SB 132 amends Kentucky’s massage therapy statutes to clarify the balance between state preemption and local regulation. The bill keeps the statewide licensing framework in KRS 309.350 to 309.364 as the controlling law over local ordinances regulating massage therapists, but it expressly preserves local government authority over businesses that are owned, operated, associated with, or affiliated with a licensed massage therapist. Under the bill, local governments may still regulate those businesses through zoning, local business or occupational licensing standards, occupational license fees, inspection, advertising, hours of operation, and sanitation requirements.
The bill also increases the penalty for violating the massage therapy licensing law in KRS 309.353 from a Class B misdemeanor to a Class A misdemeanor, and it specifies that each unlicensed massage performed is a separate offense. In practical terms, the measure strengthens enforcement against unlicensed practice while making clear that local governments retain authority over business operations even where massage therapy licensing itself remains a state matter.
Impact
SB 132 would amend KRS 309.364 and KRS 309.3535, affecting the scope of local government regulation of massage-related businesses and the criminal penalty for unlicensed massage therapy. It preserves state preemption over direct regulation of massage therapists, while expanding local regulatory authority over business operations tied to licensed massage therapists. It also raises the criminal classification for violations involving unlicensed massage practice and treats each illegal massage as a distinct offense, increasing potential exposure for violators and enforcement agencies.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was received favorably in the Senate, passing third reading 31-0 with no recorded opposition. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded floor or committee debate to indicate broader disagreement. Overall, the bill appears to have had strong bipartisan or unanimous support at the stage reflected in the record.
Contention
The main policy issue in SB 132 is the division of authority between state licensing rules and local government regulation. The bill narrows any ambiguity about what local governments may regulate by expressly allowing them to control business operations, zoning, licensing, fees, inspections, advertising, hours, and sanitation for massage-related businesses, while leaving therapist licensing itself under state law. A second point of contention, if any, is the increased criminal penalty and separate-offense language for unlicensed massages, which could be viewed as a stronger enforcement approach against unlicensed practitioners. However, the recorded vote shows no opposition at the Senate stage.