House Environment, Energy and Technology Committee
Key Moments
Layton Parker — Introduced as the committee's new page and invited to introduce himself.
Layton — Introduced himself as a Boise High School senior who moved to Boise from the Middle East and said he enjoys being a page.
Megan Egbert — Representative Egbert was prompted to review the minutes and then moved to approve the minutes from February 10th and February 16th.
Megan Egbert — Asked whether DEQ was involved in the changes.
Megan Egbert — Schurz says he can hand the materials to Representative Bingham, who can pass them along.
Megan Egbert — Megan Egbert asks a series of follow-up questions about the scope of the bill’s AI restrictions, first clarifying whether it applies beyond procurement to actual use, then raising concerns about third-party tools that agencies might use even if the contract does not reveal any DEI-related bias, and finally asking whether police would also be affected by the bill in their use of AI for determinations.
Jessica Spoya — Identified herself as licensing program manager with the Division of Occupational and Professional Licenses and presented the rule docket on behalf of the Drinking Water and Wastewater Professionals Board.
Chris Bruce — Representative Bruce was invited to ask questions and then asked why the Senate objected to Section 400 and removed it, seeking an explanation for the Senate's issue with the provision.
Chris Bruce — The chair notes that a second is not needed, referencing Representative Bruce.
Chris Bruce — Asks which department or agency the issue involved.
Chris Bruce — Representative Bruce briefly spoke in support of the motion, and the following response thanked him for his supportive comments.
Britt Raybould — Moved to approve the rule docket with Section 400 struck.
Britt Raybould — Her motion from the prior section is being acted on.
Britt Raybould — Asked whether HB 593 relates to another bill on the agenda.
Britt Raybould — Asked whether there was money in the repealed fund.
Britt Raybould — Closed her questions and yielded to Representative Bingham.
Ms. Dawson — Ms. Dawson was present and acknowledged as a witness to testify.
Heather Scott — Heather Scott presented House Bill 593 as a code cleanup measure recommended by the DOGE Committee and supported by DEQ. She explained that the bill removes obsolete statutory language tied to the old hazardous waste management planning committee and the Big Payette Lake Water Quality Act, noting that the relevant committee and plan were created decades ago, are no longer needed, and could be recreated by law in the future if necessary. In response to questions, she clarified the distinction between the hazardous waste committee provisions and the Payette-related chapter, acknowledged the overlap concern, and said the committee should hold the bill long enough to assess the issue.
Tony Wisniewski — Tony Wisniewski questioned whether committees can currently be formed under existing statute and raised concerns about how such committees would be created and overseen if the statute were removed. He clarified that his question was broader than just the Payette committee, while noting that the Payette committee appears to be the example operating under the statute.
Tony Wisniewski — Tony Wisniewski discusses the bill’s contract requirements for vendors, noting that they must assure the state that no DEI is embedded in the code and that the state may inspect if necessary. He then follows up by questioning how compliance can be verified when an agency uses a large language model without a contract, raising concerns about how the state would enforce the bill’s requirements in that situation.
Jordan Redman — Representative Jordan Redman first moved that House Bill 593 be sent to the floor with a due pass recommendation, and later withdrew that motion.
Jordan Redman — Moves that House Bill 687 be sent to the floor with a due pass recommendation.
John Woude — Questions whether House Bill 593 repeals all of Chapter 58 or only part of it.
John Woude — Explains concern that his own legislation may conflict with House Bill 593 because both address similar 1985 hazardous waste language.
John Woude — The chair addresses him by name while discussing the possible conflict between the bills.
John Woude — Asks whether the same section would be repealed twice.
John Woude — Moves to hold the bill in committee so the overlap can be clarified and the double repeal avoided.
John Woude — Is asked whether he has a motion regarding House Bill 714.
John Woude — Representative Furman is identified as the next questioner.
John Woude — Raises a question about how agencies would know whether a large language model complies with the bill's principles.
John Woude — Schurz responds to Representative Furman's implementation question.
Roy E. Guren — Roy E. Guren introduces himself as a lawyer and lobbyist representing Republic Services (formerly U.S. Ecology). He explains that the bill appears to repeal the same section of code already addressed in Representative Scott's bill, and when asked about it, he jokes that double repealing is fine and indicates the bill may be held.
Steven Tanner — Steven Tanner thanks the chair and praises the bill’s engagement with AI, then asks how the state could ever verify that a contracted AI company or model is truly ideologically neutral, expressing skepticism about the knowability of such neutrality and asking about any standards or guarantees.
Soñia Galaviz — Representative So ia Galaviz is called on for questions and immediately asks about the Department of Correction, specifically whether the department and its director support the proposed changes.
Vito Barbieri — Addressed by the speaker as chair.