Members of the BTRO Board,

As a heavy duty towing and recovery operator in Augusta County,  I am very concerned with the equipment requirements you are considering for Class A Operators.  There are currently no Class A operators in Augusta County that will qualify for public safety towing if the equipment requirements go forward as they are proposed.  There are not enough large truck accidents in our area to justify requiring all operators to have 2 heavy duty wreckers in order to do public safety towing.  We have been in the heavy duty towing and recovery business since 1989 and are on the rotation lists for both the Virginia State Police and the City of Staunton Police.  On occasion, we have been called out to handle an accident that required equipment that we do not own ( including a second heavy duty wrecker) and we have been able to hire or rent  what was necessary to clean up the accident.  We have successfully worked with all of the other heavy duty towing companies in our county and with some in adjoining counties.  Equipment that might be necessary in Northern Virginia, Hampton Roads, Richmond or Roanoke can not be economically justified in quite a few areas of the state.  There is no one in this county  that can support a heavy duty wrecker solely with public safety tows.  In order to  financially support a truck, you must have customers from the commercial and private sector as well as from public safety.  If we were to be able to justify the fiscal impact of a second truck, it would most certainly have to be available to do long distance towing or any other jobs our customers might require.  A second wrecker would also mean you would have to increase your customer base which then increases the odds that that  second truck would not be available.  Even operators who own two heavy duty trucks cannot guarantee that both will be available at all times should a major accident occur.  Will they be able to subcontract a second truck from another company if one of theirs is not available?  If so, then why not allow companies that only own one truck to be able to do that from the beginning?

In short, I ask that you reconsider the requirement for two heavy duty wreckers.  

Sincerely,

James C. Mason

The Board of Towing and Recovery Operators has not posted most of its documents including minutes of meetings and agenda for several months so it is impossible to comment on them. Letters to the Board are ignored.  Last week, as soon as it found out that tow operators had hired a lobbyist in hopes of finding out what was going on, it suddenly cancelled meetings scheduled for January 30, 2008.

None of the proposed regulations should be adopted until the Board for Towing and Recovery Operators posts them for public viewing. Until this Board considers itself accountable to the public and is willing to be open about its operations, all of its activities will be of doubtful legitimacy. 

 In our Great Commonwealth, government should be open. Back-room meetings should not be taking place and all documents including working papers and proposals should be available to the public. It should not be necessary for Virginians to have to beg the government to open its books and allow the people to see and read what is going on.

The Attorney General should initiate an investigation into the memberships and leadership positions that Board members have with organizations that are lobbying it. How can they fairly represent the people of this state if they are serving as front people for organizations that are directing their every action?

Seems things always cancelled...always a change I think the fees, the learning, and organization is a welcome thing, B|U|T the rules saying this and that.. like you MUST have a 2nd wrecker... now it MUST have 2 winches? Cmon Im spending another 15,000 on a 2nd truck now and its a single 8-10000lb winch with wheellift ..with regulated fees and bills wheream I coming up with all the extra money for this crap? I have have MANY friends try to communicate with the board..heard upon DEAF EARS..seems nobody listens what so ever.. You mean to tell me that all these companies are going to deal with the same situations all the same regardless if in north western VA .. or here in |Henrico.. I cannot believe what will work here will also me same in say king William county. what build a new office,new lot, etc, etc $$$$$$$$$$$$ be real. I dont believe any of it.But I thing its like many small business operators here including myself..feel as if there is no sense of even going to meeting, you cant speak, its a losing battle, just like the corrupt judges & legislature here in VA , ESP henrico county jude I went in front of a while back.. sorry to say I didnt even get a chance to speak, he raised his hand and ordered to hush..which I did.. no sense doing anything else. |And to top it off.I did no wrong...yet |I am local to all of the Henrico officers that expect promt ,quick and reliable service tosafely clear a disabled vehicle and/or accident. and I FOR one UNLIKE a few bad eggs, pride my self on doing so 24 hours a day no questions asked. and guaranteed you can ask many officers whom have worked with me.I  am quick,professional and fully aware at all times.

As of January 28, 2008 @ 7:45 a.m. EST, the Virginia Board for Towing and Recovey Operators has posted the minutes of meetings held in the year 2007.  This is an important step toward becoming more open to the citizens of Virginia and the tow companies that the Board intends to regulate.

or the way i am reading it will we as class b operators be required tohave 3 trucks?

.

I am interested in BTRO proposed rules and agenda.  I consider myself lucky to have found this section to post a comment. This board would do well to publish a simple list of line items access links to simplify review. I don't know where to go to fine the source documents that comments are being made to. If all of this is to be started on July '08 then much needs to be done. If the rumors I lear in the grapevine are true anout office hours, numbers/type of equipment, security area requirements, training, safety, and general compliance statutes, we need to get cracking and put all of the info out to the troops for review in an open, simply accessed forum. If there is such an area available, please publish it and get us out of this forest of mystery links, incomplete BTRO website sections and put everything on the table. It is hard to believe there are so few comments about all of the action proposed when we have hundreds of towers throughout the State who will be affected in a major way. I believe BTRO should publish a standard link address list and make it easy to understand how to respond and find the information we all need. Why make these proposed measures obscure, hard to find and secretive. I may be reached at: 276-395-2358 at Big Bertha's Towing in Coeburn, Virginia. It looks as if the BTRO could use some input to frame their good intensions but we on the end user side also need your guideance to submit ideas for proposal and line out and put some momentum in this process. I believe all of this will benefit many but in some cases it is very confusing to navigate the system.  Time is running short! Thanks,  Thomas 01/02/2008

The intentions of the BTRO are noble, but I have never seen a more confusing process to understand or navigate.  If you want tow companies --large or small -- to comply you need to establish one website that clearly tells us what and when we need to do it!  Information put in plain language would be nice.  I feel like I have to have a degree in law to interupt what information I stumble across if I'm lucky enough to hit the right link.  The tow/wrecker companies that want to comply have to be as frustrated and confused as I am....BTRO was forceful about getting our addresses, but then I only received two flyers referring me to websites that are "not user friendly" to say the least?!  Come July, I predict you are going to have a whole lot of state troopers, police, and civilians sitting on the roads waiting HOURS for tow trucks that wont be available to respond --- because half of us wont be in compliance by your JULY deadline.  We want to know what to do but the rumor mill has a thousand different versions of what exactly that is?  Secured lots? Specific equipmt? Driver Certification? Fingerprinting? Fees? I dont even know if we can AFFORD to comply anyway. July is coming too fast, BTRO might want to fall back and rethink it.

Frustrated in Fluvanna -- 434-589-6527--Wagners Wrecker Service - Palmyra, VA  

In regards to the proposed towing regulations, the towing community seems to thoroughly

confused about government proposals once again. The regulations are confusing and hard to

understand. They are going to be very costly to small towing companies trying to make a living.

Most operator- owners cannot afford to travel  and pay  to take courses on what they already now

how  to do.

How many towing companies will not be able to work accidents and work with law enforcement

efficiently if the proposed regulations go into effect?  Law enforcement  and the general public will

put at the mercy of those few huge towing companies that can afford to comply and who charge

large fees to do what  a smaller company could do if  regulations were not so demanding. In theory

will not only the small tower  suffer but also the public. We feel regulations do need to be in place,

but not the the point of discouraging the industry. Please keep the small towing companies  in mind

when re-developing the regulations.

