Melissa Wintrow — Was named as the second on the motion to approve the February 23rd, 2026 minutes.
Melissa Wintrow — Was named as the second on the motion to approve the February 24th, 2026 minutes.
Melissa Wintrow — Asked for an example of how the bill affects FQHCs and rural health care service.
Melissa Wintrow — Addressed by Mr. Malick while answering her question.
Melissa Wintrow — Was named as the second on the motion to approve the February 23rd, 2026 minutes.
Melissa Wintrow — Was named as the second on the motion to approve the February 23rd, 2026 minutes.
Shawn Dygert — Voted aye on the motion.
Mr. Malick — Mr. Malick explained that under current practice there is no clear limit on how often a federally qualified health center can request a change in scope, and that the bill would add parameters and clarify the process. He said the requests would be made annually under the legislation, noted that they are generally granted when requested, and added that the state-level statutory framework would provide needed clarity about how often and how the process would work.
Mr. Malik / Mr. Malick — Explained that the bill would create the statutory process at the state level and referenced the federal electronic submission process.
Van Burtenshaw — Senator Van Orden closed the testimony, explaining that the bill clarifies a federally driven process in state law, then cited a local clinic that went through the same process and asked for a due pass recommendation to send the bill to the floor.
Brian Lenney — Addressed in the question, though the name appears garbled and may refer to a member in the room.
Brian Lenney — A senator is called on after the supportive remarks; the name appears to be a transcription error.
Brian Lenney — Opposed the bill, saying it gives IDHW too much power and does not support it.
Brian Lenney — Referenced as sharing concerns about the bill.
Brian Lenney — Cited as sharing concerns about the bill.
Brian Lenney — Voted aye on the motion.
Christy Zito — Senator Blaylock moved to send Senate Bill 1410 to the floor with a due pass recommendation, and the motion was recorded as being made by him.
Christy Zito — Named as the second on the motion to advance House Bill 776.
Tammy Nichols — Introduced House Bill 776 and identified it as Benji's Law.
Tammy Nichols — Senator Nichols discusses the bill’s implementation with the Department of Health and Welfare, explaining that the department helped develop the measure and that it is intended to be workable and prevent past harms. The discussion then turns to how the registry process would function, with Nichols indicating that the department should handle placement and removal decisions and acknowledging possible edge cases. The exchange concludes with clarification that the bill is meant to trigger a welfare check or review rather than automatically remove a child, and the sponsor is commended for balancing child welfare concerns with parental rights.
Glenneda Zuiderveld — A person named Lindsey Wright is called for testimony, but the name is uncertain/questionable from the transcript.
Glenneda Zuiderveld — Senator Zuiderveld questioned Dr. Billingsley about how many similar Idaho cases exist beyond Baby Benji, whether the situation is truly isolated, and whether the reported cases occurred within the first year of life.
Glenneda Zuiderveld — Senator Ziderfeld followed up with Officer Gomez, asking for clarification on the meaning of 'challenged home life' and noting that a child living alone in a trailer does not necessarily indicate a challenged home life.
Glenneda Zuiderveld — Senator Kaiser argued that the bill does not adequately preserve due process and delegates too much authority, citing concerns about escalation if verification cannot be completed within 12 hours and generally stating that the bill needs further work. Another speaker later noted that Kaiser and Senator Lenny shared concerns about the bill. The sequence ends with Kaiser voting aye on the motion.
Lindsay Wright (questionable) — Called for testimony, but no response was heard.
Gabriel/Gabrielle Messick (questionable) — Introduced as the next witness; name is uncertain in the transcript.
Gabrielle Messek (questionable) — Gabrielle Messek, a hospital social worker in Nampa, testified in support of the bill based on her experience with high-risk newborn cases. She described situations involving newborns exposed to drugs, prior custody losses, abuse, neglect, criminal histories, and other warning signs such as impaired caregiving, lack of prenatal care, and unstable living conditions. She emphasized that while these families may love their children, they may still be unable to provide a reasonably safe environment, making timely child protective services response important.
Ms. Messick / Gabrielle Messek (questionable) — Ms. Messick testified that the bill could help prevent harm or death in high-risk newborn cases, referencing the community impact of baby Benji. The chair then thanked her and asked for questions, but none were raised.
Tracy Cottle — Called forward as the next witness.
Tracy Caudill — Tracy Caudill testified as a concerned citizen from District 11 about newborn Benjamin and related safety concerns. She described helping the family by arranging a meeting with Brian Lemke to assist with purchasing propane, and she concluded by urging the committee to consider stronger protections to prevent similar tragedies in the future.
