Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
AGENCY TESTIMONY
Discussion of proposed legislation and recommendations
0:34:03
·
4 min
Commissioner Aggarwala discusses the proposed legislation (Intros 5, 291, 747, and 941) and offers recommendations for improvements to the Citizens Air Complaint Program.
- Supports the intent of all four bills being heard
- Recommends specific changes to enhance the program:
- Intro 5: Suggests discussing ideas to encourage broader participation beyond translation
- Intro 941: Emphasizes the importance of the cure provision and recommends a flat rate bounty system
- Intro 291: Proposes raising the maximum fine to $10,000 for companies with significant repeat offenses
- Intro 747: Recommends aligning language with Intro 941 for consistency
- Cautions against creating a financial lobby that prioritizes summonses over air quality improvement
- Emphasizes the need for balance between financial incentives and program effectiveness
Rohit T. Aggarwala
0:34:03
We fully support the intent of the 4 bills being heard.
0:34:07
We do want to recommend a few specific changes that we believe are consistent with the objectives of these bills and would further enhance the program.
0:34:15
Intro 5 requires that the Citizens Air complaint portal be translated into the designated city wide languages.
0:34:21
We encourage New Yorkers of all backgrounds to participate in the complaint program.
0:34:26
Currently, the portal has instructions and translations in all of the designated citywide languages.
0:34:32
We welcome a discussion of ideas to encourage broader participation.
0:34:36
Intro 941 addresses many of the shortcomings of the current program that I have described.
0:34:42
We have discussed the need for these changes at previous hearings and are grateful for the chair for his leadership on this.
0:34:48
I'd particularly like to stress again the importance of the cure provision this bill would create.
0:34:53
This bill delivers on the idea that air quality not fines or bounties, is the purpose behind this program.
0:34:59
A truck that is retrofitted because of the summons issued in Manhattan will improve air quality everywhere it travels in the city.
0:35:07
Regarding the bounty, Intro 941 cuts the current percentages in half.
0:35:12
As I mentioned, we would instead recommend fixing the bounty at $100 for a DEP pursuit claim and a $150 for a self pursuit claim.
0:35:21
Interim 941 also authorizes DEP to create a code of conduct for participation in the program.
0:35:27
We think the bill language should be amended to reflect that a complainant for the Sorry, to reflect that a complainant would be disciplined for the same reasons as we would discipline a DEP air noise inspector.
0:35:42
That is submitting fraudulent or falsified evidence abusing or harassing city staff, or intimidating harassing or threatening individuals in connection with a citizen complaint.
0:35:54
Intro 291 would raise fines for idling violations, which is consistent with this administration's policy as stated in Plan YC.
0:36:02
In fact, we would like to propose raising the maximum even higher to $10,000 for companies that receive significant numbers of repeat offenses in a year, companies as we have seen like Verizon and Con Ed.
0:36:15
This would require assigning repeat violations to companies instead of individual trucks.
0:36:21
Additionally, as I noted earlier, we cannot support intro 291 unless other important changes to the program are addressed.
0:36:28
And so we ask the council to consider these bills as a packaged past together.
0:36:34
Intro 747 extends some of these citizen idling citizen complaint program changes to the noise citizen complaint program.
0:36:42
Consistent with what I said about intro 941, we support the overall idea, but would recommend changing the bill to establish a clear and high standard for discipline, and that the language of intro 747 should be brought into alignment with what is finalized for intro 941.
0:37:00
Both the genius and the challenge with the civilian complaint program is that it creates a clear financial incentive for people to issue complaints.
0:37:10
More than 2500 New Yorkers have participated in this program since its inception.
0:37:16
The vast majority seem to be driven largely by the desire to improve air quality.
0:37:22
A small group, however, have turned this into what one participant described as a, quote, lucrative side hustle, unquote.
0:37:30
I have no problem with people making money from doing the work to submit evidence of idling.
0:37:35
But this law has created a lobby.
0:37:37
That has a direct financial stake in more summonses being issued, but not a direct financial stake in improving air quality.
0:37:47
I encourage you to treat these viewpoints with the same skepticism you would treat of any lobbyists seeking to prevent the reform of a government program from which their client makes millions.
0:37:59
I want to reiterate my and my colleagues thanks to Chair General and the Committee for your attention to these programs.
0:38:05
I recognize that the bills being heard today include many of the ideas that we discussed during the noise enforcement hearing last fall.
0:38:13
The council's partnership on these is critical to maximizing the effectiveness of these citizen enforcement programs.
0:38:19
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify.
0:38:22
My colleagues and I are happy to answer any questions that you have.