Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Architect Licensing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee sends HB 114 forward after debate over use of 'architect' and public-safety implications
Summary
HB 114 would remove prohibitions on some uses of the words 'architect' and 'architectural' by non-licensed designers; the committee recommended the bill 8–2 after an extended public discussion that included licensed architects urging retention of current wording and residential designers asking for clarification.
Representative Lee presented HB 114, which removes certain language that currently restricts the use of words such as “architect” and “architectural” by people who are not licensed architects. The committee debated the bill thoroughly with testimony from residential designers, home builders, licensed architects, and the Division of Professional Licensing before passing it out with a favorable recommendation.
Zach Leifson, a residential designer, described being fined (reduced on appeal) after a complaint accused his firm of using “architecture” in marketing. He and other residential designers said they do not present themselves as licensed architects and that the existing prohibition had been used to press complaints that limit business marketing. Several residential designers and the Utah Home Builders Association supported clarifying the law so that designers can use descriptive words such as “architecture” or “architectural” in non‑deceptive contexts.
Licensed architects, represented by Jared Ma and others, strongly opposed removing the statutory language. They argued that licensure demonstrates competency (through accredited education, internships and exams) and that removing the restriction could allow unlicensed providers to offer architectural services beyond single-family exemptions, creating public-safety risks for more complex or commercial projects. The licensed-architect witnesses asked the committee to retain the existing phrasing and warned that the proposed text would diverge from model language used nationally.
Division of Professional Licensing staff said they receive complaints about misuse of architectural terms but did not rate the issue as a top public-safety priority. Committee members questioned whether removing the words would meaningfully increase risk or merely reduce marketing constraints. Representative Kyle and others said residential designers and architects both perform important roles; Kyle noted that homeowners commonly use residential designers for houses and still employ engineers or architects when a stamp is required.
Representative Kyle moved and the committee passed HB 114 favorably by roll call (8–2). Sponsors emphasized they are not seeking to diminish architects’ licensure or expertise but to prevent perceived turf protection and allow descriptive language for residential design businesses. Licensed-architect associations urged denial; the sponsor said he will take concerns into account before floor debate.
