New York Public Personnel Law

Selected items posted on the Internet during the week ending August 14, 2026 which may be of interest to NYPPL readers and posted by NYPPL pro bono

2026-08-15T01:00:00.000-04:00

The Next Benefits Cliff Isn’t Fraud. It’s Overload. Rising federal verification mandates are overwhelming state agency infrastructure. Here’s why legacy systems are failing and how consent-based and automated tools can close the gap. READ NOW

Making Sense of AI in Public Services A guide for choosing between generative AI tools, chatbots, and agentic AI. DOWNLOAD

Nominate a Rising HHS Leader Current leaders of state and local health and human services systems are invited to nominate Deputy Directors and program directors to participate in HHS 2030 programming. LEARN MORE

New York City and the MTA are studying a possible thermal energy network in Lower Manhattan, hoping to capture excess heat from subway platforms and store it for use in public buildings during the winter. Read More

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

How BAM Modernized the U.S. Army with Low-Code A veteran-owned partner delivered a mission-critical app in just six months, work that once would have taken years. Read Case Study

Educator's involuntary transfer to another position in the school district appealed to the Commissioner of Education

2026-08-14T09:00:00.000-04:00

Petitioner challenged the decision of the Board of Education of the School District [District] to transfer him to another elementary school building within school district. He also sought expungement of a counseling memorandum issued by the District in connection such transfer. New York States' Commissioner of Education, Dr. Betty A. Rosa, held that Petitioner's appeal must be sustained in part.

Petitioner had been employed by the District since 2017 and had tenure as a childhood education and special education teacher. Petitioner had also taught fourth and fifth grade English Language Arts and mathematics at one of the district’s elementary schools [School 1] for several years prior to the 2025-2026 school year.

In August 2025, the District placed Petitioner on paid administrative leave while it investigated a complaint against him alleging “improper interactions” with a fifth-grade student. On October 15, 2025, the District issued a counseling memorandum that, among other things, reassigned Petitioner to a teaching position in a different elementary school [School 2].

The memorandum noted that Petitioner “admitted to engaging in some of the behavior” alleged while maintaining that he “did nothing wrong.” An assistant superintendent concluded that Petitioner’s "continued placement at [School One was] inappropriate" and “reassigned” him to School Two. This appeal to the Commissioner followed.

Petitioner argued that his involuntary transfer to School Two was disciplinary in nature. For relief, Petitioner asked the Commissioner annul the transfer, reinstate him to his former position, and the expungement of the transfer and counseling memorandum from his personnel file. The District denied that Petitioner’s transfer was disciplinary in nature, arguing that Petitioner was a qualified candidate for the position at issue at School Two.

Initially, the Commissioner addressed two procedural matters, noting that that the Commissioner had not considered new allegations or exhibits or new material or affirmative defenses not set forth in the District's answer; and that the Commissioner did not accept "the new evidence submitted with [District's] memorandum of law or [consider Petitioner’s] evidence offered in response thereto'.

Turning to the merits of Petitioner's appeal, the Commissioner said although a board of education has broad authority to transfer teachers to assignments consistent with their certification and tenure areas, such authority, however, is not unlimited, noting that the New York State Court of Appeals has held that this power may be modified by a “contractual provision” and cannot be made in “bad faith”, citing Matter of Adlerstein v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 64 NY2d 90 and other decisions.

In an appeal to the Commissioner, a petitioner has the burden of demonstrating a clear legal right to the relief requested and establishing the facts upon which he or she seeks relief. In the instant matter the District issued a counseling memorandum setting out adverse findings against Petitioner and transferred him to a different school “[a]s a result of” such findings". Based on the plain language of the memorandum, the Commissioner said that she found that District “used reassignment as a means of discipline”.

District had argued that Petitioner’s transfer was made in the best interest of the District because there was “a vacancy in a special education program that was a match for his skill set.” However, Dr. Rosa said she found the contemporaneous language of the memorandum to be more persuasive evidence of District’s intent than its explanation on appeal.

Moreover, the Commissioner opined that District had not offered any evidence to suggest that it considered Petitioner a potential candidate for the vacant position to which Petitioner had been transferred, which vacancy was posted on August 28, 2025, until it completed its investigation into Petitioner’s conduct and that the District merely stated that, at an unspecified time, its “administrative team … determined that [Petitioner] was the best candidate” for the position. The Commissioner then annulled Petitioner's transfer from School One to School Two.

In the words of Dr. Rosa:

"Petitioner also seeks “[e]xpungement of the counseling memo … as it imposes a disciplinary transfer/reassignment without due process.” While I agree with [Petitioner] that any reference to the disciplinary nature of the transfer should be expunged from his personnel file, he has not met his burden of proving that the counseling memorandum should be expunged in its entirety. “It is not enough merely to mention a possible argument in the most skeletal way, leaving [an adjudicator] to … create the ossature* for the argument, and put flesh on its bones....” Thus, “While the timing of the counseling memorandum is relevant to assessing Petitioner’s transfer, Petitioner has failed to prove that the memorandum, in and of itself, was disciplinary in nature”.

* French: framework.

Finally, Commissioner Rosa opined that she was "compelled to comment on the serious findings contained within the counseling memorandum. The memorandum recounts numerous breaches of the student/teacher relationship". Petitioner “is an adult who knew, or should have known, how to interact appropriately with students.” Thus, although I am not privy to the information gathered by [the District] in its investigation, I am skeptical of the superintendent’s conclusion that Petitioner’s conduct “did not warrant [Education Law Section] 3020-a charges.”

The Commissioner sustained Petitioner's appeal and ordered the October 15, 2025, transfer of Petitioner from School One to School Two be annulled, "without prejudice to any further action which may be appropriate under the terms of this decision".

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

On August 11, 2026, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced the local government audits listed below had been posted on the Internet.

2026-08-13T09:00:00.000-04:00

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

Blue Point Fire District – Financial Management (Suffolk County) The board did not effectively manage fund balance and capital reserve funds. Because the board did not adopt budgets with reasonable estimates or have a fund balance and reserve fund policy, the board’s intentions regarding fund balance were not clear, reserves may have been overfunded, and real property tax levies may have been higher than necessary.

Moravia Joint Fire District – Procurement (Cayuga County) District officials did not always use a competitive process to procure goods and services in accordance with state law or the district’s procurement policy. Specifically, district officials could not support that goods and services totaling $589,180 were procured in the most economical manner.

Big Flats Fire District No.1 – Procurement (Chemung County) The board and district officials did not always use a competitive process to procure goods and services in accordance with best practices or the district’s procurement policy. As a result, there is an increased risk that goods and services were not obtained at a favorable cost, free from favoritism or for appropriate purchases.

Deansboro Fire District – Claims Auditing (Oneida County) Auditors reviewed 25 claims totaling $51,230. Except for minor discrepancies, which were discussed with district officials, the claims were adequately supported, for proper district purposes and authorized before payment. There were no recommendations as a result of this audit.

Holley Central School District – Building Access (Orleans County and Monroe County) District officials did not properly manage and monitor building access accounts and devices (key fobs). Specifically, of the accounts 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.

Red Hook Central School District – Building Access (Dutchess County and Columbia County) District officials did not properly manage and monitor building access accounts and devices (badges). Specifically, of the accounts reviewed, the district had active, but unneeded, accounts with assigned badges in the system.

Batavia City School District – Building Access (Genesee County) District officials did not properly manage and monitor building access accounts and devices (key fobs). Specifically, of the accounts reviewed, the district had active, but unneeded, accounts with assigned key fobs in the system.

Central Square Central School District – Building Access (Oswego County, Onondaga County and Oneida County) District officials did not properly manage and monitor building access accounts and devices (badges). Specifically, of the accounts reviewed, the district had active, but unneeded, accounts with assigned badges in the system.

North Collins Central School District – Building Access (Erie County) District officials did not properly manage and monitor building access accounts and devices (badges). Specifically, of the accounts reviewed, the district had active, but unneeded, non-employee accounts with assigned badges in the system.

Orange-Ulster Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) – Building Access (Orange County and Ulster County) Orange-Ulster (OU) BOCES officials did not properly manage and monitor building access accounts and devices (badges). Specifically, of the accounts reviewed, OU BOCES had active, but unneeded, accounts with assigned badges in the system.

New York Mills Union Free School District – Building Access (Oneida County) Except for minor discrepancies, District officials properly managed and monitored the district’s 117 active building access accounts and devices (badges). However, district officials did not ensure that an additional 177 non-employee badges issued for first responders remained active. Although district officials reactivated all 177 badges when auditors brought this issue to their attention, there was a potential risk that first responders could not access district school buildings when needed, compromising building security and safety for students, teachers, staff and visitors.

###

New York law does not bar a federal action that was earlier dismissed by a state court pursuant to the doctrine of res judicata without prejudice

2026-08-12T09:00:00.000-04:00

Plaintiff [Appellant] served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Roosevelt Island Operating Corporation (“RIOC”), a public benefit corporation that governs New York City’s Roosevelt Island.

On June 19, 2020, the New York Governor’s Office terminated Appellant, such dismissal to take effective immediately. That same day a senior adviser to then-Governor Andrew Cuomo informed a New York Post reporter that Appellant had been terminated following a complaint and investigation into alleged offensive comments purportedly made by Appellant.

Quoting the said adviser as its primary source, a Post newspaper article soon followed captioned: “Roosevelt Island Operating Corp. head fired over ‘racially and sexually offensive’ remarks.”

Appellant denied the claims attributed to the adviser by the Post. According to Appellant, Appellant's termination was a political reprisal for Appellant’s complaints concerning New York City authorities’ alleged refusal to address weather-related threats to Roosevelt Island. Appellant further alleged that the Governor’s Office sought to discredit her by feeding false allegations to the Post.

After two unsuccessful state court proceedings, Appellant brought a federal “stigma-plus” constitutional claim for money damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983, arguing that her termination and alleged public smearing by public officials deprived her of a liberty interest without due process of law.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Court [Circuit Court] said the question before it was "not whether [Appellant] states a meritorious §1983 claim, but whether the [federal] district court below correctly concluded that, under New York law, the doctrine of res judicata precludes [Appellant] from asserting any §1983 claim arising from her termination".

The Circuit Court concluded that Appellant’s state court dismissals "do not preclude her instant §1983 claim", noting that the state court dismissals adjudicated Appellant’s discrimination claims on the merits while expressly preserving Appellant’s right to refile her §1983 claim in another forum.

The Circuit Court explained that under New York law, the doctrine of res judicata does not bar a claim that was previously dismissed without prejudice and with express leave to refile — even where other claims arising from the same transaction were dismissed on the merits.

Accordingly, the Circuit Court reversed the federal district court’s judgment and remanded the matter for further proceedings.

Click HERE to access the Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit's decision posted on the Internet.

Audit reports for the New York State and New York City entities listed below issued on October 10, 2026

2026-08-11T09:00:00.000-04:00

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

Department of State – Office for New Americans: Connecting and Providing Immigrants With Legal Services (2023-S-35)

The Office for New Americans (ONA) offers New Americans help with accessing and navigating free services and supports through its grants and contracts with a statewide network of not-for-profit community-based providers. Through nine grant-funded programs, grantees provide referrals to legal service providers and assist New Americans with naturalization applications and citizenship interviews. Auditors identified several areas that ONA should address to improve its ability to connect and provide New Americans with legal services. For example, ONA lacks adequate information to assess and estimate potential unmet need and grantees’ ability and capacity to meet it. Auditors also found limitations in the quarterly reports that ONA requires from grantees that make them difficult to use and compare, as well as inconsistencies in grantees’ reported numbers that represent potential inaccuracies and/or lack of understanding about how to report their activity.

New York City Administration for Children’s Services & New York City Department of Youth and Community Development – Identifying, Reporting, and Providing Services for Youth at Risk of Sexual Human Trafficking in New York City (Follow-Up) (2025-F-14)
The 2014 federal Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act requires the screening of children within the child welfare system for potential sex trafficking, timely reporting of sex trafficking incidents to law enforcement, and data collection on sex-trafficked and at-risk youth. A prior audit, issued in June 2022, examined whether New York City’s Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) and Department of Youth and Community Development (DYCD) identify, report on, and provide services for victims of child sex trafficking and those at risk of child sex trafficking. The audit found that ACS officials failed to support that they ensured staff and providers screened children to identify sex-trafficked victims or at-risk youth, and that DYCD does not have procedures requiring its providers to screen youth for indicators of trafficking. ACS and DYCD officials have made limited progress in addressing the issues identified in the original audit report. Of the initial report’s nine audit recommendations, two (addressed to DYCD) were implemented, three (two addressed to ACS and one to DYCD) were partially implemented, and four were not implemented (two addressed to each ACS and DYCD).

State Education Department – English Language Learners Programs (Follow-Up) (2025-F-28)
School districts are required to provide English as a New Language (ENL) service to all eligible English Language Leaners (ELLs) and are required to make Bilingual Education (BE) programs available in all home languages spoken by 20 or more ELLs of the same grade and home language districtwide. A prior audit, issued in September 2024, examined whether the State Education Department (SED) is adequately overseeing whether school districts are providing services to ELLs as required. The audit found school districts lacked BE programs and certified BE teachers, could not consistently provide sufficient documentation to support that ELLs completed the identification process and received required ENL services, and did not always submit accurate data to the Student Information Repository System or share information regarding ELL transfer students. SED officials have made significant progress in addressing the issues identified in the original audit report. All seven of the initial report’s audit recommendations were implemented.

State Education Department (Preschool Special Education Audit Initiative) – William T. Dillon Child Study Center at St. Joseph’s University, New York: Compliance With the Reimbursable Cost Manual (2024-S-21)
William T. Dillon Child Study Center (Dillon Center) at St. Joseph’s University, New York is a New York City-based organization authorized by the State Education Department (SED) to provide Integrated Special Class education services to children with disabilities who are between the ages of 3 and 5 years (referred to as SED preschool cost-based programs). For the audit scope, Dillon Center reported approximately $1.3 million in reimbursable costs for the SED preschool cost-based programs. Auditors identified $392,884 in reported costs that did not comply with requirements.

Olympic Regional Development Authority – Security Over Critical Payment Systems (2025-S-23)
The New York State Olympic Regional Development Authority’s (ORDA) mission is to bring economic and social benefits to the Adirondacks and Catskills by managing venues that offer recreational and athletic opportunities. ORDA is subject to New York State Office of Information Technology Services policies and standards. To process credit cards, ORDA must follow the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS). Auditors identified areas where ORDA could improve its overall governance of information technology, compliance with PCI DSS requirements, and certain security controls in place to minimize the various risks associated with unauthorized access to its systems and data, and communicated the details of these findings in a confidential report to ORDA officials.

###

New York State Paid Family Leave regulation update: Construction employees

2026-08-10T09:00:00.000-04:00

Effective January 1, 2027, the Paid Family Leave (PFL) law will include a new eligibility standard for certain construction employees who work for covered employer(s) that are under a collective bargaining agreement. The NYS Workers’ Compensation Board (Board) plans to propose amendments to the PFL regulations to help implement this change and align the regulations to the law.

This proposal will be published in the State Register and on the Board’s website. A Subject Number will be issued when it is published.

Questions?

Email: regulations@wcb.ny.gov.

Selected items posted on the Internet during the week ending August 7, 2026 which may be of interest to readers and reported here by NYPPL pro bono

2026-08-08T09:00:00.000-04:00

AI Data Readiness Guide This guide identifies the essential components of AI-ready data governance and offers practical advice for implementing an effective data program. DOWNLOAD

Capital Planning in the Public Sector: Constraints, Community and Countermeasures This guide examines how state and local governments approach capital planning when budgets are constrained and infrastructure needs continue to grow. DOWNLOAD

From Days to Hours: How Chicago’s 43rd Ward Delivered Faster Constituent Services at Scale Chicago’s 43rd Ward transformed constituent services with a unified digital workflow, cutting response times from days to hours while dramatically increasing case resolutions and resident engagement. READ NOW

Deferred Maintenance and Its Impact on Communities This eBook examines the problem of deferred maintenance for America's infrastructure, considers ways to identify deferred maintenance issues early and explores options for addressing them quickly. DOWNLOAD

Making Sense of AI in Public Services A practical guide for public sector leaders choosing between generative AI tools, chatbots, and agentic AI. DOWNLOAD

How Branded Communications Can Improve Government Billing Learn how consistently branded communications can increase constituent trust, improve engagement and support stronger government billing. DOWNLOAD

Applied Intelligence: How High-Performance Workstations Are Driving Public Innovation AI innovation starts with the right infrastructure. Learn how high-performance workstations help government agencies process data faster, protect sensitive information and power AI-driven outcomes. Download the paper to discover practical strategies for modernizing your technology foundation. DOWNLOAD

New York State may not prohibit access to certain Grievance Committee proceedings and records without making specific, on-the-record findings justifying confidentiality

2026-08-07T09:00:00.000-04:00

After the Grievance Committee* informed Plaintiffs-Appellees that any resulting proceedings against twenty-one prosecutors would remain confidential, Plaintiffs-Appellees brought a 42 U.S.C. §1983 action contending that Section 90(10) of the New York Judiciary Law, which by default seals and mandates confidentiality of attorney grievance matters, violates their First Amendment right of access as applied to their complaints.

A federal District Court had ruled that a First Amendment presumption of access attaches to formal disciplinary hearings in the Second Department to records necessary to understand those hearings and to the final dispositions by the Grievance Committee. As Section 90(10) impermissibly interferes with that right, the District Court found the New York State statute to be unconstitutional as applied against Plaintiffs-Appellees’ complaints.

On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, [Second Circuit] explained that, despite the State’s contentions otherwise, Plaintiffs-Appellees’ claims are ripe and abstention, pursuant to O’Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488 (1974), is unwarranted.

The Second Circuit said that it concluded that the experience and logic test supports a qualified, presumptive First Amendment right of access to formal disciplinary hearings, including "all pertinent records, and select dispositions of the Grievance Committee".

The Second Circuit also held that New York State may not prohibit Plaintiffs-Appellees’ access to such proceedings and records pertaining to their complaints without making specific, on-the-record findings justifying confidentiality and affirmed the judgment of the District Court.

* Attorney Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts [“Grievance Committee”], which is one of three such committees for the Second Department.

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

New York State Department of Civil Service issues Attendance and Leave Memoranda updates

2026-08-06T15:00:00.000-04:00

The New York State Department of Civil Service has published Attendance and Leave Memoranda for certain holiday available to State Officers and Employees on August 6, 2026,:

Advisory Memorandum 2026-04 - Designation of Floating Holidays in Lieu of Election Day and Lincoln's Birthday for Contract Year 2026–2027

and

Transmittal Memorandum No. 52 - 2027 Calendar of Legal Holidays and Days of Religious Significance

The Text of Advisory Memorandum 2026-04 will be found by clicking:
Advisory Memorandum 2026-04

If you wish to print Advisory Memorandum 2026-04; a version in PDF format is available at Advisory Memorandum 2026-04 PDF

The Text of Transmittal Memorandum No. 52 will be found by clicking
Transmittal Memorandum No. 52

If you wish to print Transmittal Memorandum No. 52 a version in PDF format is available at Transmittal Memorandum No. 52 PDF

To view previous Attendance and Leave bulletins issued by the New York State Department of Civil Service, visit: https://www.cs.ny.gov/attendance_leave/index.cfm

Governor Kathy Hochol announces the ratification of five-year labor agreements with four CSEA collective bargaining units

2026-08-06T12:59:38.948-04:00

On August 8, 2026, Governor Kathy Hochul announced the ratification of five-year labor agreements with each of the four bargaining units represented by the Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA). In total, CSEA represents more than 55,000 New York State employees in a wide variety of roles. The agreements run from April 2, 2026 until April 1, 2031. Each agreement was overwhelmingly approved by CSEA members.

“Every day, dedicated CSEA members perform essential work to keep New York moving, and these agreements recognize those efforts while also serving as a fair deal for New York’s taxpayers,” Governor Hochul said. “Our valued public servants are the backbone of a strong Empire State, and I thank the members and leadership of CSEA for their dedication in continuing to help and serve their fellow New Yorkers.”

CSEA President Mary E. Sullivan said, “I thank Governor Hochul for working with CSEA to reach an agreement that reflects the value of our members and the vital services they provide. Every day, more than 55,000 CSEA members keep our roads safe, care for our most vulnerable neighbors, maintain our parks and campuses, protect our communities and deliver the public services New Yorkers depend on. This contract is an investment in them and in the future of our state.”

The ratified contracts each include the following raises across the five years of the agreement: 4.5 percent, 4 percent, 3.5 percent, 3 percent, and 3 percent. Boosts to location pay and several other unit-specific payments are also included in the contracts. Members also will gain 20 hours of paid pre-natal leave and an increase in the cap for sick leave accumulation. The agreements also include reasonable updates to health insurance that will reduce costs for members by eliminating certain co-pays and providing incentives to use in-network providers.

###

New York Health Policy Monitor

2026-08-06T02:00:00.000-04:00

New legislative proposals advance Medicaid coverage mandates for school-based behavioral health and establish standardized electronic prior authorization.

Lawmakers have introduced a series of legislative proposals focused on expanding Medicaid coverage mandates and standardizing utilization review processes. The active bills currently sit in the Assembly Health Committee and propose structural alterations to coverage parameters and operational standards for health care plans.

