Andrew Cuomo, Democrat Party candidate for Governor

Andrew Cuomo, Democrat Party candidate for Governor
 Responses to NY Immigration Coalition and NY Media Alliance Questionnaire

1) GENERAL What is your greatest accomplishment that has helped immigrants, and
what are your top three policy priorities for New York’s immigrant communities if
you are elected Governor?

We are a nation of immigrants and many of our forefathers and mothers came through Ellis
Island in the hope and promise of a new beginning. It is critically important that we not allow
the exploitation of immigrant communities. We must continue to fight immigration fraud, like
those individuals and companies who exploit and target vulnerable immigrants by providing
unauthorized and fraudulent immigration services. Moreover, we must continue to make sure
that these communities do not face discrimination and receive fair wages and a safe workplace.
As Attorney General, I’ve vigilantly pursued cases to help our State’s diverse immigrant
communities and as Governor I will continue to fight for the rights of our diverse communities
across the State. Some of my priorities are discussed below.

Prosecuting Immigration Services Fraud

I’ve combated scams that target New York’s immigrant communities. I am prosecuting and
have shut down individuals and companies who target immigrant communities with false
promises of residency and citizenship or provide services without having the legal authority to
do so. Specifically:

   •   In August 2010, my office shut down seven companies and their owners for providing
       fraudulent immigration services: (1) Centro Santa Ana, Inc. and Ana Lucia Baquero, in
       Queens; (2) Margo’s Immigration Services and Margarita Davidov a/k/a Margo Davidov,
       in Queens; (3) Miguel Fittipaldi, J.D., Ltd. and Miguel Fittipaldi, in Manhattan; (4) Arthur
       C. Hurwitz, in Manhattan; (5) Oficina Legal Para Hispanos, P.C. and Geoffrey S. Stewart,
       in Manhattan; (6) Asilos and Camilo Perdomo, in Queens; and (7) Mision Hispana, Inc.
       and Mayra Liz, in Queens. The owners of these companies are permanently barred from
       operating any immigration services businesses and must collectively pay $370,000 in
       damages to victims.

   •    In August 2010, my office sued four companies that allegedly have been illegally
       providing unauthorized legal services to immigrants. These companies – Inmigración
       Hoy, Inmigración Hoy News Today, Forensic Immigration Law, and Inmigración
       Accounting Service, which are all controlled by Edwin Rivera in the Bronx – all offered
       legal counsel to immigrants without being licensed attorneys or having the proper
       accreditation. In thousands of cases across New York City and Long Island, these
       companies gave unlicensed legal advice and unlawfully filed immigration petitions with
       the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services on behalf of immigrants and
       their families, jeopardizing their efforts to achieve legal status. Further, the companies
       failed to provide consumers with written contracts in both the consumer’s native
       language and English, as required by law. The matter is pending in State Supreme Court.

•   In July 2010, my office obtained a judgment of over $6.25 million against Immigration
    Community Service Corporation and its owner Vincent I. Gonzalez of Manhattan for
    engaging in the unauthorized practice of the law and defrauding thousands of
    immigrants who used their services for filing immigration applications with the federal
    government.

•   In June 2010, we sued several organizations and their principals - Chay Pa Lou
    Community Center, Inc.; Delegue Tax Consultant, Inc.; Jean Michel; Rincher’s Bookstore
    a/k/a Rincher Associates, Inc. a/k/a Rincher Associates & Bookstore a/k/a Rincher’s
    Multi Services; Haitian American Entrepreneur’s Group, LLC a/k/a Delrin Associates,
    LLC; Deslande Rincher a/k/a Dislande Rincher; and Sharlene M. Seixas-Rincher - for
    defrauding Haitian nationals of thousands of dollars by illegally providing immigration
    services they were not authorized to provide and by misrepresenting a new law that
    granted special status to certain immigrants. These organizations targeted Haitian
    nationals who were recently affected by the devastating January 2010 earthquake in
    Haiti. The cases are pending in State Supreme Court.

•    In April 2010, my office shut down American Immigrants Federation for defrauding
    immigrants with false promises of citizenship, engaging in the unauthorized practice of
    law, and illegally charging exorbitant fees for services. The organization, its president
    Estela Figueredo, and its affiliates had to shut down all of their operations and pay $1.2
    million for restitution to victims.

•   In March 2010, my office obtained a $3 million court judgment against a Queens County
    individual, Miriam Hernandez, for defrauding immigrants by claiming that she could
    help them gain citizenship.

•   In January 2010, we sued and obtained a temporary restraining order against
    International Immigrants Foundation, International Professional Association, and their
    President Edward Juarez for engaging in fraud and the unauthorized practice of law.
    The Court’s order freezes the organizations’ assets and restricts them from providing
    any immigration legal services.

•   In August 2009, my office shut down three companies - Immigration Solutions and
    Systems, Inc. and its owner Mary DiSerio of Manhattan; Alisandra Multiservices, Inc. and
    its owner Sandra A. Peguero of Brentwood, Long Island; and All Immigration Services
    and its owners Ruth A. Shalom and Isaac Shalom of Great Neck, Long Island - for
    providing unauthorized and fraudulent legal services to immigrant communities and
    required them to pay full restitution to all victims. The companies were required to pay
    more than $100,000 in penalties and were permanently prohibited from operating
    immigration services businesses.

