Jon Weber — Representative Weber questioned the bill’s civil penalty provisions, following up to ask whether non-union school members would be subject to the same civil penalties.
Jon Weber — Representative Weber questions the witness about how the bill can be balanced while still carving out police and fire unions. The witness responds by referencing Weber’s concern and expressing difficulty understanding how that position is reconciled, and Weber then clarifies his identity while continuing the same line of questioning about the bill’s carve-outs.
Jon Weber — Representative Weber questions whether fire and police emergency services have payroll deduction for union dues, then continues the exchange by challenging the witness’s distinction. He argues that emergency services and teachers unions regularly lobby the House each session and objects to creating exceptions, emphasizing that taxes fund emergency services and that "a tax is a tax is a tax."
Jon Weber — Representative Weber is addressed during discussion of the proposal and asks whether it would apply across the board to all union activities. A witness later indicates he wanted to respond to Representative Weber, keeping the exchange focused on the same issue.
Jon Weber — Recorded as voting no.
Layton — Layton was introduced to the committee and then introduced herself as a Boise High student who moved to Idaho about five years ago, enjoys the outdoors, and is excited to work with the committee.
Jon Weber — Representative Weber introduced Senate Bill 1261 and described it as a straightforward bill adding the word 'appointed' to the code.
James Holtzclaw — Chair recognized questions from the committee.
James Holtzclaw — Chairman is addressed during the exchange.
James Holtzclaw — Chairman is addressed in the exchange.
James Holtzclaw — Chairman is addressed during the follow-up exchange.
James Holtzclaw — Chairman is addressed in the exchange.
James Holtzclaw — The speaker addresses the chair and responds to a question about the bill's scope.
James Holtzclaw — The chair thanks the witness and notes that all scheduled testimony has been heard.
James Holtzclaw — The chair asks if anyone else wishes to testify on the bill and invites the next witness.
James Holtzclaw — The chair recognizes Representative Egbert's question and manages the exchange.
James Holtzclaw — The chair closes public testimony and invites Representative Boyle to close.
James Holtzclaw — The chair recognizes the motion and asks for questions.
James Holtzclaw — Identified as Chairman in the vote call.
James Ruchti — Representative Egbert opened by expressing confusion about the bill's treatment of teachers' unions compared with other unions. The chair then gave procedural guidance, indicating that questions could proceed and that broader discussion of the bill should be held for later, keeping the exchange focused and brief.
James Ruchti — Was not directly involved in this section, but the transcript includes a likely mishearing of a member name in the question sequence; no clear substantive statement attributable.
James Ruchti — Referenced as the source of the question about Boise and Twin Falls and teacher stipends.
David Leavitt — Representative Boyle was discussed and responded to a series of questions about the bill’s purpose and scope. The exchange focused on whether the bill targets teachers’ unions or all unions, why law enforcement and firefighters were excluded, and how the bill affects funding. Boyle said the bill is about all unions, does not increase or decrease the general fund, and that the $1.2 million referenced in the fiscal note is already allocated to school districts. He further argued that schools are funded through state and county money, while cities and counties control sales tax revenue for firefighters and law enforcement, and said the bill is intended to keep school money in classrooms rather than for union activities. He also clarified that some school districts directly pay union dues and pointed to the bill’s language referring to “a person” rather than “union.”
David Leavitt — David Leavitt is referenced in a brief clarification exchange in which Representative Furman asks for a comment of clarification regarding the resolution vote.
David Leavitt — David Leavitt is addressed during the question period and asks whether the bill would require the union to pay for events hosted in school facilities, effectively probing whether the legislation limits the union’s ability to use those facilities.
David Leavitt — Representative Leavitt raises a procedural point of inquiry, asking about the voting process and whether the committee is voting on the statement of purpose versus the bill text.
David Leavitt — Representative Fuhrman questioned Jason Hudson about the bill’s impact on collective bargaining, asking him to explain the process and clarify how the bill’s exclusions work for police, fire, cities, counties, and linemen. Fuhrman then sought confirmation that, based on Hudson’s role and union status, the bill would still apply to him and would not eliminate his collective bargaining rights.
David Leavitt — David Leavitt argued that the committee should focus on policy rather than a bill he believes could invite lawsuits. He said the measure unfairly targets teachers' unions while excluding other groups, noted concerns about payroll deductions and PTO reimbursements not creating extra taxpayer cost, and concluded that he cannot support the bill.
David Leavitt — Recorded as voting yes.
Tanya Burgoyne — Raised a question about the fiscal note and the $1.2 million referenced in the opening statement.
Tanya Burgoyne — Representative Bingham appears to be a transcription error; the speaker asking the question is Representative Bingham, likely Tanya Burgoyne? Uncertain.
Max Nelson — First public witness invited to testify; identified as an attorney and given two minutes.
Maxford Nelson — Maxford Nelson, representing the Freedom Foundation, testified in support of House Bill 745. He argued that public-sector collective bargaining is inherently political, cited Janus v. AFSCME, and said Idaho law requires school districts with unionized teachers to bargain over compensation, benefits, and working conditions. He contended that teachers’ unions use the process to shift union costs to taxpayers and described the bill as a common-sense reform. In response to questions, he clarified that school districts do have collective bargaining authority but are required by state law to use it, explained that the court’s reasoning in Janus concerns the political nature of bargaining rather than unions as organizations, noted that states may treat different public employees differently in labor relations, and said the bill would bar taxpayer-funded paid time off for union activities while still allowing reimbursement arrangements.
Mr. Nelson — Mr. Nelson explained that existing law contemplates a teacher taking leave to serve as a local union president while continuing to receive teacher salary, with the union reimbursing the district. He said he reviewed school district teachers’ union contracts statewide and found about 50 arrangements involving paid leave for union activities that are not reimbursed, estimating the value of that unreimbursed time at about half a million dollars per year. He then broadened the discussion to public-sector labor relations generally, noting that private-sector labor relations are governed by federal law while states vary widely in their treatment of public-sector collective bargaining, from outright prohibition in places like South Carolina to more expansive systems, with Idaho positioned in the middle by extending bargaining rights to teachers and firefighters.
Mark Johnson — Mark Johnson testified in support of the bill. He introduced himself as a Meridian resident and longtime taxpayer, thanked the committee and Representative Boyle for bringing the measure forward, argued that unions should be separated from schools and that any dues should be paid directly rather than taken from teachers’ paychecks, and concluded by urging the committee to vote for the bill.
Dan McKnight — Dan McKnight testified in support of HB 745, introducing himself as an Eagle, Idaho resident and explaining his family background in union and right-to-work politics. He described his father’s work as a journeyman electrician and his own family’s involvement in the Idaho Freedom to Work Committee, then recounted a negative childhood experience with a fourth-grade teacher who was also a union representative. Using that experience, he argued that politics should not be allowed to take over public institutions like education and that government should not act as a dues collector or facilitator for political organizations such as teachers’ unions. He concluded by urging support for HB 745.
Heather Andrews — Heather Andrews was introduced as the next witness, then identified herself as the Western Regional Director for Americans for Prosperity and testified in support of House Bill 745. She argued that the bill would end government payroll deductions for union dues, let educators keep private contact information from unions, and prevent public money from subsidizing union activities and salaries. She concluded by saying the bill would curb union favoritism and noting that both Americans for Prosperity activists and teacher unions have freedom of speech.
John K-K-K-A-L-B / John Cal (questionable) — A new witness is introduced, but the name is garbled in the transcript; the speaker then identifies himself as John Cal.
John Calb — Identified himself as vice president of the National Right to Work Committee and testified in favor of HB 745.
Randy Ricken — Introduced as the next in-person testifier.
Randy — Identifies himself as from District 12, Nampa, and says he is not a union member.
Scott Woolston-Hurman — Announced as the next in-person testifier, but apparently not present at the moment.
Billy Norp — Introduces himself as a Meridian resident from House District 20 and says he is testifying for himself in favor of HB 745.
Mr. Norp — The witness argues Idaho should stop subsidizing unions and says unions should stand on their own merit.
Mr. Norp — Responds to a question about whether his wife gave permission to be mentioned in his testimony.
Joel Fisher — Joel Fisher, policy director at the Idaho Family Policy Center, testifies in support of House Bill 745 and continues with a biblical and contractual argument favoring free negotiation of employment terms, using the parable of laborers hired at different times to illustrate his point.
Mr. Bender — Mr. Bender is called to the table and participates in a brief Q&A about how he is compensated and whether unions reimburse school districts when employees are away on union-related business. He states that he is paid by the school district, not the union, says he has no knowledge of reimbursement practices, and asks whether the union reimburses the district if the absence was not an official union activity. The exchange concludes with the committee thanking him for his testimony and moving on to the next witness.
Steve Bender — Identifies himself as treasurer of the Idaho Republican Party and urges support for House Bill 745.
Steve Bender — Says he is a substitute teacher and argues the bill does not address teachers using personal leave for union activities.