The 2023 Florida Statutes
|
||||||
|
Let's start with the obvious: Gonzalez is not a final policymaker under Florida law. Why? Because Gonzalez's decisions are subject to at least three levels of meaningful review: first, by the Chief Building Official, see FLA. STAT. § 468.604( 1) ("It is the responsibility of the ... building official to administrate, supervise, direct, enforce, or perform the permitting and inspection of construction[.]"); then by BORA, see FLORIDA BUILDING CODE : BROWARD COUNTY AMENDMENTS § 113.9.1 (2018) ("The Board shall hear all appeals from the decisions of the Building Official, Assistant Building Official or Chief Inspector[.]"); and finally by the Florida Building Commission, see id. § 113.14.1 (noting that "[a]ny person aggrieved by a decision of BORA ... may file an appeal" with the "Florida Building Commission"). The Florida Supreme Court, in fact, has come to this same conclusion in a case that's almost identical to ours. See Raben-Pastal v. City of Coconut Creek , 573 So. 2d 298, 302 (Fla. 1990). In that case, the "chief building official" of the City of Coconut Creek halted the development of a residential real-estate project by issuing an "official stop-work order pending… Plaintiff argues that Defendant acted in excess of authority because under Florida law, the evaluation of building permits are the exclusive domain of "building officials," but to demonstrate this he cites only to Florida Statutes, Section 468.604 (2002), which outlines the duties of building code inspectors. Plaintiff points out that the statute requires that building officials perform their responsibilities "without interference from any person." This hardly establishes that Defendant was acting beyond his delegated authority, particularly given that he only made recommendations to building officials regarding the permits. Plaintiff also asserts that, because Defendant participated in the state legal proceedings as the county's designated representative, this somehow evidenced that he was he was the true force behind the denial of the permits, which again was in excess of his authority. However, this assertion does no more than suggest that the County delegated to him this particular duty, perhaps because of his knowledge of the case. It certainly does not show in and of itself that Defendant had any greater role or influence than that which was already described.. . . domain of “building officials,” but to demonstrate this he cites only to Florida Statutes, Section 468.604 . . .