Professional Documents
Culture Documents
BILL ANALYSIS
SHORT SUMMARY:
• This package of bills is intended to streamline and improve delivery of services within the Friend of the
Court.
ISSUE / PROBLEM:
• In 2002, in response to concerns expressed by individual counties and Friend of the Court (FOC)
offices who were experiencing significant reductions in state funding for services, Supreme Court
Justice Maura Corrigan requested that the FOCs do the following:
o Identify unfunded mandated services provided by the FOC offices.
o Prepare suggestions for streamlining procedures.
o Submit any ideas for improving the utilization of resources.
• Subsequently, during the FY 2006 state budget discussions, Senator Hardiman also requested that the
FOC review their operations and make recommendations for improvements.
• On October 20, 2006, as a result of a joint work group between the FOC Association and the State
Court Administrative Office (SCAO), a comprehensive report with recommendations for improving
efficiency and client services was submitted to the Governor, Supreme Court Chief Justice Taylor and
Legislative leadership.
• Since that time, Senator Jansen, Senator Hardiman, the FOC Association, SCAO, the Supreme Court
and individuals from their respective staffs collaborated to place the recommendations in the report into
this package of bills.
BILL CONTENT:
SB 99 (Jansen) amends the Friends of the Court Act to:
• The H-2 does require the FOC to enforce spousal support.
• Replace the current Domestic Relations Mediation with alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to assist
parties in resolving child custody or parenting time disputes.
o ADR would occur pursuant to a plan that would have to be approved by the chief judge and the
SCAO.
o ADR would allow mediation services to be tailored to an individual county’s needs and
resources.
o Certain qualifications would be required for those providing ADR.
• Amend the definition of “recipient of support” to include counties.
o This would allow child support payments to be assigned to the county when the child is in
county-funded foster care.
• Require the FOC to enforce spousal support only when in conjunction with a child support order filed
after April 1, 2009.
o There is no federal funding provided to enforce spousal support unless there is a child support
order attached to the case.
o The FOC would be permitted to provide spousal support services after April 1, 2009, but would
not be required to provide such services.
• Require FOC to only conduct child custody or parenting time investigations if the court finds there has
been a substantial change in circumstances.
SB 100 (Jansen) amends the Support and Parenting Time Enforcement Act to:
• The H-1 revises child support enforcement and surcharge effective date.
• Add labor union to the definition of "source of income".
o This would require a labor union that assigns a member to a particular job to forward the income
withholding notice to that member’s actual employer to allow child support to be collected in a
more timely fashion.
• Revise the notification requirements for each child support order to include the following:
o Notice that an order for dependent health care coverage takes effect immediately and a national
medical support notice will be sent to both parents’ current and subsequent employers and
insurers if appropriate.
o Each party must provide the FOC with a single address for all notices and papers to be served.
o Allow the FOC to stop sending mail to an address where mail was returned as undeliverable.
The bill provides that a party waives his or her right to receive notice until properly
submitting a change of address to the FOC.
• Include new language stating that if a person fails to comply with a child support order or any of the
requirements pertaining to that order, the court may impose a fee on that person.
o This fee would be set by Supreme Court Rule or SCAO policy.
• Provide that in a child support enforcement proceeding, a report, record, or information from the SDU is
prima facie authentic and may be admitted into evidence without extrinsic evidence of authenticity.
• Eliminate the automatic assessment of a surcharge.
o Instead the court will be allowed to order a surcharge if it determines there is a willful failure to
pay support.
o This will allow the court to determine on a case-by-case basis whether the sanction is
warranted.
• Clarify that a child support order that continues beyond the 18th birthday will end on the last day of a
specified month, and not on the actual graduation date from high school.
o This will eliminate the need for prorating the last month of support
• Simplify payment plan requirements for arrearages to afford judicial discretion on a case-by-case basis.
• Require income withholding notices to direct the employer to also withhold enough money to cover any
fines, costs, and/or sanctions that have been assessed to the child support payer.
o This will allow collection of monies the legislature has previously mandated.
• Limit the total amount of income withheld by an employer to 50% of the payer’s disposable earnings.
o Previously, this was done on a case by case basis and could have gone as high as 65% of the
earnings.
• Instruct that a payer shall receive a mailed notice before a lien may be perfected or levied against real
and personal property for encumbrance or seizure if an arrearage accrues.
Arguments in Support:
o Attempts to improve the Friend of the Court and child support collection process in Michigan.
o Represents years of review and collaboration between all parties to reach a consensus.
Arguments in Opposition:
o None given.
POSITIONS:
SUPPORT: SCAO, Office of Child Support (DHS), Friend of the Court Association, Family Law Section
(State Bar), MI Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence, Michigan Association of Counties.
OPPOSED:
NEUTRAL:
COMMITTEE VOTE: HB 5501 & 5502; SB 99, 100, 105, 106 & 107
YES: Valentine (Chair), Womack, Liss, Neumann, Slavens, KURTZ (MIN VC), MOORE, PAVLOV.
NO:
PASS: MCMILLIN.
ABSENT: