BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Hearing Date:April 1, 2013 |Bill No:SB |
| |482 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Senator Curren D. Price, Jr., Chair
Bill No: SB 482Author:Hill
As Introduced: February 21, 2013 Fiscal:Yes
SUBJECT: Point-of-sale systems.
SUMMARY: Extends indefinitely the law authorizing a county to perform
inspections, and charge inspection fees for retail point-of-sale
systems, and to take enforcement actions for violations of that law.
Existing law:
1) Authorizes the board of supervisors of any county or city and
county that has adopted an ordinance for the purposes of
determining the pricing accuracy of a retail establishment using a
point-of-sale (POS) system to perform standard inspections, charge
inspection fees, and take enforcement actions. (Business and
Professions Code (BPC) § 13350)
2) Establishes the criteria and methodology, as specified, by which
local officials are to measure and verify the accuracy of a POS
system used by retail establishments as a means for determining the
price of an item being purchased by a consumer. (BPC § 13350 (a)
(1) through (4))
3) Requires the sealer to verify that the lowest price advertised,
posted, marked, displayed, or quoted is the same as the price
displayed or computed by the point-of-sale equipment or printed
receipt, and states that items computed at a higher price shall be
considered not in compliance. (BPC § 13350 (a) (5))
4) Provides that enforcement action may be taken for any item not in
compliance, and that the sealer may re-inspect any retail facility
that has a compliance rate of less than 98%. (BPC § 13350 (b),
SB 482
Page 2
(c))
5) Provides that a county may charge an inspection fee or an annual
registration fee , not to exceed the actual cost of the inspection
or testing. (BPC § 13350 (d))
6) Provides that a county may charge a re-inspection fee , not to
exceed the actual cost of the re-inspection or tests, when an
establishment has failed a standard inspection. (BPC § 13350 (e))
7) Defines "Point-of-Sale" systems as any computer or electronic
system used by a retail establishment such as, but not limited to,
Universal Product Code (UPC) scanners, price-look-up codes, or an
electronic price look-up system as a means for determining the
price of the item being purchased by a consumer. (BPC § 13352)
8) Authorizes the re-inspection of a retail establishment if one or
more price accuracy violations have occurred in the previous six
months. (BPC § 13356)
9) Repeals the January 1, 2014 sunset date of the POS law. (BPC §
13357)
This bill:
1)Deletes the January 1, 2014 sunset date of the POS law, thereby
extending indefinitely the POS law which authorizes a county to
perform inspections, and charge inspection fees for retail
point-of-sale systems, and to take enforcement actions for
violations of that law.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill has been keyed "fiscal" by
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose. This bill is sponsored by the Author to remove the sunset
on consumer protections for the Point Of Sale inspection program.
The Author indicates that the bill is necessary to ensure that the
consumer protections contained in prior legislation relating to POS
devices (AB 889, and AB 1907) remain in statute permanently. These
bills granted counties the authority to inspect the pricing accuracy
of retail POS systems and established appropriate fees, and to
ensure that fees would be commensurate with enhanced service and
uniformity in the inspection process.
SB 482
Page 3
2.Background. The Department of Food and Agriculture (DFA) has general
enforcement supervision of the state law relating to weights and
measures and measuring devices, and any state or county sealer has
authority to administer specific provisions of this law. The
authority for weights and measures registration fees was first
enacted in 1982 to provide funding for inspection activities. The
law has been amended several times to add additional devices and to
adjust the schedule of maximum fees. Under the law, the County
Board of Supervisors may authorize POS registration fees and
establish inspection fees not to exceed the actual cost of
conducting the inspection. The inspection process involves testing
a representative sample of items from a retail establishment and
determining whether the advertised price matches what the consumer
is charged.
3.Related Legislation.
AB 1907 (Ruskin, Chapter 434, Statutes of 2008) extended the sunset
date on the POS law from January 1, 2009 to January 1, 2014.
AB 2285 (Ruskin, Chapter 556, Statutes of 2006) made changes to the
list of items required to be displayed for consumers by automatic
checkout systems, and recast the term "automatic checkout" to refer
to the term "point-of-sale" and modified the definition of
"point-of-sale system."
AB 889 (Ruskin, Chapter 529, Statutes of 2005) extended authority of
county sealers of weights and measures to levy civil penalties for
violations, extended the sunset on the authority for counties to
charge an annual device registration fee, updated and revised fee
schedule levels, and extended, until January 1, 2009, the authority
for counties to inspect the pricing accuracy of retail POS systems.
AB 2732 (Washington, Chapter 818, Statutes of 2002) required automatic
checkout systems to display the price read by the computer.
Required a business that uses an automatic checkout system to ensure
that the price of the goods or services registered by the computer
is conspicuously displayed to the consumer, along with any price
reductions, taxes, surcharges and the total amount of the
transaction, and authorized enforcement by local governments.
SB 369 (Kopp, 1997) would have required DFA to adopt regulations
relating to retail scanner accuracy, including regulations to verify
the accuracy of advertised prices, price representations and
computations related to retail scanners. This bill would have
SB 482
Page 4
authorized counties to charge the owner or operator of retail
scanners an annual registration fee to recover the costs of
inspection and make other requirements. SB 369 died in the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
4.Arguments in Support. California Agricultural Commissioners and
Sealers Association (CACASA) writes in support and indicates that
the current inspection procedure represents a carefully crafted
compromise that was agreed to by all interested parties. SB 482 and
the prior bills have been collaborative efforts that were supported
by CACASA and industry representatives. CACASA states that all
affected parties have discussed the merits of the scanner inspection
program and have agreed that the local oversight benefits not only
the consumer through more accurate and fair pricing at the
marketplace; but also the industry through the creation of a level
playing field. CACASA states that there is mutual agreement that
counties should continue to have the ability to opt into the
program.
California Grocers Association (CGA) also supports making the current
POS law permanent, stating that the criteria and methodology
established in 2005 has worked effectively for the last eight years
and writes in support of removing the sunset date from the existing
law.
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support:
California Agricultural Commissioners and Sealers Association
California Grocers Association
Opposition:
None received as of March 26, 2013
Consultant:G. V. Ayers