BILL ANALYSIS
----------------------------------------------------------------
|Hearing Date:April 20, 2009 |Bill No:SB |
| |475 |
----------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
Senator Gloria Negrete McLeod, Chair
Bill No: SB 475Author:Padilla
As Introduced: February 26, 2009 Fiscal: Yes
SUBJECT: Guide dogs for the blind.
SUMMARY: Sets the annual renewal fee limit for guide dog
schools to no more than 0.005 of school's annual expenses,
requires the State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind to
establish the exact amount of the fee by regulation and requires
the renewal fee to be paid by April 30th of each year.
Existing law:
1)Creates the State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind (Board),
within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA), to issue
licenses for the instruction of blind persons in the use of
guide dogs and for the training of guide dogs for use by blind
persons. The Board also has exclusive authority to license
guide dog schools.
2)Establishes the Guide Dog for the Blind Fund (Fund) and
imposes an annual renewal fee of no than 0.004 of a school's
annual expenses to be deposited in the Fund.
This bill sets the annual renewal fee limit for guide dog
schools to no more than 0.005 school's annual expenses, requires
the Board to establish the exact amount of the fee by regulation
and requires the renewal fee to be paid by April 30th of each
year.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is keyed "fiscal" by
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
SB 475
Page 2
1.Purpose. According to the Sponsor, the State Board of Guide
Dogs for the Blind , the annual renewal payment rate was
codified in 1994 when the Board changed from a general funded
agency to a special funded agency. Since that time, the
Board's workload has doubled and it is struggling to maintain
a consistent level of services. The Board reports that it has
1.3 staff positions to perform its essential services
(licensing, examination and enforcement) but that if it cannot
provide those functions, guide dog consumers will be harmed
because they will not have an avenue for redress of
grievances, minimum training standards for guide dogs or
instruction of guide dog users may be adversely affected and
the financial integrity of guide dog schools could be
compromised. Due to the unstable finances of non-profit
organizations, the Board states that it needs to have the
flexibility to set the annual renewal payment at a rate that
can project future spending levels.
2.Background. In the 1940s, there were no minimum standards for
guide dog school operations, and it was possible for anyone to
open a school. The Industrial Revolution and World War II
casualties increased the number of persons who were visually
impaired. Guide dog programs of varying quality and
competence emerged throughout the country, most of them in
California.
There was significant public confusion on the role and
function of guide dogs in public places and there was a long
list of scandalous activities that characterized the guide dog
industry. Providing dogs with no training, raising funds with
no plans to produce trained dogs, selling dogs, accepting
people for training and not providing any and selling
unauthorized certification papers were commonplace
occurrences. Out of concern that the blind and visually
impaired were being victimized by scam artists, the State
Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind was created to protect the
blind by establishing guide dog school operation standards,
providing oversight of the disposition of donor funds to
licensed schools and licensing and regulating guide dog
instructors.
Prior to the establishment of the Board, there were
approximately 20 guide dog school operations. After the Board
was created, only two were able to qualify for licensure.
Those two schools still exist today; Guide Dogs for the Blind,
Inc. in San Rafael and Guide Dogs of America in Sylmar. A
SB 475
Page 3
third California school, the Guide Dogs of the Desert was
licensed in 1972.
3.Department of Consumer Affairs Legal Opinion. In 2007, the
Guide Dogs for the Blind, Inc. submitted a request to the
Board to have all direct expenses of its Oregon Campus
excluded from the calculation of its annual renewal payment on
the grounds that it was unfair for them to pay license fees
for expenses for services provided outside California and,
therefore, the jurisdiction of the Board. In response, the
Board requested a DCA legal opinion on the matter and on March
21, 2008, the Board adopted findings of that opinion. The DCA
opinion stated that the direct costs for operating the Oregon
campus should not be included within the total expenses used
for the calculation of the annual renewal fee. The Board
believes this decision will reduce its annual revenue by
$30,000.
.
4.Committee Fee Bill Worksheet. Included with this analysis is
a Fee Background Information Questionnaire which was completed
by the Author's office and the Board. This Questionnaire is
required by the Committee to justify any fee increases and
provide background information on requested fee increases.
The Questionnaire includes fund condition statements
displaying five years of actual and five years of projected
expenditures and revenues with (a) current statutory maximum
fee amounts and (b) proposed statutory maximum fee amounts.
It also includes a schedule of fee revenue by various fee
"categories" displaying five years of actual and five years of
projected revenue based on (a) current fees and (b) proposed
fees and includes the workload (e.g., number of licensees) and
fee charged per category. It is to provide a schedule
displaying two years of expenditures by program component. It
is to provide a table of comparison of existing and proposed
fees which includes the percentage by which the fee will
change. Lastly, it should provide the history for the past 10
years of legislative fee increase authorizations.
The worksheet shows that effective FY 2009-10, the Board's
fund will be reduced by $30,000 due to the revised calculation
of annual renewal fee calculation for the Guide Dogs of the
Blind, Inc and that the Board's total revenue will go from
$161,500 to $135,000 by FY 2010-11. In 2012-13, the Board's
fund reserve will be down to 0.3 months and by the 2013-14
fiscal year, will be at a $66,000 deficit Additionally, the
Board anticipates that the non-profit guide dog schools will
SB 475
Page 4
significantly decrease their annual expenses due to decreased
revenues from the failing economy and a loss of charitable
contributions/loss in investment portfolios.
The Board states that the only other alternative to increasing
the annual school renewal payment would be to increase the
annual instructor license renewals fee. However, to bridge
the projected $30,000 annual shortfall, the individual license
fee would need to increase from $100 to $300 a year. The
Board believes that calculation would be cost prohibitive.
