendation. The New York State Association of Counties also supports a full state takeover proposal. And for the record, this amendment is extremely similar to a bill proposed by my colleague Senator Gallivan here in this house which was introduced in 2011.
It is for all these reasons that I am offering this amendment today and believe it is completely germane to the bill before us.
Let me be clear. A vote against germaneness is a vote against mandate and property tax relief for New York cities and towns. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Krueger.
And let me reiterate that we are just voting on the ruling of the chair. All those in favor of overruling the ruling of the chair signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Opposed?
Senator Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN:A show of hands, here, please, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Breslin has requested a show of hands. It is so ordered.
(Senators raised their hands.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:Ayes, 25.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The ruling of the chair stands.
The bill is before the house.
Is there any other Senator wishing to be heard?
Senator Rivera.
SENATOR RIVERA:Thank you, Mr. President.
I rise today to talk a little bit about one of the last bills that we're going to be dealing with today, dealing specifically with health and mental hygiene.
I think, first of all, that if we missed an opportunity as relates to capital funding and MTA funding, here we missed an even bigger opportunity. I think that we have, by not including the healthcare exchange -- something that it would be fully funded by the federal government and something that is absolutely necessary to make sure that our state's citizens receive access to healthcare and save money in the process -- we missed an incredible opportunity to be able to establish it here.
I believe that my colleagues should be embarrassed that we didn't include this in the final product. The majority of people of the state want for this to happen, were supportive of the President's efforts in making sure that the Affordable Care Act was approved at the national level, and certainly are supportive of the actions that we have to take here at the state level to make sure that this extends to our citizenry.
We didn't do that today. And by not doing that, we are blocking 1 million uninsured New Yorkers, we are blocking their access to affordable healthcare and affordable health insurance coverage.
Now, I'm very thankful that the Governor has said that he is going to create this by executive order, but it is totally unacceptable that we did not do it in the Legislature. It is here that we should do it, and the Governor shouldn't have to go around Senate Republicans to get this done.
I think that there's a lot of politics that is driving this conversation --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Rivera, you need to speak to the bill. The amendment was before the house and defeated. We are now on the bill in its present form, please.
SENATOR RIVERA:Yes, Mr. President.
I believe that we should have included this in the bill.
There is something else that the bill does not have which was one of the original proposals that was presented, and that was the proposal that required certain pharmacies to provide translation services to individuals with limited English proficiency. This is something else that I believe needed to be included in this proposal. It was in the original Executive proposal and eventually was taken out by this house. It was also supported by our colleagues in the Assembly.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hannon, why do you rise?
SENATOR HANNON:I'd like to ask a question of the speaker.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Rivera, will you yield to Senator Hannon?
SENATOR RIVERA:Absolutely.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON:Are you aware that those provisions you're now objecting to their omission were moved from the Health bill and put in the Education bill?
SENATOR RIVERA:This one in particular?
SENATOR HANNON:Absolutely. Almost 90 percent of the original Governor's proposal, it's in the Education bill.
SENATOR RIVERA:Through you Mr. President, I thank you for making the observation. I was unaware that some of this had been moved over to that particular bill.
I still think that we should have included it in this piece of legislation as was originally intended in the proposal, but I thank Senator Hannon for bringing it to my attention.
Overall, ladies and gentlemen, I think that we have missed a series of opportunities in this bill, were it for the insurance exchange that we didn't include or for part of this funding related to translation that we did not include in this bill. I believe that we could be doing better. We have missed a few opportunities today. I will be voting in the negative on this piece of legislation.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Duane.
SENATOR DUANE:Thank you, Mr. President. Would the chair of the Health Committee yield?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Do you want to speak to Senator DeFrancisco or Senator Hannon?
SENATOR DUANE:I believe Senator Hannon.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Without objection, Senator Hannon may have the floor.
Senator Hannon.
SENATOR DUANE:I wanted to know why the D&TCs are not going to be able to access HEAL money and what is the reasoning behind that.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON:The question is there is an existing fund of money that has been used for capital construction, and it was originally started when the restructuring commission, called the Berger Commission, was established several years ago.
The monies available through that are now limited. They're down to about $500 million, of which $450 million were put up for requests for proposals last November. And the primary policy indication is that most of that money was going to be oriented towards restructuring of Brooklyn hospitals.
Given the nature of that backdrop, when the proposal was to expand the HEAL monies to diagnostic and treatment centers, the thought was (A) there's too little money remaining; (B) there are other needs throughout the state.
And so not necessarily because people don't favor diagnostic and treatment centers, which are aimed at doing primary care and outpatient care, but rather because there's a scarcity of funds available, they were not included.
SENATOR DUANE:And through you, Mr. President, if the chair would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hannon yields.
SENATOR HANNON:Yes.
SENATOR DUANE:Even if that is the case, why was it necessary to explicitly put that into language?
SENATOR HANNON:If that's a question, we just didn't include it. We didn't put anything explicitly into language. It was not included as originally requested.
SENATOR DUANE:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR HANNON:Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hannon yields.
SENATOR DUANE:I believe that whether they are excluded because they are not explicitly mentioned or whether they're excluded because they are explicitly said to be excluded, the result is still the same: They are excluded. And so, again, I'm wondering why they are being singled out in the budget.
SENATOR HANNON:Well, the simple answer is yes, they're not there.
The bigger answer is they're not being singled out because no one else had requested to be into the HEAL funding.
The bigger, bigger answer would be what I have said to folks doing primary care and concerned with Brooklyn, is if you're going to be looking at the structure of healthcare in that borough and any other county or borough that has a similar type of situation, is you want to start defining what a community should have in terms of its healthcare system. What should be there in primary care, what should be there in emergency rooms, what should be there as ambulatory centers?
Do we continue to have to have hospitals as the center and the be-all and the end-all of the healthcare delivery system? They're expensive, sometimes they're outmoded, sometimes their infrastructure is just way beyond repair. So there's a need to take a look at what the healthcare system ought to be.
And in many of the ways that we have done through the Medicaid Redesign Team, we're trying to revamp and relook at what that delivery system should be. And that's the bigger picture of where we should be going down the road.
SENATOR DUANE:Through you, Mr. President, if the chair would continue to yield.
SENATOR HANNON:Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hannon yields.
SENATOR DUANE:I just wanted to get clarification of how much money is still available in HEAL grants, how much money has not been, if you will, put out, given to institutions.
SENATOR HANNON:Well, this is not accurate, but this is my best guess, is it's about $500 million. The reason it's a guess is we do know that it's at least $450 million, because that was what was put up for request for proposals in November of 2011.
The remaining money would be unused expenditures from those who had previously received awards and for one reason or another, their capital programs or in some cases they would be information technology infrastructure, those projects haven't been able to go forward.
SENATOR DUANE:Through you, Mr. President, if the chair would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hannon yields.
