H.B. 248 Family Law Modifications: transcript

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair and committee. Um, I'm glad for the chance to present family law, um, modifications. This bill just has a bunch individually of fairly small policies to make, uh, payment of child support better. There were several different items that came up as we were, um, working on the issue. So I have a handout that I'd like to pass out if that, if staff could just help me with that. And this will just give you a list of the policies that are in the bill. Um, the first, uh, policy relates to spousal support and it just says that if, uh, if there's a judgment that includes spousal support and child support. And in those settings, many times the spousal support is kind of contingent on what the child support is decided to be. Um, and then later that child support is no longer being paid. Maybe the, the parent, um, there, there's some change in their situation that ORS could continue to help collect the agreed on spousal support. Um, the second relates just to the getting feedback from the frontline into Office of Recovery Services. As many bureaucracies, they tend to take feedback from their managers or their upper level folks, but sometimes the leaders of the department don't have line of sight onto what it's like if you're experiencing their uh, purposes. So it just will require ORS to host two group meetings, uh, with, uh, parents who owe child support and parents who receive child support, where they're getting frontline feedback from the things that are going well and that are going wrong for them. Because sometimes there has been a real disconnect in what the users of the system experienced from what management thought was happening. The third policy just says that when a person gets a 10 of grant, currently, if they get a TANF grant, the state then takes all their child support money to the state and doesn't pass it on to the kids. Um, uh, we say, well, that's our cost for administering our program. This would allow, which is according to a federal policy, that 100, if the $100, if there's a single child involved or $200 per month, if there's two or more child of of their or of their child support would still pass through to them. I mean, that money is for those kids and just because they got a TANF grant, they shouldn't have to be cut off from that. There's a policy about what we will do for folks who become very, very, very far in arrears For context right now, it becomes a felony if you go past $10,000 of child support that you haven't paid. That's kind of our cutoff for where that becomes a felony, but we don't really usually refer those cases. This takes a cutoff that's much higher than that. It's clear up at $35,000. And it says if you get to clear up to where there's $35,000 that you have not paid and you have not made any payment at all in 60 days, then as a rebuttable presumption, the department will take action against your driver's license. You have, you get noticed first and you have a chance to come in and say why you either can't or to get on a payment plan. So it's in no way is automatic. There is due process given to the person, but if it goes clear up to that level, the presumption is that we're gonna be in touch with you and you need to take some kind of action or that we will proceed with action against the driver's license. The next is to make a little bit more, we already have a good exchange database in the judiciary that gives information to people who are trying to pursue their own legal cases. And divorce cases are an instance where that happens a lot where people don't have legal representation and sometimes they miss out on some basic information that could help their case go better. So it has some things that we'll put on there for that. And the last policy just says, if you have child support that you have not paid interest will accrue on the principal only almost every other debt that is owed to the state. We do collect interest on and this debt of child support, we kind of treat it like an, uh, interest free loan. So it will not be compound interest, but it will just be 6% interest on the principal. And those are the policies in the bill. Thank you.

