Dave Lent — Referenced in connection with the honey rules and statutory specifics.
Dave Lent — Referenced as having said a small amount moved under ISDA.
Dave Lent — Closed by reiterating that the bill was not the original DOGE Task Force recommendation and came after discussions with honey stakeholders.
Dave Lent — Said honey stakeholders likely could not attend because they are taking care of bees and described the bill as a compromise.
Dave Lent — Explained that a memorandum of understanding already exists between ISDA and the Honey Commission and referenced the 2013 'funny honey' battles.
Dave Lent — Said the misdemeanor is likely gone, referenced the 2013 'funny honey' battles, and noted that active beekeepers were consulted.
Dave Lent — Repeated that the misdemeanor likely no longer exists and that active beekeepers were among those consulted.
Dave Lent — Asked for committee support for House Bill 826.
Dave Lent — Asked whether he would carry House Bill 826 on the floor.
Dave Lent — Introduced Senate Bill 1242 and explained it is a cleanup bill removing obsolete and duplicative provisions.
Dave Lent — Explained that Senate Bill 1242 removes obsolete definitions, repeals an old statute, and cleans up duplicative public records language.
Dave Lent — Asked whether he would carry Senate Bill 1242 on the floor, then introduced Senate Bill 1243.
Dave Lent — Explained that Senate Bill 1243 cleans up obsolete language related to the Soil and Water Commission and Idaho One Plan.
Dave Lent — Explained that the executive branch brought forward the cleanup bill and worked with relevant agencies and DFM.
Dave Lent — Was named as the floor sponsor for Senate Bill 1243.
Dave Lent — Asked how the proposal would affect Purdy's business scale and marketing.
Dave Lent — Dave Lent explained and defended the bill’s core provisions, including its labeling approach, the removal of a competency test to avoid giving a false sense of security, liability limits, and the income cap, while comparing it to Chairman Ehlers’s earlier bill. He clarified that the cap follows federal small-seller treatment, that record-keeping is required for audits and inspections, and that expenses would likely be handled consistently with existing small-seller rules. He also addressed food-safety concerns by noting the bill’s temperature requirements, its distinction from commercial-space operations, and its reliance on consumer choice and seller responsibility before concluding his remarks and opening the floor for questions.
Travis Jones — Travis Jones, executive director of the Idaho Honey Industry Association, testified about the association’s role and membership, then explained that IHIA and the commission initially had concerns but worked productively with Representative Ehlers to reach agreement on the language in House Bill 826, including the “funny honey” enforcement provision. He added that the bill codifies an existing MOU between the commission and ISDA and stated that IHIA supports the bill.
Mr. Jones — Mr. Jones responds to committee questions about the honey bill, explaining that much of it is code cleanup and incorporation of existing standards into code. He discusses changes to Title 22, Section 2810 on sampling and analysis, the removal of certain references and good manufacturing practice rules, and notes that the department relies on U.S. standards for grades of extracted honey. He also addresses concerns about the old misdemeanor penalty for adulteration, saying he shares the concern, and references the industry’s efforts and stakeholder discussions that helped shape the compromise.
Ron Taylor — Asked what happens to the rest of the honey rules and whether they are staying in statute or moving to ISDA.
Ron Taylor — Asked whether the relevant Soil and Water group agreed with removing the language.
Ron Taylor — Made the motion to send Senate Bill 1243 to the floor with a do pass recommendation.
Ron Taylor — Representative Nelson asked whether catfish are included under the bill’s fish-products language and followed up by explaining that, in his district, fish farming is significant because of hot water springs, questioning why catfish appear to be excluded.
Ron Taylor — Ron Taylor asks a series of related questions about where the bill draws the line on exemptions, especially around dairy products and backyard production. He expresses concern about food safety and listeria, and asks how the committee can encourage backyard producers and animal-share arrangements while still protecting public health.
Carrie Semmelroth — Asked a clarification question.
Carrie Semmelroth — Asked whether inspection authority also covers labeling, retail sales, and container contents, and whether that changes under ISDA.
Carrie Semmelroth — Said contents, containers, and labeling are different issues and asked whether the ISDA change is new.
Carrie Semmelroth — Expanded on the standards discussion and noted that Scott Hamilton is involved with the Honey Association and a national organization.
Carrie Semmelroth — Expressed concern that the bill began as a DOGE bill and might affect small growers.
