[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6634182,"mediaKeyId","3382131-86a8a641ebe33d3dff8635a76e987bac","parentId",3382131,"title","Board hears two reinstatement petitions; deliberation deferred to closed session","audioSeconds",2864,"startMs",3696000,"endMs",6560000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3382131-86a8a641ebe33d3dff8635a76e987bac&start=3696&end=6560","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3382131-86a8a641ebe33d3dff8635a76e987bac/thumbnail_3696000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6634182/California/Board-hears-two-reinstatement-petitions-deliberation-deferred-to-closed-session","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6634182-a723de0e337ceab33689cdb0b6ec8fd8/orig.mp4?Expires=1770453104&Signature=MISIs8YsXy-G7i~81YFwCj~OMFbCYMvORILgxQjaW-rQJ1W~EDbZ10ctblof7pFNyy3DVBBjkfzDmjo64TVZLEYkSoLHcWAWl6rJd0Vm8I70kbE6QLGUswloY6SbzupEhqBdXFvVQ6ThYaHN1t4pglu0sUcvhFuVpt7ezweTk8aMZMhT0ldvE8h4Oop1NSG8kYnBP7ZeiU5xFJ~T9mmr6JTqS9D8BKxYM6V0S2MN75VENaY-uehlP9YTt7fQFpryVzbuHqdete9k0PAm4PcRnCXCQ5p-EIxiB1dmRi05n4MeDkVaEIZuGQcpePlVXXPXtJ-93GYATE622Zm~46LC9A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Respiratory Care Board of California","date","2025-05-19T00:00:00Z","article","The California State Board of Barbering and Cosmetology heard two petitions for reinstatement of professional licenses on May 19, 2025, considering the cases of Angelina Leon Pedraza (cosmetologist) and Francisco Lemus (barber). Both petitioners testified and answered questions from the deputy attorney general and board members; the board closed the hearings and deferred decisions to a closed-session deliberation.

Pedraza, who was represented herself at the Office of Administrative Hearings portion of the proceeding, testified about family obligations and past business operations as she sought reinstatement of a cosmetologist license revoked in 2018. Deputy Attorney General Kevin J. Sheddick summarized the agency’s file for the board during the hearing, and noted that Pedraza’s record included a previous stipulated surrender of an establishment license, multiple citations and a revocation following a default when she did not appear at an earlier proceeding. Sheddick also told the panel that the burden for reinstatement is “by clear and convincing evidence.”

Petitioner Angelina Pedraza described personal circumstances she said limited her ability to respond earlier, said she had taken a rules-and-regulations class in Santa Ana and provided several character letters, and repeatedly told the board that she wanted to return to work primarily in senior-care settings. Board members pressed her on specifics including whether she had been paid for services while revoked and whether she had completed rehabilitation steps required under the California Code of Regulations. The record shows the board’s file lists eight prior citations and an outstanding balance of $5,195 in fines and cost recovery that must be paid before a license could be issued.

Francisco Lemus separately petitioned to reinstate a barber license also revoked in 2018. The board’s summary of his case showed two citations in 2017 and a default decision after the petitioner failed to file a notice of defense during an earlier action; Lemus later moved to vacate the default, and his most recent petition for reinstatement was previously denied in 2022. Lemus told the panel he has since stopped cutting hair, operates a party-supply business and would seek to work as an employee in a shop if reinstated. He said he had not completed additional barbering-specific remedial training since the revocation but expressed remorse and a desire to re-enter the field.

After questioning and public testimony, the administrative law judge closed the record in both matters. No formal votes or final orders were read into the public record at the meeting; board members said they would deliberate in closed session and issue written decisions later. Both matters therefore remain pending with no board action recorded at the public meeting.

Why it matters: Reinstatement petitions prompt the board to weigh public-safety concerns against evidence of rehabilitation. The hearings included specific factual records — prior citations, inspection findings and outstanding money owed to the board — that will frame the panel’s closed‑session deliberations and any future conditions the board may attach to a reinstatement.

