ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN THE SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS PREPARED BY NYPPL

July 14, 2023

New York State Comptroller DiNapoli releases State Department and Agency audits

New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced the following State Department and Agency  audits were issued on July 13, 2023.

Click on the text highlighted in color to access the entire audit report.

 

Department of Health - Improper Medicaid Managed Care Payments for Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies on Behalf of Recipients in Nursing Homes (Follow-Up) (2023-F-12)
For Medicaid recipients enrolled in managed care, the Department of Health pays managed care organizations (MCOs) a monthly premium for each recipient and, in turn, the MCOs arrange for their health care services, including necessary durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics, and supplies (DMEPOS). For recipients in nursing homes, Medicaid nursing home reimbursement rates generally include the cost of most DMEPOS and separate payments for DMEPOS should not be made when the cost of these items is included in the rate. The initial audit, issued in April 2022, identified $9.6 million in potential overpayments by MCOs for DMEPOS items that likely were already covered under the all-inclusive rate. The follow-up report found DOH made some progress in addressing the problems identified; however, additional actions are needed. In particular, the Office of the Medicaid Inspector General, which investigates and recovers improper Medicaid payments on behalf of the Department of Health, needs to review and recover, as appropriate, the $9.6 million in DMEPOS claims identified. Of the initial report’s four audit recommendations, one was implemented, one was partially implemented, and two were not yet implemented.



Department of Taxation and Finance – Sales Tax Vendor Registration Practices (Follow-Up) (2023-F-5)
Provisions of State Tax Law impose a tax on sales of tangible personal property and certain services, and require vendors that make these sales, including out-of-state sellers and online marketplaces, to register for a Certificate of Authority (COA), collect the tax from customers, and remit the tax to the State. The initial audit, issued in October 2021, found the Department of Taxation and Finance could do more to ensure sales tax vendors that are required to register do so. Auditors identified vendors that were denied a COA but continued to operate and likely make taxable sales. In addition, auditors found unregistered vendors submitted sales tax returns showing taxable sales. The follow-up report determined the Department of Taxation and Finance made progress addressing past issues identified and implemented the one recommendation from the initial audit.

 

New York State Health Insurance Program – CVS Health – Accuracy of Empire Plan Medicare Rx Drug Rebate Revenue Remitted to the Department of Civil Service (2022-S-1)
The Department of Civil Service has contracted with CVS Health to administer the Empire Plan’s prescription drug program. Under the Contract, CVS Health is required to negotiate agreements with drug manufacturers for rebates, discounts, and other consideration and remit the rebate revenue to Civil Service. However, for the period January 2014 through December 2019, auditors identified more than $10.7 million in rebates that CVS Health should have, but did not, invoice or collect – and did not remit to Civil Service.

 

New York State Office for the Aging – Monitoring of Select Programs (Follow-Up) (2023-F-2)
The New York State Office for the Aging (NYSOFA) helps New York residents aged 60 or older be as independent as possible for as long as possible through support services that help them stay in their homes and avoid higher levels of publicly financed care. In 2015, more than 10,000 older New Yorkers though were on waiting lists for these services, which can include home health aides, home-delivered meals, and transportation. As a result, the state earmarked $15 million each from 2019-2020 and 2021-2022 to address the waitlists. However, NYSOFA fell short on delivering all the funding, and of the $30 million, $5.9 million went unspent by agencies who provide services at the county level. The follow-up found that limited progress had been made by NYSOFA to both fund services properly and improve its oversight of the Area Agencies on Aging (AAA). Of the initial report’s five audit recommendations, three were partially implemented and two were not implemented.

 

Office of Information Technology Services – Windows Domain Administration and Management (2022-S-19)
As part of its services, the Office of Information Technology Services (ITS) maintains Active Directory domains on behalf of the state’s Executive agencies. Each Active Directory uses servers, or domain controllers, to manage the access and authentication of stored user credentials, determining who can access file servers and other network resources. Since the Active Directory and the associated domain controllers ultimately control access and authorization in a Microsoft Windows environment, appropriate security measures are vital. However, the audit found that ITS did not have certain security controls in place to ensure appropriate management and monitoring of its Active Directory environment.

 

Office of Mental Health - Benefits Advisement Services for Individuals With Disabilities Seeking Employment (Follow-Up) 2023-F-11
A 2015 report from the New York State Employment First Commission established an Employment First Policy for New York State with the main goal of increasing the employment rate of individuals with disabilities by 5% while also decreasing their poverty rate by 5%. This report tasked the Office of Mental Health (OMH) with developing a life coaching network for individuals with disabilities seeking economic self-sufficiency and creating an interactive web-based platform to provide accurate information and benefits calculators so individuals with disabilities could better assess how work would impact their benefits. The initial audit, issued in July 2021, found that OMH had created a benefits advisement system but had not included all recommended components. The follow-up found that OMH has made progress in implementing these recommendations. Of the initial report’s four audit recommendations, two were partially implemented and 2 were fully implemented.