organization that you may be representing. Hi, I am Emily Martin Pry. I'm representing the Utah Single Mothers Coalition as well as personally being a former single mother that utilized Office of Recovery Services for 17 years, 2008 until 2023. Within 18, within 18 months, my ex-husband of our divorce, my ex-husband refused to honor his legal obligations and little little was done to enforce him to pay it. During that time, I qualified for WIC and welfare assistance despite having a full-time job and a bachelor's degree. When there's no real accountability or enforcement of arrears, custodial parents often rely on services provided by the government to alleviate some of their financial stress that should be paid by the non-custodial parent legally bound obligations. There are some provisions in this bill that could help enforce their obligations. Charging interest on arrears is one such enforcement tactic. All of our neighboring states, with the exception of Idaho, charge interest on child support arrears. Many GO pled states like Kentucky, Tennessee, Florida, Texas, and Indiana also charge interest. This greatly helps reduce arrears when there is a penalty for intentionally falling behind. Arrears of more than $10,000 is a federal felony. If this bill is passed and driver's licenses are revoked at three and a half times the felony limit 800 families will be helped annually in the state of Utah. During the 12 years that I utilized ORS, I was unable to collect my ex-husband's arrears in 2022 when my case was turned over to California ORS where they have stronger enforcement policies. My ex-husband was made current in 15 months. There's not been an effective avenue for any of us to give user feedback and experience due to the audit that state auditor Tina Cannon did last year. Our opinions about ORS were confirmed. Since that time, OS has been making changes based on the auditor's recommendation. This bill will align with the efforts to positive change if users of the system are able to give their feedback in an organized manner with meetings. And the ORS directors show transparency and accountability in improvement efforts. Amendments to existing TA statutes could reduce the taxpayer burden and mitigate poverty among single parents. It is essential to ensure that both parents share financial responsibility for their children to prevent generational poverty. I hope people take this opportunity to pass this legislation. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Hi, my name is El Pulsifer and I wanna address the enforcement tools provided in this bill. The current method of spen suspending hunting and fishing licenses to encourage child support payment has ineffective, and in my case, completely ineffective. Um, we need meaningful tools to encourage payment before pursuing criminal prosecution for non-support, which becomes a felony at $10,000. In arrears. The driver's license suspension is a measured practical mechanism to encourage compliance before cases escalate to criminal charges. Court orders should mean something, families must be able to rely on them being enforceable. Single parents like myself depend on enforcement of family support orders to meet our children's financial needs. Alimony is a court ordered obligation, just like child support when unpaid, the receiving party often must return to court at significant personal expense. Authorizing ORS to collect alimony would reduce unnecessary litigation, promote efficacy and uphold judicial authority. If a court has determined alimony is appropriate, there should be a clear path to enforce it. Interest matters here as well. When support goes unpaid, custodial parents absorb the financial strain, including the lost value of money. Over time, families should not shoulder additional burdens because obligations were ignored. This bill promotes responsibility, reinforces the rule of law, and provides reasonable tools to ensure court ordered support is honored. At its core, this bill protects children's strengthens families and affirms that legal obligations must be taken seriously. Communication and oversight are also critical. My personal experience reflects the challenges identified in the recent ORS audit, which found extreme deficiencies in meeting federal performance requirements. My former spouse has been in arrears for nearly four years at over $10,000. Repeated attempts to obtain updated updates from ORS have consistently led to dead ends. Families who depend on these services deserve transparency, responsiveness, and accountability. When systems fail to communicate, the burden ultimately falls on the children and on the families that are aiming to care for these children like it has in my case.

Good morning, Senator Vickers. I'm Monica Vasquez and I'm a single mom from Price. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today and for the work you do to protect families in our state. I'm here in support of this HB 2 48 bill because I have lived the gap it is trying to fix. In 2019, a judge terminated the other parent's rights due to drug use and abuse. When those rights were terminated, my child support case with the O Office of Recovery Services was closed. What remains is a valid court ordered alimony obligation, but I now have no realistic way to collect it. Before the termination, I struggled to get clear answers from ORS about missed child support. Payments that exceeded 45,000 communication was difficult and IO often receive no guidance or resolution. After the termination, I was left without enforcement entirely. Without ORS involvement, I am forced to pursue collection through divorce court, a process that has been long, exhausting and costly with no la uh, no lasting solution. Having a court order that cannot be enforced is more than a legal gap. It is an emotional and financial strain that follows you every day. It means choosing between enforcement and paying for the necessities. I am owed over 10,000 in alimony and I don't know anyone who would simply write off that amount, especially when it would make meaningful difference for my family. It means reliving painful circumstances in court again and again just to try to receive support that has already been ordered. This bill does not create new obligations. It simply ensures that existing court orders remain enforceable. It offers families like mine, stability, dignity, and a path forward without repeating legal battles. By allowing OS to continue collecting spousal support when child support ends, you are not only improving efficiency, you are protecting real people who are trying to rebuild their lives after difficult and often traumatic circumstances. I respectfully ask you to support this bill so that families do not lose enforcement simply because the type of support changes. No one should be left holding a valid court order with no way to make it work. Please help ensure that a court order remains more than just words on paper because for families like mine, enforcement is not about policy. It's about survival, stability, and the chance to move forward with dignity. Thank you for your time, your compassion and your commitment to strengthening families in Utah.

