tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-60506840459667965482023-11-15T10:02:44.453-08:00Employment LawEmployment LawAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comBlogger1000125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-56884769401122065802013-03-18T06:00:00.000-07:002013-03-18T13:04:33.347-07:00Employer’s rejection of an individual’s claim for GML §207-c disability benefits does not necessarily bar his or her becoming eligible for such benefits at a later date<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Employer’s rejection of an individual’s claim for GML §207-c disability benefits does not necessarily bar his or her becoming eligible for such benefits at a later date</b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Zembiec v County of Monroe, 2013 NY Slip Op 01736, Appellate Division, Fourth Department</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">A Monroe County Sheriff's Department (MCSD) employee challenged the Department’s decision that he was not entitled to General Municipal Law §207-c benefits available to law enforcement personnel injured in the line of duty.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Supreme Court concluded that the MCSD’s determination was arbitrary and capricious and granted awarding the individual disability benefits retroactive to December 4, 2009, the date of the employee's request for those benefits. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court’s ruling.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The court took note of an earlier action involving the same parties [see Zembiec v County of Monroe<i> </i>[Appeal No. 2], 87 AD3d 1358] in which the employee sought disability benefits for the period August 12, 2008 through June 15, 2009 as well as his regular pay from June 15, 2009 through March 25, 2010. The Appellate Division denied that part of the employee’s petition seeking an award of regular pay from June 15, 2009 through March 25, 2010, explaining that the employee was required to report to a modified duty assignment on June 15, 2009, but did not do so</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Among the arguments advanced by MCSD was that the employee’s claim in this proceeding was precluded by the doctrine of <i>res judicata</i>.<span style="color: red;">*</span> The Appellate Division rejected this claim, stating that the employees current claim for benefits was based on a December 2, 2009 status report prepared by an MCSD physician, in which the physician determined that he was not fit to return to work. The court explained that the employee’s introduction of this status report in the prior proceeding did not establish the claims being asserted in this proceeding and in the prior proceeding arose out of the same transaction or series of transactions. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Although the proceedings both involve claims concerning the employee's entitlement to disability benefits and are arguably related in time inasmuch as certain events relevant to this appeal, i.e., the issuance of the status report and petitioner's second request for disability benefits, occurred while the prior proceeding was pending, the proceedings are based upon two different transactions — MCSD’s June 15, 2009 decision denying the §207-c benefits and its July 19, 2010 decision denying the §207-c benefits being sought by the employee.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the prior proceeding the court was concerned only with the issue whether MCSD’s June 15, 2009 determination was "arbitrary and capricious" and the court's "review of [the] administrative determination [in the prior proceeding was] limited to the facts and record adduced before the agency.'" Thus the court could not rely on post-determination submissions, such as the December 2, 2009 status report, in evaluating MCSD’s determination. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Appellate also rejected MCSD’s alternative argument that the Doctrine of Collateral Estoppel<span style="color: red;">** </span>bared the employee’s instant claim, concluding that the issues concerning employee's ability to return to work and his eligibility for disability benefits in December 2009 had not been decided in the prior proceeding. The court explained that although it determined that Supreme Court erred in awarding the employee regular pay from June 15, 2009 through March 25, 2010, in the earlier proceeding, that determination had not foreclosed the possibility that employee might, at some point after June 15, 2009, again become eligible for disability benefits</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">*</span> <i>Res Judicata</i>: <span class="st">Latin for a matter already decided or judged by a tribunal.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">**</span> <span class="st">The Doctrine of C</span><i>ollateral Estoppel</i><span class="st"> bars issues that have been litigated from being litigated again by the same parties.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The instant decision is posted on the Internet at: </div><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><a href="http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01736.htm">http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01736.htm</a></span><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: blue;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><span style="color: blue; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">====================================</span></span></span></div><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="color: blue; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"></span></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="color: blue; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><br /><i><b><span style="color: #3333ff;">General Municipal Law§§ 207-a and 207-c</span></b></i>- a 1098 page e-book focusing on administering General Municipal Law Sections 207-a/207-c and providing benefits thereunder and other disability retirement issues is available from the Public Employment Law Press. Click on <a href="http://section207.blogspot.com/">http://section207.blogspot.com/</a> for additional information about this electronic reference manual.<br /><span style="color: blue;"><br /></span></span></span><span style="color: blue;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"></span></span></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"> </span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-63639744781408467402013-03-18T04:00:00.000-07:002013-03-18T13:04:33.353-07:00Health Care Reform Webinar for Public Employers Now Available Online<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"> <b>Health Care Reform Webinar for Public Employers Now Available Online</b><br /> </span><br /><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">The </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">NYMUNIBLOG </span>Editorial Team has posted the Harris Beach webinar, “Health Care Reform’s Impact on Public Entities: Don’t Get Caught Waiting for 2014 – What You Need to be Doing Now,” on the Internet. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">It is is now available for downloading and streaming for those unable to attend on March 14, 2013 presentation at <a href="http://nymuniblog.com/?p=3120">http://nymuniblog.com/?p=3120</a></span><br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-51048244597180979052013-03-17T04:00:00.000-07:002013-03-18T13:04:33.358-07:00Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color: black;">Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli</span><span style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";"></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="background: white; color: black;">Issued during the week ending March 17, 2013 [Click on the caption to access the full report]</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/031113.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031113release"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 11.5pt;">DiNapoli: General Electric Agrees to Examine Risks from New PCB Hotspots in Hudson</span></b></a><br /><br />General Electric Corp. has <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/docs/shareowner_proposal2013.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031113release"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">agreed</span></a> to prepare an analysis of the actions required to remove recently discovered polychlorinated biphenyl contamination contaminated sediments from the Hudson River and report its findings to shareholders, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced Monday. The analysis will be completed by the end of 2013. In response to the agreement, DiNapoli withdrew a shareholder resolution calling on the company to do such an evaluation.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/031213c.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213crelease"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 11.5pt;">DiNapoli and Saratoga DA Murphy: Former Fire District Treasurer Pleads Guilty to Stealing Taxpayer Funds</span></b></a><br /><br />The former treasurer of the Charlton Fire District has admitted to embezzling $500,000 in public funds as the result of an <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/firedists/2011/charltonfd/charlton.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213crelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">audit and investigation</span></a> by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli and further investigation by Saratoga County District Attorney James A. Murphy, III and the New York State Police.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/031213.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213release"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 11.5pt;">DiNapoli: Challenges Remain For New York City Budget</span></b></a><br /><br />New York City’s budget is balanced in the current fiscal year and Mayor Bloomberg has presented a balanced preliminary budget for fiscal year 2014, but a number of issues pose significant budget risks in the years ahead, according to a <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/osdc/rpt13-2013.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213release"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">report</span></a> released Tuesday by New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/031413a.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031413arelease"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 11.5pt;">DiNapoli: Nassau County Needs to Improve Contract Process</span></b></a><br /><br />While Nassau County is following established guidelines for approving contracts, the authorization process often misses approval deadlines, according to an <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/counties/2013/nassau.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031413arelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">audit</span></a> issued Thursday by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. Auditors found that because of the lengthy review process vendors began working on half the contracts an average of seven weeks prior to the contract being signed by the county.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/031213a.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213arelease"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 11.5pt;">Comptroller DiNapoli Releases Municipal Audits</span></b></a><br /><br />New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli Tuesday announced his office completed audits of </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/columbus.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213arelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Town of Columbus</span></a>; </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/hamlin.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213arelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Town of Hamlin</span></a>; </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/villages/2013/lyndonville.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213arelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Village of Lyndonville</span></a>; </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/mansfield.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213arelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Town of Mansfield</span></a>; </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/otselic.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213arelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Town of Otselic</span></a>; and, </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/pittstown.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213arelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Town of Pittstown</span></a>.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/031213b.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213brelease"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 11.5pt;">Comptroller DiNapoli Releases School Audits</span></b></a><br /><br />New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli Tuesday announced his office completed audits of: </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/schools/2013/niskayuna.