Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Occupational Licensing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would remove national‑association requirement for massage-board appointments amid board makeup debate
Summary
House Bill 7-20 would eliminate an existing provision that ties professional board seats on the Board of Massage Therapy to membership in national associations; the Department of Labor and Industry backed the change as a recruitment fix, while multiple massage therapists and associations opposed it as disrupting a consensus‑based board balance.
Representative Nellie Nicholl introduced House Bill 7-20, saying the measure would open eligibility so more qualified massage therapists can compete for board seats by removing a requirement tying board membership to national association membership.
Sarah Swanson, commissioner of the Department of Labor and Industry, testified the existing statutory restriction is unique among Montana's 29 occupational boards and has made appointing and filling seats difficult for governors’ offices. "The massage therapy board is the only board across 29 in Montana that has a unique limitation... Why does individuals belong to a national association? Very often it's for 2 reasons... We really have a hard time understanding why it matters where a business owner gets their insurance and why that should impact their ability to serve on the board," Swanson said.
Swanson told the committee Montana had about 2,115 licensed massage therapists at the end of 2024 and said the restriction — which limits professional-member appointments by association affiliation — reduces the pool of eligible appointees.
Supporters in the room included local massage therapists who said the restriction is an unnecessary barrier; Barbara Callahan, a Helena practitioner, told the committee she belongs to both national associations and membership “has no impact on my qualifications.”
Opponents, including Deborah Shorrock and several other Montana massage therapists and representatives of a volunteer Business League for Massage Therapy and Bodywork, urged the committee to preserve the existing allocation. "HB 7 20 is not going to change anything other than disrupt the balance and fair representation of the professional members on the board," Shorrock said, adding the current arrangement was reached through consensus during initial licensure negotiations.
Opponents argued about representation of unaffiliated therapists (roughly 47% of licensees according to testimony) and warned the change could give an outsized voice to one association. Several speakers said the department's interactions with the board and appointment timing, not the association rule, were the real problems.
The committee took testimony from both sides and asked the commissioner for historical appointment data. The hearing record shows divided views within the profession and a request that the department provide a history of board makeup for committee review.
