November 06, 2013 - 1. The amendments to Minn. R. 6280.0450 were adopted in compliance with the procedural requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 14, and Minnesota Rules, Chapter 1400.
2. The amendments to Minn. R. 6280.0450 are APPROVED.
November 06, 2013 - 1. The rules were adopted in compliance with the procedural requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 14, and Minnesota Rules, Chapter 1400.
2. According to the 2013 Laws of Minnesota, Regular Session, Chapter 85, Article 5, Section 45 the Department has the statutory authority to adopt these proposed rules using the exempt rulemaking process.
3. The adopted rules are APPROVED.
November 05, 2013 - 1. The Additional Notice Plan is APPROVED, contingent upon sending the following groups either a paper or electronic copy of the Dual Notice.
2. The Dual Notice is APPROVED, provided that the Agency completes the blanks contained in the Notice of Hearing section.
October 31, 2013 - The Administrative Law Judge concludes that Appellant committed a violation of Minn. Stat. § 84D.10, subd. 4(b), and, that a civil penalty of $100 is an applicable penalty under Minn. Stat. § 84D.13, subd. 5(a)(6). Therefore, the Administrative Law Judge respectfully recommends that the Commissioner AFFIRM the citation and fine.
October 31, 2013 - THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that this matter will be scheduled for a telephone prehearing conference and an evidentiary hearing to be held at the Office of Administrative Hearings, 600 North Robert Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101.
October 31, 2013 - (1) The Complaint alleges prima facie violations of Minn. Stat. § 211A.02 in claim #2 and claim #5. These claims will proceed to a probable cause hearing;
(2) All of the other claims alleged in the Complaint are DISMISSED;
(3) This matter is scheduled for a probable cause hearing on the alleged violations of Minn. Stat. § 211A.02, to be held by telephone before the undersigned Administrative Law Judge at 2:30 p.m. on Monday, November 4, 2013. The hearing will be held by call-in telephone conference.
October 25, 2013 - The Administrative Law Judge concludes that the Respondent has failed to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the $300 fee should be reduced because he was returned to incarceration and, therefore, the Department is entitled to collect the $300 fee.