The Wise ReportHenry M. Wise, P.G.April 10, 2011
The saga of the Texas PG Board
continues. Yesterday (4/4/2011) was interesting and very confusing. I am in the
House Committee hearing currently. HB 2480 was not heard today. No other
legislation heard so far has any effect upon the geoscience community. The
other bill Kevin and I were concerned about, HB 2284, was heard and I heard
nothing in it that would affect us. That bill was essentially a peace treaty between
the engineers and architects.
It is my understanding that since
the engineers and architects have come to terms, Smith's and Callegari's bill
that would lump the engineers, architects and surveyors one board are no longer
in play.
HB 2480 (Geran's bill that would
combine the PG and PE Boards) was not laid out in the Licensing and
Administrative Procedures (LAP) Committee meeting on 4/5/2011. This was because
the Legislative Budget Board's Fiscal Note for the bill that was finally
published and indicated that it would cost $1.2M more over the biennium to
administer than the existing unconsolidated boards. Therefore, it appears that
this bill will not pass.
HB 2284, which dealt with an
agreement on the practice of architecture by qualified engineers who had been
practicing architectural design prior to 2011 with amendments (essentially, a
grandfather provision) was left pending in the LAP Committee to allow detailed
review of all the amendment language by all concerned parties. There was no
negative testimony.
All of the above is important
because HB 2543 (Smith's bill, which would combine architecture, engineering,
landscape architecture, and land surveying into the Texas Board of Professional
Services, deregulate interior design, and the abolishment of the Texas Board of
Professional Engineers, the Texas Board of Architectural Examiners, and the
Texas Board of Professional Land Surveyors), and HB 3166 Callegari's bill,
which abolishes a number of Professional Boards, but not the PG Board) are
anticipated to go away once the architects and engineers agreed to HB 2284. We
have never heard that geoscientists were to be included in HB 2543 or HB 3166,
but we were concerned that we could be.
We have been told that none of the
consolidation bills were going through, and they would be recommended for an
interim study between this session and the next session. We need to be involved
in that interim study as much as possible if we are to have any input into our
own professional destiny.
We have been unable to find a
sponsor for our
"Professional Services Department Legislation", probably because of
all of the above actions. It's just as well, since it currently looks like we
may wind up being left alone. The House Finance Committee has approved the TBPG's
budget, as proposed. and it looks like the Senate Finance Committee will also approve the TBPG
budget. However, the Governor
could still line item veto the TBPG, but without some other mechanism in place,
a line item veto of the TBPG would result in a net loss of $1.1 million to the
state over the 2012-2013 biennium.
As we
have
learned, the situation can change
with in hours. As long as the legislature is in session we need to be diligent
in our watch. Other
legislation, such as
a bill that abolishes the TBPG under a consolidation plan could still change
the appropriation to the TBPG.