More About DALA
DALA was initially established in 1974 as the Division of Hearing Officers, to replace the staff of hearing officers who formerly heard rate appeals in-house at the Rate Setting Commission. By 1978, DALA's jurisdiction had expanded to include appeals from actions of the Contributory Retirement Appeal Board, the Civil Service Commission and any other agency that requests that DALA hear designated matters. In 1983, the name of the agency was changed to the Division of Administrative Law Appeals.
Under DALA's current enabling legislation, a key role for the organization is to provide a neutral forum for the adjudication of appeals of decisions by other state agencies. DALA was purposely established as an independent agency, to help ensure that decisions would be rendered free from the appearance of conflicts of interest or undue influence by personnel within the agency whose decisions are under review.
THE CASES WE HEAR
Cases come to DALA in two ways. Certain classes of cases are assigned to DALA by statute, such as appeals of citations issued by the Attorney General for violations of the fair wage and hour laws. Other classes of cases are heard upon request - any agency authorized to conduct hearings may request that DALA hear those cases, subject to the approval of the Secretariat in which the requesting agency sits, DALA's Chief Administrative Magistrate, and the Secretary of Administration and Finance.
The subject matter of DALA proceedings is as diverse as the activities of the agencies for which DALA hears cases. DALA magistrates routinely preside over cases of public importance and their decisions can have significant and lasting consequences, for the public and for individual citizens and their families. Pension eligibility issues and disciplinary actions involving physicians may be among the better known matters heard by the agency, but a range of other issues are addressed, in the first instance, at DALA. Among these are child protection and standards of care in elder care facilities; allegations of patient abuse by licensed health care professionals; environmental protection and permitting decisions in projects ranging from construction of a single home to so-called ‘big box’ commercial developments; and charges of serious misconduct by public employees which may put the safety of the general public at risk.
In all these matters, the DALA process safeguards basic fairness because allegations, whether factual, legal or both, must be tested according to applicable standards of law. The hearing process has one of two outcomes: either the prerequisites for agency action are established, in which case the agency may proceed to act (or the agency's prior action stands), consistent with agency's legislative mandate; or the material allegations are not proven, in which case the agency must refrain from action (or its prior action must be rescinded).
The following are some of the agencies whose appeals are currently heard at DALA.
- Board of Registration in Medicine
- Civil Service Commission
In addition to hearing its own cases, the CSC refers some cases to DALA
- Contributory Retirement Appeal Board
This category includes appeals of decisions of the State Board of Retirement, the Massachusetts Teachers Retirement System, the other city, town and regional retirement boards, as well as the Public Employee Retirement Administration Commission.
- Department of Early Education and Care
- Department of Environmental Protection
- Department of Public Health
- Department of Veterans Services
- Division of Health Care and Finance and Policy (formerly the Rate Setting Commission)
- Division of Capital Asset Management; and
- Office of the Attorney General, Fair Labor Division
DALA also conducts just-cause hearings when a member of a designated municipal police force is transferred from the rank of detective. In addition, DALA routinely hears appeals on an ad hoc basis for other agencies such as the Commission Against Discrimination and the Division of Employment and Training.
STREAMLINING THE PROCESS FOR IMPROVED RESULTS
Behind the scenes, DALA is also focused on a second legislative mandate: streamline the proceedings through policies designed to encourage and assist the parties to narrow the issues, limit appeals to the Superior Court pursuant to G.L. c. 30A, and streamline the proceedings in those cases in which there are further appeals. By focusing the parties, counsel and the presiding magistrate on what really matters - i.e. the legally significant issues - the outcome should be better decisions rendered more quickly. This work has additional benefits: critical resources - the financial and other investments every litigant makes in his or her case, and staff time and administrative resources committed by the several agencies that may have an interest in a given appeal - are not expended on irrelevant matters.
Achieving these goals takes teamwork. For management, the challenge is to identify and assess the true sources of potential delay and find solutions that effectively target them. The role of the administrative magistrate is also critical to guiding parties to create a record that includes all the necessary facts and does not stray into matters that are not relevant. The administrative support personnel at DALA are also essential to keep the paper moving in the right direction and to provide the public as well as internal staff with the information they need. Finally, there are the parties themselves and their counsel. Their cooperation in raising the key issues and keeping the focus there is invaluable to enhancing the fairness and efficiency of the system.