Cited the case of Samantha Randazzo, who gave birth while handcuffed in a Brooklyn courtroom, arguing the bill extends vital anti-shackling protections to women in law enforcement custody, ensuring dignity and humane care during pregnancy and childbirth.
Emphasized that New Yorkers use health apps and devices daily but none of this data is protected by HIPAA. Stressed the need for protections against weaponization of data and unauthorized sale, and thanked advocates and the Attorney General's office for their work on the bill.
Sponsor explained the bill was passed in memory of Elijah-Alavi Silvera, a three-year-old who died from an allergic reaction at day care when staff was unprepared to administer an EpiPen. The bill ensures all facilities have epinephrine devices and trained staff.
Argued that menstrual products are a basic biological necessity comparable to toilet paper and soap, noting that 60 of 110 private colleges already provide them. Emphasized that many private college students receive scholarships and face financial need, and that the Legislature has consistently expanded menstrual product access across public and private settings over the past ten years.
Argued that menstrual products are basic necessities comparable to toilet paper and soap, that 60 of 110 private colleges already provide them, and that many private college students on scholarships face financial need. She emphasized consistency across public and private institutions and cited the Legislature's decade-long commitment to menstrual equity.
Provided examples of harassment including a Crown Heights case where a landlord converted storage into an office creating noise disturbances, and cases where landlords subdivided units to remove rent-stabilized tenants. Emphasized the bill targets illegal conversions intended to displace tenants.
Ms. Rosenthal explained the bill would require the Board of Elections to notify survivors of domestic violence six months before their confidential registration status expires, allowing them time to renew protection. Mr. Slater questioned the sponsor extensively about implementation details, including concerns about mail-only notification for survivors who may have relocated, the lack of explicit authorization for email communication, potential safety risks of mailing to a survivor's address, and whether the notice envelope would contain identifying information. Ms. Rosenthal acknowledged some concerns were valid but expressed confidence that the Board of Elections routinely sends similar notices without arousing suspicion.
Assemblymember Walsh spoke in opposition, arguing the bill mandates distribution of written materials about IUDs to patients seeking contraceptive information. Walsh contended that contraceptive counseling should remain a matter between healthcare providers and patients, citing concerns from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists that mandatory pamphlet distribution could harm the physician-patient relationship. Walsh suggested that online resources like Google are sufficient for patient education.
Argued the asymmetry between owners' two-year filing window and tenants' 60-day response period is unfair, and that tenants need more time to gather documentation and conduct FOIL requests to challenge MCI applications.
Tenants need 90 days to gather documentation and FOIL requests to challenge MCIs, whereas owners have two years to file. The extension eliminates a bureaucratic step and constituents regularly request extensions from her office.
Sponsor Rosenthal explained the bill would require DHCR to post audit results for major capital improvement rent increases as a transparency measure, following a 2019 requirement that audits be conducted but without disclosure of results. Assemblyman Pirozzolo questioned whether publication would affect landlords' ability to raise rents and expressed concern about housing shortages, noting that cost-prohibitive improvement expenses discourage landlords from making repairs. Rosenthal clarified the publication occurs after rent increase authorization is already granted, so it has no effect on landlords' ability to collect approved increases.
The bill prohibits discrimination in renters insurance policies based on dog breed, preventing insurers from refusing to write policies or increasing premiums based on breed. Mr. Gandolfo argued that larger dogs pose greater potential damage in bite incidents and that insurance companies use actuarial science to price risk; preventing breed-based pricing could increase premiums for all renters or cause insurers to stop writing policies to dog owners. Ms. Rosenthal countered that behavior depends on training, not breed, and that insurers can adjust premiums based on individual bite history rather than breed. Ms. Giglio asked about landlord requirements for renters insurance. Ms. Glick noted that the similar homeowners bill passed years ago without increasing insurance costs or denials. Ms. Lunsford, citing her experience with dog bite cases, argued that bite severity depends on location, not dog size, and that prior bite history is a better predictor than breed.
Emphasized that many renters want insurance and should not be forced to choose between their dogs and coverage, and that the bill makes it easier for people to comply with insurance requirements.
Emphasized that many dogs need homes and it is difficult to find affordable apartments; the bill allows renters who love animals to obtain insurance without breed discrimination.
Sponsor Rosenthal explained the bill prohibits landlords from charging fees for ACH or online rent payments while requiring landlords to offer at least one fee-free payment method (cash or check). Questioner Gandolfo challenged the necessity, arguing that since the bill already requires a fee-free option, tenants can avoid fees by choosing that method, and landlords should be able to pass through processing costs for online payments. He noted existing law already prohibits requiring electronic payment as the only method and prohibits charging fees for non-electronic payments. Rosenthal countered that online payment benefits landlords by providing faster receipt of funds and that tenants should not pay extra on top of rent. Gandolfo expressed concern the bill would incentivize landlords to eliminate online options or raise rents to cover costs, forcing tenants to purchase checks and stamps.
The bill codifies existing requirements and simply adds SCRIE/DRIE information to monthly rent bills. Landlords receive tax write-offs and the bill increases awareness of programs that benefit both tenants and landlords. In 2023, 158,000 households were eligible but less than half knew about the programs.
The bill addresses a real problem where tenants in multiple buildings received incorrect 421-a expiration dates on leases, causing some to move out unnecessarily. Large corporations receiving tax benefits have teams of well-paid attorneys and must be held accountable for accuracy.
Assemblymember Glick clarified that the bill is limited to traveling acts and prohibits only large cats, bears, non-human primates, kangaroos and wallabies. She emphasized the bill does not limit domesticated farm animals at county fairs or other events, and is targeted at protecting the public from dangerous incidents. Glick noted that 4-H activities and county fair displays of safe animals remain unaffected.
Explained that the bill extends existing liability protections to cover adherence to State or local standards, allowing the State to establish its own standards if Federal standards change. Noted that injured parties can still sue for gross negligence or willful misconduct.
The bill conforms 22 State-managed public buildings to existing law already requiring free menstrual products in shelters, correctional facilities, and schools. The cost is comparable to other restroom supplies like toilet paper and soap.
Sponsor argued coal tar sealants contain the highest concentration of PAHs and, unlike voluntary food preparation choices, expose everyone who inhales or contacts treated surfaces. She noted many states and localities have banned coal tar above 1,000 ppm and that asphalt-based alternatives are readily available.
Argued that coal tar sealants contain the highest concentration of PAHs, which are probable human carcinogens, and that asphalt-based alternatives are readily available; noted that PAH exposure from driveways and playgrounds affects entire communities unlike voluntary cooking choices.
The bill reinforces the principle that government is the public's business and prevents FOIL exemptions from functioning as indefinite shields. If information is sensitive, businesses will ensure timely submission of renewal requests within the 60-day window, and the bill does not require automatic disclosure of trade secrets.
Sponsor argued the bill provides a critical pathway for victims of coerced debt—including domestic violence survivors, trafficking victims, and exploited seniors—who previously had no recourse. Emphasized that qualified third-party professionals (clergy, social workers, therapists, etc.) are trusted community members whose reputations are on the line, and that creditors retain the ability to reject claims after investigation.
The bill provides abuse survivors a path to challenge coerced debt; creditors have sufficient resources and opportunity to dispute claims, while victims need assistance rebuilding their lives from economic abuse used to control them.
The bill requires producers and creators of commercial advertisements to provide a conspicuous disclaimer when ads contain synthetic performers or deepfakes. Debate focused on the definition of 'synthetic performer' and concerns about the breadth of the requirement. The sponsor clarified that the definition is narrow and excludes standard post-production techniques like CGI animation, digital compositing, voice modulation, audio-only advertisements, and synthetic performers in ads for expressive works like film and TV. Members questioned whether the definition adequately distinguishes between AI-created fictional characters and common digital editing techniques, and expressed concern that broad application could result in disclosures on nearly all modern advertisements, potentially diminishing their effectiveness.
Sponsor argued the bill protects consumers by requiring disclosure that advertisements use synthetic humans rather than real people, similar to pharmaceutical ads disclaiming fake doctors. Emphasized the intent is clear even without prescriptive wording, and that the AG has jurisdiction over General Business Law enforcement.
Sponsor argued the bill protects tenants by preventing landlords who refused ERAP payments from later suing for covered rent. She contextualized ERAP as emergency federal relief during mass COVID unemployment and noted many landlords accepted the program.
The bill creates a pathway for survivors to escape economic abuse by allowing them to dispute coerced debts while creditors pursue the abusers who incurred the debt, addressing a widespread problem that traps survivors in abusive relationships.
Argued that pit bull breed designations are myths unsupported by veterinary science. Cited the American Veterinary Medical Association's position that dangerousness depends on individual dog characteristics, training, and owner behavior, not breed. Clarified the bill allows insurers to deny coverage for dogs individually deemed dangerous by courts.
Extensive debate centered on whether insurance companies should be permitted to deny coverage or increase premiums for renter's insurance based on dog breed. Opponents argued that certain breeds, particularly pit bulls, are statistically more likely to cause severe damage if they bite, and that insurance companies should be able to price in this risk. Proponents countered that breed-based determinations are unreliable, citing American Veterinary Medical Association studies showing controlled research has not identified pit bull-type dogs as disproportionately dangerous, and argued that individual dog temperament, training, and behavior—not breed—should determine insurability and rates.
The bill extends existing collusion prohibitions under the Donnelly Act to algorithmic pricing, which artificially sets prices high and reduces competition among landlords. Evidence exists in other jurisdictions, including a D.C. case involving RealPage software.
The bill extends existing antitrust law to algorithmic price fixing, which is already illegal when done by humans. Companies like RealPage have orchestrated collusion in other states; New York needs tools to prosecute similar conduct. The bill requires three specific functions and includes a 'knowingly or reckless disregard' standard.
Argued breed-based insurance restrictions are myths contradicted by veterinary science. Emphasized that pit bull is not a single breed, visual identification is unreliable, and individual dog behavior—not breed—should determine coverage. Noted the AVMA confirms breed does not determine dangerousness and that insurers can still deny coverage for dogs deemed dangerous by courts.
Extensive debate centered on whether insurance companies should be permitted to deny coverage or increase premiums for renter's insurance based on dog breed. Opponents argued that certain breeds, particularly pit bulls, are statistically more likely to cause severe damage if they bite, and that insurance companies should be able to price in this risk. Proponents countered that breed-based determinations are unreliable, citing American Veterinary Medical Association studies showing controlled research has not identified pit bull type dogs as disproportionately dangerous, and argued that individual dog temperament, training, and behavior—not breed—should determine insurability and rates.