SB 1096

85(R) - 2017
Senate Health & Human Services
House Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
Senate Health & Human Services
House Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
Health & Human Services

Vote Recommendation

  • Neutral
  • Neutral
  • Neutral
  • Neutral
  • Neutral


Judith Zaffirini


John Smithee

Bill Caption

Relating to guardianships; authorizing a fee. 

Fiscal Notes

From the LBB: Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for SB 1096, As Engrossed: a negative impact of ($837,834) through the biennium ending August 31, 2019.

Bill Analysis

This bill would require that if a person who is a ward is taken into custody, peace officers must notify a probate court that has jurisdiction over the ward’s guardianship not later than the first working day after the ward is taken into custody. 

This bill would require that before a person is appointed guardian, they complete a free training course designed to educate guardians about their responsibilities as guardians, alternatives to guardianship, supports and services available to the ward, and the ward’s bill of rights. A floor amendment in the Senate would allow a court to grant a waiver of this mandatory training. The state supreme court would be required to determine the circumstances under which a court may waive the training.

The bill would also require the Health and Human Services Commission to obtain fingerprint-based criminal history of applicants to be guardians if the liquid assets of the estate of the ward exceed $50,000 and name-based criminal history if the assets are $50,000 or less. The commission would be allowed to charge a fee to obtain criminal history under the section, and a guardian would be entitled to reimbursement for the fee.

The bill would also establish a registration program for guardianships including establishing a central database of all guardianships subject to the jurisdiction of the state. The database would have a "limited purpose of determining whether an individual has a guardian and obtaining a guardian ’s contact information." Law enforcement would have access to the database for those limited purposes.

Vote Recommendation Notes

When this bill was before the Senate on second reading our position was No; Amend based on the mandatory training requirement. We suggested amending the bill to exempt familial guardians from the training requirements. An amendment was offered and adopted to allow a court to grant a waiver under circumstances to be determined by the state supreme court. This amendment satisfies our objection and we have moved our position to neutral.