HOUSE BILL NO. 239 "An Act extending the termination date of the Board of Examiners in Optometry; and providing for an effective date." 2:24:03 PM CRYSTAL KOENEMAN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE LORA REINBOLD, addressed the legislation, which would extend the Board of Examiners in Optometry. The Division of Legislative Audit recommended a full eight-year extension, which reflected the division's belief that the board was serving the public's interest by effectively licensing and regulating the profession. The division recommended that the Division of Corporations, Business and Professional Licensing (CBPL) continue its efforts to improve the investigative case management system's integrity and confidentiality. She understood that the department and division had taken great strides on the issue and would continue the efforts in the future. Co-Chair Stoltze asked for comments on the board's current significant deficit. Ms. Koeneman believed there were steps the department and the division could take to reevaluate how licensing fees were set. She knew improvements had been made in the past couple of years, but the issue continued to need addressing to ensure that programs brought in money that would enable them to operate. Co-Chair Stoltze remarked that the shortfall was $44,755. KRIS CURTIS, AUDITOR, DIVISION OF LEGISLATIVE AUDIT, relayed that the agency had conducted a sunset review of the board dated June 30, 2013. The audit's purpose had been to determine whether the board was serving the public's interest and whether it should be extended. The audit had concluded that the board was serving the public's interest by effectively licensing and regulating optometrists. The board was scheduled to terminate on June 30, 2014; the division recommended extending the termination date to June 30, 2022. The one recommendation had been directed to CBPL and addressed improvements needed in the division's case management system. Representative Costello wondered if the Division of Legislative Audit had considered recommending that boards share staff or locate other efficiencies. Ms. Curtis replied that the division would recommend efficiencies if it believed there was a need. She pointed to page 13 of the audit report that addressed board fees. She explained that the board had been operating in a surplus; however, a sharp decrease in revenues had eliminated the surplus in FY 10. Fees had not been increased at the time, but she believed they should have been increased. The fees had been increased in the following licensing cycle. She expounded that when an increase in fees was implemented and a licensing cycle was not complete the division did not typically make a recommendation to change fees until it observed what the true amount was. Co-Chair Stoltze believed the opticians' board had voted to disband and to be managed by the department. He told an optician joke. 2:29:21 PM Co-Chair Stoltze CLOSED public testimony. Ms. Koeneman relayed that the opticians' board had been repealed in 2008. Co-Chair Stoltze intended to discuss the fiscal note at a later time. HB 239 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration.