The Issue The issue in this case is whether Petitioner has just cause to terminate the employment of Respondent.
Findings Of Fact Mr. Wheeler was employed as a teacher with Lee County School District (Lee County) from 1989 to May 6, 2004. From 1994 to 2003, Mr. Wheeler taught driver education at Lehigh Senior High School (Lehigh). Mr. Wheeler taught health at Lehigh during the 2003-2004 school year. In addition to teaching at Lehigh during 2000 to 2004, Mr. Wheeler owned a driver training school and traffic school. When Mr. Wheeler taught driver education at Lehigh, he was authorized by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) to be a third-party tester. As a third-party tester, Mr. Wheeler was allowed to test secondary school students on their knowledge of road rules and road signs and their road skills. Mr. Wheeler was authorized to issue Driver Education Licensing Assistance Program (DELAP) waivers to his high school students who passed the tests and were applying for a driver license so that they could bypass the driver license tests conducted by the DHSMV. The DELAP waivers had to be signed by an authorized representative of Lehigh. Mr. Wheeler misused his authorization as a third-party tester and granted DELAP waivers to students in his private driving school, who were not high school students. Sometime in the summer of 2003, Mr. Wheeler became the subject of a criminal investigation concerning the issuance of DELAP waivers to students through his employment at Lehigh to students in his private driving school. On August 6, 2003, the DHSMV received a complaint against Mr. Wheeler concerning his issuance of a DELAP waiver to a person who was not a high school student. On the same date, the DHSMV stopped accepting any DELAP waivers issued by Mr. Wheeler. On August 29, 2003, the Department of Education (DOE) notified Mr. Wheeler that a complaint had been filed against him, alleging that he had engaged in inappropriate conduct. On January 22, 2004, Mr. Wheeler was arrested on charges of driver license fraud. On April 16, 2004, a No Information Notice was filed by the State Attorney’s Office, advising the Clerk of the Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit that the State Attorney’s Office was declining to prosecute Mr. Wheeler. No further criminal actions were taken against Mr. Wheeler based on the issuance of DELAP waivers. By letter dated February 11, 2004, the DHSMV advised Mr. Wheeler that his certification as a commercial driving school instructor had been cancelled. In early 2004, Lee County began investigating Mr. Wheeler for possible disciplinary action regarding his issuance of DELAP waivers. By letter dated March 30, 2004, Lee County advised Mr. Wheeler that probable cause was found to discipline him and that a recommendation would be made to the Lee County superintendent of schools to terminate Mr. Wheeler’s employment. Mr. Wheeler resigned from his employment with Lee County effective May 6, 2004, citing that the reason for his resignation was personal reasons. Mr. Wheeler’s resignation was accepted by Lee County on the condition “that should [Mr. Wheeler] apply at a later time for employment with the District, the District in its sole and exclusive discretion, may refuse such application and/or deny him employment should it believe [Mr. Wheeler] has not been sufficiently rehabilitated in relation to the issues raised in the investigation which preceded his resignation.” Mr. Wheeler agreed to the condition imposed by Lee County. On May 11, 2004, Mr. Wheeler submitted an on-line application to the School Board for employment as an instructor. On his application he stated that he had 16 years of teaching experience. However, he listed his employment at Lehigh as commencing in 1994 and ending in 2000; his employment at Gulf Middle School as commencing in 1992 and ending in 1993; and his employment at Riverdale High School as commencing in 1989 and ending in 1992. The employment dates listed for these three schools totaled 11 years. Mr. Wheeler also listed that he had been employed from December 2000 to February 2004 as the owner- instructor of a private driving school. On his application, Mr. Wheeler listed the reason for terminating his employment with Lee County as personal. Although this reason is technically correct, Mr. Wheeler should have disclosed the circumstances under which he resigned, meaning that he should have disclosed that Lee County intended to discipline him and that he reached a settlement agreement in which he resigned for personal reasons. Mr. Wheeler listed Brian Botts, who was an assistant principal at Lehigh, as a reference. Although Mr. Botts completed a reference form, nothing on the form eluded to the problems that Mr. Wheeler had when he taught at Lee County. Mr. Wheeler submitted a resume to the School Board as part of his application package. The resume correctly listed his employment dates with Lee County and correctly listed his employment with Lehigh as commencing in 1994 and ending in 2004. In addition, Mr. Wheeler’s resume listed a year of employment at Temple Christian School in Connersville, Indiana. The number of years of teaching experience listed on the resume totaled 16 years as he had stated on his on-line application. On August 25, 2004, the School Board received a Verification of Teaching/Experience from Lee County, showing that Mr. Wheeler had been continuously employed by Lee County from 1989 to 2004. Mr. Wheeler was hired by the School Board as a substitute teacher effective August 18, 2004. Although Mr. Wheeler incorrectly listed the dates of employment at Lehigh on his on-line application, such incorrect listing was not intentional based on the evidence as a whole, particularly the submission of the resume as part of the application package, the listing of Brian Botts as a reference, and the statement on the on-line application that correctly showed the number of years Mr. Wheeler had been employed as a teacher. The School Board was not duped concerning the number of years that Mr. Wheeler had taught at Lehigh because the School Board had received an employment verification form from Lee County, which accurately showed the number of years that Mr. Wheeler had worked as a teacher at Lehigh. Although Mr. Wheeler did not intend to deceive the School Board about the number of years that he worked for Lee County, he should have at least informed the School Board of the circumstances surrounding his resignation from Lee County. Such information had a direct bearing on his qualifications for teaching and should have been disclosed. For the 2004-2005 school year, Mr. Wheeler worked for the School Board as a substitute teacher. Most of his teaching during this period was done at Immokalee High School (Immokalee). Mr. Manny