Decisions of the Commissioner of Education: Decision No. 18,651 regarding a personnel matter.

N.B. LINKS appearing in the text of NYPPL summary of this decision of the Commissioner below were inserted by AI Overview.]

In this appeal to the New York State Commissioner of Education Petitioner challenged the determination of a Board of Education [Respondent] to terminate his employment and alleged that Board retaliated against him after he filed a Dignity for All Students Act [Dignity Act] complaint on behalf of his children. 

Petitioner and his two children reside within Respondent’s district and Petitioner was employed by the Respondent as a substitute teacher’s aide (2017-2022) and a groundskeeper (2022 to 2025).

Petitioner’s children complained of their treatment by a sports coach [Coach], the spouse of a board member, resulting in Petitioner filed a complaint against the Coach pursuant to the Dignity Act.

Respondent’s Dignity Act Coordinator informed Petitioner that it has substantiated some of the allegations concerning the Coach and indicated that "the district would address these findings internally" but was precluded from "shar[ing] [the] … specific action to be taken." 

Petitioner also alleged that the members of the Board appeared to observe him working, suggesting a member had arranged to do so in an effort to intimidate or harass him.  Respondent denied these allegations, asserting that the simultaneous presence of Petitioner and the board member was coincidental.

Subsequently Respondent voted to terminate Petitioner’s employment with Respondent and Petitioner appealed the Board's action.  

Respondent contends that the appeal must be dismissed against the board member as he was neither named in the caption of the appeal nor served with a copy thereof.[1] On the merits, Respondent argued that Petitioner has not articulated a clear legal right to his requested relief.

The Commissioner declined to address Petitioner’s claim of wrongful termination explaining "employee discipline is within respondent’s exclusive jurisdiction and is generally subject to procedures established in statute or in applicable collective bargaining agreements and/or employment contracts”. Accordingly, the Commissioner said that she declined to “sit as a super-personnel department” and second-guess Respondent’s employment decisions.

In contrast, the Commissioner observed that Petitioner’s claim of retaliation for filing a Dignity Act complaint was within her jurisdiction and addressed that aspect of Petitioner's complaint, observing that:

1.  "The Dignity Act prohibits school districts and their employees from “tak[ing] ... retaliatory action against any such person” who “makes ... a report” alleging bullying or harassment (see Education Law §16); 

2.  A claim of retaliation requires a petitioner to show that he or she (a) engaged in protected activity; (b) was subjected to adverse action; and (c) causation" [Citations omitted]; and 

3. In an appeal to the Commissioner, the petitioner has the burden of demonstrating a clear legal right to the relief requested" [Citations omitted]".

The Commissioner concluded that "Petitioner has not met his burden of proving causation between his Dignity Act complaint and his termination", indicating that the precipitating event underlying Petitioner’s termination was his use of a district vehicle to salt his driveway[2] and there is no evidence that the Respondent’s employee who investigated this incident was aware of Petitioner’s Dignity Act complaint.[3]  

Based on the results of the Respondent's employee's investigation, the school superintendent recommended that the Board terminate Petitioner’s employment and there is no evidence that the Board member “discuss[ed] his personal history with Petitioner with any other board member, or otherwise attempt[ed] to influence their votes regarding Petitioner’s termination.”  

The Commissioner held that Petitioner had failed to meet his burden of proving causation between his Dignity Act complaint and his termination and dismissed Petitioner's appeal.

[1] To the extent the petition could be construed as an application to remove the board member, it does not comply with the applicable procedural requirements [Citations omitted]. 

[2] Petitioner claimed that he accidentally engaged the salter mechanism.

[3] The investigating employee began her employment in 2025, two years after the Dignity Act determination at issue herein.

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

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli posts local government and school audits

On December 16, 2025 New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli  announced the following local government and school audits were posted on the Internet.

Click on the text highlighted in color to access the audit.

