Latest news with #Ehardt
Yahoo
09-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
An Idaho lawmaker made a joke of deleting records. It's legal, but should it be?
Idaho state Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls, walks away from the lectern after presenting a piece of legislation to the House State Affairs Committee on Jan. 7, 2025, at the State Capitol Building in Boise. (Pat Sutphin for the Idaho Capital Sun) Originally posted on on April 9, 2025 It's not a secret that some Idaho lawmakers delete their emails and text messages — which are public records when they relate to legislation and other official business, according to state law. But they rarely admit it publicly. Rep. Barbara Ehardt bucked this trend last week, in an attempt to bring some levity to a tense House debate over a bill that would restrict diversity, equity and inclusion on college and university campuses. The debate occurred Thursday, the penultimate day of a hectic legislative session. Ehardt, an Idaho Falls Republican who has long opposed DEI, said that she had received text messages from people 'at the universities' who supported Senate Bill 1198. Then she addressed Statehouse reporters who were watching the debate and might want to see the messages. 'I'm gonna delete (them),' Ehardt said with a laugh. 'Don't put in the FOIA request.' Half an hour after the House approved the anti-DEI bill, Idaho Education News hand-delivered a public records request to Ehardt. Too late. The messages were gone. Ehardt later told EdNews that her comment 'was all meant to add a little levity' on the House floor. When asked why she didn't want reporters to see the messages, Ehardt said that the authors may not have expected their texts to be public. 'No one's anticipating that that's going to get shared,' she said. 'Obviously, if I hadn't said anything, nobody would have known.' State law exempts from disclosure personal communications by a member of the Legislature, but communications related to 'the conduct or administration of the public's business' are considered public. In other words, someone who messages a lawmaker about a bill shouldn't expect that it will remain private. While Ehardt's stunt was clearly meant to be funny, it raised a more serious question: Why are lawmakers allowed to destroy public records? Unlike the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which applies to federal agencies, the Idaho Public Records Act doesn't have a retention provision that bars destroying records before a certain period of time. State agencies adhere to a schedule — created by the Idaho State Historical Society — that guides how long various types of records should be retained, and local governments set their own guidelines. But similar rules don't apply to the Legislature. Lawmakers can trash their records at any time, unless someone files an official request to see them. Destroying records after they've been identified in a request would violate the Public Records Act, but Ehardt didn't appear to do that in this case. Still, her decision to delete the texts is a good example of why the state needs more specific retention requirements, said Scott McIntosh, First Amendment committee chairman for the Idaho Press Club. 'The decisionmaking process of state legislators is the public's business and should be done in public,' said McIntosh, who is also opinion editor for the Idaho Statesman. 'Deleting text messages cited by a lawmaker during a legislative debate is anathema to the Idaho values of open and honest government.' Journalists and other members of the public often rely on correspondence records to shed light on government work that happens behind closed doors. Here are some recent examples from EdNews: Emails between West Ada School District administrators and trustees exposed internal turmoil after the district told a teacher to remove a classroom sign promoting inclusivity. Messages between Idaho State University President Robert Wagner and House Speaker Mike Moyle, R-Star, revealed that ISU is considering the feasibility of buying a private medical school in Meridian. Public comments on a divisive bill to fund private education using tax dollars showed widespread opposition to the proposal that was ultimately signed into law. On Tuesday, Ehardt declined to share details on the messages, except that they were from people affiliated with multiple universities and they weren't from students. Ehardt said she will retain EdNews' records request, however. 'I did scan and copy and save that for time and all posterity,' she said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
11-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Idaho House narrowly passes bill banning legislators from also holding certain local elected offices
Idaho Gov. Brad Little gives his annual State of the State address on Jan. 6, 2025, on the House floor at the Statehouse in Boise. (Pat Sutphin for the Idaho Capital Sun) The Idaho House on Tuesday passed a bill to ban Idahoans elected to state or federal offices — including the Idaho Legislature — from simultaneously serving in elected city, school or highway district positions. House Bill 362, sponsored by Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls, would automatically vacate local elected offices that officials hold when they swear into elected federal, statewide, or legislative offices. Several state legislators have served in local offices while in the Idaho Legislature, which is a part-time Legislature that typically only meets during the first few months of the year. Ehardt's bill is a modified version of a similar bill she brought last year, House Bill 497. That bill narrowly passed the House, by one vote, but did not advance in the Senate. The Idaho House passed the new bill on a wider 43-27 vote on Tuesday, after about 10 minutes of debate. Ehardt said she and several other lawmakers see the bill as addressing 'divided loyalty.' 