The Board of Barbering and Cosmetology reviewed a draft of its 2026 sunset report and proposed legislative language at its Oct. 21 meeting in Sacramento, including measures that would expand the board's oversight authority over schools and apprenticeship program sponsors.

Why it matters: the sunset report is the board's formal record to the Legislature; changes the board requests there shape what issues the Legislature examines and may become the starting point for bills. Board staff told members the final report must be approved at the board's November meeting to meet January submission deadlines.

What the board proposed: staff presented suggested statutory edits and new statutory language to (a) require applications and a fee for new school approval; (b) clarify the board's inspection authority beyond health-and-safety items so staff can review attendance records and other evidence tied to proof-of-training; and (c) require schools and program sponsors to meet specified documentation standards.

Board staff emphasized costs and staffing: "We continue to believe that resources are needed to provide efficient oversight of barbering and cosmetology schools," staff said. The board currently does not charge an application fee for school approval and does not require a renewal process for approved schools; staff asked the board to consider charging and using fees to fund oversight.

Public comment and board reaction: Industry advocates pressed two competing views. Professional Beauty Federation lawyer Fred Jones urged the board to pursue full authority over schools rather than partial, dual oversight with the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE). "The answer is to put schools under your sole oversight," Jones told the board, citing prior years when the state board managed schools directly. Other speakers, including school owners, said they face multiple regulatory demands and urged clarity on how new authority would be implemented.

Policy details under consideration: staff proposed specific statutory changes to Business and Professions Code sections (e.g., 73.62, 74.25.1 and related provisions) to require school applications and to allow the board to charge an initial approval and renewal fee (staff proposed a statutory cap as part of the template language). The board also discussed a fallback approach: seek targeted authority to require proof-of-training records and stronger exchange of data with BPPE if sole oversight is not achievable.

Vote and next steps: the board did not vote on final language at the Oct. 21 meeting. Members instructed staff to revise the draft and return it for formal board approval at the November meeting; staff warned that any item to be included in the sunset report must be finalized in November to be transmitted to the Legislature. Staff also noted the board can pursue separate legislation after the sunset cycle if members decide to seek narrower or additional changes.

Ending: The board laid groundwork for a likely legislative push to strengthen school oversight and to add application/renewal fees to fund that work; members asked staff to supply specific language and cost estimates for board approval in November.