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

I'M SHANTEL DESTRA.

IN RECENT MONTHS, THERE HAS BEEN MAJOR CONCERN OVER CUTS STEMMING FROM THE FEDERAL BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL.

IN NEW YORK, STATE LAWMAKERS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS HAVE BEEN SOUNDING THE ALARM ON HOW THE LEGISLATION WOULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE MEDICAID PROGRAM AND SNAP BENEFITS IN NEW YORK.

THE STATE COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE, WHICH IS IN CHARGE OF LOOKING AT THE OVERALL FINANCIAL HEALTH OF THE STATE, IS ALSO INDICATING THAT NEW YORK WILL FACE AN UPHILL BATTLE IN MITIGATING THESE CUTS.

IN THIS NEXT SEGMENT, WE'LL SIT DOWN WITH STATE COMPTROLLER, TOM DINAPOLI, FOR AN IN DEPTH ANALYS OF THE FEDERAL CUTS, THE FUTURE OF STATE BUDGETS AHEAD AND UNCLEAN FUNDS FOR NEW YORKERS.

HERE'S THAT CONVERSATION.

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

>> GREAT TO BE BACK IN THE STUDIO WITH YOU.

>> IT'S NO SECRET THAT FEDERAL FUNDING TAKES UP A GOOD PORTION OF THE STATE'S BUDGET.

THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONCERN THIS YEAR ABOUT CUTS TO FEDERAL FUNDING STEMMING FROM THE BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL.

SO AS A STATE COMPTROLLER, I WANTED TO GET YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON THE BILL'S IMPACT ON THE STATE.

>> YEAH.

CERTAINLY NOT A POSITIVE IMPACT, AND YOU KNOW, YOU'RE RIGHT.

AT ANY GIVEN YEAR, 35 TO 40% OF THE STATE BUDGET IS FEDERAL MONEY THAT COMES THROUGH AND THE BUDGET-- THE YEAR WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW WAS COUNTING ON ABOUT $94 BILLION OF FEDERAL MONEY COMING IN.

IT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS WHEN THE BUDGET WAS BEING PUT TOGETHER THAT WE HAD EXPRESSED THAT WITHOUT KNOWING THE NUMBERS, WE KNEW THAT SOMETHING NEGATIVE WAS GOING TO BE COMING OUT OF THE PROCESS IN WASHINGTON.

WELL, NOW WE CERTAINLY HAVE A BETTER IDEA AND THE HITS ARE SIGNIFICANT.

PARTICULARLY IN TERMS OF HEALTH CARE, MEDICAID DOLLARS, JUST IN THAT AREA, LOOKING AT THE IMPACT ESPECIALLY WITH WHAT'S CALLED THE ESSENTIAL PLAN, THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET WE'RE LOOKING AT A LOSS OF FUNDING ABOUT $750 MILLI DOLLARS AND THAT WILL GET LARGER NEXT YEAR ABOUT $3 BILLION DOLLA THAT'S JUST PRIMARILY LOOKING AT HEALTH CARE.

WHEN YOU ADD IN SNAP, USED TO BE CALLED FOOD STAMPS, NUTRITION PROGRAMS, EDUCATION, SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS RELATED TO CLEAN ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE AND SO ON, IT'S GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE TO NAVIGATE THAT.

ONE OF THE OTHER ISSUES IS THAT NOT ALL OF THESE CUTS WILL TAKE EFFECT RIGHT AWAY.

SOME OF IT IS GOING TO BE PHASED IN OVER TIME.

SOME OF IT WILL COME IN AFTER THE NEXT ROUND OF MIDTERM ELECTIONS.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S A COINCIDENCE.

WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT.

IT'S NOT JUST CUTS.

IT'S ALSO INCREASED ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.

YOU'RE LOOKING AT VERY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS PARTICULARLY WITH REGARD TO HEALTH CARE.

>> I KNOW YOUR OFFICE RECENTLY PUT OUT A REPORT REALLY FOCUSED ON THE IMPACT OF FOOD INSECURITY IN THE STATE BECAUSE OF THESE FEDERAL CUTS.

WHY DO YOU THINK THIS IS SUCH A BIG ISSUE FOR A STATE LIKE NEW YORK?

>> YOU KNOW, NEW YORK WE'RE VIEWED AS A WEALTHIER STATE THAN MANY OTHER STATES AND THAT'S CERTAINLY TRUE, BUT WE'RE ALSO A VERY DIVERSE STATE.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS, WE FOUND THAT ABOUT 1 IN 8 HOUSEHOLDS IN NEW YORK WERE SUFFERING FROM FOOD INSECURITY.

YOU KNOW, SOME OF THAT RELATES TO CHALLENGES THAT CAME OUT OF THE PANDEMIC, BUT DURING THE PANDEMIC, IT WAS ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR PROGRAMS INCLUDING NUTRITION PROGRAMS THAT THOSE FEDERAL DOLLARS, THAT PANDEMIC AID IS LARGELY GONE NOW.

WE'RE STARTING TO SEE THAT IMPACT AGAIN.