Perfect. Um, thanks for hearing me today. My name is Shannon Durr and I'm in Salt Lake County. Um, I am here in support of House Bill 2 48, not as a policy expert, but as a mother living the consequences of a system that does not enforce its own court orders in Utah. I am the custodial parent of my children. I wake them up, take them to school, help them with homework and make sure they have what they need. But I'm also the parent who is supposed to receive child support and often does not. The other parent chooses not to work consistently or pay because he knows there are few consequences. Um, because child support is not enforced, I'm in debt because child support is not enforced. I rely on public assistance and oftentimes my family of origin takes on the burden to help me and my children. I spend hours on the phone with Office of Recovery Services asking for help, trying to understand what can actually be done and how enforcement works. Communication is difficult. Follow up is limited. And two, often parents like me feel unheard. When I was finally able to give feedback through a third party channel, it mattered that feedback loop needs to exist and improve. So an so ORs can better serve the families who rely on it. If someone refuses to pay taxes, there are real consequences. But when someone refuses to pay to support their children, the consequences are often just warnings. And that is heartbreaking and it is wrong. This house bill would change that. It creates real enforcement, real accountability and real consequences for ignoring the financial obligations to children. This bill protects families, it protects stability and most importantly, it protects the children. So please vote yes and please pass this house bill for families like mine and for children who depend on it. Thank you.

But I got a couple questions anyway, I apologize. Um, so it just occurs to me on a practical level if even though 35,000 is ridiculous, I mean that's a pretty high bar that you've set, but doesn't that, doesn't it just exacerbate for most people have to have a car to be able to earn income in order to pay child support? My, what am I, have you already thought of this? I'm

Sure. Yeah, yeah. No, that's a really, that's a super important point. So the already today, the ORS can take this action, but functionally they essentially never do. Okay. They just don't. And this one still wouldn't make them carry through the action. It's a rebuttable presumption. They say to the person, this will happen if you don't come to us and tell us why you can't pay or that, or get on some low level payment plan. And that happens first. We don't want to cut someone off if that just their Ability. 'cause you gonna cut, you're gonna cut off the income potentially Correct. But the ab the person needs to come to the table. They either need to make the case about why they have paid zero, why they are 35,000 in arrears and have not paid any. And if they can't pay any, they can come make that case. And then it is in or s's discretion to correctly decide that it wouldn't be helpful. Or they can say, well look, I can pay a tiny amount, but I can't pay that amount. And then they could pay that tiny amount. But right now they don't use that tool ever. And there are individuals who could pay some, who choose not

to because there's no enforcement. So, okay. One, one other question, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

So I'm, I'm, I'm trying to figure out how many, how the other state to do it as far as continued bowel support after child support ends and there's this whole slew of different, but is there, and this is gonna reveal my ignorance, is there just no end if they can just continue on forever? Or is there an end point at some point? Yeah,

No, there is still an end point for, for both, both of these. What is that? Uh, there's a certain time limit after the child turns 18 when they can't collect it anymore and there's always an end point for alimony after children turn 18. Uh, the issue is that, and this was this case of one of the witnesses up here in her, when the decision was made for her, the amount of alimony that was recommended was lower than it otherwise would've been because child support was still a part of what she was owed. Then her ex did other things that were bad enough that his parental rights got revoked and so then she didn't get the child support and she didn't get the alimony. So it's just a saying, if the child support, if the case was initially decided as together, that this is the amount that was owed, then if the child support goes away, the ORS can still help with the alimony, but that still always cuts off. The time that it comes to an end is already predetermined from the beginning. So it's only during the time when it normally and that would be agreed to be collected.

Okay. Alright. Thank you.

I'm ready for action, Mr. Chair, if that's appropriate.

Thank you. I wanna, um, make a motion that we favorably recommend first substitute HB 2 48 to the Senate, if I can speak to that.

Thank you for the thoughtful process. This is an ongoing conversation every time we deal with child support or alimony conversations. But the reality is by the time you hit $35,000 in debt, you probably have other problems that are not related to income at that point. And if you are involved in some of this cases or you meet people you recognize, there needs to be a stricter way of enforcing. We've tried everything. We've tried fishing licenses, um, um, you know, one point is like we should start discussing passports. I mean, it's just insanity sometimes. What is happening here? So I, first I wanna thank the, the, the parents that are engaging and, and are speaking up on issues that are impacting their children and their stability. Um, this is another tool and hopefully we get to see better results and also an opportunity for all of us as the legislature to maybe recognize that we need to do more with our ORS Office of Recovery, you know, the Office of Recovery Services in terms of how things need to be implemented. But thank you for doing this. It's not an, an easy, um, task. And with that, I, hopefully my colleagues can support the bill.