What’s next: The board moved both matters to closed session for deliberation and will issue written decisions by the timeframes set under administrative hearing rules. The public record remains closed until the board’s final mailed decision.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","BBC Meeting May 19, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The California State Board of Barbering and Cosmetology heard two petitions for reinstatement of professional licenses on May 19, 2025, considering the cases of Angelina Leon Pedraza (cosmetologist) and Francisco Lemus (barber).","taxTitle","Respiratory Care Board of California, Boards and Commissions, Executive, California","taxId",76751,"location","California","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6634172,"Board backs extension of hybrid meeting rules and emergency-waiver authority; votes recorded for SB470 and SB641",639,8966000,9605000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3382131-86a8a641ebe33d3dff8635a76e987bac&start=8966&end=9605","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3382131-86a8a641ebe33d3dff8635a76e987bac/thumbnail_8966000.jpg","/articles/6634172/California/Board-backs-extension-of-hybrid-meeting-rules-and-emergency-waiver-authority-votes-recorded-for-SB470-and-SB641","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6634172-cfdd34707c8a09cd0251a2cb3d90d764/orig.mp4?Expires=1770453104&Signature=j47QN-UmrUMoFX2LMC-l1Y2XduGGlOB4-4fP8MgqW3Ba5XLMjndFWwpRZ951BcN8u6iPhaDcNiM-6lgdDe3O7se7SdeN7ll8aqLkY9eSztzV8KRulNXF-ptVOq3FKZulrKJIv6abO5BrAiCMd6JIARZj8UhtUgl-ydEQ3oexBXoHZY-3SQxGE4b1FmrnvvjYKFvtUScFpDdsKGng8sZbMc6HnRnpYA8SJuRUWP57gLZTDFLgYHlTyXhdkRirNYlgoe4MGAepCumKOSQqGh91v~V36cleO8035xiR1IWs3nf8o1oIY0rYkTTvcj2y6AR6x0xKobuK2C2y7Qk4oS0GxA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The California State Board of Barbering and Cosmetology on May 19, 2025 voted to support two pieces of legislation affecting board operations and emergency authority: Senate Bill 470, which extends hybrid meeting flexibilities, and Senate Bill 641, which would authorize boards to issue fee/renewal waivers and require licensees to provide email addresses so agencies can communicate during declared emergencies.

Board President Tanya Fairley moved to support SB470 and called for a roll call; a second was recorded from board member Kelly Funk and the motion passed on a roll-call vote with all members present voting yes. Fairley framed the vote in operational terms: board members said extending remote/hybrid meeting authority would preserve continuity and reduce future logistics costs while keeping the board accessible to the public. \"I motion to support Senate Bill 470,\" Fairley said during deliberations, and the motion was seconded and carried.

On SB641, staff explained the bill would let boards temporarily waive specified licensing provisions for licensees and applicants impacted by declared federal, state or local emergencies and would strengthen the board’s ability to contact affected licensees during an emergency by collecting emails. DCA staff noted an implementation cost estimate related to outreach and system updates; staff estimated a modest implementation cost. The board discussed confidentiality concerns for email addresses and staff said protections could be recommended in language to preserve licensee privacy.

Board members voted to support SB641 after a motion and second; the motion passed on a recorded roll-call vote with all members voting in favor. Following the vote, Board staff said they would track the bills’ progress in the legislature and continue coordinating with the Department of Consumer Affairs on any necessary regulatory or system changes should the measures pass.

Why it matters: SB470 preserves the board’s ability to hold hybrid or remote meetings, a procedural change that affects how the board and many of its stakeholders participate in meetings. SB641 would give the board statutory authority to help licensees impacted by disasters and to communicate more quickly with licensees using collected email addresses.

