Barbara Ehardt — Asked whether the committee was still on questions or comments, then said she would reserve her remarks for comments.
Barbara Ehardt — Begins comments about prayer and prior legislation.
Barbara Ehardt — Explains that prior legislation in 2023 affirmed that students and teachers can pray at school.
Barbara Ehardt — States that the moment of silence could also be used for prayer and cites Section 33-6601.
Barbara Ehardt — Clarifies that prayer is not allowed disruptively during class, but could occur during a moment of silence.
Barbara Ehardt — Voted yes.
Barbara Ehardt — Barbara Ehardt questioned why so many people were counted in the teaching category when they were not actually teachers, noting concerns about administrative growth versus teacher growth. She referenced charts, asked whether the bill would address the imbalance, and sought confirmation that principals are considered part of administration.
Barbara Ehardt — Representative Barbara Ehardt is briefly called on during a procedural exchange, including a light aside about holding something up and a follow-up response addressing the timing of the question.
Barbara Ehardt — Representative Ehardt is first mentioned in connection with a malfunctioning light/recognition issue, then appears in the roll call vote where her name is called and she votes yes.
Jack Nelsen — Jack Nelsen raised concerns about the bill’s mandatory moment of silence requirement, including the required time of day and how the rule would work in practice for late-arriving students and parents.
Jack Nelsen — Voted no.
Jack Nelsen — Representative Jack Nelsen is recorded as voting yes, with his name appearing in slightly different transcript forms ('Nelson' and 'Representative Nelsen').
Prager University representative — Referenced as being present in favor of the bill and as an organization already used in schools.
Tammy Nichols — The next speaker is introduced as 'Representative Mindy,' likely a transcription error for a member name, but the intended identity is uncertain.
Kent Marmon — Representative Marman requested a roll call vote and was later recorded in the roll call as voting yes.
Kent Marmon — The speaker addresses Representative Vili's question and lists positions covered by the coding.
Kent Marmon — Representative Marmon is called during the roll call vote and responds 'Yes.'
Clint Hostetler — Supported the general idea of the techniques but said he would defer to the district and not mandate it.
Clint Hostetler — Referenced as the member whose comments he agreed with.
Clint Hostetler — Voted yes.
Clint Hostetler — Representative Hostetler briefly praised the bill and its sponsors for adding accountability, then moved to send House Bill 728 to the floor with a due pass recommendation.
Clint Hostetler — Representative Hostetler cast votes in the sequence, first voting no and later voting yes.
Clay Handy — Representative Handy said he agreed with the prior speaker that the bill was a good idea and suggested a school district association could encourage schools to implement it, but he felt the bill lacked real enforcement or punishment and said he would probably vote no. A few minutes later, he cast a yes vote.
Ron Mendive — Representative Nelson criticized unfunded mandates, arguing that the administrative burden they create should be reflected in district staffing and FTE counts, especially when administrators must complete paperwork for the state. He supported the bill as a way to categorize and evaluate those administrative costs consistently.
Ron Mendive — Speaker references Representative Mendive as a long-serving colleague while discussing longstanding questions.
Ron Mendive — Speaker says Representative Mendive would agree the issue has been a thorn in their side for years.
Ron Mendive — Representative Mendive is called in the roll call vote.
Ron Mendive — Voted yes.
Ron Mendive — Voted yes.
Tony Wisniewski — Voted yes.
Tony Wisniewski — Representative Wisniewski votes no.
Dan Garner — Voted yes.
Dan Garner — Representative Garner is called during the vote and his vote is recorded, first as no and then as yes in subsequent mentions, indicating repeated or corrected vote entries within the same voting sequence.
Michael Veile — Voted no.
Michael Veile — Representative Veile asks what positions would now be lumped into the administrative allocation.
Michael Veile — Representative Veile appears in a roll-call vote, with the transcript showing duplicate name variants ('Vili' and 'Veile') and recording his vote responses across the sequence. The mentions collectively reflect the same member's voting entry during the roll call.
Chris Mathias — Name called in the roll, but no vote is captured in the transcript excerpt.
Chris Mathias — Representative Mathias asks Representative Pickett what information is needed before the bill can move forward, and Pickett responds directly to that question.
Chris Mathias — Representative Chris Mathias is recorded multiple times during the roll-call vote, each time voting yes; one instance appears to be a transcription variant of his name as 'Matthias.'
Monica Church — Monica Church, District 19, Boise, introduced herself for the record and then explained that the bill is intended to clarify school funding language by defining what counts as administrator, instructional staff, and per-pupil staff, addressing language issues in school funding and reflecting the LSO recommendation/report.
Representative Church / Monica Church — Representative Church responded to questions about the bill’s funding formula, explaining that it provides a framework for determining where money goes and that anything defined as administration is included, with reference to the relevant pages in the bill. A later brief mention simply addressed her in the course of the same exchange.
James Woodward — Representative Church explained how the 50% threshold for classifying staff as instruction works: anyone spending 50% or more of their time with students is considered instruction, even if they also have supplemental duties. He clarified that roles not involving classroom time, such as internship coordinators, would be excluded, and noted that districts have discretion in how they apply the split. He further explained that the department intended the rule to give rural districts flexibility in classification.
James Woodward — Representative Church is addressed, but the member list does not include a Church; the transcript likely refers to another speaker. No correction made beyond preserving the text.
Christy Zito — Representative Galaviz asked follow-up questions about how the new staffing definition would affect district categorization, specifically how split-time staff in rural districts and charter schools would be classified and how positions split exactly 50/50 between administrative and instructional duties would be categorized under the new definitions.
Christy Zito — Speakers praise Representative Church for the substantial work and due diligence he has put into the bill.
Heather Williams — Heather Williams of the Idaho Association of School Administrators testified in opposition to parts of House Bill 728, specifically sections 16 and 36. She said the bill would reduce districts’ and charters’ flexibility to support instructional leadership roles such as coaches, teacher leaders, and mentors. Williams explained that districts currently can code these positions to the instructional allocation, but the bill would require them to be paid from the limited administrative allocation. She noted that districts receive only 0.075 administrative allocation per support unit, so expanding what must be funded from that same pool would create unintended consequences and limit leadership positions.
Ms. Wilcox — Ms. Wilcox is brought into the discussion to clarify an earlier funding example. She explains that the funding formula is calculated at the district or charter system level rather than by individual school, and adds that the superintendent is counted only once in district reporting and funding. The exchange remains focused on clarifying how the funding calculation works.
Ms. Williams — Ms. Williams is corrected after being misnamed and then explains the district-level support-unit example.