Thank you. Um, representative, I have one question. Um, you have ORS reporting back, uh, on their public hearings in line 2 88 on November 30th of each year. Seems to me if that was changed to like August 30th, then the interim committee or a member of that would have time to maybe open a bill file based on the comments. Are you, how tired are you to the November 30th, um, deadline? N

Not at all. It was just to be some mechanism of feedback.

Senator AMI to change November to August on line 2 88. Um, so Move Mr. Chair.

So move that we, um, pass first substitute HB 2 48 as amended to the Senate floor with a favorable recommendation.

Motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn.

Um, Mr. Vice Chair, I have just a handout. Can my intern pass that out? Yeah. Um, I'll be speaking to the first substitute and hope to have that moved, um, at the correct time. It has a, a few changes, not many from the underlying bill. Yes. Great. Um, uh, colleagues, this bill has several different policy changes in it all. I would, to me, in my mind there, all the policy changes are small ones and all of them point in the direction of getting a more robust and more reliable and a more fair system for the way that we do, um, child support payments. And in particular, um, when child support is owed, uh, an option available to the parent who is supposed to receive that child support is to go through ORS Office of Recovery Services, which is our state agency tasked with, um, making that happen. Um, so if someone isn't paying to do things, to get those payments to come through and to keep track of whether or not the payments are made. So each of the different small policies in here is to try and make, um, ORS function a little bit better. Um, the handout, I think you'll find quite helpful because the handout, just the bill, sometimes it's hard to follow from one policy to another, and it's different sections of code. But the handout will just delineate what the different policies each are, um, in the bill that, uh, relate to child support payments. So I'm just gonna go down the list. I'll be working off of the, the, the handout that we passed around. So the first one on there is spousal support when there is a divorce, and then there's child support that may be owed to a custodial parent from a non-custodial parent. In some of those divorce cases, there is also spousal support that gets decided at that same time. Uh, colloquial call, um, alimony, uh, to pay. Right now, the law says that ORS will help collect alimony only, uh, during a time period that child support is also being, uh, collected. If the child support ceases to be owed, uh, then the alimony is no longer collected via ORS. It does happen sometimes though, that a decision about how much alimony is paid, um, winds up in some ways being contingent on the child support. So, uh, or the judge may say, well, you're getting this much child support, and so the amount of alimony that you're getting is gonna be kind of this much less. And, and then that's the, the agreement for the time being. But then if the child support goes away, um, then that alimony is less than what otherwise it might have been considered. And an an example of that would be, um, a parent who behaves so badly that their parental rights get terminated, um, may in some circumstances of then not owe the child support anymore. And so the non-custodial p spouse may lose the ability of our to help collect their alimony. So this just says that where there was a, both things were determined to be owed, uh, the spousal support, um, and the child support, that if the child support goes away, ORS can continue, um, to help collect the alimony, uh, following the chain, the same procedures that it does for child support. The second policy in there is to get some frontline feedback to our Office of Recovery Services. We have them come in and report to the legislature in different settings. And sometimes it really seems that there is a big disconnect, uh, from what you hear about frontline people, uh, who are trying to use their services, who have found them to be very frustrating, um, and, and really not function well at all from the way the managers of the program perceive that everything is going. So I think the program would function better if the managers of the program had some chance to get frontline feedback just from the people who are using the services. So the, the bill will require them to host a couple of group meetings each year with parents who are paying the child support so we can hear from them what's working well and what is not working, and from those parents who are receiving child support, and hopefully that frontline feedback will allow them to make corrections when things are going wrong. The third policy relates to tanf, um, and child support. Right now, if child support is owed, uh, and let's say that it's in some circumstance when it really is not being paid regularly. So there's a, uh, a single parent who's trying to care for their children, who's just not getting the child support. Another option that is available to them, um, is if is to go get a TANF grant. And in some circumstances, they can get a TANF grant. If they get the TANF grant, that's helpful to them. But if they get the TANF grant, then the state says, oh, we gave you a TANF grant so now any child support that you get will go to the state. So in that circumstance, the state actually takes the child support for itself. It says, well, we have overhead costs to run these grants, so whatever child support money comes in, we will now keep that money when it really was meant to go, uh, through to the children. There's a federal provision where the, the feds are willing, and that money then gets split between the federal government and the state that they keep. The feds are willing to allow some of the money that would otherwise to go through, to go to them in those circumstances, to pass through to the single parent, um, to the children. And this bill, the bill just calls out the exact circumstances in which they're willing to pass some of that on, and that these are families who really, really still need that support. It rightfully belongs to those children for their care. Um, and I don't when at all possible, we shouldn't take that away just because it got the TANF grant. So it's a hundred dollars a pass through for a up to a hundred for a single child and up to $200 per month if there's two or more children. And then that would come out of the federal, uh, portion of what we would otherwise keep. Um, the next policy on there, we have in statute right now, that if someone doesn't pay their child support and it gets up to the level of being a felony, which is a $10,000, that it is possible then to go after their driver's license and say, look, you're a felony level. We're going to take your driver's license away in, in practice right now, today, that happens essentially never. Um, there's a single digit number of cases out of the many thousands of cases, um, in the state. So what this bill does is, is say, well, there's some point at which we need to at, at least switch from never to saying You need to come pay at least some of that child support, or we're gonna proceed with a claim against your license. And in the bill that that cutoff is not at the level of a felony. It's over three times that. So not 10,000 behind. But if you are $35,000 behind, then it, it kind of changes to a rebuttable presumption. Then ORS will notify the person that unless they come, unless they either start paying or at least come sit down and say, well, this is why I cannot pay. They, they still have the chance to work it out. If they just flat out can't afford the child support, they can work out a lesser level. But if the person refuses to engage, then the OS would take action, um, against their license. Um, the next policy just re relates to information that people, uh, may or may not have when they're going through a divorce proceeding. It happens sometimes that goes, somebody goes through a, a custody proceeding and winds up not even knowing that there was actions being taken simultaneously against their ex in other courts, um, other criminal charges that may have been filed. And these cases, these divorce cases are one of our areas where it is much more common than in other courts where people are trying to represent themselves. Whether you do not have enough money for an attorney and may not be aware that they could go look and see what other information, uh, was available. This is one of the changes in the sub as opposed to what was in the underlying bill. Um, the state already maintains a an online database that is meant to give direction to people who are trying to represent themselves, um, in these cases. And the bill in the substitute just asks that in those on our state website, that is already meant for this purpose to try and give people who are representing themselves information that we would let them know that they can go to open records, um, through the exchange database to see if there's information that would relate to their case. And then the last policy that's in the bill, um, just relates to interest payment on, on past due or in arrears child support. Every other debt that I can think of when the state is owed a debt, if you have, uh, fines that are owed to the state, if you have criminal charges where you have owed money back to the state, um, to my knowledge, those things accrue interest and those things accrue compound interest. So if you have some debt to the state that you haven't paid and it gets set to the Office of State Debt Collection, I don't know of any of the times where we say, ah, that's okay. There's, it's just an interest free loan. You don't have to pay it. But that is what we do with child support. And so the bill would just change that this is not compound interest. It is interest only on the baseline amount, and it just sets it at 6%. If your child support is, is that far behind, it's not just an interest free loan, we'll charge an interest on it similar to every other debt that's owed to the state. And those are, uh, various policies in the bill and I'd be happy to try and answer any questions.

