[ THEME MUSIC ] >> WELCOME TO THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF "NEW YORK NOW."

I'M SHANTEL DESTRA.

EACH AND EVERY YEAR AT STATE CAPITAL, THERE'S A PUSH BY HUMAN SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS FOR A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT, OR COLA, WHICH WOULD INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF STATE SUPPORT THEY RECEIVE.

THE STATE CONTRACTS HUMAN SERVICES WORK FOR MANY NONPROFIT TO PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR HOSPITALS, REHABILITATION CENTERS, FOSTER CARE CENTERS, NURSING HOMES, AND EDUCATIONAL SERVICES.

THIS YEAR, GOVERNOR KATHIE HOCHUL HAS PROPOSED A 1.7% INCREASE TO SUPPORT THAT WORK.

ADVOCATES SAY THAT IS FAR FROM WHERE THEY WOULD LIKE THE BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS TO LAND.

THEY ARGUE THE RISING COST OF INFLATION PUTS A FINANCIAL STRAIN ON THEIR ALREADY TIGHT BUDGETS AND ARE PUSHING FOR A 2.7% COLA INCREASE.

DAVID LOMBARDO OF WNCY'S CAPITOL PRESS ROOM, SPOKE WITH BILL GETTMAN, THE CEO OF NORTHERN RIVERS FAMILY OF SERVICES, FOR MORE ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE.

HERE'S THAT CONVERSATION.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> THANKS FOR TAKING THE TIME, BILL.

I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

>> GREAT TO BE HERE, DAVID.

>> LET'S BEGIN WITH A RECURRING ISSUE.

IT HAS A NEW NAME, BUT IT'S THE SAME ISSUE AND IT HAS TO DO WITH THE COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT THAT NONPROFIT PROVIDERS ARE CONSTANTLY LOOKING FOR FROM THE STATE TO KEEP UP WITH THAT COST OF LIVING BECAUSE EVERYTHING, WHETHER IT'S LABOR OR KEEPING THE LIGHTS ON, GETS MORE EXPENSIVE EVERY YEAR AND COMING INTO THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A 2.7% COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT.

THE GOVERNOR IN HER BUDGET PROPOSAL CAME OUT WITH 1.7%.

OBVIOUSLY NOT WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.

WHAT'S THE SUBSTANTIVE DIFFERENCE THERE?

WHAT DOES IT MEAN THAT ONE PERCENTAGE POINT DIFFERENCE?

DOES IT MEANS DOOR OPEN, OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE PAPERED OVER?

>> IT CAN'T BE PAPERED OVER.

RIGHT NOW, WORKFORCE IS UNDERPAID AND OUR COSTS ARE GOING UP.

INFLATION IS GOING UP.

FOOD IS UP ABOVE 14%.

INSURANCE IS UP NORTH OF 15% FOR MOST AGENCIES AND OUR WORKFORCE HAS TO PAY THEIR BILLS.

THE GOVERNOR DID PUT IN 1.7 IN HER BUDGET AND WE APPRECIATE THAT.

COST OF LIVING FOR-- AS CALCULATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS 2.7.

SO WE NEED AN ADDITIONAL ONE PERCENT.

THAT VALUE IS ABOUT $100 MILLION, AND THAT MONEY IS GOING TO GO INTO THE PAYCHECK AND THE POCKETS OF OUR FRONTLINE WORKERS WHO ARE WOEFULLY UNDERPAID.

AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE HOPING THAT THE ADDITIONAL ONE PERCENT CAN HELP US REDUCE OUR TURNOVER, TURNOVER IN OUR SECTOR RANGES FROM 25 TO 50% DEPENDING ON WHAT KIND OF WORK YOU DO.

THAT HAS AN IMPACT ON QUALITY, CUSTOMER SERVICE, AND COSTS.

>> WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE HERE, THIS IS, IN MANY CASES, DIRECT HANDS-ON CARE FOR SOME OF THE MOST VULNERABLE IN SOCIETY.

PEOPLE WITH MENTAL HEALTH CONDITIONS, PEOPLE WHO MIGHT HAVE A DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITY, RIGHT?

>> THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO WORK 24 HOURS A DAY, 7 DAYS A WEEK.

THESE ARE FOLKS WHO RUN THE GROUP HOME OR MANY RESIDENTS GO ON A MOBILE CRISIS CALLS OR DO MENTAL HEALTH IN THE COMMUNITY.

