Transcript Highlights:

• Sometimes you all bring us cases, folks in the audience bring us cases, we learn cases. their entire
• > cases Audience bring us cases, we learn about cases from other government agencies.
• So it's how we can do the cases and how we get the cases done.
• So it's how we can do the cases and how we get the cases done. >> Okay. Thank you.
• So it's how we can do the cases and how we get the cases done. >> Okay. Thank you.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard an update on the Consumer Protection Restitution Account, also called SPRA, from the Minnesota Attorney General’s office and AARP Minnesota. AARP described the fund as a first-of-its-kind consumer fraud restitution program that should encourage scam reporting, give the AG’s office more incentive to pursue cases, and provide financial recovery to victims, especially older adults. The AG’s office explained that the fund is financed by 50% of consumer enforcement recoveries up to $5 million per year, plus unclaimed or undistributable restitution, and said about $4.6 million had been deposited since July 1, 2025, largely from a Johnson & Johnson settlement. Jessica Whitney outlined how claims are processed: consumers file complaints, the office obtains a court order, then determines whether defendants have collectible assets before distributing funds in chronological order based on the date of the court order. She said the first major case is Woodbury Dental Arts, a defunct dental clinic whose patients filed more than 300 claims; the office estimates about 75% are likely valid, is reviewing them, and hopes to issue checks within a month. She also described upcoming cases involving High Road Builders and another home remodeling contractor, along with more than 100 individual fraud complaints, including nine claims totaling more than $5.2 million. Committee members raised concerns about delays, communication with constituents, and whether victims know if their cases are being processed. Whitney said the office is trying to improve outreach through press releases, community visits, senior centers, AARP, and Commerce senior outreach. She also flagged two possible legislative issues: restitution that cannot be distributed may not be subject to the $5 million cap, and the statute’s prohibition on pro rata payments may need reconsideration because available funds appear insufficient to pay all claims in full. The office said it would provide a fuller report in October and continue processing claims this fiscal year.

Transcript Highlights:

• Venue, and you know that Dallas County case—God, that was a really, really difficult case.
• has not prejudged the case.
• is informant testimony. ...comes up in high-profile cases, often murder cases.
• In his case, the...
• about the case.

Bills: HB285, HB795, HB1795, HB1871, HB2407, HB2461, HB2695, HB3507, HB4911, HB200

Keywords: animal cruelty, nonlivestock, prosecution, veterinary defense, animal welfare, aggravated assault, penal code, public servant, deadly weapon, mass shooting, Penal Code, penalties, felony, Texas Penal Code, felony enhancement, first-degree felony, second-degree felony, violent crime, assault punishment, serious bodily injury

Transcript Highlights:

• or be summarily dismissed cases that or be summarily dismissed cases that or complaints<00:12:51.199
• is handled on a case-by-case basis.
• chair representative dur the each case chair representative dur the each case is<00:30:11.080>
• This case will be a case that we are working on for many years to come.
• <01:27:51.840> came about how cases how cases were um came about how cases how cases were

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Judiciary and Civil Law Committee met to hear an informational presentation from the Board of Judicial Standards. After brief member and staff introductions and a review of committee rules, the board’s executive secretary, Sarah Bas, and Mary Pat Maher explained the board’s history, mission, and operations. They described the board as an independent state agency that handles complaints about judicial misconduct and disability, issues advisory opinions, and educates judges on ethics. The presentation covered the board’s composition, complaint intake and screening process, and the levels of discipline available, ranging from summary dismissal and letters of caution to private admonitions, deferred disposition agreements, public reprimands, and formal complaints that can lead to Supreme Court review. Members asked about the board’s budget, public access to discipline records, confidentiality of complaints, and how the board balances accountability with protecting public confidence in the judiciary. The board said public discipline is posted on its website, while private admonitions, deferred dispositions, dismissals, and letters of caution remain confidential. It also said judges generally are told who complained so they can respond, though the board can withhold the source for good cause. Questions also focused on whether attorneys are underreporting misconduct, how many complaints are nuisance complaints, and whether the online complaint system changed the types of complaints received; the board said nuisance complaints make up more than half, the complaint types have not changed much, and it does not have data comparing complaint sources to outcomes. No votes or formal committee actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• At least 750 cases. And I have no clue how long it takes to litigate a case on a claim like this.
• But there are certain cases, very complex cases, where a high level of expertise is needed.
• And those cases are generally the most difficult cases that have been out there because if the case could
• We spent $16,000 on the case of our own money. Those experts help us prevail in that case.
• and then the second case.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that Dallas County case, God, that was a really, really difficult case.
• And so if a defendant feels in that case, if a police officer feels in that case that, man, this trial
• Elizabeth Henneke: 770 cases, at least what they told us is that most of them are law parties cases.
• case.
• That victim did that and that same grand jury that no-billed the case true-billed the case.

