EARLIER THIS MONTH, GOVERNOR HOCHUL SHARED A VISION FOR THE FUTURE OF NEW YORK IN HER FIRST STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS SINCE GETTING ELECTED TO A FULL TERM.

WE'LL BREAK DOWN THE GOVERNOR'S AGENDA AND LOOK AHEAD TO THE GOVERNOR'S 2023 AGENDA.

DON'T GO ANYWHERE.

WELCOME TO CONNECT NEW YORK.

I'M DAVID LOMBARDO, HOST OF WCNY'S THE CAPITOL PRESSROOM, A DAILY PUBLIC RADIO SHOW, BROADCASTING FROM THE STATE CAPITOL.

ON TODAY'S SHOW WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS THE LEGISLATION SESSION AT THE CAPITOL IN ALBANY AND EXAMINE THE BIG-TICKET ITEMS IN THE GOVERNOR'S STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS - INCLUDING RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE, INCREASING TUITION AT NEW YORK'S PUBLIC COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, PUTTING A PRICE ON POLLUTION AND DOUBLING THE RATE OF NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION.

TO DO ALL THAT, WE'RE JOINED IN THE STUDIO BY REBECCA GARRARD, LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR FOR THE PROGRESSIVE ADVOCACY GROUP CITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK, AND CHAPIN FAY, A REPUBLICAN POLITICAL CONSULTANT WHO SERVES AS MANAGING DIRECTOR FOR THE CONSULTING FIRM ACTUM, AND ZOOMING IN REMOTELY IS NEAL KWATRA, FOUNDER AND CEO OF METROPOLITAN PUBLIC STRATEGIES, WHICH BACKS LIBERAL CANDIDATES AND CAUSES.

AND BEFORE WE LOOK AHEAD TO 2023, WE ARE GOING TO REWIND SLIGHTLY BACK TO NOVEMBER AND TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ELECTIONS AND WHAT, IF ANYTHING, THE POLITICIANS IN ALBANY SHOULD HAVE LEARNED FROM THEM.

SO, REBECCA, WE'LL GO LEFT TO RIGHT.

WHAT, IF ANYTHING, SHOULD THE DEMOCRATIC MARKET MAJORITIES IN THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR HOCHUL TAKE AWAY FROM WHAT VOTERS HAD TO SAY IN NOVEMBER?

>> I THINK NOVEMBER WAS AN INTERESTING REFERENDUM ON PROGRESSIVE POLITICS, AND THE STRENGTH OF THE LEGISLATURE.

SO IF WE LOOK AT THE SENATE RACES IN NOVEMBER, WE SAW THAT THEY HELD THEIR SUPER MAJORITY.

>> THEY DID.

>> AND ELECTED NEWER PROGRESSIVE MEMBERS.

SO NOT JUST HOLDING THE NUMBERS BUT BRINGING IN MEMBERS WHO ARE REALLY WANTING TO MOVE AN AGENDA TO EVERYDAY NEW YORKERS CARE ABOUT.

WHEN WE CONTRAST TRAFT THIS WITH THE ELECTION RESULTS OF THE GOVERNOR, WHO, IN AN EXTREMELY BLUE STATE, WON BY A SLIM MARGIN, I THINK IT SPEAKS TO THE MANDATE, DISTRICT BY DISTRICT, THAT PEOPLE WANT POLICY AGENDAS MOVED FORWARD THAT ARE PROGRESSIVE IN NATURE AND DEAL WITH THE CRISIS WE ARE IN, WHICH IS ONE OF BEING UNABLE TO PAY EVERYDAY COSTS AND LIVING THE REALITY OF THIS WEALTH GAP.

SO HOUSING, ALL OF THESE ISSUES THAT ARE IMPERATIVE TO EVERYBODY ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS.

I THINK VOTERS SPOKE IN TERMS OF SAYING THAT IS MOST IMPORTANT.

>> WELL, LET ME PUSH BOOK THAT FOR A SECOND, BECAUSE WHEN I THINK ABOUT THE NEW PROGRESSIVES THAT GOT ELECTED TO THE STATE SENATE, THEY'RE MEMBERS THAT COME FROM HEAVILY PLU DISTRICTEDS.

THESE ARE NOT PEOPLE WHO WON THE PURPLE STRIRKTS.

IT'S THE PURPLE STRIRKTS THAT WE SAW MORE LIBERAL MEMBERS LIKE MELNICK FALL AND MOD MODERATE MEMBERS FALL ON LONG ISLAND BUT YOU VIEW THIS AS A REFERENDUM ON PROGRESSIVE POLICIES.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT DEGREE BECAUSE I THIS I WE SEE THAT VOTERS ELECT DEMOCRATS WHO ARE GOING TO USE THEIR POSITION TO MOVE THEIR POSITIONS FORWARD THAT IMPACT EVERYDAY VOTERS.

WE SAW-- NOBODY WOULD CONSIDER THAT ABUBER BLUE DISTRICT.

>> THAT IS A BLUE DISTRICT THE WAY IT WAS CRAFTED.

DEMOCRATS WERE ACHING TO RUN IN THAT SEAT AND HAD NOT RUN PREVIOUSLY WHEN IT WAS A COMPETITIVE DISTRICT.

>> CORRECT BUT WE SEE IN THE PRIMARY THERE WAS A MANDATE FOR THE MORE PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATES TO TAKE HOLD.

AND I WOULD SAY THAT THE MODERATES WHO LOST THEIR SEATS FELL INTO WHAT I THINK IS A COMMON TRAP OF TRYING TO PLAY BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE.

AND WHAT VOTERS WANT, AND I THINK THIS CROSSES THE AISLE, RIGHT?

WHAT VOTERS WANT IS SOMEBODY WHO IS GOING TO STAND FOR SOMETHING, GOING TO STAND FOR THE ISSUES THAT IMPACT THEM AND SO WE SAW WINS IN AREAS WHERE YOU HAD CANDIDATES WHO EITHER HAVE A HISTORY OF DOING THAT OR WERE RUNNING ON A NEW PLATFORM OF SAYING, I'M NOT GOING TO COMPROMISE.

I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE MYSELF ACCOUNTABLE TO SPECIAL INTERESTS.

I AM GOING TO UPLIFT THE NEEDS OF EVERYDAY NEW YORKERS OVER SPECIAL INTEREST MONEY.

>> AS WE CONTINUE TO MOVE ALONG THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM, LET'S THROW IT TO NEIL.

WHAT DID YOU TAKE AWAY FROM THE NOVEMBER ELECTIONS?

THE NARRATIVE THAT REBECCA HAVE IS THE RIGHT ONE IS THIS.

>> I THINK SOME OF THE POINTS REBECCA MADE I WOULD AGREE WITH.

I THINK WHEN LOOKING AT THE ELECTIONS, IT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT NEW YORK NOT AS A MONOLITH.

WE'VE GOT REGIONS OF THE STATE THAT I THINK HELPED INFORM THE OUTCOMES WE GOT.

WE HAVE NEW YORK CITY, THE NEW YORK CITY SUBURBS, THE HUDSON VALLEY, WE HAVE UPSTATE.

AND THE NEW YORK CITY SUBURBS IS WHERE A LOT OF THE PROBLEMS, YOU KNOW, WAS FOR DEMOCRATS.

AND LET'S JUST STEP BACK FOR A SECOND.

I MEAN WE HAD AN ELECTORAL ENVIRONMENT WHERE DEMOCRATS ARE IN CONTROL OF CONGRESS, THE WHITE HOUSE, OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE, OF THE GOVERNOR'S MANSION.

THAT'S A DIFFICULT THING TO SUSTAIN.

IN AN ENVIRONMENT WE HAD THE ELECTIONS IN WITH INFLATION RISING, CONCERNS AROUND PUBLIC SAFETY.

I THINK THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT DEMOCRATS WERE A LITTLE SLOW TO MEET SOME OF THE PROPAGANDA THAT WAS BEING PROSECUTED BY REPUBLICANS ON THE RIGHT ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATED TO PUBLIC SAFETY.

AND I THINK THAT'S CLEARLY ONE OF THE LESSONS TO BE TAKEN AWAY, ESPECIALLY IN THE SUBURBS WE SAW THAT AND ESPECIALLY ON LONG ISLAND.

I THINK IT WAS A BIT OF A MIXED BAG.

I THINK WHEN YOU ARE DEFENDING TURF THE WAY DEMOCRATS WERE, MAJORITIES UP AND DOWN, WASHINGTON AND ALBANY, IT WASN'T A TERRIBLE OUTCOME GIVEN THE ENVIRONMENT.

>> FOR YOUR I'D OF THE AISLE, WE HAD REPUBLICAN GAINS IN THE CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATION, NOTHING TOO POSITIVE FOR THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

BUT IN THE GOVERNOR'S RACE, YOU HAD THE STRONGEST PERFORMANCE BY A REPUBLICAN IN MORE THAN TWO DECADES.

SO WHAT IS YOUR TAKE AWAY FROM THIS RECENT ELECTION SEASON?

>> A LOT TO UNPACK GLND AYOU HAVE TWO MINUTES.

