Agenda 06/24/2014 Item #16K66/24/2014 16.K.6.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation that the Board approves an after - the -fact filing of a joint Petition with
the Florida Association of Counties ( "FAC ") and other counties to challenge proposed new
rules related to the billing and collection of the county cost share for juvenile pre-
disposition secured detention (Potential short term fiscal impact is $3,500).
OBJECTIVE: To require the Department of Juvenile Justice ( "DJJ ") to enact rules which are
consistent with Florida law.
CONSIDERATIONS: On Wednesday, June 11`t', I received a telephone call from Greg Stewart
of Nabors Giblin, who is representing Collier County (along with other counties) seeking a
refund in excess of $5 million from the State as overpayments made by Collier County to the
Department of Juvenile Justice. Mr. Stewart had just agreed to represent FAC on a Rule
Challenge against DJJ and inquired whether Collier County would be interested in being a
named plaintiff. After consulting with the County Manager, and based on prior general Board
direction in this matter, I agreed. The deadline to file this Petition was June 16, after which it
was uncertain whether anyone else could join. The Petition, a copy of which is attached as back-
up, was duly filed on June 16.
The following is a brief synopsis of the Petition:
Under Florida law, the cost for providing secure juvenile detention is shared between the
State of Florida and various counties within the State. The respective responsibility, as between
the State of Florida and the various counties, is established by section 985.686, Florida Statutes.
On July 16, 2006, the Department of Juvenile Justice promulgated Rules 63G- 1.002,
63G - 1.004, 63G- 1.007, and 63G- 1.008, Florida Administrative Code, among others, setting forth
the definitions and procedures for calculating the costs as between the State of Florida and the
various counties. These rules were repealed as of July 6, 2010, and in their place, the
Department adopted Rules 63G - 1.011, 63G - 1.013, 63G - 1.016, and 63G - 1.017, Florida
Administrative Code, which had the effect of transferring the responsibility for tens of thousands
of days of detention from the State to the counties.
In 2012, several counties challenged these new Rules. On July 17, 2012, a Final Order
was issued by Administrative Law Judge W. David Watkins, who agreed with the counties and
found that the rules were an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority. This ruling was
affinned on appeal. Department of Juvenile Justice v. Okaloosa County, 113 So. 3d 1074 (Fla.
1 st DCA 2013).
Shortly after the decision of the First District Court of Appeal was issued in the Rule
Challenge, the Department issued an interpretation that the decision required the State would be
responsible for all detention days occurring after a final court disposition, including a final court
disposition of commitment, probation, or dismissal of the charge. This interpretation changed
the counties' collective responsibility for the costs of detention care from approximately 74
percent of the total costs, to approximately 32 percent of the total costs.
Packet Page -2070-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
During the budgeting process for the 2014 -15 Fiscal Year, the Department altered its
interpretation of the Rule Challenge decision in order to limit its responsibility for the costs of
detention care. Instead of accepting full responsibility for the costs of detention days occurring
after final court disposition, the Department has now shifted to the counties the responsibility for
detention days occurring after a final court disposition of probation for new law violations of
probation. This changed the counties' collective responsibility for the costs of secure detention
care from approximately 32 percent to approximately 57 percent.
On May 15, 2014, the Department advertised Proposed Rules 63G- 1.011, 1.013, 1.016,
and 1.017. The stated purpose of the amendments was to "comply with a recent appellate
decision invalidating portions of the department's rules implementing detention cost share." It is
FAC's position that the Proposed Rules do not comply with section 985.686, Florida Statutes,
the decision issued in the Rule Challenge, or the Department's prior interpretation of the same,
and is an invalid exercise of legislative authority to misallocate the respective costs of secure
detention as between the counties and the State.
Should the Board elect not to participate; the County Attorney will withdraw from the
suit.
FISCAL IMPACT: The stated flat fee to join in this Petition is $1,000. Should the matter be
appealed, an additional $2,500 will be requested. Funds are available from the County Attorney's
general litigation budget. A successful outcome in this challenge could potentially be worth
millions in savings to the County over time.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approves an after- the -fact
filing of a joint Petition with the Florida Association of Counties and other counties to challenge
proposed new rules related to the billing and collection of the county cost share for juvenile pre-
disposition secured detention.
