California Disability Services Assn. v. Bargmann

California Court of Appeal Jul 31, 2020 No. C088493Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that service providers are not entitled to a rate adjustment for increased program director salaries because the minimum wage law does not mandate the exempt classification of those directors, and thus does not constitute an "unanticipated program change" under the relevant regulations.

Issues

Whether an increase in the minimum wage constitutes a "mandated service adjustment" under section 57920, subdivision (c)(1) when it impacts the salaries of exempt employees.
Whether the trial court erred in denying the petitioners' request for judicial notice of various Department documents.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The statute requiring an increase of the minimum wage does not mandate any change to program directors’ salaries -- by the statute’s plain reading it applies only to minimum wage workers, which a program director is not.”

“The only provisions of legal significance identified by petitioners requiring the program directors’ salaries be at least twice the minimum wage are the employment contracts between the providers and the program directors.”

Filed 7/31/20 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

CALIFORNIA DISABILITY SERVICES C088493 ASSOCIATION et al., (Super. Ct. No. Plaintiffs and Appellants, 34201780002571CUSMGDS)

NANCY BARGMANN, as Director, etc. et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County, Richard K. Sueyoshi, Judge. Affirmed.

Forrest & Becker Law Group and Emma L. Forrest for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Cheryl L. Feiner, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Ismael A. Castro, Christine M. Murphy, and Hadara R. Stanton, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendants and Respondents.

Petitioners California Disability Services Association; Horrigan Cole Enterprises, Inc., doing business as Cole Vocational Services; Unlimited Quest, Inc.; Loyd’s Liberty

Homes, Inc.; and First Step Independent Living Program, Inc. (collectively petitioners) filed a petition for writ of mandamus and damages and a complaint for declaratory relief against the California Department of Developmental Services (Department) and its director, Nancy Bargmann (collectively respondents). Petitioners challenged the Department’s denial of their requests for a rate adjustment due to the increase of the minimum wage, which, in turn, impacted the salaries of their exempt program directors, who must be paid twice the minimum wage. The trial court upheld the Department’s denial. We affirm. BACKGROUND The Welfare and Institutions Code requires the Department to contract with regional centers to provide services to individuals with developmental disabilities. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 4500 et seq., 4620, subd. (a).) The regional centers contract for needed services, such as community-based day programs for individuals with developmental disabilities, through approved service providers. (Id., § 4691, subd. (a).) Petitioners, except for California Disability Services Association, are approved service providers of community-based day programs.1 California Disability Services Association is their trade association. Providers are subject to various licensing requirements (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 4851), which obligate providers to submit to the regional center information about the community-based day program’s design, job descriptions, staff qualifications, and staffing plan (Cal. Code Regs.,2 tit. 17, § 50608). Collectively, providers employ 24 program directors who are required to “carry out the administrative responsibilities for

California Disability Services Assn. v. Bargmann

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief