Texas House Bill HB3287

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 3/11/11
• Out of House Committee: 4/14/11
• Voted on by House: 4/27/11
• Refer: 3/18/11
• Out of Senate Committee: 5/3/11
• Report Pass: 4/4/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/10/11
• Engrossed: 4/27/11
• Governor Action: 5/27/11
• Refer: 4/28/11
• Report Pass: 5/3/11
• Enrolled: 5/11/11
• Passed: 5/27/11

Caption

Relating to license renewals by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation.

Impact

The bill specifically introduces a more flexible framework for license renewal, impacting various professions regulated under the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. By allowing a limited window for renewal without requiring individuals to apply for a new license – thus avoiding the full examination process – the bill seeks to reduce the burden on applicants who may have let their licenses lapse due to a variety of reasons. The effective date of the changes is set for September 1, 2011, and will apply to all renewal applications submitted on or after this date.

Summary

House Bill 3287 pertains to the processes and fees associated with license renewals administered by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. The legislation amends the Occupations Code to clarify the conditions under which individuals may renew their licenses. Under the proposed changes, individuals whose licenses have been expired for more than 90 days but less than 18 months can renew their licenses by paying double the regular renewal fee. This provision aims to streamline the process and encourage individuals to maintain current licenses even after they lapse.

Contention

One notable point of contention regarding HB 3287 is whether the increment in renewal fees, proportional to the duration of expiration, is a fair measure to encourage prompt renewals. Critics might argue that imposing a double fee could disproportionately affect low-income individuals or small business owners, who may struggle to afford renewal fees after lapses due to financial constraints. Furthermore, the bill may spark discussions about balancing regulatory enforcement with accessibility to professional practice, citing concerns about potential barriers to continued employment for individuals facing hardships.