Thank you

There are actually two sets of regulations currently being considered, both of which are required to go into effect on July 1, 2008. The first set is the "General Regulations" that will apply to all tow companies in Virginia and are, except for the minimum licensing fee of $500 every year, not too harmful. Nonetheless, you should look them up, print them, and study them thoroughly.

How to find the proposed regulations that are covered by this comment forum:  Go to "Google", (2) type in Va. Register of Regulations 24vac27-30-10, (3) click Show XML. The regulations will then appear and can be printed out. After you have studied them, you should then calculate how they will affect your company. Write your comments out on paper and make sure your thoughts are clear, easy to understand, and do not reglect anger. Proof-read your comments and have someone else read them and share your thoughts with you. Then you should write them out on this forum. Remember, what you say is important and your words should be well chosen because once you "submit" them, they cannot be altered.

The second set of regulations are more properly referred to as "Working Papers and are the ones that cover  "PUBLIC SAFETY"  towing. These regulations are not technically open for comment yet, but you should look them up, print them, and study them carefully. These are the regulations that will have serious and very dangerous impact on most tow companies in Virginia, and in my opinion have been written with the intent of putting most tow companies out of business.

You can find these documents by (1) looking up the "Va. Regulatory Town Hall", (2) click "Browse by Secretariat", (3) click "Transportation", (4) click "Board for Towing and Recovery Operators", (5) click "Board for Towing and Recovery Operators" again, (6) click "Meetings", (7) click "45 meetings during the last 180 days", (8) scroll down to "30-Jan-08", find "Licensing and Regulatory Affairs Committee", and finally (9) click " Agenda". Your computer will then show the latest "Working Paper" for the most serious proposed rules covering "Public Safety" towing. These are the rules that could kill most tow companies in Virginia. Read them carefully and you will find that very few tow companies will be able to meet the equipment, office, and storage lot regulations. The education or certification requirements will also be hurtful since most tow operators will not be able to meet them. READ the document carefully and make sure you understand every word and sentence. There are a lot of hidden meanings in this document.

The Virginia Board of Towing and Recovery Operators is an official agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia but I think it is actually serving as a puppet for the private organization known as the "Major Incident Heavy Recovery Operators Association" (MIHROA). This organization of less than 15 members has spent thousands of dollars in its quest to devise and have regulations approved that will totally control the towing industry in this state. MIHROA is a private organization that has spent a fortune on lobbying and has become an "Ex Officio" member of BTRO. In my opinion, this results in a situation in which the contact person for MIHROA is taking part in formulating MIHROA proposals which are then lobbied before himself as Chairman of the state board  which has managed to make MIHROA a member of the board. This is like a judge serving as a prosecutor and defense attorney plus the jury. BTRO rarely answers questions posed to it by citizens during open public meetings and it also does not answer many of the written letters sent to it. The lobbyist hired by MIHROA is shown on BATRO's "Minutes for the "Education Committee Meeting" (Nov. 7, 2007) as the actual "Ex-Officio" member. I question whether it is reasonable for a lobbiest hired by a private organization to serve as a member of a state board that he lobbied to create and also help that board formulate policies and regulations in behalf of the private organization that hired him. Of course, these are just my opinions.

NOTE:  My source for determing who the "Contact Person" for MIHROA is comes from vpap.org.

Well.. Mr Foster asked me for my #,nevercalled me...the Gov seems to care less..the rules here are NOT for a classification of class b operator. I have been in publi safety towing past 2 or 3 years here in henrico. I have towed in NYS  for serveral years.|I have been other areas. I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF SUCH BS IN ALL THESE YEARS. The requirements for a small family owned business to survive is going to be very hard, esp I just committed to purchasing another truck, and now Im told it must have 2 winches and such..for what? I have done everything with my 2 rollbacks that has been asked of me and above that. FOR verication, call all the officers on the Henrico PD force that have worked with me and ask them. I GUARANTEE esp those on nightshift will state I am there ahead of my estimate, I do my job,I do it safely and help them any way possible.As well as the state police. |These demands |& requirements are more for a medium duty towing organization, not a light duty operator. there are 3 classifications  that should be in place not 2.. a light duty class, a medium duty class and a heavy duty class.... these are not the same ,to comibine a light duty and medium duty is not fair not reasonable ..as well as the january 1 2006 deadline,,,,, well damn so because I formally got everything set up in march 2006 i miss it by 3 months?? CMON!|!!!|There are lot of small companies out here, we need to rally this and show  what we are & need.. or we may just as well close up and let the big guys take over.... its ridiculous.......but then again is the BTRO listening?

I dont think so...

Why oh why does it clearly state in the copies of papers emailed to me from Mr Foster  in their own words,"One possible disadvantage to the public might(might?) be that a one truck operation (or maybe even 2) may elect to cease operatiing in a locality rather than seek licensure. At this point ,it is not known, in spite of the boards efforts to identify the affected entiities, how many businesses  may elect the option."

Well honestly I doubt ANYof them would elect that op[tion, besides being forced to close up . and about tthe locality? well this is a state wide... so I guess those who choose not to continue operating would , a either find a: find a job b: move to a different state.

Unfortunately for my its not that easy,and others ..I myself have a mortgage, a wife, 4 girls,I cannot just go and do a hard labor job...for someone else.I have truck payment like a bigger company may have,FULL insurance as needed ........Where  am I to go after 5 years? What am I to do? The fees I can deal with,the requirements of training.. a 1st a TRAA leve 1 training to be approved, second a min 8 hrs a year, then it statesclass b operators shall possess a certification with a gvw of 26001 or greater.? HUH I thought my rollback was 26000 or less? Then a minimum  of 2 hrs training extra every year and now WE MUST DESIGNATE A RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL WHOMMUST ATTEND A ADDITIONAL 8 HOURSOF GENERAL CONTINUING EDUCATION(COLLEGE COURSE???) IN BUSUINESS MANAGEMENT OR OTHER BUSINESS RELATED COURSE.IT MUST ALSO CONTAIN 3 HOURS OF 1 OR MORE TOPICS:HAZ MATERIALS,UNIFORM TRAFF CTRLS,PS TOWING,RECOVERY,OSHA,TT & MOTORIST SAFETY AND RECOVERY...THEN NOPE IT DONT STOP THERE THEN THE INDIVIDUAL MUST ATTEND 1 NATL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM(NIMS) OR TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT(TIM) SEMINAR EACH YEAR.ALTHOUGH THEY WILL CONSIDER LEADERSHIP POSITION IN A PROF ASSOCIATION OR COMMITTEE  WILL BE COSIDERED FOR QUALIFICATION FOR THIS REQUIREMENT? ARE YOU FOR REAL ? Shall we all form committees on towing?.....I am sorry but I see this as a major blow to all small towing related companies. Esp is the board paying for all this"cont education"?

|I would sugggest maybe all those across the state of VA may want to contact local legislature or all and make everyone aware of the regulations and what is happening.

