Skip to content

Judicial Watch • Vining v. DC Health Exchange appeal 242

Vining v. DC Health Exchange appeal 242

Vining v. DC Health Exchange appeal 242

Page 1: Vining v. DC Health Exchange appeal 242

Category:Obamacare

Number of Pages:78

Date Created:July 13, 2015

Date Uploaded to the Library:July 28, 2015

Tags:Actual, Change, benefit, Vining, Budget, exchange, Business, appeal, authority, Columbia, defendants, health, Congress, Small, funds, federal, FOIA, district, court


File Scanned for Malware

Donate now to keep these documents public!

  • demand_answers

See Generated Text   ˅

Autogenerated text from PDF

Case Number 15-cv-242 THE DISTRICT COLUMBIA
COURT APPEALS
KIRBY VINING,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
EXECUTIVE BOARD D.C. HEALTH BENEFIT
EXCHANGE AUTHORITY, al.,
Defendants-Appellees. APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT THE DISTRICT COLUMBIA, CIVIL DIVISION
BRIEF PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT KIRBY VINING
Michael Bekesha
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
425 Third Street, S.W., Suite 800
Washington, 20024
(202) 646-5172
Counsel for Plaintiff-Appellant
PARTIES, INTERVENORS,
AMICI CURIAE, AND THEIR COUNSEL
The following parties, intervenors, and amici curiae appeared below and are part this
proceeding:
Plaintiff-Appellant:
Kirby Vining efend ants-Appellees:
Executive Board the District Columbia
Health Benefit Exchange Authority;
Mila Kofman, her official capacity
Executive Director the District
Columbia Health Benefit Exchange
Authority; and
District Columbia Health Benefit
Exchange Authority the Superior Court, Plaintiff-Appellant Kirby Vining was represented Michael
Bekesha and Paul Orfanedes, both Judicial Watch, Inc. appeal, Plaintiff-Appellant
Kirby Vining being represented Michael Bekesha Judicial Watch, Inc. the Superior Court, Defendants-Appellees were represented William Causey,
Chad Copeland, and Grace Graham the Office the Attorney General for the District
Columbia. appeal, Defendants-Appellees are being represented Todd Kim, Solicitor
General for the District Columbia.
TABLE CONTENTS
TABLE CONTENTS .... .......................... ..... ........... ... ...... ......................................................
TABLE AUTHORlTIES .......... ........ ............... ....................... ..................................................
STATEMENT THE ISSUES PRESENTED ................. ........................... ... .... ..........................
STATEMENT THE CASE ................................... ............... ...................................................
STATEMENT FACTS .......................................... .............................................. ......................
ARGUMENT ..................... ..................... .... .... ...................... ............... ............ ........ ...... ............
Standard Review .......... ... ........... .... ......... .......... .... ..... .............. ......... ... ..........
II.
Vinings Complaint Sufficient Demonstrate Standing ...................................
III.
The Exchange Act Not Preempted .....................................................................
The Exchange Act not preempted the ACA ......................................
The Exchange Act not preempted any regulation .............................
CONCLUSION ......... ... .................................. .......... ..... .................. ..... ......................................
TABLE AUTHORITIES
PAGE
CASES
American Council Life Insurers Health Benefit
Exchange Authority, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160038
(D.D.C. Nov. 13, 2014) .....................................................................................................
Biotechnology Industry Organization District Columbia,
505 F.3d 1343 (D.C. Cir. 2007) ......................................................................................... Calvin-Humphrey District Columbia,
340 A.2d 795 (D.C. 1975) ...........................................................................................
Cipollone Liggett Group, Inc.,
505 U.S. 504 (1992) ...........................................................................................................
Chevron, US.A., Inc. Natural Resource Defense
Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984) ....................................................................................
District Columbia Common Cause District Columbia,
858 F.2d (D.C. Cir. 1988) .............................................................................................
FDA Brown Williamson Tobacco Corporation,
529 U.S. 120 (2000) ........................................................................................................... Grayson ATT Corporation, A.3d 219 (D.C. 2011) ............................................ .4, 9,10
Heardv. Johnson, 810 A.2d 871 (D.C. 2002) ............ .................................................................
King Burwell, U.S.
2015 U.S. LEXIS 4248 (June 25, 2015) ...................................................................... 14,
Matthews Automated Business Systems Services,
558 A.2d 1175 (D.C. 1989) .............................................................................................
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Oxendine,
649 A.2d 825 (D.C. 1994) ........................................................................................... 10,
Rice Norman Williams Company, 458 U.S. 654 (1982) ...........................................................
Roberts Bradfield, App. D.C. 453 (D.C. 1898) ...................................................................... Authorities upon which Plaintiff-Appellant chiefly relies are marked with asterisks.
PAGE
Tarrant Regional Water District Herrmann, U.S. 133 Ct. 2120 (2013) ........ .......... .... .......... .... ..... ....... ...... ............... .............
Washington Service Contractors Coalition District Columbia, F.3d 811 (D.C. Cir. 1995) ............................. ........ .... .... ... .......................
STATUTES U.S.C. 18024(b)(2) ................ ............ .............. ................... .............. ............................. 12, U.S.C. 18031(b)(1) ........................................................... ....................... .... .......................... U.S.C. 18031(f)(2)(b)(i) ...................... .......................... ........ .................. ..... ................. U.S.C. 18032(d)(3)(D)(i) ......................... ............................................................... 13, 14,
D.C. Code 1-204.04 ............................................... .... ....... ........ .......... ..... ... ...................... ..........
D.C. Code 1-204.46 ....... ... ..... ............. .................. .... ............ .......................... ......... .................
D.C. Code 31-3171.01(16)(A) ........ ...................... ... .... .................................... ........................
D.C. Code 31-3171.02(a) ................................................ ............................... .......................... ...
D.C. Code 31-3171.06(a) ... .......... ....................................................... ....................................
OTHER AUTHORITIES C.F.R. 890.101 .......................................................... ........ ................................................... C.F.R. 890.102(c)(9) ..... .... ... ......................... .... ......... ..... ......................................................... C.F.R. 155.20 ...... .... ... ........................ ...... ..... ... ..................... ..... ....... .......... ........ ...............
Federal Employees Health Benefits Program:
Members Congress and Congressional
Staff, Fed. Reg. 60653 (Oct. 2013) ........................... ................................................ Authorities upon which Plaintiff-Appellant chiefly relies are marked with asterisks.
111
STATEMENT THE ISSUES PRESENTED
Whether Vinings Complaint sufficient demonstrate standing.
Whether the Health Benefit Exchange Establishment Act of2011 preempted.
STATEMENT THE CASE
This case concerns the illegal expenditure municipal funds. Defendants this case
are the Executive Board the District Columbia Health Benefit Exchange Authority; Mila
Kofman, Executive Director the District Columbia Health Benefit Exchange Authority; and
District Columbia Health Benefit Exchange Authority. They have spent and continue
spend municipal funds the Small Business Exchange and are allowing members
Congress, congressional staffers, and their dependents participate the exchange even though
D.C. law expressly limits participation employers with fewer employees. Congress
obviously has far more than employees. has thousands employees, and Defendants have
allowed least 12,359 congressional employees and their spouses and dependents obtain
health insurance through the Small Business Exchange. These 12,359 participants represent
astonishing 86% the Small Business Exchanges total enrollment. creating the Small
Business Exchange, the D.C. Council intended help small businesses operating the District Columbia provide health insurance their employees. Instead, Defendants have allowed the
Small Business Exchange become health insurance exchange for Congress. Allowing
Congress participate the Small Business Exchange violates the law that created the
exchange. effect, Defendants are spending municipal funds Congresss health insurance.
Kirby Vining, longstanding resident and taxpayer the District Columbia (D.C. the District), seeks declaratory and injunctive relief stopping the illegal expenditure
municipal funds. Specifically, Vining seeks prevent Defendants from spending any
additional monies this health insurance exchange for Congress. response, Defendants
moved dismiss two grounds: lack standing and failure state claim. The Superior
Court granted Defendants motion both grounds and dismissed the case. Vining timely
appealed.
STATEMENT FACTS
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires each state and the
District Columbia establish two marketplaces for the purchase health insurance:
American Health Benefit Exchange for individuals (the Individual Exchange) and Small
Business Health Options Program for small businesses (the Small Business Exchange
SHOP Exchange). Complaint (Appendix (App) 3). The D.C. Council subsequently
enacted the Exchange Act comply with the ACA. Complaint (App 3). The Exchange
Act established the District Columbia Health Benefit Exchange Authority (the Exchange
Authority) and directed the Exchange Authority create the two exchanges required the
ACA. Id. (App 3). The Exchange Act also created executive board and executive
director. Id. (App 3). Under the Exchange Act, the Executive Board governs the
Exchange Authority generally and the Executive Director serves chief administrative officer
and directs, administers, and manages the operations the Authority. Id. (App 3-4).
The Exchange Authority created two exchanges: individual exchange and Small
Business Exchange. Only businesses having fewer full-time employees may participate
the Small Business Exchange. Complaint (App 4). Since November 2013, the Exchange
Authority has allowed the U.S. House Representatives (the House) and the U.S. Senate
(the Senate) (collectively Congress) use the Small Business Exchange provide health
insurance some (but not all) congressional employees, including members Congress and
these employees spouses and dependents. Id. (App 4-5). all relevant times,
Defendants have known that the House and the Senate were participating the Small Business
Exchange provide health insurance some (but not all) congressional employees. Id.
(App 5). Beginning early November 2013, the Exchange Authority conducted outreach
efforts the House and Senate about Congress participation the Small Business Exchange
and provided weekly support sessions assist members Congress and their staffs with
enrollment. Id. (App 5).
Neither the House nor the Senate small business under the Exchange Act, each has
more than full-time employees. Complaint (App 5). Records provided the
Exchange Authority response Freedom Information Act request show that both the
House and the Senate falsely claimed that they each employ only full-time employees. Id. (App 5). When Congress applied participate the Small Business Exchange,
representatives falsely asserted that the House and the Senate each employ fewer full-time
employees. Id. (App 5). Defendants were fully aware these false statements. Id. (App
6). Not only obvious that Congress, with its 535 members, employs more than people,
but Defendants own guidelines require verification employer information. February 2014, least 12,359 congressional employees and their dependents
had obtained health insurance through the Small Business Exchange. Complaint (App 6).
These 12,359 persons represent approximately percent the 14,289 persons enrolled the
Small Business Exchange between October 1,2013 and September 9,2014. Id. (App 6).
-3-
ARGUMENT
Standard Review.
Defendants moved for dismissal under both Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) the D.C.
Superior Courts Rules Civil Procedure. The Superior Court granted the motion both
grounds, and both are reviewed novo. Grayson ATT Corporation, A.3d 219, 228
(D.C. 2011) (en bane) (Whether the trial court has subject matter jurisdiction question
law which this court reviews novo. also review dismissal for failure state claim
novo.) (internal quotations and citations omitted).
II.
Vinings Complaint Sufficient Demonstrate Standing.
[T]axpayers have always had the right, the proper case, initiate suit against the city
government prevent the illegal use municipal funds. Calvin-Humphrey District
Columbia, 340 A.2d 795, 799 (D.C. 1975); see also District o/Columbia Common Cause
District Columbia, 858 F.2d (D.C. Cir. 1988) and Roberts Bradfield, App. D.C.
453, 459 (D.C. 1898). District o/Columbia Common Cause, taxpayer was found have standing because
the challenged expenditures were made from funds appropriated Congress. 858 F.2d 11.
The decision the U.S. Court Appeals for the District Columbia focused not where the
public monies came from but how the public monies were being spent. Id. Calvin-Humphrey,
the D.C. Court Appeals permitted the intervention individual taxpayers even though the
issue before the Court involved the assessment and collection taxes from commercial property
owners. 340 A.2d 799. Although the government action issue did not directly affect
individual taxpayers, the Court concluded [t]here can doubt but that the instant litigation
concerns the [individual taxpayers]: [they have] economic interest some magnitude the
outcome the suit, since perceive distinct and substantial possibility that [they] will incur
higher taxes suffer diminution municipal services the commercial property owners
paid less taxes. Id. The focus there too was how municipal monies were spent.
There dispute that Vining D.C. taxpayer and has resided the same D.C.
address since 1986. Complaint (App 2). There also dispute that Defendants are
spending money the Small Business Exchange that Vining alleged that municipal funds
are being spent operate the exchange. Id. (App (Monies appropriated from the
general Fund the Exchange Fund were used establish the Small Business Exchange and,
information and belief, are being used administer the Exchange.). Nor there dispute that
Defendants have authorized Congress use the Small Business Exchange provide health
insurance certain congressional employees and their dependents even though D.C. law
expressly limits participation the exchange employers with fewer employees. The
Superior Court nonetheless concluded that Vining had not demonstrated reasonable inference
that municipal taxpayer funds have been appropriated defendant exchange authority
establish cognizable injury maintain standing bring his underlying complaint. Order
(App 44).
The courts ruling the Rule 12(b)(I) motion incorrect for least two reasons. First,
the Superior Court was required, minimum, construe the Complaint Vinings favor.
Second, the extent the Court reviewed additional submissions determine the sufficiency
the Complaint, the evidence supports Vining. Rule 12(b)(1) motion dismiss for lack subject matter jurisdiction may either
facial attack the allegation jurisdiction the complaint, factual attack the basis the Courts jurisdiction. Heardv. Johnson, 810 A.2d 871,877 (D.C. 2002). When
-5-
defendant makes facial attack, the court must accept true all material allegations the
complaint, and must construe the complaint favor the complaining party. Grayson,
A.3d 246. defendant attacks the factual basis upon which the plaintiff alleges jurisdiction,
the court may conduct independent review the evidence submitted the parties,
including affidavits, resolve factual disputes. Matthews Automated Business Systems
Services, 558 A.2d 1175, 1179 (D.C. 1989). their motion dismiss, Defendants merely argued, District Columbia taxpayer
money has never been used fund operate the D.C. Shop Exchange. Memorandum
Points and Authorities Support Defendants Motion Dismiss (Defs Mem.) 12. They
did not identify whether their motion was facial factual attack. Nor did the Superior Court
identify whether considered Defendants challenge facial factual. See generally Order 3-5 (App App 45). However, appears though the court considered the motion
factual attack and looked beyond the four corners the Complaint. Ifthe Superior Court treated
the motion facial attack should have the Superior Court incorrectly ignored Vinings
factual allegation that municipal monies from the Districts General Fund were used and
continue used administer and operate the Small Business Exchange. See Complaint ,-r (App 4). That allegation alone sufficient satisfy the inquiry concerning the use
municipal funds. Grayson, A.3d 246. the extent Defendants made factual attack and the Superior Court treated the motion such, Defendants did not submit any admissible evidence for the court review. Instead
providing testimony and affidavits (Heard, 810 A.2d 878), Defendants directed the Superior
Court handful internet links various budget plans and reports the D.C. government
for Fiscal Years 2013 2015. See Order (App 44). Instead submitting evidence about the
-6-
proper interpretation the documents, the budget process, the various types funds, and the
numerous sources the funds, Defendants summarily stated, Funds used establish and
operate the D.C. SHOP Exchange FY13 and came exclusively from federal grants, while
FY15 operations will funded through health carrier assessment. Defs Mem. 12.
Besides the fact that Defendants failed submit admissible evidence support their argument,
the information found the various budget plans and reports the D.C. government for Fiscal
Years 2013 2015 does not contradict Vinings factual assertion that municipal monies from
the Districts General Fund were used and continue used administer and operate the
Small Business Exchange. point have Defendants expended monies from the Districts Federal Funds account the Small Business Exchange. August 7,2014, the District submitted Congress its
2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan, which includes Operating Appendices. addition detailing the actual budget, approved budget, and proposed budget each D.C. agency for
Fiscal Years 2013 through 2015, the report contains Glossary Budget Terms. See App App 31. The following definitions are particular relevance:
General Fund The principal operating fund the District, which used
account for all financial resources except those required accounted for
another fund. General fund revenues consist Local, Dedicated Tax, and
Special Purpose Revenues.
Federal Funds (1) Federal Grants: Funding provided the federal government
via federal agency for specific purpose with the conditions for the
administration the funding dictated each grantor organization; (2) Federal
Payments: Funding specifically detailed the Federal Funds portion the
District Columbia Appropriations Act with the conditions for the
administration the funding found within the statute and federal appropriations;
(3) Federal Medicaid Payments: Funding provided pay for portion the appears though the Superior Court did not consider the complexity the Districts
budget. See Order (App 44) (The court summarized the Districts budget for three-year
period one sentence.).
-7-
health care costs eligible individuals with oversight performed District and
federal authorities.
Private Revenue Funding from private grants fund the intended purpose
the grant.
Intra-District accounting mechanism track payments for services
provided one District agency another District agency.
Id.
The report includes the Exchange Authoritys actual budget, approved budget, and
proposed budget for Fiscal Years 2013 through 2015. See App 33- App 35. According the
report, the Exchange Authoritys actual budget for Fiscal Year 2013 was $10,915,000. Id. The
report identifies all ofthese municipal monies originating from the Districts General Fund.
Id. monies are identified Federal Funds, Private Revenue, Intra-District Funds. Id. For
Fiscal Year 2014, the Exchange Authority was budgeted $66,140,000 from the General Fund.
Id. Again, monies were budgeted from Federal Funds, Private Funds, Intra-District Funds.
Id. The municipal monies appropriated establish, administer, and operate the Small
Business Exchange came from [t]he principal operating fund the District, not from Federal
Funds.
For Fiscal Year 2015, the Exchange Authoritys budget was reclassified from the General
Fund newly created fund, separate and distinct from Federal Funds. See App App 38.
Monies budgeted from this new fund, much like the General Fund, must appropriated the
D.C. Council, signed the mayor, and approved Congress. See D.C. Code 1-204.04 and
1-204.46; see also App 40. Also, the newly created fund did not exist, like Fiscal Years
2013 and 2014, ifit experiences shortfall, the District would required allocate monies
from the General Fund administer and operate the Small Business Exchange. Vining therefore
has economic interest how all monies are being spent would incur higher taxes
-8-
suffer diminution municipal services the newly created fund did not have sufficient
funds support the Small Business Exchange. Calvin-Humphrey, 340 A.2d 799. Similarly, likely that the District will again use least some municipal funds administer and operate
the Small Business Exchange just like did Fiscal Years 2013 and 2014. See District
Columbia Common Cause, 858 F.2d
Importantly, Vining sufficiently supported these irrefutable facts about the municipal
funds issue. also did affidavit, not internet links. The Superior Court ignored
this evidence and, instead, found that Vining did not substantively challenge the websites cited Defendants. Order (App 44). Not only this demonstrably incorrect, also
irrelevant whether Vining challenged Defendants assertions which did. the extent that
reviewed material addition the Complaint, the Superior Court was required review all
the evidence submitted the parties, which would have included Vinings submissions.
Matthews, 558 A.2d 1179. this Court has emphasized:
Before ruling the motion dismiss, within the trial courts power allow require the plaintiff supply, amendment the complaint
affidavits, further particularized allegations fact deemed supportive
plaintiffs standing; and if, after this opportunity, the plaintiffs standing does not
adequately appear from all materials record, the complaint must dismissed.
Grayson, A.3d 246. Vining presented more than sufficient evidence support his
allegation that municipal funds were being spent the Small Business Exchange. Taking the
Defendants also sought support their assertion that District Columbia taxpayer
money has never been used fund operate the D.C. Shop Exchange differentiating
between various sources municipal monies support its argument. Defs Mem. 12-13.
Although the Superior Court did not address whether the law recognizes distinction between
municipal funds and the source the municipal funds, Vining does not waive his right
respond Defendants make similar argument its response brief. Distinguishing between
municipal funds and the source the municipal funds being expended has never been
prerequisite for establishing taxpayer standing cases brought against the District.
-9-
allegations the Complaint and the evidence submitted Vining support the allegation,
the Superior Court should not have dismissed Vinings Complaint. minimum, Vining identified complex legal and factual issues that could not
adequately addressed the pleading stage. Because the multifaceted nature ofthe Districts
budget process well the budget itself, decision whether municipal funds are being
spent would have been more appropriate after discovery, where more complete record could
developed and the Districts budget process could analyzed more thoroughly. The Superior
Court should not have dismissed the case motion dismiss, where the court was only
required review the substance [Vinings] pleadings determine whether general factual
allegations ... have been averred. Grayson, A.3d 246. For this reason alone, the case
should remanded.
III.
The Exchange Act Not Preempted.
The Superior Court also erred finding that the Exchange Act preempted. Ordinary