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213brelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Niskayuna Central School District</span></a>; </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/schools/2013/patchoguemedford_br.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213brelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Patchogue–Medford Union Free School District</span></a>; </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/schools/2013/pinebush.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213brelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Pine Bush Central School District</span></a>; and, </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/schools/2013/southglensfalls.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130316&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=031213brelease"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">South Glens Falls Central School District</span></a>.</span><br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-58632206839255121462013-03-16T04:00:00.000-07:002013-03-18T13:04:33.363-07:00New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli’s audit of Mill Neck Manor reports the facility overcharged the State more than $280,000 <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:DocumentProperties> <o:Subject>Convert to Draft, Info put in. Cosmetic work needs to be done. hj 11-29-12; FInished Hazel's Work NT 11-30-12, NT entered Sue D.'s and Kim B.'s edits, NT 2-20-13 entered Frank P. and Jerry's edits. NT 2-21-13 Steve L.'s edits and Sue D.'s and Jerry B.'s </o:Subject> <o:Author>hj</o:Author> <o:Version>9.2720</o:Version> </o:DocumentProperties></xml><![endif]--><br /><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>New York <span style="color: #212100; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli’s a</span>udit of Mill Neck Manor reports the facility overcharged the State more than $280,000 </b><br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" /><br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" /></div><div class="MsoNormal">An audit report released by New York <span style="color: #212100; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli</span> on March 14, 2013 reports that the <span style="color: #212100; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Mill Neck Manor School for the Deaf, </span><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">a Nassau County provider of special education services for children with hearing disabilities, overcharged the State Department of Education<span style="color: red;">*</span> [SDE] more than $280,000, including charges for <span style="color: #212100;">extra salary and benefits for the school’s Executive Director.</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><span style="color: #212100; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Mill Neck, part of the larger Mill Neck Family of Organizations, claimed $64,817 from the State for salary paid to its Executive Director, </span><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Mark Prowatzke, that should have come from elsewhere in the organization. <span style="color: #212100;">Auditors also identified $7,688 in vacation costs that were claimed for reimbursement, but were not paid by the school to its employees.</span></span> <br /><br /><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">DiNapoli recommendations included that:</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br />1. SDE review the inappropriate and unsupported expenses and take action to recover such reimbursed expenses; and</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">2. <span style="color: black; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.5pt;">Mill Neck School should not charge costs to the program that are not in compliance with the State Education Department’s Reimbursable Cost Manual (Manual). </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.5pt;">3. Explain Manual requirements to staff involved in preparing the Consolidated Fiscal Reports and the cost reimbursement processes.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: 11.5pt;"> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">A copy of the audit report is posted on the Internet at: </span><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/11s40.pdf"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">http://www.osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/11s40.pdf</span></a><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"> </span><br /><br /><span style="color: #212100; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">DiNapoli has identified other fraud and improper use of funds in a recent series of audits of special education providers. </span><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">There have been several criminal referrals, felony arrests, criminal convictions and hundreds of thousands of dollars in restitution made as a result of the audits<span style="color: #212100;">. In total, 30 special education contractors have been or are being audited. </span></span><br /><br /><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">The Comptroller's recent audit of SED’s fiscal and program oversight of special education providers found that the agency has not conducted any on-site provider audits since 2007.</span> <span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">A summary of key findings in this audit report, which was issued on December 18, 2012, is posted on the Internet at:</span><a href="http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/12s103.htm"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/12s103.htm</span></a>. The link to the full text of the December 2012 audit report, which is posted on the Internet, is: <strong><a href="http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/12s103.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-weight: normal;">Link to full audit report (2012-S-103)</span></a></strong></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><span style="color: red; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">*</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">SDE oversees special education programs for students with disabilities between the ages of 3 and 21. In addition to services provided by local school districts, these programs include services delivered to about 75,000 students by more than 300 for-profit and not-for-profit entities at an annual state cost of $1.3 billion.</span><br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-62005420177458515062013-03-15T04:00:00.000-07:002013-03-18T13:04:33.368-07:00Additional duties to incumbents of certain positions may serve as a rational basis for their allocation to different salary grades despite some overlap of duties<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Additional duties to incumbents of certain positions may serve as a rational basis for their allocation to different salary grades despite some overlap of duties</b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Cribbin v New York State Unified Ct. Sys., 2013 NY Slip Op 01548, Appellate Division, Second Department<br /><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal">Patrick Cribbin file an Article 78 petition seeking an order compelling the Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts of the State of New York to reclassify an certain New York State Court Officer-Major I (Judicial Grade-26) employees to the title of New York State Court Officer-Major II (Judicial Grade-28).</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Appellate Division reversed a Supreme Court ruling that granted the petition [as amended] and remitted the matter to the Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts of the State of New York for further proceedings. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The court said that when a position classification decision is made "[t]he courts have the power to reverse or modify a particular classification . . . [only] if it is wholly arbitrary or without any rational basis," citing Association of Secretaries to Justices of Supreme and Surrogate's Courts in the City of New York. v Office of Court Administration of the State of New York., 75 NY2d 460 and other decisions.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Appellate Division explained that “So long as the classification determination has a rational basis, a court may not disturb it even if there are legitimate grounds for a difference of opinion.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">As the record established a rational basis for the distinction between the positions of <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Major I and Major II, even though there was some overlap in duties, the court concluded <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>that the additional managerial duties assigned incumbents of Major II positions provided a rational basis for distinguishing between the two positions. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The decision is posted on the Internet at: </div><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><a href="http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01548.htm">http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01548.htm</a></span><br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-25925178551219042242013-03-14T05:35:00.000-07:002013-03-18T13:04:33.373-07:00The failure of a witness to respond to a subpoena issued by the hearing officer not necessarily fatal to the administrative decision if good cause for such failure is shown<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>The failure of a witness to respond to a subpoena issued by the hearing officer not necessarily fatal to the administrative decision if good cause for such failure is shown</b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Appellate Division affirmed a Supreme Court’s denial of an Article 78 petition seeking to annul the determination of Waterfront Commission of New York.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Among the addressed by the Appellate Division concerning the admission of hearsay statements in the course of the proceeding and petitioner’s inability to cross-examine a witness alleged to have made statements to the detriment of the petitioner.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">As to the issue concerning hearsay evidence, the Appellate Division ruled that “The admission of hearsay statements at the administrative hearing did not violate petitioner's due process rights to a fair hearing or cross-examination.” The court explained that “It is well established that ‘[h]earsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination,’" citing Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741.<br /><br />The court also noted that in addition to the challenged hearsay testimony, the Commission presented testimony that corroborated the hearsay testimony.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">With respect to the issue concerning the petitioner’s inability to cross-examine an individual who made statements implicating him because the individual ignored a subpoena issued by the Administrative Law Judge, the Appellate Division said that this did not require a different result. In the words of the court: “The fact that the subpoena may have been ignored was not the fault of [Commission] or the [Administrative Law Judge…” as the target of the subpoena was incarcerated at the time.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The court noted that the petitioner was able to cross-examine the live witnesses, and good cause was established for the failure to produce the subpoenaed witness at the hearing. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The decision is posted on the Internet at:</div><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><a href="http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01496.htm">http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01496.htm</a></span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-51219336535878423792013-03-12T08:12:00.000-07:002013-03-18T13:04:33.377-07:00A town council member may not simultaneously serve as the town's financial operations manager<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>A town council member may not simultaneously serve as the town's financial operations manager</b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Informal Opinions of the Attorney General 2013-01 </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">A town asked for the Attorney General’s opinion as to whether the positions of town council member and town financial operations manager or, alternatively, director of finance, can be held by the same person. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Attorney General concluded that such positions may not be held by the same individual, explaining that because of the town board's responsibility to oversee the Town's fiscal operations, a council member should not simultaneously hold the position of financial operations manager or director of finance. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The opinion notes that the Attorney General has repeatedly expressed the view that one person cannot serve as both a member of a local government's governing body and in a subordinate second position for the same local government. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The fundamental concept regarding such incompatibility: one person cannot be both the supervisor and the supervised [see People ex rel. Ryan v. Green, 58 N.Y. 295, 304 (1874)]</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">The Informal Opinion is posted on the Internet at:</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/opinion/2013-1_pw.pdf">http://www.ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/opinion/2013-1_pw.pdf</a></div><br /> Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-75326862771410271652013-03-12T06:24:00.000-07:002013-03-18T13:04:33.381-07:00Former town clerk alleged to have used town’s credit card to pay personal debts<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Former town clerk alleged to have used town’s credit card to pay personal debts</b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli reported that a <span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">former clerk of the Town of Argyle, Washington County, used a town credit card to pay for more than $8,000 of personal expenses.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">DiNapoli’s auditors found that from January 2009 through December 2012, the former clerk made four separate purchases totaling $8,347 that were not for town business. In addition, late fees and finance charges totaling $2,013 were accumulated. The town supervisor alerted auditors to the misuse.</span><br /><br /><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">The former clerk paid off the debt and admitted to improperly using the town’s credit card. The town did not pay for any of the unauthorized purchases, late fees or finance charges incurred. Charges were not filed because the clerk repaid the town.</span> <br /><br /><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">DiNapoli’s recommendations for the town to avoid such situations in the future included:</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">1. The board should ensure that all town-issued credit cards are used for business purposes only and the monthly credit card statements are included with the monthly claims to be audited prior to payment;</span> <br /><br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" /><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">2. The board and town clerk should assess the credit limit on the Clerk’s credit card account and reduce it to an appropriate level for the needs of the office;</span> <br /><br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" /><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">3. The clerk should deposit all moneys intact and in a timely manner; and</span> <br /><br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" /><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"></span></div><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">4. The clerk should remit moneys collected to the town supervisor and other agencies in a timely manner.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"> <br /><br /></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">Town officials agreed with several findings in the audit. Their comments are included in the audit report.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"> <br /><br /></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">For a copy of the report, it is available on the Internet at: </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/argyle.pdf"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/argyle.pdf</span></a></span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-15593075838726702212013-03-11T07:00:00.000-07:002013-03-18T13:04:33.386-07:00Disqualification of applicant unable to meet Civil Service Commission’s hearing requirements not unlawful discrimination under the State’s Human Rights Law<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Disqualification of applicant unable to meet Civil Service Commission’s hearing requirements not unlawful discrimination under the State’s Human Rights Law</b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">A candidate for the position of a Nassau County police officer filed an Article 78 petition challenging the Nassau County Civil Service Commission’s decision disqualifying him for the position.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Although Supreme Court granted the candidates petition and annulled the Commission’s determination, the Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s ruling and dismissed the candidate’s petition “on the merits.”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Commission had appealed two rulings by Supreme Court:</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The first was procedural: was the candidates Article 78 petition timely. The Commission contended that it was untimely, arguing that the Article 78 action was commenced more that four months after its determination disqualifying the candidate. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Appellate Division disagreed with the Commission, holding that the candidate’s petition was timely. Noting that CPLR 217(1) specifies that the limitations period begins to run when "the determination to be reviewed becomes final and binding upon the petitioner," the court explained that "An administrative determination becomes final and binding when the petitioner seeking review has been aggrieved by it."</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Here, said the Appellate Division, the candidate “was not aggrieved until he was notified that he was disqualified from further consideration” for failing to meet its hearing requirements.<span style="color: #cc0000;"></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The second issue concerned the Commission’s exercise of its discretion when it adopted a more stringent audio logy standard than that established by the State’s Municipal Police Training Commission.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Appellate Division ruled that the Commission had acted within the scope of its discretionary power when it adopted a resolution which modified the Municipal Police Training Commission standards and did not contravene the procedure for the adoption of "rules" in doing so.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">As the appointing authority has wide discretion in determining the fitness of candidates, the disqualification of the petitioner for failing to meet those modified audiological, the court concluded that the modified standard was not arbitrary and capricious.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In addition court noted that the Commission’s determination that the candidate failed to meet the modified Municipal Police Training Commission hearing standards constituted an individualized finding that his disability prevents him from performing the functions of a police officer in a reasonable manner “such that his disqualification did not constitute unlawful discrimination under the State’s Human Rights Law.<br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div class="MsoNormal">The decision is posted on the Internet at:</div><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><a href="http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01404.htm">http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01404.htm</a></span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-53994340675799545872013-03-09T12:31:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:33.391-07:00Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoBodyText"><b>Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli</b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="background: white;">Issued during the week ending March 10, 2013 [Click on</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"> </span></span><span style="background: white;">text highlighted in</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"> </span></span><span style="background: white;">bold<span style="color: blue;"> </span>to access the full report]</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: #333333; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"> </span></span><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 6.0pt;"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/030713a.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030713arelease"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 7.0pt;">DiNapoli: Dunkin’ Donuts Agrees to Run on Sustainable Palm Oil</span></b></a><br /><br />New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced Thursday that Dunkin’ Brands Group, owner of Dunkin’ Donuts, has agreed to set a date for sourcing 100 percent of the palm oil used to make its products from sustainable sources.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 6.0pt;"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/030513.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030513release"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 7.0pt;">DiNapoli: State and Local Public Authority Debt Nears $250 Billion</span></b></a><br /><br />Public authority debt increased to nearly a quarter of a trillion dollars in the latest reported fiscal year, according to a <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/reports/pubauth/public_authorities_btn_2013.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030513release">report</a>released Tuesday by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. New York relies on authorities to undertake most borrowing on its behalf, and routinely uses authority resources to plug state budget gaps.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 6.0pt;"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/030613.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030613release"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 7.0pt;">MTA’s East Side Access Project 10 Years Late and $4.4 Billion Over Budget</span></b></a><br /><br />The Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s (MTA’s) East Side Access project, which will bring Long Island Rail Road service to Grand Central Terminal for the first time, is expected to cost nearly $9 billion when finished in 2019, more than twice the MTA’s initial cost estimate and a decade later than expected, according to a <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/osdc/rpt12-2013.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030613release">report</a>released Wednesday by New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 6.0pt;"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/030713b.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030713brelease"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 7.0pt;">DiNapoli Announces Results of General Obligation Bond Sale: $566,560,000 Awarded</span></b></a><br /><br />State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli Thursday awarded three series of New York State General Obligation Bonds, totaling $566,560,000, through a competitive sale. Specifically, the sales were $348,065,000 of Series 2013A Tax–Exempt Bonds, $47,810,000 of Series 2013B Taxable Bonds and $170,685,000 of Series 2013C Tax–Exempt Refunding Bonds. The bonds are scheduled to be delivered on March 19, 2013.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 6.0pt;"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/030813.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030813release"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 7.0pt;">DiNapoli Urges Caution as Budget Progresses</span></b></a><br /><br />The amendments to the Executive Budget for state fiscal year 2013–14 curtailed some risks contained in the originally proposed budget, but the impact from federal sequester cuts represent a risk to the Financial Plan according to a <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/reports/budget/2013/30_day_amends.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030813release">report</a>released by Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 6.0pt;"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/030413.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030413release"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 7.0pt;">DiNapoli: Rochester Faces Serious Fiscal and Demographic Challenges</span></b></a><br /><br />The city of Rochester, hampered by increasing budget gaps and the highest percentage of families living in poverty of any city in New York, is expected to face heightened fiscal stress in coming years, according to a <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/pubs/fiscalprofiles/rochester.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030413release">report</a>released Monday by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. The city’s revenues have grown at a higher rate than other cities, giving it some flexibility that other cities do not have. The report is the latest in a series of fiscal profiles DiNapoli will issue on cities across the state.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 6.0pt;"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/030713.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030713release"><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 7.0pt;">Comptroller DiNapoli Releases Municipal Audits</span></b></a><br /><br />New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli Thursday announced his office completed the following audits: </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 6.0pt;">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/prattsvillejc.