BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Hearing Date:April 29, 2013 |Bill No:SB |
| |308 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Senator Curren D. Price, Jr., Chair
Bill No: SB 308Author:Price
As Amended:April 18, 2013 Fiscal:Yes
SUBJECT: Professions and vocations.
SUMMARY: Extends until January 1, 2018, the provisions establishing
the Interior Design Law, and the Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind.
Extends, until January 1, 2016, the provisions establishing the Board
of Barbering and Cosmetology and the term of the executive officer of
the Board. Makes other changes regarding the Interior Design Law and
the regulatory programs of the boards, as specified.
Existing law:
1)Authorizes a certified interior designer, as defined, to obtain a
stamp from an interior design organization, as defined, that
uniquely identifies the designer and certifies that he or she meets
certain qualifications and requires the use of that stamp on all
drawings and documents submitted to any governmental agency by the
designer, and repeals these provisions on January 1, 2014.
(Business and Professions Code (BPC) § 5800 et seq.)
2)Licenses and regulates guide dog schools, guide dog instructors, and
fundraising programs to open new guide dog schools by the Board of
Guide Dogs for the Blind (BGDB) in the Department of Consumer
Affairs (DCA), and repeals these provisions on January 1, 2014.
(BPC § 7200 et seq.)
3)Establishes a pilot project to provide an arbitration procedure for
the purpose of resolving disputes between a guide dog user and a
licensed guide dog school, as specified, and repeals these
provisions on January 1, 2014. (BPC § 7215.6)
SB 308
Page 2
4)Licenses and regulates the practice of barbering, cosmetology and
electrolysis under the Barbering and Cosmetology Act (Act) by the
State Board of Barbering and Cosmetology (BBC) within DCA and
authorizes the BBC to appoint an executive officer subject to the
approval of the Director of the DCA, and repeals these provisions on
January 1, 2014.
(BPC § 7303)
5)Provides that a BBC-approved school of barbering and cosmetology is
one that is licensed by the Bureau for Private Postsecondary
Education or a public school in the state, and offers a course of
instruction approved by the BBC, as specified.
This bill:
1)Revises the provisions of the Interior Design Law as follows:
a) Includes in the definition of "certified interior designer"
that a certified interior designer provides plans and documents
that illustrate partition layouts, horizontal exiting, rated
corridors, reflected ceiling plans and lighting orientation,
location of power and communication outlets, materials, finishes,
furniture, interior alterations, fixtures, millwork, appliances,
and equipment, and engages in coordination and collaboration with
other design professionals who may be retained to provide
consulting services, including architects, engineers, and other
specialty consultants.
b) Requires a certified interior designer to use a written
contract that includes specified information when contracting to
provide interior design services to a client and specifies that
nothing in these provisions prohibit interior design or interior
decorator services by any person or retail activity.
c) Requires all meetings of an interior design organization to be
subject to the open meeting requirements applicable to state
agencies.
d) Additionally makes it an unfair business practice for any
person who does not hold a valid certification to use a term such
as "licensed," "registered" or "CID," that implies or suggests
that the person is a certified interior designer.
e) Extends, until January 1, 2018, the provisions relating to
interior design.
SB 308
Page 3
2)Revises the provisions of the Guide Dogs for the Blind as follows:
a) Extends, until January 1, 2018, the provisions authorizing the
BGDB.
b) Extends the operation of the arbitration program until January
1, 2018.
3)Revises the provisions relating to the Board of Barbering and
Cosmetology (BBC) as follows:
a) Extends, until January 1, 2016, the provisions authorizing the
BBC, and the executive officer.
b) Requires a school to be approved by the BBC before it is
approved by the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education
(Bureau) and authorizes the BBC and the Bureau to simultaneously
process a school's application for approval.
c) Authorizes the BBC to revoke, suspend, or deny its approval of
a school on the following grounds:
i) Unprofessional conduct, as specified.
ii) Failure to comply with the requirements of the Act.
iii) Failure to comply with the health and safety rules
adopted by the BBC and approved by the State Department of
Public Health, for the regulation of approved schools.
iv) Failure to comply with the rules adopted by the BBC
for the regulation of establishments, or any practice licensed
and regulated under the Act.
v) Continued practice by a person knowingly having an
infectious or contagious disease.
