Committee introduces Barber and Cosmetology sunset bill after DORA recommends 11‑year continuation

The House Business Affairs and Labor Committee on Thursday voted to introduce a draft sunset bill for the Barber and Cosmetology Act after hearing the Department of Regulatory Agencies’ review, which recommended continuing the statute for 11 years.

Saul Larson, analyst with the Colorado Office of Policy Research and Regulatory Reform, told the committee the Act regulates five practitioner types — barbers, cosmetologists, aestheticians, hairstylists and nail technicians — and that the office reviewed a five‑year snapshot showing more than 71,000 licensees and roughly 580 registered businesses in fiscal 2023–24. Larson said the most common complaints were unlicensed practice and substandard care and that DORA’s review supports continued regulatory oversight to protect public health and safety.

The department recommended the General Assembly continue the Act for 11 years (until 2037), repeal the standing advisory committee that meets infrequently, update dated statutory definitions (for example, replacing references to "hair dyeing" or "bleaching" with industry terms such as "hair lightening" and "coloring"), clarify exemptions (examples cited included funeral-service providers who work on deceased persons, certain cosmetic tattooing that mimics makeup, theatrical hair and makeup, and persons preparing at‑home hair color for consumer use), and make the statute gender‑neutral.

Two witnesses who testified supported targeted reforms. Eileen Kanter, a licensed cosmetologist, business owner and director of a registered beauty apprenticeship program, urged a narrowly tailored provisional license for apprentices who have completed required hours but are awaiting state board exams. "Once they complete all required hours they are legally required to stop working entirely while they wait to take and pass their state board licensing exam," Kanter said, calling the current gap a period of "forced unemployment" that disproportionately affects career changers and people rebuilding their lives after incarceration. Kanter described a provisional credential as "narrow, supervised and time limited" and said it would preserve standards while preventing trained apprentices from being sidelined.

Laura Kelly of the Institute for Justice urged the committee to adopt DORA’s recommendation to exempt "safe niche services" such as makeup application and blow‑dry styling. Kelly cited other states' approaches — "9 states exempt blow dry styling, including neighboring Arizona, Utah and Oklahoma, and 17 states exempt makeup artistry from licensure" — and added that cosmetology school costs ("on average $17,500") and low on‑time graduation rates make full licensure burdensome for people seeking to provide limited services.

Committee members asked about scope of practice, inspection frequency and safety. Larson said inspectors are limited and inspections are largely complaint‑driven but can be proactive. Monica Sutherland of the Division of Professions and Occupations clarified that straight‑razor shaving is within barber scope and is not within cosmetologist scope (cosmetologists may trim but not shave beards).

After testimony and questions, the vice chair moved to introduce the draft sunset bill "as drafted." The motion passed on a roll‑call vote recorded as 11 in favor, 0 opposed, with two members excused. Chairwoman Ricks said she and Representative Richardson will carry the bill as co‑primaries; the bill now will be assigned to a committee of reference and may return to this committee for amendments.

The committee’s action sends the recommended continuation and statutory changes to the bill drafting and committee‑of‑reference process; any amendments to address the apprenticeship testing gap or other points would be offered when the bill returns for further committee consideration.