Written “Findings of Fact” are required to support a decision of the hearing body to approve or deny a discretionary action (Topanga Association for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 C.3d 506). 1/

• Findings are the legal footprints showing how the decision-making process evolved from the initial facts to the decision.
• They “bridge the analytical gap between the raw evidence and ultimate decision” (Topanga, supra).

Topanga cites several purposes for making findings, including: (1) providing a framework for making principled decisions, thus enhancing the integrity of the administrative process; (2) helping make analysis orderly and reducing the likelihood that the agency will randomly leap from evidence to conclusion; and (3) serving a public relations function by helping to persuade parties that administrative decision-making is careful, reasoned, and equitable. Findings should also justify any conditions which impose fees or other exactions.” 2/

If the decision is challenged, a court will examine the evidence supporting the Findings to determine whether the hearing body abused its discretion when acting.  Such an abuse of discretion is found when:

• The decision-maker did not proceed in a manner prescribed by law;
• Findings do not support the decision; or
• The Findings are not supported by evidence in the administrative record.

To summarize, Findings must give:

• Reasons for the approval or denial; and,
• Evidence supporting those reasons.

While all conditions, particularly those required by the Planning and Zoning Code, need not be individually, in detail, supported, those conditions which are significant to the action should be discussed. Conditions that are important in mitigating impacts must also be backed with Findings. Notably, a Finding must be written if the approval decision does not include a mitigation measure in the environmental clearance.

Footnotes

1/   A more comprehensive discussion of Findings is presented in SATT's Training on Zoning Basics (Tool Kit).

2/ The Planner Trainer Series: The Conditional Use Permit, Office of Planning and Research, State of California, August 1997. For a detailed discussion of findings requirements, see OPR's publication entitled Bridging the Gap.