Pinellas Cnty. v. Fla. Dep't of Juvenile Justice, 1D14–4187.
Decision Date | 18 February 2016 |
Docket Number | No. 1D14–4187.,1D14–4187. |
Citation | 188 So.3d 894 |
Parties | PINELLAS COUNTY, A Political Subdivision of the State of Florida, Appellant, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Nancy Meyer, and Carl E. Brody, Clearwater, for Appellant.
John Milla, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
On Motion For Clarification And Rehearing
KELSEY
, J.
We grant Appellant's Motion for Clarification and Rehearing, withdraw our previous opinion, and substitute the following opinion quashing footnote 1 in the Department's Final Order On Remand.
This case is one of many now pending before this Court, with more in the pipeline, between the Department of Juvenile Justice ("Department") and certain of Florida's non-fiscally-constrained counties. The issues relate to allocating between the State and counties the costs of secure juvenile detention care as required by section 985.686 of the Florida Statutes
. The statute requires the counties to pay in advance their respective shares of the estimated costs of such detention, based on previous use; and requires that "[a]ny difference between the estimated costs and actual costs shall be reconciled at the end of the state fiscal year." § 985.686(5), Fla. Stat. (2008).
At all times pertinent to this class of litigation, and continuing today, the Department has been bound by, has not disputed the meaning of, and has not substantively amended, its own rules setting forth the process for implementing the reconciliation required under section 985.686(5)
. Rule 63G–1.008 of the Florida Administrative Code ( ), clearly provides that credits function as a reduction of future billings, just as debits are added to future billings:
Fla. Admin. Code R. 63G–1.008 (2006)
. The function of debits and credits in the "reconciliation" process remained the same under the new rule adopted in 2010:
(6) If the total amount paid by a county falls short of the amount owed based on actual utilization, the county will be invoiced for that additional amount. The amount due will be applied to the county's account. An invoice will accompany the reconciliation statement, and shall be payable on or before March 1. If the amount paid by a county exceeds the amount owed based on actual utilization, the county will receive a credit. The credit will be applied to the county's account and be included on the invoice sent in November.
Fla. Admin. Code R. 63G–1.017(6)
.
In correspondence and notices to Appellant and other counties, the Department has advised of additional amounts owed, or of credits to be applied to their accounts, with but one example being the following notice sent in 2009 (emphasis original):
The amount shown in the Difference column is the amount of overpayment or underpayment by the county based on utilization. A debit amount in this column means the county did not pay enough based on their utilization. Any counties that have a debit amount owed will find enclosed with this correspondence an invoice for that amount. This amount is due by March 1, 2010. A credit amount in this column means the county overpaid based on their utilization and a credit invoice is enclosed with this correspondence. (If the credit amount is larger than the amount currently being paid by the county, the credit will be applied to future invoices until the credit is applied in total.) It is critical that all credits be taken prior to June 30, 2010. It is requested that counties not make payments on their accounts as long as their account balance is a credit. Invoices with credit balances are marked PAID when sent to the county.
Several counties...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Daly v. Marion Cnty.
...and we remanded for the Department to apply credits over time until the total credit was applied. Pinellas Cty. v. Florida Dep't of Juvenile Justice , 188 So.3d 894 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) ; Broward Cty. v. State, Dep't of Juvenile Justice , 192 So.3d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (Mem).Unlike Pinella......
-
Marion Cnty. v. Dep't of Juvenile Justice
...meaningless.").This Court recently considered the Department's duty under section 985.686 in Pinellas County v. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice , 188 So.3d 894, 896 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). This Court found the Department's attempt to avoid applying a forwarding credit by using the same ......
-
Broward Cnty. v. State, Dep't of Juvenile Justice, 1D14–4219.
...for Appellee.On Motion for Rehearing and Request for CertificationPER CURIAM.REVERSED. See Pinellas Cty. v. Fla. Dep't of Juvenile Justice , 188 So.3d 894 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).THOMAS, RAY, and KELSEY, JJ., ...