0:12

Welcome to Idaho

0:12

education Association's hotline

0:15

podcast, a weekly discussion

0:15

about what's happening at the

0:17

Idaho legislature around public

0:17

education and the policy

0:20

priorities of ies members, EAA

0:20

members of public school

0:23

educators from all over the

0:23

state. They're Idaho's most

0:26

important education experts, and

0:26

they use their influence to

0:29

fight for a free quality and

0:29

equitable public education for

0:32

every student in the state. I'm

0:32

Mike journee, communications

0:35

director at the IEA and I'll be

0:35

your host for this episode of

0:38

hotline. In this episode, our panel

0:39

discusses week seven of the

0:42

Idaho legislators 2023 session,

0:42

including the defeat of an

0:47

extreme voucher bill,

0:47

maneuvering around other voucher

0:49

legislation, failed attempts to

0:49

police and sensor libraries, and

0:53

other action around education

0:53

policy. joining me for today's

0:57

conversation, our IEA is

0:57

political director Chris Perry.

1:00

And IEA Associate Executive

1:00

Director Matt Compton.

1:05

So Matt, Chris, thanks for

1:05

joining me again for hotline

1:08

podcast. And you know, it's been

1:08

a kind of a crazy week, this

1:12

week at the Idaho legislature

1:12

very crazy.

1:14

Yes.

1:15

And it's been very

1:15

interesting to watch. We've had

1:18

some, some really good things

1:18

happen on education policy.

1:23

We've had some interesting

1:23

things happen around education

1:26

policy, there's been just a lot of different things happening. And so I think we just to start

1:28

off with what happened on Monday

1:32

on the on the Senate floor with

1:32

with House Bill 1038. We had

1:38

I know the senators rejected

1:38

that voucher bill that we've

1:42

been talking about, it was on a

1:42

vote of 12 to 23. You know, the

1:47

bill brought forward we talked

1:47

about it a couple times now,

1:51

buffer by Tammy Nichols from

1:51

Meridian and Brian Linney out of

1:55

Nampa and it was a really pretty

1:55

lopsided vote considering what

1:59

we thought was gonna get

1:59

tighter. So great news for our

2:03

members, right, Chris?

2:04

Oh, man, what like

2:04

an exciting way to stomp on this

2:08

bill, because I think we all

2:08

expected it to be a lot closer

2:10

than it actually ended up being.

2:10

So what this vote means 12 to

2:14

23. I mean, it's like two to one

2:14

against these vouchers. It's all

2:19

it also means that every senator

2:19

that received emails from our

2:23

members over that time, voted

2:23

against this bill. So it was

2:28

incredible. It was great to see

2:28

I think the the consensus

2:31

amongst the state senate was

2:31

that they need to send a message

2:35

that these types of bills are

2:35

just not going to be tolerated,

2:37

and particularly the very

2:37

aggressive and kind of petulant

2:41

lobbying tactics that the that

2:41

side used, are also not going to

2:45

play well.

2:46

And the State

2:46

Senate, you know, encouraging

2:48

the Idaho Freedom Foundation

2:48

ranked, you know, they scored

2:51

this on their freedom index, a

2:51

plus five, which is a pretty

2:55

significant rating. So that

2:55

means if you voted against it,

2:58

you'd now have five points

2:58

deducted away from your score.

3:01

And if 23 lawmakers were willing

3:01

to do that, it does look like

3:06

they're kind of like standing up

3:06

to the bully, you know, all

3:10

right. elements at the

3:10

legislature, a two to one ratio

3:15

against this legislation is

3:15

telling. And when you listen to

3:19

the debate on the floor, you

3:19

recognize so many of those

3:22

talking points that we and other

3:22

stakeholders have been sharing

3:27

before the session began. And

3:27

this is not the first time we've

3:30

had this fight. But when it

3:30

comes to the lack of

3:33

accountability, and the

3:33

ballooning price, we've talked

3:37

about that before on the

3:37

podcast. That's exactly what the

3:41

lawmakers were saying when they

3:41

were debating this. So they they

3:44

took our truth and used it to

3:44

defeat some really, really bad

3:49

legislation.

3:50

All right. And so you're talking about the scorecard that the IFF uses to

3:51

rate lawmakers in years past

3:56

that's been a really, really

3:56

powerful tool, influential tool.

