1 BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 2 450 N STREET 3 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 4 5 6 7 8 REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT 9 APRIL 29, 2015 10 11 12 13 14 15 ITEM P 16 OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS 17 ITEM P3 18 SALES AND USE TAX DEPUTY DIRECTOR'S REPORT 19 1. REFUND APPROVAL 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 REPORTED BY: Kathleen Skidgel 28 CSR NO. 9039 1 1 P R E S E N T 2 3 For the Board Jerome E. Horton of Equalization: Chairman 4 5 Sen. George Runner (Ret.) Vice Chairman 6 7 Fiona Ma, CPA Member 8 9 Diane L. Harkey Member 10 11 Yvette Stowers Appearing for Betty T. 12 Yee, State Controller (per Government Code 13 Section 7.9) 14 Joann Richmond 15 Chief, Board Proceedings Division 16 17 ---oOo--- 18 For Staff: Jeff McGuire Deputy Director 19 Sales & Use Tax Administration 20 Lynn Bartolo 21 Chief, Special Taxes Policy & Compliance 22 Division 23 Kevin Hanks Chief, Sales & Use Tax 24 Administration 25 Randy Ferris Chief Counsel 26 Legal Department 27 ---oOo--- 28 2 1 450 N STREET 2 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 3 APRIL 29, 2015 4 ---oOo--- 5 MR. HORTON: Ms. Richmond, our next 6 matter. 7 MS. RICHMOND: Our next matter is Item P3 8 Sales and Use Tax Deputy Director's Report; Item 9 P3.1 Refund Approval. 10 MR. HORTON: Okay. Welcome. Please 11 introduce yourself for the record. 12 MR. McGUIRE: Good morning, Members. I'm 13 Jeff McGuire with the Sales and Use Tax Department, 14 and with me today is Lynn Bartolo of our Special 15 Taxes and Fees Department. 16 We have one item before you today for your 17 consideration which involves a proposal to raise the 18 threshold for Board Member approval of refunds. 19 The Board's current delegation of authority 20 to staff is set at $100,000 or less. Board Member 21 approval is currently required for all refunds in 22 excess of $100,000. 23 For purposes of this discussion, just to 24 clarify, "refunds" refers to refund approvals, 25 denials and credits and cancellations included on 26 the Board's agenda, either under nonappearance 27 matters, matters for consideration or credits, 28 cancellation and refund matters that are either 3 1 consent or adjudicatory. 2 The alternatives before you start with 3 Alternative 1, which is recommended by staff, which 4 would increase the threshold from the current 5 $100,000 to $250,000. This change would still 6 require the Board to approve 92 percent of the 7 dollars that currently go before the Board for 8 approval for refunds. 9 Under this change, cases between 100,000 10 and 250,000 would be processed and refunded to 11 taxpayers up to three months sooner by bypassing the 12 Board's approval process. All the public posting 13 requirements required under the law, which are -- 14 include all refunds over $50,000, would continue to 15 be met for the ones between 100,000 and 250,000 that 16 staff would approve. 17 This change would require some amendments 18 to our Board Regulations 5218, 5237 and 5267 which 19 are Board's rules for tax appeals. And as such, the 20 changes that anything you adopt today would actually 21 not take place until we actually amend those 22 regulations and those are approved by the Office of 23 Administrative Law. 24 Our second alternative would just delegate 25 authority to issue all refunds approval from the 26 Board to staff. And under this change then all of 27 the cases would potentially be processed up to three 28 months sooner and give the money back to taxpayers. 4 1 This would also require changes to those 2 three regulations and would be implemented, again, 3 once we change the regulations and those are 4 approved by the Office of Administrative Law. And 5 all the public record posting requirements would 6 continue to be met by us as the agency as we do 7 currently for all over $50,000 refunds. 8 And then, finally, our third alternative is 9 just to actually leave it the way it is today, which 10 is $100,000. 11 And so we are here today before you to 12 request your approval of one of these alternatives 13 and then if -- as necessary, your authorization to 14 publish any changes to the regulations mentioned. 15 MR. HORTON: Discussion? 16 Member Harkey. 