PREPARED BY: Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Attachments: E -mail from FAC; Proposed Petition
Packet Page -2071-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 16.16.K.16.K.6.
Item Summary: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve an
after - the -fact filing of a joint Petition with the Florida Association of Counties ( "FAC") and other
counties to challenge proposed new rules related to the billing and collection of the county cost
share for juvenile pre- disposition secured detention. (Potential fiscal impact $3,500)
Meeting Date: 6/24/2014
Prepared By
Name: NeetVirginia
Title: Legal Assistant/Paralegal, CAO Office Administration
6/13/2014 3:43:31 PM
Approved By
Name: KlatzkowJeff
Title: County Attorney,
Date: 6/13/2014 4:31:27 PM
Name: IsacksonMark
Title: Director -Corp Financial and Mngmt Svs, Office of Management & Budget
Date: 6/16/2014 10:02:36 AM
Name: KlatzkowJeff
Title: County Attorney,
Date: 6/17/2014 9:31:06 AM
Naive: OchsLeo
Title: County Manager, County Managers Office
Date: 6/17/2014 11:10:08 AM
Packet Page -2072-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
KlatzkowJeff
From: Gail Ricks [gricks @fl - counties.com] on behalf of Ginger Delegal [gdelegal @fl- counties.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 9:09 AM
To: Ginger Delegal
Cc: gstewart@ngniaw.com; cschrader @ngnlaw.com; 'elabrador @broward.org'; Jess McCarty;
Chris Holley; Lisa Hurley; Cragin Mosteller
Subject: ATTENTION and IMMEDIATE ACTION DJJ Rule Challenge Participation
Attachments: Draft Petition for Rule Challenge_6 9 14 (2).doc
Importance: High
To: All Non- Fiscally Constrained County Attorneys
Last Friday, the Department of Juvenile Justice held a public hearing on proposed new rules related to the billing and
collection of the county cost share for juvenile pre- disposition secured detention. The revised rules are purportedly
intended to implement the direction of the First District Court of Appeal in its opinion, invalidating the current rules.
Despite the written submission of at least 22 counties and FAC and despite the direct participation of over 15 counties at
the public hearing and FAC, the Department appears unwilling to make certain changes that would bring the rules in line
with the court's direction. Accordingly, FAC will file a rule challenge. The deadline to do so is currently believed to be
Monday, June 16.
Each of the 38 non - fiscally constrained counties are encouraged to join the petition. FAC has hired Nabors, Giblin &
Nickerson, P.A., as special counsel to represent us in the rule challenge and any subsequent appeals. The large urban
counties (Duval, Pinellas, Hillsborough, Palm Beach, Orange, Broward and Miami -Dade) can join this petition for $2500
through the administrative process up to any appeal. If any appeal is taken, these seven counties can then remain in the
FAC suit for $2500 more (all the way to and through the Florida Supreme Court; for a total of $5,000). All other
remaining 31 counties can join the rule challenge petition for $1,000 and for $2500 more for any and all appeals (for a
total of $3,500). Payments should be made to FAC; counties will be individually named on the petition.
The FAC Executive Committee has authorized the hiring of NG &N and FAC's filing of the rule challenge. That decision
will be reported to and ratified by the FAC Board of Directors next week during the FAC Annual Conference.
We understand the difficulty with the speed of the decision making at this point. I am attaching a draft of the petition
for your reference. We are continuing to research the ability for counties to either join or intervene at future dates but
do not have yet have advice on the ability to join /intervene at a later time.
Please let me know what questions you have and notify me by 5:00 on Friday, June 13`h of your interest in being a
named petitioner.
