August 1, 2025 • 26 mins
The New York Protect Our Courts Act prevents ICE from making courthouse arrests without a judicial warrant. But a lawsuit from the federal justice department is threatening to challenge that law. State Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal (D - Senate Judiciary Committee Chair) joins us to unpack the bill and the lawsuit. In the final days of the legislative session, there was energy around the Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act. Assembly Member Deborah Glick (D -Environmental Conservation Committee) unpacks the support around the bill and plans to build on its momentum through the summer.
EXPLORE MORE: nynow.org
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
[ THEME MUSIC ]
(00:18):
>> WELCOME TO THIS WEEK'S
EDITION OF "NEW YORK NOW."
I'M SHANTEL DESTRA.
THE NEW YORK PROTECT OUR COURTS
ACT IS A STATE LAW THAT
PROHIBITS FEDERAL IMMIGRATION
OFFICIALS FROM MAKING COURTHOUSE
ARRESTS WITHOUT A JUDICIAL
WARRANT.
BUT A NEW LAWSUIT BY THE FEDERAL
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IS ATTEMPTING
TO CHALLENGE THAT STATE LAW.
(00:40):
THE DEPARTMENT IS ALLEGING THAT
THE STATE, QUOTE, PURPOSELY
SHIELDS IMMIGRANTS FROM BEING
LAWFULLY DETAINED AND
IMPOSES UNLAWFUL CRIMINAL
LIABILITY FOR VIOLATIONS.
MEANWHILE, STATE ATTORNEY
GENERAL TISH JAMES MAINTAINS
THAT THE STATE LAW PROTECTS
VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES AND IS
ACTIVELY WORKING TO DEFEND IT IN
(01:02):
COURT.
WE SAT DOWN WITH STATE SENATOR
BRAD HOYLMAN-SIGAL WHO SPONSORED
THE ORIGINAL BILL TO UNPACK THE
IMPENDING LAWSUIT AND THE
STATE'S APPROACH TO IMMIGRATION
RIGHTS.
HERE'S THAT CONVERSATION.
[ THEME MUSIC ]
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING
US HERE TODAY, SENATOR.
>> NICE TO SEE YOU.
(01:23):
NOW CAN YOU GIVE OUR VIEWERS
SOME INSIGHT INTO WHAT THE NEW
YORK PROTECT OUR COURTS ACT IS
AND WHY IS THE LAW SO IMPORTANT
TO NEW YORK?
>> NEW YORK STATE PROTECT OUR
COURTS ACT, WHICH WE PASSED IN
2022, ENSURES THAT ICE, WHEN
ENTERING COURTHOUSE GROUNDS HAVE
(01:46):
A JUDICIAL WARRANT IF THEY SEEK
TO ARREST AN UNDOCUMENTED
IMMIGRANT.
THAT IS WHOLLY WITHIN NEW YORK
STATE'S JURISDICTION TO ENSURE
THAT NEW YORKERS, WHETHER THEY
BE UNDOCUMENTED OR CITIZENS HAVE
(02:08):
DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS AND A
RIGHT TO THEIR DAY IN COURT
WITHOUT INTERRUPTION OR
INTERFERENCE BY ANY OTHER
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.
>> AND THE FEDERAL JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT HAS FILED A LAWSUIT
TO CHALLENGE THE STATE LAW.
(02:30):
SO CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH THE
BASIS OF THAT CHALLENGE, AND
WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION TO THE
LAWSUIT?
>> WELL, I WAS EXTREMELY ALARMED
THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS
ATTEMPTING TO USE SHAM,
SELF-EXECUTING WARRANTS BY ICE
(02:53):
TO ARREST NEW YORKERS WITHOUT
THEIR DUE PROCESS RIGHTS BEING
FULLY EXECUTED IN THE COURT
SYSTEM.
>> AND WHAT HAVE YOU HEARD FROM
YOUR OWN CONSTITUENTS ABOUT THIS
CHALLENGE?
IS THERE A SENSE OF WORRY THAT
(03:14):
YOU'RE HEARING?
>> THERE'S CERTAINLY WORRY AMONG
IMMIGRATION ATTORNEYS WHO
REPRESENT MANY OF THESE
UNDOCUMENTED NEW YORKERS.
WE'RE CONCERNED THAT BY ICE
ENTERING COURTHOUSES OR
(03:35):
COURTHOUSE GROUNDS AND PICKING
OFF INDIVIDUALS WHO THEY THINK
ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW
SENDS A CHILLING EFFECT
THROUGHOUT THE IMMIGRATION
COMMUNITY, THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE
(03:55):
STATE OF NEW YORK AND WOULD
POTENTIALLY RESULT IN MANY
INDIVIDUALS NOT COMING FORWARD.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE ARE
WITNESSES TO A CRIME OR IN SOME
INSTANCES, VICTIMS TO A CRIME.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE DISPUTES.
(04:16):
>> AND AS CHAIR OF THE SENATE
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, WHAT DO YOU
THINK THE STATE'S RESPONSE
SHOULD BE TO THE CHALLENGE IN
THIS MOMENT?
>> WELL, I'M VERY PROUD THAT MY
COLLEAGUES HAVE RECOGNIZED THIS
THREAT, ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE
FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WHEN
(04:36):
WE PASSED THIS LAW.
NOBODY KNEW THAT DONALD TRUMP
WAS GOING TO BE ELECTED AGAIN
AND USE ICE AS A CUDGEL TO
SEEK WARRANTLESS ARRESTS OF
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS AND, IN
EFFECT, DISAPPEAR THEM OUT OF
(04:57):
OUR COMMUNITIES.
I THINK THAT IT IS AN OUTRAGE
SHARED BY NEW YORKERS ACROSS THE
BOARD.
WE'RE VERY CONCERNED MOVING
FORWARD ABOUT THE STATE'S
ABILITY TO MANAGE THIS
SITUATION, BUT I'M GLAD WE'RE IN
(05:19):
COURT AND STILL, WE HAVE JUSTICE
ON OUR SIDE AND I'M CONFIDENT
THAT NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY
GENERAL TISH JAMES WILL DEFEND
OUR LAW TO THE BEST OF HER
ABILITY AND I HOPE FOR A
VICTORY.
>> AND IN THE EVENT THAT THE
(05:39):
LAWSUIT IS NOT DISMISSED, WHAT
SHOULD THE STATE BE DOING IN THE
LONG TERM TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS
OF IMMIGRANT NEW YORKERS IN THE
YEARS TO COME?
>> WELL, CERTAINLY AT THE CITY
AND STATE LEVEL, WE NEED TO
INVEST MORE RESOURCES INTO LEGAL
SERVICES TO REPRESENT
(06:03):
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS IN
COURT.
THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS IF
YOU'RE AN IMMIGRANT AND YOU'RE
BEFORE A JUDGE AND ENGLISH MAY
NOT BE YOUR FIRST LANGUAGE,
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A HARD TIME
(06:24):
REPRESENTING YOUR SIDE OF THE
CASE, WHETHER IT'S IN A STATE OR
FEDERAL COURT.