THEY ARE THERE HANDS ON, DESPITE THE WEATHER, DESPITE THE CONDITIONS, AND WE NEED THEM TO BE OUT THERE TO PROTECT OUR KIDS AND FAMILIES IN THE COMMUNITY AND TORE THOSE KIDS WHO NEED INSTITUTIONAL OR GROUP CARE, THEY'RE THE ONES WHO TAKE CARE OF THEM ON SATURDAY NIGHT AT 2:00 IN THE MORNING.

>> THE BUDGET PROCESS IS A NEGOTIATION PROCESS AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STRUCK ME WHEN I HEARD THE 2.7% ASK WAS WHY ONLY 2.7%?

BECAUSE ONE COMES IN HIGH, ONE COMES IN LOW.

YOU SETTLE IN THE MIDDLE.

DO YOU HAVE ANY REGRETS ABOUT SETTING WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE MORE REALISTIC NUMBER?

DO YOU WISH YOU HAD SAID, HEY, LET'S DO 4% AND MAYBE LAND AT THAT 2.7% FROM THE GOVERNOR?

>> THERE'S TWO PARTS TO THAT.

ONE IS WE WANT TO STAY TRUE TO THE COST OF LIVING INCREASES.

2.7 IS THE CPI.

THERE'S A FACTUAL BASIS.

THE BUDGET FOLKS ALWAYS SAY, WHAT'S YOUR RATIONALE?

PULLING IT OUT OF THIN AIR DOESN'T REALLY CONVINCE THE POLICYMAKERS.

>> THERE'S MATH YOU COULD LEAN ON.

YOU COULD SAY, WELL, YOU HAVEN'T KEPT UP IN THOSE PAST YEARS SO WE GOT TO MAKE UP FOR SOME OF THOSE YEARS AS WELL.

>> WELL, WE WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO THE FINANCIAL STRUCTURE OF THE STATE RIGHT NOW.

BUDGET IS ALWAYS A MOVING DOCUMENT.

WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO TAKE 5% OR 6%, AS WAS SUGGESTED BY SOME MEMBERS IN THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING PROCESS, BUT WE DIDN'T WANT TO BE-- YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO BE HONEST STEWARDS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S MONEY.

>> WELL, STICKING WITH THAT IDEA OF RECOGNIZING THAT THERE ARE LIMITED RESOURCES, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'RE LOOKING FOR FROM THE STATE IN THE BUDGET PROCESS OR MAYBE A STAND-ALONE BILL THAT YOU THINK WILL MAKE YOUR OPERATIONS EITHER MORE SUSTAINABLE OR HAVE OTHER POSITIVE IMPACTS?

>> I THINK THERE'S WAYS TO CREATE DEFICIENCIES IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES.

WE HAVE A NINE-POINT PLAN CALLED CUT THE RED TAPE, CUT THE RED TAPE, AND THESE ARE IDEAS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TOGETHER BY OUR SOCIAL WORKERS, OUR DIRECT CARE WORKERS, OUR ASSOCIATIONS.

HOW DO WE MAKE DELIVERY SERVICE MORE EFFICIENT?

FOR-PROFIT COMPANIES DO THIS EVERY SINGLE DAY?

HOW DO YOU IMPROVE YOUR PROCESS TO REDUCE COSTS, MAKE THE EXPERIENCE OF DEALING WITH YOU EASIER AND FASTER, AND MAKE IT MORE SATISFYING?

SO WE HAVE NINE BIG BUCKETS OF ITEMS THAT WE WANT TO REDUCE, REDUCE THE REGULATIONS.

NEW YORK STATE HAS THE SECOND MOST REGULATIONS IN THE COUNTRY.

ONLY TO CALIFORNIA.

WE HAVE 300,000 REGULATIONS IN THIS STATE TAKING UP THREE MILLION WORDS.

WE CAN DO A BETTER JOB OF DELIVERING SERVICES IF WE CUT THE RED TAPE.

A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES.

>> SURE.

>> FIRST OFF, IF YOU COME TO WORK FOR ME AND WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU A GREAT BACK SUCH GROUND CHECK AND CHECK YOUR FINGERPRINTS AND CHILD ABUSE HISTORY AND ALL THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, YOU WALK ACROSS OUR PARKING LOT AND WORK IN A MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAM, WE HAVE TO RECLEAR YOU AGAIN AT THE SAME COST, WITH THE SAME RIGOR WITH THE SAME DELAYS.

THAT MAKES NO SENSE.

WE HAVE TECHNOLOGY TODAY.

WE HAVE AI.

WE HAVE SMART PEOPLE WHO CAN PUT AN EMPLOYEE PASSPORT, FOR INSTANCE.

THAT MAKES COMMON SENSE.

SAVES MONEY AND SPEEDS UP THE HIRING PROCESS WHICH HELPS CLIENTS.

THE OTHER AREA WE TALK ABOUT A LOT IS THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS.

IF YOU COME INTO OUR SYSTEMS, MENTAL HEALTH, CHILD WELFARE, OASIS, OPWDD, YOU GET ASSESSED FOR WHAT YOUR BACKGROUND IS, WHAT YOUR MENTAL HEALTH DIAGNOSIS IS, BUT IF YOU MOVE TO ANOTHER PROGRAM OR GET A NEW CLINICIAN, THAT'S GOING TO START ALL OVER AGAIN.

YOU HAVE TO DO IT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

THAT TRAUMATIZES THE FAMILY.

IT TRAUMATIZES THE YOUNG PERSON IN CARE.

AND IT ADDS DELAYS TO TREATMENT.

LET'S COME UP WITH A COMMON ASSESSMENT THAT CAN BE USED ACROSS THE SYSTEMS, MENTAL HEALTH, CHILD WELFARE AND PUBLIC HEALTH.

>> WELL, GENERALLY SPEAKING THEN, WHAT IS THE OBSTACLE YOU'RE FACING WHEN IT COMES TO CUTTING RED TAPE?

IS IT JUST THE FACT THAT THE STATUS QUO HOLDS A LOT OF SWAY IN ALBANY, OR ARE THERE STAKEHOLDERS ON THE OTHER SIDES OF THESE ISSUES WHO WILL SAY WE HAVE THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS FOR THIS REASON?

WE HAVE TO CLEAR PEOPLE MULTIPLE TIMES FOR THIS REASON OR AGAIN, IS THIS JUST THE STATUS QUO AND IT'S TOUGH TO MOVE SOMETIMES?

>> I THINK THE STATUS QUO IS A KIND WAY OF SAYING IT.

I THINK IT'S BUREAUCRACY.

I THINK IT'S PEOPLE COMING TO THE TABLE WITH THE POSITION OF THE ANSWER IS NO AND WE CAN'T DO IT INSTEAD OF SAYING, WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO GET THROUGH IT?

THERE ARE COMPLICATIONS TO THIS.

BUT SMART PEOPLE CAN FIGURE IT OUT, ESPECIALLY WITH THE LEADERSHIP IN THE DIVISION OF THE BUDGET AND THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE TO MAKE NEW YORK A MORE EFFICIENT STATE.

>> BIG MESSAGING FOR THE GOVERNOR THIS YEAR IS THIS IDEA OF AFFORDABILITY AND ONE OF THE LENS THAT SHE'S LOOKING AT THIS QUESTION THROUGH IS CAR INSURANCE AND INSURANCE, WHETHER IT'S CARS OR HEALTH, IS CONSTANTLY INCREASING AND NEW YORK PAYS A LOT MORE THAN WHAT PEOPLE ARE PAYING IN OTHER STATES.

IS THIS AN ISSUE FOR YOU, WHETHER IT'S CAR, HEALTH OR OTHER FORMS OF INSURANCE IN >> ALL FORMS OF INSURANCE ARE GROWING AT AN INCREDIBLE RATES.

HEALTH INSURANCE IS GROWING BY 15 TO 20%.

CAR INSURANCE IS AN ISSUE BECAUSE WE TRANSPORT CLIENTS.

THE BIGGEST ISSUE FACING US IS THE ABILITY TO GET LIABILITY INSURANCE FOR OUR AGENCIES.

WE CARE FOR KIDS.

WE CARE FOR YOUNG KIDS AND THE NEED FOR LIABILITY INSURANCE HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE.

MANY OF THE INSURANCE PROVIDERS ACROSS NEW YORK STATE AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY DECLINED THE PROVISION IN THE SELLING OF INSURANCE TO FOSTER CARE AGENCIES AND TO CHILD WELFARE AGENCIES BECAUSE OF RISKS.

SO WE'RE ASKING THE GOVERNOR LEGISLATURE TO PASS LEGISLATION TO CREATE AN INSURANCE RISK POOL AND A TRANSITION PLAN SO THAT OUR AGENCIES CAN, IN FACT, HAVE INSURANCE AT A REASONABLE PRICE SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO CARE FOR THE GOVERNMENT'S KIDS.

>> IS THIS A RECENT PROBLEM, OR DO YOU FEEL LIKE A FROG IN BOILING WATER AND IT'S BEEN GETTING WORSE AND WORSE AND WORSE EVERY YEAR?

>> THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN COMING AT US FOR THE LAST FIVE OR SIX YEARS.

CALIFORNIA HAS BEEN HIT WITH THIS PROBLEM AND IT'S LED TO THE DECLINE IN THE REDUCTION OF 19 AGENCIES OUT THERE PROVIDING CARE.

PENNSYLVANIA HAS FACED THIS CHALLENGE.

NEW YORK IS AT THE CUSP RIGHT NOW OF, WE CAN'T BUY INSURANCE IN THE COMMERCIAL MARKETPLACE, WE CAN'T PROVIDE SERVICES.

>> I CAN'T IMAGINE THIS IS A SURPRISE TO ANY OF THE AGENCIES WHO OVERSEE YOU AND MAYBE THE STATE LAWMAKERS WHO WORK IN THE SPACE.

HAS THERE BEEN ANYTHING SUBSTANTIVE FROM A REGULATORY APPROACH OR FROM THE LEGISLATIVE APPROACH TO ADD YOUR CONCERNS AT THIS POINT?

>> WE WERE TALKING TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, FINANCIAL SERVICES AND THE OFFICE OF FAMILY SERVICES, BUT THE LEGISLATURE BROUGHT US IN AND ASSEMBLIES INTRODUCED LEGISLATION TO CREATE A RISK POOL FOR OUR SECTOR.

WE'RE HOPING THAT CONVERSATION AROUND THE LEGISLATION, ALONG WITH THE BUDGET PROCESS, PRODUCES A FAVORABLE RESULT.

>> WHAT IF WILL IS NO ACTION?

DOES THIS MEAN PROVIDERS ARE CLOSING THEIR DOORS, LIMITING THEIR CAPACITY?

WHAT'S THE OUTCOME?

>> WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IS WHEN WE GO TO BID OUR INSURANCE OR BUY OUR INSURANCE, THE INSURANCE PROVIDER SAYS NO OR SAYS IT'S A 70% INCREASE, AS THE CASE WITH ONE AGENCY IN NEW YORK CITY, AGENCIES ARE GOING TO MAKE A DECISION.

DO WE STAY IN THIS BUSINESS ANY LONGER?

KIDS ARE VIEWED AS RISKY BY THE INSURANCE COMPANIES, AND THESE ARE KIDS THAT WE SERVE IN CHILDCARE CENTERS, FOSTER CARE CENTERS.

THEY'RE THE GOVERNMENT'S KIDS.

THEY'RE OUR JOINT RESPONSIBILITY, SO PEOPLE HAVE TO STEP UP AND HELP SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

>> LASTLY, IN TERMS OF MEETING THE NEEDS OF KIDS, THERE WAS A RECENT SETTLEMENT THAT WAS APPROVED TO RESOLVE AN OUTSTANDING LAWSUIT HAVING TO DO WITH WHETHER THE STATE WAS MEETING THE NEEDS OF KIDS WHO ARE ON MEDICAID IN TERMS OF GIVE THEM MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES LOCALLY IN THEIR COMMUNITY AS OPPOSED TO SHIPPING THEM OFF TO INSTITUTIONAL SETTINGS AND THE STATE MENTAL HEALTH COMMISSIONER, ANN SULLIVAN, WAS ASKED ABOUT THIS ISSUE DURING THE LEGISLATIVE BUDGET HEARINGS, AND SHE SAID THAT THEY ARE GONNA EMBARK ON AN 18-MONTH PLANNING PERIOD TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GO ABOUT MEETING THE CAPACITY NEEDS AND DELIVERING THAT CARE AND THEN A TWO TO THREE-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION WINDOW BEFORE THOSE KIDS ACTUALLY ARE DEFINITELY ALL RECEIVING THAT CARE.

BY MY WATCH, THAT MEANS WE'RE LOOKING AT FOUR AND A HALF YEAR OF IMPLEMENTATION.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT TIME LINE?

>> WE NEED TO SPEED IT UP.

WE KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEMS ARE.

THE COURT BROUGHT SOME LIGHT TO THE ISSUE.

PROVIDERS HAVE BEEN OUT THERE TALKING ABOUT THESE ISSUES.

CONSUMERS, PEERS, STATE HAS HAD NUMEROUS LISTENING TOURS TO TALK ABOUT HOW DO WE SOLVE SOME OF THE BARRIERS TO ACCESS TO CARE.

WE NEED TO SPEED UP THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS.

WE CAN'T WAIT FOUR YEARS.

THERE'S WAITLISTS IN EVERY COMMUNITY.

ACCESS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM.

WE NEED TO PUT THE BEST MINDS ON THIS AND GET IT DONE QUICKLY.

>> WELL, IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE BUDGET, ASIDE FROM PUTTING SOME MONEY ASIDE FOR THE PLANNING STAGE, THAT WOULD BEGIN TO ADDRESS THIS CONCERN?

BECAUSE I HAVE TO IMAGINE SOMETHING LIKE HIGHER MEDICAID RATES OR ANY OTHER SORT OF TARGETED INVESTMENTS TO BUILD OUT CAPACITY WOULD MAYBE GET THE BALL ROLLING A LITTLE EARLIER?

>> I THINK TWO THINGS ARE GOING TO BE DONE IN THE BUDGET.

ONE IS TO PUT IN SOME RATE ADJUSTMENTS ON AN INTERIM BASIS TO TRANSITION TO THE NEW SYSTEM.

BECAUSE THE NEW SYSTEM WILL HAVE HIGHER RATES BECAUSE IT'S CLEARLY UNDERFUNDED NOW.

SECONDLY, WHAT CAN WE DO TO SUPPORT THE WORKFORCE, BE IT LOAN FORGIVE, IS IT ADDITIONAL TRAINING SUPPORT, IS IT SIMPLIFYING THE ONBOARDING PROCESS, SCOPE OF PRACTICE PROCESS THAT THE STATE CURRENTLY IMPLEMENTS, ALL THOSE THINGS CAN BE DONE NOW IN ORDER TO TRANSITION THE PROVIDERS TO INCREASING THEIR ACCESS, ANY MORE SLOTS, SPEEDING UP THE TIME TO INTAKE.

>> WELL, BILL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE TIME.

I APPRECIATE IT.

>> ALL RIGHT.

CUT THE RED TAPE.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> AND FOR MORE ON THE COLA INCREASE OR THE HUMAN SERVICES SECTION, YOU CAN VISIT OUR WEBSITE.

AGAIN, THAT'S AT NYNOW.ORG.

IN THIS NEXT SEGMENT, WE'LL SIT DOWN WITH PAT SENATOR PAT FAHY TO UNPACK THE LATEST ON THE $400 MILLION IN FUNDING THAT WAS ALLOCATED TO THE CITY OF ALBANY IN LAST YEAR STATE BUDGET.

WE'LL ALSO DIVE INTO THE SENATOR'S FOCUS ON STATE IMMIGRATION POLICY THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

LET'S TAKE A LOOK.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> THANK YOU SO MUCH JOINING US HERE TODAY, SENATOR.

>> THANK YOU.

GREAT TO BE BACK.

>> NOW THE LAST TIME YOU WERE ON THE SHOW, WE SPOKE AT LENGTH ABOUT THE MORE THAN $400 MILLION IN FUNDING BEING ALLOCATED TO THE CITY OF ALBANY FROM THE STATE BUDGET LAST YEAR.

SO WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THAT FUNDING AND HOW THINGS ARE PROGRESSING WITH THE PROJECTS IN ALBANY?

>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I HAVE TO SAY IT WAS MY EASIEST VOTE LAST YEAR OR MAYBE MY FAVORITE VOTE LAST YEAR.

ALBANY REALLY NEEDS THIS SHOT IN THE ARM.

WE HOPE THIS 400 MILLION WON'T JUST BENEFIT ALBANY, THE CORE OF THE REGION, BUT THAT STRENGTHENING THE CORE WILL REALLY BENEFIT THE ENTIRE REGION, AND YES, FAST FORWARD TO LESS THAN A YEAR LATER AND WE JUST HAD THE CONSULTING FIRM MIG, ISSUE THEIR REPORT.

I THINK IT WAS FRIDAY REGARDING HOW THEY RECOMMEND A CORE PART OF THAT 400 MILLION, WHICH IS THE 200, ONE HALF OF IT, THAT HAS BEEN INTENDED TO BE FOCUSED ON DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION.

SO WHILE THE REPORT DIDN'T HAVE ANY FIREWORKS IN IT, WHAT THEY DID IS RECOMMEND HOW THAT 200 MILLION WOULD BE DIVIDED.

SO THEY HAVE 120 MILLION OF THAT FOCUSED ON REALLY ENCOURAGING DESTINATION PLACES AND WITHIN THAT, AT LEAST 40 MILLION OF IT WILL BE ON THE LIBERTY PARK OR WHAT IS OFTEN REFERRED 20 AS THE DOWNTOWN PARKING LOT DISTRICT.