Key measures include a proposed mandate for Medicaid to cover applied behavior analysis therapy when delivered during school hours, expanding access points for autism spectrum disorder treatment. Concurrently, new legislation would require the Department of Health and the Department of Financial Services to establish standardized electronic prior authorization protocols for all health care plans, aiming to codify utilization review pathways.

Additionally, legislators proposed a rare kidney disease screening pilot program that would operate in at least two geographic regions to target at-risk populations. If implemented, this program would direct the state to utilize community-based outreach and specific diagnostic screening tools to evaluate the scalability of broader permanent initiatives.

Past Week at a Glance

3 Health Bills Referred to Assembly Committee

Priority Items

Coverage Expansions & Utilization Standards

Driven by: A11624, A11623

Why it matters: These proposals would simultaneously expand Medicaid coverage requirements for behavioral health therapies in schools while imposing new technological standardization mandates on prior authorization processes for insurers.

Suggested action: Evaluate existing prior authorization software platforms for adaptability to potential new state standards and model the financial impact of expanded school-based applied behavior analysis coverage.

Topics: Medicaid & Managed Care, Behavioral Health / Substance Use

Affected Entities and Corresponding Policies

ABA Providers: A11624
Clinical Laboratories: A11655
Community Health Centers: A11655
Department of Health: A11655
Health Care Plans: A11623
Health Care Providers: A11623
Medicaid Managed Care Organizations: A11624
School Districts: A11624

Key Policy Actions

Assembly Committee

A11624: Mandates Medicaid coverage of applied behavior analysis therapy for autism spectrum disorder rendered during school hours

Topics: Public Health / Prevention

Sponsor: Kalman Yeger (Assembly — Democrat, New York City)
Co-sponsors: 0

Status: Assembly Committee
Action Date: July 29, 2026

Summary: Requires Medicaid coverage of applied behavior analysis therapy for the treatment of autism spectrum disorder rendered during school hours in certain schools.

Affected Entities: Medicaid Managed Care Organizations; ABA Providers; School Districts

Practical Implications: If enacted, this measure would mandate Medicaid reimbursement for applied behavior analysis therapy for the treatment of autism spectrum disorder delivered during the school day. Medicaid Managed Care Organizations would need to adjust coverage policies, while ABA Providers could see expanded service utilization and billing opportunities within educational settings.

Source: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/A11624/

A11623: Requires the development of standards for an electronic prior authorization program for health care services

Topics: Public Health / Prevention

Sponsor: Kalman Yeger (Assembly — Democrat, New York City)
Co-sponsors: 0

Status: Assembly Committee
Action Date: July 29, 2026

Summary: Requires the commissioner of health and the superintendent of financial services to develop standards for an electronic prior authorization program for the utilization review of health care services.

Affected Entities: Health Care Plans; Health Care Providers

Practical Implications: If enacted, this measure would require health care plans and providers to adapt to new standardized electronic prior authorization processes for utilization review. Organizations could face initial administrative integration burdens but may ultimately experience streamlined coverage determinations.

Source: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/A11623/

A11655: Establishes a rare kidney disease screening pilot program for at-risk populations

Topics: Public Health / Prevention

Sponsor: Yudelka Tapia (Assembly — Democrat, New York City)
Co-sponsors: 0

Status: Assembly Committee
Action Date: July 29, 2026

Summary: Establishes a rare kidney disease screening pilot program within the department of health to operate in at least two counties or regions in the state, targeting at-risk populations, to improve early diagnosis of RKD, connect patients with treatments and care, and evaluate the effectiveness and scalability of state-based RKD screening initiatives.

Affected Entities: Department of Health; Community Health Centers; Clinical Laboratories

Practical Implications: If enacted, this bill would direct the Department of Health to launch a screening pilot program for rare kidney diseases in at least two regions. Clinical Laboratories and Community Health Centers in selected areas could see increased demand for urinalysis and genetic testing services as outreach initiatives target at-risk populations.

Source: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/A11655/

Executive Order No. 62: Establishing a Temporary Moratorium on Data Centers in New York while the State Develops Higher Standards for Data Center Development and Benefits Blueprint to Support Localities

2026-08-05T15:00:00.000-04:00

WHEREAS, New York State (the State) is experiencing unprecedented growth in demand for data center development, driven by the need for computing infrastructure that supports artificial intelligence (AI), cloud computing, streaming services, and other computing operations; and

WHEREAS, the increasing demand for data storage and processing capacities, especially for intensive computational tasks, has led to multiple proposals for the construction and operation of data centers that require large amounts of energy and water to run and cool thousands of computer servers; and

WHEREAS, as of May 2026, nearly 12 gigawatts (12,000 megawatts) of data center load requests are in the New York Independent System Operator interconnection queue with more than eight gigawatts entering the queue in 2025 alone, representing accelerating demand growth and a need for action; and

WHEREAS, Energize NY Development, announced in the 2026 State of the State, directs the Public Service Commission to modernize how large energy consumers, including data centers, connect to the grid, while ensuring those consumers pay their fair share or supply their own power; and

WHEREAS, it is the policy of New York State that the cost of electric system upgrades required to provide electric utility service to large loads should not be paid for by every-day New Yorkers; and

WHEREAS, the growth of Statewide electric load caused by data centers challenges the clean energy targets of the State and will require the procurement of additional energy supply to serve this incremental electric load; and

WHEREAS, data center development can be unpredictable and creates potential risk for utilities and ratepayers, including when infrastructure investments are made in anticipation of loads that may not fully materialize; and

WHEREAS, the State is dedicated to environmental quality, sound public health and safety, economic prosperity, and social well-being; and

WHEREAS, New Yorkers have expressed legitimate concerns regarding the potential impacts of the siting and operation of data centers on energy use, water use, water quality, air quality, noise, lighting, quality of life, and other potential environmental impacts; and

WHEREAS, the State’s existing regulatory frameworks are not yet prepared to address the large-scale water use and treatment from data centers which could strain aquifers, surface waters, and public infrastructure; and

WHEREAS, as competition for clean freshwater resources increases due to threats to water quality and changing precipitation and drought patterns from climate change, the need to maximize water reuse and implement the best available technologies to conserve water resources becomes increasingly important, especially within sectors of highwater-demand such as data centers; and

WHEREAS, without regulations, policies, or guidance that enable safe, efficient, and economically viable water use and reuse, the State risks exacerbating water scarcity conditions in high-demand areas, constraining industrial growth, and undermining long-term climate resilience; and

WHEREAS, localities across New York are increasingly contending with the costs and benefits of serving as host communities for data centers, and hosting a data center presents unique opportunities for the host community to encourage and secure private sector investment from the developer or operator that delivers meaningful local benefits; and

WHEREAS, while the negotiation of local benefits with data center developers or operators is the responsibility of the locality, the State can offer valuable technical resources and provide best practices to support the negotiation of meaningful local commitments from the developer or operator;

NOW, THEREFORE I, Kathy Hochul, Governor of the State of New York, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and Laws of the State of New York, do hereby order as follows:

1. Data Center Permitting Moratorium and Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) The Department of Public Service (DPS) is directed to examine the impacts associated with the interconnection of data centers to the electric distribution network through its proceeding under Case 26-E0045, Proceeding on Motion of the Commission to Address Interconnection Reforms for Large Loads.

In connection with such proceeding, DPS is further directed to initiate a formal public process, including public comment and a public hearing, to create a Generic Environmental Impact Statement in accordance with the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act at Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and the regulations promulgated thereunder (collectively, SEQRA), to assess the potential environmental impacts of the construction and operation of data centers in the State, including energy demand, water use and quality, air quality, disproportionate impacts on disadvantaged communities, and noise levels. DPS shall submit a report of such Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement and findings statement. DPS shall consult with the Department of Environmental Conservation and other relevant state agencies and authorities.

Until DPS submits its report of the final Generic Environmental Impact Statement and associated findings statement, the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), consistent with its obligations under SEQRA, is directed to hold in abeyance all applications for any discretionary permit, approval, license, or similar form of permission for the construction or expansion of a data center that (1) are or may hereafter be pending before DEC and (2) have not been determined to be complete by DEC before the date of this Executive Order. As a condition precedent to a determination of completeness for an application for a discretionary permit, approval, license, or similar form of permission, DEC may require the applicant to identify and describe in writing whether such application relates to or involves the construction or operation of a data center.

This provision does not apply to permits, approvals, licenses, or similar forms of permission from local governments. DEC shall assist DPS in the preparation of the Generic Environmental Impact Statement referenced above.

2. Developing a Community Investment Framework To assist localities across New York in analyzing and attaining local economic benefits and mitigating potential negative effects of serving as a host community for a data center, Empire State Development (ESD) is directed, within 60 days of this Executive Order, to consider feedback on and create and post on its website a Community Investment Framework. 87 ESD shall include in such Community Investment Framework, guidance associated with:

a. Creation and maintenance of a community investment fund into which data center developers or operators provide capital that can be used for energy affordability efforts and enhancements to public services such as child care, K-12 programming, or public infrastructure.

b. Investments in local infrastructure such as local energy distribution systems, broadband or irrigation systems or wastewater treatment plants

c. Establishment of frameworks that provide organized labor a seat at the table and prioritize prevailing wage standards and project labor agreements for data center construction, local hiring, apprenticeships and workforce development to maximize economic benefits.

d. Transparency through reporting requirements or other means so that communities understand many of the key economic metrics associated with data center development. Localities and other governmental entities, including but not limited to Industrial Development Agencies, may use the Community Investment Framework to negotiate terms and conditions with the developer or operator of such data center, to help the host community explore ways it can directly benefit from such project through established partnerships, direct investments in the community, and any other appropriate terms.

3. The New York Grid Acceleration Fund DPS is also directed to consider the development of a mechanism to protect all customers from the risk of significant costs and risks of stranded assets, including consideration of a New York Grid Acceleration Fund, and may consider such as part of the Energize NY Proceeding. The Fund may require data centers to make upfront capital contributions to finance grid improvements, participate in demand response programs, support the procurement of new clean energy supply including distributed energy resources, and establish an insurance pool to which developers may need to contribute. This Fund would help ensure that New York’s grid is modernized to maintain reliability while also ensuring the costs of integrating and serving these new loads are not borne by other ratepayers.

The Fund could also explore options to support energy affordability. DPS shall consider assessing how data center contributions to the Fund may be structured, including contribution levels and how funds may be allocated. Additionally, the department shall consider developing a process to work with utilities and other stakeholders to identify necessary infrastructure improvements across the grid.

