California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: Enacted

SB 608 — Architects and landscape architects.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 376, Statutes of 2019.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 22, 2019. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 70% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 8 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

(1) Existing law regulating professions and vocations requires certain designated agencies, within the purview of the Department of Consumer Affairs, to require applicants to furnish their fingerprints for purposes of conducting criminal history record checks. This bill would, beginning on January 1, 2021, add the California Architects Board and the Landscape Architects Technical Committee to the list of designated agencies subject to these provisions. The bill would also provide that beginning on January 1, 2021, the California Architects Board has the authority to obtain and review criminal offender record information to determine whether an applicant is subject to denial of a license. The bill would require, as a condition of the application for a license or reinstatement thereof, that each applicant furnish to the Department of Justice a full set of fingerprints for the purpose of conducting a criminal history check and undergoing a state and federal level criminal offender record information search. The bill would require an applicant to certify under penalty of perjury that the applicant's fingerprints have been furnished to the Department of Justice in compliance with this provision and to pay the reasonable regulatory costs for furnishing the fingerprints and conducting the searches. By expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law, the Architects Practice Act, establishes the California Architects Board consisting of 10 members and sets forth its powers and duties over the licensure and regulation of architects. The act permits the board to appoint a person who is exempt from civil service as its executive officer to exercise duties delegated to the officer by the board. Existing law transfers duties previously within the jurisdiction of the California State Board of Landscape Architects to the California Architects Board. Existing law also creates a Landscape Architects Technical Committee within the jurisdiction of the board and authorizes the committee to assist the board in examining candidates for a landscape architect's license and, after investigation, evaluate and make recommendations regarding potential violations of the act. Existing law repeals these provisions on January 1, 2020. This bill would extend the operation of these provisions until January 1, 2024. The bill would also confer specified powers of the board to its executive officer, or, in the executive officer's absence, to the acting executive officer. These powers would include receiving and filing accusations, issuing notices of hearings, and conducting various other duties in connection with the board's administrative hearing duties. The bill would additionally delegate to the executive officer the board's power to evaluate and determine qualifications and approve applicants for examination and determine eligibility for applicants for reciprocity licenses to waive the written examination. This bill would also make nonsubstantive changes to those provisions related to the renaming of the "State Board of Architectural Examiners" to the "California Architects Board." (3) Existing law authorizes boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs, to establish, by regulation, a system for issuing a citation to a licensee in accordance with certain provisions. Under existing law, the system is required to contain, among other elements, information provided to the licensee that if they desire a hearing to contest the finding of a violation, that hearing shall be requested by written notice to the board within 30 days of the date of issuance of the citation or assessment. This bill would authorize a cited person subject to the Architects Practice Act, in addition to requesting an administrative hearing as described above, to request an informal conference to review the acts charged in the citation, in accordance with certain procedural requirements and timeframes. (4) Under existing law, an architect is required to use a written contract when contracting to provide professional services, as specified. Existing law requires that the contract include, among other things, a description of services to be provided and a description of the procedure to be used to accommodate additional services. This bill would require the written contract to also include a description of the project, a description of the procedure that will be used to accommodate additional services and contract changes, the project address, a statement identifying the ownership and use of instruments of service prepared by the architect, and a statement notifying the client that the architect is licensed and regulated by the board located at a specified address. The bill would provide that the written contract requirement does not apply to professional services rendered to a public agency when using that agency's written contract. (5) Existing law requires a landscape architect to use a written contract when contracting to provide professional services. Existing law requires that the contract include, among other things, a description of services to be provided, a description of the procedure to be used to accommodate additional services, and a notice that landscape architects are licensed by the State of California. This bill would require the written contract to also include a description of the project for which the client is seeking services, a description of the procedure that the landscape architect and the client will use to accommodate contract changes, a statement identifying the ownership and use of instruments of service prepared, and a statement notifying the client that the landscape architect is licensed by the Landscape Architects Technical Committee located at a specified address. The bill would revise and recast related provisions governing written contracts for landscape architects. The bill would provide that the written contract requirement does not apply to professional services rendered to a public agency when using that agency's written contract. (6) Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for a person to advertise or represent that they are a "registered building designer" or registered or otherwise licensed by the state as a building designer. This bill would delete the above misdemeanor penalty provision prohibiting a person from advertising or representing that they are a "registered building designer" or registered or otherwise licensed by the state as a building designer. (7) Existing law requires a person licensed to practice architecture to complete, as a condition of license renewal, a specified amount of coursework regarding disability access requirements that depends on the date of renewal. Existing law requires a licensee to comply with specified recordkeeping requirements to that effect. This bill would revise and recast those requirements to, among other changes, require a licensee to complete 5 hours of coursework that meets certain requirements, and would require the board to promulgate regulations to establish qualifications for courses and course providers by January 1, 2023. The bill would also make a licensee who provides false or misleading information as it relates to completion of coursework requirements subject to an administrative citation or disciplinary action by the board and would make specified changes to the recordkeeping requirements. (8) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (9) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 376, Statutes of 2019.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.