Kyle Bensley / Bill Inslee / Kylie (questionable) — The chair struggles to identify the next witness; the name is unclear in the transcript.
Dr. Kylie Billingsley — Dr. Kylie Billingsley, a licensed psychologist with neuropsychological assessment training, testified that prior evaluations had identified parents as unfit and that House Bill 776 addresses a gap by creating a safety check that could help struggling families receive support earlier. Her testimony emphasized the need for early intervention and referenced severe infant injury cases in Idaho as examples of why the review is important.
Dr. Billingsley — Dr. Billingsley responded to a question about whether the situation was isolated, saying it was not isolated and that she had included a packet of roughly six to eight Idaho stories. She clarified that every case in the packet involved children who were under a year old. The exchange concluded with thanks to Dr. Billingsley for her testimony.
Nicole Egbert — Nicole Egbert was introduced as the next witness, then testified in support of House Bill 776 (Benji’s Law), sharing her story and speaking on behalf of Delphina Krakow, and was thanked after completing her remarks.
Delphina Krakow — Delphina Krakow is introduced as a local foster parent with direct ties to Baby Benji’s family and as the first foster parent for Isaiah. After learning that Benji was born into the same home, she did what was required and filed a detailed report with CPS, demonstrating that she fulfilled her responsibility by reporting the concerns.
David Gomez — The committee first works to establish audio contact with David Gomez during the virtual hearing, confirming that he can hear them. Once connected, Gomez introduces himself as a Boise County Sheriff’s Office employee and school resource officer, then begins describing his experience in Boise County, including observations about families living in remote conditions and related welfare checks.
Rob Beiswenger — Officer Gomez testified that he has seen multiple cases involving infants, including deaths, and said the bill would help him get a team on scene without violating rights. In response to questions, he explained that a challenged home life is not simply living in a trailer; instead, he looks for signs such as lack of water or basic equipment, or indications that a family is hiding or fleeing. He said that when families cooperate, officers try to help them, but if they are evasive, more careful checking may be needed based on dispatch information. He also described conditions that would raise concern but said they still would not justify a search warrant on their own without timely Health and Welfare involvement. He concluded that a rapid team response is needed so services can be provided quickly and, in severe cases, so a search warrant can be supported to protect children.
Kevin Watson — Kevin Watson testified in support of House Bill 776. He introduced himself and argued that Baby Benji’s death was not an unpredictable tragedy, explaining that adoptive families often see patterns across siblings that the system failed to connect. He said reunification should only occur when safe and that the bill is meant to require faster safety review in high-risk infant cases, not create new grounds for termination or removal. Watson cited HHS data on reoffending risk, noted that many states already allow prior termination of parental rights to be considered in new cases, and concluded that while Benji cannot be saved, the next child still can.
Mr. Watson — Mr. Watson was asked to explain the bill’s risk-factor provisions and how DHW would respond. He clarified that a priority one response means action within 24 hours, and that DHW would use the child protection list to verify risk factors, including cases where a substantiated report may place someone on the list even if they appeal. He was then asked to address how prior terminations of parental rights factor into the bill and to explain how neonatal abstinence syndrome would be reported.
Jeremy Rudolph — Jeremy Rudolph was introduced as the next testifier, then identified himself as representing foster parents across Idaho. He testified that the bill addresses known risks to newborns rather than expanding government authority.
Mr. Rudolph — Thanked after testimony; no questions from the committee.
Monique Pire — Introduced as the next testifier, likely a misspelling of Monique Perry.
Monique Perry — Identified herself as the adoptive mother of Benji's older siblings and explained why she contacted people during the baby's life.
Ms. Perry — Thanked after her testimony; no questions were asked.
Madison Conrad — Madison Conrad was introduced as the final virtual testifier and then began her testimony by identifying herself as a licensed social worker in the Treasure Valley and former child welfare caseworker, speaking in support of House Bill 776.
Madison Conrad — Madison Conrad testifies about her background in child welfare and child protection casework, describing her experience working with vulnerable infants and children and making daily safety decisions. She argues that infant and child safety should not be left to discretion because her work has shown the serious impacts of trauma, abuse, and dangerous environments. The exchange concludes with the committee thanking her and noting there are no questions.
Steven Tanner — Cited as the house sponsor who received signatures supporting the bill.
C. Grow — The discussion centers on how the Department of Health and Welfare will handle the bill’s implementation and potential caseload impacts. One speaker asks Senator Zidafel about whether the department has been consulted and how it will manage the added responsibilities, and Senator Nichols responds that they are already working with the department on the bill.
Carrie Semmelroth — Likely the senator speaking in support of the bill and its welfare-check approach.