A component of the Fund may include measures to protect ratepayers from project delays, changes in scope, or cancellations that could result in stranded assets. As part of this effort, DPS may evaluate approaches to require data centers to fund new clean electric generation and/or battery storage dedicated to their operations, consistent with the State’s clean energy goals, including customer-sited distributed energy resources, to the greatest extent feasible.

4. Interconnection, Reliability, and Cost Allocation DPS is directed within sixty days to form a Data Center Interconnection Working Group to identify and resolve issues related to the interconnection of data centers, and other large loads, in order to support efficient interconnection of large new customers and the faithful compliance of “beneficiary pays” principles as related to network upgrade and resource adequacy costs. DPS is directed to convene the State’s transmission owners to review their practices and methodologies for studying the system impacts of data centers, and other large loads in order to understand their sufficiency for the purpose of estimating and managing cost impacts, both as they relate to network upgrades and to supply. DPS is directed to report to the Commission within ninety days. Data centers may also be subject to service classifications and requirements pertaining to data centers to be developed by DPS and as may be established by the Public Service Commission in the exercise of its discretion.

5. Data Center Water Withdrawal Review and Report DEC shall assess whether any new or amended regulations, policies, reporting, or guidance is necessary or appropriate to help ensure its water withdrawal program requirements, pursuant to 6 NYCRR Parts 601 and 602, accurately and completely reflect the water demands of large use customers in the State, including data centers.

No later than twelve months after the date of this order, DEC shall deliver a report setting forth the results of such assessment and an identification of the potential regulatory, policy, and guidance actions that are necessary or appropriate to address the concerns associated with the siting and operation of data centers in the State.

6. Definition For the purposes of this Executive Order, “data center” shall mean a facility or group of facilities located on the same site or contiguous sites used to house computer servers, associated components, or computing or telecommunications equipment for the storage, processing, distribution, and / or management of data. Characteristics of data centers subject to this Executive Order include computer servers, associated components, or computing or telecommunications equipment which: (1) are in facilities containing uninterruptible power supply systems, specialized cooling systems designed for high-density computing loads, and / or contain cybersecurity systems designed for secure digital infrastructure operations, (2) provide data storage, cloud computing, and/or content delivery to customers, internal operations, and/or affiliated business operations, oftentimes on a continuous twenty-four-hour cycle, and (3) consume or can consume 50 megawatts of energy or more.

Provided, however, that a facility that is primarily used for manufacturing, research (including but not limited to quantum computing research or biomedical research), education (including but not limited to such facilities used by accredited colleges and universities in New York State, to the extent such colleges and universities are engaging in academic research, and the Empire AI consortium, or the institute, as defined in section three hundred sixty-one of the Economic Development Law), or the provision of medical care, is not covered by this definition and thus not subject to this Executive Order.

7. Agency Consultation In implementing this order, DEC, DPS, and ESD shall consult with one another and with additional partner agencies and authorities in the State, including but not limited to the Authorities Budget Office, Department of Health, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, the Long Island Power Authority, the Department of State, as well as the New York Independent System Operator. (L.S.)

GIVEN under my hand and the Privy Seal of the State in the City of Albany this fourteenth day of July in the year two thousand twenty-six.

BY THE GOVERNOR /S/ Kathy Hochul

/s/ Karen Persichilli Keogh Secretary to the Governor

Executive Orders NYS Register/August 5, 2026

Administrative Law Judge recommended a 60-Day suspension without pay after finding supervisor sexually harassed a coworker while both were on duty

2026-08-05T09:00:00.000-04:00

In this New York State Civil Service Law Section 75 disciplinary action New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearing [OATH] Administrative Law Judge [ALJ] Christine Stecura found a Supervisor guilty of disciplinary charges alleging Supervisor had sexually harassed a coworker while on duty and recommended that the appointing authority [Petitioner] impose a 60-day suspension without pay on the Supervisor as the appropriate penalty under the circumstances.

The Petitioner's disciplinary charges alleged Supervisor of “[e]ngaging in activity that interferes with any activity of the [Department] or those of its officers or employees”, which is “conduct unbecoming a City employee” and “[p]rejudicial to [g]ood [o]rder] and [d]iscipline”.

ALJ Stecura found that Petitioner had proved the charges served on Supervisor by a preponderance of the credible evidence.

Credible evidence has been defined as “the burden of persuading the triers of fact that the existence of the fact is more probable than its non-existence.”

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

School Board's prompt reporting of certain improprieties in the school district's 2026 election results in immediate corrective action

2026-08-04T09:00:00.000-04:00

The School Board [Board] in this appeal to New York State's Commission of Education, the Board asked the Commissioner to annul her May 19, 2026 order pursuant to Education Law §2037 annulling the results of the School District's May 19, 2026 election.

The Board had reported a number of improprieties in connection with the May 2026 including the Board's discovery of a garbage bag containing “folded ballots” and “ripped up cast ballots” in a dumpster outside of the district’s administrative office.

The Board also noted that:

(1) the district clerk did not, as required by statute,[1] create a list of absentee/early mail voters;

(2) there were numerous discrepancies regarding absentee ballots; and

(3) certain ballots for voters “unable to appear personally at the polling place because of illness or physical disability”[2] were mailed beyond the statutory deadline.

The Commissioner noted that in order to invalidate the results of a school district election, the petitioner must either:

(1) establish not only that irregularities occurred but also that any irregularities actually affected the outcome of the election or were so pervasive that they vitiated the electoral process; or

(2) demonstrate a clear and convincing picture of informality to the point of laxity in adherence to the Education Law.

The Commissioner, noting that the Board's above recited evidence amply paints a “clear and convincing picture of informality” that warrants a new election, said that such relief was awarded in an interim order dated June 25, 2026.

Further, the Commissioner noted that the appointment of the District Superintendent for the Putnam Northern Westchester Board of Cooperative Services to fulfill the role of district clerk and indicated that "the June 25, 2026 order continues to represent appropriate relief for the violations of law and irregularities described in the [Board's] petition" and that her "interim order remains in effect without modification".

Footnotes:

[1] Education Law §§ 2018-b (7), 2018-f (7). See Appeal of Touré, et al., 54 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 16,660 (the “failure to maintain ... a list [of absentee voters] is an open invitation to fraud and threatens the integrity of the electoral process”).

[2] Education Law § 2018-a (2) (a) (2).

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

New York State Bar Association's Labor and Employment Law Section's 2026 meeting

2026-08-03T08:45:44.304-04:00

Selected items posted on the Internet which may be of interest to readers and posted by NYPPL pro bono

2026-08-03T06:00:00.000-04:00

Updated August 1, 2026

This website offers a range of reports and analyses, with a primary focus on public health in New York City and New York State Addresses diverse topics including COVID-19 tracking, sports data, Medicaid enrollment, environmental data, hate crimes, and more. Click HERE to access this Internet website.

Santa Clara University School of Law Professor Eric Goldman has published the 2026 edition of his casebook, Internet Law: Cases & Materials. Click to READ MORE.

Combating on the job misbehavior An “app” (The #NotMe app) employers can make available to their personnel permitting an easy and timely submission of complaints of alleged supervisor or co-worker misconduct to personnel officers, human resource teams, compliance officers or designated individuals. Click HERE to access this post.

The Discipline Book An E-book for attorneys, arbitrators, mediators, administrators, union officials, and others involved in disciplinary actions taken against public officers and employees employed by New York State and its political subdivisions pursuant to New York State's Civil Service Law, New York State's Education Law and similar statutes and negotiated disciplinary grievance procedures. Updated periodically since its initial date of publication via posts to NYPPL. Click HERE to access this website.

Selected items posted on the Internet during the week ending July 31, 2026

2026-08-01T02:00:00.000-04:00

Santa Clara University School of Law Professor Eric Goldman has published the 2026 edition (17th edition) of his Internet Law casebook, Internet Law: Cases & Materials. READ MORE

Attackers Move in Days. Can You? See how autonomous, real-time remediation closes the exposure gap before attackers exploit it. Read now

Exposure Management: Autonomous IT Beyond CVEs Real-time risk scoring, prioritization, and remediation for CVEs, misconfigurations, and compliance — unified. Watch Now

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

Reimagining Permitting and Licensing with AI This guide shows how cities and counties can modernize with a unified cloud-based approach, use AI responsibly and create a more efficient, responsive permitting experience. DOWNLOAD

Preparing for Medicaid's New Redetermination Mandates Learn how to prepare for more frequent eligibility reviews, strengthen constituent communications and reduce administrative burden ahead of new Medicaid mandates. DOWNLOAD

Turning Public Finance Data into Insight Public finance teams need systems built for today’s complexity. This paper shows how modern finance platforms reduce manual work, streamline reconciliation and deliver stronger management insights. DOWNLOAD

Why Identity Is Now Core HHS Infrastructure For HHS agencies, identity verification is no longer a support function. This paper explains how modern identity platforms give agencies a consistent, risk-based way to verify new applicants and returning beneficiaries. DOWNLOAD

Weekly Government Webinar Roundup
Register now and watch at your leisure!

📜 All registrants will have the opportunity to download a certificate of attendance at the completion of a webinar.

From Hybrid Work to Mission Outcomes Learn how modern collaboration strategies help IT leaders support hybrid teams, simplify technology and improve outcomes. WATCH NOW

The State of AI in Government This webinar will provide a practical, research-driven look at the evolving role of AI in government. WATCH NOW

Regulatory Reinvention: A Blueprint for Modernization We'll discuss regulatory reinvention and the foundational elements that drive successful technology transformation. WATCH NOW

Modernize IT with Actionable Visibility Discover how better visibility across your IT environment enables proactive management, smarter investments and greater efficiency. WATCH NOW

Modernize Public Sector ITSM with No-Code Automation and AI In this session, we examine how AI and no-code automation are being combined to modernize public sector service delivery. WATCH NOW

Building a Strong Foundation for AI in Government IT Learn how to modernize and adopt AI while maintaining compliance, reducing risk and increasing efficiency. WATCH NOW

Workers' Comp 101 with the Advocate for Injured Workers continues

2026-07-31T09:00:00.000-04:00

The New York State Workers' Compensation Board continues its free webinar series for employees next week, and there is still time to register!

On the dates listed below, the Board’s Advocate for Injured Workers will discuss the basics of the workers’ compensation system, including employees’ rights if they become injured or ill on the job. Presentations will also cover:

Employees’ benefits under workers’ compensation
How to file a claim
How to get help with your claim if needed
Tips and best practices for injured workers

The sessions are free and there will be time at the end for questions and will be held on:

Tuesday, August 4, 2026 11:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Wednesday, September 2, 2026 11:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Register here

More information

Visit the Advocate for Injured Workers section of the Board’s website for additional resources.

You can also call the Advocate for Injured Workers at (877) 632-4996 or email advinjwkr@wcb.ny.gov.

Having trouble?

