Barbara Ehardt — Barbara Ehardt is introduced as the representative being spoken for, and later references credit her with explaining and sponsoring the bill, including that it clarifies the ability to use the suicide hotline. The discussion stays focused on her role in the bill throughout.
Barbara Ehardt — Representative E. Hart continued a brief follow-up line of questioning about the Sheriff's Association letter, asking whether a sign stating 'women only' or 'girls only' would be enough to designate an area as women-only.
Barbara Ehardt — Begins remarks after being recognized by the chair.
Barbara Ehardt — Is called on after Representative Garner's remarks.
Barbara Ehardt — Questioned the clarity of the Sheriff's Association's suggested language and described a hypothetical scenario involving a person being asked to depart.
Barbara Ehardt — Continued arguing that the proposed language is unclear and less direct than saying someone is not supposed to be in the space.
Barbara Ehardt — Said the language does not clear anything up and puts the onus on the victim, whom she identified as women.
Barbara Ehardt — Recorded as voting yes in the roll call.
Ken McClure — Ken McClure is introduced as the first witness and then testifies on behalf of the Idaho Medical Association in support of the legislation. He continues by noting that while he supports the bill, there are still some issues not addressed that he hopes can be improved in future legislation.
Dakota Baker — Dakota Baker was introduced as a witness and then testified in support of House Bill 860. She identified herself, explained that she is a minor with parental permission to testify, and described her traumatic experiences and severe mental health struggles. She recounted calling the 988 suicide and crisis lifeline on January 6, 2025, while desperate for help, and said she was hung up on while still crying. She emphasized that House Bill 860 matters because it helps ensure young people in Idaho can reach out for help and actually receive it. The testimony concluded with a committee member thanking her for sharing her story.
Jace Woods — Jace Woods was introduced and then testified in strong support of House Bill 860. He described a personal story involving a friend in a mental health crisis and said the National Suicide Hotline had hung up because of the original bill language, requiring parental permission. He cited Idaho teen mental health concerns and argued that the current bill language could contribute to a child's death by making it harder for minors to seek help. He also said he knew multiple minors who had been hung up on during crises and urged the committee to pass House Bill 860.
Jace Woods — Jace Woods was listed as the first witness and then called again, but he was not present and did not testify.
Brian Noggle — Listed as the next witness after Jace Woods.
Brian Nagel — Brian Nagel, executive director of the Idaho Prosecuting Attorneys Association, testified in support of a minor amendment to the bill governing when prosecutors may collect time-sensitive evidence in cases involving minors. He explained that child sex abuse cases often do not involve serious bodily harm or death, but evidence such as minor injuries or STDs can be crucial to determining whether a case can be charged. He argued that the bill’s current language could unnecessarily limit prosecutors and investigators, and proposed striking the phrase "authorized by paragraph B of this subsection" from the relevant provision. He clarified that the subsection is new language and that the proposed change would narrow the restriction while preserving the ability to investigate criminal allegations involving minors.
Lee Flynn — Introduced as the final testifier after Brian Nagel.
Lee Flynn — Lee Flynn, director of Idaho Crisis and Suicide Hotline (Idaho 988), introduced the organization and explained that it has served Idahoans in crisis for more than 13 years through the 988 lifeline. She described how calls are answered or rerouted through the national 988 network when the center is at capacity, ensuring every call is taken either by Idaho staff or a backup center. Flynn emphasized that the center’s protocol is never to hang up on callers and that follow-up calls are typically made within 24 hours as an important safety check. She also explained the current legal and operational process for minor callers: staff conduct a safety assessment, determine whether the situation meets the emergency exception in current law, and if it does not, they gently wind down the call while prioritizing safety. She reassured the committee that safety is the top priority for every call, including those involving minors or high-risk situations.
Heather Scott — Questioned whether the association had been involved in negotiations earlier and whether it had spoken with the sponsor.
Heather Scott — Asked how the proposed language conflicts with current law and where the problem lies.
Heather Scott — Began to follow up after Ms. Flynn’s explanation.
Heather Scott — Asked whether the center had hung up on children and pressed for an explanation of the center’s practices.
Heather Scott — Questioned whether politics were influencing hotline decisions and asked for assurance that volunteers would help people in crisis.
Heather Scott — Pressed for assurance that the hotline would help people in crisis and said he would otherwise support defunding the program.
Heather Scott — Thanked Ms. Flynn for her work and testimony.
Heather Scott — Wrapped up by explaining why the bill language was changed and why the language was considered too vague by those dealing with the issue.
Heather Scott — Explained the purpose of the language changes, cited help from Alliance Defending Freedom, and urged the committee to support the bill now.
Heather Scott — Asked for support and indicated she would take questions before closing.
Heather Scott — Representative Scott supported the motion and used the opportunity to argue that outside groups and lobbyists should engage earlier in the legislative process instead of waiting until the 11th hour. He emphasized that legislators are the ones doing the work publicly and that stakeholders should come forward sooner on major issues.
Heather Scott — Asked Nixon Matthews whether he uses a urinal or a stall in the men's restroom.
Heather Scott — Representative Scott was called on next in the questioning sequence and then immediately began his question, asking Anthony Dollinger whether he was testifying in an individual or official capacity.
Heather Scott — Referenced as having mentioned a bill he ran last year.
Heather Scott — Makes an amended substitute motion to send the bill to the floor with no recommendation and says the sponsor spoke with prosecutors.
Heather Scott — Explained that her motion to send the bill to the floor with no recommendation was intended to preserve the bill and allow more time for members to gather information.
Heather Scott — Her motion is described as an effort to get the bill to the floor with no recommendation.
Heather Scott — Named as the member who will present the bill on the House floor; likely a transcription error for Representative Ehardt/Ehart or another member in context.
Heather Scott — Mentioned in a lighthearted comment about being an afternoon person who is just getting started.
John Gannon — Asked whether Mr. Nagel had the proposed amendment language available.
John Gannon — Asked whether staffing or funding issues could explain reports of callers not getting through.
John Gannon — Referenced as having a motion before the committee.
John Gannon — Moved to send House Bill 860 to the floor with a due pass and explained why he believed that was the best path forward.
John Gannon — Announced he had a motion and moved House Bill 860 to the floor with a due pass.
John Gannon — Explained why he thought the bill should move forward rather than go to general orders.
John Gannon — Outlined a possible Senate amendment path to address prosecutors’ concerns.
John Gannon — Asked how many additional interviews would need to be recorded under the bill.
John Gannon — Representative Gannon is called on for questions and briefly raises concern that the fiscal note does not account for the costs of creating a new misdemeanor. He follows up by asking whether the note can be revised so the impact is properly reflected.
John Gannon — Representative Gannon questioned the witness about how she could tell the person in the other stall was not female, repeating the same point in follow-up questioning. The exchange continued into the witness’s response, which also referenced Representative Gannon while addressing whether the bill should be broader, but remained tied to the same underlying incident and issue.
John Gannon — Asked whether the witness worked with the Fraternal Order of Police or the Sheriff's Association on the bill.
John Gannon — Representative Gannon asked how the proposed enforcement would work in practice, including whether police could ask someone for identification and how that might apply in a bathroom-related context.
John Gannon — Raises concerns that law enforcement was not consulted.
John Gannon — His point about indecent exposure is referenced as the subject of the response.