1 BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 2 450 N STREET 3 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 4 5 6 7 8 REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT 9 MARCH 24, 2010 10 11 12 13 14 15 FINAL ACTIONS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 REPORTED BY: JULI PRICE JACKSON 24 CSR NO. 5214 25 26 27 28 1 1 P R E S E N T 2 3 For The Board Betty Yee of Equalization: Chair 4 5 Jerome E. Horton Vice-Chair 6 Barbara Alby 7 Acting Member 8 Michelle Steel Member 9 Marcy Jo Mandel 10 Appearing for John Chiang State Controller 11 (per Government Code Section 7.9) 12 Diane G. Olson 13 Chief, Board Proceedings Division 14 15 ---OOO--- 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 1 450 N STREET 2 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 3 MARCH 24, 2010 4 ---o0o--- 5 MS. YEE: All right, thank you. 6 Okay, Miss Olson? 7 ---o0o--- 8 MACROMEDIA, INC. 9 NO. 461946 (BH) 10 ---o0o--- 11 MS. OLSON: The first oral hearing under 12 submission is C1, Macromedia, Incorporated. 13 MS. YEE: Okay. Members, the first item under 14 submission is item C1, Macromedia, Incorporated. 15 May have a motion, please? 16 MS. STEEL: I want to move that sales of 17 licenses to C. S. U. are exempt and then we going to 18 adopt the Appeals Division's recommendation the 19 remaining issues. 20 MS. YEE: Okay. We have a motion by Ms. Steel 21 to find the sales to C. S. U. Long Beach are exempt and 22 otherwise redetermine. 23 Is there a second? 24 MS. ALBY: Second. 25 MS. YEE: Second by Ms. Alby. 26 Discussion? 27 Ms. Mandel? 28 MS. MANDEL: You know, I -- it's not that I -- 3 1 it's not that I disbelieve the accountant-types that 2 were here. It just -- I wish they had a more complete 3 letter from the Keith guy that laid out what he looked 4 at. 5 I mean, I'd be happy to let them have the time 6 to get that, because he's saying C. S. U. never got 7 it. 8 MS. STEEL: So, you want me to withdraw the 9 motion and 30-30-30? 10 MS. MANDEL: But if they could -- yeah, a 11 30-30-30. 12 If they could get something more specific from 13 him that substantiates why he is saying that C. S. U. 14 never got any hard copies on any of the ones that are in 15 dispute, that seems like that would make a big 16 difference. 17 MS. YEE: Mr. Levine? 18 MR. LEVINE: If we got something like that, 19 you'd get a recommendation from Appeals that was exactly 20 that motion. 21 MS. YEE: Okay. 22 MS. MANDEL: So, I'd rather give them the 23 chance to have a better letter from the Keith -- I can't 24 remember his last name. 25 MS. YEE: Ms. Steel, you want to withdraw your 26 motion? 27 MS. STEEL: Withdraw my motion and then I give 28 them 30-30-30 -- 4 1 MS. YEE: Okay. 2 MS. STEEL: -- to get the letter. 3 MS. YEE: All righty, we have a motion by 4 Ms. Steel to move the 30-30-30, to -- 5 MS. ALBY: Second. 6 MS. YEE: -- have the Petitioner further 7 substantiate the sales to C. S. U. 8 Second by -- I think I heard Ms. Alby. 9 Without objection? 10 MS. MANDEL: And if there's -- if it's 11 appropriate for -- I don't know, David, if it's 12 appropriate for them to get an explanation of -- I mean, 13 I said it when they were sitting there, but they may not 14 have -- 15 MS. YEE: Right, just -- 16 MS. MANDEL: -- that they understand what, 17 because I think he can write it if he really -- 18 MR. LEVINE: And if we get a letter and we have 19 more questions, Appeals will ask for contact information 20 so we can call him direct. 21 MS. YEE: Okay. 22 MS. MANDEL: All right, thank you. 23 MS. YEE: Thank you very much. 24 25 26 27 28 5 1 MS. YEE: Okay, next item?. 2 ---o0o--- 3 C2a DOUGLAS BRENT DUNBAR, ZAID RAHMANI 4 AND IRINA RASULI 5 NO. 295401 (CH) 6 C2b SMOKER'S PARADISE, LLC 7 NO. 295398, 378099 (GH) 8 C2c DOUGLAS BRENT DUNBAR AND ZAID RAHMANI 9 NO. 34043, 378109 (CH) 10 C2d CHEAPER CIGARETTE, DOUGLAS BRENT DUNBAR, 11 MANSOOR RAHMANI, TARIQ RASULI AND ZAID RAHMANI 12 NO. 296295 (JH) 13 C2e CIGARETTES 'R' CHEAPER, ZAID RAHMANI, 14 TARIQ MOHAMMED RASULI AND MONSOOR RAHMANI 15 NO. 296294 (JH) 16 C2f CIGARETTE CENTER, LLC 17 NO. 295400, 378108 (CH) 18 ---o0o--- 19 MS. OLSON: Our next item is C2a through f, 20 Douglas Brent Dunbar. 21 MS. YEE: Okay. 22 We have C2a, Douglas Brent Dunbar; C2b, 23 Smoker's Paradise; C2c, Douglas Brent Dunbar and Zaid 24 Rahmani; C2d, Cheaper Cigarette, Douglas Brent Dunbar, 25 Mansoor Rahmani, Tariq Rasuli and Zaid Rahmani; C2e, 26 Cigarettes R Cheaper, Zaid Rahmani, Tariq Mohammed 27 Rasuli and Monsoor Rahmani; and C2f, Cigarette Center. 28 I know that the -- Mr. Dunbar had made a 6 1 statement about the absence of Mr. Rasuli and 2 Mr. Rahmani today. Any thoughts on behalf of the 3 Members -- on part of the Members with respect -- 4 MS. MANDEL: Well, as I understand that's just 5 for "e"? 6 MS. YEE: Yes, that's correct. 7 MS. MANDEL: And he did -- the gentleman who 8 was here, did say that he didn't have authority to speak 9 for them. 10 MS. STEEL: Is that what he said? I thought he 11 came on behalf of them? 12 MS. YEE: Mr. Levine, can you clarify 13 Mr. Dunbar's -- 14 MR. LEVINE: He represented everybody. 15 MS. YEE: Okay. 16 MR. LEVINE: And I note that he did file a 17 request for relief of penalty as to two of the matters. 18 On one the -- there was no penalty that he paid, it was 19 all paid by the predecessors, that one doesn't help him. 20 But, on -- on, I believe it's 259398, Smoker's 21 Paradise, LLC, there was a -- sorry, I've misplaced my 22 notes. 23 I'll look for them and finish, but he 24 represented everybody. 25 MS. STEEL: Yeah. 26 MS. YEE: Okay. 27 MS. MANDEL: Did he represent everybody today? 28 Sounded like he was asking for a continuance on those. 7 1 MR. LEVINE: He was. He was, but he was 2 confusing his partnership status, which he wasn't, with 3 whether he represented. 4 But he has provided -- and Board Proceedings 5 can tell you more -- but the documents he submitted was 6 that he represented all six. 7 And I believe that he appeared at the 8 conference for all six. He was the rep for all six at 9 the conference. 10 MS. MANDEL: But then he made -- I thought he 11 said, 12 "I could speak, but I'm not going to speak 13 because they want to be here and they asked for 14 a --" 15 It was -- he was a little confused about 16 things. 17 MS. STEEL: Car trouble? 18 MS. MANDEL: I'm sorry. 19 MS. MANDEL: Car trouble. 20 Yeah, the other people had the car trouble. 21 MS. YEE: The other parties had vehicle trouble 22 that I think Mr. Dunbar has continued to represent. 23 MS. STEEL: When the first then he sat down, he 24 was representing whole case here? 25 MS. YEE: Yes, okay. 26 MS. STEEL: And then there's two penalties are 27 in 2d and 2f. 28 MR. LEVINE: Yes. 8 1 MS. STEEL: Mr. Levine? 2 MR. LEVINE: Yes, actually on 2d, I believe, 3 isn't that the one that he's not the partner, he 4 actually signed a request for relief included that 5 one. 6 MS. YEE: On 2e? 7 MR. LEVINE: On 2e. 8 MS. YEE: And that's the one you believed he 9 wasn't authorized to speak for. 10 MR. LEVINE: That's also the one that there was 11 no interest paid, no penalty paid. 12 I believe it was not -- I'm sorry, that is the 13 one that is entitled to an adjustment for the penalty. 14 I'm sorry for my confusion. There was a 15 successor -- that successor liability included late 16 payment penalties of which the successor paid $1907, but 17 there's only a timely claim for 500. 18 They -- he did file a request for relief on 19 that party's behalf. We recommend relief be granted, 20 but the refund be granted only to the extent of the 21 timely claim of $500 on that one. That's our revised 22 recommendation. 23 MS. YEE: Okay. 24 MR. LEVINE: That one was 296294. 25 MS. YEE: Okay, that's C2e, okay. 26 Okay, all right. 27 Is there a motion on this matter? 28 MS. STEEL: I move we adopt staff 9 1 recommendations, except that what Mr. Levine stated, 2 that is, 2e or 2d? 3 MR. LEVINE: It is 2e. 4 MS. STEEL: 2e for $500 refund; is that right? 5 MR. LEVINE: Correct. 6 MS. STEEL: Okay. 7 MS. YEE: Okay. So, we have a motion by 8 Ms. Steel to adopt the revised Appeals staff 9 recommendation. 10 Is there a second? 11 MR. HORTON: Second. 12 MS. YEE: Second by Mr. Horton. 13 Further discussion? 14 Ms. Mandel? 15 MS. MANDEL: He sounded pretty confused about 16 the accounts and the dollars and everything. And I 17 thought that it was potentially useful, at least for his 18 understanding of what was going on with all of the 19 numbers, that maybe -- I don't know, Taxpayer Rights or 20 somebody could sit down with him and the Department and 21 just go over the -- I mean he clearly seemed confused 22 about the numbers that just seemed to be -- 23 MS. YEE: And I think that the Department did 24 offer. 25 MS. MANDEL: It might just be helpful when 26 people then understand -- 27 MS. STEEL: I thought -- 28 MS. MANDEL: -- to the extent that they can 10 1 understand why. 2 MS. STEEL: -- the Department was talking to -- 3 I mean, supposed to talk to him right after the hearing? 4 MS. MANDEL: Okay, maybe they -- did you get -- 5 MS. YEE: The Department offered, yes. 6 MR. HANKS: We did. 7 MS. MANDEL: You got them squared away? 8 MR. HANKS: We spoke to him -- 9 MS. MANDEL: Okay, thank you. 10 MR. HANKS: -- right after the hearing. 11 MS. STEEL: Okay. 12 MR. HANKS: It's taken care of. 13 MS. YEE: Very well. 14 MS. STEEL: Thank you. 15 MS. YEE: Thank you. We have a motion by 16 Ms. Steel, second by Mr. Horton, to adopt the revised 17 Appeals staff recommendation. 18 Without objection, that motion carries. 19 ---o0o--- 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 11 1 MS. YEE: Okay, next item? 2 ---o0o--- 3 C3 TESTOUT CORPORATION 4 NO. 400769, 400658 5 ---o0o--- 6 MS. OLSON: Our next item is C3, TestOut 7 Corporation. 8 MS. YEE: Okay, item C3, TestOut Corporation. 9 May I have a motion, please? 10 MS. ALBY: Move staff recommendation. 11 MS. YEE: Okay, motion by Ms. Alby to adopt the 12 staff recommendation. 13 Is there a second? 14 MR. HORTON: Second. 15 MS. YEE: Second by Mr. Horton. 16 Discussion? Objection? 17 Hearing none, that motion carries. 18 ---o0o--- 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 12 1 MS. OLSON: Our next item is C4, James Fishman. 2 . 3 ---o0o--- 4 C4 JAMES FISHMAN 5 NO. 355538 (CH) 6 ---o0o--- 7 MS. YEE: Okay, item C4, James Fishman, is 8 there a motion? 9 MS. STEEL: Is that the taxpayer that said he 10 can provide the letters or any documents for this to the 11 extent of $50,000 accounts receivable that he never 12 received it, if he has time? No? 13 MR. LEVINE: We're only concerned with about 14 100,000, because 500,000 or so was already removed. 15 MS. STEEL: Okay. 16 MR. LEVINE: I think -- I'm not sure why, maybe 17 because the Department concluded that they didn't get 18 the funds. 19 But the amount in dispute is now -- it's a tax 20 of 9,000, it's a measure of a little over a thousand. 21 MS. YEE: Okay. 22 MS. STEEL: So, what happened to $100,000? Do 23 you think he can provide us more documents or no? 24 MR. LEVINE: Part of the problem, I think, was 25 the confusion. 