WILLIAMS v. S.C. (MARSHALLS OF CA)Amicus Curiae, Retail Litigation Center, Inc., California Retailers Association, and California Grocers Association, Request for Judicial NoticeCal.May 17, 2016SUPREME COURT COPY IN THE SUPREME COURTOFTHE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 8227228 SUPREME COURT MICHAEL WILLIAMS,AN INDIVIDUAL FILE 1) PETITIONER, V. MAY 17 2016 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA Frank A. McGuire Clerk FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES RESPONDENT. Deputy AFTER DECISION BY THE COURT OF APPEAL, SECOND APPELLATEDISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, CASE NO. B259967 FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CASE No. BC503806 THE HONORABLE WILLIAM F. HIGHBERGER MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE RECEIVED CALL & JENSEN MAY 19 2016 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION JULIE R. TROTTER (BAR No.209675) CLERKSUPREME COURT JAMIN S, SODERSTROM (BARNo. 261054 DELAVANJ. DICKSON (BAR NO.270865) 610 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 700 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 TEL: (949) 717-3000 Fax: (949) 717-3100 JTROTTER@CALLJENSEN.COM Lies: JSODERSTROM@CALLJENSEN.COM ogy DDICKSON@CALLJENSEN.COM COUNSEL FOR AMICI CURIAE RETAIL LITIGATION CENTER, INC., CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION, AND CALIFORNIA GROCERSASSOCIATION oa ee . $227228 IN THE SUPREME COURTOF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA MICHAEL WILLIAMS,AN INDIVIDUAL PETITIONER, V, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES RESPONDENT. AFTER DECISION BY THE COURT OF APPEAL, SECOND APPELLATEDISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, CASE No. B259967 FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CASE NO. BC503806 THE HONORABLE WILLIAM F. HIGHBERGER MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE CALL & JENSEN A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION JULIE R. TROTTER (BAR NO.209675) JAMIN S. SODERSTROM (BAR No.261054 DELAVAN J. DICKSON (BAR NO. 270865) 610 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 700 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 TEL: (949) 717-3000 FAX: (949) 717-3100 JTROTTER@CALLJENSEN.COM JSODERSTROM@CALLJENSEN.COM DDICKSON@CALLJENSEN.COM COUNSEL FOR AMICI CURIAE RETAIL LITIGATION CENTER, INC., CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION, AND CALIFORNIA GROCERS ASSOCIATION Pursuant to rules 8.54, 8.252(a), and 8.520(g) of the California Rules of Court, Evidence Code section 452, subdivisions (c) and (h), and Evidence Code section 459, amici parties the Retail Litigation Center, California Retailers Association, and California Grocers Association move for judicial notice of the Budget Change Proposal submitted by California’s Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) for the Fiscal Year 2016/17 regarding the resources made available to it with respect to California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”). The Court can access this submission by the DIR at the following publicly available website: http://web la.esd.dof.ca.gov/Documents/bcp/1617/FY1617_ORG7350_BCP 474.pdf. A true and correct copy of this proposal is attached to this motion as Exhibit A. MEMORANDUMOF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES This motion seeks judicial notice of the budget proposal the DIR submitted with respect to funding allocated to it with respect to the PAGA for the Fiscal Year 2016/17. Judicial notice is the appropriate procedure for bringing this proposal by the executive branch before this court. (See Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (c) and (h).) The proposal is relevant to amici’s arguments regarding the potential for abuse under the PAGAifPetitioner’s arguments in this matter are endorsed by the Court as set forth in Section III of their concurrently filed brief, and has been cited therein. No party has previously sought judicial notice of this proposal, and the proposal was submitted by the DIR after the court of appeals ruling in this matter. Based on the foregoing legal authority, and for the foregoing reason, Amici respectfully request that the Court grant this motion for judicial notice. Dated: May 9, 2016 Respectfully submitted, CALL & JENSEN A Professional Corporation JULIE R. TROTTER By eRFA )R. Trotter Julie Trotter Jamin S. Soderstrom Delavan J. Dickson Attorneys for Amici Curiae Retail Litigation Center, Inc., California Retailers Association, and California Grocers Association PROPOSED ORDER Amici The Retail Litigation Center, Inc., California Retailers Association, and California Grocers Association’s motion for judicial notice is granted. The court takes judicial notice of Exhibit A attached to the motion. Date: Presiding Justice EXHIBIT A Exhibit A-1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA Budget Change Proposal - Cover Sheet DF-46 (REV 08/15) Fiscal Year Business Unit Department Priority No,2016/17 7350 industrial Relations 2 Budget Request Name Program Subprogram7350-003-BCP-DP-2016-GB 9900106 - DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATION0559-003-BCP-DP-2016-GB 6105 - DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT Budget Request Description Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) Resources Budget Request Summary The Labor and Workforce Development Agency and the Departmentof Industrial Relations (DIR) request 10.0positions and $1.6 million in resources from the Labor and Workforce Development Fundfor the 2016/17 fiscalyear and $1.5 million ongoing to stabilize and improve the handling of PAGA cases, largely to the benefit ofworkers, employers, and the state. This proposal also requests approval of the attached Trailer Bill Language to implement the Statutory changesneeded to provide DIR with the enhanced oversight neededto achieve the stated outcomes. Requires Legislation Cade Section(s) to be Added/Amended/RepealedBd Yes [1 No Labor Code Sections 2699, 2699.3, 2699.7 Does this BCP contain information technology (IT) Department CIO Datecomponents? [] Yes Ex} No If yes, departmental Chief Information Officer must sign. For IT requests, specify the date a Special Project Report (SPR) or Feasibility Study Report (FSR) wasapproved by the Department of Technology, or previously by the Departmentof Finance. [_] FSR []SPR Project No, Date: If proposal affects another department, does other department concur with proposal? [_] Yes [] No Altach comments of affected department, signed and dated by the department director or designee. Prepared By Date Reviewed By; Date - 7% m8 . ee ’ : LAF we» Deparment Director LZ Date AagicySeereta fe Date ELITIfA/2/BOYMIS + /- 9. fs eeeMamet Ol)1G Additional Review: [_] Capital Outlay []itcu [] Fscu [JOSAE [] CALSTARS [7] Dept. of Technology BCP Type: [-] Policy [-] Workload Budget per Government Code 13308.05 PPBA __~¢ a Date submitted to the Legislature 7 LEELAms i/FltE Exhibit A-2 Analysis of Problem A. Budget Request Summary This proposal requests 1.0 position for the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA), 9.0 positions for the Departmentof Industrial Relations (DIR), and $1.6 million in the Labor and Workforce © Development Fund (LWDF)for the 2016/17 fiscal year ($1.5 million ongoing) to stabilize and improve the handling of Private Attorneys General Act cases,largely to the benefit of workers, employers, and the state. This proposalalso requests statutory changes,asreflected on AttachmentI, to provide the enhanced oversight needed to achieve the outcomes contemplated below. B. Background/History The Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) was enacted in 2003 to enable private parties to litigate claims and recover penalties for Labor Code violations that previously could only be pursued by the Labor Commissionerorother divisions within DIR. As amended in 2004, PAGA requires employees or their representatives to initiate a case by sending a written notice to the employer and the LWDAwhich identifies the alleged violations and the facts and theories supporting the claims. The LWDAthen has a short time to decide whether to investigate or cite the employer; and the issuanceofa citation will preclude privatelitigation over the same violation. Current law authorizesprivatelitigants to retain 25%of the penalties recovered in a PAGA case, with the remainder being deposited into the