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

Dec 4, 2025

New York State Employees Retirement System's Online Tools and Tips

Posted on the Internet by NYSERS on December 04, 2025 


Retirement Online is the fastest and most convenient way to access your retirement account information and conduct business with NYSLRS. In many cases, you can use Retirement Online instead of sending forms through the mail or calling. For example, members can estimate their pension or apply for retirement, and retirees can get their 1099-R tax form or update their federal tax withholding.


Recent disciplinary decisions by New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings Administrative Law Judges

Administrative Law Judge [ALJ] Kevin F. Casey recommended a 30-day suspension after finding that a New York City correction officer submitted a false, misleading, inaccurate, or incomplete report regarding a colleague’s use of force. 

Judge Casey, however, did not sustain a companion charge that the officer failed to intervene when the same person allegedly engaged in self-harm. 

In recommending a 30-day suspension, the ALJ noted that the evidence did not support a departure from the employer's Disciplinary Guidelines. 

Click HERE to access the text of Judge Casey's decision setting out his findings  and recommended penalty.


ALJ Orlando Rodriguez recommended termination of employment of a New York City Eligibility Specialist after the employer proved the employee failed to report to her work location for approximately four months, was absent without authorization, ignored supervisory directives, and acted aggressively and discourteously. 

Judge Rodriguez noted that although the employer only proved some of the charges, the employee’s prolonged unauthorized absence alone provided sufficient grounds to terminate her employment. 

Click HERE to access the text of Judge Rodriguez's decision setting our his findings and recommended penalty.


Judge Astrid B. Gloade recommended a 20-day suspension of a supervisor after finding that the supervisor failed to perform her duties efficiently and failed to properly supervise her subordinates. 

The ALJ had determined that the employer had proved that the supervisor sent a letter containing confidential information about an applicant to an incorrect childcare program, that the supervisor provided incorrect guidance to a subordinate and that the supervisor had failed to meet deadlines with respect to performing certain of her responsibilities. 

Judge Gloade, however, had concluded that the employer's requested penalty that the supervisor be terminated from her position was excessive given the proven charges and, in consideration of the supervisor's long service and heretofore unblemished record, recommended that the appointing authority impose a penalty of a 20-day suspension*.
 
Click HERE to access the text of Judge Gloade's decision setting out her findings and recommended penalty.

* A Reasonable Disciplinary Penalty Under the Circumstances - NYPPL's 442-page e-book focusing on determining an appropriate disciplinary penalty to be imposed on an employee in the public service in instances where the employee has been found guilty of misconduct or incompetence. Click on http://booklocker.com/books/7401.html for more information.



Dec 3, 2025

Disciplinary decision and the penalty imposed remanded for review with instructions to consider only timely charges and specifications

In this appeal of an administrative disciplinary action which found an employee of the New York State Unified Court System [UCS] guilty of the charges filed against him, the Appellate Division notes that where the issue is whether an agency complied with its own internal procedures, the appropriate standard of review is whether the determination was "made in violation of lawful procedure".

Further, opined the court, it is a "fundamental administrative law principle that an agency's rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to statutory authority are binding upon it as well as the individuals affected by the rule or regulation".

The employee [Petitioner] had been served with a notice of charges and specifications alleging that he had engaged in three specified acts of misconduct when he used biased and discriminatory language in three Facebook comments he had posted on the Internet. One such comment, however, was subsequently determined to have been "untimely" at the time it was charged and served.

The Appellate Division's decision notes that where the issue is whether an agency complied with its own internal procedures, the appropriate standard of review is whether the determination was "made in violation of lawful procedure" as it is a "fundamental administrative law principle that an agency's rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to statutory authority are binding upon it as well as the individuals affected by the rule or regulation".

The revised Hearing Officer's findings and recommendation had not distinguished between the sanction initially recommended by the hearing officer in consideration of finding the employee guilty all three alleged charges of misconduct and an appropriate reasonable sanction recommended by the hearing officer to be imposed based on the employee in consideration of the hearing officer's finding the individual guilty of the surviving two timely alleged acts of misconduct. 

The Appellate Division then remitted the matter to UCS for a new determination and recommendation of a penalty to be made by a hearing officer based solely on the two timely specified acts of misconduct, noting that "DILLON, J.P., LOVE and GOLIA, JJ., concur" while DOWLING, JJ., "voted to confirm the revised determination, deny the petition, and dismiss the proceeding on the merits, with a memorandum."

