Critical Classifications

Critical ClassificationsThe CSLB has seen the error of their ways and has done away with the list of Critical Classifications!

Yep, you heard me! The Contractors State License Board, under the direction of the new Registrar Cindi Christenson (she’s moved to the top of my Christmas List!), has seen the light.

They have done away with what has been dubbed the “Villucci Rule” or “Villucci Disaster” and have gone back to processing license applications in a manner that is consistent with the law.

No longer will they be REQUIRING applicants of the A, B, C10, C16, C20, C36, C38, and C57 classifications to provide written documentation to PROVE their experience.

It’s been a long 3+ years, but the day has finally come. To put it in the words of the Registrar herself at a recent Board meeting… the previous way of processing applications was “probably improper.” One of the Board members wanted to know why application submittals have gone up, but the number of licenses issued has gone down.. uh… Rick Villucci is why!! I wonder how Rick is doing in his newly demoted position?!?! LOL

This means that ALL applications will be processed according to the contractors license law. This is to say that a minimum of 3% of ALL applications received will be pulled for a secondary review… as the law allows!

Bottom line… your A, B, C10, etc app will most likely get through the initial review process without issue (unless it isn’t formatted properly… [I can help with this] and is rejected) and sent straight to the exams. This is good new people!!

I give the CSLB a lot of grief (having been a former CSLB employee I feel I’ve earned the right), but in this instance… I totally applaud the Registrar!!

Please follow and like us:
error

Comments

  1. So the Villucco rule was to pull a higher % of applications to be audited? Also, what’s in place of written documentation to prove work history? where do I find these new rules?

    Tganks

    • He decided that 8 of the classifications held a level of health and safety issues that required more scrutiny of the applications. There was no rule, law, or regulation that gave him/they the authority to single out applications for certain classifications.

      They used the law that allows the CSLB to pull a minimum of 3% of all apps received to justify what they were doing. It was unethical, unprofessional, and most likely illegal.

      I have a page on my site that outlines what they were asking for from the “critical classifications” applicants. Click here to view.

      If your application is selected at random, the documents listed on that page is what you’d have to provide.

      • So they are no longer asking for that information listed on the outline?

        Thanks.

        …and thanks for the quick response!

        • They are no longer asking for it automatically when the app is first processed. They will only ask for it if your app is pulled as part of that 3% minimum. When they do that, it’s usually after the exam date has been issued.

  2. Thank you for your prompt response, please keep me posted.

  3. Great News!

    Does this means is I can re-apply again, it will not get audited automatically?
    By the way, I already passed both exams! But after got audited and rejected due to insufficient payment receipts / W2
    Thank you for good news.

    Vazrik

    • That still remains to be seen. I spoke to a guy today who is in the same situation. I’ve reached out to my connection at the CSLB to find out if an applicant who withdrew his app last year is able to re-apply this year and get thru the system without being put thru the wringer again. I’ll keep you posted.

Speak Your Mind

*

%d bloggers like this: