Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee weighs broad child‑services bill — sports‑wagering, payment locations, background checks; bill held
Summary
Representative Devon presented HB10‑92, a five‑part DCS bill that would allow courts to capture certain sports‑wagering winnings for child‑support collection, expand approved payment locations, revise volunteer background checks, clarify DCS involvement in adoptions, and standardize DCS caseworker identification; the committee moved the amended bill but ultimately elected to hold it for further consideration.
Representative Devon presented House Bill 10‑92 as a Department of Child Services agency bill containing five separate measures. He described an amendment intended to enable collection of child‑support arrearages from sports‑wagering jackpots paid through apps by aligning collection procedures with federal W‑2G reporting forms. Devon said roughly 198,000 parents are subject to child‑support orders, with approximately 67–70% paying and about 30–33% not current; he acknowledged that the percentage of those noncompliant who also use wagering apps is unknown.
Harmony Gist, DCS executive director of operations, explained changes to background‑check requirements for child‑caring institutions: background checks would be required only for volunteers or subcontractors who have unsupervised access to children or access to confidential medical records, rather than everyone on the property, which proponents said would reduce administrative burdens on facilities.
Other provisions in the bill would expand approved payment locations (for example, retail outlets) to reduce barriers for custodial parents making payments and would clarify how DCS caseworkers identify themselves in schools (for example, showing a DCS badge rather than a driver's license with a home address). Senator Freeman offered Amendment 7 to remove DCS's ability to intervene in adoption proceedings; he moved the amendment and it was seconded, and multiple witnesses then testified in support of the bill. After discussion and explanation‑of‑vote remarks by several senators, Chair Carrasco directed the committee to hold the bill for further consideration rather than advancing it that day.
