Senate committee hears heated testimony on bill to merge appraiser, abstractor and home‑inspector boards

The Senate State Agencies & Govt'l Affairs committee heard extended testimony on SB 354, a bill that would abolish three separate special‑revenue licensing boards and create a single State Board of Appraisers, Abstractors and Home Inspectors.

Proponents, including Diana Pioski, director of the Appraiser Licensing and Certification Board, and Daryl Bassett, secretary of the Department of Labor and Licensing, told the committee the three entities already operate under the same agency and from the same offices and that consolidation would increase staff support, shorten processing times and resolve audit segregation‑of‑duties issues. Pioski said the bill "allows the new agency to better service to provide better service to both licensees and the public" by providing cross‑trained staff and a common electronic licensing platform.

Opponents, chiefly current and former Home Inspector Registration Board members, said consolidation would shrink subject‑matter representation and imperil consumer protection. Robert Neal, a past chairman of the home inspector board, said the board is a "consumer protection board" funded entirely through licensing fees and warned that merging it into a larger board "would leave home inspectors under‑represented and would be a bad thing." Daniel Burkett, the current chair of the Home Inspector Registration Board, told senators that since the board was moved under the Department of Labor and Licensing its ability to spend and staff itself has been constrained and that he has seen long complaint backlogs and operational friction: "Since transformation and being drawn in under the Department of Labor licensing, basically, it's been a disaster."

Witnesses supplied competing factual details about finances and scale. Dan Parker, chief legal counsel for the Department of Labor and Licensing, said the home inspector board currently holds roughly $550,000 in cash funds and argued the bill preserves those balances while consolidating administration. Several home inspector witnesses and the board chair reported a different figure: WC McBride and Daniel Burkett cited a figure of about $667,000 in the home inspector account. The number of licensed home inspectors was disputed in testimony, with different figures cited from agency and board representatives; the board chair said 497 active licensees as of that morning while another source referenced a smaller number. The transcript records both figures; the committee did not resolve the discrepancy during the hearing.

Committee members questioned how consolidation would affect complaint handling, continuing education approvals, appointment processes and the share of licensed professionals on the new board. Opponents stressed that home inspectors perform on‑site, safety‑oriented inspections distinct from appraisal and abstracting work and that disciplinary decisions benefit from industry expertise. Supporters said the new complaint‑committee model used by the appraiser board could be applied to ensure subject‑matter expertise is available for disciplinary review.

The committee agreed to hear public testimony about SB 354 at that time (motion by Senator Dodson; second by Senator Tucker) but did not take a final vote on the bill that day; the chair said the bill would be considered again after the floor session. The record shows multiple senators indicating they expect to hear additional testimony, and several members said they planned to examine audit materials and appointment language before voting.

The debate centered on a practical tradeoff: operational efficiency and cross‑staffing versus preserving subject‑matter representation and volunteer board membership that advocates say provides consumer protection. The committee recessed at the end of the hearing and expected to take final action on the bill later.