Your License For A Misdemeanor. Any Misdemeanor.
KBHI Proposes In New Regs.
Operating a nudist colony for religious reasons with no permit from the county judge may be the next far-fetched thing the Kentucky Board of Home Inspectors (KBHI) picks to chase a license. It's a misdemeanor. One of many. Many. Many misdemeanors, down to nudist camps. Or marrying your cousin.
Hard as it is to believe, the KBHI just proposed making any misdemeanor enough to yank a license, or deny a new one. It's part of the KBHI's proposed changes to our home inspector licensing regulation, 815 KAR 6:010.
Today, only a misdemeanor "involving theft or dishonesty" or a "sex offense" counts under the regulation. Theft and sex offenses are pretty directly connected to going into homes to inspect. Running a nudist colony is not. So why change to any misdemeanor? Anytime? It's a "fix" looking for a problem. What's the point?
That's the main reason rules like the proposed reg are just plain against the law. The proposal also undoes the very carefully considered decisions the KBHI made -- following the law -- which have worked fine, for years. Decisions of past Boards, and Kentucky law, both deserve a little more respect. So do home inspectors. There's also something to be said for not changing rules that the public and others have just gotten used to. All true. And still, the real question is why is the KBHI breaking the law again?
"No person shall be ... disqualified from pursuing, practicing, or engaging in any occupation for which a license is required solely because of a prior conviction of a crime..." unless it "directly relates" to the licensed occupation. KRS 335B.020. You might think that was a common sense, obvious and fair law. Most people do.
The Board would know about KRS 335B.020 if it was committed to respecting the decisions and work of Boards who have gone before it. There's an old rule on this basic idea: "If you do not respect the decisions the board made before you, why should anyone respect the decisions you make on this board now? Don't both deserve the same respect?"
The prior Board carefully debated this when the present regulation was adopted. This Board should listen to those tapes (KBHI meetings all were taped then, as is routine at DHBC, and here's one more example of how useful that can be). The Board that wrote today's misdemeanor rule carefully ticked off the statute's three tests to decide what "directly relates" to home inspecting. Drunk driving? Nope. Plea bargains? Nope. The KBHI decided the only misdemeanors that related to the ability and fitness to inspect homes were things like burglary and sex crimes. This Board apparently did not know to ask that question.
It's sad that this ends up being one more example of the Board "going it alone," flying by the seat of its pants -- instead of getting the help and public input it desperately needs.
When the Board debated this rule only a few years ago, it sent out public drafts for comment. It checked out the rules at other state boards. Then, the Board also had Department of Housing, Buildings and Construction, (DHBC) laywers and staff who knew licensing law, KRS 335B.020, and inspecting homes like the back of their hands.
This Board is different. It never posted a draft regulation or asked any mere mortals for comments. Since it marched out of DHBC, or got thrown out, the KBHI only has a rental lawyer, part-time, who never worked with housing or construction. Between the public feedback the Board worked hard to hear, and the DHBC staff who knew this stuff so well, the KBHI was able to avoid mistakes like this when the misdemeanor regulation was written. But not this Board.
This is not exactly a fire that needs to be put out. In six years, since the board issued its first license, the regulation has worked.
You have to wonder if this Board even knew what "misdemeanors" are, or how they differ from felonies and violations, when they wrote this. They never asked for a list.
But you might be curious. So here's a sample of misdemeanors the Board thinks it should be able to take back your license over. Don't be marrying your second cousin (Class B misdemeanor). Sure don't want no second-cousin-marrying types getting' no home inspector license, fo sure. Don't even "attempt" to marry anyone mentally disabled (Class B misdemeanor), no matter what.
It's a misdemeanor to be "fortune-telling" without a permit. It's a misdemeanor to own or run a nudist society, for religious or health reasons, without a license from the county judge. It's a misdemeanor to buy cigarettes or a beer for someone under age. Wouldn't want any low-life like that picking up a home inspector license. It's a misdemeanor to cure cancer, unless you're a doctor or a dentist. Go figure. It's a misdemeanor to deliver malt beverage Sundays, or any day between midnight and 6 a.m. It's a Class A misdemeanor -- A, now, whooo, that's biggie -- to willfully goof up Catholic church charitable gaming record. It's also a Class A misdemeanor to "erase" a true entry in those records. You get the idea. That's why state law demands some "direct" connection between a prior conviction and getting thrown out of a licensed job.
Then come the details. Does a misdemeanor count if it was expunged -- wiped off the record -- by court order? What about if it was a juvenile status offense?
Might as well skip the details in this case.
KRS 335B.020 should put this one out of its misery without further ado.
Buddy Can You Spare a Dime?
Board Votes Itself a 300% Pay Hike In New KBHI Regs!
The Kentucky Board of Home Inspectors (KBHI) wants a raise.
They think they can scrape by with about a 300% raise, bare minimum. It's the "bare minimum," because that would be the new guaranteed base pay.
But that's not all. They're tucking even more pay checks away in their brand new pay raise regulation, 815 KAR (Kentucky Administrative Regulations) 6:070, slipped in on Jan. 13, 2012, on the Q.T.
Why not just 350, the roasting point of a turkey?
Right now, the Board gets paid a "per diem" (per day) rate for each day a member attends a meeting. They want more. So the new reg also would let the Board write themselves checks for "otherwise engaging in the in-person, face-to-face duties of a member of the Board as approved by the Board."