26 He kept -- terminology, he was arguing the sale 27 wasn't consummated, but the sale was consummated. He -- 28 his explanation is the buyer didn't want to pay for it 13 1 until they needed it, which isn't a good way to do 2 business for a seller, but was a big buyer. So, maybe 3 they were stuck doing that. 4 But as I stated, it seemed -- seems like it 5 would be listed on the bankruptcy. And if they listed 6 that on the bankruptcy, given the state of the evidence, 7 I think I would accept that as showing that they never 8 got paid for it. 9 And if they never got paid for it, then he 10 shouldn't be liable for it -- neither would the 11 corporation because they get a bad debt. But this just 12 wouldn't meet the requirements for responsible person 13 liability. 14 I don't know what the Department saw, but the 15 Department said they looked through the bankruptcy and 16 I -- I assume they didn't see a listing for this 17 transaction. But we could have the Department go back 18 through and look for -- with Appeals being aware of the 19 issue -- and making sure that they look at the right 20 thing? 21 MS. MANDEL: And would it makes a difference if 22 there had been an adversary proceeding against the -- 23 MR. LEVINE: That might be too. If they -- if 24 they filed a complaint against Seagate, at least 25 alleging that they made a sale and didn't get paid, 26 especially if they hired an attorney, that would be good 27 enough for me. Because why would you waste all -- well, 28 people would, but I accept that they're good enough 14 1 business people, they wouldn't throw away money suing 2 someone knowing it was pointless. 3 MS. YEE: Okay. Will of the Members here? 4 MS. MANDEL: Give them a 30-30-30. 5 MS. YEE: Okay, motion by Ms. Alby to move this 6 -- to adopt the staff recommendation. 7 Is there a second? 8 MR. HORTON: Second. 9 MS. YEE: Second by Mr. Horton. 10 Please call the roll. 11 MS. OLSON: Madam Chair? 12 MS. YEE: Aye. 13 MS. OLSON: Ms. Alby? 14 MS. ALBY: Aye. 15 MS. OLSON: Ms. Steel? 16 MS. STEEL: Aye. 17 MS. OLSON: Mr. Horton? 18 MR. HORTON: Aye. 19 MS. OLSON: Ms. Mandel? 20 MS. MANDEL: Abstain. 21 MS. OLSON: Motion carries. 22 MS. YEE: Okay. 23 ---o0o--- 24 25 26 27 28 15 1 MS. OLSON: Our next item is C5, Sukrita 2 Sanahi. 3 ---o0o--- 4 C5 SUKRITA SANAHI 5 NO. 436874 (EA) 6 ---o0o--- 7 MS. YEE: Okay, C5, Sukrita Sanahi, is there a 8 motion? 9 MS. STEEL: I -- I want to go for reasonable 10 for this taxpayer. I make a motion with 15 percent 11 markup and only for 2004 125 percent error rate, same as 12 2005, and adopt the staff recommendation for the rest 13 and then offer-in-compromise. 14 MS. MANDEL: Okay, can you give it to me more 15 slowly? 16 MS. STEEL: 15 percent markup instead of 25 17 percent because it's 10 to 40 percent average and then 18 125 percent error rate for 2004, it's the same as 2005, 19 because 2006 goes up to 300 something, and then adopt 20 the staff recommendation for the rest of it. 21 And then we refer to offers-in-compromise. 22 MR. LEVINE: I may just not understand the 23 audit methodology properly, but it seems like one of the 24 other of these -- that if you set the 15 percent markup, 25 then we'll get an answer or if you pick a 125 error, 26 we'd get an answer. 27 But if you say both, they may not jive. I 28 think -- I am not sure, but I think what happens is they 16 1 used the markup to derive the error rate and then they 2 applied the error rate to the whole thing, so -- 3 MS. STEEL: Do you think I have to choose one 4 or the other? 5 MR. LEVINE: And I don't know what effect that 6 would be. 7 MS. STEEL: I choose the 125 percent error 8 rate, forget about markup then. 9 And then rest of it, adopt the staff 10 recommendation and then refer to offers-in-compromise 11 because she doesn't have any money to pay for it. 12 MR. LEVINE: So, that's 125 for 2004 and 2005? 