Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fees And Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Veterinary board endorses tiered premises fee plan and higher statutory caps; seeks to protect RBT fees
Summary
After four years of data collection, the board approved a legislative proposal (option 2) to adopt a tiered veterinary premises fee structure and increase several statutory fee caps while reducing the RBT fee burden; the board approved submitting the package to the legislature.
The California Veterinary Medical Board voted to submit a legislative proposal that would create a tiered fee structure for registered veterinary premises, raise several statutory fee caps for veterinarians and premises, and reduce statutory constraints that previously limited refunds to the board's reserve balance.
After reviewing four years of veterinary-premises employee data and multiple funding projections prepared with the Department of Consumer Affairs budget office, the Medical and Dental Committee and board staff presented a two-option proposal to the board. The board chose option 2, which increases several statutory fee caps for veterinarians and veterinary premises while seeking to ease the cost burden on registered veterinary technicians (RBTs).
Key elements of the chosen plan - Tiered veterinary premises fees based on full-time equivalent (FTE) veterinarians at the premises: small (1— vets), medium (4— vets), and large (9+ vets). The tiering was designed to place a larger share of costs on larger premises. - Increased statutory caps for veterinarian license application and renewal fees (proposed to allow higher fees set in regulation over time) and higher caps for premises registration fees, with graduated increases across the three tiers. - An increased statutory cap for the Veterinary Assistant Controlled Substances Permit (VACSP) and a modest decrease to certain RBT statutory caps compared with earlier options, balancing revenue needs and equity concerns. - An option to charge an additional $25 per mobile unit tied to a fixed veterinary premises, to cover the inspection workload associated with mobile units.
Rationale and financial analysis Board staff and DCA financial analysts showed long-range fund-condition projections and argued that incremental fee increases spaced over several years would help the board reach a healthier reserve position (target discussed was 12—15 months) without seeking immediate large caps at every sunset.
The board also acknowledged fiscal uncertainties in multi-year forecasts and the potential savings from pending legislation allowing stipulated settlements without Attorney General involvement, which could reduce average annual expenditures for legal costs.
Stakeholder input Representatives from CVMA and other stakeholder groups reviewed the proposal and generally raised no objections to option 2. Some stakeholders suggested earlier implementation or larger increases targeted to veterinarian fees and smaller increases for RBTs; the board's option 2 reflects those concerns by softening the impact on RBTs while increasing capacities for premises and veterinarians.
Board action The board voted to submit the option 2 legislative proposal to the Legislature (motion passed). Staff will file the legislative language and continue outreach with stakeholder groups, and the board will prepare a fiscal justification to accompany the bill.
What this means for licensees If enacted, the bill would give the board statutory caps that permit higher fees to be set by regulation in future cycles, permit tiered premises fees, and update delinquency and duplicate-document provisions. The board also instructed staff to publish guidance for licensees about where and how to print duplicate certificates from the Breeze system while procedural improvements are implemented.
Next steps Board staff will file the legislative language with legislative counsel and coordinate outreach with stakeholder groups as the bill advances through the committee process.
