In miscellaneous provisions, providing for waiver of subrogation.
Summary
HB2490 would amend Title 67 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes to prohibit certain contract terms in service provider agreements involving county agencies or municipal government entities. Specifically, it would make void and unenforceable any provision that attempts to eliminate or limit the right of an insurer or other liability coverage provider to pursue subrogation against a county agency or municipal government entity to recover costs paid on a liability claim. The bill expressly includes waiver-of-subrogation clauses within the prohibited terms.
The bill defines a "service provider contract" as an agreement for services regulated under the Pennsylvania Children, Youth and Families Manual (55 Pa. Code Pt. V). The new section would apply only to contracts entered into or renewed on or after the effective date, and the act would take effect 60 days after enactment.
Impact
HB2490 would create a new statutory rule in Title 67 that overrides conflicting contract language in covered service provider agreements. In practice, counties and municipal government entities that contract for children and youth services could no longer require providers to waive subrogation rights held by insurers or other liability carriers. This would shift risk-allocation terms in those contracts and could affect how liability costs are recovered after claims involving covered public-service arrangements.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded votes, so there is no documented debate or formal vote history to gauge sentiment. Based on the bill’s introduction by multiple sponsors and its targeted consumer/public-policy framing, the measure appears to be intended as a protective clarification for contractors and insurers rather than a controversial policy change, but the legislative record provided does not show broader support or opposition.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the bill’s restriction on contract drafting by county agencies and municipal government entities, especially where those entities may prefer waiver-of-subrogation clauses to control insurance costs or allocate liability. Opponents could view the bill as limiting local contracting flexibility and potentially increasing public-sector exposure, while supporters would likely argue that such waivers unfairly shift recovery rights away from insurers and are contrary to public policy in regulated children and youth service contracts. No specific stakeholder positions are included in the provided record.