SENATOR DUANE:The "prescriber prevails" in the final Article 7 budget bill provides that managed care will cover some prescription drugs, but only the atypical antipsychotic drugs -- you know, the nonformula antipsychotic therapeutic drugs. And I'm wondering why they were singled out over organ transplant rejection drugs or certain specific diseases or some kinds of cancer, for instance, or HIV/AIDS.
Why are only antipsychotic drugs now covered through Medicaid managed-care plans and not the others? What was the thinking behind that?
SENATOR HANNON:The backdrop to the policy question lies in the fact that on October 1, 2011, as a result of actions by this Legislature a year ago, the provision of pharmaceutical drugs to those on Medicaid was now done through the Medicaid managed-care plans instead of being directly administered by the state. When it had been administered by the state, there was a provider-prevail policy provision.
Going completely -- there was a change in delivery of drugs for 3 million New Yorkers that happened all at once. There have been some anecdotal reports that has not been done correctly. There were suggestions that provider-prevail ought to be carried over to all of those Medicaid recipients. And in fact in the budget bill that passed and the resolution that passed in this house a couple of weeks ago, we had a much broader provision.
When it came to negotiating provider-prevail with the other house and the Executive, we found that this became a very costly item to include in the final budget. The provision that's in there now for the atypical psychiatric drugs costs, in this budget, $3 million. That's only for a partial fiscal year. On a full fiscal year, it would be over $12 million. Those were monies that were not able to be found in the monies available to the health table, and the result is what you have correctly described as resulting in the bill.
SENATOR DUANE:And through you, Mr. President, if the chair would continue to yield.
SENATOR HANNON:Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hannon yields.
SENATOR DUANE:The bill that's before us is going to make it so that -- well, actually what I'd like is an explanation of the Medicaid part B cost-sharing limits. What is the impact on the dual-eligible Medicaid/Medicare people? I want to know what the real-life implications --
SENATOR HANNON:What section?
SENATOR DUANE:It is Section 41. It will limit the Medicaid coinsurance for Medicare covered Part B services when the total coinsurance amount would exceed the amount Medicaid would have paid using a Medicaid rate.
In other words, it definitely, I think -- well, so I guess I can't say I definitely think. I believe it is true for dual-eligible Medicaid/Medicare recipients. Is that correct? And who else will that impact? It's an informational question.
SENATOR HANNON:Well, it's a technical accounting question and I will get you the details of it. I've had it explained to me, and it's one of those answers that goes out of your head after you get the explanation. But it's frankly nothing more. It's not policy, but it's technical accounting.
SENATOR DUANE:Okay, thank you.
If the chair would -- I know he's not the sponsor, but if the chair would continue to yield, would kindly continue to yield.
SENATOR HANNON:Yes, sure.
SENATOR DUANE:And I thank him for his patience, and everyone else.
The HEAL New York funds -- and I know this has been raised before, but I was hoping that the chair could just be a little bit more specific in how that part of the budget was amended from its original format.
SENATOR HANNON:The only thing that was added was to attempt to have an equitable distribution of funds as far as practicable. And I think that was the language that was added.
SENATOR DUANE:Well -- and through you, Mr. President, if the chair would just continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hannon yields.
SENATOR DUANE:So the origin of the language was I believe with the Senate Majority, and that did stipulate that no more than 50 percent of HEAL funds could be distributed to a particular economic region.
So how explicit is that -- how has that been amended or has it been amended? And if so, how explicitly has it been amended?
SENATOR HANNON:The bill now says that "provided, however, that to the extent practicable, the commissioner shall award such grants equitably among health planning regions of the state."
SENATOR DUANE:And through you, Mr. President, just to clarify, if the chair just would clarify. So the 50 percent has been taken out?
SENATOR HANNON:There is no 50 percent in this sentence.
SENATOR DUANE:Thank you.
Okay, and the Preferred Drug Program extender, it's extended until June 15th. You know, the PDP.
SENATOR HANNON:Which section are you speaking about?
SENATOR DUANE:Part G. And most specifically, it's Section 14. If the chair would be so kind as just to explain what Section 14 -- what was the impact of not extending all provisions of the PDP program. It's my understanding that it doesn't extend to Section 14. So what is it that mean in real terms?
SENATOR HANNON:That was in the original bill.
SENATOR DUANE:So if the sponsor would just --
SENATOR HANNON:I don't have what it was extended. I believe it was in the original bill.
SENATOR DUANE:And so through you, Mr. President, the chair and I will I assume discuss it at a later --
SENATOR HANNON:I will get you the information.
SENATOR DUANE:Thank you.
Again, just because the language is confusing in the final bill, the integration of health and behavioral health services delivery, there was -- the Senate modified that a little bit. And again -- oh, it's -- I may not have written down the page. Is it part -- Part L, I believe. Part L, yes.
And through you, Mr. President, while this is being looked at, these questions are not in any way meant to be hostile, and I hope they're not taken that way. They are truly informational, because it's a very -- it's a new and actually very good concept, but there was a modification from the original Executive Budget, and it's hard for me to figure out what the modification has been.
SENATOR HANNON:Senator Duane, Part L deals with joint action by OASAS and the Office of Developmental Disabilities along with the commissioner of the Department of Health when they would be jointly acting. This is an attempt to streamline the operations of these agencies, tie them together, because they are all in one way or another funded by Medicaid and federal regulation.
And to the extent that it's clear here, there's a lot of clarity here, to the extent there needs to be discretion, the commissioner is given discretion.
SENATOR DUANE:And just through you, Mr. President, the one thing that I did see, and I just want to confirm this, is that the difference is that the reporting requirements were -- well, they seem to have been nonexistent before and now there are reporting requirements and a requirement of how this delivery of the integrated services are constructed now must be presented to the Legislature.
Is that what the change was -- is? Does this sound accurate?
SENATOR HANNON:Well, I think the language is very clear. I think there is an accountability that's set forward here, there's a transparency. What different versions had on this would have been only technical.
And I think this -- I think it's a very positive step forward as we try to integrate so much of our O agencies into a care management system and for the better care of the patient.
SENATOR DUANE:Yes. And through you, Mr. President, I'm going to make a statement. I think it's a good thing to have reporting to the Legislature both on the construction of the integration -- and of course it would be great to see outcomes. And if that's the result of what the new language is, then that would be a good thing.
And finally, and really finally, the educational service for children in OMH facilities and hospitals, originally there was going to be an agreement between the Office of Mental Health and State Ed to establish some pilot programs. This is a very disempowered population.
The proposal in the Executive Budget I believe was very good, but the Senate modified it. Am I correct in assuming that instead of going forward with it completely we're now just going to have pilot programs and no specific schedule?
SENATOR HANNON:The goal was to have the education given through OMH to be at least the equivalent of what we give children in the public school system. And it was always intended to be a pilot. I think the modifications in the language came as a result of discussions with the Assembly.
