Legislature(2005 - 2006)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/08/2005 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB100 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 64 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 100 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | HB 115 | ||
HOUSE BILL NO. 64
"An Act extending the termination date for the Board of Public
Accountancy; and providing for an effective date."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAWKER testified this housekeeping legislation
would extend the Board of Public Accountancy. This Board consists
of five certified public accountants (CPA) and two public members,
who adopt regulations, issue final licensing decisions and take
action against violators of licensing laws. Upon completion of the
sunset review, the auditor determined the Board was meeting its
statutory requirements and that the occupational licensing fees are
sufficient to cover the regulatory costs of this occupation.
Representative Hawker noted the auditor made one recommendation
relating to the Board's need to conform to recently adopted
national professional testing standards. The previous legislative
session, statutes were amended to provide for the new testing
procedures. The Board has undertaken efforts to secure a second
testing location in Fairbanks and must secure a third location in
Juneau.
Senator Olson asked the number of disciplinary actions the Board
has taken.
Representative Hawker deferred to the audit report or the Chair of
the Board. He estimated the number was limited.
Senator Olson asked the number of licensed certified public
accountants in Alaska.
Representative Hawker estimated the amount to be approximately
1,700.
Co-Chair Wilken cited language on page 12 of the audit report,
which reads as follows.
In June 2004, 13, or just over half, of the complaints [filed
during the period between July 2001 and May 2004] were still
open. Six of those 13 complaints had been opened for longer
than 120 days. We reviewed five of these six complaints in
detail. Four of the five complaints had no evidence of having
any investigative activity for the last 90 days. Based on our
review, we concluded the public inquiries and complaints
regarding BOPA activities were not being resolved efficiently.
Co-Chair Wilken asked for an explanation of this and whether the
delays are cause for concern.
Representative Hawker replied that concern is warranted for all
boards. The audit statement relates to the timing in which disputes
are resolved. The Board of Public Accountancy is working to
establish more comprehensive guidelines for resolving complaints.
The Board may not have been timely in resolving complaints in the
past, but is now aware of the need to address these matters more
timely. None of the delays were of specific concern that arose to
the attention of the Ombudsman.
PAT DAVIDSON, Legislative Auditor, Division of Legislative Audit,
informed the Committee that although audits are performed in
accordance with General Accounting Procedures, these procedures
require independence and because the professional staff of the
Division is CPAs and the Division is statutorily required to
perform these audits, this independence standard is not obtainable.
Ms. Davidson stated the Division had overall concerns about the
timeliness of investigations conducted by all boards and
commissions. Historically, the audits have reviewed this matter on
an individual board basis; this method does not require accurate
information from which recommendations could be made. However, the
audit did review the timeliness for this Board and made
recommendations to the Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Development. The Department concurred and changes were
made to structure of the investigative process.
Co-Chair Green asked if the complaints relate to the boards or the
Department.
Ms. Davidson explained that the Division of Occupational Licensing
staff receives the complaints and "works" the investigations. The
results of those investigations are brought before the boards for
determination. The boards serve as administrative adjudication
rather than detail investigative.
Co-Chair Green concluded the complaint is directed to the
Department.
Ms. Davidson affirmed and pointed out that criterion for review is
provided in statute. Delays would impact the licensing of CPAs, and
is the concern of the Department and not the Board.
Co-Chair Green referenced other language on page 12 of the audit,
which reads as follows.
Efficiency issues related to investigations are being
evaluated in another audit report. This report addresses the
history, and evaluates the effectiveness, of the State's
overall sunset process.
Co-Chair Green asked if this audit has been released.
Ms. Davidson replied this report has been issued.
Co-Chair Green members may want to review that report to determine
if additional questions are warranted.
Senator Olson asked if the investigator writes the Memorandum of
Understanding to the applicable board.
Ms. Davidson responded that the investigator makes a recommendation
to the board of a Memorandum of Agreement, licensing action or
fine.
Co-Chair Green asked for an explanation of the examination and
whether it is computerized.
Representative Hawker answered that until recently the examination
was administered as a paper test administered in multiple parts in
three locations of the State. The American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants "guides" this testing process. A decision was
made "outside of the State of Alaska" to conduct the examination
using a professional testing agency as a computerized test. The
legislature amended statute to allow for this change, as it became
the only testing methodology available. The company administering
the tests offered the CPA examinations four times annually although
only offered in Anchorage. Previously, the tests were offered twice
each year. It was discovered that the contractor provides unrelated
testing services in Fairbanks and therefore the CPA examination
could be administered at that location as well.
Co-Chair Green was surprised at the difficulty in securing
locations given the commonality of this type of testing. She
expected that the tests should be available at any location with a
proctor available once a pass code is provided to the examination
administrator.
Senator Olson asked if a person residing in Ketchikan would be
required to travel to Anchorage to take this examination.
Representative Hawker replied that the examination could be taken
at many locations nationally. A university student could take the
take the test at their school campus. He took the test at his
college in Iowa before traveling to Alaska and was certified to
practice in Alaska once reaching this state.
Co-Chair Green ordered the bill HELD in Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|