15-002386BID Capital Grove Limited Partnership vs. Florida Housing Finance Corporation
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Monday, August 3, 2015.


View Dockets  
Summary: Protester failed to establish standing or that its application should be approved for funding.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8CAPITAL GROVE LIMITED

11PARTNERSHIP ,

12Petitioner,

13v s . Case No. 15 - 002386BID

21FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE

24CORPORATION,

25Respondent,

26and

27HTG WELLINGTON FAMILY, LLC ,

31Intervenor.

32______________________________/

33RECOMMENDED ORDER

35A final hearing was held in this matter on July 1, 2015, in

48Tallahassee, Florida , before James H. Peterson, III,

55Administrative Law Judge with the Division of Administrative

63Hearings (DOAH) .

66APPEARANCES

67For Petitioner: Michael P. Donaldson, Esquire

73Carlton Field Jorden Burt , P . A .

81215 South Monroe Street, Suite 500

87Tallahassee, Florida 32302

90For Respondent: Hugh R. Brown, General Counsel

97Florida Housing Finance Corporation

101227 North Monroe Street, Suite 5000

107Tallahassee, Florida 32301

110For Intervenor: Maureen McCarthy Daughton, Esq uire

117Maureen McCarthy Daughton, LLC

1211725 Capital Circle Northeast , Suite 304

127Tallahassee, Florida 32308

130STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

134Whether Florida Housing Finance Corporation Ós (Florida

141Housing , Corporation, or Respondent) rejection of the funding

149for the a pplication submitted by Capital Grove Limi ted

159Partnership (Capital Grove ) was contrary to Florida HousingÓs

168governing statutes, rules, policies, or the specifications of

176Request for Applications 2014 - 114 (the RFA ). If so, whether

188Florida HousingÓs decision to fund the application submitte d by

198HTG Wellington Family, LLC (HTG W ellington) , is contrary to

208governing statutes, rules, policies, or the RFA specifications.

216PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

218Florida Housing issued the RFA on November 20, 2014,

227requesting a pplications for awards of low - income housing tax

238credits to assist in the development of affordable housing in

248medium and small counties (including Pasco County).

255On March 20, 2015, Florida HousingÓs Board of Directors

264(the ÐBoardÑ) met to consider the recommendations of the staff

274Review Committee regarding the RFA, and posted its Notice of

284Intended Decision. This Notice set forth the scoring and

293ranking of the a pplications, in which HTG Wellington was found

304eligible for funding, and Capital Grove Ós a pplication was deemed

315ineligible and nonresponsive.

318Capital Grove and another a pplicant , Woodland Lake Family

327Apartments Limited Partnership and Beneficial Communities

333( Woodland Lake) , timely filed notices of intent to protest

343Florida HousingÓs preliminary decisions regarding the RFA,

350followed by formal written protests, pursuant t o section

359120.57(3), Florida Statutes . 1/ Florida Housing subsequently

367referred these cases to the Division of Administrative Hearings,

376where the cases were consolidated and a hearing scheduled for

386June 1, 2015. The p arties moved to continue the final hearing,

398which was granted and the final hearing rescheduled for July 1,

4092015. On June 23, 2015, Woodland Lake filed its Notice of

420Voluntary Dismissal.

422At the final hearing , the p arties offered eight exhibits

432which were admitted into evidence as Joint Ex hibits J - 1 through

445J - 8 . The p arties stipulate d to the authenticity and

458admissibility of all Joint Exhibits admitted in this proceeding.

467Motions for Official Recognition filed by Capital Grove and HTG

477Wellington were granted.

480At the beginning of the hearing, Capital Grove withdrew its

490allegations regarding HTG WellingtonÓs Road Infrastructure Form

497as set forth in paragraphs 36 - 39g of its Amended Petition.

509Capital Grove presented the testimony of its corporate

517representativ e, B rian Parent, and offered nine exhibits which

527were admitted into evidence as Pe ti ti onerÓs Exhibits P - 1 through

541P - 9 .

545Florida Housing presented the testimony of Ken Reecy, its

554Director of Multifamily Programs and corporate representative,

561but offered no ad ditional exhibits beyond the Joint Exhibits.

571HTG Wellington presented no testimony, and offered 11

579exhibits which were admitted into evidence as Exhibits I - 1

590through I - 11 .

595The proceedings were recorded and a one - volume Transcript

605of the final hearing was filed July 6, 2015. The parties were

617given until July 16, 2015, to file their respective Proposed

627Recommended Orders, all of which were timely filed and

636considered in the preparation of this Recommended Order.

644FINDINGS OF FACT

6471. Florida Housing is a public corporation created

655pursuant to section 420.504, Florida Statutes. Its purpose is

664to promote the public welfare by administering the governmental

673function of financing affordable housing in Florida. Pursuant

681to section 420.5099, Florida Housing is designated as the

690housing credit agency for Florida within the meaning of section

70042(h)(7)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code and has the

709responsibility and authority to establish procedures for

716allocating and distributing low - income housing tax credits.

7252. The low - income housing tax credit program was enacted

736by Congress in 1986 to incentivize the private market to invest

747in affordable rental housing. Tax credits are competitively

755awarded to a pplicant s in Florida for qualified rental housing

766projects. App licant s then sell these credits to investors to

777raise capital (or equity) for their projects, which reduces the

787debt that the owner would otherwise have to borrow. B ecause the

799debt is lower, a tax - credit property can offer lower, more

811affordable rents.

8133. Provided the property maintains compliance with the

821program requirements, investors receive a dollar - for - dollar

831credit against their federal tax liability each year over a

841period of ten years. The amount of the annual credit is based

853on the amount inves ted in the affordable housing.

8624. Tax credits are made available by the U.Seasury to

872the states annually.

8755. Florida Housing is authorized to allocate tax credits

884and other funding by means of request for proposal or other

895competitive solicitation in section 420.507(48), and adopted

902Florida Administrative Code c hapter 67 - 60 to govern the

913competitive solicitation process for several different programs,

920including the one for tax credits.

