Idaho State Board of Optometry
MEETING MINUTES of February 4, 2000
The meeting of the Idaho State Board of Optometry was called to order by Dr. Kenneth King, Friday, February 4, 2000, at 10:10 a.m. at the Bureau ofOccupational Licenses, Owyhee Plaza, 1109 Main Street, Boise, Idaho.
Board Members Present: Dr. Kenneth W. King, Jr., Chairman; Dr. Dick Vester; Dr. James Dean; Dr. Scott Taylor;
Also Present: Thomas E. Limbaugh, Bureau Chief; Budd Hetrick, Jr., Deputy Bureau Chief; Roger Hales, Administrative Attorney; Kirsten Wallace, Deputy Attorney General; John Kersey, Supervising Investigator; Dee Ann Randall, Administrative Secretary
Absent/Excused: Dr. Stanley Matsuura, Board Member
Moved by Dr. Vester, seconded by Dr. Dean and carried that the minutes of the November 5, 1999 board meeting be approved.
Mr. Limbaugh reported that the Bureau received a continuing education bill from Larry Benton, and paid $10,000.00 per the Boardís authorization.
Mr. Limbaugh discussed with the Board a letter from Join Finance-Appropriations Committee (JFAC) regarding new program authorizations. Recently it has come to JFACís attention that some of the regulatory self-governing agencies have been authorizing new programs without the proper appropriation authority from JFAC. Difficulties arise when a board finds that it does not have the needed spending authority to continue the program. As a result, the board comes before JFAC to ask for a supplemental request for the current year budget. To alleviate this problem, board is requested to obtain the needed spending authority from JFAC prior to creating a new program.
The current fund balance for the optometry special fund is $63,131.00.
The current bureau fund balance for the optometry board is $2,889.00. This fund balance is considered low, as an adequate fund balance is equal to one yearís operating expenses. Mr. Limbaugh stated that moneys could be transferred from the special optometry fund to the bureau fund to cover expenses.
Discussion was held regarding the increases in expenses. Several reasons contribute to the increase. The recalculation of the distribution percentages, to insure a more equitable distribution of costs to all boards within the bureau, has resulted in some increase in cost to the Board. Review of continuing education requirement for license renewal has also increased the distribution costs to many boards.
Dr. King requested that the Bureau give a report to the board at their May 12, 2000 meeting on the increase in costs from FY96 to present. The Board requested that this information be mailed to them at least two (2) weeks prior to the meeting for their review.
Moved by Dr. Taylor, seconded by Dr. Dean and carried the Board accept the financial reports as presented.
The Board discussed several items in the contract between the Board and the Bureau. Moved by Dr. Dean, seconded by Dr. Taylor, motion passed, that the Board have the final draft of the contract reviewed by an outside attorney, and based on that review, make a decision regarding the contract.
Discussion was held regarding retaining an attorney to review the contract. Dr. Dean has an attorney in mind and, after contacting him, will contact Dr. King for a decision on what attorney to hire to review the contract.
Release of Draft Minutes
The Board had requested that Roger Hales, Administrative Attorney, advise them on the release of draft minutes. Mr. Hales informed the Board that draft minutes are public record and must be released upon request. Draft minutes do not fall under any of the exemptions in the public records law, and must therefore be released. Draft minutes could include a tape of the board meeting and any board members notes. However, only board-approved minutes record the action of the board.
Mr. Hales informed the Board that as of last week there have been no changes in 1-800-CONTACTS lawsuit. The Board had requested that Mr. Hales draft a letter to the Attorney Generals office asking if they can support this lawsuit. Mr. Hales talked to Brett DeLange, Deputy Attorney General, Consumer Protection Unit, concerning the lawsuit. Mr. DeLange said he was not familiar with the lawsuit. In order to provide the Board with any information, he would need evidence of violation of Idaho State law by 1-800-CONTACTS including which statutes have been violated, and if there are any Idaho patients that have been injured by them. The Board discussed ways in which they could be apprised of anyone in Idaho who has been harmed by the improper release of contact lens prescriptions purchased from 1-800-CONTACTS.