vi) Habitual drunkenness, or habitual use of or addiction
to the use of any controlled substance.
vii) Obtaining or attempting to obtain practice in any
occupation licensed and regulated under the Act, or money, or
compensation in any form, by fraudulent misrepresentation.
viii) Failure to display the license or health and safety
SB 308
Page 4
rules and regulations in a conspicuous place.
ix) Refusal to permit or interfering with an inspection
authorized by the Act.
x) Any action or conduct that would warrant the denial of a
school approval.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill has been keyed "fiscal" by
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose. This bill is one of six "sunset review bills" authored by
the Chair of this Committee. Unless legislation is carried this
year to extend the sunset dates for Board of Guide Dogs for the
Blind, and the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology, they will be
repealed on January 1, 2014. In addition, unless legislation is
carried this year to extend the sunset date for the Interior Design
Law, the entire chapter relating to certified interior designers and
authorizing an interior design organization to issue a certification
stamp to an interior designer will be repealed as of January 1,
2014. This bill extends the Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind and
the Interior Design Law for four years to January 1, 2018. The bill
would extend the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology for two years to
January 1, 2016. This bill further makes a number of legislative
changes recommended by the boards and the CCIDC as well as
recommendations made in the Committee's background paper.
2.Oversight Hearings and Sunset Review of Licensing Boards and
Commission of DCA. In 2013, this Committee conducted oversight
hearings to review 14 regulatory boards within the DCA. The
Committee began its review of these licensing agencies in March and
conducted three days of hearings. This bill, and the accompanying
sunset bills, is intended to implement legislative changes as
recommended in the Committee's Background/Issue Papers for all of
the agencies reviewed by the Committee this year.
3.Review of the California Council for Interior Design Certification
(CCIDC), Issues Identified and Recommended Changes. The following
are some of the major issues pertaining to the CCIDC, or areas of
concern reviewed and discussed by the Committee during the review of
the CCIDC, along with background information concerning each
particular
issue. Recommendations were made by Committee staff and members
SB 308
Page 5
regarding the particular issues or problem areas which needed to be
addressed.
a) Issue : Written Contracts.
Background : In its report, CCIDC recommended amending the law to
require Certified Interior Designers (CIDs) to use a written
contract when providing interior design services to a client.
CCIDC pointed out that there are not current requirements in the
law of interior designers to provide a contract or written
agreement. In fact, in a number of the complaints made against
designers by clients, there is no written contract. CCIDC feels
that requiring CIDs to use a written contract would provide
clarity and structure to the transaction between the CID and the
consumer.
Although CCIDC has received only 71 complaints against certified
interior designers in the 20 plus years it has been in operation,
the large amount of those complaints related to unfulfilled
contract obligations, disputes over charges for goods sold, and
failure to deliver goods. No doubt the use of written contracts
would lend clarity to those types of disputes.
Written contracts are an effective tool for protecting all parties
in business transactions. Architects, contractors, engineers and
land surveyors are required to use written contracts. Written
contracts enhance protection of consumers by ensuring fair
contracting and billing practices. They also would protect
certified interior designers by ensuring that both parties
understand the essential terms of the agreement.
Recommendation : The Committee staff recommended amending the
Interior Designer Law to require a CID to use a written contract
when entering into an agreement with a client for interior design
services. [The current language in this measure reflects this
recommended change.]
b) Issue : Use of the term "CID."
Background : The Interior Designer Law defines the term "certified
interior designer" (CID) (BPC § 5800) and makes it an unfair
business practice for a person to represent themself as a CID
unless they comply with the requirements of the certified
interior designer law (BPC § 5812). This is the provision in the
law which restricts the use of the title "certified interior
designer" to those who meet specified requirements of the law.
SB 308
Page 6
This is a practice known as "title protection."
CCIDC indicates that the abbreviation CID is often used to indicate
one's status as a certified interior designer, and requests that
title protection be extended to the use of that term as well when
used within the context of interior design services.
The Committee staff notes other title acts in the BPC, such as
those for registered dietitians and massage therapists, contain
similar restrictions against the use of abbreviated titles.
Staff further advises that if the amendment requested by CCIDC
were made relating to certified interior designers, that it would
not prohibit the otherwise legitimate use of the initials CID in
other contexts.
Recommendation : The Committee staff recommended amendments to
include the term "CID" and other terms such as "licensed" or
"registered" in connection with interior design in the title
protection provisions of BPC § 5812. [The current language in
this measure reflects these recommended changes.]
c) Issue : Acceptance of Stamp.
Background : The CCIDC raised the issue in its report that, in
recent years, two separate bills have been introduced to license
or register interior designers under a practice act within the
Business and Professions Code. Both of these bills, SB 1312,
(Yee in 2008) and AB 2428 (Ma in 2012) were the focus of a good
deal of controversy, and were ultimately never enacted and
eventually died in the legislative process.
One of the biggest concerns raised by the proponents of these bills
was the issue of interior designers being able to submit
non-structural, non-seismic interior design plans to local
building departments for building permit approval and acquisition
purposes and being denied access without an architect or an
engineer's stamp. The proponents felt that a state program for
registered interior designers would provide greater acceptance in
local building departments across the state.
A significant issue in this discussion is the use of the title
"registered design professional" in the International Building
Code, and concern that local building departments in California
might refuse to accept designs from an interior designer who was
"certified" as provided in the Interior Designer Law (BPC § 5800
SB 308
Page 7
ff.), rather than "registered."
CCIDC contends that use of the "registered design professional" in
building codes typically is a general title used to refer to
registered architects and licensed engineers, and is for the
benefit of building officials so that they know who can stamp and
sign structural and seismic drawings used for permitting and
construction purposes. CCIDC states that the issue of
"certified" or exempt persons who are allowed by both the
building code and state law to do non-structural and non-seismic
work, is not addressed in the building code.
A certified interior designer under the Business and Professions
Code is defined in part as "a person who prepares and submits
nonstructural or nonseismic plans consistent with Sections 5805
and 5538 to local building departments . . ."
The BPC § 5538 provides that the Architects Practice Act does not
prohibit the submission of plans or drawings for nonstructural or
nonseismic work provided the work does not change or affect the
structural system or safety of the building. This is regarded as
exempting certified interior designers, all other interior
designers, building designers, contractors, owner builders, and
the general public from the Architects Practice Act for these
purposes.
BPC § 5805 provides that nothing in the interior design law
precludes certified interior designers or any other person from
submitting interior design plans to local building officials,
except as provided in the BPC § 5538. This section further
provides that in exercising discretion with respect to the
acceptance of interior design plans, the local building official
shall reference the California Building Standards Code.
Taken as a whole, these provisions of law allow certified interior
designers to prepare and submit plans to local building
departments for permitting purposes. However, it remains true
that the law does not require a local building official to accept
plans or drawings from a certified interior designer or from any
other person regardless of whether the person has a license,
registration or certification in the design profession. A
building department must use its discretion, including looking at
the character of the plans, and the project involved.
However, the law relating to interior designers is still a source
of contention and controversy. To address this concern CCIDC
SB 308
Page 8
recommended amendments to clarify the law as it relates to the
acceptance of plans from a certified interior designer by local
building officials.
The Sponsor of both SB 1312 and AB 2428, the Interior Design
Coalition of California (IDCC), has also submitted its concerns
to the Committee staff of the lack of uniformity in stamp
acceptance across the state by building departments. IDCC has
proposed amendments to the BPC and the Health and Safety Code to
expressly use "registered design professional" for purposes of
the building codes use by local building departments to include
certified interior designers.
It appears appropriate to clarify the law relating to the
acceptance of certified interior designer plans and designs by
local building departments. However, more input is needed from
all stakeholders before acceptable amendments are drafted.
Stakeholders should include not only CCIDC and IDCC, but also
other trade or professional associations for interior design,
architecture, building officials, other state regulators. Any
legislative proposal must allow building officials to retain the
authority to accept submittals from architects, engineers,
interior designers, building designers, and owners, as
appropriate to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.
Recommendation : The Committee staff recommended that CCIDC and
other stakeholders should seek to find a consensus on this issue.
Committee staff will further work with stakeholders in an effort
to seek an acceptable solution to this issue. [The current
language in this measure does not reflect any changes to the
Interior Design Law regarding this issue.]
Issue : NCIDQ examination.