No one has the slightest idea what that means. No home inspector law sets out any "in-person, face-to-face duties" of a Board member -- other than attending meetings. But you can wager it means at least one thing -- they will put more home inspector money in their pockets, and bank even more on top, buying themselves more meals, hotel rooms, drinks, and gas.
The Governor -- who appointed most of the Board members -- gave himself a pay cut and ordered across-the-board cuts throughout state government. This Board is above all that. Even getting paid for going to meetings is not enough. Now they want more -- for not going to meetings, just going "in-person, face-to-face," uh, somewhere, sometime, because, well, they say so. Does gin at a bar count? Sounds like "face-to-face, in-person."
You might feel a little Scotch, hassling a guy over $100 a day. But there once was a time when the honor of the Governor appointing you to serve the public was plenty.
Those Board members are not the only ones having a hard time, though. Every dime that goes into the Board pockets comes directly out of home inspector pockets. Home inspectors are having a tough enough time right now that more drop out most months than renew their licenses.
In fact, Kentucky as a whole is having a pretty tough time. The Governor cut back the budget about 23%, after his own pay cut.
Some Board members say they need a raise to attract good candidates to serve on the Board. Of course, the old pay -- $35 a day, for meetings only -- attracted each of them. They're not saying that they, themselves, are crumby Board candidates, of course. They're just saying they really are Secret Heroes, and no one else would conceivably be wacky enough to go on the Board -- like they did, for today's chinchy $35 per day. Isn't it obvious it would take top dollar -- $65 more -- to reel in those stellar candidates today? Did we mention there also are three people applying to fill the one vacant seat on the Board today? And every other seat was filled under today's pay, with more applicants than seats?
Some inspectors think the Board should "earn" any raise. They figure any Board whose main achievement was blowing over a quarter-million dollars in home inspector license fees still has not earned any pay. There are even some who think the Board should pay back the daily pay it took if cannot figure out how to do anything worthwhile with all those license fees in the last six years. Call it the Ron Paul school.
Call it another $100 down the same charity.
Or, call it the way you see it -- and show up at the hearing on the new regulation. It's Feb. 21, 2012 at 1 p.m. at the Board rental "office," 911 Leawood Drive, Frankfort, KY 40602. If you're going, send a note to the Board administrator, tony.crockett@ky.gov. You know Steve will be there. Always is. If you want to send written comments instead, they go to Tony Crockett, at the same address. Written comments are due there by Feb. 29, 2012. Feel free to call PLI if you'd like to kick around ideas before you comment.
The full text of the regulation is online at http://www.lrc.ky.gov/kar/815/006/070reg.htm
SEND COMMENTS
GO TO THE HEARING
A public hearing on this administrative regulation will be held on February 21, 2012, at 1:30 p.m., local time, at the Kentucky Board of Home Inspectors,911 Leawood Drive, Frankfort, Kentucky.
Individuals interested in being heard at this hearing shall notify this agency in writing five (5) workdays prior to the hearing of their intent to attend. If no notification of intent to attend the hearing is received by that date, the hearing may be canceled. This hearing is open to the public. Any person who wishes to be heard will be given an opportunity to comment on the proposed administrative regulation.
If you do not wish to be heard at the public hearing, you may submit written comments on the proposed administrative regulation. Written comments will be accepted until close of business on February 29, 2012.
Send written notification of intent to be heard at the public hearing or written comments on the proposed administrative regulation to:
CONTACT PERSON: Tony Crockett, Board Administrator, Office of Occupations and Professions, 911 Leawood Drive, Frankfort, Kentucky 40602, phone (502) 564-3296, fax (502) 564-4818.
KRS 198B.704(17) allows each member of the Board a "minimum salary of $35.00 per diem." It also provides each member of the board "is entitled to reimbursement for traveling expenses and other expenses actually incurred in connection with the member's duties as established under KRS 45.101." Nothing in KRS 45.101 says a word about "in-person, face-to-face duties."
So the new reg tries a little slight of hand. Instead of the obvious, plain English definition of "per day" and "actual and necessary travel and other expenses," the new regulation wiggles to make up its own definition.
Under the new regulation, "actual and necessary travel and other expenses" would include whatever the Board says it includes.
Here's the slight-of-hand in its wording: "Each member of the Board shall receive: (1) A per diem of $100.00 for: (a) Attending each meeting of the Board; (b) Otherwise engaging in the in-person, face-to-face duties of a member of the Board as approved by the Board, and; (c) Any additional days of travel incidental to and contemporaneous with attending each meeting of the Board or engaging in the in-person, face-to-face duties of a member of the Board as approved by the Board."
Plus "reimbursement for their actual and necessary expenses."
Even if this was passable English, the main trouble is that there are no "in-person, face-to-face duties of a member of the Board" -- except, of course, attending a meeting of the KBHI. Even attending meetings is required, under the Board statute, only four (4) times a year, though the Board has managed to milk it by setting up useless monthly meetings.
Under this regulation, "per diem" turns into as many $100 days as Board members are willing to hand each other.
They can drive around. They can drive to Board meetings a day early, get inspectors to cover their hotel room and bar tab, stick around another day and play in Frankfort. Call that three "per diem" paychecks, all sitting on the stool, soaking up nifty "in-person, face-to-face" duties.
Your license dollars at work.
