This is one of the hidden dangers of turning control of the profession over to the state. You are not only subject to the whims of those formulating the laws governing you, today…but those “down the road” as well.
What is wrong with allowing the market to decide what is good and what is not?
I have no information beyond the link that was posted as far as the bill update. I suspect we will see a number of such updates, explanations, definitions as it moves on. I think they are trying to formulate it all from the basic skeleton they have.
I wish I could attend. I am booked though. I am even working later today (Sunday), which I normally try to avoid. I was hoping that there would have been a little more notice than what we received. I can usually block out some time when I haven’t scheduled any inspections yet.
I am hoping that TVW will have it archived on their website, so that I can watch it later.
Their link;
http://www.tvw.org/media/recentevnt.cfm?CFID=7052255&CFTOKEN=87694826
Thanks for the Link Harold, It’s been pretty slow over here, most of my inspections any more seem to be on weekends, people don’t like to take time off work unless they have too, all my kids are grown so weekends don’t really bother me, my wife isn’t a great fan, but it doesn’t upset that I’m working half as much as if I was going fishing on the weekend and leaving her home.
I’ll check out that link, I hope they show the meeting.
Mentoring:
The concept of mentoring is excellent, but from what I have been able to gather, here is the problem and how events unfolded. Some of the individuals who would have been grandfathered in with the industry advisory committee suggestions decided that if new inspector legislation was on the horizon, they wanted to make money off these new people. I know, from associates in meetings conducted by a leading HI society, that some of those individuals publicly stated that they looked on mentoring as a possible new income stream – new inspectors paying an hourly fee for mentoring.
Because some of these people were obvious about this desire in public, the word was out and the legislature was told – in resounding measure – that mentoring was a problem because it would increase the cost of becoming a home inspector. Some figures were estimated in the $50 to $100 per hour range for mentoring. Figure that at maybe three or four hours per inspection, and 30 inspections as they suggested and it is very expensive. So, from what I have gathered, the legislature decided to side with the advisory committee on the concept and value of mentoring…but they decided to bind the hands of mentors and state that it must be done gratis.
So basically, now we have a proposed bill that requires mentoring for some new inspectors, but the parties who could provide it are not allowed by law to charge for the service. Obviously, at least in my analysis, this will result in those potential mentors just “freezing-out” new potential inspectors. Who would want to take them out? Honestly, it is not within the realm of reasonable to expect someone to train their competition for free.
As a result of this wrangling, it seems to me that mentoring should be removed. Either that or come up with a system like Oregon. In Oregon, each applicant is allowed to have experience points, and that earns the person the right to sit for a test. These points come from trade or construction experience, home inspection experience, qualified education, seminars, etc and mentoring is good for a few points.
From what I have been able to gather, this is the situation with mentoring. I think it might have been more straight forward had there not been an overwhelming number of concerned people who told legislators that the mentoring was being promoted so certain “grandfathered” inspectors could make extra money. The cat was out of the bag, so to speak.
Before anyone points it out, I admit that I am affiliated with the state college system and the BTC training program. That role obviously influences my view but it was in that position, where I talk to many inspectors and other people, that I became aware of what seems to be taking place with mentoring. How it will all turn out … no clue!
If your planning on attending the hearing Monday 10AM:
http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature/showagenda.aspx?id=11602&Acronym=LCRD
About parking, see link below:
http://www.leg.wa.gov/WorkingwithLeg/dashshuttle.htm
Capitol Campus:
http://www1.leg.wa.gov/documents/LIC/Documents/Education_and_Information/Map_Capitol_Campus_and_Vicinity.pdf
Possible executive session on bills heard in committee. Other business.
Does this mean they may make a decision?
http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/2007-08/Pdf/Bill%20Reports/Senate/5788.SBR.pdf
This is from the ninth. Is this more recent than the other copy we read before?
This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members
in their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a
statement of legislative intent.
Reciprocity: The director of DOL may issue a license to a person who is a licensed home
inspector in another state if the person’s qualifications meet the licensing requirements of this
state.
It seems this is an updated copy.
Charge for menotring, yes.
Inspectors in the middle of no where face additional hurdles to starting a successful HI business no matter if it is in Greer, AZ or Walla Walla, WA; that’s how life works.
Liability is always an issue and each situation has to be looked at carefully.
You always ask the client if they mind that you are training a new HI.
I personaly found my formal HI training including two years of ITA’s convention CEU’s lame for the most part.
Good Luck in WA fellow HI’s
It seems to be updated, but pretty much all the same.
Here’s an Interesting change:
Original:
(2) On July 1, 2008, any person who has been actively engaged in
2 the business of conducting home inspections for at least two years and
3 who has conducted at least one hundred home inspections may apply to
4 the board for initial licensure without meeting the examination or
5 instruction requirements of this chapter.
Senate Bill Reprot 02/09/07
Grandfather Clause: On July 1, 2008, any person who has been actively engaged in
conducting home inspections for at least two years may apply for a license without first
meeting the exam or instruction requirements. The person must pass the written exam before his or her license can be renewed.
Where did the 100 Inspections GO???
Gone. And it also states that an inspector from another state must be licensed in that state to be licensed here. Looks like alot of changes going into it last minute before they put it in front of the public.
Does anyone know if it looks like they can rule on it tomorrow?
Don’t confuse the actual wording of the legislation with the report prepared as background for the legislators. The report is just an outline, not the actual wording of the bill.
It’s a summary Wendy, don’t count on the 100 being gone, and the only requirement for someone out of State is to meet the requirements of Washington, to have been " actively" in the business of Home Inspection for 2 years
You beat me to it by 6 minutes Steve.
Did you get the picture of the Narrows I sent?
Getting a little aggressive for the thread aren’t we Lewis?
Anyway. I’ll be there tomorrow. So I’ll have a pretty darn good take on the whole thing tomorrow afternoon.
I’ll wave to ya. 
Those were great pictures Lewis. I am over the bridge a couple times a week and some of those days can be real ugly, especially when the wind is blowing. I could never do what those bridge workers do. Gives me the willies just thinking about it.
The ones without the fog make me dizzy, my wife’s uncle emailed me those this morning, I don’t know where he found them. I used to live south of Gig Harbor I drove that bridge everyday to Ft Lewis, and my wife drove it getting to work, I remember several times when we had to drive clear down to Olympia and around to get back home, with that wind through the Narrows that bridge is quite an engineering feat.
Send me an Email about the meeting tomorrow if you think of it