Selected items posted on blogs during the week ending November 21, 2025

How Public Sector Leaders Are Reframing Government Cyber Strategy Most cyber strategies fall short for one simple reason: limited visibility. This paper shows how state and local governments are rethinking cybersecurity by prioritizing real-time asset visibility across IT, OT and IoT systems. DOWNLOAD

Leveraging GenAI to Secure Critical Federal Funding One state agency cut weeks off its grant writing timeline--and walked away with $15 million in funding. This case study shows how public sector teams can use AI tools to streamline complex applications without cutting corners or sacrificing compliance.  DOWNLOAD

Firewalls Aren't Enough: Securing Government for the AI Era AI is changing how governments operate — and how cyber threats emerge. Traditional firewalls alone can’t keep up with modern attack surfaces, especially in decentralized, cloud-driven environments. This paper explores why a platform-based security approach is now essential, highlighting strategies like autonomous segmentation, AI model protection and centralized threat detection. DOWNLOAD

On-demand service enhances transit equity in Jersey City Tech-driven service design improves transit equity and job access in Jersey City. Read the full case study on Jersey City's transit innovation.

AI Security Readiness: Insights from 100 Cloud Architects, Engineers, and Security Leaders AI services are everywhere, but the security playbook hasn’t caught up. This report digs into how 100 cloud and security professionals are tackling gaps in AI visibility, governance, and risk. Learn where most teams fall short and what steps leading organizations are taking to regain control in complex cloud environments. DOWNLOAD

Keep Your New York State and Local Retire Pension Safe with Direct Deposit

The New York State and Local Retirement System [NYSLRS] reports having seen an increase in check fraud and the delayed receipt of pension check sent by mail during 2025. NYSLRS is urging all retirees and beneficiaries who still receive pension checks by mail to enroll in its Direct Deposit Program. Read more.

Non-profit institution claim of being exempt from the wage orders under New York States Labor Law §652(3)(b)" rejected

Home health aides [Plaintiffs] employed by the Defendants, alleged, among other things, that Defendants failed to pay them the New York State minimum wage, overtime pay, and spread-of-hours pay in violation of New York State Labor Law §§663 and 650 et. seq. and 12 NYCRR §142-2.4. 

Defendants submitted documentary evidence showing their certifications electing to pay the statutory minimum rate in lieu of minimum wage orders pursuant to Labor Law §652, and claimed non-profitmaking institution status within the meaning of Labor Law §652(3) and thus were "exempt from the wage orders" under Labor Law §652(3)(b).

The Appellate Division said that even if the Defendant's certifications were sufficient to show that Defendants are a non-profitmaking institution exempt from the wage orders under Labor Law §652(3)(b), Supreme Court correctly determined that this exemption is also contingent on Defendants first showing that they "pa[id] and continue[d] to pay" Plaintiffs the statutory minimum wage.

Plaintiffs had alleged that Defendants had paid them for only 13 hours of work when they worked 24-hour shifts, which effectively reduced their hourly rate to an amount "well below New York's statutory minimum wage for the period 2019 to 2021". 

Finding that Defendants failed to submit evidence disputing Plaintiffs' allegations, the Appellate Division unanimously affirmed Supreme Court's decision denying Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' Labor Law action, with costs.

Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli posted local government and school audits on the Internet

On November 20, 2025, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced the following local government and school audits were issued.

Click the text highlighted in COLOR to access the audit posted on the Internet.

Town of Elmira Fire District No.1 – Long-Term Planning (Chemung County)

District officials did not establish or adopt up-to-date long-term capital and financial plans. The district had five vehicles at or beyond their useful life estimates in 2025. Auditors estimated that the total vehicle replacement cost of these five vehicles was approximately $2.3 million in 2025. However, the reserve fund balance totaled $971,000 as of Dec. 31, 2024. If all five vehicles at or beyond their useful life estimates were replaced in 2025, the district may face a shortfall of approximately $1.3 million. 

Because district officials did not maintain a long-term capital plan for vehicles or plan for future financial operations, the board’s ability to effectively manage the district’s finances was hindered. Therefore, potential large increases to real property tax levies may occur when assets are needed in the future. As a result of the audit, the board created a new capital plan that projected reserve contributions, vehicle replacement costs and useful life through 2054.

Richburg-Wirt Fire District – Board Oversight (Allegany County)

The board did not provide adequate oversight of financial operations. Specifically, the board did not develop and adopt required policies, including an investment policy, a procurement policy and a code of ethics. It did not use reserve funds in a transparent manner and could not support that transfers totaling $36,611 were adopted through board resolutions and that public hearings were held, when required. The board also did not audit the treasurer’s records or ensure all of its members completed mandatory oversight training within the required time period. 

In addition, the board did not use competitive bidding for the purchase of an off-road utility vehicle for approximately $28,000 as required, and may have paid more than necessary.

