stipulation to dismiss without prejudice the City’s Second Cause of Action forDeclaratory Judgment under C.R.C.P. 57 and C.R.S. § 13-15-101.
Standard of Review
A court’s review under C.R.C.P. 106(a)(4) is “limited to a determination of whether the body or officer has exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion.” Areviewing court is primarily concerned with “whether the agency has regularly pursued its authority; whether its decisions are just and reasonable; and whether itsconclusions are in accordance with the evidence.”
Stevinson Imports, Inc. v. City & Cnty. of Denver
, 143 P.3d 1099, 1101 (Colo. App. 2006).An administrative agency or governmental entity exceeds its jurisdiction orabuses its discretion only if it misapplies the law or if there is no competent evidencein the record to support its decision.
Bd. of County Comm’rs v. Conder
, 927 P.2d1339, 1343 (Colo. 1996);
Puckett v. City of County of Denver
, 12 P.3d 313, 314(Colo. App. 2000) (reviewing court may not reweigh evidence);
State Civil Serv. Comm'n v. Hazlett
, 119 Colo. 173, 178, 201 P.2d 616, 619 (1948) (reviewing court notpermitted to substitute its judgment “where there is competent evidence in the recordto support” an agency decision). A court may reverse final agency action when“unsupported by substantial evidence.”
, 143 P.3d at 1101 (citing
Nededog v. Colo. Dep't of Health Care Policy & Fin.,
98 P.3d 960, 961 (Colo. App. 2004)).Review of a governmental body’s interpretation of the law is de novo.
Treece,Alfrey, Musat & Bosworth, PC v. Dep't of Fin.
, 298 P.3d 993, 996 (Colo. App. 2011) cert.denied, 11SC967, 2012 WL 3642414 (Colo. Aug. 27, 2012) (citing
Talbots, Inc. v.Schwartzberg,
928 P.2d 822, 823 (Colo. App. 1996)). “Whether an order is supportedby adequate findings of fact  is a question of law.”
, 143 P.3d at 1101.Additionally, an administrative body’s findings concerning mixed question on law andfact are not binding on the reviewing court.
Pursuant to Denver City Charter § 9.4.15(F), the Commission may review ahearing officer's or panel’s decision in limited circumstances, such as when:. . . the decision of the hearing officer involves an erroneousinterpretation of departmental or civil service rules, [or] the decision of