9266. Rule 67 - 60.002(1) defines Ð Applicant Ñ as Ðany person or

939legally - formed entity that is seeking a loan or funding from the

952Corporation by submitting an a pplication or responding to a

962competitive solicitation pursuant to this rule chapter for one

971or more of the CorporationÓs programs .Ñ

9787. Applicant s request in t heir applications a specific

988dollar amount of housing credits to be given to the applicant

999each year for a period of 10 years. Applicant s typically sell

1011the rights to that future stream of income tax credits (through

1022the sale of almost all of the ownershi p interest in the

1034Applicant entity) to an investor to generate the majority of the

1045capi tal necessary to construct the D evelopment. Th e amount of

1057housing credits an Applicant may request is based on several

1067factors, including but not limited to a certain p ercentage of

1078the projected Total Development Cost; a maximum funding amount

1087per development based on the county in which the development

1097will be located; and whether the development is located within

1107certain designated areas of some counties.

11138. Florida HousingÓs competitive application process for

1120the allocation of tax credits is commenced by the issuance of a

1132Request for Applications. In this case, that document is

1141Request for Applications 2014 - 114 (the RFA). The RFA was issued

1153November 20, 20 14, and responses were due January 22, 2015 .

11659. Capital Grove submitted Application No. 2015 - 045C in

1175RFA 2014 - 114 seeking $1,509,500 in annual allocation of housing

1188credits t o finance the construction of a 94 - unit residential

1200rental development in Pasco County (a Medium County), to be

1210known as Highland Grove Senior Apartments. HTG Wellington

1218submitted Application No. 2015 - 101C seeking $1,510,000 in annual

1230allocation of housing credits t o finance the construction of a

1241110 - unit multi family residenti al d ev elopment in Pasco County,

1254Florida , to be known as Park at Wellington Apartments. Florida

1264Housing has announced its intent ion to award funding to nine

1275Medium County Developments, including Park at Wellington in

1283Pasco County (Application No. 2015 - 101C), but not Highland Grove

1294Senior Apartments.

129610. Florida Housing received 82 a pplications seeking

1304funding in RFA 2014 - 114, including 76 for Medium County

1315D evelopments. The process employed by Florida Housing for this

1325RFA makes it virtually impossible for more than one application

1335to be selected for funding in any given medium c ounty. Because

1347of the a mount of funding available for medium c ounties, the

1359typical amount of an a pplicant Ós h ousing c redit request

1371(generally $1.0 to $1 .5 million), and the number of m ed ium

1384c ounties for which developments are proposed, many medium

1393c ountie s will not receive an award of housing c redit funding in

1407this RFA. Florida Housing in tends to award funding to nine

1418developments i n nine different m edium c ounties.

142711. The a pplications were received, processed, deemed

1435eligible or ineligible, scored, and ranked, pursuant to the

1444terms of RFA 2014 - 114; Florida Administrative Code c hapters 67 -

145748 and 67 - 60; and applicable federal regulations. Florida

1467HousingÓs executive director appointed a Review Committee of

1475Florida Housing staff to evaluate the applications for

1483eligibility and scoring. Applications are considered for

1490funding only if they are deemed Ðe ligible,Ñ based on whether the

1503a pplication complies with Florida HousingÓs various co nten t

1513requirements. Of the 82 a pplications submitted to Florida

1522Housing in RFA 2014 - 114, 69 were found Ðeligible,Ñ and 13 were

1536found ineligible, including Capital Grove. Florida Housing

1543determined that Capital Grove was ineligible on the ground that

1553its Letter of Credit was deficient under the terms of the RFA.

1565A five - page spreadsheet created by Florida Housing, entitled

1575ÐRFA 2014 - 114 Î All Applications,Ñ identifying all eligible a nd

1588ineligible applications was provided t o all Applicant s. In

1598additi on to scoring, Applicant s received a lottery number to be

1610applied in tie situations, with the lower number given

1619preference. Capital Grove received lottery number 12. HTG

1627Wellington received lottery number 9.

163212. On March 11, 2015, the Review Co mmitte e met and

1644considered the a pplications submitted in response to the RFA,

1654and made recommendations regarding the scoring and ranking of

1663the a pplica tions to Florida HousingÓs Board of Directors ( the

1675Board ) .

1678Capital GroveÓs Letter of Credit

168313. The RFA provides for a Withdrawal Disincentive in

1692which an a pplicant c ould either provide a $25,000 check or a

1706$25,000 Letter of Credit that would be forfeited if the

1717a pplication was withdrawn by the a pplicant before a certain

1728period of time. Applicant s so withdr awing would also suffer a

1740de duction from the full developer - experience point total in

1751certain future Request s for Applicati ons issued by Florida

1761Housing.

176214. According to specifications in the RFA, any Letter of

1772Credit submitted must be in compliance with all the requirement s

1783of subsection 4.a . of Section Three, Procedures and Provisions

1793of the RFA , which provides in pertinent part:

18014. $25,000 Letter of Credit. Each

1808Applicant not submitting a $25,000

1814Application Withdrawal Cash Deposit (as

1819outlined in 3 above) must submit to the

1827Corporation a letter of Credit that meets

1834the following requirements with its

1839Application:

1840a. The Letter of Credit must:

1846(1) Be issued by a bank, the deposits of

1855which are insured by the FDIC, and which has

1864a banking office loca ted in the state of

1873Florida available for presentation of the

1879Letter of Credit.

1882(2) Be on the issuing bankÓs letterhead,

1889and identify the bankÓs Florida office as

1896the office for presentation of the Letter of

1904Credit.

1905(3) Be, in form, content and amount, the

1913same as the Sample Letter of Credit set out

1922in Item 14 of Exhibit C of the RFA, and

1932completed with the following:

1936(a) Issue Date of the Letter of Credit

1944(LOC) which must be no later than

1951January 22, 2015 .

1955(b) LOC number.

1958(c) Expiration Date of the LOC which must

1966be no earlier than January 22, 2016 .

1974(d) Issuing BankÓs legal name.

1979(e) Issuing BankÓs Florida Presentation

1984Office for Presentation of the LOC.

1990(f) Florida HousingÓs RFA number RFA 2014 -

1998114 .

2000(g) Applicant Ós name as it appears on the

2009Applicat ion for which the LOC is issued.

