ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [AI] IS NOT USED IN COMPOSING NYPPL SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS.

Jan 22, 2026

2026 Paid Family Leave webinar series for employers and HR professionals

The New York State Workers’ Compensation Board is hosting a Paid Family Leave (PFL) webinar specifically for "employers and HR professionals" to share What’s New for 2026", including:

  • the higher maximum weekly benefit amount, and
  • the updated employee contribution rate.

Each one-hour, online session, will also provide an overview of New York State’s landmark PFL benefits, including:

  • who is eligible,
  • how employees take it, and
  • employers’ role in the process.

The sessions are free and there will be time at the end for questions. Each session covers the same content, and interested individuals are invited to choose the date that works best for them. 


PFL for employers and HR professionals are schedule to be held on:

 

Thursday, January 29, 2026 12:00 p.m. - 1:00 p.m.


Wednesday, March 18, 2026 12:00 p.m. - 1:00 p.m.


A party's request that the administrative tribunal reconsider its decision does not extend the statute of limits to appeal the administrative decision

In this appeal to the Commissioner of Education the Respondent [School District] contended that the appeal must be dismissed as untimely, among other reasons. 

The Commissioner agreed, explaining that an appeal to the Commissioner of Education must be commenced within 30 days from the administrative decision or act complained of, "unless any delay is excused by the Commissioner for good cause shown" and it is the actual knowledge of the facts underlying a claim that begins the running of the 30-day period in which the aggrieved party may bring the proceeding.

In this instance the Commissioner noted that the Petitioners had received actual notice of the School District's decision on June 27, 2025 but did not commence their appeal until August 25, 2025, more than 30 days after had knowledge of the School District's ruling.  

Although Petitioners had requested the School District reconsider its decision, the Commissioner noted that such a request does not extend the time limits within which a petitioner may file an appeal to the Commissioner.

As Petitioners did not offer any explanation for the delay in their submitting their appeal to the Commissioner, the Commissioner held that Petitioner's appeal must be dismissed as untimely.

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


Jan 21, 2026

New York State local government and school audits posted on the Internet on January 20, 2026

On January 20, 2026, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced that a number of local government and school audits and certain follow-up reports were posted on the Internet.

Click of the text in color to access the audits and follow-up reports


Mattituck Fire District – Claims Audit (Suffolk County) The board did not ensure that all nonpayroll disbursements were appropriate, adequately supported, audited and approved before claims were paid. Auditors determined that the board did not always perform a thorough and deliberate audit of claims before approving payments, and the treasurer paid claims that were never audited by the board. Auditors reviewed 135 claims totaling $194,478 and determined that the board should not have approved 90 claims totaling $125,562.The board did not ensure that all nonpayroll disbursements were appropriate, adequately supported, audited and approved before claims were paid. Auditors determined that the board did not always perform a thorough and deliberate audit of claims before approving payments, and the treasurer paid claims that were never audited by the board. Auditors reviewed 135 claims totaling $194,478 and determined that the board should not have approved 90 claims totaling $125,562.


Town of Horseheads – Claims Auditing (Chemung County) The board did not conduct a thorough audit of claims to ensure that individual claims contained supporting documentation to demonstrate compliance with statutory requirements and town policies. Auditors reviewed 274 claims totaling $897,321 and 206 claim payments totaling $414,075 and determined that 61 claims totaling $473,309 were paid prior to the board’s audit.


North Creek Fire District – Board Oversight (Warren County) The board did not provide adequate oversight of district financial activities related to budgeting, monthly financial reporting, bank reconciliations, annual financial reporting, annual audits and policy reviews. The board did not develop and adopt realistic budgets taking into consideration multiyear financial planning or ensure that the treasurer provided sufficient financial reports. The board also did not conduct an annual audit to provide oversight and ensure accuracy of records or ensure the treasurer filed required annual reports and failed to periodically review required policies including the district’s code of ethics, purchasing and investment policies.


Center Moriches Fire District – Fiscal Transparency (Suffolk County) The board did not obtain annual audits in a timely manner or ensure the treasurer filed all annual financial reports (AFRs) with the State Comptroller’s office. Additionally, district officials had no record of the board ever using an RFP process to contract the CPA firm’s services for the annual audit or an engagement letter with the CPA firm detailing the services to be provided. As of Nov. 15, 2025, the treasurer has not filed the 2020 through 2024 fiscal year AFRs and the last filed AFR, for fiscal year 2019, was filed 122 days late.


