Joint Legislative Public Hearing on 2016-2017 Executive Budget Proposal: Topic "Public Protection" - Testimonies
February 10, 2016
-
COMMITTEE:
- Finance
Hearing Notice Event:
http://www.nysenate.gov/calendar/public-hearings/february-04-2016/joint-legislative-public-hearing-2016-2017-executive
Archived Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Cll9Do9eBW8
Hearing Event Transcipt:
1
1 BEFORE THE NEW YORK STATE SENATE FINANCE
AND ASSEMBLY WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEES
2 -----------------------------------------------------
3 JOINT LEGISLATIVE HEARING
4 In the Matter of the
2016-2017 EXECUTIVE BUDGET ON
5 PUBLIC PROTECTION
6 -----------------------------------------------------
7 Hearing Room B
Legislative Office Building
8 Albany, New York
9 February 4, 2016
9:40 a.m.
10
11 PRESIDING:
12 Senator Catharine M. Young
Chair, Senate Finance Committee
13
Assemblyman Herman D. Farrell, Jr.
14 Chair, Assembly Ways & Means Committee
15 PRESENT:
16 Senator Liz Krueger
Senate Finance Committee (RM)
17
Assemblyman Robert Oaks
18 Assembly Ways & Means Committee (RM)
19 Senator John J. Bonacic
Chair, Senate Committee on Judiciary
20
Assemblywoman Helene Weinstein
21 Chair, Assembly Committee on Judiciary
22 Senator Patrick M. Gallivan
Chair, Senate Committee on Crime Victims,
23 Crime and Correction
24
2
1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Public Protection
2 2-4-16
3 PRESENT: (Continued)
4
5 Senator Michael F. Nozzolio
Chair, Senate Committee on Codes
6
Assemblyman Joseph Lentol
7 Chair, Assembly Committee on Codes
8 Senator Thomas D. Croci
Chair, Senate Committee on Veterans,
9 Homeland Security and Military Affairs
10 Assemblyman Daniel O'Donnell
Chair, Assembly Committee on Correction
11
Senator Frederick J. Akshar II
12
Assemblyman Michael Montesano
13
Senator Diane Savino
14
Assemblyman Al Graf
15
Assemblywoman Janet L. Duprey
16
Senator Rich Funke
17
Assemblyman J. Gary Pretlow
18
Senator Velmanette Montgomery
19
Senator Ruth Hassell-Thompson
20
Assemblyman Joseph M. Giglio
21
Senator Martin Golden
22
Senator Joseph P. Addabbo, Jr.
23
Assemblywoman Crystal Peoples-Stokes
24
3
1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Public Protection
2 2-4-16
3 PRESENT: (Continued)
4
5 Senator Daniel Squadron
6 Assemblyman John T. McDonald III
7 Assemblyman Joseph S. Saladino
8 Senator Gustavo Rivera
9 Assemblywoman Diana C. Richardson
10 Senator Leroy Comrie
11 Assemblywoman Nicole Malliotakis
12 Senator Phil M. Boyle
13 Assemblywoman Patricia Fahy
14 Assemblyman John T. McDonald III
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
4
1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Public Protection
2 2-4-16
3 LIST OF SPEAKERS
4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
5 Honorable Lawrence K. Marks
Chief Administrative Judge
6 NYS Office of Court
Administration 9 20
7
John P. Melville
8 Commissioner
NYS Division of Homeland Security
9 and Emergency Services 106 113
10 Michael C. Green
Executive Deputy Commissioner
11 NYS Division of Criminal
Justice Services 180 186
12
Anthony J. Annucci
13 Acting Commissioner
NYS Department of Corrections
14 and Community Supervision 257 264
15 Joseph D'Amico
Superintendent
16 NYS Division of State Police 361 370
17 Margaret Miller
NYS Chief Information Officer
18 Director, NYS Office of
Information Technology Services 422 430
19
William J. Leahy
20 Director
NYS Office of Indigent
21 Legal Services 465 474
22 Robert H. Tembeckjian
Administrator and Counsel
23 New York State Commission on
Judicial Conduct 483 488
24
5
1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Public Protection
2 2-4-16
3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Cont.
4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
5 Thomas H. Mungeer
President
6 New York State Troopers PBA 492 495
7 Christopher M. Quick
President
8 New York State Police
Investigators Association 497 502
9
Michael B. Powers
10 President
NYS Correctional Officers &
11 Police Benevolent Assn. 504 511
12 Patrick J. Lynch
New York City Patrolmen's
13 Benevolent Association 524 530
14 Steve Drake
NYSDOCCS
15 Paul Rigby
NYSDOCCS
16 Nikki Brate
Vice President
17 NYS Public Employees
Federation (PEF) 561 579
18
19 Jonathan E. Gradess
Executive Director
20 Art Cody
Legal Director, Veterans
21 Defense Programs
NYS Defenders Association 611
22
Mark Williams
23 President-Elect
Chief Defenders Association
24 of New York State 620 625
6
1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Public Protection
2 2-4-16
3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Cont.
4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
5 Patrick Cullen
President
6 New York State Supreme Court
Officers Association 634
7
Pamela Browne
8 President
New York State County
9 Clerks Association 643
10 Billy Imandt
President
11 Court Officers Benevolent
Assn. of Nassau County 651
12
William Dobbins
13 President
Suffolk County Court
14 Employees Association 664
15 Colonel Jack Ozer
New York Wing of the
16 Civil Air Patrol 672
17 Charlotte Carter
Executive Director
18 NYS Dispute Resolution Assn.
-and-
19 Julie Loesch
Director
20 Center for Resolution and
Justice
21 Child & Family Services 676
22 Connie Neal
Executive Director
23 NYS Coalition Against
Domestic Violence 681 688
24
7
1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Public Protection
2 2-4-16
3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Cont.
4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
5 Soffiyah Elijah
Executive Director
6 Correctional Association
of New York 690 696
7
Karen L. Murtagh
8 Executive Director
Thomas Curran
9 Board Member
Prisoners' Legal Services
10 of New York 700
11 Page Pierce
Executive Director
12 Families Together in NYS 707
13 Terry O'Neill
Director
14 The Constantine Institute 714
15 Anne Erickson
President and CEO
16 Empire Justice Center 720
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
8
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good morning.
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Good morning.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Could we have some
4 order, please.
5 Welcome to the Joint Legislative
6 Budget Hearing on Public Protection. I'm
7 Senator Catharine Young, chair of the Senate
8 Finance Committee.
9 Pursuant to the State Constitution and
10 Legislative Law, the fiscal committees of the
11 State Legislature are authorized to hold
12 hearings on the Executive Budget proposal.
13 Today's hearing will be limited to a
14 discussion on the Governor's proposed budget
15 for public protection.
16 Following each presentation, there
17 will be some time allowed for questions from
18 the chairs of the fiscal committees and other
19 legislators.
20 I would like to welcome Judge Lawrence
21 K. Marks, chief administrative judge of the
22 Office of Court Administration; John P.
23 Melville, executive deputy commissioner of
24 the Division of Homeland Security and
9
1 Emergency Services; Michael C. Green,
2 executive deputy commissioner of the Division
3 of Criminal Justice Services; Anthony J.
4 Annucci, acting commissioner of the
5 Department of Corrections and Community
6 Supervision; Joseph A. D'Amico,
7 Superintendent of the Division of State
8 Police; and Margaret Miller, director and
9 chief information officer of the Office of
10 Information Technology Services.
11 At this time I would like to begin
12 with testimony of Judge Lawrence K. Marks,
13 chief administrative judge of the Office of
14 Court Administration.
15 Welcome, and good morning.
16 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
17 Good morning. Good morning. Thank you.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Before we begin,
19 though, Assemblyman Farrell, who keeps me in
20 line, reminded me that we need to introduce
21 our members. So if you'd hold on one second.
22 I'd like to introduce Senator Liz
23 Krueger, who is ranking member of the Senate
24 Finance Committee; Senator Michael Nozzolio,
10
1 who is chair of the Senate Codes Committee;
2 Senator Patrick Gallivan, who is chair of the
3 Crime and Corrections Committee; Senator Fred
4 Akshar; Senator Rich Funke; Senator Joe
5 Addabbo; Senator John Bonacic; Senator Diane
6 Savino; and Senator Marty Golden.
7 Assemblyman?
8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: We've been joined
9 by Assemblywoman -- and chair -- Weinstein,
10 Assemblyman Lentol, Assemblyman O'Donnell,
11 and Assemblywoman Peoples-Stokes.
12 We also have Mr. Oaks, who will give
13 us his names.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you,
15 Chairman.
16 We've been joined also by Assemblyman
17 Giglio, Assemblyman Montesano, Assemblyman
18 Graf, and Assemblywoman Malliotakis.
19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Good morning.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good morning.
21 So, Judge, we do welcome you once
22 again, and we're ready for your testimony.
23 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
24 Okay, thank you very much. I'm Lawrence
11
1 Marks. I'm the chief administrative judge of
2 the courts. And thank you so much for the
3 opportunity to speak to you today about the
4 Unified Court System's budget request. And
5 I'd just like to take 10 minutes, if I may,
6 to lay out the key issues in our budget
7 request. And then of course I'd be happy to
8 answer any questions that you may have.
9 But just before I do that, I'd like to
10 make note of our new chief judge, Janet
11 DiFiore, just confirmed by the Senate two
12 weeks ago. Everyone in the court system is
13 excited about Judge DiFiore assuming the
14 leadership of the Judiciary. The Governor
15 certainly made a terrific decision in
16 nominating her. And on behalf of her and the
17 entire court system, I want to say that we
18 very much look forward to continuing to work
19 closely and cooperatively with the
20 Legislature in the coming years.
21 So turning to our budget request, I
22 would start by providing some brief context.
23 In fiscal year 2009-2010, the General Fund
24 state operations portion of the court
12
1 system's budget was approximately
2 $1.78 billion. Today, six years later, that
3 amount is approximately $1.85 billion, an
4 increase of only $64 million, or 3.5 percent,
5 which averages out to about six-tenths of
6 1 percent of an increase each year over that
7 six-year period.
8 Yet during that same period of time,
9 the Judiciary has absorbed nearly
10 $400 million in higher costs. These higher
11 costs include mandated employee salary
12 increases, increased contractual expenses,
13 funding for indigent criminal defense to meet
14 statutory caseload standards, and funding for
15 civil legal services.
16 And because our budget is
17 overwhelmingly -- roughly 90 percent --
18 salaries and fringe benefits, we've managed
19 to do this -- that is, absorb increased costs
20 that have been far higher than the very
21 minimal increases in our budget
22 allocations -- we've been able to do this
23 primarily by decreasing our employment
24 levels. Indeed, the number of nonjudicial
13
1 employees in the court system has decreased
2 by about 2,000 since 2009, which is a 12
3 percent reduction in our workforce. That
4 means we have fewer court officers, fewer
5 court clerks, court reporters, court
6 interpreters, court attorneys, back-office
7 staff, and so on.
8 And although we've worked tirelessly
9 to try to minimize the impact of this through
10 innovation and streamlining -- and in our
11 budget submission we highlight steps we've
12 taken in that regard -- those efforts have
13 been only partially successful. Without
14 question, we, and more importantly the
15 public, are still suffering consequences from
16 our reduced staffing levels. These
17 consequences include delays on some days in
18 opening courtroom parts, delays in entering
19 judgments in the clerk's offices, lines to
20 get into courthouses, lines in the clerk's
21 offices, just to name a few of these
22 consequences.
23 So given that context, this year we
24 are asking for an increase in our budget.
14
1 And while you've helped us with additional
2 budgetary support in the last two years, this
3 year our situation is a little more
4 complicated. And I want to take a moment to
5 explain that to you.
6 As I think you know, under the State
7 Constitution the Judiciary is required to
8 submit its proposed budget to the Governor on
9 the December 1st preceding the upcoming
10 fiscal year. But this year, as we were
11 preparing our budget request, and when we
12 submitted it to the Governor on December 1,
13 the commission on Legislative, Judicial and
14 Executive Compensation had not yet issued its
15 findings and determinations with regard to
16 judicial salary increases.
17 Under the statute creating the Salary
18 Commission, the commission's findings and
19 determinations as to judicial salaries were
20 not due until the end of December. So by the
21 time we were required by law to submit our
22 proposed budget to the Governor, we had no
23 idea what the Salary Commission would be
24 doing with regard to judicial salaries. We
15
1 were certainly hopeful that the commission
2 would be voting for a judicial salary
3 increase, but we had no idea what the salary
4 levels would be, and therefore we had no idea
5 how much they would cost.
6 Consequently, what we did was note in
7 our budget request that we were awaiting the
8 Salary Commission's determinations and that
9 we might well be seeking additional funding
10 to pay for judicial salary increases,
11 depending on what the Salary Commission ended
12 up doing.
13 As it happened, later that month in
14 December, the Salary Commission issued its
15 report, which called for phased-in salary
16 increases for New York judges, using the
17 Federal District Court judge salary as a
18 benchmark, and providing for the largest
19 portion of the phase-in to take effect this
20 April 1st.
21 Now, I'm not planning on going into
22 the details of the Salary Commission's
23 findings now in my prepared remarks, but I'll
24 certainly answer any questions that you may
16
1 have about that this morning. What I will,
2 say, however, is that we are extremely
3 pleased with what the commission did, and I
4 would note that its findings and
5 determinations were fully supported by the
6 Legislature's two representatives on the
7 commission.
8 By using the federal salary as the
9 benchmark, the Commission followed the
10 precedent that was set by the last commission
11 in 2011, which in turn was the precedent the
12 Legislature itself had used throughout much
13 of the history of judicial salaries before
14 the commission process was enacted. Indeed,
15 this commission has finally and essentially
16 resolved what has been a decades-long,
17 haphazard, inadequate and frankly unfair
18 process for setting judicial salaries.
19 So we're extremely grateful for the
20 commission's findings, and for the support of
21 the Legislature's representatives on the
22 commission, and through them, we are
23 extremely grateful to you for those findings.
24 The problem, though -- and this is the
17
1 main issue I want to talk to you about and
2 highlight for you this morning -- is that the
3 cost of the first year of the phase-in of the
4 judicial salary increase, beginning on
5 April 1st of this year, is $27 million.
6 That's a cost we were not able to budget for
7 when we submitted our proposed budget to the
8 Governor on December 1st, for the reasons
9 that I've explained. Our budget request
10 submitted on December 1st sought a 2.4
11 percent increase in our General Funds
12 operating budget, which is an increase of
13 $44.4 million. An increase is necessary
14 because we are again facing significant cost
15 increases, which include mandatory salary
16 increases for court employees, increases in
17 contractual obligations, such as our
18 contracts with local governments to provide
19 courthouse security in certain portions of
20 the state, annualization of the cost of the
21 five Family Court judgeships that the
22 Legislature created effective January 1,
23 2016, and additional funding for civil legal
24 services.
18
1 But because of the additional cost of
2 judicial salary increases, a cost we could
3 not estimate when we submitted our budget
4 request on December 1st, we now must seek
5 additional funding to meet that cost. What
6 we are proposing to you, and what we are
7 respectfully urging you to support, is an
8 additional $19.6 million to help pay for this
9 increased cost. We are proposing that we
10 apply the four-tenths of 1 percent part of
11 the 2.4 percent increase we requested in our
12 December 1 submission -- and the four-tenths
13 of 1 percent part of that is about $7.4
14 million. We're proposing applying that
15 toward the cost of the judicial salary
16 increase, and then we also proposing that the
17 Legislature add to our budget the remaining
18 $19.6 million of the full cost. That would
19 pay for the cost of judicial salary increases
20 in the upcoming fiscal year, and it would
21 leave the courts with an increase of
22 2 percent -- which is the Governor's target,
23 as we know -- or $37 million in our operating
24 budget to cover our increased expenses,
19
1 including the mandated court employee salary
2 increases, increased contractual expenses,
3 and additional funding for civil legal
4 services.
5 We firmly believe that what we are
6 seeking is fair and reasonable. The newly
7 arising cost of the judicial salary increase
8 has resulted from a statutory process that
9 was designed to inject fairness, objectivity,
10 and transparency into the method for
11 determining judicial salaries. That
12 statutory process worked, and the Salary
13 Commission's determinations were fully
14 supported by the Legislature's two
15 representatives on the commission.
16 We respectfully submit that the fair
17 thing to do now is to provide the funding to
18 implement those results. Without that
19 funding, it will be increasingly difficult to
20 replace employees when they leave the court
21 system, further decreasing our employment
22 level and resulting in the consequences that
23 will entail. With that funding, the
24 Judiciary will be able to furnish the quality
20
1 of service that we need to provide to the
2 people of this state, a quality of service
3 that we all agree the public fully deserves.
4 Thank you very much, and I'd be happy
5 to answer any questions.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Chief
7 Administrative Judge Marks.
8 We have been joined by Senator Gustavo
9 Rivera.
10 And our first speaker will be Senator
11 John Bonacic, who is chair of the Senate
12 Judiciary Committee.
13 SENATOR BONACIC: Good morning,
14 Your Honor.
15 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
16 Good morning.
17 SENATOR BONACIC: It's good to see
18 you.
19 Before I ask you some questions, I
20 just would like to say that I always enjoy
21 working with my counterpart, Helene
22 Weinstein, who chairs the Judiciary in the
23 Assembly. We've been having discussions how
24 to work through this Judiciary Budget to try
21
1 to be fair to all concerned.
2 Your budget, I think, for court
3 administration is between 2.8 and 2.9
4 billion; would I be correct?
5 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
6 That's correct.
7 SENATOR BONACIC: Okay. Now, we have
8 a concern, what we see happening in the court
9 system. As you pointed out, a lack of
10 staffing, shorter hours.
11 We now see the Hurrell-Harring case,
12 which basically stated that there's not
13 enough district attorneys for first
14 appearance for defendants in criminal
15 actions. So for five counties that brought a
16 lawsuit, monies were given to those five
17 counties. So there's a need for more monies
18 for criminal representation for mainly
19 upstate. That's another developing future
20 cost on the court system.
21 As, you know, you explained, it
22 appears to me that the priorities are to take
23 care of the judicial salaries, which we're
24 all supportive of. We think the judges are
22
1 deserving of raises. You're struggling with
2 the 2 percent cap, how to live with all of
3 this, with a judicial court system with
4 access to justice that is deteriorating
5 rather than getting stronger.
6 So when I look at your budget, one of
7 the priorities, in addition to the raises, is
8 civil services. Now, that item has jumped
9 from $70 million to $85 million this year.
10 So that's free legal services for civilian
11 actions. Civil service; right? As opposed
12 to criminal.
13 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
14 Civil cases.
15 SENATOR BONACIC: Right. So
16 middle-class families have to pay for legal
17 fees, but there's a movement to have the poor
18 have free legal services. I just point that
19 out.
20 I think for this year, that's a wrong
21 priority. I think that part of the budget
22 should be no gain, because last year they got
23 a $15 million bump, they're up to $70 million
24 now for free legal services for civil
23
1 actions. And you now want to take it to 85.
2 There's $15 million. If you kept that level,
3 you would help reach your other priorities of
4 making the court system stronger and/or
5 helping to support the raises. So I throw
6 that out to you.
7 I haven't asked you a question yet. I
8 have not asked you a question.
9 (Laughter.)
10 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: I'm
11 waiting for the question.
12 SENATOR BONACIC: Right. But things
13 like CASA and the dispute resolution, I think
14 these are very worthwhile services. A lot of
15 them are on a volunteer basis. They help
16 children and families in preventive action
17 before it even gets to the courts. They help
18 relieve court congestion.
19 We did the divorce law amendments this
20 past year; that's supposed to clean up
21 94 percent of matrimonial actions with court
22 congestion. So we're trying.
23 So I would say to you that those two
24 volunteer programs are very helpful. You
24
1 should look to see what you can do there.
2 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: And
3 we are continuing, proposing to continue the
4 funding for those programs in this budget.
5 SENATOR BONACIC: So now I'm going to
6 come to the $64,000 -- more than the $64,000
7 question.
8 If the Governor is insisting on the
9 2 percent cap, have you given any thought to
10 how you're going to reconcile making the
11 court stronger, doing the judicial raises,
12 and what has to be saved and what has to be
13 cut?
14 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
15 Well, so you're asking if we don't get
16 additional money and we had to stay within
17 the 2 percent, how would we cope with that?
18 SENATOR BONACIC: Which the Governor's
19 kind of indicating that's where he wants to
20 go. I'm not speaking for the Governor, but I
21 just --
22 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: No,
23 if you read his commentary on our budget
24 submission, that is what he said, that's
25
1 right.
2 SENATOR BONACIC: Yes.
3 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: So
4 I'll answer that. But let me -- if I could,
5 let me just respond to your comments about
6 civil legal services.
7 SENATOR BONACIC: Could you speak into
8 the mic a little?
9 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
10 Sure. I was saying if -- and I'll answer
11 your question, but if I may just initially,
12 if I could respond to your question about --
13 SENATOR BONACIC: Sure.
14 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: --
15 your comments about civil legal services.
16 Look, this is a critically important
17 program. I mean, everyone here on this
18 panel, every member of the Legislature should
19 really support money for civil legal
20 services.
21 Our program, money goes to every
22 single county in the state, all 62 counties.
23 This is not a New York City program, it's not
24 an upstate program, it's a statewide program.
26
1 And every legislative district in this state
2 has -- every one of you has constituents that
3 benefit from this money. You know, as you
4 all know, there's a legal right in a criminal
5 case, if you can't afford an attorney, one
6 will be provided for you free of charge.
7 There's no such right, generally speaking, in
8 civil cases.
9 And this is money that goes to provide
10 lawyers, again, in every county in this
11 state -- people who are facing potential
12 eviction, people who are facing potential
13 foreclosure, victims of domestic violence in
14 Family Court proceedings, veterans seeking
15 disability payments. This is money that is
16 very well spent. There have been studies
17 done by economists that have concluded that
18 for every dollar spent on civil legal
19 services, government can save as much as $6.
20 And that's because if someone is evicted or
21 their house is foreclosed on or they don't
22 receive federal benefits, that leads to
23 further problems and further costs imposed on
24 government. This is a critically important
27
1 program that I really can't emphasize enough
2 that everyone here should really be
3 supporting.
4 And this last $15 million that we're
5 seeking in this budget is the last
6 installment in a plan that was announced five
7 years ago, five, six years ago, where each
8 year -- and by the way, each year in years
9 that were fiscally much weaker than this
10 particular year, where the state economy is
11 relatively strong now -- the Legislature
12 provided money for each of the last four or
13 five years. And this would be the last
14 installment that would get us to
15 $100 million, which will meet the goal that
16 we set for funding civil legal services.
17 So again, I really can't emphasize
18 enough how this is a program that benefits
19 people throughout the state in all
20 62 counties. And I would urge that you
21 support the additional funding that we're
22 seeking for civil legal services.
23 Having said that, in the doomsday
24 scenario where we don't get any additional
28
1 money -- and this is to answer your question,
2 Senator Bonacic, what would we do. Well, you
3 know, we don't have a lot of choices in the
4 Judiciary budget, since we're roughly
5 90 percent salaries and fringe benefits. We
6 don't have a capital budget, we don't have --
7 other than civil legal services, we don't
8 have a whole lot of programs that we could
9 cut. We're primarily people, and that's what
10 makes up the vast percentage of our budget.
11 So if we had to absorb the full cost
12 of this judicial salary increase, the
13 $27 million, you know, we would have to look
14 at attrition, not replacing people when they
15 leave the court system. Which is how we
16 managed far more difficult budgets going back
17 to 2011, where we sustained a massive budget
18 cut that year which resulted in layoffs that
19 year because the budget cut was so extreme.
20 And that was followed by two years of flat
21 budgets. And the way we managed that --
22 because every year our costs go up, they
23 don't go down. Costs go up.
24 So the way we managed that those years
29
1 was through attrition. When people left, we
2 didn't replace them. We had a strict hiring
3 freeze. So if we were not successful in
4 getting this additional money, we would
5 inevitably have to look at attrition, not
6 replacing people when they leave, and we
7 would have to look at the civil legal
8 services money as well, as you've suggested.
9 SENATOR BONACIC: Thank you.
10 My only point is the Legislature has
11 been supportive of monies for civil legal
12 services. But times change. And it's a
13 question of priorities this year. And we're
14 suggesting to you that maybe judicial
15 salaries are more important than that area.
16 But I would certainly never like to hear you
17 say that you're going to cut more personnel
18 from the Judiciary Budget for the
19 administration of the courts, which are now
20 not up to par where they should be, in terms
21 of the hours, the staffing. That would be
22 really not a good thing to do.
23 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: I
24 agree with you. We would be loath to do
30
1 that. We're 2,000 employees fewer, as I
2 mentioned in my remarks, than we were in
3 2009. And that absolutely has consequences
4 on the operation of the courts. And the last
5 few years we have finally been able to kind
6 of get our heads above water and replace
7 people when they leave and maybe even
8 slightly increase our employment level.
9 But again, it's the last thing we
10 would want to do, is to go back to the
11 scenario of a few years ago where we were
12 bleeding people and, you know, when they left
13 that we couldn't replace them.
14 Please don't misunderstand me. I'm
15 not suggesting that we would favor further
16 reducing our employment level. It's the last
17 thing we would want to do. But in the end,
18 because our budget is overwhelmingly, you
19 know, 90 percent salaries and fringe
20 benefits, when we don't have sufficient
21 money, that's really where we look. And we
22 have no choice.
23 SENATOR BONACIC: My only last comment
24 is I believe that there's $15 million there
31
1 in civil services that you should not give
2 this year to make sure that the judges get
3 their raises, which we all think they're
4 entitled to.
5 And I thank you very much, Your Honor,
6 for coming today.
7 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
8 Thank you.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator
10 Bonacic.
11 We've been joined by senator Thomas
12 Croci, chair of the Veterans, Homeland
13 Security, and Military Affairs Committee, and
14 also Senator Leroy Comrie.
15 Chairman Farrell.
16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Yes. Mr. Oaks.
17 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Yes, we've been
18 also been joined by Assemblyman Saladino.
19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Next to question,
20 Chairperson Weinstein.
21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WEINSTEIN: Thank you,
22 Mr. Chairman.
23 Judge Marks, it's a pleasure to see
24 you here today. And as Senator Bonacic said,
32
1 we work closely together. But in relation to
2 the civil legal services, it's a point where
3 we diverge in terms of this increase.
4 And I just wanted to continue that
5 discussion a little bit more. I looked at
6 the task force, permanent commission's last
7 report, and I just want to make sure that I
8 read correctly that, based on the
9 commission's finding, that New York State
10 realized $260 million in taxpayer savings in
11 the form of reduced emergency shelter costs
12 alone as a result of legal services.
13 So that was one of their findings?
14 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
15 That's correct.
16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WEINSTEIN: And that the
17 overall -- the finding that the overall
18 investment in civil legal services has
19 resulted in an overall economic benefit to
20 New York State of $2.4 billion through 2014?
21 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
22 Yeah, that's -- I think that's correct. And
23 that goes to the point that I made a moment
24 ago that investing in civil legal services in
33
1 the end can save state and local government,
2 you know, significant amounts of money.
3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WEINSTEIN: So if we
4 were to cut out of the Judiciary Budget the
5 $15 million for civil legal services and
6 dedicate it to a different purpose, as my
7 colleague suggests, it would actually cost
8 New York State money in this next year going
9 forward?
10 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
11 Yes. There have been studies by economists
12 that have suggested that, that if -- that
13 expenditures on civil legal services is
14 cost-effective.
15 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WEINSTEIN: And could
16 you just maybe go into a tiny bit more detail
17 as to how the funding that's in the Judiciary
18 Budget for civil legal services is allocated
19 around the state, and perhaps restate some of
20 the services, the kinds of populations that
21 benefit from civil legal services?
22 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
23 Yeah, the money is divided up based on a
24 formula, 200 percent -- each county's
34
1 population that's less than 200 percent of
2 the federal poverty level -- the formula is
3 based on that. So it's equally divided to
4 the state's 62 counties based on that
5 formula.
6 And the money goes to really kind of
7 the essentials of life. People who find
8 themselves in court without a lawyer, or who
9 would otherwise find themselves in court
10 without a lawyer -- in landlord-tenant
11 proceedings, so facing eviction; in
12 foreclosure proceedings, where people are
13 facing the potential loss of their home.
14 Victims of domestic violence in family
15 offense proceedings in the Family Court
16 receive lawyers under this program.
17 I mentioned veterans are a significant
18 component of the people who benefit from
19 these services. Veterans who may be facing
20 eviction, facing foreclosure, seeking
21 disability benefits.
22 And so those are some of the examples
23 of the types of people who benefit from this
24 program in every county in the state.
35
1 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WEINSTEIN: And I was
2 just wondering, from the court's perspective,
3 how do unrepresented litigants impact the
4 functioning of the courts, people who come in
5 without an attorney?
6 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
7 It's -- actually, I can speak personally for
8 this, because I sit -- in addition to my
9 administrative responsibilities, I sit in
10 Supreme Court. And I can tell you, from the
11 court's perspective and the judge's
12 perspective, when someone comes in without a
13 lawyer, it's just a -- it's a night-and-day
14 situation.
15 You know, it's very difficult for the
16 judge because judges ethically can't advise
17 litigants on the law. The court staff can't
18 do that. You know, people are basically on
19 their own. It's not an equal playing field,
20 obviously, when that happens. It's not -- I
21 mean, my own view, which I know is shared by
22 the new chief judge, is that a justice system
23 just doesn't make sense when you have
24 hundreds of thousands of people coming into
36
1 court without a lawyer, their opponents often
2 represented by lawyers. It's just -- it's
3 not a justice system, you know, that we could
4 all be proud of, you know, when that's as
5 serious a problem as it has been in New York.
6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WEINSTEIN: And beyond
7 just the impact on the individual litigant
8 who's unrepresented, does it also impact the
9 courts? Are there additional delays? You
10 mentioned the court staff that are asked
11 questions. Does it actually increase costs
12 to the court system and use up resources that
13 would not be needed if those litigants were
14 represented?
15 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
16 Yeah. I mean, I would say that cases in
17 which litigants are self-represented become
18 more labor-intensive for the court -- for the
19 judge, for the judge's staff, for the clerk's
20 office, for the court personnel.
21 So yes, I would agree with that very
22 much.
23 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WEINSTEIN: And to go to
24 the defense side, I know and I agree with my
37
1 colleague that there is a need for increased
2 services for indigent defendants,
3 particularly in first appearances that go
4 beyond the Hurrell decision. And I
5 understand that the Indigent Legal Services
6 Board has asked for increased resources to be
7 able to address those needs. And I think
8 that that is something obviously that
9 personally I would support, and I think other
10 members also.
11 Can I just -- I just want to ask you a
12 question about the staffing. You mentioned
13 that there's been a reduction of 2,000
14 nonjudicial employees, and I think you
15 mentioned it was 12 percent; is that correct?
16 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
17 Since 2009, that was the high level mark for
18 us, we have 2,000 fewer employees since that
19 year.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WEINSTEIN: And I
21 probably should know the answer, but perhaps
22 do you know how that compares to state
23 agencies?
24 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: The
38
1 executive branch?
2 For us, it's a 12 percent decrease in
3 the court system, the roughly 2,000 fewer
4 employees. In the executive branch,
5 depending on how you define the executive
6 branch -- but if you include CUNY and SUNY,
7 the executive branch employment level since
8 2009 has dropped between 8 and 8.5 percent.
9 So our employment level has declined
10 more than the executive branch.
11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN WEINSTEIN: Thank you.
12 Thank you on that. And I think for the
13 moment that's all the questions,
14 Mr. Chairman.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
16 much.
17 Our next speaker is Senator Michael
18 Nozzolio, who is chair of the Codes
19 Committee.
20 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you,
21 Chairwoman Young.
22 Good morning, Judge Marks.
23 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
24 Good morning.
39
1 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: We're used to
2 seeing Judge Prudenti in that chair. I don't
3 see much of a resemblance --
4 (Laughter.)
5 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: -- at least in
6 outward appearances. But she certainly --
7 there's big shoes to fill, and I wish you all
8 the luck in this endeavor.
9 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
10 Thank you.
11 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I want to follow up
12 on the questioning that's already occurred.
13 Senator Bonacic and I have discussed this
14 issue a number of times over the last few
15 weeks.
16 One of the things about Judge Prudenti
17 is that she always looked for creative ways
18 to solve problems, that in large part because
19 of the creativity she exhibited, the CASA
20 program was revived when budgetary axes had
21 to fall. And Senator Bonacic, myself and
22 others worked very closely with her to
23 restore that program.
24 I share your admiration for civil
40
1 legal services. I think it's a great
2 program. I probably, in the course of my
3 service, have had many more requests for
4 legal assistance through the Assembly and
5 Senate offices that I served in than you as a
6 judge would have ever had. Literally
7 hundreds of people have asked.
8 We supported, I have supported,
9 through special grants, civil legal services
10 in the Finger Lakes region. I understand its
11 importance. However, Senator Bonacic, I
12 think, stated it very clearly. We believe
13 we're your partner in the Legislature as we
14 try to tackle these budget challenges. The
15 Judicial Pay Commission was a commission
16 established by the Legislature because we
17 believed there was a need to have judicial
18 salaries increased. And we look to be a
19 partner with you in the court system in
20 meeting the obligations established by the
21 commission. That's public policy. We need
22 to do that.
23 At the same token, a major increase in
24 the budget from one year to the next,
41
1 21 percent, for albeit a very noble program,
2 just is not appropriate for this period of
3 time. And that we look to see you develop
4 the creativity that we know you are likely to
5 have in solving this problem.
6 And certainly we understand the time
7 frame, we understand the budgetary
8 restrictions. I think logically, though, to
9 say it saves money for the state -- yes, it
10 does, but if that was the case, then we
11 should raise civil legal services to
12 $100 million, we should increase the budget
13 by 75 percent, 100 percent. Because if we're
14 going to have such a great savings, obviously
15 more would be helpful.
16 But that's not the reality. And it's
17 not a dollar-for-dollar savings.
18 I want to hear from you, in your
19 capacity as leader of the court system, what
20 types of creative solutions are here. Judge
21 Lippman spent a lot of time discussing pro
22 bono work, established requirements for pro
23 bono services for attorneys to be admitted,
24 for attorneys to continue in other services.
42
1 To achieve the objectives that this
2 body shares in supporting legal services,
3 yes, an increase could be appropriate. Yes,
4 we need to be partners with you on the salary
5 increases that judges are receiving. But
6 what are you doing to make civil legal
7 services more effective, efficient and
8 cost-effective for the taxpayer?
9 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
10 Well, I think your points are well taken,
11 particularly about Judge Prudenti, who was
12 very creative, and had to be, when she served
13 as chief administrative judge through some
14 very difficult years.
15 And hopefully things have gotten
16 better. But, you know, I understand
17 necessity can be the mother of invention.
18 And when you're really pressed, you're forced
19 to be creative. And I can promise you that
20 I'll do that as well. I mean, I'll continue
21 that trend.
22 But, you know, in the end we -- our
23 budget situation has been so challenging, you
24 know, for so many years at this point. I
43
1 mean, we started back in 2011 with a
2 $170 million budget cut. That was followed
3 by a flat budget the following year. And of
4 course a flat budget is really a negative
5 budget because costs go up, they don't go
6 down.
7 The year after that was another flat
8 budget. And the last two years we've
9 received, you know, very modest increases in
10 the range of 2 percent -- which we greatly
11 appreciate, and I'm not being ungrateful
12 about that in the least, don't misunderstand
13 me. But at some point where costs have been
14 going up and up and up, which is what they
15 do, you can be creative only so much. And,
16 you know, you run out of ideas at some point.
17 So I can't sit here today and tell you
18 about all the creative ideas that are in my
19 head as to how we'll deal with this if we
20 don't get additional money, because I'm very
21 much hoping that we get additional money.
22 I'm hoping that we can get your support about
23 that.
24 But in the end, frankly, if we don't,
44
1 we'll have to prepare for that eventuality
2 because that's certainly a possibility. And,
3 you know, we will find a way to manage this
4 in one way or the other. The courts will
5 remain open. I'm not suggesting in any way
6 at all that we won't continue to keep
7 courthouses open and we won't be providing
8 justice to the people of this state. But
9 we're going to have to be very, very
10 creative, I agree with you.
11 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: And again, we are
12 not trying to shirk the responsibilities of
13 the Legislature one bit. We believe strongly
14 that the issues of judicial salary increases
15 have to be met, can't totally be absorbed
16 within the traditional court budget, judicial
17 budget.
18 But we look to these other
19 expenditures as -- so expect you'll have
20 advocates to help in that endeavor, but we
21 want you to also find ways to help the
22 taxpayers who are paying for these bills, to
23 find creative ways to stretch, to cut, and to
24 provide the services in less costly ways.
45
1 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: And
2 I appreciate that. And I agree with you.
3 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you.
4 And thank you, Madam Chairman.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
6 But we've been joined by Senator Phil
7 Boyle and Senator Daniel Squadron.
8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Mr. Montesano.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN MONTESANO: Thank you,
10 Mr. Chairman.
11 Good morning, Judge.
12 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
13 Good morning.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN MONTESANO: Judge, in your
15 response to the different questions, and in
16 comments you made, you know, what I'm
17 concerned about is -- and I'll address the
18 indigent legal services in a moment, for the
19 civil part.
20 But, you know, as a practicing
21 attorney, I get into the courts quite a bit
22 in Nassau County, and I can't begin to tell
23 you the decimation of our court system in
24 Nassau County over the last several years.
46
1 In our surrogate's court alone, we lost
2 approximately 35 operational staff, which
3 resulted in limited cashier hours, limited
4 record room access. And some of those things
5 have cured a little bit down the line.
6 In our Supreme Court, many parts are
7 down on a daily basis because there's no
8 court officers or clerks to staff them. So
9 while we give this free indigent legal
10 services in the civil parts, it's all well
11 and good when the litigant comes in with the
12 free attorney, but there's no courtroom to
13 appear in.
14 We have one clerk covering three
15 parts. So they run from one courtroom to the
16 next, or they're handling three calendars at
17 the same time.
18 So when you indicated that a lot of
19 these costs that OCA is incurring over the
20 last several years has to do with personnel
21 and salaries, when many of the -- and I'm not
22 going to put myself in the middle of the
23 contract negotiations. But many of those
24 unions that you're talking about, the court
47
1 officers and clerks specifically, they've
2 gotten zero contracts over the last several
3 years. So I don't understand where there's
4 an increase in salaries, because they haven't
5 gotten anything.
6 So -- yet there's a $15 million bump
7 in the free civil legal services. So I'd
8 like to get an idea from you what's driven
9 that uptick --
10 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: I'm
11 sorry, which what?
12 ASSEMBLYMAN MONTESANO: What is
13 driving the uptick in the civil legal
14 services to warrant another $15 million?
15 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
16 Well, just -- we don't have a contract with
17 the Nassau court employees union, that's
18 correct. Unfortunately, we don't. We would
19 like to have a contract with them. We have
20 12 labor unions in the court system, and at
21 the moment we have contracts with eight of
22 the 12.
23 So with respect to the employees in
24 those unions, they've received salary
48
1 increases, modest salary increases over the
2 last couple of years. And that's the reason
3 for our increasing salary costs. It's the --
4 we have contracts with two-thirds of our
5 unions, but not in Nassau, unfortunately.
6 And hopefully we will reach agreement with
7 them shortly.
8 But the -- yes, you know, what you're
9 describing in the courts in Nassau, there
10 have been consequences of our reduced
11 staffing levels. And I'm sure you've
12 accurately described some of those, you know,
13 based on your firsthand experience.
14 And, you know, that's my concern, is
15 that we -- and I think there have been
16 improvements over the last year or two. And
17 I very much want to be able to continue that
18 trend and be able to improve from year to
19 year. Which is why I'm very much arguing
20 for, asking you and pleading with you to
21 provide this additional money that I firmly
22 believe we need to continue improvement and
23 to mitigate some of the problems that you're
24 describing in the courts in Nassau County,
49
1 for example.
2 ASSEMBLYMAN MONTESANO: And, Judge,
3 just to go in a different direction for a
4 second.
5 The bail system, I know that a process
6 has been instituted -- I think it started in
7 the city -- that when bail is set on a
8 defendant, it can go to another judge of the
9 same court who's going to review the judge's
10 bail. Now, it just seems odd to me that a
11 judge of the same jurisdiction and the same
12 court is acting as an appellate review of a
13 judge's bail.
14 Legally, how did that come about?
15 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: Let
16 me explain it to you. It's just in New York
17 City, by the way, not in your district.
18 There's a review -- if it's requested
19 by the defendant or the defense counsel,
20 there's a review, not to a judge of the same
21 jurisdiction, but to a judge in the Supreme
22 Court. And this is for misdemeanor cases
23 only, only the low-level offense. And it's
24 perfectly authorized under the law. It's --
50
1 Section 530.30 of the Criminal Procedure Law,
2 if you take a look at it, gives the Supreme
3 Court the authority, upon an application by
4 the defendant, to review bail that was set by
5 the lower court judge. So it was based on
6 that statutory authority.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN MONTESANO: Thank you,
8 Judge.
9 And just a last follow-up on my
10 question before, can you give us just a quick
11 overview of the justification for the
12 $15 million increase on the indigent legal
13 fund? What's driven that uptick and that
14 cost over the last year?
15 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: The
16 justification for it is it's the last
17 installment of a five-, six-year plan to
18 reach $100 million for civil legal services
19 in this state. Which, by the way, doesn't
20 solve the problem of the justice gap. There
21 will still be multitudes of people who do not
22 have lawyers and won't have lawyers. But
23 because of this money, for example, in this
24 fiscal year there will be over 450,000 people
51
1 who have lawyers because of the money that
2 we're providing.
3 And this would be the very last
4 installment that will fulfill the goal that
5 was set five, six years ago to reach
6 $100 million for civil legal services.
7 And we were able to add money to it in
8 more difficult budget years, more difficult
9 fiscal years than this year. So we feel that
10 it's very important, it benefits hundreds of
11 thousands of people who need help throughout
12 the state. It levels the playing field in
13 the courts, and we feel it's very important.
14 And that's why we're urging the Legislature
15 to provide that funding.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN MONTESANO: Thank you,
17 Judge. Thank you, Chairman.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
19 Assemblyman.
20 Our next speaker is Senator Diane
21 Savino.
22 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
23 Young.
24 Good morning, Judge Marks.
52
1 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
2 Good morning.
3 SENATOR SAVINO: I'm happy to see in
4 your testimony that you guys are actually
5 asking for more money. If you recall, at
6 Judge DiFiore's nomination and her
7 confirmation on the Senate floor, I mentioned
8 the fact that she's inheriting a court system
9 that is overburdened in many ways and has
10 suffered from a shortage of resources. In
11 fact, Sunday's New York Times detailed the
12 long slog through the court system that it
13 took one particular young man who was
14 injured, and it took several months for cases
15 to move that should have taken much less
16 time. So we know that our courts are
17 overburdened.
18 But I have a question. I know you've
19 had several collective bargaining units in
20 the court system. Are all of them now
21 settled? Have you settled all their
22 contracts?
23 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: No.
24 I was saying before we have 12 unions in the
53
1 court system. We have contracts with eight
2 of the 12, and we're eager to reach agreement
3 with the remaining four.
4 SENATOR SAVINO: Do you feel that the
5 proposed budget by the Governor is sufficient
6 to meet the financial settlements of those
7 contracts?
8 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: It
9 would be very difficult.
10 SENATOR SAVINO: It would be very
11 difficult.
12 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
13 Yes. Yes.
14 SENATOR SAVINO: And in addition,
15 there was a lawsuit brought against the
16 courts by the Court Officers Association that
17 triggered a hiring mandate. From what I
18 understand, there was supposed to be 350
19 court officers hired; 150 have been actually
20 accomplished, and there's another 200
21 outstanding. Is there sufficient money in
22 your budget to meet that additional hiring?
23 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
24 Well, court officers -- you know, we're down,
54
1 as I was saying before, 12 percent in our
2 workforce since 2009. We have -- court
3 officers have been hit less hard. At least
4 when you look at it today, statewide we're
5 about 6.2 percent fewer court officers than
6 we were in 2009, which is proportionally less
7 than some of the other titles. And in
8 fact -- because, look, public safety, you
9 know, in the courts, there's really nothing
10 more important than that.
11 SENATOR SAVINO: No doubt.
12 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
13 People who work in the courts, people who
14 come into the courts have to be secure and
15 safe. And we would never compromise that.
16 In fact, we're starting a court
17 officer class in our academy, which when we
18 hire court officers, they have to go through
19 the academy, obviously. There's a class of I
20 think it's 150 recruits starting later this
21 month. Once they are deployed in the courts
22 when they graduates from the academy, you
23 know, later this year, we'll be down to maybe
24 only 3 percent or so less -- 3 percent fewer
55
1 court officers than we had in 2009.
2 So frankly, I'm less concerned about
3 the number of court officers. Although it's
4 not perfect, and we do need more court
5 officers, particularly in some parts of the
6 state. But I think we're in better shape
7 with regard to court officers than we are
8 with some of the other titles.
9 SENATOR SAVINO: I'm glad to see you
10 feel that way. But again, there's certainly
11 a shortage of court officers, court clerks,
12 court stenographers, and basically
13 courtrooms.
14 I spoke previously about the problem
15 we have in Richmond County. You know, the
16 state created a separate judicial district
17 for Staten Island, Richmond County, in 2007.
18 To date, we have yet to receive the seven
19 judges that we're entitled to. We owe three
20 to Brooklyn. You know, we're entitled to 10
21 judges for the County of Richmond. We don't
22 have them. We have a brand-new courthouse
23 that we outgrew already.
24 And this is not your problem. I'm
56
1 just saying this to make the point that while
2 the discussion today seems to be between
3 civil legal services and judges' salaries, I
4 think it goes beyond that. We still have a
5 court system that is overburdened,
6 under-resourced, regardless of how we decide
7 whether you should get civil legal services
8 or whether judges should get a raise.
9 By the way, I think we should do both.
10 But I think we also need to increase funding
11 to the court system because we're not able
12 to, in my opinion, deliver what Judge DeFiore
13 says is most important to her, the speedy and
14 efficient administration of justice.
15 So I would just hope that while we
16 continue to listen to you today, people take
17 into consideration it shouldn't be just civil
18 legal services versus judges' salaries, it's
19 how do we appropriately fund a court system
20 so that we can meet that mandate of speedy
21 and efficient administration of justice.
22 Thank you, Judge Marks.
23 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
24 Thank you.
57
1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblyman Lentol,
2 Chairman Lentol.
3 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Thank you,
4 Mr. Chairman.
5 And congratulations, Mr. Marks, for
6 your ascendency to this very good position --
7 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
8 Thank you.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: -- chief
10 administrative judge.
11 I guess I'm a little bit torn, because
12 I know that having appeared in court and
13 knowing judges like I do -- and even
14 legislators like I do -- that none of us
15 would like to see a wounded warrior not have
16 a lawyer in court at the expense of my not
17 getting a raise or a judge not getting a
18 raise. I would not like to see a homeless
19 person who lost his home because of a bank
20 who foreclosed on him illegally.
21 And so I guess that I believe that, as
22 Diane Savino said, that we surely have to do
23 both. But I certainly wouldn't advocate for
24 taking money away from legal services and
58
1 putting additional people out on the
2 streets -- and, since we're going to be in
3 Afghanistan for a while, not having legal
4 representation for the veterans of the United
5 States of America.
6 Actually, I wanted to ask you about
7 raising the age of criminal responsibility,
8 because the chief judge, as you know, has
9 created an adolescent diversion court part in
10 the adult criminal court in nine counties
11 dedicated exclusively to handling cases of
12 16-and-17-year-olds. And since the Governor
13 has again talked about this in his State of
14 the State, and it's in his budget, might you
15 provide us with an update on the status and
16 operation of these new adolescent diversion
17 court parts?
18 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
19 Well, they're continuing. This was a program
20 that was started by the prior chief judge,
21 Judge Lippman, at the same time that he
22 called for statutory reform, the Legislature
23 raising the age of criminal responsibility.
24 Which I think, as we all know, we're one of
59
1 only two states in the country that sets the
2 age of criminal responsibility at 16.
3 And so the adolescent diversion court
4 parts were a complement to the legislative
5 proposal. The legislation is the ultimate
6 solution.
7 But in the meantime, these are court
8 parts that were set up -- I think we have 11
9 of them now throughout the state. They have
10 been successful. They're set up in
11 cooperation with the district attorneys in
12 those jurisdictions, who have been
13 supportive. They're a limited solution to
14 the problem, I think it's fair to describe it
15 that way. They're mostly dealing with
16 misdemeanors. I think a few may deal with
17 some -- a modest number of nonviolent
18 felonies. But they've been certainly
19 successful. We're continuing them. There's
20 been evaluations done, scholarly evaluations
21 of the results of the adolescent diversion
22 parts, and they've been shown to reduce
23 recidivism for the 16-and-17-year-olds
24 participating in the program.
60
1 So it's been a successful program, but
2 it's somewhat of a limited program. And we
3 feel and certainly the new chief judge feels
4 that way, that the ultimate solution is to
5 statutorily raise the age of criminal
6 responsibility in New York.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Now, both the
8 Assembly and the Executive proposals talk
9 about a large amount of cases being shifted
10 from the criminal part to the Family Court.
11 And since we're talking about the lack of
12 resources for all the court system, I'm
13 wondering if you believe the necessary
14 resources are available to implement that.
15 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
16 Yeah, the -- we've taken the position we
17 could accommodate the -- there would be more
18 cases in Family Court. So there wouldn't be
19 more cases overall in the court system, there
20 would be a shift of some cases that are now
21 in the criminal courts to the Family Court.
22 And Family Court certainly has challenges --
23 I'm not going to suggest otherwise -- but
24 Family Court does have 25 new judges. Thanks
61
1 to the support of the Legislature, we have 25
2 additional judges in Family Court around the
3 state.
4 So the other thing is when Judge
5 Lippman --
6 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Has that helped,
7 the 25 additional Family Court judges?
8 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
9 Absolutely. Yeah, it absolutely helps. We
10 are very happy that the Legislature approved
11 that two years ago.
12 But the number of 16-and-17-year-olds
13 who have been arrested, that number has
14 plummeted over the last half dozen years or
15 so. It's a fraction of what it once was.
16 So there might be a need for some
17 additional resources in Family Court, but my
18 sense is that it would not be draconian. So
19 it would be a problem that we would cope
20 with. And if the legislation passed, I think
21 under all the proposals -- I know this about
22 the Governor's proposal -- the effective date
23 would not be for, you know, a year and a half
24 down the road, so there would be time to
62
1 prepare for it. There might be some modest
2 additional expense in costs for the court,
3 but we feel -- and, you know, we've thought
4 about this a great deal over recent years --
5 that we would be able to handle that. And --
6 it would be a good problem to have, in other
7 words. You know, we view it that way.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Thank you very
9 much.
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: Next is Senator Ruth
11 Hassell-Thompson, ranker on Judiciary. We're
12 going to make a chair trade.
13 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you,
14 Madam Chair.
15 Good morning, Judge.
16 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
17 Good morning.
18 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: I just have
19 a couple of questions. I understand that
20 most of the questions that I had wanted to
21 pose have already been asked of you, so I
22 won't be redundant.
23 But I would like to just ask, are you
24 committed to the bail reform process that was
63
1 begun by Chief Judge Lippman last year? And
2 how soon do you think, if you're committed,
3 that that would roll out?
4 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
5 Well, the bail reform process has mostly been
6 put in place. The new Chief Judge supports
7 it. We're going to continue that. We feel
8 that there are a number of people who are not
9 a threat to anyone -- you know, people who
10 don't have a history of violence, who are
11 detained pending the outcome of the
12 disposition of their case simply because they
13 can't afford to make bail.
14 There are a lot of alternatives that
15 we feel that judges could be using to avoid
16 that situation. We're trying to encourage
17 judges -- in the end, it's a judge's
18 decision, an individual judge's discretion on
19 whether to set bail or not and how much. But
20 we are trying to be supportive of judges and
21 to provide them with sufficient resources and
22 alternative resources so that people -- look,
23 some people, you know, should be detained who
24 clearly are a threat to society, a threat of
64
1 committing further violence, but many people
2 are not. And they're sitting in jail
3 awaiting the disposition of their case simply
4 because they don't have the means to make
5 bail, and that's a problem that we're trying
6 address.
7 There's also a statutory solution
8 which has been proposed, and I think we'll
9 pursue that as well. And I think that the
10 new Chief Judge will want to pursue that as
11 well.
12 But this is a problem that we're
13 committed to addressing and committed to
14 trying to resolve it as best we can.
15 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: What have
16 been some of the barriers to getting it
17 resolved?
18 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
19 Statutorily? The proposal that we sent to
20 the Legislature a couple of years ago would
21 address, number one, the fact that in
22 New York -- and it's almost kind of
23 completely upside down, if you think about
24 it. In New York, judges are not permitted to
65
1 take risk to public safety into account when
2 they make a bail determination, which doesn't
3 seem to make any sense. We're one of only a
4 few states that prohibits judges from taking
5 that into account.
6 Judges should be able to take that
7 into account, so that if there is someone
8 with a real propensity for violence before
9 them, that that should be a factor that the
10 judge should consider in setting bail.
11 But on the other hand, we feel that
12 where someone does not present a risk of
13 violence and does not present a risk of
14 failing to return to court if they're
15 released, that there should be a presumption
16 of release without bail.
17 So it sort of addresses two kind of
18 different but in some ways related problems
19 that we feel, you know, the Legislature
20 should take a careful look at. And both of
21 those problems could be resolved, we feel, in
22 the bill that we presented to the
23 Legislature.
24 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: I'm
66
1 confused. I'm confused because if you're
2 saying the bail happens before the case goes
3 to trial, there still is a presumption of
4 innocence. So where -- the argument that
5 you're raising confuses me tremendously.
6 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
7 Well, look, there are people who have a
8 history of interaction with the criminal
9 justice system, have had prior cases and have
10 a history of having been released pending the
11 disposition of their case and not returning
12 to court. And bench warrants get issued.
13 And, you know, that's a real problem for the
14 courts, it's a real problem for society when
15 people have a criminal charge against them --
16 presumed innocent, you're absolutely
17 correct -- but have a history of not
18 returning to court when they've had a
19 criminal case.
20 So bail, we feel, in those instances
21 is entirely appropriate, when there's a
22 history of not returning to court when they
23 should be doing that.
24 We also feel -- and this is the law in
67
1 the vast majority of states in the country --
2 that in making a bail determination a judge
3 should be able to take into account whether
4 the person before them is a violent person
5 and may, if released, commit a further act of
6 violence. To us, that seems like a very
7 commonsense approach and an approach that
8 should be reflected in the bail statutes in
9 New York.
10 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you.
11 Just to go back for a minute to the
12 explanation that you were giving on the
13 implementation of Raise the Age. Answer for
14 me again, how many new parts and attorneys
15 will OCA need in order to fully implement --
16 I know you have -- you know, the
17 implementation is not going to occur in '16.
18 But we're also looking at you absorbing a
19 tremendous deficit this year in terms of the
20 new judges that have come on, and judge
21 raises and a lot of other issues. I would
22 not like to see any of these issues become a
23 barrier to us implementing this program as we
24 move out.
68
1 So what would the numbers mean given
2 the financial straits that you find OCA in at
3 this moment?
4 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
5 Frankly, I don't think we would need
6 additional resources to accommodate a
7 statutory raise of the age of criminal
8 responsibility. I think we could accommodate
9 the -- again, it wouldn't create more cases
10 in the court system, it would move certain
11 cases from one court to another court.
12 So, you know, we have flexibility in
13 reassigning judges from one court to another
14 court. We have flexibility in reassigning
15 court staff -- the court officers, court
16 clerks and the like -- from one court to
17 another court.
18 If you combine that with the 25
19 additional Family Court judgeships that we
20 have now and the fact that the rest of
21 16-and-17-year-olds, you know, are much lower
22 than they were a few years ago, we feel that
23 we could accommodate this change -- which,
24 again, would not be more cases, it would be
69
1 moving cases from one court to another. We
2 feel we can accommodate that with what we
3 have.
4 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Is it not
5 true that when you took the last budget cut
6 that you lost close to 2,000 employees across
7 the spectrum? So I'm --
8 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
9 Yes. But we're dealing with -- it's the same
10 number of cases. Raise the Age doesn't
11 necessarily reduce the number of cases,
12 although it can. It could lead to more
13 diversion of cases out of the courts and 16-
14 and 17-year-olds going into programs. You
15 know, rather than having their cases go
16 through the court system.
17 But we're not expanding the number of
18 cases, we're merely moving them from one
19 court to another. We feel a court that --
20 cases can be better served and can be better
21 handled in the Family Court than in the
22 criminal courts. So given that and given our
23 flexibility to move judges around and our
24 flexibility to move court employees around,
70
1 since this wouldn't be more cases for the
2 court system, it would be the same number of
3 cases or maybe even fewer cases, that we
4 could accommodate them.
5 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Okay, my
6 time is going to run out. But I guess the
7 crux of the question for me is we've given
8 you 20 new judges, but do you have the court
9 support staff for those 20 judges in the
10 numbers given the cuts that you've taken?
11 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
12 Yes.
13 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: And I think
14 that's the basis of my question, because
15 these are Family Court judges.
16 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: We
17 have sufficient staff for the new Family
18 Court judges, yes, we do.
19 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you,
20 Judge.
21 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
23 Next, Assemblyman Graf.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Hi, Judge, how are
71
1 you?
2 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
3 Good morning.
4 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Now, you have one
5 program where at arraignments everyone gets
6 assigned an attorney. Right? And even if
7 the person is making $200,000, $300,000 -- or
8 no matter what he makes, right, they get
9 assigned an attorney at arraignment. How
10 much is that costing us?
11 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
12 People making $200,000, $300,000 a year are
13 getting attorneys at arraignments? I can't
14 tell you that that's never happened, but I
15 can honestly say I don't believe that's a
16 major problem in the court system.
17 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Well, that's what
18 happening. In Suffolk County they have
19 assigned attorneys, okay, that sit in the
20 courtroom. And if somebody doesn't have an
21 attorney, and it doesn't matter what they
22 make, for arraignment they're getting an
23 attorney.
24 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: :
72
1 Yeah, I think that attorneys staff the
2 arraignment parts in places like Suffolk
3 County. And, you know, the courts are under
4 a very strict mandate from the Court of
5 Appeals that people have to be arraigned
6 within 24 hours of their arrest. So if
7 someone is arrested, is brought by the police
8 to the courthouse, is brought to the
9 courtroom to be arraigned and there's a
10 lawyer assigned to that arraignment part,
11 yes, that could happen, that somebody who
12 otherwise could afford a lawyer would have
13 the services of that lawyer for the very
14 brief arraignment proceeding.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Well, they have --
16 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: But
17 they would not receive a free lawyer for the
18 pendency of the case.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: If I can, Judge.
20 You have Legal Aid assigned to the courtroom,
21 but there are income requirements. All
22 right? So anyone that doesn't meet the
23 income requirement in Suffolk County, right,
24 who cannot be assigned Legal Aid is being
73
1 assigned almost like an 18-B attorney. All
2 right? Even if they're making $200,000 a
3 year, if they're being arraigned.
4 That money -- and I'm looking -- could
5 be better used, all right, to staff court
6 personnel. Because let me explain what's
7 happening. It takes me, in Suffolk County in
8 district court, up to three and a half years
9 to get a hearing. I just did a trial on a
10 misdemeanor. It took me five years, five
11 years, to get a jury trial.
12 And what's happening is we've come to
13 a point where we've cut the court staff so
14 much in an attempt to save money that it's
15 actually costing us money.
16 So what's happening in Suffolk
17 County -- and I don't know about the rest of
18 the state, because that's mainly where I
19 practice -- is if somebody has to be taken
20 into custody, the entire courtroom shuts
21 down. That slows down the entire process,
22 right, and leads to court congestion.
23 There are times where they have to
24 bring a person from custody up to the
74
1 courtroom. That takes forever, because they
2 have limited personnel to bring that person
3 to the courtroom. There have been times in
4 Suffolk County where you have an individual
5 who's in custody and it's so hard to get that
6 person into the courtroom that where there
7 would have been disposition in the case and
8 that person would have been released that
9 day, they wind up getting adjourned for two
10 weeks, so they spend more time in custody.
11 So what I'm saying to you -- you know,
12 and I'm just looking at all the things that
13 you've been forced to do because of budget
14 constraints. And I'm not picking -- I'm
15 saying we need more money for court officers,
16 we need more money for court clerks, because
17 we're at a crisis point where the safety of
18 the personnel in the courtroom are in
19 jeopardy. The safety of the people appearing
20 in the court is now in jeopardy because of
21 the lack of court officers. The
22 courtrooms are not functioning properly
23 because of the lack of personnel.
24 And I mean you have gotten creative,
75
1 and I'm not blaming the judges and I'm not
2 blaming the administration, I'm blaming us
3 for not looking at the problems here and
4 identifying these problems and making sure
5 that we're not stepping over a dollar to pick
6 up a dime, which is what I think we're doing
7 here.
8 You've seen the slowdowns in the
9 courtroom. You know, you watch the
10 calendars. So, I mean, do you agree with the
11 fact that we've gotten to the point where
12 it's actually costing us money because it's
13 slowing down the process?
14 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
15 Yeah. No, I think there are delays in cases
16 throughout the court system.
17 But I have to tell you, if it's taking
18 five years to get a misdemeanor trial in
19 Suffolk County, that is absolutely
20 unconscionable. And I will -- I can promise
21 you I will look into that today, this
22 afternoon, because that's -- that's
23 unconscionable in a --
24 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Judge, half the
76
1 other problem, if you want to relieve the
2 congestion, is the 30.30 statute doesn't
3 exist in New York State. Okay? Because all
4 we get is it's always court time, it's always
5 court time. That's nonsense. They're
6 denying clients' rights to a speedy trial.
7 And I look at the appellate decisions,
8 and never, never is there a decision on
9 30.30, for the most part. So it's like --
10 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: The
11 30.30 is -- I agree with you, it's a
12 misnomer. It's never been an effective
13 speedy trial statute. It is not effective in
14 moving cases to trial. I agree with you
15 completely on that.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Well, year after
17 year I keep saying that we have to do
18 something with this. You know, it's
19 nonsense, when I sit there -- and I've been
20 in front of judges and I'm ready for trial,
21 I'm ready for a hearing, and the judge goes,
22 "Well, we can't do a trial today." I say,
23 "Well, send me to another courtroom." Okay?
24 And I get court time. And then if I do an
77
1 appeal, it's never decided on 30.30.
2 So basically we're ignoring the
3 Constitution in the State of New York, and
4 that's causing court congestion.
5 So, I mean, I have a lot of problems
6 with what's going on in our courtrooms,
7 especially with the staffing requirements.
8 All right? And I do think that we're
9 stepping over a dollar to pick up a dime
10 here, and by not funding especially
11 correction officers and clerks and everything
12 else, right, it's actually costing us money.
13 The last thing is the recording
14 devices that we have for transcripts, it's
15 not the same as a person that is actually
16 taking it down, a court reporter. Because
17 when we get that back, there's nothing but
18 errors and everything else in the time
19 period.
20 So I would say, you know, we need to
21 fund court personnel. If you really want to
22 save money, we need to hire more court
23 personnel.
24 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: I
78
1 agree with you.
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
3 Senator.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Our
5 next speaker is Senator Dan Squadron.
6 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very
7 much, Madam Chair, and the committee. It's
8 good timing, and I want to pick up right
9 where Assemblymember Graf left off, with I
10 think you referred to it as the nonexistent
11 30.30 statute. In fact, we might be better
12 off with none than with this.
13 The current 30.30 statute was written
14 in order to keep the federal government from
15 coming into New York State in the early '70s,
16 signed by Governor Rockefeller, in
17 contradiction to a report from the court on
18 how to actually fix our speedy trial statute,
19 at a time when court congestion wasn't as bad
20 as it is today.
21 I appreciate your testimony. I
22 understand that the Commission on Judicial
23 Pay ties your hands a little bit. But I do
24 want to say when we have the kind of delay
79
1 and backup that we see, when we have the kind
2 of violation of the accused's constitutional
3 rights, the kind of cost and pain suffered by
4 victims from the sort of court delay that we
5 have, I really urge -- and I've done the same
6 thing to the incoming chief judge -- an
7 aggressive look at a crisis of court delay, a
8 crisis of constitutional rights to a speedy
9 trial being absolutely ignored in New York
10 State. In fact, the statute to protect them
11 is used to damage them.
12 In my home borough of Brooklyn, we're
13 up 26 percent on court delays in 2015. In
14 2013 in New York City, 594 days citywide mean
15 age at disposition. Five hundred ninety-four
16 is almost two years. It's 732 days in the
17 Bronx. In 2012, 55 percent of felony cases
18 in New York City were pending for more than
19 six months. That is a crisis.
20 In fact, the Advisory Committee on
21 Criminal Law and procedure gave a report to
22 you last year that said most would agree --
23 as you have already, which I really
24 appreciate -- that 30.30 has been largely
80
1 unsuccessful in moving criminal trials in an
2 expeditious fashion.
3 It also says the problem is more than
4 just a lack of sufficient judicial resources.
5 It also involves a willingness to go to
6 trial.
7 You said, in response to Senator
8 Hassell-Thompson, that people are sitting in
9 jail because they can't make bail. I would
10 amend that. They're sitting in jail because
11 they can't make bail and because of the kind
12 of court delays we have.
13 I carry a bill to fix this named for
14 Kalief Browder, who spent more than a
15 thousand days in jail before having his case
16 dismissed. Tragically, he committed suicide
17 last year.
18 What's the solution? How are we going
19 to do it together this year?
20 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
21 Well, I think the -- these are all real
22 problems that you've discussed, and the
23 solution is -- and I think the new chief
24 judge is very interested in this problem, and
81
1 I think you'll be hearing more from her
2 shortly about this. But I think she wants to
3 address and focus her attention on this.
4 And this has to be a priority. It
5 will be a priority. But I think the ultimate
6 solution -- you know, the criminal justice
7 system has many components and obviously the
8 court system is a central component within
9 the criminal justice system. But to
10 eliminate some of these problems, address
11 these delays, streamline the process, we have
12 to work together with the other components of
13 the criminal justice system. There's a lot
14 that we can do ourselves, that the judiciary
15 can do, but we can't do it all. And we need
16 to work with law enforcement, with the
17 defense bar, with the institutional criminal
18 defense providers, with probation
19 departments. I mean, we need to work
20 together with all the components of the
21 criminal justice system to solve these
22 problems. That's the only way to do it.
23 SENATOR SQUADRON: And just explain to
24 me the role of the court system and then the
82
1 role of the other partners you just
2 described.
3 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
4 It's -- we have a major role, maybe the
5 critical role in --
6 SENATOR SQUADRON: And what is that
7 role? Just sort of more specifically.
8 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
9 Well, in the end, it's the judge that can
10 move the case to trial. I mean, the parties
11 have to be ready, but if there's delay or
12 lack of readiness, if there are excuses, in
13 the end it's the judge that has to ensure
14 that there's a quick resolution and an
15 expeditious resolution of the case.
16 So first and foremost and ultimately,
17 the responsibility is with the court system
18 and with judges.
19 SENATOR SQUADRON: Let me just ask
20 this question directly. If court congestion
21 didn't stop the clock, wouldn't that move
22 trials a lot more quickly?
23 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: If
24 court congestion --
83
1 SENATOR SQUADRON: If court congestion
2 wasn't a reason to stop the speedy trial
3 clock, wouldn't that move trials much more
4 quickly?
5 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
6 Absolutely.
7 SENATOR SQUADRON: Is that something
8 you support?
9 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: Is
10 that what?
11 SENATOR SQUADRON: Something you
12 support --
13 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: Oh,
14 sure.
15 SENATOR SQUADRON: -- allowing the
16 clock to run for the entire time between
17 trial or hearing dates even if it's court
18 congestion that's leading to the delay?
19 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: You
20 mean if court congestion is the reason for
21 the delay --
22 SENATOR SQUADRON: The prosecutor asks
23 for a week and gets a date three weeks hence.
24 Is that seven days or is that 21 days?
84
1 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
2 Under the speedy trial statute?
3 SENATOR SQUADRON: Currently it's
4 seven. If it were 21, I think that would be
5 the beginning of solving this problem. I'm
6 asking, is that something that the courts --
7 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
8 Look, a more effective speedy trial statute
9 could make a great contribution to
10 eliminating delays in criminal cases, no
11 question.
12 SENATOR SQUADRON: So it sounds like
13 you also agree that we don't need more money
14 before we talk about fixing speedy trial --
15 we should fix 30.30 and then next year we'll
16 talk about the money that we need to make
17 that work. Is that the right order of
18 operations?
19 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: I
20 think there are a lot of things we can do
21 without more money.
22 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very
23 much. I really appreciate it.
24 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
85
1 Thank you.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We have been joined
3 by Senator Velmanette Montgomery.
4 Assembly?
5 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: We've also been
6 joined by Assemblywoman Duprey.
7 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Any questions on
8 this side? Oh. Danny O'Donnell.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Well, it's
10 been a rough morning for me, Judge.
11 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
12 It's part of the job.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Senator
14 Nozzolio suggested $100 million for legal
15 services; I almost passed out. And I agree
16 with Al Graf, so that's really quite a
17 morning for me.
18 (Laughter.)
19 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: I had chosen
20 not to speak, because I would like to go home
21 sometime in my lifetime today, so -- but
22 there's a couple of things I want to raise.
23 One is I want to say that I
24 100 percent agree with Senator Squadron. And
86
1 just so you know, I was a full-time public
2 defender from 1987 to 1995. And at the
3 beginning of that time, if a DA came into the
4 courtroom and said, "Your Honor, my key
5 witness is in Florida, and I'll be ready
6 tomorrow," and the case was adjourned for a
7 month, the judge charged that whole month to
8 the people on the running of the clock.
9 So now there's an absolute
10 manipulation of that, where they say "But
11 I'll be ready tomorrow," and then they
12 adjourn the case for two months and only
13 charge one day to the people. With all due
14 respect, sir, that's the judge's fault. The
15 judge doesn't have to do that. The judge
16 could say "Well, you're not ready today,
17 you're not ready."
18 And in the time that I worked there,
19 it went from when you could expect some
20 attempt to try a case within the speedy trial
21 limits to a point where it could never ever
22 happen. Which leads me to my statement about
23 bail.
24 We have too many people in jail
87
1 awaiting trial on bail. So isn't it true a
2 judge is allowed to take into consideration,
3 in setting the bail, the nature of the crime?
4 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
5 Yes.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Aren't they
7 allowed to take into consideration the facts
8 that they're aware of about the crime?
9 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
10 Yes.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Aren't they
12 allowed to take into effect any history of
13 coming or not coming to court?
14 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
15 Absolutely.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Aren't they
17 allowed to take into effect family ties,
18 community ties and other things determined by
19 the criminal justice system?
20 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
21 You've read the statute recently, I guess.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: No, I haven't,
23 I'm just pretty smart about this.
24 So my question for you is, how many
88
1 people are you aware of that have been
2 accused of murder who have never been accused
3 before who get released on bail?
4 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: I
5 couldn't say on that --
6 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: I would like
7 someone -- one of the minions that work for
8 you -- to tell me what the answer to that
9 question is. Because the answer, in my
10 opinion, is almost nobody -- except if you're
11 white and rich, but that's not your fault.
12 Almost no one.
13 So if in fact almost no one is
14 released when they're charged with murder,
15 then what that means is in effect the system
16 is taking into account what the risk might be
17 to society to let them out, and we don't need
18 to change the bail statute to give more
19 people reasons to keep more people in jail.
20 We need to change the bail statute so
21 that we're not having people sit in places
22 like Rikers island for years -- years --
23 before they can assert their constitutional
24 right to the presumption of innocence.
89
1 And I think the judiciary needs to
2 take a better role and look at this and not
3 advocate for changing it to make the bail
4 statute even harder on people who don't have
5 resources.
6 Thank you, sir.
7 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
8 Thank you.
9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
11 Senator Liz Krueger.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you. I also
13 wasn't planning to ask too many questions
14 because so many of us are here today.
15 But just going back to civil legal
16 services, even though there has been the
17 growth in money available, can you tell me
18 how many people have to go to a court
19 situation without an attorney in the civil
20 system?
21 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
22 It's still about -- although there's been
23 great improvement with that problem, there's
24 still a great majority of the people in civil
90
1 cases who can't afford a lawyer, still don't
2 have a lawyer. It's as much as 70 percent.
3 SENATOR KRUEGER: And someone gave me
4 the number that we were at 2.3 million cases
5 without attorneys, and we're down to
6 1.8 million. Does that seem a realistic
7 number to you of the number of people who
8 don't have attorneys for civil cases?
9 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: I
10 know -- it's very difficult to kind of
11 document this. But I think that sounds
12 correct, if I recall. I know that the
13 estimates are that over the last five, six
14 years, the percentage of people in civil
15 cases who can't afford an attorney who have
16 an attorney has gone from 20 percent to
17 30 percent, which is actually a 50 percent
18 increase, if my math is correct.
19 But obviously that still leaves the
20 great majority of people without a lawyer.
21 So it's -- it's an ongoing problem. This
22 additional money has made, you know, an
23 enormous difference in the lives of the
24 people who do have lawyers because of it, and
91
1 it's hundreds of thousands of cases a year
2 where people now have lawyers because of this
3 money. But it's a gargantuan problem, no
4 question.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: I certainly -- I
6 represent a part of Manhattan Island, and I
7 certainly can verify that the difficulty in
8 finding somebody -- representation in endless
9 numbers of civil cases for disproportionately
10 the elderly, the disabled, tenants -- and
11 again, the biggest issue I see in the
12 problems here are that in a civil case where
13 it's not you versus the government, it's you
14 against someone, the someone else always has
15 an attorney. And so the unfairness of going
16 through the court process to me seems fairly
17 extreme.
18 So, you know, for the record, we can't
19 support reducing funding for civil legal
20 services. We have to continue our commitment
21 that was a multiyear commitment to expanding
22 funds for civil legal services.
23 Thank you.
24 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
92
1 Thank you.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblywoman
4 Peoples-Stokes.
5 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank
6 you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
7 Judge, I appreciated hearing all your
8 comments today, and I actually appreciated
9 hearing the questions and responses from my
10 colleagues. But I just have one really quick
11 point I want to raise, and hopefully you're
12 able to give me that number today. And, if
13 not, I can look forward to receiving it soon.