  4. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 2869.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. Ordered to special consent calendar.

  6. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  7. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 3323.) Ordered to the Senate.

  8. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  9. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 18. Noes 0.) (August 30).

  10. August 14 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  11. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 19. Noes 0.) (July 9). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  12. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on B. & P.

  13. Referred to Com. on B. & P.

  14. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  15. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 38. Noes 0. Page 1279.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  16. Ordered to special consent calendar.

  17. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  18. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 1105.) (May 16).

  19. Set for hearing May 16.

  20. May 13 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  21. Set for hearing May 13.

  22. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  23. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0. Page 769.) (April 22).

  24. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on B., P. & E.D.

  25. Set for hearing April 22.

  26. Referred to Com. on B., P. & E.D.

  27. Read first time.

  28. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 27.

  29. Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Glazer · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Glazer

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Passed 40 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 27000
Democratic 10000
Republican 3000
Total 40000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Rubio — Yea
Monning — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Beall — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Hill — Yea
Roth — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Allen — Yea
Borgeas — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Chang — Yea
Pan — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 79 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 52000
Democratic 22000
Republican 5000
Total 79000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Mathis — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Low — Yea
Burke — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Smith — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Gray — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Kamlager-Dove — Yea
Medina — Yea
Chu — Yea
Ting — Yea
McCarty — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Salas — Yea
Brough — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Holden — Yea
Daly — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Weber — Yea
Fong — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Levine — Yea
Wood — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Luz Rivas — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 18 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 5000
Unaffiliated 13000
Total 18000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Fong — Yea
Brough — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 19 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 4000
Unaffiliated 14000
Republican 1000
Total 19000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (19)
Member Party Vote
McCarty — Yea
Low — Yea
Medina — Yea
Ting — Yea
Fong — Yea
Brough — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Holden — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Special Consent SB608