'We really feel like if you're serving here, you should serve here,' Ehardt said. 'It also ends up creating a consolidation of power. And I don't think any of that's ever really good.' The bill now heads to the Senate for consideration. To become law, Idaho bills must pass the House and Senate, and avoid the governor's veto. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Following concerns from the Idaho Association of Cities about the bill's impact on small communities, Ehardt told the House that the new bill offers several exceptions to the automatic vacancy trigger for officials from small communities, such as for elected positions in: Cities with less than 1,000 population; School districts with less than 500 students enrolled; and Highway districts 'located primarily' in a county with less than 10,000 population. If passed into law, the bill would take effect July 1, 2026. Rep. Rick Cheatum, R-Pocatello, serves on Pocatello City Council, and voted against the bill. Serving in both offices 'has been very advantageous for both the city and my service to the three counties that I serve to have the information and the knowledge that I've obtained in doing both jobs,' he told the House. 'This bill would not affect me, unless I seek re-election to City Council this next year. But I think it's wrong to carve out small cities and say 'It's OK,' and tell folks in bigger communities that 'It's not to serve both ways and give part of your life to your community,'' Cheatum said. Echoing concerns he raised in a committee hearing on the bill on Friday, Rep. Todd Achilles, D-Boise, argued the bill violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution by treating officials differently based on numbers for small communities that lack an 'empirical justification.' 'The thing that gives me the most pause with this bill — is that we're canceling a citizen's vote. We're overriding the votes of Idahoans who are voting in a school district, highway district or city council because of some arbitrary delineation of the size of those entities,' Achilles said. 'And what that means is that this Legislature is saying 'We know better than those voters.'' As she closed debate on her bill, Ehardt pushed back on that notion. 'There's no voter suppression here. What we're actually asking is that we, as with the rest of the options, if you look through that section, we eliminate the ability to serve in different areas all the time,' she said. 'For example, you cannot serve here — and I know it's a little more extreme, you can't serve here and also serve federally.' CONTACT US At least two current Idaho state lawmakers hold local elected offices that could be affected by the bill. Rep. Cheatum serves on Pocatello City Council. And Rep. Chris Bruce, R-Kuna, serves on the Kuna City Council. Ehardt was first appointed to the Idaho Legislature in December 2017, after she lost a runoff race for Idaho Falls mayor, Local News 8 reported, and as her first term on Idaho Falls City Council was coming to an end, East Idaho News reported. She won the 2018 general election for the Legislature and is in her fifth legislative term. Some current and former lawmakers resigned from local elected offices soon after winning state legislative seats. After being elected to the Idaho Legislature in November 2022, Rep. Dan Garner, R-Clifton, resigned from the West Side school board, the Preston Citizen newspaper reported. In November 2022, newly elected Rep. Josh Wheeler, R-Ammon, resigned from Ammon City Council — after being elected to the Legislature, East Idaho News reported. That same month, newly elected Sen. Treg Bernt, R-Meridian, resigned from the Meridian City Council after being elected to the Legislature, BoiseDev reported. In 2021, Bellevue Mayor Ned Burns was appointed to the Legislature as a Democrat, KIVI-TV reported. Former Rep. Burns resigned as mayor in January 2022, the Idaho Mountain Express newspaper reported. He lost his legislative seat in the November 2024 election. Some former lawmakers have also simultaneously held local elected offices while in the Idaho Legislature. Former Rep. Thyra Stevenson, a Lewiston Republican who died in 2020, served as a city councilor while in the Legislature. Former Sen. Dan Johnson, a Republican, served as Lewiston's mayor while in the Legislature. Former Rep. Colin Nash, D-Boise, had a substitute in the Idaho Legislature in 2024 while he served on the Boise City council. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Under Idaho bill advancing to House, lawmakers couldn't hold local office simultaneously
Idaho state Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls, walks away from the lectern after presenting a piece of legislation to the House State Affairs Committee on Jan. 7, 2025, at the State Capitol Building in Boise. (Pat Sutphin for the Idaho Capital Sun) Idahoans elected to state or federal offices — including the Idaho Legislature — would be banned from simultaneously serving in elected city, school or highway district positions, under a bill state lawmakers advanced to the House on Friday. House Bill 362, by Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls, would automatically vacate local elected offices that officials hold when they swear into elected federal, statewide, or legislative offices. Ehardt's bill is a modified version of a similar bill she brought last year, House Bill 497. That bill narrowly passed the House, by one vote, but did not advance in the Senate. The Idaho House State Affairs Committee advanced the bill to the House floor Friday. 