Background : BPC § 5801 authorizes the CCIDC to approve an
interior design examination which a certified interior designer
must pass in order to receive a certification stamp from CCIDC.
Since certification was first introduced in 1992, one portion of
a six part National Council for Interior Design Qualification
(NCIDQ) examination was used through an initial grand-parenting
period which expired in 1994. After that time, the full six part
NCIDQ examination was required by CCIDC in order to become a CID.
The CCIDC developed a supplemental examination on California
Codes and Regulations (CCRE) to address concerns of California
building officials who felt the national examination alone was
SB 308
Page 9
inadequate for California.
Eventually, the National Kitchen & Bath Association (NKBA) and
the Council for Qualification of Residential Interior Designers
(CQRID) examinations were determined to be valid under BPC § 139,
and were adopted as sufficient examinations for interior design
certification by CCIDC.
In 2004 the Legislature amended BPC § 5811 to require CCIDC to
assess the costs and benefits associated with the CCRE and
explore feasible alternatives to that examination. The Sunset
Review Committee felt there were too many obstacles and costs
associated with becoming a CID in California which posed barriers
to entry into the field. Ultimately the CCIDC agreed, and
developed an entirely new examination for California certified
interior designer candidates and replaced all of the national
exams and the CCRE with the Interior Design Examination (IDEX
California) as the only examination required in order to test
candidates for certification.
IDCC indicated that in order to bid on federal projects or to
work outside of California in a state which has some type of
state interior design certification, an individual must pass the
NCIDQ Examination, and no reciprocity exists for the California
CID credential or the IDEX California.
IDCC further stated that NCIDQ is an independent, nonprofit
organization of state and provincial credentialing bodies and has
issued interior design certificates since 1974. IDCC also states
that most federal RFPs expressly require that the interior
designers included in a project bid must be an NCIDQ certificate
holder. Ultimately, IDCC proposed adding the NCIDQ as an
alternative exam, to the IDEX California which would be accepted
by CCIDC to meet the examination requirement for the
certification of interior designers in California. IDCC does not
argue to eliminate the IDEX for those interior designers who feel
the IDEX/CID alone meets their practice needs.
Arguing against this idea, some have suggested that using a
national examination allows the standards for certification to be
dictated by the national examination vendor, and that California
would loose control. However, Committee staff observes that many
professions in California use a national examination without
being deemed that California has lost control of the requirements
to enter a trade or profession.
SB 308
Page 10
Recommendation : The Committee staff recommended that
consideration should be given to accepting passage of the NCIDQ
as an alternative to the IDEX California to qualify for interior
design certification in California. The Committee staff will
further work with stakeholders in an effort to seek an acceptable
solution to this issue. [The current language in this measure
does not reflect any changes to the Interior Design Law regarding
this issue.]
d) Issue : Should CCIDC be subject to the rules of the
Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.
Background : A major public protection among regulatory programs is
the transparency of their operations. Under state law, the
Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act (Bagley-Keene) (Government Code
(GC) § 11120) generally requires all state boards and commissions
to publicly notice their meetings, prepare agendas, accept public
testimony and conduct their meetings in public unless
specifically authorized under by the Act to meet in closed
session. The public meeting requirement applies, not only to
board meetings but to all committee meetings as well. A meeting
is "gathering" of a majority of the board or a majority of a
committee of 3 or more persons where board business will be
discussed. This includes telephone and email communications.
In its Sunset Report, in responding to the Committee's questions
about any committees formed under the CCIDC board, the CCIDC
indicates that it does not have any public committees per se,
only four internal committees as previously noted above in this
paper. In addition in its response to the question about
strategic planning, CCIDC responds in part: "The board regularly
conducts strategic planning meetings as an ongoing process the
day prior to each scheduled board meeting."
Committee staff is concerned that these committees and planning
meetings may fall short of the open meeting standard that is the
standard in California.
In considering this issue, it is important to point out that CCIDC
is not a state board or commission, and is not a public agency,
and CIDs are not certified by the state. Indeed, the BPC § 5804
makes it an unfair business practice for any certified interior
designer to represent that he or she is "state certified" to
practice interior design. However, CCIDC is the entity that
meets the criteria of an interior design organization under the
interior design law and thus certifies certified interior
SB 308
Page 11
designers in California. As such it is appropriate that CCIDC's
functions, operations and deliberations be open and transparent.