2017(h) Development name as it appears on the

2025Application for which the LOC is issued.

2032(i) Signature of the Issuing BankÓs

2038authorized signatory.

2040(j) Printed Name and Title of the

2047Authorized Signatory.

204915. The S ample Letter of Credit included in Exhibit C ,

2060Item 14 of the RFA reads:

2066(Issuing BankÓs Letterhead)

2069Irrevocable Unconditional Letter of Credit

2074To/Beneficiary: Florida Housing Finance

2078Corporation

2079Issue Date: [a date that is no later than

2088January 22, 2015]

2091Attention: Director of Multifamily Programs

2096227 N. Bronough Street, Suite 5000

2102Tallahassee, Florida 32301

2105Letter of Credit No.: ___________

2110Expiration Date: [a date that is no earlier

2118than January 22, 2016]

2122Issuing Bank:

2124______________________________ ______________

2126Florida Presentation Office:

2129_________________________ ___________________

2131FHFC RFA # 2014 - 114

2137Applicant : ____________________________

2140Development: _________________________ _

2143Gentlemen:

2144For the account of the Applicant , we, the

2152Issuing Bank, hereby authorize Florida

2157Housing Finance Corporation to draw on us at

2165sight up to an aggregate amount of Twenty -

2174Five Thousand and No/100 Dollars

2179($25,000.00).

2181This letter of credit is irrevocable,

2187unconditional, and nontransferable .

2191Drafts drawn under this letter of credit

2198must specify the letter of credit number and

2206be presented at our Florida Presentation

2212Office identified above not later than the

2219Expiration Date. Any sight draft may be

2226presented to us by electronic, reprographi c,

2233computerized or automated system, or by

2239carbon copy, but in any event must visibly

2247bear the word Ðoriginal. Ñ If the document

2255is signed, the signature may consist of (or

2263may appear to us as) an original handwritten

2271signature, a facsimile signature or an y

2278other mechanical or electronic method of

2284authentication.

2285Payment against this letter of credit may be

2293made by wire transfer of immediately

2299available funds to the account specified by

2306you, or by deposit of same day funds in a

2316designated account you maint ain with us.

2323Unless we notify you in writing at least

2331thirty (30) days prior to the Expiration

2338Date, the Expiration Date of this letter of

2346credit must be extended automatically for

2352successive one - month periods.

2357This letter of credit sets forth in full t he

2367terms of our obligations to you, and such

2375undertaking shall not in any way be modified

2383or amplified by any agreement in which this

2391letter is referred to or to which this

2399letter of credit relates, and any such

2406reference shall not be deemed to incorporate

2413herein by reference any agreement.

2418We engage with you that sight drafts drawn

2426under, and in compliance with, the terms of

2434this letter of credit will be duly honored

2442at the Presentation Office.

2446We are an FDIC insured bank, and our Florida

2455Presentation Of fice is located in Florida as

2463identified above.

2465Yours very truly,

2468[Issuing Bank]

2470By

2471______________ ______________________________

2473Print Name ________________________________ _

2477Print Title _ _______________________________

248116. Despite these requirements , Capital Grove submitted an

2489ÐIrrevocable Standby Letter of CreditÑ issued by PNC Bank

2498National Association (PNC).

250117. Capital GroveÓs Letter of Credit provides, in

2509pertinent part:

2511Beneficiary: Applicant :

2514Florida Housing Finance Westbrook Housing Corp.

2520Corp. Development, LLC 4110 Southpoint Blvd.,

2526227 North Bronough Street Ste 206

2532Suite 5000 Jacksonville, Fl 32216

2537Tallahassee, Fl 32301

2540ATTENTION: DIR. OF MULTI - FBO CAPITAL GROVE FAMILY

2549PROGRAMS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

2552IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT

2557OUR REFERENCE: 18123166 - 00 - 00

2564AMOUNT: USD $25,000.00

2568ISSUE DATE: JANUARY 20, 2015

2573EXPIRY DATE: JANUARY 22, 2016

2578EPIRY PLACE: OUR COUNTER

2582RE: FHFC RFA #2014 - 114

2588DEVELOPMENT: HIGHLAND GROVE SENIOR APARTMENTS

2593GENTLEMEN:

2594WE HEREBY ESTABLISH OUR IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF

2602CREDIT NO. 18123166 - 00 - 000 IN FAVOR OF FLORIDA HOUSING

2614FINANCE CORPORATION FOR THE ACCOUNT OF WESTBROOK

2621HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LLC AVAILABLE FOR PAY MENT AT OUR

2630COUNTERS IN AN AMOUNT OF USD $25,000.00 (TWENTY FIVE

2640THOUSAND AND 00/100 UNITED STATES DOLLARS ) AGAINST

2648BENEFICIARY'S PURPORTEDLY SIGNED STATEMENT AS FOLLOWS:

"2654I (INSERT NAME AND TITLE) CERTIFY THAT I AM AN

2664AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE

2670CORPORATION AND HEREBY DEMAND PAYMENT OF USD (INSERT

2678AMOUNT) UNDER PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION LETTER OF

2686CREDIT NO. 18123166 - 00 - 000. I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT

2697WEST B ROOK HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, LLC HAS FAILED TO

2706COMPLY UNDER THE PROJECT NAME: HIGHLAND GROVE SENIOR

2714APARTMENTS BETWEEN FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION

2720AND WESTB R OOK HOUSING DEVEL OPMENT, LLC."

272818. Ken Reecy, Director of Multifamily Programs for

2736Florida Housing, personally reviewed all Letters of Credit

2744submitted by RFA applic ant s, and reported his findings to the

2756Review Committee.

275819. The Review Committee recommended finding Capital

2765GroveÓs a pplication nonresponsive and ineligible for funding

2773because Capital Grove failed to include a responsive Letter of

2783Credit.

278420. T he Review Committee also found four other

2793a pplications ineligible for failing to meet the Letter of Credit

2804requirements, all of which used PNC Bank and involved entities

2814related to Capital Grove, including Westbrook Housing

2821Development, LLC , appearing as Co - D eveloper. All such PNC

2832Letters of Credit failed for the same reasons.

