House bill 4913 would let apprentices count toward architects' licensure experience
Loading...
Summary
Speaker testimony split over House Bill 4913, which would allow apprenticeships to satisfy part of the professional experience requirement for architecture licensure; sponsors say degrees and exams remain required, architecture groups warn the bill lacks detail.
House Bill 4913 would amend section 2004 of Michigan's Occupational Code of 1980 to allow documented apprenticeships to satisfy the professional-experience requirement for architect licensure while keeping existing degree and examination requirements.
The bill's sponsor, Representative Bonac, told the committee the measure "expands flexibility in how that experience can be obtained while maintaining the same high standards for professional practice." He said a candidate "would still be required to meet all the same key licensing requirements, such as holding a professional degree in architecture or equivalent credential approved by the board of architects" and to pass the required examinations.
Supporters framed the change as a workforce and economic development measure. Paige Fultz of the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) told the committee LARA submitted recommendations from its red-tape report and is "working with individual sponsors" toward an official position. Fultz said LARA's recommendations were intended to modernize implementation but that an official agency position was not yet finalized.
Opponents, including Tom Reeder of Michigan AIA, said the bill as drafted would reduce education standards and lacks the necessary detail to ensure public safety. Reeder testified that "reducing the education requirements is not in the interest of the public" and urged further work with the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) and the National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB) to develop any alternative pathways.
Committee members pressed for clarification over whether an apprenticeship could substitute for an academic degree. Representative Grant said the bill's current language referencing a "first professional degree or the equivalent" was unclear; Representative Bonac answered that the bill would still require a professional degree for licensure and that apprenticeship would help satisfy experience requirements but would not replace the degree.
The committee did not take a final vote on the bill during this hearing. Members and witnesses repeatedly urged further drafting and stakeholder engagement to define what an apprenticeship would have to include and how boards would verify equivalency and quality.
Ending: The sponsor and LARA indicated they are continuing discussions with stakeholders, including NCARB and accreditation bodies; opponents asked for more specific guardrails before the Legislature moves forward.
