[ THEME MUSIC ] 1 >>DAN CLARK: WELCOME TO THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF "NEW YORK NOW."

I'M DAN CLARK.

WE ARE NOW FOUR WEEKS INTO THIS YEAR'S LEGISLATIVE SESSION, AND ONE TOPIC CONTINUES TO DOMINATE THE CONVERSATION IN ALBANY.

THAT'S CRIME.

AND MORE SPECIFICALLY, BAIL REFORM.

WE'VE HAD THAT LAW FOR TWO YEARS NOW AND IT REQUIRES JUDGES TO RELEASE PEOPLE WITHOUT BAIL ON MOST LOWER-LEVEL AND NON-VIOLENT CHARGES.

SUPPORTERS OF THE LAW POINT TO A DOUBLE STANDARD IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.

ONE THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE WITH MONEY TO BE RELEASED BUT LEAVES THOSE WITHOUT BEHIND BARS, AND SINCE THE LAW TOOK EFFECT, CRIME HAS GONE UP IN NEW YORK AND OPPONENTS OF THE LAW HAS TRIED TO LINK THOSE TWO THINGS SAYING BAIL REFORM HAS CAUSED THE RISE IN CRIME AND SHOULD, THEREFORE, EITHER BE TWEAKED OR SCRAPPED ALTOGETHER.

BUT WE DON'T REALLY KNOW IF THAT'S TRUE OR IF WE'RE JUST RIDING THE NATIONAL CRIME WAVE.

THERE IS SOME DATA OUT THERE, BUT THERE'S BEEN NO NON-PARTISAN ANALYSIS TO SEE IF IT'S CAUSE OR JUST COINCIDENCE.

SO FOR NOW, IT'S A LOT OF POLITICS AND GOVERNOR KATHY HOCHUL SAID THIS WEEK, THAT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE HER POSITION.

2 >> IF REFORMS ARE NEEDED BASED ON DATA THAT IS STILL BEING GATHERED, I'M WILLING TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS SO I DON'T FEEL JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE, FOR POLITICAL REASONS, LIKE THE INDIVIDUALS THAT YOU'RE QUOTING HERE TODAY, WANT ME TO GIVE AN ANSWER.

THAT'S NOT HOW I OPERATE.

I DON'T CAVE TO PRESSURE.

I DO WHAT'S RIGHT BASED ON ALL THE FACTS THAT COME BEFORE ME.

>> AND UNTIL THEN, HOCHUL DIDN'T HAVE A LOT TO SAY ON THIS.

SAYING SHE'D LEAVE IT UP TO THE LEGISLATURE.

THAT CAME TO A HEAD THIS WEEK WHEN LAWMAKERS SAID THEY WEREN'T GOING TO BUDGE.

DARRELL CAMP IS HERE WITH MORE.

DARRELL?

>> THAT'S RIGHT, DAN.

LEADERS FROM BOTH THE STATE ASSEMBLY AND THE SENATE SAID THIS WEEK THAT THEY HAD NO PLANS TO CHANGE BAIL REFORM.

ASSEMBLY SPEAKER CARL HEASTIE, WHO HAS MADE CRIMINAL JUSTICE A TOP PRIORITY IN THE FAST FEW YEARS SAID THE LAW WAS BEING USED AS A SCAPE COAT FOR THE RISE IN CRIME.

>> PART OF MY FRUSTRATION IS ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS THAT'S WHAT BAIL REFORM'S FOR.

I THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE TO LINK THE RISE IN GUN VIOLENCE, YOU KNOW, SOLELY ON BAIL.

3 >> THERE HAVE BEEN PROPOSALS THAT WOULD KEEP BAIL REFORM THE SAME BUT GIVE JUDGES THE OPTION TO HOLD SOMEONE IN JAIL IF THEY THINK THEY'RE A THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY.

BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CAPITOL, SENATE MAJORITY LEADER, ANDREA STEWART-COUSINS, SHOT DOWN THAT IDEA SAYING IT WOULD BE A STEP BACK TO BEFORE BAIL REFORM.

>> WE CANNOT PRETEND THAT THERE HAS NOT BEEN JUDGES' DISCRETION AND THAT DISCRETION HAS LED IN SOME CASES, IN MANY CASES NATIONALLY, NOT JUST HERE, TO A DISPARITY OF WHO GETS HELD, WHO DOESN'T GET HELD.

>> THAT MIGHT NOT SIT WELL WITH JUDGES IN CRIMINAL COURT.

DURING A BUDGET HEARING AT THE STATE CAPITOL THIS WEEK, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE LAWRENCE MARKS WAS ASKED IF HE THOUGHT THAT JUDGES WOULD LIKE MORE DISCRETION ON THE BENCH.

HERE'S WHAT HE SAID.

>> JUDGES WHO HANDLE CRIMINAL CASES, UM, TWO-- WOULD FAVOR HAVING MORE DISCRETION.

NOW HAVING SAID THAT, ARE THEY ABLE TO CARRY OUT THEIR DUTIES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS DURING THE CURRENT BAIL REFORM LEGISLATION?

YES, ABSOLUTELY.

4 >> SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE CHANGES ARE COMING TO THE LAW ANYTIME SOON, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE DOOR IS CLOSED.