17 MS. HARKEY: Hi. Thank you very much. 18 I am predisposed just to let them all stay 19 with the Department. But before we do that, what is 20 it that we get now? If you could describe exactly 21 what we get now and what the criteria are right now 22 for those items over a hundred thousand. Because as 23 I -- I know what I think I get. I want to hear from 24 you for the record. 25 MR. McGUIRE: So I guess, just to make 26 sure, what you get as the Board in addition to what 27 we would do at the staff level? 28 MS. HARKEY: Right. 5 1 MR. McGUIRE: All right. So normally at 2 the staff level it has an approval level within each 3 of our departments based upon the level of the 4 refund, how high up it has to go within our 5 departments to be approved. 6 When they actually move on to the Board, 7 then of course we prepare all the materials for the 8 Board, the planning with the Board Proceedings 9 Division to get those in time, ahead of time. 10 We prepare hearing -- in essence, 11 summaries. We call them refund summaries, not 12 hearing summaries. But refund summaries on each of 13 those for the U.S., the Members and your staff to 14 review and understand what all the items were in 15 those. 16 Those, also, that come before the Board do 17 require additional approval levels within our 18 department. So any one of those that are going to 19 go to the Board do come up to, like, my level as a 20 Deputy Director and Lynn Bartolo's level over at 21 Special Taxes and Fees, as well as those go through 22 our Assistant Chief Counsel in Legal before those 23 actually go to you guys. 24 So there's a lot of kind of administrative 25 process in getting those to you, which is really 26 just related to providing you with the information 27 so you can understand what was the whole background 28 on those cases that's really already been reviewed 6 1 by staff but prepared additionally for you. 2 MS. HARKEY: Okay. How frequently -- I 3 guess, we would still -- we would still, as Board 4 Members, be privy to a staff report and the refund 5 summary reports? If we didn't see these they would 6 be appealed? 7 MR. McGUIRE: Right. We could -- we could 8 provide any reports that the Board would like us to 9 provide on refunds just like we do on some of the 10 other items that we process through our department 11 each year. Like where we grant relief of certain 12 things, we provide you guys with a report on that, 13 like 6596 relief and things like that. So we 14 could -- we could do that. 15 We don't currently have an alternate 16 process to provide you with that information for 17 cases over a certain dollar amount. We process the 18 ones under a hundred thousand, and all the ones over 19 a hundred thousand come to you. 20 MS. HARKEY: Okay. For the ones under a 21 hundred thousand right now, if we wanted to view 22 something, what would we get? 23 MR. McGUIRE: You would make a request to 24 us as the department, either department, and we 25 would prepare an ad hoc report to you about that. 26 We don't have a -- we don't currently have 27 a process that we do that on a regular basis, but we 28 could if that was the desire of the Board. 7 1 MS. HARKEY: Okay. If -- if -- how many -- 2 how many of these appeals -- or not appeals. But 3 how many of these -- of these refunds -- before it 4 comes to us, staff is recommending a refund? 5 MR. McGUIRE: Yes, a refund, cancellation 6 or credit, right. 7 MS. HARKEY: That's -- that's just 8 standard. 9 How many times does a Board Member pull 10 these because they don't agree? 11 MR. McGUIRE: We have -- we aren't aware 12 that the Board has. 13 MS. HARKEY: I'm just not aware -- 14 MR. McGUIRE: I mean historically there 15 must have been some situation, but in recent memory 16 we can't remember any. 17 MS. HARKEY: Okay. I'm just -- I'm just 18 wondering. And I know this may be subject for a 19 little discussion, but I'm -- I'm just thinking that 20 we pretty much rely on you for your staff report, 21 your recommendation, and I'm not really aware that 22 the Board staff gives money away easily. So I think 23 these are pretty well ferreted out. 24 Yes, Mr. Hanks. 25 MR. HANKS: Yes. Ms. Harkey, Kevin Hanks 26 with the Sales and Use Tax Department. 27 Just in response to -- to your inquiry, I 28 just wanted to comment that very occasionally Board 8 1 Members might have some questions concerning the -- 2 the write-ups that -- that we're recommending in 3 connection with refund matters. Ordinarily it 4 relates to items apart from the refund itself, but 5 whether or not petitioner has been apprised of their 6 appeals rights concerning any other elements that 7 they might disagree with. 8 For instance, you might have a taxpayer 9 that isn't full in agreement with the amount of the 10 refund that's being recommended, but they're 11 indicating to us they want more of a refund 12 actually. And so those are the type of situations 13 that we typically might see where a Board Member 14 might have a question. 15 MS. HARKEY: So -- so if we didn't -- if we 16 chose to just let you have approval for those items, 17 what recourse would the taxpayer have, an appeal? 18 MR. HANKS: They would have their appeals 19 rights. 20 MS. HARKEY: Okay. 21 MR. HANKS: Correct. 22 MS. HARKEY: Thank you. 23 MR. HANKS: Correct. So that wouldn't 24 change. 25 MS. HARKEY: Thank you. 26 MR. HORTON: Member Ma. 27 MS. MA: So, Mr. McGuire, you said that 28 usually takes three to four months longer for a 9 1 refund if they -- if we have to come to the Board 2 for approval. 3 MR. McGUIRE: That's correct. 4 MS. MA: Do we give interest -- 5 MR. McGUIRE: Yeah, we -- well -- 6 MS. MA: -- to the taxpayer? 7 MR. McGUIRE: Currently credit interest is 8 at zero, so -- 9 We do -- we -- we do grant interest. But, 10 again, current -- in the current periods it's zero 11 right now, based on current interest rates and 12 that's the statutory calculation of interest. So 13 debit interest, like if you owed us, is at six 14 percent, but credit interest is at zero. 15 MS. MA: And what's the rate for interest 16 if we are assessing the tax? 17 MR. McGUIRE: That would be six percent 18 debit interest, right. So we charge six percent. 19 We give back zero right now. 20 A lot of times -- 21 MS. MA: And then how is this determined, 22 like who determined this? 23 MR. McGUIRE: This is a statutory 24 calculation that's based upon -- I can't remember 25 the exact details. But it's calculated based in 26 statute where we look at certain factors and current 27 interest rates and it's discounted. 28 There's been a number of legislative 10 1 proposals over the years to take the interest rates 2 back to being equalized like they were back years 3 ago when I started at the Board. But they've been 4 separate for probably 15 or 20 years now. 5 MS. MA: Okay, thank you. 6 MR. HORTON: Member -- Member Runner. 7 MR. RUNNER: Yeah, I -- I'm actually fine 8 with going to all with the idea, but I -- what I 9 would like, though, is to -- and again, Jeff, maybe 10 you could help us know if this would slow the 11 process down, then I may not be too concerned about 12 it if it does slow the process down. A report that 13 would be -- but go to the 250. That each month we 14 as a Board -- I'd like to see a report of our 15 refunds that are 250 and above, as they would be 16 done. And that -- and that -- but -- but only as a 17 report, not as a -- not as an item of -- of action 18 or -- 19 Does that make sense? 20 MR. McGUIRE: Yeah. No, that absolutely 21 can be done. 22 MR. RUNNER: Would that add -- would that 23 be expedited? 24 MR. McGUIRE: That would definitely help us 25 shrink the time down because we have to write an 26 individual summary -- 27 MR. RUNNER: Right. 28 MR. McGUIRE: -- for you guys in detail of 11 1 each case. But there would still be some lead time 2 for us with the Board Proceedings process, just to 3 get that. So -- 4 MR. RUNNER: No, I don't mean a report to 5 the Board. I'm sorry. 6 MR. McGUIRE: Oh, I'm sorry. 7 MR. RUNNER: I meant an individual -- a 8 report to Board Members, not a report to the Board. 9 MR. McGUIRE: Oh, just like a Member -- 10 MR. RUNNER: Yeah, yeah. 11 MR. McGUIRE: -- a report from like us as 12 the Department -- 13 MR. RUNNER: Yeah. 14 MR. McGUIRE: -- to you guys? 15 MR. RUNNER: Yes. Not at a Board meeting. 16 MR. McGUIRE: Yeah, we could do that. 17 MR. RUNNER: It would just be just so we're 18 knowledgeable about those -- those larger ones. 19 MR. McGUIRE: And I don't believe that 20 would have any slowdown on the process though. 