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030713release">Town of Prattsville</a>; </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 6.0pt;">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/riverhead.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030713release">Town of Riverhead</a>; and, </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 6.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/cities/2013/rome.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130310&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030713release">City of Rome</a>.</span><br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-34761110393989817672013-03-08T04:00:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:33.396-07:00Accrual of a cause of action commences upon the receipt of the final administrative determination<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Accrual of a cause of action commences upon the receipt of the final administrative determination</b></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In this Article 78 action the Appellate Division affirmed Supreme Court’s determination that the employee’s claim did not accrue until she received the final administration decision, citing Education Law §3813.2-b.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">As the individual commenced her action within one year of her receiving the final determination, the Supreme Court ruled that she had satisfied the relevant statute of limitations.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In some case, however, the final administrative determination may not initially be sent to the individual. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Significantly, the delivery of a final administrative decision to an employee's union does not count with respect to the commencement of the running of the statute of limitations.<span style="color: #cc0000;"></span> In Weeks v State of New York, 198 AD2d 615, the court held that the statute of limitations begins to run when the decision is served on the employee, not from the date on which the union received its copy.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The basic rules are:<br /><br />1. If an employee is represented by an attorney, the administrative body may send a copy of the determination to the employee but it must serve the attorney to commence the running of the statute of limitations.<br /><br />2. If the employee is represented by a person who is not an attorney, the administrative body may send a copy to the representative but it must serve the employee to start the statute of limitations running.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">It should be remembered, however, that an individual’s <b><span style="font-weight: normal;">request for reconsideration of a “final administrative determination” neither tolls the running of the statute of limitations [see </span></b>Lavin v Lawrence, 54 AD3d 412] <b><span style="font-weight: normal;">nor extends </span></b><b><span style="font-weight: normal;">the statute of limitations </span></b><b><span style="font-weight: normal;"><b><span style="font-weight: normal;">[see </span></b>Raykowski v NYC DOT, 259 AD2d 367] for the purposes of perfecting an appeal. </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The decision is posted on the Internet at:</div><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><a href="http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01358.htm">http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01358.htm</a></span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-87775518228337312722013-03-07T04:00:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:33.485-07:00Alcohol-related misconduct <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Alcohol-related misconduct </b></div><div class="MsoNormal">OATH Index No 543/13</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">OATH Administrative Law Judge Kevin F. Casey found that the Department of Sanitation sustained seven charges relating to time and leave violations brought against a sanitation worker, R.M. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">R.M. admitted much of the charged misconduct. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">ALJ Casey, however, found that most of R.M.’s time and leave issues were related to an alcohol problem, that R.M. had completed inpatient alcohol rehabilitation, and that R.M. had not been late or AWOL since completing the program.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Citing <i>McEniry v. Landi</i>, 84 N.Y.2d 554, in which the Court of Appeals ruled that an employee should not be terminated for alcohol-related misconduct that occurred before rehabilitation if he or she completed it successfully and maintains satisfactory performance afterwards, Judge Casey recommended that R.M. should not be terminated from his position. Rather, the ALJ recommended that R.M. be suspended without pay for 30-days.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The decision is posted on the Internet at: </div><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><a href="http://archive.citylaw.org/oath/13_Cases/13-543.pdf">http://archive.citylaw.org/oath/13_Cases/13-543.pdf</a></span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-91693692694914878872013-03-06T04:00:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:33.573-07:00Alleged violation of a job security clause in a collective bargaining agreement not always subject to arbitration<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Alleged violation of a job security clause in a collective bargaining agreement not always subject to arbitration</b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Village of Monticello v Monticello Police Benevolent Association, Supreme Court, Sullivan County, Index #2974-12</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Contending that the Village of Monticello had breached the relevant collective bargaining agreement which provided that the Monticello Police Department shall not consist of less than a Chief of Police and twenty-three sworn officers, the Monticello Police Benevolent Association [PBA] demanded that its grievance be submitted to arbitration. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Village filed a petition pursuant to Article 75 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules in an effort to stay the arbitration, contending that the staffing provision as set out in the agreement, which it characterized as a “job security clause,” violated public policy and thus was not subject to arbitration.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Supreme Court Justice Christopher E. Cahill said the sole issue to be resolved was whether the so-called “job security clause” in the collective bargaining agreement satisfies the stringent test the Court of Appeals referred to in deciding Johnson City Professional Firefighters Local 921, 18 NY3d 32, i.e., did the employer explicitly agree to bargain away its rights to eliminate positions and terminate or layoff employees for budgetary or other reasons.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span">In<i> </i>Board of Educ. of Yonkers City Sch. Dist. v Yonkers Federation of Teachers, 40 NY2d 268, the Court of Appeals noted that “Not all job security clauses are valid and enforceable, nor are they ‘valid and enforceable under all circumstances.’" In Yonkers Federation of Teachers the court found that a "job security" was<i> “</i>explicit in its protection of the [workers] from abolition of their positions due to budgetary stringencies" and thus enforceable.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span">In contrast, in CSEA v City of Yonkers [Crossing Guard Union], 39 NY2d 964, the Court of Appeals concluded that the "job security" clause in the collective bargaining agreement relied upon by the Crossing Guard Union was ambiguous and thus not enforceable. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span">Similarly, the clause relied upon by the Monticello PBA, said Justice Cahill, did not explicitly protect the police officers from the abolition of their positions due to economic and budgetary stringencies. Concluding that provision was ambiguous, the court ruled that it did not constitute an “explicit” provision barring such layoffs.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">__________________</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-style: normal;">Brian D. Nugent, Esq.,</span></i><span style="font-style: normal;"> </span><b><span style="font-weight: normal;">Feerick Lynch MacCartney PLLC,</span></b><i><b><span style="font-weight: normal;"> </span></b><span style="font-style: normal;">represented the Village of Monticello in this proceeding and sent </span></i><b><span style="font-weight: normal;">a copy of Justice Cahill’s February 21, 2013 decision to NYPPL.</span></b></div><br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-20106467455970731072013-03-05T04:00:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:33.663-07:00Court cites the “principle of stare decisis” in affirming a custodian of public record’s denial of a Freedom of Information Law request<br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color: #333333;">Court cites the “</span>principle of <i>stare decisis” </i>in affirming a custodian of public record’s denial of a Freedom of Information Law request</b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Empire Ctr. for N.Y. State Policy v Teachers' Retirement Sys. of the City of N.Y, 2013 NY Slip Op 01329, Appellate Division, First Department</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Appellate Division, Third Department recently considered another “FOIL case” involving the not-for-profit Empire Center for New York State Policy’s request seeking the names of the New York State Teachers’ Retirement Systems [NYSTRS] retirees and concluded that the NYSTRS could lawfully deny such request within the exemptions from disclosure permitted by Public Officers Law §89(7)."<span style="color: red; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.5pt;">*</span><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The First Department came to the same conclusion in this action, holding “[The New York City Retirement System’s] decision to withhold the names of retirees of the public retirement system pursuant to the exemption set forth in Public Officers Law § 89(7) was not affected by an error of law.” </div><div class="description" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The City Retirement System’s determination, explained the court “is in accord with [the court’s] interpretation of that exemption in <a href="http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2011/2011_07259.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: windowtext;">Empire Ctr. for N.Y. State Policy v New York City Police Pension Fund (88 AD3d 520</span></a> [1st Dept 2011]), motion for<i> </i>leave to appeal dismissed,<i> </i>18 NY3d 901 [2012]).<span style="color: red;">**</span> </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Accordingly, said the First Department, “we adhere to our prior holding under the principle of <i>stare decisis</i>,<span style="color: red;">***</span> which applies with particular force to issues of statutory interpretation.”<br /><br /><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: red;">*</span><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: #333333;"> Empire Ctr. for N.Y. State Policy v New York State Teachers' Retirement Sys., 2013 NY Slip Op 01117, Appellate Division, Third Department at <a href="http://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-foil-request-seeking-names-of-public.html">http://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-foil-request-seeking-names-of-public.html</a></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">**</span> The First Department also noted the decision in New York Veteran Police Assn. v New York City Police Dept. Art. I Pension Fund,<i> </i>61 NY2d 659, cited by the Third Department in its ruling.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">***</span> <span class="st">Latin for "to stand by things decided."</span></div></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="Default">The decision is posted on the Internet at:<o:p></o:p></div><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01117.htm">http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01117.htm</a></span><br /><br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-39400044262954270582013-03-04T21:23:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:13:35.430-07:00Ninth Circuit: Class Action Erroneously Certified Given Wal-Mart v. DukesBack in 2004, employees of the Chinese Daily News started a class action, claiming mis-classification, unpaid overtime and denied meals and breaks. The trial court eventually certified a class, and the employees won summary judgment on whether reporters for the newspaper qualified under the professional exemption. The employees won millions of dollars after trial, which the Ninth Circuit affirmed.<br /><br />Not so fast, said the Supreme Court. Following the Supreme Court's Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes decision (discussed<a href="http://shawvalenza.blogspot.com/2011/06/supreme-court-rules-on-dukes-v-walmart.html"> here</a>), the Supreme Court vacated the Ninth Circuit's decision in this case. The Ninth Circuit decided that Wal-Mart requires reconsideration of the decision and sent it back to the district court.