14 What is the total number of staff on
15 the Office of Court Administration? And what
16 is the total number of counsel on civil legal
17 services? And what are the diversity numbers
18 there?
19 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: I'm
20 sorry, I don't have that with me. But I'll
21 absolutely get you those numbers. We have
22 them. And we'll get them to you.
23 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PEOPLES-STOKES: The
24 numbers and the diversity.
93
1 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
2 Yes.
3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank
4 you, sir.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
6 Senator Marty Golden.
7 SENATOR GOLDEN: Thank you very much,
8 Madam Chair.
9 I have to believe judges should have
10 the discretion to set bail and the ability of
11 the defendant to return to court and also set
12 the risk assessment of the violence. And I
13 think you're doing an outstanding job. And I
14 do believe that we have to help you correct
15 the imbalance in the system in putting more
16 dollars made available so we can have more
17 judges and more employees to be able to move
18 these cases through the system.
19 Real quick question. I'm also the
20 chair of the Public Employees, and I had them
21 up in my office about a month ago. And I
22 thought I heard 14 percent they're down, and
23 that's different from the number that you've
24 given.
94
1 The court officers across the State of
2 New York are 14 percent off from where they
3 were in 2009?
4 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
5 That -- could you repeat that? I'm sorry.
6 SENATOR GOLDEN: The number of court
7 officers presently are down 14 percent from
8 the number in 2009 that I have.
9 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
10 It's 6 percent. But depending on who came to
11 you, they might have been talking about a
12 particular court or type of court.
13 SENATOR GOLDEN: That was statewide.
14 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
15 Statewide it's 6 percent. I'll show you the
16 numbers.
17 SENATOR GOLDEN: If you could get
18 those numbers for me, I'd appreciate it.
19 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: I
20 will.
21 SENATOR GOLDEN: Thank you,
22 Your Honor.
23 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
24 Thank you.
95
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: That's it.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. Senator
4 Velmanette Montgomery.
5 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you, Madam
6 Chair.
7 Judge, good morning.
8 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
9 Good morning.
10 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I just have one
11 question that I would like to ask. You are
12 familiar with the Center for Court
13 Innovation?
14 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
15 Yes.
16 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And one of the
17 issues or one of the sort of experimental, if
18 you will, I guess we can say, courts that
19 they have come up with and have been actually
20 put into action by -- under the auspices of
21 Chief Justices Kaye and Lippman, and I hope
22 that we're looking to make that a permanent
23 and central part of our court system, and
24 that is the youth courts.
96
1 So I'm not -- I'm not -- I don't
2 understand and I don't know how you view
3 that. It has worked so beautifully in one of
4 the community courts in my district. And all
5 of the information that I have in those areas
6 other than the Red Hook Youth Court, which is
7 in my district, have really benefited young
8 people extremely well.
9 It's also an opportunity to teach
10 young people how the system works, to give
11 them an opportunity to develop some skill and
12 some understanding of the system because they
13 play the roles of all of the different
14 components of the court. And so it keeps
15 young people out of the system, but it also
16 acts as an extremely important leadership
17 development program.
18 So I'm wondering what you think about
19 it and if we can look forward to continuing
20 to support that court and make it more
21 central to what we do as it relates to young
22 people in our state.
23 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
24 Yeah, the youth courts are terrific. And,
97
1 you know, we have them in Brooklyn, we have
2 them in places all over the state. They're
3 supported by defense attorneys offices where
4 we have them. And, you know, they're a
5 terrific idea. You find them in other states
6 around the country, not just New York. And
7 we're totally committed to continuing to
8 support them.
9 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
11 Senator Michael Nozzolio.
12 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you again,
13 Madam Chair.
14 Judge, coming to the issue of bail,
15 that Judge Lippman drafted a bill but because
16 Judge Lippman is not a member of the
17 Legislature, I as chair of the Codes
18 Committee, as a professional courtesy,
19 introduced his legislation. It's been
20 pending before the Codes Committee for a
21 number of months.
22 And I'd like to have your reaction to
23 a comment made that says the reform of the
24 so-called broken jail system, Judge Lippman's
98
1 bill, insults judges, overlooks that bail
2 review is available presently, fails to
3 provide a complete record of bail release
4 decisions, and intrudes on the judiciary's
5 independence.
6 Now, that's not by a member of the
7 Legislature, that's by a co-Supreme Court
8 judge, Judge McLaughlin in the City of
9 New York, who indicated that these provisions
10 would establish what he called a two-tier
11 system of justice where you'd see an
12 automatic judicial review triggered when a
13 defendant is unable to make bail.
14 Now, that means, to me, that we'd have
15 50,000 appeals automatically. And you were
16 talking about clogging the system earlier,
17 the demands on the budget. Certainly I know
18 those have to be weighed. We're seeking
19 justice here. But from a logistical
20 standpoint -- and I think it would be very
21 fair for you to be able to comment publicly
22 on Judge McLaughlin's public opposition to
23 the legislation.
24 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
99
1 Well, I have to say I strongly disagree with
2 that assessment of that program. Fifty
3 thousand cases, it's just -- that's just not
4 true.
5 It's a misdemeanor program. It takes
6 advantage of an existing statutory provision
7 in the law which gives a Supreme Court judge
8 de novo review -- authority, on the
9 application of a defendant, to conduct a de
10 novo review, a full review of a lower court's
11 bail ruling.
12 We've simply set up a part in Supreme
13 Court to allow for that, if the defendant
14 makes an application, to have the case
15 calendared in the Supreme Court part. It's
16 not a lot of cases. It's limited to
17 low-level cases. It's not insulting to
18 judges at all. Judges -- you know, judges --
19 bail is set in the arraignment parts where
20 the volume is enormous. There's strict
21 constitutional and statutory time limits on
22 how quickly cases have to be arraigned.
23 In the arraignment part, it quickly
24 follows the arrest. The defense lawyer
100
1 doesn't really know much about the defendant
2 at that point. The prosecutor doesn't know
3 much about the defendant. The judge
4 certainly doesn't know much about the
5 defendant. And the process that was put in
6 place is merely to give an option to the
7 defendant to make an application later on to
8 a Supreme Court judge where there will be
9 more time to evaluate the case, there will be
10 more information at that point.
11 And there's nothing insulting to
12 judges about this at all. It's a fairer
13 process that's been put in place that's
14 entirely consistent with what the law now
15 authorizes.
16 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Nonetheless, Judge
17 McLaughlin felt pretty insulted by this. And
18 I -- certainly opinion differs. And that
19 we'll look to you for further explanation of
20 this from your vantage as a judge
21 experienced.
22 It seems as though, just on its
23 surface, that any defense counsel would be
24 tiptoeing around malpractice if they didn't
101
1 seek an automatic appeal under this
2 provision. And to me, that begs the question
3 in the real world, wouldn't they be doubly
4 encouraged to pursue extrajudicial review?
5 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
6 Well, that's an interesting point.
7 But, you know, this is in place now.
8 It's not -- it's been implemented. And the
9 experience of the last couple of months since
10 it was implemented is completely to the
11 contrary. There have been very few
12 applications made to the Supreme Court judge.
13 Actually, surprisingly few.
14 So it hasn't opened the floodgates.
15 Any suggestion that it would, that hasn't
16 turned out to be the case at all.
17 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you for your
18 insights.
19 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
20 Sure.
21 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you, Madam
22 Chair.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
24 Senator Tom Croci.
102
1 SENATOR CROCI: Thank you, Madam
2 Chair.
3 Thank you, Judge, for your appearance
4 here today.
5 I represent the Third Senate District,
6 which includes the Central Islip Court
7 Complex on Long Island, which as you know is
8 collocated with a federal courthouse as well.
9 Some of my concerns come out of a
10 recent visit there where there is long lines
11 outside of the courthouse. In light of
12 what's happened in San Bernardino and other
13 places, it comes to our attention that having
14 long lines of civilians standing outside of
15 federal buildings, state, county, town
16 government buildings, is probably not a good
17 idea.
18 Recognizing that some of the staffing
19 levels the court officers are contending with
20 lead to some of these long lines, and also
21 recognizing that on Long Island our law
22 enforcement has stepped up their approaches
23 to combating the heroin and opioid epidemic
24 on Long Island, we're seeing more individuals
103
1 who are incarcerated for those crimes and who
2 are going through the court system.
3 So I have two concerns. One is the
4 lines and the security situation that it
5 presents. And then two is inside the
6 courthouse, we've had instances where rival
7 drug gangs are actually having altercations,
8 and the staffing levels, it seems to me,
9 we're spreading them pretty thin.
10 So I was wondering if you could
11 address that in your remarks. Thank you.
12 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
13 Well, I mean it's a good point that you
14 raise. You know, lines outside the
15 courthouse aren't good because, as you say,
16 they can create public safety concerns.
17 But it's also unfair to the people who
18 have to wait on line. Weather can be
19 inclement, and we don't want people waiting
20 in lines to get into courthouses. It can be
21 a problem. You know, I recognize that.
22 And it again goes back to staffing
23 shortages and, you know, not enough court
24 officers in the lobbies at the magnetometers,
104
1 you know, moving people through the screening
2 and, you know, getting them through that so
3 they can go up to attend to their court
4 business. So, I mean, it's a problem. We
5 have to do a better job to avoid lines, I
6 agree with that.
7 The -- what was the second issue?
8 SENATOR CROCI: Talking about actually
9 responding within the courthouse when you
10 have individuals who are involved in
11 drug-related offenses.
12 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: We
13 do have a process in place that we are -- our
14 court officers in our public safety
15 department try to be aware of when a case
16 comes in, if there's some gang connection.
17 And when we know about that -- and, you know,
18 often we do know that, if not always, but
19 usually we will know that -- that there's
20 some gang connection to a particular case, we
21 will deploy more officers where they need to
22 be deployed when that case is called in the
23 courthouse.
24 So it's something we are aware of and
105
1 have tried to address.
2 SENATOR CROCI: And one follow-up.
3 Are court officers instructed in the use and
4 administration of Narcan?
5 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: I'm
6 sorry?
7 SENATOR CROCI: I said, are court
8 officers instructed in the administration of
9 Narcan, the anti-heroin overdose drug?
10 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS: I
11 believe so, but I'll to check that for you.
12 I'm not sure.
13 SENATOR CROCI: Thank you.
14 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
15 Thank you.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
17 Thank you very much for your testimony
18 today.
19 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
20 Thank you.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We truly appreciate
22 it. Look forward to continuing to work with
23 you. So thank you.
24 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MARKS:
106
1 Thanks so much.
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is
4 Commissioner John P. Melville, commissioner,
5 New York State Division of Homeland Security.
6 (Pause.)
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: If we could have
8 some order, please. We need to get underway.
9 We have a long, long list of speakers.
10 Welcome, Commissioner.
11 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you,
12 Senator.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Proceed.
14 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you.
15 Good morning. Thank you, Chairwoman
16 Young, Chairman Farrell, and distinguished
17 members of the Joint Committee. I am John
18 Melville, commissioner of the Division of
19 Homeland Security and Emergency Services.
20 I appreciate the opportunity to
21 discuss with you today some of the good work
22 of the agency over the past year as well as a
23 few of the highlights of Governor Cuomo's
24 public safety budget.
107
1 The division is charged with an
2 enormous responsibility, which includes an
3 all-hazards prevention, preparedness,
4 response and recovery mission. The
5 Governor's budget provides the resources
6 needed to accomplish our mission and protect
7 public safety. Total appropriations are
8 $1.5 billion, up $583 million over last year.
9 Six hundred million dollars is added in the
10 event of future disaster. A reduction of
11 $3.2 million in one-time appropriations for
12 citizen preparedness, reduced need for
13 capital financing in the amount of
14 $15 million, and the addition of $1.3 million
15 for an expanded counterterrorism program, all
16 contribute to the change.
17 Unfortunately, this past year our
18 nation witnessed an increase in the number of
19 terrorist attacks and plots -- three here in
20 New York alone. The most recent example was
21 the New Year's Eve Rochester arrest, which
22 ultimately proved to be an intelligence and
23 operational success.
24 In December, Governor Cuomo stated
108
1 that the threat of terrorism is a "new
2 normal" for Americans. Unfortunately, I have
3 to agree.
4 Let me discuss some of the efforts we
5 are undertaking to ensure the safety of
6 New Yorkers from Montauk to Buffalo. This
7 past year, the Governor launched the "See
8 Something, Send Something" mobile application
9 so that people can report suspicious
10 activities. To date, it has been downloaded
11 over 40,000 times.
12 In addition to community-level
13 awareness, we have to arm our first
14 responders with the intelligence information
15 they need to keep pace with emerging
16 terrorism trends. The Governor outlined a
17 plan to consolidate the division's
18 intelligence and analysis function into the
19 New York State Police to continue their work
20 at the New York State Intelligence Center,
21 which serves all law enforcement and public
22 safety agencies throughout the state. This
23 will allow the division, as a primary
24 consumer of the intelligence, to focus on key
109
1 preparedness activities, and will be used to
2 inform our decision-making in the areas of
3 grant funding, the homeland security strategy
4 and target hardening.
5 Ultimately, the collective goal is to
6 provide quick and actionable intelligence to
7 our local law enforcement and public safety
8 partners who, along with vigilant private
9 citizens, truly are the first line of
10 defense.
11 The Governor also proposes
12 $1.3 million in funding to drastically
13 increase the number of vulnerability
14 assessments -- or, as we term them, "Red Team
15 exercises" -- the division will execute
16 across the state.
17 In conjunction with Operation
18 Safeguard activities and our "See Something"
19 campaigns, we want to increase the state's
20 collective detection capacity of tactics that
21 may be used by terrorists in preoperational
22 planning.
23 The division's Red Team will then
24 test, through a series of adversary-based
110
1 assessments, to determine the success of the
2 preparedness strategy. As a target-rich
3 state, New York continues to rely on federal
4 homeland security funding.
5 In 2015, New York State received over
6 $262 million from the Homeland Security Grant
7 Program, which has been used in communities
8 throughout the state to prevent, protect and
9 prepare for terrorism and other catastrophic
10 events.
11 The division continues to advance the
12 state's preparedness posture for all hazards,
13 including natural disasters. Last August,
14 the Governor announced a new incident
15 management system called "NY Responds" to
16 establish a uniform electronic system to be
17 used throughout the state and by all
18 counties. We completed the first phase of
19 the transition in December, with a full
20 implementation expected to be completed this
21 year.
22 We also continue our recovery work,
23 which includes the reimbursement of over
24 $5 billion to New York communities for Sandy,
111
1 Irene and Lee rebuilding and resiliency
2 projects.
3 Last year the Governor announced the
4 first-in-the-nation College of Emergency
5 Preparedness, Homeland Security and
6 Cybersecurity at the University at Albany.
7 To date, 159 students have enrolled in the
8 college's minor program and, by fall of this
9 year, the major program should be available
10 as an official offering.
11 The college also leverages the network
12 of resources of the State Preparedness
13 Training Center in Oriskany for
14 out-of-classroom, hands-on training. The
15 SPTC is quickly being recognized as a
16 world-class facility.
17 The U.S. Departments of Defense and
18 Justice chose the SPTC to host the annual
19 Raven's Challenge, which is an
20 interoperability exercise to test the
21 capabilities of bomb squads and military
22 explosive ordnance disposal units. It was
23 such a success that, this May, New York will
24 once again host the Raven's Challenge at the
112
1 SPTC.
2 Moving to citizen preparedness
3 training, in conjunction with the National
4 Guard, the Red Cross and together with our
5 partners in the Legislature, we have been
6 able to train over 95,000 new people.
7 Last year the Governor announced that
8 the Office of Fire Prevention and Control
9 would be deploying 19 trailers equipped with
10 firefighting foam to local fire departments
11 and county hazmat teams. Prepositioning this
12 equipment ensures the state is well-prepared
13 to confront fires caused by crude oil and
14 other highly flammable substances.
15 Finally, the division's Office of
16 Interoperable and Emergency Communications is
17 modifying its approach to the state's
18 interoperable communications grant
19 distribution strategy. This year there will
20 be two separate programs: One will include a
21 formula-based distribution, and the second
22 includes a targeted distribution of
23 $20 million towards statewide
24 interoperability.
113
1 While not possible to cover all the
2 great work of the division during my
3 testimony today, I hope that I have provided
4 you with an idea of the priorities for the
5 Division of Homeland Security and Emergency
6 Services into the next fiscal year. These
7 include strengthening response integration
8 and coordination, intelligence-driven target
9 hardening, training, and thoughtful
10 investments of state grants to bolster the
11 state's preparedness and response posture.
12 I appreciate the opportunity to be
13 here and appear before you today, and I am
14 pleased to answer any questions you may have.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
16 Commissioner, for that testimony. Protecting
17 our communities and our citizens is job one
18 for New York State government, and there's an
19 intense interest in what you have to say
20 today by the Senate.
21 At this time I would like to introduce
22 our chair of the Homeland Security, Veterans
23 and Military Affairs Committee, and that's
24 Senator Tom Croci.
114
1 SENATOR CROCI: Thank you, Madam
2 Chair.
3 And thank you, Commissioner, for your
4 appearance today. It's been a great
5 privilege to have the opportunity to work
6 with you and the staff over the past year.
7 One of the things I'd like to
8 compliment you on is your investment in the
9 prevention and preparedness for the State of
10 New York. I think that was best seen in he
11 recent blizzard that we had downstate.
12 Pre-staging of assets certainly saved a lot
13 of time in responding when the storm finally
14 stopped, and I think that it's partly due or
15 in large part the amount of snow that was
16 able to be moved was because of that
17 investment in prevention and preparedness.
18 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you,
19 sir.
20 SENATOR CROCI: I listened with
21 interest to your testimony, and of course
22 we've had conversations about some of the
23 proposals in the budget. In talking about
24 the Article VII language in Part D of the
115
1 ELFA budget bill, you mentioned in your
2 testimony that the transfer of certain
3 assets, human assets in this case, would
4 focus on key preparedness activities, will be
5 used to inform our decision-making in certain
6 areas.
7 So I'm wondering, with respect to that
8 transfer of personnel to State Police, what
9 if any counterterrorism functions does the
10 Division of Homeland Security retain in that
11 transfer?
12 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you,
13 Senator. We propose to transfer 10 people,
14 or 10 positions, from our intel and analysis
15 section in the Division of Homeland Security
16 and Emergency Services to the State Police.
17 That transfer sounds a little more
18 ominous than it really is. In actuality,
19 those people will probably be sitting in the
20 same seats they sit in now. They work at the
21 New York State Intelligence Center with the
22 State Police. They are supervised not only
23 by us, but by the State Police. And what we
24 plan to do is just streamline the chain of
116
1 command with the analysts so the information
2 can get right to the people that it needs to
3 right away.
4 I need it; I still will get it. But I
5 am not operational as the State Police are.
6 They get that information right out to the
7 people on the ground that need it first. I
8 will still get it.
9 As far as maintaining duties with
10 respect to the Office of Counterterrorism, we
11 have a critical infrastructure team that
12 we're very proud of. They do inspections all
13 around the state, some legislated, some not.
14 We are proposing a significant increase in
15 our Red Team exercises that we will be
16 conducting throughout all the
17 counterterrorism zones in New York State,
18 which there are 16 of them.
19 We have our training center at
20 Oriskany, which we run. It's first responder
21 training for not only police but fire, EMS,
22 emergency managers, and it's very
23 counterterrorism-based.
24 So in actuality, our core mission will
117
1 remain the same, Senator. We will still be
2 receiving that intelligence information. I
3 still will remain the homeland security
4 advisor to the Governor. I will report to
5 the legislature. And I am still the point of
6 contact for the Department of Homeland
7 Security of the federal government.
8 SENATOR CROCI: So you mentioned that
9 you'll still receive the information
10 regardless of where these analysts are
11 positioned and where they're sitting. That's
12 not clear statutorily in the budget. I guess
13 we would have to statutorily amend the
14 article in order so that you receive that
15 information? Because otherwise how would
16 that information flow from the State Police
17 now up to you?
18 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Well, the
19 analysts will actually physically be
20 supervised by the State Police in this
21 proposal.
22 I will still be a consumer of that
23 intelligence information. As a matter of
24 fact, we recently took on a director in the
118
1 Office of Counterterrorism in the Division of
2 Homeland Security and Emergency Services.
3 His name is Mike Cerretto. He's very
4 qualified, well respected, a 30-year member
5 of law enforcement. And he is actually still
6 a member of the New York State Police even
7 though he has been detailed to the Division
8 of Homeland Security and Emergency Services
9 and in actuality works for us now. So Mike's
10 still being -- Director Cerretto's still
11 being a member of the New York State Police
12 will ensure that we receive that information,
13 as I have no doubt.
14 SENATOR CROCI: So hypothetically we
15 have a new -- someday we have a new
16 commissioner, we have a new director and
17 another governor, maybe a Republican
18 governor, so the relationships will change.
19 How do we ensure that that information flow
20 remains the same regardless of those
21 relationships?
22 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Well, the
23 analysts will be at the NYSIC, working for
24 the New York State Police. The NYSIC is the
119
1 fusion center for all of New York, all of our
2 law enforcement partners. It's federally
3 funded, and the mandate to the New York State
4 Police, who runs the NYSIC, is to share that
5 information with everybody.
6 I fortunately have the unique
7 distinction of having worked in the New York
8 State Police for 32 years before I became the
9 commissioner in the Division of Homeland
10 Security. I have the utmost respect and
11 confidence, I know how the organization
12 works, and its main goal, main mission, main
13 function is to push that intel out to the
14 people that need it. It will not be
15 stovepiped.
16 SENATOR CROCI: But there's nothing
17 that's going to be in statute to ensure that.
18 It's because we have great relationships,
19 very qualified individuals in yourself and
20 your new director, no doubt about that. But
21 there's no formal pipeline that's laid out in
22 statute. Is that your understanding?
23 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I believe,
24 Senator, that the fact that it is New York
120
1 State's fusion center, funded by the
2 Department of Homeland Security, they are
3 mandated to share that information with
4 everyone.
5 SENATOR CROCI: Okay. Obviously
6 you've had a very distinguished career. And
7 again, it's been a great privilege to work
8 with you and get to know you personally.
9 In your professional opinion -- and
10 you better than anyone personally dealt with
11 the attacks of September 11th, as did so many
12 in this room and so many in our state -- do
13 you believe that we're doing everything we
14 can as New Yorkers, as the State of New York,
15 to protect us, to protect our residents?
16 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I do, Senator.
17 Unfortunately, the threat remains to New York
18 State. New York State is certainly a target.
19 I believe we certainly put our resources into
20 every effort that we can to keep New Yorkers
21 safe. That is our main function, is
22 emergency preparedness, training, response
23 coordination, recovery. I think that we have
24 what we need to do that, and we do do it.
121
1 And we do it very well.
2 SENATOR CROCI: So one concern, in
3 looking at the proposal, is that information
4 flow, and to ensure that not only the
5 individuals charged with the counterterrorism
6 mission in the state in the executive branch,
7 at the higher levels, who are advising the
8 Governor on these matters, are receiving the
9 latest and the best intelligence and the most
10 timely intelligence that they possibly can.
11 The National Security Act and the way
12 the National Security Councils have been set
13 up is there just for that reason, so that the
14 decisionmakers, the policymakers are
15 receiving that information on which to make
16 good legislative decisions and good executive
17 actions. So I'm looking forward to working
18 with staff and finding a way that we can
19 accomplish this and ensure that regardless of
20 who sits in our chairs -- my chair, your
21 chair, or your very experienced and diligent
22 staff -- we want to make sure that that
23 information flow happens regardless of
24 personality, regardless of relationship. The
122
1 process piece I think is something we need to
2 continue to work on.
3 And with regard to your training
4 center, I think I've mentioned that one of
5 the key lessons from the 9/11 Commission
6 report, and certainly something we've learned
7 locally in the wake of Superstorm Sandy and
8 recent weather events, is that we should
9 train the way we fight. So on the ground in
10 response and recovery operations,
11 preparedness as well, we should train at the
12 local level the first responders who actually
13 will be responding to those disasters,
14 whether it's New York City or Buffalo or
15 Suffolk and Nassau counties.
16 While it's great that we have these
17 statewide investments in the training
18 centers, I hope we can work with the
19 Executive and with your department to make
20 sure that we're pushing some of that training
21 and those training dollars down to the local
22 level -- to the cities, to the counties --
23 who are asking us for that, to bring fire,
24 law enforcement, police, your first
123
1 responders, your ambulance companies, bring
2 them together for realistic training at the
3 local level, because in the event of a
4 catastrophic attack or weather event, they're
5 going to be responding together.
6 And going back to that personality
7 issue, it's great that those personalities
8 know each other before they're responding, as
9 I'm sure you could attest to in your
10 distinguished career. I think it's very
11 important, and I hope to work with the staff
12 and your division to ensure that that occurs.
13 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I look forward
14 to that, Senator.
15 SENATOR KRUEGER: Assembly, thank you.
16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
17 Assemblywoman Peoples-Stokes.
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank
19 you, Mr. Chairman.
20 And thank you, Mr. Melville, for your
21 testimony this morning. I would join my
22 other colleagues who have already expressed
23 how the number-one issue for everyone who
24 lives and represents this government is that
124
1 our citizens must be safe. And we do realize
2 that we live in a difficult time. And so
3 your due diligence to make sure that we are
4 safe is very much appreciated.
5 I did want to just really comment on
6 the citizen preparedness. I have had a few
7 of them in the district, and they've been
8 located in different places and different
9 citizens have attended it, and they have very
10 much appreciated that. So while, you know,
11 our first responders are highly skilled and
12 trained, I think it's also important to --
13 for the average citizen to understand what
14 should you do in case of some disaster. So
15 thank you for that.
16 I understand from looking at the
17 budget that there's $14 million in additional
18 dollars for counterterrorism in New York City
19 by the State Police, and an additional
20 $23 million by the National Guard for
21 New York City. And so I guess my question is
22 clearly New York City, having been targeted
23 before, and the seat of finance is in our
24 state -- and quite frankly, the seats of
125
1 finance in the world should be protected.
2 But I'm just wondering how far will, you
3 know, these dollars be able to go to protect
4 other parts of the state? I did hear your
5 comments about Rochester. And as you know,
6 I'm located very close to that, so we were
7 paying attention to that issue. But we are a
8 state that borders Canada, 15 minutes if
9 you're in Buffalo, and closer in some other
10 places.
11 And so I wondered could you speak a
12 little bit about why all those dollars are
13 being designated -- excess dollars are being
14 designated to New York City?
15 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Sure,
16 Assemblywoman. Thank you for your comments
17 about the citizen preparedness; we're very
18 proud of that training effort.
19 We fund -- we, being the Division of
20 Homeland Security and Emergency Services,
21 fund every county in the state through our
22 State Homeland Security Grant program. We
23 also fund different areas across the state
24 through our targeted grant programs and other
126
1 grants that we administer. There's also a
2 UASI federal grant that a lot of money goes
3 to New York City, Long Island, Westchester.
4 That is a decision that is made by the
5 federal government with respect to where
6 UASI -- it stands for Urban Area Security
7 Initiative -- where they are. We don't
8 decide that, the federal government does.
9 I believe -- and I really can't speak
10 to the National Guard budget items or the
11 State Police. But I would suspect that that
12 money is probably going to be used to
13 continue the Governor's initiative of putting
14 troopers and National Guard soldiers in the
15 very important transportation hubs in and
16 around New York City, whether it be Grand
17 Central, Penn Station or those types of --
18 but that's -- probably that can be better
19 answered by either the superintendent or
20 General Murphy.
21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PEOPLES-STOKES: Okay.
22 Well, I was very excited about the
23 announcement of the cybersecurity curriculum
24 at UAlbany. And I note from your comments
127
1 that there are some 159 students that have
2 availed themselves of that opportunity. That
3 might seem like a large number now, but it's
4 really not, particularly with the increasing
5 rates of people being hurt, average citizens
6 being hurt by people abusing the internet.
7 Not to withstand what could happen from a
8 violent perspective, but from a consumer
9 perspective, it's a huge issue.
10 And so is there any thought by your
11 agency -- or I guess I can also ask this
12 question of Nancy Zimpher from SUNY as well,
13 and CUNY -- if there's any thought about
14 expanding this curriculum to other colleges
15 and universities throughout the state.
16 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I can't answer
17 that, Assemblywoman. I don't know. I can
18 tell you that the college originally was
19 hoping for 50 students to sign up for the
20 minor; they got 159. The major will
21 hopefully be available this fall.
22 We're excited at the Division of
23 Homeland Security and Emergency Services
24 about the college because it will prepare
128
1 professionals that we can utilize in our
2 field. We're looking forward to that.
3 We're also excited about it because
4 the SPTC, the training center in Oriskany,
5 will be the out-of-classroom training spot
6 for the students who attend the State
7 University of New York at Albany College of
8 Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness
9 and Cybersecurity. So we're happy to
10 showcase that, and we hope the students find
11 that that is a world-class facility.
12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank
13 you.
14 I recently had the opportunity to
15 speak to some veterans in the state of
16 Florida who -- where they've established a
17 program specifically to train veterans in
18 cybersecurity. So I'd like to connect with
19 you real soon, perhaps late next week, and
20 have an additional conversation about that
21 end of it. Thank you.
22 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Perfect.
23 Thank you, Assemblywoman.
24 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
129
1 Senator?
2 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
3 Next, Senator Joe Addabbo, ranker on
4 the committee.
5 SENATOR ADDABBO: Thank you, Madam
6 Chair, and thank you, Commissioner, for being
7 here today.
8 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you.
9 SENATOR ADDABBO: And let me echo the
10 sentiments of my colleagues: The daunting
11 task of protecting the roughly 20 million
12 people in New York State, I want to again
13 thank you very much for your efforts on that
14 of the division.
15 I think the critical movement of the
16 services to New York State Police is a major
17 move, certainly for, again, protection of our
18 people. I'd like to know the further
19 details, if I may. I need to convince, as we
20 all do, our constituency that this is a more
21 efficient move for the protection of our
22 people.
23 Briefly, how do we convince our
24 residents that this is a more efficient move
130
1 as we look to secure, again, the people of
2 our state?
3 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Sure, Senator.
4 And, you know, I've been in this position for
5 a little over a year and have had the
6 opportunity to look at the agency as a whole
7 and all the different missions that we were
8 charged with. And the counterterrorism
9 mission is certainly at the forefront of all
10 of those.
11 So we constantly evaluate how we do
12 things and why we do things and, you know,
13 can we do them better. And during the course
14 of this past year I've had several
15 conversations with members of my staff as
16 well as the State Police, and eventually Ray
17 Kelly, the former commissioner in New York
18 City, who was asked by the Governor to review
19 the counterterrorism efforts of all the state
20 agencies. After that year of review, my
21 discussions with the superintendent and other
22 public safety partners, and Commissioner
23 Kelly, we all agreed that we thought that
24 this was a smart move.
131
1 What it really does is just defines
2 the line of communication and the chain of
3 command a little bit clearer. As I said,
4 those people work in the NYSIC. They're very
5 talented, I'm very proud of them. They're
6 literally probably not going to change their
7 seat at their desk, it's just that the line
8 of authority will be right to the
9 State Police, it will get to the people that
10 need that information instantaneously.
11 I use that information to pass out to
12 constituents across the state, but I don't
13 need that actionable intelligence as fast as
14 they do. I can set the state homeland
15 security strategy the next day, depending on
16 the intel; they need it right then and there
17 to push out. And that's really the reason,
18 it's just to try and streamline the chain of
19 command and make things work better, faster,
20 safer for the public.
21 SENATOR ADDABBO: We've seen obviously
22 the importance of information-gathering.
23 Rochester you mentioned earlier as well in
24 your testimony. So getting that information
132
1 quicker certainly makes it more efficient.
2 And I look forward to working with you and
3 furthering obviously this critical change.
4 But that being said, with the change
5 going, with services to the New York State
6 Police, the terror alert system, the New York
7 State Police will then have the authority to
8 use the terror alert system? It would be
9 under their jurisdiction at that point?
10 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Well, we're
11 not giving up any authority in the Division
12 of Homeland Security and Emergency Services.
13 As I said, Senator, I remain the state
14 homeland security advisor, the point of
15 contact from the federal government and to
16 the Governor and to the Legislature. So that
17 will -- inasmuch as it does now, it will
18 remain with us.
19 SENATOR ADDABBO: So basically there
20 is some sense of shared responsibilities
21 here.
22 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Yes. We still
23 are maintaining our core mission, which is --
24 much of that is counterterrorism. This is
133
1 just a small piece, albeit a very important
2 piece of it.
3 SENATOR ADDABBO: The restoration of
4 $600 million to now get the total to
5 $1.2 billion for disaster assistance locally,
6 can we talk about possibly how the plan is to
7 spend that money?
8 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: That money,
9 Senator, the $600 million, is just an
10 appropriation. It gives us the authority to
11 spend that if we have to. That's really to
12 be used for future disasters. Hopefully we
13 don't have to spend it, but it's there in
14 case we need to.
15 SENATOR ADDABBO: I would be remiss if
16 I didn't say thank you. A third of my
17 district was affected by Sandy. You know,
18 the areas of Howard Beach, Broad Channel,
19 Rockaway. I still have roughly over 4,000
20 people still on the road to recovery three
21 years after the storm. So again, I want to
22 say thank you.
23 There has been, again, monies for
24 Sandy. Can you detail or explain those
134
1 additional monies for Sandy recovery?
2 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Sure. We have
3 funneled more than $5 billion in recovery
4 money to the victims of Superstorm Sandy,
5 Irene and Lee. We've also funneled
6 approximately $1.4 billion through these what
7 we call HMGP grants, which are Hazard
8 Mitigation Grant Programs.
9 The Hazard Mitigation Grant program
10 money that has been used in your district,
11 Senator, has basically been used for big
12 projects that would benefit whole
13 communities. The individual homeowner would
14 not really be covered through us under that.
15 That would be under a different funding
16 stream, a HUD funding stream, CDBG money that
17 comes under a different -- the Office of
18 Storm Recovery. So if those people in your
19 district are struggling, we'd be happy to
20 talk about that and to help them in any way
21 we can, but we don't really control that
22 funding.
23 SENATOR ADDABBO: No, and again, I
24 understand. I just want to thank the efforts
135
1 of all those associated with New York Rising,
2 and working with HUD and their requirements.
3 But -- and certainly helping not only my
4 constituents, but those throughout the state
5 who are still, again, recovering from
6 Superstorm Sandy.
7 And lastly, you had mentioned in your
8 testimony the "See Something" app, 40,000
9 downloads. Can you just walk us through the
10 process of somebody downloading that app and
11 the information that you may receive and how
12 it goes forward after that?
13 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Sure. Happy
14 to. It's a free app. Any cellphone, you
15 Google it, you'll find it, you can download
16 it.
17 And what it allows you to do is take a
18 picture of whatever you might term
19 suspicious. You can add a text to it and
20 send it along, or you can just send the
21 picture. And what it does is it goes to the
22 New York State Intelligence Center, where it
23 is then reviewed and evaluated by members at
24 the center, and it is pushed out to -- the
136
1 way we handle -- or the way the State Police
2 in the NYSIC now, it's pushed out to the
3 Joint Terrorism Task Force in the particular
4 area that it might have been sent from. They
5 have the right of first refusal per se. And
6 if they don't feel it's appropriate for them
7 to adopt the case, it will go to a local
8 police department.
9 It can be geotagged so even if you
10 don't include a text, we can tell, normally,
11 where it comes from.
12 SENATOR ADDABBO: I was going to say,
13 those who give the information, is it
14 confidential information on their end?
15 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: It is.
16 SENATOR ADDABBO: It is, okay.
17 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I believe that
18 the State Police and the people at the NYSIC
19 reserve the right to try and contact them if
20 they need to, but they don't have to.
21 SENATOR ADDABBO: Commissioner, once
22 again, thank you very much for your efforts.
23 And of course through our good chair, Senator
24 Croci, I look forward to working with you as
137
1 well.
2 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you,
3 Senator.
4 SENATOR KRUEGER: Assembly?
5 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very
6 much.
7 Assemblyman Lentol.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Good morning,
9 Commissioner.
10 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Good morning,
11 sir.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: And thank you for
13 your service.
14 I just was wondering, while you were
15 testifying -- maybe I'm behind the times, but
16 I remember after 9/11 how much we were
17 shortchanged by the federal government in the
18 resources that New York City as well as New
19 York State deserved because we were the
20 primary target of terrorism.
21 So I have two questions leading from
22 that. Is that still true? And does your
23 agency have an advocacy function in
24 Washington to make sure that we get the
138
1 resources from them that we deserve for this
2 problem?
3 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Well, I can
4 tell you that we are always advocating for
5 more money from the federal government. And
6 I believe that the Governor's office has that
7 issue handled for the most part. We do not
8 really lobby Washington for that. But we
9 deal with FEMA and the Department of Homeland
10 Security all the time.
11 We receive, in New York State,
12 probably 30 percent or in the area of
13 30 percent of the UASI money that's
14 distributed throughout the country, and I
15 would say 18 percent or so of the State
16 Homeland Security Grant Program. Is that
17 enough? I don't know if we could ever have
18 enough. But we certainly do great things
19 with that amount of money that we do get from
20 the federal government.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: As far as
22 disaster preparedness goes, I remember, even
23 though it wasn't my district, but in some
24 places upstate during Irene and Lee, there
139
1 were people who were flooded out and who died
2 as a result of not being able to be rescued.
3 And I wonder, since then, if we've developed
4 a better, for lack of a better word, roadmap
5 to be able to go by boat, by helicopter or
6 any other means in order to rescue people who
7 may in the future need to be rescued from a
8 storm like Sandy, Lee or Irene.
9 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Unfortunately,
10 Assemblyman, we do learn from the tragedies,
11 and we react to them. We change our training
12 structure and our tactics all the time based
13 on the intelligence that we've received and
14 the events that have occurred in New York
15 State and around the world. We have targeted
16 tech rescue grants, we call them now, that go
17 to fire departments. We have swift water
18 rescue programs that we train on.
19 So we're well aware of that. Our
20 first responders and our Office of Fire
21 Prevention and Control teach many, many, many
22 courses around the state in just that type of
23 circumstance.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Thank you, sir.
140
1 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
3 Our next speaker is Senator Michael
4 Nozzolio.
5 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you,
6 Chairwoman.
7 Good afternoon, I guess it is now.
8 Good afternoon, Commissioner Melville.
9 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Good
10 afternoon, Senator.
11 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Kudos to you and
12 the division for taking charge, working with
13 the Governor, under his direction, in
14 managing the emergency preparedness of our
15 state. The reaction in storm management,
16 communication, ensuring safety is improving
17 with every instance of those kinds of
18 challenges, and I thank you and your division
19 for that effort.
20 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you,
21 Senator.
22 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I would like to
23 focus, however, on some issues that are not
24 so seen, they're unseen, but personally could
141
1 be extremely devastating to individuals,
2 taxpayers, constituents of this state -- and
3 that's the issue of security, and
4 specifically cybersecurity.
5 That your division's experiences with
6 cybersecurity -- and with all admiration for
7 encouraging student participation in
8 education, tell us beyond that, what is the
9 division doing to beef up our cybersecurity
10 efforts?
11 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Well, the
12 analysts that we have now, Senator, are
13 collocated at the NYSIC with the Multistate
14 Information Sharing and Analysis Center,
15 which is the federal government's
16 cybersecurity watchdog, if you will. They
17 also work with the state --
18 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Is that in
19 Rensselaer? Where is that located?
20 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Yes, it is.
21 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Rensselaer?
22 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Yeah. That's
23 collocated with our New York State
24 Intelligence Center. And the State Police
142
1 also are collocated there with their
2 cybersecurity investigative teams.
3 Probably in 2013, the Division of
4 Homeland Security and Emergency Services --
5 cybersecurity was taken away as one of our
6 core functions, and removed to the ITS, along
7 with our funding and personnel.
8 We don't have a main role in
9 cybersecurity. We're well aware of it, we
10 use it in terms of intel passing all the
11 time. We have a critical infrastructure unit
12 that goes all around the state and is
13 legislated in some respects to do certain
14 types of critical infrastructure, in others
15 not. But they take a cybersecurity component
16 with them from ITS to do the cybersecurity
17 inspections of, say, pipelines or energy
18 transmission facilities, things of that
19 nature.
20 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: This expands on
21 Senator Croci's comments, that you were
22 finding the Division of Homeland Security not
23 having direct reportable information by law
24 and channel, that is strengthened by law,
143
1 that provides that security function. And
2 I'll be probing this with those
3 representatives of Office of Information
4 Technology later today and others.
5 That you'd have to be totally immune
6 from what's going on if we didn't recognize
7 this. Last year alone, we've seen cyber
8 attacks on the Internal Revenue Service, the
9 Office of Personnel Management, even the
10 Joint Chiefs of Staff. And if that's the
11 case, isn't the New York State Department of
12 Taxation and Finance going to be next? We've
13 seen a major security breach in the largest
14 repository of health and financial data
15 probably in this state, in the data breach
16 that occurred with Excellus last year.
17 So I am wondering what type of
18 commitment do we have to help, first, guard
19 our public sector-held information and,
20 secondly, encourage and assist those private
21 companies in doing business in New York to
22 protect the data of its citizens.
23 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Senator, we're
24 well aware of the cybersecurity threat. We
144
1 at the Division of Homeland Security and
2 Emergency Services view our role in
3 cybersecurity as an intelligence-driven role,
4 passing information along about schemes,
5 attacks, issues.
6 We also have the role of responding to
7 an emergency that would occur as a result of
8 a cyber attack. So it would not necessarily
9 be the attack itself, but the issues that
10 follow after that attack. And that's really
11 what we would be functioning or at least
12 focusing on with our Office of Emergency
13 Management.
14 I think that the state is
15 well-prepared with their Multistate ISAC, the
16 NYSIC, and the State Police and the other
17 efforts across the state from ITS, to deal
18 with those types of investigations. It's
19 just not what we do per se.
20 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: And I understand
21 that, Commissioner. I'm not suggesting that
22 you be an investigatory or law enforcement
23 operation. That's not your role, it's not
24 something I would even suggest.
145
1 However, just as you are involved in
2 storm preparedness, just as you are involved
3 in other disaster preparedness, why are we
4 not having you involved -- and I ask that
5 question because I think it's something the
6 Legislature ultimately has to deal with,
7 along with the Governor -- why aren't we
8 involved, Homeland Security involved in
9 issues of cybersecurity protection? Ensuring
10 that someone is overseeing, with security in
11 mind, the vast data systems that are being
12 held by state government? That's what I
13 believe we need to address.
14 And certainly your -- after the fact
15 is too late. The horse is out of the barn,
16 it's too late a question for you to be
17 involved. Then it's a question for law
18 enforcement.
19 But what should be done proactively by
20 the Division of Homeland Security to protect
21 the data of New Yorkers?
22 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I believe we
23 are doing what we need to do now, Senator.
24 We react to issues that may or may not be
146
1 created by a cyber breach. We have analysts
2 that work with the State Police in close
3 coordination with the Multistate ISAC Center.
4 So we are there to push information out that
5 we receive about cybersecurity issues to our
6 partners, to the public, to the private
7 sector. So I believe our role is being
8 fulfilled at this point.
9 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Yes, from a
10 statutory standpoint that is, I'm sure,
11 accurate. But shouldn't the role be to
12 protect in the first place? Shouldn't the
13 role be -- not as a law enforcement
14 enterprise and a, again, closing the barn
15 door after the horse ran away -- shouldn't it
16 be more to make sure the barn door is locked
17 and not tampered with and having the
18 appropriate security to ensure that
19 particularly the data is protected?
20 And that I think is -- let me ask you
21 this. Who is in charge of the state to
22 protect the data of its citizens, that's
23 entrusted with the state?
24 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I would say
147
1 the ITS, the State ITS, as well as the State
2 Police and their partners at the NYSIC.
3 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Commissioner, thank
4 you. We'll certainly be probing that issue.
5 And it may be something that our chair of the
6 homeland security, Commander Croci, is going
7 to be dealing with in the months ahead. So I
8 appreciate your candor and your forthcoming
9 comments. Thank you.
10 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you,
11 Senator.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblyman Ortiz.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN ORTIZ: Good morning,
15 Commissioner.
16 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: How are you,
17 sir?
18 ASSEMBLYMAN ORTIZ: I am doing well.
19 I have a few questions, very quick, if
20 I can put on my glasses.
21 My first question is, what is the
22 working relationship that you have with the
23 ICE and Homeland Security at the federal
24 government?
148
1 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: The federal
2 Homeland Security?
3 ASSEMBLYMAN ORTIZ: No, yours. What
4 is the relationship between your Homeland
5 Security and the federal Homeland Security?
6 Do you guys talk to each other often? And
7 how often?
8 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: We do talk to
9 each other often. I would say more through
10 email communication, but I do have
11 conversations with people in Washington. I
12 am the homeland security advisor for the
13 Governor, so I am the point for contact for
14 certain things with the Department of
15 Homeland Security.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN ORTIZ: Okay. So right to
17 my second question, so you are familiarized
18 with the Obama deportations approach
19 throughout the country; correct?
20 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: The what? I'm
21 sorry.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN ORTIZ: The Obama
23 deportation, the President of the United
24 States has said we -- you know, he has given
149
1 ICE the green light to go through state by
2 state to deport folks after January 2014.
3 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Okay.
4 ASSEMBLYMAN ORTIZ: Are you
5 familiarized with that?
6 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Somewhat.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN ORTIZ: Okay. So my third
8 question goes along the lines of if you are
9 somewhat familiarized with it, I represent
10 the areas of Sunset Park in Brooklyn. I have
11 a lot of undocumented immigrants who live in
12 my district. And what we've been getting in
13 my office is that there has been some folks
14 from ICE, some local enforcements, who has
15 been knocking on their doors and going
16 through the churches and looking for folks
17 who are not legally in this country.
18 Are you familiarized with this?
19 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: No, I'm not,
20 Assemblyman. And really that has -- that
21 issue, albeit a very important issue, has
22 really no place in the Division of Homeland
23 Security and Emergency Services at a state
24 level. That's a federal program and a
150
1 federal issue. We don't have anything to do
2 with that.
3 ASSEMBLYMAN ORTIZ: So you have not
4 anything to do -- despite the fact that you
5 have a relationship with the Homeland
6 Security/ICE agency at the federal
7 government?
8 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: My
9 relationship with the Homeland Security
10 people at the federal level really has to do
11 with our grant funding, what we get from
12 them, what we spent it on, how we spend it,
13 what we target. It really has nothing to do
14 with immigration issues.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN ORTIZ: Okay. And you
16 just stated that you serve as an advisor to
17 the Governor to ICE, to Homeland Security;
18 correct?
19 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I am the
20 advisor to the Governor for homeland security
21 issues here in New York State.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN ORTIZ: Well, let me just
23 recommend a couple of things. I think that
24 we do have a lot of serious issues regarding
151
1 law enforcement. And I know the -- I
2 addressed this issue to the superintendent
3 last year about folks in the law enforcement
4 stopping individuals, Hispanic individuals in
5 Buffalo, in the Western Hemisphere {sic} and
6 then that came to Long Island as well.
7 I think that if you are the advisor to
8 ICE and you work for our Governor, my advice
9 will be probably to try to have a more
10 preactive action plan, that these families
11 will not have fear, these families will not
12 have fear as they have bring their children
13 to the hospital, their children to the
14 schools. Right now in my district we have
15 seen a decrease of kids going to school as a
16 result of this initiative.
17 So if you are the advisor, I would
18 recommend that you take that message back to
19 those folks that you're speaking to, either
20 via email -- on behalf of the people that we
21 represent in our own community.
22 And thank you for the job that you
23 continue to do in serving us in the state.
24 Thank you.
152
1 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you,
2 Assemblyman, and I would love to have a
3 dialogue with you about that at some point.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
5 Senator Marty Golden.
6 SENATOR GOLDEN: Thank you, Madam
7 Chair.
8 And thank you for your service.
9 You're doing an outstanding job.
10 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you,
11 Senator.
12 SENATOR GOLDEN: I don't want to beat
13 a dead horse, but -- I know we went over
14 this, seven -- two downstate, five upstate,
15 and we probably beat it to death. But just
16 in my family, my son went down with the viral
17 last weekend, I went down with the viral on
18 Wednesday and Thursday, my wife went down
19 with the viral on Friday, Saturday, and
20 Sunday. When the wife goes down, the whole
21 house gets shut down. All right? So we went
22 down, it was different.
23 You got seven people, two downstate
24 and five upstate. How do we -- if there's
153
1 any type of sickness, vacations, how is that
2 manned? How does that work?
3 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: You're
4 referring to the intelligence analysts,
5 Senator?
6 SENATOR GOLDEN: Yes.
7 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Yeah, we have
8 seven presently. There's 10 actually being
9 proposed to be transferred. We have three
10 openings that we haven't been filled yet, and
11 we probably -- we're waiting till this
12 transfer occurs and they go to the State
13 Police.
14 But each one of those analysts is
15 cross-trained in different types of
16 counterterrorism, and they have different
17 expertises, although some are experts more so
18 in one field than the other. So if one is
19 out, another covers. But for the most part,
20 that's never been an issue for us.
21 SENATOR GOLDEN: What was a little
22 shock for me last week is when the Port
23 Authority -- not the Port Authority, but the
24 ILA went out on strike and ports were shut
154
1 down in Jersey and in New York. Anybody
2 having some idea that that was going to
3 happen obviously would have had some
4 advantage.
5 How did -- were we informed of that?
6 Did we know about that? And how do we stay
7 in touch with our ports, and how are we
8 dealing with our maritime.
9 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: The
10 longshoremen issue that was last week? Yeah,
11 I was made aware of it after it happened,
12 actually, and was made aware of it when it
13 ended. But it wasn't really a -- I would say
14 a counterterrorism issue per se. So even
15 though our analysts track all open-source
16 intel about all different things, the ports
17 being one of those areas, I don't think we
18 received any previous Intel that this was
19 coming.
20 SENATOR GOLDEN: But we are in touch
21 with maritime? If there's a ship coming in,
22 we have problems with the ship, or a cruise
23 ship or a tanker?
24 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: We have
155
1 analysts that brief monthly at the ports who
2 are very familiar with shipping industries
3 and the Coast Guard and all the partners that
4 certainly are involved in various ports
5 around the state.
6 SENATOR GOLDEN: Thank you.
7 The Superstorm Sandy -- which again,
8 you did an outstanding job -- but again,
9 we're in our fourth year and there are still
10 thousands of people that are still not in
11 their homes and still waiting to get their
12 homes razed, and there's still a whole lot
13 that has to be done and hardening of our
14 arteries. And you've explained to us and
15 expressed to us how to fund it and gotten
16 money out from the federal government and
17 from the state government into the city and
18 state and Long Island. Is there anything
19 that's not -- are there any obstacles in your
20 way of not getting that money out? Is there
21 anything that's not giving you the
22 opportunity to let that money flow more
23 freely?
24 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I would have
156
1 to say no, Senator. We had over 12,000
2 contracts for public assistance -- repairing
3 bridges and tunnels and roadways and things
4 like that -- and we're current on all 12,000.
5 The issue with some of those funding
6 problems is the work has to be done first.
7 The municipality has to pay for the work.
8 Once that municipality pays, we reimburse
9 through the federal government. So it's
10 not -- we just can't give the money up-front
11 and say okay, go do your project. It has to
12 be done, the work has to be completed, it has
13 to be inspected, it has to be paid, and then
14 we reimburse.
15 And we are current on all those
16 contracts. We don't have any outstanding
17 bills as far as I know.
18 SENATOR GOLDEN: So you're working
19 closely with the Army Corps of Engineers and
20 in certain areas where we need dredging to be
21 able to get our police boats, our fire boats
22 in and out of -- and get them operable when
23 needed, you're on top of all of that?
24 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I believe so,
157
1 Senator. That's probably those HMGP grants
2 that aren't really targeted at individuals or
3 communities. They're large-scale projects.
4 For example, they're -- one of the projects
5 is bridge scour projects for 106 bridges
6 across the state. There's projects like that
7 that HMGP money goes for that just take a
8 long time to complete. And we pay as the
9 bills come in. So, you know, those 12,000
10 contracts that we have open, we are current
11 on, but they just take a long time to get to
12 the end.
13 SENATOR GOLDEN: I have a town hall
14 coming up in Garrison Beach, Manhattan Beach
15 and Sheepshead Bay in the Brooklyn area in
16 the City of New York. I may ask somebody
17 from your office to attend. It's coming up
18 on March 1st, March 2nd. So if I can get
19 somebody to attend, I would appreciate it.
20 Because I'm going to have both -- not only
21 the homes and the people that are affected by
22 Build It Back and by other streams of funds
23 that are being made available for the
24 building and rebuilding of these homes, but
158
1 also they're going to have people there from
2 the hardening of the arteries in and around
3 those areas, to make sure that that water
4 doesn't come in and hit them again.
5 So if you can, I'd appreciate somebody
6 from your office at that, if I can. I'll
7 send a memo to your office.
8 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: We'll
9 certainly look forward to that, Senator.
10 SENATOR GOLDEN: The settlement funds,
11 are you guys getting any of the settlement
12 funds that the -- coming in from the Attorney
13 General and other areas? Is Homeland
14 Security getting any of that at all?
15 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Settlement
16 funds? I'm not familiar with that.
17 SENATOR GOLDEN: Settlement funds from
18 the different settlements that the Attorney
19 General has made or others have made with
20 financial institutions of wrongdoing, where
21 we see billions of dollars coming into the
22 State of New York. Are you getting any of
23 those funds coming into your organization?
24 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Those funds
159
1 don't get channeled through us.
2 SENATOR GOLDEN: They don't get
3 channeled at all. Last question, or last
4 series of questions.
5 The interoperability, how long is this
6 going to take? I know that it's a tough
7 question, but I've still got the Port
8 Authority in one area and I still got NYPD in
9 another area. And we know the 9/11 was
10 Port Authority. So we want to make sure
11 we're on top of that in the city, and for the
12 state. If you can -- I know it's a leap
13 here, but if you can give us some timeline as
14 to when this interoperability is going to be
15 in effect across the State of New York or,
16 more so, when it's going to be effective with
17 Port Authority and NYPD, I would greatly
18 appreciate it.
19 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Hey, I
20 understand the issue, Senator. And I'm no
21 radio geek, so that's a hard thing for me to
22 say. I asked the same question when I came
23 to the agency: How long is this going to
24 take? We keep throwing money, money, money
160
1 at this. You know, $228 million, I think, to
2 the counties to get this done.
3 It's a hard problem. You'll probably
4 hear from the superintendent later this
5 afternoon about the issues maybe they had in
6 Dannemora with radio interoperability. And
7 we sent people up there to assist with that.
8 We're close. We're throwing another
9 $75 million at this problem this year to the
10 counties to take care of this.
11 We're trying to fill gaps now. We're
12 almost there. I would say our goal is to be
13 interoperable statewide by the end of 2017.
14 But New York's a big state, it's got a lot of
15 topography issues, a lot of -- it's just a
16 hard issue to finish. But we're almost
17 there.
18 SENATOR GOLDEN: My time is up. If
19 you could let me know when Port Authority --
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes, it is.
21 SENATOR GOLDEN: -- NYPD is going to.
22 If you can get a memo to my office on Port
23 Authority and NYPD. I would appreciate it.
24 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: We will do
161
1 that, Senator.
2 SENATOR GOLDEN: Thank you very much.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator
4 Golden.
5 SENATOR GOLDEN: You're quite welcome,
6 Madam Chair.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Assembly?
8 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: I think we're done.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Bonacic.
10 SENATOR BONACIC: Thank you,
11 Commissioner. I think you're doing a
12 terrific job since you've taken on this
13 responsibility.
14 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Thank you,
15 Senator.
16 SENATOR BONACIC: Especially
17 outstanding when it comes to natural
18 disasters -- floods, fire, Sandy. And
19 dealing with us, as Senator Golden said.
20 But I want to talk about terrorism.
21 Terrorism has now moved up to maybe the top
22 two things that are on Americans' minds, that
23 we want to be safe in America. And I myself,
24 a little upset when I hear the Governor say
162
1 that terrorist attacks on America is the new
2 normal. If we're the greatest country in the
3 world, we should never have the mindset of
4 terrorist attacks on the homeland being
5 normal. It's a crisis. Okay?
6 And I know you don't walk on water,
7 and I know many of these things that are
8 happening are beyond your control. But my
9 view of this -- and I'm not a dramatist -- I
10 think there is a clear and present danger to
11 New York and America. New York especially
12 has the biggest bull's-eye of all the states
13 in America. And how we handle the Syrian
14 crisis, with refugees, how we handle
15 deportation for visas that have expired, how
16 we handle our borders, how we handle
17 immigration issues -- when are we going to
18 stop gutting the military? -- all of these
19 factors are happening, challenges, because of
20 a failure of leadership in Washington.
21 So I wanted just to say that. And I
22 know that may not be within your province.
23 But Senator Croci, Senator Nozzolio and I
24 have talked about -- at length about this
163
1 cybersecurity. Now, we've seen a pattern
2 over the last few years. We see the Chinese
3 hacking our military secrets. We see them
4 hacking the IRS. We see them hacking Hillary
5 Clinton's personal server that has national
6 security issues.
7 So I just think -- and this has gone
8 on for a while. I think they're sleeping at
9 the switch, some of these people in
10 Washington. There's a loss of confidence, in
11 my mind. This is only me speaking.
12 So I would suggest to you, if it's
13 within your power in working with the
14 Governor, to come up with a budget on how we
15 can do more cybersecurity in the State of
16 New York, to give you more resources so you
17 don't have to depend on what other
18 bureaucracies and what other people are
19 doing, because I see us as having the biggest
20 bull's-eye in New York.
21 So if it's within your power, I would
22 certainly be supportive of more money for
23 homeland security -- on cybersecurity,
24 in-house, under your leadership and whatever
164
1 agencies you need to make us the best that we
2 can be.
3 And for the law enforcement that we
4 have in New York and in this country, I think
5 they have the most challenges in the world
6 and they're doing the best job that they can
7 with all that's facing them. And we're so
8 grateful for the work that they do.
9 Thank you, Commissioner.
10 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I agree.
11 Thank you, Senator.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
13 much, Senator Bonacic.
14 Our next speaker is Senator Squadron.
15 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very
16 much, Madam Chair.
17 Thank you, Commissioner, for the work
18 you do and the testimony you're providing.
19 So as we look at a growing mandate,
20 for the reasons we've heard and so many
21 others, speak just briefly to something I've
22 worked with the department on going back many
23 years, to the coordination especially with
24 New York City -- which as we know is a
165
1 central target, has been centrally impacted
2 by Sandy and other severe emergencies, and
3 has in its NYPD one of the great
4 counterterrorism programs in the nation, and
5 in its own Office of Emergency Management a
6 very, very sophisticated emergency response
7 system. How is that coordination with the
8 City of New York going?
9 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Excellent.
10 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. So that's
11 true vis-a-vis NYPD?
12 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Yes, it is. I
13 meet with Chief Waters regularly, the chief
14 of counterterrorism. Superintendent D'Amico
15 of the State Police and I are good friends,
16 we converse often about those types of
17 issues. And the cooperation between the
18 Office of Emergency Management in New York
19 City, the Police Department, and us is
20 outstanding.
21 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. And the
22 office of Fire Protection and the FDNY?
23 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Perfect.
24 SENATOR SQUADRON: Excellent. I
166
1 passed a bill a number of years ago that
2 produced a report about some of the real
3 dangers to residents in New York City and
4 FDNY due to the fact that state buildings,
5 buildings under the state code in New York
6 City are not covered by the city building
7 code, historically did not have shared
8 building plans, which meant that tragically,
9 in my district, when FDNY went to respond to
10 a fire at 130 Liberty Street at the World
11 Trade Center site, they didn't have the same
12 plans on file they would for another
13 high-rise fire, and in that case leading to
14 truly tragic circumstances.
15 There had been a plan to embed State
16 Office of Fire Protection personnel with FDNY
17 in their emergency response so that it was
18 much easier to coordinate that information
19 up-front and make sure that we weren't
20 putting FDNY personnel at risk and were
21 ensuring the kind of safety we have in state
22 buildings in city buildings.
23 Is that program still continuing? And
24 what confidence can we have that FDNY is
167
1 going to have the same information going into
2 a building under state jurisdiction as it
3 does every other building in the city?
4 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Can you just
5 provide some context as far as a date for
6 that, Senator? Because I've only been here a
7 year, and I don't know if that goes way back
8 or --
9 SENATOR SQUADRON: Sure, of course.
10 Yeah, that report I believe came out in 2012.
11 And then through 2012 and '13 and into the
12 beginning of 2014, we worked with
13 then-Commissioner Cassano and Hauer on this
14 quite extensively.
15 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Okay. I'm
16 going to have to get back to you, if that's
17 okay, Senator. I know there was some issue
18 about state buildings in the city and it was
19 a legal issue that our legal team was looking
20 at. I don't know if it's the same issue that
21 you're referring to -- it may be. But I
22 don't have an answer for you.
23 SENATOR SQUADRON: Okay. Well, this
24 is a critically important issue. We need a
168
1 path to a solution here. And we can't, you
2 know, rely on sort of the status quo or on,
3 you know, bureaucratic attempts to hold on to
4 one role or the other.
5 The fact is building plans are
6 available to FDNY when they get an emergency
7 in every building in the city unless it's not
8 under city jurisdiction, which means all the
9 state buildings, the Port Authority
10 buildings, the buildings at the World Trade
11 Center site are not automatically shared in
12 that way.
13 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Okay.
14 SENATOR SQUADRON: Further, some of
15 the roles and the consistency between the
16 roles and the processes for how you create
17 safe buildings or fire-safe buildings are not
18 the same. And therefore, it can create
19 concerns and risks both for the users of
20 those buildings and for emergency personnel
21 who are responding.
22 This is something that has to be
23 better coordinated than it has been in the
24 past. We started that process, and it sounds
169
1 like -- and thank you for your sort of
2 straightforwardness in this answer -- it's
3 not clear that process has been completed in
4 a way that's sufficient. So I would love a
5 report on where that is and why it is that we
6 can have more comfort now than a half-decade
7 ago when tragic consequences ensued and
8 firefighters lost their lives at 130 Liberty
9 Street related to this issue.
10 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Yeah, don't
11 misunderstand me, Senator; I don't know if
12 that issue has been resolved. I do know that
13 we have a wonderful working relationship
14 between our Office of Fire Prevention and
15 Control and the FDNY. I would assume that if
16 it was some critical issue, as you described,
17 I would be aware of it. I really haven't
18 heard -- I know there was an issue about
19 building inspections or something --
20 SENATOR SQUADRON: Exactly.
21 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: -- but it
22 hadn't risen to the level of really a
23 critical problem that I certainly would hope
24 that I would be aware of.
170
1 So it may be solved, it may be done,
2 but I guarantee I'll get back to you.
3 SENATOR SQUADRON: I mean, one of the
4 issues is this long-standing problem folks
5 have gotten used to -- which doesn't mean
6 it's not a problem but sometimes it doesn't
7 rise to the level of an alarm bell being
8 rung. It's smoldering as opposed to sort of,
9 you know, really burning out of control right
10 now. But let's stop it while it's
11 smoldering.
12 So I'll look forward to some feedback
13 and follow-up on where we are with that issue
14 over the next couple of weeks. Thank you so
15 much.
16 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: As do I.
17 Thank you.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
19 much. Senator Krueger.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
21 And thank you for your excellent work.
22 A number of my colleagues were
23 discussing their support for even more money
24 for your agency. My question actually is,
171
1 your agency is receiving $600 million
2 additional in federal revenue this year
3 compared to last year. So last year you had
4 $653,774,000 in federal special revenue; this
5 year it increases by $600 million.
6 Where is all this money going in the
7 current budget?
8 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: That
9 $600 million increase in Aid to Localities,
10 Senator, is really just an appropriation, in
11 case we need to pass federal funds through
12 for a future disaster, that we have the
13 ability and the appropriation to do that.
14 We don't have any plans to use that
15 money. I hope we don't.
16 SENATOR KRUEGER: So it's a cash
17 infusion from the feds or a line of credit,
18 that if something happens, we can make
19 requests for certain categories of things?
20 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: The latter, is
21 my understanding.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. Can you talk
23 a little bit about how you used last year's
24 $653 million, or is that also still just a
172
1 line of credit that we drew down some of but
2 not all of?
3 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: That is
4 correct. And this is just increasing that
5 $600 million in case we need to use it.
6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Did we use any of
7 that $653 million from the fiscal year that's
8 closing?
9 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: We did not
10 have a federally declared disaster in all of
11 2015. I'm taking credit for that. But --
12 (Laughter.)
13 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: So I'm going
14 to say no, Senator. But as much as I'm not a
15 radio geek, I'm really not a budget person
16 either. But I -- that's my understanding.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: And do you know, is
18 there a specific set of language somewhere,
19 and perhaps that you could get us, that
20 explains under what circumstances we can draw
21 that money down?
22 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Certainly.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: I would appreciate
24 that.
173
1 And do you have any understanding of
2 whether, if we don't spend it by some date,
3 do we not have access to it?
4 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: I think it
5 just gets -- my understanding -- and again,
6 take it from where it's coming from -- is
7 that it would have to be reappropriated next
8 year. But I'm not sure.
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
11 Commissioner. By the way, good work on not
12 tapping that fund, so keep it up.
13 I want to just quickly ask, to follow
14 up on Senator Krueger's question, so
15 generally that fund would be used, for
16 example, for FEMA disasters or some kind of
17 terrorism attack, is that basically it?
18 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: If we had a
19 flood, if we had a hurricane, if we had a
20 tornado, that type of disaster, we would be
21 able to appropriate those funds. Because the
22 Legislature had said it was okay to do that.
23 And that money would come to us
24 through FEMA or DHS.
174
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Correct. Thank
2 you.
3 Our final speaker, to wrap up, is
4 Senator Croci.
5 SENATOR CROCI: Well, thank you, Madam
6 Chair, for the opportunity to ask a couple of
7 follow-up questions, Commissioner. And I
8 appreciate your patience here today with us.
9 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: My pleasure.
10 SENATOR CROCI: We touched on a little
11 about the Governor's statement about a "new
12 normal." My colleague brought that out. And
13 I think Commissioner Kelly, Ray Kelly, is one
14 of those individuals who helped redefine what
15 our actions needed to be, particularly in
16 New York City, in the wake of the attacks in
17 the early '90s on Lower Manhattan, but also
18 specifically after September 11th and the
19 kind of counterterrorism unit and capability
20 that the NYPD built.
21 So I'm very interested in having the
22 opportunity, perhaps the Legislature to see
23 that report. Given his expertise and his
24 national recognition, it would be very
175
1 interesting to see that.
2 But I am curious -- you have a direct
3 one-on-one relationship with the head of
4 counterterrorism at the NYPD. And I'm just
5 curious, why we would take away statutory
6 language that puts you in charge of
7 counterterrorism in the State of New York by
8 taking that title away, along with bodies, if
9 you are the individual who has relationships
10 in counterterrorism. That's a question that
11 I had, if you had any follow-up answer.
12 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Sure. I don't
13 view this transfer of the analysts from my
14 division to the Division of State Police as
15 anything more than getting them in line to
16 streamline their intel to the people who need
17 it first, and then we'll get it.
18 I don't think that I will not be
19 considered a counterterrorism person anymore.
20 I mean, I'll still have those relationships,
21 I'll still have different functions with
22 respect to counterterrorism in the Division
23 of Homeland Security and Emergency Services,
24 just not the intel and analysis report.
176
1 SENATOR CROCI: So why take that
2 statutory responsibility away from you, then,
3 counterterrorism, by changing that language
4 in the statute as proposed here?
5 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: Are you
6 referring to the analysts?
7 SENATOR CROCI: Well, but it also --
8 there's a deletion of the term
9 "counterterrorism." So I was just wondering
10 if that's something that you had a thought
11 on.
12 COMMISSIONER MELVILLE: My impression,
13 Senator, is that it's just the analysts
14 moving over and that all other
15 counterterrorism responsibilities lie with
16 the Division of Homeland Security and
17 Emergency Services, the ones that we have
18 now.
19 I remain, again, the homeland security
20 advisor to the Governor and the contact for
21 the Department of Homeland Security in
22 Washington. And I really don't think it's
23 going to change anything other than make it a
24 little clearer for the analysts to get their
177
1 information to the people that need it first,
2 and then we'll get it. And so will everybody
3 else.
4 SENATOR CROCI: Touching on what
5 Senator Nozzolio mentioned about the transfer
6 of cybersecurity responsibilities to ITS and
7 then, two years later now, a proposal to take
8 counterterrorism and certain bodies out of
9 that pool, I think it's a conversation that
10 we'll have to continue to have. I'm
11 concerned at the deemphasis of it because I
12 believe at the executive level, the lessons
13 of 9/11 and the "new normal" have suggested
14 that we need to continually augment that and
15 we need to continually highlight that from
16 the executive level. And that I would want
17 any executive, but particularly the Governor
18 of this state and his staff, to be getting
19 the most timely and accurate intelligence
20 possible so that good decisions could be made
21 and good policies could be passed to protect
22 New Yorkers.
23 My last statement was just that I
24 really -- I do believe that you have, in the
178
1 year, been able to work well with the
2 Legislature. These are very complicated
3 issues. I share my colleagues' concerns that
4 we're out of time with regard to attacks.
5 And if Paris and San Bernardino and going
6 back to the attacks in the Boston Marathon
7 and others, if that isn't indicative of
8 what's coming -- it's an inevitability that I
9 hate to concede, and I'm sure every New
10 Yorker hates to concede. But I believe that
11 there are things we can do, there are
12 prevention preparedness moves that we can
13 make in the State of New York, legislative
14 and others.
15 It does take us out of our normal
16 comfort zone, and that's the new normal, that
17 we have to take actions we ordinarily
18 wouldn't as a Legislature, and look at laws
19 and administrative controls for the Governor
20 and authorities that we wouldn't ordinarily.
21 So I'm concerned about what's coming
22 for us, certainly. I heed the message of the
23 director of the FBI, who has since last year
24 asked state and local governments to look at
179
1 this in a new light and to come up with
2 innovative ways to assist our federal
3 partners. And I just don't want to
4 deemphasize that in statute, I don't want to
5 deemphasize that in our administrative rules,
6 and I would hope that we could continue to
7 work together with the Governor's office to
8 make sure that we're doing everything we can
9 to protect New Yorkers. We have no higher
10 priority. We have no more solemn duties than
11 the security of our state and the residents
12 of New York.
13 So thank you, and I look forward to
14 working with you in the future.
15 Thank you, Madam Chair.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Chairman
17 Croci.
18 Commissioner, we truly appreciate your
19 participation today and for being so patient
20 and sticking with us as we had our questions
21 asked and answered. So thank you for that.
22 And our next speaker is Executive
23 Deputy Commissioner Michael C. Green --
24 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
180
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
2 -- New York State Division of Criminal
3 Justice Services.
4 (Pause.)
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Could I have your
6 attention, please. Thank you.
7 Executive Deputy Commissioner Green,
8 welcome. We're glad to have you here. We
9 look forward to your testimony.
10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Thank
11 you.
12 Good afternoon, Chairwoman Young,
13 Chairman Farrell, and distinguished members
14 of the Legislature. I'm Mike Green, head of
15 the Division of Criminal Justice Services,
16 and I appreciate you having me here today.
17 Governor Cuomo's proposed budget for
18 fiscal year 2016-2017 will allow DCJS to
19 support the criminal justice system in
20 communities across our state, expand the use
21 of evidence-based programs proven to be
22 effective and cost-efficient, and continue
23 the development of innovative programs that
24 position New York as a national leader in
181
1 effective public safety policy.
2 New York continues to experience
3 reductions in crime and prison population.
4 Reported crime reached an all-time low in
5 2014, and that year we maintained our
6 standing as the safest large state in the
7 nation. New York also has the lowest
8 imprisonment rate of any large state.
9 Statewide crime data is not yet
10 available for 2015, but preliminary trends
11 indicate that crime continued to decline last
12 year. And we will have better numbers by
13 mid-spring.
14 In addition to reintroducing
15 legislation to raise the age of criminal
16 responsibility, the Governor has proposed a
17 range of other reforms to enhance the
18 fairness and effectiveness of our criminal
19 justice system and build trust between law
20 enforcement agencies and communities.
21 In his Built to Lead agenda, Governor
22 Cuomo advocates for legislation requiring
23 recording of interrogations in serious cases,
24 and reforming identification procedures, to
182
1 bring New York in line with 49 other states
2 that allow photo-array identifications into
3 evidence at trial.
4 Law enforcement agencies have embraced
5 recording, and we have already provided
6 approximately $3 million for them to purchase
7 and install the technology. DCJS plans to
8 announce additional funding this year.
9 The Innocence Project and the District
10 Attorneys' Association support these
11 concepts; it's time they became law.
12 The Governor also is committed to
13 reforming New York's bail statute. New York
14 is one of only four states that prohibit
15 judges from considering risk to public safety
16 as a factor when setting bail. A commonsense
17 amendment will allow judges to consider that
18 risk when setting bail or allowing release
19 and permit them to use proven risk
20 assessments to aid in pre-trial release
21 decisions. Other jurisdictions have
22 successfully implemented the use of risk
23 assessments, which has resulted in fewer
24 individuals being detained pre-trial as well
183
1 as increased public safety.
2 Through the Pew-MacArthur Results
3 First Initiative, DCJS has strengthened the
4 state's community-based alternative to
5 incarceration network, funding programs that
6 are effective in reducing recidivism and
7 cost-efficient. We are training ATI
8 providers, in addition to implementing a
9 fidelity and evaluation system to ensure the
10 programs we fund are delivered as designed.
11 New York's ATI realignment work has
12 been touted by Pew-MacArthur in a recently
13 published case study as a best practice for
14 other states to follow to reduce recidivism
15 and maximize taxpayer dollars.
16 The Governor's budget invests nearly
17 $26.2 million through DCJS in programming
18 that reduces incarceration and recidivism.
19 That figure includes new funding: $1 million
20 to expand the state's County Re-Entry Task
21 Forces to include new task forces in Queens
22 and increase the capacity of existing county
23 task forces; and $1 million to create new
24 defendant screening and assessment programs
184
1 in jurisdictions outside New York City.
2 In its second year, New York's Gun
3 Involved Violence Elimination initiative, or
4 GIVE, supports the use of proven strategies
5 to reduce shootings and save lives. GIVE
6 targets the 17 counties that collectively
7 report 87 percent of the violent crime
8 outside of New York City. GIVE provides
9 police departments and their county law
10 enforcement partners $13.3 million in
11 funding, in addition to training and
12 technical assistance from national experts to
13 help implement programs proven to be
14 effective.