Hello? Um, my name is Rochelle Pulsifer and I would just like to speak to my lived experience to some of the items in the bill. Um, first, the, um, consequence of pursuing, uh, the driver's license being revoked for non-payment of child support. Right now there are very few consequences available underneath criminal pursuing criminal non-support. Um, typically the only things that are enforced are, um, revoking hunting and fishing licenses. In my case, my ex-husband does not hunt or fish. So that offers zero Helper, zero incentive for him to pay his child support. So the driver's license gives us something that would hopefully incentivize paying child support. The next thing I'd like to speak to is communication with ORS. Um, we rely heavily on the support and the services that ORS provides, but at this point, frankly, I haven't received even a minimum of the services that I need for them to provide. And I don't have an opportunity to follow up or ask questions or ask them what's going on with my case. Um, I've tried multiple times reaching out to them over the phone via email, and there is literally nothing available for me to speak to them or to get my case addressed. No follow up whatsoever. So, um, the next item is, um, adding alimony. The, the way this bill addresses alimony being able to be collected by ORS, um, when, when there are, um, when in a divorce situation, um, the custodial parent relies on both child support and alimony to pay its bills when the child support, for whatever reason, either the kids age out or, um, for whatever the circumstance, alimony is the only means that we have often to ask for support from the non-custodial parent. In my case, I have two adult children living at home who are going to school and doing their best to begin to provide for themselves. Alimony is the only thing I have left to rely on. So, um, having the support of ORS to collect that would be greatly, greatly appreciated and very beneficial.

Hi, um, I'm Emily Martin Prisy. Um, I represent, um, the Utah Single Mothers Coalition and also myself as a former single parent, um, that utilized Office of Recovery Services for 17 years from 2008 until June of 2023. Uh, just to give you a little background, despite having a bachelor's degree with only a five year break from working full time to raise two children, um, I started a job and was making $14 an hour, which is equivalent about 22 an hour in, in 2026. At this low pay, I qualified for WIC and welfare assistance and I became a burden to the Utah taxpayer because my ex-husband refused to honor his legal obligations. And little was done to enforce him to pay it. Um, when there's no real accountability for, uh, or enforcement of arrears, custodial parents often rely on services provided by the government to alleviate some of their financial stress that should be, um, paid by the non-custodial parent who's been legally bound and to these obligations. And these, um, uh, this bill addresses some of those ways that we can maybe help enforce that a little bit better. Um, and the ones that I will speak to is, um, on the interest, which is final one that a representative bill mentioned or representative board mentioned in the bill is that all of our neighboring states, with the exception of Idaho charge interest on child support arrears. And many of the GOP LED states, uh, such as Kentucky, Tennessee, Florida, Texas, and Indiana, also charge interest. Um, when my case, my ex-husband moved to California, and after 12 years of having very difficult, uh, inaction from ORS, quite frankly in the state of Utah, he, I had my case moved to, uh, California. And within 15 months because of their laws, um, they were able to get him current where at 12 years I could not get him current. So the time, by the time my youngest child graduated from high school, he was current and we were able to move forward. Um, and that is California has one of the strictest interests and they are, um, at 12%, so double what is in this bill, but they're able to collect where Utah is not. Um, and, um, speaking to the, uh, 800 families would be helped with the, um, if the $35,000, uh, driver's license revoked would be helpful each year. And then just, uh, in the last thing that I wanna say is with the ORS, um, reporting system, so difficult, I've spent hours and, and years of my life on the phone with them not getting this resolved. And so with the recent audit that Tina Cannon did, um, I feel like the alignment is if we can do with work with this legislation, that we will get off to a better start with the reporting and the transparency to the legislature and the users of this bill if we can, um, have those things put in. Thank you. Appreciate

Um, thanks for your time today and hearing me. My name is Shannon Dur Brown, and I'm here to ask you to support this house Bill 2 48. I've been utilizing ORs for a year and a half now. I'm the custodial parent, parent of my children. I'm the parent who provides the housing, the food, the school supplies, transportation and daily care. I'm also the parent who should be receiving court order child support, but often does not. The non Castillo parent, in my case, is consistently late or behind on payments. Not because he cannot work, but because he chooses not to. He does not feel obligated to maintain employment. And there are currently very few, very few consequences for that choice because child support is not enforced. I'm in debt because child support is not enforced. I rely on public assistance oftentimes getting a second job to make ends meet and putting the burden on my other family members to help. And because child support is not enforced, Utah taxpayers are helping cover expenses. That should be the league of responsibility of the other parent. I have spent countless hours on phone, on the phone with ORs trying to understand what can be done, asking for job information, payment tracking, or enforcement options. And my case, the only action taken has been placed in a lien on the other parent. And that does nothing to feed my kids or keep the lights on. If someone fails, if someone fails to pay their taxes, there are real consequences, interest rate, penalties, and including jail time. When someone fails to pay to pay court order, child support or alimony, the consequences are often only empty threats. That is why this bill 2 48 matters. This bill introduces enforcement tools that would actually increase compliance, including interest on overdue payments. Just like any late credit card payment or unpaid bill, there should be accountability when obligations are ignored. Um, let's see. I have spoken to the third party feedback channel and I felt heard for the first time. The bill doesn't punish parents who are trying to hold accountable for those who are not. And importantly, it protects my children.

Go ahead. Um, good afternoon. My name is Gina Cornea and I'm with Utahans Against Hunger. And we just want to, um, speak in support of this bill, particularly the child support pass through provision that allows families who are receiving funding from the Family Employment Program or TANF to get those dollars that are being paid to the state for child support. And research shows that when those families get that money that is passed through compliance improves. Thank you.

Is this to the committee for questions and discussion or are we open to motions?

