April 28, 2015 - Based upon a review of the record in this proceeding, the Chief Administrative Law Judge hereby approves in all respects the findings in the Report of the Administrative Law Judge dated April 21, 2015.
April 28, 2015 - 1. The Administrative Law Judge concludes that the Department failed to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the Licensee committed maltreatment by neglect as defined in Minn. Stat. § 626.556, subd. 2(f) (2014).
2. The Administrative Law Judge concludes therefore that the fine based upon the maltreatment determination should not have been imposed.
3. The Administrative Law Judge concludes that the Department has shown that reasonable cause existed for finding that the Licensee failed to provide adequate supervision of the children in violation of Minn. R. Minn. R. 9502.0315, subp. 29a; .0365 (2013). The Administrative Law Judge also concludes that the Licensee failed to show that she was in compliance with those requirements.
4. The Administrative Law Judge concludes that the violation of the supervision rules warrants the conditional license ordered by the Department.
5. Accordingly, it is recommended that the maltreatment determination be REVERSED, the Order to Pay a Fine be RESCINDED, and the Order of Conditional License be AFFIRMED.
April 27, 2015 - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Respondent’s Motion for Summary Disposition is DENIED.
2. Counsel shall confer with each other and the tribunal as to whether adjusting the current case milestones and the dates for the evidentiary hearing would be useful and convenient to the parties.
April 23, 2015 - 1. The proposed rules were adopted in compliance with the procedural requirements of Minnesota Statutes, chapter 14, and Minnesota Rules, chapter 1400 (2014).
2. According to Minn. Stat. §§ 84.027, subd.13a; 84D.12; 97A.045; .551; 97C.205; .341; .342; .505, subd. 1(b); .805 (2014), the Department has the statutory authority to adopt these proposed rules using the expedited rulemaking process.
3. The proposed rule parts are APPROVED.
April 14, 2015 - The Panel concludes that the Complainant Kirsten Kennedy has failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent Charles Duncan participated in the preparation or dissemination of campaign material that lacked a disclaimer in the form required by Minn. Stat. § 211B.04(b). The Complaint is, therefore, DISMISSED.
April 13, 2015 - The Commission should grant a Certificate of Need to NDPC for the Project.
NDPC has complied with all relevant statutes and regulations regarding its Certificate of Need application. NDPC has demonstrated that application of the criteria in Minn. R. 7853.0130, to the facts in the hearing record, support issuance of a Certificate of Need. Moreover, no party demonstrated, under Minn. R. 7853.0130(B), that there was a more reasonable and prudent alternative to the proposed project.
April 09, 2015 - The Administrative Law Judge concludes that Aurora has satisfied the applicable legal requirements and, accordingly, recommends the Commission grant a Site Permit for the Project, subject to the conditions discussed below.
April 08, 2015 - 1. The issues presented for hearing in this matter have been adequately identified in the June 27, 2014, Notice and Order for Hearing.
2. The County’s request that the contested case hearing encompass not only the three issues identified in the Notice and Order for Hearing but also five additional issues is DENIED.
3. The hearing in this matter will proceed as previously scheduled on July 20 - 24, 2015, at 9:30 a.m. in the courtrooms of the Office of Administrative Hearings, 600 North Robert Street, First Floor, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101.