Getting RID of ID Regulation Pushback

Or at least minimizing the cries of disenfranchised interior designers.
PROFESSIONALINTERIORDESIGNER has been bantering about the blogosphere lately with anybody willing to discuss the issue of interior design regulation. I gotta say it’s a thin crowd. None the less I have been enlightened by the ways in which we as a profession see regulation and, as my previous 250 posts point out, how the general public, vis-a-vis our lawmakers, sees interior design regulation.

I am now able to boil the justification for the entire effort into two (Okay 3) words; Respect and Practice Rights.

Pitching a New Mantra….AGAIN.

Well it’s been about 2 years since I trotted out this proclamation and while there has been some positive movement toward this vision….we are still singing too many songs from too many hymnals. It’s time to re-post;


ONE VOICE: We need to have one professional organization that is devoted to serving the best interests of vetted interior design professionals by continually raising the standards of professional status, advocating for our legal/political rights in a unified, cohesive manner, and promoting our unique value to society. The old adage that there is strength in numbers does not count if we don’t have a clear direction.

ONE CREDENTIAL: We need a brand identity that clearly communicates our unique value to society and demands the respect that we all have earned. And no this brand is not “Interior Design” nor are we merely “Interior Designers”. Since anyone with a pulse can claim that title it does not make sense to try to make it our own unique brand- does it?

ONE MISSION: To allow us to compete as equals to, or independent of, other licensed design professionals.

What part of that is unclear? Not a rhetorical question.

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- and what happens in California does not stay in California.

Unfortunately the interior design profession in California is literally an island


Seems the California Chapter of the American Institute of Architects has drunk the entire jug of Interior Design Protection Council Kool-Aid;

“Interior Design Practice Act
So far, this bill has taken the majority of our lobbying time. It is still early in the year, and our time soon will be divided among many issues, including our sponsored bills, but an active coalition has formed in opposition to AB 2482 and is meeting with the author, legislators who sit on the Assembly Business & Professions Committee, where the bill has been assigned, and the Secretary of the State and Consumer Services Agency.

The coalition includes the National Kitchen & Bath Association, the Community College League of California, several community college districts, the California Building Officials, the California Legislative Coalition for Interior Design, Home Depot, Lowes, the California Retail Association, and several other groups.

AB 2482 creates a practice act for interior designers and limits who can engage in this newly defined practice. It would not stop architects from legally engaging in interior design, of course. It is, however, an attempt by a small group of interior designers to use the power of the state to limit who can provide interior design services.

Additionally, for a reason we cannot understand, it places restrictions on who can own an architectural firm and, if an architectural firm has a non-licensed individual as a co-owner, places the architectural firm under the regulatory authority of the proposed Interior Design licensing board.

More to come in the next issue of Relevance”

As Mr. Christian noted ” It would not stop architects from legally engaging in interior design, of course.” Then PROFESSIONALINTERIORDESIGNER must ask- WHY DO YOU CARE?

Who Let the Dogs Out?

I love discussions like this one on Houzz;

Not only do we have to defend our right to practice against our peers and competitors we have a more substantial effort to combat misinformation on the general public’s part- you know….the very people we purport to protect and to serve. California AB 2482 does not stand a chance.


So the NKBA has issues with California AB 2482 which would allow designers to become “registered” with the state.

Not sure who is parroting who but the IDPC is making similar claims of anti-competiveness.

Both expend a lot of breath claiming how the proposed legislation will spell doom to every carbon based bi-pedal oxygenated humanoid in California yet they do not explain how the bill will affect those interior designers who simply choose not to become “registered”- because it really doesn’t affect them. Much like the current “certified” designer voluntary quasi-regulation. IT DOES NOT MATTER.

Don’t want to practice as a “registered” interior designer? Then don’t. Simple.


The California AIA is posturing to combat efforts by California Interior Designers to push for an interior design practice act…..

“Interior Design Practice Act
Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore Fiona Ma has introduced AB 2482 to create a Practice Act for Interior Design. This is a proposal that is introduced in California every three to five years; it is part of a nationwide effort led by the American Society of Interior Designers and others who advocate providing interior designers the same legal recognition given to architects and engineers.

The AIACC has historically opposed Interior Design Practice Act efforts, and instead supports the existing state-sanctioned private certification program available to interior designers who meet the education, experience, and examination requirements spelled out in state law.

The AIACC is just beginning its detailed review of AB 2482 and will be working with other groups who in the past have expressed strong reservations to this type of proposal, including the large segment of interior designers who would be economically harmed by this proposal.”

It is PROFESSIONALINTERIORDESIGNER’s marginal opinion that California has the most convoluted interior design regulation (if you can call it that) in the Nation. One would think that with the number of interior designers in California that they would be on the forefront of regulation the practice of ID…..think again O.J.

So it will be interesting to see how far California Assembly Bill AB2482 gets this round.

Stay tuned.