Bills: HB200

Keywords: HB 200, emergency communication, backup communications, satellite phone, portable satellite equipment, radio, floodplain, 100-year floodplain, FEMA, natural disaster, disaster preparedness, emergency preparedness, vulnerable populations, children, elderly, seniors, people with disabilities, care facilities, residential care, assisted living

Transcript Highlights:

• The cases that we have right now, we have about 1,700 cases pending in the settlement fund.
• If that is the case, we may If that is the case, we may award more in the next fiscal year than if we
• The first case...
• That's one case.
• Those are different cases and Those are different cases and they're factually different.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee opened by approving the May 15 minutes and then recognized Pam Ellis for her long service with the Legislative Budget Assistant’s office and upcoming retirement. The committee adopted the consent calendar with two items removed for separate consideration, then approved transfers for the Administrative Office of the Courts and the Department of Environmental Services after questions about court benefit costs and dam project funding. The Department of Health and Human Services also received approval for a general fund transfer item. A major portion of the meeting focused on the Youth Development Center settlement fund. New administrator Jared Boyle, joined by the Attorney General, described the fund’s remaining caseload, the payment matrix, and the need for additional funding to begin hearings in August. Members raised concerns about administrative costs, attorneys’ fees, payday loans, structured settlements, and the long-term fiscal impact on the state. Boyle requested $55 million, but the committee ultimately approved a reduced appropriation of $20 million, with members noting the possibility of returning for more funding later depending on revenues and the October revenue review. The Department of Corrections then received approval for a smaller shortfall transfer and a larger overtime-related transfer, with officials citing a 52% corrections officer vacancy rate, ongoing recruitment, academy classes, and efforts to use civilian staff in some non-security roles. A late item from the Veterans Home was also approved to cover overtime, holiday pay, and indirect cost shortfalls within its existing budget. The committee then heard an informational presentation on implementation of Senate Bill 134 and the new federal Medicaid work-requirement rule. DHHS said it plans to submit a state plan amendment, seek approval for hardship exceptions, start with one eligibility check cycle, and use existing federal grant funding to make system changes. Finally, the committee received a performance audit of the Doorway opioid treatment program, which found weak written procedures, incomplete data use, reimbursement delays, and problems with the Governor’s Commission on Addiction Treatment and Prevention. Members discussed follow-up reporting, and the next Fiscal Committee meeting was scheduled for August 21 at 11:00 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• cases, also in guardianship cases.
• in DNA cases um TPR cases also in DNA cases um TPR cases also guardianship<00:52:02.800> cases
• These cases, the overdose and ingestion cases, have remained among the most common types of cases that
• That's the big case.
• c><01:30:46.719> cases,<01:30:47.199> I the ingestion cases, ingestion cases, I the ingestion

Keywords: 1. Call to Order and Roll Call – 00:00:24 2. Discussion of The Center for Courageous Kids – 00:02:46 3. Discussion of Adult Protective Services and State Guardianship Programs – 00:25:22 4. Discussion of Annual Report of the External Child Fatality and Near Fatality Review Panel – 01:00:34 5. Consideration of Referred Administrative Regulations – 01:33:41 6. Adjournment – 01:42:07, 958, all

