STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
MERRIE J. LEE CONSTRUCTION )
COMPANY, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
vs. ) CASE NO. 88-6018
) STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF ) GENERAL SERVICES, )
)
Respondent. )
)
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Notice was provided and on February 27, 1989 in Tallahassee, Florida, a formal hearing was held in this case under the authority of Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes. Charles C. Adams was the Hearing Officer. This Recommended Order is being entered following the receipt and review of the transcript and exhibits. The transcript was filed on March 16, 1989. Proposed recommended orders of the parties, filed on March 31, 1989, have also been considered. The fact finding in those proposals is discussed in an Appendix to this Recommended Order.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner: John C. Pelham, Esquire
Pennington, Wilkinson, Dunlap and Camp 30375-A Capital Circle, Northeast
Post Office Box 13527 Tallahassee, Florida 32317-3527
For Respondent: Stephen S. Mathues, Esquire
Office of General Counsel Department of General Services Room 452, Larson Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0955
ISSUE
The issues in this case concern the question of the entitlement of the Petitioner to certification as a Minority Business Enterprise within the meaning of Chapter 288, Florida Statutes and Rule 13-8.005, Florida Administrative Code. In particular, the issue to be resolved is whether Merrie J. Lee, the majority person within this corporation and owner of more than 51 percent of the stock, controls the management and daily operations of the corporation.
FINDINGS OF FACT
On July 28, 1988, the Respondent received an application from Merrie J. Lee Construction Company, Petitioner, requesting certification as a Minority
Business Enterprise under the authority of Chapter 288, Florida Statutes and Rule 13-8.005, Florida Administrative Code. Merrie J. Lee is the sole director of that corporation and is the minority person within the corporation, by virtue of the fact that she is a female. She is also the president of the corporation. Lee M. Brown, a non-minority person, is the vice-president. William V. Lee, the brother to Merrie J. Lee is the secretary/treasurer to the corporation. He is a non-minority person.
The business of Merrie J. Lee Construction Company is underground utilities.
When the corporation was formed Merrie J. Lee contributed $140, Lee M. Brown $100 and William V. Lee $100, as capitalization. Of the 10,000 stock shares, 1,000 have been issued. At the inception of the corporation Merrie J. Lee held 52 percent of the stock. She now holds 68 percent of the stock in that her father Wayne E. Lee bade a gift to his daughter of his 16 percent of the stock shares that had been issued. This arrangement was made following the request for certification. As a result, Merrie J. Lee owns 68 percent of the issued stock shares, her brother owns 16 percent and Lee Brown owns 16 percent.
Petitioner is a small business corporation with less than 25 full-time employees. It operates the business at an address of 1136 Nestling Court, Gulf Breeze, Florida 32561. This is the residence address of Ms. Lee and has been provided to her rent-free from her father Wayne E. Lee who owns the property.
Merrie J. Lee Construction Company is a Florida corporation having been incorporated on May 3, 1988.
Thus far, the work that the company has performed has been in the public right-of-way. The work that has been done by the Petitioner has been conducted in Santa Rosa, Escambia and Okaloosa Counties in Florida.
Under the terms of the Articles of Incorporation, Article Nine, the power to adopt, alter or amend or repeal By-Laws is vested in the shareholders. Merrie J. Lee holds the majority position among the shareholders.
Article III, Section 1, of the By-Laws points out that the function of the corporation as an entity shall be exercised by or under the authority of and the business affairs of the corporation shall be managed under the direction of the Board of Directors. In this instance, that means Merrie J. Lee, the sole director.
Article IV, Section 2, of the By-Laws provides in part that the officers of the corporation shall have the following duties:
THE PRESIDENT shall be the chief executive officer of the corporation, shall have general and active management of the business and affairs of the corporation subject to the directions of the Board of Directors, and shall preside at all meetings of the shareholders and Board of Directors.
THE SECRETARY shall have custody of, and maintain, all of the corporate records except the financial records; shall record the minutes of all meetings of the shareholders
and the Board of Directors, send all notices of meetings out, and perform such other duties as may be prescribed by the Board of Directors or the President.
THE TREASURER shall have custody of the corporate funds and financial records, shall keel full and accurate accounts of receipts and disbursements and render accounts thereof at the annual meetings of the shareholders and whenever else required by the Board of Directors or the President, and shall perform such other duties as may be prescribed by the Board of Directors or the President.
Article III, Section 10, of the By-Laws provides that a majority of the number of directors fixed by the By-Laws shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. The act of the majority of the directors present at the meeting which constitutes the quorum shall be the act of the Board of Directors. This means that in this corporation in which there is only one director by the terms of the legal documentation, Merrie J. Lee controls the corporation.
In actuality given the limited experience which Merrie J. Lee has had in the conduct of an underground utilities business; the similarity of this business to that of her father, a company known as Utility Service Company, which specializes in underground utility construction; the familial relationship between Merrie J. Lee and her brother and father, the latter two persons having substantial influence in the business affairs of the Petitioner; the reliance upon her father for financial support; the necessity to trade upon his reputation in the business community to attract jobs and the close relationship between her father's corporation and the Petitioner corporation concerning employees and equipment, meaningful control of Merrie J. Lee Construction Company on the part of Merrie J. Lee, the minority person, cannot be found.
Examples of this close affiliation concerns the fact that, at present, Merrie J. Lee is a full-time, salaried employee of the Utility Service Company, which is owned by Wayne Lee and William Lee. Her duties with that company include answering the phone, bookkeeping, paying bills, and handling radio traffic. She has no function as a corporate officer with Utility Service Company or any other company excepting Merrie J. Lee Construction Company. In her position with Utility Service Company she is not called upon to sign checks.
Her work with Utility Service Company commenced in 1985. At this time she is training a replacement with the expectation of taking a full-time position with Merrie J. Lee Construction Company.
Prior to her affiliation with Utility Service Company Merrie J. Lee had worked for Gulf Isles Utility Company, a water and sewer company, owned and operated by her father. Her duties with Gulf Isles Utility Company included answering the phone, attending customer complaints, reading meters and turning service on and off. Before her time of employment with Gulf Isles Utility Company Ms. Lee had worked part-time with Gulf Island National Seashore on Pensacola Beach, Florida and her duties included registering campers and assisting those campers during their stay at the park. She also collected toll fees from the campers. Ms. Lee has worked in a bait and tackle shop in the past and as a part-time daycare worker.
Merrie J. Lee has a high school diploma and attended both Pensacola Junior College and Stephens College in Columbia, Missouri. She did not obtain degrees following her high school education.
Having grown up in a family in which the father was actively involved in the underground utility business, Merrie J. Lee had the occasion to make trips to job sites with her father, as a child, and has had that sort of acquaintenanceship with the underground utilities work in her adult life.
Ms. Lee has obtained occupational contractor's licenses from Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties or caused that to be done.
Ms. Lee is not intimately familiar with the field work aspects of the underground utilities business. She is more familiar with the attempt to gain business, negotiation of contracts, preparation and submission of bids, purchasing of goods, equipment and services, hiring and firing of employees and keeping financial and business records of the corporation and participating in decisions about the progress of work. Her strongest understanding of the underground utilities business relates to the financial and business record aspects.
In the bid preparation by Merrie J. Lee Construction Company, this is joint effort involving Ms. Lee, Wayne Lee and Lee Brown. Lee Brown is also employed as an estimator at Utility Service Company in addition to his association with Merrie J. Lee Construction Company. Bid preparation at Utility Service Company is also a joint effort. In that circumstance at Utility Service Company, Ms. Lee checks suppliers by phone, and checks mathematical extensions of prices. Her participation in the bid process at Merrie J. Lee Construction Company, in its short history, having examined her explanation of that arrangement, does not appear to be significantly different than her role at Utility Service Company, with the exception that she is more interested in that process and continues to gain experience in this process with the passage of time. In any event, one could not say that Ms. Lee is a mainstay in the bid process within Merrie J. Lee Construction Company and she has conceded this point. Without the assistance of others Merrie J. Lee does not seem capable of making critical choices about the bidding at this time.
In conjunction with the job foreman, Ms. Lee is involved in scheduling the sequence of construction work. Merrie J. Lee does not go to the job sites on a daily basis. She does visit on occasion. Her daily contacts are by phone in discussion with the foreman concerning progress of work and the need for further materials. She and the field supervisor are both involved in arranging delivery of materials to the job site. Wayne Lee is also involved in the ordering of supplies and materials for job sites.
Ms. Lee in her testimony made some explanations about the type of equipment necessary to install underground utilities and gave some description of what function an underdrain pipe fulfills.
In relying upon her father as a source of guidance, she has as a resource a man who is licensed by the State of Florida, Department of Professional Regulation as a certified plumbing contractor within the meaning of Subsection 48.105(3)(m) and 489.115, Florida Statutes. Mr. Lee also has a degree in civil engineering and is a registered professional engineer, a registered land surveyor in Florida, a certified Class C water treatment operator in Florida and a certified Class C wastewater treatment operator in
Florida. All total he has 35 years of experience in underground utility construction.
Her brother William Lee has been in the construction business since the time he was a young man and has considerable experience in the underground utility business. He has learned his business with extensive on-the-job training, training which Ms. Merrie J. Lee has not undergone. William Lee is a licensed plumbing contractor with the Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board. William V. Lee is being groomed to take over Utility Service Company from his father, Wayne E. Lee.
At the time of the hearing, eight persons were employed by Merrie J. Lee Construction Company, in the sense of those who were on the payroll. These employees had been hired by Merrie J. Lee and her father. Among those persons was Greg Thorsen, the foreman of one of the jobs that the company was involved with. Calvin Talbert a pipe layer on that job and his helper, Clarence Davis. Another person in that crew referred to as a hooker, is Jeffrey Underwood. A further person in that crew, is Willie Smith, who works a compacting machine. Donnie Silcox is a foreman on the same job that Thorsen is associated with. His helper is Louis Schwent. Another helper on the job is Darren Watson.
Kevin Dixon worked on this job, but was fired and replaced by Watson. In the firing Silcox had checked with Ms. Lee concerning the fact that Dixon was not performing adequately and Ms. Lee told Silcox that persons who would not work should not be left on the payroll and that Silcox should dismiss Dixon from his employment, which was done. Ms. Lee had hired Willie Smith, Jeffrey Underwood, Kevin Dixon, Gregg Thorsen, and Donnie Silcox among others. Greg Thorsen, Calvin Talbert, Clarence Davis, Willie Smith, Donnie Silcox and Louis Schwent had worked for Utility Service Company in the past.
Given that the company has just begun, it does own a great deal of equipment. It has rented most equipment in order to fulfill its obligations under contract. One piece of equipment that is being purchased is a pickup truck, which it bought from Utility Service Company, based upon the agreement to pay the balance of a note owed on this truck which was in the amount of $4,000. This was a favorable arrangement for Petitioner. A considerable amount of the equipment that is being used has been rented at favorable rates from Utility Service Company. This would include a hydraulic excavator, a bulldozer, a rubber-tired backhoe and a front-end loader, whose operators were employees of Utility Service Company. Utility Service Company allows the Petitioner the free use of telephones and radios.
Wayne E. Lee has loaned the corporation $1200, which is not an interest bearing loan. In addition the house in which Ms. Lee lives, belonging to Wayne E. Lee, stands as security for a $20,000 loan which Ms. Lee negotiated on behalf of Merrie J. Lee Construction Company. Wayne E. Lee cosigned the note. Ms. Lee is personally accountable for debts outstanding in the corporation and for her company's performance under jobs under contract.
At the time this application for recognition as a minority business was made four persons had the ability to sign checks written by the corporation. They included Merrie J. Lee, William V. Lee, Wayne E. Lee and Lee Brown.
Because of concerns expressed by the Respondent's employee in the review of this application, all individuals, other than Merrie J. Lee, have been removed as persons who have the authority to write checks on the business account of Merrie
J. Lee Construction Company. During the pendency of the time in which persons other than Merrie J. Lee could have written checks, they did not.
Merrie J. Lee Construction Company is not registered with the Construction Industry Licensing Board.
The time devoted to Merrie J. Lee Construction Company by her brother and father is in the interest of assisting that company without the expectation of compensation.