WE WILL TAKE A MUCH DEEPER LOOK INTO THE ISSUE OF BAIL REFORM AND VIOLENT CRIME AS A WHOLE IN NEW YORK ON NEXT WEEK'S EDITION OF "NEW YORK NOW."

>> THANKS, DARRELL.

LOOKING FORWARD TO IT.

IN THE MEANTIME, THE CLOCK IS TICKING ON THIS YEAR'S LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

WE'RE ALREADY AT THE END OF THE FIRST MONTH AND LAWMAKERS ARE ONLY HERE UNTIL EARLY JUNE.

SO THEY'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO THIS YEAR AND FAST.

REPUBLICANS HOLD THE MINORITY IN THE LEGISLATURE BUT THEY'RE ALREADY OUT WITH A PROPOSAL THAT THEY SAY COULD HELP NEW YORKERS WITH THE RISING COST OF INFLATION.

FOR THAT AND MORE, I SPOKE THIS WEEK WITH ASSEMBLY REPUBLICAN LEADER, WILL BARCLAY.

[ THEME MUSIC ] ASSEMBLY REPUBLICAN LEADER WILL BARCLAY, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME ON, DAN.

>> OF COURSE, ANYTIME.

5 YOU HAVE A NEW PROPOSAL OUT THIS WEEK THAT YOU SAY COULD HELP NEW YORKERS WITH THE RISING COST OF INFLATION.

OF COURSE, WE'VE SEEN INFLATION GO UP NATIONWIDE AT LEVELS THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN HERE IN DECADES.

YOUR PROPOSAL, YOU SAY, WOULD HELP CONSUMERS AFFORD THE HIGHER COST OF GOODS.

CAN YOU TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT?

>> YEAH.

WELL, TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH, IT'S SAD TO SAY, BUT I CAN REMEMBER IN THE LATE '70s AND EARLY '80s WHEN WE HAD THE SAME RATE OF INFLATION.

WE HAD INFLATION AT 7 OR 8% AND THE AFFECT IT HAS ON THE MIDDLE CLASS AND LOWER MIDDLE CLASS PAYCHECK IS REALLY TERRIBLE.

IN FACT, IF YOU RECALL BACK IN THE '70s AND '80s, THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS REAGAN BEAT CARTER WAS BECAUSE OF INFLATION.

PEOPLE SAY YOU CAN'T DO MUCH AT THE STATE.

I DISAGREE.

WE HAVEN'T HEARD A LOT ABOUT IT AT THE STATE, BUT ONE THING THAT WE CAN DO IS TAKE THE SALES TAX OFF ITEMS LIKE GASOLINE, WHICH INFLATION HAS AFFECTED, SOMETHING LIKE 50%, FOOD ITEMS OUT THE HOME.

THEY INCREASED 13% AND HEATING FUEL IS INCREASING LIKE 30%.

IF WE CAN TAKE THE SALES TAX, THAT WOULD PROVIDE IMMEDIATE RELIEF TO NEW YORKERS AND WE HAVE THE MONEY NOW IN NEW YORK TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

6 >> NOW WHEN YOU SAY FOOD OUTSIDE THE HOME, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT GROCERY STORES, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT RESTAURANTS?

WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THAT?

>> WELL, THE RESTAURANTS TAKE OUT FOOD, ON OBVIOUSLY DON'T PAY SALES TAX IN THE GROCERY STORE, SO ITEMS THAT YOU WOULD NORMALLY PAY SALES TAX ON.

>> OKAY.

I CAN IMAGINE, BECAUSE SALES TAX IS A BIG REVENUE RAISER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

SO HOW WOULD THIS IMPACT THEM IN TERMS OF THEIR BUDGETING?

COULD WE SEE SOME SHORTFALL THERE?

HAVE YOU WORKED OUT THE NUMBERS?

MAYBE IT'S NOT SO MUCH OF A DENT?

>> WELL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT STATE SALES TAX NOT LOCAL SALES TAX.

>> OKAY.

>> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TAKING OFF THE STATE SALES TAX.

ACCORDING TO OUR NUMBERS, IT WOULD BE $2.6 BILLION WITH A TWO-YEAR SUSPENSION, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $5 BILLION, A LITTLE OVER $5 BILLION, WHICH WOULD BE THE COST.

AS I SAID, BUDGET AIRILY YOU HEARD THE GOVERNOR'S SPEECH THAT WE'RE DOING PRETTY WELL FROM A BUDGET STANDPOINT IN 7 THE STATE AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE FEEL-- WE AGREE WITH HER WHEN SHE TALKS ABOUT DOING MIDDLE CLASS TAX CUTS AND SOME OTHER TYPES OF TAX CUTS, PROPERTY TAX CUTS OUT INTO THE FUTURE, WHICH IS HELPFUL AND WE SUPPORT THOSE, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO IMMEDIATELY TO HELP NEW YORKERS WHO ARE STRUGGLING WITH INFLATION.

>> OKAY.

YOU KNOW WHEN WE TALK ABOUT EFFORTS LIKE THIS, WE ALWAYS COME BACK TO THE PROPERTY TAXES IN NEW YORK.

I THINK WE TALK ABOUT THE EXODUS FROM NEW YORK ALL THE TIME.

WE DON'T SO MUCH TALK ABOUT THE REASONS WHY PEOPLE ARE LEAVING BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S A DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN A LOT OF PEOPLE ABOUT WHY PEOPLE ARE LEAVING BETWEEN IS IT THE PROPERTY TAXES, IS IT THE INCOME TAXES IN SOME PEOPLE SAY IT'S THE WEATHER, WHICH, YOU KNOW, SURE.

I'M SURE SOME PEOPLE DO LEAVE BECAUSE OF THE WEATHER.

LET'S TALK ABOUT PROPERTY TAXES FOR A SECOND BECAUSE I KNOW YOU THOUGHT ABOUT THIS AS SOMEBODY WHO IS FROM UPSTATE NEW YORK.

HOW DO YOU THINK THE STATE COULD REALLY REDUCE THE PROPERTY TAXES FOR PEOPLE WHO OR AT LEAST KEEP THEM LEVEL?

WE HAVE THE PROPERTY TAX CAP.

THE GOVERNOR IS PROPOSING THE REBATE.

8 DO YOU THINK THAT GOES FAR ENOUGH, OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THINGS GO FARTHER?

>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, WE'VE GOT TO STOP MANDATING STUFF FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

THAT'S WHAT'S GENERATING THE COST, WHETHER IT'S MANDATED ON SCHOOL DISTRICTS OR MANDATED ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

IT'S CAUSING THE PROPERTY TAX TO INCREASE.

YOU'RE RIGHT.

WE DID PUT A CAP ON IT.

I THINK THAT'S A SMART MOVE.

WE CAPPED THE LOCAL SHARE OF MEDICAID.

THAT WAS THE RIGHT MOVE.

ONE THING WE CAN DO IS MAYBE TAKE OVER THE FULL SHARE OF MEDICAID AND THAT WOULD CERTAINLY PROVIDE A GREAT RELIEF TO COUNTY GOVERNMENTS.

THEN THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO CHARGE SO MUCH ON PROPERTY TAXES.

THE OTHER THING IS SCHOOL AID FORMULA, YOU KNOW, HAS ALWAYS BEEN A LITTLE INEQUITABLE.

WE SEND A LOT OF SCHOOL AID TO HIGH WEALTH DISTRICTS VERSUS LOW WEALTH SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

I REPRESENT A LOT OF RURAL AREAS THAT DON'T HAVE HIGH PROPERTY VALUES.

SO THEY DON'T HAVE ANYWHERE TO GO WHEN THEY HAVE TO RAISE MONEY BECAUSE THEY'RE MANDATED TO DO CERTAIN SERVICES AND PROGRAMS.

SO IF YOU COULD PROVIDE THOSE SCHOOLS MORE MONEY, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO RELY ON PROPERTY TAXES TO COVER THEIR SHORTFALLS.

9 >> I'M SURE THAT ISSUE'S GONNA COME UP IN THE BUDGET.

ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE'RE EXPECTING TO COME UP THIS YEAR IN SOME WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM IS ETHICS REFORM IN ALBANY AFTER EVERYTHING WITH FORMER GOVERNOR CUOMO LAST YEAR, AND OBVIOUSLY WE'VE SEEN JUST DECADES OF CORRUPTION AT THE STATE CAPITAL.

WHAT DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE DONE HERE?

YOUR CONFERENCE HAS BEEN REALLY OUTSPOKEN ON ETHICS REFORM IN THE PAST.

SOME AT THE LEVEL OF JUST AT THE CHAMBER LEVEL BUT ALSO AT THE STATEWIDE LEVEL.

HOW CAN WE CLEAN UP ALBANY?

I KNOW IT'S A BIG QUESTION, BUT GIVE ME YOUR BRIEF ARGUMENT HERE.

>> RIGHT.

I THINK THE GOVERNOR IS RIGHT IF ONE RESPECT THAT JCOPE PROBABLY ISN'T THE RIGHT VEHICLE TO CONTINUE.

AS YOU KNOW IT'S BEEN CALLED JOKINGLY J-JOKE.

WHAT I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THE GOVERNOR IS SHE'S SUGGESTING, I GUESS, THE DEANS OF THE LAW SCHOOLS MAKE UP THIS ETHICS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT MAKES THE DEANS QUALIFY OR WHY THEY WOULD BE OTHER THAN HAVING A LEGAL BACKGROUND.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF IT WAS A TRUE BIPARTISAN ORGANIZATION.

I THINK THAT'S HOW THEY DO IT.

THEY DO THAT IN OTHER AREAS AND I THINK WE WOULD HAVE 10 BETTER SUCCESS IN GOVERNING ANY KIND OF MISDEEDS.

I WOULD MENTION THIS, DAN.

ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE WITH ETHICS, YOU KNOW, I ONCE SERVED ON THE LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEE.

I SERVED ON THE ASSEMBLY ETHICS COMMITTEE.

WE HAVE THE D.A.

THAT HAS JURISDICTION OVER US.

WE HAVE THE BOARD OF ELECTION AND LOCAL D.A.s BACK HOME AND THEN YOU HAVE THE U.S. ATTORNEY.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF BODIES THAT CAN PROSECUTE WRONGDOING.

OFTEN, THE LEGISLATORS HAVE TO UNDERSTAND OR ANYONE ACTING IN GOVERNMENT THAT YOU DON'T DO THIS TO ENRICH YOURSELF.

YOU DO IT TO MAKE THE STATE BETTER DO IT TO TRY TO HELP YOUR CONSTITUENTS AND MOVE THINGS FORWARD.

YOU KNOW, THAT MESSAGE SOMETIMES GETS LOST, I THINK.

WE HAVE TO KEEP PUSHING THAT.

ULTIMATELY, AS WE ALL KNOW, THERE SHOULD BE AN OVERSIGHT BODY.

THERE SHOULD BE SOMEONE WHO LOOKS INTO ETHICS.

AGAIN, I THINK IF IT'S DONE IN A BIPARTISAN MANNER, YOU WILL GET A MORE HONEST TYPE OF ORGANIZATION OR BODY.

>> YOUR CONFERENCE IN THE PAST HAS CALLED FOR TERM LIMITS FOR THE SPEAKERSHIP IN THE ASSEMBLY.

THAT HASN'T HAPPENED.

THE ASSEMBLY LEADERSHIP, 11 DEMOCRATS HAVEN'T AGREED TO THAT.

I KNOW THEY DON'T WANT TO DO IT.

THE GOVERNOR HAS PROPOSED TERM LIMITS FOR STATEWIDE ELECTED OFFICIALS SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GOVERNOR, L.G., CONTROLLER AND A.G. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT?

IS THAT THE RIGHT MOVE?

>> I DON'T THINK IT'S A BAD IDEA.

I THINK IT'S GOING TO HAVE A HARD TIME PASSING IN THE LEGISLATURE.

I THINK I HEARD THE SPEAKER ALREADY COME OUT AND SAY HE DOESN'T SUPPORT ANY TYPE OF TERM LIMITS, BUT I DO THINK THERE'S SOMETHING TO IT.

I MEAN, WE SAW WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE LAST GOVERNOR WHO STARTED OFF WITH A VERY PROMISING ADMINISTRATION, A LOT OF STUFF EVEN AS A REPUBLICAN I COULD GET BEHIND.

BUT AS HE MOVED AND GETS CONSOLIDATED POWER AND MOVE FURTHER IN HIS CAREER YOU SAW HIM, I THINK, WAS TAKING MORE RISKS AND REALLY BECAME, I THINK HE FELT A LOT THAT HE WAS ABOVE ANY KIND OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND SO THAT'S WHERE TERM LIMITS WOULD PLAY AN IMPORTANT ROLE AND CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPORTANT WHEN IT CAME TO THE LAST ADMINISTRATION.

>> WE WILL SEE HOW IT PLAYS OUT.

IT'S A REALLY INTERESTING PROPOSAL AND ONE THAT HASN'T COME UP IN YEARS RECENTLY.

12 WE'LL SEE.

SENATOR REPUBLICAN LEADER WILL BARCLAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU, DAN.

GOOD TALKING TO YOU.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> SO WE'LL SEE WHERE ALL THAT GOES IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS UNTIL LAWMAKERS LEAVE ALBANY IN THE YEAR IN JUNE.

LET'S GET TO THE WEEK'S NEWS WITH THIS WEEK'S PANEL.

ZACH WILLIAMS IS FROM CITY AND STATE.

YANCEY ROY IS FROM NEWSDAY.

THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THE BIG TOPIC I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS REDISTRICTING.

WE GOT SOME NEWS THIS WEEK THAT THE INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION BASICALLY CALLED IT QUITS.

THEY DIDN'T COME TO AN AGREEMENT WITH EACH OTHER.

THIS IS A COMMISSION THAT HAS ONE SIDE THAT'S DEMOCRAT APPOINTED AND ONE SIDE THAT'S REPUBLICAN APPOINTED.

SO IS GOOD WE SHOULDN'T BE THAT SURPRISED THAT THERE WAS GRIDLOCK.

SO NOW LAWMAKERS SAY THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PASS THEIR OWN SET OF MAPS NEXT WEEK.

NANCY, WHAT ARE WE EXPECTING OUT OF THIS?

THIS IS A BIG UNDERTAKING TO REDRAW DISTRICTS AND WE'RE LOSING A 13 CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT.

SO IT'S NOT JUST KIND OF LIKE TWEAKING THE LINES HERE AND THERE.

>> RIGHT.

I THINK THAT THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS TO KNOW.

ONE IS THAT DESPITE THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A COMMISSION AND IT WAS GOING THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROCESS OF TRYING TO COME UP WITH MAPS, THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN A LEGISLATIVE TASK FORCE ON REDISTRICTING.

THEY'VE HAD THE SAME DATA THAT THE COMMISSION HAS HAD SINCE SEPTEMBER.

THEY HAVE TRADITIONALLY DRAWN THE LINES.

IT'S BEEN THEIR ROLE.

I IMAGINE THEY'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PRETTY MUCH SINCE SEPTEMBER.

SO THEY ARE READY TO GO WITH THEIR OWN VERSION OF THE MAPS.

IT WAS ANNOUNCED BASICALLY AS SOON AS THE COMMISSION WENT OUT THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE MAPS THIS WEEKEND.

I THINK THAT THE SENATE AND THE ASSEMBLY ARE, YOU KNOW, THERE WILL BE TWEAKS HERE AND THERE IN DISTRICT THE AND NOT A LOT OF DIFFERENCES FOR PEOPLE.

MAYBE SOME IMPORTANT SWING DISTRICTS.

THE REAL GAME IS CONGRESS AND IT'S BECAUSE NEW YORK IS PART OF A NATIONAL FIGHT FOR CONTROL OF CONGRESS.

AND, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT-- WE'VE SEEN ALL SORTS OF STORIES IN REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED STATES IN THE SOUTH MAINLY, NORTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA, 14 WHATEVER, ABOUT REDISTRICTING.

REPUBLICANS ARE TRYING TO ADD REPUBLICAN SEATS.

I THINK SO THE BIG THING FOLKS ARE LOOKING FOR HERE IS DEMOCRATS REALLY TRYING TO USE THEIR LEVERAGE TO DRAW DISTRICTS TO REALLY BOLSTER THE NUMBER OF DEMOCRATS IN THE NEW YORK DELEGATION SO THAT THE PARTY HAS A BETTER CHANCE AT CONTROLLING CONGRESS THIS FALL.

THAT'S THE BIG STORY.

>> DO WE KNOW WHERE THE SEAT COMES FROM, THE ONE THAT WE'RE LOSING?

DID WE LOSE IT UPSTATE?

>> IT'S ALMOST ASSURED.

>> WE HAVE THE CHAIR OF THE COMMISSION ON IN OCTOBER OR SEPTEMBER OF THAT AREA.

HE SAID IT WAS GOING TO BE UPSTATE.

YOU PROBABLY DON'T KNOW WHERE UPSTATE, THOUGH.

>> WE DON'T KNOW WHERE UNTIL WE SEE THE MAPS.

IT'S ALMOST COMPLETELY ASSURED THAT IT WILL BE BECAUSE, A, UPSTATE HAS NOT GAINED POPULATION.

THAT'S THE SAME AS DOWNSTATE.

B, AGAIN, DEMOCRATS CONTROL THIS.

THE REPUBLICAN SEATS ARE GENERALLY UPSTATE.

IT'S GONNA-- THERE'S SOME REPUBLICANS WHO ALREADY SAID THEY'RE NOT RUNNING AGAIN.

15 SO IT'S JUST A NATURAL TAKE THAT IT'S ONE OF THOSE REPUBLICAN DISTRICTS THAT'S GOING TO GET SWALLOWED UP.

IN THE PAST WHEN NEW YORK LOST TWO SEATS RATHER AT A TIME, IT WAS ALWAYS A GENTLEMEN'S AGREEMENT THAT EACH PARTY WOULD LOSE ONE SEAT.

THAT'S HOW IT WORKED OUT IN BACK ROOM DEALS.

NOW IT'S JUST ONE SEAT.

DEMOCRATS CONTROL THE PROCESS.

THERE'S LIKE 99.9% CHANCE THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A REPUBLICAN SEAT THAT IS SWALLOWED UP.

>> ZACH, THERE HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, RUMORS FROM REPUBLICANS WHO SAY THAT SINCE DEMOCRATS ARE CONTROLLING THIS PROCESS NOW, THEY CONTROL BOTH THE SENATE AND THE ASSEMBLY.

SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE PASSING THE NEW MAPS.

REPUBLICANS SAID THEY'RE GOING TO USE THIS AS A WAY TO GAIN GROUND, BOTH, YOU KNOW IN CONGRESS AND IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

DO WE SEE ANY INDICATION OF THAT BEING TRUE?

WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THAT?

>> THE PROCESS CAN ONLY DISADVANTAGE THE REPUBLICANS.

PARTICULARLY IN THE STATE SENATE.

(INAUDIBLE) THEM TEN YEARS AFTER THEY JERRYMANDERED THE STATE SENATE, NOW IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW BAD IT WILL BE FOR THEM.

YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE A 16 LOT OF INDICATIONS ABOUT THE SPECIFICS OF WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THE STATE SENATE BUT NEEDLESS TO SAY IT WILL BENEFIT THE DEMOCRATS.

SOMETHING THAT WILL BE VERY INTERESTING, THOUGH, IS THE DEMOCRATS HAVE HAD SUPERMAJORITIES IN THE STATE SENATE AND ASSEMBLY SINCE THE 2020 ELECTIONS.

BIGGEST MAJORITY THE, I THINK, LIKE A CENTURY AND SOME AND THIS WILL BE THE FIRST TIME THAT THEY ACTUALLY MATTER.

THEY HAVEN'T-- THEY HAVEN'T PUSHED BACK AT ALL ON THE EXECUTIVE, ANY VETOES OR OVERRIDING THEM BUT THEY WILL NEED A TWO-THIRDS MARGE TON PASS THEIR REDISTRICTING PLANS IN THE SENATE WHERE THERE'S ONLY 44 DEMOCRATS AND YOU NEED 42 VOTES, MAYBE, JUST MAYBE TWO OR THREE DEMOCRATS COULD RAISE A LITTLE BIT OF TROUBLE, BUT MY SUSPICION IS THAT IN THE END, THEY'RE GOING TO VOTE IN LOCK STEP FOR REDISTRICTING PLAN THAT'S GOING TO BENEFIT THEM IN THE ASSEMBLY, STATE SENATE AND IN CONGRESS WHICH HAS NATIONAL IMPLICATIONS.

>> I MEAN, DO WE KNOW HOW MANY SEATS THEY COULD REALLY GAIN?

>> THAT WAS CIRCULATED ONLINE THIS WEEK THAT WAS ATTRIBUTED TO SEAN PATRICK MAHONEY, THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE HUDSON VALLEY WHO CHAIRS THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE, WAS FLOATING A 17 24:2 MAP.

THAT MEANS THAT REPUBLICANS WOULD LOSE QUITE A FEW SEATS AND JUST TWO OF THEM WOULD SURVIVE.

MOST LIKELY CHRIS JACOBS IN THE WESTERN NEW YOURK AND ELISE STEFANIC IN THE NORTH COUNTRY.

THAT MEANS THE ONLY REPUBLICAN IN NEW YORK CITY, NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, IS PROBABLY GOING TO FACE A TOUGH CHALLENGE TO GET RE-ELECTED BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE THE BROOKLYN PART OF HER DISTRICT TO LOWER MANHATTAN WHICH REALLY FAVORS THE DEMOCRATS.

>> OH, WOW.

IS THIS HER FIRST TERM IN CONGRESS, OR IS THIS HER SECOND TERM?

I DON'T REMEMBER-- >> BELIEVE IT OR NOT, SHE'S ONLY BEEN IN CONGRESS ONE TERM.

IT FEELS LIKE A LIFETIME.

THIS WILL BE A REAL KEY TEST OF JUST HOW STRONG REPUBLICANS ARE IN NEW YORK CITY AFTER A PRETTY FRIENDLY 2021 ELECTION CYCLE.

>> WE'LL SEE HOW THAT WORKS OUT.

YANCEY, I WANT TO TURN BACK TO YOU.

SO WE SAW FORMER ASSEMBLY SPEAKER SHELDON SILVER PASS AWAY THIS WEEK IN PRISON.

TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT HIS LEGACY IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE NOW THAT HE'S GONE.

HE HAD A TUMULTUOUS TIME AS SPEAKER.

18 I DON'T-- WAS HE THE LONGEST SERVING SPEAKER IN HISTORY?

>> ALMOST MADE THE RECORD.

IF NOT FOR THE INDICTMENT, HE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE MADE IT.

>> EXACTLY AND HIS TIME THERE WAS REALLY POISONED WITH A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, HE PROTECTED SOME LAWMAKERS THAT WERE ACCUSED OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT ALLEGATIONS.

HE WAS CONVICTED ON CORRUPTION CHARGES.

HOW WILL PEOPLE REMEMBER SHELDON SILVER?

>> SOMETIMES IT WILL DEPEND A LITTLE BIT HOW WHATEVER HIS ACTIONS PERSONALLY AFFECTED YOU OR YOUR COMMUNITY PERHAPS.

I MEAN, LOOK, HE WAS IN PLACE MORE THAN 20 YEARS.

AS YOU MENTIONED, SECOND LONGEST SPEAKER IN THE ASSEMBLY HISTORY.

THERE'S SO MANY WAYS TO LIKE LOOK AT THIS, SO MANY ANGLES.

START FROM THE FOLKS WHO CHAMPIONED HIM.

HE WAS THE DEMOCRATIC FACE OF ANY OPPOSITION OF REPUBLICAN DOMINATION DURING THE PATAKI YEARS AND DURING THAT TIME, HE SUCCESSFULLY PUSHED FOR A LOT OF THINGS THAT DEMOCRATS WANT, PRE-KINDERGARTEN EXPANSION, MORE MONEY FOR EDUCATION, MORE MONEY FOR COLLEGES, SOME ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS.

HE WAS THE CHAMPION OF LIBERAL CAUSES FOR ALL OF THAT.

BUT AS YOU SAID ON THE OTHER 19 SIDE, THERE'S SO MANY THINGS THAT DETRACT FROM THAT, ESPECIALLY THE ENDING.

HE WAS CONVICTED IN A CORRUPTION SCAM.

ESSENTIALLY STEERING MONEY THROUGH HIS LAW FIRM TO GET KICKBACKS IS SORT OF THE SHORT TERM THERE-- SHORT ANSWER THERE.

THE COVER-UP OF VETO LOPES SEXUAL HARASSMENT CASES AND THE SECRET SETTLEMENTS AND HOW THAT RESULTED IN CHANGES ON HOW THE ASSEMBLY AND STATE HANDLES THOSE.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF MIX BAG THERE FOR HOW PEOPLE CAN LOOK BACK OVER HIS 20 PLUS YEARS AS A POWERFUL FIGURE IN NEW YORK POLITICS.

>> OF COURSE IN 2015 REPLACED BY CARL HEASTIE AS THE ASSEMBLY SPEAKER AND HE'S REMAINED IN THAT POST SINCE.

I DID WANT TO GET TO THE MASK MANDATE BUT WE'RE RUNNING OUT OF TIME UNFORTUNATELY.

ZACH WILLIAMS FROM CITY AND STATE.

YANCEY ROY FROM NEWSDAY.

THANK YOU BOTH SO MUCH.

I APPRECIATE IT.

SO AS WE TOLD YOU, HOUSING IS EXPECTED TO BE ANOTHER BIG ISSUE IN ALBANY THIS YEAR.

GOVERNOR HOCHUL WANTS A FIVE-YEAR, $25 BILLION HOUSING PLAN AND PART OF IT WOULD EXPAND SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.

JUST FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW, SUPPORTIVE HOUSING HAS SERVICES ON-SITE FOR TENANTS WITH CERTAIN NEEDS, LIKE 20 THOSE WITH A CHRONIC ILLNESS OR AN ADDICTION OR A FAMILY THAT WAS RECENTLY HOMELESS.

WE'VE GOT THE DETAILS OF HOCHUL'S PLAN THIS WEEK AND WHAT IT WOULD MEAN FOR SUPPORTIVE HOUSING WITH WORD ON THE SHOE FROM THE SUPPORTING HOUSEWORK OF NEW YORK.

LAURA, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

I APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU, DAN, FOR HAVING ME.

>> OF COURSE.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, WHICH SOMETHING THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT.

THE GOVERNOR IS PROPOSING 7,000 NEW SUPPORTIVE HOUSING UNITS IN HER EXECUTIVE BUDGET.

SHE ALSO WANTS TO REHAB 3,000 EXISTING UNITS.

I'M WONDERING FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, IS THAT ENOUGH, OR DO WE NEED TO GO FARTHER WITH THAT?

>> I THINK IT'S AN INCREDIBLE INVESTMENT, AND THESE RESOURCES WILL ABSOLUTELY TAKE US A LONG WAY.

THE OTHER THING THAT'S AMAZING ABOUT IT IS THAT IT'S A FIVE-YEAR HOUSING PLAN SO THAT WE CAN REALLY HAVE THE PREDICTABILITY AS DEVELOPERS OF SUPPORTIVE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO KNOW THAT THE MONEY WILL BE THERE YEAR AFTER YEAR, WHICH IS 21 VERY IMPORTANT.

AND OF COURSE, THE NEED IS GREAT ALWAYS.

WE DO HAVE AN AFFORDABLE AND A HOMELESSNESS CRISIS, THAT I DO THINK THIS WILL GET US WELL ON OUR WAY, AND THE GOVERNOR IS REALLY DOING MORE THAN THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION BY ADDING THE PRESERVATION UNITS, WHICH IS ALSO WONDERFUL.

>> SO TELL ME ABOUT WHERE THE NEED IS HERE.

SO IN TERMS OF SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE TRANSITIONING FROM BEING HOMELESS.

SO WHERE DO WE TARGET THESE UNITS?

IS IT MOSTLY-- ARE WE LOOKING AT NEW YORK CITY MOSTLY, OR IS IT SPREAD OUT ACROSS THE STATE?

WHAT WOULD HAVE THE BEST IMPACT?

>> UH-HUH.

SO GREAT QUESTION.

WE ACTUALLY HAVE MORE OF A HOMELESSNESS CRISIS IN THE CITY.

NOT SURPRISING.

IT'S A LARGER POPULATION, BUT WE ALSO DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS IN THE REST OF STATE.

SO THIS PROGRAM, THE SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PROGRAM THAT'S BEEN GOING FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS HAS DEVELOPED A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF UPSTATE BUILDINGS WHICH HAS BEEN FABULOUS BECAUSE IT'S THE FIRST TIME THAT THE SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PROGRAM WAS ACTUALLY STATEWIDE.

22 SO GOVERNOR HOCHUL IS CONTINUING THAT AND, YOU KNOW, WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THOSE UPSTATE COMMUNITIES TO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP SUPPORTIVE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

>> YOU KNOW WHEN WE LOOK AT BIG PICTURE GOALS HERE, HOMELESSNESS IS OBVIOUSLY A PROBLEM.

IT FEELS LIKE A PERENNIAL PROBLEM.

HOW DO WE GET TO THE HEART OF IT WITH THE SUPPORTIVE HOUSING?

DO WE NEED TO GO BEYOND THAT 7,000 IN THE OUTYEARS?

DO WE NEED TO BUILD ONTOP OF THAT?

OR, DOES THIS MEET YOUR FIVE-YEAR PLAN THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, IS THIS ENOUGH TO TACKLE THE HOMELESSNESS CRISIS THAT WE HAVE GOING ON RIGHT NOW?

>> RIGHT.

SO THIS FIRST FIVE YEARS IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT.

BUT WE NEED TO CONTINUE HAVING ONE AFTER THE OTHER FIVE-YEAR HOUSING PLANS, AND I DO THINK NOW THAT WE'VE SET THE TONE, JUST FINISHING THE PREVIOUS FIVE-YEAR PLAN AND NOW WE ARE MOVING ON TO ANOTHER ONE THAT I THINK REALLY THIS GOVERNOR AND ANY GOVERNOR THEREAFTER WILL REALLY WANT TO INVEST IN A FIVE-YEAR HOUSING PLAN BECAUSE THE AFFORDABILITY CRISIS AND THE HOMELESSNESS CRISIS IS NOT EASILY GOING AWAY AND SO AFFORDABLE AND SUPPORTIVE HOUSING ARE ABSOLUTELY KEY TO-- TO ADDRESS BOTH OF THOSE 23 ISSUES.

>> SO THE UNIQUE PART ABOUT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING IS YOU HAVE THESE DIRECT SERVICES PROVIDERS RIGHT ON-SITE.

THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSING A 5.4% COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT INCREASE, WHICH FOR PEOPLE THAT AREN'T FAMILIAR, IT'S BASICALLY MORE FUNDING TO RAISE THEIR SALARIES AND RETAIN STAFF BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS PROBLEM IN THE HUMAN SERVICES SECTOR WHERE PEOPLE JUST AREN'T PAID ENOUGH.

SO THEY GO ONTO OTHER JOBS WITH COMPARABLE SALARIES AND EVEN JOBS WITH LESS STRESS AND HAVE THE SAME SALARY.

WITH THIS 5.4% INCREASE, IS THAT ENOUGH TO KEEP THIS INDUSTRY AFLOAT?

CAN WE RETAIN THOSE WORKERS WITH THIS INCREASE?

>> ANOTHER GREAT QUESTION.

THE 5.4% IS AMAZING.

WE WERE VERY, VERY HAPPY TO SEE THAT IN THE EXECUTIVE BUDGET, AND YOU KNOW, REALLY OUR WORKFORCE WAS AN ESSENTIAL WORKFORCE DURING THE PANDEMIC AND WE NEED TO SHOW THAT WORKFORCE THAT WE ARE INVESTING IN THEM, THAT WE APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THEY'RE DOING, AND SO THIS INCREASE WILL GO A LONG WAY, BUT WE ALSO NEED REPEATED INCREASES EVERY YEAR.

BECAUSE COSTS GO UP AND WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO RETAIN OUR STAFF AND WE DON'T WANT THEM ONCE TRAINED AND WORKING WITH US AND HAVING RELATIONSHIPS WITH OUR TENANTS AND OUR CLIENTS TO 24 THEN GO OFF TO ANOTHER JOB BECAUSE THEY CAN GET PAID, YOU KNOW, MORE MONEY THERE.

SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE REALLY INVEST AND RECOGNIZE THE WORK OF THE HUMAN SERVICES SECTOR.

>> IT'S A BIG UNDERTAKING FOR THESE PROVIDERS.

I HAVE TO IMAGINE IT'S STRESSFUL.

WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THESE INCREASES THAT YOU WANT EVERY YEAR FOR THEM, DO YOU HAVE A BALLPARK NUMBER, OR DOES IT DEPEND ON A YEAR?

WITH A 5.4%, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT'S COST OF LIVING AND THAT'S KIND OF BASED ON INFLATION.

IS THERE A PERCENT OR AN AMOUNT THAT WE SHOULD BE INCREASING EVERY YEAR, OR SHOULD LAWMAKERS AND THE GOVERNOR PLAY THAT BY EAR?

>> YES.

GOOD QUESTION.

SO I REALLY FEEL THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A CONSISTENT INCREASE EVERY YEAR AND I THINK THE TARGET OF 5% WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.

IT WOULD ALSO GIVE THE SECTOR THE PREDICTABILITY THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO BUDGET FOR THAT AND TELL STAFF THAT WOULD BE THE CASE, THAT THEY COULD GIVE THEM INCREASES.

LIKE WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, ANYWHERE FROM A 3 TO 5% INCREASE EVERY YEAR JUST TO KEEP THE SECTOR GOING.

AND AS YOU KNOW, WE REALLY HAVE A LOT OF VACANCIES IN A NUMBER OF SECTORS RIGHT NOW, 25 AND THE NONPROFIT HAVE NOT BEEN SPARED.

AND IT IS A TOUGH, STRESSFUL JOB AND WE IF WE WANT TO KEEP THE STAFF, WE REALLY NEED TO BE COMPETITIVE WITH OUR SALARIES.

>> IT'S A BIG PROBLEM NOT JUST FOR SUPPORTIVE HOUSING BUT FOR ALL HUMAN SERVICES ADMINISTRATORS ACROSS THE STATE.

THEY'VE BEEN CALLING FOR INCREASES FOR YEARS AND MAYBE WE'LL SEE THAT HAPPEN IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET.

WE'LL LEAVE IT THERE.

LAURA MASCUCH FROM THE SUPPORTIVE HOUSING NETWORK, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU, DAN.

>> AND THE STATE BUDGET HEARING ON HOUSING IS MONDAY.

WE'LL KEEP OUR EYES OUT FOR ANY NEWS THERE.

UNTIL THEN, THANKS FOR WATCHING THIS WEEK'S "NEW YORK NOW."

HAVE A GREAT WEEK AND BE WELL.

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

[ DRILLING NOISE ]