1 IN 8, THAT'S A PRETTY BIG PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE SUFFERING.

SO WHEN YOU CUT DOWN ON A PROGRAM LIKE SNAP, YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO MAKE THOSE NUMBERS WORSE, AND THAT'S REALLY A CONCERN.

LOOK, WE SEE THE IMPACT OF INFLATION.

EVERYBODY'S FEELING IT.

ESPECIALLY AT THE GROCERY STORE AND CERTAINLY IF YOU'RE-- IF YOU'RE A FAMILY THAT ALREADY HAS LIMITED FUNDS TO PROVIDE FOR FOOD AND YOU RELY ON SOMETHING LIKE SNAP, THE SNAP PROGRAM, AGAIN, WHAT WE USED TO CALL FOOD STAMPS, CUTS BACK THERE WHERE, AGAIN, THERE ARE CHANGES IN ELIGIBILITY, INCREASED ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS AND BOTTOM LINE CUTS, IT JUST SPELLS FOR I THINK A LOT OF PAIN FOR TOO MANY FAMILIES.

>> AND ON THE CUTS TO MEDICAID, WE KNOW THAT THE STATE EACH AND EVERY YEAR SPENDS A LOT OF MONEY IN THE STATE BUDGET TO THAT PROGRAM.

SO HOW DO YOU THINK THE GOVERNOR AND STATE LAWMAKERS SHOULD APPROACH FUNDING TO THAT PROGRAM IN THE YEARS TO COME GIVEN THESE FEDERAL CUTS IN A WAY THAT IS FINANCIALLY SUSTAINABLE FOR THE STATE?

>> IT'S GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE.

I THINK IT HAS TO BE A COMBINATION OF FACTORS.

I MEAN, LOOK, LET'S HOPE THAT AT SOME POINT THERE WILL BE A CHANGE IN POLITICAL DIRECTION WHERE SOME OF THE CUTS THAT WILL BE COMING DOWN THE ROAD WON'T EXACTLY COME TO PASS, BUT PUTTING THAT ASIDE, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE CAREFUL IF WE DO ANY CUTS IN SPENDING, MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE DON'T GET HURT.

THE STATE DOES HAVE SOME RESERVES.

NOT AS HIGH AN AMOUNT AS I'VE ARGUED FOR IN THE PAST BUT THERE IS SOME MONEY THERE TO BACKSTOP.

MAY NOT BE ABLE TO COVER IT ALL, YOU KNOW, GOING BACK IN RECENT WEEKS, IT WAS ESTIMATED THAT ON MEDICAID ALONE WE COULD BE LOOKING AT OVER $13 BILLION LOST.

PRETTY SIGNIFICANT LOSS.

AGAIN, WE HAVE TO SEE WHAT THE ACTUAL NUMBERS ARE.

I WOULD HOPE THAT THE MEDICAID PROGRAM PARTICULARLY WE WOULD ALSO USE THIS AS A CHALLENGE TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE COULD BE MORE EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE WITH HOW WE'RE SPENDING THE MONEY.

YOU KNOW, OUR OFFICE DOES AUDITS ALL THE TIME ON THE MEDICAID PROGRAM.

WE OFTEN IDENTIFY OPPORTUNITIES TO SAVE MONEY BECAUSE OF INEFFICIENCY.

SOMETIMES THERE'S FRAUD BUT IT'S REALLY MORE A QUESTION OF INEFFICIENCY AND WAYS HOW THE PROGRAM CAN BE RUN MORE TIGHTLY, MORE EFFECTIVELY WITHOUT HURTING PEOPLE GETTING SERVICES.

SO I THINK THE CHALLENGE IS GOING TO BE TO REALLY SEE WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE GOING TO BE.

THE FIRST YEAR, THIS ONE I'M SURE WE CAN MANAGE.

IT SAYS WE SEE THE MULTIBILLION DOLLAR IMPACT IN THE OUTYEARS.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE A BIT MORE CAREFUL.

KEEP IN MIND FOR THE STATE BUDGET, EVEN WITH THE GENERAL STATE BUDGET THAT WAS ENACTED THIS YEAR, IT WAS ALREADY ASSUMED THERE WAS GOING TO OUTYEAR BUDGET GAPS THAT WERE GROWING.

NOW WITH FEDERAL CUTS, NOW THAT WE'RE SEEING THE ACTUAL NUMBERS, THOSE OUTYEAR GAPS ARE JUST GOING TO GROW.

NOT JUST IN TERMS OF HEALTH CARE, BUT PROGRAMS FOR EDUCATION, FOR SENIORS, FOR FIREMEN, FOR HOUSING, GO DOWN THE LONG LIST.

IT'S GOING TO BE A CHALLENGING FEW YEARS OF BUDGETING HERE IN NEW YORK.

>> AND THE GOVERNOR DOES HAVE EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY TO MAKE MIDSTREAM CUTS TO THE STATE BUDGET AND CHANGES GIVEN FEDERAL CUTS COMING DOWN UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT.

SO CAN YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND HOW THIS ALL WORKS?

>> YEAH.

VERY GOOD POINT.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONTINGENCIES THAT WAS PUT IN.

