BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1685|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1685
Author: Williams (D)
Amended: 4/21/14 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE BUSINESS, PROF. & ECON. DEV. COMMITTEE : 8-0, 6/16/14
AYES: Lieu, Wyland, Berryhill, Block, Corbett, Galgiani, Hill,
Torres
NO VOTE RECORDED: Hernandez
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 6-0, 6/30/14
AYES: De León, Walters, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: Gaines
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 72-0, 5/8/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Structural pest control operators: fees
SOURCE : Pest Control Operators of California
DIGEST : This bill increases the statutory maximum for
licensure examination fees charged by the Structural Pest
Control Board (SPCB).
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1. Provides for the licensure and regulation of the practice of
structural pest control by SPCB.
CONTINUED
AB 1685
Page
2
2. Requires SPCB to examine all applicants for a license to
practice as an applicator, field representative, or operator
in any of the three branches of structural pest control and
apply all fees.
3. Permits SPCB to charge a fee for examinations for the renewal
of licenses, but prohibits the fee from exceeding $50 per
examination.
4. Establishes a fee schedule for the various stages in the
application process, including examination fees. The fees
are set at $10 for applicators, $15 for field
representatives, and $24 for operators.
This bill:
1. Authorizes a registered structural pest control company to
provide by electronic mail (e-mail), if an e-mail address has
been provided, a written notice to the owner or owner's
agent, and the tenant of the premises where the pest control
work is to be done.
2. Removes the $15 cap on the applicator's examination fee, and
instead authorizes SPCB to charge a fee in an amount
sufficient to cover the reasonable regulatory cost of
administering the examination, as specified.
3. Increases the maximum licensure examination fees as follows:
A. Operator examination fees from $25 to $100;
B. Field Representative examination fees from $15 to $75;
and
C. Applicator examination fees from $15 to $60.
4. Removes the $50 cap on examination fees in cases where the
exam is taken during the course of license renewal, and
instead authorizes SPCB to charge an examination fee amount
sufficient to cover the reasonable regulatory cost of
administering each exam.
Background
In January 2013, SPCB's examinations were compromised when
CONTINUED
AB 1685
Page
3
examination participants misappropriated examination questions.
This subversion led to suspension of the examinations until SPCB
was able to draft a new examination at a cost of $41,532.
Computer-based testing is seen as a way to decrease the risk of
the occurrence of cheating.
Further, because SPCB currently only has two examination sites,
computer-based testing will improve testing availability and
efficacy, particularly for out-of-state candidates who will save
on costs associated with airfare and other travel to California
to take an examination. There are currently 17 proposed
computer-based testing sites in California and 22 sites in other
states.
Currently, SPCB is paying the increased cost for computer-based
testing. However, SPCB is only authorized to incur this
increased cost through 2014 in anticipation that it can raise
the fee in 2015. Fees assessed for these examinations will be
based on actual costs to administer the examinations (currently
$37.50 under contract with the Department Consumer Affairs and
an outside vendor for computer-based testing) and miscellaneous
costs for staffing.
A moderate increase in these fees to modernize testing
methodologies allows SPCB to more efficiently and effectively
offer the tests required to become a licensed operator in
California.
Comments
According to the author's office, this bill helps fund the
implementation of computer-based testing for licensees which
will accomplish the following: reduce the risk of cheating;
simplify test validation, scheduling and monitoring for SPCB
staff and examinees; and significantly increase the number of
examination sites in and out of state, making it easier and
cheaper for applicants to take an exam.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
CONTINUED
AB 1685
Page
4
Minor costs to SPCB to revise regulations to reflect increased
examination fees. (Structural Pest Control Fund)
Estimated revenue gains of approximately $364,000 for
expenditure on computer-based testing of applicants, based on
an anticipated examination fee increase of $40. (Structural
Pest Control Fund).
The Structural Pest Control Fund, which supports the activities
of the SPCB, is in a declining condition. Expenditures from the
Fund outpaced revenues by $593,000 in the current year and are
projected to outpace revenues by $547,000 in 2014-15. The
Fund's reserve has declined from $1.37 million at the end of
2012-13, to $770,000 at the end of 2013-14, and is projected to
be $223,000 at the end of 2104-15. This bill provides authority
to raise the licensing examination fees beyond the current
proposal to increase the fees by $40 per licensing category.
The additional fee authority could help the condition of the
Fund.
SUPPORT : (Verified 7/1/14)
Pest Control Operators of California (source)
Structural Pest Control Board
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the bill's sponsor, Pest
Control Operators of California (PCOC), this bill helps bring
the industry up to date with advances in today's technology.
PCOC believes this bill will help improve the application and
licensing process in a manner that will save pest control
companies far more than the nominal fee increased proposed. The
organization also adds that this bill improves consumer
protection d and helps small businesses in California.
SPCB writes, "The ability to offer CBT [computer-based testing]
examinations will help the Board ensure its applicants meet an
acceptable level of competency for licensure. This helps the
Board achieve its goals of protection of public health and the
promotion of worker safety."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 72-0, 5/8/14
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
CONTINUED
AB 1685
Page
5
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chávez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,
Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Fong, Frazier, Beth Gaines,
Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hagman,
Hall, Harkey, Roger Hernández, Holden, Jones, Jones-Sawyer,
Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein, Medina,
Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan,
Perea, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez,
Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber,
Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, Yamada, John A. Pérez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Donnelly, Eggman, Fox, Gorell, Mansoor,
Patterson, V. Manuel Pérez, Vacancy
MW:d 7/2/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED