Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legislation And Compacts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BSRB says House Bill 256 unlikely this year; board advances compact background-check plan and flags AI licensing questions
Summary
Board staff told members that House Bill 256 (a proposed addiction-counselor license) is unlikely to move forward this session; the board reported progress on KBI background-check approvals for counselor compact participation and opened a preliminary discussion about regulation or licensing of AI mental-health agents.
The Kansas Behavioral Sciences Regulatory Board concluded at its March 9 meeting that House Bill 256 — a proposal to create a new addiction-counselor license — is unlikely to advance this legislative session after stakeholder negotiations and a postponed hearing.
David F, the board's executive director, told members the board had weighed in with concerns about the bill’s drafting when it was introduced because it lacked clear educational and training qualifications. He said the hearing was canceled to allow advocates, the board and other stakeholders to pursue an alternate proposal, but staff and advocates have so far been unable to reach consensus. "As of right now, since that bill has not had a hearing, it is unlikely the contents of that bill would be unable to move forward this year," David F said.
The board also received an operational update on a separate but related item: preparing to run fingerprint-based background checks with the Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI) to support the professional counseling multi-state compact. David F said the board expects KBI approval "in the next couple months" and that the initial rollout will be an opt-in process for clinical professional counselors seeking compact eligibility.
Board members noted workforce shortages as part of the broader background for the discussions. Several state compact updates showed that three states were already accepting counselors into the compact and Kansas staff emphasized the background-check step as the key technical hurdle to go live.
A different strand of the meeting turned to artificial intelligence. Multiple advisory committees recommended that if practitioners use AI in client care they should: (1) provide informed consent that explains how AI is used; (2) ensure confidentiality and secure storage consistent with standards of care; and (3) give clients an opt-out from AI use. Board members cautioned that federal privacy rules such as HIPAA overlay the issue and asked staff to research other states’ legislation and report back.
The board did not adopt a licensing pathway for AI systems at this meeting but asked staff to collect examples of state action and to return with research for future discussion.