LWDF. Resource History (Dollars in thousands) Program Budget 2010/11 20/41/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Authorized Expenditures 0 0 0 n/a na Actual Expenditures 0 0 0 Wa na Revenues 4,468 5,276 4,529 5,680 8,365 © Authorized Positions n/a n/a nia 25 1 Filed Positions n/a nla nia 25 1 Vacancies n/a n/a n/a 0 0 Workload History’ Workload Measure 2010 2011 2012 2013 20147 PAGANotices Filed 4,430 5,064 6,047 7,626 6,307 Notices Filed (entered in nia nla nia nia 2,777 System) As reflected by the above ResourceHistory chart, neither the LWDAnor DIR has ever had the staffing and resourcesto effectively review notices, or choose cases for furtherinvestigation. DIR took over the administration of PAGA notices/casesin the last quarter of the 2013/14 fiscal year. Since that time, PAGA notices have been sentdirectly to the headquarters of the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE)in San Francisco, where they are reviewed by one employee working under the direction of a unit managerin Oakland. As also reflected above, review and investigations of PAGA claims are quite rare, and usually occur only because a case has beencalled to the LWDA’s attention through some other means besides the PAGAnotice. Nevertheless, the ability to review and investigate a PAGA caseis 9 ' DIR began keeping track of PAGA caseson the behalf of LWDAin the last quarter of the 2013/14 fiscal year. Historically, PAGA cases have not been routinely tracked eachfiscal year. Therefore, the “Notices Filed” informationis likely understated to some degree. Cases reviewed and investigated cannotbe accurately estimated because records have not been historically or systematically tracked. However, the department estimates that less than 1% of cases have historically been reviewed/investigated. in spite of the apparent reduction in “PAGANotices Filed" (although this could be a result of an imprecise case countfor 2014},it should be noted that the aggregate amount of PAGA deposits rose from 2013/14 to 2014/15 by ~$2.7M, or 47%(fram $5.7M to $8.3M). PAGAResources 4 Exhibit A-3 Analysis of Problem considered an important check on potential abusesin this arena. Attachmentli showsthe historical percentage of PAGAnoticesfiled by industry. State Level Considerations The Administration is committed to reducing unnecessary litigation and lowering the costs of doing business in California to support a thriving economic environment. Given the scope and frequency of PAGAfilings, there is great opportunity to increase the rate of administrative handling of cases versus the courts. Reducingthelitigation and increasing early resolution will improve outcomesfor workers and reduce costs for employers. Justification Asindicated in the Resource History and Workload History charts above,historically, the LWDA and DIR have not beenstaffed to perform the review and oversight functions contemplated by the Labor Code Sections 2698 — 2699.5 (PAGA). This has contributed to a range of concerns about the PAGAstatute itself, including that employers are being sued and incurring substantial costs defending against technical or frivolous claims, and that workers and the state often end up being shortchanged when these cases are settled. Employers are also concerned about potential exposure to large back pay and penalty claims, often pursued through PAGAactions, when courts make new precedential determinations in wage and hour cases. This proposal would address these by concernsby providing DIR with the staffing needed to effectively oversee and, when appropriate, step in to handle PAGA cases. This proposal is neededto stabilize and improve the handling of PAGA cases, largely to the benefit of workers, employers, and the state. Amongotherthings, cases investigated by the state tend to resolve much more quickly with a better outcome for workersin terms of back wages recovered, promptness of payments, and commitments to future compliance, than private PAGAlitigation. This will save employers considerable litigation casts and potential liability for plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees. In addition, the settlement review authority contemplated by this proposal should deliver better wage recoveries for workers since the current absenceofstate participation makesit difficult to ensure that settlements are fair to all the affected employees and the state. Finally, greater state oversight and participation in PAGA caseswill help reduce PAGAlitigation andlitigation costs by weeding out marginal andfrivolous claims. lf approved, this proposalwill create within DIR a unit to carry out the LWDA's responsibilities under PAGA. Underthe direction of the Director of Industrial Relations, the PAGA Unit would: {. Review PAGA notices to determine whether to accept cases for investigation or authorize commencementofprivatelitigation. As reflected by the Workload History chart, less than 1% of all PAGA cases are reviewed or investigated. The purpose of the current requirement to give the LWDA advance notice of PAGA cases is to enable the LWDAto intercept and investigate claims that may (1) implicate important legal policy issues or (2) overlap with ongoing investigations or otherclaims that have already cometo DIR’s attention in another manner. The volume of PAGA notices is as high as 635 notices per month and each requires review from staff with appropriate training/expertise in order to review the case in the time frame required, and make a determination whetherto investigate. 2. Investigate accepted cases and determine whetherto (1) cite the employer for Labor Code violations, and (2) settle claims with the employer. When a decision is madeto investigate a PAGA case,it forestalls private litigation during the statutory investigation period (currently 120 days), makes that private dispute a matter of public interest, and completely usurps the private claimsif a citation is issued to the employer for the sameviolations asserted in the PAGA notice. Currently, DIR lacks the resources to reach a solid conclusion and cite or settle within the allotted time before losing the ability to forestall privatelitigation. Two recent PAGA cases required an average of 325 hoursin staff time (investigators, auditors, and support), 90 hours of attorney time, plus additional time from high-level decision-makers in each case, all of which had to be 3 Based on 2014/15 fiscal year data. PAGAResources 2 Exhibit A-4 g Analysis of Problem squeezedin with other regular casework. Currently, the size of the task coupled with the lack of extra time and resources operate as a great disincentive against accepting PAGA casesfor investigation. The additional resources requestedin this proposalwill allow DIR to accept cases with broaderlabor policy issuesof statewide interest that would otherwise be decided by the courts through essentially private litigation. . Litigate and manageresolution of cases in which the employer has beencited or hassettled. A PAGAinvestigation must conclude with a formalcitation of the employerin orderto foreclose private litigation against the employer over the same violations. The citation may be an administrative citation that is subject to an appealandlitigation by the employer, or it may take the form of an agencylawsuit which charges the employerwith the violations, and which mustbelitigated in superior court. Both options require a major commitmentof resources and professionalstaff time following the citation. If the requested resources are approved, DIR’s goal will be to cite and settle with the employerin order to largely avoid this commitment, although settlements themselves must be managed and sometimes must be enforced through court action when termsare violated. Tofulfill the purpose of the PAGA procedures for agency notice and involvement, the LWDA must have the resources not only to investigate someof the cases, but also to see a case all the way through once an employer has been cited. . Evaluate and approve proposed settlements of PAGAlitigation. Currentlaw authorizes privatelitigants to retain 25% of the penalties recovered in a PAGA case and to turn over the other 75% to the LWDF. It also requires the superior court to review and approve any settlementinvolving penalties. However, with the exception of cases involving OSHAviolations (in which case the court must also review the adequacyof the safety protections or remedies), there is no requirement to