After spending some time poring over Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s budget proposal, it leaves me with the same sense of disappointment, as it is filled with downstate-heavy spending, costly programs, and hidden tax increases. The governor has spent his early weeks of the year setting his gaze on higher office and touting a lofty progressive agenda, which will prove to be costly for average hardworking middle-class families of our state. Worse still is that the governor has been laying down a foundation of blame directed at the federal government and localities. 

I think it’s fair to say that the governor’s focus has been on the presidency for some time. He’s set his sights on 2020 and is using New York as his sandbox to “prove” to far-left progressives that he’s their guy. This year, New York is facing a possible $4 billion budget deficit. To compensate for his past and continued policies that have contributed to this emergency, the governor has peppered throughout his budget proposal revenue boosters or taxes on New York’s hardworking families. These proposals include the discontinuation of the energy service sales-tax exemption, which would cost New Yorkers $96 million in the coming fiscal year and $128 million annually in subsequent years. He places a cap on the STAR Exemption benefit growth to zero, which would cost homeowners $49 million in 2018-19. 

These moves don’t make a dent in this deficit. It’s clear that reductions in spending are needed. I am frustrated by the pressure the governor forces on our local governments to “consolidate” while he has done little to alleviate the unfunded mandates that are to blame for high costs of living in New York. Further still, using his insincere version of “ethics” reform would require same-day voter registration as well as early voting, which would amount to more costly mandates on our county governments.

Our upstate local communities need investment and attention from the state. The governor’s solution to revitalizing downtowns is the continuation of his Downtown Revitalization Program which pits 10 “winning” cities against each other to divide up a $100 million pot. The governor has gamified almost every aspect of government and investment, but I have serious reservations as to whether this is the best way to lift up and support our upstate communities. He further proposes to eliminate $1.8 million worth of village-per-capita aid, which helps small villages like those found in the Mohawk Valley and North Country. Elsewhere in his budget, Cuomo proposes to cut $11.5 million in agricultural aid, which supports rural districts like the one I represent. 

The governor’s proposal provides $438.1 million to Consolidated Local Street and Highway Improvement Program (CHIPs) and $39.7 million to the Marchiselli Program to repair bridges, the rates from the previous year. His budget proposal offers another $100 million from his PAVE-NY and BRIDGE-NY. This, however, is not enough to repair the overall decline in our vast local infrastructure due to lack of state investment, and it pales in comparison to the billions being spent in downstate New York like the rebuild of the formerly named Tappan Zee Bridge, which cost about $4 billion. In last year’s budget, the governor offered $546 million to work on JFK Airport roads alone, and now he plans to give a $194 million subsidy to the highly mismanaged Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA). Upstate New Yorkers continually have to fund billions or forgo their share in windfall settlement money to support downstate infrastructure. The governor fails to see the gross inequity in funding for our region.

Our state and budget are not items the governor should use for his political gains. His flagrant use of the budget and state policy for his own means puts upstate New Yorkers at a disadvantage. I urge him to abandon this approach and really come to the table and listen to our proposals to make this a budget that will work for middle-income families, small businesses, and the many people relying on the state to make wise decisions with the programs and services we offer.              

Marc W. Butler (R,C,I, Ref–Newport) is a New York State Assemblyman for the 118th District, which encompasses parts of Oneida, Herkimer, and St. Lawrence counties, as well as all of Hamilton and Fulton counties. Contact him at butlerm@nyassembly.gov

Unfortunately, New York State has a habit of creating policies that punish businesses. In the past two years, business owners in New York have had to ingest several onerous mandates such as new wage orders, higher minimum wages, and a new paid family leave policy. 

Now the Department of Labor is considering another mandate, known as the “call-in pay” regulation that will, if adopted, place additional strain on affected businesses. In short, the “call-in pay” regulation would require employers to provide employees with a 14-day work schedule and, if there is deviation from that schedule, the employer must pay the employee “call-in pay.” The amount of “call-in pay” depends on when and how the worker’s schedule deviates. In some cases, an employer would be required to be pay an employee four hours at minimum wage.

The intention of this proposed regulation is to address challenges some workers face with erratic work schedules. Unfortunately, as is too often the case, the proposed regulation instead of taking a reasonable approach to address the issue, takes a one-size-fits-all approach and fails to balance the interest of the employee and the employer.

While this mandate will have a substantial impact on all businesses effected, its impact will be significantly negative for small businesses. While national chains and big-box stores have thousands of employees, small businesses operate with far fewer employees. An employee calling in sick for a national retail store will cause less disruption and scheduling issues than an employee calling in sick at a small business that employs less than 10 individuals. Presumably, in this type of situation, the small-business owner would either have to cover the shift himself or call in another employee to fill the shift. Under the proposed regulations, if an employee was called in to cover the shift as described above, the employer would have to pay the employee the additional call-in rate along with his regular wage. Penalizing a business for scheduling issues beyond its control is excessively punitive.

Secondly, it is unclear why the Department of Labor has settled on mandating a 14-day schedule as opposed to a shorter period. In today’s business world, circumstances can change quickly. Orders can come in, be filled and be out the door to customers in less than a day. On the other hand, customers have more options and years of loyalty to a supplier is no longer the reality. Penalizing an employer for his or her inability to predict work flow 14 days in advance illustrates that the Department of Labor does not understand how modern business works. A more balanced workable approach would be a shorter time-period.

Finally, the proposed regulations fail to provide an exemption for weather-dependent businesses. What happens if, within the 14-day scheduling period, weather plays a role in the employer’s ability to provide a service? For example, what if there is no snow for a snow-removal company to plow. Would the company still have to provide call-in pay for the employees whose work schedule was canceled? Again, the proposed regulations are divorced from how business works and at the very least, weather-dependent businesses should be exempted from the regulations.

These proposed regulations have yet to be adopted by the New York State Department of Labor. I and other legislators have written to the department expressing our concerns over the regulations. It’s my hope that the agency listens to our concerns and at the very least amends the regulations to better match the realities of today’s business. If the Department of Labor goes ahead and adopts the regulations as proposed, I would look to work with my legislative colleagues, to enact legislation that would overturn the department’s adoption of the call-in pay regulations.

William (Will) A. Barclay is the Republican representative of the 120th New York Assembly District, which encompasses most of Oswego County, including the cities of Oswego and Fulton, as well as the town of Lysander in Onondaga County and town of Ellisburg in Jefferson County. Contact him at barclaw@assembly.state.ny.us, or (315) 598-5185.