Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Occupational Licensing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances licensing reform to limit use of criminal records in occupational licensing
Summary
Lawmakers advanced a 95-page licensing reform bill (Senate Bill 207) that would require licensing boards to find a direct nexus between past criminal conduct and job duties before denying a license, add a predetermination option and create an appeal process under the Administrative Procedures Act.
A Judiciary committee reviewed and moved forward Senate Bill 207, a multi-part licensing reform measure that sponsors said aims to standardize how occupational boards use criminal records in licensing decisions.
The presenter described SB 207 as a 95-page bill that "deals with how our occupational licensing boards address criminal records," noting it would require a direct and substantial nexus between an applicant's past crimes and the duties of the licensed occupation before a board could deny a license. The sponsor illustrated the principle with an example: "If I have a DUI from 10 years ago, should that keep me from being a plumber?" he asked. "But if I have a theft conviction, should I go work in a long-term care facility?" The bill would require boards to make written findings when denying licenses, offer an administrative appeal under the Administrative Procedure Act and post predetermination procedures on board websites so applicants can check eligibility before investing in training.
Supporters told the committee the bill grew from a multi-stakeholder working group and is backed by the Georgia Justice Project, the Georgia Chamber and other business and faith organizations. The sponsor said the bill's intent is both to prevent unnecessarily barring qualified workers and to increase public transparency about how criminal records affect licensure.
Committee members asked hypotheticals about the nexus test and whether certain convictions would bar particular jobs; the sponsor said the bill leaves determinations to boards while guaranteeing an applicant a predetermination process and an administrative appeal. One member suggested additional cleanup amendments; the sponsor acknowledged a few final non-substantive edits and said he was "happy to answer any questions." Later in the hearing the committee moved SB 207 forward to the next stage and sent it to rules.
The committee also handled other bills that day; earlier the panel had similarly approved Senate Bill 42 by voice vote. At one point during consideration of SB 207 the chair noted competing substitutes and asked parties to meet offline to merge language; the bill was later presented and the motion to pass carried.
Action taken: the committee voted to report SB 207 favorably and to forward the bill to Rules for further consideration; no roll-call vote totals were recorded in the transcript.
