BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 483
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
483 (Patterson)
As Amended May 28, 2015
Majority vote
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes |Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Business & |14-0 |Bonilla, Jones, | |
|Professions | |Baker, Bloom, | |
| | |Campos, Chang, | |
| | |Dodd, Eggman, | |
| | |Gatto, Holden, | |
| | |Mullin, Ting, Wilk, | |
| | |Wood | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Appropriations |17-0 |Gomez, Bigelow, | |
| | |Bonta, Calderon, | |
| | |Chang, Daly, | |
| | |Eggman, Gallagher, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, | |
| | |Gordon, Holden, | |
| | |Jones, Quirk, | |
| | |Rendon, Wagner, | |
| | |Weber, Wood | |
| | | | |
AB 483
Page 2
| | | | |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Requires that the fees for an initial license, an
initial temporary or permanent license, an original license, or a
renewal for specified regulatory entities, be prorated on a
monthly basis. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires that the fees imposed for an initial license, an
initial temporary or permanent license, an original license, or
a renewal be prorated on a monthly basis for the following
licenses:
a) Dentist;
b) Dental hygienist;
c) Osteopathic physician and surgeon;
d) Hearing aid dispenser;
e) Occupational therapist or occupational therapy assistant;
f) Physical therapist;
g) Registered veterinary technician;
h) Veterinarian;
i) Acupuncturist; and,
AB 483
Page 3
j) Architect.
2)Makes conforming changes.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Potential revenue loss to affected boards attributable to lower
average initial licensure fees in the range of hundreds of
thousands of dollars annually (various special funds). This may
increase pressure on boards to raise fees. However, in some
cases, fees are already set at their statutory maximums.
2)Minor and absorbable costs to affected licensing boards
associated with changing cashiering procedures, forms and
materials (various special funds).
3)$120,000 in Information Technology expenditures due to licensing
system modifications. (various special funds).
COMMENTS:
Purpose. This bill is author sponsored. According to the author,
"[This bill] will decrease financial burdens on newly-licensed
professionals in our state. Current law in California states that
initial licenses for certain professions? expire on the last day
of a licensee's birth month on the second year of their second
term.
"For example, a constituent in my district? was notified that her
AB 483
Page 4
brand-new license expired in three weeks, due to her birth date,
and that she had to pay a full $160 renewal fee. This occurred
only a few months after she paid $575 for her state exam and
application and $100 for her initial license.
"Various licensing agencies have tried to remedy this issue, but
this piecemeal approach still means that licensees in some
professions pay far more than is appropriate for the duration of
their initial license. [This bill] would standardize initial
licensing fees across state-licensed professions that follow a
birth month renewal policy. [This bill] makes a common-sense
change to a policy that can adversely affect young professionals
who are just starting out in their careers."
Background. Many of the boards within the Department of Consumer
Affairs (DCA) have implemented a birth date renewal program to
calculate license expiration dates. Under the program, a license
expires on the licensee's birth date or on the last day of the
licensee's birth month on the second year of a two-year renewal
term.
For many boards, licensees submit applications for licensure at
the same time (e.g. because of the timing of exams). This causes
boards to have a large number of applications for initial licenses
during peak times. As a result, rather than renew on the date the
license was issued, many boards renew licenses based on birth
date, which helps prevent the boards from processing large numbers
of applications or renewals at one time.
Existing License Fee Pro Rata Formulas. Currently, there are
three boards that use an initial license fee pro rata formula. The
California Board of Psychology (BOP) and the Veterinary Medical
Board (VMB) are required by statute to establish a birth date
renewal program that includes a pro rata formula for the payment
of fees. The California Architects Board (CAB) voluntarily
AB 483
Page 5
established a pro rata formula through regulation.
The VMB uses a yearly pro rata formula. For a license that is
valid for less than one year, a licensee pays half the initial
license fee. For a license that is valid between one to two
years, a licensee pays the full fee.
The CAB has used a formula for an initial license that pro rates
fees on a monthly basis. According to the CAB, its pro rata
formula has been in place for over a decade and continues to
operate well. While there are boards that currently use pro rata
formulas, this bill would create a consistent system for all the
boards.
Implementation Issue:
The DCA anticipates that implementing pro rata formulas will have
an impact on BreEZe, the new information technology program
created to assist regulatory boards in licensing and other
pertinent functions. However, the DCA is unsure of what the
impact will be and it is currently looking into the issue.
Analysis Prepared by:
Vincent Chee / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301 FN:
0000806
AB 483
Page 6