Honorable Lois W. Kolkhorst, Chair, House Committee on Public Health
FROM:
John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE:
HB722 by Harless (Relating to the regulation of massage therapists, massage establishments, massage schools, and sexually oriented businesses; providing penalties.), As Introduced
The provisions of the bill that are the subject of this analysis are the provisions that would deal with felony sanctions. The bill would amend the Occupations Code by expanding the list of prohibited practices relating to the regulation of massage therapists, sexually oriented businesses, and persons while in a massage establishment; providing criminal penalties. The bill would make a violation of prohibited practices relating to the regulation of massage therapy punishable as a state jail felony if it is shown that the person has been previously convicted two or more times. Under current statute, a violation of prohibited practices relating to the regulation of massage therapy is punishable as a state jail felony if the actor has been previously convicted three or more times of an offense involving certain violations by a licensed massage therapist, or an owner or operator of a massage establishment; otherwise the offense is punishable at various misdemeanor levels.
A state jail felony is punishable by confinement in a state jail for a term from 180 days to 2 years and, in addition to confinement, an optional fine not to exceed $10,000 or Class A Misdemeanor punishment (mandatory post conviction community supervision).
In fiscal year 2010, approximately 85 individuals were arrested, and of those arrested less than 10 were placed on misdemeanor community supervision for a misdemeanor offense involving a violation of prohibited practices relating to the regulation of massage therapy. In fiscal year 2010, less than 5 individuals were arrested, or admitted to state jail for a felony offense involving a violation of prohibited practices relating to the regulation of massage therapy. For this analysis, it is assumed the number of offenders convicted under this statute would not result in a significant impact on the programs and workload of state corrections agencies or on the demand for resources and services of those agencies.