[music]

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning again, everyone. We had many conversations here leading up to the passage of the new state budget for New York that got its final final approval in the state legislature just last night. The breakout headline, as you just heard on the news, has been the tax hike on people with million dollar a year incomes or more, but there's so much more than that that affects so many people in the state that we'll spend some time going down that list now with the top Albany journalist, who'll answer my questions and yours about what these are and what these things mean.

Things like rent relief for both renters and landlords, nursing home reform after the shocking numbers of COVID deaths. That's not just a Cuomo scandal, it's also about conditions in nursing homes which will change somewhat under these new reforms. Public schools, especially in New York City, will finally get money that a court said they're owed many years ago. A new plan for development of and near Penn Station that is instantly controversial. A casino for New York City for the first time and mobile sports betting. Who wants odds on how many days Aaron Judge will be on the injured list this season, or whether the Jets will lose 80% or 90% of their games next fall?

You might actually be able to bet on those things, but how does the bill address problem gamblers? All those things and more are in this budget bill for the fiscal year that officially began a week ago today, on April 1st. Also, an excluded workers fund that there was even a hunger strike in support of to give some benefits to people who are not covered by the federal COVID Relief Act. Joining us with a gigantic spreadsheet in his living room of all $212 billion worth in this budget is Wall Street Journal state politics reporter Jimmy Vielkind. Thanks for doing this, Jimmy, welcome back to WNYC.

Jimmy Vielkind: Happy to be with you and your listeners, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: Do you have your spreadsheet printed out and laid all over the kitchen and ready to go?

Jimmy Vielkind: It's in the ether. It's online, it's in my mind, but really the budget lives in all of our hearts, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: Let's start on, eeny meeny miny, Penn Station. $1.3 billion in this new budget to do what?

Jimmy Vielkind: This is actually not a new proposal. Governor Cuomo has been talking for years about Penn Station as like the catacombs. Vincent Scully once said we used to enter New York like gods now we scuttle about like rats. Governor Cuomo, I think, really sees this as a legacy project. He has proposed condemning the block South of Penn Station and extending eight new platforms there. We started talking about this several years ago and it's in fact envisioned by the Gateway Program, which would dig a new rail tunnel underneath the Hudson River between New Jersey and New York.

The way Governor Cuomo is going about this is he wants to use Empire State Development, which is the fancy name for the old Urban Development Corporation which has the power significantly, one, to use eminent domain and, two, to bypass the city's normal land use review procedures, The ULURP Process. The governor envisions a massive real estate development around Penn Station and using pilot payments as well as the sale of air rights to fund these transportation improvements. The $1.3 billion was essentially going to be seed money for stuff that will need to be paid for.

Legislators pushed back and were able to secure language that would restrict it to the transportation improvements. This is the kind of thing that we've seen time and again in New York major developments using state authorities. The Columbia University Campus at West Harlem comes to mind, the Barclays Center and the Atlantic Yards Project come to mind, and now we're seeing it again right in the heart of Midtown Manhattan.

Brian Lehrer: The Journal reports today, your colleagues in The Wall Street Journal report today, that a coalition of transportation and civic groups is already mobilizing to stop this. What are their main objections and what do they want instead? As your quote at the beginning indicated nobody thinks Penn Station the way it is, is okay.

Jimmy Vielkind: They want to slow down, they want to think more holistically about what should be done about Penn Station, and they want this development to think more about transportation and transportation improvements, rather than that New Yorkyest of things, real estate development. Should Madison Square Garden be relocated and Penn Station be improved that way? Some people have thought about that. Should there be a street removed in Manhattan? Maybe. I think what these groups are saying is they want to go to the drawing board and actually have a seat at the table rather than having a deal be spearheaded by Empire State Development with the input certainly of some stakeholders, but not necessarily those.

They also, of course, want a dedicated community voice in whatever project is crafted and ultimately moves forward.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, you have questions about anything in the new state budget, welcome here, or any comments about any of the provisions, 646-435-7280. We're going to ask you to keep your questions and comments brief because we're trying to tick through a number of really interesting items that just got passed in Albany in our limited time. 646-435-7280, if you want to say something about them or ask something about them for Jimmy Vielkind who covers Albany for The Wall Street Journal. 646-435-7280 or tweet your comment or question @BrianLehrer. Let's go next to rent relief, Jimmy. Who will qualify for what kind of relief and how will they have to prove it?

