James Woodward — James Woodward recalled a school sit-down strike from his youth, noting that although they were protesting not getting President’s Day off, the experience of being able to express themselves felt positive. He then reflected on the debate and questioned whether the issue needed to be legislated, indicating he would vote against the bill. The later mentions record his roll-call votes as no.
Kevin Cook — Vice Chair votes no; name appears as Handy in transcript, likely a transcription error.
Kevin Cook — Recorded as voting yes.
Tammy Nichols — During the garbled roll-call vote, Tammy Nichols’ name appears with transcription errors ('Ehart' and 'Peeley'). The record shows conflicting or duplicated vote entries, including both 'no' and 'yes' in one instance and 'no' in another.
Tammy Nichols — Recorded as voting yes.
Steve Tanner — Introduced himself as representing District 13 and asked for materials to be distributed.
Steve Tanner — Responds that he is not sure of the distinction and invites clarification.
Steve Tanner — Explains that Idaho school districts do not, in his view, currently allow parents to excuse absences for protest walkouts.
Sierra Clark — Sierra Clark testified in support of the bill, identifying herself as being from District 25 and chair of Moms for Liberty in Twin Falls County. She stated that protest-related absences should be marked unexcused and argued that the bill does not restrict free speech. She was also introduced as the first witness to testify by telephone.
Nolan Jarvis — Nolan Jarvis testified against the bill, identifying himself as a District 4 student and describing a 2023 student walkout he helped organize around a levy-related issue. He explained that hundreds of students participated and argued that attendance penalties would discourage student participation and could create safety concerns.
Olivia Luna — Olivia Luna was introduced as the next witness, then identified herself as representing District 17 and serving as president of Babe Vote, a nonprofit focused on voter registration and civic engagement. She later responded to questions about whether Babe Vote organizes protests or walkouts.
Ms. Luna — Ms. Luna was introduced and then explained that while Babe Vote students have been involved in recent walkouts around the state, Babe Vote does not directly organize those events. Instead, students come to the organization for logistical help and additional resources.
Nathan Zimmerman — Nathan Zimmerman, a fifth-generation Idahoan and Boise State freshman from District 21, testified in opposition to House Bill 794. He said his experience volunteering with the Idaho Special Olympics since seventh grade shaped his commitment to inclusion and civic engagement. He argued the bill is vague and could wrongly eliminate excused absences for volunteer work with organizations like Special Olympics if they are swept into the language about groups known to engage in political protests. He also objected to the provision treating political-action absences as full-day absences that would count against a school’s average daily attendance, saying it would unfairly penalize students for civic engagement and could treat a walkout more harshly than other missed class time, such as a family trip.
Janie Ward-Engelking — A representative is referenced in the question, but the transcript appears to mishear the name as 'Representative Gallivie/Gallivese.'
Janie Ward-Engelking — Representative Galviz raises concerns about the bill’s practical and legal implications for school districts, questioning how it would align with Tinker v. Des Moines and student protest rights during the school day. He then follows up with a technical applicability concern, noting that charters are not mentioned in the bill and that the definition of school district may create compliance issues because districts, rather than charters, would be the entities expected to concede and comply.
Janie Ward-Engelking — Recorded as voting no.
Ms. Hardy — Ms. Hardy explained that decisions about missing school for protests would be left to parents and students, especially for students who are 18. She described the attendance system in her former West Ada School District high school as having three categories—unexcused absence, truancy, and excused absence—and said that when she participated in a walkout at age 18, she called herself out and received an unexcused absence. She added that she had never seen a school grant excused absences for walkouts and suggested protests should be planned after school rather than during school time.
Ms. Hardy — Referenced as having made comments supporting or informing the discussion.
Christina Hardy — Christina Hardy testified in support of House Bill 794 as a parent and taxpayer, arguing that organized student walkouts during class time disrupt instruction, force staff to divert from regular duties, and waste school resources. She said the bill would provide needed guidance to schools, similar to how districts waited for state direction on the bathroom issue, and emphasized that it is a light-touch measure that does not outright ban anything but simply removes attendance for the day to discourage walkouts. She concluded by urging passage of the bill.
Cruz Beezer — Cruz Beezer is introduced and then testifies in opposition to the bill as a District 17 student involved in walkouts. He explains that the walkout was scheduled during the last 20 minutes of the school day, during advisory, so students could protest while minimizing disruption and avoiding educational penalties. He also argues that the bill conflicts with state law and that penalizing walkouts improperly links school staff to a political movement. After his testimony, he answers brief procedural questions about parental permission and why the protest was timed near the end of the day. The segment ends with Jen Beezer identifying him as her child and praising his testimony and protest as an example of democratic participation.
Jen Beezer — Jen Beezer, speaking virtually as a Boise parent, testifies in opposition to the bill. She says her son Cruz’s recent walkout was an example of civic participation and that she views his testimony and activism as part of democratic engagement. She argues the bill infringes on her parental rights and First Amendment protections, says she has excused her children from school when she believes it is appropriate, and states she would defend her position before the school board.
Quinn Perry — Quinn Perry was introduced as the next testifier and then testified, identifying herself as the deputy director of the Idaho School Boards Association and speaking in opposition to the legislation.
Ms. Perry — Perry is thanked for her testimony.
Ms. Perry — Responded to the question by explaining the Tinker standard.
Ms. Perry — Clarified that excused and unexcused absences both count against ADA and district attendance policies.
Ms. Perry — Referenced as having been asked a question earlier.
Amanda Reid — Introduced as the next witness.
Amanda Reed / Amanda Reid — Identified herself as a District 17 resident and representative of the Idaho chapter of the Sierra Club.
Christy Zito — The chair indicates this is the time for questions before Representative Tanner gives closing remarks.
Christy Zito — Indicates he will make closing remarks after questions.
Christy Zito — The sponsor is asked to explain how the legislation fits with existing law.
Christy Zito — Says he would need more research on Tinker and is surprised by the suggestion that the conduct would be supported.
Christy Zito — Says he does not know whether the bill conflicts with Tinker and would need to be more familiar with it.
Christy Zito — Responds that the bill would apply to charter schools but not private schools.
Christy Zito — Responds that charters are public schools and suggests the bill would apply to them as written.
Christy Zito — Begins closing remarks and says the bill does not restrict free speech.
Christy Zito — States the bill does not restrict free speech and says protest walkouts would be counted as unexcused absences.
Christy Zito — Reiterates that walkouts will be counted as unexcused absences and references comments from Ms. Hardy and Ms. Clark.
Christy Zito — Cites a handout showing a walkout at 12:20 p.m. involving over 100 Skyline High School students.
Christy Zito — Argues the issue is not limited to a few students or the end of the day and references comments from Mr. Beezer.
Christy Zito — Concludes that the bill does not silence speech but prohibits leaving class during the day to protest.
Christy Zito — States support for the bill and says Tinker v. Des Moines is a different situation.
Christy Zito — Christy Zito first stated that she did not see constitutional issues with the bill and focused on how absences are reported. The discussion then moved into the roll-call vote, where several members were called and recorded, including repeated references to Hostetler voting yes as the roll call continued.
Ms. Clark — Referenced as having made comments supporting or informing the discussion.
Mr. Beezer — Referenced as having commented that the last 20 minutes of class are important for catching up on missed work.
Carrie Semmelroth — Argued that the bill is unconstitutional because it singles out free speech and the committee has not shown a legitimate and significant state interest.
Carrie Semmelroth — Recorded as voting no.
Van Burtenshaw — Recorded as voting yes.
Dave Lent — The chair is speaking to the committee and moving the meeting forward.
Dave Lent — The chairman is referenced in Price's remarks.