Jota ol STATE OF FLORIDA ant, DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES o: &y RYAN FLINT, , Oye on Petitioner, CASE NO. 00-4255 CASE NO. 00-4675 v. RENDITION NO. DCF-01-_/79 -FO (Denial of DD Services for Lack of Funding) DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, (DISTRICT 2) F I LE D Respondent. MAR 3 0 2001 I DCF Department Clerk FINAL ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDED ORDER DENYING SERVICES THIS CAUSE is before me as the result of a Recommended Order that was issued by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) who had been assigned to hear the case by the Division of Administrative Hearings. The facts of the case reveal that Ryan Flint is a client of the Department’s Developmental Disability Program. As such, he is eligible to receive developmental services subject to the availability of legislatively appropriated funds. Master Flint asked to receive services. Unfortunately, however, there are no funds in the Individual and Family Support appropriation category other than funds that are already committed. Accordingly, and consistent with Florida law, which legally prohibits the Department from spending or obligating funds in excess of its appropriation, the district denied Master Flint’s request. At hearing, the burden of proof was on Master Flint to show that the funds existed in the general revenue categories of the Developmental Services budget. Florida Dept. of Transp. v. J.W.C. Co. Inc., 396 So.2d 778 (Fla. 1* DCA 1981). Master Flint failed to meet his burden of proof. Consequently, the Department was not legally obliged to defend. Nonetheless, the Department presented evidence to support its assertion that uncommitted funds in the general revenue category do not exist. Having proved it more than once, the Department should not incur taxpayers’ expense in proving it again in each case where denial is based on the same premise. The Recommended Order is attached to and incorporated herein by reference. | adopt its findings of fact and conclusions of law. | specifically adopt the following conclu- sions of law to guide presiding officers in future cases involving the existence and use of general funds for developmental services. As a conclusion of law, | agree with the ALJ in Destiny Smith v. Department of Children and Family Services, Case No. 00-4539, that Chapter 393, Florida Statutes, pro- vides a scheme for addressing the needs of developmentally disabled persons in Florida. | also agree with the ALJ in that case and in the instant case that Section 393.066(4), Florida Statutes, specifically provides that the Department's provision of developmental services is limited by the availability of funds. Indeed, Section 216.311, Florida Statutes, makes it illegal for any state agency to spend money in excess of its appropriation, and Florida’s District Courts of Appeal have reversed circuit court decisions requiring an agency to provide services when funds were lacking. Department of Juvenile Justice v, C.M., 704 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 4" DCA 1998); Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Brooke, 573 So.2d 363 (Fla. 1** DCA 1991). Moreover, the Department's established priorities in the FY 1999-2000 Spending Plan are consistent with the Legislature’s proviso language in the 1999 and 2000 General Appropriations Act, and this plan was reiterated for fiscal year 2000-2001 in a depart- mental memorandum dated May 22, 2000. As a conclusion of law, therefore, the spending Plans set forth a lawful method of deciding priorities for the receipt of services by persons who are eligible for enrollment in the Department's Developmental Disabilities Program. Such reasonable prioritization decisions must be upheld. See Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. V.L., 583 So.2d 765, 767 (Fla. 5" DCA 991). The propriety of the Department's plan for spending general revenue funds in the provision of developmental services has now been established as a matter of law. That conclusion of law, coupled with the Statutory prohibition against spending funds in excess of an appropriation, means that the Department will henceforth accord Section 120.57(2) proceedings to petitioners who challenge these appropriation and spending decisions in the future. In addition, the challengers will be required to make a prima facie showing, before the Department will be required to defend, that the conclusion should be overturned. Florida Dept. of Transp. v. J.W.C. Co, Inc., 396 So.2d 778 (Fla. 1 DCA 1981). It is hereby ORDERED that developmental services are denied in Case No. 00- 4255 and Case No. 00-4675. DONE and ORDERED this IP Aay of Aevelh , 2001, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. A ‘ Keer KATHLEEN A. KEARNEY, Secretary Department of Children and Family Copies of this Final Order are being furnished to: Barbara J. Staros John R. Perry Administrative Law Judge District 2 Legal Counsel Division of Administrative Hearings Department of Children and Families The DeSoto Building 2639 North Monroe Street 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, FL 32399-2949 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3060 Mac McCoy Ryan Flint Developmental Disabilities Program c/o Madeline Flint Department of Children and 1327 Conservancy Drive East Family Services Tallahassee, FL 32312 2639 North Monroe Street, Suite 140-A Tallahassee, FL 32399-2949 NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL A party who is adversely affected by this final order is entitled to judicial review. To initiate judicial review, the party seeking it must file one copy of a “Notice of Appeal” with the Agency Clerk. The party seeking judicial review must also file another copy of the “Notice of Appeal,” accompanied by the filing fee required by law, with the First District Court of Appeal in Tallahassee, Florida, or with the District Court of Appeal in the district where the party resides. The Notices must be filed within thirty (30) days of the rendition of this final order. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ! HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and copy of the foregoing FINAL ORDER has been sent by U.S. Mail or by hand delivery to each of the persons named above on this PA ay of Yl , 2001. Virginia Daire, Agency Clerk t Department of Children and Families 1317 Winewood Blvd. Bldg. 2 Room 204X Tallahassee, FL 32399-0700 ' The date of the “rendition” of this Final Order is the date that is stamped on its first page. The Notices of Appeal must be received on or before the thirtieth day after that date. 4

Docket for Case No: 00-004675

Orders for Case No: 00-004675