Permits records required to be disclosed under the freedom of information law to have exempt parts of such documents be redacted before disclosure
Introduced
Moved
Reached a final decision
Vetoed
Derived from the official record below.
Officially: “Permits records required to be disclosed under the freedom of information law to have exempt parts of such documents be redacted before disclosure” Read the full text
Assembly
What it does
Permits records required to be disclosed under the freedom of information law to have exempt parts of such documents be redacted before disclosure.
Summary from the sponsor's memo in the official legislative record, shown verbatim. Not legal advice.
Where it is
REFERRED TO GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS · Mar 6, 2025
Assembly
REPORTED REFERRED TO RULES · Jun 5, 2025
Assembly
REPORTED · Jun 9, 2025
Assembly
RULES REPORT CAL.510 · Jun 9, 2025
Assembly
ORDERED TO THIRD READING RULES CAL.510 · Jun 9, 2025
Assembly
PASSED ASSEMBLY · Jun 9, 2025
Assembly
DELIVERED TO SENATE · Jun 9, 2025
Assembly
REFERRED TO RULES · Jun 9, 2025
Senate
SUBSTITUTED FOR S67 · Jun 11, 2025
Senate
3RD READING CAL.1431 · Jun 11, 2025
Senate
PASSED SENATE · Jun 11, 2025
Senate
RETURNED TO ASSEMBLY · Jun 11, 2025
Senate
DELIVERED TO GOVERNOR · Dec 1, 2025
Assembly
VETOED MEMO.69 · Dec 5, 2025
Assembly
TABLED · Dec 5, 2025
Assembly
Why the Governor vetoed it
VETO MESSAGE - No. 69 TO THE ASSEMBLY: I am returning herewith, without my approval, the following bill: Assembly Bill Number 6613, entitled: "AN ACT to amend the public officers law, in relation to permitting records required to be disclosed under the freedom of information law to have exempt parts of such documents be redacted before disclosure" NOT APPROVED This bill would require agencies to disclose records that are disclos- able under the Freedom of Information Law while redacting or withholding any portions of such records that are subject to an exception from disclosure. This bill is unnecessary and duplicative of current law, which already permits agencies to withhold records or portions of records that are otherwise exempt from disclosure under FOIL. I am therefore constrained to veto this bill. The bill is disapproved. (signed) KATHY HOCHUL __________...
Veto message no. 69, quoted verbatim from the official record, signed KATHY HOCHUL. The full message is on the official bill page.
The numbers
2
sponsors on the bill
Sponsors
John T. McDonald IIIJudy Griffin
Recorded votes
Recorded voteSenate · 2025-06-11 · EXC 4, NAY 2, AYE 57
Roll-call results shown verbatim from the New York legislature’s records. A result reflects that roll call’s own motion, not the bill’s overall outcome.
Who is lobbying on this
NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, INC.via NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, INC.
2 filingsFrom 2 filings in New York State lobbying disclosures (COELIG), via data.ny.gov, naming this bill (2025). Filings are self-reported by lobbying firms and show who is paid to influence this bill. They do not say which side, or whether it worked.
Nothing on this page shows why any vote was cast. Recorded votes and lobbying filings are separate official records, self-reported by different parties, and neither explains the other.
Every fact on this page links to its source, starting with the official bill record. Last action: Vetoed (Dec 5, 2025).