I don't know that they've actually changed the guts of what the administration wants to do with this in terms of, and you're correct, how to improve the system.
SENATOR DUANE:Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And if I may speak on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Duane on the bill.
SENATOR DUANE:I have very strong concerns about the lack of a complete restoration of the prescriber-prevail provisions that we previously had and that we're only limiting it to antipsychotic therapeutic drugs. I think the decisions specifically around those conditions which had previously been carved out for prescriber-prevails, there was good reason to do that.
I think the decisions made between healthcare providers and patients or consumers, particularly around those conditions, I regret that they were removed originally and I regret that only antipsychotics are being put back in. I believe that they all should have been put in.
I also am saddened that there's a delay in the implementation of the COLA for at least a year for various human services programs. It seems unfair that those who we entrust with helping the most vulnerable are not getting their COLA. They didn't cause the financial crisis, and for them not to get a COLA just piles on what already is a condition of an employment where people are underpaid for really very, very important work.
I think it's a positive thing that we added money for women's health and wellness programs. I also think it's a good thing that we provided money for the Niagara Health Quality Coalition. As the chair knows, and others, these are things that I think matter a lot, and I hope we can build on those in the outyears.
The money that's put in for the Nurse Family Partnership, particularly as we transform healthcare, is very good. But sadly, the appropriation is not enough. And again, the Nurse Family Partnership is, I believe, going to be and is a very good health policy, but we really are not devoting the resources to it.
I'm not going to go through my position, which would come as no surprise to anyone, about additional grants, that there should be more for HIV education, prevention, et cetera. Also grants to Article 28 treatment centers, because sadly HIV continues to be a chronic problem in our state.
And I also, because I think that the relationship between particularly our universities and our academic medical centers, that we are not -- or it doesn't seem as if maybe money will be found later on -- that we are taking $5 million away from the stem cell grant expenditures is -- it's bad public policy. We should be investing more at this time in that kind of research. And it's also an investment in our universities and our academic medical centers.
I know that Senator Montgomery has mentioned this many times. And while there is money for new and existing school-based health centers, again, that's the best way to reach children for preventive care. And we can do more, we can do better.
The same is true of -- and I know these are tough times. And as you know, I am supportive of -- though I know we changed the tax structure last year, I still think that we need to have some people put up more of their fair share so that we can do things like put more money into the Breast Cancer Network.
I'm very concerned about what the EI -- there was a shift from having an EI infrastructure, a big umbrella, to replace what's there now. There's no language at all about it in the budget. The devil will be in the details. But EI is a very -- I know it's a contentious issue, both from expense and, you know, philosophically, perhaps. But how the changes will happen I think is something that needs to be transparent.
I am a big supporter of Roswell, and I'm glad we're giving them more time to develop a plan. They certainly needed that.
And, I don't know, I have a sense that maybe people would be -- they don't want to only hear the bad and not the good, so maybe I'll stop with that, because there's more good and bad, and --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Duane.
SENATOR DUANE:-- so I'll just wrap up, if I may.
I still am -- I am incredibly upset about the -- whether it's implicit or omission or comission, that HEAL grants can't go to D&TCs. As we see more hospital closures, they are picking up the slack. They're doing the work. They need to be eligible to get HEAL grants.
We need to restore the prescriber-prevails for those categories which we had previously had which were removed in last year's budget. Yes, the antipsychotic prevails being put back in, that's good. But we should not have left off the others.
I do not want us to forget or not bring to the table pharmacies, large and small, about translation services. This is going to be a direct impact, a mandate upon them. Particularly the smaller pharmacies, the independent ones who have many managed-care clients, this is going to be burdensome.
And there are many places across the state where there aren't enough pharmacies. Senator Young and I, though there was also money put in for -- we need to be investing in primary health care in rural areas, and part of that investment has to be to keep independent pharmacies alive. Because independent pharmacies know who lives in our rural areas and they can be incredibly helpful to their clients.
And this mandate is going to affect them, and I think we do a disservice. I hope they don't go out of the business, but we're losing a lot of them as it is. And they're a very important part of providing rural healthcare, particularly primary healthcare.
And finally -- and again, I do this in a spirit of collegiality -- I very much want to in the outyears work with the Executive, with both parties in both houses to work on some of these issues to make sure that we reach out to the stakeholders. I as you know didn't go through the entire list of where my concerns are, but we have much work to do.
I know that the federal healthcare reform law is before the Supreme Court. However it comes out will -- if it's changed in any way will have a dramatic input on healthcare delivery, as well as what the state has been and is doing and is doing in this budget is going to have an impact on all New Yorkers and New York families and families with children and families with challenges, health challenges and challenges with access to healthcare.
So I do that in a spirit of wanting to see cooperation on that, because we all know our districts very well and what's needed.
For instance, I've found that urban and rural healthcare needs are remarkably similar, and I look forward to all of us working together, both houses, both parties, the Executive and stakeholders, to make sure that we do not hurt healthcare delivery but that we provide the best possible healthcare for all New Yorkers even if that means we need to get more revenue so that we will have the resources to do that.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hassell-Thompson.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:Just very quickly on the bill, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Hassell-Thompson on the bill.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:As someone who spent a great deal of her life prior to coming to the Senate in the field of health and healthcare proviso, it's incumbent upon me to just make couple of comments.
One, as Senator Hannon knows, we don't agree on a whole lot of things, but one of the things that I have to agree with his statement on -- and I do this very carefully -- medicine of the future is not going to be dependent on hospital beds. And so that when we're talking about how do we plan to ensure that the healthcare needs of all of our communities are taken care of, rushing to save hospital beds is not the answer.
But I am concerned that the SAGE Committee and some of the other people who have had input into making some of the determinations about healthcare in the future do not contain enough people from the field of health to help to make the kind of determinations that I think are really in the best interests of all New Yorkers.
In our desire to save money, to be careful about how we expend the state dollars, we cannot rush to judgment but rather need to be very thoughtful and deliberate in terms of how we look to provide the care of all of our citizens and take into consideration the cultural differences if we're going to ensure that we're going to really be providing that which is in the best interests and will attract people to coming in to get healthcare in a preventive mode, thereby saving a lot of money on the back end.
So I think that as we look at how we expend our money, the concerns that Senator Duane continues to raise and I would continue to reiterate -- that we're still not doing enough in terms of HIV and AIDS among our women and the way in which treatment is being developed is still designed around how men receive treatment as opposed to the needs of women. And so I think there are a lot of things that need to be taken into consideration. And I don't want us to just, in our desire too be fiscally responsible, be medically irresponsible.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you.
Is there any other Senator wishing to be heard? Senator Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON:Yes, Mr. President.
I'm not going to get into the vast amount of things we have done in a positive way in this bill. But I just wanted to mention that the EPIC program has been one, I think, of a hallmark of accomplishment.