Summary: The committee’s first interim meeting opened with roll call and a reminder that Kentucky had 8,641 children in out-of-home care with active placements as of June 1, 2025. The first presentation was from the Center for Courageous Kids (CCK), a donor-funded camp in Scottsville that serves children with lifelong illnesses and disabilities at no charge. Representatives described the camp’s history, its year-round family retreats and summer sessions, its medical and accessibility supports, and its impact on campers’ confidence and independence. They said CCK has served more than 43,000 campers from 46 states and 13 countries, including 22,000 from Kentucky, and noted plans to reach all 120 Kentucky counties. CCK also outlined future capital needs: a new art barn and a medical lodge. The organization said the art barn project would cost $2.5 million, with a legislative request of $1.5 million, and the medical lodge would cost $2.875 million, with a legislative request of $1.75 million. Members responded very positively, with several praising the camp’s work and one member asking about operational challenges. CCK said its main challenges are awareness, staff and volunteer recruitment, and expanding medical and housing capacity; it also said it is accredited by the American Camp Association and receives health and safety visits and audits. The committee then moved to a presentation on adult protective services and state guardianship programs from Jessica Wayne and Cliff Bryant of DCBS. They explained the legal framework for guardianship, the difference between full and limited guardianship/conservatorship, emergency appointments, and the state’s role as a last-resort guardian when no family member or private entity is available. They reported 4,464 individuals under state guardianship as of June 1, with most cases involving dementia, developmental disability, intellectual disability, nursing home or long-term care placement, severe mental illness, or brain injury. They also said the division has 89 field workers across 14 regional offices, with an average caseload of 52 and a goal of reducing that into the mid-40s through additional hiring.

Transcript Highlights:

• in a murder case?
• . criminal case.
• It's not in all cases, it's only in limited cases.
• I know we're talking about a narrow set of cases, subset of cases, but...
• The highest number of drug cases, OCA says it's 154,000 drug cases a year.

Bills: HB36, HB75, HB76, HB166, HB799, HB 1135, HJR15, HJR16, HB36, HB75, HB76, HB166, HJR15, HJR16

Keywords: family violence, global positioning monitoring system, victim resources, electronic monitoring, protective orders, magistrate, criminal procedure, probable cause, written findings, law enforcement, bail bonds, bail fund, charitable bail fund, nonprofit bail organization, public funds, local government spending, political subdivision, county, city, taxpayer lawsuit

Transcript Highlights:

• The case was Blake Burr.
• Well, when was your bankruptcy case? I'm not familiar with the bankruptcy case, Senator.
• And so that's why we had two separate cases. And the federal case has been dismissed?
• The case was affirmed. Okay.
• case.

Summary: The committee first reviewed several wage-claim and labor-related litigation reports from the Department of Labor and Licensing. Members questioned the department’s authority and jurisdiction, whether it was acting like a court, and why it sought attorney’s fees and costs. Department staff explained that the claims arose under the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act and related labor statutes, that the department investigates small wage claims and can file suit when informal resolution fails, and that filing fees are waived by statute though service costs may be incurred. The committee reviewed individual cases, including one where the employer had not proven cash payments, another that had already been paid and dismissed, and a third where service could not yet be completed. The committee then voted to review or batch-file the labor items. The University of Arkansas System then reported on three pending lawsuits under the litigation-notification statute. One case involving a tenured professor alleging age and race discrimination had already been resolved and dismissed after the university re-engaged in discussions about a position. A second case involving a former employee alleging ADA and FMLA retaliation was moving forward after partial dismissal and an answer denying liability. A third case involved a former vendor employee alleging retaliation tied to a parking ticket; members asked about individual-capacity exposure for a university police sergeant, and counsel explained that punitive damages could potentially create personal exposure. The committee reviewed each report. The Department of Finance and Administration presented a proposed tax settlement reducing a sales-and-use tax assessment from about $48,000 to $20,000, with interest and penalties waived, and the committee approved it. The Claims Commission then presented several claims and settlements, including an unpaid salary differential for the Department of Health, reissued warrants, unpaid bills for DHS, and multiple negotiated settlements involving UAMS, Arkansas State Police, and ARDOT; these were generally approved or batched for approval. The most extensive discussion involved a settlement between the Teacher Retirement System and Tetronics International Limited in liquidation, arising from losses tied to the failed Blue Oak project; members questioned the company’s liquidation status, the prior investment loss, and why the matter was settling for $65,000, and the committee ultimately affirmed the settlement. The committee also heard a disputed tax-sale claim involving the Commissioner of State Lands, where a claimant argued that excess proceeds from a 2009 tax sale should have gone to her family rather than escheating to the county. After testimony from the claimant and counsel, members debated sovereign immunity, heirship, and whether the committee could or should award the $4,200 overage. The motion was amended and then replaced with a motion to hold the matter over for further review in a future joint session, which passed. Finally, the committee considered an appeal by Andrew Simpson challenging dismissal of his claim against the Arkansas Court of Appeals; after Simpson and court staff explained the underlying dispute, the committee reviewed the dismissal and the matter was held over for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• apply to civil cases.
• It's my information that right now in criminal cases, once the case is done, all of that information
• All the way back to the 1970s with the Amish cases. the Yoder case in particular, the Troxell case in
• 2000, the Dersab case in 2000. in 2007 and Enri C.J.C. in 2020, the language of those cases is... that
• . modification cases.