Requiring private certification organizations that are authorized
by state law to issue specific certifications to comply with open
meeting laws is consistent with what the Legislature has recently
done regarding the massage therapy law, enacted in 2008. The
same requirement should be placed upon CCIDC.
Recommendation : The Committee staff recommended amending the
interior designer law to require that the meetings of an interior
design organization issuing stamps under Section 5801 shall be
subject to the rules of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.
[The current language in this measure reflects this recommended
change.]
e) Issue : Continuation of the Interior Designer law.
Background : The California law relating to certification of
interior designers was initially enacted in 1990 by SB 153
(Craven, Chapter 396, Statutes of 1990). The current law
provides for a voluntary system whereby an interior designer may
become certified and obtain a stamp from an interior design
organization by demonstrating competency by means of education,
experience and examination.
The voluntary certification for interior designers in California
serves a valuable benefit to the public, and should be continued
and reviewed again by the appropriate policy committees of the
Legislature in four years.
Recommendation : The Committee staff recommended that that the
Certified Interior Designer Law should be continued and be
reviewed once again in four years. [The current language in this
measure reflects this recommended change.]
f) Issue : Continued Certification by CCIDC.
Background : The CCIDC was created by a coalition of professional
interior design organizations in 1992 with the intent of being
the organization responsible for determining whether interior
designers met the education, experience and examination
requirements. The CCIDC operates outside of the state
government, is not a state agency, and does not rely on any funds
from the state for its operations.
SB 308
Page 12
As a private certifying organization, the CCIDC serves a valuable
benefit to the public, in certifying interior designers in
California and should be continued and reviewed again by the
appropriate policy committees of the Legislature in four years
Recommendation : The Committee staff recommended that interior
designers in California should continue to be certified by the
California Council for Interior Design Certification in order to
protect the interests of the public and be reviewed once again in
four years.
[The current language in this measure reflects this recommended
change.]
4.Review of the Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind (BGDB), Issues
Identified and Recommended Changes. The following are some of the
major issues pertaining to the BGDB, or areas of concern reviewed
and discussed by the Committee during the review of the BGDB, along
with background information concerning each particular issue.
Recommendations were made by Committee staff and members regarding
the particular issues or problem areas which needed to be addressed.
a) Issue : Arbitration Pilot Program.
Background : BPC § 7215.6 establishes an arbitration panel for the
settlement of disputes between a guide dog user and a licensed
guide dog school regarding the continued use of a guide dog by
the user in all cases except those in which the dog user is the
unconditional legal owner of the dog. The arbitration program
has only been used two times during the nine years it has
existed. In its 2012 Sunset Review Report, the Board states that
it is open to consumer feedback about whether the arbitration
program should be continued. The program will sunset on January
1, 2014, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before
January 1, 2014, deletes or extends that date.
The Committee is concerned that the arbitration program should
remain available if it is an important tool for guide dog users
and guide dog schools in resolving disputes between them.
However, due to the infrequent use of the program, if it is not
meeting the needs of the stakeholders, it should be allowed to
sunset.
Recommendation : The Committee staff recommended that the Board
should inform the Committee whether it believes the arbitration
program should be continued. Subsequently the Board has
SB 308
Page 13
recommended the program be continued, and accordingly, the bill
extends the arbitration program until January 1, 2018. [The
current language in this measure reflects this recommended
change.]
b) Issue : Continued regulation by the BGDB.
Background : Since 1948 the BGDB has sought to ensure that blind
persons receive well-trained guide dogs, and to confirm that
blind persons are thoroughly trained to be effective and safe
guide dog users, and to assure donors to guide dog charities that
their donations will be used for the intended charitable purpose.
In fiscal year 2011/12 the Board had a license base of 109
active guide dog instructors and 3 inactive guide dog
instructors. The Board also oversees 3 guide dog schools located
throughout California.
The Board has seven members. One member represents the Director of
the Department of Rehabilitation. The other six are Governor's
appointees, two of whom must be blind persons who use guide dogs.
The Board plays a significant role in the service of blind persons
in California. The state is best served by a well-run Board of
Guide Dogs for the Blind.
Recommendation : The Committee staff recommended that the sunset
date of the BGDB be extended and the Board reviewed again in four
years. [The current language in this measure reflects this
recommended change.]
5.Review of the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology (BBC), Issues
Identified and Recommended Changes. The following are some of the
major issues pertaining to the BBC, or areas of concern reviewed and
discussed by the Committee during the review of the BBC, along with
background information concerning each particular issue.
Recommendations were made by Committee staff and members regarding
the particular issues or problem areas which needed to be addressed.
a) Issue : Continued Regulation by the Board of Barbering and
Cosmetology (BBC).
Background : The potential for public health problems stemming from
unlicensed practitioners could be quite severe. Although most
injuries caused during beauty services heal, there are some
SB 308
Page 14
injuries that can cause permanent injury and/or scarring. In
addition, the practice of these professions requires physical
contact between licensees and consumers which increases the
chance of spreading disease from person to person. These
professions are the only non-medical professions regulated by the
Department where licensees come into close contact with and touch
their clients while providing hair, skin, and nail services.
This is also the only other group of non-medical professions that
has the potential for spreading blood-borne diseases, as well as
diseases such as bacterial or fungal infections, lice and other
skin ailments that can cause physical harm to consumers.
The BBC's vast licensing population and the contact of licensees
with millions of Californians also requires a successful,
organized and forward thinking regulatory body. This BBC
continues to face challenges, many of which have been present for
at least a decade. New, more sophisticated products and
techniques, such as skin care practices and other machines, and
the use of acids and chemicals, continue to come into the
marketplace every day. These emerging technologies, combined
with the existing use of chemicals will continue to provide
challenges to the BBC.
Recommendation : The Committee staff recommended that that the
barbering, cosmetology, electrology, manicure and esthetician
professions continue to be regulated by the current BBC members
in order to protect the interests of the public and be reviewed
once again in two years. [The Author will be requesting Author's
amendments to reflect the two year extension of the BBC's sunset
date.]
b) Issue : School Approvals.
Background : The BBC approves many aspects of a barbering,
cosmetology and electrology program in California while the
Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) approves many
institutions and ensures student protections for individuals
attending schools. What is the appropriate relationship for each
entity as it relates to school oversight, approval and actions
against bad schools?
The BBC plays an important role in ensuring the educational quality
of barbering, cosmetology and electrology programs in California,
as well as guaranteeing the health and safety of these facilities
and the practitioners and students working in them, as well as
consumers who may receive services at schools. The BBC approves
SB 308
Page 15
curriculum, facilities, equipment and textbooks for schools
offering training programs for eventual licensees. The issue of
what appropriate role the BBC should play in school and program
approval has been raised in prior sunset reviews and has been the
subject of proposed legislation, legislative amendments and
confirmation hearings before the Legislature during the past
5 years.
BPC § 7362 states that a school that is approved by the BBC is one
which is licensed by the Bureau for Private Postsecondary
Education (BPPE). A school that offers cosmetology, barbering or
electrology must first be licensed by the BPPE and then must
receive approval from the BBC. The BBC issues schools a unique
code which is included on BBC applicants' proof of training
documents. To receive approval from the BBC, a school must
possess certain equipment, have a certain amount of floor space,
use BBC-approved text books, receive BBC approval for the school
curriculum and provide the BBC with a list of potential bona fide
students. However, the BBC does not receive a fee from schools
for the work it conducts to provide approval.
There have been serious problems with the approval and oversight of
private degree granting and non-degree granting (career and
vocational) schools by the state agencies charged with
regulation. After numerous legislative attempts to remedy the
laws and structure governing regulation of private postsecondary
institutions, AB 48 (Portantino, Chapter 310, Statutes of 2009)
created a new, solid foundation for oversight and responded to
the major problems with prior law. The California Private
Postsecondary Education Act (The Act) requires all unaccredited
colleges in California to be approved by the new BPPE and all
nationally accredited colleges to comply with numerous student
protections.
