Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Professional Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Contentious sunset debate: massage council reauthorization draws calls for state licensing board and process reforms
Summary
Assemblymember Berman asked lawmakers to reauthorize the California Massage Therapy Council for four years while adopting technical reforms; supporters called CAMTC a cost‑effective certifying body, while critics urged creating a formal state licensing board because of alleged due‑process and transparency problems.
Assemblymember Berman presented AB 1504 as a four‑year reauthorization of the California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC) with a package of technical reforms developed during the sunset review process. He said the bill reflects stakeholder work and recent amendments intended to address outstanding concerns.
CAMTC representatives described the council’s role certifying practitioners and overseeing education approval. Terry McHale of a contract firm representing CAMTC and Lisonbee Siegel, special counsel to CAMTC, thanked the author and staff but also identified several areas where the council sought further technical fixes. Supportive testimony from professional groups — including the American Massage Therapy Association — said they favored either a carefully reformed CAMTC or, in the longer term, full licensure; many individual certified therapists testified that CAMTC certification is important for practice uniformity.
Several witnesses urged a different path. Representatives of A to Z Health Massage School testified that they and many students face protracted investigations, contested hearing processes and delayed certifications; they urged the Legislature to sunset CAMTC and create a formal state licensing board to provide statutory due process and public oversight. Testimony included allegations of long administrative delays, contested telephone hearings with no video record, and an ongoing court enforcement dispute involving CAMTC.
Committee members noted both perspectives. Supporters cited cost‑effective, statewide certification and urged careful drafting to avoid unintended consequences; critics argued that repeated governance and due‑process complaints mean the council should not simply be reauthorized without substantive change. Questions also focused on proposed Public Records Act (PRA) language, executive compensation, volunteer board burdens and ensuring protections for trafficking survivors.
The committee took the motion to move AB 1504 out of committee; members recorded votes and the item was left on call for additional members. The hearing record shows ongoing disagreement about whether reauthorization should proceed or whether a statutory licensing board is required; sponsors and critics said they would continue negotiations and asked for additional legislative oversight and clarifications in subsequent committees.
