Dylan Stack calls 561-A a corporate giveaway and unsalvageable

Hello, Mr.

Chairman.

My name is Dylan Stack.

I'm the vice president of the New York Clean Air Collective, and I'm a New York City resident.

I think the current count is 25 civic groups in New York City oppose Intro 561A, and I regretfully say that I believe it is unsalvageable as a piece of legislation.

This bill would not do anything to improve the environment or the air quality of New York City.

This bill is a corporate giveaway.

Amazon paid $9 million, as we saw in the news this year, because of their incessant idling that hasn't stopped.

If we have 561A passed with its provisions about regeneration and processing devices and everything else in that piece of legislation that is going to be debunked in the written testimony of this hearing,

that is going to cause millions and millions of fines that these corporations should be paying to be gone forever.

Because this is about the air quality.

As we heard from Councilmember Aviles, 2,400 kids a year die from air pollution.

This is something that we all care about deeply.

And I think New York City should be a leader in clean air.

We do not need to go back.

You're looking at the...

Ultimate leader in New York City clean air.

I talked about what I did years ago, and I'm still doing, where in one fell swoop, I cobbled together a thing that created the equivalent of every car, truck, and bus being taken off the road forever.

So I'm not a slouch when it comes to

It's the clean air.

Mr.

Chairman.

And I'll give you your time back.

Thank you.

You've been the committee chairman of this committee for 18 years, the Environmental Committee in the greatest city in the world, a leading city.

I think that we can be the shining example to the rest of the world about preserving the citizen air complaint program.

We can pass intro 48.

We can help environmental justice neighborhoods, the residents there submit the complaints in their own language.

Well, that would be up to the, you know, to the people who are.

Putting in the violations who aren't going to those neighborhoods as much as they go to other neighborhoods.

So that's for you to talk about with your other people participating in this good program.

Where were the people out in the communities of color and the EJ communities?

This is like a Manhattan and like Brooklyn thing.

But anyway.

Now I'm testifying, and so I don't want to testify.

You're here to testify.

Thank you for your comments, Mr.

Chairman.

I believe the city can lead.

The city can expand the program.

I don't think we should go back.

The truck industry, I very much appreciate that they have been very successful over the years.

They can hire lobbyists to come here.

And testify on their behalf, I don't think the lobbyists fully understand the technology in these trucks.

That's why Intro 561A is so detrimental.

It talks about regeneration, when they can regenerate while they're driving.

All these claims, like I mentioned,

will be thoroughly debunked in the written testimony.

So I would ask you, Mr.

Chairman, I would ask the members of the council, I would ask the speaker to reconsider why are we going back with Intro 561?

This would do nothing to help the environment.

Well, you know, this is what reconsideration looks like.

You know, reconsideration is a hearing.

And so, I mean, I'm not happy with where, this is why we, you know, I felt that after the, you know, last amendments were made, I thought that we could certainly do better, which is why we're here today.

You know, I don't have to be here.

I wanted to be here.

I wanted to hear from everyone so that I could make it better.

And, you know, no one wants to make it better more than you.

So I appreciate that.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I'm not going to fight with anybody else.

It was just his turn, you know.

He looked like he could take it, too.

He looks like a nice guy.

So, yes.