If you are having trouble registering for or attending any of these webinars, check out these Webinar FAQs.

The New York State Public Employment Relations Board interprets New York State's Taylor Law to mean that the chief executive of a village may unilaterally agree to employees accreting into a union

2026-07-31T08:59:00.000-04:00

The relevant employment contract with the Petitioner [Village] provided the Superintendent of the Village's Department of Public Works [DPW] would be paid a specified salary for a period of two years. Subsequently the Superintendent and the then-mayor and village manager reached an agreement to raise the Superintendent's salary by $10,000, which amount had already been included in the Village's budget.

Thereafter Superintendent approached AFSCME Local 750-9, Council 66, AFL-CIO [Union] proposing that the Union vote to recognize "[Superintendent's] addition to the DPW collective bargaining unit under the title of "working supervisor" in DPW negotiating unit. Subsequently the Village and the union membership approved the new position by unanimous vote and Superintendent began paying union dues.

A subsequent Village Board election overturned the majority on the Village Board and the Village Board met with Superintendent and requested that he leave the union. The Superintendent agreed to do on the condition that he keep his $10,000 raise.

Ultimately the parties could not come to an agreement and in June 2022, the Village Board adopted a resolution directing Superintendent to resign from the union and lowering his salary by $10,000 to his original contracted amount.

This failure to come to an agreement ultimately resulted in the instant litigation. The decision of the Appellate Division in this matter is setout below.

In the Matter of Village of Monticello, Petitioner,

AFSCME Local 750-9, Council 66, AFL-CIO, et al., Respondents.

Decided and Entered: July 30, 2026

CV-25-1357

Calendar Date: May 27, 2026

Before: Aarons, J.P., Pritzker, Ceresia, Fisher And Mcshan, JJ.

Sussman & Associates, Goshen (Michael H. Sussman of counsel), for petitioner.

AFSCME Council 66, Syracuse (Kerry M. Lightcap of counsel), for AFSCME Local 750-9, Council 66, AFL-CIO, respondent.

Laura H. Delaney, Public Employment Relations Board, Albany, for Public Employment Relations Board, respondent.

Fisher, J.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Public Employment Relations Board finding, among other things, that petitioner committed an improper employer practice.

In 2020, Jay Sherb entered into an employment contract with petitioner, the Village of Monticello (hereinafter the Village), to work as the superintendent of the Village's Department of Public Works (hereinafter DPW) at a specified salary for a period of two years. In July 2021, Sherb and then-mayor and village manager George Nikolados reached an agreement to raise Sherb's salary by $10,000, which had already been approved in the Village's budget. In 2022, Sherb approached respondent AFSCME Local 750-9, Council 66, AFL-CIO (hereinafter the union), proposing that the union vote to recognize his addition to the union under the title of "working supervisor" in the DPW. A representative from the union asked Nikolados if, should the union approve the addition to the bargaining unit, the Village would voluntarily recognize the accretion of the new position. Nikolados responded that the Village would, and the union membership approved the new position by unanimous vote and Sherb began paying union dues. Shortly thereafter, an election overturned the majority on the Village Board and replaced Nikolados as village manager with James Snowden. Snowden and other trustees on the Village Board met with Sherb to request that he leave the union, to which Sherb agreed on the condition that he keep his $10,000 raise. Snowden indicated that he was unaware of the raise, but offered to let Sherb keep $5,000. However, they could not come to an agreement, and, in June 2022, the Village Board adopted a resolution directing Sherb to resign from the union and lowering his salary by $10,000 to his original contracted amount.

The union filed an improper practice charge with respondent Public Employment Relations Board (hereinafter PERB) against the Village, alleging that the attempt to coerce Sherb into forfeiting his union membership by reducing his pay violated Civil Service Law article 14 (hereinafter the Taylor Law). The Village answered and filed a petition for unit clarification, alleging that Sherb had been illegally accreted into the union due to the managerial character of his job. Following a hearing, the Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter ALJ) held that the Village had violated Civil Service Law § 209-a (1) (a), (c) and (d) under the Taylor Law, finding that Nikolados had apparent authority — if not actual authority — to bind the Village to his agreement with the union to recognize Sherb's accretion into the bargaining unit and that the Village's resolution was an improper practice as an attempt to coerce Sherb out of the union. The ALJ ordered the Village to, among other things, refrain from unilaterally altering the composition of the bargaining unit, changing the salary of any member thereof or requiring anyone to resign, and ordered the Village make Sherb whole for lost pay and benefits. The ALJ further rejected the Village's unit clarification petition, reasoning that only a decertification petition could remove Sherb from the bargaining unit which he had legally joined.

On administrative appeal, PERB affirmed the ALJ's decision, albeit on different grounds. PERB found that Nikolados had actual, rather than apparent, authority to bind the Village under its precedent interpreting the Taylor Law. PERB further affirmed the ALJ's ruling that the Village's resolution was an improper practice and that the clarification petition was an improper mechanism to challenge Sherb's title being accreted into the union. The Village commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging PERB's determination, which was transferred to this Court.

Initially, we find that PERB's determination that the village manager had actual authority to add the DPW supervisor position into the union is not reviewable under the substantial evidence standard as its determination was based entirely on its own precedent interpreting the Taylor Law (see CPLR 7803 [3]; Matter of Lippman v Public Empl. Relations Bd., 263 AD2d 891, 895 [3d Dept 1999]; see also Matter of Cold Spring Harbor Teachers Assn. v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 12 AD3d 442, 444 [2d Dept 2004]). Although the transfer of the issue of the village manager's authority to this Court was therefore not warranted, we retain jurisdiction in the interest of judicial economy (see Matter of Albany Police Benevolent Assn. v New York Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 202 AD3d 1402, 1404 [3d Dept 2022]; Matter of Lippman v Public Empl. Relations Bd., 263 AD2d at 895).

When interpreting the Taylor Law, "PERB is presumed to have developed an expertise and judgment that requires us to accept its construction if not unreasonable," and "we will not disturb PERB's determination unless it was affected by an error of law or was arbitrary and capricious or an abuse of discretion" (Matter of State of New York v Public Empl. Relations Bd., 137 AD3d 1467, 1468 [3d Dept 2016] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted]; see Matter of Chenango Forks Cent. Sch. Dist. v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd.,21 NY3d 255, 265 [2013]). Relevant here, the Taylor Law defines an " 'agreement' " as "the result of the exchange of mutual promises between the chief executive officer of a public employer and an employee organization which becomes a binding contract, for the period set forth therein, except as to any provisions therein which require approval by a legislative body, and as to those provisions, shall become binding when the appropriate legislative body gives its approval" (Civil Service Law § 201 [12]). Any such agreement reduced to writing must contain a clause stating that "any provision of this agreement requiring legislative action to permit its implementation by amendment of law or by providing the additional funds therefor, shall not become effective until the appropriate legislative body has given approval" (Civil Service Law § 204-a [1]). "[T]he Taylor Law prohibits local legislative bodies from usurping the executive's prerogative to agree with unions on terms and conditions of employment" (Mayor of City of N.Y. v Council of City of N.Y., 9 NY3d 23, 31 [2007]).

The crux of the Village's argument is that the former village manager, Nikolados, lacked the authority to agree to Sherb's accretion into the union. We disagree. In a case nearly factually identical to the present one, PERB interpreted the Taylor Law to mean that the chief executive of a village may unilaterally agree to employees accreting into a union because doing so "simply effectuates the representational rights that they possess" and requires neither the amendment of village laws nor the allocation of additional funds, i.e., actions that would require legislative approval (Matter of Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Inc. [Incorporated Village of Hempstead], 42 PERB ¶ 3024 [2009]). We discern no basis to find this interpretation unreasonable. Indeed, the Village fails to advance any argument on appeal that we should.FN1 Rather, relying on Matter of Town of Clay v Helsby (45 AD2d 292, 296 [4th Dept 1974]), the Village argues that Sherb's accretion violated longstanding precedent that union recognition is reserved for a town or village board as a legislative action. There is no inconsistency here. Hempstead, citing Clay, affirmed that recognition of a union was reserved to the board, but held that accretion into that union is distinct as a nonlegislative act and may be agreed to unilaterally by the chief executive (see Matter of Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Inc. [Incorporated Village of Hempstead], 42 PERB ¶ 3024 [2009]). Adding Sherb's title to the bargaining unit represented by the union required neither the allocation of additional funds nor the amendment of any law. We therefore find that PERB's determination that Nikolados, as the Village chief executive, had actual authority to bind the Village to an agreement to Sherb's accretion into the union was neither arbitrary nor capricious nor affected by error of law (see Matter of State of New York v Public Empl. Relations Bd., 137 AD3d at 1468-1469; Matter of Local 589, Intl. Assn. of Firefighters, AFL-CIO v Cuevas, 271 AD2d 535, 536-537 [2d Dept 2000]).

Next, the Village contends that PERB's determination that it committed an improper practice and thereby violated the Taylor Law is not supported by substantial evidence. We are not persuaded. It is well settled that "the public policy of this State in favor of collective bargaining is 'strong and sweeping' " (Matter of City of Watertown v State of N.Y. Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 95 NY2d 73, 78 [2000], quoting Matter of Board of Educ. of City School Dist. of City of N.Y. v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 75 NY2d 660, 667 [1990]). With this principle in mind, our "review of a PERB determination following a hearing is limited to whether it is supported by substantial evidence, that is, whether there is a basis in the record allowing for the conclusion that PERB's decision was legally permissible and rational" (Matter of Uniformed Fire Officers Assn. of the City of Yonkers v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 197 AD3d 1470, 1472 [3d Dept 2021] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted]; see CPLR 7803 [4]; Matter of Buffalo Teachers Fedn., Inc. v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 208 AD3d 127, 129 [3d Dept 2022]). "A public employer is required to negotiate in good faith with the bargaining representative of its current employees regarding the terms and conditions of employment" (Matter of Uniformed Fire Officers Assn. of the City of Yonkers v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 197 AD3d at 1472 [citations omitted]). "The term 'terms and conditions of employment' means . . . salaries, wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment" (Civil Service Law § 201 [4] [a]). It is an "improper practice" and a violation of the Taylor Law for an employer to "to interfere with, restrain or coerce public employees in the exercise of their rights" to join an employee organization of their own choosing, "to discriminate against any employee for the purpose of encouraging or discouraging membership in, or participation in the activities of, any employee organization" or "to refuse to negotiate in good faith with the duly recognized or certified representatives of its public employees" (Civil Service Law § 209-a [1] [a], [c], [d]; see Civil Service Law § 202).

Here, Sherb was paid a higher salary before the election in 2022 and the appointment of the new village manager, Snowden. After that election, Sherb met with Snowden and two other Village Board members who asked him to leave the union, to which Sherb agreed on the condition that he keep his higher salary. Snowden countered with an offer of letting Sherb keep $5,000 of the $10,000 raise if he left the union. When Sherb did not leave, the Village Board passed a resolution revoking Sherb's raise and directing Snowden to order him "to resign forthwith his membership in the labor union." Based on these undisputed facts and our review of the remaining record, Sherb was represented by the union at the time of these occurrences, making the terms and conditions of his employment subject to requirements of the Taylor Law. Threatening his salary unless he left the union and lowering his salary when he refused to do so constituted (1) coercion and interference with Sherb's exercise of his statutory rights, (2) discrimination to discourage his participation in the union and (3) a refusal to negotiate in good faith with the union over the terms and conditions of his employment. Such actions are definitionally improper practices under the Taylor Law (see Civil Service Law §§ 201 [4] [a]; 202; 204 [3]; 209-a [1] [a], [c], [d]). We therefore find that PERB's determination that the Village violated the Taylor Law is supported by substantial evidence (see Matter of Albany Police Benevolent Assn. v New York Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 202 AD3d at 1404; cf. Matter of Uniformed Fire Officers Assn. of the City of Yonkers v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 197 AD3d at 1473-1474; see also Matter of Village of Scarsdale v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd.,205 AD3d 1031, 1034 [2d Dept 2022]).

The Village also contends that its petition for unit clarification should have been granted based on Sherb's managerial responsibilities, which exempt him from coverage under the Taylor Law. We find this contention to be without merit. The Taylor Law provides PERB broad authority to establish procedures for the resolution of disputes over the representation status of public employees (see Civil Service Law § 205 [5] [a]-[d]). "Employees may be designated as managerial only if they are persons (i) who formulate policy or (ii) who may reasonably be required on behalf of the public employer to assist directly in the preparation for and conduct of collective negotiations or to have a major role in the administration of agreements or in personnel administration provided that such role is not of a routine or clerical nature and requires the exercise of independent judgment" (Civil Service Law § 201 [7] [a]). "In excluding managerial and confidential employees from the protection of the Taylor Law, the Legislature cautioned that it was not its intent to destroy existing employer-employee negotiating units, and [PERB] has repeatedly reiterated that the statutory criteria should be applied conservatively and narrowly, and employees should not be excluded except in very clear instances with all uncertainties resolved in favor of Taylor Law coverage" (Matter of Lippman v Public Empl. Relations Bd., 263 AD2d at 896 [citations omitted]). Again, PERB's determination hinged on its own precedent interpreting the Taylor Law and, as such, we review its determination to dismiss the Village's clarification petition under the arbitrary and capricious standard (see id. at 895). This requires only that PERB's construction be reasonable (see Matter of State of New York v Public Empl. Relations Bd., 137 AD3d at 1468).

PERB also relied on Hempstead in dismissing the Village's petition for the proposition that the Village must "file the appropriate application or petition under PERB's Rules of Procedure" if it believed that Sherb was not covered as "managerial or confidential" (Matter of Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Inc. [Incorporated Village of Hempstead], 42 PERB ¶ 3024 [2009]). Relevant here, a decertification petition "alleg[es] that an employee organization which has been certified or is being currently recognized should be deprived of representation status as to all or part of a unit" (4 NYCRR 201.2 [a]). On the other hand, the purpose of a clarification petition is "to clarify whether a position is encompassed within the scope of an existing unit" (4 NYCRR 201.2 [b]). PERB has explained that the "criteria used in deciding a certification/decertification or unit placement petition differ markedly from the criteria used to decide a unit clarification petition" (Matter of Syracuse Teachers Assn. [Syracuse City Sch. Dist.],37 PERB ¶ 3003 [2004]). A decertification petition triggers an investigation and an assessment "as to the community of interest shared by the at-issue title and the titles in the petitioned-for unit, including the potential for conflict of interest" (id.). A unit clarification petition, on the other hand, "seeks only a factual determination as to whether a job title is actually encompassed within the scope of the petitioner's unit" (id.; see Matter of Nassau Community Coll. [Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Inc., Local 1000, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, Local 830],55 PERB ¶ 3004 [2022]).

As pertinent here, the Village's clarification petition contended that, because Sherb's position is managerial, he "should immediately be excluded from the union." PERB has squarely rejected substituting a clarification petition for a decertification petition in the past, reasoning that doing so would allow a petitioner "to effectively sidestep the requirements of a petition of decertification" (Matter of International Bhd. of Teamsters Local 693 [Village of Endicott], 48 PERB ¶ 4011 [2015]). This comports with the long-held precedent that the Taylor Law presumes coverage, and exceptions to that presumption are to be construed narrowly (see Matter of NYC Health + Hosps. v Organization of Staff Analysts, 171 AD3d 529, 530 [1st Dept 2019]; Matter of Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Inc., Local 1000, AFSCME, AFL-CIO v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 34 AD3d 884, 885 [3d Dept 2006]; Matter of Lippman v Public Empl. Relations Bd., 263 AD2d at 904; Matter of Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth. v Public Empl. Relations Bd., 48 AD2d 206, 211 [3d Dept 1975], lv denied 37 NY2d 712 [1976]). The Village would have us direct PERB to discard its process for making such a determination in favor of a hand-written, two-page form. We decline to do so and hold that PERB's dismissal of the petition was not arbitrary, capricious nor affected by error of law (see Matter of State of New York v Public Empl. Relations Bd., 137 AD3d at 1468-1469; Matter of County of Erie v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 247 AD2d 671, 672-673 [3d Dept 1998]; Matter of Civil Serv. Empls. Assn. v Newman, 90 AD2d 114, 116 [3d Dept 1982]).

Lastly, we grant PERB's counterclaim for enforcement of its determination as its remedy "was not unduly burdensome and seemingly furthered the goal of reaching a fair negotiated result" (Matter of State of New York v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 176 AD3d 1460, 1465 [3d Dept 2019] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citation omitted]; see Matter of Board of Educ. of the Newburgh Enlarged City Sch. Dist. v Public Empl. Relations Bd. of the State of N.Y., 243 AD3d 1194, 1197 [3d Dept 2025]). The Village's remaining arguments, to the extent not already addressed, have been considered and found to be without merit or rendered academic.

Aarons, J.P., Pritzker, Ceresia and McShan, JJ., concur.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, petition dismissed, and respondent Public Employment Relations Board is entitled to a judgment of enforcement of its remedial order.

Footnotes

Footnote 1

The Village fails to mention PERB's determination that Nikolados possessed actual authority until its reply brief, rendering its challenge to this interpretation of the Taylor Law abandoned (see Matter of Jimeno [Commissioner of Labor], 231 AD3d 1467, 1467-1468 [3d Dept 2024]).

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

On July 29, 2026, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli reported that the following State Government Accountability audits were released.

2026-07-30T09:00:00.000-04:00

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

Department of Health – Medicaid Program: Improper Medicaid Payments to Hospitals for Outpatient Services Billed as Inpatient Services for Recipients Enrolled in Managed Care (Follow-Up) (2026-F-1) When managed care enrollees receive care at hospitals, managed care organizations (MCOs) reimburse the hospitals, and a recipient’s hospital status—inpatient versus outpatient—affects Medicaid’s reimbursement. A prior audit, issued in August 2024, examined whether Medicaid made improper payments to hospitals for outpatient services billed as inpatient services for recipients enrolled in managed care with a focus on inpatient claims with patient stays of less than 24 hours (“short-stays”). The audit found that the Department of Health (DOH) did not review short-stay inpatient encounters or provide guidance to MCOs and hospitals on how to determine whether a short-stay claim should be billed as inpatient or outpatient. DOH officials made little progress in addressing the problems identified in the original audit report. Of the initial report’s four audit recommendations, one was implemented and three were not. implemented.

Department of Health – Medicaid Program: Improper Payments for Laboratory and Related Services (2023-S-51) The Department of Health (DOH) and managed care organizations (MCOs) can set limits on laboratory procedures, such as daily, weekly, yearly or per lifetime. These limits are enforced in MCOs’ claim processing systems and in eMedNY (the Medicaid claim processing and payment system) through system edits but can be exceeded for medical necessity. For the period from June 2019 through January 2025, auditors found $21.6 million in payments due to DOH not providing adequate guidance to providers and MCOs and not effectively monitoring claims for certain laboratory procedures, as well as weaknesses in the eMedNY system edits.

Office for People With Developmental Disabilities – Incentives for Non-Profit Service Providers’ Recruiting and Retention Efforts (2023-S-44) The Office for People With Developmental Disabilities (OPWDD) coordinates services for individuals directly through its 13 Developmental Disabilities Services Offices, and through a network of over 500 non-profit service providers (Providers). To address significant staff shortages that caused many Providers to close programs or reduce operations, OPWDD issued bonuses and supplemental one-time payments to help Providers retain and recruit direct support professionals, utilizing federal funding through the American Rescue Plan Act and enacting State budget cost‑of‑living adjustments. Auditors identified certain weaknesses in OPWDD’s oversight of various incentive payments, which resulted in inconsistent distribution of these payments to direct support professionals, potentially working counter to the bonus and incentive programs’ intention to retain and recruit this critical workforce sector.

Department of Motor Vehicles – Assessable Expenses of Administering the Motor Vehicle Financial Security Act and the Motor Vehicle Safety Responsibility Act for the State Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2025 (2025-M-3) The Motor Vehicle Financial Security Act and the Motor Vehicle Safety Responsibility Act help ensure that the operators of motor vehicles driven in New York State possess adequate insurance coverage, or are financially secure, to compensate those persons they might injure or whose property they might damage as a result of an accident. The Department of Motor Vehicles is responsible for tracking the expenses of administering the acts and assessing these expenses on insurance carriers that issue policies or contracts of automotive bodily injury insurance. Auditors found that the expenses for administering the acts for the State Fiscal Year ended March 31, 2025 totaled $32.4 million.

Nelson A. Rockefeller Empire State Plaza Performing Arts Center Corporation – Security Over Critical Systems (2025-S-37) The Nelson A. Rockefeller Empire State Plaza Performing Arts Center Corporation operates the performing arts center housed within The Egg, which is part of the Nelson A. Rockefeller Empire State Plaza complex in Albany. The Egg utilizes 11 systems to support its network and operations. The Egg is subject to New York State Office of Information Technology Services policies and standards under Executive Order 117. To process credit cards, The Egg must follow the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard. Auditors identified areas where The Egg could improve security controls to minimize risks associated with unauthorized access to its systems and data and communicated the details of these findings in a confidential report to Egg officials.

