NHIDC Public Meeting
November 7, 2007
Hesser College, 5:30 – 7:00 pm
Live Free and Design! MINUTES
In order to expedite, the following abbreviations will be used:
LFD - Live Free and Design!NHIDC – New Hampshire Interior Design CoalitionNCIDQ – National Council of Interior Design Coalition ED&A – Executive Departments & Administration CommitteeNHIA – New Hampshire Institute of ArtNASAD – National Association of Schools of Art and Design ASID – American Society of Interior DesignersThe meeting was called to order at 5:35 p.m.
Those in attendance were:
NHIDC in support: Marcia Gouveia, Kim Harkins, Genella MacDonald, Maria Perron, Alma YossNHIDC undecided: Donna D’HemecourtLFD in opposition: Bonnie Burgess, Ellie Davis, Meghan Donati, Marsha Ginsler, Patti Morrow, Cheryl TuftsLegislators: -0-Design Community: -0-Alma and Maria introduced themselves and asked for introductions from NHIDC members then LFD members. Conspicuously absent were the rest of the members of NHIDC, any uncommitted members of the design community, and any of the ED&A Committee, all of which received multiple invitations and reminders.
Maria expressed her disappointment on the low turnout. Patti informed her that, as was the case with the three public meetings they held last year, the design community chooses to boycott them as a statement that they do not support the NHIDC agenda.
Alma then opened the floor for questions.
The first question posed by Patti was that ED&A has very clearly indicated that they do not want to get involved in a turf war, so why are you bringing forth another bill that the design community does not support? The lengthy answers that followed did not address the turf war issue at all, but rather shifted the discussion into defending the bill on the basis of raising the level of professionalism of interior designers.
The “Trojan horse” issue was raised – if NHIDC were to be successful in passing its title act, in effect getting their foot in the door, would they then try to get a practice act? Maria said that they would NOT do that because NH Legislators would not support it. Patti then stated the following fact, “Maria, I have it in your own writing that ‘we may want to begin with a title act and move inconspicuously toward a practice act within a few years,’ so my question to you is: were you lying then, or are you lying now?” It was also conceded by Alma that no matter what kind of “guarantees” were given by current NHIDC members, they have no control over attempts made by future advocates of regulation. Patti also noted that historically, every state that begins with a certified/title act consider them a step towards a full-blown practice act – this is the true motive and we have every reason to expect that’s what would happen here.
Maria argued that in order to be recognized as a profession, we need a law on the books. She further stated that they [those who support regulation] take their jobs seriously, and they want to be part of a team with builders and architects. Patti replied that designers who do not support regulation also take our careers seriously [as opposed to “dabbling” as she has previously accused], and we are already working with builders and architects, and at no harm to the public. She went on further to state that this notion that Maria has been publicly promoting that only NCIDQ certified designers be allowed to work on new construction, remodeling, project management, electrical plans, barrier free design, and that the rest be allowed to work on window treatments, flooring choices, and color selection is outrageous. Designers currently have the choice of working in ALL of those services; we are doing great work, and we are in no way causing harm to the consumer.
A discussion followed regarding the exclusion of NHIA. Maria said that instead of getting angry at NHIDC for excluding them, NHIA students and alumni should direct their anger at NHIA for not getting on board with NCIDQ’s credit hour system. Patti answered that the NHIA program is fantastic (everyone in the room agreed) and the graduates have gone on to become successful designers who do not need to be NCIDQ certified in order to continue to practice. Carolyn (Director of the Interior Design program at Hesser) asked what accreditation NHIA has and Patti told them it has NASAD, which is very well-respected. Patti also said the NHIA demographics were mature, non-traditional students. Discussion followed about how Hesser demographics were younger, just out of high school. As such, it was agreed that the programs are rightfully suited to each. The NHIA students do not need or want to take on subjects such as English, Marketing, Management, etc. because most have already taken them earlier in life. Alma asked if NHIA was still considering adding a third year, and Patti (an adjunct instructor at NHIA) said yes, they are working towards that, but that it still would not (nor is it a goal to) meet NCIDQ criteria because of how the credit hours are applied.
Alma noted that they had added a new grandfather clause in an effort to bring in as many people as they could. Bonnie asked what about people like her, who would not qualify for grandfathering within the 18 month period? After the 18-month period, it will be virtually impossible for anyone else to become certified because the criteria of working under another certified designer for 4 years cannot be met in NH, where most designers are sole-proprietors who will not or cannot take on another designer. Donna initiated a discussion on grandfather criteria.
Maria raised the issue of reciprocity and said that Maine has a title act and Massachusetts is also on board. Patti immediately corrected that false statement saying Massachusetts DOES NOT have any interior design laws! [Of course, everyone in the room was aware of Maria’s false claim in her recent ad that said “NH has joined 26 states that register or license interior designers” which is not only misleading and blatantly false, but may also be illegal, as the Consumer Protection Bureau of the NH Attorney General's Office, RSA 358-A:2 states:
It shall be unlawful for any person to use any unfair method of competition or any unfair or deceptive act or practice in the conduct of any trade or commerce within this state. Such unfair method of competition or unfair or deceptive act or practice shall include, but is not limited to, the following: II. Causing likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding as to the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods and services.]
