Court Opinion

ID: 9568165
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:01:06.743205+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:24:25.087702
License: Public Domain

SANDSTROM, Justice,
dissenting.
Because I believe Barnett’s evidence of physical and mental impairment exceeded the scope of the hearing, I respectfully dissent.
Barnett, an unemployed drug addict who gives his address as his car, applied for food stamps. He asserted no exemption, and specifically acknowledged he was required to attend the Basic Employment Skills Training Program (BEST) when directed, and to seek and accept suitable employment.
Barnett’s benefits were suspended because he failed to comply with the work requirements, and he did not have “good cause” for that failure. 7 CFR § 273.7(g)(1)®. “Good cause” for failing to comply with the work requirements includes “circumstances beyond the member’s control, such as, but not limited to, illness, illness of another household member requiring the presence of the member, a household emergency, the unavailability of transportation, or the lack of adequate child care.” 7 CFR § 273.7(m).
The purpose of the hearing was to determine whether Barnett had a valid reason for missing the scheduled BEST appointment. Rather than address that issue, Barnett contested the issue of whether he should be required to participate in the BEST program at all.
Our Administrative Code provides: “ ‘Fair hearing’ means an appeal hearing, established pursuant to ... 42 CFR part 431, subpart D ... or any other federal law or regulation that specifically requires the department to provide a dissatisfied claimant an opportunity for a hearing that meets the requirements for due process of law.” N.D.Admin.Code 75-01-03-01(10). 42 CFR § 431, subpart D provides the complaining party is afforded “(a]n opportunity for a full evidentiary hearing on the issue of the noncompliance that led to the imposition of enforcement actions ...” 42 CFR § 431.153(f)(2) [emphasis added]. The noncompliance here was failure to participate in the BEST program, which Barnett had acknowledged he was required to attend when directed.
The agency properly found that Barnett did not show good cause for missing the BEST appointment, and properly suspended his benefits. Barnett’s ineligibility for benefits then continues until he becomes exempt from work registration through mental or physical impairment, “or for two months, whichever occurs earlier.” 7 CFR § 273.7(g)(1)®.