Ben Toews — Representative Wheeler explains that the bill’s good-faith effort language requires documented outreach and follow-up to identify and consider qualified applicants. He then clarifies that the city council retains control over the employee, including employment decisions and compensation, and notes that the current language could be read to include firing but does not say so explicitly. He indicates he would not object to adding a few words to make that authority clearer, though he is unsure of the best drafting approach.
Mark Harris — Is identified as the next member to ask a question.
Mark Harris — Asks who has authority to fire the employee if the city council approves the appointment.
Mark Harris — Says she would like the bill to clearly allow the council to fire the person.
Mark Harris — Argues the bill should clearly allow the council to fire the employee.
Mark Harris — Is recognized next to speak, though the transcript likely misidentifies the member name.
Mark Harris — Argues the bill already covers firing through the disciplinary-action language and does not need amendment.
Mark Harris — Says disciplinary action already includes firing and no amendment is needed.
Mark Harris — Asks who supervises a city attorney if the mayor and city attorney are related under the bill’s requirements.
Lance Sayers — Lance Sayers, speaking for the Association of Idaho Cities, explains that city staff serve at the will of the mayor and council, making it appropriate for further action to be taken against employees when unlawful conduct or needed discipline arises. He says cities have broadly raised this issue, supports the bill’s approach, and is open to working with LSO on drafting changes. He adds that city attorneys typically serve under contract and are renewed with mayor and council involvement, concluding that the city council should have authority to weigh in on employees just as much as the mayor.
Donald Powell — Donald Powell, mayor of St. Anthony, testifies about several personal examples showing how nepotism and hiring restrictions affected his city. He explains that his son was prevented from helping cover police shifts and from being considered for a street department opening, and that a son-in-law hire was also blocked because of the family relationship. He says the council supported the hires, but he felt constrained by the law and frustrated by the outcome, which led him to bring the issue to the Association of Idaho Cities and testify about it.
Rocky Hill — Powell refers to Rocky Hill as his son-in-law and explains that, despite Hill’s relevant public works and plumbing experience, he could not be hired because of the family relationship.
Robert Berlin — Robert Berlin, mayor of Roberts and an AIC board member representing small cities, testifies about the challenges small cities face in hiring and retaining part-time employees, including situations where local hiring concerns arise in close-knit communities. He explains that these issues repeatedly come up for the small cities he represents and argues that elected officials are already accountable through frequent elections. In response to concerns about oversight and nepotism, he emphasizes that small cities rely on elections every two years and separation from disciplinary authority as safeguards, and the chair then thanks him for his testimony.
James Ruchti — Berlin responds to her question about who oversees these hiring decisions.
Brent Schindler — Brent Schindler is identified during the hearing as the last person signed up to testify, with clarification that he is the mayor of Tetonia. The discussion notes that he is present, watching with a high school class, and that he has submitted written testimony, making him the likely person being referenced in the closing remarks.
Jim Guthrie — Closes testimony and asks for closing remarks.
Megan Woller — Identified as the substitute for Annie Haas and noted as being with the committee for the next week, or three days.