AGAIN, I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO SEE A LITTLE MORE PUT IN RESERVE.

INSTEAD, THE FLEXIBILITY GIVEN TO THE EXECUTIVE WHO LED THE DIVISION OF THE BUDGET, HAVE CUTS UP TO $2 BILLION DOLLARS.

YOU KNOW, AS THE GOVERNOR JUST ANNOUNCED, SHE'S LOOKING AT THE BUDGET NOW, CALLING ON AGENCIES TO SAVE MONEY, TO ADDRESS THAT $750 MILLION HIT THAT WE HAVE IN THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET.

THE PROVISION IN THERE ALSO IS THAT IF THE LEGISLATURE WOULD HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION AS TO WHERE ANY CUTBACKS SHOULD BE, THEY HAVE TEN DAYS, I THINK IT IS, TO COME BACK, COME UP WITH AN ALTERNATE PROGRAM.

YOU KNOW, I'M SURE THE GOVERNOR WON'T TAKE THAT ACTION WITHOUT CONSULTING, YOU KNOW, WITH PARTNERS AND THEY'RE TRYING TO BUILD A CONSENSUS.

BUT IT'S-- THAT'S GOING TO BE THE FIRST REAL PENCIL SHARPENING AND REALLY LOOKING AT THE BOTTOM LINE THAT I THINK IS GOING TO BE MORE TYPICAL OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE LIVING WITH FOR MANY, MANY MONTHS IF NOT YEARS TO COME.

>> AND LOOKING AT THE BUDGET IN THE YEARS TO COME, HOW DO YOU THINK THE GOVERNOR AND STATE LAWMAKERS SHOULD BE APPROACHING THE BUDGET IN A WAY THAT IS CONSERVATIVE AND ALSO ADDRESSES NOT ONLY THE REALITY OF FEDERAL CUTS BUT ALSO THE INCREASING COST OF INFLATION AND YOU KNOW, TARIFFS ON GOODS?

>> YOU KNOW, VERY GOOD POINT.

THAT TARIFF QUESTION REALLY AFFECTS THE OVERALL ECONOMY.

THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS IF THE ECONOMY IS GOING TO START TO SLOW DOWN, AND WE ALSO KNOW THERE ARE PARTS OF OUR STATE THAT STILL HAVE NOT GROWN BACK ALL THE JOBS THAT WERE LOST OVER THE PANDEMIC, WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACT ON ECONOMIC ACTIVITY, THEN WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACT ON TAX REVENUE SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT CAREFULLY.

I THINK WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT INSTEAD OF JUST WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET JUST ADDING TO WHATEVER IS THERE, REALLY SCRUTINIZE THE SPENDING AND SEE IF THERE ARE WAYS TO BE MORE EFFICIENT, TO STILL DELIVER THE SERVICE, BUT IN A MORE COST EFFECTIVE WAY.

WE DON'T ALWAYS DO THAT AS WELL AS WE SHOULD IN GOVERNMENT GENERALLY.

SO I THINK THAT CHALLENGE IS THERE.

YOU KNOW, AND SOME ARGUE THAT IT SHOULDN'T JUST BE ON THE SPENDING SIDE, BUT YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THE TAX REVENUE SIDE.

YOU KNOW, SOME ARGUE FOR INCREASED TAXES, PARTICULARLY ON HIGHER INCOME NEW YORKERS.

I THINK THAT'S ALWAYS IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT HIGHER INCOME FOLKS ARE ALREADY PAYING A BIT MORE AND YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE BEEN LOSING SOME TAXPAYERS.

NOT EVERYBODY IS LEAVING NEW YORK STATE CONTRARY TO WHAT THE CRITICS SAY, BUT YOU KNOW, KEEP IN MIND THE STATE IS VERY DEFENDANT ON PERSONAL INCOME TAX REVENUE.

YOU KNOW, ROUGHLY THE TOP 2% OF TAXPAYERS CARRY CLOSE TO 50% OF THE TAX BURDEN THAT COMES IN AS FAR AS PERSONAL INCOME TAX COLLECTION.

SO MAKING THE RIGHT CHOICES ABOUT APPROPRIATE TAX LEVEL, NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE BUT SOMETHING WE HAVE TO BE MINDFUL OF.

SO I WOULD ALWAYS SAY, YOU KNOW, START AT THE POINT OF SAYING WHAT'S THE APPROPRIATE SPENDING LEVEL, CAN WE BE MORE EFFICIENT WITH HOW WE'RE SPENDING MONEY.

THAT SHOULD BE THE FIRST EFFORT.

AND LET'S NOT RESORT TO MORE BORROWING TO SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS AS WELL.

THAT'S ALSO BEEN A PATTERN THAT NEW YORK HAS FALLEN INTO IN PAST YEARS.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE VERY HIGHLY INDEBTED STATE.

THAT'S NOT A GOOD POSITION TO BE IN ESPECIALLY AS WE'RE NAVIGATING MORE CHALLENGING TIMES.

I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, A TALL ORDER FOR THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR.

I'M SURE THEY'RE UP TO IT BECAUSE NEW YORKERS EXPECT A LOT IN TERMS OF SERVICES.

WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE STRUGGLING TO GET THROUGH THIS TOUGH TIME AND THEY DEPEND ON GOVERNMENT SERVICES.

WE TALKED ABOUT A FEW OF THEM.

WE HAVE A LOT OF OTHER ISSUES THAT PEOPLE NEED HELP ON.

HOUSING IS OBVIOUSLY A BIG ISSUE ACROSS THE STATE IN MANY WAYS.

SO IT'S GOING TO BE A VERY INTERESTING TIME IN GOVERNMENT, A VERY CHALLENGING TIME, BUT YOU KNOW, I ALSO BELIEVE IN THE STRENGTH OF NEW YORK AND THE WISDOM OF NEW YORKERS.

WE'LL GET THROUGH THIS AND WE'LL DO IT IN A WAY THAT WE ARE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT NO ONE GETS UNREASONABLY HURT DESPITE WHAT WASHINGTON IS THROWING OUR WAY.

>> AND LASTLY, I KNOW YOUR OFFICE HAS BEEN DOING A LOT OF AWESOME WORK AROUND UNCLEAN FUNDS FOR NEW YORKERS.

CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THAT WORK?

AND YOU KNOW, THE PROCESS IF A NEW YORKER WANTS TO CLAIM SOME FUNDS?

>> SO THIS IS THE FUN PART OF THE JOB.

I ALSO TELL PEOPLE GO TO OUR WEBSITE.

PUT IN NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER OR WHATEVER YOUR SEARCH ENGINE IS.

CLICK ON UNCLAIMED FUNDS.

UNCLAIMED FUNDS, WE CALL IT LOST MONEY.

PEOPLE HAVE OLD BANK ACCOUNTS AND MAY HAVE MOVED.

THE BANK LOST TRACK OF YOU.

YOU DIDN'T UPDATE YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION.

YOU MAY HAVE HAD A HEALTH INSURANCE CHECK THAT WAS NEVER CASHED OR OLD UTILITY SECURITY DEPOSIT CHECK THAT WASN'T CASHED.

AGAIN, OFTEN IT'S BECAUSE PEOPLE MOVED AND CONTACT IS LOST OR SOMETIMES PEOPLE LEFT MONEY BY SOMEBODY.

IT'S INHERITANCE SITUATION.

THERE ARE VARIOUS WAYS THAT THESE KINDS OF DOLLARS OR ACCOUNTS ARE DECLARED, WE CALL IT ABANDONED PROPERTY.

TURNED OVER TO THE STATE FOR SAFEKEEPING.

THOSE ACCOUNTS NEVER EXPIRE AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO REMIND NEW YORKERS, ESPECIALLY DURING TOUGH TIMES THIS IS YOUR MONEY.

WE WANT TO GET IT BACK TO YOU.

SO WE HAVE MANY WAYS THAT WE PUBLICIZE GOING TO OUR WEBSITE.

BECAUSE YOU CAN ACTUALLY NOW SEARCH RIGHT ONLINE, APPLY RIGHT ONLINE IF IT'S A QUICK MATCH.

WE'RE DOING SOMETHING ELSE NEW STARTING THIS YEAR WHERE FOR ANY NEW CLAIM COMING IN $250 OR LESS, WE'RE HAVING AN EXPEDITED PROCESS.

WHERE IF WE HAVE THE VALID INFORMATION, WE WILL ACTUALLY MAIL THE CHECK DIRECTLY TO YOU BEFORE YOU HAVE TO COME TO US.

IN THE PAST, IT WAS, YOU KNOW, YOU COME TO US OR WE'LL FIND AND YOU ASK YOU TO SUBMIT A CLAIM.

NOW WE'LL JUST SEND THAT CHECK OUT.

SO USING THAT EXPEDITED PROCESS ACTUALLY, WE RETURNED ABOUT $5 MILLION JUST SO FAR THIS YEAR AND WE'RE UP TO, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, RETURNING ABOUT $2 MILLION A DAY TO NEW YORKERS.

BUT MORE MONEY KEEPS COMING IN.

GIFT CARDS IS A NEW AREA, WHEN THEY EXPIRE, IT IS TURN OVER TO US.

SO WE KEEP THE ACCOUNTS IN SAFE KEEPING BUT CERTAINLY DURING TOUGH TIMES WE WANT NEW YORKERS TO GET THEIR MONEY.

I DO HOPE YOUR VIEWERS WILL IF THEY HAVEN'T HEARD OF THE PROGRAM, GO TO OUR WEBSITE.

CLICK ON UNCLAIMED FUNDS AND ALWAYS REMIND PEOPLE IT COULD BE IN YOUR PERSONAL NAME, ANY ORGANIZATION YOU'RE ATTACHED TO, OR IT COULD BE IN THE NAME OF A DECEASED PARENT OR GRANDPARENT.

IF IT'S AN INHERITED SITUATION, WE MAY NEED A LITTLE MORE DOCUMENTATION.

BUT A LOT OF THESE ACCOUNTS GO BACK MANY DECADES.

PEOPLE WHO PASS AWAY.

ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE DEFUNCT.

WE MAY NEED MORE PROOF THAT YOU'RE CONNECTED TO IT, BUT THERE ARE MANY WAYS YOU MAY BE PART OF THOSE UNCLAIMED FUNDS.

>> WELL, THAT IS ALL THE TIME WE HAVE FOR TODAY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US HERE TODAY, COMPTROLLER.

>> I ENJOY THE CONVERSATION.

LOOK FORWARD TO COMING BACK.

>> WE WERE SPEAKING WITH TOM DINAPOLI, COMPTROLLER FOR THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> AND FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THE IMPACT OF FEDERAL CUTS ON NEW YORK, YOU CAN VISIT OUR WEBSITE.

THAT'S AT NYNOW.ORG.

NOW TURNING TO ANOTHER IMPORTANT TOPIC.

DURING THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION, STATE LAWMAKERS WERE PUSHING FOR A BILL THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR GROCERY STORES AND SUPERMARKETS TO SELL WINE IN THE STATES, BUT EVEN WITH CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS, THE BILL ULTIMATELY WAS NOT ABLE TO MAKE IT OVER THE LEGISLATIVE FINISH LINE.

OUR ELISE KLINE SPOKE WITH SUPPORTERS AND CRITICS OF THE BILL TO UNDERSTAND ITS LEGISLATIVE FUTURE.

HERE'S THAT STORY.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> IN 40 OTHER STATES ACROSS THE COUNTRY, YOU CAN BUY WINE IN GROCERY STORES.

NEW YORK IS ONE OF TEN STATES THAT DOESN'T ALLOW IT.

SOME NEW YORK STATE LAWMAKERS WANT TO CHANGE THIS WITH LEGISLATION THAT WOULD LEGALIZE THE SALE OF WINE IN GROCERY STORES.

STATE SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER, A DEMOCRAT REPRESENTING THE UPPER EAST SIDE IN MANHATTAN, AND A LEAD SPONSOR OF THE BILL, SAYS NEW YORK IS OUT OF THE NORM AND PASSING THIS BILL WOULD HAVE BENEFITS FOR CONSUMERS AND WINERIES.

>> IT WILL VERY LIKELY DECREASE THE COSTS AND IT'S AN INCREASE IN THE COMPETITION OF WHERE YOU CAN BUY IT, AND OF COURSE, IT ALSO THE WAY WE STRUCTURE THE BILL, GIVES PRIORITY INCENTIVES TO THE SALE OF NEW YORK STATE WINE AND ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF THIS LEGISLATION IS TO SUPPORT OUR LOCAL WINE AND GRAPE INDUSTRY.

SO WE SEE THIS AS A WIN-WIN-WIN FOR NEW YORK.

>> KRUEGER SEARCHED THAT THE ISSUE OF WINE IN GROCERY STORES IS POPULAR AMONG THE PUBLIC.

ACCORDING TO A 2025 SIENNA POLL, NEARLY 80% OF NEW YORKERS SUPPORT THE SALE OF WINE IN GROCERY STORES.

>> IT'S CLEARLY RESPONSIVE TO THE OPINION OF THE VAST MAJORITY OF CONSUMERS.

>> ASSEMBLY MEMBER PAM HUNTER, A DEMOCRAT REPRESENTING SYRACUSE, AND THE LEAD SPONSOR OF THE BILL IN THE ASSEMBLY, SAYS THE STATE NEEDS TO LEGALIZE WINE IN SUPERMARKETS BECAUSE THE STATE'S LIQUOR LAWS ARE OUTDATED AND DON'T AFFECT HOW CONSUMERS SHOP TODAY.

>> I THINK THE BENEFIT OF IT TODAY IS ULTIMATELY THE CONVENIENCE FOR CONSUMERS.

OVERWHELMINGLY, WHETHER IT'S DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS, INDEPENDENTS, OVER 75% OF WASN'T CONSTITUENTS ACROSS THE STATE ARE ASKING FOR AND ARE SUPPORTING THIS.

SO WE'RE LISTENING TO CONSUMERS.

WE'RE LISTENING TO PEOPLE WHO WANT THIS.

>> PAUL ZUBER, THE EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT WITH THE BUSINESS COUNCIL OF NEW YORK STATE, A SUPPORTER OF THE BILL, SAYS THIS LEGISLATION WILL ALSO MAKE NEW YORK MORE COMPETITIVE.

>> AND I THINK THAT COMPETITION HAS BEEN EVEN MORE HEIGHTENED OVER THE YEARS BECAUSE OF TECHNOLOGY.

WHEN OTHER STATES ARE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE SIMPLICITIES OF LIFE, IT'S VERY, VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT TO COMPANIES THAT WANT TO COME HERE.

>> WHILE THE BILL SEEMS TO BE QUITE POPULAR AMONG NEW YORKERS AND SOME ADVOCATE GROUPS, IT HAS STRONG OPPOSITION FROM LAWMAKERS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, AS WELL AS WINE AND LIQUOR STORE OWNERS.

MICHAEL CORRERA, OWNER OF MICHAEL TOWNE WINE&SPIRITS AND THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF METROPOLITAN PACKAGE STORE ASSOCIATION, SAYS THIS LEGISLATION WOULD BE A GAME-CHANGER FOR THE INDUSTRY AND HAVE A DEVASTATING IMPACT ON LOCAL WINE AND LIQUOR STORES.

>> IF WINE WENT TO GROCERIES, THE CONSUMER WOULD STOP BUYING WINE IN LIQUOR STORES AND BUYING IN LIQUOR STORES AND THEY WOULD BUY IN GROCERIES.

THERE WOULDN'T BE MORE WINE CONSUMERS.

THERE WOULDN'T BE MORE WINE SALES.

THERE WOULD BE JUST BUY WINE AT THE RICH COMPANIES LIKE THAT ARE OWNED BY AMAZON LIKE WHOLE FOODS AND ALL SORTS OF BIG COMPANIES LIKE THAT AND SMALL, INDEPENDENT BUSINESSES THAT WE REPRESENT, THAT WE ARE-- THAT'S WHAT WE ARE, LOCAL, SMALL MAIN STREET BUSINESSES WILL BE OUT OF BUSINESS.

>> LOCAL WINE AND LIQUOR STORE OWNERS LIKE TONY RUSSO IN WHITE PLAINS SAY THE LEGISLATION WOULD MAKE BUSINESS HARDER AT A TIME WHEN THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS IS BECOMING MORE EXPENSIVE.

>> SO EVERYTHING IS SKYROCKETING.

AGAIN, AS I SAID BEFORE, DRIVE DOWN ANY MAIN STREET AND SEE HOW MANY OPEN STORES YOU HAVE.

WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?

NOT ONLY OUR BUSINESS AND OUR BUSINESS IS IMPACTED THE SAME WAY.

WE HAVE A SELECT GROUP OF ITEMS THAT WE SELL.

I CAN'T SELL EVERYTHING.

I CAN SELL WINE.

I CAN SELL LIQUOR.

I CAN'T EVEN SELL, YOU KNOW, A NON-ALCOHOLIC WINE, RIGHT?

(LAUGHING) SO NOW YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE AWAY HALF OF MY BUSINESS.

>> RUSSO SAYS FOR HIS DAD WHO MIGRATED FROM ITALY DURING THE GREAT DEPRESSION, A WINE AND LIQUOR STORE WAS HIS WAY TO MAKE A LIVING AND THAT HOLDS FOR MANY COMMUNITIES TODAY.

>> THINK ABOUT THE IMMIGRANTS TODAY AND HOW, YOU KNOW-- HOW HARD THEY WORK.

TAKING ALL THAT AMERICAN DREAM AWAY FROM THESE GUYS, YOU KNOW.

HOW DO YOU START A BUSINESS TODAY, YOU KNOW, THE WAY MY DAD DID, THE WAY-- YOU KNOW THAT GOES BACK A WHILE.

EVEN COME 30 YEARS, 40 YEARS, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE.

THE COMPETITION THAT YOU FACE, THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT IT TAKES.

>> FOR SOME STORE OWNERS, THEIR LIVELIHOOD ALSO KEEPS A FAMILY LEGACY ALIVE.

STEFAN KALOGRIDIS, OWNER OF COLVIN WINE IN ALBANY, TOOK OVER FOR HIS DAD, WHO STARTED THE BUSINESS IN THE '70S.

>> IT'S BEEN A FAMILY BUSINESS FOR SO MANY YEARS.

I PUT TWO OF MY SONS THROUGH COLLEGE AND I'VE BEEN MAKING A FAIR LIVING.

>> KALOGRIDIS SAYS HE'S VERY WORRIED HE COULD BE FORKED TO CLOSE DOWN HIS BUSINESS, WHICH HAS BEEN IN HIS FAMILY FOR ABOUT 25 YEARS, IF THIS LAW IS PASSED.

>> I HAVE A MORTGAGE TO PAY.

I HAVE A LEASE HERE.

I HAVE EMPLOYEES.

I HAVE FOUR EMPLOYEES THAT MAY LOSE THEIR JOB.

YEAH, IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DETRIMENTAL TO OUR BUSINESS.

>> SUNDEEPA TELL, THE MANAGER OF NEW YORK STATE WINE AND LIQUOR WAREHOUSE, SAYS WINE AND LIQUOR STORES LIKE THE ONE HE MANAGES WILL SIMPLY NOT BE ABLE TO COMPETE.

>> WE CANNOT COMPETE DOLLAR TO DOLLAR WITH A BIG BOX STORE BECAUSE THEY HAVE DEEP POCKETS.

THEY CAN WHEEL AND DEAL WITH THE SUPPLIERS.

THEY CAN GET A MUCH LOWER PRICE THAN WE CAN.

>> TOWARD THE END OF THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION AT THE CAPITAL, LAWMAKERS MADE AMENDMENTS TO THE BILL IN AN EFFORT MEANT TO MITIGATE SMALL OWNERS' CONCERNS.

THE AMENDMENT WOULD ALLOW WINE AND LIQUOR STORES TO ALSO SELL SNACKS, MIXERS, AND CIGARETTES, WHICH THEY CURRENTLY CANNOT DO UNDER THE STATE'S LIQUOR LAWS.

THE AMENDMENT ALSO ESTABLISHES A 500-FOOT RULE PROHIBITING A WINE IN GROCERY STORE LICENSE WITHIN 500 FEET OF AN EXISTING WINE OR LIQUOR STORE.

SOME STATE LAWMAKERS FEEL THIS IS A GOOD COMPROMISE.

>> STORES THAT HAVE ONLY BEEN ABLE TO SELL LIQUOR AND WINE UP UNTIL NOW HAVE HAD SOME CONCERNS, INCLUDING THE FACT THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO SELL OTHER PRODUCTS AND HAVE BEEN PREVENTED FROM DOING SO.

THIS BILL ALLOWS THEM TO DO SO, AND THIS BILL ALSO REFLECTS RESP THEIR CONCERN ABOUT NEXT DOOR COMPETITION.

>> HUNTER STRESSES THEY ARE MAKING AN EFFORT TO LISTEN TO STAKEHOLDERS' CONCERNS.

>> WE ARE NOT CLOSING THE DOOR TO ANYONE.

WE'VE HAD SIGNIFICANT CONVERSATIONS WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND INDEPENDENT LIQUOR STORES, AND THAT'S WHY WE INTRODUCED MOST OF THESE AMENDMENTS BECAUSE OF THE CONCERNS COMING FROM THESE SMALLER INDEPENDENT LIQUOR STORES.

>> HOWEVER, MANY STORE OWNERS AND LAWMAKERS ALIKE DON'T FEEL THIS AMENDMENT DOES ENOUGH TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS.

>> WE DON'T WANT ANY OF THAT.

THAT'S JUST AN ATTEMPT ON THEIR PART TO PLACATE US SO THEY CAN DO A QUID PRO QUO.

WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN ANY OF THAT, AND IT'S CERTAINLY NOT AN EVEN EXCHANGE.

>> PATEL SAYS HE DOESN'T THINK THIS CHANGE TO THE BILL WILL HELP STORES.

>> I DON'T THINK IT'S A SOLUTION.

IT'S JUST SOMETHING-- IT'S LIKE A SOAP THAT THEY GIVE YOU WHEN THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE AWAY SOMETHING BIGGER FROM YOU.

>> STATE SENATOR PATRICIA FAHY, A DEMOCRAT REPRESENTING PARTS OF THE CAPITAL REGION, SAYS THE AMENDMENT IS SIMPLY INSUFFICIENT AND LAWMAKERS HAVE MORE WORK TO DO.

>> I'VE BEEN A FIERCE ADVOCATE FOR SMALL BUSINESSES HERE IN UPSTATE NEW YORK, SO WITH LEGISLATION, YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE, FIRST, DO NO HARM, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE PUTTING THOSE LIQUOR STORES OUT OF BUSINESS.

>> LAWMAKERS ACROSS THE AISLE, LIKE STATE SENATOR JOSEPH GRIFFO, A REPUBLICAN REPRESENTING LEWIS AND ONEIDA COUNTIES, AGREE.

>> WE SHOULD NOT BE IN THE BUSINESS TO PUT SMALL BUSINESSES OUT OF BUSINESS.

SO IF WE CAN FIGURE A WAY TO BRING EVERYBODY TOGETHER WHERE THEY CAN COMPETE AND SURVIVE AND THRIVE, I'M WILLING TO LISTEN AND CONSIDER THAT, BUT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I DON'T BELIEVE THE LAW IS PRESENTED EVEN WITH SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS, IS SUFFICIENT.

>> STATE SENATOR GEORGE BORRELLO, A REPUBLICAN REPRESENTING PARTS OF THE FINGER LAKES, SAYS A BETTER COMPROMISE IS A BILL HE SPONSORS TO ONLY ALLOW FOR THE SALE OF LOCAL NEW YORK STATE WINE IN GROCERY STORES.

>> NEW YORK STATE HAS A VERY ROBUST WINE INDUSTRY, BUT LIKE EVERY OTHER INDUSTRY IN NEW YORK STATE, IT'S UNDER STRAIN.

SO I UNDERSTAND THE NEED, YOU KNOW, WINE SALES GLOBALLY ARE DOWN.

AND I KNOW THE BIG PURVEYORS OF WINE ARE LOOKING FOR NEW MARKETS.

NEW YORK STATE IS ONE OF ONLY TEN STATES IN THE NATION THAT DOES NOT ALLOW THE SALE OF WINE IN GROCERY STORES AND IT'S BY FAR THE BIGGEST OF THOSE TEN STATES.

SO THERE IS CERTAINLY THE TEMPTATION.

THAT'S WHY I OFFERED WHAT I FEEL IS A COMPROMISE BILL.

>> BUT SOME ADVOCATES ARGUE THIS WILL LIKELY RESULT IN LAWSUITS AND WOULDN'T NECESSARILY MITIGATE THE PROBLEM.