preemption principles apply D.C. law. Washington Service Contractors Coalition. District Columbia, F.3d 811, 813, 815 (D.C. Cir. 1995). Although there presumption against
preemption (Tarrant Regional Water District Herrmann, U.S. 133 Ct. 2120, 2132
(2013)), preemption D.C. law may occur three ways. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals
Oxendine, 649 A.2d 825,828 (D.C. 1994). First, federal law may expressly preempt D.C.
law. Id. Second, Congress may thoroughly occupy legislative field make reasonable
the inference that Congress left room for the [District Columbia] supplement it. Id.
(quoting Cipollone Liggett Group, Inc., 505 U.S. 504, 516 (1992)). Third, implied conflict
preemption occurs D.C. law makes compliance with both federal and [its] law impossible [its] law obstructs the federal purpose. /d. addition, [t]he existence ofa hypothetical potential conflict insufficient warrant the preemption D.C. law. Rice Norman
Williams Company, 458 U.S. 654,659 (1982).
The Exchange Act not preempted the ACA. recent, separate lawsuit challenging another provision the Exchange Act,
Defendants argued that the ACA does not preempt D.C. law. The U.S. District Court for the
District Columbia agreed:
[E]xpress preemption clearly unavailable. The ACA squarely addresses
preemption and provides that: Nothing this title shall construed preempt
any State law that does not prevent the application the provisions this title. U.S.C. 18041(d). Express preemption cannot apply because the ACA
explicitly recognizes that State laws may required carry out the ACA
mandate provide minimum essential health coverage. Similarly, the extent
the plaintiff seeks invoke field preemption referencing the authority
Congress reserve for itself exclusive dominion over entire field legislative
concern, this effort unavailing. The ACA expressly grants the States the
choice operating their own Exchanges, pursuant state law, rather than adopt Federal Exchange plainly undercutting any perceived congressional intent
control the entire field local Exchanges.
American Council Life Insurers Health Benefit Exchange Authority, 2014 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 160038,26-27 (D.D.C. Nov. 13,2014) (internal citations omitted). There plainly
express preemption. Nor does the ACA occupy the field. the Exchange Act preempted
all, would implication.
The ACA however does not preempt the Exchange Act implication. The Exchange
Act does not make compliance with federal law impossible. Nor does stand obstacle
the purpose the ACA. completely consistent and entirely compatible with the ACA.
fact, the sole purpose the Exchange Act was implement various provisions the ACA,
thereby assisting D.C. residents and employees small D.C. employers obtaining affordable
health insurance. See D.C. Code 31-3171.06(a).
Specifically, the ACA provides:
Each State shall, not later than January 1,2014, establish American Health
Benefit Exchange (referred this title Exchange) for the State that(A) facilitates the purchase qualified health plans;
(B) provides for the establishment Small Business Health Options
Program (in this title referred SHOP Exchange) that designed assist qualified employers the State who are small employers
facilitating the enrollment their employees qualified health plans
offered the small group market the State. U.S.C. 18031(b)(1). The ACA expressly defines small employer employer who
employed average least but not more than 100 employees.,,3 U.S.C. 18024(b)(2).
The Exchange Act tum created two exchanges: the Individual Exchange and the Small
Business Exchange. Under the Exchange Act, D.C. residents may enroll themselves and their
dependents the Individual Exchange. D.C. Code 31-3171.02(a). The Exchange Act limits
the Small Business Exchange single employers having fewer full-time employees (D.C.
Code 31-3171.01(16)(A)), but that limit completely consistent with the ACAs not more
than 100 employees limit. U.S.C. 18024(b)(2). The D.C. exchanges created the
Exchange Act are completely consistent with the requirements the ACA based any reading the plain language. separate provision the ACA governs health plans for certain members Congress
and congressional employees. This provision provides:
Notwithstanding any other provision law, after the effective date this
subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available
Members Congress and congressional employees with respect their service
Beginning 2017, the ACA authorizes all State District-created exchanges offer
health insurance anyone, including large employers. See .S.C. 18031 (f)(2)(b)(i). Thus,
Congress plainly knew how expand the scope persons eligible participate the
exchanges. simply chose limit participation the first several years the new law. There conflict inconsistency here either. Member Congress congressional employees shall health plans that
are(I) created under this Act (or amendment made this Act);
(II) offered through Exchange established under this Act (or
amendment made this Act). U.S.C. 18032(d)(3)(D)(i). This section does not specify what health insurance should
offered the affected congressional employees. only specifies that the insurance must
created either under this Act offered through exchange established under this Act.
Because Congress has not created health insurance specifically for the affected congressional
employees, the affected employees must purchase insurance exchange created under the
ACA. other words, they must purchase insurance exchange created either their state residence (or the District, they are D.C. resident) the federal government, their
state residence did not establish exchange. this regard, U.S.C. 18032(d)(3)(D)(i) unambiguous. The plain language the
ACA unequivocally limits the purchase insurance SHOP Exchange employees
small businesses. state decides create exchange for all businesses, regardless size,
such exchange would not SHOP Exchange created under the ACA. Similarly, the
District allows all businesses, regardless size, participate its SHOP Exchange, the
exchange would longer exchange created under the ACA and members Congress,
congressional staffers, and their families would not able purchase health insurance it.
Therefore, the affected employees not have the option purchasing health insurance through SHOP Exchange. They must purchase health insurance through individual exchange.
Arguably, the inclusion Congress D.C.s Small Business Exchange causes the
exchange longer exchange created under the ACA.
There inconsistency between the ACA and the Exchange Act. There impossibility
frustration purpose. There preemption here.
The Superior Court however ignored the plain language the ACA. concluded:
[T]he court not persuaded that U.S.C. 18032(d)(3)(D)(i) can interpreted either requiring members Congress and their staff purchase health plans
via only the individual exchange prohibiting those same members and their
staff from purchasing health plan via the small business exchange .... [T]his
statutory subsection vague that does not state which type health plans
can cannot purchased.
Order (App 47). The Superior Court then cited Chevron, US.A., Inc. Natural Resource
Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984) and determined that, because U.S.C.
18032(d)(3)(D)(i) ambiguous, OPM had implicit, delegated authority clarify the law. !d.
7-8 (App App 48). the extent that U.S.C. 18032(d)(3)(D)(i) may ambiguous and Vining does
not concede that the Superior Court incorrectly concluded that Congress implicitly
delegated the authority OPM decide where members Congress, congressional staffers,
and their families could purchase health insurance. See Order (App 48). the Supreme
Court recently affirmed, extraordinary cases, however, there may reason hesitate before
concluding Congress has intended create implicit delegation agency fill
statutory gaps. King Burwell, U.S. 2015 U.S. LEXIS 4248, *18 (June 25, 2015).
this section the ACA concerns the health insurance members Congress, their staffs, and
their families, highly unlikely that Congress would outsource decision-making about its own
health insurance executive branch agency. Had Congress wanted delegate such power
concerning issue obvious personal concern, would have done expressly. Id.
Therefore, the Superior Court incorrectly concluded that such authority was delegated.
The Exchange Act not preempted any regulation.
Even Congress implicitly delegated its authority the executive branch and Vining
does not concede that did OPM did not resolve the ambiguity regulation. Contrary the
Superior Courts ruling, the regulation does not preempt the Exchange Act. The pertinent
regulation merely states, relevant part, that congressional employees may purchase health
benefit plans ... offered appropriate SHOP determined the Director.,,6 C.F.R.
890.102(c)(9). with the ACA itself, there plainly preemption. The regulation does not identify
which SHOP appropriate for members Congress congressional employees purchase
health in.surance. Nor does make any mention any state-created SHOP D.C. Small
Business Exchange. The Districts Small Business Exchange only identified the the Court were find U.S.C. 18032(d)(3)(D)(i) ambiguous and sought
determine the correct reading the section (id. *19), the Court must read the words
context and with view their place the overall statutory scheme. Id. (quoting FDA
Brown Williamson Tobacco Corporation, 529 U.S. 120, 133 (2000 Because the ACA
unequivocally limits the purchase insurance SHOP Exchange employees small
businesses, members Congress, congressional staffers, and their families obviously must
purchase health insurance through individual exchange. SHOP defined Small Business Health Options Program operated
Exchange through which qualified employer can provide its employees and their dependents
with access one more health plans. C.F.R. 890.101; C.F.R. 155.20. qualified
employer defined employer who employed average least but not more than
100 employees business days during the preceding calendar year and who employs least
employee the first day the plan year. C.F.R. 155.20. remain consistent with the
ACA, the regulation also allows, beginning 2017, for state re-define qualified
employer include large employer the state authorizes large employers participate
exchange. Id.
appropriate SHOP determined the Director the supplementary information
published along with the regulation:
Given the location Congress the District Columbia, OPM has determined
that the SHOP, known the Health Link Small Business Market
administered the Health Benefit Exchange Authority, the appropriate
SHOP from which Members Congress and designated congressional staffwill
purchase health insurance order receive Government contribution.
Federal Employees Health Benefits Program: Members Congress and Congressional Staff,
Fed. Reg. 60653, 60654 (Oct. 2013). The regulation does not preempt the Exchange Act. find that the regulation, much less the OPM directors determination, has preemptive
effect, the Court would have find that all existing limitations the size employers eligible participate small business exchanges are force effect. Again, the ACA gives states
and the District authority create small business exchanges and establish limits 100
employees the size employers eligible participate their small business exchanges.
U.S.C. 18024(b)(2). There provision the regulation preempting state laws limiting the
size the employers that may participate states small business exchanges. Nor there any
provision preempting the Districts 50-employee limit participating the Small Business
Exchange.
Nevertheless, the Superior Court concluded that OPMs rules and regulations preempt
the Exchange Act. Order (App 49). reality, the court ruled that determination
federal bureaucrat this instance, the director OPM trumps the 50-employee limit the
Exchange Act, least with respect Congress. lawful regulation much less regulation
that purports delegate such authority agency head can that, and the Court cites other words, this Court would have conclude that the OPM director has the authority nUllify sections the ACA. This, course, wrong. Only Congress, enacting new
legislation, has the authority change duly enacted laws.
legal authority whatsoever for their astonishing conclusion that can. See generally Order (App App 50). overcome the presumption against preemption, the party asserting preemption must
demonstrate that the clear and manifest purpose Congress supports preemption.
Biotechnology Industry Organization District Columbia, 505 F.3d 1343, 1351 (D.C. Cir.
2007). Like the ACA, clear that neither the plain language the regulation nor the OPM
directors determination preempts the Exchange Act. There preemption. And Defendants
have justification excuse for turning blind eye D.C. law. The Superior Courts
decision that the Exchange Act preempted must overturned.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Vining respectfully requests that this Court reverse the
Superior Courts order granting Defendants motion dismiss and remand for further
proceedings.
Dated: July 13,2015
Respectfully submitted,
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
425 Third Street, W., Suite 800
Washington, 20024
(202) 646-5172
Counsel for Plaintiff-Appellant
APPENDIX
TABLE CONTENTS
Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and, the Alternative, Petition for Writ Mandamus,
Filed October 15, 2014 ....... ....App
Declaration Michael Bekesha (with Exhibits A-E),
Filed with Plaintiff Memorandum Points and
Authorities Opposition Defendant Motion Dismiss December 12, 2014.. App
Order Judge Herbert Dixon, Jr. Granting Defendants Motion Dismiss the Complaint, Filed February 25, 2015 ..App
Notice Appeal, Filed February 25, 2015. ..App THE SUPERIOR COURT THE DISTRICT COLUMBIA
CIVIL DIVISION
KIRBY VINING Franklin Street, N.E.
Washington, 20002
Plaintiff,
vs.
EXECUTIVE BOARD THE
DISTRICT COLUMBIA HEALTH
BENEFIT EXCHANGE AUTHORITY,
1100 15th Street, W., 8th Floor
Washington, 20005,
MILA KOFMAN, her official
capacity Executive Director the
District Columbia Health Benefit
Exchange Authority,
1100 15th Street, N.W., 8th Floor
Washington, 20005,
and
DISTRICT COLUMBIA HEALTH
BENEFIT EXCHANGE AUTHORITY,
1100 15th Street, W., 8th Floor
Washington, 20005,
Defendants.
Serve Executive Office the Mayor
for the District Columbia,
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,
Suite 316, Washington, 20004;
Serve Office the Attorney General
for the District Columbia, 441 4th
Street, N.W., 6th Floor South,
Washington, D.C. 20001.
App
Case Numbt!r:
,-v-u..-M:;:~~~
CIVlLAcnoNS ~RANCH
OCT 2014
S~pe:ior Q>urt tho
DiStrict ofCoJurnbia
Washirtgton.
OMPLETED
~1~m~~lllll~~111111
flvfy--,
tt~
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
AND, THE ALTERNATIVE, PETITION FOR
WRIT MANDAMUS
Plaintiff Kirby Vining, and through his attorneys, brings this action for declaratory
and injunctive relief against the Executive Board the District Columbia Health Benefit
Exchange Authority, Mila Kofman, her official capacity Executive Director the District Columbia Health Benefit Exchange Authority, and the District Columbia Health Benefit
Exchange Authority. Plaintiff seeks judgment declaring that the U.S. Congress participation the District Columbias Small Business Exchange unlawful and injunction
prohibiting Defendants from allowing Congress participate the exchange expending
taxpayer dollars Congress participation. the alternative, Plaintiff petitions for writ
mandamus ordering Executive Director Kofman cease and desist from allowing Congress
participate the exchange. grounds therefor, Plaintiff alleges follows:
PARTIES
Plaintiff Kirby Vining taxpayer the District Columbia, residing
Franklin Street, N.E., Washington, 20002. has been taxpayer, residing that address
since 1986. taxpayer ofthe District Columbia, Plaintiff has the right initiate suit
equity prevent the illegal use public funds. Calvin-Humphrey District Columbia, 340
A.2d 795, 799 (D.C. 1975); see also District Columbia Common Cause District
Columbia, 858 F.2d (D.C. Cir. 1988); Roberts Bradfield, App. D.C. 453,459 (D.C.
1898).
Defendant Executive Board the District Columbia Health Benefit Exchange
Authority (the Executive Board) the governing body the District Columbia Health
App
Benefit Exchange. D.C. Code 31-3171.05(a). The Executive Board has the express authority sue and sued. D.C. Code 31-3171.06(c)(2).
Defendant Mila Kofman the Executive Director the District Columbia
Health Benefit Exchange Authority (the Executive Director). This action brought against
Executive Director Kofman her official capacity.
Defendant District Columbia Health Benefit Exchange Authority
independent authority the District Columbia government. D.C. Code 31-3171.02(a).
JURISDICTION
The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant D.C. Code 11-921(a).
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires each State and
the District Columbia establish two marketplaces for the purchase health insurance:
American Health Benefit Exchange for individuals (the Individual Exchange) and Small
Business Health Options Program for small businesses (the Small Business Exchange the
Exchange). March 2012, the Council the District Columbia (D.C. Council) enacted
The Health Benefit Exchange Authority Establishment Act (the Exchange Act)
comply with the ACA.
The Exchange Act established the District Columbia Health Benefit Exchange
Authority (the Exchange Authority the Authority) and directed the Exchange Authority create the two exchanges required the ACA.
The Exchange Act also created executive board and executive director.
Under the Act, the Executive Board governs the Exchange Authority generally and the Executive
App
Director serves chief administrative officer and directs, administers, and manages the
operations ofthe Authority.
10. finance the Exchange Authority, the Act created the District Columbia
Health Benefit Exchange Authority Fund (the Exchange Fund). Among other monies, the
Exchange Fund consists monies from the General Fund taxpayer money appropriated
line item the annual budget approved the D.C. Council.
11. Fiscal Year 2013, the D.C. Council appropriated $10,915,000 from the General
Fund the Exchange Fund.
12. Fiscal Year 2014, the D.C. Council appropriated $66,140,000 from the General
Fund the Exchange Fund.
13. October 1,2014, the D.C. Council had not approved budget for Fiscal
Year 2015.
14.
Monies appropriated from the General Fund the Exchange Fund were used
establish the Small Business Exchange and, information and belief, are being used
administer and operate the Exchange.
15.
The Small Business Exchange began operating October 2013.
16.
Under the Exchange Act, small business single employer having fewer
full-time employees. D.C. Code 31-3171.01(16)(A). Only small businesses that elect
provide coverage all eligible employees all eligible employees principally employed the
District Columbia are eligible participate the Small Business Exchange. D.C. Code 313171.01(11).
17.
Since November 2013, the Exchange Authority has allowed the U.S. House
Representatives (the House) and the U.S. Senate (the Senate) (collectively Congress)
App
use the Small Business Exchange provide health insurance some (but not all) congressional
employees, including members Congress, and these employees spouses and dependents.
18. all relevant times, the Executive Board and Executive Director Kofman knew
that the House and the Senate were participating the Small Business Exchange provide
health insurance some (but not all) congressional employees. Beginning early November
2013, the Exchange Authority conducted outreach efforts the House and Senate about
Congress participation the Small Business Exchange and provided weekly support sessions
assist members Congress and their staffs with enrollment. These outreach efforts, weekly
support sessions, and Congress participation the Exchange generally were discussed
November 13,2013 meeting the Executive Board, and November 20,2013, Executive
Director Kofman testified before the Senates Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee
about Congress participation the Small Business Exchange. information and belief, the
Executive Board and Executive Director Kofman authorized and approved Congress
participation the Small Business Exchange.
19.
Neither the House nor the Senate small business under the Exchange Act,
each has more than full-time employees.
20.
When Congress applied participate the Small Business Exchange,
representatives falsely asserted that the House and the Senate each employ fewer full-time
employees. Specifically, records provided the Exchange Authority response Freedom Information Act request show that both the House and the Senate falsely claimed that they
each employ only full-time employees.
App
21. information and belief, the Executive Board and Executive Director Kofman
knew that the House and the Senate each have more than full-time employees and knew
should have known that Congress certifications the contrary were false.
22. least 12,359 congressional employees and their spouses and dependents had
obtained health insurance through the Small Business Exchange February 2014. These
12,359 persons represent approximately percent the 14,289 persons enrolled the Small
Business Exchange between October 1,2013 and September 9,2014.
COUNT ONE
(Taxpayer Action Declaratory and Injunctive Reliet)
23.
Plaintiff reaffirms paragraphs 1-22 though fully restated herein.
24.
Under the Exchange Act, both the House and the Senate are ineligible
participate the Small Business Exchange because they each employ more than full-time
employees.
25. allowing Congress participate the Small Business Exchange, Defendants
are exceeding their lawful powers and operating the Small Business Exchange illegal,
unlawful, and ultra vires manner.
26.
Because the Small Business Exchange financed through measurable
appropriations from the General Fund and Defendants are exceeding their lawful powers and
operating the Small Business Exchange illegal, unlawful, and ultra vires manner,
Defendants have injured Plaintiff irreparably his/her interests taxpayer and will continue injure Plaintiff irreparably unless and until Congress participation the Exchange declared
unlawful and Defendants are enjoined from allowing Congress continue participate the
Exchange.
App
27.
Plaintiff has adequate alternative remedy law.
COUNT TWO
(Writ Mandamus)
28.
Plaintiff reaffirms paragraphs 1-27 though fully restated herein.
29.
Because the House and the Senate each employ more than full-time
employees, Defendant Kofman had clear, non-discretionary, ministerial duty deny them
participation the Small Business Exchange.
30.
Defendant Kofman has failed and failing carry out this duty and will
continue fail carry out this duty unless ordered so.
31. taxpayer and resident the District Columbia, Plaintiff has clear and
indisputable right have Defendant Kofman carry out her public duties.
32.
Plaintiff has adequate alternative means obtain relief.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that the Court: (a) declare the Houses and the Senates
participation the Small Business Exchange unlawful; (b) enjoin Defendants from
continuing allow the House and the Senate participate the Small Business Exchange, minimum, from expending further taxpayer funds the Houses and Senates participation the Small Business Exchange; (c) issue writ mandamus ordering Defendant Kofman
deny the House and the Senate further participation the Small Business Exchange; (d) award
Plaintiff reasonable attorneys fees and costs; and (e) order such other and further relief the
Court finds just and equitable.
App
Dated: October 15,2014
.........
Mlchael ekesha
D.C. Bar No. 995749
Paul Orfanedes
D.C. Bar No. 429716
JUDICIAL WATCH INC.
425 Third Street .W. Suite 800
Washington 20024
Phone: (202) 646-5172
Email: mbekesha@judicialwatch.org
Coun elfor Plaintiff Kirby Vining
App THE SUPERIOR COURT THE DISTRICT COLUMBIA
CIVIL DIVISION
KIRBY VINING,
Plaintiff,
EXECUTIVE BOARD THE
DISTRICT COLUMBIA HEALTH
BENEFIT EXCHANGE AUTHORITY, aI.,
Defendants.
Case Number: 2014 6496
Judge Herbert Dixon, Jr.
Next Event: Initial Conference
Date: January 16,2015 9:30 a.m.
-------------------------------)
DECLARATION MICHAEL BEKESHA Michael Bekesha, declare follows: attorney employed Judicial Watch, Inc. and counsel for Plaintiff the
above-captioned matter. over the age eighteen and have personal knowledge the
matters set forth below. August 14,2014, sent Freedom ofInformation Act request the D.C.
Health Benefit Exchange Authority seeking copies the confirmation eligibility form
completed the U.S. Congress and/or the U.S. Senate and/or the U.S. House Representatives
when (or they) signed for D.C. Health Link. September 2014, part her official duties and activities FOIA Officer
for the D.C. Health Benefit Exchange Authority and required D.C. Code 2-534(a)(2),
Mary Beth Senkewicz responded FOIA request. Attached hereto Exhibit true and
correct copy the response that received.
App
Pursuant D.C. Code 1-204.46, the Mayor the District Columbia must
submit the budget adopted the Council the District Columbia the President the
United States for transmission the Congress for approval. August 7,2014, part his official duties and activities required D.C.
Code 1-204.46, the Mayor submitted 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan the
President.
Attached hereto Exhibit the Glossary Budget, which was part ofFY
2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan that was submitted Congress the Mayor
August 2014.
Attached hereto Exhibit the Schedule 40-PBB for the Health Benefit
Exchange Authority, which was part ofFY 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan that was
submitted Congress the Mayor August 7,2014.
Attached hereto Exhibit the Schedule 30-PBB for the Health Benefit
Exchange Authority, which was part ofFY 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan that was
submitted Congress the Mayor August 7,2014.
Attached hereto Exhibit the Schedule for the Health Benefit Exchange
Authority, which was part ofFY 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan that was submitted Congress the Mayor August 7,2014. declare under penalty perjury that the foregoing true and correct. Executed
Washington, D.C. this 12th Day December 2014.
Michael Bekesha
App
Exhibit
App Health Benefit
Exchange Authority
September 2014
Michael Bekesha
Judicial Watch, Inc.
mbekesha@judicialwatch.org
Re: FOIA 2014-11
Dear Mr. Bekesha,
This letter response your email sent August 14, 2014 containing Freedom Information Act
request. Your request granted part and denied part. Responsive documents are attached.
Request: Judicial Watch, Inc. requests from the Health Benefit Exchange Authority access and copy the confirmation eligibility form completed the U.S. Congress and/or the U.S. Senate
and/or the U.S. House Representatives when signed for Health Link. The confirmation
eligibility form identified page the Small Business Guide Health Link.
Response: The request granted part and denied part pursuant D.C. Official Code 2-534(a)(2).
Under D.C. Official Code 2-537 and DCMR 412, you have the right appeal this letter the
Mayor the Superior Court the District Columbia. you elect appeal the Mayor, your
appeal must writing and contain Freedom Information Act Appeal FOIA Appeal the
subject line the letter well the outside the envelope. The appeal must include (1) copy the
original request; (2) copy any written denial; (3) statement the circumstances, reasons, andlor
arguments advanced support disclosure; and (4) daytime telephone number, and e-mail andlor
U.S. Mail address which you can reached. The appeal must mailed to: The Mayors
Correspondence Unit, FOIA Appeal, 1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 316, Washington, D.C.
20004. Electronic versions the same information can instead e-mailed The Mayors
Correspondence Unit foia.mayor@dc.gov. Further, copy all appeal materials must forwarded the Freedom Information Officer the involved agency.
Please not hesitate contact you have any questions. The file now closed.
Sincerely,
Mary Beth Senkewicz
Associate General Counsel and Policy Advisor
FOIA Officer
1100 15th St., NW, Suite 800, Washington, 20005
App
https:/Iapp.dchealthlink.com/dcsa/applicationservice/ApplicationSumm ...
Close
Print
Employer name address
Employer name House Representatives
Doing business as(name) STAFF House Representatives
Federal ..rnnlnv~r
IdentificaHon Number(
Employer Type State/local government
Average Number
FulJ nme Employees (In Prior
Calendar Year)
Average Number
Part-Time Employees (In
Prior Calendar Year)
Average Weekly Hours
Worked Part-nme
Employees
Number Full nme
Equivalents (FTEs) Prior
Calendar Year
Primary business address
Business address Line B-215 Longworth HOB
Business address Line
City Washington
state
ZIP Code 20515
8/15/20141:18
App
https:/Iapp.dchealthlink.com/dcsa/applicationservice/ApplicationSumm
Contact name email address
Check here you are the contact?
Name First Name Middle Initial last Name Suffix
Title
E-mail address.-.r
Contact mailing address
v,<
Check here the contact address the same the primary business address?
Address MalHng address Line
Mailing address Une House Representatives Members Svc Room 139A Cannon HOB
City
Siale Z!P Code
Washington
20515
Contact preferences
Preferred phone number Phone type Phone number Phone number Ext
Work
Secondary phone number Phone type Phone number Phone number Ext.
Fax number
Preferred spoken language
Preferred written language
8/15/20141:17
App
https://app.dchealthlink.com/dcsa/applicationservice/ApplicationSumm ... FirslName
Last Name
ZIP Code
EEClass
Congress
Twenty
Dale Birth
01/01/1994
20002
All Employees
Employee Dependents: None
Confirmation attest that employ fewer full time equivalent employees, attest that will offer coverage all full-time employees working average hours
per week through Health Link (or. for multi-stat! employers. any other exchange serving
those work locations outside DC),
Electronic Signature
Ive provided true and correct answers all the questions this form the best knowledge. know
that not truthful there may penally, know that must tell (DC Health Link) anything changes about
what wrote this application agree
Job THle from Your
Company
Signature:
First Name Middle Initial
last Name Suffix
Date 1112512013
r-----
Close
30fJ
8/15/20141:17
App
https://app.dchealthlink.com/dc:sa/applicationservice/AppllcationSumm... Close_J1
Print
Employer name address
Employer name United States Senate
Doing business as(name) United States Senate
federal Employer~
Identification Number(EIN)
EmployerType Statellocal govemment
Average Number
full-Time Employees (In Prior
Calendar Year)
Average Number
Part-Time Employees (in
Prior Calendar Year)
Average Weekly Hours
Worked Part-Time
Employees
Number fuJI-Time
Equivalents (fTEs) Prior
Calendar Year
Primary business address
Business address Line United States Senate
Business address Line Disbursing Office
COy Washington
State
ZIP Code 20510
8/15/2014 1:20
App
https://app.dchealthlink.com/dcsa/applicationservice/ApplicationSumm ...
Contact name email address
Check here you are the contact?
Name
First Name Middle Initial Last Name Suffix
nile
E-mail address
Contact mailing address
Check here the contact address the same the primary business address?
Address
Mailing address Line
Mailing address Line City
B-215 Longworth HOB
State ZIP Code
Washington 20515
Contact preferences
Preferred phone number
Phone type Phone number Phone number Ext.
Work
Secondary phone number
Phone type Phone number Phone number Ext
Fax number
Preferred spoken language
Preferred wrlHen language
f-Ir-st-~-:-m-e=------------Las~~t-N-am-e
---- ----------------------Date BIrth
ZIP Code Class
8/15/2014 1:18
App
https://app.dchealthlink.com/dcsa/applicationservice/ApplicationSumm
First Name
Last Name
first
last
Dale Birth
ZIP Code
EEClass
Employee Dependents None
Confirmation attest that employ fewer full time equivalent employees, attest that will offer coverage all full-time employees working average hours
per week through Health Link (or, for multi-state employers, any other exchange serving
those work locations outside DC).
Electronic Signature
Ive provided true and correct answers all the questions this form the best knowledge. know
that not truthful there may penalty. know thai must lell (DC Health link) anything changes about
what wrote this application. agree
Job TItle from Your
Company
Signature First Name Middle Initial
Last Name Suffix
Date 02/1912014
Close
Prlnt
8/15/2014
App
https:/Iapp.dchealthlink.com/dcsa/applicationservlce/ApplicationSumm...
Close
Print
Employer name address
Employer name House Representatives
Doing business as(name) House Representatives
Federal Employer
Idenllflcatlon Number(EIN)
Employer Type Statel/ocal government
Average Number
full-nme Employees (In Prior
Calendar Year)
Average Number
Part Time Employees (In
Prior Calendar Year)
Average Weekly Hours
Worked Part-nme
Employees
Number Full nme
Equivalents (fTEs) Prior
Calendar Year
Primary business address
Business address Une House Representatives
Business address Une Members Sve Room 139A Cannon HOB
City Washington
state
ZIP Code 20515
lof3
8/15/20141:17
App
https:/Iapp.dc:healthlink.com/dcsa/applicationservice/ApplicationSumm...
Contact name email address
Check here you are the contact?
Name First Name Middle Initial last Name Suffix
ntle
E-mail address
Contact mailing address
,.,1,
Check here the contact address the same the primary business address?
Address Mailing address line Mailing address line City
United States Senate Disbursing Office
Slate ZIP Code
Washington 20510
Contact preferences
Preferred phone number Phone type Phone number Phone number Ext.
Work
Secondary phone number Phone type Phone number Phone number Ext.
fax number
Preferred spoken language
Preferred wrlHen language
rFirst Name
Last Name
Date Birth
ZoB
ZIP Code Class
8/15/2014 1:20
App
https:/lapp.dchealthlink.com/dcsa/applicationservice/AppllcationSum mH.
First Name
Last Name
Date Birth
Twenty
Congress
01/01/1994
Employee Dependents None
ZIP Code
EEClass
---.-------- ------. -----T-
20012
Ail Employees
Confirmation attest that employ fewer full time equivalent employees. attest that will offer coverage all full time employees working average hours
per week through Health Link (or, for mUlti-state employers, any other exchange serving
those work locations outside DC).
Electronic Signature
Ive provided true and correct answers all the questions this form the best knowledge. know
that not truthful there may penalty. know that must teU (DC Health Link) anything changes about
what wrote this application. agree
Job ntle from Your
Company
Signature: First Name Middle Initial
Date 11/03/2013
Close
Print
8/15/2014 1:20
App
Exhibit
App
AppendixB
Glossary Budget Terms
Accrual basis accounting accounting method that recognizes the financial effect transactions, events, and interfund activities
when they occur, regardless the timing related cash flows. Accordingly, revenues are recognized when they are eamed and expenses
when they are incurred, not when cash changes hands. Contrast this term modified accrual basis accounting.
Activity component part the Districts program structure that comprised set services grouped around common purpose
result.
Additional Gross Pay Pay other than base compensation and premium pay. Examples include Holiday Pay, Longevity Pay, Shift
Differential. and Terminal Leave.
Agency Financial Operations Program (AFO) program within agencys performance plan under Performance-Based
Budgeting. AFO used track the funding and FTE count for all Office the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) FTEs assigned the
agencies. Though many these employees work on-site agency locations, all financial positions within District agencies report
the Chief Financial Officer. Under AFO, these costs fall within one three activities: (1) Budget Operations, (2) Accounting Operations,
(3) ACFO. Six Associate Chief Financial Officers (ACFOs), each representing one the major appropriation titles the Districts
budget. manage agency financial operations. Agency fiscal officers report their respective ACFO, who serves the key contact
between the Office Chief Financial Officer, the Mayors Office Budget and Finance, and the Office the City Administrator
managing agency finances. For budgetary purposes, funding for these positions assigned the agencies included the
various agency budgets. This funding not duplicated the budget for the OCFO.
Agency Management Program (AMP) program within agencys performance plan under Performance-Based Budgeting.
AMP used track costs associated with common administrative expenses across the District. Under AMP, these costs fall within activities: (1) Personnel, (2) Training and Employee Development. (3) Labor-Management Partnerships, (4) Contracting and
Procurement, (5) Property Management, (6) Information Technology, (7) Financial Management, (8) Risk Management, (9) Legal
Services, (10) Fleet Management. (11) Communications, (12) Customer Service, (13) Performance Management, (14) Language
Access, and (15) Court-Ordered Supervision. Many agencies not include all these activities.
Allocable Revenue Revenue eamed, collected, and used the agency responsible for generating the revenue.
Allocation The movement budget from central budget item, like Reserve fund, specific budget location. the case the
Highway Transportation Fund, the movement capital budget from master project capital project authorized within the master project
group.
Amendment proposed change budget that not yet finally approved, but has been formally submitted the executive the legislative branch.
Annualization budget increase provide full-year budget authority for budgetary item that was only partially funded the prior-year
budget.
Appropriated Revenue Authority collect revenue agency behalf the District Treasury; such revenue used support the
operations all agencies.
Appropriation Authority spend funds appropriated Congress and financed general District revenues. 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan
Glossary Budget Terms
Appendix B-1
App
Appropriation Group (or Appropriation litle) The eight broad areas which the District categorizes services the citizens