21 Because, again, we would be notifying you after we'd 22 approved because, again, we're not asking -- we 23 wouldn't be asking for your approval -- 24 MR. RUNNER: Right -- 25 MR. McGUIRE: -- again. So it would be -- 26 MR. RUNNER: Afterwards. 27 MR. McGUIRE: That would be fine. That 28 would be easy to do. 12 1 MR. HORTON: When there is a dispute 2 between the taxpayer and the Department where the 3 taxpayer is of the opinion that the deposit -- I 4 mean the claim should be higher, what discretion 5 does the Board have, aside from the appeals process, 6 in order to grant that claim? 7 MR. McGUIRE: Really I believe -- unless 8 I'm wrong, that's the appeals process. The taxpayer 9 can request an appeals hearing and then appeal that 10 all the way to you guys as the Board. 11 Ultimately, if they had some dispute, they 12 could take us to court ultimately, you know, after. 13 Because we've in essence denied, I guess, part of 14 their claim if they wanted more and we only gave 15 them a part of it. 16 MR. HORTON: When it's presented to the 17 Board, at the time that it's presented, does the 18 Board have the discretion at that time to adjust 19 that claim? 20 MR. McGUIRE: Yeah, under the Board's rules 21 of appeals you can approve, adjust, you know, and 22 modify anything on those claims that come before 23 you. 24 MR. HORTON: Yeah. 25 MR. RUNNER: But we -- 26 MS. HARKEY: I think -- 27 MR. RUNNER: For as long as I've -- I mean 28 I've only been here four, but -- 13 1 MR. HORTON: I mean I -- 2 MR. RUNNER: We pretty much accept them. 3 MR. HORTON: I generally -- 4 MS. HARKEY: Well, you could -- I mean -- 5 Go ahead. I'm sorry. 6 MR. HORTON: I'm -- Members, I don't know 7 what the number is, what the threshold should be. 8 I think it's wise to expedite the process 9 and get the claims for refunds to these individuals 10 as soon as possible. 11 If there is a disputed amount, I believe 12 that amount should come to the Board. And I'm not 13 necessarily prepared to give -- personally to give 14 up that -- that authority or responsibility to be 15 able to adjust in favor of the taxpayer if we agree, 16 which is generally the only direction that we 17 ultimately go is in favor of the taxpayer if their 18 claim is -- if they feel the claim is higher or to 19 give direction as a body to the staff as to how to 20 deal with those claims. 21 So I guess a solution would be is that if 22 there are any disputed amounts, that they still come 23 to the Board. That all the amounts that are agreed 24 to, everyone's in agreement, so why rubber-stamp it? 25 But when there are disputed amounts, the Board 26 should have somewhat some discretion in that 27 process, and I'm not necessarily prepared to give 28 that up. 14 1 I see Legal wanting to -- 2 MR. FERRIS: No. 3 MR. HORTON: No? 4 MR. FERRIS: I wanted to keep my focus on 5 you. 6 MR. HORTON: Oh, okay. All right. 7 MS. MA: Would there be notification to the 8 taxpayer that this is the refund amount; however, if 9 they do not agree, then, you know, their course of 10 action is X? 11 MR. McGUIRE: Right. Yeah, currently we 12 advise them if they disagree, then they can request 13 an appeals conference. Which, you know, kind of 14 starts moving them into the appeals process that 15 ultimately could, you know, be sitting right here 16 before you guys, discussing -- not like an audit 17 like we had earlier, but a refund case. 18 MS. MA: And how long would that process 19 take? 20 MR. McGUIRE: If they were appealing all 21 the way to the Board? 22 MS. MA: Yes. 23 MR. McGUIRE: That could take, you know, 24 maybe a year or two. 25 MR. RUNNER: We can use General Electric 26 for an example. 27 MR. HORTON: Yeah. 28 MR. McGUIRE: It could be take a little 15 1 while. 2 MR. HORTON: No, no, no. I mean it -- in 3 my -- in my experience, in the rare occasions when 4 that does happen, these companies, they do these -- 5 they do this risk assessment and the cost of 6 lawyers -- in order to get their rights, in order 7 to -- to make their statement, the cost of lawyers 8 and time and delay is generally not worth 50, a 9 hundred thousand dollars in claim. But they truly 10 believe that that refund should be higher, they 11 should receive more money than what the staff has 12 allowed. But because of the risks associated with 13 that or the cost of litigating that, they just go 14 ahead and settle. "Oh, well, just settle with the 15 Board of Equalization." 