An act to amend Section 464 of the Business and Professions Code, relating to professions and vocations.
Summary
SB 1391 would amend Section 464 of the Business and Professions Code to require any board, bureau, or commission within the Department of Consumer Affairs that offers a retired category of licensure to post that fact on its website. Existing law already allows these licensing boards to create a retired license category by regulation for people no longer actively practicing their profession or vocation; this bill does not create the category, but makes its availability easier for the public to find.
The bill leaves the core retired-license framework in place. Retired licenses would still be available only to holders of active or qualifying inactive licenses, would not require renewal, and would remain subject to board-set application fees and conditions for returning to active status, including fees, background certification, fingerprinting, continuing education, and any other board requirements. The bill also preserves board authority to investigate licensees, including those with retired, inactive, canceled, revoked, or suspended licenses, and does not apply to boards that already have separate statutory authority for retired licenses.
Impact
SB 1391 would make a narrow procedural change to Business and Professions Code Section 464 by adding a website-disclosure requirement for Department of Consumer Affairs licensing boards that offer retired-category licenses. It would not materially alter licensure standards, disciplinary authority, or the process for restoring an active license, but it would require affected boards to update their internet websites to inform applicants and licensees about the retired-license option. The bill affects DCA boards, bureaus, and commissions that use this regulatory authority, while excluding boards with separate statutory retired-license authority.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests broad, noncontroversial support for the bill. It advanced with unanimous committee votes and later passed on the Assembly consent calendar with no recorded opposition. The lack of committee transcript discussion also suggests the measure was viewed as a straightforward transparency or consumer-information bill rather than a major policy change.
Contention
There is little evidence of substantive contention in the materials provided. The only potential issue is the added administrative obligation on boards to maintain website disclosures, but the bill’s fiscal note and committee action indicate this was not treated as a significant burden. Because the bill does not change who may obtain a retired license or the conditions for reinstatement, there is no sign of disagreement over licensing standards, discipline, or professional practice rules.