Prior to the enactment of AB 48, California was without a
regulatory body for private postsecondary institutions after the
previous Bureau was allowed to sunset in 2008, leaving
approximately 1,500 private postsecondary institutions to operate
in California without state oversight. During the sunset of the
former Bureau, many Boards, including the BBC, took on a more
direct role in institutional approval. Prior to the BPPVE
Sunset, the BBC and BPPVE worked according to a formal Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU). The Board was responsible for
establishing school curricula (BPC § 7362), school size, and
minimum equipment standards, as well as enforcing health and
safety standards while the BPPVE was responsible for student
SB 308
Page 16
protections and ensuring financial solvency of schools. The MOU
provided for an active working relationship to ensure that
schools met all requirements for licensure before being licensed
or approved. The BBC and BPPVE worked collaboratively on school
inspections and shared information on a daily basis regarding
school compliance. During the sunset of BPPVE and prior to the
reconstitution of the new BPPE, the BBC was granted authority to
approve schools until 2008 if the school met certain criteria
including entering into an agreement with the DCA and being
operational by a certain date.
The BBC stated in its Sunset Report that it has been attempting to
work with the BPPE since it was reconstituted in 2010; however,
the BBC believes that many of the same problems that the BBC
experienced with the BPPVE "are repeating, to the great
consternation of all concerned, including most importantly
students. While dual oversight explains a lot of the confusion
and issues, there are also intractable communication issues and
lack of consistent action on the part of BPPE enforcement staff.
This has created an environment where fraudulently operated
schools continue to exist and even proliferate, while honest and
well-established schools are being hit with costly new fees and
long delays in application reviews and approvals that seem
largely pointless." The BBC outlined student confusion and
potential "harmful practices" that arise with both entities
overseeing certain, specific aspects of schools.
The BBC further stated that, "lack of communication between the BBC
and the BPPE is causing student harm and potentially increases
unlicensed activity in the industry." The BBC also stated in its
report that it does not receive the information it needs to
ensure applicants are attending approved schools and that the BBC
is not made aware of schools that are out of compliance with the
BPPE. The BBC stated that it must go online and monitor schools
on a regular basis to determine if schools are in compliance with
the BPPE because BPPE does not report this information to the
BBC. The BBC stated that students "often are the last to know
and are usually informed by being denied admittance to the exam
from the BBC."
Despite budget and staff constraints noted throughout the Report,
the BBC requested that it be granted sole oversight and sole
approval of barbering, cosmetology and electrology schools in the
state. The BBC stated that "it is the best positioned regulatory
entity to have sole oversight of schools;" however, the BBC
currently has no laws related to upholding fair business
SB 308
Page 17
practices like contracts or recourse for students in the event of
an abrupt school closure when students have already paid tuition.
Given the expertise of the BBC's staff in the educational and
training requirements for its licensees to safely interact with
patients, it is no doubt appropriate for the BBC to have approval
over barbering, cosmetology and electrology programs offered in
California. Similarly, it is appropriate for the Board to have
the ability to remove its approval of schools and programs that
do not meet the educational quality standards necessary for an
individual to learn how to be a safe, effective beauty
practitioner. However, it also appears as if the BPPE serves an
important function in providing approval to these schools and the
continued oversight it provides as well as the student
protections.
Recommendation : The Committee staff recommended that the BBC
should continue to work with the BPPE under the MOU. The Board
should be granted statutory authority to remove its approval of a
school, which will then allow the BPPE to take action for
offering a training program to students who will not be eligible
to sit for licensure and close down bad schools. [The current
language in this measure reflects these recommended changes.]