Well then, um, I move to pass house bills. I have a sub. You gotta, yeah, let's adopt it. First, let's go ahead and adopt the sub. I'll make that motion. Thank you. Okay.

I appreciate that. That is what I presented to. Okay.

Sure. Well then now I would move to a pass HB 2 48 with a favorable recommendation.

I appreciate that motion. And

Thank you, uh, Mr. Speaker ProAm colleagues, this bill just makes several changes to try and make our state system for getting, um, child support to work better. Um, child support is a very difficult issue. Uh, many times a single parent trying to take care of kids gets left in the lurch. We have a state system, ORS, which is their job, is to help with those collections. And sometimes that system works very well, but there's other times when that system doesn't work so well. So this bill is just really a collection of small policies to help that work better. Um, children have enough stacked against them already, um, when their parents are not together and when there's not the financial means to support them, that gets much worse. So I'll just, there's a little handout which hopefully you have there on your desk. And I'll just tick through the policies that are, um, in the bill. The first policy says that if, um, if there were two payments ordered, both child support and spousal support, sometimes called alimony that, and then after that, the child support goes away. ORS can continue to help the court collect the court ordered spousal support. So RRS just can provide support to continue to collect that alimony. Um, the second portion is for our Office of Recovery Services in Social Services Committee. We often would hear back from them, and it seemed that at times it was difficult for them to get feedback from the people on the frontline who were using the system. So the people who had to use their services would be very, very frustrated and the managers of the department had not had a chance to get that frontline, uh, feedback from them. So this just asked RS to have four online meetings per year to meet with, uh, parents who ha who are, who have the children, uh, and the, the parents who are paying the child support. Um, and hopefully that frontline feedback will help RS do its job better. The third policy in there relates to tanf. Uh, right now when a TANF grant is given to a needy family, um, the state and the federal government actually keep some of the child, well, they keep all of the child support, they give them the TANF grant, but then we take their child support to the state and the feds take it in exchange for that. So they actually lose their child support if they give a TANF grant. And this would just pass a small amount of that 10 of support still onto the family who needs it. The next, uh, policy on there says we have in code right now that the office may, if a person does not pay their child support and gets way in arrears, um, take an action against their driver's license. So, but that policy essentially is used zero times. It's just the department just doesn't use it, uh, functionally and it hasn't really made any difference. So this policy says that if a person gets so, and I, I would point out that it becomes a felony if you're a $10,000 in arrears. So if you have owed $10,000 of child support, you haven't paid it. That's a felony level offense. So this policy takes a, a threshold that is much higher than that $35,000. If you get $35,000 in arrears, and also you have not paid any in 60 days, then we'll just move to kind of like a rebuttable presumption. The department will then initiate a case to say, you either need to start paying, come speak with us, or there is gonna be an action taken against your driver's license. The, the person that is in no way saying that it for sure will happen. The person can still come work with them. The person can explain why they can't pay it. The person can make a small payment, but the action will be taken to say this is so far out of line that that step needs to be thought about out. Um, we have a, a database, a court database that can provide information. Um, and many times when people are going to court for a divorce, that is an area of court where people often represent themselves and things happen to them because they're not expert at what they're doing, including being unaware of other criminal or legal actions that were taken against the, their spouse in the marriage. That would have made an important difference in the case. Um, and so this portion of the bill just puts, we have some instructions online to try and help people who are doing their own legal cases who don't have an attorney, and it will just make them aware, uh, of that that's in there. And then the last policy in there just says, um, i, it, it, it re regards interest paid on child support, every other debt. If you owe the state a debt, the state has a collection agency and we charge you interest income after you. But right now, if you owe child support, it's kind of like, uh, a loan with no interest on it, no interest accrues. So this will just say, if you owe child support, it's in arrears, you haven't paid it, there will be 6% interest on it. Um, it it's just on the principle, it's not compound. And those are the policies in the bill. And I'm open for questions. Mr. Speaker Prote.

Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. I rise in support of this bill. I work with many, um, single moms and single dads in my district who, uh, without exception, these, um, modifications are, uh, really important to them. They've become a real hindrance in their, their ability to support their families by themselves. Uh, they think they're doing something right and they find out that what they did didn't work. And, uh, they have a, an ex-spouse who owes them all this money and they know that we have these rules and laws out here, but they're not being enforced. And so it creates so much frustration because they're really des desperate for help sometimes, uh, many times, uh, uh, from these former spouses who, who are hiding or claiming not to have, uh, any money to help with the support of their children. So, Mr. Speak, Mr. Speaker ProAm, uh, I really urge everyone to support this great bill. Thank you,

Further discussion to the bill representative ch Speaker. Um, I just have a question on the, um, since we already have would dead, would we like to sponsor to question?