Virginia "Ginger" Delegal
General Counsel
Florida Association of Counties
100 S. Monroe St - Tallahassee, FL 32301
(850) 922 -4300
Facebook: face book.com /flcounties
Twitter: 0D-ficounties
www.fl- counties.com • All About Florida
Packet Page -2073-
STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES,
ALACHUA COUNTY, BAY COUNTY,
BREVARD COUNTY, CHARLOTTE COUNTY,
COLLIER COUNTY, ESCAMBIA COUNTY,
FLAGLER COUNTY, HERNANDO COUNTY,
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, LAKE COUNTY,
LEE COUNTY, LEON COUNTY, MANATEE COUNTY,
MARTIN COUNTY, NASSAU COUNTY,
OKALOOSA COUNTY, PALM BEACH COUNTY,
PINELLAS COUNTY, SANTA ROSA COUNTY,
ST. JOHNS COUNTY, ST. LUCIE COUNTY,
SARASOTA COUNTY and WALTON COUNTY,
Petitioners,
vs.
DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE,
Respondent.
CASE NO.
PETITION FOR RULE CHALLENGE
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES, ALACHUA COUNTY, BAY COUNTY,
BREVARD COUNTY, CHARLOTTE COUNTY, COLLIER COUNTY, ESCAMBIA
COUNTY, FLAGLER COUNTY, HERNANDO COUNTY, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY,
LAKE COUNTY, LEE COUNTY, LEON COUNTY, MANATEE COUNTY, MARTIN
COUNTY, NASSAU COUNTY, OKALOOSA COUNTY, PALM BEACH COUNTY,
PINELLAS COUNTY, SANTA ROSA COUNTY, ST. JOHNS COUNTY, ST. LUCIE
COUNTY, SARASOTA COUNTY and WALTON COUNTY, by and through their undersigned
counsel, file this Petition pursuant to section 120.56(2), Florida Statutes, and Rule 28- 106.201,
Packet Page -2074-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
Florida Administrative Code, and request an administrative determination regarding the
invalidity of proposed rules 63G- 1.011, 63G- 1.013, 63G - 1.016, and 63G- 1.017. Florida
Administrative Code, as they are an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.
I. Name and Address of Affected Agency
1. The agency affected is the Department of Juvenile Justice, Knight Building, 2737
Centerview Drive, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -3100.
I1. Name and Address of Petitioners
2. Petitioners Alachua County, Bay County, Brevard County, Charlotte County,
Collier County, Escambia County, Flagler County, Hernando County, Hillsborough County,
Lake County, Lee County, Leon County, Manatee County, Martin County, Nassau County,
Okaloosa County, Palm Beach County, Pinellas County, Santa Rosa County, St. Johns County,
St. Lucie County, Sarasota County and Walton County are all political subdivisions of the State
of Florida ( "Petitioning Counties ").
3. Petitioner Florida Association of Counties ( "FAC ") is a statewide association and
not - for - profit corporation organized and existing under Chapter 617 of the Florida Statutes for
the purpose of representing county government in Florida and protecting, promoting, and
improving the mutual interests of all counties in the State. Among the express purposes for
which FAC was organized is to defend the "rights. . of county government under any
constitutional provision [and] statute..." All of Florida's 67 counties are members of the FAC.
4. The name, address, telephone number, and email addresses of counsel for the
Petitioners, to which all communications regarding this Petition shall be directed, are:
2
Packet Page -2075-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
Gregory T. Stewart
Carly J. Schrader
Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson, P.A.
1500 Mahan Drive, Suite 200
Tallahassee, Florida 32308
gstewart@ngnlaw.com
cschrader @ngnlaw.com
(850) 224 -4070
(850) 224 -4073 (Facsimile)
Additional counsel of record are listed below.
5. This Petition is timely filed in these proceedings, within 10 days of the final
hearing on the Proposed Rules, held June 6, 2014.
III. Explanation of Substantial Interests
6. Proposed Rules 63G- 1.011, 1.013, 1.016, and 1.017 ( "Proposed Rules ") govern
the allocation of costs amongst the counties and the State for the joint statutory responsibility for
providing for the costs of secure detention care, under the provisions of section 985.686, Florida
Statutes, the law implemented.
7. The Petitioning Counties and a substantial number of petitioner FAC's members
are non - fiscally constrained counties, and pay a portion of the costs of secure juvenile detention,
pursuant to section 985.686, Florida Statutes, and are substantially and adversely affected by the
Proposed Rules 63G - 1.011, 63G - 1.013, 63G - 1.016, and 63G - 1.017, Florida Administrative
Code, because the Proposed Rules directly impact how cost for secure juvenile detention under
Chapter 985, Florida Statutes, is allocated between the State and the various counties, and
inappropriately allocate a portion of the costs to the counties for which they are not statutorily
responsible.
I "Fiscally constrained county" is defined by section 985.686(2)(b), Florida Statutes. Pursuant to
section 985.686(4), Florida Statutes, "the state shall pay all costs of detention care for juveniles
for which a fiscally constrained county would otherwise be billed."
3
Packet Page -2076-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
8. As alleged herein, a substantial number of FAC's members are substantially
affected by the Department's Proposed Rules, and the subject matter of these proceedings are
clearly within FAC's scope of interest and activity, and the relief requested is appropriate for
FAC to receive on behalf of its members.
IV. Notice of Agency Decision
9. The Department's Notice of Proposed Rules for Rules 63G -1.011 63G - 1.013,
63G- 1.016, and 63G - 1.017, Florida Administrative Code, appeared in the May 15, 2014, issue of
the Florida Administrative Weekly.
10. A public hearing was held on June 6, 2014, in which the Petitioners participated,
and comments and objections to the Proposed Rules were provided.
V. Disputed Issues of Material Fact
11. Whether the Proposed Rules inappropriately shift a portion of the costs of secure
detention to the counties from the State for which the counties are not statutorily responsible.
12. Whether the Department's Proposed Rules are inconsistent with its agency
practices and policies subsequent to the invalidation of its 2010 rules.
13. Whether the Proposed Rules enlarge, modify, or contravene section 985.686,
Florida Statutes, the specific provisions of law implemented; are vague and fail to establish
adequate standards for agency decisions, or vest unbridled discretion in the agency; and /or are
arbitrary or capricious, and therefore an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.
14. Whether the Proposed Rules impose regulatory costs that could be reduced by the
adoption of less costly alternatives that substantially accomplish the statutory objectives, and are
therefore are an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.
4
Packet Page -2077-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
VI. Provisions Alleged to be Invalid and Concise Statement of Ultimate
Facts or Grounds for the Invalidity
15, Under Florida law, the cost for providing secure juvenile detention is shared
between the State of Florida and various counties within the State. The respective responsibility,
as between the State of Florida and the various counties, is established by section 985.686,
Florida Statutes. Subsection 985.686(3), Florida Statutes, provides:
(3) Each county shall pay the costs of providing detention care,
exclusive of the costs of any preadjudicatory nonmedical
educational or therapeutic services and $2.5 million provided for
additional medical and mental health care at the detention centers,
for juveniles for the period of time prior to final court disposition.
The department shall develop an accounts payable system to
allocate costs that are payable by the counties.
(Emphasis added).
16. On July 16, 2006, the Department of Juvenile Justice promulgated Rules 63G-
1.002, 63G- 1.004, 63G- 1.007, and 63G - 1.008, Florida Administrative Code, among others,
setting forth the definitions and procedures for calculating the costs as between the State of
Florida and the various counties. These rules were repealed as of July 6, 2010 and in their place,
the Department adopted Rules 63G - 1.011, 63G - 1.013, 63G - 1.016, and 63G - 1.017, Florida
Administrative Code. Although the previous rules defined "final court disposition," for purposes
of determining the counties' responsibility for providing the costs of secure detention, the 2010
rules replaced this with a definition of "commitment," so that the State was only responsible for
days occurring after a disposition of commitment. This had the effect of transferring the
responsibility for tens of thousands of days of detention from the State to the counties. In
addition, the 2010 rules failed to provide a process by which the counties were only charged their
respective actual costs of secure detention.
F
Packet Page -2078-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
17. In 2012, several counties challenged Rules 63G- 1.011, 63G - 1.013, 63G - 1.016,
and 63G- 1.017, Florida Administrative Code, as an invalid exercise of delegated legislative
authority, because these rules replaced the statutory dividing line for the costs of secure detention
with "commitment," and because the rules resulted in the overcharging of counties for their
respective actual costs of secure detention. On July 17, 2012, a Final Order was issued by
Administrative Law Judge W. David Watkins, who agreed with the counties and found that the
rules were an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority. Okaloosa County, et al. v.
