Conference committee reviews changes to HB 27 on permanency hearings, adds police-DCF reporting provision

Senate members meeting in conference on House Bill 27 on Oct. 27 discussed amendments that would change the timing of permanency hearings for children removed from their homes and add new requirements for how police reports reach DCF.

Jesse of the Revisor’s office summarized the bill and recent amendments, saying HB 27 as introduced would require a permanency hearing nine months after a child’s removal from the home and then "not less frequently than every nine months thereafter," replacing current law that sets the interval at 12 months. He said the House amended the bill to require subsequent hearings every six months if permanency is not achieved, and that the Senate committee made technical language cleanups in multiple sections. He also described a Senate floor amendment that would prevent a permanency hearing from being held until a child’s biological parent or an interested party confirms to the court that the secretary has made reasonable efforts toward reintegration.

The committee discussed striking the floor amendment on page 3 and adopting language that several committees and stakeholders had supported during the session to improve information flow between police and DCF. "This language was not in any other bill this session, but it came up from testimony that we had throughout the session," Jesse said, adding that "the district attorneys, DCF, Children's Alliance, all came together on this." The insertion would create an electronic mechanism to give priority to police reports and require DCF to "initiate an investigation and within 24 hours visit that family or make contact with that family somehow," he said.

Senator Gossage told the committee the Senate is "willing to accede to the House position" after consulting with the bill sponsor and DCF staff about potential issues created by the floor amendment. "I believe that there might be another amendment to address that," Gossage said. Several senators said they concurred with the proposed conference amendment.

Representative Howerton commented during the discussion about potential overlap with recent trafficking-related legislation. The Revisor present clarified that the trafficking references in the bill "do not change the underlying law" and do not create conflicts, though they noted there had been a separate trafficking bill in the session.

Revisor Pringle asked for the usual leeway for grammatical and conforming changes, including title amendments and repealers; senators agreed. Committee members said they expect a conference committee report in the next few days to gather signatures and finalize the agreed language.

No formal roll-call votes were recorded in the transcript of this session. The committee discussion produced concurrence on adopting the House amendment timing (9 months then every 6 months if permanency not achieved), removal of the Senate floor amendment in favor of the agreed language on police reporting, and inclusion of the electronic police-to-DCF reporting attachment in the bill text. The committee indicated it will circulate a conference committee report to finalize signatures and technical conforming edits.

Background: HB 27 involves court review timelines for children removed from their homes and related definitions (for example, references to adoptive parent placement and "child in need of care"). The session transcript shows stakeholders raised concerns about potential court scheduling delays tied to certain amendments and emphasized the goal of ensuring timely information-sharing between law enforcement and DCF.