•   In August 2009, we sued Professional Solutions Consultants (d/b/a Reliable Clerical
    Services and Reliable Immigration Services) and its owner Clover A. Perez, located in

Queens, for providing unauthorized and fraudulent legal services to immigrant
       communities and is seeking injunctive relief, restitution, and penalties.

Stopping Tenant Harassment

In addition, we entered into a settlement with Vantage Properties (“Vantage”), a major New
York City landlord stopping the company from serving tenants with baseless legal notices and
from commencing frivolous Housing Court eviction proceedings. Under the settlement, Vantage
must pay a total of $1 million to resolve the investigation. Specifically, Vantage must pay
$750,000 in damages to tenants who can demonstrate that they unjustly vacated their
apartments or were subject to frivolous Housing Court proceedings. Vantage must pay an
additional $250,000 to not-for-profit organizations that provide free legal and educational
services to tenants.

To ensure proper protections to tenants in the future, Vantage is also required to comply with
the Rent Stabilization Code and other laws, as well as implement new policies related to
processing complaints, initiating legal proceedings, collecting rent, and establishing succession
rights. All residents will receive a notice informing them of the policy changes. These new
reforms will set a new best practices standard in the industry.

Requiring Pharmacies to Provide Free Prescription Drug Information

As Attorney General, I reached settlement agreements with Wal-Mart and Target, the two
largest retail chain stores in the United States; CVS, Rite-Aid and Duane Reade, three of the
largest pharmacy chain stores in New York City; and Costco Wholesale Corporation, the largest
wholesale club operator in the country, agreed to provide New York customers with
prescription medication instructions in their primary language. In addition, A & P, one of the
largest supermarkets on the East Coast operating Pathmark, Super Fresh, and Food Emporium
among others, also entered into the same agreement. Under the terms of these agreements, the
companies will counsel all pharmacy customers about prescription information in their own
language and provide written translations in Spanish, Chinese, Italian, Russian, and French.

There are over one million people in New York who don’t speak English as their first language,
and this agreement will ensure they have the medical information needed to protect their
health and well-being and that of their families. New York is defined by its diverse population,
and it is our job to make sure that every member of that population, whether English is their
first language or not, has access to adequate assistance in understanding their medication.

My office’s agreements affect more than 2,450 stores statewide and require pharmacies to:
   • Identify whether a customer needs assistance in understanding their prescription
       medication;
   • Inform customers of their right to free assistance in reading and understanding their
       prescription medication;
   • Provide prescription labels and directions regarding dosage and safety information in
       the six languages that are spoken by more than one percent of the population of New
       York;
   • Provide additional assistance orally in all languages; and

•   Ensure that pharmacy staff counsel customers about their prescription medication in
       the customer’s own language

2) EDUCATION

   a) Drop in test scores. According to a recent report by Educational Testing
      Service, English proficiency rate dropped to 42% from 69%, and Math to 54%
      from 82% in the past academic year in NYC. Black, Latino and ELLs students
      are disproportionately affected by this change. What specific actions would
      you take to ensure that New York makes real gains for minority and
      immigrant students, and finally close the racial gap in education?

The National Center for Educational Progress, a division of the U.S. Department of Education,
conducts biennial surveys of the basic educational competencies of 4th and 8th graders across
the nation. The comparative reading levels of New York State’s 4th and 8th graders from the
2009 NEAP survey reflect disparities according to race and income.
Similarly, high school graduation rates for minorities lag well behind the rates achieved by
white students. In New York City, the 2009 high school graduation rate was 59 percent in city
high schools, representing an overall increase from previous years. However, the achievement
gap between black and Latino students and their white peers remained vast, at 20 and 22
percentage points, respectively.

Finally, while students are enrolling in community colleges in record numbers, most do not
secure credentials that will prepare them for the realities of today’s job markets. The U.S.
Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System indicates that
public 2-year institutions produce only a 32 percent graduation rate. Studies also show 62
percent of working learners (adult employees who study) have not completed a degree or
certificate 6 years after beginning their postsecondary education, and were no longer enrolled.
These statistics have a pronounced impact on minority populations, given the high percentage
of minority students enrolled at community colleges and trade schools rather than at four-year
colleges.

The State must create a special focus on our most at-risk youths, particularly those in
underserved communities, in order to reduce drop-out rates, encourage the pursuit of post-
secondary education and training, and provide work-readiness skills and training. There are a
number of programs employed within the State and across the nation that have demonstrated
success in achieving these goals and the State must focus its investments on these proven
models.

I will seek to create dual enrollment programs that allow high school students to enroll in
courses at community colleges with a goal of increasing postsecondary access and success,
particularly for minority and low-income students. These dual-enrollment programs are
employed with great success and varying degrees of emphasis in 40 states across the nation, as
well as in the CUNY system. In fact, in many states across the nation, the focus on dual-
enrollment programming has evolved into such an essential educational tool that every high
school student within the state is given the opportunity to participate. CUNY’s dual enrollment
program, College Now— a collaboration among all 17 CUNY campuses and 240 of New York
City’s 425 public high schools. Serving more 32,000 students each year, or 11.1 percent of all of
New York City’s high school student population, it is the largest public urban dual enrollment
program in the country. The 32,000 students who participated in College Now in 2004–2005
enrolled in close to 56,000 different courses, workshops, or activities, and 80 percent of those
students achieved a grade of C or higher in their credit-bearing classes. CUNY data also
demonstrates that College Now alumni have higher rates of first-year retention in college. I will
seek to expand the College Now model to the SUNY system in other parts of the State.

