New York State local government and school audits posted on the Internet on September 16, 2026.

On September 16, 2026, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced the following local government and school audits were posted on the Internet.

                Click the text highlighted in COLOR to access the audit report.

South Huntington Union Free School District – Credit Cards (Suffolk County) District officials did not ensure that credit card charges were authorized, supported, for valid district purposes or approved. As a result, the board and officials did not establish adequate oversight and internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that district credit cards were used appropriately and in the best interest of taxpayers. In addition, because the board did not ensure that all claims were reviewed and approved by the claims auditor prior to payment, the district faced an increased risk of paying for goods or services that did not serve a proper district purpose.

Village of Groton – Capital Project (Tompkins County) The village board did not competitively procure certain goods and services for the project. Although the project’s original construction contracts, totaling $3.7 million, were properly procured, the board subsequently procured $135,900 in goods and services without seeking competition in accordance with state law or the village’s procurement policy.

Beekmantown Central School District – Investment Program (Clinton County) Auditors determined that the district’s investments were legal, safe and liquid. However, district officials did not develop and manage a comprehensive investment program. For example, during the audit period, officials did not prepare any cash flow forecasts to estimate funds available for investment or solicit interest rate quotes from financial institutions. As a result, officials missed an opportunity for the district to realize additional revenues of more than $1 million.

Honeoye Central School District – Financial Management (Ontario County and Livingston County) The board and district officials did not effectively manage fund balance. Although the board and district officials generally maintained surplus fund balance within the statutory 4 percent limit, they did so by transferring surplus fund balance to reserves at, or after, year-end and maintaining $1.1 million excess fund balance in the debt service fund. As of June 30, 2025, two general fund reserves totaling $977,890 were not reasonably funded.

###

Concerning standing to sue in an educational setting.

Defending Education* is an association of parents, students, and concerned citizens that brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 challenging a set of student speech policies adopted by the Croton-Harmon Union Free School District, a New York State School District, for alleged violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. 

Defending Education represented three of its parent-members whose children attend school in the Croton-Harmon School District and espouse social and political views that they wish to share but refrain from doing so because they feared their speech was prohibited by the School District’s policies. Defending Education brought suit in a Federal District Court seeking a preliminary injunction against the School District's enforcement of those policies. 

The District Court denied that motion and dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction citing Aguayo v Richardson, 473 F.2d 1090 (2d Cir. 1973), in which the Second Circuit had held that "Associations lack standing to sue on behalf of their members for claims brought under §1983". Defending Education appealed the District Court’s decision to the Second Circuit but, acknowledging Aguayo, moved for summary affirmance, which the Second Circuit granted. 

Defending Education then petitioned for reconsideration of their cause of action en banc, asking the Second Circuit to overrule Aguayo and to remand the case to the District Court so that Defending Education could pursue its lawsuit against the School District. 

After circulating this opinion to all active members of the Second Circuit and receiving no objection, the Second Circuit overrule Aguayo’s holding "with respect to associational standing under §1983".  In its place, the Second Circuit adopted the rule outlined by the Supreme Court in Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission, 432 U.S. 333, 343 (1977), and adopted by its sister Circuits, which provides that a membership organization has standing to bring suit on behalf of its members under §1983 when:

(a) those members would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right;

(b) the interests protected are germane to that organization’s purpose, and 

(c) the participation of individual members in the lawsuit is not necessary for the claim asserted or the relief requested. 

The Second Circuit than REVERSE the judgment of the Federal District Court and REMAND the matter for further proceedings in accordance with its instant ruling. 

* The Court pointed out that "Defending Education is an association of parents, students, and concerned citizens that brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 challenging a set of student speech policies adopted by the Croton-Harmon Union Free School District (“Croton-Harmon” or the “District”) in New York for alleged violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

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

 

Don't miss the 2026 Women's Leadership Summit!

 

The Future is Chasing Us - Are You Ready to Lead it? To be held at the Joseph A. Floreano Rochester Riverside Convention Center Rochester, New York Thursday Sep 24, 2026 11:00 AM : 5:00 PM EDT The annual Women’s Leadership Summit will bring together women leaders in all phases of their careers throughout the Greater Rochester area. Influential leaders will come together for an afternoon of learning, conversation, career development, networking and more. During lunch, we will celebrate Rochester companies who are elevating, growing and supporting women leaders through the annual Elevating Women awards program. Buy Tickets Now!

Employee alleges Employer subjected him to unlawful retaliation and other unlawful acts and served him with false disciplinary charges

Plaintiff was served with Civil Service Law §75 disciplinary charges. After a Civil Service Law §75 hearing, a Hearing Officer found that Plaintiff was guilty a charge of speeding on the Thruway but found that all remaining disciplinary charges were not sustained. 

Although the Hearing Officer recommended that Plaintiff be restored to his position,  Plaintiff was reassigned to another facility, more than a three hour drive from Plaintiff's residence.

Plaintiff sued his Employer and other named individuals [Defendants] alleging that he was subjected to retaliation and other actions acts by Defendants including being served with disciplinary charges based on "false and manufactured charges", and a disciplinary suspension. The matter proceeded to trial and a jury considered the following three causes of action:

(1) Deprivation of Plaintiff's 14th Amendment right to equal protection pursuant to 42 USC §1983; 

(2) Retaliation in violation of 42 USC §1983; and 

(3) Tortious interference with business relations.

The jury found for Plaintiff and awarded Plaintiff $500,000 in damages for "pain, suffering, and emotional distress, harm to reputation, and loss of enjoyment of life". 

Supreme Court awarded Plaintiff $185,392 in attorneys' fees. 

Defendants appealed the Supreme Court's ruling, contending Supreme Court erred in denying that part of their CPLR 3211 motion seeking dismissal of Plaintiff's equal protection cause of action. The Appellate Division rejected that contention. 

Defendants, citing Engquist v Oregon Dept. of Agriculture (553 US 591), also argued that "a class-of-one equal protection claim is unavailable in the public employment context, and an equal protection claim based on selective enforcement, such as alleged by [Plaintiff], is likewise barred. Noting that the Second Circuit has left open that question and that there is a split of authority in the district courts, the Appellate Division said it was "persuaded by the reasoning in Airday v City of New York (2020 WL 4015770), that selective-enforcement claims survive after Engquist.

Defendants' further argued that, "even if selective-enforcement claims survived Engquist, they are entitled to qualified immunity under 42 USC §1983". The Appellate Division said that such an argument was not preserved for its review, and, in any event, is without merit, observing that "Public officials may invoke qualified immunity under 42 USC §1983 unless, inter alia, the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time." Further, opined the Appellate Division, malice-based selective-enforcement claims premised on the violation of equal protection were recognized at the time of Defendants' actions and thus Defendants were aware of the purported unlawfulness of their conduct.

Defendants next contend that, with respect to Plaintiff's equal protection cause of action, Plaintiff failed to identify "a materially similar comparator whom [Defendants] treated differently and [Defendants] are therefore entitled to a directed verdict on that cause of action". The Appellate Division held that "[Defendants'] contention [was] not preserved for [its] review inasmuch as [Defendants] did not raise that issue in their motion for a directed verdict."

Defendants also argued that Supreme Court erred in denying that part of their CPLR 3211 motion seeking to dismiss the retaliation cause of action because Plaintiff's speech was not protected inasmuch as it was speech he made as an employee, not as a citizen. The Appellate Division rejected that argument, noting that "To establish a claim for retaliation under the First Amendment, a plaintiff  'must demonstrate that (1) [their] speech addressed a matter of public concern, (2) [they] suffered an adverse employment action, and (3) a causal connection existed between the speech and the adverse employment action, so that it can be said that [their] speech was a motivating factor in the determination'". 

In contrast, the Appellate Division noted that "[W]hen public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, the employees are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline".

The Appellate Division said it agreed with Defendants that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the tortious interference cause of action, observing that "Generally, actions against [New York] State officers acting in their official capacity in the exercise of governmental functions are deemed to be, in essence, claims against the State and, therefore, suable only in the Court of Claims".

Finally, the Appellate Division rejected Defendants' contention that the matter should be remitted to Supreme Court for a recalculate the award of attorneys' fees and unanimously affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment without costs.

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

New York State Local Government and School District audits posted on the Internet

On September 11, 2026, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli  announced the following local government and school audits were issued.

