Dave Lent — Addressed as chair during the discussion.
Dave Lent — Addressed directly in anticipation of future concerns and questions.
Dave Lent — Likely a garbled reference to the next speaker making a motion to introduce RS 3327.
Dave Lent — Presiding over the motion and discussion.
Dave Lent — Likely a garbled reference to a member asking a question about the proposal.
Dave Lent — Likely a garbled reference to the next speaker being called on after the prior comment.
Dave Lent — Addressed at the start of the comment/question.
Dave Lent — Thanked for the introduction and addressed directly.
Dave Lent — Chair Dave Lent manages committee procedure during consideration of an amendment and substitute motion. He allows additional questions to the sponsor, recognizes Representative Hostetler and others, notes that the discussion may be treated as a substitute motion, and then moves the committee into roll call votes. The amended substitute motion fails, the committee returns to the original substitute motion, and that motion also proceeds to a roll call vote. After the vote sequence concludes, he announces the measure will move forward and transitions the committee to the next bill, introducing Representative Pickett for House Bill 58.
Dave Lent — During the committee exchange, the chair asks the sponsors one more question before closing, and the discussion concludes with a brief acknowledgment to the chairman.
Christy Zito — Referenced as working on another bill addressing IDLA; the speaker said she had seen his bill and he had not seen hers.
Christy Zito — Mentioned again in connection with a separate IDLA bill and possible coordination.
Christy Zito — Her bill is referenced again as a separate IDLA-related measure.
Christy Zito — Confirms the bill would apply to all grades.
Christy Zito — Representative Sonia Galaviz of District 16 introduced herself to the chair and indicated she was ready to help move through the bill.
Christy Zito — Representative Ehart is repeatedly referenced throughout a continuous discussion about standards, testing, local control, district differences, and academic success. The exchange also touches on process concerns, teacher issues, and prior questions to other members, including references to Representative Petski/Petsky and Representative Sauter, but the overall narrative remains centered on Ehart’s role in the broader debate over testing and educational policy.
Christy Zito — Christy Zito is part of a continuous discussion on the bill, responding to concerns raised by Representative E. Hart about keeping the measure flexible and workable for stakeholders such as IHLA and teachers. The exchange continues with remarks that the issue requires balancing competing interests, then shifts to comments about Representative Galavis’s district and how the relevant code sections specifically relate to virtual education programs. The discussion concludes with reassurance to Representative E. Hart that the process will continue with attention to public schools and stakeholder input.
Bruce Skog — Introduces RS 33027 and explains it as a moment-of-silence bill used in other states with reported classroom benefits.
Tammy Nichols — Called on after the sponsor asks for the bill to be introduced for a hearing.
Tammy Nichols — Makes the motion to introduce RS 33027.
Tammy Nichols — The speaker warns against deleting words from the bill and argues for setting the tone at the start of the day.
Tammy Nichols — Representative Thane is referenced multiple times in a short span as part of the discussion supporting the bill and charter school policy, with emphasis on the need to balance competing considerations and preserve flexibility and nimbleness in charter schools.
James Woodward — Representative Mathis asks whether the bill’s time-of-day requirement could be removed, and the sponsor replies that removing that requirement would not be a problem.
James Woodward — The speaker says Representative Pickett already highlighted the need for a wording tweak to clarify supplemental learning funds.
James Woodward — The speaker cites Representative Pickett as part of the commitment to keep stakeholders supportive of the bill.
James Woodward — Representative Hostetler credits Representative Pickett with the easier part of the presentation.
James Woodward — Was addressed by the speaker and then responded to the question.
James Woodward — Said the gold standard of school choice is parents choosing the curriculum and raised a concern about House Bill 93.
James Woodward — Explained the difference between standards and curriculum and said the IHLA approach gives parents more say in curriculum.
James Woodward — Gave an example of flexibility in curriculum choice while still meeting standards.
James Woodward — Shifted to concerns about testing and referenced Common Core.
James Woodward — Argued that too much testing has not improved outcomes and said the approach is flawed if it relies too heavily on testing.
James Woodward — Was thanked and acknowledged as having no more questions directed to him.