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

Dec 2, 2025

Rochester women pleads guilty to stealing nearly $13,000 from the New York State Employees' Retirement System by failing to report her mothers death

On December 1, 2025 New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli, Monroe County District Attorney Brian Green and New York State Police Superintendent Steven G. James announced that Karen Walsh, a 68-year-old Rochester woman, pleaded guilty to stealing $12,973 in state pension payments sent to her mother, whose death had not been reported to the pension system. As part of the plea, Walsh was ordered to pay full restitution upfront.

“Ms. Walsh tried to profit off of her mother’s death and defraud the state pension system,” DiNapoli said. “Now, through my partnership with law enforcement, she has been held accountable for her actions and must repay the money she stole. My thanks to D.A. Green and the New York State Police for their work with my office to ensure justice is served.”

“The defendant’s actions represent a misuse of the New York State pension system and, by extension, an offense against the citizens who fund it,” Green said. “Allowing such conduct would undermine the integrity of a system relied upon by countless public servants who dedicated their careers to their communities. I appreciate the thorough work of the State Comptroller’s Office and the New York State Police in this investigation that assisted in today’s resolution. The Monroe County District Attorney’s Office is committed to seeking justice and accountability for all who commit economic crimes against the residents of New York State.”

“Ms. Walsh used her mother’s death to her advantage and continued to inexcusably collect the pension meant to support her mother for the remainder of her life. We will continue to aggressively investigate any case involving financial corruption and those who take advantage of the pension system. I commend the Comptroller’s Office and the Monroe County District Attorney’s Office for their partnership in this investigation,” James said.

Walsh’s mother, also of Rochester, received a monthly payment as the beneficiary of her deceased husband’s state pension. When she passed away in 2020, her pension payments should have stopped, however, Karen Walsh failed to report the death to the pension system and instead pocketed the money.  A total of $19,524 in pension payments went to Walsh’s account.

Walsh stole $12,973 by withdrawing over $4,000 from the account and transferring at least $8,000 to a second account in her mother’s name to which she also had access. She wrote checks from that second account, forging her deceased mother’s name and endorsing the back of the checks with her own signature, before depositing them into her own account. Walsh also used the second account in her mother’s name to make personal credit card payments, pay for home improvements and buy groceries.

Walsh pleaded guilty to petit larceny before Judge Van H. White in Rochester City Court.

###

Since taking office in 2007, DiNapoli has committed to fighting public corruption and encourages the public to help fight fraud and abuse. New Yorkers can report allegations of fraud involving taxpayer money by calling the toll-free Fraud Hotline at 1-888-672-4555, by emailing a complaint to investigations@osc.ny.gov or by mailing a complaint to: Office of the State Comptroller, Division of Investigations, 8th Floor, 110 State St., Albany, NY 12236.



Dec 1, 2025

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli posts local government audits on the Internet

On November 26, 2025, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced the following local government audits were issued.

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

City of Dunkirk – Budget Review (Chautauqua County)
The lack of complete, accurate and current accounting and financial records significantly limited this review and precluded auditors from determining the reasonableness of all of the city’s significant revenue and expenditure projections. The city’s most recent Annual Financial Report (AFR) was submitted to the Office of the State Comptroller (OSC) for the 2023 fiscal year; the 2024 AFR was due April 30, 2025. 

The most recent available independent audited financial statements were finalized for 2024 in October 2025. The external auditor’s findings reported in the 2022, 2023 and 2024 financial statements further support OSC’s position that the city’s accounting records are not reliable or up to date. These findings also acknowledge the rapid deterioration of the city’s finances and report that officials do not have the ability to effectively monitor the city’s cash position or results of operations, making financial planning and budgeting incredibly difficult. 

The city’s most recently completed audited financial statements reported that as of Dec. 31, 2024, the general, water, wastewater, refuse and boardwalk funds had deficit fund balances totaling $15.3 million. 

The city’s financial condition continued to decline during the current year because the 2025 adopted budget was not structurally balanced and due to a large unbudgeted $1.8 million payment for the purchase of two pumper trucks. With fund balance depleted, the city has limited options available to fund any increases in operating costs. 

