Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Law F topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and advocates urge changes to Albany County 'parental responsibility' bill
Summary
Dozens of public commenters at the Albany County Legislature urged caution on proposed Local Law F, which would establish parental responsibility for acts of dependent minors; speakers cited lack of supports, disproportionate impact on BIPOC families and a call for statutorily required service connections.
Dozens of residents, advocates and policy experts urged Albany County legislators on Aug. 10 to slow, rewrite or reject a proposed local law that would establish parental responsibility for acts of dependent minors.
The measure—referred to in county materials as Local Law F and described in the meeting as an amendment to chapter 125 of the Albany County Code—drew a wide range of testimony during a public hearing. "Please reject this bill and instead consider ways to support parents," Ashley Chapel, first vice president of the NAACP Albany branch, told the Legislature, arguing the draft does not account for housing, health, employment and food insecurity.
Advocates repeatedly warned the law, as drafted, could widen the "circle of punishment." "Punishing a parent does not address the root conditions producing violence," Sherrod Craft, interim executive director of We Are Revolutionary, said, citing the case of a local organizer incarcerated while a gun charge is expected to be dismissed but a probation violation is alleged. Craft urged the county to "invest in families before it creates new ways to punish them."
Other commenters urged clearer statutory language to prevent automatic presumption of parental failure. A speaker who identified past service as committee director for the New York State Senate standing committee on children and families said the bill should require "an individualized finding that a parent failed to exercise reasonable care" and a family needs assessment connecting households to services before penalties are imposed.
Not all speakers opposed the concept: Michael Campbell, who identified himself as a resident of the county's 10th District, said he would support Local Law F if it included procedural safeguards such as waivers for parents who already sought help and reasonable accommodations for required classes. "The proposed law is less than three pages long, so I hope everyone took the time to read it word for word," Campbell said.
The chair opened the hearing but stressed the body would not decide the substance of the law that night. "We are not voting on Local Law F tonight," the chair said, and the Legislature instead adopted a resolution to report the public hearing record to the body for further consideration.
What happens next: the Legislature recorded the public hearing (Resolution 241) and will take up the bill's substance in committee and future sessions; no final policy vote on the law's substance was taken on Aug. 10.
