The July meeting of the Kansas Board of Cosmetology was held at the Board office, 714 SW Jackson, Suite 100, Topeka, Kansas.  The meeting was called to order by Ms. Allene Owen, Vice-Chair.  Also in attendance were Mr. Jerry E. Waltrip, Member; Mr. Darrell D. Ringler, Member; Mr. Douglas R. Rushing, Member; Mr. Charles Householder, Jr., Member; and Ms. Marie Plinsky, Member.  Ms. Athena Andaya, Deputy Attorney General; and Ms. Chiquita C. Coggs, Executive Director for the Board, were also in attendance.  Minutes were recorded by Ms. Lisa S. Florez.   

ITEM I.                        PUBLIC COMMENT.
None scheduled.

ITEM II.           CALL TO ORDER. 
The meeting was called to order by Ms. Allene Owen, Vice-Chair. 

ITEM III.          APPROVAL OF BOARD MINUTES FOR MAY 23, 2011
Motion to approve the Board minutes for May 23, 2011.  (Householder/Waltrip).

A discussion was had regarding the accuracy of the May 23, 2011, minutes.  Ms. Plinsky stated the record should reflect the announcement of resignation by Board Chair, Ron McKenzie, during the May 23 meeting.  The Board agreed.

Mr. Waltrip withdrew his second of the motion on the table.  Mr. Householder withdrew his motion.

Motion was made to approve the May 23, 2011, Board minutes, with the addition of Mr. McKenzie’s announcement of resignation.  (Plinsky/Householder).
Motion passed unanimously.

ITEM IV.          FINANCIAL REPORT
YTD FY 2011 receipts and expenditures
Legislative action for FY 2012 and FY 2013
FY 2012 budget reductions
Ms. Coggs reported she would not be able to present any information regarding the financial report at this time, as she has not had time to adequately prepare since her appointment as Executive Director.  Ms. Coggs will resume with the financial report at the September 12, 2011, meeting.

ITEM V.           NEW BUSINESS.
Board review of conferring authority to Executive Director Chiquita C. Coggs to sign Board Orders (SPO, CAD, EO)
Ms. Coggs reported that she has not been conferred the authority to sign Board orders.  The previous Executive Director was conferred the authority by name and not by title.  The Board discussed conferring the authority based upon name versus title so that future incoming Directors would be able to proceed with signing Board orders. 

The Board agreed to confer the authority to sign Board orders to the “Executive Director” by title and not by name.

Motion to confer authority to the Executive Director of the Board of Cosmetology to sign Board orders.  (Plinsky/McDonald).

Mr. Householder addressed his concern regarding the intent of the previous decision by the Board to confer the authority to sign Board orders based upon name and not title.

A vote was had regarding the pending motion.  Motion passed unanimously.

Review/Approval of designated Board member to sign orders and notices if Ms. Coggs or Ms. Plinsky are not available  
The Board discussed whether an order could be signed by the Board member via fax and sent back to the Board and meet the requirement of being an original document.  Ms. Andaya confirmed the signed faxed document would be regarded as an original signed document.  Mr. Rushing moved that Mr. Waltrip serve as the member to sign orders and notices should Ms. Coggs or Ms. Plinsky not be available.  Ms. Plinsky inquired whether Mr. Watrip had been reappointed to the Board as his appointment expired on June 30, 2011.  Mr. Watrip confirmed he had not been reappointed at this time.  Board consensus was to confer the authority to a Board member who would be with the Board a more definite period of time.  Mr. Rushing withdrew his motion. 

Motion to approve Mr. Householder to serve as the member to sign orders and notices should Ms. Coggs or Ms. Plinsky be unavailable.  (Plinsky/Rushing).
Motion passed unanimously. 

Review of facility renewal period/procedure.  Proposed legislation to be taken by the Board
Ms. Coggs reported to the Board that the annual facility renewal period of June 30 is unduly burdensome to the Board office.  Approximately 4,000 facilities must renew their license by June 30 each year and the office is responsible for processing this large amount of licenses during a short period of time each year.  Ms. Coggs proposed that the facility renewal should be changed so that each facility would be required to renew annually at the end of the month following their initial licensure, so that the facility renewals would be staggered and office staff would not be required to renew all facilities during the June 30 renewal period. 

Ms. Plinsky stated that establishing that type of statute for new facilities upon initial licensure would be feasible, but inquired of Ms. Coggs her plan for establishing such a statute for facilities which are already licensed.  Ms. Coggs reported that some establishments renew as early as April annually and some renew after the June 30 expiration date, and those renewal dates could be used to establish new renewal period dates.

Ms. Coggs stated she is willing to research the matter and determine a means of staggering facility licensure renewals throughout the year. 

Ms. Plinsky stated that the changing of the facility annual renewal period would require a statute change.  Ms. Coggs acknowledged the change would require a legislative change and asked the Board to allow her to pursue the matter and make recommendations to the Board in pursuit of the statute change. 

The Board agreed to allow Ms. Coggs to review the facility license renewal process and for her to report to the Board a method or methods by which the facility license renewal process could be improved.

Review of Staff positions – Need to reinstate additional position
Ms. Coggs reported that during the current fiscal year the Agency lost a position due to the new Administration sweeping positions which were not being utilized.  Ms. Coggs would like to look at having the position reinstated.  However, the issue needs to be researched in regard to workload the office carries and the need for the position.  Ms. Coggs stated she would need to justify to the legislature the need for reinstating the position.

Mr. Waltrip inquired regarding the cell phone budget which had been cut and whether or not the cut could be reinstated.  Mr. Waltrip stated the cell phone usage by the inspectors involves the safety of the inspectors while out in the field.  Ms Coggs stated she would like to create a larger budget for cell phone usage for the agency.  The technology of the cell phone can be used while an inspector is working in the field to relate important information regarding licensure or misrepresentation of a license during the course of facility inspections. 

Ms. Coggs reported to the Board that the inspectors have continually been using their own personal computers to complete work assigned to them by the Agency.  Ms. Coggs would like to explore the idea of instituting a one-time cost for implementing a program whereby the inspectors would utilize in the field a laptop provided by the Agency.  Ms. Coggs believes that in the long run this would be a cost-effective, efficient manner of inspectors completing their reporting tasks and inspection reports in the field. 

Mr. Rushing inquired whether the Board is responsible for approving such an endeavor, or does the Executive Director have the authority to implement such a program as long as it fits within the budget.  Board consensus was that Ms. Coggs may implement such a program as long as it complies with budget restraints and is approved in the budget by the legislature. 

Ms. Coggs reported that the Governor’s Administration has recommended that she spend more time in the field in a one-on-one fashion with the individuals and facilities the Agency licenses.

Field Study Request, Hays Academy of Hair Design, Salon Observation, August 2nd
Ms. Andaya addressed the Board regarding the field study request in general and it’s viability within statute.  Ms. Andaya questioned whether the statutes referenced on the field study request form convey the authority to the study’s instructors the ability to be considered an instructor as outlined by statute in order to teach the cosmetology professions.  Ms. Andaya stated that the review by the Board of a field study request then makes the determination whether the instruction falls within statutory requirement to the Board’s satisfaction. 

Mr. Rushing stated the field study requires licensed instructors to accompany students on the field study and is a method for enhancing classroom instruction.  Ms. McDonald stated the field study is not intended to replace educators or licensed instructors but serves as a means to broaden the field of study for the students. 

The Board discussed whether or not the field study request could be approved after the event, in order to accommodate field studies which are not able to be presented before the Board 10 days in advance of the bi-monthly Board meetings.  Ms. Plinsky suggested the field study request form should be revised.  Ms. McDonald agreed to revise the form for presentation at the September
12, 2011, Board meeting to include objectives of the study.       

The Board reviewed the field study request from Hays Academy of Hair Design Salon Observation, August 2, 2011.  The submission was complete.  Motion to approve the request for 3 hours of business practices.  (Ringler/Rushing).
Motion passed unanimously.

Field Study Request, Eric Fisher Academy, Salon/Spa Observation, August 31st
The submission was complete.  Motion to approve the salon/spa observation for August 31, 2011, for 5 hours of business practices.  (Rushing/Plinsky).
Motion passed unanimously.

Ms. Coggs presented her background to the Board.  She has most recently worked with a small non-profit organization whose goal is economic redevelopment of northeast Wyandotte County, where Ms. Coggs is from.  Ms. Coggs is also the founder of the first charter school in Kansas City, Kansas, USD 500.  Ms. Coggs is working to change statute in regard to chartering schools in Kansas.  She has worked in educational research in various parts of the country.    Ms. Coggs also has experience in writing grant proposals.  She attended Kansas University and has a degree is in Business Administration.  She will begin a doctoral program in Industrial/Organizational Psychology in the upcoming two months.  Ms. Coggs served on Governor Brownback’s transition team.    

VI.        OLD BUSINESS
Review of tanning laws/regulations.  Review of the disciplinary action process as it pertains to tanning facility.  Darrell Ringler, Board Member
Mr. Ringler reported he had spoken with Smart Tan regarding issuing a wallet-sized tanning training certificate for individuals who work in more than one tanning facility and need to have verification of training onsite. 

Ms. Coggs reported she has been in contact with the FDA who has assured her there are no Federal regulations in regard to tanning bed temperatures. 

Ms. Coggs agreed that a wallet-sized tanning training certificate is a viable option for meeting the requirement of posting of the tanning training certificate or training log at the tanning facility where a trained individual is employed.  

