BILL ANALYSIS H.B. 149 By: Raymond Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence Committee Report (Unamended) BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Parties in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship are sometimes unable to pay the fees of a parenting coordinator due to hardship. If neither party has the means to pay the fees of a parenting coordinator, a court may appoint a domestic relations officer or an individual from a comparable county agency to act as a parenting coordinator. However, these officers and individuals are not always available in smaller counties. H.B. 149 allows a court to appoint a person who meets the minimum qualifications prescribed by state law, including an employee of the court, to act as a parenting coordinator on a volunteer basis and without compensation. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution. ANALYSIS H.B. 149 amends the Family Code to clarify that, in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship, a person, including an employee of the court, appointed by the court to act as a parenting coordinator on a volunteer basis must meet the minimum qualifications prescribed by provisions of law relating to the qualifications of a parenting coordinator and must serve without compensation. The bill, in provisions relating to the compensation of a parenting facilitator, provides that a person appointed in the same manner as provided for a parenting coordinator to act as a parenting facilitator must meet the minimum qualifications prescribed by provisions of law relating to the qualifications of a parenting facilitator and makes conforming changes relating to these provisions. The bill makes a change to provisions relating to the appointment of a parenting coordinator or a parenting facilitator in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship to conform to provisions amended in a prior legislative session. EFFECTIVE DATE On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2011.
BILL ANALYSIS
# BILL ANALYSIS
H.B. 149
By: Raymond
Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
Committee Report (Unamended)
H.B. 149
By: Raymond
Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
Committee Report (Unamended)
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Parties in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship are sometimes unable to pay the fees of a parenting coordinator due to hardship. If neither party has the means to pay the fees of a parenting coordinator, a court may appoint a domestic relations officer or an individual from a comparable county agency to act as a parenting coordinator. However, these officers and individuals are not always available in smaller counties. H.B. 149 allows a court to appoint a person who meets the minimum qualifications prescribed by state law, including an employee of the court, to act as a parenting coordinator on a volunteer basis and without compensation.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS H.B. 149 amends the Family Code to clarify that, in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship, a person, including an employee of the court, appointed by the court to act as a parenting coordinator on a volunteer basis must meet the minimum qualifications prescribed by provisions of law relating to the qualifications of a parenting coordinator and must serve without compensation. The bill, in provisions relating to the compensation of a parenting facilitator, provides that a person appointed in the same manner as provided for a parenting coordinator to act as a parenting facilitator must meet the minimum qualifications prescribed by provisions of law relating to the qualifications of a parenting facilitator and makes conforming changes relating to these provisions. The bill makes a change to provisions relating to the appointment of a parenting coordinator or a parenting facilitator in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship to conform to provisions amended in a prior legislative session.
EFFECTIVE DATE On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2011.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Parties in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship are sometimes unable to pay the fees of a parenting coordinator due to hardship. If neither party has the means to pay the fees of a parenting coordinator, a court may appoint a domestic relations officer or an individual from a comparable county agency to act as a parenting coordinator. However, these officers and individuals are not always available in smaller counties.
H.B. 149 allows a court to appoint a person who meets the minimum qualifications prescribed by state law, including an employee of the court, to act as a parenting coordinator on a volunteer basis and without compensation.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS
H.B. 149 amends the Family Code to clarify that, in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship, a person, including an employee of the court, appointed by the court to act as a parenting coordinator on a volunteer basis must meet the minimum qualifications prescribed by provisions of law relating to the qualifications of a parenting coordinator and must serve without compensation. The bill, in provisions relating to the compensation of a parenting facilitator, provides that a person appointed in the same manner as provided for a parenting coordinator to act as a parenting facilitator must meet the minimum qualifications prescribed by provisions of law relating to the qualifications of a parenting facilitator and makes conforming changes relating to these provisions. The bill makes a change to provisions relating to the appointment of a parenting coordinator or a parenting facilitator in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship to conform to provisions amended in a prior legislative session.
EFFECTIVE DATE
On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2011.