City officials were not planning to increase water or wastewater rates to address the deficits in the water and wastewater funds. The 2026 budget includes a proposed tax levy increase of $198,675 (2%) which will exhaust 86.37% of the city’s constitutional tax limit. As a result, the city’s ability to raise taxes going forward will be severely limited.


Seaford Union Free School District – Capital Assets (Nassau County)
District officials did not maintain complete and accurate capital asset records. Auditors determined that, while assets totaling $1.7 million were inventoried, the district’s inventory records lacked sufficient detail to account for and safeguard the assets. Assets totaling $196,089 were not inventoried, and assets totaling $42,314 were missing and could not be located. The inventory list did not include all necessary information to locate and identify assets. For example, 358 IT assets on the inventory list totaling $1.7 million did not have a serial number. Additionally, 280 assets totaling $630,009 (including 186 IT assets totaling $200,705) did not have the current location recorded on the inventory list. 

Town of Kingsbury – Multiyear Planning for Fund Balance and Reserves (Washington County)
The board and officials did not develop and adopt a multiyear financial plan, a fund balance policy or a reserve policy. As a result, officials continued to accumulate unrestricted fund balance without defining the amounts the board deemed necessary and without documenting future goals or expectations for the accumulation of funds. Had the board and officials developed and adopted a multiyear financial plan and fund balance and reserve policies, the goals of maintaining an adequate level of fund balance and improving the town’s capital assets over time would have been more transparent to the town’s taxpayers. Without such plans or policies, the board cannot assess revenue trends, expenditure commitments, financial risks and the affordability of new services and capital investments over time.


Town of Hornellsville – Financial Management (Steuben County)
The board did not effectively manage the town’s fund balance. Despite maintaining significant unrestricted fund balances, the board overrode the tax levy limit each year and adopted budgets that increased real property taxes by a total of 18% in calendar years 2022 through 2025. As a result, the board maintained unrestricted fund balances that, as of Dec. 31, 2024, were sufficient to fund more than five years of water, three years of sewer and half of the combined town-wide (TW) funds’ 2025 budgeted appropriations. In addition, the board did not treat taxpayers equitably because it inappropriately allocated sales tax revenues totaling $1.1 million to the TW funds instead of the town-outside-village funds in calendar years 2022 through 2024. The board also did not adopt a written fund balance policy until Feb. 11, 2025, after the State Comptroller’s audit notification, or adopt comprehensive written multiyear financial or capital plans. Although auditors provided recommendations in their prior audit, the board did not implement adequate corrective action to address the deficiencies.


  
City of Little Falls – Budget Review (Herkimer County)
The tentative budget includes revenues of $966,599 for revenue sharing state aid, $480,000 for garbage collection user fees, $177,000 for the sale of real property, $350,000 for ambulance charges, $60,000 for the sale of timber, $1.4 million for metered water sales, $1.6 million for sewer rents and $138,500 for golf revenues. These revenues may not be reasonable. The budget also does not include a contingency appropriation in any fund. In addition, the budget includes approximately $1.16 million in debt payments, which are likely overestimated by $37,327. The budget also includes retirement appropriations totaling approximately $1.3 million for members of the state retirement system and appropriations totaling $161,398 for workers’ compensation costs. These appropriations were not properly allocated to each of the operating funds.


Wyoming County Industrial Development Agency (WCIDA) – Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT)
WCIDA officials ensured PILOTs they calculated were accurate and in compliance with the PILOT agreements. During the audit period, WCIDA officials calculated PILOT billings for nine wind and solar energy projects, totaling $971,547. Auditors reviewed the PILOT billings for five of these agreements totaling $280,693 and determined they were accurate and in compliance with the PILOT agreements.


Town of Danby – Audit Follow-Up (Tompkins County)
A previous audit, Town of Danby – Board Oversight (2022M-127), determined that the board did not seek competition when procuring goods and services and audit claims prior to payment. The audit included 14 recommendations to help officials monitor and improve the town’s purchasing and claims auditing procedures. The board and town officials failed to implement any of the 14 audit recommendations and were unable to provide reasonable explanations for their lack of action. The board also persisted in procuring goods and services that may not have been made in a cost-effective manner and the board’s ability to effectively monitor the town’s financial operations continued to be diminished.

###

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