Skip to content
Administrative Hearings Office Evaluation
Hearing Officer/Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Evaluation
To the extent possible, please complete the survey in an objective manner independent of your preferred final outcome.
OK
1.
Name of the ALJ/Hearing Officer and Case Type
Hearing Officer
Case Type
Hearing Officer Name/Case Type
-- Select an option --
Brian VanDenzen
Chris Romero
Dee Dee Hoxie
David Buchanan
Ignacio Gallegos
Irma Gonzalez
Lauren Baldwin
Mary Valencia
Pam Candelaria
Jacob Streeter
-- Select an option --
Implied Consent Act/DWI License Revocation
Motor Vehicle Code
Parental Responsibility Act
Tax Protest (Gross Receipts Tax)
Tax Protest (Personal Income Tax)
Tax Protest (Corporate Income Tax)
Tax Protest (Credit Claim)
Tax Protest (Property Tax Valuation)
Tax Protest (Other)
Other
Other (please specify)
2.
My Role at the Hearing
Party (represented by an attorney or other authorized individual)
Party (Unrepresented)
Attorney
CPA/Accountant
Bona fide employee of a taxpayer
Law enforcement officer
Witness
Other (please specify)
3.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the final result, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ was knowledgeable of the relevant law in the subject matter of the hearing you attended?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
4.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the final result, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ was well-prepared for the hearing?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
5.
Regardless of whether you agreed with any particular ruling or the final result, were you satisfied overall that the hearing officer/ALJ applied hearing rules/procedures fairly to all parties?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
6.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the final result, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ explained the hearing process in an understandable manner?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
7.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the final result, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ engaged respectfully and professionally with hearing participants?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
8.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the final result, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ maintained appropriate control/decorum of the hearing?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
9.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the final result, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ was attentive to testimony and arguments?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
10.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the final result, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ allowed the parties at the hearing to make appropriate/non-repetitive arguments and objections?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
11.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the final result, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ efficiently used hearing time and kept the overall hearing process on track?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
12.
Were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ refraind from and prohibited others from engaging in bias based on race, religion, ethnicity, culture, ancestry, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, disability, or socioeconomic status during the hearing process?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
13.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the final result, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ decided the case based upon the evidence presented?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
14.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the orders or final decision, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ prepared an order or decision that resolved each relevant issue presented?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
15.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the ultimate conclusion, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ's orders and decision contained sufficient legal analysis, explanation, and citation/discussion of supporting authority?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
16.
Regardless of whether you agreed with the orders/decision, were you satisfied that the hearing officer/ALJ's order/decision was well-written and understandable?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
17.
Considering the complexity of the issues and case, were you satisfied with the timeliness of orders/rulings/decision in the case?
1: Poor/Very dissatisfied
2: Below average/Somewhat dissatisfied
3: Average/Normal
4: Good/Satisfied
5: Excellent/Very satisfied
Unsure/Not Applicable
Current Progress,
0 of 27 answered