15 New York is unique among states in its
16 commitment to funding only evidence-based
17 work through GIVE. The initiative's emphasis
18 on procedural justice -- which focuses on
19 ensuring that interactions between law
20 enforcement and individuals are fair, and
21 that individuals who come in contact with
22 police believe they are being treated fairly
23 and respectfully -- also sets GIVE apart.
24 More than 200 law enforcement
185
1 professionals recently attended a two-day
2 symposium to help them put procedural justice
3 into action. Research shows that positive
4 police-community relations contribute to
5 safer communities.
6 To help stem the tide of gun violence
7 that continues to claim too many lives,
8 particularly those of young men of color,
9 DCJS encourages GIVE jurisdictions to
10 implement street outreach work into their
11 strategies. We've provided additional
12 funding to support street outreach in 10 GIVE
13 jurisdictions and in the Bronx. The
14 Governor's budget proposal funds GIVE and
15 street outreach work at the same level as the
16 current budget.
17 This 2016-2017 budget proposal will
18 allow DCJS to continue supporting our local
19 partners, expanding our evidence-based work,
20 and implementing initiatives designed to
21 foster fairness, respect and transparency in
22 the state's criminal justice system.
23 I thank you for the opportunity to
24 speak with you today, and I'd be happy to
186
1 take any questions you have.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
3 Executive Deputy Commissioner Green.
4 Our first speaker is Senator Gallivan,
5 who is chair of the Senate Crime and
6 Corrections Committee.
7 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you, Madam
8 Chair.
9 Good afternoon, Commissioner.
10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Good
11 afternoon, Senator.
12 SENATOR GALLIVAN: I have questions in
13 three different areas that is outside of the
14 testimony that you just gave us. And you may
15 not or may not be aware -- and if this is not
16 your area of responsibility, if you can point
17 me in the right direction so I can follow
18 through.
19 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN:
20 Certainly.
21 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Two years ago, in
22 the 2014-2015 budget, there was language in
23 that budget to provide for a statewide law
24 enforcement records management system. And
187
1 the goal, of course, was to do a number of
2 things -- to increase the ability of law
3 enforcement agencies statewide to interact
4 with each other, streamline reporting, help
5 them provide better service in the area of
6 case management, things like that.
7 What is the status of that?
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I am
9 aware of the issue you're speaking about, and
10 it's an issue that involves both DCJS and the
11 New York State Police. The State Police side
12 of it -- and I'm sure the superintendent can
13 address this better than I do -- is that
14 their records management system needs to be
15 updated. The technology that it's built
16 upon, as I understand it, is on the verge of
17 becoming unsupported.
18 Basically the same records management
19 system through DCJS is offered to local law
20 enforcement agencies. At one time there were
21 well over 200 local law enforcement agencies
22 that took advantage of that offer and used
23 that as their records management system.
24 Again, that same system has the same problems
188
1 as the State Police one, in that the
2 technology was becoming unsupported two years
3 ago when that proposal was put forward.
4 That proposal was subject to the
5 approval by the Legislature of a plan
6 submitted to the Legislature by the
7 Executive. The State Police and DCJS put
8 together that plan, submitted it to the
9 Legislature, we met with legislative staff
10 repeatedly. And it's my understanding that
11 to this date there is still not legislative
12 approval for that plan.
13 What's happening on the ground, in the
14 meantime, is I have local law enforcement
15 agencies calling me literally every week
16 saying, I need a new records management
17 system, do I need to go out and buy my own
18 records management system or is this ever
19 going to happen? Just last week I received
20 an outreach from the Sheriffs Association
21 asking me the same thing. So I really
22 appreciate you raising the issue. I think it
23 is an issue that needs to be addressed
24 urgently. And we're still waiting for
189
1 approval.
2 SENATOR GALLIVAN: I was aware, I
3 think it was late last session and into the
4 summer, perhaps into the fall, I was aware
5 that there was discussions that were ongoing.
6 Has there been recent discussions over the
7 past several months, to your knowledge?
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I have
9 not personally heard anything from the
10 Legislature. I've met, I'd say, at least
11 three or four times with staff, we've
12 answered questions in person, we've responded
13 to all the written questions that we've
14 received. So I'm not aware of any
15 unaddressed inquiries from the Legislature to
16 DCJS.
17 SENATOR GALLIVAN: How can I find out
18 where this is, the status of it?
19 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Again,
20 to the best of my understanding -- and I have
21 been following this on a weekly basis because
22 of the inquiries and the concerns I get from
23 local law enforcement -- is that we're just
24 waiting for approval from the Legislature,
190
1 that the RFP is drafted and ready to go, the
2 RFP was provided to the Legislature. The
3 plan was drafted, it was amended a number of
4 times in response to concerns that the
5 Legislature raised. The plan was provided to
6 the Legislature.
7 So, you know, everything is done,
8 ready to go, and the RFP is waiting to go out
9 the door. And the only thing we're waiting
10 on is the legislative approval.
11 SENATOR GALLIVAN: All right, thank
12 you.
13 The next question has to do -- it does
14 have to do with the Governor's budget
15 proposal this year, but more so pointing to
16 last year. So in the last fiscal year there
17 was $60 million allocated, the category was
18 for law enforcement safety equipment. But it
19 was to include vehicles for State Police and
20 then some other equipment, bulletproof vests,
21 things of that nature.
22 There was a recent news article within
23 the past three or four weeks where a
24 spokesperson for the Governor said that that
191
1 money was contingent on the Legislature
2 reaching an agreement with the Governor on
3 last year's various criminal justice
4 proposals. I was in on many of those
5 meetings; I don't recall any time that that
6 funding was contingent when we put that
7 budget forward.
8 So this year's budget essentially
9 takes that $60 million for badly needed State
10 Police cars, for badly needed equipment and
11 the other things, and reallocates it for
12 different things. I do know that there was a
13 much smaller amount allocated for equipment,
14 I think it was $4 million or something of
15 that nature. Are you able to comment on that
16 and maybe allay our concerns that the State
17 Police does not need vehicles, does not need
18 additional equipment?
19 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: First of
20 all, you would certainly have better
21 information than I in terms of what was said
22 in the negotiating sessions. I wasn't there.
23 I am well aware of the $60 million you
24 talk about. What I can tell you is that that
192
1 money was never provided to DCJS. Originally
2 there was conversation about DCJS doing an
3 RFP or solicitation for local law
4 enforcement. I know one issue related to the
5 appropriation language. The way the language
6 was drafted, it did not give DCJS the
7 authority to pass that money through on the
8 local assistance grants. I know that the
9 Executive and DCJS provided input as to
10 language that would fix that problem, and
11 it's my understanding that language never
12 made it into the bill.
13 You know, I do know that the state
14 does invest through other sources in -- you
15 know, for example, bulletproof vests and
16 other funding sources that law enforcement
17 can use. But that $60 million has never come
18 to us for distribution.
19 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Fair enough. Where
20 can you point me to get answers?
21 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Again,
22 you know, I think there were negotiations
23 between the Executive and the Legislature.
24 And I -- you know, I know one of the things
193
1 that would need to be fixed is that
2 appropriation language.
3 SENATOR GALLIVAN: All right. Thank
4 you.
5 The last question has to do with an
6 overall small item in the State Budget, but
7 very significant for some of the local law
8 enforcement agencies that enforce the
9 navigation law. The Governor's budget calls
10 for a reduction in reimbursements to those
11 specific local agencies that provide those
12 services -- some of the Finger Lakes, Lake
13 Erie, Lake Ontario, agencies like that.
14 The budget -- the reduction was from
15 50 percent to 25 percent. In the overall
16 scheme of the State Budget, $1 million is not
17 significant. But to these local agencies,
18 it's huge. Some of them have expressed to me
19 they won't have the ability to provide the
20 enforcement of the navigation on these
21 various bodies of water.
22 How can you suggest we deal with that?
23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Again, I
24 do not believe that that is through the DCJS
194
1 budget, because I'm not familiar with that
2 and I believe I know our budget fairly well.
3 But I can certainly look into it and get you
4 information on what budget stream that is in.
5 SENATOR GALLIVAN: All right. Thank
6 you.
7 SENATOR KRUEGER: Assembly?
8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Yes. Assemblyman
9 Joe Lentol -- Chairman Joe Lentol.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Thank you,
11 Chairman, Chairman Dennis Farrell.
12 (Laughter.)
13 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: And thank you,
14 Commissioner Green, for the work that you've
15 been doing. I've been watching you, and I
16 admire all the work that you've done in this
17 job.
18 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Thank
19 you.
20 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: I just wanted to
21 digress from some of the questions that I
22 wanted to ask you because of some of your
23 testimony, and following up on what
24 Mr. Gallivan asked. And I guess the first
195
1 thing I'm going to ask is about the cloud
2 that he discussed. And we have had and we
3 have sent letters over to you regarding some
4 issues that we'd like to resolve in order for
5 us to get on board with some legislation
6 that's needed either independently or in the
7 budget. So I'm just hoping that you'll be
8 able to meet with our staff, that your staff
9 will be able to meet with our staff to clear
10 up some of those issues.
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I'm
12 sorry, I missed -- you said with regard to
13 what issue?
14 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: With the cloud.
15 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I guess
16 I -- when you say cloud, I really don't know
17 what you're talking about. The issue is a
18 records management system --
19 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Yes.
20 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: -- it's
21 not a cloud.
22 So, you know, we have met every single
23 time we've been asked to meet; we've reached
24 out and asked for meetings. To my knowledge,
196
1 we've answered every single inquiry.
2 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Okay.
3 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: And I
4 will make myself available at any time going
5 forward to meet with you, your staff, or
6 anyone else from the Legislature with regard
7 to the records management system.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Thank you.
9 That's all I can ask.
10 And secondly, I'm very perplexed by
11 the Governor's commitment to reforming the
12 bail statute. Because the mayor of the City
13 of New York as well -- it's not only the
14 Governor -- have proposed issues like the
15 Governor is proposing with respect to public
16 safety being required and having a statutory
17 change in order to include public safety in
18 bail reform.
19 At the same time, trying to implement
20 a program to allow people to get out, rather
21 than -- on bail, as opposed to having them
22 languish for two or three years and then
23 committing suicide like what happened in the
24 case in the Bronx.
197
1 And so I don't want to ask a long
2 question, but I know historically that -- and
3 I don't know if you were here to hear
4 Mr. O'Donnell's questions earlier --
5 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Yes, I
6 heard the questions.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: -- about bail
8 reform and how we know that judges take into
9 account all of the things involving public
10 safety when they set bail.
11 So my most important concern is that
12 this will prevent the judges from letting
13 anybody out if they have a new component
14 that's added to the statute regarding risk
15 assessment or public safety. Because I don't
16 know, some of the judges that I've seen
17 aren't brave, and they might take the
18 position, well, the Legislature just passed a
19 statute that we have to take public safety in
20 mind, so why should I let anybody out who
21 comes before me? That's my question.
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I think
23 that's a very good question. You know, and I
24 know you've spent a great deal of time both
198
1 in and dealing with the criminal justice
2 system, as has Assemblyman O'Donnell.
3 And I think that sometimes your first
4 instinct is to say, well, if you let judges
5 consider that type of risk, we're going to
6 hold more people. You know, and certainly I
7 can admit that when I first heard the issue,
8 that was one of the things that crossed my
9 mind.
10 But I'm a firm believer in
11 evidence-based work. I think that we
12 constantly need to look at our system and see
13 how can we make it better. I think we need
14 to look at what's happening in other parts of
15 the country in terms of new practices that
16 have been studied and shown results, and see
17 what we can learn from them. And this is one
18 of the areas where I think we can learn.
19 If you look at, for example, some of
20 the work the Arnold Foundation has done where
21 you allow judges to consider that risk and at
22 the same time you provide a framework -- so
23 right now, assuming what Assemblyman
24 O'Donnell said is true -- and I certainly
199
1 can't tell what's going on in the mind of
2 judges, but, you know, I have to say that I
3 think the inference that he asked people to
4 draw is reasonable -- then you have judges
5 right now with no guidance, no legislative
6 authority, considering that risk.
7 I would argue that it's much better to
8 put it in legislation, establish guidelines,
9 and then allow judges to use evidence-based,
10 validated risk assessment instruments as a
11 tool -- not to replace their judgment, but as
12 a tool in addition to their judgment -- and
13 train judges and prosecutors and defense
14 lawyers on how to use those instruments. And
15 what the evidence has shown in the
16 jurisdictions that have done that is that you
17 actually end up holding fewer people, not
18 more people, and at the same time you have
19 fewer crimes committed by people who are
20 released because you're making better
21 decisions as a system as to who to release.
22 And, you know, to your point about
23 judges being concerned or not wanting to take
24 a risk, if you have valid risk assessment
200
1 instruments, in some cases that may give the
2 judge the cover that the judge feels he or
3 she needs to make that decision and release
4 somebody who doesn't pose a public safety
5 risk and could safely be released.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Just to let you
7 know that I'm kind of a student of history,
8 because my father had been here before I was,
9 and he was here during the 1965 revision of
10 the State Penal Law, when the Republican
11 Party controlled both houses of the
12 Legislature and the Governor was a
13 Republican.
14 And at that time, the Penal Law was
15 amended by a sentencing commission, I guess,
16 or a -- I'm sorry, a law revision commission
17 that was basically headed by Mr. Bartlett,
18 Assemblyman Bartlett, who was a Republican
19 member -- I guess from Ms. Duprey's district,
20 I'm not sure, upstate New York.
21 And that commission recommended, after
22 a long arduous discussion about the issue of
23 preventative detention, that we should leave
24 it out of the Penal Law, we should put in
201
1 provisions to allow judges to make the
2 assessment based on the risk factors that
3 Mr. O'Donnell mentioned earlier about it, so
4 that a judge's hands wouldn't be tied by a
5 preventative detention statute that would
6 require them to set high bail in most every
7 case.
8 I just wanted to point that out to
9 you, because that was done in 1965 when the
10 Penal Law was revised. So ...
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: From the
12 question, it sounds like you have an
13 advantage and may be a little bit older than
14 I am --
15 (Laughter.)
16 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Just a little
17 bit.
18 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: But, you
19 know, I think that that's a good point, that
20 we should learn from history. But I think we
21 also have to learn from the experiences. And
22 I'm not sure that the science behind risk
23 assessment that exists today existed back
24 then when they were making that decision.
202
1 And again, if you look to
2 jurisdictions that have implemented this and
3 implemented it properly, the result is fewer
4 people being held.
5 And back to your initial statement,
6 this proposal is being put forth by the
7 Governor because of his belief that if we
8 make better decisions and we use the science
9 that's available, we can hold fewer people
10 and make the state safer.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: I want to move
12 on, but I should also point out, which I
13 forgot to mention, that at the time in 1965
14 we had a crime rate that was much worse than
15 today, when that decision was made.
16 But let me move on to the independent
17 monitor. Because we talked about this last
18 year when you were here, and I don't want to
19 ask a whole host of questions. But it's hard
20 for me to understand whether this was a
21 mistake to be put back in the budget or not.
22 Because since the Governor issued an
23 executive order to allow the Attorney General
24 to act as a special prosecutor -- and an
203
1 independent monitor would have no resources
2 at all within which to work, and the Attorney
3 General would have a multitude of resources
4 to handle these cases -- why are we asking
5 again for an independent monitor and why not
6 let the Attorney General handle these cases
7 as a special prosecutor?
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: To
9 address your first point, it is not a mistake
10 that it was put back in. I think -- at least
11 from my position, I think the Governor made
12 clear last year that he believed that the
13 best option was the legislative option that
14 he put forward.
15 As I know you're well aware, there are
16 many very important considerations to be
17 balanced here. One of those is that every
18 county has an elected district attorney that
19 the people of that county elected to handle
20 cases like this and make decisions like this
21 in their county.
22 And a countervailing consideration is
23 public confidence in the criminal justice
24 system, which we know is critical, you know,
204
1 for a number of different reasons. One of
2 which is studies show that when public
3 confidence in the criminal justice system
4 erodes, one of the things that can follow is
5 lawlessness and higher crime rates.
6 So in balancing those things, the
7 Governor put forth a proposal that would not
8 automatically take away the district
9 attorney's ability to handle cases but would
10 put a provision in place when the district
11 attorney either did not go to the grand jury
12 within a reasonable time on the case or the
13 grand jury issued no bill, to have an
14 independent monitor come in, review the facts
15 of the case, review the grand jury
16 proceedings and make a report to the
17 Governor, so when the Governor exercised his
18 or her powers in terms of whether or not to
19 appoint a special prosecutor, it would be
20 made based on solid information about the
21 facts and circumstances of that particular
22 case. And if the Governor felt that there
23 was an injustice or that there was new
24 evidence, the Governor could appoint a
205
1 special prosecutor.
2 And I don't agree with your assessment
3 that there would be no resources, because I
4 think that it is envisioned under their
5 proposal that both the independent monitor
6 and, if necessary, the special prosecutor
7 would have the resources necessary.
8 Now, last year the Governor made clear
9 that that was his preference, but that if it
10 didn't pass, he felt something had to be
11 done. And when nothing was passed, he felt
12 something needed to be done, he signed the
13 executive order.
14 We're obviously in a different
15 position this year. You know, now there's an
16 executive order in place. But that doesn't
17 change the fact that the Executive feels that
18 the best path forward is a path that creates
19 that balance between those two very important
20 considerations. And I believe that that is
21 the reason why this legislation is put back
22 in again in the Governor's Article VII
23 budget.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: I listened very
206
1 carefully to the Governor at his State of the
2 State message, and I thought I heard him
3 say -- and maybe I'm mistaken, because you
4 said I'm getting older; my hearing may be
5 getting bad. But I thought the Governor said
6 that he was asking for not an independent
7 monitor but passage of the Keith Wright bill
8 to make permanent a grand jury -- I'm sorry,
9 a special prosecutor in the Attorney
10 General's office to prosecute these cases and
11 investigate whether or not an additional
12 prosecution is necessary.
13 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I was
14 sitting much farther back than you were, so I
15 might not have heard right either. But my
16 comments are based on the language of the
17 Article VII bill that was submitted. And I
18 believe what I have just indicated in my
19 comments is consistent with the language
20 that's in that Article VII bill.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Okay.
22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: You're at zero now.
23 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: I'm at zero, so
24 I'll turn my time over to the next speaker.
207
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very
3 much.
4 SENATOR KRUEGER: Our next speaker is
5 Senator Mike Nozzolio.
6 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you very
7 much.
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Good
9 afternoon.
10 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Mr. DCJS
11 Commissioner, former district attorney and
12 good friend. How are you, Mike?
13 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Good,
14 thank you.
15 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Senator Funke and
16 Senator Akshar may be talking about other
17 issues regarding parole, and I want to put
18 you on notice in this forum that we are very
19 concerned with -- by we, those of us in the
20 Senate -- as we review the budget, in terms
21 of the allocation of resources for parole. I
22 know that's not directly within your purview,
23 but certainly we will be probing that with
24 Acting Commissioner Annucci and others.
208
1 But I wanted you to know that that's a
2 big concern of ours, and particularly in
3 Western New York. The supervision and the
4 problems we've had with the caseload of
5 parole officers as well as the results of
6 very tragic incidents occurring in your
7 hometown over the last few years regarding
8 those who are out on parole and committing
9 very violent crimes soon after their
10 discharge. So putting you on notice of that,
11 Mike.
12 Again in your region, but this is --
13 we're finding this happening throughout the
14 state, is the scourge of heroin. It's a
15 scourge, it's a deeply rooted problem that is
16 no longer isolated in the inner cities but
17 expanding well into the suburbs and rural
18 areas.
19 Just as an aside, the sheriff of
20 Seneca County had a forum late last fall, and
21 it was discussed how those traveling from the
22 Central Finger Lakes, going to Rochester and
23 Syracuse to buy their supplies, and then
24 coming home, a round trip of 80 to 100 miles
209
1 and actually distributing, as dealers of
2 heroin, and having a market in the Central
3 Finger Lakes, which never existed before.
4 But you travel the Thruway, we travel
5 the Thruway. Just think of those who are
6 high on heroin going back and forth to their
7 places of obtaining supplies and being high
8 on the road -- in fact, inebriated, under the
9 influence. And that just is nonetheless a
10 very disturbing situation.
11 What is DCJS doing, your agency, to
12 stem the heroin epidemic and to address the
13 heroin epidemic in our state?
14 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: That's a
15 very good question. You know, and I
16 certainly agree with you that heroin is a
17 very serious problem. One thing I'd say to
18 preface my remarks, as you noted, I was a
19 prosecutor, I spent 25 years in the DA's
20 office, the last eight years as the DA. And
21 I can't tell you how many wiretap
22 applications I signed on drug cases, how many
23 search warrants, you know, how many thousands
24 of drug dealers were prosecuted and, you
210
1 know, God knows how many pounds of heroin and
2 coke and whatever else. And none of it made
3 the drug problem go away.
4 So, you know, when we think about this
5 problem, I think we need to think about it
6 from more than just a law enforcement
7 perspective. You know, if all we do is
8 figure out how to arrest people and how to
9 confiscate drugs, we're on a never-ending
10 treadmill and we'll just keep doing that with
11 no change.
12 So, you know, a huge part of the
13 equation has to be on the treatment side.
14 And I, in my remarks, briefly talked about
15 how we are bringing evidence-based practices
16 to the support of the funding that we do, to
17 make sure that the money that we provide to
18 Alternative to Incarceration programs -- so
19 when people come into the criminal justice
20 system, need help and get referred to help,
21 the help that they're getting is effective
22 help that's done by agencies that are running
23 in a way that is designed to make sure that
24 they get effective treatment and don't keep
211
1 cycling through the system. So that's one
2 area that we're working in.
3 We've also been very active in terms
4 of Naloxone, working with a number of other
5 state agencies. We've been engaged in a
6 program for about two years now to train and
7 provide law enforcement officers across the
8 state with Naloxone. So far, over 8,000
9 officers have been trained as part of that
10 program, including about 2,500 trainers under
11 the Train the Trainer model. They've
12 administered Naloxone about a thousand times.
13 Over 900 of those 1,000 administrations have
14 resulted in saves.
15 In addition, we've provided funding
16 and do provide funding to the special
17 narcotics prosecutor, to district attorney's
18 offices across the state, some of which is
19 used for the prosecution of drug cases. And
20 then through our work with crime analysis
21 centers, we provide resources to local law
22 enforcement on the crime analysis side to
23 help fight this. So those are some of our
24 efforts. I'd be happy if you want to follow
212
1 up.
2 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Is there any area
3 of the state that is doing better than -- is
4 establishing better successes than maybe
5 other areas of the state?
6 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I travel
7 the entire state from, you know, the North
8 Country to Buffalo to Long Island and
9 everywhere in between. And I -- you know, I
10 consistently hear that this is an issue. I
11 couldn't point to one area and say they've
12 got it figured out.
13 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Well, please --
14 there are many -- in our conference and all
15 across the Legislature, they're deeply
16 concerned about this issue. And your
17 suggestions and guidance in the future will
18 be very helpful as we try to appropriately
19 provide legislative solutions.
20 And I must say the task force that a
21 number of members have served on, the Heroin
22 Task Force, has not just relied on the
23 traditional law enforcement measures. We
24 agree with you that treatment is paramount to
213
1 ever finalizing and reducing the demand.
2 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I
3 certainly share your concern, appreciate it,
4 and would look forward to working with you on
5 this very important issue. And I also wanted
6 to thank you for your service as a Senator,
7 too.
8 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you, Madam
9 Chair.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
11 Assembly?
12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblyman Graft
13 {sic}.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Thank you, Denny.
15 You can leave off the T, though.
16 (Laughter.)
17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: I'll take it off if
18 I find it.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Okay, a few
20 questions. Going back to the police vests.
21 Now, the report that I read was that, you
22 know, we had money allocated to upgrade vests
23 for police officers. And the Governor didn't
24 get his whole package, and he basically took
214
1 his ball and went home. And he gave the
2 money to the DOT. That's the report that I
3 had. Right?
4 So I don't know if the plows need
5 Kevlar, that the snowmen are shooting at
6 them, but I don't appreciate the Governor
7 sitting there and playing politics with the
8 lives of hardworking police officers. And
9 now I look at this reform package that the
10 Governor has, and he's just jumping on the
11 anti-cop bandwagon again.
12 As far as special counsel, now, you
13 know the grand jury proceedings have been
14 secret, and there's a reason that they're
15 secret, for -- you know, from the inception.
16 And I'm reading through this stuff. And if
17 I'm not mistaken -- and you can correct me if
18 I'm wrong -- most of this stuff here says
19 they're allowing the DA to turn over a report
20 if they don't indict. Is that correct? It
21 allows them to.
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN:
23 Basically the provision would allow the
24 district attorney to either do a report or
215
1 write a letter to make information available
2 to the public explaining why the case
3 resulted the way it did.
4 And I can tell you, you know, I first
5 of all spent my entire career trying to
6 support law enforcement, and I strongly
7 disagree with your characterization. But
8 secondly, I personally have been in a
9 position where I have presented high-profile
10 cases to the grand jury where police shot
11 somebody -- and shot and killed somebody, in
12 circumstances -- and I felt like my hands
13 were unduly tied in those circumstances,
14 where I had to go out and tell the public,
15 this is what happened, and by law I'm not
16 allowed to tell you one additional word.
17 You know, I don't think anyone wants
18 to disclose names of witnesses that testified
19 or other information that would compromise
20 anybody. But to give the public just a basic
21 level of information so that there can be
22 some understanding. If the case gets
23 no-billed and the determination was that a
24 police officer was justified in doing what he
216
1 or she did, then I think it's only fair not
2 only to the public but to the police officer
3 that the community have some understanding of
4 why that happened so that they don't have
5 this notion in their head that there was some
6 kind of fix that happened and it was a bad
7 result.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: You know, we have
9 duly elected DAs, and that's their job to
10 make this decision whether they're going to
11 indict or not. And this just looks to me,
12 for political purposes, all right, to be able
13 to get another bite at the apple when it
14 comes to police officers. That's --
15 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN:
16 Actually, it does not. This does not give
17 anybody another bite at the apple. This does
18 not in any way, shape or form change the law.
19 Right now, under existing law if a
20 case goes to a grand jury and the grand jury
21 no-bills, there's a provision in the law that
22 allows the district attorney or any other
23 prosecutor who's duly appointed to go to a
24 judge in that jurisdiction and seek
217
1 permission to get that case re-presented to a
2 grand jury based on either new evidence or
3 some flaw with the posterior proceeding.
4 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: But you're removing
5 that.
6 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: That
7 same rule would continue to apply. There is
8 no new bite at the apple. This simply goes
9 to who it is that will be carrying out that
10 function. Will it be the district attorney,
11 or will it be a special prosecutor? But it
12 does not create --
13 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: But wait a minute,
14 wait a minute, wait a minute --
15 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: -- a
16 second bite.
17 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Wait a minute.
18 Now, if the special prosecutor does not like
19 the way that the DA presented the case to the
20 grand jury, right, the special prosecutor can
21 bring the case again; correct?
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: No.
23 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: That's the way I
24 read it.
218
1 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: First of
2 all, "does not like" is not the standard in
3 the bill. There has to be a substantial flaw
4 with what happened, or there has to be new
5 evidence.
6 And secondly, the law right now
7 requires anybody who wants to go back into a
8 grand jury after there's been a no-bill to
9 get permission from a judge. And under this
10 proposal, it simply says that there would be
11 a special prosecutor, not the DA. But it
12 does nothing to change that existing section
13 of law.
14 And that special prosecutor would
15 still have to go back in front of a judge and
16 show the judge that there was cause under the
17 existing standard to go back into grand jury
18 before he or she could do so.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Okay. And -- so
20 the way I'm reading this, a lot of this
21 allows the DA, the DA may -- correct? He
22 doesn't have to give a statement. He doesn't
23 have to write a letter.
24 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Correct.
219
1 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: He doesn't have to
2 go out there.
3 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: But if
4 the DA, like me in that situation I was in,
5 felt that it's important that the public
6 understand at a basic level what happened, it
7 gives them the ability to do that.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Okay.
9 Now, is part of this the video cameras
10 for the police officers too? Is that what
11 he's looking at, with the ones that they
12 wear?
13 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Yes,
14 that is one of the items that the Governor
15 has put forward -- not as a budget bill, but
16 in his State of the State, the Build to Lead
17 agenda book.
18 And frankly, my recollection is that
19 two years ago in his State of State, it was
20 something he talked about. I know there was
21 legislation last year that both the District
22 Attorneys Association and the Innocence
23 Project had signed off on that I believe
24 passed the Senate. And that same framework
220
1 is the framework that the Governor is
2 proposing.
3 You know, A, we're the only state in
4 the country that doesn't allow photo-array
5 identifications into evidence at trial. And
6 all of the research on this issue suggests
7 that if it's done properly, your best
8 identification is the one that's done first
9 and soonest in time to the crime, which
10 almost always is a photo-array
11 identification. And yet we keep that best
12 identification from the jury.
13 So that was half of the package. The
14 other half of the package is video recording
15 of interrogations in serious cases. And
16 again, you know, the MPTC has adopted
17 policies regarding it. Almost every major
18 police department in the state is recording.
19 You know, I can tell you, as someone
20 who tried cases, the last case I tried was a
21 case where two police officers were shot and
22 one of my best pieces of evidence was
23 3Ω hours of a recorded interview with the
24 person who was convicted of attempting to
221
1 murder those police officers.
2 You know, it's something that I think
3 almost everyone who's up on these issues in
4 law enforcement agrees we should be doing.
5 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Yeah, I'm talking
6 about the body cams. Is that part of these
7 proposals?
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: No, I
9 don't believe there's legislation with regard
10 to body cameras.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Okay. Thank you.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
13 Senator Squadron.
14 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very
15 much.
16 I've got a lot to cover here. I don't
17 know if you were here earlier when we had
18 that extensive conversation about speedy
19 trial or the absolute lack of speedy trials
20 in New York State.
21 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I was
22 listening to all of it.
23 SENATOR SQUADRON: I appreciate it.
24 What if any data does DCJS keep on the period
222
1 from arraignment to disposition or trial
2 delays in general?
3 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I don't
4 have it with me, but I do believe we have
5 county-by-county data on time from
6 arraignment to disposition.
7 SENATOR SQUADRON: County by county.
8 Also related to charge levels -- felony, A
9 and B misdemeanors -- to sort of track the
10 ready for trial statute?
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I'd have
12 to check and see how far it's broken down.
13 But I can certainly find out and get back to
14 you on that.
15 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. And then
16 sort of taking off the data hat and putting
17 on the policy hat, what do you think DCJS can
18 do to help solve this crisis?
19 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I think
20 that it's mainly an issue within OCA. You
21 know, our role -- you know, we provide
22 support, provide funding to prosecutors. We
23 provide a very small amount of aid to
24 defense. It's mainly the Office of Indigent
223
1 Legal Services that does that.
2 So I think our role is minor. I do
3 agree with you that it's a very important
4 issue. You know, when we talk about things
5 like the number of people being held in
6 jails, you know, one part of it is who's
7 going to jail, but another part of it is how
8 long are they in jail. And certainly on the
9 pretrial side it's a huge issue.
10 So, you know, I'd be happy to follow
11 up on the data piece and certainly be willing
12 to work with you, OCA, and anyone else on
13 what I think is a very important issue.
14 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. Thank you
15 very much. We'd really like to see trends
16 especially. I mean, you know, it's something
17 that the five boroughs of New York City know
18 a lot about. We heard about it from the
19 Long Island perspective as well.
20 Speaking of reporting, the Governor
21 proposes the sort of expanded reporting for
22 summonses, et cetera, similar to last year's
23 proposal, as I understand it. Is that fair
24 to say?
224
1 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Yes.
2 Basically right now we get fingerprintable
3 offenses and we can do all kinds of reports
4 or data with regard to fingerprintable
5 offenses. This would give us information
6 with regard to non-fingerprintable offenses.
7 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. And last
8 year we covered that it would be sort of part
9 of a unified database with the
10 fingerprintable offenses so there would be
11 ways to sort of cut it to include
12 fingerprintable and non-fingerprintable
13 offenses in terms of how it was sort of
14 stored and analyzed.
15 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Yeah, I
16 don't want to say unified. I don't know in
17 terms of the logistics. I don't think they
18 would be combined.
19 But certainly our intention would be
20 to be able to provide the same level of data
21 with regard to those offenses that we provide
22 you now with regard to the fingerprintable
23 ones.
24 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. And
225
1 Assemblymember Lentol and I carry a bill that
2 would do this.
3 Let me just kind of speed around here
4 for a second. Which of these factors either
5 would be authorized or required to be
6 included in the information? Obviously,
7 offenses and violations are included; right?
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Yes,
9 like harassment, disorderly conduct.
10 SENATOR SQUADRON: Demographics on an
11 individual's charge, race, ethnicity,
12 et cetera?
13 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Yes.
14 SENATOR SQUADRON: Whether the summons
15 or appearance ticket contained a custodial
16 arrest or not?
17 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I don't
18 know if the proposal is that specific. And
19 I'd have to check. But there may be language
20 in there that indicates that it is subject to
21 regulation by the commissioner of DCJS in
22 terms of how it gets reported.
23 SENATOR SQUADRON: Disposition?
24 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: No, I
226
1 don't believe it's disposition, because it's
2 coming -- the requirement is for the police
3 department. So I don't believe they would
4 have the disposition information.
5 SENATOR SQUADRON: And therefore not
6 sentence, either, right? Neither disposition
7 nor sentence.
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: No, that
9 would have to be information that would come
10 from OCA.
11 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. And then of
12 course that could be aggregated countywide,
13 statewide, any -- regionally, et cetera?
14 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN:
15 Absolutely.
16 SENATOR SQUADRON: Okay. That's
17 important. And hopefully this year we can
18 get that over the top, since knowing what
19 we're talking -- you said fact-based a number
20 of times; I couldn't agree more.
21 Speaking of which, let's talk about
22 the Arnold Foundation briefly that you
23 referenced earlier. How do you ensure that
24 sort of algorithm that goes into the
227
1 predictive score that the Arnold Foundation
2 throws out is sufficiently transparent?
3 Sure, it's showing preliminarily to do a
4 better job of having fewer people held on
5 bail and arguably or potentially lowering
6 violent crimes or violent actions among those
7 who are out in that period. But for each
8 individual case, how do we know that there's
9 a relationship between what that individual
10 has actually done in the past and the
11 likelihood that they'll be given the capacity
12 to get out on bail?
13 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I guess
14 two points I'd make.
15 First, I indicated that we believe
16 that this should be given to judges as a
17 tool. I don't think you can ever replace the
18 judgment of a judge with a tool. But I think
19 the more tools you can give a judge to help
20 them exercise that discretion so -- you know,
21 there may be a case where the risk instrument
22 says one thing but a judge, you know, given
23 his or her experience, says I can safely
24 release this person regardless of what --
228
1 because there's some factor that didn't get
2 put in here.
3 Secondly, as to the algorithm, we in
4 other settings have taken algorithms that
5 have been developed, used our research staff
6 and our DCJS data and improved on them to
7 make them New York-specific, to be as
8 tailored as they can to, you know, our
9 particular circumstances here in New York.
10 And I certainly would anticipate that
11 we do that. And I think it's got to be a
12 very transparent process. I think that in
13 creating that, you know, we need to make sure
14 everyone understands what we're doing.
15 And then the last thing I would say is
16 I mentioned training. You can't just put an
17 instrument out, throw it out there and say,
18 use it. I think it's important, if you're
19 going to do this and do it right and expect
20 to get the results that we truly do lower
21 jail populations and increase public safety,
22 everyone needs to be trained. So the judges,
23 the lawyers on both sides using this know
24 what the algorithm is, know how we came up
229
1 with it, know what it means, you know, know
2 how to use it.
3 And I think if you do all those
4 things, the evidence shows that you do get to
5 a point where you can drive down the jail
6 population and at the same time make the
7 state safer.
8 SENATOR SQUADRON: I would strongly
9 urge that anytime we're talking about these,
10 whether as part of a change in the
11 methodology as proposed by the Governor or
12 not, that we are a lot more careful about
13 telling the judges and requiring the judges
14 consider what it really means, what the
15 underlying factors are that go into that risk
16 assessment, not just -- you know, it's very
17 appealing to simplify everything and every
18 human being to a score. That actually is not
19 how the criminal justice system works. It's
20 the reason we have the criminal justice
21 system we have.
22 And to implement a score absent a
23 whole lot of requirements for due diligence
24 and understanding by the judge is likely to
230
1 cause constitutional among other problems.
2 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I
3 couldn't agree with you more.
4 SENATOR SQUADRON: Briefly, I believe
5 just a final issue on transparency. We did
6 talk about body cams before briefly. Does
7 DCJS have an opinion or a willingness to be
8 part of the solution on how we make body cam
9 footage available to the public while still
10 protecting individual privacy rights?
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: We
12 certainly have spent time with the issue of
13 body cameras. Specifically the issue was
14 considered by the Municipal Police Training
15 Council. We're the staff arm for that
16 council. We did a lot of research over the
17 period of about a year. The council recently
18 adopted a model policy with regard to the use
19 of body cameras which does touch on some of
20 those issues but certainly I don't think is
21 the end of the discussion.
22 But yes, you know, I think body
23 cameras clearly have a place. And I think
24 that there are a lot of issues that go along
231
1 with them that are very important issues that
2 need to be hashed out. So we'd be happy to
3 be involved.
4 SENATOR SQUADRON: They have the
5 potential to really help both law enforcement
6 and civilians who are in contact with law
7 enforcement. Frankly, I would like to see
8 some funding in here to help us devise a
9 system and a storage capacity for how that
10 becomes public and when it becomes public.
11 Because absent that, the truth is that's
12 going to hold up any kind of expansion of
13 body cameras, which I think there's
14 increasingly a consensus is something we need
15 to do. We're not going to be able to do it
16 without funding sort of the back end data
17 question. That's not an additional question
18 when it comes to this new technology, it's a
19 core question about whether the technology
20 can move forward.
21 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: No,
22 that's the cost. The cost of the cameras
23 up-front is almost nonexistent compared to
24 the data shortage and management cost.
232
1 SENATOR SQUADRON: And "management"
2 being the key word there, even more than
3 storage, probably, if the curve continues on
4 storage.
5 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Yeah, if
6 you never need it, it's easy to store it.
7 SENATOR SQUADRON: Finally, the
8 special counsel was proposed. I asked a
9 question last year, there was a little
10 ambiguity on it. It's been a year, the
11 special counsel proposal seems similar to
12 last year's, so maybe there's more clarity
13 this year.
14 The Governor appoints a special
15 counsel to consider whether to recommend an
16 independent prosecutor is appointed. That
17 special counsel has the capacity to access
18 the grand jury findings and transcripts, all
19 of the information related to the grand jury
20 proceeding.
21 Is the special counsel able to share
22 that information with the Executive or not?
23 And if not, is the special counsel able to
24 make a recommendation other than yea or nay
233
1 to justify or explain why the recommendation
2 is what it is?
3 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: The way
4 I read and understand the proposal, the
5 special counsel would have the ability to
6 share as much information as necessary in the
7 context of making a recommendation to the
8 Governor.
9 I don't believe that a reasonable
10 reading of this bill or a reasonable
11 interpretation would say that the special
12 counsel is limited to walking into the
13 Governor's office and saying yes or no and I
14 can't answer any other questions.
15 SENATOR SQUADRON: And would the
16 Governor be allowed to share that information
17 in announcing to the public his or her
18 decision, or would the Governor be under the
19 same limitations on sharing information that
20 emanates from a grand jury proceeding as
21 everyone else is?
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I don't
23 read the bill in a way that would allow for
24 additional disclosure of that information
234
1 beyond from the special counsel to the
2 Governor.
3 SENATOR SQUADRON: Doesn't that take
4 the black box of the grand jury room, extend
5 it into the Executive, and then stop it right
6 there, so that from the perspective of the
7 public and policymakers and law enforcement
8 in general, they're left with the same black
9 box, just one where a different branch of
10 government has also the ability to come out
11 and tell us no more than we've heard before,
12 which is just yes or no?
13 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: If that
14 were the end of the day, you know, you could
15 make that argument, I think. But first of
16 all, you're balancing or trying to balance
17 some very important policy considerations
18 here, and grand jury secrecy is one.
19 And secondly, if the Governor,
20 following a recommendation from the special
21 counsel, appoints a special prosecutor, you
22 know, I would argue that it's not the
23 Governor's position at that point to be
24 making public statements about the case
235
1 before the special prosecutor has a chance to
2 do his or her work. I think that the
3 appropriate course of action at that time
4 would be not to disclose anything further
5 until the special prosecutor has had an
6 opportunity to do their job.
7 SENATOR SQUADRON: Look, it's both --
8 it's those two competing conclusions that
9 lead to such concerns about this. You're
10 probably right about that, but what does that
11 say about the overall proposal? I think
12 that's something that we still need to really
13 consider.
14 Thank you.
15 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Thank
16 you.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
18 Assembly.
19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
20 Assemblyman O'Donnell.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Thank you very
22 much.
23 Once again, I agree with Mr. Graf.
24 Okay? So I will take some medication when I
236
1 get home --
2 (Laughter.)
3 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: -- to make
4 sure I arrive tomorrow in the same state I
5 arrived yesterday.
6 But I believe in the secrecy of the
7 grand jury. And I believe that it serves a
8 very important function. And mostly what I
9 believe, that it's outrageous to suggest that
10 because a defendant happens to be a member of
11 law enforcement that her or his rights are
12 less than all the other people who are
13 defendants in a grand jury.
14 So having said that, I don't believe
15 we should be opening them up. I don't
16 believe we should be giving the names of
17 witnesses. And I don't believe we should be
18 giving out what the nature of the testimony
19 is.
20 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I guess
21 that's --
22 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: However --
23 there's a however -- what a DA charges to the
24 grand jury is different. You and your
237
1 cohorts who are DAs are elected, they owe an
2 obligation to their citizenry.
3 So to that end, I have a bill that
4 would allow any citizen to request from a DA
5 what did you charge that grand jury in this
6 case. Because in the cases where we've had
7 these problems where there's been great
8 public outcry, I fear that the DA is not
9 charging the grand jury in a way that many of
10 their constituents would have wanted them to
11 do.
12 And so just like my votes are public,
13 just like my speech here will probably be put
14 up by one of the people in this room a little
15 while from now, the actions of DAs should be
16 subject to the same scrutiny.
17 So do you think it would be
18 appropriate to require that DAs be required
19 to release what charges they gave to a grand
20 jury in cases where the public wants to know?
21 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: First of
22 all, I think I differ with you in terms of
23 your characterization of the proposal. I
24 don't think it subjects police to a different
238
1 standard. Right now the Governor --
2 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: No, sir, I
3 wasn't saying that was in the proposal, I was
4 saying that was my opinion.
5 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I'd
6 appreciate the opportunity to respond.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Okay.
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Right
9 now the Governor has the power to appoint a
10 special prosecutor. I remember the death
11 penalty case in the Bronx where Governor
12 Pataki exercised that power, and frankly the
13 ability to review that power is very limited.
14 And right now the information that the
15 Governor has at his or her disposal when
16 making that very important decision is very
17 limited.
18 What this proposal does is not give
19 the Governor any additional powers in terms
20 of appointing a special prosecutor in cases
21 involving police, because frankly he can do
22 that already. What it does is give the
23 Governor a mechanism to get information other
24 than what's reported in the press, but real,
239
1 accurate information about the case so the
2 Governor can make an informed decision about
3 whether or not it furthers good public policy
4 to appoint a special prosecutor in that
5 particular case.
6 In terms of your point about release
7 of the instructions to the grand jury, I
8 certainly think that that's an important
9 issue that should be discussed in the context
10 of any legislation in this area.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Well, I wrote
12 the bill, so I'd like to get, you know, my
13 name on that. That would be good. Okay?
14 I'd like to now talk a little bit
15 about photo arrays. You had mentioned it in
16 your testimony that most places use photo
17 arrays.
18 In my experience, one of the problems
19 with photo arrays is the pictures that are in
20 them. So how does someone get to have their
21 picture in a photo array? Well, chances are
22 that's because they've been arrested before,
23 and that's the picture that's there.
24 Then you have the problem with what
240
1 the picture looks like. Now what we know
2 from just reading the paper, when famous
3 celebrities who are really drop-dead
4 gorgeous, they get paid millions of dollars
5 because of how good-looking they are, when
6 they get arrested, they look like they went
7 to hell in a handbasket. Right? So even
8 among the most gorgeous creatures in America,
9 their arrest photos, they look guilty as can
10 be.
11 So isn't there some inherent risk in
12 putting in front of a jury a picture of a
13 criminal defendant in their worst possible
14 moment, looking the worst they could possibly
15 look, and creating a -- and trampling on the
16 presumption of innocence by putting such an
17 image in front of them?
18 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I guess
19 the first thing I'd say is that the Innocence
20 Project has been strenuously advocating for
21 this, to me and publicly, for some period of
22 time. And I can't believe that the Innocence
23 Project would advocate for this if they felt
24 that it was trampling on people's rights.
241
1 And secondly, you know, in this day
2 and age -- you know, there was a time where I
3 think it would be reasonable to say if you
4 have a photo, it must be an arrest photo. If
5 I want a photo of someone in this day and
6 age, I go on the internet -- you know, and I
7 don't know how to do it as well as, you know,
8 so many --
9 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Your
10 grandkids. Yes, I understand.
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: -- other
12 people could, but you pull up a Facebook
13 photo, you pull up any other photo. You
14 know, so I think that the idea that the
15 public perception that you have a photo, it
16 must be an arrest photo may have been true 40
17 years ago. If I asked my kids today, I don't
18 think their first instinct would be you got
19 it from an arrest, I think their first
20 instinct would be you got it off the
21 internet.
22 So, you know, I think things are
23 changing. And I think that all of those
24 things are important considerations, but at
242
1 the end of the day, when the Innocence
2 Project is advocating for me saying this is
3 the best way to ensure against wrongful
4 identifications that lead to wrongful
5 convictions, and this is what you should
6 do -- and I think the last thing I'll say is
7 they do that with a caveat, that the photo
8 arrays have to be assembled and put together
9 properly and the procedure has to be
10 conducted properly before it's a good idea to
11 let a jury see it. So it's not just that any
12 photo array should go in and a jury should
13 see it; we should have guidelines and
14 standards about how the arrays have to be put
15 together and about how the procedures have to
16 be done. And if and only if you meet those
17 standards, then we should allow a jury to
18 hear them.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: I wouldn't
20 dream of questioning Mr. Scheck or
21 Mr. Neufeld and their commitment to
22 innocence. And in fact, Mr. Scheck once
23 tracked me down and congratulated me on my
24 skills at cross-examination during one of
243
1 these hearings, so I consider that a high
2 mark.
3 But most of the defender organizations
4 in the state do oppose this idea. And I
5 guess this is one of those cases where the
6 devil will always be in the details.
7 The third point I'd like to raise has
8 to do with these verified instruments that
9 you want to talk about. You know, we have
10 some experience in putting verified
11 instruments out there. Where do we do that
12 legislatively? We did that before the Parole
13 Board. The Parole Board is currently
14 required to use a verified instrument in
15 determining release rates. And you know what
16 happens? They ignore it. They ignore it,
17 sir. We made them use them, they've used
18 them, they look at them and say despite the
19 fact that this instrument says X, I'm going
20 to keep you in prison for two more years
21 because I think that's the right thing to do.
22 So in the end, any instrument, no
23 matter how good it is, is only as useful as
24 the person who's using its ability to use it
244
1 correctly. And so from my own personal --
2 I'm not speaking for the panel -- from my own
3 personal perspective, I would be unwilling to
4 do that anywhere else in the state until you
5 can talk to the people who work in the Parole
6 Board to get them to do the job that we
7 mandated that they do, which is take into
8 account the information on that very
9 instrument.
10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I
11 certainly can't speak for the Parole Board,
12 but I agree with your point that the
13 instruments are only as good as the use that
14 the people who need to use them make of them.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Thank you very
16 much.
17 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Thank
18 you.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
20 Assemblyman.
21 Our next speaker is Senator Ruth
22 Hassell-Thompson.
23 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you,
24 Madam Chair.
245
1 Good afternoon, Mr. Green.
2 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Good
3 afternoon.
4 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: I'd like to
5 explore some of the stuff we've been talking
6 about, but my time is going to be very
7 limited. So let's flip the switch a little
8 and go to the GIVE initiative that you talk
9 about and certainly that's in the budget.
10 We understand that the GIVE initiative
11 is a replacement for Operation Impact, for
12 the most part. But you don't discuss the
13 specificity of what these outreach programs
14 are. Would you identify SNUG as perhaps
15 being one of those, or that type of model?
16 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN:
17 Absolutely.
18 GIVE did replace Impact, you're right.
19 Whereas Impact allowed a wider focus, GIVE
20 focuses on shootings and homicides, and GIVE
21 identifies four strategies that law
22 enforcement can receive training and
23 technical assistance on and that we'll fund.
24 That's focused deterrence, hotspot policing,
246
1 crime prevention through environmental
2 design, and street outreach work.
3 So street outreach work is
4 specifically one of those four strategies
5 that we will support, that we do support and
6 we provide training on.
7 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Okay, then
8 I may be confused, then. You're saying that
9 the street outreach that's a part of GIVE is
10 not SNUG.
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: No. As
12 part of GIVE, one of the requirements of GIVE
13 is that all of the efforts that are funded by
14 the state to get at shootings and homicides
15 be aligned, so that we shouldn't have a GIVE
16 initiative over here designed to reduce
17 shootings and homicides and a SNUG initiative
18 over here designed to do the same thing, but
19 no coordination between the two.
20 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Okay.
21 Okay, good.
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: You
23 know, and that's not to say we don't
24 recognize that in a good street outreach
247
1 program, you know, there are pieces of it
2 that can't be aligned with the police.
3 For example, when your outreach
4 workers are out on the street, it's very
5 important that people do not view them as an
6 arm of the police. But by the same token,
7 they both have the exact same goals. There's
8 information they both have at a higher level
9 that's very useful to both of them. So there
10 has to be at least some level of coordination
11 between those efforts.
12 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: How
13 successful do you believe that the
14 outreach -- it's been a year. And how
15 successful do you think, number one, the
16 outreach overall has been? And number two,
17 its coordination with SNUG in terms of
18 reducing crime in your hotspots?
19 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: We're
20 actually heading into our third year, I
21 believe, with the street outreach work. And
22 I think that it is a huge asset. I think
23 it's something we all should be very proud
24 of. You know, certainly the Legislature for
248
1 providing the funding.
2 We've provided a structure, we have a
3 statewide coordinator for the street outreach
4 programs across the state. He visits every
5 program at least once a month. He
6 communicates with them regularly. In
7 addition, we have a training director now, so
8 we train every program manager, every
9 supervisor, every outreach worker.
10 If you look at the jurisdictions
11 across the state, you know, some are more
12 advanced than others, they have different
13 strengths. But, you know, there are
14 instances in one jurisdiction where the
15 police were having a spike in homicides and
16 they reached out to the street outreach
17 program, who on at least two separate
18 occasions helped them get a handle on what
19 was going on and really quashed the violence.
20 You know, there are stories from
21 around the state where in different ways
22 those street outreach programs have really
23 helped control shootings, so -- and the other
24 thing I'd say is I'm not aware of any other
249
1 state that has a statewide street outreach
2 network that's organized and coordinated the
3 way ours is.
4 So, you know, I think it's a huge tool
5 in the toolbox and would certainly advocate
6 that at a bare minimum we continue it.
7 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: We've used
8 the Chicago Ceasefire model and some other
9 models. Do you see us moving toward creating
10 a New York model?
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Yes.
12 You know, as with everything that I
13 do, I like to look at everything that's out
14 there, try and understand what the strong
15 points are of all of the different
16 approaches, and then take the strong points
17 of all of them and put them into what I think
18 is the best approach.
19 And, you know, certainly there are a
20 lot of really good ideas in the Ceasefire
21 Chicago Cure Violence model. But, for
22 example, Teny Gross, out of the Institute for
23 Nonviolence, has been doing this work since
24 the mid-nineties and has a lot of good ideas
250
1 as well, and has done a lot of good work.
2 And his ideas aren't necessarily the same as
3 all of the Cure Violence ones out of Chicago.
4 So what we've tried to do is really
5 work with Teny and understand his program and
6 his thoughts, work with Cure Violence and
7 understand theirs. And yes, at the end of
8 the day I do envision us taking all of those
9 ideas and putting them into what we think is
10 the best model.
11 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
13 Our next speaker -- well, I'm sorry. Do we
14 have anyone from the Assembly?
15 Okay, our next speaker is Senator
16 Velmanette Montgomery.
17 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you, Madam
18 Chairwoman.
19 Good afternoon. It's finally
20 afternoon.
21 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Good
22 afternoon.
23 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I just wanted to
24 ask you about the -- I guess two areas. One
251
1 is the reentry issue, and the other one is
2 juvenile justice.
3 On reentry, I'm looking at the
4 proposed budget for this time which reflects
5 the Governor's -- some of the Governor's
6 primary concerns, one of them being the whole
7 question of reentry. And I know that the
8 Governor has been working on that for some
9 time, and I really appreciate the fact that
10 this has become a primary concern.
11 I am, however -- I don't understand
12 why it is that at the same time that we are
13 concerned about reentry, there's
14 $12.8 million in reductions or eliminations,
15 proposed eliminations of programs that are
16 basically community-based, many of them
17 specifically related to providing support
18 services to people reentering the community.
19 And so I have a big question as to --
20 obviously, many of these are legislative
21 adds. However, I would like to hear from you
22 how you, from your perspective, will be
23 ensuring that we continue some of those very
24 critical services. Because when people
252
1 return to community, when they return home,
2 they look for people like me to find out
3 where they can get some help immediately.
4 They need housing, they are looking for
5 employment, they need services that help them
6 repair or access necessary papers that they
7 -- or other information that they would need.
8 So where will those services fit into
9 your budget as proposed?
10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: And I
11 can't speak to the legislative adds. It's my
12 understanding that those are things that will
13 be discussed as you go forward with the
14 budget negotiations.
15 But in terms of the Governor's budget,
16 there is no reduction in the DCJS budget with
17 regard to any of our reentry or Alternative
18 to Incarceration funding streams. And in
19 fact, there's a $2 million increase.
20 There's a $1 million increase -- the
21 prior budget was just over $3 million for
22 19 reentry task forces around the state.
23 This year in the Governor's proposed budget
24 it gives us another million dollars. That
253
1 will allow us to, assuming -- or if it is
2 approved, start a 20th reentry task force in
3 Queens, which obviously, given the volume of
4 cases, is in need of a task force, but also
5 strengthen all of the task forces across the
6 state.
7 And then, secondly, there's an
8 additional million-dollar add with regard to
9 the Alternative to Incarceration programs
10 that would allow us to help develop screening
11 and assessment programs to make sure that the
12 people coming into the criminal justice
13 system at a very early point in time are
14 screened and assessed so that their needs are
15 understood by those making decisions --
16 defense attorneys, judges, prosecutors -- and
17 at the same time they understand what the
18 needs are, they understand the inventory of
19 programs available in that area so that
20 people can get matched to the right programs
21 and we have the best chance of breaking that
22 cycle of recidivism.
23 So as to the programs or as to the
24 funding streams for DCJS in the Governor's
254
1 proposed budget, none of them were cut and in
2 fact they were increased by $2 million.
3 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: All right. I
4 just -- when I look at this list and I see
5 programs like Exodus Transitional Community
6 Center and Fortune Society and Community
7 Service Society and those programs -- so
8 obviously they will be coming to the
9 Legislature to say we need funding. And
10 these are, relatively speaking, small
11 amounts -- $100,000, $200,000, and so forth.
12 However, the fact of the matter is
13 each of those programs -- and if you put all
14 of that together, we then begin to have a
15 real network of reentry organizations, and
16 each one is important and related to our
17 success. The task forces, all due respect, I
18 appreciate the work that they do, but they're
19 not on the ground providing actual services.
20 And so that's what I feel is missing, and I
21 certainly hope that together we're going to
22 ensure that the programs that need support
23 will receive it.
24 And I would like to, in order for me
255
1 to see where the programs -- some of them
2 certainly in my district, but in the city in
3 particular -- where they fit into your
4 framework, I would really appreciate having a
5 list of those, because I don't know exactly
6 where they all are at this point.
7 The second question -- and I'm out of
8 time, unfortunately -- but I have a real
9 interest in the juvenile justice work that
10 you're doing and where you are with that,
11 especially as it relates to Alternative to
12 Incarceration programs.
13 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: I
14 just -- I know you're out of time. I'll
15 briefly say the Governor's budget does put
16 $26.2 million through DCJS into those
17 on-the-ground programs you're talking about.
18 I don't have the list with me. We'll
19 certainly get it to you.
20 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
21 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: But just
22 for example, Fortune gets a sizable amount of
23 money --
24 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Fortune Society?
256
1 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Fortune
2 Society, for their employment-based work,
3 working with people who are reentering, on
4 employment services.
5 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And there are
6 several others that you will let me know
7 where they stand as well?
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Yes.
9 We'll provide you a list of our funded
10 programs.
11 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you very
12 much.
13 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Thank
14 you.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
16 That closes our discussion. So I want
17 to thank you very much, Executive Deputy
18 Commissioner Green. It's good to see you
19 again. And thank you for your testimony
20 today.
21 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER GREEN: Thank
22 you, Senator. Appreciate the time.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Great. Our next
24 speaker is Acting Commissioner Anthony
257
1 Annucci, New York State Department of
2 Corrections and Community Supervision.
3 Thank you very much. Could I have
4 some order, please.
5 Welcome, Acting Commissioner Annucci.
6 We're very glad to have you here today. I'm
7 sure that the members, between the Senate and
8 the Assembly, will have a lot of questions,
9 and we look forward to your testimony. And
10 at this time, you may begin.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Thank
12 you.
13 Good afternoon, Chairwoman Young,
14 Chairman Farrell, and other distinguished
15 chairs and members of the Legislature. I am
16 Anthony J. Annucci, acting commissioner of
17 the Department of Corrections and Community
18 Supervision. It is my honor to discuss some
19 of the highlights of Governor Cuomo's
20 Executive Budget plan.
21 The Governor's policies are moving
22 corrections in the right direction. Last
23 year New York State's inmate population
24 continued to decline, and there are now over
258
1 20,000 fewer inmates than there were in 1999.
2 Still, New York State continues to be the
3 safest large state with the lowest
4 incarceration rate.
5 To continue this trend of reduced
6 incarcerations coupled with increased public
7 safety, the department's proposed Executive
8 Budget contains a number of important new
9 initiatives. These include groundbreaking
10 special housing unit reforms; the increased
11 use of technology and updated policies to
12 better supervise and secure our facilities;
13 and several reentry initiatives designed to
14 further reduce recidivism by upgrading
15 educational opportunities and vocational
16 training.
17 Within our $310 million capital
18 budget, we are also moving forward with plans
19 to transform Hudson into a hybrid youth
20 facility for 16-and-17-year-olds. Despite
21 the reduction in inmate population, the
22 Executive Budget does not recommend any
23 prison closures this year.
24 Prison discipline is vital to the
259
1 safety of correction officers and inmates
2 alike. We will undertake historical reforms
3 in our approach to solitary confinement which
4 will modernize prison discipline. These
5 reforms will improve conditions within our
6 segregation units and revise our disciplinary
7 guidelines, while preserving safety and
8 security. As we did for the seriously
9 mentally ill, we will develop specialized
10 programs to safely provide out-of-cell
11 programming and treatment to inmates.
12 Inmate reentry programming, including
13 education and vocational training, is a vital
14 part of the reform process. DOCCS will
15 continue its expansion of college programming
16 through $7.5 million in funding from the
17 Manhattan district attorney's office. This
18 expansion will not cost taxpayer dollars.
19 College programming has been shown to
20 significantly lower recidivism and increase
21 the likelihood of a successful transition
22 back into society. It also creates positive
23 role models for other inmates to follow,
24 ultimately leading to safer prisons.
260
1 Further, in an effort to increase the
2 issuance of high school diplomas, we will
3 hire psychologists to diagnose adult inmates
4 with learning disabilities, and update our
5 Thinking for a Change program with a new
6 version issued by the National Institute of
7 Corrections, or NIC. In an effort to
8 modernize vocational training, we will also
9 upgrade several vocational print shops and
10 expand our computer vocational shops to
11 include computer coding.
12 The department is focused on creating
13 the safest environment possible. In
14 partnership with the unions, we will continue
15 to develop strategies to reduce violence
16 within prisons and to conduct security
17 staffing reviews as outlined in the fiscal
18 year 2014-2015 budget. Last year we hired
19 103 correction officers.
20 Also, we have either begun or will
21 pursue technological enhancements, training
22 improvements, and policy changes that will
23 enhance overall safety and security within
24 DOCCS facilities. These initiatives include
261
1 installation of fixed cameras, the deployment
2 of thermal imaging and heartbeat detection
3 devices, the installation of the rounds
4 tracker system, the procurement of portable
5 metal detectors, and the piloted use of body
6 cameras to be worn by staff. The department
7 will also be refining training in the areas
8 of use of force and interpersonal
9 communications to provide our staff with
10 additional avenues to deescalate situations,
11 before force becomes necessary.
12 In the upcoming year, we will also be
13 pursuing many policy changes such as a new
14 rule designation for synthetic marijuana, the
15 expanded use of K-9 units, the elimination of
16 metal containers from our commissaries, the
17 use of secure vendors for packages, the
18 piloting of pepper spray, and enhancement of
19 tool control practices.
20 Our internal investigations unit has
21 been completely overhauled and is now called
22 the Office of Special Investigations, or OSI.
23 A new chief and a new director of operations
24 have been appointed. The chief now reports
262
1 directly to me, and we meet regularly. The
2 new leaders are both attorneys with
3 significant law enforcement backgrounds.
4 Under their leadership, a number of new
5 initiatives have been implemented to foster
6 an atmosphere of ethical behavior and
7 thorough investigations.
8 OSI has also bolstered its ranks with
9 highly qualified investigators and analysts
10 with decades of experience from outside law
11 enforcement agencies.
12 Most importantly, DOCCS will be
13 working with our federal partners to
14 establish best practices. In 2015, the NIC
15 conducted comprehensive security audits at
16 several facilities, and in 2016 they will
17 audit several more. The NIC will also review
18 our training academy, and train selected
19 staff members on how to conduct security
20 audits.
21 To build upon these best practices,
22 DOCCS will be instituting a process for
23 unannounced security audits and risk
24 assessments in line with NIC's suggestions.
263
1 DOCCS is also responsible for
2 approximately 36,000 parolees. In 2014, we
3 issued a recidivism report showing that just
4 nine percent of ex-offenders released in 2010
5 were sent back to prison within three years,
6 based upon a new felony conviction. This
7 figure was the lowest since 1985. And for
8 those released in 2011, the figure has been
9 lowered further to 8.6 percent. We are
10 making an impact.
11 Despite this positive trend, we know
12 there is still work to do. we have undertaken
13 an enhanced supervision project in
14 Monroe County that focuses on our
15 highest-risk parolees with GPS monitors and a
16 lower caseload ratio. We also launched
17 combined operations, involving Community
18 Supervision and our Office of Special
19 Investigations, to apprehend parole violators
20 in careful coordination with our federal,
21 state and local Law enforcement partners.
22 We also implemented last year's law
23 ensuring next-day reporting, and we arranged
24 for inmates to be released from facilities in
264
1 closer proximity to their home communities.
2 Opioid abuse is a serious concern when
3 it comes to recently released inmates. To
4 address this, DOCCS has started an opioid
5 overdose prevention program, in collaboration
6 with DOH and the Harm Reduction Coalition.
7 We now issue Naloxone kits -- the opioid
8 antidote -- to inmates scheduled for release,
9 and provide training on how to use it. To
10 help prevent relapse, DOCCS will also be
11 using Vivitrol paired with traditional drug
12 treatment counseling.
13 In conclusion, there again will be
14 many challenges and expectations for DOCCS
15 and the thousands of hardworking employees
16 who perform their responsibilities in an
17 exemplary manner, often under dangerous and
18 difficult circumstances. The Governor's
19 proposed budget will place DOCCS in an
20 advantageous position to fulfill these
21 expectations.
22 Thank you, and I will be happy to
23 answer any questions.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
265
1 much.
2 Our first speaker is Senator Mike
3 Nozzolio.
4 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you, Madam
5 Chair.
6 Good afternoon, Acting Commissioner.
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Good
8 afternoon, Senator.
9 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Another year of
10 acting, Anthony.
11 But you've had a hard year. All
12 kidding aside, it's been a very, very
13 difficult year for the department, for the
14 people who work in the department. And I
15 want to probe just a couple of things
16 regarding what was so costly an effort last
17 year.
18 The cost of the prison break from
19 Clinton, what does the department estimate
20 those costs to be?
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: $12.7
22 million for the escape.
23 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Now, are these
24 exclusively personnel costs, or how do you
266
1 estimate those elements?
2 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Mostly
3 those expenses were related to overtime for
4 staff involved in the pursuit. Some
5 ancillary services like food and things of
6 that nature, lodging. But mostly the
7 overtime.
8 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: That those costs
9 are exclusively for the department --
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Yes.
11 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: -- not inclusive of
12 costs that coordinating agencies,
13 particularly the New York State Police, had
14 to engage in; is that correct?
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Those
16 were just DOCCS's expenses.
17 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Our estimates have
18 the total cost on or about $23 million to
19 $25 million. Does that sound about right to
20 you?
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I really
22 can't speculate on those other costs,
23 Senator.
24 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Tell us what kinds
267
1 of things has the department had to
2 reevaluate since that prison break?
3 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: There
4 are many steps that we have taken to bolster
5 security. I've had conversations with
6 every one of my superintendents, in
7 particular my maximum security
8 superintendents. We've issued a number of
9 memoranda to reinforce basic security
10 protocols, basic frisk practices, ensuring
11 that superintendents understand their
12 responsibility to oversee all three shifts,
13 to be there at unannounced times, to ensure
14 that security supervisors are making rounds.
15 We are also investing in a lot of new
16 equipment to better enable our security staff
17 to perform their responsibilities. We have
18 the thermal imaging devices, we have portable
19 metal detectors. We are enforcing a lot more
20 frisking of staff periodically. Going
21 forward with our training, we have the Games
22 Inmates Play video so that that will be shown
23 to every employee, and they can understand
24 the dangers involved with becoming too
268
1 familiar with inmates.
2 There are many, many things that we've
3 done, Senator. I can provide you a full
4 list. I don't want to take up too much time.
5 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I think that broad
6 outline is important, it's important that you
7 provide it to our members of the Public
8 Protection Budget Subcommittee, especially
9 Senator Gallivan, as chair of the Crime and
10 Corrections Committee.
11 And I'm not going to ask you any more
12 questions about those issues; that's, I
13 think, certainly a topic Senator Gallivan
14 wants to pursue.
15 There is one area that I'd like to ask
16 you about, and that's the employee Joyce
17 Mitchell. Obviously you're familiar with who
18 that is, one of the linchpins in the ability
19 for the prisoners to escape. Do you know
20 what her title was?
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I think
22 it was industrial training specialist,
23 something along those lines.
24 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: It's my
269
1 understanding that it's something to that
2 effect, industrial training, in the prison
3 tailor shop, as a prison tailor shop
4 instructor. Her salary, we looked it up, is
5 $57,697 a year.
6 Did Joyce Mitchell have any advisory
7 capacity to the Department of Corrections in
8 any way, any management or reporting beyond
9 management within the correctional facility?
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Senator,
11 before I go further, I cannot comment on
12 anything that is the subject of a pending
13 investigation.
14 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: The inspector
15 general -- I know Senator Gallivan has asked
16 a number of these questions, and we've gotten
17 the same answer so far, Commissioner. Do you
18 have any idea how long that investigation
19 will take and when a report will be issued?
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I cannot
21 answer that.
22 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Here's my -- let me
23 just ask you, then, not about Joyce Mitchell
24 but about your other industrial training
270
1 supervisors across the correctional system.
2 Do any of your industrial training
3 supervisors have policymaking
4 responsibilities within the Department of
5 Corrections?
6 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I have
7 met with my industrial training
8 superintendents. The Corcraft industry
9 aspect of our operations is very important.
10 Inmates are meaningfully employed, they learn
11 a skill, they provide an important service
12 for our customers throughout the state. And
13 I am hopeful of continuing that and upgrading
14 it in many ways.
15 They can occasionally sit in on
16 executive staff meetings at the facility
17 level, because everybody is important. And
18 they certainly should listen to all the
19 security concerns and other
20 cross-disciplinary issues. But I don't think
21 they have formal policy roles as you define
22 it, if I understand your question correctly.
23 But they certainly -- every one of my
24 staff -- and I hammer this to the
271
1 superintendents: Your primary
2 responsibility, among other things, is you
3 have to know your jail. You have to walk and
4 talk with everybody. Every employee is
5 important in this agency. Everyone might
6 have possible suggestions for you as to how
7 to better improve operations for everybody's
8 safety and security. So that is fundamental
9 to me, that they have to make those kinds of
10 rounds regularly.
11 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: And that's
12 exemplary. I know you've always listened to
13 us. We're hopeful that you continue to
14 listen to all the correctional employees with
15 their suggestions and their input.
16 But I guess in the hypothetical, it's
17 safe to say that normally the industrial
18 training supervisor doesn't have policymaking
19 responsibilities within the correctional
20 system. Is that safe to say?
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I
22 believe that's safe to say, if I understand
23 your question.
24 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: And yet
272
1 potentially, if an industrial training
2 supervisor was involved -- again, in the
3 hypothetical -- directly involved with
4 criminality regarding a prison escape which
5 cost the taxpayers of this state at least
6 $12 million from the Department of
7 Corrections, and our estimates are another
8 $11 million to $13 million for the Department
9 of State Police, as well as other federal
10 costs to the FBI -- that one industrial
11 training supervisor could have cost the
12 taxpayers of this state at least $25 million.
13 And that employee of the State of
14 New York and the taxpayers of this state has
15 had absolutely no policy implications, or
16 extremely limited policy implications within
17 her -- within their position of
18 responsibility. I think that's the point
19 that glares to me, Commissioner, that the
20 impact of wrongdoing within state employment,
21 entrusted to the taxpayers through state
22 employment, can have enormous financial
23 implications. Not to mention the havoc that
24 it created within your department in trying
273
1 to deal with these issues, and that you're
2 going to continue to deal with these issues.
3 I know Senator Gallivan is awaiting
4 the inspector general's report, certainly
5 other members of the Corrections Committee as
6 well as the Codes Committee are waiting for
7 that report, and we hope that we'll have the
8 opportunity to sit down with you as you
9 continue to make improvements in the
10 correctional system on a day-to-day basis.
11 So thank you for your dialogue, and I
12 appreciate the important responsibilities
13 that you have.
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Thank
15 you, Senator, especially for all your years
16 of service to our agency. We will miss you.
17 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you,
18 Commissioner.
19 SENATOR KRUEGER: Assembly?
20 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you. Our
21 next speaker is Assemblymember O'Donnell.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Good
23 afternoon. It's very nice to see you again.
24 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Good
274
1 afternoon.
2 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: I was watching
3 TV last night; I got to watch Mr. Sweat's
4 sentencing time, and he was sentenced to
5 $80,000 of restitution. Which I thought was
6 an odd number, given the number you just gave
7 us, $12 million. And of course when you pay
8 your inmates $1.25 an hour, I don't think
9 you're going to get back that $80,000 anytime
10 soon.
11 But I also assume you don't have a
12 budget line for escapes, right? So where did
13 the $12 million come from?
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: The
15 Division of the Budget provided the money for
16 us.
17 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: So did you
18 call somebody up and say "We need $12 million
19 for overtime?" Is that what -- like that?
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: They
21 found a funding source for us.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: They're very
23 good like that. Funny how that is.
24 Let me talk about this new Office of
275
1 Special Investigations, which used to be the
2 inspector general's office, is that correct?
3 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Yes.
4 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: You know, the
5 other day I went out and bought some new
6 jeans and they were called skinny jeans. But
7 that doesn't mean I'm skinny. You know what
8 I mean?
9 So I wonder if by changing the name
10 from one entity to another is enough to
11 effectuate real change. I just heard you
12 answering some of the Senator's questions. I
13 don't want you to divulge anything you know
14 about the inspector general and when and if
15 her report will be coming out, nor about what
16 it says. But internally, your own inspector
17 general's office had a report against
18 Ms. Mitchell that they found lacking in
19 veracity or whatever you want to say, and
20 dismissed that.
21 Isn't that of great concern to you,
22 that the entity that is in charge,
23 investigating internally, ignored the fact
24 that this inappropriate relationship was
276
1 going on? I mean, I'm not suggesting that
2 you would have guessed that would have led to
3 a $12 million overtime charge for an escape.
4 But doesn't that give you concern?
5 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I cannot
6 comment on something that's the subject of a
7 pending investigation.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Well, then
9 let's talk about the budget. You have 125
10 investigators. Can you tell me what is the
11 budget of the Office of Special
12 Investigation?
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I can
14 get that information for you. I don't know
15 the exact amount.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: We did a
17 hearing last year, the end of last year,
18 where you unfortunately couldn't come -- we
19 missed you, Tony -- to look at the question
20 of how do other places in the country and in
21 the world deal with this problem. Right? So
22 we have this very high-profile escape that
23 cost us possibly up to $25 million, people's
24 lives were upended. And seemingly, the
277
1 mechanisms that you had to provide oversight
2 within your system failed.
3 And what we learned was that in
4 something like 42 other states, they have a
5 separate office of an ombudsman. In Canada,
6 in England and in Wales, they all have their
7 own outside agency specifically for the
8 purpose of conducting investigations inside
9 the prison system. What do you think of
10 that?
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Well,
12 Assemblyman, we have a lot of outside
13 entities that have access to our prisons
14 right now. The State Commission of
15 Correction can visit at will, any member of
16 the Legislature can visit at will, together
17 with any number of their aides. We've
18 entertained requests where aides can come by
19 themselves. Any district attorney can visit.
20 We have outside entities like PAMI that come
21 and do investigations with respect to their
22 clients. We have the Justice Center that
23 comes in. The Justice Department can come
24 in, and U.S. Attorneys in connection with any
278
1 pending investigation.
2 We know the Correctional Association
3 comes in, they do their site visits, they
4 come in with as many as eight to 12 people.
5 We accord them privileged correspondence
6 rights so that any inmate that writes to
7 them, it goes out sealed, it comes in sealed,
8 it's not read by staff.
9 So there are a lot of entities now
10 that presently have access.
11 I'd like to for a moment talk briefly
12 about how we have reformulated significantly
13 our OSI office. First, there's an attorney
14 at the top now. That wasn't the case. He
15 has an extensive law enforcement background.
16 He brought in another attorney with an
17 extensive law enforcement background. They
18 have since made significant efforts to link
19 with the U.S. Attorneys, with the FBI, with
20 all local district attorneys. They bring
21 cases to them. They've also brought in many
22 other outside investigators.
23 So we have new energy from the outside
24 mixing in with experienced people. You have
279
1 to understand how jails operate in order to
2 conduct a proper investigation. They have
3 changed how they process cases, they have a
4 new initiative where they're going to do an
5 analysis of an entire facility and they're
6 going to speak to every employee and get
7 feedback from inmates so that we can get
8 better results on our investigations.
9 There's a lot of things that they are
10 doing that I am very hopeful about, including
11 now they directly report to me, and I meet
12 with them regularly to go over where they've
13 gone. So I think we are moving in the right
14 direction in this area.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Well, I
16 appreciate your point of view. I just want
17 to share with you that we are the outlier
18 here in New York in how we do this. Those
19 left-wing places like Indiana do it
20 differently, and we had great information and
21 testimony that was provided all day, both
22 from those ombudspersons and what they do.
23 And then we also had family members
24 who were not here -- family members of
280
1 inmates do not complain about the treatment
2 by the corrections officers. In fact, most
3 of them were complaining about their
4 treatment by other inmates -- but by their
5 inability to get information from somebody
6 until they found me.
7 And so I think the time has come for
8 New York to say is this the right way to do
9 this, is there another way to run this
10 railroad, and we'll be taking that up under
11 consideration.
12 In this year's budget you have
13 requested $3.1 billion, which was up from
14 last year's $2.9 billion, an increase of
15 8.02 percent -- despite the fact that the
16 prison population went from 53,000 to 51,000.
17 Can you address that?
18 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Well,
19 there are increased costs related to health
20 services, $120 million alone just for
21 medications. We are spending more money to
22 implement the new SHU settlement, which is
23 groundbreaking. There's a lot of rehab that
24 has to be done, there will be new staff added
281
1 for that.
2 There are other initiatives related to
3 reentry that are important for the Governor,
4 and they make a lot of sense, related to
5 upgrading our vocational programming, our
6 Thinking for a Change. So there's a lot of
7 initiatives there, as well as for the youth
8 initiative with respect to the Hudson
9 Correctional Facility. There are additional
10 staff added there. And a lot for the capital
11 projects that we have to undertake to make
12 that happen.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Thank you for
14 bringing that up. I'd like to address that
15 issue. I, as you well know, have been to 27
16 prison visits in my capacity as chair of the
17 Corrections Committee, and I have been to
18 Hudson and Coxsackie twice.
19 And so my first question for you is
20 given the small number of prisoners that you
21 have who are 16 and 17, why are you not
22 putting them all together? So why are you
23 keeping a small cadre of them at Coxsackie
24 and still yet also building a second -- not
282
1 building, renovating, whatever you call that,
2 the Hudson? So are you removing all the
3 adults from the Hudson?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI:
5 Eventually, yes. Right now what we
6 implemented was a housing arrangement where
7 16- and 17-year-olds are either placed at
8 Woodbourne, at Greene, or at Coxsackie if
9 they require maximum security placement.
10 Going forward, the plan is for all 16-
11 and 17-year-olds to be removed to Hudson,
12 with the exception of those that still
13 require maximum security placement.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: I was at
15 Greene when they began the process of the
16 renovation of Greene to allow for 16- and
17 17-year-olds. That was to be in PREA
18 compliance. So why the change? Like why did
19 you originally come up with the idea we're
20 going to put the medium security
21 PREA-compliant units in different places?
22 And then why did you decide now, no, they all
23 have to be in the same place?
24 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: This is
283
1 the next logical step. The Governor is
2 really committed to removing 16- and
3 17-year-olds from adult prisons globally, the
4 Raise the Age initiative. We're tied with
5 North Carolina in last place, so to speak.
6 It would be a lot easier for us as a system
7 if every person walking through our door was
8 at least 18 or over.
9 The PREA requirements require us to
10 separate, by sight and sound, all 16- or
11 17-year-olds. And to do that effectively, we
12 looked at the existing services at the time.
13 And it made sense to use Woodbourne because
14 it had some cells, it made sense to use
15 Greene, and it made sense to use Coxsackie
16 for those that would require maximum security
17 placement.
18 Now this initiative is the next step,
19 because it's going to completely remove them
20 from the adult prisons. But Hudson will
21 still remain as a correctional facility.
22 So it is our hope that you do raise
23 the age, because the other thing is this.
24 With any 17-year-old right now on our system,
284
1 if they come in just two months shy of their
2 birthday, they have to go into one of these
3 facilities where we currently cohort them,
4 either Woodbourne, Coxsackie, and, in future,
5 Hudson. But once they turn 18, we have to
6 immediately uplift them and move them to a
7 general confinement facility.
8 So the Raise the Age initiative will
9 allow the Office of Children and Family
10 Services to hold on to them, to continue in
11 their program, to decide when the appropriate
12 time is to transfer them to us as adults,
13 either at 21 or possibly later. That, I
14 think, is the best possible solution going
15 forward for everyone.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: But back to
17 the problem at hand with segregating out the
18 maximum security prisoners into Coxsackie.
19 As I spoke to you beforehand, when I went
20 there relatively recently, they were one
21 unhappy group of people who -- not because
22 they were in prison, but they felt that they
23 were almost in solitary, that they were being
24 punished. And they kept on saying to me and
285
1 the other people there, Why did you do this
2 to us?
3 So what do you intend to do at Hudson
4 to prevent that from being repeated for the
5 medium-security 16- and 17-year-olds that
6 you're putting into that facility?
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Well,
8 the numbers will be much more significant.
9 And they'll be out and they'll be
10 participating in the general-confinement
11 program, they'll have free rein of the
12 facility because we don't have to worry about
13 any separation by sight or sound. There will
14 be no one 18 or over at that facility.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Well, one last
16 question, thank you.
17 When I originally toured Hudson you
18 were a little upset with me because I went to
19 the crappy dorm, or I went to the one place
20 that was really like crumbling down. It was
21 really decrepit.
22 Are you intending to put those 16- and
23 17-year-olds into that crappy dorm? I don't
24 know what the word would be. But you know
286
1 what I'm talking about, right? So like
2 literally there were rooms that eight inmates
3 slept, you know, in beds next to one another
4 in a room that was probably built for four.
5 Is that where you're putting these
6 kids?
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: We are
8 upgrading. We're spending a lot of money to
9 upgrade the place to make it suitable for
10 children.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: And there will
12 still be adults on the work release side of
13 the prison?
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Yes.
15 That is outside the secure perimeter. So the
16 temporary release, industrial training
17 program, will still continue to operate in
18 that building.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Okay. I just
20 want to take an opportunity to thank you for
21 how responsive you have been to me and my
22 staff and for answering all the letters that
23 I take the time to write. Thank you very
24 much.
287
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Thank
2 you, Assemblyman.
3 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you.
4 Senate?
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
6 much. Our next speaker is Senator Patrick
7 Gallivan, chair of Crime and Corrections.
8 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you, Madam
9 Chair.
10 Commissioner, good afternoon.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Good
12 afternoon, Senator.
13 SENATOR GALLIVAN: I can't help but
14 add to the comments of Senator Nozzolio. You
15 have had a very challenging year, and we
16 understand that.
17 I also understand that the inspector
18 general report is still pending, there's
19 pending investigations related to the escape
20 and looking into it. And I think -- I'd like
21 you to understand how frustrating it is for
22 us. We've got a responsibility, an oversight
23 responsibility, starting with the
24 Constitution, the various laws, the rules of
288
1 the Senate. And I'll get into some of the
2 safety and security issues.
3 But when we see overdoses, when we see
4 assaults on staff, when we see assaults on
5 inmates, when we see drugs in facilities and
6 so on -- I mean, there's a very real
7 frustration when, as chair of the Crime and
8 Corrections Committee, people say: What are
9 you doing about it? And how are you trying
10 to address it?
11 And I've tried to be very respectful
12 of the investigations that are going on, to
13 not impede on any of them. But there will
14 have to come a time when they're out that
15 we'll have to have a more extensive public
16 airing of the events leading up to that.
17 But nonetheless, I hope you understand
18 that handicaps us right at this point,
19 especially when we're considering a package
20 that's spending $3 billion, 3 billion
21 taxpayer dollars.
22 So safety and security. That is --
23 it's evident throughout your testimony, very
24 appropriately so. And since my time in this
289
1 chair and yours in that chair, I know that
2 that is something that you've talked about
3 each time that you're before us, and pretty
4 much every time you and I have a
5 conversation.
6 And I want to point to just a couple
7 of different things. I have a letter that
8 you wrote to all the inmates back in April of
9 2015 -- which I commend you for taking a very
10 responsible action while at the same time
11 admitting failures of the system and warning
12 them about the dangers of synthetic
13 marijuana. And we really should rightly be
14 concerned about that.
15 I've got some data regarding
16 contraband in facilities that has continued
17 to increase each of the last four years, last
18 year being the highest total ever.
19 Inmate-on-staff assaults, same thing, have
20 continued to increase each of the last three
21 or four years, highest total ever.
22 Inmate-on-inmate assaults, same thing.
23 So no matter how we look at it, we've
24 got problems and concerns. And it doesn't
290
1 matter if you are there defending the
2 correction officer or some family member very
3 concerned about their brother, sister,
4 whomever it might be in a correctional
5 facility. Your foremost obligation is to
6 provide for the safety, security, humane
7 constitutional treatment inside those
8 facilities.
9 So of course it begs the question,
10 what are we doing about all this? We're
11 going in the wrong direction each of the last
12 three or four years.
13 But having said that, I know your
14 testimony started to address that. So the
15 security staffing reviews that we took on two
16 years ago, can you tell me where they -- and
17 I know you briefly mentioned them. But can
18 you tell me where you are along that process?
19 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: We've
20 completed the next -- I think it's 18 audits.
21 We've shared that information with the two
22 unions -- NYSCOPBA, Council 82. We're
23 awaiting their feedback. And then we'll send
24 the final set of recommendations to the
291
1 Division of the Budget.
2 SENATOR GALLIVAN: When did you
3 anticipate the review of the entire system
4 will be completed, of all the facilities?
5 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: The
6 third year will be next year.
7 SENATOR GALLIVAN: And partly in
8 response, I'm assuming, to some of the things
9 that have taken place as you're doing your
10 internal review of the escape at Clinton, as
11 well as the security staffing reviews, your
12 testimony talked about the technological
13 enhancements, training improvements, policy
14 changes -- begun some things, are going to
15 begin some others.
16 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Mm-hmm.
17 SENATOR GALLIVAN: It can't come soon
18 enough. I think you agree with that. But
19 how far along are we with these things, and
20 how can we accelerate it so these -- which
21 you can't see, but obviously the chart that
22 goes up --
23 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Yes.
24 SENATOR GALLIVAN: -- starts going in
292
1 the other direction?
2 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Right.
3 The first thing is that we have made
4 arrangements to change our rules, our
5 disciplinary rules, so that K2, or synthetic
6 marijuana, is defined as a drug for purposes
7 of our disciplinary system.
8 That required a formal change in a
9 rule and then serving it on every inmate. So
10 I think the date where it officially will
11 take effect is the next couple of weeks or
12 few weeks. So that will enhance our ability
13 to discipline appropriately the individuals
14 that engage in that.
15 The next thing that we've done is
16 we've sent out notices to advise the vendors
17 that supply products to our commissaries that
18 we will no longer be able to accept canned
19 goods. There are too many instances where
20 can lids are being used for weaponry. And
21 we've talked to other systems, we're one of
22 the few states that's in this area that still
23 does that sort of thing.
24 So we're confident that we can supply
293
1 other products that are packaged in ways so
2 that ultimately we will be removing can lids
3 from our commissaries.
4 And we will make similar steps, you
5 know, when you buy from secure vendors. So
6 that's the next change. We're going to allow
7 inmates to buy only from secure vendors that
8 we've identified. Because this would
9 prevent -- assuming no one is compromised by
10 the secure vendors we select, and they will
11 have to prove to us their track record --
12 that purchasing goods from the outside and
13 coming into the facilities, A, will not have
14 can lids and, B, hopefully will no longer
15 have drugs secreted --
16 SENATOR GALLIVAN: If I can just stay
17 right along the commissaries, I had -- I know
18 this has been talked about for years. I had
19 a meeting with the deputy secretary for
20 public safety several months ago, and he
21 talked about an RFP either being prepared or
22 going out for -- for a central commissary, I
23 think?
24 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Yes.
294
1 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Is that still a
2 plan?
3 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: The
4 commissary RFP is still out there. But
5 meanwhile, for the existing vendors, we want
6 to implement this now. That will also be
7 part of the long-range RFP for the winning
8 bidder there, but right now we want to make
9 this change.
10 SENATOR GALLIVAN: All right, let's --
11 there will be much more to follow, I mean,
12 with all the specific items, about trying to
13 prevent contraband from coming into
14 facilities, trying to stop the various
15 assaults on staff or inmates. So I know
16 we'll have many more discussions.
17 If I may just talk very briefly -- you
18 talked briefly about it as well in your
19 testimony -- inmate discipline, the whole
20 process. I know you had the settlement, you
21 had the SHU lawsuit. Some things were
22 prompted by that. And you've talked about
23 the revamping of an inmate discipline system
24 in your testimony.
295
1 Some of the concerns that people have
2 come to me with from various facilities
3 across the state is that inmate discipline
4 has gone in the wrong direction and there's a
5 feeling that that has contributed to the
6 increase in assaults, be it on inmates or
7 staff. Can you comment on that?
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: We
9 continue to study and meet with our unions to
10 get feedback.
11 Certainly, as we know -- we spoke
12 about this maybe a year ago or two years
13 ago -- the demographics of our population
14 have changed. Many years ago we had 24,000
15 drug offenders, mostly low-level drug
16 offenders. And now, disproportionately, we
17 have more violent felony offenders in our
18 system, I think maybe 64 percent. We have
19 9,500, 9,600 inmates that are serving
20 sentences with maximums of life terms.
21 So those are changing demographics.
22 That may be one of the reasons that we're
23 seeing the uptick in assaults.
24 No assault is good. The majority of
296
1 assaults that do happen -- and as I
2 explained, our definition of what constitutes
3 an assault is much lower than what's in the
4 Penal Law. It does not require physical
5 injury. I throw this cup of water, I don't
6 cause you injury, but it's an assault, it's
7 a --
8 SENATOR GALLIVAN: No, I understand
9 that. And just if I may -- sorry to
10 interrupt -- we can call it anything, but
11 there should never be a time that an inmate
12 puts his hands on another inmate or an inmate
13 puts his hands on a correction officer.
14 So I appreciate the semantics of it,
15 but I think we're on the same page with that.
16 I mean it's the order within a facility
17 that's of concern.
18 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Mm-hmm.
19 And I think, moving to the reforms that we've
20 implemented or are planning to implement with
21 the changes, we see that as very analogous to
22 what we've done with the seriously mentally
23 ill. And we planned that out, we spent the
24 right amount of money, we developed programs
297
1 like the RMHU at Marcy, the one at Five
2 Points, where we can safely bring inmates who
3 were otherwise very problematic out of their
4 cells to receive programming and treatment
5 using secure "Re-Start" chairs.
6 So we envision that this will help
7 safety, because we're going to do the
8 step-down program at one of our facilities, a
9 couple of other step-down to the communities.
10 We're going to change -- we have this
11 elaborate CCP program that we're planning.
12 We have a whole array of options, similar to
13 what we did with the seriously mentally ill.
14 And I think staff for the most part,
15 unless I'm wrong, will tell you that they see
16 what we've done with the seriously mentally
17 ill in those programs at Marcy as working.
18 And we're effectively changing behavior,
19 which is our ultimate goal. We want to
20 change behavior by difficult inmates.
21 We see that going the same way
22 ultimately -- it will take some time, we have
23 to be patient. When we bring everything
24 online, we think we'll have a safer system
298
1 for everybody.
2 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Commissioner, thank
3 you. I would love to go on, but the chair is
4 going to turn my microphone off because my
5 time's up. Thank you very much.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you.
8 Our next speaker is Assemblymember
9 Duprey.
10 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: Good afternoon,
11 Commissioner.
12 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Good
13 afternoon, Assemblywoman.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: Before I start,
15 I would really be remiss -- several people
16 have already spoken about the event that
17 happened in my district in June, and I want
18 to extend my thanks to you personally,
19 Commissioner, to your administrative staff
20 for your tremendous cooperation during the
21 most difficult 23 days that I think probably
22 the Department of Corrections, certainly
23 anyone in my district, has ever had to
24 endure.
299
1 We're glad it didn't go on any longer.
2 I might have asked all of you to register to
3 vote, so -- but I know you were all there,
4 and you were there a lot and for a long time,
5 and your support was greatly appreciated.
6 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Thank
7 you, Assemblywoman.
8 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: And continues
9 to be.
10 A couple of the Senators mentioned the
11 IG report, and I can tell you that there's no
12 one waiting for it more than I am in the
13 State Legislature, as well as several hundred
14 of my constituents. And I know,
15 Commissioner, that we share our concern on
16 safety issues. Certainly there are -- and
17 again, there's been some talk about the
18 assaults. The media seems to want to
19 certainly talk a lot about the inmates, the
20 assaults on inmates. And none of us condone
21 those. I've also seen way too many assaults
22 on our correction officers.
23 And could you just again -- and I hate
24 to ask you to repeat, but so that I'm clear
300
1 on what your recent initiatives are to
2 enhance the safety of our correction officers
3 in these facilities.
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Well,
5 among the other things that we're spending
6 some money on for new equipment are these
7 portable medical detectors that we are
8 issuing in maximum security facilities to
9 start with. They are much better than the
10 fixed areas, because the inmates know where
11 the metal detector equipment is now. These
12 we can put and move about and therefore
13 effectively conduct metal detection searches
14 on inmates, which is one of the things that
15 we think will help significantly.
16 I mentioned the intention to get rid
17 of the cans, the intention to get secure
18 vendors. Because being the only way that
19 goods can come in, this will mean changes in
20 our package rooms, because we're one of the
21 few states that continues to allow packages
22 from anyone. And with new technology, people
23 can disguise, in seemingly a can of
24 vegetables from the store, anything.
301
1 We have great security staff that
2 review these, and they're terrific sometimes
3 at finding them. But no matter how diligent
4 they are, things get in. Scalpel blades get
5 in. All those things present a safety threat
6 to our staff and to other inmates.
7 And we continue to regularly meet with
8 our partners in the unions to hear what their
9 suggestions are. And we're looking at things
10 also to deescalate situations. We want to
11 introduce pepper spray into the department to
12 see how that works. That may be a way of
13 safely defusing a situation. A lot of other
14 jurisdictions use that.
15 We have deescalation training. We're
16 sharing that with the unions now, we're
17 rewriting our policies, we're going to get
18 their feedback before putting anything out.
19 But we recognize that everybody's in this
20 together. Nobody has the single answer to
21 every problem. The only answer is that
22 everything requires either hard work or a lot
23 of hard work. But we're willing to do it
24 together and get the job done.
302
1 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: Thank you.
2 And I also want to address something
3 that is, I think, difficult. I'm sure it's
4 difficult for the department, difficult for
5 me. But we recently had a very well
6 respected sergeant in one of my correctional
7 facilities who committed suicide. He left
8 behind a loving family and certainly
9 coworkers in shock. It's one more example of
10 the incredible stress that our correctional
11 officers face every day.
12 About six years ago a retired
13 corrections lieutenant who's a personal
14 friend of mine came to my office in
15 Plattsburgh, and he actually broke down,
16 talking about the flashbacks, the depression
17 that he went through soon after his
18 retirement. Coincidentally, that same day I
19 was having lunch with a couple of
20 psychologists who started talking to me about
21 their wanting to work more with veterans.
22 And I asked them to start working with our
23 correction officers.
24 They've done that. I introduced the
303
1 two of them. They've had great success with
2 PTSD programs. I think we need to be very
3 open that our correction officers --
4 certainly some who are currently working, but
5 those who retire -- are facing PTSD the same
6 as our veterans are. We have now in the
7 North Country, in the Plattsburgh area,
8 trained local licensed mental health
9 counselors. They recently held a seminar.
10 Commissioner, I know you're trying to
11 reach out to those in need in my district,
12 but I'm also concerned -- and I believe we've
13 done that pretty well -- I'm concerned about
14 correction officers across the state. And
15 can you just tell us about what the
16 department is doing to address the stress
17 that these officers are facing? And I worry
18 about their stress, the stress of their
19 families.
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Sure.
21 And I commend the gentleman that started that
22 program. I read the article on it, I think
23 it was very impressive. I think people don't
24 realize the nature of the job -- mostly for
304
1 correction officers with stress, but for all
2 staff working inside correctional facility,
3 what they face every day. And they
4 internalize it a lot, and that can build up
5 over time.
6 Two years ago I was concerned about
7 the uptick in suicides among our staff, so I
8 put out a notice to all staff. We had worked
9 to give out some materials to our EAP
10 coordinators, resources to refer people to.
11 The notice I created was with help from my
12 assistant commissioner in charge of mental
13 health services, where we basically explained
14 depression is something that can affect
15 anybody. And when you reach that state where
16 you think the only solution to your problem,
17 you're so depressed you think the only
18 solution to your problem is to take your
19 life, it's a very unfortunate circumstance.
20 There are countless individuals alive
21 today who were at that stage but got help in
22 time, and now they're leading healthy and
23 productive lives.
24 So in my notice two years ago I urged
305
1 that, you know, if you see a fellow worker
2 that's at risk, take advantage of these
3 materials. They have resources in the
4 community.
5 Now, more recently, we are working
6 with our partners in NYSCOPBA and the
7 Governor's Office of Employee Relations. We
8 are using joint labor-management funding.
9 They've selected a vendor who's going to roll
10 out a training program to our union stewards
11 and EAP coordinators on how to prevent
12 suicide.
13 Suicide is a terrible tragedy, and we
14 owe it to the hardworking men and women, both
15 inside our institutions and in the
16 communities, to do everything possible to get
17 them help before these tragedies reach
18 fruition.
19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: Thank you. I
20 know my time is up, but thank you for that
21 answer. It's certainly something that none
22 of us want to continue to deal with.
23 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Thank
24 you.
306
1 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: Thank you, sir.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
3 much. Our next speaker is Senator Funke.
4 SENATOR FUNKE: Thank you, Madam
5 Chairwoman.
6 Commissioner, thank you for the
7 challenging work that you do.
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Thank
9 you. Good afternoon.
10 SENATOR FUNKE: I'd like to talk to
11 you about parole today and what's going on in
12 my particular district, Monroe and Ontario
13 counties. Thomas Johnson, III, was a parolee
14 who murdered Rochester police officer Daryl
15 Pierson. Johnny Blackshell Jr., another
16 parolee accused of killing three people
17 outside the Boys & Girls Club in Rochester.
18 David Alligood, another parolee accused of
19 shooting up a bar in Gates and killing one,
20 injuring six others. Michael Carruthers,
21 released on parole and only hours later raped
22 a 14-year-old girl. The list goes on.
23 People in my community believe that if
24 the parole system is not broken, it is
307
1 severely cracked. We have 30 program
2 officers in Rochester responsible for 1200
3 parolees in Rochester metro, with three cars.
4 They tell me the cars have about 150,000
5 miles on them, too.
6 Have parole issues become lost in
7 DOCCS since the two have been merged
8 together? Because it sure seems like it to
9 me. How can we better ensure the public
10 safety, the safety of our community, the
11 safety of these parole officers as well? How
12 can we better have parolees reporting when
13 they're supposed to report? And what's being
14 done to address those issues, please?
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Senator,
16 your points are very well taken. And the
17 community supervision aspect of this agency
18 is extremely important.
19 When the Governor merged these two
20 agencies, his vision was that there should be
21 a seamless transition between when a person
22 enters the front door of a correctional
23 facility, throughout their incarceration, and
24 then released into the community to continue
308
1 with the services. And at that time, even
2 though I had many, many years of experience
3 and work with the Division of Parole, I
4 really learned firsthand the tough job that
5 parole officers do.
6 It's tough enough dealing with some of
7 the convicted felons behind the walls, where
8 you know they don't have access to guns. But
9 in the community when you're doing a home
10 visit and you don't know if he's on drugs,
11 you don't know if there's a gun in the room.
12 And our parole officers are very
13 professional, very well trained.
14 What is going on in Rochester has
15 caused us great concern. And we've rolled
16 out several important initiatives that we
17 think are making difference.
18 First and foremost, before someone is
19 released to the Rochester area, we have a
20 screening process so that if they are
21 identified as what we call a high-risk
22 parolee, through our risk and needs
23 assessment, we first arrange for that person
24 to get closer to a facility so that they're
309
1 not traveling a long distance. We then put
2 GPS bracelets on them at the correctional
3 facility. We then transport them to the
4 field office for their official report, so
5 that there's no break in the release, so that
6 they're not in the community before they
7 officially understand, yes, I'm a parolee,
8 I'm still serving the sentence, I'm subject
9 to jurisdiction.
10 We make sure that we have the right
11 individuals on the right supervision level.
12 And we work with our local law enforcement
13 partners. Recently we joined forces with our
14 BSS unit, our OSI unit, to conduct an
15 initiative whereby we would round up
16 absconders in the Rochester area. I forget
17 the raw number that we ended up with, but by
18 all accounts it was successful. Local law
19 enforcement welcomed the cooperative
20 initiative.
21 We just recently did one in New York
22 City that went over very, very well, and the
23 police commissioner acknowledged us in that
24 effort. So we envision continuing to do
310
1 things along those lines.
2 The vehicle issue you mentioned has me
3 greatly concerned. We've been working on a
4 business plan, which I was informed today has
5 been approved by OGS. So instead of the
6 existing ratio -- and I can get the exact
7 ratio. I have it in my notes somewhere that
8 we'll be moving to. But over a three-year
9 period we are going to acquire a lot more
10 vehicles that are going to be going to
11 community supervision. The first year has
12 been approved, so we will be, I think,
13 spending about $800,000. I think the number
14 is like 37 or 38 more vehicles for use by
15 parole officers so they can do their
16 responsibilities.
17 SENATOR FUNKE: One quick question.
18 Assemblyman Peter Lawrence and the police
19 chiefs in Monroe County have suggested
20 expanding the database within police agencies
21 on parolees, so that if it should happen that
22 a parolee is stopped, a police officer could
23 make an arrest right then and there. Is that
24 something that you would support?
311
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Well,
2 right now if we have already lodged an
3 absconding warrant, that's on a system that
4 anybody can acknowledge and any police
5 officer in the state can take someone into
6 custody based upon the fact that they're a
7 parole absconder.
8 SENATOR FUNKE: Thank you, sir.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Our next
11 speaker is Assemblymember Lentol.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Hello,
13 Commissioner.
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Hi,
15 Assemblyman.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: First of all, I
17 don't want to give you too much praise, but I
18 have a great deal of affection as well as
19 respect for your knowledge, not only of
20 corrections but also of the sentencing law
21 which we studied together -- which I studied
22 and you knew. And I learned a great deal
23 from you when we served on the Sentencing
24 Commission together.
312
1 But I too want to talk about parole,
2 but a different aspect of parole, which is
3 the Parole Board. And I looked at some of
4 the proposals that the Governor has
5 propounded in order to open up parole to the
6 public regarding having people come into
7 watch parole or video of the live interview,
8 of the interaction between the Parole Board
9 and the inmates.
10 And my question is when I looked at
11 this proposal, it looks like a Sunshine Law.
12 But then after reading it or understanding
13 it, it sounds likes it's designed to keep
14 people in prison. Because I don't know how
15 an inmate in the prison would be forthcoming
16 or the Parole Board folks would be able to
17 ask appropriate questions given the fact that
18 they know they're on tape.
19 And furthermore, if the public heard
20 the details of the crime, the Parole Board
21 may be unwilling to release anybody, because
22 they'd be afraid to.
23 So I'm just wondering how and why we
24 have this proposal in the budget.
313
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Well, I
2 think what the Governor was responding to was
3 the concern by a lot of individuals in the
4 community who get frustrated at repeated
5 denials of parole. And they want to make
6 sure that the Parole Board is weighing all of
7 the appropriate factors that they're
8 obligated to weigh under the law.
9 She's not here today, but I have the
10 utmost respect for Chairwoman Stanford.
11 She's a terrific individual, she's provided
12 great leadership to the board. In my
13 conversations with all the individual parole
14 commissioners, they want to do the right
15 thing. They really do. They want to weigh
16 the entire record that an inmate has done.
17 No inmate can go back in time and change the
18 original crime. That's fixed as is. But
19 they want to be judged on what they've done
20 over the course of their incarceration.
21 So we certainly -- my job, and this
22 was part of the merger, is to make sure they
23 have all the resources they need to do their
24 job. But their decision making still has to
314
1 be independent from me. The decisions of the
2 ALJs have to be independent.
3 One of the things that we're exploring
4 is potentially using outside lawyers in some
5 role to assist the inmate with the
6 preparation of his packet. The Governor
7 reached out, and there are a number of
8 lawyers who are willing to come forward as
9 the Pardon Initiative and the Clemency
10 Initiative. And I had several staff members
11 participate in a webinar to train them so
12 that they could understand all of the
13 different documents that are part of our
14 documentation -- what the commitment means,
15 what program participation means, what a
16 disciplinary record means.
17 Some of these lawyers who might be
18 taking on inmates for clemency applications
19 might also be tapped for responsibilities
20 along this line, to potentially help an
21 inmate prepare his package and appear before
22 the Parole Board.
23 So there's a lot to be discussed,
24 there's a lot to be considered. It's not a
315
1 black-and-white issue, it's not easy to get
2 people into our correctional facilities. A
3 lot of the Parole Board hearings are done by
4 televideo, so it could be possible that
5 somebody could be at a remote site and listen
6 to what's going on.
7 We certainly support transparency, but
8 we also want to be fair to everybody.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: And isn't it also
10 true that in parole hearings there are
11 certain facts that never come to light,
12 either in video or at the Parole Board,
13 because there are confidential communications
14 between the district attorney and the judge,
15 as well as others who may have their thoughts
16 not ever brought up at any of these hearings?
17 So the public would be denied knowledge of
18 why somebody was denied because of those
19 confidential communications.
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I am
21 reluctant to give you a hard and fast answer.
22 I know the crime victim's statement is
23 absolutely confidential. The inmate never
24 gets it. And we take extraordinary means to
316
1 make sure that that gets delivered to the
2 parole commissioners at the time of the
3 hearing; they take that into consideration.
4 I'm not sure what the practice is if a
5 district attorney writes a letter. I'm
6 tending to think that it's part of the record
7 that should be made available --
8 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: I don't think it
9 is.
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: -- but I
11 don't want to give you a definite answer.
12 I'd have to check with the Board of Parole.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Thank you, sir.
14 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senator Ruth
15 Hassell-Thompson.
16 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you,
17 Madam Chair.
18 Good afternoon, Commissioner.
19 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Good
20 afternoon, Senator.
21 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: I know
22 there was mention made of both Hudson and
23 Coxsackie's correctional facilities, but just
24 a couple of quick follow-up questions,
317
1 really.
2 What would be the impact -- you talked
3 in your presentation about $300 million in
4 the capital budget. And some of that is
5 going to be for the renovation and the
6 reengineering of Hudson. What impact is that
7 going to have on services provided to inmates
8 that are currently at Hudson?
9 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Well,
10 eventually the inmates that are currently at
11 Hudson are going to be moved to other
12 facilities.
13 The first phase of the construction
14 project is slated to be completed so that we
15 can start to move 16- and 17-year-olds there
16 by August. We want to move as quickly as
17 possible.
18 The existing inmates that are there
19 will continue to get services while we're
20 still doing the rehabilitation. Gradually
21 they will attrit out and eventually, for
22 those that remain behind, we can transfer
23 them. We have enough vacancies throughout
24 our system. So we do not envision that as
318
1 being a challenge to us.
2 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: And you
3 know I want to ask you how is that going to
4 impact Close to Home, but I'll leave that for
5 another day.
6 Tell me about Coxsackie. You know,
7 will those housing units be modified to reach
8 the goals that are in our age-appropriate
9 behavioral modification protocols?
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: We don't
11 have any further construction changes planned
12 for Coxsackie. These changes were already
13 made as part of the first initial settlement
14 we made with NYCLU.
15 So Coxsackie has a general confinement
16 unit, I forget the number of beds -- it's
17 either 15 or 30 -- and then a comparable
18 number if we have to segregate an inmate for
19 disciplinary reasons at Coxsackie. Coxsackie
20 will be used for 16- and 17-year-olds going
21 forward who require maximum security
22 placement.
23 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: No, that
24 I'm aware of. But how does -- looking at
319
1 Coxsackie as it current exists, is it part of
2 the developmental plan to meets the goals of
3 this new population?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Yes.
5 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: That's the
6 question.
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: It is
8 part of the goal.
9 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Okay. Tell
10 me a little bit about the hepatitis C crisis
11 that's in the prison population and what's
12 being done to address the rising costs and
13 the proliferation of this disease within the
14 populations?
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Well,
16 rising costs are something we really can't
17 control. If you need treatment, we have to
18 provide it.
19 Several years ago it was triple
20 therapy, it was pegylated-interferon and
21 ribavirin and a protease inhibitor that
22 combined for the treatment. Now there are
23 new treatments. The cost could be $84,000
24 for a treatment round. It depends upon the
320
1 extent of the disease. And we have to
2 provide it. We have to offer it and we have
3 to provide it.
4 I think there's a new law that says
5 that you have to offer the test to everybody
6 between the ages of 45 and 55. So we are
7 doing that. And those that want the
8 treatment, we have to provide it to them.
9 And we also have arrangements to
10 continue the treatment in the community as
11 well, so that we hook that up -- them up as
12 well. But it is very expensive. It could
13 rise as much as up to $24 million for that
14 this year.
15 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: That rolls
16 over into my last question, because my clock
17 just seems to be ticking faster than anybody
18 else's. But the aging and the medical cost
19 for older patients, what is being done to do
20 consideration of release for this population?
21 Looking at the $16 billion additional for
22 this population, is nobody cognizant of that?
23 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Good
24 point, Senator. We're very cognizant of it.
321
1 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: No, no, no.
2 I don't mean you, but I mean people outside.
3 Because we keep talking about the rising
4 costs of everything, but these are people who
5 pose absolutely no threat to public safety,
6 and yet we are keeping them in a facility
7 that exacerbates an already bad condition,
8 and it's costing us an extra $16 billion.
9 You know, everybody wants to be a cost-saver,
10 but that's not a consideration that we're
11 making.
12 Plus it's inhumane. Let's not leave
13 that out of the equation either.
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Senator,
15 medical parole is an avenue that I personally
16 would like to use more. We've changed the
17 law last year to try and short-circuit the
18 cases where certain nonviolent inmates who
19 are terminally ill can avoid the Parole Board
20 appearance and instead I can make that
21 decision.
22 But the list of crimes that make you
23 eligible are very narrow. Typically like a
24 drug offense. Drug offense sentences now are
322
1 very small compared to what they used to be.
2 So typically you have to be inside for a
3 while for a terminal condition to make itself
4 known.
5 There have only been two cases so --
6 well, there's actually been three cases so
7 far. And what I have done is turn them
8 around very quickly, but unfortunately the
9 individuals died before the requisite time
10 frame within which I had to get feedback,
11 because the law requires me to do that. I
12 have to write to the judge, I write to the
13 sentencing court, the district attorney and
14 the defense lawyer, and I have to allow them
15 a period of time before I can make it
16 official.
17 But the list of crimes is very narrow.
18 I have instructed my chief medical officer --
19 because he is the one that forwards the case
20 on to me. He sends it to me by an email. I
21 try and answer him the same day. I look up
22 the case, I look up his description. If I
23 have any questions, I will ask him. But --
24 and I get a million emails, but I've told him
323
1 if he doesn't get an answer from me that day,
2 the next day, get back to me. Because I
3 don't want any delays.
4 I'm very sensitive to the humanitarian
5 aspects of this. If we can at all, if at all
6 possible, these individuals deserve to die
7 with dignity in a setting other than a
8 correctional facility.
9 But for those that do stay in our
10 facilities, we do have hospice programs
11 within our regional medical units. We've
12 trained inmates how to be hospice aides, how
13 to be the companion. Because we don't want
14 anybody to ever die alone in our system.
15 And we are looking at ways to try and
16 expedite the process. I know there's a lot
17 of frustration. People want to see a lot
18 more medical paroles. We get it. We're
19 going to be taking steps to look, how can we
20 improve things? My initial inclination is we
21 probably have to start backing up the
22 decision a little earlier so that the normal
23 process that has to be followed -- the
24 letters that have to go to the district
324
1 attorneys, et cetera, can go out earlier.
2 The challenge is the standard you have
3 to apply is that you have to be convinced
4 that the person is too sick to present a risk
5 of harm. What does that mean? If you can
6 fire a gun, are you potentially a risk?
7 So we're trying to weigh and balance
8 all those factors and accelerate the process.
9 It's not easy, but we definitely want to make
10 a lot more progress in that area.
11 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you,
12 Commissioner.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you.
14 We've been joined by Assemblymember
15 Richardson, and we will now hear from
16 Assemblymember Graf.
17 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Hi, how you doing,
18 Commissioner? I'm going to be kind of short
19 here because it's been a long day.
20 Can you tell me the percentage of your
21 inmates that are coming into this system that
22 are opiate-addicted or have a heroin
23 addiction? Do you have a percentage number?
24 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I can't
325
1 tell you a percentage that are coming in
2 opioid-addicted. I might be able to; I know
3 that the inmates coming in with a substance
4 abuse need is very high, so at some point we
5 have to put them into some type of drug
6 treatment program.
7 But heroin is a serious concern. I
8 have had inmates die of overdoses inside the
9 institutions. We've had parolees die of
10 overdoses. So the two initiatives I
11 described we think will be helpful.
12 We have a program whereby inmates who
13 will shortly be released -- it's a program we
14 developed in partnership with the Harm
15 Reduction Coalition and the Department of
16 Health. We train them on Naloxone kits, and
17 then we offer it to them as they're leaving,
18 free of charge. And we know that there have
19 been a couple of instances where a parolee
20 has used his Naloxone kit to bring someone
21 back to life who is an apparent overdose from
22 heroin.
23 We're also the first state agency
24 that's approved by the Department of Health
326
1 for our nurses to give the injectable
2 Naloxone to any inmate or visitor, volunteer,
3 whomever, that apparently is suffering from
4 an opioid overdose.
5 So this is part of the Governor's
6 initiative. We're trying to take all
7 reasonable steps. But it is a rising
8 concern, there's no question about it, in our
9 communities.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: It's becoming a big
11 problem. Would you say in your population,
12 when you're getting new inmates, this is
13 becoming a big problem with the heroin or
14 some type of addiction?
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: If I
16 heard your question correctly, you're asking
17 if I have a problem --
18 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: No, has this been
19 an increasing problem as far as --
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Yes, in
21 general I would say it's been an increasing
22 problem.
23 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: All right. Now,
24 the Vivitrol that you said you're giving some
327
1 inmates, Vivitrol, once they're released, are
2 they released into a program or are they just
3 released?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Yeah,
5 this is a pilot program that we've started at
6 Edgecombe in conjunction with Odyssey House
7 and of course our partners at OASAS. And the
8 program is for parolees actually who have
9 relapsed on heroin. And we have this parole
10 diversion program where we can put them in
11 for 45 days at Edgecombe.
12 So while they're there, recognizing
13 that they have this problem, this addiction,
14 this drug, if they voluntarily will take it,
15 coupled with all of the counseling that we're
16 going to give them in the community, will
17 block the effects of opioid as well as the
18 euphoria from drinking alcohol.
19 So we've just started this, we've
20 mapped it all out, there's a lot of things
21 that to be lined up -- the physician that's
22 going to give the injection at Edgecombe, the
23 follow-up injection in the community if they
24 follow up accordingly, the identification
328
1 that they have to wear. We've just lined
2 this all up; we haven't yet had a test case.
3 But it is something that we are hoping, if it
4 produces positive results there, we also have
5 PD programs at Hudson and at Orleans for the
6 parole violators who have this opioid
7 relapse, come into our system, and then we
8 offer that as a means of trying to block the
9 effects and deal with their addiction.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Now, the Vivitrol,
11 are you able to buy that in bulk when you
12 bring it? Because I know it's like a
13 thousand dollars a shot.
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Yeah, I
15 think that's being supplied by Odyssey House.
16 This is not a department expense for that.
17 ASSEMBLYMAN GRAF: Okay. Thank you
18 very much.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
20 Our next speaker is Senator Krueger.
21 SENATOR KRUEGER: Good afternoon.
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Good
23 afternoon, Senator.
24 SENATOR KRUEGER: You talked about the
329
1 mental health issues in the prisons in your
2 testimony. What's your estimate of what
3 percentage of the prisoners in DOCCS are
4 suffering from mental illness?
5 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: That
6 number keeps growing. We've crossed the
7 10,000 number. We have over 10,000 on the
8 caseload. I think it's 19 percent of our
9 population now that are on the OMH caseload.
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: And as we are
11 releasing people from DOCCS back into their
12 communities, how is the system of ensuring
13 they are processed for Medicaid before they
14 leave prison going?
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Yeah,
16 that's a big initiative on our part to enroll
17 as many inmates as possible into the Medicaid
18 program.
19 We've prioritized which inmates we
20 should put to the front of the list, so to
21 speak -- the ones that might get an illness,
22 the elderly inmates, et cetera. I think
23 we're averaging something like 500-and-some-
24 odd registrations per month.
330
1 And another big initiative that we
2 have that came out of the Reentry Council,
3 the Governor's Reentry Council, their
4 suggestion -- and we were able to coordinate
5 this with our Department of Health
6 partners -- is that we will be able, some
7 time this year, in the not too distant
8 future, to activate the Medicaid card prior
9 to release. I think it's 30 days prior to
10 release.
11 That will help us greatly with
12 placements. It will help us with the elderly
13 inmates that we're trying to place into
14 nursing homes, where some of them want the
15 inmate on Medicaid with his card prior to
16 leaving. It will help us hook up with
17 certain services in the community. So we're
18 very hopeful about that as well.
19 SENATOR KRUEGER: I represent the East
20 Side of Manhattan, where the intake for the
21 New York City homeless shelter system for men
22 is located. And we were provided an estimate
23 recently that there are 2,000 people who come
24 out of DOCCS and their discharge plan sends
331
1 them to the Bellevue Men's Shelter entry
2 system.
3 Do you believe that's an appropriate
4 discharge plan from the New York State
5 prisons?
6 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Well, we
7 can't legally hold someone past their release
8 date if they are homeless. The law requires
9 us to notify the local DSS if someone is
10 coming out of prison and requires homeless
11 shelter services. So we do that throughout
12 the 62 counties of the state.
13 We try very hard to work with the
14 parolee to know in advance his release date,
15 to ascertain if he has any relative, any
16 friend, anyone who might be willing to offer
17 them a place to stay. The reality is there
18 are significant numbers of individuals who
19 leave the prison system without a home to go
20 to.
21 We have contract beds that we use, we
22 have various programs for employment that
23 hopefully get them the money that they can
24 then secure private residences. The numbers
332
1 in New York City I think were significantly
2 affected by the loss of three-quarter
3 housing. So that amplified the numbers.
4 But the number of undomiciled
5 individuals is significant, and the
6 subpopulation of that is the number of sex
7 offenders who are covered by the Sexual
8 Assault Reform Act, which requires that any
9 residence that they get can't be within a
10 thousand feet of a school. So we will not
11 release someone to a homeless shelter who's
12 covered by that law unless the city or the
13 county tells us: We have a bed for that
14 person that's SARA-compliant.
15 What we've been doing instead is
16 relying on our authority to put these people
17 into what are called residential treatment
18 facilities. They're usually located near the
19 community. We have one, I believe it's
20 Lincoln, and we give them transitional
21 services, we pay them $10 a day to work on an
22 outside crew, and they come back and they
23 sleep at the facility until such time as we
24 do find a SARA-compliant residence. But it
333
1 is a huge, complicating problem.
2 SENATOR KRUEGER: I am familiar with
3 the sex offender issue, and in fact I think
4 the City of New York is working very hard to
5 make sure that released sex offenders are
6 going into appropriate locations. That has
7 also been an issue in my community.
8 But I will say that there seems to be
9 a pattern of release of mentally ill people
10 from prison without Medicaid kicking in
11 before they get to the city, ending up at the
12 front door of the shelter system. And I
13 propose to you that's a guarantee that those
14 people will end up right back in the prison
15 system or having some terrible trauma happen
16 in the community.
17 So I'm hoping that DOCCS can take a
18 more active review of whether a discharge
19 plan ought to be "there's no other option, so
20 we'll just drop them off at the Bellevue
21 Men's Shelter."
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: We try
23 very hard to avoid that. We work very
24 closely now with OMH on discharge planning.
334
1 We have identified seriously mentally ill who
2 also might be violent well in advance, when
3 they come into the system, as part of our
4 reception centers, to put them into special
5 programs. We know that ultimately they're
6 going to be released. We want to make sure
7 we give them the best opportunities to
8 succeed.
9 We're establishing new special
10 discharge ICPs for this population. One is
11 going to be at Auburn, one is at Sing Sing,
12 where we already have the core program. We
13 release them with medication, I think it's
14 either two or three weeks' worth of
15 medication that they have, with scrips to
16 refill.
17 And your point is well taken, to the
18 extent there may be some that may not have
19 been registered on Medicaid, if they've
20 fallen through the cracks, I will make sure
21 that we prioritize getting them Medicaid
22 cards as well before release, Senator.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you.
335
1 Our next speaker will be
2 Assemblymember Giglio.
3 ASSEMBLYMAN GIGLIO: Good afternoon.
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Good
5 afternoon, Assemblyman.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN GIGLIO: I only have two
7 quick questions for you, Commissioner. And I
8 wouldn't wish the last year you've spent on
9 my worst enemy.
10 But besides that, my first question is
11 you said there are 103 new correction
12 officers. How many retired?
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: How many
14 of those 103 retired?
15 ASSEMBLYMAN GIGLIO: No, no. You
16 hired a new 103. How many have you lost in
17 the same period of time?
18 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I should
19 know that off the top of my head because we
20 lose a lot every two weeks. It's something
21 like 54 retire. But we keep -- the 103 are
22 added over our BFL. So we keep doing
23 training classes to try and replace the
24 attrition.
336
1 ASSEMBLYMAN GIGLIO: When you lose
2 that kind of institutional knowledge, how do
3 you make it up?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: You
5 can't replace experience, there's no question
6 about that, Assemblyman. I wish our staff
7 would stay longer. It's a tough job, they're
8 eligible to retire after 25 years, that's the
9 retirement law. But they're very valuable,
10 especially because a lot of them have learned
11 how to deal with a violent situation by using
12 their wits as opposed to the normal uses of
13 force.
14 So we value very much our experienced
15 correction officers. I can't prevent anybody
16 from retiring who wants to retire. But we
17 keep replacing them with classes from the
18 training academy as quickly as we can.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN GIGLIO: In our limited
20 conversations, you've always been concerned
21 with staffing ratios and those kind of
22 things, to keep it safe and secure. And you
23 talked about that in your testimony.
24 The only other question I have now is
337
1 this Office of Special Investigations. In
2 that, you said that you hired two attorneys
3 to run it. My question is very simple.
4 There was no one within the Department of
5 Corrections that had moved up to the ranks
6 that could have filled those two roles?
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: There
8 was nobody within that unit that was an
9 attorney.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN GIGLIO: But you think
11 it's necessary to have an attorney then go
12 talk to the men and women on the line to tell
13 the attorneys what's wrong with the facility?
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I lost
15 the question.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN GIGLIO: My point is this.
17 You said during your testimony that these two
18 new hires would then, as part of their
19 duties, go talk to individual correction
20 officers about what's going on in the
21 facility. My question to you is, would we be
22 better off bringing people up through the
23 ranks and through your command staff that you
24 already have to fill these positions, instead
338
1 of asking outside lawyers to come in and ask
2 the very people you're supposed to work with
3 what's wrong with the facility?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI:
5 Assemblyman, I think the answer is that we
6 have the combination, the best of both
7 worlds. There are still people that have
8 risen through the ranks, and they're still
9 directors, or at least they occupy
10 supervisory roles. Those are very
11 experienced individuals. They started out as
12 correction officers.
13 But we definitely needed to bring in
14 an outside perspective, individuals that had
15 extensive experience dealing with law
16 enforcement, prior experience with district
17 attorney's offices, prior experience working
18 with the Attorney General. And they can
19 bring in the linkages they have to work with
20 the U.S. Attorney's office, to work with the
21 federal Civil Rights Bureau, with the
22 Department of Justice, to work with the
23 marshals and bring all of that to bear so
24 that we can be a much stronger office.
339
1 ASSEMBLYMAN GIGLIO: Do you think
2 that's what's going to help you when you
3 charge inmates and/or correction officers
4 with any crimes behind the walls?
5 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I think
6 it will.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN GIGLIO: Thank you very
8 much.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
10 Assemblyman.
11 Acting Commissioner, I had a couple of
12 questions. And it's related to an issue that
13 you just discussed with Senator Krueger. And
14 I know you remember the notorious case of
15 Daniel St. Hubert, who was a paranoid
16 schizophrenic, violent in prison, was
17 released and ended up stabbing to death
18 little 6-year-old P.J. Avitto in Brooklyn;
19 his 7-year-old playmate Mikayla Capers was
20 stabbed, did survive. He was a suspect in
21 some other murders. And he had been released
22 from the state prison system.
23 As a result of that, Assemblyman
24 O'Donnell and I did a chapter together to try
340
1 to address some of the issues. And last year
2 the Legislature included in the final budget,
3 along with the Governor, a $20 million
4 expenditure I believe that you were
5 referencing when you talked about discharge
6 planning and that sort of thing.
7 And I did discuss the issue with the
8 OMH commissioner yesterday. And just as
9 background, there was $20 million in last
10 year's budget for enhanced services to reduce
11 recidivism and potential violence in the
12 community. This includes additional
13 supportive housing, assertive community
14 treatment, team services for at-risk
15 individuals discharged from prisons and
16 psychiatric centers, increased mental health
17 assessments in prison, treatment for
18 high-risk inmates, enhanced discharge
19 planning, staff training, and placement of
20 individuals in OMH facilities.
21 So I'm happy to hear you say that you
22 believe things are going better. One of the
23 issues I'd like to raise with you, however,
24 is that when I questioned the OMH
341
1 commissioner yesterday about how much of that
2 money had been utilized so far, she did say
3 $18 million out of the $20 million line item.
4 I would assume that you would think that
5 these sorts of initiatives have been
6 beneficial -- at least that's what I'm
7 gathering from your testimony today -- and
8 you would recommend that that program
9 continues. Because if there's only
10 $2 million left, I don't see anything in the
11 budget, unless I'm missing something or
12 you're aware of something, to replenish those
13 funds.
14 Could you comment on that, please?
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I really
16 can't comment on these specific
17 appropriations and how they're being spent
18 from OMH's side of the ledger. But I can
19 reaffirm that we are very excited about the
20 discharge planning units that are going to be
21 launched at Auburn and at Sing Sing, the
22 continued work with the core program, and the
23 continued collaboration that we do with our
24 community supervision and OMH staff,
342
1 including making sure that when someone has
2 to get to a program, we arrange many times
3 for direct transport.
4 I'm also excited about the early
5 identification of inmates when they come into
6 the system who are both seriously mentally
7 ill and could have these violent
8 proclivities.
9 So I think ultimately we will make a
10 big difference in this area.
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So you would
12 obviously be supportive of such programming
13 to continue in the same format? You're
14 saying to us as a Legislature that this has
15 been beneficial in the correctional system?
16 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: It's
17 been beneficial, yes.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Very beneficial in
19 reducing violence, okay. Thank you.
20 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you,
21 Senator.
22 Our next speaker will be
23 Assemblymember Oaks.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Hi, Commissioner.
343
1 Thank you.
2 I just wanted to follow up a little
3 bit. Senator Funke had talked about parole
4 issues, and he listed off a number of
5 different situations of individuals who had
6 recommitted while on parole. And I had, you
7 know, myself one of those types of situations
8 in my district, a recent parolee who broke
9 into a home, the people were away, but he
10 happened on a mother and her daughter who
11 were there to feed the cat, and they ended up
12 losing their lives in that incident and
13 whatever.
14 So all of us, I think, have some of
15 those things. And the issue of parolees
16 obviously it's an opportunity for individuals
17 to find their way back into society, but it
18 doesn't always work.
19 And I think back to Assemblyman
20 Funke's question about Assemblyman Lawrence's
21 legislation, the one thing of making
22 information -- right now police officers stop
23 individuals for whatever, to check. They can
24 tell that a person is on parole, but they
344
1 have no information about the conditions of
2 the parole. And so if the individual by
3 their activity at that moment is violating
4 the parole, they would have no way of knowing
5 that. And so then it goes through a process
6 of letting the parole officer know that
7 that's happened, and then through a process
8 of trying to figure out what happens.
9 Certainly for those who might offend
10 quickly after they've been released but may
11 have violated in some way before, his
12 proposal would try to make that information
13 available to police and also give police the
14 opportunity, empower them to do something
15 then, as opposed to having to take several
16 days or time down the down the road of
17 dealing with this.
18 And so I think the question -- I know
19 you said if the person has been an absconder
20 or had a problem, obviously they can tell,
21 they can be a help. This would be a way of
22 strengthening that. And I just go back to
23 that, of saying I welcome a comment on it
24 and/or just a willingness to work with us in
345
1 looking at it. If we can strengthen parole
2 in this way, I think it makes communities
3 safer, makes parole work better for those who
4 are going to follow the conditions of it.
5 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Well, we
6 value all of the working relationships we
7 have with local law enforcement, so we're
8 always willing to share as much information
9 as possible.
10 With respect to the specific
11 legislative proposal or concept, we follow a
12 protocol where we submit any feedback,
13 thoughts, to our Governor's counsel's office.
14 But we don't independently provide comments
15 or suggestions on the substance or
16 well-thought-outness of a particular
17 proposal.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Understood. I just
19 think it could end up making your job better
20 and easier, and have us working better
21 together. Thank you.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
23 Assemblyman.
24 Senator Savino.
346
1 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
2 Young.
3 I'll be very brief because many of the
4 questions that I had have already been
5 answered.
6 But you'll recall, Commissioner, that
7 in the past we've been somewhat critical of
8 your agency's level of overtime. So backing
9 out the extra overtime that was related to
10 the prison break, can you give me a sense of
11 the level of overtime in the past year?
12 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I can
13 tell you that if we back out the overtime
14 related to Clinton -- and there was also a
15 significant expenditure related to an
16 individual that was lost in the North Country
17 for a number of days, and we were
18 participating in the search -- that our
19 process shows we were only a little over
20 where we were last year. Which is not good.
21 SENATOR SAVINO: No.
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: But the
23 good news is that we have started a process
24 whereby, A, I've communicated to all my
347
1 superintendents the need to justify every
2 expenditure of overtime. We've broken it
3 down by program areas, so that Facility A,
4 this is what you spent on program in this
5 quarter and this is what you spent on admin,
6 this is what you spent on security. And then
7 we have phone calls to discuss and show to
8 them whether they made progress or whether
9 they went in the wrong direction. And then
10 it's incumbent upon them to explain to us the
11 reasons why.
12 There are a lot of reasons why we have
13 overtime --
14 SENATOR SAVINO: Not to interrupt, but
15 I can predict one of them. And I don't
16 dispute for a moment that the overtime is
17 justified. I understand how hard it is to
18 run a prison system. But the problems you
19 have now are the same problems you had five
20 years ago, and your predecessors had -- it's
21 a shortage of staff. And we know that.
22 Whether it's in the civilian titles or in the
23 correction titles.
24 I know you've taken steps, though, to
348
1 increase hiring in the correctional officers
2 titles. But I'm concerned about the other
3 professional titles -- the nurses. You know,
4 thank God that one poor nurse finally
5 retired, because every year she would wind up
6 as the highest overtime earner in the state,
7 as if she was doing something wrong. As if
8 she had a choice about whether she was going
9 to stay.
10 So my concern continues to be about
11 the level of hiring so that we can
12 sufficiently staff the facilities so you
13 don't have overworked correction officers or
14 nurses or psychiatrists or social workers or
15 anybody else that's there because of the
16 level of, you know, security that is so
17 important in maintaining a prison like that.
18 So I just want to keep it on your
19 radar, we're going to continue to watch this.
20 You know, it's something that is of concern
21 to us, the level of overtime -- not because
22 you're spending money, but because you're
23 spending it because you don't have sufficient
24 staff to meet the needs of the institution.
349
1 Thank you.
2 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Okay,
3 Senator.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. I don't
5 believe there are any other Assembly
6 speakers. So Senator Montgomery.
7 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Good afternoon,
8 Commissioner.
9 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Good
10 afternoon, Senator.
11 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I will start by
12 offering thanks to you for a couple of
13 things, and then I'll make my complaints,
14 I'll register my complaints.
15 (Laughter.)
16 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: So first of all I
17 want to say my last visit to Sullivan, my
18 staff and I were up there and we were -- it
19 was a very, very interesting and -- it was a
20 good experience. And I want to thank the
21 superintendent and her staff because she
22 really made it what I thought to be a very
23 worthwhile experience. So I appreciate that.
24 And I also want to thank you for the
350
1 fact that you agreed to do the advisory
2 council for the parole facility that's also
3 in my district. And that has really
4 contributed to a lot of reduction in the
5 tension that was around that facility when it
6 first opened. So I thank you for that.
7 And I will just ask a couple of
8 questions, raise a couple of issues with you.
9 And in the interests of my time not running
10 out, I'll do it all together and you can
11 answer accordingly.
12 I am very pleased to see how much
13 emphasis you are placing on the whole issue
14 of offering college and looking at training
15 programs and those programs that really
16 prepare people for a successful reentry back
17 into the communities. I appreciate that.
18 The question about that -- two things.
19 One is, have we ever thought about the
20 possibility of creating sort of an
21 educational training facility where one of
22 your buildings, one of your facilities could
23 become sort of a hub, if you will, for this
24 kind of activity? I'm so impressed -- I've
351
1 been to Sullivan, obviously, there's really
2 such a great group up there -- Sing Sing,
3 eastern and the others that I have not
4 visited but I've heard of them. And I'm
5 always so impressed with the degree of
6 excitement of the men in there. And people
7 who have expressed very serious intentions of
8 coming back to their communities and giving
9 back and becoming productive citizens again.
10 So you will play a very major role in
11 that, and I certainly would like to know how
12 you're moving with that and what can we do to
13 enhance that.
14 And the second part of that is, how do
15 we align what you do inside, the kind of
16 training and the experiences that people have
17 inside, creating some sort of a certification
18 so that when they do return to the community,
19 they have something that says I have these
20 skills, and that that can be acknowledged and
21 accepted as a legitimate representation of
22 that person's experience?
23 So those are the two things that I'm
24 asking. Thank you.
352
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Okay,
2 Senator. First let me thank you for all the
3 efforts you expended to help with the opening
4 of the new parole office in Brooklyn. There
5 was originally a lot of controversy. I know
6 you helped us out. I know it's very well
7 accepted now.
8 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, it sure is.
9 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: In fact
10 I think we've actually proven that the crime
11 rates in that precinct have gone down --
12 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: That's right.
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: -- since
14 we've been there. But it couldn't have
15 worked without your assistance, and we're
16 very grateful for that.
17 I'll take your second question first.
18 We've already started to work with the
19 Department of Labor to create
20 preapprenticeship programs. We're going to
21 have our first meeting, and we're looking at
22 different voc programs that we have and we're
23 look at what's available in the community so
24 that we can start a preapprenticeship program
353
1 and then continue it in the community,
2 wherever it's selected. So we're going to
3 depend upon the DOL to give us some good
4 advice in that area.
5 And thank you for acknowledging the
6 college programming. That's another big
7 initiative. Courtesy of the Manhattan
8 district attorney's office, $7.5 million of
9 asset forfeiture money. College is very,
10 very useful, not just in terms of lowering
11 recidivism, but also as a positive role model
12 in the institutions.
13 I saw the three gentlemen that were
14 graduates of Bard with the Governor at the
15 announcement. I went over, I congratulated
16 them, and I just said "Make sure you succeed,
17 because you're carrying the torch for a lot
18 of other individuals coming after you."
19 And we know how excited the whole
20 country was when the three individuals in the
21 debate team went up and beat Harvard, which
22 was an amazing story, and they were from
23 Eastern.
24 So we're very excited about that. And
354
1 I can tell you that you've asked me have I
2 given thought to a building possibly being an
3 educational institutional.
4 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Fantastic.
5 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: The
6 answer is I've given it thought.
7 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Great.
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: But it's
9 too early to talk about, you know, what the
10 possibilities are. We have to do some
11 outreach with various individuals.
12 But the whole idea of an educational
13 institution, so to speak, is something that's
14 at least worthwhile pursuing and exploring to
15 see if that can be done.
16 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Great. Thank
17 you.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
19 Senator Nozzolio to close.
20 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you again.
21 Senator Montgomery, it's not unusual
22 that we disagree on subjects and that she and
23 I have had wonderful debates in the past, and
24 I'm sure we're going to have a few more this
355
1 session, that we're going to be scrutinizing
2 whether or not taxpayers' dollars are in fact
3 utilized for this purpose. I know that there
4 are -- it's the purpose of providing free
5 tuition for inmates.
6 However, Senator Montgomery and I do
7 agree on issues regarding training for
8 skilled opportunities to provide inmates in
9 their exit from prison, entry into the
10 community, to have skill sets that are
11 marketable for jobs. And that's something
12 that I don't need you to get in the middle
13 of, but it's something that we are going to
14 be scrutinizing.
15 What I do need you to focus on --
16 Senator Funke mentioned this -- it's
17 something that is outside the prison walls,
18 but relative to parole. And we talked about
19 the ratios, we talked about Western New York.
20 I think your three-point program regarding
21 analysis of high risk, moving inmates closer
22 to the facility they exited from, GPS
23 bracelets, and transferring to official
24 reporting, makes a lot of sense.
356
1 But if our parole officers don't have
2 the appropriate tools, don't have the
3 vehicles -- you said 38 more vehicles. Since
4 you made that statement, I've been trying to
5 find in the State Budget where that is.
6 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: It's not
7 in the budget. It was just approved today,
8 Senator.
9 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Just approved
10 today.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: The plan
12 by OGS.
13 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Is this a -- Danny
14 O'Donnell's -- assemblyman O'Donnell's
15 comment, it's nice that we have these kinds
16 of appropriations available from time to
17 time. It would be nice if the Legislature
18 knew about it. But the fact is if you were
19 able to take those out of last fiscal year,
20 monies from the current fiscal year as
21 opposed to next fiscal year, that this was
22 approved and these are going to be
23 forthcoming by the end of March?
24 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: I don't
357
1 know the schedule. I just got the news that
2 our plan, it's a three-year plan to increase
3 the vehicle totals. I think the total we
4 have now is 248. So it's 30-something --
5 don't hold me to 38, if it's 38 or 35 -- that
6 we will be able to get this year.
7 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: And why we're
8 discussing this is because we live in areas
9 in upstate New York in particular that are
10 vast in terms of geography, and that for the
11 parole officers, as it is they have
12 significantly higher ratios than ever before.
13 That we have sheets on the types of offenders
14 and the types of cases and the caseload, and
15 the ratios are anywhere from 25 to 1 to 160
16 to 1, 200 to 1, in terms of the types of
17 caseloads that individual parole officers are
18 asked to absorb.
19 And I think that in spite of your very
20 good attention to this criteria, without you
21 having more staff in the field, I just think
22 this is not going to work. You're getting
23 infrastructure, cars -- that's a good thing.
24 Thank you for that. Thank you for addressing
358
1 the issues. But the question of more
2 officers -- not just taking those with only
3 Department of Correctional Services training,
4 CO training, and moving them into -- I mean,
5 we have many great COs who became parole
6 officers. But the fact is to have them now
7 from the prison into parole officer capacity
8 without adequate training is very, very
9 concerning.
10 (Applause from audience.)
11 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Please address,
12 Commissioner, the issues going beyond the
13 foundation you set up. And again, I'm here
14 to thank you for that. But let's -- what are
15 your plans to move forward with the
16 deployment of additional personnel?
17 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI: Well,
18 right now I know we have at least two
19 additional classes scheduled for this year
20 for parole officers, Senator.
21 We've also gotten other equipment.
22 We've gotten radios, we've gotten replacement
23 vests, we're replacing -- I believe we may
24 have already completed it -- the weaponry,
359
1 the Glock that they use. There's no question
2 that they need the appropriate equipment.
3 The ratios are driven by the risk
4 management plan that tells us whether someone
5 is a high risk or a low risk, et cetera. We
6 haven't changed that. But what I can tell
7 you is that there is the ability by the
8 parole officer to make changes, to identify
9 someone as, Listen, this guy needs to be
10 supervised at a higher level than what he
11 currently is. And so that's been recognized
12 and adopted.
13 But I can't speak to you exactly what
14 the ratios are in various parts of the state.
15 But I'll certainly go back, we'll look at it
16 and, you know, make recommendations for
17 adjustments as warranted.
18 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Your attention to
19 this is most welcome. I guess you're taking
20 an absconder as a low security risk or lower
21 security risk, because the ratios there --
22 our numbers show a 200-to-1 ratio, 200
23 parolees to one parole officer. That sex
24 offenders, 25 to 1. Now, that's not -- I
360
1 think most of the parole officers, if they
2 only had that to deal with, they would feel
3 more comfortable in their job in terms of
4 being able to manage the system.
5 But what Senator Funke mentioned,
6 those disastrous criminality that occurred in
7 Rochester by parolees, it's symptomatic of
8 the structure. And I'm not blaming you for
9 the structure, you're a career correctional
10 personnel. You came up through the ranks. I
11 appreciate the fact that you know corrections
12 and you've gotten a good job with
13 corrections.
14 But I think in terms of parole,
15 something that was thrust upon you a few
16 years ago -- we discussed it very briefly at
17 this table, if you recall, when the proposal
18 first came through, a proposal that ended up
19 being accepted. But it's a proposal that
20 still needs ironing out some important
21 wrinkles.
22 And if the public knew about these
23 ratios, I believe they would be extremely
24 concerned with public safety. And I think
361
1 that you -- if you would --
2 (Applause from audience.)
3 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: -- if you would
4 continue the work to address, let us know
5 what more resources you need to make this
6 happen. You have partners here, and I know
7 you're well-intentioned. Let's try to
8 understand that we've got to solve this
9 problem.
10 Thank you, Commissioner.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER ANNUCCI:
12 Certainly, Senator. Thank you.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
14 much. I think that concludes our speakers.
15 So again, we appreciate you being here today
16 and all of the answers that you gave.
17 Our next speaker is Superintendent
18 Joseph D'Amico, New York State Division of
19 State Police.
20 (Pause.)
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good afternoon,
22 Superintendent.
23 Could I have some order, please.
24 Could we please have some order. Thank you
362
1 very much.
2 We welcome you today. I know it's
3 been a lengthy day so far, but it's always
4 difficult under Public Protection because we
5 have so many commissioners and leaders of the
6 different state agencies. And we certainly
7 are very happy to have the State Police and
8 you here today.
9 So if you'd like, we would love to
10 hear your testimony.
11 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Good
12 afternoon. Thank you.
13 Thank you, Chairwoman Young, Chairman
14 Farrell, and distinguished members of the
15 committees for this opportunity to discuss
16 with you Governor Cuomo's budget for the
17 Division of State Police.
18 I'd like to take this opportunity to
19 thank the Legislature for its past support of
20 the State Police. Because of your support,
21 the New York State Police continues to enjoy
22 its --
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Can we have some
24 order, please, at the top of the room. Thank
363
1 you.
2 Sorry, Superintendent.
3 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: That's okay.
4 Because of your support, the New York
5 State Police continues to enjoy its well-
6 deserved reputation as one of the leading law
7 enforcement agencies in the nation.
8 On April 11, 1917, Governor Whitman
9 signed the Wells-Mills Bill into law,
10 establishing the State Police. As we
11 approach the agency's 100th anniversary next
12 year, our role in New York is essentially
13 unchanged to this day. The bill stated: "It
14 shall be the duty of the State Police to
15 prevent and detect crime and apprehend
16 criminals. They shall also be subject to the
17 call of the Governor and empowered to
18 cooperate with any other department of the
19 State or with local authorities."
20 And the importance of this original
21 charter is as significant now as it was back
22 then.
23 Since its inception, the State Police
24 has consistently provided public service
364
1 through its core missions, adapting mission
2 priorities constantly to societal changes,
3 and we have continually improved these
4 services. Our current mission priorities
5 include reducing the number of deaths,
6 injuries and property damage caused by motor
7 vehicle accidents through vehicle and traffic
8 enforcement and motorist education, providing
9 professional police services to communities
10 and investigative support to departments
11 around the state, engaging in emergency
12 preparedness, planning and response
13 activities and serving a crucial role in the
14 StateĂs counterterrorism efforts through our
15 collaborative work with federal, local and
16 other state agencies. Our mission and goals
17 all focus on ensuring the continued safety of
18 the people of New York State.
19 The Governor continues to dedicate
20 funding to Joint Task Force Empire Shield to
21 enhance efforts to detect and deter terrorism
22 in a time when such acts are constantly a
23 threat to the safety of New Yorkers. As a
24 result, New York remains one of the safest
365
1 large states in the nation. Using
2 intelligence-based investigative techniques
3 and targeted enforcement, state troopers have
4 been assigned to potential target locations
5 and, with local partners, provide greater
6 protection for the public through asset
7 integration strategies. This effort is being
8 permanently implemented in New York City with
9 the new assignment of 55 State Police
10 personnel dedicated solely to this mission.
11 The State Police is unique as the only
12 law enforcement agency in New York State with
13 the ability to deploy large numbers of
14 professionally trained police officers
15 anywhere in the state on short notice in
16 response to an emergency or natural disaster.
17 The State Police is also available for
18 large-scale deployments to meet an immediate
19 need for law enforcement services in any
20 community. This was clearly demonstrated
21 over 23 days this past summer, during the
22 Clinton Correctional escape in Dannemora,
23 where we deployed as many as 532 troopers and
24 200 investigators from around the state to
366
1 assist with that investigation. At its peak,
2 State Police directed 1560 personnel from 16
3 different agencies in the investigation.
4 In addition, we continue our
5 partnerships with the Office of Emergency
6 Management and the Division of Homeland
7 Security and Emergency Services, with a focus
8 on disaster preparedness and response
9 readiness.
10 Our first and foremost priority
11 continues to be the safety of the public and
12 our troopers who protect them. Toward that
13 goal, we will continue to provide our
14 troopers with the necessary equipment and
15 other resources to ensure safety as they
16 perform their duties. The Governor
17 recognizes this need after observing the
18 level of sophistication and tactics employed
19 at criminal events in the United States and
20 abroad, and has committed to new funding for
21 additional patrol rifles, rifle-resistant
22 body armor plates and ballistic helmets for
23 State Police patrols statewide.
24 Illegal drug use and its impact
367
1 continues to dominate headlines in our
2 country. Heroin availability and abuse
3 continues. State Police will continue to
4 aggressively work in partnership with local
5 police agencies to investigate drug-related
6 crimes and to arrest offenders.
7 Our troopers, as first responders,
8 continue to patrol with Naloxone, the opioid
9 reversal drug which we have administered
10 132 times in medical emergencies involving
11 overdoses. One hundred fourteen of those
12 administered Naloxone survived as a result of
13 troopers' efforts.
14 The use of social media to foster the
15 relationship between the agency and the
16 citizens we serve has been successful in
17 improving cooperation with law enforcement
18 efforts in the communities we serve. By
19 posting safety-related and crime alert
20 information on Twitter and Facebook, the
21 State Police has generated enhanced
22 investigative capabilities that have led to
23 successful case resolutions and shared
24 important public safety information.
368
1 This year will be the first full year
2 for the Sexual Assault Victims Unit that
3 arose from passage of the "Enough is Enough"
4 legislation and the GovernorĂs commitment to
5 combating sexual assault on college and
6 university campuses. Fifteen State Police
7 personnel will work statewide to ensure
8 uniformity in the handling of campus sexual
9 assault investigations, provide investigative
10 assistance and training to campus or local
11 police investigating these cases, and to
12 educate individuals and campus communities
13 regarding victims' rights and their available
14 resources.
15 Agency staffing remains an area of
16 constant executive-level discussion within
17 the State Police. We continue to request and
18 conduct academy classes so that adequate
19 staffing levels are maintained to perform our
20 core mission priorities without sacrificing
21 the response time or the safety of our
22 troopers. We will continue to look for
23 additional efficiencies through our
24 partnerships with other law enforcement
369
1 agencies throughout the state and through
2 consolidation of state government services
3 where practical and possible.
4 And as you're aware, 85 percent of the
5 appropriations made for State Police
6 operations are in support of personnel
7 service obligations, of which approximately
8 93 percent supports the salaries and overtime
9 expenses of our sworn members. The vast
10 majority of the non-personal service
11 appropriations are best characterized as
12 non-discretionary expenditures. Expenditures
13 for vehicles, equipment, facilities and
14 communications are all essential to providing
15 the tools necessary for the men and women of
16 the State Police to fulfill their law
17 enforcement missions.
18 New Yorkers have come to expect public
19 service from a stable, well-deployed and
20 adequately resourced State Police. I am
21 proud to say that New Yorkers can be
22 confident their expectations are being met.
23 It is the integrity, knowledge, dedication
24 and quality of our men and women that
370
1 distinguishes the New York State Police. I
2 am honored and privileged to be a part of
3 such a professional police agency and its
4 great traditions and to serve alongside our
5 members.
6 I thank you for your support of the
7 State Police and for this opportunity today
8 to address you.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
10 Superintendent.
11 Our first speaker is Senator Tom
12 Croci.
13 SENATOR CROCI: Thank you,
14 Superintendent, for your appearance here
15 today. I know it's been a difficult year in
16 the United States for law enforcement. And
17 for me, who grew up in a small town, we grew
18 up thinking, you know, police were good and
19 drugs were bad. There's a lot of mixed
20 messages out there for young people today.