6.Current Related Legislation. SB 304 (Price, 2013). Makes various
changes to the Medical Practice Act and to the Medical Board of
California. ( Note : This bill will also be heard before the BP&ED
Committee during today's hearing)
SB 305 (Price, 2013). Extends until January 1, 2018, the provisions
establishing the Naturopathic Medicine Committee and the Respiratory
Care Board of California, and extends the term of the executive
officers of the Respiratory Care Board of California and the
California State Board of Optometry. Specifies that the Osteopathic
Medical Board of California is subject to review by the appropriate
policy committees of the Legislature. Exempts individuals who have
performed pulmonary function tests in Los Angeles County facilities
for at least 15 years, from licensure as a respiratory care
therapist. Specifies that any board under the Department of
Consumer Affairs is authorized to receive certified records from a
local or state agency to complete an applicant or licensee
investigation and authorizes them to provide those records to the
board. ( Note : This bill will also be heard before the BP&ED
Committee during today's hearing)
SB 306 (Price, 2013). Extends until January 1, 2018, the provisions
establishing the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners,
SB 308
Page 18
Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology and Hearing Aid Dispensers
Board, the Physical Therapy Board of California and the California
Board of Occupational Therapy and extends the terms of the executive
officers of the Physical Therapy Board of California and the
Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology and Hearing Aid Dispensers
Board. This bill also subjects the boards to be reviewed by the
appropriate policy committees of the Legislature. ( Note : This bill
will also be heard before the BP&ED Committee during today's
hearing)
SB 307 (Price, 2013) Extends, until January 1, 2018, the term of the
Veterinary Medicine Board, which provides for the licensure and
registration of veterinarians and registered veterinary technicians
and the regulation of the practice of veterinary medicine by the
Veterinary Medical Board. ( Note : This bill will also be heard
before the BP&ED Committee during today's hearing)
SB 309 (Price, 2013). Extends the term of the State Athletic
Commission, which is responsible for licensing and regulating
boxing, kickboxing, and martial arts matches and is required to
appoint an executive officer until January 1, 2018. ( Note : This
bill will also be heard before the BP&ED Committee during today's
hearing)
7.Support if Amended. Approximately 90 individuals have written
stating a "Support if Amended" position on the bill. These letters
from California interior designers request the following amendments
to the bill:
(a) Uniform stamp/seal acceptance . In order to ensure
uniformity amongst local building officials regarding
acceptance of plans containing a CID stamp for review, there
should be an amendment in the Business and Professions Code and
the Health and Safety Code that establishes CIDs as registered
interior design professionals. It benefits California
consumers by increasing competition and ensuring access for
interior designers to work independently, as they are qualified
to do, in non-structural, non-seismic code-based built
environments.
(b) The addition of the NCIDQ exam as an alternative to the
IDEX California for certification eligibility . Inclusion of
the nationally recognized exam would give our state improved
reciprocity with other regulated states.
(c) More mechanisms should be in place to require transparency
SB 308
Page 19
in the CCIDC . The CCIDC should hold public hearings and accept
public testimony. Currently, there is no public testimony or
comment permitted at CCIDC board meetings, meeting minutes are
released months after the meetings take place, and the minutes
do not actually contain descriptions of decisions made by the
CCIDC. Increased transparency will go a long way in giving the
public and the interior design community an interest and trust
in CCIDC.
It should be noted that as amended, the bill adds BPC § 5811.1 to
require CCIDC to comply with the requirements of the Bagley-Keene
Open Meeting Act. Furthermore, as noted above, as this bill moves
through the legislative process, Committee staff will further work
with stakeholders in an effort to seek acceptable solutions to the
issues regarding the acceptance of an interior design stamp, and the
examinations for certification.
8.Oppose Unless Amended. The Professional Beauty Federation of
California (PBFC) has taken an "oppose unless amended" position on
the bill, arguing for sole oversight of beauty colleges by the BBC
only. PBFC argues that regulation by both BBC and the Bureau of
Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) is costly, ineffective, and
duplicative, and that the latest amendments further adds another
layer of red-tape over all beauty colleges, by giving the BBC new
authority to remove deny or revoke its approval of a school. PBFC
proposes amendments to exempt actions by students as a ground for
denial or revocation, and further asks that the bill be amended to
remove as a ground for denial or revocation of a school's approval
by the BBC the following: failure to comply with the requirements
of the Barbering and Cosmetology Act; failure to comply with the
rules adopted by the BBC; failure to display a license or health and
safety rules in a conspicuous place; and any action or conduct that
would have warranted the denial of a school approval.
9.Author's Amendments. The recommendation for the Board of Barbering
and Cosmetology is to extend the sunset date two years so that the
Committee could again review the regulatory program of the board.
As drafted, the bill extends the sunset date of the BBC four years,
instead of two years. The following will be offered as Author's
amendments in Committee.
On page 9, line 4, strike out "2018" and insert "2016"
On page 9, line 6, strike out "2018" and insert "2016"
SB 308
Page 20
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support:
Guide Dogs of America
State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind
4CID.org
5 individuals
Support if Amended: 89 Individuals
Oppose Unless Amended : Professional Beauty Federation of California
Opposition: None received as of April 24, 2013
Consultant:G. V. Ayers