Bills: HB170, HB865, HB748, HJR112, HB 1110, HB1495, HB786, HB 1130, HB170

Keywords: civil liability, self-defense, force, deadly force, legal immunity, attorney's fees, criminal justice, firearms, liability, veterans, gun ownership, immunity, firearm hold agreement, sexual abuse, nondisclosure, confidentiality, public policy, Trey's Law, parental rights, child upbringing

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to highlight a case.
• four cases in 2022, and we went up to 25 cases in 2024.
• We talked about increases in cases and an increase from from 4 to 30 cases is a lot, but in the ICAC
• And those 25 cases are without trying. Thank you. That's why there's so few cases.
• So they will do the forensics on whether it's an ICAC related case or whether it's another case that

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• criminal case not if it's a civil case criminal case not if it's a civil case and<00:56:39.240><
• , so one case instead of two.
• This applies to drug cases.
• This applies to drug cases. This does not apply to every case.
• <04:01:09.439> as cases but it comes up in other cases as cases but it comes up in other cases

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard CACR 6, a proposed constitutional amendment by Representative Keith Ammon to recognize a fundamental right to use computation resources. Ammon argued that computing is now essential to daily life, speech, education, and economic opportunity, and said the amendment was intended to push back against government or corporate restrictions, citing a 2023 federal executive order on AI registration and reporting as an example of the kind of precedent he wanted to oppose. He said the proposal should be simple and clear because it would go to voters, and he compared the right to compute to other constitutional rights that do not require the government to provide the underlying tools. Committee members raised concerns about the breadth of the language, including whether it could affect encryption, authentication, network security, energy use, and other regulatory issues. Representative McFarland questioned whether the amendment could interfere with security measures, while others asked whether it would prevent ordinary network management such as throttling or require the state to provide internet access or hardware. Ammon responded that the right would not entitle someone to other people’s resources and said encryption and similar issues would sort themselves out. Several members also raised concerns about child safety, public safety, and whether existing laws could still regulate misuse of computing; Ammon said reasonable limits would still apply, similar to other constitutional rights. Sarah Scott of Americans for Prosperity testified in support, saying the amendment would protect innovation, individual autonomy, and economic competitiveness by preventing overregulation. After questions concluded, the chair closed the hearing on CACR 6. The committee then opened House Bill 615, sponsored by Representative Dan Maguire, which would substantially rewrite the state’s drug-forfeiture law. Maguire said the bill is intended to improve fairness and efficiency in cases where property such as cars or cash is seized in connection with drug offenses, noting that the criminal case and the civil forfeiture case are currently handled separately, with the property case prosecuted by the Attorney General’s office. He explained that the bill addresses courtroom procedure for these forfeiture actions and is meant to make the process more specific and orderly.