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

Averill Park – Sand Lake Fire District No. 2 – Claims Auditing (Rensselaer County) The board did not conduct a thorough audit of claims paid. Auditors reviewed 62 claims totaling $280,832 and determined that none of the claims were audited and approved by the entire board as required. Auditors determined that the 62 claims were properly supported and for valid and legal purposes. However, the lack of a claims audit increased the risk that claims for improper purposes could be paid, or that irregularities could go undetected and uncorrected.

City of Olean – Financial Management (Cattaraugus County) City officials did not properly manage the city’s fund balance or ensure that financial activity was accurately recorded and reported. Specifically, city officials did not consistently maintain unrestricted fund balance in accordance with the city’s fund balance policy, and the city’s accounting records and financial reports were inaccurate.

Fulton City School District – Financial Condition (Oswego County) The board adopted budgets that relied on appropriated fund balance and underestimated expenditures, resulting in recurring operating deficits that significantly depleted the district’s financial cushion. As a result, the district's surplus fund balance declined to $607,034 at the end of the 2024-25 fiscal year, representing just 0.6% of the ensuing year’s budget. The district also issued $8 million in revenue anticipation notes to address year-end cash flow needs.

Groton Central School District – Building Access (Cayuga County, Cortland County and Tompkins County) District officials did not properly manage and monitor building access accounts and devices. Specifically, of the accounts auditors reviewed, the district had active, but unneeded, accounts with assigned key fobs in the system. As a result, there was a potential risk for unauthorized access to district school buildings, compromising building security and safety for students, teachers, staff and visitors.

Hancock Rural Fire District – Board Oversight (Delaware County) The board did not provide adequate oversight of the district’s financial operations. As a result, contracts were incomplete, required policies were not adopted, commissioners did not complete required fiscal oversight training and the board did not annually audit the treasurer’s records.

Malverne Union Free School District – Building Access (Nassau County) District officials did not properly manage and monitor building access accounts and devices. Specifically, the district had active, but unneeded, accounts with assigned key cards in the system. As a result, there was a potential risk for unauthorized access to district school buildings.

North Brookfield Volunteer Fire Department – Investments (Madison County) Department officials did not adopt a written investment policy or establish procedures to govern the investment of department funds or provide a framework to help ensure funds were invested safely and prudently, and that the department’s resources were not exposed to unnecessary financial risk. During the audit period, the department invested $77,200 with a local tax preparer/insurance agent who issued promissory notes that promised an 8% annual return. The individual whom the department invested their funds with subsequently filed for bankruptcy in April 2023 and was convicted of operating a Ponzi scheme involving more than $50 million. Although the department recovered $6,442 through the bankruptcy proceedings, it lost $45,758 of its principal investment and never received a return on the investment.

Snyder Fire District – Claims Auditing (Erie County) The board did not properly audit all claims before payment, and the district incurred unnecessary costs totaling approximately $9,700 as a result. Auditors reviewed 137 claims totaling approximately $367,000 and determined that 115 claims totaling approximately $357,000 (84% of the claims reviewed, and 97% of dollars examined) did not have sufficient documentation to support a proper audit and should not have been approved and paid for.

Springfield Fire District – Board Oversight (Otsego County) The board did not provide adequate oversight of the treasurer’s accounting records and financial reports or ensure that all required Annual Financial Reports (AFRs) were filed. As a result, the board lacked assurance that the district’s accounting records and financial reports were accurate, financial operations were properly monitored and statutory reporting requirements were met. In addition, when AFRs are not filed, the board, taxpayers, the Office of the State Comptroller and other interested parties are prevented from obtaining timely and reliable information to assess the district’s financial condition.

Town of Galway – Salaries and Employee Benefits (Saratoga County) The board authorized salaries and benefits through resolutions and a collective bargaining agreement (CBA). Time worked was supported by time records containing supervisory approval, all payrolls were certified by the town supervisor, and leave accruals were generally earned and used appropriately. However, the town supervisor did not adequately monitor salaries paid and benefits provided to ensure employees were paid and received benefits consistent with approved board resolutions and the CBA.

Town of Portage – Supervisor’s Records and Reports (Livingston County) The supervisor did not maintain complete, accurate and up-to-date accounting recors and reports. Although the supervisor assigned his duties for maintaining the accounting records and preparing disbursements and financial reports to a bookkeeping firm, the supervisor did not provide adequate oversight of these duties.

Town of Rose – Supervisors’ Records and Reports (Wayne County) The supervisors did not maintain complete, accurate and up-to-date accounting records and reports. Although the supervisors assigned their duties for maintaining their accounting records and preparing disbursements and financial reports to the appointed clerk to the supervisor, the supervisors did not provide adequate oversight of these duties.

Village of South Glens Falls – Budgeting and Financial Management (Saratoga County) The board and village officials did not adopt realistic and structurally balanced budgets or effectively manage fund balance and reserve funds during the audit period. The board routinely overestimated appropriations, did not consistently receive or review monthly budget-to-actual reports and did not adopt fund balance or reserve policies. These practices contributed to accumulating excessive surplus funds which may indicate that taxes and fees were higher than necessary to fund operations.

Waterloo Central School District – Building Access (Seneca County) District officials did not properly manage and monitor building access accounts and devices. Specifically, of the accounts auditors reviewed, the district had active, but unneeded, accounts with assigned badges in the system. As a result, there was a potential risk for unauthorized access to district school buildings.

###

Selected items posted on the Internet during the week ending September 11, 2026

Budget Director Kristin Walker is using research, data and performance management to help state agencies evaluate programs and direct limited resources where they can have the greatest impact. Read More

Keeping Public Services Accessible During Emergencies Power outages, severe weather, and equipment failures don't stop the need for public services. Learn how agencies can prepare for unexpected disruptions while maintaining reliable communications with staff and the communities they serve. DOWNLOAD

Better User Experiences, Better Government: Designing the Modern Workplace In this thought leadership paper, explore how the Texas Teachers Retirement System redesigned its workplace to create a more seamless employee experience, improve collaboration and reduce IT complexity. Download the paper to learn five practical best practices for modernizing meeting spaces, supporting hybrid work and building workplaces that empower employees to focus on serving the public. DOWNLOAD

From Threat to Trust: Building Security into Public Workflows Protecting today's public sector means building security into every workflow — not bolting it on afterward. This thought leadership paper explores why embedding security directly into devices and everyday workflows is essential for reducing risk, improving resilience and supporting mission success. Download the full paper to learn how your organization can make security a seamless part of daily operations. DOWNLOAD

A Candid Conversation About Government AI Hear government leaders discuss AI governance, risk, data protection and accountability. Save Your Spot

Employee on a pregnancy-related leave terminated after failing to commit to a return-to-work date

In this action to recover damages for alleged unlawful employment discrimination on the basis of gender in violation of Executive Law §296 and the Administrative Code of the City of New York §8-107, Plaintiff appealed from an order of the Supreme Court granting the Defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing her complaint. 

Plaintiff had taken a pregnancy-related leave but had repeatedly failed to commit to a date on which she would return from such leave. Defendant terminated Plaintiff's employment at the end of her pregnancy-related leave.

Plaintiff commenced the instant action alleging unlawful discrimination on the basis of gender and retaliation within the meaning of the New York State Human Rights Law [NYSHRL] (Executive Law §296) and the New York City Human Rights Law [NYCHRL] (Administrative Code of the City of New York §8-107). Defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing Plaintiff's complaint. 

Supreme Court granted Defendant's motion for summary judgment and Plaintiff appealed the Supreme Court's ruling.

The Appellate Division found that:

1. Defendant met its prima facie burden by demonstrating that Plaintiff's employment was terminated for a nondiscriminatory reason, namely her failure to commit to a return-to-work date, citing Niemotko v Mount St. Mary Coll., 241 AD3d at 703; and

2. Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the Defendant's reason for terminating her employment was a pretext for pregnancy discrimination, citing D'Agostino v MMC E., LLC, 184 AD3d 719.

The Appellate Division held that "Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the [Defendant's] motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action alleging pregnancy discrimination in violation of the NYSHRL", noting that "the [Defendant] met its prima facie burden by establishing that there was no evidentiary route that could allow any jury to believe that the [Plaintiff's] employment was terminated for discriminatory reasons".

The Appellate Division also noted that Plaintiff "failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the proffered explanation [by the Defendant] was a pretext for discrimination or whether discrimination was one of the motivating factors for the challenged action".

Opining that "Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the [Defendant's] motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action alleging gender discrimination in violation of the NYCHRL", the Appellate Division dismissed Plaintiff's appeal.

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

New York State Bar Association’s Workers’ Compensation Division to hold its 1st Annual Educational Seminar

Join the New York State Bar Association’s Workers’ Compensation Division for its 1st Annual Educational Seminar, a premier two-day program featuring timely updates, practical guidance, and in-depth discussions on the issues shaping New York State's workers’ compensation law. 

Topics include:

• Current Trends in NYS Workers’ Compensation
• Litigation Strategy & Effective Hearing Protocol 
• Appellate Division, 3rd Department Panel 
• Section 32 Settlements & Stipulations
• Permanency & Labor Market Attachment 
• Medical Causation & Benefits
• A View From the Bench 
• Kids Chance of New York Scholarship Presentation
• Presentation from the New York State Compensation Board
  Advocate for Injured Workers
• Case Law Update/Appeals
• Third Party Settlements – Liens & Offsets
• Practicing with Professionalism

Wednesday, November 4, 2026 – Thursday, November 5, 2026 New York State Bar Association – Albany, NY

Register Now

Sponsors include: Workers' Compensation Law Division Committee Torts, Insurance, & Compensation Law Section Committee on Continuing Legal Education

New York State's State and Local Employees' Retirement System announces employer contributions rates for State Fiscal Year 2027-2028

In a press release issued on September 8, 2026, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli reported "the  employer contribution rates for the New York State and Local Retirement System  (NYSLRS) for State Fiscal Year (SFY) 2027-28. Employers’ average contribution rates will decrease from 17.6% to 17.3% of payroll for the Employees’ Retirement System [ERS] and increase from 36.5% to 37.4% of payroll for the Police and Fire Retirement System [PFRS]."

In the press release, the State Comptroller reported:

NYSLRS is made up of these two systems, which pay service and disability retirement benefits to state and local public employees and death benefits to their survivors. There are more than 3,000 participating employers in ERS and PFRS, and more than 300 different retirement plan combinations. In the SFY that ended March 31, 2026, NYSLRS paid more than $17.5 billion in benefits. ERS has about 1.2 million members with 493,000 retirees and beneficiaries receiving benefits and PFRS has 79,000 members with 42,000 retirees and beneficiaries currently receiving benefits.*

The Governor' press release notes: 

“Our state pension fund and retirement system continue to be among the strongest in the nation, even as we navigate the challenges of damaging federal policy changes, market volatility and global conflict,” DiNapoli said. “These rates, coupled with our disciplined, long-term investment strategy and prudent management, will help ensure public workers and their families receive the retirement benefits they have earned.

"Employer rates for NYSLRS are determined based on investment performance and actuarial assumptions recommended by NYSLRS’ actuary, who is required to review the actuarial assumptions and experience and to issue an annual report. The recommendations are reviewed by the independent Actuarial Advisory Committee and approved by the Comptroller. In addition to investment performance, other factors that impact rates include higher salaries, plan options selected by employers, recent legislative reforms to Tiers 5 and 6 and member retirement rates.

The press release also noted: "In 2012, DiNapoli began providing employers with access to a two-year projection of their annual pension bills. Employers can use this projection in the preparation of their budgets. Projections of required contributions vary by employer depending on factors such as the types of retirement benefit plans adopted, salaries paid, and the distribution of employees among the six membership tiers."

The press release continues, indicating:

"Payments based on the new rates are due by Feb. 1, 2028, but employers receive a discount if payment is made by Dec. 15, 2027.

"The New York State Common Retirement Fund’s long-term assumed rate of return will remain at 5.9%. DiNapoli has been a leader in the trend of public pension funds lowering their assumed rates of return to better enable New York to weather volatile markets. The median investment return assumption for public pension funds was 7% in July 2026, according to the National Association of State Retirement Administrators."

DiNapoli also announced that NYSLRS had a funded ratio of 96.8% as of March 31, 2026. NYSLRS is consistently one of the nation’s best funded retirement systems. "A high funding ratio means NYSLRS has funds available to pay retirement benefits to about 1.3 million members, consisting of over 750,000 current and former state and local government employees and more than 535,000 retirees and their beneficiaries."

The fund’s estimated value was $309.7 billion as of June 30, 2026.

* Nota Bene: The State University of New York's Optional Retirement Program is not part of NYSLRS. 

Report 

Annual Report to the Comptroller on Actuarial Assumptions

Related Work:

State Pension Fund Valued at $309.7 Billion at End of First Quarter

Fiduciary and Conflict of Interest Review

###

Election of remedies

Plaintiff, a parent of children attending the School District's schools, appealed a determination of the School District's Board of Education [Respondent] with the Commissioner of Education after being informed "that he would be banned from all district property and that any emails sent to district staff would be blocked through June 30, 2026".  

Plaintiff argued that the Respondent’s limitations on his access to school property was arbitrary and capricious because his conduct was neither disruptive nor abusive and violated his First Amendment and due process rights. 

Respondent contended that Plaintiff had violated its code of conduct and that its "temporary restrictions were necessary given [Plaintiff's] aggressive and inappropriate conduct".

Commissioner of Education Rosa, decided that Plaintiff's appeal to the Commissioner must be dismissed in consideration of the doctrine of election of remedies, noting that Plaintiff had filed a law suit in Supreme Court on March 10, 2026 against the  Respondent concerning the same issues and seeking similar relief.  

Noting that the action in Supreme Court "remains pending," the Commissioner said that "Under these circumstances, it would be contrary to the orderly administration of justice for the Commissioner to decide claims that [Petitioner] has elected to raise in court, particularly where that proceeding seeks the same or similar relief".

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

Selected items posted on the Internet during the week ending September 4, 2026

The Q3 2026 issue of Governing Magazine is out now. This edition spotlights Governing’s 2026 Public Officials of the Year. Honorees are tackling government’s toughest challenges with pragmatic leadership, fresh ideas and a focus on delivering results that improve people’s lives. Read More.

Governing in the Age of Agentic AI This Governing guide gives elected, legislative and executive leaders a practical framework for navigating this next phase of AI. Drawing on real-world examples from states and cities, it explores how policymakers can encourage responsible experimentation, modernize governance and funding models, prepare the public workforce, strengthen transparency and build safeguards that keep pace with rapidly evolving technology. DOWNLOAD

Govern AI Before It Governs You Practical templates, scorecards, and worksheets to help your agency govern AI. Download the Free Kit

Local government leadership is a public activity, from campaigning to showing up when constituents need help or attention. But according to a new survey from Princeton’s Bridging Divides Initiative, many local leaders feel less comfortable being in public.  Read More

Safer Communities, Lower Costs: What Government Leaders Need to Know About AI Dash Cams This paper explores how agencies are using AI to reduce crashes, lower liability and insurance costs, protect employees from false claims, and uncover operational efficiencies that deliver a rapid return on investment. DOWNLOAD

Colorado, New Mexico and Washington are expanding protections for wetlands and streams as federal oversight retreats, offering potential models for other states. Read More

How Much AI Is Already in Your Agency? See how CapMetro uncovered AI usage and built governance on real organizational data.  Discover Their Approach

Creating Strategic Partnerships in State and Local Government Download this paper to explore how strategic partnerships can help agencies optimize technology investments, improve service delivery and prepare for what's next. DOWNLOAD

How Reno Transformed Boards and Commissions to Build an Award-Winning Governance Model Learn how Reno centralized governance workflows, reduced administrative burden, improved compliance and delivers a more accessible experience for residents — all without increasing costs. READ NOW

How High-Performance Computing Meets Compliance Innovation and compliance don't have to compete. Learn how public sector organizations can securely power AI, advanced analytics and high-performance computing while meeting evolving regulatory requirements. Download the paper for practical guidance on building secure, future-ready computing environments. DOWNLOAD

Think Like a Fraudster, Adapt Like an Expert Identity fraud is a significant and growing threat to the integrity and mission of government services. The key to countering today's threats and future risks is to understand what motivates fraudsters. This handbook explains key varieties of identity fraud and the fundamentals of effective identity verification. Most importantly, it gives government leaders insights into the fraudster's mindset so they can create strategies to proactively prevent fraud and adapt to evolving tactics. DOWNLOAD

How the City of Newport News Is Raising the Bar for Open Government Facing a surge in public records requests, Newport News centralized FOIA management to improve transparency, streamline compliance and strengthen public access to government information. READ NOW 

Achieve Governance and Speed Without Compromise Outdated systems and disconnected workflows slow progress and limit accountability. Discover how intelligent work management gives government leaders the visibility, control and automation needed to accelerate projects without sacrificing governance. Download the paper the full paper to learn more. DOWNLOAD

NYPPL will observe Labor Day on Monday, Sept. 7, 2026.