4:00

Yes. Has and so, you know, the

4:00

fact that that tide has turned a

4:04

little bit, especially around

4:04

this issue is something that's

4:06

that seems very interesting to

4:06

me. And I think, I think it's

4:10

probably bearing out in some of

4:10

the other bills that we'll talk

4:12

about today, as well, that we're

4:12

here that we're hearing about.

4:14

So Chris, you mentioned the fact

4:14

that our that our members sent

4:19

about 200 least 230 members sent

4:19

over sent 1000s of emails to two

4:25

senators about this. So and they

4:25

really stood up and were counted

4:28

on this bill. I think that's

4:28

that's a really engaged people

4:33

understand that the damage

4:33

vouchers can do to our public

4:36

schools, and they jumped in and

4:36

did it.

4:38

Yeah, that's it

4:38

speaks to the power of IEA

4:40

members as the state's best

4:40

education experts to to get out

4:44

there and really tell the story

4:44

of why, you know, not only is

4:47

public school funding in dire

4:47

need of more essentially to get

4:53

us to where we want to be but

4:53

how this creates a huge threat

4:57

to the future of public schools

4:57

for the very reasons that the

5:00

senators were speaking to on the

5:00

floor to it's that siphoning

5:03

away the ballooning budget.

5:03

Yeah, all of that stuff. So I

5:05

think I think it's really

5:05

validating, I think, to see how

5:08

effective our members really

5:08

are, and that the senators will

5:12

listen, I'll jump ahead. I know

5:12

we want to talk about this a

5:15

little later. But there were

5:15

additional voucher bills that

5:18

were supposed to be heard in the

5:18

House Education Committee. This

5:22

week, a couple of them were

5:22

pulled back. But the even the

5:26

House members when they were

5:26

talking to one another, and to

5:30

the audience, were saying that

5:30

they were getting five to one

5:33

emails against the essays and

5:33

they said, We're going to be

5:36

voting for our constituents, or

5:36

we campaigned on this, I'm not

5:40

going to turn my back on public

5:40

education. And they stood stood

5:44

firm. And the messages that

5:44

they're getting from everyday

5:49

Idahoans and our members about

5:49

vouchers,

5:53

It directly

5:53

correlates with all of the

5:55

polling that we've done that we

5:55

know that this is not a popular

6:00

concept. And now we really just

6:00

need to start talking about

6:04

teacher pay and adequate funding

6:04

for schools.

6:07

Right. And Chris

6:07

mentioned the fact that the some

6:10

of the key reasons that the

6:10

senators vote against this was

6:13

accountability, and the cost,

6:13

you know, we know that the bill

6:18

sponsors originally really

6:18

lowball the cost on this $20

6:21

million. They said, this is

6:21

going to cost. And of course,

6:24

when people started questioning,

6:24

and they raised that to 40

6:27

million, okay, you know, we can

6:27

do that. But then we had a third

6:30

party come forward and say, no,

6:30

no, this is really likely what

6:33

is going to cost more in the

6:33

neighborhood of 370 million here

6:37

in a couple of years. And so I

6:37

think people were like, you

6:41

know, they were taken, probably

6:41

taken aback by that. I didn't

6:44

come up with much of the debate.

6:44

But it still was interesting to

6:47

that that came forward. So cost

6:47

and accountability, the

6:50

inability for taxpayers to track

6:50

where this money's going, how

6:53

it's being used in education.

6:55

And so, you know,

6:55

we've been talking about those

6:58

things from from the very

6:58

beginning. So before the

7:02

session, because we were using

7:02

the Arizona model, which Idaho

7:06

was trying to adopt, as the

7:06

example of how this ballooning

7:09

costs just gets out of control.

7:09

And that's what, that's what

7:13

Arizona is experiencing. Now. It

7:13

started at something like $200

7:17

million, and now they're looking

7:17

at upwards of a billion dollars

7:21

in voucher funds. The what I

7:21

really like about where we are

7:26

on this debate is that the

7:26

concept of the camels nose under

7:30

the tent like that, that is

7:30

becoming more and more evident,

7:33

I think, to senators and the

7:33

general public, like you might

7:36

have a, quote unquote, modest

7:36

price tag on your proposal after

7:40

the get go. But I think

7:40

everybody now knows like these

7:44

things only go one direction,

7:44

Ratchet only goes one direction,

7:47

and no state has successfully

7:47

pulled it back from from that

7:50

precipice. And those voucher

7:50

bills that we're going to

7:52

discuss that we're going to be

7:52

or what were introduced into

7:56

House Education, that's those

7:56

are examples of that camel knows

7:59

they had small fiscal impacts.

7:59

It was for a small group of

8:04

students that would be eligible

8:04

for it. Well, we know once that

8:07

goes into effect, that the next

8:07

year the legislature will come

8:11

back and just as they did in in

8:11

Arizona, and turn it into a

8:15

universal program.

8:16

Well, let's go ahead and talk about that those bills then because that happened

8:18

on Thursday, in the in the House

8:22

Education Committee. And at the

8:22

start of the day, there were

8:26

three different voucher bills on

8:26

the on the docket. They were

8:32

with the called ESAs, education

8:32

savings accounts, all three of

8:35

them. One of them, which you

8:35

mentioned, to your point the

8:40

camels nose. Last year, the

8:40

empowering parents grant program

8:44

was brought forward. And

8:44

originally the sponsors of that

8:47

Bill wanted to include tuition

8:47

in that you guys did a great job

8:52

of negotiating with them along

8:52

with the other education

8:54

stakeholders to get that pulled

8:54

out. The sponsor of one of the

8:58

bills brought forward to this

8:58

year was an expansion of that

9:01

empowering parents program that

9:01

would again include tuition.

9:05

And I think we've talked a little bit about empowering parents and how it is

9:07

a universal program. So public

9:10

school parents can pull grants

9:10

out of this and use it for

9:14

investments in the home, because

9:14

and I think that was part of the

9:17

appeal as well, right? And now

9:17

to have them coming back and

9:21

saying, Well, now, you know,

9:21

we're going to cut the cut the

9:23

money, and we're going to say

9:23

only some of this can be used

9:26

for public school parents, but

9:26

the majority of it will go

9:29

towards tuition or something

9:29

like that. It really does

9:31

undermine the entire good piece

9:31

of that legislation. And I think

9:35

I think a lot of stakeholders see that I think the governor sees that as well.

9:38

And last year,

9:38

when we testified on empowering

9:41

parents, we said, you know, we

9:41

kind of want to guarantee that

9:44

this stays the way that it's

9:44

written do not include tuition.

9:48

We got the nod from the

9:48

legislature that it would remain

9:51

the same and unfortunately this

9:51

year they come back and as

9:55

suspected or trying to to use,

9:55

you know, to use taxpayer

9:59

dollars was to pay for private

9:59

school tuition.

10:01

Gosh, they are

10:01

trying everything to it is a

10:03

desperate scenario.

10:05

And that's a really interesting point because I think the whole dynamic around

10:07

that meeting in house education,

10:11

there was a bill that was heard

10:11

from representative clients

10:13

cloud. And it was an ESA and

10:13

they debated it long and hard.

10:19

It ended up being voted down.

10:19

And I think the sponsors of

10:24

those other bills saw the

10:24

writing on the wall after

10:26

Monday's vote. And they and

10:26

they, they probably heard

10:29

through the grapevine that that

10:29

House Education Committee

10:33

members weren't inclined to

10:33

approve any essays and they

10:35

pulled those. They're gonna

10:35

reroute those it sounds like So

10:38

Wendy Hormann is sponsor of one

10:38

of those bills. She's the the

10:41

co-chairwoman of the Joint

10:41

Finance and appropriations

10:45

committee, the budget writing

10:45

committee, so she's got some got

10:47

some heft. So she's going to be

10:47

moving, moving that bill to a

10:51

more voucher friendly committee,

10:51

it sounds like probably the same

10:54

is going to happen. The other bill was pulling what you think

10:56

so yeah, and I just

10:56

really quick to I want to point

10:58

out, so the representative

10:58

clouds bill, it was a print

11:02

hearing, and it was probably the

11:02

most debated print hearing that

11:05

I've ever kind of seen in the

11:05

legislature. But what a lot of

11:09

the representatives say, you

11:09

know, said was, at first at

11:12

least they were they were kind of talking about well, we should at least give this a print

11:14

hearing or something. Send this

11:17

to print and then you know, if

11:17

we still disagree with it after

11:20

a print hearing is really

11:21

Lets explain what that is real quick. So that and so that's so if someone someone

