Board of Cosmetologists Minutes _March 7, 2011

A meeting of the State Board of Cosmetologists was held on Monday, March 7, 2011 in the 2nd floor conference room, Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation Building, 500 N Calvert Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202.

The following members were in attendance:

Mr. Phillip Mazza, Chairman, Industry Member

Ms. Sharon Bunch, Consumer Member

Ms. Ellen Trujillo, Industry Member

Ms. Christina Roberts, Consumer Member

Also in attendance:

Mr. Robert Wood, Executive Director

Mr. Brian Logan, Assistant Executive Director

Mr. Bruce Spizler, Senior Assistant Attorney General

Not in attendance:

Ms. Clairee Britt-Cockrum, Vice Chairperson, Industry Member

Ms. Maxine Sisserman, School Owner Member

Ms. Carmel Owens, Industry Member

Meeting was called to order

The meeting was called to order at 9:50 a.m. by the Chairman, Mr. Mazza.

Approval of Agenda

A motion was made by Ms. Bunch, and seconded by Ms. Roberts, to approve the agenda; and the Board voted unanimously to approve.

Minutes

Following the notation of several corrections, a motion was made by Ms. Trujillo to approve the minutes of the February 7, 2011 meeting; Ms. Bunch seconded the motion; and the Board voted unanimously to approve.

Approval of Executive Session Minutes

Following the notation of several corrections, a motion was made by Ms. Bunch to approve the minutes of the February 7, 2011 Executive Session; Ms. Trujillo seconded the motion; and the Board voted unanimously to approve.

Commissioner Stanley Botts

Commissioner Stanley Botts of the Division of Occupational and Professional

Licensing addressed the Board. The Commissioner wanted to thank the Board members for volunteering their time and wanted to reassure its members that he will make himself available to address any of the Board’s concerns.

New Business:

Informal Conference – Apprentice Benita Marcia Washington

An informal conference was held for Ms. Benita Marcia Washington who, previously, was registered as an apprentice. Ms. Washington requested to appear before the Board today, with her sister, Belinda Washington, who is a licensed cosmetologist. Ms. Benita Washington advised the Board that, during her previous apprenticeship, her sponsor failed to submit written reports of her training as an apprentice to the Board. Ms. Washington and her sister alleged that the sponsor, who is also the owner of the beauty salon in which both of them worked, also failed to provide adequate training and supervision during Ms. Washington’s apprenticeship. While the Board was sympathetic to Ms. Washington’s circumstances, the Board advised Ms. Washington that she also was responsible for ensuring that the reports were submitted to the Board. Further, the Board advised Ms. Washington that she could re-start her apprenticeship training at another beauty salon and train under another sponsor upon applying for the same (but with a forfeiture of any previous apprenticeship hours she previously may have earned). Finally, the Board advised Ms. Washington that, if she wishes to pursue the matter further against the previous sponsor/salon owner, she may file a complaint with the Board; and the Board would investigate.

Informal Conference - Kelly Fraunhoffer - Approval of School Training

An informal conference was held for Ms. Kelly Fraunhoffer, who, by way of letter, requested the Board to consider approval of her out-of-state school training. Ms. Fraunhoffer alleged that she received inaccurate information from the Board’s staff which resulted in her inability to qualify to take the Maryland cosmetology examination. Ms. Fraunhoffer, who advised her last name had changed to Wagner, stated that her training at the out-of-state cosmetology school was completed “on-line”. The Board noted that, in order to qualify to take the Maryland cosmetology exam, a candidate must provide adequate evidence that, among other things, they have completed practical training in a clinic setting. Although, Ms. Fraunhoffer (Wagner) advised that she did provide shampooing services in a salon setting, the Board concluded that this was inadequate to satisfy the required practical training. Specifically, the Board noted that, to qualify to take the Board’s examination, the applicant must have been trained "in a cosmetology school in another state … that has standards substantially equivalent to or more stringent than the standards of a school that is approved by the State Board of Education (public schools) or the Maryland Higher Education Commission (private schools) in consultation with the Board." Business Occupations and Professions Article, §5-304(a) (4) (iii) (2.). Further, the Board explained that, in order to ensure that the standards of the out-of-state cosmetology school are substantially equivalent to the standards of a cosmetology school approved by the (Maryland) State Board of Education or the Maryland Higher Education Commission, the Board requires verification that the out of state cosmetology school is approved and/or accredited by a governmental agency in that state. The Board suggested that Ms. Fraunhoffer (Wagner) request a Maryland-approved cosmetology school to assess how much, if any, training she received from the “on-line” out-of-state cosmetology school could be credited; so that she need not take all 1500 hours of training in a Maryland-approved school. The Board also noted that, as an alternative, Ms. Fraunhoffer (Wagner) may elect to register with the Board as an apprenticeship and train under a senior cosmetologist to qualify to take the examination.