16 But anyway, that's just my -- 17 MR. RUNNER: I was going to say at least 18 my -- again, my time here, once they came on that 19 list, I kind of assumed that they're all okay. 20 Because if they're not, then we've -- then 21 they've -- then they've talked to us individually or 22 they've going through the appeal -- they're going 23 through some appeal process. 24 I'm trying to remember if we've ever -- I 25 don't think I've ever had a case where we actually 26 had somebody who said, "Hey, I'm on the list for 27 appeals and I need -- I need you to take me off." 28 MR. HORTON: For refund. 16 1 MR. RUNNER: I mean, "I'm on the list for 2 refund; I need you to take me off." I don't know. 3 MR. McGUIRE: I agree. I'm not aware of 4 that because they would have requested an appeals 5 conference. 6 MR. RUNNER: Right. 7 MR. McGUIRE: And then moved through, you 8 know, further up in the process. 9 MR. RUNNER: Yeah. 10 MS. HARKEY: I'm open for whatever. 11 MR. RUNNER: So I -- I -- well, let me 12 start. I'll go ahead and make a motion -- 13 MR. HORTON: Why don't we -- 14 Let me ask the Department, are there times 15 that the taxpayer disagrees with your -- the 16 amounts, and they feel that the claim should be 17 higher? 18 MS. BARTOLO: Occasionally, yes. 19 MR. HORTON: Occasionally. 20 MR. McGUIRE: There -- there -- there's 21 some situations. 22 MR. HORTON: On those occasions, what 23 happens? 24 MR. McGUIRE: Typically they would request 25 an appeals conference because they disagree with the 26 Department. 27 MR. HORTON: Has those appeals ever come 28 before the Board when they disagree? 17 1 MR. McGUIRE: Yes. 2 MS. BARTOLO: Yeah. 3 MR. McGUIRE: Uh-huh, absolutely. 4 MR. RUNNER: We get those. 5 MR. HORTON: And would it be faster to have 6 that item come before the Board and the Board grant 7 the appeals or grant the claim? 8 MR. McGUIRE: You mean just going straight 9 to the Board with those instead of going to an 10 appeals conference? 11 MR. HORTON: If they -- as opposed to 12 filing an appeal, it stays in its normal course of 13 action now, and when it comes before the Board, they 14 simply tell the Board that they disagree or they 15 contact the Member and say we disagree, we think it 16 should be higher and here's why. 17 Or, in fact Members have actually said in 18 the past that they disagreed with the decision and 19 pulled it off the calendar. And then we resolved it 20 and ultimately agreed. Only happened twice to my 21 knowledge. 22 MS. HARKEY: So it has happened. 23 MR. McGUIRE: Yeah, I think, again, it's 24 like a disputed audit amount. You know, a 25 deficiency as well as a refund, those appeals 26 processes are the same process that they can go 27 through. So if they agree at the staff's 28 recommendation to approve the refund and, you know, 18 1 even if they maybe thought it should be a little bit 2 different than it was agreed to but they thought 3 that's fine, then those wouldn't move forward and we 4 wouldn't even know that sometimes maybe they even 5 had, you know, a little bit of heartburn over them 6 or thought it should have been slightly different. 7 I think there is a process. I -- I just 8 wasn't sure if you were saying that we try to do 9 some expedited process for refund disputes that's 10 different from the process that vets them through 11 the appeals like we would with deficiencies. 12 MR. HORTON: I'm okay with trying it, 13 Members. It just -- it's an authority that I'm 14 not -- 15 MS. STOWERS: Yeah. 16 MR. HORTON: -- necessarily all that 17 comfortable with releasing. 18 MR. RUNNER: Well, we're -- 19 MR. HORTON: Well, here's -- if -- 20 My apologies, Mr. Runner. 21 MR. RUNNER: Yeah. Go ahead. 22 MR. HORTON: Please. No, I'm deferring to 23 you. 24 MR. RUNNER: Oh. No. I'm going to say 25 it's really -- I don't think it's an authority that 26 we're really giving up. I mean right now we -- 27 we -- we -- in that sense, they're -- I mean they 28 are basically rubber-stamped. 19 1 The ability for somebody who has a concern 2 about refund, there's a whole process for appeal. 