Under the NYS Liberty Partnerships Program (“LPP”), State funding supports collaborative
youth development programs between participating colleges and universities and the schools
in their communities to provide academic and social support services to students at-risk for
dropping out. Currently there are 57 individual LPP programs that collectively serve
approximately 12,000 students each year. Students who are identified as a high drop-out risk
are referred to LPP by their schools, and while the vast majority of participating students are in
high school, younger at-risk students who are deemed to be in need of intervention are also
served. LPP programming focuses on academic immersion, career counseling, and parent
participation.

Since 2002, State budget allocations for the LPP have ranged from $10.9 million to $12.6
million annually, with State funding for 2009-2010 at $11.8 million. These investments have
produced well-documented and extremely positive outcomes. For example, during the 2006-
2007 school year, the drop-out rate for LPP participants was only 0.8 percent, while the
graduation rate was 82.3 percent. Moreover, of those 2007 LPP high school graduates, 89
percent were college or career-bound, and 80 percent were planning to attend college in New
York State. Over 65 percent of LPP participants were either African American or Hispanic, and
6 percent were Native American.

Development of a similar work-readiness program is also underway as an initiative of the New
York State Greater Capital Regions Workforce Investment Boards in recognition of their need
to establish standardized work-readiness criteria to support regional workforce initiatives.
This program will address basic workplace needs in the areas of attendance, appearance,
communication and customer service skills, as well as general work skills such as computer
literacy and basic math.

I recognize the significant value that these mentoring programs can provide to youth in
underserved communities and will seek to fortify the public-private partnerships that are
critical to program delivery and success. As with the youth work-readiness initiative currently
underway in the NYS Greater Capital Regions Workforce Investment Boards, the Regional
Economic Councils can serve as key facilitators in bringing youth and the business community
together in programs that will bolster skills and enhance the work-readiness of our youth.

Other valuable tools in bridging the achievement gap for students are the investments being
made in Expanded Learning Opportunities (“ELOs”). ELOs typically take two forms: Afterschool
Programs and Community Schools, both of which focus on providing supportive educational
and enrichment services to youth and their families with the goal of enhancing literacy and
academic performance, health and well-being, and skills development.

After School Programs (“ASPs”) serve as a natural extension of the school day and can, when
properly structured, reinforce and complement classroom lessons. Each year, more than $700
million in local, state and federal funds are invested in New York’s afterschool programs. In
2009, more than 644,000 students- or 21 percent of the State’s three million school-age
children- were served by an ASP in a variety of school buildings, community centers, YMCAs,
and religious facilities. According to a comprehensive study undertaken by the national
Afterschool Alliance, another 1.2 million New York students would participate if an ASP existed
in their community. Despite the value of ASPs, the State’s budget crisis has led to significant
cuts in State ASP funding. For example, the State’s 2009-2010 Deficit Reduction Plan cuts,
coupled with funding reductions in the 2010-2011 State Budget, resulted in a reduction of State
allocations to the Advantage Afterschool program from $30.5 million to its current funding
level of $22.6 million.

Community schools initiatives are a significantly more enhanced version of the ASP model. Also
operating out of school facilities and community centers, Community Schools join together the
public school system with community-based organizations to implement a curriculum that is
focused on building stronger communities through both youth and adult programming.
Community Schools are typically open year-round, after school and on weekends. In its
simplest terms, Community Schools operate as full-scale community centers. In addition to
providing formalized education supports and health services, Community Schools often
provide a wide range of recreational and cultural programming, as well as ESOL, literacy, work-
readiness, housing assistance and parenting workshops. Many of the country’s high-performing
Community Schools are located in New York City.

At the present time, the 21st Century Community Learning Centers (“21st CCLC”) funding,
which supports programming specifically for students in high-poverty, low-performing
schools, is the sole federal funding source targeted exclusively to ASP and Community Schools
programming, and provides a key resource in support of the State’s ASP and Community
Schools activities. In 2010, New York received $99 million in 21st CCLC grant funding which
will serve over 99,000 students and tens of thousands of adults in communities across the
State.

I recognize the transformative value that Afterschool Programs and Community Schools can
have for youth and their families in our most underserved communities. In addition to ensuring
more rigorous accountability and performance-based standards for State-funded programs,
and will work with the Obama Administration and our Congressional delegation to expand
federal resources to support ASP and Community Schools programming.

b) Race to the Top. New York has recently won $700 million as part of the Race to
      the Top federal education initiative. Secretary Arne Duncan says that this
      funding is a “game changer” for disadvantage students. How will you ensure
      that ELLs, Black and Latino students, who are our State’s most disadvantaged,
      are a priority for this funding? What percentage of this funding will go
      towards addressing the educational needs of this population?

Race to the Top/ELL Students

As a supporter of charter schools I understand how important it is to retain high standards and
strong accountability. Charter schools that fail to perform at the levels promised at the time the
charter school application was granted should be closed. I support provisions that will require
charter schools to increase their enrollment of special education and ELL students—so that
they are comparable to levels of neighboring schools.