>> THERE WILL BE A LAWSUIT, WHETHER IT'S IN THE CALIFORNIA WINERIES OR THE EUROPEAN WINERIES, AND SURELY THEREAFTER, THAT LAW WOULD GET THROWN OUT OF COURT AS BEING UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS BEING A CHALLENGE TO THE COMMERCE LAWS AND BASICALLY SAY THAT YOU CAN'T FAVOR-- AND I'M NOT A LAWYER, BUT YOU CANNOT FAVOR AN IN-STATE ENTITY TO AN OUT-OF-STATE ENTITY SO WINE IN GROCERIES WOULD IMMEDIATELY HAPPEN.

>> THE TOPIC OF WINE IN GROCERY STORES HAS BEEN FIERCELY DEBATED AND SEEN A VARIETY OF VERSIONS FOR ABOUT TWO DECADES AND, EVEN WITH AMENDMENTS AND OTHER BILL OPTIONS ON THE TABLE, THE FUTURE IS STILL UNKNOWN.

THE BILL SPONSORS, KRUEGER AND HUNTER, SAY A BIG REASON THE BILL HAS NOT PASSED IN RECENT YEARS IS THE STRONG OPPOSITION.

LAWMAKERS AND ADVOCATES ALSO SAY THAT THE STATE'S LIQUOR LAWS ARE SOME OF THE OLDEST IN THE COUNTRY, STILL RETAINING SOME REMNANTS OF THE PROHIBITION ERA.

>> WHEN PROHIBITION ENDED, THERE WAS THIS DESIRE BY THE STATE TO MAKE SURE THAT TEMPERANCE WAS THE OVERRIDING ISSUE TO PROTECT PEOPLE FROM THE DEMON RUM, AS THEY USED TO CALL IT.

SO THERE WERE A LOT OF ARCHAIC PROVISIONS THAT THEY PUT IN THE LAW.

YOU CAN ONLY OWN ONE LIQUOR STORE.

WHY CAN YOU ONLY OWN ONE LIQUOR STORE?

BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE ONE OWNER THAT WOULD KEEP AN EYE ON EVERYBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

YOU CAN'T SELL FOOD ANYWHERE BECAUSE IT WAS AN ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE, AND YOU COULD BRING KIDS INTO THE STORES AND THEY WOULD END UP BUYING ALCOHOL.

>> ZUBER STRESSES THAT TIMES HAVE CHANGED AND NEW YORKERS PURCHASE AND CONSUME THINGS DIFFERENTLY.

AND SOME LAWMAKERS AGREE.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LAW THAT'S BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR A HUNDRED YEARS AND CONSUMERS AREN'T CONSUMERS FROM A HUNDRED YEARS AGO, AND WE'VE DEFINITELY SEEN A CHANGE WITH LIQUOR SALES.

>> MANY STORE OWNERS SAY THE LAWS HAVE WORKED FOR THIS LONG AND A CHANGE ISN'T NEEDED.

>> WE HAVE BEEN EFFECTIVELY AND INTELLIGENTLY MANAGING THE DISPENSATION OF ALCOHOL AND WINE SINCE REPEAL.

THIS IS WHAT THE LEGISLATURE GAVE US AND THIS IS WHAT WE'VE DONE, AND I THINK WE'VE DONE IT EXTREMELY AND EFFECTIVELY AND EXTREMELY WELL.

>> KALOGRIDIS SAYS THEY JUST WANT TO BE LEFT ALONE.

>> EVERYTHING IS OKAY.

THEY DON'T NEED TO FIX ANYTHING.

>> BUT LAWMAKERS PUSHING FOR THIS BILL HAVEN'T GIVEN UP.

>> HUNTER SAID THERE ARE ONGOING CONVERSATIONS DURING THIS OFF-SE TO DISCUSS THE LANGUAGE OF THE B WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS BEFORE NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION >> BUT I DO FEEL CONFIDENT.

YOU KNOW, I GO BACK TO CHANGE IS HARD, BUT I THINK NEW YORKERS ARE A VERY HEARTY BUNCH.

OBVIOUSLY, WE RUMBLE SOMETIMES IN ORDER TO GET LEGISLATION ACROSS THE FINISH LINE BUT ULTIMATELY, IT WILL BE SUCCESSFUL FOR ALL PARTIES INVOLVED.

LAWMAKERS WON'T RETURN TO ALBANY UNTIL JANUARY, SO THAT MEANS THEY HAVE ABOUT FIVE MONTHS TO CONTINUE THEIR OFF-SESSION CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS BILL.

HUNTER SAYS IT'S UNCLEAR AT THIS POINT WHAT POTENTIAL NEW AMENDMENTS COULD LOOK LIKE BECAUSE THE CONVERSATIONS ARE STILL ONGOING.

ELISE KLINE, "NEW YORK NOW."

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> AND FOR MORE INFORMATION ON WINE IN GROCERY STORES, YOU CAN VISIT OUR WEBSITE.

AGAIN, THAT'S AT NYNOW.ORG.

YOU CAN ALSO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER BY GOING TO NEWSLETTER.NYNOW.ORG, OR BY SCANNING THE QR CODE ON YOUR SCREEN.

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.