Touron was the principal at Immokalee during the time Mr. Wheeler worked as a substitute teacher. Ms. Troy Kirkland, an assistant principal at Immokalee, was familiar with Mr. Wheeler’s work while he was substituting. By letter dated April 1, 2005, DOE notified Mr. Wheeler that a complaint had been filed with DOE, alleging that Mr. Wheeler had engaged in inappropriate conduct. DOE further advised Mr. Wheeler that an investigation was being conducted based on the allegations. In the summer of 2005, a full-time teaching position came open at Immokalee for a health teacher. Mr. Touron recommended Mr. Wheeler for the position. Mr. Touron completed a Recommendation/Personnel Action Form, indicating that he had contacted two references concerning Mr. Wheeler. One of the references was Ms. Kirkland. The other reference was Ms. Darlene Weber, who had worked with Mr. Wheeler at Lehigh. At the time Mr. Touron recommended Mr. Wheeler for the health teacher position, he was aware Mr. Wheeler had been arrested for fraud at one time. On July 18, 2004, Mr. Touron sent an e-mail to an investigator with the School Board’s Human Resources Department. The e-mail stated: Peter, I just sent a recommendation for Russell Wheeler for the position of Health. He has been subbing for us all year and has done a great job. He taught at Riverdale and Lehigh. At Lehigh there was an issue that he was arrested for fraud. Something to do with drivers [sic] licenses. I need to know if he has been cleared from that charge. I assume that he has because of his sub status. Please let me know. Two days later Mr. Touron received a reply from the investigator, stating that Mr. Wheeler had been cleared of the criminal charges. On July 22, 2005, Mr. Wheeler completed a Criminal Record form in which he omitted to say whether he had ever had a criminal record expunged. At some time, Mr. Wheeler did have his arrest records expunged, but he does not know when that was done. Mr. Wheeler was hired on an annual contract basis, effective August 3, 2005, as a full-time health teacher at Immokalee. In November 2005, a full-time position for a driving education teacher position came open at Immokalee. Mr. Touron recommended Mr. Wheeler for the position, and Mr. Wheeler’s assignment was changed from health teacher to driver education teacher. Ms. Debra Ogden, who was the coordinator of the driver education program, gave Mr. Wheeler an Application for Driver Education Teacher Certification as a Third Party Tester to complete and submit.1 Mr. Wheeler did not advise Ms. Ogden that his certification as a third-party tester had been cancelled when she asked him to complete and submit the application form. Mr. Wheeler submitted the application certification as a third- party tester, and the application was denied in December 2005. Ms. Ogden learned of the denial in January 2006. Ms. Ogden asked Mr. Wheeler about the denial of his application, and he explained that he had lost his certification as a third-party tester and that his certification as a commercial driving school instructor had been cancelled. He told her that he had had some problems in Lee County concerning DELAP waivers, but that he was trying to take care of the problem and was working on getting recertified as a third-party tester. Ms. Ogden contacted a driver education teacher at another school in Collier County and arranged to have that teacher do the third-party testing for the students at Immokalee. She advised Mr. Touron that she had arranged to have another teacher do the third-party testing for Mr. Wheeler. On April 3, 2006, the commissioner of education filed a six-count Administrative Complaint against Mr. Wheeler, alleging that Mr. Wheeler “engaged in inappropriate and unprofessional conduct in that he fraudulently issued waivers to individuals who were not students at Lehigh Senior High School but in fact were customers of his private business” and that he “resigned in lieu of termination.” The Administrative Complaint charged that Mr. Wheeler violated Subsections 1012.795(1)(c), 1012.795(1)(f), and 1012.795(1)(i), Florida Statutes (2003), and Florida Administrative Code Rules 6B-1.006(4)(c), 6B- 1.006(5)(a), and 6B-1.006(5)(h). When Mr. Wheeler received the Administrative Complaint, he did not advise any of the School Board’s administrators, including Mr. Touron, that an administrative complaint had been filed against him. On July 24, 2006, Mr. Wheeler and the commissioner of education entered into a settlement agreement (Settlement Agreement), which was contingent on being accepted by the Education Practices Commission (EPC). The Settlement Agreement stated that Mr. Wheeler “neither admits nor denies, but elects not to contest the allegations set forth in the [commissioner of education’s] Administrative Complaint.” Mr. Wheeler agreed to accept a letter of reprimand and to be placed on probation for two employment years. The Settlement Agreement further provided that, if Mr. Wheeler was currently employed as a teacher, the probation would begin upon the issuance of a final order by the EPC, accepting the Settlement Agreement. Among other conditions, the Settlement Agreement provided that Mr. Wheeler would contact DOE within ten days of the issuance of the final order and provide the name and address of his work site as well as the name, address, and telephone number of his immediate supervisor. The Settlement Agreement required Mr. Wheeler to “make arrangements for his immediate supervisor to provide the EPC with a true and accurate copy of each written annual performance evaluation or assessment prepared by his supervisor within ten (10) days of it[s] preparation.” At the time he entered into the Settlement Agreement, Mr. Wheeler did not advise any of the School Board’s administrators that he had executed a settlement agreement with the commissioner of education. The School Board gave Mr. Wheeler an annual contract for the 2006-2007 school year. By letter dated October 5, 2006, Mr. Wheeler was advised by the EPC that the Settlement Agreement had to be accepted by the EPC and that a final order would be issued by the EPC upon the EPC’s acceptance of the Settlement Agreement. The EPC filed its Final Order on February 8, 2007, accepting the Settlement Agreement. On February 20, 2007, Mr. Wheeler sent a facsimile transmission to Rita Healy, his probation officer with DOE, advising her that his supervisor was Mr. Touron and providing contact information. Mr. Touron was advised by Mr. Wheeler that a Final Order had been issued, placing Mr. Wheeler on probation for two years. Mr. Wheeler also told Mr. Touron that Mr. Touron would need to provide to DOE a copy of Mr. Wheeler’s annual evaluation when it was completed. On March 20, 2007, Ms. Healy advised Mr. Touron that a Final Order had been issued by the EPC, placing Mr. Wheeler on probation for two years. Ms. Healy sent a copy of the Final Order to Mr. Touron by facsimile transmission and by e-mail. For some unknown reason, the Final Order was never placed in Mr. Wheeler’s personnel file, In the 2006-2007 school year, Immokalee was on status as an “F” school. In order to rehabilitate the school, a new principal, Ms. Linda Salazar, was appointed as principal at Immokalee for the 2007-2008 school year. Ms. Salazar met with the faculty at Immokalee to determine which teachers she would retain for the 2007-2008 school year. She interviewed Mr. Wheeler, and there was no discussion concerning the Final Order that had been issued by the EPC, reprimanding Mr. Wheeler and placing him on probation for two years. Mr. Wheeler thought that Ms. Salazar knew about the disciplinary action against him because he had told Mr. Touron about the Final Order. Mr. Touron did not advise Ms. Salazar or the School Board’s Human Resources Department about the Final Order disciplining Mr. Wheeler. By letter dated March 15, 2007, Ms. Salazar notified Mr. Wheeler that he had been selected to teach at Immokalee for the 2007-2008 school year. His employment at Immokalee for the 2007-2008 school year was on an annual contract basis. Mr. Wheeler sent Ms. Healy a copy of his evaluation for the 2006-2007 school year after he received it in April 2007. Mr. Wheeler also sent a copy of his evaluation for the 2007-2008 school year to Ms. Healy. Although, the Settlement Agreement required that Mr. Wheeler make arrangements for his immediate supervisor to provide the EPC with a copy of the annual evaluation, Ms. Healy considered it to be Mr. Wheeler’s responsibility to make sure that she received copies of the evaluations, regardless of who actually sent them. There was no dispute regarding the authenticity of the evaluations which Mr. Wheeler provided to Ms. Healy. On June 11, 2008, Mr. Wheeler entered into a professional service contract with the School Board. Unlike the annual contracts, the professional service contract was to “be renewed each year in accordance with and subject to the provisions of F.S. §1012.33 and in conformity with Board policy and any applicable collective bargaining agreement then in place.” In August 2008, Mr. Wheeler again applied to the DHSMV for his third-party tester certification. On or about August 1, 2008, he dropped off the application for Ms. Salazar to sign as representative of Immokalee. At this time, Ms. Salazar was unaware that Mr. Wheeler’s third-party tester certification had been canceled and assumed that the application was a recertification document that teachers often left in her mail box to be signed. Ms. Salazar signed the application form. On September 9, 2008, Ms. Ogden sent an e-mail to Ms. Salazar, requesting that Ms. Salazar write a letter of recommendation for Mr. Wheeler for his third-party tester application. The e-mail stated: Hi, Linda, would you be willing to write a letter of support for Russ Wheeler to become a Third Party Tester through the DMV, so he can legally administer the written and road test and issue waivers for your students? I am not sure if you know the history, but there were charges brought against him in Lee Co. and the [sic] he is having trouble getting the state to allow him to become a Third Party Tester. I will be writing one for him and if you are willing, here is the contact information. . . . Ms. Salazar asked Mr. Wheeler to come and talk about the charges that had been brought against him. Mr. Wheeler brought all the documentation that he had relating to the criminal charges. He explained to Ms. Salazar that the charges had been dropped. He told her that he had owned a private driving school and that he had been framed for fraud, and that was the reason that he resigned from Lee County. No mention was made by Mr. Wheeler that disciplinary action had been taken against him by the EPC. Mr. Wheeler assumed that Ms. Salazar knew about his probation because he had discussed the issue with Mr. Touron. Ms. Salazar declined to write a letter of support on behalf of Mr. Wheeler. At this time, Ms. Salazar was unaware that Mr. Wheeler had been reprimanded and was on probation. Mr. Wheeler received his third-party tester certification on October 24, 2008. On November 21, 2008, Ms. Debbie Terry, the School Board’s director of Staffing, Recruitment, and Retention, conducted an Administrator Academy Training for personnel of the School Board, which included training school principals on the use of the internet website, myfloridateacher.com, which is maintained by DOE to document discipline taken against teachers holding Florida Educator’s Certificates. Ms. Terry advised the administrators attending the training that in hiring a new teacher they would be required to contact the applicant’s previous employers, access the DOE website to determine if there had been disciplinary action against the applicant, and to speak with the applicant’s references. The School Board had instituted a policy of not renewing annual contracts of teachers who had been disciplined by the EPC. Additionally, applicants for teaching positions who had been disciplined by the EPC were not hired. Ms. Terry checked the DOE website and found that Mr. Wheeler was listed as having been disciplined by the EPC. In December 2008, Ms. Terry called Ms. Salazar to inquire why Mr. Wheeler had been recommended for a professional service contract when he had been disciplined by the EPC. Ms. Salazar was unaware until Ms. Terry contacted her that Mr. Wheeler had been reprimanded and placed on probation by a Final Order from the EPC. The School Board started an investigation concerning Mr. Wheeler. The investigation included interviewing Ms. Healy, who told the School Board’s staff that she had sent a copy of the Final Order to Mr. Touron. Mr. Wheeler was also interviewed. On December 12, 2008, the School Board sent Mr. Wheeler’s evaluations for the prior two years to Ms. Healy. On December 5, 2008, Mr. Wheeler again sent Ms. Healy by facsimile transmission copies of his evaluations. The fax cover sheet stated that Ms. Salazar was the principal at Immokalee. After the investigation was complete, the superintendent advised Mr. Wheeler by letter dated May 18, 2009, that he would be recommending to the School Board that Mr. Wheeler’s employment be terminated. The superintendent alleged in the Notice of Intent Recommendation to Terminate Employment that the recommendation for termination was based on the following acts: Count 1: [He] falsely indicated the reasons for [his] separation from Lee County, Florida schools. In addition, [he] failed to disclose pertinent and relative information on [his] employment application; specifically, that [he] resigned from Lee County, Florida, schools “in lieu of termination.” Count 2: [He] falsely represented in [his] employment application the correct termination date of May 6, 2004, leaving a four-year employment discrepancy. Count 3: [He] violated the terms of [his] probation and settlement agreement with the Florida Department of Education by failing to disclose that [his] immediate supervisor, effective August 2007, was Linda Salazar, principal of Immokalee High School. In addition, [he] did not disclose the fact to Ms. Salazar that [he] entered into a settlement agreement. At some point in time, Ms. Salazar confronted [him] after learning that there was an issue relative to [his] certifying drivers’ education certificates; however, [he was] not forthcoming and indicated to her that there wasn’t a problem and assured her that the FLDOE case had been dropped. Count 4: In furtherance of [his] deception, [he] failed to follow the directive of [his] settlement that required that [his] evaluations be forwarded to the FLDOE by [his] supervisor. [He] directly forwarded the evaluations to FLDOE without the knowledge of [his] supervisor and the FLDOE. Count 5: [He was] found “guilty of an act involving gross immorality or an act involving moral turpitude” and attempted to conceal this knowledge from the school district. On May 5, 2008, Mr. Wheeler was approved to teach a driver education course for migrant students during summer school. Mr. Wheeler was to work 32 hours per week for nine weeks at a rate of pay of $40 per hour. His total compensation for the summer school employment was to have been $11,520. By e-mail dated May 27, 2009, Ms. Salazar advised Mr. Wheeler that he could not teach during summer school because of the recommendation to terminate his employment. Mr. Wheeler successfully completed his probation with DOE. Ms. Healy notified Mr. Wheeler by letter dated March 20, 2009, that the probation was closed. Ms. Healy did not consider that any actions by Mr. Wheeler during his probation constituted a breach of the Settlement Agreement which would be prosecuted by the EPC.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order finding that Mr. Wheeler is guilty of failing to disclose the relevant and pertinent information on his employment application in violation of Florida Administrative Code Rule 6B-1.006(5)(i) and School Board Policy 3121; finding that Mr. Wheeler is not guilty of the other violations set forth in the notice of intent to terminate; suspending Mr. Wheeler without pay for eight months, beginning May 18, 2009; and reinstating Mr. Wheeler to his employment at the end of his suspension. DONE AND ENTERED this 22nd day of December, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S SUSAN B. HARRELL Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 22nd day of December, 2009.
The Issue The issue is whether the Petitioners' proposal for a dealer to sell two new lines of motorcycles should be approved.
Findings Of Fact On October 10, 2008, in the Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 34, Number 41, two separate Notices of Publication for a New Point Franchise Motor Vehicle Dealer in a County of More than 300,000 Population were published. The first notice provided, in relevant part, as follows: Pursuant to Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, notice is given that [Galaxy] intends to allow the establishment of [Treasure Coast] as a dealership for the sale of motorcycles manufactured by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG) at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie (St. Lucie County) Florida 34952 on or after September 26, 2008. The second notice provided, in relevant part, as follows: Pursuant to Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, notice is given that [Galaxy] intends to allow the establishment of [Treasure Coast] as a dealership for the sale of motorcycles manufactured by Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd (ZHEJ) at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie (St. Lucie County) Florida 34952 on or after September 26, 2008. On October 16, 2008, Respondent filed the following letters of protest with the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles: In regards to the intent of [Galaxy] to establish a Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG) with [Treasure Coast] for the sale of motorcycles at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie, Fl [sic] 34952. This letter represents a written complaint to their application for this dealership, because we already represent said dealership. and In regards to the intent of [Galaxy] to establish a Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd (ZHEJ) with [Treasure Coast] for the sale of motorcycles at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie, Fl [sic] 34952. This letter represents a written complaint to their application for this dealership, because we already represent said dealership. Both letters made the following additional representations: The proposed dealership would be within 20 miles of our dealership, as measured by straight line distance. They are 8.61 miles away per mapquest. The proposed dealership is to be located within the contractual area outlined in our dealer agreement, as we have a 20 mile exclusivity. We have made more than 25% of our retail sales to persons whose registered household addresses are within 20 straight line miles of the proposed dealership during the past 12 month period. By letter dated October 22, 2008, the Department apparently tried to refer this matter to DOAH. For reasons that were not explained, however, this matter was not received at DOAH until it was referred again by letter dated June 3, 2009. The protest filed by Respondent was timely. The parties agreed that the population of St. Lucie County is over 300,000, and that Respondent's dealership is 8.61 miles from the proposed site. Respondent has dealer agreements to sell various lines of motorcycles, including motorcycles manufactured by Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co., Ltd. (ZHEJ); and motorcycles manufactured by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG). At the hearing, Mr. Young agreed that the evidence showed that, as a dealer for Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd. (ZHEJ), Respondent has adequately promoted that line and has made 25 percent or more of its retail sales to household addresses within 12.5 miles of the proposed dealership. At the hearing, Mr. Young said that the only motorcycles at issue were those manufactured by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG). Specifically, he questioned whether the line represented sufficient numbers of sales within the territory. Mr. Mourning explained that the ZHNG line was also called ZNEN before 2009. He produced records that confirm that Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd., used ZNEN as the make of its vehicles in 2008. Taken together, his sales records for ZHNG and ZNEN motorcycles demonstrated that he also adequately and successfully represents that line in the territory.