Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Regulatory Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State Board of Cosmetology declines immediate suspensions for two Las Vegas spas after prostitution citations
Summary
At its May 19 meeting the Nevada State Board of Cosmetology voted to follow staff recommendations and not impose immediate temporary suspensions under NRS 644.855 for NN Day Spa (S709071) and Wonderful Spa (S709602), both cited in prostitution-related incidents. Formal discipline remains possible.
The Nevada State Board of Cosmetology on May 19 voted not to impose immediate temporary suspensions on two Las Vegas cosmetology establishments after each was cited in prostitution-related incidents, board staff and members said at the meeting.
Board staff told the board the citations triggered the emergency-review authority under Nevada Revised Statutes 644.855, which allows the board to impose a temporary suspension lasting up to 15 business days. Staff recommended no immediate temporary suspension in both cases because formal disciplinary proceedings are pending, the board said.
At the meeting board staff identified the first case as NN Day Spa, license S709071, associated with event number LLV2503021928; staff said a female employee was cited for prostitution and that a prior related event (LLV250100080468) is pending formal discipline. Board staff also identified the second case as Wonderful Spa, license S709602, associated with event number LLB250300014127; staff said a female employee was cited for solicitation of prostitution. Both establishments are licensed cosmetology establishments, the board was told.
Board members asked one clarifying question during the review. Board Member Douglas asked whether the cited individuals were licensed cosmetologists or whether only the establishments were licensed; board staff said the licensing applied to the establishments, not the employees.
Following staff presentations the board voted to accept staff recommendations of no immediate temporary suspension for both matters. The first motion — to impose no temporary suspension for NN Day Spa — was moved by the meeting chair (recorded as Madam President) and seconded by Board Member Veronica Herren; the board voted in favor and the motion carried. For Wonderful Spa, Board Member O'Brien moved the motion and Board Member Douglas seconded; the board voted in favor and the motion carried.
Board staff told the licensees present that staff would follow up with instructions and next steps; formal disciplinary proceedings noted by staff remain pending and could lead to further action.
The board took no other action on either license during the meeting and did not open closed-session deliberations on the character or competence of the individuals involved.
