In Fukuda v. City of Angels (1999) 20 Cal.4th 805, in considering a terminated police officer's petition for writ of administrative mandate, the superior court stated the defendant city "'has the burden of proof to produce a preponderance of evidence in support of the findings.'" (Id. at p. 810, fn. omitted.) The Court of Appeal affirmed, concluding that no presumption of correctness applied to the agency's findings. (Id. at 817.) The California Supreme Court reversed, holding the trial court must afford administrative findings a "strong presumption of correctness," and the party contesting the findings "bears the burden of convincing the court that the administrative findings are contrary to the weight of the evidence." (Ibid.) In short, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that, "in exercising its independent judgment, a trial court must afford a strong presumption of correctness concerning the administrative findings, and the party challenging the administrative decision bears the burden of convincing the court that the administrative findings are contrary to the weight of the evidence." While the trial court utilizes the "independent judgment" standard of review, an appellate court does not. Instead, we review the record to determine whether the trial court's decision is supported by substantial evidence. ( Fukuda v. City of Angels, supra, 20 Cal.4th at p. 824).