PROPRIETARY SCHOOLS SOLICITORS S.B. 480:
FLOOR SUMMARY
Senate Bill 480 (as reported without amendment)
Sponsor: Senator Mark C. Jansen
CONTENT
The bill would repeal Public Act 40 of 1963, which regulates solicitors representing certain private schools, and would rescind administrative rules related to those solicitors. The bill also would amend the Proprietary Schools Act to delete a reference to solicitors for proprietary schools.
Public Act 40 of 1963 requires a solicitor's permit for a solicitor representing certain private schools. Each permit application requires a surety bond and an annual fee. Fee revenue must be credited to the Department of Education to be used solely for administrative expenses of Public Act 40 and the Proprietary Schools Act. Public Act 40 applies to private trade schools, business schools, correspondence schools, and institutes licensed under the Proprietary Schools Act or incorporated under Public Act 327 of 1931 (which provides for the organization, regulation, and classification of corporations). The bill would repeal Public Act 40 of 1963.
The bill would rescind an administrative rule that authorizes private trade schools, business schools, correspondence schools, and proprietary schools to solicit students by solicitors who have been granted permits (R 340.471). It also would rescind a rule regarding the issuance of, and qualifications for, solicitor's permits (R 340.472).
Under the Proprietary Schools Act, the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs must exercise jurisdiction over proprietary schools and solicitors for them. The bill would delete the reference to solicitors.
MCL 395.102a et al. Legislative Analyst: Patrick Affholter
FISCAL IMPACT
The bill would have an indeterminate fiscal impact on the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) and no fiscal impact on local units of government. Under the bill, proprietary school solicitors would no longer be required to seek a permit to practice. Currently, these individuals pay $125 per year to solicit for schools located inside of Michigan and $225 per year for schools located outside of Michigan. To the extent that the revenue generated by these fees is less than the cost incurred by LARA for issuing permits and regulating the profession, LARA would stand to save money under the bill. The opposite is also true. At this time, the number of permits issued and the cost of regulating the profession are not available, so the fiscal impact of the bill is indeterminate.
Date Completed: 10-11-13 Fiscal Analyst: Josh Sefton
This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.