Jimmy Vielkind: Both landlords and tenants will be able to apply under this program, Brian, and it's largely with eligibility set by the federal government. What state lawmakers did was add some extra funding, I think about $100 million, that would let people who earn up to 120% of an area median income apply for relief. Under the federal program, I believe it was capped at 80%. What would have to happen is a tenant would have to prove some kind of financial hardship related to the pandemic. That's a purposefully pretty vague and loose standard. The program will be administered by the state's Office of Temporary Disability Assistance and applications will be opening very soon.

During the first 30 days, they'll be processed with people with the lowest income given preference and after that, it will be on a first-come, first-served basis. This is something that both tenant groups and landlord groups are excited about.

Brian Lehrer: People with lowest incomes given first priority. You said the standards for proof will be very loose, some kind of hardship related to the pandemic. Somebody loses 10% of their income and say, "Well, that's a hardship," but maybe they really still can pay their rent. Will they qualify?

Jimmy Vielkind: You need to show that you've qualified for unemployment benefits or experienced financial hardship. I think that the intent that lawmakers have put behind this fund is that it be broadly available because we know many people who are gig workers, who have paid on 1099s or, as many New Yorkers do, don't make a living with a traditional pay-check. The intent is to have this program be available to them as well. I believe that it's going to be purposefully loose, but the exact framework and the exact details will be listed on the state's OTDA, or as it's called in Albany, O ta-dah, website.

Brian Lehrer: You said the landlords are happy about this. We get calls on the show all the time from landlords on the rent moratorium saying, "I'm just a little property owner. I have a few units that helps me pay my mortgage. This is all unfair to me." There's something in there to take care of them?

Jimmy Vielkind: Well, yes. They would be able, as I said, to apply for this but they would have to agree not to evict the tenant due to an expired lease or have a holdover tenancy for one year. They'd have to waive late fees, and tenants would need to receive proof that rent was paid on their behalf. In other words, a landlord couldn't apply and pocket the money. We heard from the Community Housing Improvement Program, that's our landlord group which chaired this. They see this as money that, whether it flows through tenants' pockets or directly into landlords' pockets, is going to provide relief for many New Yorkers who have fallen behind on their rent and are otherwise facing eviction or homelessness.

Brian Lehrer: I mentioned in the intro the excluded workers fund that's in this budget. Relief for people like undocumented immigrants who are not covered in the COVID Relief Act from the federal government, but may have lost their jobs or are facing other hardships. We have a call about the excluded workers fund from Michael, says he's a rabbi on the Upper West Side, and who doesn't think it included enough workers. Michael, you're on WNYC, thank you for calling.

Michael: Thank you for taking my call. Funnily, I didn't say I was a rabbi, but I am. I was supportive of the workers in their fight to get this fund. I'm just concerned that this two-tiered system cuts out many potential workers who could receive the monies. Also, the amount that was arrived at is more than a billion-dollars short of what the initial ask was. I get that there's negotiation, but that seems like it's going to leave a lot of people out in the cold.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you very much. Jimmy, give us a one-on-one on the excluded workers fund for people who haven't been following this.

Jimmy Vielkind: The final amount approved was $2.1 billion, but as Michael points out advocates for the fund, including Make the Road New York, the advocacy group, had initially sought more funding. This program was actually revised in the final days and hours of budget talks in response to concerns from upstate and suburban members who feared that there weren't stringent enough eligibility requirements. Among the changes were this two-tiered structure that Michael talked about. Workers who have an ITIN, an Individual Tax Identification Number, they'll be eligible to receive, I think it's $15,600 of benefits minus 5% that's going to be withheld for state income tax purposes.

Workers who cannot provide an ITIN but who can otherwise demonstrate residency, loss of employment, as well as a current inability to receive federal benefits, they'll be eligible for awards of about $3,000. Again, the idea of giving a check to people who perhaps did not reside in New York at the time of the pandemic, who were not providing lots or any documentation, it didn't sit well with some lawmakers, including Assemblyman Tom Abinanti, a Democrat from Westchester County, who I spoke with. This, Brian, actually opened a very harsh debate among the ruling Democrats in the state.

Abinanti was given the middle finger during a conference. He called one of his colleagues "Smart butt" because I don't know if I can say that bad name for a donkey on the radio here. We'll spare you the FCC troubles. What was resolved was, like most compromises, something that both sides were unhappy about, but was now enacted into law. We saw some moderate Democrats including assembly member Monica Wallace from Western New York vote no on the budget because of this. We also saw some of the more progressive, even democratic socialists of America backed members, express concerns but ultimately say that they were voting yes.

Brian Lehrer: On a practical basis, how can undocumented workers who might be listening right now apply for these benefits and be secure that the process won't get them flagged for being out of status?