notify or seek agency input on the adequacyof a settlement. Because most judges have no particular expertise in labor law and mustrely upon the knowledge and representations of counsel, both of whom areinterested in having the settlement approved, there is no assurancethat settlementsare in fact fair to all the affected employeesor the state. The dynamics at play in major litigation tend to work against such assurances:protractedlitigation creates strong incentives to settle in a waythat best protects the interests of the actual plaintiffs and their attorneys, while discounting the claims andinterests of other employee class members. These dynamics also run counter to PAGA’s fundamental goal of enabling private parties to aid in the enforcement of labor laws for the public benefit rather than purely their own private interest. Requiring that the agency have notice and an opportunity to abject to any proposed settlement ina PAGAcase(i.e. extending the current OSHA requirementto all cases) would provide an effective check and balance to ensure that the public purposes of PAGA arebeingfulfilled; in particular, that the legal rights of affected employees are being fully protected. Legal staff will be needed to review the proposedsettlements andto file objections in those cases where the settlements appear inadequate or unfair. The costof this work is likely to be offsetif not exceeded by larger penalty recoveries to the state, as this mechanism will also provide DIR with the meansto ensure that the appropriate amount of revenue for each caseis transmitted to the LWDF. . Evaluate petitions for amnestyrelief arising out of new precedent orlegal development and determine time frame and conditions for amnestyrelief. if approved,this proposalwill also create a mechanism through which DIR can set up an amnesty plan in situations where an industry-wide practice has beeninvalidated through a major court decision or other developmentthat creates potentially cripplingliabilities under PAGA. The basic goal of such an amnesty is to induce employers to move quickly to make their employees wholefor past violations and bring their practices into conformity with current law in exchangefor substantialrelief from the penalties and other special damages that would be available ina PAGA case. DIR has recently worked on amnesty-style settlements and legislation affecting piece-rate workers and drayage truck operators; and PAGAResources 3 Exhibit A-5 Analysis of Problem this experience showed that each plan mustbetailored around the specific issues and practices of the affected industries. For this reason, the proposal would give DIR responsibility to determine the need for amnestyrelief in a given situation and then to craft and administer an appropriate amnesty plan. The proposal would provide DIR with the attorneys, investigators, and support staff to exercise oversight functions under PAGAaslisted above,including those functions that would be added through PAGAreform legislation. The requested LWDA Assistant General Counsel position is necessary to fulfill LWDA's oversight responsibilities, as the LWDAis ultimately responsible for oversight and implementation of the PAGA statutes. The attorney's responsibilities will include helping to stand-up the program byestablishing the PAGA program policy parameters and monitoring the new program, reviewing and providing oversight anddirection in the more complicated PAGAsettlements, reviewing and assisting with DLSElitigation arising from cases in which the employer has beencited, advising the LWDASecretary and the General Counsel on PAGArelated legal and statewide policy issues, and responding to LWDA PAGAPublic Records Act requests. Estimated annual outcomesarelisted in the Outcomes and Accountability section below. See AttachmentIII for additional workload by position. This proposalwill also make a numberof modestrevisions to the PAGAstatute to improvethe state's oversight of PAGA casesandbetter insure that they are pursuedin the public's interest and not just for private purposes. Proposed revisions would provide for the following: * Require more detail in the PAGAclaim noticesfiled with the LWDA and require that claimsfor ten or more employeesbe verified and accompanied by a copyof the proposed complaint. * Extend the LWDA’stimeto review PAGAnotices from 30 to 60 days, and specify that employers may fee. submit a request for the LWDAtoinvestigate a PAGA claim. * Extend the time for the LWDAto investigate an accepted claim from 120 to 180 days. Require PAGAnotices and employer responsesto be submitted online and accompanied by a filing * Require the Director of Industrial Relations to be served with a copy ofthe complaint when a PAGA caseis filed. * Require court approvalof all PAGA case settlements, and require that the Director of DIR be provided with notice and an opportunity to object before the court determines whetherto approve a settlement. * Create a separate procedure through whichinterested parties may ask the Director of DIRto establish a temporary amnesty and safe harbor program to provide expedited back wage paymentsto employees and penaltyrelief to employers following the invalidation of a widespread industry practice (similar to AssemblyBill 1513, Chapter 754, Statutes of 2015). E. Outcomes and Accountability Projected Outcomes Workload Measure cY 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Review of PAGA Notices 250 900 900 900 900 900 Caseinvestigation (Cases retained) nla 45 45 45 45 45 Qatari Review/Approval nia 270 270 270 270 270 CaseLitigation nla Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Review of Amnesty Petitions nia 1 1 4 4 4 PAGA Resources 4 Exhibit A-6 Analysis of Problem F. Analysis of All Feasible Alternatives @ 1. Continue to process receipt of PAGAfilings with current staffing levels. Pros: No additional resources required. Cons: While LWDA’s notice and investigation rights are perceived as an important check and balance on potential abuses in PAGAlitigation, the reality is that LWDAlackstheability to meaningfully review notices or investigate more than handful of the thousands of claims that come through. As a practical matter, the typical PAGA noticewill not get reviewed or investigated unless someonecallsit to the special attention of LWDA. In addition, while current law requires court approval of settlements involving penalties, courts lack the meansto provide effective oversight, and there is no way to determineif the public’s interest is being served or appropriate penalties being recoveredin individual cases. The process may continue atits current level, howeverthe potential for time and workload savings, improved outcomesforprivatelitigants, and reducedlitigation overall will accordingly continue to elude the state. It could be argued that the ongoing societal costs tied to this alternative would dwarf the resources requested by this proposal. 2. Removethe statutory provision (Labor Code section 2698 et sec.) that allows PAGA. Pros: The purpose for PAGA’s adoption and amendmentin 2004 wasto give private litigants the ability to take over someof the enforcement work that previously had been entrusted exclusively to DIR and the Labor Commissioner. This was in response to DIR’slimited capacity to address the broad range of claims and violations under the Labor Code. PAGAcould be repealed to return all penalty enforcement authority to the exclusive jurisdiction of DIR and curtail what some regard as abusiveprivatelitigation under PAGA. Cons: This would simply return the state to the status quo of 2003, when DIR could not comeclose to absorbing and handling all of the enforcement work that had been entrusted to it under the Labor Code. @ 3.. Approve the proposal. Pros: Additional staffing would enable the PAGA Unit resourcesto stabilize and improve the handling of PAGAcases,largely to the benefit of workers, employer, and the state. Cons: Additional cost to the State. G. Implementation Plan LWDA and DIR would begin hiring once the BCP is approved and the funds are appropriated. Resources would be augmented to support the functions described in this proposal. Improved tracking, review and monitoring will enable ongoing evaluation of performance and progress in handlingfilings administratively, as deemed appropriate. Reports will be reviewed and updated for managementreview andfor purposes of informing the administration of cost avoidance achieved through this proposal. H. Supplemental Information N/A !. Recommendation Approve this request for 1.0 position for the Labor Workforce and Development Agency, 9.0 positions for the Departmentof Industrial Relations, and $1.6 million in the LWDFfor the 2016/17 fiscal year ($1.4 million ongoing) to stabilize and improve the handling of PAGA cases, largely to the benefit of workers, employers, and the state (See Attachments IV and for current/proposed Fund Conditions). Approve the attached Trailer Bill Language to implement the statutory changes needed to provide DIR with @ the enhanced oversight neededto the stated outcomes. PAGA Resources 5 Exhibit A-7 Departmentof Industrial Relations Attachment| Fiscal Year 2016-17 Budget Change Proposal Private Attorneys General Act Resources ProposedTrailer Bill Language SECTION 1. Section 2699 of the Labor Code is amendedasfollows: 2699. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any provision of this code that provides for a civil penalty to be assessed and collected by the Labor and Workforce Development Agencyor anyofits departments, divisions, commissions, boards, agencies, or employees,for a violation of this code, may, as an alternative, be recovered througha civil action brought by an aggrieved employee on behalf of himself or herself and other current or former employees pursuantto the procedures specified in Section 2699.3, (b) For purposesofthis part, “person” has the same meaning as defined in Section 18. (c) For purposesofthis part, “aggrieved employee” means any person who was employed by the alleged violator and against whom oneor more ofthe alleged violations was committed. (d) For purposesof this part, “cure” means that the employer abates each violation alleged by any aggrieved employee, the employeris in compliance with the underlying statutes as specified in the notice required by this part, and any aggrieved employeeis made whole. A violation of paragraph (6) or (8) of subdivision (a) of Section 226-shall only be considered cured upon a showing that the employer has provided fully compliant, itemized wage statement to each aggrieved employee for each pay period for the three-year period prior to the date of the written notice sent pursuantto paragraph(1) of subdivision (c) of Section 2699.3. (e) (1) For purposesof this part, whenever the Labor and Workforce Development Agency,or any of its departments, divisions, commissions, boards, agencies, or employees, has discretion to assess a civil penalty, a court is authorized to exercise the samediscretion, subject to the samelimitations and conditions, to assessa civil penalty. (2) In any action by an aggrieved employee seeking recovery of a civil penalty available under subdivision (a)or (f), a court may award a lesser amountthan the maximum civil penalty amount specified by this part if, based on the facts and circumstancesof the particular case, to do otherwise would result in an award that is unjust, arbitrary and oppressive, or confiscatory. (f} For all provisionsof this code except those for whicha civil penalty is specifically provided, there is established a civil penalty for a violation of these provisions, as follows: (1) If, at the time of the alleged violation, the person does not employ one or more employees,the civil penalty is five hundred dollars ($500). (2) If, at the time of the alleged violation, the person employs one or more employees,the civil penalty is one hundred dollars ($100) for each aggrieved employee Page 7 of 9 Exhibit A-8 Departmentof Industrial Relations Attachment| Fiscai Year 2016-17 Budget Change Proposal Private Attorneys General Act Resources ProposedTrailer Bill Lanquage per pay periodforthe initial violation and two hundred dollars ($200) for each aggrieved employee per pay period for each subsequentviolation. (3) If the alleged violation is a failure to act by the Labor and Workplace Development Agency,or anyofits departments,divisions, commissions, boards, agencies, or employees, there shall be no civil penalty. (g) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), an aggrieved employee may recoverthe civil penalty described in subdivision(f) in a civil action pursuant to the procedures specified in Section 2699.3 filed on behalf of himself or herself and other current or former employees against whom one or moreof the alleged violations was committed. Any employee whoprevails in any action shall be entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, including anyfiling fee paid pursuant to paragraph (1)(D) of subdivision (a) of Section 2699.3. Nothing in this part shall operate to limit an employee’s right to pursue or recover other remedies available under state or federal law, either separately or concurrently with an action taken underthis part. (2) No action shall be brought underthis part for any violation of a posting, notice, agencyreporting,orfiling requirementof this code, except wherethefiling or reporting requirement involves mandatory payroll or workplace injury reporting. (h) No action may be brought underthis section by an aggrieved employee if the agencyoranyofits departments, divisions, commissions, boards, agencies, or employees, on the same facts and theories, cites a person within the timeframes set forth in Section 2699.3 for a violation of the same section or sections of the Labor Code under which the aggrieved employee is attempting to recover a civil penalty on behalf of himself or herself or others orinitiates a proceeding pursuant to Section 98.3. (i) Except as provided in subdivision (j), civil penalties recovered by aggrieved employees shail be distributed as follows: 75 percent to the Labor and Workforce Development Agencyfor enforcementof labor laws, including the administration of this part, and for education of employers and employees abouttheir rights and responsibilities under this code, to be continuously appropriated to supplement and not supplant the funding to the agency for those purposes; and 25 percentto the aggrieved employees. (j) Civil penalties recovered under paragraph (1) of subdivision (f) shall be distributed to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency for enforcementof labor laws, including the administration of this part, and foreducation of employers and employees abouttheir rights and responsibilities under this code, to be continuously appropriatedto supplement and not supplant the funding to the agencyfor those purposes. (k) Nothing containedin this part is intended to alter or otherwise affect the exclusive remedy provided by the workers’ compensation provisions of this code for liability against an employer for the compensationfor anyinjury to or death of an employee arising out of and in the course of employment. ()(1) Within 10 days followingcommencement of a civil action pursuantto this part, Page 2 of 9 Exhibit A-9 Departmentof Industrial Relations Attachment| Fiscal Year 2016-17 Budget Change Proposal Private Attorneys General Act Resources ProposedTrailer Bill Lanquage the aggrieved employee or representative shail provide the Director of Industrial Relations with a file-stamped copy of the complaint that includes the case number assigned by the court, and shall thereafter notify the director of any proposed settlement in accordance with subparagraph (2). (2) The superior court shall review and approve any penaltiessoughtas-par-ofa proposed settlement agreement-of anycivil action filed pursuantto this part. The proposed settlement shall be submitted to the director at the sametime thatit is submitted to the court, and the director shall be provided with an opportunity to obiect to or comment upon the proposed settlement before the court determines whetherto approve the penalties sought as part of the settlement. (3) Items required to be submitted to the director under this subdivision or to the Division of Occupational Safety and Health pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 2699.3, shail be transmitted online through the same system established for the filing of notices and requests under subdivisions (a) and (c) of Section 2699.3. (m) This section shall not apply to the recovery of administrative and civil penalties in connection with the workers’ compensation law as contained in Division 1 (commencing with Section 50) and Division 4 (commencing with Section 3200), including, but not limited to, Sections 129.5 and 132a. (n) The agencyor anyof its departments, divisions, commissions, boards, or