I do not believe an increase in the license fee for veterinarians is warranted.  Especially in this economic environment, increasing fees to small business is extremely harmful.  Many veterinarians are trying to maintain their employees and increasing fees and expenses to them may cause some to cut employees or employees compensation.  Government spending should be cut.  Increasing license fees should not be done.

What justification do you have for the "user" fee increase? What expenses have risen or what additional services are we veterinarians going to receive from the state? Are ther new federal unfunded mandates?

This program is required by law to be 100% self-supporting.  If you want to be licensed, you pay the entire cost yourself.  There is no taxpayer support for your government-guaranteed monopoly.  The cost of personnel, of rent, and of IT services (VITA) have all increased, and are not in the control of the Board.  Do yourself a favor, and support your regulatory board instead of complaining like a layman.

I have had a recent experience with the board and based on my experience, I do not feel the board is justified in raising fees as I do not believe that this board serves the public except for licensing purposes.

As a member of the public, I looked to the board for help when my healthy kitten died following a routine spay procedure. She had her surgery on Jan. 13, 2010 and died on Jan. 14, 2010.

My kitten’s surgery ended at 11:45 am.  At 2:30 pm, we were told her surgery went fine and she was “waking up well.”

At 4:40 pm, the vet’s notations is that “Molly is non responsive in her cage.”  The vet did nothing to treat Molly, the vet did not call us to tell us she needed urgent medical care and the vet did not even document any vital signs.

In the morning, they found Molly had “died overnight”.  We filed a complaint, and like approximately 80% of other complaints filed with the board, the board found that our vet did not violate a reasonable standard of care.  Our complaint was that the vet failed to call us and tell us that our kitten needed urgent medical care.   We would have immediately transferred her to an overnight animal hospital.  Instead, our vets turned off the lights and left Molly to die in the dark and all alone.  This board finds that to be acceptable veterinary practice in VA.  The board has reprimanded vets in the past for failure to notify the pet’s owner that the pet needed urgent medical care but not in Molly’s case.

I do not believe that this board has the ability to adequately investigate complaints that are made by the public and make unbiased judgments when they are reviewing a complaint, as evidenced by their 80% closure rate.  I do not believe that giving more money to the board will improve its ability to do fulfill its duty to thoroughly and fairly investigate complaints.

I attended the last board meeting on July 20^th and made a Public Comment. The board has refused to accurately post my comments to reflect that my concern is related to what the board has determined to be a reasonable standard of care for veterinarians in VA. (My comment was less than 200 words, I narrowed it down to 115 words, and the board still would not post an accurate reflection of my comment).  My comment was that the board has decided that it is an acceptable standard of care for a vet to do nothing, when a healthy kitten is non responsive 5 hours after a routine spay.  The board found no violation in Molly’s case but on July 6, 2010 found a vet in violation for failure to document weights or temperatures on felines. 

I believe that when a citizen and taxpayer takes the time, energy and money to go to the board meeting to make a Public Comment and provides the board with a verbatim text of that comment, the board has a duty to accurately reflect that comment in the minutes of the meeting. 

It is my opinion that the board fails to meet the needs of the public when it fails to have a process for complaints and investigations that is open and transparent and thus the board could continue to produce the same “quality” investigations and adjudications without additional funding.  I think the board could actually mange with less money and in today’s economic environment, I would recommend that the board take a 10% decrease in funding.

It is my belief that the board fails to recognize that it has a duty to the public and part of that duty is to be fair and objective when reviewing complaints and that the board members are public servants.  I believe that the board should give their investigatory duties over to an impartial committee and focus solely on licensing which it is capable of doing.

Part of the rationale in raising the fees is that without increasing the fees, investigations and adjudications of complaints would take longer, our complaint took months and months, and even with that amount of time, the investigator placed at least one false fact in her report about the investigation, we were not allowed to see the investigator’s report to see if there were other inaccuracies.  This needs to be changed, a complainant should have the ability to review the investigator’s report.   The increase fee request cites that “The agency should have sufficient funding to carry out its statutory responsibilities of licensing, investigations and disciplinary proceedings.”

Allowing the board to raise fees, without having a thorough and complete review of the complaint process is not justified.  The current process has many flaws which need to be addressed, in my opinion. If one files a complaint against a medical doctor or an attorney, the complainant is allowed to see the MD’s or attorney’s response. If one files a complaint against a vet, the complainant is not allowed to see the vet’s response.   This is just one of the changes that need to be made in the process, but I do not feel that allowing the board to collect higher fees without a complete outside review of the complaint process is unjustified at this time.

(I can be contacted at dcarey1113@comcast.net .)

what's the public opinion about or against it?  What's the benefit of general public? It should be described first.  I think  fee increasing is not the solution.

Thanks ,

M. Wakefield

http://www.your-car-insurance-biz/

Dear Board of Veterinary Members:

I am not opposed to increased fees however, I am opposed to annual renewals. Would propose an additional option for on-line license renewal for an additional year (if in good-standing and not renewing late).

So please consider a 2-yr license renewal option for $300.00 with 30 required CE hours.

Thank you,

Tregel Cockburn, DVM

I think the Department should be divided this fee for type of Veterinary practice. Since in town with kitty and dog it is one side, but in the country with cows and sheep is really another. Any way I sure this increasing will be approved. So, question only for money - for whom more, for whom less.

I think the Department should be divided this fee for type of Veterinary practice. Since in town with kitty and dogs it is one side, but in the country with cows and sheep is really another. Any way I sure this increasing will be approved. So, question only for money - for whom more, for whom less.

Sorry for repetition – don’t see my comment.

The increase in veterinarian's license fee means also that there will be a tendency for an increase in there professional fees. Where will they get an extra amount for paying this fees if they won't increase there professional fees? The citizen's will be affected with that. Also there employees might be at risk also.

The increase in veterinarian's license fee means also that there will be a tendency for an increase in there professional fees. Where will they get an extra amount for paying this fees if they won't increase there professional fees? The citizen's will be affected with that. Also there employees might be at risk also.

search lawyer online

Before you think about raising fees you need to consider what benefit there is to the PUBLIC. My understanding is that a veterinary board exists not only to license and regulate vets but also to ensure standard of care by its licensees -- both are matters of PUBLIC health and safety. Reading D Carey's account of the death of a kitten and the subsequent dismissal of a valid complaint makes me wonder if the VA vet board even knows what it's doing. How is the PUBLIC supposed to trust a board that lets a situation like that go undisciplined and the vet unaccountable for any part of that tragic incident? Shameful.

Before you start raising fees I would take a good look at your complaint review process and ask how it can better serve the PUBLIC, starting with making the complaint process a fair and equitable one. The fact that the complainant cannot see the vet's response to a complaint is inexcusable, especially when so many other states allow it. Do you expect the PUBLIC to trust a system that is so secretive that it withholds that type of information from the very victim that was affected? Again, shameful.

I would say no to raising fees until and unless you can show it benefits the PUBLIC in some substantial way. You remember the PUBLIC, don't you? We're the ones who pay your salaries as vets.

Thank you. 

Before deciding if fees should be raised please go to

http://badvetdaily.blogspot.com/

After reading the comment from the person who had a kitten die at the vet and this board then did nothing, it sounds like to me that this board is already failing to properly protect the public. Isn't that your primary responsibility?

 Unless the increased fees are earmarked to open up the complaint process and make it FAIR for all parties - such as ALLOWING the complainant to see the licensee's response and the investigator's report - then I would be opposed to increased funding for an ineffective board.

In fact, if this board cannot do a better job of protecting the public, perhaps it should be abolished and licensing handled by another agency. Now THAT would SAVE some money. With the saved money, a new and IMPARTIAL veterinary complaint and investigation division should be created whose goal it is to actually PROTECT the public.

START protecting our pets. STOP protecting BAD vets.

Thank you.

There should be no increase in regulations concerning vet. medicine.  Thank you for the opportunity for me to express my opinion.  I also believe that we should ban together to stop the ground zero mosque.

My sympathy goes out to D. Carey on the unforgivable loss of her pet at the hands of the vet.  What is the purpose of the these fees, if this type of practioner is  sanctioned by the state?  This incident should never have happened let alone been found to be justified.  No fee increase.....no!

What is the protection for pet owners?  Since the board has condone the activity of the vet that killed the kitten, what has that vet learned from this experience.  Will this vet kill another pet and then will the board condone that behavior?  How can this board sleep at night knowing the public is not protected from this incompetent vet?  I just hope it is not my vet.  I would have thought that any with any sense, would know to call an owner if the pet was not doing so good. 

T    OPPOSED TO ANY VET LICENSING FEE INCREASE for the following reasons:1) the average worker in today's economy is asked to do more with less, do the job of 1.5 to 2 workers with no pay inrease.   If that is the case in the private sector, should we not expect the same from our public sector?     2) My experience with license renewal by computer in this state has not been good.  Not only has the service been unreliable, but credit card numbers are not safe.  So unless these problems are resolved, I cannot see any reason to increase the fee.   3)  If you are attempting to use disciplinary or regulatory reasons ("to protect the public") to argue for the fee increase, I dont' have to look any further than the comments on this proposal.   What Ms.Carey describes appears clearly negligent and yet there was no board activity against the vet involved.  So how is this "serving the public" or protecting the profession?      You have not justified the fee increase, all you've shown it that you intend to provide the same poor service and charge more for it.   

ype over this