11:22

introduces legislation, a

11:26

committee print, quote, prints

11:26

agrees to print the bill. And

11:30

that means they agreed to have a

11:30

public hearing on the bill. It's

11:33

then given a bill number and

11:33

that kind of thing. And it

11:37

becomes a bill in the old school

11:37

since from the from the school

11:41

rock days, you know, but it it

11:41

and so these this these lessons

11:45

shows just legislations, typically print hearings are very brief. They're very high

11:47

level discussions about what the

11:51

bill will do. But that wasn't

11:51

the case on

11:54

No, exactly. Yeah, there was a ton of debate talking about a lot of the

11:56

talking points that that the Senate also talked about in

11:58

shutting down. Senator Nichols

12:01

and Senator Lenny's bill. What I

12:01

found really interesting was, as

12:06

the debate developed, and

12:06

representatives realized what

12:09

Representative Hormann and

12:09

Representative Crane had done

12:11

with the other two bills, pulled

12:11

them out, and trying to reroute

12:14

them potentially through a different committee, that's more voucher friendly. They said,

12:15

well, we can't even risk giving

12:18

this a print hearing. So in

12:18

essence, you could blame

12:21

representative Horman reps in

12:21

Ukraine for the failure and risk

12:24

of wildflowers gonna get why

12:24

couldn't risk it because I think

12:28

representative Lanting put it

12:28

best. He said, You know, I

12:32

campaigned against CSAs. i It

12:32

was a campaign promise of mine.

12:36

I do in in, in theory support

12:36

saying this a print and having a

12:40

discussion about and having a

12:40

full debate with the public

12:42

about it. But if there's no

12:42

guarantee that this is going to

12:46

come back to the House Education

12:46

Committee, if we print this and

12:48

it goes to some other voucher friendly committee, and I don't even have a chance to vote on

12:50

it, it's just a risk that I'm

12:52

not willing to take. And I think

12:52

that that's it's it's really an

12:56

indictment of this kind of

12:56

cynical tactic of of choosing

13:00

the committee that best suits

13:00

your legislation, rather than

13:03

having the the legislation heard

13:03

by the committee that is germane

13:08

to the issue, and essentially

13:08

has been hearing about this

13:11

stuff is more has more expertise

13:11

on these issues.

13:14

One would think the House leadership actually chooses the makeup of these

13:16

committees, you then trust them

13:20

to make the decisions on each

13:20

piece of legislation, in the

13:24

middle of the ballgame to change

13:24

tactics, and now disregard the

13:28

committee and try to go through

13:28

a more friendly committee just

13:30

seems bizarre. I've been here

13:30

for a long time. And this is not

13:35

a tactic that I'm very familiar

13:35

with this is this seems like a

13:38

pretty extreme happens. Very

13:38

rare. Very rarely, and it's

13:41

something I've seen before but

13:41

it's but it's usually it's

13:43

usually in a situation like

13:43

this, where they were where

13:46

there's there's something that

13:46

that somebody really, really

13:49

wants, that's powerful and wants

13:49

it and and they recognize that

13:53

they're not going to get it from that committee.

13:54

And so but, but

13:54

and you know, you mentioned

13:57

representative Lanting and his

13:57

his his comment, Representative

14:02

Greg Lanting, from Twin Falls.

14:02

He's the one who gave the quote

14:05

about getting five to one emails

14:05

from his constituents saying

14:09

vouchers are bad. Don't let any

14:09

any of them through. And so

14:13

really appreciate his his

14:13

reasoned approach on on a lot of

14:17

this legislation that we're

14:17

seeing coming through the

14:20

education committee, but but

14:20

he's been a he's, you've

14:23

commented, you really appreciate

14:23

his approach on things.

14:25

Oh, yeah. He's he's

14:25

one of my favorites right now. I

14:29

think he's been really clear in

14:29

his debate against vouchers. I

14:32

also want to commend

14:32

representative McCann. I mean, I

14:35

could go down the entire list of

14:35

good folks on the House

14:37

Education Committee. They're

14:37

just really great people that

14:40

actually have values. They don't

14:40

want to play games and political

14:43

games with these serious issues.

14:43

I really do want to commend

14:46

representative representative

14:46

McCann, she also mentioned that

14:48

she had gotten emails five to

14:48

one and spoke to the issue of

14:52

rerouting bills and how that is

14:52

a front to the committee and the

14:56

people of Idaho.