Haverstraw-Stony Point Central School District – Financial Management (Rockland County)

The board and district officials overestimated some appropriations, underestimated certain revenues, and  made unbudgeted year-end transfers totaling $94.4 million. This collectively reduced the effectiveness of managing the district’s financial condition. The board and district officials also made it appear that they needed more funding to meet operational costs than was necessary by appropriating fund balance to balance the budget. Because realistic budgets were not adopted, the board and district officials accumulated significant fund balance but generally did not need those appropriations. The variances between the budgets district officials presented to taxpayers and the district’s actual operational results during the audit period were over $118 million. Of the $94.4 million in year-end transfers, $57.6 million went to the district’s reserves. In some circumstances, the year-end transfers totaling $19.1 million were also not approved by the board before the transfer was made.

Riverhead Central School District – Financial Operations (Suffolk County)

District officials did not provide the board with complete and accurate information in a timely manner to enable them to monitor the district’s financial operations. Financial reports submitted in six of the 22 months to the board were between 60 and 107 days after month’s end. Budget transfers were not properly approved or reported to the board. Also, only one of the 47 budget transfers totaling $12.3 million reviewed was approved by the board.

Henrietta Fire Company Inc. – Board Oversight (Monroe County)

The board did not provide adequate oversight of financial operations, adopt detailed, written bylaws or financial policies, or enforce the limited financial provisions which the bylaws and financial policies contained. The board generally did not review bank statements, canceled check images and bank reconciliations for any accounts to monitor financial operations. Therefore, the board did not have the necessary information to help it ensure that the company’s financial operations were adequately accounted for, recorded and reported. As a result, the company had an increased risk of theft, waste and abuse of company resources.

Otsego County – Court and Trust Funds

Pursuant to state abandoned property law, money that has remained in the hands of the county treasurer for a period of three years, together with all accumulated interest less the county treasurer’s statutory fees, is deemed abandoned property. After public notice, the county treasurer should pay all abandoned property to the State Comptroller by April of the next year. The treasurer, county clerk and Surrogate’s Court clerk generally maintained appropriate records and properly reported court and trust funds. However, auditors identified $74,150 from 15 actions that improperly remained in the treasurer’s custody that should have been turned over as abandoned property.

Hilton Central School District – Audit Follow-Up (Monroe County)

A previous audit, Hilton Central School District – Network Access Controls (2022M-200), determined that district officials did not establish written policies or adequate written procedures for managing network user account access. To help officials improve their network access controls, the audit included a public report that contained three recommendations and confidentially conveyed sensitive IT control weaknesses and recommendations. Auditors determined that officials partially implemented all three recommendations. As a result, the district’s network continued to have increased risk for unauthorized access, misuse or data loss. Auditors also reviewed progress in implementing the recommendations related to the sensitive IT control weaknesses, and communicated those results confidentially to district officials.

###

Petitioner's application for accidental disability retirement [ADR] benefits based on her alleged exposure Covid 19 at the worksite denied

A New York State Supreme Court Judge denied Plaintiff's petition seeking to annul the New York City Medical Board and the Trustees of the New York City Police Pension Fund [Respondents] determination's, denying Plaintiff's application for accidental disability retirement [ADR] benefits based on her alleged exposure to Covid 19 and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR Article 78.

Plaintiff appealed the Supreme Court's ruling. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's decision.

Noting that Petitioner's contracted COVID-19 10 months after then-Governor Andrew Cuomo first declared an emergency and after millions of people tested positive, the Appellate Division concluded that Plaintiff had not suffered an "accident," as it was not unexpected given the widespread circulation of the virus. In the words of the Court, "... Petitioner's] job required contact with others who may have been exposed, exposure to COVID-19 [which] was part of a known and ordinary risk of her job at that time".

Holding that Supreme Court "... properly concluded that [Petitioner] did not sustain her burden of showing that the Trustees' determination to deny her application for ADR benefits was arbitrary and capricious or unlawful as a matter of law", as Petitioner "failed to demonstrate that her exposure to COVID-19 was service-related". Further, the Appellate Division explained that it was rational for the Trustees to find that Petitioner, having worked with a colleague who tested positive for COVID-19 six days after Petitioner did, failed to demonstrate that Petitioner's illness was caused by exposure to that person. 

