Legislature(2017 - 2018)ADAMS ROOM 519
04/11/2018 01:30 PM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB384 | |
| SB32 | |
| HB384 | |
| SB32 | |
| HB306 | |
| SB4 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 339 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 32 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 4 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 306 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 384 | TELECONFERENCED | |
CS FOR SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 4(FIN) am
"An Act relating to the Board of Barbers and
Hairdressers; relating to a limited license to
practice non-chemical barbering; relating to a license
to practice hair braiding; relating to the Department
of Environmental Conservation; and providing for an
effective date."
4:14:08 PM
RACHEL HANKE, STAFF, SENATOR PETER MICCICHE, reviewed the
bill. She reported that the bill allowed the board to
enforce existing Department of Environmental Conservation
(DEC) regulations and issue licenses for hairdresser and
barber shops. The bill also created a new lower level
licenses for braiding and non-chemical barbering allowing
for less than 1,650 hours of training which was the current
requirement.
SENATOR PETER MICCICHE, SPONSOR, thanked the committee for
hearing the bill. He explained that the bill accomplished
five things. He maintained that the bill was important
because the state had overstressed and overregulated people
in the barbers and hairdresser industry. He listed the five
goals of the legislation. The number of hours required
under the current structure was costly and non-chemical
barbers and braiders could not afford the license. He
delineated that students or practitioners were required by
statute to conspicuously display their licenses, however
the shop owner was not. The inequity led to employees being
fined because the shop owner's license had lapsed. The bill
required the shop owner to conspicuously display the shop
license. He noted that DEC was no longer providing shop
certifications due to budget reductions. The bill
authorized a self-certification process regulated through
the Board using DEC standards. He repeated that SB4 created
two new license types: braiding and non-chemical barbering.
He reported that non-chemical barbering only used scissors
and clippers and their training hours would be dramatically
reduced. The braiding license would require 35 hours of
training. Additionally, SB 4 separated tattooing and
permanent cosmetic coloring into two separate licenses.
4:18:49 PM
Vice-Chair Gara OPENED public testimony.
4:20:01 PM
DARAE CREWS, DARAE'S SALON and SPA, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), spoke in support of the bill. She read the
testimony on behalf of two practitioners of who performed
permanent coloring or microblading. The practitioners had
many hours of education and experience. The practitioners
indicated that microblading was not permanent and not a
tattoo. They elucidated that the ink was inserted in the
basil layer of the skin versus the dermal layer. They
explained the instruments and techniques used for
sanitation and patient safety that included a patient
intake. They shared their personal stories of how they
became interested in the profession and where they received
their training. Ms. Crews explained that both testifiers
travelled to Texas to attend a school for microblading.
They returned to Alaska, opened a shop and practiced
microblading. A state investigator forced the shop's
closure declaring the practice illegal. She claimed that
the practitioners had never found any statute or regulation
for microblading and believed they were operating within
the law. She asked for help on behalf of the practitioners
and supported the legislation.
4:29:12 PM
Ms. Crews believed people who had been legally trained with
many hours of experience should not have any additional
educational requirements for licensure.
Representative Wilson asked Ms. Crews to submit the
testimony electronically. Ms. Crews agreed.
4:31:12 PM
JEREMY PRICE, STATE DIRECTOR, AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY,
thanked the committee for hearing the bill and spoke in
support. He believed that the bill provided more
opportunities for small business owners. He shared that
many Alaskans were experiencing economic hardship and the
bill went a long way to give Alaskans an opportunity to
operate a small business a support themselves financially.
4:32:29 PM
GLORIA BAMBERG-MERRITT, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), testified in support of the bill. She
stated that she was a licensed "hair instructor" and
aesthetician for 29 years and owned Plethora Designs in
Anchorage. She spoke to the provisions regarding the
braiding licensure and agreed with the 35 hours of training
and stated that the need for licensure was to ensure health
and safety. She believed the licensure allowed
practitioners to operate legally, strengthened the economy,
increased small business opportunities, and allowed low
income individuals financial opportunities. The bill would
benefit the state by collecting license fees. She planned
to send in testimony regarding micro-braiding.
Vice-Chair Gara CLOSED public testimony.
Representative Wilson wondered whether the bill addressed
the microblading issue. Senator Micciche replied there was
clearly a misunderstanding. He explained that at the
request of the board chair, the bill merely defined
tattooing and permanent cosmetic coloring and did not
relate to licensing requirements at all. He stated that the
bill did not address the caller's issues and did not change
any current requirements. Senator Micciche deferred to Mr.
McKinley for further answers. Senator Micciche reiterated
that the bill was about reducing requirements, not
increasing them.
Representative Kawasaki referred to Section 29 of the bill
regarding tattooing and microblading. He wondered whether
the bill's language was a more specific description of the
practices.
4:38:33 PM
KEVIN MCKINLEY, CHAIR, BOARD OF HAIRDRESSERS, FAIRBANKS
(via teleconference), answered that the definitions removed
ambiguity and was more inclusive, defined, and
standardized. He explained that the new definition of
tattooing did not specify what layers of skin the needle
was inserted into. Representative Kawasaki asked if the new
definition was broader than current statute. Mr. McKinley
answered in the affirmative. Representative Kawasaki asked
Mr. McKinley if he heard the testimony from Ms. Crews and
requested that he address the testimony. Mr. McKinley
answered in the affirmative. He explained that the claims
that micro-braiding only inserted into a certain layer in
the skin was debatable and questioned in the industry. He
stated that trade associations classified micro-braiding as
a form of tattooing.
Vice-Chair Gara asked to hear from the department.
4:43:08 PM
SARA CHAMBERS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS,
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING, DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, answered that
the bill broke the licensing requirements into sectors of
the industry who were not performing permanent tattooing,
which would include micro-braiding and lowered the training
requirements. She expounded that the board believed micro-
blading to be a form of tattooing according to national
standards. However, the board believed that a full tattoo
license was too high of a bar for practitioners of
microblading. The bill allowed people to legally microbraid
in their existing shop, perhaps with their existing
education under the permanent cosmetic coloring license.
She clarified that the board did not want to act punitively
on behalf of those legitimately practicing microblading.
4:44:48 PM
AT EASE
4:46:05 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Kawasaki asked how the 35-hour requirement
for hair braiding was conceived. Senator Micciche replied
that he compared the state rankings around the country and
discovered that the middle of the road ranking was
approximately 35 hours. He also spoke with professionals
and solicited professional opinions regarding the health
and safety aspects. He believed the requirement was
adequate. Representative Kawasaki wondered whether it was
necessary to license hair braiders at all. He acknowledged
licensure was a policy call. Senator Micciche answered in
the affirmative. He stated that braiders were handling
people's hair and health and safety issues were a concern
and thought 35 hours was minimal. Representative Kawasaki
referenced the elimination of shop inspections by DEC. He
asked who would be investigating shop owners.
Ms. Chambers answered that DEC currently oversaw tattooing
inspections and had overseen hair salons. She elucidated
that DCCED investigators would perform the work in tandem
with DEC and leave the door open for DEC to take over the
inspections if funding improved.
4:50:45 PM
Vice-Chair Gara reviewed the two previously published
fiscal notes.
Vice-Chair Gara MOVED to REPORT HCS CSSSSB 4(L&C) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
HCS CSSSSB 4(L&C) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one previously published zero
fiscal note: FN3 (DEC); and one previously published fiscal
impact note: FN5 (CED).