Um, since we already have deadbeat parents who are not paying, would it, is this going to somehow make it so that they will pay?

So I think, um, each of the things in here in some small cases will help make that happen. Right now, for example, the part with spousal support ORS doesn't help collect that. Um, the part with interest, at least they'll be charged later. They may pay later, but right now they wouldn't even pay the interest. Um, and the part with the driver's license is just to draw some line three times the felony line to say, there here is a specific action. You, you can still come explain why you can't, and that's fine, then you don't. But it's time to take an action. This many, many times actions are not taken by ORS and they're doing the best they can with their staff. But each of these will, in some instances, I think get more money to the children who need it and deserve it and the, and their parents who are trying to take care of them. Thank you Mr. Speaker.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield Yield? I will go ahead. Thank You Mr. Speaker.

Um, just in reference to the sponsor's presentation I was trying to locate in the bill, um, but is it correct that this raises the amount that you would be considered delinquent from 10,000 up to 35,000 before those enforcement actions take effect?

So currently it just says the department may take action, um, at 10,000, but in practice they almost never take that action at 10,000 or at any other number right now, the department almost never uses that for any reason. Um, and so this would just say at this much higher level of 35,000, the department would need to take action. They would need to go notify the person that unless that person came and spoke with them, um, and either showed why they couldn't pay or began to make some small payment, then they would proceed with that action if it was past 35,000.

Thank you. Will the sponsor continue to yield? Will you yield? Yes. Go ahead.

Does this maintain the department's ability to still take enforcement action at that $10,000 level if they choose to?

Absolutely. Thank you.

Um, by themselves. Each one of these is just a small change, uh, colleagues, but together they'll make a meaningful improvement. I believe in the number, uh, of children who do get some support. That's just so important. Also for the parent, the custodial parent who's taking care of them, um, they're in a very tough spot. Um, and we should have our laws set up to help them as best we can. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. President. This bill deals with child support and, uh, what the representative is doing in this bill, which I support, is trying to make child support more effective and more efficient. So there's basically six changes that we're doing that are, that are going to help ORS and as we resolve issues with child support. So the first one allows for ORS to continue collecting spousal support, alimony after child support ends. The second part is we let ORS schedule four, four online meetings a year to make sure parties are aware of their obligation. Third party of this bill allows for a portion of the child support to be held when receiving a, a TANF grant to a family rather than than being held by the state. Um, the other issue, um, we deal with driver's licenses and our, our current law allows a, a driver's license to be leveraged to a certain extent if folks don't pay child support. This actually, this policy actually has been, has been used almost zero times. So this bumps up the amount to 35,000. And if, if it hasn't been paid, if there hasn't been a response, then, then that that provision would still apply. But we put a restriction and we put that higher dollar amount. The next thing that we do is when the court database provides info information, not everyone is aware of it. So there's a portion of this bill that requires instructions on how to review the database. And the last thing this policy does is it just deals with interest on child support. And if, if there's going to be child support held in arrears, it'll be 6% interest, which is reasonable. With that, I'm open for questions.

Yeah. I'm gonna waive summation to move that this bill be read for a third time. Thank

You, Mr. President, uh, a motion that we table on third for physical impact.

to circle sponsors off the floor.

on onto the family rather than being held by the state. Um, the last, the fourth thing it does right now, the, the office may take action against a driver's license if a person doesn't pay child support. That's the current, that's the current law. This, this deals with an amount. If somebody owes at least 35,000 and hasn't made a full payment in 60 days, there's a re a rebuttable presumption that kicks in just to add a little, a little more teeth to the, to the rule that's already in place. Um, without, I think we've got, we've got a good, good bill that's gonna strengthen our ability to, to collect some of that support that our, that our families need without open for questions.

Aye. First substitute

Representative Ward. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Motion to concur

I would. This is a very simple change. The bill had in a reporting requirement from ORS back to the HHS Interim Committee, um, after some meetings that they were to have had with the people whom they served. And the Senate Amendment just moved that from November to August. Uh, so that if there were things that came from that that would lead to improvements or changes, that there would still be time for those to be thought about after the report.