DF4EEAA1170B5363872583A100718E8A Hearing Summary

The committee recessed.

The committee returned to order. Representative Snyder, prime sponsor, presented House Bill 19-1045, concerning funding for carrying out duties related to the Office of Public Guardianship.  Representative Snyder explained the effect of the bill and discussed its need. Committee members received a letter supporting the bill (Attachment A).  Representative Snyder explained the effect of some forthcoming amendments.

The following persons testified regarding HB 19-1045:

Ms. Deb Bennet-Woods, representing the Office of Public Guardianship (OPG), testified in support of the bill. Ms. Bennett-Woods explained why private funding for the OPG was not feasible, and discussed the population served by the office. Ms. Bennett-Woods responded to questions regarding how offices similar to OPG are funded and administered in other states, who staffs the office, and the selection of pilot program sites in Colorado.

Judge Elizabeth Leaf, representing the Denver Probate Court, testified in support of the bill. Judge Leaf discussed the OPG pilot program conducted in her judicial district, and the need for the services provided by the office. She addressed a question raised during earlier conversation.

Mr. Carl Gladstein, representing himself, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Gladstein discussed the demand for an OPG. Mr. Gladstein responded to questions regarding the Colorado Bar Association's position on the bill. Judge Leaf responded to questions regarding planned staffing for the OPG pilot program in Denver, and the caseload to be carried under the program. Judge Leaf responded to further questions regarding the experience required to be a public guardian, and the role of a public guardian.

Ms. Jean Abbott, representing herself, testified in support of HB 19-1045. She discussed the purpose of the OPG as originally created, and provided examples of the types of individual served by the office.

Ms. Amber Burkhart, representing the Colorado Hospital Association, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Burkhart discussed the role of hospitals in assisting the population served by the OPG.

Ms. Amanda Thompson, representing Denver Health, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Thompson discussed the patients in Denver Health awaiting service by the public guardianship process, and explained why a hospital is not appropriate for long-term care of this population. Discussion ensued regarding the population discharged from hospitals that are eligible for service by the OPG. Ms. Burkhart responded to questions regarding funding for the OPG from hospitals.

Mr. Ed Shackleford, representing the Colorado Senior Lobby, testified in support of HB 19-1045. Mr. Shackleford outlined three reasons for the state to support the OPG, and trends in the population served by the office.

Ms. Stephanie Garcia, representing the Arc of Pueblo, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Garcia discussed services provided by her organization to the subject population, and expressed support for expanding OPG services.

Ms. Cara Oberheide, representing the Alzheimers Association, testified in support of the bill. She discussed the nexus between Alzheimers and the services provided by OPG, and trends in this population. Mr. Shackleford and Ms. Garcia responded to questions regarding the number of individuals requiring the services of OPG. Ms. Oberheide provided input on this issue.

Ms Luanne Fleming, representing FACEUS, testified in opposition to HB 19-1045. Ms. Fleming discussed the lack of oversight over guardians, and the potential for the bill to create targets for guardians who prey on the vulnerable.

Mr. David Cassidy, representing himself, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Cassidy recounted the loss of his mother under the oversight of a public guardian, discussed the costs that will result from the bill, and discussed oversight needed for public guardians.

Mr. Robin Austin, representing FACEUS, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Austin explained why the bill is inadequate for the task at hand, and discussed the victimization of vulnerable individuals by public guardians. Discussion ensued regarding the indigency requirement to receive services from OPG.

Ms. Maureen Welch, representing herself, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Welch discussed certain budget precedents that might be set by the bill, and the burdens to be taken on by the state due to the bill. She discussed certain ethical issues associated with OPG.

Mr. Rob Hernandez, representing himself, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Hernandez recounted the case of an incapacitated individual who was placed under public guardianship.

The committee recessed.

The committee returned to order. Representative Snyder explained the effect of amendment L.001 (Attachment B). Discussion ensued regarding the timeline for the OPG pilot program under the amendment, and funding for the pilot program. Discussion followed regarding reporting requirements for the pilot program.

Representative Snyder provided closing remarks in support of HB 19-1045. Various committee members provided their positions on the bill.