Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Occupational Licensure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee pauses action after members question private investigators board finances, fees and oversight
Summary
Members of the Political Subdivisions Committee discussed complaints about the Private Investigators Board’s finances and a proposed fee increase; legislators raised concerns about insolvency, the scale of a proposed fee increase, and whether a performance audit or one‑time state funding is appropriate. No formal action taken; committee deferred.
The Political Subdivisions Committee discussed concerns about the Private Investigators Board’s finances, proposed fee changes and oversight options, and elected not to take immediate action pending follow‑up information.
Committee members said testimony showed the board is close to insolvency and asked why administrative rulemaking was not used to set fees. One lawmaker summarized testimony as saying, “they burned through their reserves. They’re basically broke,” and urged the committee to consider whether the legislature should set a fixed fee rather than allow a proposed 100% increase. Several members expressed reluctance to bail out boards with one‑time state funding, while others said a short, one‑time appropriation was discussed previously in the Senate and could be an option to avoid steep fee increases that would hit licensees.
Members asked the State Auditor’s office how a performance audit is triggered; the auditor’s office confirmed citizens may file an online complaint form to request an audit and said there are both financial and performance audits. Committee members also asked whether an audit would be paid for by the board (a common practice) and were told the auditor would follow up with details; legislators said they did not want a board to be required to pay for an audit if it is already insolvent.
Some members urged amending the bill in committee to set a specific, lower fee that would provide liquidity without imposing a 100% increase. Others warned that creating a precedent of the Legislature covering boards’ operating shortfalls could encourage more requests for state help. Representative Moschenbacher said he was waiting for more information from the State Auditor and urged postponing action until that information and responses from other legislators and stakeholders arrive.
The committee did not adopt a bill or motion on the matter at this meeting; members said they will revisit the issue after the auditor provides further details about audit procedures and potential funding options.
