Massive N.Y. state budget bill forces Democrats to consider controversial climate law changes alongside Tier 6 pension reform
Source: Spectrum NY1
Voting on New York’s late state budget continued Tuesday with a bloated omnibus Transportation, Economic Development and Environmental Conservation bill that left some lawmakers in New York’s Democratic legislative majorities in the state Senate and Assembly with a tough choice nearly two months after the April 1 budget deadline:
Vote yes on Tier 6 pension reforms for public employees in their districts, which many of them support, while also green-lighting rollbacks to the state’s 2019 climate law, which progressive Democrats strongly oppose, or stand up to Gov. Kathy Hochul and vote no on an overall budget bill and, with that, pension relief and other measures geared toward addressing affordability.
For Assemblymember Anna Kelles, an Ithaca Democrat, it was too much — she voted no along with a handful of others, though the bill passed both houses.
“I’ve spent the last 40 years of my life working in the environment,” she said. “I was a guide in the Amazon. I’ve seen firsthand what the fossil fuel industry has done to the Amazon. I come from an area of the state where people are very passionate about environmental issues. I would say it’s the headquarters of environmental activism in the state.”
The bill was jam-packed with everything from the climate law changes, which the governor insists are necessary to stave off additional utility rate spikes, to Hochul’s auto insurance reforms, as well as establishing a 50-foot buffer zone around houses of worship, punishable as a misdemeanor.
“To vote no on the CLCPA, I had to vote no on improvements to the pension system,” she said. “That anyone should have to choose between the two is crazy because they have nothing to do with each other. We should be able to vote on them separately," adding that she is confident public employees in her district will understand.
Kelles blamed the situation on New York’s budget process overall, insisting that the changes to the climate act would never have moved forward without the governor’s ability to drive budget discussions through policy debates.
“The pension should be in the budget because that’s related to funding,” she said. “The climate rollbacks — if that was done outside of the budget, we wouldn’t have done it. If we wouldn’t have done it outside of the budget because it is so unpopular with so many New Yorkers, then we shouldn’t be doing it at all. The only reason it was possible to do is because it was hidden within the budget.”
The idea that changes to the state’s nation-leading effort to reduce emissions by 85% by 2050 — which include provisions that will delay regulations for how the state will reduce emissions until December 2028 after a 2024 deadline lapsed and change how those emissions are calculated — could not have moved forward with the state Legislature in the driver’s seat is not one disputed by Hochul. She frequently chalks her use of the budget process up to a desire to accomplish agenda items that could not be successfully advanced through other legislative levers.
Hochul’s push for such changes, which she claims are necessary because of a lawsuit brought by environmental advocates tied to the missed 2024 deadline, is supported by some business groups but has forced her to defend her record on environmental issues.
Assemblymember Jessica González-Rojas ultimately decided to vote yes, but echoed Kelles’ concerns in pointed floor remarks and an interview with Spectrum News 1.
“I have municipal workers and a lot of teachers in my district who are depending on Tier 6 reform, while my district was also ravaged by Hurricane Ida. This was really a difficult vote,” she said.
Both Kelles and González-Rojas support a constitutional amendment to curb the governor’s power over the budget process and the use of it to drive the executive’s policy agenda, though they admit it would be a heavy lift to pass such an amendment through two consecutively elected legislatures and then get New Yorkers to support it at the ballot box.
González-Rojas went as far as to suggest that Hochul and her team pushed to include the climate law provisions in the same budget bill as Tier 6 reforms to force lawmakers into such a decision and cut down on “no” votes like Kelles’.
“I think in this case the governor wanted it together so we couldn’t vote against the climate law,” she said.
In response, Ken Lovett, senior communications adviser on energy and environment for Hochul, told Spectrum News 1 that the governor has made her intentions clear. While this is broadly true, Hochul bypassed releasing public budget language by not including the changes in her executive budget proposal or 30-day amendments.
“The Governor has been transparent about the need to make these changes to keep the lights on and costs down for all New Yorkers. While reckless policies coming out of Washington, D.C., continue to bring unprecedented challenges, the commonsense reforms Governor Hochul fought for in this year’s budget protect New York’s status as a climate leader while prioritizing affordability for New Yorkers. Governor Hochul remains committed to building on the state’s robust record of climate and clean energy successes," Lovett said in a statement.
Environmental advocates have strongly disputed the governor’s reasoning in a memo circulated earlier this year by New York State Energy Research and Development Authority claiming that utility rates will skyrocket if action is not taken, insisting that the continued reliance on fossil fuels will cost more in the long run.
Some Democrats, like Assemblymember Brian Cunningham, took a more measured approach when it comes to the climate law changes, which also establish a new soft 2040 emissions target of a 60% reduction and include the language “to the maximum extent feasible,” drawing additional ire from environmental advocates.
“Making sure that we’re not putting this on pause, we’re not delaying it too far, but making sure we’re being reasonable and we can actually get to those goals,” he said.
That sentiment was shared by Assemblymember Keith Powers as lawmakers grapple with striking a balance.
“I, like others, want to see us be very bold on how we handle our environmental goals and look to be ambitious and not just do what’s currently easy and acceptable, but actually set goals,” he said. “While we are doing that, we have to be realistic about how it impacts New Yorkers and the cost of living. I think this was always meant to be a way to try to meet the goals. I think we are OK with the compromises, but we don’t want to be backtracking too hard and losing New York’s lead.”
Republicans in the minority were put in the likewise challenging position of offering Hochul some praise for budging on an issue they have championed for years — a reconsideration of the state’s climate goals — while criticizing the effort for falling short of what they say is needed to avoid economic consequences for New York ratepayers.
“We’ve told you so for years. It’s a problem that we’re still at net zero by 2040. That means no natural gas generation in 2040. That’s not going to work, that’s not feasible, that’s not an all-of-the-above approach,” said Assemblymember Phil Palmesano, ranking member on the Ways and Means Committee.
