A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Senate committee advances bill to restore grandparents’ visitation and placement presumptions

April 30, 2026 | 2026 Legislature CO, Colorado


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Senate committee advances bill to restore grandparents’ visitation and placement presumptions
House Bill 13‑14, which would align Colorado law to preserve grandparents’ placement and visitation rights when a parent is deceased or a child is removed from parental custody, was advanced unanimously by the Senate Health and Human Services Committee.

Sponsor Tony Exum said the measure “fixes that error” created by a 2025 Colorado Supreme Court decision that, he said, narrowed who counts as a grandparent in dependency proceedings. Exum told the committee the bill amends the statutory definition of grandparent and great‑grandparent and codifies a presumption that placement with relatives is in the child’s best interest while allowing that the presumption may be rebutted by evidence.

Two witnesses who said they represent family‑focused groups supported the bill. Sue Ricker of the Colorado Council of Churches’ Voices for Justice unit said the measure “prioritizes the preservation of the family” and that grandparents often find out too late that a relative entered foster care. Melanie Jordan, policy director for the Office of Respondent Parents Council, said the change would restore what she described as common sense to the law while emphasizing that background checks and safety assessments for placements would continue.

Committee members asked about earlier, broader versions of the bill that drew opposition from some counties and stakeholders; Jordan said counties have moved toward neutral positions and that more controversial post‑adoption contact provisions were removed in the House amendments. Jordan also cited a court case (identified in committee testimony) as an example of how statutory language had produced confusion.

After a brief wrap‑up from the sponsor, a member moved House Bill 13‑14 to the Committee of the Whole; the motion passed unanimously and the bill was placed on the consent calendar. The committee did not adopt any committee amendments in this hearing.

The next procedural step is consideration by the Committee of the Whole.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee