Interior Design Protection Consulting

May 14, 2013

Victory: Years of Interior Design Misrepresentation in TX to End!


On May 13th, the Texas Senate passed the extension of the interior design title law and ended years of misrepresentation in which the so-called “grandfathered” designers had been perpetrating a fraud on the public by calling themselves “registered” even though they had not met criteria under the law. (Note: IDPC objects to the entire basis of the title law and ALL interior design regulation, but that’s another story.)

Incredibly, nearly 70% of Texas’ current registered interior designers were grandfathered and don’t have the qualifications for registration that they insist that every other designer seeking registration after them must adhere to.  The Texas legislature recognized this deception and both the House and Senate have passed a bill demanding that every designer claiming that they are state registered must, in fact, meet the qualifications for registration required by the law within FOUR years.

The bill will go to Governor Perry to sign, and we do not expect any hold up.

Special thanks to Kelley Barnett for spearheading the superb grassroots effort!  IDPC along with our allies at the NKBA, AIA, and the Institute for Justice worked together with Kelley to obtain this outstanding victory – one step closer towards total freedom for the Texas design community.

Patti Morrow signature


March 19, 2010

IDPC: Texas interior design regulations

Texas Cartel:  One word tells YOUR story


In her article entitled “Texas Registered Interior Designers: One word tells your story,” Ms Hendricks calls the lifting of the prohibition on the title “interior designer” a mere “simple change.”  What she purposefully  fails to mention was that the change was ONLY made because a federal court ORDERED them to change the law since it violated both the Texas and Federal Constitution.  It was only after the Court declared it a violation of the law that the Board, who had fought vigorously to maintain its discriminatory prohibition and monopoly, was forced to give in.  If it was so simple, why did it take a court order to get them to recognize the right of non-registrants to call themselves “interior designers”?

Ms. Hendricks goes on to claim that TBAE’s sole interest is the “health, safety, and welfare of the public.”  This is an absurd allegation because (1) Texas only has a title law, and a title act doesn’t prevent anyone from practicing, and (2) there is not a shred of evidence – in Texas or anywhere else – that the unregulated practice of interior designers places the public in any form of jeopardy whatsoever.

Next, she disingenuously professes to be neutral maintaining “we don’t promote the profession, or the industry, or any individual or group of professionals.”   However, it is well-established that Ms. Hendricks is far from neutral on this matter and not without conflict.  It was clear from the transcript of her deposition that she was instrumental in passing the title act and has been an activist for full-blown occupational licensing – she has appeared before the legislature to urge just such a law.  She was a founding and current member of TAID, financially contributed to that organization, and previously served as its president.  She also received the ASID presidential citation for distinguished service award in 2003 – 9 years into her tenure as Executive Director of the licensing Board.  Impartial?  We think not.  She clearly is indoctrinated and a staunch advocate for TAID, ASID, and other members of the pro-regulation cartel.

Most disingenuous of all however is this statement:

“There are many ways we protect the public, but in this story we’re focused here on one method:  ensuring that the public is not misled in seeking the services of a design professional and ensuring that those professionals maintain the minimum professional standards set by law.”

Ms. Hendricks is fully aware that that is not true.  In her deposition, she was forced to acknowledge that potentially as many as 84% of the Texas “registered interior designers” were grandfathered under the original 1991 bill which merely required that they have 6 years of experience as an interior designer, and that there were a “flood of applications” granted under this grandfathering provision.  She also admitted under oath, that the marketing and public information about “registered interior designers” is, at best, misleading and inaccurate.  IDPC and our colleagues in the Freedom Movement have a different term for it:

FRAUD upon the public.

But don’t take our word for it – click on this link to read her own words in her deposition (substitute the term “registered interior designer” for interior design or designer where appropriate as the analysis is the same):

Create a free website or blog at