Steuben County – Financial Management County officials did not effectively manage the county’s fund balance. As a result, as of Dec. 31, 2024, the county maintained unrestricted fund balance in the general fund totaling $103.4 million (48% of the upcoming year’s budget) and in the road fund totaling $15.5 million (53% of the upcoming year’s budget). The legislature did not adopt an adequate fund balance policy or develop a comprehensive, written multiyear financial or capital plan. After initial audit discussions with county officials, the legislature updated its administrative code to add a maximum general fund balance goal to its fund balance policy and adopt a reserve fund policy. The legislature also created and funded new reserves in July 2025 to significantly reduce its unrestricted fund balance.


Colesville-Windsor Fire District – Board Oversight (Broome County) The board did not provide adequate financial oversight. Specifically, the board did not review periodic financial reports to assess the district’s operations or conduct an annual audit of the secretary-treasurer’s records to verify that they properly recorded collections and disbursements and maintained current and accurate records and reports.


Cincinnatus Fire District – Board Oversight (Cortland County)  The board did not always properly safeguard assets. Although the board received sufficient monthly financial reports, monitored financial  operations throughout the year and ensured that annual financial reports were filed in a timely manner, the board did not ensure that district assets were properly accounted for and safeguarded, including 19 assets totaling $33,009 that were not onsite. These assets included items such as computers, cameras and night vision goggles. Also, one board member did not complete the required fiscal oversight training within 270 days of taking office which, as of March 11, 2025, was 165 days past the deadline.


Ashville Fire District – Procurement and Board Oversight (Chautauqua County) The board did not demonstrate that the purchase of equipment was done in accordance with state law, as well as provide proper oversight of equipment purchases. In addition, the board should have periodically reviewed and updated the district’s purchasing policy, but the board has not updated the policy since 2014. As a result, the board could have been more fiscally responsible by increasing competition and avoiding vendor overpayments that would have totaled $6,500 by ensuring vendor invoices agreed with contract terms. The board also could not demonstrate that it complied with competitive bidding requirements when purchasing two fire trucks, totaling $796,200, as required by law.


Morristown Fire District – Board Oversight (St. Lawrence County) The board did not provide adequate oversight of district financial operations, and it did not always conduct a proper audit of claims prior to payment. Furthermore, the board did not ensure the secretary-treasurer filed required annual financial reports. The board also did not ensure the secretary-treasurer deposited district collections in a timely manner, performed monthly bank reconciliations and maintained accurate financial records and reports, or conducted an annual audit of the secretary-treasurer’s records. In addition, the board did not develop and adopt a procurement policy or investment policy or ensure claims were properly supported and audited and approved prior to payment.


Rotterdam Fire District Number 7 Schonowe – Claims Auditing (Schenectady County) The board did not conduct a thorough and deliberate audit of all claims paid during the audit period. Auditors reviewed 79 claims totaling $941,015 and determined that none of the claims were audited and approved by the entire board, as required. In addition, the lack of a claims audit increased the risk that claims for improper purposes could be paid.


Follow Up Reports

Chenango Valley Central School District – Audit Follow-Up (Broome County) This review assessed the Chenango Valley Central School District’s progress in implementing recommendations in Chenango Valley Central School District – Network User Accounts and Information Technology Contingency Planning, released in June 2023. The audit determined that district officials did not adequately manage network user accounts or develop and adopt an information technology (IT) contingency plan. To help district officials improve managing network user accounts and assist in adopting an IT contingency plan, the audit included a public report that contained three recommendations. The district’s IT Director, board and officials fully implemented one recommendation and partially implemented two recommendations.


City of Fulton – Audit Follow-Up (Oswego County) This review was to assess the City of Fulton’s progress in implementing recommendations in City of Fulton – Capital Projects, released in February 2022. The audit determined that city officials did not appropriately maintain capital projects fund records, monitor project financial results against budgets and close out records for completed projects. The audit included 12 recommendations to help officials improve their controls over capital projects. The city has made minimal progress implementing corrective action. Of the 12 audit recommendations, one recommendation was fully implemented, two recommendations were partially implemented, and eight recommendations were not implemented. Auditors could not determine the implementation status for the remaining recommendation because certain capital projects records were unavailable or inadequate. 


Gates Fire District – Audit Follow-Up (Monroe County) This review was to assess the Gates Fire District’s progress in implementing recommendations in Gates Fire District – Board Oversight of Long-Term Planning, released in June 2024. The audit determined that the board and district officials did not properly plan for the district’s long-term financial and capital needs, which inhibited the board and officials from effectively managing finances and addressing future operating and capital needs. The audit included eight recommendations to help officials effectively manage finances and address future operating and capital needs. The district has implemented corrective action for all eight audit recommendations.


City of Mount Vernon – Audit Follow-Up (Westchester County)  This review was to assess the City of Mount Vernon’s progress, as of July/August 2025, in implementing recommendations in City of Mount Vernon – Financial Reporting and Oversight, released in September 2020. The audit determined that the city council and officials did not have adequate financial information for the effective management of operations and, as a result, the city lost its credit rating. The audit included 11 recommendations to help the board improve its oversight of the district’s financial activities. The city has implemented three recommendations, partially implemented four recommendations and not implemented four recommendations.


Monsey Fire District – Audit Follow-Up (Rockland County) The purpose of the review was to assess the Monsey Fire District’s progress in implementing recommendations in Monsey Fire District – Board Oversight released in July 2020. The audit determined that district officials did not provide adequate oversight to ensure district financial records and reports were prepared, filed and/or audited. The audit report contained three recommendations to help officials improve their controls over financial records and reports. The board implemented one recommendation, partially implemented one recommendation and did not implement one recommendation.


Montauk Fire District – Audit Follow-Up (Suffolk County)  The purpose of the review was to assess the Montauk Fire District’s progress in implementing  recommendations in Montauk Fire District – Board Oversight, released in December 2024. The audit determined that the board did not adequately monitor financial activities or ensure that appropriate records and reports were maintained and audited to comply with statutory requirements. To help the board monitor financial activities and ensure appropriate records and reports were maintained or audited to comply with statutory requirements, the audit contained four recommendations. The district has partially implemented all four recommendations.


Ridge Fire District – Audit Follow-Up (Suffolk County) This review was to assess the Ridge Fire District’s progress in implementing recommendations in Ridge Fire District – Board Oversight of Treasurer’s Fiscal Duties, released in January 2022. The audit determined that district officials did not provide adequate oversight of the treasurer’s fiscal duties and could not explain why the bank balances presented on the treasurer’s reports for three consecutive months contained discrepancies totaling $2.96 million. The audit included three recommendations to help officials monitor and improve the district’s financial operations. The board partially implemented one recommendation and did not implement two recommendations.


Ticonderoga Joint Town/Village Fire District – Audit Follow-Up (Essex County) The purpose of the review was to assess the Ticonderoga Joint Town/Village Fire District’s progress in implementing recommendations in Ticonderoga Joint Town/Village Fire District – Board Oversight, released in April 2024. The audit determined that the board did not ensure required annual audits were completed and annual update documents were filed in a timely manner. To help the board improve its controls over monitored financial activity and ensure appropriate records and reports were maintained and filed in a timely manner, the audit report contained two recommendations. The district has partially implemented the audit’s two recommendations.

###


Jan 20, 2026

Adjudicating a Workers' Compensation claim when a claimant dies before there is an adequate development of the record

Claimant for Workers' Compensation benefits injured in the course of his work filed a claim for Workers' Compensation Benefits and subsequently filed a claim of alleged he he had also suffered psychiatric injuries as a result of the accident and requested a hearing on that issue. 

Claimant's self-insured employer and its third-party administrator [Employer] conceded that Claimant had sustained head, neck, right shoulder and right leg injuries in the accident but contended that Claimant's death prevented an adequate development of the record on the disputed psychiatric conditions and thus required the abatement of that portion of the claim. 

A Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge determined that the Claimant had presented  prima facie medical evidence of posttraumatic concussion, headaches and amnesia, as well as adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and insomnia, and continued the case for further proceedings. 

The Workers' Compensation Board [Board], after considering the Employer's administrative appeal of the hearing officer's determination, disagreed, ruling that the psychiatric claim "abated" upon Claimant's death" and modified the claim for Workers' Compensation benefits to reflect such abatement of the claim with regard to Claimant's alleged psychiatric conditions. Claimant's representative appealed the Board's decision.