Transcript Highlights:

• Cases because I didn't know the three types of cases; I didn't see that, but thank you for that clarification
• Cases because I didn't know the three types of cases; I didn't see that, but thank you for that clarification
• In a smaller number of the cases, when those cases are appealed, everything stops in the trial court,
• In most cases, if not all cases, ...will actually reject the application, leaving the patient in the
• A case appeal from a non-record municipal court is retried from the beginning, de novo, while a case

Bills: HB 1239, HB1990, HB1748, HB1749, HB2578, HB2986, HB1970, HB3163, HB2733, HB1922, HB 113, HB 1088, HB1938, HB3004, HB2637, HB2960, HB113

Keywords: public health, access to healthcare, insurance reforms, medical expenses, healthcare providers, mental health, protective custody, preliminary examination, detention period, emergency circumstances, emergency detention, legal framework, detention, healthcare, liability, landowners, nonagricultural land, trespassing, public safety, interpreters

Transcript Highlights:

• Jack Smith's lawfare cases.
• And I saw with my own eyes, in Manhattan, with the Manhattan case, I saw... it in the Georgia case.
• That doesn't mean every case should go federal. To the contrary, most cases should not.
• That working group is gonna look at the January 6th cases and the Mar-a-Lago case, the cases you worked
• , the Mar-a-Lago case, and the Alvin Bragg case?

Keywords: nominations, Deputy Attorney General, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice, Todd Blanch, Gail Slater, confirmation hearing

Summary: The meeting focused on the nominations of Todd Blanch and Gail Slater for the positions of Deputy Attorney General and Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust, respectively. The committee considered the qualifications of both nominees, with opening statements provided by the nominees themselves. There was an evident emphasis on the rigorous vetting process that nominees undergo before their selection, highlighting the importance of the roles within the Department of Justice. Members of the committee engaged in a structured question-and-answer session to further evaluate the nominees' capabilities and fit for the positions they were nominated for, with each member allotted seven minutes to pose questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Where was your case out of your original case?
• What about when you moved your case to, when your case... North Dakota.
• case.
• I mean, our civil cases are not stacked like criminal first appearance cases.
• cases, small claims court cases, and protection orders.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and reviewed a memorandum compiling member suggestions for possible legislation. The memo grouped ideas into topics including creation of a family court, expanded education for parents, attorneys, and judges, expedited hearings for parenting-time violations, limiting law enforcement involvement in custody disputes, creating parenting time expediters, and adopting more uniform court procedures. Members also discussed whether to form subcommittees, but the task force decided to continue working as a full committee rather than create subcommittees at this time. The committee then heard testimony from Dr. John Perez, a mental health professional, who described his personal custody experience and his professional work with families he believes have been affected by parental alienation. He argued for stronger education, faster court response times, and better tools to address intentional interference with parenting time. Members questioned him about his case history, the concept of parental alienation, and whether specialized family courts or judges with family-law training could help. Dr. Perez said a dedicated family court and faster hearings would likely have helped his situation. The task force spent substantial time discussing the possible creation of a family court. Judge Hovey supported the idea of a specialized family court or at least a study of one, saying family cases are distinct from ordinary adversarial litigation and that judges with family-law experience could better handle them. Several members agreed that a family court could improve consistency, expertise, and speed, but others cautioned that the task force’s current directive is focused on enforcement of existing orders rather than broader custody policy, and noted that voters had previously rejected equal shared parenting proposals. The group also discussed expedited procedures for parenting-time disputes, with Judge Hovey suggesting a 30-day hearing timeline may be workable. On education, members generally supported requiring parents to complete a parenting education course and adding educational materials explaining court process, child support, and what judges can and cannot do. Mr. McLean suggested a short instructional video for litigants and more family-law education for judges and attorneys, while Ms. Moldenhauer said education could be incorporated into scheduling orders or mediation orders. Members also discussed the Parents Forever course, including whether it should be mandatory in all counties and whether cost is a barrier; no vote was taken on any of these proposals.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:01.000> and and timely res resolution of cases and and timely res resolution of cases
• and are authorized to hear cases and are authorized to hear cases anywhere<00:04:05.360> within
• We also cannot refuse cases.
• <00:53:20.839> uh case load we also cannot refuse cases uh case load we also cannot refuse
• <01:13:39.040> our<01:13:39.280> case little bit earlier is our case our case little