AND THEN ANOTHER 40 MILLION WILL BE HOUSING AND THEN ANOTHER 40 MILLION WILL BE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS, SUCH AS STREETSCAPE, REDOING STATE STREET.

THERE'S SOME GREAT PROPOSALS OUT THERE.

SOME CHANGES DOWN IN THE WAREHOUSE DISTRICT.

YOU CAN DO A LOT WITH STREETSCAPE TYPE IMPROVEMENTS.

MAKING CORRIDORS MUCH MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY, PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE FRIENDLY AND BRINGING PEOPLE OUT, REVITALIZING THOSE COMMERCIAL AREAS SO WE HAVE A SENSE OF WHERE THEY'RE GOING AND NOW, ESD, OR THE EMPIRE STATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION WILL TAKE IT FROM THERE AND START TO ISSUE RFPS.

THERE'S A LOT OF WORK AHEAD, BUT AT LEAST WE HAVE MORE OF A SENSE.

PROBABLY THE BIGGEST PIECE OF WHAT WAS NOT MENTIONED IN THE MIG REPORT IS THE STADIUM, THE SOCCER STADIUM THAT HAS BEEN PROBABLY MOST INSTRUMENTAL IN REALLY ENCOURAGING THESE CONVERSATIONS.

SO THERE WAS A LOT OF EXCITEMENT ABOUT IT, BUT THEN THERE WAS A LOT OF CONTROVERSY.

IT LOOKS LIKE THE STADIUM IS NOT ONE THAT WILL BE RECOMMENDED FOR GOING FORWARD WITH MORE OF AN EMPHASIS ON HOUSING, COMMERCIAL RETAIL DEVELOPMENT.

>> CERTAINLY A LOT OF PROJECTS ON THE DOCKET.

SO I'M CURIOUS, DO YOU THINK THAT $400 MILLION IS MUFF TO COVER EVERYTHING, OR IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT MORE FUNDING WILL BE REQUIRED IN THIS YEAR'S STATE BUDGET IN >> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

THE 400 MILLION IS ALL INTENDED TO BE CAPITAL DOLLARS.

THE 200 MILLION OF THAT, WHICH IS THE DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION FUND, THE INTENT IS THAT BE MATCHED 3:1.

SO FOR EVERY DOLLAR INVESTED, IT DRIVES THREE MORE DOLLARS OF PRIVATE SECTOR DEVELOPMENT.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, THESE FUNDS WILL BE USED TO HELP INCENTIVIZE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, OF ALL TYPES BY THE WAY, ALL THE WAY FROM LUXE HOUSING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

EACH DOLLAR DRIVE AN ADDITIONAL THREE.

SO IT REALLY IS INTENDED TO BE STIMULUS MONEY, IF YOU WILL, I DON'T THINK WE NEED THOSE ADDITIONAL DOLLARS THIS YEAR.

IN THE MEANTIME, THOUGH, WE HAVE A NEW MAYOR THAT IS LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL DOLLARS.

ONE, TO HELP WITH HER OPERATING EXPENSES, AS WE'VE GIVEN TO PREVIOUS MAYORS.

THOSE ARE THE CAPITAL CITY FUNDS, AND ALSO LOOKING FOR MONEY TO RENOVATE CITY HALL.

IT'S AN OLD HISTORIC BUILDING, ALSO FUNDS TO HELP WITH THE COMMUNITY CENTERS, ONE OF WHICH IS ALREADY OPENED AND ONE SOON TO OPEN IN THE SOUTH END.

SO THERE ARE ADDITIONAL DOLLARS, BUT NOT TIED TO THE 400 MILLION.

AND THE 400 MILLION, IT'S NOT JUST TRANSFORMATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES.

THESE ARE ONCE IN A GENERATION TYPE OPPORTUNITIES.

IT'S REALLY THAT UNPRECEDENTED.

I CAN'T SAY-- THERE AREN'T ENOUGH ADJECTIVES TO DESCRIBE HOW PLEASED I WAS, AND AGAIN, HUGE SHOUTOUT TO THE GOVERNOR FOR PROPOSING THIS LAST YEAR AND I COULDN'T HAVE BEEN HAPPIER TO SUPPORT IT.

>> MOVING AWAY FROM THE FUNDING FOR ALBANY, I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE BEEN VERY FOCUSED ON IMMIGRATION POLICIES THIS YEAR.

IT'S NO SECRET THAT THE GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE THIS YEAR HAVE MADE THAT A BIG FOCUS.

SO WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THE BILLS THAT YOU'VE INTERVIEWS INTRODUCED TO PROTECT IMMIGRANT NEW YORKERS?

>> AS I SAID, A LOT OF OPTIMISM AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.

I HAVE BEEN NOTHING SHORT OF HORRIFIED TO SEE SOME OF THE POLICIES THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED BY THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.

THE IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT WEPT FROM GOING AFTER CRIMINALS, IF YOU WILL, IN THE SPRING OF LAST YEAR, TO THOSE THAT MAY HAVE CRIMINAL BACKGROUNDS AND ALMOST IMMEDIATELY RAMPED UP TO CIVIL IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT.

SUCH THAT I BELIEVE IT'S BEEN LIKE A REIGN OF TERROR BY ICE.

AND OFTEN, KEEP IN MIND, THESE ARE BY MASKED FEDERAL AGENTS, UNIDENTIFIED.

LITERALLY CONDUCTING WHAT APPEAR TO BE ABDUCTIONS IN OUR STREETS.

SOMETIMES IN OUR COURTS, OUR SCHOOLS, OUR HOSPITALS.

SO YES, I HAVE BEEN VERY AGGRESSIVE IN PROPOSING LEGISLATION AND JOINING MY COLLEAGUES IN SUPPORTING THEIR LEGISLATION.

THE IDEA THAT UNIDENTIFIED, MASKED AGENTS CAN ABDUCT PEOPLE WITHOUT A JUDICIAL WARRANT IS UNPRECEDENTED, WITHOUT DUE PROCESS THEY'RE OFTEN FLOWN OUT OF STATE, WHICH MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR IMMIGRATION LAWYERS TO PROVIDE SERVICES.

SO I COULD GO ON AND ON.

JUST LET'S SAY I SHARE THE OUTRAGE.

WE ARE A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS.

WE ARE A LAND-- OUR COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED 250 YEARS AGO.

THIS YEAR IS THE 250TH ANNIVERSARY.

WE WERE FOUNDED ON FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS.

ONE OF THOSE FREEDOMS INCLUDES DUE PROCESS.

WE HAVE SEEN ALL OF THAT ERODE OVER THESE LAST EIGHT TO TEN MONTHS, AND SO I HAVE LEGISLATION.

FIRST OF ALL, I SUPPORT THE NEW YORK FOR ALL.

MY COLLEAGUE SENATOR GIANARIS HAS THAT.

I HAVE THE MILT BILL TO UNMASK AGENTS BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS IS NOT WHO WE ARE, AND IT'S JUST FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG ON A MILLION LEVELS AND BY THE WAY, IT UNDERMINES LOCAL AND STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT.

WE HAVE, AGAIN, SPENT YEARS ON BODY CAMERAS.

SPENT YEARS ON BUILDING BETTER RELATIONS, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE HORRIFIC KILLING 6 GEORGE FLOYD IN 2020 AT WHAT KICKED OFF THE BLACK LIVES MATTER.

TO SEE US GO SO BACKWARDS IS REALLY HORRIFYING.

SO THE MILT BILL WOULD UNMASK ICE.

I HAVE THE RADAR BILL THAT WOULD HELP CREATE A DASHBOARD, IF YOU WILL, SO WE CAN GET A SENSE OF WHAT IS GOING ON BECAUSE THERE'S SO LITTLE COOPERATION AND AGAIN, YOU SEE WHAT I BELIEVE ARE ROGUE AGENTS, LITERALLY ABDUCTING PEOPLE, AND BY THE WAY, OUR CONSTITUTION GIVES ALL RESIDENTS IN THIS COUNTRY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

YOU DON'T NEED TO BE A CITIZEN.

MY LAST BILL WAS TO GO AFTER AVELO AIRLINES, COMMERCIALLY CONTRACTED AIRLINE, TO HELP WITH THESE DEPORTATIONS.

THAT'S A BILL I WORKED WITH MULTIPLE OTHER STATES ON, ABOUT A HALF DOZEN OF US HAD LEGISLATION.

OURS WOULD HAVE TAKEN AWAY THEIR SUBSIDY.

AIRLINES GET A FUEL TAX EXEMPTION.

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS ARE THAT BILL, BEFORE WE COULD MOVE IT-- WE INTRODUCED THAT LAST JUNE.

THE DAY OR TWO AFTER RENEE GOOD WAS KILLED IN MINNEAPOLIS, AVELO AIRLINES ANNOUNCED THEY ARE STOPPING DEPORTATIONS.

SO THE POWER OF THE PRESS, THE POWER OF PROTESTS, THE POWER OF LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS THAT DID NOT EVEN ADAPT, NOT EVEN BEEN ADOPTED REALLY MADE A DIFFERENCE HERE AND WE HOPE THE CONTINUED PROTESTS WILL HAVE AN IMPACT AND CONTINUE TO PUSH BACK ON THESE HORRIFIC ICE TACTICS.

>> I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT THE RADAR ACT BECAUSE AS YOU MENTIONED, IT WOULD BE THE NATION'S FIRST STATEWIDE DATABASE TO TRACK ICE ACTIVITY.

IT WOULD REQUIRE INPUT AND PARTICIPATION FROM THE STATE DIVISION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES AND EVEN LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT.

SO IS THERE ANY CONCERN FROM YOUR OFFICE THAT WHILE THIS BILL IS SIMPLY MEANT TO TRACK ICE ACTIVITY IT COULD SOMEHOW UNINTENTIONALLY IMPEDE ON THE WORK THAT THEY'RE DOING WHICH WOULD POSSIBLY RESULT IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STEPPING IN AND, YOU KNOW, STOPPING THE LEGISLATION?

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT IT?

>> ANOTHER GREAT QUESTION.

THOSE ARE BOTH TWO HUGE CONCERNS.

ONE, WE WOULDN'T WANT TO SET UP A DASHBOARD AND DATABASE TO HELP TO TRACK AND THEN UNDERMINE.

WE WOULD HAVE THE-- MAKE SURE THAT NAMES AND IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL ARRESTED WOULD NOT BE SHARED, SO THAT WE COULD PROTECT THE INDIVIDUAL BUT WE DO NEED A DASHBOARD.

WE DO NEED DATA.

SO MUCH OF WHAT WE ARE RELYING ON IF THERE ARE DATA AND INFORMATION ABOUT THESE ABDUCTIONS AND ARRESTS ARE FROM THE GROUPS IN THE STREETS, FROM THE PROTESTERS OR FROM GROUPS LIKE NYIC, THE NEW YORK IMMIGRATION COALITION, OR LOCALLY THE CAPITAL DISTRICT LATINOS.

IT'S SO ANECDOTAL, SO SPORADIC, AND THEN IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO TRACK THE INDIVIDUAL BECAUSE THEY ARE SO OFTEN IMMEDIATELY FLOWN OUT OF STATE.

SO YES, WE NEED BETTER TRACKING.

THERE IS-- WE THINK WE'VE ADDRESSED THE NEED FOR MAKING SURE THE INDIVIDUAL IS PROTECTED WITHOUT IDENTIFYING INFORMATION BEING SHARED, BUT DO ALL OF THESE BILLS RISK HAVING FEDERAL PREEMPTION PROBLEMS, OR WILL THEY BE LITIGATED BY THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION?

SURE.

WE SAW CALIFORNIA ADOPT AN ENTIRE PACKAGE OF LEGISLATION IN SEPTEMBER.

IT WAS ALMOST IMMEDIATELY LITIGATED.

FOR THE MOST PART, THE COURTS HAVE BEEN UPHOLDING A LOT OF THIS WORK.

IT'S NOT BEEN PERFECT.

WE'VE SEEN THE COURTS, FOR THE MOST PART, BE A VOICE OF REASON, BUT AGAIN, EVEN THAT'S UNPREDICTABLE.

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS I'VE HAD CHALLENGES TO MY LEGISLATION OR I'VE HAD CRITICS OF A FEW OF THESE BILLS.

BOTTOM LINE IS, I SAY LIKE ANYTHING ELSE, LET'S LITIGATE IT, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE MUST, WE MUST AS STATES PUSH BACK.

>> WELL, UNFORTUNATELY THAT IS ALL THE TIME WE HAVE FOR TODAY, BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE TIME TO SPEAK WITH US TODAY, SENATOR.

>> ALWAYS A PLEASURE.

THANK YOU.

>> AND WE WERE SPEAKING WITH STATE SENATOR PAT FAHY, REPRESENTING THE 46TH STATE SENATE DISTRICT.

[ THEME MUSIC ] WELL, THAT DOES IT FOR THIS EDITION OF "NEW YORK NOW."

THANK YOU FOR TUNING IN AND SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >>ANNOUNCER: FUNDING FOR "NEW YORK NOW" IS PROVIDED BY WNET.