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