ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [AI] IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN PREPARING NYPPL SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS

September 16, 2020

Freedom of Information Law Rulings

Summaries of selected Freedom of Information Law [FOIL] court and administrative rulings posted on New York Public Personnel Law

Click on the text highlighted in color to access the text of the posting.

A “conclusory affidavit” by the custodian of the records that are the target of a FOIL request insufficient to trigger a FOIL “statutory exception”

A FOIL request seeking the names of a public retirement system’s retirees may be denied by the custodian of the records as exempt from disclosure

A Freedom of Information demand may trump an agreement to keep some or all of the terms of a disciplinary action settlement "confidential"

A Freedom of Information request for records concerning law enforcement operations may be denied

A peer-review panel member’s evaluation of an individual may be withheld from disclosure pursuant to a FOIL request

A police officer's personnel records are exempt from disclosure pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law during and after he or she leaves public service

A state may deny access to records available to its citizens pursuant to its Freedom of Information Law to individuals not citizens of that state who make a FOIL request for such records

Access to documents under FOIL limited

Action for alleged defamation follows disclosure of document pursuant to a FOIL request 

An agency may decline to acknowledge that requested records exist in response to a Freedom of Information Law request

An attorney’s advice sent by one layperson to another layperson not an attorney-client communication subject to a FOIL exception

An autopsy of a Freedom of Information request

An entity claiming that it is not subject to the State’s Freedom of Information Law has the burden to provide documentary evidence that conclusively establishes such a defense as a matter of law

An individual terminated pursuant to Civil Service Law §71 must be reinstated consistent with §71 once the individual has been found qualified to return to work by a medical officer selected by personnel department or civil service commission having jurisdiction

Another FOIL Lesson: Be mindful of your audience

Applying the exemption from releasing documents and records to the public pursuant to a FOIL request

Attorney-Client privilege and e-mail communications

Certain information contained in personnel records may be redacted in complying with a Freedom of Information request

Certain personnel records are exempt from disclosure pursuant to Public Officers Law §87(2)(a) and Civil Rights Law §50-a even in a redacted form

Challenging the denial of a Freedom of Information Law request on the representation that the records are exempt from disclosure

Charging a fee for the cost of reviewing and redacting requested video footage sought pursuant to New York State's Freedom of Information Law

Commissioner of Education does not have jurisdiction to resolve FOIL or Title IX appeals

Complying with administrative procedural requirements prior initiating litigation seeking information pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law

Conditioning the disclosure of material sought pursuant to a FOIL request upon the prepayment of costs authorized by statute

Confidentiality of disciplinary records based on an agreement not to disclose their contents

Confidentiality of police records

Correspondence exchanged between public officers and agencies and private consultants are within the ambit of the Freedom of Information Law

Court cites the “principle of stare decisis” in affirming a custodian of public record’s denial of a Freedom of Information Law request

Courts are to determine the appropriate balance between personal privacy and public interests in considering the appeal of a denial of a Freedom of Information [FOIL] request

Custodian of a public record may decline to release pre-decision materials prepared to assist in final decision making being sought pursuant to a Freedom of Information request

Decision highlights some essentials of the Freedom of Information Law

Determining if a "non-governmental entity" is an "agency" within the meaning of the New York State's Freedom of Information Law and thus subject to its provisions

Disclosing the unlisted telephone numbers called by public officials pursuant to a FOIL request

Disclosure of public information or records to one is disclosure to all Disclosure of the terms of settlement agreements pursuant to a FOIL demand

Disclosure of public records pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law

Documents concerning an employee’s separation and post-termination employment benefits available under New York's Freedom of Information Law

Documents containing information used to evaluate the performance of specified public employees are not subject to disclosure pursuant to a Freedom of Information request

Duplicative FOIL requests

E-mails between a public employer and an applicant for public employment may be subject to disclosure pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law

Employee disciplined for alleged acts of misconduct that took place 20 years earlier

Employee organization may not rely of a FOIL request to obtain the names of charter school employees

Entities subject to the Open Meetings Law and the Freedom of Information Law

Exceptions to providing public records pursuant to New York State's Freedom of Information Law [FOIL]

Expanding exemptions from FOIL to protect "technology assets used to maintain public information"

FOIL amended

Exploring claimed procedural obstacles to demands for certain records pursuant to New York's Freedom of Information Law

Exploring claimed procedural obstacles to demands for certain records pursuant to New York's Freedom of Information Law

Failure of the custodian of a public record sought pursuant to a Freedom of Information Law request to respond to the request within the relevant time limit deemed a denial of the request

Failure to respond to a request for documents sought pursuant New York State's Freedom of Information Law