Washington D.C. They include Governmental Direction and Support, Economic Development and Regulation, Public Safety and Justice, Public
Education System, Human Support Services, Public Works, Financing and Other, and Enterprise and Other Funds.
Arbitrage The differential between the rate which funds are borrowed long term and then subsequently re-invested short-term
investment vehicles like money market fund.
ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009, which made available supplemental appropriations for job preservation and
creation, infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance the unemployed, and state and local fiscal stabilization. Some
ARRA funds continued beyond Fiscal Year 2009.
Attrition Voluntary employment losses, such retirements and resignations.
Bonds Officially called debt securities, bonds provide ways for governments raise large sums money borrowing. Bonds usually have principal amount and contract interest rate. For fixed rate bonds, the principal can paid maturity while the interest generally paid
semi-annually percent the principal. For example, government could issue $10,000,000 bonds with percent interest rate. the
bonds matured five years, then the $10,000,000 principal amount would repaid the bondholder the fifth anniversary issuance.
During that period, $500,000 would paid interest each year $250,000 semiannually. Governments may also issue floating rate bonds,
where interest accrues rates that are reset periodically (typically weekly monthly). Interest payments may due monthly basis,
with principal due maturity.
Bond Rating bond rating independent assessment the creditworthiness bond issued state municipality (including
all short and long term indebtedness) rated these agencies. The three primary rating agencies are Standard Poors Ratings Services P), Moodys Investors Service, Inc. (Moodys), and Fitch Ratings, Inc. (Fitch). Bond ratings measure the probability the timely repayment principal and interest bond. Generally, higher credit rating would lead more favorable effect the marketability bond and
lower cost borrowing for the borrower. The credit rating symbols (long-term) for investment grade bonds range from the highest ratings
AAA, and BBB-, the lowest investment grade ratings. Pluses are added distinguish strength and minuses reflect weaknesses.
Bonds rated below BBB- are referred speculative, high grade junk bonds. The Bond Ratings table denotes the bond rating codes
the various rating agencies.
Bond Ratings
Rating
Best Quality; extremely strong capacity pay principal and interest
High Quality; very strong capacity pay principal and interest
Upper Medium Quality; strong capacity pay principal and interest
SP
Moodys
Fitch
Aaa
Medium Grade; adequate capacity pay principal and interest
BBB
Baa
BBB
Somewhat Speculative
Low Grade, Speculative
Low Grade, Partial Recovery Possible
CCC
eaa
eee
Low Grade, Default Recovery Possible
Recovery Unlikely
Budget plan financial and operational intent embodying estimate proposed expenditures for given period and proposed means financing.
Budget Authority Authority provided law enter into obligations that will result expenditures. may classified the period availability (one-year, multiple-year, no-year). the timing congressional action (current permanent), the manner
determining the amount available (definite indefinite).
Glossary Budget Terms 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan
Appendix B-2
App
Budget Establishment The period immediately preceding the beginning the budget fiscal year during which final revenue budgets,
intra-District budgets, and expenditure budgets are prepared and entered into the formal accounting records the District.
Budget Fonnulation The budget planning and development process from the initial budget call and including final approval
Congress.
Budget Modification change any portion the budget during the fiscal year.
Budget Reserve Funds that are earmarked protect the District against shortfalls revenue and unforeseen expenditures.
Build America Bonds (BABs) The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009 provides federal subsidies for state and local
governments borrow lower costs. Build America Bonds are taxable bonds issued state and local governments give them access the conventional corporate debt markets where portion the debt service these bonds are reimbursed from direct federal payment
subsidy. The Treasury Department directs subsidy payments participating state local governmental issuers amount equaling percent the interest payment the Build America Bonds. The federal subsidy payment effectively lowers the net borrowing costs and
increases the amount municipalities can borrow, compared traditional tax-exempt tax credit bonds.
CAFR State and local governments issue annual financial report referred the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CAFR. The
CAFR has, minimum, the following three parts: (1) introductory section, (2) financial section, and (3) statistical section. Some
the principal users the CAFR are credit bond rating agencies Fitch Ratings, Moodys Investors Service, Standard and Poors Ratings
Services), institutions which buy and sell bonds, and those charged with managing and governing the state local government.
Capital Budget The budget that provides for the acquisition District-owned assets that help meet the long-term and
infrastructure needs, summarized the Capital Improvements Program.
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) plan for initiating the development, improvement. replacement District-owned assets
during six-year period. annually revised, this plan provides the basis for future-year capital budget requests.
Certificates Participation (COP) secured the pledge the issuing municipality annually appropriate (each year that the COPs
are outstanding) amount sufficient pay debt service the bonds. typical lease-purchase arrangement, the District lessee
purchases property under contract from lessor, usually private corporation, another public entity, special purpose nonprofit
corporation. The lessor receives portion each lease payment tax-exempt interest. One common way financing this the Certificate Participation (COP). where the lessor assigns the lease and lease payments trustee.
Charter School private non-profit entity that accepts and educates public school students under the terms charter granted the
Districts chartering authority. Charter Schools receive the same public funding D.C. Public Schools pursuant the Districts uniform per
student funding formula; additionally, facilities allowance provided.
Chart Accounts chart expenditure and revenue accounts used record each type financial transaction incurred District
agencies.
Collateral Security pledged creditor assure that the obligor municipal credit will meet its payment obligations. When the
obligor has performed, the creditor must release the collateral.
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) federal grant that supports housing, economic development, health and human
services, and planning and administration.
Component Unit Legally separate organizations which meet the following criteria: (a) the primary governrnent appoints voting
majority the organizations board; and (b) there financial benefit/burden relationship between the primary government and the
organization the primary governrnent able irnpose its will the organization.
Comptroller Object This represents the lowest level the General Ledger Account structure for operating statement statewide
accounting purposes. includes revenue, expenditure, transfer and statistical accounts.
Comptroller Source Group This used group Cornptroller Objects for reporting purposes. Also called Object Class.
Consolidated Plan The U.S. Departrnent Housing and Urban Development requires single consolidated plan and subrnission for 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan
Glossary Budget Terms
Appendix B-3
App
the following federal grant programs: Community Development Block Grant HOME Investments Partnerships Program, Emergency Shelter
Grants (ESGl. and the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) grant.
Contractual Services budgetary classification nonpersonal services that includes funds for contractual services.
Controllable Property Non-capitalized tangible property with value that less than $5,000 that considered sensitive with
high risk theft; such property typically has expected useful life less than three years.
Current Services Funding Level (CSFL) The CSFL Local funds ONLY representation the true cost operating District agencies,
without consideration any new policy decisions.
Debt Cap This measure the Districts long-term debt capacity, supported District revenues. The District has statutorily
mandated debt limits (a) percent (maximum annual debt service total current-year local revenues) for general obligation bonds, and
(b) percent (annual debt service total General Fund expenditures) for all tax-supported debt.
Debt Ratio Debt ratios are means measuring the affordability burden municipalitys outstanding debt. Common measurements
include debt per capita, debt per general fund expenditures, and debt percentage total income.
Debt Service The payment interest and the repayment principal bondholders specified dates. Generally, principal repaid once year. Interest fixed rate bonds paid twice year six-month intervals, and interest floating rate bonds generally paid monthly.
Dedicated Taxes Tax revenues that are dedicated law particular agency for particular purpose. Dedicated Tax revenue part General Fund revenue.
Encumbrance amount funds committed for the payment goods and services ordered but not yet received.
Enterprise Funds Budget and accounting units created for particular purposes, such water and sewer other self-sustaining
operations, separate the revenue and financial control such operations from the Districts General Fund.
Entitlement service grant that under District Federal law, must provided all applicants.
Equipment and Equipment Rental- The name the object class used allocate funds for such needs.
Escrow Agreement The legal document outlining the terms and conditions under which proceeds refunding bonds are used pay the
debt service refunded bonds. The escrow (which should irrevocable) stipulates which bond bonds are refunded, whether the
bonds will redeemed call date paid until maturity and what the refunding bond proceeds are invested in. Usually refunding bonds
are invested U.S. government securities.
Expenditure payment for goods services received.
FMAP (Federal Medicaid Assistance Percentage) The percentage Medicaid expenditures that reimbursed the Federal
Government. For the District this percentage generally percent for most Medicaid functions, but was temporarily increased from
October 2008, through Decernber 31, 2010, part the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
Federal Funds
Federal Grants: Funding provided the federal government via federal agency for specific purpose with the conditions for
the administration the funding dictated each grantor organization.
Federal Payments: Funding specifically detailed the Federal Funds portion the District Columbia Appropriations Act with
the conditions for the administration the funding found within the statute and federal appropriations law.
Federal Medicaid Payments: Funding provided pay for portion the health care costs eligible individuals, with oversight performed District and federal authorities.
Fixed Costs Expenses that not change proportion the activity business and are related the everyday functioning business. the District fixed costs are categorized electricity, heating fuel, janitorial services, natural gas, occupancy,
telecommunication, postage, rent security services, steam, water and sewer, and fleet fuel and services. While the expense item
fixed, the costs have variability. Rate fluctuations and consumption levels playa large part determining the amount fixed costs.
Fringe Benefits Part overall employee compensation costs, including life and health insurance and retirement and social security
contributions.
Glossary Budget Terms 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan
Appendix B-4
App
Full-lime Equivalent (FTE) employment indicator that translates the total number hours worked year all employees,
including part-time workers, equivalent number work years. For example, one FTE generally equals 2,080 hours and 0.75 FIE equals
1,560 hours.
Fund budgeting and accounting device used establish accounts for separating revenues and their related obligations and expenditures
for one purpose from those revenues, obligations, and expenditures for other purposes.
Fund Accounting Method organizing and maintaining accounting activities fund basis. fund defined separate, distinct
accounting entity that has its own assets, liabilities, equity, revenues, and expenditures/expenses. Funds are established for the purpose
carrying specific activities attaining certain objectives accordance with special regulations, restrictions, limitations.
Fund Balance The difference between fund assets and deferred outflows resources and fund liabilities and deferred inflows
resources. The fund balance cumulative over the life the fund.
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) Uniform minimum standard for accounting and financial reporting. GAAP
includes the conventions, rules, and procedures that serve the norm for the fair presentation financial statements. The standard setting
body which establishes GAAP for governmental entities the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GAS B).
GASB Established June 1984, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) the ultimate authoritative accounting and financial reporting standard-setting body for state and local governments. Although GASB standards not have the force law, governments
are required follow GASB standards order obtain clean opinions from their auditors, and failure comply with GASB standards can
adversely affect state local governments bond ratings and thus, its attempts issue bonds.
GFOA The Government Finance Officers Association the United States and Canada the premier association public- finance
professionals. Since its inception 1906, originally the Municipal Finance Officers Association, the organization has played major role the development and promotion GAAP for state and local government. The GFOA has sponsored the Certificate Achievement for
Excellence Financial Reporting Program since 1946. Under this program, governments which achieve the highest standards financial
reporting are awarded prestigious Certificate Achievernent. The GFOA also sponsors the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award
Program, which recognizes governments whose budgets are deemed exemplary policy documents, financial guides, operational guides,
and communication devices. The GFOA also publishes Governmental Accounting, Auditing, and Financial Reporting (GAAFR), also known
the Blue Book.
GPRA Government Performance and Results Act. Legislation that requires the establishment direct relationship between the use
federal funds and the delivery services federal agencies. Many federal grants require GPRA performance measures part the
reporting process.
General Fund The principal operating fund the District. which used account for all financial resources except those required
accounted for another fund. General Fund revenues consist Local. Dedicated Tax, and Special Purpose Revenues.
General Obligation Bonds Bonds are issued directly state local governments their agencies meet essential government
functions such schools and highway construction. These bonds are backed the issuers pledge its full faith, credit and taxing power rneet interest and principal payments.
Gift Funds Financial donations the District government. which may only accepted behalf the District the Mayor, that may
earmarked for specific purpose.
Grant Contributions assets (usually cash) governrnent unit private entity for specified purposes. The District government receives
grants from the federal government (and occasionally from private entities) for variety purposes. District agencies also make grants
non-profit other non-District government organizations. When the source the Districts grant non-District government organization itself grant the Districts grant called subgrant.
Grant Anticipation Revenue (GARVEE) Bonds Bonds used state state infrastructure agencies under the guidelines the
National Highway System Designation Act finance major highway projects receiving Federal funding. States rnust repay the bonds using
federal funds expected received the future; however, the federal government does not guarantee that the funds will made
available repay the bonds. 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan
Glossary Budget Terms
Appendix B-S
App
Gross Budget total budget amount that includes resources from all funding sources.
Imprest Fund fund designated amount out which payments for expenses small amounts are made (sometimes referred
petty cash).
Income Tax Secured Revenue Bond Revenue bonds secured and paid solely from the individual income tax and the business
franchise tax received the District.
Indirect Costs Administrative overhead costs incurred the District managing grant programs.
Industrial Revenue Bond bond issued the District behalf non-profit other eligible entity finance refinance projects
including housing, health facilities, transit, higher education, and other industrial commercial development.
Inflation increase general price goods services resulting decline the purchasing power currently available money.
Infrastructure Long-lived assets that are stationery nature and normally can preserved for significantly greater number years
than most capital assets. Examples infrastructure include such highways, bridges, drainage systems, and water and sewer systems.
Interest Accrual The interest that has accumulated bond since the last interest payment to, but not including, the settlement
date.
Intra-District accounting mechanism track payments for services provided one District agency another District agency,
similar internal service fund.
Key Result Measures set result performance measures that are contained within each program. They are comprised one result
measure from each the activities within that program.
Local Education Agency (LEA) education agency the local level which exists primarily operate schools contract for
educational services. This term used synonymously with the terms school district, school system, and local basic administrative unit.
Local Revenue -Includes tax and non-tax revenue that not earmarked for particular purpose and allocated fund District programs
during the annual budget process. Local revenue part General Fund revenue.
Mandate Any responsibility, action procedure that imposed one government another through constitutional, legislative,
administrative, executive, judicial action direct order, that required condition aid.
MARC Maximum Allowable Request Ceiling. The maximum Local fund budget that the agencies are allowed request the beginning the budget formulation process.
Match locally provided cash in-kind services contribution required supplement equal grant gift condition for receiving
the funds.
Mission The mission clear, concise statement the purpose the agency. The mission focuses the broad, yet distinct, results the
agency will achieve for its customers.
Modified Accrual Basis Accounting basis accounting that recognizes revenues the period they become measurable and
available, and expenditures the period which the associated liability incurred.
Municipal Bond bond issued state political subdivision. Also bond issued state agency authority. general,
interest earned municipal bonds exempt from federal income taxes and state and local taxes the state the investor lives the
issuing state.
Nonpersonal Services (NPS) budget category that includes budget objects for reporting other than personnel-related expenditures.
Nonpersonal services includes supplies, utilities, communications, rent, other services and charges, subsidies and transfers, equipment and
equipment rental, and debt service.
Nonrecurring Expenditures One-time expenditures for special items, such new fire truck computer system, that not need budgeted for again the year following their purchase. 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan
Glossary Budget Terms
AppendixB-6
App
Notice Funding Availability (NOFA) public notice that agency will issue Request for Applications (RFA), informing
interested parties when and where RFA may obtained.
Object Category The category object classes for which the District budgets the operating budget. There are two object categories:
Personal Services (salaries, fringe benefits, additional pay, and overtime) and Nonpersonal Services (all object classes that are not personal
services).
Object Class budgetary classification that breaks down the object categories personal services and nonpersonal services into more
specific types expenditure, such fringe benefits (Object Class 14) supplies (Object Class 20). Also called Comptroller Source Group.
Objectives Measurable activities program that are sought achieve the overall mission.
Obligations The amount expenditures already made well the cost commitments requiring future payments.
Operating Budget The budget that encompasses the day-to-day District activities. The operating budget includes employee salaries,
supplies, and other non-personnel items related current activities. The operating budget also includes debt service and overhead costs
related daily operations.
Other Services and Charges budgetary classification nonpersonal services that includes funds for printing, postage, tuition,
travel, conference, and membership dues.
Overtime Pay Pay for full-time employees whose work hours exceed their regular tour duty, generally, for hours work authorized
excess hours pay status workweek accordance with provisions section the Fair Labor Standards Act 1938 (FLSA), amended (29 USC 207)
Personal Services (PS) budget category that includes budget objects for reporting personnel-related expenditures. Personal Services
includes regular pay, other pay, additional gross pay, overtime, and fringe benefits.
Performance-Based Budgeting (PBB) budget system which budget decisions are based informed performance information that describes the cost efficiency producing activity and the results achieved for customers.
Performance Measures Measures that describe the information managers and other decision-makers need order make good
business decisions. There are four types measures: (1) results, (2) outputs, (3) demand, and (4) efficiency.
Performance Plan agency-level plan that contains the agencys mission, summary services, objectives, initiatives, and performance
measures for set period time.
Private Revenue Funding from private grants fund the intended purpose the grant.
Program component part the Districts program structure. Comprised set activities that have common purpose result,
organized sub-unit agency for accounting, budgeting, planning, and performance measurement purposes.
Program Structure The del ineation programs, activities, and services that constitute the work agency.
Proprietary Fund Fund category that often emulates the private sector and focuses the measurement net income. Expenditures are
typically funded user charges and fees. Governments may have two types proprietary funds: enterprise funds and/or internal service
funds.
Oualified Zone Academy Bond federal bond program established help schools raise funds to: renovate and repair buildings, invest equipment and up-to-date technology, develop challenging curricula, and train quality teachers. OZABs reduce the burden interest
payments giving financial institutions holding the bonds (or other debt mechanism) tax credit lieu interest for construction
eligible low-income schools. Through tax credit the lending institution, the federal government covers all the interest these bonds,
reSUlting savings percent the cost these renovation and improvement projects.
Real (Constant) Dollars Refers adjusted value currency used compare dollar values from one period another. Due inflation, the purchasing power the dollar changes over time, order compare dollar values from one year another, they need
converted from nominal (current) dollar values constant dollar values.
Reallocation The modification budget from one phase capital projectto another. The total budget for the project remains the same. 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan
Glossary Budget Terrns
Appendix B-7
App
Redirections The permanent shift funds positions within agency.
Regular Pay Continuing Salary and wages for all continuing full-time employees.
Regular Pay Other Salary and wages for part-time, part-year, temporary employees.
Reorganization change the budget and reporting structures within agency.
Reprogramming Any budget modification for purposes other than those originally planned, which results offsetting reallocation
budget authority from one budget category another, from one capital project another.
Request for Applications (RFA) The document that describes the requirements for subgrant applications.
Request for Proposals (RFP) solicitation document requesting from prospective contractors submit business proposal with
detailed description the manner which they plan achieve the goals specified the RFP. were they awarded contract so. The
