ALBANY — A bill that would prevent the most-reckless drivers from speeding — which supporters see as the crown jewel of this year's legislative session — easily moved forward on Tuesday. But that doesn't mean its passage is assured.
The so-called Stop Super Speeders bill (S4045B) passed the Senate Transportation Committee with just two "no" votes (both from upstate Republicans) out of 13, giving boosters reason to cheer.
“I know that ... our members recognize that this will go a long way to helping people in New York stay safe on our streets,” said Sen. Jeremy Cooney (D-Monroe).
The vote came after its sponsor Sen. Andrew Gounardes (D-Bay Ridge) showed up to lobby his colleagues on its behalf. (Watch the relevant portion here.) He made his standard pitch: The bill, which requires a speed-limiting device to be installed in the cars of motorists with six or more camera-issued speeding tickets in 12 months, is better than license suspension because everyone knows that drivers in a car-dependent state like ours will still drive even if their license is suspended.
And even with the speed device, the driver can still get wherever he needs to get.
“This is really meant to crack down on the extremely reckless drivers for whom no other existing penalty in our laws seem to be a deterrent to their reckless behavior,” Gounardes said, “I'm not talking about five tickets or four. I'm talking about 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 speeding tickets.”
He also had an argument for suburban lawmakers who argue that government should be small when it comes to street safety: the bill is modeled on ignition lock devices that are ordered for convicted drunk drivers. Plus, people who "need" their car will still have full access to it. They just can't drive recklessly, he said.
“People say, ‘Oh, you can't take away our car. We need it for family purposes,’" Gounardes said. "Well, if you can't operate the vehicle safely, we're going to force you to operate the vehicle safely if you have a history of being extremely reckless.”
The bill will save lives: In March, Miriam Yarimi, who had a history of speeding, drove at twice the speed limit on Ocean Parkway before crashing into and killing Natasha Saada and two of her children as they crossed the street. If the bill had been in place, Yarimi would have had a speed-limiter in her Audi. She had, after all, been driving on a suspended license.
The Assembly Transportation Committee has yet to take up the measure. That chamber's sponsor, Emily Gallagher (D-Greenpoint), said she's heard objections from some colleagues who are concerned about the cost of the speed-limiting device as well as the personal biases of upstate judges.
"[They're] thinking about what these judges do in these rural areas, because that's where a lot of people get speeding tickets," Gallagher said. "[Or that] having to pay for the interlock device can sometimes ruin people's life because they end up in debt."
Of course, provisions in the bill allow for the cost of installing the speed limiter to be waived in cases of hardship.
Gallagher has her work cut out for her (and not only because the Assembly is so much larger and, therefore, requires more people to convince. She also has to persuade a lot of upstaters who are very dependent on cars.
In those cases, she reminds them that speeding doesn’t just kill pedestrians but also kills motorists, including passengers, on all kinds of roads in the state (including those "quiet" country lanes).
“Showing that there's a wide variety of folks from different kinds of environments,” she said, “has an impact on sending that signal that people want to see this bill implemented.”
The bill won't pass without the support of Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, who has not spoken about it. But Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins broke her silence about the bill under questioning from Streetsblog.
We wanted to know if Stewart-Cousins shared the bias of many drivers — and virtually all of our elected officials are themselves drivers — who believe that six camera-issued tickets in any 12-month period is not that many. Even the Assembly member who represents the district where the Saada family lived says stuff like that.
Fortunately, Stewart-Cousins doesn't agree.
“If you've been given six tickets, I think that says something about how you’re driving," she said, promising to discuss the bill with her members "in conference" because "we are certainly focused on safety.”
When ASC says "in conference," she means the closed-door discussions held by the Senate majority and minority to discuss pending legislation. Last year, New York Focus published a story about a select group of Democratic senators who decide the fate of many bills outside of the committee process.
Amy’s Albany Addenda
Here's a bill we'll be watching ... again.
Gounardes and his Assembly colleagues Jeffrey Dinowitz (D-Bronx) and Linda Rosenthal (D-Manhattan) have re-intro'd the Rider Representation Act (S1148/A1162) to give riders more say in how the MTA operates.
The bill would give voting rights to the three existing rider representatives on the MTA board while also allowing their attendance to count towards a quorum. It would also provide voting representation to an advocate for people with disabilities.
The quorum issue is no small thing: of 62 MTA committee meetings in 2024, 10 failed to achieve a quorum. If this bill had been passed, quorums would have been reached.
In a statement, Gounardes said the bill “gives New Yorkers a real say in the transit system they depend on.”
The legislature has been trying to pass this bill since 2019.