agencies may promulgate regulations to implementthe provisionsofthis part. SECTION 2. Section 2699.3 of the Labor Code is amendedasfollows: 2699.3. (a) A civil action by an aggrieved employee pursuant to subdivision (a) or(f) of Section 2699 alleging a violation of any provision listed in Section 2699.5 shall commenceonly after the following requirements have been met: (1) (A)The aggrieved employee or representative shail give written notice by certified rratlteby online filing with the Labor and Workforce Development Agency and by certified mail to the employerof the specific provisions of this code alleged to have been violated, including a statement setting forth the relevant facts, legal contentions, and theoereste-authorities supporting the-each alleged violation. The notice shall also include an estimate of the number of current and former employees against whom the alleged violations were committed and on whose behalf relief is being sought. (B) ifthe aggrieved employee or representative is seeking relief on behalf of ten or more employees, the notice shall be verified in the manner prescribed by Section 446 of the Codeof Civil Procedure, and a copy of the proposed complaint shall be attached to the notice. (C) Within 30 days after receiving the notice prescribed by paragraph (A), the employer may request the Labor and Workforce Development Agency to investigate Page 3 of 9 Exhibit A-10 Departmentof Industrial Relations Attachment| Fiscal Year 2016-17 Budget Change Proposal Private Attorneys General Act Resources ProposedTrailer Bill Language one or more of the claims raised in the notice. The employer's request shall be filed online with the Labor and Workforce Development Agency and sent by certified mail to the aggrieved employee or representative, and shall specify the basis for requesting the investigation. (D) A notice filed with the Labor and Workforce Development Agency pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be accompanied by filing fee of $150.00 if also subject to requirements of subparagraph (B), or $75.00 in all other cases. An employer request filed with the Labor and Workforce Development Agency pursuant to subparagraph (C) shall be accompanied by a filing fee of $50.00. The fees required by this subparagraph are subject to waiver in accordance with the requirements of Sections 68632 and 68633 of the Government Code. (E) The fees paid pursuant to subparagraph (D) shall be paid into the Labor and Workforce Development Fund and used for the purposes specified in subdivision (j) of Section 2699, (2) (A) The agencyshall notify the employer and the aggrieved employee or representative by certified mail that it does not intend to investigate the alleged violation within 36-60calendar days of the postmark date of the notice received pursuantto paragraph (1). Upon receipt of that notice orif no notice is provided within 33-65 calendar days of the postmark date of the notice given pursuant to paragraph (1), the aggrieved employee may commencea civil action pursuant to Section 2699. (B) if the agencyintends to investigate the alleged violation, it shall notify the employer and the aggrieved employee or representative by certified mail of its decision within 33-65calendar days of the postmark date of the notice received pursuantto paragraph (1). Within 420-180calendar days of that decision, the agency may investigate the alleged violation and issue any appropriate citation. If the agency determinesthat no citation will be issued, it shall notify the employer and aggrieved employee of that decision within five business days thereof by certified mail. Upon receipt of that notice orif no citation is issued by the agency within the 458-245day period prescribed by subparagraph (A) and this subparagraphorif the agencyfails to provide timely or any notification, the aggrieved employee may commencea civil action pursuant to Section 2699. (C) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,a plaintiff may as a matterof right amend an existing complaint to add a causeof action arising underthis part at any time within 60 days of the time periods specified in this part. (b) A civil action by an aggrieved employee pursuant to subdivision (a) or (f) of Section 2699 alleging a violation of any provision of Division 5 (commencing with Section 6300) other than thoselisted in Section 2699.5 shall commenceonly after the following requirements have been met: (1) The aggrieved employee or representative shall give notice by online filing with serified-maitte the Division of Occupational Safety and Health and by certified mail to Page 4 of 8 Exhibit A-11 Departmentof Industrial Relations Attachment| Fiscal Year 2016-17 Budget Change Proposal Private Attorneys General Act Resources ProposedTrailer Bill Language the employer, with a copy to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency,of the specific provisions of Division 5 (commencing with Section 6300) alleged to have been violated, including the facts and theories to support the alleged violation. (2) (A) The division shall inspect or investigate the alleged violation pursuant to the procedures specified in Division 5 (commencing with Section 6300). (i) If the division issues a citation, the employee may not commencean action pursuant to Section 2699. The division shall notify the aggrieved employee and employerin writing within 14 calendar days of certifying that the employer has corrected the violation. (ii) If by the end of the period for inspection or investigation provided for in Section 6317, the division fails to issue a citation and the aggrieved employee disputes that decision, the employee may challenge that decision in the superior court. In such an action, the superior court shall follow precedents of the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board.If the court finds that the division should have issued a citation and orders the division to issue a citation, then the aggrieved employee may not commence a civil action pursuant to Section 2699. (iii) A complaint in superior court alleging a violation of Division 5 (commencing with Section 6300) other than thoselisted in Section 2699.5 shall include therewith a copy of the notice of violation provided to the division and employer pursuant to paragraph (1). (iv) The superior court shall not dismiss the action for nonmaterial differences in facts or theories between those containedin the notice of violation provided to the division and employer pursuant to paragraph (1) and the complaintfiled with the court. (B) If the division fails to inspect or investigate the alleged violation as provided by Section 6309, the provisions of subdivision (c) shall apply to the determination of the alleged violation. (3) (A) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to alter the authority of the division to permit long-term abatement periods or to enter into memoranda of understanding or joint agreements with employers in the case of long-term abatement ISSUES, (B) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to authorize an employeetofile a notice or to commencea civil action pursuant to Section 2699 during the period that an employer has voluntarily entered into consultation with the division to ameliorate a condition in that particular worksite. (C) An employer who has beenprovided notice pursuantto this section may not then enter into consultation with the division in order to avoid an action underthis section. (4) The superior court shall review and approve any proposed settlementof alleged violations of the provisions of Division 5 (commencing with Section 6300) to ensure that = the settlement provisions are at least as effective as the protections or remedies e provided by state and federal law or regulation for the alleged violation. The provisions Page 5 of 9 Exhibit A-12 Department of industrial Relations Attachment| Fiscal Year 2016-17 Budget Change Preposal Private Attorneys General Act Resources ProposedTrailer Bill Language of the settlementrelating to health and safety laws shall be submitted to the division at the sametime that they are submitted to the court. This requirement shall be construed to authorize and permit the division to comment on those settlement provisions, and the court shall grant the division's commentary the appropriate weight. (c) A civil action by an aggrieved employee pursuant to subdivision (a) or(f) of Section 2699 