 

State Education Department – Licensing and Monitoring of Proprietary Schools (Follow-Up) (2023-F-1)
Non-degree-granting proprietary schools provide training in a broad range of disciplines, such as business, computer/information technology, and English as a second language. The State Education Department (SED) is responsible for overseeing these schools to ensure students’ education interests and their tuition investments are protected. A prior audit report, issued in January 2021, found that SED did not perform due diligence in assessing proprietary schools’ financial viability and issued licenses to schools despite evidence of insufficient resources, potentially jeopardizing students’ future employment prospects and their ability to repay loans. The follow-up found that SED made significant progress in addressing the problems identified. Of the initial report’s six audit recommendations, five were implemented and one was partially implemented.

 

State Education Department – Privacy and Security of Student Data (2021-S-29)
The increased reliance on technology for virtual learning during the COVID-19 pandemic gave rise to an escalation of cybersecurity threats for schools. According to a U.S. Government Accountability Office report, the number of students impacted by cyberattacks rose from 39,000 in 2018 to nearly 1.2 million in 2020. The audit found that the State Education Department, which oversees more than 700 school districts with 2.4 million students, did not take appropriate, proactive steps to ensure schools were complying with regulations intended to safeguard the safety and privacy of student data, nor did it fully comply with its own data security protection policies.

 

 

July 13, 2023

Parent banned from attending high school athletic events

A parent [Plaintiff], whose daughter played on the high school's varsity girls basketball team, was banned from attending athletic events at the high school* filed a lawsuit against the School District and various school district officials [School District] alleging that School District violated his First Amendment rights, right of assembly, and "retaliation". The jury found for the School District and the federal district court dismissed Plaintiff's action.

Plaintiff appealed, contending that the District Court erred in (1) denying his Rule 50(b) motion with respect to his right of assembly claim, (2) dismissing his Monell claim against School District on School District's motion for summary judgment, and (3) granting the School District’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss his Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim.

Addressing Plaintiff's Right of Assembly claims, the Circuit Court, noting it "reviews a district court’s decision on a Rule 50(b) motion de novo, “considering the evidence in the light most favorable to party against whom the motion was made and ... giv[ing] that party the benefit of all reasonable inferences that the jury might have drawn in [its] favor from the evidence.” 

The court then observed that here "the jury reasonably concluded that [School District] did not violate [Plaintiff's] right of assembly by banning him from the high school’s athletic events. Although, said the court "The right of peaceable assembly is a right cognate to those of free speech and free press and is equally fundamental", citing Johnson v. Perry, 8594 F.3d 156, "[n]othing in the Constitution requires the Government freely to grant access to all who wish to exercise their right to free speech on every type of Government property without regard to the nature of the property or to the disruption that might be caused by the speaker’s activities.”

The Circuit Court said it has "recognized that school property becomes a limited public forum during school-sponsored athletic events, which 'encourage' attendees to engage in 'expressive activity' such as 'chanting and cheering for whichever team they favor' that schools 'may regulate access to such limited public fora' so long as [their restrictions] are reasonable and viewpoint neutral."

With respect to the District Court’s grant of summary judgment against Plaintiff on his §1983 claim against the School District under color of Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, the Circuit Court explained that, as relevant here, Plaintiff was required to show that a government employee violated his federal rights “pursuant to official municipal policy,” and Plaintiff had "not demonstrated that a government employee violated his federal rights."

* The Circuit Court's decision reports the trial record established Plaintiff, without permission or authorization, "entered the high school after hours through a locked side door, waited outside of the girls’ locker room for students on the varsity girls basketball team to finish practice, gathered several of those students in the cafeteria to discuss concerns about their coach and a potential boycott of an upcoming game, and hugged at least one student who was not his daughter."

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

See, also, Decisions of the Commissioner of Education Decision 18,296, in which the genesis of the appeal to the Commissioner was a School Superintendent's prohibiting a parent [Petitioner] from accessing school property based on a faculty advisor's statement that a student at a music rehearsal told him that Petitioner’s “actions caused her to feel uncomfortable.” The Commissioner dismissed the appeal as moot without addressing the merits of the appeal based on the Superintendent's having informed the Petitioner that "the directive would be rescinded "as of June 30, 2023". The Commissioner's decision is posted on the Internet at https://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume62/d18296

 

July 12, 2023

Theft of retirement benefits discovered by the Comptroller’s Division of Investigations and the Social Security Administration

On July 11, 2023, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia Ryan K. Buchanan and Inspector General for the Social Security Administration Gail S. Ennis announced that Sandra Smith, a resident of Georgia, has pleaded guilty to the federal crime of theft of government funds and must pay back $459,050 in New York state pension and Social Security payments that were issued to her deceased mother-in-law.

Smith pleaded guilty to two counts of theft of government funds. Under her plea agreement, she will pay $264,699 in restitution to the New York State's Employees'  Retirement System [ERS] and $194,351 to the Social Security Administration.

“Exploiting the death of a family member for personal profit is a heinous crime,” DiNapoli said. “The defendant took advantage of our state pension fund and the Social Security Administration but as a result of our joint investigation her crimes  were discovered. She now faces the consequences of her actions. My thanks to U.S. Attorney Buchanan and the Social Security Administration Office of the Inspector General [SSA-OIG] for their partnership in ensuring justice was served and restitution was made in this case.”

The defendant’s late-mother-in-law, Minnie Smith, was an employee of the New York State Insurance Fund for 20 years until retiring in 2005. To be closer to family, she later moved from Brooklyn to Georgia and passed away there on Sept. 14, 2006.

As her mother-in-law’s caretaker, Sandra Smith had access to her bank account, which she kept open after her mother-in-law’s death to enable the theft of  continued payments from the New York Employees' Retirement System and the Social Security Administration. The thefts were discovered and investigated by the Comptroller’s Division of Investigations and the SSA-OIG.

Smith, 49, pleaded before Judge Eleanor Ross of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.

###

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 filing a complaint online at https://www.osc.state.ny.us/investigations, or by mailing a complaint to: Office of the State Comptroller, Division of Investigations, 8th Floor, 110 State St., Albany, NY 12236.

 

July 11, 2023

Social media platform Threads launched

New York State public entities on the social media platform Threads with at least one post created in the first 24 hours of the launch of the platform.

Albany Public Library, Albany, New York, Library, Verified - No

NY State Parks, New York, Parks, Verified - Yes

City of New York, New York, New York, City, Verified - Yes

NYS Department of Labor, New York, Labor, Verified - Yes

Minnewaska State Park Preserve, New York, Parks, Verified - No

Westbury Union Free School District, Westbury, New York, Education, Verified - No

Jefferson County Public Health, New York, Public Health, Verified - No

Source: Threads • Updated July 6, 2023, by Nikki Davidson.

Recent decisions issued by the Commissioner of Education

Petitioners in this appeal to the Commissioner of Education alleged the Board of Education failed to hire a school resource officer [SRO] and seek the removal from the board its president and other, unspecified board members [Board]. The Commissioner dismissed the appeal and denied the application.

Petitioners asserted that the Board engaged in willful misconduct and neglect of duty by failing to expeditiously hire a second SRO and requested the Commissioner "remove the board president, and any other board member whose removal [the Commissioner] deems warranted, from office."

According to an affidavit submitted by the board president, “[b]etween June 16, 2022 and November 2022 … there were internal discussions as to where the money would come from to fund [a] second SRO.”  On November 16, 2022, the board rejected a resolution to “authorize the transfer of [funds] from [the] unassigned fund balance to the [SRO] budget code … to cover the cost of a second [SRO].” 

Following commencement of this appeal, the board announced that it had secured a grant to fund the second SRO position and thereafter approved a resolution “to allocate [funds] to cover the cost of the second [SRO] through [the end of the 2022-2023 school year].” 

The Board contended that the appeal should be dismissed for lack of standing, as moot, and for failure to join necessary parties. The Board also contended the appeal should be dismissed on the merits in that the Board acted in good faith with respect to the employment of a second SRO.

The Commissioner dismissed the appeal as moot, explaining that the Commissioner "will only decide matters in actual controversy and will not render a decision on a state of facts that no longer exists due to the passage of time or a change in circumstances."

Further, the Commissioner noted that a Commissioner of Education "may remove a school officer or member of a board of education from office when it is proven to the satisfaction of the Commissioner that the officer or board member has engaged in a willful violation or neglect of duty under the Education Law or has willfully disobeyed a decision, order, rule, or regulation of the Board of Regents or the Commissioner." The Commissioner then explained that to be considered willful, "the action of a board member or school officer must have been intentional and committed with a wrongful purpose."

The Commission opined that the record indicated that "the board did not immediately hire a second SRO in June 2022 due to the need to identify a funding stream for the position," and that the board president explained that “the [Board] determined that it would not be prudent to draw from [its] [u]nassigned [f]und [b]alance to pay for a contract that was not contemplated at the time the budget was prepared … the district’s budget is tight and does not allow for significant unbudgeted expenditures.”

Finding that Petitioners "have not proven that the board president engaged in any willful violation of the Education Law" the Commissioner held that "their application for his removal must therefore be denied."

Click HERE to access the decision of the Commissioner in this appeal posted on the Internet.

In addition, the Commissioner of Education recently issued four decisions addressing actions by Boards of Education involving residency and homelessness issues. 

Click on the text in color set out below to access these decisions posted on the Internet.

Decision No. 18,290

Decision No. 18,291

Decision No. 18,292

Decision No. 18,293

 


 

 

 

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.
New York Public Personnel Law Blog Editor 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.
Copyright 2009-2024 - Public Employment Law Press. Email: n467fl@gmail.com