Department of Juvenile Justice, DOAH Case No. 12- 0891RX (Final Order July 17, 2012). This
ruling was affirmed on appeal. Department of Juvenile Justice v. Okaloosa County, 113 So. 3d
1074 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) ( "Rule Challenge ").
18. Shortly after the decision of the First District Court of Appeal was issued in the
Rule Challenge, the Department issued an interpretation that the decision required the State
would be responsible for all detention days occurring after a final court disposition, including a
final court disposition of commitment, probation, or dismissal of the charge. This interpretation
changed the counties' collective responsibility for the costs of detention care from approximately
74 percent of the total costs, to approximately 32 percent of the total costs. This interpretation
was also stipulated to by the Department in three separate administrative proceedings. Bay
County et al. v. Department of Juvenile Justice, DOAH Case Nos. 11 -0995, et al. (consolidated)
Joint Stipulation of Facts and Procedure filed December 6, 2013; Okaloosa County v.
Department of Juvenile Justice, DOAH Case Nos. 11 -5894, Joint Stipulation of Facts and
Procedure filed December 9, 2013; Volusia County et al. v. Department of Juvenile Justice,
DOAH Case Nos. 13 -1442 et al. (consolidated), Joint Stipulation of Fact and Procedure filed
December 17, 2013.
G
Packet Page -2079-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
19. During the budgeting process for the 2014 -15 Fiscal Year, the Department altered
its interpretation of the Rule Challenge decision in order to limit its responsibility for the costs of
detention care. Instead of accepting full responsibility for the costs of detention days occurring
after final court disposition, the Department has now shifted to the counties the responsibility for
detention days occurring after a final court disposition of probation for new law violations of
probation. This changed the counties' collective responsibility for the costs of secure detention
care from approximately 32 percent to approximately 57 percent.
20. On May 15, 2014, the Department advertised Proposed Rules 63G- 1.011, 1.013,
1.016, and 1.017. The purpose of the amendments, as stated by the Department, was to "comply
with a recent appellate decision invalidating portions of the department's rules implementing
detention cost share." However, the Proposed Rules do not comply with section 985.686,
Florida Statutes, the decision issued in the Rule Challenge, or the Department's prior
interpretation of the same.
21. Instead, the Proposed Rules provide definitions in Rule 63G -1.01 I for
"predisposition" and "postdisposition" which, assign responsibility to the counties for days
occurring after final court disposition, including but not limited to, those circumstances where a
juvenile that is on probation has a new law violation of that probation.
22. These definitions must also be read in conjunction with Rules 63G- 1.013, 1.016,
and 1.017, which provide the process by which the Department calculates both the estimated
costs to the counties at the beginning of the fiscal year, and the reconciliation process at the end
of the fiscal year, which ultimately determines the costs to the counties. Through the application
of the definitions for "predisposition" and "postdisposition" in the remaining Proposed Rules, the
Department passes on the costs of secure detention days occurring after a "final court
7
Packet Page -2080-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
disposition" that include, but are not limited to, those circumstances where a juvenile that is on
probation has a new law violation of that probation.
23. The above definitions and the application thereof in the Proposed Rules enlarge,
modify, or contravene the statute sought to be implemented.
24. The Proposed Rules are arbitrary and capricious by inappropriately applying an
interpretation of the Rule Challenge decision in the Proposed Rules which is in conflict with that
decision and the Department's prior interpretation of the same, and its past agency practices or
policies implemented shortly after the Rule Challenge decision, in fall of 2013.
25. The result of the Department's invalid exercise of legislative authority is a
misallocation of the respective costs of secure detention as between the counties and the State.
26. The Proposed Rules also fail to exclude from the "actual costs" certain costs
exempted from the counties' responsibility for detention cost share, in section 985.686(3),
Florida Statutes, for the "costs of any preadjudicatory nonmedical educational or therapeutic
services and $2.5 million provided for additional medical and mental health care at the detention
centers."
27. The Proposed Rules are vague for failure to provide a definition of "actual costs"
or "actual expenditures" or "total expenditures" as used within Rules 63G -1.011 and 1.017. In
addition, the definition of "actual per diem" and its application within Proposed Rules 63G -1.011
and 1.017 is vague and ambiguous and internally inconsistent.
28. As currently drafted, the process prescribed by the Proposed Rules for calculating
the estimate and the total year -end costs allocated to the counties is vague and ambiguous, fails
to establish adequate standards for agency decisions, or vests unbridled discretion in the agency;
and/or improperly attempts to enlarge, modify, or contravene section 985.686, Florida Statutes.
K
Packet Page -2081-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
Further, Rules 63G -1.013 and 63 -1.017 of the Proposed Rules fail to provide for input from the
counties as provided for by section 985.686(6), Florida Statutes.
29. The Proposed Rules impose regulatory costs that could be addressed by the
adoption of a less costly alternative.
VII. Specific Statutes Requiring Reversal
30. The Proposed Rules enlarge, modify, or contravene the specific provisions of law
implemented, section 985.686, Florida Statutes, for the reasons stated herein, under sections
120.56 and 120.52(8)(c), Florida Statutes.
31. The Proposed Rules are vague and fail to establish adequate standards for agency
decisions, or vest unbridled discretion_ in the agency; and/or are arbitrary and capricious, under
sections 120.56 and 120.52(8)(d) -(e), Florida Statutes.
32. The Proposed Rules impose regulatory costs that could be addressed by the
adoption of a less costly alternative, under sections 120.52(8)(f) and 120.541, Florida Statutes,
33. Petitioners are obligated to pay their attorneys a reasonable fee and are entitled to
recover their reasonable costs and attorney's fees under section 120.595(2), Florida Statutes.
34. To the extent it may be required, (without conceding the same), this Petition is
also being served on the Department of Financial Services under the provisions of section
284.30, Florida Statutes,
WHEREFORE, Petitioners, FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES, ALACHUA
COUNTY, BAY COUNTY, BREVARD COUNTY, CHARLOTTE COUNTY, COLLIER
COUNTY, ESCAMBIA COUNTY, FLAGLER COUNTY, HERNANDO COUNTY,
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, LAKE COUNTY, LEE COUNTY, LEON COUNTY,
MANATEE COUNTY, MARTIN COUNTY, NASSAU COUNTY, OKALOOSA COUNTY,
C
Packet Page -2082-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
PALM BEACH COUNTY, PINELLAS COUNTY, SANTA ROSA COUNTY, ST. JOHNS
COUNTY, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, SARASOTA COUNTY and WALTON COUNTY,
respectfully request:
A, That a hearing be held in accordance with sections 120.56, 120.569 and
120.57, Florida Statutes;
B. That the ALJ enter an administrative determination finding and
concluding that Proposed Rules 63G- 1.011, 63G - 1.013, 63G - 1.016, and 63G - 1.017, Florida
Administrative Code are invalid;
C. That the ALJ enter an award of attorney's fees and costs pursuant to
section 120.595(2), Florida Statutes; and
D. That the ALJ grant such other relief as is fair and appropriate.
DATED this 16th day of June, 2014,
GRF,GOR T. STEWART
Florida Bar No. 203718
CARLY J. SCHRADER
Florida Bar No. 14675
Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson, P.A.