Informal Conference - Nicole Jankowski - Apprenticeship Request

An informal conference was scheduled for Ms. Nicole Jankowski, who advised the Board that, at one time, she was a cosmetology student at “The Temple” - a Paul Mitchell School of Cosmetology in Frederick, Maryland. By way of e-mail, Ms. Jankowski explained that, due to family matters, she was required to temporarily withdraw from the school. Ms. Jankowski questioned whether she could enter the apprentice program without forfeiting the hours of training she earned while in the cosmetology school, noting the possibility of returning to that school at a later time. The Board had invited Ms. Jankowski to today’s meeting to discuss, and provide a resolve to, her situation; however, in a subsequent email, Ms. Jankowski apologetically advised of a family emergency which resulted in her inability to attend today’s meeting. Although Ms. Jankowski hoped to reschedule the conference, the Board noting the distance for Ms. Jankowski to travel and the time delay in re-scheduling an informal conference for another month, discussed the matter in Ms. Jankowski’s absence. Following these discussions, a motion was made by Ms. Roberts that Ms. Jankowski can enter an apprenticeship program, under the sponsorship of a senior cosmetologist, and not forfeit her schooling hours; however, Ms. Jankowski may not attend a school at the same time she is in the apprentice program nor can she combine the apprentice hours. Ms. Bunch seconded the motion; and the Board voted unanimously to approve.

Informal Conference - Melissa Carr- Conviction Approval

An informal conference was held for Ms. Melissa Carr. Ms. Carr appeared with Ms. Donna Carpega of the Department of Education, Division of Rehabilitation Services. Ms. Carr appeared at today’s meeting inquiring as to whether her previous criminal conviction would constitute grounds to deny her application for a cosmetology license once she completed her training and passed the Board’s examination. The Board agreed to make such a determination at this time (prior to training and testing) to avoid Ms. Carr taking the training and passing the Board’s examination, only then, to be told that her criminal conviction constituted a basis upon which to deny her a license. After Ms. Carr explained the events which led to the conviction and the consequences which resulted, and after holding deliberations, the Board decided that the past criminal conviction of Ms. Carr would not serve as a bar to her licensure as a cosmetologist if she successfully completes her cosmetology training and passes the Board’s examination; however, any subsequent convictions may affect her becoming licensed as a cosmetologist.

Senate Bill 478

Board Chairman Phillip Mazza and Executive Director Robert Wood advised the Board of a hearing held on February 24th before the Senate Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee on Senate Bill 478 which would repeal the existing limitations on where cosmetology services may be performed. Mr. Mazza advised that he and Mr. Wood appeared and testified on behalf of the Department. Senior Assistant Attorney General Bruce Spizler explained that the passage of the Bill would in effect repeal Business Occupations and Professions Article, §5-605, Annotated Code of Maryland. The ramification of such repeal would allow licensed cosmetologists, nail technicians and estheticians to provide services outside of a beauty salon and/or barber shop, resulting in the non-enforcement of the laws and regulations of the Board. Mr. Mazza advised that he will update the Board on the status of the Bill at the next Board meeting. Mr. Mazza also noted that, in his testimony, he provided an insert from the Sunset Report noting the Board is running as well as can be expected with the limited resources it has been provided.

Kevin Jones Continuing Education Proposal

Although not scheduled to appear and not listed on the agenda, Mr. Kevin Jones, who purportedly is a salon owner and co-owner of an information and architectural firm, addressed the Board in regard to a proposal to add continuing education regarding the renewal of a cosmetologist’s license. Mr. Jones noted that his research into 7 other States reflects a direct correlation between their success rates and their continuing education requirement in the industry. Mr. Jones proposed to start a network for continuing education; from how to get a course accredited to having a portrait of industry members for the consumers to utilize. While the Board, noting the absence of 3 of its industry members, one being a school owner, was not desirous of reviewing Mr. Jones proposal at this time, the Board suggested that Mr. Jones appear at the Board’s next meeting so that those Board members not in attendance could discuss and review Mr. Jones’ proposal.

Old Business:

Limited Licenses and Cessation of Endorsement

Board Chairman Phillip Mazza requested that the continued discussion on the establishment of limited license categories, and the cessation of endorsement, be tabled for the next Board meeting.

Regulatory Update

Assistant Executive Director Brian Logan provided an update on the status of pending regulations upon which the Board had voted. Mr. Logan advised that he is working on sending the final approval for 09.22.02.03 Prohibitions and 09.22.01.08 Fees.

Further, Mr. Logan advised that three (3) regulations which the Board proposed - 09.22.01.01 General Requirements, 09.22.01.10 Supervision of Apprentice and 09.22.03.06 Complaints and Violations in Beauty Schools - are still awaiting approval from the Administration. The Board expressed its displeasure over the length of time it has taken for the Administration to grant its approval of its regulations. Mr. Logan advised that he will convey the Board’s concerns to Deputy Commissioner Harry Loleas.

Update Test Candidate Wasana Digges

Assistant Executive Director Brian Logan provided the Board with an update on Ms. Wasana Digges, who appeared at last month’s Board meeting. Ms. Digges, who had unsuccessfully taken the nail technician theory examination, was granted additional time to take the examination. The Board had requested that its staff contact Prometric (the testing vendor contracted by the State of Maryland to administer the examinations) in light of Ms. Digges’ advisement that she had been provided an interpreter which is in violation of COMAR 09.22.01.12 E. Mr. Logan advised that Mr. Andy Parker, Client Services Manager from Prometric, advised that no translator was provided for Ms. Digges, but that she had inappropriately been approved a reader under ADA accommodations.

Adjournment

There being no further business, a motion was made by Ms. Bunch and seconded by Ms. Trujillo, that the meeting be adjourned at 12:34 p.m., and the motion passed unanimously.

Approved By:

______

Phillip S. Mazza,

Chairman

Submitted By:

______

Brian K. Logan

Assistant Executive Director