plan usually includes the proposers corporate and financial information, estimate total cost, and required completion schedule.
Rescission legislative cancellation budget authority previously approved the Council and the Congress.
Revenue Bonds revenue bond special type municipal bond distinguished its guarantee repayment solely from revenues
generated specified revenue-generating entity source associated with the purpose the bonds, rather than from tax.
Revenue The annual income receipts the District from taxes, charges, grants, and investments.
Revenue Category General types revenue, such taxes.
Revenue Class Specific revenues, such real property taxes.
Review Panel- team qualified individuals responsible for reviewing, scoring, and recommending applicants for subgrant awards.
Revolving Fund fund that replenished amounts are used, either additional appropriations income/revenue from the
programs the fund finances. Therefore, the fund retains balance all times.
Service-Level Budgeting The development budgets program level four SOAR. This one level below the current level
budgeting for most agencies, which the activity level.
Special Purpose Revenue Funds used account for proceeds derived from specific revenue sources (other than expendable trusts,
special assessments, major capital projects) that are legally restricted expenditures for specified purposes. Formerly called O-type
other revenue, Special Purpose Revenue part General Fund revenue.
Stimulus Federal funding provided via the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act stimulate the economy.
Strategic Business Plan strategic business plan establishes and articulates the purpose, strategic goals, operational organization,
and performance expectations for agency.
Strategic Goal-In strategic business planning, refers goal statements that describe measurable terms the significant results that
agency must accomplish over the next years respond the critical trends, issues, and challenges.
Structural Balance The degree which revenues match expenditures over time.
Subgrant The commitment funds from grant District government agency governmental private organization support
specific services and operations. See D.C. Municipal Regulations, Title Chapter 50.
Subsidies and Transfers The name the object class used allocate funds for variety public welfare and support costs and
transfer funds other organizations, such the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, providing services District residents.
Supplemental Budget increase the Districts budget during the course the fiscal year, after the budget has first been approved.
After approval Council and signature the Mayor, Supplemental Budget must also Congress for review. Within certain limits, the
District may implement Supplemental Budget after 3~-day review Congress, Congress does not disapprove it.
Supplies and Materials The names the budgetary object class used allocate funds for consumable materials. 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan
Glossary Budget Terms
AppendixB-8
App
System Accounting and Reporting (SOAR) The financial management system currently used the District its official
accounting system record.
Tax Abatement decrease rebate tax burden improperly made. times tax abatement may reflect only acknowledgment changed situation.
Tax Increment Financing method pay for the costs qualifying improvements necessary create new development
redevelopment. The financing the qualifying improvements paid from increased property and/or sales taxes generated from the new
development redevelopment that would not occur but for such assistance.
Tobacco Securitization Securitization financing method whereby party sells bonds investors backed future stream
payments. With tobacco securitization, the future stream payments the periodic payments tobacco companies will make part
settlement reached the companies and various states 1998. The District received funds front from the proceeds the bond sale.
The investors receive principal and interest payments their bonds from the tobacco companies payments. Securitization shifts the risk
that the tobacco companies will stop making settlement payments from the government private investors insurers.
Trust and Agency Funds Fiduciary funds that are used account for assets held the District trustee capacity agent for
individuals, private organizations, and other governments.
Transfers Reallocation resources (funds positions) among agencies orfunds.
Unfunded Liabilities Potential actual debts for which current funding available.
Uniform Per Student Funding Formula (UPSFF) Funding formula used the District that determines the annual appropriation
Local funds for the operation D.C. Public Schools and D.C. Public Charter Schools based the number students, the grade level, and
the special programs which they are enrolled.
WAE The abbreviation for when-actually-employed appointment. This temporary appointment under which the employee serves intermittent basis.
Weighted Student Formula (WSF) Funding formula used the D.C. Public School system annually fund each school. The formula based enrollment, grade level, special education needs, free and reduced price lunch eligibility, and English Second Language
characteristics.
Within-Grade (Step) Increase salary increase awarded employee based longevity service and acceptable performance. 2015 Proposed Budget and Financial Plan
Glossary Budget Terms
Appendix B-9
App
Exhibit
App 2015 Proposed Budget
for the District Columbia Government
~]:i~~h:~
(Dollars Thousands)
HIO D.C. Health Benefit Exchange Authority
1000 Agency Management Program
General Funds
Comptroller
Source Group
0011
0012
0013
0014
0015
Subtotal:
0020
0031
0032
0040
0041
0050
0070
App
Subtotal: NPS
Total 1000
Federal Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
1,475
2,401
-2,401 2013
Actual
176
1,676
8,534
464
9,114
10,790
552
2,953
780
131
44,759
45,758
48,711 2013
Actual
-552
-2,953
-12
-780
-131
-44,759
-75
-45,758
-48,711
Private Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Intra-District Funds
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Gross Funds
Change
2014 2013
Actual
1,475
176
1,676
8,534
464
9,114
10,790 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
2,401
-2,401
552
2,953
780
131
44,759
45,758
48,711
-552
-2,953
-12
-780
-131
-44,759
-75
-45,758
-48,711
100F Agency Financial Operations
General Funds
Comptroller
Source Group
0011
0014 2013
Actual 2014
Appr
0020
0040
0041
0070
514
118
632
320
Subtotal: NPS
TotallOOF
324
956
Subtotal:
Federal Funds 2015
Req
Change
2014
-514
-118
-632
-320
Private Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
-324
-956 2013
Actual 2013
Actual
Intra-District Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
Gross Funds 2014
Appr 2013
Actual 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
514
118
632
320
324
956
-514
-118
-632
-320
-324
-956
2000 Plan Management Program
General Funds
Comptroller
Source Group
0011
0014
Subtotal:
0020
0032
0041 2013
Actual 2014
Appr
D.C Health Benefit Exchange Authority
197
242
Federal Funds 2015
Req
Change
2014
-197
-45
-242
Intra-District Funds
Private Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
August 2014
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Gross Funds
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
197
242
-197
-45
-242
H-lDO
... iSchedule 2015 Proposed Budget
for the District Columbia Government
General Funds
Comptroller
Source Group
Subtotal: NPS
Total 2000 2013
Actual
Federal Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
243
-243 2013
Actual ;;
~~p
(Dollars Thousands)
-,.U.
Intra-District Funds
Private Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
Gross Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
243
-243 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
3000 Eligibility And Enrollment Program
General Funds
Comptroller
Source Group
Federal Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
0020
0041
197
242
Subtotal: NPS
Total 3000
243
-197
-45
-242
-243
0011
0014
Subtotal: 2013
Actual 2013
Actual
Private Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual
Intra-District Funds
Gross Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
197
242
243
-197
-45
-242
-243 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
-197
-45
-242
-243 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
15,200
15,200
15,200
-15,200
-15,200
-15,200 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
441
-441 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2013
Actual
4000 S.H.O.P. Operations Program
App
General Funds
Comptroller
Source Group 2013
Actual
Federal Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual
0011
0014
197
-197
-45
Subtotal:
242
243
-242
-243
0020
Subtotal: NPS
Total 4000 2015
Req
Change
2014
Intra-District Funds
Private Funds 2014
Appr 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Gross Funds
Change
2014 2013
Actual
197
242
243
5000 Consumer Education And Outreach Program
General Funds
Comptroller
Source Group
0011
0014
Subtotal:
0040
0041
0050
Subtotal: NPS
Total 5000 2013
Actual
Federal Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
15,200
15,200
15,200
-15,200
-15,200
-15,200 2013
Actual 2015
Req
Change
2014
Intra-District Funds
Private Funds 2014
Appr 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Gross Funds
Change
2014 2013
Actual
6000 Business Development Program
General Funds
Comptroller
Source Group
0011 2013
Actual
Federal Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
441
-441
D.C. Health Benefit Exchange Authority 2013
Actual
Intra-District Funds
Private Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
August 2014 2013
Actual
Gross Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual
H-lDl 2015 Proposed Budget
for the District Columbia Government
0014
Subtotal:
0020
Subtotal: NPS
Total 6000
Total budget 2013
Actual
10,915 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
101
542
544
66,140
-542
-544
-66,140
-101 2013
Actual 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
,rqg~iW:$um.n~,,(ijY ,...
n;: ,.:Schci9vl~,!
C9mpJr911~S()urC. ;r()up;, ~~PBlJ .....
Private Funds
Federal Funds
General Funds
Comptroller
Source Group
(Dollars Thousands) 2013
Actual
Intra-District Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual
Gross Funds 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014 2013
Actual
10,915 2014
Appr 2015
Req
Change
2014
101
542
544
66,140
-101
-542
-544
-66,140
App
D.C. Health Benefit Exchange Authority
August 2014
H-102
Exhibit
App
D.C. Health Benefit Exchange Authority
Name
Scheclule,/. 2015 Proposed Budget
for the District Columbia Government 3Q-,efi::
(Dollars Thousands)
HID
Code 2013
Actual 2014
Approved 2015
Request
Change from
2014
Local
(Dedicated
Taxes)
Other
Federal
General
(Local
Other)
Private
IntraDistrict
1000
PERSONNEL
1010
TRAINING
1015
-20
CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT
1020
9,521
14,295
1,614
-12,681
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
1030
1,187
1,083
-105
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
1040
30,350
9,107
-21,243
RISK MANAGEMENT
1055
300
100
-200
LEGAL SERVICES
1060
261
608
1,025
417
FLEET MANAGEMENT
1070
-12
COMMUNICATIONS
1080
215
441
486
CUSTOMER SERVICE
App
AGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
1085
174
329
155
1090
586
1,129
2,734
1,605
10,790
48,711
16,815
-31,896
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
Subtotal: AGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
159
301
142
AGENCY FINANCIAL OPERATIONS
100F
BUDGET OPERATIONS
110F
101
120
ACCOUNTING OPERATIONS
120F
-35
213
124
-89
AGENCY FISCAL OFFICER
140F
642
422
-220
956
666
-290
243
5,919
5,676
243
5,919
5,676
243
2,698
2,454
243
2,698
2,454
243
373
130
243
373
130
15,200
1,479
-13,721
Subtotal: AGENCY FINANCIAL OPERATIONS
PLAN MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
2000
PLAN MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICE
2010
Subtotal: PLAN MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
ELIGIBILITY AND ENROLLMENT PROGRAM
3000
ELIGIBILITY ENROLLMENT SUPPORT SVCE
3010
Subtotal: ELIGIBILITY AND ENROLLMENT PROGRAM
S.H.O.P. OPERATIONS PROGRAM
4000
S.H.O.P. OPERATIONS SUPPORT SVCE
4010
Subtotal: S.H.O.P. OPERATIONS PROGRAM
CONSUMER EDUCATION AND OUTREACH PROGRAM
5000
CONSUMER EDUC OUTREACH SUPPORT SVCE
5010
Subtotal: CONSUMER EDUCATION AND OUTREACH PROGRAM
D.C. Health Benefit Exchange Authority
15,200
August 2014
1,479
-13,721
H-9S 2015 Proposed Budget
for the District Columbia Government
Scheauf(e:,:t
SO_PBSs;l;,;
(Dollars Thousands)
---
D.C. Health Benefit Exchange Authority
Name
HIO
Code
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
6010 2014
Approved 2015
Request
Change from
2014
Local