Alma said that aesthetics don’t come into play with this bill, and also that anyone can study and pass the NCIDQ exam. Patti replied that passing NCIDQ only means that you studied and passed an exam – it does not necessarily indicate that you’re a good designer. Most of the highly successful and creative designers in our country are not licensed, certified, or NCIDQ. [Editor’s note: you cannot remove aesthetics from the design equation – it’s an essential component without which design does not exist.]
Maria said that certification would help the consumer understand what we do, and that people in other states are coming in and buying homes in the Lakes Region, but instead of calling her to do their houses, they are having designers in from other states because they perceive them as more professional. Patti replied that these people are bringing in their own designers – that’s called loyalty and we all would hope for the same from our clients. It’s our job to market our own businesses, not the States. Indeed, it’s a misuse of the legislative process to ask them to enhance some designers’ business to the detriment of others.
Genella stated that we’re all missing the big picture – the only reason to regulate interior design is to protect the life, health and safety of the public. Patti absolutely agreed that that is the only reason, and given the absence of evidence that unregulated interior design places the public in any form of jeopardy, that there is no legal or reasonable basis for regulation. She also added that the 170-page Sunrise Report presented by NHIDC at the last hearing did not list even one instance of harm. She further added that if there was any harm to the public, where are the complaints? Where are the lawsuits? According to the BBB and other data, since 1907 there have been only 52 lawsuits against interior designers in the entire country and only 2 of those had anything to do with safety. Genella conceded the point saying that she’s not totally sold on regulation, but added that it might be good to be proactive, but again this is just her opinion to which she is certainly entitled; no supporting data was given.
Bonnie further added that the consumer’s safety was protected by processes that are already in place, i.e. codes, and building inspectors who oversee any building. Contractors should also know code and object to anything they didn’t think was right. Likewise plumbers and electricians are also licensed and their work is scrutinized by qualified inspectors.
Genella suggested that NH was behind the curve in the regulation process. Patti corrected that actually NH was right in step with the rest of the country – thirteen states introduced interior design regulation in 2007 – none of them have been enacted. The opposition to regulation is growing, in NH and in the US.
Alma said that presently anyone can call themselves a designer, and that the public is confused as to what we do. Bonnie said that we counter any confusion by showing the consumer our brochures, portfolio, resumes, references. In a free enterprise system, the cream rises to the top and the market takes care of those who fall short of the mark. Word of mouth is everything in our profession and bad news travels fast. Since there is no harm to the life, health or safety to the public, this is an entrepreneurial system that actually works, especially in NH. Any other way of doing business in our state just isn’t going to fly with either the design community or the consumer.
Bonnie stated that those who have passed NCIDQ can put NCIDQ Certified # after their name. To have “Certified” [by state] is redundant. Patti asked that since NCIDQ certification already exists, why do you want the state to get involved in what is the exact same process? This is a duplication of effort and a waste of the state’s resources. Alma replied that it’s not really the state that will be involved (many disagreed) but creating a Board that would oversee applications, and change rules, etc. Patti pointed out that the section on Rulemaking Authority in the bill was unduly vague and basically gives the Board the power to change anything, after the fact. Alma said that was not the intent. Patti said maybe not, but that’s the way the bill reads.
Ellie said that most designers come into the profession, like her, as a second career, and NCIDQ’s education requirements, as well as their requirement to work under another certified designer are not practical, and virtually unattainable in NH. NHIDC conceded that this was a problem.
Maria said that they have the support of ASID, our trade organization. Patti said that ASID is only one of our trade organizations [and hasn’t been given a mandate to speak for the design community at large]. Maria agreed but agued that they are the largest. Patti replied that we all know that regulating interior design is ASID’s baby – they’ve been at it for 30 years. They’ve spent $5 million and fund the coalitions. It’s all about the money.
As it was almost 7:00, the deadline for occupancy in the room, Alma graciously thanked everyone for coming, and said she was always open to discussion with anyone, and would love to have everyone join NHIDC to voice their opinion. Patti replied that she’d already tried that, as a former member and whenever she raised important issues at meetings, Maria told her she was paranoid, and to stop asking the same questions at every meeting because Sally was getting frustrated and she was afraid she would quit.
Marcia asked a final question: if NHIDC were to change either the grandfathering or qualifications to sit for NCIDQ, would that be acceptable, or is it that we just don’t accept certification at all? Patti replied that we are opposed to any regulation of interior designers. That’s why we’re here – not to argue about the merits of the bill -- everyone already knows we stand in opposition to any NH interior design regulation. At the last hearing, you lamented the fact that you were ‘battered by unsuspected opposition,’ and we just want to go on record that we are philosophically opposed to regulation. The ED&A Committee made it very clear that they do not want to legislate a turf war, and whether or not that was your intent, by bringing forth another bill that the design community does not support, you have incited a turf war. We are going to fight this bill. Why put the design community through that again?
Patti added that professionals can disagree but yet remain civil, and she hoped that we would be able to at least do that. Alma wholeheartedly agreed and said that it would be great to work together on educating and networking the NH design community. Patti told her that Live Free and Design! is already doing that – having just this month begun a Designer Dynamics series of workshops to be held every other month, each on a different important design topic, and invited NHIDC to drop the certification bill and join us. It would be a great way to unify the design community.
The meeting adjourned at 7:10.