Filing a FOIL request for personnel records

Footage at issue captured by a body-worn-camera held not a "personnel record" within the meaning of §50-a of the Civil Rights Law

Freedom of information [FOIL] requests for information concerning health insurance plans

Freedom of information and speech

Freedom of Information in cases involving the termination of an employee – an advisory opinion

Freedom of Information requests

Freedom of Law only applies to public entities

Governor Cuomo signs Executive Order 8-149 providing for expediting the Freedom of Information Law appeals process

Home addresses of State employees and retirees may be excluded from disclosure in response to a FOIL request

If the custodian of a record demanded pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law refuses to provide the record, the custodian has the burden of showing that an exemption applies 

Misconduct off-duty and FOIL

Names of retired New York City police officers not available pursuant to a FOIL request

Neglecting to advise a party of the availability of an administrative appeal defeats a failure to exhaust administrative remedies defense

New York State's E-mail management and preservation policy

New York’s Freedom of Information Law does not permit the custodian of the records to routinely charge for employee time spent searching for documents responsive to a FOIL request

Objecting to producing certain documents demanded pursuant to a non-judicial subpoena duces tecum

Obtaining police personnel records pursuant to a Freedom of Information Law [FOIL] demand

Only a governmental not-for-profit corporation’s records is subject to FOIL

Police agency's records concerning breath alcohol measurement instruments may be obtained pursuant to a Freedom of Information Law request

Processing a Freedom of Information request

Processing Freedom of Information Law requests for disciplinary records of law enforcement personnel involving "unsubstantiated and unfounded complaints against an officer"

Providing the names and home addresses of employees of a private contractor to an employee organization to be determined by applying a “balancing test” to avoid an "unwarranted invasion" of privacy

Public Authority agrees to pay legal expenses incurred as a result of its not responding to a Freedom of Information request

Public benefit corporations are subject to the Open Meetings Law and the Freedom of Information Law as long as they remain public benefit corporations

Public employees personal E-mails exempt from disclosure from FOIL Source: Adjunct Law Prof Blog; http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/adjunctprofs/
 
Redacting certain content in a public record when responding to a Freedom of Information request

Redacting the name of the accused employee from the decision following a disciplinary hearing

Releasing the body camera footage recorded by equipment worn by a police officer

Remedying an inadvertent disclosure of records provided pursuant to a Freedom of Information Law request

Responding to a Freedom of Information Law request by neither confirming nor denying the existence of such information or data

Sanctions ordered after lawsuit filed pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law ruled frivolous

Seeking documents that the custodian of the records contends may be denied pursuant to one or more Freedom of Information Law “exemptions from disclosure”

Seeking information pursuant to a Freedom of Information [FOIL] request

Seeking public documents and records pursuant to New York State's Freedom of Information Law

Seeking public records the custodian contends are exempt from disclosure within the meaning of the Freedom of Information Law

Some guidelines to consider in determining the records to be delivered, in whole or in part, in responding to a Freedom of Information Law request

Some limitations to obtaining information pursuant to New York State's Freedom of Information Law

Standards used by courts in evaluating the denial of a Freedom of Information request for public records

State Senate required to provide employee payroll records in response to a Freedom of Information Law request

The “law enforcement exemption” in POL §87(2) (e) (iv) is not applicable to FOIL requests for documents that might result in administrative disciplinary action

The “personal records” exemption from disclosure set out in Civil Rights Law §50-a (1) applies to both active and former employees of the agency

The custodian of a public record must articulate particularized and specific justification for denying access to a record requested pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law

The custodian of public records demanded pursuant to a FOIL request electing to withhold some or all such records has the burden of demonstrating that the information requested falls within a statutory exemption

The custodian of the records has the burden of proving that information it withheld in responding to a FOIL request is within a FOIL exemption

The denial of a FOIL request by an entity subject to the Freedom of Information Law may not be based on the purpose for which the document or record was produced or the function to which it relates

The Freedom of Information Law does not require an agency to formulate a final determination in the event there is none in existence

The Freedom of Information Law typically does not require an entity to create records not in existence in order to satisfy a FOIL request

The government must honor its promise not to disclose the names of individuals asked to disclose certain information – at least for the present

Where disclosure is not barred by statute, claims of “unwarranted invasion of personal privacy" are resolved by a court weighing "privacy interests" against the public's interest in the information

Writ of mandamus to compel disclosure of records pursuant to FOIL

 

September 15, 2020

Former Lake George Watershed Coalition Director sentenced to 8-24 years for stealing nearly $250,000 in state grant funds

On September 10, 2020, State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli and Warren County District Attorney Jason Carusone announced that David Decker, former director of the Lake George Watershed Coalition,* was sentenced to 8-24 years in prison by the Warren County Court after a jury convicted him of 6 felonies, including grand larceny in the second degree, scheme to defraud in the first degree and four counts of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree, related to his diversion of federal and state grant funds meant to improve the area surrounding Lake George.

