Dan Garner — The committee and chair acknowledged Representative Dan Garner’s birthday, with multiple brief references noting that today is his birthday and offering birthday wishes.
Mark Sauter — Called during the roll call vote; vote recorded as yes.
Todd Lakey — Todd Lakey is referenced in the context of being the House sponsor, and he is then directly asked whether he wants to follow up on the discussion.
Ben Miller — Ben Miller was invited to testify and briefly introduced his background in agriculture and private industry before explaining that, while the legislation is well-intentioned, he has concerns about how it addresses the problem. He testified that the bill could create burdens for private industry through licensing, insurance, and training requirements, and noted that regulated licensing can be beneficial but does not replace practical experience. He also raised concerns about long-term costs and compared the proposal unfavorably with other programs. In response to questions, he clarified the difference between registered applicators and over-the-counter chemicals, and explained that restricted-use pesticides require a license, though effective application still depends on practical know-how.
Ron Taylor — The transcript says 'Representative Nelson,' which appears to refer to a committee member asking a question; the exact member is uncertain from this excerpt.
Mr. Miller — Mr. Miller testified at length about rat control, explaining that rats are much harder to eliminate than mice and require repeated treatments, bait stations, and specialized knowledge. He said homeowners may try control themselves, but emphasized that most rodent-control products are general-use pesticides and that county personnel should not be assumed to have the expertise to handle the work. He distinguished rat control from restricted-use chemical application, argued that private-sector pest control is better suited to the task, and raised concerns about government taking over work on private property. He also compared the issue to prior quagga mussel treatment efforts, noted that county commissioners already have authority over abatement matters, and warned that a new state role could create confusion, weak recordkeeping, and voluntary compliance problems. He questioned whether counties or the state would have enough staff and resources, said homeowners should pay for work on their own property, and described the rat problem as ongoing for years, with reports increasing over time and rats impossible to eradicate completely—only control.
Kirk Dean — Kirk Dean, a member and board member of the Idaho Pest Management Association and owner of Barrier Pest Control, testified that rat control is largely a private-sector activity occurring on private property and inside structures such as homes, restaurants, warehouses, and agricultural buildings. He argued that pest management professionals are already trained, licensed, insured, and equipped to handle these problems, and warned that if government employees or government-directed programs become involved in rat abatement, liability and costs would shift to taxpayers. Dean also raised concern that the bill could create a precedent for new government programs for other pest or nuisance issues, and concluded that private industry already has the tools, staff, and continuing education to address rat control, with only a limited public-private partnership possibly being appropriate if the bill were written differently.
Chris Mathias — Representative Matthias questioned whether the bill was really a coordination plan rather than a true program and asked why private industry had not already eliminated the rats in Caldwell. Dean responded that the government should not be involved in controlling anything on private property, and later acknowledged that he had not fully answered Matthias’s earlier questions, indicating the discussion remained focused on the same issue.
Chris Mathias — Chris Mathias questioned how rat abatement and pest control would be handled in the county, asking whether the county would use its own employees or private-sector contractors, and then following up on who would request or manage pest control for public right-of-ways, canals, and other public property where rats are present.
Chris Mathias — During the roll call vote, Representative Chris Mathias is called twice; one response records him voting no, and a later response records him voting yes.
Chris Mathias — Representative Mathias asked how the agency decides whether and how to incorporate the private sector into efforts like this, and the director responded by explaining the role of the private sector in the project, describing it as part of a three-legged stool approach.
Casey Johnson — Casey Johnson, a 24-year pest industry professional, testified that Idaho already has a strong, licensed pest management industry that is actively controlling rats across the state. He argued that rats can be controlled but not eliminated, and that private pest professionals already protect homes, businesses, farms, and food facilities under strict state regulation, insurance, and safety requirements. He warned that creating new government authority in this area would duplicate existing services, undermine free enterprise, and raise concerns because abatement districts are not required to be licensed while pest professionals are.
Craig Newtok — Craig Newtok, president of the Idaho Pest Management Association and a vendor of pest control products, testified in opposition to the bill. He explained that effective rat control is expensive and labor-intensive, requiring inspections, trapping or baiting, structural exclusions, sanitation corrections, and repeated follow-up over weeks or months. He noted that rat problems usually occur inside homes, restaurants, warehouses, garages, and crawl spaces, making the work especially difficult and intrusive. He also suggested the issue may have been sensationalized by social media and news coverage, said the bill appears aimed at urban areas where control is more feasible, and added that rural control would be extremely difficult. In response to a question, he agreed that outdoor feeding can attract rodents and other opportunistic wildlife.
David Cannon — Representative Dyer asked for a ballpark estimate of what an average homeowner might pay for pest control to address rats, then continued the same line of questioning as the discussion shifted to practical inspection and identification of entry points. Representative Birch was referenced as an example of someone having a home inspected to find possible access points, reinforcing the broader topic of evaluating and treating residential rat problems.
David Cannon — The chair thanks Representative Birch and states there is a motion on the floor.
David Cannon — Representative Cannon is called during the roll call vote.
David Cannon — Called during the roll call vote; vote recorded as no.
Mr. Dean — Mr. Dean explained the company’s pricing structure for pest-control services, saying it starts at a base rate and increases depending on the work involved. He clarified that the initial price is $4.99 and noted that crawl-space or attic work can cost around $8.99 or more because it is more expensive, dangerous, and requires higher insurance coverage.
unknown witness — Answered that birds and other animals can be drawn to food left outside, and said this is similar to urban situations.
Jimmy Halliburton — Jimmy Halliburton, Boise City Council member for District 6, described the rat problem in Northwest Boise and Eagle, noting that rats appear to be moving along irrigation canals and waterways. He said complaints have risen sharply over the past two years and that he now receives frequent calls and emails about rats. Halliburton emphasized that Boise should not address the issue alone, but instead work with surrounding jurisdictions and utility partners on a coordinated plan, since rats do not respect jurisdictional boundaries. He argued that education, policy review, and shared resources are more effective than relying on new staff or isolated efforts, and noted that Boise is already doing some public education while using existing staff and resources. He concluded by reiterating the need for intentional collaboration and was thanked by the committee.
Douglas Pickett — Douglas Pickett questioned why the committee could not facilitate the creation of an abatement district among the affected municipalities and fund the effort through property taxes. He then followed up by asking whether the committee was skipping a step by not first attempting to create such a district, and whether that approach had already been tried and failed.
Douglas Pickett — Representative Pickett is called on and then reserves comment.
Douglas Pickett — Representative Pickett is called during the roll call vote.
Douglas Pickett — Called during the roll call vote; vote recorded as no.
Steve Miller — Referenced as having testified earlier and discussed the issue at length with the closing speaker.
Steve Miller — Representative Steve Miller is called during the roll call vote, and the sequence continues with another roll call mention involving Miller, alongside Representative Beiswenger, where a 'No' response is captured.
closing speaker — Explained that the bill was amended after discussions and is not an unfunded mandate.
Robert Beiswenger — Representative Beiswenger questions whether the bill is merely symbolic and says he leans toward holding it in committee.
Robert Beiswenger — Representative Beiswenger votes yes.
Robert Beiswenger — Called during the roll call vote; vote recorded as no.
Shawn Dygert — Representative Viger is likely a mishearing; the speaker says he is undecided but stresses the threat of invasive species.
Shawn Dygert — Representative Dygert votes yes.
Shawn Dygert — Called during the roll call vote; vote recorded as no.
Shawn Dygert — Representative Diger was introduced as the next speaker, then Representative Sean Dygert spoke in support of county fair boards serving as governing boards, drawing on his own experience with fairs and a county fair board.
Jack Nelsen — Representative Nelsen is called during the roll call vote.
Jack Nelsen — Representative Nelsen votes no.
Jack Nelsen — Called during the roll call vote; vote recorded as yes.
Jack Nelsen — Called during the roll call vote; vote recorded as yes.
Jack Nelsen — Representative Nelson is first addressed during discussion of the bill’s impact on county fair boards, then later is asked for a motion and moves House Bill 823 to the floor with a due pass recommendation, after which he is thanked for making the motion.
Ron Mendive — Representative Mendive votes yes.
Ron Mendive — Representative Mendive votes yes.
Ron Mendive — Called during the roll call vote; vote recorded as no.
Don Hall — During the roll call vote, Representative Don Hall was called and his vote was recorded as no on the first mention and aye on the later mentions, reflecting repeated roll-call references to the same voting sequence.
Dori Healey — Representative Healey votes no.
Dori Healey — Called during the roll call vote; vote recorded as yes.
Anne Haws — Representative Haws is called during the roll call vote.
Jerald Raymond — Chairman Raymond is called and votes no.
Jerald Raymond — His name was called during the roll call vote.
Jerald Raymond — The chairman's vote was called and recorded as yes.
Jerald Raymond — Addressed as Mr. Chairman while discussing the value of clear legislative direction.