<br /><br />Why? The trial court did not apply the proper analysis (after Wal-Mart) to determine whether there is sufficient commonality to certify the class. As explained by the Court:<br /><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">On remand, the district court must determine whether the claims of the proposed class “depend upon a common contention . . . of such a nature that it is capable of classwide resolution — which means that determination of its truth or falsity will resolve an issue that is central to the validity of each one of the claims in one stroke.” Wal-Mart, 131 S. Ct. at 2551.</blockquote>So, it's not enough that there are "common questions" in the abstract, because, as the Ninth Circuit stated (quoting Wal-Mart and its own later decision in Ellis v. Costco):<br /><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">"any competently crafted class complaint literally raises common questions.” Wang [sic], 131 S. Ct. at 2551 (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted). “What matters to class certification is not the raising of common questions — even in droves — but, rather the capacity of a classwide proceeding to generate common answers apt to drive the resolution of the litigation.” Id. (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted). Dissimilarities within the proposed class may “impede the generation of common answers.” Id. “If there is no evidence that the entire class was subject to the same allegedly<br /> discriminatory practice, there is no question common to the class.” Ellis v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 657 F.3d 970, 983 (9th Cir. 2011).</blockquote><div><br /></div><div>The Ninth Circuit also decided that the district court would have to reconsider whether certification is appropriate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3). That rule permits monetary recovery in class action cases when</div><div><br /></div><blockquote class="tr_bq">the court finds that the questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members, and that a class action is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy.</blockquote><div>First, the district court over-relied on the employer's policies applicable to all employees, but without considering whether issues pertaining to individual claims and defenses would "predominate" over the common policy. Second, the district court did not have the California Supreme Court's Brinker decision (you've heard of it, right?) to assess whether certification of a meal / rest claim was appropriate. </div><div><br /></div><div>Of note, the Ninth Circuit also wrote this, which will likely be of interest to class action litigators:</div><div><br /></div>In Wal-Mart, the Supreme Court disapproved what it called “Trial by Formula,” wherein damages are determined for a sample set of class members and then applied by extrapolation to the rest of the class “without further individualized proceedings.” Wal-Mart, 131 S. Ct. at 2561. Employers are “entitled to individualized determinations of each employee’s eligibility” for monetary relief. Id. at 2560. <br />Employers are also entitled to litigate any individual affirmative defenses they may have to class members’ claims. Id. at 2561. <div><br /></div><div>The case is Wang v. Chinese Daily News and the opinion is <a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2013/03/04/08-55483.pdf">here.</a><br /><div><br /></div></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-23942768061925386262013-03-04T09:05:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:33.751-07:00<br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><b>Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli</b><span style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Issued during the week ending March 1, 2013 [Click on</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: #333333;"> </span></span><span style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">text highlighted in</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: #333333;"> </span></span><span style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">bold<span style="color: blue;"> </span>to access the full report]</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: #333333; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"></span></span></span></div><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/video_press_releases/march13/wall_street_profits_up_01.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022613release"><b><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Wall Street Bonuses Rose In 2012</span></b></a><br /><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Cash <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/feb13/avgbonus.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022613release">bonuses</a> paid to New York City securities industry employees are forecast to rise by 8 percent to $20 billion during this year’s bonus season, according to an estimate released by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. Click <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/video_press_releases/march13/wall_street_profits_up_01.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022613release">here</a> to view video.</span><br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/feb13/022813.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813release"><b><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">DiNapoli Audit Finds Errors and Potential Abuses in STAR Program</span></b></a><br /><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Administrative shortcomings in the School Tax Relief program have resulted in duplicate and improper exemptions going to individuals or entities not eligible to receive them, according to an <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/swr/2013/star/global.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813release">audit</a> released Thursday by New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. Auditors estimate these exemptions cost New York State $13 million during the 2010–11 fiscal year and could top $73 million by the 2015–16 fiscal year.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/mar13/030113a.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030113arelease"><b><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Comptroller DiNapoli Releases School Audits</span></b></a><br /><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli Friday announced his office completed audits of the </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/schools/2013/albany.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030113arelease">Albany City School District</a>; and,<span style="line-height: 15.6pt;"> </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/schools/2013/kippcharter.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=030113arelease">KIPP Tech Valley Charter School</a>.</span><br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><!--[endif]--></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/feb13/022813b.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813brelease"><b><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Comptroller DiNapoli Releases Municipal Audits</span></b></a><br /><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli Thursday announced his office completed audits of the </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/villages/2013/brightwaters.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813brelease">Village of Brightwaters</a>;<span style="line-height: 15.6pt;"> </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/bovina.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813brelease">Town of Bovina</a>;<span style="line-height: 15.6pt;"> </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/swr/2013/CoopIT/global.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813brelease">Cooperative Information Technology Services</a>;<span style="line-height: 15.6pt;"> </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/villages/2013/forestvillewater.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813brelease">Village of Forestville</a>;<span style="line-height: 15.6pt;"> </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/firedists/2013/lakeville.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813brelease">Lakeville Volunteer Fire Department</a>;<span style="line-height: 15.6pt;"> </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/lindley.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813brelease">Town of Lindley</a>;<span style="line-height: 15.6pt;"> </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2013/monroewater.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813brelease">Town of Monroe</a>;<span style="line-height: 15.6pt;"> </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/cities/2013/norwich.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813brelease">City of Norwich</a>;<span style="line-height: 15.6pt;"> </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/villages/2013/parish.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813brelease">Village of Parish</a>; and,<span style="line-height: 15.6pt;"> </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/cities/2013/saratogasprings.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130302&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022813brelease">City of Saratoga Springs</a>.</span><br /><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-21545462650269510482013-03-01T13:30:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:33.842-07:00Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli<br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli</b><span style="background: white;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="background: white;">Issued during the week ending March 1, 2013 [Click on</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"> </span></span><span style="background: white;">text highlighted in</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"> </span></span><span style="background: white;">bold<span style="color: blue;"> </span>to access the full report]</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: #333333; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The state Department of Health [DOH] made $26 million in Medicaid overpayments and other questionable payments because of flaws in its eMedNY claims processing computer system according to an audit released on March 1, 2013 by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">DOH officials generally agreed with the audit’s findings and have begun to implement the recommendations. For a copy of the report, including DOH’s response, click on: </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/11s28.htm" style="font-size: 12pt;">http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/11s28.htm</a></div><br />The audit looked at claims for patients who are both Medicare and Medicaid eligible, which are known as crossover claims. In December 2009, the Department of Health implemented a new payment mechanism in eMedNY to achieve greater control over Medicaid payments. The new mechanism is an attempt to ensure Medicaid does not pay crossover claims denied by Medicare, only pays the portion of the claim that it actually owes and crossover claims are billed first to Medicare before being billed to Medicaid.<br /><br />DiNapoli’s auditors found that from implementation of the new system in 2009 through March 31, 2012, the system was not working correctly, allowing nearly 866,000 improper and questionable payments to be made. Auditors identified $6.9 million that eMedNY improperly paid for, including 137,000 crossover claims previously denied by Medicare. Auditors also identified $3.1 million for 277,000 crossover claims where the payment exceeded the amount that Medicaid owed. In addition, auditors found that more than 24,800 providers were able to bypass crossover system controls and bill approximately 452,000 claims directly to Medicaid instead of first billing Medicare. As a result, Medicaid made potential overpayments totaling $16.4 million. Since December 3, 2009, Medicaid reimbursed a total of $1.1 billion for approximately 41.4 million crossover claims.<br /><br />DiNapoli’s auditors recommended that the DOH:<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><br /><div class="MsoNormal"> · Correct the eMedNY computer controls that caused the Medicaid overpayments identified during the audit;<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--></div><div class="MsoNormal"> · Recover the Medicaid overpayments totaling $10 million caused byeMedNY computer programsthat incorrectly processed Medicare crossover claims; and<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--></div><div class="MsoNormal"> · Review the $16.4 million in potential Medicaid overpayments and recover where appropriate. <br /><br /><br /><a href="http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/11f19.pdf"><b>Office of Children and Family Services, Oversight of Child Protective Services Outside New York City (Follow-Up) (2011-F-19)</b></a> <br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--></div><div class="MsoNormal">An initial audit found that districts are intervening in a timely and appropriate manner to protect the children who are at risk in the most serious types of child abuse cases. However, the actions taken are not summarized in a format that would enable OCFS to readily determine that necessary interventions have actually occurred. In a follow-up report, auditors determined OCFS officials have not made progress in correcting the problems identified in the initial report. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><a href="http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/12f21.pdf"><b>Division of Housing and Community Renewal, Housing Preferences for Disabled Veterans (Follow-Up) (2012-F-21)</b></a><br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">In November 2007, the Private Housing Law was amended to require housing companies to provide disabled veterans with a preference in the admission to Mitchell-Lama housing developments. An initial audit found disabled veterans did not receive the intended housing preference. The individual Mitchell-Lama housing companies failed to follow the Division’s guidance concerning the law, and the division failed to monitor the housing companies adequately. In a follow-up report, auditors found DHCR officials have made significant progress in correcting the problems identified in the initial report. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><br /><a href="http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/12s142.pdf"><b>Alfred State College of Technology, Selected Employee Travel Expenses (2012-S-142)</b></a><br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">As part of a statewide initiative to determine whether the use of travel money by selected government employees was appropriate, Auditors examined travel expenses for the highest-cost travelers in the State. In an audit of $1,293,461 of the college’s travel payments, auditors found two Alfred employees had travel costs totaling $224,683. Auditors also examined other travel expenses, including $1,037,509 paid to a provider of campus services such as transportation, vending, and concessions, and airfare expenses incurred by one employee that totaled $31,269. Auditors found that the travel expenses for the three employees and the service provider were documented and adhered to state travel rules and regulations. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><br /><a href="http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/12s144.pdf"><b>State University of New York College at Cortland, Selected Employee Travel Expenses (2012-S-144)</b></a><br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">As part of a Statewide initiative to determine whether the use of travel money by selected government employees was appropriate, auditors looked at travel expenses for the highest-cost travelers in the state. Auditors found five SUNY Cortland employees had travel costs totaling $696,909. The travel expenses for the employees selected for audit were documented and adhered to state travel rules and regulations. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><br /><a href="http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/12s148.pdf"><b>State University of New York College of Optometry, </b><b>Selected Employee Travel Expenses (2012-S-148)</b></a> <br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--></div><div class="MsoNormal">As part of a statewide initiative to determine whether the use of travel money by selected government employees was appropriate, auditors looked at travel expenses for the highest-cost travelers in the state. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />One employee at the College of Optometry had travel costs totaling $116,828. The selected employee was responsible for arranging travel for other college staff members, charging these travel expenses to his travel card. The expenses were documented and generally adhered to state travel rules and regulations. However, auditors found one instance where SUNY Optometry paid $9,000 to the Intrepid Museum Foundation for an event that was not related to travel. SUNY Optometry travel guidelines states that such payments are not permissible. A college official told auditors the card was uses only as a contingency because the vendor had not received the check issued for payment. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><br /><a href="http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093013/12s149.pdf"><b>State University of New York College at Purchase, Selected Employee Travel Expenses (2012-S-149)</b></a> <br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--></div><div class="MsoNormal">As part of a statewide initiative to determine whether the use of travel money by selected government employees was appropriate, auditors looked at travel expenses for the highest-cost travelers in the state. <o:p></o:p></div><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">An employee at SUNY Purchase and incurred lodging costs totaling $991,999. Auditors found the employee was responsible for arranging overflow student housing at local hotels each fall semester when on campus housing was exhausted, charging these expenses to her procurement card. Housing students at local hotels has been the practice since 2002. The expenses were appropriately approved and documented. However, College management has not conducted a formal written study to examine the options for alleviating the student housing shortage and to ensure the most efficient use of state funds.</span><br /><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-9845211867415385682013-03-01T04:00:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:33.931-07:00The fact that subordinates failed to complete an assigned task standing alone is not sufficient to prove a charge of “failure to supervise”<br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The fact that subordinates failed to complete an assigned task, standing alone, is not sufficient to prove a charge of “failure to supervise”</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">OATH Index No. 681/13</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The Department of Investigation discovered that certain sanitation workers collected and sold recyclable scrap metal, referred to as “mongo.” As a result their supervisor was charged with failure to supervise subordinates who engaged in the activity. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">OATH Administrative Law Judge Kevin F. Casey noted that the charge of failure to supervise requires more than proof that a subordinate did not complete a task; there must be proof of neglect or fault by the supervisor. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Judge Casey recommended dismissal of the charges, finding the Department of Sanitation did not prove that there was unauthorized material on the truck in a place where the supervisor should have discovered it before the crew was sent to the dump. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The decision is posted on the Internet at:</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://archive.citylaw.org/oath/13_Cases/13-681.pdf">http://archive.citylaw.org/oath/13_Cases/13-681.pdf</a></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-91392386220117868772013-02-28T04:00:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:34.020-07:00Use of hearsay evidence in an administrative disciplinary proceeding<br /><div><div class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Use of hearsay evidence in an administrative disciplinary proceeding</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">OATH Index No. 1944/12</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">A New York City Health and Hospital Corporation facility filed disciplinary charges against its manager of building services alleging that the manager had engaged in sexual contact with a patient suffering from dementia. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The patient did not testify, but his prior statements, which indicated he had consented to the sexual contact and received $5 afterward, were taken in evidence as admissible hearsay after OATH Administrative Law Judge Tynia D. Richard found them to be reliable and probative as the hospital’s security videos substantiated the patient’s hearsay statements and contradicted accused employee’s testimony. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Judge Richard sustained the charges and recommended that the manager be terminated from his position, commenting that the individual’s prior positive performance record and long tenure did not mitigate against imposing the penalty of dismissal for such serious misconduct. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Hearsay testimony, which typically is barred from testimony in a criminal trial, is permissible in an administrative hearing. Indeed, in some instances the statute providing for the due process hearing specifically excuses compliance with or the application of the technical rules of evidence. For example, Civil Service Law §75.2 provides that “compliance with technical rules of evidence shall not be required,” while §3020-a.3.c(C) of the Education Law states “rules and procedures for the conduct of hearings ... shall not require compliance with technical rules of evidence.” <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">As the court said in Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, "it is well settled that hearsay is admissible in administrative hearings and may form the basis of an adverse determination." <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Despite its admissibility as competent evidence, however, an employee may not be found guilty of charges solely on the basis of hearsay. As the court explained in Brown v Ristich, 36 NY2d 183, some "real evidence" </span><span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">is required. </span><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">"</span><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Real evidence" can be “direct,” that is evidence which standing alone establishes the facts at issue, or “circumstantial.”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The decision is posted on the Internet at:</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://archive.citylaw.org/oath/12_Cases/12-1944.pdf"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">http://archive.citylaw.org/oath/12_Cases/12-1944.pdf</span></a></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 14.0pt;"><b><span style="color: blue;">===================</span></b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><strong><span style="color: #660000;">The Discipline Book</span></strong>, - a concise guide to disciplinary actions involving public employees in New York State. This more than 2,100 page e-book is now available from the Public Employment Law Press. Click on <a href="http://thedisciplinebook.blogspot.com/">http://thedisciplinebook.blogspot.com/</a>for additional information concerning this electronic reference manual.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 12pt;"></span><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><b>=======================</b></span></span></span></div><span style="font-size: 12pt;"></span></div><div><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-73870493055306323482013-02-27T04:00:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:34.109-07:00An educator’s tenure rights are not sacrosanct and should yield to administrative decisions based on economics and sound educational policy<br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">An educator’s tenure rights are not sacrosanct and should yield to administrative decisions based on economics and sound educational policy<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Educator, a tenured foreign language teacher, taught .8 Full Time Equivalent [FTE] French, for which she is state certified, and .2 FTE Spanish, for which she is not certified.<span style="color: #cc0000;">* </span>The Board notified her that her full-time teaching assignment would be reduced to a .6 FTE part-time position. The Board then hired a new teacher to teach German on a .2 FTE basis. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Supreme Court dismissed Educator’s application seeking a review a decision of the Board of Education, contending that the Board acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner by reducing Educator's teaching assignment and hiring another teacher without first attempting to shuffle the schedules of other teachers in the school district, including the most senior teacher[Senior] in the foreign language tenure area who was certified to teach German.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The Appellate Division held that Supreme Court correctly found that the Board's determination was not arbitrary, capricious or unlawful explaining that school districts are granted "sufficient latitude within the law to manage their affairs efficiently and effectively," including the ability to consolidate and abolish teaching positions for financial reasons.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The decision also noted that in the event a teaching position is consolidated or abolished, the Education Law requires that "the services of the teacher having the least seniority in the system within the tenure of the position abolished shall be discontinued." </span></div><div class="description" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Citing a number of decisions including <i>Chambers v Board of Educ. of Lisbon Cent. School Dist.