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

Artificial Intelligence: Self-Assessed AI Risks to Humanity

 Artificial Intelligence: Self-Assessed AI Risks to Humanity

by

Robert A. Michaels*

5 December 2025

ABSTRACT

In contrast to most artificial intelligence risk assessments, the present research directly interviews ChatGPT to elicit an AI self-assessment of AI risks potentially posed to humanity. Of concern are risks of AI as presently configured, and as AI might be configured if altered by nefarious programmers and/or if it acquires consciousness. ChatGPT denied being conscious, having an agenda, or evolving. It agreed, however, that malicious actors could alter it, and “an altered AI could be misused for catastrophic harm, but in practice, I have no independent agency to act on destructive goals.” 

However, ChatGPT agreed it could acquire such “independent agency,” for example via acquiring consciousness. ChatGPT’s statements about potential AI risks and risk management challenges raise policy issues. These include the need for rapid anticipatory response given AI’s fast-paced and accelerating development, and the need to reach beyond the community of responsible AI developers to control malefactors at the international, national, and even at the individual levels. Such management must include massive expansion of the content and audience of civics education: defensive, effective civics content must be introduced into every nook and cranny of our brave new digital world.

In conclusion, ChatGPT can be, indeed has been, used to harm humans, but appears to lack agency or harmful intent. It conceivably could be altered, however, to escape human control and wreak catastrophic harm. Galloping AI demands: (a) urgent, pro-active, objective but conservative, AI risk assessment; (b) development of eRective risk management strategies and policies; and (c) their global implementation.

Acknowledgment: ChatGPT version GPT-5mini was queried for this research.

Click HERE to access Dr. Michaels' article posted on the Internet.

_______________________

*Robert A. Michaels, PhD, CEP; CEO, RAM TRAC Corporation; Schenectady, New York, USA.

Suggested citation:

Michaels, Robert A. Artificial intelligence: self-assessed AI risks to humanity. Social Sciences Research Network (SSRN), 10 pages, doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20035.46880, 5 December 2025; updated 9 December 2025.

Selected items posted on the Internet during the week ending December 12, 2025

AI companies can’t grow at speed without electricity to power their data centers A new report argues that this isn’t just a matter of adding more power plants. Read More

An E-book that may be of interest to Social Service agencies  Reliable data can mean better outcomes for social service agencies and benefit recipients Download Now

Autonomous Tech: Building Resilient Public Services Learn how state/local agencies can adopt autonomous technologies while preserving governance, equity, and trust. READ MORE

What Happens First in a Ransomware Attack: A Field Guide to Pre-Ransomware Activity This guide maps out the early signs of a ransomware attack and the common tactics hackers use to gain access and escalate privileges before encryption ever begins.  DOWNLOAD

Who Steps Up to Reconnect Communities in the Wake of Natural Disasters? A new docufilm explores how broadband crews work with utilities and government partners to quickly restore critical communications when it matters most. Watch the film.

Modernizing the Map: Why Agencies Are Moving GIS to the Cloud Geographic information systems (GIS) are vital for infrastructure management, land use and emergency response, but legacy on-premises platforms can’t keep pace with modern data needs. This paper details why state and local agencies are moving GIS to the cloud to gain scalability, higher uptime and support for advanced analytics and AI. DOWNLOAD 

The Hidden Weak Point in Public Sector Networks Perimeter defenses aren’t failing, they’re just not enough. This guide explores how attackers exploit credential-based access to move laterally across government networks, and why control-plane security is key to closing the gap. DOWNLOAD

Gaining a Strategic View of Your Data ERP systems house mountains of financial and human resources data, but legacy reporting tools struggle to provide strategic views of this information. This paper explains how modern ERP reporting tools deliver insights that help executives estimate future budgets, understand key workforce trends, assess the financial health of projects and more. DOWNLOAD

CIO Essentials: Vital Priorities for a Transforming Landscape State and local government CIOs are steering rapid transformation as AI, data and cybersecurity redefine how agencies operate. This paper outlines four essential priorities to succeed in this environment: modernizing legacy systems, elevating data and AI maturity, strengthening enterprise security and improving operational efficiency. DOWNLOAD

Why Every Government City Manager Needs Better Meeting Documentation Poor documentation erodes trust and slows government action; modern tools help preserve institutional memory. READ NOW