The Board asserts that increasing the annual school renewal
payment to up to 0.005 and permitting them to set the fee by
regulation, will allow them to establish the amount of fee
required to keep and build a three to six months fund reserve.
The Board also believes this gives them more long-term
flexibility to set fees at a necessary rate to provide
services.
5.Related Legislation. SB 260 (Wiggins) seeks to increase the
maximum fee paid to the Department of Food and Agriculture's
Division of Measurement Standards from $0.02 to $0.05 for each
gallon of motor oil sold or purchased on or after January 1,
2010 and provides that a fee of $0.03 for each gallon of motor
oil sold or purchased may be applied by the Secretary prior to
the adoption of regulations. The measure was approved 6-3 in
this Committee on April 13th and is set for hearing in the
Senate Appropriations Committee on April 20th.
AB 1071 (Emmerson) seeks to increase the minimum and maximum
amount of the application, examination, licensure and renewal
fees the Board of Pharmacy imposes on its licensees. The
measure will be considered in the Assembly Committee on
Business and Professions on April 21st.
SB 1362 (Margett, Chapter 716, Statutes of 2008) authorizes
disciplinary action by the Contractors State License Board
(CSLB) for failure of a licensed contractor to comply with
existing law related to the certification of electricians;
authorizes CSLB to charge an additional fee up to $20 to C-10
and C-7 contractors to enforce the law relating to electrician
certification.
SB 1584 (Padilla, Chapter 529, Statutes of 2008) increased the
fee amount charged for veterinarian licensing, registered
veterinary technician registration, registered veterinary
SB 475
Page 5
technician schools and creates new fees to be paid by these
licensees for services provided to them by the Veterinary
Medical Board.
AB 214 (Fuentes, 2008) would have established the Physician
and Surgeon Diversion Program under the Department of Public
Health and permits physicians and surgeons to obtain treatment
and monitoring of alcohol or substance abuse or mental
disorder recovery so that they may continue to treat patients
during treatment or agree to cease practice. The bill
required the program to be funded from additional licensing
fees of physicians and surgeons collected by the Medical Board
of California. It was vetoed by the Governor.
AB 547 (Ma, 2008) sought to require the Medical Board of
California (MBC) to fix the initial licensure and biennial
renewal fees assessed on physicians and surgeons and sets
these fees at up to $790 and requires the Bureau of State
Audits (BSA) to conduct an audit of the MBC's revenue
projections by January 1, 2012. The measure was vetoed by the
Governor.
AB 1248 (Eng, Chapter 488, Statutes of 2008) deleted the
exemption from the written examination for any person with an
equivalent certificate of registration; and required each
applicant to pay an examination fee fixed by the board at an
amount up to $450, equal to the actual cost to administer the
written examination.
AB 2111 (Smyth Chapter 301, Statutes of 2008) made various
changes relating to licensure fees and examination
requirements for physical therapists (PTs) and physical
therapy assistants (PTs); allowed the Physical Therapy Board
of California (PT Board) to issue a public letter of reprimand
in lieu of filing or prosecuting a formal accusation against a
licensee and allowed the PT Board to disqualify an applicant
from taking the physical therapy examination, deny or revoke
an application or license if it determines that an applicant
for licensure or a licensee has engaged or attempted to engage
in conduct that undermines the licensing examination.
AB 2439 (DeLaTorre, Chapter 640, Statutes of 2008) required
the Medical Board of California to charge physicians and
surgeons an additional $25 as part of their initial license
fee or renewal fee to support the Steven M. Thompson Physician
Corps Loan Repayment Program and required at least 15 percent
SB 475
Page 6
of the funds to be dedicated to loan assistance for physicians
and surgeons who agree to practice in geriatric care settings
or settings that primarily serve adults over the age of 65
years or adults with disabilities
AB 2946 (Hayashi, Chapter 504, Statutes of 2008) made
permanent the $8.50 fee that each cemetery and crematory pays
to the Cemetery and Funeral Bureau for each burial,
entombment, inurnment or cremation.
SB 615 (Oropeza, 2007) would have created the California
Pharmacy Technician Scholarship and Loan Repayment Program to
provide scholarships and loan repayment for pharmacy
technicians in underserved areas and required all pharmacy
technicians and pharmacies to pay a $10 fee upon renewal of
their licenses to fund the program. The bill was vetoed by
the governor.
AB 986 (Eng, Chapter 276, Statutes of 2007) established a
retention period for optometrists to maintain patient records,
allowed the practice of optometry at temporary locations under
certain conditions, increased the amount of fees charged for
optometry licensing and created new fees to be paid by
licensed optometrists for services provided to them by the
Board of Optometry.
AB 1670 (Mendoza, Chapter 716, Statutes of 2007) revised the
conditions under which a new fictitious business name must be
filed, revised the content of the fictitious business name
statement and permitted county clerks to charge appropriate
fees sufficient to cover the actual cost of providing services
related to these filings
6.Arguments in Support. The Guide Dogs of America writes in
support of SB 475 as it believes the Board needs the resources
to protect their interests and provide guidance to the
industry. They assert that the fee ceiling proscribed by the
bill provides them reassurances that they will be able to
afford the new fee and that if the Board's funds exceed the
amount necessary to maintain its functions, the measure also
provides them the ability to request a regulatory change to
the fee.
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
SB 475
Page 7
Support:
Guide Dogs of America
One individual
Opposition:
None received as of April 10th.
Consultant: Sieglinde Johnson