What’s next: Staff will monitor both bills in the legislative process and, if enacted, will return with necessary implementation steps including draft privacy language for required email collection and fiscal planning.","The board voted to support two state bills: SB470 (extends hybrid/remote meeting flexibilities) and SB641 (authorizes emergency waivers and requires email collection for licensees). Both motions passed unanimously in roll-call votes recorded at the May 19 meeting.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6634178,"Board flags widespread problems in apprenticeship programs, recommends reforms for 2026 sunset report",2379,8034000,10413000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3382131-86a8a641ebe33d3dff8635a76e987bac&start=8034&end=10413","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3382131-86a8a641ebe33d3dff8635a76e987bac/thumbnail_8034000.jpg","/articles/6634178/California/Board-flags-widespread-problems-in-apprenticeship-programs-recommends-reforms-for-2026-sunset-report","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6634178-3d206419fa1b70688009b9652d934f69/orig.mp4?Expires=1770453104&Signature=ANh9q8cxULkAn1t50TmLYVdg0s5E2mP2FQmv0aOkS9Zxg~JEaM~fNnWfElPJXZxPMvOV9aEh9hjn1VZF720xj2MPDCqTGUlaUKfEedGMy9CQHhn5d1WBAC8SFHyHfji7tjf4LdJvPxRYQsxhxyHrc1bBASBLX4T~m95pwRRel~RqMs8KOfJliEF7iEsYXARRn9IfOUNdSBNXsUQcXnFZ89nYceuD4sIW6tuOlyhJH1v3vcJBQ6rSj5xXGpXJHCrYveBveWJqAVVBCQbmwHFqHsLSy04xXuzBZEvs9EMDTB~bFOl9uTy-0AwYjJIrSj5g~zTMnLfTWqPaRg8b8MvplA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The California State Board of Barbering and Cosmetology on May 19, 2025, focused an extended portion of its meeting on the status of cosmetology and barbering apprenticeship programs, reporting widespread problems and directing staff to pursue reforms in the board’s 2026 sunset review.

Executive Officer Christy Underwood told the board that investigators interviewed 115 apprentices and found significant payments and inconsistent program practices across sponsors. \"Board staff spoke to 115 apprentices and found 25 apprentices, stated that they've paid 2,500 to 2,800; 7 apprentices stated they pay 3 to 3,500; ... 3 stated they paid $10,000; 2 apprentices stated they paid $15,000 for tuition to an apprenticeship program sponsor,\" Underwood said in the record. The board said those payments conflict with the apprenticeship model of \"earn while you learn\" and that many apprentices reported being paid by commission or not paid at all.

Staff described several recurring problems: low exam-application and pass rates among apprentices, training facilities that operate as independent businesses while using a sponsor’s approval (what staff characterized as \"franchising\" the sponsor approval), apprentices left unsupervised on clinic floors, and lack of consistent oversight by other agencies. Underwood noted the board’s enforcement team and licensing staff had devoted substantial work hours to investigating the issues.

Board members and public commenters stressed the program’s potential value, and multiple members proposed keeping apprenticeship as a pathway if the board could obtain stronger oversight and clearer rules. Committee chair Danielle Muñoz said the Enforcement and Inspections Committee supported staff’s proposed changes and that staff would prepare regulatory language for the board’s consideration. Members suggested forming a task force with program sponsors that are doing work \"the right way\" to craft concrete statutory fixes.

Staff put forward a draft set of recommended reforms to include in the board’s 2026 sunset report. Proposed steps included requiring apprentices to be employees earning at least the applicable minimum wage (no booth‑rental arrangements for apprentices), prohibiting program sponsors from charging tuition beyond modest kit/textbook fees, creating a one‑time approval plus periodic renewal (and fees) for program sponsors, clarifying the board’s authority to discipline sponsors, and requiring better onboarding and written apprenticeship agreements for each apprentice. Staff also flagged state and federal funding flows (WIOA and other grants) that may be used by sponsors and described instances where LEAs were invoiced for training hours for individuals who did not appear to have valid apprentice registrations.

Public commenters included current apprenticeship sponsors and barbers who described successful models and volunteered to join a task force. Board members agreed to add apprenticeship reform proposals to the sunset report and to convene a working group that will help draft legislative language for consideration in the next legislative cycle.

Why it matters: Apprenticeship programs affect workforce development, public safety and consumer protection. The board’s recommended reforms would change how programs are approved, funded and monitored and could require legislative changes to strengthen the board’s enforcement authority.

What’s next: Staff will include the recommendations and supporting data in the board’s draft sunset report for further review; the board signaled support for a task force to develop specific statutory language and implementation details.","Board staff reported apprentices paying thousands in tuition, widespread on‑the‑job training violations and franchised training facilities. The board directed staff to include proposed regulatory and legislative changes in the 2026 sunset report and discussed a task force to develop reforms.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board hears two reinstatement petitions; deliberation deferred to closed session

Board backs extension of hybrid meeting rules and emergency-waiver authority; votes recorded for SB470 and SB641

Board flags widespread problems in apprenticeship programs, recommends reforms for 2026 sunset report