###

Applicant challenged the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board's rejection of her religious exemption request finding that Applicant was disqualified for unemployment insurance benefits

2026-07-29T09:00:00.000-04:00

The text of the Appellate Division's ruling sustaining the decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board in the instant matter is set out below:

In the Matter of the Claim of Roxalana T. Jordan, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

Decided and Entered: July 9, 2026

CV-24-0840

Calendar Date: May 27, 2026

Before: Aarons, J.P., Pritzker, Ceresia, Fisher And Mcshan, JJ.

Roxalana T. Jordan, Brooklyn, appellant pro se.

Letitia James, Attorney General, New York City (Dennis A. Rambaud of counsel), for respondent.

Aarons, J.P.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 12, 2023, which ruled, among other things, that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

In September 2021, claimant was notified by her employer, the Unified Court System, that all judges and nonjudicial personnel were required to obtain a COVID-19 vaccine by September 27, 2021 in order to continue employment, unless otherwise approved for an exemption due to a medical reason or sincerely held religious belief. Claimant submitted a written religious exemption request seeking to be exempt from the vaccination requirement, which request the employer denied. Claimant thereafter submitted a medical exemption request, which request was also denied. In addition, claimant submitted an amended religious exemption request, which was not considered by the employer. Claimant's employment was ultimately terminated for failure to obtain the COVID-19 vaccine, prompting her to apply for unemployment insurance benefits.

The Department of Labor, as is relevant here, issued an initial determination finding that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause. Following various hearings, an Administrative Law Judge sustained that determination, and that decision was affirmed by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board in a decision filed October 12, 2023. Claimant appeals.

We affirm. "Whether a claimant has good cause to leave employment, and whether their conduct is motivated by a sincerely held religious belief, are factual issues for the Board to resolve, and its determination will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence" (Matter of Gardner [Commissioner of Labor], 238 AD3d 1464, 1465-1466 [3d Dept 2025] [citations omitted]; see Matter of Palmieri [Commissioner of Labor], 243 AD3d 970, 971-972 [3d Dept 2025]; Matter of Salloum [Commissioner of Labor], 238 AD3d 1394, 1396 [3d Dept 2025]; see also Frazee v Illinois Dept. of Employment Sec., 489 US 829, 833 [1989]). In her initial written religious exemption request, claimant stated, "In God We Trust. My religious beliefs and practices do[ ] not require or mandate or force[ ] the use of legal or illegal drugs." At the hearing, claimant explained that her religion — one she declined to disclose — believes in "self-autonomy of the body" and not being forced to take illegal or legal drugs. Claimant acknowledged, however, that her religion does not prohibit her from being vaccinated but, rather, it is her choice whether to be vaccinated. Claimant further testified that she amended her religious exemption request once her initial request was denied, asserting a generalized concern about the content of the vaccine. No further information about her religious beliefs or tenets of her undisclosed religion was provided.

Regarding her request for a medical exemption, claimant failed to provide any requisite documentation from any medical health professional, asserting only that the COVID-19 vaccine is contraindicated and ill-advised based upon "recent conversations with [her] medical professionals" given her "current heath condition and status" — a medical condition she deemed unnecessary to disclose. Given the vague and generalized information in support of her religious and medical exemption requests, and deferring to the Board's credibility assessments, the record supports the Board's findings that claimant did not establish that her refusal to comply with the employer's COVID-19 vaccine mandate was rooted in a sincerely held religious belief but, rather, was based on personal and secular reasons (see Matter of Tandian [Commissioner of Labor], 239 AD3d 1105, 1106-1107 [3d Dept 2025], lv denied 44 NY3d 910 [2026]; Matter of Gardner [Commissioner of Labor], 238 AD3d at 1466; Matter of Ocasio [City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y.-Commissioner of Labor], 237 AD3d 1412, 1415-1416 [3d Dept 2025], lv denied 44 NY3d 906 [2025]) and, further, that there was insufficient medical information to assess the basis or validity for the requested medical exemption (see Matter of Smith [Roswell Park Cancer Inst. Corp.-Commissioner of Labor], 227 AD3d 1344, 1346-1347 [3d Dept 2024]). Accordingly, substantial evidence supports the Board's decision that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause (see Matter of Des Abbayes [Commissioner of Labor], 239 AD3d 1199, 1200-1201 [3d Dept 2025]; Matter of Cosma [Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Ctr.-Commissioner of Labor], 236 AD3d 1121, 1123-1124 [3d Dept 2025]). Claimant's remaining contentions are either not properly raised in this proceeding or are without merit.

Pritzker, Ceresia, Fisher and McShan, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

On July 27, 2026 New York State Comptroller posted the New York State municipal and school audits listed below on the Internet

2026-07-28T09:10:00.000-04:00

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

Lake Mohegan Fire District – Procurement (Westchester County) The board and district officials did not always use a competitive process to procure goods and services in accordance with state law, the district’s procurement policy or best practices. As a result, the board, district officials and taxpayers lack assurance that procurements were made in a manner that promoted competition, transparent, free from favoritism and an economical use of public funds.

Town of Cato – Town Clerk/Tax Collector (Cayuga County) Although the clerk and former clerk generally recorded and reported collections accurately and in a timely manner for the period reviewed, the former clerk did not deposit and remit all collections within the timeframes prescribed in town law. This resulted in a lack of compliance and increased the risk that collections could be lost, unaccounted for or misappropriated without detection.

Auburn Enlarged City School District – Building Access (Cayuga County) Auditors found that district officials did not properly manage and monitor building access accounts and devices (badges). 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, compromising building security and safety for students, teachers, staff and visitors.

Hannibal Fire Company – Kartway Fundraising Activities (Oswego County) The board and company officials did not comply with the statutory requirements set forth in state law when they engaged in a non-permissible fundraising activity known as Kartway, a go-kart racetrack that operated on company property. In addition, the board did not provide oversight or otherwise monitor Kartway’s activities. Instead, the board relied on an unincorporated “association” to handle all racetrack operations and cash collections and did not require the association to provide any financial reports. The former chief was arrested in connection with stealing from the company. He pleaded guilty and agreed to pay $9,838 in restitution.

Town of Amherst – Employee Benefits (Erie County) Town officials did not ensure employees received leave time benefits, stipends and separation payments consistent with collective bargaining agreements (CBA) and town policies. As a result, the town provided additional benefits and paid compensation to employees which were not provided for in the applicable CBAs, authorized by the board or supported by sufficient documentation.

Town of Amherst – Information Technology (Erie County) Town officials did not properly secure user account access to the network. As a result, the town was exposed to an increased chance of unauthorized network access which could cause a variety of disruptions to the town, ranging from minor operational disruptions to network outages or data breaches.

Crystal Beach Fire Department – Foreign Fire Insurance (FFI) Tax Proceeds Accountability (Ontario County) The treasurer did not provide adequate oversight of FFI tax proceeds. The treasurer did not maintain separate, complete and accurate records of FFI tax proceeds received and expended, establish a formal process for approving expenditures prior to payment or file the required annual FFI tax proceeds report with our office. In addition, the department’s bylaws lacked clear guidance for the receipt, recording, use and reporting of FFI tax proceeds.

Village of Richburg – Transparency of Fiscal Activities (Allegany County) The board did not conduct or provide for an audit of the clerk-treasurer’s records and reports for fiscal year 2023 in accordance with state law. The clerk-treasurer also did not file the results of the village’s fiscal activities to the State Comptroller’s office for the 2019 through 2023 fiscal years, as required by state law.

Cuddebackville Fire District – Audit Follow-Up (Orange County) The purpose of the review was to assess the Cuddebackville Fire District’s progress in implementing our recommendations in a prior audit, Cuddebackville Fire District – Board Oversight (2024M-94), released in February 2025. The audit determined that the board did not provide adequate oversight of the district’s financial operations or properly audit claims. Of the 13 audit recommendations, district officials fully implemented six recommendations, partially implemented five and did not implement two. While officials made progress in addressing many of the report’s findings, the board cannot ensure district assets are fully safeguarded until all recommendations are implemented.

###

Press Release - GOVERNOR HOCHUL ANNOUNCES OPPORTUNITY FOR STUDENTS DISENROLLED FROM HOWARD UNIVERSITY TO EARN THEIR DEGREE AT SUNY AND CUNY

2026-07-27T16:00:00.000-04:00

Impacted New York Resident Students Eligible For Expedited Late Admissions Review for Fall 2026 at Participating SUNY and CUNY Campuses

SUNY and CUNY Campuses To Provide $800 Credit To Offset Non-Refundable Howard University Enrollment Deposits

On July 27, 2026, Governor Kathy Hochul announced that New York State is prepared to help students impacted by Howard University’s recent decision to disenroll more than 500 admitted students ahead of Fall 2026 classes beginning later this summer. Governor Hochul has directed the State University of New York (SUNY) and the City University of New York (CUNY) to work to ensure that every impacted New York resident student will have the opportunity to seek admission to participating SUNY or CUNY institutions for the Fall 2026 semester. Additionally, all impacted students will receive expedited late admissions review at participating campuses with available capacity.

“Hundreds of students, including New Yorkers, are scrambling and scared since they’ve been disenrolled from their intended college just a few weeks before classes are set to begin,” Governor Hochul said. “New York is home to the nation’s finest systems of public higher education, and we are ready to welcome these talented students with the opportunity they deserve. To every student who is worried that their educational future has been disrupted: New York is ready to support and empower you.”

Under Governor Hochul’s plan, participating SUNY and CUNY campuses will use existing capacity in their Fall 2026 entering classes, ensuring that this initiative will not reduce opportunities for other New York students seeking admission. Potential participating SUNY campuses that will provide expedited admissions review include the State University of New York at Albany, the State University of New York at Binghamton, the State University of New York at Buffalo, the State University of New York at Stony Brook, SUNY Buffalo State University, SUNY New Paltz, and SUNY Oneonta, with additional campuses reviewing available capacity.

State University of New York Chancellor John B. King Jr. said, “There is a place at SUNY for every New Yorker, and we want to empower all students with access to the affordable, excellent public higher education they deserve. We thank Governor Hochul for her leadership and vision to support students who recently were disenrolled elsewhere and ensure they are able to pursue their academic goals at SUNY campuses.”

The SUNY Board of Trustees said, “Uplifting students and empowering them to reach their full potential with an affordable, excellent public higher education is foundational to the SUNY System. Under Governor Hochul’s leadership, SUNY will be able to support students who were disenrolled from the school they planned to attend, and will ensure they are able to continue their academic journeys without interruption.”

City University of New York Chancellor Félix V. Matos Rodríguez said, “CUNY’s mission is to expand access to higher education for all students, not restrict it based on financial means. To these students currently facing uncertainty and left in academic limbo: our doors are open, our admissions are expedited, and your dream of a college degree remains well within reach. We are grateful to Governor Hochul for her vision and swift action to help these displaced students find a home in our public university system.”