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee met to approve the January 16 minutes and then heard a budget presentation from State Court Administrator Jeff Shorba on behalf of the Minnesota judicial branch. Shorba described the courts’ structure, mission, and workload, noting 322 judges, about 2,800 staff, roughly 1 million district court filings annually, and a current budget of about $479 million. He emphasized the branch’s constitutional obligation to provide fair and timely access to justice and said the courts are funded almost entirely through legislative appropriations. He also highlighted recent accomplishments made possible by prior legislative funding, including eliminating the pandemic felony and gross misdemeanor backlog, expanding remote and hybrid hearings, improving courtroom technology, sustaining treatment courts, and increasing pay for interpreters and psychological examiners. Shorba outlined the judicial branch’s 2026–27 budget request, which he said totals a 12% increase over the starting biennial base. Major requests included $77.3 million in 2026–27 and $104 million in 2028–29 for a 6% judicial salary increase and related compensation costs; $5.1 million in 2026–27 and $1.76 million in 2028–29 for digital accessibility compliance with new federal ADA rules; $4 million in 2026–27 and $800,000 in 2028–29 to modernize justice partner access to court records; $7.2 million in 2026–27 to raise pay for contract psychological examiners; and $18 million in 2026–27 to increase juror pay from $20 to $100 per day and align mileage rates with federal rates. He also discussed ongoing funding needs for interpreter services, jury costs, cybersecurity, and other statutorily required court services, saying temporary funding provided in the prior session will expire and that permanent support is needed. Members asked questions about treatment courts, employee bargaining, and mental health competency issues. Representative Eric requested more detail on funding for newly launched and existing treatment courts, and Shorba said many treatment courts begin with federal grants before transitioning to state support after about three years. He confirmed the judicial branch negotiates its own employee contracts rather than the executive branch doing so, and said the branch has three unions plus many unrepresented employees. On mental health and competency, Shorba said the branch is focused on obtaining timely psychological evaluations and is not responsible for treatment services themselves, but acknowledged a shortage of examiners and treatment beds and said a related competency board would be testifying the following week. No votes or formal actions were taken beyond adoption of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our records become public in disciplinary cases after either a case is closed without a probable cause
• that case, is that what I understand you to say?
• that case.
• in case B, and therefore are the citizen members this... ...from the grievance committee in case B,
• and therefore are the citizen members different from case to case, or are you appointed to the grievance

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met with a quorum present and Senator Thompson excused. The committee first considered Senate Bill 48 by Senator Garcia on judicial sales and procedures. Garcia explained a delete-all amendment that would create clearer statewide procedures for alternative judicial sales, increase transparency, remove bidding credits, extend sale timelines, and add oversight for auctioneers and escrow agents to prevent fraud and collusion. After no questions or opposition, the amendment was adopted, Senator Pasadoma said the rewrite addressed many of his concerns, and the committee then voted CS for SB 48 favorably with unanimous yes votes from members present. The committee then received a presentation from the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office on the effectiveness of Florida’s recent anti-squatting law, House Bill 621/SB 888. Presenters described several cases in which deputies used the new process to remove unlawful occupants, including a false landlord report, a long-term fake lease situation, and a more recent unlawful occupancy case. They said the law has helped protect property owners and potential victims, but suggested technical changes: clearer authorization for deputies to enter and use force if needed, and a fix to the affidavit penalty provision because false statements are currently being charged as false reports rather than perjury under the existing wording. The Florida Bar also presented on its role in regulating lawyers, lawyer advertising, and the unlicensed practice of law. Bar leaders explained that the Bar operates under the Florida Supreme Court’s authority, is funded by member fees, and handles complaints through a multi-step process involving intake, branch offices, grievance committees, referees, and final Supreme Court review. They described advertising review procedures, discipline statistics, consumer assistance, the Clients’ Security Fund, and enforcement against unlicensed practice. Senators asked about the Legislature’s authority over lawyer advertising, the prevalence of legal ads, the role of public members on grievance committees, and how those members are selected and used.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that case was called Pennington v. Hair.
• Just like in that case, the voters didn't get to vote here.
• <00:25:49.520> says I think that the Pennington case says I think that the Pennington case
• ,<00:28:03.039> they case, they case, they stipulated<00:28:05.279> with<00:28:05.760><
• Um, and this may be one of those cases."

