Board of Barbering and Cosmetology staff and members revisited whether to reinstate the state practical examination for cosmetology and related licenses during the board's Oct. 21 meeting in Sacramento.

The practical exam was eliminated as part of the legislature's adoption of SB 803 during the prior sunset review, and board staff told members any restoration would require a legislative bill. "We would have to ask the legislature to give back what was taken away at sunset review," board staff said, noting the board no longer operates practical testing sites and had reduced related staff and leases.

Why it matters: reinstating a hands-on exam would change the licensing pathway for thousands of applicants and require new facilities, staff and funding. Board staff said those costs are unknown but likely substantial because the board previously ran staffed testing sites in Glendale and Fairfield and has since "liquidated our physical assets" used for tests.

Board members and industry speakers offered competing views. Former board president Steve Weeks recounted the sunset negotiations and cautioned about returning immediately to the same lawmakers who supported elimination. "It could jeopardize the board's credibility," Weeks said, arguing the board would need a strong rationale to reverse course so quickly.

Several current board members and industry representatives urged the board to consider ways to test safety-focused, competency-based skills. Board member Danielle Muf1oz said she wants more disaggregated data before deciding: "In order to review the true impact of this change, we should probably look at the data more specifically," she said, asking staff to provide pass rates broken out by language, by apprenticeship pathway, and by written/practical results pre- and post-elimination.

Industry commenters divided along scope lines. Kelly Funk, speaking as an aesthetician and industry member, told the board she supports reinstating a practical for aestheticians specifically, saying written tests do not measure technique and sanitation in hands-on services. Public speaker Fred Jones emphasized the industry's hands-on nature: "This is a hands-on based industry. It's not accountants. It's not lawyers," he said, urging standards that prevent consumer harm.

Board action and next steps: Several members said they want further analysis rather than an immediate proposal. The board agreed to return the topic to the agenda in January 2026 to allow staff time to compile disaggregated pass-rate data and cost estimates; the board noted that reinstatement would require a legislative author and a bill. No formal vote to change policy or direct staff to pursue legislation occurred at the Oct. 21 meeting.

The board also discussed alternatives to an in-person practical exam, including vendor-developed "written-practical" items and school-based practical testing models used in other states. Staff said it could convene a task force and consult the department's testing unit and vendors to explore modern assessment options.

Ending: The board did not take formal action to ask the Legislature to reinstate the practical exam at the Oct. 21 meeting. Instead members requested more specific language and data for future deliberations and asked staff to return with additional analysis in early 2026.