"OCR"), and by the Attorney General's Charities Bureau, which has enforcement powers beyond those of the OCR. We concluded that defendants will have established the permissibility of § 173-b(1) under the First Amendment if they can show that there is a reasonable connection between the eighty dollar fee and the costs of administering the statute (which includes the aforementioned enforcement costs). Id.
Plaintiffs then moved for certification of an interlocutory appeal on the dismissal of their equal protection claim and the holding that enforcement costs may be considered when assessing the nominality of a registration fee. We granted the motion in a memorandum decision dated March 22, 1993, but the Second Circuit denied leave to file an interlocutory appeal in a mandate dated July 13, 1993.
Subsequently, the parties agreed to a Joint Stipulation of Facts, and now both parties are moving for judgment on a stipulated record pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 57. According to the stipulated record, the total annual filing fees received by OCR from professional solicitors who register pursuant to § 173-b(1) varied from $ 99,120 to $ 140,880 between 1989 and 1993. The annual cost of OCR's administrative activities with respect to registered and delinquent professional solicitors is in excess of $ 20,000, and the Charities Bureau estimates that it devotes at least $ 150,000 annually to "actions, investigations, litigation, and compliance efforts" pursuant to § 173-b(1). The last paragraph of the stipulated record sums up these findings, stating that
the costs incurred by the State of New York in the administration and enforcement of Executive Law § 173-b(1) exceed the fees received by the State of New York through the registration of professional solicitors with OCR, pursuant to Executive Law § 173-b(1) of Article 7-A, if both the administrative costs incurred by OCR and the enforcement costs incurred by the Attorney General's office are considered.