Asm. John Lemondes

Cited detailed letters of opposition from National Fuel and New York State Laborers' PAC warning of increased costs for ratepayers, decreased construction jobs, and grid reliability concerns. Argued the bill contributes to affordability crisis.

Lemondes expressed concern that the bill could enable more sole-source contracting with less oversight and recommended the entire body oppose it based on maintained opposition from the Economic Development Council and Council of Mayors.

Opposed the bill citing letters of opposition from National Fuel and New York State Laborers' PAC, arguing it will increase costs for ratepayers, decrease construction jobs, and contribute to grid unreliability.

Expressed concerns that the bill may enable more sole-source contracting with less oversight, shifts approval authority from Department of State to the Authorities Budget Office, and noted opposition from the Economic Development Council and Council of Mayors.

Objected that the bill mandates reasonableness without specifying fee schedules, questioned why disclosure at the ATM terminal is insufficient, and warned the bill could create "ATM deserts" if businesses remove machines. Argued consumer choice and proper disclosure are adequate protections.

Questioned whether the bill explored alternative disposal methods like deep well injection or incineration, and expressed concern that microfibers in landfills could eventually be classified as hazardous waste, increasing taxpayer costs.

Bill increases costs for small businesses (estimated $5 billion), invades privacy, increases cyber security risks, and exacerbates out-migration. New York is already the highest out-migrating state and ranked 50th in business climate; this adds more regulatory burden.

Raised concerns about self-defense scenarios during home invasions, arguing that securing firearms may prevent quick access in emergencies; questioned whether the bill violates the Second Amendment and whether enforcement mechanisms are practical.

The bill defines excessive fees without evidence or criteria; DFS will define them later, putting the cart before the horse. ATM users see fee disclosures and can choose not to withdraw cash. Casinos are not captive audiences since patrons enter willingly understanding the business structure. Regional differences in fee definitions may require different standards.

The bill is not comprehensive enough and fails to account for environmental concerns such as CLCPA wind turbine impacts on birds of prey while including other environmental protections.

Criticized the bill as not comprehensive enough, noting hypocrisy in protecting wildlife habitat while ignoring wind turbine impacts on birds of prey, and highlighting the burden of asylum fees on small businesses using H-2A migrant labor.

Argued the bill is not comprehensive enough and fails to account for CLCPA wind turbine impacts on birds of prey despite including wildlife habitat protection as a standard.

The bill is not comprehensive and contains hypocrisy—it claims to enhance wildlife habitat while ignoring wind turbine impacts on birds of prey. It fails to address asylum fees on small businesses using H-2A migrant labor, which all farms depend on. The bill is full of shortcomings.

Questioned whether 15 days is sufficient, particularly in emergency situations or acts of God. Expressed concern that the fee schedule ($100 per day per customer) could result in thousands of dollars in fines and ultimately drive rates higher for consumers.

Questioned whether 15 days is sufficient, particularly in emergency situations. Expressed concern that the fee schedule could result in thousands of dollars in fines and ultimately drive rates higher for consumers.

Voted against the bill citing unconscionable 90-day displacement of corrections officers and families, drawing on experience closing large industrial facilities which took 2.5-3 years.

Voted against due to prison closures on 90 days notice, comparing it to closing industrial facilities and calling the displacement of corrections officers and families unconscionable.

Warned that without viable alternatives, the restrictions will decrease efficiency, reduce yields, increase costs, and harm the entire agricultural supply chain. Highlighted a critical national shortage of entomologists and educational institutions teaching entomology, undermining the IPM approach premise.

Bill is an attack on Second Amendment and hunting rights. Raised concerns about unintended consequences for ginseng farmers who rely on squirrel population management. Noted fishing derbies are legal while hunting derbies are not, creating an inconsistency.

Stated the bill lacks an agricultural exemption and cited opposition from the New York Farm Bureau, expressing concern about unanticipated impacts on agricultural operations, food production, and security.

Questioned whether solar projects and airport/airfield lands would count toward the 30 percent goal, noting these multi-use lands could reduce pressure on farmland if properly credited.

Opposed the bill on Orthodox Christian religious grounds, citing the departure from the two traditional methods of handling human remains (burial and cremation) practiced by most major religions for thousands of years.