15:00

So the upshot is

15:00

we've got probably at least two

15:04

more about your bills hanging

15:04

out in the in the wings out

15:08

there waiting to come forward,

15:08

we are getting down toward the,

15:12

the probably the least the last

15:12

third of the session, probably

15:15

I'm guessing, at least from the

15:15

amount of legislation that's

15:18

going to be coming through. So

15:18

we're looking at budgets, so

15:20

it's going to have to happen, it's gonna have to happen pretty quick. So.

15:24

So starting on on

15:24

March 10, the J fac, Joint

15:30

Finance and appropriations

15:30

committee will start taking up

15:32

the public school budgets, which

15:32

includes teacher pay, classified

15:36

pay, and all the programmatic

15:36

budget work that schools depend

15:41

on. I, you know, I think the

15:41

messaging that we're going to

15:46

shift to is, we've seen that

15:46

there is not an appetite in the

15:50

legislature for siphoning money

15:50

off for non public schools. But

15:54

we do know that there's a,

15:54

there's a huge need to

15:58

adequately fund teacher pay so

15:58

that we can attract and retain

16:01

teachers address the

16:01

hemorrhaging problem that we

16:05

have when it comes to a human

16:05

resource issue, and then ensure

16:09

that we're making those

16:09

necessary investments in

16:13

classified staff, so that we

16:13

have, like I've said, in the

16:15

past, more adults in the

16:15

building, to help with some of

16:18

the behavioral issues, reduce

16:18

reduce the stress and

16:22

frustration, that that our

16:22

members are experiencing in

16:25

schools. And that's those budget

16:25

discussions are is where those

16:29

those salaries going to be

16:29

coming forward. And that's going

16:32

to be happening here pretty

16:32

quickly. So we are we're looking

16:34

down toward the end of the end

16:34

of the legislative session as we

16:37

move forward.

16:38

So the there was

16:38

another topic that came up this

16:44

week on Wednesday, in the House

16:44

Education Committee again, so it

16:48

was the the members of the House

16:48

Education Committee earn their

16:51

modest pay as legislators this

16:51

week, and I think Chairwoman

16:57

Yamamoto particularly earned her

16:57

keep it this week, just just by

17:03

just just by the even handed and

17:03

thoughtful way that she handled

17:09

these really contentious issues.

17:09

Anyway, the the the bill I'm

17:12

talking about is House Bill 139.

17:12

It was it's a it's a library

17:17

smart bill, colloquially known

17:17

that way. It's about certain

17:25

quarters of the legislature

17:25

wanting to be able to police,

17:29

library materials, and do it

17:29

outside of established processes

17:33

that libraries and library

17:33

districts have outside of the

17:37

accountability of elected

17:37

officials that oversee these

17:40

libraries. And they ended up

17:40

holding this bill in committee

17:43

at a nine a vote.

17:45

Yeah, I mean, people who take the Idaho Freedom Foundation's like full

17:46

line and believe it completely,

17:49

they seem to think that there's

17:49

like a massive wave of immoral

17:54

materials that have pornographic

17:54

materials. They talk about

17:57

pornography constantly. They're

17:57

in the debate. And there's not

18:00

even a mentionable dog for free

18:00

in the bill. Right, exactly. And

18:02

I think there was a lot of

18:02

frustration about, what are we

18:05

actually talking about with this

18:05

bill? You heard you heard it

18:07

from representative Mathias as

18:07

well? Like, are we talking about

18:10

LGBTQ books and culture? Is that

18:10

what we're talking about? You

18:14

heard it from quite a few

18:14

members like your, again,

18:17

pornography is not mentioned in

18:17

this bill. So why is every piece

18:21

of of pro testimony talking

18:21

about pornography here. And

18:26

again, I mean, it's all in the

18:26

eye of the beholder when it

18:28

comes to this kind of stuff. And

18:28

it really is a ton of

18:31

frustration from people who have

18:31

swallowed the Freedom Foundation

18:34

lines, while at the Manhattan

18:34

Institute line, all of this

18:37

propaganda about harmful

18:37

materials that are not harmful.

18:42

And folks,

18:42

honestly, that are completely

18:45

willing to, to press their own

18:45

personal mores, upon society,

18:50

and upon their community. If

18:50

they see something they don't

18:55

like, they want it gone, no

18:55

matter what. And if it goes

19:00

against their values, or

19:00

whatever they think the world

19:02

should look like. They're

19:02

completely willing to completely

19:06

willing to step on other

19:06

people's rights in order to make

19:08

that to make that happen.

19:09

Something I really appreciated that was brought up was that the library boards in

19:11

these areas are elected, they

19:14

are elected. So you can have a

19:14

democratic election to elect

19:19

these Library Association.

19:19

Library Board, folks, if you

19:21

don't like what's on the library

19:21

shelves, kick out someone who,

19:24

who's who's there, you know,

19:24

make it her during an election.

19:27

The reason that doesn't satisfy

19:27

these folks is because they are

19:31

a loud minority that could not

19:31

do that in a fair election. So,

19:36

of course, they're trying to

19:36

kind of, you know, skate by the

19:39

rules and remove books that the

19:39

majority of people don't find

19:42

anything harmful in. But they're

19:42

just very frustrated that

19:46

there's a common

19:46

theme roll around as a common

19:48

theme around elections. Yeah, in

19:48

recent years.

19:50

It's actually a common theme around the legislature this year as well. I

19:51

think we're seeing far more

19:55

bills addressing the LGBTQ

19:55

community than I've seen in a

19:59

longtime, I feel like we're

19:59

going back in time to the early

20:03

90s, when this was a huge topic

20:03

for Idaho.

20:10

And Chris, you made the point that this was this was an effort to, to bring

20:11

forward frivolous lawsuits

20:17

against libraries and against

20:17

library districts with a $10,000

20:22

potential fine. It also for many

20:22

small rural library districts

20:29

and smaller libraries, that's a

20:29

lot of money. Probably a

20:32

volunteer director running a

20:32

running a library in a little

20:36

town. They're not going to have

20:36

that kind of money to do and it

20:41

could be a potentially fatal

20:41

thing to a lot of libraries and

20:44

law library districts. That's

20:44

right on top of it, the

20:46

liability that would be there,

20:46

you mentioned, right, yeah.

20:49

So I mean, the the

20:49

Idaho free Family Policy Center,

20:54

which is an allied group of the

20:54

Freedom Foundation, they stated

20:58

plainly that the goal of

20:58

legislation like this is to

21:00

create a civil liability load,

21:00

essentially, that affects

21:05

insurance providers so that

21:05

insurance providers will

21:07

encourage libraries to self

21:07

censor, to head off any

21:12

potential lawsuits. So again,

21:12

it's just amplifying the power

21:15

of this small minority of

21:15

people. And I think, you know,

21:19

I'm sure we'll talk about it.

21:19

But as you can see, after that

21:22

Bill kill was killed and the

21:22

testimony that came after, these

21:25

are not reasonable people, you

21:25

know, they were yelling at the

21:27

committee, they were saying, you

21:27

know, shame on you. And all this

21:30

stuff is

21:31

representatives of

21:31

the IFF as Freedom Foundation

21:35

coming up and saying that to them.

21:36

Yep, exactly. So I

21:36

didn't really say it was a

21:39

really dramatic day in House

21:39

Education. But I was really

21:42

proud of our allies on that,

21:42

that committee for the way they,

21:46

they dealt with it,

21:47

we would be remiss

21:47

if we didn't celebrate the IEA

21:51

voices, the librarians who have

21:51

either testified remotely or in

21:55

person, we often talk about how

21:55

our members are their best

21:59

advocates, they do a better job

21:59

advocating at the legislature

22:02

than we as their lobbyists can

22:02

do. And we had some some

22:05

extraordinarily passionate and

22:05

articulate librarians from the

22:09

IAEA testify on behalf of their

22:09

profession. And I think the

22:13

Idaho libraries Association also

22:13

deserves a shout out here to the

22:15

president Lance McGrath has made

22:15

a real effort to get librarians

22:19

more involved in into these

22:19

discussions, particularly after

22:21

last year when those bills, this

22:21

kind of same style of Bill was

22:24

promulgating through the

22:24

legislature. So the we work with

22:28

our librarians and we are

22:28

increasingly effective for it.

22:33

Yeah, I'm not just

22:33

I'll just call out one of our

22:35

members as well, Gregory Taylor,

22:35

who is he's the, the teacher

22:39

librarian at Hillside junior

22:39

high here in Boise. And he was

22:42

the 2022, school librarian of

22:42

the year. And he testified and

22:47

he talked about something that I

22:47

thought was really fantastic. He

22:49

talked about how, how books save

22:49

lives, and and that over the

22:54

years, he's had countless people

22:54

right, and pull them aside and

22:59

grocery stores at one instance,

22:59

apparently had to fool them into

23:02

the corner at a rock concert.

23:02

And tell him thank you for

23:05

recommending this book. It meant

23:05

all the world to me, and it, it

23:11

might have saved my life. So

23:11

thank you for that. So that's,

23:14

that's, that's a powerful,

23:14

powerful notion about about what

23:18

books can do and why libraries

23:18

and their freedom to offer offer

23:23

up the kind of, of literature

23:23

and art that really changes

23:29

lives.

23:31

There's been an

23:31

interesting juxtaposition this

23:33

year, with a number of parental

23:33

rights where parents want to

23:37

extend their their rights into

23:37

classrooms, which I think is

23:40

fantastic. The more parental

23:40

influence and experience and

23:45

engagement that we can have, the

23:45

better of that argument just

23:48

wasn't landing with these anti

23:48

library folks where you do have

23:53

a responsibility to have

23:53

oversight of what it is that

23:56

your kids are checking out of

23:56

the library. You should censor

23:59

their books, not not the

23:59

librarians themselves.

24:03

Right, exactly.

24:03

It's, oh, it's frustrating. I'm

24:05

glad you brought that up.

24:05

Because it is like it speaks to

24:08

take an active role in your

24:08

child's education, which

24:10

ostensibly is what these people

24:10

have been, you know, yelling

24:13

about for years. But as soon as

24:13

you ask them to they try and do

24:17

bills like this, that

24:17

completely, you know, absolve

24:20

themselves of that

24:20

responsibility. Well, you

24:23

brought up the parent all rights bills. Yeah, I think I

24:24

really appreciate superintendent

24:24

Let's go ahead and

24:24

jump into those real quickly.

24:26

Critchfield saying that this

24:26

doesn't mean that there's

24:27

There was one that was that was

24:27

passed House Bill, or it's

24:30

working its way through the

24:30

process House Bill 163 with Judy

24:32

something wrong currently

24:32

happening in schools. You know,

24:33

Boyle and Superintendent

24:33

Crutchfield along with Senator

24:36

Taves out of quarter lane, but

24:36

Senator tase has a similar bill

24:37

I think one of the dangers that

24:37

sometimes pops up with these

24:40

that's working its way through

24:40

as well. So they've got we got a

24:43

couple of parents rights bills.

24:43

Now these these tend to be

24:46

pretty popular people are people

24:46

there okay, but it's since we

24:46

bills is that it insinuates that

24:46

something awful is going on and

24:50

like we talked about the the

24:50

earlier bill last week a little

24:53

bit and, again, these are things

24:53

that our schools are already

24:56

doing a good school and again

24:56

Each parent knows what's going

24:59

on with their kid. This really

24:59

codifies all that and even our

25:03

members are standing up and

25:03

saying, Yeah, this is a fine

25:06

bill, we should we should

25:06

support this.

25:20

systemically with public

25:20

schools. But she was very clear,

25:23

when she testified in favor of

25:23

this one, that this does not

25:26

mean that there is something

25:26

wrong going on, we just want to

25:29

standardize the expectations of

25:29

parents across the state. So

25:33

they know how involved they can get. One last issue,

25:36

guys, and that's that's

25:39

facilities, something that we

25:39

talked about going into the

25:42

session was, was the huge

25:42

backlog of facilities needs in

25:46

the state. We think it's well

25:46

over a billion dollars, there's

25:49

at least one study that shows it

25:49

to be around $800 million, but

25:53

certainly it's much larger than

25:53

that, because it was a partial

25:57

study. You know, and some

25:57

lawmakers have made attempts to

26:01

to figure out ways to address

26:01

that, so that local school

26:04

districts don't have to rely on

26:04

property, local property,

26:07

taxpayers, to build new schools

26:07

and that kind of thing. There

26:11

should be a statewide effort to

26:11

fund facilities to make sure

26:15

that schools are equitable.

26:15

Schools are well lit schools are

26:19

dry and comfortable and safe for

26:19

kids so that they have the most

26:23

optimum learning environment.

26:23

One bill came forward from from

26:26

again, Senate Education

26:26

Committee Chairman Dave lent

26:29

would have changed the use of

26:29

about $60 million from the state

26:33

land endowments all across the

26:33

state, the state land alone and

26:37

state owned land across the

26:37

state they pay into public

26:40

schools. This This legislation

26:40

would have shifted somewhat. Now

26:44

it was just $61 million,

26:44

compared to probably well over a

26:48

billion dollars worth of things.

26:48

But it was an effort to try to

26:52

get something going.

26:53

And it was killed

26:53

unceremoniously to. I think Matt

26:56

knows a little bit more about

26:56

the endowment funds and that thing.

27:00

So this is a

27:00

product of a longer conversation

27:03

that Senator that was part of,

27:03

in the summer, where there was a

27:07

subcommittee that was developed

27:07

to talk about the burgeoning

27:11

needs of schools, when it comes

27:11

to facilities. So he, he drafted

27:15

a piece of legislation that he

27:15

thought could get some universal

27:19

agreement didn't have a huge

27:19

price tag that utilizes

27:23

resources that the state is

27:23

already taking in through the

27:26

endowment fund. The endowment

27:26

fund is supposed to be used to

27:30

help support school funding. So

27:30

mechanically, it sounded like it

27:34

was the right thing to do. And

27:34

unfortunately, once presented,

27:38

the Senate committee killed his bill.

27:42

Yeah, and it looks

27:42

like we're not going to be able

27:45

to address facilities this

27:45

session. I know, especially some

27:48

of our our fellow education.

27:48

Stakeholder groups, we're very

27:51

interested in trying to find

27:51

something happened, I think our

27:54

members are very interested in

27:54

having something happen as well.

27:58

So it's unfortunate that that's

27:58

not going to happen, especially

28:01

when we got such a huge amount

28:01

of surplus still looking at us

28:05

in the face.

28:05

So I think this

28:05

was the school board's

28:08

Association's top or second most

28:08

important legislative issue

28:12

coming in at to see that one

28:12

piece of legislation was drafted

28:16

to address it. That's, that's

28:16

pretty depressing. And like you

28:20

said, sitting on top of like

28:20

over a billion and a half

28:24

dollars in surplus that that

28:24

means we're not including

28:27

increasing taxes. But this could

28:27

be put forward to address all of

28:32

the building needs, we would see

28:32

a significant decrease in

28:36

property taxes. We have, we're

28:36

on the eve of an election here.

28:40

And I think we've discussed this

28:40

before. But schools are going

28:44

out in in this March. And

28:44

they're asking for the single

28:48

largest investment in schools,

28:48

whether it be through bonds and

28:52

levies. This is a historic

28:52

election for schools.

28:55

So on March 14,

28:55

they're they're here coming up

28:58

in a couple of weeks, or

28:58

actually, about a week.

29:02

I mean, contrast,

29:02

contrast the efforts by local

29:05

communities across the state to

29:05

get these bonds and levies done

29:09

with the effort being put

29:09

forward by the legislature this

29:12

session. I mean, you know, I'll

29:12

try not to yell about it. But

29:15

it's very frustrating to see. So

29:15

little work go into it after

29:19

there was really there were

29:19

really great presentations

29:22

throughout the legislative

29:22

session in the, you know, in

29:25

multiple committees about the

29:25

dire need to improve our

29:28

facilities investments. And

29:28

yeah, it's deeply frustrating.

29:31

And now, again, local

29:31

communities are going to ask to

29:34

do the job that the legislature

29:34

should have been doing for decades.

29:38

Yeah, instead of

29:38

doing the serious work of

29:40

funding schools, we've more used

29:40

this legislative session to

29:44

engage in unnecessary cultural wars.

29:46

The chronic

29:46

underfunding of public

29:48

education. And it touches on

29:48

every issue that we've talked

29:52

about this today on this podcast

29:52

and every issue we've talked

29:56

about in all the other previous

29:56

episodes as well.

30:00

So guys, thanks so much for your

30:00

participation again today, and

30:04

we'll see you next time.

30:06

Thanks, Mike.

30:06

Awesome. Thanks, Mike.

30:08

Thank you for listening to education Association's hotline podcast

30:10

and this discussion about week

30:13

seven of the 2023 Idaho

30:13

legislature. Thanks as well to

30:16

my colleagues Chris Perry, and

30:16

Matt Compton for joining me.

30:20

Please watch for future updates

30:20

about new episodes on IE social

30:23

media channels, or sign up for

30:23

our hotline email on our website

30:27

at IDEO. ea.org. I'm Mike

30:27

journee. And as always, I hope

30:30

you join me in thanking Idaho's

30:30

public school educators for

30:33

everything they do for our State

30:33

students, families and public schools.