Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Social Service Worker Licensing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate rejects bill to tighten social-service-worker licensure after fiscal and access objections
Summary
Senate Bill 91, which sought to clarify bachelor-level licensure requirements for social service workers, failed on a 9–16 roll-call vote after lawmakers questioned cost and rural staffing impacts; sponsor Sen. Julander said the bill does not require master’s degrees and was backed by DCFS.
Senate Bill 91, the Social Worker Licensing Act Amendments, failed its second-reading roll call on Feb. 5, 2002, after a contentious floor debate in the Utah Senate. The motion to move the bill to the third-reading calendar received 9 yeas and 16 nays and will be sent to staff for filing.
Sponsor Sen. Julander told colleagues the bill only clarifies prerequisites for bachelor-level social service-worker licensure and does not alter licensing for master's-level social workers or current licensees. "The purpose of this bill... is to clarify the prerequisites for qualification for licensure as a social service worker and to ensure an adequate knowledge base within the profession," Julander said, adding the change would apply only to bachelor-level social service workers and would not force rural agencies to hire licensed staff.
Opponents raised concerns about cost and workforce effects. Sen. Butters said he opposed the bill and objected to what he described as an implicit shift toward master's-level compensation: "The fiscal note to move them up to pay them as a master's would be in the millions," he said, estimating roughly 1,500 caseworkers might be affected. Sen. Evans and others warned that additional mandated education could strain rural hiring and that on-the-job training is vital.
Julander responded that the bill requires no additional education for existing positions and that mental-health degrees meeting a 39–45 credit threshold—offered at in-state institutions—would satisfy the clarified standard. She said DCFS and county mental-health directors support moving the bill forward and that if problems arise the House could address them.
After debate and a technical announcement that posted bill descriptions were not available because of a cut wire, the Senate held its roll-call vote. The clerk announced the result: "Senate Bill 91, having received 9 yay votes, 16 no votes, 4 being absent, fails." The bill will be filed with staff, ending its immediate progress.
The Senate moved on to other second-reading calendar items. No amendment to SB91 was adopted on the floor during this session.
