ID REGULATION: WHICH WAY TO THE FRONT?

I appreciate Robert Nieminen’s support of the ongoing effort to regulate the profession of Interior Design . I agree with all of his points regarding the unification of the profession and the efforts by the anti-regulation contingent to stop any and all ID legislation.  As far as Utah’s new ID practice law we can claim it as a battle won but I am concerned by his broad brush definition of “Interior Design Laws of North America” as represented by this map (source unknown-attribute to Interiors & Sources) Sorry the resolution is limited.

I_0316_robblog2

(Attributed to Interiors & Sources?)

PROFESSIONALINTERIORDESIGNER would like to see such graphic depictions of our efforts to regulate the profession truly represent those laws that allow qualified Interior Designers to practice to the fullest extent of their abilities.  That includes the ability to sign and seal documents to legally obtain building permits as necessary to fully own one’s design work.  While it looks more impressive to apply a color to all states with some form of Interior Design law or act in place, when you actually consider our right to work as peers with or independent of other licensed design professionals in each of these states the battle field is far less impressive.  And let’s not forget our allies in Canada who have their own similar battles.

LegislativeMap

Color in Utah green-yeah! But read the Utah bill and consider that it does sanction the title “Commercial Interior Design” and the ID scope is limited. A victory none the less.

We have to stop depicting any and all ID legislation as legislation that is good for the entire profession (it isn’t) one, and two, we have stop looking at ID Regulation as nothing but a means to distinguish us from the unqualified decorator wannabe’s. That is a battle that was lost years ago.  Sure it makes us feel good to see all of those states colored in….but is it a true assessment of the battle?

So if we are going to look at this as a “war” we need to be working from the same battlefield map with a cohesive strategy to win our right to work at a minimum.  Otherwise what is the point?

UTAH PASSES COMMERCIAL INTERIOR DESIGN PRACTICE BILL!

Utah Senate Bill 0117  which allows state certified Commercial Interior Designers to submit signed and sealed drawings (within limited scope) in order to obtain building permits in that state was approved today.  Yay!

This is the first substantial piece of ID legislation to be approved in several years.

Kudos to IDEAL Utah and their lobbyist Amy Coombs for creating the proper strategic alliances and educating/swaying/cajoling Utah policymakers.   This was the result of a monumental investment of time, effort and perseverance.

With that a precedent has been established.  Utah SB0117 codifies the title “Commercial Interior Designer”.  PROFESSIONALINTERIORDESIGNER finds the savvy semantics interesting.  As far as I know Oregon was the first state ID coalition to draft ID legislation using that particular title nuance.  It makes sense to help distinguish our work  in the regulated ID realm…but.

Are we ready to dissect the profession in this manner?  Will we evolve into Commercial Interior Designers and Residential Interior Designers or just Commercial Interior Designers and Interior Designers (my vote)?  Will we need to create Schools of Commercial Interior Design?  Will CIDA need to become CCIDA?  Will the NCIDQ Examination need to become the NCCIDQ Examination? Will this minimize the appeal of the title “Interior Architect”?

Do I ask too many questions?