The jury convicted Mr. Decker after hearing evidence that he was double billing two different grants for the same work, one from the Town of Queensbury and another from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Services, in the amount of $135,000. Additionally, evidence at the trial showed that Decker pocketed over $100,000 in state grant funds meant to reimburse subcontractors whom he never paid. While the victims went unpaid, bank records showed that Mr. Decker withdrew funds from the Watershed Operating account at the Saratoga Race Course, Foxwoods MGM, Harrah’s and Turning Stone casinos. The records also show that he paid his personal credit card bills as well as numerous other personal expenses and inappropriately transferred grant money to his personal investment funds.

Mr. Decker was also convicted of filing four false tax returns which failed to report income from funds diverted from the grant programs as well as a for-profit basketball league for children.

“Mr. Decker helped himself to hundreds of thousands of dollars meant to help his community,” said State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. “Thanks to my partnership with District Attorney Carusone, the Department of Taxation and Finance, and the Warren County Sherriff’s Department, Decker’s shameless exploitation of his position of trust was exposed and he has now been held accountable for his actions.”

“David Decker’s years of illegal conduct harmed local businesses, government entities and not for profit organizations,” said District Attorney Jason Carusone. “The jury’s verdict and the court’s sentence send a strong message to the defendant that his ongoing criminal activity will not be tolerated. I thank the exceptional work of assistant district attorney Ben Smith along with special assistant district attorney Christine Stevens who jointly prosecuted the case. I also wish to thank the Warren County Sheriff’s Office, the New York State Office of the State Comptroller, and the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance for their hard work through the course of a lengthy investigation and trial.”

“State grant funding is meant specifically for the betterment of local communities,” New York State Commissioner of Taxation and Finance Michael Schmidt said. “When that money is instead used for someone’s personal gain, they must be held accountable. We cannot stand by while the public trust is so blatantly violated. I commend the efforts of all partners involved in this case.”

* The Lake George Watershed Coalition is a consortium of municipalities and organizations surrounding Lake George including Warren County, the towns of Queensbury and Bolton and the village of Lake George, and was created in 2001 to preserve the beauty and health of Lake George by coordinating state and federal grant funds.

 

September 14, 2020

Reporting on-the-job misbehavior

A computer "application" - #NotMe - provides employers with a tool that permits employees to make timely submission of complaints of alleged supervisor or co-worker misconduct to personnel officers, human resource teams, compliance officers or designated individuals. Click on https://www.not-me.com/organizations for information concerning this program.

 

Workplace Harassment Webinar: Updates to the Law and Investigation Techniques

This complimentary webinar, Workplace Harassment: Updates to the Law and  Investigation Techniques, is scheduled for  Wednesday, September 23, 2020, 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. EST, and replaces the originally scheduled iteration of Harris Beach's in-person Labor Seminar Series. SHRM Credit is Available.
 
The presentation will include:
  • An overview of the federal and state laws prohibiting harassment in the workplace;
  • Recent legislative and case law developments impacting harassment claims;
  • Best practices in conducting workplace investigations.

Harris Beach participants:
  • Daniel Moore, Leader of the Labor and Employment Practice Group
  • Joshua Steele, Labor and Employment Practice Group
  • Taylor Ventre, Labor and Employment Practice Group
  • Lindsey Zullo, Labor and Employment Practice Group

To Register click on:

 
Questions may be submitted during the registration process. The webinar will be recorded in order to be available to those registering unable to participate in person. 
 
N.B. Harris Beach notes "This may be considered Attorney Advertising by the Rules of Professional Conduct."
 

September 12, 2020

Audits of New York state and local government agencies released during the week ending September 10, 2020

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced the following audits have been issued during the week ending September 10, 2020. Click on the text highlighted in color to access the complete report. 


State Departments and Agencies:


Department of Health (DOH): Improper Medicaid Payments for Recipients Diagnosed With Severe Malnutrition (Follow-Up) (2020-F-9) An audit issued in 2019 identified $416,237 in Medicaid overpayments on inpatient claims that contained a severe malnutrition diagnosis that the medical records did not appear to support. In a follow-up, auditors found DOH officials made some progress in addressing the problems identified in the initial audit report; however, additional action is needed. In particular, the Office of the Medicaid Inspector General had not taken action to review the Medicaid overpayments and make any recoveries. 

