Committee backs statutory changes to retired‑license rules, eases process for recently expired licenses

The California Board of Behavioral Sciences Policy and Advocacy Committee voted Jan. 24 to direct staff to prepare statutory amendments clarifying retired‑license requirements and to bring the legislative proposal back to the board.

Roseanne Helms, legislative manager, reviewed the proposed amendments and said the retired license — created in 2011 — is currently available only to licensees with a current active or inactive license and that many callers ask to retire licenses they have already allowed to expire. "The proposal, as long as the license is expired within the past 3 years ... we would permit a license that has been expired for up to 3 years to be retired," Helms said, explaining the change would remove administrative burden for those who recently let a license lapse.

Key details in the committee's proposal include: allowing retirement of licenses that expired within the past three years; clarifying what it means to be "subject to disciplinary action" when seeking retired status; specifying required information on retirement and reinstatement applications; restricting a retired license to a single reactivation; specifying continuing education age limits for restoration; correcting fingerprint submission references; and making clear that licenses retired three or more years cannot be restored and require a new application.

Helms said the board currently has about 29,100 retired licensees and that roughly 60 retired licenses have been restored since 2014. The restoration process for a retired license returned to active status includes an application, payment of renewal fee, fingerprinting, and up to 36 hours of continuing education depending on the time out of practice. "The 36 hours that we're requiring is the same for a two‑year renewal," Kristy Shields, legal counsel, added, explaining the continuing education requirement is meant to ensure currency of knowledge for public protection.

Committee chair Chris Jones moved the recommendation directing staff to make discussed and non‑substantive changes and bring a legislative proposal to the board; the motion was seconded and carried on a recorded vote. Christina took the roll and recorded votes as yes for Chris Jones, Abigail Ortega and Kelly Ranasinghe; the motion carried.

Next steps: staff will draft the legislative language for the board’s sunset bill or a separate proposal as advised by the Legislature and return the proposal to the board for consideration as a legislative item.