Brent’s Blog

Putting it out there

About

Blog about industrial design, modern prefab, eco-friendly stuff, cool EVs and anything else that interests me. I’m a space planner (designer) in central Calif. with over 30 years dealing with it all.

REVISED ADDENDUM: This blog posted alot about SB 1312, an interior design Practice Act in California. So many interior designers did not understand what this legislation was about because it was a very poorly written, ambiguous bill (a “voluntary practice act” — that had penalties for doing interior design work if you are not “registered”). My blog is currently a Pro and Con “public forum” on interior design legislation (mainly for California, as that is where I live). I encourage everyone to post their thoughts and ideas on interior design practice act legislation, particularly in California. It is good to hear both sides even though I am fine with the current law.

2 Comments »

  1. BE INFORMED ON SB#1312 BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE:
    iF YOU HAVE NOT PERSONALY READ THE SB#1312 BILL CAREFULLY DEFINING THE SCOPE OF WORK OF AN REGISTERED INTERIOR DESIGNER YOU ARE NOT INFORMED. DO NOT LET ANYONE “TELL” YOU WHAT IS IN THE BILL. READ IT FOR YOUR SELF. HERE ARE SOME POINTS TO THINK ABOUT: ASID AND Bruce et al are telling the senators that this bill is for commercial only…that this bill will pay for it’s self because 10,000 designers will sign up first year. No where in the new amended bill does it SAY commercial only. There are less than 2,000 state wide that are currently NCIDQ qualified that could sign up first year! Where are the thousands of students going to work for the next FOUR YEARS if there are only 2,000 NCIDQ designers? Look into the bill! Here are my comments on the bill once I read it for the 6th time:
    o it is riddled with misdirection (contradictions on scope of work #5702.f and then look at exemptions #5704.5)
    o important information to be added later (fees = how much; how long will those of us be grand fathering last (#5750.4.b), etc) omissions
    o requirements that are already clearly found in other laws—-duplicate legislation, i.e. architects practice act (copied into #5705), CID bill (2 pages and very clear) and building codes
    o too many MAY’S …the committee MAY….do something like approve an application or not, interpret the bill one way or the other – just doing the education, having experience AND pass NCIDQ does not, under this bill as written, GUARANTEE the committee will accept you. #5730.d …Submits proof satisfactory to the committee… Look at history in other states
    o work we do MAY or MAY NOT be a crime (#5704.6c & #5751) based on the interpretation of the bill by a committee of 3 designers and 4 public members appointment by the governor
    o based on the fees they charge & get, they can hire people to INVESTIGATE violators and ask the local DA to prosecute (#5753)
    o exemptions are all over the bill….hard to understand and therefore again up for interpretation
    o definition of our work hits hard at #5700 …limit the practice of registered interior design to persons who hold design education and experience and successfully pass an interior design examination, as provided in this chapter.

    It is a bad bill because it is WRITTEN BADLY PLUS IS ALREADY COVERED BY THE CID BILL, ARCHITECTS PRACTICE ACT, BUSINESS ETHICS,BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS AND GOOD COMMON SENSE.

    OUR RESPONSIBLE AS INTERIOR DESIGNERS: Remember as designers, our major scope (#5702.f) of work includes working with and within the structure….NOT DEVELOPING, DRAWING OR PULLING PERMITS FOR MAJOR CONSTRUCTION new or remodels. If that is what we do 90% of the time, then we are not interior designers but house designers and/or architects. And if so, such be schooled and named correctly.

    We all “touch” the structure with things we specify and design, ie. add appliances, cabinets & counters to the structure, specific and purchase items for the structure lighting, plumbing, window treatments, wallpaper, painting, wall textures, carpet, wood flooring, tile materials & layout design = which all “could” be interpreted as “code related” and therefore requiring a license EVEN THOU we do not install (contractors) any of the above. Some designers do “draw” and develop space planning concepts, NON STRUCTURAL (#5702.l) work for kitchen and baths and even other interior spaces but our MAJOR responsible is not to design new houses or make changes to load bearing walls, move that responsible back to the architects where it belongs. We work with architects and contractors to make sure that our mutual clients can live IN the space. With regard to construction: we do n ot supervise (some designers will disagree) even thou this bill says we can (#5702.k) if registered…that belongs to the contractors again so it is taking us down a slippery slope and goes against another bill (General Contractor) that is already in place. We “observe” and report back to the architect and/or client. We are not general contractors. This business is very complex and over the years, many of us, because our clients want us to do “everything” have crossed the line with no negative impact. Some have crossed into the contractor’s supervisory role and have been arrested! Does not make it right, but it has happened. If we handle our responsible correctly and take care working with the other trade professionals, we all can work without fear.

    If this bill is passed with the restrictions and POWER of this unknown committee and their team of investigators, it will make the general contracting laws child’s play!

    Also, watch out, the bill says that the committee will be a member of the board for NCIDQ (#5730.1) and can tell the NCIDQ what may be the requirements to take the test IN California. Is there something from NCIDQ that says they are giving over the requirements to the State fo California?

    So if you read some of Bruce’s facts vs fiction Connex blog, he is “almost” correct based on “his interpretation of the bill he probably wrote”.

    Read the bill and then take action TODAY.

    Comment by Diane Kremer ASID PRofessional | May 25, 2008 | Reply


Leave a comment