</i>, 47 NY2d 279, the Appellate Division said that to comply with the statute, “a board of education must, if possible, make schedule adjustments and shuffle teachers within the same tenure area to retain a district's most senior teachers.” </span><br /><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">However, the court noted, tenure rights are not sacrosanct and "should yield to decisions based on economics and sound educational policy." In such situations the board of education bears the burden of proving that it was impossible to adjust schedules to retain the more senior teacher, and this burden can be met with proof that proposed schedules are "not educationally or financially feasible."</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Educator contended that the Board could have shuffled schedules by having Senior teach .8 FTE French and .2 FTE German<span style="color: red;">**</span> and giving .2 FTE French classes to Educator, resulting in Senior having a full-time schedule and Educator with .8 FTE schedule, eliminating the need to employ a new teacher to teach .2 FTE German. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The court said that the Board considered this schedule arrangement, but found it educationally unsound and not logistically feasible. In addition to considering Senior’s self-professed incompetency to teach German, the Board considered the difficulty or impossibility of scheduling Educator to teach classes in both the middle school and high school, considering the differences in starting and ending times, different bell schedules in the two buildings and travel time between the two buildings. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Although the Board had not meet its burden of proving the impossibility of "schedule shuffling" based on the logistical problems, the Appellate Division concluded that the Board met its burden overall. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Although it would have been legally possible for Senior to teach German as she was certified in that language, the record supports the Board's assertion that it would not have been educationally sound to adjust the schedules as Educator suggested considering the fact that Senior had not taught German in 20 years and was admittedly incompetent to teach it. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Given this educational reason and the Board's economic reasons for reducing the number of French classes, the Appellate Division ruled that Supreme Court correctly found that the Board complied with Education Law §3013 and its determination was not arbitrary or capricious.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="color: #e06666;">* </span>Teacher taught .2 FTE Spanish which although outside her area of certification was permitted by Department of Education regulations.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="color: red;">**</span> The most senior teacher, although certified to teach German, “self-professed [her] incompetency to teach German” as she had <span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">only a few sections of German throughout her career, the last of which was in 1991, and has taught French exclusively since then.</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The decision is posted on the Internet at:</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01122.htm"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01122.htm</span></a></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><strong><span style="color: blue;">=========================</span><span style="color: #660000;"><o:p></o:p></span></strong></div><div class="MsoNormal"><strong><span style="color: #660000;">The Layoff, Preferred List and Reinstatement Manual</span></strong> - a 645 page e-book reviewing the relevant laws, rules and regulations, and selected court and administrative decisions is available from the Public Employment Law Press. Click On <a href="http://nylayoff.blogspot.com/">http://nylayoff.blogspot.com/</a> for additional information about this electronic reference manual.</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: blue;">=========================</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-30477137081644920812013-02-26T12:30:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:34.199-07:00 US Department of Labor – Decisions of the Administrative Review Board<span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: left;"><b><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">US Department of Labor – Decisions of the Administrative Review Board</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">January 2013</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Case summaries and links to the decisions for the Board’s January 2013 decisions are posted on the Internet at:</span></div><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 12pt;"></span><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://links.govdelivery.com/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTMwMjI2LjE1OTczNTgxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDEzMDIyNi4xNTk3MzU4MSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3NDE4MDg3JmVtYWlsaWQ9cHVibGljYXRpb25zQG55Y2FwLnJyLmNvbSZ1c2%20" style="font-size: 12pt;">http://www.oalj.dol.gov/PUBLIC/ARB/REFERENCES/Caselists/01_2013.HTM</a></span></div><span style="font-size: 12pt;"></span></div><div align="center"><br /></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-89014941435272220912013-02-26T04:00:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:34.287-07:00A FOIL request seeking the names of a public retirement system’s retirees may be denied by the custodian of the records as exempt from disclosure<br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">A FOIL request seeking the names of a public retirement system’s retirees may be denied by the custodian of the records as exempt from disclosure </span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Empire Ctr. for N.Y. State Policy v New York State Teachers' Retirement Sys., 2013 NY Slip Op 01117, Appellate Division, Third Department</span><br /><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The Empire Center for New York State Policy, [Policy] a nonprofit corporation, operates a website "aimed at educating and informing the general public about government spending."</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">In 2012, Policy filed a Freedom of Information Law<span style="color: #cc0000;"><b>*</b></span> [Public Officers Law Article 6 (FOIL)] request seeking an updated database containing information pertaining to the Teachers’ Retirement System's [Retirement] retired members. Such request sought the same information that System had provided to Policy in previous years pursuant to FOIL requests, including the name of each retiree. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Retirement furnished most of the requested information, but refused to disclose the names of the retirees to whom the information corresponded, contending that "such information is exempt from disclosure under Public Officers Law §89(7)."</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Public Officers Law §89(7), in pertinent part, provides: “<span class="negative">Nothing in this article shall require the disclosure of the home address of … a retiree of a public employees' retirement system; nor shall anything in this article require the disclosure of the name or home address of a beneficiary of a public employees' retirement system … provided however, that nothing in this subdivision shall limit or abridge the right of an employee organization, certified or recognized for any collective negotiating unit of an employer pursuant to article fourteen of the civil service law, to obtain the name or home address of any … retiree of such employer, if such name or home address is otherwise available under this article.”<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Citing the foregoing provisions of law, Policy contended that the plain language of Public Officers Law §89(7) exempts from disclosure only the home address, not the name, of a retiree. Noting that the statute makes a clear distinction between retirees and beneficiaries, Policy further argued that to read the term "beneficiary" to include a "retiree" would both deprive the word "retiree" of its own meaning and render the first clause of the provision superfluous.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Although conceding that “Well-settled principles of statutory construction lend support to the interpretation advanced by Policy,” the Appellate Division said that it was bound by the Court of Appeals' decision in Matter of New York Veteran Police Association. v New York City Police Dept. Art. I Pension Fun<i>d</i> (61 NY2d 659 [1983]). </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">In Veterans Police Association the Court of Appeals interpreted Public Officers Law §89(7) as exempting from disclosure both the names and home addresses of retirees of a public employees' retirement system.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">Policy attempts to distinguish its FOIL request from that relevant in Veterans by contending that the Veteran’s FOIL request was for both the names and the addresses of the retirees, whereas its request here was for the names only. </span></div><div class="description" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The Appellate Division ruled that the Retirement System properly denied Policy's FOIL request for the names of its retired members, noting that the First Department, relying on Veterans, reached this same conclusion in addressing a similar FOIL request by Policy for the names of the retirees of the New York City Police Pension Fund (<a href="http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2011/2011_07259.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: windowtext;">see Empire Ctr. for N.Y. State Policy v New York City Police Pension Fund, 88 AD3d 520</span></a>, 521 [2011], <i>lv dismissed</i>, 18 NY3d 901 [2012]). </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="color: red;">*</span> The basic concept underlying FOIL is that all government documents and records, other than those having access specifically limited by statute [see, for example, Education Law, §1127 - Confidentiality of records and §33.13, Mental Hygiene Law - Clinical records; confidentiality], are available to the public. The custodian of the records or documents requested may elect, but is not required, to withhold those items that are otherwise properly within the ambit of the several exceptions to disclosure permitted by FOIL.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">The decision is posted on the Internet at: </span></div><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01117.htm">http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01117.htm</a></span><br /><br /><br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-22326110869404639852013-02-25T08:36:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:34.376-07:00Bath Volunteer Fire Department not a public agency for the purpose of contractor's paying prevailing wages pursuant to Labor Law §220<br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Bath Volunteer Fire Department not a public agency for the purpose of contractor's paying prevailing wages pursuant to Labor Law §220</b><span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">*</span><br />M.G.M. Insulation, Inc. v Gardner<b>, </b>2013 NY Slip Op 01017, Court of Appeals</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Bath Volunteer Fire Department [BVFD], a not-for-profit fire corporation under Not-for-Profit Corporation Law §1402, historically operated from a building owned by the Village of Bath.<br /><br />After BVFD determined that the facility was no longer adequate for its needs and the Village declined to build it a new firehouse, BVFD commissioned a feasibility study and obtained its own financing for the construction of a new facility. Ultimately BVFD acquired land and in 2006 employed R-J Taylor General Contractors, Inc. (Taylor) as the general contractor to build the facility. Taylor subsequently hired a number of subcontractors to construct the various portions of the firehouse.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Following an investigation, the Department of Labor (DOL) issued an opinion letter, concluding that the firehouse project was a public work subject to the prevailing wage law and ultimately an administrative hearing was held on the question of the applicability of the prevailing wage law to the firehouse project.<span style="color: red;">**</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">A DOL Hearing Officer subsequently determined that the project was subject to the prevailing wage law, concluding that the firehouse project satisfied both prongs of the so-called<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Erie County<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>test for prevailing wage law applicability, (see Matter of Erie County Indus. Dev. Agency v Roberts, 94 AD2d 532, affd 63 NY2d 810), holding that volunteer fire corporations such as BVFD are the "functional equivalent[s]" of municipal corporations and are therefore "covered entities" under Labor Law §220.