The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) is a cornerstone of administrative law, designed to ensure transparency, accountability, and public participation in government decision-making. Under the APA, government agencies are required to follow specific procedures when making rules, addressing petitions, or taking administrative actions. These protections are meant to guarantee that individuals and organizations have their rights respected and their concerns fairly addressed.
As part of our ongoing efforts to challenge the California Fish and Game Commission’s classification of ferrets as wild animals and a detrimental species, we first sent a Request for Regulatory Change to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL). They responded by stating that such petitions belong to the state agency involved, not the OAL. Consequently, we sent our petition to the Fish and Game Commission.
Fish and Game responded by insisting that we needed to fill out Form FGC 1 – their petition for regulation change. We have complied with this request multiple times. However, there are two key problems: first, this form does not align with the nature of our request, and second, it places Fish and Game in complete control over the decision-making process.
The typical response we receive from Fish and Game is that permits for wild animals will not be issued. There is no acknowledgment of hearings, public testimony, or scientific studies to determine whether domestic ferrets are indeed wild animals or a detrimental species. Perhaps we should have reframed our request as a “Petition for Public Input and Scientific Integrity” rather than a “Petition for Regulatory Change.”
Ari Cornman, a wildlife expert at Fish and Game, initially responded to our inquiry by stating that we needed to start with Form FGC 1. This form, required since October 1, 2015, is intended for use by individuals or agencies recommending regulation changes. However, our request is not about a regulation change—it is about ensuring that our rights under the APA are respected.
The lack of acknowledgment of our specific APA-related concerns raises significant issues. Despite repeated efforts to address these concerns, Mr. Cornman has not responded to our inquiries about respecting our APA rights and continues to insist on using Form FGC 1.
Reaching Out for Help
We have attempted to escalate this issue by appealing to various ombudsmen. The OAL ombudsman was courteous and genuine in a phone conversation, but her written response was less than helpful:
“This is in response to your request to document that the Office of Administrative Law is not another level of appeal for FGC decisions. Have a great day!” — OAL Reference Attorney
Requests to Governor Newsom’s Ombudsman have yet to be acknowledged, and emails sent to my newly elected Assemblywoman, Dr. La Shae Sharp Collins, and State Senator Akilah Weber, remain unanswered.
A Final Attempt to Engage
I sent the following email to Mr. Cornman, which has also gone unanswered:
Subject: Follow-Up: APA Petition and Procedural Clarifications
Dear Mr. Cornman,
I am writing to follow up on my previous inquiries regarding the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and my petition to the California Fish and Game Commission. As of now, I have not received a response to my questions, and I am seeking clarification on the next steps for addressing the procedural aspects of my petition.
The Office of Administrative Law (OAL) recently suggested that the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) might be an appropriate forum to resolve these concerns. However, I would prefer to resolve this matter directly with your office to avoid unnecessary escalation.
To help me understand the Commission’s position and next steps, could you please provide clarity on the following:
Could you clarify the Commission’s obligations under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) regarding petitions such as mine? Specifically, what steps are required to ensure compliance with APA procedural rules?
What is the expected timeline for the Commission to provide a formal response to my petition, as mandated by the APA?
Does the APA require a public hearing or specific review process for my petition? If so, has the Commission initiated this process?
Are there specific APA provisions that the Commission believes my petition does not satisfy? If so, could you provide details to help me address these concerns?
If the Commission does not act on this petition, would an administrative hearing through the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) be an appropriate forum to address potential APA compliance issues?
I kindly request a response within 10 business days to help me determine the appropriate path forward. I remain hopeful that we can work together to address this matter constructively and in a timely manner.
Thank you for your time and attention, and I look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Pat Wright
(619) 757-7426
Next Steps
I find it difficult to believe that when we are advocating for our rights under the Administrative Procedures Act, our request is simply ignored. It’s one thing to deny a request, but to ignore it entirely is outrageous.
Let’s see what happens between now and New Year’s. I’m prepared to make more noise and, if necessary, return to court to ensure that our rights are respected.