alleging a violation of any provision other than thoselisted in Section 2699.5 or Division 5 (commencing with Section 6300) shall commenceonly after the following requirements have been met: (1)(A) The aggrieved employee or representative shall give written notice by online filing with certified-mailte the Labor and Workforce Development Agency and by certified mail to the employerof the specific provisions of this code alleged to have been violated, including a statement setting forth the relevant facts, legal contentions, and theeres-te authorities supporting the each alleged violation. The notice shall also include an estimate of the number of current and former employees against whom the alleged violations were committed and on whose behalf relief is being sought. (B) If the aggrieved employee or representative is seeking relief onbehalf of ten or more employees, the notice shall be verified in the manner prescribed by Section 446 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and a copy of the proposed complaint shall be attached to the notice. (C) Within 30 days after receiving the notice prescribed by paragraph(A), the employer may request the Labor and Workforce Development Agencyto investigate one or more of the claims raised in the notice. The employer's request shall be filed online with the Labor and Workforce Development Agency and sentby certified mail to the aggrieved employee or representative, and shail specify the basis for requesting the investigation, (D) A notice filed with the Labor and Workforce Development Agency pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be accompanied bya filingfee of $150.00 if also subject to requirements of subparagraph (B), or $75.00 in all other cases. An employer request filed with the Labor and Workforce Development Agency pursuant to subparagraph(C) or a cure notice submitted pursuant to paragraph (2)(A) of this subdivision, whicheveris submitted first, shall be accompanied bya filing fee of $50.00. The fees required by this subparagraph are subject to waiver in accordance with the requirements of Sections 68632 and 68633 of the Government Code. (E} The fees paid pursuant to subparagraph (D) shall be paid into the Labor and Workforce Development Fund and used for the purposes specified in subdivision (j) of Section 2699. (2) (A) The employer may cure the alleged violation within 33 calendar days of the postmark date of the notice sent.by the aggrieved employee or representative. The employer shall give written notice by-certified-mail within that period of time by certified mail to the aggrieved employee or representative and by onlinefiling with the agencyif Page 6 of 9 Exhibit A-13 Departmentof Industrial Relations Attachment| Fiscal Year 2016-17 Budget Change Proposal Private Attorneys General Act Resources ProposedTrailer Bill Language the alleged violation is cured, including a description of actions taken, and nocivil action pursuant to Section 2699 may commence.If the alleged violation is not cured within the 33-day period, the employee may commencea civil action pursuant to Section 2699. (B) (i) Subject to the limitation in clause (ii), no employer may avail himself or herself of the notice and cure provisions of this subdivision more than three times in a 12-month period for the same violation or violations contained in the notice, regardless of the location of the worksite. (ii) No employer may avail himself or herself of the notice and cure provisions of this subdivision with respect to alleged violations of paragraph (6) or (8) of subdivision (a) of Section 226 more than once in a 12-month period for the same violation or violations containedin the notice, regardless of the location of the worksite. (3) If the aggrieved employee disputes that the alleged violation has been cured, the aggrieved employee or representative shall provide written notice by online filing with the agency andby certified mail to the employer, including specified grounds to support that dispute, to the employer and the agency. Within 17 calendar days of the postmark date receipt of that notice, the agency shall review the actions taken by the employerto cure the alleged violation, and provide written notice of its decision by certified mail to the aggrieved employee and the employer. The agency may grant the empioyerthree additional business days to cure the alleged violation. If the agency determines that the alleged violation has not been cured orif the agencyfails to provide timely or any notification, the employee may proceed with the civil action pursuant to Section 2699.If the agency determinesthat the alleged violation has been cured, but the employeestil! disagrees, the employee may appeal that determination to the superior court. (d) The periods specified in this section are not counted as part of the time limited for the commencementof the civil action to recover penalties underthis part. SECTION 3. Section 2699.7 of the Labor Codeis added asfollows: 2699.7 Notwithstanding any other statute, the Director of Industrial Relations may establish a temporary amnestyor safe harbor program to provide expedited back wages to workers and penailtyrelief fo employers, consistent with the requirementsof this Section, when the conditions of subdivision (a) are met. (a) A temporary amnesty or safe harbor program may be established upon the petition of one or more interested parties and findings by the director that all of the following are true: (1) A published decision of the Supreme Court or a court of appeal or a similar legal development has invalidated a commonplace industry practice which a substantial segmentof the industry previously believed in good faith to be leqal. (2) The decision or development referred to paragraph (1) affects 10.000 or more Page 7 of 9 Exhibit A-14 Departmentof Industrial Relations Attachment| Fiscal Year 2016-17 Budget Change Proposal Private Attorneys General Act Resources ProposedTrailer Bill Language employees andis likely to lead to the filing of actions against at least five different employers to recover penaities under the Labor Code pursuantto this part. (3) Good cause exists to establish a temporary or safe harbor program, including that the program is likely to provide more relief to employees than private litigation. (b) A partyfiling a petition for relief under this Section shall provide notice and copies of the petition and supporting documentation to other parties known to be interested in the potential amnesty or safe harbor program,including but not necessarily limited to representatives of employees, employers, and worker or industry advocacy groups. Any party receiving the petition shall havefifteen days to submit a responseto the director and shall provide copies of that response and supporting documentation to the petitioner and otherinterested parties identified in the petition. The director may expand the parties entitied to notice and any time limits for responding to a petition or to a responseto a petition. {c) An amnesty or safe harbor plan established by the director pursuant to this Section shall include the following: (1)A requirementto fully compensate employees,including former employees,for back wages duein light of the decision or developmentreferred to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), (2) A time frame, including beginning and endingdates, for determining the back wages due to each employee. (3) Any requirements for determining and adding interest or other amounts to the back wages due. (4) A time limit, not to exceed eighteen (18) months, for making back payments to employees. (5) Requirements to provide appropriate documentation, consistent with the requirements of Section 226, for all back payments, and to retain records of calculations and back payments for at least four years after the time limit referred to in paragraph (4) of this subdivision. (6) Requirements to make diligent good faith efforts to locate former employees and to pay the amounts due to employees who cannot be located to the Unpaid Wage Fund pursuant to Section 96.7, together with a prescribed administrative fee. (7)-A provision providing for the suspension of the statute of limitations for affected wage, damages, andpenalty claims during the time frame referred to in paragraph (2) of this subdivision. (8) A provision providing for the reduction in whole orin part of statutory penalties and damages under the Labor Code