Administrative Adjudication Bill of Rights

Administrative Adjudication Bill of Rights By Chris Micheli

            In the California Government Code, there are administrative adjudication procedures for state departments and agencies. Among those provisions is a “bill of rights” related to administrative adjudication. Government Code Section 11425.10 specifies requirements that must be included in the governing procedure by which a state agency conducts an adjudicative proceeding. Those requirements include the following:

 

·         The agency shall give the person to which the agency action is directed notice and an opportunity to be heard, including the opportunity to present and rebut evidence.

 

·         The agency shall make available to the person to which the agency action is directed a copy of the governing procedure.

 

·         The hearing shall be open to public observation.

 

·         The adjudicative function shall be separated from the investigative, prosecutorial, and advocacy functions within the agency.

 

·         The presiding officer is subject to disqualification for bias, prejudice, or interest.

 

·         The decision shall be in writing, be based on the record, and include a statement of the factual and legal basis of the decision.

 

·         A decision may not be relied on as precedent unless the agency designates and indexes the decision as precedent.

 

·         Ex parte communications shall be restricted.

 

·         Language assistance shall be made available by an agency.

            Section 11425.20 requires a hearing to be open to public observation, but a presiding officer has authority to order closure of a hearing or make other protective orders to the extent necessary or proper.

To the extent a hearing is conducted by telephone, television, or other electronic means, and is not closed as otherwise required by law, the requirement that the meeting is open to public observation is satisfied if members of the public have an opportunity to do hear or inspect the agency’s record, and be physically or virtually present at the place where the presiding officer is conducting the hearing.

Section 11425.30 prohibits a person from serving as a presiding officer in an adjudicative proceeding if the person has served as investigator, prosecutor, or advocate in the proceeding or its preadjudicative stage, or the person is subject to the authority, direction, or discretion of a person who has served as investigator, prosecutor, or advocate in the proceeding or its preadjudicative stage, with specified exceptions.

Section 11425.40 specifies that the presiding officer is subject to disqualification for bias, prejudice, or interest in the proceeding. The provisions of this section governing disqualification of the presiding officer also govern disqualification of the agency head or other person or body to which the power to hear or decide in the proceeding is delegated. And, an agency that conducts an adjudicative proceeding may provide by regulation for peremptory challenge of the presiding officer.

Section 11425.50 requires the decision to be in writing and include a statement of the factual and legal basis for the decision. The statement of the factual basis for the decision may be in the language of, or by reference to, the pleadings.

In addition, the statement of the factual basis for the decision must be based exclusively on the evidence of record in the proceeding and on matters officially noticed in the proceeding. The presiding officer’s experience, technical competence, and specialized knowledge may be used in evaluating evidence.

Section 11425.60 provides that a decision may not be expressly relied on as precedent unless it is designated as a precedent decision by the agency. An agency may designate as a precedent decision a decision or part of a decision that contains a significant legal or policy determination of general application that is likely to recur, and it is not subject to judicial review.

In addition, an agency must maintain an index of significant legal and policy determinations made in precedent decisions. The index must be updated annually and be made available to the public by subscription.

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Another Reason to Limit Bill Introductions?

Another Reason to Limit Bill Introductions?  By Chris Micheli             As I did my final review of Governor Newsom’s actions on the 1,046 bills sent to him after the 2023 Legislative Session, I noticed that some of the Governor’s veto messages provide additional rationales for limiting bill introductions.             Out of 156 vetoes from the 2023 Session, the number one reason for the Governor’s veto was budget concerns or cost pressures. In fact, 41% of the vetoes used that basis. That by itself is not a reason to limit bill introductions, but another statistic may provide such a reason…             By my count, just over 1/3 of the bills vetoed by Governor Newsom likely should not have been sent to his Desk and, arguably, should not have made it through the process at all. In fact, perhaps they should not h...
Read more

Frequently Asked Questions about California’s Budget Process

Frequently Asked Questions about California’s Budget Process  By Chris Micheli             What are the main parts of the California state budget? They are the Budget Bill, Budget Bill Junior, Trailer Bills, and Supplemental Reports.             What is the Budget Bill? This bill contains the appropriations and “Budget Bill Language”. Note that only a Budget Bill (or BBJ) can contain multiple appropriations. It requires a majority vote for passage and the bill takes effect immediately. There is just one Budget Bill. What is the “Budget Bill Jr.”? This is the bill that amends the main Budget Bill by making changes to multiple appropriations. There are often multiple BBJs. What is a Trailer Bill? This bill makes the statutory changes needed to implement the budget. It is the same as any other bill, but it takes effect immediately with a majority vote if it contain...
Read more

Can Any Bill Call an Election?

Can Any Bill Call an Election?  By Chris Micheli             In June 2024, we saw two bills that contain a provision to call an election.             Both bills contain a “plus” section at the end of the bill, which is an uncodified statute, stating the following: “this act calls an election within the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall go into immediate effect.” Such a measure only requires a majority vote, unless some other constitutional provision requires a higher vote threshold (e.g., a tax increase). What is the basis for this statement? Section 8(c)(3) of Article IV of the state Constitution provides: “ Statutes calling elections, statutes providing for tax levies or appropriations for the usual current expenses of the State, and urgency statutes shall go into effect immediately upon their enactment.” However, there is no further gui...
Read more