'This change will ensure that whoever, whatever office we're serving in, we're giving our attention to that office. We are serving … the office in which we're elected, and we are doing the best for that group of citizens — without any weighted or divided attentions,' Ehardt told the committee. Several state legislators have served in local offices while in the Idaho Legislature, which is a part-time Legislature that typically only meets during the first few months of the year. But the new bill offers several exceptions to the automatic vacancy trigger for officials from small communities, such as for elected positions in: Cities with a population of less than 1,000 people; School districts with less than 500 students enrolled; and Highway districts 'located primarily' in a county with a population less than 10,000 people. The House State Affairs Committee's two Democrats — Reps. Brooke Green, D-Boise, and Todd Achilles, D-Boise — voted against advancing the bill. Achilles argued the bill violates multiple constitutional protections and will be challenged in court. If the bill passed, he said the Legislature would lose 'the perspectives of local communities.' 'And by restricting this to certain cities or school districts or highway district based on their size, this creates an unequal application of the law, which violates the Equal Protection Clause — by treating similarly situated office holders differently based on this arbitrary definition of what is a small or a large community,' Achilles said. If passed into law, the bill would take effect July 1, 2026. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
28-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Child care facility de-regulation bill widely passes Idaho House, heads to state Senate
Idaho bill to would let Idaho child care facilities to set their own child-to-staff ratios "appropriate to ensure the health, safety and welfare of all children in attendance" is headed to the state Senate. (Getty Images) The Idaho House of Representatives widely passed a bill to let child care centers set their own child-to-staff ratios. Aimed at addressing Idaho's child care crisis by easing the process to operate child care centers, House Bill 243, is co-sponsored by Idaho Republican House lawmakers Reps. Barbara Ehardt, from Idaho Falls, and Rod Furniss, from Rigby. The bill would repeal age-based child-to-staff ratios for child care facilities in Idaho law. Instead of those standards, determined on a points-based system based on the ages of children in facilities, the bill would allow Idaho child care facilities to set their own child-to-staff ratios 'appropriate to ensure the health, safety and welfare of all children in attendance.' Ehardt said the new standard would be stronger than the current one required under Idaho law, and that Idaho would retain administrative rules in the Department of Health and Welfare focused on a range of safety issues in child care facilities. 'Isn't that ultimately what we want? Because we could have a ratio of kids that were all troubled kids, and or incredibly active kids, or, you know, kids that were very difficult to handle. And that wouldn't meet this standard,' Ehardt said. On the House floor, Ehardt spent several minutes addressing what she called 'disinformation' spread by opponents of the bill. She stressed that the bill would not be eliminating child-to-staff ratios in child care facilities because Idaho regulations would still cap the maximum number of children that can be in facilities, based on their facility type. Idaho House Minority Leader Ilana Rubel, D-Boise, said child care is 'uniquely inappropriate for over de-regulation,' and that the bill 'eliminates most of the state requirements around child safety in these facilities.' 'We talk about vulnerable populations. I don't know what population is more vulnerable than 1 year olds,' she said. 'These — they are very easily injured. They are non-verbal. They can't tell us — they can't identify abuse or problems or neglect. They can't express it to people. … Parents are not coming into these places every five minutes. They're dropping their kid off at 8 a.m. and maybe coming back at 5 p.m.' Rubel said the bill totally eliminates ratios, which she assumed Idaho created for child care facilities because 'something really bad happened.' 'That's why they put in ratios, to make sure that there is adequate supervision in this incredibly delicate population, who can be so easily injured, who can choke on something in the blink of an eye if they're not being watched — and if there aren't adequate people to follow,' she said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The bill would also repeal a provision in Idaho law that allowed local regulations on child care facilities to be more stringent than standards in state law. In floor debate, Ehardt said Idaho is one of four states that allows cities to 'over-regulate,' and that city 'over-regulation' on day cares has 'shut many of them down.' 'There is a direct correlation — if you look back through the years — on the regulation, the decrease in day cares and the increase in costs, ' Ehardt told House lawmakers. 'Costs have systematically risen and skyrocketed because of the lack of child care.' Ehardt declared a conflict of interest on the House floor because she must abide by child care regulations because she works at Apple Athletic Club, which she said runs a preschool program. The Idaho House passed the bill on a 54-15 vote Thursday, with one lawmaker absent. The bill now heads to the Idaho Senate, where it could receive a committee hearing before a possible vote on the Senate floor. To become law, Idaho bills must pass the House and Senate, and avoid the governor's veto. Ehardt, on the House floor, said big day care centers, who she said are most opposed to the bill, can still use whatever child-to-staff ratios they want. 