3) HEALTH CARE

Access and Affordability. Noncitizens are three times more likely to lack insurance
than citizens. The recent closings of hospitals and clinics across New York City,
exacerbating the shortage of primary health care facilities in our most vulnerable
neighborhoods, as well as the exclusion of hundreds of thousands of immigrant New
Yorkers in the national health care reform create enormous barriers to adequate
and affordable health care for immigrants. What will you do to ensure the basic need
of health care is more accessible to immigrant communities, and how will you ensure
adequate support for safety-net facilities?

Access to affordable health care coverage is one of the greatest needs of people in underserved
communities. In 2009, approximately 2.7 million people in New York were uninsured. Most of
these uninsured New Yorkers are in working families and a large percentage of them live in the
underserved areas. But insurance coverage alone will not translate into access to health care if
there are not health care providers in the neighborhoods in which these underserved people
reside. New York State needs to embrace a comprehensive approach to expanding access to
care, including expanding the number of providers of primary care and ensuring that true
“safety net” institutions remain available to underserved communities.

Expanding access to primary care is essential both because it improves health outcomes and
because it is the most cost-effective form of care in most cases. Indeed, one of the reasons New
York’s health care spending is so much greater than other parts of the country is that we spend
far more than the average on expensive specialists and hospitalizations rather than on more
cost effective primary care. New York currently ranks 12th worst among states in
hospitalizations for conditions that generally are avoidable with effective primary care. Within
New York State, counties that have a higher proportion of primary care providers have
significantly lower hospital and emergency department use, as well as fewer surgeries, than the
statewide average.

In many cases, primary care services are often just unavailable. By one estimate, more than five
million people in New York State lack “ready access” to primary care today. All too often, then,
New Yorkers have no choice but to go to the emergency department of a hospital when more
appropriate and less expensive care could be obtained through a primary care doctor. As many
as 40 percent of emergency room visits do not involve a medical emergency that requires the
type of care that only an emergency department can provide. This amounts to nearly two
million unnecessary emergency room visits in New York State each year. Money saved from
eliminating this unnecessary care can be used not only for providing less expensive but equally
effective health care services.

With an estimated 1.2 million New Yorkers expected to become newly insured due to Federal
Health Reform, the problem of an insufficient number of primary care providers is likely to get
worse. Both the current lack of access to primary care and the dramatic increase in the number
of insured New Yorkers under Federal Health Reform necessitate a significant effort by the
State to expand access to primary care in New York. We must also educate the public on the
importance of primary care, so when it is available New Yorkers will use it. The New York
primary care system has been broken for so long that people assume the emergency
department is the place to receive primary care.

Federal Health Reform recognizes the central role of primary care in controlling costs and
improving outcomes and makes significant new resources available to both states and
providers to expand the use of primary care facilities. New York should aggressively take
advantage of these programs to create new centers, expand the availability of care at existing
centers (for example, through extended hours of operation), and expand the range of services
available at each center.

Two of the most promising models for delivering primary care are Community Health Centers
and School Based Health Centers. Community Health Centers, in particular, have the potential
to play a critical role in the coordination of different types of care- including physical and
mental health services, while School-based Health Centers bring full-service primary care to
children inside the four walls of school facilities. Both models represent a plan for coordination
of care as a central strategy in improving health care quality and controlling costs.

In New York, fifty Community Health Centers - often known by the technical name federally
qualified health centers (“FQHCs”) are already operating and serve 1.3 million patients at 508
sites. Most of these centers provide high quality care in a cost effective way. These centers also
serve an important role as local employers in the communities they serve. For example, the
Greater Hudson Valley Family Health Center serves more than 17,000 patients in the greater
Newburgh region, and continues to grow. As a result, it has created and filled thirty new jobs in
all areas of its organization since the beginning of this year. It expects to add up to twenty more
positions over the next two years, in the health professions, patient services, information
technology, facilities maintenance, and health care administration based on the anticipated
need for expanded services and locations.

Federal Health Reform establishes a Community Health Center Fund that will help support the
operations existing FQHCs and promote the overall expansion of New York’s FQHCs system.
Between 2011 and 2015, $9.5 billion will be available to the State for base grant adjustments,
expanded medical capacity and service expansions, new centers, new sites for existing centers,

and enabling services. Additional funds will be available for the National Health Services Corps,
which will help increase the number of health care professionals in areas that generally suffer
shortages. It is estimated that these funds will add 15,000 providers and serve 20 million new
patients nationally. The amount of new funding that will be coming to New York will be
determined in part by a competitive bidding process. It is essential that New York aggressively
pursues this new funding and works with providers to help them apply directly for funds as
well in order to maximize the availability of the services provided by these facilities,
particularly in our underserved communities.

School-Based Health Centers (“SBHCs”) are another valuable tool for providing primary care,
especially to adolescents. SBHCs provide comprehensive, on-site primary and preventative
care services to pre-school and school age children inside the four walls of participating school
facilities, and operate like full-service doctor’s offices. The SBHC program was established more
than two decades ago to address the fact that many thousands of school age children across the
nation have limited access to comprehensive health services because of financial, geographical
and other barriers. In a school with an operating SBHC, health care services are provided on-
site through working partnerships with local hospital and/or community health center
sponsors, with the assistance of a multi-disciplinary team consisting of a mid-level practitioner,
a mental health counselor, and a medical assistant working in consultation with a physician.
The community health center or hospital sponsor not only provides service support within the
school, but also ensures 24 hour/7 day a week access to care to assure continuity of services
when school is closed.