21 But at a time when we have incidents
22 like San Bernardino, California, and the
23 heroin epidemic that you raised, it's nice to
24 know that we have the troopers out there
371
1 watching out for us. And I commend you on
2 your leadership of that organization.
3 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Thank you.
4 SENATOR CROCI: We have previously
5 questioned the commissioner of DHSES,
6 Commissioner Melville, who just recently
7 appeared today to talk about the Article VII
8 language in Part D of the ELFA, which seeks
9 to transfer some of the counterterrorism
10 responsibilities from that organization to
11 the State Police.
12 With respect to that specific Article
13 VII language, who in your knowledge, in your
14 mind, would be responsible for
15 counterterrorism in the state should that
16 occur?
17 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: The
18 counterterrorism initiatives and
19 responsibility is really a partnership of the
20 State Police and the Division of Homeland
21 Security and Emergency Services. We've
22 shared that since that agency was formed
23 after 9/11.
24 I heard Commissioner Melville's
372
1 testimony this morning and if I could just
2 build on the answer that he gave. You know,
3 currently the 10 analysts who are assigned
4 and employed in the Intelligence and Analysis
5 section of OCT in DHSES, the Office of
6 Counterterrorism, work at the New York State
7 Intelligence Center, in the Terrorism Center
8 and the CTC, and basically report up and are
9 managed by State Police personnel, as it's
10 happening right now.
11 So what happens is information comes,
12 whether it's by phone, email, phone app or
13 suspicious activity reporting by law
14 enforcement. The information is worked on
15 and analyzed and built and vetted by those
16 analysts, and the whole goal here is to
17 develop actionable intelligence that we could
18 then hand off to people who could react to
19 it -- whether it's State Police or Joint
20 Terrorism Task Force partners, or just alerts
21 or information that has to go out.
22 Currently the information travels up
23 almost simultaneously through DHS management,
24 DHSES management and State Police management.
373
1 So by making the change from having people
2 employed by DHSES over to the State Police
3 side functionally changes nothing. And all
4 it will allow us to do, we'll be more
5 efficient in use of those people, backing up
6 those people when people are out -- because
7 there's a criminal side and a terrorism side,
8 and they complement each other. A lot of the
9 people are interchangeable.
10 I mean, my goal -- the information
11 that travels upward for us has to be
12 operational. For DHSES it has to be to
13 develop policy, to react, to brief the
14 Executive. Both important. That's not going
15 to change.
16 SENATOR CROCI: So on initial glance,
17 that's the appearance of what's occurring
18 here. I just want to ask you a series of
19 questions, because this is what the proposed
20 language would get rid of and not replace
21 either with the State Police or DHSES.
22 So would you agree that the following
23 in 2016 is an important function for the
24 State of New York to be engaged in: To
374
1 coordinate state resources for the collection
2 and analysis of information with relation to
3 terrorist threats and terrorist activities?
4 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Yes.
5 SENATOR CROCI: Okay. The
6 responsibility to coordinate, facilitate
7 information-sharing among state, federal
8 agencies to ensure appropriate intelligence
9 to assist in the early identification and
10 response to potential terrorist activities?
11 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Yes, of
12 course.
13 SENATOR CROCI: The responsibility of
14 the Office of Counterterrorism to collect,
15 analyze and share information relating to
16 terrorist threats and terrorist activities
17 throughout the State of New York?
18 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Yes.
19 SENATOR CROCI: So part of the reason
20 that I have some concern, listening to
21 Commissioner Melville, whose understanding
22 was we're simply transferring resources,
23 we're shedding the counterterrorism language
24 in the statute so DHSES no longer has
375
1 statutory responsibility. I can't find
2 anywhere in the State Police authority for
3 direct counterterrorism responsibilities.
4 And those functions that are being
5 transferred to you don't include the three
6 sections that I just read to you, which I
7 think the genesis of these statutes post-9/11
8 were to ensure that the kind of information
9 sharing, the kind of fusion that should
10 occur, and the kind of relationships that
11 need to be built up and down echelon existed.
12 So to the members of the committee and
13 to the chairperson, I just want to emphasize
14 the fact that it appears that in transferring
15 these bodies, you're also eliminating the
16 term "counterterrorism" at the statutory
17 level in the executive branch. And then to
18 an agency which is now going to have the
19 responsibility, presumably, of doing the
20 work, you don't have the statutory
21 responsibility in writing, you don't have the
22 language "counterterrorism," and you also
23 don't have a reporting requirement up and
24 down chain.
376
1 So do you see that you're going to be
2 able to perform these functions in a time of
3 crisis, understanding that you're not going
4 to have the statutory authority to do the
5 mission and that DHSES will no longer have
6 the statutory authority? So the question is,
7 who has the responsibility if there's no
8 authority?
9 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: So even
10 though the language may not be there, you
11 know, in the function of NYSIC, New York
12 State Intelligence Center, as the state's
13 recognized fusion center, those are the roles
14 of NYSIC.
15 You know, when DHS put out the
16 guidelines back in 2008 in a document called
17 "Baseline Capabilities for State and Major
18 Urban Area Fusion Centers," they talk about
19 information sharing, they talk about
20 briefings. And three of the things that come
21 along with intelligence and information
22 dissemination is to develop a dissemination
23 plan, to develop a plan for high-level
24 discussions up and down the chain, be able to
377
1 brief the state, local, tribal agencies on
2 occurring incidents. It requires sharing of
3 information with other fusion centers in
4 surrounding states. It requires reporting of
5 information to the federal government,
6 whether it's DHS or DOJ or the FBI.
7 Now, while that's not required for
8 funding, it's the way we operate. It's the
9 way the center operates. It's the function
10 of the fusion center. A number of years ago
11 we were actually acknowledged by DHS for the
12 excellent way that we do carry out activities
13 there. It's an integral part of the
14 counterterrorism program for New York State.
15 So whether the language is there or
16 the language isn't there, that's the way we
17 function. That's the way the guidelines from
18 DHS are dictated, and we follow them. And I
19 think that's what would fill the gap without
20 the statutory language.
21 SENATOR CROCI: So many of the
22 recommendations that I'm told are being
23 proposed in the Governor's budget come from a
24 review that former Commissioner Ray Kelly
378
1 did, and I think we all acknowledge that he
2 was a pioneer in some of the most innovative
3 and effective counterterrorism policies for a
4 police force that we've ever seen, which is
5 being duplicated worldwide.
6 Have you had the opportunity to read
7 this report?
8 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: I don't
9 believe that Commissioner Kelly or former
10 Commissioner Kelly has issued a report.
11 I had met with him and his staff a
12 number of months ago when they were going
13 through just a review of the state's
14 procedures. And since that time, you know,
15 I've heard it verbally, I heard it at the
16 State of the State, but I don't know that
17 there's a written report actually presented.
18 SENATOR CROCI: Because it would be
19 very interesting to know if this was fleshed
20 out in that analysis, to know whether or not
21 those three areas, which will disappear from
22 the role of New York State government -- some
23 sound pretty important. Collection and
24 analysis of information related to terrorist
379
1 threats; sharing among state and appropriate
2 intelligence partners.
3 I think that you would agree that in
4 law enforcement and the military that there
5 are those relationships, those sharing
6 relationships. But in the weeks, months and
7 years before September 11, 2001, those
8 relationships existed, yet information at the
9 FBI was stovepiped to CIA, the military
10 intelligence community, the Department of
11 State.
12 And the post-9/11 Commission made
13 recommendations that we have the kind of
14 executive focus on these issues to ensure
15 that all departments and agencies within the
16 state -- to my colleagues and to you, I don't
17 see, without explicit statutory
18 responsibility by either the State Police or
19 by DHSES -- I see seams created again. And
20 if those relationships as you currently have
21 aren't there -- new superintendent, new
22 commissioner, new governor; law enforcement
23 personnel, as you know, rotate all the
24 time -- I'm afraid we're recreating seams
380
1 that the 9/11 commission said we specifically
2 should avoid.
3 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Well, I mean,
4 just to go back to the report by former
5 Commissioner Kelly, I'm not aware of a
6 report. I don't believe a report was issued.
7 I mean, I don't know if he has intentions on
8 addressing those issues in his report.
9 You know, I can only tell you, as kind
10 of the custodian of NYSIC and a very large
11 counterterrorism function, not only at the
12 troop level but with the federal partners,
13 you know, I'm fairly confident that the
14 information will flow. Especially between us
15 and DHSES. You know, we've always had that
16 partnership, the DHSES commissioner still
17 retains the ownership as chairman of the
18 state's Executive Committee on
19 Counterterrorism, still coordinates the
20 activity of the 16 counterterrorism zones.
21 That really hasn't changed. He's still the
22 arbiter of Homeland Security funding, and a
23 lot of that funding funds the New York State
24 Intelligence Center.
381
1 So I mean, you know, I would think
2 that if he wasn't satisfied with the
3 information that was flowing, you know, he
4 controls the funding purse strings, and there
5 would be an issue there.
6 I would just like to say, you know,
7 the law enforcement committee pre-9/11 and
8 post-9/11 are two different worlds.
9 SENATOR CROCI: Absolutely.
10 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: You know, no
11 doubt about it. The same with the military
12 and the intelligence communities.
13 You know, we shared before 9/11, but
14 since 9/11, it's so much more seamless.
15 We're open, we work together. You know, it's
16 about collaboration and cooperation. It's
17 just a whole different world in law
18 enforcement.
19 SENATOR CROCI: Well, as I -- and I
20 know I'm out of time, Madam Chair. I would
21 just close with under this construct, as I
22 read it -- and I've had a lot of very smart
23 minds look at it as well -- if you were to
24 have a liaison meeting with the JTTF and they
382
1 were to provide you information about a
2 pending attack on New York, in this construct
3 you don't have to share it with the
4 commissioner at DHSES. You would have no
5 statutory responsibility to do so. You may,
6 of course, and I know you would. But that's
7 my concern, and I think my colleagues and I
8 will have to continue to address it.
9 But I appreciate your testimony today,
10 and I'll turn it over to the chair. Thank
11 you.
12 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Thank you,
13 Senator.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you,
16 Senator. Our next speaker is Assemblymember
17 Duprey.
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: Good afternoon,
19 Superintendent.
20 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Good
21 afternoon, ma'am.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: The last time
23 that you and I saw each other was at a very
24 emotional day in my district, just hours
383
1 after the capture of Sweat. I guess more
2 than questions, I first want to extend my
3 heartfelt thanks to you as the
4 superintendent; to certainly Major Chuck
5 Guess, Troop B commander; our hometown hero,
6 Sergeant Jay Cook; and all of law
7 enforcement. Certainly our SORT teams who
8 put unbelievable hours tromping through the
9 mud and the mess of some of our North Country
10 territory, to have a successful conclusion to
11 the escape, which none of us will soon
12 forget.
13 And I want to take a moment to extend
14 personal thanks to you because I -- you know,
15 I was -- my body was down here, my heart and
16 my mind were in my district for those
17 23 days. But I was surrounded every day by
18 some of my colleagues and friends who
19 continued to say to me: Matt and Sweat are
20 long gone, we're wasting tax dollars, we
21 shouldn't have 1500 law enforcement in such a
22 small area.
23 And I thank you, on behalf of my
24 thousands of constituents who were incredibly
384
1 frightened, that you stood behind Major Guess
2 in your belief and his belief that those two
3 were still there. And certainly you were
4 proven right. And for that, I thank you,
5 because I can't imagine what my district
6 would have gone through had you pulled those
7 troops out. So thank you, sir.
8 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Thank you.
9 And I really need to thank your
10 constituents, your communities, who were
11 tremendously supportive of law enforcement,
12 who were out there 24 hours. They helped
13 with shelter and drink, refreshments and food
14 and everything else. They were tremendously
15 supportive, they were helpful in information,
16 and it was really a good partnership between
17 law enforcement and community.
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: I've never been
19 more proud to represent folks than I was
20 during that time. So thank you for that too.
21 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Thank you.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: I do want to
23 mention the one -- and I don't want to really
24 call it a glitch, but I think it's something
385
1 that all of us up there have been advocating
2 for so long, for better cell towers. I think
3 that that certainly was an issue during the
4 escape, the lack of -- what we lacked in
5 communication through cell towers was
6 certainly made up for in the communication
7 that took place between our federal, state
8 and local law enforcement agencies.
9 But in the future, we will be looking
10 to you and others to reinforce with us, as we
11 go through the process of Adirondack Park
12 Agency approval, the need to have sufficient
13 cell tower coverage throughout that district.
14 because when they're out there, and I know
15 the SORT teams were out there all by
16 themselves with no way to communicate to
17 anybody.
18 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: That's true,
19 Assemblywoman. The lack of infrastructure
20 was a tremendous detriment -- not being able
21 to communicate, not being able to track our
22 people on the ground, whether it's through
23 cell service or through radio communications.
24 And, you know, I would say, without
386
1 naming any companies, but the cell carriers
2 were excellent in coming in with, as best as
3 they could support us, with trailered
4 equipment. But there's a tremendous void up
5 in that part of New York State.
6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: Yeah, now
7 they're gone, so -- we need them all the
8 time.
9 And my only other question to you,
10 sir, is -- and I hear it not all the time,
11 but fairly often, that the need to have newer
12 vehicles that so many of the troop cars --
13 you know, the vastness of that region, of
14 Troop B, is huge. That so many of the troop
15 cars are way over 100,000 miles on their
16 odometers, that they're breaking down. And,
17 you know, certainly a nightmare of mine is
18 that we will have a trooper out there alone
19 some night without cell service and with a
20 car broken down.
21 And so are you addressing that in this
22 budget and going forward?
23 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Yes, we are.
24 I mean, we've been working that for at least
387
1 a couple of years now. It is a major
2 concern. It's one of our biggest needs in
3 the State Police, are vehicles. You know,
4 followed by people. And probably half of our
5 fleet is at 100,000 miles on the odometer.
6 So, you know, we need a tremendous
7 infusion in this year's budget to kind of
8 make a leap so that at the end of the year we
9 could -- our goal is 125,000 miles on the
10 cars. You know, I think through our
11 maintenance program, inspection program, the
12 vehicles can certainly have that kind of
13 life. There may be a year life span also,
14 like seven years, that might be appropriate
15 for a fleet.
16 But in this year's budget we do have
17 sufficient money that I expect at the end of
18 the fiscal year all of our patrol vehicles,
19 all of our investigator vehicles, and all of
20 our officer vehicles with -- that are
21 currently at 100,000 miles now will be
22 replaced. So I think we'll be in a much
23 healthier place at the end of the fiscal
24 year. We'll come back next year and look to
388
1 find the right amount to kind of maintain
2 that number so we don't fall back into that.
3 You know, for us it was a couple of
4 years of insufficient vehicle purchases,
5 problems with procurement contracts, and
6 obviously just not enough funding in the
7 budget to do adequate vehicle purchases.
8 So I think that this year we should
9 get a good place, and then we just have to
10 figure out what's the right maintenance
11 number to keep us at a good mileage.
12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN DUPREY: Thank you.
13 Thank you for your service.
14 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Thank you.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
16 Assemblywoman.
17 Senator Gallivan.
18 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you, Madam
19 Chair.
20 Good afternoon, Superintendent. And
21 as always, thank you for your service and
22 that of the thousands of professional men and
23 women who make the State Police one of the
24 finest agencies in the country.
389
1 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Thank you.
2 SENATOR GALLIVAN: And I'm very proud
3 to have come from the State Police, as you
4 well know. And perhaps because of that, I
5 have a special interest in the things that
6 take place and the maintenance of the
7 professionalism, and that the State Police
8 maintains that high level of service.
9 The Governor's budget, you talked
10 about it just a little bit. The Governor's
11 budget provided $40 million, some of it for
12 additional State Police personnel for
13 New York City, some National Guard for
14 permanent staffing down there as well. And
15 the reference I think in the Governor's
16 presentation had to do with homeland security
17 issues. My question has to do with, are you
18 sufficiently staffed to meet the needs of the
19 citizens of the rest of the state?
20 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Yeah, I think
21 right now the staffing levels, we're at --
22 we're about 4750 on the sworn side, is a good
23 number. You know, a couple of dozen more,
24 I'd be much happier. I think that, you know,
390
1 we'll get back to that. We had dropped down
2 very low a couple of years ago; we've been
3 putting in consistent academy classes, and
4 we've been able to build back that number.
5 And obviously we don't want to lose it.
6 As far as the $40 million, I believe
7 that's for counterterrorism. It's to extend
8 the counterterrorism surge, if you want to
9 call it that, throughout the state -- you
10 know, beyond New York City. Last year we put
11 troopers down supporting MTA and other
12 agencies in the counterterrorism effort,
13 especially in the transportation
14 infrastructure. And this year's budget is --
15 since we now permanently assign troopers to
16 do that in New York City, it's to take that
17 money and spend it elsewhere in the state.
18 And we've done some of that already
19 after some of the terrorist attacks we've
20 seen around the world. But I would
21 anticipate you'll see additional troopers at,
22 you know, high-profile public events, whether
23 they be sporting events or parades or
24 concerts or school events, college campuses,
391
1 things like that.
2 And, you know, I think we're all aware
3 that whether it's crime, traditional crime,
4 or terrorism, increased uniform presence has
5 a profound impact on that.
6 SENATOR GALLIVAN: What is your
7 current plan for future classes? In this --
8 in the current fiscal year or the year
9 beginning April 1st.
10 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Well, in this
11 fiscal year we plan on putting in a class in
12 March, which is the end of the fiscal year.
13 We're anticipating somewhere around 200.
14 We're anticipating a second academy class in
15 next fiscal year, which will follow.
16 And as far as the numbers, you know,
17 we'll look at attrition between now and then,
18 we'll look at the people who don't make it
19 through the academy. We'll look at new
20 needs, such as Enough is Enough and casino
21 gaming, and we'll work with Budget to come up
22 with the right number when we're ready to put
23 the class in.
24 But two classes in the next 12 months,
392
1 in 12 months, the first one being probably
2 200, somewhere around there.
3 SENATOR GALLIVAN: I'd like to
4 continue on a couple of the topics the
5 Assemblywoman had talked about. First,
6 vehicles. Last year's budget, we know -- you
7 testified about the critical needs for -- the
8 critical state of your fleet last year, as
9 did the Troopers PBA, State Police
10 Investigators Association. And your
11 testimony convinced us; we provided a
12 significant amount of money in the budget
13 for, among other things, State Police
14 vehicles and various equipment needs.
15 I am pleased to see that the Governor
16 has included some of that in this year's
17 budget that you testified to, a significantly
18 smaller amount of dollars spent on it than
19 what we allocated last year.
20 Nonetheless, though, the Governor's
21 spokesman, within the past month or so, said
22 that that $60 million that was provided last
23 year is going to be reallocated to different
24 things in this upcoming fiscal year.
393
1 Because, they said, it was contingent on
2 policy proposal acceptance of the
3 Legislature, the Governor's proposals last
4 year.
5 Many of us were at that table, as we
6 talked about that. It wasn't contingent on
7 anything. We provided the funding for it.
8 So I guess -- my question has to do
9 with your fleet, and I just want to make sure
10 that I'm hearing you okay, that you have
11 plans to address the fleet, however you came
12 up with the money in last year's budget that
13 wasn't part of the $60 million, combined with
14 monies planned for this fiscal year. So
15 you're -- do you need more funding from us
16 for your fleet?
17 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: No, I --
18 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Other than what was
19 proposed.
20 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: No, I don't
21 believe so. I mean, I've been working with
22 Budget on this.
23 The last couple of years we've spent
24 about $15 million consistently each year on
394
1 fleet. You know, we thought that probably
2 this year if we spend $20 million, we'll be
3 able to bring our mileage down and get it to
4 a healthy place. And as we get closer to
5 budget, we do our analysis and realized
6 $20 million is not going to do it. We're
7 currently looking at $30 million from Budget
8 to put into fleet purchase, which as I said
9 will have a tremendous impact and help us to
10 get almost completely healthy by the end of
11 the fiscal year, and then we just need to
12 kind of figure out the maintenance going
13 forward on how do we keep it at that level.
14 You know, as far as what you're
15 speaking about, the $60 million or what
16 conditions or terms, I --
17 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Not your area.
18 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: I wasn't part
19 of any of that discussion, so --
20 SENATOR GALLIVAN: The point that I
21 wanted to make is that we had provided money
22 that was not allocated for that purpose, and
23 I want to make sure that your fleet is being
24 taken care of.
395
1 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Yes, it is.
2 SENATOR GALLIVAN: All right, thanks.
3 The next area is communications. Very
4 interesting, nearly 20 years ago during my
5 time with the State Police and then as Erie
6 County sheriff, I was involved in a number of
7 different committees regarding statewide
8 communication system interoperability.
9 Almost 10 years ago, the Bucky
10 Phillips escape, and the after-action report
11 identified communications problems as the
12 biggest problem, the most critical issue
13 facing us.
14 While I don't know if you've completed
15 your own internal after-action on the escape,
16 the Assemblywoman alluded to the problem.
17 There was some testimony before, we hear it
18 time and time again. Once again, if not the
19 biggest problem issue up there, one of the
20 most significant. I don't expect you
21 necessarily to have an answer or be able to
22 write the check to fix it, but my question
23 is, how do we solve this? I mean, money has
24 gotten thrown at it, at least as far as I
396
1 know, for over 20 years, and we continue to
2 have the same problem.
3 And we look at the geography of the
4 state, North Country is difficult, Southern
5 Tier is difficult, Western New York is
6 difficult. We have these dead spots across
7 the state. We have local agencies that can't
8 communicate with others, the interoperability
9 issues. How do we fix it?
10 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: I mean,
11 communications obviously is a big issue. You
12 know, if you were to come back to the State
13 Police today, Senator, you could pick up a
14 radio and -- right where you left off,
15 because the technology and the way we do it
16 is old. The equipment is new, you know, and
17 it works, but it's -- you know, time has
18 changed and we haven't caught up to it.
19 Over a year ago I charged our
20 communications people with looking at the
21 State Police system, the communications
22 system, with a view on upgrading. Now
23 obviously for a lot of years we sat back
24 waiting for the SWN to come on board, which
397
1 didn't happen. So there were a lot of years
2 lost. And then there was narrowbanding from
3 the FCC, which caused us to have to regroup
4 to make deadlines.
5 But, I mean, at this time we're
6 looking probably to go forward with a
7 multiyear plan to upgrade our own
8 infrastructure to a much more modern system.
9 Whether it's digital or repeated or -- still
10 has yet to be told. We've met with vendors,
11 including Motorola, who made proposals to us
12 just to give us some ideas on where we might
13 be able to go. But, you know, at this time
14 it's still premature to say that their
15 solution is the one we like or anything like
16 that.
17 So we're still looking at it. It's
18 one of my goals that I would like to
19 accomplish in the near future.
20 As far as the communications and
21 interoperability issue, you know, I read the
22 Bucky Phillips after-action as well, and it
23 struck me that we identified it back then and
24 we had the same type of issues this time.
398
1 But the issues weren't exact. So back in
2 Bucky Phillips, we had unencrypted analog
3 transmissions that everybody listened to and
4 knew where our police were and what they were
5 doing. And in some cases they were helped,
6 and in some cases they were hindered.
7 So since that time, you know, we've
8 moved ahead, we've gone to digital and
9 encryption on some of our tactical
10 frequencies, and we get up to the northern --
11 the Adirondack region, where, you know, you
12 couldn't have been in a more difficult
13 terrain to try to support communications up
14 there. And then add to that, we bring in,
15 you know, ten partner agencies who all have
16 different radio systems and everything else.
17 And even when you were both on VHF and said,
18 Wow, this should be easy -- well, this
19 agency's encryption doesn't comport with this
20 agency's encryption.
21 So in the end, you know, we ended up
22 with unencrypted analog VHF like we did in
23 the Bucky Phillips days. And because of
24 that, less so that the community was
399
1 monitoring, but the news media was
2 monitoring. And in the case of our escapees,
3 they had a radio -- you know, a
4 transistorized radio -- and they were
5 listening to the news reports of what the
6 police were doing.
7 So it certainly is in the draft
8 after-action that we're working on right now.
9 It's something that if we could solve it in
10 the Adirondack region, we could take that
11 anywhere and just -- because as I said, you
12 know, we sent communications trucks up there,
13 but there's no infrastructure. There's no
14 towers to climb and put up an antenna or
15 anything like that. So it was as difficult
16 as it could be.
17 It's one of our priorities not to come
18 back and see this in another after-action
19 report in the future, and to work with our
20 partners on the encryption issues and the
21 different, you know, frequencies and things
22 like that.
23 SENATOR GALLIVAN: All right. Thank
24 you, Superintendent.
400
1 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Sure.
2 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you,
3 Senator.
4 Our next speaker will be
5 Assemblymember Lentol.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Good afternoon.
7 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Good
8 afternoon.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: I just wanted to
10 say that -- in fact, I wanted to thank you,
11 by the way --
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Microphone.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Sorry. I don't
14 know how to use these technological equipment
15 things. I think this is encrypted the wrong
16 way.
17 (Laughter.)
18 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: But I wanted to
19 say how pleased I was, since the Bucky
20 Phillips incident, how well and hard you've
21 worked on equipping the State Police with the
22 modern armaments and the necessary tools in
23 order to do their job. And I saw in the
24 budget proposal that there's $4 million to
401
1 provide uniformed troopers statewide with
2 rifles, body armor, and ballistic helmets.
3 And I just wanted to ask you, is that enough?
4 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Yeah. I
5 mean, my goal in the equipment was to get a
6 patrol rifle into the hands of every trooper
7 who's out there on patrol. You know, right
8 now it's a -- it's going to a major effort to
9 train everyone and bring them up to speed,
10 get the equipment to get them into the cars,
11 because we have a limited number right now.
12 We probably have 500 patrol rifles in
13 addition to shotguns, and this will increase
14 us by 425 or somewhere around there.
15 I think for this fiscal year, yeah, I
16 think it's what we can handle. It will get
17 them into the hands of all the troopers. We
18 have some in the -- some of the plainclothes
19 units have them as well. And, you know, once
20 we get this completed, we'll come back and
21 evaluate needs maybe for next fiscal year.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: That would be
23 good.
24 And I listened with great interest to
402
1 Senator Croci's questions about the New York
2 State Intelligence Center, and I wondered
3 whether or not it is important for us to come
4 up with statutory language in order to make
5 this merger, if you will, of all of the
6 services into a statute so that it has the
7 requisite authority in order to do its job.
8 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Yeah, I would
9 just say that, you know, I personally can
10 assure you that during my tenure, while I'm
11 sitting here, you know, we would never have
12 an issue with information exchange. You
13 know, and as we go forward years from now, I
14 would hope that the staff that runs the
15 Intelligence Center, you know, would continue
16 on to follow the DHS rules, which would keep
17 us in line.
18 You know, I can't tell you -- I can't
19 tell you about statutory language other than
20 that.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Thank you, sir.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
23 Senator Nozzolio.
24 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you, Madam
403
1 Chair.
2 Superintendent, welcome again to these
3 discussions.
4 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Thank you,
5 Senator.
6 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I would feel
7 confident to make the case to anyone that
8 your efforts have, I believe, qualified you
9 to be the best superintendent in the history
10 of the State Police. I say that with all
11 sincerity and directness.
12 We were involved from the first day of
13 your confirmation. You have done nothing but
14 impress and continued to work with
15 distinction throughout your tenure, and I
16 congratulate you for that.
17 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Thank you,
18 sir.
19 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: The world has
20 certainly changed since you became a police
21 officer many years ago. That we live in a
22 much more dangerous place. And that I'm
23 concerned certainly with -- I have no concern
24 with the ability of the State Police and the
404
1 record of the State Police in general law
2 enforcement functions, in dealing with
3 disasters, and even taking the additional
4 steps that you have taken regarding drug
5 addiction and the administration of a very
6 difficult antidote to heroin overdoses.
7 Time and time again, the department
8 has done yeoman work in getting things done.
9 Assemblywoman Duprey was talking about the --
10 we all watched you work in her district
11 during those times. We also looked to a huge
12 amount of additional costs. We're glad that
13 those are being absorbed, although we know it
14 puts stress on other portions of the budget.
15 It appears, in your answers to Senator
16 Gallivan, that we are fine in terms of at
17 least a runway for solution -- we're on the
18 runway for solution to the vehicle issue.
19 That we couldn't find those monies in the
20 budget, although it appears that you are
21 going to be using those deployed from
22 particular settlement funds to be able to put
23 into additional vehicles. That's fine.
24 That's good. It's extending resources. And
405
1 at meetings like this, we've certainly heard
2 the need. So we'll be working with you and
3 monitoring that situation to see what
4 additional needs there are.
5 Senator Croci's comments, echoed by
6 Assemblymember Lentol, you can't comment on
7 it, but I just need to emphasize so that you
8 understand our position. That we have every
9 confidence that right now that communication
10 is taking place. Senator Croci has mentioned
11 this many times to us in conference. He's
12 analyzed this. There's nobody better to do
13 it than him, through his experience.
14 But this isn't about one person, one
15 superintendent. We're looking to structure
16 something in the future. And we could
17 support the change if we had assurances that,
18 moving forward, there was a statutory
19 template for action.
20 That I asked Commissioner Melville
21 earlier today about cybersecurity and its
22 relationship to homeland security. And what
23 I'm fearful of is that we're falling through
24 the cracks on a particular area of security
406
1 protection. And I'd like you to address this
2 issue from the standpoint of you, as you're
3 working counterterrorism, you are certainly
4 dealing with public protection -- but the
5 question of individual protection through the
6 cyber networks, through entrusting the state
7 government. What role now does the State
8 Police have in this issue of cyber
9 protection?
10 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Okay, so the
11 New York State Police is involved on a number
12 of different levels. You know, we start kind
13 of from the bottom up. We do retail kind of
14 cyber crime, whether it's theft of
15 information or social media hacking, things
16 like that which are really kind of, you know,
17 customer-based to our New Yorkers who make
18 crime complaints.
19 As it moves up into kind of larger
20 cyber crime, we have a cyber analysis unit
21 that we created in partnership with the
22 MS-ISAC, which is part of the center in
23 East Greenbush that we spoke about earlier.
24 And what we do is MS-ISAC is responsible for
407
1 monitoring most of the state networks and
2 state systems. Information that comes in
3 through the MS-ISAC -- we're part of the
4 operations center. Our analysts and our
5 investigators, we're at the dailies, we work
6 with them hand in hand all day long, and
7 we're able to see what kind of threats are
8 going on throughout the country to other
9 states' infrastructure.
10 Anything that comes in that affects a
11 state agency or a state network goes to ITS.
12 ITS has their security piece; they're
13 responsible for that.
14 Anything below that, you know, whether
15 it's local government, whether it's, you
16 know, utilities, whether it's anything less
17 that we can address at the state level, we
18 do. Whether it's just getting the
19 information out, whether it's trying to, you
20 know, make criminal cases on it -- there's
21 really a tough line there, because so much of
22 what happens cyber is federal. We work very
23 closely with the federal partners in the FBI
24 and Secret Service because so much of what
408
1 goes on, even though it seems like it's in
2 your backyard here, is coming from, you know,
3 Eastern Europe or Asian countries. And so,
4 you know, we just don't have that reach.
5 We've been trying to find, since we
6 stood up the cyber analysis unit, what really
7 is the niche. And we think the niche is
8 local government, local utilities,
9 mom-and-pop banks, things like that which
10 fall below that federal threshold.
11 Fortunately, a lot of what comes in
12 through MS-ISAC that we're sitting at the
13 table and we know it, gets funneled over to
14 ITS and they're able to react or patch or do
15 what they have to do so it doesn't become a
16 problem in New York State. I mean, a lot of
17 what happens is kind of preemptive. You
18 know, we've been very fortunate here. I'm
19 not saying it's never going to happen, it
20 happens to some of the best organizations at
21 some of the highest levels. But that's the
22 infrastructure that's in play here.
23 I personally think the gap is below
24 that, you know, for these small communities
409
1 that just don't have the support of a
2 cybersecurity team or anything like that.
3 And being that it's all part of the New York
4 State Intelligence Center, we intentionally
5 collocated for this purpose, because we are
6 concerned about cyber going into the future.
7 We're able to take the information, put it
8 out as informational, put it out as
9 intelligence, refer it to the federal
10 partners, work with them. That's kind of
11 where we're at on the cybersecurity piece.
12 Myself, Division of Homeland Security
13 and Emergency Services, and many members of
14 the chamber sit on the Cyber Advisory Board.
15 We're part of it, either in an advisory
16 capacity or as actual members, together with
17 Financial Services, Public Service
18 Commission. And we all are constantly
19 working with the private sector to discuss
20 what are the emerging threats, how do we
21 target-harden.
22 And when it comes to things like
23 utilities and finance, it's not just the
24 cyber piece, it's kind of cyber and physical
410
1 put together. You know, you have to be able
2 to protect from both sides.
3 And, you know, we're still -- I would
4 say we're still young at this in New York
5 State. But, you know, as states go I would
6 say we're probably -- as to effectiveness,
7 we're one of top ones. I think we're, you
8 know, a couple from the top maybe, but I
9 think we're doing a good job at it for the
10 amount of time we've been invested in it.
11 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: And I have no doubt
12 that upon receipt of questionable information
13 about potential threats that have occurred,
14 about trying to isolate who did those, I
15 would imagine you and your partners are up to
16 that task.
17 What I fear is that the state
18 government itself does not have someone that
19 can tap them on the shoulder and say, You
20 aren't having appropriate protections
21 within -- protecting the data that you're
22 entrusted to hold. Whether it be the
23 Department of Taxation and Finance, whether
24 it be one of our health organizations,
411
1 whether it be even the DMV, are we having --
2 are you able to, or is it too early or are
3 you too thin in manpower at this stage to be
4 able to act as a coach, if you will, a cyber
5 consultant to those state government agencies
6 that have to protect this data?
7 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: I mean, to
8 steal a line from Commissioner Melville, I'm
9 not a computer geek. But, you know, I think
10 that we've had conversations with ITS about
11 them becoming part of the operations center
12 at the Intelligence Center with the Center
13 for Internet Security and the MS-ISAC, so
14 that we're not just a pass-through on that
15 type of information -- when we hear about
16 something that's affecting a network or
17 affecting other states or that's directly
18 targeted at something in New York State that
19 we have people at the table with us who could
20 react to it and we don't have to be the
21 pass-through to send it over to ITS. I think
22 that's kind of the improvement we could make,
23 just, you know, better cooperation in that
24 respect.
412
1 I don't mind being the coach to get
2 this done. You know, the whole discussion
3 about merging New York State Police, Intel
4 Center and Center for Internet Security, you
5 know, it was done about three years ago and
6 we all saw the value of it. It's just
7 something we've been trying to grow. And,
8 you know, in the world of units, it's still
9 relatively young. It's probably a year --
10 you know, a year in the making for us. We
11 have an investigator and I think three or
12 four analysts who are actually assigned there
13 full-time.
14 So I don't mind being a coach to drive
15 it forward, because I do agree with you that
16 no matter what you're talking about, cyber is
17 a tremendous threat to us.
18 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Superintendent,
19 thank you very much. Thank you for your
20 answers, and thank you for your service.
21 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Thank you,
22 senator.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
24 Senator Savino.
413
1 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
2 Young.
3 Thank you, Superintendent. I'm not
4 going to go over the issues of the aging
5 fleet and the number of miles on it, because
6 I think you've addressed it. And also I
7 understand you have a class in the academy
8 that's expected to graduate -- is it March?
9 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: No, we
10 graduated a class in September.
11 SENATOR SAVINO: When is the next one?
12 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: In March.
13 They're going in in March.
14 SENATOR SAVINO: They're going in in
15 March.
16 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Right. So
17 you figure they'll be out by probably
18 September, and then we're hoping to follow up
19 with another class in a couple of weeks,
20 maybe October.
21 SENATOR SAVINO: So what do you think
22 the estimated new hire rate will be by the
23 time these two classes are over?
24 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: I mean, my
414
1 goal always is, you know, keep flat with
2 attrition, consider new needs.
3 So, you know, our attrition yearly is
4 probably 230, you know, average. It goes up
5 a little, it goes down a little. You know,
6 you add new needs, whether they're casino
7 gaming or Enough is Enough or any other kind
8 of initiatives, and that's what I need to do.
9 You know, I bill 10 percent above that for
10 people who don't make it through the academy.
11 And like I said, I think we're at a healthy
12 place numberwise for the agency, and I don't
13 want to lose that.
14 SENATOR SAVINO: Is there some
15 concern, though, that you might see some
16 accelerated rate of retirement because of --
17 the collective bargaining agreement does have
18 a couple of zeros in it, so there's almost no
19 incentive to stick around for some of the
20 members who are approaching retirement age.
21 Have you factored that in to the calculation?
22 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Yeah, we
23 anticipate -- PBA settled their contract, and
24 we anticipated a little rise in retirements,
415
1 which we did see. NYSPI is currently in
2 negotiations, and I would assume that, you
3 know, maybe they're months away from theirs.
4 We'll expect to see people going out the door
5 at an increased rate right after that.
6 We also last year spent a lot of
7 overtime in New York City on counterterrorism
8 and other areas, and a lot of those people
9 are going to see the opportunity to retire.
10 So yeah, I mean, we say 230. And what
11 I like about the two academy classes is that
12 by the time we get to the second one, we can
13 kind of adjust for actual retirements. So if
14 it's up higher, we'll have a bigger class.
15 SENATOR SAVINO: Well, hopefully we'll
16 continue.
17 I want to turn to an issue that
18 Senator Klein has been out in front on with
19 respect to restricting firearm purchases for
20 people who are on the FBI's, you know,
21 terrorist screening database or the no-fly
22 list.
23 Has the State Police had discussions
24 with the FBI? Do they give you access to
416
1 that list?
2 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Yeah, I mean,
3 we do have access to that list for
4 counterterrorism purposes. You know, it's a
5 different discussion to be able to use it
6 for, you know, denying pistol permits.
7 You know, part of the issue there is
8 you can be placed on the terrorist watch list
9 or the no-fly list for a number of reasons.
10 You know, one is you're kind of a bona fide
11 terrorist, you know, you've been identified
12 that way. But there are people who are --
13 who have active investigations, you know,
14 that are not quite, you know, at the bona
15 fide terrorist level, who are placed there --
16 you know, and the standards for being placed
17 there are kind of loose, you know.
18 And it gives us the ability to
19 restrict people from traveling and the safety
20 issues related to that, but I don't know that
21 it's the kind of thing that we want to
22 publicize where people would be able to know
23 they're on the no-fly list so they'll -- you
24 know, why am I on the no-fly list, maybe
417
1 they're looking at me for this or for that.
2 So I think that's a concern. Before
3 we say, well, let's take the list and make it
4 available, you know, for denying pistol
5 permits, I think you have to vet out that
6 whole situation. But that's a discussion
7 with the feds. It's their information. And
8 as of now, they haven't given anyone
9 permission to use it for denying pistol
10 applications.
11 SENATOR SAVINO: And finally, in the
12 last minute -- I think I have a minute and
13 20 -- you were instrumental in helping us
14 develop the Compassionate Care Act, the
15 medical marijuana program. It has been up
16 and running now, dispensaries are opening,
17 the grow houses are growing. Has there been
18 any security leaks, any concerns that the
19 State Police have encountered with the
20 implementation of the program?
21 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: No, ma'am.
22 None at all. I guess we're, what, about
23 three weeks maybe, now --
24 SENATOR SAVINO: A little more.
418
1 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: -- going
2 towards four weeks? We haven't seen any
3 criminal acts, we haven't seen any
4 improprieties. Obviously we're charged with
5 the public safety aspects of it. We speak to
6 DOH and their Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement
7 all the time. And no, as of now, we haven't
8 had any issues.
9 SENATOR SAVINO: That's great. Thank
10 you.
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
12 Superintendent.
13 I wanted to ask this question on
14 behalf of Senator Golden, who had a pressing
15 district event he had to get to. And as you
16 know, we've had lengthy testimony today.
17 But the question is, what is the
18 coordination between the NYPD and the
19 Executive's proposal to permanently deploy
20 State Police and National Guard members to
21 New York City?
22 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: So I kind of
23 have an unfair advantage, because I am a
24 graduate of NYPD. And the people who are in
419
1 place down there at all levels are people
2 that, you know, were peers of mine. So I do
3 have the ability to have the conversations.
4 Early on when we started bringing
5 troopers down on overtime, before they were
6 permanently assigned there, we had
7 discussions with NYPD, with MTA police, to
8 make it seamless, to make sure that we're
9 complementing each other and not, you know,
10 doing kind of redundant work. The safety
11 issues, the safety issues of having another
12 law enforcement agency kind of planted in
13 there, to make sure we had communications and
14 everything else.
15 As we went into 55 permanent troopers
16 assigned there, we continued the discussions.
17 We've expanded our role where we're doing
18 some commercial vehicle enforcement at the
19 bridges and tunnels on the East River. We
20 invited NYPD in, we did them hand in hand
21 with them, it's been joint operations,
22 standing together. You know, State Police is
23 7 percent of the state's law enforcement, but
24 we do well over 90 percent of the commercial
420
1 vehicle enforcement in the state. So we do
2 bring something to the table, and I think we
3 were great partners with NYPD.
4 Same thing with MTA. We've worked
5 hand in hand with them in Grand Central, Penn
6 Station, and on train patrols, both through
7 Metro North and Long Island railroad.
8 You know, our biggest issue here is to
9 make sure our troopers are armed with the
10 information they need, have access to
11 communications, and that they're completely
12 safe while they're operating there.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you for that.
14 Just one more question. You
15 referenced in your testimony that there are
16 15 troopers assigned to the Sexual Assault
17 Victims Unit within the State Police. What
18 will be the coordination between this unit,
19 local police departments, and colleges? If
20 you could expound on that, please.
21 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Okay, so the
22 makeup of the Sexual Assault Victims Unit is
23 15 people. It's 12 members of the State
24 Police -- so it's 11 senior investigators,
421
1 one lieutenant who coordinates the program,
2 it's an office aide, it's a press person to
3 kind of work on the outreach issues.
4 You know, the way we see our role here
5 is to provide outreach and education to
6 college campuses, whether it's the student
7 population, whether it's the security or
8 police force or it's college administration.
9 The way we see our role with local police is
10 to coordinate with them on the investigation
11 to make sure that none of the victims who
12 need police response, you know, aren't able
13 to get what they need.
14 Whether it's a State Police response
15 or a local police response, we're looking to
16 do training for our own investigators to make
17 them better at investigating sex crimes. And
18 we'll be affording the same training to the
19 locals. I've spoken to the Chiefs and the
20 Sheriffs Associations and offered those
21 services.
22 You know, we don't know that there's a
23 tremendous void there, but we think that we
24 could work together so that we're all better
422
1 at it.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you for that.
3 Anyone else?
4 Well, I think that concludes your part
5 of the testimony. We truly appreciate you
6 being with us today and for taking the time
7 and for the great work that you do on behalf
8 of the citizens of New York State to protect
9 them. Thank you, Superintendent.
10 SUPERINTENDENT D'AMICO: Thank you.
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is
12 Margaret Miller, director and chief
13 information officer from the New York State
14 Office of Information Technology Services.
15 Welcome, Director Miller.
16 DIRECTOR MILLER: Thank you.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Whenever you're
18 ready, proceed.
19 DIRECTOR MILLER: Thank you.
20 Good afternoon, Chairwoman Young,
21 Chairman Farrell, and distinguished members
22 of the Legislature. I'm Margaret Miller, the
23 state's chief information officer and
24 director of Information Technology Services.
423
1 Thank you for the opportunity to speak with
2 you today and share our request for budget
3 expenditure and our plans for ITS.
4 The 2016-2017 Governor's Executive
5 Budget includes $567 million in General Fund
6 support to enable ITS to provide consolidated
7 statewide information technology services.
8 The Executive Budget also includes
9 $85 million in capital funds for IT
10 innovation in enterprise-level applications
11 and programs. This funding will allow ITS to
12 continue the progress of the state's
13 multiphase, multiyear IT transformation to
14 make government work smarter for citizens, to
15 spur economic growth, and make the state more
16 accessible to business.
17 We've encountered, and will continue
18 to encounter, challenges in this multiyear
19 journey. But those challenges don't deter
20 us. Rather, they inspire us to be even more
21 creative, innovative, and dedicated to
22 achieving service excellence and the best
23 possible experience for our citizens.
24 Our transformation progresses in
424
1 multiple phases. First there was
2 consolidation, then stabilization, and now
3 transformation of the citizen experience. At
4 every stage, plans have been created based on
5 the best information available at that time,
6 and then we've been agile in adapting these
7 plans whenever we need to as we learn more
8 about the challenges we face.
9 Each phase requires a different focus,
10 different capabilities, and different
11 partners, but has built inexorably on the
12 previous one.
13 Having made significant progress with
14 building a sound technology and
15 infrastructure foundation, we are beginning
16 to shift our focus to transforming the whole
17 life-cycle experience of our citizens to one
18 that they have the right to expect in the
19 digital era.
20 We're bringing together what was once
21 a highly decentralized, inefficient IT
22 structure across more than 50 disparate
23 agencies into a single agency that is ITS.
24 We can now work to maximize the tremendous
425
1 talent in the workforce, standardize the
2 myriad systems and applications implemented
3 in each agency, and create an environment in
4 which ITS can leverage IT investments across
5 all state government, adopt industry best
6 practices, and enhance service delivery to
7 our partner agencies, businesses interacting
8 with the state, and the citizens New York
9 State serves, providing needed services more
10 rapidly and cost-effectively, to fuel the
11 innovation economy.
12 In the 2016-2017 fiscal year, in
13 addition to our continuing program of work to
14 support the mission of the agencies, our
15 transformation program will focus on a number
16 of broad areas.
17 We'll continue to drive up the
18 maturity continuum of operational excellence,
19 adopting standard best practice processes and
20 tools to deliver reliable, secure services at
21 minimum cost to the taxpayer.
22 One of the benefits of the Governor's
23 IT transformation program which created ITS
24 is that we now have visibility to the risks
426
1 inherent in our whole infrastructure. During
2 the consolidation and stabilization phases of
3 the IT transformation --
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Director, could I
5 ask a favor? Could you get a little bit
6 closer to the microphone?
7 DIRECTOR MILLER: Oh, I beg your
8 pardon.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. If you
10 could pull the mike a little closer.
11 DIRECTOR MILLER: I'm short.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
13 DIRECTOR MILLER: One of -- is that
14 better?
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes.
16 DIRECTOR MILLER: Okay, thank you.
17 One of the benefits of the Governor's
18 IT transformation program which created ITS
19 is that we now have visibility to the risks
20 inherent in our infrastructure. During the
21 consolidation and stabilization phases of the
22 IT transformation, it became clear that a
23 significant technology debt had accumulated
24 over many decades of underinvestment, across
427
1 the state, creating operational, legal and
2 financial risks. During 2016-2017 we'll be
3 prioritizing a significant investment of
4 funds -- in fact approximately $40 million --
5 and resources to eliminate this debt.
6 ITS continues cybersecurity
7 improvements in 2016, with key programs to
8 address cyber risk and comply with industry
9 best practice standards of the National
10 Institute of Standards and Technology, or
11 NIST, which is part of the U.S. Department of
12 Commerce, and ISO standards and regulatory
13 rules for all agencies we support.
14 ITS carries over a comprehensive NIST
15 800.53 assessment from 2015 into 2016, and a
16 comprehensive NIST Top 20 Cyber Controls
17 Assessment. These two assessments will be
18 the primary baseline used to guide risk-based
19 investment and cybersecurity best practice
20 improvement through 2016 and beyond.
21 ITS is engaging key suppliers and
22 organizations, and the New York State
23 Intelligence Center, the NYSIC, to assist in
24 implementation of our enterprise-wide
428
1 programs, close high-risk gaps, and guide the
2 deployment of cybersecurity best practices.
3 With the cybersecurity function
4 centralized under ITS, the state can
5 implement the policies consistently, and
6 react swiftly across all IT assets when we
7 receive intelligence about potential threats.
8 Our current technology landscape has
9 been created over decades by more than
10 50 different agencies, each entirely focused
11 on their own mission without a unifying
12 vision of the citizen experience or the
13 underlying technology or data strategies.
14 The resulting environment is massively
15 complex and expensive to support reliably and
16 securely.
17 We also have significant staffing
18 challenges due to this complexity. The
19 skills of our staff are locked into skill
20 silos, leading to excessive spend on third
21 parties and an inability to offer the most
22 exciting career paths to our brightest and
23 best, too many of whom are stuck supporting
24 legacy technologies.
429
1 Most importantly, this complexity
2 leads to a negative citizen experience. To
3 address these issues, we are building a set
4 of strategic platforms comprising a portfolio
5 of tools and services which not just
6 individually, but as an integrated set, will
7 deliver an enhanced citizen experience across
8 all agencies.
9 Our staff are a vital asset in
10 delivering the best possible service to our
11 citizens, businesses, partner agencies and
12 all other digital visitors to New York State.
13 We have much to do to ensure that all team
14 members have the opportunity to reach their
15 potential and make the greatest contribution
16 to our transformation program.
17 We plan, then, to focus on a number of
18 initiatives with regard to our staff. We'll
19 increase the frequency and quality of our
20 team communication at all levels to ensure
21 all team members understand the overall ITS
22 strategy and how their work contributes to
23 the mission of ITS and our partner agencies.
24 We'll ensure our training and development
430
1 plans are closely aligned with our
2 transformation strategy and that team members
3 have the skills needed to be effective and to
4 progress in their careers. We'll implement
5 an intensive hiring program to ensure we're
6 bringing in sufficient new team members to
7 allow us to fulfill our objectives and allow
8 existing team members to progress in their
9 careers. And we will continue to seek ways
10 we can reward and promote outstanding talent.
11 Thank you for the opportunity to speak
12 with you today and share our plans. I
13 welcome your questions and comments.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
15 Director.
16 Our first speaker is Senator Croci.
17 SENATOR CROCI: Thank you, Madam
18 Chair. And thank you, Ms. Miller, for
19 joining us today.
20 The department that you head, is it
21 statutorily charged with providing the
22 protection of the state's -- our entire state
23 government's cybersecurity infrastructure,
24 including but not limited to identifying --
431
1 identification and mitigation of
2 vulnerabilities as well as deterring and
3 responding to cyber events and promoting
4 cyber awareness? Is that the statutory
5 charge?
6 DIRECTOR MILLER: Well, we took over
7 the responsibilities that were formerly with
8 the Department of Homeland Security and
9 Emergency Services, as you know. And they --
10 under Section 715 of the Executive Law, the
11 core mission of their Office of Cybersecurity
12 was to protect the state's executive
13 agencies' cybersecurity infrastructure and to
14 provide coordination of policies, standards
15 and programs related to cybersecurity.
16 And they did that in three different
17 ways. They had information security
18 management, managed security services, and a
19 cyber incident response team. Those were the
20 functions that we took over from them. They
21 never had enforcement functions. Those were
22 always split between multiple agencies, and
23 hence the creation of the fusion center.
24 So those are the three functions that
432
1 we took over, as well as the geographical
2 information services that we took.
3 Would it be helpful if I explained how
4 the responsibility now splits?
5 SENATOR CROCI: I think you just
6 answered the question. Thank you.
7 Could you describe for me a typical --
8 you were talking about some staffing
9 challenges. Can you describe for me a
10 typical cyber team employee? Do they have
11 delegated roles and responsibilities when
12 they're hired? How do they work together?
13 Do they work in teams, do they work
14 independently? And do they have other roles
15 other than their cyber roles? Are they doing
16 some other IT-related work that's outside of
17 the scope of cyber.
18 DIRECTOR MILLER: Well, first of all,
19 I'd like to say how delighted I am that we
20 just managed to hire a new chief information
21 security officer, Jim Garrett, who's with us
22 here today. And he joins us with a very
23 distinguished career in cybersecurity and was
24 formerly chief information security officer
433
1 with 3M and Ingram Micro; he has a great
2 pedigree. And he is currently reorganizing
3 his team and has been pleasantly surprised at
4 the caliber of staff that we have.
5 In answer to your direct question,
6 they are a dedicated team and have no other
7 responsibilities for other aspects of ITS.
8 Their role is very much focused on
9 cybersecurity, which is forefront in all our
10 minds.
11 SENATOR CROCI: Okay. We actually
12 have had a hearing on this last May 20th, and
13 you were invited to testify. Is there any
14 reason why you didn't come to testify at the
15 hearing last May 20th? I know your office
16 was invited. And I believe Dr. Bloniarz is
17 the individual who was here, but --
18 DIRECTOR MILLER: That's right.
19 SENATOR CROCI: -- I think he came
20 from the Governor's staff, not from yours.
21 DIRECTOR MILLER: That's right. In
22 fact, Professor Bloniarz was at that point
23 fulfilling multiple roles. So as you know,
24 he chairs the Governor's advisory committee,
434
1 but that was before our new chief information
2 security officer was appointed, and he was
3 interim in that role also. So that's why we
4 felt that he was probably the best person to
5 come and testify.
6 SENATOR CROCI: Okay. But you were
7 aware that you were invited to testify?
8 DIRECTOR MILLER: I'm sure I was at
9 the time. I don't remember, to be honest.
10 But we honestly felt, out of respect for your
11 time, that we should send the person best
12 capable to answer your questions.
13 SENATOR CROCI: Is Dr. Bloniarz here
14 today?
15 DIRECTOR MILLER: I'm not sure if he's
16 physically in the room, but I know he's
17 watching.
18 SENATOR CROCI: Okay, very good.
19 What if anything has been done in the
20 past year, since we've seen now, over a
21 process of about two years, the integration
22 from DHSES into ITS -- and it's an
23 interesting case study, since the Executive
24 Budget proposes a similar consolidation or
435
1 transfer of individuals from DHSES now to the
2 State Police, of course in a different
3 function. So I'm curious as to the
4 success -- if anything, what has been done in
5 the past year? Do you have success stories
6 in response to any cyber attacks that have
7 occurred?
8 And based on what's transpired with
9 the attacks on the federal government, OPM,
10 and then, of course, in the commercial
11 industry, what have we done as a state to
12 protect our infrastructure? Do you have any
13 success stories that you can discuss about
14 how this transfer of responsibilities has
15 been -- I've been cut off. That means it's
16 time for me to stop talking.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Keep going. Keep
18 going, Senator. Finish your question.
19 DIRECTOR MILLER: So first of all, I'd
20 like to speak to the role of ITS versus the
21 Department of Homeland Security and Emergency
22 Services previously. It would have been very
23 difficult previously, because DHSES would
24 only have sight of a small piece of the life
436
1 cycle, if you will, of cybersecurity.
2 ITS manages the infrastructure that
3 houses the data that we're trying to protect,
4 of course. So we are able to look across the
5 whole NIST life cycle of identify, protect,
6 detect, respond and recover. We can see
7 across the whole piece. And so it's far
8 easier for us both to make sure that the
9 systems that we're building are built to a
10 high standard of security so we can build
11 that in from the get-go, for us to be able to
12 see potential threats, for us to protect our
13 environment to make sure that it's fully
14 hardened, that we're up to speed with
15 patching and that we've implemented the best
16 possible protections, and then to detect any
17 attempted intrusions and then to help recover
18 when they do happen.
19 What I would say is that I guess the
20 success is that we haven't had -- touching
21 wood; I hope I'm not tempting fate -- any
22 major intrusion events. We monitor on a
23 daily basis for attempts, and we do record a
24 high number of attempts to penetrate our
437
1 security. But we have not had any very
2 significant intrusion exposures.
3 SENATOR CROCI: One final question.
4 Are you aware if your department is fully
5 compliant with the statutory set-asides for
6 minority-owned, women-owned and service-
7 disabled veteran businesses?
8 DIRECTOR MILLER: Yes. I'm afraid I
9 don't have the number at the tip of my
10 fingers, but actually we exceed the number by
11 a significant amount.
12 SENATOR CROCI: Okay. Very good. And
13 you mentioned staffing silos. So could you
14 please explain to me how you're overcoming
15 those challenges?
16 DIRECTOR MILLER: Right. We have a
17 staffing crisis looming with a huge number of
18 retirements, which will see a great many very
19 experienced staff lost from state service.
20 SENATOR CROCI: Specifically with
21 regard to cyber --
22 DIRECTOR MILLER: No, with regard to
23 the overall IT environment.
24 And one of the ways we will address
438
1 this is to focus and standardize on a smaller
2 number of technologies, which will make it
3 far easier for us to share expertise across
4 all agencies. At the moment we have staff
5 who are specialists in a large -- small
6 numbers of staff who are specialists in a
7 huge number of different technologies. Which
8 isn't good for their career paths, and it
9 isn't good for providing the best, most
10 cost-effective service.
11 So by standardizing on a smaller
12 number of key technologies, we can both
13 provide a better career path for them and
14 provide a better service.
15 SENATOR CROCI: Very good. Thank you,
16 Madam Chair. And thank you very much.
17 DIRECTOR MILLER: Thank you.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
19 Assemblyman?
20 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Director, thank
21 you for being here. I too wanted to actually
22 pick up where Senator Croci had left off in
23 regards to -- I was struck by your comments
24 about the skills of our staff are locked into
439
1 silos. It sounded as if there was a
2 resistance to change, but I don't think
3 that's what you meant. Is that correct?
4 DIRECTOR MILLER: No. No. I
5 apologize if that's how it sounded. No,
6 indeed, it's not a resistance to change,
7 quite the opposite. It has to do with the
8 fact that we have this huge complexity in our
9 environment, which we are addressing through
10 standardizing.
11 But we also have a problem with
12 experience. As I said, we will lose -- in
13 the next few years we'll lose 25 percent of
14 our staff through retirements. And that
15 means that the average experience level will
16 go -- at the most senior levels will go from
17 40 years to 11 years.
18 Now, expertise, of course, is a
19 mixture of training plus experience. Just as
20 you wouldn't take a doctor straight out of
21 med school and make him head of brain
22 surgery, we need a combination of training
23 plus experience. And because we see that
24 huge skills gap, it results in us having to
440
1 rely very heavily on contract staff. We
2 currently have 1200 contract staff that cost
3 the state $245 million a year, because we
4 rely on them for that mid-level of expertise
5 that includes the required experience. And
6 that means that the more junior folk aren't
7 able to progress.
8 I would love to find a way of
9 increasing the permanent staff in those
10 middle levels, maybe through insourcing that
11 we were able to do some years ago, or other
12 initiatives that we might agree with the
13 unions and the Civil Service that would allow
14 us to inject expertise into the middle ranks
15 and reduce our dependence on very expensive
16 contractors. So we would really look to find
17 a way of doing that.
18 And by that means, we would be able to
19 release those more junior staff from those
20 silos and be able to give the best
21 opportunities to our brightest and best
22 staff, which is something I very passionately
23 believe in.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: I think that
441
1 speaks to your final comments about staff
2 development.
3 And I will say, particularly being a
4 member from the Capital Region, I represent
5 many great, fine people who have been part of
6 those silos for years that do want to advance
7 their skills and want to be given the
8 opportunity. And I also respect the
9 complexity of technology, that there are
10 going to be times when you do need the
11 specialists. But we don't want the
12 specialists the norm at all costs possible.
13 I think one of the great things about
14 experience that you talk about is there are
15 many people who can say, Oh, yeah, we've done
16 that before, and here's why it didn't work.
17 Or here's how it may work.
18 DIRECTOR MILLER: Right.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: So I am
20 encouraged by your comments about increasing
21 development and training. I would think that
22 would mean particularly for our current
23 workforce -- that is in place, that has the
24 opportunity -- but also recruitment, which
442
1 indicates to me that we will be hiring more
2 staff to help move things along. Is that a
3 correct assessment? And does this budget
4 proposal support that in regards to positions
5 and also training and development dollars?
6 DIRECTOR MILLER: I believe we have
7 the appropriate budget to hire the staff that
8 we're in a position to hire. Of course they
9 have to be entry level. The skills gap is in
10 the middle and at the senior levels. That's
11 what's the problem.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: So to address
13 the skills gap, is the funding for
14 development and training going to help
15 address some of that?
16 DIRECTOR MILLER: To address the
17 training part. It's the experience that's
18 the problem.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Our
21 next speaker is Senator Nozzolio.
22 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you, Madam
23 Chair.
24 Good after -- good evening. I guess
443
1 we're getting into the evening.
2 I must admit I believe you've been
3 before the general finance committees in the
4 past, I believe you've testified before us.
5 Is that not correct?
6 DIRECTOR MILLER: Last year, yes.
7 That's shortly after I joined, yes.
8 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Last year I didn't
9 pay much attention to what you said at all.
10 This year I've listened to every word.
11 It is a different day in this nation
12 and in the world. Senator Croci began this
13 discussion; the cyber attacks to agencies of
14 the federal government that are generally
15 well protected show that they weren't so well
16 protected.
17 I don't -- I don't doubt for a second
18 that you've had managerial issues. It sounds
19 as though you have addressed a number of
20 those issues during your tenure. But I want
21 to probe, in the time I have, on
22 cybersecurity and what role that is playing
23 within the information technology that you
24 manage. And that you casually indicated that
444
1 there have been a high-level number of
2 attempts to develop security breaches in our
3 area. Any particular aspect of that data?
4 DIRECTOR MILLER: No, I --
5 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: For instance, the
6 Department of Motor Vehicles, the Parks
7 system, Taxation and Finance? What levels of
8 attack and what type of data are you
9 referring to?
10 DIRECTOR MILLER: We experience the
11 same sort of attacks and the same categories
12 of attacks as the general business
13 population. In fact, we work with the
14 Multistate ISAC, as do DHSES and State
15 Police, to garner intelligence about what's
16 happening in the broader world, and we see
17 exactly the same level of attack and same
18 nature of attack as the general business
19 community. And --
20 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: And the general
21 business community has, over the last
22 12 months, as you know, in New York State
23 experienced a huge amount of data breaches.
24 DIRECTOR MILLER: Indeed. Indeed. So
445
1 we adopt a stance at --
2 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: So you've achieved,
3 then, a huge amount of data breaches, is that
4 what you're telling us?
5 DIRECTOR MILLER: No, not at all. No,
6 we experience a huge number of attempts. So
7 there are a large number of attempted attacks
8 on our environment.
9 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you for
10 clarifying that. Where are the attempts
11 being made? Where are they centered?
12 DIRECTOR MILLER: They vary very
13 widely. I wouldn't single out any one
14 source. In fact, our posture is to be
15 vigilant whatever the source. And we remain,
16 I would say, confidently paranoid --
17 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: That's good. Do
18 you have a priority, though? You've said in
19 your testimony that you're understaffed and
20 basically overworked. What, then, are we
21 establishing as priorities within your
22 department?
23 DIRECTOR MILLER: Right. The biggest
24 priority we have is cybersecurity. And as
446
1 you will see, we've increased the budget very
2 significantly in cybersecurity over the last
3 few years. And the Governor himself and
4 members of the Governor's staff have
5 repeatedly asked whether we are spending
6 enough. Our judgment is that we have the
7 right budget for this year, but it's been
8 made very clear to us that should we require
9 additional funding, we should ask for it.
10 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Well, you indicate
11 that 2016, the improvements you've made --
12 and your testimony says that you've
13 established key programs to address cyber
14 risk and comply with industry best practices.
15 What steps have been taken to achieve that
16 objective?
17 DIRECTOR MILLER: Let me list out some
18 of it. So first of all, we're aggressively
19 remediating all out-of-date hardware and
20 software that could pose a risk to our
21 environment.
22 We've engaged third-party experts to
23 assess our cyber control risk related to
24 regulated data and third-party-managed data.
447
1 And then we focus on the most
2 sensitive citizen data and data regulated by
3 law, to ensure that these NIST controls are
4 in place for that data as a priority.
5 We also make sure that the legal
6 contractual language for any third parties we
7 use reflects the best standards of regulatory
8 control and best practice.
9 And we also are implementing a
10 comprehensive risk-management program to
11 raise the visibility and track mitigation of
12 high-risk areas of weakness.
13 And we're also making significant
14 process improvements in areas such as the
15 enterprise cyber command center, enterprise
16 risk assessments, enterprise identity
17 management, and so forth, which are the
18 cornerstones of a best-practice cybersecurity
19 program.
20 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Are you a
21 cybersecurity expert yourself?
22 DIRECTOR MILLER: I am not, sir.
23 That's why --
24 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Have you had any
448
1 cybersecurity experience in other positions
2 prior to your becoming IT head?
3 DIRECTOR MILLER: No. I have
4 experience extensively as a chief information
5 officer, and that's why I'm very pleased that
6 we've hired Jim Garrett, as I mentioned
7 earlier, as our chief information security
8 officer. He's a --
9 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: What experts -- you
10 said you've deployed experts. Does that mean
11 your agency has contracted with experts in
12 the field --
13 DIRECTOR MILLER: Yes.
14 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: -- for consultant
15 services?
16 DIRECTOR MILLER: We're currently
17 working with Deloitte.
18 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: With -- pardon me.
19 Stewart? I couldn't hear.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Repeat the name?
21 DIRECTOR MILLER: With Deloitte.
22 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Oh, Deloitte.
23 What additional steps have you
24 suggested to the agencies that hold the most
449
1 private of information, particularly the Tax
2 Department, the Health Department? What have
3 your technology people done with the
4 technology people from those departments to
5 establish appropriate firewall safeguards?
6 Industry best practices, certainly. But is
7 Deloitte -- are they giving your agency
8 consulting expertise and suggestions with
9 additional infrastructure to establish within
10 the IT systems?
11 DIRECTOR MILLER: Well, we have
12 information security experts embedded in
13 every agency. And they are part of the chief
14 information security office's team. And they
15 are experts in the particular challenges of
16 that agency, whether it be HIPAA, whether it
17 be federal law related to tax, and so on and
18 so forth. So that we have experts embedded
19 in each team.
20 And we are working with every agency
21 to educate them in the risks of cybersecurity
22 and to undertake steps such as classification
23 of their data, to make sure that every
24 agency, every agency head understands the
450
1 vulnerabilities of their data and what needs
2 to be protected when.
3 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I guess what I --
4 I'm doubly concerned about the fact we're
5 relying on each agency, which primarily has
6 had a workforce that has not been exposed to
7 cyber attacks, are not expert in those
8 fields, yet you're indicating they're the
9 centerpiece of reliance on protecting this
10 data. And what type of real-world
11 experience, particularly from the private
12 sector, is being brought into the public
13 sector to provide the real-life experience --
14 I mean government, thank God, has not been
15 the recipient of major attacks yet at the
16 state level, although you're indicating that
17 the breaches are pretty uniform and
18 broad-based -- or the attacks, not breaches.
19 DIRECTOR MILLER: Right.
20 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: The attacks are
21 broad-based. What I -- I'm just trying to
22 probe -- and this is what the subject of
23 Senator Croci's hearing was about last year
24 that you couldn't attend. But this is the
451
1 kind of thing that we're trying to probe.
2 What type of protections are being provided
3 to New Yorkers that their data is being held
4 in a secure way with the most appropriate
5 cyber protections available?
6 DIRECTOR MILLER: Let me clarify.
7 Cybersecurity is a centralized function
8 within ITS. It's not devolved to the
9 agencies, although we have representatives of
10 the cyber team embedded with each agency to
11 make sure that we're mindful of any
12 particular requirements in each agency.
13 It's a very highly skilled, very
14 specialized team. And we do rely on
15 third-party experts wherever we deem it
16 necessary. So as I said before, we are -- we
17 remain paranoid rather than complacent, and
18 at every occasion we ask ourselves do we have
19 the expertise in-house for a particular
20 aspect of cybersecurity or do we need to rely
21 on a third party.
22 And in fact as part of the arrangement
23 with the Multistate ISAC and the Center for
24 Internet Security, we have access to external
452
1 experts through those relationships.
2 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: That this is a
3 subject that I believe the Senate should
4 probe further, and that we definitely will be
5 back to you. We appreciate your discussions
6 today in this budgetary context. You have a
7 very important responsibility, and we need to
8 make sure that you have the resources
9 available to you to conduct that protection
10 of our data, particularly in light of the
11 rest of the world and what's happening out
12 there.
13 So thank you very much for your time
14 and your answering our questions.
15 DIRECTOR MILLER: Thank you.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
17 Our next speaker is Senator Krueger.
18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Good afternoon, or
19 close to evening.
20 Many of us sat through a double
21 hearing yesterday, and one of the hearings
22 was on workforce development for the state.
23 And there was testimony that in the last two
24 years your department lost 6 percent of your
453
1 state workforce but you've increased the
2 number of consultants by five times, from 164
3 to 849.
4 So you just testified about the
5 exacerbation of significant retirement. So
6 I'm just curious, even as you're seeing some
7 shrinkage already in the workforce, how can
8 you explain such a radical growth in the
9 number of consultants in your department?
10 DIRECTOR MILLER: It's -- it's a
11 challenge. And as I just said, we can hire
12 at the entry level very aggressively, which
13 we are doing. But we don't just need skill,
14 we need experience as well as skill. And of
15 course what we're losing is experience. So
16 that's a huge challenge for us.
17 And we had hoped in this budget cycle
18 to repeat the insourcing initiative, whereby
19 some years ago we were allowed to actually
20 hire a large number of those contractors as
21 state staff and bring them into the
22 workforce, bring them into the union
23 workforce. And that would provide an
24 injection of expertise, experience and skill
454
1 to plug the gap and reduce the spend on
2 contractors.
3 We were very much hoping to do that.
4 Unfortunately, our local PEF colleagues
5 weren't prepared to work with us on that.
6 But we're very optimistic that the senior PEF
7 leadership will work with us on that in the
8 future. That seems to be the most obvious
9 and most -- the quickest way of plugging that
10 gap.
11 Otherwise, you know, I'm open to
12 suggestions as to how to fill that gap.
13 Given the restrictions we work within, it's
14 very difficult.
15 SENATOR KRUEGER: So I'm a little
16 confused. So what presents you from hiring
17 new more senior people? You said you can
18 only hire junior people. Is there some rule
19 that prevents you from hiring --
20 DIRECTOR MILLER: Under civil service
21 law, we can only hire at entry level from the
22 external world.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: Only at entry level.
24 Okay. And do you agree with PEF's analysis
455
1 that the cost for consultants is
2 significantly higher per person than state
3 employees?
4 DIRECTOR MILLER: I do. That's why we
5 would very much like to turn some of those
6 consultants into state employees. We'd love
7 to.
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: Certain agencies are
9 desperately in need of modernization for
10 their technology and computerization. The
11 Department of Housing and Development, HDS --
12 HCR, excuse me. I'm getting my letters
13 confused -- Housing and Community
14 Development, thank you, has literally -- I'm
15 not even going to say it's computers, maybe
16 ancient DOS computers, but in a number of its
17 divisions, just huge piles of paper records.
18 They were promised to somehow be on a
19 priority list of computerization, I think
20 when Governor Cuomo first got in.
21 Can you update me at all about where
22 computerization of that agency is?
23 DIRECTOR MILLER: Yes, certainly.
24 That particular initiative is something I've
456
1 been personally involved in over the past
2 year. There's been certain delays, but what
3 I would say is that the RFP for that work is
4 just about ready to issue. And we look
5 forward to implementing a 21st-century system
6 for them as soon as we practically can.
7 SENATOR KRUEGER: Can you give me an
8 estimated time?
9 DIRECTOR MILLER: I don't want to do
10 that quite yet until we have the responses
11 from the RFP. But we haven't --
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: And you've only been
13 here two years or --
14 DIRECTOR MILLER: A year and a bit.
15 Year and two months, I think.
16 SENATOR KRUEGER: So it was my
17 understanding they were like in the top list
18 of priority agencies. Are there other
19 agencies that are also in queue and haven't
20 gotten to even the RFP process yet?
21 DIRECTOR MILLER: Well, we've just
22 been through a very rigorous process of
23 prioritizing initiatives in the budget for
24 the new year. So we asked every agency to
457
1 put forward their proposals for the projects
2 that they wanted to pursue in the new year,
3 and for them to choose what was most
4 important. And we're about to publish, I
5 think maybe next week, the final list of
6 projects that have been requested by the
7 agencies and that DOB have verified there is
8 funding for. So it really is entirely up to
9 the agencies what they prioritize.
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: We passed a law,
11 often just nicknamed the SAFE Act, that
12 required the state to develop a database for
13 ammunition. What's the process and what
14 stage are you at in preparing a request for
15 software development for this database, or do
16 we already have that done?
17 DIRECTOR MILLER: Well, the budget was
18 provided, as you know, in 2013-2014, and
19 there was some $27 million in capital funds,
20 I think, at that point for the SAFE Act.
21 We've spent $9.3 million already, and
22 we're ready with the pistol permitting
23 process. That is pretty much ready to be
24 rolled out. Because as you know, we need to
458
1 begin that process in January 2017. So we're
2 confident that that piece of the program will
3 be rolled out in time so that we don't end up
4 with a huge workload for the county clerks.
5 The ammunition sales database is --
6 that's something that's been a little
7 problematic. We've been doing a great deal
8 of research on that, and we've offered
9 Superintendent D'Amico three different
10 solutions. But unfortunately, to date, we
11 haven't come up with a solution that is
12 acceptable to him, either for cost or
13 usability reasons. So we're continuing to
14 research to see if we can find a solution
15 that's acceptable to State Police.
16 SENATOR KRUEGER: So you believe you
17 came up with three alternatives to model that
18 database, but the State Police have not
19 approved any of the three?
20 DIRECTOR MILLER: Not to date. As I
21 say, either for cost or usability reasons.
22 So we'll keep working on it until we can find
23 something that they believe is workable.
24 SENATOR KRUEGER: Do you know what the
459
1 current obstacles are that we still cannot
2 overcome?
3 DIRECTOR MILLER: Not in detail, I'm
4 afraid. Not in detail.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: And was your office
6 involved in the I-STOP technology? The
7 I-STOP -- I, dash, STOP -- that was for
8 opioid prescription tracking.
9 DIRECTOR MILLER: Oh. No, sorry. No.
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: So questions about
11 that aren't relevant for your office.
12 Thank you.
13 DIRECTOR MILLER: Thank you.
14 (Discussion off the record at
15 committee table.)
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Croci.
17 SENATOR CROCI: Thank you, Madam
18 Chair.
19 One additional question, ma'am.
20 You said 1200 contract staff. What's
21 the total cost?
22 DIRECTOR MILLER: It's approximately
23 $245 million a year.
24 SENATOR CROCI: $245 million. And
460
1 these are individuals who have to have
2 specialized skill sets, I'm assuming some
3 sort of a thorough vetting process before
4 they're given access to sensitive information
5 procedures.
6 DIRECTOR MILLER: Oh, indeed. Yes.
7 SENATOR CROCI: What kind of vetting
8 goes on for these individuals? Does the
9 contract agent -- are they required to
10 provide employees who are properly vetted, or
11 is there additional vetting done by your
12 agency?
13 DIRECTOR MILLER: We apply the same
14 vetting as we do to our permanent staff,
15 including fingerprinting.
16 SENATOR CROCI: And 1200 -- is it one
17 agency that's providing these individuals, or
18 is it multiple companies?
19 DIRECTOR MILLER: No. No, it's a
20 range. A great many of them are HBITS staff
21 and sourced from minority- and women-owned
22 businesses.
23 SENATOR CROCI: Okay. And with regard
24 to that, since you raised it, OGS has a
461
1 conflict with your data on veterans,
2 disabled-veteran-owned businesses --
3 DIRECTOR MILLER: I'm sorry, I didn't
4 hear.
5 SENATOR CROCI: OGS, who did a report
6 on the minority-, women-, and service-
7 disabled-owned businesses, differs -- there's
8 a disparity in their accounting of your
9 agency's compliance with the service-disabled
10 veteran set-aside. So I'd ask for -- at some
11 point for you to get that information back to
12 us --
13 DIRECTOR MILLER: Oh, sure.
14 SENATOR CROCI: -- just to ensure that
15 there's not a disparity.
16 DIRECTOR MILLER: Yeah.
17 SENATOR CROCI: And with regard to
18 your staffing issues, the great expertise
19 that's been developed over the years started
20 in the Department of Defense, I believe,
21 certainly within the services. And there are
22 a lot of veterans who have this skill set and
23 are eager to be employed. So perhaps that's
24 a potential answer for us that would satisfy
462
1 Senator Krueger's desire to bring some of
2 this in-house, and certainly our desire to
3 hire veterans in New York.
4 DIRECTOR MILLER: I'm glad you raised
5 that, sir. There is a particular initiative
6 that I'm associated with out of Columbia
7 University, called Workforce Opportunity
8 Services that actually looks to specifically
9 train veterans in IT skills and place them
10 with employers. We are actively looking at
11 making use of that initiative if we can find
12 the right procurement vehicle.
13 SENATOR CROCI: Well, I'm happy to be
14 of assistance in any way. Thank you, ma'am.
15 DIRECTOR MILLER: Thank you. Thank
16 you.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
18 Any other legislator want to ask
19 questions?
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
21 I believe that you made a statement a
22 little while ago saying that there was over
23 $27 million allocated in the 2013-2014 budget
24 specifically for the SAFE Act that was
463
1 capital. That is not a true settlement.
2 There was no lining out in the state budget
3 regarding those funds.
4 So I just want to point that out,
5 because that was not a correct statement,
6 number one.
7 DIRECTOR MILLER: I apologize.
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Number two, you
9 said that you've actually used $9 million
10 toward the ammunition database. And when was
11 that?
12 DIRECTOR MILLER: Not for the
13 ammunition database, no. This is for the
14 pistol research part of the work. We
15 haven't -- we have not yet spent money on the
16 ammunition database.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: You have not spent
18 money on the ammunition database.
19 DIRECTOR MILLER: That's correct.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And you're aware of
21 the MOU that's in place.
22 DIRECTOR MILLER: I'm sorry?
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: You're aware of the
24 memorandum of understanding that's in place
464
1 right now not to develop the database.
2 DIRECTOR MILLER: I am indeed. As I
3 testified earlier, we have done research, but
4 that's all we've done with regard to the
5 ammunition database.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
7 That concludes the testimony, so thank
8 you for being here.
9 DIRECTOR MILLER: Thank you.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So this is where
11 we're at, just to let the speakers know. We
12 have 26 speakers in the queue now. A few of
13 those are multiperson panels. And the time
14 is late, obviously; it's 5:30. We had five
15 state agencies on Public Protection testify
16 today, the judiciary testified today.
17 And so I just want to ask of the
18 speakers, if you have written testimony
19 that's lengthy, we would prefer that you did
20 not read the whole thing. And if you could
21 try to come down and hit the most salient
22 points, maybe do your presentation in five
23 minutes, just so we can get all the speakers
24 in before midnight. And then based from
465
1 that, I'm sure that our members may have
2 questions or may not. So let's start this
3 portion of the hearing.
4 And first we have Bill Leahy, director
5 of the New York State Office of Indigent
6 Legal Services.
7 And if speakers would prefer to submit
8 their testimony, they may do that also if
9 they don't want to stay.
10 Following Mr. Leahy, Director Leahy,
11 we will have the administrator of the New
12 York State Commission on Judicial Conduct.
13 Welcome, Director.
14 DIRECTOR LEAHY: Thank you, Madam
15 Chairwoman.
16 And congratulations on your position,
17 even though at this hour you might be
18 regretting it. And greetings to all the
19 Senators and Assemblymembers who are here.
20 Let me begin -- and I will try to
21 address the salient points. I'm here to talk
22 about the current situation with respect to
23 the provision of counsel in the State of
24 New York pursuant to County Law 18-B.
466
1 And I come here at a time when we are
2 just a couple of weeks away from the fifth
3 anniversary of the creation of my office, the
4 Office of Indigent Legal Services. And
5 before the legislative session is over, we
6 will have hit the 10th anniversary of the
7 Kaye Commission report.
8 And for those of who you don't
9 remember, that Kaye Commission report in 2006
10 described the state of the provision of
11 counsel for people who cannot afford to
12 retain counsel in the State of New York as a
13 "fragmented system of county-operated and
14 largely county-financed indigent defense
15 services that fails to satisfy the state's
16 constitutional and statutory obligations to
17 protect the rights of the indigent accused."
18 Quite a serious indictment of the
19 State of New York's compliance with one of
20 its basic governmental responsibilities.
21 Partly as a result of that Kaye
22 Commission report, my agency was created and
23 I came in as director. As I mentioned
24 earlier, it's five years that we've been
467
1 here. I happen to have a five-year term,
2 which is also shortly to expire. Thanks to
3 the unanimous recommendation of my board --
4 one of whose members, Senator John Dunne, is
5 here today -- and thanks to the cooperation
6 of Governor Cuomo, I am happy to say that I
7 am embarking on a new five-year term in about
8 three weeks. And I'm glad I can, because
9 there's an awful lot of work yet to be done.
10 We've made some great strides. We've
11 made it with the cooperation of this
12 Legislature. We're very grateful to you.
13 Let me tell you where we are today in
14 the wake of the Executive Budget. A year
15 after the Kaye Commission report was filed,
16 the New York Civil Liberties Union filed the
17 Hurrell-Harring lawsuit that has been
18 referenced a few times by earlier speakers
19 today, and by members. That lawsuit came to
20 a negotiated settlement in October 2014
21 between the State of New York, five counties
22 of Ontario, Onondaga, Schuyler, Suffolk and
23 Washington, and my agency was chosen as the
24 implementing agency.
468
1 So that happened in October 2014. And
2 what I said at that time were two things that
3 are still very important today. One, the
4 State of New York, the Governor deserved an
5 enormous amount of credit for acknowledging
6 for the very first time since County Law 18-B
7 was enacted in 1965 that it is the state's
8 responsibility, not an individual county's
9 responsibility, to make sure that the
10 Constitution and the laws are complied with
11 and to make sure, to cite one of my favorite
12 quotes from one of my favorite Attorneys
13 General of the nation, Janet Reno, "the best
14 protection against wrongful convictions is
15 the presence of a good lawyer."
16 And so at that time the two things I
17 said were, one, that the Governor was right
18 to acknowledge that it is the state's
19 responsibility. He was right to vest the
20 implementation in an independent professional
21 agency that, just as the superintendent of
22 State Police who testified so impressively,
23 knows what it's about, knows what it is
24 doing, knows how to make things right.
469
1 And then the second thing, of course,
2 was I pointed out there's one big problem.
3 And I wasn't the only one who pointed it out.
4 Mark Williams, the Cattaraugus County public
5 defender and the president-elect of the Chief
6 Defenders Association of New York -- you'll
7 be hearing from him I hope shortly -- he said
8 it at the time as well, that it's just simply
9 unfair that five counties receive the
10 benefits of appropriate representation,
11 state-funded representation, and all the rest
12 of the upstate counties do not.
13 Of course New York City, 2009, this
14 Legislature acted to reduce caseloads, with
15 ample state funding that goes to New York
16 City now to the tune of about $55 million a
17 year.
18 So flash-forward now to the Executive
19 Budget. First I want to say the
20 implementation in those five counties --
21 because there were skeptics who said, Well,
22 yeah, the Governor entered into this
23 settlement, but are he and his people really
24 going to support it, are they really going to
470
1 comply with its provisions, are they really
2 going to fund it? Yes, yes, and yes.
3 The Governor has cooperated at every
4 step. His first assistant legal counsel,
5 Sandi Toll, has shepherded and honored our
6 independent implementation. She and his
7 office have supported us at every turn. So
8 there are no worries on that score, and I
9 want to be clear about that.
10 The second thing is I want to
11 congratulate and thank the Governor with
12 respect to the Hurrell-Harring portion of the
13 Executive Budget, because we have been given
14 all the tools, all the staff, all the funding
15 that we need to implement that settlement
16 effectively. That's a big deal. Because for
17 once, New York is going to get it right with
18 respect to indigent defense. And that's big
19 news.
20 Now the other big news is the Tale of
21 Two Cities or the Tale of Two Counties or the
22 Tale of Two States, however you want to
23 characterize it. I put in my written
24 testimony, you know, Clinton in the northeast
471
1 and Chautauqua in the southwest and Niagara
2 in the northwest and all of that.
3 But really the best way to graphically
4 illustrate it, I think, is just to take the
5 two counties on Long Island, the two most
6 populous counties in the state outside of New
7 York City. And they both have huge needs,
8 they've both made great efforts as counties.
9 They have both partnered with us over five
10 years very effectively, but with minimal
11 funding. Now Suffolk will get a big chunk of
12 the $10.4 million in this Executive Budget,
13 should you approve it -- and I urge you to
14 approve it -- to reduce caseloads to
15 appropriate levels, New York City-type
16 levels. Nassau County, under fiscal control,
17 doing its best, working hard with a terrific
18 public defender, Kent Moston, one of the
19 smartest, wisest, best public defenders in
20 the state -- they're left behind.
21 And if you want to take another look,
22 go a little more traditional upstate, you can
23 go to the two cities of Syracuse and
24 Rochester. Very similar cities, they have
472
1 their struggles, they're trying hard.
2 Syracuse is getting very significant
3 assistance under this settlement. We've had
4 terrific cooperation from the county
5 attorney's office in Syracuse. I'm going to
6 be going out to see Bob Durr, the new county
7 attorney, next week to continue the path
8 forward.
9 And then you have Rochester.
10 Rochester has another great public defender,
11 Tim Donaher. They've had terrific county
12 leadership. What they don't have is state
13 funding. And so the city court caseloads are
14 wildly in excess of any rational maximum in
15 the City of Rochester.
16 And on the appellate side, we have a
17 great appellate unit -- there's a three-year
18 delay before someone gets his or her right to
19 appeal. And they're sitting in prison or
20 jail.
21 So what can be done? Well, we have
22 $34 million that we requested in our budget
23 request, and the final two pages of our
24 handout tells the whole story as far as the
473
1 numbers are concerned. One page is our
2 request, $139.26 million. The second page is
3 the Executive Budget. And yes, there's an
4 over $12 million increase. It's big, we're
5 very grateful for it. It's the biggest
6 increase we've ever seen. It pales in
7 comparison to a lot of the numbers that have
8 been thrown around here earlier today, but
9 it's a big number to us, and we're deeply
10 grateful to the Governor for it.
11 The problem is New York cannot
12 tolerate -- Senator DeFrancisco said this
13 recently better than I ever could. He said:
14 Who could be against this idea that there
15 should be one standard of justice in this
16 state? There can't be two. And right now
17 that's what we have.
18 So we're coming to you and we're
19 asking you to do what we tried unsuccessfully
20 to get the Executive to do, which is to
21 provide significant funding in the
22 legislative budget for the
23 non-Hurrell-Harring counties.
24 For what reasons? Primarily two. We
474
1 start to reduce the caseloads, number one.
2 And number two, eliminate this intolerable
3 lack of compliance with the most fundamental
4 legal obligation, to have a lawyer at a
5 defendant's side when that magistrate or
6 judge is considering whether to leave the
7 person at liberty or put them into pretrial
8 detention. That is just intolerable.
9 At the Court of Appeals, it's been six
10 years since the Court of Appeals has said so.
11 And the fact that we still have large swaths
12 of upstate in which there is no counsel at
13 arraignment is just -- just should not be
14 tolerated a minute longer.
15 That's probably a little bit more than
16 you wanted, but I'm open for questions.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
18 The Assembly?
19 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: We will hear
20 from Member Lentol.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Thank you very
22 much, Mr. Chairman.
23 Is my mic on? No.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: How many years
475
1 have you been here?
2 (Laughter.)
3 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Too long.
4 First of all, Bill, I want to thank
5 you for the five wonderful years that you've
6 given us. You've really lifted this office
7 to where none of us ever would have thought
8 it could have gone. And you've been just
9 tremendous in changing the whole landscape of
10 providing legal defense services for the
11 indigent.
12 DIRECTOR LEAHY: Thank you.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: And so I couldn't
14 agree with you more about the Hurrell-Harring
15 problem, that we need to have all of the
16 counties on an equal footing. This is a
17 disservice to all of the counties. This is
18 really what some of my colleagues can call an
19 unfunded mandate. And it's an unfunded
20 mandate for legal services that are required
21 by the Constitution of the United States of
22 America.
23 So I just wanted to talk to you a
24 little bit about the bill that I introduced
476
1 last year that OCA -- a program bill to
2 transfer authority to approve bar association
3 plans for the operation of an assigned
4 counsel program of conflict defender, from
5 the chief administrator of the courts to your
6 office, to the Office of Indigent Defense
7 Services, with the statutory mission to make
8 sure that we have quality 18-B, as we call
9 it, services provided for indigent
10 defendants.
11 And I think I know the answer, but do
12 you support this legislation?
13 DIRECTOR LEAHY: Oh, certainly we do.
14 And really this has been, you know, kind of
15 an understanding with OCA since our probably
16 first year. The OCA responsibility goes back
17 to the day when there was no state agency
18 with the expertise or the resources to
19 undertake this responsibility. And I know
20 there is a big backlog of county conflict
21 defender plans that have been sitting with
22 OCA, essentially waiting for the day when we
23 can take over that responsibility. We're
24 ready, willing and able.
477
1 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: Okay. And I
2 guess you would agree that that would enhance
3 your ability to provide quality 18-B services
4 to indigent defendants.
5 DIRECTOR LEAHY: Yes, absolutely, in
6 continuation of our partnership with the
7 counties and the providers.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: That would be
9 great. Thank you, sir.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
11 Our next speaker is Senator Ruth
12 Hassell-Thompson.
13 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you,
14 Madam Chair.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN LENTOL: And by the way,
16 before I finish, I just want to congratulate
17 Assemblywoman Fahy and Assemblyman McDonald
18 for introducing that bill in the Assembly to
19 actually bring us into the 21st century in
20 providing legal services for indigents
21 throughout the State of New York.
22 DIRECTOR LEAHY: I join you in that.
23 I just had the pleasure of reading
24 Assemblyman McDonald's -- I think it was the
478
1 blog in the Times Union. That was very
2 eloquent.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
4 Senator?
5 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you.
6 I was afraid you'd moved into my time.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We know better than
8 that.
9 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: No, I don't
10 have a lot of questions. Most of them you
11 answered. And as I was trying to read
12 quickly through your presentation, some of
13 the answers are there.
14 You know, I too would like to
15 congratulate you, Mr. Leahy, for an
16 extraordinary five years. It was a struggle,
17 and we got a lot of pushback. But I
18 appreciate your tenacity and certainly the
19 fact that you were one of the first ones here
20 today, and still here to give your testimony,
21 is just a statement of how tenacious you are
22 about something that you really care about
23 and believe in. And so I just want you to
24 know that I appreciate that.
479
1 As we began to talk before
2 Hurrell-Harring was settled, we had an idea
3 of what the five counties' issues were in
4 terms of their backlog. What's your sense of
5 the backlog for the 52 counties that we're
6 now going to -- that will be Phase 2 of our
7 next struggle, I suppose?
8 DIRECTOR LEAHY: Well, I think in
9 general you can say that the average
10 situation in the 52 counties is slightly
11 worse than the situation was in New York City
12 when this Legislature came to the rescue of
13 New York City in 2009. In other words, the
14 average weighted caseload in our most recent
15 upstate caseload report, 616 cases among
16 institutional providers. It was around 582,
17 I believe, in New York City back in 2009.
18 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Two years
19 ago we went to Washington, D.C., for the
20 anniversary of Gideon, and we were deeply
21 concerned about civil legal services as well.
22 But just making sure that people who come to
23 court are represented. But we came back
24 really looking at this thing and saying it's
480
1 wonderful to have all these attorneys and
2 have all these laws on the books, but without
3 the case caps and some of the other pieces
4 that we've added to it, most of the attorneys
5 were showing up in court with a folder and
6 saying, "Plead out, because I don't have time
7 to study it. You know, I just have a
8 caseload that's unbelievable."
9 Are you telling me that that's what's
10 going on now in the 52 counties?
11 DIRECTOR LEAHY: Back when I was
12 serving in Massachusetts, I was quoted as
13 saying that control of caseloads is a sine
14 qua non of good representation. You can't
15 have good representation without controlled
16 caseloads, no matter how good of a lawyer you
17 are, no matter how much you care.
18 So your point is an excellent one.
19 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Right.
20 Well, again, I just -- I would like to be
21 sure that the fact that this budget is flat
22 is going to give you, number one, what you
23 need to satisfy Hurrell-Harring and, number
24 two, that this level budget will not have a
481
1 negative impact on your goals for 2015-2016.
2 DIRECTOR LEAHY: Well, as I say, we
3 need help from the Legislature and we will
4 need help from the Governor at the table to
5 achieve some progress for the upstate
6 counties. I mean, all that we have right
7 now -- in fact, we have the threat where some
8 counties -- we have 25 counties right now who
9 are participating in our Counsel at First
10 Appearance Grant Program. The three years of
11 that program comes due at about the end of
12 this year. So we will be putting out a new
13 RFP.
14 Now, there is $800,000 in the
15 Governor's budget to protect the four out of
16 the five lawsuit counties, to hold them
17 harmless so that they don't -- they're
18 participating in that, among the 25 counties,
19 in that Counsel at Arraignment Program. So
20 if they were to be unsuccessful in their
21 effort.
22 But the point is there's only $4
23 million in that fund. And without support
24 from the Legislature, we know that now -- now
482
1 that all counties do understand -- they
2 didn't five years ago -- that there is a
3 legal right to representation. This is not
4 just some liberal idea, this is the law, and
5 everybody knows it now. And so we expect the
6 other 32 counties will be coming in. So, you
7 know, the $4 million that's being used now,
8 not only does it only cover 25 counties, but
9 it only covers portions of those counties.
10 So the need is great. I mean, we
11 requested $8 million additional. We know
12 that economies can be made, and we're working
13 with OCA to come up with a potential
14 legislative solution that would allow for
15 centralizing arraignments maybe in one or two
16 locations in rural counties, rather than 30
17 or 40, as at present. Which I think
18 everybody could get behind, and I think
19 everybody would be enthusiastic about it.
20 It's -- and I think it is underway.
21 We hope to have it here in this session. But
22 still, there's an undeniable cost to
23 providing a lawyer at arraignment, just as
24 there is with providing a lawyer anywhere.
483
1 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you.
2 Thank you, Madam Chair.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
4 And thank you, Director, for being
5 here today. We truly appreciate it.
6 DIRECTOR LEAHY: Thank you.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is
8 Robert Tembeckjian, the administrator of the
9 New York City office of the New York State
10 Commission on Judicial Conduct.
11 Welcome, Administrator. And my first
12 question is, how badly did I butcher your
13 name?
14 ADMINISTRATOR TEMBECKJIAN: Yes, you
15 pronounced it correctly. You got it exactly
16 right.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Exactly right, wow.
18 I'm happy to hear that.
19 ADMINISTRATOR TEMBECKJIAN: Yes, thank
20 you. My mother would be pleased if you'd
21 come to dinner.
22 I appreciate the opportunity to speak
23 to the budget committee here about the
24 Executive recommendation for the Commission
484
1 on Judicial Conduct.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Could you pull your
3 mic a little bit closer, please? Thank you.
4 ADMINISTRATOR TEMBECKJIAN: Yes, happy
5 to.
6 As you know, the commission is created
7 in the State Constitution. We are the entity
8 of government that is responsible for
9 enforcing judicial ethics on the 3500 members
10 of the state judiciary. We are not an
11 executive agency, but our budget is submitted
12 to the Legislature in the Executive Budget
13 with a recommendation by the Governor so that
14 the Judiciary would not be in a position to
15 control the commission's budget. That
16 decision was made at the commission's
17 inception about 40 years ago.
18 For the sixth year in a row, the
19 Executive Budget is recommending a flat
20 budget for the commission, not one penny
21 more. Over the last six or seven years, the
22 economies that we have been required to
23 initiate in order to live within the
24 constraints of the budget that has been
485
1 recommended by the Governor, has resulted in
2 a reduction of our staff by about 18 percent,
3 from 55 authorized full-time employees to 45
4 actual full-time employees.
5 Now, unlike any other Executive Budget
6 recommendation -- certainly if we're thinking
7 or talking about executive agency heads -- I
8 would not be in a position to come before you
9 and disagree with the Executive Budget
10 recommendation. But because the commission
11 is an independent entity in the State
12 Constitution, I can and I have in the past
13 asked the Legislature for help where the
14 Executive Budget has tended to treat us with
15 some benign neglect.
16 And the Legislature has come through.
17 Three times since 2007, I have asked for help
18 from the Legislature, and you have come
19 through each time. This will be the fourth
20 time that I'm doing it. I'm asking for an
21 additional $186,000 so that we can maintain
22 the status quo -- not have to reduce staff
23 any further, not have to reduce our services
24 any further in order to stay where we are
486
1 now.
2 That number, it seems to me, pales in
3 significance to the overall State Budget,
4 certainly. And it pales in significance
5 compared to what we have heard other agencies
6 testify as to what the Division of Budget is
7 able to do when they determine that agencies
8 ought to be helped in the Executive Budget to
9 fulfill their mission.
10 The reduction in staff, the reduction
11 is services has meant that it takes longer to
12 discipline judges who are found guilty of
13 misconduct, which is a disservice to the
14 public interest, and it means that it takes
15 longer for us to exonerate those judges who
16 have been wrongly accused, which is
17 disrespectful to the independence of the
18 Judiciary and to the individual judges who
19 have to endure investigation for longer
20 periods than is right or fair.
21 We're not asking for much. And in an
22 era when enhanced public interest has been
23 demonstrated in ethics in government, with a
24 commission that is arguably the most
487
1 effective ethics enforcer in the state -- in
2 40 years the commission has handled over
3 52,000 complaints of misconduct, we have
4 initiated 10,000 preliminary inquiries, we
5 have conducted 8,000 full-fledged
6 investigations, and we have publicly
7 disciplined 801 judges, including 224 who
8 have been removed from office or publicly
9 stipulated to permanent resignation because
10 of misconduct. That is an exemplary record
11 that is being threatened or challenged by
12 inappropriately low levels of funding.
13 As I said, I'm not asking for much
14 help. $186,000, which would bring our
15 overall budget up to $5.77 million, is really
16 a drop in the bucket Compared to the
17 140-some-odd billion State Budget. And in a
18 time when revenue expenditures or revenue
19 projections are going up, when executive
20 agencies have been asked to limit their
21 growth to 2 percent, the fact that we're not
22 getting one penny more from the Executive
23 Budget seems to me to be unfair, unnecessary,
24 and unduly inhibiting our ability to fulfill
488
1 our mission.
2 So again, as I have in the past --
3 with success -- asked for your help, I'm
4 asking for it again here. I don't think it
5 is too much or should be too difficult. But
6 I am aware that there is a lot of competition
7 for, as high as it is, a relatively finite
8 amount of money. And I'm hoping that the
9 Legislature will, as it has before, consider
10 judicial ethics enforcement to be an
11 important priority for the state. And to
12 augment with relatively little what we need
13 to just keep the status quo and stop the
14 growing backlog and the decline of our
15 services.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
17 Administrator Tembeckjian. I said it right
18 again, right --
19 ADMINISTRATOR TEMBECKJIAN: You're
20 very welcome, Senator Young. Thank you.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: -- so two?
22 Senator Krueger.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you again for
24 your testimony this year.
489
1 You're right, your ask seems so
2 minimal it's actually a little shocking that
3 you don't get the same formula percentage
4 increase that we're seeing for other
5 agencies. So I empathize with your being
6 the, I guess, the orphan child --
7 ADMINISTRATOR TEMBECKJIAN: The orphan
8 child, yes. Exactly right.
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: Exactly.
10 I'm just curious that we do keep
11 increasing the number of judges in New York
12 State, and many people who participate on
13 these panels would argue we don't have enough
14 of them yet. If you were listening earlier
15 today, there was much discussion about
16 backlogs. So it seems to me, by definition
17 of having busier courts and more judges, on
18 some formula there would be more complaints
19 brought to you -- not necessarily because of
20 the quality of our judges per se, but just
21 statistically based on the potential for
22 problems that need to be investigated and
23 addressed.
24 Can you tell me sort of where you are
490
1 in relationship to a growth in the judiciary
2 over the last few years?
3 ADMINISTRATOR TEMBECKJIAN: Yes. Last
4 year we received 1958 new complaints. That
5 is the second highest in our history. And at
6 the same time, our backlog grew at year end
7 by about 25 percent. We went from 171 at the
8 end of 2014 to 204 at the end of last year.
9 We have reduced our staff by one,
10 again last year, as we had for the previous
11 four years. So that the number of judges is
12 increasing, as you say, the number of
13 complaints that we're receiving is
14 increasing, but the resources are staying
15 static.
16 As you know, a flat budget is really a
17 cut. If we need $186,000 just to meet our
18 additional rent expenses and other
19 contractual obligations, and don't get it, it
20 means that we have to reduce our current
21 budget, which is just a little under
22 $5.6 million, by that $186,000. Somehow I've
23 got to find it. And the only way we've been
24 able to do that in the last five years has
491
1 been through the attrition of staff, not
2 replacing some people who have left, or --
3 and this is good budgeting -- when someone at
4 a senior level leaves, if we can replace them
5 with someone more junior and save some money
6 that way, we have always done that.
7 But our workload is increasing, and
8 the time it's taking us to do that job is
9 also increasing because the budget is not
10 proportionately increasing.
11 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much
12 for your work.
13 ADMINISTRATOR TEMBECKJIAN: Thank you,
14 Senator.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
16 much. I don't believe the Assembly has any
17 questions for you. So you did a very
18 thorough job, Administrator Tembeckjian.
19 ADMINISTRATOR TEMBECKJIAN: Thank you
20 very much.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Now, I said it
22 correctly I believe three times.
23 ADMINISTRATOR TEMBECKJIAN: Three for
24 three, Senator, yeah.
492
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Does that qualify
2 me for a movie with that dinner?
3 ADMINISTRATOR TEMBECKJIAN: Breakfast,
4 lunch, and dinner. One apiece.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, thank you
6 very much.
7 ADMINISTRATOR TEMBECKJIAN: Thank you
8 very much.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And thank you for
10 being here today.
11 Our next speaker -- and again, I'd
12 like to remind people, just for the sake of
13 time -- and I apologize, it's 6 o'clock
14 now -- but we would welcome President Tom
15 Mungeer, of the Police Benevolent Association
16 of the New York State Troopers.
17 So thank you very much, and we look
18 forward to what you have to say. And we also
19 appreciate you sticking with us for so long.
20 PRESIDENT MUNGEER: Thank you, Madam
21 Chair.
22 Distinguished members of the
23 Legislature, it's an honor; this is my
24 seventh year in a row addressing you. I'm
493
1 just going to hit some very quick points; I'm
2 sure you're relieved to hear that.
3 Listening to my superintendent, I'm
4 not privy to some of the stuff -- recent
5 conversations he had with Budget, but I am
6 relying on the Governor's Executive Budget in
7 regards to rifles and cars.
8 This past year we've been through a
9 lot. We went over it before with the Clinton
10 County Dannemora prison break, the ratcheting
11 up of terrorist threats. There's never any
12 lack of missions for my troopers to do. On
13 top of that, in the last 10 years I've
14 suffered 18 line-of-duty deaths. So it is a
15 dangerous job. And I appreciate everybody's
16 support up here in the Legislature, giving us
17 the necessary tools.
18 Those tools, number one, are vehicles.
19 The superintendent indicated that he should
20 be fine with the replacement of the vehicles.
21 Currently we have 50 percent of the vehicles
22 that are over 100,000 miles; I do agree with
23 him on that. But in the Governor's Executive
24 Budget, only $15 million was allocated to
494
1 replace those vehicles.
2 In my math, anyway, we're going to
3 need another $20 million. I know that's kind
4 of shocking compared to the last guy, who
5 wanted $186,000. But, you know, we're
6 looking for $20 million to bring it up and
7 replace these vehicles. We're going from
8 high speeds of zero to 100, back down to
9 zero, all day. And they do -- it's a lot of
10 wear and tear.
11 Other than that, manpower. The last
12 seven years I've harped that we need more
13 manpower. It's getting a lot better. In the
14 Governor's budget, there are allocation for
15 210 bodies. There is an academy class
16 they're planning for next month. But there
17 is not enough for two classes. Again, I'm
18 not privy to the conversation the
19 superintendent has had.
20 But, you know, it's absolutely
21 necessary that we have two classes of at
22 least 150 troopers to take care of the
23 attrition and also the expanded duties that
24 we're given every day.
495
1 So thank you.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
3 much.
4 Senator Gallivan.
5 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you, Madam
6 Chair.
7 Mr. President, welcome again. Thanks
8 for the work that you and your members do.
9 PRESIDENT MUNGEER: Thank you,
10 Senator.
11 SENATOR GALLIVAN: You touched -- the
12 superintendent -- a number of us spoke with
13 the superintendent, and his testimony spoke
14 of the rifles and vehicles. I would just ask
15 that if you have follow-up with the
16 superintendent, there appears to be a little
17 bit of difference. He did mention
18 $30 million. I don't know if that's from
19 money that's in this year's budget somewhere
20 else --
21 PRESIDENT MUNGEER: Yeah, I --
22 SENATOR GALLIVAN: -- which is the 15
23 you just mentioned. But just -- if we need
24 to do work on it, let's just be sure to
496
1 follow up over the course of the next several
2 weeks as we go through the process.
3 PRESIDENT MUNGEER: I do have many
4 conversations with the superintendent in any
5 given week. And again, what's black and
6 white is the $15 million. Whatever
7 conversations he's had with budget, it is not
8 reflected in the Governor's Executive Budget.
9 So we have to, you know --
10 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Understood. But he
11 spoke fairly confidently that it was going to
12 get done. But we just want to make sure that
13 it is done before we vote on a budget.
14 PRESIDENT MUNGEER: Absolutely.
15 Absolutely.
16 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: All set? Well, I
18 think we're all set. But on behalf of me, I
19 just want to say -- and my colleagues, I want
20 to say how much we appreciate the jobs that
21 your members do every single day, standing up
22 and protecting the public. They have very
23 difficult circumstances sometimes, but
24 they're professional, and we truly value what
497
1 they do.
2 So thank you for being here.
3 PRESIDENT MUNGEER: Thank you, Madam
4 Chair.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is
6 Christopher Quick, New York State Police
7 Investigators Association.
8 And behind President Quick is
9 President Mike Powers from NYSCOPBA.
10 So good evening. Welcome.
11 PRESIDENT QUICK: Good evening. Thank
12 you.
13 Good evening, Senators and
14 Assemblymembers. I am Christopher Quick, an
15 investigator with the New York State Police,
16 and I also serve as president of the New York
17 State Police Investigators Association,
18 otherwise known as NYSPIA. NYSPIA is the
19 employee union that represents 1,086 State
20 Police senior investigators and investigators
21 throughout the state.
22 State Police investigators are
23 assigned to stations or special details that
24 are referred to as the Bureau of Criminal
498
1 Investigation or BCI. Our investigators work
2 on everything from larcenies, robberies,
3 burglaries, identity theft, sex crimes, and
4 homicides. We also have investigators
5 assigned to special details,
6 including computer crimes, forensics,
7 narcotics, auto theft, dignitary protection,
8 special investigations, gaming, and
9 counterterrorism.
10 The most public example of some of the
11 work we do was our investigation into the
12 escape of the two inmates from Clinton
13 Correctional Facility this past June. Our
14 investigators worked around the clock for
15 22 days, gathering and analyzing evidence
16 that would ultimately lead to an end to the
17 manhunt without a member of the public being
18 harmed.
19 Demand on the resources of the State
20 Police, particularly investigators, has
21 increased, whether it's to keep up with the
22 background checks for casinos being built in
23 New York State or keeping the public safe in
24 the face of the changing world we live in,
499
1 involving terrorism and mass attacks on the
2 public. To ensure the safety of New Yorkers
3 and its visitors, we must have the proper
4 equipment and manpower.
5 One area in particular that is of
6 utmost importance is our aging fleet, as
7 you've heard earlier today, of our unmarked
8 vehicles. The BCI fleet is currently
9 numbered at 1,177 vehicles. There are 688
10 vehicles with more 100,000 miles; that's
11 58 percent of the BCI fleet. There are 755
12 vehicles that are seven years or older, and
13 165 of them are 10 years or older.
14 Due to the age of our fleet, we have
15 experienced a number of mechanical,
16 electrical, and structural damages to the
17 vehicles, including brake lines rusting
18 through, causing loss of brakes; loss of
19 headlights due to electrical wiring that's
20 become corroded; and rusting of integral
21 structural components that make up the body
22 or unibody of the vehicle. The results could
23 have been catastrophic to the member or the
24 public or both. We are lucky no one was
500
1 injured, but it is a risk we should not have
2 to take.
3 Many of our investigators perform
4 undercover operations. In these cases, our
5 investigators need to blend in with the
6 community, both in disguise and with their
7 vehicles. These undercover operations can
8 range from drug surveillance to
9 counterterrorism investigations. The
10 criminal element does its homework, and many
11 are aware of the type of undercover vehicles
12 we typically use.
13 For that reason, we propose a pilot
14 program to allow for the leasing of vehicles
15 for these special details. A leased vehicle
16 will allow our investigators many more
17 choices of diverse makes and models and, most
18 importantly, non-police-type vehicles for
19 undercover work.
20 Leasing vehicles will also help reduce
21 the maintenance costs we currently
22 experience.
23 In addition to the desperate need for
24 more unmarked vehicles, the Division of State
501
1 Police must be made whole again in terms of
2 manpower in order to meet today's security
3 threats.
4 Terrorism in the United States is on
5 the rise. The Governor recognizes this and
6 has dedicated a significant uniform trooper
7 presence in New York City as a result.
8 Superintendent D'Amico has repeatedly
9 stressed and fought for the need to have
10 recruit basic school classes at our academy
11 to bolster the needs of the division. We
12 have not been able to keep up with the
13 attrition.
14 We strongly urge this Legislature to
15 ensure our investigators are safe, as well as
16 the public, by adequately funding the
17 Division of State Police to allow for the
18 purchase of unmarked vehicles and other
19 necessary safety equipment as well as funding
20 new and regular academy classes so we can
21 accomplish our core mission of protecting and
22 serving the people of this great state.
23 I appreciate your time in allowing me
24 to give testimony, and I'm happy to answer
502
1 any questions you may have.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
3 Any questions? Senator Gallivan.
4 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you, Madam
5 Chair.
6 Mr. President, thanks for your
7 testimony, for the work you do, and your
8 members as well.
9 I want to focus on the cars. We
10 understand the message on manpower; it's been
11 a consistent message along with the PBA and
12 the superintendent.
13 When the superintendent testified, the
14 talk was about vehicles in general, without a
15 breakdown between marked cars and unmarked
16 vehicles. Is it your understanding -- if you
17 know at all -- when the superintendent was
18 talking about the plan to replace cars, that
19 that included all vehicles? Or was he just
20 talking marked vehicles?
21 PRESIDENT QUICK: No, he included
22 officers' vehicles. And once the officer
23 vehicles that are unmarked, that would be the
24 remedy to push the cars down the line into
503
1 the back rooms and special details.
2 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Have you had
3 conversations with him as -- the plan that he
4 put forward, is it adequate to meet the needs
5 of your members?
6 PRESIDENT QUICK: Can you repeat that
7 again?
8 SENATOR GALLIVAN: When the
9 superintendent testified about his plan over
10 the next year or two to replace those
11 vehicles, does that satisfy the needs of your
12 investigators? The plan that he put forward.
13 PRESIDENT QUICK: It does. And the
14 consideration of leasing the unmarked cars,
15 that would give a more diverse choice, would
16 be an instant remedy to get more cars into
17 the field right away, versus ordering a fleet
18 of cars and waiting six months down the road.
19 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Understood. Thank
20 you.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
22 The Assembly?
23 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: We're good.
24 Thank you.
504
1 PRESIDENT QUICK: Thank you.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Well, thank you,
3 President, again. Please extend our
4 gratitude to your members.
5 PRESIDENT QUICK: Thank you.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And thank you for
7 being here today.
8 Next up we have President Mike Powers,
9 New York State Correctional Officers And
10 Police Benevolent Association.
11 Welcome, President.
12 PRESIDENT POWERS: Thank you, Madam
13 Chair.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Could you introduce
15 the people joining you today?
16 PRESIDENT POWERS: I will. To my left
17 is Executive Vice President Tammy Sawchuck.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Welcome.
19 PRESIDENT POWERS: To my right is the
20 Northern Region Vice President Chris Hansen.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Great. Thank you
22 for being here.
23 PRESIDENT POWERS: And in the interest
24 of time and your lengthy agenda here, we'll
505
1 be quick.
2 Good afternoon, Assemblyman Farrell,
3 Senator Young, and esteemed members of the
4 fiscal committees. Thank you for allowing me
5 the opportunity to speak today on behalf of
6 my entire membership regarding the Governor's
7 proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year.
8 My name is Michael Powers, and I have
9 the privilege of serving as president of the
10 New York State Correctional Officers & Police
11 Benevolent Association, known as NYSCOPBA.
12 Among other titles, NYSCOPBA
13 represents approximately 20,000 dedicated
14 correctional officers and sergeants who are
15 charged with maintaining the care, custody
16 and control of our state's prison population,
17 a thankless job that is becoming more
18 dangerous each year.
19 I'll begin by stating the obvious.
20 Since we visited with you a year ago, the
21 correctional system in New York State has
22 faced the greatest challenge in its recent
23 history. Of course I'm talking about the
24 escape at the Clinton Correctional Facility
506
1 last June. We are all waiting for the
2 inspector general to complete her
3 investigation -- an investigation, we trust,
4 that will not only reveal the specific facts
5 associated with the escape, but will also
6 address the root causes of such a breakdown
7 in one of the most critical institutions in
8 our society, namely our correctional
9 facilities.
10 When that investigation is complete
11 and we have had time to thoroughly digest its
12 findings and conclusions, I can assure you
13 that NYSCOPBA will clearly, forcefully and
14 frequently share its recommendations for how
15 New York's correctional system can be
16 improved.
17 NYSCOPBA can do this because of the
18 working knowledge its members have of our
19 correctional system. We have shared these
20 recommendations with this administration and
21 with prior administrations, and we will
22 continue to do so until the one goal of every
23 corrections advocate, regardless of political
24 or ideological persuasion, has been achieved.
507
1 That goal is the dramatic reduction in
2 violence that afflicts inmates and staff
3 alike within the walls of New York's
4 correctional facilities.
5 Some of you may remember our testimony
6 from last year. For the first time, we
7 presented visual displays of the amount of
8 violence that afflicts New York's
9 correctional system. Sadly, I am duty bound
10 to share an even more troubling display than
11 we provided last year.
12 According to data gathered by the
13 Department of Corrections and Community
14 Supervision, inmate-on-inmate assaults grew
15 by 6 percent in 2015 and are up 47 percent
16 from their recent low-water-mark of 2009.
17 Inmate-on-staff assaults grew by 20
18 percent last year, and are up more than 70
19 percent from the recent low in 2012.
20 There's also an explosion in the
21 amount of contraband in the correctional
22 system, up nearly 24 percent from just the
23 prior year.
24 Unfortunately, we are not aware of any
508
1 data on the amount of K2 or other drugs
2 possessed by inmates. But anecdotal evidence
3 and the contraband data suggest that they are
4 rampant in most, if not all, facilities.
5 Let me remind you that this alarming
6 rise in assaults and confiscation of
7 contraband have been occurring while the
8 inmate population has been falling by more
9 than 5 percent.
10 Let me also repeat that it is our
11 belief that no one supports the more violent
12 system depicted by these graphs. We just do
13 not agree on the root causes of this epidemic
14 or how to reverse it.
15 I would like to clearly and concisely
16 state what the dedicated professionals of
17 NYSCOPBA believe. We believe it takes
18 resources to effectively provide care,
19 custody and control of inmates. This is
20 especially true because a larger percentage
21 of the inmates inhabiting correctional
22 facilities -- nearly 2 out of 3 -- have been
23 convicted of violent felonies.
24 It is also the case that inmates that
509
1 were originally assigned to maximum-security
2 facilities based on the nature of their
3 conviction have been reshuffled to
4 medium-security facilities to address
5 overcrowding at the maximum-security
6 prisons -- overcrowding, I should mention,
7 that still exists today.
8 The necessary resources I just
9 mentioned come in the form of a sufficient
10 number of regularly and uniformly trained
11 corrections officers outfitted with equipment
12 that enables them to both do their job and
13 return home safely to their family each
14 night.
15 While we are encouraged by the
16 increase in correctional officer positions
17 that have been filled in the current fiscal
18 year, we have not yet reached a staffing
19 ratio that allows posts critical to the
20 safety of inmates and staff to remain open as
21 their security plan dictates.
22 Meaningful training is not regularly
23 available once a corrections officer leaves
24 the academy. All too often what is provided
510
1 does not focus on the tools and techniques
2 corrections officers need to provide security
3 to a facility.
4 While we are encouraged by the
5 additional money proposed in this budget for
6 better equipment at Clinton and certain other
7 facilities, in many cases the equipment
8 correction officers rely on is embarrassingly
9 outdated and inadequate. And we are not
10 talking about high-tech devices you may see
11 in the movies; we're talking about basic
12 needs such as flashlights, batons, radios,
13 vehicles and the like.
14 NYSCOPBA has articulated its stance on
15 these critical issues frequently and
16 consistently at hearings like this and
17 through official channels like
18 labor-management meetings at both the state
19 and facility levels. All too often, the
20 response has been a polite acknowledgement
21 but no meaningful follow-through by the
22 department.
23 NYSCOPBA hopes that the release of the
24 inspector general's report will spur
511
1 meaningful and concerted action to reform a
2 correctional system that had already been in
3 crisis prior to June of 2015 -- a crisis that
4 no one can now deny.
5 The men and women of NYSCOPBA, each of
6 whom walks the toughest beat in law
7 enforcement, as Senator Nozzolio often
8 states, remain committed to such reform.
9 Thank you again for the opportunity to
10 share our views. We'll do our best to answer
11 any questions you may have.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
13 President Powers.
14 Senator Gallivan.
15 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you, Madam
16 Chair.
17 Mr. President, thanks for your
18 testimony, the work that you and of course
19 all of your members do.
20 We all acknowledge that this past year
21 has been a challenging year. I sense some of
22 the frustration in your voice that we share
23 while we all wait for that inspector general
24 report.
512
1 I know that you sat through
2 Commissioner Annucci's testimony. There was
3 talk about resources, there was talk about --
4 certainly an emphasis on safety and security
5 in facilities. I actually talked with him
6 about the same data that you made reference
7 to in your testimony here, and he
8 acknowledged that, and that something has to
9 be done.
10 But nonetheless, he outlined some
11 things in his testimony, focusing on
12 technological enhancements, training
13 improvements and policy changes. The one
14 thing that we did not talk about, we did not
15 talk about the proper classification of
16 inmates. And I recognize that, point noted,
17 and I share that concern.
18 But nonetheless, as he talked about
19 the technological enhancements, training
20 improvements, policy changes, he mentioned a
21 number of different things, like expanded use
22 of canine units, elimination of metal
23 containers and such. What other things do
24 you think need to be done that he did not
513
1 mention, to ensure that our facilities are
2 safe and secure for everybody?
3 PRESIDENT POWERS: Through much of our
4 communication with the department and the
5 administration, much of our concerns are
6 actual posts. While we recognize a rise in
7 our staffing levels -- which still has quite
8 a ways to go to balance out and to be
9 effective in the field -- what we're lacking
10 are actual posts in our facilities. We have
11 an issue with post closings and actual posts
12 in the facilities and the staff to staff it.
13 That's just one of many things.
14 You know, he mentioned new technology
15 and --
16 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Can we stay with
17 the posts for a minute? So post closings I
18 understand. When you say posts, do you mean
19 that there are posts that you believe should
20 exist that do not?
21 PRESIDENT POWERS: Yes. And with --
22 the post closings, as you're familiar with,
23 create breaches in security in the facility.
24 If I can give you an example real
514
1 quick here, and for something for you to
2 understand, as you look outside of this hall
3 and you recognize the men's room on the other
4 side of this wall over here, and the angle at
5 which that hall juts and comes down -- if the
6 men's room or the hallway down at the end of
7 the hall was an area of recreation, and that
8 post was closed and we didn't have a staff
9 member in there, you can see the blind spot
10 from the front of this, the entrance of this
11 hall. And then as we come down the hall, we
12 don't have security staff there.
13 And that could be a viable post. I
14 mean, and sometimes those posts get closed.
15 And that's where the staff comes in to be
16 able to allow us to staff those positions in
17 some of the blind spots in our facilities.
18 EX. VICE PRES. SAWCHUCK: What
19 President Powers is saying is that you could
20 give us a hundred new correction officers,
21 but if you close a hundred posts, we've
22 gained nothing.
23 SENATOR GALLIVAN: No, I understand
24 about the post closings. What I wanted to
515
1 understand better was the existence of --
2 your belief that additional posts should
3 exist.
4 Now, I'm assuming that -- I think I
5 understand correctly that that becomes part
6 of the staffing security analysis that you
7 have the opportunity to weigh in on?
8 PRESIDENT POWERS: We do. We do.
9 We've -- and as Tammy was alluding, we've
10 seen an increase in items, officers, but
11 we're not seeing the posts that are critical
12 in our facilities.
13 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Would you be able
14 to follow up and be more specific for the
15 various facilities? I mean -- I don't mean
16 today, but --
17 PRESIDENT POWERS: Absolutely.
18 SENATOR GALLIVAN: -- like going
19 through the facilities --
20 PRESIDENT POWERS: Be happy to share
21 that with you. With anybody, of course.
22 SENATOR GALLIVAN: -- the things that
23 you think should exist that don't.
24 There was some discussion with the
516
1 commissioner about the renaming,
2 restructuring of the Office of Special
3 Investigations. What are your thoughts about
4 that?
5 PRESIDENT POWERS: I know they had
6 their issues a while back. I believe those
7 issues still exist. We have our own concerns
8 with OSI. We realize that it's new and they
9 may be feeling their way, but that doesn't
10 stop the day-to-day operations that we have.
11 You know, they talk of new plans and
12 implementation, yet they discipline us
13 towards the old style, so to speak. We're
14 coming in, thanks to a lot of our
15 intervention and a lot of our barking, if you
16 will, to the department to implement new
17 changes, and we're starting to see some of
18 that. But we're being treated as if we're
19 the old guard, so to speak, and it's becoming
20 an issue for us. And it's coming through
21 timeliness, through disciplines towards
22 staff, and towards the lack of discipline,
23 sometimes, to deter criminal activity in our
24 correctional settings.
517
1 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Is it your opinion
2 or do you have any thoughts on whether or not
3 the so-called internal affairs, for lack of a
4 better way of saying it, should be run by the
5 department? Or should there be separate
6 outside oversight, as some have proposed? If
7 you have thoughts.
8 PRESIDENT POWERS: We provide care,
9 custody and control. You know, we're charged
10 with providing that. We have our issues, we
11 share them with the department. And in the
12 interim, until we either get the fair shake
13 that we just rightly deserve, then we'll
14 decide whether or not we proceed forward with
15 any of our concerns.
16 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Fair enough. Thank
17 you.
18 PRESIDENT POWERS: Thank you.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
20 Anyone on the Assembly side?
21 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: We're good.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Nozzolio.
23 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you very
24 much, Madam Chair.
518
1 President Powers, always good to see
2 you. Thank you for the work that your
3 members do each and every day to keep us
4 safe.
5 PRESIDENT POWERS: Thank you.
6 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: That's not said
7 enough. I appreciate you quoting me in
8 the -- I hope those words live forever. The
9 fact is, you do walk the toughest law
10 enforcement beat in America. Your members
11 are put in harm's way each and every day,
12 each and every hour of every day, with
13 nothing much to protect them other than their
14 wits and your abilities.
15 There's $47 million of capital money
16 in the State Budget proposal by Governor
17 Cuomo to reflect the settlement with the
18 special housing -- the SHU settlement, the
19 special housing. That NYSCOPBA and I worked
20 very closely when I had Senator Gallivan's
21 responsibilities, closely on the issue of
22 establishing different special housing for
23 those mentally ill inmates.
24 And I must say, NYSCOPBA was terrific
519
1 in ensuring the seamless transition of that
2 very major program in our state correctional
3 facilities. It wasn't easy, but major
4 expenditures -- down at Auburn, down at even
5 Five Points, who didn't have that type of
6 facility constructed.
7 Tell us what types of anticipated
8 concerns or protocols, procedures, safety
9 issues that you see in the development of
10 this new settlement. And just to preface
11 that question with a statement, that I
12 understand what special housing has been.
13 It's been to, in many cases -- certainly in
14 some cases to discipline, but in many cases
15 to ensure the protection of the inmate, so an
16 inmate who may have needed special housing.
17 Tell me what this new settlement looks
18 to develop.
19 PRESIDENT POWERS: Well, thank you for
20 the acknowledgment. We consider ourselves
21 the best in the nation in this line of law
22 enforcement. And it's a good question, and
23 I'm glad you asked, because quite frankly
24 you're the only one that's asked us.
520
1 And with that being said, you know,
2 minus the mental health aspect -- and the
3 commissioner mentioned, I believe, 18 percent
4 of the population has mental health issues.
5 And the NYCLU settlement addresses that quite
6 well. But from a disciplinary standpoint,
7 when you take out the mental health issue,
8 from a disciplinary standpoint and an
9 operational standpoint in the Department of
10 Corrections and Community Supervision, to
11 keep the facilities operating in a timely
12 fashion, these -- these -- this new
13 settlement has -- doesn't have a deterrent to
14 criminal activity.
15 And there's plenty of criminal
16 activity inside the walls and fences of our
17 correctional facilities. And I'm not to say
18 that -- you know, a majority of them go to
19 program, go to -- you know, they're looking
20 for their rehabilitation process. But we
21 have a small factor, and that factor that
22 comes into play, that acts out criminally,
23 doesn't have the deterrent anymore after a
24 short SHU sentence or a -- or a longer one,
521
1 to come back out and modify his behavior or
2 her behavior from that aspect.
3 I believe Tammy could speak a bit on
4 it as well, as she was a supervisor in a SHU
5 for many years and we -- you know, I mean, we
6 have our concerns with it, but we implement
7 it, we'll roll it out, because we are the
8 best at what we do. And, you know, we'll
9 work with it. We'll have to wait and see.
10 I mean, in 2014 the interim
11 stipulation settlement that was agreed to in
12 the NYCLU case didn't significantly drop the
13 numbers of acts of violence in our
14 facilities. I mean, with the reintroduction
15 of heroin and the introduction of K2 and the
16 epidemic of K2, that the -- even the
17 commissioner acknowledges has created a very
18 violent workplace. And it's created a --
19 a -- a mode of behavior that doesn't have a
20 deterrent to bad behavior.
21 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Do you think
22 that -- this proposal, are you suggesting,
23 will basically eliminate, significantly
24 reduce, at best, the deterrent factor in
522
1 terms of inmate discipline?
2 PRESIDENT POWERS: I'm sorry, could
3 you repeat that?
4 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: This settlement,
5 this proposal to construct additional -- to
6 retrofit the housing, taking -- you believe
7 it takes away the deterrent tool of -- that
8 exists today for deterrence --
9 PRESIDENT POWERS: Yes.
10 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: -- with special
11 housing?
12 PRESIDENT POWERS: Yes.
13 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: So that -- how --
14 to those who haven't worked in our
15 correctional facilities, what does that mean?
16 PRESIDENT POWERS: If there's a
17 criminal act that takes place in the
18 correctional setting -- I'll give you an
19 example. If we suspect somebody of using a
20 narcotic inside the facility, and we test
21 them for that narcotic, there's usually a --
22 you know, there could be a confinement, they
23 could be confined from their programs,
24 confined from recreation, confined from
523
1 certain privileges that they get. Not
2 necessarily visitation or anything
3 family-related; they still have
4 correspondence and everything with that. But
5 from a privilege inside the facility, they
6 could lose that.
7 That's being modified significantly at
8 this point with this settlement. And that is
9 not -- we'll continue to see the action. If
10 an individual didn't submit to the urine
11 sample and the urinalysis, then the penalty's
12 not there anymore. So, you know, is there a
13 deterrent for drug use? No.
14 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Very difficult
15 situation going to be made worse.
16 PRESIDENT POWERS: Makes it extremely
17 difficult for our front-line staff.
18 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: My time is long
19 since up. Thank you very, very much for your
20 work and your testimony.
21 PRESIDENT POWERS: Thank you. Thank
22 you for your service to the people of the
23 State of New York. And best wishes.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
524
1 And thank you, President Powers and
2 all of you for what you do for us on behalf
3 of the people of New York State to keep us
4 safe every single day. We appreciate you
5 very much. So thank you.
6 PRESIDENT POWERS: Thank you for your
7 time.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is
10 President Patrick J. Lynch, New York City
11 Patrolmen's Benevolent Association.
12 Welcome, President Lynch. It's great
13 to see you again.
14 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Thank you. Good to
15 be with you.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So happy you can
17 join us. I'm sorry this is a marathon, not a
18 sprint today, but we're getting there.
19 Could you please introduce the
20 gentlemen at the table with you?
21 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Sure. To my left is
22 Mubarak Abdul-Jabbar, he's our second vice
23 president in the PBA. And our counsel,
24 Michael Murray.
525
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
2 much.
3 PRESIDENT LYNCH: And also the people
4 that do the work, actually -- behind me is
5 John Nutholtz {ph} and Valerie Dabas in the
6 gallery.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Great. Welcome to
8 each and every one of you, and we look
9 forward to your testimony today.
10 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Thanks very much.
11 Good evening, Senators and
12 Assemblymembers. Thank you for the
13 opportunity to testify.
14 In the interests of time, I will
15 summarize the written remarks that I've
16 submitted on to the record, and I know it's
17 been a long day of testimony for all of you.
18 As many of you may know, New York City
19 police officers have made extraordinary gains
20 in restoring our city's public safety over
21 the past 25 years. This renaissance has been
22 tremendously important to New York City's
23 economic vitality, to its fiscal health, and
24 by extension to the health of New York State
526
1 as a whole.
2 Unfortunately, we're not currently
3 receiving the support we need to maintain
4 these public safety gains. To help remedy
5 this situation, we respectfully request your
6 support for the following initiatives in the
7 budget process and also in the legislative
8 session.
9 One priority is the three-year
10 extension of the Taylor Law's interest
11 arbitration provisions, which is included in
12 the GovernorĂs Executive Budget. As you may
13 know, the Taylor LawĂs impasse resolution
14 process represents New York City police
15 officers' only recourse in the face of the
16 city's long-standing refusal to pay us at a
17 rate even approaching our local and national
18 counterparts. Our salaries have fallen
19 30 percent or more behind our counterparts in
20 comparable local jurisdictions, largely due
21 to the one-sided bargaining environment and
22 skewed impasse resolution process that we
23 faced throughout the 1990s.
24 This Legislature attempted to help
527
1 close that gap when it granted the PBA the
2 right to resolve impasses under the Taylor
3 Law in 1998. Nearly two decades later,
4 however, we remain in virtually the same
5 uncompetitive position as we were under the
6 previous administration's regime, for several
7 reasons.
8 One glaring issue is the complete lack
9 of codified ethical standards for neutral
10 arbitrators. Given the current scrutiny on
11 public officials and police officers at all
12 levels of government, it is especially
13 important for taxpayers and public employees
14 to be able to trust that the arbitration
15 process is unbiased. We are therefore
16 seeking legislation to establish a code of
17 conduct for arbitrators in Taylor Law
18 proceedings, modeled on the ethical codes
19 already in widespread use in other private-
20 and public-sector arbitrations.
21 The second item of concern: Our
22 current lack of training and equipment
23 necessary to counter the type of
24 active-shooter style and terrorist attacks
528
1 that we've recently witnessed, unfortunately,
2 in Paris, San Bernardino, and other places.
3 Law enforcement best practices now
4 dictate that the first police officers on the
5 scene of an active-shooter incident, usually
6 a police officer on routine patrol, must
7 immediately engage the attacker to minimize
8 any further casualties. According to a
9 report by the Public Executive Research
10 Forum, PERF, one-third of police officers who
11 attempt to stop an active shooter alone are
12 shot by that attacker.
13 New York City police officers on
14 patrol are currently equipped with only a
15 .9mm handgun and basic ballistic restraint
16 vests that provide no protection from a
17 high-powered rifle round. In this respect,
18 the NYPD lags behind many other law
19 enforcement agencies nationwide, which
20 already train and equip their patrol officers
21 with long guns, ballistic helmets and
22 enhanced body armor.
23 The Governor has also requested
24 funding for similar equipment and training
529
1 for all New York State troopers in his
2 Executive Budget. We believe that the police
3 officers who patrol our nationĂs top terror
4 target must be similarly trained and
5 equipped. We will therefore be asking and
6 seeking legislation that will provide a
7 mandate for the NYPD to equip every New York
8 City police officer with an Anti-Terrorism
9 Response Kit of the type I have just
10 outlined, and provide training in advanced
11 counterterrorism tactics.
12 The third item of concern: Our city
13 and our state's moral obligation to provide
14 for police officers who are disabled in the
15 line of duty. That obligation is not being
16 met for New York City police officers hired
17 after July 1, 2009, under the Tier 3 pension
18 plan. Although they face the same dangers as
19 their more senior colleagues, they are
20 subject to a reduced accident disability
21 benefit that would not allow them to feed or
22 care for their families if they are disabled
23 on the job. They are the only police
24 officers in the state who face this unjust
530
1 situation.
2 Simply put, it is not in the public
3 interest for police officers to ask
4 themselves whether they can risk their
5 families' financial future by going into
6 harms way. We are therefore calling upon
7 the Legislature to establish a statewide
8 minimum standard for police officers'
9 accident disability benefits that will
10 equalize those benefits for New York City
11 police officers in Tier 3.
12 The issues I've just outlined
13 represent our members' top concerns heading
14 into the budget cycle, but there are many
15 other issues that we'll want to address as
16 the legislative session moves forward.
17 I thank you once again for your time
18 and your consideration of my testimony. A
19 longer version has been submitted. I
20 appreciate the opportunity to testify here
21 today.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senator Diane
23 Savino.
24 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
531
1 Krueger.
2 Good afternoon, President Lynch.
3 As you know, I was the sponsor of the
4 bill that was unfortunately vetoed by
5 Governor Paterson in 2009, I think it is now.
6 Last year we attempted to resolve the
7 situation, but we ran into a roadblock with
8 the City Council of the City of New York who
9 decided that they couldn't provide us a home
10 rule message.
11 Are we making any progress with the
12 council with respect to that?
13 PRESIDENT LYNCH: No, we've made no
14 progress whatsoever with both sides of City
15 Hall, whether the City Council or the Mayor's
16 Office as well.
17 SENATOR SAVINO: So they still remain
18 obstinate about this issue?
19 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Absolutely, every
20 step of the way.
21 SENATOR SAVINO: And since the veto of
22 the Tier 2 extender, can you tell me how many
23 New York City police and firefighters are
24 currently affected by that veto?
532
1 PRESIDENT LYNCH: We have, just in the
2 NYPD, we have upwards of 10,000 younger New
3 York City police officers on patrol who are
4 covered under Tier 3.
5 SENATOR SAVINO: How many of them have
6 been injured on the job since then?
7 PRESIDENT LYNCH: That exact number I
8 can get you. But as we go through that
9 number, just the risk itself has an effect on
10 every police officer.
11 SENATOR SAVINO: Right.
12 PRESIDENT LYNCH: If you have a more
13 senior police officer like myself in a radio
14 car who's covered by Tier 3, and my partner
15 sitting next to me is Tier 3, it's unfair
16 that we both go into the same job, face the
17 same risk, but unfortunately, if we're
18 disabled together, I'll be able to take care
19 of my family on into the future but my
20 partner won't be able to do that, under
21 Tier 3.
22 SENATOR SAVINO: I really would be
23 interested in finding out the number of
24 officers that have been injured that are now
533
1 facing this financial burden.
2 PRESIDENT LYNCH: I've heard that --
3 SENATOR SAVINO: You don't have to
4 give it to me today, but it will be helpful
5 in us pushing this -- what is really an
6 unfair situation.
7 PRESIDENT LYNCH: I'm looking forward
8 to getting you that information.
9 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.
10 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Thank you, Senator.
11 SENATOR KRUEGER: Evening.
12 Assembly?
13 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you,
14 Senator. We will hear from Assemblymember
15 O'Donnell.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Thank you for
17 staying around.
18 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Good evening.
19 Thanks.
20 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: You sound like
21 a true New Yorker, may I say, and you spoke
22 very quickly. So I wanted to just ask one
23 quick question.
24 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Sure.
534
1 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: You said in
2 the beginning that you are compensated at
3 less of a level than comparable other
4 officers, so I'm curious to know what you
5 meant by comparable. Do you mean compared to
6 Boston or Philadelphia? Do you mean compared
7 to Westchester or Nassau? What did you mean?
8 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Actually, both.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Okay.
10 PRESIDENT LYNCH: When you compare us
11 across the country, both locally and
12 nationally, we're 30 percent behind. All
13 those --
14 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: So you're
15 30 percent behind what they pay in
16 Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia and
17 Boston?
18 PRESIDENT LYNCH: The exact numbers I
19 can get you. But when you average it
20 nationally across the country as well as
21 locally, we're 30 percent behind.
22 Absolutely.
23 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: But there's
24 nothing really we can do about that, right?
535
1 That's a negotiation between you folks and
2 the City of New York --
3 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Yeah.
4 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: -- and whoever
5 the mayor and City Council happen to be at
6 the time, right?
7 PRESIDENT LYNCH: What's important,
8 though, in what we're asking, is that be a
9 code within the arbitration process. First,
10 that we --
11 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: I understood
12 you very clearly. I'm just trying to get to
13 the money part.
14 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Sure.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: The money part
16 is -- there's nothing here in the State
17 Capitol that can really be done to address
18 the money part. It's your own negotiation
19 with the collective bargaining agreement with
20 the City of New York; correct?
21 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Right. And what we
22 can do is encourage the city to reasonably
23 negotiate, which they haven't. They rely on
24 a negotiation that says pattern bargaining,
536
1 one size fits all. And as we know, whether
2 it's a pair of gloves or it's negotiation,
3 one size never fits all.
4 So what you should do at the
5 bargaining table is negotiate to solve
6 problems on both sides.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Right.
8 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Pattern bargaining
9 doesn't do that. So our only recourse is to
10 go to the Taylor Law, to go to arbitration in
11 that process.
12 So first we need to make sure that law
13 gets re-signed, and then we want to add some
14 fairness and ethics into that process as
15 well.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: I didn't mean
17 for you to slow down. I heard you the first
18 time.
19 (Laughter.)
20 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Speak as slow
21 or as quickly as you want.
22 I just want to say that I have
23 extraordinarily good working relationships
24 with the 2-4 and 2-6 in my district, and I
537
1 thank you for being here and for your
2 service.
3 PRESIDENT LYNCH: And thank you for
4 being a voice for us.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senator Michael
6 Nozzolio.
7 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you,
8 Senator.
9 President Lynch, it's good to see you
10 again.
11 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Thank you, Senator.
12 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you for your
13 cogent testimony.
14 A big surprise that for all that we
15 have been through as a city, a state -- all
16 our cities are going through today, with
17 New York City being blessed with the most
18 professional police force possible -- but
19 it's a shock to hear of the lack of tools
20 that you have on the front lines.
21 Tell us, is the administration doing
22 anything to heighten the awareness of -- this
23 is a serious homeland security issue. It's
24 one that the federal government should be
538
1 invested in. Tell us about any discussions
2 you've had on that score.
3 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Sure. Our concern
4 is this. In any active shooter-style
5 incident -- and we see from the attacks that
6 we've had, they can happen anyplace, at any
7 time. It can happen in a cafe, it can happen
8 in a mall in one of our boroughs, or the
9 subway system as well. So the first police
10 officer that will respond to that attack or
11 that 911 call will be a local police officer
12 on patrol, what we call our sector police
13 officers. When they respond, they're going
14 to respond with bullet-resistant vests that
15 are basic, and a .9-millimeter weapon.
16 What we need to do is have an
17 anti-terrorism kit. Now, what the department
18 has done is grown those different departments
19 within our agency, but they're not the first
20 ones to respond. We need to be able to
21 respond and neutralize that attack
22 immediately, the first police officer on the
23 scene.
24 For instance, if you looked in the
539
1 films of San Bernardino tragedy, when the
2 attack happened, you had police officers
3 respond. The local sector cars, police
4 officers on patrol, responded. They had long
5 guns, ballistic helmets, and ballistic vests.
6 And then the specialized units -- what we
7 call emergency service, many know as SWAT --
8 they responded. But we were able to protect
9 ourselves as we went in to stop that attack
10 right from the get-go.
11 In New York City, the local police
12 officer in your precinct, in your
13 neighborhood, will respond and unfortunately
14 most likely will be shot, because we're not
15 equipped to be able to hold off that -- the
16 specialized unit, they come later, they're --
17 minutes, in an attack like this, are
18 important. It takes time for them to get
19 there. But the local police officer in your
20 neighborhood that gets that radio run, as we
21 call it, they'll be there within minutes and
22 get shot.
23 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: You'd certainly
24 expect units to be developed. It makes
540
1 sense. But it appears that the terrorist
2 threat is a moving target, in the sense that
3 it's -- they're changing tactics all the
4 time. It is much more of almost a guerilla
5 on-scene situation --
6 PRESIDENT LYNCH: That's correct.
7 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: -- as opposed to
8 major events. I mean, who knows, but the
9 fact is we need to be equipped for
10 everything. And this appears that yes, the
11 unit makes sense. However, we seem to be
12 equipping the unit, but not those on the
13 front lines -- in Times Square, or where
14 people gather, or in one of the stadiums or
15 wherever.
16 Is that the basic concern of our PD?
17 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Yes, absolutely.
18 And we have to be concerned with multiple
19 things happening at once, as we've seen in
20 Paris, where you may have one of our
21 boroughs, an incident happen, and
22 simultaneously in Times Square or in one of
23 our neighborhoods -- I live in Queens -- out
24 in Queens, and one of our malls -- it all
541
1 goes on at the same time.
2 So then those specialized units will
3 be stretched. But if our local police
4 officers are equipped and trained in those
5 techniques, we'll be able to respond and hold
6 it off and save folks' lives. And that's
7 something that --
8 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: And this is not a
9 hypothetical situation.
10 PRESIDENT LYNCH: No.
11 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Just look at what
12 happened in Paris. In Paris, if that's a
13 template.
14 So keep us informed, let us know what
15 this group can do. Particularly our areas of
16 public protection, the requests we need to
17 make from Washington as well. You raise
18 excellent points, and we'd be glad to be
19 supportive.
20 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Senator, I
21 appreciate that.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: Assembly?
23 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Our next
24 speaker is Assemblymember Malliotakis.
542
1 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: Thank you.
2 Thank you for being here.
3 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Thank you,
4 Assemblymember.
5 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: I want to
6 say first off, well, thank you to the men and
7 women of the NYPD, thank you for what you do
8 each and every day. I want to say that I
9 support the initiatives that you outlined
10 here today --
11 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Thank you.
12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: -- and
13 especially when it comes to the parity issue
14 and disability. Certainly they all take the
15 same risk, and one shouldn't be treated
16 differently than the other. And so I support
17 you and I lend my voice to you to use as you
18 continue to fight this fight.
19 I just had three relatively quick
20 questions. In October, we had a terrible
21 tragedy with the shooting of Police Officer
22 Randolph Holder. I believe that there is a
23 tremendous problem with the drug diversion
24 laws that we have currently in the State of
543
1 New York.
2 I wanted to get just your opinion, if
3 you could just talk a little bit about this.
4 Someone who had four felony drug convictions,
5 in my view, should never have been released
6 from prison and put into a diversion program.
7 And had he been kept in jail where he
8 belonged, I believe that Police Officer
9 Holder would be alive today. And so I'd like
10 to just get your perspective on this. And
11 what are your concerns about the drug
12 diversion law, and should it be changed?
13 PRESIDENT LYNCH: I think that when
14 you have someone with such a violent history
15 that's there, when they go before the judge,
16 he or she needs to have all the information
17 in front of them to make that decision.
18 Someone that goes into a diversion program
19 should be someone that's nonviolent, that
20 shows a proclivity to do better, to get
21 better, and maybe they've made a mistake.
22 But what we've seen is that that's
23 been bastardized, where you go in, it's just
24 they clear the calendar, they clear the
544
1 docket to let's just put them in the
2 diversionary program for drug treatment,
3 alcohol treatment, and all those different
4 types of things -- which are fine for certain
5 folks.
6 When you have a violent repeat
7 offender, I don't believe they should be
8 allowed to go in that program. Because what
9 will happen is we will face them while we're
10 riding the subway and our members, the
11 New York City police officers, will have to
12 face them on the street. And we had that
13 with Randolph Holder, that police officer who
14 stopped a bicycle robbery and he spun around
15 and shot that police officer and killed him,
16 a police officer from a family of police
17 officers. Why? Because that perp was
18 allowed to go back on the street through a
19 diversionary program which he never, ever
20 should have been included in.
21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: Has the
22 City of New York or anyone else in the state
23 asked you your opinion on this, or to work
24 with them in changing the law?
545
1 Senator Marty Golden and I are
2 actually working on legislation now. I was
3 wondering if anyone else has talked to you
4 about this. Or has the mayor had any
5 discussions with you?
6 PRESIDENT LYNCH: No, just the public
7 discussion that happened after Officer
8 Holder's assassination that day. But no.
9 But we look forward to working with
10 you and to get that accomplished to make all
11 of us, quite frankly, all of us safe. But if
12 the first-line police officers aren't safe,
13 there's not a chance for the rest of us.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: Sure.
15 On that note, we are one of three
16 states that does not consider the danger
17 level of defendants when setting bail. I was
18 just curious if you would comment on that as
19 well and if you have any proposals to change
20 that.
21 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Yes, traditionally
22 now it's -- bail is used, will that person
23 come back to court. So we have cases where
24 they don't and they still get bail. But
546
1 obviously you should look and say what
2 condition are they in, what crimes that they
3 have, and will they commit a violent crime.
4 Even if they have the funds to be able to get
5 out on bail and whether they'll come back or
6 not, what will they do while they're out?
7 So I think it's very important that
8 you look at the background of each defendant
9 in that case and make an educated decision on
10 the information. So I believe that if you
11 have a violent background, you should not be
12 out.
13 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: Okay. So
14 you would support, obviously, changing that
15 law, then.
16 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Yes.
17 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: Okay.
18 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Yes.
19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: One last
20 question. The 2014 sanctuary law prohibits
21 NYPD from cooperating with Immigration and
22 Customs Enforcement. In fact, there was a
23 report that was issued by the criminal
24 bureau, justice bureau of the NYPD that says
547
1 474 of the 504 immigration detainers received
2 from the feds were not honored.
3 I find this to be a little shocking.
4 I mean, I think these sanctuary laws that
5 were put in place by the City Council are
6 really misguided. Do you have an opinion on
7 this? I just want to know what -- what are
8 your thoughts on this as well? Because --
9 well, I'll let you speak first.
10 PRESIDENT LYNCH: So we have -- we
11 should be allowed to use every tool on the
12 street as police officers to take someone
13 that committed a crime. Look, police
14 officers don't want to go out and go after
15 undocumented folks, it's not what we're
16 looking to do. We're out looking to keep
17 everyone safe and do the job. But
18 unfortunately, sometimes those same folks are
19 committing crimes, just like a person that's
20 legally here in this country may commit a
21 crime.
22 So in both of those cases, we should
23 be allowed to look at and use every aspect.
24 Sometimes that aspect may be deportation. So
548
1 we shouldn't be too quick to close doors on
2 what we can use to make the streets safe.
3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: There was
4 an incident where someone who was
5 undocumented on Staten Island was arrested
6 for trespassing, was released back on the
7 street, then later on was accused of rape.
8 Then they were brought back in.
9 But the issue I find with some of
10 these laws and the bail laws is that some of
11 these individuals won't come back for their
12 court dates.
13 PRESIDENT LYNCH: That's right.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: So I think
15 that's a major issue that we need to address
16 as well. Do you have any suggestions on that
17 front?
18 PRESIDENT LYNCH: I think, again, part
19 of the tools -- and I'll begin to research it
20 some more for you, and with you. But I think
21 all those tools should be allowed. But if
22 there's a violent history there or there's a
23 chance they're not coming back, they
24 shouldn't be allowed out on bail. It's as
549
1 simple as that.
2 We think it should be a fair system in
3 court, we think it should be a system where
4 they're before the judge. But in order to
5 make sure that happens, we have to make sure
6 they show up. So if there's a violent
7 history or they're illegal, then they may not
8 come back.
9 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: It seems
10 some of these policies, they don't have
11 common sense behind them.
12 But I thank you so much for sharing
13 your opinions. Thank you so much for what
14 you do.
15 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Thank you.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
17 Senator Krueger.
18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Evening. Hi.