Member Name	District		Party		Capitol Office		District Office
Barker, George L.	39		D		(804) 698-7539		(703) 303-1426
Blevins, Harry B.	14		R		(804) 698-7514		(757) 546-2435
Colgan, Charles J.	29		D		(804) 698-7529		(703) 368-0300
Cuccinelli, Ken, II	37		R		(804) 698-7537		(703) 766-0635
Deeds, R. Creigh	25		D		(804) 698-7525		(434) 296-5491
Edwards, John S.	21		D		(804) 698-7521		(540) 985-8690
Hanger, Emmett W., Jr.	24		R		(804) 698-7524		(540) 885-6898
Herring, Mark R.	33		D		(804) 698-7533		(703) 729-3300
Houck, R. Edward	17		D		(804) 698-7517		(540) 786-2782
Howell, Janet D.	32		D		(804) 698-7532		(703) 709-8283
Hurt, Robert	19		R		(804) 698-7519		(434) 432-4600
Locke, Mamie E.	2		D		(804) 698-7502		(757) 825-5880
Lucas, L. Louise	18		D		(804) 698-7518		(757) 397-8209
Marsh, Henry L., III	16		D		(804) 698-7516		(804) 648-9073
Martin, Stephen H.	11		R		(804) 698-7511		(804) 674-0242
McDougle, Ryan T.	4		R		(804) 698-7504		(804) 730-1026
McEachin, A. Donald	9		D		(804) 698-7509		(804) 288-3381
Miller, John C.	1		D		(804) 698-7501		(757) 595-1100

I have listened, and I have read,  It is clear to me, that this board needs to become more forth coming, and dilligent in their efforts to educate and inform the towing industry, that you so hastily wish to regulate.  I have listened to local towers talk for hours regarding their treatment by your "board."  After a small business owner (and in most cases, operator), drives 2 hours to attend your radomley announced meetings, you dignify them with an entire 2 minutes.  Two stinking minutes, that your "board," blantantly ignores commentors during their small amount of time you have so graciousley bestowed upon them.  You claim to want, even invite towers to participate in their own destiny, and when they do you shut them down with a minimum of time and respect.  That does not seem to be the way to encourage involvement, rather a tactic to discourage participation.  What is this "board" so afraid of?  How deep and dark is the closet, that towers feel like they are definetly not receiving full disclosure from this entity?   I had a chance to view correspondence from the "board" to a local tower,and in my opinion it was bit shrewd and condesending.  If this "board" knows people (and I mean a lot of people), have issues with these proposed regulations, why won't  you answer specific questions.  Instead the "board" has chosen to muddy up the waters so badly, that it leaves you with the explicit feeling of deceit, and dishonesty.  I know for a fact that I registered the contact information for the towing service I work for more than once, and we have NOT received all of the correspondence this "board" claims to have sent.  Let it be known that on both occasions I sent an address, a fax number, and an e-mail address, as well as registered with VA Town Hall.  However when you log on for information in January 2008, and you can only retrieve information on the "boards" meetings as recent as Oct 13, 2007, even if it is not the intention of the "board" to be "sneaky" their actions certainly leave you feeling that way.  What happened to what is right and what is simply wrong, and then making the honest good decisions based on mutual respect.  This "board" does not seem interested in "mutual respect'" or honesty for that matter.  I have heard many good suggestions, from many different and well respected towers in my community and there are answers to all of these questions and concerns, if this "board" can move past it's greed, and ego.  I fear only then can we sit down for rational and sensible safety regulations.

Yes..... although I would rather like to see the BTRO be able to regulate & workout everything.. |I think its in all's best interest... because if MIHROA OR EVEN THE VADOT  have their way..forget it.. such as the southern I95 situation with  the"big company" there having a total control contract./.. small business owners in that respect would be forever gone and useless to try to fight.....

I believe the bto has good intentions... if they do what they have to do.. and correctly.. but by allow imput from a major heavy duty group to interfere I believe its a un nerveing situation... for all small " class b" towing operators...   seems right now there outta be 3 levels.. likein ny.. light ,medium and heavy.. not b or a.. there needs a c... because trying to merge a b operator into  medium duty requirements just isnt right.. I know that the 3 classes will prob never happen but some of  the stuff being presented .. isnt exactly right nor fair.......

I, like many other Virginia towing company owners, would like to know why we are not notified as to the Board's current actions, meetings, and minutes. After spending several hours searching around on the Town Hall web site, I just discovered that the Public Hearing is scheduled for MONDAY, February 11, 2008 at 9:00 a.m. at the Department of Motor Vehicles, 2300 West Broad Street, Classroom 131, Richmond, Virginia. I want to know why we were not notified as to this hearing. How can we publicly convey are concerns if we are not aware of this opportunity?? I personally spoke to Mr. Foster last Nov. or Dec. and was told that the towing companies WOULD BE NOTIFIED prior to this Public Hearing! I am currently on the e-mail list to receive notices about all meetings and still received no notification. It is only be chance that I found out about the Public Hearing. Then again, I guess that was the plan!

Funny...since I started posting..I got guys from allover the state sayin contacting me saying same thing ..

I think if the BTRO got rid of the actual outside interference..it would be a benefit to all owner-operators..

justmyopinion..

To my understanding, this committee was created because of major concerns with private property towing.  It seems to have snowballed into something much more.  I feel that there are many things in this industry that could or even should be regulated. However, with the current "working papers"(thanks to a previous comment I was able to find), and the regulations open for public comment tomorrow, 2/11/08, the board seems to be going much more beyond having general standards to something more of a dictatorship.

What happened to the public being able to choose with whom they do business? Why is this portion of towing being so heavily regulated, for example, all of the training requirements?  If we did not know how to do our jobs, we would not be able to get insurance. So, why do we have to constantly prove our worthiness?  If we don't know how to do our jobs it will eventually catch up with us as far as insurance companies are concerned. If we were surgeons, we would not have to show the state documents of up-training every year, surgeons would not be able to get insurance if they were not qualified. Let our ability to attain insurance serve as the standards for the industry as far as training is concerned and make, as it has been written, minimum insurance requirements.  If this is just too incomprehensible, then let us simply take tests every five years or so to pass the license requirements.  We don't even have to have annual training or have to retest for our drivers licenses every year! How can we, as a group, truly decide what classroom and hands on training minimum requirements we have to have every year when a lot of us know the business from living it? I personally don't feel like paying my extremely hard earned money for training that I already have on top of the thousands of dollars that I have to spend every year on insurance.

Making sure, as an industry, that companies have insurance, have equipment that is rated for the type of service that we provide, and by making sure we are held accountable for the jobs that we do and how we will be accountable for those jobs is basically all this board should be doing. It would also be acceptable to take it a step further in regulating who is allowed to provide public service towing in regards to police and non-consensual towing, i.e. no sex offenders, murders, setting lot hours, lot requirements, what forms of payment have to be accepted and/or even truck requirements. But most of these should not be for the general practice of towing. We, as citizens of the United States, have the right to choose with whom we do business.   

These are my general thoughts of the whole system.  As far as some of the specific line items in the documents that are being composed, I have comments and concerns there but will address those separately.  We can't let this board take over if it suppose to be a representative us all of us!

I attended the BTRO Public Hearing today in Richmond and was very disappointed that there were only 2 Board members present. I would like to know how we can voice our opinion to the board when the members aren't present to hear our concerns. There were towers from all over the state of Virginia who took their time and effort to attend and should have been given the deserved respect to have ALL members present. How can this be called a Public Hearing without full attendence of the Board?

I will be waiting for a reply...... Mark

I went to the 2-11-08 meeting and can't believe the Board scheduled a Monday morning meeting at 9am. Given the scheduling of this meeting I was surprised at the number of towers that were able to attend. 9am on a Monday morning is one of our busiest times which should have been taken into consideration.  I am curious to know how the Board could have a total number of those in attendance when there was NO sign in sheet, the only sign in was for those wishing to speak. And if attendance was considered so poor, why was the meeting room we were packed into so crowded? Maybe one of the two board members that was actually present was counting heads. It is disrepectful that all or most of the board members were not present. Anytime there is any meeting to discuss these issues all parties involved should be in attendance, especially those who are going to to be making the decisions in the end. At this point, I think it is irrelevant how many people spoke at the meeting because  to me it looks like the same thing happens at each meeting, questions are asked and there are promises that answers will be given but as of yet I haven't seen anything in black and white from the Board addressing any of the questions/concerns that have been voiced. The only response I heard yesterday was that the Board has a plan in place, but of course he neglected to elaborate what that was.

"Board of Towing and Recovery Operators. 

Postpones until July 1, 2010, the effective date of any regulations promulgated by the Board, the requirement that tow truck operators have tow truck driver authorization documents issued by the Board, and the requirement that towing and recovery services have and display licenses issued by the Board. The bill also alters composition of the Board.  Regulations recommended by the Board shall be presented to the Senate and House Transportation Committees for their consideration during the 2009 General Assembly session.

A BILL to amend and reenact §§

  "

Does anyone know if this is actually going to happen?  If so, where would we have been able to locate this desire of the board? from previous board meetings? Does this give us time to work with the board to have things done fairly?  This information was gathered from the February 7, 2008 Senate Transportation Docket, located at http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?081+doc+DOCS11

The Senate Bill 707 which you referenced is very good news and was accepted by the Senate on Feb. 12, 2008. From here it goes to the House Transporation Committee. We expect a major fight to defeat the bill but hope that the House Transporation Committee votes it out of committee to the full House and that it will be accepted by the Delegates. This bill, if it is passed by both houses will give more time to the board to straighten out the mess it has created. It will also give us more time for compliance and more time to fight the unreasonable parts of the regulations. As you printed the bill, that is how it was accepted.  Yes, this is major good news for free enterprise, honest tow companies, and for the motoring public.

As the July 1 deadline is fast approaching, it reminds me of another law recently passed that caused many outcries from the public, the bad driver fees. Everyone involved in passing this law, all the way up to the governor endorsed these fees as a way to penalize repeat offenders as well as a great way to generate extra income for the state. It was hastily put into place without much notice to the citizens of Virginia and without the proper planning and research to implement these new fees. Now a year later these fees are currently going through legislation to be repealed because they were deemed unconstitutional. This is not much comfort for the many people who have already been cited for these fees and have paid.

 where do we find this list of proposed changes to the trucks that may be used since you are going to mandate them size weight etc

THIS BILL WILL MAKE IT A FAIR PLAYING FIELD FOR ALL .  I  AM ALL FOR SAFETY AND I AGREE SOME THINGS NEED TO BE IMPROVED !    BUT THIS SHOULD NOT RUN SMALL FAMILY OWNED  COMPANIES OUT .   CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE AT A PACE THAT GIVES ALL A CHANCE TO COMPLY.  HAS ANYONE TAKEN TIME TO SEE HOW LONG IT WILL REALY TAKE TO PUT THESE CHANGES  INTO EFFECT WITHOUT CAUSING A HARD SHIP ON SMALL CO.  AND HOW MANY JOBS WILL BE LOST TO THIS CHANGE?    PASS THIS BILL !!!!  LETS ALL WORK FOR A BETTER FUTURE .

 WHEN ARE THEY HELD

I am writing you to make you aware of the recent Board of Recovery Operators regulations.  I have received a copy of the proposed committee recommendations and feel at this time this legislation should not be approved. Like every business in this great state of Virginia, each day as a owned/operator,  I take the key out of my pocket and open the front door to our business and the struggle begins. I am the third generation of our company and my Dad and I have been in business in May for 50 years. I have personally been towing for the past 26 or more years. Due to the tremendous cost of insurance($9,300.00),trucks($65,000.00) and fuel $3.25 per gallon making a profit is almost impossible. I feel this legislation will be such a burden and other fees affiliated will cause many  businesses to close. I would appreciate you voicing my opinion.

God Bless,

Brad McClenny

I have concerns about the lack of information that is being given to towers and the public. To have a fair and equal board all towers must be given a voice. Another problem that is not being addressed is that what is needed for a tower in the mountian ares of the state is not needed near the coast. We do not have recoveries that go off the side of the mountian. Therefore we do not need the same equipment.

Under what circumstances (if there are any) can a tow truck driver break into a vehicle to "check" the validity of a parking hangtag if he suspects it to be fake? If this is in any way legal, who/what gives them the authority to do so and where can I go to find more information regarding this issue.  If it is, in fact, illegal, what is the right place to file a complaint regarding this matter.

Thanks for your help!

I have just heard that this bill failed but I am trying to verify this information.  Can anyone tell me what the current state of the bill is?  Has it failed and the regulations still going into effect July of this year?

The regulations are still alive. As of this posting (Feb 27, 2008) debate is still going on in the House Transportation Committee and a vote is expected tomorrow regarding whether to carry the effective date to Jan. 1, 2009 or keep the date at July 1, 2008. Additionally, debate is taking place as to whether to keep a Class A tow operator as chairman of the Board or to allow a Class B operator to rotate the chairmanship. Nonetheless, the laws are still in full effect and regulation is still on the table. The "General Regulations" that are being considered and that are in this period of public comment will go into effect on July 1 2008 unless the date is changed. The purpose of this comment site is to accept thoughts regarding the "General Regulations" only and this comment site is not for discussing the existing laws or for discussion of the "Public Safety" regulations that will be posted at a later date for public comment. The laws requiring regulation are still on the books and no bills have been introduced to ammend or cancel them.

Posters on this comment site should address their concerns regarding the General Regulations that have been presented for comment.

Now my personal opinion: These regulations are excessive, abusive of decent businessmen, and their enactment will smash small companies to death with ridiculously high fees and requirments that will drive costs of operation through the roof.

Question 1: How do you become a member of The Board? I don't want to use sarcasm but I don't know another way to as effectively get my point across: Does anyone remember our history books about the Boston Tea Party? (Taxation without representation) To my understanding, everyone on the board has been appointed. How do we ensure that we as the general tower ensure that we are represented? I agree that towing associations do have many benefits but I don't believe that just because you are not a member that you are not a professional. To my understanding there is a lot larger percentage of towing companies that are not members of local association than are. Thus, if everyone on the board is a member of VATRO, then the overall population of towers, the higher percentage, is not being represented.

Question 2: In one of the previous comments someone asked a question as to why have there not been comments since this board has been taking place over the last three years. I am one of the 700 companies that registered but have only rec'd three documents in the mail from the board. If this has been going on for three years why, if I registered, have I not received any information as to the status or the 'goings on' of the board? Though, based on a document that I did receive, the board went into effect in July of 2006 which would only mean the board has been around for 1 1/2 years. Even still, where are the notices?

Question 3: On the hot topic of training, how is the board going to determine who qualifies to give the training? I, like others it would appear, feel as if the training requirements should be every three to five years and not every year. A lot of us get training as we go but apparently that is not going to be sufficient. Why not make a testing requirement every three to five years and if you cannot pass the standardized test then require the completion of training? I, for one, do not want to bolster Wreckmaster's profit every year. Also, we are required to have huge amounts of insurance, if an insurance company will insure our company and we can pass a standardized test, why should we have to pay even more for additional training on top of what we already pay? It also says that at least one half of the training has to be face to face. Why? It appears that not only do they want to require continuing education, which is helpful, but they want to regulate who gives us that training, how that training has to be conducted, what training is NO good. But, the proposed regulations also say that one hour of continuing education credit shall require the licensee's presence and participation for at least 50 minutes. This does not make any since to me at all and is contradictory to their other requirement of having 50% being face to face.

Questions 4: Is there anyway to make endorsements to the towing license like what the state currently does with the CDL license? IE:, One endorsement for private property towing, one endorsement for public safety towing, one for repos? Depending on the endorsements, it could increase the amount of the license vs charging the $500.00 to anyone for a general license. For those of us that do not tow for the police or private property, we should not have to comply with all of the additional minimum requirements that may be needed to provide different services. If I have a set customer base that is happy with my services, why is the Board going to try and regulate free trade?

Question 5: On one of the previous comments, it is said that the fee structure was based on the number of companies that registered. However, in the 'Draft' of the regulations it is listed at "Businesses and Entities Affected. Approximately 2,200 towing operators and 9,000 to 10,000 drivers are estimated to be affected." If these numbers are listed in the proposed regulations, I don't know how we could be using the 700 number for estimating the fees. Likewise if there are 2,200 @ $500 a year that equals 1,100,000.00 just for the companies and 450,000.00 for driver authorizations. If the board has to operate within 10% exactly how much money are the board members making? Those are just the two basic fees, that does not include all the others the Board would be collecting. Do we as an industry feel that it is appropriate for us to pay over 1 MILLION dollars to regulate our industry per YEAR?

Question 6: Under section 24VAC27-30-100, #4 and #5, these sections state that upon request we are to open our books and records to the board at the boards request and it is all inclusive. I should not have to show my records for my business that I conduct outside of public safety, private property, or repo. It also states that we have to tell them where the records are maintained. Why? How "Big Brother" are we allowing this board to be?

Question 7: On page 2 of the Draft the board supposedly did research on the financial impact to the average company. It makes a comment: "One possible disadvantage to the public might be that a one-truck operation may elect to cease operating in a locality rather than seek licensure. At this point, it is not known, in spite of the board's efforts to identify the affected entities, how many businesses may elect this option." What are the efforts the board made? It also states: There is insufficient data to accurately compare the magnitude of the benefits versus the costs for other changes" How do we not consider that the new regulations will not have much of an impact? Annual fees, $500 license, $10 per truck, $50 for each driver, TRAA certification-$100 level one $260 level two, as noted in the regulations "these operators will incur time costs associated with studying for and taking" these tests, the fingerprinting $50, proposed annual training $200-$1000(plus more for drivers too), fees to provide the customer's with required documents and having them available at all times including 'providing the owner of a stolen vehicle written notice of his right under the law to be reimbursed for towing and storage of his vehicle'. If these amounts are added and looked at collectively, they pose a large impact on companies especially the ones that follow the rules as it is.

Question 8: Where in the regulations does is show or state how the enforcement will be made to those that don't comply other than what the penalty will be? It appears as if those of us that follow the rules will be most impacted.

Question 9: On page three paragraph three it states: "the Board may refuse to issue a license or tow truck driver's authorization document if, based upon all the information available, including the record of prior convictions of the applicant or any individual who is an owner, manager or other person involved in the management or operation of the applicant's business, it finds that the applicant is unfit to engage in providing towing and recovery services" Why does the Board have a right to say someone is "unfit", without having specific items that would make it such? This gives Big Brother way too much room to govern who can do business with such an open statement. Doesn't free trade allow an individual to decide if they should do business with me? I really do understand and agree with a lot of the regulations with regards to public safety tows, private property or even repo, but normal free trade work?

Question 10: Page 4, paragraph 4, if a rouge company operates currently without required insurance why would they bother to even get a license? They already show the disrespect for the law.

Question 11: Why are we being required to update our license every year and drivers update every year? This really seems excessive in regards to money, both what companies have to pay out and what the Board has coming in, in regards to paperwork and the work that goes into having to update the license every year. If you are mechanic and have a State Inspection License, you don't have to update it every year and yet they deal with vehicles as we do along with the new vehicles that come out every year.

Question 12: Page 5, paragraph 2, "There are no localities that should expect a disproportionate impact from these regulations". How was that determined?

Question 13: Page 5, paragraph 6, "Alternative Method that Minimizes Adverse Impact. There are no clear alternative methods that both meet statutory requirements and reduce adverse impact" I have read several options and have submitted some of my own. So, how can that statement be true? Also part of this section is states that the Department of Planning and Budget that it should include "(ii)the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other administrative costs required for small businesses to comply with the regulation, including the type of professional skills necessary for preparing required reports and other documents." Where is this explained or documented?

Question 14: Page 10 #7, paragraph 1, its states that "Such tow trucks may only be operated by an employee of the dealer or manufacturer for the sole purpose of transporting it to and from the location of sale or demonstration", etc. What about when or if a towing company needs to rent a tow truck if theirs is in the shop? Or a shop wanted to give the company a loner truck if the situation was called for?

Questions 15: Page 10, 24VAC27-30-80, What qualifies as an emergency to transfer an operators license?

Question 16: Page 10, 24VAC27-30-100, It states that if all you are doing is repossessing vehicles, you don't have to label your truck with the company name. How are they going to know that in fact repossession is all that company is doing?

Question 17: Page 11, 24VAC27-30-110#4, it specifies the minimum insurance requirements. Why are the requirements the same for class A and class B? Class A is hauling items worth much more than any class B would be able to. Also, I currently have on-hook coverage greater than what is required but I have it split up between my trucks. Does the 50k limit have to be for each truck, if so it seems high for class B?

Question 18: Page 11, 24VAC27-30-110#9, it states that "Operators shall not provide public safety towing and recover services unless they have met the criteria established by the Board.." How is any company going to be able to comply with this standard July 2008 or even 2009 if the standards have not even been completed? I think, as someone asked before, are we going to have to operate illegally based on these regulations going into effect without having the supporting items being completed as well?

Question 19: Page 12, 24VAC27-30-110#16(i), it states all fees have to be displayed. What about the provider that does not handle public safety, repo, private property?

Question 20: Page 13, 24VAC27-30-130B, "It says anonymous complaints received by the board shall be handled in accordance with board's policy and guidance documents" What are those documents? Is it not true like, someone else mentioned, that we have the right to face our accuser? What is going to be required to substantiate a complaint? What is to prevent false complaints?

Question 21: Page 14, 24VAC27-30-160 #2,#3, "Provide evidence at time of application for a tow truck driver's authorization document that he is employed or about to be employed by a licensed operator and the name and address of that operator." Many drivers have stays in between jobs, why is this information is required? If I have to make sure a driver is licensed, it would be nice to be able to know that he/she already has a license and not that they have to submit a request before they can work for me or anyone else. Why does a driver have to be employed by a company to maintain a towing license? If he does not, why does the license have to have a board-issued license number of the driver's employer?

Question 22: Page 14, 24VAC27-30-160#6.#7, Why do we have to have a signed statement from a driver that they have complied with the requirements if we also have to verify that they have a license? If they have a license, does that not show that they have complied? Linked to the questions also in 21, why does the board need to know what driver is working for what company? If the company has to make sure it's drivers are licensed, it should not be any business of the board which driver is working for which company? Going back to the reference of an automotive State Inspector, they don't have to notify anyone they are changing jobs are their license is good regardless of where they work.