By locating these full-service health clinics within the educational facilities where children and
youth spend the bulk of their days, SBHCs increase the accessibility and continuity of quality
primary and preventative physical and mental health care services, particularly in low-income,
high-risk communities where the need for such services is greatest. SBHC program services
include: comprehensive physical health and mental health assessments; diagnosis and
treatment of acute illnesses and chronic conditions (e.g. asthma); screenings (e.g., vision,
hearing, dental, nutrition, TB); mental health counseling and referrals; and immunizations.
SBHC services are available at no cost to all students, but provide a mechanism for accessing
Medicaid and third-party insurance reimbursement, where applicable, to enable most cost-
effective health care and program implementation. Research shows that students who are
regularly served by SBHC have significant decreases in absenteeism, fewer hospitalizations and
fewer trips to emergency rooms. Other studies have indicated that students with access to
SBHCs “experienced greater satisfaction with their health, more physical activity and greater
consumption of healthy food than students who did not use such centers,” as well as overall
improvements in both attendance and academic performance.

Research shows that students who are regularly served by SBHC have significant decreases in
absenteeism, fewer hospitalizations and fewer trips to emergency rooms. Other studies have
indicated that students with access to SBHCs “experienced greater satisfaction with their
health, more physical activity and greater consumption of healthy food than students who did
not use such centers,” as well as overall improvements in both attendance and academic
performance.

There are currently 222 SBHCs operating in New York State, 135 of which are located in New
York City. New York State funding of SBHCs has grown to an annual allocation of $24 million as

of 2009, with funding re-authorized by the legislature on an annual basis. There is significant
federal funding for SBHCs as well, with the Healthy Schools/Healthy Communities grant
program, administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (“HHS”) Bureau
of Primary Health Care, providing the largest source of federal funding to date, and will be
supplemented by additional funding supports to be provided through Federal Health Reform.

I recognize the importance of providing comprehensive primary and preventive care services
to our State’s most vulnerable youth populations, and believe that the State’s SBHCs programs
can be an integral part of that delivery system. To maximize their impact, SBHCs should
coordinate with other providers of primary care, including participating in interoperable
Regional Health Information Technology systems. I will work to maximize the impact of SBHCs
and fight for New York State’s fair share of federal funding that is dedicated to this important
health program.

Another key to ensuring access to quality care in underserved communities is to strengthen
access to truly essential “safety net institutions” that provide acute care services in
neighborhoods where there are few other health care alternatives. New York has seen a
significant number of hospital closures—both planned and unplanned—since 2006. For a
variety of reasons, including reduced reimbursement rates from government, sharp pricing
from private insurers and often an excessive debt burden, many of New York’s hospitals and
other providers continue to be at risk of closure. The State will not be able to save all such
institutions given its current fiscal condition, nor would it be the best way to ensure access to
quality health care to do so. But there are other, truly essential safety net institutions that must
be preserved. The State must work with the entire health care system to find new ways to offer
operational and financial assistance to institutions the loss of which would seriously weaken
the health care safety net.

The State needs to enter into a careful and data-driven process to determine which health care
facilities institutions provide services that cannot be adequately provided by other hospitals or
facilities in the geographic area. The State should work with all stakeholders, including the
federal government in its role as a major provider of health care reimbursement, commercial
insurance carriers and other health care providers, to develop a proactive strategy to preserve
those safety net institutions that are providing essential care that could not be effectively
replaced if the institution were not to survive. These essential institutions would still have to
be accountable for their financial and management performance.

The State will have to resist the political pressure to apply this special treatment to all
institutions that face closure due to financial circumstances. The State cannot afford to
guarantee the continued existence of every institution. But through good planning and a
transparent process, the State can ensure that essential safety net institutions are kept open
while maintaining financial accountability within the health care system. In addition, the State
must provide technical assistance to these essential institutions and other safety net facilities
to ensure that they can meet the new federal quality standards needed to receive the highest
level of federal reimbursement.

Both Federal Health Reform and state health reform initiatives demand new capital in order for
providers to move from inpatient based care to outpatient and community based primary care.
Many hospitals and other institutions in underserved communities lack the financial

wherewithal to make these investments. Access to capital for healthcare providers in New York
generally is at a critical juncture. I will create a dedicated task force of investment experts,
private lenders, providers, government leaders and other stakeholders to explore new ideas for
expanding access to capital for health care institutions, with a special focus on essential safety
net institutions. The task force will explore enhancing and expanding current tax exempt
capital financing programs, finding ways to bridge the gaps in access to small and medium size
loans, and policies related to federal FHA mortgage insurance programs. If we fail to help these
institutions keep up with changes encouraged by Federal Health Reform—both by providing
technical assistance and expanding access to capital, then health reform will simply expand the
gap between the “haves” and the “have nots” for both patients and providers.

4) HOUSING

a) Mandatory Foreclosure Settlement Conference. Immigrant communities in parts
of New York City have been “ground zero” for the foreclosure crisis. The 2008 NYS
Mandatory Foreclosure Settlement Conference law has failed to help homeowners
keep their homes. In fact, of the 795 conferences that occurred between June and
July 2009 only 1.5% resulted in settlements. What steps will you take to make
certain that mortgage companies comply with this law?

