J_CCU_2024A 10/30/2024 01:02:38 PM Committee Summary

Makyla Moody, representing Colorado Creditors Bar Association, expressed concerns regarding the uniform act's combatibility with Colorado law and asked the commission to delay its introduction to allow additional stakeholder meetings to address the issues.

Scott Allely, representing Associated Collection Agencies of Colorado, Wyoming, and New Mexico, testified that legislation in this area was enacted last year and requested the uniform act not be introduced this year to give the new laws a chance to work.

Andy Toft, representing Colorado Bar Association Business Law Section, reported that there were substantive issues between the act and current Colorado law and that some language is inconsistent with the Uniform Commercial Code. He added that the act would need additional stakeholder input before proceeding forward and that the fiscal note could continue to be a problem this year.

Commissioner Snyder concurred that the points presented were valid, but added that it is a good and balanced bill and would be willing to work on it again this year if asked, but thought that introduction should be delayed a year.

Commissioner Levy acknowledged the act's complexities, but the commission should look at it again and consider enacting it.

Commissioner Gardner asked about the act's movement through the process last session and Commissioner Snyder responded that there was good support in the House but while working with stakeholders on amendments similar bills were passed.

Commissioner Gardner reiterated that the fiscal note may be an issue again this year and suggested the commission keep working on the act but not introduce it this session.

When asked about other state interest in the act, Libby Snyder, Uniform Law Commission staff, responded that several states were considering it and holding stakeholder meetings.

Elizabeth Moran, representing The Arc of Colorado, thanked Commissioner Gardner for carrying the bill last year and those involved in the stakeholding process on it. She noted that it's been 23 years since Colorado has done a comprehensive update of its guardianship law, which is now largely outdated and not in line with national best practices. The biggest hurdle to the act's passage last year was funding, so this year the focus was will be on the fiscal impact.

Ben Orzeske, representing Uniform Law Commission, thanked Ms. Moran and her colalition on their work on the act last year. He added that he expects at least five other states to be working on the act for introduction this year and that he is happy to support efforts on the act again this year.

Maureen Welch, representing Navigating Disability Colorado, testified that there is a need for comprehensive updates to Colorado laws regarding guardianships. The small tweaks over the years have not resulted in the changes needed.

Commissioner Levy thanked Commissioner Gardner and the stakeholders for their work on this act last year and would like to see the act introduced this year, starting where last year's bill left off.

Commissioner Gardner noted that the bill was killed last year due to the fiscal note and would like to see the act reintroduced. He suggested that the fiscal note might be addressed by phasing in portions of the act or looking at some reorganization of the judicial guardianship system.

Commissioner Snyder agreed that the act should be reintroduced this year and that the fiscal note could be brought down.

The commission thanked the witnesses and the stakeholder group for their testimony and hard work .

Leia Ursery, representing Colorado Bar Association Trusts and Estates Section, testified that a subcommittee has been meeting and discussing the act since last year. There is not yet a formal position on the act, but the subcommittee does see an opportunity, through the act, to consolidatee portions of the statutes and asked for additional time for analysis and stakeholding.

Matthew Fowls, representing Colorado Bar Association Health Law Section, concurred that the act provides a potential avenue for some strategic frameworks to be implemented for the betterment of Colorado, but currently lacks stakeholder feedback from the health care community.

Jonathan Caldwell, representing Colorado Bar Association Elder Law Section, would like to ensure that the act works well for people and this requres additional stakeholder input for discussions on the act and regarding policy and medical ethics.

Saskia Young, representing Colorado Hospital Association, testified that the association respectfully requests that the act not move forward this year. She added that Colorado has a unique landscape of laws in this area which calls for medical community consideration before changes are contemplated.

John Conklin, representing Colorado Medical Society, echoed the request to defer consideration and the need for additional discussion on the act. Initial physician perspective on the act is that some of it is confusing and there are concerns regarding its interaction with current Colorado law.

Commissioner McGihon noted that, earlier this year, the commission reached out to members of the medical community to join in discussions regarding the act.