I personally feel that this Board is trying to over control the industry. How do we make it stop? Regulations are good, they provide a level playing field, so to speak, but these regulations are going so far as to affect free trade. My company, by the way, already complies with all of the requirements including the requirements within the Working Papers of 12/20/07, other than having the actual license, which are not available yet.

CEASE AND DESIST BTRO IMMEDIATELY

In these comments and suggestions from my fellow, friends, peers and colliegues I have been trying to keep up with the issues, regulations, plan of action and milestones (poa&m), memorandums of understanding (mou), expert opinions, regular folks opinions, puff and steam from authoritative sources, threats, fines, jail, penalties, licenses (at $500 a pop) both A & B IN ADDITION to CDL's, collusion, shadow meetings, secrecy, equipment requirements, hidden agendas, arrogance, ignorance, mystery board member's' connections to some nefarious organizations, and so on and so on to infinity. I'm just a one guy operation; a rollback and a wrecker servicein a rural area. I thought working way out here I would have some immunity of sorts from large corporate influence, bank robberies, political crooks, gangsters, and all of that one might find in a large metropolis. Well, it looks like from my point of view, it is encroaching on our simple little society here with this towing enforcement program a group of folks are trying to throw together back on the East coast of Virginia. There is a reason for this program and I do not think it is in the best interest of the Virginia towers who are being forced to participate. Yes, we need some serious guidelines in terms of keeping unlicensed operators hauling without insurance. We call them scabs. That is something that DMV and the State Police can easily handle on a casual basis. We don't need another bureaucratic level in the State Government sucking up valuable resources and demanding outrageous license fees under the threat of jail and fines to operate. We need to have the laws that are in-place enforced by the authority that currently exists. It costs much less to add some staff to do these functions, if that is what is needed, than to start up another bureau, or board or or division, or agency that essentially will duplicate what is already there. There is more to this board in my opinion than is being let out to the general towing public. It starts to stink out here and I am way up wind of what is going on. I don't think we need any of this. It's wrong, it is without basic foundation, it is unnecessary, and it is a burden on the towing community. I believe the entire board should be immediately dismissed, the causes for it's organization be immediately rescinded and a two year moratorium be placed on any actions created thus far. Let's let the current authority and the laws that are in place be flexed with some additional impetus and initiate a two year research and review process to develop an accurate indicator of what is additionally needed to smooth out the towing operations in the State of Virginia. This is a ridiculous situation and should be put an end to NOW! Thomas

I have not found anything in the General Regs showing one of the impacts to the public being higher cost to receive services.  If we are being charged all of these high fees and now have to comply with so many regulations, if we are going to be able to stay in business, those fees are going to have to be passed onto the consumer. One of the reasons for the start of this board was because someone felt that they had been charged too much. How are they going to feel now when those prices have to go up 50% to cover the additional cost in training, insurance, background checks on ourselves, fingerprinting, oh and don't let me forget the license fee, etc.

Should the Board not be required to point that out when they present their recommendations to Senate Transportation Committee? Who truly will end up feeling the impact of all of these fees? The consumer!

The towing industry is NOT a non-profit organization!

January 25, 2008
Mr. Ray I-lodge

Chairman, Virginia Board of Towing and Recovery Operators
Highway Garage
1269 American Legion Road
Fredericksburg, Virgin 22405

Dear Mr. Hodge:

I would like to take this opportunity to discuss some issues concerning the Board of Towing and Recovery Operators (BTRO) and the position of the Vii State Police concerning these issues. As you are aware, I met with Mr. Malt Benka on November 20,2007 to discuss some of the proposed regulations of the Board regarding public safety tows.
We discussed regulations pertaining to training requirements and equipment mandates, specifically, the requirement for both Class A and B towers to have a second wrecker in order to be certified by the Board for public safety towing. At this meeting, Informed Mr. Benka that our position at the time was in support of the two wrecker requirement for both classes, as long as there was an AMPLE window of opportunity for towing businesses to come into compliance, preferably five years but no less than three years at a minimum. In regards to mandatory training, I stated our position was for support of training requirements as long as towing operators had sufficient time up front to come into compliance and that the training was readily available statewide and that it was affordable.
Since that meeting, I have received numerous telephone calls and letters, and have had meetings with other law enforcement officials, towing industry representatives and traffic safety advocates along with consumer service providers, who are very concerned about the proposed regulations and their Impact on the towing industry statewide, ESPECIALLY on small business owners. These contacts have provided me with additional information and insight that has convinced me that there is not overwhelming support for the proposed regulations as I was led to believe initially, particularly for the training and equipment mandates. Therefore, based on this outpouring of concern, the State Police has reconsidered its earlier position regarding these regulations and cannot support the adoption or Implementation of them at this time.
I believe more time is needed in order to fully evaluate and determine the impact of The proposed regulations on the towing industry in Virginia. The Board should be careful not to alienate its many partners by pushing through burdensome and far reach certification and equipment standards that would result in many owners having to get out of the business partially or altogether The Board would be better served initially to proceed slowly, implementing reasonable regulations widely supported throughout the towing industry. As it appears to me, to do otherwise would resuit in failure of the Board to accomplish its intended purpose, which is to regulate the towing lndustry fairly and in a manner which must benefit towing businesses of all sizes, as well as the public.
The Department of State Police looks forward to working with the Board and the towing industry. Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can be of any assistance.

Sincerely,
Superintendent

Where to start...what to do...Want suggestions? Have a look at this:
There are people towing for hire in unmarked trucks.
There are people towing for hire on "P" for private license plates.
There are people towing for hire without insurance.
As far as I know, the State Police, County Sheriff, or local Police Departments do not have these on rotation. And as far as the individuals above, I do not care if they are happy. I don't want them to be happy. I want them to be in compliance like the rest of who are responsible enough to do the right thing and stay within the confines of the law. Part of the problem here is there are current menbers on the board who are biased, are looking out, not for the towers statewide, but themselves first, and have an affiliation with an organization outside the board that is apparently on it's own agenda and attempting to garner statewide contracts with VDOT and other interest based on their rather large financial influence.

1. I would start by dismissing BTRO members who are affiliated with MIHROA immediately as it appears to be a conflict of interest and no one likes that. If you are going to be a governing body, do so without conflict of interest. Do you think you are politicians now?
2. I would ensure compliance with the regulations and statutes concerning unmarked tow trucks, uninsured operators, and using not for hire tags.
3. I would work closely with the Virginia State Police, the County Sheriffs Offices and local Police Departments and value their input and don't misrepresent yourselves to them if you expect to maintain any dignity and influence in this boards development.
4. I would initiate a cost effective two year (at a minimum) study committee to research all of the proposals thoroughly before feeding them to the legislature, who know little about what you are doing as you know, and stop trying to input submissions as earmarks on other bills to gain legislative approval. If you are representing the Virginia Towing Industry, show a little decorum, respect, courtesy and be mature and sensitive in your dealings with the towing community.
5. Stop trying to force the issues here. You are not gaining support of the towing community. It is very obvious isn't it? Many already don't like BTRO and in fact are against it and don't and will not support it. And you are not even there yet. That is not a great way to start off in this program.
6. We don't need a $500 drivers license...you do. Drop the requirement and stay with the present system until the atmosphere improves.
7. Want to legislate something? Put in a bill for tow truck driver training. Have the State fund 20%-30% of it in the interest of Public Safety.
8. Put in a legislative bill to stiffen penalities for improper plates, no insurance and private tags and no or improper license when operating a owing vehicle for hire.
9. Legislate to add to that more frequent DMV roadside safety inspections for tow vehicles including load security. Present this to the Govenor.
10. Put out a general memorandum to all thus far who have registered with BTRO, where the Town Hall is and to register for feedback, and that their input is welcome. That is where this note is going today.

