Todd Lakey — Todd Lakey addresses Isabella, joking that he cannot let her off without a question or two, and then asks what surprised her most about serving as a page, beginning the committee’s Q&A with her.
Todd Lakey — Todd Lakey questioned whether the hemp products under discussion were zero-THC and expressed concern about marijuana/hemp-related products in the state. He then continued pressing for clarification on THC content, culminating in confirmation that the products do not contain any THC, and followed up by asking why people would inhale hemp products if they contain no THC.
Todd Lakey — Asked for confirmation that the products intended for human ingestion or inhalation, including excluded products, have no THC.
Todd Lakey — Asked for confirmation that the excluded products have no THC.
Todd Lakey — The speaker thanked the vice chair and asked questions about the bill language.
Todd Lakey — Referenced as having noted the zero-THC concentration standard.
Todd Lakey — Was thanked for his earlier comments.
Todd Lakey — Senator Todd Lakey asks for clarification on hemp testing and remediation requirements, specifically whether a crop with elevated THC must be remediated before leaving the field and whether it must leave the field at zero THC. The responses confirm his understanding and clarify that hemp does not need to be at zero THC; it may leave the field as long as it is under the 0.3% threshold.
Todd Lakey — Seeks clarification that the bill does not change the circumstances under which hemp can leave the field.
Todd Lakey — Clarifies that the bill does not change the standard for hemp leaving the field and instead addresses negligent violations within the field.
Todd Lakey — Brought the discussion back to a question after the explanation about hemp.
Todd Lakey — Asked about law enforcement's ability to conduct marijuana interdiction operations when hemp is present.
Todd Lakey — Spoke in support of the bill while expressing concern about marijuana interests and Idaho's hemp rules.
Todd Lakey — A likely transcription error refers to 'Senator Lant'; this appears to be Senator Lakey's nay being recorded.
Ron Taylor — Ron Taylor makes two lighthearted remarks during the meeting: first, he compliments the page's enthusiasm and positivity, and later he jokes that she may want to present the Farm Bureau bill because she might be interested in becoming a lobbyist.
Ron Taylor — Senator Taylor asked for clarification about industrial hemp, specifically the 0.3% THC threshold and how that compares to the THC level needed for psychoactive effects, continuing the question about hemp versus marijuana THC levels.
Ron Taylor — Moved to send House Bill 772 to the floor with a due pass recommendation.
Christy Zito — The chair turns the gavel over to Vice Chair Zito to conduct the next bills.
Christy Zito — The speaker thanks the Madam Vice Chair for handling the vote.
Tammy Nichols — Senator Tammy Nichols, District 10, is introduced and then presents House Bill 879, explaining that it stems from prior discussion last session with hemp growers. A later reference notes that Senator Nichols was the chair who brought the bill and began the discussion last year.
Tammy Nichols — Tammy Nichols is repeatedly addressed as Madam Chair/Vice Chair by different senators during a continuous portion of the meeting, reflecting ongoing procedural exchanges rather than separate substantive topics.
Tammy Nichols — Addressed as Madam Chair during the discussion.
Tammy Nichols — Addressed as Madam Vice Chair.
Tammy Nichols — Begins closing remarks and summarizes the bill's purpose.
Tammy Nichols — Addressed as Madam Chair during the motion request.
Tammy Nichols — Addressed as Madam Chair during the motion.
Tammy Nichols — Addressed as Madam Chair.
Tammy Nichols — Addressed as Madam Chair during the vote.
Tammy Nichols — Introduces herself and presents House Bill 772.
Tammy Nichols — Addressed as Madam Vice Chair.
Tammy Nichols — Addressed as Madam Chair.
Tammy Nichols — Thanked for bringing and scheduling the bill for hearing.
Tammy Nichols — Addressed as Madam Chair.
