WAPG
 

Legislative Issues

Find your legislator

Find a Bill by number

Washington Association of Professional Guardians

Legislative Watch by Sylvia Curry 3-10-08

Notes added by Tom O'Brien

My initial research identified eleven bills in the Legislature related to Guardians. The one establishing the OPG passed last year. There were a few that I found to be potentially detrimental to CPGs but they had only crossed over from last year and hadn’t gone past the first reading in the house of origin. That is usually the end of a bill but I kept watching. If we had an active Legislative group, they would have been alerted. As it was, the bills died.

However, the bills do indicate potential problems and will probably be back in some form in future years so I believe it is important for WAPG to know what they were and who introduced them and try to educate the Legislators who did introduce them.

Sponsoring Legislators districts

 

 

Rep Marilyn Chase of the 32nd district  shoreline, Lake Forest Park

 

 Rep Ruth Kagi of the 32nd district Shoreline Lake Forest Park

 

 

Sen Ken Jacobsen of 46th district greenwood, Northgate, Lake City Laurelhurst

 

 

 

Sen. Adam Kline of the 37th  Lake Washington from Madrona to Renton

 

 

 

 

Sen. Pam Roach of the 31st district pierce/king county line Bonney Lake Enumclaw

 

 

 

HB 2278 was introduced by Representative Maralyn Chase of the 32nd district. It said that petitions are not to disclose SSN, Medicare number or financial account number. It also said the hospitals and long term care facilities may not petition for guardianships.

This bill will be reintroduced in the next session. It is not at all obvious why hospitals should be barred from filing petitions.

Read the Bill:  http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2007-08/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/2278.pdf

HB 3124 was introduced by Representative Ruth Kagi of the 32nd district. It wanted to allow family members of an AIP to testify and present evidence at any petition hearing.

This bill appears to be based on a belief that family have difficulty being heard at court. It gives family a special status at hearings and is different from present practice only in that small minority of cases in which an obsessed family member will have a legislated right to prolong proceedings

Read the bill http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2007-08/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/3124.pdf

SB 5016 was introduced by Senator Ken Jacobsen of 46th district. It requires Professional Guardians to comply with the CPG Board ethical opinion on filing petitions. 

Read the bill:  http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2007-08/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5016-S.pdf

SB 5018 was introduced by Senator Ken Jacobsen of the 46th district, Senator Adam Kline of the 37th district and Senator Pam Roach of the 31st district. Restricts a CPG  in a given case to one of the following roles: Guardian, attorney for IP or GAL. 

It is not clear why the bill limits the restriction to CPGs. In any case it would mostly apply to the minority of CPGs who are also lawyers. It allows dual representation in extraordinary cases, a real world example of which is hard to imagine.

Read the bill http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2007-08/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5018-S.pdf

SB 6632 was introduced by Sen. Pam Roach of the 31st district and Sen. Ken Jacobsen of the 46th district. This is the one the CPG Board said WAPG should be concerned about. It asks that the court in appointing a Guardian consider otherwise qualified persons: current Guardian (note – if this is a new appointment, how is there a current Guardian); nominated Guardian by AIP; PoA by AIP; spouse, adult child, parent, adult brothers, adult with who resident lived for six months. This seems to basically say that no CPG would be appointed as a Guardian!!

This is a highly destructive bill that for the world appears intended to benefit abusers

Read the bill: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2007-08/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/6632.pdf