Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the HB1272 Kinship Care topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee holds kinship-care bill after members question ‘allegations’ language
Summary
Members delayed House Bill 1272 (kinship caregiver approval criteria) to allow the sponsor to consider striking a clause that would have required review of prior or current "allegations" of abuse or neglect; staff and members debated whether that language duplicates existing child-protective screening.
House Bill 1272, introduced in committee on March 13, 2026, was held by the Judiciary Committee after members raised concerns about an amendment that would add new criteria for approving kinship caregivers.
Lauren, a committee staff member who explained the amendment, told the panel: "The amendments add clarifying language and some additional criteria for local department of social services to consider when determining whether to approve an individual as a kinship caregiver." The amendment proposed three criteria: whether there have been previous or current allegations of abuse or neglect against the individual, the individual's willingness to abide by court orders, and the individual's willingness to cooperate with the child's parents to facilitate court-ordered contact under a safety plan.
Several members questioned the phrasing and scope. One committee member asked whether the clause should target only "findings" rather than "allegations," noting the risk that unsubstantiated allegations could unduly bar relatives from providing kinship care. Another member observed that child-protective screening and records are already checked during kinship assessments, and asked whether the proposed language was therefore necessary.
The chair summarized the concern and announced the committee would hold the bill to give the sponsor time to consider revisions. "So we're gonna hold House Bill 12 72 to give me time to ask the sponsor if we can amend ... so we can strike out that one section," the chair said on the record. The transcript shows staff concurred that striking the clause could be an option.
No final vote occurred on HB 1272 during the March 13 session; committee staff recorded that the sponsor will be asked whether they wish to remove or revise the contested language and return the bill to the committee at a later date.
Next steps: committee staff will contact the sponsor about amending the language and report back to the panel before the bill is scheduled again for consideration.
