►
From YouTube: House Standing Committee on Judiciary 2/10/21
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
D
B
D
C
F
A
In
the
room-
and
we
do
have
a
quorum
as
we've
discussed
before,
if
you're
using
cell
phones-
and
we
all
are
try
to
keep
them
on
silent
or
airplane
mode,
so
it
doesn't
interfere
with
the
equipment.
We
are
going
to
be
having
presenters
today
via
electronics.
So
we
want
to
be
accommodate
the
sensitivity
of
the
equipment.
We
have
two
matters
before
us
today.
A
They
are
house
bill,
402
and
house
bill
404,
I'm
actually
going
to
take
404
first,
simply
because
that's
the
longer
of
the
two
and
it's
really
the
precursor
for
the
402
anyway,
and
this
whole
meeting
is
for
purposes
of
updating
child
support
and
dealing
with
that.
That's
an
issue-
that's
been
before
the
judiciary
committee
for
some
time
now
so
with
that,
if
it's
appropriate,
I'm
going
to
hand
the
gavel
over
to
my
vice
chair
representative
banta,
and
she
will
conduct
the
meeting
from
there
and
I
will
come
down.
A
H
C
H
A
A
I
have
representative
hatton
here
your
district
is
94.,
and
then
we
have
two
people
from
the
child
support
commission
as
well.
We
have
mr
steve
vino
who's
on
was
on
the
picture
a
moment
ago,
and
then
I
believe
we
have
lily
and
I
don't.
I
can't
see
her
name.
What's
her
last
name:
patterson
I've,
I've
I've
talked
to
her
as
lily.
So
is
a
little
bit
of
very
brief
background
of
this,
and
I
will
turn
it
over
to
them.
A
As
I
became
chair
of
this
year
of
judiciary,
this
is
something
that
was
not
new.
This
has
been
brought
before
the
judiciary
before
it's
been
worked
on,
but
candidly,
the
child
support
tables
have
not
been
updated
in
about
15
years,
and
so
a
lot
of
the
judges
were
reaching
out
to
us.
A
lot
of
the
county
attorneys
were
reaching
out
to
us.
A
Mr
vino
reached
out
to
me
and
indicated
that,
because
there's
some
federal
issues
tied
to
this,
that
we
needed
to
try
to
expedite
this
and
get
it
done,
we
tried
to
get
there
last
year,
didn't
work
out
due
to
coven,
among
other
things,
and
so
we're
back
at
it
here
again
this
year.
All
that
I
want
to
say
before
turning
it
over
to
mr
vino
is
that
this
has
truly
been
a
process
where
we've
incorporated
the
input
from
the
family
law.
A
Judges
in
the
commonwealth
from
the
county
attorneys
from
the
attorneys
that
were
present,
many
of
them
in
the
house
and
from
the
child
support
commission,
it's
fairly
complex
for
people
that
have
never
done
child
support
calculations
before,
but
this
is
a
way
to
update
it
and
to
deal
with
the
case
that
was
decided
a
couple
of
years
ago.
That
gives
a
presumption
of
joint
legal
custody
and
shared
parenting.
So
there
has
to
be
ways
to
offset
and
adjust
and
accommodate.
Accordingly,
we
have
tried
to
address
any
questions
that
have
come
up
to
the
contrary.
A
You
may
notice
that
in
the
bill,
I
believe
it's
the
last
page
of
the
bill.
There
is
actually
a
delayed
start
for
a
piece
of
the
bill
and
that's
section
three.
They
won't
take
effect
until
march
1
of
2022
and
that's
part
of
the
issue
that
we
had
trouble
with
last
year
and
we're
going
to
continue
to
work
with
the
family
judges,
the
county
attorneys
to
get
that
worked
out
that
deals
with
the
shared
parenting
piece.
So
with
that,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
mr
vino.
A
I
I
Also
as
part
of
the
10th
block,
the
tana
block
rack
state
plan,
it
would
be
penalized
up
to
five
percent.
Five
percent
would
be
roughly
nine
million
dollars
and,
of
course,
if
we
can't
operate
a
child
support
program
without
the
federal
funds,
then
consequently
we
would
possibly
lose
the
entire
tanf
block
grant,
which
is
roughly
181
million
dollars.
I
So
this
is
a
very
important
piece
of
legislation.
There
have
been
a
number
of
attempts
to
enact
updates
since
actually
2006
on
up
every
session
practically
and
I'll.
Ask
ms
pattison
to
kind
of
just
briefly
give
the
federal
mandates
contained
in
the
bill
and
move
forward
from
there.