1500 Mahan Drive, Suite 200
Tallahassee, Florida 32308
(850)224 -4070
(850) 224 -4073 (Facsimile)
gstewartcr�,ngnlaw.com
cschrader @ngnlaw.com
legal-admin@ngnlaw.com
COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS
VIRGINIA DELEGAL
Florida Bar No. 989932
General Counsel
Florida Association of Counties
100 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
850 -922 -4300
850 - 488 -7192 (Facsimile)
gdelegal @fl- counties.com
Co- Counsel for Florida Association of
Counties
10
Packet Page -2083-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
MICHELE L, LIEBERMAN
JANETTE S. KNOWLTON
Florida Bar No. 134864
Florida Bar No. 77232
Alachua County Attorney
Charlotte County Attorney
ROBERT LIVINGSTON, IV
DANIEL E. GALLAGHER
Florida Bar No. 0003840
Florida Bar No. 872822
Assistant County Attorney
Assistant County Attorney
Post Office Box 5547
18500 Murdock Circle, 5th Floor
Gainesville, Florida 32627
Port Charlotte, Florida 33948
(352) 374 -5218
(941) 743 -1330
(352) 374 -5216 (Facsimile)
(941) 743 -1550 (Facsimile)
mlieberman@alachuacounty.us
janette.knowlton @charlottefl.com
rl @alachuacounty.us
daniel.gallagher @charlottefl.com
Co- Counsel for Alachua County
Co- Counsel for Charlotte County
TERRELL K. ARLINE
JEFFREY A. KLATZKOW
Florida Bar No. 306584
Florida Bar No. 644625
County Attorney
Collier County Attorney
JENNIFER W. SHULER
3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 800
Florida Bar No. 728810
Naples, Florida 34112
Assistant County Attorney
(239) 252 -8400
Bay County Attorney's Office
(239) 252 -6300 (Facsimile)
840 West 11th Street
jeffklatzkow @colliergov.net
Panama City, Florida 32401 -2336
Co- Counsel for Collier County
(850) 248 -8176
(850) 248 -8189 (Facsimile)
CHARLES V. PEPPLER
tarline @baycountyfl.gov
Florida Bar No. 239739
jshuler @baycountyfl.gov
Deputy County Attorney
Co- Counsel for Bay County
Escambia County
221 Palafox Place, Suite 430
SHANNON L. WILSON
Pensacola, Florida 35202
Florida Bar No. 332836
(850) 595 -4970
Deputy County Attorney
(850) 595 -4979 (Facsimile)
Brevard County
cpeppler @co.escambia.fl.us
2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way
Co- Counsel for Escambia County
Viera, Florida 32940
(321) 633 -2090
ALBERT J. HADEED
(321) 633 -2096 (Facsimile)
Florida Bar No. 180906
shannon.wilson @brevardcounty.us
Flagler County Attorney
Co- Counsel for Brevard County
1769 E. Moody Boulevard
Building 2
Bunnell, Florida 32110
(386) 313 -4005
(386) 313 -4105 (Facsimile)
ahadeed@flaglercounty.org
Co- Counsel for Flagler County
11
Packet Page -2084-
GARTH COLLER
Florida Bar No. 374849
Hernando County Attorney
JON A. JOUBEN
Deputy County Attorney
20 N. Main Street, Suite 462
Brooksville, Florida 34601
(352) 754 -4122
(352) 754 -4001 (Facsimile)
garthc @co.hernando.fl.us
jjouben@hemandocounly.fl.us
Co- Counsel for Hernando County
STEPHEN M. TODD
Florida Bar No. 886203
Senior Assistant County Attorney
Hillsborough County Attorney's Office
Post Office Box 1110
Tampa, Florida 33601 -1110
(813) 272 -5670
(813) 272 -5758 (Facsimile)
todds @hillsboroughcounty.org
Co- Counsel for Hillsborough County
SANFORD A. MINKOFF
Florida Bar No. 0220175
Lake County Attorney
MELANIE MARSH
Florida Bar No. 0136522
Deputy County Attorney
Post Office Box 7800
315 West Main Street, Suite 335
Tavares, Florida 32778 -7800
(352) 343 -9787
(352) 343 -9646 (Facsimile)
sminkoff@lakecountyfl.gov
mmarsh@lakeeountyfl.gov
Co- Counsel for Lake County
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
RICHARD WM. WESCH
Florida Bar No. 710921
County Attorney
ASHLEY D. ROBERTS
Florida Bar No. 138045
Assistant County Attorney
Lee County Attorney's Office
