Arapahoe County to seek amendments to bill requiring counties to handle federal benefits for foster youth

Arapahoe County officials said a Colorado House bill that would require county departments to determine eligibility for federal benefits for children in foster care and place those benefits into trust accounts would create a significant legal and administrative burden for counties.

County attorneys and commissioners told a legislative update meeting the bill — discussed as House Bill 25 12 71 in the meeting materials — would require county departments to determine eligibility “within 90 days of the date of placement,” create trust accounts for benefits, and prohibit counties from using those federal benefits to offset the cost of the child’s care. The draft also would create a legislatively appointed work group but, officials said, keeps the statutory duties in place with an effective date that would begin before the work group’s recommendations are due.

County officials said why the matter matters: Arapahoe County’s legal staff and social services staff lack routine, in-house expertise to create the kinds of protected accounts described in the draft. Creating protected ABLE accounts or specialized trusts incorrectly can jeopardize a child’s other benefit eligibility, county attorneys warned. That, officials said, could cause harm the bill aims to avoid.

Deputy County Attorney Mike Valentine told commissioners he was “equally baffled” by the strike‑below amendment that adds a work group on its face but preserves exhaustive county mandates later in the text. “You put a work group on page 1 and 2, but then pages 4 through 8 still tell us that we have to do exactly what the work group is studying,” Valentine said. He told the board the bill would require counties to determine eligibility and start saving benefits beginning July 2026 even though the work group’s report would not be due until February 2026 and the work group is scheduled to end in July 2027.

Ed Babbage, listed on the meeting roster as part of the county’s lobby team, told the board the specialized trusts and account types the bill envisions are “very specialized trust[s] that you cannot mess up” and that the county has typically outsourced that work. “If you don’t do the trust correctly, it’s looked at as income for the kid that makes them then ineligible for other benefits,” Babbage said.

Commissioners also criticized the composition of the work group in the strike‑below, saying the Office of the Child’s Representative (OCR) was listed but county attorneys were not. Commissioner Warren Gully described the draft language as “very disingenuous” because it appears to mandate the sponsors’ outcome before the work group can study alternatives.

County staff recommended opposing the statutory mandates and retaining the study component; several commissioners said they preferred an amended position that would strike the county mandates from the bill, leave the work group intact and require the work group to include a county attorney representative and to produce practical templates for trusts and accounts.

Action: By a thumb‑vote during the legislative update, the board instructed staff to seek an amendment and take an amend position on the bill to remove statutory implementation mandates and add county representation on the work group. The roll call indicated four members in favor of the amend position and one member absent and excused (Commissioner Baker).

The county’s legislative staff and county attorney’s office said they will propose language and pursue conversations with sponsors and committee members ahead of committee hearings.

Commissioners and staff repeatedly emphasized they supported the policy goal — ensuring federal benefits are preserved for youth — but said the draft as written would shift specialized, risky fiduciary duties onto counties without adequate funding, training or legal support.

The board directed county lobby staff and the county attorney to pursue the amendment described at the meeting and to report back before the bill’s hearing.

Ending: County staff said they will work with statewide associations and sponsors to press for the changes and to provide a template if the work group is retained. The county’s request to amend the bill will be lodged with legislative staff and communicated to the bill sponsors and committee members ahead of the next hearing.