HomeMy WebLinkAbout4c. Declaration of Tamara Crisp in Support of City of Renton's Opposition to Tracfone's Motion for Summary Judgment1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
{KCO2366593.DOCX;1/07851.000003/ }
SECOND DECLARATION OF TAMARA CRISP IN SUPPORT OF CITY OF
RENTON’S OPPOSITION TO TRACFONE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT - 1
OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, PLLC
901 5th Ave, Suite 3500
Seattle, WA 98164
Tel: 206-447-7000/Fax: 206-447-0215
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF RENTON RE: TracFone Wireless, Inc. Administrative Appeal
SECOND DECLARATION OF TAMARA CRISP IN SUPPORT OF CITY OF RENTON’S OPPOSITION TO TRACFONE’S MOTION SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I, Tamara Crisp, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that
the following is true and correct:
1. I am over the age of eighteen, and I am competent to testify in court as to the matters set
forth herein and make this declaration based upon my personal knowledge.
2. I have worked for Tax Recovery Services, LLC (“TRS”) since 2004. At TRS, I am part
owner and the company’s Vice President for Administration and Technical Analysis, and I have been
performing many of the more complicated audits for the company since 2012.
3. There was no need for TRS to meet with representatives of TracFone Wireless Inc.
(“TracFone”) or inquire about their business activities because TRS was familiar with TracFone’s well-
known business as a prepaid wireless provider before starting the Renton audit in June 2013. Information
about TracFone is widely available in the public domain, such as TracFone’s website, advertisements,
and marketing materials, all of which clearly depict TracFone as offering prepaid wireless services for
sale to the public.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
{KCO2366593.DOCX;1/07851.000003/ }
SECOND DECLARATION OF TAMARA CRISP IN SUPPORT OF CITY OF
RENTON’S OPPOSITION TO TRACFONE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT - 2
OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, PLLC
901 5th Ave, Suite 3500
Seattle, WA 98164
Tel: 206-447-7000/Fax: 206-447-0215
4. In addition, TRS was familiar with the Washington supreme court’s decision in TracFone
Wireless, Inc. v. Dep’t of Revenue, 170 Wn.2d 273, 278-80, 242 P.3d 810 (2010), which describes
TracFone’s business activities in the “facts” section and throughout the case. Based on the description
of TracFone’s business activities in that state supreme court decision, we understood that TracFone was
providing prepaid wireless services to its end users, which enabled the end users to access the local
cellular telephone network to access calls, data and text services.
5. TracFone staunchly claimed throughout the entire audit process that it was not liable for
local telephone utility tax as a telephone business. Thus, TRS questioned whether it would be a
productive use of time to argue with TracFone on the issue of tax liability, especially given tax liability
is legal issue.
6. TRS knew that TracFone would have its legal counsel present at any in-person meeting,
and TRS did not want to be disadvantaged due to not having our own legal counsel at such meeting.
When finally, near the completion of the audit, TracFone offered to meet us without their lawyer, we
had already become convinced that, as auditors, we would not be able to bring about any type of
resolution to their legal objections. At this point, the tax schedules were becoming ready, and we very
much wanted them to instead focus on reviewing them for accuracy and approach, and urged them to
do just that, knowing that they would need to take their legal positioning up with the City’s legal
department or representatives.
7. In summary, because TracFone held firm in its position against imposition of local
telephone utility tax despite our attempts to address their concerns in written form, TRS decided against
such meeting and instead focused on the revenue data that was needed to complete the audit. We
anticipated that if, after completion of the audit, the contested issues could not be resolved by discussion
between the City of Renton and TracFone representatives, then the issue regarding tax liability would
be the subject of a future legal proceeding, as it is now.
/ / /
/ / /
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
{KCO2366593.DOCX;1/07851.000003/ }
SECOND DECLARATION OF TAMARA CRISP IN SUPPORT OF CITY OF
RENTON’S OPPOSITION TO TRACFONE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT - 3
OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, PLLC
901 5th Ave, Suite 3500
Seattle, WA 98164
Tel: 206-447-7000/Fax: 206-447-0215
SIGNED this 12th day of February, 2021 at Spanaway, Washington.
By /s/Tamara Crisp
Tamara Crisp
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
{KCO2366593.DOCX;1/07851.000003/ }
SECOND DECLARATION OF TAMARA CRISP IN SUPPORT OF CITY OF
RENTON’S OPPOSITION TO TRACFONE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT - 4
OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, PLLC
901 5th Ave, Suite 3500
Seattle, WA 98164
Tel: 206-447-7000/Fax: 206-447-0215
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Kenya Owens, an employee of Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC, certify that on the date below,
I filed and served the Declaration of Tamara Crisp in support of City of Renton’s Opposition to
TracFone’s Motion for Summary Judgment via email on the following parties:
TracFone Wireless, Inc. Scott Edwards Lane Powell, PC 1420 5th Avenue, Suite 4200 Seattle, WA 98101 EdwardsS@LanePowell.com Grant S. Degginger Lane Powell, PC 1420 5th Avenue, Suite 4200 Seattle, WA 98101 DeggingerG@LanePowell.com
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at Seattle, Washington this 12th day of February, 2021.
/s/ Kenya Owens
Kenya Owens
Legal Assistant