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles enter a Final Order denying Treasure Coast's applications to become the licensee to sell motorcycles line-makes manufactured by Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd. (ZHEJ); and by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG) at the proposed site. DONE AND ENTERED this 2nd day of November, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S ELEANOR M. HUNTER Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 2nd day of November, 2009. COPIES FURNISHED: Electra Theodorides-Bustle, Executive Director Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles 4052 Bald Cypress Way, BIN A02 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1701 Robin Lotane, General Counsel Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500 Guy Young J & F South Florida Investments, Inc. d/b/a Treasure Coast Scooters and Things 7320 South US 1 Port St. Lucie, Florida 34952 Mark Mourning WenMark Inc., d/b/a All The Wheel Toys 1540 Northwest Federal Highway Stuart, Florida 34994 Jennifer Clark, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-308 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0635 Leo Su Galaxy Powersports, LLC, d/b/a JCL International, LLC 2667 Northhaven Road Dallas, Texas 75229
Conclusions This matter came before the Department for entry of a Final Order upon submission of an Order Closing File by Errol H. Powell, Administrative Law Judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings, a copy of which is attached and incorporated by reference in this order. The Department finds that the proposed establishment of Spitzer Autoworld Homestead, Inc. was duly noticed in accordance with section 320.642, Florida Statutes, a single protest was filed to that establishment and the matter referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings, and the protest has been withdrawn with prejudice by the protestant. The Department, therefore, hereby adopts the Order Closing File as its Final Order in this matter. Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the establishment of Spitzer Autoworld Homestead, Inc. as a new motor vehicle dealer for the sale and service of Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge cars and trucks at 30101 South Dixie Highway, Homestead (Miami Dade County), Florida 33030, be and Filed September 21, 2011 8:24 AM Division of Administrative Hearings is hereby approved. Having been issued license number VF-1030719, Spitzer Autoworld Homestead, Inc. is authorized to operate as a new motor vehicle dealer at 30101 South Dixie Highway, Homestead (Miami Dade County), Florida 33030. DONE AND ORDERED this ac’ day of September, 2011, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. /, Sandra C. Lambert, Director “Division of Motorist Services Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A435, MS 80 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Motorist Services this S20"? day of September, 2011. Nalini Vinayak, Dealer a Administrator NOTICE OF APPEAL RIGHTS Judicial review of this order may be had pursuant to section 120.68, Florida Statutes, in the District Court of Appeal for the First District, State of Florida, or in any other district court of appeal of this state in an appellate district where a party resides. In order to initiate such review, one copy of the notice of appeal must be filed with the Department and the other copy of the notice of appeal, together with the filing fee, must be filed with the court within 30 days of the filing date of this order as set out above, pursuant to Rules of Appellate Procedure. SCL:vlg Copies furnished: Kenneth L. Paretti, Esquire Adams, Quinton and Paretti, P. A. 80 Southwest 8" Street, Suite 2150 Miami, Florida 33130 Jerald Freshman, Esquire Freshman & Freshman LLC 9155 South Dadeland Boulevard, Suite 1014 Miami, Florida 33156 Dean Bunch, Esquire C. Everett Boyd, Jr., Esquire Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP 3600 Maclay Boulevard South, Suite 202 Tallahassee, Florida 32312 Errol H. Powell Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Nalini Vinayak Dealer License Section
Conclusions This matter came on for determination by the Department upon submission of an Order Closing File by P. Michael Ruff, an Administrative Law Judge, of the Division of Administrative Hearings, a copy of which is attached and incorporated by reference in this order. The Department hereby adopts the Order Closing File as its Final Order in this matter. ORDERED that this case is CLOSED and no license will be issued to BMS Motorsports, Inc., and Putnam City Motors, Inc. to sell motorcycles manufactured by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG) at 7033 Beach Boulevard, Jacksonville (Duval County), Florida 32216. DONE AND ORDERED this Lh day of June, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. LA. FORD, Director Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Filed with the Clerk of the tis Zé Potash, 2009. NOTICE OF APPEAL RIGHTS Judicial review of this order may be had pursuant to section 120.68, Florida Statutes, in the District Court of Appeal for the First District, State of Florida, or in any other district court of appeal of this state in an appellate district where a party resides. In order to initiate such review, one copy of the notice of appeal must be filed with the Department and the other copy of the notice of appeal, together with the filing fee, must be filed with the court within thirty days of the filing date of this order as set out above, pursuant to Rules of Appellate Procedure. CAF/vlg Copies furnished: Terry Henson Scooter Boutique, Inc. 12526 Masters Ridge Drive Jacksonville, Florida 32225 Patrick Kim BMS Motorsports, Inc. 1201 Jellick Avenue City of Industry, California 91748 Pete Biltoc Claudio Biltoc Putnam City Motors, Inc. 7033 Beach Boulevard Jacksonville, Florida 32216 Michael J. Alderman, Esquire Assistant General Counsel Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Rm. A-432 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0504 P. Michael Ruff Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 Nalini Vinayak Dealer License Administrator Florida Administrative Law Reports Post Office Box 385 Gainesville, Florida 32602
The Issue The issue is whether Petitioners are entitled to a motor vehicle dealership that is proposed to be located in Winter Park, Florida.