19 So my district is the 19th, 17th, and
20 13th Precincts, and happily I think we
21 sometimes have more arguments about bikes on
22 the sidewalks, and the irritation of
23 hovercraft bumping old people over, than
24 organized crime.
550
1 PRESIDENT LYNCH: We hope that's
2 everyone's problem to deal with.
3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Exactly. Just for
4 the record, you don't support electric bikes
5 or hovercrafts, do you?
6 PRESIDENT LYNCH: No.
7 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
8 PRESIDENT LYNCH: I think I'd probably
9 fall off it, but --
10 (Laughter.)
11 SENATOR KRUEGER: It's just -- it's
12 creating too much chaos.
13 But more seriously, although that is
14 an issue in my district --
15 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Of course, of
16 course.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- my understanding
18 is every NYPD officer is going to be given
19 some kind of Apple phone that gives you
20 direct access to records of anyone you're
21 picking up. So partly as follow-up to that
22 question, you will or now have more direct
23 data about the people that you are stopping
24 on our streets. Can you talk to me about
551
1 that program?
2 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Yeah, sure. The new
3 Apple phones that the department is providing
4 for all out police officers on patrol is
5 basically like a minicomputer in your hand
6 where you can more quickly run the names of
7 the folks to find out if they have warrants,
8 what's their background, the location you're
9 going to, has there been other incidents in
10 that apartment or that building. So it's a
11 safety factor for the member, as well as
12 knowing what you're walking into as a police
13 officer.
14 And it's more extensive than that.
15 It's a huge amount of information at your
16 fingertips literally in that radio car where,
17 when I came on the job in 1984, there was no
18 computer in the car, you'd have to possibly
19 take that person in, run the name at the
20 stationhouse. Sometimes they popped a
21 warrant, sometimes they didn't, but it was
22 consuming of time.
23 This is -- for a safety reason, it
24 works. To make sure we're dealing with the
552
1 right folks and not the wrong folks, it
2 works. So it's a good tool to get the job
3 done.
4 And it's more extensive than that.
5 You can even see what other 911 calls are
6 going on in your area, a patrol in your
7 sector, in your foot post, so it educates the
8 police officer on exactly what she or he is
9 dealing with on their post. So I think it's
10 a good tool that helps us get the job done.
11 SENATOR KRUEGER: And is it rolled out
12 completely now, or is it rolling out?
13 PRESIDENT LYNCH: It's not rolled out
14 completely, but it's well on the way to doing
15 that, to make sure every police officer on
16 patrol -- so I would venture to say it's more
17 a question of the department -- but I would
18 definitely say by midyear, the end of the
19 year, that every police officer will have
20 them.
21 SENATOR KRUEGER: Great. And then
22 just one more question, I know it's so late.
23 Following up, I think, on Senator
24 Nozzolio's questions about your proposal for
553
1 an anti-terrorism package for each police
2 officer, so would you actually propose that
3 patrol officers who are walking a beat are
4 carrying long guns?
5 PRESIDENT LYNCH: No, we would have
6 the -- what we call the radio car in your
7 neighborhood, the patrol -- that'd be
8 equipped, it would be in their trunk,
9 safeguarded, so when they're going to an
10 incident like that they can equip themselves
11 and take it out.
12 Now, if you're on a foot post,
13 obviously it wouldn't be practical to be
14 standing at a foot post with a rifle slung
15 over your shoulder. But in an incident like
16 that, that you'd be able to have each
17 stationhouse equipped with that equipment,
18 that when it's an all-hands-on-deck kind of
19 call, that those police officers on foot can
20 respond to the stationhouse, get prepared,
21 and then respond out to the scene and help
22 get that job done.
23 So we're not proposing that our police
24 officers be walking around with a rifle on
554
1 their back. We're not suggesting that. But
2 we should have access to them no matter what
3 our assignment is, and the training to use
4 them properly and the techniques in
5 anti-terrorism, so, quite frankly, we don't
6 have to use them. But our techniques will
7 help stop it.
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
9 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Thank you, Senator.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
11 Senator Hassell-Thompson.
12 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you.
13 Just very briefly, I just -- somewhere
14 in there, my ears got pricked up because I
15 just -- it almost sounded as though you did
16 not feel that bail was a tool that should be
17 used at all.
18 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Say again, I'm
19 sorry?
20 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: My ears
21 heard, I didn't say you said --
22 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Fair enough. Well
23 put.
24 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: -- my ears
555
1 heard you expound on bail. Have you taken a
2 look very closely at what the bail reform is
3 that is being proposed?
4 PRESIDENT LYNCH: We're looking at it
5 and will continue to look at it to better
6 educate ourselves on those opinions. But
7 what our concern --
8 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Okay, wait,
9 wait --
10 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Sure. Go ahead.
11 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Don't go
12 ahead of me.
13 PRESIDENT LYNCH: That's quite fine.
14 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you.
15 Because this is your area of expertise, so
16 you have to take it slow with me.
17 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Sure.
18 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: I asked --
19 you know, I asked you that question very
20 specifically because bail is, as I earlier
21 stated to one of the other presenters, is
22 supposed to be administered or recommended
23 before the presumption of guilt has been
24 established. So therefore when you start to
556
1 talk about who should and shouldn't get bail,
2 that's where I want you to enter.
3 PRESIDENT LYNCH: What I'm saying, in
4 a process that -- and the legislation, we'll
5 continue to review and make our opinions as
6 we get educated on it more -- right now, as I
7 understand it, the process is will that
8 person that's accused come back to court.
9 What we've found is many times that's
10 not the case, those that may have been
11 released on bail have a violent past and,
12 while they're out on bail, continue to follow
13 through on that violence as well.
14 So what I think should happen is you
15 should have the judge have all the
16 information in front of her or in front of
17 him that can make an educated decision on
18 what kind of threat is this person if we do
19 release them on bail. It's just purely a
20 safety issue for our members and for the
21 public we serve.
22 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Okay.
23 Because I asked the question that way very
24 deliberately, because again, when you look at
557
1 it, you know, one of the things that we have
2 to determine -- and we're not clear that it's
3 really the best way to go -- is that we
4 should be legislating that for the judges.
5 Because then we'll end up with nobody getting
6 out.
7 And so we want to be very -- but we
8 want to be able to give, in any of our
9 legislative initiatives, the greatest
10 latitude of discretion with the greatest
11 amount of information.
12 PRESIDENT LYNCH: That's right.
13 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: And so we
14 kind of agree on that part.
15 PRESIDENT LYNCH: We're kind of on the
16 same page.
17 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Yes. So
18 that the decision that's made is made in such
19 a manner that fairness occurs.
20 Our problem is, and as we have
21 discussed sometimes -- most times it's
22 budgetarily, sometimes it's case caps -- and
23 if you listened, if you sat through all this
24 today, so you understand why those of us who
558
1 continue to push for bail are cognizant of
2 the fact that there are so many cases, and
3 that you know when you come before the bench,
4 neither the judge has had the opportunity to
5 kind of read the disposition --
6 PRESIDENT LYNCH: That's right.
7 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: -- nor has
8 the attorney that's representing the client
9 had the proper amount of time to be able to
10 understand this, to instruct their client in
11 order for them to get the best chance for
12 justice.
13 PRESIDENT LYNCH: And that should be
14 all of our mission. That judge should have
15 every bit of information. And quite frankly,
16 at the end of the day you want fair justice.
17 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: But timing.
18 But timing. Some of these cases -- we talked
19 about backlog, we talked about all of those
20 things today.
21 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Sure, sure. Yeah.
22 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: And I think
23 that when we really push for justice -- I'm
24 just interjecting this because I want people
559
1 who think I'm soft on crime to understand
2 that I'm not at all soft on crime --
3 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Look, justice should
4 never be rushed.
5 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: -- but
6 rather, I do want to be sure that the process
7 is as just as we can make it.
8 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Sure. And --
9 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Because
10 those are the cases we don't want to get
11 thrown out.
12 PRESIDENT LYNCH: That's right. No,
13 we agree there should always be justice,
14 that's what we work on as police officers.
15 We want to be fair to everyone, and justice
16 should never be rushed.
17 So whatever -- and there may be others
18 that can testify more cogently on this issue
19 in the courts. What do we need to make sure
20 is that it's not rushed but also, because
21 we're not rushing, they're not behind bars
22 longer they should be because there may be
23 someone innocent that's there. We want to
24 get to the right answer, the right result.
560
1 So whatever we need to do to keep the
2 folks safe, that's what we should be looking
3 at, that's what we should be legislating in
4 all cases. You should be deliberate in your
5 deliberations, absolutely.
6 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
8 PRESIDENT LYNCH: Thank you, Senator.
9 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Because my
10 time ran out. I had a great question --
11 PRESIDENT LYNCH: I understand.
12 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: -- but my
13 time ran out.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
15 And we want to thank you, President
16 Lynch, and all your members for all that you
17 do on behalf of the people of New York City
18 and the people of New York State. We
19 appreciate you being here.
20 PRESIDENT LYNCH: I thank all the
21 Senators, the Assemblymembers as well. And
22 any other information you need, we'll gladly
23 provide it to you.
24 Good evening, everyone.
561
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
2 much.
3 Next we have the New York State Public
4 Employees Federation. And representing the
5 New York State Department of Corrections and
6 Community Supervision, we have Steve Drake
7 and Paul Rigby. And also, from the New York
8 State Office of Technology Services, Penny
9 Howanski.
10 I see you've got a book with you.
11 Welcome. I was hoping that we could
12 maybe summarize the highlights of your
13 testimony. We do have this, we will read it,
14 but just in the interests of it being
15 7 o'clock -- what you have to say is very
16 important, and we will take it to heart, but
17 if we could maybe streamline this a bit, it
18 would be helpful.
19 So welcome.
20 MS. BRATE: Absolutely. And thank you
21 for the opportunity to speak before you
22 today.
23 My name is Nikki Brate. I am a PEF
24 vice president. Penny Howanski is that local
562
1 council leader that you heard of earlier
2 today. She has submitted her testimony, but
3 I wanted to just speak about a couple of
4 points that came up during the course of the
5 day and just to clarify some concerns that we
6 had.
7 Ms. Miller clearly does not understand
8 the workforce, the current workforce. She
9 did in fact reach out to PEF 24 hours prior
10 to the budget being printed to ask PEF to
11 accept her plan. She really wasn't willing
12 to work with us, collaborate or communicate,
13 or even allow us positions, it was a yes or
14 no for that.
15 What we found most intriguing and
16 incredible is that, you know, Ms. Miller says
17 that we can't hire mid-level. We have
18 promotional exams, correct? And we even went
19 so far as to have in the 23s, which are some
20 of the mid-levels, actually can come off of
21 open competitive.
22 That said, when you're looking at
23 wanting to outsource your help desk, your
24 Layer 1 and 2, that's where that expertise
563
1 starts to be learned, right? So if you're
2 going to outsource that, later on down the
3 road you are not going to have that expertise
4 that they're claiming that we don't have
5 right now.
6 And that is a huge concern when you
7 look at the stability of the workforce that
8 you have in place today. If you have that
9 aging workforce that's going out, you're not
10 bringing in them at that beginning level so
11 that the mid-level can down-train, that is an
12 absolutely huge problem.
13 Ms. Miller talked about wanting to
14 have a strong permanent workforce. But the
15 hiring of contracting shows the opposite.
16 Her words were much different than the
17 actions that have been experienced, and the
18 misinformation quite frankly is troublesome.
19 It appears that a lot of thought went
20 into the planning for the RFP outsourcing.
21 Not planning on investing in the existing
22 employees, not allowing for the knowledge
23 transfer, and not allowing the opportunities
24 that Ms. Miller quite frankly gave lip
564
1 service on. The way that the OITS has been
2 progressing, that is what has begun the
3 creation of the silos.
4 Again, the succession plan for OITS
5 simply is privatization. A little example:
6 New York City did a lot of outsourcing and
7 contracting at one point. What New York City
8 did, and other jurisdictions, they determined
9 that those jobs need to be insourced. Not
10 only for cost savings, but for the security
11 and protection of the data and the network
12 and the infrastructure.
13 Ms. Miller's plan fails the workforce,
14 it fails the State of New York. Ms. Miller's
15 plan quite frankly is a recipe for disaster.
16 One other thing I wanted to say that's
17 a little bit off of that was I heard a lot
18 about the cybersecurity today. The
19 cybersecurity that ITS really provides is
20 fundamental security over our networks and
21 our data. It requires a specific skill set.
22 The other part of the security that you
23 really need is security against cyberwarfare.
24 This is a different skill set that is needed.
565
1 So when we talk about yes, we're
2 throwing off some of the threats, those are
3 some of the tools that they have on that they
4 can do it, but cyberwarfare is certainly a
5 scare, and it's a whole different skill set
6 than you need for those that are providing
7 cybersecurity at the level in ITS.
8 Thank you.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
10 Next speaker?
11 MR. DRAKE: Good evening,
12 distinguished committee members. My name is
13 Steve Drake. I'm a vocational instructor at
14 Mohawk Correctional Facility, and I've worked
15 for the department for over 23 years.
16 The New York State Public Employees
17 Federation represents thousands of members
18 within the Department of Corrections and
19 Community Supervision. These include those
20 who work in the prison health system,
21 rehabilitative services, education,
22 vocational training, and drug treatments.
23 These are all areas critical to help DOCCS
24 maintain their mission, which is preparing
566
1 and ensuring an inmate's ability to become a
2 productive member of our communities upon
3 their release.
4 I'm going to consolidate some of this
5 for you.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
7 much.
8 MR. DRAKE: I would like to bring an
9 issue of urgency to your attention. Our
10 members rely on personal alarms for their
11 safety in the prisons, commonly called a
12 personal alarm system, or PAS. These are
13 small devices similar to a pager that our
14 members activate during an inmate assault or
15 potential danger. The current PAS system is,
16 in some instances, 20 years old or older.
17 Technology has advanced greatly during this
18 time period, and there are now PAS systems
19 that can pinpoint locations, which we would
20 request, for quicker response times by
21 security.
22 There was a plan in place to update
23 the PAS system, but with budget cuts in
24 recent years, this very important item has
567
1 been pushed to the back burner. As a
2 priority, and for everyoneĂs safety, I am
3 requesting that you help us make this
4 lifeline possible.
5 Next, PEF represents numerous licensed
6 medical professionals within DOCCS. These
7 medical professionals provide vital health
8 care 24 hours a day, every day, for all of
9 the inmates in the facility and any staff who
10 get hurt or have other medical emergencies at
11 work.
12 DOCCS, as many state agencies, suffers
13 from recruitment and retention problem of
14 licensed professionals, which PEF represents,
15 such as nurses, doctors, pharmacists, and
16 nurse practitioners within its facilities.
17 The nurse vacancy rate has increased from
18 10 percent in January 2015 to 15.85 percent
19 in November 2015 -- an increase of nearly
20 6 percent in less than one year -- and this
21 situation is not improving.
22 These vacancies are attributed to, in
23 part, salary disparities between what is
24 offered by New York State compared to similar
568
1 jobs in the community, resulting in the
2 inability to attract and maintain a
3 sufficient number of staff.
4 Salary disparities are further
5 exacerbated by the workplace conditions for
6 these professionals. Recruitment and
7 retention problems result in frequent
8 scheduling and assignment changes, as well as
9 a high volume of voluntary and mandatory
10 overtime. Medical professionals represented
11 by PEF are unsung, undervalued, and
12 needlessly overstretched.
13 Two points that I'd like to make to
14 you, and our key point thing is DOCCS has the
15 most "no mandatory overtime" violations of
16 all state agencies. And with that, DOCCS has
17 violated this law 2,729 times between July 1,
18 2009, and November 2015, forcing nurses to
19 work beyond their regular shift, repeatedly
20 and unethically, in violation of the New York
21 State Labor Law 167, Part 177.
22 I would like to say at this point that
23 it is imperative that we begin to look at
24 increasing the base pay of nurses from a
569
1 Grade 16 to a Grade 18 to help in the
2 recruitment and retention of qualified
3 nurses. With Tier 6 in place, and stagnant
4 salaries, there is no incentive for qualified
5 nurses to come to the state for employment or
6 remain with the state for a career.
7 At this time, I'll let Paul speak.
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Mr. Rigby?
9 MR. RIGBY: Good evening. Thank you
10 for allowing me to come today --
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good evening.
12 MR. RIGBY: -- and testify on the
13 Executive Budget for fiscal year 2016-2017
14 and to provide testimony at the Public
15 Protection hearing.
16 My name is Paul Rigby. I'm employed
17 as a senior parole officer for the State of
18 New York. I worked as a corrections officer,
19 a parole officer, and a senior parole officer
20 for the last 17 years. I am the council
21 leader for all the parole officers and the
22 senior parole officers for the entire state.
23 We've heard testimony today by Acting
24 Commissioner Annucci, we've heard testimony
570
1 from the commissioner for DCJS, and I wanted
2 to give some stats and clarify some of the
3 positions that they didn't have earlier for
4 you guys to consider.
5 Right now, let me give you some facts.
6 You heard Acting Commissioner Annucci give
7 you the prison population. There's 52,000
8 inmates in the Department of Corrections
9 right now. And there's about 24,000
10 corrections officers that supervise them, and
11 it's a tough job. I know, because I was one
12 of those officers.
13 But there are 36,000 parolees in the
14 State of New York, and right now 650 parole
15 officers are responsible for supervising
16 those 36,000 parolees. I've heard many of
17 the Senators testify and ask Acting
18 Commissioner Annucci questions about the
19 rising crime. A lot of local municipalities
20 have been asking what's going on with
21 parolees in the community, why are they
22 committing so many crimes nowadays.
23 Well, I can tell you, since I've been
24 around through the transition, that, you
571
1 know, we also heard about the risk and needs
2 tools. We heard about the COMPAS tools. I
3 heard Assemblyman O'Donnell talk about the
4 Parole Board was not used in this. What is
5 that designed to do? It's designed to give
6 an inmate a questionnaire and, based upon
7 their responses, it determines the risks and
8 needs that a person has on there.
9 And I would agree that some parolees
10 come out with more risks, they come out with
11 more needs. Some are undomiciled. We heard
12 about the shelter system in New York City and
13 how it's overcrowded. We hear about these
14 young kids who are coming out, you know,
15 without the skill sets. We heard so much
16 from the commissioner when he testified about
17 what they're doing inside the facilities to
18 help these kids get along and come out
19 better, these inmates.
20 But we did not hear the
21 commissioner -- what's disturbing to me is
22 that during his direct testimony he never
23 testified about anything in Community
24 Supervision. I would tell you there was
572
1 definitely a disconnect between what happens
2 in the facilities and what happens out here.
3 Prior to our merger, and prior to the
4 old parole supervision, a parole officer
5 would supervise up to 40 parolees when he
6 first came out for the first year. That was
7 called intensive supervision. It allowed the
8 parole officer to meet with these people two,
9 three, four times a month inside the office,
10 allowed them to meet with them two, three,
11 four times a month in the community. You
12 made sure they're doing well, because the
13 parole officer has to wear two different
14 hats. We wear the hat as law enforcement,
15 but we also wear the hat as a counselor to
16 help these guys out.
17 Nowadays the new COMPAS system allows,
18 you know, four different levels, you know,
19 where a parolee can be supervised on 25 to
20 1 -- one parole office for 25 people -- 40 to
21 1. Where it gets disturbing nowadays is that
22 there's Levels 3s and 4s which they consider
23 being low risk, where one parole officer is
24 supervising 80 people and a Level 3 caseload,
573
1 and then the Level 4 caseload, one parole
2 officer is supervising 160 people. And
3 they're considered low risk.
4 And how COMPAS determines -- you know,
5 weighs it, a lot of it deals with age. A lot
6 of these low-risk parolees for COMPAS,
7 they're a guy who has a murder, he has double
8 homicide, robbery first, just did 30 years
9 inside the facility, and he's coming out as a
10 low-risk parolee. Now, you can't imagine the
11 face on these parolees. And they're low risk
12 because the standard at a Level 4 is that you
13 see them once every four months. For the
14 first two months you see them, you know,
15 pretty much weekly, but then after your first
16 two months, you know, where you're telling
17 them "I need you to go to treatment, this is
18 a job, where you can find a job," you tell
19 the parolee "I'll see you in four months,"
20 and they look at you like you're crazy.
21 Because they're like, What do you mean, four
22 months? You don't want to see me for four
23 months? No, that's how the science says we
24 have to supervise you.
574
1 And I can tell you right now, we're
2 failing these people dramatically. Because
3 not seeing them in four months, not seeing
4 them in three months, we're losing out. The
5 reason why I supervise a sex offender
6 caseload as a supervisor, the reason why the
7 sex offenders recidivate at such a low rate,
8 is that we see them all the time. We are on
9 top of them. We know if they miss one
10 treatment program. We know as soon as
11 they're positive for drugs.
12 The new COMPAS system right now was a
13 cost-effective tool to eliminate parole
14 officers, and it's a rise to crimes,
15 unfortunately. And I apologize for that.
16 I would also like to clarify a couple
17 of things that they talked about. You heard
18 about the two different warrant sweeps, the
19 absconders. And you heard about -- I think
20 Assemblyman Oaks talked about police officers
21 doing our jobs. And I think it's wonderful
22 to have the information come our way, but you
23 also hear about the absconder -- excuse me --
24 the absconder thing in which they did -- OSI
575
1 is the Office of Special Investigation. It's
2 run by the Department of Corrections. It's
3 the former Inspector General's office. They
4 led two different warrant sweeps on
5 absconders.
6 Senator Nozzolio told you that the
7 department talks about one to 200, one parole
8 officer for 200 absconders. OSI ran a
9 warrant sweep in Rochester in December, the
10 22nd through -- I think the 19th through the
11 22nd. They brought 100 different correction
12 officers, CERT officers, and a few different
13 parole officers. They focused on 36 parole
14 absconder warrants. During that time, they
15 caught 13 people. It cost the state, to pay
16 their overtime, their regular salary and
17 lodging, approximately $250,000 to run that
18 one operation. That was a net rate of
19 $19,000 per one absconder.
20 The one in Brooklyn cost the state I
21 believe it was around $450,000. They caught
22 50 absconders, I think 59, running the state
23 $8,000 per absconder.
24 I can tell you in Syracuse, during
576
1 that same three-day period they did the
2 warrant attempt in Rochester, I had my
3 regular parole officers who were still seeing
4 their parolees for the office in their home,
5 we did our own warrant sweep without paying
6 any overtime. I caught nine, costing the
7 state no money extra.
8 We have problems also with OSI running
9 the operations. Due to many different
10 reasons right now -- Assemblyman O'Donnell
11 heard from the Corrections Institute, and
12 they talked about reform for OSI and the
13 problems that have plagued OSI across the
14 state. We heard Assistant Commissioner
15 Annucci talk about reforms which they're
16 trying to put forward with OSI. We have a
17 lot of problems with that. I can tell you
18 right now, the Rochester sweep -- we're
19 effective public, you know, safety right now.
20 We were always told, you know, your
21 relationship with your parolee is what's
22 going to save you as a parole officer. You
23 need to build that relationship, you build
24 that trust, you build their care, you build
577
1 the family's trust, and that's how you get
2 by.
3 What they did when they ran these
4 warrant sweeps, instead of talking your way
5 in, they introduced CERT canine units, they
6 had CERT officers there with assault rifles.
7 They answered the door with a ballistic
8 shield in their hand and someone pointing a
9 gun behind there when grandma and grandpa and
10 mom and dad and the loved ones answered the
11 door.
12 So what they did there is that they
13 trampled over our relationship, because we
14 understand, we violate that guy's parole,
15 he's coming back in 90 days. We've got to
16 work with them. We got to make them succeed.
17 We want him to succeed, we want him to be
18 productive. And what they did, they trampled
19 over that whole relationship.
20 And we question the motive on which
21 they're doing that, because the day that they
22 announced the warrant sweep and that OSI was
23 going to take over our warrants was a day
24 after the Corrections Association made their
578
1 I think 107-page testimony to Crime and
2 Corrections. So we question the motive
3 behind there.
4 We heard a lot of different things
5 about vehicles. Mr. Annucci -- before I go
6 back, let me revert back real quick. They
7 said that these warrant sweeps are not going
8 to stop. And that's problematic for us,
9 because it was $700,000 for two warrant
10 sweeps. If they continue those warrant
11 sweeps the rest of the year, it would cost
12 $4,350,000 for one year.
13 New York City has a high number of
14 absconders down there, and the reason why the
15 high number of absconders is down there is
16 that prior to the merger we used to have
17 seven different warrant teams down there,
18 with a senior parole officer and six parole
19 officers. Now it's down to only two teams,
20 trying to find all those absconders.
21 So just to talk real quick about the
22 vehicles, and I'll be done, I promise --
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, because we do
24 have a lot of people waiting.
579
1 MR. RIGBY: All right. Yes.
2 The vehicles -- Commissioner Annucci
3 talked about 37 new vehicles, and I've heard
4 the State Police talk about their vehicle
5 fleet. I can tell you, our vehicle fleet
6 right now for Community Supervision, it's
7 219. Out of those, only 186 are assigned to
8 parole officers that supervise 36,000
9 parolees. And we have right now 57 vehicles
10 that have over 125,000 miles on them. A lot
11 of them have over 200,000 miles on them.
12 We are asking for that to be changed
13 and for more money to be put into the budget
14 to add more vehicles for our fleet as a
15 resource in which we need to do -- because if
16 there's not a vehicle available for the state
17 vehicle, we're forced to use our own personal
18 vehicle in which we take our family members
19 in, we have our kids traveling in, and it's a
20 danger to my officers' safety.
21 Thank you.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Thank
23 you, Mr. Rigby.
24 Senator Nozzolio.
580
1 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Good evening.
2 MR. RIGBY: Good evening, sir.
3 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: This is important
4 stuff. I'm in no hurry. We've been at this
5 for 10 hours. And I think the fact of the
6 matter is --
7 (Applause from audience.)
8 -- when your job -- when your job is
9 not being done to the standards that you have
10 just described, people die. It is life and
11 death. So this -- many, many important
12 issues.
13 Let's start with, maybe, from my left
14 to right, is it Howanski?
15 MS. BRATE: My name is Nikki Brate.
16 Penny gave the written testimony.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Nikki, what's your
18 last name again?
19 MS. BRATE: It's Nikki Brate.
20 B-R-A-T-E. And I'm a vice president with
21 PEF.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Great. Thank you.
23 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you.
24 I won't belabor the testimony. I
581
1 think it's important that we recognize that I
2 do not subscribe to the director's testimony
3 here and the rosy picture that was put
4 forward.
5 I am very fearful that the data of New
6 Yorkers is not being properly kept. That I
7 don't think you're suggesting that we
8 eliminate people with knowledge and
9 appropriate expertise to come in and help,
10 but you're just saying as a replacement for
11 those workers, you're objecting to.
12 So I think -- is that -- do I have
13 that message correct?
14 MS. BRATE: Can you repeat what you
15 just said?
16 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Yeah. What I
17 gather from your message was that you
18 objected to certain consultants taking over
19 the workload of otherwise state employees
20 that are entrusted with taking an oath of
21 office and ensuring that they protected the
22 data, the information, that's existing.
23 Is that not correct?
24 MS. BRATE: So what I was saying is
582
1 that we have various -- we have a very
2 talented workforce, and absolutely sometimes
3 you will need to augment some of that with a
4 consultant. But outsourcing all of that is
5 taking out a lot of that institutional
6 knowledge that will provide that future
7 protection and the institutional knowledge
8 that we have and the members that built those
9 systems, know those systems. And that is why
10 we need to keep this workforce in play.
11 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: And I'm not going
12 to go overboard with that, because frankly
13 the world is changing rapidly, and that the
14 state has an obligation to come in to provide
15 the best minds with the most experience in
16 the quickest possible time.
17 So my recommendation is you don't
18 fight that, you work with it. And if it
19 comes to the point where you have suggested,
20 that the security is jeopardized because of
21 privateers coming in and doing all the work
22 or a substantial amount of the work or an
23 amount of the work that is detrimental to the
24 safety and security of the data, then we need
583
1 to know about it.
2 But don't fight those that are
3 trying -- and I guess that's the sense that I
4 have, is that the technology department
5 suggests it uses a major consultant, but I'm
6 not sure to what extent. And maybe you could
7 give us an offline, off-this-testimony report
8 on exactly what is being provided. Because I
9 left that testimony shaking my head -- not
10 your testimony, but the testimony of the IT
11 director, shaking my head because I don't
12 have a clear picture, I don't believe any
13 member of the panel has a clear picture of
14 what she is describing.
15 Going to --
16 MR. DRAKE: Steve Drake.
17 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: To -- Steve?
18 MR. DRAKE: Yes.
19 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I've been around a
20 long time. I worked with Dave Stallone many
21 years ago -- do you remember, does that name
22 sound familiar to you?
23 MR. DRAKE: Absolutely.
24 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: That we got those
584
1 antique pagers -- except they were high-tech,
2 cutting edge at the time. Twenty years ago
3 is a long time in the technical world. Those
4 things are necessary to the teachers in our
5 correctional system, absolutely. I'm shocked
6 they haven't been upgraded in all this period
7 of time.
8 Do you have specific proposals
9 relative to upgrading and the protecting?
10 MR. DRAKE: We can provide you that
11 information.
12 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Would you do that?
13 MR. DRAKE: Yes.
14 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: And do it quickly?
15 That's what Dave Stallone did 20 years ago.
16 I hope you'll follow up in that path.
17 MR. DRAKE: Absolutely.
18 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I don't know if you
19 heard any of the comments I made during the
20 questioning of Commissioner Annucci.
21 MR. DRAKE: I did, sir.
22 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: That the staffing
23 ratios are the structural problem that is
24 creating a dangerous situation. I think
585
1 that's the bottom line. That's your bottom
2 line. Certainly there are people who are
3 trying to do the best in changing protocols
4 and providing additional infrastructure and
5 equipment. But with these kind of ratios, I
6 don't know how effective that will be.
7 Please comment.
8 MR. RIGBY: Yes, sir. The ratios
9 nowadays are unacceptable, and I think that's
10 where the system is failing nowadays. I
11 mean, it's failing the community because
12 community safety is being jeopardized, it's
13 failing the parolee because the parolee's not
14 getting the service which they used to
15 receive.
16 I mean, the relationship and the bond
17 between the parole officer and the parolee
18 cannot be undermined, and when you don't see
19 a person for three, four months at a time and
20 you don't get to meet mom -- you know, when I
21 used to visit my parolees when I was a parole
22 officer, I'd be out there two, three, four
23 times a month. The parents knew me. The
24 sisters knew me. The kids knew me. "Hey,
586
1 Mr. Rigby, how are you?" You built that
2 bond, you built that relationship, because
3 they tell you, "Hey, Johnny's doing right,
4 Mr. Rigby."
5 And when you don't see these people,
6 we've got a disconnect nowadays, and it's
7 causing the problems. And if the parolee
8 does relapse and he starts using drugs, we
9 don't know about it sometimes three, four
10 months down the road. And then we're losing
11 them by that time, because it's going too far
12 along.
13 If you dropped the numbers back down
14 to something that was manageable and a parole
15 officer could have an active contact with the
16 parolee in the community, we'd be much safer
17 and we'd be much more successful.
18 Commissioner Annucci only gave you the
19 rate of recidivism for a person committing a
20 felony. Right now, our rate of recidivism
21 for a parole violator is about 49 percent.
22 And we have many different alternative
23 programs they have in there.
24 And another problem they have is they
587
1 have us doing a lot of duties which we never
2 did before. I know, you know, I think --
3 you know, everybody in here because -- about
4 five years ago, one of our parole officers
5 was shot and killed in -- shot and injured in
6 Manhattan, at the office. We put metal
7 detectors in there. And then the state
8 developed an ISO item to guard our metal
9 detectors.
10 But what happens right now is that
11 when that ISO officer is no longer able to
12 man that metal detector, the department has
13 parole officers, Grade 21s, doing Grade 9
14 work. They will not run the academy until
15 they have five empty items. We waste tens of
16 thousands of hours, parole officers taken out
17 of the community to work a Grade 9 metal
18 detector because they refuse to run the
19 academies. And it's not acceptable.
20 Those parole officers need to be in
21 the community. They need to be having
22 contact with these parolees to help them
23 succeed.
24 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I'm out of time,
588
1 so -- in terms of the clock, I know others
2 want to speak. But thank you very much for
3 the focus on this, and please continue to
4 provide us the input we need to help change
5 these policies.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: We'll now hear
8 from Assemblymember O'Donnell.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Thank you very
10 much, Mr. Rigby. You're not from New York
11 City, but you speak as fast as Mr. Lynch.
12 (Laughter.)
13 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Which is quite
14 an accomplishment. And the way you say
15 Manhattan, I know you're not from New York
16 City.
17 So one of the problems is you have a
18 huge amount of information with a lot of
19 acronyms and letters that I've come to know
20 what a lot of them are, but many people
21 don't. Okay? So I want to start first with
22 the definition section.
23 In the day, 20 years ago, no one got
24 out of prison until the Parole Board said
589
1 "You can go." So everyone had a sentence
2 with two numbers -- it was two-to-six or
3 one-to-three, whatever else it was -- and at
4 some point they say, "Oh, you're a good guy
5 to go home."
6 We changed that system, and now we
7 have a system where we have a solid number,
8 one number -- five -- and then five years of
9 community supervision. So when someone says
10 someone was, quote, paroled, in a lot of
11 people's minds that means someone decided to
12 let them go, which may not be the case. But
13 they're under supervision.
14 So you're not even really parole
15 officers anymore, you're technically
16 community supervision officers. Is that
17 right?
18 MR. RIGBY: That's the new term, sir.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Okay, yeah.
20 So I want to make sure that you understood my
21 criticism earlier about the COMPAS system was
22 not directed at you or anybody who does your
23 job. It was entirely directed at the
24 Parole Board, which, when getting that
590
1 instrument, is not following the law that we
2 wrote about how to use it. It had nothing to
3 do with the way that you hardworking men and
4 women do your job. So I'll be very clear
5 about that. Okay?
6 MR. RIGBY: Okay.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Now, you seem
8 to have new presidents on a regular basis at
9 the PEF. I just want to share that with you,
10 you seem to roll through them -- I don't
11 criticize you for that, but I've met with the
12 previous ones and now your new one has asked
13 for a meeting with me with, I believe, people
14 in the Parole Department. Are you on the
15 list of --
16 MR. RIGBY: I will see you next week,
17 sir.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: See? Now who
19 knows my schedule better than me?
20 I'm very happy, because you clearly
21 know quite a bit about the way that works.
22 And I want to assure you that I have the
23 utmost respect for the people who do your
24 job, and I will do everything I can to help
591
1 you do your job better.
2 MR. RIGBY: Thank you, sir. I
3 appreciate it.
4 (Applause from audience.)
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
6 Senator Gallivan.
7 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you.
8 And thanks to all of you for your
9 work, your members' work, and your testimony.
10 Senator Nozzolio covered much of what
11 I wanted to cover, so I'll spare two of you.
12 But, Officer Rigby, if I can follow through
13 on the discussion regarding the caseload
14 ratios.
15 So first, tell me -- so a parole
16 officer. An individual is released from the
17 prison and is assigned to your caseload.
18 What is your responsibility?
19 MR. RIGBY: Well, prior to the
20 individual being released from the facility,
21 he has that COMPAS risk-and-needs-assessment
22 tool done to him.
23 SENATOR GALLIVAN: No, let me ask -- I
24 just want to know -- I'll get into COMPAS.
592
1 But I just want to know what is the
2 responsibility -- what does it mean when
3 you're supervising a parolee?
4 MR. RIGBY: Well, when they're first
5 initially released, they come to your office,
6 you go over the rules and regulations, you
7 talk about their housing, you talk about
8 their needs, you talk about their goals. You
9 take a look at what they need to have happen.
10 We want to refer them to DSS.
11 I know the department's been working
12 tirelessly trying to get Medicaid on board,
13 but each county's a little different in
14 trying to have those services available.
15 So we take a look at, you know, their
16 history. They might have a substance abuse
17 history; we'll refer them to get substance
18 abuse treatment. They might be a domestic
19 violence guy, we refer them to treatment. So
20 after we get our first initial referral set
21 up, we'll say, "Hey, come back and see us
22 next week, this is my report date."
23 We go -- we visit them in the
24 community, we make sure they're staying where
593
1 they're supposed to be staying, we meet with
2 the family to make sure they're transitioned
3 and they head home where they're supposed to
4 be. If they're homeless, we're working with
5 them, "Hey, who do you know" -- because a lot
6 of times they don't know someone, they might
7 run into somebody on the street and say,
8 "Hey, Johnny says you can take me in. He's
9 my friend." Then we go take a look at that
10 house.
11 We refer them to a lot of different
12 programs, the Department of Labor, so they
13 get help finding work.
14 So we're trying to prioritize with
15 them and meet with them to address their
16 needs and to help them to stabilize
17 themselves, because those first eight weeks
18 are crucial.
19 So the initial first eight weeks
20 depends on the COMPAS score. We meet them
21 weekly. But then where the disconnect comes
22 through, Senator, is after that. Because
23 then COMPAS kicks in, and then that
24 determines when we got to see them again.
594
1 The Level 1s and 2s are high risk,
2 maybe not so much the high needs, I would
3 argue sometimes, and we still see them on a
4 monthly basis. But where we're losing the
5 battles, and I cannot stress enough, are the
6 3s and 4s who are being supervised by one
7 parole officer to 80 parolees on the 3s, one
8 parole officer to 160 -- because I can't tell
9 you, the look on their face when we say "Come
10 back and see me in three months, come back
11 and see me in four months." We were their
12 crutch, and now you just took that crutch
13 away from them.
14 And that's the difference between
15 nowadays, with the COMPAS, and prior.
16 Because they can rely on us for one full
17 year, and after one full year, if they did
18 well, they earned their way back down to
19 lower-level supervision. Because we all want
20 them to have a lower level of supervision, we
21 all want then to succeed.
22 SENATOR GALLIVAN: So now we get to
23 the Level 4s that have the 160-to-1 ratio.
24 Over the course of a four-month period,
595
1 you're seeing them once every four months?
2 MR. RIGBY: Twice.
3 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Twice?
4 MR. RIGBY: You see them once in the
5 office, and once at home.
6 SENATOR GALLIVAN: And how much time
7 does that involve?
8 MR. RIGBY: Well, I can tell you, the
9 ones in the office visit might be five,
10 10 minutes. The ones at the home visit might
11 take an officer five, six, seven days.
12 And here's the problem. Because when
13 you have this disconnect -- and the parolee's
14 not supposed to change his residence unless
15 we know about it -- the parole officer might
16 go to his house two months from now, knock on
17 the door, the guy's not there. He tries then
18 two weeks later, goes there, he's not there.
19 Goes up again next week, he's still not
20 there. We talk to mom, mom says: "No, he
21 moved last week. He didn't tell you?"
22 And so there's a lot of wasted time
23 trying to catch back up with these guys. And
24 a lot of times they're trying to hide from us
596
1 because they know they relapsed on drugs,
2 they know they did something wrong.
3 And we're no longer proactively
4 supervising these people. The parole
5 officers are making their standards, but I
6 can tell you they're not being supervised,
7 based upon the new COMPAS system.
8 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Let me, for the
9 sake of time -- and I agree with Senator
10 Nozzolio that I wish we had much more time
11 today to talk about this, but of course
12 there's other speakers, and we can follow up
13 separately.
14 What I want to get to is -- so you're
15 five, 10 minutes once or twice a month with
16 an individual that has committed what types
17 of crime?
18 MR. RIGBY: The COMPAS Level 4 --
19 because COMPAS uses age as a primary factor
20 in weighing out stuff. A lot of those guys
21 are guys who committed murder, homicide,
22 robbery first, because they're the guy that
23 just did 25, 30 years in the facility.
24 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Okay. Thanks.
597
1 MR. RIGBY: They're a little bit
2 older.
3 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Now --
4 MR. RIGBY: Here's the problem,
5 though, is the guy --
6 SENATOR GALLIVAN: No, no. Timewise,
7 I'm sorry.
8 MR. RIGBY: Sorry.
9 SENATOR GALLIVAN: And then I will let
10 you finish.
11 Is the COMPAS instrument the only
12 thing that determines those caseload ratios?
13 MR. RIGBY: Yes. COMPAS is the
14 primary driver for that.
15 SENATOR GALLIVAN: All right. Thanks.
16 And then, finally, you mentioned two
17 different areas, which I believe is why
18 everybody should care. And it doesn't matter
19 where you start. You could start with the
20 community that I care about and talk very
21 briefly why this is wrong and we're failing
22 the community in helping to ensure community
23 safety, public safety. And we all also care,
24 I believe, about rehabilitation and reducing
598
1 recidivism. And you mentioned that we're
2 failing the inmate.
3 Finish with commenting on both of
4 them, please.
5 MR. RIGBY: I will.
6 It's kind of plain and obvious to see
7 that communities' safety is jeopardized when
8 we're not seeing these people on a regular
9 basis. If we can catch them when they first
10 relapse to drugs, when they first start
11 violating their curfew -- I always believe in
12 the mantra that I always sweated the small
13 things and the small conditions because if we
14 took care of all the small things, we never
15 had big things. You know, so if I kept them,
16 you know, for the first year doing the right
17 things, they'd relapse, I'd talk to them, I'd
18 get them to a little more treatment -- it
19 kind of corrected itself, you know.
20 So by keeping these people involved in
21 programs, helping them find the jobs, helping
22 them become productive, they're less likely
23 to engage in new criminal behavior. You
24 heard the commissioner talk about all these
599
1 educational programs? We try to also send
2 them to educational programs, vocational
3 programs in the community.
4 Now, on the flip side, that's about
5 the parolee. The community supervision and
6 safety part is hand in hand there. Parolees
7 are committing crimes because they're not
8 being supervised the same way they used to be
9 supervised, Senator. We do not have an
10 adequate amount of parole staff supervising
11 these people. Our ratio is at an all-time
12 high right now. And if that COMPAS risk and
13 needs assessment was so perfect, why do I
14 always have to override all the sex
15 offenders? They come up as 3 or 4, as low
16 risk. I've always got to override them. Why
17 am I always overriding the domestic violence
18 cases to make them a higher level? Because
19 it does not ask the right questions and does
20 not assign the right amount of supervision.
21 And that's the problem we're having today,
22 sir.
23 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Okay. It sounds
24 like you have an impossible task, and that's
600
1 very troublesome. None of it falls on the
2 shoulders of your officers, but we recognize
3 the problems. Thank you.
4 MR. RIGBY: Thank you.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
6 Assembly?
7 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: So I have a
8 couple of questions, and I'm going to start
9 at the left and work through to the right.
10 And I'll be as quick possible.
11 First of all, Nikki, you heard my
12 comments earlier when the director was
13 speaking. I do want to continue to follow up
14 on that. I have a great challenge when we're
15 spending hundreds of millions of dollars in
16 overtime on consultants, because I don't know
17 if the supervision is there. We all agree,
18 and you admitted it yourself, there's going
19 to be a time and place. But it shouldn't be
20 the practice all the time, and I do agree
21 that middle level is a great opportunity to
22 grow committed employees in this department.
23 Steven, in regards to the salary
24 disparity you're talking about with the
601
1 professionals -- the nurses, the pharmacists,
2 whatever it may be -- what is the disparity
3 percentage-wise between what the market is
4 bearing and where they're being compensated
5 at?
6 MR. DRAKE: I mean, it varies across
7 the board, you know, across the state. But
8 like in Central New York, where I work, you
9 know, our biggest competitor is SUNY Upstate.
10 And they offer thousands -- $8,000 to $10,000
11 more than the salaries that we can pay in the
12 local facilities.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Right.
14 MR. DRAKE: And we compete against,
15 you know, local hospitals as well, who
16 offer -- they may offer different programs
17 for them that we can't offer. And we start,
18 you know -- nurses are way underpaid. We
19 can't compete. We can't even -- honestly, we
20 can't even get extra service or outside
21 services to come into a lot of our facilities
22 as well.
23 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: All right,
24 thank you.
602
1 And Paul, as a gentleman who was
2 privileged to be mayor of a small city for
3 13 years and one who represents five cities
4 now, the coverage criteria that you were
5 telling me absolutely scares the life out of
6 me. I appreciate all the work that all of
7 you do. I would like to know at a
8 follow-up -- and Nikki knows how to get hold
9 of me, she sees me regularly -- a little more
10 detail on the coverage here, particularly
11 here in the Capital Region.
12 You guys play a very interesting role.
13 Yes, you're enforcement, to a degree, but
14 you're guidance and you're support. And
15 let's face it, when individuals are released
16 from facilities, they're getting their feet
17 back on the ground and they need the support
18 as much as possible.
19 And at the same token, I can tell you
20 that I have mayors calling me regularly
21 saying -- because the cities, naturally, will
22 attract many people being released. They
23 usually return to where they came from, and
24 that's where most of the crime tends to be,
603
1 unfortunately -- right, wrong, or
2 indifferent. And there's a frustration at
3 the local law enforcement level, which -- I
4 know you guys work well together, but still
5 it's a challenge.
6 So I am very interested in greater
7 detail, particularly with here in the
8 Capital Region. Thanks for all the work that
9 all of you do.
10 MR. DRAKE: Thank you.
11 MR. RIGBY: Thank you, sir.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
13 Senator Savino.
14 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you,
15 Senator Young. I will be brief.
16 You know, last night your president
17 was here. We were with him, the vice
18 president, and you during the workforce
19 hearing, and a lot of discussion was around
20 the shortage of staff in all of these
21 agencies and the difficulty that your members
22 now face meeting the demands of these
23 agencies, whether it's Parole or DOCCS or
24 OCFS or OMH, OPWDD -- the list goes on and
604
1 on.
2 We heard earlier tonight from the
3 DOCCS -- earlier today from the DOCCS
4 commissioner that overtime is a little bit
5 less than last year, and that everything
6 seems to be okay. But I get the sense that's
7 not necessarily the case. I understand that
8 there's a real problem with attracting and
9 recruiting and retaining medical
10 professionals in DOCCS; is that correct?
11 MR. DRAKE: That's correct.
12 SENATOR SAVINO: I mean, I think --
13 there used to be this poor nurse, I'm not
14 going to name her name, but she would always
15 list the highest overtime in the state at
16 Bedford Correctional Facility. I think she
17 finally retired, thank God. But, you know,
18 seriously, thank God for her.
19 But I'm seriously concerned about the
20 ability of your members to deliver medical
21 care in our facilities, to be able to track
22 parolees, to be able to deal with the
23 developmentally disabled, to plan or to
24 handle engineering, and this is -- so agency
605
1 by agency, we're seeing this. But this is a
2 real problem. It's the number of staff and
3 the number of -- and the ability to recruit
4 and retain quality staff.
5 I mean, do you guys have -- can you
6 give us any sense of how short-staffed you
7 are in these three divisions?
8 MR. RIGBY: I'll start.
9 Right now, if you look at our BIFL,
10 when you look at the warrant sweep they did
11 in Brooklyn and they caught the 59 parole
12 absconders -- they were short 37 parole
13 officers prior to the last recruit class
14 coming out. So when you wonder why, you
15 know, they caught 59 out of 200, it's because
16 no one was looking for them for a while
17 because they were down 37 items.
18 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm.
19 MR. RIGBY: You know, the problem is
20 right now, using the new parole math, when
21 you say one officer can supervise 160
22 people -- prior to COMPAS, that was four
23 officers supervising those people. So if you
24 use their new math, their math is going to
606
1 say that we might be down 10 percent, but if
2 you use the old math, we're probably down
3 about 45 percent.
4 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm.
5 MR. RIGBY: I mean, our ratio right
6 now is one parole officer per 55 parolees,
7 where before it was right around one per 38.
8 You know?
9 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm.
10 MR. RIGBY: So our staffing levels are
11 down dramatically, and the commissioner
12 alluded to two academy classes this year. I
13 did not see that in the budget. I'm not sure
14 where he's getting that from, but I did not
15 see the two academy classes for parole
16 officers in the budget.
17 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm. I mean,
18 conceivably there are some positions that can
19 be contracted out. Some things can't. You
20 cannot contract out parole supervision,
21 right?
22 MR. RIGBY: Correct.
23 SENATOR SAVINO: Exactly. So there is
24 a case to be made that this budget doesn't
607
1 really reflect the needs of the agency or the
2 responsibilities that have to be delivered by
3 these agencies and your members.
4 MR. DRAKE: From our standpoint in the
5 facilities, I can't give you the actual
6 number, but I know that there's 200-some-plus
7 new full-time employees that they're adding,
8 and a large portion of them are medical
9 services.
10 But the ability to recruit and bring
11 those people in to fill those is nearly
12 impossible. I mean, our facility just
13 underwent a $30 million renovation, with the
14 plan hopefully sometime in the next couple of
15 months to open that new wing for inmate care.
16 And we're going to be looking for -- well,
17 right now we're short 12 nurses, and with the
18 new increase, we'll be looking for almost
19 21 nurses in our facility.
20 SENATOR SAVINO: Unbelievable.
21 Thanks. I just want to -- I
22 constantly want to get it on the record that
23 the agencies are drastically understaffed and
24 that hiring has got to be a consideration,
608
1 not just for the administration of the
2 mission of the agencies but for the safety of
3 the staff as well. Thank you.
4 MR. DRAKE: Thank you.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
6 I have a comment and a question. I
7 share Senator Savino's concern about
8 understaffing, and especially about the
9 medical understaffing. And in the 2016
10 budget, this year's budget, the Legislature
11 felt so strongly about mental health services
12 in the prison system because, as you know,
13 we've seen real-life tragedies where people
14 have been severely injured and killed by
15 inmates who have left the system without the
16 supports that they need within the system and
17 outside.
18 And so apparently $18 million of that
19 funding has been expended to treat the
20 psychiatric prisoners who have violent
21 tendencies. Have you seen that happen?
22 Because it's concerning to me to see that
23 there was an MOU between OMH and DOCCS which
24 expired in 1999 -- that's incredible to me --
609
1 that outlines the duties of the nurses
2 between psychiatric nurses and regular
3 nurses. Could you expound on that?
4 And my question, also, if you've seen
5 any changes over the past year regarding that
6 issue and are there additional measures being
7 taken or is there additional attention to the
8 psychiatric prisoners, and how does it affect
9 your members?
10 MR. DRAKE: From my standpoint,
11 there's definitely been an increase in
12 training for all staff, I will say, from the
13 initiative from the department to educate us
14 on handling mental health inmates. Our
15 facility earlier on, prior to when we first
16 started taking mental health inmates in or
17 dealing with them, there was basically -- you
18 were a normal correctional facility one day
19 and then you became a mental health facility
20 the next day, with no real training to the
21 staff.
22 Over the last three years there's been
23 an initiative with the department and
24 ourselves from the union standpoint to train
610
1 staff in informing them how to deal with
2 that. They're still looking at developing
3 some of that training and including
4 correction officers to deal with, you know,
5 some of that. Because some of the correction
6 officers are not getting that same training
7 that the civilian staff are getting.
8 As far as the MOU goes, there's a lot
9 to be said. Supposedly, that we heard today
10 that they are almost done with revising the
11 MOU between the two departments. But there
12 is still -- is nothing that distinguishes
13 between the psychiatric nurse and a regular
14 nurse in the facilities.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So it's taken since
16 1999 to get the MOU done. Thank you for
17 that. And I want to sincerely thank you for
18 being here today, and all of your members.
19 And, you know -- does the Assembly
20 have any more?
21 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: We're good.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Oh, you're good.
23 Okay.
24 Well, what I was going to recommend is
611
1 that PEF continue to be in touch with the
2 Senators and the Assemblymembers. We
3 appreciate the work that you do. We're
4 concerned about the issues you raised
5 tonight; we would like to hear more about
6 those issues so that they can be addressed.
7 So again, thank you for being here
8 tonight. We really appreciate it.
9 (Applause from audience.)
10 MR. DRAKE: Thank you.
11 MS. BRATE: Thank you.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next group is
13 from the New York State Defenders
14 Association. We have Executive Director
15 Jonathan Gradess and Legal Director of
16 Veterans Defense Programs Art Cody.
17 Glad to have you here.
18 MR. GRADESS: Thank you. And thank
19 you for your patience.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you for your
21 patience.
22 MR. GRADESS: Well, mutual admiration.
23 As you noted, I am joined by Captain
24 Art Cody, U.S. Navy, retired. I want to
612
1 apologize for Gary Horton, the director of
2 the Veterans Defense Program; he had to be
3 back in Batavia in about 10 minutes, so he
4 left here a bit ago, disappointed.
5 I want to talk about four things. Art
6 will help me with VDP. But I want to talk to
7 you about the Backup Center, a part of which
8 is the Veterans Defense Program. I want to
9 talk about the IPP program, the indigent
10 legal services budget, and the Fahy bill --
11 the Fahy-DeFrancisco bill, forgive me.
12 Before I do that, I'd like to sort of
13 paint a little bit of a picture because I
14 think, for the first time in many years --
15 and I have been coming before you for many
16 years -- we have a watershed moment in New
17 York, and it is a watershed moment in which I
18 think we may all be on the same page, which
19 is a wonderful thing. And that page is
20 mandate relief.
21 And everything I want to talk to you
22 about actually can be viewed as mandate
23 relief. And in recent years, I have talked
24 to you about my efforts to create a global
613
1 settlement for the Hurrell-Harring lawsuit.
2 They were uniquely unsuccessful. And then
3 there came the settlement last year, and that
4 has created a real opportunity for
5 conversation in New York unlike anything I
6 have seen since 1978 when I started with the
7 Backup Center.
8 Sometimes I've come before you
9 whining, sometimes thanking you, thanking you
10 particularly last year for the Veterans
11 Defense Program and always saving the Backup
12 Center from what is this year a 58 percent
13 cut by the Governor that I hope will be
14 restored by you. But right now, we have 57
15 counties in the State of New York who are up
16 in arms about the nature of the settlement.
17 One of the reasons we urged a global
18 settlement in Hurrell-Harring was because we
19 thought that would empower the state to move
20 incrementally and do what is right for all
21 the counties. Recall, please, that when the
22 New York Civil Liberties Union sued the State
23 of New York, it sued the State of New York.
24 It didn't sue the five counties that were
614
1 named in the suit eventually. Those were
2 added by the judge. This was a lawsuit on
3 behalf of counties against the State of
4 New York to say the State of New York is
5 responsible for funding public defense
6 services -- not the responsibility of
7 Onondaga and Schuyler and the other
8 defendants, but also not the responsibility
9 of Seneca or Albany or anywhere else.
10 And that reality, I think, has now
11 come home to roost, because the settlement
12 called on ILS to engage in quality
13 development in each jurisdiction to develop
14 Counsel at First Arraignment programs, to
15 develop eligibility standards and caseload
16 relief.
17 And so as Bill Leahy so eloquently
18 said before, you have this situation of
19 Suffolk County getting a present and
20 Nassau County feeling coal in their stocking.
21 You have two assigned-counsel programs that
22 surround Onondaga, one to the north, one to
23 the west. They're both in the same kind of
24 problem. And it's true on the Southern Tier,
615
1 where Schuyler sits, that the surrounding
2 counties all need the help, as I think you'll
3 hear when Mark Williams testifies.
4 So what I want to say is that all of
5 what I am asking you to look at is part of
6 that mosaic that puts us together for the
7 first time in history to recognize that the
8 state has an obligation to fund and care and
9 take care of the constitutional right to
10 counsel.
11 So when Bill Leahy talks about the
12 $34 million of local assistance that is in
13 the ILS budget, it shouldn't be passed over,
14 because it begins to repair the kind of
15 things in the other 57 counties that the
16 settlement did for the five.
17 I would hope that each of you -- I
18 know Assemblyman McDonald is on the bill, I
19 don't think anybody else is -- get on the
20 DeFrancisco bill. He's on the Fahy bill, but
21 there's now consensus in both houses that
22 that bill that would call for the
23 reimbursement of localities for the
24 expenditure of public defense services. That
616
1 bill makes tremendously good sense, it allows
2 for the incremental repair of the state, and
3 it reverses what's happening with the five
4 down, 57 to go, as we call it, that has
5 resulted from the settlement.
6 The Backup Center, which you have
7 helped for every year that I have been in
8 Albany, is in need of your assistance once
9 again. It is in need of your assistance
10 because last year we came to you for
11 $3.5 million; this year is for $4.25 million.
12 The difference really is the incremental
13 increase for the Veterans Defense Program
14 that I'd like to speak about in a second.
15 But the Backup Center is really the
16 poster child for the original mandate relief.
17 When we were housed with NYSAC, it was
18 recognized that if in one single place you
19 could put the expertise that would help
20 localities and public defenders, you could
21 bring up the boats in the state. And we now
22 have a case management system in 67 offices
23 in 45 counties, we are doing 35 to 40
24 training programs a year for defenders, we do
617
1 thousands of cases a year where lawyers can
2 call us, there are 6,000 lawyers that we're
3 under contract to serve in 120 defender
4 plans. And they need us.
5 So all of these things create a
6 mosaic. We need the Local Assistance budget,
7 we need the Fahy bill, we need the Backup
8 Center to be funded, we need the IPP
9 program and -- I'm sorry Senator Gallivan
10 isn't here -- we need that to be restored by
11 the Senate.
12 And we very much need to increase the
13 Veterans Defense Program. Last year you were
14 kind enough to put $500,000 into the budget.
15 That program has exploded and is doing
16 wonderful work across the state. You should
17 each have a copy of this report, which is our
18 activities report, which I think will show
19 you that you ought to be proud of what you
20 did. We asked the Governor to pick it up at
21 $1.1 million this year, because we thought it
22 would be a natural. Apparently it was a
23 little unnatural; he did not pick it up.
24 We're asking for $1.1 million for VDP.
618
1 That's within the $4.25 million total we're
2 asking.
3 I'd like to ask Captain Cody to talk
4 about what he's been doing, because he's been
5 working like a dog. And we're very proud of
6 the work of the program, and I think he
7 should be too.
8 MR. CODY: Thank you, Jonathan.
9 What I want to talk to you about
10 tonight, quickly, is the scope and the
11 urgency of the catastrophe that our veterans
12 are suffering in New York State courts every
13 day. Myself and Gary Horton, our director,
14 are on the ground every day assisting these
15 cases. We hear the horrific stories of what
16 our veterans have been through. We see the
17 resulting post-traumatic stress disorder and
18 traumatic brain injury. We see the military
19 combat trauma. Without our help, their
20 stories are often never told to the judges,
21 the prosecutors, and the juries that will
22 pass judgement on them.
23 We have assisted, in the past year,
24 over 1,000 veterans and defense attorneys.
619
1 Our requests, however, have grown
2 exponentially. We've assisted veterans
3 literally from Montauk to Niagara, from
4 Canton to New York City. Each attorney we
5 train, each veteran we help generates new
6 referrals with the success that we've had
7 that are discussed in the report that you
8 have. The VDP has a staff of three, only two
9 of which are attorneys.
10 You can be assured we will never turn
11 a veteran away who needs our help. But we
12 desperately need help. We cannot cover as
13 much as is the need. The requested increase
14 in our appropriation will make possible
15 additional staff members and permit us to
16 carry on this much-needed work that our
17 veterans need and deserve.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Thank you.
19 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Points well made.
20 Thank you very much for your input.
21 MR. CODY: Thank you.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: No comment?
23 Gentlemen, thank you very much. We
24 have no other comment.
620
1 MR. GRADESS: Thank you very much.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. We
3 appreciate you being here tonight.
4 MR. CODY: Thank you.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you for all
6 that you do for veterans.
7 Our next speaker is from the
8 Chief Defenders Association of New York, Mark
9 Williams, president-elect and public defender
10 in Cattaraugus County, my home district.
11 Welcome, President-Elect Williams.
12 MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Senator
13 Young. It's my pleasure to be here.
14 I was going to start off by letting
15 you all know that I forgot to bring
16 certificates for you, but you all qualify or
17 are getting pretty close to qualifying as
18 honorary public defenders because, from what
19 I hear last night, you were here until
20 10 p.m. Tonight you'll probably be here
21 until 10 p.m.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: At least.
23 MR. WILLIAMS: And that's the typical
24 day of an upstate public defender. We start
621
1 at 8 o'clock or 8:30 in the morning, and we
2 go until 10 o'clock at night. And usually
3 without breaks for dinner or sometimes even
4 lunch. So I just want to welcome you to my
5 world.
6 I have my prepared comments; I'm not
7 going to read those to you. But what I want
8 to point out is that right now in New York
9 State, as Jonathan Gradess has stated, it's a
10 united world for indigent defense. We are
11 all on the same side. Whether you're a
12 public defender on Long Island or in the City
13 or anywhere upstate, we all are of one mind,
14 and that is that it's time for reform, it's
15 time for change. It's time for the state to
16 recognize its obligation to provide indigent
17 defense. Not the counties.
18 And this point is being brought home
19 to us now from the standpoint of the grants
20 that ILS has sent out in the last couple
21 of -- last three years, actually, the grant
22 that 25 counties applied for and were
23 accepted for Counsel at First Appearance.
24 The grant for caseload reduction that, again,
622
1 it was 46 counties applied for and were
2 awarded. Those grants are going to expire
3 later this year.
4 Cattaraugus County is the beneficiary
5 of both of those grants, and what has
6 happened is my office has added staff, we've
7 added two attorneys, we've added an
8 investigator, we've added clerical help. All
9 of those people are working to allow us to
10 have more time or try to find the time to do
11 Counsel at First Appearance, and also for
12 caseload reduction.
13 You know, one thing I mentioned in my
14 testimony that I submitted is that in my
15 county last year we had a trial that ended
16 with a not-guilty verdict on four felonies,
17 three of which were violent felonies. My
18 client was facing 20 years or longer in
19 prison. She was found not guilty of those
20 felonies, and it's directly attributable to
21 the fact that we had the money from ILS to
22 start on that case from the moment she was
23 first arraigned in the local court. Now, we
24 weren't successful in keeping her from going
623
1 to jail on bail that she could not afford.
2 It was in the amount of about -- I think it
3 was $25,000 cash, $50,000 bond. She was a
4 single mother, 23 years old, she had no job,
5 she was taking care of her child and another
6 child. She had never been arrested for
7 anything, not even a parking ticket.
8 Nothing. She went to jail for a year for
9 this case to work through the court system
10 and have the trial, when she was acquitted
11 and she was released.
12 Now, the reason why I bring that up is
13 that the Counsel at First Appearance money,
14 if that ends, Cattaraugus County will get rid
15 of that attorney and that investigator that
16 were so critical in helping us defend this
17 young woman.
18 When I look to see the five counties
19 in the Hurrell-Harring settlement, those
20 counties are going to be able to continue
21 their program, to have counsel at first
22 appearance. We will not be able to do that
23 if this grant money ends. And under the
24 Executive Budget that has been presented to
624
1 you, that will happen.
2 We're asking you to not let that
3 happen. The ILS budget needs to be fully
4 funded. The $139.26 million or $139.27
5 million that ILS has requested is going to
6 start to make a dent in the rest of upstate
7 New York so that we can have caseload
8 standards.
9 My attorneys and myself, because I
10 carry a full caseload, we are handling cases
11 that it would take a staff of probably
12 15 attorneys to handle. Caseload reduction,
13 if we lose that grant, if we lose the Counsel
14 of First Assignment, we're going to go down
15 to five attorneys handling those cases. The
16 number of cases are not going to go down. So
17 what's going to happen? Less justice.
18 You know, when I think about my client
19 and her 3-year-old daughter, Avery -- who
20 I've now seen two or three times, and every
21 time I see her, she thanks me for freeing her
22 mother -- when I think about that, I don't
23 sleep at night at times. And it's because we
24 have to prioritize, we are like triage nurses
625
1 in an emergency room. There's not enough
2 people to treat everyone that comes through
3 the doors. And so you've got to decide, do
4 we take care of this person, do we take care
5 of that person. And so for everybody like
6 Avery's mom who we are able to successfully
7 represent, there's probably five to 10 people
8 that their cases aren't getting the attention
9 that they deserve.
10 You know, one great myth that's out
11 there is that -- well, it's actually people
12 believe that when somebody gets arrested,
13 they must have done something wrong. It's
14 not always that way. A lot of people that
15 get arrested are innocent, and they need to
16 have that right to counsel and have an
17 attorney that's there with a support staff
18 fighting for them nonstop.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
20 Mr. Williams.
21 I know Senator Hassell-Thompson has a
22 question for you.
23 MR. WILLIAMS: Yes. Senator?
24 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Just one.
626
1 Thank you. Well, I had several, but I'll ask
2 one.
3 What is your opinion regarding the
4 Governor's bail reform proposal, which is to
5 include in statute consideration of public
6 safety as a factor determining bail?
7 MR. WILLIAMS: As a public defender
8 representing indigent folks, it scares me.
9 And it scares me because so far New York
10 State hasn't lived up to what they should be
11 doing when the determination of bail is set.
12 And that is, number one, a whole lot of
13 people are being arraigned still without
14 having counsel even there when that decision
15 is being made.
16 So if we're going to do that, if
17 you're going to have any kind of reform,
18 let's have counsel at every arraignment.
19 The second is that the public
20 defenders -- and it's been an issue that
21 NYSDA has talked about for several years
22 now -- but we are not qualified agencies to
23 get criminal histories of our clients when
24 they're done through the eJustice system.
627
1 And what that means is that in the old
2 days -- and I used to be a town judge back in
3 the 1980s -- I would get the rap sheets and I
4 would get two of them, one for me and one to
5 give to the defense attorney. That no longer
6 happens. The rap sheets are produced that
7 way. So the statute that says that the
8 defense attorney is entitled to that -- it
9 doesn't happen. Because the judges are in
10 the eJustice system, we are deemed not to be
11 a qualified agency, so we don't get access to
12 it.
13 Now we've made arrangements with OCA
14 that during the business day we can send them
15 an email and they will send us the criminal
16 history for our clients, maybe in six to
17 eight hours. It doesn't work that way at
18 arraignments. So we're not getting that
19 information. Whether the judges run that
20 eJustice report or not, I don't know.
21 But that brings up the next point I
22 want to make about it. And that is that if
23 you are a prior felon with two felony
24 convictions at any time in your prior
628
1 history, local judges cannot set bail. It
2 has to be done by a county or supreme court.
3 It's got to be done by a superior court. So
4 a whole lot of those people that you've heard
5 talk about that, well, they're a danger to
6 society, you know, for public protection,
7 public safety -- well, if those people have
8 two prior felony convictions, bail isn't
9 being set when they're arraigned in the local
10 court anyways.
11 And in upstate New York, 85 to 90
12 percent of the arraignments are done by local
13 judges who are, most of the time, not
14 lawyers. It scares me to think that we're
15 going to say to those folks, well, you've got
16 to take into -- a public safety
17 consideration, a concern whether this person
18 is going to go out and commit more crimes.
19 They're going to lock up everybody.
20 They're already trying to lock up a whole lot
21 of people. They will change that, and they
22 will start locking up everybody if that
23 reform is done without taking into
24 consideration these other factors.
629
1 So with that, I also want to add that
2 how are they going to make that
3 determination? They're going to use a
4 COMPAS-based, computer-based assessment,
5 right? I've sat through and watched as
6 probation officers ask my clients those
7 questions when it's somebody that might be
8 released under supervision. A computer is
9 making the ultimate decision. Is that what
10 we've come to? Are we going to turn over
11 these important issues to a computer program
12 that's going to say yes, this person has got
13 a propensity for violence?
14 I sit at times and read to the court
15 those COMPAS assessments, because they make
16 no sense. And the judge sits and looks at me
17 and is like, "That says that? Where did you
18 get that term from? Where did you get that
19 information from?" It's scary to me to do
20 that.
21 If we start working the system the way
22 that it should be, by having counsel at every
23 arraignment, by having criminal histories
24 given to the attorneys or letting us have
630
1 access to it through eJustice at that time,
2 and maybe not having local judges who aren't
3 attorneys making that decision, then after we
4 do that, then let's talk about the rest of
5 that reform.
6 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you
7 very much.
8 MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Assemblyman
10 McDonald.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: We will hear
12 from Assemblymember O'Donnell.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: I walked in in
14 the middle, but I have a solution to one of
15 your problems. I have a bill currently in
16 bill drafting that would allow non-lawyer
17 judges to arraign someone but deprive them of
18 the ability to put them in.
19 MR. WILLIAMS: The ability to put them
20 in jail?
21 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: That's
22 correct.
23 MR. WILLIAMS: Yes.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: So you can
631
1 apprise them of what they've been accused of,
2 you can do all those other things -- serve
3 their notices, if that's what you want to do.
4 But if you're not a lawyer and you're the
5 judge who's sitting in that town justice
6 part, you don't have the authority to put
7 them in jail.
8 Maybe that'll change the way the town
9 justice system works. I originally had a
10 bill that I thought was going to just sail
11 through here, because it came from Judge
12 Kaye's report, that would have simply said
13 that if a defendant in a town or village
14 justice court system wanted to, they could
15 request or require that they be only heard by
16 a lawyer who's a judge. But the Magistrates
17 Association, which apparently has immense
18 amount of power in this building, said no,
19 we're not going to have any of that.
20 But that's a solution I've come up
21 with to try to address some of what you're
22 talking about here. And thank you.
23 MR. WILLIAMS: As a member of the
24 State Magistrates Association, they should be
632
1 supporting that bill.
2 ASSEMBLYMAN O'DONNELL: Yeah, well --
3 MR. WILLIAMS: They should be letting
4 their -- you know, allowing that decision to
5 be made because it's too critical of a
6 decision that's happening.
7 A last thing that I want to just add,
8 if I can quickly. The Backup Center, NYSDA,
9 we need to have them fully funded. An office
10 like mine, with seven attorneys and two
11 investigators, two legal secretaries and
12 three clerical positions, we don't have the
13 time to do what we need to do without the
14 Backup Center. I refer to them as my back
15 office. They're so critical, again, to the
16 upstate offices, where we don't have the
17 resources available to us to present and to
18 get the information that we need at times to
19 defend our clients.
20 Whether it's finding experts for us,
21 whether it's coming up with an argument, I
22 call them during trials, they know I'm on
23 trial, two minutes later I have an answer
24 texted to me in court that may save the day
633
1 for a client. So we need them fully funded.
2 And the very last thing is the
3 Veterans Defense Program. As a retired Navy
4 commander, as a two-time county commander of
5 the American Legion in Cattaraugus County and
6 commander of my post, our veterans need your
7 attention. And there's no reason -- when the
8 largest veteran population in the state lives
9 in New York City, we need to have that office
10 in New York City. So we need to have that
11 program fully funded at the $1.1 million that
12 they requested.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
14 Mr. Williams, for your valuable testimony.
15 Glad to have you here tonight. We appreciate
16 you coming all the way from Cattaraugus
17 County.
18 MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you. My
19 pleasure.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I'm sure we'll be
21 talking soon. Thank you very much.
22 Our next speaker is President Patrick
23 Cullen, New York State Supreme Court Officers
24 Association.
634
1 Hi, President Cullen.
2 PRESIDENT CULLEN: Thank you, Madam
3 Chair.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Look
5 forward to your testimony.
6 PRESIDENT CULLEN: Thank you.
7 Good evening, members of the
8 Legislative Budget Committee. I am once
9 again thankful for the privilege to address
10 you all, and it's an honor to appear in front
11 of you on behalf of the men and women I
12 represent. They are New Yorkers who put
13 service first and bravely protect their
14 fellow citizens. They are also New Yorkers
15 who have consistently continued to do our
16 best as the engine of the judicial branch,
17 under adverse financial circumstances and
18 extraordinarily lean personnel conditions.
19 So today I thank you as we can --
20 well, tonight I thank you as we can, with one
21 voice, express our concerns about how the
22 Unified Court System budget affects both the
23 professional and personal aspects of our
24 lives.
635
1 As Judge Marks outlines in this yearĂs
2 budget, the last five judiciary budgets have
3 left the court system "unable to fill the
4 positions left void by attrition." Perhaps
5 the most glaring problem of that sentiment is
6 the inability, through the oversight, to
7 maintain the standards of safety and security
8 that this system has proudly enjoyed for
9 years.
10 The depth of our losses can not be
11 simply stated in a sentence or two. Our
12 court officers are, quite candidly, spread
13 too thin. There are just not enough of us to
14 get the job done in the tremendous fashion we
15 have become known for. We are working with
16 13.3 percent less security staffing than in
17 2009 while absorbing more work, done by more
18 judges, in shorter periods of time. It is
19 unacceptable to put at risk the safety and
20 well-being of all court employees, court
21 users, and jurors.
22 Court parts formerly staffed by four
23 or five officers are now staffed by two or
24 three. Supervisors normally in charge of one
636
1 part are now in charge of managing three or
2 four. All of this occurs while we see an
3 annual increase in the amount of cases
4 handled. The need for full staffing in our
5 facilities prevents our officers from being
6 sent for yearly training for equipment and
7 CPR. Many officers cannot spend their
8 accrued vacation time with their families
9 because managers cannot afford to grant them
10 the time.
11 The system is not recovering and our
12 employees are suffering. In fact, the system
13 itself is staying above water on the already
14 overburdened backs of its employees. In a
15 preventative health initiative introduced by
16 our union, we found our membership to be
17 19 percent higher than the national average
18 for hypertension. The dearth of staffing and
19 the administrationĂs failure to restore our
20 losses will have a profound effect and a
21 long-lasting effect on these men and women --
22 not only at work, but as husbands and wives
23 and mothers and fathers.
24 Furthermore, these austerity budgets
637
1 have actualized deficiencies in our
2 courthouse infrastructure. Early closures
3 and the cessation of overtime have left our
4 buildings empty at a much earlier hour than
5 in the past. We have found homeless people
6 living in the bowels of our courthouses and
7 discover people in unauthorized areas on a
8 very regular basis. These are avoidable
9 security breaches that in the past, at full
10 staffing, would be unheard of, a time when
11 the emphasis was on people and not the bottom
12 line.
13 These landmarks of justice are
14 targets, and we will see catastrophic events
15 take place if we do not restore staffing and
16 overtime to its proper levels, levels which
17 protect New York.
18 Our bargaining unit will be without a
19 contract for five years come March 31st. Our
20 members want a fair contract; they deserve
21 one. What they cannot afford to do is accept
22 a contract that sets them back and gives back
23 provisions they have earned. Many
24 non-security personnel in our system have
638
1 done that, and we are expected to follow
2 suit. We cannot support or accept working
3 under a restructured pay scale which
4 negatively alters these employees' earnings.
5 Additionally, this budget calls for
6 funds in excess of $100 million to be spent
7 on steering business into the judicial
8 system. A budgetary item to ensure court
9 engagement is improper when the very same
10 budget begs so many shortcomings. The system
11 must stand on its own two feet again before
12 it can use its own funds to escort people
13 into the system. Our members remain those
14 who keep our system on its feet.
15 Judge Marks has also been on the
16 record at the Commission on Judicial
17 Compensation, as well as in the media,
18 espousing the financial woes of the
19 judiciary. What is interesting to note is
20 that much of what he says applies to our
21 members as well. He says that the state "has
22 the ability to pay the increase advocated" in
23 reference to a $27,000 increase in salary for
24 each of the state's judges. My members are
639
1 certainly not seeking such a wage hike, just
2 a fair and equitable wage over the last five
3 years.
4 Judge Marks also states that New York
5 is historically the most expensive state to
6 live in. Well, 99 percent of our members
7 live in this great state. He goes on to say
8 that inflation has gone up 42 percent since
9 1999. If so, it has gone up for all of us,
10 including members of this committee and the
11 workers I represent.
12 Finally, Judge Marks advocates the
13 introduction of an automatic cost-of-living
14 adjustment into the judicial pay package. I
15 too support this for our members, because it
16 is the only way to keep up with the
17 ever-rising costs associated with living and
18 working in New York.
19 I applaud Judge Marks for bringing to
20 light important financial issues, but they
21 must apply to everyone within the framework
22 of the system. I fully understand the role
23 of the judiciary. However, if these
24 principles are not addressed to include all
640
1 under its banner, then the Unified Court
2 System is widening an already existing double
3 standard. The judiciary is the face of
4 fairness and equity, and it must practice
5 what it preaches.
6 I have continued to advocate for new,
7 innovative and useful projects to enhance
8 security at all court facilities. I renew
9 the call for budgeted funds to create a K9
10 program for which studies have already been
11 done. This program was green-lighted, only
12 to be derailed at the last minute because an
13 administrator did not like dogs. All of
14 New York will like dogs when they prevent an
15 explosive device from being planted or deter
16 the plans of a potential active shooter and
17 the damage these types of events could
18 inflict.
19 The fact is this is a program that
20 this system should have implemented 20 years
21 ago. Archaic thinking and an inability to
22 install advanced training procedures have
23 left us in the last century. A real and
24 mandatory active-shooter protocol is sorely
641
1 needed. We must be prepared for its near
2 inevitability, based on recent national
3 events, including one in our very own
4 Middletown City Court. We need practical,
5 experienced training from the top experts in
6 the field. This is not a program you want to
7 have to install after a mass carnage event.
8 A real endeavor must be made to
9 upgrade our magnetometers, our x-ray
10 machines, radios and cameras to the latest
11 technologies used in federal facilities and
12 by thousands of police departments
13 nationwide. These programs and ideas will
14 also help us not only do our jobs the way
15 they should be done, but with an eye toward
16 the future. Law enforcement has become a
17 dynamic field, and we must embrace that with
18 personnel, philosophy and financial support.
19 This is a brief synopsis of some of
20 the most conspicuous problems facing our
21 workforce in the court system of New York.
22 These things must be met with certitude that
23 our system needs to be brought up to speed.
24 Our court officers cannot be left behind
642
1 again. We are playing catch-up, and it is
2 only a matter of time before calamitous
3 circumstances result. We are a proud and
4 patient group of the state workforce, but our
5 patience is eroding and our pride is being
6 destroyed by a continued neglect to the
7 things we need to properly execute the duties
8 we have nobly sworn.
9 I ask this committee to pass the
10 judicial budget as it is constituted and not
11 to make further cuts. It is critical to the
12 system's recovery and frankly to our survival
13 within the workforce. The time has come to
14 make a stand and aid in the restoration of
15 the system and those of us who protect it and
16 all it stands for.
17 I want to thank everybody here and for
18 your time and for your hard work.
19 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
20 Assembly?
21 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: No questions
22 from the Assembly, but thank you for your
23 testimony.
24 PRESIDENT CULLEN: Thanks.
643
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: We thank you very
2 much for your testimony.
3 Next up is --
4 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: Pamela Browne.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- Pamela Browne,
6 thank you, Court Clerk Association.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: And on deck is
8 Billy Imandt, from the Court Officers
9 Benevolent Association of Nassau County.
10 PRESIDENT BROWNE: Good evening,
11 esteemed Senators and Assemblypeople. My
12 name is Pamela Browne, and I'm the president
13 of the New York State Court Clerks
14 Association.
15 Thank you for the opportunity to
16 discuss Governor Andrew Cuomo's Executive
17 Budget. I represent about 1,550 court clerks
18 in the City of New York. We support
19 increased money to the courts as you
20 legislators examine the courts and approve a
21 budget.
22 The budget crunch in 2010 left my
23 union with 250 fewer court clerks to make the
24 courts work. There was a freeze on hiring,
644
1 but there was no retirement freeze. The
2 workload did not decrease, however, but it
3 increased with each new program, initiative,
4 task, and system. When anything new is
5 introduced and when you pass any new laws, it
6 falls upon the clerks to carry it out, which
7 we do, as we are consummate professionals.
8 The staffing shortage continues, but
9 the number of clerks and other court
10 personnel is severely depleted. There are
11 court clerks working off the clock because
12 they are diligent and conscientious and do
13 not want to see unfinished work the next day.
14 They want to start off clean.
15 Working at a manic pace should not and
16 cannot be sustained. Additionally, working
17 off the clock is illegal. Not all courtrooms
18 can be staffed. We have clerks covering
19 multiple parts, and we have had judges
20 sitting in chambers for lack of staff. All
21 parts must be adequately staffed.
22 The courts are closing earlier, and
23 special permission is mandated before
24 overtime can be approved. A woman went to
645
1 family court seeking an order of protection,
2 and she was told to go to criminal court as
3 it was past the hour that family court was in
4 operation. There was a strict closing time
5 to not yield overtime, and the directive
6 indicated that such cases were to be referred
7 to criminal court.
8 Previously she would have been allowed
9 to file in family court. Criminal court sent
10 her back to family court, as they were
11 probably unaware of family court's closing at
12 that the hour. Dejected, she obviously gave
13 up and left. She was subsequently killed by
14 her husband.
15 If she were a DuPont or a Carnegie,
16 this case would have received a lot of
17 attention. But she was an ordinary
18 New Yorker with no name recognition or fame.
19 This was the ultimate. Someone lost their
20 life so the courts would not incur overtime
21 costs. What price is a life? Lack of
22 funding has life and death consequences.
23 Not all insufficient funding has such
24 immediate egregious outcomes. Most are
646
1 smaller, but harmful nonetheless, and affect
2 people's well-being. The shortage of funds
3 for court clerks has created tremendous
4 backlogs in every court in many areas --
5 i.e., warrants and housing court, small
6 claims are backed up for months, and
7 judgments that are yet to be entered, to name
8 a few.
9 Not everyone is so middle class that
10 they can easily miss work to come to court.
11 There must be adequate staff, in particular
12 court clerks, to minimize the time the public
13 spends away from their jobs. People cannot
14 and should not have to spend all day in
15 court. Many people have such little vacation
16 or sick time that a day in court is a day
17 without pay.
18 The public is suffering and receiving
19 short shrift. Justice delayed is justice
20 denied. And family court, in the referee
21 parts, there is the referee and the court
22 clerk. The court clerk is a receptionist,
23 security, court attorney, and court clerk all
24 in one. These parts handle orders of
647
1 protection, custody, visitation, and foster
2 care. Previously these cases were handled in
3 a courtroom with a judge, a court clerk,
4 security, and a law assistant.
5 The staffing in these referee parts
6 was created legislatively, and it must be
7 corrected legislatively. Each of these parts
8 must be required to have two court clerks.
9 You must make this right.
10 Over the years there has been the
11 realignment of lines and titles, and
12 negotiation and talks have failed to correct
13 a classification system that is severely out
14 of balance. We have been told that these
15 issues would be addressed, but this has not
16 come to fruition. Court officers have been
17 reclassified for a third time, and the clerks
18 have not been reclassified once in 38 years.
19 The court officers deserve their
20 reclassification. But as their supervisors,
21 we also deserve this. This has upset the
22 hierarchy. How can you not upgrade the
23 supervisors? You cannot promote up only to
24 lose ground. This is against the natural
648
1 order.
2 The courts are in the business of
3 dispensing justice and equitable relief, and
4 it is the court clerks who facilitate this.
5 We are the backbone of the court system.
6 During the years of the budget crunch, court
7 clerks were number one on the wish list of
8 chief clerks. Seasoned judges tell new
9 judges, If you don't listen to the clerk,
10 you're crazy.
11 (Laughter.)
12 PRESIDENT BROWNE: Clerks are retiring
13 in unprecedented numbers for a non-buyout
14 year. The hiring freeze and zeroes have
15 erased the career path. The clerks are not
16 receiving the credit, acknowledgement, or
17 appreciation we have earned. We want, need,
18 deserve, and have earned reclassification.
19 It is the clerks who move the
20 paperwork and allow the courts to function.
21 Whenever any new change is invoked, the task
22 of the court clerk changes as well. Our jobs
23 as court clerks have become convoluted,
24 complex, and all-encompassing. Court clerks
649
1 supervise court officers, and they promote
2 into our ranks. With their third
3 reclassification, the salary gap between us
4 has shortened. There are newly promoted
5 court clerks who have chosen to go back to
6 the ranks of officers. The job of a court
7 clerk has become so challenging, and with
8 such a small pay difference, that officers
9 would prefer to roll around on the floor with
10 defendants and litigants. This never
11 happened before, and is due to a lack of
12 reclassification for court clerks which has
13 turned everything upside down.
14 To become a court clerk, you must pass
15 a test which some attorneys could not pass.
16 You give up months of your life and forgo
17 numerous activities for the sake of studying.
18 Some court officers sacrifice so much to
19 become clerks, and despite their forfeiting
20 so many endeavors, they're going back to
21 uniform.
22 In order to stay competitive, we must
23 be reclassified, which would reflect the
24 changes in our function and value and allow
650
1 us to reestablish our rightful place. There
2 must be sufficient funding for the courts,
3 the judiciary, and court clerks. The budget
4 must have sufficient funding which would
5 allow us to be reclassified. Equilibrium
6 must be restored, the rank structure must be
7 preserved. The financial consequences of the
8 underfunding of the court budget, and its
9 effect on court clerks and consequently the
10 courts, must be reversed.
11 The loss of 250 court clerks saved
12 $22.5 million annually for the last six
13 years, a total of $135 million. We have more
14 than paid for our own reclassification. We
15 who made the biggest effort and sacrifice in
16 keeping the courts functioning smoothly must
17 reap our just reward.
18 Are there any questions?
19 SENATOR KRUEGER: Any questions?
20 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: No questions
21 here.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: We appreciate your
24 coming and testifying tonight.
651
1 Thank you very much.
2 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: My wife is a clerk
3 in a justice court, but she would agree
4 you're crazy if you don't listen to the
5 clerk.
6 (Laughter.)
7 PRESIDENT BROWNE: Thank you.
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
9 And our next testifier is Billy
10 Imandt, president, Court Officers
11 Bevenolent -- Court Officers Benevolent
12 Association of Nassau County. I can't speak
13 anymore.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: That's getting
15 there.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: That's easy enough
17 for you to say. That's a mouthful.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONALD: And up next is
19 Bill Dobbins, from the Suffolk County Court
20 Employees Association.
21 PRESIDENT IMANDT: As you've been here
22 for about 11 hours, so have I. And my
23 mouth -- of course, I had dry mouth, so --
24 indulge me just a minute.
652
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: So did I.
2 PRESIDENT IMANDT: (Pausing to drink
3 water.) Thank you.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
5 Welcome.
6 PRESIDENT IMANDT: Thank you very
7 much, Madam Chairperson. My name is Billy
8 Imandt, and I'm a 32-year court employee and
9 I am the president of COBANC, the Court
10 Officers Benevolent Association of Nassau
11 County, representing not only court officers
12 but approximately 65 different job titles
13 including court clerks, court attorneys,
14 reporters, interpreters, analysts, judge's
15 secretaries, judge's law clerks, and what we
16 call the back office workers, who really
17 should be called the backbone-of-the-system
18 office workers, just to name a few of the
19 titles.
20 I asked to speak to you today to give
21 you a report from the trenches and let you
22 know how well my members are equipped and
23 supported to handle the business of serving
24 the public in their vital role as the support
653
1 staff in the administration of justice to the
2 citizens of Nassau County and, of course,
3 New York State.
4 My message to you is we're just barely
5 holding on. For over seven years, with
6 layoffs and an attrition-based budget -- that
7 being when someone retires, no one is hired
8 to replace them, and the responsibilities of
9 their job are spread out to the remaining
10 workforce -- we have been getting the job
11 done, as I said, for years now. In my
12 bargaining unit, COBANC, we have 20 percent
13 less workers then seven years ago, and we're
14 still getting the job done.
15 We have been spread thin, working
16 harder than ever, without a decent
17 compensation package offer to any of the
18 court unions. In fact, we have been offered
19 the worst compensation package of any
20 municipality in New York State that I know
21 of, and that's after taking 20 percent
22 layoffs. Over the past five years, inflation
23 has increased by almost exactly 10 percent.
24 Our -- and all court union workers --
654
1 compensation package has been zero, zero,
2 zero, 2 percent and 2 percent, or 4 percent
3 over those same five years. And again, with
4 20 percent less workers. And the job is
5 still getting done.
6 In 2011 when our contract expired, the
7 state was just beginning to come out of the
8 worst period of the worldwide recession. And
9 when it came time to discuss a new contract,
10 we knew that it would probably be less then
11 we deserved, and we understood it. Working
12 with no contract and the prospects of zero
13 compensation, we forged on, still getting the
14 job done. Even as desk after desk became
15 vacant and more and more work was put on our
16 desks, again we understood. We are extremely
17 professional and prideful, and our work ethic
18 wouldn't allow us to have work backlog or to
19 slide the window closed at exactly 5 o'clock,
20 leaving members of the public to go home and
21 try again tomorrow because the members
22 weren't getting compensated past that time.
23 Many of my members, unsanctioned by
24 their union, are actually coming in earlier,
655
1 working through all or part of their lunch
2 hour, and leaving well after 5 o'clock. Off
3 the clock. This was, and is, virtually --
4 I'm sorry, there was and is virtually no
5 overtime, and my members -- and I say God
6 love them -- refused to let that demoralizing
7 condition affect their work product. They
8 were, and are, doing this to make it work.
9 To make it work until the cavalry comes to
10 the rescue.
11 Well, it's been five years since we
12 had a contract, and it's time. We cannot
13 hold our breath underwater for too much
14 longer. Sick leave usage is up, disciplines
15 are up, grievances are up, and morale is way
16 down. Senator Savino said at Justice
17 DiFiore's confirmation hearings not to be
18 afraid to ask for more money for the budget,
19 and said "We want to help." Committee
20 members, we need your help.
21 I'm hoping you can help now, because
22 COBANC is at the impasse stage of
23 negotiations with the Office of Court
24 Administration and, unless something changes
656
1 dramatically, we will be back to you in
2 Albany to settle our contract. We don't have
3 binding arbitration, as do many of our police
4 and sister and brother peace officer
5 organizations, and our remedy to resolving
6 our contract, when all else fails, is you
7 here in Albany.
8 It doesn't have to come to that.
9 Being that the court system had three flat
10 budgets, or zero percent increases, while the
11 Governor was calling for a 2 percent cap, we
12 feel that this vital segment of society, the
13 court system, is owed more than the
14 2.4 percent increase it is now asking for.
15 As you know, the courts are not a
16 discretionary agency. We are included in the
17 U.S. and New York State Constitution as an
18 absolute right that society is entitled to,
19 an important part of life, liberty and the
20 pursuit of happiness. How would we function
21 if the criminal courts didn't have funding to
22 complete their task? There would be a real
23 potential for anarchy. Wouldn't society soon
24 be crippled if, due to lack of funding, there
657
1 were not enough court workers and judges on
2 staff to interpret and enforce contracts?
3 They wouldn't be worth the paper they are
4 written on. What about the havoc that would
5 rain down if our matrimonial courts are not
6 funded to the point where there could be
7 swift resolution to one of the more volatile
8 divisions of what the court system handles?
9 Over the past half a decade, our
10 courts have been funded at an average of
11 approximately 1.4 percent when the Governor
12 has capped everybody else at 2 percent. And
13 by the way, that's again with 20 percent
14 layoffs and still getting the job done. It's
15 time to put the proper amount needed back in
16 the system. I not only ask you to grant the
17 requested 2.4 percent increase, but to
18 determine how much funding the court actually
19 needs to get back on its feet, be it an
20 increase of 3 percent, 4 percent, or whatever
21 is needed to properly serve the citizens of
22 New York State.
23 During contract negotiations we were
24 told that the Office of Court Administration
658
1 had no money at all to increase the
2 compensation for a respectable, somewhat
3 close to cost-of-living offer, so we started
4 digging to see how the budget was spent. And
5 you don't have to dig too far to see that
6 there's a whopping $85 million budgeted for
7 fiscal 2016-2017 for a program that is known
8 as Civil Legal Services. And as you know,
9 this is a program to help the public that
10 cannot afford counsel for important civil
11 legal matters -- foreclosures, family court
12 matters, and landlord-tenant matters, just to
13 name a few.
14 A noble and worthy program, no doubt.
15 However, we feel it has no business being
16 funded through the court budget. The Office
17 of Court Administration budget is 90 percent
18 paychecks to people. We don't have tractors
19 and trucks like the DOT. Ninety percent of
20 that budget money goes to workers' paychecks,
21 which then of course gets circulated back
22 into the communities and into paying taxes.
23 We can't afford to fund a program of this
24 magnitude through the court budget. It even
659
1 has a sense of impropriety that the court
2 budget money is going to attorneys that
3 appear before the same organization that
4 funded them to represent people of need.
5 We have been reading that the state is
6 so flush with money now that we feel this
7 should be a program that is financed through
8 the executive branch and not the Office of
9 Court Administration. We can't afford it.
10 Our buildings are in horrendous condition,
11 our staffing needs to be reinforced, and our
12 workers, who are the foundation of the court
13 system, need to be treated with the respect
14 they have earned by being compensated fairly
15 and equitably.
16 We are the middle class. We fuel the
17 economy. If we do well, history has shown
18 that society does well. You can't fund
19 programs from money intended to make the
20 courts work, on all levels, on the backs of
21 middle-class workers in that system. In
22 fact, ironically, the Civil Legal Services
23 program was formally created and expanded at
24 the same time we were being laid off and
660
1 offered zero compensation.
2 If the Civil Legal Service program was
3 picked up by the executive branch, we could
4 fund the judges' raises and fair and
5 equitable compensation for my members and
6 members of the other court unions. And with
7 all the surplus money that New York State
8 has, I think they should expand the Civil
9 Legal Services program -- under the executive
10 branch, though.
11 That would most probably instantly
12 resolve the contracts of the remaining
13 one-third of the unions without a contract.
14 Three of the four without a contract are
15 speaking today. It would not burden future
16 budgets with recurring monies, and it would
17 show appreciation and recognition for how
18 hard and long all state court employees have
19 been working and sacrificing.
20 I believe that Justice DiFiore --
21 Chief Justice DiFiore, excuse me -- could
22 also require that the approximately 60,000
23 non-municipal New York State Bar Association
24 attorneys donate 14 hours pro bono a year, or
661
1 half a day per quarter, to keep this program
2 operating as it has been. Or she can caucus
3 with the legislature, her OCA experts, bar
4 association representatives, and union
5 leaders to figure out how to take this
6 program out of the court budget.
7 Honorable members of this committee,
8 please don't kick the can down the street.
9 Because as I said, if we don't resolve this
10 situation now, very soon we will be back in a
11 number of months asking you to impose what
12 would be a fair contract on us and the Office
13 of Court Administration. We don't want to
14 give you more work, but we may have no
15 choice. We are willing to roll the dice as
16 to what you think is fair, because we don't
17 think anyone would fathom, with a 20 percent
18 reduction in workforce and the job still
19 getting done every day in every courthouse in
20 every county, that reasonable people such as
21 you would think that the fair number is zero.
22 Due to low-paying salaries, I've been
23 told by human resources that the courts are
24 having a retention problem. Now couple that
662
1 with the fact that the state has the ability
2 to pay. With the inadequate budgets that
3 they've been given, OCA keeps cutting and
4 cutting to the point now where we have
5 retention problems, staffing problems,
6 contract problems, people working out of
7 title, and very serious morale problems and
8 extreme security issues.
9 Although OCA's own security staffing
10 guidelines say that there should be a minimum
11 of three court officers in a court -- in a
12 criminal court -- and two officers on
13 perimeter patrol, they're actually down to
14 one now. We didn't squawk when it was two,
15 although we didn't think it was safe -- but
16 again, we tried to make it work.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you for that
18 testimony, and we appreciate it,
19 President Imandt. And we would like for you
20 to keep in touch with us and let us know how
21 things are going.
22 You heard a lot of concern today from
23 legislative members about the court system
24 and making sure that they're adequately
663
1 staffed and up to speed, so I think you have
2 a lot of people here who are concerned about
3 the courts. And we appreciate the jobs that
4 you do, especially in difficult
5 circumstances -- that's what it sounds like.
6 Do we have any members who have any
7 questions? Okay.
8 So thank you very much. Did you have
9 anything else that you wanted to add?
10 PRESIDENT IMANDT: Well, I just did
11 have to say that --
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Because we do have
13 your testimony in writing, so --
14 PRESIDENT IMANDT: Right.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Your --
16 PRESIDENT IMANDT: Well, I just want
17 to say that I'm the president of COBANC, once
18 again, and we're the proud members of the
19 court system.
20 Thank you very much for your time. I
21 appreciate it.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We appreciate it so
23 much. And we appreciate you being here.
24 Thank you.
664
1 I would remind our speakers that
2 there's five minutes on the clock.
3 And our next speaker is President Bill
4 Dobbins, Suffolk County Court Employees
5 Association.
6 Welcome, President Dobbins.
7 PRESIDENT DOBBINS: Good evening,
8 Madam Chairperson. Thank you all for having
9 me come here to speak today -- tonight.
10 I just want to express to you -- the
11 reason I'm here is to express a major concern
12 that we have. I want to convey to you
13 problems that our courts in Suffolk County
14 are facing. And the best way to say it is
15 the state of our courts are extremely poor.
16 Morale is suffering, people are doing more
17 work with less help, and it's been happening
18 for a period of over six years. And it seems
19 like there's no end in sight.
20 The budget cuts from several years ago
21 have really disabled our court system. The
22 hardworking members of our union, the very
23 heart and soul of the court system, are
24 working with lack of appreciation, lack of
665
1 help, and any sense of hope. Staffing levels
2 have been so diminished that our courts are
3 no longer operated in the manner that they
4 should be. Public safety is deteriorating as
5 a result. We are in crisis, and it seems as
6 though we are spinning out of control.
7 One of the major concerns in our
8 courts is security. As a previous speaker
9 spoke of, the court officer staffing in
10 courtrooms -- in district court, we currently
11 are using one court officer in a courtroom.
12 It's unconscionable that that is happening.
13 In a criminal court courtroom, one court
14 officer. And what surprises me is that, God
15 forbid, something happens. In the sense of
16 saving money, in the sense of not spending a
17 little bit more, we're waiting for something
18 to happen. Are we waiting for the next
19 headline? Are we waiting for the next mass
20 shooting because we didn't have enough money
21 to put more court officers in a courtroom?
22 There's more sophistication out there
23 today. Weapons can be secreted into our
24 buildings despite the magnetometers, despite
666
1 the line of defense at the front doors of the
2 courthouse. We have titanium knives that are
3 undetected by metal detectors. We have guns
4 made out of plastic that can come into our
5 courthouse and be used. There were speakers
6 earlier today that spoke of the criminal
7 activity in prisons. Well, there's no doubt
8 that there's criminal activity happening in
9 our courts every single day, and it seems
10 like the administration just wants to ignore
11 the problem.
12 It's time that we wake up. We don't
13 need another situation like San Bernardino.
14 We don't need another situation like what
15 happened in Paris. Unfortunately, the sense
16 is it's not going happen to here, it's not
17 going to happen here. But what if it does?
18 What are we going to do?
19 We need more money to hire more staff.
20 We need more money to hire more court
21 officers. That would solve so many of the
22 problems.
23 Judge Marks spoke earlier about the
24 shortage and he said -- he spoke to us, and
667
1 he said there's a class coming in February
2 29th, 150 brand new court officers, that will
3 help with the staffing problems. Well, you
4 know what, they're coming out in June and
5 Suffolk County has been promised to get maybe
6 15 out of those 150. The problem is that by
7 June, we're going to lose 15 officers. So
8 that 15-officer gain will not even help us.
9 The hiring is not moving fast enough,
10 the retirements are going quicker and
11 quicker. We are losing staff. The courts
12 are definitely not safe. And unfortunately,
13 the judges in our courts are under the
14 misconception that they are safe with just
15 one court officer, because they're being
16 misinformed by superior officers.
17 Misinformed. God forbid something happens,
18 and I hope it never does.
19 In the meantime, the courts throughout
20 New York and especially in Suffolk County are
21 foundering. Our back-office staff is working
22 exhaustively without any help. We have boxes
23 and boxes of files in our records room on the
24 floors, on the tables, just waiting to be
668
1 filed or waiting to be worked on. Our
2 foreclosure courts in Riverhead -- I was out
3 there two weeks ago, there are motions for
4 summary judgements on those foreclosures
5 dating back to 2011 and 2012 not even
6 touched. They're sitting on windowsills in
7 the courthouse on Griffing Avenue in
8 Riverhead.
9 We're supposed to be public servants,
10 and it seems that we're more and more public
11 disservice. We're not doing anything to help
12 the public anymore. It's about just getting
13 by, what can we do to save money, what can we
14 do to get to a calendar. If we want to bring
15 a prisoner up from the cell block to come to
16 a courtroom, we have to wait until other
17 courtrooms close before we can properly staff
18 a team to bring prisoners up to a courtroom.
19 Sometimes attorneys -- Assemblyman Al
20 Graf spoke earlier, he said he waited three,
21 four, five hours, sometimes, for a
22 prisoner -- ultimately they get frustrated
23 because they have cases in other parts or
24 cases in other jurisdictions that they have
669
1 to handle. Inevitably, they waive their
2 client's appearance. So now this poor
3 defendant, transported 33 miles from
4 Riverhead Jail, sits in a holding cell in
5 Central Islip hoping, waiting for his case to
6 come up so that he can be brought to the
7 courtroom. And it doesn't happen. It
8 doesn't happen.
9 Talk about a waste of resources. What
10 did it cost to bring that defendant from
11 Riverhead Jail to the Central Islip
12 Courthouse? What did it cost? We're talking
13 about saving money, and we're wasting money
14 left and right. We're wasting it. But
15 nobody looks at that. The Judiciary Budget
16 talks about Civil Legal Services, which is a
17 great thing, we don't think it's bad -- but
18 we don't think it should come from our
19 budget. We think it should come from the
20 executive branch budget. It just doesn't
21 seem right that the judiciary is paying for
22 attorneys that have to argue before them. It
23 just gives that sense of impropriety -- it
24 doesn't mean that there is, but it just gives
670
1 that sense that there is something amiss. It
2 doesn't seem right. And again, we advocate
3 for it. We think these people need help when
4 they're dealing with their civil issues.
5 They're poor people. But we think it should
6 be paid by somebody else.
7 I urge you to pass the budget that was
8 submitted by the Office of Court
9 Administration. I urge you to pass it
10 because we need the funding so that we can
11 hire people, so that we can staff our courts,
12 so that we can make sure that our courts are
13 safe. We had a gang fight outside the court
14 building. We have court officers, trained
15 peace officers with the ability to arrest,
16 they carry firearms. They couldn't even go
17 outside to attend to the problem. They had
18 to call local police. A problem that could
19 have taken care of right then and there, it
20 took ten minutes for police to arrive. What
21 did that delay have to cause? Did anybody
22 get hurt? Who knows. Could anybody have
23 gotten hurt? Who knows. The money has to be
24 spent properly. I implore you to pass the
671
1 budget, pass more so that everything can be
2 paid for. Everything could be paid for.
3 Because we've been neglected far too long.
4 Thank you.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Thank
6 you very much, President Dobbins, for that
7 testimony.
8 And as I said previously, we're very
9 concerned about the condition in our courts
10 right now, and it's very helpful for you and
11 all the people from the court system who have
12 been here tonight to hear firsthand your
13 testimony and real-life cases and how that
14 affects the people of New York State.
15 So we appreciate what all the people
16 who work in the courts do every single day.
17 It sounds like a very difficult job, and we
18 truly appreciate you staying so late tonight.
19 PRESIDENT DOBBINS: Thank you,
20 Senator.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
22 Our next speaker is Colonel Jack Ozer,
23 New York Wing of the Civil Air Patrol.
24 And again, speakers are allotted five
672
1 minutes of time. And if you could summarize,
2 if you have a lengthy testimony especially,
3 if you could just please summarize the
4 highlights and the high points, because we
5 still have other people waiting. Thank you.
6 Good to see you, Colonel.
7 COLONEL OZER: Good evening.
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good evening.
9 COLONEL OZER: And thank you very
10 much. I noticed we have one member, Senator
11 Young, who's a member of our legislative
12 squadron.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: That's correct.
14 COLONEL OZER: And Senator
15 Hassell-Thompson, who is a Civil Air Patrol
16 cadet. That's great.
17 I will make it very brief. For those
18 of you don't know, the Civil Air Patrol is
19 the auxiliary of the United States Air Force.
20 It has been called upon for numerous things
21 in New York State, which I'll get on to in a
22 minute. It has three functions: emergency
23 service, cadet programs, and aerospace
24 education.
673
1 Our emergency service includes
2 homeland security, it includes disaster
3 relief, it includes counterdrug operations,
4 missing person searches, et cetera. Our
5 cadet program is a unique program that
6 teaches cadets things like self-discipline,
7 honor, integrity, and respect. And our
8 aerospace education program teaches people
9 about science, math, engineering, and
10 technology in how the future will be.
11 We are very unique in one respect.
12 Although we come to you for money, we have
13 saved the State of New York 10 times the
14 money they've given us. In the last several
15 years, we've saved New York State in excess
16 of $2 million for our people through
17 Hurricane Sandy, Hurricane Irene, programs of
18 fire watchers, Department of Transportation
19 overflights, missing person searches,
20 sheltering of people during disasters. And
21 this has worked out very well.
22 Two years ago we came and asked for
23 funding, $200,000, and that was because we
24 realized after Hurricane Sandy we were not --
674
1 although we did the job, we had problems too.
2 We didn't have electricity in a lot of our
3 bases. We didn't have enough cameras, we
4 didn't have enough support. That money went
5 to put in -- for example, Long Island, our
6 mission base, received a new heating system,
7 a permanent generator system. Our base in
8 Rome received a permanent generator system.
9 We've purchased more cameras. We've
10 purchased more equipment, more training
11 funds, and that's gone a long way.
12 One of the things we did with our
13 cadet program, which was great, is we
14 started a "Depressed Area Initiative," we
15 called it, for areas of the state where the
16 cadet programs are really needed for our
17 youth but they can't afford it because the
18 funding is not there. The parents can't
19 afford the registration, they can't afford
20 uniforms, so part of this money went to, in
21 fact, buy uniforms, fund people that couldn't
22 afford the program to get into our program.
23 The program is so important to them, and to
24 help them in the future, that money should
675
1 not be the object. That's what we've done.
2 We continue to do it.
3 With the added money we are asking, we
4 will continue to build our infrastructure,
5 put more money into the cadet program, more
6 science kits for our cadets, more cameras,
7 computers -- so that every time the State of
8 New York calls us or any of the
9 municipalities within the State of New York
10 calls us up, we're ready and willing to help.
11 As you can see, the paperwork that was
12 given out -- I don't want to go and lengthen
13 this with questions -- we are a very
14 professional organization that actually is
15 the cheapest game in town, and the amount of
16 money we save is tremendous. So we're asking
17 the state to just give us our budget this
18 year so we can continue our work.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
20 much, and it's an excellent program. I've
21 seen the results firsthand with the cadets,
22 and I appreciate all that you do. So thank
23 you for being with us tonight.
24 COLONEL OZER: Thank you.
676
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: You want -- okay,
2 all set. Thank you. Thank you so much.
3 COLONEL OZER: Thank you.
4 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is
6 Executive Director Charlotte Carter, from the
7 New York State Dispute Resolution
8 Association, and she is joined by Julie
9 Loesch, director of the Center for Resolution
10 and Justice at Child & Family Services.
11 Welcome. I know it's been an
12 extremely long day, and we appreciate your
13 tenacity.
14 MS. CARTER: Thank you, Madam
15 Chairwoman, and thank you all for this
16 opportunity to speak.
17 We're here on behalf of a statewide
18 network called CDRCs, the Community Dispute
19 Resolution Centers. And thank you for that
20 introduction.
21 The New York State Dispute Resolution
22 Association is a bit of a hybrid. We're a
23 statewide contract program administrator, and
24 we also are a professional association. The
677
1 CDRCs are among our members. Together we
2 provide access to justice and tools like
3 mediation to help people to address conflict
4 productively and quickly, and those services
5 are provided in every county in New York.
6 We're here to request $3 million as a
7 legislative add to stabilize our network and
8 to allow us to respond to emerging community
9 needs.
10 In 1981, the New York Legislature was
11 the first in the country to pass legislation
12 to create the CDRC network, and the funding
13 and oversight was provided by OCA. The
14 budget grew from an initial $529,000 for
15 17 counties to a little over $9 million in
16 2010. In 2011, that funding was slashed by
17 nearly 50 percent, and it has not increased
18 significantly since then.
19 Despite the dramatically reduced
20 funding, the CDRCs have continued to provide
21 free or low-cost mediation and conflict
22 resolution services to your constituents.
23 They help ensure that people do not lose
24 their homes, their jobs, or basic human
678
1 services. Mediation solves disputes between
2 neighbors, family members, business owners
3 and customers, and they're resolved often
4 before those disputes escalate to require
5 intervention by police or the court system.
6 In addition to this low-cost,
7 high-yield conflict management process,
8 there's a very high compliance rate. Also,
9 92 percent of the participants are very
10 satisfied with their mediation. Everyone
11 benefits from the restoration of important
12 personal and business relationships.
13 Last year the network served over
14 70,000 individuals and handled over 28,000
15 cases. Mediation saves the state and the
16 court system money and resources. From start
17 to finish, the average mediation costs $336,
18 which is far less than court costs for even
19 minor criminal or civil matters.
20 CDRCs match state funding dollar for
21 dollar. They use professionally trained
22 community volunteers to mediate cases, with
23 donated time valued at over $2.3 million
24 annually. Over 75 percent of mediations
679
1 conclude with a written agreement, usually
2 within a few weeks of the initial intake.
3 The CDRC offers access to efficient
4 and effective justice for all New Yorkers,
5 especially for our most vulnerable
6 populations.
7 MS. LOESCH: The demand for the work
8 mentioned by Charlotte continues to grow,
9 but so do the costs of providing services.
10 My CDRC covers Allegany, Cattaraugus,
11 Chautauqua, Erie, Genesee, Niagara, Orleans,
12 and Wyoming counties, and yet we have only
13 six staff providing services across this vast
14 eight-county region in which one of my
15 offices can be nearly two hours from the
16 other.
17 We have slowed our expansion of elder
18 and veterans mediation, and all but stopped
19 our conflict education and peer mediation
20 programs in local schools, despite increasing
21 requests for these services.
22 My story is not unique. Each of you
23 here today has a CDRC in your community with
24 a similar story of unfortunate realities and
680
1 difficult choices about who to serve and who
2 must wait for mediation and other services.
3 Given the many ways in which CDRC services
4 benefit communities beyond the court system,
5 we come to ask you to help diversify and
6 stabilize our base funding. We have been
7 meeting with legislators in districts and
8 here in Albany, and we're pleased that we've
9 had a great response on the ground.
10 The $3 million legislative add will
11 make it possible for the CDRC network to
12 continue to provide responsive, effective,
13 and acceptable dispute resolution services to
14 all of your constituents.
15 Thank you.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
17 much. And thank you for covering such a wide
18 territory. We appreciate it.
19 But we appreciate you being here
20 tonight and staying so long, and your
21 testimony was very helpful, so thank you.
22 MS. LOESCH: Thank you.
23 MS. CARTER: Thank you.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
681
1 Our next speaker is Connie Neal,
2 executive director of the New York State
3 Coalition Against Domestic Violence.
4 Thank you for being here.
5 MS. NEAL: Well, good evening,
6 everyone. I really appreciate this
7 opportunity to speak with you tonight.
8 I'm Connie Neal, executive director of
9 the New York State Coalition Against Domestic
10 Violence. We are a statewide membership
11 organization of local domestic violence
12 programs located throughout the State of
13 New York. Currently there are 249
14 residential and non-residential programs with
15 a shared commitment to create and support
16 social change necessary to prevent and end
17 domestic violence.
18 Each year, the National Network to End
19 Domestic Violence coordinates a National
20 Census of Domestic Violence Services. This
21 census recently took place on September 16,
22 2015, and provides a one-day, unduplicated
23 count of adults and children seeking services
24 from domestic violence programs in all states
682
1 and U.S. territories. Later this month, the
2 National Network to End Domestic Violence
3 will provide a briefing to Congress on the
4 results of the 2015 survey. The information
5 in that briefing will include some staggering
6 information about New York State.
7 According to the census, New York has
8 the highest demand for domestic violence
9 services in the country. From this census
10 this past fall, on one day in New York nearly
11 7,000 victims of domestic violence received
12 services. Also on that same day, almost
13 1,000 requests for domestic violence services
14 went unmet because programs did not have
15 funding or the staff to respond to those
16 requests for service.
17 We also know that domestic violence
18 programs reduced 148 individual domestic
19 violence service options for survivors and/or
20 eliminated them during 2015. And finally,
21 domestic violence programs reported that 115
22 staff positions -- mostly direct service
23 advocates -- were reduced or eliminated
24 during the same time frame.
683
1 We have an incredible demand for
2 domestic violence services here in New York,
3 as you can see, and I believe this is a call
4 to action for the State of New York. We have
5 the opportunity in front of us now to create
6 the strongest network of domestic violence
7 services in the country and, equally
8 important, to provide a clear message that a
9 meaningful investment in domestic violence
10 services and primary prevention is a top
11 priority for public protection in our state.
12 Currently the New York State Executive
13 Budget contains little state-originating
14 dollars to support domestic violence services
15 and relies heavily on federal funding
16 sources. Clearly that federal funding is not
17 enough.
18 Lessons from an August 2014 report on
19 domestic violence programs and practices in
20 other states indicates it is important to
21 insure that services are stable and available
22 for victims throughout a state. Victims,
23 their communities, and states are best served
24 by the presence of a network of local
684
1 programs whose sole purpose is to ensure that
2 services and support for victims and their
3 children exist, and that gaps and needs are
4 identified and met. Frequently that includes
5 the need for victims to flee their homes and
6 communities in order to remain safe.
7 It is difficult to achieve these goals
8 when programs are competing with one another
9 for limited funds, are constantly facing the
10 threat of losing funding, and grant
11 administrators view local programs as vendors
12 instead of as experts that offer
13 comprehensive solutions to a serious social
14 problems.
15 So today, we're asking that you ensure
16 the following items are prioritized in the
17 final budget. First, address some
18 long-standing gaps in funding for local
19 domestic violence programs across the state
20 that have resulted due to several years of
21 flat or reduced investments. And that
22 includes $6 million in TANF funding for
23 non-residential domestic violence programs,
24 providing at least a 3 percent increase in
685
1 the domestic violence shelter per diem rate
2 as well.
3 Secondly, stabilize and increase civil
4 legal services for domestic violence victims
5 statewide. I ask that you review the funding
6 levels in last year's budget, restore and
7 increase it in order to meet the demands for
8 services that are just so critical for
9 domestic violence survivors.
10 Third, provide $4.5 million in funding
11 for local domestic violence programs to
12 collaborate with colleges and universities in
13 implementing the recent "Enough Is Enough"
14 campus policy mandates that also include
15 dating violence, domestic violence, and
16 stalking services. This support for domestic
17 violence programs is intended to complement
18 the 4.5 million that's already provided in
19 support for rape crisis programs and their
20 work to prevent sexual assault.
21 We know that this was incredibly
22 groundbreaking legislation that was passed
23 during the last legislative session, and I
24 encourage you to provide the funding for
686
1 domestic violence programs so that they can
2 adequately support this legislation by
3 addressing dating violence, domestic
4 violence, and stalking in conjunction with
5 colleges and universities across the state.
6 And then, fourth, create a primary
7 prevention funding stream for domestic
8 violence programs in New York by establishing
9 a $17.25 million fund in the public
10 protection budget that will be dispersed
11 through coordinated support to the coalition
12 and local programs statewide. We know that
13 the consequences of homicides are
14 significant, not only for those immediate
15 individuals involved but also communities and
16 neighborhoods and our larger society. The
17 average cost per homicide can exceed
18 $17.25 million when considering medical
19 costs, lost future earnings, public program
20 costs, property damage and losses, and
21 quality of life losses.
22 We know that innovations are critical
23 in the work to end domestic violence, and a
24 lot of those innovations have come from
687
1 states with reliable, noncompetitive funding
2 practices and strong state coalitions.
3 Also, just a couple of notes about
4 primary prevention. This is a relatively new
5 concept for many working to end domestic
6 violence, whose main focus has been
7 responding to victims. However, it is clear
8 that a shift is at hand here for us and to
9 include looking at programs and services that
10 promote social change through activities,
11 programs, and policies that change the
12 attitudes, behaviors, and social norms that
13 allow domestic violence to thrive.
14 Again, because the cost of a single
15 homicide can be well over $17.25 million, we
16 are requesting funds at this level to
17 demonstrate New York State's commitment to
18 preventing domestic violence before it
19 occurs. That's the crux and the basis of
20 primary prevention services, to shift it to
21 the front end.
22 So New York has a long history of
23 being a leader across the nation, and we
24 certainly should not want to be the
688
1 number-one state in the country regarding
2 demand for domestic violence services. The
3 time is now for us to move forward. It's a
4 time for us to confirm our collective
5 commitment to ending domestic violence by
6 increasing these investments in vital
7 programs, and it's a time for us to look at
8 ways that we can really shift the process,
9 shift the focus, shift the services so that
10 we can prevent domestic violence from
11 occurring in the first place.
12 I look forward to working with you and
13 your colleagues with the goal in mind of
14 creating the strongest statewide domestic
15 violence coalition, network of domestic
16 violence services, and primary prevention
17 initiatives in the country. And I want to
18 thank you again for this opportunity to speak
19 with you tonight.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
21 much.
22 Senator Nozzolio.
23 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you, Madam
24 Chair.
689
1 I certainly agree with the points you
2 raised, particularly the issue of preventing
3 domestic violence before it occurs. That
4 you're asking for a sea change in our
5 society; that's a good thing to ask for.
6 I think one of the first steps could
7 be the establishment of Brittany's Law, which
8 the Senate has passed a number of years,
9 which you and I have talked about and you've
10 failed to really support.
11 You're talking about prevention, you
12 highlight prevention. Well, Brittany's law,
13 otherwise known as the Domestic Violence
14 Prevention Act, is a step in that direction.
15 And it's been a step in that direction for a
16 number of years now.
17 There were two homicides that resulted
18 in the development of this statute, a double
19 homicide of a daughter and a granddaughter.
20 I wish you would relook at that, or at least
21 look at it again -- I'm not sure if you've
22 ever looked at it. But it's one thing to
23 talk about prevention, it's another thing to
24 ask for money for prevention, it's another
690
1 thing to work to positive steps to establish
2 a way that citizens could be forewarned about
3 violent behavior from the people that they
4 associate with.
5 I believe you know what I'm talking
6 about. I would hope that you would put your
7 action where your comments are and in fact
8 support this measure.
9 Thank you.
10 MS. NEAL: Thank you very much.
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Anyone
12 else?
13 Thank you for being here tonight.
14 Appreciate it.
15 Our next speaker is Executive Director
16 Soffiya Elijah, Correctional Association of
17 New York.
18 Following Executive Director Elijah,
19 we will have people from Prisoners' Legal
20 Services. So if you want to move closer to
21 the front, that might be helpful.
22 Good evening.
23 MS. ELIJAH: Hi. Good evening. I'm
24 glad I'm not saying good morning.
691
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yeah, I know --
2 well, that may happen.
3 Okay. This is quite an extensive
4 amount of testimony. Would you be able to
5 streamline that and hit the highlights,
6 please?
7 MS. ELIJAH: I have definitely
8 summarized it. Do you have the --
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: You're the best.
10 Thank you.
11 MS. ELIJAH: I'm going to hit some
12 highlights, and you can ask questions, of
13 course, if you want.
14 I'm going to focus first on Raise the
15 Age. Some specific things, of course: We
16 are asking that the Legislature this year
17 raise the age of criminal responsibility and
18 get all of our children out of adult jails
19 and prisons.
20 As we know, raising the age is good
21 for public safety. When Connecticut moved
22 the majority of the cases for
23 16-and-17-year-olds out of adult court, their
24 arrests plummeted, including those for
692
1 violent crime. We believe that New York can
2 experience the same.
3 Children prosecuted as adults can
4 carry permanent criminal records, forever
5 impacting their ability to obtain stable
6 housing, employment, and education, each of
7 which are key to successful community
8 reentry. And all of these harms are
9 disproportionately experienced by black and
10 Latino children.
11 So we ask that you support seven key
12 elements. First, raise the age overall for
13 all offenses for juveniles to age 18.
14 Raise the lower age of juvenile
15 delinquency from age 7 to 12.
16 Ensure that no youth are held in adult
17 jails or prisons, but are instead placed in
18 youth facilities, and create youth facilities
19 that utilize evidence-based therapeutic youth
20 development models in small residential
21 settings that have been proven to be most
22 effective.
23 Originate as many cases of
24 16-and-17-year-olds in Family Court as
693
1 possible, and create Youth Court parts in the
2 adult court system for the remaining cases.
3 Ensure parental notification upon the
4 arrest of any 16- or 17-year-old, and ensure
5 that all youth under 18 are interviewed using
6 best practices.
7 Expand opportunities for diversion
8 from the system, reducing the unnecessary and
9 ineffective confinement of low-risk youth
10 while increasing access to community-based
11 interventions, which is good for children and
12 good for the public.
13 And last, allow for the sealing of
14 records for crimes committed by those under
15 age 21, to provide relief from collateral
16 consequences of an adult conviction.
17 Now I want to focus just briefly on
18 another very central issue for the
19 Correctional Association, and that is the
20 issue of violence and abuse in our prisons.
21 And specifically we're talking about the
22 violence and abuse that is experienced by the
23 people who are incarcerated at the hands of
24 people who are public employees, paid with
694
1 our tax dollars -- to wit, correctional
2 officers.
3 As most of you know, there's been
4 quite a bit in the media over the past
5 12 months about violence and abuse and the
6 beating to death of people who are
7 incarcerated by corrections officers. That
8 information was brought to light through the
9 media by the work of the Correctional
10 Association.
11 Mr. Harrell was killed in April of
12 last year, as was Mr. Taylor, both at the
13 hands of corrections officers. Mr. George
14 Williams was beaten within an inch of his
15 life at Attica back in 2011 and still, the
16 guards who did that, although they pled
17 guilty, were allowed to keep their pensions
18 and are still resisting civil penalties. At
19 Clinton, Mr. Strickland was beaten to death,
20 and unfortunately we saw the beating on video
21 camera, and still no one was held
22 accountable. And the atrocities that
23 happened at Attica continue throughout the
24 system on a regular basis, and no one is held
695
1 accountable.
2 We must address the underlying culture
3 and environment of abuse and violence. This
4 is not a case of a few bad apples.
5 Unfortunately, it is a system that is fueled
6 by racism, dehumanization, and an overly
7 punitive approach.
8 We could start this process by closing
9 Attica Prison and bringing an end to the
10 abusive culture that exists within our prison
11 system. Related to that, we must expand
12 public oversight. We must provide for media
13 access and public reporting, support for the
14 Department of Justice to investigate and
15 expand the oversight abilities of the
16 Correctional Association.
17 We must also closely examine the
18 abusive use of solitary confinement. We feel
19 that the settlement brought about by the
20 NYCLU suit is an important first step, but
21 there are still hundreds of people
22 languishing in solitary confinement in our
23 prisons.
24 I will stop there. The bulk of my
696
1 testimony, as you have it, is in writing. If
2 you have any questions, I'm happy to address
3 them. Thank you.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
5 much.
6 Senator Hassell-Thompson would like to
7 speak.
8 MS. ELIJAH: Good evening.
9 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Good
10 evening. Thank you.
11 I obviously have not had a chance to
12 read your testimony, but what I looked for
13 was to see if you had included in here any of
14 the discussion -- I know that you've been a
15 part of a coalition of prison reform groups
16 who have looked at aging out in the
17 correctional facilities, and those -- as you
18 heard earlier, because I know you've been
19 here for several hours, and so I know you
20 heard the conversation that I had with
21 Commissioner Annucci talking about release
22 for those who are medically indigent.
23 Can you just elaborate for a minute,
24 because of the amount of money that is stated
697
1 in that report that's really involved -- and
2 I just want to go on the record again as
3 talking about, just very quickly, about the
4 fact that the numbers of people who are very,
5 very ill and whose conditions are exacerbated
6 by being in prison, just by virtue of the
7 facilities themselves and the lack of the
8 ability to get the kind of timely care that's
9 necessary.
10 MS. ELIJAH: Yes, thank you. We did
11 focus on that issue in our written testimony.
12 Just in the interests of time, I didn't go
13 into it in my summary. But we have, and I
14 did address this last year, a growing and
15 increasing number of people over 50 years old
16 who are requiring more and more medical care.
17 It costs approximately $60,000 a year
18 to maintain someone under 40 in the DOCCS
19 system, but as they get older that cost,
20 because of medical expense, goes up as high
21 as $240,000 to $260,000 a year. We have not
22 enough medical beds available for those
23 people who are in need of significant
24 cognitive medical care. And we know that
698
1 those people by and large do not present any
2 concern for public safety, and therefore the
3 more humane and economically intelligent
4 thing to do would be to move them out of the
5 DOCCS system. They could be paroled and
6 maintained in the community.
7 We have approximately 9,000 people in
8 the current system who are over 50 years of
9 age, and that number is growing faster than
10 any other segment of our prison population.
11 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Somewhere
12 in the report, that I think I read that it's
13 over 78 percent of the people incarcerated
14 are over the age of 50. That's a tremendous
15 number.
16 MS. ELIJAH: It is.
17 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: And the
18 other quick thing that I wanted, before my
19 time runs out, is to talk about the fact that
20 the evaluation, when they come up for parole,
21 they're denied release, time and again, due
22 to the immutable fact of the nature of
23 offense for which the person has been
24 convicted.
699
1 MS. ELIJAH: Yes.
2 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Help me
3 with that one as well.
4 MS. ELIJAH: Many of the people who we
5 find in our system who are 50 years of age
6 and older are serving long sentences. And
7 when they become parole-eligible, and having
8 completed all the programming that's been
9 required of them, they're being denied parole
10 even though they have a low risk assessment
11 score, over and over again, because of the
12 nature of their crime. It's one thing that
13 they can't change, any more than any of us
14 can change our date of birth.
15 And so you find people who've been
16 denied seven, eight, nine, and 10 times from
17 being released on parole, despite the fact
18 that they've had no disciplinary problems for
19 many, many years and their risk assessment
20 score is very low.
21 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: I just want
22 to take my couple of seconds to thank you,
23 number one, for your diligence and the work
24 that you've done on behalf of our corrections
700
1 system.
2 And, you know, there's always this
3 sense that we care more about the prisoners
4 than we do the people who work there, but
5 it's absolutely not true. I think it's as
6 important for us to distinguish at this
7 budgetary time the importance of both and how
8 the care of -- if we want to be considered a
9 humane society, that our prisons is the place
10 to begin.
11 MS. ELIJAH: I couldn't agree with you
12 more.
13 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: And I thank
14 you again.
15 MS. ELIJAH: Thank you.
16 SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank you,
17 Madam Chair.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
19 much.
20 MS. ELIJAH: Okay. Thank you.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speakers
22 are from Prisoners' Legal Services. And we
23 have Karen Murtagh, executive director;
24 Thomas Curran, member of the board of
701
1 directors; and John Dunne, also a member of
2 the board of directors. Except we're missing
3 one.
4 MR. CURRAN: John escaped.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. He escaped.
6 (Laughter.)
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Well, thank you for
8 sticking it out, and welcome tonight. We
9 look forward to your testimony.
10 MS. MURTAGH: Thank you. I think --
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Again, it is quite
12 thick, so if you could summarize, that would
13 be helpful.
14 MS. MURTAGH: Oh, no problem at all.
15 That's our plan.
16 John did apologize for not being able
17 to be here this evening. He was here until
18 about 5:30.
19 MR. CURRAN: His wife summoned him
20 home.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We saw -- we did
22 see that.
23 MR. CURRAN: Mine has summoned me
24 home, but yet I remain.
702
1 MS. MURTAGH: He told me he was under
2 house arrest.
3 MR. CURRAN: I'm hoping she's asleep
4 by the time --
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes. Well, he was
6 sighted in the building. And we did see
7 John Dunne, so thank you very much.
8 MS. MURTAGH: So my board member,
9 Tom Curran, is going to begin.
10 MR. CURRAN: The basic mission of
11 Prisoners' Legal Services is to assure, or to
12 try to assure, that New York's prisons are as
13 humane as they can and should be. There's
14 not a frivolous thing about it. This is not
15 a starry-eyed lot. The Prisoners' Legal
16 Services board, PLS's board, consists of
17 former prosecutors, judges, defense lawyers,
18 general practitioners, mental health
19 professionals, and former legislators.
20 PLS is dedicated and extremely
21 hardworking. I've seen this staff and its
22 board. The board votes with its wallet. We
23 actually actively support this organization.
24 We don't believe in the abolition of prisons,
703
1 but we believe in making them better.
2 And the fundamental belief is that it
3 is incongruous for the criminal justice
4 system to take away a person's liberty for
5 violating perceived and acceptable norms of
6 conduct, only to incarcerate them in settings
7 that themselves don't fully uphold basic
8 social norms and standards of justice.
9 Among other ills, we believe that such
10 a systemic failure contributes to the scourge
11 of recidivism and represents an ongoing
12 threat to the safety of our communities.
13 Also PLS works, we believe, with DOCCS
14 in order to make our prisons better and make
15 them better places for the DOCCS personnel to
16 work, and I think that Karen's going to
17 educate you on that too.
18 And I'm out.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
20 MS. MURTAGH: Thank you. Thank you,
21 Madam Chairman.
22 As all of you know, the five of you
23 that are left, PLS was created in 1976 as the
24 number-one post-Attica reform. Fast-forward
704
1 to today, we have four offices across the
2 state when we used to have seven. We have
3 15 attorneys when we used to have 50. Our
4 attorneys have to provide civil legal
5 services to over 52,000 prisoners in
6 54 prisons located across the state.
7 Tom mentioned that we are a partner
8 with the Department of Corrections. We are a
9 critical partner with not only DOCCS but with
10 the Executive, the Judiciary, and the
11 Legislature. With DOCCS, over the past
12 several years we've created the Albion
13 telephone program, so women prisoners can
14 call PLS for assistance. We have worked with
15 them to create a reentry video, which is
16 shown at reception to all incoming prisoners.
17 We have worked with the Executive and DOB on
18 both encouraging prisoners to apply for
19 Medicaid and on the Executive's clemency
20 efforts.
21 We also work with the Judiciary. The
22 Court of Appeals reaches out to us, time and
23 time again, to take cases that it has granted
24 leave to appeal in. Last year we accepted at
705
1 least three cases.
2 And we work closely with the
3 Legislature. A number of you send us letters
4 that you've received from your constituents
5 concerned about loved ones in prison, and we
6 follow up on those letters and help to
7 resolve those issues.
8 But the most telling about PLS' role,
9 partnership role, is what happened this past
10 summer with the Clinton escape. After the
11 escape happened, family members contacted
12 PLS, frantic because they could not find what
13 happened to their loved ones at Clinton.
14 They called Clinton, they tried to visit,
15 there was a lockdown, nobody could get in.
16 Nobody was giving them any information.
17 I contacted both the Executive and
18 Tony Annucci. We worked together for PLS to
19 put together a notice that we put on our
20 Facebook page and our webpage, telling all
21 the family members what was going on -- when
22 the lockdown was going to be lifted, what
23 meals were being served, letting them know
24 that medical care was being given. So many
706
1 things that they were worried about that we
2 were able to calm their fears about, which in
3 turn results in calming the tension of the
4 prison.
5 And if you look back at what happened
6 at Attica, and you look back at what we were
7 able to do this summer to calm those
8 tensions, it is like night and day. That is
9 why PLS is so important.
10 We also were asked to go to Clinton
11 with Assemblyman O'Donnell and Assemblywoman
12 Duprey and meet with the inmate liaison
13 committee to discuss their complaints about
14 what was going at Clinton. We met with them,
15 and then we met with the superintendent, and
16 we shared those complaints and we worked
17 through many of those issues.
18 In the interests of time I just want
19 to say I'm here today to ask the Legislature
20 to add money to the appropriation in the
21 Executive Budget. Governor Cuomo put us in
22 the budget for $2.2 million. I'm asking the
23 Legislature to add $1.3 million. Last year,
24 you added $1.2 million.
707
1 I'm asking for that add because we
2 have been grossly underfunded for the past
3 16 years, and even though we do a fabulous
4 job, we cannot do the job the state has
5 tasked us to do without additional funding.
6 Thank you very much.
7 MR. CURRAN: You won't regret funding
8 this organization.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
10 much. We really appreciate you staying so
11 late, and thank you for your valuable
12 testimony.
13 MR. CURRAN: Thanks for the
14 opportunity.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
16 MS. MURTAGH: Thank you.
17 MR. CURRAN: Thank you.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Next, Executive
19 Director Paige Pierce, Families Together in
20 New York State, Inc.
21 And following Executive Director
22 Pierce there's Terry O'Neill, director of the
23 Constantine Institute. So if you could get
24 ready.
708
1 MS. PIERCE: Hi. Thank you so much
2 for staying. I know it's been a long day for
3 you. I appreciate it.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: It's been a long
5 day for you. So we appreciate you too.
6 MS. PIERCE: As CEO of Families
7 Together in New York State, a nonprofit,
8 parent-run organization serving families of
9 youth with social, emotional, and behavioral
10 challenges, I have dedicated my career to
11 serving our stateĂs most vulnerable citizens,
12 connecting them with community-based
13 supports, and advancing sound social welfare
14 policies in response to family identified
15 needs.
16 As such, we have been advocating for
17 juvenile justice reforms, specifically
18 legislation to raise the age of criminal
19 responsibility from 16 to 18.
20 As you are well aware, New York State
21 continues to be only one of two states that
22 automatically prosecutes and incarcerates
23 16- and 17-year-olds as adults. Upon arrest,
24 they are interrogated without so much as a
709
1 call to their parents, charged and
2 incarcerated with the adult population in the
3 local jail while awaiting trial.
4 Should they be found guilty, they are
5 incarcerated with the adult prison population
6 where they are five times more likely to be
7 sexually assaulted, two times more likely to
8 be injured by prison staff, and five times
9 more likely to complete suicide than if they
10 were in a juvenile facility. They are also
11 more likely to recidivate upon release, do so
12 at a higher level, and perpetuate public
13 safety concerns.
14 While the Governor recently issued an
15 interim-measure executive order that will no
16 longer allow for incarceration of youth in
17 adult facilities, the measure does not reach
18 out to county jails.
19 For the last two years, I've shared
20 stories of our children whose lives have been
21 destroyed or even ended. I have them in my
22 written testimony, and I won't read them all
23 now, but I would really encourage you to read
24 them.
710
1 They're stories like Ben Van Zandt and
2 Kalief Browder, who are no longer with us.
3 They were both teenagers and arrested and
4 imprisoned with the adult population, and
5 both took their own lives.
6 Throughout the time span of these
7 horror stories, I along with other advocates
8 have been here in Albany attempting to
9 advance systemic reforms. Given the fact
10 that I am here before you yet again this
11 year, it leads one to beg the question, how
12 many more children will be irrevocably harmed
13 or lost before we implement reforms?
14 As you are aware, the Governor again
15 included in his Executive Budget proposal a
16 comprehensive Smart on Crime initiative that
17 allows us to keep intact a strong response to
18 violent offenses and cost-effective
19 evidence-based diversion reforms that will
20 result in a higher level of public
21 protection.
22 Over the course of the past several
23 weeks, we have met with several legislators,
24 and similar to last year, the response has
711
1 been positive regarding Raise the Age -- with
2 some concerns raised as well, related mostly
3 to the violent offenses and a misguided
4 notion that we are suggesting youth convicted
5 of crimes such as murder or rape will be
6 slapped on the wrist and forgiven. That is
7 not now, nor has it ever been, the position
8 of the Raise the Age advocates. Nor has it
9 ever been reflected in the many bills
10 drafted.
11 Under the current proposed language,
12 these youth would still be processed through
13 the adult court system with stiff sentencing.
14 The difference is that they would not be
15 remanded to an adult facility until they are
16 indeed an adult. And they would be given the
17 appropriate services while incarcerated.
18 It is, however, important to remember
19 that such heinous crimes are an
20 infinitesimally small percentage of the
21 crimes committed by youth. The majority of
22 initial crimes committed by youth are much
23 less serious -- but despite evidence to the
24 contrary, we continue to prosecute and in
712
1 many instances incarcerate them as adults.
2 In one study, the MacArthur Foundation
3 Research Network on Adolescent Development
4 and Juvenile Justice examined the
5 effectiveness of prosecuting teens as adults
6 by comparing New York teens with teens in
7 New Jersey. In New York, juveniles as young
8 as 13 can be charged in an adult court, while
9 in New Jersey most juvenile offenders under
10 the age of 18 are processed in juvenile
11 court.
12 When comparing youth arrested for the
13 same felony offenses in New York City and
14 New Jersey, data showed that adolescents
15 processed in New York adult courts were more
16 likely to be rearrested, they were rearrested
17 more often and more quickly and for more
18 serious offenses, and they were
19 reincarcerated at higher rates than those in
20 the New Jersey juvenile courts. This is not
21 a smart on crime approach, nor is it one that
22 takes public safety into consideration.
23 We heard earlier stories of violent
24 crime committed by recent parolees. We are
713
1 producing these adult criminals by sending
2 our children to adult prisons.
3 We've also heard concerns about costs.
4 While there is a modest up-front capital cost
5 associated with imprisonment, the overall
6 results are expected to decrease costs. As
7 Soffiya Elijah stated earlier, Connecticut
8 was a recent state to implement Raise the
9 Age, and they've seen costs go down
10 significantly. And I talk about that more in
11 my written testimony.
12 So again, we contend that the fears
13 are unlikely to be realized. The evidence
14 overwhelmingly demonstrates our current model
15 in New York State is archaic in its design,
16 ineffective as a deterrent model, and
17 exorbitantly costly. Renowned
18 neuroscientists, respected researchers, and
19 even our nationĂs Supreme Court have all
20 registered concerns and recommended that we
21 utilize the wide breadth of evidence to build
22 a better system. It's time we heeded this
23 advice.
24 I urge you to lead New York down a
714
1 path of reform in 2016. Last year I left you
2 with a quote from Maya Angelou that says
3 "When we know better, we do better." As I
4 noted then, we know better and as a result,
5 we need to do better.
6 This year I will suggest we ponder the
7 words of Mahatma Gandhi: "There is a higher
8 court than courts of justice, and that is the
9 court of conscience. It supersedes all other
10 courts." We cannot in good conscience leave
11 this issue unattended again this session.
12 Thanks for your time.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
14 Our next speaker is Director Terry
15 O'Neill, from the Constantine Institute, Inc.
16 And then our final speaker will be
17 Anne Erickson, CEO of the Empire Justice
18 Center.
19 Welcome.
20 MR. O'NEILL: Thank you for your kind
21 welcome, and thank you for your patience and
22 forbearance this evening. I've been
23 attending these meetings for over 30 years,
24 so I know what you're going through. And
715
1 obviously the prepared statement that I gave
2 you is not something I'm going to attempt,
3 even though I'd like to dazzle Mr. O'Donnell
4 with some real speed reading.
5 So what I'm going to do, I'm just
6 going over about three items that are in our
7 program. The one that is most timely and
8 important is -- you know, we're all aware,
9 across the nation, and notwithstanding, as
10 Mr. Green said today, that crime continues to
11 go down in New York and, as Commissioner
12 Annucci told us, our prison population has
13 been steadily shrinking -- but out in the
14 streets and neighborhoods in this state and
15 all over the nation, there's been an eruption
16 of public dissatisfaction with the kind of
17 policing services that people are getting.
18 And we all know the stories that have
19 been in the news in the last couple of years.
20 So our prescription for dealing with this is
21 the concept of community policing, which has
22 been around for over 25 years, and which was
23 derailed here in New York in 1994 when Bill
24 Bratton took over the New York City Police
716
1 Department and started American policing down
2 the road of data-driven policing. So now,
3 all across the nation, police chiefs and
4 mayors are pointing to their downward-
5 trending statistics as evidence that
6 everything is just fine when we're hearing
7 from people who have to live under these
8 policing tactics that they don't like being
9 treated like dots on one of Bill Bratton's
10 crime maps.
11 So I'm not saying that we shouldn't
12 have this kind of management tool, but it has
13 to be balanced by some investment in
14 restarting the community policing movement
15 that's been -- we've lost total momentum on
16 that. And I think that Mr. McDonald here and
17 Pat Fahy can tell you that here in Albany,
18 our police department over the past six years
19 or so has gone down the road of recovering
20 that community policing spirit many miles.
21 And all you have to do is introduce yourself
22 to how police is being provided in our
23 neighborhoods, with neighborhood engagement
24 units and a citizen organization that
717
1 interacts with the police on these issues on
2 a continuing basis.
3 So you may have heard last week that
4 our mayor got shouted down by people from the
5 Black Lives Matter movement, and they've
6 called for our police chief to be fired.
7 They're mistaken. Things are going better
8 here in Albany than anywhere else, although
9 last year we had an incident that upset many
10 people.
11 Now, I was reading the other day the
12 report that the Assembly minority put out on
13 a heroin-addiction tour of hearings. And one
14 thing that jumped out at me, and Mr. Giglio
15 tells me he heard this at every venue they
16 went to in their seven-hearing tour, is that
17 there is a big hole in our prevention
18 program. We do not have a program that
19 credibly reaches an audience of high school-
20 aged kids. The whole philosophy behind the
21 DARE program is just inappropriate for their
22 way of thinking and accepting things.
23 So what experts are telling us is that
24 what will work is a peer-to-peer approach
718
1 where you enlist kids in school bodies to
2 take on the responsibility of carrying the
3 message to their schoolmates. And I have
4 found a program that is doing exactly that.
5 It's called Mentor International. It was
6 founded by the Queen of Sweden in 1994, and
7 six years ago Mentor opened an office in
8 Washington, D.C., and started networking
9 schools in the D.C. metropolitan area.
10 And I've been determined to introduce
11 this program to New York, and I was very
12 happy in November when a foundation
13 headquartered in Columbia County came up with
14 the money to offer this program in three
15 public schools in Columbia County. I
16 attended two of them, and I can tell you that
17 it went over very, very well with the kids.
18 And what happens is they come in and do
19 workshops and identify kids that have been
20 pre-selected by teachers who would be likely
21 to participate well in this program. They
22 develop a program that's offered at a
23 school-wide rally the next day, and after the
24 rally on the third day, the mentor starts
719
1 sitting down with these kids and giving them
2 training so that they can replicate this
3 program on their own in their schools and in
4 their community, because it also involves a
5 linkage with the business community to create
6 mentoring opportunities for kids in the
7 community.
8 So there was one other thing that's in
9 there in my written testimony. There's
10 appended a draft of a bill that I've been
11 promoting for quite a number of years. The
12 bill would create a new program at the State
13 University focusing on transnational
14 organized crime. It doesn't interfere or
15 conflict with anything else that the
16 University is doing on homeland security or
17 management or emergency disaster
18 preparedness. It's something quite
19 different, and it comes uniquely out of the
20 history of the State Police and its
21 pioneering exposure of the existence of the
22 Mafia back in 1957.
23 They had quite a record of
24 achievement, and their late superintendent
720
1 Tom Constantine is credited with having
2 brought down -- from the time he was a field
3 commander in 1985 through his years at the
4 DEA -- the Cali cartel, the largest drug
5 conspiracy in history. And then he went on
6 to Northern Ireland and helped end three
7 decades of terrorist violence there.
8 So this is a whole story that comes
9 out of the very personality and character of
10 our State Police. And as their anniversary
11 is next year, I'd like to bring this proposal
12 out into the open and make it a gift to the
13 men and women of the State Police.
14 So with that being said, thank you
15 again for your time and attention.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Director
17 O'Neill. Thank you for your perseverance.
18 And our final speaker of the night,
19 last but not least, is Anne Erickson, CEO of
20 the Empire Justice Center.
21 Thank you for joining us.
22 MS. ERICKSON: Thank you so much. And
23 as usual, I admire the stamina. I'm not sure
24 if I was quite last last year, but close to
721
1 it.
2 So thank you very much. My name is
3 Anne Erickson; I'm president and CEO of the
4 Empire Justice Center. We are a statewide
5 organization that provides training, support,
6 and technical assistance for basically the
7 back up center for the civil legal services
8 side. We engage in legislative and
9 administrative advocacy, and we provide
10 direct representation in one of our four
11 offices around the state in Rochester,
12 Albany, Westchester, and out on Long Island.
13 So again, thank you. You've heard a
14 lot today about the judicial investment in
15 civil legal services, and I just wanted to
16 provide a little bit of context. You have my
17 testimony; I'm not going to go through that.
18 But when the task force to expand
19 access to legal services, which is now the
20 Judicial Commission on Access to Justice,
21 first started operating in 2009, one of the
22 things they did was take a look at where are
23 we in New York State in terms of access to
24 justice on the civil side.
722
1 And what we found was that for those
2 households on incomes at or below 200 percent
3 of poverty, nearly half of them, 3 million
4 people, experienced at least one civil legal
5 need each year, and 1.2 million of them had
6 three or more incidents where they needed
7 civil legal assistance.
8 And what are these kinds of needs?
9 We're talking about housing, we're talking
10 about evictions, we're talking about
11 foreclosures, we're talking about income
12 supports, we're talking about healthcare,
13 disability -- we're looking at families, at
14 the elderly, at the disabled, at veterans, at
15 low-income homeowners. All of our
16 constituents across the state, low- and
17 moderate-income households who come up
18 against the civil legal services system in
19 ways that many of us do not. You know, they
20 just confront issues that are driven by their
21 poverty and by their economic fragility.
22 At that point we were meeting about
23 20 percent of the legal need of the poor and
24 low-income households. The investment by the
723
1 Judiciary in civil legal service has made a
2 tremendous difference. We are now meeting,
3 as we heard earlier today from Judge Marks,
4 about 30 percent of the civil legal needs of
5 low- and moderate-income households in this
6 state.
7 We've made progress, but 70 percent of
8 the civil legal needs of our constituents are
9 still not being met. We have a long way to
10 go. So this is really -- we are making
11 inroads, but we are nowhere near where we
12 need to be.
13 I also wanted to touch on the impact
14 on the courts. We heard very powerful
15 testimony earlier today and this evening from
16 the court clerks and from the court officers
17 about the impact, from their perspective, on
18 the courts, and I am with them.
19 But when we first looked at what was
20 happening on the civil side of the court
21 system, 2.3 million litigants were coming
22 into civil court unrepresented on an annual
23 basis. Two-point-three million people
24 walking into civil court without the benefit
724
1 of counsel, about to lose their homes, having
2 lost their health care, having been denied
3 unemployment, having had any array of issues
4 that come at them.
5 We again have made some inroads:
6 1.8 million people are now in front of our
7 civil courts unrepresented, down from
8 2.3 million. Still a long way to go.
9 So as you deliberate this budget --
10 and I know there's a lot of pressure from a
11 lot of different areas -- this is an
12 investment we need to make, and we need to
13 continue and hold strong to that commitment.
14 It's the first time that New York State has
15 really looked at this civil legal needs side
16 of the equation in any systemic way since
17 I've been around, and I've been doing this, I
18 hate to say, for 26 years.
19 So we can't stand still, we can't walk
20 backwards. We're finally where we need -- on
21 the path that we should be on.
22 I also just wanted to mention the
23 distribution of the funding. I have to
24 really give the court, the OCA, a lot of
725
1 credit, because what they did is they
2 distributed the funding based on judicial
3 department, based on the number of households
4 under 200 percent of the poverty. Very
5 equitable distribution across the state. I
6 represent programs outside of New York City;
7 I'm always afraid, you know, it's all going
8 to go to the City. That has not happened.
9 It has really gone where the need is.
10 And then I would also just say on the
11 economic impact in my testimony, you have
12 information drawn from the most recent
13 commission report, and they're estimating
14 that every dollar invested in civil legal
15 services draws back in about $10 into the
16 New York State economy.
17 So it's a good investment, it's a just
18 investment. I would urge you to keep working
19 with us, as we're finally on the path we need
20 to be on in New York State.
21 And with that, I thank you very much.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Any questions?
23 Thank you.
24 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: We've gone full
726
1 circle. We started with this subject today,
2 now we're finishing with it. Thank you very
3 much.
4 MS. ERICKSON: See? Clean-up hitter.
5 Thank you guys very much.
6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you, Anne.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So thank you, Anne.
8 That concludes our public hearing,
9 joint public hearing on Public Protection and
10 the New York State budget proposal, and I
11 want to thank all of my diehard colleagues
12 for staying so late yet again tonight.
13 And I'd also like to thank all of the
14 participants for hanging in there with us,
15 so -- and the staff, too. So thank you very
16 much.
17 - - -
18 (Whereupon, the budget hearing
19 concluded at 9:42 p.m.)
20 - - -
21
22
23
24
Newsroom
Go to NewsroomStatement from NYS Senator Catharine M. Young (R,C,I-57th District)
February 28, 2019
Town of Mansfield Slated to Receive $300,000 State Grant
February 27, 2019
Senator Young Secures $125,000 for Town of Ripley
February 27, 2019