Wayne E. Lee interceded with the Chadbourne Company owner, to arrange for Merrie J. Lee Construction Company to act as a subcontractor in a job in which Merrie J. Lee Construction Company expects to be paid $495,000 under the terms of the contract. This arrangement between the Chadbourne Company and Merrie J. Lee Construction Company as brought about by the efforts of Wayne E. Lee, meant that Merrie J. Lee Construction Company would not have to provide a bond. This was vital to the interest of Merrie J. Lee Construction Company because it was not in a position to bond it in that amount.
In addition to the $495,000 contract as a subcontractor to Edward M. Chadbourne, in work at the Pensacola, Florida, airport, Merrie J. Lee Construction Company has had three other jobs at the time of the hearing in this cause. The first job was for approximately $1,200 with Lost Bay Trading Company in which, after consultation with her father, Merrie J. Lee arranged for this work by consultation with the principals in the Lost Bay Trading Company. The second contract was for $24,000 of work at the University of West Florida. The third contract was for $54,800 with Panhandle Paving Company. Bonds were not required in these three contracts either.
The application here was reviewed by Raymond Lawrence Bryant, an employee of the Department of General Services in the Minority Business Assistance Office. He concluded that Merrie J. Lee as the minority person within the corporation, did not control the management and daily operations of Merrie J. Lee Construction Company as envisioned by Section 288.703(2), Florida Statutes. He also expressed the opinion that the business was not currently performing a useful business function as defined by Section 287.0943(1), Florida Statutes. That position was modified with the advent of the four contracts which have been discussed. In essence, the idea of denying certification based upon the belief that the-company does not perform a useful business function has been withdrawn. In connection with the idea of lack of control, Bryant identified a number of criteria within Rule 13-8.005(3)(a)-(g), Florida Administrative Code as reasons for denial. This speaks to provisions that were in effect at the time of the submission of the application. A copy of the Bryant report related to this project may be found as Joint Exhibit number 2, admitted into evidence. His summarizing remarks were submitted on October 14, 1988. His suggestion of denial was followed up by correspondence of Carolyn Wilson-Newton, Minority Business Assistance Coordinator for the Department of General Services. This correspondence date is November 2, 1988 and describes the intent to deny the certification.
Subsequently, the provisions at Rule 13-8.005(3)(a)-(g), Florida Administrative Code, were amended on November 17, 1988.
On November 23, 1988 the Petitioner filed its petition requesting a formal hearing under Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes to contest the denial of the application for Minority Business Enterprise certification. The case was then sent to the Division of Administrative Hearings and a hearing was conducted on the date set out before.
The amendments to Rule 13-8.005(3)(a)-(g), Florida Administrative Code are refinements to the previous rules and are in keeping with incipient agency policy that had been developing before the advent of the changes to the rule.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties to this action in accordance with Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.
Petitioner timely requested a Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes hearing.
Petitioner has the burden of proving its entitlement to certification as a Minority Business Enterprise. This requirement for proof is announced in Rule 28-6.008, Florida Administrative Code and Florida Department of Transportation v. J.W.C. Company, Inc., 396 So.2d 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
The proof is measured against the satisfaction of the terms of Section 288.703(2), Florida Statutes, which says:
"Minority business enterprise" means any small business concern as defined in subsection (1) which is organized to engage in commercial transactions, which is domiciled in Florida, and which is at least
51 percent owned by minority persons and whose management and daily operations are controlled by such persons. A minority business enterprise may primarily involve the practice of a profession.
Merrie J. Lee is the minority person within the corporation, the company engages in commercial transactions and is domiciled in Florida. Merrie
J. Lee is a 68 percent share holder. However, she does not control the management and daily operations of the company.
In this connection, Section 28.703(4), Florida Statutes contemplates that the Respondent is held responsible for considering the question of certification of a Minority Business Enterprise and to effect the purposes of that responsibility, Respondent has promulgated Rule 13-8.005(3), Florida Administrative Code. Within that rule are set forth the criteria for examining the issue of the quality of the control of the management and daily operations on the part of the minority person. Pertinent to this case are those provisions set forth in Rule 13-8.005(3)(a)-(g), Florida Administrative Code, in effect at the time of application, which state:
An applicant must establish that the minority owners possess control over the management and daily operations of the business. The department will consider the following factors:
Whether the minority owners have control over the purchase of goods, equipment, business inventory and services needed in the day-to-day operation of the business.
Whether the minority owners have the authority to hire and fire employees.
Whether the minority owners have a knowledge of the financial structure of the business and control over all financial affairs.
Whether the minority owners control business accounts - checking, savings, and other financial affairs.
Whether the minority owners have the capability, knowledge, and experience required to make decisions regarding that particular type of work.
Whether the minority owners have displayed independence and initiative in seeking and negotiating contracts, accepting and rejecting bids and in conducting all major aspects of the business.
Whether the minority owners are current employees of the non-minority business corporation or individual or
partnership which has a significant ownership in the business firm applying fob certification.
The theories expressed in the amendments to Rule 13-8.005(3)(a)-(g), Florida Administrative Code, effective November 17, 1988 had been emerging as policy at the time this application was considered. Although they are not requirements which must be met, per se, in this instance, they serve the reasonable purpose of a more comprehensive explanation of what is meant by the rules that do apply. Again, this refers to those rules existing prior to amendment of November 17, 1988. This refinement or further explanation set out in the amendment of November 17, 1988 is to this effect:
An applicant must establish that the minority owners possess control over the management and daily operations of the business. The control exercised by minority owners shall be real, substantial and continuing, and shall go beyond mere pro forma control. Neither shall the discretion of minority owners be subject to any formal or informal restrictions (including, but not limited to, by-law provisions, partnership agreements, trust agreements or charter, requirements for cumulative voting rights or otherwise) which would vary or usurp managerial discretion customary in the industry. If the owners of the firm who are not minority persons are disproportionately responsible for the operations of the firm, then the firms is not controlled by minority
persons. The previous and existing managerial relationship between and among all owners, especially those who are familially related, and the timing of management changes shall be reviewed to ensure that the minority owner has sufficient management responsibilities and capabilities to maintain control of the business while delegating responsibilities and to hire and fire key management personnel, especially those with whom he/she also has a familial relationship. In such instances, the minority owner will substantiate that he/she has caused the direction of the management of the business through his/her demonstrable knowledge and capability. The Department will consider the following factors over which the minority owner shall have dominant responsibility:
Whether the minority owners have control over the purchase of goods, equipment, business inventory and services needed in the day-to-day operation of the business.
Whether the minority owners have the authority to hire and fire employees. In instances where minority owners do not currently exercise their authority to hire and fire employees, the minority owners shall demonstrate that their knowledge and capability is sufficient to evaluate the professional skills of employees' performance in the given industry.
Whether the minority owners have knowledge of the financial affairs of the business.
Whether the minority owners control all financial affairs. The ability of any
non-minority or employee to sign checks and enter into financial transactions on behalf of the business shall be considered in determining financial control. The minority owners shall expressly control the investments, loans to/from stockholders, bonding, payment of general business loans, payroll, and establishment of lines of credit.
Whether the minority owners have the managerial and technical capability, knowledge, training, education and experience required to make decisions regarding that particular type of work. In determining the applicant's eligibility, the Department will review the prior employment and educational backgrounds of the minority owners, while reviewing the professional skills, training
and/or licensure required for the given industry.
Whether the minority owners have displayed independence and initiative in seeking, negotiating and executing contracts, accepting and rejecting bids and in conducting all major aspects of the business. In instances where the minority owners do not directly seek to negotiate contracts, prepare estimates, or coordinate with contracting officials, but claim to approve or reject bids and contractual agreements through affixation of their signatures, the minority owners shall demonstrate that they have the knowledge and expertise to independently make contractual decisions.