>> EXACTLY SO I AGREE WITH THE DESTINATION YOU ALL ARRIVED AT BUT DIFFERENT ROUTE THE LESSON LEARNED BY THE LEGISLATURE, THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT AND THEY'RE SAFE.

THE GOVERNOR LEARNED THAT THE GOVERNOR CARE ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS AND THEY'RE GOING TO VOTE THAT WAY.

CRIME, INFLATION, LIKE MENTIONED, VERY CLOSE RACE, SHOULD NOT BE IN A DEEP BLUE STATE.

BUT I THINK THAT REPUBLICANS DID MAKE A LOT OF GAINS SORT OF ON SECOND TIER LEVEL, RIGHT?

WE BEAT THE TRIPLE C CHAIRMAN, MIKE LAWLER IS A CONGRESSMAN.

WE SENT THE LARGEST DELEGATION OF REPUBLICANS TO THE HOUSE IN I THINK DECADES.

AND WE-- I WOULD PUSH BACK A LITTLE BIT ON NO BRIGHT SIGNS OR NO BRIGHT LIGHTS IN STATE LEGISLATIVE RACES.

WE SENT TWO REPUBLICAN PLAIM FROM THE CITY ASSEMBLYMAN FROM THE CITY.

SO HOW MUCH OF A MESSAGE THAT SENDS BUT WE WON A BUNCH OF RACES ON LONG ISLAND AS NEIL POINTED OUT.

LONG ISLAND IS AN ISSUE FOR THE DEMOCRATS FOR SURE AND I THINK THE STATE SENATE REPUBLICANS HAVE A TWO-YEAR PLAN.

SO I THINK THAT YOU SAW 2021, PARTICULARLY ON LONG ISLAND, IT WAS JUST A TIDAL WAVE OF EPIC PROPORTIONS ON THE LOCAL RACES: SOLELY BASED ON BAIL REFORM.

THEN LEE ZELDIN HAMMERED THAT MESSAGE AND HAD AN EFFECT ON THAT.

HE CAME WITHIN A HAIR'S BREATH OF BEATING AN INCUMBENT, HISTORIC FIRST FEMALE GOVERNOR IN DEEP BLUE NEW YORK AND THEN ON THE CONGRESSIONAL LEVEL, WE WON SEATS THAT WE PROBABLY SHOULDN'T HAVE WON AND SOME SEATS THAT WILL BE TARGETED AND PROBABLY LOST AND TRUMP'S POPULARITY IN SUFFOLK COUNTY.

I AGREE IT WAS A MIXED BAG BUT I ALSO DO NOT AGREE, I THINK THE GOVERNOR IS GOING TO HAVE TO PICK HER BATTLES VERY WISELY AND I THINK SHE RUNS REAL RISK OF HELPING US WIN MORE RACES THIS YEAR AND NEXT YEAR.

>> IT WAS CLEARLY A RECOGNITION OF PUBLIC SAFETY AS A BIG ISSUE IN THE FINAL WEEKS OF THE CAMPAIGN BY THE GOVERNOR AND IN THE AFTERMATH OF HER ELECTION.

EVEN ATTORNEY GENERAL LETITIA JAMES TALKED ABOUT THE STATE'S LAWS AFTER SHE WAS RE-ELECTED AND IN HER INAUGURATION, THE GOVERNOR IDENTIFIED PUBLIC SAFETY AS HER NUMBER ONE ISSUE AND WE ARE GOING TO PLAY A CLIP RIGHT NOW OF HER TALKING ABOUT ONE OF THE BIG PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES THAT SHE HIGHLIGHTED DURING HER STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS.

>> BAIL REFORM IS NOT THE PRIMARY DRIVER OF A NATIONAL CRIME WAVE.

IT WAS CREATED BY A CONVERGENCE OF FACTORS WITH THE PANDEMIC AND ALL ACROSS THE NATION.

BUT ALSO I WOULD SAY WE CAN AGREE THAT THE BAIL REFORM LAW AS WRITTEN LEAVES ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT AND AS LEADERS, WE CANNOT IGNORE THAT WHEN WE HEAR SO OFTEN FROM NEW YORKERS THAT THEIR TOP CONCERN IS CRIME AND SO TO MY PARTNERS IN GOVERNMENT IN THE LEGISLATURE LET'S START WITH THE BASE OF SHARED UNDERSTANDING HAVE A THOUGHTFUL CONVERSATION, NOT THIS AND TALK ABOUT WHAT WE CAN DO DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS AND MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT LAW.

>> SO, NEIL, THE GOVERNOR GOT BIG APPLAUSE WHEN SHE MADE THE CASE THAT THE 2019 CHANGES WERE IMPORTANT, THE DEMOCRATS IN THE ROOM CLAPPED.

PRETTY MUCH SILENCE WHEN SHE TALKED ABOUT REVISITING THESE LAWS, EVEN FROM THE REPUBLICANS IN THE ROOM, WHO WANT HER TO REALLY SCRAP EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED IN 2019.

IS THERE ANY SORT OF BENEFIT TO THE GOVERNOR TAKING THIS ON FROM A POLITICAL SENSE BECAUSE SHE TALKS ABOUT THIS IDEA OF REACHING A CONSENSUS, AND EVERYBODY WORKING TOGETHER, MAYBE EVEN SINGING COME BA INCUMBENT BAIA HIGHHIGHKU MBA YA.

>> WE HAVE A HEARING NEXT WEEK THAT THE LEGISLATURE IS DOING THAT WILL EXAMINE DATA.

BUT HERE IS THE DYNAMIC AS I SEE IT.

YOU HAVE THE MAYOR AND THE GOVERNOR ALIGNED AROUND A DESIRE FOR CHANGE IN THE BAIL LAWS AND YOU HAVE THE SENATE AND THE ASSEMBLY VERY ALIGNED IN THEIR, YOU KNOW, RESISTANCE THOSE FAR AND THE ONE THING I WOULD SAY HAVE SOMETHING UNIQUE.

A BULLY PULPIT THAT ALLOWS THEM TO GENERATE AND LEVERAGE EARNED MEDIA AND ATTENTION AROUND THIS ISSUE THAT CAN MOVE THE POLITICS.

I THINK WE SAW THAT A BIT IN THE ELECTION AND I THINK THAT IS ONE OF THE TOOLS THAT THEY HAVE AS THEY ENGAGE LEGISLATURE ON THE ISSUE.

NOW THE CHALLENGE FOR THEM IS THE LEGISLATURE, YOU KNOW, FRANKLY, HAS AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF LEVERAGE AND POWER IN A NEGOTIATION LIKE THIS BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT AS CONCERNED ABOUT THE PUBLIC'S IRE ON ANY ONE INDIVIDUAL.

AND IT'S RARE THAT THE PUBLIC HOLDS A LEGISLATIVE BODY RESPONSIBLE.

IT'S THE EXECUTIVES WHO ARE HELD RESPONSIBLE AND ACCOUNTABLE.

AND SO IT'S WHY KATHY AND THE MAYOR, FRANKLY, ARE MOST INCENTIVIZED TO DEAL WITH THE ISSUE BECAUSE THEY'RE ULTIMATELY THE ONES THAT WILL FRANKLY PAY A POLITICAL PRICE IF THESE ISSUES ARE NOT RESOLVED AND ARGUABLY THEIR PARTY AS WE SAW A LITTLE BIT IN THE 2022 ELECTIONS.

SO I THINK IT'S AN OPEN QUESTION, WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> REBECCA A RECENT SIENNA POLL FOUND THAT 65% OF NEW YORKERS SUPPORT GIVING JUDGES MORE DISCRETION TO SET BAIL FOR OFFENDERS ACCUSED OF SERIOUS CRIMES WHICH IS WHAT THE GOVERNOR IS GOING TO BE PITCHING OVER THE NEXT TWO MONTHS AND THAT INCLUDES 68% FROM DEMOCRATS,65% FROM SELF IDENTIFIED LIBERALS.

I ASSUME CITIZENS ACTION OF NEW YORK WILL BE RALLYING AROUND THE GOVERNOR AND HER EFFORT RIGHT NOW.

>> THAT'S A LOADED QUESTION.

WE WILL NOT.

I THINK I WANT TO AGREE VERY MUCH ON THE FRAMING THAT WAS JUST PRESENTED, RIGHT?

I THINK THE BULLY PULL IT, RIGHT, THAT-- THE BULLY PULPIT THAT IS HELD BY THE GOVERNOR AND THE MAYOR HAS BEEN ENORMOUSLY PROBLEMATIC IN CREATING A NARRATIVE THAT IS REALLY CAUGHT ON, RIGHT?

THAT THE PRETRIAL LAWS THAT WERE PASSED ARE DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE INCREASE IN CRIME THAT WE SAW POST THE PASSAGE BUT ALSO DURING THE PANDEMIC PERIOD, RIGHT?

>> THE GOVERNOR SAYS IT'S NOT THE PRIMARY DRIVER.

SHE WANTS TO HAVE A VERY NUANCED CONVERSATION IT SOUNDS LIKE.

>> YES, AND WE ARE HOPING THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT SHE WANTS.

HAVING SAID THAT, WE KNOW THAT ALL THE DATA SHOWS THAT THE LAWS THAT WERE PASSED ARE NOT RELATED TO THE INCREASE IN CRIME.

WE SAW AN INCREASE IN CRIME ACROSS THE COUNTRY IN AREAS THAT DID NOT PASS SIMILAR LAWS, AND SO THE REALITY IS, I THINK, WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC OF HARM THAT'S PERPETUATED DUE TO SURVIVAL AND POVERTY ISSUES THAT WERE LAID BARE DURING THE PANDEMIC BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE SYSTEMS THAT CREATE PROTECTIONS, RIGHT, DURING THESE MOMENTS OF ECONOMIC, SOCIAL HEALTH CRISES.

I WILL AGREE THAT WHAT HAS BEEN PROBLEMATIC IS THAT THE NARRATIVE HAS BEEN STUCK IN THIS CYCLE AROUND THE LAWS THAT WERE PASSED.

AND I THINK IT'S A MISSTEP TO CONTINUE TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT CONVERSATION.

IT GIVES IT OXYGEN.

AND IT LENDS AN APPEARANCE OF TRUTH TO SOMETHING THAT IS NOT BACKED BY DATA.

AND SO WHAT I WOULD HOPE THIS SESSION IS THAT WE CAN HAVE INTENTIONAL CONVERSATIONS AROUND THE VALID DESIRE TO HAVE PUBLIC SAFETY IN COMMUNITIES THAT IS SOLUTION-ORIENTED AND NOT CENTERED IN THIS SORT OF CYCLIC BACK AND FORTH AROUND RELITIGATING LAWS THAT HAVE PASSED.

>> TO THAT END, THE GOVERNOR, IN HER STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS, IDENTIFIED THAT SHE WANTS TO INVEST IN ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION.

SHE WANTS TO, AS WELL THOUGH ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE, INCREASE FUNDING FOR DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.

SHE WANTS TO INCREASE THE POLICE RANKS, HAVE ANOTHER STATE POLICE ACADEMY.

SO IT SEEMS LIKE SHE IS TRYING TO PULL FROM DIFFERENT SIDES OF THIS EQUATION, INCLUDING REVISITING PRETRIAL DETENTION.

SO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT DEMOCRATS SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT AS THEY BEGIN TO NEGOTIATE, APPROACH THIS ISSUE, SHOULD THEY BE WILLING TO GIVE AND TAKE A LITTLE BIT ON THIS?

SHOULD THERE BE CONVERSATION THAT INCLUDES PRETRIAL DETENTION OR SOME THINGS TOO CONTROVERSIAL AND SHOULD NOT BE PART OF THE DISCUSSION?

>> I MEAN I THINK THE ROBUST CONVERSATION IS IMPORTANT.

THE THINGS SHE NAMED IN THE STATE OF THE STATE AROUND DIVERSION, RIGHT, IN TERMS OF MENTAL HEALTH, DIVERSION, SUPPORT SERVICES ARE ENORMOUSLY IMPORTANT.

I THINK THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS.

SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THE EXECUTIVE BUDGET TO SEE IF THAT MATCHES.

BUT THE REALITY IS THAT FIRST OF ALL, SO MUCH OF THE IMPORTANT THINGS THAT WERE WON IN THOSE PRETRIAL LAWS WERE AROUND DISCOVERY AND SPEEDY TRIAL AND NOT HAVING FOLKS LANGUISH IN INCARCERATION WHEN THEY ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY SIMPLY BECAUSE IT TAKES A YEAR, TWO YEARS, THREE YEARS TO EVEN BEGIN TO PARTICIPATE AND DEFEND AGAINST THE CHARGES THAT WERE LEVERAGED AGAINST THEM AND EVEN IF GUILT DOESN'T EXIST, RIGHT?

I THINK WE CONTINUE TO RUN INTO THE PROBLEM OF JUDGES GRANTING BAIL IN SITUATIONS WHERE WE ARE SAYING BAIL IS NOT NECESSARY, RIGHT?

>> CLEANING UP THE LAW.

THEY'RE GOING TO EXPLAIN THIS ALL TO THE JUDGES.

>> IN SITUATIONS WHERE CLEARLY THE PERSON WOULD HAVE BEEN BAIL ELIGIBLE.

SO I THINK WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, A PUBLIC EDUCATION CAMPAIGN TO DO IN THE SYSTEM.

I'M GOING TO BE KIND AND SAY THAT THAT IS INADVERTENT AND NOT DELIBERATE.

BUT CERTAINLY THERE IS A MYRIAD OF THINGS.

AND I THINK THERE IS PROACTIVE SOLUTIONS THAT CAN REALLY GET TO THIS WITHOUT GETTING STUCK IN THE CYCLE OF RELITIGATING REALLY IMPORTANT LAWS THAT PASS.

>> YOU WANTED TO JUMP IN.

>> YEAH, I DID.

I MEAN I AGREE GENERALLY WITH THAT.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO MAKE A DISTINCTION HERE AND THIS IS PART OF WHY I THINK DEMOCRATS SUFFERED SOME ELECTORAL LOSSES IS THIS ISSUE IS VERY VISCERAL, PUBLIC SAFETY IS VISCERAL TO PEOPLE.

IT'S THEIR LIVED EXPERIENCE IN DIFFERENT WAYS AND IF YOU TELL THEM THAT THIS IS NOT TRUE OR THE DATA SAYS SOMETHING ELSE, IT'S NOT AS COMPELLING AND FRANKLY DEMOCRATS HAVE NOT DONE DONE AS GOOD A JOB DEFENDING THIS LAW-- >> I THINK BAD IS THE WORD YOU ARE LOOKING FOR.

>> IT'S JUST, TO REBECCA'S POINT, THERE HASN'T BEEN GOOD PUBLIC EDUCATION F. WE WANT TO DEFEND A LAW LIKE THIS, WE HAVE TO REALIZE THE PLAYING FIELD UPON WHICH THIS ISSUE IS BEING PLAYED AND PROPAGANDIZED.

SO YOU HAVE THE NEW YORK POST, YOU HAVE OTHER INTERESTS YELLING INTO THE VOID ABOUT THIS ISSUE YET THERE IS NO REAL RESPONSE ABOUT WHY THE LAW SHOULD BE MAINTAINED.

AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE CHALLENGE.

DEMOCRATS HAVE A REAL MESSAGING PROBLEM ON THIS ISSUE.

THEY'RE ON THE DEFENSE.

THEY'RE REACTIVE AND THEY DON'T HAVE AS COMPELLING A PROACTIVE MESSAGE ON BAIL RIGHT NOW.

>> SO SENATE REPUBLICANS AND HAVE BEEN OUT FRONT ON THIS ISSUE SINCE 2019 AND KICKOFF TBEE THEY HAVE HAD PRESS CONFERENCES AT THE CAPITOL WHERE THEY HAVE ADVANCED THEIR OWN SAFETY PLAN.

FOR THE NEXT TWO MONTHS, SHOULD THEY SIT BACK AND RELAX AND WATCH THE INTRAPARTY JAWBL OR BE TRYING TO INTERJECT EVEN IF THEY DON'T HAVE A VOICE IN THE POLICY CONSIDERING ONE PARTY RULE IN ALBANY.

>> I WOULD NEVER RECOMMEND SOMEBODY SIT BACK.

THEY SHOULD FIGHT FOR WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN.

AND JUST A QUICK ASIDE, YOU MENTIONED NUANCED, THE CORNERSTONE OF AMERICAN POLITICAL DISCOURSE IN 2023, RIGHT?

A BAD IDEA IS A BAD IDEA.

TAKING DISCRETION AWAY FROM JUDGES ON EITHER SIDE OF THIS ISSUE IS A BAD IDEA.

FOR EXAMPLE, A LOT OF REPUBLICANS INCLUDING MYSELF DON'T LIKE THE FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES OR MAND MOTHER MINIMUMS.

THE JUDGE IS A JUDGE FOR A REASON AND THEY SHOULD HAVE THE DISCRETION TO KEEP DANGEROUS PEOPLE IN JAIL AND OTHER PEOPLE WHO DO NOT PRESENT A DANGER AND ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY AND MAY NOT HAVE MEANS AND ARE COMING FROM WHATEVER WALK OF LIFE, SHOULD BE GIVEN THAT CONSIDERATION.

BUT.

BUT IT'S NOT REALLY A MESSAGING PROBLEM.

AS NEIL SAID.

THIS IS A LIVED EXPERIENCE.

IT WAS DURING A CAMPAIGN, RIGHT SO IT WAS A LITTLE ENFLAMED, BUT YOU HAVE THE POST AND THE DAILY NEWS COVERS OVERAND OVER AGAIN OF THE CRIME AND PEOPLE BEING LET OUT AND, YOU KNOW, SOME GUY BEING ARRESTED SAYING I'LL BE OUT TOMORROW, DON'T WORRY, NO BIG DEAL.

IT'S A MAJOR ISSUE.

AND SO I DO THINK REPUBLICANS SHOULD NIGHT FOR THIS.

THE IRONIC THING IS ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM, I THINK THERE IS A TON OF COMMON GROUND AMONG EVEN THE MOST PROGRESSIVES, SOME PROGRESSIVES WILL SAY, AND REPUBLICANS, YOU KNOW, THERE IS A NATIONAL MOVEMENT NOW AMONG REPUBLICANS, YOU KNOW, PRETRIAL DIVERSION, ALL THAT STUFF.

LONG SERVING DUTCHESS COUNTY D.E.A., HE WAS THE-- DA THE FIRST TO DO A DRUG PRETRIAL INTERVENTION IN OUR COUNTY.

AND HE WAS A VERY CONSERVATIVE LOCK EVERYBODY UP DA.

THERE IS A LOT OF COMMON GROUND ON THIS ISSUE.

BAD IDEAS ARE BAD IDEAS.

NOT A MESSAGING PROBLEM.

JUST A BAD IDEA.

WHEN PEOPLE ARE GETTING ATTACKED ON THE SUBWAY AND I'M NOT TRYING TO SAY IT'S A HUGE PROBLEM OR NOT A HUGE PROBLEM.

THAT'S BESIDE THE POINT.

WHEN PEOPLE ARE SEEING THAT HAPPEN AND THEN THEY SEE THAT THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS TAKEN SOME DISCRETION AWAY FROM JUDGES TO LET PEOPLE GO FREE, THAT IS TRUE, RIGHT?

IT MAY NOT BE AS TRUE AS THE OTHER SIDE, YOU KNOW, MAY EXPLAIN IT AWAY, BUT THAT IS A FACT.

AND SO IT MATTERS.

ALL THESE THINGS MATTER.

BUT I DO THINK THERE SHOULD BE A NUANCED DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF IDEAS THAT MY COLLEAGUES MENTIONED THAT REPUBLICANS CAN GET ON BOARD WITH.

MY WORRY IS THAT 2023 AMERICAN POLITICAL DISCOURSE, IT IS HARD FOR PROGRESSIVES TO WORK TOGETHER BECAUSE EACH BASE WILL TAKE IT OUT ON... >> I CAN'T-- UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVE SO MANY MORE TOPICS AND JUST LIKE IN ALBANY, THERE IS SO MUCH TO GET DONE AND ONE OF THE OTHER BIG ISSUES THAT I KNOW YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS HOUSING AND THIS IS SOMETHING THE GOVERNOR TALKED ABOUT IN HER STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS, LAYING OUT A PRETTY BOLD VISION, WHETHER HER VISION FOR HOW TO ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISH THAT IS EQUALLY BOLD WE WILL SEE BUT LET'S HEAR WHAT THE GOVERNOR WANTS TO DO IN THE HOUSING SPACE.

>> THE COMPACT PULLS TOGETHER A BROAD MENU OF POLICY CHANGES THAT ARE COLLECTIVELY ACHIEVE THE AMBITIOUS GOAL OF 800,000 NEW HOMES BUILT OVER THE NEXT DECADE.

THE COMPACT SETS CLEAR EXPECTATIONS FOR THE GROWTH WE NEED WHILE AT THE SAME TIME GIVING LOCALITIES THE TOOLS, THE FLEXIBILITY AND RESOURCES TO STIMULATE THAT GROWTH.

>> SO REBECCA, THIS COMPACT THAT THE GOVERNOR ANNOUNCED IN HER STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS IS THIS IDEA THAT WORRY GOING TO DOUBLE THE RATE OF NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION IN NEW YORK, SETTING REGIONAL GROWTH GOALS AS PART OF A LONG-TERM PLAN TO ADDRESS THE STATE'S HOUSING NEEDS.

A LOT OF PROGRESSIVES HAVE NOTED THAT THIS DID NOT REALLY REVOLVE AROUND THE IDEA OF NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING NECESSARILY AND THAT THIS DOESN'T NECESSARILY ADDRESS THE IMMEDIATE HOUSING CONCERNS IN NEW YORK.

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS HOUSING COMPACT THAT WE HAVE HEARD SO FAR?

>> I THINK IT WAS THE MOST DEEPLY DISAPPOINTING PART OF THE STATED OF THE STATE FOR US.

IN A COUPLE OF WAYS.

ONE, WAIT IS EXTREMELY CENTERED IN A PRO-DEVELOPMENT SUPPLY AND DEMAND PHILOSOPHY WITHOUT ANY ATTACHMENTS TO AFFORDABILITY.

>> THAT'S NOT A SURPRISE FACING THIS GOVERNOR, THE IDEA THAT SHE IS APPROACHING IT FROM A SUPPLY PROBLEM.

>> NOT A SURPRISE AT ALL.

AND THE REALITY IS LOOK, WE ARE NOT ANTI-INCREASING SUPPLY, RIGHT?

BUT WITHOUT CO-EXISTING POLICY THAT IS BAKED INTO THAT, THAT ENSURES TENANTS ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS STABLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WE KNOW THIS DOESN'T WORK.

THIS HAS BEEN THE PLAN AT THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVEL FOR DECADES.

WE HAVE SEEN AN EXACERBATION OF THE HOUSING CRISIS.

WHAT WE NEED TO CO-EXIST WITH THESE POLICIES TO INCREASE SUPPLY ARE PROTECTIONS THAT LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD AND EQUAL THE POWER DYNAMIC.

>> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING IN MIND.

>> HERE IS ONE GOOD EXAMPLE.

THERE WAS A GREAT ARTICLE THAT CAME OUT EXPOSING ATLANTIC YARDS, WHICH WAS A 421A DEVELOPMENT.

>> NEW YORK CITY, A SUBSIDIZED PROJECT.

>> IT IS BUT I THINK WE CAN EXTRAPOLATE THIS SPECIFIC EXAMPLE TO AROUND THE STATE IT HAD AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS, I WOULD ARGUE NOT ENOUGH BUT WE'LL PUT THAT ASIDE FOR NOW.

THE ARTICLE IS REALLY CENTERED IN HOW THEY HADN'T MET THE AFFORDABLE REQUIREMENTS AND SO WAS THIS A SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM?

SHOULD THEIR TAX SUBSIDIES BE REVOKED?

WHAT I TOOK FROM THE ARTICLE WAS SOME REALLY INTERESTING FACTS, RIGHT?

YOU HAVE THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT COMES IN, AND PREDEVELOPMENT, IT WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS 20% WHITE, POST-DEVELOPMENT, IT'S A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS ALMOST 60% WHITE.

AND THE REASON THAT EXISTS IS BECAUSE ALL OF THE MARKET RATE RENTALS THAT ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND ANY NEW RESOURCES THAT COME INTO HISTORICAL DISINVESTED NEIGHBORHOODS WHICH ARE PREDOMINANTLY BLACK AND BROWN NEVER ACTUALLY GET TO BENEFIT FROM THEM BECAUSE WHAT WE SEE ARE RENTS INCREASED DUE TO PROXIMITY OF WEALTH AND WHITENESS.

IT HAS NO BEARING ON MATERIAL CONDITIONS OF THOSE UNITS, AND SO PEOPLE WHO HAVE SUFFERED THROUGH DISINVESTED NEIGHBORHOODS NEVER GET TO BENEFIT FROM THE INVESTMENT.

THEY'RE DISPLACED BY IT BECAUSE OF A MARKET RATE RENT GOUGING THAT IS ABLE TO HAPPEN IN PROXIMITY TO THE DEVELOPMENTS.

SO BEFORE WE CAN EVEN TALK ABOUT INCENTIVIZING THE DEVELOPMENTS IS A GOOD POLICY IDEA, WE HAVE TO HAVE PROTECTIONS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, FOR THE COMMUNITY, TO ENSURE THAT THESE INVESTMENTS BENEFIT THEM AND DON'T DISPLACE AND GENTRIFY THEM.

>> NEIL, I WANT TO TURN TO YOU, BUT FIRST I'M CURIOUS WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE ON PART OF THE GOVERNOR'S PLAN WITH REGARDS TO THE EXTENSION OR THE FUTURE LIFE OF 421A, THIS TAX CREDIT IN NEW YORK CITY THAT SUBSIDIZES OR AT LEAST DESIGNED TO SUBSIDIZE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THE GOVERNOR HAS SAID THIS IS SUPER POLITICALLY TOXIC BASED ON WHAT THE LEGISLATURE THINKS AND IF WE ARE GOING TO RENEW IT, IT IS GOING TO HAVE TO COME FROM THEM.

DO YOU THINK THAT THERE IS A VERSION OF 421A THAT THE DEMOCRATICALLY CONTROLLED STATE LEGISLATURE IS GOING TO GO FOR IN THE NEXT TWO MONTHS?

OR THIS IS PROPOSAL STILL DEAD SINCE IT DIED LAST SUMMER?

>> IT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

BEFORE I ANSWER IT, BECAUSE I DON'T QUITE KNOW THE ANSWER, I WANT TO MAKE THE POINT, WHICH IS WHAT REBECCA IS TALKING ABOUT MAY BE THE CASE IN TERMS OF A POLICY APPROACH.

BUT THE BIGGER ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IN THIS STATE OF NEW YORK AROUND HOUSING IS BUILDING AND FINANCING.

AND THAT'S WHY PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT THINGS LIKE 421A.

LET'S JUST TALK ABOUT ANY DEVELOPMENT, OKAY?

WE ARE IN A HIGH INTEREST RATE ENVIRONMENT, OKAY.

IT'S DIFFICULT TO FINANCE AND BRING CAPITAL TO PROJECTS, ESPECIALLY IF WE WANT TO CREATE AFFORDABLE UNITS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE BUILDING WE ARE DOING.

WHAT IS THE INCENTIVE FOR A DEVELOPER IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK, WITHOUT A SUBSIDY OF SOME KIND, WHY ARE THEY GOING TO BUILD ANYTHING BUT MARKET RATE?

THAT'S THE ISSUE THAT, I THINK FRANKLY IS GETTING A LITTLE LOST.

AND IN TERMS OF-- UNLESS WE GET AT FINANCING, ALL THESE POLICIES, FRANKLY, ARE A BIT MOOT BECAUSE THE POLICIES CAN ONLY COME INTO PLAY IF YOU HAVE FINANCING AT PLAY TO BUILD NEW HOUSING.

SO WE HAVE A LITTLE CHICKEN OR THE EGG HERE.

I THINK WITHOUT SOME NEW GENERATION OF 421A, WE ARE NOT GOING TO GET ANYWHERE CLOSE TO MEETING THESE HOUSING GOALS.

>> LET'S GO BACK TO THE QUESTION THOUGH, WHICH IS DO YOU THINK THIS LEGISLATURE, WHICH ALLOWED 421A TO EXPIRE LAST YEAR WHILE PEOPLE WERE MAKING THE ARGUMENTS THAT YOU MADE JUST NOW, IS THIS LEGISLATURE GOING TO GO ALONG WITH COMING UP WITH SOME SORT OF NEW SUBSIDIES, SOMETHING WOULD NEW ACCOUNTABILITY OR OVERSIGHT MEASURES?

>> IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE IT RIGHT NOW BUT I GOT TO TELL YOU THERE IS A REAL VACUUM AND REAL COMPRESSION THAT IS GOING TO NEED TO BE BROUGHT BY POLICY MAKERS, BY COMMUNITY LEADERS TO FIGURE THIS OUT.

WE HAD OUTMIGRATION, WE ARE LOSING POPULATION IN NEW YORK BECAUSE OF THE AFFORDABILITY CRISIS.

UNLESS WE FIGURE OUT HOW TO BUILD BOTH MARKET RATE AND DEEPLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM.

>> LIKE I AGREE WITH YOU AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT WE ARE NOT ANTIDEVELOPMENT.

BUT THE REALITY IS THAT DEVELOPERS WHO ARE GOING TO BUILD LUXURY UNITS ARE GOING TO PROFIT OFF OF THAT WHETHER INCENTIVIZED OR NOT.

SO THE DETAILS AROUND WHETHER AFFORDABILITY IS ATTACHED TO IT IS CRUCIAL.

AND WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE BROADER ECOSYSTEM OF THE IMPACT THAT YOU BUY WITH THOSE UNITS IN THAT SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT, THAT IT HAS ON THE MARKET RATE RENTS SURROUNDING IT.

BECAUSE YOU CAN END UP AT A NET NEGATIVE IN TERMS OF AFFORDABILITY WHEN YOU SUBSIDIZE A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS 10, 12, 15% AFFORDABLE UNITS AND 85% MARKET RATE WITH BELLS AND WHISTLES.

SURE, YOU BOUGHT THE 15% OF THE UNITS, AND YOU HAVE LOST THE AFFORDABILITY OF THE SURROUNDING UNITS DUE TO PROXIMITY.

SO IT IS NOT, IN MY MIND, A BINARY.

IT'S NOT-- IT'S HAPPENING IN NEW YORK CITY.

IT IS ABSOLUTELY HAPPENING.

>> YOU ARE GIVING AN EXAMPLE OF A 25-YEAR-OLD PROJECT.

THERE HAS BEEN ENORMOUS PROGRESS IN THE M.I.H.Z.Q.

ZONING.

THERE IS AFFORDABILITY THAT ARE MUCH MIRE RATES.

YOU ARE RATE, ATLANTIC YARDS DID HAVE A PROBLEM WITH EXECUTION, BUT THERE HAS BEEN AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF MATURATION OF REQUIREMENTS.

THE PROJECTS THAT ARE PASSING IN NEW YORK CITY RIGHT NOW ARE 40 AND 45% AFFORDABLE.

>> AND SO... >> THAT IS NOT REQUIRED UNDER 421A.

>> IT'S NOT REQUIRED, YOU ARE RIGHT.

>> I HAVE TO CUT YOU OFF.

AND I WANT TO... >> THERE SHOULD BE REQUIREMENTS.

>> CHAPIN IS GOING HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK HERE AND I'M LOVING THIS THOUGH.

YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO CONTINUE THIS AFTER THE SHOW.

I HOPE WE WILL HAVE A MEETING OF MINDS.

WE ARE GOING TO PIVOT TO SOMETHING ELSE ON THE HOUSING FRONT WHICH HAS TO DO WITH THE IDEA THAT THE GOVERNOR WANTS TO ESSENTIALLY LET THE STATE SET ITS OWN SORT OF REGULATIONS AND RULES IF REGIONS ARE NOT HITTING THEIR FUTURE NEW HOME CREATION GOALS, ESSENTIALLY, TO FAST TRACK HOUSING IF MAYBE ZONING OR LOCAL PLANNING BOARDS AREN'T ALLOWING ENOUGH NEW HOUSING.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF SOMETHING LIKE THAT?

IS THAT GOING TO HAVE BUY IN FROM THE STATE LEGISLATURE?

>> NOT FROM REPUBLICANS AND I'LL GET TO THAT BUT VERY QUICKLY.

I LOVE THAT.

THAT WAS A MICROCOSM OF HOW THE DEBATE IS GOING TO PLAY OUT IN NEW YORK STATE, THE DIFFERENT FAXES OF DEMOCRATIC INTERESTS WILL BATTLE IT OUT AND REPUBLICANS WILL JUMP IN.

>> I GET TO STAY OUT OF IT.

>> THE SENATE AND REPUBLICANS DON'T HAVE YOU TO MODERATE THE DISCUSSION.

AND I AGREEY WITH A LOT OF WHAT EACH OF THEM SAID, WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

WE ALSO NEED TO BE ABLE TO BUILD MORE HOUSING.

WHAT I WILL SAY AND MAYBE NO SURPRISE TO ANYONE ABOUT MY CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL BELIEFS, BUT THE HOUSING CRISIS IN NEW YORK IS 100% MAN MANMADE GOVERNMENT MADE CRISIS.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE NEW YORK CITY PROPERTY TAX SYSTEM IS SO OUT OF WHACK, YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH HOURS IN THE DAY TO EXPLAIN IT.

IT DISPROPORTIONATELY NEGATIVELY AFFECTS PEOPLE OF COLOR.

RENT REGULATIONS, ARTIFICIALLY DEFLATE THE AMOUNT OF HOUSING STOCK AND AVAILABILITY THERE IS AND IT'S NOT DARE I SAY A FREE MARKET SYSTEM AND THE GOVERNMENT COMES IN AND REGULATES AND REGULATES AND THE PROBLEMS ARE GETTING WORSE.

SO I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR WHAT THE PROBLEM IS.

SECONDLY, THAT LEADS RIGHT TO WHAT HOCHUL, I FORGET WHAT THE SLOGAN IS NOW, HOCHUL, NOT LOCAL.

IT IS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM FOR MULTIPLE REASONS.

IT'S BAD POLICY.

ANY TIME THE STATE TELLS A LOCALITY WHAT TO DO, I THINK WE SEE THAT IT DOESN'T WORK OUT VERY WELL.

SECONDLY IT'S GOING TO BE A HUGE POLITICAL PROBLEM FOR THE GOVERNOR.

MAYBE NOT THE LEGISLATURE, PROBABLY NOT THE LEGISLATURE BUT FOR THE GOVERNOR; FOR EXAMPLE, I GREW UP ON LONG ISLAND IN THE SUBURBS OF LONG ISLAND.

PEOPLE MOVE THERE BECAUSE OF THE COMMUNITIES LOOK A CERTAIN WAY, WHETHER THAT'S GOOD OR BAD, YOU KNOW, THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

THAT'S WHY THEY MOVE THERE.

THEY DO NOT WANT TO LIVE IN A CITY WHERE BIG BUILDINGS GO UP ALL THE TIME AND THERE ARE TONS OF PEOPLE.

THEY WANT TO LIVE, YOU KNOW, WHERE THEY WANT TO LIVE.

YOU WILL SEE SOME PRETTY POWERFUL INTERESTS AND VOTERS ON LONG ISLAND, FOR EXAMPLE, REACTING VERY POORLY TO NEW YORK STATE GOVERNMENT SAYING A GIANT SKY RISE OR LUXURY CONDOS, AFFORDABLE OR NOT, RIGHT?

, INCLUDING AFFORDABLE OR NOT, THERE IS GOING TO BE PUSH BACK ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

SHE IS GOING TO HAVE TO PICK AND CHOOSE.

SHE IS GOING TO NEED TO PUT POINTS ON THE BOARD.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WILL GET THAT DONE FOR HER.

>> WE HAVE TO MOVE ON TO ANOTHER TOPIC.

WE ARE GOING TO SKIP THE GOVERNOR'S REMARKS ABOUT THE MINIMUM WAGE WHICH IS PART OF HER AFFORDABILITY PUSH AND WE ARE GOING TO PIVOT TO AN INTERVIEW WE DID WITH STATE SENATE LABOR COMMITTEE CHAIR JESSICA RAMOS WHO HAS HER OWN PROPOSAL TO RAISE MINIMUM WAGE SIMILAR TO THE GOVERNORS IN THE SENSE THAT THEY'RE BOTH TYING A FUTURE RATE INCREASES TO INFLATION.

BUT THE SENATOR'S PLAN IS GOING TO HAVE A LEAST $5 INCREASE THAT GETS PHASED IN OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS.

WE SPOKE REMOTELY WITH THE SENATOR IN JANUARY.

HERE IS A BIT OF THAT CONVERSATION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR TAKING THE TIME, SENATOR.

I APPRECIATE.

>> IT THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HAVING ME.

>> ON JANUARY 10, WE HAD THE GOVERNOR'S STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS AND ONE OF THE BIG PROPOSALS SHE LAID OUT BEFORE A JOINT SESSION OF THE LEGISLATURE IS THE IDEA OF INCREASING NEW YORK'S MINIMUM WAGE, SOMETHING THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE, AT LEAST THROUGH STATUTE, IN MORE THAN SIX YEARS.

WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION TO THE PROPOSAL?

>> I WAS SO HAPPY!

I STOOD UP AND GAVE, YOU KNOW, A HUGE ROUND OF APPLAUSE TO THE GOVERNOR.

TO ME IT'S AN ADMISSION THAT THE COST OF LIVING IN NEW YORK IS WAY TOO HIGH RIGHT NOW.

AND EVERYONE IS FEELING THE SQUEEZE.

I THINK WHERE WE NEED TO IRON OUT DETAILS, AND OF COURSE THIS WILL HAPPEN THROUGHOUT BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS, IS ENSURING THAT WE ARE NOT COD CODIFYING POVERTY WAGES BECAUSE PART OF MY PROPOSAL THAT SHE DID TALK ABOUT WAS TAKING THE MINIMUM WAGE TO INFLATION, WHICH IS FANTASTIC.

BUT WE NEED TO RAISE IT TO A LIVING WAGE BEFORE WE DO THAT OR ELSE WE ARE JUST CODIFYING THOSE POVERTY WAGES AND THAT DOESN'T ACTUALLY HELP ANYONE.

>> WHAT IS THE HIGHER WAGE THAT YOU WANT TO SEE SET FOR NEW YORK'S MINIMUM WAGE BEFORE THAT AUTOMATIC TRIGGERING OF INCREASED WAGES TAKES EFFECT?

>> YEAH, DAVE, I'D LIKE TO SEE THE MINIMUM WAGE IN NEW YORK GO UP TO $21.25 BY THE YEAR 2026 AND THEN TAKE IT TO INFLATION.

THIS WILL ACTUALLY GIVE THREE MILLION PEOPLE A RAISE OF OVER $3,000 IN THE FIRST YEAR.

AND BY THE WAY, A QUARTER OF THE MINIMUM WAGE EARNERS IN NEW YORK STATE ARE ACTUALLY PARENTS OF YOUNG CHILDREN.

SO WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.

WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SINGLE ADULTS.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BREAD WINNERS, PEOPLE WHO ARE RAISING FAMILIES.

AND WITH THE RENTS BEING TIE HIGH AND THAT HAS BEEN TRUE FOR A LONG TIME, BUT MAINLY THE MAIN TRUTH IN NEW YORK STATE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SEEN GROCERIES ALSO GO UP.

GASOLINE AND SO MANY OTHERS THINGS THAT ARE CRUCIAL TO A NEW YORKER'S DAILY LIFE.

SO WE NEED FOLKS TO NOT ONLY BE ABLE TO KEEP UP WITH THOSE COSTS, BUT WE WANT THEM TO HAVE SOME EXTRA SPENDING MONEY.

WE WANT THEM TO HAVE SOME DISPOSABLE INCOME SO THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE TO PATRONIZE OUR SMALL BUSINESSES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.

RIGHT NOW MY DISTRICT, WHICH IS WELL KNOWN FOR, YOU KNOW, DIVERSITY AND THEREFORE IT'S DELICIOUS FOOD, OUR RESTAURANTS ARE SUFFERING AND JANUARY IS A ROUGH MONTH AFTER THE HOLIDAYS BUT THE TRUTH IS PEOPLE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH MONEY TO SPEND AND SUPPORT OUR SMALL BUSINESSES DURING THIS TIME AS THEY USUALLY DO.

SO THIS WOULD GO A LONG WAY IN HELPING NEW YORK'S ECONOMY IN THAT WAY.

>> THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL INCLUDES OFF RAMPS TO STOP INCREASES IN THE FUTURE, ESSENTIALLY IF THE ECONOMY IS DEEMED NOT TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF MINIMUM WAGE HIKES AND WOULD ALLOW FOR CAPS ON THE GROWTH OF THE MINIMUM WAGE IF INFLATION IS AS HIGH WAS IT HAS BEEN.

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE CARVEOUTS SHE IS PROPOSING?

>> I DON'T LIKE THEM.

THAT'S WHY I SAY THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING.

WE CAN'T CODIFY POVERTY WAGES IN NEW YORK STATE.

PEGGING THE MINIMUM WAGE TO INFLATION IS VERY SMART.

THEY DO IT IN 17 OTHER STATES.

WE ARE THE ONES WHO ARE BEHIND HERE.

BUT WE CAN'T DO THAT WHERE THE MINIMUM WAGE IS RIGHT NOW.

$15 HAS BEEN THE MINIMUM WAGE SINCE 2019 AND QUITE FRANKLY, IT HASN'T BEEN ENOUGH FOR A WHILE, EVEN BEFORE THE PANDEMIC PEOPLE WERE HAVING TROUBLE MAKING ENDS MEET.

INCOME INEQUALITY IN NEW YORK STATE HAD BEEN AT ITS HIGHEST ALREADY.

SO WE CAN'T PEG IT TO INFLATION AT $15.

IT NEEDS TO GO UP.

>> SO BUSINESS GROUPS HAVE RESPONDED WITH THIS IDEA THAT A MORE TARGETED APPROACH TO HELPING LOW INCOME NEW YORKERS WOULD BE AN EXPANSION OF THE STATE'S EARNED INCOME TAX CREDIT IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU VIEW AS A POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE OR IS THAT SOMETHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE?

>> WORKING FAMILIES NEED THAT TAX CREDIT, TOO.

IT'S NOT ONE OR THE OTHER.

WHILE WE HAVE SEEN THIS 40-YEAR INFLATION HIGH, WE ARE SEEING A HIGH IN CORPORATE PROFITS OF 70 YEARS.

THERE IS A TON OF MONEY THAT C.E.O.s AND BIG BUSINESS OWNERS HAVE BEEN HOARDING.

IT IS NOT FAIR TO SAY TO WORKING FAMILIES IN NEW YORK STATE THAT IT'S ONE THING OR THE OTHER.

NO!

IT'S THE EARNED CHILD CREDIT.

IT'S RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE AND PEGGING IT TO INFLATION.

IT'S UNIVERSAL CHILD CARE.

AND IT'S ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO HELP OUR ECONOMY GET ON TO A PROPER RECOVERY THAT ACTUALLY SHIFTS THAT PARADIGM SO THAT WORKING FAMILIES DON'T HAVE TO FEEL THE SQUEEZE, YOU KNOW, AND MAKE DECISIONS BETWEEN PAYING RENT AND PAYING MEDICAL BILLS OR PAYING FOR MEDICINE AT THIS CRUCIAL TIME.

THEY CAN'T CONTINUE TO PIT ONE IDEA AGAINST THE OTHER WHEN ALL WE HAVE DONE IS GIVE THEM, THE BILLIONAIRES AND THE CORPORATIONS, TAX BREAKS AND ALL SORTS OF ADVANTAGES SO THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE BEING RICH WHILE THE POOREST NEW YORKERS ARE BEING EVICTED FROM THEIR APARTMENTS.

>> YOU MENTIONED THE CORPORATE PROFITS THAT WE HAVE SEEN IN RECENT YEARS.

AND I THINK THERE IS A GENERAL ASSUMPTION THAT CORPORATIONS ARE MORE EQUIPPED TO HANDLE MINIMUM WAGE INCREASES THAN SAY THOSE ANECDOTAL MOM AND MOP ORGANIZATIONS MOM AND POP ORGANIZATIONS GETTING BY BY THE SKIN OF THEIR TEETH.

WITH THAT CONSIDERATION, SHOULD THERE BE DIFFERENT MIMOSAS BASED ON THE EMPLOYERS, THE SIZE OF THE EMPLOYERS, AND WHAT ABOUT MINIMUM WAGE DIFFERENCES BASED ON PARTS OF THE STATE WHERE THE COST OF LIVING IS DIFFERENT?

>> SO THERE SHOULD NOT BE DIFFERENT MIMOSAS.

MY-- MIMOSAS.

THERE SHOULD NOT BE DIFFERENT MINIMUM WAGES.

WE DO WANT PEOPLE TO MAKE A LIVING WAGE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE BUT I THINK WE SHOULD DO MORE FOR SMALL BUSINESSES.

WE COULD HAVE PASSED THE RESTAURANT REVITALIZATION ACT WHICH WOULD HAVE HELPED OUR RESTAURANTS DURING THAT TRYING TIME WHEN CORPORATIONS WITH FANCY LAWYERS WERE ABLE TO AFFORD FOR PPP BY MY NEIGHBORS WHO ARE BUSINESS OWNERS WERE NOT.

THERE IS AN IMBALANCE THAT NEEDS TO BE TALKED ABOUT.

I DON'T LIKE ONE THING ALL OF THE BUSINESSES IN BUS IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IF ANY BUSINESS CANNOT AFFORD TO PAY THEIR WORKERS A LIVING WAGE, IF YOU CANNOT PAY A LIVING WAGE, THEN YOU DO NOT HAVE A VIABLE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

YOU CANNOT PRETEND THAT SOMEONE IS GOING TO HELP YOU MACK PROFIT BUT IS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO LIVE A DIGNIFIED LIFE IN OUR STATE WE HAVE BEEN SPEAKING WITH EXPWREART JESSICA RAMOS, THANK YOU FOR TALKING WITH US.

>> THAT WAS THE MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR'S LEFT FLANK ON THE ISSUE OF MINIMUM WAGE.

SO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT MIGHT END UP HAPPENING IN NEW YORK, WHAT WILL THE FUTURE MINIMUM WAGE LOOK LIKE BECAUSE IF THE GOVERNOR IS ON BOARD WITH MINIMUM WAGE AND THE LEGISLATURE IS ON BOARD WITH MINIMUM WAGE, I THINK WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A MINIMUM WAGE HIKE THIS YEAR.

>> I THINK WE WILL AND IT'S LONG OVERDUE, FRANKLY.

NEW YORK IN 2015 AND 2016 LED THE WAY WITH THE FAST FOOD MINIMUM WAGE AND THEN MOVED AHEAD ON THE FIGHT FOR 15, BUT FRANKLY AS THE SENATOR POINTED OUT, HAS BEEN LANGUISHING SINCE.

WE HAVE 17 OTHER STATES THAT HAVE TIED THE MINIMUM WAGE TO THE INDEX OF INFLATION.

IT'S A NO BRAINER, FRANKLY.

IT IS AN ISSUE THAT REPUBLICANS AND INDEPENDENTS SUPPORT BY A CLEAR MAJORITY, BOTH OF THEM, EVEN REPUBLICANS, A MARKET OF REPUBLICANS SUPPORT-- MAJORITY OF REPUBLICANS SUPPORT RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE.

THIS IS A POLITICAL WINNER UP AND DOWN.

I THINK IT'S A NO BRAINER.

ONE OF THE FEW AREAS WHERE THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR CAN COME TOGETHER IN A FRICTIONLESS, YOU KNOW, DYNAMIC... >> FRICTIONLESS?

YOU THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE WITHOUT FRICTION?

I THINK THERE ARE GOING TO BE BUMPY PARTS.

THERE IS THERE GOING TO BE A PUSH TO RAISE THE WAGE.

THE SENATOR WANTS TO BUMP IT UP TO $21 AND CHANGE BY 2026 IN NEW YORK CITY.

IS THAT WHAT ENDS UP GETTING DONE?

>> I THINK THAT IS CLEARLY THE GOAL, THE DESTINATION.

WHEN ARE A LOT OF CAMPAIGNERS ARE PUSHING AND OTHER STATES AND CITIES AS WELL.

SO I THINK RAMOS IS CLEARLY A LEADER ON THIS ISSUE.

I THINK SHE IS STAKING OUT A SMART AND STRATEGIC APPROACH TO THIS.

SHE IS BRINGING ALLIES AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT.

AND THE GOVERNOR, FRANKLY, PAYS ATTENTION TO THE LABOR MOVEMENT, AS WE'VE SEEN NOT WITH NOTWITHSTANDING THE LASALLE SITUATION.

>> CHAPIN, AS NEAL MENTIONED, A RECENT POLL TELLS US 50% OF NEW YORKERS SUPPORT RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE TIED TO INFLATION.

THE LAST TIME WE HAD A MINIMUM WAGE HIKE IT WAS SENATE REPUBLICANS THAT CHAMPIONED IT THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS.

WHAT DO YOU THINK REPUBLICANS COULD OR SHOULD DO?

IS IT THE CASE THEY SHOULD RALLY BEHIND THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE WHICH IS PROBABLY THE GOVERNOR'S PLAN, SOMETHING THE BUSINESS COUNCIL IS TAKING A PRAGMATIC LOOK AT?

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> SO WE LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD.

WE LIVE IN A BLUE PROGRESSIVE STATE CONTROLLED BY DEMOCRATS SO I AGREE I THINK THERE WILL BE A MINIMUM WAGE HIKE AND REPUBLICANS WILL TRY TO MAKE IT AS PALATABLE AS THEY CAN.

BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY ABOUT THIS ISSUE IS THAT THIS IS YET ANOTHER PROBLEM TOTALLY CREATED BY GOVERNMENT AND THEN GOVERNMENT IS TRYING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM WITH YET ANOTHER PROBLEM.

NEW YORK IS ONE OF THE MOST, IF NOT THE MOST EXPENSIVE PLACES TO LIVE IN THE COUNTRY.

WHY DON'T WE-- RATHER THAN PUTTING MORE BURDENS ON SMALL BUSINESSES AND INCREASING PRICES FOR CONSUMERS, WHY DON'T WE HELP THE MINIMUM WAGE WORKERS BY CUTTING THEIR TAXES THAT WAS MENTIONED, MAKING IT MORE AFFORDABLE IN THE CITY, CUTTING REGULATIONS, PUTTING MORE MONEY BACK IN INTO THEIR POCKETS?

SHE MENTIONED, THE SENATOR MENTIONED RESTAURANTS BEING HIT HARD.

DO WE THINK THAT THEM HAVING TO RAISE THE COST OF THEIR GOODS OR THEIR MEALS ALREADY ON TOP OF THE INCREASED COST OF GOODS BECAUSE OF THIS GIANT MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE DO YOU THINK THAT'S GOING TO HELP RESTAURANTS OR HURT THEM?

MAYBE RESTAURANTS.

IT WOULD BE EASIER TO OPEN A RESTAURANT IF THEY WERE NOT REGULATED OUT OF BUSINESS.

IF THE PREVIOUS MAYOR DIDN'T SPEND A LOT OF TIME TRYING TO SHUT BUSINESSES EVERYWHERE HE WENT PANDEMIC OR NOT PANDEMIC.

THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS YOU MIGHT BE DOING TO MAKE IT AFFORDABLE IN NEW YORK.

RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE IS ONE OF THEM.

>> REBECCA, THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR LETTING US MOVE ON TO THE NEXT TOPIC AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT NEAL MENTIONED IN PASSING, THE NOMINATION OF JUDGE HECTOR LASALLE TO SERVE AS THE CHIEF JUDGE FOR THE STATE'S COURT OF APPEALS AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS SQUARED OFF THE STATE SENATE AGAINST THE GOVERNOR.

AND THEY ARE NOW GOING INTO TWO MONTHS OF POTENTIAL INTENSE NEGOTIATIONS.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THE SENATE'S REJECTION AT LEAST SO FAR CHIEF JUDGE LASALLE, TITLE HE MAY OR MAY NOT EVER HAVE, WILL MEAN FOR THE NEXT TWO MONTHS?

THERE IS A LIKELIHOOD THAT THE LEGISLATURE PARTICULARLY THE SENATE IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO WORK IN A COOPERATIVE MANNER WITH THE GOVERNOR?

THIS IS GOVERNOR GOING TO WANT TO WORK WITH SENATE MAJORITY LEADER ANDREA COUSINS.

YOU HAVE BEEN AROUND THE BLOCK.

>> I THINK THE SENATE DEFINITELY WOULD WANT TO DO THAT.

PEOPLE VOTED ACCORDING TO WHAT THEY THINK WAS THE MANDATE FOR THEIR CONSTITUENTS FROM THEIR CONSTITUENTS, RIGHT?

AND SO THIS IS A PROCESS THAT PLAYS OUT NOT JUST IN NEW YORK BUT AROUND THE COUNTRY WHERE THESE APPOINTMENTS, RIGHT, ARE HANDLED BY ELECTED OFFICIALS.

AND SO EACH SENATE MEMBER DID THEIR DUE DILIGENCE IN RESPONDING TO WHAT THEIR CONSTITUENTSCY FEEDBACK WAS AND IT WAS OVERWHELMING THAT THIS WAS NOT THE RIGHT CHOICE AT THE RIGHT TIME.

I WOULD HOPE THIS WOULD NOT BE SEEN AS A SHOT ACROSS THE BOW AND AN INDICATOR OF BEING ABLE TO WORK TOGETHER.

DO I FEAR THAT'S A POSSIBILITY?

OF COURSE.