James Woodward — Asked Dr. Samora to address the apparent conflict between preserving flexibility and undermining innovation.
James Woodward — James Woodward is mentioned repeatedly during a short procedural discussion about the bill and the legislators involved. The references appear to identify him as one of the members associated with drafting or discussing the bill, though the transcript is somewhat unclear and includes possible misidentifications of other members in the exchange.
James Woodward — Representative Nelson is identified as making the motion to send the bill to the floor with due pass.
Stephen Thane — Stephen Thane introduces himself as a former legislator with 16 years on the Education Committee and notes that he was the main architect of the Advanced Opportunities Program, which served nearly 45,000 students. He then states his concern with the bill, arguing that its process-based accountability approach could inhibit innovation and that policy should focus more on outcomes. He also mentions his recent attention to the IHLA program and identifies himself as chairman of the board of the Pet River Regional Technical Academy.
Janie Ward-Engelking — Representative Ehart asked for a little more explanation about the changes, standards, and process, and the response thanked him for the question while continuing the same discussion.
Janie Ward-Engelking — One of the committee members present; no specific statement attributed in this section.
Dr. Alejandro Samora — Dr. Alejandro Samora, superintendent of the Wilder School District, testified in support of HB 58. He explained that WAVE is a public K-12 virtual option already operating with high standards, including local oversight, hiring qualified Idaho teachers, alignment with state standards and board policy, and responsible fiscal stewardship through centralized purchasing and accountability measures. He acknowledged the bill adds some procedural steps but said those requirements are compatible with innovation and help maintain transparency and high standards for students’ education, ultimately recommending the bill for a due pass.
Robin Merrifield — Robin Merrifield, principal of Naples Elementary School and Boundary County Online School, testified virtually about her district’s online program serving nearly 400 students. She explained that Idaho-certified teachers guide and monitor the program, provide standards-aligned instruction and interventions, and benchmark students in reading and math three times per year. She emphasized the flexibility and rural access the virtual model provides and urged continued support for strong, accountable virtual programs in the bill.
Scott Wolstenhum — Introduced as the next witness; name appears to be Scott Wolstenhum/Wolston-Hum in the transcript.
Scott Wolston-Hum — Scott Wolston-Hum, superintendent of Bonneville School District 93, testifies in support of the bill by explaining the district’s virtual school program and its development. He describes how Bonneville joined other Idaho virtual schools, created a public-school online pathway staffed by Idaho-certified educators, and later partnered with Overture Learning to expand family choice and curriculum flexibility while prioritizing quality over quantity. He says the district already evaluates online teachers similarly to brick-and-mortar teachers and that the bill aligns with existing practice by promoting transparency and accountability. He closes by relaying Boundary County Superintendent Jan Baer’s support and urging a do-pass recommendation.
Terry Sorensen — Terry Sorensen, executive director of the Idaho Home Learning Academy, testifies in support of parent choice and personalized education. He describes the academy’s growth to more than 7,600 Idaho students and explains that it balances state requirements with flexibility for families. Sorensen says the virtual public education bill is the next step in that evolution and reflects recommendations from the Office of Performance Evaluation report. He commends the legislators who drafted the bill for their collaborative approach, emphasizing that it balances accountability, transparency, and parent choice. He closes by urging that the bill’s intent be honored and thanking the committee for the opportunity to speak in support of it.
Kevin Cook — Representative Pickett is repeatedly addressed during a continuous discussion of the bill. The exchange covers the bill’s drafting, the need to keep it flexible and responsive to concerns, and follow-up questions about the bill’s language, scope, and the absence of certain stakeholders. The discussion remains focused on the same legislative issue and builds as a coherent back-and-forth.
Kevin Cook — Explained that unanimous consent was needed to withdraw his motion and then requested withdrawal of his motion on House Bill 588.
Kevin Cook — The chair called on Representative Nelson after the unanimous-consent vote.
Kevin Cook — Thanked for taking over at the beginning of the meeting.
Cindy Carlson — One of the committee members present; no specific statement attributed in this section.
Van Burtenshaw — One of the committee members present; no specific statement attributed in this section.