Santa Barbara should reject the proposed ordinance requiring California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC) certification for all massage therapists. This certification should remain voluntary, as was intended when CAMTC was created in 2009.
CAMTC itself notes that it is “not a law enforcement agency nor government agency.” As a private nonprofit, CAMTC is not subject to public records laws, due process requirements, or democratic oversight. CAMTC should not function as an equivalent to a state licensing board unless it adopts the same standards of transparency and checks on its authority.
Supporters of mandatory CAMTC certification frame it as a public safety measure. But forcing every massage therapist to obtain certification from a private nonprofit gives extraordinary power over people’s livelihoods to an organization dogged by allegations of discrimination, arbitrary decision-making, and failure to adhere to its own stated processes.
The problems with allowing CAMTC to gatekeep the massage industry are not just hypothetical. In 2024, Asian Americans Advancing Justice filed a discrimination lawsuit against CAMTC on behalf of Chinese and Thai massage therapy students who allege they were denied certification because of perceived English-language deficiencies. According to the lawsuit, students were subjected to arbitrary interviews unrelated to massage competency, which constituted discrimination based on their “race, color, national origin, or primary language.”
In 2025, Hanley Chan, a veteran and former law enforcement officer, was nominated to serve on the CAMTC board. According to Chan, he brought “relevant experience, community ties, and a clear vision for how the council could better serve the diverse workforce it regulates.” Chan, the only Asian American nominee, was never interviewed. Instead, the seat was given without public discussion to a white male former board member with a spotty attendance record.
Allegations of anti-Asian racism are especially troubling in an industry where Asian immigrants make up a large share of the workforce. Massage therapy has long provided economic mobility for immigrants. Policies that funnel workers through a private certification body accused of discriminatory practices risk reinforcing exactly the kinds of racialized suspicion and exclusion that Asian Americans have faced for far too long.
CAMTC has also faced criticism over its finances. In 2022, CAMTC approved a 50 percent fee increase, increasing fees from $200 to $300, paid every two years. Critics, including the Associated Bodywork & Massage Professionals (ABMP), claimed the fee increase was pushed through in a manner calculated to limit public scrutiny.
Another reason that the fee increase was controversial is that CAMTC had recently described itself as financially healthy. In fact, the organization stated that it had chosen to provide “a higher level of customer service and support of local law enforcement and local government rather than having an excessive amount of reserves sitting in the bank.”
After the fee increase, CAMTC’s reserves grew, as did executive compensation. In 2025, CAMTC’s CEO earned $615,897. By comparison, a 2019 study of the salaries of regulatory board executive officers (EOs) found that the highest-paid made $149,000. As another point of reference, the 2025 salary of the Secretary of the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency was $247,000.
Critics find this disturbing because CAMTC’s funding comes from fees collected from massage therapists, including low-income immigrants and independent workers. The ABMP has accused CAMTC of “expanding their purview beyond their original legislative charter.” The result is that massage therapists — whose average income nationally was only $32,015 in 2023 — are paying to fund policing initiatives and regulatory expansion that they may not benefit from or support.
A related concern is that CAMTC’s board has several members representing law enforcement, whereas only two out of 13 seats are specifically allotted to massage therapists. Critics say this has led the organization to prioritize policing and lobbying for regulatory initiatives over advancing the profession of massage therapy. The CAMTC defends its board composition by saying that its role is to protect the public interest rather than represent the massage industry. But the public interest might be better served by an organization focused on elevating the practice of massage as a healing art rather than one that views the industry primarily through a lens of suspicion, enforcement, and punishment.
Even many massage therapists who support stronger statewide standards argue that California should create a truly public licensing system. The two major massage therapy professional associations, ABMP and the American Massage Therapy Association (AMTA), favor sunsetting CAMTC and replacing it with a “real” licensing board.
Given the controversies surrounding CAMTC, the city should maintain the voluntary framework already established under California law. The city can pursue legitimate labor and safety goals through ordinary business regulations, health standards, and enforcement against actual crimes. There is no need to impose new barriers, especially at a time when immigrant communities already face heightened fear and scrutiny. Making CAMTC certification mandatory gives too much power to an unaccountable organization accused of discriminating against the immigrant communities that built California’s massage industry.
