Agricultural Land Services Inc. v. State Department of Transportation
Docket: No. 97-3563
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; June 15, 1998; Florida; State Appellate Court
Agricultural Land Services (ALS) appealed a decision from the Department of Transportation (DOT) that denied its application for certification as a disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE). The appeal was affirmed based on ALS's failure to prove that a disadvantaged individual owned more than 51 percent of the business according to Florida Administrative Code chapter 14-78. Rachel Lines owns 60 percent of ALS and qualifies as a disadvantaged individual due to her status as a woman. The certification process requires that a disadvantaged individual not only owns a majority interest but also manages and controls the business's daily operations. The relevant regulations stipulate that ownership must be real and substantial, requiring documented contributions of capital or expertise. ALS argued that personal loans made by Rachel Lines to the business should be considered capital investments. However, the administrative law judge (ALJ) did not classify these loans as capital contributions and instead assessed that Rachel Lines's experience and operational control did not adequately substantiate her majority interest. The ALJ concluded that ALS did not demonstrate that her contributions matched her 60 percent ownership as mandated by the rules. Furthermore, the regulations state that when family members share management responsibilities, it undermines the claim that the disadvantaged owner controls the business. ALS failed to provide clear evidence of how Rachel Lines exercised majority control. Lastly, ALS contested DOT's reliance on decisions from the United States Department of Transportation during the case evaluation. However, DOT was required to consider such decisions under the applicable rule, and ALS did not challenge the validity of this requirement during the proceedings. The court affirmed DOT's decision, with judges Eervin and Booth concurring, and Benton concurring in result.