Thank you, Thomas

Dear Sir,

In my oppinion there is no abundance of evidense to require a towing board in Virginia. The state already has laws on the books that plainly spell out the rules in Virginia pertaining to towing. Furthermore, towing is already regulated at the city/counrty levels in many parts of the state.If you have a towing problem solving it at the city or county level should be your first option. It works in Virginia Beach quite well !!. If it dose not work in your location its due to your elected officials. Then you can call the state police for  assistance. Stop trying to regulate and ledgeslate every industry. We have plenty of rules already in effect , you need to concentrate on enforcement if preceive there is an abundance of towing  problems . We do not need any more regulations.

Based on the currently proposed regs, I would be considered an "Operator".  I have been an "Operator" for ten years. In those ten years, I have never towed a vehicle. The only time I have ever even driven my trucks was to take them in for repair or if I needed to pick them up from somewhere.  In that ten years, my company has rec'd no more than three complaints. We do not undercharge nor overcharge, we carry more than enough insurance, my equipment either new or within three years old has everything on them that are currently listed as the required items under the current working papers for public safety tows, we have won the "ACE" award several times, and my company either by phone or in person provides outstanding customer service. I know I personally do not have the knowledge to go out alone and operate and clear the scene of an accident efficiently. I read the laws, understand them, and enforce them. Now, with all of that being said, should that mean that my company should not qualify for a license after the initial license I will receive because I have been in business since before 2006? I probably would not pass the TRAA level 1 test the next year because I don't drive the trucks, I run the business.  I make sure all of my drivers are qualified to do the job. According to the proposed regs, I would not qualify for a license after year one or I would have to designate someone who could pass the test but I would almost be positive that they would not be able to do anything else, laws, enforcement, etc. I run the company, I manage the company, and I would like to think I am not the only company out here that operates as such.

Taking the above scenario into consideration, “Operators”, should not have to qualify at any point for minimum standards of testing, knowledge, future training, etc. These things should by all means, within limits, be required to obtain a “Driver Authorization Document”. These quys/gals are the ones doing the job. They are the ones that need the training. If, like in most cases, you are an “Operator” and driver, that individual should have to have the training and knowledge that would be required under the “Driver Authorization”, however, it should not be required to qualify as an “Operator”. It appears based on the fee structure that a separate designation between the two is fully made, but under the current regs, the two are often blended together in regards to requirements.  To qualify as an “Operator”, the “Operator” should have to have minimum insurance, trucks labeled, safe equipment, For Hire tags, etc but not the other items that are more important as drivers.

Some additional comments on the proposed regs, page 7 item #6 appears to have a typographical error, it currently states: that the applicant has to certify that he/she HAS been convicted of any criminal offense vs HAS NOT.

Also, on the same page #5, what happens when you are working with a corporation that has multiple stock holders whom are the owner’s of the company?

Thank you for working so hard to make this industry what it should be.

On my rounds throughout the county area and on trips to auto dealerships in Kingsport, Johnson City, Bristol and many areas in Virginia, I have had the opportunity to talk to others in the towing industry.  We discussed the BTRO, MIHROA, the proposals, and concepts that have evoluved with the development of this towing social arrangement.  This organization pursues collective goals, controls its own performance, and which has a boundary separating it from its environment, us.  That the goal would be to influence political and State power through legislation.  You all may be surprised to know that many are not that familiar with what is going on here.  I think this may be true all over.  Many are suspicious in a way because it is new, a different concept of rules and ideas that make and/or suggest major changes in the Virginia towing industry.  A couple of my colliegues believe that the MIHROA is a subversive organization driven by greed and powered by large amounts of financial backing who don't think twice about peddling their influence by bribes, favors, and political affect  They believe it's goal is to to control and/or manipulate the system.  A couple of others strongly believe that in time MIHROA will rent a lot central to the county and then plant 8 or 10 trucks on it and low-ball everyone else in the surrounding area out of business, then ratchet up the prices. That would essentially create a monopoly in the local area towing business. Now if they would create a subterfuge corporation in each instance, the monopoly would be complete throughout the State. People are scared.  People fear these things and worse are in our future. Many think the MIHROA will come in like Wal-Mart and drive the mom and pop operations out of existance.  Many believe that the BTRO having these as members are promoting this idea.  Personally, I don't know what will happen. No one really knows. But the suspicions are running wild and concerns are in a high state of aggitation.  I do think more time for the BTRO to assemilate into the towing community would be a benefit.  Both for the community to build trust in the organization, and for BTRO to get their act together before bull dozing down the opposition and develop rapport with the Virginia towers. Thanks for your time. Thomas

Whom ever writes the minutes for this board, may do better handing the task over to a High School Englsh class.  I by no means am a professional writer, but these minutes are useless.  I am not sure how the minutes are approved by the board on March 4th and it takes two entire days to post them for the public to view.  This board does not make good use of  "The Information Super Highway," (the internet), or the postal service for that matter.  Yet this board does not understand why towers do not respond to them, duh!!!!! because they have miserably failed to reach out and inform the towers.  The minutes for the January 15th meeting are all of two pages, that are filled with "fluff", nothing informative as usual with this board.  I find it hard to believe, as well as insulting, that the board expects us to believe that in just short of two hours these were all of the details they could muster up for our reading pleasure. 

Further more it would be very nice if this board would consider towers worthy enough for full disclosure.  I would truly have liked to read more about the discussions between the committee members and the PR firms they were conferencing with, it is listed in their minutes, minus any details of course! 

In the future it may be more effective as well as efficient if the board just bottle meeting minutes, notes and info, and float them to me via the Chesapeake Bay!  There is a light house close by, I am willing to learn morris code, if anyone truly believed that the information would reach us any better than it does now!  Yes, my sarcasm may be a bit much, however it is to this point members of the towing inudstry have been pushed.  We are forced to face this board with all of it's smoke and mirrors, with little help from the very government that up until this point I believed was in place to protect me. 

Meredith

Should those of us who dare to be courageous enough to say this is WRONG, be afraid of reprisals from this board primarily composed of towing competitors?  There have been quite a few towers who have taken their own time to dig deep into many of the darker corridors that this board lives in, and they were fearless enough to expose this board and it's lack of integrity.  Will some of these towers end up in the cross hairs of this board?  It seems as if the Commonwealth has employed the fox to guard the hen house.  So what happens when the hens start to disappear?  Oh yeah, I know, then the fat fox lives happily ever after!  A republican would never hire a democrat to run their election campiagn, nor would a democrat hire a republican to do the same.  Why? Because it does not make good sense!  Please can someone explain to me why we would have a tower regulate another tower?  My employer would never hire our competition down the street to come in and tell him how to run his towing service.  I am far from being formally educated, but I do understand the term "CONFLICT OF INTEREST".  I have heard all of the "off the record" comments regarding the board members and their conscience free lobbyists opinions of those towers they choose to disrespect, however did the board really and truly think we were so stupid that we would just take them at face value, we would just lay down and accept their shady ways as our own?  It is evident to me that after the shake up in Richmond, this board was banking on our naivete.  They anticipated our trust, knowing they would have to take advantage of that very same trust.  Perhaps the Commonwealth should be looking into rogue boards they have put in place, rather than focusing on rogue towers, that can easily be controlled by enforcing already existing rules designated for the towing industry.  I read in the paper today that the budget for Va is falling short this year, so why don't we stop funding this corrupt board and give the money back to the great deserving people of Virginia. 

