CA pending flight school bill

[Dave Siciliano]

Seems this is in reaction to some schools that charged tuition up front; then folded. It's affect may be to have other good flight schools fold.

Thank goodness we don't get all the government we pay for.

http://www.ahart.com/newWeb/articles/AB48/index.html

Best,

Dave

 

[ScottM]

FYI it is not a pending bill at all. The bill was signed into law last year. The flight schools would do themselves a favor if they would at least understand their own state's legislative processes, what the law is and what is happening that will adversely affect them.

Here is the actual status of the bill

http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/Bills/AB_48/

Notice the last action was to be signed by the govenator on 11 Oct 2009?

The real issue is that flight schools had an exemption to the law. That exemption is being considered for withdrawal by the Bureau for Private Post Secondary Education (BPPSE) NOT the California Assembly.

This is the factual status from the California Pilots Assoc
http://www.calpilots.org/html/article.php?sid=2707

That is the real status and history. Now for opinion.

This is really going to hurt them and is a dumb move by the BPPSE and will only hurt small businesses. I was checking to see if any scuba courses are also being affected. But have not seen anything. That could be an ally to the flight schools.

 

[Trapper John]

This is really going to hurt them and is a dumb move by the BPPSE and will only hurt small businesses.

If the objective is to keep students from being taken by paying up front, wouldn't a requirement for tuition funds to be kept in something like an escrow account be a lot more efficient way to do it? Or just simply prohibit schools from charging up front in the first place?

 

[dmccormack]

Bottom line -- stealth money grab by desperate politicians.

Shocker.

 

[Palmpilot]

If the objective is to keep students from being taken by paying up front, wouldn't a requirement for tuition funds to be kept in something like an escrow account be a lot more efficient way to do it? Or just simply prohibit schools from charging up front in the first place?

I sent them an email suggesting that the regs ONLY apply to schools that take payment in advance.