'One of the main things I heard in the testimony — parents were demonized,' Ehardt said, calling the legislation another example of a 'parental rights bill.' 'Because we trust our parents. … What we were hearing is that really 'it's government that has to dictate everything you do, because government knows best,'' Ehardt said. 'We're talking about our kids, and we're talking about … who's going to love them, who's going to watch them, and protect them.' Rep. Josh Wheeler, R-Ammon, agreed Idaho does and should trust parents. But he said parents 'need to be given the information about these self-determined ratios with some of the facilities.' 'I just feel like this bill is in its infancy,' said Wheeler, who was among five Republican House lawmakers to vote against the bill, along with all nine House Democrats. Under the bill, facilities shall comply with their child-to-staff ratios and make those ratios available to parents and guardians. Furniss, a cosponsor of the bill in the Idaho House, called deregulation 'the Idaho way.' 'Money does not solve this crisis, but deregulation will solve this crisis,' said Furniss, saying Idaho has more than doubled funds for the child care system but has seen providers decline by 10%. Rep. Marco Erickson, R-Idaho Falls, supported the bill, calling it 'common sense legislation' and will 'benefit our local communities.' 'I have a lot more faith in our families than what we've been seeing exhibited in … these debates,' Erickson said. Idaho Voices for Children Executive Director Christine Tiddens told the Idaho Capital Sun she opposed the bill in committee, saying she couldn't find out the effect of eliminating child-to-staff ratio standards 'because no other state or developed nation that licenses child care has attempted anything like this before.' 'We did find plenty of research showing that if ratios become too flexible, children experience increased rates of injuries and death,' Tiddens told the Sun in an email, saying she shared these concerns with lawmakers in a House committee hearing on the bill. 'Considering that Idaho already ranks last in the nation for childcare regulation, why would we roll back childcare ratio and supervision requirements even more?' Tiddens told the Sun. 'Stripping these key safety standards opens the door to operators and bad actors who cut corners to save costs. And in childcare settings, cutting corners results in babies being put in harm's way.' In an interview after the bill passed the House, Ehardt told the Sun state regulators would maintain their role in child care facility regulation — using existing safety regulations that the new bill wouldn't touch. Having only one staff-member-per-18-kids isn't a safe ratio, she said, and 'wouldn't fit this standard. 'If that's the way somebody starts to operate, then there would be grounds — they would not be meeting the law. And that could then be grounds for revocation of a license,' Ehardt told the Sun. And she stressed that facilities can still maintain as much regulation as they want. 'To be honest, I don't even see that as a bad thing. I really don't. … It won't even hurt them, in my opinion, for business — because the people who couldn't go there, couldn't go there because of cost,' Ehardt told the Sun. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
25-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Idaho House unanimously passes media shield law bill protecting journalists' sources
The Idaho House of Representatives in session at the State Capitol building in Boise on Jan. 23, 2024. (Otto Kitsinger for Idaho Capital Sun) The Idaho House of Representatives on Tuesday threw bipartisan, unanimous support behind a bill that would create a media shield law protecting sources who provide confidential information or documents to journalists. Without any debate, the Idaho House voted 69-0 to pass House Bill 158. The bill states, 'No person engaged in journalistic activities shall be compelled to disclose in any legal proceeding, trial before any court, or before any jury the source of any information procured or obtained and published in a newspaper, print publication, digital news outlet, or by a radio or television broadcasting station with which the person is engaged or employed or with which the person is connected.' Supporters said the bill would help combat frivolous lawsuits and provide protections similar to whistleblower protections available in existing state and federal laws. Rep. Barbara Ehardt, an Idaho Falls Republican who co-sponsored the bill, said without a media shield law, journalists could be forced to reveal the identity of confidential sources or risk being found in contempt of court, fined or even jailed. 'The only thing right now protecting or stopping a journalist from revealing their sources is their own personal ethics,' Ehardt said. 'Many have gone to jail,' Ehardt added. 'They've been sent to jail, and they sat there at their own (volation) trying to protect the sources. And at some point, that's not right.' The bill's other co-sponsor, Rep. Marco Erickson, R-Idaho Falls, said Idaho is one of 10 states without a shield law protecting sources who provide confidential information to journalists. House Bill 158 heads next to the Idaho Senate for consideration. If a majority of members of the Idaho Senate vote to pass the bill, it would head to Gov. Brad Little for final consideration. Once a bill reaches his desk, Little may sign it into law, veto it or allow it to become law without his signature. Disclosure: Idaho Capital Sun journalists are members of the Idaho Press Club, which drafted and advocated for the passage of the media shield law bill. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
