Extends the effectiveness of the state charter advisory board
A11393 is a short extender bill that changes the sunset date for a provision of the Financial Services Law. Specifically, it amends chapter 62 of the laws of 2011 to extend the effectiveness of section 205-b, which establishes the state charter advisory board, from October 3, 2026 to October 3, 2031. The bill does not create a new program or change the board’s duties; it simply keeps the existing advisory board in place for an additional five years.
The practical effect is to preserve the statutory authority for the state charter advisory board and avoid its automatic repeal in 2026. Because the bill is an extension of an existing financial services provision, it affects the Financial Services Law and the institutions or stakeholders that interact with the state charter advisory board, including state banking and financial regulatory interests. The act takes effect immediately upon enactment.
The bill amends the sunset clause for section 205-b of the Financial Services Law, extending the provision’s expiration date from October 3, 2026 to October 3, 2031. This keeps the state charter advisory board authorized under state law for five more years and prevents the underlying section from being deemed repealed on the earlier date. The bill does not otherwise alter the board’s structure, powers, or duties, but it maintains the existing regulatory framework for state financial services oversight.
Available context suggests the bill was treated as a routine extender measure rather than a controversial policy change. It passed the Senate, and there are no recorded committee transcripts or vote details indicating opposition or debate. The overall sentiment appears neutral to favorable, consistent with a technical continuation of an existing advisory body.
No specific points of contention are documented in the available materials. Because the bill simply extends the life of an existing advisory board, any disagreement would likely center on whether the board remains necessary or should be allowed to sunset, but no such objections appear in the provided transcripts or vote history. The absence of recorded debate suggests little visible controversy.