Commissioner Gardner noted that, in Colorado, it can be frustrating for people to arrange for advanced directives when all the information is not in one place. He asked for commitments from the witnesses to be involved in the stakeholding process to make the bill better.

Libby Snyder, Uniform Law Commission staff, informed the commission that the act was enacted in Delaware this past year, Nebraska introduced the act, and seven other states are actively working towards introduction in 2025.

Commissioner Gardner noted that the act may need some amendments to address mental health care issues and wondered if that would make the act nonuniform. Libby Snyder, Uniform Law Commission staff, responded that she would loop in the appropriate individuals to help the working group unwind these issues.

Commissioner Snyder asked for clarification regarding the need for this legislation in Colorado and Ms. Ursery replied there is not an immediate need for legislation as Colorado law is not broken, it just needs some updating, improvement, and consolidation to make the statutes more user friendly.

Kaela Zihlman,  representing Colorado Bar Association Family Law Section, testified that the act does not expand the rights of individuals that aren't already covered by Colorado law. There is room to expand current Colorado law to contemplate nontraditional families, but does not think the act necesarily does that.

Chelsea Augelli, representing Colorado Bar Association Family Law Section, testified that Colorado already has law regarding psychological parents, grandparent rights, child support, and some of the same standards regarding the harm to a child if a nonparent is not in the child's life. In some cases, Colorado law is more expansive than the uniform act and recommends that the act not move forward.

When asked about the application of the act in other states, Libby Snyder, Uniform Law Commission staff, responded that she was not aware of any states going beyond the scope of what was intended in the act.

Andy Toft, representing Colorado Bar Association Business Law Section, noted that Colorado has not enacted the Uniform Unincorporated Organization Act. Passage of these amendments could result in significant inconsistences and would require many amendments to the business entity laws and there is not a need for this act to be enacted in Colorado.

When asked about the passage of the original act in Colorado, Libby Snyder, Uniform Law Commission staff, confirmed that it has not been enacted in Colorado but that Colorado did enact three other uniform acts that fit within the original act. She added that these amendments are meant to be tweaks to correct inconsitencies between the three acts enacted in Colorado. She concurred that it might be a good idea to allow time for additional review of the act's interaction with Colorado law.

The commission asked for a status report on the act in other states, Libby Snyder, Uniform Law Commission staff, responded that four states are working towards introducing the act, three of which were doing so in consultation with their state attorney general office.

Tyler Mounsey, Colorado Bar Association Legislative Liaison, referred to an email sent to the commission with some initial written testimony regarding the act and confirmed that it was an informal opinion. He added that it was felt that the act is not ready for introduction this year, but if it does move forward the Bar would like to help with it's drafting.

Commissioner Levy noted that concerns raised and discussed at the annual meeting seemed to be narrow in scope and proposed the commission consider drafting the act for introduction.

Commissioner Gardner added that one of the act's stated goals was to standardize the notifications with federal pre-merger notification requirements.

Commissioner Snyder concurred and added that evidence indicates that leaving states out of the notification loop causes problems and that it is in everyone's best interest to get this information to all relevant parties.

When asked, Libby Snyder, Uniform Law Commission staff, confirmed that the Uniform Law Commission considered enacting this act a priority.

Seth Holley, representing a Colorado Bar Association subcommittee within the Real Estate Counsel, testified that the act is not needed in Colorado and not recommended for introduction

Libby Snyder, Uniform Law Commission staff, responding to a question regarding the status of the act, stated that four states are considering it for introduction. 

Commissioner Snyder asked for clarification regarding the the capitalization of interest effect on junior lien holders and the commission discussed moving the act forward versus tabling it for now.

Commissioner McGihon suggested working with the Colorado Bar Association, in conjunction with bankers, to see what in the act might need to be modified for Colorado.

The commission discussed other acts that were not pursued last year and asked for a status report regarding the Model Public Health Emergency Authority Act. Libby Snyder, Uniform Law Commission staff, responded that no state had yet introduced it. Commission consensus was there was no need to consider it for Colorado.