Findings Of Fact Respondent is an existing franchised dealer of motorcycles manufactured by Zongshen Industrial Group (ZONG). Petitioners have proposed the establishment of a new dealership to sell the same line and make of motorcycles as those sold by Respondent. Respondent's dealership is located at 306 West Main Street, Apopka, Florida 32712. Petitioners' proposed dealership would be located at 2650 West Fairbanks Avenue, Winter Park, Florida 32789. The proposed dealership is within a 12.5-mile radius of Respondent's dealership. Respondent has standing to protest the establishment of the proposed dealership.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED: That the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles enter a final order denying the establishment of Petitioners' proposed franchise. DONE AND ENTERED this 29th day of May, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S LAWRENCE P. STEVENSON Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings 29th day of May, 2009. COPIES FURNISHED: Carl A. Ford, Director Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkland Building, Room B-439 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500 Robin Lotane, General Counsel Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500 Michael James Alderman, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-432 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32344 James Sursely Action Orlando Motorsports 306 West Main Street Apopka, Florida 32712 Patricia Fornes Zongshen, Inc. 3511 Northwest 113th Court Miami, Florida 33178 Randy Lozanas Scooter City USA, LLC 2650 West Fairbanks Avenue Winter Park, Florida 32789
The Issue The issue is whether Petitioner's applications to establish new dealerships for the sale of motorcycles manufactured by Shanghai Motorcycle Co., Ltd. (JMSTAR), and Shanghai Shenke Motorcycle Co., Ltd. (SHEN), should be granted. PRELIMANARY STATEMENT In the Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 34, Number 21, May 23, 2008, the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) published two Notices of Publication for a New Point Franchise Motor Vehicle Dealer in a County of Less than 300,000 Population. Said notices advised that Petitioner Gator Moto, LLC and Gator Moto, LLC (Petitioner) intended to establish new dealerships for the sale of motorcycles manufactured by Shanghai Motorcycle Co., Ltd. (JMSTAR), and Shanghai Shenke Motorcycle Co., Ltd. (SHEN). On or about June 3, 2008, Respondent Austin Global Enterprises, LLC, d/b/a New Scooters 4 Less (Respondent) filed two complaints with DHSMV about the proposed new motorcycle dealerships. DHSMV referred both complaints to the Division of Administrative Hearings on June 10, 2008. On July 2, 2008, Respondent filed its Compliance with Initial Order. On July 7, 2008, Petitioner filed Petitioner's Compliance with Initial Order Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) Case Nos. 08-2735 and 08-2736. This is the only communication that DOAH has received from Petitioner. On July 23, 2008, Administrative Law Judge Barbara J. Staros entered an Order of Consolidation for DOAH Case Nos. 08-2735 and 08-2736. On July 24, 2008, Judge Staros issued a Notice of Hearing, scheduling a final hearing on December 4, 2008. On November 26, 2008, Respondent filed its Compliance with Pre-hearing Instructions. Petitioner did not respond to the Order of Pre-hearing Instructions. On December 1, 2008, Judge Staros issued an Amended Notice of Hearing. The amended notice only changed the commencement time for the hearing. DOAH subsequently transferred these consolidated cases to the undersigned. On the morning of the December 4, 2008, hearing, DHSMV advised the undersigned's office that DHSMV had failed to arrange for the appearance of a court reporter at the hearing. Accordingly, the undersigned issued an Order Granting Continuance and requiring the parties to confer and provide DOAH with mutually-agreeable dates for re-scheduling the hearing. On December 17, 2008, Respondent filed its unilateral Compliance with Order Granting Continuance. Respondent filed this pleading after an unsuccessful attempt to confer with Petitioner. On December 18, 2008, the undersigned issued a Notice of Hearing and Order of Pre-hearing Instruction. The notice scheduled the hearing for February 9, 2008. On February 3, 2007, Respondent filed its unilateral Compliance with Order of Pre-hearing Instructions. Petitioner did not file a response to the Order of Pre-hearing Instructions. When the hearing commenced, Petitioner did not make an appearance. Respondent made an appearance and presented the testimony of Colin Austin, Respondent's Managing Member. Respondent did not offer any exhibits. The hearing transcript was not filed with DOAH. Neither party filed proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Findings Of Fact Respondent has standing to protest Petitioner's applications pursuant to Section 320.642(3)(a)2., Florida Statutes (2008). According to DHSMV's published notice, Petitioner intended to establish two new motorcycle dealerships at 2106 Northwest 67th Place, Suite 15, Gainesville, Florida, on or after May 9, 2008. This location is only 4.5 miles from Respondent's place of business. At some point in time, Petitioner relocated its business to 7065 Northwest 22nd Street, Suite A, Gainesville, Florida. This location is only 5.3 miles from Respondent's place of business. Petitioner's application indicated that Petitioner intended to establish itself as a dealer of SHEN and JMSTAR motorcycles. Currently, Respondent sells those motorcycles under License No. VF/1020597/1. Respondent currently supplies itself with SHEN and JMSTAR products from a United States distributor. Respondent has a good faith belief that Petitioner intends to import the motorcycles and related products directly from the Chinese manufacturers. In that case, Petitioner would be able to sell the products at a lower price than Respondent and thereby deny Respondent the opportunity for reasonable growth. Petitioner did not notify DOAH about a change of address. DOAH's notices and orders directed to Petitioner at its address of record have not been returned. Petitioner has not communicated with DOAH since filing a response to the Initial Order. Petitioner did not make an appearance at the hearing. Apparently, Petitioner has abandoned its applications to establish the new dealerships.
