When must an administrative agency reflect facts and opinions given through a public hearing or an online public hearing in its disposition?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In a practice file we read the record of the public hearing or online public hearing and the list of facts and opinions presented there, the agency's reasons for the disposition, and the disposition itself, since each shows whether the presented matter was given substantial reasons and reflected.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading takes the duty at its word: when making a disposition, an agency that finds that facts and opinions presented through a public hearing, an online public hearing or information and communications networks have substantial reasons must reflect them, so the finding of substantial reasons is the condition the agency itself reaches before the duty attaches.
Another reading marks the limits: the duty attaches only at the stage of making a disposition, and only to what was presented through the channels the provision names and only where the agency recognises substantial reasons, so the provision leaves open how a party could test a finding that reasons were not substantial.
Your judgment
If the agency states that the opinions presented had no substantial reasons, what in the file would show how it reached that finding?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to change the channels it names or to require reasons for a finding of no substantial reasons, or if a court decision clarifies what showing an opinion has substantial reasons requires.