2115 Second Street
Post Office Box 398
Fort Myers, Florida 33902 -0398
(239) 533 -2236
(239) 485 -2106 (Facsimile)
rwesch @leegov.com
aroberts @leegov.com
Co- Counsel for Lee County
HERBERT W. A. THIELE
Florida Bar No. 261327
Leon County Attorney
301 South Monroe Street, Suite 202
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(850) 606 -2500
(850) 606 -2501 (Facsimile)
thieleh@leoncountyfl.gov
Co- Counsel for Leon County
MITCHELL O. PALMER
Florida Bar No. 351873
Manatee County Attorney
JAMES A. MINIX
Florida Bar No. 239240
Assistant County Attorney
Post Office Box 1000
Bradenton, Florida 34206 -1000
(941) 745 -3750
(941) 749 -3089 (Facsimile)
mitchell.palmer @mymanatee.org
jim.minix@mymanatee.org
Co- Counsel for Manatee County
12
Packet Page -2085-
MICHAEL D. DURHAM
Florida Bar No. 399485
Martin County Attorney
Martin County Administrative Center
2401 SE Monterey Road
Stuart, FL 34996 -3322
(772) 288 -5438
(772) 288 -5439 (Facsimile)
mdurham @martin.fl.us
Co- Counsel for Martin County
DAVID A. HALLMAN
Florida Bar No. 0825794
County Attorney
Nassau County Attorney's Office
96135 Nassau Place, Suite 6
Yulee, Florida 32097
(904) 548 -4590
(904) 321 -2658 (Facsimile)
dhallman@nassaucountyfl.com
jbradley@nassaucountyfl.com
Co- Counsel for Nassau County
DENISE MARIE NIEMAN
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
JAMES BENNETT
Florida Bar No. 698873
Pinellas County Attorney
CARL E. BRODY
Florida Bar No. 0102229
Senior Assistant County Attorney
315 Court Street, 6th Floor
Clearwater, Florida 33756
(727) 464 -3354
(727) 464 -4147 (Facsimile)
jbennett@pinellascounty.org
cbrody @pinellascounty.org
Co- Counsel for Pinellas County
ANGELA J. JONES
Florida Bar No. 096441
Santa Rosa County Attorney
6495 Caroline Street, Suite C
Milton, Florida 32570
(850) 983 -1857
(850) 983 -1856 (Facsimile)
angiej@santarosa.fl.gov
Co- Counsel for Santa Rosa County
Florida Bar No. 642118
PATRICK F. McCORMACK
County Attorney
Florida Bar No. 61980
AMY T. PETRICK
St. Johns County Attorney
Florida Bar No. 0315590
500 San Sebastian View
Assistant County Attorney
St. Augustine, Florida 32084
Palm Beach County Attorney's Office
(904) 209 -0805
300 N. Dixie Highway
(904) 209 -0806 (Facsimile)
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
pmccormack @sjcfl.us
(561) 355 -2225
Co- Counsel for St. Johns County
(561) 355 -3600 (Facsimile)
DNieman@pbcgov.org
DANIEL S. MCINTYRE
APetrick @pbcgov.org
Florida Bar No. 287571
Co- Counsel for Palm Beach County
St. Lucie County Attorney
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, Florida 34982
(772) 462 -1420
(772) 462 -1440 (Facsimile)
mcintyred@stlucieco.org
Co- Counsel for St. Lucie County
13
Packet Page -2086-
6/24/2014 16.K.6.
STEPHEN E. DF,MARSH
Florida Bar No. 0335649
Sarasota County Attorney
DAVID M. PEARCE
Florida Bar No. 01 07905
Assistant County Attorney
1660 Ringling Boulevard
Second Floor
Sarasota, Florida 34236
(941) 861 -7272
(941) 861 -7267 (Facsimile)
sdemarsh @scgov.net
dpearce@scgov.net
Co- Counsel for Sarasota County
MARK D. DAVIS
Florida Bar No. 764700
Walton County Attorney
Office of the County Attorney
161 East Sloss Avenue
DeFuniak Springs, Florida 32435
(850) 892 -8110
(850) 892 -8471 (Facsimile)
mdd @co.walton.fl.us
Co- Counsel for Walton County
CERTIFICATE, OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Petition for Rule
Challenge has been furnished by U.S. Mail to Jeff Atwater, Chief Financial Officer, Florida
Department of Financial Services, 200 East Gaines Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -0301, this
16th--day of June, 2014.
14
Packet Page -2087-
�,.�. big
.