Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Welfare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House approves HB33 changing child-welfare timelines; amendment shifts burden of proof to division
Summary
House Bill 33, from the Child Welfare Oversight Panel, passed the Utah House 62-10 on Jan. 15, 2001, after an amendment clarifying that the Division must show noncompliance with reunification efforts and placing an 8-month timetable for courts to complete permanency planning efforts.
The Utah House on Jan. 15, 2001, approved House Bill 33, which places a clearer timeframe on child-welfare court processing and permanency planning after a child's removal from the home. The bill passed 62-10 and was referred to the Senate.
Sponsors explained HB33 came from the Child Welfare Oversight Panel and responds to concerns that courts and agencies were not completing permanency reviews promptly. On the floor a sponsor said the bill seeks to create statutory pressure on courts and the child-welfare system to move cases toward timely decisions. The bill text sets an overall expectation that from the time a child is removed the court has eight months to complete a plan and either implement permanency or demonstrate why additional time is required.
Representative Helper moved Amendment #1 (dated Jan. 15, 12:13 p.m.) to clarify the bill's intent; the amendment was described on the floor as shifting the burden of proof to the Division (Division of Child and Family Services) to demonstrate that the case plan is being followed before the Division moves to terminate parental rights. Helper characterized the change as clarifying intent and protecting parental-reunification opportunities where a legitimate plan and services were in place.
During floor discussion Representative Lochner observed the amendment harmonizes the bill with existing court timelines and the court's current process for presenting grounds when termination petitions are filed. Members asked whether the bill's eight-month overall review overlaps or differs from existing six-month review steps; sponsors explained the six-month procedural review remains distinct while the bill's eight-month provision addresses the broader timeline for permanency planning.
The motion to adopt the amendment carried on the floor, and the House then passed HB33 as amended by a recorded tally of 62 yes and 10 no votes. The bill will now go to the Senate for its committee and floor consideration.
What happens next: HB33, with the adopted amendment, will be transmitted to the Senate. Because the amendment clarifies the Division's burden to show noncompliance, child-welfare stakeholders — including courts, county attorneys, and child-welfare providers — may seek guidance or implementation direction during the Senate process or in subsequent administrative rulemaking.