Jimmy Vielkind: The Department of Labor is going to administer the program and there will be details available on that departmental website. There will be no formal questions, as I understand it, about immigration status. Essentially, what some of them will need to prove is that they lost employment and that they were ineligible to receive federal benefits. That is essentially where this landed. The hope is that with a federal administration that is less hostile to immigrants and undocumented immigrants compared to the Trump administration, there won't be some major crackdown by the federal government to try and get data, which was a fight that we saw on many fronts in the proceeding four years.

Brian Lehrer: Michael, thank you for your call launching this important part of this conversation. Listeners, if you're just joining us, we're going over aspects of the new New York state budget, given final final approval in the state assembly last night with Jimmy Vielkind from the Wall Street Journal, who covers Albany. We're talking about everything in the budget, except the tax hike on million-plus earners, which you already know about. Denise in Queens, you're on WNYC. Hi, Denise. Denise?

Denise: Hello.

Brian Lehrer: Hi. Is that Denise?

Denise: Hi. I was calling regarding adult daycare. I'm a furlough, I've been out of work for a year, and I don't know when we're returning. The problem with me there's all kinds of programs for the immigrants, but I'm American citizen and I've been here forever. I just want to know what's in it for me, an unemployed American that's been furloughed from adult daycare that they're not even mentioning. What's in it for me? Thank you.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you very much. Are you familiar with the adult daycare? Certainly, to part of your point, there are certainly many, many benefits for unemployed people that the federal government provides that undocumented immigrants did not qualify for, to make that distinction. Jimmy, the adult daycare sector, anything in particular on that?

Jimmy Vielkind: I am not particularly aware of what the funding line was for adult daycare programs, Brian. I do know generally that previous cuts that had been implemented over the course of this year, initially because of what was thought to be a cash crunch, state government had been holding back 10% of the promised payments to social service providers, including many adult daycare programs. I don't know if Denise lost her job as a result of those funding withholds. Because of the influx of federal money and the higher tax revenue, those reductions have been restored.

What we saw was some increase in some social services areas. Again, I don't know specifically how that applies to adult daycare programs or a specific one with where she works but there has been cuts that were rolled back as part of this budget. As you suggested, I hope that our caller is availing herself of federal unemployment benefits to the extent that she's eligible.

Brian Lehrer: This will lead me to the topic of nursing home reform. We've covered the need for a forum on this show multiple times during the pandemic. How far did they go or not go?

Jimmy Vielkind: The budget includes a mandate that nursing homes spend 70% of their gross revenue on patient care. This is something that was pushed for by the healthcare workers union, SEIU 1199. It was an issue that really gained a lot of traction in late January when attorney general Latisha James issued her report on the effects of COVID-19 on nursing homes around the state. Of course, that report focused on the under attribution of deaths to those facilities, nursing homes and other long-term care facilities, and it ended up sparking some hot water, shall we say for, for Governor Andrew Cuomo.

This mandate was opposed by nursing homes, but it is seen as improving quality of patient care. It was mostly targeted at for-profit nursing homes who are facing renewed scrutiny for some of their practices by which they take money out of homes by contracting with related entities. There is also a separate piece of legislation, which Governor Cuomo signed, which would repeal the immunity from civil and criminal prosecution that was afforded to nursing homes, hospitals, and other healthcare facilities as part of last year's budget. This, again, came under intense scrutiny as we saw practices during the COVID-19 pandemic that some family members say may have decreased the quality of care and in some cases lead to infection with coronavirus or even the death of some loved ones.

It had become a major cause for Assemblyman Ron Kim, a Democrat from Queens as well as state Senator Alessandra Biaggi of the Bronx. They passed that bill outside of the budget process, put it on Governor Cuomo's desk, and he signed it this week.

Brian Lehrer: One follow-up on this, why do they continue to allow for-profit nursing homes when all the hospitals in New York need to be non-profit? This has come up on the show as a motivation for some nursing homes to understaff or play, if not fast and loose, at least to the most minimal letter of the law in terms of what kinds of staffing and what kinds of sanitizing and things like that, that might've contributed to the pandemic.

Jimmy Vielkind: I know that there is a proposal pending in the legislature that would essentially ban for-profit nursing homes. It has not gained too much traction, and it was not part of the budget agreement that was enacted this week. I don't have a good answer to your question, Brian. I know that obviously people make arguments for capitalism and say that when you have a profit motive, it leads to investment and meeting the market demand. Here in New York, though, there's clearly a consensus among legislators, as there has been for some time, that this is a sector that should be highly regulated. With the new provisions that will be coming online shortly, there will be a greater deal of regulation.

Brian Lehrer: Next topic, the legislature legalized mobile sports betting in New York State. For the uninitiated, what does mobile sports betting mean?

Jimmy Vielkind: Well, it means that you can bet from your phone, your tablet, your implanted chip, your laptop computer. Whereas now, sports betting is legal in the state of New York, only at the four commercial casinos, the closest one to New York City is in Orange County, or on Indian gaming reservations. What's happening is many New Yorkers are taking the path train over to New Jersey, taking out their phones and placing their wagers here. Under this legislation, New Yorkers will be able to lose money by betting that the Mets will win a game or by betting against Tom Brady winning the Superbowl while staying in Manhattan or within the confines of the city and the state.

As you said, we can bet on Aaron Judge, you can bet, you can pray, I'll just be praying about that one, and how long he'll be sidelined. This is going to take some time. The state decided that it's going to issue a request for proposals and select two operators, perhaps more but at least two operators. State Senator Joe Addabbo, Democrat from Queens tells me that it's his hope that this program is up and running maybe by the NFL playoffs in the new year, but his hope is that it will be online for the Superbowl.

Brian Lehrer: That's a ways away. Can you bet on how many new ways the Mets will find to get your hopes up and then break your heart? Never mind, that's another show. Did the legislature deal seriously with gambling addiction and how much legal sports gambling in other states has destroyed families or any of the other worst downsides that they may be able to learn from other states that could potentially happen here?

Jimmy Vielkind: There is a self-exclusion list that already exists for brick and mortar casinos in the state, and there are provisions that would extend that list to mobile sports betting. I also know that lawmakers really approach this by looking for revenue. Governor Cuomo was quite explicit that he wants this practice legalized so that the state can realize funds and realize revenue. Among the projected $500 million that will be, lawmaker's hope, eventually generated for the state fisc, some of that money will be set aside for problem gambling and for gambling addiction services.

Brian Lehrer: A casino for New York City is in the bill. It would limit it to one?

Jimmy Vielkind: Not in the bill.

Brian Lehrer: Not in the bill?

Jimmy Vielkind: This was something that was considered at the 11th hour by lawmakers. It's funny, gambling legislation tends to prop up at the last minute. This was something that was considered. New York's constitution was amended in 2013 to allow for up to seven casinos, but a law passed that year restricted licenses to four facilities located in upstate New York until the year 2023. There had been talk about accelerating that timeline and issuing licenses for downstate facilities, including potentially one within the five boroughs of New York City, but that proposal fell by the wayside in budget talks.

Instead, the state Gaming Commission has been directed to request interest from developers, from potential bidders, just to assess what the market might be like for a downstate casino, again, potentially one or more in the five boroughs of New York City, and develop a report. There is no change to the timeline upon which licenses could be awarded, and there is no immediate plans for a formal bidding process for those casinos, nor formal restrictions about where they could or could not be.

Brian Lehrer: Well, thank you for that correction. Listeners, so I can be very clear about this, I got this wrong in the intro to the segment and in my question to Jimmy Vielkind just now. For some reason, I got the impression that there was one casino for New York City approved in the new New York state budget, but Jimmy's clarifying that it is not there. Legal mobile sports betting, yes. A casino for New York City, no. I apologize. We're almost out of time. Jimmy, what haven't I brought up yet that you'd like to mention from the budget?

Jimmy Vielkind: Well, I think it's important, Brian, I know you've talked a lot on the show about the tax rates. This is a very big budget. It's $212 billion, up from $178 billion this year. A lot of that money is from the federal government. Some of that is extraordinary aid. It's a one-shot, so to speak. Of course, the state budget always has an inflated number for capital projects, which are not spent down within one year, sometimes even within 10 years. The size of the budget has led to some concern among people in the business community that taxpayers in the state, and particularly wealthy taxpayers in this state, will be moving elsewhere.

Even though a lot of this is financed with one-time shots of relief, organizations like the Citizens Budget Commission say the spending levels that are baked into law will not easily be reduced. What could happen down the road is deficits, whether or not that's going to take one year, two years, or more years really remains to be seen, but it's something that New Yorkers should probably take note of in the way that we discuss our budget and our fisc. On the other hand, of course, there was a lot of need in this state that is not met currently by government, and a lot of need was exacerbated by the pandemic or at least laid bare by the coronavirus pandemic.

Many of the people, predominantly Democrats, who voted in support of this budget said that they were proud to be approving a spending plan that did what they had long felt was necessary to meet the needs of everyday New Yorkers.

Brian Lehrer: Jimmy Vielkind, covering state politics for the Wall Street Journal in Albany. His Twitter feed calls him an upstate American. Jimmy, thank you very much as always.

Jimmy Vielkind: Thanks, Brian. It's always a pleasure to be with you and your downstate American listeners.

Copyright © 2021 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.