Cosmetology Board Executive Director Steve Young and Chairman Edwin Neill collude to covertly cram 40% license fee increase down licensees’ throats.


Cosmetology Board Chairman Edwin Neill, III

 

On Tuesday, April 18, 2017, Cosmetology Board Executive Director Steve Young and Chairman Edwin Neill, III, cavalierly walked into the Louisiana House Commerce Committee and, without any authorization from the present members of the Cosmetology Board and using Rep. Sherman Mack as an apparent naïve patsy, took the first critical step toward cramming a 40% increase down the throats of the cosmetologists whom they serve.  In the following brief video, Mack comes across as (being kind) uninformed and having little idea of what the bill even does, and he has to have his hand held throughout by Young and Neill to help explain its purpose:


Mack struggles to explain that the whole purpose of the bill is to enact a $10 annual increase in the licensing fee (from $25 to $35), and relies upon Young and Neill to answer his colleagues’ questions.

Now remember, all three (Young, Mack, and Neill) admit the whole purpose of the bill is to enact an increase in the licensing fee.  Nevertheless, as simple as that measure is, the Chairman of the Commerce Committee has to indicate an amendment is necessary to correct the bill!  We’re NOT kidding!  A bill THAT simple has to be amended because, as Mack explains, “a clerical error” caused the bill to read the license renewal fee would continue to be $25 rather than $35!  There was no “clerical error!!!”  They simply intentionally concealed the fact they were seeking a license fee increase because they feared public opposition!  Sound Off Louisiana has actively tracked every cosmetology bill since each was filed, and this one failed to even garner attention for the very reason that it contained no increase in licensing fees!  We have attended (or had a reliable representative attend) virtually every Cosmetology Board meeting for the last two years, and there was never an item presented to the Board to seek an increase in the licensing fee and the Board vote on it during that time.

Consequently, we made a public records request for any entry in the minutes wherein the actions of Young and Neill had been presented to the Board and a vote taken for them to pursue this increase!  The Board’s attorney, Sheri Morris, responded by directing us to February 2, 2015 minutes, wherein there was a parenthetical disclosure that Young had “requested” that Morris be permitted to seek an increase and that she attempt to enable the Board to be able to seek further increases by mere rule promulgation and not by having to have a statute enacted.  While Young “requested” that Morris pursue the increase, the “suggestion” was that specific about who was to do so (Morris), yet Morris is nowhere to be seen on the video above!  Did she have concerns about the legal grounds of pursuing an increase absent an action by the CURRENT Board?

So, Young and Neill are relying upon a February, 2015 (as in 26 months ago) discussion by the Board and, upon THAT, they just sashayed right on up to the Louisiana House of Representatives and sought the fee increase! Of course, there was a convenient “clerical error” so nobody would know what they were up to.  The present Cosmetology Board has only two members on it from those who heard Young make his “suggestion” in February of 2015 entailing Morris pursuing the increase.  They are Frances Hand, who was the previous long-time Chairman and whom Neill replaced as Chairman, and Jill Hebert.  Apparently, the viewpoints of Rev. James Williams, Melinda Tilley, William Greyson, Deidre Delpit, nor Mella Brown were deemed relevant (not to mention confirming, on the record, that Hebert and Hand still approve of the “suggestion.”)

Most importantly, the licensees were provided with no opportunity to observe a proposed fee increase appear on an agenda and weigh in on the matter themselves.  That opportunity may have been especially beneficial to Mr. Chris Guidry, who appeared at the April, 2017 meeting and was on the agenda to make a presentation to the Board on the topic of “deregulation.”  Guidry got no such opportunity, however, because an insufficient number of members attended to convene a meeting, thus triggering a lack of a quorum causing everyone to simply have to disband and go back home.  Having driven up from New Orleans, he was understandably frustrated.  He asked if the Board would have to pay all the per diems and hotel costs for those members who did show up, and we responded, “Yes.”  Furthermore, we informed him that the most recent meeting was certainly not the first time that had transpired.

We at Sound Off Louisiana very much wanted to hear what Mr. Guidry, a prominent hair stylist with Paris Parker in New Orleans and a graduate of Aveda Institute (for which the Louisiana franchises are owned by Neill), had to say (and videotape his commentary).  Our curiosity was peaked by his February 5, 2017 post in which he vents that Louisiana students “are required to complete 1,500 hours at a cost of around $20,000.”  He further complains that the Board “is a straight money grab.”  He further states that “the Board has no regard for the guest or the craft.”  He further describes the situation as “disgusting.”  In buttressing his argument that the Board “has no regard for the guest or the craft,” he states that the Board’s inspectors are only concerned with ensuring workers are licensed and up-to-date.  In all the meetings Sound Off Louisiana has attended, we have observed Guidry to be totally on point in that argument.  Every hearing we have observed has entailed licensing and not health and safety violations.  The only instance we observed that remotely qualified for a health and safety concern was in February when the Board conducted a hearing over a dog running around loose in a salon.  Even that, however, was a part of a larger issue of the potential use of an unlicensed manicurist.  Visit this link to see Guidry’s comments in full and those of some other contributors to the blog to which they were posted.

Now, in the preceding video, at the 1:44 mark, Rep. Kenny Cox asks why the fee increase is needed.  Thereafter, he is given a superb snow job by Neill during the next 20 seconds that the money is needed for things like painting the building and technology upgrades.  Well, Rep. Cox, you were lied to!!!  Let’s itemize off some of the REAL reasons the Board seeks this fee increase, shall we?  It cost money (and LOTS of it) for the following:

Having to pay MASSIVE legal fees and a settlement to resolve very obvious claims of discrimination of Vietnamese manicurists during which one inspector was alleged to have “falsely imprisoned” the owner of a salon as she, without a search warrant, plundered through all of the salon’s drawers and demanded that “nobody (not even the customers) move.”  The week after this settlement was reached, the inspector in question retired.  In the final hearing in Federal Judge Brian Jackson’s courtroom prior to the settlement, Judge Jackson said, “constitutional rights were clearly violated” through the actions of the inspector.

Having to pay even more legal fees upon the Institute for Justice suing the Board over it having shut down the operations of Indian eyebrow threaders.

Having to “rally the forces” entailing defeating a bill to allow hair braiding with no licenseSound Off Louisiana has learned that the Board has asked the bill’s sponsor, State Rep. Julie Emerson, to withdraw the bill.  We’ve also learned that she has politely informed them that she has no intention of pulling the bill.

Having to pay the investigative costs of an employee, Winn Johnson, selling answers to the cosmetology exam for $500 each.

Conducting multi-day hearings to ensure a shut-down of school owner Nelda Dural as well as striving to shut down all public schools (i.e. “zero cost competition”) teaching cosmetology such as Raynetta Frazier, who appears on video on the preceding link pleading with the Board not to shut her school down.  The total cost for the Board to close down Dural’s school based on student complaints (all of whom owed her money) was $43,000!!  That’s a figure that former Congressman Joseph Cao, who has never been bashful in characterizing the Cosmetology Board as “operating without regard for the law,” had to emphasize twice to Judge Jackson when he indicated it is “impossible” to fight this Board and referenced that Nelda Dural did try to, and the result was the $43,000 tab they held her liable for as a means to close her school down.

As evidenced by the following video, forcing a Vietnamese couple to have to beg and plead with the Board to permit her to work as a cosmetologist (by honoring through reciprocity her Texas license rather than grilling her about whether she has the equivalent of a 10th grade education):

Meanwhile, Executive Director Steve Young responds to Channel 2 (WBRZ)’s Lee Polowczuk asking if he is EVER going to hire a Vietnamese translator to interact with Vietnamese manicurists (who own 90% of the manicuring salons in Louisiana) by stating he is only concerned with having translators for hearings!

Closing down Jennifer Menard’s mobile salon.

And the biggest reason of all for seeking the increase which, as Young testified, would generate an estimated $350,000 each year?  That would be to chip away at the $3.1 million UNFUNDED pension liability for these bureaucrats to impede free enterprise via the mechanisms outlined above!  There’s also a $1.4 million amount for employee unfunded benefits, for a total of $4.5 million.  These, Rep. Cox, are the REAL reasons the increase was requested, and we see you fell for the slick little con job Neill pulled on you in those 20 seconds hook, line, and sinker.

The measure comes up for a vote by the full House on Tuesday, April 25, 2017.  We’ll see if this little slick maneuver by Neill and Young results in yet another, as Guidry says, “straight money grab” by two state officials who would resort to this type con job rather than having the guts to place the item on an agenda of the CURRENT Board and see how the new members and licensees feel about the measure.  Then again, it’s likely the anticipated reaction of licensees like Guidry that prompted them to resort to this despicable act in the first place!

 

If you would like to be added to our Sound Off Louisiana email list to be notified of future Sound Off posts, simply scroll to the very bottom of this page (mobile devices) or to the end of the right-hand column (desktops) and supply your email address within the subscribe box.  You’ll then receive an automated email from Word Press, and all you have to do is click on the blue “confirm follow” bar contained within that email, and you’ll begin receiving great posts such as the preceding one above. 

9 thoughts on “Cosmetology Board Executive Director Steve Young and Chairman Edwin Neill collude to covertly cram 40% license fee increase down licensees’ throats.”

    1. Probably not but, as Congressman Cao has emphasized, the Cosmetology Board “acts as if it does not have to comply with any laws.”

  1. It is a wonderful thing there are people like Mr. Burns that keeps watch on these criminals within our State. The more we learn about the incompetence and corruption the harder it is to continue reading the next paragraph as it gets worse.

    1. Thanks for your kind words, Phyllis, and please hold in and keep reading. When enough people get involved and legislators feel the pressure, they tend to cave under it!

  2. Where is the CB’s legal staff for the hearing? Did they even know? If the bill passes, can it be successfully challenged in court since the CB never voted to approve giving Young or Neill authorization to seek the increase? If so, will Neill and young be held personally liable for the litigation costs?

  3. ALL. 35,000 COSMETOLOGIST IN THE STATE OF LOUISIANA SAY NO TO HOUSE BILL 326. STEVE YOUNG, LOUISIANA STATEBOARD OF COSMETOLOGY DIRECTOR AND EDWIN NEILL, LOUISIANA STATEBOARD OF COSMETOLOGY CHAIRMAIN WENT BEFORE THE LEGISLATOR TO INCREASE THE COST OF COSMETOLOGY LICENSE BY 40%. THEY SAID THAT IT IS TO PAINT THE BUILDING AND UPGRADE TECHNOLOGY, WE ARE SUPPOSE TO BELIEVE IT IS DUE TO THE COST OF LIVING. WE ARE TOLD THAT THE BUILDIND HAS NOT BEEN PAINTED IN 10 YEARS. WHEN ASKED ABOUT THE BUDGET, THEY RESPONDED, THAT THEY OPERATE ON 1.9 MILLION A YEAR. THIS IS ALMOST 2 MILLION A YEAR. I DO SUPPOSE THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN ENOUGH TO SOMEHOW GET THE BUILDING PAINTED IN 10 YEARS. NOW YOU WANT TO INCREASE THE COSMETOLOGY LICENSE 40% SO SAY TO PAINT THE BUILDING. HOW CAN THIS AGENCY DEMAND ANY SALON TO KEEP UP THEIR FACILITY, IF LOUISIANA STATEBOARD OF COSMETOLOGY, WHO OPERATE WITH 1.9 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR HAS GREAT DIFFICULTY MANAGING IT FUNDS. COSMETOLOGIST PLEASE RESPOND….. WE MUST LET OUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS KNOW THAT WE DO NOT SUPPORT HOUSE BILL 326 TO INCREASE THE COST OF COSMETOLOGY LICENSING FEE. YOUNG AND NEILL REFERENCED THAT THE BARBERING FEE IS 4O.00. THE BARBERING INDUSTRY HAS AN APPERTIENCE PROGRAM WHICH AFFORDS THEM THE ABILITY TO CREATE JOBS AND EDUCATE AND MENTOR THE UNDERPRIVILEGED TEENS. YOUNG AND NEILL SHOULD CONSIDER SOWING SEEDS OF HOPE RATHER THAN OVER TAXING THE BACKS OF LOUISIANA’S HARD WORKING COSMETOLOGIST.

  4. I guess these people on this board want inner city crime to escalate since they try to block what heritage we know in hair braiding and don’t want inner city black females trying to better themselves by learning cosmetology in public school. Glad Raynetta showed up to stop them dead in they tracks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.