Meredith Russell

I have been trying to find out what is being discussed at board meetings but this rouge board chose not to post their agena, minutes on this town hall information web site. What are you trying to hide? Is someone being paid to post meeting information? What happened in the March 4th 2008 meeting?

In view of the comments and the regulations proposed, I have a couple comments.

First being that there are regulations for insurance requirements and haul permits that are in place for commercial carriers.  Does this not apply, and are tow trucks not commercial vehicles.

Secondly,  in order to be on the police rotation do you not need equipment capable of handling all calls in the area of your service.  Meaning a wrecker for winching an over the bank accident several feet off the road, and a rollback to haul an untowable vehicle.  This requires a 2 truck operation.

Third, times have changed so look at the size and type of vehicles on the road which demand a larger tow truck.  I started with a Superduty 1989 Ford Rollback in the mid 1990's.  After a few years in order to keep with changes and demands of the auto industry I had to upgrade to medium duty to have equipment available to answer police calls wheather winching is involved or flatbed tow.

I live and operate in rural Scoll County in southwest Virginia where we have hills and mountains  not the concrete jungles that most members and influencing advisors of the board live and operate.

A light duty truck may be great for some operations in some areas, but in others you need more muscle. I am not in the heavy duty class just the medium duty class.

The board needs to seek the advice from  the State Police in each division to get the advice as to what needs to be regulated and what equipment mandates are needed for their area ,  They see towers on a dialy basis know most operators by their first name. All areas are not the same and the old saying  of one size does not fit all.

The enforcement of the laws if passed will probably be in the hands of Commercial Enforcement Division which should inspecting trucks anyway to check for permits and insurance coverage and DOT numbers.. 

The bottom line of my comment is if regulated everyone should be treated the same and there should be more meetings state wide instead of just in Richmond.  Everyone cannot close shop and drive 6 to 8 hours to get there.  

Am I reading this right? It seems as though we will now have until January 1, 2009 to figure this mess out.

Information obtained from: http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?081+sum+SB707S if you would like to read the whole text.

Summary as passed:
Board of Towing and Recovery Operators.  Provides that in even-numbered years, the chairman of the Board of Towing and Recovery Operators will be a licensed Class A operator and the vice-chairman a licensed Class B operator, and in odd-numbered years, the chairman will be a licensed Class B operator and the vice-chairman a licensed Class A operator.  The bill also extends the effective date for Board regulations pertaining to public safety towing and recovery services to July 1, 2010, and extends the effective date of other Board regulations to January 1, 2009.  Any violation of § 46.2-2812 on or after January 1, 2009, will constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor.  Prior to drafting any public safety towing regulations, the Board will hold four public meetings to receive comments and recommendations regarding the appropriate equipment, standards, training, safety, and other factors related to providing public safety towing and recovery services.

Summary as passed Senate:
Board of Towing and Recovery Operators. Provides that in even-numbered years, the chairman of the Board of Towing and Recovery Operators will be a licensed Class A operator and the vice-chairman a licensed Class B operator, and in odd-numbered years, the chairman will be a licensed Class B operator and the vice-chairman a licensed Class A operator. Extends the effective date for Board regulations pertaining to public safety towing and recovery services to July 1, 2010. Any violation of this section on or after January 1, 2009, will constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor. Prior to drafting any public safety towing regulations, the Board will hold four public meetings to receive comments and recommendations regarding the appropriate equipment, standards, training, safety, and other factors related to providing public safety towing and recovery services.

Summary as introduced:
Board of Towing and Recovery Operators.  Postpones until July 1, 2010, the effective date of any regulations promulgated by the Board, the requirement that tow truck operators have tow truck driver authorization documents issued by the Board, and the requirement that towing and recovery services have and display licenses issued by the Board. The bill also alters composition of the Board.  Regulations recommended by the Board shall be presented to the Senate and House Transportation Committees for their consideration during the 2009 General Assembly session.

Even though there are many good companies, the state is obliged to protect consumers against the bad ones.  More regulation is not always a bad thing.

We respectfully request that a stay of cut-off time of 90 days at a minimum be considered for the end of the Comments Period.  That the Comment Period be pushed back until JUNE 27, 2008. There is not enough time to consider the volumes of proposals, changes, suggestions and ideas with the March 21, 2008 cut-off period. Would all who agree with extending the Comment Period please say so and state so here.  Thank you.  Thomas

maybe a good idea...esp since the meetings are AGAIN getting cancelled..WHAT IN THEWORLD ..

It is very important that this should be required and should have been done before this late stage, for BTRO to [mail] send "all Towing Companies" a copy of all new laws being considered and a comment space for "every Towing Company to respond".  And BTRO listen to what they have to say. Every Towing Company that has Business License and pays taxes should be sent this notification.  Right now many of us, have absolutely no idea what [all] the new laws are. And not all of us are lawyers and able to understand many of the new laws, and may have concerns and questions. I will say that I already disagree with the fees that are being considered to be imposed on towing Companies.  Towing Companies already have high fuel prices, high insurance cost, payroll, high taxes, high maintenance cost, high truck payments, etc.  Towing is a very costly business. So we do not need even more expense imposed by new laws. If fees are to imposed, they need to be reasonable. And we do NOT want to drive small towing companies out of business. If the laws do as many have said they will, Virginia's will suffer. Because as many towing companies that are out there, we are all needed for the huge number of motorist on the road. And many towing companies do not work 24 hours. We need these small towing businesses too! If the new laws are too harsh as the fees are now, and fingerprinting etc, it may drive many towing businesses out of business. We as contractors for AAA have been doing criminal background checks for years. As well as DMV background checks. That is reasonable to require this. But fingerprinting? If this is to be done, it should be a uncostly way for towing companies.  We already have to have a picture I.D. as a driver's license on file. We can look at the person and tell if it is them or not. Unless they have a twin! l.o.l.s. 

Anyway, I am opposed to high fees that are trying to be imposed. I don't believe a towing company should be required to have change for $100.00 (danger of drivers being robbed is higher with higher amounts of cash on hand. And lets face it, tow truck drivers go out in the middle of the night and most times, DO NOT know the individual who is requesting service. So we need to be concerned about the drivers too). Also, I don't think it should be imposed that Towing Companies "have to take checks". Many businesses are NOT taking personal checks now. As Americans we may not like it, BUT it is necessary when so many ppl are writing bad checks.  And Towing Companies should not be required to take credit cards. This should be optional. There are ATMs on every corner. If a person doesn't have cash, an ATM can be used. And of course, the Towing Company should have to give a receipt to the customer.  This is a few things I don't agree with. Like I said, the cost of towing is already sky high. By adding credit card machines, check cashing approval machines, is going to drive Towing cost up even higher and is hard on drivers time wise making all these transactions. Time is money when you pay a driver to run calls. We need to have a local meeting in every County and City in Virginia and someone needs to talk to the Towing Companies about this and "listen" to their questions and concerns. 

Thank you,

Calvin and Janice Tyree

Calvin's Low Price Towing/Lynchburg, VA.