Sen. Thomas F. O'Mara

Criticized the exclusion of corrections officers from pension enhancements given their dire staffing needs and unsafe working conditions. Noted NYC corrections has lost half its staff since 2019 and questioned why corrections officers were not included in the pension improvements.

Criticized the lack of progress on the full budget, arguing that spending approximately $900 million per day without a completed budget represents poor governance and does not reflect constituent priorities. Questioned whether budget priorities could be adjusted to reduce overall spending compared to the prior year.

The $10 billion cushion above known debt is problematic because it authorizes spending on unspecified future borrowing before other budget bills are finalized. O'Mara argued the state should authorize only the $56 billion in current debt and amend the bill later, and criticized the state's failure to meet the constitutionally mandated April 1st budget deadline.

Questioned whether the bill will actually reduce plastic recycling given the exclusion of advanced recycling, and expressed concern about the lack of clarity on implementation and municipal cost-sharing.

Voted against the bill.

Voted against the bill.

Argued that a point-of-sale fee, as used in four other states and New York's successful paint program, would ensure efficiency and fair contribution from all producers. Cited opposition from Local 17-14T union representing Sealy workers in Green Island, concerned about competitive disadvantage from foreign manufacturers not paying their fair share.

Voted in the negative on the measure.

Voted in the negative on the measure.

The bill has significant drafting issues that create ambiguity about whether the 15- and 30-day deadlines apply to the commission's investigation or only to utility reporting. There are no time requirements on the PSC itself to complete investigations, and the removal of the 90-day appeal timeline leaves constituents in limbo. The bill fails to expedite actual determinations, only utility reporting of determinations.

Opposed the bill on grounds that it places certification burdens on small suppliers rather than the state, citing concerns from lumber dealer associations about compliance costs and the difficulty of tracking complex global supply chains. Argued the state should verify products rather than requiring contractors to certify, and noted exceptions for the MTA and ferry services undermine the bill's consistency.

Questioned the rushed timeline for public review of the bill, noting it was made available only 6 hours before floor debate, and raised concerns about the lack of time for stakeholder feedback on major healthcare changes.

Questioned the financial plan revisions showing $1.1 billion increase, noted two budget bills still not finalized, and expressed concern about lack of outyear deficit projections and no funding for unemployment insurance deficit paydown despite Senate's one-house proposal for corporate income tax increase.

Argued the budget was not ready for a vote with 60% of bills not in print, no appropriation bills available, and no financial plan overview. Criticized the rushed process and lack of transparency, noting school districts needed budget information by April 23rd.

Criticized the lack of transparency and specifics in budget negotiations, noting that school superintendents cannot responsibly plan budgets based on optimism alone. Expressed concern about repeated extenders with no concrete information about education funding.

Criticized the budget being 10 days late and noted lack of progress since the previous week's extender. Expressed concern about lack of transparency, absence of budget subcommittee meetings, and failure to establish table targets for substantive budget negotiations.

Questioned the inclusion of $8 billion in vague anticipated borrowing authority not yet tied to a completed capital projects budget. Argued the bill should be extended to next Thursday like other government extenders to allow time to complete the full budget before committing to additional debt.

Emphasized vast natural gas reserves in the Southern Tier that Pennsylvania citizens have profited from while New York residents are denied economic benefits. Argued natural gas will remain part of the energy mix and criticized the state's approach of rejecting the better in pursuit of the perfect, citing the Indian Point closure that increased carbon emissions by 40 percent.

He raised procedural concerns including the lack of minority party representation on the commission, the absence of requirements to consider fiscal feasibility, unclear language about whether the commission must recommend reparations, and questions about whether the commission should consider who should be excluded from bearing costs.

Voted in the negative on the measure.

Voted against the bill.

Voted in opposition to the bill.

Voted against the measure.

Raised concerns about grid reliability and the feasibility of all-electric buildings without adequate infrastructure. Questioned the cost analysis and noted that NY accounts for only 0.4% of global emissions. Expressed concern about peak demand shifting to winter months.

Questioned the MTA payroll tax increase (76% increase from 0.34% to 0.6%), the diversion of casino revenues away from education (from 80% to 50%), and the lack of specific cost-containment measures for MTA capital projects, which he noted cost significantly more than similar projects in London, Paris, and Spain.

Noted counties are owed $1.6 billion in reconciliation since 2017 and questioned why the state is now reducing eFMAP pass-through when counties have no ability to absorb costs without raising property taxes.

Questioned why the budget could not wait 48 hours for the three-day aging period, noting state government has continued functioning under extenders. Criticized the $230 billion spending level as unsustainable, noting a $60 billion increase over five years of Democratic control—larger than entire budgets of 35 states. Highlighted that New York spends 50% more per capita than California despite half the population.

Questioned the inefficiency of two separate one-week extenders versus one two-week extender, estimating the cost to taxpayers at $60,000-$70,000 in per diems and mileage. Raised concerns about school districts' inability to plan budgets without knowing state education funding levels and sought clarity on the 340B program funding changes.

Questioned the sponsor extensively about the gap between $15.6 billion in authorization and $3.5 billion in actual payments, arguing the bill provides authority for unknown future spending without a complete budget. Urged a no vote and proposed the bill be amended to cover only the $3.5 billion in actual obligations.