284021. Mr. Reecy and the Review Committee found that the

2850Letters o f Credit from PNC Bank ( including that submitted by

2862Capital Grove) did not meet the facial requirements of the RFA,

2873in that the Letters of Credit were not in the name of the

2886applicant .

288822. The General Partner of the applicant , Capital Grove

2897Limited Partnership, is Capital Grove GP, LLC. The Co - Developer

2908entities are JPM Development , LLC , and Westbrook Housing

2916Development , LLC .

291923. Co - Developer Westbrook Housing Development, LLC, a

2928Michigan Company authorized to conduct business within the State

2937of Florida, is a different legal entity from Co - Developer JPM

2949Development, LLC .

295224. Mr. Ree cy and the Review Committee also found the PNC

2964Letters of Credit (including t hat submitted by Capital Grove)

2974nonresponsive to the s pecification of the RFA because the

2984Letters included a condition requiring Florida Housing, in order

2993to draw on the Letter of Credit, to certify that the Co -

3006Developer (and not the applicant ) had Ðfailed to comply under

3017the project name: Highlan d Grove Senior Apartments .Ñ However,

3027under the RFA specifications, the action that is the basis for

3038the presentment of the Letter of Credit is a withdrawal of the

3050application by the applicant , not the developer.

305725. Only an applicant may withdraw an a pplication.

306626. If the Le tter of Credit cannot be drawn upon, the RFA

3079provides that the applicant , Ðshall be responsible for the

3088payment of the $25,000 to the Corporation; payment shall be due

3100from the applicant to the Corporation within 10 calendar days

3110following written notice f rom the Corporation.Ñ

311727. Applicant Capital Grove is a single - purpose entity

3127that has no assets.

313128. I n order to collect on the Letter of Credit submitted

3143by Capital Grove, Florida Housing would have to submit a

3153different certification than that called for under the RFA

3162sample letter of credit .

316729. According to Kathleen Spiers, Vice President of PNC

3176Bank, to draw down the Letter of Credit, Florida Housing would

3187have to copy the statement outlined in paragraph 2 of the

3198Capital Grove Let ter of Credit, sign it , and submit it to PNC to

3212draw upon the letter of credit.

321830. At the final hearing, Mr. Reecy testified , ÐI am not

3229prepared to certify to something that isnÓt true. I am not

3240going to certify that the developer didnÓt comply by the

3250Applicant withdrawing.Ñ

325231. All other Letters of Credit submitted by applicant s

3262under this RFA were accepted as responsive.

3269HTG WellingtonÓs Unit Count

327332. HTG Wellington indicated in its a pplication to Florida

3283Housing that its proposed Park at Welling ton Development would

3293be 110 multifamily units. In its a pplication for Local

3303Government Support, HTG Wellington described the D evelopment as

3312a 120 - unit , mul tifamily development in five three - story

3324buildings.

332533. The RFA requires a minimum $50,000 L ocal G overnment

3337C ontribution in Pasco County for an applicant to receive the

3348maxi m um of five points.

335434. In order to obtain a L ocal G overnment C ontribution,

3366tax credit developers must submit an application to Pasco County

3376at least six weeks before the matter is presented to the Board

3388of County Commissioners for approval . Pasco County , in turn ,

3398has their underwriter, Neighborhood Lending Partners ("NLP") ,

3407organize the a pplications and create an underwriting package .

3417NLP does not make a recommendation to the Board of County

3428Commissioners for funding. Rather, NLP alerts Pasco County if

3437there is a red flag concerning the Development and scores the

3448applications based upon financial stability of the organization,

3456financing of the project , and the development pro forma.

346535. HTG Wellington submitted an application for L ocal

3474G overnment C ontribution to Pasco County in November 2014. The

3485application contemplated a 120 - unit development.

349236. Impact fees schedules are adopted by the Pasco County

3502Board of Commissione rs. Pasco County has established an impact

3512fee rate for affordable and non - affordable development and the

3523difference between the two is multiplied by the number of units

3534to determine the impact fee amount.

354037. The impact fee waiver amount approved for Park at

3550Wellington Apartments was $219,600. This amount was calculated

3559based up on 120 units contemplated in November 2014, multiplied

3569by $1830.00, which is the difference between the normal impact

3579fee rate , minus the rate for affordable housing development .

3589The $219,6 00 figure was used in HTG WellingtonÓs a pplication.

360138. At 110 units (as opposed to 120 units) , the total

3612Local Government Contribution available to HTG Wellington is

3620$201,300.

362239. Either amount ($219,600 or $201,300) meets the minimum

3633fo r HTG Wellington to receive five points for its Local

3644Government Contribution. T he change in the c ontribution amount

3654would have no effect on the scoring of the HTG Wellington

3665a pplication.

366740. Pasco CountyÓs Man ager of Community Development and

3676Officer of Community Development, George Romagnoli , testified

3683that f or approximately 15 years, Pasco County has employed a

3694strategy to approve all applications for Local Government

3702C ontribution and then le t Florida Housing choose which

3712D evelopment wil l receive tax credits.

371941. Pasco County is not concerned about the ultimate

3728accuracy of the number of units submitted for a Contribution Î -

3740as stated by Mr. Romagnoli: "We funded 84, 120, whatever. It's

3751really not material to the approval one way or the o ther."

376342. Although Florida Housing approved HTG WellingtonÓs

3770a pplication before discovering the discrepancy, h ad Florida

3779Housing discovered the discrepancy in the number of units during

3789the scori ng process, the discrepancy would have been deemed a

3800minor i rregularity unless the discrepancy resulted in a change

3810in scoring or otherwise rendered the a pplication nonresponsive

3819as to some material requirement and t he discrepancy would

3829generally be handle d with a simple adjustment to the amount

3840pre sented on the a pplication Pro For ma, if necessary.

385143. Additionally, changes to the number of units in a

3861development may be increased (but not decreased) under certain

3870circumstances during the c redit u nderwriti ng process which

3880follows the competitive solicitation proc ess.

388644. The discrepancy in the number of units does not

3896provide any competitive advantag e to HTG Wellington.

390445. The discrepancy in the number of units does not

3914provide a benefit to HTG Wellington no t enjoyed by others.

392546. Florida HousingÓs waiver of the discrepancy in the

3934number of units does not adversely impact the interests of the

3945public.

3946HTG WellingtonÓs Bus Stop

395047. The RFA allows an applicant to obtain 18 p roximity

3961points , including six points for a Public Bus Transfer Stop.

3971Florida Housing awarded HTG Wellington 4.5 p roximity points for

3981its purported Public Bus Transfer Stop.

398748. The RFA defines a Public Bus Transfer Stop as:

3997This service may be selected by all

4004Applicant s, regardless of the Demographic

4010Commitment selected at question 2 of Exhibit

4017A. For purposes of proximity points, a

4024Public Bus Transfer Stop means fixed

4030location at which passengers may access at

4037least three routes of public transportation

4043via buses. Ea ch qualifying route must have

4051a scheduled stop at the Public Bus Transfer

4059Stop at least hourly during the times of

40677 am to 9 am and also during the times of

40784 pm to 6 pm Monday through Friday,

4086excluding holidays on a year - round basis.

4094This would include b oth bus stations (i.e.

4102hub) and bus stop with multiple routes. Bus

4110routes must be established or approved by a

4118Local Government department that manages

4123public transportation. Buses that travel

4128between states will not be considered.

413449. In response to t his requirement HTG Wellington

4143submitted a Surveyor Certification Form which lists coordinates

4151submitted to qualify for a Public Bus Transfer Stop. The site

4162identified by HTG Wellington as a Public Bus Transfer Stop,

4172however, is not a fixed location where passengers may access at

4183least three routes of public transportation. While another b us

4193s top which serves an additional two routes is within 700 feet,

4205stops cannot be combined for purposes of the RFA. Therefore,

4215the site designated as a Public Bus Trans fer Stop by HTG

4227Wellington is not a Ðfixed locationÑ for purposes of the RFA and

4239HTG Wellington is not entitled to obtain p roximity points for a

4251Public Bus Transfer Stop.

425550. Not including the 4.5 p roximity points for a Public Bus

4267Transfer Stop, HTG was awarded 11.5 total p roximity points for

4278selected Community Services .

428251. The required minimum t otal of proximity points for

4292developments located in a m edium county that must be achieved in

4304order to be eligible to receive the maximum a mount of 18 points a s

4319set forth in the RFA is 9 .

432752. HTG had more than the required minimum t otal of

4338proximity points to receive the m aximum a ward of 18 proximity

4350points based on its Community Services score alone.

435853. The disqualification of HTGÓs submitted Public Bus

4366Transfer Stop would have no effect on the scoring or ranking of

4378the HTG Wellington a pplication , nor affect its ranking rela tive

4389to any other a pplication, nor affect the ultimate funding

4399selection .

440154. The RFA requires each applicant to read and sign at

4412Attachment A , an Applicant Certification and Acknowledgement

4419Form (the Form) . The signing of the Form is mandatory.

443055. Page 5, Paragraph 8 of the Form provides:

4439In eliciting information from third parties

4445required by and/or included in this

4451Application, the Applicant has provided such

4457parties information that accurately

4461describes the Development as proposed in

4467this Application. The Applicant has

4472reviewed the thir d party information

4478included in this Application and/or provided

4484during the credit underwriting process and

4490the information provided by any such party

4497is based upon, and accurate with respect to,

4505the Development as proposed in this

4511Application.

451256. Even though there was a discrepancy in the unit

4522numbers submitted to Pasco County for a Local G overnment

4532Contribution and its a pplication submitted in response to the

4542RFA, HTG signed the Form. No evidence was submitted indicating

4552that HTG signed the Form with knowledge of the discrepancy .

4563CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

456657. DOAH has jurisdiction over the p arties and subject

4576matter of this proceeding, pursuant to section 120.57 (3) .

458658 . For purposes of section 120.57(3), the R FA is

4597equivalent to a ÐRequest for Proposal.Ñ Fla. Admin. Code R. 67 -

460960.009(3).

4610Standing

461159 . As an applicant that was awarded tax credits and whose

4623application was challenged in this proceeding, HTG WellingtonÓs

4631substantial interests are affected by the outcome of this

4640proceeding, and HTG Wellingto n has standing to participate as a

4651party . Agrico Ch em. Co. v. DepÓt of Envtl . Reg. , 406 So. 2d 478

4667(Fla. 2 d DCA 1981).

467260 . As the party claiming that Florida HousingÓs proposed

4682agency action does not meet th e standards in s ection

4693120.57(3)( f), Capital Grove bears the burden of proof . DepÓt of

4705Transp. v. J.W.C . Co. , 396 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1981).

471961 . Florida Administrative Code Rule 67 - 60.006 (1)

4729provides:

4730The failure of an Applicant to supply

4737required information in connection with any

4743competitive solicitation pursuant to this

4748rule chapter shall be grounds for a

4755determination of nonresponsiveness with

4759respect to its Application. If a

4765determination of nonresponsiveness is made

4770by the Corporation, the Application shall

4776not be considered.

477962 . Even without the express requirement that applicant s

4789be both responsive and responsible, these factors are inherently

4798part of the standing requirement in a competitive solicitation,

4807as it is incu mbent upon a protesting party to demonstrate that

4819its substantial interests are affected. Preston Carroll Co. v.

4828Fla. Keys Aqueduct Auth. , 400 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

484063 . I n order for Capital Grove to have standing to

4852challenge the scoring and ranking of the HTG Wellington

4861a pplication , it must first prove that its a pplication was

4872eligible ; otherwise , it has no substantial interests which could

4881be affected by Florida HousingÓ s scoring and ranking of HTG

4892Wellington.

489364 . Even if Capital Grove could overcome the ineligibility

4903issue, it must still knock out HTG Wellington , which has a

4914better lottery number (9), to be in the funding.

4923Standard of Review

492665 . Although c hapter 120 uses the term Ðde novoÑ when

4938describing competitive solicitations protest proceedings, a

4944different kind of de novo is contemplated than that applied in

4955other types of substant ial interest proceedings under section

4964120.57. Bid disputes are a Ðfo rm of intra - agency reviewÑ in

4977which the object is to evaluate the action taken by the agency.

4989State Contracting & EngÓg Corp v. DepÓt of Transp. , 709 So. 2d

5001607, 609 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1998).

500866 . Accordingly, competitive bid protest proceedings such

5016as the instant case remain de novo in the sense that the

5028proceedings are not confined to a record review of the

5038information before Florida Housing. Instead, a new evidentiary

5046record is developed for the purpose of evaluating the proposed

5056agency action. See e.g. , Asphalt Pavers, Inc. v. DepÓt of

5066Trans. , 602 So. 2d 558 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) .

507667 . Section 120.57(3)(f) provides, in pertinent part:

5084In a prot est to [a] . . . request for

5095proposals procurement, no submissions made

5100after the bid or proposal opening which

5107amend or supplement the bid or proposal

5114shall be considered . . . . Unless

5122otherwise provided by statute, the burden of

5129proof shall rest with the party protest ing

5137the proposed agency action. In a

5143competitive - procurement protest, other than

5149a rejection of all bids, proposals, or

5156replies, the administrative law judge shall

5162conduct a de novo proceeding to determine

5169whether the agencyÓs proposed action is

5175contrary to the agencyÓs governing statutes,

5181the agencyÓs rules or policies, or the

5188solicitation specifications. The standard

5192of proof for such proceedings shall be

5199whether the proposed agency action was

5205clearly erroneous, contrary to competition,

5210arbitrary, or ca pricious . . . .

521868 . To find Florida HousingÓs scoring in this case to be

5230Ðclearly erroneous, Ñ it must be shown that Florida HousingÓs

5240rejection of the Capital Grove Letter of Credit falls outside

5250the permis sible range of interpretations [ of the RFA

5260specifications ]. Colbert v. Dep Ó t of Health , 890 So. 2d. 1165,

52731166 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).

527869 . In order to conclude that Florida HousingÓs scoring of

5289the Capital Grove a pplication was arbitrary or capricious, it

5299must be shown that the scoring in question was performed without

5310the support of facts or logic (arbitrary), or taken without

5320thought or reason or irrationally (capricious). Agrico Chem.

5328Co. v. DepÓt of Envt l . Reg . , 365 So. 2d 759, 763 (Fla. 1 st DCA

53461978), cert. denied , 376 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 1979).

535570 . To find that Florida HousingÓs scoring in this case

5366was Ðcontrary to competitionÑ requires evidence demonstrating

5373that the scoring unreasonably interferes with the purposes of

5382competitive procurement. I n Wester v. Belote , 138 So. 721, 723 -

5394724 (Fla. 1931) , the Supreme Court of Florida , with further

5404elaboration, agreed with the contention that :

5411[T]he object and purpose of [ the competitive

5419bidding law ] is to protect the public

5427against collusive contracts; to secure fair

5433compe tition upon equal terms to all bidders;

5441to remove not only collusion but temptation

5448for collusion and opportunity for gain at

5455public expense, to close all avenues to

5462favoritism and fraud in its various f or ms;

5471to secure the best values . . . at the

5481lowest p ossible expense; and to afford an

5489equal advantage to all desiring to do

5496business [with the State], by providing an

5503opportunity for an exact comparison of bids.

551071 . In this case, Capital Grove failed to establish and

5521the evidence was otherwise insufficien t to reasonably suggest

5530that Florida HousingÓs scoring was clearly erroneous, contrary

5538to competition, arbitrary , or capricious.

5543Capital GroveÓs Letter of Credit

554872 . The Letter of Credit sub mitted by Capital Grove in its

5561a pplication for funding does not meet the facial requirements of

5572the RFA. As set forth in Section Three , subsection 4.a.(3) . of

5584the RFA, Ð The Letter s of Credit must . . . [b] e, in form,

5600content and amount, the same as the Sample Letter of Credit set

5612out in Item 14 of Exhibit C of the RFA .Ñ Rather than being a

5627mere example that applicant s may or may not choose to f ollow,

5640the RFA makes it clear that any Letter of Credit must match the

5653Sample Letter provided in form, content , and amount.

566173 . Capital Grove Ó s Letter of Credit differs from the

5673mandatory Sample Letter in two significant and material aspects:

5682(1) it is not in the name of the applicant ; and (2) it includes

5696conditions not appearing in the Sample Letter. In fact, the

5706Sample Letter required the Le tter of Credit to be unconditional.

5717Florida HousingÓs determination that Capital Grove Ós Letter of

5726Credit was nonresponsive was not clearly erroneous , contrary to

5735competition, arbitrary , or capricious . Rather, in its

5743determination, Florida Housing followed and applied the plain

5751lang uage of the RFA specifications.

575774 . Nor can the errors present in the Capital Grove Letter

5769of Credit be waived as a m inor i rregularity. Rule 67 - 60.008

5783provides Florida Housing with the authority to waive minor

5792irregular ities in a pplications . Rule 67 - 60.002(6) defines a

5804Ð minor i rregularity Ñ as:

5810[A] variation in a term or condition of an

5819Application pursuant to this rule chapter

5825that does not provide a competitive

5831advantage or benefit not enjoyed by other

5838Applicant s, and does not adversely impact

5845the interests of the Corporation or the

5852public.

585375 . The errors present in the Capital Grove Letter of

5864Credit constitute a significant departure from the proscribed

5872Sample Letter and RFA specifications and they ca nnot reasonably

5882be waived as a minor i rregularity . T he Letter of Credit

5895submitted by Capital Grove includes impermissible conditions

5902contrary to the Sample Letter, and is issued in the nam e of an

5916entity that is not the applicant . While Capital Grove argues

5927that these differences are meaningless in light of the Letter

5937being drafted Ðfor the benefit ofÑ the applicant , the fact

5947remains that it does not meet the form or content of an

5959unconditional letter of credit required by the RFA as specified

5969in the Sample Letter .

597476 . Moreover, the terms Ð Applicant Ñ and Ð D eveloper Ñ are

5988separately defined in the rules governing the competitive

5996solic itation funding process. See Fla. Admin. Code R. 67 -

600748.002.