for employers who comply with the terms of the amnesty or safe harbor program. (d) An amnesty or safe harbor program established by the director pursuant to this Page 8 of 9 Exhibit A-15 Departmentof Industrial Relations Attachment| Fiscal Year 2016-17 Budget Change Proposal Private Attorneys General Act Resources ProposedTrailer Billi Language Section shall not extend to any of the following: (1) Claimsin litigation prior io the decision or development referred to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a). (2) Claims resolved by an order or judqment that wasfinal and not subject to further appealprior to the effective date of the amnesty or safe harbor program. (3) Claims arising on or after the effective date of the amnesty or safe harbor program. (e) The decision to establish or not establish an amnesty or safe harbor program under this Section is within the sole discretion of the director and is not subject to the rulemaking or adjudication procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act in Chapters 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340), Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 11400), and Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 11500) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code. Page 9 of 8 Exhibit A-16 Departmentof Industrial Relations Fiscal Year 2016/17 Budget Change Proposal Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) Resources Percentage of PAGA Casesby Industry Industry Professional, Technical, Clerical, Mechanical & Similar Occupations Public Housekeeping Industry Mercantile industry Transportation Industry Manufacturing Industry Certain on-site occupations in the construction, drilling, logging and mining industries Personal Service Industry Amusement and Recreation Industry Agricultural Occupations Broadcasting Industry & Motion Picture Industry Broadcasting Industry Laundry, Linen Supply, Dry Cleaning & Dyeing Industry Industries Handling Products after Harvest Household Occupations Canning, Freezing, and Preserving Industry Industries Preparing Agricultural Products for Market on the Farm Miscellaneous Employees Page. 1 of 1 Exhibit A-17 AttachmentI 55.1% 16.1% 11.9% 5.4% 2.8% 2.6% 1.7% 1.3% 0.9% 0.6% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% Departmentof Industrial Relations Fiscal Year 2016/17 Budget Change Proposal Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) Resources Attachment Il] Workload Review of PAGA Notices IRC Legal Analyst [{nvestigator Aucitor OT Numberof Reviews 0 800 0 900 900 Hours/Review 0 1 0 3 2 Total Hours 0 900 0 2,700 1,800 Case Investigations IRC. Legal Analyst investigator Auditor OT Numberof Gases 45 45 45 45 45 Hours/Case 80 15 80 4 4 Tota! Hours 3,600 675 3,600 180 180 Review/Approva! of Settlements IRC Legal Analyst Investigator Auditor OT Numberof Reviews 270 270 270 270 270 Hours/Review 6 2 2 q 1 Total Hours 1,620 540 540 270 270 IRC Legal Analyst Investigator Auditor OT Total Hours 5,220 2,115 4,140 3,150 2,250 Total Positions Requested 3 1 2 2 1 PAGAResources Page 1 of 1 Exhibit A-18 D E P A R T M E N T O F I N D U S T R I A L R E L A T I O N S F I S C A L Y E A R 20 16 -1 7 B U D G E T C H A N G E P R O P O S A L Pr iv at e At to rn ey s Ge ne ra l Ac t R e s o u r c e s C U R R E N T F U N D C O N D I T I O N (d ol la rs in t h o u s a n d s ) Ac tu al Ac tu al Es ti ma te d Pr oj ec te d 2 0 1 3 - 1 4 2 0 1 4 - 1 5 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 3 0 7 8 L a b o r a n d W o r k f o r c e D e v e l o p m e n t F u n d B E G I N N I N G B A L A N C E 9 , 2 8 9 1 0 , 0 1 2 4 2 , 6 3 4 1 2 , 5 9 0 Pr io r Y e a r A d j u s t m e n t s -3 1 ~ - A d j u s t e d B e g i n n i n g B a l a n c e 9 . 2 5 8 1 0 , 0 1 2 1 2 , 6 3 4 1 2 , 5 9 0 R E V E N U E S A N D T R A N S F E R S R e v e n u e s : 4 1 7 3 5 0 0 Se tt te me nt s a n d J u d g m e n t s - O t h e r , 5 , 6 8 0 8 , 3 6 5 6 , 0 0 0 6 , 0 0 0 P r o j e c t e d 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 1 2 , 5 4 6 12 ,5 46 6 , 0 0 0 P r o j e c t e d 2 0 1 8 - 1 3 42 ,5 02 1 2 , 5 0 2 6 , 0 0 0 A T T A C H M E N T I V P r o j e c t e d 20 19 -2 0 12 ,4 58 1 2 , 4 5 8 6, 00 0 P r o j e c t e d 20 20 -2 1 12 ,4 14 72 ,4 14 6 , 0 0 0 ot al R e v e n u e s a n d Tr an sf er s 5 , 6 8 0 8 , 3 6 5 6 , 0 0 0 6 , 0 0 0 6, 00 0 6, 00 0 6, 00 0 6, 00 0 Exhibit ot al R e s o u r c e s 1 4 , 9 3 8 1 8 , 3 7 7 1 8 , 6 3 4 1 8 , 5 9 0 P > E X P E N D I T U R E S _. Ex pe nd it ur es : \ © 0 5 5 9 L a b o r a n d W o r k f o r c e D e v e l o p m e n t A g e n c y (S ta te Op er at io ns ) 2 3 2 2 6 9 3 2 4 3 2 4 7 3 0 0 Ag ri cu lt ur al L a b o r Re la ti on s B o a r d (S ta te Op er at io ns ) 1 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 9 3 1 , 1 6 7 1 , 1 6 7 7 3 5 0 D e p a r t m e n t o f In du st ri al Re la ti on s (S ta te Op er at io ns ) 3 , 6 6 8 4 , 3 7 7 4 , 5 4 3 4 , 5 4 3 8 8 8 0 Fi na nc ia l In fo rm at io n S y s t e m fo r Ca li fo rn ia (S ta te Op er at io ns ) 2 6 4 10 10 To ta l E x p e n d i t u r e s 4 , 9 2 6 § , 7 4 3 6 , 0 4 4 6 , 0 4 4 18 ,5 46 3 2 4 4, 16 7 4, 54 3 10 6, 04 4 18 ,5 02 3 2 4 4 , 1 6 7 4 , 5 4 3 10 6 , 0 4 4 4 8 , 4 5 8 3 2 4 4, 16 7 4, 54 3 10 6, 04 4 1 8 , 4 1 4 32 4 1, 16 7 4, 54 3 10 6, 04 4 F U N D B A L A N C E 1 0 , 0 1 2 1 2 , 6 3 4 4 2 , 5 9 0 1 2 , 5 4 6 R e s e r v e fo r e c o n o m i c un ce rt ai nt ie s 1 0 , 0 1 2 1 2 , 6 3 4 1 2 , 5 9 0 1 2 , 5 4 6 P a g e 1 of 1 1 2 , 5 0 2 1 2 , 5 0 2 4 2 , 4 5 8 1 2 , 4 5 8 12 ,4 14 12 ,4 14 1 2 , 3 7 0 1 2 , 3 7 0 D E P A R T M E N T O F I N D U S T R I A L R E L A T I O N S F I S C A L Y E A R 20 16 -1 7 B U D G E T C H A N G E P R O P O S A L Pr iv at e A t t o r n e y s G e n e r a l A c t R e s o u r c e s P R O P O S E D F U N D C O N D I T I O N (d ol la rs in t h o u s a n d s ) A c t u a l A c t u a l E s t i m a t e d 2 0 1 3 - 1 4 2 0 1 4 - 1 5 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 3 0 7 8 L a b o r a n d W o r k f o r c e D e v e l o p m e n t F u n d B E G I N N I N G B A L A N C E 9 , 2 8 9 4 0 , 0 1 3 1 2 , 6 3 5 Pr io r Y e a r A d j u s t m e n t s “3 4 - Ad ju st ed Be gi nn in g Ba la nc e 9, 25 8 10 ,0 13 12 ,6 35 R E V E N U E S A N D T R A N S F E R S R e v e n u e s : 4 1 7 3 5 0 0 Se tt le me nt s a n d J u d g m e n t s - O t h e r 5 , 6 8 0 8 , 3 6 5 6 , 5 0 0 P r o j e c t e d 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 13 ,0 91 73 ,0 91 6 , 5 0 0 P r o j e c t e d 20 17 -1 8 4 1 , 9 7 9 1 1 , 9 7 9 6 , 5 0 0 P r o j e c t e d 2 0 1 8 - 1 9 1 0 , 9 4 3 10 ,9 43 6 , 5 0 0 A T T A C H M E N T V P r o j e c t e d 2 0 1 9 - 2 0 9 , 9 0 7 9, 90 7 6 , 5 0 0 P r o j e c t e d 2 0 2 0 - 2 1 8, 87 1 8, 87 1 € , 5 0 0 ot al R e v e n u e s a n d Tr an sf er s 5 , 6 8 0 8 , 3 6 5 6 , 5 0 0 6, 50 0 6, 50 0 6, 50 0 6, 50 0 6, 50 0 To ta l Re so ur ce s 14 ,9 38 18 ,3 78 19 ,1 35 Exhibit PE XP EN DI TU RE S t O Ex pe nd it ur es : © 0 5 5 9 La bo r a n d Wo rk fo rc e D e v e l o p m e n t A g e n c y (S ta te : Op er at io ns ) 2 3 2 2 6 9 3 2 4 0 5 5 9 1 6 / 1 7 P A G A U n i t B C P 7 3 0 0 Ag ri cu lt ur al La bo r Re la ti on s Bo ar d (S ta te Op er at io ns ) 1, 00 0 1, 09 3 1, 16 7 7 3 5 0 De pa rt me nt o f In du st ri al Re la ti on s (S ta te Op er at io ns ) 3, 86 8 4, 37 7 4, 54 3 7 3 5 0 1 6 / 1 7 P A G A Un it 8 C P 8 8 8 0 Fi na nc ia l In fo rm at io n S y s t e m fo r Ca li fo rn ia (S ta te Op er at io ns ) 2 6 4 1 0 19 ,5 91 32 4 20 7 1, 16 7 4, 54 3 4, 36 1 10 1 8 , 4 7 9 3 2 4 1 9 9 4 , 1 6 7 4 , 5 4 3 1 , 2 9 3 1 0 1 7 , 4 4 3 32 4 19 9 1, 16 7 4, 54 3 1, 29 3 10 1 6 , 4 0 7 3 2 4 1 9 9 1, 16 7 4 , 5 4 3 1 , 2 9 3 15 ,3 71 32 4 49 9 1, 16 7 4, 54 3 1, 29 3 10 To ta l E x p e n d i t u r e s 4 , 9 2 6 5 , 7 4 3 6 , 0 4 4 7 , 6 1 2 7 , 5 3 6 7 , 5 3 6 7 , 5 3 6 7 , 5 3 6 F U N D B A L A N C E ” 1 0 , 0 1 3 1 2 , 6 3 5 1 3 , 0 9 4 R e s e r v e fo r e c o n o m i c un ce rt ai nt ie s 4 0 , 0 1 3 1 2 ; 6 3 5 1 3 , 0 9 1 P a g e 1 of 1 1 1 , 9 7 9 1 1 , 9 7 9 10 ,9 43 10 ,9 43 9, 90 7 9, 90 7 8, 87 7 8, 87 1 7 , 8 3 5 7 , 8 3 5 Exhibit A-21 B C P Ti tl e: Pr iv at e A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l A c t R e s o u r c e s B u d g e t R e q u e s t S u m m a r y Po si ti on s - P e r m a n e n t To ta l Po si ti on s S a l a r i e s a n d W a g e s E a r n i n g s - P e r m a n e n t To ta l Sa la ri es a n d W a g e s To ta l St af f Be ne fi ts T o t a l P e r s o n a l S e r v i c e s O p e r a t i n g E x p e n s e s a n d E q u i p m e n t 5 3 0 1 - Ge ne ra l E x p e n s e 5 3 0 2 - Pr in ti ng 5 3 0 4 - C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 5 3 0 6 - P o s t a g e § 3 2 0 - Tr av el : in -S ta te 5 3 2 2 - Tr ai ni ng 5 3 2 4 - Fa ci li ti es O p e r a t i o n 5 3 4 4 - Co ns ol id at ed Da ta Ce nt er s 5 3 4 6 - In fo rm at io n T e c h n o l o g y 5 3 6 8 - No n- Ca pi ta l A s s e t P u r c h a s e s - E q u i p m e n t T o t a l O p e r a t i n g E x p e n s e s a n d E q u i p m e n t To ta l Bu dg et : R e q u e s t F u n d S u m m a r y F u n d S o u r c e - St at e Op er at io ns L a b o r a n d W o r k f o r c e D e v e l o p m e n t 3 0 7 8 - F u n d To ta l St at e O p e r a t i o n s E x p e n d i t u r e s T o t a l Al l F u n d s P r o g r a m S u m m a r y P r o g r a m F u n d i n g 6 1 0 5 0 0 5 - L a b o r S t a n d a r d s E n f o r c e m e n t P r o g r a m B C P F i s c a l D e t a i l S h e e t C Y 0. 