Passed 38 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 27000
Democratic 9000
Republican 2000
Total 38000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (38)
Member Party Vote
Rubio — Yea
Monning — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Beall — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Hill — Yea
Roth — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Allen — Yea
Borgeas — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Chang — Yea
Pan — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 6 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 1000
Unaffiliated 5000
Total 6000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (6)
Member Party Vote
Wieckowski — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Hill — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 6 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 1000
Unaffiliated 5000
Total 6000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (6)
Member Party Vote
Wieckowski — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Hill — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 608 do?
(1) Existing law regulating professions and vocations requires certain designated agencies, within the purview of the Department of Consumer Affairs, to require applicants to furnish their fingerprints for purposes of conducting criminal history record checks. This bill would, beginning on January 1, 2021, add the California Architects Board and the Landscape Architects Technical Committee to the list of designated agencies subject to these provisions. The bill would also provide that beginning on January 1, 2021, the California Architects Board has the authority to obtain and review criminal offender record information to determine whether an applicant is subject to denial of a license. The bill would require, as a condition of the application for a license or reinstatement thereof, that each applicant furnish to the Department of Justice a full set of fingerprints for the purpose of conducting a criminal history check and undergoing a state and federal level criminal offender record information search. The bill would require an applicant to certify under penalty of perjury that the applicant's fingerprints have been furnished to the Department of Justice in compliance with this provision and to pay the reasonable regulatory costs for furnishing the fingerprints and conducting the searches. By expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law, the Architects Practice Act, establishes the California Architects Board consisting of 10 members and sets forth its powers and duties over the licensure and regulation of architects. The act permits the board to appoint a person who is exempt from civil service as its executive officer to exercise duties delegated to the officer by the board. Existing law transfers duties previously within the jurisdiction of the California State Board of Landscape Architects to the California Architects Board. Existing law also creates a Landscape Architects Technical Committee within the jurisdiction of the board and authorizes the committee to assist the board in examining candidates for a landscape architect's license and, after investigation, evaluate and make recommendations regarding potential violations of the act. Existing law repeals these provisions on January 1, 2020. This bill would extend the operation of these provisions until January 1, 2024. The bill would also confer specified powers of the board to its executive officer, or, in the executive officer's absence, to the acting executive officer. These powers would include receiving and filing accusations, issuing notices of hearings, and conducting various other duties in connection with the board's administrative hearing duties. The bill would additionally delegate to the executive officer the board's power to evaluate and determine qualifications and approve applicants for examination and determine eligibility for applicants for reciprocity licenses to waive the written examination. This bill would also make nonsubstantive changes to those provisions related to the renaming of the "State Board of Architectural Examiners" to the "California Architects Board." (3) Existing law authorizes boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs, to establish, by regulation, a system for issuing a citation to a licensee in accordance with certain provisions. Under existing law, the system is required to contain, among other elements, information provided to the licensee that if they desire a hearing to contest the finding of a violation, that hearing shall be requested by written notice to the board within 30 days of the date of issuance of the citation or assessment. This bill would authorize a cited person subject to the Architects Practice Act, in addition to requesting an administrative hearing as described above, to request an informal conference to review the acts charged in the citation, in accordance with certain procedural requirements and timeframes. (4) Under existing law, an architect is required to use a written contract when contracting to provide professional services, as specified. Existing law requires that the contract include, among other things, a description of services to be provided and a description of the procedure to be used to accommodate additional services. This bill would require the written contract to also include a description of the project, a description of the procedure that will be used to accommodate additional services and contract changes, the project address, a statement identifying the ownership and use of instruments of service prepared by the architect, and a statement notifying the client that the architect is licensed and regulated by the board located at a specified address. The bill would provide that the written contract requirement does not apply to professional services rendered to a public agency when using that agency's written contract. (5) Existing law requires a landscape architect to use a written contract when contracting to provide professional services. Existing law requires that the contract include, among other things, a description of services to be provided, a description of the procedure to be used to accommodate additional services, and a notice that landscape architects are licensed by the State of California. This bill would require the written contract to also include a description of the project for which the client is seeking services, a description of the procedure that the landscape architect and the client will use to accommodate contract changes, a statement identifying the ownership and use of instruments of service prepared, and a statement notifying the client that the landscape architect is licensed by the Landscape Architects Technical Committee located at a specified address. The bill would revise and recast related provisions governing written contracts for landscape architects. The bill would provide that the written contract requirement does not apply to professional services rendered to a public agency when using that agency's written contract. (6) Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for a person to advertise or represent that they are a "registered building designer" or registered or otherwise licensed by the state as a building designer. This bill would delete the above misdemeanor penalty provision prohibiting a person from advertising or representing that they are a "registered building designer" or registered or otherwise licensed by the state as a building designer. (7) Existing law requires a person licensed to practice architecture to complete, as a condition of license renewal, a specified amount of coursework regarding disability access requirements that depends on the date of renewal. Existing law requires a licensee to comply with specified recordkeeping requirements to that effect. This bill would revise and recast those requirements to, among other changes, require a licensee to complete 5 hours of coursework that meets certain requirements, and would require the board to promulgate regulations to establish qualifications for courses and course providers by January 1, 2023. The bill would also make a licensee who provides false or misleading information as it relates to completion of coursework requirements subject to an administrative citation or disciplinary action by the board and would make specified changes to the recordkeeping requirements. (8) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (9) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors SB 608?
SB 608 is sponsored by Glazer.
What is the current status of SB 608?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 22, 2019. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 608?
Track SB 608 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 608

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Stay ahead of SB 608

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →