Selected items posted on blogs during the week ending October 25, 2025

8 Cybersecurity Best Practices From CivicPlus® Cyber threats target governments—deploy best practices to secure systems, protect resident data, and sustain trust. Learn 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 

Transparency in Motion: Real-Time Data for Safer Streets and Stronger Communities Public safety agencies are under pressure to do more with less -- respond faster, operate more efficiently, and remain accountable to both leadership and the communities they serve. This paper explores how telematics and in-vehicle data are helping agencies meet those expectations and deliver measurable results. DOWNLOAD

Modernizing Outdated Identity Tools in Government Outdated identity tools increase the risk of cyberattacks, user fatigue, and regulatory noncompliance for state and local agencies. Learn why legacy IAM systems—and methods like passwords, manual provisioning, and siloed identity data—can no longer meet today’s security and compliance needs. DOWNLOAD 

How to Drive Value with AI Now Government agencies are under pressure to adopt AI—but without the risk, complexity, or backlash that often follows rushed implementations. This paper lays out the practical steps state and local governments can take to start using AI right now — without losing control of costs, data or decision-making. DOWNLOAD

Inside the Priorities Shaping Public Budgeting in 2025 Discover what’s top-of-mind for local and state government budget leaders. This year’s survey of public finance professionals reveals how agencies are balancing uncertainty with action, and where opportunity still exists to make budgeting smarter and more community focused. DOWNLOAD

Employer's denial of a police officer application for General Municipal Law §207-c disability benefits deemed to be a travesty under the circumstances

In October 2021, a police officer [Petitioner] employed by a New York State village police department responded to an emergency welfare call that culminated in a confrontation during which Petitioner fatally shot an individual. 

Placed on administrative leave pending an investigation, Petitioner returned to work after being cleared of any wrongdoing. In April 2022, Petitioner left work on sick leave after disclosing concerns regarding his mental health to the Village's Chief of Police. 

Petitioner began meeting with a clinical social worker and, on June 29, 2022, he was diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD] stemming from the October 2021 incident. Petitioner then spoke with the Chief of Police about applying for General Municipal Law §207-c disability benefits. In accordance with the Police Chief's instructions, Petitioner promptly submitted various supporting documents and also submitted his completed application for General Municipal Law §207-c disability benefits to the Mayor of the Village.

The Mayor acknowledged receipt of Petitioner's application but Petitioner's application for General Municipal Law §207-c disability benefits was denied as untimely under the applicable collective bargaining agreement [CBA] which required that such an application had to be made within 10 business days of when the individual "reasonably should have known of the illness or injury giving rise to his claim".

Petitioner challenged the denial of his application as provided by the relevant CBA grievance process and an arbitration hearing was conducted.

The arbitrator issued a written recommendation that the Village [Respondent] exercise discretion available to it under the CBA to overlook any untimeliness in Petitioner's application and grant him General Municipal Law §207-c disability benefits. The Respondents rejected the arbitrator's recommendation and denied Petitioner's application for General Municipal Law §207-c disability benefits. 

Petitioner initiated the instant CPLR Article 78 proceeding challenging the Respondent's determination. Respondents moved to dismiss the Plaintiff's Article 78 petition for failure to state a cause of action. 

Supreme Court, reaching the merits of the Respondent's determination: 

1. Held that the Respondents' determination was not improper;

2. Held the Respondents' determination was supported by substantial evidence; and 

3. Dismissed Plaintiff's Article 78 Petition.

Plaintiff appealed the Supreme Court's rulings.

The Appellate Division found that the Respondents' determination that Petitioner had failed to demonstrate good cause for the minor delay in the submission of his application for accidental disability retirement "is unsupported by substantial evidence" and opined that it "wholeheartedly agree with the arbitrator that denying [Petitioner's] application for General Municipal Law §207-c disability benefits would be a travesty".

The Appellate Division annulled the Supreme Court's judgement and remitted the matter to the Respondents "for further proceedings not inconsistent with [its] decision".

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

Access to educational facilities

Plaintiffs allege that the New York City public education system, through its admissions and screening policies, curriculum content, and lack of diversity among the teacher workforce, discriminates against and disproportionately affects Black and Latino students, leading to unequal educational opportunities and negative outcomes for those students. 

Plaintiffs further allege that these practices and policies deprive Black and Latino students of a sound basic education in contravention of the Education Article of the State Constitution (NY Const., Article XI, §1), denies them equal protection of the laws (NY Const., Article I, §11), and denies them access to educational facilities in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law (Executive Law §296. 

Although Plaintiffs identify troubling aspects of New York City's public education system, the claims as presented in the complaint fail as a matter of law. 

Click HERE to access the Court of Appeals' decision posted on the Internet.