The extent of the foreclosure crisis nationally is well known. As of the beginning of this year, it
was estimated that one in seven borrowers was behind in their mortgage payments and one in
four homeowners with a mortgage owed more than their home was worth. New York is not
immune from the foreclosure crisis. Over 50,000 homeowners in New York State faced
foreclosure in 2009. Although the foreclosure rate has leveled off somewhat in 2010, it remains
nearly double pre-crisis rates. The New York State Banking Department reports that, between
February and October of 2010, 134,000 90-day pre-foreclosure notices were mailed to
borrowers with mortgages on owner-occupied 1-to-4 family residential properties in New
York. In addition to the devastation that foreclosure often brings to the lives of individual
homeowners, these high foreclosure rates threaten devalue whole neighborhoods. The State
must take aggressive action to seek to prevent foreclosures where another remedy is possible
and to mitigate the effects of foreclosures on the broader community.

Recent reports indicate that mortgage servicers in New York State have engaged in the
widespread practice of “robo-signing” foreclosure-related documents. Employees of numerous
mortgage companies have acknowledged filing false affidavits that serve as the basis for home
foreclosures by improperly verifying loan file information which they had never reviewed or
validated or by signing outside of the presence of a notary. The practice of robo-signing calls
into question the legitimacy of home foreclosures that have already occurred, as well as those
now pending.

As Attorney General, I took action to protect New York’s homeowners in response to this
discovery. I have launched an investigation into four major mortgage servicers and demanded
not only the production of records in connection with foreclosure filings made by those
servicers, but also the suspension of all foreclosure-related activities, including evictions and
foreclosure sales, by all companies that engage in robo-signing pending a thorough assessment
of the veracity of their foreclosure filing processes. As Governor, I will maintain this focus on

ensuring the integrity of the foreclosure practices of mortgage service companies to ensure
that the already serious impact of the foreclosure crisis in New York is not exacerbated by
fraudulent or negligent loan administration.

Support Foreclosure Prevention Services

During the height of the foreclosure crisis, the State made significant investments in the
Subprime Foreclosure Prevention Services program, with $25 million appropriated in 2008-09
and an additional $21.8 million appropriated in 2009-10. These monies are administered
through the NYS Housing Trust Fund Corporation (“HTFC”), a division of DHCR, with the bulk
of foreclosure prevention services being delivered through a network of non-profit partners
operating in every county in the State. In addition to those services, DHCR also provides
training and support services to counselors, mediators and attorneys that represent
homeowners with subprime or other unconventional mortgage instruments.
New York State must maintain a strong focus on helping people stay in their homes wherever
possible, including supporting cost-effective foreclosure prevention services. The State must
actively seek funding sources for foreclosure prevention services, including funding recently
made available by HUD, in order to provide both housing counseling and services designed to
help homeowners and renters better understand their financial capacity.

Aggressively Pursue Foreclosure Mitigation and Reclamation Strategies

New York State must also actively engage in foreclosure mitigation and reclamation strategies
to mitigate the impact of foreclosure on the surrounding communities. One important tool that
can be employed in the promotion of community revitalization goals in targeted metropolitan
areas hit hard by both real estate vacancies and foreclosure is the creation of land banks. The
purpose of a land bank is to assemble, manage, and dispose of vacant land in order to stabilize
neighborhoods and encourage re-use or redevelopment of urban property. Land banks acquire
and maintain this inventory of properties only for the short-term, until conveyance can be
made to non-profit entities for the development of affordable housing, mixed-income housing
or mixed-use development in support of well-defined economic development goals. Land banks
have long been used to address the problems of large numbers of vacant and abandoned
properties. Like properties subject to foreclosure, these properties represent a significant loss
of tax revenues due to tax delinquency and lead to the increase incidence of crime, the overall
deterioration of neighborhoods and the absence of new private investments in those areas. I
will push legislation to authorize the establishment of community-based land banks to
assemble, manage and dispose of vacant land in order to stabilize neighborhoods and
encourage re-use or redevelopment or urban property as part of a strategic plan. I will push
legislation to authorize the establishment of community-based land banks to assemble, manage
and dispose of vacant land in order to stabilize neighborhoods and encourage re-use or
redevelopment of urban property as part of a strategic plan.

b) Rent Regulation. High rent vacancy decontrol allows landlords to
          permanently deregulate rent-controlled and rent-stabilized apartments if
          the legal rent is $2,000 per month or higher. It is estimated that New York
          City and the suburban counties of Nassau, Westchester, and Rockland have
          lost at least 200,000 apartments to this decontrol mechanism. This has
          resulted in a loss of affordable housing and exposed tenants to abuse as the
          tenants in deregulated units have no rent or tenure protections. What role
          will you play as Governor to increase affordable housing? Will you support
          legislation to repeal vacancy decontrol?

Creation of Affordable Housing

New York has been a leader among the states in creating affordable housing, with direct capital
funding that averages more than $100 million annually, through State LIHTCs and by providing
insurance for affordable housing the State’s Mortgage Insurance Fund. Nevertheless, both State
and federal funding available to support housing is typically over-subscribed at a rate of up to
5-to-1. The consistent need for new affordable housing stock and the rehabilitation of existing
housing stock highlights the need for New York to maintain its commitment to the housing
sector. As Governor, I will ensure that New York maintains this leadership position.

Under the State’s Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program (“SLIHTC”), the Commissioner of
DHCR may award a credit of up to $750,000 per project for the construction of affordable
housing to serve households with incomes at or below 90 percent of the area median income.
This $750,000 credit is claimed over a period of ten years, amounting to a total tax credit value
of up to $7.5 million per project under the SLITHC. However, as a stop-gap measure to close
this year’s budget gap, the State took the extraordinary measure of deferring the payments of
tax credits to a wide range of businesses that had made decisions in reliance on receiving these
credits, including those issued under the SLIHTC. This deferral was the equivalent of borrowing
the amount due under these credits from these businesses, yet the State will pay no interest on
the monies deferred. The State must take steps to assure the businesses that this deferral will
not be extended again into the future. Moreover, when the State does pay businesses the funds
owed under these tax credits, it should include interest for the period of time the State has used
this money. Only in this way will New York be taken seriously when it offers to use tax
incentives as an incentive for the development of affordable housing.

Address the Growing Problem of Overleveraged Buildings by Using the Mortgage Insurance Fund
to Create and Support Affordable Housing

Prior to the 2008 crash, the real estate market in the New York City region saw an
unprecedented increase in property values and in the level of acquisition and rehabilitation
financing available to owners. As the market value of condominiums declined and the luxury
rental market retreated, many of the multi-family residential buildings that were financed or
refinanced prior to 2009 have become overleveraged as a result of low occupancy, as buyers
and renters have been unwilling to buy or rent at the prices needed to support the financing of

the buildings. In addition, many projects that contained affordable housing were purchased in
highly leveraged transactions by investors who expected to significantly increase rents over
time. Refinancing is effectively unavailable to the owners of these three different types of
“overleveraged” buildings. Many of these owners are struggling to avoid loan defaults and are
failing to maintain the upkeep of these buildings. As a result, the communities in which this
overleveraged housing is located face the deterioration of this housing with negative impacts
on the related retail and other community facilities located nearby.

Recent estimates suggest that as many as 70,000 units of multifamily housing in New York City
are carrying unsupportable levels of debt and are at risk of owners being unable or unwilling to
maintain their properties. Through the leadership of Assemblyman Hakeem Jefferies,
legislation was signed into law by that gives the State Mortgage Insurance Fund the authority
for the first time to provide credit insurance for the refinancing of loans that meet certain
criteria—including that the loan will preserve or create affordable housing units. This ability to
insure refinancing can potentially give the State a key role with overleveraged multifamily
housing, since it can facilitate a refinancing that reduces the amount of debt outstanding to a
level that recognizes the true, lower value of the property, thereby creating a capital structure
enables permit affordable rents to be charged.

The State should strategically use the Mortgage Insurance Fund’s ability to insure refinancing
to increase the stock of affordable housing and prevent the deterioration of neighborhoods that
can result from disinvestment in overleveraged buildings. As part of that strategy, the State
must work in tandem with bank regulatory agencies to encourage lenders to these
overleveraged buildings to participate in this kind of restructuring process. The State should
also seek to stretch the Mortgage Insurance Fund resources by getting the Federal government
to co-insure loans directly or through Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.

Due to the potential size of the problem of overleveraged buildings and the limited insurance
capacity of the Mortgage Insurance Fund, the State will have to be strategic when deciding
when to offer insurance refinancing. It will be important to coordinate with the City of New
York for projects to ensure that the new debt is at a sustainable level that will support
affordable housing operations and to concentrate on buildings or projects that are likely to
have a neighborhood-wide effect.

5) IMMIGRATION

   a) Immigration Reform. What specific actions will you take as Governor to fight
      for federal immigration reform on behalf of New York’s immigrant
      communities? Will you support any legislation – similar to the one adopted in
      Arizona – that empowers police in New York state to search people they
      suspect are undocumented immigrants?

   b) Pardon Panel. In May 2010 Governor David Paterson announced the creation
      of a “Pardon Panel” allowing his office to take a closer look at the cases of
      certain immigrants: those who may have pleaded guilty some time ago to a
      crime that at the time did not make them deportable; and those who were
      unaware of the immigration consequences of their guilty pleas or convictions,

but who have lived in the United States for many years and have demonstrated
       rehabilitation and positive contributions to the community and have had no
       further interactions with law enforcement. What will you do as Governor to
       ensure the continuity and strengthening of the pardon panel to help prevent
       the deportation of certain immigrants?

   c) Immigration Enforcement. In May 2010, the Paterson Administration entered
      into a memorandum of agreement with DHS to implement the “Secure
      Communities” program as a means to engage state and local law enforcement
      in immigration control. Even if no crime was committed or the arrest was
      based on racial profiling, individuals can have their immigration status
      checked at the point of arrest. As a result, thousands of New Yorkers may be
      put at risk for deportation. Will you end the state’s participation in this
      program?

The federal government is going to put out guidance on Secure Communities, and how they
believe the states have to follow the law. Obviously federal law would be the law and the
State would ultimately follow the federal law. I think the federal government has to be very
careful in Secure Communities, because you don’t want to create a situation where people
are afraid to report a crime, or afraid to testify, it could actually interfere with law
enforcement and with public safety, so I think the federal government should tread very
carefully.