3 And that's what they deal with. And in fact I've 4 had numerous conversations with folks who are 5 concerned about a refund, and so we'll be in the 6 process. But they're not the ones that are on the 7 list because they've -- those folks have already 8 kind of worked through all their issues. 9 So I -- I think it -- that would be my 10 concern is -- and the other issue is if we 11 actually -- if we actually ever thought that 12 somebody on this list would come here and say "I 13 want to go ahead and have a hearing on this," we're 14 not -- I don't think those are public hearings at 15 that point. So then we would have to re -- it'd end 16 up in another agenda anyhow and staff would have to 17 then do their presentation. So we wouldn't be ready 18 to -- we wouldn't be ready to actually do the 19 hearing. 20 MR. HORTON: Right. 21 MR. RUNNER: So I don't see us giving up 22 anything. I think we're expediting, again, getting 23 people back their money. That's -- I mean gotta get 24 back to what the breadth of this is, is we are 25 holding people's money and we're trying to get it 26 back to them. 27 MS. MA: Yes, I would agree too. We hold 28 it. We give them no interest. We're not adding any 20 1 value to the process. So why does it have to come 2 to us? That's my -- 3 MR. HORTON: We'll take that as a motion 4 for Alternative 3. 5 MR. RUNNER: 2 -- is that 2? 6 MR. HORTON: 2? 7 MR. McGUIRE: That would be 3, I believe. 8 MR. RUNNER: Oh, 3. I'm sorry. 9 MS. STOWERS: 3 is -- 10 MR. RUNNER: Is it 3? 11 MR. McGUIRE: Oh no. That would be 2. 12 MR. HORTON: We'll take that as a motion 13 for Alternative 3 by Member Ma. Second by -- 14 MS. HARKEY: Alternative 2. 15 MR. HORTON: Alternative 2 by Member Ma. 16 Second by Member Harkey. With -- 17 MR. RUNNER: With the understanding that 18 there will be a report to the Board Members on items 19 over 250,000. 20 MR. McGUIRE: That would will be monthly 21 report then, right? 22 MR. RUNNER: Monthly report that will just 23 come to the Board. 24 MR. McGUIRE: Okay. 25 MR. RUNNER: Not to Board meetings but to 26 the Board Members. 27 MS. MA: Can you just read us Alternative 2 28 again? 21 1 MR. McGUIRE: Okay. So Alternative 2 would 2 delegate all authority -- or it -- it would delegate 3 authority to issue all refund approval without 4 requiring the Board. It would delegate it to staff. 5 And so the change with basically anything 6 currently we do up to a hundred thousand. It would 7 go over a hundred thousand, up to whatever amount 8 that would be. 9 We still do have to revise the regulations 10 which is the public process. So as we're doing 11 that, that's also another opportunity. If people 12 had some concerns over our making these changes, 13 that could happen in that process that will come 14 before you again. And ultimately the Office of 15 Administrative Law is the final approval of our 16 regulation. So that's when it would actually take 17 effect. 18 And then we added to the alternative that 19 staff will provide a monthly report to the Board of 20 all refunds over a hundred thousand dollars. 21 MR. RUNNER: I said 250. 22 MS. HARKEY: 250. 23 MR. McGUIRE: Oh, 250. Okay. I just want 24 to make sure I have the right -- 25 MS. HARKEY: The Board Members, 26 individually. 27 MR. RUNNER: Yeah. 28 MR. McGUIRE: Right. 22 1 MR. HORTON: There's a motion and a second. 2 Without objection, such will be the order. 3 With it passing, I really only want to see 4 it if there's an objection. I don't need to see it 5 if there's concurrence on both parts. So save 6 yourselves some time. 7 ---oOo--- 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 23 1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 2 3 State of California ) 4 ) ss 5 County of Sacramento ) 6 7 I, KATHLEEN SKIDGEL, Hearing Reporter for 8 the California State Board of Equalization certify 9 that on April 29, 2015 I recorded verbatim, in 10 shorthand, to the best of my ability, the 11 proceedings in the above-entitled hearing; that I 12 transcribed the shorthand writing into typewriting; 13 and that the preceding pages 1 through 23 constitute 14 a complete and accurate transcription of the 15 shorthand writing. 16 17 Dated: May 18, 2015 18 19 20 ____________________________ 21 KATHLEEN SKIDGEL 22 Hearing Reporter 23 24 25 26 27 28 24