Contractors State License Board takes neutral position, seeks amendments on muralist licensure bill

The Contractors State License Board voted to take a neutral position, with proposed amendments, on a bill that would exempt certain muralists from contractor licensure after extended public comment and staff briefing.

Board staff told members the bill defines a mural as “a fine work of art…put on by hand,” and is not intended to cover surface patching, structural repairs, or spray-applied coatings. Staff recommended a neutral position while the board and author resolve outstanding questions about scaffolding, subcontracting and workers’ compensation.

The matter drew comments from artists and stakeholders during the public-comment portion of the meeting. Diana Sessoms, public affairs manager with the League of California Cities and a sponsor representative, told the board the bill would not change safety or permitting requirements: “Nothing in this bill stops the permitting process or other safety requirements of the muralists. Nothing stops the requirement that scaffolding be obtained that have to be a licensed contractor or other safety requirements…This is simply the work of the muralist.”

Staff noted three central issues for amendment: (1) the legal definition of a mural and whether typical painting or surface repairs are excluded; (2) whether scaffolding that is affixed to multistory buildings should remain work that requires a licensed contractor; and (3) how workers’ compensation laws would apply to muralists who employ others.

Board member Wright, who identified himself as a plastering contractor, said large mural projects often involve licensed contractors for surface preparation and scaffolding and warned the board not to undercut existing licensees who perform related work. Wright said some mural projects seen in other jurisdictions involved licensed contractors for the prep and scaffolding and that liability coverage, not necessarily licensure, was present in some examples.

After discussion, a motion to take a neutral position with recommended amendments to clarify scaffolding, subcontracting and workers’ compensation was made and seconded. The board took a roll-call vote; the chair announced the motion passed. The board indicated the neutral position would allow staff to continue working with the bill author on specific amendment language.

The board discussion emphasized that the bill, as framed in the staff summary, focuses on distinguishing “fine artwork put on by hand” from general painting and structural work; it does not exempt required permits, building-code compliance or scaffold-safety rules. Staff repeatedly recommended using the neutral stance to negotiate clarifying language that would preserve safety and clarify when contractors’ licenses remain required.

The board did not adopt final statutory language at the meeting; rather, members directed staff to work with the author to refine definitions and to return with proposed amendments. Public commenters and board members urged clarity about when a muralist may lawfully contract directly versus when a licensed contractor must perform or supervise preparatory or scaffold work.

The item concluded with the board instructing staff to continue discussions with the bill’s author and to report back with recommended amendments and analysis.