6) IMMIGRANT SERVICES AND EQUAL ACCESS

   a) ESL Classes. 2.4 million New Yorkers are limited English proficient (LEP).
      Learning English is one of the primary ways for immigrants to integrate into
      our community and to earn a better living. An overwhelming majority of LEP
      individuals want to learn English but face a limited supply of affordable
      English classes—it is estimated that the number of available English classes
      only meets 5% of the need. What would you do to ensure that the supply of
      English classes meets the demand?

   b) Statewide Language Access and Confidentiality Policy. Good government is
      about meeting the service needs of all New Yorkers, including those not yet
      proficient in English. By ensuring effective communication with the public,
      New York State can dramatically improve the efficiency of state agencies and
      enhance the wellbeing of all New Yorkers. Would you support the enactment
      of a statewide language access policy that would allow all New Yorkers,
      regardless of their immigration status and English language abilities, to access
      government services and thereby bringing state agencies into compliance
      with existing federal language access obligations, similar to New York City’s
      Executive Order 120?

c) Legal Services. A shortage of quality, affordable immigration legal services is
      one of the most pressing concerns in immigrant communities. Immigrants and
      their family members could avoid turning to scam artists, notarios, and others
      engaged in the unauthorized practice of law if there were greater availability
      of competent, free or low-cost, nonprofit immigration legal service providers
      in New York. What would you do as Governor to increase funding for
      authorized, free or low-cost, nonprofit immigration legal service providers
      throughout New York?

Far too many adult New Yorkers lack basic English and/or literacy skills necessary to secure
employment or to advance within their current fields of employment. According to U.S. Census
data more than 2.6 million New Yorkers 25-and-older, or nearly 21 percent of the adult
population, lacked a high school or GED diploma as of 2000. Further, New York currently ranks
49th in the nation in terms of GED test pass rates. While some measure of the low pass rate is
attributable to New York’s atypical “no fee, no practice test required” open system of GED
testing which often draws test takers who are not yet test-ready, the core issue is the lack of
GED preparation programs and sites in place to meet the overwhelming need. Because these
preparatory programs are key to pass rates, and therefore to individual advancement, New
York must commit to evaluating both the funding and service delivery streams which could
drive critically necessary improvements in GED preparation programming throughout the
State.

Improving adult literacy is another key to advancement of many low-income New Yorkers.
According to the National Assessment of Adult Literacy (“NAAL”) prepared in 2003, 14.5
percent of working age people nationally were classified as Literacy Level 5, which is defined as
persons whose capabilities range from being “unable to read and understand any written
information in English to being able only to locate easily identifiable information in short,
commonplace prose text in English.” Notably the percentage of New Yorkers which fell into
Literacy Level 5 far exceeded the national average at 22 percent, with New York ranking 49th
overall in terms of states with the largest populations of Literacy Level 5 persons. It has been
estimated that, as of 2007, “for every ESOL classroom seat in New York State there are 20 adult
immigrant workers who need to improve their English skills.” Today, long waiting lists and/or
lottery systems for limited ESOL slots are not uncommon.

I will make expanding such ESOL and literacy programs a priority to better enable non-English
speakers to apply for citizenship and to obtain better jobs, higher wages and employer-
provided health benefits. As part of this effort, the State will promote investments in ESOL and
literacy programming in conjunction with on-the-job training programs. Specifically, the State
will require that a portion of its budget for these OJT programs be dedicated to the hiring of
persons needing additional literacy skills training, with such training being provided by the
participating employer as part of the overall job training commitment.

Moreover, I will work with the Congressional delegation to change the formula for federal
funding of ESOL and literacy programming under the authority of Title II of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (“WIA II”). WIA II funding disbursed to the states according to a need-
based formula. Notable, while all adults with limited English proficiency (“LEP”) are eligible to
participate in WIA II-funded programming, the disbursement formula counts only those LEP

adults within the State with education levels that are less than a high school diploma or its
equivalent. As a result, more than half of the nation’s LEP adults- or 11.2 million – are excluded
from the funding formula. New York has the third highest population of LEP adults in the
nation, and 59 percent of our 2,143,000 LEP adults have at least a high school diploma, and are
thus excluded from the WIA disbursement formula, even though they lack the English skills
they need to advance their employment opportunities.

7) WORKERS RIGHTS

   a) Workplace Violations. Immigrant workers are a significant part of New York’s
      economy, yet they are among the most vulnerable. Despite federal and state
      regulations, many employers frequently violate labor laws and pay workers
      less than the legal minimum wage and do not recognize overtime pay
      requirements. What protections would you put in place to lessen workplace
      violations for immigrants?

   b) Farmworker Fair Labor Practices Act. In New York State, farmworkers, who
      are mostly immigrants, have little workplace protection. What’s more, it has
      been over 10 years since any progress has been made on farmworker rights.
      In early August, Farmwork Fair Labor Practices Act, which would have
      afforded farmworkers overtime pay, an unpaid day off per week and collective
      bargaining rights, failed to pass the NYS Senate. Do you support this bill and if
      so, what would you do as Governor to ensure that it is passed early on in your
      administration?

As Attorney General, I’ve aggressively brought wage and other discrimination cases to ensure
all New Yorkers, including disadvantaged communities, receive fair wages in non-
discriminatory workplaces. As Governor, I will continue to fight workplace violations.
Moreover, it is critical that farmworkers be protected and I will work to make sure that
farmworkers are provided the rights they deserve.