House agriculture committee advances bill to set rules for veterinary professional associates after hours of testimony

The House Agriculture Committee voted 11‑1 to send House Bill 12‑85 — legislation to create statutory guardrails for the new veterinary professional associate (VPA) role established by Proposition 129 — to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation. Representative Lisa McCormick, the bill sponsor, moved the bill after adopting five committee amendments that tightened supervision language, added an accreditation timeline and set a maximum supervisor-to‑VPA ratio.

Supporters told the committee the bill provides necessary consumer protections and workplace standards to make the VPA role safe and practical. “The VPA will be able to practice veterinary medicine within their scope, but we need clear guardrails so veterinarians can safely delegate and patients receive consistent care,” said Dr. Jennifer Bolster, chief clinic veterinarian at the Humane Society of Boulder Valley. Proponents highlighted three policy areas: establishing supervisory agreements between veterinarians and VPAs, requiring national accreditation and competency testing for VPA programs, and clarifying the veterinarian‑client‑patient relationship (VCPR) for prescribing and delegation.

Opponents, including Humane Colorado and officials from the Division of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) and Colorado State University (CSU), urged delay. “The rulemaking process for VPAs is already underway and expected to conclude in August,” Sarah Werner, deputy division director for policy and communications at DORA, told the committee, saying DORA has the materials and stakeholder input needed to implement the ballot measure. Veterinarians and animal‑welfare advocates warned that some provisions in the bill as introduced would restrict VPAs’ ability to increase access to care, change the minimum educational requirement from a master’s degree to an associate degree, or preempt the board’s rulemaking authority. Several witnesses asked the committee to allow the State Board of Veterinary Medicine’s rule process, and CSU’s task force, to finish before codifying specific practice details into statute.

Committee amendments adopted at the hearing addressed multiple concerns. L002 extended the deadline for required accreditation to the Veterinary Practice Act’s next scheduled sunset date; L003 removed telehealth provisions and cross‑referenced federal and state prescribing law; L004 and L006 revised supervision language and statutory placement; and L005 changed several references from “liable” to “accountable,” replaced a written informed‑consent requirement with identification guidance, and set a supervisory ratio ceiling of no more than one veterinarian to three VPAs (the board may further define exact ratios). Representative McCormick said the changes aim to align the statute with existing medical models while giving the State Board clearer structure to finish its rulemaking.

Supporters including CSU Chancellor Tony Frank and Dr. Will French, chair of the Colorado Veterinary Medical Association’s advocacy committee, said consistent national accreditation and competency exams are critical to ensure graduates meet baseline standards. Rural practitioners at the hearing asked the committee to limit VPAs to species and procedures for which they are trained; Dr. Curtis Crawford, a mixed‑animal veterinarian, pressed that initial CSU programs focus on small animals and that livestock capabilities would require additional training.

After the debate and adoption of amendments, Representative McCormick moved the bill to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation. The clerk read the roll call: the motion passed 11 yeas, 1 nay. The committee record shows several members said they will continue working with the sponsor as the bill proceeds.

The hearing included substantial public testimony — both in person and online — from veterinarians, university officials, veterinary technicians and animal‑welfare groups. Key schedule points mentioned during the hearing: DORA’s stakeholder rulemaking was described as ongoing with a final rulemaking hearing planned for August; licensure for VPAs was discussed as required to begin Jan. 1, 2026; and CSU’s master’s program expects to admit its first students in the fall, with graduates not expected until 2027 under the timeline described by witnesses. The bill as amended inserts statutory detail supporters say the board can use to complete rulemaking, while opponents argued written statutory changes this year risk contradicting or preempting the collaborative rule process already underway.

Representative McCormick said the bill is intended to implement the voters’ intent and to prepare the profession for the first cohort of trainees. The Committee of the Whole will receive the amended bill next. The committee did not adopt amendments that would have removed rulemaking authority from the State Board; instead, it moved to clarify statutory expectations and timelines for accreditation, supervision and accountability.

Votes at a glance: House Bill 12‑85 as amended — Committee vote to send to Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation: 11 yes, 1 no.