[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6626418,"mediaKeyId","2753555-5f558db9ee818f1858fd303553f7b49f","parentId",2753555,"title","Legislators, law enforcement and stakeholders debate CAMTC’s role amid lawsuits, fee hikes and calls for licensure","audioSeconds",4877,"startMs",8051000,"endMs",12928000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2753555-5f558db9ee818f1858fd303553f7b49f&start=8051&end=12928","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2753555-5f558db9ee818f1858fd303553f7b49f/thumbnail_8051000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6626418/California/Legislators-law-enforcement-and-stakeholders-debate-CAMTCs-role-amid-lawsuits-fee-hikes-and-calls-for-licensure","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6626418-5814854e99492f38fb2bcbcaabf77e6d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770512909&Signature=eHDCuU4lwCQzqkzBBYjru2JFiQoZOE~NTlzIsxs-ZDr2vEv434fHoLaPX8dCGj2Y1zMvHWOAqc~fIfxgVQEWtQ0jX6dGrEl4bagsDug6lCwS4aDdUUJyqxavxTEhjCkkyuxcRJixWqfhE-5mJK9pSKX6U~-Wq8pKzAQ~6VVl89ixW0S5s~80VhNlST6EMwWa3yWHFIXOIKP0mWXXCVz9FxX2Ilhac-rvMJS0adC2oiT~GT1orY87P6J7z8SVdmRX7HAN0Tq579X-1O5J-kRy-75Y55xlQZk7ObBsxLIm2VkxAoT5Bti4CMMhRdkbWEyjE7hEhltKUKxZQ8UMK34kxg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","California State Senate","date","2025-03-24T00:00:00Z","article","The California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC) faced intense scrutiny at the joint sunset review hearing for its voluntary certification model, recent fee and compensation actions, enforcement practices and an ongoing court dispute with a school operator that has been central to public comment.

Board and staff presentation: Mark Dixon, chair of the CAMTC board of directors, and Amos Netanel, CAMTC chief executive officer, described CAMTC as a public‑benefit nonprofit that has certified more than 50,000 massage professionals and taken more than 13,000 disciplinary actions. CAMTC representatives said the voluntary certification model enables rapid collaboration with local law enforcement and local governments and argued licensing by a state board would be less nimble and far costlier for practitioners.

\"I believe the legislature made the right choice when they authorized a certification program for massage professionals rather than licensure,\" CAMTC Chair Mark Dixon said, arguing that licensure would make certification \"far more expensive\" and slow enforcement.

Law enforcement and anti‑trafficking support: Several local law enforcement leaders and anti‑trafficking advocates testified in favor of CAMTC, saying the council's partnerships allow quick enforcement responses and help shut down illicit massage establishments. Jeff Rosen, District Attorney of Santa Clara County, said CAMTC's prompt action in one case led to a parlor closure within a day after police filed criminal charges.

School revocation litigation and public complaints: The hearing included extended, often emotional public comment from students, school owners, applicants and representatives of a single controversial operator (identified in public comment as \"A to Z Health\" and related entities). CAMTC staff said the council has proposed revocation for that school after an investigation that identified alleged transcript and attendance irregularities and other issues (the council cited proposed grounds including \"failure to maintain accurate records\" and \"engaging in fraudulent practices\"). The operator and affected students said they faced repeated, disruptive unannounced visits and inconsistent administrative hearings; they told the committee they have filed litigation and obtained court orders related to CAMTC's actions.

Transparency, fees and CEO compensation: Several committee members and members of the public criticized CAMTC's handling of a November 2022 fee analysis and a subsequent fee increase that raised the two‑year certificate fee. Committee members said CAMTC represented itself as \"solvent\" during the 2022 sunset process yet commissioned a fee study the month after its sunset bill was signed and then moved quickly to seek the maximum fee permitted by statute. CAMTC leaders defended the study and said they worked with an independent consultant to benchmark CEO pay; they described the study, published materials and board deliberations as transparent and publicly posted.

Concerns about due process and hearing procedures: Multiple public commenters complained about proposed school denial and certification‑revocation procedures, claiming inadequate notice and inconsistent hearing officer practices. CAMTC's special counsel explained that proposed denial processes follow statutory procedures that permit applicants to seek judicial review; she described CMTC's criteria for proof of rehabilitation and its practice of using experienced, segregated hearing officers for school and certification matters.