600877 . Under the facts and circumstances, Florida HousingÓs

6017decision to reject the Capital Grove a pplication for failing to

6028meet submission requirements was not clearly erroneous, contrary

6036to completion, arbitrary, or capricious, nor was it contrary t o

6047the RFA sp ecifications, or any of Florida HousingÓs policies,

6057rules , or governing statutes.

606178 . Accordingly, Capital Grove lacks standing to bring

6070allegations against HTG Wellington. See paragraphs 60 - 6 4 ,

6080supra .

608279 . Even if Capital Grove had demonstrated that its letter

6093of credit should be accepted , it failed to prove that its

6104substantial interests are affected by the award to HTG

6113Wellington.

611480 . It is uncontested that the discrepancy in the number

6125of units in the HTG Wellington a pplication (110) versus a number

6137appearing in documentation filed with Pasco County (120) makes

6146no difference in the scoring or ranking of HTG Wellington Ós

6157a pplication, and thus cannot affect the substantial interests of

6167any other applicant , including Capital Grove.

617381 . Both representati ves for Florida Housing (Ken Reecy)

6183and Pasco County (George Romagnoli) provided uncontroverted

6190testimony that the discre pancy in the number of units Î -

6202particularly where the Local Government was promised more than

6211that proposed to Florida Housing - - was o f no concern in terms

6225of the eligibility of the proposed Development for its Local

6235Government Contribution. The change in the amount of the

6244Contribution does not cause it to fall below the $50,000 minimum

6256to receive 5 points under the RFA specifications.

626482 . Capital Grove presented no evidence or testimony in

6274this proceeding to show how this discrepancy could affect the

6284scoring or ranking of these a pplications. Under such

6293circumstances , the unit - count discrepancy lands squar ely within

6303the definition of a m in or i rregularity. I t does not result in a

6319scoring change, and so cannot provide any advantage or benefit

6329to HTG Wellington not enjoyed by other applicant s, and does not

6341adversely impact the interests of the Corporation or the public.

635183 . Capital Grove further argu es that errors in H TG

6363WellingtonÓs unit count make HTGÓs Applicant Certification false

6371and therefore , HTG WellingtonÓs a pplication should be rejected

6380as nonresponsive. While Florida Housing and HTG Wellington

6388concede that the unit count diffe rs from that shown in certain

6400documentation filed with Pasco County, it creates no discrepancy

6409in the a pplication, where HTG Wellington consistently presents

6418110 as its unit c ount. Notably, nothing in the a pplication, the

6431testimony , or evidence presented in this proceeding prevents HTG

6440Wellington from increasing its unit count from 110 to 120 during

6451c redit u nderwriting, sh ould it so choose.

646084 . Moreover, having determined that the unit count

6469discrepancy qualifies as a m inor i rregularity, it follows that

6480t he discrepancy cannot form the basis for rejection of the HTG

6492Wellington a pplication on the grounds that its Application

6501Certification is no longer valid. To conclude otherwise would

6510elevate the importance of an error that is insubstantial and

6520immaterial to the competitive scoring process.

652685 . T he same reasoning applie s to the issue regarding HTG

6539WellingtonÓs designated Public Bus Transfer Stop. While the bus

6548stop provided in the HTG Wellington a pplication was not valid

6559for the 4.5 proximity points it was awarded, it was stipulated

6570that, even without those 4.5 points, HTG WellingtonÓs proximity

6579score was higher than the nine proximity points necessary for

6589the 18 - point boost to its overall score.

659886 . Accordingly, disqualifica tion of the bus stop

6607proximity points does not result in any change to HTG

6617WellingtonÓs overall score and ranking among a pplications.

6625Thus, HTG WellingtonÓs loss of the bus stop points cannot affect

6636the substantial interests of Capital Grove or any other

6645comp eting applicant as it has no effect on the scoring or

6657ranking of the HTG Wellington application or any other

6666applicant .

6668RECOMMENDATION

6669Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

6679Law, it is

6682RECOMMENDED that Florida Housing Finance Corporation enter

6689a final order :

66931. Rejecting Capital Grove Ós a pplication as nonresponsive

6702and denying the relief requested in its Petition;

67102. C oncluding that Capital Grove lacks standing to bring

6720all egations against HTG Wellington; and,

67263. Upholding Florida HousingÓs scoring and ranking of the

6735HTG Wellington a pplication.

6739DONE AND ENTERED this 3rd day of August , 2015, in

6749Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

6753S

6754JAMES H. PETERSON, III

6758Administrative Law Judge

6761Division of Administrative Hearings

6765The Desoto Building

67681230 Apalachee Parkway

6771Tallahassee, Florida32399 - 3060

6775www.doah.state.fl.us

6776Filed with the Clerk of the

6782Division of Administrative Hearings

6786this 3rd day of August , 2015.

6792ENDNOTE

67931/ All references to Florida Statutes and the Florida

6802Administrative Code are to current ve rsions unless otherwise

6811indicated.

6812COPIES FURNISHED :

6815Michael P. Donaldson, Esquire

6819Carlton Field Jorden Burt , P . A .

6827215 South Monroe Street, Suite 500

6833Tallahassee, Florida 32302

6836(eServed)

6837Hugh R. Brown, General Counsel

6842Florida Housing Finance Corporation

6846227 North Monroe Street, Suite 5000

6852Tallahassee, Florida 32301

6855(eServed)

6856Maureen McCarthy Daughton, Esquire

6860Maureen McCarthy Daughton, LLC

68641725 Capital Circle Northeast , Suite 304

6870Tallahassee, Fl orida 32308

6874(eServed)

6875Wellington Meffert, General Counsel

6879Florida Housing Finance Corporation

6883Suite 5000

6885227 North Bronough Street

6889Tallahassee, Florida 32301 - 1329

6894(eServed)

6895Kate Flemming, Corporation Clerk

6899Florida Housing Finance Corporation

6903Suite 5000

6905227 North Bronough Street

6909Tallahassee, Florida 32301 - 1329

6914(eServed)

