California Puts The Brakes on Interior Design Practice Act

Yesterday California Assembly Bill 2482 which would have established a registered interior design practice act was suspended in the Assembly Committee on Business, Professions, and Consumers evidently as a courtesy to allow the bill sponsor, Assemblywoman Fiona Ma a chance to amend and edit the bill to address concerns raised by those opposed to such a bill. Basically the supporters of AB2482 raised the white flag rather than push the bill forward in the face of stronger opposition. 

Why should we care?  

Good question. My simple answer is because California is the most populous state in the Union and has the most interior designers particularly if you include the innately qualified like this- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2130695/Justin-Timberlake-turns-interior-designer-launch-new-home-line.html?ito=feeds-newsxml and what happens in California does not stay in California. 

Unfortunately the interior design profession in California is literally an island unto its own. However, it is a perfect beta site for the effort to regulate, via state government powers, the practice of Interior Design. Those that oppose the government regulation of Interior Design have created a private certification process by which designers that are so inclined can become “Certified”. Here is their explanation;

ABOUT CCIDC
Background on The California Council for Interior Design Certification
CCIDC was established in January 1992 as the organization responsible for administering the requirements of the Certified Interior Designers Law under Chapter 3.9, Section 5800 of the California Business and Professions Code.

After several years of legislative efforts by interior design groups and by the California Legislative Coalition for Interior Design a new law went into effect on January 1, 1991 outlining the parameters and responsibilities of work that an interior designer can perform. Along with these guidelines the listing of “Certified Interior Designer” was added to the California Business and Professions code, providing an official designation for interior designers who meet the education, experience and examination requirements as outlined by the California Council for Interior Design Certification.

  • Under the Certified Interior Designers Law, Certified Interior Designers are qualified by the CCIDC upon evidence of a combination of interior design education and/or experience and passage of a designated examination.
  • Only the CCIDC can determine eligibility to be a Certified Interior Designer in the State of California. Designers who meet the education, experience and examination criteria of the CCIDC Board are allowed to use the “Certified Interior Designer” title and are recognized in the State of California.
  • Upon qualification, the Certified Interior Designer will be identified by an individual number which will appear on a certificate, a stamp with which to identify interior design nonstructural and non-seismic drawings and documents, and an identification card.
  • Certified Interior Designers, as mandated by the State of California, have met high standards of qualification and have agreed to uphold a strict code of ethics and conduct.

So for 20 some years California has had a voluntary self-regulatory process for its Interior Designers. PROFESSIONALINTERIORDESIGNER suspects that it was implemented to spite the pro-regulation effort as championed by ASID.

So CCIDC http://www.ccidc.org/index.html is the private regulatory entity. Their grassroots coalition is the CLCID http://www.clcid.org/ …got that?  So if you have been reading with me so far you may note the sponsors of CLCID are the very same organizations that steadfastly oppose government regulation (A.K.A. licensure) of interior design across the nation. In fact you could say that their goal is to de-professionalize the ID profession. So the Interior Design bed in California is a crazy mix of bedfellows and they really don’t care about the other 49 states and territories. 

But hey it is after all California- BUT PROFESSIONALINTERIORDESIGNER does see merit in the self-regulatory process. There is some merit here and it deserves our consideration. See this discussion on this blog under comments for instance https://professionalinteriordesigner.com/2012/04/16/much-ado-about-nothing-redux-part-deux-redo/

California Assembly Bill 2482 was championed by the Interior Design Coalition of California  http://www.idc-ca.org/ vis-a-vis ASID. Here is a good dialog explaining their position on government regulation of interior design http://www.linkedin.com/groups/IDCC-Interior-Design-Coalition-California-4296228?trk=myg_ugrp_ovr there are obviously some good points to be considered here.

If we thought the recent legal and political battles in Florida were convoluted and contentious California represents the Battle of the Bulge in regard to the use of the government to sort out the qualified interior designers from the not. PROFESSIONALINTERIORDESIGNER is determined to sort it out and present the facts on both sides of the issue so that if there is anything from this orgy that we can use to move the entire profession forward I think we need to consider it. More to follow- I’m off to grade NCIDQ exams…..again.

8 thoughts on “California Puts The Brakes on Interior Design Practice Act

  1. STOP RIGHT HERE MIKE – YOU DON’T KNOW THE HISTORY OF CALIFORNIA. CERTIFICATION WAS CREATED BY THE STATE, AS ALL WE COULD GET AT THE TIME. IT WAS NOT, REPEAT, NOT CREATED IN A VACUUM BY INTERIOR DESIGNERS WHO OPPOSED GOVERNMENT REGULATION. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT??????