Nowhere near as much a restoration as I would have liked, but still a major restoration and a major addition, because there has been a determined policy from Budget that they would like to have it done away from our public health system in New York.
And I also want to just point out one other thing. People keep on making mention of the health exchange. My whole position on the health exchange, and it's a personal one, is what does it cost. Where is the money going to come from, but what is it going to cost?
The more we go into the debate we don't need to look into anyone's ideological viewpoint, we don't need to look into Supreme Court arguments, we need to know what it's going cost the state.
As I hear people in this chamber on the Democratic side offer amendments to better the STAR program, money that I don't know where we would get that money, even though I like that STAR program, as I hear people offer amendments to have a takeover Medicaid from the local -- a policy I think is a really good idea, but I don't know where we'd get the money -- I think we have to be prudent with the people's dollar and figure out where is the money going to come from if we ever have a health benefit exchange.
We know that there's questions as to what would be in the essential benefit package. The federal healthcare reform law says that the state pays for anything in that package over and above what the federal government says is the basic package. We know that there are lots of other parts to this healthcare reform.
Not dealing with the people who are in the exchange, but people who are on Medicaid, we know that many people will go on to Medicaid to avoid the individual mandate, if that survives. That addition would be a burden to localities as well as to the state.
So there's a lot of questions, and I think those questions need to be answered. We've been supportive of expansion of coverage in the past and will be in the future. But we need to know what it costs before we put a burden on our taxpayers.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz.
SENATOR DIAZ:Thank you, Mr. President.
I was not going to speak on this one, I was going keep quiet, but Senator Hannon mentioned EPIC. And by him mentioning EPIC, I have to speak about EPIC and about the travesty that we're doing in this piece of legislation with EPIC.
However, as I said a few days ago, I have to give credit to the Republican side, I have to give a little credit, I said last time, about EPIC. The only credit I'm going to give you, Senator Hannon and Senator Skelos and that side, is that last year Governor Cuomo took away $58 million from EPIC, $58 million, forcing the senior citizens, many of them, to pay 25 percent of their prescription drugs. Seniors that don't have money, they have to decide if they eat, if they pay their rent, if they pay utilities or if they buy their medicine.
That was last year. So this year, Governor Cuomo, not satisfied enough with what he did last year, requested $48 million in this year's budget to take away from EPIC. And I'm going to give you credit because you, that side, tried to put the whole $48 million back. Yes, let's give credit where credit is due. It was the Assembly side that decided not to put any money, and you had to agree to put $30 million back.
And I'm going to go that far to give you credit, $30 million back on EPIC this year. However, however, those $30 million will be due on January 1, 2013. Meaning that seniors cannot get sick until January 1, 2013. Because if they get sick from now to 2013, thanks to Governor Cuomo's budget of last year and this year, they're going to have to pay 25 percent out of their pocket of their prescription drugs.
So, ladies and gentlemen, this action is killing our seniors, to tell those senior citizens wait until January 1, 2013, so the $30 million that the Republican side agreed to put back -- I give you that credit, Senator Skelos. At least they got $30 million. Because the other side, the Democratic side, the Assembly side, the Democrats didn't want nothing.
So I've got no problem with saying that. On the other hand, the seniors have to wait -- I'm going to repeat myself again -- till January 1, 2013, to get sick and to be able to use some money out of EPIC.
This is a travesty, it's an abuse it's something that we -- it's uncalled for to put our senior citizens through this. And that's why I'm asking all of you to vote no. Vote no. Tell the Governor, Governor, no, enough is enough. No. Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Seeing and hearing no other Senator who wishes to be heard or speak, I now close debate and ask the Secretary to ring the bell.
The Secretary will substitute the bill.
THE SECRETARY:On page 24, Senator DeFrancisco moves to discharge, from the Committee on Finance, Assembly Bill Number 9056D and substitute it for the identical Senate Bill Number 6256D, Third Reading Calendar 484.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The substitution is so ordered, and the Secretary will read the bill.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 484, Budget Bill, Assembly Print 9056D, an act to amend the Public Health Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY:Section 2. This act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Montgomery to explain her vote.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY:Yes, Mr. President, to explain my vote on this particular part of our budget.
The healthcare in particular, I want to thank my colleague Senator Duane, who's mentioned school-based health, and my colleagues who have talked about the HEAL grant. I think those two concepts in terms of health reform for our state are extremely important.
I am very, very disappointed that the HEAL funding will not be available for the D&TCs, because that's where primary and preventive care is in fact provided for people. And we certainly know that as we're looking for planning for a future different and more significant healthcare reform, we have to look at what we're doing for young people and what our health system will look like for them.
And so every dollar that we do not invest in school-based health clinics means that we're going to be spending a few hundred thousand dollars later because we will not have provided a basic beginning of a quality healthcare experience.
So that's why I talk about school-based health clinics all the time, and that's a very important part of a primary preventive health system that then walks into the community as adults and becomes a health system that works for people, as opposed to waiting until they get sick and cost us more money.
I vote yes, but I just did want to go on record that we really -- I hope that this is the beginning and next budget we will be including and not excluding HEAL funding for D&TCs, primary care, preventive care, and exploding our school-based health clinic program.
Thank you, Mr. President. I vote aye.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Montgomery to be recorded in the affirmative.
Senator Duane to explain his vote.
SENATOR DUANE:Thank you, Mr. President. This is mostly so that I can have a clear conscience. I'm generally concerned that we don't reward nursing homes that don't provide good care and that we reward nursing homes which are necessary for some that provide good care.
Though the issue of reimbursement for house calls was raised, the budget is silent on it. I believe this is something that should be reimbursed.
I'm also concerned that there's silence on the rate enhancement for rural hospitals. And I do that because of my work with my colleagues who represent rural areas. Certainly when I've visited Senator Valesky's district, when I've worked with Senator Young, this is a critically important issue.
Doctors Across New York. There are doctors that are good to go, there are healthcare facilities ready to hire them, but the money is still not going out fast enough to bring them in, and that's also a critical part of our rural healthcare delivery.
I commend Senator Nozzolio because I know he's concerned about the involvement of Mental Health, OMH, in our correctional facilities. And I look forward to working with him on that.
EPIC is a good thing, if I'm ending on a high note.
And my vote on this, as on the others, is not done lightly. However, even if we get every available federal grant, we still need more revenue to do what we need to do to keep New Yorkers healthy.
And it is because of that that I sadly have to vote no, with the hope that, working together, we can continue to try to improve our state's healthcare system during this very difficult and complex time.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Duane to be recorded in the negative.
Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:In relation to Calendar Number 484, those recorded in the negative are Senators Diaz, Duane, Parker, and Rivera.
Absent from voting: Senator Oppenheimer.
Ayes, 56. Nays, 4.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The bill is passed.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, could we please go to motions for a minute and call on Senator Valesky.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:We will return to motions and call on Senator Valesky.
