Architect license board faces review
Stones By UZ BUTCHER
Of the Emerald
An estimated 75 percent of the
state’s landscape architects, sev
eral of their clients, and numerous
members and students of the
University’s landscape architec
ture department will converge on
the city of Salem today to attend a
hearing determining the fate of the
Landscape Architect Examiners,
scheduled to terminate July 1,
1980.
Members of the board and its
licensees will be among suppor
ters for continuation of the board,
while the major opposition will be
found encapsulated in a formal
report by the Legislative Research
Office, which has been in charge
strated public need for the licens
ing of landscape architects and
there would be no significant
dangerto the public health, safety,
or welfare if the (landscape ar
chitect) statutes are repealed.
Therefore, the staff recommends
that the Legislative Assembly take
no action to reenact (them)."
This recommendation is based
Sunset law to affect 44 boards
me wregon sunset Law will put state boards
and commissions to rest as they outlive their use
fulness in an effort to check “mushrooming
bureaucracy.”
Oregon’s law affects 44 occupational and pro
fessional licensing boards, specifically those
comprised of non-state employees. Every two
years, the law states, several of these boards will
cease to exist unless renewed by the legislature.
To determine if renewal is justified, the law re
quires that each agency be “thoroughly” re
viewed by a joint interim committee. This commit
tee, or task force, is charged with determining
whether an agency has demonstrated a public
need for its continued existence, using the 15
guidelines set down by the law.
These guidelines address everything from the
efficiency with which complaints received by an
agency are processed, to economic impact of
certain regulations and the extent to which the
state's power needs to be associated with a par
ticular regulatory board.
Basically, sunset review follows the same pat
tern for each agency. The Legislative Research
Office assists the task force by providing an
analysis of each board; this is formulated through
a multiplicity of surveys, interviews, and observa
tions.
Within this analysis a staff recommendation for
or against the board’s termination appears, along
with several secondary recommendations sug
gesting improvements should the agency be re
newed.
Upon completion, a public hearing is held in
Salem, where this report and other testimony are
discussed.
“The burden of proof rests with the board,” said
Allan Green, Legislative Research director, and
so the board’s participation in this hearing is of
vital importance to its existence.
Some time after this hearing, the task force
drafts its decision concerning the board’s re
newal, which will take the form of a recommenda
tion to the 1979 Legislature.
The first nine Oregon agencies affected by
sunset legislation will terminate on July 1, 1980
unless renewed. Their reviews will be completed
by the end of this year.
These nine boards and the month their reviews
will be completed are: The State Board of Land
scape Architect Examiners, April; the Auc
tioneer’s Licensing Board, May; the State
Board of Watchmakers, June; the boards regulat
ing television repair persons and landscape con
tractors, May or June; the Oregon Liquor Control
Commission, the State Racing Commission, the
Board on Police Standards and Training and the
Board on Teacher Standards and Training, Au
gust.
profession’s state licensing board
and perhaps that of the profes
sion, itself.
This is the first sunset review
hearing to be held as a result of
the 1977 Legislature’s enactment
of the sunset law. (See story this
page.)
At the hearing, the Joint Interim
Task Force on Sunset will listen to
opposing testimony concerning
the renewal of the State Board of
of analyzing the board since last
November.
This report holds undeniable
weight in the task force’s
decision-making process, and this
is what has the state’s landscape
architects disturbed. Its final draft,
mailed to licensees only last
week, contains the following
primary recommendation:
“The Legislative Research staff
concludes that there is no demon
on a number of findings, some of
which the state’s landscape ar
chitects find controversial and
even misleading.
First, the report makes the dis
tinction that Oregon landscape
architects are regulated by a title
act, not a practice act, i.e., un
licensed persons may practice
their skills providing they refer to
themselves by another name,
such as landscape designers.
Also, the profession in changing
so much, says the report, that
none of its common definitions
accurately reflect it any longer,
and licensees are voluntarily
using other titles to describe what
they do. Thus, it concludes, title
licensing seems superfluous.
Asserting that the exam’s re
quirements and low passing rate
might indeed have this effect, and
that “this burden of higher prices”
outweighs any social costs that
could arise in the absence of
licensing, the report finds “no
economic justification for licens
ing landscape architects.”
The interpretations of these
findings have two sides, however.
Most of the state’s landscape ar
chitects agree that the profession
is changing, but the problem of its
definition is neither new, nor war
rants eliminating its licensure.
Says Ron Cameron, landscape
architect of the local firm Ruff,
Cameron, Lacoss, and As
sociates, “The public and most of
the people who use our services
are absolutely unaware of what
our major objectives and skills
are. Therefore, they are in a much
greater need for the licensing pro
tection than, say, an architect."
The fact that landscape ar
chitects are using different titles,
asserts Bob Lacoss, of the same
firm, "is because they’re fighting a
stereotype in the public mind of
what a landscape architect is.”
r
But the title regulation still en
sures the public that the bearer
has the skills and education
necessary.
Although there are critics of the
test among the profession, its dif
ficulty is more often seen as an
upholder of standards than a bar
rier.
And the report’s statement that
landscape architecture schools
are not preparing students for the
test must be met with a reminder
that one to two years of work ex
perience are required before it can
be taken for the specific purpose
of allowing the candidate to gain
necessary technical and design
knowledge.
Concerning the economic im
pact of licensing, the report itself
states, “Landscape architect
license fees are small in compari
son to the value of work performed
and, therefore, have little impact
on consumer costs.”
Even this, however, is an
analysis of short-run costs only,
one which ignores both long-run
and social costs. In the context of
these two, licensing is deemed
even more necessary, according
to Cameron and Lacoss.
Our profession is not dealing
with short-run, easily identifiable
costs, says Cameron. “Our major
emphasis is going to be on the
nebulous, long-term things which
probably in a few years won’t be
nebulous at all.”
STORIES TO BE TOLD
V' or HISTORIA PARA SER CANTADAS
By Osvaldo Dragun
“The Man with the Abscessed
Tooth”
The Story of the Man Who Turned
into a Dog”
“The Story of Panchito Gonzalez”
April 14, 15, 19, 20. 21, 22
8:00 P.M.
Box Office Noon - Five Daily
686-4191
Adm. $1.25
Arena Theatre
EMU Cultural Forum presents
The Annual
Undergraduate Art
Show
April 24 - 28
12-4 pm 167 EMU
The Following Guidelines Should Be Followed When
Submitting A Work:
1. Each artist may submit a total of two
works. They may be drawings, photographs,
paintings or self-standing sculpture. All
pieces must be properly mounted, and
2-dimensional works no larger than 4’ x 4’.
2. Each entry must have an entry card
and jury card filled out; the entry card must
be returned to the Forum by April 21 (Fri
day). Jury cards should be attached to the
works. Cards are available in Suite 2, EMU.
3. Pieces must be brought to Room 167
EMU between 3 and 4 pm Saturday, April
22. The works will be juried and rejected
works should be picked up between 5 & 6 pm
Sunday.
4. The pieces may be picked up after the
show on Friday evening, April 28, between
6:30 & 7:30 pm.
STUDY IN EUROPE
WHILE EARNING
U.O. CREDIT
The University of Oregon announces
the opportunity to spend a term or
year of study in Avignon, France;
London, England or Cologne,
Germany (fall term only)
• No language prerequisite
j*Vou may combine the programs (spend a term at each site)!
• Live with families
For more information contact International
Student Services, 172 Oregon Hall. You are
encouraged to attend a presentation on the
programs Tuesday, April 25 at 4:00 p.m. in the
EMU, room to be posted.