Dave Lent — As chair, Dave Lent outlines the committee’s process for the morning, including possible motions on whether to move the bill forward, and asks Representatives Pickett and Galavis/Galviz to come forward to provide their input.
Dave Lent — Throughout this portion of the hearing, Dave Lent is repeatedly addressed as the chair or chairman while the committee transitions into testimony and proceeds through questioning. Speakers refer to him as Mr. Chairman, Chairman Lent, Senator Lent, and similar variants as they move between witnesses and discussion of course fees, but the underlying theme remains the same: procedural address to the committee chair during the hearing.
Christy Zito — Representative Zito yields to Representative Galavis to clarify the bill language, especially the intent behind the 'not entirely virtual' provision. Galavis explains that the language is meant to address virtual programs operating on their own, confirms the off-ramp exists, and then expands on how the fiscal reduction comes from restructuring programs and limiting access by grade level or school type.
Christy Zito — The chair recognized Senator Zito after a mistaken reference to Senator Carlson.
Christy Zito — Recognized in the chair's call sequence.
Christy Zito — Responded that, to her knowledge, no code or administrative rule had been broken.
Christy Zito — Reiterated that no code or administrative rule had been broken and asked whether the committee was starting over.
Christy Zito — Is thanked by the chair before the next speaker continues.
Christy Zito — Said she opposes the motion because digital learning and IDLA are important for rural students.
Christy Zito — Identified as opposing the motion for the record vote.
James Woodward — Referenced as having discussed the language with the speaker the previous night.
James Woodward — Perry referenced Dr. Simmons as sharing advocacy against passing academic fees to students.
Kevin Cook — Kevin Cook asks whether section 33-1020B provides an off-ramp that would allow schools, including brick-and-mortar or fully virtual schools, to pay for or send students to IDLA.
Kevin Cook — Senator Cook questions Dr. Simmons about House Bill 940, asking whether he supports the bill as written and opposes the amendment. The discussion continues into the broader fiscal impact, with Cook asking what the combined effect of the JFAC bill and House Bill 940 would be, including the $13 million cut and the resulting funding gap, which he describes as roughly an additional $3 million needed to make up the difference.
Kevin Cook — Senator Cook is recognized in the chair’s call sequence, with a brief correction/confirmation of the name, and then speaks to thank the chairman and move House Bill 940 to the Senate floor with a due pass recommendation.
Tammy Nichols — Tammy Nichols asks follow-up questions about the fiscal note reduction amount of $13,385,455, seeking clarification on how it was calculated and requesting more detail on the line-item reductions, including examples of how the reductions were determined.
Tammy Nichols — Senator Nichols asks a series of related questions about the bill’s fee structure and course costs, including whether the fees were already being paid or set by the board, what non-graduation courses are included, what the current elective course fee costs are, whether caps currently exist, how those costs are determined, and whether removing caps would give IDLA more flexibility on pricing.
Tammy Nichols — Asked how the bill addresses concerns about double dipping and LSO's prior concerns.
Tammy Nichols — Asked the follow-up question about double dipping.
Tammy Nichols — Asked why fee amounts were being codified.
Tammy Nichols — Expressed concern about codifying fee amounts because districts differ and future costs are uncertain.
Tammy Nichols — Perry said she understood Nichols's concern but explained that the House wanted the provision included.
Tammy Nichols — Asked whether the program had ever violated Idaho Code or IDAPA rules.
Tammy Nichols — Said she would support the motion but reserved the right to change her vote on the floor.
Andy Grover — Testimony is about to begin with Andy Grover as the first witness.
Scott Muir — The chair introduces Scott Muir as the next witness, noting he is expected to join by video and identifying him as being from Soda Springs. When he does not respond, the chair remarks that he should be coming in and adds that he is a superintendent at Soda Springs who was opposed to the proposal.
Craig Woods — Craig Woods is identified as an in-person witness and then begins his testimony, introducing himself as the superintendent of the Emmett School District and stating that he is speaking in opposition to the Senate amendments to House Bill 940.
Janie Ward-Engelking — Janie Ward-Engelking asks for clarification on the bill’s fiscal note, including the $13.4 million amount and what it covers, requests more detail on the proposed fiscal note reductions, asks for examples of legislatively mandated classes that received no funding, and follows up by asking where dual credits fit within the bill.
Janie Ward-Engelking — Senator Ward-Engelking asks about IDLA enrollment projections, including when they are submitted, and then follows up on how the appropriation bill and intent language would negatively affect IDLA. The response notes that projections are submitted in September of the previous year, and the discussion continues into the potential impact of the budget language on the program.
Janie Ward-Engelking — Said she agrees the cuts are unnecessary and hurt students, but will support the motion because the appropriation bill's intent language is worse.
Jeff Simmons — Jeff Simmons is identified as the next witness after Craig Woods.
Dr. Jeff Simmons — Dr. Jeff Simmons, superintendent of IDLA, testifies that the bill would significantly cut IDLA’s budget, reduce the number of students it can serve, and limit support for students who rely on IDLA for access to courses. He explains that course fees are often passed on to families, that custom sections help fill gaps in school offerings, and that dual credit fee waivers were intended to preserve access to higher education and career pathways. He also clarifies questions about cost caps and says the bill would reduce IDLA’s flexibility to respond to changing needs, including enrollment forecasting and future program planning.
Dr. Jason Moss — Dr. Jason Moss, superintendent of Gray School District, testified in opposition to the amendments to House Bill 940. He urged the committee to reject the amendments, arguing that enrollment thresholds would create scheduling nightmares and reduce students’ access to electives in small schools. He concluded by saying the legislature missed the mark and should return the bill to its original form.
Jeff Gee — Jeff Gee, superintendent of the Riley School District, testified in support of IDLA as an essential resource for rural students. He explained that in small communities, schools serve as gateways to broader experiences and opportunities beyond the town, including academics, trades, entrepreneurship, and leadership. He also cited district usage data, noting that 109 Riley students were enrolled in IDLA classes that spring and pointing to digital literacy offerings through a custom section.
Catherine Larson — Catherine Larson is introduced and then gives opening testimony defending IDLA as an extremely successful program that fills an important need. She argues that it supports Idaho teachers, keeps money in Idaho, and that the need for these services will not disappear; if local programs are reduced, districts may turn to out-of-state solutions.
Quinn Perry — Quinn Perry, Deputy Director of the Idaho School Boards Association, testified in support of preserving IDLA funding and cautioned against cuts, describing IDLA as a lifeline that helps districts offer hard-to-staff courses and even associate’s degree opportunities. She later responded to questions about the funding structure, rejected the characterization of the issue as “double dipping,” and explained how IDLA and career technical education funding work. In follow-up discussion, she addressed concerns about codifying fee amounts, acknowledged the uncertainty around setting those amounts in statute, and continued engaging with senators’ questions on the issue.
Quinn Perry — The speaker announces that Quinn Perry will be leaving and offers thanks for her leadership in education and her support of public education and students in Idaho, adding that her expertise and experience will be missed and that she will be difficult to replace.
Cindy Carlson — Perry referenced Senator Carlson in an example about a student in Riggins who was able to attend Dartmouth because of IDLA classes.
Cindy Carlson — Senator Carlson opposed the motion, saying the bill needed amendments and that amendments would improve it. She also criticized the legislative process, noting the bill skipped House Education and Ways and Means, went straight to second reading and the floor, and received very little public testimony, making it feel rushed. Later, she was identified as one of the members opposing the motion for the record vote.
Ms. Perry — Testified that, to her understanding, the program had not violated Idaho Code or IDAPA rules.