Tammy Nichols — Tammy Nichols closes the bill presentation by explaining that the measure applies only to grain and fiber production, leaves everything else unchanged, and simply distinguishes between negligent and non-negligent violations. She further emphasizes that hemp farmers are part of Idaho’s production and economy and should not be held to impractical guidelines, then confirms in response to questions that the bill does not change the field-leaving standard and only addresses negligent violations.
Tammy Nichols — The time is turned back over to Chairman Nichols.
Braden Jensen — Braden Jensen, representing the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation, testified on House Bill 879 and responded to committee questions. He clarified that the bill’s excluded products are hemp seed, hemp seed powder, and hemp seed oil, and explained that legal products must contain 0% THC, which applies to those excluded products as well. He also thanked the committee for its caution and thoroughness while discussing these provisions.
Braden Jensen — Identifies himself as being with the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation and begins technical testimony on House Bill 772.
Pam Eaton — Referenced as part of conversations with retailers about narrowing the bill.
Officer Colos — Referenced as someone who could address specific issues based on experience.
Officer Colos — Officer Colos was brought up to answer committee questions and then responded to a question by explaining that the three listed products are the only hemp-derived, FDA-approved products for human consumption and that he was not aware of any misuse.
Mr. Jensen — Mr. Jensen explained that the bill clarifies existing law governing establishments offering hemp products intended for human ingestion or inhalation, while excluding hemp seed, hemp seed protein powder, and hemp seed oil. He said the language was worked on with LSO and stakeholders to make it clearer, noted that he does not personally use the products and therefore cannot speak to why people inhale them, and emphasized that retail products cannot contain THC. When asked technical follow-up questions, he said he was not a chemist and could not answer every detail. Later, the discussion returned to whether the covered and excluded products contain THC.
Mr. Jensen — Mr. Jensen explains the hemp regulatory framework: licensed growers are subject to background checks, audits, inspections, and required pre-harvest testing. If hemp tests above the legal threshold, it must be remediated in the field before it can leave the site. He clarifies that hemp may leave the growing site only after being reduced below 0.3% THC, and that this bill does not change that rule. He further distinguishes this from Idaho retail products, which must be 0% THC, while growers may operate up to the federal 0.3% threshold.
Carrie Semmelroth — Asked about distinctions between Delta 8 and Delta 9 in CBD products and how they relate to hemp versus marijuana.
Carrie Semmelroth — Addressed by Director Tewalt in response to her question.
Carrie Semmelroth — Carrie Semmelroth thanked the witness and described the bill as targeting THC products being sold as hemp, then asked whether the legislation is intended to close that loophole, particularly as used by vape shops.
Chanel Tewalt — Chanel Tewalt, Director of ISDA, responded to questions about hemp and cannabinoid products by explaining that Idaho law already covers Delta 8 and Delta 9 through its total THC standards, and that Delta 8 is typically synthetically derived. She said ISDA receives many complaints about products assumed to be hemp but that actually fall under Idaho’s marijuana definition, and clarified that ISDA oversees farmers and processors but not retail sales. Tewalt added that Idaho’s law never had the federal loophole being discussed, so federal changes do not affect the state in the same way. She argued the real issue is retail enforcement, noting that retail hemp products are regulated less strictly than even dog food at feed stores, and said the bill would create a consistent statewide administrative presence and educational approach to enforcement, especially for imported products.
Director Tewalt — Was asked to confirm that the products have no THC.
Director Tewalt — Confirmed the products have no THC and said the clause may not be necessary because the products are already legal.
Director Tewalt — Referenced as possibly having more information on the issue.
Cameron Colos — Cameron Colos, a Boise police officer with 18 years of law-enforcement experience, described his work on alcohol compliance, youth access to age-restricted products, DUI enforcement, and oversight of vape and smoke shops. He explained that Boise retailers were selling drug paraphernalia and controlled substances with limited oversight, which led him to develop a compliance program to help local stores follow Idaho law. He also stated that he was not aware of any legitimate way the products in question could be used to access THC and framed the bill as an effort to close a loophole that some vape shops may be using to sell THC products under the guise of hemp.