Mike Moyle — Representative Mike Moyle of District 10 is invited to the podium, introduces himself, and begins discussing House Bill 842.
Mike Moyle — The sponsor concludes his presentation and stands for questions.
Jason Monks — Sought clarification on the motion.
Jason Monks — Asked whether the motion would allow additional testimony tomorrow or only committee debate.
Jason Monks — Said he had no problem with additional testimony but wanted the Speaker's view.
Jason Monks — Said he wanted to support the Speaker and asked for his take.
Jason Monks — Said he might vote no to preserve the option to change his vote on the floor.
Jason Monks — Said he wanted to briefly address concerns about the initiative process and the court ruling before a vote.
Jason Monks — Argued that the local initiative process is statutory, not constitutional, so changing the statute would avoid a constitutional issue and not conflict with the 1993 ruling.
Jason Monks — Recorded as voting aye in the roll call.
Vito Barbieri — Representative Barbieri asks how the bill will specifically help existing property owners, seeking clarification on the direct benefits to property owners.
Vito Barbieri — Representative Barbieri asked Mr. Russell to clarify the distinction between using the initiative process to lower taxes and the court case indicating initiatives cannot be used to lower budgets, seeking to understand how the two concepts differ.
Vito Barbieri — Said he saw no point in delaying and was prepared to move the bill forward.
Vito Barbieri — Made a substitute motion to send House Bill 842 to the floor with a due pass recommendation.
Vito Barbieri — His vote is called as part of the roll call.
Seth Grigg — Seth Grigg, executive director of the Idaho Association of Counties, testifies that counties have one main concern with the bill: the added initiative language. He argues that the Idaho Constitution limits initiatives to legislation and that county budget approval is administrative rather than legislative, citing Weldon v. Bonner County Tax Coalition as relevant case law. Based on that precedent, he says the bill’s initiative provision could be struck down in court, which is the counties’ primary objection. He adds that counties have long supported reverting to the preliminary levy rate, but remain concerned about the initiative language.
Greg Timminsky / Greg Timmonski (questionable) — Introduced as a witness from Middleton and the Star Fire District, representing the Idaho Fire Chiefs Association; supports fixing House Bill 389 as discussed by Representative Moyle.
Greg Timminsky — Greg Timminsky testified that the Star Fire District has repeatedly failed to secure needed levy increases, leaving public safety struggling and in need of action. He said the bill is a step in the right direction to address these public safety and growth-related pressures in Idaho.
Kelly Packer — Kelly Packer, executive director of the Association of Idaho Cities, testified in opposition to the bill while explaining that the association had spent years trying to fix House Bill 389 and now seeks specific changes rather than outright repeal. She outlined requested amendments such as removing the preliminary levy rate, adjusting or removing caps for smaller taxing districts, and changing construction percentage limits. Packer disputed claims that only a small number of districts were affected, saying the Tax Commission’s L2 forms undercount impacts because they only show districts that would have exceeded the cap. She argued the cap has caused commercial projects and subdivisions to be turned away, and said even the proposed 15% cap would still leave many cities unable to approve small developments. She defended foregone as an important fiscal tool that encourages responsibility, warned that losing it would worsen the problem, and noted concerns about the initiative process and the difficulty small cities face in realizing budget authority. While acknowledging some helpful provisions in the bill, she concluded that the Association of Idaho Cities still opposes it because it does not adequately address the needs of small cities and their ability to fund services like roads and emergency services.
Charlie Shepherd — Charlie Shepherd asked Kelly Packer to specify her concerns about the initiative provision, and the exchange continued as Packer responded to his question.
Charlie Shepherd — Representative Shepherd was recorded as voting yes in the roll call; the second mention appears to be the same member with a slightly inconsistent transcription of the name.
Russ Hendricks — Russ Hendricks was introduced as the next witness and then testified on behalf of the Idaho Farm Bureau, stating support for House Bill 842. He focused on the bill’s initiative provision, arguing that Idaho law allows local governments to seek voter approval to exceed caps, but does not provide a corresponding process for citizens to initiate a reduction, making the framework one-sided.
Ilana Rubel — Referenced as having made a similar point earlier.
Mr. Greg — Referenced as having raised the Idaho Supreme Court case about Weldon.
Rob Beiswenger — Representative Birch was called on to question Mr. Hendricks and asked whether voters already have a chance to weigh in on city council budget decisions through regular elections. The exchange continued with a response acknowledging the question as fair, keeping the discussion focused on whether elections serve as a mechanism for public input on budgets.
Mr. Hendricks — Mr. Hendricks is thanked after his testimony, then addressed by Representative Birch in a question, and later thanked again as public testimony closes.
the fire chief — Referenced as having testified in support of the bill's rationale.
Jeff Cornilles — Makes a motion to hold House Bill 842 in committee for a time certain.
Cornel Rasor — Asked to speak to the motion and said he had not received a response from his city in the last few days.
Cornel Rasor — Said he had not heard back from his mayor or council and asked for time to get input; referenced former mayor Rick Hogaboon.
Cornel Rasor — Was said to have spoken with the chair in advance about making the motion.
Cornel Rasor — Was thanked after the chair stated he had no objection to the motion.
Cornel Rasor — Was called on for further discussion or debate.
Cornel Rasor — Said he would not support the substitute motion and favored the original motion because a 24-hour delay would not matter.
Cornel Rasor — Was described as sincere in asking for the delay.
Cornel Rasor — Recorded as voting no in the roll call.
Chris Bruce — Was called on as the discussion moved toward a roll call vote.
John Gannon — Representative Ganon expressed support for the bill, highlighting the importance of the initiative process for city voters. He then participated in the roll call vote, voting yes, and announced that House Bill 8 passed by an 8-6-1 margin.
Kyle Harris — Voted no in the roll call.
Jeff Ehlers — Recorded as voting yes in the roll call.
Jerald Raymond — Recorded as voting no in the roll call.
Edward Hill — Recorded as voting yes in the roll call.
Britt Raybould — Her vote is called as part of the roll call.
John Shirts — His vote is called as part of the roll call.
Richard Cheatum — His vote is called as part of the roll call.
Chris Mathias — His vote is called as part of the roll call; he votes no.
Mike Moyle — The sponsor responds to questions and the committee moves to public testimony.
Mike Moyle — Referenced as having discussed House Bill 389 and the Star Fire District example.
Mike Moyle — Speaker Moyle was thanked for bringing the bill forward, and his earlier point about higher approval thresholds for city and county tax-related measures was referenced as part of the same discussion.
Mike Moyle — Speaker Moyle told the committee that the testimony they had already heard would not change by the next day and left the decision to the committee, while also being referenced as the speaker whose position was being considered in the discussion.