Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Board Governance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Dental Hygiene Board president: board opposed AB 1952 unless amended; education committee to review violation rubric

Dental Hygiene Board of California · March 27, 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

President Joanne Pacheco reported the board is developing a violation-and-fine rubric for hygiene educational programs and said the board voted in a March 13 teleconference to 'oppose unless amended' Assembly Bill 1952, arguing oversight of internationally trained dentists belongs with the Dental Board of California for consumer-protection reasons.

Joanne Pacheco, president of the Dental Hygiene Board of California, opened the board’s March 27 meeting by summarizing recent activities and setting priorities for consumer protection.

Pacheco said she continues to co‑chair a task force charged with drafting a violation‑and‑fine rubric for dental hygiene educational programs that fail to meet California law and Commission on Dental Accreditation standards; she said the draft will be taken up by the education committee for review and possible approval.

She also reviewed a March 13 teleconference in which the board "voted to take the position of oppose unless amended" on Assembly Bill 1952. Pacheco said the board’s concern is that oversight and licensing of dentists and certain pathways for internationally trained dentists should remain with the Dental Board of California "from the perspective of consumer protection." The board’s position, she said, asks that any pathway proposed in AB 1952 include oversight by the Dental Board of California.

Pacheco closed her report by noting ongoing communications with executive staff and by reiterating that board discussions and actions must be guided by consumer protection rather than profession‑only concerns.

The education committee was scheduled to consider the draft rubric during the committee session following the full board proceedings.