CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2013 WL 2421093, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8929
...In pertinent part, AFSCME and FPD argued that the Department lacked the authority to spend state funds on the Corizon contract because the 2012 GAA contains “no specific appropriation for contracting out health services” in Regions I, II, or III, as they contended section 216.313, Florida Statutes (2012), requires....
...Our review, therefore, is de novo. Garcia v. Andonie,
101 So.3d 339, 343 (Fla.2012) (constitutional interpretation); Fla. Dep’t of Envtl. Protection v. ContractPoint Fla. Parks, LLC,
986 So.2d 1260, 1266 (Fla.2008). To provide a background for our discussion of section
216.313 and the Legislature’s intent to allow privatization of inmate health services, we first consider the extent of the Department’s general authority to enter into contracts on behalf of the state. After concluding that the Department’s general authority is broad, we consider whether section
216.313 presents an impediment to the Department’s reliance on that authority for the purpose of the Corizon contract....
...h the Department to provide services to prison inmates). That the contract at issue is for comprehensive, as opposed to discrete, health services does not remove the Department’s authority for it. B. The “Specific Appropriation” Requirement in Section 216.313, Florida Statutes (2012) Given the Department’s broad authority to enter into contracts to carry out its duty to provide health services to inmates, a contract for comprehensive health care in a particular region is valid absent a legislative directive to the contrary....
...d power under the Florida Constitution allows them to exercise any power for a municipal purpose except where expressly prohibited by law). The circuit court found such an impediment in section 216.813. With an exception not applicable to this case, section 216.313 prohibits the Department from entering into a contract for the purchase of services in excess of $5 million “unless the contract identifies the specific appropriation of state funds from which the state will make payment under the contract in the first year of the contract.” (emphasis added)....
...provision of inmate health services. Line Item 784, in character and name, is a specific appropriation of funds for the purpose of “Inmate Health Services.” By designating that appropriation as its funding source, the Corizon contract satisfied Section 216.313’s requirement to disclose the specific appropriation from which payment will be made....
...784 is a specific appropriation for the broad category of “Inmate Health Services,” the Department’s decision to use the available funds in that line item for a comprehensive health services contract in Regions I, II, and III does not violate section 216.313, even though the privatization of health services for those regions is not specifically mentioned in the GAA....