6915NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

6921All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

693115 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

6942to this Recommende d Order should be filed with the agency that

6954will issue the Final Order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 08/07/2015
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 08/07/2015
Proceedings: (Agency) Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/03/2015
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 08/03/2015
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held July 1, 2015). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 08/03/2015
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 07/16/2015
Proceedings: Intervenor's Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/16/2015
Proceedings: (Petitioner's Proposed) Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/16/2015
Proceedings: (Petitioner's) Notice of Filing Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/16/2015
Proceedings: Respondent's Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/15/2015
Proceedings: Order Granting Extension of Time.
PDF:
Date: 07/15/2015
Proceedings: Petitioner's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/02/2015
Proceedings: Joint Exhibits (not available for viewing) filed.
Date: 07/01/2015
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 06/30/2015
Proceedings: Amended Joint Prehearing Stipulation filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/29/2015
Proceedings: Joint Prehearing Stipulation filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/29/2015
Proceedings: Petitioner's Request for Judicial Notice (with attachments) filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/29/2015
Proceedings: Petitioner's Request for Judicial Notice filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/24/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Second Motion for Judicial Notice filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/23/2015
Proceedings: (Petitioner's) Notice of Voluntary Dismissal filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/23/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Cross Notice of Taking Telephonic Deposition (of George Romangnoli) filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/23/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Cross Notice of Taking Telephonic Deposition (of Dennis Hernandez) filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/23/2015
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Telephonic Deposition (of Denise Hernandez) filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/23/2015
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Telephonic Deposition (of George Romagnoli) filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/23/2015
Proceedings: Notice of Telephonic Motion Hearing (motion hearing set for June 25, 2015; 10:30 a.m.).
PDF:
Date: 06/23/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Notice of Service of Responses to Second Set of Interrogatories Propounded by Capital Grove Limited Partnership filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/22/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Response to Capital Grove Limited Partnership Third Request for Admissions filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/19/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Motion for Judicial Notice filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/18/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Motion to Compel Responses to First Set of Interrogatories to Woodland Lake Family Apartments Limited Partnership, and Beneficial Communities, Inc. filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/17/2015
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Telephonic Deposition (of Kathleen Speirs) filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/17/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Responses to Capital Grove Limited Partnership's Second Request for Admissions filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/16/2015
Proceedings: Capital Grove Limited Partnerships Third Request for Admissions to HTG Wellington Family, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/15/2015
Proceedings: Capital Grove Limited Partnership Notice of Service of Second Set of Interrogatories to Intervenor HTG Wellington Family, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/12/2015
Proceedings: Capital Grove Limited Partnership's Second Request for Admissions to HTG Wellington Family, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/11/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family LLC's Motion to Deem Second Requests for Admissions to Woodland Lake Family Apartments Limited Partnership and Beneficial Communities, Admitted filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/09/2015
Proceedings: Order Re-scheduling Hearing (hearing set for July 1, 2015; 9:00 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 06/09/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Motion to Deem First Requests for Admissions to Woodland Lake Family Apartments Limited Partnership and Beneficial Communities, Inc., Admitted filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/08/2015
Proceedings: (Petitioner's) Motion for Renotice of Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/03/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family LLC's Second Request for Admissions to Woodland Lake Family Apartments Limited Partnership and Beneficial Communities, Inc. filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/02/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family LLC's Response to Capital Grove Limited Partnership's Amended First Request for Admission filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/22/2015
Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance (parties to advise status by June 22, 2015).
PDF:
Date: 05/22/2015
Proceedings: Joint Motion to Continue Final Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/21/2015
Proceedings: Capital Grove Limited Partnership Notice of Serving Verified Responses to Intervenor HTG Wellington Family, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/20/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Notice of Service of Responses to Interrogatories Propounded by Capital Grove Limited Partnership filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/19/2015
Proceedings: Respondent's Response to HTG Wellington Family LLC's First Request for Admissions filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/19/2015
Proceedings: Amended Capital Grove Limited Partnership's First Request for Admissions to HTG Wellington Family, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/15/2015
Proceedings: Capital Grove Limited Partnership Notice of Service of First Set of Interrogatories to Intervenor HTG Wellington Family, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/15/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's First Request for Admissions to Woodland Lake Family Apartments Limited Partnership and Beneficial Communities, Inc. filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/15/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Notice of Service of First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioner, Woodland Lake Apartments Limited Partnership and Beneficial Communities, Inc. filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/15/2015
Proceedings: Amended Formal Written Protest and Petition for Administrative Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/15/2015
Proceedings: Capital Grove Limited Partnership's First Request for Admissions to HTG Wellington Family, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/14/2015
Proceedings: Order Granting Motion to Leave to Amend Formal Written Protest and Petition for Administrative Proceeding Complaint
PDF:
Date: 05/13/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's Notice of Service of First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioner, Capital Grove Limited Partnership filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/13/2015
Proceedings: (Petitioner's) Motion for Leave to Amend Formal Written Protest and Petition for Administrative Proceeding filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/13/2015
Proceedings: Capital Grove Limited Partnership's Response to HTG Wellington Family, LLC's First Request for Admissions filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/12/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington Family, LLC's First Request for Admissions to Florida Housing Finance Corporation filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/07/2015
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing (hearing set for June 1 and 2, 2015; 9:00 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 05/07/2015
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 05/06/2015
Proceedings: HTG Wellington's First Request For Admissions to Capital Grove Limited Partnership filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/06/2015
Proceedings: Order of Consolidation (DOAH Case Nos. 15-2386BID and 15-2387BID).
PDF:
Date: 04/28/2015
Proceedings: Notice of All Bidders on RFA 2014-114 filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/28/2015
Proceedings: Agency referral filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/28/2015
Proceedings: Notice of Appearance (Maureen Daughton) filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/28/2015
Proceedings: Formal Written Protest and Petition for Administrative Hearing filed.

Case Information

Judge:
JAMES H. PETERSON, III
Date Filed:
04/28/2015
Date Assignment:
04/29/2015
Last Docket Entry:
08/07/2015
Location:
Tallahassee, Florida
District:
Northern
Agency:
ADOPTED IN TOTO
Suffix:
BID
 

Counsels

Related Florida Statute(s) (6):