Mr. Ringler reported that it is unduly burdensome on a tanning facility with several locations and hundreds of employees to be expected to maintain tanning training verification for all employees at each location.

Ms. Andaya reported that KAR 69-12-7(c) states “A tanning facility operator shall maintain a list of tanning device operators, trained in accordance with this section, which shall be available at the tanning facility.” 

Mr. Coggs suggested to the Board the Board may wish to consider not only protecting the consuming public but also protecting and supporting the industries which the Board regulates.

Ms. Coggs reported she is working with the Department of Human Resources to develop a consumer satisfaction survey, as her intent is to make the Agency become more user-friendly.  The Board needs to be able to determine how we are serving our customers. 

Ms. Plinsky inquired whether the Agency’s mission would then need to be changed.  Ms. Coggs reported that it would.

The Board returned to the review of the tanning laws and regulations.  Ms. McDonald inquired whether tanning facility owners would be made aware of the review.  Ms. Owen reported the Board minutes are posted online at the Board’s website.  Ms. Owen stated the process can be lengthy as the Board reviews and discusses law and regulation.

The Board took a ten minute break.  The meeting was called back to order by Ms. Owen, Vice-Chair.

Substitute for SB 92 – status
Substitute for SB 92 was not passed during the last legislative session.  Ms. Owen reported the Board would need to move forward with the Bill during the upcoming legislative session. 

Mr. Rushing reported for future reference as the Bill moves forward that the panel which drafted the language was committed to ensuring the Board office is able to accommodate any new apprentice licensure process. 

 

SB 229 and HB 2368.  Status of legislation pertaining to the 20% deposit of fee revenue to the SGF.
Ms. Coggs reported that beginning July 1, 2011, (FY 2012), this Agency is only required to deposit 10% of fee revenue to the State General Fund, rather than the 20% which had been required in previous years.  The budgets for FY 2012 and FY 2013 will need to be reworked reflecting the 10% deposit amount.  
 
VII.       DISCIPLINARY ACTION
Nails So Happy, Kansas City, Kansas.  Review of Settlement Agreement

Thuy Diem Thi Pham, #25474, Nail Technician. Request for Review of Initial Order – High School Diploma not Authentic

Tresses Salon – Tanning Establishment. Failed to Renew License. Petition for Review of Initial Order
Ms. Andaya discussed with the Board the appropriateness of presenting disciplinary action reviews during the course of the Board meeting.  Disciplinary action reviews are a quasi-judicial proceedings which fall under the Kansas Administrative Procedure Act (KAPA) and are not subject to the Kansas Open Meetings Act.  Therefore, the disciplinary reviews should not have been included on the meeting agenda.

Board consensus to remove item VII from the July 11, 2011, meeting agenda.  Item VII will be reviewed by Board panel pursuant to KAPA. 

VIII.      EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Consumer awareness posting of the Board’s disciplinary action – status.
Ms. Coggs stated she was unable to give a status report on the online posting of the Board’s disciplinary actions as this was a work in process being carried out by the former Executive Director.  Ms. Coggs will investigate the status and report back on the matter.

Prometric Exam Review Workshop, September 21-23 or September 28-30.  Who participates.
Ms. Coggs informed the Board that Prometric needs the Board to choose one set of dates to proceed with the exam review workshop.  The Board discussed the potential dates.  A consensus was reached to schedule the review for the September 21-23 dates.  Both Mr. Householder and Ms. Plinsky are available for those dates.

Mr. Rushing recommended that school owners or representatives should be included in the review process.  Ms. Coggs indicated Prometric has requested a variety of subject matter experts (SMEs) be included in the review.  Ms. Coggs will work toward compiling a list of SMEs to participate in the exam review.  Three SMEs from each exam category (cosmetology, esthetics, and nail technology) are required. 

NIC Annual Conference, August 25-29, Administrator’s Meeting, August 25-26.  Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Ms. Coggs will be representing Kansas at the upcoming NIC Annual Conference. 

CLEAR (Council on Licensure, Enforcement and Regulation) 2011.  Annual Educational Conference, September 8-10, Pittsburg, PA
Board members who are interested in attending the CLEAR Conference should notify Ms. Coggs.

IX.        Election of Board Chair and Vice-Chair
Motion to elect Allene Owen Board Chairperson and Eileen McDonald Vice-Chairperson.  (Plinsky/Ringler).
Motion passed unanimously.
IX.        Adjournment – Next regularly scheduled board meeting, Monday, September 12, 2011
(Date for the remaining 2011 Board meetings- September 12 and November 14.)

Board panel review of felony convictions upon adjournment of meeting.  
Board panel review of pending disciplinary action.

Motion to adjourn.  (Plinsky/Householder).
Motion passed unanimously.