Carrie Semmelroth — Said she is concerned about DOGE-style cuts affecting important issues for small growers.
Carrie Semmelroth — Voiced concern about labeling the bill as code cleanup and then moved to send House Bill 826 to the floor with a do pass recommendation.
Carrie Semmelroth — Said she would support the motion but expressed concern about expanding enforcement and creating unnecessary legislation.
Julie VanOrden — Was called on first for questions.
Julie VanOrden — Representative Leavitt asked whether the bill would conflict with existing laws governing raw dairy products, and the response noted that large dairies are regulated differently, referencing her dairy-country district.
Ms. Sheila Millett — Had signed up to testify on House Bill 826, but was inadvertently skipped.
Nicholas Purdy — Nicholas Purdy testified in support of the legislation, identifying himself as representing Piquipu Livestock and serving as vice chair of Fair Idaho. He explained that his cow-calf operation does not currently finish its own beef because it is too costly and burdensome under existing federal regulations, but the bill could remove barriers and allow them to finish cattle again, potentially creating savings and benefits for the community. He noted that cattle prices are currently high and that the operation is beginning to pay down debt. In response to the discussion, he clarified that his 800-head operation would not put all cattle into the program at once, but would start small and continue using existing sales channels like Superior while creating a secondary market path. He concluded by reaffirming his support and offering to answer questions.
Dan Ratliff — Dan Ratliff testified in support of the bill, saying he had supported it from the start. He described his own experience trying to enter the grass-fed/direct beef market, noting that after complying with the requirements, the costs made it uneconomical for both producers and customers. He said his operation now produces direct-consumer beef and argued the bill could reduce barriers for younger generations and smaller operations, helping them make a living and participate in Idaho agriculture. The chair then thanked him and closed his testimony without questions.
Holly Condi — Holly Condi testified on behalf of Fair Idaho as policy chair, describing the organization’s support for independent farmers, producers, and the local food system. She said consumers want access to local foods and better information about where food comes from, how it is grown, and what is in it. She added that she is personally willing to pay more for locally grown vegetables and argued that the legislation would restore and expand access to local food markets, keeping money in the community. She closed by asking for a yes vote.
Elizabeth Kriner — Elizabeth Kriner testified on behalf of Food Northwest, a tri-state trade association representing food companies in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. She explained that Food Northwest cannot support the bill because of unresolved food safety concerns, particularly the labeling provisions, which do not require a label to go home with the consumer. She noted that earlier language had included a competency test, which was removed, and said such a test is important for time- and temperature-controlled foods. She also argued that the bill penalizes poor recordkeeping but does not address foodborne illness outbreaks with comparable consequences or training requirements. In addition, she raised the issue of an income cap for direct-to-consumer sellers, while emphasizing that Food Northwest still supports food entrepreneurs and the broader food economy despite opposing this bill.
Elizabeth Kriner — Referenced as a prior testifier from the red meat industry.
Dexton Lake — Dexton Lake testified on behalf of the Idaho Farm Bureau in support of the bill, noting it was only his second time speaking before House Ag. He identified himself, said he appreciated the opportunity to testify, and emphasized that the bill is largely code cleanup. He explained that it updates archaic Idaho code language, including the outdated 'one car load' limit for direct-to-consumer fresh potato sales, and said the measure would open markets and better inform consumers. He also noted that requiring labeling every unit was not practical during interim work on the bill.
Pachi Larcia Phillips — Pachi Larcia Phillips testified on behalf of the Idaho Cattle Association and Idaho Wool Growers Association, speaking about animal shares and urging responsible, conscientious language in the bill.
Dave Lent — Was invited to present House Bill 826.
Dave Lent — Introduced House Bill 826 and explained that it moves regulatory functions from the Honey Commission to ISDA.
Dave Lent — Explained that the bill aligns the Honey Commission with other agriculture commissions by moving regulatory duties to ISDA while leaving marketing and publicity with the commission.
Dave Lent — Was asked to explain what problem the bill solves.
Dave Lent — Explained that the $10,000 fine already exists in Idaho Code and said industry representatives and Honey Commission board members were involved in discussions.
Dave Lent — Clarified that the Honey Commission remains intact and only one duty is moving to ISDA.
Dave Lent — Met with the association and others to walk through the bill.
Dave Lent — Referenced as having said a small amount had moved under ISDA.