SO WE'VE ADVANCED RESOURCES IN
THE STATE BUDGET, BUT WE NEED TO
DO MORE BECAUSE SO MANY
IMMIGRANTS APPEAR IN COURT
(06:45):
WITHOUT ATTORNEYS, AND I THINK
THAT NEEDS TO BE A FOCUS MOVING
FORWARD IN THE NEXT LEGISLATIVE
SESSION TO ENSURE THAT
IMMIGRANTS GET THE LEGAL COUNSEL
THEY NEED TO STAY IN THIS
COUNTRY ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE
ASYLUM SEEKERS AND FEARING
(07:07):
PERSECUTION IN THEIR HOME
NATIONS.
>> AND THIS LAWSUIT COMES AT A
TIME WHERE WE'VE SEEN OTHER
DIRECTIVES FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT IN DEPTH TACKLING
IMMIGRATION POLICY IN DIFFERENT
SANCTUARY STATES ACROSS THE
COUNTRY.
SO WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS SAYS
ABOUT THE OVERALL TONE REGARDING
ICE AND IMMIGRATION IN NEW YORK
(07:28):
CURRENTLY?
>> WELL, SO MANY NEW YORKERS AND
MY COLLEAGUES BELIEVE THAT ICE
IS, IN EFFECT, A SECRET POLICE
FORCE, MASKED TO ROUND UP
UNDESIRABLE NEW YORKERS IN THE
EYES OF THE CURRENT
ADMINISTRATION AND SHIP THEM TO
(07:50):
FAR AWAY MEGA PRISONS.
AND SADLY, THERE'S A LOT OF
EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT
SUPPOSITION.
I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE
CLIMATE, THE TENOR, THE TONE
TOWARD OUR IMMIGRANT
COMMUNITIES.
WE NEED TO DO MORE TO SUPPORT
THEM WITH NOT JUST LEGAL
(08:10):
SERVICES BUT SOCIAL SERVICES TO
ALLOW THEM TO BEGIN THEIR LIFE
HERE IN OUR STATE AND CONTRIBUTE
TO OUR COMMUNITIES AND TO OUR
LOCAL ECONOMIES.
>> AND IS THERE ANYTHING THAT
YOU THINK CONGRESS SHOULD BE
DOING TO HELP PROTECT THESE
RIGHTS?
I'M CURIOUS IF YOU'VE HAD ANY
(08:31):
COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEW YORK
CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION ON THIS
MATTER.
>> WELL, I CERTAINLY HAVE BEEN
IN TOUCH WITH OUR LOCAL MEMBERS
OF CONGRESS WHO FEEL SIMILARLY
THAT ICE IS OVERREACHED IN A WAY
THAT IS APPALLING AND HAS NO
(08:52):
PRECEDENT.
WE'RE A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS.
WE SHOULD RESPECT PEOPLE WHO
SEEK ASYLUM IN THIS COUNTRY, AND
WE KNOW THAT IMMIGRATION IS
ESSENTIAL TO OUR NATION'S AND
OUR LOCAL ECONOMIES.
SO THE DISAPPOINTMENT, THE
(09:14):
DISGUST, THE FEAR IS PALPABLE IN
NEW YORK AND I WOULD VENTURE
ACROSS THE ENTIRE NATION.
IMMIGRANTS AREN'T OUR ENEMIES.
THEY'RE OUR NEIGHBORS.
>> IS THE LEGISLATURE CURRENTLY
CONSIDERING HOLDING A SPECIAL
SESSION TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE
(09:34):
THREATS TO IMMIGRANT NEW YORKERS
AT THIS TIME?
>> I WISH THERE'D BE
CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL
SESSION IN THAT REGARD, BUT
THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER ISSUES
THAT WE'RE TRYING TO SORT OUT IN
CONNECTION WITH THE RECENTLY
PASSED BUDGET RECONCILIATION BIL
IN WASHINGTON INCLUDING
(09:55):
DEVASTATING MEDICAID CUTS.
SO IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN WHETHER
IMMIGRATION WILL BE A TOPIC OF
ANY FUTURE POTENTIAL SPECIAL
SESSION.
>> AND LASTLY, HEADING INTO THE
NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION, WHAT
WOULD BE YOUR STRATEGY TO
FURTHER PROTECT THE LEGAL RIGHTS
(10:17):
OF IMMIGRANT NEW YORKERS?
DO YOU THINK THAT THIS WILL BE
SOMETHING THAT IS A PRIORITY IN
THE STATE BUDGET?
>> I CERTAINLY HOPE IMMIGRATION
LEGAL SERVICES WILL CONTINUE TO
BE A PRIORITY OF THE EXECUTIVE
IN BOTH HOUSES OF OUR STATE
LEGISLATURE.
LEGISLATION CALLED ‘THE ACCESS T
(10:40):
REPRESENTATION ACT’, AS MOVED IN
PREVIOUS SESSIONS BUT NEVER
PASSED FULLY BY EITHER HOUSE.
IT WOULD PROVIDE HUNDREDS OF
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN LEGAL
SUPPORT FOR OUR IMMIGRANT
COMMUNITIES.
AT THE SAME TIME, THERE HAS TO
BE BALANCED WITH OTHER NEEDS
ACROSS THE STATE INCLUDING CUTS
(11:03):
THAT WE FORESEE COMING IN THE
FOLLOWING FISCAL YEAR.
>> WELL, UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS
ALL THE TIME WE HAVE FOR NOW.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE
TIME TO SPEAK WITH US TODAY,
SENATOR.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> AND WE WERE SPEAKING WITH
STATE SENATOR BRAD
HOYLMAN-SIGAL, CHAIR OF THE
STATE SENATE JUDICIARY
(11:24):
COMMITTEE.
[ THEME MUSIC ]
>> AND FOR MORE INFORMATION ON
THAT LAWSUIT, YOU CAN VISIT OUR
WEBSITE.
THAT'S AT NYNOW.ORG.
IN THE FINAL DAYS OF THE
LEGISLATIVE SESSION,
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES AND
STATE LAWMAKERS WERE HOPEFUL
THIS A BILL KNOWN AS THE
PACKAGING REDUCTION AND
(11:44):
RECYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE ACT
WOULD MAKE IT OVER THE
LEGISLATIVE FINISH LINE.
IF ENACTED, THE LEGISLATION
WOULD REQUIRE LARGE COMPANIES TO
REDUCE PACKAGING WASTE BY 30%
OVER THE NEXT 12 YEARS.
WHILE PROGRESS ON THE BILL
FAILED IN THE FINAL HOUR IN THE
ASSEMBLY CHAMBER, THE BILL'S
(12:05):
SPONSOR AND ADVOCATES ARE HOPING
TO BUILD ON THEIR EFFORTS
THROUGHOUT THE SUMMER MONTHS.
IN THIS NEXT SEGMENT, WE'LL HEAR
FROM ASSEMBLY MEMBER DEBORAH
GLICK ON WHAT'S AHEAD FOR THE
BILL.
HERE'S THAT CONVERSATION.
[ THEME MUSIC ]
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING
US HERE TODAY, ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
(12:25):
>> I'M VERY PLEASED TO BE WITH
YOU TODAY.
>> NOW FOR OUR VIEWERS WHO MAY
NOT BE FAMILIAR, WHAT IS THE
PACKAGING REDUCTION AND
RECYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE ACT,
AND WHY IS IT SO IMPORTANT TO A
STATE LIKE NEW YORK?
>> EVERYBODY THAT RECEIVES
PACKAGING INTO THEIR HOMES
SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THEY PAY
(12:48):
FOR THE COST OF DISPOSAL.
THE MANUFACTURERS, THE PRODUCERS
DO NOT.
BUT THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES WHO
CAN CONTROL THE AMOUNT OF
PACKAGING OR WHAT IS IN THE
PACKAGING IN TERMS OF TOXIC
MATERIALS THAT COME INTO OUR
HOMES, THAT WE DON'T HAVE AN
ABILITY TO RESTRICT, SO THE
(13:12):
PACKAGING REDUCTION WOULD SET
CERTAIN STANDARDS FOR REDUCTION
OVER TIME.
IT'S OVER 12 YEARS, WHICH IS
AGAINST MANUFACTURERS' HORIZON,
THEY HAVE TO REDUCE THE
PACKAGING BY ONLY 30% SO IT'S
(13:34):
NOT EVEN A HUGE ASK.
WE MADE ABOUT 26 CHANGES TO THE
BILL OVER A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS
TALKING WITH STAKEHOLDERS.
SO WE STARTED OUT WITH A MORE
AGGRESSIVE PROPOSAL, BUT WE HAVE
MADE SOME CHANGES.
(13:55):
IT ALSO REQUIRES THEM TO PAY A
FEE BASED ON HOW MUCH PACKAGING.
THEY PAY LESS AS THEY SEND US
LESS AND THOSE DOLLARS THAT ARE
IN THE FUND GO TO HELP
LOCALITIES EXPAND THEIR
RECYCLING FACILITIES, UPGRADE
(14:16):
THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE.
THEREBY, HAVING SHARED COSTS
BETWEEN TAXPAYERS, CONSUMERS,
WHO ARE GENERALLY THE SAME, AND
THE PRODUCERS.
SO WE ALSO ELIMINATE OF THE
(14:36):
THOUSANDS OF CHEMICALS THAT ARE
IN VARIOUS PACKAGING MATERIAL,
WE RESTRICT THE USE OF 17, NOT
IMMEDIATELY.
THEY HAVE FIVE YEARS TO GET RID
OF THINGS LIKE LEAD, MERCURY,
CADMIUM AND PFAS.
(14:59):
SO THAT'S THE BROADEST
DESCRIPTION AND THOSE COMPANIES
THAT ARE IMPACTED HAVE TO BE NOT
SMALL BUSINESSES.
THEY HAVE TO HAVE REVENUES OVER
$5 MILLION, AND THEY HAVE TO BE
PRODUCING MORE THAN A TON OF
(15:26):
WASTE.
SO IF IT IS A SMALL COMPANY THAT
IS INVOLVED IN A REUSE AND
REFILL OPERATION, THEY'RE
EXEMPT.
SO THAT THE EASIEST THING THAT I
CAN THINK OF THAT WOULD BE A
(15:47):
REUSE AND REFILL IS IF PEOPLE
HAVE PACKAGING THAT THEY CAN
RETURN AND THEN IT GETS USED TO
RETURN MATERIAL TO THEM.
SO THAT'S A CIRCULAR ECONOMY,
AND THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS
(16:07):
WE ALSO REQUIRE OVER TIME MORE
RECYCLED MATERIAL IN THE
PACKAGING.
SO THAT WE CREATE THAT CIRCULAR
ECONOMY.
YOU HAVE TO USE MORE SO THE
MUNICIPALITIES WILL HAVE A
MARKET FOR THE THINGS THAT THEY
ARE RECYCLING BECAUSE THAT
(16:27):
RECYCLED MATERIAL WILL BE MORE
VALUABLE BECAUSE THEY ARE-- THAT
MATERIAL IS NEEDED TO BE CONTENT
IN PACKAGING.
>> AND AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER,
THE BILL REQUIRES COMPANIES
MAKING MORE THAN $5 MILLION A
YEAR TO REDUCE PACKAGING WASTE
BY 30% OVER THE NEXT 12 YEARS,
SO HOW DID YOU IN THE SENATE
(16:48):
SPONSOR LAND ON THESE FIGURES?
>> WELL, WE ACTUALLY STARTED BY
DETERMINING WE HAVE A SOLID
WASTE CRISIS.
WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF LANDFILL
SPACE, AND SO WE BACKED INTO
THIS AND WE ACTUALLY HAD, AS I
SAID EARLIER, MORE AGGRESSIVE
(17:09):
GOALS.
WE WANTED 50% OF PACKAGING
REDUCED OVER 10 YEARS.
WE CAME TO THIS DIFFERENT
REQUIREMENT BASED ON LITERALLY
HUNDREDS OF MEETINGS WITH
STAKEHOLDERS.
WHAT IS POSSIBLE?
YOU HAVE EXISTING INVENTORY.
(17:31):
YOU HAVE TO USE UP WHAT'S IN THE
PIPE LINE.
YOU HAVE THE MATERIAL STOCKPILED
FOR USE.
THOSE KINDS OF THINGS AND SO WE
GIVE TIMEFRAMES INCLUDING THE
ELIMINATION OF TOXIC MATERIALS.
(17:52):
NOW I WILL SAY THAT IN OTHER
PLACES LIKE EUROPE AND CERTAIN
CANADIAN PROVINCES, THESE
MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES ARE
ALREADY REQUIRED TO DO MUCH OF
THIS.
SO FOR THE BIGGEST COMPANIES,
WE'RE NOT REINVENTING THE WHEEL.
(18:14):
THEY HAVE NO EXCUSE FOR WHY THEY
CAN'T DO THIS.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF MOST
BUSINESSES DON'T DO THINGS
UNLESS THEY'RE REQUIRED TO IN
THE SAME WAY THAT WE WOULD NOT
SEE SEAT BELTS IN CARS IF THE
(18:36):
GOVERNMENT HADN'T HAD A SAFETY
STANDARD THAT REQUIRED THEM.
SO REGULATION IS DONE BY THE
GOVERNMENT.
WE TRY NOT TO MICRO MANAGE HOW
THEY REDUCE THE PACKAGING.
WE THINK AMERICAN INDUSTRY ARE
GREAT INNOVATORS, AND THEY WILL
(18:57):
COME TO IT IN THE BEST POSSIBLE
WAY OVER TIME.
WE JUST SAY, HEY, HERE ARE SOME
OF THE THINGS-- HERE ARE THE
BENCHMARKS.
>> AND THERE WAS, OF COURSE, A
LOT OF ENERGY AROUND THIS BILL
IN THE LAST DAYS OF THE
LEGISLATIVE SESSION THIS YEAR.
THE BILL DID GET PASSED IN THE
SENATE BUT WAS NOT ABLE TO MAKE
IT OVER THE LEGISLATIVE FINISH
(19:17):
LINE IN THE ASSEMBLY.
SO CAN YOU UNPACK WHAT WENT ON
THIS YEAR?
>> WELL, OBVIOUSLY, THERE WAS A
TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF LOBBYING.
ESPECIALLY FROM THE AMERICAN
CHEMISTRY COUNCIL.
WE HAD MEETINGS.
I THINK THAT THERE WERE CONSUMER
BRANDS THAT WERE CONCERNED.
(19:39):
THERE WERE -- AND WE RESPONDED
TO MANY OF THOSE.
AND MADE CHANGES ALONG THE WAY.
WE-- ONE OF THE MAJOR CHANGES
WAS THIS WAS NOT PRODUCT LINE BY
PRODUCT LINE.
THIS WAS ACROSS COMPANYWIDE.
SO REDUCING 30%, IF THERE WAS A
(20:02):
PARTICULAR PRODUCT THAT-- FOR
WHICH THEY COULD NOT FIND AN
ALTERNATIVE PACKAGING, THAT
COULD HAVE BEEN IN THE, YOU
KNOW-- THERE WAS LEEWAY FOR
THAT.
BECAUSE IT WAS NOT PRODUCT LINE
BY PRODUCT LINE.
IT WAS COMPANYWIDE.
(20:23):
SO THAT WAS A MAJOR ADVANTAGE TO
BUSINESSES IN TERMS OF THEIR
COMPLIANCE, AND I THINK THAT IN
THE END, THE CHEMISTRY COUNCIL
SPENT AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF
(20:43):
MONEY.
IN FACT, THIS BILL HAD THE MOST
AMOUNT OF MONEY SPENT IN
LOBBYING AGAINST IT OF REALLY
ANY BILL THIS SESSION AND
PERHAPS ANY BILL I'VE EVER SEEN.
SO THIS WAS-- AND A LOT OF SCARE
TACTICS.
THINGS ARE GOING TO COST MORE.
(21:04):
YOU'RE USING LESS PACKAGING.
YOU'RE USING MORE RECYCLED
CONTENT.
HOW IS THIS COSTING YOU MORE?
YOU'RE USING LESS MATERIAL.
YOU COULD SAY, WELL, WE HAVE TO
RECONFIGURE OUR PROCESSES.
(21:24):
YES, BUT VERY SLOWLY OVER 10-- A
12-YEAR HORIZON.
REALLY, I THINK THE OTHER THING
I DIDN'T MENTION WAS THE HEALTH
CONSEQUENCES OF CONTINUING TO DO
WHAT WE'RE DOING.
WE DON'T HAVE LANDFILLS.
IT'S COSTING TAXPAYERS MORE TO
(21:47):
DISPOSE OF THINGS.
YOU EITHER-- HOW DO YOU GET RID
OF THINGS?
YOU RECYCLE AND REUSE.
YOU INCINERATE OR YOU BURY IT.
THAT'S A LANDFILL, IT'S BURYING.
THERE ARE IMPLICATIONS, HEALTH
IMPLICATIONS FOR ALL OF THOSE
THINGS.
(22:07):
SO IF YOU ARE INCINERATING, YOU
ARE CREATING POLLUTION.
IF YOU ARE BURYING IT, THE
LANDFILLS CREATE WHAT'S REFERRED
TO AS LEACHATE, WHICH IS SORT OF
SLURRY, A LIQUIDY DISSOLVE THAT
(22:31):
IS, YOU KNOW, CONCENTRATED
POLLUTION, AND THAT HAS TO BE
DEALT WITH.
SO AND THE PACKAGING, ITSELF,
EVERYBODY IS NOW AWARE OF MICRO
AND NANOPLASTICS AND HOW THEY
HAVE INVADED THE ENVIRONMENT
AND OUR OWN BODIES.
(22:52):
THE HEALTH IMPLICATIONS OF WHICH
WE ARE STILL NOT PERFECTLY CLEAR
UPON, BUT IT CANNOT BE GOOD FOR
YOU TO HAVE PLASTIC THAT IS A
COMPOSITION OF TOXIC CHEMICALS
IN YOUR BODIES AND IN THE BODIES
OF CHILDREN.
>> AND GIVEN THAT MOMENTUM THAT
(23:13):
THE BILL HAD IN THE LAST
LEGISLATIVE SESSION, HOW ARE YOU
HOPING TO BUILD ON THAT IN THE
SUMMER MONTHS?
AND WHAT ARE YOUR CURRENT
CONVERSATIONS LIKE WITH THE
ASSEMBLY SPEAKER ABOUT THIS
BILL?
>> I THINK THAT WE CAME VERY
CLOSE.
I THINK THE FINAL ANALYSIS,
PEOPLE WERE MADE NERVOUS ABOUT
AFFORDABILITY, AND THAT BECAME
(23:34):
VERY IMPORTANT.
NOW WE WILL RAISE PEOPLE'S-- WE
THOUGHT WE HAD SHARED ENOUGH
MATERIAL WITH THEM THROUGH THE
SESSION, BUT OUR FOCUS MAY NOT
HAVE BEEN THEIR FOCUS.
SO WE WILL REDOUBLE OUR EFFORTS
TO EDUCATE COLLEAGUES AND THE
PUBLIC ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF
(23:57):
THIS ISN'T COST FREE.
YOU'RE PAYING FOR THE DISPOSAL,
AND YOU-- IN YOUR TAXES OR IF
YOU PAY A CARTING FEE, THIS IS
AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT
THAT ALSO HAS A HEALTH COST, AND
(24:17):
SO WE'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW,
REDOUBLE OUR EFFORTS AND RAISE
PEOPLE'S LEVEL OF COMFORT IN
THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO COST
THEIR CONSTITUENTS SUBSTANTIALLY
MORE.
THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT THERE'S
NO IMPACT, STUDIES IN PLACES
WHERE THIS HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED,
(24:39):
THERE HAS BEEN NO DEMONSTRATABLE
CHANGE IN THE COST OF PRODUCTS
ON THE SHELF, BUT PEOPLE WERE
CONCERNED ABOUT THAT THIS PAST
YEAR.
BUT THERE ARE OTHER COSTS.
NOT JUST DISPOSAL, BUT THERE'S
COSTS TO PEOPLE'S HEALTH.
ALL THE MORE IMPORTANT AS WE
(24:59):
SEEK FEDERAL RESTRICTIONS ON
SUPPORTIVE HEALTH CARE AND
ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE, AND THERE
ARE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
COMMUNITIES THAT ARE CONCERNED
ABOUT THE MANUFACTURING
PROCESSES THAT INVOLVE SOME OF
(25:19):
THESE CHEMICALS AND THEN HAVING
THESE CHEMICALS IN THEIR-- IN
OUR HOMES WHERE THEIR CHILDREN
CAN, YOU KNOW, INGEST
MICROPLASTICS.
>> WELL, UNFORTUNATELY THAT IS
ALL THE TIME WE HAVE FOR TODAY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE
(25:41):
TIME TO SPEAK WITH US TODAY,
ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
>> I AM VERY APPRECIATIVE OF YOU
GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO
TO-- TO PROVIDE THIS
INFORMATION.
>> AND WE WERE SPEAKING WITH
ASSEMBLY MEMBER DEBORAH GLICK,
CHAIR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION COMMITTEE.
[ THEME MUSIC ]
>> AND FOR MORE INFORMATION ON
THE FUTURE OF THAT BILL, YOU CAN
(26:03):
VISIT OUR WEBSITE.
AGAIN, THAT'S AT NYNOW.ORG.
YOU CAN ALSO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR
NEWSLETTER BY GOING TO
NEWSLETTER@NYNOW.ORG, OR BY
SCANNING THE QR CODE ON YOUR
SCREEN.
WELL, THAT DOES IT FOR THIS
EDITION OF "NEW YORK NOW."
THANK YOU FOR TUNING IN AND SEE
(26:23):
YOU NEXT WEEK.
[ THEME MUSIC ]
>>ANNOUNCER (26:42):
FUNDING FOR "NEW
YORK NOW" IS PROVIDED BY WNET.
[ THEME MUSIC ]
(00:18):
>> WELCOME TO THIS WEEK'S
EDITION OF "NEW YORK NOW."
I'M SHANTEL DESTRA.
THE NEW YORK PROTECT OUR COURTS
ACT IS A STATE LAW THAT
PROHIBITS FEDERAL IMMIGRATION
OFFICIALS FROM MAKING COURTHOUSE
ARRESTS WITHOUT A JUDICIAL
WARRANT.
BUT A NEW LAWSUIT BY THE FEDERAL
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IS ATTEMPTING
TO CHALLENGE THAT STATE LAW.
(00:40):
THE DEPARTMENT IS ALLEGING THAT
THE STATE, QUOTE, PURPOSELY
SHIELDS IMMIGRANTS FROM BEING
LAWFULLY DETAINED AND
IMPOSES UNLAWFUL CRIMINAL
LIABILITY FOR VIOLATIONS.
MEANWHILE, STATE ATTORNEY
GENERAL TISH JAMES MAINTAINS
THAT THE STATE LAW PROTECTS
VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES AND IS
ACTIVELY WORKING TO DEFEND IT IN
(01:02):
COURT.
WE SAT DOWN WITH STATE SENATOR
BRAD HOYLMAN-SIGAL WHO SPONSORED
THE ORIGINAL BILL TO UNPACK THE
IMPENDING LAWSUIT AND THE
STATE'S APPROACH TO IMMIGRATION
RIGHTS.
HERE'S THAT CONVERSATION.
[ THEME MUSIC ]
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING
US HERE TODAY, SENATOR.
>> NICE TO SEE YOU.
(01:23):
NOW CAN YOU GIVE OUR VIEWERS
SOME INSIGHT INTO WHAT THE NEW
YORK PROTECT OUR COURTS ACT IS
AND WHY IS THE LAW SO IMPORTANT
TO NEW YORK?
>> NEW YORK STATE PROTECT OUR
COURTS ACT, WHICH WE PASSED IN
2022, ENSURES THAT ICE, WHEN
ENTERING COURTHOUSE GROUNDS HAVE
(01:46):
A JUDICIAL WARRANT IF THEY SEEK
TO ARREST AN UNDOCUMENTED
IMMIGRANT.
THAT IS WHOLLY WITHIN NEW YORK
STATE'S JURISDICTION TO ENSURE
THAT NEW YORKERS, WHETHER THEY
BE UNDOCUMENTED OR CITIZENS HAVE
(02:08):
DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS AND A
RIGHT TO THEIR DAY IN COURT
WITHOUT INTERRUPTION OR
INTERFERENCE BY ANY OTHER
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.
>> AND THE FEDERAL JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT HAS FILED A LAWSUIT
TO CHALLENGE THE STATE LAW.
(02:30):
SO CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH THE
BASIS OF THAT CHALLENGE, AND
WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION TO THE
LAWSUIT?
>> WELL, I WAS EXTREMELY ALARMED
THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS
ATTEMPTING TO USE SHAM,
SELF-EXECUTING WARRANTS BY ICE
(02:53):
TO ARREST NEW YORKERS WITHOUT
THEIR DUE PROCESS RIGHTS BEING
FULLY EXECUTED IN THE COURT
SYSTEM.
>> AND WHAT HAVE YOU HEARD FROM
YOUR OWN CONSTITUENTS ABOUT THIS
CHALLENGE?
IS THERE A SENSE OF WORRY THAT
(03:14):
YOU'RE HEARING?
>> THERE'S CERTAINLY WORRY AMONG
IMMIGRATION ATTORNEYS WHO
REPRESENT MANY OF THESE
UNDOCUMENTED NEW YORKERS.
WE'RE CONCERNED THAT BY ICE
ENTERING COURTHOUSES OR
(03:35):
COURTHOUSE GROUNDS AND PICKING
OFF INDIVIDUALS WHO THEY THINK
ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW
SENDS A CHILLING EFFECT
THROUGHOUT THE IMMIGRATION
COMMUNITY, THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE
(03:55):
STATE OF NEW YORK AND WOULD
POTENTIALLY RESULT IN MANY
INDIVIDUALS NOT COMING FORWARD.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE ARE
WITNESSES TO A CRIME OR IN SOME
INSTANCES, VICTIMS TO A CRIME.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE DISPUTES.
(04:16):
>> AND AS CHAIR OF THE SENATE
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, WHAT DO YOU
THINK THE STATE'S RESPONSE
SHOULD BE TO THE CHALLENGE IN
THIS MOMENT?
>> WELL, I'M VERY PROUD THAT MY
COLLEAGUES HAVE RECOGNIZED THIS
THREAT, ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE
FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WHEN
(04:36):
WE PASSED THIS LAW.
NOBODY KNEW THAT DONALD TRUMP
WAS GOING TO BE ELECTED AGAIN
AND USE ICE AS A CUDGEL TO
SEEK WARRANTLESS ARRESTS OF
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS AND, IN
EFFECT, DISAPPEAR THEM OUT OF
(04:57):
OUR COMMUNITIES.
I THINK THAT IT IS AN OUTRAGE
SHARED BY NEW YORKERS ACROSS THE
BOARD.
WE'RE VERY CONCERNED MOVING
FORWARD ABOUT THE STATE'S
ABILITY TO MANAGE THIS
SITUATION, BUT I'M GLAD WE'RE IN
(05:19):
COURT AND STILL, WE HAVE JUSTICE
ON OUR SIDE AND I'M CONFIDENT
THAT NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY
GENERAL TISH JAMES WILL DEFEND
OUR LAW TO THE BEST OF HER
ABILITY AND I HOPE FOR A
VICTORY.
>> AND IN THE EVENT THAT THE
(05:39):
LAWSUIT IS NOT DISMISSED, WHAT
SHOULD THE STATE BE DOING IN THE
LONG TERM TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS
OF IMMIGRANT NEW YORKERS IN THE
YEARS TO COME?
>> WELL, CERTAINLY AT THE CITY
AND STATE LEVEL, WE NEED TO
INVEST MORE RESOURCES INTO LEGAL
SERVICES TO REPRESENT
(06:03):
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS IN
COURT.
THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS IF
YOU'RE AN IMMIGRANT AND YOU'RE
BEFORE A JUDGE AND ENGLISH MAY
NOT BE YOUR FIRST LANGUAGE,
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A HARD TIME
(06:24):
REPRESENTING YOUR SIDE OF THE
CASE, WHETHER IT'S IN A STATE OR
FEDERAL COURT.
SO WE'VE ADVANCED RESOURCES IN
THE STATE BUDGET, BUT WE NEED TO
DO MORE BECAUSE SO MANY
IMMIGRANTS APPEAR IN COURT
(06:45):
WITHOUT ATTORNEYS, AND I THINK
THAT NEEDS TO BE A FOCUS MOVING
FORWARD IN THE NEXT LEGISLATIVE
SESSION TO ENSURE THAT
IMMIGRANTS GET THE LEGAL COUNSEL
THEY NEED TO STAY IN THIS
COUNTRY ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE
ASYLUM SEEKERS AND FEARING
(07:07):
PERSECUTION IN THEIR HOME
NATIONS.
