Laserfiche WebLink
act or decision is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record." Public <br />Resources Code §21168. "The inquiry in such a case shall extend to ... whether there <br />was any prejudicial abuse of discretion. Abuse of discretion is established if the <br />respondent has not proceeded in the manner required by law, the order or decision is not <br />supported by the findings, or the findings are not supported by the evidence." C.C.P. <br />1094.4(b). "Where it is claimed that the findings are not supported by the evidence... <br />abuse of discretion is established if the court determines that the findings are not supported <br />by substantial evidence in light of the whole record." C.C.P. § 1094.4(c). <br />As stated by the Court of Appeal in Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v City <br />of Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.AppAth 1184, 1197, 1198: <br />Substantial evidence is defined as `enough relevant information and <br />reasonable inferences from this information that a fair argument can be <br />made to support a conclusion, even though other conclusions might also be <br />reached. "' [Citations.] Substantial evidence is not "argument, <br />speculation, unsubstantiated opinion or narrative, evidence which is clearly <br />inaccurate or erroneous, or evidence of social or economic impacts which <br />do not contribute to, or are not caused by, physical impacts on the <br />environment, is not substantial evidence. <br />CEQA requires an EIR to reflect a good faith effort at full disclosure; it <br />does not mandate perfection, nor does it require an analysis to be <br />exhaustive." [Citation.] Therefore, "noncompliance with CEQA's <br />information disclosure requirements is not per se reversible; prejudice must <br />be shown." [Citations.] Failure to comply with the information <br />5 <br />8.B. - Page 64