13 MS. STEEL: Just -- yes. 14 MS. YEE: Yes. 15 MS. STEEL: 2005 already that -- yes, that 16 already recommended. 17 MS. YEE: Okay. So, we have a motion by 18 Ms. Steel to apply 125 percent error rate for 2004 and 19 5 -- actually, yeah, the other year, and otherwise 20 redetermine and refer Petitioner to the 21 offers-in-compromise program. 22 Is there a second? 23 MS. ALBY: Second. 24 MS. YEE: Second by Ms. Alby. 25 Discussion? 26 Okay, hearing none, objection? 27 MS. MANDEL: Yeah, I'll just object. 28 MS. YEE: Please call the roll. 17 1 MS. OLSON: Madam Chair? 2 MS. YEE: No. 3 MS. OLSON: Ms. Alby? 4 MS. ALBY: Aye. 5 MS. OLSON: Ms. Steel? 6 MS. STEEL: Aye. 7 MS. OLSON: Mr. Horton? 8 MR. HORTON: No. 9 MS. OLSON: Ms. Mandel? 10 MS. MANDEL: No. 11 MS. OLSON: Motion fails. 12 MS. YEE: I'd like to move the staff 13 recommendation and refer Petitioner to the 14 offers-in-compromise program. 15 Is there a second? 16 MR. HORTON: Yeah, I'd second. And let me 17 just -- 18 MS. YEE: Mr. Horton, please? 19 MR. HORTON: You know, I am empathize with the 20 taxpayer, but the Department clearly indicated that they 21 had significant -- the taxpayer indicated that they were 22 significant purchases that weren't included in the cost 23 of goods sold that was marked up and extrapolated and a 24 subsequent percentage of error was applied and objected. 25 In and of itself, if everything was pure, we 26 might be able to give them -- there might be an argument 27 that the markup could be closer to 15 percent, given the 28 variables that they shared -- the discounted purchases, 18 1 potential consumption, distinction between the ending 2 inventory -- but both the Department and the taxpayer 3 seemed to, intentionally or unintentionally, testify 4 that the cost of goods sold used in the audit was 5 significantly less than what has evolved over the 6 process. 7 So, we would actually end up with a larger 8 liability if we did anything to this account, I would 9 think. 10 MS. STEEL: Well, I understand that part, but 11 three times auditor went out and because of -- she had a 12 problem, personal problem, that it was closed. 13 So, what they did was not the shelf test, but 14 they were just -- they went to the Sam's Club and got 15 the merchandise and tried to compare it with what they 16 have. 17 Yes, I understand there is other merchandise 18 were there, but at the same time the price difference 19 that, you know, few years later you went to Sam's Club, 20 price must be higher than what they used to get. 21 So, I thought it's reasonable to give them 22 little break. But at this point I'm not giving them 23 25 percent markup, I'm not, you know, giving them lower 24 than 25 percent, what Department gave them. But what 25 125 percent error rate is they couldn't find anything on 26 2004 because they opened up on May. 27 What they did was they find the error rate of 28 2005 was 125 percent and then go to 2006 was over 19 1 300 percent. And then they averaged it and then that 2 number came to 2004. 3 So, what I'm saying is when they open up the 4 2004, May, that store, then error rate has to be closer 5 to 2005 than 2006. So, why you averaging it? 6 We can just error rate -- give the taxpayer 7 error rate of 125 percent, that's why I made that 8 motion. 9 MR. HORTON: Yeah, and I believe that your 10 motion has merit. 11 I would support opening it up for a 30-30-30 12 and ask the Department to take all of the additional 13 information under consideration. 14 But you may find that that ends up in a larger 15 liability, hypothetically speaking. I mean, they just 16 made reference to cost of living analysis would have 17 yielded more at the more conservative number, just 18 paying the rent and the basic fundamental bills. So, 19 anyway -- 20 MS. STEEL: We are saying all ifs at this point 21 and they already closed down the stores. So, you 22 know -- you know, I just assumed that cost of living 23 came from the divorce. I mean, you know, whatever can 24 happen, but the error rate has to be closer to -- 2004 25 error rate has to be closer to 2005 than to 2006. 26 But my motion was killed. So, it does not 27 really matter at this point. 28 MS. YEE: Okay. Other discussion, Members? 20 1 Comments? 2 Okay, we have a motion by Yee, second by Horton 3 to adopt staff recommendation and refer Petitioners to 4 the offers-in-compromise program. 5 Please call the roll. 6 MS. OLSON: Madam Chair? 7 MS. YEE: Aye. 8 MS. OLSON: Ms. Alby? 9 MS. ALBY: Aye. 10 MS. OLSON: Ms. Steel? 11 MS. STEEL: No. 12 MS. OLSON: Mr. Horton? 13 MR. HORTON: Aye. 14 MS. OLSON: Ms. Mandel? 15 MS. MANDEL: Aye. 16 MS. OLSON: Motion carries. 17 ---o0o--- 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 21 1 MS. YEE: Next item? . 2 ---o0o--- 3 C6 WINNTECH DIGITAL SYSTEMS, INC. 4 NO. 353092, 416075, 416073 (OH) 5 ---o0o--- 6 MS. OLSON: Our next item is C6, Winntech 7 Digital Systems, Incorporated. 8 MS. YEE: Okay, item C6, Winntech Digital 9 Systems, is there a motion? 10 MS. STEEL: Is it possible to we can move to 11 finality penalty from here? 12 Mr. Levine, do I have enough power to remove? 13 MR. LEVINE: Yeah, they filed request for 14 relief, any that you find -- they have convinced you, 15 can be removed. 16 MS. STEEL: Seems like the attorney's the one 17 that, you know, was delaying it. So, I am not asking 18 other penalties, but just remove finality penalty. 19 MS. YEE: Remove the finality penalty? 20 MS. STEEL: Yeah. 21 MR. HORTON: I'd second that. 22 MS. STEEL: Thank you. 23 MS. YEE: Okay. We have a motion by Ms. Steel 24 to remove the finality penalty, seconded by Mr. Horton. 25 Discussion? 26 MS. MANDEL: We can -- I think he was asking 27 for a payment plan maybe? 28 MS. YEE: Yes. 22 1 MS. STEEL: Okay, with a payment plan. 2 MS. YEE: Yes. 3 Okay, objection? 4 Hearing none, that motion carries. 5 ---o0o--- 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 23 1 MS. OLSON: And our final item for the day is 2 C7, Edward A. Foster. . 3 ---o0o--- 4 C7 EDWARD A. FOSTER 5 NO. 424872 (CH) 6 ---o0o--- 7 MS. YEE: Okay. Item C7, Edward A. Foster, may 8 I have a motion, please? 9 MS. MANDEL: Move to redetermine and talk to 10 him about payment plans, if that's what he needs. 11 MS. YEE: Okay. 12 MR. HORTON: Second. 13 MS. YEE: Motion by Ms. Mandel to redetermine, 14 second by Mr. Horton -- and to discuss payment plan 15 options with Petitioner -- second by Mr. Horton. 16 Without objection, that motion carries. 17 MS. OLSON: And that concludes our business for 18 today. 19 MS. YEE: Okay, Members, thank you very much. 20 We will recess until 9:30 tomorrow. 21 Thank you. 22 ---o0o--- 23 24 25 26 27 28 24 1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE. 2 3 State of California ) 4 ) ss 5 County of Sacramento ) 6 7 I, JULI PRICE JACKSON, Hearing Reporter for the 8 California State Board of Equalization certify that on 9 MARCH 24, 2010 I recorded verbatim, in shorthand, to the 10 best of my ability, the proceedings in the 11 above-entitled hearing; that I transcribed the shorthand 12 writing into typewriting; and that the preceding pages 1 13 through 24 constitute a complete and accurate 14 transcription of the shorthand writing. 15 16 Dated: MAY 6, 2010 17 18 19 ____________________________ 20 JULI PRICE JACKSON 21 Hearing Reporter 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 25