Ted Hill — Representative Hill moves to send House Bill 944 to the floor with a do pass recommendation.
Ted Hill — Representative Ted Hill takes the floor to argue that the situation has become an organizational crisis and that immediate action is needed. He warns that if the issue is not addressed now, the agency may not be able to recover and the long-term effects will be serious.
Ted Hill — Ted Hill expressed concern that sending the bill to general orders could kill it, but said he would withdraw his motion if alternatives could improve the bill. He then agreed to proceed with a vote on the substitute motion, and later voted yes on the motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders.
John Gannon — Representative John Gannon questions whether the proposed $5 million ISP pay plan is sufficient, then follows up by asking what level of funding would fully and sustainably support the plan and how much ISP previously received from the gas tax before the funding change several years earlier.
John Gannon — Representative Gannon asks whether part of the gas tax could again be dedicated to ISP, then argues that ISP must be funded because of vacancies and that the current funding amount is inadequate. He supports the motion while attributing the funding problem to prior revenue cuts, noting that affected cities and counties have not come forward to oppose those cuts and that the proposal on the table is the only available option.
John Gannon — Described a ride-along with ISP on I-84 and said local sheriff's deputies were called in because troopers were short-staffed.
John Gannon — Said ISP needed backup from local sheriff's deputies during a ride-along because of staffing shortages.
John Gannon — Said he would support general orders only with a commitment to restore the gas tax funding for ISP.
John Gannon — Said a positive resolution is unlikely without a concrete plan.
John Gannon — Votes no on the motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders.
John Gannon — His name is referenced as part of the roll call/vote tally context.
Vito Barbieri — Representative Vito Barbieri asked Director Gardner how much the proposed funding increase would help, specifically whether it would improve recruiting efforts and bring in enough people to fill existing vacancies and staffing spots.
Vito Barbieri — Vito Barbieri says he will support the motion, describing it as reasonable, while noting that the amount provided is only about one-third of what the police really need.
Vito Barbieri — Votes no on the motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders.
Charlie Shepherd — Charlie Shepherd questioned the funding approach in the bill, saying he supports improving ISP funding but opposes taking money away from county sheriffs in his district to do it. He emphasized that while ISP needs more resources and manpower, the proposed funding method does not work for him because it would reduce support for local sheriffs.
Charlie Shepherd — Charlie Shepherd argues that the issue is a self-inflicted budgeting crisis rather than an organizational one, and opposes the bill’s method of funding state police by shifting money away from counties and smaller agencies. He says his counties already have some of the lowest-paid deputies, warns that the proposal would hurt county budgets and property tax relief efforts, and emphasizes that while state police must be funded, it should not be done this way. He concludes by supporting the substitute motion and later votes yes to send House Bill 944 to general orders.
Jason Monks — Asked whether ISP receives reimbursement when it assists local law enforcement.
Jason Monks — Jason Monks spoke in support of sending House Bill 944 to general orders. He thanked the chair, emphasized that sponsors deserve courtesy and that leadership can help move the bill forward, and argued that general orders is a place to continue working rather than letting the bill die. He also objected to using the Rainy Day Fund for ongoing salary expenses, and ultimately voted yes on the motion to send the bill to general orders.
Jerald Raymond — Asked where the solution is for the general fund versus registration funding challenge and noted the bill appears to address only distribution of funding.
Jerald Raymond — Votes yes on the motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders.
David Cannon — The Chair closes questions and invites Representative Palmer to make his request.
David Cannon — The Chair addresses Representative Palmer and asks him to proceed.
David Cannon — The Chair is speaking to the committee and to Representative Palmer.
David Cannon — The Chair asks whether anyone else wants to testify and then yields the floor to Representative Palmer.
David Cannon — The Chair introduces HB 944 for committee action.
David Cannon — David Cannon is praised in the course of the discussion for his long-standing support of law enforcement and for his work efforts, with the speaker offering positive recognition of his contributions.
David Cannon — As chair, he calls for the roll call vote on the motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders.
Britt Raybould — Representative Birch is likely Representative Britt Raybould, who speaks against the motion.
Britt Raybould — Representative Birch speaks against the motion and against sending the bill to General Orders.
Britt Raybould — Representative Birch/Raybould says she is frustrated and angry, and supports funding Idaho State Police despite opposing the motion as written.
Britt Raybould — The speaker is responding to Representative Birch's comments and closing debate on the motion.
Britt Raybould — The chair reminds the committee to keep debate focused on the motion after Representative Birch's remarks.
Britt Raybould — Representative Gannon agrees with Representative Birch's view that revenue cuts caused the funding problem.
Britt Raybould — Representative Gannon agrees with Representative Birch's explanation of the cause of the funding issue.
Britt Raybould — The chair tells Representative Birch to stick to the issue at hand.
Britt Raybould — Votes yes on the motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders.
Jeff Cornilles — Representative Cheatham references Representative Palmer’s prior work on the issue and cites Palmer’s advice as guidance for a better path forward.
John Shirts — Representative John Shirts states that being pro-police was central to his platform and that he cannot vote against funding law enforcement. He then questions how funds are distributed, noting that rural counties in his district do not seem to receive much money. He reiterates that he is not one to vote against police funding and says he would support opportunities to provide law enforcement more money, while distinguishing that from the broader issue of county-level distributions.
John Shirts — Votes yes on the motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders.
Cornel Rasor — Representative Cornel Rasor expressed concern that ongoing reductions in county law enforcement funding would create a compounding problem over time, similar to other funding and pay issues in public safety. He then said he would support the motion to send the bill to general orders so the sponsor could work on other solutions.
Cornel Rasor — Cornel Rasor votes yes on the motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders, with a later garbled repeat of his name appearing in the vote record.
Jeff Ehlers — Jeff Ehlers supported the substitute motion and explained that it would give the sponsor more time to work through competing concerns, including Representative Cheatham's concerns, possibly through a Ways and Means meeting. He emphasized that sending the bill to general orders was intended to create a path forward rather than kill the bill, and referenced Chairman Ehlers in support of that procedural approach.
Jeff Ehlers — Votes yes on the motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders.
Bill Gardner — Director Bill Gardner explains how ISP’s lateral hiring program currently works for POST-certified officers from Idaho agencies: lateral hires attend a shortened modified academy, and compensation is tied to POST certificates and credentials. He notes that the lateral program would be suspended for anyone, including city police, and that academy length can vary by agency, with some agencies operating their own POST-certified academies. He also adds that the proposed $5 million funding is a helpful start but does not fully cover the department’s original request.
Richard Cheatum — Representative Cheatum questions Director Gardner about the lateral transfer process for sheriff’s officers, including what steps are required and how they would be compensated during the transition. He then follows up by asking whether the same kind of agreement applies to city police. Later in the same discussion, he returns to the broader recruitment issue, asking where ISP expects to find new officers if it does not recruit from city police or sheriff’s offices, given the decline in law enforcement recruitment.
Richard Cheatum — Richard Cheatum thanks the chair, notes that Representative Palmer has spent considerable time working through the issue and has consulted with the colonel and troopers, says he respects Palmer’s advice but worries the bill could die in general orders, and then offers a substitute motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders.
Richard Cheatum — His concerns were cited as something the sponsor could continue to address.
Richard Cheatum — During the roll-call vote on the motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders, Richard Cheatum is recorded in the voting sequence and votes yes.
Ted Hill — Representative Ted Hill asks about differences in training requirements, including academy length, between the ISP, sheriff's offices, and other agencies.
Jon Weber — Votes yes on the motion to send House Bill 944 to general orders.