Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Cosmetology Regulation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

House package would let cosmetology apprentices perform shampoo services, ease monthly reporting to LARA

House Regulatory Reform Committee · January 23, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Two bills (HB4908, HB4909) sponsored by Representative Regis would allow cosmetology apprenticeship students to provide shampoo services after 350 hours of instruction and pause routine monthly attendance reporting to LARA, while retaining hour-tracking for the 1,500‑hour licensing requirement.

Representative Regis introduced two bills aimed at reducing licensing paperwork and aligning apprentices with cosmetology school rules. HB4908 would permit cosmetology apprenticeship students to perform shampoo services after completing at least 350 hours of instruction; sponsors said the change creates parity with cosmetology schools. HB4909 would remove a routine monthly attendance submission to LARA, allowing the agency to request attendance records only as needed while apprentices and schools would still log hours toward the 1,500‑hour total needed for a cosmetology license.

Supporters told the House Regulatory Reform Committee the measures are straightforward deregulation intended to reduce administrative burden without weakening safety or training standards. "This just allows cosmetology apprentices... to be able to perform shampoo services under certain conditions," Representative Regis said, adding that the bill preserves training requirements and mirrors existing school practice. Committee members sought and received confirmation that the bills cover barbers and cosmetologists alike.

No formal vote was taken during the hearing. The bills were presented and discussed; committee members asked clarifying questions about scope and parity. The committee clerk later returned the record to these bills for further action at a subsequent time.