10 minute read
AWAITING SIGNATURE
The bills Hochul hasn’t signed
Hundreds of pieces of legislation from the last session still await the governor’s signature. Here are six examples.
Advertisement
By Shantel Destra
GOV. KATHY HOCHUL checked one of the many outstanding bills off her to-do list on Sept. 8 by signing the New York City class size legislation into law. Starting next year, public schools will be required to cap class sizes at 20 students in kindergarten through third grade, 23 students for fourth through eighth grade and 25 students for high schoolers. The bill has officially become law after getting passed by the state Senate and Assembly three long months ago.
This isn’t the only outstanding bill that has been awaiting signature by the governor. While state lawmakers continue their break from the state Capitol, there are about 450 bills that have passed both chambers and are awaiting review by the governor as of Sept. 9. Those include ones that would establish a moratorium on cryptocurrency mining and require insurance coverage for prescription drugs to prevent HIV.
The governor has 10 days (minus Sunday) to sign or veto a bill once it’s sent to her desk. If the bills are never sent to the governor’s desk, they will expire at the start of the 2023 legislative session in January. Hochul also has the authority to request bills get sent to her before the start of the next session. There are many reasons why the governor may hold off on requesting controversial bills for a while, including the upcoming general election in November.
Here is a breakdown of some of the remaining outstanding bills.
This bill, sponsored by state Sen. Kevin Parker and Assembly Member Anna Kelles, would establish a two-year moratorium on cryptocurrency mining that would limit the state from approving any new permits for new cryptocurrency mining plants. As digital currencies become extremely popular amid carbon emission concerns, the bill would also require crypto operations to be subject to an environmental impact review. With
One bill would require a disaster plan for getting medical supplies to hospitals.
the increased presence of cryptocurrency lobbying in Albany, the bill faced major pushback. Hochul has been aloof concerning the legislation and has not made her position on it clear.
This bill, sponsored by state Sen. Brad Hoylman and Assembly Member Daniel O’Donnell, would require all insurance policies for prescription drugs to include coverage for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to prevent HIV infection. PrEP is known to be extremely effective in slowing the transmission of HIV. PEP can aid in protection from virus transmission following possible exposure.
REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR UTILITY RATE HIKES
This bill, sponsored by state Sen. John Brooks and Assembly Member Kimberly Jean-Pierre, would require utility companies to include notices of all public hearings on rate hikes on consumer bills. For years, climate change has meant extreme heat during the summer months and an increase in utility bills. With utility bills already increasing along with the added increases due to rate hikes, consumers can feel the impact on their pocketbooks. If passed, this bill would equip consumers with information about future rate hikes and prevent them from being blindsided by utility bill increases.
This bill, sponsored by state Sen. Jamaal Bailey and Assembly Member Ken Zebrowski, would prohibit state agencies from collecting additional interest on student loans. Under current law, the state charges an additional 22% interest when a student defaults on payment to SUNY schools on top of interest they were already charged. This law would protect students from accruing additional debt when unable to pay loans.
This bill, sponsored by state Sen. Luis Sepúlveda and Assembly Member Jeffrion Aubry, would establish the definition of serious mental illness for inmates. Inmates who are considered seriously mentally ill cannot legally be placed in solitary confinement. In New York City, the effects of this bill can easily be seen. Amid concerns about the treatment of detainees on Rikers Island in New York City and pressure from Mayor Eric Adams to roll back on bail reform, nearly half of the people incarcerated on Rikers have some form of mental illness.
REQUIRING STATE DISASTER PREPAREDNESS FOR MEDICAL SUPPLIES
This bill, sponsored by state Sen. James Gaughran and Assembly Member Jeffrey Dinowitz, requires the state disaster plan to include how medical supplies and medication will be delivered to pharmacies, hospitals and nursing homes during times of emergency. It’s been 10 years since Superstorm Sandy tore through communities across New York. The bill points to the difficulty of getting medical supplies to hospitalized patients when the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey closed off access to bridges for nonemergency vehicles. ■
WHAT’S THE HOLD UP? WHAT’S THE HOLD UP?
WHAT’S THE WHAT’S THE WHAT’S THE WHAT’S THE
The New York City Council and the mayor are working on a deal to make outdoor dining permanent.
By Annie McDonough
LAST MONTH, New York City Mayor Eric Adams took a sledgehammer to an abandoned outdoor dining shed in Manhattan. The move was a demonstration of how the city will handle deserted structures as well as an opportunity to announce in no uncertain terms that the administration was fully behind making the Open Restaurants program permanent.
In order to make that happen, however, Adams and the New York City Council will have to use much finer instruments.
New York City’s Open Restaurants program has operated on a temporary basis since 2020, under an continually renewed emergency executive order citing the need to keep restaurants and bars operating while allowing safe social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic. While Gov. Kathy Hochul is letting the statewide COVID-19 state of emergency expire, the Adams administration said its temporary program will keep running until a permanent program is in place. “The expiration of the Governor’s emergency order will not affect the Open Restaurants program or any other emergency executive order issued by the city,” a City Hall spokesperson wrote in an email.
The New York City Department of Transportation – which the Adams administration would like to see put in charge of the permanent Open Restaurants program – has outlined a target date of 2023 for implementing the program, including an application period beginning later this year. But with less than four months left in the year, the process of determining what that permanent program will look like is still ongoing. And while the City Council
is working on updating a bill that would create a permanent program, the Adams administration contended that ongoing litigation against the city over outdoor dining was standing in the way.
The City Council took a first step to making citywide outdoor dining permanent earlier this year by approving a zoning amendment that expanded where sidewalk cafés were allowed. (Prior to the pandemic, restaurants in the outer boroughs had largely been excluded from being able to operate sidewalk cafés.) Assuming that the council passes legislation creating a framework for a permanent outdoor dining program – and the mayor signs it – the city agency tasked with running the program would then be expected to determine some of its finer details – like the specifics of how applications will work or the specific designs of sidewalk cafés – in the rule-making process. It’s also possible, however, that the council legislation will outline some of these questions, leaving less for the agency to determine.
But at an August press conference on outdoor dining sheds, Adams and his deputy mayor for operations, Meera Joshi, pointed to litigation against the city over outdoor dining as the main roadblock for making progress on that permanent program. “There is a small minority that has filed litigation trying to stall that program,” Joshi said. “Unfortunately, that has put a paralysis on our plans to create a permanent program.”
There have been several lawsuits over outdoor dining since the program got up and running, many of them cited complaints about excessive noise, trash and rodents that opponents said have been exacerbated by the program, and outdoor dining sheds in particular. One recent suit argued that the city shouldn’t be able to renew the temporary program on the basis of a public health emergency considering it has done away with many other pandemic-era initiatives like mask mandates and vaccine requirements.
But the lawsuit that the Adams administration said was actually impeding progress on making open restaurants permanent argued that the city erred in finding that the program wouldn’t have a significant enough environmental impact to warrant an extensive environmental review. That kind of review, known as an Environmental Impact Statement, could take months.
In March, a state Supreme Court judge ruled against the city in that suit, finding that a more extensive environmental study was necessary. The city is in the process of appealing that decision.
But despite the legal challenges, the City Council is working on updating a bill introduced by Council Member Marjorie Velázquez in February that would make the Open Restaurants program permanent. Council leaders were not concerned that the ongoing litigation would pose an impediment to passing the legislation, but neither the council speaker’s office nor City Hall provided an explanation on the difference in opinion between the mayor and council.
Asked about the ongoing litigation, Velázquez said it doesn’t stop the council
LINDSEY NICHOLSON/UCG/UNIVERSAL IMAGES GROUP VIA GETTY IMAGES; JOHN MCCARTEN/NYC COUNCIL; PREVIOUS PAGE: SPENCER PLATT/GETTY IMAGES New York City Council Member Marjorie Velázquez, right, has been leading the charge to create permanent outdoor dining in the city.
Some outdoor dining sheds, like this one in Queens, have been abandoned or have fallen into disrepair.
from drafting legislation. “You have to let the courts play out the way they are,” she said.
According to one council source, the legislation to make outdoor dining permanent could be ready as soon as this week. Velázquez was more conservative in her estimate for when to expect an updated bill, however, telling City & State not to expect that legislation this month, and she noted that there was still a lot of feedback to gather on what the program should look like, including from other council members. “It was almost a 10-hour hearing,” Velázquez said, referencing a February hearing on the issue. “Everybody has got something to say about it.”
A number of issues are still up for discussion, including the details of how outdoor dining setups in the road (as opposed to on sidewalks) will work as well as the licensing and fee structure. In the first version of Velázquez’s bill, restaurants would pay $1,050 for a license to operate a sidewalk or roadway café, and a $525 renewal fee.
Velázquez said she wants to explore ways to make outdoor dining as streamlined and affordable as possible, including considering a variable fee structure in which restaurants in more dense areas face a slightly higher fee. Creating an accessible application process is a priority for not just Velázquez but the restaurant industry too. “We want to cut the bureaucracy, cut the red tape and cut the costs. So it’s not cost prohibitive and geographically restrictive, like it was pre-pandemic,” said Andrew Rigie, executive director of the New York City Hospitality Alliance.
As for the outdoor dining sheds that have garnered some fierce opposition, Velázquez said the council was trying to figure out how to phase those out in the permanent program. “I think the biggest concern for a lot of folks has been what we call those sheds,” she said, when asked what kind of feedback she’s getting from other council members. “We’re talking about standardization more so of chairs and tables, and traffic-blocking (items) like planters,” she added, describing what might replace the sheds.
Although both the council and the Adams administration support the concept of permanent Open Restaurants, there’s some disagreement about how it should work. One issue is determining which agency should be tasked with implementing and running the permanent program. While the Adams administration wants the Department of Transportation to run the program, the council is looking to cede that authority to the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection.
Rigie stressed the importance of moving this program forward regardless, noting that restaurants need clarity on what kinds of outdoor dining structures and materials will be permitted in the permanent program – and therefore, which to continue investing in. Still, he said he understands the delays. “It’s better for it to take a little bit longer and get it right, than rush it and get it wrong,” he said.” ■