Stakeholder divide: Testimony at the hearing showed a sharp split. Law‑enforcement and many anti‑trafficking service providers urged continuation of CAMTC's model, citing nimble enforcement, interagency coordination and victim‑sensitive processes. School owners, students, and some legal challengers argued that CAMTC had overreached, exercised insufficient transparency and should be replaced by a state licensing board or stricter statutory oversight. Several students said they had completed education and paid fees but remained uncertified; others asked the Legislature to require a state licensure board instead of a voluntary certification model.

What lawmakers asked for: Committee leaders asked CAMTC for follow‑up documents, including board materials, the fee study and the compensation benchmarking analysis, and signaled they expect additional oversight due to the litigation and the mixture of supportive and critical testimony. Chair Ashby and other members said they planned to continue working with CAMTC, local law enforcement and stakeholders to address concerns about student notice, hearing transparency and CAMTC’s accountability.

Public comment highlights: Testimony included support from multiple district attorneys and anti‑trafficking advocates, arguments from school owners and graduates (some saying they had lost income while awaiting certification), and calls from others to convert to a traditional state licensing model. Several speakers asked the committees to require better student notification when schools are under investigation and greater clarity on CAMTC’s internal processes and hearing procedures.

Next steps: Lawmakers asked CAMTC to compile requested materials for the committee record, and several committee members said they will coordinate with legal counsel and staff to evaluate CAMTC’s structure, transparency and statutory status while monitoring the pending court actions.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Joint Hearing Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee and Assembly Business and Professions Committee (1)","oneSentenceSummary","CAMTC defended its voluntary, nonprofit certification model at a contentious joint sunset hearing as law enforcement, anti‑trafficking advocates, school owners and students offered sharply divergent views about fees, transparency and enforcement.","taxTitle","California State Senate, Senate, Legislative, California","taxId",77650,"location","California","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6626422,"Podiatric Medical Board reports regulatory updates, flags small budget and fee pressures",592,7252000,7844000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2753555-5f558db9ee818f1858fd303553f7b49f&start=7252&end=7844","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2753555-5f558db9ee818f1858fd303553f7b49f/thumbnail_7252000.jpg","/articles/6626422/California/Podiatric-Medical-Board-reports-regulatory-updates-flags-small-budget-and-fee-pressures","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6626422-7624fa8a912e9a859cee686340b7c3ce/orig.mp4?Expires=1770512910&Signature=RLpCppjgHfiSpgsjUsILlGpaagi5NBZZWFKPgBgfj5-pV3ExWsKqhOMX6LQVJ7itdkpx2FetQMFuV3Mf5dFijNQpt0l7p0t2YZIVQciQxRQxGpo3z5DyhMMuxWCXJ00-ICK0j2kgQQ72N~mc0JPWX1XsoHNN2vO-HgrvVJmFWK7HMuhIvLJ6hc9d1njxStkLaG6ygYeUDuarKCK0T8rlUZ7k3vzqUbj5nDod6Uy9RkVjhmyhCSq1XT~CPrCr7~o3JRtyGav0SDtvI0gitrSMlyBmIq1kxpf0HEf92yufOgeO-dU7Bqg6Tn8K1bu889JW0EfRnTAT774e1XigA1Wb1Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Doctor Carolyn McAloon, outgoing president of the Podiatric Medical Board of California, told the committees the board has modernized renewal requirements, added residency approvals and used a hybrid meeting model to save costs.

\"We eliminated outdated burdensome license renewal requirements,\" McAloon said, noting legislation the board sponsored and supported (for example, AB 826 and AB 1704 were referenced in testimony) to align podiatric requirements with MD and DO colleagues and modernize certain practice authorities.

Board accomplishments and concerns: The board said it streamlined licensing processes through an automated \"Breeze\" system, added podiatric experts to assist with complaint review, expanded outreach via website and newsletters, and worked on DEI objectives consistent with Governor's Executive Order 1622. Board staff also acknowledged enforcement and administrative costs are growing and that the board has a relatively small population of licensees, which spreads fixed Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) pro rata costs across fewer payers.

Budget and fees: Board representatives urged attention to long‑term sustainability, saying staffing and enforcement expenses driven by inflation and fixed pro rata charges constrain outreach and travel. Board members described careful cost control and said they will report on any proposals to address revenue needs.

Practice and scope questions: Senators and assemblymembers asked about referrals to physical therapy, residency training and whether reimbursement or ancillary provider issues are contributing to practice disparities. The board said it regularly refers patients to physical therapists and plans to discuss an ancillary‑provider/reimbursement item at an upcoming board meeting and report back to the committees.

Next steps: The board committed to follow up with the committee on specific practice‑parity and reimbursement questions and to provide additional materials about fee and enforcement trends as requested by committee staff.","The Podiatric Medical Board outlined licensing and residency updates, new outreach and DEI work, and said it faces sustainability pressures because of a small licensee base and fixed administrative costs.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6626427,"Physician Assistant board urges regulatory flexibility as PA workforce expands",1045,5513000,6558000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2753555-5f558db9ee818f1858fd303553f7b49f&start=5513&end=6558","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2753555-5f558db9ee818f1858fd303553f7b49f/thumbnail_5513000.jpg","/articles/6626427/California/Physician-Assistant-board-urges-regulatory-flexibility-as-PA-workforce-expands","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6626427-f69298680332706fec1f479363367c99/orig.mp4?Expires=1770512910&Signature=IpA7ePKKF12F5ip8Kw6vaZsWFVP9CNTkJ-Rv39YAa~IChyAWD-eJHPR3kyfNzJPpDqKbmX9397UIWFFUHB-v8ck~IGJ3AGGRpm~lem613KmI51HJFm5HG4mIym~zoKFZJkLwgkvm9mOuuAUsxTBkScsHZ7oFv68wmc2-LD~xpPIBFywgRF4lQHAUHoHDjMQvrQJYl9wMwAVAt6h4rbhSgHdCO~u3t-1x9L7rtRGIFMuV44pZyDmotNFnrnQZGVF0fI5fgk5-TOHwb4lmy9pWj6ep-3ClJMqLOQwYNH40SrvzGTYCd7utf6T~6KX9SiiSTTX-qEv0ogOhf6mtO1VHLA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Dr. Vasco Deonkidd (identified in testimony as Vasco Deonkidd), president of the Physician Assistant Board, told the joint sunset hearing that California now licenses roughly 18,200 physician assistants, a 22% increase since the last review, and that the number of accredited PA programs in the state has grown from 16 to 20 with additional applicant programs in the accreditation queue.

\"California is home to the second largest PA population in the nation,\" Dr. Deonkidd said, adding that if all current programs remain operational, \"more than 1,000 PA graduates will enter the workforce annually.\" He and board staff said the board is focusing on modernizing regulation after the passage of SB 697 (implemented Oct. 1, 2024) and on fee adjustments to sustain enforcement activities.

Why it matters: Committee members and public commenters emphasized that PAs are central to expanding access to primary and behavioral health care in rural areas and health‑care deserts. Witnesses and commenters argued that state‑level restrictions — notably the physician‑to‑PA ratio and practice‑agreement paperwork — can inhibit rapid deployment of PAs where they are most needed.

Practice agreements and ratios: The board and multiple public commenters urged statutory flexibility. The board noted a previous statutory change (AB 1070 for home health) that allowed a 1:8 ratio in a narrow context and observed 22 states now have no statutory physician:PA ratio. Board witnesses suggested 1:8 as an example of an approach other states have taken; public speakers, including urgent‑care and community health PAs, argued for eliminating or loosening the ratio to improve access.

Fees and enforcement: The board said enforcement accounts for roughly 50–53% of its annual budget and that it has not adjusted fees for two decades; the board plans regulatory work to increase an initial licensing fee (from $200 toward the statutory cap of $250) and asked the committee to consider fee cap adjustments for long‑term sustainability.

Emerging technology and workforce: Committee members asked about artificial intelligence; the board said it has not received complaints tied to inappropriate AI use but is monitoring developments. Members also discussed workforce development and rural training pipelines, and the board noted Central Valley capacity constraints and encouraged removing regulatory barriers to practice where possible.

Public testimony: Representatives of the California Academy of PAs and practicing PAs testified in favor of regulatory reforms to ratios and practice agreements; the California Medical Association cautioned that statutory protections (ratios/practice agreements) help define supervisory responsibilities and patient safety.

Next steps: The board said it is tracking other states' reforms and will continue studying practice agreements and ratio changes; committee members encouraged stakeholder engagement and asked the board for additional analysis on safety and oversight mechanisms that could accompany ratio reform.","The Physician Assistant Board reported a 22% increase in PAs in California and urged the Legislature to consider changes to physician‑to‑PA ratios and practice agreements to expand access, especially in rural and underserved regions.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6626432,"Board of Psychology draws criticism over proposal to access psychotherapy records without patient consent",1175,4256000,5431000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2753555-5f558db9ee818f1858fd303553f7b49f&start=4256&end=5431","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2753555-5f558db9ee818f1858fd303553f7b49f/thumbnail_4256000.jpg","/articles/6626432/California/Board-of-Psychology-draws-criticism-over-proposal-to-access-psychotherapy-records-without-patient-consent","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6626432-5215ae38ded5d27a79a131cc19b0e601/orig.mp4?Expires=1770512910&Signature=Sxc2LO4iVHz-lZoUyqsgjgsQU0GSTzLnh3cQNIxTq~iyYdVJTGmEjU4~CabPUf74nSKQvoxYqyzZNIhbT3aQDifUnXS17z8KtFdZgc-FQUsh6nFEF7tsUnTzAzhE5n4X7htqHUKcilwK46IkbSokZTVTAX2Ymqc7XIjti13ybMmnScvaBndlckr7yLhmsTJoQ8YYXc2dSFnbfMxtAJ2C3dhP24SdAh0wLvqaEQBPWfE9Ooyg7fAM~WTOsPERDeEfaj5mllUPFF8z7YhxeWBIrz35FFjAm1rZ4Z2dSwsZsFpGy6oG-3~8IqP0oRKc5gTlmp0NYeIeg3ys~6~2G-KAVA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Doctor Leah Tate, president of the California Board of Psychology, described recent regulatory and procedural reforms and raised an issue under debate: a proposed narrow exception to psychotherapist–patient privilege to allow the board to access records for certain investigations.

\"Currently, the records that we receive are kept confidential,\" said Sandra Monterrubio, enforcement manager for the Board of Psychology, who noted the board relies on statutory protections (citing \"Evidence Code 1040\" and \"Government Code 7923.6\" in testimony) and protective redaction practices when cases proceed to prosecution. She said, however, the board sometimes closes cases for \"insufficient evidence\" when a complainant refuses to release records needed to review allegations such as bias in custody evaluations or allegations of sexual misconduct.

Why it matters: The proposal pits two competing priorities: investigators' ability to gather evidence in cases alleging serious professional misconduct, and patients' privacy and autonomy over psychotherapy records. Several professional associations told the committees they oppose weakening privilege; some committee members also expressed concern.

Opposition from professional groups: Testimony included written and oral opposition from the California Psychological Association and the California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists. Dr. Elizabeth Winkelman (California Psychological Association) said the board's staff can already obtain records via subpoena and civil court review, a process that, though time-consuming and costly, \"ensures judicial review to determine if the needs of the investigation outweigh patient privacy considerations.\" She said the board reported only four cases in four years closed because of a patient's refusal to release records, and argued the proposed exception is unnecessary.

Board rationale: Board witnesses said the current subpoena process can take over a year and cost tens of thousands of dollars, and that some complaints (for example, alleging bias in child custody evaluations) require test data and notes to assess whether practice standards were met. The board asked the committee to consider options that would allow investigators access to certain records for investigation while retaining privacy protections in public files.

Other Board of Psychology items: The board also described fee changes to address structural shortfalls, implementation of continuing professional development (CPD) requirements (including four CPD hours devoted to cultural diversity and social justice), and changes to foreign degree evaluation processes for applicants trained outside the United States and Canada. The board reported an increase in registered psychological associates to 1,853 and described changes allowing inactive status without counting toward registration time limits when supervision is disrupted.