SENATOR VALESKY:Mr. President, I move that the following bill be discharged from its respective committee and be recommitted with instructions to strike the enacting clause: Senate Bill 5036C.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:So ordered.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Thank you, Mr. President. Can we now take up Calendar Number 486.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The bill is before the house.
The Secretary will read the substitution.
THE SECRETARY:On page 25, Senator DeFrancisco moves to discharge, from the Committee on Finance, Assembly Bill Number 9059D and substitute it for the identical Senate Bill Number 6259D, Third Reading Calendar 486.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The substitution is so ordered.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY:Calendar Number 486, Budget Bill, Assembly Print Number 9059D, an act to amend Chapter 540 of the Laws of 1992.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you, Mr. President. If the sponsor would please yield to some questions.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
Are you restoring any rebate checks in this revenue bill?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: When you say scoring, what is your --
SENATOR KRUEGER:Restoring.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Oh, restoring. No. I'm sorry, no.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Is there any property tax circuit-breaker language in the revenue bill?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No.
And by the way, the restorations you're referring to, there was nothing to restore from this year. The cuts to the rebate program were done in prior years.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The sponsor yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
Is there any repeal to the MTA payroll tax in this revenue bill?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: We already did that for part of the MTA tax. There's nothing -- are you referring to the MTA payroll tax that was imposed in either the year 2009 or 2010?
SENATOR KRUEGER:The remaining MTA payroll tax.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Right. In December we passed a bill that eliminated part of it, but there's nothing more in this one.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you. If the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you.
Is there any repeal to the 18A assessment increase enacted in 2009 in this revenue bill?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No. And, you know, I'm glad you brought this up, because it's very, very difficult to repeal all the repressive taxes that the state became reliant upon during the years 2009 and 2010.
We've been trying to repeal as much as we can, like with the library, the MTA payroll tax was cut back. We're trying to do as much as we can to repeal those taxes. It would have been much better if we didn't have the taxes in the first place and rely on that money, which was just money that we shouldn't have been taking from the taxpayers.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco yields.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Are there any mandate relief proposals in this revenue bill?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: There is mandate relief throughout the budget bills, not in this particular one.
For example, we rejected the Early Intervention cost shift that the Governor had in his budget so that we didn't provide that burden on the locals. Same thing with the special ed pre-K cost shift. We did some mandate relief with respect to the 3 percent of the Medicaid takeover. And we provided funding, for example, for the increase in the DNA database and the like.
So nothing in this bill, but those are some of the things we did for mandate relief in the overall budget.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if the sponsor would continue to yield.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR KRUEGER:What is the total value of tax expenditures in this budget?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I missed that one, I'm sorry.
SENATOR KRUEGER:The total value of tax expenditures projected for the next fiscal year, 2012-2013.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Total value of tax expenditures. I can't give you the number. I know the total expenditures are $132.6 billion. But what is taxes, what is money from the federal government, what is from different sources, I can't give you that breakdown.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, if I might make this a bit of a longer question.
The definition of a tax expenditure is a feature of the Tax Law that by exemption, exclusion, deduction allowance, credit, preferential tax rate, deferral or other statutory device reduced the amount of some taxpayers' liabilities to the state by providing either an economic incentive or tax relief to a particular class of person or entities.
So the question is, within this revenue bill or, to be broader, within any other bill, since this is the last budget bill, do we know the total amount of tax expenditures to the State of New York, either new ones or decreased ones?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Net new is $1.6 million.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Through you, Mr. President, $1.6 million new, therefore bringing the total amount to how much?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I don't have that number.
SENATOR KRUEGER:On the bill, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Krueger on the bill.
SENATOR KRUEGER:So the revenue bill is a rather small bill this year. I agree with the sponsor there's very little new in it for tax expenditures, there's very little new in it for new taxes or fees. There's also not mandate relief in this budget bill, nor is there reversal of previous tax policies made by the state.
But perhaps most disturbing to me, what's not in here is any discussion of the fact that we'll have an estimated $28 billion in specific tax expenditures in 2012-2013. Now, I don't know exactly the number because it's always an estimate until after it happens. But the projected tax expenditures for 2011-2012 were $28.8 billion, so I think it's reasonable to assume approximately the same amount in 2012-2013. I have been in the Senate for ten years and I have seen this number grow exponentially each year, so even assuming a flat amount for next year is a very conservative projection.
Why should I care in the context of the revenue budget? Because we have talked about taxes people don't like having. The sponsor, in responding to my questions, pointed out several that I think he doesn't like having. We've heard from many of my colleagues today their frustrations about things that should have been funded at a higher level, programs that should not have been proposed to be cut were actually cut in this budget, promises made that have not been kept for public funding of education, losses to funding for healthcare.
Again, $10 billion in cuts last year. I believe it's an estimated $2 billion hole we were filling this year. And again, in this revenue bill there's not one discussion of challenging any of the existing law on tax expenditures, exemptions from taxes for specific categories of individuals and companies within state law.
Every year we in theory attempt to start from scratch, having a budget that decides how much revenue we're going to collect, how much money we're going to spend in which ways. This is the final budget bill of I believe 11 in total bills. Months and months of debates and disagreements and agreements, ultimately, on what would be the budget for the State of New York moving forward.
But as far as I can tell, almost no discussion of the third budget bill, the tax expenditure budget, which is not its own bill because we simply allow, ad infinitum, anything that has gone into the tax code in any year to continue as an exception for somebody or somebodies from having to pay their taxes.
I question, as I have many times before, why this house or the other house or the Governor -- because a budget is a three-way responsibility -- why nobody will ever ask the questions or challenge the amount of money we don't collect from certain entities under certain categories because of tax expenditures. We never revisit them. We simply pass new budgets each year that accept whatever was there before in tax expenditures.
And in fact, some of them grow radically over time. Because in fairness, if you can find a loophole in the tax law that will make sure you don't have to pay a tax, you're going to figure out how to redesign your business model, your corporate papers, your actual structure under banking or corporation law to make sure you can maximize your advantage in not paying taxes.
Now, that's legal. I don't question someone's right to take advantage of tax expenditures under the law. I question this government's failure to ever ask the questions about whether those should be the laws.
Because it's not a hypothetical. We have a limited amount of money to spend on the needs of our people, and clearly we have a limited ability to create new taxes. So I say the discussion should be on who isn't paying their taxes. And when there's $28.8 billion not being collected from somebody or somebodies in taxes when other people in similar circumstances are paying taxes, that should be the fundamental question before this house.
Why aren't we collecting taxes that are owed to us if only we corrected our tax code? And in fact, even further, why aren't we collecting taxes that are owed to us under law?
There are two proposals that I have made that are not in this revenue bill, both of which would not raise taxes, not one dollar more in taxes owed, but rather require those who owe taxes to pay them.
Several states have already enacted a law that I drafted here which is in shorthand called the Zapper Bill, which would establish prohibitions, presumptions, and penalties related to the use and sale of sales suppression technology. There are companies selling devices to retailers to artificially remove from their recordkeeping systems the sales tax collected.
So, Mr. President, you go to a store or another kind of retail outlet, a restaurant, you purchase something -- could be in your county, could be in my county. You pay your tax, I pay my tax. The company doesn't pay the State of New York that tax because they have used a device to rig their books, through technology, so that it doesn't show up.
Florida and Georgia have already passed laws to do something about this. Canada and multiple countries of Europe have passed laws to do something. The technology exists.
The estimate, the estimate is that New York State would collect $1.7 billion more per year if we actually used technology to stop this fraud. Not a new tax on anyone, a fraud-prevention system that would bring in new revenue to the state. It's not in the bill today before us.
There has been documentation of a particular form of tax fraud specific to real estate partnerships, groups of people who come together in real estate partnerships to purchase buildings. Perfectly legal. The buildings are then sold or turned over. Perfectly legal. But there's a pattern of the individuals not paying taxes on the profits.
The IRS has estimated a billion dollars not being paid in taxes to the State of New York from this kind of activity. The State of Pennsylvania recently implemented a system of investigating and going after this kind of tax fraud. The State of Pennsylvania recaptured over $700 million by making sure that the investors in real estate partnerships pay the proper taxes on their overall gains.
Imagine if the discussion today included the collections of fraudulently withheld tax revenue. We would have so much more money to be fighting over on the critical issues that we think we should be spending money on -- not by raising taxes, but by collecting the taxes that are owed.
Imagine if we had a serious discussion over the tax expenditure laws that year in, year out, simply exempt certain entities from paying us $28 billion in taxes. Our full budget, through all funds, is $132.6 billion.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Excuse me, Senator Krueger.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Certainly.
SENATOR LIBOUS:If members have their cellphones on, they're instructed to turn them off. Staff shouldn't have any cellphones in the chamber.
Thank you, Senator.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you, Senator Libous.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Your point is well-taken, Senator Libous.
Please refrain from using the mobile devices in the chamber or take them outside to the lobby.
Senator Krueger, you may continue.
SENATOR KRUEGER:Thank you, Mr. President.
So $28 billion wasn't even put on the table for discussion. Billions of dollars of uncollected taxes weren't put on the table for discussion, and they're not in this revenue bill. And that is such a loss to us, because this budget is the most important thing we do each year in this house, in both houses, I think most people would agree.
It includes an enormous amount of Article 7 language that is in fact policy and statutory changes for the State of New York. It is the document or group of documents that determine the priorities of the State of New York, what we think are the most important things to spend money for, what are the things that we don't think we should spend money for.
The budget is not about making the numbers work out; that's a bare minimum. The people deserve better. The budget is a statement of our priorities. It is how we as a a state try to guarantee a healthy environment for our businesses and our families. It is how we lay out how we intend to solve the problems and build a better future. A budget is about what we know we need to do for the people of New York State and how we're going to do it.
Passing a budget on time is important, passing a balanced budget is important. But in fact I would argue that is simply the minimal statutory requirement on us. We need to have a 21st-century budget that addresses our 21st-century problems. We have lagged behind other states.
I think there are some very good things in this year's budget. I applaud Governor Cuomo for taking on difficult issues, facing the question of billions of dollars in deficit over the last two years and attempting to build us a model of a better government and a better budget. But again, we're not there. We need to go further.
And in this revenue bill I believe we highlight what we haven't yet done in all of the other budget bills. Because again, if we had had a fair, reasonable debate about where the revenue was that wasn't being collected or wasn't being spent, we might have had a more serious discussion about what to do about our unemployment rate that is still more than 9 percent. We might have done something about the fact that more than 16 percent of families with children under the age of 18 in New York are living under the poverty line.
We have real problems. Our poverty rate is going up. Our unemployment rate is barely going down. We've heard from so many of my colleagues about the needs of our educational system from kindergarten to college, trying to do more with less when they should be equipping our children for a future that requires high-skilled, globally competitive workers. And our high school statistics aren't really reflecting our ability to accomplish this, since we're finding that our high school graduates aren't even college-ready.
We talked about the importance of investing in public transportation and the fact that we did the minimum we needed to do, leaving our transit system with enormous debt to pay back, almost requiring that they raise rates for the people who need to use buses and trains and subways every day of their lives.
We heard about our failure to create a health exchange, health benefits exchange. And there was debate about whether we were losing money or saving money by not enacting that today. I think the facts are there, we're losing money by not creating a health benefit exchange.
And none of this -- again, the decisions that are made in the budget for the expenditures, none of it's made in a vacuum. It's made because we decide what is our revenue bill, what's in it and what's not in it. And there's not enough in it. One in 10 New Yorkers are unemployed. We're lagging the national economic recovery.
It's not a time to simply say it was a better budget than the last two years. It's not good enough to say we'll have an on-time budget or even an early budget. Although actually I don't understand an early budget, because the existing budget lasts through the end of the fiscal year whether we get it done at midnight or six hours early. But fine, somebody thinks it's good to have an early budget.
But I think what's much more important is what's in that budget or what's not in that budget. For decades we have learned over and over there's no free lunch. The people of New York State have paid their tax dollars and we've given them back as tax expenditures and tax loopholes, rather than investing in our infrastructure, in our education, or in successful models of job creation that are documentable. That's what we need to be doing, committing ourselves to a 21st-century vision for our future.
There were bills I could vote for today; there were bills I voted no on. But the number-one bill I must vote no on is the revenue bill because of what it doesn't do.
Now, I'm told somebody is going to raise the issue of the earned income tax being the single largest tax expenditure. That may be true. I'm not a hundred percent sure that's true, because there's also homeowners' tax exemptions, and I think that might be larger. I'll double-check, perhaps when someone asks me a question.
But really the issue is why didn't we have the debate before we got to the floor or why aren't any of those proposals in the budget. I think of those $28 billion in tax expenditures, I could agree and support many of them. Many of them are justifiable. Many are not.
You might have been following some national debate about why we are giving petroleum companies enormous tax expenditures at the federal level, why we are still providing federal tax expenditures for certain kinds of environmentally hazardous activities. Do you know we have the same expenditures on our books here in New York State? We match many of those bad policy decisions in Washington, and we don't have to. We can do the right thing. We can change the dynamic of the money we have to spend in our budget, the money we collect and how we prioritize, not with increasing taxes on people but in tax fairness and equity.
So I will vote no on the revenue bill because it does not reflect tax fairness or equity.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Diaz.
SENATOR DIAZ:(Expostulation.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Can you repeat that?
(Laughter.)
SENATOR DIAZ:Thank you, Mr. President.
You know, ladies and gentlemen, I am a pastor of a church. I'm a pastor of a church. And when I invite a preacher to my church and that preacher, he or she, stays long and talk, talk, talk for long, I go to him, hand him my keys, or to her, and tell her, "When you finish, please close the church." And I leave.
But we cannot do --
(Laughter.)
SENATOR DIAZ:But we cannot do this in here. We have to be professional. We have to be intelligent.
It's 4 o'clock. It's 4 o'clock. We are about to finish voting on the budget of this year. We haven't even finished yet, we are about to finish, but at 12:00 noon Governor Cuomo called a press conference and signed the budget.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR DIAZ:He cannot sign the budget before it passed. He already did. The budget has been signed while you were making here believe that you deal with a budget. It's already signed. This is a mockery.
But the Governor cannot do this unless, unless he called each and every one of you -- not me, because he doesn't call me. I'm on the blacklist. Not because I'm black, because I'm on the blacklist.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR DIAZ:But for the Governor to call a press conference at 12:00 noon and sign the budget that is not even finished yet, he has to call each and every one of you and ask you "I need your vote, did you commit your vote?" And you have to say yes. So he is counting chips, says "I got it," and then he goes, calls a press conference and signed the budget. And we are here making the people of the State of New York believing that we are the greatest legislators in the world fighting for them.
I have too much respect for myself -- I am black, Puerto Rican, with kinky hair and broken English, but I respect myself. I got respect for myself. This is a game. This is a joke. The Governor cannot -- how could he do this? How could he call a press conference to sign a budget? We're dealing with it. We're discussing it.
But I wish you all a nice Holy Week. Go to church Good Friday. Go to church, it's Passover. Celebrate it. And pray, pray that maybe next year we all come back with our pants on and our skirts on and decide to tell the Emperor Cuomo: No more, no more, we respect ourself too much for you to laughing at us. He should be laughing at -- wherever he is, he's laughing at us. Not at me. I'm voting no.
God bless you all. Have a nice week -- two weeks, right? Senator Skelos, two weeks?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Diaz.
SENATOR DIAZ:Thank you, sir.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Is there any other Senator wishing to be heard?
Seeing none, hearing none, debate is closed. The Secretary will ring the bell.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY:Section 2. This act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco to explain his vote.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes, I just wanted to respond to a few things that were said about the process as well as a little bit about the substance.
You know, I agree with Senator Krueger that maybe we should talk about the tax expenditures and discuss that issue. And she must have overheard us speaking a little bit, because there are -- many of the tax expenditures include not only the Earned Income Tax Credit but housing credits for low-income housing, the credit for having a child in the State of New York, child tax credits, tuition tax credits, low-income housing credits, clothing tax sale -- we're all going to take advantage of that discussion, since the clothing tax is going to be on a break coming next year. So there are a lot of them.
And there's a lot of credits for business, because other states do it and we've got to compete to bring in companies here.
And had there been a request to discuss this topic about expenditures at any time in the six weeks we sat next to each other until today, I would have definitely made sure we had that discussion at one of the tables.
With respect to the process, I know Senator Diaz -- he's gone? He must have given somebody the keys.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: With respect to Senator Diaz, I know there was a news conference earlier today, but that was done, I believe, to accommodate Speaker Silver.
And the budget wasn't signed, one of the budget bills that had passed up to that point was signed. Maybe that wasn't the greatest of procedures, but the Governor was accommodating the Speaker at that time.
Lastly, as far as the overall process, we can debate the issues but as to the overall process, this was a wonderful year. There was very little incivility. There was a lot of cooperation.
The six weeks that I sat with the ranking member of the Finance Committee during those hearings, they were difficult, but we asked good questions, we tried to get to the bottom of things, and I think we made some substantial changes in this budget that accommodated many of the members here.
So this was a good budget substantively and it was a good budget procedurally, and I'm happy to vote aye.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator DeFrancisco to be recorded in the affirmative.
Senator Parker to explain his vote.
SENATOR PARKER:Thank you, Mr. President, to explain my vote.
Again, I know this has been a long process and I know people have put in a lot of time and hours. And congratulations and thank you for all your hard work.
And as I listened to Senator DeFrancisco, I was overcome. As many of you know, I have, as Liz Krueger calls it, waxed poetic about my problems with the process that we have had.
I think that the budget process that we've done this year is a joke. I think it goes back to the old dysfunction that we saw, you know, prior to 2009 and 2010 where three men in a room -- you pick the color that you want them to be -- but, you know, a process that has iced out the minority conferences in both houses, not only -- where we don't get even the courtesy of even a discussion about what was going on.
And we talk about the tables? The tables are a joke. Let's be clear, ladies and gentlemen. They're a joke. There are between $50 million and $500 million which, you know, if we took that money, that's MegaMillion money, right? That would change all of our lives if we split it up between anybody in this room. But in the context of the third largest budget in the entire country, at $132.6 billion, it is a rounding error.
I've been in meetings with some of you guys when we dropped $500 million on the floor and didn't even bend over to pick it up.
So to be at a table talking about education and you're talking about $500 million and then call that a real conversion about education spending is insulting to the people of the State of New York.
I think this process was flawed. I think that we don't do ourselves justice by pretending that it is anything other than it is. And I'm hoping that next year that we have a better process and thus a better product.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Parker, how do you vote?
SENATOR PARKER:Nay.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Parker to be recorded in the negative.
Senator Grisanti to explain his vote.
SENATOR GRISANTI:Thank you, Mr. President.
I stand here today as a member of the State of New York Senate voting yes on this budget and proud to represent my district, Western New York, and the great State of New York.
With the leadership of Governor Cuomo, our leader Dean Skelos, and with bipartisan support from the Assembly, I got a different take. My friends and colleagues, we are shutting the door on the dysfunction that has plagued Albany by its spending and its debt, especially in 2009 and 2010.
This budget will pass on time two years in a row. It has done with less spending for the last two years the first time in 30 years, without raising a single tax or a single fee. It's a budget that resonates with a single message: Cut spending, cut taxes, and have the necessary tools for job growth.
This budget does that. It has programs that will create private-sector jobs. I'm proud about this budget from Western New York. We've assisted Roswell, the NFTA, provided programs for our youth such as the New York Youth Program, jobs, the New York Works Task Force, provided much-needed funding for our roads, bridges, infrastructure in my region and the state.
We corrected past mistakes from Western New York by DOT funding in Region 5, started repayment for those errors. We kept our commitment with regards to SUNY UB 2020. Yes, you did hear the word again this year. UB 2020 is a reality. We know it was in last year's budget. The process has begun, and in this budget we continue to provide for this plan and all SUNY schools.