0 B Y 9. 0 F Y 1 6 B Y + 1 9. 0 D P N a m e : 7 3 5 0 - 0 0 3 - B C P - D P - 2 0 1 6 - G B B Y + 2 B Y + 3 B Y + 4 9. 0 9. 0 9. 0 0. 0 $ 0 9. 0 6 8 8 $ 6 8 8 3 5 3 9. 0 6 8 8 $ 6 8 8 3 5 3 9. 0 9. 0 9. 0 6 8 8 6 8 8 6 8 8 $ 6 8 8 $ 6 8 8 $ 6 8 8 3 5 3 3 5 3 3 5 3 $0 Oooocoorooeo © $1 ,0 41 1 4 1 0 2 2 1 1 5 35 72 $1 ,0 41 1 4 7 1 0 14 2 2 4 1 1 5 3 0 35 4 $1 ,0 41 $1 ,0 41 $1 ,0 41 14 14 4 4 10 1 0 10 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 1 5 1 1 5 1 1 5 3 5 3 5 3 5 o| Oo el] % $3 20 $1 ,3 61 4, 36 1 $ 2 5 2 $1 ,2 93 1, 29 3 $2 52 $2 52 $2 52 $1 ,2 93 $1 ,2 93 $1 ,2 93 4, 29 3 1, 29 3 1, 29 3 $0 $0 $1 ,3 61 $1 ,3 61 1, 36 1 $ 1 , 2 9 3 $1 ,2 93 1, 29 3 $ 1 , 2 9 3 $ 1 , 2 9 3 $1 ,2 93 $ 1 , 2 9 3 $ 1 , 2 9 3 $1 ,2 93 4, 29 3 1, 29 3 1, 29 3 Exhibit A-22 9 9 0 0 7 1 0 0 - A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 9 9 0 0 2 0 0 - A d m i n i s t r a t i o n - Di st ri bu te d To ta l Ai l P r o g r a m s Oo 1, 36 1 +1 ,3 64 1, 29 3 -1 ,2 93 4, 29 3 -1 ,2 93 1 , 2 9 3 - 1 , 2 9 3 1, 29 3 -1 ,2 93 $ 0 $7 ,3 61 $1 ,2 93 $ 1 , 2 9 3 $1 ,2 93 $1 ,2 93 Exhibit A-23 Po si ti on s 4 1 3 9 - 4 1 7 5 - 5 2 3 7 - 5 7 8 0 - 8 6 1 0 - 9 5 0 4 - BC P T i t l e : P r i v a t e A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l A c t R e s o u r c e s P e r s o n a l S e r v i c e s D e t a i l s Of fi ce T e c h n (T yp in g) Au di to r | Le ga l An al ys t At ty IV In ve st ig at or D e p L a b o r C o m m i s s i o n e r 1 ] T o t a l P o s i t i o n s Sa la ri es a n d W a g e s 1 1 3 9 - 4 1 7 5 - 5 2 3 7 - 5 7 8 0 - 8 6 1 0 - 9 5 0 4 - Of fi ce T e c h n . { T y p i n g } Au di to r | Le ga l An al ys t At ty IV In ve st ig at or D e p L a b o r C o m m i s s i o n e r tI ! To ta l Sa la ri es a n d W a g e s St af f Be ne fi ts 5 1 5 0 3 5 0 - 5 1 5 0 6 0 0 - 5 1 5 0 9 0 0 - H e a l t h I n s u r a n c e R e t i r e m e n t - G e n e r a l St af f Be ne fi ts - O t h e r T o t a l S t a f f B e n e f i t s T o t a l P e r s o n a l S e r v i c e s Sa la ry In fo rm at io n M i n C Y oooo0o 0 Mi d B Y 3 8 9 0 5 4 3 6 5 6 3 7 8 M a x B Y + 1 3 8 3 0 3 6 5 6 3 7 8 D P N a m e : 7 3 5 0 - 0 0 3 - B C P - D P - 2 0 1 6 - G B c y B Y 0. 0 81 .0 0 0 2. 0 0 0 1 0 0. 0 3. 0 0 0 861 .0 0 0 1 0 BY +1 1 .0 2. 0 1. 0 3. 0 1. 0 1. 0 B Y + 2 1. 0 2. 0 1. 0 3. 0 1. 0 1. 0 B Y + 3 1. 0 2. 0 4. 0 3. 0 1. 0 1. 0 B Y + 4 1. 0 2. 0 1. 0 3. 0 1. 0 1. 0 0. 0 9. 0 B Y + 2 3 8 9 0 5 4 3 6 5 6 3 7 8 9. 0 9. 0 B Y + 3 3 8 9 0 5 4 3 6 5 6 3 7 8 9. 0 9. 0 B Y + 4 3 8 9 0 5 4 3 6 5 6 3 7 8 $ 0 oo o/c $ $0 $ 6 8 8 85 17 3 95 $3 53 $1 ,0 44 $ 6 8 8 8 5 1 7 3 9 5 $ 3 5 3 $1 ,0 44 $ 6 8 8 85 17 3 95 $3 53 $1 ,0 41 $ 6 8 8 8 5 1 7 3 9 5 $ 3 5 3 $1 ,0 44 $ 6 8 8 8 5 1 7 3 9 5 $ 3 5 3 $1 ,0 41 PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 610 Newport Center Drive, Suite 700, Newport Beach, CA 92660. On May 9, 2016, I served the foregoing documentdescribed as MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICEon the following person(s) in the mannerindicated: SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST { ] (WY ELECTRONIC SERVICE) I am causing the document(s) to be served on the Filing User(s) through the Court’s Electronic Filing System. [X] (BY MAIL) I am familiar with the practice of Call & Jensen for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Correspondence so collected and processed is deposited with the United States Postal Service that same day in the ordinary course of business. On this date, a copy ofsaid document wasplaced in a sealed envelope, with postage fully prepaid, addressed as set forth herein, and such envelope was placed for collection and mailing at Call & Jensen, Newport Beach, California, following ordinary businesspractices. [X] (BY GSO) I am familiar with the practice of Call & Jensen for collection and processing of correspondencefor delivery by overnight courier. Correspondence so collected and processed is deposited in a box or other facility regularly maintained by GSO that same day in the ordinary course of business. Onthis date, a copy of said document was placed in a sealed envelope designated by GSO with delivery fees paid or provided for, addressed as set forth herein, and such envelope was placed for delivery by GSO at Call & Jensen, Newport Beach, California, following ordinary businesspractices. [ ] (BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION) Onthis date, at the time indicated on the transmittal sheet, attached hereto, I transmitted from a facsimile transmission machine, which telephone number is (949) 717-3100, the document described above and a copy of this declaration to the person, and at the facsimile transmission telephone numbers, set forth herein. The above-described transmission was reported as complete and without error by a properly issued transmission report issued by the facsimile transmission machine upon which the said transmission was made immediately following the transmission. [ ] (BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION) I served electronically from the electronic notification address of the document described above and a copy ofthis declaration to the person and at the electronic notification address set forth herein. The electronic transmission was reported as complete and withouterror. I declare under penalty of perjury under the lawsof the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed on May 9, 2016, at Newport Beach, California. abitha Muncey SERVICE LIST Supreme Court of California 350 McAllister Street San Francisco, CA 94102 Clerk Court of Appeal Second Appellate District, Division 7 Ronald Reagan State Building 300 S. Spring Street 2"! Floor, North Tower Los Angeles, CA 90013 Frederick Bennett Los Angeles County Superior Court Stanley Mosk Courthouse 111 North Hill Street, Rm 546 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Hon.William F. Highberger Los Angeles County Superior Court Central Civil West Courthouse 600 South Commonwealth Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90005 Glenn A. Danas Robert J. Drexler, Jr. Stan Karas Liana C. Carter Melissa Grant Ryan H. Wu Capstone Law APC 1840 Century Park East, Suite 450 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Electronic submission, original and 8 hard copies by GSO Court of Appeal Case No. B259967 *BY FIRST CLASS MAIL Respondent Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC503806 *BY FIRST CLASS MAIL Respondent Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC503806 *BY FIRST CLASS MAIL Attorneysfor Petitioner Michael Williams *BY FIRST CLASS MAIL Robert G. Hulteng Joshua J. Cliffe Emily E. O’Connor Scott D. Helsinger Littler Mendelson, PC 650 California Street, 20" Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 Amy Todd-Gher Kyle W. Nageotte Littler Mendelson, PC 501 W. Broadway,Suite 900 San Diego, CA 92101 Attorney General Appellate Coordinator Office of the Attorney General Consumer Law Section 300 S. Spring Street Los Angeles, CA 90013 District Attorney’s Office County of Los Angeles 320 West Temple Street, #540 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Jennifer Grock Brian Van Vleck Van Vieck Turner & Zaller LLP 6310 San Vicente Blvd., Suite 430 Los Angeles, CA 90048 Attorneys for Real Party in Interest Marshalls of CA, LLC *BY FIRST CLASS MAIL Attorneys for Real Party in Interest Marshalls of CA, LLC *BY FIRST CLASS MAIL Electronic upload to http://oag.ca.gov *BY FIRST CLASS MAIL Attorneys for Plaintiff Albert Ebo *BY FIRST CLASS MAIL