CUNY Board of Trustees Chairperson William C. Thompson Jr. said, “The Board of Trustees is dedicated to ensuring CUNY is responsive whenever New Yorkers face unexpected hurdles. Thanks to Governor Hochul’s decisive leadership, we have moved quickly to work with these students to provide the stability, academic excellence, and the immediate support they need.”

Assemblymember Alicia Hyndman said, "It is unfortunate that several students planning to attend Howard University were disenrolled last week," said Assemblywoman Alicia L. Hyndman, Chair of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education. "To help impacted New York residents, the State is guaranteeing admission to participating SUNY or CUNY campuses. The state is also willing to help other scholars nationwide who are eligible for expedited late admission review for the fall semester at campuses with available capacity. With soaring financial costs, pursuing higher education is already hard. Let’s help make it easier for those who want to better themselves and pursue their dreams.”

Impacted students and families seeking additional information about eligibility, participating campuses and the admissions process are encouraged to visit SUNY at www.suny.edu/howard or CUNY at https://www.cuny.edu/admissions/undergraduate/.

About the State University of New York

The State University of New York is the largest comprehensive system of higher education in the United States, and more than 95 percent of all New Yorkers live within 30 miles of any one of SUNY’s 64 colleges and universities. Across the system, SUNY has four academic health centers, five hospitals, four medical schools, two dental schools, a law school, the country’s oldest school of maritime, the state's only college of optometry, 12 Educational Opportunity Centers, over 30 ATTAIN digital literacy labs, and manages one US Department of Energy National Laboratory. In total, SUNY serves about 1.7 million students across its portfolio of credit- and non-credit-bearing courses and programs, continuing education, and community outreach programs. SUNY oversees nearly a quarter of academic research in New York. Research expenditures system-wide are nearly $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2025, including significant contributions from students and faculty. There are more than three million SUNY alumni worldwide, and annually one in three New Yorkers who earn a college degree is a SUNY alum. To learn more about how SUNY creates opportunities, visit suny.edu.

About the City University of New York

The City University of New York is the nation’s largest urban public university, a transformative engine of social mobility that is a critical component of the lifeblood of New York City. Founded in 1847 as the nation’s first free public institution of higher education, CUNY today has seven community colleges, 11 senior colleges and eight graduate or professional institutions spread across New York City’s five boroughs, serving nearly 240,000 undergraduate and graduate students and awarding 50,000 degrees each year. CUNY’s mix of quality and affordability propels almost six times as many low-income students into the middle class and beyond as all the Ivy League colleges combined. More than 80 percent of the University’s graduates stay in New York, contributing to all aspects of the city’s economic, civic and cultural life and diversifying the city’s workforce in every sector. CUNY’s graduates and faculty have received many prestigious honors, including 13 Nobel Prizes and 26 MacArthur “genius” grants. The University’s historic mission continues to this day: provide a first-rate public education to all students, regardless of means or background. To learn more about CUNY, visit www.cuny.edu.

###

Judicial review of an application to proceed in litigation under a pseudonym and seal the record

2026-07-27T09:00:00.000-04:00

Petitioner appealed an order of the Supreme Court which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR Article 78, denied Petitioner's application to proceed to trial under a pseudonym and have the record seal.

Affirming the Supreme Court's ruling, the Appellate Division said in considering whether to grant a petitioner's request to proceed in the litigation anonymously and have the record sealed, the court must use its discretion to:

(1) Balance the petitioner's privacy interest against the presumption in favor of open trials and against any potential prejudice to the respondent;

(2) Determine whether the petitioner is challenging a governmental activity or an individual's actions;

(3) Determine whether the proceeding requires disclosure of information of the utmost intimacy;

(4) Determine whether identification would put the petitioner or innocent third-parties at risk of suffering physical or mental injury; and

(5) Determine whether the respondent would be prejudiced by allowing the petitioner to proceed anonymously.

The Appellate Division cautioned that "Permission to use a pseudonym [and seal the record] is not to be granted automatically ... the motion court should exercise its discretion to limit the public nature of judicial proceedings sparingly and then only when unusual circumstances necessitate it and a petitioner seeking such permission must provide facts specific to the petitioner that will allow the motion court to exercise its discretion in an informed manner".

The Appellate Division also noted that its "review of the [instant] record revealed that the proceeding did not require disclosure of information of the utmost intimacy" and that the allegations of misconduct, while possibly embarrassing, were not highly sensitive or intimate in nature and are "insufficient, under the circumstances, to allow [Petitioner to proceed] anonymously" in the instant matter.

The Appellate Division's decision also pointed out that Petitioner failed to demonstrate Petitioner's risk of suffering physical or mental injury if required to proceed under Petitioner's legal name, and there is no question that Petitioner is challenging a governmental activity, "which implicates a public interest".

The Appellate Division also indicated that it agreed with Supreme Court that Petitioner's stated privacy interests did not present the type of unusual circumstances that warrant the use of an anonymous caption and that it had not found any abuse of discretion in the Supreme Court's denial of the Petitioner's application.

In the words of the Appellate Division, Petitioner's "general concerns about his reputation and employability – though perhaps valid – are insufficient to demonstrate 'compelling circumstances' to overcome the presumption of public access".

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

Selected items posted on the Internet during the week ending July 24, 2026

2026-07-25T08:00:00.000-04:00

New York State Governor Kathy Hochul issued an executive order pausing new hyperscale data center construction This will provide New York State with an opportunity to better determine how these massive facilities could impact New York State's electric grid, clean water, utility bills, and its local communities.

The State of AI in Government: Research, Reality and the Road Ahead [A Webinar] Learn how government organizations are approaching AI adoption, governance, and long-term success. Register

The Cable Industry Is Investing in America's Connected Future Cable broadband providers fuel American innovation by increasing access and opportunity. America's technology future depends on investing where it matters most— connection. Learn more.

Making Sense of AI in Public Services A practical guide for public sector leaders choosing between generative AI tools, chatbots, and agentic AI. DOWNLOAD

Why Identity Is Now Core HHS Infrastructure For HHS agencies, identity verification is no longer a support function. This paper explains how modern identity platforms give agencies a consistent, risk-based way to verify new applicants and returning beneficiaries. DOWNLOAD

Selected Webinars focusing on public sector operations being offered during the week ending August 7, 2026.

Register now and watch at your leisure!

How Evolving AI Is Transforming Public Sector Outcomes Hear how AI is redrawing the threat landscape and why Zero Trust is quickly becoming the baseline. WATCH NOW

AI-Powered SOC Modernization: Building 24/7 Cyber Resilience AI-powered SOCs help security teams detect threats faster, automate response and extend 24/7 cyber resilience with limited staff. WATCH NOW

AI vs. AI: The New Fraud Threats Targeting Government Programs AI-driven fraud is scaling fast — learn how agencies can detect synthetic identities and stop improper payments before they happen. WATCH NOW

Preventing Outbound Email Data Loss Across the Public Sector Learn how behavioral AI and adaptive email security help public sector organizations prevent misdirected emails and data loss. WATCH NOW

Workforce Management and Security Resilience with FedRAMP and StateRAMP Learn how agencies can strengthen their security posture with FedRAMP and StateRAMP compliance. WATCH NOW

Building a Strong Foundation for AI in Government IT Learn how to modernize and adopt AI while maintaining compliance, reducing risk and increasing efficiency. WATCH NOW

New York Public Personnel Law

Selected items posted on the Internet during the week ending August 14, 2026 which may be of interest to NYPPL readers and posted by NYPPL pro bono

Educator's involuntary transfer to another position in the school district appealed to the Commissioner of Education

On August 11, 2026, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced the local government audits listed below had been posted on the Internet.

New York law does not bar a federal action that was earlier dismissed by a state court pursuant to the doctrine of res judicata without prejudice

Audit reports for the New York State and New York City entities listed below issued on October 10, 2026

New York State Paid Family Leave regulation update: Construction employees

Questions?

Selected items posted on the Internet during the week ending August 7, 2026 which may be of interest to readers and reported here by NYPPL pro bono

New York State may not prohibit access to certain Grievance Committee proceedings and records without making specific, on-the-record findings justifying confidentiality

New York State Department of Civil Service issues Attendance and Leave Memoranda updates

Governor Kathy Hochol announces the ratification of five-year labor agreements with four CSEA collective bargaining units

New York Health Policy Monitor

New York Health Policy Monitor (August 04, 2026)

New legislative proposals advance Medicaid coverage mandates for school-based behavioral health and establish standardized electronic prior authorization.

New York Health Policy Monitor · August 4, 2026

About New York Health Policy Monitor is published by I.H. Michaels, LLC, an independent health policy and data analytics practice. The publication is informational and does not constitute legal or policy advice.

Past Week at a Glance

Priority Items

Affected Entities and Corresponding Policies

Key Policy Actions

Assembly Committee

Executive Order No. 62: Establishing a Temporary Moratorium on Data Centers in New York while the State Develops Higher Standards for Data Center Development and Benefits Blueprint to Support Localities

Administrative Law Judge recommended a 60-Day suspension without pay after finding supervisor sexually harassed a coworker while both were on duty

School Board's prompt reporting of certain improprieties in the school district's 2026 election results in immediate corrective action

New York State Bar Association's Labor and Employment Law Section's 2026 meeting

Selected items posted on the Internet which may be of interest to readers and posted by NYPPL pro bono

Selected items posted on the Internet during the week ending July 31, 2026

Weekly Government Webinar RoundupRegister now and watch at your leisure!

📜 All registrants will have the opportunity to download a certificate of attendance at the completion of a webinar.

Workers' Comp 101 with the Advocate for Injured Workers continues

More information

Having trouble?

The New York State Public Employment Relations Board interprets New York State's Taylor Law to mean that the chief executive of a village may unilaterally agree to employees accreting into a union

Footnotes

On July 29, 2026, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli reported that the following State Government Accountability audits were released.

Applicant challenged the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board's rejection of her religious exemption request finding that Applicant was disqualified for unemployment insurance benefits

On July 27, 2026 New York State Comptroller posted the New York State municipal and school audits listed below on the Internet

Press Release - GOVERNOR HOCHUL ANNOUNCES OPPORTUNITY FOR STUDENTS DISENROLLED FROM HOWARD UNIVERSITY TO EARN THEIR DEGREE AT SUNY AND CUNY

Judicial review of an application to proceed in litigation under a pseudonym and seal the record

Selected items posted on the Internet during the week ending July 24, 2026

Selected Webinars focusing on public sector operations being offered during the week ending August 7, 2026.Register now and watch at your leisure!

Weekly Government Webinar Roundup
Register now and watch at your leisure!

Selected Webinars focusing on public sector operations being offered during the week ending August 7, 2026.

Register now and watch at your leisure!