Joe Alfieri — Acknowledged the loophole concern and said it is possible.
Joe Alfieri — Said the bill is the best attempt to prevent out-of-state corporations and entities from bringing money into Idaho, though it cannot stop it entirely.
Joe Alfieri — Responded that the bill would at least level the playing field by forcing money through Idaho entities.
Joe Alfieri — Named as a co-sponsor of the bill.
Joe Alfieri — Was asked whether he considered a family-member carve-out.
Joe Alfieri — Said he was not sure he heard the question.
Joe Alfieri — Addressed as 'Representative Valfiieri' in the transcript; the speaker is asking him about the legal resident definition and corporate donation rules.
Joe Alfieri — The response references Section C2 as the provision governing out-of-state entities and donation eligibility.
Joe Alfieri — Identified as the sponsor of RS 33385 as the committee transitions to the next item.
Joe Alfieri — Introduced RS 33385 and explained that it would require district-wide city council elections in cities over 25,000 population.
Joe Alfieri — Argued that district-wide elections would improve direct local representation and accountability in cities like Coeur d'Alene.
Joe Alfieri — Continued explaining the benefits of RS 33385 and asked for its introduction.
Lori Hartog — Lori Hartog questioned the amendment’s definition changes, asking why the bill adds out-of-state persons and revises the definition of foreign national, whether the language would improperly prohibit residents rather than citizens, and whether entities could evade the restriction by forming an Idaho corporation. She then followed up with concern that the bill’s redefinition of legal residency could conflict with federal law and Idaho tax law.
Lori Hartog — Representative Scott raised a series of related questions and concerns about whether the lands could be used for data centers or nuclear power plants, how the priority structure would work, and what effect that would have on public access. He continued pressing on the issue that much of the land is tied up and not open to the public, with his concerns about access control acknowledged.
Stephanie Mickelsen — Representative Stephanie Mickelsen acknowledged that out-of-state influence in elections is becoming significant, but argued that much of it comes through independent expenditures that cannot be limited under Citizens United. She questioned how the bill would address out-of-state money routed through Idaho entities, said the proposal is only a starting point that may need revision later, and expressed concern that the bill could disadvantage in-state candidates and businesses with multi-state interests while leaving independent expenditures untouched.
Stephanie Mickelsen — Mentioned in the transcript text as 'Representative Petsky,' likely a transcription error referring to the speaker responding to the question about land uses.
Stephanie Mickelsen — Mentioned in the transcript text as 'Representative Pettsky,' one of the members being thanked before public testimony began.
Brent Crane — Brent Crane said he did not object to the general goal of giving Idahoans more control over elections, though he questioned some of the influence of Citizens United. He then commented on the motion, noting that the Supreme Court has consistently allowed out-of-state U.S. citizen contributions in elections and expressing concern that the bill could face constitutional problems, especially if it were aimed at such contributions rather than foreign nationals. He added that he would support the idea in principle but worried it might be struck down, and agreed with an example by saying he has relatives in New York who would be similarly affected.
Brent Crane — Representative Crane was called on by the chair and asked what percentage of the $3.9 billion endowment is distributed annually.
Brent Crane — Representative Brent Crane introduced the final RS on the agenda, explaining that it would create a shot clock for initial plan reviews. He noted that the proposal would expand the existing 30-day review deadline, which had previously applied only to public schools, to include public works projects and other submissions. He then made a Rule 80 declaration, stating that he has a public works license.
Monica Church — Representative Church asked whether the bill should include a carve-out for family members, using the example of an aunt in Utah, and clarified that her concern was whether such a nonresident relative would still be allowed to donate to her niece's campaign.
Joe Palmer — Representative Joe Palmer discussed concerns about applying Idaho’s rules consistently to out-of-state campaign contributions and business donations. He questioned whether an out-of-state corporation would need an Idaho employee or residency to donate to an Idaho candidate, raised the possibility of using a P.O. box, and broadened the point to warn about influence from other states on Idaho policy.
Joe Palmer — Representative Palmer was recognized and then moved to introduce RS 33373.
Heather Scott — Representative Heather Scott is mentioned in a brief exchange where the transcript appears to misstate the name as 'Representative Raibold'; the context indicates the intended reference is Representative Britt Raybould.
Heather Scott — Identified as the next committee member asking a question after the explanation of distributions.
James Ruchti — James Ruchti is referenced repeatedly as the committee discussion turns to public access and land board authority. After several transcription variants of his name, he explains that the existing language already allows the Land Board to do what was discussed, then elaborates that current law does not require public access and that the amendment is intended to balance public access with revenue generation. The exchange concludes with him being thanked as the discussion transitions to testimony.
Eric — Called forward to begin public testimony.
Eric Wyseth — Eric Wyseth, executive director of the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Association, testified in support of the RS/H.J.R. 8 proposal. He explained that much of Idaho’s outdoor recreation occurs on Idaho Department of Lands property and argued that the constitutional amendment would strengthen the economic impact of those lands while recognizing their cultural value to Idaho. He concluded by stating that the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Association supports the measure and asked the committee to send it forward with a do-pass recommendation.
Ann Long — Ann Long was called forward, introduced herself as a resident of Horseshoe Bend, Idaho, and testified in support of the resolution. She described the value of recreation experiences on state/public lands, noting that her family’s recreation business serves about 1,500 people each summer and emphasizing the personal and transformational importance of those experiences. She concluded by urging support for the resolution, after which the chair thanked her and asked for questions.
Kelly Anthon — Representative Raibold was invited to wrap up and used the opportunity to explain a technical correction to the bill. She noted that an earlier draft had left the ballot question in section two outdated and requested that the committee update the language, specifically replacing it with wording referring to "ongoing revenue generation followed by public access."
Mike Pohanka — He was recognized for a motion.
Shawn Dygert — Representative Dygert was recognized and then moved to introduce RS 33-415 with an amendment and send it to second reading with a do pass recommendation. He then explained his support for the motion, arguing that state land leases and resource use should not be driven solely by financial pressure and emphasizing beneficial use over maximizing financial return. He further noted, citing a friend in the audience, that timber and grazing are renewable and regenerative uses of public lands when done correctly.
Judy Boyle — Representative Boyle moved to substitute the motion so the bill would be introduced and receive a full hearing. A follow-up clarification sought to determine whether her proposal was simply to introduce the bill or to introduce it with the recommended changes, indicating a discussion focused on the scope of the motion and the desire for broader consideration of the bill.
Bruce Skaug — The transcript appears to misidentify the member as 'Representative Crane 12'; context indicates the motion to introduce RS 33385 is made by Representative Crane, likely Bruce Skaug?
Bruce Skaug — He said he would support the motion but noted the statement of purpose needs updating.
Joe Alfieri — Secretary of State cited as expressing concern over out-of-state money.
Joe Alfieri — Responded to Representative Haas and asked her to restate the question.
Joe Alfieri — Responded that he would appreciate the definition and referenced Section 2B.
Bruce Skaug — Representative Crane asked who has authority to approve or block fee increases and requested the current account balance, then stated that while he supports the introduction, he is not sure he will support the measure going forward.
Bruce Skaug — Representative Bruce Skaug identified himself as a sponsor of the bill and noted its background, then moved to introduce RS 33380. A subsequent comment from another member referred back to Skaug’s point as part of the same discussion.