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So how these cases start, how these cases start, the court...
• And so, well, no, a case manager would have—sorry, in my cases.
• This is a case in which...
• The case manager assigned to the case was excellent—one of the best I worked with.
• A dependency case was open.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee met for a presentation-only hearing on the Arizona Department of Child Safety, with no bills on the agenda. Chair Blackman opened by emphasizing that the hearing was intended to be data-focused and respectful, and that personal attacks or false accusations would not be tolerated. Director Catherine Patak then presented DCS data on hotline volume, investigations, reunifications, adoptions, guardianships, foster care entries and exits, kinship placement, congregate care, missing youth, and extended foster care. She said the department investigated more than 43,000 cases in 2025, kept the out-of-home care population relatively steady, and had reunified about 3,000 children with parents, while also noting that older youth and behavioral-health-driven removals are creating a mismatch with available foster homes. She also described kinship supports, foster parent recruitment, and the impact of Family First on funding, saying DCS lost federal drawdown for congregate care while waiting on approval for prevention programs. Members questioned the director about kinship caregivers, behavioral health access, reunification services, parental rights terminations, notice and documentation practices, and the effect of increased reimbursement rates. Patak said unlicensed kin can receive support through the kinship supports contract, that behavioral health assessments are done quickly at the welcome center or within 24 hours for kin placements, and that provider capacity remains a major constraint outside DCS control. She explained reunification conditions and services, said the department is working on documentation and notice issues flagged by the Auditor General, and noted that kinship reimbursement increases have helped some families step forward. She also said DCS procurement for group homes is handled internally through an RFP process and that about 10% of kinship caregivers become licensed. Representative Gillette then delivered a lengthy presentation arguing that the child welfare, Medicaid, and disability systems are structurally intertwined and that procurement and funding rules create incentives for volume and congregate care use. He criticized DCS, DES, and AHCCCS/Access oversight structures, argued that the system diffuses accountability, and said the committee’s work and related materials would be referred to special counsel. He also raised concerns about documentation, placement decisions, and the cost of congregate care, while asserting that the system over-relies on large providers and that reforms should focus on structural and financial incentives. Vice Chair Fink followed with a brief slide noting that congregate care costs far more per child than foster or kinship care, reinforcing the committee’s concern about placement costs and the need to shift children toward family-based care when possible.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um but we've used in family cases.
• We require a pre-trial case management order within 30 days for family cases.
• <00:18:14.240> Um hundreds of cases over the years. Um hundreds of cases over the years.
• and the case is enough discovery and the case is actually<00:18:59.679> settled<00:19:00.080>
• /c> they hear in the case how the case is they hear in the case how the case is likely<00:26:19.919><

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met without a quorum and discussed how to proceed with its family court review work. The chair said preliminary, unofficial reports could be circulated and voted on by email, and noted that next year the work might continue as a full committee rather than a subcommittee. Members also discussed carrying unresolved issues into next year, including the long-standing “one judge, one case” concept. Later, the committee received additional materials from a member who could not attend, including a packet on state-funded transcript requests and background information on how different states structure family court systems. A major presentation focused on improving New Hampshire family court pre-trial and mediation practices. The presenters said current rules give judges broad discretion, which can lead to inconsistent discovery, evidence, and timelines, especially for self-represented parties. They raised concerns about uneven mediator training and oversight, lack of uniform domestic violence screening, and unclear information for families about their rights and how to exit mediation. They recommended standardized pre-trial case management orders, clearer plain-language deadlines, mandatory domestic violence screening, stronger mediator certification and continuing education, a mentorship program, an independent oversight board, and a pilot program in a few counties before any statewide rollout. Members and presenters also discussed existing court forms and practices, including mediation agreements, mediator preparation forms, first appearances, and the use of Zoom for mediation. One participant argued that mediation can work better when parties are better prepared and when cases are not sent too early, and suggested that neutral case evaluation is another useful alternative dispute resolution tool. The discussion also touched on the need for better educational materials for pro se litigants, with one member describing efforts to create a more accessible guide for people going to court. No votes were taken, and the session ended with plans to continue reviewing materials and refine recommendations.