Barbara Ehardt — Barbara Ehardt is repeatedly addressed as Chair/Chairman/Madam Chairman during a continuous question-and-response exchange, indicating her role presiding over the discussion throughout this segment.
Barbara Ehardt — The chair presided over roll call votes on the substitute motion and then the original motion, recording the votes as part of the same procedural action.
Richard Cheatum — The transcript appears to contain a transcription error in which Representative Rasor’s name is misrendered as both “Representative Raiser” and “Representative Razor.” Both mentions refer to the same person and the same correction issue, so they should be treated as one consolidated moment.
Barbara Ehardt — Barbara Ehardt is referenced as the presiding chair during a procedural exchange, first as the chair entertaining a motion and then as the chair being addressed during the vote process.
Barbara Ehardt — Madam Chair Ehardt is addressed at the start of the committee hearing and again as the witness begins testimony, then is referenced once more during the ensuing question-and-answer exchange, all within the same discussion.
Clint Hostetler — Was echoed in support of private property rights.
Clint Hostetler — Requested a roll call vote and argued that drones can still be used with larvicide and that people should be able to opt out.
Clint Hostetler — Referenced in the response as having raised the property-rights concern.
Clint Hostetler — Cited as the colleague whose property-rights argument he agreed with.
Clint Hostetler — Said that if more people opt out as information changes, that suggests broader health concerns and a need to revisit the issue.
Clint Hostetler — Continued his remarks about changing information and health concerns affecting opt-outs.
Clint Hostetler — Voted no on the substitute motion.
Clint Hostetler — Voted yes on the original motion.
Joe Alfieri — Joe Alfieri followed up on whether the district is already required to disclose ingredients or file related information under existing code, and then questioned what the objection was to the proposal given those existing requirements. The exchange centers on clarifying how the proposal differs from current obligations and why it is being challenged.
Joe Alfieri — Was recognized to speak after Representative Price.
Joe Alfieri — Argued the real issue is property rights, not mosquitoes, and said the government should not be able to enter private land without permission.
Joe Alfieri — Continued arguing that property rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and that the bill is about requiring permission before entering land.
Joe Alfieri — Voted no on the substitute motion.
Joe Alfieri — Voted yes on the original motion.
Joe Alfieri — Voted yes on the original motion.
Elaine Price — Asked whether the district does ground spray or only aerial spray.
Elaine Price — Representative Price argued that laws sometimes need to be revisited and clarified when they are interpreted differently by different people, saying the bill appears to add intent language for that reason. After those remarks, Price voted no on the substitute motion and then voted yes on the original motion.
Sarah Allstott — Introduced as the next witness and given a short time limit to testify.
Dale Hawkins — A brief exchange occurs in which the transcript appears to misidentify the speaker as 'Representative Skog.' The context suggests the legislator is asking the witness where she is from, and both mentions refer to this same moment and likely transcription error.
Dale Hawkins — Representative Hawkins was recorded in consecutive vote calls, voting no on the substitute motion and yes on the original motion.
Lauren Hughes — Lauren Hughes was introduced as the next witness and asked to identify herself and where she is from. She then stated that she is from Emmett, gave her address in Gem County, and expressed support for HB 747 while criticizing the health impacts of abatement practices.
Mark Ellison — Mark Ellison testified in support of House Bill 747, introducing himself as a resident of Emmett in Gem County and describing his work with St. John’s Organic Farm and his own business, Grandad Farms. He said his family is concerned about the health effects of mosquito abatement pesticides, believes the literature shows they are harmful, and opposes mandates that force pesticide spraying, preferring alternatives such as larvicide. His testimony concluded with thanks from the committee.
Daniel Markowski — Daniel Markowski was introduced as the next witness, then identified himself as a Canyon County, Idaho resident and technical advisor for the American Mosquito Control Association. He explained that his role involves helping communities nationwide develop mosquito-control best practices and standards, and he argued that mosquito control is a local issue that should be managed by counties or districts rather than through the bill’s broader control and notification requirements. He concluded his testimony by confirming the committee had pronounced his name correctly.
Rhonda Tomlin — Rhonda Tomlin testified in favor of HB 747, describing the bill as a compromise and criticizing the abatement district’s exclusion/opt-out process as unclear, intrusive, and confusing. She said her group verbally opted out in 2021 but did not learn until 2025 that yearly action was expected, and she recounted attending a commissioners’ meeting where the abatement manager presented the plan. Tomlin argued the commissioners approved the plan without reading it, showing poor oversight, and concluded that taxpayers are effectively paying to poison themselves.
Jared Arnold — Jared Arnold, the Madison County Mosquito Director, testified in opposition to House Bill 747. He explained that local residents chose to fund mosquito abatement districts to protect public health and reduce mosquito-related nuisance, and argued that any concerns or decisions about such districts should be handled locally by the constituents who established and funded them, rather than being decided elsewhere.
Mr. Arnold — Mr. Arnold responds to questions about the bill, explaining that locals can opt out easily, that most of his county is private land and his district works closely with landowners, and that the proposed change would be very detrimental to his program. The exchange then references the relevant bill language before moving on.
Carol Andrews — Carol Andrews of Emmett, Idaho testifies about living on a 10-acre property and trying non-spray mosquito-control methods such as bat houses, birdhouses, and mosquito canisters. She says she felt unwell and unsafe after mosquito sprayers passed by her area, and uses that experience to argue that health decisions should remain with private citizens rather than government, concluding that people should take responsibility for their own health.
Jeff Ho / Jeff Huff — The chair attempts to call the next witness, apparently meaning Jeff Huff.
Jeff Huff — Jeff Huff, chairman of the Bannock County Commissioners, testifies in opposition to House Bill 747. He argues the bill creates a legal structure unlike any other state public health law, replaces the current balanced opt-out system with a burdensome requirement for counties to build and maintain parcel-by-parcel registries, and raises unresolved questions about what happens when exempt properties are sold. He warns that GPS errors or other mistakes could push counties into civil court, that the bill imposes harsh penalties with no notice or cure period, and that it requires a formal health emergency declaration before aerial application can occur. He concludes that the measure is legally unprecedented, financially unfunded, and effectively dependent on an emergency clause. When asked a follow-up question, he adds that the district interprets the bill to mean a no-fly zone would carry forward to a new owner after a property sale.
Commissioner Huff — Commissioner Huff testified that a no-fly zone would remain attached to the property even if ownership changed, creating ongoing liability and significant administrative burdens for the district, including the difficulty of tracking property sales and exemptions.
Lana Roberts — Called up next to testify.
Dr. Lana Roberts — Dr. Lana Roberts, a veterinarian from Emmett, testified that mosquito control is important for protecting animal health, agriculture, and families. She described the severe mosquito density in Gem County and its harmful effects on horses, livestock, pets, and wildlife, including her own daily efforts to protect herself and spray her horses with repellent during the summer. She also noted that, despite being cautious about chemical exposure and as a breast cancer survivor, she believes mosquito abatement is necessary because the mosquito pressure is so severe that it affects daily life and animal welfare, even forcing her to give up one of her horses due to constant hives from mosquito season. The chair then thanked her and noted there were no questions.
Susan Patrick — Called up as the last person to testify.
Susan Paddock — Susan Paddock introduced herself and testified in support of the bill, arguing that people should have the right to choose natural products and protect their families and property from government overreach, including forced chemical spraying. She framed opposition to the bill as giving the government permission to undermine citizens' choices and property rights.
Kent Marmon — Representative Marmon raised concerns about liability if an opt-out property were to become a major mosquito breeding ground, potentially creating a public health risk and spreading disease, and the discussion continued around the difficulty of addressing that scenario.
Kent Marmon — Representative Keeler/Kaler voted no on the substitute motion and then yes on the original motion.
Bruce Skaug — Representative Beiswinger explains that the added word "public" was intended to clarify that the language applies to public land and not private land, and that access to private land would still require permission. He continues the same line of argument in his closing remarks, emphasizing the need for an opt-out option, concerns about the dangers of certain pesticides, and the broader balance between accountability and individual rights.
Bruce Skaug — Representative Skaug (listed inconsistently as Skog/Skox) participated in the roll-call vote on HB 747, voting yes on the substitute motion to hold the bill in committee and later voting no on the original motion.
Mrs. Allstate — Identified as a presenter in committee today and said to be from Ada County; name is likely mistranscribed.
Mrs. Allsot (questionable spelling) — Identified as one of the presenters in committee and said to be from Ada County.
Jeff Cornilles — Representative Cornelis/Cornilles was recorded in the roll-call votes on HB 747 procedural motions, voting no on the substitute motion to hold the bill in committee and yes on the original motion.
Monica Church — Representative Church is repeatedly called during roll call, but the transcript does not clearly capture the response or vote. One later mention appears as a likely variant of the same name and refers to the same unresolved roll-call entry.
Richard Cheatum — Referenced as saying that several horses die annually; speaker says they checked with the Department of Agriculture and found no records kept because the number is so few.
Richard Cheatum — Representative Cheatum asked Ms. Tomlin where she was from, and after she identified herself as being from Gem County, he was addressed and thanked in the exchange.
Richard Cheatum — Representative Cheatum was called on after the substitute motion and then spoke in support of it, arguing that Gem County should work with local officials rather than pursue statewide legislation.