Florida's 1996 Administrative Procedure Act.

• Author: Rigot, Linda M.

What do a property owner whose application for a state permit to build a dock has been denied, a real estate salesman who has received an administrative complaint from the Florida Real Estate Commission, a nursing home administrator whose application for licensure has been denied, a doctor who has been accused by the Board of Medicine of committing malpractice, a business which has received an assessment for unpaid state sales tax, and a vendor who submitted the lowest bid to the state agency but was not awarded the contract have in common?

Florida's modern Administrative Procedure Act (APA) dates back to 1975, when the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) was created as a central panel to hear cases involving disputed issues of material fact for state agencies and specific procedures for agency rulemaking were established. That system has remained relatively unchanged and not subject to serious question until the last several years. By then, individual citizens and businesses had become concerned that the balance of fairness of the administrative law system had tilted in favor of the agencies as a result of judicial decisions and agency final orders which had not been appealed. Pressure on the legislature to restore balance to the system began to increase.

Legislative leaders reacted to the perception of their constituents by establishing select committees and task forces to receive comments and propose changes. Despite the hard work of those committees and those from the public and private sectors who appeared before those committees, the 1994 Legislature adjourned after implementing only minor changes. By the time the 1995 Legislature convened, many members were adamant that substantial APA reform would occur. And it did. A major revision to the APA passed the legislature as CS/CS/SB 536.

The Governor exercised his veto power with a detailed veto message which called for simplification of the administrative process, greater flexibility for executive branch decisionmaking, and greater accountability for agency action. Some members of the legislature responded that the veto would be overridden in the 1996 session.

The Governor did not stop with a stroke of his veto pen. He assembled a technical working group (working group) charged with the task of reorganizing and simplifying the APA.(1) The working group on Ch. 120 was composed of attorneys from the Governor's legal office, agency attorneys, private practitioners, and the chair of...