Town of Cherry Valley – Budget Review (Otsego County)

Auditors determined that the town’s preliminary budget significantly underbudgeted the appropriations for the Cherry Valley Community Health Center. Although all other significant revenues and appropriation estimates were considered reasonable and accurate, auditors identified long-term financial concerns regarding the lack of recurring revenues to fund recurring expenditures. 

The 2026 preliminary budget includes an estimate for health center appropriations of $495,000 in the general fund. Auditors’ projection of health center expenditures for 2025 is approximately $1 million. 

The board’s unrealistically low estimate for health center expenditures enabled the board to lower the town’s tax levy in the preliminary budget. However, without a source of additional revenues for the health center, the board could nearly deplete the town’s general fund resources by the end of 2026.

West Irondequoit Central School District – Emergency Drills (Monroe County)

During the school year, district officials must conduct a minimum of 12 evacuation and lockdown drills for each building and three bus drills for each bus to provide staff and students with the training necessary to respond appropriately in an emergency. 

District officials did not conduct all required bus drills and did not ensure all students participated in bus drills. Officials also did not file the required annual certification for bus drills or properly notify parents of drills as required in 2024-25. Without adequate emergency instruction and training, district officials cannot ensure that staff and students are prepared for emergencies. 

Additionally, without properly notifying parents in advance of building drills, parents may not have sufficient information to ask questions about procedures or be prepared to discuss the drills with their children.

Newark Valley Fire District – Audit Follow-Up (Tioga County)

The review assessed the district’s progress in implementing the recommendations in the audit report, Newark Valley Fire District – Board Oversight (2020M-30). The audit determined that district officials, needed to improve controls over hall rentals, did not adopt an investment policy and update the procurement policy, retain documentation of quotes in compliance with the procurement policy, provide for an annual audit of the treasurer’s records and ensure that the treasurer filed its required annual financial information within 60 days of the close of the fiscal year. 

The audit included five recommendations to help officials monitor and improve the district’s financial operations. Of those, two recommendations were implemented, one recommendation was partially implemented, and two recommendations were not implemented.

Hunter-Tannersville Central School District – Audit Follow-Up (Greene County)

The review examined the district’s progress in implementing recommendations in the audit report, Hunter-Tannersville Central School District – Network User Accounts and Information Technology Contingency Planning (2022M-125). The audit determined that district officials did not adequately manage or monitor nonstudent network user accounts or develop a written IT contingency plan. 

To help officials improve their controls over nonstudent network user accounts and be prepared for system disruptions, the audit included a public report that contained five recommendations and confidentially conveyed sensitive IT control weaknesses and recommendations. The district fully implemented all five recommendations contained in the public audit report, auditors determined. 

Auditors also reviewed progress in implementing the recommendations related to the sensitive IT control weaknesses, and communicated those results confidentially to district officials.

###

In seeking to dismiss an action brought under color of CPLR 3211(a)(5) as untimely, the moving party must show that the controlling statute of limitations has expired

In this CPLR Article 78 action Petitioner sought judicial review of a determination of the Town Board [Town] which had adopted the report and recommendation of a disciplinary hearing officer's finding accused Petitioner guilty of 12 specifications of misconduct and incompetence, and terminated the Petitioner's employment as a police officer. Supreme Court, however, issued an order and judgment granting the Town's motion to dismiss the Petitioner's Article 78 action challenging the Town's decision as untimely and dismissed Petitioner's Article 78 action. Petitioner then appealed the Supreme Court's ruling.

The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's ruling, with costs, explaining:

1. "On a motion to dismiss a complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5) on the ground that the statute of limitations has expired, the moving defendant must establish, prima facie, that the time in which to commence the action has expired;

2. "The burden then shifts to the plaintiff to raise a question of fact as to whether the statute of limitations was tolled or otherwise inapplicable, or whether the plaintiff actually commenced the action within the applicable limitations period; and

3. "Unless a shorter time is provided in the law authorizing the proceeding, a four-month statute of limitations is generally applicable to proceedings pursuant to CPLR Article 78".

In this instance, the Count's Police Act, as amended, stated that the review of a disciplinary action, the "conviction of any member of such police force" shall be presented to the court "within sixty days after the conviction". 

The Appellate Division's decision, noted that the Town "had established, prima facie", that the instant proceeding was time-barred by showing that the petition was not filed within 60 days from the Town's final  determination and Petitioner failed to raise a question of fact as to whether the proceeding was timely commenced," opined that "[I]t is well settled that an argument 'may not be raised for the first time before the courts in an article 78 proceeding'".

Finding that Petitioner failed to raise his contention that his disciplinary proceeding was not governed by the County Police Act until the Petitioner commenced this Article 78 proceeding, the Appellate Division opined that Supreme Court should not have considered that issue and then concluded that Supreme Court had properly granted the Town's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5) and 7804(f) to dismiss the petition as time-barred and correctly dismissed the proceeding.

Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.