STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
FLORIDA BOARD OF REGENTS, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
vs. ) CASE NO. 75-139RP
)
GERALD LEWIS, Comptroller, )
Department of Banking and )
Finance, State of Florida, )
)
Respondent. )
)
FINAL ORDER
This proceeding was instituted on the petition of Florida Board of Regents seeking an administrative determination of the validity of a proposed rule under Chapter 120.54, F.S. The petition was filed in the Division of Administrative Hearings on March 26, 1975. The rule challenged was originally proposed in January of 1975 and a public hearing was held regarding this proposed rule on March 11, 1975. Subsequent to the initially proposed rule, by letter on April 1, 1975, the proposed rule was modified to its presently propounded form which reads:
(Rule 3A-6.02(2) The following information shall be clearly shown by proper documentation
and furnished to the department on each invoice:
(a) the date of receipt of the invoice by the agency; (b) the date that the goods or services were received; and, (c) the date the goods were inspected and approved as acceptable by the agency.
Although the rule as originally proposed was formulated in January and notice thereof under 120.54 was published in the Florida Administrative Weekly more than 14 days before the petition in this case was filed, the modified rule was proposed within 14 days of the filing of this petition.
Chapter 120.54(3) states in part: "The request seeking a determination under this section shall be in writing and must be received within 14 days after the date of publication of the notice." With regard to the timeliness of this petition, the parties have agreed it has been filed within the time frame of the above quoted section of 120.54.
Petitioner, Board of Regents, challenges the proposed rule on both grounds provided for in 120.54(3): "That the proposed rule is an invalid exercise of validly delegated legislative authority; or, that the proposed rule is an exercise of invalidly delegated legislative authority."
A pre-hearing conference was held on April 2, 1975, wherein the parties stipulated and agreed to certain issues including: (a) that the Petitioner was substantially affected by the proposed rule; (b) that the sole issue to be decided was the validity of proposed Rule 3A-6.02(2) as amended; (c) the parties waived the requirement of 14 days' notice for final hearing as set forth in Florida Statutes 120.57(1)(a).
On April 22, a final hearing was conducted on this matter. At that hearing evidence was introduced relating to the additional burden placed upon the state universities by requiring the information requested in the proposed rule to be placed upon vouchers submitted to the Comptroller's Office for payment. The impetus for this proposed rule is Chapter 74-7, F.S., which requires agencies to maintain the above information in its own files. The proposed rule does nothing more than require that information to be furnished to the Comptroller's Office.
The Petitioner acknowledges it is required by statute to keep this information. It challenges the authority of the Comptroller to adopt a rule requiring that this information be furnished on vouchers submitted to his office for payment. The position of the Comptroller is that his is more than a ministerial duty; that he is the chief fiscal officer of the state and has a supervisory responsibility to determine that accounts are properly paid and that vouchers are prepared and submitted according to law. The Comptroller cites Article 4, Section 4, of the Florida Constitution, which states in part: "d. The comptroller shall serve as the chief fiscal officer of the state, and shall settle and approve accounts against the state."
Testimony presented at the final hearing was relatively brief and not in great dispute. It was acknowledged by witnesses called by the Petitioner that the information requested in the proposed rule is kept by their agencies and that at least the University of Florida is presently complying with the proposed rule. Mr. Joseph Hough, Comptroller, University of Florida, testified that the University was presently able to comply with the proposed rule without increasing their normal staff. Mr. Olcie Harrell, Associate Director of Business Systems, Florida Board of Regents, stated that to comply with the proposed rule would require the additional time of 5 to 10 seconds per voucher.
The proposed rule is challenged both as an invalid exercise of validly delegated legislative authority and as an exercise of invalidly delegated legislative authority. The issues in this matter turn upon whether the Comptroller has the legislative authority to adopt this rule. That question is determined by the statutory duties and responsibilities of his office.
Chapter 74-7, F.S. (215.422) states in part:
The voucher authorizing payment of an invoice submitted to an agency of the state, required by law to be filed with the comptroller, shall be filed with the comptroller Not later than 15 days after receipt of the invoice and receipt, inspection, and approval
of the goods or services, except that in the case of a bona fide dispute the voucher shall contain a statement of the dispute and authorize payment only in the amount not disputed.
If a voucher filed within the 15-day period is returned by the Department of Banking and
Finance because of an error, it shall [nevertheless] be deemed timely filed. The 15-day filing requirement may be waived by the Department of Banking and Finance on a showing of exceptional circumstances in accordance with rules and regulations of the department.
(3) Each agency of the state which is required by law to file vouchers with the comptroller shall keep a record of tile date of receipt of the invoice, dates of receipt, inspection and approval of the goods or services, date of filing of the voucher, and date of mailing of the warrant in payment thereof. If the voucher is not filed or
the warrant is not mailed within the time required, an explanation in writing by the agency head shall be attached to the voucher.
(5) The Department of Banking and Finance is authorized and directed to adopt and promulgate rules' and regulations to implement this section.
Section 20.12, F.S., installs the Comptroller as the head of the Department of Banking and Finance and Section 20.05 gives the Comptroller some vague rule-making authority. The rule-making authority in Subsection 5 of Section 215.422, F.S., is broad and gives the Comptroller the responsibility to implement the act by rule and regulation.
The Comptroller's fiscal responsibilities were described partly in Florida Development Commission v. Dickinson, 229 So.2d 6. In view of the above authorities, it is clear that the Comptroller's responsibilities as head of the Department of Banking and Finance are supervisory rather than ministerial.
while no one contends that the Comptroller may refuse to honor a proper voucher, he certainly has the authority to prescribe the method and means by which payment will be accomplished. Further, Section 215.42, F.S., states:
The State Comptroller may require proof as he deems necessary of delivery and receipt of purchases before honoring any voucher for payment from appropriations made in
the General Appropriations Act or otherwise provided by law.
Finally, Section 17.14, F.S., states:
The Department of Finance may prescribe the forms of all papers, vouchers, reports and returns and the manner of keeping the accounts and papers to be used by the officers of this state or other persons having accounts, claims or demands against the state or entrusted with the collection of any of the revenue thereof or any demand due the same, which form shall be pursued by such officer or other persons.
In view of the above, it is the conclusion of this hearing officer that the above challenged rule is a valid exercise of validly delegated legislative authority.
Wherefore, the petition filed in this matter is Denied. DONE and ORDERED this 15th day of May, 1975.
KENNETH G. OERTEL, Director
Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304
(904) 488-9675
COPIES FURNISHED:
Bill Corbett, Esquire Office of the Comptroller The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32304
Gene T. Sellers, Esquire
Counsel, State Board of Education
400 Barnett Bank Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304
| Issue Date | Proceedings |
|---|---|
| May 15, 1975 | Recommended Order (public hearing held March 11, 1975). CASE CLOSED. |
| Issue Date | Document | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| May 15, 1975 | DOAH Final Order | Challenged rule is valid exercise of delegated legislative authority and should be upheld. |