Recommendation Based on the forgoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is ORDERED: That the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles enter a final order denying Petitioner's applications. DONE AND ENTERED this 16th day of February, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S SUZANNE F. HOOD Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 16th day of February, 2009. COPIES FURNISHED: Michael James Alderman, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-432 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32344 Collin Austin Austin Global Enterprise, LLC 118 Northwest 14th Avenue, Suite D Gainesville, Florida 32601 Justin Jackrel Gator Moto, LLC 4337 Northwest 35th Terrace Gainesville, Florida 32605 Justin Jackrel Gator Moto, LLC 2106 Northwest 67th Place, Suite 15 Gainesville, Florida 32653 Carl A. Ford, Director Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room B-439 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500 Robin Lotane, General Counsel Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500
The Issue The issues presented are whether the Department has the authority to approve Petitioner's distance-learning driver improvement course, whether Petitioner's delivery system is effective, and whether Petitioner's method of delivery complies with statutory and rule requirements.
Findings Of Fact Petitioner is a provider of basic driver improvement courses in a number of states, including Florida, Texas, and New York. These courses use the traditional classroom setting. Petitioner also provides its course via distance learning in California and Texas. That course is conducted using video and computer technology. The Texas course has been evaluated three times by the Texas education agency, which has determined that the delivery system is effective in achieving behavioral and attitudinal changes in drivers taking the course. In 1996 Petitioner's representatives met informally with the Department's representative, Milton Grosz, to discuss offering in Florida Petitioner's interactive video course which is the same course as Petitioner's already-approved basic driver improvement course. As a result of that meeting, Grosz, who heads the Department's review committee, researched the literature regarding the effectiveness of distance learning. His research revealed a growing body of literature supporting learning by interactive video but none in the field of driver improvement. Grosz noted that other providers would complain that the course's methodology does not work or that it offers the potential for cheating but the literature did not support such claims. Grosz recommended that the Department pilot test Petitioner's course in a limited geographic area. In 1997, Petitioner's representative in Tallahassee met with the Department's Director and explained that Petitioner proposed to introduce its distance-learning version of its course in Florida. After being encouraged to submit an application for approval, Petitioner did so on August 5, 1997. On August 20, 1997, Barbara Lauer, the Chief of the Department's Bureau of Driver Education and DUI Programs, wrote to Petitioner advising that the Department had decided to proceed with the development of interactive video methodology, limited to a single judicial circuit until the Department could pilot test that delivery system for effectiveness in Florida. That letter had been approved by the Director and the Assistant Director of the Department's Division of Driver's Licenses. Petitioner's proposal for Florida uses video and computer technology. The process begins when a person cited for certain non-criminal traffic infractions elects to attend a basic driver improvement course approved by the Department in lieu of a court appearance. A person choosing Petitioner's interactive video course would check out a laptop computer and four-hour video tape from a Blockbuster Video outlet after signing a contract. The contract provides that the student pay a fee, agree to the terms of the course, acknowledge that he or she will be subject to a validation process, acknowledge that he or she will be tested as to the content and must answer correctly 32 of the 40 questions in order to pass the course, and forfeit all money paid if he or she does not pass the course. Once the student agrees to the contractual terms, the student takes the video home, watches the video, and uses the laptop computer, linked to a data-base via modem, to answer questions generated by the computer based on the course content. The student must log into Petitioner's system several times during the course process. He or she is then subjected to a combination of verification and content questions including a final exam. The student also must answer unique identifying questions particular to the student taking the course which are intended to ensure that the person answering the questions via the computer is the student who registered for the course. The course contains situational learning segments where the student is encouraged to reflect on the driving situation covered. Throughout the course process the student is encouraged to use Petitioner's 1-800 number, manned by Florida-certified instructors 24 hours a day, should the student have a question about the course content or wish to discuss other driving situations. A different 1-800 number is provided for technical assistance 24 hours a day. Upon return of the equipment to the Blockbuster Video location, the student is informed as to whether he or she passed or failed the course. If the student passed, he or she is issued a certificate of completion from Petitioner's central office. If the student failed, he or she is given a phone number to call which results in the student being given a verbal quiz by a course instructor, who can then determine that the student has passed the course. Five to seven percent of students typically fail the course. Petitioner would establish a single Florida base of operations if the course were approved for use in this State. The address of each Blockbuster Video store where the course computer and materials are available would be registered with the State as a school. Petitioner's interactive video course would be available in many languages and would be offered in several versions for handicapped and hearing-impaired individuals. Thus, the course would be uniquely accessible to drivers whose handicaps may not be accommodated by places where the traditional classroom version of the course may be offered. The course would be available also for drivers whose work schedules or personal obligations do not allow them to take the basic driver improvement course when offered in a classroom setting. Several requests for additional information were made by the Department, and Petitioner responded to all. By letter dated July 6, 1998, the Department notified Petitioner that its application for course approval was complete and could be evaluated for content. The Department routinely reviews applications for driver improvement course approval by using a review committee. The committee determines whether the application meets the requirements of the administrative code (the Department's rules) and the statutes and determines whether the course curriculum should be approved for use in Florida. The review committee members are the only Department personnel who have actually reviewed the curriculum, have sat through the videotaped course, and have used the interactive computer. The review committee recommended that Petitioner's interactive video course be approved. Accordingly, the Department determined that the course content promotes driver safety, driver awareness, and accident avoidance techniques. In November 1998, the Director of the Department's Division of Driver's Licenses was contacted by a reporter regarding the use of Petitioner's interactive video course in a single county in Florida. After the article appeared, the