In examining these criteria and the further explanation offered by the amendments to the subject rule, seen as emerging policy, Rule 13-8.005(3)(a)- (e), Florida Administrative Code in effect at the time of the application, has not been satisfied. Ms. Lee did not demonstrate that she has the capability, knowledge and experience required to make the decisions regarding the particular type of work. Her understanding of this business is limited. Without the assistance of others who are affiliated with utility service companies, especially her father, Lee Brown and the field foreman, she does not appear to have sufficient understanding to satisfy this criterion. Furthermore, within the meaning of Rule 13-8.005(3)(f), Florida Administrative Code in effect at the time of the application, Merrie J. Lee has not displayed the kind of independence and initiative in seeking and negotiating contracts and in accepting and rejecting bids, and conducting all major aspects of the business that one would expect of a person in control of the management and daily operations. She has a limited understanding of the bid process and the construction phase of the business. Again, without the advise and expertise of her father, brother and Lee Brown, it does not appear that she could manage and control the business. Although she intends to remain in her position at an utility service company, she is employed in that non-minority business corporation and one of its principals, her brother had a significant ownership in the Merrie J. Lee Construction Company, as described in Rule 13-8.005(3)(g), Florida Administrative Code, in effect at the time of the application.
In addition to the necessity to rely upon her father for assistance in running her business related to choices about jobs, without his intervention it does not appear that the Pensacola Airport job would have been obtained. This job constitutes the most apparent indication of success for this business to date. Moreover, the business office of the corporation is a house that belongs to the father. Utility Service Company equipment and operators have been used in performing the work of Merrie J. Lee Construction Company. Employees of Merrie J. Lee Construction Company were affiliated with Utility Service Company in the past. Her father has provided financial support in the amount of $1200 and has allowed the residence, which he owns, to service as security on a
$20,000 note as well as signing the note himself. By contrast, Merrie J. Lee in terms of her understanding and financial contribution has not offered a great deal and certainly not enough to demonstrate that she is in control of the management and daily operations of Merrie J. Lee Construction Company.
The corporate papers which identify her status within that corporation do not change this opinion. See Chapter 607, Florida Statutes. While on paper
she controls the majority of stockshares issued, and is the sole director, her company could not function without the substantial assistance of her father and his business concern, which is also related to underground utilities and provides equipment for free or favorable rates.
Other terms of Rule 13-8.005(3), Florida Administrative Code in effect at the time of application were satisfied.
In summary, Merrie J. Lee is moving in the direction of effective management and control but has not reached that place as yet.
Based upon a consideration of the facts found and the conclusions of law reached, it is,
RECOMMENDED: that a final order be entered which denies Petitioner's request for certification as a Minority Business Enterprise.
DONE and ENTERED this 5th day of May, 1989, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.
CHARLES C. ADAMS
Hearing Officer
Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building
1230 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550
(904) 488-9675
Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 5th day of Mat, 1989.
APPENDIX
The following discussion is made of the proposed facts of the parties.
Petitioner's Facts
Paragraphs through 5 and the first two sentences to paragraph 6 are subordinate to facts found. The last sentence in paragraph 6 is contrary to facts found.
Paragraph 7 is rejected to the extent that it creates the impression that Merrie J. Lee has sufficient understanding of the bidding and technical side of the business to be effectively in control of the management and daily operations of the corporation.
Paragraphs 8 through 12 are subordinate to facts found.
Paragraph 13 is subordinate to facts found with the exception of the second sentence which is contrary to facts found.
Paragraph 14 is subordinate to facts found.
Respondent's Facts
Paragraphs 1 through 6 are subordinate to facts found as are all sentences in paragraph 7, excepting the last. The last sentence in paragraph 7 is unnecessary to the resolution of the dispute.
Paragraphs 8 through 16 are subordinate to facts found. Paragraph 17 is unnecessary to the resolution of the dispute. Paragraphs 18 through 20 are subordinate to facts found.
Paragraphs 21 through 23 are not necessary to the resolution of the dispute.
COPIES FURNISHED:
John C. Pelham, Esquire Pennington, Wilkinson, Dunlap
and Camp
30375-A Capital Circle, N.E. Post Office Box 13527 Tallahassee, Florida 32317-3527
Stephen S. Mathues, Esquire Office of General Counsel Department of General Services Room 452, Larson Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0955
Ronald W. Thomas, Executive Director Department of General Services
133 Larson Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0955
| Issue Date | Proceedings |
|---|---|
| May 05, 1989 | Recommended Order (hearing held , 2013). CASE CLOSED. |
| Issue Date | Document | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Jun. 29, 1989 | Agency Final Order | |
| May 05, 1989 | Recommended Order | Applicant not in control of company so not entitled to be recognized as a minority business enterprise. |
