As you know by now, the New York State budget is now 13 days late.  This past Monday and the prior Monday, the Legislature passed straight budget extenders to make sure that the state workforce continues to be paid since they should not bear any brunt of the burden caused by the lack of a final deal between the Legislature and the Executive.  We will continue to make sure the workforce is not impacted, and it is my hope that we will pass the budget by this time next week or in the worst-case scenario, the week after.

I am not happy that the budget is not complete; however in my 23 years working in local and state government, I understand that it is important to have a solid budget addressing many concerns.  In my 11 years in the Assembly, we have had on-time budgets 8 out of 11 times. On-time budgets are the goal, but to be honest I have never had a constituent express how happy they were to have a budget on time, mostly I hear about whether the programs that are important to people are being funded.  Therefore, the work is ongoing to address the main issues holding up the budget – Public Safety and Housing, two items I want to expand upon further below. It is important to note that a concern with having a late budget is making sure our school boards have a definite amount for state aid to finalize their budgets which most districts will approve next week. I stay in regular contact with the 13 district superintendents I represent, and the good news is that aid is at an all-time high as proposed and brings districts to a level that represents the true cost of education. I doubt that number will be lower in the final budget, and I have expressed the same to the districts to provide some insight for finalizing the local budgets set to be voted on next month.

As for the two main issues still under discussion:

Public Safety – We have heard the term bail reform tossed around a lot over the past few years and it is very easy to blame everything on bail even as crime rates have increased throughout the country and at higher rates in states such as Texas, Florida, and California.  Contrary to what you hear from some of my majority colleagues in the Assembly, I believe we do need to make improvements to bail to a degree and when it comes to provisions related to gun crimes.  As a reminder, bail reform was initiated at the start of the pandemic which arguably was a difficult time as our courts remained closed for almost two years, and many cases were dismissed and never prosecuted which only made a bad situation worse.  Bail reform was focused on two main principles – individuals are innocent until proven guilty and just because someone is poor and cannot afford to make bail does not mean they should sit in jail while others who have resources or family support can return to work. Contrary to popular belief many individuals released have returned to the courts and their cases have been adjudicated and this has been supported by a report from the John Jay School of Criminal Justice and featured very prominently in the Times Union (TU) after a thorough review of the actual data, not a biased opinion.

Areas that I am pushing for reform are in two main areas. First is regarding those who struggle with substance use disease (SUD) and mental health disease; prior to bail reform, judges could offer treatment options to individuals vs. incarceration. This option was taken off the table with bail reform and it must be reinstated to direct people to the treatment that they need. A recent TU article demonstrated that drug court cases have declined by over 90% since bail reform.  This is unacceptable.

Second, we need to address the proliferation of young 16 and 17-year-olds who have been recruited to carry out shooting incidents in the community because of a non-bail policy called Raise the Age that focuses on treating youth differently in the court system. Since enacted in 2019, these youth are sent through the youth part of Family Court and released to their family or home. If they were 18 or 19, they would not be released into the community.  I believe that these young individuals need to be retained in a youth-designed setting to protect themselves and the community and if found guilty, should serve a reduced sentence of 5 years vs. 15 years. We must ensure that the proper supports are provided while they are serving their time to prepare them to live a self-sustainable life when released.  I call it the three S’s…Secure, Sentence (if found guilty), and Support.

Third, we need to address the issue of repeat criminal acts.  The impression of catch and release is real and to be clear, there is something wrong with an individual who is repeatedly stealing property and not being held accountable. I believe if judges had greater discretion to address these types of acts the public would be better served, along with law enforcement, and small and large business owners.  All of these groups have been negatively impacted by the issues related to repeat offenders.  Associated with this issue is the retail organized crime that is prevalent throughout the country and an issue that I am introducing legislation on later this week to take a more comprehensive approach toward addressing the causes.  These are my views which I have shared with our leadership and colleagues on both sides of the aisle as I believe addressing these public safety issues is common sense.

Housing – The Governor is correct in that we need to build more housing supply as the demand is high and the supply is low, hence one of the driving factors in why rents and housing prices, in general, continue to be unacceptably high.  I support the intent of the Governor and believe this is a basic economic principle of supply and demand.  Although New York’s population is at an all-time high, we did not grow as much as other states. While some have chosen to move to the southern states, more studies are showing that many families have moved to New Jersey from New York as housing is plentiful and more affordable. I realize there are many other reasons for why people are moving and where, but housing is one of the most critical and that is why there is a hyper-focused effort albeit with some issues raised.   The concern is that the proposal seeks to supersede each community’s home rule where traditionally communities make their own decisions when it comes to zoning. The complaint is that some communities are exclusive in their housing, especially when it comes to land size and property type, often preferring single-family homes. This plays a role in driving demand and choking supply, also to the exclusion of those who may be lower income.  I think a better approach is for the state to provide a template of what constitutes inclusionary zoning and to require local communities (town board, city council, zoning board, planning board, etc.) to review their zoning against the template and for those that make changes to be more inclusive, to recognize those changes with financial support as critical infrastructure needs and thus meeting the common goal of making supply more affordable.

It is my hope that we are in the home stretch and maybe things will come together quickly, even after you finished reading this epistle of mine.  I am reminded of the main priority Speaker Heastie laid out in his opening comments at the beginning of the session this year.  His message was clear – we need to make New York more livable.  To me, that means we need to make more housing options readily available and make them affordable. It also means we need to make sure that the public is safe and feels safe.  Recent reports in the last six months show that some aspects of crime continue to decrease; however, I understand the public does not feel that way and therefore we need to do better.

Thank You for taking the time to review this update and as always, your comments are always appreciated.  Feel free to share through my email at mcdonaldj@nyassembly.gov or call the office if that is not convenient.