Department's Executive Director received numerous letters from Petitioner's competitors. The Department has never before denied an application which received the approval of its review committee. However, by letter dated March 8, 1999, the Department advised Petitioner that its application for approval was denied for the reasons that the law does not contemplate approval of a basic driver improvement course conducted in a non-classroom setting although the law does not prohibit such approval, that the Department had never before approved such a course, and that the concept of independent study was not the best choice for effectuating behavioral and attitudinal changes. No one from the Department questioned its legal authority to approve Petitioner's interactive video course until Petitioner's competitors began contacting the Department. Even after those contacts, the Department did not raise any concern about its legal authority although it continued to correspond with Petitioner regarding other aspects of Petitioner's application. Only when the denial letter was issued did the Department advise Petitioner that it did not have authority to approve the course even though such approval was not prohibited. Petitioner provided to the Department as part of its application the effectiveness study performed for the State of Texas which had reviewed Petitioner's interactive video course three times, approving it on each occasion. That study concludes that the course is effective in changing driver behavior. The Department has historically accepted effectiveness studies done for other states. Further, the Department does not require the submission of an effectiveness study for approval of a course to be offered in a single judicial circuit. The Department determined that the course participation validation process was acceptable and does not challenge that process now. Jon Crumpacker, an expert in distance learning, has worked on distance learning projects for the Florida Departments of Corrections, Agriculture and Consumer Services, Education, Transportation, Management Services, Military Affairs, Juvenile Justice, and the Lottery, which have all embraced and used interactive technology similar to that proposed by Petitioner. He found Petitioner's technology to be effective in delivering course content and to be a particularly reliable form of interactive technology. He also concluded that Petitioner's technology is not "radical" as previously characterized by the Department. A delivery system or mechanism is how a particular course content is imparted to a student. There are a variety of systems used today, including traditional classroom, computer- assisted instruction, and virtual classrooms on the Internet. The contractual element of Petitioner's course motivates students to participate in the learning process, as does the testing component, particularly when compared with the traditional classroom delivery system of the basic driver improvement course which includes no testing component. Petitioner's delivery system is a true interactive system and is an effective delivery system, likely to cause changes in attitude and behavior.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered granting Petitioner's application for approval of its interactive video course. DONE AND ENTERED this 28th day of October, 1999, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. LINDA M. RIGOT Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 28th day of October, 1999. COPIES FURNISHED: Charles J. Brantley, Director Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room B439 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-5000 Enoch Jon Whitney, General Counsel Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room B439 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-5000 Michael J. Alderman, Esquire Department of Highway Safety And Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room B439 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-5000 Mark K. Logan, Esquire Smith, Ballard & Logan, P.A. 403 East Park Avenue Tallahassee, Florida 32301
The Issue The issue is whether Petitioners are entitled to a motor vehicle dealership that is proposed to be located in Longwood, Florida.
Findings Of Fact Respondent is an existing franchised dealer of motorcycles manufactured by Chunfeng Holding Group Co. Ltd. (CFHG). Respondent also has an existing distribution arrangement with Petitioner CF Moto Powersports, Inc. Petitioners have proposed the establishment of a new dealership to sell the same line and make of motorcycles as those sold by Respondent. Respondent's dealership is located at 306 West Main Street, Apopka, Florida 32712. Petitioners' proposed dealership would be located at 821 South Highway 17-92, Suite 101, Longwood, Florida 32750. The proposed dealership is within a 12.5-mile radius of Respondent's dealership. Respondent has standing to protest the establishment of the proposed dealership.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED: That the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles enter a final order denying the establishment of Petitioners' proposed franchise. DONE AND ENTERED this 29th day of April, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S LAWRENCE P. STEVENSON Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 29th day of April, 2009. COPIES FURNISHED: Carl A. Ford, Director Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkland Building, Room B-439 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500 Robin Lotane, General Counsel Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500 David Levison Mega Powersports Corp. 390 North Beach Street Daytona Beach, Florida 32114 Michael James Alderman, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-432 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32344 Ivan Escalante CF Moto Powersports 3555 Holly Lane North, No. 30 Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 James Sursely Action Orlando Motorsports 306 West Main Street Apopka, Florida 32712
The Issue The issue in the case is whether an application for a motor vehicle dealer license filed by LS Motorsports, LLC, and Michael J. Konczal, Inc., should be approved.
Findings Of Fact LS MotorSports is seeking to establish a new point motor vehicle dealership in St. Petersburg, Florida, for line- make LINH. The Respondent is an existing franchise motor vehicle dealer for line-make LINH, located within 12.5 miles of the proposed new point motor vehicle dealership location. The majority of the Respondent's vehicle sales come from within a 12.5-mile radius of the proposed dealership. The Respondent timely filed a protest of LS MotorSports’ proposed dealership. There is no evidence that the Respondent is not providing adequate representation within the territory of the motor vehicles at issue in this proceeding.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Finding of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles enter a final order denying the application for establishment of the motor vehicle dealer franchise at issue in this case. DONE AND ENTERED this 3rd day of April, 2009 in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S WILLIAM F. QUATTLEBAUM Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 3rd day of April, 2009. COPIES FURNISHED: Electra Theodorides-Bustle, Executive Director Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500 Robin Lotane, General Counsel Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500 Michael James Alderman, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-432 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32344 Chris Densmore Scooter Escapes, LLC, d/b/a Scooter Escapes 1450 1st Avenue North St. Petersburg, Florida 33705 Mathu Solo LS Motorsports, LLC 10215 South Sam Houston Parkway West, Suite 100 Houston, Texas 77071 Michael Konczal Michael J. Konczal, Inc. 1801 28 Street North St. Petersburg, Florida 33715