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the alternative, the Hearing Officer said that even if a volunteer fire corporation did not generally satisfy the public entity test, the protection services agreement between BVFD and the Village of Bath satisfied the first prong of the test and, because the Village authorized and supported the firehouse project, and the object of the project entailed provision of fire protection services for the community, the project satisfied the "public works" requirement.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Court of Appeals disagreed with the Hearing Officer’s determination on both theories, holding that <span style="background: white;">BVDF was not a public agency as contemplated by the statute nor was any other public entity a party to the 2006 contract. Accordingly, said the court, the prevailing wage law did not apply with respect to this project.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Had the Legislature intended to include volunteer fire corporations under the statute, said the court, it could easily have done so, explaining that in 2007, the Legislature expanded the <span style="font-size: 12pt;">statute's coverage to include contracts involving other types of entities [see </span><span style="font-size: 16px;">Labor Law § 220(2)]</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">, but only when it can be shown they were acting on behalf of the public entity,</span> citing New York Charter School Association v Smith, 15 NY3d 403, at 410.</div><div class="description" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color: red;">*</span></b> <b><span style="color: blue;">N.B.</span></b> The court said that “Indeed, certain volunteer fire department contracts may fall under the prevailing wage law based on the 2007 “amendment language” of Labor Law §220(2) but at the time of contract relevant in this litigation, i.e., 2006, “the 2007 amendment of the prevailing wage law did not exist.”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-converted-space"><b><span style="background: white; color: red; mso-bidi-font-size: 16.0pt;">**</span></b></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> </span></span><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Once the subcontractors learned of the DOL's determination, work on the project halted. In December 2006, BVFD agreed to indemnify Taylor and its subcontractors against any liability resulting from their failure to pay the prevailing wages, and construction resumed and the project was completed.<span class="apple-converted-space"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="Default"><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">The decision is posted on the Internet at:</span></span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span></div><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01017.htm">http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_01017.htm</a></span><br /><br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-47239019068159278672013-02-25T04:00:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:34.464-07:00Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli<br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.6pt;"><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10pt;"><b>Selected reports and information published by New York State's Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli</b></span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="background: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;">Issued during the week ending February 24, 2013 [Click on<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><b>text </b>highlighted in<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><b>bold</b></span><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;"> </span><span style="background: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;">to access the full report]</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;"> </span></span><b> </b><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/feb13/021913.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130223&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=021913release"><b>Independent Review of State Pension Fund Finds DiNapoli’s Reforms Highly Effective</b></a><br /><br />New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli Tuesday released an independent <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/reports/pension/NYSCRF_Fiduciary_and_Conflict_of_Interest_Review.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130223&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=021913release">review</a> of the New York State Common Retirement Fund (Fund) that found it is well–run, operates with an industry–leading level of transparency and invests effectively on behalf of its members. The review by Funston Advisory Services, required as part of robust oversight reforms pushed by DiNapoli, determined the Comptroller is fulfilling his fiduciary responsibilities and that Fund employees act within ethical and professional standards.<br /><br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/feb13/022013c.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130223&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022013crelease"><b>A.G. Schneiderman and Comptroller Dinapoli Announce Guilty Pleas Of Former Senator Shirley Huntley’s Co–Defendants</b></a><br /><br />Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman and Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli Wednesday announced that the co–defendants in the case of former New York Senator Shirley L. Huntley have pleaded guilty for their roles in an illegal member item theft scheme and a cover up. Patricia Savage, Senator Huntley’s aide and president of Parent Workshop, a bogus nonprofit, and Lynn Smith, Senator Huntley’s niece and the treasurer of Parent Workshop, pleaded guilty today to the felony of Attempted Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, and agreed to pay $29,950 in restitution to the state of New York, the full amount of taxpayer dollars they had stolen. A third co–defendant, David Gantt, pleaded guilty to the charge of Falsifying Business Records in the Second Degree.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><br /><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/feb13/022013b.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130223&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022013brelease"><b>New York State Common Retirement Fund Announces Third Quarter Results</b></a><br /><br />The New York State Common Retirement Fund’s (Fund) rate of return for the third quarter ending December 31, 2012 was 1.74 percent, according to New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. The Fund’s estimated value at the end of the third quarter was $152.9 billion, near its historical high.<br /><br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/feb13/022013.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130223&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022013release"><b>DiNapoli: Yonkers Challenged by School Finances, Declining Property Values</b></a><br /><br />The City of Yonkers has persistently faced significant budget gaps which have caused the city to draw down its fund balance. Recent declines in state aid, property values and growing school demands have added to the city’s financial challenges, according to a <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/pubs/fiscalprofiles/yonkers.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130223&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022013release">report</a> released Wednesday by New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. Yonkers officials have started making tough choices needed to bring the City’s budget into structural balance. The report is the latest in a series of fiscal profiles on cities across the state released by the Comptroller’s office.<br /><br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/feb13/022013a.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130223&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022013arelease"><b>DiNapoli: Syracuse’s Fiscal Condition Challenged by Systemic Problems</b></a><br /><br />The City of Syracuse is confronted by a large number of vacant and tax–exempt properties, low rates of home ownership and decreased home values, according to a <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/pubs/fiscalprofiles/syracuse.pdf?utm_source=weeklynews20130223&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022013arelease">report</a> released Wednesday by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. The rating agencies credit Syracuse for having a relatively strong financial position, but caution the City is susceptible to adverse economic conditions. The report is the latest in a series of fiscal profiles DiNapoli will issue on cities across the state.<br /><br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/feb13/022213.htm?utm_source=weeklynews20130223&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=022213release"><b>Qualcomm Implements Industry–Leading Political Spending Disclosure Policy; DiNapoli Commends Action</b></a><br /><br />Qualcomm Incorporated and the New York State Common Retirement Fund (Fund) were pleased to announce Friday that following informative discussions, the Fund has decided to withdraw the lawsuit it filed on January 2, 2013. Qualcomm will implement a revised political spending disclosure policy which is now available on its <a href="http://investor.qualcomm.com/governance.cfm">website</a>.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6050684045966796548.post-86202342134110254052013-02-24T07:05:00.000-08:002013-03-18T13:04:34.554-07:00Governor Cuomo introduced 30-day amendments to the Executive Budget<br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Governor Cuomo introduced 30-day amendments to the Executive Budget</b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Among the measures introduced by Governor Cuomo having a direct effect on public employees of the State are the following:</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><b>1. Implement teacher evaluation system in New York City.</b> Under the Governor’s leadership, the state passed a comprehensive teacher evaluation system for every district across New York State. Though 99 percent of districts were able to reach an agreement on a plan with their local teacher unions, submit it to the state, and have their plan approved by the State Education Department before their January deadline, New York City failed to so. As a result, it lost $240 million in state aid and is in danger of losing additional funds if an evaluation system is not in place this year.<br /><br />In the event the City and its collective bargaining units fail to reach agreement on a teacher evaluation system by the end of May, an expedited arbitration process, led by the Commissioner of Education, will occur. Following hearings and a review of evidence, the Commissioner, by June 1<sup>st</sup>, will make a final, written determination on the structure of a teacher evaluation system for New York City schools. This legislation will ensure that New York City students and educators will not see another school year go by without the timely feedback, professional development, and accountability that a robust teacher evaluation plan will provide. <br /><br /><br /><b>2. Expand availability of the Stable Pension option. </b>The stable pension contribution rate for local governments and schools, submitted as part of the Executive Budget, will provide a new tool for local governments to access the long-term savings from Tier VI and have greater predictability in their fiscal planning. Given the positive response to this proposal from sectors who asked to take advantage of the program but were not initially included, the Governor would expand eligibility to include BOCES and three local public hospitals – Nassau University Medical Center, Westchester Medical Center, and Erie County Medical Center. The county sponsors of the three hospitals included in this amendment, as well as their taxpayers, have a direct interest in financial condition of these institutions and, therefore, the stable pension option is a viable approach to meeting local fiscal demands.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>3. Provide retraining funds for state employees. </b>The Executive Budget included a $5 million appropriation to be used to retrain State employees impacted by 2012-13 and 2013-14 facility closures at OMH, OPWDD, DOCCS and OCFS. Funding would be available to retrain employees for which comparable State positions could not be found nearby their current work location. This amendment reduces the radius to 25 miles, allowing the funds to be used to help a larger number of impacted employees.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />The entire list of 30-day amendments is available at <a href="http://budget.ny.gov/">http://budget.ny.gov</a> </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The Governor said that his 2013-14 Executive Budget and Management Plan builds on two years of balanced, fiscally responsible budgeting and invests in economic development, education reform, rebuilding after Superstorm Sandy, provides support to local governments and school districts, and includes no new taxes or fees. The budget is required to be passed by April 1.</span><br /><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04293556467912885925noreply@blogger.com