Thank
you.
J
Thank
you
steve.
There
are
two
primary
goals.
We're
trying
to
reach
with
the
guideline.
One
is
to
update
the
criteria
in
the
guideline.
Look
at
the
most
current
and
credible
economic
evidence
on
child
rearing
expenditures,
look
at
state
as
well
as
federal
level,
tax
and
fica
income,
as
well
as
observe
the
federal
poverty
guideline
we
observed
when
we
created
this.
The.
J
Poverty
guideline
was
1041
for
the
national,
we
did
price
parity
to
kentucky
at
87.9
percent,
based
on
cost
of
living
and
cost
expense
for
the
state.
This,
as
mr
vino
indicated,
was
a
1990
guideline.
Frankly,
the
data
used
was
one
to
two
years,
older,
so
closer
to
1988,
standard
of
living
and
child
rearing
expenses,
which
is
very
outdated.
J
J
What
this
means
is
we
want
to
make
sure
after
they
pay
child
support.
There
is
sufficient
income
to
meet
their
needs.
Also,
if
you
look
at
the
guideline,
the
minimum
order
is
added
in
a
large
portion
of
income.
So
how
that
would
work?
Is
we
look
at
the
obligated
parents
income
if
they
fall
within
the
range
that
is
listed
within
the
statute?
We
only
look
at
the
obligated
parents
as
income
to
determine
this
guideline
for
those
who
are
familiar
with
it.
J
Typically,
you
use
mom
and
dad's
income
to
determine
what
the
obligated
parent's
payment
would
be.
You
will
also
see
a
slight
update
regarding
incarcerated
individuals.
Prior
to
this
incarcerate
incarcerated
individuals
can
be
imputed
minimum
wage
or
income
once
it's
determining
what
they
need
to
pay
in
child
support.
J
The
update
in
kentucky
will
mirror
more
closer
to
federal
guidelines,
which
is
not
to
impute
income,
for
those
incarcerated
put
them
at
the
same
level
as
parents,
caring
for
children.
Three
and
under
two
other
minor
interest
points
are
the
extraordinary
medical
costs
you
may
see.
It
was
at
100
and
had
been
for
a
while.
This
is
out-of-pocket
medical
expenses
that
parents
would
pay
that
are
not
covered
by
a
deductible
or
is
above
beyond
insurance.
So
again,
that's
250.
J
We
also
reduce
the
time
regarding
filing
and
tolling
statute
limitation
for
retroactivity
for
child
support
for
children
before
it
was
three
and
under
now
it's
two
and
under
we
believe.
By
closing
that
gap,
we
will
reduce
the
number
of
arrears
that
accrue
for
individual
obligated
parent
and
also
propagate
having
the
establishment
fraternity
to
be
done
as
soon
as
possible.
A
Thank
you.
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna
defer
for
a
moment
to
my
colleague,
representative
hatton,
and
she
has
worked
on
this.
We
both
both
of
us
in
our
practices,
handle
child
support
matters.
Obviously
there
are
a
number
of
ways
those
can
become
before
the
court.
A
You
know,
if
there's
a
very
amicable
resolution,
there
are
still
some
judges
that
will
nonetheless,
even
if
the
parties
agree
on
an
amount
of
support,
they
will
follow
religiously
the
guidelines.
There
are
some
that
will
deviate
and
allow
the
guidelines
to
be
changed
for
purposes
of
of
the
family
structure.
But
then
you
have
the
circumstances
where
you
have
an
absent
father
or
an
absent
parent,
and
it
creates
a
very
difficult
situation
for
a
single
mother
that
is
trying
to
rear
a
child
or
children
and
needs
the
services
not
only
of
child
support.
A
But
you
know,
there's
concerns
related
to
medical
cost
and
child
care.
So
with
the
case
that
came
out
a
couple
of
years
ago,
with
the
presumption
of
joint
legal
custody,
that's
a
place
to
start
and
of
not
only
joint
legal
custody
but
a
shared
parenting
arrangement,
believing
that
both
parents
should
have
an
active
involvement
in
the
life
of
their
children.
A
A
But
when
you
add
in
jobs-
and
you
add
in
school
activities-
and
you
add
in
other
events
and
sometimes
even
distance
travel
time
windshield
time,
then
it
becomes
much
more
complicated
as
to
how
to
calculate
that
and
that's
part
of
what
we're
trying
to
address
in
this
bill.
So
with
that,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
my
very
helpful
colleague,
representative
hatton,
and
have
her
make
her
comments.
C
D
D
I
wanted
to
say
that
I
recognize
that
no
bill
of
this
magnitude
is
going
to
be
perfect,
but
we
drew
on
all
of
the
expertise
that
we
could
find
and
had
as
many
stakeholders
and
voices
involved
as
we
could
and
that
it
definitely
was
bipartisan
in
in
that
I
was
included
and
had
input
from
from
my
caucus
as
well.
So
it
was
crucial
that
we
update
these
guidelines
and
the
the
ssr
the
self-support
reserve
is
required
by
federal
guidelines.
D
So
we
actually
are
one
of
only
a
few
states
that
hadn't
done
that
we
provide
some
relief
for
incarcerated
individuals,
and
then
we
also
provide
for
the
situation
where
a
child
has
been
removed
by
an
eco
emergency
custody
order
and
reverse
the
flow
of
child
support,
so
that
it
doesn't
take
months
to
have
the
the
person
who
had
the
child
removed
from
their
custody
to
stop
getting
child
support
on
that
child
and
we've
had
part
of
it.
D
The
50
50
custody
has
been
a
big
concern
for
a
lot
of
my
clients
for
some
time,
and
this
attempts
to
do
the
very
best
we
can
to
make
it
fair.
According
to
the
time
I
actually
spent
with
the
child,
and
that
part
has
the
delayed
effect,
all
it
won't
go
into
effect
until
next
march,
so
that,
if
we
figure
out
the
method
we've
picked
is
not
workable,
that
it
could
even
be
tweaked
in
early
next
session.
D
So
I
had
some
concerns
this
morning
from
the
kentucky
coalition
against
domestic
violence,
and
I
don't
know
if
they
got
signed
up
in
time
to
get
to
speak
today.
But
their
concerns
were
that
some
folks
who
have
domestic
violence
petitions
could
see
further
levels
of
poverty
based
on
the
reduced
amount
of
child
support.
If
the
other
party
has
perpetuated
domestic
violence,
but
then
also
still
gets
50
50.
D
it's
the
way
the
custody
law
is
designed
now
is
supposed
to
take
that
into
account,
but
if,
if
judges
aren't
taking
that
to
into
account,
that
may
be
something
that
we
need
to
beef
up
later,
but
we
did
put
a
delayed
effect
there
and
hopefully
that
that
will
alleviate
her
concerns
and
thank
you.
A
I
know
there's
a
motion
on
the
bill.
The
last
thing
I
want
to
bring
up
is
that
my
colleague,
who
is
also
does
this
work,
which
is
representative
petery,
had
done
a
lot
of
work
on
this
before
I
ever
got
the
bill,
and
I
think
that's
important
to
note
for
for
a
couple
of
reasons
we
spoke
yesterday
and
he
said:
there's
some
still
some
things
we
need
to
work
on
and
we're
going
to
continue
to
work
on
this
as
we
move
it
through
the
process.
A
So,
with
regards
to
the
people
that
that
representative
hatton
just
mentioned,
we
are
trying
to
address
those
concerns,
but
we
need
to
get
these
child
support
tables
in
proper
order
so
that
we
can
keep
moving
forward.
H
F
Thank
you,
madam
chairwoman.
I
would
note
to
our
domestic
violence
community.
That's
a
very
important
consideration.
I
would
I
want
to
point
out
that
krs
403.270,
subsection
2
cdfng
apply
to
protect
those
interests
as
they
ought
to.
If
we
need
to
make
them
high
more
protective.
We
will,
I
assume,
but
that's
important
to
point
out.
I
think
another
thing
I
wanted
to
point
out.
I
was
talking
to
of
some
voters
about
this
bill
and
I
think
there
may
have
been
an
oversight
on
page
10
of
the
bill.
F
It
requires
720
to
go
from
one
parent
to
another
as
a
minimum
at
60
a
month,
no
matter
even
if
their
share
parenting
and
the
and
the
incomes
are
about
the
same
as
representative
massey
pointed
out,
that's
not
always
the
case,
but
it
could
be
the
case
and
so
that
the
minimum
child
support
should
be
zero
and
leave
that
to
the
discretion
of
the
of
the
family
court
judge
or
the
or
the
judge
in
the
particular
particular
matter.
F
G
H
G
Know,
I'm
sorry,
I'm
sorry,
I
don't
know
the
remote
rules
for
judiciary.
Sorry
go
ahead.
Representatives
for
comment.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
So
much
chairwoman.
I
I
appreciate
my
two
colleagues
for
bringing
this
bill
forward.
G
I'm
a
single
mom
and
I've
definitely
gone
through
shared
custody
issues,
and
I
want
to
be
able
to
take
this
bill
back
to
my
constituents,
who
I
know,
are
going
to
have
some
comments
and
questions
for
me
around
child
support
and
in
particular,
the
medical
support
component
and
because
this
bill
was
just
posted,
I
haven't
really
had
a
chance
to
dig
deep
enough
into
it.
So
I
wanted
to
hear
from
my
two
colleagues.
If
you
could
please
explain.
A
If
I
may
I'll
take
the
first
stay
about
it,
so
representative,
the
the
bill
is
not
I'll
say
it
wasn't
rushed
in
the
sense
that
they've
been
working
on
it
for
several
years.
A
We
don't
like
to
move
things
forward
until
the
people
that
are
affected
or
the
people
that
are
processing
this
type
of
legislation
have
weighed
into
it.
So
that's
why
we
arranged
for
the
conferences
with
the
family
law.
Judges,
that's
why
we
had
conferences
with
the
county
attorneys
who
actually
implement
the
program
out
in
the
counties.
A
That
is
why
I've
had
conversations
with
many
of
our
rep
or
lawyers
that
are
in
the
in
the
caucus
to
get
their
feedback
on
this.
There
really
wasn't
any
significant
change
made
to
what
they
presented
other
than
trying
to
grapple
with
the
shared
custody
component
that
we
already
talked
about.
That
is
going
to
have
a
delayed
effect
until
march
of
2022
and
that's
why
we
delayed
it.
So
we
could
have
those
conversations
continue
that
work
on
it
and
prove
it,
but
nonetheless
indicate
that
we
realize
there's
case
law
out
there.
A
That
says
there
is
shared
custody.
That
says
there
is
a
shared
parenting
plan
and
we're
going
to
try
to
tighten
that
up
to
make
it
effectual
so
that
the
county
attorneys
can
implement
that.
The
other
piece
out
there
that
was
very
important
is
that
if
a
child
is
removed
from
the
custody
of
the
parents
under
a
domestic
violence
situation,
what
happens
is
a
lot
of
times
that
parent
may
be
receiving
child
support,
and
so
the
child
is
taken
away
and
then
that
parent
continues
to
receive
the
support,
even
though
they
don't
have
the
child.
A
So
what
this
does?
Is
it
triggers
a
hearing
to
address
those
issues
and
instead
of
letting
it
you
know
in
cases,
I've
had
obviously
there's
a
reunification
piece
where
you're
trying
to
get
the
child
back
to
the
family
members
and
but
by
the
time
it
gets
back
to
the
family
members.
Child
support's
been
received
been
spent
and
it
becomes
a
conundrum
of
things
to
deal
with.
So
we
added
that
in
there
to
trigger
that
now.
A
I
think
it
dialed
a
covet
death
and
and
so
that
it's
been
out
there
and
it
may
not
be
out
there
for
the
new
members,
obviously
because
this
may
be
their
first
time
looking
at
it.
But
it's
not
really
anything.
That's
new
in
that
regards
and
again
as
rep
as
as
indicated
by
representative
hatton,
we
literally
worked
on
this
up
until
the
day
where
we
had
to
post
it
and
we're
running
out
of
time
and
that's
the
nature
of
a
short
session.
H
H
K
Yes,
could
I
explain
my
vote?
Yes,
thank
you
for
the
reasons
already
mentioned
about
the
domestic
abuse
issues
that
does
concern
me.
I
appreciate
you
talking
about
the
fact
that
you
will
continue
working
on
this
item,
because
the
the
bill
is
necessary
to
secure
the
federal
funds
etc.
I'm
going
to
vote
yes,
but
I
I
really
appreciate
the
fact
that
you
will
continue
working
on
the
domestic
violence
issues.
Thank
you.
I
E
I
just
want
to
thank
you
all.
I
always
love
seeing
bipartisan
efforts,
but
coming
from
a
family
that
was
divorced,
I
appreciate
it
if
you've
not
had
to
deal
with
a
divorce
family
you're
lucky.
I
just
appreciate
you
all
taking
on
this
issue.
I
think
it's
very
important
and
I
really
respect
you
all
for
doing
it.
So
thank
you.
C
C
I
want
to
thank
representatives
massey
and
hatton,
for
you
know
doing
this
necessary
work
and
doing
it
in
bipartisan
fashion.
Thank
you
for
sharing
your
expertise
with
us.
Yes,.
C
A
B
H
Yes,
15,
yes
with
16,
yes
and
one
pass,
should
move
with
favorable
expression
and
should
do
the
same
on
the
floor.