Office of Mental Health (OMH): Oversight of Provider Consolidated Fiscal Reports – Independent Living Inc. (2019-S-60) OMH takes certain steps to ensure costs and other information reported by providers on their fiscal reports is accurate, documented, properly calculated and allowable. These steps include performing desk reviews that incorporate computer-assisted auditing techniques to identify areas for further review by an analyst. However, OMH generally does not perform detailed audits or field reviews of providers’ fiscal report information. There is a risk that conclusions drawn from any inaccurate data may not be as useful as they otherwise could be. 

State University of New York at Stony Brook: Select Financial Management Practices at the Office of Transportation and Parking Operations (2018-S-11) Auditors identified control deficiencies over certain accounts, expenditures, and collections of revenues that jeopardize its ability to support operations. Three of the transportation and parking accounts have operated with a cash deficit balance for at least four consecutive years and $429,420 of the approximately $3.4 million in expenditures reviewed were not properly supported. Auditors also identified control deficiencies in the revenue collection process for the administration parking garage and metered parking accounts. 

Metropolitan Transportation Authority - New York City Transit: Subway Wait Assessment  (2019-S-62) Subway wait assessment is calculated at time points, which should consist of between 25 and 50 percent of all stops along each route. Auditors found that time points only cover between 11 and 30 percent of all stops on each route per direction. Therefore, the majority of the service provided is not captured in the wait calculation. The points did not include key subway stations such as Penn Station, 59th Street-Columbus Circle, and 14th Street. 

New York City Department of Social Services: Controls Over Capital Improvements at City-Owned Homeless Shelters (2018-N-3) The Department of Homeless Services lacks the necessary controls over city-owned homeless shelter capital improvement projects to ensure urgently needed projects are properly prioritized and completed timely and within budget. 

Office of Victim Services (OVS): Controls Over Selected Expenditures (Follow-Up) (2020-F-16) An audit issued in September 2018 found that OVS’ controls generally ensured that its expenditures for crime victim compensation claims, grants, and forensic rape examination (FRE) claims were made only to eligible victims and providers for eligible victim services. However, auditors identified minor discrepancies in OVS’ verification of FRE provider licenses and recommended they implement a risk-based approach to verify and validate provider licenses on submitted claims. In a follow-up, auditors found that OVS has implemented the recommendation from the initial report. 


School districts:

Dryden Central School District – Cash Management (Tompkins County) District officials did not follow their investment policy. As a result, officials did not maximize interest earnings for the district. Auditors determined officials did not develop and manage a comprehensive investment program. Auditors also found officials did not seek competitive interest rates. Officials earned interest totaling $246,431 during the audit period, however, they could have earned an additional $614,606 if they used other available investment options. 

Niagara Falls City School District – Out-of-District Tuition Billing (Niagara County) Tuition billings for district students enrolled in out-of-district programs were not always accurately calculated or properly supported. District officials overpaid two charter schools for 36 special education students by approximately $71,000 and may have overpaid for three students in foster care and three students in McKinney-Vento status by approximately $44,000. District officials were unable to properly monitor out-of-district tuition billings or ensure the billed amounts were accurate and proper because they did not obtain or retain adequate support documentation.


Municipal jurisdictions

County of Greene – Information Technology The county legislators did not monitor compliance with the county’s acceptable use policy, and did not adopt Information Technology (IT) policies. County legislators did not adopt a breach notification policy, a disaster recovery plan and a personal, private and sensitive information (PPSI) policy. In addition, county officials did not provide cyber security training to IT personnel and county employees. Sensitive information technology (IT) control weaknesses were communicated confidentially to officials. 

Town of Oyster Bay – Financial Condition Management (Nassau County) The board and town officials need to continue to improve their management and oversight of the town’s financial condition. Three of the town’s funds have carried repeated fund balance deficits, while two other funds have accumulated unrestricted fund balances equal to at least 45 percent of the next year’s budgets and no reserve funds were established. In addition, the town has nearly $605 million in outstanding debt, which is significantly more than neighboring towns and requires 37 percent of the revenue of the funds servicing this debt. The also board did not develop and adopt several comprehensive written plans and policies, including a multiyear financial plan, fund balance policy and reserve policy.

 

CAUTION

Subsequent court and administrative rulings, or changes to laws, rules and regulations may have modified or clarified or vacated or reversed the decisions summarized here. Accordingly, these 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.
NYPPL Blogger Harvey Randall served as Principal Attorney, New York State Department of Civil Service; Director of Personnel, SUNY Central Administration; Director of Research, Governor’s Office of Employee Relations; and Staff Judge Advocate General, 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.
New York Public Personnel Law. Email: publications@nycap.rr.com