Moved by Dr. Vester, seconded by Dr. Taylor, motion passed that the Board send all licensees a letter stating what the law is in regards to contact lens prescriptions, and ask if they know of, and would inform the Board of, any violations of the law or harm that has been done to a patient purchasing contacts from 1-800-CONTACTS. Roger Hales will prepare a draft letter for review by the Board regarding this matter.
Managed Care Plans
The Board asked Roger Hales to provide information to them regarding managed care plans. Question asked was "Can patients forego the gatekeeper in managed care plans and have direct access to the optometrist? Roger Hales summarized his research on this question. After some discussion it was decided that further research would be needed to clarify this issue. The Board decided not to pursue the matter further at this time.
Question: "Does the Ďany willing providerí provision help in the argument of discrimination against optometrists in managed care plans? Roger Hales summarized his research on this question. After some discussion it was decided that further research would be needed to clarify this issue. The Board decided not to pursue the matter further at this time.
Question: "Can optometrists certify disabilities on the state level?" Optometrists can certify "blindness" under the statutory provision for the Commission for the Blind. Also an optometrist approved by or designated by the state department of health and welfare can examine and certify that an applicant (for public assistance) is blind.
Kirsten Wallace, Deputy Attorney General, requested a recommendation of action on two (2) cases. Moved by Dr. Vester, seconded by Dr. Taylor and carried that the Board close the disciplinary files on the two (2) cases presented. John Kersey, Supervising Investigator, reported that to date no new complaints have been received. Four (4) complaints were received for 1999. Two (2) are under investigation and two have just been closed by board action. The one remaining complaint from 1998 has been forwarded to legal review.
Moved by Dr. Dean, seconded by Dr. Vester and carried that the Board goes into executive session to review records exempt under the Public Records Act, the time being 11:51 a.m.
Moved by Dr. Vester, seconded by Dr. Taylor and carried the Board comes out of executive session at 12:15 p.m.
Moved by Dr. Vester, seconded by Dr. Dean and carried that the endorsement application of Paul E. Koch be approved for licensure.
Moved by Dr. Vester, seconded by Dr. Dean that the application of File #OPT1099AS be denied licensure by endorsement. Dr. King will send the letter to the applicant advising him of the Boardís decision.
ARBO Membership Dues
Dr. King presented a membership bill from the Association of Regulatory Boards of Optometry, Inc. (ARBO). Moved by Dr Dean, seconded by Dr. Taylor and carried that the Board authorizes the Bureau to pay the membership dues bill to retain membership in the Association of Regulatory Board of Optometry, Inc.
Delegation of Tasks and Direct Supervision
The Board discussed the delegation of duties to employees and the training required for that delegation of duties. The Board also discussed what constitutes direct supervision. Dr. King explained that individual boards are encouraged by the American Optometric Association to initiate action in these areas. It was the consensus of the board to not pursue these avenues at this time.
Patient Freedom of Information Act
Budd Hetrick updated the Board on the Patient Freedom of Information Act. Currently there are eighty (80) licensed optometrists who have not submitted the required information regarding the act. He also provided the Board with copies of letters and brochures that are being sent out to all optometrists.
Open Book Test
Discussion was held regarding the open book test currently being given to all applicants and whether to continue using this test or change to submission of an affidavit from the applicant stating they have received and reviewed the Idaho Optometry Laws and Rules. No board action will be discussed further at the next board meeting.
Discussion was held as to whether to keep in the rules the requirement of staying current with CPR. It was the decision of the Board to keep the CPR requirement, that as a health care professional this does add to the protection of the public.
Moved by Dr Taylor, seconded by Dr. Dean and carried the meeting adjourned at
Return to Idaho State Board of Optometry Home Page
Return to Bureau of Occupational Licenses Home Page
Last Modified - May 23, 2006