Committee hears wide-ranging testimony on proposed guardianship office and $18.3M funding package

The Senate Judiciary Committee continued hearings on Senate Bill 2029, a major proposal to centralize guardianship oversight in North Dakota and consolidate multiple guardianship programs and appropriations into a single structure.

Judge Phelan (testifying for the court system) described the proposal’s goals: create an Office of Guardianship and Conservatorship (OGC), establish licensing and oversight, address long waiting lists for guardianship services and standardize funding across programs. He told the committee the state is seeing large and rising demand: Catholic Charities’ waiting list for developmental‑disability (DD) corporate guardianship had grown to about 142 people, and total active adult guardianship cases state‑wide rose from 3,482 in 2023 to 3,669 at the end of 2024. The judge explained the bill’s proposed line items and funding rationale: past (public) guardianship funding was increased in 2023 and remains under pressure, and the 2025–27 request for past funding is $8,600,000 based on an $18‑per‑day reimbursement rate (a $1 increase over current levels). The panel was also shown a proposed DD guardianship line item of $6,835,136 to serve about 760 DD adults, which would incorporate the existing waiting list.

Catholic Charities and other providers described operational concerns. Donna Bezanski, program director for Catholic Charities’ corporate guardianship program, said corporate guardianship is “guardian of last resort” and observed that consolidating all guardianship appropriations into one $18.3 million pool could inadvertently shift funds away from direct services unless the OGC’s administrative budget is set aside. Guardianship providers and the Guardianship Association of North Dakota urged a phased approach and asked that current funding streams such as PASS (public guardian/conservator indigent funding) remain in place for the next biennium to allow a smoother transition.

Provider groups raised other concerns: the proposed review board and investigative counsel could require legal responses and subpoenas that increase costs for guardianship agencies; professional guardians warned the bill as drafted may discourage providers from remaining in the field. Margo Hout, president of the Guardianship Association of North Dakota, asked the committee to slow the timeline and consider a pilot program, saying members support the concept of oversight but need clarity on contracts, licensing, rules and funding flows before implementation.

Hospitals also testified to system costs. Melissa Hower, general counsel for the North Dakota Hospital Association, said six large hospitals reported multiple patient days where a medically ready patient remained in a hospital bed only because a guardian was needed; the association estimated an average cost of about $1,417 per day and roughly $1.9 million in avoidable costs for the six hospitals combined. She asked the committee to give the bill a due‑pass recommendation to promote a more efficient guardianship system.

Human service zone officials sought tailored treatment: Kim Jacobson, a human service zone director, requested that human service zones or zone directors be exempted from certain OGC provisions because zones are already the department’s designees for many custodial responsibilities.

Committee members and the judge discussed timeline and rulemaking. Judge Phelan said court rules and administrative steps are being prepared so the OGC could begin operations quickly if the bill passes, but several testifiers asked that the committee consider a phased implementation (for example, a pilot or keeping existing funding lines in place for a transition biennium) to avoid disrupting services.

No final committee vote on SB 2029 occurred during the hearing; the committee closed testimony and said it will continue discussion and return to the bill in a later meeting. Several witnesses asked the committee to preserve funding for direct guardianship services and to require robust guardian training and clear rules before starting new oversight activities.