BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                             Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
                            2015 - 2016  Regular  Session

          ACR 131 (Patterson) - Professions and vocations:  licensing  
          fees:  equity
          
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |                                                                 |
          |                                                                 |
          |                                                                 |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Version: June 23, 2016          |Policy Vote: B., P. & E.D. 9 -  |
          |                                |          0                     |
          |                                |                                |
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Urgency:  No                    |Mandate:  No                    |
          |                                |                                |
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Hearing Date: August 1, 2016    |Consultant: Brendan McCarthy    |
          |                                |                                |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

          This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

          Bill  
          Summary:  ACR 131 would  encourage the Department of Consumer  
          Affairs and its licensing entities to create policies to ensure  
          that each licensee pays a fair amount of licensing fees.


          Fiscal  
          Impact:  The intention of the resolution is to encourage  
          licensing entities within the Department of Consumer Affairs to  
          prorate the fees charged to licensees for the licensee's initial  
          license period. To the extent that licensing entities did switch  
          from a fixed initial license fee to a prorated license fee,  
          those licensing entities would experience a reduction in  
          licensing revenue. 

          The projected revenue reductions for licensing entities not  
          currently using a prorated system for the initial license period  
          are:
           Architects Board - $16,156
           Board of Chiropractic Examiners - $7,563







          ACR 131 (Patterson)                                    Page 1 of  
          ?
          
          
           Dental Hygiene Committee - $22,401
           Medical Board  - $686,348
           Board of Pharmacy - $88,481
           Board of Psychology - $74,891
           Board of Registered Nursing - $378,125
           Veterinary Medical Board - $75,706

          In addition there would one-time costs of about $50,000 per  
          licensing entity to make necessary changes to the information  
          technology systems used to process license applications.


          Background:  Under current law, various licensing entities within the  
          Department of Consumer Affairs license certain professions and  
          vocations. In general, applicants for licensure pay an initial  
          license fee upon application and pay a fee upon renewal of a  
          license. Professional licenses are typically valid for two  
          years.

          Historically, licensing entities experienced a large number of  
          applications for initial licensure based on academic schedules.  
          For example, most applicants for an initial license would apply  
          for licensure soon after undergraduate or graduate training  
          programs are completed and/or accredited professional  
          examinations have taken place. Thus, licensing entities must  
          typically process most of their applications for initial  
          licensure at the same time every year. (However, over time, many  
          licensing entities have experienced a shift in workload as  
          changes in academic requirements or applicant preferences mean  
          that an influx of applications for initial licensure does not  
          always take place at one time of year.)


          To avoid the same influx of applications for license renewal,  
          licensing entities often require licensees to renew their  
          license during the licensee's birth month during the second  
          year, rather than on the anniversary of the initial licensure.  
          This is done to spread out the workload for license renewal  
          across the calendar year. 

          For example, the initial license granted by the Medical Board is  
          valid for one full year and then expires at the end of the  
          licensee's birth month in the second year. In practice, this  
          means that the length of the initial license period can vary  








          ACR 131 (Patterson)                                    Page 2 of  
          ?
          
          
          significantly between licensees, depending on when the  
          licensee's birth month occurs and when the initial license was  
          granted. The length of the initial license period can vary from  
          13 months to 24 months. After the initial license period, the  
          renewed license period lasts for two full years (from the  
          licensee's birth month until the licensee's birth month two  
          years later).




          Proposed Law:  
            ACR 131 would  encourage the Department of Consumer Affairs  
          and its licensing entities to create policies to ensure that  
          each licensee pays a fair amount of licensing fees.


          Related  
          Legislation:  
           AB 773 (Baker, Statutes of 2015) changed the system for  
            renewing licenses issued by the Board of Psychology from a  
            birth month renewal system to a two-year initial license  
            period.
           AB 483 (Patterson, 2015) would have required initial license  
            fees (and other specified fees) to be assessed by specified  
            entities within the Department of Consumer Affairs on a  
            prorated basis. That bill was vetoed by Governor Brown.
           AB 1758 (Patterson, 2014) would have required initial license  
            fees (and other specified fees) to be prorated on a monthly  
            basis. That bill was held on this committee's Suspense File.


          Staff  
          Comments:  As noted above, for several licensing entities, the  
          revenue reduction is expected to be minor and can likely be  
          absorbed by the licensing entity. However, the projected revenue  
          loss to the Medical Board and the Board of Registered Nursing is  
          substantial.
          Typically, licensing fees charged by Department of Consumer  
          affairs licensing entities are either explicitly set in statute  
          or statute provides for the maximum fee that a licensing entity  
          may charge. In cases where the license fee is set at or near the  
          maximum statutory fee, a licensing entity that switches to a  
          prorated system for initial licenses may not be able to raise  








          ACR 131 (Patterson)                                    Page 3 of  
          ?
          
          
          fees on all license applicants to offset the revenue reduction. 


          The license fees that the Medical Board may impose on applicants  
          is capped in statute at $790 (with certain additional surcharges  
          for enforcement activities allowed). The current fee level is  
          $783 (plus an additional $25 related to enforcement activities).  
          A shift to a prorated initial license fee is projected to result  
          in reduced revenues of about $690,000 per year to the Medical  
          Board. Under current law, the Medical Board has very limited  
          ability to raise the overall license fee to offset the lost fee  
          revenue that would occur under this bill. Therefore the Medical  
          Board would need to reduce expenditures for licensure activity  
          or enforcement activity to offset the projected revenue loss.


          Similarly, the initial license fees charged to registered nurse  
          applicants is set at the statutory maximum. 




                                      -- END --