Next steps: Committee members signaled the issue of privilege will draw follow-up discussions. Some members said they are not amenable to a statutory change that bypasses judicial review absent clearer evidence the current subpoena process cannot be made more efficient.","The Board of Psychology told lawmakers it sometimes cannot pursue investigations because patients decline to release therapy records; the board proposed an exception to psychotherapist–patient privilege for investigations, drawing sharp opposition from professional groups and lawmakers.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6626438,"Board of Behavioral Sciences pushes telehealth guidance, licensure pathways amid workforce shortages",1934,2266000,4200000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2753555-5f558db9ee818f1858fd303553f7b49f&start=2266&end=4200","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2753555-5f558db9ee818f1858fd303553f7b49f/thumbnail_2266000.jpg","/articles/6626438/California/Board-of-Behavioral-Sciences-pushes-telehealth-guidance-licensure-pathways-amid-workforce-shortages","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6626438-cf33e21d126f50b7062677851866cc4a/orig.mp4?Expires=1770512910&Signature=TKOKKiFFa2n8nhFTuxSMLbnIS~~qcYFxq61ttAsQ-b44FKkaWDH~pVaO1rtHE--KLu1fmyY~2ROAN7cenQX~yngbUXxym2MT2f2w6JL4dhODYlrA8MyYC~Ayt1~745pXek-tAuQvUQ~YwVGO3JKvDeOCVzni-1VKthjhkbntypzKASkwJumGE4q-GLZTMO0zshTo2161YVQ5ejoOyDhmkmr1aKRaNN9U1rLosdZRjLSgQLXFS7B7pEtIomk~agl5bYQiVt5E7KjUZVUmUvmqKnqqBCzLuIHLLuOYsUvqIOpTPR4eHOhQv9rHwIbfjRxlf0NFmnBS5jviPV2Udco32g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Chris Jones, president of the California Board of Behavioral Sciences, told a joint legislative sunset review hearing that the board is focused on workforce development, telehealth protections and easing barriers to licensure.

\"The board regulates 4 critical mental health professions, licensed marriage and family therapists, licensed clinical social workers, licensed professional clinical counselors, and licensed educational psychologists,\" Jones said. He told lawmakers the board's licensing population has grown \"by approximately 25%\" over the last four years and that workforce shortages—especially in rural areas—remain a primary concern.

Why it matters: Lawmakers pressed the board on two recurring tensions: expanding patient access quickly while maintaining consumer protections, and how to adapt supervision and exam rules so new clinicians enter practice sooner. The board described a package of short- and medium-term steps it is pursuing to try to square those goals.

What the board said it is doing: Jones and board staff said the board recently surveyed licensees and registrants about licensure pathways and supervision barriers, produced three new handbooks explaining pathways to licensure, and is finalizing an online registration/application system intended to reduce turnaround times. The board said it is evaluating adoption of a national exam for licensed marriage and family therapists (noted in the hearing as the \"AMF TRB national exam\") to improve portability and reduce costs for multistate licensure.

Telehealth and confidentiality: Committee members raised confidentiality concerns for telehealth and for recordings of sessions. The board said it is increasing outreach, has developed best-practice guidance and requires a minimum of three hours of telehealth law and ethics coursework for applicants and licensees as of July 2023. Steve Sodergren, executive officer of the board, said the board will \"be looking at and delving more deep in deeper into\" electronic confidentiality protections and the interaction of telehealth platforms with privacy laws such as HIPAA.

Supervision and pathway changes: Board members and staff described regulatory changes intended to expand who can supervise associates. The board told the committee that AB 1651 (as referenced in testimony) expanded supervision options by allowing licensed educational psychologists (LEPs) to provide supervision in certain school-based counseling contexts, and that a workforce survey on supervision will be released to gather more data.

Temporary practice and compacts: The board described a temporary practice mechanism used for short-term continuity of care (30-day certifications tied to an existing client) and said it is tracking those registrations electronically to enable enforcement if needed. The board also said it has concerns about interstate compacts, including consumer-protection issues, administrative burden, potential ceding of regulatory authority and committee representation within compact governance.

Public comment and stakeholders: Shanti Ejren of the California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists testified in support of the board's work and urged additional resources and funding to speed application review. Committee members urged continued focus on outreach to clinicians and measures that preserve confidentiality while improving access.

Looking ahead: The board said it will continue to strengthen telehealth rules (including work on safety planning and informed consent), evaluate artificial intelligence's role in behavioral health practice, and pursue short-term regulatory fixes to reduce delays in licensure and supervision.","The California Board of Behavioral Sciences told a joint legislative sunset committee it is prioritizing telehealth privacy, expanded supervision options and licensing pathway reforms to address a roughly 25% growth in its licensee population and ongoing workforce shortages.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Legislators, law enforcement and stakeholders debate CAMTC’s role amid lawsuits, fee hikes and calls for licensure

Podiatric Medical Board reports regulatory updates, flags small budget and fee pressures

Physician Assistant board urges regulatory flexibility as PA workforce expands

Board of Psychology draws criticism over proposal to access psychotherapy records without patient consent

Board of Behavioral Sciences pushes telehealth guidance, licensure pathways amid workforce shortages