New York Assembly Bill A00204

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/8/25
• Refer: 1/8/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Requires annual reports of legal settlement payments related to law enforcement activity; provides such report shall include, but not be limited to, monetary amounts, plaintiffs and named parties, and shall be published on the website of the comptroller.

Summary

This bill requires annual public reporting of legal settlement payments related to law enforcement activity. The New York State Comptroller would have to publish a yearly report listing settlement amounts, plaintiffs, named parties, and, for the city of New York, details and descriptions of the allegations or misconduct involved in each case. Plaintiffs could choose to be identified by pseudonym, but defendants named in the settlement could not. The bill applies both statewide and specifically to New York City. At the state level, it amends the Executive Law to require law enforcement agencies and related officials to report settlement information to the Comptroller and to the Division of Criminal Justice Services. It also directs the Comptroller, in consultation with DCJS, to adopt regulations and identify agencies that fail to comply. In New York City, it amends the Administrative Code to impose a similar reporting requirement for city-related law enforcement settlements.

Impact

The bill would create new disclosure obligations for police departments, sheriffs, correctional facilities, the State Police, the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, and any agency employing peace officers. It would also tie compliance to consequences: agencies that fail to report the required information could lose eligibility for state or city funding and accreditation until they come into compliance. The measure would therefore expand public transparency around law enforcement settlement costs and potentially affect agency budgeting, accreditation, and administrative reporting practices.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or recorded support/opposition in the materials supplied. Based on the bill text, the measure appears aimed at transparency and accountability in law enforcement spending, which suggests a reform-oriented purpose. The absence of recorded votes or discussion prevents a more specific assessment of legislative sentiment.

Contention

The main likely points of contention are privacy, administrative burden, and the penalty structure. The bill allows plaintiffs to use pseudonyms, which appears designed to address privacy concerns, but it still requires naming defendants and disclosing misconduct details in the city report. Law enforcement agencies may object to the reporting workload and to the loss of state or city funding and accreditation for noncompliance. Supporters would likely emphasize public accountability, while critics may focus on confidentiality, due process, and the severity of enforcement mechanisms.