In Carson Harbor Village, Ltd. v. City of Carson Mobilehome Park Rental Review Bd. (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 281, the Board disallowed as an operating expense attorney fees incurred for the investigation, research and preparation of a lawsuit seeking to recover the costs of the wetlands remediation from various corporate and governmental entities, as well as attorney fees incurred in endeavoring to recover cleanup costs from insurers in the face of environmental damage policy exclusions. (Id. at pp. 293-294.) Simply stated, "the Board found the legal services underlying those attorneys' fees were not provided in connection with regular mobilehome park operations." (Id. at p. 294.) In affirming the disallowance, the court observed the administrative record showed that the Board received testimony on the attorney fee issue, asked questions of the interested parties, distinguished situations where attorney fees had been allowed as operating expenses and weighed the arguments supporting each position. (Carson Harbor Village, supra, 70 Cal.App.4th at p. 294.) The court concluded: "We find substantial evidence in the administrative record supports the Board's findings. A court should not substitute its judgment for that of the local mobilehome rent control board even though the court may arrive at different findings of fact after hearing the case on its merits. We are therefore unwilling to overturn the Board's decision based on its careful weighing of evidence and interpretation of expenses directly connected with park operations." (Ibid.)