I WOULD HOPE THE GOVERNOR WOULD REALIZE THIS IS PART OF THE PROCESS AND GOVERNING AND WOULD NOT HOLD PREVIOUS RESENTMENTS OR BATTLES AS SHE GOES INTO DECISION MAKING ON FUTURE ISSUES.

DO I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE?

SADLY, I DO.

>> YOU ARE A BIG WIG IN DEMOCRATIC POLITICS, WHAT DO YOU THINK, IF YOU COULD ADVISE THE GOVERNOR ABOUT WHAT TO DO NEXT AS SHE APPROACHES HER STATE BUDGET AND LOOKS TO HAVE SUCCESSFUL LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

SHOULD SHE, FOR EXAMPLE, BRING A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE SENATE TO FORCE A FULL FLOOR VOTE ON HECTOR LASALLE.

YOU ARE SHAKING YOUR HEAD NO.

SHOULD SHE LIGHT THE CAPITOL ON FIRE, LOCK THE DOORS?

WHAT WOULD YOU BE TELLING HER TO DO RIGHT NOW?

>> I AGREEY WITH REBECCA IN SO FAR AS I THINK IT'S IN THE GOVERNOR'S INTEREST TO MOVE ON FROM THIS EPISODE AND TRY TO BUILD A MORE DURABLE RELATIONSHIP.

I MEAN ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK SHE HAS GOING FOR HER IS THE PREVIOUS GOVERNOR, I THINK WE ALL KNOW, OFTEN LED BY EGO AND GOVERNED BY EGO AND I THINK WE HAVE A DIFFERENT DYNAMIC WITH THIS LEADER IN THAT WE HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR LEADERS TO HAVE DISAGREEMENTS, BUT NOT HAVE IT DEFINE THE RELATIONSHIP AND THE WORK THAT THEY DO ON BEHALF OF THEIR CONSTITUENTS.

AND SO MY HOPE REALLY IS, YES, WE WERE ALL ENRAPTURED BY THE POLITICS AND THE INFIGHTING AROUND THIS AND WHO WAS UP AND WHO WAS DOWN AND WHO IS GOING TO BE MORE POWERFUL AND WHAT THE PERCEPTION IS BUT THE REALITY IS THE WORK OF THE LEGISLATURE AND THAT THE GOVERNOR NEEDS TO DO ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE OF NEW YORK NEEDS TO GO ON.

THERE IS A LOT OF CRITICAL ISSUES.

I AM ONE WHO TENDS TO THINK THEY'RE GOING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MOVE ON AND WORK TOGETHER AND THAT THIS IS NOT A CUOMO SORT OF INSPIRED APPROACH TO GOVERNING WHERE IT'S SCORCHED EARTH ONCE YOU CROSS THEM.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE LIKELIHOOD OF, YOU KNOW, LINGERING TENSION IS POSSIBLE, BUT I THINK IT'S IN EVERYONE'S INTERESTS TO MOVE PAST THIS AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET A LOT DONE.

>> CHAPIN, THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME SHADE OF ANDREW CUOMO IN THE WAY THE GOVERNOR IS APPROACHING THIS RIGHT NOW BUT IT'S NOT CLEAR THAT SHE IS ABLE TO WIELD HER POWER AS EFFECTIVELY AS THE FORMER GOVERNOR DID, BECAUSE EVEN WHEN THE LEGISLATURE HATED HIM, HE WAS ABLE TO GET HIS PRIORITIES THROUGH.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THIS GOVERNOR'S ABILITY TO NAVIGATE THE MINE FIELDS OF HER OWN CREATION?

>> I STILL THINK IT'S VERY EARLY IN HER TENURE TO REALLY ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

WE STILL NEED TO SEE HOW SHE HANDLES THE SITUATION.

BUT.

>> SHOULDN'T IT BE DONE BY NOW.

>> DO I HAVE TO COMMENT AT ALL?

CAN I CONTINUE TO WATCH THE DEMOCRATS BEAT EACH OTHER UP OVER THIS?

>> YOU CAN.

WE CAN MOVE ON.

>> BUT QUICKLY I DO THINK IT WAS A FLEX OF MUSCLE THAT DIDN'T WORK ON THE GOVERNOR'S BEHALF AND THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE FOR THE LEGISLATURE.

DID THEY DO IT FOR JUST THAT PURPOSE?

I DON'T THINK SO.

BUT WE'LL HAVE TO SEE HOW SHE HANDLES IT.

SHE COULD HANDLE IT DIPLOMATICALLY AND MOVE ON AND GET ANOTHER GOOD CHOICE AND CONTINUE TO WORK WITH DEMOCRATS OR SHE COULD GO TO BATTLE.

I SUSPECT IT'S GOING TO BE THE FORMER.

I SUSPECT SHE, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, SHE IS GOING TO NEED TO PUT SOME WINS ON THE BOARD THAT WILL COME IN THE BUDGET SEASON PROBABLY BUT SHE NEEDS TO PUT WINS ON THE BOARD AND SOME BIG ONES.

LITTLE ONES AND BIG ONES.

SO I THINK YOU WILL SEE HER TRY TO WORK WITH THE VERY POWERFUL LEGISLATURE.

ANDREW CUOMO DID NOT HAVE AS POWERFUL A LEGISLATURE SO HIS POLITICAL REALITY WAS DIFFERENT FOR MANY REASONS.

>> REBECCA, THIS IS A LEGISLATURE THAT IS POWERFUL IN ITS NUMBERS IN TERMS OF THE SIZE OF THE DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY.

BUT UNTIL THIS REJECTION OF A JUDGE NOMINEE BY THE GOVERNOR, WE HADN'T SEEN THEM FLEX THEIR MUSCLES A LOT.

FOR EXAMPLE, THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANY VETO OVERRIDES.

SO IS THERE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A LEGISLATURE THAT IS GOING TO HAVE ITS WAY WITH THE GOVERNOR IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY IN 2023?

>> I THINK THIS IS A LEGISLATURE THAT IS UNIQUELY ALIGNED IN THEIR PRIORITIES AND WILLING TO STAND TOGETHER TO PASS... >> THE HOUSES YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT?

>> I DO AND I DON'T THINK THE HOPE IS THAT THAT MEANS GOING INTO A BATTLE WITH THE GOVERNOR.

I THINK THE HOPE IS THAT CONSENSUS INCLUDES THE GOVERNOR AND PASSING A BUDGET THAT ARE VERY MUCH IN LINE WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PRIORITIES THAT AROUND EVERYDAY NEW YORKERS AND WORKING CLASS PEOPLE.

BUT I DO THINK THIS ABSOLUTELY FEELS LIKE A UNIQUE YEAR WHERE THE LEGISLATURE FEELS EMPOWERED TO USE THEIR ALIGNMENTS TO REALLY STAND FIRM ON SOME THINGS THAT NEW YORKERS DESPERATELY NEED.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE HOPE IS THAT THE GOVERNOR JOINS THAT FIGHT.

AND IT DOESN'T BECOME A FIGHT WITH HER.

>> WE ONLY HAVE A FEW SECONDS LEFT BUT IS THERE AN ISSUE OR TWO THAT YOU THINK THE LEGISLATURE IN TERMS OF THE ASSEMBLY AND SENATE WILL COME TOGETHER AND SORT OF LEAD ON?

IS IT HOUSING, HEALTHCARE?

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> I THINK HOUSING IS PROBABLY THE BEST EXAMPLE, THOUGH THERE WILL BE OTHERS.

THERE IS HUGE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN WHERE THE GOVERNOR IS ON HER HOUSING PROPOSAL AND WHERE THE LEGISLATURE IS ON THEIR HOUSING PROPOSAL.

AND SO MY HOPE IS THAT THEY CAN WORK TOGETHER TO PASS WHAT NEEDS TO BE A ROBUST AND NOT MYOPIC PACKAGE.

BUT TO BE DETERMINED BUT I DO THINK THIS IS AN AREA WHERE THEY'RE WILLING TO FLEX THEIR WEIGHT.

>> YOU HAVE FIVE SECONDS.

WHAT IS THE LEGISLATURE GOING TO LEAD ON THIS YEAR IF ANYTHING?

FIVE SECONDS GO.

>> I THINK ON SOME CLIMATE AND ENERGY, CLEAN ENERGY AND CLIMATE I THINK WE WILL SEE SOME STUFF THE LEGISLATURE LEADING ON ESPECIALLY ON ELECTRIFICATION AND DECARBONIZATION ON BUILDINGS WHICH ARE THE LARGEST SOURCES OF EMISSIONS IN NEW YORK >> AND UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S ALL THE TIME WE HAVE TODAY.

MY THANKS TO CITIZEN ACTION'S REBECCA GARARRD, ACTUM'S CHAPIN FAY AND METROPOLITAN PUBLIC STRATEGIES'S NEAL KWATRA.

BOY ALL THESE NAMES AND TITLES ARE HARD TO SAY.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO REVISIT THIS EPISODE - OR DIG INTO THE CONNECT NEW YORK ARCHIVES - VISIT WCNY ORNT ORG/CONNECTNEW YORK.

ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE TEAM AT WCNY - I'M DAVID LOMBARDO - NO FIGHT WILL NEEDED.

THANKS FOR WATCHING.