The Appellate Division confirmed the Board's ruling, explaining that in the event "an injured employee dies before his or her workers' compensation claim can be adjudicated, the Board has discretion to continue the proceeding, resolve any controversies and, if appropriate, make an award of workers' compensation benefits", 

The Appellate Division's decision also noted that the Board has recognized that "due process concerns may be implicated in those cases if the claimant's death deprives a party of "the essential elements of a fair trial in resolving those controversies unless waived, including the opportunity to cross- examine witnesses, to inspect documents and to offer evidence in explanation or rebuttal".

Noting that the Board is vested with discretion to "decline[ ] to allow such a claim to proceed where the record is undeveloped and the employer or carrier is unable to cross-examine the deceased claimant regarding his or her allegation of a work-related injury or subject him or her to an independent medical examination on controverted issues such as causation and any alleged disability", the Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision.

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


Jan 17, 2026

Posted on the Internet during the week ending January 16, 2026

Procuring a Modern Payment Platform Payments are a critical but often underprioritized factor in user experience. As governments work to become more responsive and resident-centric, payment strategies should emphasize enterprise platform approaches and innovative capabilities like digital wallets and recurring payment options. This paper offers practical advice for procuring modern payment solutions that support a superior user experience. DOWNLOAD

Future Forward Government A space created for state and local IT leaders and decision-makers who are charting the course of tomorrow's public sector. EXPLORE

4 Ways SLED Organizations Are Driving Efficiency Government and education organizations are under growing pressure to do more with fewer resources. This thought leadership white paper explores four proven ways SLED organizations are driving efficiency through modernization, from process mapping and AI-powered automation to cloud adoption and improved constituent experiences. DOWNLOAD

Five Ways Government Leaders Boost Transparency and Trust Learn how public-sector agencies strengthen community confidence through improved transparency and accountability. READ NOW

Secure Payments Without the Staff Burden Accept cash, checks and cards automatically, securely, and without added overhead. See Government Payment Solutions

Modernize Government Payouts for Better Service Discover how agencies can deliver fast, secure and equitable payments. READ MORE

How AI-Powered Agents Streamline State and Local Service Delivery Explore how AI agents can help state and local governments handle routine tasks, streamline operations, and give staff more time for complex issues. DOWNLOAD

From the Trenches: 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

Build an AI Policy in Minutes Create a free, editable AI policy aligned to public sector expectations. Create Your Free AI Policy

New Federal AI Rules Just Dropped What the latest executive order means for state and local AI governance. Read the EO Impact Guide




Editor in Chief Harvey Randall served as Director of Personnel, SUNY Central Administration, Director of Research , Governor's Office of Employee Relations; Principal Attorney, Counsel's Office, New York State Department of Civil Service, and Colonel, New York Guard. Consistent with the Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a Committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations, the material posted to this blog is presented with the understanding that neither the publisher nor NYPPL and, or, its staff and contributors are providing legal advice to the reader and in the event legal or other expert assistance is needed, the reader is urged to seek such advice from a knowledgeable professional.

CAUTION

Subsequent court and administrative rulings, or changes to laws, rules and regulations may have modified or clarified or vacated or reversed the information and, or, decisions summarized in NYPPL. For example, New York State Department of Civil Service's Advisory Memorandum 24-08 reflects changes required as the result of certain amendments to §72 of the New York State Civil Service Law to take effect January 1, 2025 [See Chapter 306 of the Laws of 2024]. Advisory Memorandum 24-08 in PDF format is posted on the Internet at https://www.cs.ny.gov/ssd/pdf/AM24-08Combined.pdf. Accordingly, the information and case summaries should be Shepardized® or otherwise checked to make certain that the most recent information is being considered by the reader.
THE MATERIAL ON THIS WEBSITE IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY. AGAIN, CHANGES IN LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS AND NEW COURT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS MAY AFFECT THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS LAWBLOG. THE MATERIAL PRESENTED IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND THE USE OF ANY MATERIAL POSTED ON THIS WEBSITE, OR CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING SUCH MATERIAL, DOES NOT CREATE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
New York Public Personnel Law. Email: publications@nycap.rr.com