    WHEN CERTIFICATION WAS ESTABLISHED, ASID WAS A PROMINENT MEMBER OF THAT COALITION. CCIDC IS NOT ‘SELF-REGULATORY’ – IT IS UNDER THE STATE BECAUSE IT IS IN B&P CODE AND IS REGULARLY REVIEWED BY THE STATE AND IT BEHAVES THE WAY THE STATE WANTS IT TO.

    IF YOU CAN’T GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT, YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS WRITING ABOUT IT. TAKE SOME RESPONSIBILITY HERE AND BE A GOOD JOURNALIST INSTEAD OF PERPETRATING LIES.

  2. Calm down- THANKS for the historical perspective. But that does not answer why ASID supports government regulation of the very same profession you claim is already regulated?

    Please regal me with your ID regulatory acumen.

  3. It’s ALL about the NCIDQ. ASID wants it to be the ONLY exam in California and if it can’t be the only one, then it should be the “top exam” for the “state run board”, which by the way they perceive is oh, so *prestigious (as in inspiring respect and admiration; having high status. And oh, let’s not forget money. The more exclusive you are, the more jobs you will get. After all, “we’re licensed”, and that designer over there isn’t. Listen: there is NOTHING stopping anyone from taking the NCIDQ in California. Test for it any time. No one will stop you. You want a legal title and a stamp? Get Certified.

    Re history, ppgs 14 and 15 sums it up pretty well.
    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_2451-2500/ab_2482_cfa_20120416_102405_asm_comm.html

    Background . There is a lengthy and at times tumultuous history
    regarding interior design in California. SB 153 (Craven),
    Chapter 396, Statutes of 1990 established an Interior Designer
    Practice Act. Eventually, the bill was amended to instead
    establish title protection for “CIDs” who obtain a stamp from a
    private nonprofit organization. The stamp certifies that the
    interior designer has provided the interior design organization
    with evidence of meeting certain qualifications including
    examination, education and experience requirements. After SB
    153 passed, the CCIDC was established in 1992, to issue
    certifications under the law.

    AB 1096 (Romero) of 1999 would have created a practice act and
    established an independent Board of Interior Design for the
    purpose of registering interior designers. The bill would have
    repealed the private certification program for interior
    designers and established a nine-member Board of Interior Design under DCA to register interior designers. AB 1096 would have
    shifted the funds, and transferred files and data from the CCIDC
    to the newly established board. The measure was vetoed by the
    Governor stating, “This bill creates a new regulatory program
    for an industry where there is no demonstrated consumer harm.
    The creation of a new regulatory program and new state agency at a time when the Legislature is eliminating licensing boards and
    streamlining regulatory programs is inappropriate.”

    EVEN IN 1999 the state recognized. No demonstrated harm. = No need for state board. You would think designers would be thrilled with that kind of track record. But no, they want everyone to think they are as potentially dangerous as plastic surgeons.

  4. So here is how I see it;
    California interior designers implemented, and continue to support, a regulation model that suits them and only them.
    When will you do what is right for the entire profession?

    That is not a rhetorical quesiton.

  5. The hysterical woman above, has it mostly right, not in tone, but in substance. The entire interior design profession was on board with the creation of CCIDC, When the State of California mandated that CCIDC provide all interior design examinations that met their (California’s) Psychometric Standards, CCIDC hired a consultant psychometrician that reviewed all known interior design examinations at that time. His findings concluded that three exams met the State’s Psychometric Standards – the NCIDQ, CQRID and both NKBA exams. That is when Mr Toad’s wild ride began. Through further investagation, it was descovered that NCIDQ did not meet an additional State Standard for being able to take a qualifying exam without education.
    After several years of trying to play referee, CCIDC created the IDEX – California Examination, a California Building Code (CBC) based test.

    The “fit hit the sham” and ASID bailed from the California Legislative Coalition for Interior Design(CLCID) a group they helped form, with IIDA following. (You have to remember, ASID use to own the NCIDQ, before IBD (now IIDA) made them spin-it-off) That left CLCID in the hands of NKBA, and IDS. NKBA as a Trade Organization, is in the business of protecting their mostly retail and cabinet shop members.

    The State of Californis is some 25 Billion dollars in debt, laying off first responders and educators, it has no appetite to form a state board that has an estimated start-up cost of 5 million dollars.

    CCIDC was the first private/ public regularity board partnership with the State, there are four others now. And, the State is studying others. I believe we can strengthen the current statute, at no cost to the public, and get what the whole profession wants.

    Michael, as for “When will you do what is right for the entire profession?”
    The evolution of the interior design profession is not a linaer progression of events, perhaps California has the model for the future of all professinns?

  6. Very good and informative reply Rayne. I appreciate it.
    Like I said what happens in California does not stay in California.
    Should be an intereresting ride. Hope it ends in my lifetime though.

  7. Don’t hold your breath!
    Once you “jump on the back” State based regulation, it’s never over!
    Ask Florida or Alabama.

    Are we having fun yet?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s