We provide for our community colleges, where it's just as important, with additional funding and restoration of childcare centers. We restored education aid, in particular to need-based districts. We increased aid to libraries. For our seniors, we restored EPIC. Copays will remain low. We established a Power Proceeds bill for Western New York to authorize funding for economic development which is dedicated to Erie and Niagara counties, again resulting in the construction of permanent jobs.
Funds will be provided for a second round of Regional Economic Development Councils throughout the state, which was a success last year, and the beginning of Buffalo's regional innovation cluster, otherwise known as the Billion for Buffalo.
The energy superhighway is underway, bringing again thousands of jobs. Foreclosure relief. There's mandate relief in here for Western New York to provide numerous monies for various groups, HEOP, EOP, and Liberty Partnerships.
For that reason, again, I will continue to fight for my district, Western New York --
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Grisanti, how do you vote?
SENATOR GRISANTI:-- putting people first and not politics. I vote yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Senator Grisanti to be recorded in the affirmative.
Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY:In relation to Calendar Number 486, those recorded in the negative are Senators Diaz, Duane, Krueger, Parker, and Perkins.
Ayes, 55. Nays, 5.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:The bill is passed.
Senator Libous, that completes the controversial reading of the budget bills and the calendar.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, at this time would you please call on Minority Leader John Sampson.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:I will.
Senator Sampson.
SENATOR SAMPSON:Thank you very much, Mr. President.
And I just want to give a few brief remarks, and just to follow up on, just to make a point of reference.
Senator Grisanti, you're right. You know, the people of New York State don't care whether you're a Democrat or Republican or an Independent. People are concerned about a couple of things. They're concerned about putting food on the table, they're concerned about making sure they have a roof over their head, they have a good education for their children and, most of all, they have a job. They're concerned about making sure that they can make ends meet at the end of the day.
And when we talk about this budget process -- but before I even talk about it, I have to commend the staff of both sides for doing a phenomenal job. Because without you, we would not have been able to do what we're doing. So, my colleagues, we need to give them a round of applause for the phenomenal work that they do.
(Applause.)
SENATOR SAMPSON:And, Senator Skelos, I want to also thank you for your leadership on this, and all my colleagues. Because when we talk about passing a budget on time, it's phenomenal that we're passing a budget on time.
But time does not dictate what is a good or a bad budget. It's the content that makes that determination. And last year we know there was unprecedented cuts to services that was taken, and we know that people had to make hard choices. But at this point in time the people are seeing a little light at the end of the tunnel.
You know, we talked about shared sacrifice, and last year some felt others were not sharing. But however, we came back in December and allowed the principles of fairness and equity to guide us. And this is what this budget has done because of the foundations that we laid in December.
There are good parts and there are bad parts about this budget. We talk about the unprecedented money provided for economic development throughout New York, the increase in school aid, and also the funding formula is slightly fairer. But at other times there's things that we missed. Talking about the DREAM Act, providing opportunities for all New Yorkers irrespective of where you come from. Mandate relief, there has been mandate relief throughout this budget. But can we go a little bit further? Yes, we can. And I know, my colleagues, we'll go a little bit further.
Did we provide additional help for our seniors? Yes, we provided additional help for our seniors. But could we have gone a little bit further with the New York health exchange to provide affordable health care to all New Yorkers? We didn't. But hopefully the Governor, with his executive order, will also.
We talked about the money we provided for the development of new sources of energy but yet we failed to provide funding for a study to deal with hydrofracking.
So is the process perfect, is the budget perfect? I would say no. But one thing I can say is that the principles, the foundation has been laid for fairness and equity. And this is the foundation that has made New York the Empire State.
So, my colleagues, I want to congratulate you on a job well done. I will be voting yes for this budget. There's things I like and things I don't like. But what I always remember is that the foundation has been laid for fairness and equality, and that's what we need to go forward. Understanding that we still have work to do, our work is not done. But as long as we understand the principles of fairness and equity, they will continue to guide us to make sure that New York State is the Empire State.
So thank you very much, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Sampson, for your comments.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS:Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you for presiding in such a wonderful way.
I want to thank Senator DeFrancisco, our chair of Finance, for not only answering the questions so well but really the time that was involved in the hearings throughout the year and putting the final package together.
John, we thank you very much for your dedication and good work.
To our staff -- and, Senator Sampson, you mentioned both on your side of the aisle, our side. We thank you.
And I want to pay special tribute to Diane Burman, our counsel, but in particular Robert Mujica, who is just an expert, understands public policy, understands the direction that this state should be going, and certainly working very closely with us, keeping you informed, and dealing with so many personalities on the second floor at times.
Robert, we thank you for your good work. Excellent job, Robert.
We should be very proud of today. Number one, the sun is shining, which is excellent. We're about to depart for a short break. And I wish everybody, obviously, a blessed holiday season.
And this is the second early budget that we've passed in a row. I think that is significant because we've done it by working on a bipartisan basis, working with Speaker Silver, working with Governor Cuomo. And I salute the Governor for his leadership. You know, you have policy disagreements, but those policy disagreements were resolved by listening to each other, finding a middle ground, and ending up with a positive result.
And this budget is a good budget. We are still in challenging times economically, and the people of the State of New York have asked us to do a fiscally sound budget that does not increase spending. We didn't increase spending. They asked us not to raise taxes. We listened, we did not raise taxes. And they've asked us to really focus in on private-sector job creation, to empower the private sector to create jobs. And I believe this budget goes a long way in doing this.
There is a lot more to do. You know, sometimes people think that it's over with now that it's early, which is great. But we have to stay focused on mandate relief to help our local property taxpayers, and we have to continue to look at ways to cut taxes so that we can empower the private sector to create private-sector jobs.
And that's going to be the focus of our majority. We ask you to join us so that we can have a great session -- not just a budget session, but a great legislative side when we return.
So I thank you, Senator Sampson, for your cooperation. I thank all of our members for the great work that we've done collectively. We should all be proud today to be State Senators and to live in this great state.
So, Mr. President, I thank you very much.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:Thank you, Senator Skelos, for your comments.
Senator Libous.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, is there any further business at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:There is no further business.
SENATOR LIBOUS:Mr. President, there being no further business at the desk, I move we adjourn until Tuesday, April 17th, at 3:00 p.m., intervening days being legislative days.
ACTING PRESIDENT GRIFFO:On motion, the Senate stands adjourned until Tuesday, April 17th, at 3:00 p.m., intervening days being legislative days.
Senate adjourned.
(Whereupon, at 4:19 p.m., the Senate adjourned.)
Highest impact first.
Not yet analyzed. Open the bill for its official title.
Not yet analyzed. Open the bill for its official title.
Not yet analyzed. Open the bill for its official title.
Not yet analyzed. Open the bill for its official title.
Not yet analyzed. Open the bill for its official title.
Not yet analyzed. Open the bill for its official title.
Not yet analyzed. Open the bill for its official title.
Not yet analyzed. Open the bill for its official title.
Not yet analyzed. Open the bill for its official title.