>> AND THIS LAWSUIT COMES AT A
TIME WHERE WE'VE SEEN OTHER
DIRECTIVES FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT IN DEPTH TACKLING
IMMIGRATION POLICY IN DIFFERENT
SANCTUARY STATES ACROSS THE
COUNTRY.
SO WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS SAYS
ABOUT THE OVERALL TONE REGARDING
ICE AND IMMIGRATION IN NEW YORK
(07:28):
CURRENTLY?
>> WELL, SO MANY NEW YORKERS AND
MY COLLEAGUES BELIEVE THAT ICE
IS, IN EFFECT, A SECRET POLICE
FORCE, MASKED TO ROUND UP
UNDESIRABLE NEW YORKERS IN THE
EYES OF THE CURRENT
ADMINISTRATION AND SHIP THEM TO
(07:50):
FAR AWAY MEGA PRISONS.
AND SADLY, THERE'S A LOT OF
EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT
SUPPOSITION.
I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE
CLIMATE, THE TENOR, THE TONE
TOWARD OUR IMMIGRANT
COMMUNITIES.
WE NEED TO DO MORE TO SUPPORT
THEM WITH NOT JUST LEGAL
(08:10):
SERVICES BUT SOCIAL SERVICES TO
ALLOW THEM TO BEGIN THEIR LIFE
HERE IN OUR STATE AND CONTRIBUTE
TO OUR COMMUNITIES AND TO OUR
LOCAL ECONOMIES.
>> AND IS THERE ANYTHING THAT
YOU THINK CONGRESS SHOULD BE
DOING TO HELP PROTECT THESE
RIGHTS?
I'M CURIOUS IF YOU'VE HAD ANY
(08:31):
COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEW YORK
CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION ON THIS
MATTER.
>> WELL, I CERTAINLY HAVE BEEN
IN TOUCH WITH OUR LOCAL MEMBERS
OF CONGRESS WHO FEEL SIMILARLY
THAT ICE IS OVERREACHED IN A WAY
THAT IS APPALLING AND HAS NO
(08:52):
PRECEDENT.
WE'RE A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS.
WE SHOULD RESPECT PEOPLE WHO
SEEK ASYLUM IN THIS COUNTRY, AND
WE KNOW THAT IMMIGRATION IS
ESSENTIAL TO OUR NATION'S AND
OUR LOCAL ECONOMIES.
SO THE DISAPPOINTMENT, THE
(09:14):
DISGUST, THE FEAR IS PALPABLE IN
NEW YORK AND I WOULD VENTURE
ACROSS THE ENTIRE NATION.
IMMIGRANTS AREN'T OUR ENEMIES.
THEY'RE OUR NEIGHBORS.
>> IS THE LEGISLATURE CURRENTLY
CONSIDERING HOLDING A SPECIAL
SESSION TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE
(09:34):
THREATS TO IMMIGRANT NEW YORKERS
AT THIS TIME?
>> I WISH THERE'D BE
CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL
SESSION IN THAT REGARD, BUT
THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER ISSUES
THAT WE'RE TRYING TO SORT OUT IN
CONNECTION WITH THE RECENTLY
PASSED BUDGET RECONCILIATION BIL
IN WASHINGTON INCLUDING
(09:55):
DEVASTATING MEDICAID CUTS.
SO IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN WHETHER
IMMIGRATION WILL BE A TOPIC OF
ANY FUTURE POTENTIAL SPECIAL
SESSION.
>> AND LASTLY, HEADING INTO THE
NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION, WHAT
WOULD BE YOUR STRATEGY TO
FURTHER PROTECT THE LEGAL RIGHTS
(10:17):
OF IMMIGRANT NEW YORKERS?
DO YOU THINK THAT THIS WILL BE
SOMETHING THAT IS A PRIORITY IN
THE STATE BUDGET?
>> I CERTAINLY HOPE IMMIGRATION
LEGAL SERVICES WILL CONTINUE TO
BE A PRIORITY OF THE EXECUTIVE
IN BOTH HOUSES OF OUR STATE
LEGISLATURE.
LEGISLATION CALLED ‘THE ACCESS T
(10:40):
REPRESENTATION ACT’, AS MOVED IN
PREVIOUS SESSIONS BUT NEVER
PASSED FULLY BY EITHER HOUSE.
IT WOULD PROVIDE HUNDREDS OF
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN LEGAL
SUPPORT FOR OUR IMMIGRANT
COMMUNITIES.
AT THE SAME TIME, THERE HAS TO
BE BALANCED WITH OTHER NEEDS
ACROSS THE STATE INCLUDING CUTS
(11:03):
THAT WE FORESEE COMING IN THE
FOLLOWING FISCAL YEAR.
>> WELL, UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS
ALL THE TIME WE HAVE FOR NOW.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE
TIME TO SPEAK WITH US TODAY,
SENATOR.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> AND WE WERE SPEAKING WITH
STATE SENATOR BRAD
HOYLMAN-SIGAL, CHAIR OF THE
STATE SENATE JUDICIARY
(11:24):
COMMITTEE.
[ THEME MUSIC ]
>> AND FOR MORE INFORMATION ON
THAT LAWSUIT, YOU CAN VISIT OUR
WEBSITE.
THAT'S AT NYNOW.ORG.
IN THE FINAL DAYS OF THE
LEGISLATIVE SESSION,
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES AND
STATE LAWMAKERS WERE HOPEFUL
THIS A BILL KNOWN AS THE
PACKAGING REDUCTION AND
(11:44):
RECYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE ACT
WOULD MAKE IT OVER THE
LEGISLATIVE FINISH LINE.
IF ENACTED, THE LEGISLATION
WOULD REQUIRE LARGE COMPANIES TO
REDUCE PACKAGING WASTE BY 30%
OVER THE NEXT 12 YEARS.
WHILE PROGRESS ON THE BILL
FAILED IN THE FINAL HOUR IN THE
ASSEMBLY CHAMBER, THE BILL'S
(12:05):
SPONSOR AND ADVOCATES ARE HOPING
TO BUILD ON THEIR EFFORTS
THROUGHOUT THE SUMMER MONTHS.
IN THIS NEXT SEGMENT, WE'LL HEAR
FROM ASSEMBLY MEMBER DEBORAH
GLICK ON WHAT'S AHEAD FOR THE
BILL.
HERE'S THAT CONVERSATION.
[ THEME MUSIC ]
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING
US HERE TODAY, ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
(12:25):
>> I'M VERY PLEASED TO BE WITH
YOU TODAY.
>> NOW FOR OUR VIEWERS WHO MAY
NOT BE FAMILIAR, WHAT IS THE
PACKAGING REDUCTION AND
RECYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE ACT,
AND WHY IS IT SO IMPORTANT TO A
STATE LIKE NEW YORK?
>> EVERYBODY THAT RECEIVES
PACKAGING INTO THEIR HOMES
SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THEY PAY
(12:48):
FOR THE COST OF DISPOSAL.
THE MANUFACTURERS, THE PRODUCERS
DO NOT.
BUT THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES WHO
CAN CONTROL THE AMOUNT OF
PACKAGING OR WHAT IS IN THE
PACKAGING IN TERMS OF TOXIC
MATERIALS THAT COME INTO OUR
HOMES, THAT WE DON'T HAVE AN
ABILITY TO RESTRICT, SO THE
(13:12):
PACKAGING REDUCTION WOULD SET
CERTAIN STANDARDS FOR REDUCTION
OVER TIME.
IT'S OVER 12 YEARS, WHICH IS
AGAINST MANUFACTURERS' HORIZON,
THEY HAVE TO REDUCE THE
PACKAGING BY ONLY 30% SO IT'S
(13:34):
NOT EVEN A HUGE ASK.
WE MADE ABOUT 26 CHANGES TO THE
BILL OVER A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS
TALKING WITH STAKEHOLDERS.
SO WE STARTED OUT WITH A MORE
AGGRESSIVE PROPOSAL, BUT WE HAVE
MADE SOME CHANGES.
(13:55):
IT ALSO REQUIRES THEM TO PAY A
FEE BASED ON HOW MUCH PACKAGING.
THEY PAY LESS AS THEY SEND US
LESS AND THOSE DOLLARS THAT ARE
IN THE FUND GO TO HELP
LOCALITIES EXPAND THEIR
RECYCLING FACILITIES, UPGRADE
(14:16):
THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE.
THEREBY, HAVING SHARED COSTS
BETWEEN TAXPAYERS, CONSUMERS,
WHO ARE GENERALLY THE SAME, AND
THE PRODUCERS.
SO WE ALSO ELIMINATE OF THE
(14:36):
THOUSANDS OF CHEMICALS THAT ARE
IN VARIOUS PACKAGING MATERIAL,
WE RESTRICT THE USE OF 17, NOT
IMMEDIATELY.
THEY HAVE FIVE YEARS TO GET RID
OF THINGS LIKE LEAD, MERCURY,
CADMIUM AND PFAS.
(14:59):
SO THAT'S THE BROADEST
DESCRIPTION AND THOSE COMPANIES
THAT ARE IMPACTED HAVE TO BE NOT
SMALL BUSINESSES.
THEY HAVE TO HAVE REVENUES OVER
$5 MILLION, AND THEY HAVE TO BE
PRODUCING MORE THAN A TON OF
(15:26):
WASTE.
SO IF IT IS A SMALL COMPANY THAT
IS INVOLVED IN A REUSE AND
REFILL OPERATION, THEY'RE
EXEMPT.
SO THAT THE EASIEST THING THAT I
CAN THINK OF THAT WOULD BE A
(15:47):
REUSE AND REFILL IS IF PEOPLE
HAVE PACKAGING THAT THEY CAN
RETURN AND THEN IT GETS USED TO
RETURN MATERIAL TO THEM.
SO THAT'S A CIRCULAR ECONOMY,
AND THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS
(16:07):
WE ALSO REQUIRE OVER TIME MORE
RECYCLED MATERIAL IN THE
PACKAGING.
SO THAT WE CREATE THAT CIRCULAR
ECONOMY.
YOU HAVE TO USE MORE SO THE
MUNICIPALITIES WILL HAVE A
MARKET FOR THE THINGS THAT THEY
ARE RECYCLING BECAUSE THAT
(16:27):
RECYCLED MATERIAL WILL BE MORE
VALUABLE BECAUSE THEY ARE-- THAT
MATERIAL IS NEEDED TO BE CONTENT
IN PACKAGING.
>> AND AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER,
THE BILL REQUIRES COMPANIES
MAKING MORE THAN $5 MILLION A
YEAR TO REDUCE PACKAGING WASTE
BY 30% OVER THE NEXT 12 YEARS,
SO HOW DID YOU IN THE SENATE
(16:48):
SPONSOR LAND ON THESE FIGURES?
>> WELL, WE ACTUALLY STARTED BY
DETERMINING WE HAVE A SOLID
WASTE CRISIS.
WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF LANDFILL
SPACE, AND SO WE BACKED INTO
THIS AND WE ACTUALLY HAD, AS I
SAID EARLIER, MORE AGGRESSIVE
(17:09):
GOALS.
WE WANTED 50% OF PACKAGING
REDUCED OVER 10 YEARS.
WE CAME TO THIS DIFFERENT
REQUIREMENT BASED ON LITERALLY
HUNDREDS OF MEETINGS WITH
STAKEHOLDERS.
WHAT IS POSSIBLE?
YOU HAVE EXISTING INVENTORY.
(17:31):
YOU HAVE TO USE UP WHAT'S IN THE
PIPE LINE.
YOU HAVE THE MATERIAL STOCKPILED
FOR USE.
THOSE KINDS OF THINGS AND SO WE
GIVE TIMEFRAMES INCLUDING THE
ELIMINATION OF TOXIC MATERIALS.
(17:52):
NOW I WILL SAY THAT IN OTHER
PLACES LIKE EUROPE AND CERTAIN
CANADIAN PROVINCES, THESE
MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES ARE
ALREADY REQUIRED TO DO MUCH OF
THIS.
SO FOR THE BIGGEST COMPANIES,
WE'RE NOT REINVENTING THE WHEEL.
(18:14):
THEY HAVE NO EXCUSE FOR WHY THEY
CAN'T DO THIS.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF MOST
BUSINESSES DON'T DO THINGS
UNLESS THEY'RE REQUIRED TO IN
THE SAME WAY THAT WE WOULD NOT
SEE SEAT BELTS IN CARS IF THE
(18:36):
GOVERNMENT HADN'T HAD A SAFETY
STANDARD THAT REQUIRED THEM.
SO REGULATION IS DONE BY THE
GOVERNMENT.
WE TRY NOT TO MICRO MANAGE HOW
THEY REDUCE THE PACKAGING.
WE THINK AMERICAN INDUSTRY ARE
GREAT INNOVATORS, AND THEY WILL
(18:57):
COME TO IT IN THE BEST POSSIBLE
WAY OVER TIME.
WE JUST SAY, HEY, HERE ARE SOME
OF THE THINGS-- HERE ARE THE
BENCHMARKS.
>> AND THERE WAS, OF COURSE, A
LOT OF ENERGY AROUND THIS BILL
IN THE LAST DAYS OF THE
LEGISLATIVE SESSION THIS YEAR.
THE BILL DID GET PASSED IN THE
SENATE BUT WAS NOT ABLE TO MAKE
IT OVER THE LEGISLATIVE FINISH
(19:17):
LINE IN THE ASSEMBLY.
SO CAN YOU UNPACK WHAT WENT ON
THIS YEAR?
>> WELL, OBVIOUSLY, THERE WAS A
TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF LOBBYING.
ESPECIALLY FROM THE AMERICAN
CHEMISTRY COUNCIL.
WE HAD MEETINGS.
I THINK THAT THERE WERE CONSUMER
BRANDS THAT WERE CONCERNED.
(19:39):
THERE WERE -- AND WE RESPONDED
TO MANY OF THOSE.
AND MADE CHANGES ALONG THE WAY.
WE-- ONE OF THE MAJOR CHANGES
WAS THIS WAS NOT PRODUCT LINE BY
PRODUCT LINE.
THIS WAS ACROSS COMPANYWIDE.
SO REDUCING 30%, IF THERE WAS A
(20:02):
PARTICULAR PRODUCT THAT-- FOR
WHICH THEY COULD NOT FIND AN
ALTERNATIVE PACKAGING, THAT
COULD HAVE BEEN IN THE, YOU
KNOW-- THERE WAS LEEWAY FOR
THAT.
BECAUSE IT WAS NOT PRODUCT LINE
BY PRODUCT LINE.
IT WAS COMPANYWIDE.
(20:23):
SO THAT WAS A MAJOR ADVANTAGE TO
BUSINESSES IN TERMS OF THEIR
COMPLIANCE, AND I THINK THAT IN
THE END, THE CHEMISTRY COUNCIL
SPENT AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF
(20:43):
MONEY.
IN FACT, THIS BILL HAD THE MOST
AMOUNT OF MONEY SPENT IN
LOBBYING AGAINST IT OF REALLY
ANY BILL THIS SESSION AND
PERHAPS ANY BILL I'VE EVER SEEN.
SO THIS WAS-- AND A LOT OF SCARE
TACTICS.
THINGS ARE GOING TO COST MORE.
(21:04):
YOU'RE USING LESS PACKAGING.
YOU'RE USING MORE RECYCLED
CONTENT.
HOW IS THIS COSTING YOU MORE?
YOU'RE USING LESS MATERIAL.
YOU COULD SAY, WELL, WE HAVE TO
RECONFIGURE OUR PROCESSES.
(21:24):
YES, BUT VERY SLOWLY OVER 10-- A
12-YEAR HORIZON.
REALLY, I THINK THE OTHER THING
I DIDN'T MENTION WAS THE HEALTH
CONSEQUENCES OF CONTINUING TO DO
WHAT WE'RE DOING.
WE DON'T HAVE LANDFILLS.
IT'S COSTING TAXPAYERS MORE TO
(21:47):
DISPOSE OF THINGS.
YOU EITHER-- HOW DO YOU GET RID
OF THINGS?
YOU RECYCLE AND REUSE.
YOU INCINERATE OR YOU BURY IT.
THAT'S A LANDFILL, IT'S BURYING.
THERE ARE IMPLICATIONS, HEALTH
IMPLICATIONS FOR ALL OF THOSE
THINGS.
(22:07):
SO IF YOU ARE INCINERATING, YOU
ARE CREATING POLLUTION.
IF YOU ARE BURYING IT, THE
LANDFILLS CREATE WHAT'S REFERRED
TO AS LEACHATE, WHICH IS SORT OF
SLURRY, A LIQUIDY DISSOLVE THAT
(22:31):
IS, YOU KNOW, CONCENTRATED
POLLUTION, AND THAT HAS TO BE
DEALT WITH.
SO AND THE PACKAGING, ITSELF,
EVERYBODY IS NOW AWARE OF MICRO
AND NANOPLASTICS AND HOW THEY
HAVE INVADED THE ENVIRONMENT
AND OUR OWN BODIES.
(22:52):
THE HEALTH IMPLICATIONS OF WHICH
WE ARE STILL NOT PERFECTLY CLEAR
UPON, BUT IT CANNOT BE GOOD FOR
YOU TO HAVE PLASTIC THAT IS A
COMPOSITION OF TOXIC CHEMICALS
IN YOUR BODIES AND IN THE BODIES
OF CHILDREN.
>> AND GIVEN THAT MOMENTUM THAT
(23:13):
THE BILL HAD IN THE LAST
LEGISLATIVE SESSION, HOW ARE YOU
HOPING TO BUILD ON THAT IN THE
SUMMER MONTHS?
AND WHAT ARE YOUR CURRENT
CONVERSATIONS LIKE WITH THE
ASSEMBLY SPEAKER ABOUT THIS
BILL?
>> I THINK THAT WE CAME VERY
CLOSE.
I THINK THE FINAL ANALYSIS,
PEOPLE WERE MADE NERVOUS ABOUT
AFFORDABILITY, AND THAT BECAME
(23:34):
VERY IMPORTANT.
NOW WE WILL RAISE PEOPLE'S-- WE
THOUGHT WE HAD SHARED ENOUGH
MATERIAL WITH THEM THROUGH THE
SESSION, BUT OUR FOCUS MAY NOT
HAVE BEEN THEIR FOCUS.
SO WE WILL REDOUBLE OUR EFFORTS
TO EDUCATE COLLEAGUES AND THE
PUBLIC ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF
(23:57):
THIS ISN'T COST FREE.
YOU'RE PAYING FOR THE DISPOSAL,
AND YOU-- IN YOUR TAXES OR IF
YOU PAY A CARTING FEE, THIS IS
AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT
THAT ALSO HAS A HEALTH COST, AND
(24:17):
SO WE'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW,
REDOUBLE OUR EFFORTS AND RAISE
PEOPLE'S LEVEL OF COMFORT IN
THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO COST
THEIR CONSTITUENTS SUBSTANTIALLY
MORE.
THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT THERE'S
NO IMPACT, STUDIES IN PLACES
WHERE THIS HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED,
(24:39):
THERE HAS BEEN NO DEMONSTRATABLE
CHANGE IN THE COST OF PRODUCTS
ON THE SHELF, BUT PEOPLE WERE
CONCERNED ABOUT THAT THIS PAST
YEAR.
BUT THERE ARE OTHER COSTS.
NOT JUST DISPOSAL, BUT THERE'S
COSTS TO PEOPLE'S HEALTH.
ALL THE MORE IMPORTANT AS WE
(24:59):
SEEK FEDERAL RESTRICTIONS ON
SUPPORTIVE HEALTH CARE AND
ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE, AND THERE
ARE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
COMMUNITIES THAT ARE CONCERNED
ABOUT THE MANUFACTURING
PROCESSES THAT INVOLVE SOME OF
(25:19):
THESE CHEMICALS AND THEN HAVING
THESE CHEMICALS IN THEIR-- IN
OUR HOMES WHERE THEIR CHILDREN
CAN, YOU KNOW, INGEST
MICROPLASTICS.
>> WELL, UNFORTUNATELY THAT IS
ALL THE TIME WE HAVE FOR TODAY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE
(25:41):
TIME TO SPEAK WITH US TODAY,
ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
>> I AM VERY APPRECIATIVE OF YOU
GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO
TO-- TO PROVIDE THIS
INFORMATION.
>> AND WE WERE SPEAKING WITH
ASSEMBLY MEMBER DEBORAH GLICK,
CHAIR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION COMMITTEE.
[ THEME MUSIC ]
>> AND FOR MORE INFORMATION ON
THE FUTURE OF THAT BILL, YOU CAN
(26:03):
VISIT OUR WEBSITE.
AGAIN, THAT'S AT NYNOW.ORG.
YOU CAN ALSO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR
NEWSLETTER BY GOING TO
NEWSLETTER@NYNOW.ORG, OR BY
SCANNING THE QR CODE ON YOUR
SCREEN.
WELL, THAT DOES IT FOR THIS
EDITION OF "NEW YORK NOW."
THANK YOU FOR TUNING IN AND SEE
(26:23):
YOU NEXT WEEK.
[ THEME MUSIC ]
>>ANNOUNCER (26:42):
FUNDING FOR "NEW
YORK NOW" IS PROVIDED BY WNET.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.